Kashaf-ul-haqaiq

CHAPTER 4: IJTIHAD

Before I start discussing this important topic I think it is better if I were to mention a few points.

The majority of us, in fact the majorities of the majority are of the understanding that whatever you hear you should accept and not try to find out what the reality is. That is why when someone tries to explain the reality to them, they are surprised when it contradicts with their beliefs which they know nothing about, and then they start arguing. Therefore it is better for me to explain a few things beforehand so that it would cut out unnecessary arguments later on.

IJTIHAD

Ijtihad is the maximum efforts of a jurist to enable him to get the presumption of a Sharia law - Allama Asad Haider.

This is not my definition but one that I have taken from a Mujtahid and therefore am free from any blame. Anyhow, I thank Allah (s.w.t.) that in the very beginning it has reached the minds of my readers that Ijtihad has nothing to do with certainty. If the foundation of Sharia law were to be set on Ijtihad, which permits conjecture, then the result would be subject to doubt.

Let me quote another Mujtahid, Allama Bakhshahi of Tehran from his book ‘Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (a.s.) Peshwa U Mazhab’, where he states: ‘The significance of Ijtihad in relation to Islamic Law is such that a Mujtahid takes the raw material of information and then processes it in his factory by doing Ijtihad and then supplies the final product to the Islamic Society. This is why the thinker Agha e Mutahhari has referred to Ijtihad as the engine that drives Islam.

Apparently it cannot be refuted that during the times of the Inafallibles (a.s.) the term Ijtihad was not there, and even in the traditions it has never been used like it is being done today in reference to the Shia and the Sunni jurists. This term was neither used to refer to the Infallibles (a.s.) nor did they use it for any of their companions who were scholars.

He goes on to say that, ‘We also see that until the 4th and the 5th century Hijra, the scholars use to make use of the term Ijtihad in reference to analogy and opinion. For example Sheikh Tusi in his book ‘Uddat Ul Usool’, in one of his arguments has referred to Ijtihad to mean analogy’.

Let us take a breather here and let this sink in for a while.

1.The terms Ijtihad and Mujtahid have nothing to do with the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) and they never used these words in the manner that is being done today.

2.The Infallible Imams (a.s.) never appointed any Mujtahid to be a guide for the people and therefore a Mujtahid can never be a NAIB-E-IMAAM. (Appointed representative).

3.The terms used by the Infallbile Imams (a.s.), like scholar or jurist can never be taken to mean Mujtahid.

4.In both the Sunni and Shia schools the terms Ijtihad and Mujtahid are both being used in the same meaning.

5.Ijtihad and analogy are two names of one thing.

It is my view the term Ijtihad has been clarified sufficiently, but for the contentment of the mind I would like to refer to Mufti Ja’far Hussain’s commentary on Nahj Ul Balagah’s Sermon No. 18:

‘It is the view of the Imamia Sect that Allah (s.w.t.) has not authorized anyone to make laws of Sharia nor did He (s.w.t.) Command anyone to act according to a Mujtahid’s opinion.  There are no two Orders for that same issue. Whichever the opinion that the Mujtahid finally concludes, is regarded as sufficient both for himself as well as his emulators. But, this is regarded as an apparent command which is in replacement of the actual command. He has dived into the sea of knowledge and tried to get to the pearl, but ended up with only its shell, but he does not say that his emulators should consider it as a pearl and get its value accordingly. It is another thing that the valuer would value it at half its value so that his efforts do not go to waste and his courage does not break.

I have only mentioned the above so that their viewpoint can be understood. I shall be analyzing this and pointing out its shortcomings at its appropriate place.

QIYAS (ANALOGY)

In religion the meaning of Qiyas is the application of a command in one matter to another matter based on a common ground. This then demands that the order should be the same for the two matters. -  (Commentary of Sahifa Kamila by Mufti Ja’far Husayn)

ISTAMBAAT

This means the extraction of religious law based on the application of logic by the Jurist. (Al-munjid)

Now that these three definitions have been explained, we now come back to the main topic of this book, Ijtihad.

BEGINNING OF IJTIHAD IN SHIA SECT

Whenever you wish to know about something then you have to look at its inception, otherwise you will not be able to understand its conclusion. Its like trying to untangle a knot, one has first to look for one of its ends and then try and untangle it.

That is why my Master the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.) has said: When you are in doubt about a matter, you can understand it ending by looking at its beginning. Therefore it is necessary that we look at the inception of Ijtihad so that its reality may dawn upon us.

I have pointed out in Chapter 2 how Ijtihad entered among the Sunnis. In practical life this started during the era of the 1st caliphate and then the second and carried on to the extent that those who were considered to the companions used to think that it was their birth right to use their own opinion in matters of religion. This is why the Sunnis regard all companions to be Mujtahids and cover up their mistakes by regarding it as an ‘error of Ijtihad’. It was later on, at the time of Abu Hanifa that Ijtihad was done in an organized manner, when he started commenting on the Holy Quran based on his opinion and declared some Hadeeth to be of a doubtful nature. This gave him an open field to play in. Later on many others followed on from him and created their own sects. They also created the principles of jurisprudence which formed the basis of Sharia law. (Al Risalat Ul Ilmiya Fi Akhbar Ul Ma’sumeen - Al Risala for short) It has been quoted from Rawdat Ul Jannat by Muhammad Baqir Khonsari: ‘It is the unanimous view of all the scholars that the first one to set the principles of jurisprudence was Imam Shafei of the Sunnis’.

I am only delving into this for the sake of understanding it and not to narrate the history of Ijtihad among the Sunnis. This has nothing to do with us. It’s their affair. We are only interesting in finding out where this plague came from and how it was established among the Shias.

Allama Bakhshashi has quoted his book, ‘Imam Ja’fer Al Sadiq (a.s.) Peshwa O Raees E Mazhab’ that the first Shiite scholar who used the term Ijtihad in the other meaning was Allama Hilli (died 726 AH) who in his book, in the chapter of Ijtihad used the term Ijtihad in the same meaning that it is being used today in. This was the time period in which the term Ijtihad accepted the Shiites or, shall I say, the Shiites accepted Ijtihad.

Well, that was the 8th Century AH. Let us now go back a little. Allamah Muhammad Baqir Kamrohi’s book, in his preface of Sheykh Saduq’s book Al Khisal he says: Among the Shiites, until the end of the 4th CenturyAH, on the Holy Quran and the Traditions of the Infallibles used to be the source of law. But, when they started following the scholars of other sects, they started writing books on Principles and Jurisprudence; they introduced Consensus and Evidence of reason also as sources of law. When it was pointed out to them that this was against the teachings of the AHl Ul Bayt (a.s.), they tried to explain it away by saying that the consensus includes the person of the Infallible Imam (a.s.), whilst the evidence of reason on its own is not a source but is part of the evidence which forms the law. This then led to the introduction of analogy (Qiyas) in the Shiite sect.

This was the time when referring to the Holy Quran and the traditions as sources of law, came to an end. Those than hung on to these two weighty things as the only sources of law lost the attraction of the scholars and the attention of the people.

Let me clarify the claim that ‘by consensus we mean that the Infallible Imam (a.s.) is included therein’. Now it is up to you if you wish to accept this claim without any evidence, however, it does not make sense. If you were to look at the discussions of these scholars you will see that they differ vigorously among themselves on many small and big issues. This proves that the person of the Infallible Imam (a.s.) is not present among them and part of their differences. The purpose of the Infallible Imam (a.s.) is to remove differences and not to create them.

Furthermore, since they started to create a parallel system in contrast to the unconditional obedience to the Infallible Imam (a.s.), how is it possible for the Infallible Imam (a.s.) to be part of this discussion and be agreeable to their analogies?

It has been clarified that the Shiite Sect was clean from the impurities of Ijtihad up until the end of the 4th Century AH.

Now, it is said that ‘Excuse for the sin is worse than the commission of it’. In this way they have sacrificed the Traditions of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) at the altar of the rules which they took from the Sunnis. Their assertion that the evidence of reason and consensus are the tools with which they uncover the sayings of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) is also invalid, because these two tools can have something to do with Imam Shafei of the Sunnis since he was the one who made these up, but they cannot have anything to do with the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) since they (a.s.) neither mentioned nor commanded the use of them.

We are discussing the period of the 4th Century AH, but this matter goes further. As I have said before, Marjaiat is an intoxicant like none other. Even at the time of the minor occultation, despite having respect for the last of the Imams (a.s.), they had started thinking about establishing their Marjaiat. The first thing they did was to introduce the term ‘Naaib e Imam’ (Representative of Imam) and adopt it for themselves. They were soon reprimanded for this from the letters that came of Imam (a.s.), and so the Shias were kept safe from the deceptive traps of Satan.

As soon as the major occultation started, the desires of these deceitful people came to fruition. What they then did was to refer the four messengers of the Imam (a.s.) as ‘the four representatives’ and made them well known as such, despite the fact that these four noble people never used this term for themselves. There is no mention anywhere in history of the usage of this terminology for these four noble people. Al Kafi was compiled during the minor occultation and does not refer to this term anywhere. Man La Yahzur Ul Faqih was written immediately after the start of the major occultation and there is not mention of this terminology anywhere in it either. Is it not strange that the Shias of that time had neither heard of these ‘representatives of the Imam’ nor had any knowledge of the ‘four representatives’. It was centuries later that some people had ‘revelations’ that these terms should be pasted onto these four messengers of the Imam (a.s.) so that they should begin to be known as such among the people. This was done so strongly that if today someone were to try and uncover the veil in order to explain reality, then the people would oppose him vehemently. The whole purpose of this was that sometimes in the future they themselves would be able to adopt these terms for themselves and there would be no objection from the people. One twist in this tale is that those that referred to the four noble messengers of the Imam (a.s.) as the four ‘special representatives’ (Naaib e Khaas), and adopted for themselves the term ‘general representatives’ (Naaib e Aam) were neither Mujtahids themselves, nor were they issuing any verdicts (Fatwas), nor did they believe in the principles of jurisprudence, nor did they ever invite people to emulate them (do their Taqleed). These ‘special representatives’ only used to convey the commands of the Imams (a.s.) and that’s it. So, they did not profit from this policy and so let us see why they did it.

There are too many veils that have covered the events during the minor occultation and it is no easy task to lift these and come to know the reality. If you were to listen to the statements of these people or peruse their books you will feel that (God forbid) the period of the minor occultation was devoid of guidance. Only a few of his letters and miracles will be seen, as if the whole of his (a.s.) network was engaged in the sole activity of the collection of Khums. Someone will be seen to be bringing Khums in a canister of oil or someone will be bringing it concealed in a piece of cloth.

When they had looked at the profitability of the situation, they then had the audacity to declare themselves as being representatives of the Imam, and these days even Imams.Ijtihad and the principles of Jurisprudence were systematically introduced among the Shias from the Sunnis.

You may be astounded by this colourful display. These are not my words, but those of Allamah Syed Baqir Musavi Khownsari from his book ‘Rowzat Ul Jannat Fi Ahwal E Ulama O Sadaat’.

Muhammad Bin Junaid who was a resident of Baghdad, and was known by the title of KATIB (Writer), was the first person who laid the foundation of Ijtihad in the Shiite world by adopting the principles of Jurisprudence from the adversaries. He followed Hasan Bin Aqeel Nu’mani in this concept and lived at the time of Muhammd Bin Yaqoub Kulayni. These two jurists are known as the Two Old Ones. Sheykh Toosi was the first one to follow the footsteps of Ibn Junaid who issued a number of religious commands against Yaqoub Kulayni, prompting the other scholars to try and affect a compromise between the two in order to prove both of them to be correct.

In this regard those that went against the companions of the Infallible Imams (a.s.) by using the evidence of reason, the art of theology and the analogy, were Muhammad Bin Junaid and Hasan Bin Aqeel Nu’mani. Then came Sheykh Mufeed, who made conjecture a beloved thing from what he wrote, and his companions Syed Murtadha and Sheykh Toosi who forwarded the method of Ibn Junaid and Ibn Abi Aqeel to the next generation. After this, Allama Hilli made the principles of the adversaries an obligation and got the aggressive support of both the Shaheed E Awwal and Shaheed E Thaani.

The first one to make the claim that the majority of Traditions are such that they have been derived from those books which were written on the instructions of the Infallible Imams (a.s.), upon which the Shias used to act and will continue to do so during the major occultation, was Sheykh Ali.

The Mujtahid Muhammad Idris Hilli was the first one to declare that any tradition which has only one narrator cannot be relied upon and no knowledge can be gained from it, because they do not contain any law from which a decision can be concluded. Sheykh Ta’ifa, Syed Murtadha, Sheykh Toosi all acted upon this regulation.

You have just seen what an old Mujtahid Allamah Muhammad Baqir Khonsari has explained above. Now let us see what conclusions can be drawn from all this.

1.The Mujtahid Ibn Junaid is the founder of Ijtihad in the Shia Sect, but he was himself in the Taqleed of Hasan Bin Abi Aqeel Nu’mani and they both were at the time of the Minor Occultation.

2.These two elders are referred to as the ‘Two Old Sheykhs’ (Qadeemain’).

3.Ibn Junaid is the first Shia Mujtahid to not only adopt the principles of Jurisprudence of the Sunnis but also made these a part of the Shia Sect.

4.The great Mujtahid who completed the adoption of these principles as part of religion was Sheykh Toosi.

5.Ibn Junaid lived at the time of Sheykh Yaqoub Kulayni the narrator of traditions, and openly opposed him.

6.The words, ‘Some Mujtahideen tried to make a compromise between the two and try and prove both of them to be correct’ testifies that there were some scholars who had the same Ijtihad mentality.

7.The vehement opposition to Sheykh Yaqoub Kulayni shows that the process of Ijtihad had already started and the road to the guidance of Infallible Imam Mahdi (a.s.) was being blocked. These people were backed by the government of that time because Ibn Junaid was a minister of Mo’iz Ud Dowla in the Buyid period.

8.The Mujtahids of that time stopped following the traditions and started opposing the great collector of traditions Sheykh Yaqoub Kulayni, who presented to us his monumental book ‘Al Kafi’, which is based on the original principles of religion and is regarded as a reliable book, vehemently opposed him in opposition to the Traditions of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) started following their own opinions based on conjecture and analogies and gave preference to Ijtihad.

If this religion of the Mujtahids were to be analysed, what would be the criteria for it? Personal opinions, personal choice, personal circumstances or the words of an Infallbile?

Certainly those that are aware and love their religion would say that the criteria should be the words of the infallible Imam (a.s.). So, without any hesitation I would like to quote one tradition from Al Kafi and let you decide.

Imam Jafar (a.s.) said, “People have been ordered to get our understanding, and to turn to us (rujoo) and obey what we say. If these people fast , offer prayers , and give testimony of allah but have this thing in their heart that they would not turn to us , they would become polytheists” - AL KAFI.

Now look at some more from Rowzat Ul Jannat :

1.The first person to say that truth can only be reached by four sources - The Holy Quran, Coincidental traditions (Hadees), The Evidence of Reason (Aqal) and Consensus (Ijma), was Abu Huzaifa Wasil Bin Ata who was the first one to be referred to as a Mu’tazilite. He is the leader of the misguided and the father of the Mu’tazilites. He used to live in Medina and has the title Abu Huzaifa Ghazali.

2.It is the unanimously accepted view of all the scholars that it was Imam Shafei who first made up the principles of jurisprudence.

The more you look into these Mujtahideen the more shocking revelations you will come across and you realize that the reins of this matter are in the hands of the adversaries.

The main problem is that the Shiites have been impressed by the general appearance of these Mujtahids who have adopted the apparent religion of the Infallible Imams (a.s.), but follow their adversaries. The Shias, when they look at their turbans and cloaks that they wear, get easily influenced by them and consider their words as being the guidance of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.).

EVIDENCE OF IJTIHAD FROM THE HOLY QURAN

It has now become clear from the words of the Jurists themselves that Ijtihad, by its word and its meaning has been taken from the Sunnis and it has nothing to do with the religion of Ahl Ul Bayt (a.s.). The focus of the people has been turned away from the Ahl Ul Bayt (a.s.) and towards the Jurists. They quote from the Holy Quran in order to justify their misdirection and quite surprisingly the Shiites have believed them. This is the result of staying away from religion that every one tends to lend his ear to anyone who calls to them and ends up mortgaging his intellect to him. They not only lose their religion to them but their wealth as well. They then end up making enemies out of those who reject the fallibles and only follow the Infallibles (a.s.), and only emulate those whose obedience has been commanded by Allah (s.w.t.) and they do not include others in this matter.

Anyhow, let us now examine the Verses which are presented as proofs of the establishment of ijtihad. Incidentally, these verses are the same that are presented by the Sunnis for the justification of their Ijtihad.

The verse is from Sura Tawbah (Repentance) 9:122:

[Yusuf Ali] Nor should the Believers all go forth together: if a contingent from every expedition remained behind, they could devote themselves to studies in religion and admonish the people when they return to them― that thus they (may learn) to guard themselves (against evil).

[Mohsin Khan] And it is not (proper) for the believers to go out to fight (Jihâd) all together. Of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may get instructions in (Islâmic) religion, and that they may warn their people when they return to them, so that they may beware (of evil).

[Pickthal] And the believers should not all go out to fight. Of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may gain sound knowledge in religion, and that they may warn their folk when they return to them, so that they may beware.

[Shakir] And it does not beseem the believers that they should go forth all together; why should not then a company from every party from among them go forth that they may apply themselves to obtain understanding in religion, and that they may warn their people when they come back to them that they may be cautious?

Now, some of you will be of those who recite the Holy Quran quite regularly and some of you might have even read some of these commentaries. Tell me the truth, from the above translations; can you even catch a glimpse of the permission of Ijtihad or the justification for it?

Let me now quote from Syed Ali Haeri’s book where he has referred to the above verse as, ‘In Sura Tawbah it has been revealed that it is not the responsibility of all the believers to travel for the sake of acquiring knowledge, but a group from among them should endeavor to gain the knowledge of jurisprudence and wisdom so that when they return to their people and warn them then maybe they will fear the punishment of Allah (s.w.t.)’.

He then comments on this that ‘Therefore, a few matters can be proven from this verse. Firstly, the acquisition of knowledge is a collective responsibility and not an individual one.

Secondly, there is no need for the general public to indulge in this exercise as they are handicapped by simply being members of the general public. It is now obligatory on the educated ones to teach the ignorant about matters of religion.

Thirdly, the warning has to be based upon the knowledge of the allowed and the forbidden and the Commands of Allah (s.w.t.). This warning deals with logic and verdicts because the Mujtahid talks without mentioning the Divine Verses and Hadeeth. Ijtihad is therefore necessitated because until such time as the Mujtahid is well versed in religious matters it is not possible for him to warn the people, and if he does, without being well versed, then he cannot be relied upon.

Fourthly the words ‘Maybe they will fear’ prove Ijtihad, because the public is listening to them without any proofs and act upon these bears testimony that they have the fear of God in them. They themselves do not possess the ability to acquire this knowledge because they are emulators (Muqalliden). Ijtihad is thus proven.

I am convinced that your eyes will have been opened after listening to the above arguments. The way Ijtihad has been proven by the above points makes me feel as if someone is telling me that ‘The day has dawned, the sun is shining, there is also a cool breeze and the branches of the tree are in motion, this therefore proves that there is a crow sitting on the tree’.

The following points are actually proven from this discussion:

1.The words ‘Obtaining understanding in religion’ has been translated as ‘The knowledge of Jurisprudence’.

2.Acquisition of knowledge is only for a few and not for all.

3.The whole of the Shiite world has been described as illiterate, and this is what actually suits the Mujtahids as illiteracy of the people is profitable for their business.

4.The verdicts of the Mujtahids have been considered as the Commands of Allah (s.w.t.).

5.‘Warning’ has been taken to mean Ijtihad and these warnings can only be done by logic and verdicts.

6.The idiocy and stupidity of the people has been made the reason for Ijtihad as they neither ask for any proofs nor for any references. They just bow their heads to the statements of the Mujtahids and follow them blindly.

7.The Mujtahids have been declared as being ‘well versed in knowledge’.

If you go through the above points again you will realize that this mujtahid has placed certain accusations on none other than the Words of Allah (s.w.t.) i.e. the Holy Quran Itself.

1st Accusation

The acquisition of knowledge is only for some people and not for all whereas Allah (s.w.t.) and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) have commanded us to do otherwise. Not only in the verse under discussion, but in the entire Holy Quran there is no indication for the acquisition of religious knowledge incumbent upon only a few. This audacious attitude is only being promoted for the preservation of the institution of Marja’iat and to keep people ignorant in opposition to the Commands of Allah (s.w.t.) and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.).

2nd Accusation

Not only in this verse, but in the entire Holy Quran, Allah (s.w.t.) has never referred to the believers as illiterate, or stupid or dishonorable people like this Mujtahid has. In the Holy Quran words like ‘Ignorant’ etc. may have been used for the unbelievers, polytheists and the hypocrites but not for the believers. Allah (s.w.t.) has referred to the believers as ‘people of intellect’ etc. but never used any ugly words for them. Nowhere has it been said that the warner or the one who enjoins good and forbids evil should be a person of a particular level of knowledge. In fact this is proven from the fact that based on the verdicts of the Mujtahids themselves the enjoining of good and forbidding of evil has been included in the branches of religion thereby expecting everyone to perform these acts and not the Mujtahids only. Whosoever knows whatsoever should warn those that are unaware of it and it is not necessary to be a Mujtahid before one can do this.

3rd Accusation

There is nowhere in the Holy Quran anything devoid of evidence or proofs. It is not allowed to issue verdicts without making any reference to Hadeeth as they claim it to be. There are many places in the Holy Quran where we have been told to ask for proofs and to give proofs. Allah (s.w.t.) Himself has given proofs of the claims that He (s.w.t.) has made and asked people to produce their proofs for their claims. So who are these people who consider themselves to be above the provision of proofs or evidence or reference? The Holy Quran has in fact forbidden the religions without proofs or blind imitations, and so from the Holy Quran, neither is Ijtihad proven nor Taqleed.

The reason why the Mujtahids have made use of this verse is because they saw the word ‘Layatafaqqahu’ in it and they thought that it would be a good idea if they were to translate it as ‘Usool Fiqh’ (Principles of Jurisprudence), which were actually made up some 200 years after the passing away of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.). In this way they altered the meaning of the verse to allow them to place a lot of weight behind jurisprudence, so that the people would think that the Jurisprudence of the Mujtahids has actually been commanded by Allah (s.w.t.). This was despite the fact that this word has been used in many places in the Holy Quran to denote ‘understanding’.

If we were to look at the statements of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) then we would see that this word has been used in the same manner. For example when Imam Husayn (a.s.) wrote a letter to Habib Ibn Mazahir to invite him for help then he addressed it as ‘From Abu Abdillah Al Husayn to a man of understanding (Rajool Un Faqih) Habib Ibn Mazahir’.

Can someone now tell me as to which Usool Fiqh did Habib Ibn Mazahir study or whether he used to issue any verdicts (Fatwas)? When you study the whole of Imam Husayn (a.s.)’s letter you will realize the connotation of the epitaph ‘Man of Understanding’ that he (a.s.) used for Habib Ibn Mazahir. He (a.s.) says in his letter ’O Habib! You are aware of our station and position, therefore come to our help’. It is now established that according to Imam Husayn (a.s.) the ‘Faqih’ is one who understands the position and the station of the Imam (a.s.). This word has no relationship with the branches (Furoo) of religion.

Now let us look at the meaning in which the Mujtahids take to be the meaning of ‘Faqih’.

Al KAFI H 206, Ch. 22, h8

it is reported that: A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn uhammad ibn Khalid from ‘Isma’il ibn Mihran from abu Sa‘id al-Qammat and Salih ibn Sa‘id from Aban ibn Taghlib who has said the following: “Once a man asked a question from Imam abu Ja’far, recipient of divine supreme covenant, who replied to it, and then the man said, ‘The Fuqaha (scholars of law) do not say this.’ “The Imam then said, ‘It is a pity. Have you ever seen a Faqih (a scholar of law)? The real Faqih is one who maintains restraint from worldly matters, who is deeply interested in the life hereafter and holds firmly to the Sunnah (noble tradition of the Holy Prophet, recipient of divine supreme covenant).’”

In AL KHISAL Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq has said: A man becomes a FAQIH by leaving greed and personal desires to the extent that he becomes unaware of what he is wearing or has even eaten.

These traditions have effectively eradicated the definitions of the Mujtahids.

When we read history we see that most of the lives of our Imams (a.s.) have either been spent in prisons or they have lived in their own cities. So then who used to give verdicts (Fatwas) in far flung areas where people did not have the direct contact with the Imams (a.s.)? If people of those areas were in need of Mujtahids then who were the people appointed by the Imams (a.s.) as Mujtahids for those people? If there was no need for the Mujtahids at that time then there is no need for them today. As far as newly occurring problems as time goes on is concerned, God willing, this shall be discussed in the next chapter.

The author of ‘Al Risala’ has indulged in additional discussion on this verse. ‘In this verse two terms ‘Fiqh’ and ‘Tanzeer’ (Warning) are used by these people to prove Ijtihad. I have done the exposition of the term ‘Fiqh” above. Now let us look at the other term ‘Tanzeer’ (Warning). Firstly let us look at the Mujtahideen of today. After the revolution of Iran, now that the government is in the hands of the ‘Ayatullahs’ and the ‘Hujjatullas’, and they have their own schools of learning, it has become obligatory on every group that they should send their representatives to Iran in order to learn Jurisprudence from them so that on their return they can warn their own people who would then be able to save themselves from the ‘punishment of Allah (s.w.t)’.

First of all they should explain to us as to how did the term ‘Tanzeer’ come to mean Ijtihad. This term actually means to warn people of the punishments of the hereafter if they were to indulge in bad deeds. For proof, I hereby refer you to the verse revealed for the day of ‘Be’that’:

[Shakir 26:214] And warn your nearest relations,

I cannot understand which part of this verse indicates that Fatwas should be given based on analogies and consensus. This verse neither proves Jurisprudence nor its principles, nor Mujtahids nor Ijtihad, nor the issuance of Fatwas.

After this illogical struggle of the Mujtahideen let me refer you to explanation of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) about this verse. Sheykh Saduq has recorded in his book ‘Allal U Sharaai’ that Imam Al Ridha (a.s.) in his explanation of the Pilgrimage (Hajj) said : “ From whatsoever that is there for them in this congregation of Hajj, it is also that they should gain their understanding of religion of the Imams (a.s.) and spread if in every corner of this earth because Allah (s.w.t.) has Commanded in the Holy Quran that why don’t some people from all sects come out and obtain their understanding of religion from the Infallible Imams (a.s.) in whose service Hajj is being done. And when they return back to their people they should relate to them the understanding that they have had from the Infallible Imams (a.s.) and warn them so that they would save themselves from the forbidden things. They must and must be a witness over their own benefits.

I hope that after this it will be clear that this verse 9:122 has nothing to do with Ijtihad or going to a ‘Hawza’ but it is for the annual Pilgrimage where the congregation is to gain knowledge of the traditions of the Infallibles (a.s.) and spread them across the world.

This whole issue of Ijtihad was created from not understanding religion and the misuse of the term ‘Understanding of religions’ (Tafaqqoh Fil Deen). When the meaning of religion will be explained to you it will then the whole game will become clear to you which has been played on the premise of the people being ignorant.

You should know that religion (Deen) is a set of beliefs (Usool) whereas religious laws (Shari’at) is both of the ‘Usools’ and ‘Fur’oos’ put together. This is because the belief never changed because from Adam (a.s.) to The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) there was only one religion.

[Shakir 3:19] Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam,

Since Shari’at is a combination of ‘Usools’ and ‘Fur’oos’, therefore Shari’at keeps changing over time as the ‘Fur’oos’ change. For example let us look at what Allamah Hilli has said in his book ‘Ahsan Ul Aqaaid’ on pages 8 and 9 : ‘In the Glorious Quran the Usool have been referred to as ‘Deen’ and the combination of both the ‘Usools’ and ‘Fur’oos’ has been referred to as Shari’at. Religion has always been one whereas Shari’ats have been five as in the verse:

[Shakir 42:13] He has made plain to you of the religion what He enjoined upon Nuh and that which We have revealed to you and that which We enjoined upon Ibrahim and Musa and Isa that keep to obedience and be not divided therein; hard to the unbelievers is that which you call them to; Allah chooses for Himself whom He pleases, and guides to Himself him who turns (to Him), frequently.

The Verses clearly show that the religion of all these five great prophets was one whereas they had five different set of laws. In fact all the prophets came with the one and only religion as has been mentioned in the verse before that ‘Surely the religion with Allah is Islam’.

The point to ponder over is this that if there was a Command to ponder over Shari’at then some sort of argument could have been made to delve into the principles of jurisprudence, however, the Command is to ponder on religion (Deen) and therefore it can only mean to try and understand the beliefs. This is why Imam Husayn (a.s.) referred to his Habib Ibn Mazahir as a ‘Man of understanding’ (Rajul Un Faqih). It is now proven that ‘Fiqh’ stands for the understanding of the station and position of the Imam (a.s.) and a Faqih (Jurist) is one who understands the true Imam (a.s.).

I think more than enough has been written about this verse now, that those who reflect over their religious matters just as they do over their worldly affairs, will be able to come to the correct conclusion about it, and this is my aim. As for those that come under the definition of this sermon of the Commander of the Faithful Imam Ali (a.s.): ‘The third group of people is one who responds to every caller and follows him, and change their direction according to whichever way the wind blows’ as well as for those that consider it forbidden upon them to ponder over religious matters or reflect upon their hereafter, and prefer to blindly follow a non-infallible as proof of their religiousness, and those who take pleasure in throwing away their religion and their wealth, then I have nothing to do with these people nor am I addressing them in this book. I am convinced that there is no shortage of people who consider intellect and pondering over matters to be a mark of a human being. If one were to make them aware of the truth then they will not refute it without thinking over it, or consider the weight of evidence or proofs.

The other verse that is used to prove Ijtihad is:

[Shakir 4:83] And when there comes to them news of security or fear they spread it abroad; and if they had referred it to the Messenger and to those in authority among them, those among them who can search out the knowledge of it would have known it, and were it not for the grace of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have certainly followed the Shaitan save a few.

I shall deal with this verse in the chapter of ‘Istambaat’ later on. In the next chapter I shall deal with the ‘Usool Fiqh’ (Principles of Jurisprudence) about which you have read earlier on.