Necessity of cognition standard
Unity of cognition standard
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim
Recently a challenging book with new thinking style in the field of knowledge about Islam with the title “Return to Islam” written by “Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani” has been spread among the Muslim elites and thinkers and it has had various reactions. The content of this book, which has been written in an academic and argumentative manner and with reliance upon Islamic certitudes and certainties of all Muslims from different sects, is criticism of official and common version of Islam and presentation of a distinct and beyond sectarian version with the title “complete and pure Islam”.
Author in this book, first explains cognition criterion and considers necessity, unity and self-evidence as three characteristics for it and after plenteous further investigation, considers intellect as its instance and emphasizes that all cognitions inevitably should be concluded with intellect. But he recognizes intellect, different from philosophy and he believes that cognition criterion is the wisdom intellect not the philosophical intellect. In addition he recognizes the millennium long quarrel between Asharites and Adliyah about basis for good and evil or Hosn and Qobh a verbal quarrel originated from recklessness toward creativeness and religiousness of God’s command and prohibition and he believes that intellect and religion are both deeds of God and there is an intrinsic unity among God’s deeds and there is no incongruity or nonconformity among them.
After that he explains impediments of cognition and mentions ignorance, imitation, passions, worldliness, prejudice, arrogance and superstition from among its most important instances and thereunder he explains, in a historically and pathologically manner, beliefs and deeds of Muslims and criticizes their intellectual foundations since demise of the prophet peace and salutation be upon him and his household to this day, and then explains and finds the roots for common innovations [Bida’ah] and deviations and miseries and difficulties of the world of Islam.
In a part of his book, he recognizes Muslims lack of sufficient and complete knowledge about Islam as the most cause for their division and deviation and he mentions different motives and origins for that; He also knows lack of correct and complete knowledge about one another and about their enemies as another cause for that.
One of the important subjects that has been challenged in this book is imitation. He considers imitation from predecessors and oppressor rulers to the meaning of following them, from among the reasons for degeneration of Islamic culture and he deems Muslims uprising against dictator and dependent governments, even though they pretend to be Islamic, permissible; Not only he does not deem imitation from unbelievers to the meaning of following their non-Islamic thoughts and models, a cause for Muslims material and worldly progress, but even he knows it a cause for collapse of their culture and civilization. In addition he recognizes imitation from majority of people, wrongful and then after rejecting validity of consensus and fame as religious reasons due to their conjectural nature, he criticizes democracy theoretically and knows it inefficient, particularly in societies whose people do not have enough intellectual maturity.
He also rejects imitation from scholars with the reason that it is just useful for conjecture and conjecture does not have authority in Islam and he knows it one of the causes for divisions of Muslims since long time ago to this day. Yet further he does not even consider Ijtihad to its commonplace meaning which is interpreting laws from conjectural reasoning, correct with regards to invalidity of conjectural reasoning in Islam and he knows it necessary to figure out another solution to achieve certainty. It is clear that, even though this exquisite and distinct view of the author can bring about various political reactions in some countries, they have been mentioned in an intellectual and discursive frame and lacks political orientation.
The author then continues by criticizing the theory of “Absolute Wilayah of Faqih” [Absolute authority of jurisprudent] from a foundational point of view and deems it an exaggeration about scholars and considers it invalid from an intellectual perspective; Because the author believes unconditional and unrestricted obedience to someone who may willingly or unwillingly commands opposite to the truth, is against verdict of intellect and religion. Also as a consequence of belief in absolute Wilaya of Faqih [absolute authority of jurisprudent], he believes incontestable obedience to a fallible person and devolving powers of an infallible person to him, habitually becomes a source for various seditions and great corruptions such as political dictatorship, and he knows it as another reason to avoid that belief. It is clear that, even though this critical view of the author has been accompanied by some severe political and security reactions in some of the Shiite countries, it is completely a scholarly view and is similar to the view of their great and famous scholars such as Sheikh Ansari, Akhund Khorasani and Abul Qasim Khou’i, and by no means has a political or anti-security orientation.
The author continues by considering superstition, an influential cause that has impacted beliefs and deeds of Muslims and criticizes some of the Sufi people for spreading it and he deems their role, in evading wisdom and a religiousness which is emotional and poetic, bold among Muslims. He also reproaches many poets because of composing beautiful, but incorrect poems which in some cases are in opposition with teachings of the prophets and accounts them like magicians as competitors and enemies of the prophets who obstruct the path of God for people by their “Zukhruf-ul Ghawl” [glittery orations] and “Lahw-ul Hadith” [vain orations].
Another fundamental and important subject that Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani has dealt with in the challenging and outstanding book “Return to Islam”, is Islamic sovereign ruling. In his view, sovereign ruling over people belongs to God only, and no one but Him has the right to have ownership over them and He accomplishes His sovereignty over them through acquiring a representative or the so called “Caliph”. With this description the foundation for formation of Islamic sovereign ruling and its political legitimacy, is contingent upon God’s solid and exclusive permission which does not exist for any of the current rulers in the world of Islam and therefore, none of their sovereign ruling is considered Islamic...