Please note the following points:

Firstly, the fact that most hadiths are ahad reports and that ahad reports lead to conjecture is not solely the opinion of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani, but rather the opinion of all Muslim scholars, except for a small group of Hanbalis and Salafis. This is a fact perceived by common sense that no intellectual denies; as Abu al-Ma‘ali al-Juwaini (d. 478 AH) has said: «ذَهَبَتِ الْحَشْوِيَّةُ مِنَ الْحَنَابِلَةِ وَكَتَبَةِ الْحَدِيثِ إِلَى أَنَّ خَبَرَ الْوَاحِدِ الْعَدْلِ يُوجِبُ الْعِلْمَ، وَهَذَا خِزْيٌ لَا يَخْفَى مُدْرَكُهُ عَلَى ذِي لُبٍّ. فَنَقُولُ لِهَؤُلَاءِ: أَتُجَوِّزُونَ أَنْ يَزِلَّ الْعَدْلُ الَّذِي وَصَفْتُمُوهُ وَيُخْطِئَ؟ فَإِنْ قَالُوا: لَا، كَانَ ذَلِكَ بَهْتًا وَهَتْكًا وَخَرْقًا لِحِجَابِ الْهَيْبَةِ، وَلَا حَاجَةَ إِلَى مَزِيدِ الْبَيَانِ فِيهِ، فَإِذَا تَبَيَّنَ إِمْكَانُ الْخَطَإِ فَالْقَطْعُ بِالصِّدْقِ مَعَ ذَلِكَ مُحَالٌ. ثُمَّ هَذَا فِي الْعَدْلِ فِي عِلْمِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى، وَنَحْنُ لَا نَقْطَعُ بِعَدَالَةِ وَاحِدٍ، بَلْ يَجُوزُ أَنْ يُضْمِرَ خِلَافَ مَا يُظْهِرُ»[1]; “The literalists among the Hanbalis and the hadith compilers are of the view that the ahad reports lead to knowledge. This is a shame whose understanding is not hidden from anyone with intelligence. So we say to these people: ‘Do you allow that the just person you described could err and make a mistake?’ If they say no, then that is a lie, a disgrace, and a tearing of the veil of reverence, and there is no need for further explanation. But if it becomes clear that error is possible, then it is impossible to be certain of truth at the same time. Moreover, this is regarding the just person in the knowledge of Allah Almighty, and we do not assert the justness of any single person, but rather it is possible that he may conceal something contrary to what he reveals,” and al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) has said: «أَمَّا مَنْ قَالَ (خَبَرُ الْوَاحِدِ) يُوجِبُ الْعِلْمَ فَهُوَ مُكَابِرٌ لِلْحِسِّ، وَكَيْفَ يَحْصُلُ الْعِلْمُ؟! وَاحْتِمَالُ الْغَلَطِ وَالْوَهْمِ وَالْكَذِبِ وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ مُتَطَرِّقٌ إِلَيْهِ»[2]; “As for one who says that (ahad reports) lead to knowledge, he acts obstinately against the perceptible. How can knowledge be attained?! While the possibility of error, misunderstanding, falsehood, and the like is always present.”

Secondly, the lack of the authority of conjecture is not the opinion of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani; rather, it is the statement of Allah Almighty in the Holy Quran, where He has explicitly said: ﴿إِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا﴾[3]; “Indeed, conjecture is not sufficient for the truth.” This is a reminder from Allah Almighty of a rational ruling, as explained by Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani in the book Return to Islam, where he has said:

Conjecture is certainly not adequate to be the basis of Muslims’ beliefs and deeds, and Islam is based only on certainty; as Allah has said repeatedly and emphatically: ﴿إِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا﴾; “Indeed, conjecture is not sufficient for the truth,” and it is clear that this is a real rule, in the sense that it informs about reality, and therefore, it does not accept nominal specification, as its context does not tolerate specification; because conjecture, due to the possibility of a contradiction in its essence, is not proof in reality, and considering authority for a thing that is not proof in reality is useless, like considering burning for ice; in view of the fact that there is no conflict between the intellect and Sharia, and considerations of the wise are based on reality, but rather considering a thing that does not exist in reality is counted as a lie; such as considering darkness for the day and light for the night, while lying is impossible for Allah… The abolishment of the authority of conjecture in an absolute manner has been done by the intellect; because its lack of authority means it does not reveal reality, which is one of the rational and real categories and cannot be authenticated to be within the reach of Sharia, and therefore, Sharia is not able to interfere in it. It is hereby understood that the belief of some Muslims in the authority of special conjecture, in the sense of conjecture resulting from ahad narrations, is baseless; because authority is not one of the religious categories, but rather it returns to the human being’s natural perceptions of reality, and therefore, it is not possible to establish authority for conjecture with a ruling, as it is not possible to abolish the authority of certainty with a ruling. Regardless of the fact that the ruling of Sharia on the authority of some conjectures is not proven; because there are numerous verses and narrations that deny the authority of conjecture in general, and with their existence, there is no certainty about the authority of some conjectures in Sharia, but rather, to be fair, the explicitness of some verses and narrations about the lack of authority of absolute conjecture is so great that attributing its specification to Sharia is like fabricating lies against Allah and His Messenger.[4]

Thirdly, the fact that most hadiths are conjectural and that conjecture is not proof does not imply the permissibility of imitating scholars; rather, it implies the opposite, as it is well known that the basis for most of their fatwas is conjectural hadiths; regardless of the possibility of their error in deriving rulings from these hadiths as well, since they are not infallible. Also, some of them disagree with others despite their shared belief in the authority of these hadiths. Therefore, it can be said that imitating the scholars who believe in the authority of conjectural hadiths is ﴿ظُلُمَاتٌ بَعْضُهَا فَوْقَ بَعْضٍ﴾[5]; “darkness upon darkness”; because it is conjecture upon conjecture! This reveals the gross contradiction in your statement, where you said: “If hadiths are conjectural, then how can I know the religious rulings except by imitating scholars?!” Because imitating scholars does not lead to knowledge of religious rulings, even if the hadiths were certain, as they may make mistakes in deriving rulings from them; how can it then lead to knowledge of religious rulings when the hadiths are also conjectural?! Therefore, all the early scholars unanimously agreed on the impermissibility of imitating scholars, regardless of whether conjectural hadiths have authority or not; as it has been narrated from the Ahl al-Bayt and a group of the Sahabah and the Tabi‘un that they interpreted the statement of Allah Almighty: ﴿اتَّخَذُوا أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ﴾[6]; “They took their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah” to mean that «لَمْ يَكُونُوا يُصَلُّونَ لَهُمْ، وَلَكِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا إِذَا أَحَلُّوا لَهُمْ شَيْئًا اسْتَحَلُّوهُ، وَإِذَا حَرَّمُوا عَلَيْهِمْ شَيْئًا حَرَّمُوهُ، فَتِلْكَ كَانَتْ رُبُوبِيَّتَهُمْ»[7]; “they did not perform prayer for them. But when they made something lawful for them, they considered it lawful, and when they made something unlawful for them, they considered it unlawful. So this was their lordship.” This means that they counted imitating scholars as a form of polytheism. It has been narrated from Ali that he said: «إِنَّ دِينَ اللَّهِ لَا يُعْرَفُ بِالرِّجَالِ، بَلْ بِآيَةِ الْحَقِّ»[8]; “Indeed, the religion of Allah is not known by men, but by the signs of the truth,” and he said: «مَنْ أَخَذَ دِينَهُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِ الرِّجَالِ أَزَالَتْهُ الرِّجَالُ، وَمَنْ أَخَذَ دِينَهُ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ زَالَتِ الْجِبَالُ وَلَمْ يَزَلْ»[9]; “Whoever takes his religion from the mouths of men, men will make him slip; and whoever takes his religion from the Book and the Sunnah, the mountains may vanish, but he will remain steadfast.” It has been narrated from Salman and Mu‘adh ibn Jabal that they warned against the error of a scholar, saying: «إِنِ اهْتَدَى الْعَالِمُ فَلَا تُقَلِّدُوهُ دِينَكُمْ»[10]; “If the scholar is guided, do not imitate him in your religion,” meaning do not imitate him even if he is just; because he may make a mistake. It has been narrated from Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud that he said: «أَلَا لَا يُقَلِّدَنَّ أَحَدُكُمْ دِينَهُ رَجُلًا»[11]; “Beware! None of you should imitate a man in his religion,” and he said: «لَا يَكُونَنَّ أَحَدُكُمْ إِمَّعَةً»[12]; “None of you should be imma‘ah,” and imma‘ah refers to an imitator in religion. It has been narrated from Ja‘far ibn Muhammad al-Sadiq that he said: «إِيَّاكُمْ وَالتَّقْلِيدَ، فَإِنَّهُ مَنْ قَلَّدَ فِي دِينِهِ هَلَكَ»[13]; “Beware of imitation, for whoever imitates in his religion is doomed,” and he said: «إِيَّاكَ أَنْ تَنْصِبَ رَجُلًا دُونَ الْحُجَّةِ فَتُصَدِّقَهُ فِي كُلِّ مَا قَالَ»[14]; “Beware of appointing a man (as your leader) without proof and believing him in everything he says.” It has been narrated from Abu Hanifah that he said: «لَا يَحِلُّ لِمَنْ يُفْتِي مِنْ كُتُبِي أَنْ يُفْتِيَ حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ مِنْ أَيْنَ قُلْتُ»[15]; “It is not permissible for a person who issues fatwas based on my books to issue fatwas until he knows on what basis I have said,” and from Abu Yusuf that he said: «لَا يَحِلُّ لِأَحَدٍ أَنْ يَقُولَ مَقَالَتَنَا حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ مِنْ أَيْنَ قُلْنَا»[16]; “It is not permissible for anyone to say our words until he knows on what basis we have said.” Isam ibn Yusuf has said: «كُنْتُ فِي مَأْتَمٍ، فَاجْتَمَعَ فِيهِ أَرْبَعَةٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ، زُفَرُ بْنُ الْهُذَيْلِ، وَأَبُو يُوسُفَ، وَعَافِيَةُ بْنُ يَزِيدَ، وَآخَرُ، فَكُلُّهُمْ أَجْمَعُوا عَلَى أَنَّهُ لَا يَحِلُّ لِأَحَدٍ أَنْ يُفْتِيَ بِقَوْلِنَا مَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْ مِنْ أَيْنَ قُلْنَا»[17]; “I was in a mourning gathering. Then four of the companions of Abu Hanifah gathered: Zufar ibn al-Hudhayl, Abu Yusuf, Afiyah ibn Yazid, and another. They all agreed that it is not permissible for anyone to issue fatwas based on our statements unless he knows on what basis we have said.” It has been narrated from Malik ibn Anas that he said: «إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ أُخْطِئُ وَأُصِيبُ، فَانْظُرُوا فِي رَأْيِي، فَكُلُّ مَا وَافَقَ الْكِتَابَ وَالسُّنَّةَ فَخُذُوا بِهِ، وَمَا لَمْ يُوَافِقِ الْكِتَابَ وَالسُّنَّةَ فَاتْرُكُوهُ»[18]; “I am only a human being; I may be wrong, and I may be right. So examine my opinions; whatever agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, take it, and whatever does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, leave it.” It has been narrated from al-Shafi‘i that he said: «كُلَّمَا قُلْتُ وَكَانَ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ خِلَافُ قَوْلِي مِمَّا يَصِحُّ، فَحَدِيثُ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَوْلَى، وَلَا تُقَلِّدُونِي»[19]; “Whenever I say something, and there is something authentic from the Prophet that contradicts my statement, then the hadith of the Prophet comes first, and do not imitate me,” and he said: «إِذَا صَحَّ لَكُمُ الْحَدِيثُ فَخُذُوا بِهِ، وَاضْرِبُوا بِقَوْلِي الْحَائِطَ»[20]; “If a hadith is proven true for you, then take it and throw my saying against the wall,” and he said: «مَثَلُ الَّذِي يَطْلُبُ الْعِلْمَ بِلَا حُجَّةٍ كَمَثَلِ حَاطِبِ لَيْلٍ، يَحْمِلُ حُزْمَةَ حَطَبٍ، وَفِيهِ أَفْعَى تَلْدَغُهُ، وَهُوَ لَا يَدْرِي»[21]; “The example of a person who seeks knowledge without evidence is like that of a wood gatherer at night who carries a bundle of firewood, and within it is a snake that bites him while he does not know it.” It has been narrated from Ahmad ibn Hanbal that he said: «لَا تُقَلِّدُونِي، وَلَا تُقَلِّدُوا مَالِكًا وَلَا الشَّافِعِيَّ وَلَا الثَّوْرِيَّ، وَتَعَلَّمُوا كَمَا تَعَلَّمْنَا»[22]; “Do not imitate me, and do not imitate Malik, or al-Shafi‘i, or al-Thawri. And learn just as we learned,” and he said: «لَا تُقَلِّدْنِي، وَلَا تُقَلِّدْ مَالِكًا وَلَا الثَّوْرِيَّ وَلَا الْأَوْزَاعِيَّ، وَخُذْ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَخَذُوا»[23]; “Do not imitate me, and do not imitate Malik, or al-Thawri, or al-Awza‘i. And take from where they took,” and he said: «لَا تُقَلِّدْ دِينَكَ الرِّجَالَ، فَإِنَّهُمْ لَنْ يَسْلَمُوا مِنْ أَنْ يَغْلُطُوا»[24]; “Do not imitate men in your religion, for they are not free from making mistakes,” and he said: «مِنْ قِلَّةِ فِقْهِ الرَّجُلِ أَنْ يُقَلِّدَ دِينَهُ الرِّجَالَ»[25]; “One of the signs of a man’s lack of understanding is that he imitates men in his religion.” It has been narrated from Rabi‘ah ibn Abi Abd al-Rahman that he cried for people due to the widespread imitation of scholars among them, saying: «النَّاسُ عِنْدَ عُلَمَائِهِمْ كَالصِّبْيَانِ فِي حُجُورِ أُمَّهَاتِهِمْ! مَا أَمَرُوهُمْ بِهِ ائْتَمَرُوا، وَمَا نَهَوْهُمْ عَنْهُ انْتَهَوْا»[26]; “People, in the view of their scholars, are like children in the laps of their mothers! Whatever they command them, they obey, and whatever they prohibit them from, they leave off.” It has been narrated from Abdullah ibn al-Mu‘tazz that he said: «لَا فَرْقَ بَيْنَ بَهِيمَةٍ تَنْقَادُ وَإِنْسَانٍ يُقَلِّدُ»[27]; “There is no difference between an animal being led and a person who imitates.” Ibn Abd al-Barr has said: «إِذَا صَحَّ وَثَبَتَ أَنَّ الْعَالِمَ يَزِلُّ وَيُخْطِئُ لَمْ يَجُزْ لِأَحَدٍ أَنْ يُفْتِيَ وَيَدِينَ بِقَوْلٍ لَا يَعْرِفُ وَجْهَهُ»[28]; “If it is proven and established that a scholar may slip and make mistakes, then it is not permissible for anyone to issue fatwas or practice religion based on a statement whose basis he does not know.” Al-Mufid, who is one of the greatest scholars of the Shia, has said: «التَّقْلِيدُ مَذْمُومٌ بِاتِّفَاقِ الْعُلَمَاءِ وَنَصِّ الْقُرْآنِ وَالسُّنَّةِ»[29]; “Imitation is condemned by the consensus of scholars and by the explicit text of the Quran and the Sunnah.” Al-Tusi, who is also one of their greatest scholars, has said: «التَّقْلِيدُ قَبِيحٌ بِمُوجِبِ الْعَقْلِ»[30]; “Imitation is abhorrent according to the intellect,” and he has said: «لِأَنَّ فِيهِ إِقْدَامًا عَلَى مَا لَا يَأْمَنُ كَوْنَ مَا يَعْتَقِدُهُ عِنْدَ التَّقْلِيدِ جَهْلًا لِتَعَرِّيهِ مِنَ الدَّلِيلِ، وَالْإِقْدَامُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ قَبِيحٌ فِي الْعُقُولِ»[31]; “This is because it entails taking a risk on what one cannot be sure is correct, as what one believes through imitation may be ignorance due to the lack of evidence, and taking such a risk is deemed abhorrent according to intellects,” and he has said: «إِنَّ التَّقْلِيدَ فِي الدِّينِ لَا يَجُوزُ»[32]; “Imitation in religion is not permissible,” and he has said: «لَا يَجُوزُ لِأَحَدٍ أَنْ يَعْمَلَ عَلَى شَيْءٍ مِنْ أَمْرِ الدِّينِ إِلَّا بِحُجَّةٍ»[33]; “It is not permissible for anyone to act on any matter of religion except with evidence.” It is clear that their statements are general and encompass imitation in both the principles and the branches of religion equally. Al-Sharif al-Murtada has explained this in one of his letters, saying: «إِنْ قِيلَ: مَعْلُومٌ ضَرُورَةً أَنَّ الْعَامِّيَّ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُ أَنْ يَعْرِفَ الْحَقَّ فِي الْفُرُوعِ كُلَّهُ، وَمَنْ كَلَّفَهُ فَقَدْ كَلَّفَهُ مَا لَا يُطِيقُ، قُلْنَا: لَا خِلَافَ بَيْنَنَا فِي أَنَّ الْعَامِّيَّ مُكَلَّفٌ لِلْعِلْمِ بِالْحَقِّ فِي أُصُولِ الدِّينِ، وَهِيَ أَدَقُّ وَأَغْمَضُ وَأَوْسَعُ وَأَكْثَرُ شُبَهًا، وَإِذَا جَازَ أَنْ يُطِيقَ الْعَامِّيُّ مَعْرِفَةَ الْحَقِّ فِي أُصُولِ الدِّينِ وَتَمْيِيزَهُ مِنَ الْبَاطِلِ، مَعَ مَا ذَكَرْنَاهُ مِنْ غُمُوضِهِ وَكَثْرَةِ شُبَهِهِ، فَأَوْلَى أَنْ يُطِيقَ ذَلِكَ فِيمَا هُوَ أَقَلُّ غَوْرًا وَأَوْضَحُ طُرُقًا. فَإِنْ قِيلَ: لَيْسَ يَجِبُ عَلَى الْعَامِّيِّ فِي أُصُولِ الدِّينِ إِلَّا الْعِلْمُ بِالْجُمَلِ الَّتِي يُشْرِفُ بِهَا عَلَى الْحَقِّ، فَأَمَّا التَّدْقِيقُ وَكَشْفُ الْغَامِضِ فَلَيْسَ مِمَّا يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ، قُلْنَا: وَمَا الْمَانِعُ مِنْ أَنْ نَقُولَ ذَلِكَ فِي الْفُرُوعِ وَالشَّرَائِعِ، وَأَنَّ مَعْرِفَةَ الْحَقِّ مِنْهَا مِنَ الْبَاطِلِ يَكُونُ طَرِيقًا مُخْتَصَرًا لَا يَخْرُجُ إِلَى التَّعْمِيقِ وَالتَّدْقِيقِ، يَكْتَفِي بِهِ الْعَامِّيُّ كَمَا اكْتَفَى بِمِثْلِهِ فِي الْأُصُولِ؟ فَإِنْ قِيلَ: فَمَا قَوْلُكُمْ فِي عَامِّيٍّ لَا يَقْدِرُ عَلَى شَيْءٍ مِنَ النَّظَرِ وَالتَّمْيِيزِ لِلْحَقِّ مِنَ الْبَاطِلِ؟ أَتُوجِبُونَ عَلَيْهِ تَقْلِيدَ الْعَالِمِ، أَمْ لَا تُوجِبُونَ ذَلِكَ؟ فَالْجَوَابُ عَنْ هَذَا السُّؤَالِ أَنَّ مَنْ لَا يَقْدِرُ عَلَى تَمْيِيزِ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الْبَاطِلِ فِي فُرُوعِ الدِّينِ، لَا يَقْدِرُ عَلَى مِثْلِ ذَلِكَ فِي أُصُولِهِ، وَمَنْ هَذِهِ صِفَتُهُ فَهُوَ عَامِّيٌّ فِي الْأُصُولِ وَالْفُرُوعِ، وَلَا يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ شَيْءٌ مِنَ النَّظَرِ وَالْبَحْثِ، وَكَمَا لَا يَجِبَانِ عَلَيْهِ فَلَا يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ التَّقْلِيدُ فِي الْفُرُوعِ، كَمَا لَا يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ مِثْلُ ذَلِكَ فِي الْأُصُولِ، وَهَذَا جَارٍ مَجْرَى الْبَهَائِمِ وَالْأَطْفَالِ الْخَارِجِينَ عَنِ التَّكْلِيفِ، فَلَا حَرَامَ عَلَيْهِمْ، وَلَا حَلَالَ لَهُمْ»[34]; “If it is said: ‘It is necessarily known that a layperson cannot know the truth in all the branches, and whoever obligates him to do so has obligated him to something he cannot bear,’ we say: ‘There is no disagreement among us that a layperson is obligated to seek knowledge of the truth in the principles of religion, which are more subtle, more obscure, broader, and filled with more doubts. And if it is permissible for a layperson to bear knowing the truth in the principles of religion and distinguish it from falsehood, despite the obscurity and numerous doubts we mentioned, then it is more appropriate for him to bear this in matters that are less profound and clearer.’ If it is then said: ‘A layperson is only obligated to have knowledge of the general principles that give him an overview of the truth. As for detailed examination and uncovering the obscure, that is not obligatory for him,’ we say: ‘What prevents us from saying the same about the branches and divine laws, and that knowing the truth from falsehood in these matters can be a concise path that does not require deep and detailed examination, so this suffices for a layperson just as a similar approach suffices for him in the principles?’ If it is then said: ‘What do you say about a layperson who is incapable of any kind of examination and discernment between the truth and falsehood? Do you obligate him to imitate a scholar, or do you not obligate that?’ The answer to this question is that one who cannot distinguish the truth from falsehood in the branches of religion cannot do so in the principles either. And whoever possesses this quality is a layperson in both the principles and the branches, and no examination or research is obligatory for him. And just as this is not obligatory for him, imitating in the branches is also not obligatory for him, just as it is not obligatory for him in the principles. This situation is similar to that of animals and children who are beyond obligation; thus, no unlawful is on them, and not lawful is for them.” Al-Hurr al-Amili, the author of Wasa’il al-Shia, has acknowledged this, saying: «أَدِلَّةُ جَوَازِ التَّقْلِيدِ ضَعِيفَةٌ، وَالْآيَاتُ الشَّرِيفَةُ صَرِيحَةٌ فِي ذَمِّهِ وَالْمَنْعِ مِنْهُ مُطْلَقًا، بَلْ بَعْضُ الْآيَاتِ ظَاهِرَةٌ فِي تَنَاوُلِ الْمَنْعِ لِلْفُرُوعِ»[35]; “The pieces of evidence for the permissibility of imitation are weak, and the noble verses are explicit in condemning it and prohibiting it absolutely. Rather, some of the verses clearly show that the prohibition extends to the branches.” He has also said: «يُسْتَفَادُ مِنَ الْآيَاتِ الشَّرِيفَةِ عَدَمُ جَوَازِ الْعَمَلِ بِالظَّنِّ، وَهُوَ مُصَرَّحٌ بِهِ فِي آيَاتٍ كَثِيرَةٍ، مِنْهَا مَا هُوَ عَامٌّ فِي الْأُصُولِ وَالْفُرُوعِ، وَلَا يُوجَدُ لَهُ شَيْءٌ يُخَصِّصُهُ بِحَيْثُ يُمْكِنُ الْإِعْتِمَادُ عَلَيْهِ، بَلْ بَعْضُ الْآيَاتِ الشَّرِيفَةِ ظَاهِرَةٌ بَلْ صَرِيحَةٌ فِي عَدَمِ جَوَازِهِ فِي الْفُرُوعِ، كَتَحْلِيلِ الْأَنْعَامِ وَتَحْرِيمِهَا وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ، وَمِنْهَا مَا هُوَ صَرِيحٌ فِي شُمُولِ الْقِسْمَيْنِ كَالْآيَةِ الْمُتَضَمِّنَةِ لِلشِّرْكِ وَالتَّحْرِيمِ... وَتَخْصِيصُ هَذِهِ الْآيَاتِ بِأُصُولِ الدِّينِ كَمَا وَقَعَ مِنَ الْأُصُولِيِّينَ بِنَاءً عَلَى أَنَّ الضَّرُورَةَ أَلْجَأَتْ إِلَى الْعَمَلِ بِالظَّنِّ، إِمَّا مُطْلَقًا كَمَا قَالَهُ الْعَامَّةُ، أَوْ فِي زَمَنِ الْغَيْبَةِ كَمَا قَالَهُ بَعْضُ الْخَاصَّةِ، ضَعِيفٌ لَا وَجْهَ لَهُ»[36]; “It is understood from the noble verses that acting based on conjecture is not permissible, and this is explicitly stated in many verses, some of which are general in both the principles and the branches. And there is nothing that specifies it in a way that could be relied upon. Rather, some of the noble verses are clear, even explicit, in prohibiting it in the branches as well, such as the permissibility and prohibition of livestock and other matters. And some verses are also explicit in encompassing both categories, such as the verse that includes polytheism and prohibition… And the specification of these verses to the principles of religion, as has occurred among the Usuli scholars based on the claim that necessity compels one to act on conjecture—either absolutely, as stated by the general public, or during the time of the absence (of the Mahdi), as some of the elite have said—is weak and lacks justification.” Al-Sharif al-Murtada has said regarding the impermissibility of acting based on the books of fatwas circulating among the Shia due to their lack of evidence: «اعْلَمْ أَنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ لِعَالِمٍ وَلَا عَامِّيٍّ الرُّجُوعُ فِي حُكْمٍ مِنْ أَحْكَامِ الشَّرِيعَةِ إِلَى كِتَابٍ مُصَنَّفٍ، لِأَنَّ الْعَمَلَ لَا بُدَّ مِنْ أَنْ يَكُونَ تَابِعًا لِلْعِلْمِ عَلَى بَعْضِ الْوُجُوهِ، وَالنَّظَرُ فِي الْكِتَابِ لَا يُفِيدُ عِلْمًا، فَالْعَامِلُ بِمَا وَجَدَهُ فِيهِ لَا يَأْمَنُ مِنْ أَنْ يَكُونَ مُقْدِمًا عَلَى قَبِيحٍ»[37]; “Know that it is not permissible for either a scholar or a layperson to refer to a compiled book for a ruling from the rulings of Sharia; because a deed must necessarily follow knowledge in some way, and consulting such books does not lead to knowledge. Therefore, a person who acts based on what he finds in them cannot be assured of not committing something abhorrent.” He has also said: «إِنَّا مَا نَجِدُ مُحَصِّلًا مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا يَرْجِعُ إِلَى الْعَمَلِ بِمَا فِي هَذِهِ الْكُتُبِ مِنْ غَيْرِ حُجَّةٍ، وَمَا زَالَ عُلَمَاءُ الطَّائِفَةِ وَمُتَكَلِّمُوهُمْ يُنْكِرُونَ عَلَى عَوَامِّهِمُ الْعَمَلَ بِمَا يَجِدُونَهُ فِي الْكُتُبِ مِنْ غَيْرِ حُجَّةٍ، وَلَا اعْتِبَارَ بِعَوَامِّ الطَّائِفَةِ وَطَغَامِهِمْ، وَإِنَّمَا الْإِعْتَبَارُ بِالْعُلَمَاءِ الْمُحَصِّلِينَ»[38]; “We do not find any of our learned companions who resort to acting based on what is in these books without proof. And the scholars of the sect and their theologians have consistently denied their laypeople’s practice of acting based on what they find in these books without proof. The opinions of their laypeople and masses hold no weight; rather, only the opinions of learned scholars should be considered.” From here, it is understood that the impermissibility of imitation in religion was a clear and well-accepted matter among the early scholars from all Islamic sects. The view of its permissibility has only emerged among later scholars as a grave innovation.

Fourthly, the non-validity of personal opinion is a clear matter that should not be disputed; because if it refers to a fatwa without evidence, then it is imitation, which we have demonstrated to be incorrect, and if it refers to a fatwa based on qiyas and istihsan, then it is merely following conjecture and guesswork, while Allah Almighty has prohibited following them, saying: ﴿إِنْ تَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا الظَّنَّ وَإِنْ أَنْتُمْ إِلَّا تَخْرُصُونَ﴾[39]; “You follow nothing but conjecture and do nothing but guess.” Also, it has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah that he said: «لَا رَأْيَ فِي الدِّينِ»[40]; “There is no opinion in religion,” and he said: «لَا تُفْتُوا بِرَأْيِكُمْ»[41]; “Do not issue fatwas based on your opinion,” and in another narration: «لَا تَعْمَلُوا بِرَأْيِكُمْ»[42]; “Do not act based on your opinion.” It has been narrated from Ali that he said: «لَوْ كَانَ الدِّينُ بِالرَّأْيِ لَكَانَ بَاطِنُ الْقَدَمَيْنِ أَحَقَّ بِالْمَسْحِ مِنْ ظَاهِرِهِمَا، وَلَكِنْ رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَمْسَحُ ظَاهِرَهُمَا»[43]; “If practicing religion were based on opinion, then the soles of the feet would be more deserving of wiping than their tops. But I saw the Messenger of Allah wiping their tops,” and he said: «مَنْ نَصَبَ نَفْسَهُ لِلْقِيَاسِ، لَمْ يَزَلْ دَهْرَهُ فِي الْتِبَاسٍ، وَمَنْ دَانَ اللَّهَ بِالرَّأْيِ، لَمْ يَزَلْ دَهْرَهُ فِي ارْتِمَاسٍ»[44]; “One who bases his affairs on qiyas will always be in confusion, and one who practices religion based on opinion will always be wandering aimlessly.” It has been narrated from Umar ibn al-Khattab that he said: «اتَّقُوا الرَّأْيَ فِي دِينِكُمْ»[45]; “Avoid opinion in your religion,” and he said: «إِيَّاكُمْ وَأَصْحَابَ الرَّأْيِ، فَإِنَّهُمْ أَعْدَاءُ السُّنَنِ»[46]; “Beware of the people of opinion, for they are the enemies of the Sunnah.” It has been narrated from ibn Abbas that he said: «إِيَّاكُمْ وَالرَّأْيَ، فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ رَدَّ عَلَى الْمَلَائِكَةِ الرَّأْيَ، ﴿قَالَ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ﴾[47]، وَقَالَ لِنَبِيِّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ﴿وَأَنِ احْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ﴾[48]، وَلَمْ يَقُلْ: بِمَا رَأَيْتَ»[49]; “Beware of opinion, for Allah rejected the opinion of the Angels; ‘He said: Indeed, I know what you do not know.’ And He said to His Prophet : ‘And judge between them by what Allah has revealed,’ and He did not say: ‘By your opinion.’” It has been narrated from Sahl ibn Hanif that he said: «اتَّهِمُوا رَأْيَكُمْ عَلَى دِينِكُمْ»[50]; “Blame your opinions about your religion.” It has been narrated from Abu Ja‘far that he said: «مَنْ أَفْتَى النَّاسَ بِرَأْيِهِ فَقَدْ دَانَ اللَّهَ بِمَا لَا يَعْلَمُ، وَمَنْ دَانَ اللَّهَ بِمَا لَا يَعْلَمُ فَقَدْ ضَادَّ اللَّهَ حَيْثُ أَحَلَّ وَحَرَّمَ فِيمَا لَا يَعْلَمُ»[51]; “Whoever issues a fatwa to people based on his opinion has worshipped Allah by what he does not know. And whoever worships Allah by what he does not know has opposed Allah where he has made lawful and unlawful in what he does not know.” It has been narrated from Ja‘far ibn Muhammad that he said to Abu Hanifah: «اتَّقِ اللَّهَ، وَلَا تَقِسِ الدِّينَ بِرَأْيِكَ، فَإِنَّ أَوَّلَ مَنْ قَاسَ إِبْلِيسُ، إِذْ أَمَرَهُ اللَّهُ بِالسُّجُودِ لِآدَمَ، فَقَالَ: أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِنْهُ، خَلَقْتَنِي مِنْ نَارٍ، وَخَلَقْتَهُ مِنْ طِينٍ»[52]; “Fear Allah, and do not make comparisons in religion based on your opinion, for the first one to make a comparison was Iblis, when Allah commanded him to prostrate to Adam, and he said: ‘I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay.’”

Fifthly, if it is established that imitation and the use of personal opinion are not permissible due to the invalidity of conjecture in religion, then seeking knowledge becomes obligatory; as the Prophet said: «طَلَبُ الْعِلْمِ فَرِيضَةٌ عَلَى كُلِّ مُسْلِمٍ»[53]; “Seeking knowledge is an obligation upon every Muslim,” and this can only be achieved by referring to the Book of Allah and the authentic Sunnah of the Prophet . As for the Book of Allah, it is accessible to everyone, and Allah has made it easy to learn and has not placed any crookedness in it. As for the authentic Sunnah of the Prophet , it can be obtained by referring to the widely transmitted reports from him and by going to his rightly guided caliph; as he explicitly stated this, saying: «عَلَيْكُمْ بِمَا عَرَفْتُمْ مِنْ سُنَّتِي وَسُنَّةِ الْخُلَفَاءِ الرَّاشِدِينَ الْمَهْدِيِّينَ مِنْ بَعْدِي»[54]; “Adhere to what you learn of my Sunnah and the way of the rightly guided caliphs after me.” As for referring to the widely transmitted reports from him, there is no difficulty or hardship for people in this; because these reports are well-known and found in many circulating hadith books. Even if there were some difficulty or hardship, it would still be necessary; because difficulty and hardship do not waive an obligation if they arise from the poor choices of the obligated person. As for referring to the rightly guided caliph, there is also no difficulty or hardship for people in this; because he is a human like them who lives among them, and they can reach him to seek his fatwa, unless they refuse to know him or make him fear for his life, thus forcing him to hiding. If they do so, they are not excused from their obligations; rather, they are responsible, and they must know him or make him feel secure about his life as soon as possible so that they can reach him. Their deeds before that, if based on the Book of Allah and the widely transmitted reports from the Prophet , are adequate. However, if they are based on ahad reports, qiyas, istihsan, or imitation, they are not adequate, even if it appears that they have no alternative. This is a “very illogical situation” that they have brought upon themselves, ﴿وَمَا رَبُّكَ بِظَلَّامٍ لِلْعَبِيدِ﴾[55]; “and your Lord is not unjust to the servants.” It is like a usurper or a thief who enters a house without the owner’s permission and then finds himself short of time for prayer, thus performing prayer inside the house, while his prayer there is invalid, even if he has no alternative, and this is a “very illogical situation” that he has placed himself in through his poor choice. Therefore, Allah Almighty has said: ﴿فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ غَيْرَ بَاغٍ وَلَا عَادٍ فَلَا إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ﴾[56]; “Whoever is forced by necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin is upon him”; because one who is forced because of his own desire or because he exceeds the limit, there is sin upon him, even if he is compelled in what he does. This is a bitter truth that Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani has explained in the topic “Consequences of non-advent of Mahdi for people” from the book Return to Islam. Perhaps Muslims will realize their urgent need for the Mahdi and the lack of any alternative to him, thus going to him and removing the obstacles to his advent as soon as possible, ﴿مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ يَأْتِيَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ﴾[57]; “before a painful punishment comes upon them.”