| Author: Morteza | Date: 2015-01-02 |
If in the opinion of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani, Hadiths (with the exception of a few of them) are conjectural, then where can I find religious laws other than the treatises of the eminent maraji’ al-taqlid (muftis)? Considering that he does not approve of ijtihad either! Where do I take the laws of the prayer that the Quran has said about: «إِنَّ الصَّلَاةَ كَانَتْ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ كِتَابًا مَوْقُوتًا» (An-Nisa/ 103) which means, “Undoubtedly the prayer is obligatory for believers at specific times”? Where do I take the laws of fasting that the Quran has said about: «يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الصِّيَامُ» (Al-Baqarah/ 183) which means, “O you who believed, Fasting has been made obligatory upon you”? And many other laws for actions that have been made obligatory in the Quran. Should I leave them for now and start training myself and many other people so that the Caliph of God on the earth may appear, and then perform the prayer and fasting and so on?! That does not make sense at all!
| Response to critique: 1 | Date: 2015-01-02 |
Please pay attention to the following points:
Firstly, the fact that Hadiths are conjectural, with the exception of mutawatir Hadiths, is not just “the opinion of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani”, rather it is the general opinion of Muslim scholars from all Islamic sects except for a group of Salafis, and this is an obvious fact perceived by common sense, to the extent that according to some Muslim scholars such as al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) in Sharh Sahih Muslim[1], «ليس إنكاره إلا مكابرة للحسّ» which means “denying it is nothing but obstinacy against the perceptible"; because wahid Hadiths are such that there is the possibility of mistake, distortion and lying in them, and naturally, with this possibility, they do not lead to certainty.
Secondly, the fact that conjecture is not proof is not just “the opinion of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani”, rather it is the explicit saying of God Almighty in the Holy Quran, where He has said repeatedly and affirmatively: ﴿إِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا﴾[2]; “Indeed, conjecture is not sufficient for the truth”, and it is clear that this explicit saying of God is a guide to an intellectual law, because the intellect also considers certainty alone as the criterion for knowing the truth, and does not consider conjecture and doubt and illusion sufficient to know the truth, taking into account the possibility of the opposite in them, and it is clear that intellectual laws cannot be specified; as the explicit saying of God refuses to be specified, in the sense that considering its decisive and explicit context and also its guidance toward the nature of conjecture, it does not tolerate specification; regardless of the fact that specification of conjectures resulted from wahid narrations from it is specification of many, rather the majority, which is reprehensible; considering that many conjectures, rather the majority of them, arise from wahid narrations, and mutawatir narrations do not lead to conjecture; as conjectures resulted from anything other than narrations are in the minority. Therefore, it is not possible to exclude wahid narrations from other conjectures intellectually and religiously, and this is not considered the sin of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani!
Thirdly, the lack of authority of conjectural narrations does not necessitate the permissibility of “imitating the eminent maraji’ al-taqlid”, rather it clearly necessitates the opposite; because on the one hand, the basis of these eminent people in most of their fatwas is conjectural narrations, and therefore, the lack of authority of these narrations necessitates the impermissibility of imitating them, and on the other hand, according to the sense and conscience, imitating them leads to conjecture on the laws of God, whereas God does not consider conjecture on His laws sufficient and says: ﴿إِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا﴾[3]; “Indeed, conjecture is not sufficient for the truth”. Therefore, imitating the eminent maraji’ al-taqlid is not sufficient in the opinion of God; in the sense that it does not lead to freedom of liability for religious duties, and this is not the sin of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani either!
Fourthly, Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani does not consider ijtihad in the sense of deducing religious laws from conjectural reasons sufficient, and this is clearly based on the fact that conjecture is not sufficient in Islam; because when conjecture is not sufficient in Islam, it does not matter whether its origin is imitation or ijtihad, rather whatever its origin is, it is not sufficient, and this is too obvious to need clarification.
Fifthly, the insufficiency of imitation and ijtihad in the sense mentioned above, since they lead to conjecture, necessitates the fall of religious duties or the obligation of gaining certainty about them; but since the fall of religious duties is not possible, it is imperative to gain certainty about them, which is possible in two ways: the Book of God and the certain Sunnah of His Prophet which can be accessed through the mutawatir narrations from His Excellency and through his Caliph.
Fortunately, many of the essential and fundamental laws of Islam, such as the pillars of the prayer, fasting, Zakat and Hajj, as explained by Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani in a part of his book, are known through the Book of God and the mutawatir narrations from His Prophet, peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family; therefore, acting on them is possible and sufficient, but in order to be certain of the rest of the laws of Islam and be free from liability for them, there is no way but to refer to the Caliph of God on the earth, which is possible in the opinion of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani; because the impediment to referring to him is nothing but the fault of people in providing its prerequisites, and therefore, removing this impediment in the sense of providing the prerequisites for referring to him is possible for them, and if it requires the gathering of a sufficient number of them but a sufficient number of them do not gather, then it is not the sin of Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani, but the sin of people themselves and those who prevent them from doing so. With this description, this situation that “does not make sense at all” and you are wondering about, is a situation brought forth by people themselves, ﴿وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ لَيْسَ بِظَلَّامٍ لِلْعَبِيدِ﴾[4]; “and God is no oppressor of His servants”; like thieves who have entered a house and have to perform the prayer at the ending time, whereas their prayer in it is void, and this situation that “does not make sense at all” is a situation that they have got themselves into by making a poor choice, and therefore, it does not make their prayers in people’s house valid; as Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani has explained this bitter and unfortunate reality in detail in the section “Consequences of non-advent of Mahdi for people” in his book Return to Islam[5]; may Muslims realize their misery and ignominy in the absence of Mahdi, and return to him as soon as possible.
Yes, this preparer of the ground for the advent of Mahdi warns Muslims of the world that they are in a “tremendous predicament” and calls them to get out of it by providing clear and practical solutions, but most of them do not hear his call, or hear but do not understand, except for a few of them whose hearts God has tested for faith, and indeed, they will be sufficient, Insha’Allah.