Appendix 2 – The Robustness Of The Views Of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A) In Islamic Thoughts | Shi’a And The Despotic Rulers

Appendix 2 – The Robustness Of The Views Of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A) In Islamic Thoughts

Appendix 2 – The Robustness Of The Views Of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A) In Islamic Thoughts (Shaykh Abbas Ali Burraqi)

Muslims have always discussed and researched Islamic beliefs and they will continue to do so. Along with the efforts made in this search there arose differences of belief, and many sects came into being. But all the sects are unanimous in the belief that the source of Islam is the Qur’an and traditions. In spite of being united in the source of religion, there are many reasons for these differences, among which the following bear great importance:

Difference in the method of debate and derivation of Islamic laws (ijtihad).
Innovations and erroneous interpretations.
Ignorance and unawareness of religious texts.
Tribal differences and political aspirations.
Fabrications of traditions by Muslim scholars of Jewish and Christian origin to distort Islam.

We have no hesitation to confess that many different religious views and opinions arose during the very lifetime of the Holy Prophet (S), but those differences did not reach the extent that it could have taken the shape of a religion because the Holy Prophet (S) was there, and he used to put a stop to such views so that they may not spread further.

Due to his wise statesmanship, the Muslim society had become such a cradle of love and brotherhood that its equal could not be found anywhere else in history. In the lifetime of the prophet, there were differing views among the children of the companions as regards the matter of pre-destination and freewill, and it had gone to a level that debates used to be held on this topic.

When the Holy Prophet (S) heard this, he came out of his house and restrained them from it. This is mentioned in books of traditions. For example, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal has narrated from Amr Ibn Shuaib from his father from his father that one day the Messenger of Allah (S) came out to find people (in the masjid) discussing pre-destination. The narrator says that when the Holy Prophet (S) heard them, his face became red like pomegranate seeds, and he asked what was wrong with them and why they were countering one verse against another. He said: “Nations preceding you were also destroyed because of this.”1

The fundamentals of Islamic beliefs are mentioned in the Qur’an and traditions. However, after the departure of the Messenger of Allah (S), some questions arose whose answers were not present clearly in the Qur’an and traditions. It was therefore felt that there was a need for derivation and deduction. And the right of ijtihaad in the shari’ah and matters of beliefs was entrusted to the scholars of religion (fuqaha). That is the reason we find differences of opinion among the companions, as regards some matters of the religious belief.

There is a great dissimilarity between the differences during the prophet's lifetime and those after his departure. During his lifetime, when a difference arose, he used to issue his verdict about it and resolved the matter.2 However this did not continue after he departed. The ruler used to favour certain companions.

Therefore, the difference did not end because the views of these companions did not tally with the opinions of other companions. As examples, may consider these instances:

The matter of successorship of the Holy Prophet (S) and imamate.3
The issue of killing the apostates and those who refused to pay Zakat.

Thus, these problems led to the creation of various schools of scholastic theology and beliefs, and the views used to prove beliefs that were responsible for the creation of these different schools are as follows:

Deduction based only on religious texts: Ahmad Ibn Hanbal was an Imam of this line of thinking, and today this approach is adopted by the Ahl ul-Hadith who consider that their sole responsibility is guarding the heritage of traditions. They are not concerned with the depth of the meanings of narrations and whether they are authentic or not. In the present age these people are called Salafi. The Hanbalis followed this method in deriving Islamic practical laws also. According to their view, it was not allowed to contemplate and ponder upon religious problems and to question them is heresy. It is heretical to have discussions on these matters. They considered discourses of traditions necessary for themselves, but as far as discussions on them was concerned, it was absolutely forbidden. They considered only their method to be the correct obedience, and all types of contemplation and pondering to be heretical. All their efforts were aimed at only collection and compilation of all the traditions that have come on the matters of beliefs etc. They also explained the meanings of their words and compiled the chains the narrators of traditions. Anything beyond this was neither necessary nor permissible. Thus, the same approach is adopted in the books of Bukhari, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Ibn Khuzayma Baihaqi and Ibn Qutaibah. The level of radicalism of these people is evident from the way they have prohibited scholasticism and logical thinking in matters of belief. Ibn Qutaibah even compiled a treatise 'Prohibition of opinion in scholasticism.’

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal used to say that one who practices scholasticism can never get salvation and such a person is always having hypocrisy. He has severely condemned scholasticism, and the level of his extremism can be gauged from the fact that he broke off relations with Harith Muhasibi, although the latter was a pious and a religious person.

The reason for this conflict was that Harith had a written book against heretics. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, while criticizing this book said:

“It is regrettable that in your book you have first described the heretics and then you have refuted them. In the process, you gave people the chance to read about the views of heretics and urged them to think upon them, which makes the people inclined to have discussions about it and to express their views.”

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal was such a radical that he used to say: “Scholastic theologians are irreligious.”

Zafran says that Imam Shafei has given the verdict that:

“Scholastic theologians should be whipped and then they should be taken around and exhibited in the tribes so that people come to know that this is the punishment of those who abandon the Qur’an and traditions and follow scholasticism.”

The Salafis have followed this same idea right from their inception. They have always claimed that the companions were more aware of the facts in comparison to other people as regard religious matters. And that they were also more knowledgeable about the arrangement of the words. Despite this, they have maintained silence on various matters because they knew that those matters would give rise to evils and the Holy Prophet (S) had also said: “Those who argue are destroyed, those who argue much are destroyed. Those who argue much are destroyed.”4

The Salafis believe in corporeality and comparison in relation to Allah. According to them, pre-destination means that man does not have any freewill, and that he is absolutely helpless in every way.5 This group allows imitation (taqleed) in matters of faith and considers the contemplation and deliberation of rules to be unlawful.

Dr. Ahmad Mahmood Sabihi writes that neither is imitation possible in matters of faith, nor is it allowed, whereas Ubaidullah Ibn Hasan Amberi in Hashuya and Taleema,6 and also Razi7 in Al-Mahsil has opposed this, while the majority of the scholars believe that imitation is unlawful in matters of faith.

In Sharh Tarteeb, Ustad Abu Ishaq writes that the scholars of truth are unanimous that imitation is not allowed in matters of faith. Imam al-Harmain has written in his book Ash-Shamil that except for the Hanbalis, no one believes in the lawfulness of imitation in principles of faith. But Imam Shaukafi, differing from the majority, has stated that to learn about the principles of belief through proofs and arguments is so difficult that not everyone is capable of resorting to.

After that, Shaukafi has refuted the arguments of scholars who do not accept imitation in matters of faith. We are astonished at this essay of Shaukafi. He says that to believe in the fundamentals of religion on the basis of logic and reasoning is an injustice on this ummah. It is a responsibility beyond their capacity. Since many companions did not reach the level of legal deduction (ijtihaad), they adopted imitation (taqleed) in the matter of beliefs also. For the majority of the people of the ummah, it is unlawful to employ logical reasoning in the matter of principles of belief, and it will lead to ignorance and deviation.8

Those having this view consider the study and teaching of logic unlawful, and do not think that it will lead one to gain divine recognition, while the science of logic is a science of proofs and reasoning, and it contains the method of arrangement of evidence. The basic principles of this science were mentioned by Aristotle in his book, Organon, and he named them ‘criteria’.

Among the experts of logic and philosophy in the Islamic world were Farabi, Ibn Sina, Ghazali, Ibn Majah, Ibn Tufayl and Ibn Rushd. To refute the science of logic, the group of the followers of tradition (ahl ul-hadith) argued that if the science of logic had helped these logicians and philosophers to reach a correct conclusion, there would not have been differences among them. Since there were wide differences in their views and opinions, it cannot be taken as a criterion of truth and falsehood.

This group had such a belief during the stage of its inception, and it severely condemned scholasticism and the science of logic. However, later it was compelled to concede its stand to some extent. For example, when we look at a later follower of this school, Ibn Taimiyyah, we see that he is somewhat inclined to scholasticism. He did not consider scholasticism as absolutely unlawful. He says that scholasticism becomes lawful in certain situations. And he himself took the help of scholasticism to refute the views of atheists and apostates.9

Though Ibn Taimiyyah agreed to scholasticism, he continued his opposition to the science of logic. He also wrote a book Refutation of Logicians.

Followers of Ibn Taimiyyah say that the French philosopher Descartes (1596 - 1650), instead of accepting the logic of Aristotle, formulated some principles of recognizing the right and wrong. He had claimed that one who followed these principles shall be safe from contemplative mistakes and shall reach certainty. But see what happened? Like the logic of Aristotle, the principles of Descartes also could not save one from committing mistakes in mental deductions, and even today man still needs maturity of thought like he was hundreds of years ago.10

Many Islamic thinkers disliked the logical method. Thus, Imam al-Ghazali, in Tahafat ul-Falasafa refuted the views of philosophers through arguments. The basic premise of Ghazali's book is that one cannot rely wholly on reason, because just as reason is constructive it can also cause destruction. Imam Ghazali proves that in the matters of divinity and ethics, the most that reason can do is to provide a conjecture, but it cannot create certainty.

Ibn Rushd al-Al-Andalusi (died 595 A.H.) wrote Tahafatu Tahafa in refutation of Ghazali, in which he rebutted the views of Ghazali and said that there is no contradiction between correct reasoning and authentic texts. He explained his contention further in his book, Fasl ul-Maqaal Feema Bainal Hukma wash Shariah Minal Ittesaal.

It may be called force of circumstances or a good coincidence that the view presented by Ibn Rushd was the same as that which Ibn Taimiyyah mentioned in his book Mawafia Sarih al-Maqool Le Sahih al-Manaqool.

We are surprised how Ibn Taimiyyah adopted two contradictory stands. In every manner, whether it is the Ahl ul-Hadith from Ahl Sunnah or the Akhbaris11 from the Shi’as, they all follow the apparent meanings of the traditions, and try their utmost to avoid inferences and analogy (Rai and Qiyas).12

These days the Salafi and Ahl ul-Hadith ideology is widespread in Saudi Arabia (Najd). Some of their groups are also present in Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, and Egypt.13

Deduction based only on logical reasoning: Reason and logic is given utmost importance in the Mu’tazali faith. People of this school were known in history as the people of 'Rai' and people of monotheism and divine justice. The founders of this school of thought were Wasil Ibn Ata (80 - 131 A.H.) and Amr Ibn Ubaid Misri (81- 144 A.H). At that time Mansur Dawaniqi was the reigning caliph. After Wasil and Amr, this school was led by Ahmad Ibn Abi Dawood, the vizier of Ma’moon Rashid. Qadi Abd ul-Jabbar Ibn Ahmad Hamadani (died 415 A.H.) also played an important role in spreading this ideology. Nazzam, Abu al-Hindeel, Allaaf, Jahiz Jabayaan also held a special position in Mu’tazila sect.

Because the Mu’tazilites accorded utmost importance to reason, they relied on logical reasoning for the interpretation and understanding of the divine reality, attributes of Allah and the Shari’ah. And they were certain that it is impossible to understand and derive religious concepts without the use of logica1 reasoning.

Mu’tazila has become extinct since a long time, but we can see the traces of Mu’tazila views in the Zaidiyyah and Ibadi sects. These two sects are influenced by Mu’tazilite views in several matters of faith. Mu’tazila had many common points with the Shi’a school of thought also. The Ahl ul-Hadith used to refer to the Mu’tazila as Qadariyya, because the latter believed in absolute freewill man.

The important book of this sect is Qadi Abd ul-Jabbar's Sharh Usool al-Khamsa, and they also accord significance to Risala Adl wat Tauheed, which was compiled by the well-known Mu’tazili scholars, Hasan Basri, Qasim ar-Rasi and Abd ul-Jabbar Ibn Ahmad.

The Mu’tazila used to interpret (in a new way) the verses that were against their beliefs, therefore they were considered among ‘the people of interpretation (ta’wil)’. Mu’tazila have rendered a great service to Islam. The Mu’tazila confronted with absolute determination the intellectual storm that arose against Islam due to the popularity of Greek philosophy during the early period of the Abbasid reign. Even the cruel and tyrannical kings like Ma’moon and Mu’tasim could not remain without being influenced by Mu’tazila.

However, during the reign of Mutawakkil, the Mu’tazila School began to decline because the rulers had turned against them, and the Ahl ul-Hadith were laying verdicts of infidelity, deviation and transgression against them. Therefore, this school gradually became extinct. It is also incorrect to call the Mu’tazila innocent or suppressed because they also had severely persecuted their opponents during their period of dominance.

After that, whatever happened can be called fruits of deeds. For those who like to know about further details, they can refer to books on this subject.14

Mu’tazila had five fundaments of faith:

Tawhid: It means that Allah is purified of the qualities of the creatures, and it is impossible to see Him with one’s eyes.
‘Adl: It means that the Almighty Allah is not unjust on the people, and He does not compel them to disobey Him.
Al-Manzila Bainal Manzilatain: It means that one who commits a greater sin (kabeera) is neither a believer nor an infidel; he is a transgressor (fasiq).
Waad O Waeed: It means that it is necessary that Allah should fulfil His promise of Paradise to the believers and the promise of Hell to the disbelievers.
Amr bil Ma’roof and Nahi ‘Anil Munkar: It means that when tyrannical rulers do not give up oppression, it becomes necessary to campaign against them.

Beliefs Of Ash’ari And Maturudi

The Ash’ari faith, which is represented by the Ahl Sunnah wa al-Jamaah today, is a moderate school of thought between the Mu’tazila and Ahl ul-Hadith.15 The founder of this school, Abu al-Hasan Ash’ari (died 324 A .H.), was Mu’tazali in the beginning. He had followed Mu’tazale beliefs for forty years. But in the year 300 A.H. in the Basra Jame Masjid, he repented for being a Mu’tazili and adopted the faith of Ahl Sunnah wa al-Jamaah.

He chose a path between Ahl ul-Hadith and Mu’tazila. Although he practically imparted strength to the Ahl ul-Hadith, for this purpose he employed the logical method of Mu’tazila. Due to this style of his, the Mu’tazila opposed him whereas the Ahl ul-Hadith also did not support him. They are not prepared to forgive him even to this day. They accuse him of deviating from the basic principles and many Ahl ul-Hadith with extremist stand have issued the verdict of infidelity against him.

During the time of Ash’ari, Abu Mansur Maturudi Samarqandi (died 333 A.H.) also was acting on these lines. Maturudi is also considered an Imam of Ahl Sunnah in the matters of belief. Although both Ash’ari and Maturudi were imams of Ahl Sunnah in the matter of belief, their opinion is not the same in some matters.

Some people have mentioned that there are eleven points of differences between their views.16 Ash’ari is very particular to avoid interpretation of the apparent meanings of the words of Qur’an and Hadith. He used to fall into the debasement of simile and corporeality without any hesitation and in the issue of predestination, he used to take the cover of “bil Kasab” (by acquiring) whereas other sects used to consider it a failure on his part to understand the problems of faith and thoughts.

In any case, Ash’ari remained adamant against the faith of Ahl ul-Hadith, and gradually the mischief spread all over the Islamic world.17

3. Gnostic and Neo-Platonist way of reasoning: Among the Islamic schools, there was a school that subjected the problems of scholastic theology on the criterion of research and then chose the view that were in consonance with the gnostic way of thinking. This school was completely different from the philosophical and scholastic sects based on logical reasoning. The founder of this school was Hallaj.18

Imam al-Ghazali holds a very important position in this school. He has written in Al-Jame al-Uloom ‘An llm ul-Kalaam that it is the method of “Khassa” (special). Apart from this, they have “Aamma” (common) style of thinking. The “Aamma” and their followers know evidence, but they are deprived of logical deduction.19

Dr. Sulaiman Dina has written a book entitled, Al-Haqiqah fee Nazar al-Ghazali. on Ghazali and other Sufi schools of thought. Criticizing the view of Ghazali, Dr. Ahmad Mahmood Sabihi has written that Ghazali issued a verdict regarding the reality of being of the Almighty that it is unlawful for the public to contemplate on this matter.

Though we have nothing against this verdict of Ghazali, the extremism of Ghazali is such that he included even the litterateurs, grammarians, traditionists, jurisprudents and scholastic theologians among the ‘public’, and issued the verdict that ‘the firmly rooted in knowledge' are only those gnostics who are fully immersed in divine recognition, who keep away from carnal desires. This statement of Ghazali is the proof for those who claim that Ghazali had a completely different view regarding Illuminism and profusion, and as a result of having this view, Abu Hamid Ghazali is called Hujjat ul-Islam.

After that Dr. Sabihi questions the justifiability of keeping out the jurisprudents, exegetes, and scholastic theologians from the ranks of ‘the firmly-rooted in knowledge’ and regarding only the Sufis as being in that rank. Does it not increase the scope of profane talks of mystics? While the fact is that the principles of illuminism and gnosticism are as harmful to Islamic beliefs as the self-made problems of the scholastic theologians.20 Despite this, the Sufi school of thought has left a considerable heritage regarding Islamic beliefs.21

4. Perceptive and experimental deduction: It was an absolutely new type of thinking with regard to Islamic beliefs and it is mostly followed by scholars and intellectuals who are more influenced by the western world. These scholars and intellectuals come from Egypt, India, Iraq, and those countries that had been British, American, French and Japanese colonies.

People who follow this style of thinking have a special opinion regarding the means of human recognition and they rely more on perceptive and experimental deductions. In their view, the ancient method of thinking and the logic of Aristotle does not have any importance. They have tried to subject metaphysics and divine recognition to scientific and experimentative criterion.22

The scholars of this school interpret divine miracle in material terms and say that prophethood is nothing but human perfection. Some researchers have compiled whole books on this style of thought.23 For example the writings of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan.24

Sir Sayyid has proved himself a fan of the western world in his Tafsir of Qur’an. His Tafsir is more in consonance with modem scientific discoveries. Though Sir Sayyid cannot be called the main standard bearer of this school of thought, it must be mentioned that he has adopted an apologetic attitude with regard to the Qur’an and has gone to great lengths to prove that the holy Qur’an is in complete support of modern science. Tough no particular boundary can be fixed for this school of thought, it is perfectly reflected in different religious issues and modem scientific essays.25

5. Conventional Reasoning: The basic elements of conventional reasoning are present in the teachings of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a), without which it is not possible to understand the Islamic beliefs correctly. This method of reasoning is based on the Qur’an and Sunnah as the Holy Qur’an says:

“...The nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know” (30:30).

It is announced in this verse that the best way to obtain the understanding of divine realities (Ma’rifah)26 is through the nature of man. And the first condition for nature is that it should not have been changed by adverse social conditioning and poor upbringing, and not contaminated by succumbing to selfish desires, and useless debates and discussions. The majority of people cannot realize this fact because their nature has become clouded by prejudice and their obstinacy is a hurdle in understanding realities.

Traditions have also explained the significance of a perfect nature. The Holy Prophet (S) says: Every child is born on human nature. Then its parents make it a Jew, Christian or Magian.27

The conventional method includes all, logical, religious texts, intuition, illuminism and scientific methods. The specialty of this school is that it does not rely on only one method. Rather in keeping with divine guidance it used any method that is required.

The tawfeeq (good sense) of guidance is from the Almighty Allah as He mentions in the Qur’an:

“They think that they lay you under an obligation by becoming Muslims. Say: lay me not under obligation by your Islam: rather Allah lays you under an obligation by guiding you to the faith if you are truthful” (49:17).

Another verse reads:

“…And were it not for Allah’s grace upon you and His mercy, not one of you would have ever been pure…” (24:21).

A special characteristic of this school of thought is that its followers avoid debates of scholastic theology and doubts and uncertainties. They narrate traditions from the imams of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) in which they have prohibited useless debates regarding religion, and they know that their opponents, despite having the same religion, are having differences in hundreds of issues.28 In the traditions of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) 'nature' is sometimes referred to as 'teenat' (essence) and sometimes 'aql-e-Matboo' (agreeable intellect). For more information, please study collection of traditions.29

Method Of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A) In Understanding The Principles Of Faith

In the debates on matters related to faith, the sources are of great importance. Previously we had stated that the sources of Islamic beliefs are the Qur’an and traditions. The main difference between the school of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) and other schools is that the former under no circumstances leaves aside Qur’an and traditions and solves every problem through the guidance of the Qur’an and traditions.

It is not prepared to accord preference to any personal desire or prejudice over the Qur’an and traditions. In the matter of deriving the practical laws also this school considers the Qur’an and traditions to be the fundamental sources. That is the reason for these:

The depth of the views of this school of thought can be gauged from the fact that its followers never accord priority to personal deduction (ijtihad) over authentic texts (nass), and they exercise care to see that the nass should be without contradiction, or if it is present, it should not negate the meaning of the text. Other sects are not very particular about texts. There are even some schools that are seen to resort to weak reasonings in trying to free themselves from the obligation of following texts.

His Eminence, Amir Al-Mu’minin (‘a) said to Harith Ibn Hout: ...Indeed you have not yet recognized the truth, then how can you recognize the people of truth, and you have not yet recognized falsehood then how can you recognize the people of falsehood?30
In the school of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) nothing is accorded priority over nass, subject to the condition that the nass should be absolute and is related by a large number of narrators (mutawatir). This is the fundamental requirement for Islamic beliefs because conjectures and possibilities cannot establish fundamental principles of faith. Keeping in view the style of the followers of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a), the Salafi group must also reform their attitude, because they rely on weak or solitary traditions with regard to their beliefs, and they are very fanatical about their school of thought. Based on some weak narrations, they accuse some Muslims to be infidels. They should not be merely fond of traditions but must also distinguish the traditions by evaluating their respective authenticity, generality, particularity, and ambiguity. They should also research the antecedents of the narrators.
The Islamic beliefs can be divided into two types: “Essential” and “Academic”. ‘Essentials’ are those that if one denies any of them, one goes out of the pale of Islam. For example, belief in monotheism (tawheed), prophethood (nubuwwah) and Judgment Day (qiyamat); they are called Dhururiyaat-e-Deen (essentials of religion). The ‘academic’ beliefs mean those in which there may be need for research and evidence, and in which there is difference of opinion among the leaders of different sects. Thus, those who deny the 'essentials' are infidels, whereas one who denies ‘academic’ principles of faith is not.
Analogy and personal discretion are not allowed in matters of beliefs.
The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) also believes that the demands of intellect are according to authentic texts, subject to the condition that both of them should be considered in an objective manner, and that a mere possibility should not be presented as a certainty. Clear logic should not be replaced with weak text, and authentic and widely related narrations should not be given the same weightage as a solitary report.
All such inferences and deductions are unlawful, and they aim to spread heresies.
Based on absolute proofs, the school of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) considers all the prophets and the twelve imams (‘a) to be infallible, and when something is proved to be from them, it is obligatory to believe in it. A jurisprudent (mujtahid) can reach a correct decision on jurisprudence, but it is also possible for him to err, even though if errs in doing so – while he has fulfilled all the requirements for research in jurisprudence, - he is excused.
Traditionists are present among the ummah. But so are those who are inspired divinely, and those who have true dreams. Through these channels they perceive realities, but all these matters need proofs. In matters of faith and practice they also have a position, but conditions are prescribed for that.
If a debate - held with piety, good manner and decorum - is intended to spread enlightenment, recognition of truth and to promote beliefs, it is worthy of praise. But to hold a debate only to show off one’s knowledgeableness is despicable. During a debate one should never say anything that one is not certain of.
The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) dislikes heresies and anything that is an innovation (bid’ah) that is promoted in the name of religion, while it is not from religion. Some people consider certain things to be bid’ah and some other things to be recommended (sunnat), but when the matter is investigated it does not tum out to be bid’ah or sunnat. Therefore, it is necessary to first investigate the matter first, and only then should one issue a fatwa.31
Utmost care and contemplation are required before calling anyone as a kafir (disbeliever). As long as a person does not himself admit his infidelity or there is irrefutable testimony against him, one cannot issue a verdict of kufr (disbelief) because associating disbelief (takfeer) with anyone makes him liable for penalty, and for religious penalty it is necessary that the matter should be beyond all doubts. It is a very serious sin to call someone an infidel. However, if someone really becomes infidel, there is no problem in calling him as such.32
In the event of differences, it is obligatory to refer to the holy Qur’an, sunnat and itrah (progeny of the prophet). The holy Qur’an says:

“And if they have referred it to the apostle 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” (4:83).

Regarding the divine qualities, it is the belief of the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) that the divine qualities are the actual being of the Almighty. He is alive himself and not due to life. He is himself Powerful and Himself Knowing. The Almighty Allah is not imbued with qualities as the person – who is making the comparison - makes him out to be. The worst view that Abu Hashim Jabai has presented regarding divine qualities, for which he left the pale of Islam, such views are refuted by the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a). As regards the qualities of the Almighty Allah, the composite sum of the Imamiyah and Mu’tazila belief is the same, though Mu’tazila differ in some of them as we indicated in the above discussion. Apart from the Imamiyah and Mu’tazila, the Zaidiyyah, most of the Murji’ah, and the Ahl ul-Hadith either follow the Ahl ul-Asbaat' (affirmative) of the 'Ahl Tateel' (denying all qualities).33
The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) considers that something is good or bad on the basis of reason, and this school believes that intellect immediately senses the virtue or defect of certain things.

Views Regarding Belief In The Unity Of Godhead (Tawhid)

In the matter of tawheed, the school of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) believes in absolute Tanziyah (absolution from similarity) because the Almighty Allah says:

“...nothing is like Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing” (42:11).

In addition to this, the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) believes that it is impossible to see Allah with the physical eyes because the Almighty Allah says:

“Vision comprehends Him not, and He comprehends (all) vision” (6:103).

It is not correct to associate the Almighty Allah with the qualities of the creatures because the divine statement is:

“Glory be to Him, and highly exalted is He above what they ascribe (to Him)” (6:100).

And:

“Glory to the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Lord of power, from what they describe” (43:82).

Views Regarding Divine Justice (‘Adl)

The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) considers the Almighty Allah to be Just and they deny that He can ever be unjust. Allah, the Mighty and the High says:

“Surely Allah does not do injustice to the weight of an atom…” (4:40).

And:

“Surely Allah does not do any injustice to men, but men are unjust to themselves” (10:44).

Views Regarding Prophethood (Nubuwwat)

The message of the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) regarding prophethood is that the prophets were absolutely infallible as the Almighty Allah says:

“And it is not attributable to a prophet that he should act unfaithfully; and he who acts unfaithfully shall bring that in respect of which he has acted unfaithfully on the day of resurrection…” (3:161).

And:

“Say: Surely, I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the chastisement of a grievous day” (6:15).

The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) considers the prophets infallible in recognizing divine revelation too. The Almighty Allah says:

“And if he had fabricated against Us some of the sayings” (69:44).

“We would certainly have seized him by the right hand” (69:45).

“Then We would certainly have cut off his aorta” ( 69:46).

This school also regards the angels to be infallible:

“… They do not disobey Allah in what He commands them, and do as they are commanded” (66:6).

Views Regarding Belief In Imamate (Succession To The Prophet)

According to the view of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a), imamate is a divine office and a fallible cannot be an imam. The condition of infallibility is necessary for the greater imamate, and the greater imamate denotes the successorship of the Holy Prophet (S) in all material and spiritual matters (worldly and those of the Hereafter).

This Shi’a view is based on the following verse:

“And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely, I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He” (2:124).

In other words, based on confirmed text, we have reached the conclusion that the dreams of the prophets and the imams are also true, and the Almighty Allah has protected them from the mistake of dream also.34

The Value Of Logical Reasoning In The School Of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A)

In between the extreme stands adopted by the Mu’tazila and Asha’ira, the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) accords a special position to intellect. As Shaykh Mufid (a.r.) writes:

If someone says that widely related traditions are not available regarding the imams of the Imamate faith and only solitary narrations exist about them, it will have no effect on our faith because along with solitary reports we also have with us logical proofs that prove the necessity of the existence of the imams of guidance. And, God forbid, if these narrational reports had been invalid, as the opponents say, the necessary conclusion is that those logical proofs, that make the imamate of the imams necessary, would also have become invalid.35

The Shaykh further writes:

Through divine opportunity (taufeeq) and will of the Almighty Allah, in this book, I shall explain the difference between the faith of Shi’as and that of Mu’tazila. Along with this, I shall contrast the belief of Shi’as regarding divine justice with the belief of Mu’tazila.36

Shaykh Saduq Muhammad Ibn Babawahy (died 381 A.H.) says:

The practice of the Almighty Allah is that first He imbues the intellect with a vision of the reality of something. After that He invites towards that thing. Because if there is no prior imagination of this thing, calling to it will not serve any purpose. Things create a picture of themselves in the intellect, and also inform about their opposites. If the denial of prophets had been there in intellect from the beginning, the Almighty Allah would never have sent any prophet.37

Shaykh Saduq further writes:

The most correct statement regarding this matter is that we have recognized Allah through Allah Himself, because if we had recognized Allah through our intellect, this intellect is also given by Allah and if we have recognized Allah through the prophets and imams, they had also been sent by the Almighty Allah, and it is He that appointed them as His proof. And if we have recognized Allah on our own, we ourselves also are creations of Allah. Therefore, whatever may be the medium of understanding the divine reality (ma’rifat), its final conclusion would only be that we have recognized Allah through Allah Himself.38

This attitude towards the intellect - that is to consider it at par with the prophets and the imams of guidance - is the special distinction of the Imamiyah faith, and other than the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a), intellect is not accorded such a position.

Regarding Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a), there is a tradition that: If Allah had not been there, we would not have been recognized and if we had not been there, Allah would not have been recognized.39

In the explanation of this tradition, Shaykh Saduq writes that it means that if the divine proofs (Hujjat) had not been there, Allah would not have been recognized completely and if Allah had not been there, no one would have recognized the Proofs.40

View Of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A) On Scholastic Debates

There are two types of opinions regarding such debate. In the view of Ahl ul-Hadith, to have any discussion on issues related to scholastic theology is absolutely unlawful and is prohibited, whereas the Mu’tazila have solely relied on discussions of scholastic theology. Both these views are extreme. The view of the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) is between the two extremes and it has a moderate opinion regarding debates.

The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a), in light of the Holy Qur’an, says that debates are of two types,

good debates and the bad or undesirable ones.

“Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and goodly exhortation and have disputations with them in the best manner; surely your Lord best knows those who go astray from His path, and He knows best those who follow the right way” (16:125).

Interpreting the views of the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) regarding debates, Shaykh Mufid writes:

The ‘congregation of the truthful ones’ has ordered a group from among its followers that they must not debate with opponents and ordered another group that they should debate with opponents and call them to truth. Keeping in view the conditions of both groups, the imams (‘a) have issued different commands to each of them. They have ordered only that group that is capable to prove the truth and falsify falsehood to have debates.41

In that statement by Shaykh Mufid, 'congregation of the truthful ones' denotes the infallible imams from the purified progeny (of the prophet) whose infallibility is announced by the Almighty Allah and whom Allah has kept purified from all impurities, as He says:

“ ….Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying.” (33:33)

That 'congregation of the truthful ones' comprises those infallible personalities regarding whom the Almighty Allah has said:

“O, you who believe! be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones” (9:119).

The 'congregation of the truthful' comprises imams of guidance whose imamate is mentioned in the traditions of the Holy Prophet (S), and every Imam issued statement regarding the next Imam till their number was complete. Announcements regarding the imams of guidance are present in traditions in various wordings, and their number is also mentioned in the traditions of the prophet. And clear text (nass) is also present on the first of these imams. Those who wish to study this subject in detail can refer to the respective books.42

The Necessary Of Contemplation Towards Understanding Of Divine Reality (Ma’rifat)

In the school of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a), intellect (‘aql) and shari’ah are not considered as opponents of each other. They are considered as allies. As-Shaykh Saduq has written that Prophet Ibrahim (‘a) first looked at the Venus, then the Moon and then the Sun, and when he found all of them transitory, he said:

“O my people! Surely, I am clear of what you set up (with Allah)”(6:78).

His Eminence Prophet Ibrahim (‘a) had been guided by the Almighty Allah. Despite that, he could not prove the oneness of Allah without God-given arguments. The Almighty Allah has called Prophet Ibrahim's argument as divinely inspired proof:

“And this was Our argument which we gave to Ibrahim against his people” (6:83).

For recognizing monotheism, no one can be needless of the teachings of the Almighty Allah because Allah has said to His prophet: Then know that there is no god except Allah.43

Shaykh Saduq means to say that intellect is not capable of reaching full understanding of divine reality without the help of divine revelation. But it does not mean that intellect is of no use and the conclusions derived through reason are worthless.

Shaykh Mufid writes that “intellect is in need of divine revelation for its preliminaries and conclusions”44 At the same time he also emphasizes the use of intellect in understanding the principles of faith and says that the prohibition of speaking about Allah means that He should not be compared with the creatures and that the orders of creatures should not be applied on Him.45

Shaykh Mufid used to ridicule his opponents for not using the intellect and called them as being ‘weak in opinion’. He has written: Abandoning thinking and contemplation and adopting blind following indeed deserve condemnation.46

The Position Of Emulation In The School Of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A) And The Character Of Man

As we have stated previously, although intellect has an important role in the understanding of religion, but until the time intellect is not accompanied with the effulgence of divine revelation, it cannot succeed in finding the right path. All the Islamic sects and scholastic schools are unanimous on this point.

If there is difference of opinion, it is regarding the limits of traditions. Some traditions are narrated widely, through so many channels that one is assured that the prophet or imams or the companions have indeed stated such words. But sometimes a tradition is not so widely related, and its validity is viewed as weak or just as a strong possibility. It also happens sometimes that a solitary report reaches us. If it is only a solitary report, we view that it is possibly doubtful.

In the teaching of the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a), until the time such tradition is accompanied with a method that can prove its authenticity, it is not right to rely solely on the report.

Solitary Report Is Insufficient For Principles Of Faith

The school of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) prescribes extreme caution for any tradition that is related to principles of faith. Weak argument and scanty evidence cannot be used to derive matters of faith. In the present age, more precaution is required because there is a vast gap of 1,400 years between us and the period of the Holy Prophet (S) .

Therefore, we must avoid conjectures and accept only confirmed traditions so that we may be safe from misguidance. When we adopt certainties, we will be saved from the disputes that proved dangerous for Islam and its teachings.

Regarding this, Shaykh Mufid says:

And I say that it is not obligatory to act upon the solitary reports. It is not lawful for anyone to decide something based on a solitary report till the time the truthfulness of this narrator is proven from some other method. And this is the same view of all Shi’as, many Mu’tazila and thinkers and a group of Murji’ah. But the Sunni jurisprudence and those who believe in 'Rai' (personal opinion) do not agree with this.47

The above statements show that followers of Aale Muhammad used to exercise utmost precaution in the matter of faith. This precaution was also prescribed to them by the imams of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a). The imams of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) ordered their followers:

Your religion is your brother, so be careful with your religion.
The most pious is one who restrains himself from doubtful things.

Conclusion

On the aspect of Islamic beliefs, the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) is the best school of thought and this school makes use of all the available sources of knowledge and the understanding of divine reality. But it does not allow the interference of these sources in understanding divinity and attributes of the Almighty Allah because the issues of divinity are beyond the limits of man's intellect.

The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) does not rely on only one source, like the Ahl ul-Hadith - who only rely on texts - or like the Gnostics, who only follow intuition. Apart from this, another merit of the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) is that it does not assign more importance to any source of knowledge than its actual worth.

For example, though it accords appropriate position to intellect, it is not prepared to accord it an independent value. In matters beyond the limits of perception and those related to the details of the Judgment Day, it does not accept even the least guidance from intellect. Despite that, this School also does not devalue intellect. The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) has clearly announced that without the luminosity of the intellect, it is difficult to understand divine revelation.

The School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) is a school that favours prudence. Therefore, it does not rely on every type of tradition, Sunnah, and text, unless there is certainty that it is mentioned by the Holy Prophet (S) or the companions or the Holy Imams (‘a). And unless a solitary report is supported by other texts and the Book of Allah, it cannot be relied upon. And it is necessary to know the general and the specific, the abrogator and the abrogated, the ambiguous and the clear, and the literal and metaphorical aspects of narrations.

All these can be summed up in the term 'ijtihad', which means absolute effort to derive a religious connotation.

In the School of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) a debate is not supposed to open the avenue of discord. It is actually for calling the people to the Lord of the Worlds, and if it is held in a congenial manner, there is no harm in it. During a debate, one should always keep in mind the principles of wisdom and counsel. However, if it is to exalt oneself and humiliate others, or to create dissension, such a debate is condemned by Allah.

We conclude our discussion with the following verse of the Qur’an and the statement of the Almighty Allah:

“And (as for) those who believe and do good We do not impose on any soul a duty except to the extent of its ability-- they are the dwellers of the garden; in it they shall abide” (7:42).

“And We will remove whatever of ill-feeling is in their breasts; the rivers shall flow beneath them and they shall say: All praise is due to Allah Who guided us to this, and we would not have found the way had it not been that Allah had guided us; certainly the messengers of our Lord brought the truth; and it shall be cried out to them that this is the garden of which you are made heirs for what you did” (7:43).

1. Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Vol. 3, Pg. 128.
2. Seerah Ibn Hisham, Vol I, Pg. 341-342; Majmuat ul-Wasaiq asSiyasah, Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah, Vol. I, Pg. 7.
3. - Maqalaat ul-Islamiyyin wa Ikhtilaaf ul-Muslimeen, Ashari, Vol. I, Pg. 34-39; Al-Fasl fil Milal wa al-Ahwaa wan-Nihal, Ibn Hazm, Vol. 2, Pg. 111; Fajr ul-Islam, Ahmad Amin Misri
4. At-Tauheed ul-Khaalis Awil Islam wa al-Aql, Dr. Abd ul-Haleem Mahmood, Pg. 4-20.
5. Risala Aqeedat ul-Salawa AshaAbu al-Hadith (Fi Rasail ul-Muneera), Sabuni Abu Uthman Ismail.
6. Al-Ahkaam fee Usoolil Ahkaam, Aamadi, Vol. 4, Pg.300.
7. Irshaad ul-Fahool, Shaukani, Pg. 366-367.
8. Al-Irshaad Ilaa Qawaati ul-Adilla, Imam Juwaini, Pg. 25; Al-Jaam ul-Awaam An Ilm ul-Kalaam, Imam Ghazali, Pg. 66-67 and Ilm ul-Kalaam, Dr. Ahmad Mahmood Sabihi, Vol. l.
9. Majmaa al-Fatwa, Ibn Taimiyyah. Vol. 3, Pg. 306-307.
10. At-Tauheed ul-Khaalis, Dr. Abd ul-Haleem Mahmood, Pg. 5-20.
11. Al-Awail ul-Maqaalaat, Shaykh Mufid.
12. Saun ul-Mantiq wa al-Kalaam ‘An Ilmi al-Mantiq wa al-Kalaam, Suyuti, Pg. 252; Irshaad ul-Fahool. Shaukani, Pg. 202; Minhaj ul-Bahas Inda Mufakkiri ul-Islam. Ali Saami Al-Nishaar, Pg. 194; Al- Fikrus Salafi Indal lthna Asharia, Ali Husayn Al-Jabiri. Pg. 154, 204, 439.
13. Tarikh ul-Jahmiyya wa al-Mu’tazaliyya, Al-Qasmi, Pg. 56.
14. Al-Mu’tazila, Zohdi Hasan Jarullah, Second Edition, Beirut, Daar ul-Ahliya Lin Nashr wat Tauzeeh, 1974
15. Ahl ul-Hadith are also called Salafis. Among the former, they follow Muhammad Ibn Abd ul-Wahhab Najdi and among the latter they follow the beliefs and views of Abd ul-Aziz Ibn Abdullah Ibn Baaz.
16. Tarikh ul-Mazahib ul-Islamiyyah, Muhammad Abu Zahra, Qism ul-Asha’ira wa al-Maturud1yya; Al-Milal wan Nihal, Ayatullah Ja'far Subhani, Pg. 1-3; Al-Farq ul-Islamiyyah Fish Shumalil Afriqi, Pg. 118; Ilm ul-Kalaam, Ahmad Mahmood Sabihi, Vol. I.
17. Tabaqatush Shafiya, Sabaki, Vol. 3, Pg.391; Miraat ul-Jinaan, Yafai, Vol.3, Pg. 343; Al-Bidaya Wan Nihaya, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 14, Pg. 76.
18. It refers to the Sufi, Mansur Hallaj. Actually, Mansur was the name of his father, while his name was Husayn. In 309 A.H. he was executed for uttering the words: I am God. Afterwards his corpse was burnt up and the ashes thrown in the Tigris.
19. Al-Jaam ul-Awaam An Ilm ul-Kalaam, Imam Ghazali, Pg. 66.
20. llm ul-Kalaanm, Dr. Ahmad Mahmood Sabihi, Vol. 2, Pg. 604.
21. Al-Yuwaaqeetu wa al-Jawaahir Fee Bayan Aqaid ul-Akaabir, Sherani Abd ul-Wahhab Ibn Ahmad.
22. Al-Tawheed ul-Khaalis Awil Islanm wa al-’Aql, Dr. Abd ul-Haleem Mahmood.
23. Al-Muslimoon wa al-Ilm ul-Hadith, Dr. Abdur Razzaq Naufal; Al-Islam Fee Asr ul-‘Ilm, Fareed Wajidi.
24. Tarjuma Tafsir ul-Qur’an, Vol. I, Pg. 6-25.
25. Shaykh Mahmood Shaltut, Tafsir ul-Qur’an, Pg. 11-13 in the Tafsir of the first ten parts of the Qur’an; Ahya al-Fikr Ad-Deeni Fil Islam Dr Allamah lqbaI, Persian translation by Ahmad Aaraam Pg 147-15; Al-Urwat ul-Wuthqa, Sayyid Jamaluddin Afghani, Vol 7, Pg 383, Published in Italy.
26. This word refers to the understanding of divine reality [note of al-Islam].
27. Sahih Bukhari, Kitabu al-Janaiz Wa Kitabut Tafsir, 3; Sahih Muslim, Kitab Al-Qadr Hadith 22-23-24; Musnad Ahmad, Vol. 2, Pg. 233 - 481: Vol 3, Pg. 353; Siraat ul-Haqq, Asif Mohsini Khandahari.
28. Kashf ul-MuhAjja Li Thamaratil Muhajja, Ali Ibn Tawoos, Pg. 11-20, Maktabud Dawari, Qom.
29. Usool al-Kafi . Vol. I, 310, Baab al-Hidaya, Vol. 2-3. Baab Teenat al Mu’minin wa al-Kafir. Fourth Edition, Maktaba Islamiyyah, Teheran 1392 A H.
30. Nahj ul-Balagha Saying no 262.
31. Rasail Ash- Sharif al-Murtaza, Risalat ul-Huddod wa al-Haqaiq Sharif Murtaza Ali Ibn Husayn Musawi, died 436 A.H.
32. Considering those who say that Allah has qualities - and He was imbued with those qualities and who in order to prove this, cross the limits of comparison - as infidels (Tashbih).
33. Shaykh Mufid, Al-Awail ul-Maqaalaat, Pg. 18
34. Shaykh Mufid, Al-Awail ul-Maqaalaat.
35. Shaykh Mufid, Al-Masaila ul-Jaaroodiyaa.
36. Shaykh Mufid, Al-Awail ul-Maqaalaat.
37. Shaykh Saduq, Ikmaluddin wa Itmaamun Nima.
38. Shaykh Saduq, Kitab at-Tawhid, Pg. 290.
39. Shaykh Saduq, Kitab at-Tawhid. Pg. 290.
40. Shaykh Saduq, Kitab at-Tawhid, Pg. 290.
41. Shaykh Mufid, Tasih ul-Itiqaadaat, Pg.66.
42. Refer to Ibn Ayyash Jauhari, Muqtazib ul-Athar Fin Nasse Alaa Adad ul-Aaimmat ul-Ithna Ashar; Ibn Tulun Damishqi, Al-Shazaraat ul-Zahabiyya Fee Aaimmat ul-Ithna Asharia; Shaykh Mufid, AlMasaila ul-Jaarodiyaa; Shaykh Hurr Amili Muhammad Ibn Hasan, Athbat ul-Huda Bin Nusoos wa al-Mu’jizat.
43. Shaykh Saduq, Kitab at-Tawhid, Pg. 292.
44. Awail ul-Maqaalaat, Pg. 11- 12.
45. Tashih Itiqaadaat bi ThawaAbu al-Intiqaad (1370), was published with Awail ul-Maqaalaat in Tabriz.
46. Tashih Itiqaadaat bi ThawaAbu al-Intiqaad (1370), was published with Awail ul-Maqaalaat in Tabriz.
47. Awail ul-Maqaalaat, Pg. 100, Published Tabriz, Iran.