Hadiths of Asking Trustworthy People

Another set of hadiths brought in defense of taqlid are those in which someone approached the Infallible (p) and asked whom to ask about their religious matters, and the Imam introduced a specific person. Proponents of taqlid say: "If taqlid were not permitted, the Imam would not have said 'ask so-and-so'; rather, he would have said 'you must investigate yourself.'" The point is that asking someone is itself one of the methods of investigation. We do not deny asking — on the contrary, we affirm that one must ask — but asking for the verse, hadith, and evidence, not for the final determination of duty. The Infallible Imams (p) never said in any of these recommendations: "So-and-so is your marja'; whatever he says, do it, and do not concern yourself with whether it is right or wrong; if he errs, the responsibility is his"! Rather, they said: when you do not have access to us, ask so-and-so about our words and our recommendations.

In other words, opponents of taqlid also accept referring to scholars and consider it necessary; there is no disagreement on this. The point of contention is: can we refer to a scholar and, without receiving a verse, hadith, or rational argument — returning empty-handed, merely knowing the scholar's opinion — act upon it, comforted that if his opinion was wrong, the sin is on him?! The answer is no, and none of those narrations that said "ask so-and-so" indicate the current system of taqlid, marja'iyyah, and permission for blind following. They only commanded the asking of hadith. That is, those named individuals, in an era without modern communication, played the role of a medium for conveying hadith and nothing more. A look at the text of the narrations used for this purpose confirms this further.

1. "Al-'Amri and his son are both trustworthy. Whatever they convey to you from me, they convey from me, and whatever they say to you, they say from me. So listen to them and obey them, for they are the two trustworthy and reliable ones." ^[1]

For instance, in this narration, the Imam introduces a man named 'Amri and his son simultaneously! This would be meaningless if the Imam truly believed in the mechanism of marja'iyyah and taqlid of the most learned — he should have said that one of them is the most learned and you should follow him. Moreover, do proponents of taqlid believe that the Imam transferred his infallible knowledge to these two and said whatever they deduce and give as fatwa is his deduction and fatwa and God's view?! Certainly not. So what emerges from this narration is that the Imam (p) said: take our hadiths from them.

2. 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn al-Muhtadi: "I said to al-Rida (p): 'My home is far, and I cannot reach you at all times. Should I take the teachings of my religion from Yunus, the client of the family of Yaqtin?' He said: 'Yes.'" ^[2]

If the issue were marja'iyyah and taqlid, 'Abd al-'Aziz would not have given the Imam these explanations about his distance and inability to always reach him... Rather, he would have said: "In matters where I do not understand your hadith and the Qur'an, or do not have time to think about them, or in new issues on which you have given no ruling — is Yunus the most learned, and will acting on his opinion, judgment, and fatwa remove responsibility from me, so that I may imitate him?!" Long before individuals asked the Imams (p), the Prophet himself should have made a public announcement: "In various regions where I am not accessible, by God's command, to implement and establish the mechanism of taqlid among future generations, Yunus is the marja' in such-and-such region, al-'Amri in another, his son in yet another, and so on. We have implemented this system, and here is the list of declared scholars to follow." Not that years passed since the Prophet's call without anyone having heard of such a method, and then someone comes to the Imam and raises the issue for the first time, saying: "My way is far, and I do not have constant access — should I take my religious teachings from Yunus?"

In other words, to explain and establish the foundation of religion, the Prophet and Imams (p) should have acted from the very beginning, not waited for some individuals to raise the issue. Note that one cannot say "the Infallibles (p) did not initially state many rulings until someone asked; taqlid was one of them." No, taqlid is fundamentally different from other rulings — it is the foundation of religion upon which everything rests. It is logical that the Infallibles (p) said nothing about marriage with Eskimos until someone faced that issue, but this fundamental ruling — that every person must either be a mujtahid, practice precaution, or practice taqlid — cannot be kept for years without mention, with no one having heard of it, waiting to see if the issue arises for someone!

Even if someone says the Infallibles (p) had stated it from the beginning, but this 'Abd al-'Aziz was so far away that nothing reached him — first, this is highly unlikely. From whoever he heard about Islam, he should have heard about the primary issue of practical rulings after the main beliefs. But in any case, even if we accept he was unaware, Yunus — who from the proponents' perspective was a marja' — would have had the obligatory duty to explain to him that he must either practice ijtihad, precaution, or taqlid. He should not have left him so uninformed that he would come to the Imam asking such detailed questions, saying "should I take my religious teachings from Yunus?" Rather, he should have said: "Yunus claims marja'iyyah on your behalf — is he telling the truth?!" As you can see, narrations like this in no way indicate taqlid; rather, they prove that the reality was otherwise.

3. "I wrote to him — meaning Aba al-Hasan al-Thalith (p) — asking him from whom to take the teachings of my religion. His brother also wrote to him about it. So he wrote back to them: 'I understood what you mentioned. For your religion, rely upon everyone who has grown old in our love and everyone who has taken many steps in our affair, for they will suffice you, God willing.'" ^[3]

This hadith says: rely on anyone who has spent time in love for us and anyone who has taken many steps in our cause. It does not say rely on one person, nor does it say the one who has taken the most steps or is the most learned. Moreover, the arguments given for the previous hadith also apply here, and likewise for most of the hadiths that follow.

4. 'Ali ibn Musayyab al-Hamdani: "I said to al-Rida (p): 'My home is far, and I cannot reach you at all times. From whom should I take the teachings of my religion?' He said: 'From Zakariyya ibn Adam al-Qummi — trustworthy in religion and worldly affairs.'" ^[4]

Again, the same points as above apply. A new point that can be added is that in this hadith and several others, the phrase "teachings of religion" (ma'alim al-din) is used — the person asked about the teachings of his religion. This includes both beliefs and rulings. If the Infallible (p) wanted to explain the issue of taqlid with his answer, he should have said: "Religion has two parts. Beliefs you must investigate and beware — do not imitate anyone in them — but rulings you should imitate from Zakariyya." If proponents of taqlid claim that "teachings of religion" in the view of the questioner and the Imam (p) meant only rulings, they must provide evidence.

The proponent might say the Imam (p) introduced the marja', and when the person goes to Zakariyya, he will explain in what matters taqlid is forbidden and in what matters it is allowed. The response to this objection is that the Imam (p) was not only explaining for 'Ali ibn Musayyab al-Hamdani; he knew that people like you, fourteen centuries later, would rely on his words. So it was necessary for him to clarify the matter more fully with a few extra words — both for that person and for posterity. Since he did not do so, this shows his intention was not what you claim.

5. Shu'ayb al-'Aqarqufi: "I said to Abu 'Abd Allah (p): 'Perhaps we may need to ask about something — whom should we ask?' He said: 'You must go to al-Asadi, meaning Abu Basir.'" ^[5]

This hadith does not indicate taqlid either, because asking is more general than taqlid. As explained in The Verse "Ask the People of Reminder", the intent is asking accompanied by inquiry into the evidence and proofs, not merely asking for their personal opinion. Also, the questioner uses the plural verb ("if we need... whom should we ask") but the Imam answers with the singular "'alayka" (you must) — this strengthens the view that it was a personal matter. If the Imam intended Abu Basir to be the marja' for him and others like him, he would have said "'alaykum" (you all must). Additionally, most of the explanations given for previous hadiths apply here too. For example, the nature of the question shows the person had never heard of taqlid, and if we accept that taqlid was part of religion from the beginning, this would be unnatural. Also, the question is very general — the person says "if I need to ask about 'something'" — and this word includes beliefs, rulings, and everything. If this hadith indicates taqlid, then the Imam has permitted taqlid in all matters, and beliefs cannot be excluded from it.

6. Ibn Abi Ya'fur: "I said to Abu 'Abd Allah (p): 'I cannot meet you at all times, and it is not always possible for me to come. Sometimes one of our companions comes to me and asks me, and I do not have the answer to everything he asks.' He said: 'What prevents you from [referring to] Muhammad ibn Muslim al-Thaqafi? He heard from my father and was held in high esteem by him.'" ^[6]

Again, note the nature of the question. Here there are three people involved: Ibn Abi Ya'fur says some people come to me with questions I cannot answer. The Imam says: what prevents you from asking Muhammad al-Thaqafi?! If the Prophet and Imams (p) had explained the mechanism of taqlid, would this uncertainty have arisen among those who asked Ibn Abi Ya'fur, and between him and Muhammad al-Thaqafi?! No; rather, Muhammad al-Thaqafi himself would have announced to Ibn Abi Ya'fur's community that he was authorized by the Imam for ijtihad, and these were his opinions — convey them to the people. And if a new inquiry arose, bring it to me for an answer. When encountering the Imam (p), Ibn Abi Ya'fur should have asked: "Muhammad al-Thaqafi claims authorization from you for ijtihad and collecting religious funds — is this true?!" If someone says perhaps Muhammad al-Thaqafi did not know Ibn Abi Ya'fur to grant him representation, this seems highly unlikely because the Imam's response — "what prevents you from asking al-Thaqafi?" — indicates they knew each other.

The continuation of the Imam's answer is also noteworthy. He says to refer to Muhammad al-Thaqafi because "he heard from my father" (sami'a min abi) and was respected by him. This indicates that the purpose was to receive hadith from the Imam's father and convey it; otherwise, if it were a matter of deduction and issuing rulings on new matters, the Imam would have said "he learned from my father and from me and is an expert in this field."

7. Yunus ibn Ya'qub: "We were with Abu 'Abd Allah (p) when he said: 'Do you have no refuge?! Do you have no sanctuary in which to find rest?! What prevents you from al-Harith ibn al-Mughirah al-Nasri?'" ^[7]

This hadith, like the previous ones, does not resemble the introduction of a marja' — someone meant to collect religious funds, deduce rulings, and take responsibility for our actions. In my view, it does not. But if we consider that in an era without modern communication, people felt anxious and intellectually insecure about not receiving the hadiths of the Imams (p), it becomes more plausible that the Imam was telling them: why do you not take our news and hadiths from al-Harith? If one still believes the Imam was appointing al-Harith to the position of marja'iyyah, he should consider why the Imam had not previously granted al-Harith authorization for ijtihad. And if he had, what prevented al-Harith from announcing it where he was known, transmitting religious matters so that people would not feel abandoned and uncertain?!

8. 'Ali ibn Suwayd: "Abu al-Hasan (p) wrote to me while he was in prison: 'As for what you mentioned, O 'Ali, about from whom to take the teachings of your religion — do not take the teachings of your religion from other than our Shi'a. For if you go beyond them, you will take your religion from those who betrayed God and His Messenger and betrayed their trusts. They were entrusted with the Book of God but distorted and altered it. Upon them be the curse of God, the curse of His Messenger, the curse of His angels, the curse of my noble righteous fathers, my curse, and the curse of my Shi'a until the Day of Resurrection — in a lengthy letter.'" ^[8]

Most of what was mentioned in previous hadiths applies here too. Is it logical that the Prophet and previous Imams (p) had not clarified the matter, and the Imam ends up in prison while people still do not know that they should take their religious duties from the most learned scholar, with the method of identifying him being one's own certainty or the testimony of two experts?! This, for a Prophet who claims to be the seal of the prophets, and on the day of Ghadir God says "Today I have perfected your religion"?!

If the Infallibles had already explained the matter and the questioner knows the rules of taqlid — that he faces three options: ijtihad, precaution, or taqlid — and his question is only about identifying the most learned, would the Imam answer his letter by saying "do not follow non-Shi'a"?!

9. 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn al-Muhtadi and al-Hasan ibn 'Ali ibn Yaqtin both narrated from al-Rida (p): "I said: 'I can hardly reach you to ask you about everything I need from the teachings of my religion. Is Yunus ibn 'Abd al-Rahman trustworthy, so that I may take the teachings of my religion from him?' He said: 'Yes.'" ^[9]

10. Al-Fadl ibn Shadhan narrated from 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn al-Muhtadi — who was the best Qummi I had seen, and was al-Rida's representative and confidant — "I asked al-Rida (p): 'I do not meet you at all times. From whom should I take the teachings of my religion?' He said: 'Take from Yunus ibn 'Abd al-Rahman.'" ^[10]

In the two narrations above, the same words are repeated: the subject is "taking" (akhdh), not taqlid, and what is to be taken is the "teachings of religion" (ma'alim al-din), not fatwas. The reason is their lack of access to the Imam, not that they do not know Arabic or find it hard to understand the Qur'an, or lack time for tafaqquh due to life's preoccupations. The reason for introducing Yunus is his trustworthiness (thiqa) in conveying the hadiths of the Imams (p) — not his being the most learned. It has no particular limitation to beliefs or rulings, and no transfer of responsibility to Yunus is mentioned.

In sum, as stated, all these hadiths confirm referring to and asking scholars, but they do not indicate taqlid. The necessity of referring to scholars and asking them is not disputed. The present work also affirms that religious questions should be asked of those who are currently considered marja's, because they are trustworthy and reliable. But the main point is that one must also seek evidence, verses, and hadiths — not merely their personal opinion. The above narrations confirm this much and no more. Not only is there no indication permitting taqlid, but much evidence has been shown against it.

Discussion on Telegram

Parent page: We Have No Narration for Taqlid

Back to: Table of Contents