Religion cannot be divided into fundamentals and derivations
One of the fundamental and foundational deviations that has occurred in Islam is the arbitrary division of religion into categories such as the five principles (usul) and ten branches (furu'), as well as the division of actions into five categories: obligatory, recommended, disliked, forbidden, and permissible. The author's searches have so far yielded no result — no verse or hadith has been found in which God or the Infallibles (peace be upon them) made such a categorization. So far, it appears that these are innovations of the jurists after the Infallibles.
#Challenge: If you can find a verse or hadith that says religion consists of two parts — beliefs and practices — and that beliefs are five and practices are ten; likewise, that actions have five states: obligatory, recommended, disliked, forbidden, and permissible!
It is said that these categorizations are not found in the primary sources of Islam and that the scholars themselves created them to aid in better understanding of religion, prioritization of actions, and so on. So far, perhaps there is no problem, and no one can object. But the fundamental problem arises when we recall about thirty hadiths of the Imams (peace be upon them), including "Beware of taqlid" (إياكم و التقليد), and they say, "The Imam meant that it is disliked, not forbidden, so taqlid is permissible"! Or when we mention the hadith "You must engage in tafaqquh in the religion of God" (عليكم بالتفقه في دين الله), and they say, "This hadith means tafaqquh is recommended, and this command cannot be obligatory"!
Another example: we recall God's command that says "Reflect on the verses and signs of God," and they say, "Religion has two parts: rulings and beliefs, and this command applies only to beliefs — reflection and thought are not required in rulings." Thus, they exclude a large portion of actions from the scope of God's command. Then they say, "Bring one verse that says to reflect on practical subsidiary rulings," while perhaps God does not accept this categorization in the first place, so He would not send separate verses for each category of fundamentals and derivations. When and where did God or the Imams (peace be upon them) draw a line through the middle of religion and separate these two from each other, that we should now find separate evidence and proofs for each side?!
If these categorizations were not in the words of the Qur'an and the Imams (peace be upon them) and were defined to help us, that is fine. But they should not and cannot be placed above the explicit commands of God. They should not be considered so fundamental that they overshadow God's verses and exclude some actions from the scope of explicit recommendations. God has sent no evidence for the division of rulings/beliefs. Even if He has, He has sent no evidence that those general commands are qualified and apply only to one of these categories and not to the others.
Are reflection and reasoning limited to beliefs?!
Despite all the above discussions, to show that none of these demarcations have any validity in the Qur'an, this section reviews verses that contain the words "reflection" (tafakkur) and "reasoning" (ta'aqqul) and at the same time refer to rulings.
Verses of Reflection and Reasoning in Rulings
Separating belief from rulings is impossible
All the verses reviewed in the previous section show that in terms of the necessity of reflection and thought, God has made no distinction between existential verses and verses about monotheism, prophethood, resurrection, etc., and verses about practical rulings — He has considered all of them as requiring reflection.
In fact, the truth is that rulings and actions cannot be separated from beliefs! Every action inevitably stems from a belief. When someone pays khums, they first believe that God wants this action from them, and then they perform it. When someone refrains from taking an interest-bearing loan according to their marja's fatwa, they hold that it is forbidden by God's command. When someone gives women half the share of inheritance according to a fatwa, it is because they believe that God's justice has decreed this. How can someone say, "This prayer that I perform — up to this specific point and until this moment it pertains to my beliefs and faith fundamentals, and the rest pertains to my rulings"?! Or say, "No part or portion of my prayer falls into the category of my beliefs — it all falls into the category of my rulings"!
If we look more carefully, we see that the main importance of beliefs is that they lead to specific actions. First, can anyone find a theoretical or belief-related category in religion that has no manifestation in the external world and in human actions, and is one hundred percent purely theoretical and mental? Second, assuming it exists, does heartfelt faith alone, without action, have any value and worth in Islam and the Qur'an? Can someone say, "I have chosen the best beliefs and heartfelt faith through research or imitation, and then I will not lift a finger so that I won't have to think about my actions and rulings or be concerned about right and wrong in taqlid in rulings"?
The worst belief state is shirk (associating partners with God), which is described in the Qur'an as a great injustice, and verse 48 of Surah al-Nisa' says that God may forgive anything but does not forgive shirk. But why is shirk — lying about God — so bad? The reality is that most of us, although we say with our tongues that God is unlike anything and anyone, still subconsciously imagine that God has something like personal pride and is offended if something that is not true is presented as part of the truth. For this reason, He may forgive any sin but does not forgive shirk. While God is completely self-sufficient, independent, and omnipotent — if all beings in the universe were to ascribe partners to Him, it would not harm or damage His essence in the least that He would punish for it.
So why has God considered shirk so evil? Because shirk confuses and misguides the polytheist themselves. As long as they believe in the lie they have attributed to God — that is, as long as they consider that lie to be true — due to their incorrect and false understanding of God, they perform incorrect actions, and the consequences of those actions inevitably reach them. If they see the result or somehow become aware of their shirk and try to correct it, they are no longer misguided and polytheistic — they are on the path of guidance and salvation. But if despite the result or other kinds of reminders they still hold to their belief, they continue on the same path. This is why God does not forgive — essentially, it is rationally impossible for God to forgive, just as God cannot create another god. Otherwise, God's mercy extends to all things, and rational impossibilities are not things.
These explanations were given to say that shirk is a practical epistemological error, not merely a false mental opinion. Every action is based on human understanding; when understanding is wrong, the action and its result also become deviated. It is rationally impossible for someone to do something and for its result not to reach them — unless the person turns away from shirk and strives to correct it, in which case they are included in mercy: "Except those who repent, believe, and do righteous work — for them Allah will replace their evil deeds with good. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful" (Qur'an 25:70). Many other verses of the Qur'an also emphasize these points. Two other pieces of evidence for the claim that shirk occurs in actions were seen in the section "Verse 23 of Surah al-Zukhruf," where the polytheists say "...we did not commit shirk and did not make anything forbidden..." — showing that the concept of shirk and rulings of halal and haram are completely intertwined and inseparable.
Baseless naming
In conclusion, if someone categorizes things for the convenience of their own academic work or for any other reason — for example, dividing humans into black and white — there is no objection, and they may have their own categorization. But if they want to impose their categorization on God's rulings and say that such-and-such a ruling of God applies only to black people and not to white people, they must first bring evidence that God has recognized such a division, and second bring evidence that He has assigned that ruling only to the first group and exempted the second group. Without these two pieces of evidence, what they attribute to God is an instance of "speaking without knowledge" and "names which you have named, you and your fathers, for which God has sent down no authority":
"They are not but names which you have named, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance." (Qur'an 53:23)
"He said, 'There will surely befall you from your Lord defilement and anger. Do you argue with me concerning names which you have named, you and your fathers, for which Allah has not sent down any authority? Then wait; indeed, I am with you among those who wait.'" (Qur'an 7:71)
"O companions of prison, are separate lords better or Allah, the One, the Prevailing? (12:39) You worship not besides Him except [mere] names you have named, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. Legislation is not but for Allah. He has commanded that you worship not except Him. That is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know." (40)
Parent page: Taqlid from the Perspective of Reason
Return to: Table of Contents