Taqlid Needs a Direct and Positive Verse
In the previous sections, several Qur'anic verses were reviewed which are claimed to convey God's message to Muslims that they should imitate the maraji'. The details of each were examined and it was shown that none convey such a message; on the contrary, all of them negate taqlid in various ways. In this section, we address another important aspect of the above verses: even if we accept that these verses imply taqlid, the question arises: why is the command for taqlid expressed so indirectly and ambiguously? The issue of ijtihad and taqlid is the most fundamental, basic, and cornerstone of the entire religion. From the oneness and justice of God to prophethood and belief in Imamate and the Hereafter, down to the most minor religious practices — everything is defined and explained based on ijtihad and taqlid. Yet why is taqlid never mentioned by name in the Qur'an? Why are the details of how to select the most learned marja' and the other challenges of taqlid not explained in the Qur'an?
In response, it is said that "not everything must be in the Qur'an; prayer, too, is very important and the pillar of religion, but its details are not mentioned in the Qur'an," and similarly for other rulings. While this is true, the Qur'an nevertheless has multiple direct references to prayer, fasting, and other rulings — for example, "establish prayer" (aqīmū al-ṣalāh), "fasting is prescribed for you" (kutiba 'alaykum al-ṣiyām), and "give zakāt" (ātū al-zakāh). Meanwhile, taqlid is far more important than these rulings. Taqlid determines not only the quality and details of prayer and its prerequisites such as ablution and purity, but also all other divine rulings concerning fasting, Hajj, khums, jihad, zakāt, and more. It is not natural that all these rulings are mentioned by name in the Qur'an, but the ruling of taqlid itself — which is the basis and key to correctly recognizing and implementing all of them — is not directly mentioned, forcing us to search for it with a magnifying glass and connect various Qur'anic verses to taqlid through contrivances and subtle tricks. What harm would there have been if He had said: "It is incumbent upon you to either become a mujtahid, or imitate a mujtahid, or act with precaution"?
Furthermore, regarding the fact that taqlid is not mentioned by name in the Qur'an, it is sometimes said that the name of Ali (a) is also not mentioned in the Qur'an. Very well. There are reasons given for the absence of Ali's name — for example, "it might have led to distortion of the Qur'an." Did the mention of taqlid also have opponents that could have led to distortion? Or "the Qur'an is in the position of stating general principles; if it were to detail everything, it would become a voluminous work." Very well, but are there general principles more important than ijtihad and taqlid?
This is a serious question: how is it that the respected maraji' have concluded that the most key and priority issue for people's guidance and ultimate salvation is the issue of taqlid, and they begin their treatises by explaining this issue — yet the Qur'an, which is the book of guidance from the all-knowing and absolutely wise God, not only does not begin by mentioning the importance of taqlid, but does not even mention it by name anywhere? Even setting aside the direct mention of the word, the verses that advocates of taqlid invoke as evidence are extremely weak and indirect, bearing no proportion to the importance of the subject. For example, the Verse of Nafr (9:122), which is cited as the most important scriptural evidence for taqlid in the Qur'an, has very little connection to the current practice of taqlid. And after nearly 15 centuries, it is still a matter of dispute among scholars whether permission for taqlid can be inferred from this verse or not![1]
Is it fitting that after all the teachings of the fourteen Infallibles (a) and after so many years of scholarly debate, scholars have still not reached an agreement on whether the most fundamental issue of religion has been settled in the most important verse introduced for this purpose or not? Note that our objection is not that scholars disagree about taqlid. For example, Muslim scholars even disagree about the existence of God and debate it — yes, this is natural and commendable, and actually demonstrates the dynamism and scientific nature of their method. But if after all these years, scholars had not reached a consensus on whether the existence of God is settled in the Qur'an or not, that would certainly be unnatural and objectionable. The same applies to the issue of taqlid: disagreement about its details is natural, but disagreement about whether God — in the most important verse alleged — commands following without knowledge or not indicates a fundamental flaw somewhere.
Parent page: The Qur'an Has Not Recommended Taqlid
Return to: Table of Contents