The Verse of Surah Luqman 21
Verse 21 of Surah Luqman, condemning taqlid, says:
When it is said to them, 'Follow what God has sent down,' they say, 'No; but we will follow such things as we found our fathers practising.' What, even if Satan calls them to the chastisement of the Blaze? (31:21)
The overall verse is similar to verses 170 of Surah al-Baqarah and 104 of Surah al-Ma'idah. The previous verse (20) ends with: "Among the people is he who disputes about God without knowledge or guidance or an illuminating Book." Then it says that when they are told to stop disputing without those three proofs and instead follow what God has sent down with knowledge, guidance, and a Book, they say: "No, we follow the way of our fathers." Again, commentators have accepted that this verse is against taqlid but have diverted it away from current taqlid with two claims: (1) that this verse refers to "blind taqlid, not any taqlid," and (2) that it refers to "taqlid in the faith fundamentals, not the branches"! We will examine these two issues.
Does the verse uphold a concept called "blind taqlid"?
Tafsir Noor writes under this verse: "Blind taqlid and bigotry are forbidden" — meaning taqlid is permissible and proper when it is not from Satan and his people. However, this reasoning is flawed and confuses the issue of identifying the marja' with the issue of following. To reject this false proposition in simple terms: they and their like-minded say, "Following without asking for proof is permissible; you may follow a person without reflecting on whether the reason for an action is sound. Just make sure that person is not Satan." Well, do we have any way other than asking for proof and weighing it to distinguish Satan from non-Satan? Does Satan have an outward sign so that we do not have to think about whether his commands are right or wrong and merely reject him upon seeing that sign? When Satan swears by al-Abbas, does he give himself away so we realize his claim is false?
Although our argument above is simple, let us elaborate. First, no human being, if he knows that the other party is Satan or Satan's people and intends to deceive him, would practice taqlid of him! Not even following with proof. Note the difference between taqlid and following: taqlid is when we do not ask the marja' for proof and merely act on his opinion. Following is when we ask for proof, weigh his answer, and follow it if it seems true to us. Regarding Satan, if a person knows he is Satan, not only would he not act on his opinion without asking for proof, but even if he brought proof, verses, signs, and rational arguments, it would still be unlikely for him to trust — he would suspect something is wrong!
The problem and issue arise when a person has a question and wants to find someone who is expert and committed, and wants to act on his words without thinking, reflecting, or investigating the matter. Now if he finds someone and does not know whether he is Satan or not, the issue of taqlid arises: is this permissible or not? Obviously, Satan does not do anything suspicious to reveal his identity; rather, he appears in appropriate clothing and with suitable signs so the person thinks he is an expert and committed. He does not even express his wrong opinion in an overt and blatant manner so that the listener realizes it is wrong; rather, he expresses it with verses, narrations, and seemingly correct arguments so as to deceive. In such circumstances, the question arises: is a person permitted to act on the opinion of someone he thinks is expert and committed without thinking about the consequences of the action? Is responsibility removed from him?
According to the logic of taqlid proponents, including Tafsir Noor, the expected answer to the above question is: "Yes, no problem. Do not choose blindly; look for a qualified expert and committed person, and act on his opinion without asking questions and weighing reasons. This is permissible, and if it later turns out he deceived you intentionally or unintentionally, no problem — it's his fault, and you have no sin." Compare this with the answer the Qur'an gives: "Even if it is Satan, guiding you to the fire of punishment?!" As you can see, not only did the Qur'an not give that answer, it completely rejected it and said the opposite. So you see that attaching the word "blind" to taqlid does not solve the problem.
Does the verse only forbid taqlid in the faith fundamentals?
As for its indication regarding taqlid in the principles and not the faith derivations, Tafsir Ithna-Ashari states: "The noble verse explicitly prohibits taqlid in the faith fundamentals and condemns those who follow their fathers in the faith fundamentals."
The previous verses are Luqman's advice to his son, beginning with shirk, continuing with kindness to parents, establishing prayer, enjoining good, forbidding evil, not raising one's voice, and not walking proudly — all of which concern practical rulings, not beliefs and faith fundamentals. The verse itself begins with the verb "follow" (ittabi'u), which is more suitable for actions and deeds than for opinions and beliefs. It also warns us against Satan's invitation to the Fire, and we know that Satan's invitation is more about actions and does not limit itself to our beliefs. Moreover, the following verse mentions the condition of goodness; the next verse says that on the Day of Resurrection, We will inform them of the actions they performed. Then, a few verses later, verse 29 again says: "God is aware of what you do." The fact that all this contextual evidence has been ignored and the scope of the verse limited to the faith fundamentals without providing any evidence is truly questionable.
Verses 30 and 33 are also relevant. Verse 30 says: "That is because God is the Truth, and what they call upon besides Him is falsehood..." Verse 33, reminding that on the Day of Judgment no father will avail his son and no son will avail his father, destroys all beliefs of the people of taqlid who imagine that the responsibility for their wrong actions will fall on the marja': "O mankind, fear your Lord and dread a day when no father shall avail his son, and no son shall avail his father anything. God's promise is surely true..."
A Note on One of the Other Harms of Taqlid
In addition to rejecting the two qualifications of "blind" and "faith fundamentals" for this verse, there is another interesting point about this verse and sura. Similar to Surah al-Hajj (explained in The Verse of Surah al-Hajj 11), at the beginning of Surah Luqman, two groups of people are introduced with the phrase "And among the people..." condemning their religiosity without knowledge. The second group is verse 20, explained above. As for the other group, verse 6 says: "And among the people is he who buys diversionary talk, to lead astray from the way of God without knowledge, and to take it in mockery; those — for them is a humiliating chastisement."
Without giving specific examples, a fair-minded reader recalls cases where religious people have spent excessive time on unimportant matters in religion, preventing them from addressing more important issues and causing mockery of religion. This has also caused some to say: if in our current situation with so many problems, God's religion is concerned with these things, then we do not want God or religion — and thus they turn away from God without knowledge. However, if everyone kept in mind that on the Day of Judgment they must defend their religious actions with knowledge and evidence, they would know that time is short and issues are many, so they would prioritize and seek relevant sources for each matter according to its importance on the Day of Judgment. In that case, there would be no room for mockery by mockers. In the chapter on rational arguments against taqlid, we will say more about this.
Parent page: Verses Condemning Taqlid