Ijtihad and Taqlid

Objective

Every legally accountable believer (mukallaf) must understand the rational and spiritual necessity of either Ijtihad (independent juristic reasoning) or Taqlid (following a qualified jurist) to correctly fulfil their divine duties. This section elucidates how to recognize and select a Marja‘ (Source to Follow), when it is permissible or mandatory to transfer one’s alignment, and the precise duty of a believer upon the demise of the jurist they follow.

Conceptual Lexicon:

• Mukallaf (المُکَلَّف): A person who has reached the age of physical maturity (bulugh) and possesses full mental capacity (‘aql), thereby becoming legally, morally, and religiously accountable before God for performing mandatory duties (wajibat) and abstaining from prohibited actions (muḥarramāt).
• Ijtihad (independent juristic reasoning): The rigorous, highly specialized process of deducing specific legal rulings from the primary sources of Islamic law (the Quran and Sunnah).
• Omni-Qualified Jurist (Mujtahid Jami‘ al-Shara’it): A jurist (faqih) who possesses not only supreme academic erudition but also absolute moral integrity (‘Adalah), piety, and a comprehensive understanding of contemporary human affairs.
• Taqlid (Following an Expert): The rational framework through which an unspecialized believer acts in accordance with the legal rulings (fatwas) of an Omni-Qualified Jurist in the subsidiary branches of religion (furu’ al-din).

What is the Core Issue?

Upon entering the stage of being a mukallaf, every Muslim becomes directly responsible before God for their acts of worship and numerous transactions in daily life. For instance, they must possess certain knowledge regarding the validity of their prayers, fasting, commercial contracts, and criteria for ritual purity (taharah). Faced with this spiritual accountability, three distinct paths lay open to the mukallaf:

1. Attaining the rank of independent Ijtihad themselves.
2. Acting on Ihtiyat (precaution) across all jurisprudential variables.
3. Following an Omni-Qualified Jurist through the framework of Taqlid.

Since Ijtihad requires decades of rigorous, specialized training in classical sciences, and Ihtiyat demands an impractical degree of legal scrutiny that is unsustainable for most people, the standard, rational path for a general mukallaf is to follow a qualified Marja‘.

Why is Following an Expert a Rational Behaviour?

In Shia jurisprudence, Taqlid never signifies blind or uncritical imitation. Rather, it is anchored in the universal, rational axiom: “the necessary recourse of the non-specialist to the specialist.” Just as human reason dictates consulting a physician for medical treatment or an engineer for structural design, it requires the mukallaf to follow a jurist to understand the specialized rulings of religion—a scholar who has dedicated their life to mastering the Quran, Prophetic tradition (Ḥadīth), and the principles of legal theory (Uṣūl al-Fiqh).

Hence, a mukallaf’s decision to follow a scholar is not the suspension of the intellect; it is the execution of a rational dictate. Crucially, this practice operates exclusively within the subsidiary branches of religion (furu’ al-din). In the fundamental roots of faith (uṣūl al-dīn)—such as Monotheism (Tawḥīd), Prophethood (Nubuwwah), and Resurrection (Ma‘ād)—every individual must attain personal conviction through individual inquiry. However, in the intricate details of practical rulings, following verified expertise is a natural and defensible method for the mukallaf.

What role does Taqlid play in social and moral life?

Having established that Taqlid (following a specialist) is a rational means to ascertain one’s duties, we must examine its impact on collective life. If individuals were to issue religious rulings based solely on personal interpretations without adequate scholarship, religious society would fall into chaotic fragmentation. Referencing a central juristic authority anchors communal religious practice within a rigorous, scientific, and reliable framework.

• Order and Uniformity of Practice: Following the institution of Marja‘iyyah insulates a society’s religious practices from arbitrary subjectivity and chaos.
• Scholarly Response to Contemporary Issues: A living jurist, keenly aware of the shifting dynamics of time and space, can systematically evaluate novel contemporary dilemmas, ensuring that those who follow them receive relevant and deeply considered guidance.
• An Exercise in Intellectual Humility: The praxis of following expert counsel serves as a continuous moral reminder of the necessity of yielding to verified expertise within highly technical domains.

How is a Marja‘ Chosen to be Followed?

Once the necessity of following a jurist is clarified, the next question arises: whom should one choose? In Shia jurisprudence, a Source of reference must be an Omni-Qualified Jurist, embodying both peerless analytical capacity and absolute moral reliability. The selection is governed by two pivotal criteria: A‘lamiyyah (supreme expertise) and ‘‘Adalah (moral rectitude).

A) A‘lamiyyah: Supreme Expertise in Jurisprudential Deduction

The A‘lam (most knowledgeable) is the jurist who demonstrates superior capability relative to their peers in analyzing textual evidence, synthesizing conflicting legal indicators, and resolving complex, novel issues. Seeking to follow the A‘lam is analogous to consulting the most skilled specialist for a critical medical issue; the more profound the subject matter, the more vital the precision of expert selection becomes.

B) ‘Adalah: Moral Rectitude and Integrity

Moral rectitude means that the jurist is entirely trustworthy in their religious and ethical conduct. They must consciously abstain from major sins and avoid persisting in minor ones. Therefore, the scholar whom one chooses to follow is not merely an academic legal specialist; they must actively embody piety, trustworthiness, and complete detachment from self-serving desires (hawa al-nafs).

Means of Identifying the Most Knowledgeable Marja‘

An ordinary mukallaf is not expected to personally evaluate advanced treatises of jurisprudence and theory. To discover which jurist they ought to follow, both human reason and Shari’ah recognize three valid pathways:

1. Personal Certainty for Experts: This path is reserved for those who themselves possess the academic capacity to evaluate the intellectual output of jurists.
2. Testimony of Experts (Ahl al-Khibrah): If qualified, just, and knowledgeable scholars verify a jurist’s supreme expertise, and there is no conflicting testimony of equal weight, it establishes legitimate reliability for the believer.
3. Widespread Academic Reputation: At times, a jurist’s intellectual eminence within the senior tiers of the seminary (Hawzah) is so prominent that it generates normative certainty for the general public.

If Multiple Jurists Excel Equally

If the experts conclude that several jurists stand at the exact same academic level, the believer possesses the legal latitude to follow any one of them. In such scenarios, choosing the jurist who exercises greater caution (ihtiyat), exhibits deeper piety, or whose rulings are more accessible can aid in making an optimal choice.

Discerning the Jurist’s Moral Rectitude

The standard method to ascertain the ‘‘Adalah of the jurist one follows is observing or gaining assurance regarding their “good outward conduct” (husn al-zahir); meaning their public demeanour consistently mirrors piety, righteousness, and avoidance of sin. Academic, social, or political differences of opinion with a Marja‘ do not, in and of themselves, constitute a ground for invalidating their moral rectitude.

Educational Note:

Commencing to follow a deceased jurist

Following a deceased jurist from the outset (Taqlid al-ibtida’i) is not permissible. An individual selecting a Marja‘ for the first time must choose a living, fully qualified jurist. The pedagogical reason for this ruling is that a living Marja‘ can dynamically respond to the fresh issues and evolving needs of modern society. However, if an individual was already following a Marja‘ during their lifetime, and that Marja‘ subsequently passes away, the legal question of “remaining on the following of the deceased” (baqa’ ‘ala Taqlid al-mayyit) arises, which is detailed below.

Duty Following the Passing of a Marja‘

If the Marja‘ (whom a person follows) passes away, the core principle is that the mukallaf cannot remain in a state of legal suspension. While beginning to follow a deceased authority for the first time is invalid, an individual who was an established follower during the jurist’s lifetime may, in many instances, continue following their past rulings, provided they do so with the explicit permission and according to the verdict of a living, fully qualified Marja‘.

Therefore, the practical duty of an individual upon the demise of the scholar they follow is to immediately refer to a living, fully qualified jurist and seek their ruling on “remaining on the following of the deceased.”

• If the living Marja‘ deems remaining permissible: The individual may continue following the deceased jurist’s rulings in matters they had previously adopted, provided they observe the boundaries and conditions outlined by the living Marja‘.
• If the living Marja‘ deems remaining mandatory or preferable: The believer must act according to that verdict, particularly if the deceased jurist was widely recognized as the A‘lam.
• If continuing the previous path is impermissible: The individual must completely transition and begin following the living, most knowledgeable Marja‘, aligning all future actions with their fatwas.

Having clarified this transition, a natural follow-up question arises: Is a believer permitted to change the jurist they follow under other circumstances? This introduces the legal doctrine of ‘Udul.

What is the Ruling on Changing the Jurist One Follows (‘Udul)?

‘Udul refers to transitioning from one Marja‘ to another. This is not a matter of arbitrary personal preference or convenience; it must be backed by valid jurisprudential and rational justifications.

The primary scenarios include:

• Mandatory Transference: If it is definitively proven to the mukallaf that another jurist is more knowledgeable (A‘lam) than the one they currently follow, they are legally obligated to transition and begin following the more knowledgeable one.
• Impermissible Transference: Ceasing to follow one’s current Marja‘ simply to seek out more lenient rulings or out of mere personal whim, without a valid evidentiary basis, is impermissible.
• Method of Transference: Changing the scholar you follow requires no formal ritual or bureaucratic protocol. Once the religious duty becomes clear to the person, they must simply align all subsequent actions with the rulings of the new Marja‘.

What Must Be Done in Cases of Obligatory Precaution (Ihtiyat Wajib)?

Occasionally, the Marja‘ whom a believer follows does not issue a definitive verdict on a specific issue, employing instead the expression “Obligatory Precaution“ (Ihtiyat Wajib). In such instances, the believer has two choices: they must either execute the strict requirements of that precaution or refer in that specific matter to the fatwa of another living Marja‘ whom they are permitted to follow based on ranking next in academic capability.

What is the Status of Past Actions?

It is possible that an individual acted for a period without following a Marja‘ or later realized that the path they followed was fundamentally flawed from the outset. In this situation, past actions must be subjected to a rigorous retroactive assessment against an objective jurisprudential standard.

If past deeds happen to conform to the fatwas of the correct Marja‘ (the one they should have been following) or aligned accurately with the actual reality of the divine obligation, they are deemed valid and require no repetition or make-up (qada’). However, if it becomes clear that past actions were inconsistent with religious obligations, their status and remedy must be determined in strict accordance with the rulings of the valid Marja‘ whom the individual now follows.