Al-Wilayah al-Tashri'eyyah

In a previous post, the issue of "Wilayah al Takwiniyyah" (Tafwidh) was discussed. This post shall now discuss the other type of wilayah (authority), that is "Wilayah al Tashri'eyyah" i.e. the legislative authority.

عيون أخبار الرضا (ع) - الشيخ الصدوق - ج ٢ - الصفحة ٢٠

Uyun Akhbar al Reda by Shaikh Sadooq (ra), Volume 2 Page 20

 -   حدثنا أبي و محمد بن الحسن بن أحمد بن الوليد رضي الله عنه قالا حدثنا سعد بن عبد الله قال حدثني محمد بن عبد الله المسمعي قال حدثني أحمد بن الحسن الميثمي أنه سئل الرضا (ع) يوما و قد اجتمع عنده قوم من أصحابه و قد كانوا يتنازعون في الحديثين المختلفين عن رسول الله (ص) في الشي‏ء الواحد فقال (ع) إن الله عز و جل حرم حراما و أحل حلالا و فرض فرائض فما جاء في تحليل ما حرم الله أو تحريم ما أحل الله أو دفع فريضة في كتاب الله رسمها بين قائم بلا ناسخ نسخ ذلك فذلك مما لا يسع الأخذ به لأن رسول الله (ص) لم يكن ليحرم ما أحل الله و لا ليحلل ما حرم الله و لا ليغير فرائض الله و أحكامه كان في ذلك كله متبعا مسلما مؤديا عن الله و ذلك قول الله عز و جل إِنْ أَتَّبِعُ إِلَّا ما يُوحى إِلَيَّ فكان (ع) متبعا لله مؤديا عن الله ما أمره به من تبليغ الرسالة قلت فإنه يرد عنكم الحديث في الشي‏ء عن رسول الله (ص) مما ليس في الكتاب و هو في السنة ثم يرد خلافه فقال و كذلك قد نهى رسول الله (ص) عن أشياء نهي حرام فوافق في ذلك نهيه نهي الله تعالى و أمر بأشياء فصار ذلك الأمر واجبا لازما كعدل فرائض الله تعالى و وافق في ذلك أمره أمر الله تعالى فما جاء في النهي عن رسول الله (ص) نهي حرام ثم جاء خلافه
لم يسع استعمال ذلك و كذلك فيما أمر به لأنا لا نرخص فيما لم يرخص فيه رسول الله (ص) و لا نأمر بخلاف ما أمر رسول الله (ص) إلا لعلة خوف ضرورة فأما أن نستحل ما حرم رسول الله (ص) أو نحرم ما استحل رسول الله (ص) فلا يكون ذلك أبدا لأنا تابعون لرسول الله (ص) مسلمون له كما كان رسول الله (ص) تابعا لأمر ربه عز و جل مسلما له و قال عز و جل ما آتاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَ ما نَهاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانْتَهُوا و إن رسول الله (ص) نهى عن أشياء ليس نهي حرام بل إعافة و كراهة و أمر بأشياء ليس أمر فرض و لا واجب بل أمر فضل و رجحان في الدين ثم رخص في ذلك للمعلول و غير المعلول فما كان عن رسول الله (ص) نهي إعافة أو أمر فضل فذلك الذي يسع استعمال الرخص فيه إذا ورد عليكم عنا فيه الخبران باتفاق يرويه من يرويه في النهي و لا ينكره و كان الخبران صحيحين معروفين باتفاق الناقلة فيهما يجب الأخذ بأحدهما أو بهما جميعا أو بأيهما شئت و أحببت موسع ذلك لك من باب التسليم لرسول الله (ص) و الرد إليه و إلينا و كان تارك ذلك من باب العناد و الإنكار و ترك التسليم لرسول الله (ص) مشركا بالله العظيم فما ورد عليكم من خبرين مختلفين فاعرضوهما على كتاب الله فما كان في كتاب الله موجودا حلالا أو حراما فاتبعوا ما وافق الكتاب و ما لم يكن في الكتاب فاعرضوه على سنن النبي (ص) فما كان في السنة موجودا منهيا عنه نهي حرام أو مأمورا به عن رسول الله (ص) أمر إلزام فاتبعوا ما وافق نهي رسول الله (ص) و أمره و ما كان في السنة نهي إعافة أو كراهة ثم كان الخبر الآخر خلافه فذلك رخصة فيما عافه رسول الله (ص) و كرهه و لم يحرمه فذلك الذي يسع الأخذ بهما جميعا أو بأيهما شئت وسعك الاختيار من باب التسليم و الاتباع و الرد إلى رسول الله (ص) و ما لم تجدوه في شي‏ء من هذه الوجوه فردوا إلينا علمه فنحن أولى بذلك و لا تقولوا فيه بآرائكم و عليكم بالكف و التثبت و الوقوف و أنتم طالبون باحثون حتى يأتيكم البيان من عندنا

Told me my father, and Muhammad b. al Hasan b. Ahmad b. al Walid (ra), who both said: Told us Sa'd b. Abdullah, who said: Told me Muhammad b. Abdullah al Masma'i, who said: Told me Ahmad b. al Hasan al Maitham, who said that one day he asked Imam al Reda (as), while a large group from his companions were gathered around him and were arguing about differing ahadith from the Prophet (pbuh) on a single topic.

So Imam (as) said: "Indeed Allah (swt) made haram the haram things, made halal the halal things and made obligatory the fard (compulsory) things. So what comes up (among ahadith) making halal what Allah has made haram, or making haram what Allah has made halal, or lifting the obligation off what Allah has made fardh in the Qur'an without a "nasikh" (abrogating verse) issued on it to make it "mansookh" (abrogated i.e. no longer required), then it is not allowed to follow that hadith because the Prophet (pbuh) was not authorised to make haram what Allah had made halal, to make halal what Allah had made haram nor to change the faraid (obligatory acts) ordered by Allah and the laws regarding them. In preaching of religion he was completely submissive and obedient to Allah, as testified by Allah (Al Qur'an 46:9) 'I only follow the revelation which is sent to me'. He was completely obedient to Allah with regards to what he was commanded by in propagating the message of the Prophethood (i.e. Islam).

I (i.e. the narrator) said: "So if a hadith is reported from you people (i.e. the Imams) quoting the Prophet on an issue which is not explained in the Qur'an but is recorded in the sunnah, then a hadith comes up against it i.e. the previous hadith (then what should we do?)"

Imam (as) replied: "The Prophet forbid some things, declaring them to be haram, and his prohibition coincided with the prohibition by Allah. And he ordered some things and they became absolutely wajib (obligatory) such as the rules of the obligatory acts ordered by Allah (for example Allah set the obligation for prayers in the Qur'an, and some of the obligatory rules for them were then set out by the Prophet) and his command coincided with the command of Allah. So what has been forbidden by the Prophet, if a hadith is reported going against that, then it is not allowed to adopt it, and like that what the Prophet has ordered we (i.e. the Imams) are not authorised to issue a concession on it in which the Prophet did not make a concession. We do not order against what the Prophet had ordered except due to fear of necessity (such as mitigating circumstantial factors, for example it is reported that Imam Ali decreed zakat on horses also during his reign). As for the possibility of us making halal what was made haram by the Prophet, or making haram what was made halal by the Prophet, so that will never ever happen because we are completely obedient and submitted to the Prophet just like he was fully obedient towards the command of his lord (Allah).

Allah said (al Qur'an 59:7) 'So accept whatever the Messenger gives you, and refrain from whatever he forbids you.'. Indeed the Prophet forbid from many things without making them haram, making them loathed and disliked (makrooh) instead, he also ordered for many duties without making them fard and wajib, instead making them virtuous and superior (to be performed) in the religion (i.e. making them mustahab) and allowed concession in them (the mustahab acts) for those with a valid reason (to not perform it) and for those without a reason as well. So what is prohibited by the Prophet in the sense of being makrooh, or what is ordered by the Prophet in the sense of being mustahab, it is allowed to exercise choice in this matter when two (differing) ahadith are reported from us on that topic, when the same person reports/records both the ahadith and does not discard either of them and considers both of them authentic/reliable and well known.

It is then wajib to follow one of them, or both of them collectively, or whichever one that one wishes to follow. I like to offer you ease on this so that you may obey the Prophet and refer (the ahadith) back to him and us (i.e. submitting to the command of the Prophet without making judgements, and instead conceding that the wisdom behind the apparent contradiction is known to the Prophet and the Imams who inherited his knowledge). And the one who abandons those ahadith out of stubbornness, and rejects them and disobeys the Prophet, he is a mushrik (polytheist).

So what reaches you people in terms of two differing ahadith, present both of them upon the Qur'an. That which is present in the Qur'an with respect to halal or haram, follow the hadith which corresponds to the Qur'an (in that). And that which is not mentioned (explicitly) in the Qur'an, present it to the sunnah of the Prophet. So what is present in the sunnah in terms of haram or wajib, then follow the hadith which corresponds to what has been declared haram or wajib by the Prophet. With regards to what has been declared bad (but not haram) or makrooh by the Prophet, and a hadith is reported against it then it is allowed in that case to exercise choice in the matter which has been declared bad and makrooh by the Prophet but not haram (i.e. it is allowed to personally abstain or not abstain from makrooh things, HOWEVER it is not allowed to declare a makrooh thing to be non makrooh), it is this case in which it is allowed to follow either both the ahadith or whichever one of them that one prefers. This concession has been made for you so as to submit to the Prophet, to obey him and to refer (the ahadith) back to him.

And the ahadith which do not fit into this category (i.e. the Qur'an and sunnah are silent on the topic of their content), then refer the understanding of those ahadith back to us as we are more deserving of it (to analyse ahadith) and do not speak on them with your opinions. It is then obligatory on you to stop, hold steadfast and cease (from further action), and keep investigating until an explanation reaches you from us."

Grading

Ayatullah Sistani (Ikhtilaf al Hadith, Page 13): Sahih
Ayatullah Fadil Lankarani (Durasat fi Ilmil Usul, Vol 4 Page 424): Mu'tbar (reliable)


Excerpt from Ayatullah Sistani's lectures on "Ikhtilaf al Hadith", transcribed by Ayatullah Syed Hashim al Hashimi. Page 11 (The page for the Arabic text is posted at the bottom of this post):

"The ghulat believe that the authority to derive all Islamic laws has been delegated to the Imam. So in their view the Imam  may perform any act that he wills, even forbidding all the obligatory acts or allowing all the forbidden things. The remnants* of these ghulat are still present, such as the AghaKhani Ismailis."

*Translator's note: Among the Imami (Ithna Ash'ari) Shias, some clerics hold a similar belief, in fact taking it even further to extend this authority from the Imams to the ruler of the modern Islamic republic:

"The government can even temporarily prevent performing ḥajj, which is among the important Divine obligations"

Source:  http://www.leader.ir/langs/en/index.php?p=leader_imam

Ikhtilaf al Hadith, Page 11