Introduction

Muhammad Salih b. Ahmad al-Mazandarani (d. 1081/1670, hereon Mazandarani), the author of this text, was a leading scholar in the mid Safavid period, living in Isfahan.¹ He was linked by both marriage and education to the major scholars of the period.

There is some debate over whether Mazandarani can be counted as an Akhbari or an Usuli. Whilst he certainly does not display the virulent condemnation of ijtihad (and usul al-fiqh more generally) in his writings, he does display some elements of Akhbari legal reasoning around the “correct” methodology for Qur’anic interpretation and the probative force of the Imams’ reports. His close association, as both pupil and teacher, with figures associated with the Akhbari trend such as Majlis! I indicate an acceptance of certain forms of Akhbarism as acceptable, at least, and even supportable.²

His major literary output is in the form of commentaries on some of the classic works of Shi'ism. He wrote commentaries and marginal notes on the usul section of al-Kulayn!’s (d. 329/941) hadith collection (al-Kafi fi 'ilm al-din), on the famous ode to the Prophet Muhammad (Qasidat al-Burda), and on works of legal theory (usul al-fiqh). Two commentaries on usul works stand out: his famous commentary on al-Hasan b. al-Shahid al-Thani’s (d. 1011/1602) classic seminary text, Ma'alim al-usul, and a commentary on the Zubdat al-usul of one of his teachers, Baha’ al-Din Muhammad b. Husayn al-'Amili, usually referred to as al-Shaykh al-Baha’i (d. 1030/1620 or 1031/1621). These commentaries are mostly titled sharh (i.e. Sharh Usul al-kafi, Sharh Ma'alim al-usul etc.). It is from his commentary on the Zubda (titled Sharh Zubdat al-usul, which to my knowledge has not, to date, been edited) that the edited text presented below (to­gether with a summary account) has been taken.

The Zubda, in a style typical of many postclassical abbreviated works of usul, references con­cepts and examples by keywords. The meaning is hardly ever explained in full, indicating that the text really exists to be explicated by a teacher, discussed in class, and commented on, when appropriate, in writing. This is what Mazandarani does in his commentary on the Zubda. The commentary is in the mamzuj or mazji style (literally a “blended” commentary) in which the words in the base text (in this case the Zubda) are quoted in small chunks, with the commentator composing text to be inserted between the chunks in such a way that the grammatical structure remains sound. The result is a new integrated composition of base text and commentary. It is perfectly possible that al-Shaykh al-Baha’i purposely designed his base text (with its extreme brevity and keywork referential style), in this way to facilitate an integrated, mazji style com­mentary, as found in Mazandarani’s work summarised below. Certainly, the intention of such abbreviated works (in fiqh, usul or any other of the religious disciplines) was to promote memo­risation of the text as well as to prompt commentary and explication.

The text deals with two linked usul issues taken from the chapter on “personal juristic reason­ing” (ijtihad). Both are canonical within the usul tradition, in the sense that nearly all classical (i.e. post 5th/11th century) works of usul period will deal with one or both of these issues.³ The first is the issue of the ijtihdd of the Prophet: can we say that the Prophet Muhammad carried out ijtihdd or did the rulings he declared come out of revelation? The issue is problematic for various theological and legal reasons laid out below. The second issue concerns the doctrine that all those who carry out personal juristic reasoning (mujtahids) are “right” (mustb). This doctrine (known as taswib) was controversial and in the Zubda, al-Shaykh al-Baha’i demonstrates that it is false, arguing instead that only one of the mujtahids can be right and the others, however meri­torious their juristic effort may have been, are wrong. The discussions come at the beginning of the section (fasl) of the Zubda which deals with ijilhad and the duty to follow the mujtahid (taqlid), just after al-Shaykh al-Baha’i had given a short definition of the terms ytihad and taqlid which Mazandarani in his commentary subjects to discrete analysis, as can be seen in the passage presented below.