“The Masses” versus “the Select”

In the following long conversation between Ja'far alSdiq and one of his followers, the Imam responded to questions on a number of topics, including what to do when reports from the Imams were contradictory:

عمر بن حنظلة قال: سألت أبا عبد الله عن رجلين من أصحابنا ينهما منازعة في ذين أو ميراث فتحاكما إلى السلطان وإلى القضاة، أنهق ذلك؟ قال: من تحاكم إيهم في حق أو باطق فإتما تحاكم إلى الطاغوت، وما نهكم ل فإتما يأخذ سحتا وإن كان حعا ثابئا ل لأئه أخذه تحكم الطاغوت، وقد أمر الله أن كعر به٠ قال الله نغالى: حميدون أن يئحاكئوا إلى الطاغوت وقد امروا أن خعروا ده>.

237

بصنعان؟ قال: ينظران إلى من كان منكم متتن قد روى حديثنا ونظر ي حلالنا وحرمنا وعرف أحكامنا فليرضوا به حكئا فإفي قد جعلته علكم حاكئا« فإذا حكم بحكمنا فلم ينبل منه فإثما استخفن بحكم هللا وعلنا رد« قلص: فإن كان كل رجل اختار رجلا من أصحايا فرضيا أن يمونا الناظرن ي حقهما، واختلفا فيما حكئا وكلاهما اختلفا ي حديثكم« قال: الحكم ما حكم به أعدلهما وأفقههما وأصدقهما ي الحديت وأورعهما، ولا يلتفت إلى ما بحكم به الآخر« قلدا: فإنهما عدلان مرضيان عند أصحايا، لا يهصل واحد منهما على الآخر« قال: ينظرإلى ما كان من روايتهم عثا ي ذلك الذي حكما به المجع عله من أصحابك فيؤخذ به من حكمنا وييرك الشاذ الذي ليس بمشهور عند أصحابك، فإن المجع عله لا ربب فيه« وإثما الامور ثلاثة: أمر بس رشده فؤثبع، وأمر بجن غيه فيجتنب، وأمر مشكل بجد علمه إلى هللا وإلى رسول« قال رسول هللا — صلى هللا عله وآل وسلم: »حلال بنن وحرام بس وشبهات بين ذلك، فمن تربك الشبهات بحا من المحرمات ومن أخذ بالشبهات اركب المحرمات وهلك من حيث لابعلم«« قلدا: فإن كان الحيرن عنكما مشهورين قد رواهما الثقات عنكم؟ قال: ينظرفما وافق حكمه حكم الكتاب والسئة وخالف العاقة فيؤخذ به ويليك ما خالف حكمه حكم الكتاب والسئة ووافق العامة« قلت: حعادا فداك.١ أرتا إن كان الفقيهان عرفا حكمه من الكتاب والسئة ووجدنا أحد الحسن موافقا للعامة والآخر مخالفا لهم، بآتي الحسن يؤخذ؟ قال: ما خالف العامة ففيه الرشاد« قلدى: جعادف فداك.١ فإن وافقهما الحيرن جميعا؟ قال: ينظرإلى ما هم إله أميل حكامهم وقضاتهم، فيهرك ويؤخذ بالآخر« قلدا: فإن وافق حكامهم الحقيرين جميئا؟ قال: إذاكان ذلك فارجه حى تلق إمامك، فإن الوقوف عند الشبهات خير من الاقتحام ي الهلكات«^[CMLXXX]

['Umar b.

commanded that the tyrant should be rejected. God, the Exalted, said, ‘They wish for a judgment from a tyrant, although they were ordered to reject him.'"^[981]

I said, 'What should they do, then?" He said, “They should look for someone among you who reports our sayings, has studied what we deem lawful and unlawful, and knows our rulings. They should accept him as a judge, for I have made him a judge over you. If he judges according to our rulings and his judgment is not accepted, then God's judgment has been denigrated and we have been rejected."

I said, 'What if each of the two [parties to the dispute] chooses a different person from our community, and they both agree to have these judges look into their claims, but they [the judges] disagree in their judgments and disagree about your sayings?" He said, “The valid judgment is that of the individual who is more upright, legally knowl­edgeable, truthful in speech, and pious. No heed should be paid to the judgment of the other."

I said, 'What if they are both upright and accepted in our commu­nity, and neither is preferred over the other?" He said, “Then consider which of their reports from us with respect to the matter at hand is agreed upon by your community. That is what should be taken from our rulings, and any anomalous report that is unknown to your com­munity should be abandoned. What is unanimously agreed upon is not subject to doubt. Matters are of three kinds: matters that are clearly correct, so they are to be followed; matters that are clearly errant, so they are to be avoided; and matters that are ambiguous, so knowledge of them is to be referred to God and His Messenger.

I said, “What if two reports attributed to you are well known and reported from you by trustworthy people?" He said, “Look to see which of their rulings matches the rulings in the Book [of God] and the Sunna, but contradicts the [opinion of the] masses. That one is to be accepted. For whatever contradicts the Book and the Sunna, but aligns with the [opinion of the] masses is to be rejected."

I said, “May I be made your ransom! What is your position on [a case in which] two jurists reach their rulings with reliance on the Book and the Sunna, but we find one of the two reports agreeing with the [opinion of the] masses and the other contradicting it: Which of the two reports should we accept?” He said, “The one that contradicts the judgment of the masses has truth and guidance in it.”

I said, “May I be made your ransom! What if both reports agree with the practice of the masses?” He said, “Look to see which one their arbitrators and judges lean toward. That one is to be rejected and the other accepted.” I asked, 'What if their judges agree with both reports?” He said, “If that is the case, then withhold judgment until you meet your Imam. In situations of doubt and ambiguity, holding back is better than falling into ruin.”

As explicitly stipulated in the text, the purpose of the instructions is to find a way out of an impasse in the administration of justice when the avail­able evidence regarding the correct ruling is contradictory. Consequently, one must consider all possibilities to determine which reading of the story is more probable. One option is to give priority to the opinion that is prev­alent in one's community over an alternative opinion that is less known and represented.

If the opinion of the Imams agreed with the official position, there was always the possibility that it reflected precautionary considerations. The case of hunting with a falcon, mentioned earlier, illustrates the predica­ment that Shi jurists faced in the time of the caliphate. Several early jurists thought that hunting with any animal other than a trained dog was not sanctioned by the Qur'an. However, they could not publicly advocate this opinion, as hunting with falcons was a very popular pastime of the caliphs and their entourage.

عبيد س زررة عن أبي عبد هللا قال: ما سمعت متنى يشبه قول الناس ففيه التقية وما

ة. ٠٠٠ ض ٠ حم ٠٠ "٥ ٠٠ ت

سمعت متنى لايشبه قول الناس فلاتقية فيه.^[983]

['Ubayd b. Zurara:] Abu 'Abd Allah said, “What you heard from me that conformed to popular opinion among the general public was possibly said out of precautionary secrecy, and what you heard from me that did not conform to popular opinion among the general public was not said out of precautionary secrecy.”

Many sectarian books written and published in recent times criticize the reference in the long conversation quoted above as an outright anti-Sunni statement.

أبوإسحاق الأزجاني رفعه قال: قال لي أبوعبد هللا: أتدري لم أمرم بالأخذ بخلاف ما تقول العامة؟ فقات: لاأدري. فقال: إن عجا لم كن يدين هللا بدين إلا خالف عله آل أمجة^[985] إلى غيره، إزدة لابطال أمره.^[986]

Abu 'Abd Allah said to me, “Do you know why you were ordered to take the position that is contrary to the masses?” I said, “I do not know.” He said, “Anything that 'All advocated in matters of religion, the Umayyads contradicted in the hope of eliminating his influence.”^[987]

Thus, no offense was intended to other leading jurists of the time or to their opinions, nor was this approach an attempt to persuade supporters of one school to reject another out of hand.

إذا سئلت عن شيء ولم كن عندك شيء فانظر ما ذا قال فيه أبو حنيفة فخايفه فانك تصيب!^[988]

If you are asked about something and you do not have an answer, look to what Abu Hanifa said about the matter and take the opposite opin­ion. That way, you will get the right answer!

The second statement is by Ibn al-Salah al-Shahrazuri (d. 643), a Shafi'i scholar and author of one of the most popular works on the hadith sciences.^[989] He had the following advice for cases of disagreement between Abu Hanifa and Shafi'i:

إذا اختلف قولى الشافى في مسألة وأحد الولين يوافق مذهب أبي حنيفة، قال

ه ٠٠ ٠٠ م٠ ٠ ٢

الشيخ أبوحامد: ما يخالف قول أبي حنيفة أولى لأنه لولاأن الشافى عرف فيه معى خفئا لكان لا يخالف أبي حنيفة.^[990]

If the two opinions of Shafi'i [that is, his "old" and “new” opinions] regarding a matter differ and one of the opinions agrees with that of Abu Hanifa, the Shaykh Abu Hamid^[991] said, 'Whatever conflicts with the opinion of Abu Hanifa is preferred, because had Shafi'! not noticed a subtle element [meriting a different ruling] in the matter, he would not have contradicted Abu Han!fa."

Similar examples of the interplay of legal diversity and sectarian differ­ences are abundant:

الجرى رخص فيه علي والحسن وماكل والشافي وأبوثور وأصحاب الرأى وسارأهل العلم. قال اين عباس: الحري لاتأكله ايهود. ووافقتهم الرافضة ومخالغتهم صواب.^[992]

'All, Hasan [al-Basr!], Malik, Shafi'!, Abu Thawr, other followers of ray and other people of knowledge all declared the jirri/jirrith [an eel-like fish] to be lawful. Ibn 'Abbas said, “Jews do not eat jirri, and the Rafida agree with them. What contradicts them is the correct [opinion]."^[993]

قال الحافظ العرإفي في يان اسدال طرف العمامة: هل المشروع فيه إرخائه من الجانب الأيركما هو المعتاد أو الأيمن لثرفه؟ لم أر ما يدل علي تعيين الأض. وعلهل (بعجي التبي - صلي الله عليه وسلم) كان بزخيها من الحانب الأيمن بم ;ردهاإلى الحانب الأيس. إلاأنه صارشعارا للامامية فينبي تجئبه لهرلش التشبه بهم.^{[994] [995]}

Regarding the side of the turban that hangs down—whether one should let the left side hang down, as is customary, or the right, because of that side's privilege—al-Hafiz al-'Iraq!16 said, “I do not find anything indicating that it should be on the right side. The Prophet (may God's prayer and peace be upon him) possibly used to let the right side hang down and then move it to the left side, but because that has become a symbol for the Imam! [Sh!'a] it should be avoided so as not to resemble them.”

اسلئة في القبرالتسطيح، وهوأولى علي الراجح من مذهب الشافي، وقال أبوحنيفة وماكل وأحمد: التسنيم أولى لأن التسطيح صارشعارا للشيعة.^[996]

The sunna is to flatten the grave, and that is preferable according to the better, supported opinion in the school of Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa, Malik, and Ahmad [b. Hanbal] said that it is better to raise the level of the grave [by heaping loose soil on top of the grave], as flattening the grave has become a symbol for the Shia.

قال الشافي وأحمد: المسح على الخئين أولى من الفسل لما فيه من مخالفة الشيعة.^[997]

Shafi'i and Ahmad said that wiping over boots is preferable to washing [the feet]^[998] because it is against [the opinion or practice of] the Shi'a.

II.