Taqlid vs. Ijtihad

Part 8 of a series

Up until now I have used the word ijtihad in a somewhat vague and nebulous way. There is some confusion about whether the word can only refer to a specific form of jurisprudential thinking — one focused on aql — or whether it is more broadly applicable to any activity undertaken with an eye on determining the applicable principles of Sharia. In my view, the most useful way to think about ijtihad is to contrast it with taqlid.

Taqlid translates literally “to follow” but with a connotation of yoking or placing an article around the neck. Generally, it refers to following the opinions of an established scholar or school of thought with regard to sharia rather than figuring out the law yourself. This should not be seen as derogatory; it is generally agreed that at any given time, only a minority of the ummah (the Muslim community) has the faculty for independent legal investigation and reasoning. Ijtihad in general is considered wajib, or mandatory, but that is a commandment upon the ummah as a whole; if nobody in the community can perform ijtihad, that is unacceptable, but if some can and some cannot then the requirement is fulfilled (as long as those that are capable produce rulings for those that are not).

Ijtihad, on the other hand, means “to expend effort” and refers to the effort and critical thinking necessary to arrive at a properly formulated legal conclusion. One who performs ijtihad is a mujtahid. A mujtahid must be well versed in the Quranic verses (ayat) and hadith narratives that cover the areas on which he is ruling. He must fluently speak Arabic and be familiar with important legal terms. He must know about the isnad of any hadith he cites to ensure that it is properly authoritative. He must be familiar with ijma and nasikh (abrogation) so that he does note cite an abrogated source or go against consensus in his rulings. Finally, he must be aware of how rulings are restricted (taqyid) or particularized (takhsis) so he does not improperly apply precedent.

Given all of these requirements, it is no surprise that a lay person with a job and family would not be able to properly apply ijtihad every time he needs a ruling on a matter. There is no shame in this. The Quran exhorts Muslims to “ask the people of knowledge if you do not know” and so that is what most people do. Just because one is obtaining knowledge through taqlid, that does not compel them to swear singular allegiance to a single mujtahid for all time. It is incumbent on Muslims to seek out accurate and timely rulings from any reputable source. It is also permitted for mujtahids to perform taqlid if time is a factor, and they fear that the delay required for extensive ijtihad will lead to a negative outcome for their case. The important thing is that the law is properly followed, not getting tied up in procedure along the way.

There is a lively debate about the type of knowledge that can be gained through taqlid. Some scholars have held that one who only practices taqlid cannot issue fatwas (legal opinions) because taqlid cannot bring about the level of certainty required for a fatwa. Others say that a muqallid (one who practices taqlid) can issue a fatwa that is binding only on himself; and still others say that a muqallid can issue a fatwa whenever there is no mujtahid.

The relationship between muqallid and mujtahid is more complex than just follower/leader. A mujtahid has, in a sense, taken responsibility for the proper practice of the muqallid. If some error in judgment on his part causes his fellow Muslim to go astray, that is much worse than a man’s own mistake merely penalizing himself. Of course, slavishly following another can be a problem, if one does it out of ignorance or laziness. One term that might be substituted for taqlid is itiba, which refers to “enlightened following” or following a leader when you understand the basis for their position and where they are coming from. Itiba might be considered a favorable alternative to taqlid, as it stresses the need for each Muslim to strive to live his faith and to improve himself as best he can.

An important aspect of ijtihad is exerting the maximum effort one can, in order to obtain the best possible outcome. A mujtahid must exhaust his intellectual resources in coming up with an answer. To do less may be careful consideration, but it is not ijtihad. Conversely, if a muqallid exerts his full resources to try to answer a question, it is still not ijtihad, as he lacks the faculty for that type of juristic thought. Capability and effort together are required to produce ijtihad.

As you can see even from this brief essay, the question of who should perform ijtihad and who should follow the ijtihad of others is a complex one that has not been fully settled. Controversy exists on almost every point of legal doctrine, from how to choose a mujtahid to follow to whether it is acceptable to follow the fatwas of a deceased mujtahid. Nevertheless, the ijtihad/taqlid duality illustrates the understanding among the Muslim community that proper interpretation of the law is both essential and very difficult, and provides for a means by which the average person can live a faithful life according to sharia without disrupting his or her other activities.

As always, if you have any questions, comments, or suggestions please direct them to me.