Chapter 3 – The Finality of Prophethood in the view of the Twelver Shia
October 28, 2025Chapter 5 – A debate between a Qadiani and a Shia
October 29, 2025BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents
Chapter 4
The Most Important Intellectual Principles Presented by the Shia Scholars
The First Principle
They said that there is a need for the presence of an infallible leader to guide the people in every age until the coming of the Hour.
They primarily relied on intellect to prove this and then sought support for it backed with divine texts, meaning that the origin for their belief and their main proof for it is human intellect. In order to prove Imamah, their classical Shia scholar al Mufid said:
ومن الدلائل على ذلك ما يقتضيه العقل بالاستدلال الصحيح من وجود إمام معصوم كامل غني عن رعاياه … وهذا أصل لن يحتاج معه في الإمامة إلى رواية النصوص وتعداد ما جاء فيها من الأخبار لقيامه في قضية العقول وصحته بثابت الاستدلال
From its proofs is what the intellect deduces with correct reasoning that there must be an infallible complete leader, who is in no need of his followers’ help. With this principle, there is no need to narrate narrations to prove Imamah or to count the texts related to it because it is established through intellect.[1]
Sheikh al Ta’ifah al Tusi mentioned:
أما وجود الإمام وصفاته التي يستحقها (كالعصمة وغيرها) فمما لا يحتاج فيها إلى النقل بل نعلمها من جهة العقول
As for the existence of the Imam and his deserved attributes (such as infallibility etc.), divine texts are not needed to prove them but we know them through the intellect.[2]
Al Tusi made many similar statements in his book, Talkhis al Shafi:
لأن المعلوم لهم اعتقاد وجوب الإمامة وأوصاف الإمام من طريق العقل والاعتماد عليها في جميع ذلك وإن كانوا ربما استدلوا بالسمع استظهاراً وتصرفاً في الأدلة
Because it is known for them (the Shia scholars) that it is a duty to believe in Imamah and the attributes of the Imam through relying on the intellect. If they had presented what they heard (from narrations) then that is just to present additional evidence.[3]
فعندنا أن بيان ذلك (أي الإمامة) غير محتاج إليه (أي الرسول) لأن العقول تدل على وجوب الإمامة وعلى صفات الإمام وما يحتاج فيه إليه وما تدل العقول عليه ليس يجب بيانه من طريق السمع
For us, to prove it (Imamah) he (i.e., the Messenger) is not needed, because the intellect points towards the need of Imamah and it guides us to the attributes of the Imam and what he is needed for. If the intellect proves something, then there is no need to prove it through oral reports.[4]
Meaning, the Shia prove the need of having divine guides through their intellects and are in no need of divine texts nor do they rely on them. Whether the texts mentioned it or not matters not as they already established it with their human mind.
The Second Principle
They believe that if the divine texts such as the Qur’an and the Sunnah conflict with their intellects, then the intellect is given precedence and the texts are given suitable or convenient interpretations; if no such interpretations are possible, then the divine texts are discarded.
1. Al Tusi says while commenting on certain narrations that state that all the good deeds of a person can be nullified on the Day of Judgment if this person is also committing evil acts such as backbiting:
هذه أخبار آحاد لا ترد لها أدلة العقول الدالة على بطلان التحابط ولو صحت لتأولناها كما نتأول ظاهر القرآن لتلائم أدلة العقل
Each of these reports comes through a single narrator so they cannot harm the intellectual evidence which point to the corruption of the belief of nullified deeds. Even if they were authentic, we would have given them a suitable interpretation just like we gave some of the apparent Qur’anic verses interpretations which suit the intellect.[5]
He is basically saying that even if these reports were authentic, he would give them a completely different interpretation which suits his intellect, because the divine texts cannot go against his intellect or logic.
2. Shia Muhaddith al Majlisi quotes the words of al Mufid:
وذلك إني لو خليت وظاهر قوله تعالى لموسى عليه السلام لا تخف وقوله تعالى لنبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم لا يحزنك قولهم وما أشبه هذا مما توجه إلى الأنبياء عليهم السلام لقطعت على أنه نهي لهم عن قبيح يستحقون عليه الذم … لكنني عدلت عن الظاهر لدلالة عقلية أوجبت علي العدول كما يوجب الدلالة على المرور مع الظاهر عند عدم الدليل الصارف عنه وهي ما ثبت من عصمة الأنبياء عليهم السلام التي ينبئ عن اجتنابهم الآثام
If I had accepted the apparent words of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala to Musa `alayh al-Salam, “Don’t be afraid,”[6] and His words to His Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, “Let not their speech grieve you,”[7] and other similar words directed at the Prophets ‘alayhim al Salam, then I would have to believe that this is a prohibition for them because they committed an act deserving disparagement, but I have rejected the apparent words for an intellectual reason that caused me to do so, because of what was established of the infallibility of Prophets ‘alayhim al Salam that makes them avoid sins.[8]
Al Mufid is saying that Allah, according to the Qur’anic text, is apparently prohibiting the Prophets ‘alayhim al Salam from doing certain bad actions. This contradicts al Mufid’s intellect as he believes that the leader must be infallible, unable to commit sins or mistakes, so he rejected the clear words of the Qur’an and gave some sort of an interpretation to these verses that matches his beliefs.
3. Al Sayed al Murtada mentions:
فأما ما يدعى في هذا الباب من الحديث فلا يلتفت إليه لأن الأخبار يجب أن تُبْنى على أدلة العقول ولا تُقْبل في خلاف ما تقتضيه العقول ولهذا لا نقبل أخبار الجبر والتشبيه ونردها أو نتأولها إن كان لها مخرج
As for the narrations mentioned in this regard, we do not pay any attention to them, because the narrations need to be compatible with what the intellect had decided; they cannot be accepted if they conflict with what intellect decides. This is why we reject narrations of jabr[9] and tashbih[10] or we give them other interpretations if possible.[11]
قلنا لا شبهة في أن كل خبر اقتضى ما تنفيه أدلة العقول فهو باطل مردود إلا أن يكون له تأويل سائغ غير متعسف فيجوز أن يكون صحيحاً ومعناه مطابق للأدلة
We said that there is no doubt that every narration declaring what the intellect rejects becomes invalid, unless it has a palatable, non-arbitrary interpretation so it becomes authentic, having a meaning that matches the intellect.[12]
4. Shia scholar al Miqdad al Siyuri says:
والثاني هو المخالف للعقل فنقول إذا تعارض العقل مع النقل فلا يجوز العمل بهما وإلا لزم الجمع بين النقيضين ولا ترك العمل بهما وإلا لارتفع النقيضان ولا العمل بالنقل وإطراح العقل وإلا لزم إطراح النقل أيضاً لأن العقل أصل النقل لأنه منتهٍ إلى قول الرسول ص الثابت صدقه بالعقل فيكون أصلاً له فلم يبقَ إلا العكس وهو العمل بالعقل وأما النقل فلا يطرح بل للعلماء في ذلك مذهبان أحدهما أن يتوقف فيه إلى أن يظهر سره أو يفوض علمه إلى الله تعالى وثانيهما أن يُأَول تأويلاً لا ينكره العقل
The second is what is incompatible with the intellect. We say: If the intellect and the text are contrary to one another, then it is impermissible to accept them as it would mean combining two opposites, nor is it permissible to accept the text and discard the intellect because it would mean that you also have to discard the text because the intellect is the origin of the text, as the intellect is what originally leads to the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the intellect affirms his truthfulness. What remains is the opposite, to work according to the intellect. As for the texts, they are not completely discarded but the scholars have two choices in the matter: 1. To ignore the text until its meaning becomes apparent to us. 2. To give the text a suitable interpretation that is not rejected by the intellect.[13]
5. Sheikh Lutf Allah al Safi says:
فالأصل في الإعتقاد بعصمة النبي والإمام ووجوب كون الإمام معصوما هو حكم العقل والشرع يؤيد العقل في حكمه هذا … ففي مسألة عصمة الأنبياء العقل هو المرجع الأول ويحكم بوجوب كون النبي معصوما لأدلته
The origin of the belief in the infallibility of the Prophet or the Imam and the necessity for the leader to be infallible is the ruling of the intellect, and the Shari’ah agrees with that ruling. In the matter of the infallibility of Prophets, the intellect is the primary reference; it rules that the Prophet must be infallible for several reasons.[14]
6. Ayat Allah al ‘Uzma Mirza Jawad al Tabrizi says:
وحيث أن ظاهر الآية هو ما ذكرنا فلا يصح رفع اليد عن هذا الظاهر إلا بقرينة عقلية أو نقلية
And since what is apparent from this verse is what we stated, then it is improper to reject what is apparent, unless with an intellectual or textual proof.[15]
To sum up what is being said above, the Shia scholars will reject the meaning of any clear saying from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam or any Qur’anic verse if it happens to conflict with what they agreed upon among themselves as being intellectual proofs. In simpler terms, if any divine text says something that they do not agree with, they will discard it or try to twist the meaning of the text to suite their desires; this is what they referred to as a suitable interpretation matching the intellect.
NEXT⇒ Chapter 5 – A debate between a Qadiani and a Shia
[1] Al Irshad, pg. 347.
[2] Talkhis al Shafi, 1/141.
[3] Talkhis al Shafi, 1/98.
[4] Talkhis al Shafi, 1/128.
[5] Al Rasa’il al ‘Ashr, pg. 325.
[6] Surah Al Naml: 10.
[7] Surah Yasin: 76.
[8] Bihar al Anwar, 10/419.
[9] Jabr: Narrations stating that the human has no choice and that his actions are created and forced upon him.
[10] Tashbih: Narrations likening Allah to His creations.
[11] Tanzih al Anbiya’, pg. 33.
[12] Tanzih al Anbiya’, pg. 171.
[13] Al Anwar al Jalaliyyah, pg. 155.
[14] Majmu’at al Rasa’il, 1/47.
[15] Sirat al Najat, 3/447.