Interpreting Texts

 

When someone has to face such numerous texts, he is puzzled and unable to reject them because they are consecutively reported or almost so. He will then tell you that we have simply to “interpret” these texts just as the case with those relevant to the rej`a (return) or other beliefs.

We say that there is no room here for interpretation, neither of these texts nor of those. Rather, we have, if our comprehension cannot absorb them, to render their knowledge to Allah, just as al-Khawajoo’i al-Mazandarani has said when he discussed the subject of rej`a, and here is his statement:

“We ought not express our astonishment at it, for the issues whose causes are unknown should not be regarded as odd. Have you not heard that our master, the Commander of the Faithful, peace and blessings be upon him, saying, `This is knowledge of which people are vastly ignorant; refer its knowledge to Allah’? Yet some of such knowledge, like the walis winning the honour of being the supporters and the helpers (of Imam al-Mehdi [a]) and their elation at the inception of his State and Government, and like seeking revenge against the enemies and their punishment and the chastisement which they deserve, in addition to other matters all of which are recorded.”[1]

Yes, there is no room here for interpretation due to the following considerations:

 

1. If the text contains a binding order which is not subject to rationalizing, nor does it violate what is theologically or rationally fixed, it has to be accepted as is.

 

2. If we do not comprehend such a text, nor can we understand the wisdom behind it, we have no right to reject it, nor are we permitted to interpret it. Time may come when our intellectual power, our minds, ascend the ladder of supremacy, a time when our knowledge increases, and it will be then that we understand the wisdom behind it. Scores of years, even centuries, may pass for mankind to take a stride in his intellectual and scholarly progress so we may ascertain the secret in it or the wisdom behind it or the precise meaning of some texts.

Many meanings of the verses of the Holy Qur’an, such as those dealing with the cosmos, and others, have been grasped in the twentieth century, especially during the last couple of decades. Those which we do not yet comprehend are many more.

 

3. Interpreting the text takes place if it superficially appears to contradict reason or differs from what is already agreed upon or taken for granted by the Shara`a or others provided such an interpretation is acceptable, reasonable and plausible.

 

4. If the text does not permit an interpretation acceptable to linguists, and it is one which clearly contradicts what is taken for granted, to reason and to the Shara`a, while contradicting the clear text of the Holy Qur’an, it will then have to be rejected and thrown out of the window since no infallible person has stated or articulated it.

Hence, it becomes obvious that relying on what is far-fetched and what is recommended in issues relevant to the unknown, to what we cannot see, and also the lack of ability to rationalize or comprehend some issues which the text contains, does not justify rejecting such a text, nor does it obligate us to interpret it, and this is quite obvious and clear.[2]

[1]Al-Rasa’il al-I`tiqadiyya, p. 115.

[2]The rej`a is another example. Similar to what we say is said by someone else because there are issues which prove consensus or through rational evidence. Both are rational proofs, and there is no room to interpret a rational proof as stated by Sayyid Murtada (may Allah sanctify him) when he responded to someone who said that the traditions relevant to the rej`a have to be interpreted as the return of the Government (to its rightful owners), to bid and to forbid. He said: “Some Sha`as, having felt incapable of supporting the concept of the rej`a and explain how it is possible and that it does not contradict what is obligatory, resorted to such an interpretation of statements regarding the rej`a. This is not correct. The rej`a was not proven by transmitted traditions, so it could be interpreted. How can what is already proven as authentic be proven by traditions which do not necessitate knowing? What is relied upon, in order to prove the rej`a, are the consensus of the Imamites regarding what it means, that is, that Allah Almighty will bring back to life some of those who are already deceased at the time when al-Qa’im (A) comes out of his occultation, from among his followers as well as from among his foes as we explained; so, how can there be any interpretation of what is already known?” This is recorded on p. 126, Vol. 1, of the messages of al-Sharaf al-Murtada.

Sayyid al-Murtada, may Allah have mercy on his soul, then, says that:

1. The rej`a is fixed among the consensus beliefs of Imamites.

2. Consensus is a rational proof and, as such, it is not subject to interpretation because it is not among the texts which accept interpretation.

3. Those who act contrariwise have done so after verifying that the Imamites have collectively agreed upon it. Their action does not harm the consensus. Rather, it is an evidence which indicts them and obligates them to accept it and to rely upon it.

4. Rej`a is not among what can be conceived rationally, so that one may resort to reason to comprehend it. Rather, it is something unknown recognized by citation or by consensus from an Infallible one who conveys it to the public. The consensus, according to Sayyid al-Murtada, has revealed to us their knowledge of such a binding issue which they learned from the Infallible Ones (A).

If the rej`a is already fixed through consecutively reported traditions, then the transmissions relevant thereto must not be subjected to interpretation, as we have suggested above, except when they collide with a rational instinctive judgment. Yet even this does not justify its interpretation, as we have indicated.

What we have mentioned applies here, and there is no room to deny it.

In order to provide evidence for what we have stated, that is, that the rej`a is unequivocally proven through irrefutable evidence, we would like to quote here some of what prominent people have said:

On p. 250 of his book titled Jawahir al-Fiqh, Ibn al-Barraj, counting the beliefs of the Ja`feris, says, “Our Prophet and Infallible Imams have indicated that during the time of al-Mehdi, a sect of past and future nations will be resurrected in order to declare their State and rights, and this has been fixed in consecutively reported traditions and verses.”

Sayyid `Abdullah Shubbar, on pp. 2-3 of his book titled Haqq al-Yaqan, says the following:

“Be informed that the rej`a is agreed upon by true Sha`as, the rightful sect. Nay! It is one of the basics of their sect. `Allama al-Majlisi, may Allah have mercy on his soul, has said, `The Sha`as have all agreed about the reality of the rej`a in all periods and is famous among them like the sun at midday, so much so that they composed poetry about it and used to argue with those who differ from them in their views, asserting the same in their books and chronicles. Among them is al-Razi and al-Naishapuri and others. How can a believer cast doubt about the truthfulness of the Purified Imams in this regard despite more than two hundred clear traditions narrated by more than 40 trusted renown scholars in more than fifty of their books? Among the latter are: Thiqatul-Islam al-Kulayni, al-Saduq Muhammed ibn Babawayh, Shaikh Aba Ja`fer al-Tasi, Sayyid al-Murtada, al-Najjashi, al-Kashshi, al-`Ayyashi, Ali ibn Ibraham, Salam al-Hilali, Shaikh al-Mufad, al-Karakchi, al-Nu`mani, al-Saffar, Sa`d ibn `Abdullah, Ibn Qawlawayh, Ali ibn `Abd al-Hamad, Sayyid Ali ibn Tawas and his son, the writer of Kitab al-Tanzal wal-Tahraf, Abul-Fadl al-Tibrisi, Aba Talib al-Tibrisi, Ibraham ibn Muhammed al-Thaqafi, Muhammed ibn al-`Abbas ibn Marwan, al-Barqi, Ibn Shahr ashab, al-Hassan ibn Sulayman, al-Qutub al-Rawandi, `allama al-Hilli, Sayyid Baha’ ad-Dan Ali ibn `Abd al-Karam, Ahmed ibn Dawad ibn Sa`ad, al-Hassan ibn Ali ibn Aba Hamzah, al-Fadl ibn Shathan, the martyred Shaikh Muhammed ibn Mekki, al-Husain ibn Hamdan, al-Hassan ibn Muhammed ibn Jumhar, al-Hasan ibn Mahbab, Ja`fer ibn Muhammed ibn Malik al-Kafi, Tahr ibn `Abdullah, Shathan ibn Jibra’al, the author of the book titled Kitab al-Fada’il, the author of the book titled Al-`Ataq, the author of the book titled Kitab al-Khutab, and many other authors of books anonymously written.

`If such is not regarded as consecutively reported, then what is, despite what is narrated by all Sha`i scholars, sons from fathers? I think that anyone who doubts these personalities and doubts the Imams of the creed and yet is unable to come out with a justification for such doubt resorts to the annihilation of the straight faith by stating what feeble minds state of the doubts of pedants and atheists: `They desire to put out the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, though the unbelievers may be averse thereto’ (Qur’an, 61:8). A sect of ancient scholars categorized books and proved the [concept of the] rej`a. Among them is Ahmed ibn Dawad ibn Sa`ad al-Jurjani. The Shaikh has said in his table of contents that al-Jurjani has written a book about the mut`a and another about the rej`a. Also among them is al-Hassan ibn Ali ibn Aba Hamzah al-Bata’ini. A book about the rej`a is counted among the works of al-Najjashi. Also among them is al-Fadl ibn Shathan al-Naishapuri. The Shaikh, in his table of contents, stated that al-Najjashi had a book proving the rej`a. Also among them is al-Saduq Muhammed ibn Ali ibn Babawayh who has listed a book about the rej`a as belonging to al-Najjashi. Also among them is Muhammed ibn Mas`ad al-Najjashi. The Shaikh has referred to al-Najjashi in his table of contents, stating that the latter has a book about the rej`a. Also among them is al-Hassan ibn Sulayman who will soon be quoted.’”

I say that transmissions supporting each other from the Purified Imams (A) say: “None of us is one who does not believe in our rej`a.” Al-Faqah quotes al-Sadiq (A) as saying, “None of us is one who does not believe in our return nor considers our mut`a as permissible.”

The rej`a means that some people from among those who have already died and who follow and support al-Mehdi (A) will be resurrected during the time when al-Qa’im (A) comes out in order to win the rewards of supporting him and helping him, and so that they may feel elated at the inception of his State. So will be resurrected some of his own enemies so that he may seek revenge against them, and so that they may receive some of the pain which they deserve and be killed at the hands of his Shia`as and be insulted and humiliated when they see how lofty his word is. This, according to us, is restricted to those whose conviction or the lack thereof has been ascertained, whereas the others will be ignored, according to many texts. The Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (A), in addition to consensus, prove its necessity for the sect.