بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Shalom and Salaam!

Recently, during some discussions regarding vegetarianism, the subject of taqlid has come up - namely, who this group ultimately follows as the "final authority" (whether in regard to this subject, and or any others).

Even though the Quran forbids taqlid in terms of blind imitation, and insists that each believer have a basic understanding of the MAJOR pillars, and elementary aspects of the Faith, there is not an expectation for each and every Muslim to be a mystic, or a jurist, and to have an in depth knowledge of ALL detailed aspects of the Faith. In regard to these aspects, one is expected to turn towards those more knowledgeable for guidance. When the Prophet (sal) was alive, he was the single source for explanations regarding ALL aspects of Islam - in both its outer and inner dimensions. After his death, according to the 12 Imam Shi'a - this role passed to Ali (as), and the dependents of Ali (as) and Fatima (as) culminating with the 12th Imam whom we believe is in occultation.

In the physical absence of the 12th Imam, the question then arises as to who is the most learned in the community - and who serves as the Na'ib or representative of the Hidden Imam. During the Lifetime of the Imams (as), they taught many different people in different aspects of Islam. They also laid the groundwork for schools that would be set up for instructing Muslims. From these beginnings arise both the religious institutions that train people in religious law and the Sufi orders (who train people in mysticism) of BOTH the Shi'a and Sunni realm (with most Orders tracing their lineage to Ali (as) as well as the 6th and 8th Imams (as).

In Modern "orthodox" Shi'a Islam many people consider the representative to be the collective whole of a handful of religious authorities educated in these official schools. There is also an assumption that the views expressed by these schools represent the EXACT teachings of the Imams....

The problem is, this is just not historically accurate. Over the history of Shi'a Islam, there have been many currents of thought within the Shi'a world. Much of what is accepted as fact today in the current Orthodox opinion is based either on one man's interpretation (or a particular school of thought within Shi'a Islam) that only came to win out in time. Even the very system of ijtihad, and making taqlid to a mujtahid (in its current form) is one of these.

Even with that in mind, I am not arguing against the basic premises of following someone's ruling who is more learned. What I saying though, is that we as Shi'a should NOT just accept that things as they are is how they SHOULD be. That those in official power (religious authorities), necessarily represent the true face of Shi'a Islam (or should I say the FULL aspect of Shi'a Islam).

Some of these men are very knowledgeable, but we have to realize that a lot of what they know and believe is shaped by history, their cultural background and the source of their particular school of thought. Some will argue against Sufism, saying it is absolutely Bid'a (innovation), while other more renowned Shi'a scholars have said it is a valid part of Islam. Some will argue against philosophy, when we can see that the Imams (as) themselves engaged in philosophical discussion, and that there were great schools of Shia philosophical thought (like the ishraqi) - taught by people such as Mulla Sadra etc.

More importantly, doctrines that we take for granted as being one way, may in fact be another. Some of the most brilliant Shi'a thinkers for instance have stated that the resurrection takes place in the realm of Hurqalya, and NOT in dunya. Whereas, in modern "orthodox" thought, the resurrection is believed to be in dunya.

What we have to realize, is that Shi'ism has always had internal disagreement over the subtleties of the Faith. That just because a Mulla thinks it is one way, or the official religious institutions think it is so, does not mean that is true. For even today, there are rival schools of thought still functioning. There are akhbari schools in Bahrain and Iraq. A shaykhi school in Kirman. And circles of learning operating behind the scenes in Iran passing on lineaged teachings of the Ishraqi school of thought. Likewise, many Sufi Orders as stated above (both Shi'a and Sunni) have their lineage to the Ahlul Bayt and are teaching another train of thought based upon the teachings of the Imams (as). And on another plane altogether, there are still mystics being initiated into divine knowledge in the celestial realm from the Madhi himself (known as a Uwaisi transmission) - which some people in this group have experienced, and is the basis for this groups formation...

I bring all of this up, to make it clear where the wannabe Jaysh stands on this matter. We see truth being represented by many of the lineage's connected to the Ahl al-Bayt (as) - both those of an earthly nature, as well as celestial transmissions. We also see it present in the lineage's connected to previous Prophets (as). So as a group, we strive for knowledge where ever it may be found. In a sense, you can say that we are independent of the formalized system of taqlid, but not against the general idea of it. Our ultimate leader is the Mahdi (as) - but we do not necessarily fall into the ideological and or theological line of ALL who define themselves as "Shi'a." We are Shi'a in that we see the Ahl al-Bayt (as) best representing the teaching of the True primordial Din, as taught by all Prophets throughout the ages. But we are NOT Shi'a in a sectarian sense. Our goal is to hasten the Imams (as) rise - not to follow blindly in traditions that are cultural developments and have nothing to do with the true teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt.

And that is why ultimately, we bow to no authority but Allah, and pay allegiance to His representatives - the Mahdi (as) and Masih (as).

P.S. You should not be following the Taqleed of 'Mikhah and/or Muttaqi-wannabe' either :)