‫السالم عليكم ورحمة هللا وبركاته‬

Assalamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu

‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬

In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful

This is in response to the letter publicised by the World Federation, which specifically identifies 10 positions on Islamic
matters (both in fiqh and ‘aqa’id) as concerning enough not to be shared by speakers – in essence, the recommendation
from the World Federation to ban these views being propagated.

We believe that any approach in religious matters especially, should be led by the evidence and in summary, we do not
believe that this has occurred here.

The idea of attempting to prevent dissent from a minority viewpoint being propagated is found throughout our history,
whether it was the attempt to shut down the Prophet (SAW)’s message to the public, or the oppression of Shi’ism throughout
its history as it was taught to the society. In all cases, we rightly argue that the minority should be listened to and free to
propagate its views to those who choose to listen, not banished or oppressed. Since that point, our Shi’a history is replete
with examples where scholars have heavily attacked others for their poor arguments, but have retained their respect and
have not stopped them propagating their views to the public.

Rather than something to be feared, difference of opinion is in fact part and parcel of our Shi’a history, whether in fiqh or
‘aqa’id, and a necessary part of intellectual discourse. The curtailing of differences of opinion rather than celebrating their
existence, is deeply worrying, in particular given that minority opinions by a single scholar have often become the majority
ruling in Shi’ism.

To assist those interested, we have outlined the evidence behind our above assertions in an appendix to this letter, given it
appears the World Federation team and those who responded on your behalf, appear to have been unaware of these facts,
or have chosen to dismiss them without providing their rationale.

We have also specifically shared how the 10 positions raised are not as extreme as has been suggested, and in almost each
case there are well regarded scholars of the past or present who share these views.

Based on the evidence, there is therefore little doubt that the letter by the World Federation has been written in a way that
does not reflect our Shia heritage or the richness of the diversity in our history. We have concluded that the World Federation
has seriously erred in seeking to stop the propagation of different viewpoints, whether such views come from a scholar who
has been provided ijaza of ijtihad from an established cleric, or not.

We write in the hope that those scholars who have seen the initial letter, or have contributed to its response, re-think the
dangers that are caused by going against the fabric of the entirety of our Shi’a history to crush the views of those with
minority opinions.

We hope and pray that the letter by the World Federation will be rescinded and the advice to regional bodies retracted.

Yours,

Sajjad Ladha - NJ, USA
Mohamed Jawad Khaki - WA, USA
Sadik Alloo - CA, USA
Miqdaad Versi - London, UK
Mohsin Meghji - NY, USA
Sajjad Ebrahim - ON, Canada
Moonaver Dhanani - Democratic
Republic of Congo
Mohamed Takim - DSM, Tanzania
Imranali Panjwani - Essex, UK
Aliasgher Mukhi - FL, USA
Shane Dharsee - FL, USA
Mohamed Rajpar - Karachi, Pakistan
Salma Merali - DSM, Tanzania
Minaz Manekia - FL, USA
Hussein Dharsee - FL, USA
Zohra Rajpar - Karachi, Pakistan
Abdulaziz Dewjee - ON, Canada
Nazmul Damji - ON, Canada
Raza Hirji - ON, Canada
Heena Dhanani - DSM, Tanzania
Husein (Chacha) Paryani - ON, Canada
Ilhaam Dhanani - Nairobi, Kenya
Fatima Abdulhussein - FL, USA
Waheeda Manji - ON, Canada
Mustafa Kassam - TX, USA
Hasan Dharsi - FL, USA
Ghulam Jaffer - FL, USA
Arif Asaria - ON, Canada
Salim Rehmtulla - Peterborough, UK
Mariam Meghjee - DSM, Tanzania
Shabbir Kara FL, USA
Appendix

In this Appendix, we cover three areas:

1. Fiqh
2. ʿAqaʾid and history
3. The 10 viewpoints cited in the initial letter by the World Federation

1. Fiqh

Starting with fiqh, it is well established that there are and have been differences of opinion on many
topics that have wide-ranging implications on the daily life of a Shiʿa Muslim. For the sake of brevity,
we will only outline a few examples to demonstrate the point:

• Example of a ruling that has become the mainstream position despite previously never
having been a majority view amongst the Shiʿa:
Ritual impurity of Ahl al-Kitab: The popular opinion today, is that the Ahl al-Kitab are ritually
pure (‫)طاهر‬. In fact Ayatullah Waḥīd al-Bihbihānī (d. 1791), one of the most illustrious scholars
of his age, considered it amongst the signs or slogans of the Shiʿa.1 Muhammad Hasan Zamani
in his book on the topic2 cited 40 prominent Shia jurists who advocated the opinion of the
ritual impurity of the Ahl al-Kitab.3 Yet it took the courage of Ayatullah Sayyid Muhsin al-Hakim
to advocate for the ritual purity of the Ahl al-Kitab in the last century despite being different
views of the most renowned scholars at the time, after which it slowly became a popular
position in the Shiʿa world.

Therefore, just because the vast majority of scholars of our history had a particular view, it
would have been wrong to malign the minority view of Ayatullah Muhsin al-Hakim at his time,
as his view has become a mainstream view today.

• Example where after conditions have changed, a ruling (backed by clear narrations and the
vast majority of scholars in our history) has been changed by contemporary scholars:

Ruling on chess: As is well established, chess – even when not used for the purposes of
gambling – is considered impermissible by Ayatullah Sistani4 and has been considered as such
by the vast majority (if not a consensus) of scholars in our history. Examples of ahadith used
by scholars in past include:

Imam Ali (as) is reported to have said: ‘The chess and the dice, are both (considered
as) gambling.’5

1
al-Ḥāshiya ʿalā madārik al-aḥkām, vol. 2, p. 199.
2
Taharat wa najasat Ahl e Kitab wa Mushrekan dar Fiqh i Islami, Qum: Markaz e Intisharat Daftar e Tablighat i Islami, 1378/1999, chapter 3.
3
Shaykh al-Ṣadūq in Fiqh al-Riḍā; Sayyid Murtaḍa in al-Intiṣār; Abū al-Ṣalāḥ al-Ḥalabī in al-Kāfī; Shaykh al-Ṭusī in al-Mabsūṭ, al-Nihāya and al-Tibyān; Ibn Barrāj in Jawāhir
al-fiqh; Al-Ṭabarsi in Majmaʿ al-bayān; Saʿīd al-Rāwandī in Fiqh al-Qur’an; Ibn Zuhra in ʿUnya al-nuzūʿ; Abū Hamza al-Ṭūsī in al-Wasīla; Abū al-Hasan Ṣahrishtī in Iṣbāḥ
al-Shiʿa; Ibn Idrīs al-Ḥillī in al-Sarā’ir; ʿAlā al-Dīn Ḥalabī in Ishāra al-sabq; Al-Muḥaqqiq al-awwal in al-Mukhtaṣar al-nāfiʿ; Yaḥyā b. Saʿīd in al-Jāmiʿ; ʿAllāma al-Ḥillī in al-
Qawāʿid; Al-Shahīd al-awwal in al-Durūs; Al-Shahīd al-thānī in al-Rawḍa; Muḥaqqiq al-thānī in Jāmiʿ al-maqāṣid; Muqaddas Ardabilī in Majmaʿ al-fā’ida; Mashhadī in Kanz
al-daqā’iq; Muḥaqqiq al-Baḥrānī in al-Ḥadā’iq al-nāḍira; Al-Ḥasanī al-ʿĀmīlī in Miftāḥ al-karāma; Sayyid ʿAlī Ṭabāṭabā’ī in Riyāḍ al-masā’il; Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-Najafī in
Jawāhir; Shaykh Anṣārī in Kitāb al-ṭahāra; Mulla Narāqī in Mustanad al-Shīʿa; Kāshif al-Ghiṭā’ in Kashf al-Ghiṭā’; Fāḍil Hindī in Kashf al-lithām; Sayyid Yazdī in ʿUrwa;
Muḥammad Ṭaqī Shirāzī in al-Nukhba; Sayyid Abū al-Ḥasan al-Isfahānī in Wasīla al-najāt; Sayyid Burūjardī in his risāla; Sayyid Muḥsin al-Ḥakīm in Mustamsak; Sayyid
Ḥashamī Shahrūdī in his risāla; Sayyid Khūnsārī in Jāmi’ al-madārik; Muḥammad Taqī Āmilī in Miṣbāḥ; Imām Khumaynī in Ṭahrīr; Ayatullah Ghulpayganī in risāla; Ayatullah
Arākī in his risāla; Muḥammad Taqī Shirāzī in his risāla.
4
See for example, the website of Ayatullah Sistani: https://www.sistani.org/english/qa/01161/ (last accessed 14 April 2019)
5
Al-Kāfī, vol. 6, p. 435, hadith no. 3.
 Imam al-Sadiq (as) is reported to have said: ‘The Messenger of God forbade from the
playing with the chess, and the dice.’6

Yet today, Ayatullah Khomeini opined for the permissibility of playing chess as long there is
no gambling involved in it and explained his justification to Ayatullah Qadiri in response to his
letter, stating:7

“Based on your views, Zakat then should be utilised for those purposes mentioned in
Qur’an (8 instances), whereas today the eligibility to expend Zakat has amounted to
hundreds of instances!...Anfal (bounties of war which includes lands of forests etc.) is
exclusively for Shiʿas (as mentioned in some narrations) and therefore, (would it mean
that) they can freely cut trees and destroy the environment!...You should refer to
Ayatullah Ahmad Khunsari’s fatwa who opines for the permissibility of playing chess
if gambling is not associated with it….I advise that you should not heed to the voices
of sanctimonious and uneducated clergies. If you become unpopular in the eyes of
ignoramus and sanctimonious individuals and uneducated clergies, just for
promulgating the law of God, so let it be more and more of that”

The ruling on the permissibility of chess is shared by a number of scholars including some
contemporary marajiʿ such as Ayatullah Makarim Shirazi,8 Ayatulllah Fadlallah9, Ayatullah
Saanei.10

Therefore, just because the ahadith appear to point to a ruling and the vast majority of
scholars of our history had that view, it would be wrong to say that the scholars of our age
who have reached a different conclusion should not propagate their views, even if they
currently are minority positions.

• Example of a ruling where a completely different understanding was taken on a ruling:

o Moonsighting: For all of us, the challenges during Ramadan and Eid in particular, are
well known with parents potentially doing Eid on a day when their children are fasting
and would consider it haram for them to fast. Ayatullah Khui’s ruling on the “sharing
of the night” (as it is popularly known) was not a mainstream position, yet for many
decades, it became the mainstream position.
o Well water: A less current example but one that once again demonstrates this point,
is how most of the scholars prior to Allama Hilli (d. 726/1325) agreed on the fatwa
that the well-water becomes impure when a najasat fell into it and their view was
that it was obligatory to drain the entire water of the well. Allama Hilli disagreed on
the fatwas of his predecessors and suggested that draining water is recommended
but not an obligation. As long as the quality (colour, taste, odour) of the water does
not change, it remained pure. All it took in this case, was one scholar to change the
views of the subsequent scholars, most of whom adopted the view of Allama Hilli.

6
Al-Kāfī, vol. 6, p. 437, hadith no. 17.
7
Website of Imam Khomeini:
http://www.imam-
khomeini.ir/fa/C207_44610/_%D8%AD%DA%A9%D9%85_%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B2%DB%8C_%D8%B4%D8%B7%D8%B1%D9%86%D8%AC_%D9%88_%D8%A
E%D8%B1%DB%8C%D8%AF_%D9%88_%D9%81%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B4_%D8%A2%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D9%85%D9%88%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%8
2%DB%8C (last accessed 14 April 2019)
8
http://www.islamquest.net/fa/archive/question/fa11424
9
http://arabic.bayynat.org.lb/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2849
10
http://saanei.org/index.php?view=01,02,09,3436,0
There are many other such examples, including, for instance, those scholars who have abandoned the
majority position that it is allowed to take organs from non-Muslims but not donate your own organs,
and who rule on the permissibility of organ donation; and similar views on the permissibility of playing
cards or even the permissibility of charging interest on business loans.

Furthermore, we have seen individual scholars of the past whose views were significantly different to
the mainstream at their time – yet are now praised as diligent scholars, whose views were sometimes
adopted and at other times refuted, not by silencing but through engaging their rationale and
viewpoints.

Examples of these include:

• Ibn Junayd al-Iskāfī (d. after 356/966): he was amongst those Shia scholars who did not
necessarily agree with what his predecessors had said in a number of areas. A few of his fatwas
which are against the popular fatwas of the Shia scholars are as follows:
o It is makruh to touch Qur’an in the state of janabat. (Fatawa Ibn Junayd, p. 32). The
other jurists have opined for the impermissibility.
o Khums is distributed into two shares: One is for Imam and other for anyone who is in
need of it, irrespective of Sayyid or non-Sayyid (Fatawa Ibn Junayd, p. 105)
o A wife inherits from husband capital assets such as land (Jawahir al-Kalam, vol. 39, p.
307)

• Ibn Idris al-Hilli (d. c. 598/1201): He extensively critiqued the fatwas of Shaykh Tusi (d.
460/1067) which dominated the Shiʿi jurisprudence for more than a century. He was the most
prominent opponent of the opinions of Shaykh Tusi. In several instances, he accuses Shaykh
Tusi of concluding opinions against Shiʿi legal system.11

• Muqaddas Ardabili (d. 993/1585): He is believed to be the one who was honoured with the
meeting of Imam al-Mahdi (atfs). Arguably, he claimed the title of Muqaddas (saint) due to
this honour. He opposed many fatwas of the earlier jurists. For instance, he suggested:
o The purity of alcohol (after stating the non-permissibility of consuming it).12
o A woman can be entrusted with the position of judgeship.13

What should be clear from this analysis in fiqh, is that minority opinions in Shiʿa Islam have been
common and have often become the majority opinion, even when the vast majority of scholars at the
time had a different view. Furthermore, there have been major scholars of our history, who
consistently had different views to the biggest scholars of their age. There were robust discussions,
but their views continued to be propagated and shared, and have added to the richness of our heritage
and the strength of the counter-arguments.

2. Aqaʾid and history

On issues of belief, it is extremely important to reiterate the well-established view that one must not
do taqlid on belief.

Ayatullah Sistani states: It is necessary for a Muslim to believe in the fundamentals of faith
with his own insight and understanding, and he cannot follow anyone in this respect, i.e., he

11
See, al-Sarāʾir, pp. 1: 588, 2: 118, 364, 365 et al.
12
Sharḥ Irshād, vol. 1, p. 308
13
Sharḥ Irshād, vol. 12, p. 15
 cannot accept the word of another who knows, simply because he has said it….(Islamic Laws,
Ruling no. 1). This position conforms with all the Shiʿa marajiʿ.

In fact, it is our duty as communities and as scholars, to educate our communities in these important
issues, but also recognise that there are differences of opinion in these areas. This section of the letter
will demonstrate these differences on a range of issues related to belief and history. Once again, for
the sake of brevity, we will only outline a few examples to demonstrate the point:

• Natural death or martyrdom of the Imams (AS): on an important issue related to the Imams
(AS), there are differences of opinion.
o Some scholars e.g. Shaykh Saduq believes that all the Imams were killed and therefore
are martyred.
o Other scholars e.g. Sayyid Murtada argues that only Imam Ali, Imam Hasan and Imam
Husayn and, Imam Kazim (as) were killed, with the cause of the death of Imam Reza
(as) not being certain. His conclusion is that there is no evidence to suggest that the
rest of the Imams were martyred.

• Infallibility of the Prophet

o Ayatullah Khui believed that that the traditions suggesting the inability of prophet to
commit err or mistakes does not necessarily apply to external subject matters.
Whereas, other Shia scholars believe in unconditional infallibility of the Prophet which
includes not only the rulings but also subject matters.14

• The realm of Subtle Entities (al-ʿālam al-dharr) and Primordial Covenant:

o Allama Tabatabaʾi rejects the explanation of a vast majority of the traditionists who
believe (based on a number of hadith) in the existence of al-ʿālam al-dharr. Allama
dismisses the opinions of a vast majority of the earlier scholars in the tafsir of surat
al-Aʿrāf.15

• Miʿrāj of the Prophet (saw): There are three opinions in this event:
a. It was a physical experience (Shaykh Tusi, Shaykh Tabarsi, Allama Majlisi and
others)
b. It was a spiritual experience (Abu Ali Seena)
c. From Makka to Masjid al-Aqṣā it was a physical journey and then onwards a
spiritual journey (Allama Tabatabaʾi with some explanations)

• Shiʿa beliefs
o Allama Mamqani (d. 1351/1933), the author of the most comprehensive book on Shiʿi
Ilm al-rijāl, has stated that, ‘Today, many of the beliefs in respect to the status of the
Imams (as) that are considered amongst the fundamental tenets of (our Shiʿi) faith,
once used to be considered amongst the (heretic) extremist beliefs.’16

Therefore, the differences of opinion, even today, in issues of theology, belief and history are well
established.

14
https://www.al-khoei.us/books/?id=8385
15
Al-Mīzān, 8: 317 ff.
16
Māmqānī, Tanqīḥ al-maqāl fī ʿilm al-rijāl, vol. 1, p. 211-2 (introduction)
3. Specific items mentioned in the letter by the World Federation

This section specifically looks at the 10 items mentioned in the letter publicised by the World
Federation. In the letter, the organisation advised its regional bodies to prevent the propagation of
such views by individuals.

Here, we seek to demonstrate how this list of 10 items that are apparently worthy of banning, are in
fact opinions held by senior scholars and do not merit the banning approach that has been
recommended.

View that the World Federation Views of renowned scholars on this issue / explanation of the
seeks to ban being propagated viewpoint that sheds light on its appropriateness
1. Non-Muslims can enter Imam Khomeini states17: A Rabbi or a Priest is like a Muslim
heaven: “the claim that salvation scholar who would cling to his theological positions and would
in the hereafter does not not even think of its falsehood….It is not established that they
exclusively depend on embracing (Christians and Jews) will be punished on the Day of Judgment
and believing in the religion of though they ignorantly rejected the beliefs of Islam.
Islam”;
Shahid Mutahhari states:18 “If someone possesses the trait of
submission to the truth and for whatever reason the reality of
Islam has remained hidden from him or her without that person
being at fault, God will most
certainly refrain from punishing him or her; he or she shall
achieve salvation from Hell.” Elsewhere he states:19 “If you
were to look at the current corrupted Christianity and visit their
villages and cities, will you observe every priest to be an evil
individual? By God, amongst them 70-80% of people are
pious…..They will enter Paradise. Their priest will also enter
Paradise…”
2. The Qur’an’s interpretation The idea that the Qur’an’s interpretation changes through
can change through time: “that time is well established in any tafsir work. Furthermore, Imam
what is continuous and eternal is Khomeini has stated:
the spirit and essence of the
Qur’an, and not the form of its “Based on your views, Zakat then should be utilised for those
teachings”; purposes mentioned in Qur’an (8 instances), whereas today the
eligibility to expend Zakat has amounted to hundreds of
instances!...Anfal (bounties of war which includes lands of
forests etc.) is exclusively for Shias (as mentioned in some
narrations) and therefore, (would it mean that) they can freely
cut trees and destroy the environment!...20
3. Restrictions in the time of the Many scholars have discussed how slavery was not possible to
Prophet meant that the be abolished at the time of the Prophet (saw) and the Imams
implementation of perfection (as) but is haram today. Examples of such scholars include
was not possible during his time: Ayatullah Sistani, Ayatullah Makarim Shirazi amongst others.21
“that perfection of religion was
not possible to have been

17
Imam Khomeini, al-Makāsib al-muḥarrama, 1: 200-1
18
Murtaḍā Muṭahharī, Divine Justice, 125.
19
Murtaḍā Muṭahharī, Majmūʿ āthār, 3: 125.
20
Website of Imam Khomeini:
http://www.imam-
khomeini.ir/fa/C207_44610/_%D8%AD%DA%A9%D9%85_%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B2%DB%8C_%D8%B4%D8%B7%D8%B1%D9%86%D8%AC_%D9%88_%D8%A
E%D8%B1%DB%8C%D8%AF_%D9%88_%D9%81%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B4_%D8%A2%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D9%85%D9%88%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%8
2%DB%8C (last accessed 14 April 2019)
21
http://www.islamquest.net/fa/archive/question/fa2896
 accomplished during the time of
the Prophet (SAW)”;
4. A peaceful Christian is
preferable to a terrorist
murdering Muslim: “that there is
no reprehensibility in apostasy if it
means conversion from an
extremist Islam to another faith
which promotes peace and love”;
5. Changes in rulings can affect
worship: “that there are
imperative modifications required
in ‘Ibadat for example salat,
sawm, hajj according to the
demands of our time”;
6. Rulings change through time &
may not have been fully specified
at the time of the Prophet (SAW):
“that the Prophet (SAW) did not
specify the final legislations in
issues regarding buloogh
(puberty), marriage, divorce, etc.,
and therefore there is no
objection with what is known as
civil marriage and civil divorce”;
7. Rulings change through time
e.g. the “blood money” of men
and women given their equal
value for our society: that there is
need in this age to change the
laws of inheritance and diyah
(blood money) to ensure gender
equality;
8. Age of bulugh is not necessarily
a specific age but is based on
physical signs: “that the buloogh
(wherein the religious obligations
are applicable) cannot be
specified by a particular age or
specific physical signs rather it is
based on the maturity of the
personal capacity of the
individual, male or female”;
9. Obligation for woman to cover
is not general: “that the
obligation for the woman to cover
her head in front of non-mahram
22
Nahj al-Balāghah, short saying no.17. Amir al-muʾminin, peace be upon him, was asked to explain the saying of the Messenger of Allah: Banish your old age (by hair-
dye) and do not acquire resemblance to the Jews. Amir al- muʾminin replied: The Prophet (saw) said this at a time when the religion was confined to a few, but now that its
expanse has widened, and it is firmly settled everyone is free in his action.
23
Kashani, Mafātīḥ al-sharāʾiʿ, vol. 1, p. 14; Saneei, Bulugh i dukhtarān, chapter no. 2
24
Tusi, Tahdhīb al-aḥkām, vol. 2, p. 381.
25
http://law.dotic.ir/AIPLaw/lawview.do?reqCode=lawView&lawId=198907&stateNo=18&phaseNo=2&type=all
It is unclear what the specific point being made here is. Given
point 1 demonstrates that a non-Muslim can – in some
situations – enter heaven, and given we are aware that
Muslims (especially those who act in an “extremist” way) may
enter the hellfire, it is a natural conclusion that the former is
better than the latter.
Just one example would be sufficient here to prove the point
– consider Hajj, where there have been many modifications
due to the large number of people (one of the demands of our
time). Examples of such modifications include: the non-
necessity of performing tawaf inside the maqam al-Ibrahim;
non-necessity of dying the beard.22
The fact that some pre-modern and contemporary scholars
(such as Fayd Kashani, Ayatullah Saanei, Ayatullah Hadi
Marefat, Ayatullah Ibrahim Jannati)23 have opined that a girl
reaches the age of puberty when she is 13 years old or
experiences menstruation, suggests that Qur’an and the
Prophet have not specified a specific age criteria for the
buloogh. It is worth noting that Shaykh Tusi was of the opinion
that a girl reaches at the age of puberty when she is 10 years
old.24
Ayatullah Saanei has written extensively on this topic and has
reached the conclusion that the blood money of a man and a
woman are the same.
Even, the current regulations of Iran suggest the equality of the
blood money in many circumstances.25
Ayatullah Fadlallah and Ayatullah Saanei have reached a
similar conclusion.
Furthermore, scholars such as Ayatullah Makarim Shirazi have
defined different ages for maturity in different situations e.g.
for ‘ibadat, marriage, liability for capital punishment etc.
Same as no. 6
It is unclear what is meant in this point. Perhaps this is referring
to the fact that at the time of the Prophet (saw), slave women
were not required to wear hijab; or noting that there are
 is not a general law rather it different rulings for hermaphrodites (those with both sexual
depends on type of looks of the organs).
male towards the female”;
Ibn Junayd al-Iskāfī (d. after 356/966) holds the position that
there is no obligation for a slave girl of a free woman to cover
her head during prayers if there is no non-mahram watching
her.
10. In some cases, it is possible It is unclear what is meant in this point. Perhaps it may be
for the religious individual to be referring to where when the ruling is well established, it is up
in a better position to understand to muqallid to determine its applicability, as the faqih’s role is
the religious duty than fuqaha: in the ruling not in the subject (mawḍūʿ).26
“and that the religiously
responsible individual in our age
does not need to refer to the
fuqaha (experts of Islamic
jurisprudence) to determine his
religious duty in many cases
because he himself is capable of
determining his duty as a result of
his higher maturity and
awareness, and development of
his intellect.”

We do not necessarily agree with each of these points but these are not outrageous views that merit
the banning of a scholar from propagating them.

In fact, in almost every one of these areas mentioned, there are well regarded scholars of the past or
present, who share these views. However, even were that not the case, we have established in the
earlier parts of this letter, that minority opinions by a single scholar have often become the majority
ruling.

It is worth recalling the example of the will of the major Shiʿa scholar Shaykh Yusuf al-Bahrani, who
expressed a desire that his funeral prayer should be led by Ayatullah Wahid Bihbahani, who duly
performed the prayer. This is despite the fact that throughout their lives, they attacked one another
during their lives as coming from two very different perspectives (Akhbari perspective who rejected
the present-day ijtihadi framework and Usuli perspective which advocates a hermeneutic framework
to understand the sharīʿa).

26
https://makarem.ir/main.aspx?reader=1&pid=61816&lid=0&mid=11629