Jump to content

Draft:Ijmaʿ Muḥaṣṣal

Add links
From wikishia

Ijmaʿ Muḥaṣṣal (Arabic: الإجماع المحصل, lit. 'acquired consensus') is a category of consensus in jurisprudence that refers to the process of searching through the statements of jurists from the past to the present to obtain their agreement on the ruling of a specific issue. It is considered authoritative only if the jurist attains certainty regarding the view of the Infallibles (a). This type of consensus is divided into two categories: definitive acquired consensus, where the jurist gains certainty of the Infallible's statement, and speculative acquired consensus, where the jurist reaches a strong probability (zann) of the Infallible's view.

The connection between acquired consensus and the opinion of the Infallible (a) is established through methods known as sensory (hissi), providential (lutfi), and inferential (hadsy). In the sensory method, consensus is recognized implicitly based on the presence of the Infallible (a) among scholars at different times. In the providential method, the jurists' consensus signifies alignment with the Imam's (a) view, as God's grace (lutf) necessitates that the jurists be guided to the truth of the ruling. In the inferential method, the consensus of jurists—especially those close to the era of the Imams (a)—is accepted as a basis for discovering the Infallible's opinion.

The authority (hujjiyya) of acquired consensus is definitive for some scholars because they consider the jurists' agreement to be representative of the Infallible's statement, while others regard it as authoritative only if obtained through valid means. Additionally, some believe that acquired consensus lacks sufficient validity during the Occultation of the Imam (a).

Conceptual Analysis

Acquired consensus is defined as searching through the sayings and writings of jurists from the past to the present to obtain their agreement and consensus[1] regarding the ruling of an issue;[2] to the point where the jurist becomes certain that they have reached the statement of the Infallible Imam (a).[3] For example, Sahib al-Jawahir personally heard the opinions and views of all jurists from them or saw them in their books, and based on that, states in his book: the sitting of rest in prayer is obligatory by consensus (ijma'an).[4]

Some define acquired consensus as a consensus that the mujtahid obtains directly by exploring history and the views and beliefs of the companions of the Messenger of God (s), the Imams (a), or people close to the era of the Imams (a).[5]

Shia jurists consider acquired consensus valid because it is the only form of consensus that uncovers the statement of the Infallible (a)[6] and identifies their perspective.[7]

Acquired consensus is regarded as the most natural, complete,[8] and most solid type of consensus,[9] and it stands in contrast to transmitted consensus.[10]

Categories

Acquired consensus is considered to be of two types: definitive acquired consensus and speculative acquired consensus.[11]

Definitive Acquired Consensus: The Mujtahid searches through all the statements and edicts of the jurists to the point where they gain certainty of the Infallible's view through this path.[12]

Speculative Acquired Consensus: The Mujtahid examines the statements of jurists to an extent that generates a strong probability (zann) regarding the Infallible's statement.[13]

Connection of Acquired Consensus with the Infallible's View

Various ways have been proposed as to how acquired consensus can represent the view of the Infallible (a). Asadullah Tustari described twelve ways,[14] and some have identified eleven methods.[15] The most famous of these are the sensory, providential, and inferential methods.[16]

Sensory Method: Inclusive and Entering Consensus

Main article: Sensory Consensus

When a Mujtahid examines the opinions of jurists on an issue and discovers their agreement, given the presence of the Infallible in all eras, the Infallible's opinion will naturally be among these individuals, even if the mujtahid does not recognize the Imam (a) personally.[17][18]

This method is called the sensory method (al-tariqa al-hissiyya) or the inclusive and entering method (al-dukhuli).[19] Early jurists such as al-Shaykh al-Mufid in Awa'il al-maqalat[20] and al-Sharif al-Murtada in al-Dhari'a[21] presented this method.

Despite claims by some that everyone agrees on its authority,[22] this method faces criticism. Some deny the possibility of such a consensus after the Occultation[23] and believe that no jurist, when transmitting consensus, makes such a claim to authorize their consensus;[24] thus, this method is useful in the era of the Imam's (a) presence[25] and in the era of Occultation, given the unknown nature of the Imam's (a) life, it cannot be claimed that the Imam (a) lives like one of the jurists and expresses his view on jurisprudential issues such that it can be accessed among the opinions.[26]

Providential Method: Providential Consensus

Main article: Providential Consensus

Providential consensus is based on the necessity of God's grace (lutf) upon His servants based on wisdom, which includes the expression of rulings. This means God assists humans in knowing obligations and prohibitions; therefore, in the era of Occultation, if jurists agree on a ruling at one time, and if their ruling were contrary to reality, the general and permanent grace of the Lord requires that God somehow instill the real ruling into the minds or words of the jurists through the Hidden Imam (a) to break their agreement so that no consensus is realized. Accordingly, the agreement of jurists on a ruling indicates its compliance with the Imam's (a) view.[27]

Providential consensus was introduced by al-Shaykh al-Tusi in the book 'Idda fi l-usul;[28] however, some consider it insufficient for proving the authority of acquired consensus, calling the nature and limits of God's grace ambiguous.[29]

Inferential Method: Inferential Consensus

Main article: Inferential Consensus

In this method, which is introduced as the easiest path,[30] a definitive inference (hads) of the Infallible's view is gained by finding the agreement of past scholars, especially jurists contemporary to the era of the Imams (a) or close to it. This is because we know that this number of jurists would not issue a fatwa on an issue without a valid authority and definitive proof.[31] Some believe the agreement of narrators and companions of the era of the Imams (a) must also be added to this subject to avoid the assumption that jurists reached a ruling without having a tradition and merely through their own Ijtihad.[32]

Shaykh Murtada al-Ansari and al-Muhaqqiq al-Qummi proposed this method,[33] and it is sometimes claimed that a large number of researchers have accepted it.[34] Since the agreement of all jurists from the past until the time of the jurist claiming consensus is a condition for realizing this type of consensus,[35] some scholars have deemed achieving this matter to be impossible.[36] Furthermore, considering the lack of modern communication means and current facilities for obtaining the views and works of all other researchers, it cannot practically be accepted that a jurist in the past was able to obtain all the views of jurists in distant Islamic lands and discover their agreement on an issue.[37]

Authority of Acquired Consensus

Some researchers believe all scholars regard acquired consensus as authoritative if realized;[38] because Shia jurists from the ancients to the moderns consider the agreement of Imamiyya jurists to be representative of the statement of the Infallible;[39] however, others consider acquired consensus authoritative only for the individual themselves,[40] and that too if obtained through a valid path;[41] therefore, if it does not lead to certainty regarding the Infallible's opinion, it lacks authority.[42]

However, there are also those who do not consider acquired consensus authoritative at all because it cannot represent the Infallible's opinion; though it can, with the help of other evidence and indications, lead to knowledge of the Infallible's opinion, at which time it is recognized as a supportive indication and not as a reason possessing inherent authority;[43] therefore, the mere claim of consensus will not be a proof, and one must suspend judgment on it.[44] On the contrary, some believe acquired consensus possesses the ability to uncover the Infallible's opinion.[45]

Some believe acquired consensus has no external existence[46] and consensuses obtained during the time of Occultation lack value.[47]

Fundamentally, from some perspectives, the value of consensus is proportional to the extent it uncovers the statement of the Infallible; therefore, any unity of opinion that can represent the Imam's (a) view will be valuable, even if it is not called conventional consensus.[48]

See Also

Notes

  1. ↑ In the terminology of the science of principles, consensus refers to the unity of opinion among jurists of any era in a manner that represents the view of the Infallible. (Muntaẓirī, Mabānī-yi fiqhī-yi ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, 1409 AH, vol. 8, p. 383.) From one perspective, consensus is divided into two types: acquired (muhassal) and transmitted (manqul). (Muṭahharī, Majmūʿa-yi āthār, 1395 Sh, vol. 20, p. 51.)
  2. ↑ Walāʾī, Farhang-i tashrīḥī-yi iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl, 1387 AH, p. 49; Muʾassasa-yi Dāʾirat al-Maʿārif-i Fiqh-i Islāmī, Farhang-i fiqh, 1426 AH, vol. 1, p. 255.
  3. ↑ Qulīzāda, Wāzhah-shināsī-yi iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1379 Sh, p. 16.
  4. ↑ Asgharī, Awḍaḥ al-shurūḥ, 1383 Sh, vol. 2, p. 156.
  5. ↑ Muṭahharī, Majmūʿa-yi āthār, 1395 Sh, vol. 20, p. 51.
  6. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, Maqālāt-i uṣūlī, Tehran, p. 34.
  7. ↑ Markaz-i Iṭṭilāʿāt wa Madārik-i Islāmī, Farhang-nāma-yi uṣūl-i fiqh, 1389 Sh, p. 391.
  8. ↑ Markaz-i Iṭṭilāʿāt wa Madārik-i Islāmī, Farhang-nāma-yi uṣūl-i fiqh, 1389 Sh, p. 391; Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 201.
  9. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 213.
  10. ↑ Markaz-i Iṭṭilāʿāt wa Madārik-i Islāmī, Farhang-nāma-yi uṣūl-i fiqh, 1389 Sh, p. 95; Dhihnī Ṭihrānī, Tashrīḥ al-maqāṣid, 1405 AH, vol. 2, p. 340.
  11. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 382.
  12. ↑ Asgharī, Awḍaḥ al-shurūḥ, 1383 Sh, vol. 2, p. 157; Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1387 Sh, vol. 3, p. 189; Qulīzāda, Wāzhah-shināsī-yi iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1379 Sh, p. 17.
  13. ↑ Asgharī, Awḍaḥ al-shurūḥ, 1383 Sh, vol. 2, p. 157; Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1387 Sh, vol. 3, p. 189; Qulīzāda, Wāzhah-shināsī-yi iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1379 Sh, p. 16.
  14. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 383.
  15. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 201.
  16. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 201.
  17. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 202.
  18. ↑ Some believe there must be an unknown person among the jurists whose opinions have been gathered, who could possibly be the Imam; others have said the unknown jurists must be at least more than one person, for if it were only one, he would be the Imam himself, and there would be no need for the opinions of others. (Jannātī Shāhrūdī, 1370 Sh, p. 202.)
  19. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 383.
  20. ↑ Mufīd, Awāʾil al-maqālāt, 1413 AH, p. 121.
  21. ↑ al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā, al-Dharīʿa, 1376 Sh, vol. 2, p. 129 (605).
  22. ↑ Shīrwānī, Taḥrīr-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1385 Sh, p. 232; Muẓaffar, Uṣūl al-Fiqh, 1375 Sh, vol. 2, p. 114.
  23. ↑ Shīrwānī, Taḥrīr-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1385 Sh, p. 232.
  24. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1387 Sh, vol. 3, p. 190.
  25. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 386.
  26. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 203.
  27. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 203.
  28. ↑ Ṭūsī, ʿIdda fī l-uṣūl, 1417 AH, pp. 628-638.
  29. ↑ Ḥaydarī, Uṣūl al-istinbāṭ, 1412 AH, p. 192; Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, pp. 386-388; Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, pp. 206-207.
  30. ↑ Ḥaydarī, Uṣūl al-istinbāṭ, 1412 AH, p. 192.
  31. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 208.
  32. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 208.
  33. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 207.
  34. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 385.
  35. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 390.
  36. ↑ Shahābī, Taqrīrāt-i uṣūl, 1321 Sh, p. 117; Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 390.
  37. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, pp. 208-210.
  38. ↑ Ṣāliḥī Māzandarānī, Sharḥ-i Kifāyat al-Uṣūl, 1382 Sh, vol. 5, p. 210; Malikī Iṣfahānī, Farhang-i iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl, 1379 Sh, vol. 1, p. 30.
  39. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 201.
  40. ↑ Muṭahharī, Majmūʿa-yi āthār, 1395 Sh, vol. 20, p. 51.
  41. ↑ Muʾassasa-yi Dāʾirat al-Maʿārif-i Fiqh-i Islāmī, Farhang-i fiqh, 1426 AH, vol. 1, p. 255.
  42. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Adwār-i fiqh, Qom, p. 170.
  43. ↑ Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād, 1370 Sh, p. 213.
  44. ↑ Dhihnī Ṭihrānī, Tashrīḥ al-maqāṣid, 1405 AH, vol. 2, p. 421.
  45. ↑ Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, ʿIlm-i uṣūl, 1379 Sh, p. 310.
  46. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i fiqh, 1387 Sh, vol. 3, p. 190.
  47. ↑ Muẓaffar, Uṣūl al-Fiqh, 1375 Sh, vol. 2, p. 203.
  48. ↑ Muḥammadī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, vol. 1, p. 383.

References

  • Asgharī, Sayyid ʿAbd Allāh, Awḍaḥ al-shurūḥ fī Farāʾid al-uṣūl, Qom, Nashr-i Qiyām, 1383 Sh.
  • Ḥaydarī, ʿAlī Naqī, Uṣūl al-istinbāṭ, Qom, Lajnat Idārat al-Ḥawza al-ʿIlmiyya, 1412 AH.
  • Dhihnī Ṭihrānī, Muḥammad Jawād, Tashrīḥ al-maqāṣid fī sharḥ al-farāʾid, Qom, Nashr-i Ḥādhiq, 1405 AH.
  • al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā, al-Dharīʿa ilā uṣūl al-sharīʿa, Tehran, Tehran University Press, 1376 Sh.
  • Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Muḥammad Ibrāhīm, Adwār-i fiqh wa kayfiyyat-i bayān-i ān, Qom, n.p, n.d.
  • Jannātī Shāhrūdī, Muḥammad Ibrāhīm, Manābiʿ-i ijtihād az dīdgāh-i madhāhib-i Islāmī, Tehran, Kayhān, 1370 Sh.
  • Shahābī, Maḥmūd, Taqrīrāt-i uṣūl, Tehran, Haj Muhammad Ali Elmi Press, 7th ed., 1321 Sh.
  • Shīrwānī, ʿAlī, Taḥrīr-i uṣūl-i fiqh, Qom, Dār al-ʿIlm, 2nd ed., 1385 Sh.
  • Ṣāliḥī Māzandarānī, Ismāʿīl, Sharḥ-i Kifāyat al-Uṣūl, Qom, Ṣāliḥān, 1382 Sh.
  • Ṭūsī, Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan, ʿIdda fī l-uṣūl, Qom, Mohammad Taqi Alaghbandian Press, 1417 AH.
  • Qulīzāda, Aḥmad, Wāzhah-shināsī-yi iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl-i fiqh, Tehran, Nūr al-Aṣfiyāʾ, 1379 Sh.
  • Muḥammadī, ʿAlī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i istinbāṭ, Qom, Dār al-Fikr, 3rd ed., n.d.
  • Muḥammadī, ʿAlī, Sharḥ-i uṣūl-i fiqh, Qom, Dār al-Fikr, 10th ed., 1387 Sh.
  • Markaz-i Iṭṭilāʿāt wa Madārik-i Islāmī, Farhang-nāma-yi uṣūl-i fiqh, Qom, Pazhūheshgāh-i ʿUlūm wa Farhang-i Islāmī, 1389 Sh.
  • Muṭahharī, Shahīd Murtaḍā, Majmūʿa-yi āthār (Fiqh wa ḥuqūq), Tehran, Ṣadrā, 1395 Sh.
  • Muẓaffar, Muḥammad Riḍā, Uṣūl al-Fiqh, Qom, Ismāʿīlīān, 5th ed., 1375 Sh.
  • Mufīd, Muḥammad b. Muḥammad, Awāʾil al-maqālāt fī l-madhāhib wa l-mukhtārāt, Qom, al-Muʾtamar al-ʿĀlamī li-l-Shaykh al-Mufīd, 1413 AH.
  • Malikī Iṣfahānī, Mujtabā, Farhang-i iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl, Qom, Nashr-i ʿĀlima, 1379 Sh.
  • Muntaẓirī, Ḥusayn ʿAlī, Mabānī-yi fiqhī-yi ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, translated by Mahmud Salavati, Qom, Kayhān, 1409 AH.
  • Muʾassasa-yi Dāʾirat al-Maʿārif-i Fiqh-i Islāmī bar madhhab-i Ahl al-Bayt (a), Farhang-i fiqh muṭābiq-i madhhab-i Ahl al-Bayt (a), under the supervision of Seyyed Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, Qom, 1426 AH.
  • Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, Muḥammad, ʿIlm-i uṣūl, Tehran, ʿUrūj, 1379 Sh.
  • Mūsawī Bujnūrdī, Muḥammad, Maqālāt-i uṣūlī, Tehran, n.p, n.d.
  • Walāʾī, ʿĪsā, Farhang-i tashrīḥī-yi iṣṭilāḥāt-i uṣūl, Tehran, Nashr-i Ney, 1387 Sh.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikishia.net/w/index.php?title=Draft:Ijmaʿ_Muḥaṣṣal&oldid=204832"