the victory of the Islamic Revolution the writer continued to teach, lecturing groups of military personnel on such subjects as cognition, cognition of God, justice, and prophethood with each successive audience there were improvements in both form and content, resulting in no small measure from enthusiastic audience-participation. A final presentation of the material was as a series of lectures given to members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guardian Corps (IRGC) on a remote - instruction basis.

The lectures were later broadcast by IRTV, the Islamic Republic of Iran's television network, and they also appeared in the Maktab al-Enqclab '('Message of the Revolution') magazine published by the IRGC'S ideological and political instruction unit. In the spring of 1986, with the publication of the first volume of Osul al-Aqaycd Eslami ('Principles of Islamic Beliefs'), the text of which was based on the revised and expanded text of the lectures as published in Maktab al-Enqelab. Some new material, including sections on the correction of ideology and freedom of opinion, was added at this time.

The original purpose of these lectures and their published texts, which arc the fruit of many years of research into questions of Islamic ideology, was to help correct religious belief by exposing superstition and fostering sound ideology, particularly among ordinary Iranians and the other Persian-speakers to whom they were addressed. The writer has been most gratified by the response so far evoked.

It soon became evident; however, that one of the most significant effects of Iran's Islamic Revolution has been the growing interest

p: 2

in Islam which it has generated among people all over the world. It was therefore decided to produce an English­ language version of the first pamphlet of the first volume of Osul al-'Aqayed Eslami, and hopefully or the subsequent volumes, which are at an advanced stage of preparation.

The present English text is a translation of the original Persian with a small amount of additional explanatory material deemed useful to the English reader. It also incorporates some minor Corrections and revisions to the Persian original as published.

In humbling submitting this volume to a wider and relatively unknown readership, the writer hopes that his original purpose will be further served and that English-speaking Muslims will benefit from a fresh analysis of the ground work of their faith. At the same lime he has been encouraged to believe that there is an even larger group of potential readers in the world who have hitherto been deprived of an extensive survey of Islamic ideology. It is to this group in particular that the present pamphlet is most respectfully dedicated.

Mohammadi-ye Reyshahari

Tehran March 20 1988

is something which is figuratively 'tied ' or 'grafted' to a person’s mind, thought or soul. When his mind accepts that the earth revolves around the sun, or that the sun, revolves around the earth; when it accepts that blood circulates in the body or does not circulate; when it accepts that the world has, or does not have, a creator; when it accepts that there is, or is not a life after death; when, in other words, a person accepts any theory either true or false, this theory is, as it were, tied or grafted or knotted to his mind, and the theory becomes a belief and part of that person's ideology .

to judge deeds, so that even a good deed, if it is not accompanied by soundness of belief, is without value.

As Imam Baqer says: 'No action is of value if it is based on doubt and denial.(1) In other words, the soundness of an action, its role in a person’s development and its ‘usefulness' all depend on the soundness of the agent's beliefs.

If a person is ideologically unsound, and denies or doubts the truth, no action arising from his beliefs can be sound or useful, for it is his beliefs that motivate him and his motivation that gives direction to his deeds and it is the motivation and direction of his deeds that determine their meaning and intrinsic value.

For this reason Muslims believe that the first thing that happens when a person dies and enters the life to come is that in the preliminary examination of his life in this world he is asked what his beliefs were. The first questions are about his beliefs, not his deeds, such as what god and what religion did you believe in? And which leader did you follow?

Of all the world's religions and philosophies there is none that ascribes more value and importance to a person's belief s than does Islam. From the Islamic viewpoint, Ideological discussions are the most important of all discussions, and theological centers and universities in Islamic countries should pay more attention to ideological indoctrination and discussions than to other subjects.

A detailed understanding of the importance Islam attaches

p: 5

to ideological debate requires a study or such subjects as ma'rifat (divine knowledge), fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), fikr (thought), 'aql (intellect) 'ilm (science), fatwa (rulings on points of jurisprudence), Taqlid (following authority) and ray (opinion in textbooks of Islamic thought). A detailed study of such works is beyond the scope or this introduction.(1)

Here, we will restrict ourselves to quoting a hadith of Imam 'Ali, who is justly regarded as the greatest guide to belief and action that aptly illustrates the importance of ideological matters in the Islamic view.

According to Sheikh Saduq, the late ninth-century muhadith,(2) a certain Abu al-Muqaddam ibn Shorain, quoting his father, related that in the thick of the Battle of the Camel, which 'Ali fought against Internal counter-revolutionaries, just when 'Ali's warriors were gathered around him to decide on military plans and operations, a Bedouin stood up and said in a loud voice: 'O Commander of the Faithful do you believe in the unity of God?’ To the rest of the warriors, who were totally absorbed in questions of military strategy, this question was quite unexpected.

They thought that if anyone wanted to ask the Imam a question it would be connected with the battle, the vital topic of the day. When they heard this nomad's ideological question, which apparently had nothing to do with the war and could be discussed and answered at a more appropriate time. They vented their spleen on this man for failing to appreciate situation they were in.

the Bedouin coming under attack from all sides, rose to his defense, and delivered these historic words, which may serve as a clear indication of the importance and role of ideological discussion, and of the value of ideological indoctrination:

"Let him ask his question and refrain from scolding him. For what this man of the desert wants to know is the very question over which we are in dispute with our enemies!"

These words of Imam 'Ali, uttered in such circumstances are of extraordinary importance and deserve close study.

If we consider the Imam's situation at that critical time, when any moment could be decisive, we may well agree that he really did not have the time to reply to this question: be might have asked someone else to deal with it or proposed that it be left till later. But he neither referred it to someone else, nor postponed answering it, because he wanted to teach the Muslims an important lesson.

He wanted to teach them the philosophy of jihad, or holy war. He wanted to show them the importance of ideological questions, discussions and indoctrination. He wanted to say that if today Ali is fighting internal counter revolutionaries, and if tomorrow a descendant of 'Ali and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran is fighting internal and external counter revolutionaries and insists on continuing the war until the final victory, and if one-day the eleventh successor of 'Ali and Fatima, the promised Mahdi, is fighting world arrogance

p: 7

and atheism and all the Satanic forces of the age, and paints the earth red with their blood and cleanses the world from their pollution, all these wars are for Islam, all this fighting is to destroy the Satanic regimes that have prevented the blossoming of society's talents to free man from slavery a bondage, and to set him on the path towards absolute perfection and sublimity, as his creator intend.

It was for this reason that Imam 'Ali defended the Bedouin’s question at a critical and decisive moment, and used that brief opportunity to explain the philosophy of jihad and war. He told his followers to let the man ask his question and said that they were fighting the war over precisely that question.

Their objective was not conquest or exploitation, but rather divine philosophy and spiritual illumination. Their war was to destroy the obstacles and remove the veils that were preventing truth from being revealed. The Islamic philosophy of jihad is to free the people from the shackles of superstition, correct their ideology and permit true and scientific beliefs to flourish.(1)

So not only was the Bedouin's question not divorced from the main questions of the day- the war-but it had the closest possible relationship with it. After all, it was related to the philosophy of war and jihad and what bond is firmer than that between a thing and its philosophy?

For that reason the Imam turned to the Bedouin and with complete self-possession and precise detail answered his question

p: 8

in these words:

'O Bedouin! The statement that God is one is based on four assumptions, two of which are not applicable to God Almighty, while the other two are correct and susceptible of proof.(1)

The Imam then explained each of the four assumptions. Since this matter of doctrine is not related to our present discussion and, God willing, will be dealt with in detail in a later chapter in our discussion of the unity of God, we shall not continue with the rest of the Imam's reply here.

life and the life to come than the invocation of His holy name.'

The companions imagined at that critical moment Islam required more than anything else resolution and courage on the battle field, and that therefore jihad in the path of God must be the most valuable of all deeds. They were therefore understandably surprised at his words, and one of them said to the Prophet, without concealing his astonishment: 'But what about fighting on God's behalf?' Isn't that more valuable?'

The Prophet of Islam then spoke these meaningful and deeply instructive words, which may be taken as a commentary on the value and importance of ideological discussion with regard to the philosophy of war and jihad: 'Without the invocation of God's name there can be no lawful command to fight on His, behalf.(1)

War is intrinsically undesirable and jihad is in itself of no value. Their desirability and value to man in his pursuit of perfection and happiness only exist when they are 'in the path ·of God', and the objective of jihad 'in the path of God', is God and Islam. It follows that if God and the invocation of His name and Islam are not involved there can in principle be no war in the path of God, let alone any lawful command to fight such a war.

On the basis of this principle ideological discussion which acquaints a person with God and Islam in a fundamental and logical manner serves to give purpose and direction to war, and makes jihad

p: 10

in the path of God a first step towards the salvation of man and the perfection of society. It therefore follows that invoking God's name is of greater value than the actual fighting because the act of invocation lies at the heart of the philosophy of war.

this world and be martyred once again!(1)

Al the end of this talk some of you may want to ask why we should fight if invoking God's name is of greater value than war. Why don't we sit at home and pray or attend indoctrination classes in our own town s and villages? There is an Arabic proverb that says 'Take what you want and don't bother with how you get it.'

The answer to this question is that first, as I shall explain in detail later the meaning of invoking God's name or praying is not, according to the Islamic text simply verbal invocation A.s we saw in the hadith in question, the meaning of invocation is knowledge of Islamic thought and God and due regard for the philosophy of war not merely saying God's name aloud.

Secondly, to reach this kind of conclusion is as if someone were to say that studying is more valuable than eating, and someone else concluded from this remark that from now on he should not eat but devote himself exclusively to study.

In just the same way that eating is necessary precondition for studying; fighting with the enemies of God and of the divine order is a precondition for knowing God and invoking his name and we cannot neglect this precondition as an excuse to go straight to such invocation and knowledge, since if the enemies of God conquer our society there will be no opportunity left to know God or invoke His holy name.

p: 12

demanding proof, or not? Does it, in other words, demand that a person should acquire his beliefs through investigation, and accept other people’s theories only after the investigation has taken place and on the basis of rational proof?

beliefs, and remove the veils hiding true knowledge and investigate rather than take on a blind trust, differences between various schools of thought would disappear from human, society, and everyone would arrive at a single common nation and a single religion. Since differences occur only when fictitious knowledge takes the place of true knowing where true scienec reigns there is no room for differenceof divergence.

and in their absence, for those who do not have the specialized knowledgeto solve Islamic problems for the words of the Prophet or the Imams in a Mujtahid al-jame’ol-sharayet.(1)

What we are concerned here with is position of Islam on Taqlid regarding basic beliefs;whether Islam, like reason, rejects Taqlid absolutely in matter of principle, or permits it. In other words, in the Islamic view, ought people to investigate convitional peinciples personally or practise Taqlid in this respect.

As everyone who is familiar with the Quran and other Islamic texts well knows, Islam clearly and explicitly rejects Taqlid in matters of basic principles and insists emphatically that people should investigate matter of belief personally and not adopt any opinion without due consideration and rational proof.

In the Quranic view, the creator has never required mankind to accept his word alone, for example, regarding His own existence or the mission of his prophets, as an article of blind faith, without any rational proof. To substantiate His existence and the truth of the prophetic missions, God justifies on rational ground and invites man to let his reason be the judge.

No prophet has ever urged his flock to follow him blindly in matters of basic belief or to accept his word unquestionably as God’s representative. In proving the genuiness of his mission every prophet has relied on rational proof, and asked his followers to let their reason decide and by the same token has requested his adversaries to prove their claims, telling them in the words of

p: 16

the Quran:

“Show us your proof”(1)

Today, no Mujtahid or Islamic theologian permits Taqlid in matters of fundamental belief. Instead, such scholar exhort people to study the basis of their convictions for themselves.

In order to clarify the precise Islam;s view of Taqlid in matters of fundamental belief we must now examine a number of Quranic verses and hadith(2) on this subject.

hearts, but do not comprehend; eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear.” (7:179).

In other words, they are people who do not use their eyes, or their ears, or their tongues follow in the path of others, adopting other people’s opinions without proof, instead of using their own minds and thoughts.

The Quran thus unlinks the chains created by blind imitation of other, and frees man from such fetters of thought. Every individual is granted the independence of thought and permitted expression of ideas. By freeing man from the tyranny of Taqlid in convictional matters the Quran thus exhorts him to investigate and contemplate.

This leads us an extremely important and sensitive point. The Quran strives to eardicate the credence of knowledgeability from people’s minds and make them truly knowledgeable. The Quran wants to cure the followers of every school of thought and those with all kinds of beliefs of the disease of this credence which is the product of blind acceptance of the beliefs of others, and to lead them to true knowledge and knowledgeability(1). It therefore strongly condemns those, who prefer Taqlid and allow traditional beliefs to prevent them from seeking truth.

The Quran has numerous verse on this subject, two of which we will examine here:

‘When they are told: “Come to what God has revealed, and to His prophet” they say: “What we have inherited from our fathers is enough for us”…. (5:104)

In other words, when people of traditional beliefs who have always followed blindly the customers

p: 18

and beliefs of their ancestors, tribe or clan are urges to examine the words of God and His Prophet it is as if they were told, “look, you’ve heard everyone else why don’t you hear, what we have to say and when you’ve digested it use your intellects to decide which of all these is correct? If you decide that God and His Prophet are telling the truth, accept what they say and act accordingly, and if you decide that your parents and the traditions of your tribe or clan or ideals of your party or organizationare right then follow them.”

In reply to this logical argument they say: “No, we don’t need to hear the word of God and His Prophet.The traditional beliefs we’ve inherited from our ancestors are quite enough for us”. The Quran then goes on the reply to them with a clear reference to rule of reason, by saying:

“….Even though their fathers knew nothing and had received no proper guidance.” (5:104).

Is their attitude logical? Can reason accept their view simply because their parents held certain beliefs not based on logic and understanding they should follow them blindly and close their eyes and ears as they tread the same path!!”(1)

saying: ‘Wake up in the morning as a scholar or as a student, but do not be a ‘floater”, Ibn Athir commenting in the word”imma’ah” used in this hadith says: “The word imma’ah is applied to a person who has no views or opinions of his own and therefore follows anyone with an opinion. The form imma’a also occurs.”(1)

In other words, ther term imma’a is used in Arabic to indicate someone holding no independent thought, who does not dare tothink and express an opinion. His eyes and ears are always glued to others and to what they must have to say. He waits to see what the party’s ideologue says, what the head of his organization thinks, or how public at large reacts to a given situation. A floaters is one who never questions what others say or write.

In this Hadith, the prophet is telling people that in matters of doctrine, they should either be learned or at least try to acquire learning, but in no account they should follow blindly what others believe. From this we may deduce that from the Islamic viewpoint a person should either know that his beliefs are correct and in accordance with reality or else he should strive to acquire such knowledge. But on no account may he be a floater and merely follow the beliefs and views of others.

In this connection, we may quote some verses ascribed to Imam Ali:according to one tradition.

“When I am faced with something I don’t know I seek

p: 20

the truth: I seek it high and low, I’m not a floater, who can never chose, and everywhere he goes asks, “What’s the news?” I use analogy and knowledge vast, and often read the future in the past.”(1)

So the true followers of the path of Islam and the real disciplines of the prophet and Imam Ali are those who form their own opnions on matters of faith personally and do not blindly accept the views of this or that. They do not adopt the prevailing view just to avoid being laughed at. The only opnions and beliefs they accept are those that they find to be true after careful consideration, even though the general public may hold the opposite views. They take the path that they find to be true after a thorough study, and they do only what they consider logical, human and wise, which comes as a result of much thought.

Another hadith reported in Tarmadhi’s Sahih and related by Hudhdhifa, tells us how the prophet told, his companions ‘not to be floaters’ and then expounded it in these words: ‘Don’t be like those people who say: “If others do good, I’ll do good, and if others do evil, I’ll do evil.” Instead be prepared to do good if otheres do good, but if they do evil don’t follow them by doing so”.(2)

Imam Sadeq the sixth Imam, is also reported to have told his disciplines ‘not to be floaters’ and further explained it by saying: ‘A floater is someone

p: 21

who says: “I’m with the people and I’m just like one of the people”.(1)

What he meant was that in matters of belief and action one should not follow others unquestionably. Regarding what others say and do we should always think if their words and deeds are right or wrong. Do not say I’m with the people and I’m just like one of the people, so I’ll say whatever they say and do whatever they so.”

In another Hadith, Imam Kazem, the seventh Imam, is reported as telling to one of his followers, a man certain Fadhl bin Yunis: “Do good and speak good and do not be a floater”. Fadhl bin Younis tells us that he asked the Imam what he meant by this and the reply came: ‘Do not say: “I’m with the people and I’m just one of the people”. The Imam when on the quote ahadith of the prophet, as follows: ‘O people, there are two paths to follow, the path of righteousness and the path of evil. You should not be prefereing the path of evil to the path of righteousness”.(2)

The words of the prophet:verily we have shown them two paths” are an allusion to the Quranic verse “We have shown him the two paths” (90:10), the implication being that man has been created ina way that is capable of telling the difference between right and wrong. The words of the prophet, alluding thus to the word of God, convery a reprimand. He is saying: “When there

p: 22

are only two paths to choose from why does man forsake the path that reason tells him is correct and choose the path that reason tells him to avoid?” While explaining what the prophet meant by a ‘floater’ Imam Kazeem’s reasonung makes two points.

The first point is that socially what causes a person to choose the path of evil is being a ‘floater’ and blindly following the opnions and actions of others, and if someda manking manes to free himself from the bondage of Taqlid a great deal of social problems will be solved.

The second point is that man has been created in such a way that is e gets rid of Taqlid he can be a man of independent ideas and choose the path of righteouness. Since reasoning can help man to distinguish between right and wrong. Islam too exhorts man to do good and what is just and right and to shun evil and cruelty.(1)

version of this hadith is as follows: ‘One who learns his religion from the Book of od mountains will be moved before he doubts his faith, wheareas one, who gets involved in an affair out of ignorance may also leave it through ignorance.’(1)

There are several senitive and valuablepoints to be learned from these hadith: The first point is that following persons of influsence in matters of religious belief is condemned and regarded as undesirable: for a person of reason should acquire his beliefs through researh and one’s own discrenment not thorough Taqlid.

The second point is that in the cae of those who embrace Islam as a result of following the beliefs of Islamic personalities, for the reaons that the basisof their conversion is tqlid and emulation of an individual they admire and since their beliefs are not rooted in reason or knowledge of one day their hero decides to abandon Islam they too will change their beliefs in order to follow him therefore. Beliefs based on Taqlid are always subject to change and decline ’A person who enters this religion in emulation of a strong personality may also leave it for the same reason’.

The third point is that if a person who embrace Islam under the guidance of the Quran and the hadith his religious convictions will be so firmly entrenched in him that they will be stronger than mountains.

In other words mountains may be uprooted from the earth; but the religious beliefs of someone who has found his faith

p: 24

in the uran and the Hadith will never be wrenched from his heart.

‘But if a person enters religion as a result of studying the Quran and Sunna, mountains will be moved from their seat before he abandons his beliefs.’

The fourth point is, that the guidance provided by the Quran and the Hadith indicates that a person’s beliefs must be founded on reasonable and scientific grounds. If he accepts them on the same basis. “A person who becomes involved in an affair through ignorance may also leave it through ignorance”.

The points mentioned by ImamSadeq are confirmed by experience and history. In the last 1400 years of history of Islam we may find many examples of people who embraced this religion through emulation of a powerful personalities and abandoned it for the same reason.

The history of the divinely inspired reslion signifies that following political or religious personalities in matters of beliefs that is the cult of the personality, has caused untold harm to these religions. A study of the hitory of relion from this aspect although of great interst and indeed of instructive value, is nevertherless beyond the scope of the present introductory discussion. We shall therefore limit ourselves to two examples of the cult of the personality, one taken from the dawn of Islam, and the other from the recent past.

Nakethin, Qasetin and Mareqin, as a result of infactuation by the personality cult abandonded the true Islam. Infact they formed ranks against it and casued great form to the roots of this young sapling, the bitter effects of which have affected Islamic society to this day.

The Imam was painfully disappointed at how the efforts of the Prophet, himself and the followers of true Islam to establish a government and society worthy of Islam were ending in failure because of the sabotage inflicted by those who had once beein his commrade-in-arms.

What vexed Ali more was the fact the many people did not hestate to think it through to see if what those respected personalities were saying was true or false, or whether the cause of action chosen by them was right or wrong, or whether in claiming to be fighting under the banner of Islam they were really trying to help Islam or they were just using Islam as a stepping-stone to reach to their personal ambitions.

Without a doubt the ‘floaters’ and blind followers of the deviationisfs of ‘Ali’s day caused the Imam greater pain than did the devistaionists themselves, because without these followers they would have accompilshed nothing. In Chapter 147 of the Nahj-ol-Balagha ‘Ali is reported as giving a short but profound analysis of the politicial and socil conditions of his community, which can also provide valuable guidance to understanding our society today. This analysis has two special aspects that are worthy of attention.

One aspectis that in order to

p: 26

explain the matter to Kumayl one of his senior disciplines, the Imam took him by the hand and led him to the desert, while full of grief,he expounded to him on what was troubling him. The second aspet is that before embarking on his analysis of society as he as he saw it, the Imam drew Kumayl’s attention to the capacity of people’s hearts,saying some can take a great deal and others more, and the greater one is in his heart the better.

It is obvious that the Imam could not tell about his grief to everybody. To hear his words required a capacity that not everyone had. After all, how he speak of the numbers of true Muslims, those who really understood and were still faithful to Islam? How could he openly say that people with such excellent past, finding their oersonal interests threathened, had abandoned Islam?

How could he say that many of his contemporaries had been seduced in the name of Islam by the establishments of distinguished figures of society, were not real Muslims at all? Or that they did not understand Islam, and their religion was in pawn to the personalities that they trusted and followed, or that their standards of what was right and wrong belonged to those distinguished personlities, not to themselves?

In any event, ‘Ali began his plaintive analysis for Kumayl who had the heart to hear the social ills of his time. it starts with these words: ‘People are of three classes; those who

p: 27

know God;those who seek the path of salvation; and those who like foolish flies follow every voice that calls, and go on every direction that wind blows, unenlightened and have no firm refuge.

With these words the Imam divides the people of his community, or perhaps people in general, into three groups: The first group consists of those who have recognized the divine truth, and, whose beliefs and deeds, individual and social attitudes are based on sound standards. The Imam cals them “those who know God”.

The second group consists of those who may not yet have recognized the divine truth, but are people of contemplation and thought, and are on the path that leads to divine knowledge. If they continue on this path to the end they will be saved from domination. The Imam, therefore, calls such people ‘those who seek the path of salvation.

The third group consists of those who have neither recognized the divine truth nor emarked on the path that leads to divine knowledge which may be called students on the path of salvation. Rather, they are people who have totally failed to think and investigate such matters for themselves. The Imam calls such people ‘foolish flies’.

The Imam compares this third group, who fail to think for themselves, with the flies and feed on him, they are attracted to the sound of every voice that calls out without stopping to think who that person may be and whether what he says is true or false, flies that are

p: 28

carried along on every direction that wind blows.

The reason why people have become so vulgar and ignorable, in the Imam’s view, is that they have not been illuminated by the light of knowledge and lack of firmconvitional basis.

This categorization by Imam Ali is infact the same as the one that is attributed to the Prophet by Ibn Athir.(1) The difference being that prophet’s words are in the form of a statement. The prophet says that Muslims must be knowledgeable or seek knowledge but never a ‘floater’, the Imam states Muslims in his day are of three kinds:those who know God, those who seek the path of salvation and those who are like ‘foolish flies’.

The expression of ‘foolish flies’ as used by the Imam, is the same as the ‘floater’ refered to bye the Prophet, namely people, lacking an independent convitional basis, who merely follow the opnions of others. Such people are the most dangerous enemies of those governing based on truth and justice. What greived Ali so and caused him to sigh to heaven was that his contemporaries were almost without exception, of the third category: ‘floaters’, ‘foolish flies’, those who lacked a firm conviticonal base, and swayed on that way with every passing breeze.

Those who sought the oath of salvation were extremely few in Ali’s day. As his subsequent remarks tells us, such persons are characterized by a refusal to misuse knowledge or betray their faith,possesing sufficient insight to deal with doubts and totally rejecting the lust for materialistic

p: 29

life. People a speculative nature who are endowed with these characteristics were all too few in Ali’s day.

Even scarer than those who sought the path of salvation were those who had achieved knowledge of the Divine. As the Imam puts it: ‘I swear to God, their number is extremely few’.

‘We see, then, that Imam Ali was surrounded by a mass of people who were neither persons of discrement nor seekers after the truth, neither persons of knowledge nor seekers after the truth, neither persons of knowledge nor students of knowledge; rather, they were people whose minds and thoughts, knowledge an ideology, and even their fate, were in extricably tied to the fate of the distinguished personalities they admitted most and were pulled in every direction that they wished.

Imam Ali was accompanies by people who did not want to understand, or were incapabe of understanding that the personalities theyadmired were just as fallible as others. They could not understand that Talha and Zobair might also make mistakes, and that the Holy Men of Nahravan might err.

Society was in such a deplorable state that some could not even imagine the possibility that Mu’awiyah(1) might be wrong? At the Battle of the Camel one of ‘Ali’s supporters, a man named Harith bin hut spoke to the Imam in such terms that show to what a sad level Muslim thinking had declined.

When Harith saw that the leader of opposite side at this battle was none other than Aiysha, the Mother of the Faithful, and

p: 30

that personalities with such a distinguished Islamic background as Talha, and even more distinguished Zobair, who had sought sanctuary in Ali’s house during the Saqifa affair,(1) has chosen to fight on her side he simply could not believe that men with such records of distinction could be wrong to fight against Ali. So he approached the Imam and said:

“O Commander of the Faithful, I cannot believe that Talha and Zobair and Ayesha could unite unless it were for a just cause”.

In another version, Harith’s words are reported as being. ‘Do you expect me to believe that the companions of the Camel were misled?”(2)

Just imagine, if among the Imam’s companions, living as they were in an enviornment full of the light of knowledge and spiritual awareness, individuals were to be found incapable of believeing that personalities with such distinguished records as Talha and Zobair were wrong to be at war with ‘Ali what can we expect of other Muslims of his da who perhaps had not even seen the Imam?

Nevertheless, in reply to Harith, the Imam delivered words which, as Dr. Taha Hussein, the well-known Egptian writer so apthy put it “Were the epitome of firmness words of such greatness as have never been heard since the Revelation fell silent and the Voice of Heaven spoke no more.”(3)

The Imam’s reply was this: ‘You are in grave eror. Truth and falsohood can in no wise be distinguished by the yardstick of personality. Know the truth, you will know who follows the truth;

p: 31

and know falsehood. You will know who follows falsehood.(1)

In other words, your mistake, and that of others like you, os that instead of using truth anmd falsehood as criteria to judge personalities b, you have used personalities as a criterion for truth and falsehood. You are attempting to understand the truth b the standards of a personalit, weheras if you permit ourself to think for yourself you will know that the correct course is quite the opposite: a personality, however exalted and trustworth, can never the criterion for truth and falsehood. When a person knows the truth he knows who is the follower of the truth, regardless of the background or status of that follower: and when falsehood is understood the follower of falsehood can easily be identified regardless of their distinguished records or the universal acclaim they may enjoy.or status of that follower: and when falsehood is understood the follower of falsehood can easily be identified regardless of their distinguished records or the universal acclaim they may enjoy.

in its modern form the leaders of political parties and organizations are followed the organizational and non-organizational supporters of these leaders are called 'floaters'. Whose eyes and ears are closed and who do not permit themselves to think for themselves and have no doubts about the soundness., of the beliefs. actions. views and official instructions of the authorities they follow.. Today, in its modern form the leaders of political parties and organizations are followed the organizational and non-organizational supporters of these leaders are called 'floaters'. Whose eyes and ears are closed and who do not permit themselves to think for themselves and have no doubts about the soundness., of the beliefs. actions. views and official instructions of the authorities they follow.

The difficulties posed to the Islamic Republic of Iran by the organizations. parties and individuals opposed to it or are in armed conflict with are almost practically those which Imam 'Ali was confronted with by his opponents. The problem facing his government was the simple-minded or foolish followers who did not bother to evaluate the beliefs and actions of the personalities they admired.” The problem for the Islamic Republic. although nothing like so extensive since a decisive majority Of the Muslim people of Iran enjoy considerable intellectual maturity. is that within the confines of the opponents of the Islamic Republic and those groups in armed conflict with it are simple minded and ignorant supporters of these groups. whose infatuation with the personality-cult prevents them from appreciating reality.minded and ignorant supporters

p: 33

of these groups. whose infatuation with the personality-cult prevents them from appreciating reality.

The main factor responsible for the deviation of these simple-hearted supporters from the straight path of the Revolution and Islam, which has led them into the trap of these groups, is this disease- the cult of the personality. Their deviationism is due to the fact that their revolutionary beliefs are based on personality and not discernment, and the positions they have adopted are the result of Taqlid and not the quest for truth. and not the quest for truth.

Thus it was that when their ideologues deserted the true path of the Islamic Revolution and joined forces with its enemies they followed their leadership unquestioningly. Matters came to such a sorry pass those, who had once denounced imperialism with such vehemence shamelessly embraced the forces of imperialism and Zionism.embraced the forces of imperialism and Zionism.

Even more shameless were the illicit sexaul relations of the leadership in the name of an ideological revolution! This has been presented as a model to these blind followers, the "floaters" and "flies", but they cannot understand that such deeds whatever they are, are certainly not revolutionary! And if that type of relationships are revolutionary they are certainly not an ideological revolution!and "flies", but they cannot understand that such deeds whatever they are, are certainly not revolutionary! And if that type of relationships are revolutionary they are certainly not an ideological revolution!

these terms: a certain Thamali. in these terms:

'Be aware not to seek high positions and do not follow, great men blindly!”!”

It means that in life we should avoid two common habits: the pursuit of power and the cult of the personality. In society we should try to be neither in the vanguard nor the rearguard neither a leader nor the led!to be neither in the vanguard nor the rearguard neither a leader nor the led!

Thamali failed to understand what the Imam meant assumed that he was denouncing the position of leadership in general. For if there is no-one in the vanguard or the rearguard of society, the leadership, even of divinely-appointed leaders is likewise, automatically denied, and teaching and learning arc pointless also for it implies that the pupil will not follow the teacher and teacher will not undergo the stages required for his position. So Thamali replied:So Thamali replied:

‘May I sacrifice myself for you! I understand what you say about the evils of seeking power and position, but I don't understand a hat you mean by not following great men. After all. two thirds of whatever knowledge and learning I have is the result of following great men. If I hadn't followed you and people like you, I wouldn't have any knowledge worth mentioning. So why should I avoid following great men.' The Imam replied: "It is not as you have supposed. Because lest you choose a person as your leader and accept whatever he tells you without any

p: 35

reason.(1)

The Imam is saying that: "What I meant by following the great man is that you should not choose someone as your leader without the confirmating of your mind and without proper proof and accept everything that he tells. You unquestioningly, or blindly submit yourself”. [-however great his personality-].. [-however great his personality-].

What an ugly sight it is indeed to see a person who will not think for himself and has put his mind at the disposal of another and allowed himself to be led wherever that person chooses! And how regrettable it is that whenever a person pushes himself to the fore there are people who will follow him blindly and act as his disciples!how regrettable it is that whenever a person pushes himself to the fore there are people who will follow him blindly and act as his disciples!

such experts. Another question that may be posed is: Why is Taqlid in basic matters of religion rejected by both the purely intellectual and the theological stand point, yet in nonbasic matters it is held to be mandatory? in basic matters of religion rejected by both the purely intellectual and the theological stand point, yet in nonbasic matters it is held to be mandatory?

In other words, if the explicit dictates of reason. Hadith and the Quran are that a person should not accept the opinion of others without knowledge and science and awareness, and if because it is not conducive to science then Taqlid in basic matters of belief is not permissible, why should it be correct and even mandatory in non-basic matters?why should it be correct and even mandatory in non-basic matters?

Again, if Taqlid is not conducive to science, this must be so both for basic and non-basic matters alike; but why is it held that in basic matters of belief it is not correct yet in non-basic matters it is? And finally, why is reference made to the intellect and reason in matters of basic belief while this is not the case in non-basic matters? And finally, why is reference made to the intellect and reason in matters of basic belief while this is not the case in non-basic matters?

fact resorting to one's reason. For an explanation and to provide a detailed answer, consider the following analogy: Imagine you are ill or one of your family is ill, and you want to consult a doctor. What does reason tell you to do? and you want to consult a doctor. What does reason tell you to do?

When it comes to finding a doctor, who is a specialist in the disease in question and one you can place your confidence in, reason tells you that you can find him by consulting reliable acquaintances who know about such matters and in this way get the name of the most experienced specialized and reliable doctor available. When it comes to finding a doctor, who is a specialist in the disease in question and one you can place your confidence in, reason tells you that you can find him by consulting reliable acquaintances who know about such matters and in this way get the name of the most experienced specialized and reliable doctor available.

But once you have his name and have consulted him and he has carried out his examination and given you a prescription reason does not tell you to ask him what the basic for his diagnosis is or why he has prescribed this part particular treatment. On the contrary, reason tells you that since you are not a medical specialist yourself you should take whatever prescription he has given you and follow the course of treatment prescribed. Following the doctor's

p: 38

prescription is a form of Taqlid..

Just as reason has told you to enquire as to who is the most suitable factor it also tells you that when it comes to an acting on the course of treatment prescribed by the doctor Taqlid is mandatory. is mandatory.

Making enquiries on matters of non-basic belief is the same as finding the right doctor, and it is what reason tells you to do: it does not tell you to accept the opinion of others and act on them without making through enquiries to find the right consultant. Taqlid in non-basic matters, just like following the treatment prescribed by the doctor, takes place after finding the right consultant and being convinced of his expertise and putting your trust in him. in non-basic matters, just like following the treatment prescribed by the doctor, takes place after finding the right consultant and being convinced of his expertise and putting your trust in him.

And justas Taqlid with respect to medical consultant, that is following his advice and the course of treatment he prescribes, is not contrary to reason. On the contrary in following the dictates of reason, so too Taqlid in matters of non-basic belief with respect to a mojtahid having all the necessary qualifications, who is a specialist in religious matters, is in fact consulting one's reason following its dictates.necessary qualifications, who is a specialist in religious matters, is in fact consulting one's reason following its dictates.

while proving that Taqlid in fundamental beliefs is wrong from the points of view of reason and Islam. and at the same time we proved the necessity for earring out investigation and research into such matters. In this chapter the importance that Islam ascribe to research including research into Islam itself and the view that persons engaged in this task cannot be called infidels. will also be examined. Three main aspects of research will therefore be looked at: a) the Islamic view, b) the relationship between science and faith, c) the relationship between ignorance and kufr. (1)

of the self.(1) 'man is judged by the extent of his knowledge.(2) 'it is incumbent on every Muslim, both male and female, to seek knowledge in all circumstances.(3) 'those who seek knowledge are closest to the rank of prophet hood.(4) 'the angels place their wings beneath their feet.(5) 'forgiveness is implored for the student'.(6) 'paradise seeks the student.”(7) scholar is heir to the prophets.(8) 'the scholar's pen is mightier than the blood of martyrs.(9) regard for scholars is an act of worship’;(10) Islam ascribes dozens, perhaps hundreds, of other virtues to knowledge. studying and scholarship, and all this respect is to encourage people to study, so that by the aid of knowledge they can be freed from the tyranny of Taqlid, and base their beliefs and actions on reasonable and scientific standards., and base their beliefs and actions on reasonable and scientific standards.

In the Islamic view, even the slightest indications of a person's intentions should be carefully weighed and coordinated in accordance with reason. Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, gave his disciple Kumayl the following advice: 'O Kumayl, in everything you do there is a need for knowledge.(11)54

In other words Islam does not permit a person to perform an action without prior investigation and assurance that it is correct. If he does so. not only is he not free from fault, but such an action is itself a grave error. Islam thus endeavor to persuade people that before embarking on any action they should carry out an investigation and

p: 41

acquire the requisite knowledge, and considers the ideal Muslim to be one whose cognition and knowledge, not acts of worship. exceed those of others. The Prophet Muhammad is reported as saying: 'The best of you in terms of faith is the person among you with the greatest knowledge.(1)55

Another version of this hadith describes the ideal Muslim in these words: 'Some of you are superior to others in prayer, some in pilgrimage, some in almsgiving, some in fasting, but the best of all of you is the person who is superior in terms of knowledge.(2) This is why Imam Baqer, the Fifth Imam. advising his successor Imam Sadeq says: 'My son, Know the real value of our followers by the extent of their knowledge of the traditions for verily knowledge is understanding the traditions.'My son, Know the real value of our followers by the extent of their knowledge of the traditions for verily knowledge is understanding the traditions.

By traditions the Imam meant the words of the Prophet and the Imams and by knowing the traditions he meant research and investigation and expounding on the real meaning of these sayings.By traditions the Imam meant the words of the Prophet and the Imams and by knowing the traditions he meant research and investigation and expounding on the real meaning of these sayings.

In other words. he is referring to the preservation and transmission of hadith, 'knowledge' of the traditions is jurisprudent (faqih) the science of hadith a jurisprudent (faqih) is one who

p: 42

has studied and understands the hadith.hadith.

In this hadith, Imam Baqer first advises his son to judge the Shi'a and followers of the Prophet’s Household by the criterion of their knowledge, that is understanding of hadith. He then goes on to say': It is understanding of the hadith that ralses a believer to the highest levels of faith'. In other words. what 'really matters is a deep understanding of the hadith and a more knowledge of many hadith without fully Understanding them is of little value. without fully Understanding them is of little value.

Continuing. the Imam quotes a hadith of Imam Ali. He says: 'I was studying the book of Ali and in it I came across this sentence:' "The value of every person is the extent of his understanding".(1) On another occasion Imam Sadeq has this to say on the importance of understanding hadith: 'One hadith that you understand is worth a thousand that you merely relate'. that you understand is worth a thousand that you merely relate'.

Narating a hadith may be useful.(2) and instructive for those to whom it is related, but for the narrator a hadith is only useful if he understands it, otherwise as Imam Baqer says. he derives little advantage from his knowledge. In fact. sometimes it may even be harmful both for the narrator and his audience alike, since when the narrator is not knowledgeable about hadith more often this may cause hadith to be distorted. to be distorted.

This is the reason for the commander

p: 43

of the Faithful words: 'Understanding of hadith is incumbent upon you, not narrating them'.(1) And on another occasion Imam Ali is quoted as saying: ‘The ignorant devoute their efforts to narrating traditions. but the wise to understanding them.’(2) In these hadith and other similar ones.(3) There are two points to be noted: The first is that Islam attaches the utmost importance to research and understanding of the truth and the avoidance of Taqlid in ideological matters. in ideological matters.

It is a religion that stresses the need for a full understanding of its precepts, and not its ill-understood and unconsidered transmission. In other words faith must be based on knowledge and understanding not blind devoutness.It is a religion that stresses the need for a full understanding of its precepts, and not its ill-understood and unconsidered transmission. In other words faith must be based on knowledge and understanding not blind devoutness.

The second point is the confidence shown by the leaders of Islam that this religion is fully compatible with the most stringent scientific and rational standards, to the extent that scholars, if they are fair-minded, they will conclude that Islam is the true religion: otherwise why would so much emphasis be placed on study and research?placed on study and research?

principle religious convictions are opposed to science and vice versa. They therefore. think that in every society where science flourishes there is no room for religion, and wherever religion flourishes there can be no room for science to grow and develop.for science to grow and develop.

Let us see what Islam has to say on this subject.Let us see what Islam has to say on this subject.

In the Islamic view, there is an inseparable link between science and faith: faith is seen in principle, as the fruit of science, the scientist is a true believer, and a lack of faith stems from ignorance! See how profoundly and beautifully the Quran expounds this truth: ignorance! See how profoundly and beautifully the Quran expounds this truth:

'Those to whom knowledge has been given can clearly see that what your lord has revealed to you is the truth.' (34:6).'Those to whom knowledge has been given can clearly see that what your lord has revealed to you is the truth.' (34:6).

'... So that those to whom knowledge has been given may know that this Quran is the truth revealed by your Lord and thus believe in it.' (22:54).

We may note that these verses clearly and explicitly state that there is a relationship and inseparable link between science and faith, and that scholars and scientists undoubtedly understand the truth of Islam. In other words, when ignorance is eradicated from human society) Islam will embrace the whole world because it is a scientific and logical religion

p: 45

with rational standards.world because it is a scientific and logical religion with rational standards.

In other words, these verses teach us that a person cannot be a scientist or have reached- a state of true knowledge and understanding without being a firm believer in Islam. To be sure, the possibility exists that. a person may think of himself as a scientist and having acquired an understanding of the truth, yet not be a believer. Pseudo-science certainly is compatible with a lack of faith, but real science is necessarily accompanied by faith, since science and faith, as these two verses tell us, are inseparable. In the Islamic view, science and faith are like a pair of Seamese twins, born together and die together.

Now see what a beautiful expression Imam; 'Ali has left us. inspired by the Quran'.Now see what a beautiful expression Imam; 'Ali has left us. inspired by the Quran'.

'Faith and science are like twin brothers or inseparable companions.’(1)62

'Ali is saying in other words that just as if a person comes across one of a pair of Seamese twins or a pair of inseparable companions he really has visited and recognized the other. If a person reaches a high degree of knowledge he will also have reached a high degree of faith. and if a person acquires faith. he will also hate attained knowledge and understanding of the truth.degree of knowledge he will also have reached a high degree of faith. and if a person acquires faith. he will also hate

p: 46

attained knowledge and understanding of the truth.

In this connection an interesting hadith of the prophet has been recorded that explains the link between science and faith in a different way: 'Knowledge is the very life-force of Islam and the pillar of faith.(1)63

This hadith compares the link between science and faith to two things: the relationship between body and soul, and that of between a pillar and the ceiling it supports.This hadith compares the link between science and faith to two things: the relationship between body and soul, and that of between a pillar and the ceiling it supports.

If a body lacks life or soul it is incapable of movement or growth. and a ceiling without a pillar to support it cannot remain in its position for a single moment. Islam likewise has such inseparable links with science and knowledge: bon from and approved by knowledge, Islam can’ only thrive and develop in a scientific environment.scientific environment.

branches of science and knowledge their direction. validity and worth.

This brief answer will be more fully explained in the discussion of the Nobovat khasa (proper prophet hood) in a later chapter, accompanied by a commentary on the Quranic verses quoted at the start of this section. 1-The relationship between ignorance and Kufr

Next we will discuss the third aspect of our present topic, namely the relationship between ignorance and Kufr. Is the relationship between ignorance and kufr the same as that between science and faith. and is every: kafir an ignorant? Or do ignorance and kufr have a different mutual relationship? have a different mutual relationship?

The faith of the matter is that the relationship between ignorance and Kufr is not like that between science and faith. i.e. ignorance and Kufr are not linked or twinned inseparably together. since it is possible for someone to be ignorant without being a Kafir and it is also possible for a person to be a Kafir without being ignorant. without being ignorant.

To explain this brief statement more fully two introductory discussions are necessary: first what do we mean by Kufr and Kafir? and second, what are the practical positions a person can adopt in relation to facts which are either known or unknown to him?? and second, what are the practical positions a person can adopt in relation to facts which are either known or unknown to him?

which conceals something else, is termed a Kafir. Concealment is of two kinds literal and metaphorical putting a seed in the ground is an example of the first kind and hiding the truth by means of falsehood or vice versa, is an example of the second kind.(1)64

So if a person states something which is contrary to his knowledge and belief his action is a form of Kufr and he himself is termed a Kafir..

Someone who knows the truth and claims not to know it, is a Kafir, and so is someone who does not know the truth, but claims to do so. since the first person is concealing his knowledge and the second his ignorance: whereas someone who does not know the truth and admits that he does not, is not a Kafir but merely ignorant.but merely ignorant.

person who knows the truth and states that he knows it, is a person of knowledge and faith. A person who knows the truth and states that he does not know it is a person of knowledge and a kafir because he is concealing his knowledge. A person who does not know the truth yet claims to do so is a person of ignorance and a kafir. And finally a person who does not know the truth and does not claim to do so is ignorant but not a kafir..

In his attitude towards the truths of existence a person may therefore be knowledgeable and a believer, knowledgeable and a kafir, ignorant and a kafir or ignorant but not a kafir..

Form these explanations it is obvious that in the case of ignorance and kufr there is no such link as that between knowledge and faith. In the language of the logicians between ignorance and kufr, there is a relationship known as partial overlapping i.e. a person may be a kafir but not ignorant, or he may be ignorant but not a kafir. or he may be both ignorant and a kafir..

denies.(1)66

This category includes such people as Pharaoh and his followers. According to the Quran. despite the fact that Moses had provided clear proofs of the existence of the Creator of the Universe and his own prophetic mission. the truth of which they fully realized. they were unable to acknowledge this truth because of their egotistical, ambitious, cruel and criminal character, which caused them to denounce Moses and deny God. As the Quran tells it:As the Quran tells it:

`In their wickedness and pride (Pharaoh and his followers) denied (God's undoubted signs), although their souls knew them to be true.' (27:14).their souls knew them to be true.' (27:14).

As a result of the clear proofs and powerful logic that Moses gave them. and the miracles he performed in their presence, they were convinced that Moses was telling the truth and that the God of whom he spoke. whose prophet be claimed to be and who' summoned the people to worship, was the creator of the world and all therein. But despite this inner certainty they denied the signs of God, denounced Moses, and called his God a fable. Why did they do this?the creator of the world and all therein. But despite this inner certainty they denied the signs of God, denounced Moses, and called his God a fable. Why did they do this?

The Quran provides us with the answer. The reason for this denial was their wickedness and the desire to be superior. They knew that if they acknowledged the truth

p: 51

of Moses and the God of whom Moses claimed to be the prophet they would have to put an end to their wickedness and wrong-doing, and their pride and ambition. And since they were loath to do so they concealed their knowledge, covered the face of truth with the veil of kufr, and denied the signs of God.(1)67

This concludes our examination of the case where kufr exists but without ignorance, or the case of the kafir who knows. Now for the second case. who knows. Now for the second case.

ignorant person of this type is therefore not a kafir, although at the same time he is not a believer either., although at the same time he is not a believer either.

One of Imam Sadeq's followers, a certain Muhammad bin Muslim relates that one day when he was sitting on the Imam's left side and Zurara was sitting on his right Abu Basir entered and asked: "What is your opinion about someone who has doubts about the existence of God?" entered and asked: "What is your opinion about someone who has doubts about the existence of God?"

The Imam replied: "Such a person is a kafir." A few moments later, to amplify his answer, the Imam added: "Verily, he is a kafir if he denies the existence of God.(1)69

That is to say that if a person, has doubts about the existence of God but does not actually deny His existence he is not a kafir. A kafir is someone who although he has doubts and cannot produce any proofs that God does not exist nevertheless denies His existence. is someone who although he has doubts and cannot produce any proofs that God does not exist nevertheless denies His existence.

Regarding the question of whether or not an ignorant person who does not claim knowledge is a kafir or not there is another hadith, this time from the Imam 'Ali which raises an interesting point. The text of this hadith is as follows: 'If people who do not know about something refrain from

p: 53

commenting on it they will not be committing kufr nor straying from the true path'.(1)70

What is of special interest in this hadith is that according to the Imam if ignorant people refrain from commenting on truths of which they are not aware, they will avoid not only being afflicted by the disease of kufr, but also going astray, that is to say an ignorant person who pauses and refrains from comment will gradually be drawn towards enquiring and investigation to discover the truth. Once he has entered the path of enquiring, with the goal of discovering the truth, he will be saved from error and deviation in his beliefs and will ultimately, through divine grace, discover the truth.discovering the truth, he will be saved from error and deviation in his beliefs and will ultimately, through divine grace, discover the truth.

In other words it seems that the Imam is implying that the root-cause of ideological error and deviation is comments made by ignorant and non-specialist persons, and that if such people refrained from expressing their opinions on matters they are ignorant of kufr and deviation would be eradicated from human society. and deviation would be eradicated from human society.

is ignorant of. In the discussion which we will later have about understanding God we will see that people who deny the existence of God assuming that their reasoning is sound, can at the very most prove that man has no way of knowing the metaphysical world, that is to say he is not able to understand whether or not anything exists beyond the world which we know from the evidence of our senses.existence of God assuming that their reasoning is sound, can at the very most prove that man has no way of knowing the metaphysical world, that is to say he is not able to understand whether or not anything exists beyond the world which we know from the evidence of our senses.

If such people confess their ignorance, they are not committing kufr. But so often they not only refrain from making such a confession but even claim to reap scientific results from their ignorance! They use their lack of knowledge as the basis of their theories about the metaphysical and transcendental world and claim that nothing exists beyond the world of our senses!. But so often they not only refrain from making such a confession but even claim to reap scientific results from their ignorance! They use their lack of knowledge as the basis of their theories about the metaphysical and transcendental world and claim that nothing exists beyond the world of our senses!

This is the true meeting-place of ignorance and kufr, that is to say that

p: 55

such people conceal their ignorance with scientific claims., that is to say that such people conceal their ignorance with scientific claims.

In concluding this chapter we must have two important questions.

The first is whether the result of research in all cases leads to truth and an understanding of reality? In other words does the researcher always arrive at an understanding of what he is searching for? Or is it possible that a person could carry out his research and not reach a conclusion, or perhaps imagine that he has reached a real understanding when in fact has not done so?searching for? Or is it possible that a person could carry out his research and not reach a conclusion, or perhaps imagine that he has reached a real understanding when in fact has not done so?

The second question is whether the criteria for understanding the correctness of a theory or opinion actually exist or not?The second question is whether the criteria for understanding the correctness of a theory or opinion actually exist or not?

The answer to the first question is that there are obstacles to and conditions affecting understanding. and if the researcher can eliminate these and create conditions conducive to understanding then he wilt undoubtedly reach a conclusion. The obstacles and conditions will be discussed in the second book of the present work, and the second question will be deal with in the chapter that now follows.The answer to the first question is that there are obstacles to and conditions affecting

p: 56

understanding. and if the researcher can eliminate these and create conditions conducive to understanding then he wilt undoubtedly reach a conclusion. The obstacles and conditions will be discussed in the second book of the present work, and the second question will be deal with in the chapter that now follows.The answer to the first question is that there are obstacles to and conditions affecting understanding. and if the researcher can eliminate these and create conditions conducive to understanding then he wilt undoubtedly reach a conclusion. The obstacles and conditions will be discussed in the second book of the present work, and the second question will be deal with in the chapter that now follows.The answer to the first question is that there are obstacles to and conditions affecting understanding. and if the researcher can eliminate these and create conditions conducive to understanding then he wilt undoubtedly reach a conclusion. The obstacles and conditions will be discussed in the second book of the present work, and the second question will be deal with in the chapter that now follows.

in Islamic texts, which has apparently hitherto not been discussed and analyzed.

This guidance includes some of the most important points that a person-regardless of what ideology or religion he may have provided only that he really approaches ideological discussions with insight and a realistic outlook-must certainly examine. Then if he follows the advice given he can be confident of the results of his research and enquiry.

Before embarking on a discussion of Islamic guidance regarding correction of belief, however, we must first mention some of the most precarious ideological disease of all, namely self- delusion of knowledgeability.

not know something and is not aware that he does not know it, that is to say he has no knowledge of his ignorance. He does not know, but he thinks he knows, such a person may be termed a "compound ignoramus"(1). To summarize, with regard to understanding a person may be aware, unaware, a simple ignoramus or a compound ignoramus.

To explain matters further we may say that the difference between simple and compound ignorance is that the former consists of ignorance unadulterated by any other form of ignorance such as not knowing way in a given location, not recognizing a certain person, not understanding a certain scientific and so on; while the latter consists of two separate kinds of ignorance that are specifically related to each other.(2) The first form of ignorance is that the person does not know something, which is simple ignorance, but the second is that he thinks his ignorance is a form of knowledge which is a different kind of ignorance, related to the first kind and known as compound ignorance.

For example, if a person does not know the direction he is going, but thinks he does, two forms of ignorance are compounded in him, the first not knowing the way, the second thinking that he does. Thinking that he knows is another form of ignorance which when compounded with the first form becomes what is termed compound ignorance.

So, if an ignorant person thinks he is knowledgeable indeed he is a compound ignorant, and compound

p: 59

ignorance is the same as the disease of imaginary knowledge or delusion of knowledgeability.

and so on. And since no-one will admit to the possibility that what he considers to be correct might be incorrect, no-one permits himself to carry out an enquiry.

In the hadith just quoted Imam Sadeq considers such dogmatic thinking to be a kind of universal ideological sickness, and as long as a person remains afflicted by this disease there is no hope of him being able to correct his beliefs and choose a true religion.

to be correct and those of the others to be wrong.

In fact, a brief study of the conduct of all aspirants to power shows that all they are really interested in is their personal advancement, and what they put forward as their political beliefs is really nothing other than an excuse and a bridge to reach to their goal of power and control. For this reason the Imam, calls the beliefs and policies of such ambitious people the 'passion for self-advancement.

so he is destined to flounder forever in the log of compound ignorance.

The person who knows (and who knows that he knows) to celestial spheres on his thoroughbred goes, The person who knows not (yet knows that he knows not) however on his lame little donkey may trot. But the person who knows not (and knows not he knows not) thread forever in ignorance, that is his lot!

B.C.), the founder of logic.

'The source and basis of Aristotle's achievement in discovering how to acquire knowledge, were the ideas of Socrates and Plan, but his extremely precise mind was not satisfied with the Socratic method of argument, and he did not consider Platonic ideas on the origin of knowledge and the path to wisdom to be entirely realistic.

While rejecting the false logic and disputes of the sophists and polemicist he laid the foundations of his philosophy on discovering the correct rules for recovering and extracting the truth, and following in the footsteps of Plato and Socrates he acquired the principles of logic and the rules of analogy. The foundations Aristotle built on were so firmly laid that no-one since him has added a single thing.(1)

In the language of the logicians, 'logic is a tool consisting of rules and laws the use of which preserves the mind from erroneous thinking.

From the time of Bacon (1560-1625) and Descartes (1596-1650) European philosophers began to realize that Aristotelian logic was inadequate to prevent errors of thought. Descartes was convinced that: "The rules of logic' however correct and firm they may be, cannot make the unknown known, and their real use is in knowing expressions and acquiring the skills of understanding and explaining, since proof consists of deducing conclusions from preliminary data. So if the data is not known there can be no conclusions, for with the rules of logic alone knowledge cannot be acquired, and if correct data is available the conclusion

p: 64

will follow accordingly.

“Man's judgment by its very nature, applies the rules of logic, and does not need all the discussions and disputes of the logicians. And if the available data is wrong, the conclusion drawn must inevitably be wrong too, and instead of knowledge error will result. For this reason those who have sought knowledge, even knowing the rules of logic well, have made many errors.

In his clear explanation Descartes, and also Francis Bacon in his "new Organ"(1) claim to have invented a new kind of logic. The French philosopher and the English scientist tried to show that

Aristotle an logic is not a means of discovering the unknown, and the importance given to this logic by the scholastics did not justify their devoting the major part of their time to its study and use.(2)

Bacon and Descartes were aware that reasoning could be proving to error from two sources:

a) the raw data which the mind assumes to be self-evident and takes as the basis of its reasoning, and treats as the bricks and matter of its argument.

b) the shape, form, order and arrangement which the mind gives to these raw materials.

Testing for errors by Aristotelian logic relates to the form of the reasoning process and for this reason this logic is called 'formal logic'. It makes no provision for testing for errors in the substance and basis on which the reasoning in question depends, whereas what really matter as far as preventing errors of thought and correcting beliefs are concerned is

p: 65

the validification of the substance, because man's intuitive judgment can apply the rules of logic even without knowing the technical terms for them.

The new logic which Bacon proposed for the validification of substantive matter to which reasoning is applied consisted of avoiding obstacles to the discovery of truth, which he defines as tribal, personal, commercial and showing idols:

"Man is faced with a number of difficulties in his search for knowledge, which he must try to avoid. The most serious of these are the errors which affect his judgment. Since these errors can cause a person to stray from the true path Bacon refers to them as "idols" and divide them into four categories.

'The first category consists of "tribal idols", that is to say errors which emanate from the characteristics of man. Own nature since just as in a distorting mirror rays of light are refracted in an abnormal way so as to produce ugly and unnatural images. So too perceptions and rational ideas can be distorted and deformed by man's mind.

For example, when a dream and reality happen to coincide he may take this as a point of reference, but this shill not happen a hundred times. He will not remember, however, and will remain firmly attached in the most bigoted way to the beliefs he has chosen, and will tend to lose his impartiality and base his conclusion on emotions and personal whims.

Pride and conceit fear and lust will totally affect his judgment. A person's serves

p: 66

which are the source of his knowledge, are defective and prone to error ensuring that he will not be prepared to correct his errors through reflection and contemplation. He judges by appearances without delving fully into matters.

The second category is personal idols, in other words errors which affect people because of their individual natures, such as the fact that everyone has their pet interest in which they base their beliefs, like Aristotle who was- obsessed by logic and based his entire philosophy on it. Some people's minds are attracted towards similarities and generalizations; others see differences and particularities everywhere. Some people are by nature prone to dogma, others to doubt and uncertainty, to the extent that they may even become complete skeptics.

Bacon’s third category is "commercial idols", that is to say errors which occur from transactions among people as a result of deficiencies in the words and expressions used to convey their meanings such as "luck", "chance" and "destiny".

The fourth category is "apparent idols", by which Bacon means errors caused by the erroneous teachings of philosophers…(1)

Descartes also proposed principles and rules to prevent erroneous thinking and guarantee that the substantive matter forming the basis of philosophic nations is correct. The first of these principles is:

'I will not hold any proposition to be true unless it is self-evident to me, and in my validification of it I will avoid hasty or preconceived judgment, and personal inclination, not accepting its truth unless it is so obvious and distinct that I have no

p: 67

doubt whatsoever about it."(1)

been conclusively proved, to them they should not adopt it as true. The Quran explicitly states:

'Do not follow what you do not have knowledge of. (17:36).

That is to say according to the Quran, a Muslim does not have the right to follow something or adopt it as a basis for action unless it has been conclusively proved to his satisfaction.

The Quran criticizes people with false opinions and beliefs for saying something which is not clearly defined and known to them:

'You open your mouth to speak that which you have no knowledge or. (24:15).

The Quran criticize those who deny life after death on the grounds that they have no reason for such a denial, and their opinion is based not on scientific knowledge but purely on speculation and conjecture:

'They say, "There is this life on earth and no other. We die, and others are born. Nothing destroys us except time." But they have no knowledge. of this, and what they say is mere conjecture.' (45:24).

The objection of the Quran to those who consider creation to be purposeless and futile is that the basis of their belief is not scientific and that if they take a little trouble they will realize that they have no knowledge of what they believe, and that their beliefs are in fact the result of mere speculation and conjecture:

'We did not create the heavens and the earth and all that lies between them in vain: such is the supposition of the unbelievers.'

p: 69

(38:27).

If we investigate and analyze the conflicting opinions and views of people in various societies we see clearly that most of them lack any scientific basis and originate from speculation and 'conjecture. People everywhere, in older times and today, follow their fancies in questions of ideology, particularly with regard to ideological principles. This is why the Quran explicitly states that anyone who follows the majority will be led astray:

'If you follow the majority of people in the world you will astray from the path of God, because they follow nothing, but idle speculation and guess.' (6:116).

If one day the followers of all religious and devotees of every different persuasion decide to follow nothing but scientific knowledge and not believe anything until it was completely and clearly known to them the problem of religious and ideological differences would largely be solved.

Imam Sadeq is reported as saying: 'God provided his servants with two Quranic verses, one to the effect that until they have acquired knowledge of a thing they should not accept it as true, nor should they express an opinion about something that they do not understand, the other that they should not deny something they do not understand. God's words in the first verse are: 'Is it not incumbent upon them according to... the to ascribe nothing to God except what is true?' (7:169). The second verse states: Verily they disbelieve what they cannot understand.' (10:39).(1)

inclinations, which if not greater than the first is certainly no less.

When a person loves or is attached to a thing his feelings blind his reason and prevent him from thinking properly, so that he cannot see or understand the weak points of his beloved. Hatred has the same effect.

If someone wants to see the weak and strong points of a theory and think correctly about it he must therefore free himself from personal inclinations, for unless he does so they cannot help affecting his judgment.

There is a well-known story of Allama Hilli,(1) a learned jurisprudent, when he was preparing to issue a fatwah on whether a contaminated well could be purified or not First gave order that the well of his own house should be filled in. Then he sat down to study the legal precedents. The fatwah he finally issued was to the effect that the polluted well could he purified by following the instructions given by earlier authorities.

The learned judge realized that unless his own well was filled in it might be that any potential loss to him might subconsciously affect his judgment. It is an undeniable fact that until a person has filled in the well of his own inclinations and interests and freed his mind of all desire and fancy he cannot correctly perceive the truth as he should, or express an unbiased opinion on a matter.

This is why more the mind of a researcher is cleansed of personal inclination the closer he will approach

p: 71

the truth of a matter. In the words of Imam Ali: ‘The wisest opinion is the one, which is the furthest from personal inclination'.(1) Or in another version: 'The best of opinions is the one furthest from personal inclination'.(2)

Zeid bin Sowhan, one of the followers of the commander of the Faithful, once asked him whose opinion was the most realistic and constant. The Imam replied:

'The person who is not deceived by suggestions of the multitude nor by the vanities of this world'.(3)

himself before Adam. When God asked the Devil why he refused to do so he replied frankly: 'Because I am from of fire and Adam is born of earth!'

who they might be, or of what political party or group they arc from, whether their cultural background is like ours or not, whether they are Muslims or not, and even whether they are your friends or enemies.

How beautifully and clearly the Quran expresses this:

'Give good news to those of my servants who hear to what is said and follow the best of it. They are those whom God has rightly guided, and they are those of understanding' (39:18).

In other words, people of understanding and those who follow the precepts of God and the Quran and Islam are those who listen to the words of all manner of men, arid after due analysis and study adopt only what is correct, exact and beneficial.

Inspired by this Quranic verse there is a hadith ascribed in the Kanz al-Ummal to the prophet of Islam and in the Ghurar al-Hikam to the Commander of the Faithful that explicitly states:

'Do not regard, who has spoken but what is spoken'.(1)

In another beautiful expression dealing with the same subject the prophet of God Jesus says:

'Accept true words even from the unrighteous, but do not accept untruths even from the righteous. And subject all you hear to criticism.’(2)

In other words, fanaticism must not lead a Muslim to reject the truth if it is presented by others purely on the grounds that they are flit Muslims and their beliefs are wrong, or to accept what is wrong from people out of fanaticism because they are his co-religionists. The

p: 74

duty of a Muslim is to subject the words of any speaker, regardless of his overall ideological orientation, to

rigorous criticism and study, and if what he says is true to accept it, even though he may be unrighteous, and equally if what a person says is wrong not to accept it even if he is righteous. In either case the yardstick should be the truth, not the speaker, and Islam is nothing other than submission to the truth, and it is for this reason that the prophet of Islam said that fanaticism is incompatible with being a Muslim.

'A person who, practices fanaticism or allows it to be practiced, has loosed the collar of taith-Islam-from his neck'.(1)

induces a person to disregard the massage and consider only the person delivering it.

The guidance of Islam as regards the correction of belief is to break this chain. What is strange is that there are so few people who are not so fettered. And even stranger is the number of scholars who imagine themselves to be independent thinkers.

own opinion stands in grave danger'.(1) In another hadith Imam 'Ali says that a person who contents himself with his own opinion and disregards that of others lacks discommend: ‘The person who relies only on his own opinion has no opinion.'(2)

truth, and without which he cannot be confident of the results of his research, consist of the following:

1- Avoidance of haste

2- Experience

3- Concentration

4- Stimulating the mind

5- Exchange of views

6- Divine assistance

These will now be discussed:

the truth it will be by chance. For this reason the Commander of the Faithful at a critical juncture shortly before his death advised his son, Imam Hasan, to avoid haste in words or deeds: 'I forbid you to act hastily in speech or action'.(1)

comes to use them he will do things correctly.(1)

The role of experience in ensuring that one's views arc realistic and correct is so great that Imam 'AIi, although we consider him to be immune from sin or error, has some verses ascribed to him which have already been quoted.36 in which after describing himself as an expert in theoretical problems and intellectual matters, he says that relies on his experience in expounding his views: "I use analogy and knowledge vast". 'And often read the future in the past.(2)

In this couplet, Imam All tells us that he relies on his extensive experience to reach his judgment and emphasizes that he is not a person to accept the opinions of others unquestioningly, but rather draws on his knowledge of the past and the use of analogy to foresee what the future holds in store.

the hadith is as follows: 'There are five conditions the lack of any one of which will cause a person to have an inadequate life, a mind that wastes away, and a troubled heart. The first is good physical health, the second, security, the third, sufficient sustenance, the fourth, congenial companions, the fifth-which is the compendium of all these conditions-tranquility.'(1)

We may note that in this tradition the Imam first mentions those conditions each of which plays a vital role in the attainment of a fulfilled life, a healthy mind and a tranquil spirit. It is these conditions that are conducive to concentration, and if they are absent a person will be unable to concentrate properly. The Imam then describes each of them.

the Imam for the attainment of tranquility and the proper functioning of the intellect and hence fulfillment of life is that a person should have adequate sustenance.

If he is impoverished and his mind permanently concerned with where his next meal will come from he obviously cannot be listed among the leading thinkers and his opinions and beliefs will lack scientific value. This is why Imam 'Ali is reported to have spoken the following words on the subject of poverty. “Verily poverty begets forgetfulness of the soul and anxiety of the mind, and attracts cares and griefs of every kind”.(1)

In another tradition, Imam 'Ali tells his son Imam Hasan that a person afflicted by poverty suffers from four related factors: 'Uncertainty, diminishment of mental power, fragility religion and a lack of modesty.’(2)

the Imam's words which we must not overlook is that this condition is inclusive of the other conditions listed, that is to say tranquility of the soul can fill any voids caused by absence of the other conditions health, social security, adequate sustenance, congenial companions.

In other words the fact that plays the most important role in the fulfillment of life and a healthy mind and mental contentment is inner peace, and the four conditions mentioned are preliminaries to the attainment of tranquility of soul. Therefore if a person by training his soul can attain to a high degree of spirituality, certitude and tranquility, so that neither sickness nor insecurity poverty nor lack of congenial companionship can deprive him of such inner peace he will have acquired the key to mental concentration, sound judgment and fulfillment.

In short, the other conditions for achieving mental concentration all require tranquility of soul, but such tranquility may he achieved without them. We may therefore summarize the words of the Imam as follows: First, health, security, adequate sustenance and congenial companionship each play a fundamental role in acquiring peace of mind, mental concentration and fulfillment of life, provided they are accompanied by tranquility of soul.

Secondly, tranquility of soul in highly spiritual persons may often take the place of the other conditions. To put it in a nutshell, we may say that a basic condition for mental concentration is tranquility of soul.

researcher's mind other, than the matter he is researching, is an obstacle to mental concentration and a hindrance to correct judgment. This is why in a number of Islamic traditions it is recommended that a judge while deliberating and giving his opinion should not be angry, sleepy, hungry or thirsty, because all of these conditions are obstacles to mental concentration.

The Prophet of Islam is reported to have forbidden a judge to give judgment while he is angry, hungry or thirsty.(1) and in another hadith he is quoted as saying that he should not decide a case between two parties, unless he is free from hunger and thirst,(2) Imam 'Ali advised a judge named Shoraih never to sit in judgment unless he had eaten.(3)

With a little thought, it becomes obvious that anyone who expresses his opinion about a matter should follow the advice contained in these traditions, if he is to achieve mental concentration and ensure that his opinion is close to reality. For in this case there is no difference between a judge and a layman, and in fact anyone who expresses an opinion about a matter has made a judgment, even if he is not a professional judge.

Imam Sadeq is reported to have said that one day a group of children who were learning to write brought what they had written to the Commander of the Faithful for him to decide who’s was the best. The Imam said: But verily this is an arbitration and a wrong decision in

p: 84

this is like a miscarriage of justice.'(1)

In other words giving an opinion as to who writes best is a kind of judgment and if the rights of one child are ignored it is as if the rights of a litigant in a real court were abused.

So a person wanting to express his opinion must shun all obstacles to mental concentration if he is avoid error, and in this, there is no difference between a judge and a layman, who makes judgments.

Another point concerning the traditions quoted is that there is no difference between hunger, thirst, anger and sleepiness and other obstacles to concentration such as extreme cold or heat tight-fitting garments or footwear, pressure of the bladder or howl, or any other factor that distracts the mind and presents a person, from thinking clearly.

Ab al-As relates that Imam 'Ali was once asked a question by a man outside his house. The Imam entered his house without replying and shortly afterwards came out and asked where the man with the question was. The man was still there and said' Here I am.' The Imam told him to repeat his question which he did, and proceeded to answer it.

One of those present who had observed the speed with which the Imam was wanted to reply to all sorts of questions on many different occasions was surprised that this time he had not given an immediate answer. So said to the Imam: 'Commander of the faithful, as I have often seen you are

p: 85

like a fire brand in dealing with questions, so how is it that today you delayed answering, this man until you had gone into your house come out again?

The Imam replied: 'This time I was surprising the urge to urinate, Tree kinds of people have no worthwhile opinion: Those who are suppressing the urge to urinate and those, whose shoes are too tight. '(1)

various people provided it is conducted in a spirit free from prejudice will naturally bring to light all their strong and weak points, truths and errors. A person

who allows himself to study and scrutinize the views and beliefs of others provided he adopts a scholarly approach will easily come to see which is correct and which false.

In the words of Imam 'Ali: 'Anyone who encounters with various aspects of the views, can tell which are right and which are false.(1) By contrast, a person who does not allow himself to consider the views of others and by relying solely on his own mind expresses a hurried opinion will, as the Imam says, he prone to horrible errors: 'He who is unfamiliar with the views of others will be tired out by mental effort'.(2)

"Obviously, great discoveries are not the product of intelligence alone. Men of genius, in addition to their powers of observation and comprehension, possess other qualities, such as intuition and creative imagination. Through intuition they learn things ignored by other men, they perceive relations between seemingly isolated phenomena they unconsciously feel the presence of the unknown treasure. All great men are endowed with intuition. They know, without analysis, without reasoning, what is important for them to know.

A true leader of men does not need psychological tests, or reference cards, when choosing his subordinates. A good judge, without going into the details of legal arguments, and even, according to Cardozo, starting from erroneous premises, is capable of rendering a just sentence. A great scientist instinctively takes the path leading to a discovery. This phenomenon, in former times, was called inspiration.

Men of science belong to two different types: the logical and the intuitive. Science owes its progress to both forms of minds. Mathematics, although a purely logical structure, nevertheless makes use of intuition. Among the mathematicians there are intuitive and logicians, analysts and geometricians. Hermitte and Weierstrass were intuitive, Riemann and Bertrand, logicians. The discoveries of intuition have always to be developed by logic.

In ordinary life, as in science; intuition is a powerful but dangerous means of acquiring knowledge. Sometimes it can hardly be distinguished from illusion. Those who rely upon it entirely are liable to mistakes. It is far from being always trustworthy. But the great man, or the simple

p: 88

whose heart is pure, can be led by it to the summits of mental and spiritual life. It is a strange quality. To apprehend reality without the help of intelligence appears inexplicable."

The French mathematician Jacques Hadama confirms this opinion. As he says: If we consider the conditions in which discoveries and inventions take place we cannot ignore the effects of sudden inner perceptions. Every research scientist has to some extent had the feeling that his life and his profession are formed by a series of alternating activities, in some of which his determination and intelligence are the deciding factors, while the rest are the result of a series of inspirations.(1)

We can therefore say that the greater the degree of divine assistance and inspiration a scientist has the more correct will his opinions and theories be and the more scientific facts will be discover, and if divine assistance to a person is total all his theories and views will be free from error.

Materialists are unable to say what the source of illumination or inspiration is, but to those who believe in divinity the source of such assistance is Almighty God, who in His infinite wisdom secures His assistance to every person according to his merits. Prayer is one of the means for obtaining such merit and this is why Imam Zein ol-Abedin, the fourth Imam, beseeches God, and instructs us to do the same to help us so that when we express our views they are in accord with reality. 'O

p: 89

God! I seek refuge in thee from unadmitted prayer illusory hopes negated modesty failed reasoning and wrong judgment.(1)

of knowledge and interested in acquiring and utilizing information. He is humble towards men of learning, considers his own view suspect, practices silence. Is on his guard against error and is ashamed of he is wrong. If a proposition is put to him about whom he has no knowledge, he does not deny it, because he knows the extent of his ignorance.(1)124

The Imam’s comments refer in all to seven points that indicate a truly wise person, these are recognition of one’s own ignorance, an increasing thirst for knowledge, humility towards the learned, skepticism of one’s own judgment, helping silent, caution against error and not denying what one does not know.

Let us examine each of these points.

Thus, a person who has embarked on the quest for scientific facts and opinions will realize that his knowledge is so slight and insignificant when seen against his ignorance that it cannot be taken into account.

He therefore not only refuses to consider himself with the little knowledge he does not to be worthy of the little wise and learned, but on a detailed. Scientific and realistic evaluation of the case he numbers himself among the ignorant.

The wiser a person is the greater he feels the gap to be between what he knows and what he does not know. In other words, as the level of his knowledge increases the unknown he encounters increases proportionately.

A person who has no proper understanding of human being feels there is nothing he does not know about the subject. If you ask an illiterate person “What is a human being?’ he will reply: ‘That’s easy. A human being is a human being, and really that’s a silly question! ‘And if you ask him if there’s anything he does not know about human beings he will say ‘No, I think it’s quite clear what human beings are, and there’s no need to explain them!’

But if you ask someone, who has studied anthropology, the same question the more extensive or specialized his studies have been the less he will claim to know about this astonishing, complex and mysterious creature. The deeper he dives into the subject the more uncertainties he has about his knowledge.

For ignorant people

p: 92

humans are an open book, but a scientific research such as Professor Carel, who spent a life-time in anthropological research, condensed his knowledge in a book entitled ‘Man, the Unknown’.

For a real scientific it is not just man that is unknown every single creature and every single atom in the universe is complex, mysterious and unknown. A French scientific named Pilisti De Lamene is reported to have said: ‘If anyone can defined a grain of sand I will show him the Almighty.’

And it is not just a grain of sand but the atoms that it is composed of still remain to be properly defined. For does not science every day discover new mysterious about the atom? And does not this indicate that science is still in capable of fully understanding a particle of particles of the universe?

For the really wise person, as opposed to the person who thinks he is wise, the whole universe is therefore mysterious and complex and unknown, and the more he learns about it the more mysteries and complexities he becomes aware of, and hence the greater the number of question marks he is confronted with in his studies and the more aware he is of his own ignorance.

For this reason the greater a person's knowledge the less he finds that he knows! His knowledge is limited, but his ignorance is infinite. No number can quantify the gap, so, Imam 'Ali says the really wise person considers his knowledge to be so slight and insignificant that

p: 93

it is not worthy of consideration and therefore he numbers himself among the ignorant.

And this explains the meaning of the words ascribed to Socrates: ‘My knowledge has reached the point that I know I know nothing.’ In similar vein Avicenna describes his own intellectual achievements in the following verse: ‘Always asking and asking, but answer came there none splitting many a hair, but without knowing one.'

The fact that a truly learned person considers himself relatively speaking, ignorant is not confined to the likes of Socrates and Avicenna but as Imam 'Ali states this is one of the unconditional characteristics of the truly learned. Such persons are not exceptions: true learning means simply that.

We should note what the Imam says about his knowledge and then in comparing it with his ignorance. That great Imam, who could say: 'Ask me before it is too late and I am no longer with you’(1) and 'I have knowledge of the past and the future,’(2) that indescribably wise man, who could say: ' I have been to the depths of the ocean of secrete knowledge and have been so merged in it that if I appear as I am you are like a rope trembling in a deep well, losing your balance and shaking in your agitation' that great Imam, with his indescribably extensive and profound knowledge, which we do not even have the patience to hear about, considers his ignorance to be so great and his knowledge, in compares his own limited knowledge with

p: 94

the infinite wisdom of God Almighty he calls himself an ignorant!

In the prayer known as Yastashir(1), which Imam 'Ali tells us was taught to him by the Prophet of Islam with the advice that he should teach it to his successor and recite it every morning and every evening. God Almighty is addresses thus: ' Thou art All-knowing and I am ignorant, 'This is a precise scientific fact. 'Ali is not making a polite exaggerator and he is not overstating the case by a hair's breadth. What he says is the actual truth and not a lot more or less than the truth.

all the knowledge he may have of various sciences his ignorance will be sufficient to lead him astray and invalidate his views and beliefs.

Finally the bride got angry and said, Everything you keep telling me I already know.’

Her mother-in-law was well aware that she could not cook properly, but that her pride would not let her learn. To break this pride she said ‘And when you've done everything as I've said, and you've drained the rice, you must steam the rice with a sun-dried brick over the pot. ‘The bride said 'I know that too.’

The bride then did everything as her mother-in-law had told her and when she came to steam the rice she put a sundried brick on top of it. A few minutes later when she came to serve the rice she found the brick had dissolved in the steam and the rice was sludge of mud.

When we hear this story of a proud bride we laughter at her ignorance and perhaps do not believe the story. But if we think back at incidents in our life and reconsider certain views we have had find many similar incidents.

We recall stories of people who considers themselves the epitome of wisdom and express their opinion on every kind of subject, ideological, political, cultural economic and social, and many of them are like the story of this new bride, and their opinions are just like the way she cooked the rice.

his ignorance he will not suffer from intellectual pride and consider only his own knowledge as important. Instead, he will have a high regard for the research and knowledge of others and will show humility towards them because of their knowledge. By contrast, the illusion wise, men who consider themselves wiser that all other scholars, constantly belittle others in order to show themselves in a better light.

These self-deluded people assume that if they show humility towards a scholar their own scientific worth is somehow diminished. They think that if they pay their respects to other scholars this detracts them from their own status in people's eyes, for they claim that no-one is wiser than they are. They, therefore, find fault with every theory that any other scholars proposes, without basing their objections on valid criticism and research. Sometimes they even show their vanity for respecting knowledge and the learned- i.e. themselves.

When I was a theological student in Najaf a fellow-student suffered from this disease to such extent that he almost became insane. Things reached the stage where it was not possible to praise someone without his shouts of disapproval, coupled with lies in praise of himself, rending the atmosphere of the madrasa!(1)

regarding his the theories as scientific and in accord with reality until they have been conclusively prove.

How many times there have been some ideas or hypothesis which for centuries was considered as reality and the correctness of which was never doubted, until as science progressed they were found to be wrong. The Ptolemaic system is one such hypothesis, and in theoretical matters there have been many other similar cases.(1)

he did not know, so he looked him straight in the eye and said, ' Do not judge by the length of my beard and the crowd of people around me! Do not think that because I look like one of the ‘ulema and have a reputation for knowledge and many followers I know everything. No, I swear to God that I don't know the answer to your question'!

One of the senior members of the Qureish claim who was present and he had heard the conversation between Qasim and the man said to the latter, 'Don't let Qasim bin Muhammad get away with it. ‘Then he said to Qasim, 'I swear to God I've never seen you in such brilliant from as I’ve seen you here today.' Qasim replied. 'By God, I'd rather you cut my tongue out than force me to express an opinion on something I don't know.'(1)

Truly, a person who is not devoured by intellectual pride or afflicted by self-delusion is never prepared, to express an opinion about a matter that he is not knowledgeable about, and therefore instead of answering many of the questions put to him he keeps silent, and this is the reason for Imam ' Ali's profound remark, Saying “I don't know is half way to knowledge,'(2)

In his respect he differs from these who suffer from arrogance and self-delusion. Whatever you ask such people they reply without thinking twice. They are not only unscholarly, but sick, and, to use the words of Imam

p: 100

Sadeq, even mad: “The person who replies to every question that is put to him is mad.'(1)135

a matter does not imply that it does not exist. There are countless things about which man has no knowledge of, but they do exist.

Is it not a fact that a thousand years ago man was not aware of the circulation of the blood and the movement of atoms and hundreds of other scientific facts that are today known and proved? Does the fact that they were not know in the past imply that they did not exist or were not true he knows that most of the facts of life are matters about which man knows nothing.

The Commander of the faithful in further remarks dealing with characteristics of real men of learning as opposed to the seemingly wise is quoted as saying: ‘Regarding what you do not know do not express an opinion, for verily the truth lies mainly in what you deny.(1)

Although it is obvious, and every person of common sense knows that he is not entitled to deny something he has no knowledge of people who have fallen into the trap of intellectual pride and suffer from self-delusion do not seem to be aware of this, and believe the opposite to be true.

Further explanation of these points will be given in the discussion of the unscientific opinions that now follows.

imagine themselves to be wise and ignorant people who pretend to be wise, which are listed in the continuation of the words of Imam ‘Ali following his listing of the signs of the truly wise.

In this part of the Imam’s words we shall first discuss the text of the tradition and then examine separately each of the characteristics listed. The words of the Imam on the subject of ignorant people who pretend to be wise are as follows:

‘The truly ignorant person is he who considers himself knowledgeable in matters that he does not understand and confines himself to his own opinions, and thus alienates himself from the truly wise, whom he constantly criticizes, finding fault with all those to whom he is opposed and considering matters that he does not understand to be irrelevant or misleading. When matters are proposed to him that are beyond his knowledge he denies them and calls them lies, and in his ignorance he exclaims (in a tone that reveals his pride): “I don’t know that! I don’t think that is so!”

I don’t think that will result happen, whenever did such a thing happen before?!’Such remarks are the result of his believing his own opinions, and he little realizes how great his ignorance is. As a result of the false beliefs which have conquered his mind, and because of what he does not know, he is constantly increasing his ignorance and denying the truth. In his ignorance he acts stubbornly and his pride prevents him

p: 103

from acquiring knowledge.

On the basis of his tradition the signs of unscientific belief and of pseudo-scholars, like the signs of scientific belief, are seven in number. They are in fact the counter points of the first set of signs.

These signs may be summarized as follows: lack of awareness of one’s own ignorance, disregard for the opinions of others, alienation from person of learning, denigration one’s adversaries, denying unknown facts, stubbornness in scientific discussions and false pride preventing one from acquiring knowledge.

Let us examine each of these signs.

him.

So one of the ways of testing opinions and deciding whether they are scientific or not is to examine the person holding them to see whether or not he is afflicted with intellectual pride or self-delusion, whether he expresses opinion’s on things he does not know about, and finally to what extant he considers himself, wise.

‘If a person considers himself to be infinitely wise he is really infinitely stupid, and thus is the exact meaning of a hadith which both Shi’a and Sunni narrators tell of the Prophet: ‘If someone says he is learned he is ignorant.’(1)

The primary characteristic of the wise and perceptive is that they are free from all intellectual pride. Truly wise people realize from the first stages of learning that their knowledge is insignificant in comparison with that they do not know. It is therefore obvious that people suffering from intellectual pride and who think they are wise have not yet reached the first stage of knowledge. As the Commander of the faithful says: ‘A person who claims to have reached the stages of learning is manifesting the final stages of ignorance.’(2)

People of limited and shallow intellects who acquire a little knowledge, however slight that knowledge may be, acquiring with it intellectual pride and confuse their ignorance with the little learning that have, and therefore consider themselves to be infinitely wise!

There is a story of young man who wanted to be a student of theology. He began to read the Sharh Amsaleh (the first work of

p: 105

Arabic literature that theological students read). A few days later he memorized the 14 forms of the Arabic verb. The poor fool was of such limited intelligence that he thought that this little learning was like a great weight in his breast! He measured his breast with his hand and conjugated the verb ‘to beat’ and said to himself in great surprise. ‘How can my breast, only one or two spans wide, contain such vast knowledge?’

This is the story of all who are afflicted by intellectual pride. The student succumbed to the disease in the first few stage of study, while others succumb to it at other stages, sometimes years later.

A person who knows literature well and is an expert in this field imagines that he understands everything and can express his opinion on any subject. Another person might be a mathematician and think that mathematics is the epitome of knowledge and that he therefore has the right to air his views on any ideological and social matter.

Another person might be a jurisprudent, another well-versed in religions principles, another in philosophy and yet another in Quranic exegesis, and so on, and each person, whatever his specialized field of study, if he suffers from intellectual pride and is not aware how little his knowledge is in comparison with his ignorance, he may compare the two and conclude that since he is a specialist in a certain subject and his views are correct it is impossible for his views in other matters

p: 106

to be other than correct, and that therefore he is entitled to express his views on any subject under the sun. The captain replied he had not.

The grammarian said that in that case he had wasted half his life since someone who did not know grammar was condemned to a life of ignorance and if he wanted to make the second half of his life profitable he should certainly devote his time to the study of grammar.

The captain racked his brains, but could not think of a suitable answer to give this proud scholar. Soon after, a storm arose: the ship was pounded by mountainous waves and fling hither and thither until it was about to sink. The captain glanced at the grammarian and seeing he was in a great fright, decided the time was ripe to give him a suitable reply. So he said to him: ‘Professor, do you know how to swim?’

The grammarian said he did not. The captain said, you’ve wasted your entire life then, since now swimming is your only hope of being saved.’

Scholars like this grammarian who are subject to intellectual pride are all too common, especially in ideology matters. Without studying or on the basis of a little superficial study they consider themselves to be expert jurisprudents, and express their views on such matters without considering what their own field of study is.

be found right here that is, in the opinions displayed by unqualified people. An ignorant person who considers himself to be a man of learning expresses an opinion, and other ignorant people, without giving a thought to what that person’s qualifications are but just considering him to be wise, adopt his op0inion. As a result contrary beliefs and ideologies become prevalent.

‘In this connection there is a tradition of Imam ’Ali’s which without exaggeration we can say is a miracle of thought. It goes thus: ‘If the ignorant would hold their tongues, there would be no differences of opinion among people.’(1)

In truth, if people, who do not know about a subject refrain from expressing the opinion on it, and no scholar air his views on matters outside his field of specialization, all the differences of opinion and belief that divide society would disappear, and people’s minds would converge at a common point.

If in the Bazaar, theological colleges and universities ignorant people would keep quiet: if in politics, economics and sociology non-specialists would say nothing, if in matters of philosophy, jurisprudence, religious principles and Quranic exegesis unqualified people refrained from airing their views, and if in matters of ideology such people held their peace, the differences of opinion would be eradicated from human society.

If we look at the world as it is today and as it has been throughout history, with dozens of different schools of thought, and hundreds of different opinions and thousands of different ideas and viewpoints, we see that

p: 108

anyone who can gather a few supporters for his ideas considers himself and ideologue and the leader of an organization or group with its particular ideology and beliefs. If we trace the origins of all these differences we arrive at the root stated by Imam ‘Ali, that is to say the expression of opinions by ignorant and unqualified people.

If experts in various fields were to make the decision not to express their opinion until such time as a particular matter were conclusively proved and not to call unproven hypotheses scientific theories, then differences of opinion would undoubtedly be eradicated from society and all ideas relating to the facts of existence would converge at a common point, since there is only one truth and there cannot be more than one. Out of all these contradictory theories, opposing ideologies and conflicting opinions inevitably one is correct and scientific and in accord with realty and the rest are incorrect, unscientific and not in accord with realty. It is not possible for you and me and a third party all to be right if our theories are at odds with each other and each of us has his own particular view.

he studies the views and opinions of others or whether he believes that everything he says is right and everything others say is wrong.

A person afflicted with the disease of self-delusion considers himself to be the epitome of wisdom and therefore sees no need to study the opinions of others. But a person who does not suffers from this disease and knows that his knowledge is limited and his ignorance infinite admits to the possibility that others may have a correct understanding of ------------------------------ --------------himself to his own opinion but ----------------------- [Part unreadable in the printed text]

In another tradition the Imam says: ‘Only an ignorant person admires his own opinion.’(1)

be subjected to scrutiny.

He proclaims his theories about origins of life or life after death, or about economics, or politics, or social justice, or about how the country should be run or other matters, and thinks that his theories are the only correct ones, what he says or what his party or group or organization says is right, and what others say is wrong. If his views or those of his organization or group are not generally accepted, he withdraws from society and criticized and cavils from a distance, and if he can, he even imposes his unscientific theories on society by force of arms!(1)

This is what the counter-revolutionary groups of our society did, and recently the leaders of the treacherous Tudeh Party have confessed to this.

he denies them and calls them lies, and in his ignorance he exclaims (in a tone that reveals his pride): “I don’t know that’ I don’t think that is so! I don’t think that will happen. When ever did such a thing happen before?!’

Such remarks are the result of his believing his own opinions; he little realizes how great his ignorance is. In other tradition the Imam is reported as saying: ‘Do not reject everything that people say, for such a course is sufficient to prove your ignorance.’(1)

For example, if a thousand years ago a person suffering from the disease of self-delusion had been told that minute living organisms, invisible to the ordinary eye were the cause of physical illnesses, or that blood circulated in the body and if this circulation ceased, death would occur, or that if matter were split in the smallest particles, which would later be called atoms, electrons revolved at fantastic speed around protons, and that man would use atoms to make destructive weapons capable of destroying life on earth in a few seconds, that person would undoubtedly have denied such statements, and consider them superstition and fantasy.

He would probably have claimed that if such things existed he would certainly be aware of them and since this was not the case anyone claiming that such things existed must be a liar, whose views were unscientific and contrary to reality!

It so happens that history has recorded examples of such persons. More than twelve centuries ago

p: 112

in the time of Imam Sadeq, a person suffering from this intellectual disease by the name of Abu Shaker was discussing religious matters with the Imam. During their discussion the Imam said: ‘You deny the existence of a God you cannot see. But can you see inside your own body?

Abu Shaker replied ‘No’. The Imam said, ‘If you could see inside your body you wouldn’t say that because one can’t see God. Hence, belief in His existence is a fiction!

The Imam said. ‘Do you say that a thing which cannot be seen, that makes a sound that cannot be heard, and that cannot be touched or smelled or tasted does not exist, and since it does not exist it is not be worshipped? Abu Shaker said. ‘Yes, that’s what I say.

The Imam said. ‘Do you hear the sound of your blood circulating in your body? Abu Shaker said. ‘No, but does blood circulate in the body? The Imam said. ‘Yes, it does. Can you smell the blood as it circulates?’ Abu Shaker said. ‘No’. The Imam said. ‘Every few minutes your blood circulates throughout your body, and if this circulation stopped for even a few minutes you would die. Abu shaker said. ‘I can’t accept that the blood in my body circulates. The Imam said. ‘What prevents you from accepting the fact that your blood circulates, is your ignorance, and it is this ignorance thus prevents you from accepting God.’ ‘Are you aware of the existence of creature which God

p: 113

created and put to work in your body and as a result of their activity you are alive?” Abu Shakar said, No.’

The Imam said, ‘Since you only believe in what you can see you cannot be aware of the existence of these creatures. If you become a man of science you will know that in your body there are as many living creatures as there are grains of sand in the desert. They are born in your body, grow there, reproduce, and after a time die, but you don’t see them or hear them and you can’t touch them or smell them or taste them. They are born, grow and die so that you can live!’

‘You imagine that your denial of the existence of living and knowledge, whereas this denial is really based on ignorance. Do you see the stone set at the base of this? You probably consider it to be motionless, because your eye can not see its movement, and if anyone tells you that in this stone there are movements which compared with the movements of us who are gathered together here are like complete immobility, you wouldn’t believe him. You’d say he is making up a story. You’d consider yourself to be an intelligent person, unaware of the fact that because you are ignorant you cannot perceive the movement inside this stone. But perhaps one day as a result of the progress of science people will be able to see the movements inside stone’.(1)

As you can

p: 114

see, all the characteristics of the pseudo-wise and all the symptoms of these afflicted by self-delusion are untitled in Abu Shaker.

When we read the story of the debate between Abu Shaker and Imam Sadeq, which took place more than twelve centuries ago, we are filled with amazement. Even people who are suffering from self-delusion are amazed that Abu Shaker denied the circulation of the blood, the existence of micro-organism in the body and atomic movement with such certainly, and did not consider the possibility that perhaps one day science would prove these phenomena to be true.

But we must take note that even today there are many Abu Shakers about, persons who deny the existence of angels, spirits and in general everything metaphysical without relying on any scientific proof simply because our senses are incapable of perceiving what is not material. They refuse to accept as true anything in the sphere of metaphysics. Such people are the Abu Shakers of our age, and like him are suffering from the intellectual disease of self-delusion. In the words of the Imam: “Such remarks are the result of(the ignorant person) believing own opinions, and he little realizes how great his ignorance is”.

In other words, people who deny facts which are unknown to them as a result of their disease of self-delusion, if they did but know how ignorant they are, and how insignificant their knowledge is in comparison with their ignorance, would never place such faith in their now views opinions and would not

p: 115

deny things that they do not know.

Continuing his remarks about the serious effects of this dangerous disease, the Imam Says: As a result, of the false beliefs which have conquered his mind, and because of what he does not know, (the ignorant person) is constantly increasing his ignorance denying the truth.’

The most dangerous effect of self-delusion is that not only is the sufferer kept in a state of ignorance but his ignorance increases daily; his compound ignorance expands because as the disease becomes more severe new forms of ignorance, assail him in the guide of knowledge, thus making it progressively more difficult for him to be cured.

create pride and arrogance in him and prevent the truth him from ever understanding the truth of existence.

harm of himself and society-is called an opinion.

present discussion.(1)

It is worth nothing that a close study of the matter reveals that people's opinions and beliefs are not as a rule based on thought and research, but on Taqlid. One’s parents, clan or tribe, social environment party organization or group, the personalities one admire, all these are the source of inspiration for one’s views. Without demanding reason or proof, but purely on the basis of Taqlid, people accept those views and gradually become accustomed to them until they are ‘tied’ to their minds and become appendices to them, firmly established in their very souls as their own opinions.

For this reasons people’s family and social environment play a fundamental role in the formulation of their opinions. Whatever family and environment a person lives in, he usually adopts the opinions and views if individuals in that family or environment, and to tell the truth, therefore are few people who have acquired their opinions and beliefs entirely by means of personal investigation.

This is why the Quran warns people that if they follow the opinions of most people in the world they will be led astray, since such beliefs lack any scientific basis:

‘If you were to obey the majority of mankind they would lead you astray from God’s path. They follow nothing but idle speculation and guess’ (6:116).

interpreted in three ways:

a) Freedom to choose one’s opinions, i.e. the freedom to believe whatever one likes.

b) Freedom of expression, i.e. the freedom to express whatever on believes.

c) Freedom to propagate opinion, i.e. the freedom to advocate and disseminate whatever one likes.

So when freedom of opinion is under discussion it is possible that any of these three meanings, or all of them, may be meant.

Now, having clarified the meaning of the word opinion, the sources of opinions and the many of freedom of opinion, let us see what our reason has to say about freedom of opinion.

are like his loves. Love and friendship cannot be switched on at will, so that he can feel love for anyone or anything as he decides, nor is it in the power of anyone else to induce him to feel love for a person or thing, or not to feel it. If a person is convinced that it is daytime now, he cannot neither believe of his own accord that it is night-time, nor can anyone else force him to change his opinion. A person may be induced to say something against his opinion, but it is not possible for him to be induced to change his opinion.

In 1632, Galileo wrote a book on the subject of the theories of Ptolemy and Copernicus. A year later the Pope summoned him to Rome and declared that his opinion that the earth moves around the sun was blasphemous. The Pope forced him to kneel down and recant his view. The story is well known that after Galileo had recanted he got up and left the room and then they noticed that he had written on the ground with his finger “Nevertheless, the earth does move.”(1)

Only in one case can an opinion change and that is when the source of the opinion changes. If the source of the opinion was research it may be that research, in continuing his studies, will come across evidence proving that his earlier opinion was wrong, or if the source of his opinion was Taqlid it may be

p: 121

that the chain of Taqlid will be broken.(1)

harm others there is no justification in depriving him of it.

The answer to the question is that reason, while considering the expression of an opinion to be free, also considers it one’s duty to endeavor to correct false opinions, for two reasons. The first is that opinion is the basis of action and superstition and false beliefs can lead society to corruption and perdition. The second reason is that to campaign against superstition is a step towards freedom of thought, and reason cannot ignore its obligation to promote such freedom.

It should also be borne in mind that freedom of opinion and freedom of thought are fundamentally opposed to each other: opinion and thought cannot both be free, because as we have already explained opinion is something which is ‘tied’ onto a person’s mind, forming a knot there and becoming an appendix to his very soul.

So if a person’s beliefs are not based on thought and research they become chains which fetter his reason and soul, imprisoning his mind in walls of superstition and preventing him from thinking freely or arriving at scientific beliefs that are in accord with reality. We must therefore choose between freedom of thought or the freedom to have superstitious opinions, and if we choose freedom of thought the campaign to break the chains of superstitious belief becomes a serious and essential matter.

Just as if a person who is bound fast in chains and cannot free himself single-handed needs the help of someone who is

p: 123

free so mind that is bound fast in the chains of fallacious beliefs, and encircled by incorrect opinions cannot free itself from the bondage of incorrect beliefs, and someone else who is free is needed to break these chains and set him free.

From the point of view of reason therefore, it is incumbent on a person to correct the opinions of others, and by virtue of the fact that it is impossible to correct opinion by force or compulsion the appropriate measure consist of explaining matters so as to promote correct opinions, acquaint people with the true facts by means of logic and proof, and replacing Taqlid with research.

If, however, an individual or a group become obstacles to freedom of thought and the correction of opinion, logic and proof are ineffective, and in this case reason tells us that such obstacles must be forcibly destroy so as prepare the ground for the development of correct opinions and the collapse of false ones.

intellectual or scientific basis; ideas which imprison the mind and halt the growth of society, or even cause social retrogression and harm? Wrong and harmful beliefs are a kind of psychological sickness. Ideological diseases are more dangerous than physical ones: When does not permit an individual to spread the physical diseases that one may have in the society how can it justify the right to spread psychological diseases?

a cause for shame, and therefore buried their daughters alive.

let us see what the Islamic attitude to freedom of opinion is. The short answer is that the Islamic attitude to freedom of opinion is the same as the rational attitude. The detailed answer requires an examination of the Islamic view on each of the three senses of freedom of opinion based on the available evidence.

As was explained in our examination of the rational attitude a person’s beliefs are in principle outside his control in the sense that he can believe or disbelieve whatever he wishes. Opinions are not like garments that a person is free to choose or to change as the fancy takes him or that he can constrained to change against his will. Opinion is like love which can only change if the source itself changes.

Since opinion is not subject to choice, freedom of choice in this matter is not something that can be discussed in an Islamic context. This it was that when a number of nomadic Arabs of the tribe of Bani Asad came to the Prophet of Islam in a year of drought and professed their adherence to Islam(1), but did not really accept Islamic beliefs and were motivated by materialistic considerations, the following Quranic verse was revealed:

‘The nomadic Arab say they have found faith. Tell them they are not true believers. They should say they profess Islam, and true faith has not yet entered their hearts’ (49:14).

To profess Islam is to express one’s adherence to Islamic beliefs, while faith is heart-felt belief

p: 127

in Islamic ideology.(1) Expressing one’s beliefs is within a person’s power, but possession of true faith is not. A person may have various motivations for expressing his belief, but faith is a produce of the heart and can only be claimed when Islamic beliefs have become an appendage of the soul.

what he really considers to be true. In numerous verses the Quran specifically status that faith is not a matter for compulsion and the Prophet of God has no obligation to force people to faith.

wishes as the fancy takes him, but the second pillar is within his control, that is, he can confess to what he believes and take action as these beliefs demand, and similarly he may fail to confess in practical terms to his beliefs.

Heart-felt beliefs, which are the first pillar of faith, since they are not within a person’s power to control, can likewise not be imposed, that is to say, his beliefs cannot compulsorily changed. But the second pillar of faith, which is practical confession. Since it is within a person’s control, is subject to compulsion. Or in other words it is possible to force a person to make a practical confession of his beliefs or to act against them.

Once faith is defined we see that when we say it is not compulsory we are referring to the second pillar of faith, since the first pillar is not susceptible to compulsion. We mean that Islam does not force a person to confess to Islam beliefs without his believing them. On the contrary, as we discussed in detail in chapter 2 and 3 in relation to Taqlid as a basis of opinion and research, Islam does not accept that fundamental beliefs should be acquired except through research and individual investigation.

In other words, of someone says he believes that God created the universe and is the one God he should have his reason for believing this. If he says that Muhammad is the Prophet of God, he should know why. If

p: 130

he says believes that, on the Day of resurrection man will be raised from the dead and his deeds will be examined, he should know reasons for this beliefs, or says that because his parents or teacher said so he too believes this, his beliefs are not acceptable to Islam.

In short, Islam says that fundamental beliefs must be researched and not based on Taqlid, and everybody must solve the basic problems of ideology for himself, and other people’s comments have no use to him. Further, Islam does not compel a person, even to confess to what he believes, in other words, when we say that in the Islamic view faith is not compulsory we mean that not only does Islam not compel a person to confess to Islamic beliefs that he does not really possess, and not only is confession of beliefs based on Taqlid without research and reflection and knowledge unacceptable, but even people who do believe the doctrines of Islam but for some reason do not admit to doing so are free to adopt such a course, and no Muslim has right to force them to confess their beliefs. The Quran specifically states that:

‘There shall be no compulsion in religion, since true guidance is now distinguishable from error.’ (2:256).

This verse, apart from categorically denying the imposition of religious beliefs by force leaves it to the discretion of the individual weather to confess publicly to what he knows to be true, and by doing so explains the reason

p: 131

for this absence of compulsion. It first states that the acceptance of Islamic beliefs and the practical confession of them are not compulsory, and that people are free to accept or not accept Islam (‘There shall be no compulsion in religion’). Immediately after, it explains that the reason for this freedom is that the right path and the wrong path have been clearly indicated (‘true guidance is now distinguishable from error’).

Religion is a program and a path to perfection for man to follow, and in order to do so he must either know the path so as to follow it freely and with conviction, or else he must be taken by that path forcibly.

In the Quranic view once the road to perfection has been defined there is no reason for religion to be compulsory. Rather, there is necessity for man to be free in choosing this road, since the desire for perfection is optional and man fulfill the philosophy of his creator only when he chooses the right road freely and of his own volition. So once the right road is defined, but man abuses this freedom and diverges from the road he knows to be right and chooses a road he knows to be wrong, there is no point in exercising compulsion. Let him fail and afterwards learn what his punishment is.

A point worth nothing, one which the author has not seen referred to by any other writer, is that since in this verse the freedom to accept Islam

p: 132

is under discussion, that is to say ‘true guidance is now distinguishable from error’ it is obvious that this verse, and indeed all the Quranic verses dealing with compulsion refer to people who have been shown the difference between true guidance and error, and those who understand the truth of Islam and Islamic beliefs but for various reasons are not prepared to confess to what they believe.

Nevertheless, the Quran categorically states that none is entitled to force them to do so.Another verse that categorically denies the use of compulsion in the expression of Islamic beliefs is the following:

‘If you are Lord so willed He could have made all the people on earth believe in Him. Would you therefore force faith on people?’ (10:99).

With regard to the revelation of this verse Imam Reza relates that according to his ancestors, going back to Imam ‘Ali some of the Prophet’s companions proposed to him that if he forced some of the people under his authority to accept Islam the number of Muslims would increase and so would their military strength against the enemy. The Prophet replied: ‘I cannot face God having made an innovation that I was not commanded to make, and I am not a person who imposes his will on others.’(1)

At this point God Almighty revealed this verse, saying in effect ‘O Muhammad, if I had wanted to I could have forcibly converted everyone to Islam. This would be like people suddenly finding faith after death when they are

p: 133

suffering punishment for their evil deeds. If I did this with them they would not be worthy of my rewards and praise. I want them to find faith freely and without compulsion.’

In short, the explanation of this verse, in the light of the circumstances in which it was revealed is this: in the system of creation man has been created as a free being, capable of choosing between perfection and corruption, so that reward and punishment in the after-life have a justification: so the imposition of faith on an individual, since it is against the philosophy of man’s creation is not permissible, and the Prophet of GOD is not entitled to do something which is against the tradition of creation and contrary to the divine will, even though such a deed might strengthen the Islamic government and weaken the enemies of Islam.

The third instance of a Quranic verse which specifically rejects the imposition of faith is this verse, addressed directly to the Prophet:

So give them warning. Verily your duty is only to admonish you are not their custodian. (88-22-3).

In other words, the function of the Prophet is to warn and explain, to communicate the divine message and show the true path, and it is the people themselves who must make their choice and choose the true path. The Prophet was not appointed by God to a position of supremacy over the people so as to impose faith on them forcibly. The prophet’s mission is to expound opinion, not impose

p: 134

it.

The fourth Quranic verse that explicitly condemns the imposition of Islamic doctrine is also addressed directly to the Prophet:

‘You shall not use force on them; rather, use this Quran to warn those who fear My threats.’ (50:45).

These verses tell us that the Prophet of Islam was extremely sad when he saw how his contemporaries were trapped by harmful and superstitious beliefs. He wanted by whatever means, to free them from these chains, so when he realizes that his constant efforts to free a considerable number of them were of no avail the grief in his soul knew no bounds, and his body could not cope with such distress, so that God was obliged to find a way of reducing his grief, the cause of which was his compassion towards the people.

The verses quoted are therefore a kind of consolation to the Prophet, telling him that his duty is to pass on the divine message and to warn the people and not to impose faith on them by force. He has done his duty, God tells him, he has not failed, and if God wished people to become true believers coercion. He would have acted in a different way. What we infer from these verses is expounded more clearly in another verse:

‘You will perhaps kill yourself by worrying about their lack of faith. If We wished, We could reveal to them a sign from heaven and they would be forced into utter humility.’(26:3-4).

And another verse tells us:

‘You may

p: 135

destroy yourself on their account, worrying why they do not believe this new revelation. We have beautified the earth so as to test them and see who acquits himself best‘.

(18:6-7).

These last two verses tell us clearly that the Prophet of Islam was so distressed at the way in which people were enslaved by superstitious beliefs, yet reluctant to accept correct ones, that sometimes there was the very real danger of him dying of grief. It is worth nothing that to comfort the Prophet the first of these quotations(1) states that faith cannot be subjected to force, and the second(2) alludes to the philosophy of freedom, namely the testing and perfection of man.

evolution towards the perfection of man it also considers a campaign against superstition so as free the mind from the bondage of incorrect beliefs, to be obligatory, and presages ultimate victory in this campaign Islam, is confident that the day will one day come when human society is freed from such bondage that is the day when Islam rules the whole world.(1)

The justification of the campaign against incorrect opinions, in the Islamic view, is that reason considers it obligatory, just as the method proposed by Islam for the correction of beliefs is precisely the same as that which is proposed by reason. Islam cannot permit that because of wrong and unrealistic opinions, a person’s real inner beliefs, which form the basis of all his actions, should be unscientific and false, and that if such is the case the situation should remain so.

Islam cannot permit that opinions which are contrary to reason, should fatter a person’s mind, or grapple on to his a very soul or that if his mind remain in the bondage of superstitious beliefs.

in society.

With regard to the first part the Islamic, way is a publicity campaign and with regard to the second part it is an armed campaign.

truth. Thus wisdom, through the intellect and exhortation through the emotions and inmost feelings call upon a person to break the ties of incorrect belief.

A point worth nothing is that in the Quranic verse quoted above ‘exhortation’, is qualified by the epithet ‘kindly’. This is a reference to the fact that exhortation and counsel are only effective in motivating a person’s emotions and feelings to accept the truth if they are free from all adverse qualities, such as harshness, superiority or contempt, and instead are accompanied by various beauties, such as eloquence, a sympathetic attitude, purity of motivation and even the physical appearance of the person giving the exhortation or advice, all of which help to reinforce his message. Most important of all is the necessity for that person to set a good example himself, for the worst kind of exhortation comes from someone who does not practice what he preaches.

Finally, the more admirable and attractive the exhortation is presented the greater will be the effect on the listener, for it frequently happens that the effect of good advice in encouraging ordinary people to adopt sound beliefs and courses of action is greater than the effect of logical arguments and proofs.

Conversely, unattractive exhortation or ‘sermonizing’ is not only ineffective, but can sometimes have a reverse effect and cause a person to reject what he may have accepted through logic and proof, a Persian poem says:

The way in which you recite the Quran-

Being Muslim is not going to be popular around.

third practical Islamic way of dealing with unscientific opinions, in addition to the methods already mentioned, is debate and free discussion. The Quran makes mentioned of this method, using the terms jedal and mera (dispute and controversy).

Debate in this sense consists of discussion in the form of a dispute or competition, in other words kind of wrestling –match between ideas. The Quran has two different approaches for the healthy confirmation of ideas in debate that lead to the clarification of the truth and the development of correct beliefs. The first one is the expression which is translated above as ‘disputing in the most courteous manner’ and the second is what is ‘controversy’.(1)

Disputing with courtesy involves the use of the healthiest and kindest forms of debating so as to clarify the truth, and obvious appearance involves the use of proofs so decisive that they are obvious to everyone, learning the other side without an adequate rejoinder.

Islam, which is the religion of all the divinely-inspired prophets, is the founder of free discussion and the healthy confrontation of ideas. The Prophet of Islam, as the bearer of the greatest divine message, in an age when victory and defeat were matters of sheer power and wealth, was the first to introduce such concepts into that society. Both he and the learned members of his family were pioneers in this field and that is why a considerable proportion of the collections of hadith are devoted to debates conducted by the Prophet and the Imams of

p: 140

his family.(1)

It is worthy to note that the Islamic method of ridding people’s mind of unscientific opinions is completely scientific and logical, and in this regard Islam has entirely refrained from the use of military strength. The method adopted by the Prophet of Islam in his mission, in conformity with the commandments of the Quran, relied on reason proof, good advice and the use of the best and ‘healthiest methods’ of debate and free discussion. He specifically states that his method and that of anyone claiming to follow him is to invite people to god on the basis of insight, vision and, awareness.

‘Say “This is my path, I call on the people to have faith in God, on the basis of insight, and so do my “followers,” (12:108).

It is therefore the height of injustice to say that Islam has ever imposed itself by force, especially since such claims have been made by people whose crimes in the Inquisition are a shameful chapter of in the history of their times. Islam does indeed use military force, not to impose its doctrines; but to remove obstacles that the development of correct beliefs.

and unjust regimes and powers that are nourished by the ignorance of the masses, and that will collapse if the public becomes known. Such regimes are therefore an obstacle to correct beliefs, or as the Quran put it, an obstacle on the path of God.

After having made the conditions clear and the discussion completed Islam confronts such regimes with force so as to remove the obstacles to freedom or through and prepare the way for the growth of correct opinion through enlightenment.

In the discussion entitled ‘The Prophethood’ on understanding the Prophet of Islam and the way in which he dealt with his opponents we shall see that in confronting hostile powers he first of all used debating tactics and relied on reason and proof, and at the second stage he resorted to mobahilah a traditions Arab practice of calling on the creator to act as arbitrator in a dispute, and if neither of these methods proved effective, he considered warfare and battle as ways of breaking the obstacles to awareness and freedom of thought. Debate and mobahileh were final words of the Prophet’s against the powers that were opposed to him.

In addition to corrupt regimes, traditions affecting a society can be an obstacle to freedom of thought. If a person is endowed with freedom of thought a moment’s reflection will tell him without the slightest doubt that idolatry, such as the worship of claves or fire, and dozens are even hundreds of other irrational beliefs are pure superstition. But false

p: 142

traditions and customs which have embedded themselves in the heart and soul of those who believe in them are veritable chains fettering the mind and preventing a person from thinking logically. In the words of Shahid Ostad ‘Alameh Mottahari.

First there are greedy and exploitative people who want to establish a regime for themselves. This regime needs an ideological base, for without such a base nothing can be done. The person who established this base is well aware of what he is doing. His treachery is deliberate. He chooses an object, an idol, a bull, a dragon, and gives it extensive publicity. The public are hood winked. Perhaps at first people don’t pay a great deal of attention to it, but then after a few years their example. Generation follows generation and the cult becomes established, as a historical event, and becomes part of the national heritage, one of their national traditions and a matter of great pride, which cannot be abolished. It’s just like plaster. When plaster is first mixed with water it’s a gooly substance and you can mould it into any shape you like. But when it has been moulded into its final shape and begins to dry, the more it dries the larger it becomes hard, until in the end it becomes too hard that you cannot even break it with a pickaxe.

‘Ought we to fight against such cults? In other words, this freedom of through that we say should have should it include opinions like this?

p: 143

The world today is in the grip of a fallacy here.

They say people’s minds should be free, and they say opinions should be free; idolatry in their opinion should also be free. People should be free to worship a cult or a dragon; everyone should be free to worship what they want, and to choose anything they want for their beliefs, whereas in fact these beliefs run counter to freedom of thought. Its opinions like these that tie a person’s mind up in knots.’(1)

Islam says that the chain of superstitious beliefs which fetters the mind and which cannot be unlocked by reason and proof, and exhortation and counsel, must be opened by military force, and that the obstacle consisting of false traditions, which over the years and over the centuries have sedated up society’s mind with the sediment of erroneous culture until it has become so hard that it cannot be removed with ordinary implements, must be destroyed in a mighty explosion so as liberate men’s minds.

Since direct military action against opinion is as we have seen, impossible, Islam begins its battle against false traditions by campaigning against their social manifestations. For example, in the campaign against idolatry the idol-temples must be destroyed, as Abraham did, and in the campaign against calf-worship the golden calf must be melted down by fire, as Moses did.

Abraham was the only person in his society to discover the secret of existence through independent thought and thus reach a correct philosophy of life.(2) Faced

p: 144

with a people who were bogged `down in superstition and false beliefs, and who lacked the basic ability to think for themselves. Abraham tried as hard as he could, using reason and proof and advice, to make them see the error of their ways and to free their minds from the bonds of false beliefs, but without success. The more he admonished them the less effect it had. Finally, he came to the conclusion that he should prove to them in a practical way that these idols, which they had fashioned themselves, could not be true gods.

On day when the people were celebrating festival by going out into the country, Abraham decided to carry out his plan. He went to the main idol, then hung his axe round the idol’s neck and left. Abraham’s plan was to stage a scene in which he would accuse the chief idol of massacring the other idols so as to eliminate false beliefs from people’s thoughts and set their minds at liberty. When the people came back to the town from their festival they discovered that the idols had quarreled and killed each other. All the idols were broken except the chief idol, which had an axe round its neck.

It looked as if the chief idol was responsible for the carnage but their native wit told them it was impossible for a collection of inanimate objects to quarrel among themselves. So they immediately set about looking for the person who was really responsible. Since

p: 145

Abraham had always been complaining about their idolatry and had also threatened to destroy the idols they their idolatry and had also threatened to destroy the idols they summoned him on charges of having killed their Gods and began to interrogate him in public.

The first question was: ‘Did you do this to our gods?’ In order to stir their consciences Abraham replied by saying that the seen indicated that the chief idol had done the killing and if idols could talk why didn’t they asked the idols themselves what had happened?

The way was gradually being prepared for them to free their minds and think independently, Abraham’s answer made the idolaters stop and think, and to realize how wrong they were in their beliefs. In their hearts they blamed themselves for this ideological tyranny and finally they had to confess that their gods could not talk. With their superstitious beliefs thus weakened and the obstacle of false traditions broken, Abraham saw his way clear to begin an appropriate publicity campaign.

He said: ‘Would you worship, rather than God that which can neither help you nor harm you? Shame on you and your false gods! Have you no minds to think with?’ (21:66-67)

It is worth nothing that when Islam has broken the obstacle and freed the mind from the captivity of false beliefs it says ‘Now think! See .what your reason tells you. If it tells you that Islam is right, then accepts Islam, and if it tells you some other religion

p: 146

or ideology is right, then accept that. In other words Islam does not break open one chain with military force in order to fetter the mind with another chain, or even to impose another belief founded on reason and thought. On the contrary, when Islam has freed a person from erroneous beliefs it says, ‘Think, and choose a belief on the basis of thought and research. Even if you choose Islam without thinking, this is not acceptable.

After the conquest of Mecca when the worship of old traditions was broken and amnesty had been declared, the people of the Hejaz flocked to Islam. But the leaders of the idolaters, who had created innumerable difficulties for the Muslim, felt themselves in a dangerous position, and a number of them therefore fled Mecca. One of those who because of his evil past decided to flee was Safwan bin Ummaya.

‘Safwan bin Ummaya, apart from other serious crimes, had publicly hanged some Muslims in Mecca in broad daylight, in revenge for the death of his father, Ummaya, who had been killed at the battle of Badr. Fearing punishment, he decided to leave the hijaz by ship. ‘Omair ibn Wahab, one of the Prophet’s attendants, requested that his faults be pardoned. The Prophet accepted his intercession and gave him the turban he was wearing when he entered Mecca as a sign of safe conduct. ‘Amir went to Jiddah with the turban and personally accompanied Safwan back to Mecca.

When the prophet saw this arch-criminal of the

p: 147

age he told him with great magnanimity that his life and possessions were safe, but it was advisable for him to accept Islam. Safwan requested two months grace to study and think about Islam. The Prophet said. “I’ll give you not two, but four months, so that you can choose this religion with complete knowledge and understanding.” Before four months had passed Safwan embraced Islam.(1)

Even more interesting than this is the story of how Suheil bin ‘Umar become a Muslim. To use his own words, 'After the conquest of Mecca, when the Prophet of God entered the city, I went to my house and shut myself up and sent my son “Abdullah to the Prophet to request an assurance of safety, for I was not prepared to become a Muslim just to save my own life.”

Abdullah came into the presence of the Prophet and said. “My father requests a promise of safety. Will you give it to him?” “The Prophet said, “Yes, he is in God’s care. He can come out of his house.| then he turned to those around him and said, ‘if any of you see Suheil you must not show any hostility to him. He must be allowed to come out of his house. Upon my soul, Suheil is an intelligent and honorable man, and a person like him cannot fail to understand Islam and become a Muslim.”

‘Once he had received the assurance and heard the Prophet’s words ‘Abdullah left the assembly and returned to his father

p: 148

and told him what had happened. Suheil, perhaps not expecting that the prophet would treat him like this, said in voluntarily, “By God, as a child and a grown man he has always been a good and worthy person.”

After he received this assurance of safety, Suheil, although he remained a non-believer, mixed freely with the Muslims and even accompanied the Prophet’s at the battle of Hunein, without accepting Islam. Until finally at place called Ja ‘rana’. He did so.(1)

These two tales are clear example of practical biography of the Prophet of Islam in encountering those who theoretically opposed him. These tales prove that despite what a group of orientalists claim, the goals of battles of Islam commanded by Quran decrees were removing the barriers of freedom of opinion and ploughing the ground for the growth of correct beliefs.

of trickery and guile.

In the case of opinions which have their origins in thought and logic, to the extent that they rely on reason and logic and argument and proof, their propagation and dissemination, and hence the freedom to propagate them, are included in the category of freedom of expression, and here the Islamic attitude has been fully explained.

But demagoguery for the purpose of communicating opinions which lack a logical base and are harmful to society is something that reason cannot justify-as has already been explained-nor can Islam confirm it against the dictates of reason.

To sum up briefly, we may say that in Islam the expression of opinion is free, but demagogy for the transmission of false opinions to the people is forbidden(1).

he submitted logical arguments and proofs to show that the sentenced thousands of scholars to be burned alive.

Giordano Bruno, an Italian priest and one such scholar, was sentenced to be burned at the stake in the year 1600, on charges that he had expressed the belief that ‘Anyone who has reached the age of reason can reach an opinion about the world and life in conformity with his rational and deductive faculties.’ The court considered this opinion to be a proof of his opposition to Christianity, since in the Court’s view every Christian who reaches the age of reason must adopt belief’s about the world in accordance with the Holy bible, and not in accordance with his rational and deductive faculties. By expressing his views Bruno proved himself to be an apostate. His apostasy was due to the Devil entering his body and therefore he must be burned so as the exercise the Devil!

In addition, religion, in the view of those who control international politics and the philosophers inspired by these polices, is no more than a pastime and pastimes are not concerned with matters such as right or wrong. Religion, in their view, is like a piece of poetry or a film. As Shahid Ostad ‘Alameh Mottahari says: ‘In the view that concerns only the personal conscience of the individual, regardless of what that religion is, whether, for example, it’s idolatry, such as calf-worship, or worship of God…

‘Regarding the question of religion, since they do not want to admit

p: 151

to the reality of religion and prophethood or accept that prophets really came from God to reveal the true path to man, and that man’s happiness lies in following this true path, they say instead, “we don’t know what they reality and origin of religions are, but we do realize that man cannot live without religion.

One of the essential conditions of human life, one of the pastimes and distractions in man’s life, is that he occupies himself with this thing known as religion. It does not make any difference whether the object he decides to worship is a monotheistic God a man called Jesus Christ, or a calf or an object made of metal or wood. So nobody ought to be persecuted for their beliefs, and whatever a person’s individual preference is, it’s quite all right.(1)

As has been pointed out, such attitudes towards religion are not inspired by ideas that are based on philosophy, but by ideas that use science and philosophy for political ends.

If those in charge of imperialist policies pretend to be in favor of freedom of opinion it’s not because they really want everyone to be free to express his opinion so that correct beliefs might develop, and people be liberated from superstition, since such freedom would be against the interests for their political power. Instead, they want to distract people’s minds so that they can more easily achieve their anti-popular political object.

And since the best narcotic pastime is religion without politics, and superstitious religious beliefs, there

p: 152

is no difference between the various false religious, so they judge it to be in their political interests to declare religious opinions to be free, so long as these do not conflict with their interests.

But if a religion tries to gain to the world of politics, and became instrumental to the development of correct beliefs and the liberation of the masses from the bondage of incorrect belief, and hence from the domination of imperialism, this religion is not only deemed illicit by the very champions of freedom of opinion, but it’s followers are destroyed by these same exponents of freedom of thought, on the pretend of the defense of freedom.

of Taqlid? And finally, why is the teaching necessary?

3. How many methods are there for the teaching of ideology? And in the lessons that follow which of these methods will be used to teach the principles if Islamic ideology?

These question will be answer under the following headings:

the teaching of love is training a person to avoid worthless loves and instead to nature love which are innate and real.

The teaching of ideology is just the same. In other words, it consists of the provision of instruction which alienates a person from false and unscientific beliefs, and inculcates in him correct and scientific beliefs. And clearly this is a feasible goal.

human society.

Proof that the science of ideology safeguards a person’s psychological health is provided by the fact that opinion is grafted on the his mind and soul, and as was explained in Chapter I of this introduction, unscientific grafts and incorrect beliefs cause a person’s inner and real form and structure to deviate from their natural state, and this unnatural condition makes him morally sick.

The subsequent tendency towards wrong attitudes causes his individual and social life to be diverted from its natural course. Since the science of ideology prevents unscientific and fallacious beliefs from being grafted on to a person’s psyche, it is a safeguard of his psychological well-being, and therefore must be considered the most valuable of all sciences and the study of which has a greater priority than any other form knowledge.

of why they made literacy compulsory on the grounds that it is essential in life, but made no mention of the teaching of correct opinions.

Is minimum standard of literacy a necessity, but correct opinions which guide life in a proper direction not such a necessity? Which is more harmful for a person, wrong opinions or illiteracy? Do illiterates create more trouble for themselves and others, or literate people with false opinions, wrong ideas and psychological deviations?

The truth of the matter is that if we judge man’s essential requirements for life equitably and without considering political interests we see that nothing is more essential than psychological health, because if a person does not possess this he cannot benefit from a healthy body, or from knowledge and science, or indeed from anything else. As was stated in the words of Imam Baqer, the science which ensures a person’s health in this field is the most essential thing a person should know. This makes it necessary for the way to be prepared for everybody to be taught ideology, and such instruction, like literacy, should be universal and obligatory.

As for the objection that the teaching of ideology amounts to the conveying the opinions of the teacher to the pupil by means of blind obedience and Taqlid, the answer is quite clear, since Taqlid consists of accepting the views of others without reason or proof, and ideological instruction that is based on reason and proof cannot be considered Taqlid. Moreover, if instruction in ideological studies

p: 157

is considered to be Taqlid then all classes in which the various sciences are taught must be so considered.

Finally, the proposal that instead of ideological instruction people should be encouraged to study and research opinions for themselves cannot be carried put without formal instruction. Because a study of ideological problems, although it may require no more instruction than the other sciences, certainly does not requires less than they do, and if literacy classes need a classroom and a teacher how can it to be said ideological instruction does not need a teacher?!

books they are not talking to the general public. Their audience is solely people with an interest in and specialized knowledge of philosophy or scholasticism, and have studied these subjects is intend to do so; hence their words and writings cannot be appreciated by the general public.

But the audience of the prophets is everybody. They are the teachers and mentors of all mankind. In matters of ideology they refer everybody to reason, argument and proof. Their audience is not only people who have studied or intend to study philosophy, or whose inclinations and talents are towards scholasticism. Their message is not addressed solely to scholars and students, or to any other specific social group.

Every social group or class is addressed by the prophet of God, so they must talk in a manner that everybody can benefit from, and in ideological fields they must reason in such a way that is universally comprehensible as well as being useful and convincing to all classes of society, from the most learned to the most illiterate.

The second characteristic of the method used by the prophets of God in teaching ideology is its comprehensiveness. In the method used by the philosophers and scholastics beliefs are discussed without reference to action, and the ideological argument consists of a series of dry scholarly discussions divorced from social, political and moral activity. But in the prophets, method ideological discussion is particularly comprehensive, and belief and action are examined in relation to each other.

Instruction in the principles of

p: 159

ideology that utilizes this method, while introducing a person to deep scientific and philosophic arguments in matter relating to the origins of life and the resurrection of the dead can also reach him the most delicate question of mysticism, and explained the most precise questions of economics, politics and sociology to him.

In other words, the principles of ideology, when taught according to the prophet method, are a mixture philosophy, mysticism, sociology, economics and ethics. The nature of this comprehensiveness to the extent that the writer’s scientific ability permits-will be illustrated in the course of the lectures that follow.

We will also show how the divinely-inspired prophets, who always referred people to their reason in matters of ideological principles, themselves use to prove the opinions they invited the people to adopt. We will also show whether or not these arguments are convincing from the rational point of view.

The selection of this method, furthermore, may achieve two other results: it may prove the scientific miracles of the prophets, and it may show their immunity from ideological error.

In a hadith already quoted in our discussion of Taqlid Imam Sadeq says: ‘When a person knows his religion from the book of God, mountains will be moved before he abandons his beliefs, whereas a person who becomes involved in a business through ignorance may also leave it through ignorance.(1)

The teaching of ideological principles according to the method of prophets establishes belief in the origins of life and the resurrection of the dead in a person’s heart with a firmness that the very mountains of the earth cannot mated. See how firmly and peacefully the mountains are set in the around the plains. A person’s religious beliefs which have been implanted in his heart by the instruction of the prophets are even firmer than this, for as the Imam says mountains may move before such beliefs will change.

for presentation on stage.

To take an example some of the questions discussed in this Introduction could be very interestingly acted on stage: the Battle of the Camel and the question which Imam ‘Ali was asked by the Bedouin Arab in the midst of the battle and the Imam’s reply explaining the importance of ideological debate: the question of Taqlid could be shown by the way supporters of political organizations and groups copy their leaders in ideological matters and blindly follow the party-line; people suffering from self-delusion and pseudo-knowledge could be portrayed as could really wise people, who refer to the authority of their reason in matters of belief.

All of these could be most effective in publicizing ideological discussion and even in exporting the culture of the Revolution and creating cultural revolutions in Islamic and non-Islamic countries. In other words, putting ideological questions and discussions into theatrical form is a way of adopting the allegorical method which the prophets used to explain intellectual problems to the masses.

If we study the Quran and the words of the prophets and Imams we see that they often used parables to explain an intellectual question. A parable can turn a rational idea into a mental picture, and give it cinema or television screen, and this is much more effective than a parable in illustrating reality.

In other words, we can explain ideological and intellectual questions by means of television or film images so as to complement the use move by the prophets of parables. Committed artist,

p: 162

inspired by the prophets’ method, can play a useful, effective and delusive role in enhancing society’s awareness and intellectual maturity and mobilizing the people of the world towards authentic Islamic beliefs.

The writer would therefore like to propose to committed artists that they should try to bring ideological questions and principles of Islamic belief to theatrical form in a respectable and appropriate way. It is of course realized that this is no easy task, yet it should not be impossible.

p: 163