Ayatullah Abul-Qasim Ali Doust, a teacher of al-Bahth al-kharij at Qum Seminary said on November 10, 2019, at the scientific session “The Method of Discovering Schools of Jurisprudence with a Look at the Book of Ijtihad Methodology” held by the Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudential Studies, that he had recently seen a clip of a student who had said, “What is another methodology? If it is the same principles that are sufficient, and if it is something other than them, what is the need for us?” He said, “Look at how a very vast knowledge and scope is treated, and of course this person is not alone, and sometimes this material comes out of some courses and these people reflect it.”

He stated that his belief is that ijtihad will not be established without methodology, and stated: “I am not saying that the methodology of ijtihad is jurisprudential, but rather, anyone who wants to write in exegesis, theology, islamic sciences, and jurisprudence needs methodology otherwise he will go astray and his efforts will be ungrateful.”

Ali Doust gave an example in this regard and added: “The hot debate today is whether a Mujtahid can be a marja’ (reference to follow)? The majority do not believe this, and some also disagree, saying that if a Mujtahid is the most knowledgeable in his specialty, he should be followed.”

He added: “The discussion of methodology is a very important discussion, contrary to what one of the students had said, saying that if the methodology is the same as the principles that we study, then what is it?”

The seminary teacher, stating that he recommends that scholars read the margin of the scholar Iravani on great Shaykh Ansari, added: He has attacked Shaykh Ansari scientifically in some cases and said that you have brought both favorable and unfavorable opinions and evidence on the issue, and have strengthened one side and weakened the other, but you use the expression “Lakin al-Insaf” and what is this? Insha Allah and Masha Allah, and what is the if and unless? If you gave your opinion, what is the reason for this hesitation?

Teacher Ali Doust, stating that in criticizing the contents of great people like Shaykh Ansari, while we must criticize, we must also be careful because he is a level 60 student, said: I asked Ayatullah Ansari about the expression “Lakin al-Insaf” and he replied that Shaykh Ansari changed the four evidences to five instead of four, and the fifth is “Insaf”. As I grew older, I gradually realized that this was a method of Shaykh Ansari himself. For example, regarding statues, some consider their construction to be forbidden and argue about buying and selling them, but there is disagreement about their preservation; great Sheikh Ansari gives eight or nine reasons for the permissibility of this practice.

Sheikh Ansari’s Methodical Confrontation with Consensus

He added: Some of his arguments are really arguments, but some are just arguments; for example, when he cites a reputation, it is just arguments, or he says that Ibn Idris, who does not accept an authentic narration, accepted such and such a narration, while in our opinion he accepted it. He criticizes consensus in principles, but this is not the case in jurisprudence. He questioned consensus in principles, but not in jurisprudence; therefore, although great Shaykh Ansari is not infallible, in my opinion his method is like this, and for this reason I have pursued methodology and written a book on the methodology of ijtihad in general, which is not limited to jurisprudence.

The teacher of the course al-Bahth al-kharij of the seminary, stating that I use real, objective, and socially relevant examples in all my works, added: I have been gradually working in this field since 1979 and have become more mature day by day. I believe that we should focus on the essentials of ijtihad, not just the methodology of ijtihad. Of course, this book is one of two books that are to be published under the name of the methodology of contemporary ijtihad schools.

Characteristics of the jurisprudential school

Ali Doust, stating that a school refers to a phenomenon that is popular and has followers, added: Therefore, if a method does not have followers, it is not of interest to me in these books. If Shaykh Ansari uses fairness in the discussion of the aggregation of doubts, he therefore brings both evidence to produce greater certainty. If he has mentioned consensus in his principles, it is because the discussion is based on the four pieces of evidence, but in jurisprudence, he uses consensus as a supporter, and his application of consensus in jurisprudence and principles is different. This is the method of ijtihad that the elders have.

The seminary teacher stated that some also have a school-based method, and said: For example, in the method of combining suspicions, reputation are weak sources and indications, but in the school-based discussion, the reputation is nothing, and according to Ayatullah Khu’i, reputation and khabar wahid sifr and without proof, and no proof is produced by combining these two together, but Shaykh Ansari says that by the power of God, proof is produced by combining these two.

Teacher Ali Doust stated that I have not included past schools of jurisprudence such as the schools of Ahle-Ra’i, lkhbari, Usuli, etc. in the methodology book, but I have followed new schools such as combining suspicions and school-based, and said: Systematic schools of jurisprudence with the dynamic School of Jurisprudence are also among the other discussions; Some say that we have a series of dynamic rulings on ja’aleh and ijarah and … and we do not have a system in these issues, but some say that we have a system behind these dynamic issues and that discovering this system is important.

Stating that the system is a mediator between rulings and objectives, the seminary teacher added: Someone who studies contemporary schools of ijtihad and explains their drawbacks and advantages is naturally expected to give a theory himself. Therefore, I have gone after the book Methodology of Ijtihad; Theory of Assurance so that the requirements of balanced ijtihad and its disadvantages are explained because if any disadvantage is corrected, it will become a requirement.

Referring to parts of this book, he added: We should have much more scientific work methods. Shouldn’t we reflect on our methods? Some say that there is a system behind the rules of impurity and purity, and a systematic view has many effects; For example, if something sees fire and heat, it becomes pure and purified, or they say that earth is pure but asphalt is not, and this contradicts their own words because earth is earth, whether with asphalt or without it.

Cruel fatwas

Teacher Ali Doust recalled a memory of Ayatullah Khu’i confronting a doctor who had told him that if he wanted to quote something from me, he should say that a student said this and not Islam. He said: If there was an unacceptable fatwa somewhere, we should reflect because some fatwas are gross injustice; for example, some have said that if someone goes to a usurped place, he does not have the right to raise his hand, even if he wants to scratch his body, for example. In the view of the author of the book al-Jawahir, this type of fatwa is injustice.

The seminary teacher continued: In the second part of the book, 20 schools of thought are mentioned, and these schools are sometimes twins; Among them are the school of jurisprudence of contentment, or the same as the gathering of suspicions, and the school of jurisprudence of contentment, which is the same as the great and small and the result, which has nothing to do with persuasion, and says that the rule requires this, as Ayatullah Khu’i has said that the rule requires that there is no need to be convinced to use water, meaning if there was urine, feces, etc. in the water, but its taste and smell did not change, drink it, meaning that it does not have to convince the audience.

The importance of the objectives of the Shari’ah

He added: Another school is reliability and authenticity, which are a subset of the two schools of contentment and sana’at; Shaykh Ansari has considered reliability more, the jurisprudence of the rule of the texts is another school, in contrast to which the jurisprudence of the text is limited to the case of the text. The other school is the jurisprudence of the text and the objectives, and the text is based on the objectives with supervision.

He emphasized: A decade or two ago, I wrote an article entitled “Text and Objectives” that had a lot of repercussions; My opinion was that the text has a purpose and goal, and we must consider the intentions of the Shari’ah, but my critics said that if intentions were brought into play, it would destroy the religion, and this justification was incomprehensible to me.