The Epistle on Legal Theory

Chapter on Subjective Reasoning

٣٦١ 361 Chapter on Subjective Reasoning discover the signs that indicated these things, using the intellects that He had placed in them, in order to seek the direction that faced that very object itself toward which He obliged them to turn. If they sought it out by means of interpretation , using their intellects and their knowledge of those signs, after seeking assistance from God and desiring that He aid them, then they carried out what was incumbent on them. He stated clearly for them that He had obliged them to face toward the Sacred Mosque and that facing toward it meant to face in its general direction, not that one had to face the precise direction of the Sacred House in an objectively correct manner in every circumstance. Chapter on Subjective Reasoning I continued: If, however, it was not possible for them to know with certainty that they had faced the right direction, in the way someone who could actually see the Sacred House was able to do, then they had no right to say, “We face whatever direction we think best, without basing ourselves on any indication .” “This,” he said, “is as you say. Legal interpretation is only used to seek something, and that thing is an extant object sought by means of some indication that can be used to direct one to it, or by means of a comparison with another extant object. This clarifies that it is unlawful for anyone to opine on the basis of subjective reasoning if such reasoning contradicts a report, and a report from the Book or from Prophetic Practice is an object whose meaning the legal interpreter seeks in order to attain the correct answer , just as one who is distant from the Sacred House seeks its correct location or its direction by means of analogical reasoning. No one may express an opinion except on the basis of legal interpretation, and legal interpretation is just as you have described, that is, the search for the true answer.”380 “Do you yourself,” he continued, “permit someone to say: ‘I employ subjective reasoning, without analogizing?’” In my view, I replied, that is not permissible for anyone—though God knows best. Only scholars should 612 613 ٣٦٢ 362 Ž´¦€ :
;
–
¯  
QI J †  ´¦€ :
;I

§KM  de
f–“` a  
†  !  v wDE  DE . QIŠ :‹Œ  ¡¢f›œ =>
–
ÆKM  žŸ  QIŠ :‹Œ  
– ¯   ¦
îQ  ١I¼ï
  ^   DE ›œ – 
78žŸ Ž # DE . Ž/I¦€ :
;
–
¯   k l m n o DE  Q v w
QI J † d±  DE
’KM   .=>
–
ÆKM   "g˜
×  à i k l m n ožŸ 
 x I     É1 #    " #    IUV #k l m n o Èuf   "  ¡¢f›œ Ž k l  m n o $&
– ¯  
 ´³  DE  p
Ñ7 Î Ï Ð¸c    01 #  :d±  I
JK æ   de # fŸ k l m n o P&žŸ k l  m n o #  ŽDE‡ Oˆ
¸ k l m n o 
 x  þ    Z3uf_` aDE 
 x  Ë  Z3uf_` a ¡¢f›œ k l  m n o #  ŽDE‡ Oˆ
¸ k l m n o £ $&I UV #  "g˜
×  Ã i k l m n o  Ì   k l m n o#  :
Z3uf
Ì   ‫؟‬
Z §K6“”DE I1  ¡¢f›œ de # fŸ k l m n o P%Q   5 1 =>I

§KM    
 #   Ì   :d±  
Ì   .=>I

§KM  
  ¬ de # fŸ k l m n o P%Q  DE k l  m n o # 
I1 #  k l m n o DE £ $&–œ¿ÀHI
Ö   # de  fv w   DE  DE
’K
MŸ¿ Å   £ $&Iǜde  fv w   de  fv w!  pIԔ #    " # ¿ Å ] ^g c defg¬ #  Ž #   x y
 k l  m n o #  Èuf   " ŽDE‡ Oˆ
¸ k l m n o DE I1DE
V
  ¡   èuf–ã1  6ï ‘¿À  Q 9 :
 ufƒï‘  

´µ§  ï‘ - ê
.
MK
67 
r  DEÁ  žŸ   v wDE«¬DE .   v wDE«¬DE k l  m n o # ¿ÀHI
Ö   # 
g •uf´  Z€ i–“” b  d±  I
JK
MŸ k l m n o DE 
–šuf›œ ´¦
îQ
gK
6 ¯   ™
QI J † 
–šuf›œ QI
§ 
† Ž # žŸ
I1 #k l m n o  ™  $&g¬ k l m n o DE $&–Æ      $&g¬¿ÀHI
Ö   # 
r s
Y
¯      - ê
.
MK MŸ¿ Å   uf›œ
QI  œ d±  $&›œ 
–
ÆK ¾KM  d±  I
JK
MŸ Ž #   !DE ² :
 k l m n o DE .£ gK  ¦§ 
6ã1 Ž Ò 2ªI
\ï

^    ¡¢f›œ
  k l m n o P&žŸ d±  –ã1
QI  œ ô uf›œ 01
Ì   #    " #    IUV #k l m n o def01g      $&I J¬
™!  v w #  k l m n o DE - .
gK   DE   - .I
JK F      ¡¢f›œ 
– ¯   # #` a· :‹Œ  ɦ
îQ
žŸDE d±  I¼     01 
–6ï

^    de
f/K
MŸ I¼ï
  ^     $&ܒ¬   $&g¬ Ž Ò 2ª  " # I  Ö   ufƒï ‘ # DE ٢ ŽI¦€ :
;I

§KM  žŸ - .  ! 23 4  d±  k l m n o $&
´³ k l m n ožŸ ™$&IԔ
   £ –7  _` aDE ŽI
§   žŸ
Z
îQ–7   5  ‰ 
µ‚1 ŽDE‡ Oˆ
¸ I|¡ N 2O =>
–
ÆKM  žŸ  QIŠ :‹Œ   Z  _` aDE .£ $&I J˜
×  à : +, - .23 4›œ #k l m n ožŸ¿ Å   uf›œ
QI  œDE«¬DE d±  
Ì  
 x...