Najasah of the Kafir (8)

In the previous blog, we discussed a possible way to deal with the contradictory narrations i.e. to prefer those that imply the Taharah of Ahl al Kitab, because of the fact they are clearer. The author of al-Madarik (1) and Ayatullah Sabzwari (2) (may Allah be pleased with them) have come to this same conclusion but the majority of scholars at the time of Ayatullah Khui were not happy with this way of solving the contradiction.

They have actually cast aside the narrations on the Tahara of the Ahl al Kitab based on the following reasons (3):

1. They consider the narrations contrary to the verse of the Qur`an (9:28 – “Indeed the Mushrikun are naijs…”) and the narrations of Najasah are in agreement with this. And it is clear that agreeing with the Qur`an is a reason to prefer one side of an argument when there is a contradiction. However, Ayatullah Khui does not consider this reasoning correct, as we have discussed that the verse talks about the Mushrikun rather than the Ahl al Kitab (refer to previous blog)

2. The narrations on Najasah are in opposition to the view of the Sunnis (refer to earlier blog) and one of the methods of solving contradictory narrations is to turn to narrations from the Imams (AS) that say that you must take what is against the school of those in opposition (to the Imams) (4)

They therefore attribute the narrations on Tahara to Taqiyyya, and this attribution is seen as totally unacceptable by the author of al-Madarik (5) and Sabzwari, wondering how it can be possible to put such weak rules on the Imams (6)

Even though there are many narrations which say that you should take the narration that opposes the school of the opposition (Sunnis), these are only in instances of genuine contradiction. However, there is no contradiction between the “No” in the narrations of Najasa and the clarity of it being Makruh to eat their food in the texts on their Tahara.

Ayatullah Khui is particularly scathing, saying:
“Can you see that these contradict each other? If there is no contradiction, then why would you put the texts of Tahara on the majority [i.e. on Taqiyya]? …I really wonder what the author of al-Hada`iq (may Allah be pleased with him) was doing in his book.” It is difficult to believe that in all their places in these narrations were due to Taqiyya in front of the Sunnis.

Ayatullah Khui then gives forward another reasoning why Taqiyya is not applicable. In the same narrations where it discusses the Tahara of the Ahl al-Kitab, it must have been in the minds of the religious people in the times of the Imams (AS) that they are Tahir, and that was the reason they asked about eating with them because they knew about the outer Najasah of the Ahl al Kitab when they ate pork…etc..

There are many narrations that show this:

- the sound (sahih) narration of Mu’awiya ibn ’Ammar who said: “I asked Abu Abdullah (AS) about clothes which the Zorastrians work with, and they are dirty/foreigners* and they drink wine. He said: yes”. The addition of the “and they are foreigners who drink wine” implies that he knew that they were Tahir otherwise. (* = depending on the version of Wasa`il al-Shi’a 3:518/chapters on Najasa, 73:1)
- the sound (sahih) narration of ‘Abdullah ibn Sunnan, who said: “he asked Abu Abdullah (AS) when I was present: ‘A Dhimmi borrowed my clothes and I know he drinks wine and eats pork. He then returns it to me. Should I wash it before I pray in it?’ Abu ‘Abdullah (AS) said: ‘Pray in it and do not wash it because of that as you lent it to him and he is Tahir and you have not become certain that he has made it Najis, so there is no problem to pray in it unless you become certain that he has made it Najis

I will ignore the other two noted.

From this it is clear that the Tahara of the Ahl al Kitab was in the mind of the narrators until the 12th Imam (AS) and they used to ask about how to act with them and what to do, given that they eat pork and drink wine.

Therefore, it is difficult to give a fatwa (religious ruling) according to the narrations considering them to be najis, but it is also difficult to give a ruling according to the narrations considering them to be tahir because most scholars from the early periods and the recent periods consider them to be najis. Therefore, there is no choice but to consider it Ihtiyat al-Luzumi to consider them Najis.

Therefore, you can see that although Ayatullah Khui is very clear in his opinion that Ahl al Kitab are tahir, in the end, he observes precaution solely because of the fact that most of the scholars of the earlier period had a different opinion! Hopefully, this shows the way that Ayatullah Khui made his decision, his thinking and seeing inside the mind of a scholar!

In the next blog, we have two options:
1. Ayatullah Fadlallah on seafood – it is useful to see into the mind of another great scholar, especially as the structure of his argument differs from the types we have seen so far, and also because again Taqiyya is used by some scholars.

2. Consider moon issues (topical)

Please email with your thoughts!

(1) al-Mudarik 2:294-298
(2) Dhakhira al-ma’aad: 150
(3) al-Hada`iq, 5:162-172
(4) Wasa`il al-Shi’a 27:106/chapters on the attributes of a judge 9:1, 19, 25 and others
(5) al-Mudarik 2:294-298
(6) al-Hada`iq, 5:173