Shaykh Haidar Hobbollah - an introduction to his way of thinking (4/4)

In the previous blogs, we discussed the way that Shaykh Haidar Hobbollah approaches fiqh, and how it differs from many others. This is important to understand his way of thinking, but what's also interesting is the ramifications of this approach on his view of specific fiqh rulings.

This blog seeks to answer this very question i.e. how do his differences in approach, manifest in the derivation of Islamic laws?

Shaykh Hobbollah has a Telegram channel where he shares his perspectives on a number of issues. Given the differences in his approach, as laid out above, the majority of the perspectives he has chosen to distribute end up being different from the majority opinion.

I have selected a few examples of his rulings:

• Mixing between men and women is not problematic in and of itself
• A person born out of wedlock (walad al-zina) is allowed to lead prayers
• It is allowed to shake the hand of the opposite gender
• It is allowed to eat all animals from the sea, including non-fish, and fish without scales; although it is better to avoid the latter ihtiyat istihbabi, and you should avoid cat-fish (al-jarrith) and al-marmahi as an obligatory precaution (ihtiyat luzumi)
• Wine, beer etc. are all tahir (although prohibited to drink)
• The person who is doing the halal slaughter of an animal, does not have to be Muslim (but they should do the slaughter in the Halal way and mention Allah at slaughter)
• It is not required to follow the most learned (a’lamiyya is not a condition of a marja’)
• There is no requirement for a judge to be a man
• You do not have to recite a full surah after Surah Fatiha in prayers (better to be at least 3 verses)
• It is not inherently wrong to dance or clap (although inciting arousal is forbidden)
• There is no evidence that a woman travelling without a mahram man is forbidden
• It is allowed to play with tools of gambling (including with dice), and chess (as long as there is no gambling)
• It is forbidden for the husband and the wife (same rule) to leave the house when it infringes on their marital rights. If it does not infringe on their marital rights, then there is no prohibition
• Shaving the beard is not forbidden
• All humans are tahir

If there are any specific rulings of his which you would like to understand further, please message me or comment below, and if available, I'll add a short summary of how he derives his opinion. 

I hope these short posts prove useful in understanding inside the mind of Shaykh Hobbollah!

Source:

His daily rulings: https://hobbollah.com/araa_category/%d8%a2%d8%b1%d8%a7%d8%a1/

Mixing between men and women: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d9%88%d9%82%d9%81-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%ae%d8%aa%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%b7-%d8%a8%d9%8a%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b1%d8%ac%d8%a7%d9%84-%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%86%d8%b3%d8%a7%d8%a1/

Illegitimate person can lead prayers: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%85-%d8%a5%d9%85%d8%a7%d9%85%d8%a9-%d9%88%d9%84%d8%af-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b2%d9%86%d8%a7-%d9%84%d8%b5%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ac%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%b9%d8%a9/

Shaking the hands of the opposite gender: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%85-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d8%b5%d8%a7%d9%81%d8%ad%d8%a9-%d8%a8%d9%8a%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b1%d8%ac%d9%84-%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d8%b1%d8%a3%d8%a9/ (also note his 7 lectures on the topic)

Animals from the sea: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d9%88%d9%82%d9%81-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ad%d9%8a%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%86%d8%a7%d8%aa-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%a6%d9%8a%d9%91%d8%a9-%d9%88%d8%ab%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%b1-%d8%a7%d9%84/

Purity of wine, alcohol etc. etc. https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%b7%d9%87%d8%a7%d8%b1%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ae%d9%85%d8%b1-%d9%88%d9%85%d8%b7%d9%84%d9%82-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d8%b3%d9%83%d8%b1%d8%a7%d8%aa-%d9%88%d9%85%d9%84%d8%ad%d9%82%d8%a7%d8%aa%d9%87%d8%a7/

Slaughterer does not need to be a Muslim: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%b9%d8%af%d9%85-%d8%a7%d8%b4%d8%aa%d8%b1%d8%a7%d8%b7-%d8%a5%d8%b3%d9%84%d8%a7%d9%85-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b0%d8%a7%d8%a8%d8%ad-%d9%81%d9%8a-%d8%ad%d9%84%d9%8a%d9%91%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b0%d8%a8%d9%8a/

A'lamiyya: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d9%88%d9%82%d9%81-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%b4%d8%b1%d8%b7-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a3%d8%b9%d9%84%d9%85%d9%8a%d9%91%d8%a9-%d9%81%d9%8a-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d9%81%d8%aa%d9%8a-%d9%88%d9%85%d8%b1/

Judge can be man or woman: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%b9%d8%af%d9%85-%d8%a7%d8%b4%d8%aa%d8%b1%d8%a7%d8%b7-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b0%d9%83%d9%88%d8%b1%d8%a9-%d9%81%d9%8a-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%82%d8%a7%d8%b6%d9%8a/

Full surah after Fatiha: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%b9%d8%af%d9%85-%d9%88%d8%ac%d9%88%d8%a8-%d9%82%d8%b1%d8%a7%d8%a1%d8%a9-%d8%b3%d9%88%d8%b1%d8%a9-%d9%83%d8%a7%d9%85%d9%84%d8%a9-%d8%a8%d8%b9%d8%af-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%81%d8%a7%d8%aa%d8%ad%d8%a9-%d9%81/

Dancing and clapping: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%85-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b1%d9%82%d8%b5-%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa%d8%b5%d9%81%d9%8a%d9%82/

Woman travelling without a mahram: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%85-%d8%b3%d9%81%d8%b1-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d8%b1%d8%a3%d8%a9-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%af%d9%88%d9%86-%d9%85%d9%8e%d8%ad%d8%b1%d9%85/

Tools of gambling: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%84%d8%b9%d8%a8-%d8%a8%d8%a2%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%aa-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%82%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%b1-%d8%a8%d8%b9%d8%af-%d8%b2%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%84-%d9%88%d8%b5%d9%81-%d8%a2%d9%84%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84/

Leaving house: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%85-%d8%ae%d8%b1%d9%88%d8%ac-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b2%d9%88%d8%ac%d8%a9-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%a8%d9%8a%d8%aa%d9%87%d8%a7-%d8%a8%d8%ba%d9%8a%d8%b1-%d8%a5%d8%b0%d9%86-%d8%b2%d9%88%d8%ac%d9%87%d8%a7/ - also see https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ad%d9%82%d9%91-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ac%d9%86%d8%b3%d9%8a-%d9%84%d9%84%d8%b2%d9%88%d8%ac%d8%a9/

Shaving the beard: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%85-%d8%ad%d9%84%d9%82-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%84%d8%ad%d9%8a%d8%a9/

Purity of all people: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%b7%d9%87%d8%a7%d8%b1%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a5%d9%86%d8%b3%d8%a7%d9%86/

Shaykh Haidar Hobbollah - an introduction to his way of thinking (3/4)

In the previous post, we covered some of the most important differences between Shaykh Hobbollah and many other Shi'a scholars. 

In this post, we do a deep-dive into what I consider (based on my brief reading of his works) other important methodological differences in how he approaches narrations (ahadith) compared to most other scholars.

• Importance of certainty:
  
  
• Shaykh Hobbollah believes that you need to be certain about any Islamic ruling [A side point: what he means by certainty is not the traditional scholars’ definition of certainty (qat’); he would instead define certainty as what the ‘urf al-‘uqala would consider to be certain which is a lower level i.e. he believes in itmi’nan and not yaqeen]. This is at two levels: certainty that it came from Allah or an infallible (qat’iyyat al-sudur) and certainty in its meaning (qat’iyyat al-dalala)
  
  
• Further to this, is his view that in order to derive Islamic laws, you do not take the traditional approach to ahadith (what he terms al manhaj al-tafkiki al-tajzi’i), where you take the narrations of a topic, compare them and reach a conclusion (often by specifying the general narrations etc.) based on those that are authoritative. He instead takes a different approach in most cases (what he terms al-manhaj al-indimami), which he believes is closer to what a general rational person would customarily do. In this approach, one takes all the evidence available whether it is deemed sahih or da`if (weak) in its reliability as a source, and consider them altogether and exert one’s best efforts to find whatever must be true given all the evidence to get the point of certainty (al-qadr al-mutayaqqan).
  
  
• Prioritise Qur’an over narrations: Most scholars end up prioritising the inference from narrations (sunna) over what you might understand from the Qur’an (including the spirit of the Qur’an or ruh al-Qur’an). This is because when they seem to contradict, the narrations are given precedence as they are perceived to specify Qur’anic verses (even when they theoretically say that the Qur’an takes precedence).
  
  
  Shaykh Hobbollah prefers another perspective (which other contemporary scholars have taken e.g. Sayyid Fadlallah, Shaykh Shams al-din, Shaykh Saanei) where narrations are discarded if they go against the spirit of the Quran (the requirement of al-muwafaqa ma’a mizaj al-Qur`an wa madmunihi wa ruhihi). He notes that Sayyid Sistani and Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr also have this position in theory but Shaykh Hobbollah struggles to find examples of its usage in practice (other than in a few examples).

• Start from theoretical principles down to rulings (not the other way around): He notes there are 3 types of fiqh: fiqh related to a specific issue (fiqh al-mas`ala) e.g. purity, blood money etc.; fiqh related to a rule (fiqh al-qa’ida) e.g. no harm principle etc., which may have multiple applications across different issues; and fiqh related to a broader theory (fiqh al-nadhariyya). In the latter category, he notes the upwards approach (al-ittijah al-su’udi) taken by some e.g. Shahid al-Sadr in his approach to Iqtisaduna (“our economics”), which is where you take the individual rulings on an issue, and gather them to derive what the principle/system must be. He prefers the downwards approach (al-ittijah al-nuzuli) from the principles to the specific issues e.g. from Shaykh Shams al-Din, which doesn’t suffer from the problems of the previous approach (gaps, inconsistencies etc.), as these are resolved if you have principles which would take precedence (hakim) over anything that contradicts them. The challenge, of course, is how to define what are the principles and how to distinguish them from the individual rulings (al-adilla al-ulya vs. al-adilla al-juz`iyya).
  
  
• Determine which texts are contextual and which are relevant for all time (al-tamyiz bayna al-nusus al-tarikhiyya wa al-thabita). There are two important mechanisms he uses here, which are (1) Qur’anic verses are generally principles; and narrations are either principles or temporal; (2) the usages of specific expressions in the text e.g. “the messenger of Allah ruled on a specific issue” gives an indication that something is temporal rather than forever (from Shahid al-Sadr). The reality is that this is not straightforward and requires detailed understanding of the various pieces of evidence, their context, the history etc. There are two approaches that one could use: (A) there is a base position (`asl) where a rule at the time of the Prophet (SAW) is applicable forever; or (B) there is a base position (‘asl) where a rule at the time of the Prophet (SAW) is only applicable in its time and not applicable in a new time. He rejects both of these as he does not think there is any base position (‘asl) in such a situation. He believes that you have to go through each ruling and find out if it is a historical ruling, and if you have any doubt, you return only to what you are certain about (al-qadr al-mutayaqqan)

On a side point, there is a general principle used by scholars, which states that when it comes to acts of worship, you need to have specific textual evidence to allow a certain act. For example, for someone to lead congregational prayers (jama'a), you need specific evidence that allows them to do so. You cannot assume that just because there is no text, that there is no restriction (which is the case on other issues). This is the discussion in usul al-fiqh about asalat ‘adam al-mashru’iyya. When it specifically comes to the issue of congregational prayers, Shaykh Hobbollah does not agree with this perspective, and would argue that unless there is certain evidence that a sitting person cannot lead the prayer of a standing person, that evidence is discarded.

In the next (and final) post, I am going to look at the ramifications of these differences in opinion in his fiqh opinions. Hope you find them interesting!

Sources:

His 779-page book on hadith, Hujjiyat al-Hadith (2016/2017): https://hobbollah.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/HojietAlhadith.pdf

The summary of the approach he takes, Manhaj al-Wuthuq al-Itmi’nani wa Kayfiyyat al-Ta’amul ma’a al-Akhbar wa al-Riwayat (December 2021) https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d9%85%d9%86%d9%87%d8%ac-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%88%d8%ab%d9%88%d9%82-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%b7%d9%85%d8%a6%d9%86%d8%a7%d9%86%d9%8a-%d9%88%d9%83%d9%8a%d9%81%d9%8a%d9%91%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa%d8%b9%d8%a7/

The approach he takes related to women Manahij al-Ijtihad wa Ta`thiriha ‘ala Dirasat Qadaya al-Mar`a (2019, but based on lectures in 2013, written by Shaykh Sa’eed Nura but checked by Shaykh Hobbollah): https://hobbollah.com/articles/%d9%85%d9%86%d8%a7%d9%87%d8%ac-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%ac%d8%aa%d9%87%d8%a7%d8%af-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d8%b9%d8%a7%d8%b5%d8%b1%d8%a9-%d9%88%d8%aa%d8%a3%d8%ab%d9%8a%d8%b1%d9%87%d8%a7-%d8%b9%d9%84%d9%89/

Source on the final point: https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%85-%d8%a5%d9%85%d8%a7%d9%85%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%82%d8%a7%d8%b9%d8%af-%d9%84%d9%84%d9%82%d8%a7%d8%a6%d9%85-%d9%88-%d9%81%d9%8a-%d8%b5%d9%84%d8%a7%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ac%d9%85/

Shaykh Haidar Hobbollah - an introduction to his way of thinking (2/4)

In the last post, we covered Shaykh Hobbollah's view on the scope of Shari'a. This has major ramifications, when considered alongside some of his other views. 

In this post, we are going to start to cover the main differences between Shaykh Hobbollah’s approach to fiqh, and the majority of (Shi’a) scholars?

Whilst there are many differences, the three he highlighted as the most important in his lecture at Mahfil Ali (which he asked not to be recorded) were the below [in my view, the most impactful is the second one]:

1. He does not believe there is a requirement to adhere to any form of consensus (ijma’) or the majority opinion of the scholars (shuhra), because neither of these lead to certainty and therefore do not have authority. Whilst in most contemporary usul al-fiqh works, consensus or majority opinion of scholars does not have any authority (hujjiyya) unless it uncovers an Islamic rule (kashifiyya) [noting this is also dhanni], in reality, the final ruling in the fiqh works (risala ‘amaliyya) of most contemporary scholars often does adhere to the views of the majority, by use of obligatory precaution (ahwat wujubi). This is not the position he takes.
   
   
2. He does not believe that you can rely upon narrations by themselves, unless there are enough of them to give you certainty (or unless there are sufficient other contextual indicators [qara`in] that together will help reach certainty).
   
   Another way of putting this, is that he adheres to the position that khabar al-wahid al-dhanni does not have authority. This viewpoint had been held by major scholars of the past, but is not held by any (?) other senior contemporary scholar. The traditional scholarship considers that Allah has certainly given us permission to use khabar al-wahid despite it being a probable source of law. Shaykh Hobbollah disagrees with this conclusion.
   
   
3. He does not believe in the principle of tasamuh fi adillat al-sunan which some scholars use. This is a principle which allows the use of weak sources of evidence to derive a law (what I call the “why not, as there’s no harm” principle). This is often used by some scholars to justify rulings when there are only a small number of weak narrations. It is worth noting that this is not a position held by all scholars and many contemporary scholars do not use this principle.

The conclusion from these methodological differences – which in and of themselves in practice have precedent amongst the major scholars of our current time and/or of the past (including point 2) – is that the threshold required to reach an Islamic law is significantly higher than for most scholars.

This means that there are far fewer Islamic rules that can be derived compared to the majority.

This may be problematic if you had a view that the Shari’a has to be comprehensive [although you could say that the gap could be filled by principles such as bara’a, or you could use the argument of insidadis, who say that you can derive rulings without certainty (authority of Mutlaq al-dhann)]. However, given Shaykh Hobbollah does not have this view, it is not problematic.

In the next post, we will look at some of the other important ways his approach to fiqh differ from the majority.

Useful sources:

His short analysis on the authority of ijma’ and shuhra:  https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%85%d9%88%d9%82%d9%81-%d9%85%d9%86-%d8%ad%d8%ac%d9%8a%d9%91%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a5%d8%ac%d9%85%d8%a7%d8%b9-%d9%88%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b4%d9%87%d8%b1%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%81%d8%aa%d9%88/

His 779-page book on hadith, Hujjiyat al-Hadith (2016/2017): https://hobbollah.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/HojietAlhadith.pdf

His essay on the topic of Tasamuh (November 2021): https://hobbollah.com/araa/%d8%b9%d8%af%d9%85-%d8%ab%d8%a8%d9%88%d8%aa-%d9%82%d8%a7%d8%b9%d8%af%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa%d8%b3%d8%a7%d9%85%d8%ad-%d9%81%d9%8a-%d8%a3%d8%af%d9%84%d9%91%d8%a9-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b3%d9%86%d9%86/  

 

Shaykh Haidar Hobbollah - an introduction to his way of thinking (1/4)

It has been 7 years since my last post, and apologies for this! Perhaps I may start more regularly again. 

However, rarely have I been so impressed by a scholar, as I was when I met with Shaykh Haidar Hobbollah. On the one hand, he has decades of experience teaching at the highest levels (bahth kharij) in Qum complemented by a plethora of books and essays on complex topics, with innovative ideas. Yet on the other hand, he has also retained the respect of traditional scholarship despite having significantly different views.

This series of short posts aims to bring to light how he approaches Fiqh, why it is important, and what the consequences are. I have framed it as a question-and-answer dialogue, even though it is my interpretation of his perspectives, because I believe it will be easier to understand his thought process. The sources for this, is a mixture of (A) his own published works; (B) what I have heard directly from him; and (C) what he said at Mahfil Ali on 27 May 2022 (and/or what I understood from my conversations with him). I will put useful sources under each question for the more interested readers (who can understand Arabic legal texts).

[One note: I have used the term “Shaykh” throughout to refer to Shaykh Hobbollah. Some may believe this does not accurately reflect the extremely high stature of Shaykh Hobbollah, and some may prefer to use a term such as Mujtahid or Marja’. However, Shaykh Hobbollah is truly humble and does not prefer these titles, even if they appear to be a fairer reflection of his scholarship and abilities. He also dislikes the term Ayatullah because he believes we should not associate human fallible scholarship with Allah].

All errors in the below are mine, and mine alone.

What is the scope of Shari’a?

Shaykh Hobbollah covers this issue comprehensively in his 820 page book entitled “The comprehensiveness of the Shari’a” (shumul al-shari’a), and in 113 lectures on his website under the title “The comprehensiveness of the Shari’a: the limits and scope of Fiqh”. This topic is pivotal to understanding his approach to deriving Islamic laws.

He recognises that the vast majority of Muslim scholars believe that the Shari’a is comprehensive and that there is no situation without an Islamic rule (i.e. it is obligatory, prohibited, recommended, discouraged or allowed), which can be derived based on the standard sources of evidence or base principles. [I will not cover the nuance here about mintaqat al-firagh, which is the view of scholars like Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr].

In contrast to this vast majority, Shaykh Hobbollah’s conclusion is that the Shari’a is not comprehensive i.e. it does not provide an answer for every question. He does not go so far as to say that the scope of Shari’a is extremely limited or even non-existent, like Soroush, Shabastari, Ali Abd al-Razzaq, Mahdi Bazargan…etc..

Instead, Shaykh Hobbollah’s view is that the Shari’a only covers a specific number of issues, and many of issues that we face, should be resolved not by an Islamic injunction, rather they should be resolved through other mechanisms such as ethics, rationality or values (as long as they do not contravene any established Islamic law). More accurately he believes in the goals of shari’a (maqasid) or what he calls in his book the the rules of the constitution (al-qawaid al-dusturiyya). The difference here, is that the conclusions derived through these other mechanisms are human and fallible, able to be discussed and disagreed with, as they are importantly not part of the Shari’a. They therefore cannot be attributed to the religion or to Allah (swt).

For example, if one were to conclude that the Shari’a does not cover issues such as cloning, then Shaykh Hobbollah’s view is that there is no Islamic ruling on this issue, and that any ruling e.g. by the government or by society, which does not contradict an Islamic ruling or one of the maqasid al-Shari’a (goals of Shari’a), would be appropriate. If a rule was instituted by the government, it would be an Islamic duty to not break the law, but there would be no specifically Islamic rule related to cloning i.e. you could say this rule is not against Islamic law, but you could not say there is an Islamic law on this issue.

There is an important nuance to highlight here. Where there is insufficient evidence to derive an Islamic ruling, traditional scholars would often conclude that the Shari’a states that you are free to act in any way (asalat al-bara`ah). Shaykh Hobbollah would argue that there is no Shari’a ruling instituted by Allah (ja’l) in the first place.

You might think that this means there is no practical difference between these two positions (even if there is a major theoretical difference). In and of itself, this may be true. However, when this position is combined with the other differences of methodology by Shaykh Hobbollah (see below), the practical differences become very apparent.

 

Useful sources:

A short summary of his views on the topic (19 May 2022): http://hobbollah.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/shomoolshariaa.pdf

His written publication on the topic (2018): https://hobbollah.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ShomolAlshariat.pdf

His bahth kharij lectures on the topic (2017-2019): https://hobbollah.com/mohazerat_category/%D8%B4%D9%85%D9%88%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B9%D8%A9/

Translations of his position can also be seen here:

https://www.iqraonline.net/book-summary-part-1-comprehensiveness-of-the-shariah-discussions-on-extents-of-legal-reference-between-intellect-and-revelation/

https://www.iqraonline.net/book-summary-part-2-comprehensiveness-of-the-shariah/