SHIITE SCHOLARS' VIEW ON GHULU

[Taqavi]

What is the Shiite scholars' view on "ghulu"?

 

Among the discussions related to religious beliefs, especially in Shia Islam, the topic of "ghulu" has always been raised. Ghulu means exaggeration and exceeding moderation regarding the status and rank of the Infallible Imams (AS). However, the important point is that ghulu has two main types: ghulu in essence and ghulu in attributes.

Ghulu in essence: Ghulu in essence means that a person or group believes in the prophethood of the Infallible Imams (AS) or the divinity of the Infallible Imams (AS), or incarnation, or transmigration, or Tafwidh (delegation); in other words, it raises the essence of the Infallible Imams (AS) above their level.[1]

Ghulu in attributes: "Ghulu in attributes," which can also be described as "ghulu in virtues," refers to incorrectly attributing qualities, virtues, and miracles to the Infallible Imams (AS) they did not possess.

Unlike ghulu in essence, which Shiite theologians and jurists unanimously consider to be kufr (disbelief), there is a difference of opinion among them regarding ghulu in attributes, and in fact, this issue has become a relative issue. [2]

Many Shiite scholars and researchers have not specifically addressed this distinction. While this distinction has very important implications in jurisprudence, rijāl (knowledge of hadith narrators), and drayah (understanding and interpretation of hadiths). In fact, when we separate these two types of ghulu, we arrive at a more accurate understanding of the Shiite scholars' view on ghulu. Many Shiite scholars, when they speak of "ghulu," mean ghulu in essence, not ghulu in attributes, which are often confused in common conceptions.

Great Shia scholars, such as Sheikh Mufid and Allama Hilli, when speaking of Ghulat, mostly referred to ghulu in essence. For example, Sheikh Mufid considers Ghulat to be those who attribute divinity and prophethood to the Imams and ascribe to them virtues beyond their limits. He considers Ghulat to be infidels and misguided and emphasizes that Imam Ali (AS) punished them. [3]

Allama Hilli also considers the belief of Ghulat to be invalid, because he believes that God is not a body and cannot incarnate in a body. He also considers the miracles of the Imams to be similar to the miracles of other prophets and considers this as proof of refuting their divinity. [4]

The late Sheikh Saduq also said about the Ghulat: Our belief is that the Ghulat and Mufawwida are infidels towards Allah Almighty and are worse than Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Qadariyya, and Haruriyya, and all innovators and those who follow their whims, and they have not belittled anything like Allah Almighty. [5]

Allama Majlesi says about ghulu: Note that exaggeration regarding the Prophet (saw) and the Imams (as) means either believing in their divinity, or considering them partners with God in worship, creation, and provision. Belief in any of these is a type of atheism, infidelity, and departure from religion. [6]

While all Shia theologians and jurists unanimously consider ghulu in essence to be infidelity and consider those who believe in it to be infidels, the issue of ghulu in attributes is much more complex and a subject of disagreement.

In reality, the issue of ghulu in attributes has become a relative matter; meaning that each theologian, based on his specific theological viewpoint, believes in a certain degree of attributes and virtues for the Infallibles (AS). Therefore, if a theologian believes that the Infallibles (AS) possess a specific degree of attributes and virtues, he does not consider believing in exceeding that limit permissible and accuses those who believe in it of exaggeration.

On the other hand, another theologian who believes in a higher degree of attributes and virtues for the Infallibles (AS) not only does not consider himself an exaggerator but also accuses his counterpart of negligence and deficiency in understanding and knowing the high status of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) and considers him guilty. These disagreements show that the boundary between respecting and venerating the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) and exaggeration is a relative line and depends on the viewpoint and theological foundations of each individual.

In other words, regarding the attributes and virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS), there is no absolute and definitive criterion to definitively determine which belief is ghulu and which is negligence; rather, it is a broad spectrum where each individual, based on their level of understanding and belief, finds their place.  As a result, what seems like ghulu to one person may be the truth and knowledge to another, and vice versa. This relativity in understanding the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) shows that the issue of exaggeration has transcended a purely theological ruling and become a cognitive and cultural challenge.

The disagreement over the permissibility of "the Prophet's (saw) error" was one of the most prominent disagreements between two Shiite intellectual schools, namely the Qum school and the Baghdad school; a clear example of the issue of ghulu in attributes.

Shaykh Saduq, a prominent figure of the Qum school, quoting his teacher Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Hasan ibn Walid, considered the first sign of exaggeration to be the belief in the negation of error from the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and the Imams (AS). [7] From his perspective, those who elevate the status of infallibility to the point of not allowing any kind of mistake for the Infallibles (AS) have, in fact, fallen into exaggeration.

In contrast, Shaykh Mufid, one of the great figures of the Baghdad school, states that if Shaykh Saduq's quote from his teacher is correct, regarding those who deny error from the Infallibles (AS) being exaggerators, then he himself is at fault, even if he is from the scholars of Qum. [8]

Shaykh Mufid goes further and points to some of the beliefs of the people of Qum, accusing them of negligence in religion. He says that he encountered a group of people from Qum who downgraded the Imams (AS) from their true position and believed that the Imams (AS) were unaware of many of the religious laws and gained knowledge of them after deep thought and contemplation. Some of them even believed that the Imams (AS) resorted to opinion and conjecture to obtain the ruling of the Sharia. Shaykh Mufid considers these views to be clear negligence and believes that this group of scholars fell short in recognizing the position and status of the Imams (AS). [9]

Ultimately, Sheikh Mufid considers the criterion of ghulu to be the denial of the created attributes (being created) of the Imams (AS) and the attribution of divinity and eternity to them.  Instead of focusing on the issue of error or lack thereof, he emphasizes that exaggeration means denying the humanity of the Infallibles (AS) and attributing divine attributes to them. [10]

These disagreements show that the understanding and interpretation of the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) throughout history has always been a subject of discussion and exchange of views, and each intellectual group, based on its own theological foundations and viewpoints, has arrived at a specific definition of exaggeration and fault.

Conclusion:

Therefore, the scholars' views on ghulu in essence differ from ghulu in attributes; all Shiite theologians and jurists unanimously consider ghulu in essence to be disbelief and declare those who hold it to be disbelievers, while the issue of ghulu in attributes (exaggeration in expressing their virtues and abilities) is much more complex and a subject of disagreement.  In fact, the issue of ghulu in attributes has become a relative matter; meaning that each theologian, according to his specific theological viewpoint, believes in a certain limit of attributes and virtues for the Infallibles (AS).

 

---

[1] . Jaryan Shenasi Ghulu (1): Safari, Nematollah, p: 7.

[2] . Ibid. p: 10.

[3] . Tas’hih E’teqadat al-Imamiyya: Sheikh Mofid, vol. 1, p. 131.

[4] . Anwar al-Malakut fi Sharh al-Yaqut: Allameh Helli, vol. 1, p. 201.

[5] . Al-E’teqadat: Sheikh Saduq, vol. 1, p. 97.

[6] . Bihar al-Anwar: Mohammad-Taghi, Allameh Majlesi, vol. 25, p. 346.

[7] . Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih: Sheikh Saduq, vol. 1, p. 360.

[8] . Moghayesei Miyan Do Maktab Fekri Shi’a dar Qom va Baghdad dar Qarn-e Chaharom-e Hejri (A comparison between two Shiite schools of thought in Qom and Baghdad in the fourth century AH): Yaqub, Jafari, p. 30.

[9] . Tas’hih E’teqadat al-Imamiyya: Sheikh Mofid, vol. 1, p. 135.

[10] . Ibid. p: 136