Message to the World Congress on the Millennium of Sheikh Mufid

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Thanks be to God, the Lord of the Worlds, and the best of His blessings and purest of His greetings be upon our master, the greatest Prophet, Muhammad al-Mustafa, and his pure family, especially the remainder of God on earth, may my soul be sacrificed for him.

A thousand years ago, on one of the eventful days of Baghdad, the 'Ashnan' square became crowded with people gathered due to a sorrowful event. Thousands of eyes wept for a man whose death was a great incident. Tens of thousands prayed over the body of a noble person who, for fifty years, like a bright torch, illuminated a vast part of the Islamic world with his knowledge and wisdom, and had set another Tigris of knowledge and wisdom flowing on the banks of the Tigris in Baghdad. The bitter and bloody storms of events in the Abbasid capital and the storm of prejudices and ill-will could not extinguish the lamp of knowledge and action that was connected to the olive tree of Quranic sciences and the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), and had shone with the light of human intellect. The thorns and debris of misunderstandings and ill-will could not block the roaring river that carried jurisprudence, theology, reason, and tradition to fertile lands.

On the day when the body of Mufid was escorted by a multitude of people and the prayer was led by Sayyid Sharif, Ali al-Murtada, hearts full of hatred and devoid of wisdom and prudence considered this the end of that great man, and simple-minded people celebrated his death.

However, the eyes and hearts of every wise person could clearly perceive that the death of that leader of the wise could not be the end of someone whose fifty-year flow had created a spring of knowledge, culture, ethics, and wisdom in the realm of human thought, and the divine will and the tradition of history had guaranteed its fertility and growth in its eternal passage through generations, eras, and centuries, until reaching the sea of ultimate human growth.

That day, the frail body of Mufid was buried in his house in Dar al-Riyah, Baghdad, to be later transferred to the vicinity of the shrine of Abu Ja'far al-Jawad (peace be upon him) and rest in that abode of divine mercy. However, his great personality, which could not be hidden or forgotten, remained ever-present before the eyes of time and never faded from memory, playing its prominent role in the flourishing of jurisprudence, theology, and the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them).

Today, after a thousand years have passed since that day, the formation of the millennium of Sheikh Mufid by your dear efforts is a renewal of the memory of that great event and a tribute to that pinnacle of knowledge and piety, whose ten centuries of growth in science and culture have not diminished his pride or obscured him from view.

The scientific generation of today, by honoring Mufid and publishing his written works, is in fact fulfilling its duty of gratitude towards a man whose thoughts and ideas have always been present within the rich and fruitful flow of jurisprudence and theology of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), and who has served as the cornerstone and main foundation in the lofty edifice of Shiite jurisprudence and theology, as recognized over this millennium.

Mufid's presence in the assembly of living scientific and theological opinions is not through the publication of books or the mention of his views, although publishing his books and mentioning his views is a requisite of gratitude towards him by all theologians and jurists after him. Rather, this brilliant presence is due to the continuation of the process and trajectory in jurisprudence and theology that he initiated and founded.

The formation of this millennium of tribute and gratitude firstly acquaints today's generation with the face of this great man and provides the groundwork for appreciation and then utilization of his works for today's and tomorrow's generations. Secondly, it offers analysts and researchers of the history of jurisprudence and rational sciences the opportunity to gain new insights into the path of growth and development of these sciences and the formation and flourishing of their constituent elements during a critical period of history. This point gains more importance when the fourth and fifth centuries AH are considered as a prominent and brilliant period in the elevation of Islamic cultural and scientific and literary heritage.

Thirdly, it facilitates the acquaintance with Shiite theological and fundamental knowledge for Muslim researchers of every sect and creed, as well as for the general Muslim public on a wide scale. The importance of this point becomes evident when we consider that today, the poisonous pens and mercenary enemies or agents of malice and hatred have written and disseminated so many lies and slanders about Shiite beliefs, which is one of the greatest Islamic sects and today the vanguard of Muslim awakening, that it is comparable to all that has been done throughout history.

Unfortunately, today the political and colonial motivation in this misleading movement is more apparent than ever, even more so than when the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs considered spreading lies about the Shiites as part of their comprehensive struggle against the followers of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) and a necessary prelude to their suppression. With this perspective, any research introducing Shiite beliefs and knowledge also contributes to establishing unity and brotherhood among Muslims, as the enemies of Islam have always sought to sow discord among Muslims by misrepresenting the doctrinal and jurisprudential knowledge of their sects to one another.

Now, with thanks to the distinguished scholars who have organized this high-level gathering and to all of you wise and knowledgeable individuals who will enrich it with your scientific presence, I intend to participate in your great collective work by presenting an important point about the scientific personality of the great Sheikh Mufid and to partake in showcasing the luminous face of this man of centuries and ages. This point concerns 'Mufid's position in the trajectory of Shiite scientific thought in the fields of theology and jurisprudence,' and I have been convinced of it with reliable evidence from the words and scientific opinions and written works of that great man himself or from the words of those who have spoken about that great man, whether students or translators of him.

The point in a short phrase is that: Sheikh Mufid in the chain of Imami scholars is not just a prominent and distinguished theologian and jurist, but beyond that, he is the founder and leader of a scientific movement that has continued to develop in the fields of theology and jurisprudence up to today in Shiite scientific circles, and despite not being immune to historical, geographical, and doctrinal influences, its main features and fundamental lines have remained intact.

The explanation and proof of this point gain importance from the fact that this scientific movement, in the period connected to the life of Sheikh Mufid until nearly half a century after his death, has undergone such rapid and remarkable transformation and development that in the face of it, Sheikh Mufid's foundational role has been overlooked.

In this point, the main emphasis is that the outstanding and brilliant scientific efforts of Sheikh Mufid's distinguished student, Sayyid Murtada Alam al-Huda (died in 436 AH), and the pinnacle of this series in the era of Sheikh al-Ta'ifa Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Tusi (died in 460 AH) are in fact the continuation of a movement whose source and founder was Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Nu'man al-Mufid. To explain this point, it is necessary to define the effective and decisive role of Mufid:

1. In establishing the independent identity of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them)

2. In founding the correct scientific form and framework for Shiite jurisprudence

3. In creating a logical synthesis between reason and tradition in jurisprudence and theology...

The lofty edifice that Shiite jurists and theologians have erected over the past ten centuries and the unparalleled treasure they have created from their scientific works are all based on the foundation that Sheikh Mufid laid with these three dimensions of his scientific struggle.

Before explaining these three dimensions, it should be said that Sheikh Mufid and the Shiite scientific circle of Baghdad in his time are each phenomena that had no precedent in Shiite history until then.

Before this history, undoubtedly, the fertile Shiite scientific circles had spread everywhere from the Levant to Transoxiana. The 'Qom' circle, which was a major center of hadith and the successor to the 'Kufa' of the second and third centuries, and the 'Ray' circle, from which Kulayni and Ibn Quba and several others emerged, were only part of the Shiite scientific collections. In the east, the scientific circle of Transoxiana, from which two well-known graduates, Ayyashi Samarqandi and Abu Amr al-Kashi, emerged, and in the west, the Aleppo circle, from which the names of Hasan ibn Ahmad al-Sabi'i al-Halabi and Ali ibn Khalid al-Halabi are among the teachers of Mufid, should have been important centers of Shiite sciences and knowledge. A look at the list of Kashi's teachers reveals that in the region of Khorasan and Transoxiana, despite being far from the main Shiite scientific circles, a significant number of scholars and narrators were trained, and this strengthens the assumption that even before a Shiite scientific circle, these areas were engaged in training and graduating such personalities. At least ten of the mentioned teachers are attributed to Samarqand or Kash (a city near Samarqand), and approximately the same number are attributed to the cities of Bukhara, Balkh, Herat, Sarakhs, Nishapur, Bayhaq, Faryab, and some other cities in that region.

Observing all these names attributed to the cities of Transoxiana and Khorasan, who apparently were all or nearly all Shiites, considering that it is far from customary for someone in Qom or Kufa or Baghdad to seek out all these Khorasani and Turkistani teachers, strengthens the assumption that the house of Ayyashi, which according to Najashi: 'was a pasture for the Shiites and the people of knowledge' or: 'and his house was like a mosque among a copyist or a reader or a commentator, filled with people,' was in the same Samarqand and not in Baghdad, and in this case, this also indicates the prevalence of the sciences and knowledge of the Ahl al-Bayt and the warmth of the Shiite scientific circle in that city.

In the Levant and Aleppo, too, considering the large Shiite population and the Hamdanid government, which was itself Shiite and adhered to Shiite ceremonies and rituals, there must have been a significant scientific circle. Although, considering its proximity to Iraq and the presence of narrators and jurists from that region in Baghdad and later in the time of Sheikh Tusi in Najaf, it cannot be considered among the major circles.

This is the general situation of the Shiite circles in the period leading up to the time of Mufid. The Baghdad circle was also active during those times and engaged in the exchange of Islamic sciences and knowledge. However, with the emergence of Sheikh Mufid and the spread of his reputation for knowledge, Baghdad, which was the political and geographical center of the Islamic realm, gradually became the main center of Shiite sciences and knowledge, and not only the reference for solving Shiite intellectual and religious issues but also the Kaaba of the aspirations of seekers of knowledge.

Although there is no extensive list of all the students of Mufid, who must have been a large group, and the number of those mentioned as his students in biographical books is very few and much less than what a man like Mufid should have trained during nearly half a century of Shiite scientific leadership, but firstly, the departure of a genius like Sheikh Tusi from Tus to Baghdad and his not being drawn to the circles near his birthplace, namely Khorasan and Transoxiana, and his not staying in Ray and Qom, and also the lack of fame of prominent figures from those circles for a not-so-short period, all indicate that the Baghdad circle, with the fame and flourishing of Sheikh Mufid, occupied a position that we do not recall for any of the Shiite scientific circles before it, meaning that with the acquisition of all the sciences prevalent in the totality of Shiite circles, it broke the prosperity of other circles throughout the Islamic world and until the birth of the virgin and blessed Najaf circle (in the year 448 or 449), it was considered the crown jewel of Shiite scientific centers.

Undoubtedly, the axis and bright point and the source of the brilliance of this circle was Sheikh Mufid. With his extraordinary genius and tireless effort and by taking advantage of the exceptional position of the city of Baghdad as the political and geographical center of the Islamic world and the comings and goings of scientific figures from various sects to it, he achieved unparalleled comprehensiveness, and then as an attractive pole and axis, he became the distinguishing element of the Shiite circle of Baghdad in his time. By examining the scientific works of this great Sheikh and other evidence, it becomes clear that Mufid is an amazing assembly and meeting point of most of the characteristics that the prominent Shiite figures until that time were known for: in him, the jurisprudence of the ancients and Ibn Babawayh and Ja'far ibn Qulawayh, the theology of Ibn Quba and the Banu Nawbakht, the science of men of Kashi and Barqi, the hadith of Saduq and Saffar and Kulayni, in addition to unparalleled argumentative power and intellectual competition and many other prominent features were gathered together. They, of course, each held a torch on one of the paths of the knowledge of the Ahl al-Bayt. But Mufid, like a chandelier, is the assembly and meeting point of all of them. And this is something that we do not find in any of the scientific figures of Shiism before him. In his uniqueness, it is enough that Ibn al-Nadim (died 380) introduced him before the age of 44 as the leader of all Shiites in jurisprudence, theology, and hadith. And al-Dhahabi, who spoke of him in the History of Islam with a hostile and unfair tone, nevertheless quotes Ibn Abi Tayy about him, saying: he was unique in all sciences: in the two principles, in jurisprudence, in reports and knowledge of men, in the Quran and interpretation, in grammar and poetry... in all these sciences he was the leader of everyone and debated with followers of every belief.

Indeed, Mufid is someone in whom the sciences of the past in their perfection were gathered, and by the blessing of such a comprehensive and multifaceted and all-encompassing personality, the Shiite scientific circle was founded in the way that it continued for centuries after it, where jurisprudence, theology, principles, literature, hadith, and men were taught and researched and complemented each other. And it is this circle that at a very high point produced Sayyid Murtada and at the peak of perfection, Sheikh al-Ta'ifa Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Tusi.

Considering what has been said about the unprecedented nature of the phenomenon of Sheikh Mufid and the contemporary Baghdad circle, it is right to consider Mufid as the founder of Shiite scientific circles with the structure seen in the centuries after it, meaning a place where a collection of Islamic rational and traditional sciences is taught and studied, and its graduate becomes proficient in all or most of those sciences.

At least until the time of the First Martyr, when the focus on jurisprudence and its preliminaries became the dominant trend of scientific circles, the same structure was observed in all or most circles and their graduates, and this is the continuation of a movement that originated from the personality of Mufid and the circle he created, namely the Baghdad circle until the year 413.

Therefore, it is not surprising if it is claimed that such a unique and distinguished personality was the founder and opener of a new path in the three axes that were previously listed.

Now it is time to address the three aforementioned dimensions in the scientific personality of Mufid.

1. Establishing the independent identity of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them)

After the beginning of the occultation period and especially after the end of the 74-year minor occultation period and the complete disconnection of the Shiites from the hidden Imam (may our souls be sacrificed for him), one of the dangers that threatened the entirety of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt was that the mistakes and deliberate or unintentional deviations of some of those affiliated with this school might subtract or add things to it, or due to the fading of the fundamental boundaries of the school, deviant lines might mix with it and the deviations of doctrinal sects or fabricated religions might blend with its truths. During the presence of the Imam (peace be upon him), whenever such a thing occurred or its danger was raised, the person of the Imam was the reliable axis and center against which everything was compared and measured and judged. As long as the Imam (peace be upon him) was among the people, mistakes did not last long, and that infallible leader clarified major errors at critical moments. The Shiites were assured that if a deviant angle appeared in the general line of the school, eventually the proof would be revealed, and whoever sought the truth would find it. In the history of the lives of the Imams (peace be upon them), we encounter individuals who were explicitly criticized and rejected by the Imams (peace be upon them) for introducing an innovation or establishing a wrong path or promoting a false belief, such as Muhammad ibn Muflis known as Abu al-Khattab, or Ibn Abi al-Azafir known as Shalmaghani (which occurred during the minor occultation) and many others like them. We even encounter cases where in a disagreement between two groups of sincere and honest companions, when one group excommunicated and cursed someone or a group for a belief, the Imam defended the slandered individual or group, praised them, and thus confirmed that belief or refuted the deviation they were suspected of. For example, the Imam's endorsement of Yunus ibn Abd al-Rahman when the people of Qom excommunicated him and narrated strange reports from him, and the issuance of the phrase: 'May God have mercy on him, he was a righteous servant...' or: 'Yunus is the first to respond to Ali when he calls' (refer to Kashi's Rijal in the biography of Yunus ibn Abd al-Rahman) and also when the Banu Fadhal family, who were unanimously considered trustworthy and knowledgeable, were consulted by seekers of the sciences of the Ahl al-Bayt, with the issuance of the phrase: 'Take what they narrate and leave what they fabricate...' prevented the infiltration of their deviant belief (Fathi) among the Shiite masses. And there are many such cases in the history of the Imams' (peace be upon them) relations with their contemporary companions.

With this perspective, the Imam (peace be upon him) during the presence period was the vigilant and ever-alert guardian who personally took on the duty of protecting the boundaries of the school, which he was the guardian of its entirety.

However, during the occultation period, especially the major occultation, the situation completely changes. In this period, on the one hand, due to the increasing needs that now must be met not by the Imam (peace be upon him) but by the scholars of religion, and on the other hand, due to the natural differences of opinion among scholars and religious experts, for which there is no prominent and decisive axis to resolve, the way is open for different thoughts and opinions and interpretations in the principles and branches of religion, and among the various opinions expressed, naturally, elements from deviant schools or from non-Imami Shiite sects (Zaydi, Ismaili, Fathi, etc.) may enter the collection of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), threatening its purity and authenticity and even in the long run may completely change the direction of the school.

This is where one of the most important duties of the leaders of the community in that period becomes apparent, a duty that if properly fulfilled could mean the preservation of the sect and be equivalent to a decisive jihad. And that duty is to delineate Shiism as a coherent intellectual and practical system and to outline a framework for it in terms of belief and practice using the valuable heritage of the words of the Imams (peace be upon them). In this way, the independent and delineated identity of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) is specified and made available for understanding and use by its followers. This work allowed Shiite scholars and thinkers to distinguish fundamental deviation, meaning departure from the foundations of the sect in jurisprudence and theology, from differences of opinion that arise within the boundaries of the school.

Undoubtedly, this work had not been done before the time of Mufid (may his soul be sanctified). The existence of a qiyas tendency in the jurisprudence of Ibn Junayd and Mu'tazili tendencies in the theology of the Nawbakht family is the best evidence for this claim, and these are just two examples of the consequences and implications of the lack of delineation of the Shiite school in the fields of principles and branches of religion. In the field of jurisprudence, not utilizing rational and principled foundations for deduction and deriving branches from principles, which are among the established teachings of the Imams (peace be upon them), or on the other hand, slipping into the valley of qiyas, are two sides of unintentional deviation from the school and the result of not delineating and not outlining a clear framework for it. In the field of theology, the major manifestation of deviation resulting from the lack of delineation of the sect is the mixing of Shiite theology with Mu'tazili theology. In the latter case, the consequences of the lack of delineation of the sect have been numerous and damaging. Consider the following examples:

Prominent and well-known theologians like the Nawbakht family have been influenced by Mu'tazili tendencies in many issues raised in theology and have turned to extreme rationalism in understanding theological issues like the Mu'tazila.

Figures from the great Shiite scholars have been claimed by the Mu'tazila, and Mu'tazili writers have considered them as their own. One example of such individuals is the well-known Shiite scholar and theologian Hasan ibn Musa al-Nawbakhti, the nephew and contemporary of Abu Suhail Ismail ibn Ali al-Nawbakhti, a prominent figure of the Nawbakhtians.

Shiism and Mu'tazilism have been considered compatible in a single personality, and well-known and great figures have been identified and recognized as someone who is both Shiite and Mu'tazili, and even some of them have accepted and repeated this claim themselves! One example of this is Sahib ibn Abbad, who himself says in a poem:

If my heart were split open, it would be seen

Two lines written without a scribe

Justice and monotheism on one side

And love for the Ahl al-Bayt on the other

or: I said: I am Shiite and Mu'tazili...

And this is while the distinguishing belief of Shiism is the Imamate of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), which no Mu'tazili accepts, and the distinguishing belief of Mu'tazilism is the principle of 'the intermediate position' which is contrary and incompatible with the fundamentals of Shiism.

Some Shiite scholars have accepted one of the five principles of the Mu'tazila without themselves or others considering them Mu'tazili. For example, Najashi writes about Muhammad ibn Bishr al-Hamduni: he was a man of good belief and believed in the threat (Najashi: 381).

In general, Shiite theology has been considered derived from the Mu'tazila, and especially the two principles of monotheism and justice, with the claim that they entered Shiism from the Mu'tazili school, have been considered evidence for this claim. In the writings of sectarian and non-Shiite theologians from ancient times to later periods, and also in the writings of those who rely more on non-Shiite books in their knowledge, like Orientalists, this statement has been repeated many times. Even in the time of Mufid himself, the Mu'tazili Hanafi theologian and jurist from 'Saghan,' whom Mufid refers to as 'the misguided Sheikh' in al-Masa'il al-Saqaniyya, also held this false assumption about Mufid himself and, referring to him, says: a Sheikh in Baghdad who has taken his teachings from the Mu'tazila has said such and such. (See: al-Masa'il al-Saqaniyya p. 41) Of course, Shiite researchers and writers, except those who, like Orientalists, have relied more on non-Shiite sources or the Orientalists themselves, have been free from this mistake, and this is one of the blessings of Mufid and the great work he accomplished.

Considering what has been said, the importance of Sheikh Mufid's work as someone who took on the task of delineating the school of the Ahl al-Bayt becomes clear. This great genius, sensing the need of the time and relying on his scientific power, entered this difficult field and began an unprecedented and very important and sensitive work, and it must be acknowledged that he succeeded in this great task. The claim is not that after Mufid's work, no one has been ignorant or misguided in understanding the content of Shiism or could not have been. Rather, the claim is that understanding this school and recognizing its boundaries and limits has become possible for those who seek it, and in jurisprudence and theology, the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) has always been available for understanding and recognition by researchers without being confused with any other sect.

To achieve this great goal, Mufid undertook a series of scientific works, each of which deserves independent study and research. I will suffice with a brief mention of these works in the two fields of jurisprudence and theology.

In jurisprudence, he authored the book al-Muqni'a, which is a nearly complete cycle of jurisprudence, and in it, he followed the straight path and the middle line of jurisprudential deduction, which is a combination of using verbal evidence and principled rules, avoiding qiyas and istihsan and other invalid evidence (we will discuss this in the next section).

In addition, he innovated the book 'al-Tadhkira bi-Usul al-Fiqh' and in it, as far as can be said based on the existence of a book and writing, for the first time gathered the rules of jurisprudential deduction and issued fatwas based on them (we will also discuss this book in the next section). Beyond these, he compiled the book 'al-I'lam' in mentioning cases where a ruling is unanimously agreed upon among Shiite jurists and not unanimously agreed upon among Sunni jurists, meaning none of the Sunni jurists have issued a fatwa on it. Several chapters of jurisprudence in this book have been discussed and researched to convey the existing consensus in them. In the field of delineating the jurisprudential boundaries between Imami jurisprudence and Hanafi jurisprudence, the book 'al-Masa'il al-Saqaniyya,' which was written in response to the objections of a Hanafi jurist on several issues of Shiite jurisprudence, is a valuable work.

In this field, one of Mufid's main works is the book 'al-Naqd ala Ibn al-Junayd,' whose title reflects his firm border-guarding approach towards the jurisprudential boundaries of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them). Of course, a definitive judgment about the content of this book is not possible due to its unavailability, but familiarity with Mufid's style of work and his strong argumentation in religious debate and his extensive knowledge of religious sources and his intellectual rigor in arranging the premises of rational argumentation and his firm stance towards Ibn Junayd's qiyas tendency, which can be seen in al-Masa'il al-Saqaniyya, all lead to the conclusion that the aforementioned book must have had a scholarly and convincing content and undoubtedly had a complete impact on the continuation of the aforementioned tendency among Shiite jurists after Mufid.

Mufid's broader and more important work in this field, namely establishing the independent identity of the Shiite school, was carried out in the field of theology. In this field, our great Sheikh, with precision and sharp insight, aimed to delineate the boundary between Shiite beliefs and other theological schools and to prevent the entry of doctrinal elements from other Islamic or Shiite sects into the realm of Imami beliefs and also to prevent the attribution of erroneous ideas from which the Imami Shiites are free to the Shiite school. For this reason, he, while in the position of debating with other sects, invites all the schools of his time to debate and engages in discussion with Ash'ari and Mu'tazili, Murji'i and Khariji, Mushabbiha and Ahl al-Hadith, Ghulat and Nawasib, and other small and large branches attributed to Islam, but among them, he finds more intellectual confrontation with the Mu'tazili school and in several small and large books and treatises critiques and refutes the views of the Mu'tazila on various issues. The secret of this is that among the various Islamic sects, the Mu'tazila, due to the similarity between some of their principles and the principles of Shiism, have been subject to the suspicion that their school is the origin and source of many Shiite beliefs or even more than that, that Mu'tazilism is the same as Shiism with some differences. And this, in turn, has led to the false assumption that the entire Shiite theology is derived from Mu'tazili theology or that the principles of Shiite theology are the same as the principles of Mu'tazili theology, and as previously mentioned, consequences have resulted from this false assumption.

In fact, addressing the beliefs of the Mu'tazila in Mufid's books is a prominent example of the same characteristic of guarding the entirety of the Shiite school and proving the independence and originality of its theological system.

In this regard, the most important work of the high-ranking Sheikh is the famous book 'Awail al-Maqalat fi al-Madhahib wa al-Mukhtar' which was written to explain the difference between Shiism and Mu'tazilism. According to what the great man himself wrote in the introduction of the book, even the differences between these two sects in some agreed-upon fundamental issues, such as the issue of justice, have been considered and their separation from each other has been explained.

Mufid's phrase in this short introduction indicates that his goal in compiling this book was to provide a reliable and original doctrinal reference for those who want to have detailed faith in its intellectual foundations. In this book, he even critiques the beliefs of Shiite scholars who had previously incorporated some Mu'tazili views and diluted the Shiite theological collection, mentioning the Banu Nawbakht by name. And this is the same guarding and defense of the Shiite intellectual system that Mufid (may God have mercy on him) was the first to carry the banner of, as far as we know in detail.

Of course, delineating the doctrinal boundaries between Shiism and Mu'tazilism is not limited to the book Awail al-Maqalat. The great Sheikh has also addressed this important issue in other books with various expressions and sometimes in very eloquent and effective forms. However, in 'Awail...' this characteristic is very complete and comprehensive: in this book, we reach cases where there is agreement in belief between Shiism and Mu'tazilism. In these cases, he chooses the expression of the matter in a way that the independence of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt in inclination to that belief becomes clear, and the suspicion of following the Mu'tazila is eliminated. For example, in the chapter on the negation of the vision of God Almighty, he says: 'I say: indeed, seeing God the Exalted with the eye is not possible, and reason testifies to this statement, and the Quran speaks of it, and the narrations from the Imams of guidance in this regard are mutawatir. And the majority of the people of Imamate and all their theologians agree on this statement, except for one of them who deviated from the right path in this regard because a doubt occurred to him in the interpretation of the narrations. And all the Mu'tazila agree with the people of Imamate in this regard, as do the Murji'a and many of the Kharijites and Zaydis and groups from the Ahl al-Hadith.' (p. 162 Awail al-Maqalat).

In this statement, the Shiites rely on their own valid evidence, namely the book and the mutawatir tradition, in addition to the fact that rational evidence also indicates it, so there is no need to take this statement from the Mu'tazila or anyone else, but rather it is the Mu'tazila who have agreed with the people of Imamate on this issue, and this expression allows for the possibility that the Mu'tazila in this issue are indebted to the Shiites.

And again, in the chapter on 'God's knowledge of things before their existence,' he says:

'I say that God the Exalted knows everything that comes into existence before it comes into existence, and there is no event except that He knows it before it occurs. And there is no known or thing that can be known except that He knows its reality, and nothing is hidden from Him, the Exalted, in the earth or the heavens. And this statement is supported by rational evidence, the written book, and the mutawatir narrations from the family of the Messenger (peace be upon him), and this is the doctrine of all the Imamiya. And what the Mu'tazila have reported from Hisham ibn al-Hakam that he said otherwise, we have no knowledge of it, and our belief is that this report is a slander against him by them and a mistake by those who have imitated them in this report and attributed it to the Shiites. ... And in this belief, all those attributed to monotheism are with us except Jahm ibn Safwan from the Jabriya and Hisham ibn Amr al-Futi from the Mu'tazila...' (p. 60-61)

Here too, the tone of the speech and the reliance on the mutawatir hadith and the Quran and reason is such that the independence of the Shiites in the source of reference is completely clear. Although the Mu'tazila, like other sects, have accepted it.

In some cases, the Shiites and the Mu'tazila agree on part of a well-known issue. Mufid in such cases mentions the point of divergence between the Shiites and the Mu'tazila or other sects to prevent misunderstanding in the aspects of the issue. For example, both the Shiites and the Mu'tazila believe in grace and the best, but Mufid, under the chapter on grace, immediately adds after explaining the best: 'And I say that the grace that the proponents of grace consider necessary only comes from the generosity and kindness of God, not as they (the Mu'tazila and others) have thought that justice makes such grace obligatory on God, that if He does not do it, He has committed injustice.' (p. 65).

Even in cases where the opinion of a few Shiite theologians coincides with the Mu'tazila, he insists on mentioning them by name or by reference so that the opinion of that few is not considered as the belief of the Shiites and attributed to the Shiite school.

For example, in the issue of infallibility, after mentioning the Imamiya's view on the infallibility of the Imams (peace be upon them) from minor sins and even from forgetfulness and negligence, he says: 'And this is the doctrine of all the Imamiya except for those who have deviated from their straight path and have relied on the apparent meanings of some narrations whose inner meanings and interpretations are contrary to their corrupt opinion. And all the Mu'tazila in this issue are opposed and consider major sins and even apostasy possible for the Imams.' (p. 74) It seems that Mufid's reference in this statement is to Sheikh Saduq (may God have mercy on him).

In these examples and throughout the book Awail al-Maqalat, the prominent role of Sheikh Mufid in delineating the school and as a vigilant and uncompromising border guard who insists on outlining the doctrinal and theological framework of the Shiites so that its followers are not confused with any other sect or school is evident. This same goal is pursued in other books as well, albeit with slightly different methods. For example, in 'al-Hikayat,' where a significant portion is devoted to refuting the beliefs of the Mu'tazila on various theological topics, a chapter is opened under the title 'The Accusation of Anthropomorphism,' where the narrator of the stories, who seems to be Sayyid Murtada, says:

'The Mu'tazila have accused our predecessors of anthropomorphism, and even some of the Ahl al-Hadith from the Imamiya have accepted this statement from them and claimed that we have taken the belief of negating anthropomorphism from the Mu'tazila...' Then he requests Sheikh Mufid (may God have mercy on him) to narrate a hadith that refutes this accusation.

Mufid responds, after discussing the background and root of this accusation and considering the narrations from the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) in refuting anthropomorphism to be beyond enumeration, narrates a hadith in this regard from Abu Abdullah (peace be upon him), then says: 'This is the statement of Abu Abdullah (peace be upon him), now how is it possible that we have taken this from the Mu'tazila?! Unless the speaker of this statement is weak in religion.' (al-Hikayat p. 79-81)

The fact that the great Sheikh, with this attention, denies the accusation of anthropomorphism, compulsion, and vision from the beliefs of the Shiites is another clear example of Sheikh Mufid's border guarding and establishing the independent identity of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), which is the subject of our current discussion.

Considering what Mufid has conveyed in the book Awail al-Maqalat and his other theological books like: Tashih al-I'tiqad and al-Fusul al-Mukhtara and others in explaining Shiite beliefs and distinguishing them from the beliefs of other theological schools and especially the Mu'tazili school, it can be said that he aimed to present a coherent intellectual system with clear and defined boundaries for Shiism. There is no doubt that the distinguishing and differentiating point in this intellectual system is the issue of Imamate, meaning that no other sect shares this issue with the Shiites, and the criterion for attributing an individual or group to the Shiite sect is belief in this issue. It is true that the Shiites in many other beliefs, despite the similarity in the title of the issue with other sects like monotheism and justice and attributes and the like, have major differences in spirit and meaning or in some details with those sects, but in the issue of Imamate, the distinction between the Shiites and other Islamic sects is the most apparent and explicit. Therefore, Sheikh Mufid, in addition to placing the issue of Imamate at the opening of his detailed books like Awail al-Maqalat and others, has also authored several short and long treatises on the subject of Imamate with various names.

It is appropriate to mention here that the 'distinguishing point' of the issue of Imamate in Mufid's intellectual system, as explained, is different from what one of the Orientalists has assumed in this regard and introduced Imamate as the 'axis of Mufid's intellectual system.' The axis of the Shiite intellectual system and all its theologians, Mufid and others, is the issue of the Creator and the monotheism of God Almighty. Important issues such as: the attributes of God Almighty, their number and meaning and their relation to the essence of God (may His name be exalted), the issue of prophethood and its branches, the issue of justice, and also the issue of Imamate and issues related to duty and resurrection and others... all are derivatives of that issue and based on it. Unfortunately, Orientalists and those who do not have the necessary scientific mastery of Islamic concepts make such mistakes in understanding the intent of great figures like Sheikh Mufid, which such sessions and discussions should correct their misunderstandings and clarify the truths. The Western researcher who has written about Sheikh Mufid's thoughts sometimes introduces that great man as lacking a specific intellectual system and sometimes as having an intellectual system based on Imamate. As mentioned, both statements are incorrect. Mufid's intellectual system is clearly outlined in the books and treatises of the great Sheikh, and its axis, after the issue of 'knowledge,' which is the natural prelude to doctrinal issues, is the issue of the essence and attributes of God, and other fundamental issues are based on it according to their ranks. The issue of Imamate, as mentioned, is the distinguishing and main point of distinction of this school from other schools and is a belief by which the follower of Shiism is recognized, perhaps this issue can be compared to the issue of 'the intermediate position' in the Mu'tazili school. In the five principles of the Mu'tazili school, this issue is not the first and most important or the most fundamental principle of Mu'tazilism, as monotheism and justice are, but the issue of 'the intermediate position' is specific to Mu'tazilism and a prominent sign and also the origin of its emergence, and there is no Mu'tazili to whom this name applies and who does not believe in that issue. This characteristic in the Shiite intellectual system belongs to 'Imamate.'

From what has been said, it is understood that Sheikh Mufid, that great genius of Shiite history, is the first person who delineated and regulated the Shiite school in jurisprudence and theology, in theology provided a coherent and defined intellectual system from the totality of Shiite beliefs and prevented its confusion with other Islamic sects and non-Imami branches of the Shiite sect, and in jurisprudence, with a method of deduction based on principles derived from the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), provided a cycle of jurisprudence and blocked the way to invalid methods like qiyas or incomplete and primitive methods like the method of the Ahl al-Hadith.

In other words: he is the one who established the independent identity of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them).

And this is the first dimension of the three dimensions on which Mufid's personality as the founder and leader of the scientific movement towards the perfection of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) is based.

2. Founding the correct scientific form and framework of Shiite jurisprudence

Jurisprudence, in the sense of deducing the ruling of the Sharia from the sources of the Quran and the Sunnah, has a long history in Shiism. The statement of Imam Baqir (peace be upon him) to Aban ibn Taghlib: Sit in the mosque of Medina and give fatwas... and also his teaching to Abd al-A'la that: This and its likes are known from the Book of God, the Exalted, as God the Exalted said: He has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty... and other statements of this kind indicate that the companions of the Imams (peace be upon them) had long reached the stage of deducing rulings from the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and the words of those great ones, and jurisprudence, in the sense of knowing the rulings, was not limited to mere imitation and acting upon the words of the Imams (peace be upon them) among their Shiites and was moving towards expanding into more details and becoming more complex in reasoning. However, between what the jurists among the companions of the Imams (peace be upon them) did in terms of jurisprudence and fatwa and what is understood from jurisprudence in the flourishing periods of Shiite jurisprudence, meaning referring branches to principles and deducing hundreds of general rules and thousands of complex and difficult jurisprudential rulings from the Book and the Sunnah and the judgment of reason, and deriving countless branches that can answer all the questions of the obligated in the absence of the infallible Imam and explain the lawful and unlawful of God in all chapters with all details, there was a deep gap that had to be gradually filled with the gradual advancement of jurisprudence.

Undoubtedly, the jurists before Mufid took valuable steps in this path, but this great Sheikh, with his genius intellectual power, is considered the starting point of a transformative history and the leader of a fertile and growing movement. It seems that after several centuries of collecting the sources of jurisprudence, meaning the words issued by the infallibles and issuing fatwas based on the texts and apparent meanings of narrations, at a point in the history of jurisprudence, it was necessary for this valuable treasure and capital to be cast into the mold of scientific thought and a technical method for deduction to be invented.

Before Sheikh Mufid, there were two different currents in Shiite jurisprudence. One is a current whose prominent figure is Ali ibn Babawayh (died 329) and perhaps it can be called the Qom current, and most likely Mufid's teacher in jurisprudence, Ja'far ibn Qulawayh (died 368), is also among them. Jurisprudence in this current means issuing fatwas according to the texts of narrations. So that every fatwa in the jurisprudential books of this group of jurists indicates the existence of a narration in its content, and therefore whenever the owner of that fatwa has the necessary trustworthiness and accuracy, that fatwa can replace a hadith. For this reason, the martyr (may God have mercy on him) said in Dhikra: The companions used to adhere to what they found in the Shara'i of Sheikh Abu al-Hasan ibn Babawayh (may God have mercy on him) in the absence of texts due to their good opinion of him and that his fatwa was like his narration.

It is obvious that jurisprudence of this quality is very primitive and devoid of technical and complex methods, and the branches mentioned in the jurisprudential books of this current are limited to the narrated branches and are very few and limited, and this is what the opponents' criticism of the paucity of branches was directed at Shiite jurisprudence, and Sheikh Tusi (may God have mercy on him) later authored the book 'al-Mabsut' to refute this criticism.

The second current is the opposite of this current and relies on reasoning and most likely is derived and modeled after Sunni jurisprudence, and the two well-known figures of this current are Hasan ibn Abi Aqil al-Ammani (died?) and Ibn Junayd al-Iskafi (died probably 381). Although there is not enough information about this current and even these two well-known jurists to show exactly how much ijtihad and opinion were involved in their deductions, but from what Mufid and others have said about Ibn Junayd, it is certain that he had a tendency towards qiyas and opinion and was away from the well-known and accepted Shiite method. As for Ammani, although he has not been attributed to this tendency, but according to what Najashi says: 'And I heard our Sheikh Abu Abdullah praise this man a lot, may God have mercy on him,' and from what he and Sheikh have said about his book in the two indexes, it can be understood that he was a straight jurist and perhaps close to the same method that Mufid adopted and followed and in which he authored and researched and trained his students. However, despite this, since his opinions are mostly considered among the jurisprudential anomalies and abandoned, and perhaps for this reason, none of his books have survived for the ages after Allama and Muhaqqiq (may God have mercy on them), it can be guessed that he cannot be the predecessor of the jurisprudential current after him and his jurisprudence had a defect. Of course, there should be no doubt that that earlier scholar, whom Bahr al-Ulum said about him: 'He is the first to refine jurisprudence and use reasoning and open the discussion about principles and branches at the beginning of the major occultation,' had an influence on Sheikh Mufid's attainment of the correct basis and foundation of jurisprudence, which should be considered the first step in its field.

As can be seen, each of the two currents of jurisprudence is deficient in one aspect. In the first current, the fatwa is the same as the text of the narration without branching and referring the branch to the principle and discussion and critique and inference. Ijtihad in its technical sense does not have a role and influence in jurisprudence. And in the second current, although there is reasoning and opinion, it seems that it is not what should be according to the teachings of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), it is accompanied by qiyas or is in a way that leads to anomalous opinions and is such that it is not sustainable in the field of Shiite jurisprudence.

Mufid's jurisprudence is free from both defects and has both advantages: relying on methods accepted by the Imamiya and using technical ijtihad and incorporating the element of reasoning and theoretical deduction in jurisprudence. Therefore, he is the one who obtained the acceptable and valid scientific framework for Shiites and organized the transmitted materials and received principles scientifically and left it in the field of Shiite jurisprudence, and this is what the regulated jurisprudential current has followed after him for centuries and has brought it to the flourishing and growth it enjoys today.

To gain a general understanding of the value and importance of Mufid's jurisprudential work, we refer to the three main headings in this regard:

A) The book al-Muqni'a.

B) Mufid's small jurisprudential treatises.

C) The book al-Tadhkira bi-Usul al-Fiqh.

A) The book al-Muqni'a:

Al-Muqni'a is a nearly complete cycle of jurisprudence, no jurisprudential book before it has this characteristic. Al-Muqni'a of Saduq, in addition to being like the book of Ali ibn Babawayh, the texts of narrations, does not reach al-Muqni'a in terms of the comprehensiveness of jurisprudential topics, and in addition, its topics are more concise and shorter. Mufid in this book, although he did not mention the reasoning for his fatwas, and therefore understanding his reasoning for these fatwas is not easy, but based on a reliable indication, it can be said that his fatwas in this book are based on solid jurisprudential reasoning, and if this reasoning is not written for future generations to use, it was such that his students and the connected class of jurists took it as a model for their work and built upon it. That reliable indication is Sheikh Tusi's book al-Tahdhib. As we know, al-Tahdhib is a commentary on al-Muqni'a and an explanation of its jurisprudential reasoning. Sheikh Tusi (may God have mercy on him) in the introduction of that book, after mentioning his motivation for writing it and that the same friend who requested him to author the book also requested him to explain Mufid's al-Muqni'a, which is sufficient and satisfactory and free from excess and redundancy, explains his method of reasoning, which in summary is as follows: reasoning in each issue with the apparent or explicit Quran or various conceptual indications of it (such as: the concept of agreement and the concept of opposition and the implicative indication and the like), and also reasoning with the definitive Sunnah in the sense of the mutawatir report or the report accompanied by evidence, and also the consensus of Muslims or the consensus of the Imamiya, then mentioning the famous hadiths in each issue, and then presenting the opposing evidence (if it exists) and trying to reconcile the indications between the two evidences, and if reconciliation of indications is not possible, rejecting the opposing evidence due to weak chain or due to the abandonment of the companions from its content, and in a place where two evidences are equal in terms of chain and the like (such as the reason for issuance or the abandonment of the famous and others) and neither has a preference over the other, preferring the report that agrees with the principles and general rules extracted from the Sharia, and leaving the evidence that opposes the principle and rule, and in the absence of any hadith in the issue, acting according to the requirement of the principle, and always preferring the reconciliation of indications over the preference of the chain, and performing the reconciliation of indications according to the 'witness of reconciliation' mentioned and not deviating from it as much as possible.

This is the method that Sheikh Tusi used to make the book al-Muqni'a reasoned in the beginning of the book al-Tahdhib. Experts know well that this is the comprehensive method of reasoning in all periods of Shiite jurisprudence until today, and the general framework of jurisprudential reasoning in all periods after Sheikh Tusi (may God have mercy on him), until today, has been the same. Now the question arises whether Sheikh Mufid, who himself is the author of the book al-Muqni'a, was unaware of this comprehensive method of reasoning that can lead a jurist to the fatwas throughout that book, and in other words, was Sheikh Tusi (may God have mercy on him) the innovator of this method of reasoning? Or did he learn it from his teacher, Mufid? It seems that considering the aspects of the subject, the answer to this question becomes clear. We know that Sheikh Tusi began writing the book al-Tahdhib during the lifetime of Sheikh Mufid, meaning before the year 413, and this introduction was written at that time. Sheikh Tusi's arrival in Iraq was in the year 408, and in this year, when he was a 23-year-old young man, he began his advanced studies and research under the guidance of Sheikh Mufid and benefited from that great genius for 5 years until the year 413. The rest of Sheikh's scientific benefits were from the presence of Sayyid Murtada and over 23 years.

Thus, there is no doubt that Sheikh Tusi learned that method of jurisprudential reasoning in the presence of Sheikh Mufid and from the great man himself, and because he was familiar with his teacher's method of reasoning, he was able to make his book reasoned with the principles intended by him.

This interpretation is strengthened and becomes certain when the principles of Sheikh Mufid in the book of principles, which we will discuss later, are considered. Observing that book and Mufid's reliance on the book and the mutawatir Sunnah and the Sunnah accompanied by evidence or the famous and practiced mursal and other opinions of his in principles, clearly shows that the method of reasoning that Sheikh Tusi mentioned in the introduction of al-Tahdhib is the same that his teacher believed in and practiced and taught to his students. The result is that the book al-Muqni'a, although not accompanied by reasoning, from what has been said, it is known that the method of reasoning in the same way that has always been practiced and common in the field of Shiite jurisprudence for a thousand years after Mufid, led that famous jurist to his fatwas in that book.

This method of reasoning is the same comprehensive and complete line that had no precedent before him in either of the two Shiite jurisprudential currents, namely the Ibn Babawayh current and the ancient current, and our great Sheikh is the innovator and founder and establisher of it.

B) Jurisprudential treatises:

These treatises, despite their small volume, are indicative of the deep jurisprudential knowledge of the great Sheikh. Although some of them, like the treatise 'al-Mash ala al-Rajlayn' and 'Dhabaih Ahl al-Kitab,' contain argumentative and semi-rational reasoning, some others correctly contain a solid and strong, and organized jurisprudential method, for example, the treatise 'al-Mahr' or 'Jawabat Ahl al-Mawsil fi al-Ru'ya wa al-Adad' or 'al-Masa'il al-Saqaniyya.' In the treatise on vision and number, which is specifically for refuting the opinion attributed to Saduq (may God have mercy on him) and some other ancient jurists that the month of Ramadan is thirty days, Sheikh Mufid brings together inference from verses, utilization of language, citation of established jurisprudential rulings, discussion in the jurisprudence of the hadiths that are the basis of the opponent's argument, and debate in the chain and mention of the conditions of men and many points in understanding and deducing from the hadiths, and uses each in the best and most mature way. One of his interesting works in this treatise is that in a place after mentioning the hadith used by the opponent, he both weakens its chain and considers its content, relying on solid reasoning, unreasonable and far from the wise statement of the Imam and resulting from the fabrication of someone who is common and ignorant, and also with evidence raises the possibility of the chain being mursal, which this last point indicates his expertise and mastery of hadith (refer to the mentioned treatise, page 23 onwards, the section related to the narration of Ya'qub ibn Shu'ayb from Abu Abdullah 'peace be upon him').

The treatise 'al-Masa'il al-Saqaniyya,' in which he responds to the objections of the Hanafi jurist of Saghan on ten jurisprudential issues, is another example of the strength of reasoning and the jurisprudential expertise of the high-ranking Sheikh. This treatise, although it has a theological nature, meaning it is in the position of debate and argument with a non-Shiite opponent and refuting the accusation of innovation by him and reciprocally attributing slander and innovation to him and his Imam, but since the issues raised are generally jurisprudential, it clearly informs any knowledgeable observer of the strength of reasoning and the scientific spirit and ijtihad-like jurisprudence of him.

This treatise and the treatise 'al-Adad wa al-Ru'ya' can well represent the scientific innovation of Sheikh Mufid and prove this truth that everything observed in the class of his students and the students of his students in terms of scientific jurisprudential method is entirely derived from the method that the great man is considered the founder and establisher of.

C) The book al-Tadhkira bi-Usul al-Fiqh:

The science of principles is the method of jurisprudential deduction. It is a method for reaching from valid evidence to practical rulings. Organizing the principles and rules of jurisprudence is like setting a regulation for jurisprudence. Without such a regulation, the field of jurisprudence is limitless and exposed to confusion and impurity and error, and the extracted rulings are inevitably not credible. In addition to the fact that the tastes and opinions and personal understanding of the jurist play a role beyond the limit in the result of jurisprudence, and the opinions of jurists become scattered and unregulated.

It is true that the depth and maturity and increasing complexity of the science of principles help the health of jurisprudential opinions, but what affects the ultimate result of jurisprudence more than that is the original creation and establishment of this science. Undoubtedly, the main foundation and substance of the science of principles of jurisprudence are in the words of the Imams (peace be upon them) and within what is called 'received principles.' But in Shiism, the first book of principles (as far as we know) was written by Sheikh Mufid, and it is this small and content-rich book 'al-Tadhkira bi-Usul al-Fiqh,' which is probably a selection made by his student Sheikh Abu al-Fath al-Karajuki (died 449) from the original book of Mufid, which was also a brief book.

This book, despite its brevity, has great importance. Because: firstly, it is the first book on the principles of jurisprudence in Shiism. Sheikh Tusi (may God have mercy on him) in the introduction of the book 'al-Iddah fi Usul al-Fiqh' says: 'And no one from our companions has been known in this regard except what our Sheikh Abu Abdullah (may God have mercy on him) mentioned in the brief book he has on the principles of jurisprudence...' Secondly, in it, many discussions are presented with short phrases, and especially in the discussions of words, several headings containing important discussions are observed. Thirdly, in some of its discussions, the opinion of the great Sheikh is very similar and close to what has been mentioned by later principles researchers, for example, what he has stated in the chapter on the relationship between general and specific is very similar to the term: 'intentional will and usage will,' which exists in the research of predecessors close to our time. Sheikh Mufid's phrase in this regard is as follows: 'And what specifies the general word does not exclude anything that falls under it, but rather indicates that the speaker intended specificity and did not intend what was built in the word for generality...' (p. 37). Fourthly, while the book is based on brevity, discussions that are more necessary and applicable in jurisprudential deductions are prioritized, and more theoretical discussions such as the discussion of the reality of knowledge or the reality of speech, which Sheikh al-Ta'ifa (may God have mercy on him) delved into in detail at the beginning of 'al-Iddah fi Usul al-Fiqh,' have not been considered by the great man. In my opinion, it is very interesting that despite the brevity of the book under discussion, discussions such as: generality and absoluteness are specific to the verbal Sunnah and do not apply to the practical Sunnah, or that a command after prohibition does not imply more than permissibility, or that an exception after multiple sentences, in the absence of evidence, returns to all of them, and the like have not been neglected and have been expressed in appropriate phrases due to their impact and recurrence in jurisprudential deductions.

It becomes clear from what has been said that our esteemed Sheikh, by writing the book on principles, was preparing the necessary groundwork for the creation of a scientific and technical framework for jurisprudential inference. For him, the science of principles is not merely a collection of mental and quasi-theological knowledge. Rather, as his student also stated in the introduction to "Uddat al-Usul," it is something upon which the rulings of the Sharia are based, and without strengthening this foundation, knowledge of the Sharia cannot be complete. Anyone who does not strengthen the principles is merely a narrator and imitator, not a scholar.

3. The creation of a logical synthesis between reason and tradition in jurisprudence and theology

This is the third aspect of the personality of our esteemed Sheikh as the founder and leader of the scientific movement of the Shia.

Here too, the esteemed Sheikh opened a new path between the absolute rationalism of the Mu'tazila and their Shia followers like the Banu Nawbakht, and the tradition-oriented approach of Sheikh Saduq.

During the era of the spread of Mu'tazilism, which was at the end of the first Abbasid caliphate period (ending in the mid-third century AH), the Mu'tazila were heavily influenced by the influx of foreign philosophical thoughts (Greek, Pahlavi, Indian, etc.) into the Islamic world and the translation of their works. At that time, both this foreign influx and the Mu'tazila inclination were strongly encouraged by the caliphs, especially al-Ma'mun. The reaction to this extreme rationalism was the movement of the hadith scholars among the Sunnis and Shia hadith scholars like Saduq (may God have mercy on him) who wanted to understand theological and doctrinal knowledge entirely through hadith.

The great work of Mufid is to prove that reason alone is incapable of understanding all the issues raised in theology. For example, in the matter of divine attributes like will, hearing, and sight, it is with the help of revelation that one can take the correct steps in the realm of knowledge. Entering this realm, which pertains to the Divine (Glory be to Him), without revelation is entering the wilderness of misguidance. This is essentially the content of the narrations that prohibit speaking about the Almighty God. Therefore, Mufid's work is not to deprive reason of its domain, where revelation and hearing have no place, such as the realm of proving the Creator and reasoning for the existence of the Divine, monotheism, or general prophethood, but rather to limit reason to the boundaries set by the Creator of reason so that it does not go astray.

In the "Awail al-Maqalat," it is stated: "The ancient's deserving of these attributes (meaning His being hearing, seeing, perceiving) is entirely from the perspective of hearing, not analogy and rational proofs." And elsewhere: "The speech of God is created, and this is what has been narrated from the family of Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family)." And elsewhere: "God is willing from the perspective of hearing, following, and submission as stated in the Quran, and I do not impose this from the perspective of reason." And elsewhere, in general: "The Imamiyya agree that reason needs hearing in its knowledge and results, and it is not separate from hearing that guides the rational person on how to reason... and the Mu'tazila unanimously disagree with this and claim that reason operates independently of hearing and guidance..."

Such explicit statements are abundant in Mufid's words. Nevertheless, he accepts the authority of transmission where there is no rational proof of its impossibility. Therefore, in the matter of the appearance of miracles from the Imams (peace be upon them), before mentioning the entry of a transmitted proof for it, he says: "It is possible, which is neither rationally obligatory nor analogically impossible." He repeats similar statements in other instances. However, in "Tashih al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyya," which is a commentary on "I'tiqadat Sheikh Saduq," after ruling to reject a hadith that contradicts the Quran, he more explicitly than anywhere else declares: "And likewise, if we find a hadith that contradicts the rulings of reason, we discard it, due to the judgment of reason on its corruption." In this statement, in addition to rejecting a hadith that contradicts reason, he also considers the basis and foundation of this to be the judgment of reason, thereby doubly emphasizing the authority of rational reasoning.

Reliance on rational reasoning in Sheikh Mufid's independent school is such that in the discussion "Pain for the sake of benefit, not compensation," after expressing his unique view, which he shares with neither the Adliyya nor the Murji'a, he confidently states: "I have combined principles that are unique to me in their combination, unlike those who agree with me in justice and hope, based on what has been revealed to me in contemplation about its correctness, and I am not disturbed by those who disagree with it, for with the proof, I have the utmost comfort and no discomfort from the truth, and thanks be to God." Considering that in the discussion of pain and discussions derived from grace, he generally relies on rational rather than transmitted evidence, his reference to proof in the mentioned statement is indeed rational reasoning.

The introduction of the element of "hearing" in the construction of Sheikh Mufid's theological school has resulted in the assistance of the statements of the Imams (peace be upon them) in many difficult discussions, where reaching the truth requires a long path, easily finding a place in the theological collection of that great figure and saving the Shia theological path after Mufid from deviations and intellectual disturbances.

For example, in the matter of divine attributes, the Mu'tazila have traversed a long path from the negation of attributes in the words of Wasil ibn Ata and the theory of the substitution of essence for attributes, to reaching the theory of monotheism in the sense of the non-addition of attributes to the essence and that the attributes of the Almighty are identical to His essence in existence. In contrast, this issue in Mufid's words is derived from hearing, namely Nahj al-Balagha and the narrations issued by the Imams (peace be upon them). Even from these narrations, it is understood that these discussions were raised among the Shia during the time of the Imams (peace be upon them) and they used the inexhaustible source of the knowledge of the Ahl al-Bayt regarding it (refer to al-Kafi, vol. 1, p. 107, the chapter on the attributes of the essence, and various chapters from Tawhid Saduq and the sermons of Nahj al-Balagha).

It is noteworthy that in brief theological treatises like "al-Nukat fi Muqaddimat al-Usul," even in the chapter on divine attributes, where in "Awail al-Maqalat" he introduced transmitted reasoning as the sole reference in that chapter, he resorts to rational reasoning alongside transmitted reasoning. For example, in this statement:

"If it is said: What is the proof that He is capable? Say: The attachment of actions to Him, with their impossibility at the outset for the incapable..." And again: "What indicates that He is knowledgeable? Say: What is in His actions of precision and harmony, and the impossibility of what is of this nature at the outset for the ignorant." And similarly in the chapter on hearing, seeing, wisdom, and so on. (al-Nukat fi Muqaddimat al-Usul, pp. 33-34).

This cannot be considered a deviation from the aforementioned basis in "Awail al-Maqalat." It was previously mentioned that it is highly likely that the brief treatises that Sheikh Mufid wrote in a question-and-answer format were a manual for novice theological debaters or distant Shia who did not have access to a master like Mufid. In those treatises, the Sheikh chose the method of rational discussion, which is more usable for confronting any audience.

Thus, it becomes clear that the combination of rational proof and transmitted evidence in Mufid's theological approach is one of the prominent and innovative works of that great master.

I hope that in this scientific and research assembly, these important chapters and many other brilliant aspects of the scientific life of the esteemed Sheikh Mufid will be pursued.

In conclusion, it is appropriate to remind that the high-ranking genius accomplished this long scientific struggle and the establishment of the edifice of jurisprudential knowledge and the opening of a middle path in theology under difficult social conditions. The Buyid government in Baghdad, although it created a suitable atmosphere for free scientific discussion, could not solve the problem of the fanatical confrontations of the Hanbali jurists and the pressures of the Abbasid government on Sheikh Mufid and the general Shia. The oppression of the Shia of Karkh in Baghdad and the great hardships that befell them and their esteemed leader are facts that history explicitly testifies to. It is believed that Sheikh Mufid, apart from the three exiles recorded in historical books, experienced a period of approximately two years of hardship and distress around the years 405 to 407, the nature of which is not clearly known. This belief arises from the fact that in the events of the death of Sayyid Radi, Mufid's beloved student, in the year 406, although the details of the funeral and other characteristics are mentioned in the books, there is no mention of Sheikh Mufid, who should have been repeatedly mentioned according to the norm. Another clue that raises this suspicion is that Sheikh Mufid's "Amali," which was delivered in several sessions each year around the month of Ramadan at his house or mosque in Dar al-Riyah, continued from the year 404 to 411, but was not delivered in the years 405 and 406, and no session related to these two years exists in the collection of Mufid's "Amali."

Another clue is that in the events of Muharram 406, when a great sedition against the Shia occurred and one of their repeated hardships took place, the person whom the Baghdad government chose as the representative and leader of the Shia to negotiate with was Sayyid Murtada, not Sheikh Mufid. While the absolute and undisputed leader of the Shia at that time and from years before was Sheikh Mufid, and Sayyid Murtada was considered his humble and obedient student and disciple.

These clues raise the suspicion of hardship and distress for Mufid during those two years, which may have led to his absence from Baghdad, and this should be investigated. However, what is certain is that life in Baghdad for the general Shia and including their leaders during a significant portion of the 113-year rule of the Buyids over Iraq and Baghdad was very difficult, distressing, and accompanied by conflict, killing, and oppression. Sheikh Mufid, amidst these great difficulties and bearing the responsibility of leading the Shia in Iraq and indeed throughout the Islamic world, achieved such a great success in the field of Shia knowledge.

The final point of this article is my emphatic recommendation to the scholars and thinkers present in this cultural gathering to strive with all their might to make this scientific meeting a means of intellectual closeness and practical unity among Islamic sects. The manner in which Sheikh Mufid dealt with the religious adversary of his time was undoubtedly influenced by the bitter social events and calamities that the oppressed Shia of that time faced, and the blind fanaticism that fueled it. Such behavior cannot today serve as a model for the interaction of Islamic sects with each other, even in theological arenas. Today, all Islamic sects must learn the experience of peace and kindness by observing those painful historical scenes, and at a time when the principles of Islam, for which figures like Mufid in every sect endured such hardships to revive, are threatened by global enemies, they should think of unity, closeness, and cooperation among all sects and all their thinkers. This is the great lesson of our revolution and the constant guidance of our late Imam (may his pure soul be sanctified).

Once again, I ask God Almighty for your success and pray for worthy results and lasting achievements for this gathering of yours from God Almighty.

Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings.

Ali Hosseini Khamenei

Farvardin 1372, corresponding to Shawwal 1413