"The Caliphate and Imamate in Islamic Thought" Series
By the Writer and Thinker Thaer Salama – Abu Malik
Episode Thirty-Three: The Consensus on the Obligation of the Caliphate, meaning that establishing the Caliphate is an obligation by consensus, which is definitive, and establishing the Caliphate is a definitive obligation also proven by moral recurrence - Part 1
Ways to Obtain Definitive Evidence
Definitive evidence leads to knowledge, meaning certainty, meaning belief in it is obligatory[2] and theoretical[4], and reasoning based on the requirements of the mind is also necessary. Badr al-Din al-Zarkashi said in al-Bahr al-Muhit: "The issues of the mind are of two types: what is known by the necessity of the mind, which is something that cannot be contrary to what it is, such as monotheism[6] So, if knowledge of it is obtained by reason, it becomes definitive, like our reasoning about the prophethood of Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, by reason, supported by definitive textual evidence based primarily on reason (and by miracle)[8]
As for transmission, definitive evidence is obtained by definitively proven and definitively indicative evidence, and the way to obtain definitive evidence is through definitively indicative evidence from the Book, as the entire Book is definitively proven (because it was transmitted by recurrence and preserved in the hearts of a number that reached and exceeded the limit of recurrence). So, usury is definitively forbidden by a definitively indicative text, and whoever denies its prohibition is an infidel, and prayer is obligatory by a definitively indicative text from the Book, and whoever denies that prayer is obligatory is an infidel[10], whether verbal or moral. As for verbal recurrence[12], the hadith "Whoever lies about me intentionally, let him take his seat in Hellfire" was narrated by seventy-two Companions, and it was said one hundred, and it was said two hundred. So, here it combines the recurrence of narrators (proof) and the recurrence of indication
[2] Which is what (is known without consideration), like our perception of the meaning of fire and that it is hot (necessary), meaning it occurs merely by the soul paying attention to it without consideration or acquisition; and most said: the necessary is what is not preceded by a belief that depends on it, (Hashiyat al-Attar, and Sharh al-Kawkab al-Munir by al-Futuhi), which is something that cannot be contrary to what it is (Badr al-Din al-Zarkashi in al-Bahr al-Muhit) is known by the necessity of the mind, not by its evidence, and what is known by necessity by itself, which is recurrent, or by agreement with necessary knowledge, which is the primary concepts, like our saying: one is half of two.
[4] Meaning, if you provide evidence for an issue with certain premises, and link those premises or proofs to a self-evident truth such as for every action there is an actor, then the proof takes on the quality of definitive evidence, provided that the connection to the self-evident truth is sound and correct.
[6] Al-Bahr al-Muhit by al-Zarkashi, chapter on the divisions of evidence.
[8] See: The Report of Individual Narrators Between the Trap of the Question and the Problem of Methodology. By Ali Aqil al-Hamrouni, and see: The Position of Reason and Science on the Existence of the One in Whose Hand is the Dominion of the Heavens and the Earth by Thaer Salama.
[10] The recurrent report in the terminology of the jurists is the report of a group that has reached such a large number that knowledge is obtained from their statement, and knowledge is not obtained from the statement of this group and it is not recurrent unless they are knowledgeable about what they reported, not conjecturing, and that their knowledge is based on hearing and observation, not on evidence of deduction, and that they are a group that meets these conditions in the era of the Companions, the era of the Successors, and the era of the Successors of the Successors, so that the two ends and the middle of the report are equal. Therefore, the recurrent report is what was narrated in the three eras by a large group with whom it is normally impossible for them to conspire to lie, and the recurrent hadith is definitively proven from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, so it provides certain knowledge and it is obligatory to act upon it in everything, whether it is from the verbal, practical, or tacit Sunnah, Islamic Personality, Part Three: The Principles of Jurisprudence, Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani 75-79.
[12] See our book: The Evidence of Belief, in which there is a great detail in discussing all these issues.
[13] Just as we differentiate between what is speculatively indicative from the Quran and what is definitively indicative, even though the entire Quran is definitively proven, so here from what is verbally recurrent is what has reached definitive indication, and from it is what has not reached definitive indication. So, the first has combined definitive proof and indication, so there is no room to deny it verbally or indicatively, and we remember here the discussion: The Contradiction of What Impairs Understanding, and you can find its details in our book: The Evidence of Belief, and its discussion in the possibilities that must be removed from the speech until it provides definitive indication.
