IJTIHAAD A REBUTTAL OF THE VIEW OF THE JUHALA MURTADDS
Rebutting the kufr conception of some Murtadds regarding the Islamic Concept of Ijtihaad, AMPSA (Association of Muslim Professionals of South Africa) issued the following valid and praiseworthy rebuttal:
The Misuse of Ijtihaad: A Response to Waghid and Rasool on Muslim Intellectualism
In a recent article published in Muslim Views under the caption “Anti-Intellectualism and the Future of Muslim Thought”, Yusuf Waghid – Emeritus Professor of Philosophy of Education at University of Stellenbosch – aligns himself with the views expressed by Ebrahim Rasool in his public lecture delivered on the occasion of the inauguration of the Muslim Thinker at the Islamia College in Cape Town on 29 September 2025, in particular the view that Ijtihaad should be understood not merely as a juridical concept but as a pedagogical imperative. Both Waghid and Rasool call for the revival of Ijtihaad as an educational and intellectual practice—one that encourages dissent, critical reasoning, and democratic deliberation within Muslim discourse.
While the call for intellectual rejuvenation within Muslim societies is both timely and necessary, the authors’ conceptual treatment of Ijtihaad is deeply flawed. Their attempt to broaden Ijtihaad into a form of critical pedagogy reflects a misunderstanding of its linguistic, juristic, and epistemological foundations.
Ijtihaad: A Term of Juridical Precision
In classical Islamic scholarship, Ijtihaad is a technical term that refers to the exertion of a qualified jurist’s utmost intellectual effort in deriving a legal ruling from the sources of Shariah. Ijtihaad is “the total exertion of one’s capacity in seeking a legal opinion from the detailed evidences of the law.”
This effort is not arbitrary. It presupposes mastery of Arabic, the Qur’an, the Sunnah, consensus analogy and knowledge of abrogation, as well as an understanding of the higher objectives of the Shariah. Such prerequisites ensure that Ijtihaad remains a disciplined and guided reasoning process, firmly rooted in revelation.
To equate Ijtihaad with critical thinking or intellectual freedom—as Waghid and Rasool do—is therefore to strip the term of its scholarly precision and spiritual gravity. Ijtihaad is not a synonym for “thinking,” nor is every act of independent reflection a form of Ijtihaad.
It is guided exertion in pursuit of divine truth, not mere intellectual speculation.
The Conflation of Ijtihaad and Intellectual Dissent
Waghid and Rasool’s use of Ijtihaad as a metaphor for dissent and pedagogical reform introduces a dangerous conflation between critical engagement and religious reasoning.
Their framing suggests that Ijtihaad can be exercised by anyone deemed “critical” or “intellectually engaged,” regardless of their training or grounding in the Islamic sciences.
This approach effectively democratizes Ijtihaad, allowing individuals without any knowledge of usul al-fiqh, Hadith, or Arabic linguistics to assume the interpretive authority historically reserved for qualified scholars (mujtahidun). The inevitable consequence of this flattening of epistemic hierarchy is confusion and fragmentation—each individual becomes their own jurist, free to dissent even from established truths.
Islamic scholarship, by contrast, distinguishes between Ijtihaad (authoritative reasoning grounded in revelation) and ra’y (mere opinion). The former is bound by divine guidance; the latter, by human conjecture. To erase that distinction under the banner of “critical pedagogy” is to undermine both the sanctity of revelation and the integrity of religious knowledge.
The Limits of Dissent: Revelation as Boundary
Even if one were to concede that Ijtihaad can extend beyond jurisprudence to moral or social reasoning, this expansion cannot justify dissent in matters already settled by revelation. Islam allows for Ijtihaad only where the texts are silent or ambiguous—not where revelation has spoken with clarity.
Reason and revelation do not conflict; when they appear to, the error lies in human reasoning, not divine guidance. Thus, the idea that Ijtihaad entails a “pedagogical right to dissent” on all matters—including those firmly established by Qur’an and Sunnah—is not only methodologically unsound but theologically perilous.
By framing Ijtihaad as an educational practice of dissent, Waghid and Rasool unintentionally blur the line between legitimate scholarly reasoning and rebellion against revelation. True Ijtihaad never sanctions contradiction of divine instruction; it operates within the limits of revelation, not outside it.
Intellectual Revival: Yes, but Name It Correctly
None of this is to dismiss the importance of critical thinking or reflective engagement in Muslim education. Indeed, the Qur’an commands tafakkur (reflection), taʿaqqul (rational deliberation), and tadabbur (deep contemplation). These are the Qur’anic terms for intellectual exertion, and they are the rightful descriptors for the kind of thoughtful engagement that Waghid and Rasool wish to promote.
If Muslim educators and thinkers seek an Arabic term for critical pedagogy, tafakkur or taʿaqqul would be accurate and theologically sound. But to use Ijtihaad—a term denoting a juristic process bound by knowledge, discipline, and revelation—for generic intellectual activity is misleading and academically careless.
The Classical understanding of Ijtihaad
The Classical scholars did not classify it as mere critical reflection or educational dissent.
For them, Ijtihaad was a solemn act of devotion, performed by those equipped with both intellectual rigour and spiritual restraint.
Imam Al-Ghazali warns that the unqualified person’s attempt at Ijtihaad leads to error and misguidance.
It is thus imperative that Ijtihaad remains within the domain of those who possess sound knowledge of revelation and the principles governing its application. In this classical sense, Ijtihaad is not a metaphor for thinking—it is a structured process aimed at uncovering the divine will.
Conclusion: Restoring Conceptual Integrity
The Muslim world does need a revival of intellectual engagement—an awakening from blind imitation and superficial religiosity. But this revival must be built upon tafakkur, taʿaqqul, and tafaqquh—forms of reflection anchored in knowledge and humility—not on the misappropriation of Ijtihaad.
Ijtihaad can, at best, inspire a spirit of disciplined inquiry; it cannot be recast as a democratic tool for dissent or as an academic slogan. If every act of thinking were Ijtihaad, the term would lose its meaning entirely. Intellectual renewal, yes—but not at the expense of conceptual precision or theological coherence.
In short, the future of Muslim thought depends not on redefining Ijtihaad, but on restoring respect for the intellectual and spiritual conditions that make it possible.
Electronically issued by the Association of Muslim Professionals of South Africa
(End of AMPSA’s dissertation)
OUR COMMENT
The jahaalat of the promoters of the corrupt conception of the Islamic Concept of Ijtihaad effectively disbars them from the confines of Islam thereby ushering them into the folds of Irtidaad. The corrupt and baatil view propounded by the misguided miscreant chaps is merely another nail in their coffin of Irtidaad which they have adopted in the past with their views of kufr on an incremental basis. One theory of indurate kufr spawns another and another, conveying the Truth of the Qur’aanic assertion that Divine Intent has created numerous Humans and Jinn specifically to be Hasabu Jahannam (Fuel for Hell-Fire). Regarding the miscreants, this decree of the Qur’aan is confirmed for them on the basis of the eburnation of their intellect which totally lacks in understanding simple Islamic issues, the meanings of which have been established and finalized during the Khairul Quroon era, the termination of which signified the ABSOLUTE closure of the Portal of Ijtihaad.
In this regard, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) stated unequivocally:
“Honour my Sahaabah, for they are your noblest, then those after them (the Taabieen), then those after them (the Tabe Taabieen). Thereafter KITHB (FALSEHOOD) will become prevalent.”
Expanding further on the Falsehood which will rise after the era of Khairul Quroon which sealed the Door of Ijtihaad, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“The best of my Ummah are (the Sahaabah) of my age, then those after them, then those after them. Thereafter will come people who will (make haste) to testify without being asked to testify. They will commit Khiyaanat (abuse of Amaanat) and may not be trusted. They will make pledges without fulfilling them.
Among them obesity will become prevalent…..”
“Then will rise people who will love obesity”.
These will be people whose brains will become eburnated and whose bodies will become fat and diseased as a consequence of indulgence in gluttony, consumption of carrion and wasting their lives in kufr and merrymaking. These evil attributes today are not confined to the zanaadaqah and murtaddeen. They extend to even the molvis and sheikhs of our time. All have become signs of the Impending Hour.
The cut off age for Ijtihaad explicitly stated by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is the end of the era of Khairul Quroon.
Ijtihaad in the meaning expounded by the illustrious Fuqaha who were the Heirs of the Ambiya (Alayhimus salaam) does not have a literal meaning – the dictionary meaning. It has technical significance. But the manner in which the murtadd morons acquit themselves with their stupid concoction of the term conspicuously advertises their crass and compound jahaalat.
What will the juhalah murtadds say if someone had to say that the term, ‘bachelor of arts’ refers to an unmarried male who practices some form of arts which could even be satanic arts. The juhala have accorded their absolutely corrupt and convoluted understanding of the Shar’i concept of Ijtihaad by looking in the dictionary for the literal meaning of the term.
Their haggling regarding the term Ijtihaad is the abomination of hierophants. While these juhala may be qualified in satanic sciences of the atheists, they are spiritually barren and absolutely bankrupt in the sphere of Shar’i Uloom which is Spiritual Knowledge emanating from a spiritually reformed heart divinely endowed with the Noor of Ilm. This Ilm which is the bedrock on which Ijtihaad is structured is not mere textual knowledge of the Kutub of Hadith and Fiqh.
Today, there is not a single Mujtahid existing on this planet. The greatest Allaamah too is not a Mujtahid. He has no entitlement to Ijtihaad – that is, the Ijtihaad for which the Aimmah Mujtahideen of Khairul Quroon were qualified. They were the exclusive repositories of Ijtihaad – that Ijtihaad whose Portal was closed by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) with the termination of the era of Khairul Quroon.
Let all the morons understand well that the kind of ‘ijtihaad’ which qualified Ulama of today are permitted to practice refers to new developments which did not exist during Khairul Quroon and for which there are no Sareeh (explicit) Nusoos (Qur’aan and Hadith evidence). It is forbidden and haraam to utilize the Usool of the Shariah for re-interpreting issues which have been cast in solid rock during the era of Khairul Quroon. No Mufti, no Allaamah and no Buzrug has this right, leave alone the moron miscreant zanaadaqah and murtaddeen who set themselves up as authorities of the Shariah.
The ideas of these juhala are firmly embedded in the zeitgeist of the aura of today’s unbridled atheistic education which welds their brains into straitjackets of kufr which in turn induces them to stupidly and shamelessly disgorge theories, concepts and stupidities which violently militate against the Qur’aan and Sunnah.
Shar’i Ijtihaad is not a ‘pedagogical imperative’, whatever this stupidity may mean, as the murtadds seek to convey. Ijtihaad in the meaning of the Shariah’s juridical process is an inherent intellectual ability stemming from Noor-e-Ilm. What is the meaning of Ilm which is the imperative requisite for the specific Ijtihaad whose Door has been closed with the ending of Khuarul Quroon? Hadhrat Waqee’ (Rahmatullah alayh) in response to a query by his Student, Imaam Shaaf’i (Rahmatullah alayh) said:
“Ilm is a Noor from Allah, and the Noor of Allah is not granted to a sinner.”
It is a total impossibility for this Noor of Ilm to settle in the hearts of zanaadaqah and murtaddeen, hence they dwell in perpetual cognitive dissonance and confusion in matters pertaining to the Shariah.
The established Ahkaam of the Shariah may not be submitted to ‘critical reasoning’ as these juhala are propagating. Such satanic reasoning is in fact denial of the finality of the Nubuwwat and rejection of the finality and perfection of Islam declared by the Qur’aan Majeed.
If there had existed need and scope for nibbling and twiddling with the laws of the Shariah, Nubuwwat would not have ended with Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The long Chain of Nubuwwat initiated with the advent of Hadhrat Aadam (Alayhis salaam) would have continued for meeting the challenges, changes and needs of the perpetually changing circumstances of advancing time. But termination of Nubuwwat was the Will and Decree of Azza Wa Jal. This termination adequately and convincingly signifies that no system of reasoning may be employed to nibble at the Ahkaam of the Shariah. These are cast in Rock which does not permit the slightest diversion.
The Aimmah Mujtahidden had evolved the requisite Usool to meet all contingencies and exigencies right until the Day of Qiyaamah. Any opinion on a new developing issue which is not structured in the Usool of the Shariah is mardood and mal’oon (rejected and accursed). These Usool being extracted from the Qur’aan and Sunnah may not be subjected to the ‘critical reasoning’ of the juhala.
In its dissertation, Ampsa states: “…..the call for intellectual rejuvenation within Muslim societies is both timely and necessary.” This averment is ambiguous. The ‘intellectual rejuvenation’ which the murtadds call for is another stupid term for their convoluted baseless idea of Ijtihaad. We do not know what AMPSA understands by this term.
The Qur’aaic command of Tafakkur (Reflection/Pondering/Contemplating) as it applies to the Ummah at large, is not for delving into the juridical realm. The Tafakkur is for gaining the greatness, glory and wonder of Allah Azza Wa Jal and for one’s moral reformation. It has no reference to the Ijtihaad of the Aimmah Mujtahideen.
The subtlety and delicacy of Ijtihaad are of such a dangerous degree that Giants of Uloom such as Imaam Ghazaali (Rahmatullah alayh) and Imaam Raazi (Rahmatullah alayh) too are not qualified to enter into this Domain. These two illustrious Ulama and others of the same level of Ilm have been assigned to the Fourth tier of Ulama. That means, that there are three classes of Ulama above them. Of the seven classes, only the first Class, namely, the Aimmah Muijtahideen (such as the Imaams of the Math-habs) were qualified to employ Ijtihaad for the formulation of Usool. As far as the dunderhead quacks of our age are concerned, they come within the scope of satanism.
15 Rabiuth Thaani 1447 – 8 October 2025