Authors
1 PhD in Comparative Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Quran and Hadith, Al-Mustafa University, Qom, Iran.
2 Level 3 graduate, Islamic Denominations Department, Specialized Institute for Islamic Denominations, Qom, Iran.
Abstract
This study examines the evidence and validity of the claim of consensus on the issue of invalidating prayer due to intentional weeping for worldly matters in Imami jurisprudence. Although the famous later Shiite jurists have taken this ruling for granted by citing consensus or fame, an analysis of the sources shows that the claim of a widespread and ancient consensus on this subject faces serious challenges. The documentary evidence of this ruling is limited to two weakly authenticated narrations, which have themselves been disputed by scholars such as Ayatollah Borujerdi. He has tried to compensate for the weakness of the chain of transmission by relying on the "old reputation" in "Usul al-Mulqat", but an examination of the books on Usul al-Mulqat shows that many of these texts have not addressed this issue, and the scattered interpretations that exist also indicate the personal ijtihad of the jurists or inferences based on the plural verb, rather than a direct interpretation of the Infallible (a.s.). As a result, the claim of consensus is incomplete and its traces are found only in the later periods of jurisprudence and among the jurists after Sheikh Tusi. This research highlights the need to review and return to the sayings of the early jurists and discover the reputation of their fatwa or their agreement on an opinion, with the aim of ascertaining the opinion of the Infallible Imam (a.s.).
Keywords
Main Subjects
)