I wrote the following in a book I was trying to publish (and it still might be)
Chapter 3 – The disparagement of the differences of clergy attributed to Imam Ali
There is an important sermon as far as this paradox goes, found in Nahjul Balagha. Again, our concern is not the authenticity of the chain or sermon, but giving words if they are words of guidance, a chance to guide and provide insights.
The sermon we will be looking at in this chapter is as follows
When a problem is put before anyone of them he passes judgement on it from his imagination. When exactly the same problem is placed before another of them he passes an opposite verdict. Then these judges go to the chief who had appointed them and he confirms all the verdicts, although their Allah is One (and the same), their Prophet is one (and the same), their Book (the Qur’an) is one (and the same)!
Is it that Allah ordered them to differ and they obeyed Him? Or He prohibited them from it but they disobeyed Him? Or (is it that) Allah sent an incomplete Faith and sought their help to complete it? Or they are His partners in the affairs, so that it is their share of duty to pronounce and He has to agree? Or is it that Allah the Glorified sent a perfect faith but the Prophet fell short of conveying it and handing it over (to the people)? The fact is that Allah the Glorified says:
We have not neglected anything in the Book (Qur’an) . . . (6:38),
and in it is a ‘clarification of everything’ And He says that one part of the Qur’an verifies another part and that there is no divergence in it as He says:
.And if it had been from any other than Allah, they would surely have found in it much discrepancy. (4:82)
Certainly the outside of the Qur’an is wonderful and its inside is deep (in meaning). Its wonders will never disappear, its amazements will never pass away and its darkness (plural form) cannot be cleared except through itself.
This sermon shows the differences arose and Imam Ali comments on them. First condemnation is passing a judgement not on knowledge but imagination. The Quran also forbids attributing God what we do not know. Another person placed with another, they come with an opposite verdict. This means they can’t all be correct. Then the chief that appointed them confirms all their verdicts. This is exactly how Taqlid is done today. They differ but it’s accepted that we can follow any of them. Obviously the chief appointing them didn’t want to say both judgments are true, rather, he is saying which ever one you follow it doesn’t matter, for they are “attempting” to follow God and his Messenger.
Then Imam Ali begins with some rhetorical questions. God didn’t order them to differ rather we see in Quran, unity upon Quran and Sunnah is the advice, and not to differ. The notion that God wants us to differ and accepts the differences, is a notion we hold today. But the Quran has in fact commanded the opposite and said without understanding (Fiqh) our hearts will be divided even if people may think we are united.
The rope of God is meant to be a source of unity, but when it becomes a source of conflict and division, it’s obviously not guiding. So that poses the next question.
Or is it that God sent an incomplete faith? Certainly, God has sent a guidance and way to unite on guidance, so if we aren’t following that guidance, it’s due to rebellion and insincerity on our part.
The Imam shows then a more sinister intention in all this. He asks, that if they are in fact partners with God in the affair, and this goes to a verse in the 42nd chapter of Quran. The leader and guide Ali is showing that people who follow such leaders in fact, are associating with God heedlessly.
The Imam continues and then advices on the role of the Sunnah, he says or is it God sent a perfect religion, but the Prophet didn’t convey it and fell short of manifesting it?
He then refutes all these rhetorical questions and shows in fact, the Quran has an amazing quality of guiding humans through all their differences and it’s implied with the last reference to the Prophet, that the Sunnah compliments it and provides insight to it.
The Captain and Navigator of the ship of Salvation, Imam Ali, explains, that different parts of Quran explain different parts.
The last line is the most significant phrase for the purposes of the paradox. Its darkness which is in plural form, mean all the type of darkness which is a hint to the verse 3:7 and what is meant by ambiguity from it is to be cleared through itself.
And the Quran clarifies itself, but through the help of Ahlulbayt (as). The Sunnah of the Messenger was complimenting the Quran as it was dynamically built.
And here while we should provide hadiths to clarify Quran, we have to prove at the end Quranic signs and insights by Quran insights, since hadiths can always be denied.
But as anyone can talk a bunch of nonsense about Quran any right interpretation must be supported by hadiths as well. When hadiths are shown there is weight to the words and explanation, and it becomes easier to see it in Quran.
Without hadiths to support, there is no reason to give weight to the words. We can see this in the notion, did the Prophet fall short of conveying. Similar rhetorical question, did Ahlulbayt (as) leave any aspect of the religion aside and not protected?
