The imam’s ta‘lim lights the murid’s path to spiritual enlightenment and vision. In temporal matters, the Imam guides the murids, and motivates them to develop their potential. (The Preamble to Ismaili Consitution)
It was essentially a reformulation of an old Shii doctrine of long standing among the Ismailis, namely, the doctrine of ta'lim or authoritative teaching by the imam, that the Persian (Nizari) Ismailis had initiated a "new preaching" (al-da'wa al-jadida) in contrast to the "old preaching" [al-da'wa al qadima) of Ismailis in Fatimid times.
In its fully developed form the reformulation of the doctrine of talim is generally ascribed to Hasan Sabbah, who was a learned theologian and also well grounded in philosophical thought. Hasan restated this doctrine, in a more vigorous form, in a theological treatise entitled Chahar fasl (Arabic, al-Fusul al-aiba'a), or the Four Chapters.The doctrine of ta'lim stressed absolute loyalty to the imam, and in his absence, to his full representative or hujja-, and and Hasan himself, as noted, was recognised as the first of such hujjas. In sum, Hasan argued that it is by virtue of his very existence that the true imam can fulfil man's need (for his authority), something that reasoning also corroborates. The doctrine of ta'lim, thus, emphasizes the autonomous teaching authority of each imam in his own time.
The Shiis from early on had emphasised the necessity of a spiritual guide or imam to lead mankind along the right path. These guides, they had always held, were designated by divine command and not by human choice as actually attempted by Sunni Muslims. For the Shi'a, only the sinless and infallible ' Alid imams, belonging to the ahl al-bayt and possessing special religious knowledge or Ilm, were qualified to perform the spiritual functions of such guides or teachers. Hasan Sabbah reformulated this Shi'i doctrine in a series of four propositions.
First Proposition: Inadequacy of Human Reason
Hasan reaffirmed the need of men for an authority or teacher (mu' allim) and the inadequacy of human reason (aql) by itself in enabling men to understand religious truths and to know God. This proposition also aimed at refuting the position of those, notably the philosophers, who believed in the adequacy of reason and independent human judgement in comprehending the ultimate truth.
Second Proposition: Need for a Single Authoritative Teacher
Hasan argued, in line with the traditional Shi'i position, that the required teacher must be authoritative or trustworthy (sadiq). He stated, in opposition to the position of the Sunnis, that there must be only one single divinely appointed arbiter, the true imam, in every age. Here, the single authoritative sanctioned teacher (mu' allim-i sadiq) of the Shi'is was set against the multiplicity of religious scholars (ulama) who were accepted as guides and teachers by the Sunnı Muslims in every age.
Third Proposition: A Logical Basis for the Authority of the Trustworthy Teacher
Hasan brought out the dilemma faced by the ordinary Shi'ıs themselves, i.e. that the identification of the sole authoritative teacher at any time required the demonstration of his authority, which was possible only on the basis of some further authority whose own authority must be demonstrated, and so on.
Fourth Proposition: A Dialectical Principle to Solve the Dilemma
Hasan attempted to solve this dilemma by reformulating the whole question in such a manner as to arrive at the desired result. He held that the authority of the required teacher could be known not through something beyond itself but through the very nature of knowledge, in which Hasan recognized a dialectical principle. Emphasizing that all true knowledge requires a contrast of two opposites which can be recognized only through one another, Hasan then proceeded to apply this dialectical principle to the relationship between the individual person who wished to know and the authoritative teacher whom he must discover. The individual’s reasoning enabled him to realize his need for the recognition of an authoritative teacher, but it did not by itself determine who that teacher was, nor did it lead him to the ultimate truth. On the other hand, the claimant to the position of final authority, the imam, did not need to prove his claims by resorting to any proof beyond himself. But a conjunction of the individual’s reasoning and the authoritative teacher solved the dilemma.
The individual’s reasoning did, as noted, indicate his need for the teaching of an authoritative teacher, the imam. And when reasoning had reached this point, the imam could then present himself as satisfying this very need. Accordingly, the true imam did not seek extrinsic proofs for his authority or imamate, which was proved only by his own existence. Indeed it was through his very existence that the true imam could fulfil the need which only reasoning can demonstrate. For Hasan-i Sabbah. , this imam, who did not need to resort to miracles or refer his ancestry, was the Ismaili imam, whose very being and claims were sufficient proofs of his legitimacy. The doctrine of tali'm presented by Hasan-i Sabbah. was both more rigorous and more self-sufficient than the traditional Shi'i view on the subject.
In his argumentation, Hasan consistently emphasized the role of the imam, with the Prophet as a link in the logical chain from God to imam. This doctrine, stressing the autonomous teaching authority of each imam in his time, became the central doctrine of the early Nizarı Ismailis, also serving as a powerful ideological tool in the hands of the Nizarı community of later times. Meanwhile, in the absence of an accessible imam, the community authority depended on his hujja, and Hasan himself, as noted, was recognized as that hujja. The doctrine of ta'lım, asestated by Hasan-i Sabbah., became so central to early Nizarı thought that the followers of the Nizarı dawa came to be known as the Talımiyya.
Acknoweldements:
Source: 'A Short History of Ismailis' by Farhad Daftary
'Ismailis, their Histroy and Doctrines' by Farhad Daftary
