The Ruling on Taqlid (Following a Scholar Without Knowing His Evidence) in Matters of Creed

Question:
Is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) permissible in this, or is it not permissible?

Answer:
This is a very important issue. The scholars of Kalam (theology) say that taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is not permissible in matters of creed. Rather, it is necessary to engage in reflection. Reflection and reasoning with rational evidence, because rational evidence, in their view, leads to certainty, whereas auditory evidence, which is the evidence of the Shari'ah, does not lead to certainty in their view. Therefore, they obligate creation to reflect using rational evidence until they reach firm belief.
And this view is undoubtedly invalid, because most, or all, of the matters of creed are unseen matters from the affairs of the Unseen, which no one knows except Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). The intellect does not reach the matters of the Unseen. Rather, one relies on the reports of the Shari'ah that were brought down in the books and came through the messengers. One relies on auditory evidence in them, meaning the evidence of the Shari'ah that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) sent down in His books and His messengers brought. And it leads to certainty. It leads to certainty and firmness, because it is from Allah (Mighty and Majestic) or from the messengers of Allah. And they are the most knowledgeable about Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He).
So the reliance of the people of knowledge, the reliance in creed is on the evidence of the Shari'ah, and as for rational evidence, one does not rely on it entirely, but one benefits from it, one benefits from it, but one does not restrict oneself to it in establishing creed. Because the intellect is limited. And incapable of comprehending all the matters. Rather, one relies on the speech of Allah (Exalted and Majestic is He) and the speech of His Messenger. Yes. In matters of creed.
And as for taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), taqlid is accepting the statement of another without evidence, this is taqlid, accepting the statement of another without evidence. Meaning without the muqallid (one who follows) seeking the evidence, because the muqallid does not know the evidence, rather he follows another. Another. And taqlid is of two types: taqlid in the sense of following and emulation. And this is with the people of knowledge and insight. It is permissible to follow them and emulate them if they are verified scholars. Yusuf (peace be upon him) said, "And I followed the religion of my fathers Ibrahim, and Ishaq, and Ya'qub. It was not for us to associate with Allah anything." So emulation and following, if it is upon truth. That it is correct. And it is truth. As for emulating the scholars of misguidance, it is not permissible, neither in matters of creed nor in anything else, so this is the taqlid of the blind. As for the correct taqlid, which is following the people of truth and the people of knowledge, there is no harm in it, and also for the common people.
The common people are not able to know the details of creed, and rather this is the affair of the scholars, and as for the common people, it is sufficient for them to have general belief, it is sufficient for them to have general belief, and as for the details, these are with the people of knowledge. For this reason, the people used to submit in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), they would pronounce the two testimonies, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) would accept that from them. He would accept that from them, and would not demand of them that they mention the details of creed, rather he would be satisfied with their testimony in it, so general belief is sufficient for the common Muslim. And as for the scholar, it is necessary for him to know the details of creed. The people differ in this matter, are they not on the same level in terms of capacity and knowledge? So creed is