Basi, yule ambaye amesikia khitabu (amri) anakuwa na wajibu wa kuielewa na kuiamini. Na yule aliyeiamini, anakuwa na wajibu wa kuielewa na kuitekeleza, kwa sababu ni Hukm Shar'i (kanuni ya Sharia). Hivyo, msingi kwa Mwislamu ni kwamba yeye mwenyewe aelewe hukmu (kanuni) ya Allah kutokana na khitabu chake. Kwa kuwa khitabu hicho kimeelekezwa moja kwa moja kwa watu na Mwekaji Sheria, si kwa Mujtahidina au Maulamaa pekee, bali kwa wote walio mukallafu (wenye dhima ya kisheria). Hivyo ikawa ni wajibu kwa wenye dhima ya kisheria (mukallafin) kuelewa khitabu hiki mpaka wawe na uwezo wa kukitekeleza, kwa kuwa haiwezekani kutenda kulingana na khitabu bila kukifahamu. Kwa hiyo, istinbati (kutoa hukmu) ya hukmu ya Allah imekuwa fardi juu ya wote walio mukallafu, yaani, Ijtihadi imekuwa fardi juu ya wote walio mukallafu. Kwa sababu hiyo, msingi (asl) ni kwamba mtu mwenye dhima ya kisheria (mukallaf) achukue mwenyewe Hukm ya Allah kutoka katika khitabu cha Mwekaji Sheria, kwa sababu ndiye aliyeelekezewa usemi huu, ambao ni hukmu ya Allah.
So for the one who has heard the address he becomes obliged to understand it and believe in it. And the one who believed in it, he is obliged to understand it and act upon it, because it is a Hukm Shar’i (Sharī’ah rule). So the basis for a Muslim is that he himself should understand the rule (Hukm) of Allah from his address. Since, the address has been aimed directly at the people by the Legislator and not aimed only at the Mujtahiddin or the ‘Ulama but to all the legally responsible (mukallifin). Thus it became an obligation on the legally responsible (mukallafin) to understand this address until they are able to practise it since it is impossible to act according to the address without comprehending it. Thus, the deduction (istinbat) of Allah’s hukm became fard on all the legally responsible (mukallifin) i.e, Ijtihād became fard on all the legally responsible (mukallifin). Consequently, the basis (asl) is that the legally responsible (mukallaf) person adopts the Hukm of Allah himself from the address of the Legislator because it is he who has been addressed by this speech, which is the hukm of Allah .
Hata hivyo, hali halisi ya mukallafin ni kwamba kuna tofauti katika ufahamu wao, uelewa wao na uwezo wao wa kujifunza. Pia wanatofautiana katika kiwango cha elimu na ujinga. Kwa hiyo, kwa uhalisia haiwezekani kwa wote kuchambua hukumu zote za Shari'ah kutoka kwenye dalili, yaani haiwezekani kwa mukallafin wote kuwa mujtahidina. Kwa kuwa lengo ni kuelewa khitabu (amri ya Mwenyezi Mungu) na kukitekeleza kwa kuzingatia ufahamu huo, basi Ijtihad ni fardh juu ya mukallafin wote. Lakini haiwezekani kwa mukallafin wote kuelewa khitabu kwa nafsi zao kutokana na tofauti katika ufahamu na uelewa wao na tofauti katika kujifunza; kwa hiyo wajibu wa Ijtihad unakuwa ni wa kutosheleza (fardh kifaya). Iwapo baadhi yao watalitekeleza, wengine wanaondolewa dhambi. Kwa hiyo, ikawa ni wajibu kwa Waislamu mukallafin kwamba miongoni mwao kuwepo na mujtahidina watakaochambua hukumu za Shari'ah.
However, the reality of the legally responsible (mukallafin) is that there is a disparity in their understanding and comprehension and in their (aptitude to) learn. They also differ in terms of knowledge and ignorance. Therefore, it is realistically impossible for all of them to deduce all the Sharī’ah rules from the evidences i.e, it is impossible for all the legally responsible (mukallafin) to be mujtahiddin. Since the objective is to understand the address and act upon this understanding, therefore, Ijtihād is fard on all the legally responsible (mukallifin). But it is impossible for all the legally responsible (mukallafin) to understand the address for themselves due to the disparity in their understanding and comprehension and the disparity in learning therefore the obligation of Ijtihād becomes one of sufficiency (‘ala al-Kifaya). If some undertake it the rest are absolved of the sin. Therefore, it became obligatory on the legally responsible Muslims that there should be Mujtahiddin amongst them who will derive the Sharī’ah rulings.
Kwa hiyo, uhalisia wa mukallafin (watu wanaowajibika kisheria) na ule wa Hukm Shar’i unamaanisha kwamba kutakuwa na makundi mawili miongoni mwa Waislamu: mujtahidina na muqallidina. Hii ni kwa sababu yule anayechukua hukm moja kwa moja kutoka kwenye dalili ni mujtahid, na yule anayemuuliza mujtahid kuhusu hukm Shar’i ni muqallid, bila kujali kama aliyeuliza alitaka kujifunza na kutenda kwayo, kujifunza na kuwafundisha wengine, au kujifunza tu. Muqallid anachukuliwa kuwa muqallid anapomuuliza mtu ambaye si mujtahid lakini anajua hukm Shar’i na anaweza kuwaeleza wengine, iwe aliyeulizwa ni mtu mwenye elimu au mtu wa kawaida. Hivyo, wote hao ni wafuasi (muqallid) wa wengine katika hukm hii, hata kama hakumjua aliyeitoa, kwa sababu mukallaf anatakiwa kuchukua hukm Shar’i wala si kufuata mtu fulani maalum. Kuwa muqallid kunamaanisha kwamba amechukua hukm Shar’i kupitia mtu fulani, ambayo yeye mwenyewe hakuitoa kwa kutumia ijtihadi, na haimaanishi kwamba amemfuata mtu fulani maalum, kwa sababu jambo linalohusika ni hukm Shar’i na si mtu. Tofauti kati ya muqallid na mujtahid ni kwamba mujtahid hutoa Hukm Shar’i kutoka kwenye dalili za Sharī’ah mwenyewe, ilhali muqallid ni yule anayechukua hukm Shar’i iliyotolewa na mtu mwingine asiye yeye, iwe alimjua aliyeitoa au hakumjua, mradi tu anaamini kwamba ni kanuni ya Sharī’ah. Si halali kuchukua taqlīd ya maoni ya mtu yeyote wa kawaida, wala ya mwanazuoni, mfikiriaji au mwanafalsafa. Hakuna chochote kati ya hivi kinachokubalika kama taqlīd halali.
Therefore, the reality of the legally responsible (mukallafin) and that of the Hukm Shar’i means that there would be two catagories amongst the Muslims, the mujtahiddin and muqallidin. This is because the one who adopts the hukm himself directly from the evidence is a mujtahid, and the one who questions the mujtahid about a hukm Shar’i is a muqallid irrespective of whether the questioner asked in order ; to learn and act upon it, to learn and teach it to others or to learn it only. The muqallid is considered a muqallid when he asks someone who is not a mujtahid but knows the hukm Shar’i and is able to tell others, whether the one who was asked was a learned person or a layman. Thus, they are all followers (muqallid) of others in this hukm even if he did not know the one who deduced it, because the legally responsible (mukallaf) is required to adopt the hukm Shar’i and not follow any particular person. Being a muqallid means that he has adopted a hukm Shari’, via a person, which he has not deduced himself and it does not mean he followed a particular person because the subject matter is the hukm Shari’ and not the person. The difference between the muqallid and the mujtahid is that the mujtahid deduces the Hukm Shari’ from the Sharī’ah evidence himself and the muqallid is the one who adopts the hukm Shari’ which has been deduced by someone other than him whether he knew the one who derived it or not, as long as he trusts that this is a Sharī’ah rule. It is not lawful Taqlīd to adopt the opinion of any ordinary person or that of a scholar, thinker or philosopher, Non of this is legitimate Taqlīd.
Badala yake, hilo ni sawa na kuchukua kitu kisicho Uislamu, na Sharī'ah imekikataza. Si halali kwa Muislamu kufanya hivyo, kwa kuwa Allah ametuamuru tuchukue kutoka kwa Mtume Muhammad ﷺ na si kutoka kwa mtu yeyote mwingine, awe nani. Yeye amesema:
Rather it is tantamount to adopting something which is other than Islam and it has been prohibited by the Sharī’ah. It is not allowed for the Muslim to do that since Allah has ordered us to adopt from the Messenger Muhammad and not from anybody else whoever he may be. He said: