▁two ▁streams ▁of ▁Sh i ʻ ia ▁thought ▁in ▁un pre ced ented ▁ways , ▁and ▁emphas izing ▁the ▁valid ity ▁of ▁intuit ive ▁knowledge ▁for ▁religious ▁thought . ▁R ather ▁than ▁re lying ▁entirely ▁on ▁I j ti had , ▁or ▁independent ▁rational ▁just ification , ▁Sh ak y h ▁A hm ad ▁claimed ▁to ▁derive ▁direct ▁guidance ▁from ▁the ▁Im ams . ▁R ely ing ▁entirely ▁on ▁individual ▁just ification ▁for ▁religious ▁guidance ▁had , ▁he ▁suggested , ▁led ▁to ▁the ▁introduction ▁into ▁Sh i ʻ a ▁belief ▁of ▁err one ous ▁views ▁of ▁particular ▁sch ol ars . ▁By ▁emphas izing ▁the ▁role ▁of ▁a ▁char ism atic ▁leader ▁whose ▁work ▁was ▁suggested ▁to ▁shared ▁in ▁the ▁inf al lib ility ▁of ▁the ▁Im ams , ▁Sh ak y h ▁A hm ad ▁suggested ▁that ▁the ▁divers ity ▁of ▁r ul ings ▁promoted ▁by ▁the ▁ul ama ▁could ▁be ▁replaced ▁with ▁a ▁singular ▁set ▁of ▁do ctr ines - this ▁view ▁would ▁later ▁find ▁w ides p read ▁support ▁in ▁the ▁Ay atol lah ▁system ▁of ▁modern ▁Us ul ism . ▁His ▁views ▁resulted ▁in ▁his ▁den unci ation ▁by ▁several ▁learned ▁cler ics , ▁and ▁he ▁engaged ▁in ▁many ▁deb ates ▁before ▁moving ▁on ▁to ▁Pers ia ▁where ▁he ▁settled ▁for ▁a ▁time ▁in ▁the ▁province ▁of ▁Y az d . ▁It ▁was ▁in ▁Is fah an ▁that ▁most ▁of ▁this ▁was ▁written . ▁ ▁Say y id ▁Kaz im ▁Ras ht i ▁ ▁Sh ay kh ▁A hm