Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi in an Interview with Ijtihad Network: Ayatullah Shahroudi Believed Security Considerations Must Not Lead to the Violation of Citizens’ Rights

Regarding citizens’ rights, I once saw a piece by him where he considered one of the problems of citizenship rights in the Islamic Republic to be that these rights have not yet been institutionalized in our Islamic society, and therefore, some conducts of law enforcement and security forces toward violators are, in truth, a violation of their citizenship rights.

Exclusive to Ijtihad Network: The passing of Ayatullah Seyyed Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi was a major shock to the scholarly and social community of Iran. In addition to his political and scholarly persona, he was regarded as the most important intellectual heir to Martyr Seyyed Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr. In this regard, we conducted an interview with Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi, who is considered a proponent of Martyr al-Sadr’s academic methodology.

The lecturer of advanced (Kharij) jurisprudence and principles at the Islamic Seminary of Qom considers one of the most important achievements of Martyr al-Sadr to be the training of students such as Ayatullah Hashemi Shahroudi. The details of this interview are presented before you.

Ijtihad: How do you evaluate the scientific standing and services of the late Ayatullah Hashemi Shahroudi?

Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi: While offering condolences on the passing of Ayatullah Shahroudi, who was among the pillars and professors of the seminary, and from whom highly beneficial works have been preserved, I can state briefly regarding him that his intellectual horizon was deeply influenced by his master, Martyr al-Sadr. For instance, in terms of comprehensiveness, he was like Martyr al-Sadr. In terms of precision, he was indeed sharp-sighted, and in terms of reasoning in jurisprudential and scientific discussions, he possessed immense strength of argument. In precise discussions, he would express various possibilities.

He was also peerless in addressing new and contemporary issues that were required. As an example, I will mention one instance. Regarding intellectual property, I saw an article or speech by him where he emphasized that the issue of intellectual property must be considered from various dimensions. On one hand, it is a right associated with the person who, through his intellect, has written something, made an invention, or introduced an innovation. On the other hand, it must be noted that certain corporations in civilized and advanced countries attempt to possess monopolies, preventing others from utilizing them. On the third hand, it must also be noted that the absence of law in this matter may lead to disorder and chaos in the country. Alongside all of these, attention must also be paid to the issue of justice.

Subsequently, regarding the issue of intellectual property, he says: “How excellent it would be if we performed a precise investigation so that we can present a complete model to the world that both possesses the advantages of current laws and prevents their defects and harms. After all, if we wish to completely accept intellectual property as a right or ownership, this might lead to the monopolistic behavior of certain corporation owners and capitalists, or violate the rights of citizens. In any case, we can implement an Islamic model for intellectual property and present it to the world.” His attention to these multiple dimensions of the discussion was indeed peerless and highly valuable.

We have a similar discussion regarding citizens’ rights. It is interesting that regarding citizens’ rights, I once saw a piece by him where he considered one of the problems of citizenship rights in the Islamic Republic to be that these rights have not yet been institutionalized in our Islamic society, and therefore, some conducts of law enforcement and security forces toward violators are, in truth, a violation of their citizenship rights.

Well, it must be noted that this thought is highly progressive, and while it considers the right of sovereignty for preserving security, it concurrently pays attention to citizens’ rights as well. He explicitly states that the sovereignty cannot ignore the rights of individuals under the title of security, and justice must not be sacrificed in this field. Not only in relation to this issue but generally regarding the preservation of all social orders and the method of preserving the social order, he says it must be in a manner that does not contradict the values of right and justice.

As a whole, it appears that he was truly a reformist, deep jurist who was familiar with the primary transformations, while he himself entered this arena and provided valuable services.

If I wish, I can state numerous examples; for instance, his commitment to the fact that the ruler has a specific discretionary authority in governance to preserve the interests of society, which is a highly important issue. In the issue of the blood money (diya) of the protected non-Muslim citizens (Ahl al-Dhimmah), which is a discussion where jurists hold various opinions and views, he believed that the Islamic ruler—considering the expediency and preserving the status and life of the Ahl al-Dhimmah in the Islamic society—can, if he wishes, equate the diya of a dhimmi to the diya of a Muslim. He infers this from a narration and then says: “This is dependent on the nature of the treaty of safe-conduct (aman) or protection (dhimmah) established between them and the Islamic government.”

Paying attention to the objections directed toward the Islamic Sharia in today’s world in itself testifies to his intellectual capacity. It also testifies to his attention to the requirements of the time, while concurrently based on the very foundation of jurisprudence and with the same deductive method utilized by jurists in general. These were the advantages he possessed, and indeed his loss created a gap.

Ijtihad: It is clear that the principles (usuli) thoughts of Martyr al-Sadr must be sought in the book Buhuth (Buhuth fi Ilm al-Usul). However, can we also refer to the works of the late Hashemi Shahroudi to reflect other views of Martyr al-Sadr?

Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi: A fundamental point regarding him is that he was deeply influenced by the intellectual system of Martyr al-Sadr. He used to express certain points regarding Martyr al-Sadr that are highly valuable, indicating as a whole that he was influenced by his components and characteristics.

When he wished to introduce Martyr al-Sadr, he would mention a characteristic of Martyr al-Sadr that was rarely found among previous scholars. This characteristic was his comprehensiveness. For example, regarding the Infallible Imams (peace be upon them), he emphasized that Mr. Sadr believed we must examine the history of the Imams based on a comprehensive theory; meaning we should view the Imams as a continuous, alternating whole, and examine the whole within the common objectives they possessed.

Of course, this does not negate the fact that he possessed specific inclinations toward certain matters that, in terms of preference, might not be identical to Martyr al-Sadr. However, in his articles and speeches, particularly those addressing contemporary issues, the influence of Martyr al-Sadr is fully visible.

In his jurisprudential books as well—several of which have been published, such as the books on khums, lease (ijarah), zakat, partnership (shirkah), silent partnership (mudarabah), and so forth—this very point is visible. His commentaries on Buhuth under the title Adwa’ wa Ara’ (Glosses and Views) are also virtually the same. Generally, it appears that in the collection of his works and publications, we can observe a reflection of the views of Martyr al-Sadr; of course, while preserving the fact that he himself holds different opinions that are highly beneficial.

Ijtihad: How do you evaluate his theories regarding the production of the discourse of Systemic Jurisprudence (Fiqh al-Nizam)?

Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi: Systemic Jurisprudence (Fiqh al-Nizam) has multiple interpretations. In the sense that Martyr al-Sadr believed—meaning the general sense of Fiqh al-Nizam, that Islam definitely possesses a system—the late Ayatullah Hashemi Shahroudi definitely believed that Islam possesses a system, and believed that it must be disseminated within these systems. Of course, in the meantime, the ruler has specific discretionary authorities.

He was a strong believer in systemic jurisprudence and emphasized it in various places. The issue of the existence of order in the judicial rulings of Islam, the issue of observing the public interest, and observing citizens’ and social rights are components that, if considered in the domains of Fiqh al-Nizam, are highly helpful, and he also believed in them.

This approach of his can also be observed clearly in the journals associated with him. The Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence (Mawsu’at al-Fiqh al-Islami), comparative jurisprudence, or the Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence according to the Ahl al-Bayt, are all efforts toward that discourse and directing the seminaries’ attention to the issue of systemic jurisprudence.

Ijtihad: Does the entry of prominent scholars into the political arena obstruct scientific progress, or conversely, does it foster scientific growth?

Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi: In entering the political arena, several possibilities and forms are raised.

Sometimes entering the political arena means that in the domain of execution and administration of some affairs, a responsibility is accepted, such that the time, thought, and concern that must be spent on theorizing are spent on executive matters, while the assumption of this responsibility is also possible by others. This certainly obstructs progress in the scientific arena. Of course, if necessity demands this, it is another discussion; but if there is no necessity and strong executive directors exist, there is no reason for jurists to enter the executive arena. Rather, individuals who are theorists must dedicate themselves to training students and pay attention to scientific efforts.

However, entering the political arena in the sense of awareness and theorizing within it is a necessity for the jurist, and the jurist must certainly be in charge of these affairs. Assuming these affairs—which is accompanied by attention to domestic, Islamic world, and international political developments—is not only not an obstacle, but rather fosters progress, and causes the jurist to acquire a better understanding of issues and produce highly beneficial theories