Full Text of Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi’s Remarks at the Scientific Session “Explaining the School of Imam Khomeini (RA)” with the Topic “Imam Khomeini (RA), the Progressive and Leading Seminary and the Requirements of Efficient Jurisprudence”

This session was held on 1404/03/06 at the Imam (RA) Memorial Cultural and Artistic Complex.

During the days of the anniversary of the demise of the great Imam, who has a great right over the Islamic ummah, the people of Iran, and all of us, the seminaries, the Islamic clergy, whether Shia or Sunni, holding these sessions has always been customary, and this institute, praise be to God, has been and is a pioneer in holding these sessions on various occasions, and a while ago I also had the honor of attending this same assembly and gathering. I thank all the involved parties, planners, and officials of the institute, especially in the Qom office, and the honorable custodian of the institute, Ayatullah Haj Sayyid Hasan Agha Khomeini, who leads this institute. From all the esteemed and honorable figures, especially the honorable Mr. Taqvi, who himself is among the scholars and of course showed kindness toward me and said things that I do not consider myself worthy of such descriptions. I hope in this short time we can address this topic to the extent possible.
The title of this discussion is “Imam Khomeini, the Progressive and Leading Seminary and Efficient Jurisprudence,” which includes two topics, each of which deserves independent and detailed examination. The progressive and leading seminary itself is a very important issue. Likewise, the topic of the efficiency of jurisprudence is also a very important issue. In this session, we want to make some references to the requirements that must be considered for making jurisprudence efficient as an important part of the seminary, and that too in a progressive and leading seminary. What requirements exist for making jurisprudence efficient or must be considered, and how can the seminary train jurists whose fatwas are efficient?
The desired, standard, ideal, progressive, and leading seminary, which was recently addressed in detail in the message of the Supreme Leader, certainly requires all-round efforts. In various dimensions, work must be done in the seminary to become leading, progressive, and standard. But regarding jurisprudence, the matters are far beyond the title of the discussion. For now, we want to address efficient jurisprudence in a progressive seminary, and from one perspective, what are the requirements for the efficiency of jurisprudence?
We cannot speak of the efficiency of jurisprudence within the seminary collection and the intellectual system of Shia and Islam without presenting a general image of this seminary. Therefore, I will quickly address the central matters that must be attended to in a progressive and leading seminary, which have also been addressed in the message of the Supreme Leader, and of course Imam (may God’s mercy be upon him) has also referred to them in various scattered positions. Now, if I want to have an expression regarding this valuable message, I can say that the message of the Supreme Leader is, in summary, an updated version of the frameworks that the Imam outlined for the desired seminary. Although it also has some new points.
First principle: Purification and piety. This is clear and considered the base and foundation.
Second principle: The comprehensiveness of the seminary. This is a point that both the Imam emphasizes and He does. The Imam’s expression is that scholars must have various dimensions, and according to the dimensions that Islam has and according to the dimensions that humans have, seminaries must also have various dimensions. This implies a very important argument for the comprehensiveness of religion, which I will mention later.
The Supreme Leader also stated something similar, that the seminary is an outward-looking institution whose output is at the service of the thought and culture of society at all levels. The seminary is not just an institute for teaching and learning, but a collection of knowledge and education and social and political functions.
Third principle: Jihadist identity and rejection of the domination system and fighting against the world-devourers.
Fourth principle: Accompanying the people and relying on the deprived.
Fifth principle: The issue of government. This itself is a central matter for a progressive seminary, meaning having a governmental view and perspective. Government as it is responsible for various affairs of society. Of course, two additional matters were present in His message, which are very important in their own right:
First: Participation in the production and explanation of systems for administering society.
Second: Civilizational innovations within the framework of the global message of Islam.
This is a general image of the desired, progressive, and leading seminary, which has a great difference with the current state, the distance is great, the shortcomings are many. The Imam has also referred to these shortcomings in summary, and the root of all of them is the same as what the Imam said: “The clergy, until it has an active presence in all issues and problems, cannot understand that conventional ijtihad is not sufficient for administering society.” This is a very important point that conventional ijtihad is not sufficient for administering society. This has roots and reasons. One of the main problems is this lack of active presence in issues and problems.
In the message of the Supreme Leader, this matter is mentioned as an important defect in the seminary: the mismatch between promotional outputs with the intellectual and cultural realities among the people, especially the youth. This distance, the gap between realities and the current state of the seminary, and especially jurisprudence, is something that no matter how much we want to hide it, it cannot be hidden. This is a reality whose effects and results we are also seeing.
Now, if we want the seminary to be progressive and leading, we must outline a vision for it. We must also consider the current state. These shortcomings must also be taken into account. Now, in the midst of this, jurisprudence as the heart of this seminary, if it wants to be efficient, what requirements and necessities should we define for it? This is the topic of our discussion.
Before anything, we must see what efficiency means and what it signifies? Here, various definitions and theories about efficiency have been raised. If we do not want to enter those discussions and present a general and comprehensive definition that includes all those views, we can say: Efficiency consists of appropriate impact in the direction of goals. This efficiency, although more discussed in the field of management. But it has also entered the field of thought, especially that part of knowledge and thoughts that have objective effects. It is obvious that the definition of efficiency as appropriate impact in the direction of goals requires that the goals be specified.
When we speak of the efficiency of jurisprudence, we must naturally examine the appropriate impact of jurisprudence in the direction of its goals, and for this purpose, before anything, the goals must be specified. Here begins the disagreement, and various views take shape.
What are the goals of jurisprudence? One step further, what are the goals of religion? Here we have a minimal view that confines religion to dealing with otherworldly matters, and that it has no concern with worldly life and earthly existence; according to this opinion, earthly existence must be managed by the rational ones. We also have a maximal view that religion basically includes all dimensions of human life; it deals with both worldly life and the hereafter, both individual life and social life of humans. It wants to build both the world and the hereafter.
Therefore, when we want to measure the efficiency of religion or Islam and see its impact in the concreteness of society, it must be in accordance with this goal. Here there is much disagreement. The Imam believes that the goal of Islam and the goal of jurisprudence includes organizing and regulating human life in all its dimensions. That argument I mentioned at the beginning, here I use it. See, this sentence apparently is an ordinary sentence, but it includes two syllogisms of the first form, He says: Because humans have various dimensions, and Islam has come for human-building, so the breadth of Islam’s dimensions is the breadth of human dimensions. And on this basis, scholars must have various dimensions. The first syllogism is: Islam has come for human-building, humans have various dimensions, so Islam has various dimensions. The second syllogism is also: Scholars are responsible for explaining Islam. Islam has various dimensions. So scholars are responsible for explaining the various dimensions of Islam. Naturally, the broader the scope of humans, the broader the scope of Islam becomes.
This is the goal of Islam, we believe Islam is comprehensive, global and encompassing, eternal, complete, and the seal of religions. If we consider these five characteristics for Islam, we cannot separate it from these dimensions.
The jurisprudence of Sharia is also a part of Islam, the Imam has statements in this regard. Pay attention, all these indicate a very important thought, He says: “Jurisprudence is the real and complete theory of administering humans from the cradle to the grave.” “Jurisprudence is the guarantor of the growth and benefit of nations.” “Islamic jurisprudence is capable of adapting to all requirements and emerging issues.” If we present such an image of jurisprudence and Islam that includes all existential dimensions of humans, then it deals with his world, deals with his hereafter, pays attention to his material life, pays attention to his spiritual life, looks at the individual and society together, never says: This is an individual and therefore I have no concern with what role he has in society? At all, society in the logic of the Quran has an identity; society has actions, has a record, is held accountable.
If we consider jurisprudence as a set of laws and regulations presented for organizing human life and regulating his worldly and otherworldly life, then the efficiency of jurisprudence consists of appropriate impact in this scope. Now, the otherworldly life and the intermediate realm and the world of imagination have their own specific requirements. But this world, the material world, the world that has a preliminary part for eternal human life, cannot be separated from the range of jurisprudence at all. Jurisprudence wants to organize this life. This is where efficiency finds meaning.
Organizing human life is not throwing him into a pit every day, creating a dead end for him, always hitting a wall. This is an important issue. Once the Imam (may God’s mercy be upon him) in a letter to one of the professors and elders referred to this very point that: “The way you are going, humanity must return to the past and live in deserts in ancient times. It is clear what the result will be.
So the first and most important requirement among the requirements for the efficiency of jurisprudence is depicting and outlining a comprehensive Islam and comprehensive jurisprudence that is also responsible for human worldly life.
We have a big problem. Sometimes when efficiency is mentioned, only the effect is addressed. This is wrong. Some say: Why do we bring these into the circle of religion at all so that we have to ask religion to comment? These are matters related to the rational ones. That minimal view that I mentioned. It is clear what its result is. Efficiency here becomes very different based on this view. In any case, I think that this view with this inclusiveness and comprehensiveness must become widespread among students of religious sciences, professors, those who are researchers and investigators in the field of religion so that we can present an efficient face of Islam and jurisprudence.
Second, in the intellectual system of religion, government is the principle, foundation, and axis. The main root in making religion and jurisprudence efficient is government. When I say government, now do not concern yourself with objections and examples. I am stating a matter theoretically. At all, the root of efficiency is government. This impact in the direction of goals, without government, is incomplete and impossible.
This expression of the Imam about government helps us a lot in understanding efficiency, He says: “Government in the view of the real mujtahid is the practical philosophy of all jurisprudence in all corners of human life.” Can you find a more eloquent expression than this to show the impact of government on efficiency? Or for example this expression: “Government is indicative of the practical aspect of jurisprudence in dealing with all social, political, military, and cultural problems.” This indicates that government has the main role in the efficiency of jurisprudence.
Now if someone comes and says: Islam has no government, Shia has no government, religion has no government, in the era of occultation government has no meaning at all, naturally he has very limited the seminary and the impact and efficiency of jurisprudence. Therefore, government is one of the requirements for making jurisprudence efficient.
It is also good to recall this point that part of the matters goes back to insight and perspective. These insights and perspectives must be reformed. And without them, it is clear that efficiency will not be realized. This is one of those requirements. It is possible that someone imagines we are starting from the beginnings, but these are roots. Until we solve these, nothing will be solved fundamentally. It is possible that some believe we solve problems and dead ends with secondary rulings. Many have such a view, even among those who accept the idea of religious government. This view limits the efficiency of jurisprudence. In any case, commitment to the theory of religious government and guardianship of the jurist, which is the principle and foundation in this thought, has an effective role in the efficiency of religious government.
The third requirement and necessity and very very important is considering the two elements of time and place. I believe the most important pillar of the efficiency of jurisprudence is this theory. If this theory is properly explained and applied, it helps a lot in making jurisprudence efficient. I will just make a reference to this.
The Imam (may God’s mercy be upon him) had raised the two previous pillars until the time of the victory of the revolution. Look at the Imam’s works, the issue of the all-roundness and comprehensiveness of Islam, that religion is responsible for all dimensions of human life, the Imam had raised this before the revolution as well. He had also raised the issue of government before the revolution. All these relate to the efficiency of jurisprudence. But the issue of the impact and role of time and place in deduction almost at the end of his life, this in the continuation of efficiency and due to his confrontation with government issues and problems was raised. I have seen sometimes some say, some fatwas of the Imam before the revolution changed after the revolution and they mention justifications for these changes. For example, regarding music, before the revolution He had said: Music and ghina are absolutely haram. After the revolution He said: Mutrib and lahwi music is haram and accordingly, buying and selling musical instruments and teaching it, has been considered permissible, some say this was from the aspect of secondary ruling. Some also say it was from the aspect of governmental ruling. But I think this was related to the impact of the element of time and place. This itself has a detailed discussion. How time and place impact deduction. Of course, the Imam in his scholarly works, I think in the book Al-Bay’, on the occasion of one of the effective directions in fatwa, has raised it from this perspective. And that is considering the temporal and spatial conditions related to the issuance of narrations that affect the understanding of addresses.
But the issue of time and place He did not raise before the revolution. I think that after the revolution and entering the arena of realizing jurisprudence and rulings in the society scene, He encountered certain matters and in truth the peak of that thought and idea appeared and became evident here. Now how do these two elements cause efficiency? This itself becomes a seventy-man paper Mathnawi. I am forced to pass through it very quickly. Perhaps nine or ten interpretations of this theory exist, or as probability, or it has proponents. Most of these, in my opinion, are not compatible with the Imam’s view. That I tied this theory with efficiency is because these are the origin of raising this theory for making jurisprudence efficient in the present era. The most important pillar of efficiency is also this: Time and place in the establishment and legislation of rulings of course have intervention, but it is in the hand of the legislator and has nothing to do with us. Sometimes the legislator has legislated and established a ruling with consideration of a specific time or place. In any case, our hand is out of that range. At most, we discover some interests with definite reason or definite text and intervene it in deduction.
Time and place also impact in the deduction of religious rulings and jurisprudence and ijtihad and in the execution of religious rulings. In the deduction of religious rulings also in primary rulings, also in secondary rulings, also in governmental rulings, these are three types. In each of these also in the circle of subject and also in the circle of criterion, of course it has breadth and narrowness, it is not that the impact is loose and without restriction. All these are effective in deduction. Meaning a jurist who wants to deduce, must consider changes in the subject. We have 9 types of change and impact in the subject, 9 models or forms that in a way temporal and spatial changes affect the subject. The jurist at the position of deduction if he pays attention to these matters, it certainly affects his deduction. This is why the Imam (may God’s mercy be upon him) said: The clergy until it has an active presence in all issues and problems, cannot understand that conventional ijtihad is not sufficient for administering society. This is a key sentence. Why is conventional ijtihad not sufficient? Why does his presence in society and in the midst of issues help him for correct deduction, appropriate ijtihad; so that he can administer society? That they say conventional ijtihad is not sufficient for administering society, refers to the same efficiency that can administer society and be impactful. Administering society is not just being responsible and dismissing and appointing four people. Administering society means organizing individual and social life and pursuing those goals that have been considered for the world of Muslims. Of course, it is clear that the purposes of Islam and Sharia are not limited to material welfare. Certainly in this world, one must live in such a way that attention to the hereafter world always remains preserved. This aspect must always be considered.
Therefore, the theory of the impact of time and place in deduction and ijtihad is the most important element in making jurisprudence efficient. We cannot expect our jurisprudence to become efficient without this issue. Now, of course, excesses and deficiencies occur here. We must be careful not to fall into these excesses and deficiencies.
It is interesting that in this very seminary, in these very conditions, today, we have people who believe in the first pillar and the first requirement and are committed; meaning they say Islam is a comprehensive and complete religion and jurisprudence is also responsible for all life matters. They also accept the second pillar; meaning they believe in the theory of religious government and religious thought. But in the third pillar, their foot limps, and this creates many problems. This is why many jurists, mostly see the way to make efficient as resorting to secondary ruling or governmental ruling, but until when do we want to resolve problems and dead ends and troubles with secondary titles? What I say is not outside the framework; it is precisely taken from the statements of the Imam himself (may God’s mercy be upon him). Then is it possible with this speed of changes and complexities that the world today has, to solve each of these with secondary ruling, do you know what happens in the end? Primary rulings gradually (except for worships where time and place have very little impact at all.) are set aside.
It is not supposed that we have a life separate from the rational of the world. No one says this either. We cannot go live on an island, distance ourselves from all complexities and all transformations and all new things. Once I had a talk somewhere on an occasion, I said some of us regarding the issue of technology, unfortunately have a negative view, that it cannot be. If we want to go along with the human caravan, meanwhile preserve the foundations of belief and faith and laws and religious regulations and live within the framework of Sharia – which this must be – we must think of a fundamental measure. We cannot be loose, we must both go along with the human caravan and have these frameworks and regulations govern our lives. Now, there are many incidents and issues that will come later that we cannot even dream of what will happen. Until when do we want to solve these with secondary ruling and governmental ruling? What I say, gradually leading to the abandonment of primary rulings means this. Therefore, ijtihad and jurisprudence show their impact here. If jurisprudence wants to have impact appropriate to its goal, meaning to be efficient, it must certainly pay attention to this pillar, namely the impact of the two elements of time and place in ijtihad and deduction and also in the position of execution. I say this in parentheses: The efficiency we say does not mean only paying attention to providing material life and human welfare. I said this must be in accordance with that goal.
The time has passed, but I will say the last case as well and God willing entrust you to the great God. This is also among the requirements for the efficiency of jurisprudence. Forward-thinking; I said four cases now, of course there are more than these, each of these needs more explanation and expansion.
We cannot separate efficiency from forward-thinking; neither in the seminary, nor within the clergy, nor regarding jurisprudence. No organization and institution can be efficient without forward-thinking. This is among the things that analogies accompany it, an institution, a small organization, an office, and even an individual in his personal life, if he does not have forward-thinking, cannot be efficient. An individual without forward-thinking in facing problems and matters that arise falls apart, loses his discipline and cannot confront these phenomena and problems that arise in life.
The Imam says: “Seminaries, clergies must always have the pulse of the thought and future need of society in their hands and always be prepared a few steps ahead of incidents for appropriate reaction. It may be that the common methods in administering people’s affairs change in future years and human societies need new Islamic issues to solve their problems. The great scholars of Islam must think about this issue from now.”
Forward-thinking which implies future research and planning, if jurisprudence wants to become efficient, must have future research. The progressive and leading seminary is a seminary that has future research, forward-thinking, planning and is prepared for responding, for presenting programs.
In this short time, I raised these four pillars of the efficiency of jurisprudence or the requirements for the efficiency of jurisprudence, although these requirements are more. In this gathering where many are scholars who themselves know these better than I. But now we wanted to perform our duty.
Those two points that the Supreme Leader had in his message are also very important, which now this is more general from some aspects. And we did not enter it and there is no time.
One is participation in the production and conversion and explanation of systems for administering society, and the other is civilizational innovations within the framework of the global message of Islam.
What was said also has margins and branches that we must also consider for making efficient. Especially a macro and comprehensive view, a comprehensive and macro view in jurisprudence is very important. A harmonious view, a systematic view, in such a way that the parts of this collection are proportionate to each other, have coherence, have internal cohesion. There be no inconsistency between these parts and dimensions and chapters.
I hope with the movements that have started in the seminaries, the generation that is growing in this seminary, the scientific efforts that are being carried out in the seminary either individually or collectively, God willing we move toward a progressive and leading seminary, a standard seminary, a desired seminary and God willing bring jurisprudence to its real position and make its efficiency God willing more and more.
And peace be upon you and God’s mercy and blessings.