Ayatollah Sayyid Mojtaba Nourmofidi’s Exclusive Interview with Jamaran News Agency: Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani Believed That the Seminary’s Independence Must Be Preserved

In an Interview with Jamaran, on the Anniversary of the Passing of Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani

Ayatollah Mojtaba Nourmofidi: Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani believed that the seminary’s independence must be preserved / He always said that Imam Khomeini had been treated unjustly in scholarly terms / The seminaries must pay greater attention to Imam Khomeini’s scholarly thoughts and ideas

Jamaran News: In an interview conducted on the anniversary of the passing of Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani, Ayatollah Sayyid Mojtaba Nourmofidi said: “I believe that the seminaries, teachers, students, and accomplished scholars must pay greater attention to Imam Khomeini’s scholarly thoughts and ideas and study them carefully and deeply. Some of Imam Khomeini’s views are truly not merely opinions and viewpoints expressed within a scholarly environment, but rather ways of breaking the deadlocks confronting human life in the present age. In other words, if we want the seminary and the clergy to endure, lead the way, and gain acceptance in the contemporary world, there is no doubt that this will be achieved through Imam Khomeini’s ideas. For example, his theory concerning the influence of time and place on ijtihad is no minor matter, yet its dimensions and aspects have still not been properly explained.”

The text of the interview with Ayatollah Sayyid Mojtaba Nourmofidi on the anniversary of the passing of Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani follows:

As we approach the anniversary of the passing of the late Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani—your esteemed maternal uncle—we would like to hear about his spiritual and ethical qualities and his practical conduct before proceeding to discuss his relationship with Imam Khomeini and the interest and attention he showed toward Imam Khomeini and his classes.

I also thank you for placing the commemoration and honoring of the country’s and the seminary’s scholarly and revolutionary figures on your agenda. Honoring such figures is not about honoring individuals; it is about honoring virtues and the standing of knowledge and ethics. From this perspective, it is valuable work. Regarding the late Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani, I must say that he was well known and respected because of his family lineage, especially on his mother’s side. He was raised in a scholarly and spiritual environment and in an atmosphere of profound love for the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them). He also had family and kinship ties with prominent, long-established families of Qom and with individuals who were all among the pillars of the seminary.

His effort and diligence in pursuing his seminary education were renowned from childhood, and he retained them until the end of his life. If I were to mention one of his outstanding ethical qualities—which, in my view, is a characteristic found in very few people—it would be that when the various classes and groups of society, with their differing levels of understanding, knowledge, and awareness, met him, he was so warm and sincere toward them that each person thought he was the closest person to him. I have truly seen very few people display such warmth toward the different classes of society. For example, when a farmer who had come from far away met him, he felt a sense of warmth and ease, and the conversation he had with him was appropriate to that farmer’s concerns and issues. If a leading seminary scholar met him, he would feel the same warmth. If an academic figure or a merchant encountered him, he too would genuinely sense the same openness and sincerity. I know many people who felt that they were closer and more intimate with him than others were.

This character is the character of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). The Seal of the Prophets interacted with people in this sincere, easy, and unpretentious manner. This sense of warmth also existed within the family, even toward those who were younger. He was equally warm toward everyone. I have seen this in very few people.

In my view, he truly was a people-oriented marja‘ al-taqlid in every sense of the word. In addition to this ethical quality, he was concerned about society’s issues and the people’s problems and pursued these concerns under all circumstances. He did whatever he could both to resolve individuals’ personal problems and to address the country’s general problems and the problems of the city of Qom. This is highly valuable and attracts people. Many factors account for the appeal of the maraji‘ among the people, and one of the most important is certainly their character and humility toward the people. In any event, he used every opportunity to resolve these problems. His love and devotion toward the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) were indescribable. He attached particular importance to holding gatherings commemorating the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them). Since the time of his late father, a mourning ceremony had been held during the Fatimiyya period, and it may now have a history of eighty or ninety years. He was extremely sensitive about defending the sanctity of wilayah and the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), and he reacted to doubts raised in this regard. His two scholarly works, Guardians of Revelation and Radiant Figures, testify to this claim.

Another important point was his sincerity. One could feel that he acted sincerely in defending the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), Imam Khomeini, the Revolution, and the Islamic Republic. When he began writing his commentary on Tahrir al-Wasilah, there was no sign of the Revolution, nor did anyone imagine that Imam Khomeini would attain a special position in the country. Rather, because of the Pahlavi regime’s sensitivity, this work involved particular difficulties. Nevertheless, he began this important undertaking during the period of exile and wrote twenty-eight volumes of it during his lifetime. His learned and esteemed son, Ayatollah Haj Aqa Javad, is now completing the remainder.

What was his conduct like within the seminary and toward teachers, accomplished scholars, and students?

In general, he was highly attentive to and closely followed the educational, ethical, and livelihood affairs of seminary students, both as a leading teacher and as a member of the Seminary Management Council, of which he was one of the pillars. His classes were extremely valuable for seminary students, and he was truly a first-rate teacher in the seminary. I personally attended his jurisprudence and principles of jurisprudence classes for years. When he taught, one felt that the material was like wax in his hands. He had such command and mastery of it, and his presentation was so fluent.

For how many years were you his student?

I attended his classes for approximately ten years. In jurisprudence, I studied several books under him, which I believe took seven or eight years. He was truly outstanding in his manner of expression, and I regard him as nearly unparalleled in this respect. He presented subjects coherently, systematically, and profoundly, without any complexity whatsoever in his speech or expression. As one of the scholars used to say, “The late Mr. Fazel explains the contents of Kifayah better than Akhund himself and miraculously resolves the obscurity found in the expressions of Kifayah.” The way he entered and concluded discussions was entirely coherent and systematic. All of this indicated that he had thoroughly analyzed the material for himself, because sometimes one sees people explaining a subject while it appears that the issues have not yet been resolved for the speaker himself. This was a highly important matter.

He was also deeply concerned about the livelihoods of teachers and seminary students. I know of many instances in which he provided assistance to resolve the students’ problems. Some elderly teachers and figures in the seminary had been overlooked, particularly during the early years of the Revolution when an emotional atmosphere prevailed. He would obtain assistance for them from Imam Khomeini and deliver it to them. Many of them were respected individuals who had taught in the seminary for years but faced difficulties in meeting their living expenses. As a first-rate teacher himself, he was well aware of the value and importance of teachers and of their problems. I do not wish to mention names, but there were prominent teachers who faced difficulties in their lives, and he would obtain assistance for them from Imam Khomeini without anyone knowing. Even if some people had heard about it, they might not have particularly approved of assistance being given to certain individuals. In any event, however, this matter was important to him.

Did he also encourage you to enter the seminary?

Regarding myself, in order to acknowledge his right and express gratitude for this blessing, I must genuinely say that his encouragement was highly influential and constructive for me, both in entering the seminary and in continuing along this path. When I came here, I was residing at Khan School, but he constantly followed my academic progress and truly guided me in a fatherly and compassionate manner. It was as though he took pleasure in seeing someone enter this vocation and develop.

From the very beginning, he also told me to teach. I remember that in the first year of my studies, when I was studying Jami‘ al-Muqaddamat, I began teaching. He was one of my principal sources of encouragement along this path, and this continued in the same manner in subsequent years. He sometimes advised me about teaching, how to teach, the number of classes, and even the subjects to be taught. This was despite the fact that he himself faced numerous difficulties during the early years of the Revolution, both within and outside the seminary. He truly followed the circumstances of seminary students like a compassionate mentor and guide. In my view, this is highly important, and he made great efforts to cultivate seminary students both academically and ethically.

In any event, his classes, in one sense, trained mujtahids. He had attended the classes of Imam Khomeini and the late Mr. Borujerdi and was thoroughly familiar with their foundations.

What views did he hold regarding the seminary’s general affairs?

He had many concerns about the seminary’s general affairs and its future. He made predictions regarding certain matters that later came to pass. This demonstrated his keen intuition. He could see in an unbaked brick many things that others could not see in a mirror. I have many examples and instances of this, but there is presently no time or opportunity to relate them.

Please mention them. It would be good if you could also address this point.

That would take a long time. In any event, however, I wish to say that alongside his concern for seminary students’ livelihoods and ethical development, he emphasized strengthening the element of ijtihad within the seminary. To this end, he established the Jurisprudential Center of the Purified Imams (peace be upon them), which, praise be to God, is today regarded as an important and pioneering center in this field. He was also highly precise, profound, and perceptive regarding the seminary’s major issues and future. He would sometimes say that some people were overly simple and naïve and were easily deceived, but that he could not be deceived and remained vigilant. The late Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani undertook important work to systematize the seminary’s affairs. From the beginning of the Revolution, they established the Management Council, and he was one of its principal pillars. He administered the seminary’s affairs together with Mr. Mohaqqeq Damad and a small group.

An important point that must be mentioned is that although he was a staunch supporter of the Revolution and the Islamic Republic and consistently supported the Islamic Republic and the Leader, he believed that the seminary’s independence had to be preserved and that the support of such a seminary for the Revolution and the Islamic Republic could be more effective. I will never forget his statement that God has not sworn to preserve the Revolution under all circumstances; rather, this depends on our conduct and actions, on the extent to which we act correctly, remain united, and remedy our weaknesses.

Regarding his attention to the people, which you mentioned, it would be good if you could discuss some prominent points demonstrating his attention to the people’s circumstances and livelihoods and to the administration of society.

He always offered reminders and guidance to officials, both in private and public meetings. In some cases, he became truly distressed. For example, after an aviation accident in which a group of people were killed, he was deeply critical of the officials’ indifference and their failure to take the necessary measures to prevent such incidents. In private meetings, he would sometimes even speak to certain officials with shouting and raised voices.

Regarding the people’s livelihoods, because he was in contact with different social groups, he was aware of conditions at the grassroots level. He would therefore sometimes write to officials and at other times convey reminders and express his concerns through intermediaries. Regarding matters concerning the country, the Revolution, and the Islamic Republic, he also believed that the people had to be taken into consideration. He firmly believed that if anything were done that, God forbid, caused the people to become disillusioned, or if anyone did something that separated the people from the Revolution and the Islamic Republic, it would certainly be an unforgivable sin. He emphasized strengthening the means for the people’s participation in various arenas, including elections and the cultural and economic spheres. He believed that, to the extent possible, we must bring the people into different arenas so that talents may flourish and the burden upon the government and the ruling establishment may be reduced.

Tell us about his interest in and attention toward Imam Khomeini.

Yes, from childhood, he was a friend and classmate of the late Haj Aqa Mostafa and therefore had ties with Imam Khomeini’s household and with Imam Khomeini himself. These ties naturally grew stronger during the period in which he attended Imam Khomeini’s classes, where he emerged as an insightful student and a reliable recorder of his lectures. His support for Imam Khomeini from the very beginning of the movement further deepened this relationship.

In any event, that relationship developed into a profound relationship between student and teacher and between disciple and spiritual guide. He sincerely believed in Imam Khomeini’s scholarly standing. He always said that Imam Khomeini had been treated unjustly in scholarly terms. When he sometimes compared Imam Khomeini with certain figures of a similar rank, he would say, “Without any bias, I say that, academically, Imam Khomeini cannot be compared with them at all—whether in the depth of his thought and views, his comprehensiveness, or his innovation and creativity.” Imam Khomeini’s personality held such attraction for him that it truly cannot be contained in words. He was unquestionably at the forefront of defending Imam Khomeini and his path, both before and after the Revolution. He became deeply distressed by the attacks and assaults sometimes directed at Imam Khomeini. He regarded Imam Khomeini as the reviver of Islam and the faith in the twentieth century and said that, truly, had it not been for Imam Khomeini’s movement, it was unclear what would have become of Islam and the school.

I remember that on the day Imam Khomeini passed away, early that morning, when it had become certain that Imam Khomeini had died but the news had not yet been announced on the radio, Haj Aqa Javad and I were traveling with him by car to Tehran. Two people were sitting in the front, and the three of us were sitting in the back. He was deeply affected and saddened. When the news was announced on the radio at seven o’clock, however, he removed his turban, struck his head and face forcefully, and wept. He became so grief-stricken and distraught that it seemed to be beyond his control. Under certain circumstances, a person involuntarily displays such emotions, which reveal the depth of his love and affection.

He believed particularly in Imam Khomeini’s scholarly standing and maintained that Imam Khomeini’s scholarly character and works had to be introduced to the seminaries and students. On this basis, he was the first person in the seminary to teach jurisprudence according to Tahrir al-Wasilah. This subsequently became established as a practice, and several others did the same. The same was true in discussions of principles of jurisprudence. Imam Khomeini had many students, all of whom are prominent figures and sources of pride, and each contributed in some way to promoting Imam Khomeini’s scholarly personality. God willing, may God immerse those who have passed away in His boundless mercy and elevate their ranks, and may He preserve those who are still alive. As a student and an expounder of Imam Khomeini’s views and opinions within the seminary, however, he was a figure of great weight whose presence strengthened Imam Khomeini’s position. Because of his scholarly standing, his defense of Imam Khomeini in the seminary played an important role in establishing Imam Khomeini’s scholarly personality there and drawing the attention of the seminary and its students to his views.

Please also discuss his positions regarding the Revolution and the Islamic Republic.

Regarding the Revolution, I truly believe that the record of his life fully demonstrates that he stood on ceremony with no one. He was so firm and decisive on matters concerning the Revolution that he strengthened this position within the seminary and the country. Following Imam Khomeini’s passing, he was also one of the most influential individuals in the seminary who worked to consolidate the leadership of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution. Certain objections were raised at the time, but because he possessed scholarly standing, he resisted many of these statements and objections and created currents and momentum. At the same time, he consistently emphasized the need to remain vigilant regarding matters that could harm the Revolution. In other words, his defense of the Revolution had two aspects: an affirmative aspect, in which he defended the Revolution, its foundations, Imam Khomeini, and the Leader; and a negative aspect, concerning what must not be done so that the Revolution would not suffer harm. He paid attention to both aspects and spoke courageously regarding each of them.

What was his relationship with Imam Khomeini’s household after Imam Khomeini’s passing?

In fairness, following Imam Khomeini’s passing, he showed the utmost respect and courtesy toward Imam Khomeini’s household. I saw that he treated the late Haj Ahmad Aqa with the respect due to him and, after him, treated Ayatollah Haj Hassan Aqa with the utmost affection and warmth. This affection and warmth extended to all members of Imam Khomeini’s household. He held them in special esteem and also advised others that they must respect this household, which also has religious and ethical foundations.

Thank you very much. That was excellent. If there is anything else, please mention it.

I believe that the seminaries, teachers, students, and accomplished scholars must pay greater attention to Imam Khomeini’s scholarly thoughts and ideas and study them carefully and deeply. Some of Imam Khomeini’s views are truly not merely opinions and viewpoints expressed within a scholarly environment, but rather ways of breaking the deadlocks confronting human life in the present age. In other words, if we want the seminary and the clergy to endure, lead the way, and gain acceptance in the contemporary world, there is no doubt that this will be achieved through Imam Khomeini’s ideas. For example, his theory concerning the influence of time and place on ijtihad is no minor matter, yet its dimensions and aspects have still not been properly explained.

It is sometimes interpreted to mean that if the subject changes, the ruling also changes. This is not a particularly new point; many prominent scholars before Imam Khomeini had also said this. Other interpretations have also been offered that are distant from Imam Khomeini’s view. But if this subject is expanded and addressed in classes and writings, it can place Shi‘a jurisprudence in a distinguished position not only in our country but also throughout the world. It requires work, however, and must not be abandoned. The same applies to the theory of legal addresses. In various fields, including his mystical views—both practical and theoretical mysticism—these ideas can hold great appeal for today’s generation. Unfortunately, these days we see that dust has settled upon this personality and that injustices are being committed against him, leaving one able to do nothing but grieve.

God willing, these thoughts, views, and ideas will be addressed more fundamentally, and Imam Khomeini’s unparalleled personality will be properly introduced.