Full Text of the Address by Ayatullah Sayyid Mujtaba Nur Mufidi at the Academic Seminar “Explaining the School of Imam Khomeini (may his soul be sanctified)” on the Topic “Imam Khomeini (may his soul be sanctified), the Pioneering and Preeminent Seminary, and Requirements of Efficient Jurisprudence”

This seminar was held on May 27, 2025, at the Yadegar-e Imam Cultural and Artistic Complex.

During the days surrounding the anniversary of the demise of the grand Imam—who holds a great right over the Islamic Ummah, the people of Iran, all of us, Islamic seminaries, and the Islamic clergy, both Shia and Sunni—organizing these sessions has always been customary. This Institute, praise be to Allah, has been and remains a pioneer in holding such gatherings on various occasions, and a short while ago I also had the honor of attending this very gathering. I extend my gratitude to all organizers, planners, and officials of the Institute, particularly in the Qom office, and the esteemed Custodian of the Institute, Ayatullah Aqa Haj Sayyid Hassan Khomeini, who leads this institution. I thank all honorable figures and masters, especially the respected master Mr. Taqavi, who is himself among the scholars and showed kindness toward me in his remarks, though I do not deem myself worthy of such descriptions. I hope that in this brief opportunity we can address this subject to the extent possible.

The title of this address is “Imam Khomeini, the Pioneering and Preeminent Seminary, and Efficient Jurisprudence,” encompassing two subjects that themselves warrant detailed independent examination. A pioneering and preeminent seminary is itself a vital issue, just as the topic of the efficiency of jurisprudence is a vital issue. In this session, we wish to offer references regarding requirements that must be taken into account to render jurisprudence efficient as a vital section of the seminary within a pioneering and preeminent setting: What requirements exist or must be considered to make jurisprudence efficient, and how can the seminary train jurists whose fatwas are efficient?

An ideal, benchmark, pioneering, and preeminent seminary—which was recently addressed in detail in the message of the Supreme Leader—unquestionably requires comprehensive efforts. Measures must be taken across various dimensions in the seminary to become preeminent, pioneering, and benchmark. However, regarding jurisprudence specifically, matters extend far beyond the title of our discussion. Currently, we wish to address efficient jurisprudence in a pioneering seminary from one perspective: What are the requirements for the efficiency of jurisprudence?

We cannot speak of the efficiency of jurisprudence within the seminary ensemble and the intellectual system of Shiism and Islam without presenting a general image of this seminary. Therefore, I will rapidly address the pivotal matters that must be heeded in a pioneering and preeminent seminary, which were also addressed in the Supreme Leader’s message and pointed to by the Imam (may Allah rest his soul) in various scattered instances. If I were to offer a formulation regarding this valuable message, I could say that the Supreme Leader’s message is generally an updated version of the frameworks delineated by the Imam for an ideal seminary, though containing certain new points as well.

First Principle: Self-purification (tahdhib) and piety (taqwa). This is clear and serves as the bedrock foundation.
Second Principle: Seminary comprehensiveness. This is a point emphasized by both the Imam and the Supreme Leader. The Imam’s expression is that scholars must possess diverse dimensions, and according to the dimensions Islam possesses and according to the dimensions humanity possesses, seminaries too must possess diverse dimensions. This incorporates a most crucial argument for the comprehensiveness of religion that I will explain later. The Supreme Leader stated similarly that the seminary is an extroverted institution whose output at all levels serves the thought and culture of society. The seminary is not merely a teaching and learning institution, but an ensemble of knowledge, education, and social and political functions.
Third Principle: A jihadi identity, rejection of the system of dominance, and combating world devourers.
Fourth Principle: Accompanying the people and relying upon the deprived.
Fifth Principle: The issue of government. This is itself a pivotal matter for a pioneering seminary—possessing a governmental outlook and perspective, with government taking charge of various societal affairs. Of course, two additional items existed in his message that are extremely vital in their own right:
1. Participation in producing and explaining governance systems for society;
2. Civilizational innovations within the framework of Islam’s global message.

This is a general image of the ideal, pioneering, and preeminent seminary, which differs greatly from the existing state. The gap is wide, and shortcomings are numerous. The Imam referred to these shortcomings as well, and the root of all of them is as the Imam stated: “As long as the clergy does not maintain an active presence in all issues and problems, it cannot comprehend that conventional ijtihad (ijtihad-e mustalah) is insufficient for governing society.” This is a crucial point: that conventional ijtihad is insufficient for managing society. This holds roots and reasons, one primary problem being precisely the lack of active presence in issues and problems.

In the message of the Supreme Leader as well, this matter was mentioned as a major defect in the seminary: the disproportion between promotional/propagation outputs and intellectual and cultural realities among the people, especially the youth. This gap between realities and the existing state of the seminary—and particularly jurisprudence—is something that no matter how much we wish to conceal, cannot be hidden. This is a reality whose effects and results we witness daily.

Now, if we want the seminary to be pioneering and preeminent, we must delineate a vision for it, taking the existing state into account and addressing these shortcomings. Meanwhile, if jurisprudence—as the heart of this seminary—is to be efficient, what requirements and imperatives must we define for it? This is the subject of our address.

Before all else, we must see what efficiency means. Here, various definitions and theories regarding efficiency have been proposed. If we do not enter those debates and wish to provide a general and comprehensive definition encompassing all perspectives, we can state: Efficiency consists of appropriate effectiveness toward objectives. Although efficiency is discussed mostly in management, it has entered the realm of thought as well—especially that portion of sciences and thoughts possessing objective effects. Obviously, defining efficiency as appropriate effectiveness toward objectives necessitates that objectives be defined clearly.

When we speak of the efficiency of jurisprudence, we must examine the appropriate effectiveness of jurisprudence toward its goals; and for this purpose, goals must first be specified. Here begins divergence, and different views take shape. What are the goals of jurisprudence? One step further: What are the goals of religion? Here we have a minimalist view that confines religion to addressing otherworldly affairs, maintaining that it has nothing to do with worldly life, which should be managed by rational people. We also have a maximalist view holding that religion fundamentally encompasses all dimensions of human life—attending to worldly life, otherworldly life, individual life, and social life, seeking to build both this world and the Hereafter.

Therefore, when we want to evaluate the efficiency of religion or Islam and observe its effectiveness in societal reality, it must align with this goal. Here disagreement is vast. The Imam believed the goal of Islam and jurisprudence includes organizing and regulating human life in all its dimensions. The argument I noted earlier I utilize here: see, this sentence appears ordinary outwardly, but incorporates two first-figure syllogisms (qiyas-e shakl-e awwal). He states: Because man possesses diverse dimensions, and Islam came for human-cultivation, the breadth of Islam’s dimensions matches the breadth of human dimensions; on this basis, scholars must possess diverse dimensions. The first syllogism: Islam came for human-cultivation; man possesses diverse dimensions; therefore, Islam possesses diverse dimensions. The second syllogism: Scholars are responsible for explaining Islam; Islam possesses diverse dimensions; therefore, scholars are responsible for explaining Islam’s diverse dimensions. Naturally, the wider the human scope, the wider Islam’s scope becomes.

This is the goal of Islam. We believe Islam possesses comprehensiveness, is global and universal, eternal, complete, and the seal of religions. If we consider these five features for Islam, we cannot separate it from these dimensions. The jurisprudence of Shari’ah is part of Islam, regarding which the Imam held statements. Pay attention: these all speak of a paramount thought. He states: “Jurisprudence is the true and complete theory for governing man from the cradle to the grave.” “Jurisprudence is the guarantor of growth and interest (maslahah) of nations.” “Islamic jurisprudence is adaptable to all temporal requirements and emerging issues.” If we present such an image of jurisprudence and Islam encompassing all human existential dimensions, it attends to his worldly life, his Hereafter, his material life, his spiritual life, viewing the individual and society together—never stating “this is an individual, so I care not what role he plays in society.” Society in Quranic logic possesses an identity: society has deeds, a record, and is questioned.

If we consider jurisprudence as the set of laws and regulations presented to organize human life and regulate worldly and otherworldly existence, the efficiency of jurisprudence consists of appropriate effectiveness within this domain. Now, otherworldly existence, the realm of Barzakh, and the Imaginal World (‘alam al-khayal) carry their own specific requirements. But this material world—which serves a preliminary role for man’s eternal life—cannot fall outside the scope of jurisprudence. Jurisprudence seeks to organize this life; here is where efficiency acquires meaning.

Organizing human life does not mean throwing man into a pit every day, creating deadlocks, causing him to constantly hit a wall. This is a critical point. On one occasion, the Imam (may Allah rest his soul) in a letter to a senior scholar pointed to this very note: “The way you proceed, mankind would have to return to the past and live in deserts in ancient times.” It is obvious what result that yields!

Thus, the first and most fundamental requirement among the requirements for the efficiency of jurisprudence is depicting a comprehensive Islam and comprehensive jurisprudence that takes charge of man’s worldly life as well. We have a major problem: sometimes when efficiency is discussed, only the effect/symptom is addressed. This is wrong. Some say: “Why bring these into the domain of religion at all, forcing us to ask religion to comment? These are matters belonging to rational people.” That minimalist view I mentioned—its outcome is obvious. Efficiency here under that view becomes very different. In any case, I believe this comprehensive perspective must become widespread among religious students, professors, and researchers in religion so that an efficient face of Islam and jurisprudence can be presented.

Second, within the intellectual system of religion, government is the principle, foundation, and axis. The primary root of making religion and jurisprudence efficient is government. When I say government, setting aside specific flaws and instances, I speak theoretically: the root of efficiency is government. Effectiveness toward goals without government is incomplete and impossible. This expression of the Imam regarding government helps us immensely in understanding efficiency: “Government in the view of a true mujtahid is the practical philosophy of all jurisprudence in all corners of human life.” Can you find an expression more eloquent than this demonstrating the impact of government on efficiency? Or this expression: “Government demonstrates the practical aspect of jurisprudence in confronting all social, political, military, and cultural dilemmas.” This demonstrates that government plays the primary role in the efficiency of jurisprudence.

Now, if someone claims Islam has no government, Shiism has no government, or government in the era of Occultation makes no sense, he severely restricts the domain, influence, and efficiency of jurisprudence. Thus, government is one requirement for making jurisprudence efficient. It is good to remind that part of these matters traces back to insight and attitude; these mindsets must be reformed, without which efficiency will not be realized. Someone might imagine we are starting from preliminaries, but these are roots. Until we resolve these, nothing will be solved fundamentally. Some might believe we solve problems and deadlocks through secondary rulings (ahkam-e thanawiyyah); many hold such a view, even among proponents of religious government. This view restricts the efficiency of jurisprudence. In any case, adherence to the theory of religious government and Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist (Wilayat al-Faqih)—which is the core foundation—plays an effective role in the efficiency of religious government.

The third requirement—and a most vital one—is considering the two elements of time and space (zaman va makan). I believe the most important pillar of efficiency in jurisprudence is this theory. If properly explained and applied, it assists immensely in making jurisprudence efficient. Let me offer a reference: Up to the victory of the Revolution, the late Imam had presented the prior two pillars—comprehensiveness of Islam and the issue of government were both raised before the Revolution. However, he raised the role of time and space in deduction toward the end of his life, in the continuation of efficiency due to confronting governance issues. I saw some say certain fatwas of the Imam changed post-Revolution, offering justifications. For example, regarding music, before the Revolution he stated music and ghina are absolutely forbidden; post-Revolution he stated rapture-inducing and frivolous music is forbidden, permitting transaction and instruction of instruments accordingly. Some claim this was via secondary ruling or governmental ruling, but I believe it related to the element of time and space. How time and space impact deduction is a detailed discussion. In Kitab al-Bay’, he raised considering temporal and spatial conditions of narration issuance affecting textual comprehension.

However, he had not raised the issue of time and space prior to the Revolution. I believe that after the Revolution, upon entering the arena of actualizing jurisprudence in society, he encountered matters where the apex of that thought manifested. How do these two elements induce efficiency? This is a vast topic. About nine or ten interpretations of this theory exist, most incompatible with the Imam’s view in my estimation. My tying this theory to efficiency is because this served as the origin for introducing the theory to make jurisprudence efficient in the contemporary era. Time and space play a role in enacting rulings (ja’l wa tashri’), which belongs to the Lawgiver. At most, we discover certain interests (masalih) via definitive intellect (‘aql-e qat’i) or definitive text (nass-e qat’i) and factor them into deduction.

Time and space influence the deduction of religious rulings, ijtihad, and execution. In deducing religious rulings—across primary rulings, secondary rulings, and governmental rulings—influence exists in both subject (mawdu’) and criterion (malak), in a regulated manner. A jurist deducing rulings must consider subject changes: we have 9 models of change where temporal/spatial changes impact the subject. If a jurist heeds these in deduction, it impacts his outcome. This is why the Imam stated: “As long as the clergy does not maintain an active presence in all issues and problems, it cannot comprehend that conventional ijtihad is insufficient for governing society.” Why is conventional ijtihad insufficient? Because active presence helps accurate deduction for managing society. Managing society means organizing individual and social life toward targets designated for Muslims, while preserving otherworldly attention.

Therefore, the theory of time and space impact in deduction is the primary element in making jurisprudence efficient. We cannot expect efficiency without it. Extreme positions exist, which we must avoid. Interestingly, today in the seminary we have individuals believing in Pillar One (comprehensiveness of Islam) and Pillar Two (religious government), yet stumbling on Pillar Three. Thus many jurists seek efficiency by resorting to secondary rulings or governmental rulings. But how long can we solve deadlocks through secondary titles? What I state is drawn directly from the Imam’s words. Resolving every modern complexity via secondary rulings eventually causes primary rulings (outside worship acts) to fall into obsolescence.

We are not meant to live isolated from the world’s reasoners, nor live on an isolated island away from transformations. I once mentioned regarding technology that some hold a negative view, which is infeasible. If we are to advance with humanity’s caravan while preserving doctrinal foundations and living within Shari’ah frameworks, we must devise fundamental solutions. How long can future unimagined events be solved through secondary or governmental rulings? Relying solely on them gradually renders primary rulings obsolete. Hence, ijtihad displays its effect here: for jurisprudence to be efficient, it must heed the impact of time and space in deduction and execution. Parenthetically, efficiency does not mean focusing solely on material welfare, but aligning with intended goals.

Time has passed, but let me state the final requirement: Foresight (Ayandeh-nagari). We outlined four requirements, though more exist. We cannot separate efficiency from foresight—neither in the seminary, nor in the clergy, nor in jurisprudence. No institution can be efficient without foresight. An entity or individual lacking foresight collapses when facing problems, losing discipline.

The Imam states: “Seminaries and clerics must always hold the pulse of thought and future societal needs in their hands, staying several steps ahead of events prepared for appropriate reaction. Customary methods of managing people’s affairs might change in future years, and human societies may require new issues of Islam to solve their problems. Honorable Islamic scholars must contemplate this matter from now.” Foresight incorporates futures-studies (ayandeh-pazhohi) and planning. For jurisprudence to be efficient, it must possess futures-studies. A pioneering seminary possesses futures-studies, foresight, planning, and readiness to respond and present programs.

In this brief opportunity, I presented these four pillars or requirements of efficient jurisprudence, though more exist. The two points raised by the Supreme Leader in his message are also vital: participation in producing and explaining governance systems, and civilizational innovations within Islam’s global message framework.

What was stated carries branches that must be considered for efficiency—especially a macro, comprehensive, systematic view in jurisprudence, ensuring internal coherence across parts and chapters without incompatibility. I hope that with movements initiated in Islamic seminaries, the growing generation, and ongoing scholarly efforts, we advance toward a pioneering, preeminent, benchmark, and ideal seminary, elevating jurisprudence to its true standing and enhancing its efficiency. Was-salamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.