Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Returniste

Iran: Ayatollah Saanei Slams Government Policies

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I don't think so...unless you provide some reliable source and quote him...... if you don't please do not make faulty accusation against anybody, even against those whom you disagree with.

But it is a fact that he called Ahmedinejad a haramzada (an illegitimate child) without any evidence..So first of all this disqualified him from being an Adil person and hence from being a marja (no matter how much he is knowledgeable he is)..

I think he should have been flogged publicly for making such a shameless accusation against a momina (mother of Ahmedinejad)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“He lies because he is a [Edited Out] or else he would have seen the hidden Imam,” Sanei said, as laughter rippled through his audience.

Last few seconds of the clip.

And here is the same video with subtitles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJrhXcIjmsg

Edited by shiasoldier786

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it is a fact that he called Ahmedinejad a haramzada (an illegitimate child) without any evidence..So first of all this disqualified him from being an Adil person and hence from being a marja (no matter how much he is knowledgeable he is)..

I think he should have been flogged publicly for making such a shameless accusation against a momina (mother of Ahmedinejad)...

“He lies because he is a [Edited Out] or else he would have seen the hidden Imam,” Sanei said, as laughter rippled through his audience.

Last few seconds of the clip.

And here is the same video with subtitles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJrhXcIjmsg

Abbas Zaidi bro, if you are referring to the clip that Shiasoldier posted, it is not the same as you phrased it. The use of "Haramzada" and "Haramzadagi" is not the same in Farsi. "Haramzadagi" is not a noun, it is used in several ways with different meanings..it has nothing to do to accuse Ahmadinejad's mother of anything or calling Ahmadinejad (an illegitimate child). The word is often used against a person who is "fraud, lies, and fools" people.

Shiasoldier bro, in the second clip he does not make any direct reference to Ahmadinejad, but telling the story of a person who was trying to "fool" people by lying in claiming of meeting Imam Mahdi .etc.... Don't go by those titles which is made by a so called user whose nick is Neda Soltan and campaigning on a death lady. ; ) This user is a monafiq..

btw: The light in the UN and freezing of people was later denied by Ahmadinejad, if not we all could say the same thing as Saanei that he was trying to "fool" people and "lying".

Edited by someone50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Please update this topic if you have more information about this recent development.

There are 2 main qualifications for someone to be considered a marje taqleed.

1. His Ishtihaad must be proved; i.e. he must be a mujtahid

2. He must be a just person.

Agha Saanei has clearly cast doubt on his justice with a number of things he has said about recent developments in the IRI.

This may have played a big role in the announcement.

(salam)

I do not think marjayat is something that should be open to debate. I know a lot of people who will disagree with me but I do not think anyone has a right to strip-off someone's marjayat. I also think it is not easy to decide if someone is just or unjust (in the political sphere).

Look at the Iranian history before the revolution. Didn't the Shah of Iran and his government consider Imam Khomeini a traitor and a troublemaker? But he was not. He crushed Shah's evil regime and freed the Iranian people from oppression.

The only difference is that now there is an Islamic government.

Edited by Zareen
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once a marja always a marja. You can't claim someone has miraculously 'lost' his ability to deduce fiqhi rulings from textual sources based on his political views.

This is a very worrying development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, unless I'm missing something here, Ayatollah Saanei speaks against the government and is now taken off being a mar'ja...?

Has something like this never happened before in history?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The declaration against Sanei is most certainly and most undoubtedly politically motivated. That is pretty clear. We still haven't seen the exact reasons why - other than his criticisms of the ways of the regime [which puts him at odds with the All-powerful Supreme Leader] and his attacks against the government of Ahmadinejad - his marjiyat was questioned at the first place.

Look at this. A [quasi-state] organisation of religious scholars based in Qom who are loyal to the WF system aren't going to be nice to a scholar who is so obviously at odds with the regime. It is not difficult to concoct an excuse to discredit Sanei and ilk, although we haven’t seen one so far.

Just see how the blatant politicization of the marjiyyat is damaging the institution.

A tad off topic: It is also funny that their website lists 6 “top” maraje which believers can emulate “worldwide”. Obviously, the Supreme Leader, whose marjiyyat has never been established beyond doubt, sits at the top of the list whereas Sistani, the only Iraq based marja, sits at the bottom. It is also funny that none of the heavily emulated maraje such as Fadlullah, Hafiz Bashir, Saeed al-Hakim could make to the top 6. :rolleyes:

Edited by Marbles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, unless I'm missing something here, Ayatollah Saanei speaks against the government and is now taken off being a mar'ja...?

Has something like this never happened before in history?

No, there is no historical precedence in Shia Usoolism except after the ’79 Revolution. If I am not wrong, late Shariatmadari was the first marja to be “stripped off” of his marjiyyat. Credentials of other anti-regime scholars like late Shirazi and late Montazeri were repeatedly questioned.

No other person even if he is himself a marja has the right to revoke someone’s marjiyyat. They can disagree and criticise but revocation of the status of marjiyyat cannot happen in law. It is left to common perception among the believers if a religious scholar is just, knowledgeable, popular among his contemporaries and thus fit to be a marja.

There has been another unprecedented development in the history of Shia Usoolism at the time of Khomeini’s death. There was a reversal. A mujtahid [maybe not even that] was promoted to the rank of marjiyyat through political lobbying and pressure, just in order to fit the new post.

Edited by Marbles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, this is VERY worrying, in my opinion it it undermines the whole current condition of the system of marjaiyat when you can make a decision like this based on purely political grounds, simply for being a critic of a government. I was never a critic of IRI but this is just ridiculuous, this is making religion subservient to politics, a mere tool of support for political authority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there is no historical precedence in Shia Usoolism except after the ’79 Revolution. If I am not wrong, late Shariatmadari was the first marja to be “stripped off” of his marjiyyat. Credentials of other anti-regime scholars like late Shirazi and late Montazeri were repeatedly questioned.

No other person even if he is himself a marja has the right to revoke someone’s marjiyyat. They can disagree and criticise but revocation of the status of marjiyyat cannot happen in law. It is left to common perception among the believers if a religious scholar is just, knowledgeable, popular among his contemporaries and thus fit to be a marja.

There has been another unprecedented development in the history of Shia Usoolism at the time of Khomeini’s death. There was a reversal. A mujtahid [maybe not even that] was promoted to the rank of marjiyyat through political lobbying and pressure, just in order to fit the new post.

I agree. I also meant history in the wider context - in the realm of politics, those who oppose the government for whatever reason, right or wrong, tend to lose favour. Objectively, just because it's a shia government doesn't mean it's automatically right and opponents are automatically wrong. It was politics that somewhat distorted Islam 1400 years ago and it continues to do so today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

786-92-110

Salaam

When Marbles ( or BON VIVANT...) keeps himself busy bashing something, then you know that the cause he is fighting for is useless and valueless if not ,clueless at all... just shouting out loud, making hues and cries, a lot of brouhaha ... " Ka annahum humurunn mustaghfirann farrat min Qaswarat" ... ( Sura Al mudathir 74 :... marbles may be able to give the verse number if i am not wronged as my usual ) :dry:

Ma'a Salaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No other person even if he is himself a marja has the right to revoke someone’s marjiyyat. They can disagree and criticise but revocation of the status of marjiyyat cannot happen in law. It is left to common perception among the believers if a religious scholar is just, knowledgeable, popular among his contemporaries and thus fit to be a marja.

There has been another unprecedented development in the history of Shia Usoolism at the time of Khomeini’s death. There was a reversal. A mujtahid [maybe not even that] was promoted to the rank of marjiyyat through political lobbying and pressure, just in order to fit the new post.

(salam)

Marbles! Please calm down. You can't say no-one has a right to question the marjayat of Ayatullah Sanei and in the next paragraph claim someone can cast a doubt on the marjayat of Ayatullah Khamenei.

I haven't come across ruling that clearly defined these matters. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Marbles! Please calm down. You can't say no-one has a right to question the marjayat of Ayatullah Sanei and in the next paragraph claim someone can cast a doubt on the marjayat of Ayatullah Khamenei.

I haven't come across ruling that clearly defined these matters. :unsure:

Let me clarify sis. I have no issue with casting doubts on a scholar's justice and marjiyyat if one has reasons for it. I actually oppose the quasi official declarations revoking the status of or discrediting a marja, whether it comes from a person or an organisation in the position of authority. The attack on Saanei is purely political. If the organisation which issued the declaration took into account scholarship and theology, it would first deal with many lost-cause ayatullahs in the ranks of the government before targeting Saanei or Montezari or Shirazi etc.

Edited by Marbles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not think marjayat is something that should be open to debate. I know a lot of people who will disagree with me but I do not think anyone has a right to strip-off someone's marjayat. I also think it is not easy to decide if someone is just or unjust (in the political sphere).
I haven't come across ruling that clearly defined these matters.

Zareen, the situation is not as you portray it as aforementioned. No-one has or even claimed to strip anyone of their marji'iyat. Saanei was never a marja according to them in the first place. This is not synonymous with "revoking" his status. It's just their opinion, in response to a request to look into his credentials and see if he is fit for emulation. Of course there is no doubt that it is legitimate for one to hold an opinion about someone elses status of marji'iyat though. In fact, one of the standard methods of determining a marja-e taqlid is to ask other alims for their opinion. And that is what the association is for exactly. See here for more detail: http://sistani.org/local.php?modules=nav&nid=2&bid=59&pid=2845

3. There are three ways of identifying a Mujtahid, and the A'alam:

when a person is certain that a particular person is a Mujtahid, or the most learned one. For this, he should be a learned person himself, and should possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or an A'alam;

when two persons, who are learned and just and possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or the A'alam, confirm that a person is a Mujtahid or an A'lam, provided that two other learned and just persons do not contradict them. In fact, being a Mujt ahid or an A'lam can also be established by a statement of only one trusted and reliable person;

when a number of learned persons who possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or an A'lam, certify that a particular person is a Mujtahid or an A'lam, provided that one is satisfied by their statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh so now he was never recognised as a marja by any other maraja? he was just another self-declared mujtahid with no credentials in the first place and he was just lucky to get away with it for so many years until the Holy Office finally looked into the matter?

Edited by Redrum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the influence of politics in the marjiyyah sysyem has been a problem for a long time, this is probably the most blatant example since Shariatmadari. No rational person can ever doubt again that when religion and politics become this intertwined, it is not politics that is cleaned up, but religion that is infected and corrupted. The ones diminished by this are Mohammad Yazdi and the assembly and not Grand Ayatollah Saanei. Those who make taqlid of Saanei are not so blind as to be turned away from one of the most brilliant minds of our time by such utter nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when religion and politics become this intertwined, it is not politics that is cleaned up, but religion that is infected and corrupted.

Ditto. The core of the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't claim someone has miraculously 'lost' his ability to deduce fiqhi rulings from textual sources based on his political views.

No-one did..

So, unless I'm missing something here, Ayatollah Saanei speaks against the government and is now taken off being a mar'ja...?

Stop making up lies. No one ever said it was in response to any of his recent talks. In fact, the investigation started over a year ago..

No other person even if he is himself a marja has the right to revoke someone’s marjiyyat.

BS. No one claimed to have done so.

They can disagree and criticise but revocation of the status of marjiyyat cannot happen in law.

BS. No one claimed to have done so.

it undermines the whole current condition of the system of marjaiyat when you can make a decision like this based on purely political grounds, simply for being a critic of a government

Wow, keep repeating your lies to yourself and it might end up becoming a fact. If you shout it really loudly, the process happens all the faster..

I actually oppose the quasi official declarations revoking the status of or discrediting a marja

Good for you. It's a little early to be crying then, leave your tantrums for when that actually happens..

whether it comes from a person or an organisation in the position of authority

BS'er and completely ignorant..

oh so now he was never recognised as a marja by any other maraja?

Who said that ? Can you read English ok ? If not, I'll try to get someone to translate next time..

..Holy Office..

Baffled..

Those who make taqlid of Saanei are not so blind as to be turned away from one of the most brilliant minds of our time by such utter nonsense.

Such a great mind.. which can't refrain from slandering other believers..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care much all that much about his politics, and I think the list that is published of "acceptable" maraji` to be a ridiculous. And as lots of folks know, I don't even consider myself Usooli to begin with anyhow. That said, I don't disagree with this call. When Saanei started getting more notice I began looking at his fatawa, and I did find them pretty interesting. Further investigation though brought me to really question the basis of the conclusions he was coming to. Usefully, his site (the Persian and Arabic sections) do contain a lot of works, some quite detailed such as the transcription of some of his kharij lectures as well as a series of istidlali works based on his views on different topics in fiqh. That's very handy to learning the reasoning behind a jurist's rulings. So, I started reading them, but, what I found was very disappointing. What I read gave me the impression of coming to a conclusion first, and then trying to shape the evidence to suit it. Or, just dismissing the evidence altogether if it conflicts with said conclusion that one started with. This isn't how fiqh is supposed to work though. It is not the jurist's job or right to go around declaring laws to suit their views or views which coincide with whatever is currently popular, and in coming to conclusions of research personal opinion and bias should not hold sway. It is simply to find as unbiasedly as possible what the Shari`a says and report it to the people, regardless of one's personal wont. And when you find a jurist whose views are in serious conflict with the centuries of jurisprudence before him, particularly on issues which just happen to line him up with the more popular tendencies of the day it should really give you pause as to where he's getting his stuff from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Well said..

Additionally, I myself questioned and rejected his marji'iyat a few months before this whole issue based on the nonsense which he has written on his website relating to the `aqaid. Seperate topic, post is on SC for anyone who wants to read it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why dont you enlighten us then persian shah and present us with the findings of this body, but please something other than 'his rulings are dodgy and not in line with centuries of tradition'. which marjas have acknowledged his marjaiyat in the first place and how were they mislead for example?

and can you also give me a link to that post on his aqaid? must have missed it, would like to read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And when you find a jurist whose views are in serious conflict with the centuries of jurisprudence before him, particularly on issues which just happen to line him up with the more popular tendencies of the day it should really give you pause as to where he's getting his stuff from.

:yaali:

I'm now waiting for someone to post about your "pay-grade"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it is a fact that he called Ahmedinejad a haramzada (an illegitimate child) without any evidence..So first of all this disqualified him from being an Adil person and hence from being a marja (no matter how much he is knowledgeable he is)..

I think he should have been flogged publicly for making such a shameless accusation against a momina (mother of Ahmedinejad)...

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=115179&sectionid=351020101 - SAANEI IS NOT A MARJA TAQLEED according to this

flogging is a little too far i think ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waitwaitwhoa,

Did they say WHY he's not a marje' anymore? D:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Saanei started getting more notice I began looking at his fatawa, and I did find them pretty interesting. Further investigation though brought me to really question the basis of the conclusions he was coming to. ...So, I started reading them, but, what I found was very disappointing. What I read gave me the impression of coming to a conclusion first, and then trying to shape the evidence to suit it. Or, just dismissing the evidence altogether if it conflicts with said conclusion that one started with. This isn't how fiqh is supposed to work though. It is not the jurist's job or right to go around declaring laws to suit their views or views which coincide with whatever is currently popular, and in coming to conclusions of research personal opinion and bias should not hold sway. It is simply to find as unbiasedly as possible what the Shari`a says and report it to the people, regardless of one's personal wont. And when you find a jurist whose views are in serious conflict with the centuries of jurisprudence before him, particularly on issues which just happen to line him up with the more popular tendencies of the day it should really give you pause as to where he's getting his stuff from.

(salam)

Question: Whose job it is to regulate the marjas (or a mujtahid, scholar) ensuring that they don't fall into trap of going into popular tendencies ?The Government? The religious authority ? :unsure:

EDITED: The reason I am asking is not because I disagree with you, but I need to know how do you regulate this issue. I have a genuine interest in this matter, politics aside.

Edited by Zareen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Question: Whose job it is to regulate the marjas (or a mujtahid, scholar) ensuring that they don't fall into trap of going into popular tendencies ?The Government? The religious authority ? :unsure:

EDITED: The reason I am asking is not because I disagree with you, but I need to know how do you regulate this issue. I have a genuine interest in this matter, politics aside.

(wasalam)

I would think it'd be peer review. A scholar's credentials is supposed to be seen through that, that is that fellow, qualified, scholars can testify to his own qualification and degree of learning. It's not determined through popularity (as many/most people will choose their marja` through such invalid means as following the one whose fatawa they personally like, regardless of the basis in his saying so or his qualification for doing so) or some government agency. Rather, it'd be up to other experts in the field of fiqh to attest to whether this peer of theirs is indeed qualified and stands up to a certain level. As such, if the scholars of Qum have decided that they do not consider him or someone else to be of that ranking, it's very much their place to make that known. You might even say it's a duty to do so if there is a fear that people will be following someone who is giving people incorrect rulings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is also funny that none of the heavily emulated maraje such as Fadlullah, Hafiz Bashir, Saeed al-Hakim could make to the top 6.

Why is that 'funny'? Because these maraji are anti-WF, right? Apart from Sayed Fadhlallah is openly pro-IRI, and Ayatollah Bahir Najafi (an Iraq based Marji') believes in WF.

To Persian Shah, I was under the impression that this group of Ulema in Qum identify the 7 or so most knowledgeable maraji, not the only maraji, but I cant read farsi, so could you double check what theyve written?

Edited by .InshAllah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any one who followed scholarly opinions knew years and years ago that Saanie's views were outside of what is accepted in Shia jurisprudence. This is not any thing new.

HOWEVER

These "councils" and the government sat by for YEARS and said nothing, and allowed him to have offices, teach classes, and have people do his taqleed. He is not the only scholar inside of Iran (or outside for that matter) whose views are outside of Shi'sm, and who is not qualified for the position that they claim. However again these councils and the government are completely quiet about the matter.

The reality is that this was 100% political, and unless you are blind, you should be able to see that. After all of these years, they finally decide to investigate him after he starts heavily criticizing the government and gaining popularity, and then announce that his is not a marja at the height of his popularity among Iranians who are in disfavor of the government and government policies.

This is one of the stupidest decisions the government has taken in a long time, because this will only enrage those people who are already angry with the government. With these actions IR is isolating its self more and more from the population.

Edited by Al-Mufeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To Persian Shah, I was under the impression that this group of Ulema in Qum identify the 7 or so most knowledgeable maraji, not the only maraji, but I cant read farsi, so could you double check what theyve written?

I concur. Q&A: http://www.jameehmodarresin.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=599&Itemid=25. Quick summary, some one asks who are the scholars which can be emulated, approved by the Qom Theological Lecturers Association (Jame-e-Modarressin), to which they reply with that list..

But still, these are the only 6 approved by this group, which does not necessarily mean that these are the only 6 - just the 6 which have been approved thus far. There could be others about which they have not commented upon yet or not looked into fully etc. (Of course this is different to Saanei's case where they looked into it and rejected his claim to marji'iyat)..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reality is that this was 100% political, and unless you are blind, you should be able to see that. After all of these years, they finally decide to investigate him after he starts heavily criticizing the government and gaining popularity, and then announce that his is not a marja at the height of his popularity among Iranians who are in disfavor of the government and government policies.

Fallacy 1: The investigation started before any such opposition.

This is one of the stupidest decisions the government has taken in a long time, because this will only enrage those people who are already angry with the government. With these actions IR is isolating its self more and more from the population.

Fallacy 2: "The Qom Theological Lecturers Association" ≠ IRI Government.

Both these fallacies have already tripped many people in this thread already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These gentlemen did not give Grand Ayatollah Saanei the position of marja and neither can they take it away.

As for the claims he was never a marja', he has been teaching, giving fatwa, collecting khums etc, for decades and this all comes up only now. Where were these people the last 30+ years if it is such a concern? Saanei has not wildly changed his views recently.

These gentlemen did not give Grand Ayatollah Saanei the position of marja and neither can they take it away.

As for the claims he was never a marja', he has been teaching, giving fatwa, collecting khums etc, for decades and this all comes up only now. Where were these people the last 30+ years if it is such a concern? Saanei has not wildly changed his views recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...