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

Iran: Ayatollah Saanei Slams Government Policies

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Reformist Shiite cleric Ayatollah Yousef Sanei says the Iranian establishment is trying to divert people's attention from the "poverty, unemployment and social discord," that plagues the country. He

This is one Ayatollah Iran could DEFINITELY DO WITH!

You've almost completely missed the point. I was referring to Pahlavi's delusional views and the resultant erroneous judgements which led to his fall. Of course he never had the kind of support that t

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..

To be fair, it was a question which you helpfully answered in your post.

Any links to when this year long investigation started? It must have been reported somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

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.

(salam)

The timing is very suspicious. I still don't understand why they think they need to do this now. :unsure: This (new directive) is not going to make any difference to people who are already following him, and people who did not know him will think this is a politically motivated decision. That brings to my second point.

I don't normally see these announcements in the Shia Community. :unsure: What has changed? Why do the religious authority feels the need to make these announcements now (like you mention in your post)? Do we have any examples from history (of such cases)? :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(salam)

I am interested to find out more. This is from Tehran Bureau. I am unable to verify the authenticity of these reports. Someone here may be in a better position to explain these matters.

Ayatollah Amini says Qom association hurts faith

The Qom Theological Lecturers Association (Jameh-e Modarressin) issued a statement on Saturday stating that Ayatollah Yousef Sanei, a Shia Sources of Emulation, has been stripped of those credentials. The statement was signed by the head of the Qom Seminary Mohammad Yazdi.

In response to inquiries about the statement, Ayatollah Amini, a member of the Qom Theological Lecturers Association, said, "I haven't participated in Jameh-e Modarressin meetings for four years and I don't view such things [JM meetings and decisions] to be in the interest of the seminary or faith."

It appears that the JM statement about Ayatollah Sanei was issued without the knowledge of the Association's other members.

JM member says Sanei decision was not political

This report support the decision

A member of the Theological Lecturers Association said anyone who questioned the Jameh-e Modarressin statement demoting Ayatollah Yousef Sanei as a Source of Emulation, was dead wrong.

The unnamed JM member told Parleman News that "whoever thinks that the JM action was political or extreme, EDITED [has no EDITED right to think that way]."

When asked by the Parleman News reporter about the rumor that the disqualification of Ayatollah Sanei was the personal decision of Mohammad Yazdi, the unidentified official responded "[in] the meeting that I am aware of, [there] was consensus."

"As I am ill and not feeling well, I do not participate in the [JM] meetings but in the meeting that I am aware of, there was consensus."

I have edited out few words for obvious reason.

Source: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2010/01/selected-headlines-102.html

Edited by Zareen
reason and not purpose
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
The Qom Theological Lecturers Association is not an entirely independent body. The statement is too political and was issued under the pressure of the hardliners. One wonders how/why Ayatollah Saanei is no longer a 'Marja' after exercising his religious authority over a decade. Many people believe that the statement was in fact issued by the hardliner Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi and not even all the members of the Association endorse it. Ayatollah Amini, one of the senior members of the Association, openly rejected the statement. In short, this is all political and in response to Saanei's opposition to the post-election events.

The same story happened to Ayatollah Shariatmadari in the early years of the revolution. This is a political invention in the Shiite clerical tradition; it has no precedence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Persian Shah, can you provide the link for that post you have mentioned - the one on Saanei's aqaid - I cant seem to find it.

Now, i've got a few questions

If this is not a political decision against one of the most popular dissidents in Iran but purely an investigation into scholarly credentials of claimants to marjaiyat, then:

1. Who else is under investigation? Surely the likes of Fadlullah whose credentials have been questioned for ages now will soon be declared not a marja by this body of clerics?

2. Why such a precedence at this point in history? We never had any bodies or councils investigating scholars' credentials and officially assessing their marja status determining wether they can be followed or not - what's changed? Why start such an 'inquisition' now?

Also, who has endorsed Saanei's marjaiyat in the first place? Both the above reports as well as Persian Shah seem to be claiming he was never a marja in the first place, he just got lucky pretending to be one all those years. As far as we know, you become a marja by being a mujtahid first and then by some other marjas acknowledging your marjaiyat, right? Now, if there were marjas who acknowledged Saanei as a marja (would I be wrong in assuming Ayatollah Khomeini was one of them?), then can a council comprised mostly of Ayatollahs who have not reached the status or marjaiyat themselves yet take that status away from him?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Wow, just wow. This has got be one of IRI's most shameful acts in recent memory. Do they really believe people are so blind as to miss how blatantly politically-motivated this is?

A regime that can promote people like Khamenei to marja overnight and demote established marja like Saanei really taints the institution of marjayath. Throughout history, the independence of the marjayath from governments is what gave the Shiah clerics legitimacy throughout the Shiah world. By attempting to control it, they have served to undermine both the institution of marjayath and the seminary of Qom.

Extremist clerics like Ayatullah Yazdi are one of the main reasons for the problems in IRI. IMO, they are the equivalent of the Shiah Taliban.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Persian Shah, can you provide the link for that post you have mentioned - the one on Saanei's aqaid - I cant seem to find it.

Now, i've got a few questions

If this is not a political decision against one of the most popular dissidents in Iran but purely an investigation into scholarly credentials of claimants to marjaiyat, then:

1. Who else is under investigation? Surely the likes of Fadlullah whose credentials have been questioned for ages now will soon be declared not a marja by this body of clerics?

2. Why such a precedence at this point in history? We never had any bodies or councils investigating scholars' credentials and officially assessing their marja status determining wether they can be followed or not - what's changed? Why start such an 'inquisition' now?

Also, who has endorsed Saanei's marjaiyat in the first place? Both the above reports as well as Persian Shah seem to be claiming he was never a marja in the first place, he just got lucky pretending to be one all those years. As far as we know, you become a marja by being a mujtahid first and then by some other marjas acknowledging your marjaiyat, right? Now, if there were marjas who acknowledged Saanei as a marja (would I be wrong in assuming Ayatollah Khomeini was one of them?), then can a council comprised mostly of Ayatollahs who have not reached the status or marjaiyat themselves yet take that status away from him?

You have hit the nail with these questions.

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.

No, not necessarily. It's funny because the list does not include marje who are heavily emulated and are popularly known as among the most knowledgeable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have hit the nail with these questions.

No, not necessarily. It's funny because the list does not include marje who are heavily emulated and are popularly known as among the most knowledgeable.

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

Who do you mean?

The list is:

ـ حضرت‌ آيت‌الله‌ حاج‌ سيدعلي‌ خامنه‌اي‌

ـ حضرت‌ آيت‌الله‌ حاج‌ شيخ‌ حسين‌ وحيد خراساني‌

ـ حضرت‌ آيت‌الله‌ حاج‌ سيد موسي‌ شبيري‌ زنجاني‌

ـ حضرت‌ آيت‌الله‌ حاج‌ شيخ‌ ناصر مكارم‌ شيرازي‌

حضرت آيت الله لطف الله صافي گلپايگاني -

حضرت آيت الله علي سيستاني -

For those who can't read the script:

1/ Ayatullah al-Udhma Imam Khamenei(HA)

2/ Ayatullah al-Udhma Shaykh Husayn Wahid Khorasani(HA)

3/ Ayatullah al-Udhma Sayyed Musa Shubayri Zanjani(HA)

4/ Ayatullah al-Udhma Shaykh Nasir Makarim Shirazi

5/ Ayatullah al-Udhma Lutfullah Safi Golpaygani(RA) - sadly he passed away on January 4, 2010

6/ Ayatullah al-Udhma Sayyed Ali Sistani(HA)

See: http://www.jameehmodarresin.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=599&Itemid=25.

Who do you mean "heavily emulated" but not on the list? Ayatullah al-Udhma Sistani(HA) is probably the most heavily emulated; so ...

Also; the scenario with Shaykh Sanei has been ongoing for decades; there have been examinations and investigations into some of his rulings and thoughts and statements for years; long before Dr Ahmadinejad(HA) was president; in fact I remember people having issues with him from the early 90s, so please don't turn around - and this is to anyone - don't turn around and say that "it's a political thing", because it's not; it's an "Hawza thing".

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Edited by shabbir.hassanally
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Also; the scenario with Shaykh Sanei has been ongoing for decades; there have been examinations and investigations into some of his rulings and thoughts and statements for years; long before Dr Ahmadinejad(HA) was president; in fact I remember people having issues with him from the early 90s, so please don't turn around - and this is to anyone - don't turn around and say that "it's a political thing", because it's not; it's an "Hawza thing".

Out of curiousity, if it is just a 'Hawza thing' and nothing to do with Politics, then why has not Ay. Fadhlallah been put under investigation? I have found his rulings, thoughts and statements much more alarming then that of Ay. Saanei.

Surely the JM should be upset when a Marja' questions the authenticity of Ziyarat Ashura and casts doubt upon the attack on the Pure Lady Fatema as.gif, to name just a few...

Or is Lebanon outside JM's jurisdiction?

Edited by Sadiq M...
Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiousity, if it is just a 'Hawza thing' and nothing to do with Politics, then why has not Ay. Fadhlallah been put under investigation? I have found his rulings, thoughts and statements much more alarming then that of Ay. Saanei.

Surely the JM should be upset when a Marja' questions the authenticity of Ziyarat Ashura and casts doubt upon the attack on the Pure Lady Fatema as.gif, to name just a few...

Or is Lebanon outside JM's jurisdiction?

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

Thankfully Jami' al-Mudarriseen are not the sort of people that rely on heresay when making statements. Alhamdu lillah.

As for Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA)'s stance on Ziyarat Ashura and the events surrounding the murder of Lady Zahra(A); I think you'll find that his opinions and thoughts are based on his research; and he clearly says so; he doesn't cast doubt upon the attack on Lady Zahra(A), rather the mode of the attack and the perpetrators; as for the Ziayrat Ashura scenario; with respect; there are other Maraja'e including Ayatullah al-Udhma Khui(RA) who said that certain versions or renditions of Ziyarat Ashura are invalid.

Incidently; a person's qualification as a Marja' Taqleed (Souce of Emulation); is dependent on said person's knowledge of Islamic Jurisprudence and Principles of Jurispurdence and related subject areas. If a person has a particular opinion on history; as a result of said person being a scholar of history; this doesn't neccessarily cast doubt upon said person's Marja'iyyah.

Alhamdu lillah Jami' al-Mudarriseen is not made up on "mini-wannabe Ulema"; but rather is based on real and qualified Ulema; who are righteous and guard against evil; and who know that they are accountable for all that they say or do.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Edited by shabbir.hassanally
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Thanks for the clarifications.

I have a few more points in need of clarification:

- Why did Ay. Ibrahim Amini, a senior member of JM himself, openly disagree with the decision the comittee made?

- Was Ay. Saanei a recognisable Marja' in the first place, and if so, who recognised him?

- Are there any Marja's in the JM?

Shukran.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the clarifications.

I have a few more points in need of clarification:

- Why did Ay. Ibrahim Amini, a senior member of JM himself, openly disagree with the decision the comittee made?

- Was Ay. Saanei a recognisable Marja' in the first place, and if so, who recognised him?

- Are there any Marja's in the JM?

Shukran.

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

The allegation Ayatullah Ibrahim Amini(HA) has "openly disagreed" with the decision of the Jamei al-Mudarriseen is based on "news" from the "Tehran Bureau" of PBS/Frontline. Yes, very reliable.

As for Shaykh Sanei being a Marj'a - he was not formally recognised; according to some he "became a Marja' based on popularity" - but since Marja'iyyah is not a popularity content; I doubt that would be the case. In short; he was never recognised as a Marja' Taqleed (Source for Emulation) by Jame al-Mudarriseen, or any other reliable body from my information; and there have been questions - as I've said previously - about many of his rulings; including the fact that the suggests that the age of obligation for our sisters is not 9, rather it is 13.

The members of Jame al-Mudarriseen can be found here:

http://www.jameehmodarresin.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=5&id=16&Itemid=36

The document is in Farsi; if you don't understand then please advise and time permitting I'll do a translation. There are many mujtahedeen in the list.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Who do you mean "heavily emulated" but not on the list? Ayatullah al-Udhma Sistani(HA) is probably the most heavily emulated; so ...

Like Hafiz Bashir Hussain and Fadlullah to name two. Muhammad Shirazi is no more but I'm dead sure he would have never been able to make it to the JM list of Maraji.

5/ Ayatullah al-Udhma Lutfullah Safi Golpaygani(RA) - sadly he passed away on January 4, 2010

Are you sure? According to the reports I have read, it’s Ali Safi Golpaygani who has died, not his brother Lutfollah Safi Golpaygani.

LOOK UP

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

.As for Shaykh Sanei being a Marj'a - he was not formally recognised; according to some he "became a Marja' based on popularity" - but since Marja'iyyah is not a popularity content; I doubt that would be the case. In short; he was never recognised as a Marja' Taqleed (Source for Emulation) by Jame al-Mudarriseen, or any other reliable body from my information; and there have been questions - as I've said previously - about many of his rulings; including the fact that the suggests that the age of obligation for our sisters is not 9, rather it is 13.

Since when a mujtahid turning into a majra has to be recognised by JM or another "reliable body?" Recognition of marjiyyat from other eminent maraji of the time coupled with popularity of the said person [which Saanei enjoys] are enough to establish his marjiyyat among the laity. Now, it depends on individual believers if s/he thinks that the marja in question is the most knowledgeable, just, pious, and thus fit to be emulated. Having said that, Saanei's claim of marjiyyat couldn't have survived for decades if his peers never recognised his marjiyyat at the first place. And if he did make a false claim then where are statements from maraji objecting at his marjiyyat at the time when he was beginning to be known as marja. Too many questions for you to answer my dear brother.

The members of Jame al-Mudarriseen can be found here:

http://www.jameehmodarresin.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=5&id=16&Itemid=36

The document is in Farsi; if you don't understand then please advise and time permitting I'll do a translation. There are many mujtahedeen in the list.

He is asking if there are any maraji in he JM, not mujhtahideen.

The allegation Ayatullah Ibrahim Amini(HA) has "openly disagreed" with the decision of the Jamei al-Mudarriseen is based on "news" from the "Tehran Bureau" of PBS/Frontline. Yes, very reliable.

Ok, PBS isn't reliable of course. So can you please show us a statement from Ibrahim Amini where he has approved the declaration against Saanei or denied reports from PBS?

Edited by Marbles
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Hafiz Bashir Hussain and Fadlullah to name two. Muhammad Shirazi is no more but I'm dead sure he would have never been able to make it to the JM list of Maraji.

Are you sure? According to the reports I have read, it’s Ali Safi Golpaygani who has died, not his brother Lutfollah Safi Golpaygani.

LOOK UP

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

My bad; you're right it is Ayatullah Ali Safi Golpaygani(RA) who passed away, and not Ayatullah al-Udhma Lotfollah Safi Golpaygani(HA). Thanks for the correction.

No idea why they're not on the list; however; I believe it may have something to do with them being affiliated to the Qum Hawza. Since neither Ayatullah al-Udhma Bashir Najafi(HA) or Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) have no connection with the Qum Hawza. It does however seem quite reasonable that the Jame al-Mudaresseen (The Assembly of the Teachers) who are affiliated to the Hawza Ilmiyyeh in Qum would make no comment on those who are not affiliated with the Hawza in Qum.

Shaykh Sanei however, was in Qum; and they knew at a detailed level, his level of knowledge and understanding and expertise.

As for Ayatullah Muhammad Shirazi; since he's no longer alive; there is little point in discussing him.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

As for Shaykh Sanei being a Marj'a - he was not formally recognised; according to some he "became a Marja' based on popularity" - but since Marja'iyyah is not a popularity content; I doubt that would be the case. In short; he was never recognised as a Marja' Taqleed (Source for Emulation) by Jame al-Mudarriseen, or any other reliable body from my information; and there have been questions - as I've said previously - about many of his rulings; including the fact that the suggests that the age of obligation for our sisters is not 9, rather it is 13.

I am surprised Ay. Saanei was allowed the freedom to claim such a position and teach openly for many years if there was such a great concencus of scholars against him.

Nevertheless, the timing of the JM's decision couldn't really happen at a better time...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am surprised Ay. Saanei was allowed the freedom to claim such a position and teach openly for many years if there was such a great concencus of scholars against him.

Nevertheless, the timing of the JM's decision couldn't really happen at a better time...

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

It's not that he was given the freedom; rather; there has been an ongoing investigation for quite sometime; how long exactly; I don't know; but it's not something that has happened in the last few days. There has been investigation for a very long time.

Reason? Jame' al-Mudareseen can't just come out and say that such and such is not a Marja' willy nilly; they need to be totally certain; and have double, triple, quad, etc. checked their facts and understandings; and after bringing the concept of husn-e-zan (Benefit of the Doubt). Only once the doubts have all been quashed; can a statement be issued.

Perhaps the timing could have been better; however; at the same time; once their investigations and research comes to an end and they reach a conclusion; they cannot wait around for the "best time"; they have give to give their findings as soon as they are confirmed and ready.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

No idea why they're not on the list; however; I believe it may have something to do with them being affiliated to the Qum Hawza. Since neither Ayatullah al-Udhma Bashir Najafi(HA) or Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) have no connection with the Qum Hawza. It does however seem quite reasonable that the Jame al-Mudaresseen (The Assembly of the Teachers) who are affiliated to the Hawza Ilmiyyeh in Qum would make no comment on those who are not affiliated with the Hawza in Qum.

If JM only lists Qom or Iran based maraji then Sistani shouldn't have been on the list. But if they have listed the top 6 most knowledgeable maraji across the Shia world, then one cannot help believe that their list is ludicrous.

Shaykh Sanei however, was in Qum; and they knew at a detailed level, his level of knowledge and understanding and expertise.

As for Ayatullah Muhammad Shirazi; since he's no longer alive; there is little point in discussing him.

Interesting how you eschew the salutational suffix of 'HA/RA' and titles of 'ayatullah' from Saanei's name and 'al-udhma' from late Shirazi's name. I thought scholars need to be treated with equal respect even if one doesn't agree with their views. :unsure:

Edited by Marbles
Link to post
Share on other sites

In His name, the Most High

Salaams

Since when a mujtahid turning into a majra has to be recognised by JM or another "reliable body?" Recognition of marjiyyat from other eminent maraji of the time coupled with popularity of the said person [which Saanei enjoys] are enough to establish his marjiyyat among the laity. Now, it depends on individual believers if s/he thinks that the marja in question is the most knowledgeable, just, pious, and thus fit to be emulated. Having said that, Saanei's claim of marjiyyat couldn't have survived for decades if his peers never recognised his marjiyyat at the first place. And if he did make a false claim then where are statements from maraji objecting at his marjiyyat at the time when he was beginning to be known as marja. Too many questions for you to answer my dear brother.

I do not know of any Marja' Taqleed who agreed to Shaykh Sanei being a Marja' and source of emulation. Whether there was or not is frankly not relavent to me; as in Qum and Islamic Iran; where there is a Jame al-Mudareseen type organisation; they are the benchmark and they advise on whether a certain person is a Marja' or not. The investigations on Shaykh Sanei had begun a very long time ago; and like I explained in my previous post; these investigations do not happen willy nilly they are based on extensive research and analysis; and after giving the benefit of the doubt (Husn-e-Zann), so they do take some time.

During that time however; people still shouldn't have been making his taqleed; as he was never one of the Maraj'e on the list provided by Jame al-Mudareseen. If they were - they now know the scenario and should change their taqleed; it's really quite simple.

He is asking if there are any maraji in he JM, not mujhtahideen.

I answered his question; if you are unable to comprehend my answer then with respect; I nether care nor do I have the inclination to clarify for you further.

Ok, PBS isn't reliable of course. So can you please show us a statement from Ibrahim Amini where he has approved the declaration against Saanei or denied reports from PBS?

No this is where people like you are mistaken. You have alleged that someone said something. You are then asking said person to confirm or deny said statement that you allege a third person has told you that the subject of the discussion has said - even though you have no evidence - real evidence to suggest he has said that except statements from those who have an ulterior motive and are working to harm Islam - not just Islamic Iran; but Islam as a whole.

So; with respect; you make the allegations that Ayatullah Amini(HA) said what PBS allege he said. Then with respect; Ayatullah Amin(HA) doesn't have to make any comment, doesn't have to confirm or deny anything; it is YOU and your friends over at PBS/Frontline who have to prove the allegations you've made. Ayatullah Amini(HA) is clear of what PBS allege he said; they have to provide proof he said it or withdraw their "evidence". You who believe it - but cast doubt on the words of Jame al-Mudareseen and allege that Jame al-Mudareseen are "politically motivated" are the real traitors to Islam; you take the word of those who are openly fighting Islam as gospel and even dare to have the nerve and arrogance to say that the victim has to prove they didn't say what the enemy alleges they are saying? Subhan Allah.

You really amaze me; and I wonder; really; whether you have an ulterior agenda; or whether you've lost your marbles as your nickname implies.

Interesting how you eschew the salutational suffix of 'HA/RA' and titles of 'ayatullah' from Saanei's name and 'al-udhma' from late Shirazi's name. I thought scholars need to be treated with equal respect even if one doesn't agree with their views. :unsure:

Who I choose to make dua' for is my choice. (In case you didn't realise - HA and RA are forms of dua' for the subject of said HA or RA).

Incidently; it is not a mark of disrespect; just personal preference. My post; I can post how I want; if you want to put RA after Ayatullah Shirazi; no problem if you want to put HA after Shaykh Sanei no problem.

Incidently; I don't call Shaykh Sanei Ayatullah since I am unsure of his level now that this ruling has been applied; it is not a disrespectful gesture; just one that is cautious. If he is Ayatullah; fair enough I will address him as such; if he is not and is Hujjat ul-Islam, I shall address him as such; doesn't mean I'm disrespecting him. Please stop being so petty and pathetic.

If JM only lists Qom or Iran based maraji then Sistani shouldn't have been on the list. But if they have listed the top 6 most knowledgeable maraji across the Shia world, then one cannot help believe that their list is ludicrous.

I said Maraj'e AFFILIATED TO the Hawza Ilmiyyeh in Qum; I didn't say based in Qum. I think it's fair to say that Ayatullah al-Udhma Sistani(HA) IS affiliated to the Islamic Seminary in Qum, whereas Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) doesn't have any affiliation to the Islamic Seminary in Qum.

It would seem from your post that you want to find a problem - where none exists - you want to cause sedition and fitneh.

I pity you; really you're quite pathetic. May Allah guide you towards the true Islam of Muhammad(S) and away from whatever it is you currently subscribe to.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Edited by shabbir.hassanally
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The members of Jame al-Mudarriseen can be found here:

http://www.jameehmod...id=16&Itemid=36

The document is in Farsi; if you don't understand then please advise and time permitting I'll do a translation. There are many mujtahedeen in the list.

Thank you for that. I was trying to navigate myself through their website but at no success!

I was going through the list and could not find the name of any known Maraja' which I find quite surprising. Is there not a supervisor in the body of JM whose rank exceeds other members, which would be that of a Marja', and finalises any decisions made, sort of like an overseeing authoritative figure?

I fail to understand how Mujtahids can strip a Marja'-e-Taqleed of his rank, because to me it sounds like Master students attacking a PhD doctorate holder. Though I understand that Islamically speaking there is no such things as ranks when it comes to the Truth, but this is Hawza, and Hawza is an institution like any other where each scholar holds his own rank and bearing, a educational heirachy you could call it, and a Mujtahid is lower than that of a Marja'.

Or maybe my perception of how things are run in Qom is wrong?

Shukran.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that. I was trying to navigate myself through their website but at no success!

I was going through the list and could not find the name of any known Maraja' which I find quite surprising. Is there not a supervisor in the body of JM whose rank exceeds other members, which would be that of a Marja', and finalises any decisions made, sort of like an overseeing authoritative figure?

I fail to understand how Mujtahids can strip a Marja'-e-Taqleed of his rank, because to me it sounds like Master students attacking a PhD doctorate holder. Though I understand that Islamically speaking there is no such things as ranks when it comes to the Truth, but this is Hawza, and Hawza is an institution like any other where each scholar holds his own rank and bearing, a educational heirachy you could call it, and a Mujtahid is lower than that of a Marja'.

Or maybe my perception of how things are run in Qom is wrong?

Shukran.

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

A Marja' Taqleed is a Mujtahed who has followers; and has published his Practical Laws Manual, or Questions and Answers on Practical Laws.

There are many Mujtahedeen who in terms of academic prowess are far more qualified than some Maraj'e Taqleed; they have just chosen to NOT publish their Practical Laws Manuals and/or Questions and Answers on Practical Laws.

Many people - ignorantly - thought that Imam Khamenei(HA) was not at the "level" of being a Marja' Taqleed, but he had attained and surpassed and was certified by his teachers of having attained an excellence in matters of Practical Laws such that he *could* be followed in around 1963 if memory serves me right; he wasn't followed at that time; because he deliberately kept a low profile; and chose not to publish anything; even after he ascended to the position of Wali Faqih following the death of Imam Khumayni(A) he still chose to not publish anything that a person could use to follow him; it was much later; and at the insistance of many senior Ulema - including other Marja'e and following the death of Ayatullah al-Udhma Shaykh Araki(RA); that Imam Khamenei(HA) agreed; and that initially was only for people outside Islamic Iran; and then over time his practical laws manuals (or rather question and answer thesis on practical laws) was made available locally in Islamic Iran.

So just because there isn't someone in the list who is a "well known Marja' Taqleed" - that doesn't mean the level of the people in Jame al-Mudareseen is any lower than a Marja'; rather they choose to not allow themselves to be publically followed as Maraje' - but they are all Mujtahedeen of the highest calible. Logically this makes sense also; since there is then no bias towards or against anyone within the group from anyone within the group.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Edited by shabbir.hassanally
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I see. Thanks for the response. Everything is clarified for now.

Though I would like to see some sources for Ay. Saanei not being officialy recognised as a Marja'-e-Taqleed as I find it difficult to understand that someone in Qom can get away having hundreds if not thousands of followers, have his own office and give lectures to seminary students as well as issuing his own Resalahs without getting a green light neither the permission to do so. If he was a imposter taking this title without fulfilling the required credentials like some have insinuated surely he would have realised he would have got caught sooner or later.

In need of your Duas.

Edited by Sadiq M...
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Administrators
The reality is that this was 100% political
Politics and religion are not two separate entities, the political affairs of Rasool (pbuh) and the Imams (as), so too all the prophets (as) before them, were part and parcel of their religious oriented message and actions. So technically, even if this was hypothetically "politically" motivated, the motivation behind it would be (whether the decision was right or wrong; it makes no difference on the point being made) for the protection of Islam the religion.
Link to post
Share on other sites

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

I see. Thanks for the response. Everything is clarified for now.

Though I would like to see some sources for Ay. Saanei not being officialy recognised as a Marja'-e-Taqleed as I find it difficult to understand that someone in Qom can get away having hundreds if not thousands of followers, have his own office and give lectures to seminary students as well as issuing his own Resalahs without getting a green light neither the permission to do so. If he was a imposter taking this title without fulfilling the required credentials like some have insinuated surely he would have realised he would have got caught sooner or later.

In need of your Duas.

Historically people have gotten away with usurping the Islamic Government from others. Is the fact that a person published his practicals laws guide and has people who follow him really that surprising? When we comit a sin; do we need a green light from Allah to do so? No; because we forget that Allah is actually watching and aware of what we do.

So Shabbir, in that case it all comes down to wether Ayatullah Saanei was given ijaza of ijtihad by his teachers - as long as he was given one and then decided to publish his risala he is a marja, right?

If he was given "Ijaza" - it's actually that a teacher who taught him - and indeed had the right to pronouce him as being such qualified - then yes; one can argue such. However; it should also be noted; that just because someone is a teacher doesn't mean that they have the permission or authority or level of knowledge/wisdom to declare someone as a Mujtahed let alone one who can be followed.

Also; in case you've not worked it out yet - Jame' al-Mudareseen - is the Assembly of the Teachers of the Islamic Seminary. I trust that this is now a touch clearer.

It is also important to understand that there are levels of Mujtaheds; one can be a Mujtahed for oneself; wherein one is able to work out practical rulings for oneself based on the raw sources; however one's competetance may not have reached a stage where one is permitted to allow others to rely on said understanding.

So to clarify; even if Shaykh Sanei was classifed as a Mujtahed by one of his teachers (and I don't know if this is the case or not; however he has a fair bit of learning so it's not impossible); then that doesn't neccessarily make it valid for him to become a source of emulation (Marja' Taqleed); while a Marja' Taqleed is always a Mujtahed; a Mujtahed is NOT always a Marja' Taqleed.

I know that a number of you are using this incident to attempt to cast aspirtions on the Islamic Government, on Wilayat al-Faqih, and on Imam Khamenei(HA); don't think that your ulterior motives are unseen; they are being deliberately ignored; but their existance is known, and understood. Also; even if they are hidden from the likes of me - who am I? Nothing; you should realise that such treason against Islam and Allah are not unseen by Allah or Imam al-Hujjah(AJ). Please realise this; and don't condemn yourselves. But should you choose to continue; then I pray that Allah give you exactly that which you deserve; both in this world and the next. Amen, O Lord Sustainer of the Universes.

BTW - Excellent point Br "Ya Aba 3abdillah"; masha Allah.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Edited by shabbir.hassanally
Link to post
Share on other sites
Politics and religion are not two separate entities, the political affairs of Rasool and the Imams , so too all the prophets before them, were part and parcel of their religious oriented message and actions. So technically, even if this was hypothetically "politically" motivated, the motivation behind it would be (whether the decision was right or wrong; it makes no difference on the point being made) for the protection of Islam the religion

The faith of muslims was not in danger when an unqualified individual was occupying the position of Marja for years and years? They are now circulating a list of his rullings which are outside of Shariah, but those rulings of his were well known for many years.

I personally was advising people to not follow him for many years. His ijtihad had no basis what so ever, and was based on his own personal opinions. Why did they chose to wait so long before announcing this? He wasn't a danger to Shias when he was telling naive people who chose to follow him that they could eat haram meat (kosher meat)?

In fact most of his rullings are shared by another scholar in Qum, Ibraheem Jannati, why have they not taken down his status as a Marjah yet?

The timing shows that it is political, and it is not a hypothetical theory. I have no problem with dealing with an individual who is a serious threat to the state (although i doubt saanie was). However this is a stupid decision because it is at a time of serious unrest and will escalate problems in Iran.

the motivation behind it would be (whether the decision was right or wrong; it makes no difference on the point being made) for the protection of Islam the religion

Yes mashallah lets wait around many years till the man gets millions of followers and they all become misguided by his fake scholarship before we say any thing, there are allot of other fake marjas around I hope these councils get around to denouncing them as well, but the reality is that as long as they don't say any thing against the government they will be left alone, even if they are teaching people some deviated form of shiasm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The faith of muslims was not in danger when an unqualified individual was occupying the position of Marja for years and years? They are now circulating a list of his rullings which are outside of Shariah, but those rulings of his were well known for many years.

I personally was advising people to not follow him for many years. His ijtihad had no basis what so ever, and was based on his own personal opinions. Why did they chose to wait so long before announcing this? He wasn't a danger to Shias when he was telling naive people who chose to follow him that they could eat haram meat (kosher meat)?

In fact most of his rullings are shared by another scholar in Qum, Ibraheem Jannati, why have they not taken down his status as a Marjah yet?

The timing shows that it is political, and it is not a hypothetical theory. I have no problem with dealing with an individual who is a serious threat to the state (although i doubt saanie was). However this is a stupid decision because it is at a time of serious unrest and will escalate problems in Iran.

Yes mashallah lets wait around many years till the man gets millions of followers and they all become misguided by his fake scholarship before we say any thing, there are allot of other fake marjas around I hope these councils get around to denouncing them as well, but the reality is that as long as they don't say any thing against the government they will be left alone, even if they are teaching people some deviated form of shiasm.

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

There list of the Jame' al-Mudaresseen is well circulated; so anyone making taqleed of Shaykh Sanei actively chose to ignore the list of the Jame al-Mudareseen and actively chose Shaykh Sanei.

Second; when investigating a person's validity as a Marja' - especially when said person has followers and rulings in the public domain; is a difficult task; and has to be done diligently; with meticulous attention to detail.

Thirdly; one of the key responsibilities of Jam'e al-Mudareseen is to protect Islam; from both enemies internal and external. The investigations on Shaykh Sanei have been on-going for a very long time; the fact that their conclusions came out now is niether here nor there; they had to come out at sometime.

Also; it's important to understand that when they have conclusive proof - and I'm sure they have otherwise no such ruling or statement would have been released - they cannot "embargo said truth" - as this is a question of people's belief.

Also; understand; that people who chose to make Taqleed of Shaykh Sanei - prior to the ruling of Jame' al-Mudareseen - are fine - they tried to do their responsibility and followed who they thought was a Marja' - not a problem; however; now that they have information and it has been publically advised that Shaykh Sanei is not capable of being emulated - for the plethora of reasons that I am sure Jame al-Mudareseen have though they do not have to make them publically available on their website; though I'm quite sure on enquiry said reasons could be provided; - now that this is publically known; they are duty bound to immediately change their taqleed. If they don't change their taqleed now; then they are in a sitaution where they are essentially on their own.

As for their actions during then time when they didn't have information against Shaykh Sanei's Marja'iyyah; that's fine; just like the rulings we follow from any Marja' - we perform our actions; if the action is wrong; then the responsibility is not on the mukallaf; rather it is on the Marja' and if said Marj'a has not been diligent about his research into the practical laws he releases then with respect; he needs to make the back of his neck shiny and smooth for what will happen to it.

Again; to those who are using this as a reason to harm Islamic Iran and covertly speak against the Islamic Leadership and Imam Khamenei(HA); while you may fool little people like myself; you do not fool Allah; and Allah is fully aware of that which you conceal and that which you reveal; and you will be brought to account fo every iota of harm you do to the true Islam of Muhammad(S); don't think that you will not be held accountable. I advice you again; do not use this as an excuse to harm Islamic Iran and/or Wilayat al-Faqih; do not use it to harm the true Islam or harm the Righteous Islamic Leadership(HA); for if you do; then may Allah give you your Just reward; and may He reward you Justly in this world and the next.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to confirm that Ayatullah Amini (ha) has his reservations in regards to this statement being made, not necessarily the statement itself .

This is confirmed through a friend of mine who is studying at the hawza and personally discussed the issue with Ayatullah (ha).

In any case, just because Ayatullah Amini (ha) and lets say even Ayatullah Javadi Amuli (ha) don't agree, there are other maraja/mujtahideen who do. There statements should not be taken lightly.

Certainly, it should AT LEAST cast doubt upon his A'lamiyat (if that is the right word) for those who are honest and truth seekers..

Hasan Sajjad

President

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

Thanks for that clarification Brother Hassan.

Also; it should be noted that the Jame al-Mudaresseen is a group of very senior Ulema who are senior teachers in the Islamic Seminary. As you rightly say; even if one or two are not entirely convinced; the statement would not have been made had the bulk of the members of Jame al-Mudaresseen not been convinced of the content of the given statement.

On a complete off-topic Br Hassan; what's the deal with "President" under your name - President of ???? - sorry just curious :)

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Since you are a scholar, and you have asked, I have no other choice but to tell you. InshAllah in private, when you come to the US to bless us with your knowledge.

Hasan Sajjad

President

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

Insha Allah :) But please; I am but a small student of Islam.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Edited by shabbir.hassanally
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Historically people have gotten away with usurping the Islamic Government from others. Is the fact that a person published his practicals laws guide and has people who follow him really that surprising? When we comit a sin; do we need a green light from Allah to do so? No; because we forget that Allah is actually watching and aware of what we do.

Maybe I didn't portray my point clearly.

It is surprising because in the holy city of Qom, where there are many individuals whose role is to make sure there is no mischief or corruption taking place in society, espeically amongst the clergy, no one managed to spot Ay. Saanei pull a 'fast one' claiming to be a Marja', which is not a small thing.

And is it now confirmed that Ay. Amini does in fact disagree with the JM?

Salaam.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I didn't portray my point clearly.

It is surprising because in the holy city of Qom, where there are many individuals whose role is to make sure there is no mischief or corruption taking place in society, espeically amongst the clergy, no one managed to spot Ay. Saanei pull a 'fast one' claiming to be a Marja', which is not a small thing.

And is it now confirmed that Ay. Amini does in fact disagree with the JM?

Salaam.

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

1/ Qum has many people in, there are many corrupt tendencies floating around Qum, I'm sure you've heard of Akram Majidi and his disciples such as Abbas Virjee and Muhammad Tajri and others (f you haven't then this site - http://www.guidance110.info/ - explains everything in their regard, and gives people the truth about this Sufi Cult); they were in Qum; and they are not the only ones; there are many. Many people "notice" these problems; and yes they try to counter it; they discuss (or attempt to discuss) with these people; there is a process that takes place; and it's not something that can happen over night.

2/ The Jame' al-Mudaresseen gave it's opinion on who were the Maraj'e Taqleed (Sources of Emulation) a long time ago; and in their opinion at that time; Shaykh Sanei didn't factor. Those who chose to make Taqleed of others who didn't (and don't) factor on the list provided by the Assembley of Teachers of the Islamic Seminary are pretty much on their own. However; even though that is the case; in order to prevent further confusion and bewilderment and the corruption of Islamic Law through inaction and ignorance; the Jame al-Mudareseen re-iterated their stance; and explicitly stated that Shaykh Sanei - while a senior Alem no doubt - is not a source of emulation (Marj'a Taqleed) in their opinion.

3/ No it is not confirmed that Ayatullah Amini(HA) disagreed with the statement; Br Hassan Sajjad said very clearly:

I would like to confirm that Ayatullah Amini (ha) has his reservations in regards to this statement being made, not necessarily the statement itself .

Therefore to paraphrase and make clear - and Br Hassan please correct me if I misinterpret what you've said - Ayatullah Amini(HA) has reservations about the statement being made. Not neccessarily the statement itself. There's a difference; a big difference.

I hope that helps.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

*sigh* Sometimes I wish that people should try to investigate the matter in depth before throwing their 2 cents.

Yesterday I had the oppurtunity to talk to a Sheikh who is at dars e kharij level himself under Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi. We talked about this issue in quite detail and there were certain things that were agreed on from the onset such as that Sheikh Saanei is indeed a mujtahid as he has an ijaza and he does teach dars kharij as well. Sheikh was explaining that the issue regarding the fatwas of Sheikh Saanei has been there for a while well before this statement, within the Hawza circles there are many critics of his fatwas and his methodology. And in his view, he was saying that a lot of people were emulating him due to his popularity and his fatwas rather than on the basis of his knowledge, this is a point which can be argued.

The Sheikh further stated that it is more to do with the methodology that Sheikh Saanei uses because of which this statement was released. Something which Br Macisaac mentioned in his post previously, in essence the Sheikh was saying that some of his fatwas are without the 'application of Fiqh' and the statement is so that people realise this and that his status as a Marja has been revoked for this reason ie the lack of 'application of Fiqh'. I am using the quote marks because this is a term I think many of us would not understand due to the complexity but it relates in a nutshell to what Bro Macisaac stated. Since this is not a fiqhi discussion I shall leave it at that.

He did however say that the timing of the statement is not particularly right but at the same time the Hawza has a duty and hence the statement.

As for the questions posed further by Br Redrum I believe, I shall be meeting the Sheikh again so I will inquire from him and post soon Inshallah.

Edited by A follower
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zahratul_Islam

The faith of muslims was not in danger when an unqualified individual was occupying the position of Marja for years and years? They are now circulating a list of his rullings which are outside of Shariah, but those rulings of his were well known for many years.

I personally was advising people to not follow him for many years. His ijtihad had no basis what so ever, and was based on his own personal opinions. Why did they chose to wait so long before announcing this? He wasn't a danger to Shias when he was telling naive people who chose to follow him that they could eat haram meat (kosher meat)?

In fact most of his rullings are shared by another scholar in Qum, Ibraheem Jannati, why have they not taken down his status as a Marjah yet?

The timing shows that it is political, and it is not a hypothetical theory. I have no problem with dealing with an individual who is a serious threat to the state (although i doubt saanie was). However this is a stupid decision because it is at a time of serious unrest and will escalate problems in Iran.

Yes mashallah lets wait around many years till the man gets millions of followers and they all become misguided by his fake scholarship before we say any thing, there are allot of other fake marjas around I hope these councils get around to denouncing them as well, but the reality is that as long as they don't say any thing against the government they will be left alone, even if they are teaching people some deviated form of shiasm.

I do not agree with your statements regarding Saanei, but EXCELLENT post. I think people need to realize that it all comes down to what Al Mufeed just said. Can we stop pretending this is purely a product of concern about his knowledge and qualifications? You are deluded if you actually believe that.

^ Since you are a scholar, and you have asked, I have no other choice but to tell you. InshAllah in private, when you come to the US to bless us with your knowledge.

Now that right there is a majlis only two people will be attending.

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

Insha Allah :) But please; I am but a small student of Islam.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Get out of here! Only a small student of Islam? :o

The way you have been handing out tickets to heaven and hell and issuing fatwas?! Come on Shibby, quit teasing and being so humble! Just admit you are the sole representative of the mahdi himself :angel:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Get out of here! Only a small student of Islam? :o

The way you have been handing out tickets to heaven and hell and issuing fatwas?! Come on Shibby, quit teasing and being so humble! Just admit you are the sole representative of the mahdi himself :angel:

Thats a shameful way of addressing.. I wish ppl wuld have had better Akhlaq

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

×
×
  • Create New...