Sayed Kamal and gender identity

[Guest silasun]

I have listened to a few of Sayed Kamal's discussions on women's issues recently. I found some of his comments on gender identity to be extremely problematic. I don't think that he is on the same wavelength as many of the conservative Shias on this forum when it comes to gender. It seems like he is almost ignoring all of the dirty feminist propaganda on this issue.

Why does he always portray a "me vs the system" image? Are there not many better ways of sharing one's unorthodox ideas? Prophets were sent to speak the language of the people and many traditions urge us to take into account 'urf when we speak. Why does he not opt for a much more tacit approach when it comes to these issues of controversy?

@.InshAllah. @beardedbaker @Qa'im @Muhammed Ali @Ibn al-Hussain

Edited January 18, 2018 by silasun

[Hassan-]

He has very controversial views, I'd be careful listening to everything he says.

[Gaius I. Caesar]

Sayed Haidar Kamal?

[Sumerian]

It's not just the topic of gender, it's many other Fiqhi opinions and perhaps aqeeda issues too. 

[Laayla]

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

Was Sayyid Kamal bought by UAE money?  It's a question, I don't have evidence.  I'm trying to verify what happened to this man who was the frontrunner in defending shias against sunnis.

The downfall of many scholars is hub al dunya.  

Allhoma thabatna 3la deen.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 

[Sumerian]

7 minutes ago, Laayla said:

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

Was Sayyid Kamal bought by UAE money?  It's a question, I don't have evidence.  I'm trying to verify what happened to this man who was the frontrunner in defending shias against sunnis.

The downfall of many scholars is hub al dunya.  

Allhoma thabatna 3la deen.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 

What's with the conspiracy thinking? Why is it hard to imagine that someone can simply go astray without external influence, be it money or anything else? It can simply he his own nafs or ego or like you said, hubb al-dunya driving him to such things.

[Laayla]

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

I'm trying to verify brother, nothing else.  3mar ibni s3id was bought by mulk al ray, it's not hard to fathom.  I'm just trying to figure out the reasons why people would be in one direction and then through influence of money, power, and women go off to another direction.

Thank you for your response and God bless you.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 

[Guest silasun]

I don't think Sayed Kamal is a deviant at all. He's actually one of if not my favorite scholar in the Arab world. Not everyone is "astray" just because you disagree with their methods.

[Sumerian]

17 minutes ago, silasun said:

I don't think Sayed Kamal is a deviant at all. He's actually one of if not my favorite scholar in the Arab world. Not everyone is "astray" just because you disagree with their methods.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be apologetic to someone who has been rejecting clear principles of our madhab.

Let me give you some examples -

- permissibility of worship in accordance with any Islamic "madhab".

- Imamah is a "political issue", not part of Usool Al-Deen

- liberal Fiqhi opinions across the board

- claims our ulama are takfiri, and says it in a negative manner

and much more.

[Guest silasun]

Well there goes my thread. I didn't want a cross board attack on the Ayatollah... I tacked those brothers for a reason.

Whatever goes shiachat...

[Ashvazdanghe]

17 minutes ago, silasun said:

Well there goes my thread. I didn't want a cross board attack on the Ayatollah... I tacked those brothers for a reason.

Whatever goes shiachat...

Salam he is a knowledgeable person but his speeches is near borders & sometimes  causes many sensitivity about him he is one of persons that most of times is insulting by wahabists&ISIS channels such as antimsjoos channel & they cuts& Montages his speeches for their favor.

[.InshAllah.]

On 1/18/2018 at 2:52 AM, silasun said:

I have listened to a few of Sayed Kamal's discussions on women's issues recently. I found some of his comments on gender identity to be extremely problematic. I don't think that he is on the same wavelength as many of the conservative Shias on this forum when it comes to gender. It seems like he is almost ignoring all of the dirty feminist propaganda on this issue.

Ive only listened to some of the earlier discussion, but nothing recently.  Could you give examples?

[iraqi_shia]

Sometimes in order to stay in the limelight you have to say things that get headlines....

[Guest silasun]

On 1/18/2018 at 1:28 PM, .InshAllah. said:

Ive only listened to some of the earlier discussion, but nothing recently.  Could you give examples?

Salam brother, 

Thanks for your response. I will post some clips I saw from Sawtuna Haydari. I have a number of tasks to attend to in the next couple of days before I return from exams (today was my first rest day in a while lol) but I will select some segments that I would like to discuss. Expect a response by Saturday evening or at the very latest Sunday morning, inshallah.

I didn't open this thread to promote any view in particular. I want to learn more about this topic. I am incredibly ignorant about gender discussions amongst the ulama, but I am very pleased to see scholars take steps to include females in the scholarly process. One other great example of a scholar who interacted with the times was Ayatollah Fadlallah - although my personal preference and comfort lies with a more conservative faqih, there is no doubt that he was an excellent model for maraji' to follow in terms of interacting with the modern world.

On 1/18/2018 at 3:35 AM, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Sayed Haidar Kamal?

Ayatollah Kamal al-Haydari  

[Ibn al-Hussain]

I've listened to hours and hours of his talks on various different topics. He is definitely one of my favourite scholars to listen to, amongst many others, especially due to newer perspectives some of his discussions open up. At times, you may have to be well versed in the technical aspect of the topic at hand to be really able to see where he is coming from (perhaps that is why a non-student may not be able to appreciate or digest some of his discussions). For example, he doesn't believe in the principle of laws are subordinate to objective benefits and harms - at least in the way the orthodoxy accepts it. This is such a crucial principle that gets mentioned in the discussion of how God legislates law, and can completely alter the way you understand and derive law as a jurist. Unfortunately, it is hardly given due diligence in Usul al-Fiqh (due to various factors, including historical and political), and only recently has been given some detailed attention to (like by Ayatullah Alidoost, and some other researchers within the seminaries). Just developing a different understanding on this principle, can lead to different rulings. I don't suppose someone who hasn't studied Shi'i legal theory to understand this principle or even its implications. All they may see is a conclusion of a jurist, and since it is unorthodox, they may feel uncomfortable about it - even if the theory behind its deductive procedure is strong.

Of course everyone is open to critique and may have problems in their overall methodology. including Sayyid Kamal. I don't think any scholar has a completely perfect system, and even if they do, implementing it all consistently is close to impossible. Many of our scholars even ended up going against their own premises at times without realizing - such is the nature of a fallible human. For example, there are dozens upon dozen places where some of our great jurists ended up doing Qiyas, without even realizing they were doing it. Later scholars have come and critiqued them for it, but sometimes those very same later scholars end up doing Qiyas in certain rulings themselves, without realizing. This is while no Shi'i scholar actually accepts this invalid form of Qiyas (even those who believe in the binding force of speculation - i.e. those who are proponents of the view of insidad).

Nevertheless, in order to actually critique him, one would have to explain why they find any of his beliefs to be wrong and problematic, in accordance to a reliable methodology. Simply listing things out that one feels is wrong, because they are unorthodox, isn't enough if one wants to engage in a disussion. Demonstrating why those beliefs are wrong is what is necessary.

As for his very vocal personality, it seems like that is just him. Probably a difficult trait to change at this point in his life, particularly since a lot of grievances he has about "the system" are very well known by pretty much every seminarian. It probably bothers him that no one - especially those in charge and can be influential - is doing much about it.

@silasun inshallah if you can post the clips you have issues with, maybe we can try to understand the reasoning behind his conclusion.

Wasalam

Edited January 18, 2018 by Ibn al-Hussain

[Guest silasun]

37 minutes ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

f course everyone is open to critique and may have problems in their overall methodology. including Sayyid Kamal. I don't think any scholar has a completely perfect system, and even if they do, implementing it all consistently is close to impossible. Many of our scholars even ended up going against their own premises at times without realizing - such is the nature of a fallible human. For example, there are dozens upon dozen places where some of our great jurists ended up doing Qiyas, without even realizing they were doing it. Later scholars have come and critiqued them for it, but sometimes those very same later scholars end up doing Qiyas in certain rulings themselves, without realizing. This is while no Shi'i scholar actually accepts this invalid form of Qiyas (even those who believe in the binding force of speculation - i.e. those who are proponents of the view of insidad).

Thank you very much for your response. I will post them soon inshallah.

In terms of my own self-development, your best ever post was when you mentioned an error that Allamah Tabatabai made on (if I recall correctly) a grammatical issue. My major theological question that I have been trying to figure out for the last ~8 months was how to approach different opinions from people who are both apparently very pious people and ihtiyaat following people. Coming across your post was a catalyst for trying to understand this issue and I have around a number of other examples from scholars I would have had unconditional academic trust in before. I have been meaning to make a thread for a very long time for the purposes of discussing the theological implications of falling out or academic disagreements between scholars. Obviously I'm not saying that I'm anti-scholar or anything like that.

--

On a side, I agree with all of Sayed Kamal's points on the failing of the establishment. The only issue I have is with his very harsh attacks because I feel that they will be misused. On this issue, I much prefer the manner of Sayed Fadlallah in dealing with reforms that need to be made in the collective psychology of the Shia world.

Edited January 18, 2018 by silasun

[Ashvazdanghe]

It also poses the question as to what Mr. Heydari puts forward in his lectures and lectures, he really believes in them, or does he make a scientific discussion and raise them?

Answer: In their lesson, they repeatedly said that we do not believe in everything we present, but they do not understand my lessons from God and say that Heydari says this ... And so everyone heard a piece of my speech. , It is not true.

See the full text in the clip below ....

Click to view and download the clip above.

 

Another lies from these hypocrites is that they have defamed Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Sadegh Rohani (Hafsh-Zah Allah), who has cursed and defamed Mr. Ayatollah Heidari (Hafsh-Zah Allah) ... while the truth is something else. ..

The truth of the story is this: 
A statement from Ayatullah Sayyid Sadegh Rohani (Hafosh Allah) has been made about the insult of Mr. Ayatollah Heidari to the Grand Ayatullah Khoyi (RA), while he was not insulted by Mr. Heidari and not by Mr. Rouhani Mr. Criticism and insult of Heydari, but only in response to the argumentation of the definition of their own professor, not Mr. Rouhani insulting Sayyid Kamal Heydari !!

 

Ayatollah Heidari has also repeatedly said in their lessons:

"I am proud of the apprentice of the Grand Ayatullah Khoy, but scientific critique is free and it is the cause of the dynamics of the seminary and Shiite jurisprudence to criticize the votes," as it is said in the famous tradition that: "Hayat al-'Alm al-Haghghd and Al-Dard" The life of science is to criticize and reject votes ... Ayatollah Heidari also criticizes this teacher, but he has never been insulted by the Ayatollah Khayi who is their master.

Result :

First, there is no grievance against Mr. Sayed Kamal Heidari by Ayatollah Rouhani ... 
Secondly, this essay has nothing to do with the debate, but the Channel of the Prophet's # hypocrite has pretended this essay and, for example, hinted for you ... Ayatullah Rouhani has insulted them for the speeches of Seyed Heidari ...

 

------------------------------ 
Imam Sadiq (AS) research group

The most comprehensive site for criticizing atheists and hypocrites, anti-Semites and scholars of the Shiite school of thought.

 

http://imam-sadeq.com/?p=1624 (translated by google translate)

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fa&tl=en&u=http%3A//imam-sadeq.com/%3Fp%3D1624

[Ashvazdanghe]

According to the Shia news service, a few months ago, the publication of a sound file in Sayed Kamal Heidari announced on its official website that surprised the circulars of Qom and Najaf.

 

The contents of this file contain strange things, including: The implicit denial of the ijtihad of most contemporary mujtahids, based on a new definition of the concept of ijtihad and verbalism and its claims to all the ulama from the time of Sheikh Tousi to the present, and insulting contemporary authorities by mentioning the name Some of them, claiming the affiliation of the Najaf-based district of Ashraf to some of the services of foreign intelligence agencies!

 

After the release of this audio file, he claimed the relocation of phrases and file manipulation. But, surprisingly, during the Ramadan this year, in the live program of the Fayyat al-Aqayat, the Kowsar Network, while emphasizing its previous positions, began to formulate some of the Shiite beliefs.

 

Following the publication of these articles in the Kowsar network, which was pleased by the enemies of the holy religion of Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) and the protest of the faithful, scholars, scholars, and the offices of the Imam Ali, the authorities of the Al-Kousht Network not only did not stop broadcasting this program, but insisted on continued broadcasting. This program was made.

 

And for this reason, some scholars and scholars from Qom and Najaf, as well as other countries with a sense of religious responsibility, began to respond scientifically to the words of Seyyed Kamal Heidari.

 

The comments made by Seyyed Kamal Heidari, which have been raised by some people in the past, have been regrettable, but it is more than not interrupted by such statements by Al-Kowthar Network, which is run by the Islamic Republic's voice and television. The plot of the issues approved by the majority of the Shi'a-based community is only a matter of disunity and sedition.

While the different networks have been widespread attacks on the religion of the Ahlul-Bayt (PBUH), these misconceptions also sweep the common people into what is going on in the properties of the Shiite community!

 

Speech with Mr. Sayed Kumal Heidari: Mr. Master, the greatness and dignity of all the scholars and elders of Shiite from the late afternoon, the knee of praise was in front of their professors.Challenging the present and future scholars and scholars of the seminary is never a cause for growth and development.

 

 You dismiss God from these misunderstandings. Do not be so cautious. Once, let's sit down at Mr. Heydir's talk. See if something goes wrong with the truth

Response: 

Hi

Dear friend

We also ask you to listen to all his words if you are following the words of Ayatollah Heidari, but not trust the clips shared by Wahabi networks, then judge what their opinion is!

Good luck

The Answering Answers Group

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fa&tl=en&u=http%3A//www.valiasr-aj.com/persian/shownews.php%3Fidnews%3D1275

 

http://www.valiasr-aj.com/persian/shownews.php?idnews=1275

 

 

http://alhaydari.com/

 

it shows that we must sensitive about each speech & don’t judge just from a part it that selected by enemies of Ahlulbayt (as) that trying to cause disunity between shia Muslim community.

Edited January 18, 2018 by Ashvazdanghe

[Ashvazdanghe]

What does Ayatollah Seyed Kamal Heidari say and what does he want?

Martin Luther Shiite?

Ali Ashraf Fathi

• Schools of thought
• December 18, 1395
• Printed edition
• Match up
• 4 views ( RSS )

 

Shiite Intifada against Shiite?

Ayatullah Seyyed Ali Milani, a 68-year-old Faqih born in Karbala and resident of Qom whose concerns were Shiite beliefs, on his website about Ayatullah Sayed Kamal Heidari, a 60-year-old Faqih born in Karbala and resident of Qom, whose concern was for many years to defend Shi'a beliefs. He wrote: His thoughts are rejected.......

 

Seyyed Kamal Heidari, in Ko'ars' network, in a program titled "The Present and Future Perspectives (powers and responsibilities of the authority)," while expressing the views of Ayatollah Khoyi and Imam Khomeini on the domains and powers of the jurists at the time of absence, emphasized that the viewpoint of Imam Khomeini was accepted by most Shiite jurisprudents and Mr. Khoi's viewpoint is a minority. If anyone says that Imam Khomeini, the initiator of the theory of velayat-e faqih, is in the current form, is ill or ignorant.

In the month of Ramadan, 92, Seyed Kamal Heidari spoke a sentence that posed a profound challenge to Shiite and Basij circles: "I claim that many of the Shi'a narrative legacies have come from Ka'bah and Jews and Nasrines and Magi."

 

Mr. Milani is not the only mujtahid to enter the scene in the critique of Sayed Kamal Heidari. Some other authorities also issued statements in response to the Iraqi professor in Qom, or in response to his imprisoned rejection of controversial comments by Seyyed Kamal Heidari.

.....

According to Sayyid Kamal, the existence of a large number of false narratives in the Shi'ite and Sunni narrative legacy has caused the rationality of the Islamic world, not the Quranic rationality, but rationalism.

in Mohsen Kadivar in the book of the Government's views on Shiite jurisprudence and said that the claims of Seyed Kamal Heidari and Sheikh Mohsen Kadivar, about the political and social bases of Mr. Khoi, is incorrect in the light of such evidence in his writings and opinions. Javier also narrated on page 52 of Mirza Jawad Tabrizi's statement that he, like his professor, Khoyi, believed in the involvement of the jurists in political affairs and the administration of Muslim affairs and the defense of the Islamic society.

Part of the recent report by Sayed Kamal, questioning the understanding of some of the major scholars of religion, as well as the weakening of the Shi'i narrative legacy and meaningful emphasis on the Qur'an, may not be more than a Luther reform project, but does he himself accept such a relation?

 

According to Sayyid Kamal, the existence of a large number of false narratives in the Shi'ite and Sunni narrative legacy has caused the rationality of the Islamic world, not the Quranic rationality, but rationalism. [1] In his view, Islam, as a result of this narrative rationality, has become an oppression of anti-rationality and the retardation of Muslims. [2]

Sayed Kamal believes that religious culture dominated by Sunnis is influenced by the correctness of Muslim and Sahih Bukhari and the culture of the Shiites affected by the Bahá'r valley , and we must examine the effects of the Bahá'r valor and the manner in which the Allameh's access to the sources of Bahá'ís is to be accessed. [3] This 60-year-old Iraqi cleric speaks of "Shiite Wahhabism" and warns everyone of the growth of Shiite extremism.

....

questioning the understanding of some of the major scholars of religion, as well as the weakening of the Shi'i narrative legacy and meaningful emphasis on the Qur'an, may not be more than a Luther reform project, but does he himself accept such a relation?And did he think Christianity among the Shi'ites with the status of the gospel in the world for the fundamental differences of the Shi'a scholar with the institution of the Church, as well as the difference between the position of the Qur'an? Of course, he insists that, in explaining Luther's movement, he insists that reforming religious understanding is a priority over philosophical reform. But does Luther's naming mean misunderstandings in his dialogue with Shiite critics and apparently his followers?

 

http://mobahesat.ir/13056

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fa&tl=en&u=http%3A//mobahesat.ir/13056

[Ibn al-Hussain]

10 hours ago, silasun said:

My major theological question that I have been trying to figure out for the last ~8 months was how to approach different opinions from people who are both apparently very pious people and ihtiyaat following people. 

Based on my extremely limited induction, an average Shi'a youth in the West (though this is definitely not limited to the West) is going through a lot of epistemic challenges in their life. Living in an area and in an era where perceptions of morality seem to have changed, dealing with laws that often times seem irrelevant, dealing with laws that often times seem unethical, encountering theological and philosophical challenges whose responses may not fit well within a Western epistemic framework that has naturally been shoved down their minds, and trying to reconcile all these feelings and perceptions with a version of religion that was taught to them by parents who immigrated from the East, and was constantly spread from the pulpits by scholars who also came from the East. 

Couple this with the geographical distance from the center of scholarship, and lack of access to scholars, many of them who are perhaps addressing these issues - all of this becomes a recipe for an epistemological crisis. We can count the highly qualified Shi'i scholars - those who are really experts in their given field - in the West on two hands. The rest of the vast majority of scholars are followers themselves, but with a bit more grasp on the subject matter than laymen. This is not always their fault - maybe many of them did initially come to the seminary to reach that level; but it was the fault of the system that doesn't seem to have any intentions of producing legitimate scholars out of foreign students nor does it have a suitable syllabus for Western students. So you have at many times mediocre scholars at best, trying to address some very complicated issues, but in reality have not truly understood the challenge or the response themselves.

One of the greatest challenge that Islamic scholarship is still dealing with is modernity. For a thousand years, the derivation of Islamic law was based on the premise that we had empires and civilizations. Where religion was a sign of your citizenship, not your ethnicity. The average age for a border in the Islamic world is the 19th-20th century - see this really interesting infographic (https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/7ne62v/the_date_of_origin_for_almost_every_international/)

 

This is around the same time when so-called reformist voices (as we understand them today) within the Islamic world also started speaking up. With the demise of dynasties and the caliphate - where religion had relevancy over ethnicity and nationality, and a lot of laws were derived based on this presumption - now you were dealing with the concept of a modern nation state. A state where religion was secondary, and ethnicity or culture were fundamental.

When once it made sense for 'Allamah Majlisi to come and say that non-Muslims should not be allowed to leave their homes on rainy and snowy days in Safavid Iran since they will make everything and every Muslim they come into contact with najis, because the dhimmis were rightfully treated as secondary citizens (perhaps in modern terms, one can say they had a green-card, but without all the benefits of a citizen) - stops making sense since your religion doesn't dictate whether you are a citizen or not any longer (even in Iran). When once apostasy from religion made complete sense as treason, stops making sense in the modern world since religion isn't relevant - allegiance and treason with respect to the state became relevant. When once wars were fought between religions, many subsequent laws made sense, but as wars slowly stopped being fought between religions, and rather between states & nationalities, a lot of subsequent laws went out the window.

Please note I am of course talking in general terms, otherwise you will find instances where what I have written above is not absolutely true (post or pre-20th century). In any case, the challenge at this point was, what do we do? There is an intense debate amongst scholars on what to do here - sometimes one side labeling the other as sell-outs, while one labels the other as backward minded. You have two camps of scholars here: those who maintain that traditional laws and traditional interpretations should continue to be implemented the way they had been for a hundreds of years, and then you have those who argue that the subject-matter of many of these laws has changed in our day to day reality and thus some of these laws have truly become irrelevant. Not because the law itself had an issue, but rather the conditions under which it was implemented no longer exist.

What I have seen is that those who maintain the first position end up with contradictions in some of their laws, and this is inevitable - because you really cannot deny that the world we are dealing with has changed. The second camp is often accused for justifying and being complicit in their support for the incorrect premises of modernity and secularism, by passing verdicts that makes living comfortable and adjustable in modern societies. Of course, the second side also ends up slipping into territory without realizing the full implications of it (for example, as you have mentioned in your original post, is Sayyid Kamal not aware of the agenda of extremist feminists and the implications of some of their ideas? Maybe he truly isn't, since he has not lived in such a society. Perhaps if he lived in a Scandinavian country he would be witness to the detrimental effects of some of these ideas).

Nevertheless, the latter category can argue that their laws are not necessarily because they theoretically accept secularism or consider the premises of modernity to be ideal, and rather, the two are not necessarily mutually inclusive. In other words, one can give a verdict in accordance to the current context of the world, while still maintaining that the current situation of the world is not ideal. 

As I mentioned above, there is an immense debate on this topic, and both sides have strong arguments that cannot be taken for granted. Also, with respect to the second group, I am not including those scholars who are confirmed sell-outs, but rather legitimate scholars who have posed arguments that are worth looking into. For example, as far as I am concerned, Sayyid Kamal falls into the second group (there are many others though).

Let me give you another example. Why is it that we take a three-fold division to religious propositions for granted (theology, jurisprudence, and ethics)? What I mean by this is, what is the difference between jurisprudence (fiqh) and ethics (akhlaq)? Don't both ethics and jurisprudence tell us to "do" or "not do" something - in which case shouldn't it all fall under one of the categories (you can call it fiqh or akhlaq, doesn't matter)? Why is it that we have things that are permissible legally speaking, but are so detested ethically by societies and individuals that they are essentially treated as haram? Is our fiqh unethical? Do we find God, Prophet or the Imams emphasizing this difference in the religious texts - in the Qur'an or Hadith? Isn't the end goal of both fiqhi and akhlaqi propositions the same? Do we not have narrations saying, if one doesn't possess a certain ethical trait, or manifests a certain immoral trait, they will be destroyed or be punished in the hereafter. How is this different than the reports that talk about being punished if one does a haram act? Why can't this division - that is so ingrained in the minds of Muslim - be questioned and looked into? Some research has shown that this division was a natural consequence of the development of Sunni jurisprudence during the Umayyad and 'Abbasid dynasty - where ethical propositions and jurisprudential propositions became distanced for one reason or another. Given how much of our structure for Usuli and Fiqhi discussions was adopted from the Ahl al-Sunnah, it appears this division was one of those things we naturally adopted and continued to stick with it for hundreds of years.

Today many scholars (many of them are also from that first camp I defined above) are realizing that this division was a big blunder. Once again, the discussion on this is extremely detailed and complicated - I am simply citing it here so that brothers and sisters are not so quick to attack scholars from different camps, and realize the strength of some of the arguments made by scholars who they may not agree with. Strength does not mean the argument is without flaw, but rather it possess enough merit for one to seriously consider it and look into it further.

As for your actual inquiry, regarding how to follow different opinions held by credible scholars - this is something some of the Western students in the seminary do often discuss a lot. What do we present to the people back home? People are at different levels of understanding, and it is difficult to give a unified response to all of them. For example, someone like @silasun who is actually pondering over this matter (because many may not even be bothered by this question), they need to look more into religious epistemology and the philosophy and epistemic value of taqlid in human life. There are books written on this subject, but unfortunately nothing in English that I know of. Becoming acquainted with something like this puts a lot of things and a lot of beliefs a person has into perspectives. Most importantly, it helps become less dogmatic.

A friend of mine is shortly starting a blog that will be very related to the inquiry @silasun has - InshAllah I will share the link here once he posts up some entries.

Wasalam

Edited January 19, 2018 by Ibn al-Hussain

[AbdusSibtayn]

I am very confused about the Sayyid. So far, I have heard diametrically opposite claims about him. To the extent that I know and understand some of his views, I certainly agree with  them, and on the other hand, I find some of his views very difficult to accept, and disagree with them strongly, being the ill-educated layman that I am, with my own peculiar notions and opinions.
I am waiting for him to publish more of his material in English.

Edited January 19, 2018 by AbdusSibtayn

[Guest silasun]

That was a fascinating response brother, thank you. I will write more later iA.

[Intellectual Resistance]

Everyone please read @Ibn al-Hussains post before making any sort of judgement here. 

[Guest silasun]

@Ibn al-Hussain @.InshAllah.

Perhaps it is best if I change the focus of this thread from Sayed Kamal's lectures on women to the question that Ibn reflected on. Not sure if I should refrain from being very direct with controversial examples (don't want @Ibn al-Hussain to be banned from centres lol)...

I personally do not have any theological issue with scholars having different views in different eras. It's important that we separate piety from knowledge. Ayatollah Bahjat had a great heart, but his kharij class was not comparable in number of students to say Ayatollah Waheed.

My biggest question is how do we reconcile scholars attacking each other in very harsh ways. I really do believe that a number of these scholars will be questioned by Allah on Qiyama for their rash and emotional decisions. It goes against the logic of the Qur'an for a brother in faith to be attacking others in some of the manners we have seen:

• The attacks on Ayatollah Fadlallah. I'm sorry, but I don't think that it's forgivable for a scholar to say he is a deviant based upon faulty sources and their own "ijtihad". Sounds very similar to the typical Sunni response to the fitnah. The way that the campaign against him was conducted (I'm talking about the biggest names associated with that campaign) was entirely un-Islamic and a complete shambles
• Sometimes we have two scholars attacking each other. One of the recent examples was somebody attacking Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi (a number of people of this group say that Yazdi is not khat-e-Imam). It was interesting that Ayatollah Khamenei refrained from the line "Allahuma la na'lamu minhu illa khaira" in that person's janaza
• The imprisonment of Mullah Sadra by the Safavids at the request of a certain scholar.......
• "Elections were rigged" vs "Elections were valid and blessing from God" in 2009 and the big players on that debate
• There are other examples that I can give (for example some of the absolute garbage that has come from some of the famous irfan inclined scholars - Dr Farrokh has 2 lectures iirc on false irfan that I can dig up)

Believers are meant to be brothers. God says that he will always provide guidance to the sincere ones. He who acts according to what he knows, God will grant him the knowledge of what he doesn't know. This isn't something that we can discount as fairy tales of the Qur'an or something - I believe it to be one of the cases of the principle سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا مِن قَبْلُ وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا

I don't believe that God is going to bestow any marja' with knowledge of economics and politics through wahy or something like that, but the least that we can expect is for them to know where the boundaries of their knowledge and understanding are. I'm a total nobody in every way with 1001 faults, but I actively try to seek out the limits of knowledge and try to base every decision and belief on reasoning. There will be flaws, but I still try. I expect those whose voices reach millions to do the same.

Feel free to absolutely tear my argument apart if you find it flawed. I'm just an ignorant jahil trying to find his direction within the faith. But I don't know anyone else who can answer my questions except some of the respected brothers.

WS

Edited January 20, 2018 by silasun

[Ashvazdanghe]

Quote

so he is still shia? or is he someone searching for the truth, or what are his views on shia islam now>?

He is still shia all truth is in shia Islam any way he want clear it from commoners misunderstandings