Acquiring Knowledge and Violence

Acquiring Knowledge and Violence

Hujjat al-Islam Ayatollah Mohammad Reza Nokonam (May God sanctify his soul)

Bibliographic Information

• Main Author: Nokonam, Mohammad Reza (b. 1327)
• Title and Author: Acquiring Knowledge and Violence / Mohammad Reza Nokonam
• Publication Details: Islamshahr: Sobh-e Farda Publishing, 1393 (Islamic Calendar)
• Physical Description: 131 pages; 14.5 x 21 cm
• Series Title: Collected Works; 154
• ISBN: 978-600-6435-67-1
• Price: 50,000 Rials
• Cataloguing Status: FAPA
• Notes: The bibliography is in the form of footnotes.
• Subjects: Islam – Miscellaneous Issues
• Library of Congress Classification: BP11/N8D2 1393
• Dewey Decimal Classification: 297.02
• National Bibliography Number: 2983486

Preface

The contemplation on the ways in which the Muslim community can grow and evolve, as well as the appropriate strategies for its development, occupies the mind of every Muslim. So far, works such as Clerical Leadership, The Seminary: Challenges and Plans, and True Scholars: Followers of the Prophets by Ayatollah Nokonam (May his presence be blessed) have been published. In this book, the fourth in a series of such writings, which includes interviews and discussions with newspapers and periodicals, the author delves into the essentials of the educational system of Islamic seminaries. He addresses the following critical questions:

• Do the texts and curricula taught in seminaries meet the needs of contemporary humanity?
• Do the traditional advanced courses in seminaries meet the required educational standards?
• Has the goal-oriented approach to religious students declined, and what strategies can strengthen this principle?
• What scientific and moral threats face the seminaries?
• What should be the approach of the seminary towards the soft power movement and the production of knowledge? What role do seminaries play in producing ideas and scientific theories?
• In theorisation, what is the distinction between ‘innovation’ and ‘heresy’?
• Is it correct to say that the structure of seminary texts, particularly in Islamic jurisprudence, is inherently individualistic and unable to address social relations, and that many of our unresolved issues stem from this limitation?
• How can intellectuals and scholars within the seminary achieve a level of scientific authority capable of aiding an Islamic state with their theories?
• How can a space of intellectual exchange and critique be created in seminaries, allowing elites to assess and critique one another’s ideas in a healthy environment?

Additionally, this text explores the place of the science of Istikhara (divination) in religious knowledge and its relation to rejecting fatalism, and it addresses the concept of sin, its consequences in life, and the religious scholars’ duty to encourage people to avoid sin and the methods for doing so. The book further investigates the following questions:

• Does human knowledge and the conditions of time and place affect the changing definitions of sin?
• Some sins, as outlined in Islamic law, have severe consequences, such as causing financial hardship, preventing prayers from being answered, or even bringing about sudden death. How can this be explained, and why do certain sins lead to such outcomes?
• How do religious scholars and missionaries approach the issue of sin, and is this approach appropriate?

Another interview in the book highlights the features of the work Women: The Perpetual Victim of History and some of its innovations, as discussed in an interview with the esteemed Ayatollah Nokonam, as part of a conversation with Khorasan Newspaper. This article concludes the section on acquiring knowledge. The interview titled “Pope: Violence in a Reasoned Statement” addresses the place of mercy and violence in Islam and critiques the statements made by Pope Benedict XVI. The Pope attempted to challenge the concepts of Jihad and Rationality in Islam through selective quotations from a 14th-century debate between a Byzantine Emperor and an Iranian scholar, aiming to prevent potential backlash. However, this approach was rather clumsy, and as a result, the discussion explores the concept of rationality in Islam and critiques the Pope’s views.

The first two interviews in the book discuss the innovations of Imam Hasan al-Askari in creating a break in historical continuity, his role in establishing peace, and the method by which the national holidays were intertwined with traditional mourning rituals.

It is noteworthy that a previous collection of twenty-one interviews by the author has been published under the title Social Conversations.

Final Note: All praise is due to God, Lord of the worlds.

The Awakening of Nature through the Emergence of a Truth

The Joyful Tear on the Face of the Grieved

This year, the Arbaeen of Imam Hussein coincides with Nowruz (the Persian New Year). Given that both the Arbaeen of the martyr Imam Hussein and Nowruz are significant and revered for Iranians, a question arises: how can we reconcile sorrow and joy, mourning and celebration, which are inevitably concurrent this year?

Our reporter raised this question with Ayatollah Nokonam, and he remarked: “Nowruz is a natural and intrinsic celebration. In fact, Nowruz marks the awakening of nature, and all created beings in the terrestrial world welcome this occasion.”

He further explained that, because of this, Nowruz carries a particular splendour, serenity, and joy. Furthermore, Nowruz involves certain practices that are highly commendable, such as house cleaning, family visits, and reconciliation. These practices align with both reason and religion, and no criticism can be made of them from either perspective. However, individuals with a history of sinful behaviour may sometimes indulge excessively during this period, but this has no direct connection to Nowruz itself, and such individuals are accountable for their actions.

The Arbaeen: The Manifestation of a Truth

Ayatollah Nokonam continued by describing the Arbaeen of Imam Hussein as the manifestation of a profound truth. He stated, “If Nowruz is the awakening and joy of nature, Arbaeen represents the revelation of a higher truth. Nature is terrestrial, while the truth is the celestial aspect of nature.”

He went on to say that Arbaeen is the result of a truth sought by all prophets and saints, and it represents movement, vitality, and life. In fact, Arbaeen, which challenges falsehood, is a victory of truth over falsehood and offers glad tidings to believers, providing peace and serenity to all who fight for righteousness.

Ayatollah Nokonam acknowledged that, despite the mourning that accompanies Arbaeen, its essence can still bring about joy, as it symbolizes righteousness, grandeur, courage, and the manifestation of divine authority.

How Should We Respond to the Convergence of Nowruz and Arbaeen?

The question then arises: how can one honour the magnificence of Arbaeen while also celebrating Nowruz? Ayatollah Nokonam offered this insight: “As I have already mentioned, Nowruz is replete with practices that encourage peaceful coexistence and a life filled with affection, which in no way contradicts the spirit of Arbaeen. The traditions associated with Nowruz are, in many ways, a reflection of religious customs, and the only caution we must observe is that the joy of Nowruz should not overshadow the solemnity and martyrdom of Imam Hussein.”

He further noted that, historically, believers have found ways to reconcile both celebrations, engaging in traditional Nowruz practices while simultaneously offering condolences and maintaining the reverence due to Arbaeen. He concluded: “The truth of Ashura and Arbaeen brings inner purity and joy to the righteous, while Nowruz brings natural joy. Both celebrations ultimately carry a message of life. Therefore, we must preserve the integrity of both traditions in this confluence.”

Imam Hasan al-Askari and the Preparation for the Occultation Era

Introduction: The Andisheh Group extends its congratulations on the blessed birth of Imam Hasan al-Askari (peace be upon him). On this occasion, we present an interview with Ayatollah Nokonam, a prominent scholar of the Qom Seminary and author of several works on religious matters, which explores the essential characteristics and mission of Imam Hasan al-Askari. Ayatollah Nokonam believes that Imam Hasan al-Askari ended the cycle of infallibility and ushered Shiism into a new phase, describing the Imams as the distinctions of history, not its repetitions.

Interviewer: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us. To begin, could you briefly introduce your academic activities for the readers?

Respondent: I have spent nearly fifty years of my life engaged in intellectual, scientific, and practical discussions. Perhaps, more than any other period in our mortal lives, I have spent sleepless nights. All the challenges, issues, deficiencies, and critiques leveled against Islam and religion in various domains, such as theological, epistemological, social, political, and religious, have held significant research value for me. In areas such as jurisprudence, the Holy Qur’an, philosophy, and mysticism, we have maintained a unique approach toward knowledge and society, or religion and the people.

I have written extensively in this regard, with my works possibly exceeding a hundred titles. However, due to a lack of opportunity to present them, they have largely remained hidden. Around one hundred of these writings are ready for publication. A four-volume series on the issue of women has already been published, which might help address some of the challenges in our society. Additionally, I have undertaken other non-repetitive efforts to resolve social problems.

Interviewer: Do you think the current religious texts and curriculum in the seminaries address the needs of modern humanity?

Respondent: Undoubtedly, the current religious texts in the seminaries do not respond to the needs of today’s world, and there is no doubt about this. The religious curriculum in the seminaries largely consists of texts written several hundred years ago. Although these texts were valuable at their time, knowledge is dynamic and ever-evolving. It is not possible to confine it to one historical period. How can eternal works, such as the Holy Qur’an and the traditions of the infallible Imams (peace be upon them), be confined in this way? Even other divine books are temporally specific: “We have preferred some of them over others” (Qur’an 2:253). Thus, even heavenly books are not universally applicable across all eras. Our texts follow the ancient style, where knowledge was conveyed in enigmatic forms, such as “understand,” “reflect.” This style was typical in earlier times, but today, the most complex scientific topics are presented in the simplest language for the general public to understand.

Certainly, none of our books in areas such as literature, jurisprudence, principles, philosophy, or mysticism are sufficient. Moreover, the existing methods in these texts are not practical for scholars either. This is widely accepted, and it is unlikely that anyone would disagree. However, the truth is that some progress has been made in the seminary since the revolution. Some have attempted to condense or simplify the books, but that alone does not solve the issue. We need to develop comprehensive texts for all fields of study in the seminary, meaning that great scholars should write comprehensive texts that can address the problems of the modern world. These texts should offer solutions to the practical issues of contemporary society and the world. It is essential for competent scholars to take the initiative and write accurate and robust texts.

In the seminary, knowledge and scholars must be given their due so that individuals can engage with their work with a sense of specialized motivation. In such a case, everyone can address the problems effectively within their own realm. These texts, after review and testing, should ultimately be put to use. This process is not something that can be completed in six months or a year. Once tested and proven, the texts should then be applied.

Interviewer: How do you evaluate the current advanced (Kharej) courses in seminaries?

Respondent: Currently, the issues with advanced courses can be summarized as follows:

The primary and most important issue is that today’s seminary does not have an adequate level of foundational courses to offer advanced courses with quality. There was once a traditional view that “others did it this way, so we should too,” or as the scholars would say, “our predecessors did it, so we must do it this way.” We cannot afford to waste students’ time in this way. Therefore, since the seminary lacks a strong foundation, discussing advanced courses becomes a futile exercise.

Those who wish to teach advanced courses should have spent years teaching foundational courses. However, sometimes, people who have never even completed the foundational courses begin to teach advanced courses. In the past, if someone wanted to mock someone, they would say: “He studies advanced courses using ‘Suyuti’ (a famous Islamic scholar).” One must have taught foundational courses for a significant portion of their life to be qualified to teach advanced courses. Such individuals are inherently qualified to offer opinions and conduct independent legal reasoning, not simply seek permission from others. The problem with our seminary is that we continually test the students and novices, but who is testing those at the top? We must first test those at the top to assess their knowledge, and only then can they evaluate others.

Anyone teaching advanced courses should present modern and practical Islamic rulings and address new, innovative topics that were not discussed in the time of Shaykh Mufid, Al-Kulaini, or Shaykh Tusi. The topics should be innovative, new, and relevant to the contemporary issues faced by Islam, the revolution, society, and the system. You can see today that our government does not imitate any seminaries because advanced courses are not addressing its problems. For example, the government may need a religious expert to address the issues related to nuclear energy. When the seminary is not even aware of nuclear energy, how can it offer a legal opinion on it? Similarly, regarding Islamic economics, issues like profit-sharing (Mudaraba), land tenure (Musaqat), and others need to be addressed. An Islamic government may seek a fatwa from seminaries on how to eliminate interest (riba) from society, considering the global financial system promotes interest. Can we issue a fatwa to eliminate interest without disrupting the global system? These are the types of questions the Islamic government is asking us. A minister is no longer asking about doubts in prayer. The issues facing our system now are large-scale, and there is a need for fatwas in important areas. For instance, in Tehran, some people pray as if their prayer is broken, while others pray the full prayer. Some scholars argue that if one travels across the city, their prayer is shortened, while others maintain it should remain complete. How can one provide answers to such issues and, at the same time, be unfit to provide answers to larger-scale matters? Consequently, the government sometimes relies on its own fatwas in such cases. I believe that the government should first begin by imitating the seminaries, and only then should the public follow their example. The seminary must hold enough authority for the system to seek its guidance. This is especially true in a society that is young and revolutionary and challenges the world. It would be beneficial to critically examine the advanced courses in the seminaries, their content, and the number of issues raised. Some scholars still believe that these topics are irrelevant to us and that the government should solve these issues itself. But is it the role of the government to provide such answers? If the seminary is dynamic and strong, it can be a valuable source of support for the leader and the government.

Interviewer: So, you believe that the advanced courses should be modern and up to date?

Respondent: Absolutely. Advanced courses should not just be a repetition of discussions from eight hundred years ago. Unfortunately, the seminaries are facing challenges in this area. Advanced courses need to be rich in scientific content, and the peripheral issues that detract from their academic and legal foundations should be completely removed.

Another point that is particularly important for scholars, especially the youth, is the necessity of being social, revolutionary, and connected to the people. These matters should be considered fundamental principles for seminarians. A seminary student must be socially aware, people-oriented, and revolutionary in order to live with the people and think for them. A seminary student should not be indifferent to the issues of the revolution, the system, leadership, the Islamic world, or the natural course of the country and the world. These matters, in our view, are foundational principles of sound reasoning. If a seminary student is trained in such a way, we could have the best seminaries. We must be capable of leading part of the world and taking charge of its intellectual and moral issues; in other words, seminaries should take on the leadership of society and the world. Leadership is not a personal matter; the seminary must take on the leadership of the system and the world, with the position of leadership symbolising this seminary.

Of course, some steps have been taken already, but we must not be satisfied with this amount; rather, we must address the problems at their root.

The Position of Seminaries in the Movement for Knowledge Production

First, I would like to express my gratitude for your participation in this discussion. As you are aware, a secretariat has been established in the Research Department of the Seminary with the focus on the Software Movement and knowledge production. Our questions will, therefore, revolve around this subject. One of the key issues in this discussion is the current position of seminaries in this field, and we aim to understand the role of seminaries in producing thought and scientific theories.

We would appreciate it if you could begin the discussion by addressing any aspects you deem necessary so that we may raise other pertinent issues as we proceed.

Interview with the Secretariat of the Software Movement and Knowledge Production of the Research Department of the Seminary

I also thank you for pursuing the important issue of knowledge production and the Software Movement and for bringing attention to the discussions related to it. Before we delve into the status of knowledge production in seminaries and seminary sciences, let us first discuss the concept of knowledge itself and clarify what we mean by “knowledge” so that we can then address other topics, such as the position and role of the seminary in this regard.

Knowledge can be understood as the realm of creative matters, meaning new and innovative understandings. Accordingly, what is stored in memory and taught to others is not knowledge; rather, it is considered as “information.” Therefore, we must distinguish between “knowledge” and “information” and not confuse the two. Allow me to clarify the difference between knowledge and information with a simple example. Suppose you have a container of water, and if you add a drop of ink to it, the water becomes contaminated and, metaphorically, is akin to information—it turns into impure water. However, if there were a spring of water in front of you, adding even more ink would not alter its clarity or essence. The water remains pure and clear. This type of water is like knowledge. Therefore, the difference between “information” and “knowledge” is that the former can be polluted and become stale, while the latter is creative, fresh, new, and original.

With this analogy, we can assert that what we currently have in our seminary system is primarily “information” and “memorized facts,” not true knowledge. Our seminary system today is one of “information” and “memorized knowledge,” not truly a place of scientific and intellectual advancement.

Historically, seminaries were different. In the time of great scholars like Sheikh Ansari, Sheikh Mufid, Sheikh Tusi, and Sheikh Kulayni, the seminary system was quite different, brimming with new ideas. These great scholars left behind innovative and fresh thoughts in their works. Fiqh and Usul were rich and vibrant. Scholars like Sheikh Ansari, Akhund Khurasani, Kompani, and others added new perspectives to the existing knowledge, producing innovative thought. Or take for example Ibn Sina, Mulla Sadra, and Mir Damad—they had pioneering ideas that were ahead of their time. However, today, such an intellectual environment is absent. The present state of our seminaries is not comparable to the time of figures like Sheikh Ansari.

In his time, Sheikh Ansari lived in a society where the majority of people were illiterate, and it was rare to find even two people in a village who could write. Nevertheless, he was a scholar, and his works still hold significant value today. He remains a dominant figure in Fiqh and Usul even now.

The truth is that our seminaries have fallen behind our society. Today, almost two million students apply to enter universities, but many are unable to gain admission and are left behind. If someone wants to work as a labourer in a municipal job, they must have at least a high school diploma. Municipalities do not hire anyone with less education. In contrast, seminaries continue to accept students with only secondary school education. This reflects a significant lag in our seminary system when compared to the progress of the rest of society. If someone has memorized the “Makasib” or “Kifaya” or other texts, they are not necessarily considered an educated scholar.

The world has advanced tremendously in recent years, and our understanding and education system need to reflect this. The knowledge and intellectual weight of the modern world cannot be carried by someone who is illiterate or poorly educated. Thirty or forty years ago, our teachers had only completed six years of schooling, and they were considered educated. But today, this is no longer the case. The level of knowledge in society, and globally, has significantly risen. Especially in the past 25 years since the revolution, our country has advanced by eighty to ninety academic rankings, but what about the position of seminaries? Our seminaries are lagging behind in the intellectual race.

(58)

The root of this imitation may lie in the fear that religious scholars have of critiquing or rejecting the theories of their predecessors. The prominent figures in religious sciences have gained such authority and respect that no one dares to critically evaluate their words and opinions or express any doubt about them.

We have righteous predecessors and great figures who hold great respect for us, and we respect them deeply. However, this should not lead to stagnation and complacency. The reason why philosophy in the Western world has developed in certain ways is partly due to their free environment and the characteristic of free thinking. We, however, are not free thinkers. At times, we accept a theory simply because a teacher has said so. Yes, we must maintain respect for them, but this does not mean refraining from reflecting on their theories and opinions. These great figures themselves were not like that. They criticized each other’s statements and reached new theories. In Qom, we have the tomb of the late Mirza Qomi, which people highly revere, and some even seek blessings and healing from it. The significance of this becomes clearer when we recall that Mirza’s tomb is located in Qom, next to the shrine of Lady Masoumeh (AS). Nevertheless, people visit him with devotion and belief. Sheikh Ansari did not accept Mirza Qomi’s theory of “the closure” (of ijtihad), and believed in the openness of the scientific gate, yet people do not expect miracles from his grave, as they do from Mirza’s. Therefore, the respect and reverence for a religious scholar does not mean that their scientific theories are also sacred. Both of these great figures have their rightful place, and their respect is obligatory. They both earn reward for the theories they have introduced; however, this should not make us fearful or hesitant. Our teacher, the late Ayatollah Elahi Qomshaei, used to say: “Whenever I come to Qom, I visit the tomb of Mirza Qomi and recite a Fatiha, but I say, ‘Mirza, you wasted four years of our life. You were a good man, but what are these ‘laws’ that you wrote!?’” So, our righteous predecessors were divine ambassadors, and it is not inappropriate to revere their tombs while critically examining their words and theories.

It must be emphasized that critiquing the theories of past scholars must be systematic and scientific, based on evidence, criteria, and standards. Unfortunately, in our society, there are sometimes individuals who, without having sufficient studies in Islamic sciences, and some of whom are even still stuck in elementary matters, step into this field and engage in legal rulings, entering the domain of jurisprudence, discussing Quranic sciences, and so on. Such actions are akin to someone driving a car without knowing how to drive but holding a driver’s license. In truth, this is a type of crime, and the root of this problem partly lies within the religious seminaries. When the seminaries fail to take action, others step in and take charge.

In my view, we need a process of de-cluttering in all areas. In the religious sciences, we must also eliminate some outdated sciences and beliefs. We need to critically assess which rulings have no evidence to support them. Why have we issued prohibitions and permissions? Why do we say something is forbidden and another thing is allowed? We need to undertake a thorough and serious review. We know that the principle is permissibility. Everything is permitted unless there is a clear prohibition. For many rulings, we do not have solid evidence. Even for matters we have strong evidence to declare as forbidden, we should not merely state the prohibition; instead, when we say “do not do this,” we should also explain what should be done instead. We should say, “do not do this, do this instead.” We should say that everything is pure, except for a few specific things, as everything is lawful except for these few things. This is the approach of religion. Religion says, “Everything is permissible for you,” “Everything is pure for you,” and “Everything is lawful for you.” Our people are also Muslim, and if we approach them with this method, they will accept it and say, “Now that everything is permissible, respecting the prohibition of these few things becomes easy.” But when we elevate prohibitions to sky-high levels, people become alienated. Therefore, the religious estrangement of people—at least part of it—can be traced back to the seminaries. We have placed so many prohibitions in front of people that they find it impossible to live as Muslims. We must reexamine this with scientific and technical principles. Jurisprudence, principles, the Quran, and the traditions remain as majestic and noble as ever; however, this should not cause us to perpetually speak of prohibitions and urge people to be cautious. This approach is absolutely wrong, even though some scholars and prominent figures may consider this method to be correct and claim that all the programs on our radio and television are intrinsically forbidden.

How can we reconcile with this situation? Today’s world is not one of force. America, with all its wealth and power, brought ruin upon itself when it entered the field with tanks and guns. Today, we must fight with a football, with words, poetry, and dialogue. We need to introduce a pleasant and permissible voice instead of the forbidden ones. One cannot call people to Islam in this manner. Today’s world is a world of diversity. When you want to purchase a mobile phone, you face a multitude of diverse options, each with its unique advantages that the others do not have, and you find yourself lost in the selection process. Countless models are available in the market, changing daily and increasing in diversity. They have so many models for a mobile phone, yet we have not presented a tangible, practical model for our religion. We are trapped in generalities and do not clearly show what our response is; but people cannot live in an abstract and general world. We must show a concrete model with precision. We say that something is forbidden; yet when people ask, “Does this specific thing also fall under this prohibition?” we answer, “Ask the common people; we only say in general terms that it is forbidden, and it is up to you to decide if it falls under this category.” But who is the “common person”? Is the common person the religious authority? Why don’t we ask the common person ourselves and give a clear answer to people’s questions? Because our seminaries shirk this responsibility, our society faces many problems. I explicitly state: many of the problems in our society are not from the government or the leader and the revolution, but rather from the seminaries, which suffer from negligence.

A person living in Tehran, traveling across the city, does not know whether they should perform a shortened prayer or a complete one. One person performs it shortened, another performs it complete. One says that profit-sharing is forbidden, while another says it is allowed. One says certain sounds are forbidden, while another says they are highly recommended. What is the duty of people in this regard? Consequently, when the month of Muharram begins, if we want to send preachers to the villages, we have thousands of preachers, but when we want to introduce preachers to universities, the number of those qualified is very small. These preachers are not suited for universities because the university will ask them, “Why?”

Let me bring up another issue related to this discussion. Some scholars believe that some of the problems of the religious seminaries stem from the fear of excommunication (takfir) and heresy. They argue that certain long-standing theories have become so entrenched in people’s minds that it is no longer possible to challenge them, and the environment in seminaries is such that it is impossible to discuss certain topics and issues. The seminaries cannot tolerate hearing new ideas—ideas that no one has spoken before. However, one of the most important factors for scientific advancement is increasing tolerance and creating a free space for theoretical work. At the same time, there is the fear of excommunication. We see examples of this every day in the interactions between scholars. We don’t even need to discuss whether a particular theory is right or wrong, but is it correct to excommunicate a scholar just because they have a specific and unique theory?

In my opinion, raising such debates is a reactionary matter; whether this scholar or another, who considers their opinion to be incorrect, is right or wrong, they are not correct. Today, Muslims are facing a thousand and one problems. America, with all its resources, is trying to eradicate Islam, and Israel is constantly plotting and committing crimes. Is it right, in this situation, to raise such peripheral discussions and spend our time on them? These debates are a diversion and take us away from the real problems and issues of today. Instead of discussing such matters, we should highlight the legitimacy of the divine leaders and the wrong methods of their enemies and guide the seminaries. We should propose topics that are relevant to us and the society’s needs. Diverting Muslims’ attention from the challenges and dangers ahead is a form of crime. Before the revolution, some even promoted such discussions; for instance, they asked whether the purification of impurity in “Indeed, Allah only wishes to remove from you the impurity, O people of the household” (Ahzab: 33:33) removes impurity from everything associated with them. What is the benefit of such discussions? Is it appropriate to engage the seminary in such matters? Don’t our people have other problems? What practical use does this discussion have? Therefore, in my opinion, the foundation of these discussions is deviant and reactionary and is inappropriate to raise. If it is to be raised, it should be in specialized circles, not spread to the entire community and addressed on the pulpits. We must focus our energy on solving current issues. Today, Muslims need us to cleanse the world from the filth of imperialism and colonialism. The direction of seminary discussions and teachings must serve the society.

This section of the text addresses the issue of seeking guidance through the Qur’an (Istikhara) and provides a philosophical and scientific perspective on it. The author begins by defining various concepts related to Istikhara and then goes on to explain the conditions and scientific principles for carrying out this process correctly.

Istikhara, meaning the seeking of good or divine guidance, can be performed in various ways. One of these methods is Istikhara through the Qur’an, which, according to the author, is the most important and valid form of Istikhara due to its connection to the hidden and esoteric sciences. This process, unlike other forms such as using prayer beads (Subha) or reciting prayers, delves into the spiritual and hidden dimensions of the issue at hand.

Before responding to the question, it is necessary to clarify the concept of Istikhara. Istikhara means seeking good or seeking divine guidance, similar to the word “choice” (Ikhtiyar), but with a key difference. Istikhara refers to asking for something to be good or beneficial, while choice involves rational decision-making. While choice is within our control, Istikhara transcends this boundary, reaching beyond the scope of human intellect. In other words, when performing Istikhara, we seek to access hidden truths that are outside the realm of reason, and thus, Istikhara is about invoking divine intervention, whereas choice relies on human intellect.

Istikhara can be performed through different means such as prayer beads, written texts, or through supplication and prayer. The most effective and methodologically sound form of Istikhara is through the Qur’an, as it provides access to deeper, hidden realities, as will be further explained.

Thus, human beings are seekers by nature, and this quest for knowledge can be pursued through various means. Before Islam, such practices were already in place, but Islam, through the Qur’an, has provided a more profound and structured approach to this seeking.

The question arises: Is Istikhara accepted and encouraged in Islamic jurisprudence and theology? And does its use contradict human agency or lead to fatalism? Upon reviewing Islamic texts, it becomes evident that there are numerous ways of uncovering hidden truths, such as through intuition, revelation, or divine insight, and Islam encourages the use of these methods. Scholars, mystics, and philosophers alike have accepted and practiced Istikhara because humans can gain knowledge in three ways: through sensory perception, through rational thought, and through spiritual or divine insights.

Thus, there are three levels of knowledge: short-range, which pertains to sensory perception; medium-range, which involves rational reasoning; and long-range, which pertains to spiritual insight. In this sense, Istikhara is a form of spiritual guidance that complements intellect, rather than contradicting it. As mentioned, gaining access to the spiritual dimension requires special qualifications and is not something that can be accessed by everyone.

In Islamic sources such as Bihar al-Anwar and other jurisprudential texts, there are entire chapters dedicated to Istikhara, and reason does not reject it. On the contrary, intellect and Istikhara work in harmony, each shedding light on different aspects of a given situation.

It is crucial to note that, in our daily life, we trust reason, but there are certain matters beyond our intellectual grasp that can be revealed through spiritual means, such as Istikhara. For example, if someone is looking to purchase a house, consulting with an expert may provide rational insights into the decision. However, Istikhara can reveal hidden aspects of the situation—such as unforeseen disasters or future events—that are beyond the reach of reason or expert advice.

While it is essential to trust reason, spiritual insights can offer additional guidance. The purpose of Istikhara is not to replace rational judgment but to complement it by providing insights into the unseen aspects of a decision. However, this method is not suitable for trivial decisions like choosing between lemonade and vinegar, but rather for significant decisions, where hidden consequences may lie beyond the scope of rational understanding.

The proper practice of Istikhara requires a deep understanding of the Qur’an and the conditions necessary for performing it correctly. It is not a casual practice and should only be undertaken by those who have mastered its principles and who possess the necessary spiritual purity. Improper use of Istikhara could lead to misleading results, and therefore, it should not be undertaken lightly.

This is why many scholars have refrained from performing Istikhara due to the complexity involved in interpreting the Qur’an’s hidden meanings. Istikhara with the Qur’an is a specialized science, one that requires extensive knowledge of the Qur’an’s esoteric meanings and the specific conditions for performing Istikhara correctly. Without this knowledge, using the Qur’an for Istikhara could lead to negative consequences.

Unfortunately, over the years, due to the dominance of secular forces, the Qur’an has been relegated to a tool for gaining blessings or warding off harm. For instance, people often place it in their cars or homes for protection, rather than seeking its deeper guidance. The Qur’an is a living text, full of wisdom and insight, capable of guiding us in profound ways if we approach it with the necessary understanding and spiritual openness.

To master the art of Istikhara with the Qur’an, one must fulfil three essential conditions:

1. The Qur’an must be central to the process;
2. The person must be well-versed in the hidden meanings of the Qur’an;
3. The person must possess spiritual purity and clarity of heart.

When these conditions are met, the practice of Istikhara becomes possible. If any of these conditions are lacking, the process becomes compromised, leading to misleading results. It is important to note that Istikhara is not something that can be performed by just anyone—it requires specific qualifications. For example, a person who is about to undergo surgery may seek an Istikhara, and if the answer is positive, it could lead to harm if the practitioner does not fully understand the deeper meanings of the Qur’an. This highlights the importance of training and expertise in the practice of Istikhara.

While there are many books available on the topic of Istikhara and Qur’anic divination, most of these works are not scientifically grounded and lack the proper methodological approach. As a result, they can contribute to the degradation of the practice, turning it into something superficial rather than a deep and meaningful spiritual science.

Istikhara is a serious and specialized science, and it is essential that we approach it with the necessary respect and understanding. It is not a practice to be taken lightly or used for trivial matters. Rather, it is a method for discovering hidden truths and gaining insight into significant matters, helping us navigate the complexities of life in accordance with divine wisdom.

In conclusion, the practice of Istikhara, particularly when performed with the Qur’an, is an advanced and spiritual discipline. It requires a deep understanding of the Qur’an, a clear and pure heart, and a methodical approach. Only those with the appropriate knowledge and spiritual insight should engage in this practice, as misuse or misunderstanding can lead to negative consequences. However, when performed correctly, Istikhara offers a profound means of guidance and insight, complementing the rational faculties and enabling individuals to make more informed and spiritually attuned decisions.

(86)

If belief is accompanied by reasoning and experience, it does not contradict rationality and reality.

The resolution of problems and the selection of the correct option in life is not limited to sensory perception or intellect, which has the capacity to make significant decisions. While necessary, they are not sufficient on their own. The practice of Istikhara (a form of seeking guidance through prayer) compensates for the limitations of intellectual knowledge and is considered a complement to it, rather than a contradiction. Istikhara is a belief that aligns with reality, but this reality is not accessible to the limited and formal intellect. Instead, it is attained through the Quran and special principles, rules, and inner attentiveness to it.

(87)

(88)

The Concept of Sin and Its Reflections in Life

(1)

Our first question regarding the topic under discussion is: why, when God is the absolute and self-sufficient being, does He establish specific rewards and punishments for actions?

In response to this question, we must say that human actions have natural consequences, which result from the action itself and are not dependent on the external factors of that action. For example, the effects of actions stem from the actions themselves, just as the heat of fire or the freshness of a flower are the consequences of fire and flowers.

1- Khorasan Newspaper, p. 12, Wednesday, 29th of Farvardin 1386 (April 18, 2007), 29th of Rabi’ al-Awwal 1428, Issue 16674, and also Saturday, 1st of Ordibehesht 1386 (April 21, 2007), 3rd of Rabi’ al-Thani 1428, Issue 16676.

(89)

Belief in or denial of God does not affect this matter; in other words, whether we are naturalists or religious, we see such effects in fire and flowers. Thus, our actions have consequences that manifest in a pleasant or unpleasant form; of course, these consequences appear differently in this world compared to the afterlife. Legally, we refer to these consequences as thawab (reward) and ‘iqab (punishment), and naturally, we regard them as behavioral consequences. Therefore, reward and punishment are not arbitrary but are instead natural consequences.

Are legal rulings and duties contingent upon benefits and harms, and do benefits and harms equate to obedience and disobedience to the Lord, or do they have another meaning?

In this regard, we must first note that our actions have consequences, and every action has a ruling. Based on this ruling, we determine whether the behavior is right or wrong. We evaluate it from a rational or legal perspective. From a rational perspective, we say this action is good or bad, and from a legal perspective, we say it is obligatory or forbidden. From this viewpoint, doing good is an act of obedience, and disobedience is a form of rebellion. Since all actions have consequences, certain rulings are attached to them. However, some sects of Islam believe that divine laws are not based on benefits and harms, and that God could have decided differently, such as making prayer obligatory and alcohol forbidden. This belief is incorrect, as it implies that religion is not based on wisdom, and it would seem that everything is a game or trivial matter. However, obligation, prohibition, and benefit or harm are determined by the content of actions, and the content is the cause of the ruling. Therefore, duties are based on benefits and harms, and adherence to or rejection of them leads to obedience or rebellion.

(90)

Are the benefits and harms worldly or afterlife-related, and are the afterlife benefits more important than worldly ones?

If we accept that our actions have consequences, we must acknowledge that these consequences manifest in this world, not the afterlife. In other words, this world serves as the foundation for the afterlife. We do not reach the afterlife until we have passed through this world. Thus, the conditions of the world shape the afterlife, and the antithesis of this foundation is the afterlife itself. In moral and social contexts, we say that health in this world leads to happiness in the afterlife, while worldly dysfunction leads to misery in the afterlife. Therefore, the afterlife is a result of the world, and we cannot claim that the benefits of the afterlife do not originate from this world. All worldly benefits and harms are transferred to the afterlife. The proverb “You reap what you sow” exemplifies this: sometimes we plant in fertile fields and sometimes in refuse heaps, but whatever we plant, we reap, albeit with an inverse process in the refuse heap. If we plant garbage, we reap garbage. Thus, reward and punishment are the consequences of actions, and religion reveals that those who are ignorant in this world will face deprivation in the afterlife, while the righteous in this world will be happy in the afterlife. Therefore, the effects of actions and sin are an integral part of the creation system and are not merely arbitrary or religious constructs. Religion uncovers and explains this system for the happiness of humanity.

Does human knowledge and the circumstances of time and place affect the definition of sin?

Human knowledge does impact the recognition of these truths, meaning that the more knowledge and awareness a person has, the better they can discover these religious and moral criteria, provided that their knowledge is sound. However, even in this case, human knowledge cannot change the nature of sin; it can only lead to better recognition of it, revealing flaws, deficiencies, and evils. Sometimes, however, knowledge is in the hands of oppression and colonialism, and it can present abnormalities as normal, distorting human dignity and making unethical behaviours widespread in society.

A healthy person cannot have abnormal tendencies, but through constant propaganda and repetition, a person may become an addict, a murderer, or a thief, or even develop sadistic tendencies and take pleasure in self-harm. This is not a result of human knowledge; rather, it is the result of the corruption of that knowledge. Generally speaking, knowledge is like a lamp that illuminates the characteristics of the world, distinguishing between good and bad. Thus, there is a distinction between the essence of knowledge and the way it is manipulated by oppressive forces.

In a verse from the Quran, the result of committing sin is the denial of God’s signs… Analyze: How does sin lead to a psychological and doctrinal decline, eventually leading to denial and rejection? Is this the outcome of “rebellion against the Creator”?

Satan and sinners sometimes present deviations as art, thus leading sin to bring about a fall in the person. As a result of sin, a person becomes corrupted and begins to view distortions as right. A person who spends their life in corruption becomes so accustomed to it that they derive pleasure from the impurity. Therefore, human actions cause the human nature to change and adapt to wrongdoing.

For instance, if someone smokes for the first time, they cough, but repeated smoking will eventually lead them to desire a cigarette even before eating or drinking in the morning. Such a person no longer enjoys the natural world but takes pleasure in an unnatural act. Thus, the repeated commission of sin can cause it to become a secondary nature for the individual. If someone enters a city where everyone is blind, they will suffer from having sight, as blindness becomes the norm. This concept is scientifically verifiable through empirical knowledge and is expressed in the Quran.

(91)

One of the results of sin is that it leads to the gradual loss of sensitivity to moral and spiritual matters. Over time, the individual becomes desensitized to the consequences of their actions, both in the social and spiritual realms. As they continue to sin, their hearts become hardened, making it more difficult for them to perceive the truth or acknowledge their wrongdoings. This psychological and doctrinal decline can eventually lead to the complete rejection of God’s guidance, as the individual becomes increasingly distant from the truth and loses the ability to discern what is right and wrong.

(92)

This gradual process of moral decay can be likened to a spiritual blindness. Just as physical blindness distorts a person’s perception of the physical world, spiritual blindness distorts their understanding of the divine and ethical realities. The Quran describes this phenomenon when it states: “And those who disbelieve, their hearts are sealed, and they do not understand” (Quran 47:16). This metaphorical sealing of the heart represents the condition of those who have persistently turned away from God’s guidance, resulting in a hardened heart that is no longer receptive to spiritual truths.

(93)

The consequence of such a state is that the individual becomes increasingly alienated from both the Creator and creation. Their disobedience leads to a rupture in their relationship with God, and this rupture manifests itself in various forms of personal and social harm. The individual may experience a lack of peace and fulfilment, even if they outwardly appear successful in their worldly endeavors. The emotional and psychological consequences of sin – such as guilt, anxiety, and despair – become more pronounced as the individual moves further away from their moral and spiritual core.

(94)

Thus, the effects of sin are not limited to the spiritual domain but extend to all aspects of life, influencing one’s psychological well-being, relationships, and social interactions. When a person persists in sin, they distort their understanding of good and evil, right and wrong, and ultimately lose the ability to make moral judgments in line with divine wisdom. This is why sin is seen as not only a violation of divine law but also a distortion of the individual’s nature and the harmony between them and the world around them.

(95)

Moreover, this gradual moral decline has a ripple effect on society as a whole. When individuals within a community are immersed in sin, they create an environment where immoral behaviors are normalized, and virtues such as honesty, kindness, and justice are undermined. The collective moral fabric of society becomes weakened, making it more susceptible to corruption, oppression, and injustice. The breakdown of moral order in society is one of the consequences of widespread sin, which affects not only the individual but also the collective well-being.

(96)

The remedy for this moral and spiritual decline lies in repentance and the seeking of God’s forgiveness. In Islamic teachings, repentance (Tawbah) is a means of returning to God, cleansing the soul, and rectifying one’s relationship with the Creator. Repentance involves a sincere recognition of one’s wrongdoings, a commitment to change, and a turning towards God with humility and remorse. Through repentance, the heart is purified, and the individual can regain their spiritual sensitivity, allowing them to discern the truth and find peace and guidance once again.

(97)

Repentance is not merely a verbal act but requires a genuine transformation in the person’s heart and actions. It involves abandoning sinful behavior and striving to live a life that aligns with divine guidance. The process of repentance is a means of restoring one’s connection to God and to the moral order that governs the universe. It is a pathway to spiritual renewal and a return to the natural state of purity and righteousness that God intended for humanity.

(98)

Therefore, the consequences of sin are not only a result of the actions themselves but also reflect a deeper spiritual reality. Sin leads to a distortion of the soul, a disconnection from divine wisdom, and a loss of moral clarity. Through repentance and spiritual awakening, individuals can restore their inner balance and realign themselves with the divine will, which ultimately leads to peace, contentment, and spiritual fulfillment.

(99)

In conclusion, the concept of sin in Islamic thought is not limited to its immediate effects on the individual or society but extends to its long-term consequences on the soul. Sin disrupts the natural harmony of the human being, distorting their moral judgment, and distancing them from the Creator. The remedy for this spiritual illness is repentance, which allows the individual to cleanse their soul, restore their connection with God, and regain the clarity and wisdom necessary for making righteous choices in life.

(100)

Repentance is a powerful means of spiritual purification, enabling a person to return to their original state of purity and closeness to God. The process involves not only seeking forgiveness for past wrongdoings but also a firm resolution to change one’s behavior and avoid falling back into sinful habits. The Quran teaches that God is always ready to forgive those who sincerely repent, no matter how severe their sins may have been. It is through this process of seeking forgiveness that the individual is able to overcome the spiritual blindness and moral decay caused by sin.

(101)

The concept of repentance in Islam is not just a mechanical act but a deeply personal and transformative experience. It requires the individual to engage in self-reflection, recognize their flaws, and humbly turn to God for help and guidance. In doing so, they allow themselves to experience God’s mercy and grace, which leads to a renewal of both their spirit and their moral compass. This renewal brings them back to the light of truth, away from the darkness of sin.

(102)

The Quran states: “And those who, when they commit an immorality or wrong themselves [by sin], remember God and seek forgiveness for their sins—and who can forgive sins except God?—and [who] do not persist in what they have done while they know” (Quran 3:135). This verse emphasizes that repentance is an ongoing process, and it is the constant effort to return to God with sincerity and humility that holds great value. It highlights that those who are conscious of their mistakes and seek to rectify them are more likely to be forgiven.

(103)

Additionally, Islam teaches that repentance is not solely an individual act but has broader implications for the community. When individuals repent and purify themselves, they set an example for others, encouraging a collective return to virtue and righteousness. The act of repentance thus contributes to the moral rejuvenation of society as a whole, reinforcing the importance of justice, fairness, and compassion in all aspects of life.

(104)

The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) also highlighted the importance of repentance by saying: “The one who repents from sin is like the one who did not sin” (Ibn Majah). This indicates that sincere repentance can erase the negative effects of sin, restoring the individual to a state of moral purity. The promise of forgiveness from God is an essential component of the Islamic worldview, offering hope and redemption to all who seek to improve their relationship with their Creator.

(105)

Through repentance, a person’s heart is softened, and their capacity for empathy, compassion, and self-control is enhanced. The individual who repents learns to value integrity, honesty, and kindness, and these virtues gradually become embedded in their character. In this way, repentance is not only a spiritual act but a means of personal growth and ethical development.

(106)

It is important to note that repentance is a continuous journey. A person does not achieve perfection through one act of repentance but must consistently strive to improve themselves, both spiritually and morally. The process of self-improvement involves a continuous effort to align one’s actions with the ethical teachings of Islam, leading to a life of righteousness, peace, and fulfillment.

(107)

Ultimately, the concept of sin and repentance in Islam serves as a reminder that human beings are fallible but also capable of redemption. The notion that God’s mercy is boundless and that repentance leads to forgiveness is central to the Islamic perspective on sin. This understanding provides individuals with the opportunity to transform their lives and overcome the negative consequences of their past actions.

(108)

Through repentance, individuals are not only able to restore their relationship with God but also to cleanse themselves from the psychological and emotional burdens that sin inflicts. By turning to God and seeking His forgiveness, the individual frees themselves from the inner turmoil caused by guilt and remorse. This liberation allows them to live a life of peace, purpose, and spiritual fulfillment, as they are no longer weighed down by the burden of sin.

(109)

In conclusion, the Islamic teachings on sin and repentance offer a pathway to spiritual and moral renewal. Sin, while a natural part of human existence, does not have to define a person’s life. Through repentance and a sincere return to God, individuals can purify their hearts, restore their moral clarity, and lead lives that are in harmony with divine guidance. The process of repentance thus represents both a personal and collective journey toward moral and spiritual excellence.

(102)
It has been established that advertising should be based on research. Otherwise, the advertisement may not only fail to produce results but may also have the opposite effect. Of course, scholars, elites, and great figures of the religious field have always exhibited their distinctive nuances, which have enabled them to be influential. However, these subtleties are not available to all preachers. Therefore, we must be aware of weaknesses and risks, and I don’t think anyone would disagree that advertising should be regulated. These risks may harm the work of even successful individuals, which is why it is essential to identify and neutralise such individuals, and this task holds significant importance.

Regarding sins, there are two perspectives: one is that individual and societal adversities affect our lives, and the other claims that these issues have no impact on us. What is your view on this matter?

It has been proven that whatever we think in a particular way, we will act in that manner, and whatever we do will naturally manifest its consequences. In reality, “what comes out of the pitcher is what is in it.” We draw conclusions based on our actions. Whatever is within us will manifest itself. The same principle applies to our social and individual lives. If we focus on the content, each path will yield its own outcome. People who only focus on the form and go through the stages of progress will see their results in that domain. On the other hand, those who focus on the content of their actions, even if they lack outward appearances of success and live humbly, will have inner peace. Hence, faith and disbelief reveal themselves more in content rather than in form. Therefore, the final outcome of our discussion is that our actions and deeds have consequences, and these consequences never diminish, not even a little.

(103)
Women, Modesty, and Freedom

1
Introduction: Recently, Ayatollah Nikoonam has published a book titled “Women: The Perpetual Victim of History.” The discussions presented in this four-volume work, the necessity of its writing, new issues raised in it, and the overall outlook of the work have been subjects of a conversation with the author. According to Ayatollah Nikoonam, the rights of women have not been recognised in our society, and because of this lack of recognition, women have been subjected to injustice. Furthermore, he presents novel perspectives on the type of dress for women and the education required in this regard.

1 – Khorasan Newspaper, Saturday 13th of Esfand 1384, 3rd of Safar 1427, Issue 16365, Ali Reza Sharifi.

(105)
We hope this conversation will capture the attention of our esteemed readers.

To begin, what motivated you to write a four-volume book on women?

Our overarching goal is to remove the embellishments from religious discussions. One of the most significant of these topics is the issue of women. Throughout history, there has never been an appropriate or healthy approach towards women, and even today, this remains the case. On the one hand, we witness extreme patriarchy, and on the other hand, extreme feminism. This creates an unbalanced and incorrect situation. In this four-volume work, we have sought to depict a different image of women. The work is divided into twelve sections, each addressing a different topic.

In our society, traditional women have been deprived of their rights, while modern women have taken a different route. Our argument is that both traditionalism and modernism do not adequately address our needs, and with these two approaches, we cannot solve our societal issues. For example, in this book, we argue that the concept of hijab differs from the concept of covering. We have Islamic guidelines for covering, but not for hijab, and it is argued that the chador (full-body cloak) is a burdensome form of hijab for women. Islam does not impose such a difficult requirement on women. Regarding the issue of courtship, we argue that women have the right to approach men for marriage, and this right is not exclusive to men.

(106)
Our argument is that the management of women’s affairs should be done by women themselves, though on a part-time basis. Since women bear a heavy responsibility within the family, if they are to take on similar roles in society, this would have harmful consequences for them, including premature aging and even early death. Women are managers of the household, but they can also have an active presence in society. The reason we titled the book “Women: The Perpetual Victim of History” is that it refers to Lady Fatimah (peace be upon her), who has been the victim of history, and that such victimisation continues to this day. Sometimes, the man commits an injustice, and yet it is the woman who suffers. For instance, when the man is imprisoned, his wife and children may suffer more than the prisoner, facing pressures from society that are even more intense than the hardships the prisoner endures.

Another important issue raised in the book is the topic of pre-marital education. We receive training for many things, but when it comes to starting a marital life, no formal education is provided. Life is a science that should be taught in schools and universities. We read various books in both religious seminaries and universities, but there is no book that explains how to live a life together. Currently, the only medical test before marriage is blood testing; however, many other tests are required to determine whether individuals are ready for marriage and capable of maintaining a successful marital relationship. The high statistics of divorce and other issues arise because marriages are not made consciously. Our previous claims about marriage were based on limited and incomplete understandings of certain matters. We have two incorrect cultural approaches to life. We say that life should be lived with modesty, but we have combined modesty with ignorance. Thus, when we want to address sexual matters, we erroneously deem such discussions as impious and contrary to modesty, so our modesty ends up costing us our ignorance. Against this, there is a culture that mixes education with immorality. This culture undermines the spiritual essence of human beings under the pretext of education. An Islamic society should be both knowledgeable and modest, and these two should not contradict each other. Regulating scientific management will resolve the current problems.

(107)
What sources did you refer to while discussing these views in your book?

Our main sources have been the Quran and Hadith, and we have not referred to any other sources. However, we have made sure to cover all the important topics, such as reason, emotion, inheritance, and various issues related to women. In fact, this work represents our interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and its most important feature is that it neither supports patriarchy nor exploits women. We have also addressed women’s self-sufficiency, especially in the fields of healthcare and medicine. Although education for women is important in many areas, it holds particular significance in healthcare.

(108)
You made a distinction between hijab and covering, could you elaborate on this distinction?

In this book, nearly 150 pages are dedicated to this topic. Hijab refers to something worn on the head, while covering means not revealing the body’s appearance.

(109)
Other topics such as divorce and polygamy are also discussed in detail. Divorce is seen as a form of liberation and freedom, and the book argues that such freedom should not be exclusively in the hands of men. Also, it addresses whether it is permissible for women to adorn themselves and other social issues that the community faces. Additionally, we argue that women should not be seen as cheap labour or tools for managers, but rather, they deserve greater attention.

(110)
You have also discussed the difference in rights between men and women in Islam. Could you explain further?

Yes. The shared rights, the differences in rights, and the characteristics of each are explored. We should not claim that men and women are identical, because the issue at hand is value—values that are tested and measured. Islam has approached this issue in such a way, but Muslims and Islamic society often engage in both excess and deficiency in this regard. Our work focuses on the capabilities of women and the laws formulated based on these capabilities. This is why other institutions have shown interest in this book.

(111)
In these four volumes, with additional volumes forthcoming, our goal has been to both absolve religion from the accusation of patriarchy and provide a clear perspective on women, so that they do not fall into the trap of unrestrained modernity.

(112)
Has this book received any responses from scholars and intellectuals?

Many esteemed scholars and authorities have read this book, and none have opposed it. In fact, some have stated that, given the comprehensiveness of this work, they will not publish their own books because, with this book available, their own works would appear incomplete. We have strived to present the issues in a reasoned and clear manner, such that it can help solve some of the problems in our society.

(123)
It is true that those individuals and groups who speak more mildly are often harsher in practice, or that those who weep for the oppressed are often the ones who plunder them, or that some individuals are committed to disbelief while speaking of faith. Based on this, the Pope is not immune to such politics, and his statements are not only made out of ignorance and arrogance, but they also reflect his hostility towards Islam.

The Pope speaks of religion and rationalism, which is an important matter. In today’s world, if someone does not speak of rationalism, they are essentially marginalising themselves.

Today, we see that these self-proclaimed advocates of non-violence have raised the issue of a “holy war” in America. This means that Bush and several Christian scholars have brought up the concept of a holy war, while at the same time, the Pope has referred to “jihad” in Islam as an example of violence.

Bush sees himself as more Catholic than the Pope and is the one who, under the guise of some Christian beliefs, promotes war and violence.

(124)
The sinister contradiction previously mentioned is evident here as well. What relationship can there be between war and sanctity when war signifies aggression, while sanctity implies purity and non-aggression? To speak of a “holy war” is a paradox and a contradiction. It is like saying “full of emptiness” or “a bald man with long hair.” In these cases, the contradiction is very apparent, but in the concept of a holy war, two tangible and logical matters are combined. War is tangible, and sanctity is a logical concept, with tangible results.

No matter which culture we refer to, we cannot find a relationship between war and sanctity. During the Crusades, Christians used the same terminology to justify their massacres, and the current conflicts, such as in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon, are clear examples of the same sinister contradiction.

Therefore, it can be said that the Pope and Catholic politicians have a problem with their own issues; they have not been able to answer the fundamental questions about God and the Holy Scriptures, yet they speak of holy war. They talk about non-violence and peaceful coexistence, and through projection, they attribute violence to Islam.

The Pope claims that Muslims do not regard God as bound by reason; that is, Muslims say that God cannot be understood through reason. Based on this statement, it could be argued that their knowledge of Islam is either non-existent or highly confused and trivial.

When we refer to the Quran, we see that it says: “Know that there is no god but Allah” (1). Thus, the Quran says “know,” and in Islam, worshipping God is identical to rationalism.

They attribute violence to Islam, whereas the Quran speaks of mercy. The word mercy and its derivations appear 340 times in the Quran. Even in relation to Allah, the terms Rahman and Rahim are used 192 times.

The permission for Muslims to enter any action begins with “In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful,” meaning it is by God’s mercy. Therefore, attributing violence and irrationality to Islam and Muslims can only reflect their ignorance of Islamic teachings.

The Pope has claimed—based on a quote from the Byzantine emperor—that “there is no compulsion in religion” applies only to the early period of Islam when the Prophet did not possess political power. What is your opinion on this?

There are many issues in the Quran that were revealed at different times. The time when this noble verse was revealed is of no importance; what matters is whether this verse has been abrogated or not. No Muslim scholar believes that this verse has been abrogated, and for this reason, no one can disregard it or deem it insignificant. The Quran says elsewhere: “For you is your religion, and for me is my religion” (1). In Surah Al-Imran, the Quran says about such scholars: “You are those who have argued about things of which you have knowledge, so why argue about things of which you have no knowledge? And Allah knows, while you do not know” (2). Based on this verse, it can be said that those who utter such statements are speaking about matters of which they have no knowledge, whereas Islamic scholars know more about the various aspects of Christianity than the Christians themselves. When we say we are Muslims, it means we first acknowledge Christianity and then understand it. The Holy Scriptures are in our homes. We do not speak out of ignorance, whereas they are strangers to the Quran and cannot even read it.

The Pope has also stated that, in Islamic belief and teachings, God is absolutely transcendent and His will has no connection to any of the categories accepted by Christians, including reason. Does this not refer to the Ash’ari view on the will of God?

This topic, which falls under the discussion of “determinism and free will,” is one of the most complex scientific matters, and many thinkers have presented opinions on it, which are not infallible or absolute.

In the words of the Infallibles and in the Hadiths, it is stated: “There is neither compulsion nor delegation, but rather an intermediate matter” (1); however, this statement does not solve everything. Shia scholars have disagreed on the matter of the “intermediate issue.” What is it that is neither compulsion nor delegation but both compulsion and delegation?

Each person has interpreted this meaning in their own way. We have discussed this topic in the philosophy lectures and then provided a fresh understanding of it. In short, I can say that determinism and free will are shared concepts, not separable. It is not the case that we have a ten percent role in doing something and ninety percent of it is due to God, or that we have no role at all, or that we believe we are entirely in charge. That is why we say it is a shared matter; each of the manifestations and actions, in the realm of God’s existence and appearance, requires action, and each person will be rewarded or punished in proportion to that manifestation, both in this world and the next.

In any case, this is a precise scientific matter, and no one should raise such a complex theoretical issue, which has many disagreements, in an incomplete and immature way and incite more division.

The Quran says: “Say, O People of the Book, come to a word that is common between us and you” (1), but the Pope is engaged in complex discussions to create division, as such matters cannot be simply solved. Instead of such words, we should act in accordance with the Quran and seek to focus on the common points, thinking of peace.

(130)
What does the Quran say about religious differences, and does it mention such issues?

Yes, the Quran addresses this matter very clearly, and Islam’s views on this are very clear.

In the current situation, where information about various issues has increased for everyone, discussing these matters is not a simple task and requires extra care.

The Quran says: “Say, O People of the Book, come to a word that is common between us and you,” which is: “That we worship none but Allah, and we do not associate anything with Him” (2). The Quran further states: “And let none of us take others as lords apart from Allah” (3). God is God. Neither Jesus, nor the Church, nor anyone or anywhere else is worthy of worship. Based on this, all followers of Islam and Christianity should join hands and focus on the divine command that unites us: the unity of word and belief, which is the monotheism of God.

At this time, it is inappropriate to confuse the minds and hearts of monotheists, to the point where people generally turn away from religion. This behaviour itself is a form of violence.

We must ask, what has the Christian world done to promote peace and tranquility? Christian countries should help bring peace to the world, rather than causing turmoil through their actions or words.

Everyone seeks health and peace, and the Quran says: “Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam” (4). Everyone should say: “Peace, peace” (5). It is the duty of Christian scholars and Islamic scholars to pursue peace and make “peace, peace” a reality.

The entire Quran is filled with mercy and love, and if violence is observed in some part of the world from a Muslim, it is the result of oppressive rule in Islamic countries and has nothing to do with the divine religion of Islam. This discussion, that there is no violence in Islam, has been addressed by myself in a series of lectures entitled “The Most Beautiful Names,” where it has been proven that in Islam, there is no rule or principle that advocates violence.