Interviewer: Let us talk about another topic which you are interested in, namely what are the ways in which we can identify a religious authority in our hawzas? How do we choose him? Are there reliable methods we can use for this? As you know, some issues have been raised such as pre-eminence in knowledge which, as far as I know, is a late development raised by some jurists – does it have any precedent? And what are its criteria? We would like very much for you to clarify this for us!
Kamal Haydari: In reality, the mechanisms in our hawzas today are centred around the following issues:
First: the writings and scholarly output of the marja – in other words, you look at his writings and from these you recognize his pre-eminence in knowledge. For example, how do we know that Shaykh al-Mufid was one of the great scholars of our sect – in fact, the greatest scholar of his time? By looking at the writings of his which we possess today. Why do we not dispute that al-Mufid was one of the greatest scholars in our history? Because these are his writings, this is his scholarly output, these are his books, all of which we can refer to and all of which demonstrate that he was clearly pre-eminent in his knowledge. Now let us turn to Shaykh al-Tusi and we find the same is true, as it is for Allamah al-Hilli, Allamah al-Majlisi and other great scholars.
In our present time, let us look at Sayyid al-Khui, how do we know that he was one of the greatest jurists of our age? By looking at his voluminous writings on jurisprudence. How do we know that he was one of the great rijalists of our age? By looking at his voluminous writings on the science of rijal. And so on. How do we know that Sayyid al-Tabatabai was one of the greatest Quranic commentators amongst all the Muslims who have ever lived? By looking at his tafsir, al-Mizan. How do we know that Shahid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr was one of the greatest logicians of our age? By looking at his Ussus al-mantiqiyyah li al-istiqra. How do we know he was one of the greatest usulis? Look at his three books of Usul al-fiqh!
Therefore the best way to know the specialty and ability of a candidate for religious authority during the Occultation is to look at his writings.
Second: Look at how much he has taught in the hawzas.
Interviewer: You mean his presence in the hawzas?
Kamal Haydari: Not just presence, but actual teaching; because he could be present but not teach, and we cannot estimate the value of this “presence.”
What about the imam who suppose to guide & teach shia, but has no presence anywhere for 1100 years? How do we estimate his value when he doesnt even has presence?
Therefore we must know his scholarly presence in the hawzas. This is something we have found amongst the great scholars today, whether in Qom or Najaf. Imagine that Sayyid al-Khui wrote nothing, but when we look at his students over the course of sixty years we find that they are some of the greatest scholars of our sect. This shows that their teacher was a specialist and himself a great scholar of the sect.
Imagine 12th imam wrote nothing, but when we look at his student (the 4 reps) over the course of 60+ years we find that.....oops, they were not considered as great scholars of the sect either. What does that say about their teacher, the imam? Does that mean al-Khui was waaaaayyy more useful teacher?
Therefore, the second way in which we can identify a potential religious authority is through his teaching and scholarly presence in the hawzas.
I believe that these two methods are the basis for determining whether or not a particular person is qualified for religious leadership during the Occultation.
So if we apply Kamal Haydari's 2 method to imam & his 4 reps then we can say they were unqualified people because they:
1. had no teaching
2. had no scholarly presence
Shoot, how can Haydari miss that eh?
4 Replies
2691 Views
November 06, 2017, 04:49:02 PM