By Cyril Anderson

Page Two of Two

Because this institution of marjaiyyat plays a crucial stabilizing and supporting role in the community, it must be respected and protected in a general sense, so as to defend the religion itself.  It acts as a central reference and authority, led by people who have devoted their lives to studying and teaching about the religion, and as such, is a crucial tool that can serve to defend the religion, organize the believers, and coordinate their efforts.  As such, when it works well, it has the potential to be a crucial tool for raising the community.  In light of this, one should be very careful and measured in ones criticisms, so as to be sure that one is not being used, in his criticism, to damage the institution as a whole.  There are opponents of Islam, and of Shia Islam in particular, who recognize this power and potential located within this religious institution, and, as a result, aim their sharpest attacks at this institution with the goal of undermining the marjaiyyat in the eyes of the people.  Of this we must be very careful. 

 Some would like to tell us that the solution to our problems is to bring a sort of “Protestant Reformation” to the religion, throwing down the established institution of marjaiyyat, abandoning allegiance and respect for the marjaiyyat so as to be able to be a “free thinker,” guiding oneself.  The irony of this is that people taking such extreme positions within the Muslim community have usually been manipulated into such opinions through propaganda from people outside the Muslim community.  It is true that the average believer needs to reform himself and educate himself so as to be able to think more deeply and independently on his own, and not be so dependent on the maraja’ for minor matters.  It is clear that in this day people need to take more responsibility for their own learning and guidance in routine, day to day activities.  However, there is still a great need for the marjaiyyat as an institution to provide high level guidance, an appropriate role for them given their much higher than average education.  One needs to move from a confrontational way of looking at things to a perspective where the marjaiyyat and average believers work together to raise the community.  As the average believers raise themselves in knowledge and ability, this frees the maraja’ for higher level organizing of the community.  A more well educated community also tends to be more advanced economically as well, producing more surplus wealth that can be contributed as khums tax, giving the marjaiyyat more funds to work with to support good educational projects and to build the organization level of the community.

 The other problem is that there have already been parallels to the Protestant Reformation within Islam in such radical reform movements as those of Ibn Taymiyyah (1263-1328 CE) and Muhammad Abdul Wahhab (1703-1792 CE), both of which strongly attacked the legitimacy of the existing madhhab system around which the Sunni system was organized.  The damage caused by the anarchic doctrines of such individuals are seen in many of the extremist movements of today.  In no way are the Shias today in need of such drastic “reform.” 

 Truth be told, we need a Muslim Erasmus¹ or perhaps a Muslim de Cusa² much more than we do a Muslim Luther³.  We must not forget that within the Shia system of jurisprudence lies the engine of ijtihad, which serves as an internal engine of reform and change in response to changing times and changing community needs.  We must remember that some of the most powerful movements for reform of the institution of marjaiyyat in the 20^th century came from within the institution itself, with such thinkers as Muhammad Baqir as-Sadr, Muhammad Hussayn Fadlallah, Ruhullah Khomeini, Musa as-Sadr, and others pushing for reform and changes in the way the marjaiyyat functions and relates to the people.  For those of us who sense some need for change within the general Islamic system, the most effective way to achieve this is to do what we can to encourage and support the efforts of those brave scholars who work, tirelessly to reform what is lacking, while at the same time zealously guarding all that is good and essential in the existing system.  Such is the smoothest and surest path to our success.

 ¹ Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536 CE) was a leading Christian reform figure working within the Catholic system, and living at the crucial time period of the Protestant Reformation, in which the Western Church split into Catholicism and Protestantism.  His writings, in comparison to those of the leaders of the Protestant Reformation such as Martin Luther, represented a more moderate path in seeking to eliminate or moderate the most serious abuses and excesses of the Catholic church by bringing reform within the framework of the church itself.  Erasmus is famous for his classic Praise of Folly, which uses humor to attack such excesses and to call for reform.  Erasmus, while calling strongly for reform of the church and attacking excesses, did not attack the institution itself.

 ² Nicholas de Cusa (1401-1464 CE) was a highly influential Catholic Cardinal and philosopher, author of such works as De Pace Fidei (On the Peace of Faiths), De Docta Ignorantia (On Learned Ignorance) and Catholica Concodantia (Catholic Concordance).  De Cusa recognized problems and excesses within the church, and attempted, in his writings, particularly in his Catholic Concordance, an early work in political philosophy, to bring reform from within to the church.  De Cusa also worked toward the unification of the Western (Latin Roman Catholic) and Eastern (Greek Orthodox) churches.

 ³  Martin Luther (1483-1546 CE) was the leader of the Protestant Reformation.  He led a charge against the excesses during the 15^th century of the Catholic Church, arguing against the legitimacy of the church as a whole and striving to build a new church system.  Out of this were born the numerous denominations of Protestant Christianity.  In the century and a half followed, Europe broke out into nearly continuous religious warfare between Catholics and Protestants, effectively ended only with the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, but not before the Inquisition, the 30 Years’ War, and numerous assorted inter-sectarian atrocities.

                                     Part One              Part Two