Statements in Meeting with Students, Scholars, and Professors of Qom Seminary

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Thanks be to God, the Lord of the worlds, and peace and blessings be upon our master and prophet, Abu al-Qasim Muhammad, and upon his pure and chosen progeny, the infallible guides, especially the Awaited One of God among the inhabitants of the earth.

Peace be upon you, O Lady, O Fatimah al-Masumah, daughter of Musa ibn Ja'far. May the best prayers and peace be upon you and your pure and infallible ancestors.

The significance of this meeting, which has been greatly enhanced by the prominent presence of esteemed scholars, dignitaries, and dear students of the Qom seminary, coincides with the blessed birth of Imam Ali ibn Musa al-Ridha (peace be upon him) and also the birth of his honorable sister, Fatimah al-Masumah (peace be upon her). This reminds us of the great and blessed movement of this brother and sister and the meaningful migration of these two great figures, which has undoubtedly been a constructive and influential movement in the history of the Iranian nation and the history of Shi'ism.

Without a doubt, the role of Fatimah al-Masumah (peace be upon her) in making Qom a center of religious significance and in elevating this ancient city is indisputable. This great lady, this young woman nurtured in the lap of the Prophet's household, through her movement among the companions and friends of the Imams (peace be upon them), traversing various cities, sowing the seeds of knowledge and guardianship along the way, and finally arriving in this region and settling in Qom, has caused this city to shine as the main base of the teachings of the Prophet's household (peace be upon them) during that dark and oppressive period of tyrannical rule, becoming a center that transmits the lights of knowledge and the teachings of the Prophet's household to the entire Islamic world from the East and the West.

Today, the center of knowledge in the Islamic world is still the city of Qom. Today, just like in those days, Qom is a vibrant and active heart that can and must pump the blood of knowledge, insight, awakening, and awareness throughout the body of the Islamic Ummah. In that day, the first books of jurisprudence and the teachings of the Shi'a and the followers of the Prophet's household (peace be upon them) were issued from Qom. The fundamental books relied upon by jurists, scholars, and narrators were produced in the Qom seminary. The book "Nawadir al-Hikmah" by Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Yahya, the book "Basair al-Darajat" by Safar, the book "Sharai" by Ali ibn Babawayh Qummi, the book "Mahasin" by Barqi, the works of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa, and dozens and hundreds of other books were created and produced in this knowledge base. Personalities were nurtured here who, when they traveled to the corners of the Islamic world, their gatherings became centers of bounty. Sheikh Saduq (may God be pleased with him), who belongs to the third and fourth generations of this great movement, when he went to Baghdad - which was the center of Shi'ism and the center of hadith - scholars, dignitaries, and great figures gathered at his feet and benefited from him. Thus, you see that Sheikh Saduq is the teacher of Sheikh Mufid (may God be pleased with them both). Therefore, Qom became a center.

Today, Qom is still a center. Here, over the years, tens of thousands of passionate butterflies gather around the candle of the teachings of the Prophet's household, learning knowledge, gaining insight, struggling with many difficulties, setting lofty and spiritual goals, and moving forward without regard for these challenges. Perhaps there is no city in the world, or perhaps we cannot find one, where such a large number of individuals, both men and women, are engaged in the pursuit of religious knowledge, spirituality, and collective conduct, striving day and night in spiritual, scientific, and cultural endeavors. This is the seminary of Qom today, with its distinguished global position; it is also the history of Qom, which is the first important foundational seminary of Shi'ism established in this city, and great figures such as Sheikh Kulayni and Sheikh Saduq have benefited from this fountain of bounty, whose works have preserved the teachings of the Prophet's household (peace be upon them) over centuries.

Well, the seminaries - especially the Qom seminary - have never been as much in the spotlight of global thoughts and eyes as they are today; they have never been as influential in global policies and perhaps in international destiny as they are today. The Qom seminary has never had as many friends and enemies as it does today. You, the committed members of the Qom seminary, today have more friends than ever in this history; you also have more and more dangerous enemies. Today, the Qom seminary - which stands at the pinnacle of seminaries - holds such a sensitive position.

Here, there is a fallacy that I must address. Some may say that if the seminaries had not engaged in global issues, political matters, and challenging issues, they would not have had so many enemies and would have been more respected than today. This is a fallacy. No group, no institution, no valuable assembly has ever gained respect in public opinion due to isolation, withdrawal, and neutrality; nor will it ever be. Respect for indifferent and aloof institutions that shy away from challenging issues is a superficial respect; a respect that, in its essence, is disrespect; it is like respect for objects, which is not considered true respect; it is like respect for images and statues; it is not considered respect. Sometimes this respect is even insulting; it is accompanied by an inner humiliation of the one who pretends to respect. The being that is alive, active, and influential evokes respect; both in the hearts of its friends and even in the hearts of its enemies. They may oppose, but they honor and respect it.

Firstly, the marginalization of the Qom seminary and any other seminary leads to its elimination. Not engaging in social and political currents and challenging issues gradually leads to marginalization, being forgotten, and isolation. Thus, the Shi'ite clergy, as a whole, regardless of individual and occasional exceptions, has always been present at the heart of events. This is why the Shi'ite clergy has a depth and influence in society that no other religious group, whether Islamic or non-Islamic, possesses.

Secondly, if the clergy wanted to operate on the margins and isolate themselves, religion would suffer. The clergy are the soldiers of religion, the servants of religion; without religion, they have no status. If the clergy distanced themselves from fundamental issues - of which the great Islamic revolution is a prominent example - and remained indifferent to it, without a doubt, religion would suffer; and the clergy's goal is to preserve religion.

Thirdly, if presence in the arena provokes enmities, these enmities ultimately lead to good. It is these enmities that stimulate zeal and motivations and create opportunities for the living being. Wherever there is hostility towards the clergy or religion, a constructive movement arises from the awakened and aware individuals. Once, I mentioned in a gathering that the writing of a book by a biased anti-Shi'ite author led to the creation of several major Shi'ite source books. If the book "Secrets of a Thousand Years" had not been published by a deviant individual who combined secularist thoughts with Wahhabi tendencies, our great Imam would not have suspended his classes for a while to write the book "Kashf al-Asrar"; in which the importance of Islamic governance and the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist is first observed. The reproduction of this important jurisprudential and Shi'ite thought in the book "Kashf al-Asrar" of the great Imam is evident. If the leftist and Marxist movements and the Tudeh Party had not been active in the 1920s and early 1930s, a lasting book like "Principles of Philosophy and Method of Realism" would not have been produced. Therefore, these hostilities have not been detrimental to us. Wherever there has been hostility, the awakened and aware clergy have reacted and created an opportunity. Hostilities create opportunities; when we are awake, when we are alive, when we are not heedless.

During the Reza Khan era, the hostile movement against the clergy led to a religious authority like the late Sayyid Abul Hasan Isfahani (may God be pleased with him) allowing the use of religious funds for the production of religious publications and magazines; which was unprecedented at that time. Thus, religious publications were launched with the funds of religious dues and the Imam's share. This means that a personality like Sayyid Isfahani (may God be pleased with him) thought about the cultural issues of our country and the Shi'ite world and the Shi'ite nation, contrary to what some imagined and still imagine, and permitted the use of the Imam's share for such work; these are opportunities. Hostilities create such great opportunities.

Fourthly, remaining neutral in fundamental challenging issues does not mean that the enemy of the clergy and the enemy of religion will also remain neutral and silent; "And whoever sleeps, he is not asleep from him." If the Shi'ite clergy does not feel responsible in the face of hostile events that arise against it, does not enter the field, does not reveal its capacity, and does not fulfill the great task that is upon it, this does not mean that the enemy will cease its hostility; on the contrary, whenever they feel weakness in us, they advance; whenever they feel passivity, they increase their activities and advance. The Westerners have understood the immense capacity of Shi'ite thought to confront global oppression and global arrogance for a long time; from the events in Iraq, from the tobacco issue; thus, they will not remain silent; they will continue their aggression and advance. The silence and neutrality of scholars and clergy and seminaries cannot in any way stop the enemy's hostility. Therefore, the movement of seminaries, the non-neutrality of seminaries regarding global events, regarding national and international challenging issues is a necessity that cannot be overlooked.

After the victory of the Islamic Revolution, two erroneous and deviant concepts were introduced by those who were both hostile to the clergy and enemies of the revolution. Of course, these statements have been responded to; both verbally and practically; but "This sweet water and salty water are mixed." We must always be vigilant, always be awake.

These two erroneous concepts and, in fact, two accusations have been introduced by the enemy as a tactic: one is the issue of clerical government. They say that in Iran, a clerical government is in power. They wrote this, said it, promoted it, and repeated it. The other is the issue of the clerical government; dividing clerics into governmental and non-governmental. Their goal in introducing these two deviant and erroneous concepts was, firstly, to deprive the Islamic system of the immense intellectual, theoretical, argumentative, and scientific support of religious scholars; secondly, to isolate and discredit the responsible clergy, the revolutionary clergy, the clergy present in the arena who have stood against hostilities. That is, one type of cleric is governmental, which is bad, negative, and against values; another type is non-governmental, which is positive, pure, and virtuous.

The relationship of the clergy with the Islamic system is a clear one. The relationship of the clergy and seminaries with the Islamic system is one of support and advice. I will explain this. Support alongside advice, defense alongside reform. Those two erroneous concepts are truly deviant and hostile; because, firstly, clerical government and attributing the Islamic Republic to this concept is a false statement. The Islamic Republic is the government of values, the government of Islam, the government of Sharia, the government of jurisprudence, not the government of clerics. Being a cleric is not sufficient for someone to gain governmental authority. The Islamic Republic is fundamentally different from the clerical governments we know in the world, which have existed in the past and still exist in some places today. The government of the Islamic Republic is the government of religious values. It is possible that a cleric possesses values that surpass many other clerics; he is prioritized; but being a cleric does not disqualify anyone. Neither being a cleric alone qualifies someone, nor does being a cleric disqualify someone. It is the government of religion, not the government of a specific class or a specific group. Dividing clerics into governmental and non-governmental and considering these as values and anti-values is also a gross error. Moving towards government and moving towards anything other than government, if it is for worldly purposes, is bad; if it is for selfish desires, it is bad; it is not specific to moving towards government. If we move towards any goal that is for selfish desires, that is for personal interests, this is against values; this is the same as entering the world, as it is said: "The jurists are the trustees of the messengers as long as they do not enter the world"; this is not specific to moving towards government. If the goal is worldly, it is rejected; there is no distinction between government and non-government; but if moving towards government is for a spiritual purpose, for a divine purpose, this is one of the highest examples of enjoining good and forbidding wrong; one of the highest examples of striving; this is accepting heavy responsibilities or defending qualified officials. If a governmental cleric is referred to as someone who, for the sake of fulfilling his religious duty, for the sake of fulfilling his religious responsibility, for the sake of God, supports the Islamic system or supports officials, this is a value; this is not an anti-value; lacking this state is an anti-value. Therefore, neither of these two concepts - neither the concept of clerical government nor the concept of clerical officials - are correct concepts. The introduction of these after the revolution and the establishment of the Islamic system is a fallacious proposition; these concepts do not belong to the culture of this revolution.

However, conversely, there are two other truths and concepts that are valuable and value-creating. One concept is that the system, in terms of theory and science, relies on the religious scholars and seminaries and is supported by their scientific efforts. The system is dependent on the seminaries; it is dependent on scholars, prominent figures, and religious experts. Another concept is that the seminary and the clergy are not indifferent to the religious system. No cleric, no religious scholar, no Islamic servant can be indifferent to a system that has emerged based on Islam, that has acted and works with the motivation of Islam; they cannot consider themselves strangers. This is another truth.

The first truth we mentioned, that the system is supported by the seminaries, is because political theorizing and theorizing in all aspects of governing a nation and a country in the Islamic system is the responsibility of religious scholars. Those who can present the Islamic perspective on the economic system, on management, on issues of war and peace, on educational matters, and many other issues must be religious specialists who know the religion. If this theorizing is not filled, if the religious scholars do not do this work, Western theories, non-religious theories, materialistic theories will fill their place. No system, no organization can manage in a vacuum; another management system, another economic system, another political system that is created and developed by materialistic minds will come to replace it; just as in those cases where these gaps were felt and existed, this happened.

The reason I have warned about the human sciences in universities and the danger of these inherently toxic sciences - both to universities and to officials - is because of this. These human sciences that are prevalent today have contents that are inherently opposed and contradictory to the Islamic movement and the Islamic system; they are based on a different worldview; they have different messages, different goals. When these become prevalent, managers are trained based on them; these managers come to the forefront of universities, the forefront of the country's economy, the forefront of domestic and foreign political issues, security, and so on. The seminaries and religious scholars are the supports that are obliged to extract Islamic theories from divine texts, clarify them, and make them available for planning and various groundwork. Thus, the Islamic system's support is its religious scholars and experts and Islamic theories; therefore, the system is obliged to support the seminaries, as they are its backbone.

In addition to the fact that the Islamic system needs the seminaries to govern the nation and the country, there is another point that today various doubts are raised that target the system. Religious doubts, political doubts, ideological and epistemological doubts are injected into society - especially among the youth - with the sole aim of transferring one from one thought to another; their goal is to eliminate the human supports of the system; to distort the fundamental principles of the system in people's minds; it is enmity with the system. Therefore, removing these doubts, confronting these doubts, clearing this dust from the minds of society - which is done by religious scholars - is another support, another backing for the Islamic system. Thus, the Islamic system is supported from various angles by religious scholars and theorists and researchers and scholars of the seminaries.

On the other hand, the seminaries cannot remain indifferent. The Qom seminary, especially the Qom seminary, is the mother of this system; it is the creator and generator of this revolution and this great movement. How can a mother remain indifferent to her offspring, to her child, and not defend it when necessary? It is impossible. Therefore, the relationship between the seminaries and the Islamic Republic system is one of mutual support. The system supports the seminaries, and the seminaries support the system; they cooperate and help each other.

There is an issue here that I will also raise; then I will discuss a few other important issues of the seminary, God willing. This issue is the independence of the seminaries. Can the support of the Islamic system for the seminaries undermine or harm the independence of the seminaries or not? Is this permissible or not? This is an important discussion. Firstly, the seminaries have always been independent throughout history; not only during the reigns of governments opposed to Shi'ism but even during the reigns of Shi'ite governments. That is, at the time when the Safavids came to power and great scholars like Mohaghegh Karki and the father of Sheikh Baha'i and many other great figures came to Iran and held various religious positions, these scholars and their students were never subjugated by the Safavid politics nor were they under their control. Yes, they cooperated, they collaborated, they praised and honored them; but they were not in their grasp, they were not at their disposal. In part of the Qajar period, it was the same. Kashif al-Ghita (may God be pleased with him), that great scholar, came to Iran and wrote the book "Kashf al-Ghita". In this book - both in the introduction and in the discussion of jihad concerning the wars between Russia and Iran - he praises Fath Ali Shah greatly; but Kashif al-Ghita was not someone who would be in the grip of Fath Ali Shah and such figures; they were independent. Mirza Qummi was respected and honored in his home in Qom by the king of his time; but he did not yield to his demands. They insisted that Mirza issue a fatwa for them to be able to wage jihad on his behalf - I believe this topic is also mentioned in "Jami al-Shatat" - but he did not yield and did not accept. The Shi'ite clergy has always been like this, always independent; they have never been under the control of powers; today it is the same, and it must remain so, and with God's grace, it will remain so.

However, here too, be careful that another fallacy does not arise; independence of the seminaries should not be interpreted as the lack of support from the system for the seminary and the seminary for the system; some want this. Some want to cut off the relationship between the seminary and the system in the name of independence; this cannot happen. Dependency is different from support, different from cooperation. The system owes the seminaries; it must help the seminaries. Of course, the livelihood of the students must traditionally and meaningfully be managed by the people; the people should come and pay their religious dues; this is my belief.

The more one delves into this ancient custom and tradition that has perhaps been prevalent in our seminaries for a hundred or a hundred and fifty years, the more important, meaningful, and mysterious it becomes. The secret of the strong relationship between the people and the seminaries is that they feel a kinship. The people do not expect much from the clergy, but they consider themselves committed to financially supporting the seminaries and the clergy; and this is correct.

However, the issues of the seminaries are not just about livelihood. There are costs in the seminaries that can only be realized with the help of the public treasury of Muslims and the assistance of governments. Governments are obliged to pay these costs, and they should not interfere. Many important schools in various cities have been built by the orders of princes and kings and great figures. In Mashhad, three schools were built next to each other - the Nobavieh School, the Baqiriyah School, and the Haj Hassan School - all three were built during the time of one of the Safavid kings or at his order or at the order of his princes; this is not a problem. The Baqiriyah School was the place of teaching of Mohaghegh Sabzevari - Mulla Muhammad Baqir Sabzevari, the author of "Zakhira" and "Kifayah" - built by them; this is not a problem. They must spend, but they should not interfere. The seminary accepts various supports from the system with dignity and self-respect. The supports that the system provides to the seminaries today and must continue to provide and should increase, are duties that it has. It is not just material support. Today, thanks be to God, the most important and general national platforms are at the disposal of the scholars of the seminaries, at the disposal of the great religious authorities; these are supports, these are the supports of the system. The Islamic system must provide these supports, due to the bond that has been mentioned. Therefore, the issue of interference and independence should not be mixed with the realities that exist in this regard.

The truth is that these two great currents - that is, the current of the Islamic system and within it, the current of the seminaries - are two currents that are interconnected, that are connected, their destinies are one; everyone should know this. Today, the fate of the clergy and the fate of Islam in this land are intertwined with the fate of the Islamic system. If the Islamic system suffers even a slight blow, certainly the loss for the clergy and the people of religion and the religious scholars will be greater than for all other people. Of course, the system is alive, the system is standing, the system is strong, and I can confidently say that the system will overcome and triumph over all the challenges it faces.

Another important issue that is raised and needs to be clearly discussed is the issue of transformation in the seminaries. For several years, the issue of transformation in the seminaries, especially in the blessed Qom seminary, has been raised. What does transformation mean? What does the seminary want to do that it can be called transformation? If we consider transformation to mean changing the main lines of the seminaries - such as changing the method of ijtihad - this is certainly a deviation. It is transformation, but transformation towards decline. The method of ijtihad that is currently prevalent in the seminaries and upon which the religious scholars rely is one of the strongest and most logical methods of ijtihad; ijtihad based on certainty and knowledge, relying on revelation; that is, it is free from conjecture, and our deductions are scientific and certain. Even the validity of the practical principles we use in jurisprudence must be certain and definitive. As long as we do not establish the validity of this practical principle - whether it is istihsān or istishāb or ishtighāl, each in its own context - we cannot use this principle. Therefore, either directly or indirectly, all our methods of deduction in jurisprudence ultimately lead to certainty and conviction.

Ijtihad in Shi'ism does not mean relying on unreliable conjectures; this is what our predecessors referred to as ijtihad by opinion, ijtihad based on unreliable conjectures, such as qiyas, istihsan, and the like; they wrote books; "The Refutation of the Companions of Ijtihad in Judgments". Ismail ibn Abu Sahl Noubakhti, Sayyid Murtadha in "Darī'ah", Sheikh in "Iddat al-Usul" and others have rejected this ijtihad based on unreliable conjectures. This ijtihad is rejected. Today, under any name, those who turn to such ijtihads are rejected. The fact that the world does not accept this from us, this jurisprudential statement has no market in the world, or they may say this explicitly or not, but in their hearts, they may harbor this and lead to a wrong deduction; this is rejected. Unfortunately, in some cases, it has been seen that in order to comply with the norms of the civilized world - which is predominantly materialistic - alterations have been made in the deduction of religious rulings! Even worse, sometimes in order to appease the materialistic powers - not just the prevalent materialistic norms of the world, but the norms of materialistic and arrogant powers - it has been ruled that the peaceful nuclear efforts of the Islamic Republic are prohibited because they provoke the suspicions of great powers! Well, they are wrong to have suspicions.

If ijtihad is conducted with its correct and proper method, which relies on the Book and the Sunnah, and with that reasonable, correct, logical, and well-thought-out method, it is very good. Ijtihads, even if they yield different results, lead to growth, lead to progress. Our mujtahids, our jurists throughout the history of our jurisprudence have expressed different opinions on various issues. A student has spoken against the opinion of his teacher, and another student has spoken against his opinion; this is not a problem; this leads to growth and progress. This ijtihad must be strengthened in the seminary. Ijtihad is not specific to jurisprudence; in rational sciences, in philosophy, in theology, the ijtihad of those who are proficient in these fields is necessary. If this ijtihad does not exist, we will become stagnant water.

Today, the seminary must not be absent in various philosophical, jurisprudential, and theological arenas in the world. There are so many questions in the world and in various issues; what is the seminary's response? It must not be absent, nor must it be passive; both are detrimental. New thoughts are necessary, responses to the new needs that arise like a flood in the world must be prepared by you. Your response must be attentive to this need, and also attentive to the responses that various schools and sects provide. If you are unaware of their responses, your response cannot fulfill its purpose. Strong, logical, and convincing responses must be presented. Responses must be presented in the world. The export of Qom - as we mentioned, this is the heart of knowledge in the Islamic world - must be pumped out. Today, fortunately, rapid communication means are available to everyone. You can take action here, and on the other side of the world, they can hear from you and benefit from you at the same hour.

In various fields, there is a need today; both for the Islamic system, at the level of the country, and at the global level. The elucidation of Islamic epistemology, Islamic economic and political thought, the jurisprudential and legal concepts that form the foundations of that economic and political thought, the educational system, moral and spiritual concepts, etc., all of these must be prepared accurately, scientifically, convincingly, and in accordance with the prevailing thoughts of the world; this is the work of the seminaries. With ijtihad, this work is practical. If we do not do this work, we have helped to eliminate religion from the scene of human life; we have helped to isolate the clergy. This is the meaning of transformation. This new ijtihad movement is the basis of transformation.

Now, in other areas, I will also explain what transformation is, what is not transformation; or better put, what transformation is correct, what transformation is incorrect. My constant message has been and remains - I have previously raised this in multiple sessions with the scholars of the seminary - that transformation and change is an inevitable matter; it happens. Today, there are no gates and walls around various professional and national groups; however, this transformation and change must either be managed, guided, or we let it go. If we let it go, we will lose. The great figures of the seminary, the religious authorities, thinkers, scholars, and scholars must roll up their sleeves, strive, and plan this transformation, guide it, and manage it. Therefore, the fundamental meaning of transformation is: a new content-driven movement.

There may be a wrong meaning of transformation that is intended and understood, which must certainly be avoided. Transformation does not mean abandoning the very effective traditional methods of the seminary in teaching and learning and converting these methods into the contemporary university methods; such transformation and change is wrong upon wrong; this is regression.

Today, our various traditional methods are being recognized in the world; some either out of imitation or innovation are adopting these methods. Should we bring our university methods, which are derived and copied from old Western methods, and impose them in the seminary? No, we do not consider this transformation. If such a change occurs, it will certainly be retrogression; we do not accept this. We have very good methods in the seminary, which have been traditionally practiced; the method of freely choosing a teacher by the student. When a student enters the seminary, he searches for the teacher he accepts and likes, and goes to his class. The essence of studying in the seminary is thinking, reflecting, and studying, not memorizing. Memorization is what has become a plague in our new education and training, and we have been struggling against it for a long time, and it has not yet been resolved and must be resolved. In the seminary, our traditional basis is based on thinking. When a student studies, he first prepares himself in advance, readying his mind to hear new words from the teacher. After the class, he discusses that lesson with a colleague or friend; once he teaches it to him, and once he learns from him; thus, it becomes ingrained in his mind. In some seminaries like Najaf, it was common for a student to summarize the lesson of the teacher after the class - this was less common or rare in Qom - a knowledgeable student would sit after the teacher's lesson and repeat the same lesson for some students who needed it. See how much this practice impacts the depth of knowledge and understanding of the student and scholar. These traditions should not be lost; it would be a shame.

Respect for the teacher is also an issue. One of the prevalent traditions in the seminaries is the humility of the student towards the teacher; respect for the teacher. "The Etiquettes of Learners" would be written, which outlines the duties of the learner towards the teacher and the rights of the teacher over him; just as conversely, the learner has rights over the teacher. The teacher should not just come and go; the student would listen to and engage with the teacher. These have been customary for a long time. In our time, some great figures were, and still are; after class, the student would accompany the teacher home; they would discuss, talk, and ask questions. Gatherings, scholarly gatherings; research sessions and Q&A; these are good traditions of our seminary. Others want to learn these from us; should we convert these into the methods of others that are outdated and old? Therefore, these traditions must remain and be strengthened. Transformation does not mean changing these.

One of the things that is absolutely necessary for positive transformation is that we align our efforts and scholarly activities with the needs. There are certain things that our people need, and they seek answers from us; we must provide them. There are also things that the people do not need; much work has been done, much effort has been made; we should not occupy ourselves with them. These are very fundamental and important issues.

We ask universities to align their activities with the needs of society. When we encounter universities, professors, and students, we repeatedly ask them; we say, align your scientific fields with the needs of society, see what we need. This is even more applicable to the seminaries.

The next issue is the behavioral and ethical system of the seminaries; that if any transformation occurs, it must also be attentive to this aspect. There are several headings in this regard that I have noted here: honoring teachers. Our behavioral and ethical system in the seminaries must move in this direction; honoring the teacher, honoring the virtuous elements, especially honoring the religious authorities. Not everyone easily reaches the level of the great religious authorities; many qualifications are required. Generally, the religious authorities are considered the peaks of the scholarly seminaries. Therefore, respect for the authorities must be preserved; they must be honored.

Another issue in the behavioral and ethical system of the seminaries is benefiting from spirituality, purification; this is very important. Today's youth in the seminary need purification more than ever. Those who study and work in general behavioral sciences confirm this. Today, in all the world, the material situation and material pressures make the youth impatient; they make the youth depressed. In such a situation, the remedy for the youth, attention to spirituality and ethics. The reason you see false mysticism growing and some people turning to it is the same; there is a need. Our youth in the seminary - young students; whether male or female - need purification. We have peaks of purification. In Qom, the late Haj Mirza Jawad Aqa Maleki, the late Allameh Tabatabai, the late Aqa Bejhat, the late Aqa Bahai (may God be pleased with them) were peaks of purification in the seminary. Their behavior, their life stories, their words are among the most healing things that can calm a person; give peace to a person, illuminate hearts. In Najaf, there were great figures; the chain of students from the late Akhund Mullah Hossein Quli to the late Aqa Qazi and others; these are the distinguished ones. We do not care about the various intellectual and mystical schools of these figures. Here, the issue is not theoretical. Some had different intellectual schools. The late Sayyid Murtadha Kashmiri (may God be pleased with him) was one of the teachers of the late Haj Mirza Ali Aqa Qazi; but the intellectual school of these figures is completely different. He strongly forbids having a certain book; he loves that book; this is not contradictory. The same great figures who were in Mashhad were people we recognized for their piety and purity; the late Haj Mirza Jawad Aqa Tehrani, the late Haj Sheikh Mojtaba and others; they are the same. The main issue is that this tarnished heart needs a spiritual tongue, a word that arises from the heart to heal and remove this tarnish. Therefore, we do not have a discussion about theoretical mysticism here.

Another issue in the behavioral and ethical system of the seminaries is the revolutionary tendencies and sentiments in the seminary. My dear ones! The revolutionary atmosphere in the country has malicious enemies, has vengeful enemies. They oppose the establishment of a revolutionary atmosphere in the country; they want to break this atmosphere. You saw that at one time, they questioned martyrdom, questioned jihad, questioned the martyr, questioned the opinions of the Imam! The issue is not that a certain individual opposes these concepts; the issue is that this opposition must be raised in society according to the enemy; it must be publicized and the revolutionary atmosphere must be broken. In the seminary, everyone must pay attention to this issue. This is the case in society, and naturally, it is the same in the seminaries. They know that you, the clergy, are not just individuals; you have listeners, you have followers; therefore, you influence your surrounding environment. They want to break the revolutionary atmosphere, isolate the revolutionary clergy. Disrespecting the Basij, disrespecting the martyr, disrespecting martyrdom, if God forbid, at any time, there is disrespect towards some of the sanctities of the seminary, towards some of the great figures of the seminary, towards some of the authorities, this is certainly deviation, this is wrong. The essence of being revolutionary is not this. A revolutionary must be insightful, must be perceptive, must understand the complexities of the conditions of the time. The issue is not so simple that we can reject one, affirm another, accept one; it does not work like that. You must be precise, you must maintain your revolutionary zeal, you must cope with difficulties, you must not turn away from the taunts and criticisms of others, but you must not be naive either; be careful. Do not lose hope, stay in the arena; but be cautious and vigilant that the behavior of some individuals whom you think deserve criticism does not anger you, does not make you lose your temper. Rational and logical behavior is a necessary thing. Of course, we should also advise that revolutionary forces should not be accused of extremism; some like to do this. The revolutionary element, the revolutionary youth, the revolutionary student, the revolutionary scholar, the revolutionary teacher at any level should not be accused of extremism; no, this is also a deviation that is carried out by the enemy; it is clear. So, neither from that side, nor from this side.

Well, these were the issues related to transformation. Now let me ask you: Can this complex, extensive, and comprehensive transformation occur without cohesive management? This is the same thing that we discussed several years ago in this seminary with those who are now among the great authorities and were part of the community of teachers at that time, some have passed away - may God's mercy and pleasure be upon them - we discussed and they accepted. The management and administration of the seminary by a centralized group that is approved by the authorities and the great figures and is knowledgeable in the issues of the seminary is a necessary and unavoidable thing; it cannot happen without this. This complex and important comprehensive work cannot be accomplished without strong management.

I will mention two more points and conclude my remarks. Our session has taken a long time. I apologize to you, brothers and sisters, that despite the fact that this space is very wide, you are sitting densely and tightly; as well as the brothers or sisters who are outside, sitting in the courtyard or in the prayer halls of the Grand Mosque.

One issue is the issue of the philosophy lesson and the field of philosophy. Pay attention; the importance of jurisprudence and the greatness of jurisprudence should not make us oblivious to the importance of the philosophy lesson and the field of philosophy and the science of philosophy; each of these has responsibilities. The field of jurisprudence has responsibilities, and philosophy also has great responsibilities. The banner of Islamic philosophy has been in the hands of the seminaries and must remain there. If you lay down this banner, others who may not have the necessary qualifications will pick it up; the teaching of philosophy and the science of philosophy will fall into the hands of those who may not have the necessary qualifications for it. Today, if our system and society are deprived of philosophy, they will remain naked and defenseless against these various imported philosophies; they will be left vulnerable. What can answer you is often not jurisprudence; it is rational sciences; philosophy and theology. These are necessary. In the seminary, these are important fields. Another important field is interpretation; familiarity with the Quran, Quranic knowledge. We must not be deprived of interpretation. The lesson of interpretation is important, the lesson of philosophy is important; these are very valuable fields.

The last point is about the phenomenon of female students; it is a very great and blessed phenomenon. Thousands of scholars, researchers, jurists, and philosophers will be trained in the seminaries of female students; what a great movement this will be. See how the materialistic world views the phenomenon of women and the female gender with disdain, with a degrading gaze, with a deviant perspective. The presence of Islamic female scholars in various fields - like the presence of wise and understanding female university scholars who are religious and committed - will have very great effects in the world; it will bring honor to the revolution. Women must study well. Of course, the ultimate goal of women studying is not just to become a jurist or philosopher - some may have the interest, the talent, the time, while others may not - it is to become familiar with Islamic and Quranic teachings that can be beneficial for themselves and for others.

O Lord! Make what we have said and heard for You and in Your way. O Lord! Grant blessings from Yourself to these words, to these heard words, to this great movement in the seminary. O Lord! Make our work, our speech, our movement subject to the attention and pleasure of the Guardianship. Make the heart of that holy figure pleased with us. May the pure soul of Imam Khomeini (may his soul be sanctified) and the dear martyrs who opened this path be encompassed by Your mercy and blessings.

Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings.