Khomeini Evolution of views In an early work,
Kashf al-Asrar, (
Secrets Revealed, published in the 1940s), Khomeini had made ambiguous statements, arguing that “the state must be administered with the divine law, which defines the interests of the country and the people, and this cannot be achieved without clerical supervision (
nezarat-e rouhanı)”, but had not called for Jurists to rule or for them to replace monarchs – "we do not say that government must be in the hands of the
faqih". Shortly before he died, Khomeini gave perhaps his strongest statement about the power of the wilayat al-faqih in a letter to Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei (later the second
Supreme Leader of Iran: The government or the absolute guardianship (
al-wilayat al-mutlaqa) that is delegated to the noblest messenger of Allah is the most important divine law and has priority over all other ordinances of the [divine] law. If the powers of the government were restricted to the framework of ordinances of the law then the delegation of the authority to the Prophet would be a senseless phenomenon. I have to say that government is a branch of the Prophet's absolute Wilayat and one of the primary (first order) rules of Islam that has priority over all ordinances of the law even praying, fasting and Hajj…The Islamic State could prevent implementation of everything – devotional and non- devotional – that so long as it seems against Islam's interests.
Scriptural basis for guardian being ruler Khomeini's arguments While there are no sacred texts of Shia (or Sunni) Islam that include a straightforward statement that the Muslim community should or must be ruled over by Islamic jurists, Khomeini maintained there were "numerous traditions [hadith] that indicate the scholars of Islam are to exercise rule during the Occultation". The first one he offered as proof was a saying addressed to a corrupt, but well-connected judge in early Islam, attributed to the first Imam,
'Ali – • "The seat you are occupying is filled by someone who is a prophet, the legatee of a prophet, or else a sinful wretch" :B) Since trained jurists are neither sinful wretches nor prophets, by process of elimination "we deduce from the tradition" not that Ali is shaming the judge for being a sinful wretch when he should be emulating the virtue and wisdom of the prophet, but that Ali is declaring "that the fuqaha (jurists) are the legatees," • The twelfth Imam had preached that future generations should obey those who knew his teachings since those people were his representatives among the people in the same way as he was God's representative among believers.
The Sound Transmission of Qadah Other supporters have offered more hadith. Ahmed Vaezi cites a narration by Imam
Ja'far al-Sadiq, according to whom Muhammad said: • "The superiority of the learned man over the mere worshipper is like that of the full moon over the stars. Truly the religious scholars (
ulema) are the heirs of the Prophet (pbuh); the prophets bequeathed not gold (
dinar) and silver (
dirham) instead they bequeathed knowledge, and whoever acquires it has indeed acquired a generous portion of their legacy According to Vaezi, the meaning of this is not just that the knowledge the ulema have about Islam is more valuable than precious metals, but that being "the heirs of the Prophet", العلماء ورثة الأنبياء , they have inherited not just his knowledge but "all the attributes and responsibilities that Allah designated for him", including his authority "as the guardian and leader of the
ummah" (Islamic community), which includes the power to rule. and Baqir Sharif al-Qurashi) cites a hadith known as "the maqbulah of ‘Umar ibn Hanzalah", where this Umar asks the 6th Imam (
Ja'far al-Sadiq) whether it is permissible when two Shi‘ah have a dispute over a debt or a legacy to go to a judge or ruler for mediation/arbitration. The Imam replies that the mediator they use should be a Muslim who knows the hadith and rulings of the Shi'i Imams or Infallibles ("a person among you who narrates from us, is versed in the lawful and the unlawful"), i.e. who knows Shi'i fiqh; and that a "ruler or judge" who doesn't have this knowledge is of
taghut ("illegitimate ruling power"). Furthermore, to reject use or ruling of experts in Shi'i fiqh is equivalent to
shirk, i.e. polytheism (a grave sin). • “If there is a person among you who narrates from us, is versed in the lawful and the unlawful, and is well acquainted with our laws and ordinances, accept him as judge [qaḍi] and arbiter, for I have appointed him as a ruler [hakim] over you. So, if he rules according to our law and you reject his ruling, you will belittle Allah’s law and oppose us, and to oppose us means to oppose Allah, and opposing Him is tantamount to associating partners with Him.” Ahmed Vaezi interprets this to mean that the order/hukm of the guardian/wali jurist/faqih "is binding upon all Muslims"—including other faqih and including Muslims outside of the political jurisdiction of the wali (i.e. outside Iran). This is because the wali is a "the just and capable jurist ... appointed as hakim", To those who claim that the hadith is only an order to Shi‘ah not to use the courts of the usurping ‘Abbasid government when they have legal disputes, Misbah Yazdi replies that the hadith says "... I have appointed him as a ruler over you..." translating
hakim as ruler, not judge. (But in another work –
Islamic Political Theory (Legislation): Volume 2 – Mesbah-Yazdi translates
hakim as judge.){{NoteTag|In his
Islamic Political Theory, Mesbah-Yazdi quotes a different translation of the relevant part of the Maqbulah of ‘Umar ibn Hanzalah’ where Imam Jafar talks not about a ruler but a judge: • “…For I appoint him as
judge over you. Anyone who rejects his judgment is as if he belittles the judgment of Allah and rejects us, and anyone who rejects us is as if he rejects Allah, and rejection of Him is tantamount to associating partners with Him.” and in another chapter of his book he also claims, "the faqih enjoys all the prerogatives which the infallible Imam (‘a) as the holder of authority of the Islamic society has."
Arguments of Taqi Yazdi and Ahmed Vaezi Clerics connected to the Islamic Republic — Ayatollah,
Muhammad Taqi Misbah Yazdi (1935–2021) and Iranian Shi'i cleric and academic
Ahmed Vaezi (b. 1963) — have also defended Khomeini's theory of government by the Faqih and the principle of the universal and absolute guardianship of the Guardian Faqih. (Misbah Yazdi in particular was “perhaps the most prominent and vocal proponent of absolute velayat-e faghih [faqih]" and that the vali-e faghi ruler possesses "all the prerogatives" of the infallible Imam (‘a) "as the holder of authority of the Islamic society".) At least as of the early 21st century, their defenses of Khomeini's concept tended to be replies to criticisms. Misbah Yazdi (in his work,
A Cursory Glance at the Theory of Wilayat al-Faqih), emphasizes the many dangers to defend against, warning the faithful of: "intellectual and ideological threats", “satanic hands" and "propaganda" spreading "incorrect" and "groundless" thoughts", In addition, there is the danger of the influence of "the prevailing intellectual atmosphere",
Defenses Some of the criticism of Wilayat al-Faqih that they reply to, include: • that there is no straightforward statement in scripture that faqih clerics should rule over the people. Those concerned over whether Islam supports the concept of wilayat al-faqih, should note that (according to Mesbah Yazdi), the "overwhelmingly dominant opinion" of Shi'ah jurisprudents, (based on "the available views and opinions") is that "a duly competent jurist" (who is "appointed according to the general descriptions ... that the Imam has set") should rule over the people during the occultation of the Imam. Unfortunately, preventing a consensus among jurisprudents on this point are "one or two" contemporary Shi'ah jurists, who insist that for a government to be legitimate, it must be "decided by the people". In addition there are two "Intellectual proofs" (using reason rather than scripture) substantiating wilayat al-faqih: Proof #1 • Everyone needs a government for order and welfare; • the best government is that run by the infallible imam; • since we can't have that at present, we need one resembling it as much as possible; • rule by the Islamic jurist provides that, since the jurist provides "absolute immunity from any kind of corruption, error, sin, selfishness", and "comprehensive and perfect insight and competence in social conditions". Proof #2 • God possesses the exclusive "right to exercise authority over the properties, honor and lives of the people", • a right he bestowed first on "the Holy Prophet (S)" Muhammad and then on
the infallibles; • these are now gone, but God couldn't have "abandoned His purpose", namely, "man’s attainment of bliss and perfection", the reason sharia was created; • so he must have "given permission to the most appropriate person to implement them"; • and that person is a "competent jurist" who possesses fear of God and "expertise in governing society and ensuring its welfare". This also explains why giving a faqih general powers over the public does not put sane adults in the same category as minors and those without the power of reason. The powers of God, Muhammad and the Imams were total, despite the fact their subjects possessed maturity (
bulugh) and ability to reason (
ʿaql). (and so outside the bounds of understanding from individual study). • that in Shi'a Islam, all believers already have a religious scholar to provide them with guidance—the "source of emulation (
maraji‘ at-taqlid)" that each Shi'i chooses (as of 2022 there were
several dozen to choose from, mostly located in Iraq and Iran), and they were not punished by the state if they failed to obey their source. Why do they then need a wilayat? And what happens when he disagrees with a marja'? (there have been differences of opinion between the Supreme leader and other Marjas over issues such as the permissibility in Islam of chess playing, listening to music, or whether to continue fighting a war with Iraq, presenting challenges for the velayat-e faqih system in Iran.) Will the wilayat supersede the marja'? Mesbah Yazdi and Ahmed Vaezi claim that the
maraji‘ at-taqlid and
wilayat al-faqih have two different roles. One gives
fatwa; the other decrees (
hukm). answering religious questions on practical matters in Islam by making deductions from their religious knowledge; and the other (wilayat) enacts and implements laws and regulations, not only contradicts "Khomeini's previous promises but also the norms of the sacred law" (
Freedom Movement of Iran of
Mehdi Bazargan). :About nine years after its founding, a "stalemate" developed within the Islamic Government between Islamic radicals trying to push through "controversial items of social and economic legislation" (labor laws, income tax), Similarly, Ahmed Vaezi states that commands to reverse sacred law are only temporary commands applicable when some "significant damage, distress and constriction or disorder" occurs; ‘first order’ laws (
al-ahkam al-awaly) remain intact. He explains that under the "revolutionary view" of Ayatollah Khomeini, "Shari’ah … is not the ultimate goal". Islamic laws are only a means to an end, "the protection of Islam and the extension of Justice". For Khomeini "the Islamic State is not merely one part of Islam amongst others, but it is Islam itself". — after Khomeini died the
Assembly of Experts amended the constitution to remove scholarly seniority from the qualifications of the leader, accommodating the appointment of a "mid-ranking" but loyal cleric (
Ali Khamenei), to be Leader. • that the people deserve to choose who rules over them; Mesbah Yazdi argues that it is a common misconception to hold that in order to have legitimacy, government must represent the people. Since "the entire universe and whatever is in it belongs to God", humans have no more right to choose/elect someone to rule themselves, than they would have to take someone else's property ("house, car, shoes, clothes, etc.") and use it without that person's permission. This does not mean the people do not have a vital role to play in the system of wilayat al-faqih, for by their acceptance of Islamic government, the people secure the actual establishment and stability of divine government. • that Absolute Guardianship of the jurist may lead to, has led to, or will lead to despotic government or dictatorship; Mesbah-Yazdi raises this doubt, Because of the corruption of power, if you "want your religion to remain safe and the Qur’an and Islam be respected" you must keep "religion away from the political scene. Just as you would use professors of mathematics to select the best professor of mathematics, so you use experts on the subject of
fiqh—and not public opinion—to pick the best expert on fiqh. Mesbah Yazdi wrote that ''
bay'ah'' (oath of allegiance) is only "a means of expressing readiness to assist and cooperate" with the leader, and "has nothing to do with giving legitimacy and granting the right" to rule over them. • Currently there is a "problem of circularity" in selecting a Guardian Jurist/Supreme Leader in the Islamic Republic, preventing the people of Iran from having input in choosing Iran's most powerful official Misbah Yazdi defends the allegedly circular selection process of the
Guardian Council,
Assembly of Experts, Supreme Leader by noting it is "stipulated in the Constitution" or Iran, that the approval of candidates for the Council of Guardians is the "prerogative" of wali al-faqih's (who as previously demonstrated is God's ruler). He further points out that in all modern so-called democracies there is always a first election to vote members of some body of representatives (such as a constitutional assembly to write a constitution) and that body comes "into existence as a result of an election based on a certain set of rules and regulations" which were
not "enacted and approved by any popularly-elected cabinet and parliament" (such as who gets to vote—how old do they must be, whether only men can vote, etc.; who gets to be elected to the body, voting system—first past the post, ranked choice, proportional representation, etc..) because it's the first election! But this "is nothing but the circular relationship to which we have referred at the beginning". So we see that (according to Mesbah Yazdi) just because there is "circularity" in the
wilayat al-faqih system should not disqualify it; otherwise, we would "have to reject all the past, present and future democratic governments and systems in the world." But despite his confidence in the support of the people for rule by Sharia via jurists, in public proclamations "during the revolution" and before the overthrow of the monarchy, Khomeini made "no mention" of
velayat-e faqih. It is a complaint that some continue to make. The goals of ending poverty, corruption, national debt, or compelling un-Islamic government to capitulate before the Islamic government's armies, have not been met; nor have even more modest and basic goals like downsizing the government bureaucracy, using only senior religious jurists or [marja]s for the post of faqih guardian/
Supreme Leader,
Opposition among scholars to guardian as ruler According to Olivier Roy, at the time Khomeini was consolidating power in Iran, According to Ali Mamouri, writing in 2013, the Islamic Republic of Iran, "has never been able to establish a stable and harmonious relationship between the Shiite seminaries of Qom and
Najaf". "Most" of the "spiritual references", aka marjaʿ, in
Qom (at least in 2013) do not supporting the regime's position on velayat-e faqih, even though it has led to a number of them being placed under house arrest and barred "from expressing their views and ideas or continuing their teaching and religious duties". and a large segment of the clerical Shia community in general does not accept the theory of velayat-e-faqih and believes the clergy should stay away from politics. The majority of Shi'a accepted the late Grand Ayatollah
Seyyed Hossein Borujerdi (1875–1961) as their Marja' al Taqlid (source of emulation), including his student, Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini. Throughout his life, Borujerdi, who was a quietist and therefore refrained from taking political stances, forbid his student Khomeini from engaging in non-religious matters. It was only after Borujerdi's death that Khomeini published his first political and social treatise in which he explicitly called for active participation in political matters. Regarding Guardianship, several senior faqih have written on the exclusivity of the authority of the Imams, the limits of the authority of faqih, and the dangers to faqih and to Islam of the corruption of power.
Persecution of Islamic scholars In his 1970 lectures and book on Islamic Government, Khomeini took time to express his outrage at clerics who had supported his enemy, the shah of Iran, and exasperation that they had not been "stripped of their turbans": "Those persons are not Muslim
fuqaha [Islamic legal scholars], they are people whom SAVAK [the shah's Iranian security service] has issued a turban and told to pray"; and stated that "our youth must strip them of their turbans. I am not saying they should be killed ... But take off their turbans!". After the revolution a
Special Clerical Court was established in the Islamic Republic for prosecuting Islamic
clerics and scholars, and punishing them by
defrocking and
disbaring, giving sentences of imprisonment, corporal punishment, execution, etc. The court system eventually evolved into an apparatus with its own security and prison systems, and many features unique from the rest of Iran's courts (direct control by the Supreme Leader rather than the
judiciary system of the Islamic Republic as per the
Constitution of Iran, trials that are not open to the public and do not allow the accused to choose their own defense counsel, and whose verdict cannot be appealed to the
Supreme Court of Iran, as per the
Constitution of Iran, etc.). It has been suggested (by scholar Mirjam Künkler) that the courts existence, size and scope can be explained by the unique problem that dissident clerics pose for the principle of
velāyat-e faqih — that non-clerical opposition forces lacking religious cachet and knowledge of the intricacies Islamic law would not. "Dissident theologians who prove the extent to which the velāyat-e faqih is inconsistent with Shiʿi traditions and the extent to which it is a theological novelty whose primary function is to justify the exercise of authoritarian rule", are a danger to the Guardian ruler.
Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid Unlike Sunnis who believe in appointment of the Islamic Caliph through Ijm'a or Shura, Imamiyya Shia say that the Imam and the legitimate Caliph of the Islamic nation must only be appointed by God; that appointment may be known through the declaration of Muhammad or the preceding Imam. Corresponding to the godly decree of Quran in the following holy verses: Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will appoint a Caliph on earth." [2:30] Thy Lord does create and choose as He pleases: no choice they do have. [28:68] Divine authority to rule an Islamic State, traditional Shia believe, is vested exclusively with the
Infallible Imams of Ahlulbayt, making no exceptions for rule by jurists in their absence. In the words of
Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid: سلطان الإسلام المنصوب من قبل الله تعالى، وهم أئمة الهدى من آل محمد عليهم السلام “The Islamic Ruler is he who is appointed divinely by the Almighty Allah and they are the Imams of Guidance from the Progeny of Muhammad, peace be upon them all.”
Al-Sistani One of the most senior scholars in Shia Islam, reportedly the leading
Marja' in
Najaf and a former student of Ayatollah
Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei is
Ali al-Husayni al-Sistani. Perhaps because of his considerable influence, sources disagree on his stand on Wilayat al-Faqih. Al-Sistani has inserted himself in post-2003 invasion Iraqi crisises several times—issuing a call for Iraqis to take up arms and push back
Da'ish (Islamic State), pressuring the United States to hold elections sooner than it wanted, demanding Iraqi political leaders push ahead with anti-corruption reforms in 2015—but sees himself as a unifier, above politics and has had no "role in executive or administrative arms of the state". The Ahl Bayt Islamic Mission, which warns of that "the West-based campaign ... to disrupt Islamic unity, ... and separate Iraq from even the bare idea of Islamic Revolution", preventing it from and following the model of "the Islamic Revolution of Iran", has "for decades ... manipulated the Shi’i public opinion ... and "spread false notions like ... the existence of a quietist and apolitical tradition of Shi’ism among the jurists"; emphasizes al-Sistani opposes secularism, and maintains that his position is close to the Iranian doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih. Other sources (Hayder Al-Khoei), insist that "al-Sistani, like the vast majority of Shia clerics based in the city of Najaf, is well-known for his opposition to Wilayat al-Faqih", despite the efforts of "many pro-Iran propaganda campaigns" in that holy city. Guardianship of the Islamic Juristmeans every jurisprudent (Faqih) has guardianship (
wilayah) over non-litigious affairs. Non-litigious affairs are technically called
al-omour al-hesbiah. As for general affairs with which social order is linked,
wilayah of a Faqih and enforcement of
wilayah depend on certain conditions one of which is popularity of acceptability of Faqih among majority of faithful (
momeneen). Notwithstanding his "indirect but decisive role" in most major Iraqi political decisions, Grand Ayatollah
Ali Sistani has often been identified with the
quietist school of thought, which seeks to keep religion out of the political sphere until the return of the
Imam of the Age (the
Mahdi). He has "explicitly called for a 'civil state' in Iraq rather than a religious state".
Al-Sistani's argument al-Sistani in his own advanced lectures of
dars al-kharij (i.e. the highest level of theological education related to jurisprudence in the form of lectures, beyond the limited boundaries of textbooks) in the Shi'i seminary of Najaf summing up his opinion regarding Wilayat al-Faqih stated:فليس الطاغوت عبارة عن السلاطين و الأمراء كما قيل, إذ لم يكن في زمن النبي (ص) في جزيرة العرب سلطان و أمير حتى يقال بأنه القدر المتيقن منه من يحكم بالجور او ما ينسب إليه الحكم كالأصنام, مضافا إلى انه لم يكن للطاغوط قوة تنفيذية "al-Taghut (a term that is specifically used to denounce everything that is worshiped instead or besides Allah) is not an expression concerning kings or governors as stated by some (i.e. Khomeini),
since kings and governors did not exist during the times of the Apostle until it can be said to the extent of certainty that they are addressed as Taghut, in fact certainly
Taghut is who is unjust in passing judgement or to whom the judgement is attributed like the idols, moreover Taghut back in time did not have the power of enforcement." He further added:ان مستفاد من بعض الروايات هو دخالة الإنتخاب في المسألة, فلا بد أن يكون القاضي منتخباً من المسلمين, و ذلك لقوله (ع): في مقبولة عمر بن حنظلة, و على هذا الاحتمال لا بد ا أن يكون المتصدي لهذه الأمور ممثلا للمسلمين "It is deduced from some narrations, the involvement of election in this issue; so the Qadhi (i.e.
well-qualified jurist exercising authority as a Judge) must be elected by muslims and this is in accordance to the saying of the Imam "appoint among yourselves" in the acceptable report of Omar bin Hanzalah, based on this prospect he must be addressing the affairs representing muslims (
as a judge)."As his concluding remark on the subject al-Sistani said:فتحصل مما ذكرنا: ان الأدلة غير وافية و الإجماع مخدوش, و الدليل العقلي يناقش فيه بما ذكر و غير ما ذكر, و لا بد للمثبت من دفع جميع الشبهات,و أني له ذلك, لعل لأجل دقة الموقف قال المحقق النائني و المحقق الإصفهاني: (فيه تزلزل عظيم) و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد آله الطاهرين. "The proofs are insufficient, the scholarly consensus is depleted, the rational proof is disputative between what's been mentioned and what's not. The verifier must repel all the suspicions (surrounding the scriptural and rational speculations on topic) and how can he do that? Perhaps, due to the delicacy of the situation
muhaqqiq al-Naini and
muhaqqiq al-Isfahani have stated - There is extreme quake (uncertainty) about wilayat al-faqih! [''fiihe tazalzalun 'aziim''] - May blessings of Allah be upon our master Muhammad and his pure Progeny"According to Sistani's official website, unlike Khamenei he is skeptical of inflicting physical harm for the purpose of enjoining good and forbidding evil with certain established legal exceptions and subscribes to the traditional view on declaring Jihad being only the prerogative of the Infallible Imam or his direct representative (naib al-khaas).
Al-Khoei Similarly, Sistani's mentor the late
Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Abul Qasim al-Musawi al-Khoei (1899–1992), (also transliterated Khuʾi) the leading Shia ayatollah at the time Khomeini's book on his theory of Wilayat al-Faqih was published, rejected Khomeini's argument on the grounds that • The authority of faqih — is limited to the guardianship of widows and orphans — could not be extended by human beings to the political sphere. Al-Khoei is deemed to be one of the most vocal modern day jurists against the innate nature of Wilayat al-Faqih. In contrasting one-sentence mottos, Khomeini, preached that “only a good society can create good believers”, while Khoei, who championed the theory of a “civil state”, argued “only good men can create a good society.” Al-Khoei restricted the scope of Wilayat al-Faqih to the jurist's authority in terms of
wakalah (i.e. protection, delegation, or authorization often agreed to in a legal contract) alone while dismissing the notion of the jurist inheriting the intrinsic authority to rule of the Infallibles (Imams). Al-Khoei wrote: إن الولاية لم تثبت للفقيه في عصر الغيبة بدليل، وإنما هي مختصة بالنبي والأئمة المعصومين (عليهم السلام)، بل الثابت حسبما يستفاد من الروايات أمران: نفوذ قضائه، وحجّية فتواه. وليس له التصرف في أموال القصّر أو غير ذلك مما هو من شؤون الولاية، إلاّ في الأمر الحسبي، فإن الفقيه له الولاية في ذلك لا بالمعنى المدعى “Wilayah for the faqih in the age of ghaybah [occultation, i.e. from 939 CE until the coming of the Mahdi] is not approved by any evidence whatsoever'' – and it's only the prerogative of the Messenger and the Imams peace be upon them all, rather the established fact according to the narrations lies in two affairs: 1. him exercising the role of a judge and 2. his fatwa being a proof – and he holds no authority over the property of a child or others which is from the affairs of wilayah
except in the hisbi sense (wakalah), i.e. the faqih holds wilayah in this sense not in the sense of being the claimant (al mudda'ee'').” Furthermore, al-Khoei elaborates on the role of a well-qualified Islamic Jurist in the age of occultation of the Infallible Imam which has been traditionally endorsed by the Shia scholarship as follows: أما الولاية على الأمور الحسبية كحفظ أموال الغائب واليتيم إذا لم يكن من يتصدى لحفظها كالولي أو نحوه، فهي ثابتة للفقيه الجامع للشرائط وكذا الموقوفات التي ليس لها متولي من قبل الواقف والمرافعات، فإن فصل الخصومة فيها بيد الفقيه وأمثال ذلك، وأما الزائد على ذلك فالمشهور بين الفقهاء على عدم الثبوت، والله العال "As for wilayah (guardianship) of
omour al-hesbiah (non-litigious affairs) such as the maintenance of properties of the missing and the orphans, if they are not addressed to preservation by a wali (guardian) or so, it is proven for the faqih ''jame'a li-sharaet
and likewise waqf properties that do not have a mutawalli (trustee) on behalf of waqif (donor of waqf) and continuance pleadings, the judgement regarding litigation is in his hand and similar authorities, but with regards to the excess of that (guardianship) the most popular (opinion) among the jurists is on absence of its evidence
, Allah knows best."''
Nawishta-e-Akhoond Muhammad Kazim Khurasani (1839–1911), commonly known as
Akhund Khurasani, was a Shi'i
Marja'. based in
Najaf who was the main clerical supporter and legitimizing force for the
Persian Constitutional Revolution, Iran's democratic revolution of 1905–1911. Traditional Shia scholarship has been historically critical with regard to the clergy relinquishing the role of advisory for the State and taking over absolute charge of the State affairs firsthand instead. Khurasani made a set of prudent observations in his famous
Nawishta about the inevitable hazards that will arise owing to the hypothesis proposing clergymen employ religion to legitimize their rule. Some of these predictions are as follows (Persian followed by translation): • چون مردم ما را نایبان امام زمان می دانند انتظار دارند حکومت دینی هم همان شرایط را ایجاد کند و وقتی نتوانیم در آن سطح عدالت را برقرار کنیم نسبت به امام زمان و دین سست عقیده می شون "Since the people consider the clergymen to be deputies of Imam al-Zaman, they will expect the religious government to create an exemplary system (closely matching the one supposed to be established by the Infallible Imam) and when they can not establish justice at that level, the Shia masses will become weak in their faith about Imam al-Zaman and religion." • وقتی روحانیون پا به حکومت بگذارند دیگر نمی توانند عیوب خود را ببینند و توجیه می کنند و فسادها را نادیده میگیرند "When the clergymen will come to power, they could no longer see their faults and justify and ignore corruption." • آمال وآرزوی ما تبعیت حکومت از دین است در حالیکه اگر حکومت را در دست گیریم، به تبعیت دین از حکومت دچار خواهیم شد "The clergy's aspiration is government's obedience to religion, while if the clergymen took over the charge of government, they are more likely to make religion subservient to the government." • اکنون که مناصب حکومتی نداریم ، اینهمه اختلاف نظر وجود دارد . اگر به حکومت برسیم این اختلاف نظر باعث چندپارگی دین و ایجاد فرقه های جدید و آسیب به دین می شود "At the time when clergymen do not have government positions, yet there exists so much disagreement. If they come to power, this disagreement will cause further division in religion and creation of new sects and hence cause damage to religion." • ذات حکومت کردن دروغ گفتن است و نمی شود حکومت با اخلاق داشت . لذا در شان روحانیت نیست که دروغ بگوید و دامن دین را بیالاید "The essence of fallible governance is to spew lies and it is technically impossible to govern morally. Therefore, it is against the moral character of clergymen to lie and thus defame religion."
Muhammad Hussain Naini Muhammad Hussain Naini, an aide to
Akhund Khurasani, argued that while the ideal government is the rule of the divinely inspired and infallible leader of the community of believers, i.e. the Imam, this ideal form of government is unavailable during the occultation. Consequently, the choices available are between "despotic" and "constitutional" government. Despotism being tyranny, it is constitutional government that diverges "least from the ideal government of the Imam", and is "therefore the best type of government during the occultation ==Books==