As far as Imam Khomeyni’s political life is concerned, it is necessary to point out important political events that have had a profound effect on the evolution and development of his political thought and action. Undoubtedly, the most important political event is the Constitutional Movement, in which many scholars and clerics from Iran and Iraq participated.
Constitutionalism which led to the creation of conflicts and the rejection and isolation of the clergy made great social, cultural and psychological effects on society and seminaries. When Imam Khomeyni entered the Islamic Seminary of Qom, though sixteen years had been passed from the Constitutional Movement and ten years had been passed from the last attempt of the Constitutional scholars to lead and establish a constitutional government, still significant attempts were made to narrate the memories of those days and what motivated the religious scholars to take part in that movement, create divisions among clerical leaders, and highlight the political-psychological failures of the clergy in that time; especially because several Imam Khomeyni’s teachers including Akhund Khorasani were prominent students of Constitutionalist clerical leaders. They each recalled pleasant and unpleasant memories of the activities of their teachers, which were very valuable to young seminarians (such as Imam Khomeyni) who were passionate and interested in political issues. Imam Khomeyni’s references to his teachers and their struggles indicate that he not only benefited scientifically from his teachers but also used their political memories and experiences. These experiences along with his studies and contemplations about the Constitutional Movement are reflected in his logical and historical analysis:
“In the Constitutional Movement, these very scholars were at the forefront of the movement which originated and moved forward by scholars in both Najaf and Iran. As much as they wanted the constitutionalist to materialize and the constitution to be in place has found expression. However, after it occurred it was not followed up and people remained neutral and the clerics went after their own business. That way the agents of foreign powers and particularly the British worked to drive them (the clergy) out of the scene either through assassination or propaganda. Their speakers and preachers tried to stop the clergy from interfering in politics and to pass politics to those who were capable in their own words, that is, the Westernized and Easternized forces. They did what we experienced. That is, the name was constitutionalism but, in reality, it was a dark tyranny, being worse than before and definitely worse than the previous period.”
According to Imam Khomeyni, the main reason for the failure of the Constitutional Movement was the lack of the continuous leadership of the clergy in the movement, which resulted in political frustration and withdrawal of people from the political scene and the emergence of new dictators who were affiliated with foreign powers. Thus, Algar’s view can be accepted that “the scholars have often succeeded in achieving immediate political goals. Yet, when it came to making critical decisions in a special situation, they could neither predict the results nor consider future consequences.”
Imam Khomeyni never described historical political events in detail - especially the ones in which he participated – and only made some points to serve as an example. However, making such implicit points showed his true understanding of events in which he did not participate.
Imam Khomeyni’s life in Qom began in 1922. A few years before that year, Ayatollah Sayyed Abolqasem Kashani, one of the main leaders of the 1920 Islamic Revolution of Iraq, who was being pursued by British agents, secretly entered Iran on foot from the western borders of the country and came to Qom via Poshtkuh and Kermanshah and a few days later he left Qom for Tehran. Also, Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammad-Taqi Khansari, who was one of Ayatollah Kashani’s contemporaries, came to Iran after his exile ended and at the request of Ayatollah Haeri began teaching in the seminary of Arak and then the newly established the Islamic Seminary of Qom. As mentioned before, Imam Khomeyni passed some of the preliminary lessons in Ayatollah Khansari’s classes. Imam Khomeyni’s great friendship and connection with as well as the great respect that he had for Ayatollah Khansari, apart from his position as Imam Khomeyni’s teacher, were due to his struggles and revolutionary thinking. Perhaps it was in appreciation of Ayatollah Khansari’s works and personality that Imam Khomeyni used to join the congregational evening prayers led by Ayatollah Khansari in Feyzieh Seminary and that after his death he did not follow anyone else’s leadership in prayer. Also, after Ayatollah Khansari offered FRezay prayers in Qom, Imam Khomeyni was committed to joining the prayer.
Imam Khomeyni arrived in Qom a year and a half after Reza Khan’s coup. Therefore, his political activities, which began at the beginning of his life as a seminarian, coincided with the coup d’état of Reza Khan and his political tricks. Reza Khan’s efforts to strengthen the foundations of power, gain a popular base, create a suitable ground for overthrowing Ahmad Shah and isolate his opponents, especially Modarres, forced him to get closer to the scholars of Qom and show commitment to their views. That is why he pretended to be a Muslim and went to Qom three times. Apparently, he gave up the idea of republicanism on the advice of the scholars of Qom and the exiled scholars of Iraq. On the other hand, Ahmad Shah, who has realized the growing danger of Reza Khan, tried to get closer to the scholars, hence he also went to Qom and met with the scholars of that city.
The frequent trips of countries’ top personalities to Qom, which took place with the intention to gain power, had widely reflected in the small city of Qom, especially in the seminary, automatically informing the seminarians about the most sensitive political events of the country. Hence, one would realize why Imam Khomeyni pointed out that “I have witnessed all the issues from the very beginning, from Reza Khan’s coup until today.”
Before examining the practical position of Imam Khomeyni in this period, it is necessary to refer to the independent event that occurred in the second year of Imam Khomeyni’s arrival in Qom. In that year, some Shi’ah clerics and scholars who had been exiled to Iran due to leading the armed uprising against the British entered Qom and Ayatollah Haeri warmly welcomed them. Among them were Ayatollah Sayyed Abolhasan Esfahani, Mirza Hoseyn Na’ini, Sayyed Mohammad Sadr, Sayyed Hiba al-Darin Shahrestani and Shaykh Mahdi Khalesi. At the request of Ayatollah Haeri, Ayatollah Na’ini and Ayatollah Esfahani during their stay in Qom began teaching in the newly established seminary of the city. Imam Khomeyni, who witnessed the incident, was kept informed about the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and what caused the uprising of the scholars and their exile to Iran. Referring to the deportation of Iraqi scholars he stated in one of his statements:
“Mirza Shirazi, that outstanding personality, that great man who shone both in learning and deeds, rescued the country of Iraq… He issued the order for jihad…The reason why certain scholars in Iraq were sent into exile in Iran was because of their opposition to foreign forces. The late Sayyed Abolhasan (Esfahani), Naini, Shahrestani, and (Shaykh Mahdi) Khalesi were all sent into exile in Iran because they spoke out against these forces and their agents; and I can vouch for this.”
When Reza Khan came to power tyranny and oppressing people were pervading more and more. Opponents were either intimidated or forced to serve him. Only a small number of members of parliament led by Modarres stood up to his crimes and authoritarian actions.
Ayatollah Modarres was as much a favourite and a source of hope for all oppressed people and patriots as he was hated by Reza Khan and his followers in the parliament and outside the parliament. In this unequal struggle, he lacked all the facilities which the enemy (Reza Khan) had in control. He relied solely on the power of his unshakable faith, and this gave him a strong will, power, and decisiveness. How could a person, whose piety and sagacity were acknowledged even by foreigners, might be ignored by a young man like Agha Ruhollah? But he witnessed two conflicting currents among the clergy: the first (which was the dominant current in the seminaries and among the clergy), was generally reluctant to interfere in politics and strongly avoided political conflict. Interestingly, even Iraqi exiled combatant scholars during their residence in Iran pursued a policy of appeasement regarding Reza Khan. Undoubtedly, the political failures of the past two decades (after the Constitution) were the most important causes of this political indifference. Therefore, many scholars tried to avoid re-engaging in political conflicts - which, like the beginning of the Constitutional Movement, led to the creation of division among the clergies. Ayatollah Haeri, the head of the seminary of Qom, was one of them. Perhaps, from a political perspective, he and his like-minded scholars can be considered the followers of Sayyed Kazem Yazdi’s political school rather than Akhund Khorasani’s. The second current (which was not common among the seminaries and the clergy) was the political policy of Sayyed Hasan Modarres, who, along with a small group of members of the National Assembly, opposed Reza Khan and eventually was sent into exile to which the clergy and seminaries showed no reaction and kept silent.
In any case, after passing a period of public inactiveness, Ayatollah Haeri considered his most important duty to be preserving the unity of the seminaries and the education of the seminarians. However, contrary to popular belief, whenever he felt that a serious threat is posed against Islam and Muslims, he would not hesitate to take a political stand. Of course, in these cases, he tried to stop the regime from taking action by giving warnings and advice and even sought help from it to eliminate the danger.
In 1933, when the migration of Jews from all over the world including Iran to Palestine was increased, resulting in bloody clashes between Muslims and Jews in Palestine, Ayatollah Haeri and a group of Qom scholars sent a telegram to Reza Shah asking for help with the conflicts. Likewise, Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammad Behbahani asked the Prime Minister to publish their telegram in the newspapers, a request which was opposed by Reza Shah.
It is highly probable that Ayatollah Shaykh Mohammad-Hoseyn Kashif al-Ghita, an enlightened and anti-colonial mujtahid who was hosted by Ayatollah Haeri in Qom for some days, informed him and other scholars of Qom about the unfortunate events in Palestine convincing them to send such telegram. During his stay in Iran, he sent a message to the Palestinian Muslim fighters, encouraging them to continue the anti-Zionist struggle.
In 1936, when there were murmurs of changing men’s clothes and removing women’s hijab, Ayatollah Haeri, in a telegram to Reza Shah, expressed his concern about such decisions to which the then Prime Minister expressed a negative and decisive reaction. Apart from the two or three actions mentioned earlier, as far as the political events of these years are concerned, Ayatollah Haeri neither made any comments nor took any action in objection to or agreement with the government. Perhaps that is why Modarres’ revelations about Reza Khan for six years did not resonate with seminaries students. Even scholars in Qom and other cities did not show objection or reaction to his unsuccessful assassination and subsequent arrest and deportation to the city of Khaf.
We try to realize that which of the two policies against Reza Khan was approved by Imam Khomeyni in those years: the policy of being silent and taking a passive role pursued by Ayatollah Haeri, or Modarres’ struggle with Reza Khan? Although there is not a single case in Imam Khomeyni’s writings and speeches, in which he openly criticizes Ayatollah Haeri’s political policy- because of the respect he had for his teacher- yet the approval and praise he expressed towards Modarres’ policy at that time and calling other policies a “mistake” can be considered as the reason of his dissatisfaction with implicit criticism of Ayatollah Haeri’s policy against Reza Khan.
“Another mistake made at that time by those who should have enlightened the people to the facts was that they did not lend their support to Modarres. Modarres was the only great man to stand up and oppose Reza Khan, and while some of those in the Parliament supported his stance, he met with obstinate opposition from others. At that time too, some faction or other could have lent him its support. Had this happened, in the light of the fact that Modarres was a man endowed with many laudable qualities, being an enlightened individual, a powerful speaker and a brave man, he was the kind of man who could have uprooted the evil of this family there and then. But it did not happen.”
Imam Khomeyni did not doubt the legitimacy of Modarres, so he used to come to Tehran and listen closely to his speeches in the parliament. Also, he would go to the house and classes of Modarres and was greatly influenced by his lifestyle.
“He had a house which was of humble construction, it was somewhat spacious, but the building itself was humble. His way of living was below the ordinary. His dress in those days was made of karbas (burlap). He was adamant that it (the cloth) be of Iranian manufacture.”
The confrontation of Modarres with Reza Khan was another reason for approving his policy.
“When Reza Shah came and committed all of those outrageous acts, again it was an akhund by the name of Modarres, may God rest his soul, that stood before him in the Majlis and voiced protest. No one else did this other than Modarres and a few of his supporters. Nowhere else in the entire country did any other opposition force stand up to confront Reza Shah. Modarres stood up before Reza Shah and said “No!”
Of course, approving the policy pursued by Modarres did not mean ignoring some of his wrong political tactics, as Imam Khomeyni did not acknowledge the objection of Modarres to Reza Khan’s republicanism, because in his opinion “it would have been better if a republic had been established.”
Unfortunately, there is no information about Imam Khomeyni’s reaction after the arrest, deportation or martyrdom of Ayatollah Modarres. However, Imam Khomeyni took part in the protest activities carried out by the clergy against Reza Khan. In 1927, when scholars in Esfahan and other cities were protesting against the “Conscription” and other anti-Islamic actions of Reza Khan in Qom, Imam Khomeyni was fully aware of the incident and was in contact with them. Although Ayatollah Haeri praised the immigrant scholars and invited them to teach in the Islamic Seminary of Qom, he maintained his policy of being neutral and neither denied nor approved their demands.
Contrary to the opinion of some great scholars of that time, Imam Khomeyni from the beginning opposed to the idea of making “reforms in the seminary” proposed by Reza Khan’s agents; Because he believed that “they want to separate the good people from the bad ones and destroy the good (not the bad!) And it happened.” He opposed those reforms because he believed that Reza Khan is not qualified to do so since he is a layman who cannot distinguish “goodness from corruption.” Rather, for Imam Khomeyni, it was a conscious and practical step toward separating religion from politics:
“We cannot believe that this basis [separation of religion from politics] was from Reza Khan’s own dry brain, because this was a thoughtful foundation that could not be done without the deliberate order of others...”
So far, it is not clear whether Imam Khomeyni had expressed his opinion to the head of the seminary and other great scholars or not?
Two years later, when the scholars of Tabriz were sent into exile for opposing the compulsion of wearing the Pahlavi hat, one of them (the late Agha Mirza Sadeq Agha) resided in Qom after the end of his exile and Imam Khomeyni used to visit him in that time. Probably, that meeting such a knowledgeable and combatant man was not only a simple meeting with ordinary conversations, and they were talking about Reza Khan’s current policy and plans against the seminaries and the clergy. After the Goharshad Mosque incident and the arrest of Mashhad scholars, he met the late Aghazadeh in the street, who was apparently about to be sent for trial without a robe and turban and with a Pahlavi hat. This scene was so moving and shocking for him that he talked about it several times in his speeches.
In the view of Imam Khomeyni, these measures were taken to separate the clergy from the people and to dissuade them from engaging in political affairs. In a letter to a friend, he noted:
“The day when Reza Khan attacked the clergymen’s turbans, I told one of the prayer leaders ― If they arrest you and strip the turban off your head and it is time for prayers, go to the mosque for the prayers in the same appearance. It is their ultimate wish that the mosque-goers give up and the religious ones leave the stage for them to do whatever they wish.”
In 1935, Ayatollah Qommi came to Tehran to express his protest against the compulsion of wearing the Pahlavi hat. At that time, he was under the supervision of security and law enforcement officers in Siraj al-Molk Garden in Rey and Imam Khomeyni immediately went to visit him.
“Once when I was in Tehran, the late Ayatollah Qommi set off and came to Hadhrat Abdul-Adhim. We went there to visit him. He had risen (against the authorities), but they imprisoned him there and later sent him into exile.”
leave your comments