The Mystic Politician

The mysticism of Imam Khomeini was a response to “Who should rule?” and his jurisprudence was a response to “How to govern?”

Imam Khomeini has said: “It has been said that there is a theoretical nous for man which is perception and a practical nous which actualizes the reasonable functions, but we say that the action is necessary for both and the theoretical nous goes back to the practical nous and vice versa and that action is necessary for the theoretical nous which encompasses perception and knowledge. What is meant by faith in the Quran is not knowledge. Having an understanding of the origin and the resurrection day and the like is not faith, otherwise, Satan would have been among the faithful whereas he is an infidel because God says “He was of the infidels.”

When Imam Khomeini accepted the Transcendental Wisdom of Mulla Sadra and brought together the Quran, reason, and mysticism, he de-dualized and embraced a holistic view. This de-dualization is so highlighted in Imam Khomeini’s thought who stated that some have divided wisdom into two theoretical and practical parts, while the action is involved in theoretical wisdom. Imam Khomeini was not a philosopher or mystic or jurist who had nothing to do with politics and believed that politics is also part of social life. 

De-dualization in Imam Khomeini’s view implies a connection between different ontological, normative, behavioural and even empirical aspects. This is the basis of Imam Khomeini’s thinking, which I refer to as “monotheistic holism,” and I believe that in Imam Khomeini’s view, God and wisdom and love have come together. 

Following the path of Mulla Sadra and ibn Arabi, Imam Khomeini considered different stages for mysticism which are the quadruplet journeys in the last stage of which the pious mystic realizes that after the stage of the annihilation of his self he should go through another mystical stage. This stage is coming to the people and guiding them toward the right path or God. In a mystical sense, the Islamic Revolution can be defined as the fourth stage of the mystical journey of Imam Khomeini. It is at this stage that the mystical political level of Imam Khomeini is highlighted and in a sense, his mysticism is not completed without this stage. In other words, the mysticism of Imam Khomeini is not a coenobitical and personal mysticism but a mysticism of presence and conflict.

When it comes to “who should rule?” the traces of mysticism can be found in Imam Khomeini’s political theory but when the question “how to rule?” is posed and also the methods and nature of the governance are discussed, the mysticism of Imam Khomeini will no longer be included in his political theory. Thus, despite the high status of mysticism and the authority which the perfect human possesses in the view of Imam Khomeini, yet he does not establish a government by the means of philosophy and mysticism. The tools by which he would do so are ijtihad and jurisprudence. Imam Khomeini did not accept that the esoteric and mystical authority of the perfect human being which is manifested in Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the infallible Imams being attributed to Wali al-Faqih (Guardian Jurisprudent) in general and himself in particular, rather he insisted that the Wilayat al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurisprudent) should not be seen as the same as the divine authority which belongs to Prophet and the infallible Imams. Do not confuse esoteric attributes to the Prophet and the Imams.

From Political Mysticism to Non-Mystical Rule

In one of his letters, Imam Khomeini states: “There are verses and traditions that are specifically for the infallible Imams and they do not include the great Muslim jurists and scholars let alone someone like me. Although the eligible jurists represent the infallible Imams in all religious, political, and social affairs, and they are the authority during the time of Major Occultation, yet this type of guardianship is not the Great Authority which is exclusively for the infallible Imams. I demand that there be no ambiguity in statements which are being made and broadcasted and that the boundaries be set.”

Thus, although the philosophical-mystical view and the Sadraist wisdom are the foundations of the government in Imam Khomeini’s view, philosophy and mysticism are not the tools in this regard and he considers neither platonic-royal philosophy nor royal-mysticism as a tool for governing.

The Imam Khomeini’s tools for governing are jurisprudence, ijtihad and divine Islamic law. If we accept the three philosophical, mystical and theological-jurisprudential reasonings, we can say that Imam Khomeini sought to rule with jurisprudential reason, and of course, jurisprudence and law are of the same nature. 

The government which is based on jurisprudence characterizes as being lawful and predictable. In such a state, the authority of the religious government becomes routine and predictable, and others can be assured that the ruling given by the government is God’s decrees. If the government, however, becomes mystical, it becomes intuitive and personal and since people cannot realize and percept the leader’s intuition so they cannot find out that whether his perception reflects the decrees of God or not. Because intuition is a personal matter, and the government for which mysticism is the foundation can become an unpredictable state, and may even lead to some kind of sacred and mystical authoritarianism giving rise to illusory claims. But when it comes to jurisprudence, some might address the rigidness of such a government. It is here that the mystical aspect of Imam Khomeini’s politics can guarantee the gentleness and flexibility of the religious government. Under the leadership of the mystic leader, self-sacrifice and kindness are being crystallized. That is why Max Weber while addressing the relation between mysticism and the personality of the leader, says that I am looking forward to seeing a leader who has charismatic traits and pays attention to the legal, rational, and democratic dimensions.

From Mysticism to Wilayat al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurisprudent)

Regarding the inclusion of Imam Khomeini’s mystical views into the theory of the Wilayat al-Faqih, it should be said that ijtihad and jurisprudence do not have mystical aspects and have their own principles. Although Imam Khomeini, in the absence of a mystical view, may never have seen himself as being responsible for assuming the responsibility of guidance and reform, his methods for guidance in the next phase are merely jurisprudence, ijtihad, discipline and methodicalness. In this regard, especially for the infallible Imams, the mystical and esoteric aspect is no longer sufficient, although for them, especially where there is a connection between infallibility and authority, the governance can have a mystical and esoteric aspect. Having this view, Ayatollah Javadi-Amoli says that Wali al-Faqih (Guardian-Jurisprudent) has all the authorities which the infallible Imams have except those which return to infallibility.

Thus, the tool of the Wali al-Faqih for governance is by no means a mystical one. Although the mysticism of ibn Arabi and Mulla Sadra makes him feel that he is responsible for guiding people but mysticism is not sufficient in the political and social guidance. When it comes to politics, it is only the jurisprudent ibn Arabi who can establish a government, and ibn Arabi, who is a non-jurist, may only give the warning and create political awareness. given that he lacks the means of jurisprudence, ibn Arabi can’t establish a government. Therefore, it can be concluded that if Imam Khomeini’s mysticism made him feel that he has to take responsibility and start the Islamic revolution, his jurisprudence also was used for establishing and managing the Islamic government.