The Politician Mystic

Imam's mysticism was a response to "Who should govern?" and his jurisprudence was a response to "How should we govern?"

It has been said that the human has a theoretical nous which is "perception" and the practical nous which actualizes the reasonable functions, but we say that action is needed in both functions and the theoretical nous depends on the practical one in a way that the practical nous depends on the theoretical one and action is needed in a theory which is perception and knowledge. What the holy Quran describes as faith is not knowledge. Science does not depend on the beginning and the end and the like, otherwise the faith of Satan should have been better, while he is infidel because God says: "He was of the infidels".
(Imam Khomeini, Philosophical Discourses, Volume 3, Page 341)

When Imam Khomeini accepted the higher wisdom following Mullah Sadra and gathered altogether the holy Quran, proof and mysticism, in fact made a kind of de-duality and welcomed a generalist vision. This de-duality was so great in Imam Khomeini's thought who stated that some people have divided wisdom in two theoretical and practical parts while action has also lain in theoretical wisdom. Imam was not a philosopher or mystic or a jurisprudent who did not deal with politics. He believed that politics was part of the social life. De-duality in Imam's thought in fact represented the relations between various areas of ontology, value, behavior and even experiment. This is the lowest layer of Imam's thinking that I call it as "monotheistic holism" and believe that God, wisdom, and love have gathered together in Imam's thinking. Imam Khomeini attached some stages for mysticism following Mulla Sadra and Ibn Arabi. These stages are the quadruplet journeys in the last stage of which the pious mystic after complete absorption in the remembrance of Allah comes and leaves behind another mystical stage. This stage is in fact walking toward the people and their guidance toward God. The Islamic Revolution can be described as the fourth stage of Imam's mystical journey. It is in this stage that Imam Khomeini's mystical political level is highlighted and his mysticism is not completed without this stage in one meaning. In other words, the Imam's mysticism is not that of personal and coenobitical but it is the mysticism of presence and conflict.

From political mysticism to mystical rule
The trace of mysticism in Imam Khomeini's theory is found when the discussion of "Who should govern?" is brought up, but when the discussion of "How should we govern?" is brought up and the methods and content of governance is discussed, Imam Khomeini's mysticism has no way toward political theory. Thus, despite the higher status of mysticism and governance of perfect human in Imam's thinking, he does not deal with the establishment of government with the tool of philosophy and mysticism. The tool with which Imam governs is the tool of Ijtihad - systematic original thinking rooted in Quran's exegesis (hermeneutics) and the Prophet's behavior and practice – and jurisprudence. Imam repeatedly avoided that the inward and mystical governance related to perfect human which have been manifested in the Prophet Mohammad and the infallible Imams were attributed to the supreme jurist and particularly to himself, insisting that the Velayat-e Faqih or Governance of the Supreme Jurist should not be mixed with the inward governance attributed to Prophet Mohammad and infallible Imams. In one of his letters, Imam says: "I have to say that there are Quran verses and Imam Quotations which are special to the infallible Imams, and the Islamic jurists and Ulema are not involved in them let alone someone like me. Although qualified jurists represent the infallible Imams in all social, political and religious affairs and the guardianship of affairs is up to them during the greater absence, theses affairs are not the greater governance which is special to the infallible Imams. My demand is that there should be no ambiguity concerning what is said and propagated in this regard" (Sahifeh Noor [Book of Light], volume 19, page 403).  Thus, although the philosophical-mystical and the supreme wisdom view of Imam is the lower layer of the establishment of government, philosophy and mysticism is not his tool for governance and he considers neither platonic-royal philosophy nor royal-mysticism as a tool for governance. Imam's tools for governance are jurisprudence, Ijtihad and Islamic-divine law. If we accept three philosophical, mystical and juridical-verbal wisdoms with tolerance, we can say that Imam was not after governance with juridical nous and of course jurisprudence and law are of the same kind. Juridical governance is legal and predictable. In such governance, the powers of religious government become systematic and predictable and others can become confident that the decree ordered by the state is God's decree. But if the governance finds mystical aspect, it becomes intuitive and personal and the people has no way for the discovery and intuition of the leader to become sure whether this discovery and intuition is the discoverer of God's decree, because discovery and intuition have personal aspects and a government which is based on mysticism, can turn into an unpredictable one and even leads to a kind of sacred and mystical authoritarianism, providing the grounds for vague claims and illusions. But when the jurisprudence is involved, we can find people who talks about being rigid of such government. It is here that the mystical side of Imam's policy and strategy can guarantee the delicacy of religious state.  Self-sacrifice, forgiveness and kindness can become visible under the management of the mystic leader. And it is because of this that Max Weber about the connection between mysticism and the character of leader says that I wish a leader who has both charismatic features and pay attention to democratic, legal and intellectual dimensions. 

From Mysticism to Governance of the Supreme Jurist
About the inclusion of Imam Khomeini's mystical viewpoints in the theory of Governance of the Supreme Jurist, it should be said that Ijtihad and jurisprudence do not have mystical aspect and principally they have themselves. Although in the absence of mystical view, Imam might never consider to assume the mission of guidance and reform. But his tool of reform and guidance in the next stage was merely Ijtihad and jurisprudence, and discipline and methodical ways and nothing else. Here, the mystical and inward aspect is not enough especially for the infallible person, although governance can find mystical and inward aspect for the infallible person especially where a relation between innocence and jurist's powers is appeared. With the same view, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli says the supreme jurist has all the powers of the infallible person unless the ones returning to innocence. Thus, the tool of the supreme jurist for governance does not have mystical and inward aspect at all. Although it is of the mysticism of Mohieddin Ibn Arabi and Mullah Sadra that feel they have a mission for people's guidance, mysticism is not enough in the position of social and political guidance. When politics is involved, it is only the supreme jurist Ibn-e Arabi who can set up a government and the non-jurist Ibn-e Arabi is used just for an attention and punishment and political implication. That Ibn-e Arabi can set up a government is impossible since he does not have the jurisprudence tool. So we can conclude that if Imam's mysticism made him to feel that he should do the mission and created the Islamic revolution, his jurisprudence attributed to set up and run the government and shaped the Islamic state.

Emad Afrough
Translated by: Mohammad Baqer Khoshnevisan

Source: Mehrnameh Monthly, No. 3