Islamic Government: Governance of the Jurist
Introduction
In the name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful
All Praise be to God, the Lord of the worlds
And may His blessings be upon the best of His creation,
Muhammad and His Descendants.
The subject of the governance of the jurist (vilāyat-i faqīh[^1])
provides us with the opportunity to discuss certain related matters and
questions. The governance of the faqīh is a subject that in itself
elicits immediate assent and has little need of demonstration, for
anyone who has some general awareness of the beliefs and ordinances of
Islam will unhesitatingly give his assent to the principle of the
governance of the faqīh as soon as he encounters it; he will recognize
it as necessary and self-evident. If little attention is paid to this
principle today, so that it has come to require demonstration, it is
because of the social circumstances prevailing among the Muslims in
general, and the teaching institution in particular. These
circumstances, in turn, have certain historical roots to which I will
now briefly refer.
From the very beginning, the historical movement of Islam has had to
contend with the Jews, for it was they who first established
anti-Islamic propaganda and engaged in various stratagems, and as you
can see, this activity continues down to the present. Later they were
joined by other groups, who were in certain respects, more satanic than
they. These new groups began their imperialist penetration of the Muslim
countries about three hundred years ago,[^2] and they regarded it as
necessary to work for the extirpation of Islam in order to attain their
ultimate goals. It was not their aim to alienate the people from Islam
in order to promote Christianity among them, for the imperialists really
have no religious belief, Christian or Islamic. Rather, throughout this
long historical period, and going back to the Crusades,[^3] they felt
that the major obstacle in the path of their materialistic ambitions and
the chief threat to their political power was nothing but Islam and its
ordinances, and the belief of the people in Islam. They therefore
plotted and campaigned against Islam by various means.
The preachers they planted in the religious teaching institution, the
agents they employed in the universities, government educational
institutions, and publishing houses, and the orientalists who work in
the service of the imperialistic states—all these people have pooled
their energies in an effort to distort the principles of Islam. As a
result, many persons, particularly the educated, have formed misguided
and incorrect notions of Islam.
Islam is the religion of militant individuals who are committed to
truth and justice. It is the religion of those who desire freedom and
independence. It is the school of those who struggle against
imperialism. But the servants of imperialism have presented Islam in a
totally different light. They have created in men’s minds a false notion
of Islam. The defective version of Islam, which they have presented in
the religious teaching institution, is intended to deprive Islam of its
vital, revolutionary aspect and to prevent Muslims from arousing
themselves in order to gain their freedom, fulfill the ordinances of
Islam, and create a government that will assure their happiness and
allow them to live, lives worthy of human beings.
For example, the servants of imperialism declared that Islam is not a
comprehensive religion providing for every aspect of human life and has
no laws or ordinances pertaining to society. It has no particular form
of government. Islam concerns itself only with rules of ritual purity
after menstruation and parturition. It may have a few ethical
principles, but it certainly has nothing to say about human life in
general and the ordering of society.
This kind of evil propaganda has unfortunately had an effect. Quite
apart from the masses, the educated class—university students and also
many students at the religious teaching institutions—have failed to
understand Islam correctly and have erroneous notions. Just as people
may, in general, be unacquainted with a stranger, so too they are
unacquainted with Islam. Islam lives among the people of this world as
if it were a stranger.[^4] If somebody were to present Islam as it truly
is, he would find it difficult to make people believe him. In fact, the
agents of imperialism in the religious teaching institutions would raise
a hue and cry against him.
In order to demonstrate to some extent, the difference between Islam
and what is presented as Islam, I would like to draw your attention to
the difference between the Holy Qur’an and the books of hadīth,[^5] on
the one hand, and the practical treatises of jurisprudence, on the
other. The Holy Qur’an and the books of hadīth, which represent the
sources for the commands and ordinances of Islam, are completely
different from the treatises written by the mujtahīds[^6] of the
present age both in breadth of scope and in the effects they are capable
of exerting on the life of society. The ratio of Qur’anic verses
concerned with the affairs of society to those concerned with ritual
worship is greater than a hundred to one. Of the approximately fifty
sections[^7] of the corpus of hadīth containing all the ordinances of
Islam, not more than three or four sections relate to matters of ritual
worship and the duties of man toward his Creator and Sustainer. A few
more are concerned with questions of ethics, and all the rest are
concerned with social, economic, legal, and political questions—in
short, the gestation of society.
You who represent the younger generation and who, God willing, will be
of service to Islam in the future must strive diligently all your lives
to pursue the aims I will now set forth and to impart the laws and
ordinances of Islam. In whatever way you deem most beneficial, in
writing or in speech, instruct the people about the problems Islam has
had to contend with since its inception and about the enemies and
afflictions that now threaten it. Do not allow the true nature of Islam
to remain hidden, or people will imagine that Islam is like Christianity
(nominal, not true Christianity), a collection of injunctions pertaining
to man’s relation to God, and the mosques will be equated with the
church.
At a time when the West was a realm of darkness and obscurity—with its
inhabitants living in a state of barbarism, and America still peopled by
half-savaged redskins—and the two vast empires of Iran and Byzantium
were under the rule of tyranny, class privilege, and discrimination, and
the powerful dominated all without any trace of law or popular
government, God, Exalted and Almighty, by means of the Most Noble
Messenger (s), sent laws that astound people with their magnitude. He
instituted laws and practices for all human affairs and laid injunctions
for man extending from even before the embryo is formed until after he
is placed in the tomb. In just the same way that there are laws setting
forth the duties of worship for man, so too there are laws, practices,
and norms for the affairs of society and government. Islamic law is a
progressive, evolving, and comprehensive system. All the voluminous
books that have been compiled from the earliest times on different areas
of law, such as judicial procedure, social transactions, penal law,[^8]
retribution,[^9] international relations, regulations pertaining to
peace and war, private and public law—taken together, these contain a
mere sample of the laws and injunctions of Islam. There is not a single
topic in human life for which Islam has not provided instructions and
established a norm.
In order to make the Muslims, especially the intellectuals, and the
younger generation, deviate from the path of Islam, foreign agents have
constantly insinuated that Islam has nothing to offer, that Islam
consists of a few ordinances concerning menstruation and parturition,
and that this is the proper field of study for the ākhūnds.[^10]
There is something of truth here, for it is fitting that those
ākhūnds who have no intention of expounding the theories, injunctions
and worldview of Islam and who spend most of their time on precisely
such matters, forgetting all the other topics of Islamic law, be
attacked and accused in this manner. They too are at fault; foreigners
are not the only ones to be blamed. For several centuries, as might be
expected, the foreigners laid certain plans to realize their political
and economic ambitions, and the neglect that has overtaken the religious
teaching institution has made it possible for them to succeed. There
have been individuals among us, the ‘ulamā,[^11] who have unwittingly
contributed to the fulfillment of those aims, with the result that you
now see.
It is sometimes insinuated that the injunctions of Islam are defective,
and said that the laws of judicial procedure, for example, are not all
that they should be. In keeping with this insinuation and propaganda,
agents of Britain were instructed by their masters to take advantage of
the idea of constitutionalism in order to deceive the people and conceal
the true nature of their political crimes (the pertinent proofs and
documents are now available). At the beginning of the constitutional
movement, when people wanted to write laws and draw up a constitution, a
copy of the Belgian legal code was borrowed from the Belgian embassy and
a handful of individuals (whose names I do not wish to mention here)
used it as the basis for the constitution they then wrote, supplementing
its deficiencies with borrowings from the French and British legal
codes.[^12] True, they added some of the ordinances of Islam in order to
deceive the people, but the basis of the laws that were now thrust upon
the people was alien and borrowed.
What connections do all the various articles of the Constitution as
well as the body of Supplementary Law[^13] concerning the monarchy, the
succession, and so forth, have with Islam? They are all opposed to
Islam; they violate the system of government and the laws of Islam.
Islam proclaims monarchy and hereditary succession wrong and invalid.
When Islam first appeared in Iran, the Byzantine Empire, Egypt, and the
Yemen, the entire institution of monarchy was abolished. In the blessed
letters that the Most Noble Messenger (s) wrote to the Byzantine Emperor
Heraclius and the Shāhanshāh of Iran,[^14] he called upon them to
abandon the monarchical and imperial form of government, to cease
compelling the servants of God to worship them with absolute obedience,
and to permit men to worship God, Who has no partner and is the True
Monarch. Monarchy and hereditary succession represent the same sinister,
evil system of government that prompted the Doyen of the Martyrs[^15]
(‘a) to rise up in revolt and seek martyrdom in an effort to prevent its
establishment. He revolted in repudiation of the hereditary succession
of Yazīd,[^16] to refuse it his recognition.
Islam, then, does not recognize monarchy and hereditary succession;
they have no place in Islam. If that is what is meant by the so-called
deficiency of Islam, then Islam is indeed deficient. Islam has laid down
no laws for the practice of usury, for banking on the basis of usury,
for the consumption of alcohol, or for the cultivation of sexual vice,
having radically prohibited all of these. The ruling cliques,
therefore, who are the puppets of imperialism and wish to promote these
vices in the Islamic world, will naturally regard Islam as defective.
They must import the appropriate laws from Britain, France, Belgium, and
most recently, America. The fact that Islam makes no provision for the
orderly pursuit of these illicit activities, far from being a
deficiency, is a sign of perfection and a source of pride.
The conspiracy worked out by the imperialist government of Britain at
the beginning of the constitutional movement had two purposes. The
first, which was already known at that time, was to eliminate the
influence of Tsarist Russia in Iran, and the second was to take the laws
of Islam out of force and operation by introducing Western laws.[^17]
The imposition of foreign laws on our Islamic society has been the
source of numerous problems and difficulties. Knowledgeable people
working in our judicial system have many complaints concerning the
existing laws and their mode of operation. If a person becomes caught up
in the judicial system of Iran or that of analogous countries, he may
have to spend a whole lifetime trying to prove his case. In my youth I
once encountered a learned lawyer who said, “I can spend my whole life
following a litigation back and forth through the judicial machinery,
and then bequeath it to my son for him to do the same thing!” That is
the situation that now prevails, except, of course, when one of the
parties has influence, in which case the matter is examined and settled
swiftly, albeit unjustly.
Our present judicial laws have brought our people nothing but trouble,
causing them to neglect their daily task and providing the occasion for
all kinds of misuse. Very few people are able to obtain their legitimate
rights. In the adjudication of cases, it is necessary not only that
everyone should obtain his rights, but also that correct procedure be
followed. People’s time must be considered, as well as the way of life
and profession of both parties, so that matters are resolved as swiftly
and simply as possible.
A case that a sharī‘ah[^18] judge in earlier times settled in one or
two days cannot be settled now in twenty years. The needy, young, and
old alike, must spend the entire day at the Ministry of Justice, from
morning to evening, wasting their time in corridors or standing in front
of some official’s desk, and in the end they will still not know what
has transpired. Anyone who is more cunning, and more willing and able to
give bribes, has his case settled expeditiously, but at the cost of
justice. Otherwise, they must wait in frustration and perplexity until
their entire lives are gone.
The agents of imperialism sometimes write in their books and their
newspapers that the legal provisions of Islam are too harsh. One person
was even so impudent as to write that the laws of Islam are harsh
because they have originated with the Arabs, so that the “harshness” of
the Arabs is reflected in the harshness of Islamic law!
I am amazed at the way these people think. They kill people for
possessing ten grams of heroin and say, “That is the law” (I have been
informed that ten people were put to death some time ago, and another
person more recently, for possession of ten grams of heroin).[^19]
Inhuman laws like this are concocted in the name of a campaign against
corruption, and they are not to be regarded as harsh. (I am not saying
it is permissible to sell heroin, but this is not the appropriate
punishment. The sale of heroin must indeed be prohibited but the
punishment must be in proportion to the crime.)[^20] When Islam,
however, stipulates that the drinker of alcohol should receive eighty
lashes, they consider it “too harsh.” They can execute someone for
possessing ten grams of heroin and the question of harshness does not
even arise!
Many forms of corruption that have appeared in society derive from
alcohol. The collisions that take place on our roads, and the murders
and suicides are very often caused by the consumption of alcohol.
Indeed, even the use of heroin is said to derive from addiction to
alcohol. But still, some say, it is quiet unobjectionable for someone to
drink alcohol (after all, they do it in the West); so let alcohol be
bought and sold freely.
But when Islam wishes to prevent the consumption of alcohol—one of the
major evils—stipulating that the drinker should receive eighty lashes,
or sexual vice, decreeing that the fornicator be given one hundred
lashes (and the married man or woman be stoned[^21]), then they start
wailing and lamenting: “What a harsh law that is, reflecting the
harshness of the Arabs!” They are not aware that these penal provisions
of Islam are intended to keep great nations from being destroyed by
corruption. Sexual vice has now reached such proportions that it is
destroying entire generations, corrupting our youth, and causing them to
neglect all forms of work. They are all rushing to enjoy the various
forms of vice that have become so freely available and so
enthusiastically promoted. Why should it be regarded as harsh if Islam
stipulates that an offender must be publicly flogged[^22] in order to
protect the younger generation from corruption?
At the same time, we see the masters of this ruling class of ours
enacting slaughters in Vietnam over fifteen years,[^23] devoting
enormous budgets to this business of bloodshed, and no one has the right
to object! But if Islam commands its followers to engage in warfare or
defense in order to make men submit to laws that are beneficial for
them, and kill a few corrupt people or instigators of corruption, then
they ask: “What’s the purpose for that war?”
All of the foregoing represent plans drawn up several centuries ago
that are now being implemented and bearing fruit.
First, they opened a school in a certain place[^24] and we overlooked
the matter and said nothing. Our colleagues also were negligent in the
matter and failed to prevent it from being established so that now, as
you can observe, these schools have multiplied, and their missionaries
have gone out into the provinces and villages, turning our children into
Christians or unbelievers.
Their plan is to keep us backward, to keep us in our present miserable
state so they can exploit our riches, our underground wealth, our lands,
and our human resources. They want us to remain afflicted and wretched,
and our poor to be trapped in their misery. Instead of surrendering to
the injunctions of Islam, which provide a solution for the problem of
poverty, they and their agents wish to go on living in huge places and
enjoy lives of abominable luxury.
These plans of theirs are so broad in scope that they have even touched
the institutions of religious learning. If someone wishes to speak about
an Islamic government and the establishment of Islamic government, he
must observe the principle of taqiyyah[^25] and count upon the
opposition of those who have sold themselves to imperialism. When this
book was first printed, the agents of the embassy undertook certain
desperate measures to prevent its dissemination,[^26] which succeeded
only in disgracing themselves more than before.
Matters have now come to the point where some people consider the
apparel of a soldier incompatible with true manliness and justice, even
though the leaders of our religion were all soldiers, commanders, and
warriors. They put on military dress and went into battle in the wars
that are described for us in our history; they killed and they were
killed. The Commander of the Faithful[^27] (‘a) himself would place a
helmet on his blessed head, don his coat of chain mail, and gird on a
sword. Imām Hasan[^28] and the Doyen of the Martyrs (‘a), acted
likewise. The later Imāms did not have the opportunity to go into
battle, even though Imām Bāqir[^29] (‘a) was also a warrior by nature.
But now the wearing of military apparel is thought to detract from a
man’s quality of justice,[^30] and it is said that one should not wear
military dress. If we want to form an Islamic government, then we must
do it in our cloaks and turbans; otherwise, we commit an offense against
decency and justice!
This is all the result of the wave of propaganda that has now reached
the religious institution and imposed on us the duty of proving that
Islam also possesses rules of government.
That is our situation then—created for us by the foreigners through
their propaganda and their agents. They have removed from operation all
the judicial processes and political laws of Islam and replaced them
with European importations, thus diminishing the scope of Islam and
ousting it from Islamic society. For the sake of exploitation they have
installed their agents in power.
So far, we have sketched the subversive and corrupting plan of
imperialism. We must now take into consideration as well certain
internal factors notably the dazzling effect that the material progress
of the imperialist countries has had on some members of our society. As
the imperialist countries attained a high degree of wealth and
affluence—the result both of scientific and technical progress and of
their plunder of the nations of Asia and Africa—these individuals lost
all their self-confidence and imagined that the only way to achieve
technical progress was to abandon their own laws and beliefs. When the
moon landings took place, for instance, they concluded that Muslims
should jettison their laws! But what is the connection between going to
the moon and the laws of Islam? Do they not see that countries having
opposing laws and social systems compete with each other in technical
and scientific progress and the conquest of space? Let them go all the
way to Mars or beyond the Milky Way; they will still be deprived of true
happiness, moral virtues and spiritual advancement and be unable to
solve their own social problems. For the solution of social problems and
the relief of human misery require foundations in faith and moral;
merely acquiring material power and wealth, conquering nature and space,
have no effect in this regard. They must be supplemented by, and
balanced with, the faith, the conviction, and the morality of Islam in
order truly to serve humanity instead of endangering it. This
conviction, this morality, and these laws that are needed, we already
possess. So, as soon as someone goes somewhere or invents something, we
should not hurry to abandon our religion and its laws, which regulate
the life of man and provide for his well being in this world and
hereafter.
The same applies to the propaganda of the imperialists. Unfortunately
some members of our society have been influenced by their hostile
propaganda, although they should not have been. The imperialists have
propagated among us the view that Islam does not have a specific form of
government or governmental institutions. They say further that even if
Islam does have certain laws, it has no method for enforcing them, so
that its function is purely legislative. This kind of propaganda forms
part of the overall plan of the imperialists to prevent the Muslims from
becoming involved in political activity and establishing an Islamic
government. It is in total contradiction with our fundamental beliefs.
We believe in government and believe that the Prophet (s) was bound to
appoint a successor, as he indeed did.[^31] Was a successor designated
purely for the sake of expounding law? The expounding of law did not
require a successor to the Prophet. He himself, after all, had expounded
the laws; it would have been enough for the laws to be written down in a
book and put into people’s hands to guide them in their actions. It was
logically necessary for a successor to be appointed for the sake of
exercising government. Law requires a person to execute it. The same
holds true in all countries of the world, for the establishment of a law
is of little benefit in itself and cannot secure the happiness of man.
After a law is established, it is necessary also to create an executive
power. If a system of law or government lacks an executive power, it is
clearly deficient. Thus Islam, just as it established laws, also brought
into being an executive power.
There was still a further question: who was to hold the executive
power? If the Prophet (s) had not appointed a successor to assume the
executive power, he would have failed to complete his mission, as the
Qur’an testifies.[^32] The necessity for the implementation of divine
law, the need for an executive power, and the importance of that power
in fulfilling the goals of the prophetic mission and establishing a just
order that would result in the happiness of mankind—all of this made the
appointment of a successor synonymous with the completion of the
prophetic mission. In the time of the Prophet (s), laws were not merely
expounded and promulgated; they were also implemented. The Messenger of
God (s) was an executor of the law. For example, he implemented the
penal provisions of Islam: he cut off the hand of the thief and
administered lashings and stonings. The successor to the Prophet (s)
must do the same; his task is not legislation, but the implementation of
the divine laws that the Prophet (s) has promulgated. It is for this
reason that the formation of a government and the establishment of
executive organs are necessary. Belief in the necessity for these is
part of the general belief in the Imamate, as are, too, exertion and
struggle for the sake of establishing them.
Pay close attention. Whereas hostility toward you has led them to
misrepresent Islam, it is necessary for you to present Islam and the
doctrine of the Imamate correctly. You must tell people: “We believe in
the Imamate; we believe that the Prophet (s), appointed a successor to
assume responsibility for the affairs of the Muslims, and that he did so
in conformity with the divine will. Therefore, we must also believe in
the necessity for the establishment of government, and we must strive to
establish organs for the execution of law and the administration of
affairs.” Write and publish books concerning the laws of Islam and their
beneficial effects on society. Improve your style and method of
preaching and related activity. Know that it is your duty to establish
an Islamic government. Have confidence in yourselves and know that you
are capable of fulfilling this task. The imperialists began laying their
plans three or four centuries ago; they started out with nothing, but
see where they are now! We too will begin with nothing, and we will pay
no attention to the uproar created by a few “xenomaniacs”[^33] and
devoted servants of imperialism.
Present Islam to the people in its true form, so that our youth do not
picture the ākhūnds as sitting in some corner in Najaf or Qum,
studying the questions of menstruation and parturition instead of
concerning themselves with politics, and draw the conclusion that
religion must be separate from politics. This slogan of the separation
of religion from politics and the demand that Islamic scholars should
not intervene in social and political affairs have been formulated and
propagated by the imperialists; it is only the irreligious who repeat
them. Were religion and politics separate in the time of the Prophet
(s)? Did there exist, on one side, a group of clerics, and opposite it,
a group of politicians and leaders? Were religion and politics separate
in the time of the caliphs—even if they were not legitimate—or in the
time of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a)? Did two separate authorities
exist? These slogans and claims have been advanced by the imperialists
and their political agents in order to prevent religion from ordering
the affairs of this world and shaping Muslim society, and at the same
time to create a rift between the scholars of Islam, on the one hand,
and the masses and those struggling for freedom and independence, on the
other. They will thus been able to gain dominance over our people and
plunder our resources, for such has always been their ultimate goal.
If we Muslims do nothing but engage in the canonical prayer, petition
God, and invoke His name, the imperialists and the oppressive
governments allied with them will leave us alone. If we were to say “Let
us concentrate on calling the azān[^34] and saying our prayers. Let
them come and rob us of everything we own—God will take care of them!
There is no power or recourse except in Him, and God willing, we will be
rewarded in the hereafter!”—if this were our logic, they would not
disturb us.
Once during the occupation of Iraq, a certain British officer asked, “
Is the azān I hear being called now on the minaret harmful to British
policy?” When he was told that it was harmless, he said: “Then let him
call for prayers as much as he wants!”
If you pay no attention to the policies of the imperialists, and
consider Islam to be simply the few topics you are always studying and
never go beyond them, then the imperialists will leave you alone. Pray
as much as you like; it is your oil they are after—why should they worry
about your prayers? They are after our minerals, and want to turn our
country into a market for their goods. That is the reason the puppet
governments they have installed prevent us from industrializing, and
instead, establish only assembly plants and industry that is dependent
on the outside world.
They do not want us to be true human beings, for they are afraid of
true human beings. Even if only one true human being appears, they fear
him, because others will follow him and he will have an impact that can
destroy the whole foundation of tyranny, imperialism, and government by
puppets. So, whenever some true human being has appeared they have
either killed or imprisoned and exiled him, and tried to defame him by
saying: “This is a political ākhūnd!” Now the Prophet (s) was also a
political person. This evil propaganda is undertaken by the political
agents of imperialism only to make you shun politics, to prevent you
from intervening in the affairs of society and struggling against
treacherous governments and their anti-national and anti-Islamic
politics. They want to work their will as they please, with no one to
bar their way.
[^1]: Faqīh: one learned in the principles and ordinances of Islamic law, or more generally, in all aspects of the faith. For a full discussion of the term, see p. 69-70.
[^2]: Since mid-16th century, i.e., more than three centuries ago when the Portuguese and thereafter the Dutch, English, French, Italian, and the Spaniards colonized Muslim countries. At the beginning, newly discovered African countries and then, after finding the sea routes, Asian countries (whose link with the Europeans had been curtailed since the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453) fell under the sway of colonialism. (Pub.)
[^3]: Crusades is the name of a series of war campaigns waged by the European Christians against the Muslims (11th-13th centuries) for the control of the Holy Land, particularly Jerusalem. Waged in eight stages, these campaigns commenced with the religious edict of Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont (1096/489) and ended with the death of the French King, Saint Louis IX (1214-70) in 1270/669. Owing to the red-colored piece of cloth in the form of cross embedded on their right shoulders, the Christians became known as the Army of the Cross, or Crusaders. (Pub.)
[^4]: This is an allusion to the celebrated saying of the Prophet: “Islam will again become a stranger among men, as it was in the beginning, but blessed is the state of the stranger.”
[^5]: Hadīth: a tradition setting forth a saying or deed of the Prophet, or in Shī‘i usage, of one of the Twelve Imāms.
[^6]: Mujtahīd: an authority on divine law who practices ijtihād, that is, “the search for a correct opinion…in the deducing of the specific provisions of the law from its principles and ordinances” (Muhammad Sanglaji, Qazā dar Islam [Tehran, 1338 Sh./1959], p.14).
[^7]: The term kitāb (“book”) in the parlance of the Islamic jurists and traditionists means “section” in which Prophetic narrations (ahādīth) pertaining to a single topic are collected or particular laws of a topic, are discussed, such as Kitāb at-Tawhīd, Kitāb al-Īmān wa ’l-Fikr, Kitāb as-Salāh, and others. For instance, in the hadīth literature, Dūreh-ye Kāfi consists of 35 books, and in jurisprudence, Sharā’i ‘ul-Islām comprises 50 books. (Pub.)
[^8]: Hadd (literally means limit, boundary or limit) in the Islamic law is generally applied for penal law for punishments prescribed for particular crimes. The extent of these punishments is determined by law. (Pub.)
[^9]: Qisās (literally means retribution or retaliation) in the Islamic jurisprudence is to be executed against a criminal, according to the legal decree, who committed such crime as murder, amputation of a body limb, or laceration and beating in case the victim or his guardians are seeking retribution in lieu of receiving fine or blood money. (Pub.)
[^10]: Ākhūnd: a word of uncertain etymology that originally denoted a scholar of unusual attainment, but was later applied to lesser-ranking scholars, and then acquired a pejorative connotation, particularly in secularist usage.
[^11]: ‘Ulamā: the scholars of Islam.
[^12]: The draft of the first constitution was written by a commission from among the members of the Parliament and was approved with 51 articles. Kasravi, in this connection, writes: “It seems that Mashīr ad-Dawlah and Mu’tamīn al-Mulk and sons of Sadr A‘zam wrote it, or to be more appropriate, we say they translated [it].” Thereafter, a committee was formed so that a text called “Supplement” be appended in the constitution. By the way, this text was prepared in 107 articles. According to the narration of Mustafā Rahīmi, “With the use of the Belgian constitution and to some extent, the French constitution, and taking into account the laws of the Balkan states (in view of the newness of the supplementary laws under consideration), the committee embarked on the compilation of the Supplementary Constitutional Laws and on the omission of flaws of the former laws.” Concerning this influence of Belgian constitutional law on the six-man committee that drafted the Supplementary Constitutional Laws of 1907, see A.K.S. Lambton, “Dustur, iv: Iran,” Encyclopedia of Islam new ed., II, 653-654; Kasravi Tabrizi, Tārīkh-i Mashrūteh-yi Īrān (Constitutional History of Iran), pp. 170, 224; Mustafā Rahīmi, Qānūn-i Asāsi-yi Īrān va Usūl-i Demokrāsi (The Constitution of Iran and Democratic Principles) (Tehran, 1347 Sh./1968), p. 94; Qānūn-i Asāsi va Mutammin Ān (The Constituion and Its Supplement) (Tehran: National Consultative Assembly Press). (Pub.)
[^13]: Articles 35 through 57 of the Supplementary Constitutional Laws approved on October 7, 1906 relate to “the rights of the throne.” See E.G. Browne, The Persian Revolution of 1905-1909 (Cambridge, 1911), pp. 337-379.
[^14]: In the seventh year of the Islamic era, Prophet Muhammad wrote not only to Heraclius and the ruler of Iran (probably Parvīz), but also to the rulers of Egypt and Abyssinia, inviting them all to embrace Islam and abandon unjust rule. Following is the text of the Most Noble Messenger’s letter to Khosroe Parviz: “In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. From Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, to the great Kisra of Iran. Peace be upon him, who seeks truth and expresses belief in Allah and in His Prophet and testifies that there is no god but Allah and that He has no partner, and who believes that Muhammad is His servant and Prophet. Under the Command of Allah, I inviteyou to Him. He has sent me for the guidance of all people so that I may warn them all of His wrath and may present the unbelievers with an ultimatum. Embrace Islam so that you may remain safe. And if you refuse to accept Islam, you will be responsible for the sins of the Magi.” Text of his letter to Heraclius is as follows: “In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. “(This is a letter) from Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh to the great Hercules of Rome. Peace be upon the followers of guidance. I invite you to the religion of Islam. Embrace Islam so that you may be safe. Allah will give you two rewards (reward for your own faith as well as reward for the faith of those who are your subordinates). In case, however, you turn away your face from Islam you will be responsible for the sins of the Arisiyans as well. “O people of the Scriptures! We invite you to a common basis i.e., we should not worship anyone except Allah. We should not treat anyone to be His partner. Some of us too should not accept others as their gods. And (O Muhammad! as and when) they become recalcitrant against the true religion say: “Be witness to the fact that we are Muslims [Q 3:64].” ” See Makātib ar-Rasūl, vol. 1, pp. 90 and 105; Ja‘far Subhāni, The Message (Karachi: Islamic Seminary Publications, 1984), chap. 42, pp. 540-566, http://www.al-islam.org/message/43.htm; Muhammad Hamidullah, Le Prophète de l’Islam (Paris, 1959), I, 196-197, 212, 230, 241. (Pub.)
[^15]: The Doyen of the Martyrs: Imām Husayn, grandson of the Prophet. Concerning his biography, see Mīr Ahmad ‘Ali, Husain the Saviour of Islam (Qum: Ansariyan Publications, 1987); ‘Abdullāh Yūsuf ‘Ali, Imām Husain and His Martyrdom, http://www.al-islam.org/short/martyrdom/index.htm. (Pub.)
[^16]: In 60/680, Imām Husayn refused to swear allegiance to Yazīd, son of Mu‘āwiyah and second caliph of the Umayyad dynasty, since Yazīd did not possess legitimate authority and had succeeded to the caliphate by hereditary succession. The ensuing death of the Imām in battle at Karbala has always been commemorated by Shī‘ah Muslims as the supreme example of martyrdom in the face of tyranny. It served as an important point of both ideological and emotive reference throughout the Islamic Revolution in Iran. See Shaykh Muhammad Mahdi Shams ad-Dīn, The Revolution of Al-Husayn, http://www.al-islam.org/revolution; Ibrāhīm Āyāti, A Probe into the History of Āshūrā (Karachi: Islamic Seminary Publications, 1984);Zākir, Tears and Tributes (Qum: Ansariyan Publications); Yāsīn T. al-Jibouri, Kerbala and Beyond (Qum: Ansariyan Publications); Sayyid Wāhid Akhtar, “Karbala: An Enduring Paradigm of Islamic Revivalism,” Al-Tawhīd Journal, http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/paradigm-akhtar.htm. (Pub.)
[^17]: No detailed study has yet been made of the British role in the early part of the constitutional movement. Some of the relevant documents, however, are to be found in General Report on Persia for the Year 1906 (file F.O. 416/30, Public Records Office, London).
[^18]: Sharī‘ah: the all-embracing law of Islam derived from the Qur’an, the normative practice and authoritative pronouncements of the Prophet, and a number of secondary sources.
[^19]: A law promulgated in July 1969 provided the death penalty for anyone in possession of more than two kilograms of opium or ten grams of heroin, morphine, or cocaine. The first ten executions were carried out in December 1969 and by 1974, 236 people had been executed on charges under this law. See Ulrich Gehrke, Iran: Natur, Bevolkerung, Geschichte, Kultur, Staat, Wirschaft (Tubingen and Basel, 1976), p. 281. It is also probable that the law was also used to provide a cover for the execution of political prisoners who had no involvement with narcotics. Concerning the royal family’s own involvement in the drug trade, see p. 117, n. 167.
[^20]: Imām Khomeini’s complain is referring to another point; that is, the absence of justice. (Pub.)
[^21]: Under the penal laws of Islam, proof of the married status is one of the indispensable requisites for stoning an adulterer. Married man or woman is one who is mature (bāligh), mentally sound, and has a permanent spouse. (Pub.)
[^22]: In Islamic law, the presence of a number of believers at the time of penal execution has been considered part of etiquettes of punishing the offender. Shī‘ah jurists have been emphasizing on the observance of this tradition at the time of penal execution for adultery, slandering, and pandering. Their religious edict regarding the first case is based on Sūrah an-Nūr (24:2): “And a number of believers must witness the punishment of adulterer men and women.” Another reason for it is that the attendants would take lesson from the requital, and anyone who is inclined to do so or is guilty of the same, would desist or cease from its performance. (Pub.)
[^23]: After many years of resistance against the French and Japanese colonizers, in 1960 Vietnam had once again engaged in a protracted war with the United States. This war that ended in 1973 with the defeat and withdrawal of the American forces, brought untold destructions and casualties on the Vietnamese people. As the official figures fall short of exactly describing the degree of casualties and damages wrought by this ruthless aggression, the realities of the bitter contemporary history can be gleaned to some extent: Up to early 1965 when the scope of the war extended to South Vietnam, the number of South Vietnamese who perished or were injured is as follows: 170,000 died, 800,00 wounded, and 400,000 imprisoned. During that time the number of persons who had been sent on concentration camps, which are called “agricultural units” exceeds 5 millions. According to the Voice of America (January 6, 1963), throughout 1962 US Air Force had attacked 50 thousand times villages beyond the realm of “state villages,” and based on the assertions of General Herkins(?), on the same year about 30 thousand villages perished. US Air Force operations in South Vietnam reached 30 thousand times a month. According to a news report of the New York Times, in a combined US and Saigon government air operations nearly 1,400 out of 2,600 villages in the South were totally ruined by napalm bombs and chemical weapons. A Red Cross report indicates that as the effect of using poisonous elements in the vast and populous areas, thousands of residents in the South have been afflicted with divergent diseases particularly skin-related ones and for a long time they have experienced sufferings and discomforts arising from the sickness. Moreover, many herds of cows and buffalos as well as other four-footed domesticated animals had died while leaves, flowers, and fruits of tree and rice fields were completely devastated. (Pub.)
[^24]: We have not been able to determine whether this is an allusion to a particular school established by foreigners. Before the Islamic Revolution, there were a number of foreign-run schools in Iran—secular and missionary—that in effect alienated their students from Islamic culture and society.
[^25]: Taqiyyah: prudential dissimulation of one’s true beliefs under conditions of acute danger, a practice based on Qur’an, 3:28. For a fuller discussion of taqiyyah, see ‘Allāmah Tabātabā’i, Shi‘ite Islam (Albany, N.Y., 1975), pp. 223-225, http://www.al-islam.org/anthology/index.htm; Al-Taqiyya/Dissimulation,http://al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/1.html; and also p. 133 of the present work. (Pub.)
[^26]: This is a reference to an earlier and briefer series of talks given by Imām Khomeini on the subject of Islamic government. The Iranian embassy in Baghdad had sought to prevent the published text of those talks from being distributed.
[^27]: The Commander of the Faithful: ‘Ali ibn Abi Tālib, cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet, and first of the Twelve Imāms from the Prophet’s Progeny. He exercised rule from 35/656 until his martyrdom in 40/661. See Yousuf N. Lalljee, ‘Ali the Magnificent (Qum: Ansariyan Publications, 1987); Muhammad Jawād Chirri, The Brother of the Prophet Mohammad (Imām ‘Ali), (Qum: Ansariyan Publications); George Jordaq, The Voice of Human Justice, trans. M. Fazal Haq (Qum: Ansariyan Publications, 1990) (Pub.)
[^28]: Imām Hasan: son of Imām ‘Ali and second of the Imāms. He was poisoned in 50/670 after spending most of his life in seclusion in Medina. See Shaykh Rādi Āl-Yāsīn, Sulh al-Hasan: The Peace Treaty of Al-Hasan, trans. Jāsim al-Rasheed (Qum: Ansariyan Publications, 1998), http://www.al-islam.org/sulh/. (Pub.)
[^29]: Imām Bāqir: the fifth Imām. He was born in 57/675 and spent most of his life in Medina, until his martydom there in 114/732. See Bāqir Sharīf al-Qarashi, The Life of Imām Mohammed al-Bāqir, trans. Jāsim al-Rasheed (Qum: Ansariyan Publications, 1999). (Pub.)
[^30]: The “quality of justice” that is demanded of a religious scholar includes not only the practice of equity in all social dealings, but also complete abstention from major sins, the consistent performance of all devotional duties, and the avoidance of conduct incompatible with decorum. Justice is among the requisites for becoming a judge, rector (mufti), and congregational prayer leader (imām). At the margin of the book, Sharh-i Lum‘ah, vol. 1, chap. 11, p. 98, wearing of indecent clothes in the congregational prayers has been considered contrary to the spirit of magnanimity (muruwwah) and justice. (Pub.)
[^31]: The Most Noble Messanger (s) indicated in many instances the successorship of Imām ‘Ali ibn Abi Tālib (‘a) such as in Hadīth Yawm ad-Dār (Day of the Prophet’s invitation to his kinsmen); Hadīth Manzilah (The Prophet’s designation of ‘Ali as his deputy in Medina during the Tabuk expedition); Āyat al-Wilāyah (‘Ali’s offering of a ring to a beggar and the subsequent revelation of a pertinent verse); Event of Ghadīr Khumm; and Hadīth ath-Thaqalayn. See Tafsir Kabīr, vol. 12, pp. 28, 53 under Sūrah al-Mā’idah, verses 55, 67; Sīrah ibn Hisham, vol. 4, p. 520; Tārīkh Tabari, vol. 2, pp. 319, 322; Al-Ghadīr, vols. 1-3; Caliphate of Imām ‘Ali, http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter3/1.html. (Pub.)
[^32]: “O Messenger! Proclaim what has been revealed to you by your Lord, for if you do not, you will not have fulfilled the mission He has entrusted to you” (4:67). On the commentary of this verse, see Mīr Ahmad ‘Ali, Text, Translation and Commentary of the Holy Qur’an (Ehlmurst, NY: Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an, Inc., 1988), http://www.al-islam.org/quran. (Pub.)
[^33]: Xenomaniacs: those infatuated with foreign and especially Western models of culture. This is a translation of a Persian term, gharbzādeh-ha, popularized by Jalāl Āl-i Ahmad (d. 1969) in his book Gharbzādegi (“Xenomania”). See its English translation, R. Campbell (trans.) and Hamid Algar (ed. and anno.), Occidentosis: A Plague from the West (Berkeley: Al-Mizan Press, 1984). He was a writer of great influence and Imām Khomeini was acquainted with his work. See the commemorative supplement on Jalāl Āl-i Ahmad in the Tehran daily newspaper Jumhūri-yi Islāmi, Shahrīvar 20, 1359/October 12, 1980, p. 10. (Pub.)
[^34]: Azān: the call to prayer.