Political Pluralism in the Qom Seminary during the Islamic Republic of Iran

Abstract

The question of governance during the Occultation (ghayba) has been a central concern for Shiʿi scholars. Some have emphasized “waiting” (enteẓār), while others have proposed the theory of Wilāyat al-Faqīh. Using a descriptive-explanatory method, this article examines the evolution of Shiʿi political thought during the Islamic Republic across three phases. From 1979 to 1997: the central issue was the legitimacy of a jurist-led government during the Occultation. One group, centered on Ayatollah Khomeini, emphasized its legitimacy. Among his students, some believed in the election of the jurist, while others adhered to his appointment. Another group proposed a “government of a council of jurists.” From 1997 to 2009: the main issue concerned the relationship between “Republicanism” (jumhūriyyat) and “Islamicity” (eslāmiyyat). Mesbah Yazdi, Javadi Amoli, and Mohammad Yazdi prioritized Islamicity over Republicanism, while Montazeri and Mehdi Haeri Yazdi prioritized the reverse. From 2009 onward: following the 2009 election and the events of 2017, 2019, and 2022, a new question emerged: Has the Islamic Republic succeeded? Four types of political thought emerged: (1) substantive transition to an Islamic government (Mirbaqeri, Araki); (2) reformist approaches strengthening Republicanism (Montazeri, Sanei, Haghighat, Ghazizadeh); (3) fundamental transformation (Kadivar, Heydari, Fanaei); (4) withdrawal from political guardianship (Alavi Boroujerdi, Yathrebi). Thus, Shiʿi political thought has experienced one of its most pluralistic and dynamic phases.