The Conceptualization of Guardianship in Iranian Intellectual History (1800–1989) by Leila Chamankhah

Author:Leila Chamankhah
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9783030226923
Publisher: Springer International Publishing

4.5 The School of Qum and its Historical Background

In the final part of this chapter, study and analysis will be continued of Ibn ʿArabī’s legacy as it is flourished in the School of Qum. Before focusing on the texts and authors, however, it is relevant briefly to review historical developments from the Qajars to their successor—the Pahlavis. The decline of the Qajars and the rise of Riḍā Khān Mīr Panj34 to the throne, as history proves, was a crucial event for Persia. His policies, from his decision to adopt the new solar calendar in place of the lunar Islamic calendar,35 to the reinstatement of the name of the country to Iran, to the position of women in society, to his ambitions for the modernization of Iran, and lastly, his clash with the clerics, dramatically changed every aspect of the Iranians’ life. Although his legacy remains controversial to this day, these changes, whether defended or criticized, have been so major that in all of these aspects, life in Iran has never been the same since.

The research interest here is Riḍā Shah’s “programme of radical secularizing, centralizing measures” (Cronin 2007, pp. 71–72), targeted to shake off the position of clerics directly and indirectly. In fact, he clashed with the class of ʿulemā on a number of issues including “the implementation of the … conscription” law, reorganizing the “judicial system … along secular lines”, and the introduction of “a civil code” and a dress law (Cronin 2007, p. 72). As Stephanie Cronin has shown, the imposition of these measures on the society, and especially on the class of clerics, has been never without reaction and resistance from below, as middle ranking clerics led a number of oppositions in different cities, mainly in Shiraz, Tabriz, and Isfahan against the Shah and his policies (Cronin 2007, p. 72ff).

Although many ʿulemā had welcomed Riḍā Khān’s appearance on the scene as a hopeful and positive sign for the restoration of the independence of the country, “by 1927 … [they] were aware that the balance of power between themselves and the regime was about to alter decisively to their detriment” and “although on the defensive, they were bracing themselves for a struggle” (Cronin 2007, p. 75ff). With regard to the ʿulemā’s economic status and social prestige in early twentieth century Iran, their discontent with the Shah’s policies is understandable. The secular orientation of Riḍā Shah’s programs aside, his measures, as I mentioned earlier, targeted the ʿulemā’s economic and social situation. By ʿulemā, I mean those jurists who belonged to the Uṣūlī School of jurisprudence, whose activities were mainly centered on fiqh (jurisprudence) and its principles and, since the Safawid era, have become one of the twin pillars of political power in the country.

If the birth and later existence of “the Shīʿa hierocracy” (Amir Arjomand 2005, p. 21) was the result of Safawid policies, the superiority of the Uṣūlī ʿulemā in the pre-Qajar and Qajar eras was mostly due to their victory over their long-lasting rival—the Akhbārī School. Pertinent

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.