Khamenei, the God of Ash'arites

Hashemi Rafsanjani has long been active in changing the composition of the Assembly of Experts for Leadership. Conservatives have opposed his goal, labeling it a conspiracy, a new sedition, politicizing the Assembly of Experts, and infiltration. He has encouraged younger individuals, including Seyyed Hassan Khomeini, to run for the Assembly of Experts elections on March 7, 2016. Conservatives, including Ayatollah Jannati, have stated that Rafsanjani's aim is to create obstacles for Ayatollah Khamenei through the Assembly of Experts and to establish oversight over his performance. Recently, Rafsanjani gave an interview to ILNA news agency, which drew significant attention both domestically and internationally, particularly regarding a special committee of the Assembly of Experts studying candidates for Khamenei's succession. The implicit meaning of this was that, given Khamenei's age and illness, the Assembly has begun its work. This statement by Rafsanjani serves two functions: a) fueling rumors about Khamenei's serious illness, and b) destabilizing Khamenei's position, as the status of a dying leader will not be the same as that of a healthy one. However, if a successor for Ayatollah Khamenei is to be determined, it will be the responsibility of the future Assembly of Experts. Furthermore, no one knows the time of Khamenei's death. Rafsanjani made a more significant point in this interview that received less attention. He reminded of the absolute powers of the leadership and the necessity of oversight over it, stating: "All the affairs of the country are under the leadership's supervision, and we must not overlook them. The leadership is the absolute power of the country, so we must at least address and pursue the institutions that are under the leadership, and rectify any flaws they have, and if they have any merits, we should highlight and encourage those merits. This was done until now, but the laws we passed ourselves are limited. In the future, another Assembly will come, and we must see what it does." The meaning of this statement is that the future Assembly must begin oversight over the leadership. This demand is not compatible with Khamenei and his followers' tastes. For this reason, they reacted quickly. They stated that Rafsanjani would likely meet the fate of Ayatollah Montazeri. Sadegh Larijani, on December 14, 2015, in a meeting of senior judicial officials, responded to Rafsanjani by saying: "Sometimes the media fuel statements that are not correct; among them are the baseless statements regarding the oversight of the Assembly of Experts over the leadership and its subordinate institutions. Some individuals express their illegal wishes and expectations that have nothing to do with the Constitution. The oversight of the Assembly of Experts over the leadership is an incorrect and illegal statement. There is nothing in the Constitution about oversight over the leadership... According to the Constitution, the determination of the conditions of leadership or the lack of these conditions is the responsibility of the Assembly of Experts, and it is natural that the issue of determination is separate from oversight, and these two are not mutually dependent." Larijani claims that Rafsanjani intends to turn his "illegal wishes and expectations" into reality, but these wishes and expectations conflict with the Constitution. According to jurists, the duty of the Assembly of Experts is to "discover" an individual with these characteristics. Once it is discovered that a certain mountain is Mount Damavand, no one can deny its identity as Damavand. In the view of conservatives, oversight over the leadership and its performance is meaningless. Questioning and criticizing him is also meaningless because his position is divine. The Wali Faqih is the incarnate God on earth. Akbar Ganji Larijani further argues to support his claim: "Unfortunately, sometimes such statements and expectations are written and presented in the name of certain individuals and personalities; which is unexpected because they should be aware of the text of the Constitution. Oversight of the Assembly of Experts over the leadership is like saying that individuals in the position of imitation of jurists, because they must meet conditions such as (being the most knowledgeable or being a complete jurist) or justice in the jurist, therefore they oversee him! A statement whose falsity is clear. Because the duty of the imitator is to determine the characteristics and attributes of the jurist. In summary, what is stated in the Constitution is the "determination" of specific characteristics or their absence in the leadership, and determination is not mutually dependent on oversight." In the view of conservatives, oversight over the leadership and its performance is meaningless. Questioning and criticizing him is also meaningless because his position is divine. The Wali Faqih is the incarnate God on earth. Larijani compares the relationship of the Assembly of Experts with the Wali Faqih to the relationship of the people with a jurist. This analogy is flawed: First, analogy and metaphor—jurisprudential comparison—are not the basis of argument. When the analogy and metaphor change, the result will also change. Essentially, if the relationship of the people with political rulers can be compared to something, it is the relationship of the people with their representatives. People elect representatives to achieve their goals. The representative pursues the goals of his constituents, not imposing his own demands and wishes on them. People create and invent political governance as their representative to pursue and respect their rights, and whenever they do not want him, they change him. The elections are the Day of Judgment for political rulers. Second, jurists claim that the relationship between the people and the jurist is of the type of relationship between the knowledgeable and the ignorant. That is, for the same reasons that people refer to specialists in their daily lives—such as a neurosurgeon or a heart and lung specialist—they should also refer to jurists. a) This analogy and metaphor is also unjust. What is the jurist a specialist in? The jurist is like an archaeologist. He is a specialist in the customs, traditions, and lifestyles constructed by Arabs before Islam. Archaeologists discover the lives of past eras and familiarize us with them, rather than imposing them on us. The relationship between people and archaeologists is not a relationship of imitation. We ask archaeologists about the details of past eras, and they scientifically explain them to us. However, jurists do not even know how to justify the jurisprudential rulings they impose on imitators. The powerless individual is completely different from the powerful individual—especially one with absolute power. Absolute power takes away the first thing from a person, the power of justice. Ayatollah Khomeini, before the revolution, could not have killed thousands of people even if he wanted to. He, who perhaps had not killed an ant before the revolution, issued the order for the massacre of several thousand political and ideological prisoners as the Wali Faqih. Here, inability is associated with lack of power, and possibility and ability are associated with absolute power. The chain murders, the suppression of the Green Movement, the five-year house arrest of Ayatollah Montazeri, the house arrest of the leaders of the Green Movement, etc., all occurred during the leadership of Ayatollah Khamenei. The "national looting of public assets" during Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's presidency was carried out by a person whom Ayatollah Khamenei said had opinions closest to his own and that his government was one of the best governments since the Constitutional Revolution. Despite all this, is Khamenei still just? If he were a manager, Iran would not have fallen into this situation. All this widespread structural and institutionalized corruption by the system of Velayat-e Faqih is the result of a lack of transparency and oversight. The absence of justice, management, etc., we have understood from Khamenei's governance experience. He turned the IRGC into an economic and political cartel, and now Sadegh Larijani, as the head of the judiciary and a member of the Assembly of Experts, says that there should be no oversight even over the performance of the IRGC or the state media. The God of Ash'arites is an unaccountable absolute power. Whatever situation the world and humans find themselves in, it will be the best situation. They used to say: "Whatever that king does is sweet, just like the fig tree that makes all figs." The verse "لَا یُسْاَلُ عَمَّا یَفْعَلُ وَهُمْ یُسْاَلُونَ: [God] is not questioned about what He does, and they [humans] are questioned" (Al-Anbiya, 23) was the essence of Ash'arite speech. They said whatever God does is good, and there is no place for questioning the goodness and badness of His actions because His actions are not "motivated by purposes." The problem of evil did not shake them—intellectually and existentially. Rumi sometimes, like the Ash'arites, said: "In the paw of the male lion, there is a bloodthirsty creature; what remedy is there but submission and acceptance?" Khamenei has become such a god in the eyes of himself and his followers. Whatever situation Iran and Iranians find themselves in, whatever calamity they encounter, that situation will be the best situation. Followers will say: "The circle around Khamenei is entirely on the path of justice." Some great Jewish theologians after the Holocaust faced the issue of how an omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly good God allowed such a catastrophe. Why did He allow His chosen people to be burned like this? Ash'arite Jews faced no theological or philosophical problem, but rationalists among them realized that solving this issue was very difficult. Martin Buber raised the issue of God's absence from the world to somehow solve the problem. Khamenei is the present God. Oversight and accountability conflict with his absolute power and the principle of absolute Velayat-e Faqih. Corruption, decay, misery, tyranny, and oppression are also part of his divinity. We have remained Ash'arite in belief. But if God had a tongue and spoke, His first word would be that I have no vicegerent on earth. If God is unaccountable, all humans, due to their fallibility, must be accountable, critique-able, and answerable to the extent of their powers.