Imagine an alternate timeline, much like George Bailey’s in It’s a Wonderful Life, where Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was never born.
By Dr. Tim Orr
Imagine an alternate timeline, like George Bailey’s in It’s a Wonderful Life, where Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was never born. What if the fiery revolutionary who led Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution—a movement that fundamentally reshaped not just Iran but Shiite Islam and the entire Middle East—had never lived? In this thought experiment, we explore how the absence of Khomeini’s vision would impact Shiite Islam, the Middle East, and even the global landscape.
Khomeini’s leadership brought unprecedented political power to Shiite clerics, changed how Shiite communities viewed themselves within Islamic history and intensified regional rivalries. Without him, Shiite Islam’s trajectory would have been dramatically different. Let’s dive deeper into this “wonder life” world where Shiite Islam evolves along a unique, quieter path.
Traditionally, Shiite Islam was rooted in a theological stance of resistance to political corruption rather than direct involvement in political power. Shiite communities held a historical identity as the “oppressed,” advocating for justice and righteous leadership while often remaining detached from state politics. Before Khomeini, Shiite clerics had a primarily spiritual and moral role, guiding communities through ethical teachings, legal judgments, and social support. Their authority lay in interpreting the teachings of their Prophet Muhammad and his family, especially the Twelve Imams, figures revered for their wisdom, sacrifice, and moral leadership rather than political rule.
Without Khomeini’s revolutionary ideology, this traditional stance of non-political moral authority could have persisted, emphasizing an ethos of humility, ethical guidance, and service. Shiite Islam might retain its role as the voice of the oppressed but direct its energies toward social reform and moral education rather than political dominance. In this world, Shiite clerics would encourage engagement with society through a sense of collective responsibility, acting as advocates for justice without striving for control. Shiite Islam, then, would become a stabilizing force within diverse societies, channeling its legacy of resistance into a constructive influence, elevating the ethical standards of its adherents without political confrontation.
Khomeini’s doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih, or Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist, redefined Shiite religious authority by positioning clerics not just as spiritual leaders but as the ultimate rulers in the absence of the Hidden Imam, the long-awaited savior in Shiite eschatology. This was a transformative shift, aligning religious authority with state power. Before Khomeini, however, Shiite scholars, especially in the seminaries of Najaf and Qom, generally avoided direct governance, seeing it as fraught with ethical risks.
Without Khomeini’s theory of Wilayat al-Faqih, the idea that clerics should govern political life might not gain traction in our alternate world. Shiite scholars would instead emphasize a division between spiritual guidance and secular governance. Clerics would remain leaders within their communities, focused on interpreting Islamic law and providing ethical direction rather than governing. They would advocate for justice and social equity from a community-centered perspective, trusting lay political leaders to handle statecraft. This approach would allow Shiite Islam to remain deeply involved in the moral guidance of society without conflating religious and political power, a shift that could prevent many of the conflicts tied to revolutionary Shiite politics.
This division of authority might even allow Shiite Islam to serve as a bridge between secular and religious governance in countries with diverse populations. Shiite clerics could function as advisors to secular leaders, bringing a perspective of spiritual wisdom without overt political control. This apolitical approach would maintain Shiite Islam's independence and moral integrity, allowing it to act as a voice of conscience rather than one of command.
Without Khomeini’s influence, Shiite Islam's global identity would likely stay more localized. Khomeini’s call to export Iran’s revolution transformed Shiite communities into potential political movements, aligning them with Iran’s anti-Western, anti-Sunni rhetoric. In this alternate reality, Shiite identity would instead focus on community welfare, social justice, and faith-based services. Shiite communities worldwide might dedicate themselves to local concerns, engaging in acts of charity, education, and outreach without affiliating themselves with any political revolution.
In places like Lebanon and Iraq, Shiite communities would have fewer external pressures to adopt revolutionary ideals, encouraging them to integrate more peacefully with their Sunni counterparts. For instance, Hezbollah, founded initially with strong ideological and financial support from Iran, might not have emerged as a militant force. Instead, Lebanese Shiites might work within Lebanon’s multi-sectarian political structure to secure community interests through diplomatic means.
This could lead to a very different Shiite-Sunni relationship in the region. Without Iran’s revolutionary rhetoric pushing Shiite groups to take militant stances, tensions with Sunni-majority countries like Saudi Arabia would likely be reduced. Shiite communities in Iraq, Bahrain, and other regions with significant Shiite populations would advocate for their rights within existing political frameworks, focusing on social reforms and minority rights without the looming threat of a revolutionary Shiite identity. This would foster a more harmonious coexistence, emphasizing shared Islamic values over political division.
Khomeini’s political model influenced how Shiite communities saw themselves and directed the focus of Shiite theological scholarship. Under the Islamic Republic, Iran’s seminaries increasingly emphasized political subjects, often linking religious study to state interests. But in our Khomeini-free timeline, Shiite theology would likely flourish in a broader, more diverse context, with scholars exploring ethics, spirituality, and jurisprudence without the pressure to fit political agendas.
Shiite scholars, especially those in seminaries like Najaf, could remain more independent, advancing a theology that integrates democracy, human rights, and moral governance without a strict state-sanctioned framework. This environment would encourage open debate, allowing scholars to engage with modern issues, from bioethics to social justice, and develop teachings that support democratic values. Shiite seminaries could cultivate scholars who were seen as moral voices and reformers, bridging religious tradition with modern values.
In this world, Shiite theology might produce a unique moral framework that resonates within the Islamic world and broader global ethics discussions. Shiite thinkers could become advocates for a faith-based approach to universal issues like social justice, environmental stewardship, and human rights, contributing a spiritual depth and a sense of moral responsibility to international discourse.
Khomeini’s revolutionary impact also shaped Shiite communities in the West, often placing them in a complex position vis-à-vis Western societies. His anti-Western ideology created challenges for Shiite Muslims living abroad as they navigated the dual identities of being faithful Shiites and integrated Western citizens. In our alternate reality, Shiite communities in the West might not carry the same political baggage, allowing them to engage more freely and fully with their host societies.
This would open doors for Shiite communities to focus on building bridges with their Western neighbors, emphasizing common social values like justice, charity, and community service. These communities could be cultural ambassadors, promoting mutual understanding and contributing to multiculturalism. Without the association with Iranian political radicalism, Shiite Muslims might find it easier to integrate, participate in public life, engage in interfaith dialogue, and foster respect for Shiite culture as part of the broader social fabric.
This integration could be mutually enriching: Shiite communities would be free to bring their unique cultural and religious perspectives, while Western societies would benefit from their rich heritage and commitment to ethical values. This alternate path leads to a Western presence that’s respected and seen as an essential, constructive part of pluralistic societies.
In It’s a Wonderful Life, George Bailey learns how impactful his life has been on his community, even in ways he never realized. Similarly, Khomeini’s life shaped Shiite Islam in profound ways that ripple across the globe, but imagining a world without him shows us another potential path. In this alternate world, Shiite Islam would not be so wedded to further evil in our world.
This alternative Shiite Islam would emphasize justice, compassion, and community support. Shiite clerics and scholars would be voices of moral authority, standing apart from political institutions yet contributing intensely to societal values and civic life. This vision allows Shiite communities to be champions of ethical integrity, contributing to society's moral development without wielding political authority. By remaining an independent, moral force, Shiite Islam would inspire Muslims from all backgrounds, fostering respect and appreciation for its unique traditions and history.
Ultimately, imagining a world without Khomeini invites us to reflect on the transformative power of ideologies and the possibilities that open up when religious leadership emphasizes ethical integrity over political control. In this alternate Middle East, Shiite Islam offers a spiritual model that resonates beyond borders, inspiring peace, unity, and understanding. It’s a “wonderful life” vision of Shiite Islam that balances faith, ethics, and community without the weight of revolutionary ambition.
Tim Orr is a scholar of Islam, Evangelical minister, conference speaker, and interfaith consultant with over 30 years of experience in cross-cultural ministry. He holds six degrees, including a master’s in Islamic studies from the Islamic College in London. Tim taught Religious Studies for 15 years at Indiana University Columbus and is now a Congregations and Polarization Project research associate at the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University Indianapolis. He has spoken at universities, including Oxford University, the University of Tehran, and mosques throughout the U.K. His research focuses on American Evangelicalism, Islamic antisemitism, and Islamic feminism, and he has published widely, including articles in Islamic peer-reviewed journals and three books.