The Roots of Formation of Ayatollah Khomeini’S Political Thought
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sudden emerge of Ayatollah Khomeini as a prominent jurist in Iran and Muslim world political sphere and presenting Islamic Government theory considered by both Muslim and western scholars and analysts as a surprise. The Islamic Government theory which have been recognized as a turning point in Shi’a juridical and political thought, never deliberated and emphasized as much as this by any other Shi’a jurists before him. By focus upon and examining the personal experiences and interests, social and political affairs and his intellectual pursuits and the thoughts that affected his theorizing researcher aim to provide a more propound understanding of preconditions and roots of formation of his approach as well as its underlying structure. The study reveals that formation and development of his thought in the course of time in general and after publishing of his first political book, “Kashf al Asrar”, where he shows loyalty to theory of “Constitutional government with designation and permission of jurists” to “Islamic Government” book which he announced his major shift from old theory to theory of “Governance of the jurists” in particular was result of a series of social, political events and intellectual factors in Iran’s contemporary history that affected directly or indirectly his thought and contributed to formation, development and formulation of his thought. Key words: Ayatollah Khomeini; Shi’a jurists; Islamic government; governance of the jurists; Iran, roots of approach
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".