Sociological Insights into Secularist Reading of Akhbarism: A Critical Consideration

Introduction: Research projects into Akhbārīsm seem to be taking for granted that Akhbārī doctrines imply any refutation of socio-political role for the religious scholars. Not only studies concerned with the establishing period of the school but also those devoted to the decline period of the school treat Akhbārīsm as an apolitical fraction in Shi’ite scholarship. This is what might be called secularist notion of the Akhbārī theory. However, the main Akhbārī texts do not leave a room for such an interpretation and moreover the social roles and state functions performed by Akhbārī ulama are strong negations to this understanding. 
Method: In order to evaluate the secularist notion of the Akhbārī Theory and thus to criticise it, this article makes use of a textual analysis method to examine the ideas and the discussions generated by the most prominent scholars in the field and then focuses on two particular academic researches whose theoretical framework takes root in the existing Akhbārī literature.  
Findings: The contesters who evaluate the role and the function of the Akhbārīsm negatively, believe that Akhbārī ulama failed to play a socio-political role in decisive episodes of the history because Akhbārīsm lacked a political theory while on the other hand their Uṣūlī counterpart were capable, in theory and practice, to lead the society in fatal events. During the second phase of Perso-Russian war, for instance, Uṣūlī mujtahids issued fatwas urging Muslims to defend their homeland. Tobacco fatwa by which Shi’ite Muslims were prohibited from smoking tobacco is another occasion declaring the role and importance of Uṣūlī doctrines. Additionally, Iranian Constitutionalism is a significant event for the glorification of the Uṣūlī School. During victorious Constitutional Revolution the importance of theory of ijtihad and the role of Uṣūlī agenda is far beyond denial. Reportedly, Akhbārī ulama did play no role. Supposedly, they are all scenes wherein Akhbārī ulama were absent.
Similarly, the appreciators depict an apolitical portrait of the Akhbārī ulama who, historically, did their best to preserve the social integrity and to oppose the unlimited power of the mujtahids. They suggest that Akhbārī ulama believed in no political role for the religious scholars. Therefore, central to their attention was how to maintain integrity of the society by guaranteeing a life safety for Sufis as well as Sunni minorities. Akhbārī refutation of emulation theory by which they meant an opposition against mujtahids was positive in function because it was capable to accredit laypeople understanding of the sacred texts. This linear epistemology was an absolute threat to social position of mujtahids who defended some hierarchical epistemology based on which the society was divided into two groups: a majority of laypeople who ought to emulate a minority of knowledgeable ulama.     
Results & Conclusion: These apparently adversaries seem to share the same idea based on which Akhbārī ulama were propagating a notion of secularism. Reviewing well-known researchers in this field, this article focuses on two academic theses authored in a ten-year-period. Relying on different methodological and theoretical bases, Mohsen Al-e-Ghafour (2000) and Rouhollah Eslami (2010) share the same idea and conclusion that according to Akhbārī doctrines religious scholars are not allowed -and must not be- to play any political role. However, referring to Amin Astarābādī himself, this article reaches this conclusion that their argumentations are not documentarily satisfied and fail to confirm their interpretation. Besides, the so-called Akhbārī ulama were in close contacts with the state and people as well which makes us regard this interpretation historically indefensible.