Dedicating a chapter to the political history of the al-Khu'i family may surprise the reader. Abu al-Qasim al-Khu'i's hagiographers prefer, and rightly so, to remember the marja’ for his scholarly and philanthropic legacy rather than for his political role. At the doctrinal level, he held the traditional view that the authority of Shi'i jurists was limited and did not, as contended by Khomeini, pertain to all societal and political matters. Similarly, he did not regard it the duty of the men of religion to establish an Islamic state in the absence of the Hidden Imam, let alone to head it. Clerical involvement in the affairs of state was likely to be detrimental to the religious establishment. The danger of making errors was too high, and the amount of expediency, compromise and manoeuvring required to engage in worldly politics was a source of corruption.

In clarifying the political record of the al-Khu'i family, this chapter demonstrates that clerical views advocating caution towards politics by no means implies total aloofness in practice. The belief that the interference of religion in politics is valid when Islam and Muslims are in danger induced Abu al-Qasim al-Khu'i to occasionally take calculated action in their defence. This basic motive of activism, commonly invoked in the political history of the marja'iyya, also provided justification for the Al-Khoei Foundation to influence world politics as an advocate for the defence of Shi'i rights in Iraq and elsewhere. While it always refused the label of a political body, the foundation emerged under the leadership of 'Abd al-Majid al-Khu'i as a major voice in the international arena from the early 1990s.

The political activities of Abu al-Qasim al-Khu'i and the Al-Khoei Foundation shed precious light on the methods of clerical participation. In effect, the common denominator of their respective approach to the state was a preference not to enter into direct confrontation with it. Advice and mediation, occasionally accompanied by threats, as well as international advocacy and lobbying, were considered the best strategies to influence states’ behaviour. Conscious political aloofness was also sometimes required to avoid manipulation by governments.