He was the voice that shook a monarchy, the cleric who became a sovereign, the poet who wrote in Persian and signed off as “Hindi.” For most of the world, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was a symbol of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the austere face of a theocratic state that rejected both kings and superpowers. But before Khomeini was a revolutionary, he was the grandson of an Indian.
That fact is not a historical curiosity. It is a thread in a much larger weave: the centuries-long dialogue between Shia communities in Persia and the Indian subcontinent. Khomeini’s grandfather, Syed Ahmad Musavi Hindi, was born in the early 1800s in Kintoor, a village in the princely state of Awadh, now part of Uttar Pradesh. It was a time when Persian scholars and clerics migrated to India under the patronage of Shia Nawabs, and in turn, Indian-born clerics journeyed back to the Middle East to study, teach, or escape colonial rule.
Syed Ahmad Musavi’s exit from India in 1830 was officially a pilgrimage to Najaf, but it coincided neatly with the growing reach of the British East India Company into Awadh. By 1834, he had settled in the Iranian town of Khomeyn, married locally, and put down roots. But he never dropped the nisba “Hindi.” He wore it like a second skin, a living marker of origin. Even as he integrated into Iranian society, the man from Kintoor carried India with him in his name and metaphorically in his story.
His grandson, born nearly seven decades later, inherited more than a family home in Khomeyn. He inherited a legacy of scholarship, migration, resistance, and devotion. Ruhollah Khomeini was born in 1902. By then, his father had already been killed—by some accounts, in a feud with a local landlord—and the future Ayatollah was raised by women who kept the flame of faith alive in the household. He began his religious education early, studied under some of Shia Islam’s most respected clerics, and followed his mentors from Arak to Qom, where he would eventually teach, write, and earn the title of Ayatollah.
It was in Qom that his double identity took fuller shape. In Persian poems and ghazals, he would sometimes sign his name as “Hindi.” Not as a political provocation, but as a quiet nod to ancestry. Friends and students reportedly used the name affectionately. His older brother, also a cleric, kept the surname Hindi more consistently. Even in Qom’s conservative circles, the family’s subcontinental connection was seen as neither exotic nor shameful.
Yet it was precisely that origin which would be weaponised against Khomeini when his political stature began to rise. By the 1960s, Khomeini had become a fierce critic of the Shah’s modernising reforms, denouncing land redistribution, women’s rights, and Western alliances as betrayals of Islamic values. His sermons grew sharper, his following larger. Arrested and exiled in 1964, he spent 14 years abroad, mostly in Najaf. There, the mullah from Khomeyn became the mullah for millions.
In 1970, he published his theory of Islamic government—Velayat-e Faqih—arguing for clerical rule in place of monarchy. By the time the Shah’s regime tried to discredit him with a hostile editorial in 1978, calling him an “Indian-born mullah” and a man of dubious loyalties, the insult backfired. Rather than sowing doubt, the attack provoked fury. Iranians took to the streets in defence of a leader they considered their own. To label him foreign was not just inaccurate—it was inflammatory.
If the Shah’s regime had hoped to alienate Khomeini from the public by pointing to his ancestry, they misread the moment. Many Iranians viewed the smear as proof of the establishment’s desperation. The protests that followed the editorial became the first sparks of the uprising. By early 1979, the revolution was in full swing. Khomeini returned to Iran to a hero’s welcome and became the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic.
What happened next is well-documented: purges, the Iran-Iraq War, the reorganisation of law and society along religious lines, and a shift in foreign policy that isolated Iran from much of the West. But in the background of this sweeping political drama, the quiet story of Khomeini’s ancestry remained—disputed by opponents, embraced by admirers.
Inside Iran, official accounts never made much of his Indian heritage, but neither did they suppress it. Government publications acknowledged the “Hindi” surname of his grandfather. The story was not erased; it was simply placed in the footnotes. Outside Iran, particularly in India, it loomed larger. In the village of Kintoor, his relatives still live. Locals maintain the old Musavi home. Some remember tales passed down through generations. Others feel a peculiar pride that one of their own rose to global prominence.
Among Shia Muslims in South Asia, Khomeini’s Indian link is often seen as a bridge, not a blemish. As historian Shahnawaz Khan put it, the shared heritage between Indian and Iranian Shia traditions spans centuries. The idea that one of the most influential Muslim figures of the twentieth century had roots in a small Indian village only reinforces the continuity of those ties.
For the exiled opposition and conspiracy-minded detractors, the story remains a convenient target. Some still suggest that Khomeini’s views were shaped by “foreign” influences, or that his origin somehow made him less authentically Iranian. These claims have little traction among serious scholars. Migration between Persia and India was common among scholars and clerics, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries. Syed Ahmad Musavi’s journey was neither rare nor unusual. What followed—his grandson’s rise to power—was the exception, not the migration itself.
There is something quietly poetic in the way Khomeini’s life braided two worlds. His political thought was forged in Qom, Najaf, and Paris. His authority came from his mastery of Shia jurisprudence, his charisma, and his strategic sense. But his personal story was touched by older, deeper currents: the Indian ancestry he never disavowed, the poetry he wrote under the name “Hindi,” and the cultural memory that persisted in both Iran and India long after his death in 1989.
It is tempting to read too much into this heritage, to draw a straight line between the values of Awadh’s Shia courts and Khomeini’s theocratic revolution. That would be a stretch. The Indian connection did not shape his ideology in any obvious way. What it did offer was a reminder: that even the most iconic national leaders are sometimes children of more than one world.
When Khomeini’s critics tried to paint him as a foreigner, they hoped to diminish his legitimacy. Instead, they revealed their own parochialism. The man who toppled a dynasty and reshaped a nation knew where he came from. He didn’t need to prove it. Nor did he feel the need to hide the truth: that the soil of Kintoor had once cradled the roots of a revolution.
Today, as Iran faces rising tensions with Israel and confronts global scrutiny once again, it is worth noting that Khomeini’s ideology continues, but the man himself is long gone. He died in 1989, and the country is now led by Ali Khamenei, his political successor, but not a family relation. Whether the system Khomeini designed can withstand today’s geopolitical storm remains to be seen. But the story of his ancestry—part Iranian, part Indian—remains an enduring reminder that origins are complex, and revolutions are rarely born in isolation.
Sources: This article draws on Hamid Algar’s biography in Imam Khomeini: Life, Thought and Legacy (2010), Baqer Moin’s Khomeini: Life of the Ayatollah, as well as reporting from India Today (Sushim Mukul, 21 May 2024), Clarion India (Mohammad bin Ismail, 15 June 2025), NDTV (19 June 2025), and archival material from The Washington Post (4 June 1989). Wikipedia entries for “Ahmad Hindi” and “Ruhollah Khomeini” have also been referenced.
Support independent community journalism. Support The Indian Sun.
Follow The Indian Sun on X | Instagram | Facebook
Support Independent Community Journalism
Dear Reader,The Indian Sun exists for one reason: to tell stories that might otherwise go unheard.
We report on local councils, state politics, small businesses and cultural festivals. We focus on the Indian diaspora and the wider multicultural community with care, balance and accountability. We publish in print and online, send regular newsletters and produce video content. We also run media training programs to help community organisations share their own stories.
We operate independently.
Community journalism does not have the backing of large media corporations. Advertising revenue fluctuates. Platform algorithms change. Costs continue to rise. Yet the need for credible, grounded reporting in a multicultural Australia has never been greater.
When you support The Indian Sun, you support:
• Independent reporting on issues affecting migrant communities
• Coverage of local and state decisions that shape daily life
• A platform for small businesses and community groups
• Media training that builds skills within the community
• Journalism accountable to readers
We cannot cover everything, but we work to cover what matters.
If you value thoughtful reporting that reflects Australia’s diversity, we invite you to contribute. Every donation helps us maintain the quality and consistency of our work.
Please consider making a contribution today.
Thank you for your support.
The Indian Sun Team
