Shafaqna English- The Social Functions of the Culture of Waiting in Contemporary Society by Dr. Mohammad Hossein Mokhtari, Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Holy See.
Despite the remarkable expansion of knowledge and technology, the contemporary world faces a profound crisis of meaning, social despair, and the erosion of moral capital. Declining public trust, excessive individualism, and a lack of clear horizons for the future have left many societies in a state of historical disorientation. In such circumstances, revisiting the social capacities of religion may offer a way to reconstruct hope and collective agency.
The present essay, adopting an analytical–conceptual approach, seeks to demonstrate that the culture of waiting and the belief in the advent of Imam al-Mahdi (peace be upon him) is not merely a future-oriented creed or an individual ritual practice. Rather, it possesses concrete functions in organizing and shaping social life. From this perspective, waiting is interpreted as a form of responsible historical living that can contribute to the production of collective hope, the strengthening of moral responsibility, the enhancement of social solidarity, and the cultivation of a spirit of justice-seeking. In this way, the culture of waiting provides the religious community with a civilizational capacity to confront the spiritual and social crises of today’s world.
One of the most striking features of the human condition in the modern era is the sense of disconnection between material progress and spiritual tranquility. Although contemporary humanity has attained unprecedented scientific and material facilities, it is more than ever afflicted by anxiety, loneliness, and meaninglessness. Many social theorists speak of the decline of public trust, the weakening of collective bonds, and the growth of an isolating individualism whose consequences include reduced social participation and the spread of pessimism about the future. In such a climate, the fundamental question arises: what resources can restore hope and historical direction to society and rescue human beings from falling into apathy and passivity?
Within the religious tradition of Islam—especially in Shi‘i thought—the doctrine of Mahdism is regarded as one of the most significant sources of meaning and future-oriented hope. Nevertheless, this doctrine has sometimes been narrowly understood merely as an apocalyptic belief, as though Mahdism were only a promise concerning a distant future with no direct relevance to present human life. Such an interpretation inadvertently reduces waiting to a passive and suspended state. By contrast, if properly understood, waiting can become not only a psychological force but also a social and historical agent of transformation. The central issue of this article, therefore, is to examine what functions the culture of waiting can perform in contemporary social life and how it can be elevated from the level of subjective belief to that of collective action.
To answer this question, the concept of waiting must first be redefined. In Shi‘i logic, waiting does not merely mean passively awaiting an external event; rather, it signifies a continuous and responsible readiness. The one who waits takes the promised future as the criterion for evaluating the present and strives to harmonize personal and social life with that horizon. In this sense, waiting represents a form of “future-oriented existence,” a mode of life in which the future is not vague or uncertain but a guiding reality that directs present decisions and actions. Such waiting is inherently active and is intimately connected with self-reform, ethical commitment, and the pursuit of justice.
The first social function of this culture can be observed in the production of collective hope. A society that perceives the future as dark and horizonless gradually falls into lethargy and loses the motivation to participate in reform. In contrast, the belief that history is moving toward the establishment of justice and the ultimate triumph of truth generates existential confidence and enduring hope. This hope is not merely a private feeling but a form of social capital that strengthens resilience in the face of difficulties and encourages people to persist in reformative efforts. From this perspective, waiting prevents the emergence of nihilism and meaninglessness in collective life and protects society from psychological collapse.
The second function of the culture of waiting is the strengthening of moral responsibility. If the ideal future is envisioned as a just world filled with equity and spirituality, it is natural that the one who waits cannot remain indifferent to oppression, corruption, or discrimination. Waiting creates an inner commitment to align one’s life with the values of that promised future. Consequently, self-purification, respect for the rights of others, trustworthiness, and efforts toward social reform become the logical requirements of waiting. In this way, religious belief leads to a lived and practical ethics that goes beyond mere slogans.
Furthermore, the culture of waiting can enhance social solidarity and social capital. When members of a society gather around a shared ideal horizon, their sense of belonging and mutual empathy increases. Sharing a transcendent goal fosters cooperation, trust, and greater participation. Many voluntary activities, charitable services, and benevolent social movements can be interpreted in light of such a horizon—a horizon in which serving others is seen as participation in preparing society for a better future. Thus, waiting is transformed from a purely individual experience into a collective and connective one that cultivates strong social networks.
Alongside these aspects, waiting also carries a critical and justice-oriented function. Belief in the advent of a justice-spreading savior naturally produces a constructive dissatisfaction with the present condition. The true one who waits does not regard unjust situations as natural or immutable, but rather as temporary and subject to change. This outlook fosters a spirit of resistance to oppression and encourages the demand for reform, guiding society toward the correction of flawed structures. From this standpoint, waiting can serve as a force of resistance against domination and injustice, preventing passive conformity to undesirable circumstances.
In light of these analyses, it may be said that the culture of waiting possesses a capacity that extends far beyond a merely doctrinal teaching and can function as a form of spiritual and social capital. By generating hope, responsibility, solidarity, and a commitment to justice, this culture strengthens the foundational elements of a dynamic and ethical society. Consequently, Mahdism is not merely a narrative about the future, but a force for shaping the present—a force capable of opening new horizons for both individual and collective life in the face of the spiritual and social crises of the contemporary world.
Accordingly, if educational, cultural, and media institutions succeed in presenting an active and responsible understanding of waiting, this religious teaching can become an effective factor in rebuilding social capital and enhancing the quality of collective life. Such an interpretation liberates waiting from passivity and stagnation and transforms it into a model for conscious historical action. Ultimately, it can be concluded that, when properly understood, the culture of waiting is not only a response to humanity’s spiritual needs but also a social strategy for overcoming the ethical and cultural deadlocks of modern society.
Based on what has been discussed, it becomes clear that the culture of waiting is not merely a collection of doctrinal teachings or ritual practices. Rather, it constitutes an interpretive horizon for understanding social life—a horizon through which the believer assigns meaning to historical events, failures, and even collective sufferings. A society lacking such a horizon easily falls into confusion and psychological disintegration in times of crisis, for it possesses no hopeful narrative of the future. By contrast, a waiting society perceives history as an open and purposeful path, and this outlook makes the continuation of effort and reform possible. In other words, waiting represents a form of historical meaning-making that interprets the present in relation to a bright future and transforms everyday existence into a purposeful experience.
From this perspective, the culture of waiting can be explained through certain familiar concepts in the social sciences. What sociologists call “social capital”—that is, networks of trust, cooperation, and shared norms—is strengthened within the framework of common religious beliefs. Waiting, as a shared and comprehensive ideal, draws individuals out of dispersion and individualistic isolation and gathers them under a transcendent goal. This shared orientation fosters altruistic behavior and voluntary participation. Thus, belief in the promised advent indirectly reshapes the structure of social relations and improves the quality of human interactions.
Another important point is that waiting establishes a unique relationship between religiosity and social action. In some interpretations, religion is reduced to an entirely private and individual sphere, and its connection with public and social concerns is weakened. However, the Mahdist culture does not tolerate such a separation. If the ultimate goal of history is the realization of universal justice and a monotheistic society, then every small effort to reduce human suffering and expand justice is regarded as part of that historical trajectory. Consequently, religiosity transcends the sphere of personal rituals and becomes a social responsibility. This bond between faith and action can present religion as a dynamic and effective presence within the public realm.
Moreover, waiting entails a form of psychological and moral education. The one who waits learns patience in the face of hardships, avoids despair, and prioritizes long-term horizons over short-term interests. Such qualities are influential not only at the individual level but also socially. A society whose members possess greater resilience, hope, and moral commitment will be better equipped to overcome crises and achieve collective goals. Thus, waiting may also be understood as generating a form of moral capital that undergirds social well-being.
Nevertheless, it must be emphasized that these functions can only be realized if the concept of waiting remains free from distortions and misunderstandings. If waiting is interpreted as withdrawal from social responsibility or as justification for the status quo, it will not only lose its positive functions but may even lead to stagnation and passivity. Therefore, a careful and scholarly reinterpretation of this concept, highlighting its active and responsible dimensions, is essential. Intellectual and cultural institutions must demonstrate that waiting calls for continuous self- and social reform, not the suspension of history until the occurrence of a miraculous event.
In light of these considerations, it may be concluded that the culture of waiting possesses a civilizational capacity. By providing hope, meaning, solidarity, and moral commitment, it reinforces the fundamental components of a dynamic society and can play a restorative role against many pathologies of the modern world, including excessive individualism, meaninglessness, and the erosion of public trust. In this sense, Mahdism is not merely a teaching about an uncertain future but a model for responsible living in the present—a model that calls human beings to build a more just world here and now.
Thus, rethinking the culture of waiting and clarifying its social functions can open new horizons for dialogue between religion and society. If properly understood and promoted in the public sphere, this teaching can become a lasting source of hope and collective action. Through this process, the religious community can rely on its spiritual capital not only to avoid passivity in the face of contemporary crises but also to assume an active and creative role in historical reform and progress. Such an understanding ultimately transforms waiting from a mere belief into a way of life and an effective social force—one that establishes a living connection between faith, ethics, and social action and makes a brighter future possible within present life.
Extending this discussion, it should be emphasized that the culture of waiting concerns not only the “final outcome of history,” but even more the “manner of living within history.” In other words, waiting is less a doctrine about the end of the world than an interpretation of human duty in the midst of the world. Such an outlook highlights human historical responsibility and removes individuals from the position of mere spectators. The one who waits regards himself or herself as a participant in the realization of the future, not merely a witness to its occurrence. This sense of participation gives meaning and direction to social action and prevents political and ethical indifference.
From an educational perspective as well, the culture of waiting can cultivate a particular type of human character—one in which hope is combined with realism, idealism with practicality, and faith with social responsibility. Such a person is neither naïvely optimistic nor paralyzed by pessimism but, despite recognizing the difficulties of reality, still believes in the possibility of change. This combination of hope and commitment is among the most important prerequisites for social development, since societies progress when their members feel responsible for their collective destiny. Waiting nurtures precisely this feeling.
Furthermore, it can be said that the culture of waiting produces a form of “future-oriented ethics.” Within this ethical framework, present decisions and behaviors are not judged solely by short-term interests but also by their relation to a more just and humane future. This long-term perspective reduces many social harms such as excessive profiteering, consumerism, and disregard for the rights of others. When individuals feel responsible before the future of history and the coming generations, their conduct becomes more cautious and ethical. In this way, waiting can give rise to a form of collective moral rationality.
At the cultural level, this doctrine also has the capacity to create a shared and identity-forming narrative. Every society requires a story that connects its past, present, and future and unites its members under a common meaning. Mahdism provides such a narrative: a past grounded in divine promise, a present marked by responsibility, and a future filled with justice. This temporal continuity strengthens collective identity and prevents historical rupture. A society possessing such a shared narrative will be more resilient against cultural assaults and identity crises.
Accordingly, if waiting moves beyond the level of slogans and is elevated to the level of understanding and practice, it can become a comprehensive model for organizing both individual and social life. This culture generates hope and meaning on the one hand and calls human beings to reform themselves and their society on the other. For this reason, waiting may be regarded as the meeting point of faith and responsibility—the point at which religious belief becomes social commitment.
Ultimately, the culture of waiting may be considered a strategic asset for Islamic society—an asset that, if properly understood and activated, can enable it to withstand many of the ethical and social challenges of the contemporary world. By fostering hope, strengthening solidarity, nurturing moral commitment, and directing historical action, this culture guides society toward a brighter future. In this sense, waiting is not merely a belief about a distant tomorrow, but a living force for building today—a force that frees human beings from passivity and calls them to conscious participation in the realization of justice and human dignity.
Source: