“Khomeini … was a paradigm of asceticism, which in Islam was not a withdrawal from worldly affairs but a refusal to be seduced by materialism. He was incorruptible.”

Buckingham and Ross 1892, p. 660
His Character

Source: The Principles of State and Government in Islam (1961), Chapter 5: The Citizens And The Government, p 89

Virtual Meetings
Source: Virtual Mulaqat with Ahmadi Muslim Women from Kababir https://www.pressahmadiyya.com/press-releases/2021/06/ahmadi-muslim-women-from-kababir-have-honour-of-a-virtual-meeting-with-the-head-of-the-ahmadiyya-muslim-community/, 6 June 2021

Yoga: Immortality and Freedom, W. Trask, trans. (Princeton: 1969), pp. 95–96.

Part II, p. 29
A Jewish Writer in America (2011)

Source: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905; 1920), Ch. 3 : Luther's Conception of the Calling

Suzanne Belling, "Mandela bears message of peace in first visit to Israel", http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/12309/edition_id/237/format/html/displaystory.html jweekly.com, 22 October 1999
Attributed

Pt. III, Ch. 19 : The Right to Ignore the State, § 1 http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/273#lf0331_label_200
Social Statics (1851)
Context: As a corollary to the proposition that all institutions must be subordinated to the law of equal freedom, we cannot choose but admit the right of the citizen to adopt a condition of voluntary outlawry. If every man has freedom to do all that he wills, provided he infringes not the equal freedom of any other man, then he is free to drop connection with the state — to relinquish its protection, and to refuse paying towards its support. It is self-evident that in so behaving he in no way trenches upon the liberty of others; for his position is a passive one; and whilst passive he cannot become an aggressor. It is equally selfevident that he cannot be compelled to continue one of a political corporation, without a breach of the moral law, seeing that citizenship involves payment of taxes; and the taking away of a man’s property against his will, is an infringement of his rights. Government being simply an agent employed in common by a number of individuals to secure to them certain advantages, the very nature of the connection implies that it is for each to say whether he will employ such an agent or not. If any one of them determines to ignore this mutual-safety confederation, nothing can be said except that he loses all claim to its good offices, and exposes himself to the danger of maltreatment — a thing he is quite at liberty to do if he likes. He cannot be coerced into political combination without a breach of the law of equal freedom; he can withdraw from it without committing any such breach; and he has therefore a right so to withdraw.

Source: Ideas have Consequences (1948), p. 54.