Dr. Soroush (I)
Kambiz Iranpour
In light of the requests for a new topic (on Soroush,) I am breaking
my exile from SCI only for sending five different articles which
I have gathered on him :-) [With regards Kambiz]
The Guardian - Thursday 6 June 1996
A questioning approach to Islam puts maverick professor in
limelight
============================================================
=========
Kathy Evans speaks to a man whose controversial ideas on his
faith have won him supporters and made him enemies
ABDOLKARIM Sorush probably wouldn't attract a second glance
on the underground. He is balding, bearded and bespectacled,
and looks an unlikely candidate for the job of visionary.
But that is how many Iranians view this quiet professor of
philosophy and ethics from Tehran University. Dubbed the
Martin Luther of Shi'ite Islam for his reformist ideas. Dr
Sorush has been receiving a pop star's welcome at lecture
halls around London as Iranians living in Britain gather to
hear him speak.
Back home, Dr Sorush is hounded by radical groups, subject
to frequent arrest and banned-from teaching. His views on
the need for Islam to let in the fresh air of debate and to
endorse the concept of human rights have made him the chief
ideological thorn in the side of Iran's religious
authorities .
One of his main arguments is that there are essentials in
Islam which cannot be changed - and then there are what he
calls "accidentals of history" stemming from the time and
society in which the prophet Mohammed was born. It was an
accident of history, he believes, that the language of Islam
is Arabic. and that the prophet was born in the Arab world,
and not elsewhere.
If Mohammed had been born in Germany, for example, his rules
on social issues might be different.
Similarly, Dr Sorush argues, the schism between Sunni and
Shi'ite Islam was an accident of history.
Also classified as accidentals by the professor are rules
hitherto considered fundamental, such as the laws allowing
Muslim me to marry four women, and those which give
automatic rights of divorce and custody of children to men.
"All these are accidentals, which can be subjects of
discussion [ijtihad]," he said, referring to the concept of
interpretive reasoning in Islam.
Iran's silent liberals, and much of its youth, have adopted
the professor as their champion. Disbelievers cannot,
according to traditional Islam, speak out, but Dr Sorush
believes they too have the right of expression. Liberals and
secularists should be allowed, he believes, to participate
in politics and publish their views.
"I am for a pluralistic society," he said simply.
It is also time, he said, for Islam to grapple with the
concept of human rights.
"ln the Muslim world, we have talked only of duties, not of
rights. Having rights is considered a Western concept. In
modern civilisations however, believing in God is not a
duty, but a right."
Such ideological distinctions are anathema to the leadership
of the Islamic Republic and the storm troopers they
occasionally dispatch to hound the professor and his
supporters. Each time he tries to hold a meeting nowadays,
the result is a riot, provoked by hardliners of the Ansar-e
Hizbullah.
These young radicals, little more than thugs, are thought to
be backed by conservative clerics close to the office of
Iran s spiritual leader, Ayatollah Khamenei.
In an open letter last week the group called Dr Sorush the
Galileo of Islam. "We are not prepared to sell out the ideas
of the revolution to secularism, or sell the blood of our
martyrs." said the Ansar-e Hizbullah letter. The doctor's
words, it said, were not philosophy, but temptation.
Western diplomats believe Dr Sorush to be extremely brave in
continuing to express his views despite the growing tide of
threats. "He doesn't have a bright future," said one.
But many Iranians are disappointed that the professor has
not translated his ideas into an active political platform.
A number point to his involvement with the revolutionary
regime in its earlier days, as a member of the Council for
Cultural Revolution. He's just one of them, one of
[President Ali Akbar] Rafsanjani's group. He's vague,
doesn't openly criticise the system," said one critic.
Some critics believe that President Rafsanjani may in the
end prove to be his greatest protection from the radicals,
particularly as the conservative clerics recently gained the
upper hand in parliament and may next year take the
presidency.
Dr Sorush has denied seeking a political future. "I am just
a theoretician," he said. I let others draw their own
conclusions from my ideas."
Kambiz Iranpour
Muslim News - 31 May 1996
Miserable Plight of a brilliant scholar
=======================================
One would have expected that Islamic scholars would have support from an
Islamic government. However, this is not the case, not for Dr Hosein Dabbagh
more popularly known as Abdolkarim Soroush, who has, for the past two years,
been prevented from delivering lectures even at his own university. He has
been physically assaulted many times. The government denies its involvement.
However, nothing is done to protect him or to apprehend the perpetrators.
Dr Soroush, 50, an unassuming figure, soft-spoken, and a deep thinker,
normally calm and relaxed, now sits in his office at the Research Institute
for Human Sciences, Tehran, extremely tense, under a cloud of intense
pressure. He is a unique scholar, being at home both in the University in
Tehran and the Hawza (Islamic Seminary) in Qom.
Professor Soroush is a popular Islamic thinker with a wide following amongst
Islamic intellectuals, not only in lran but in other parts of the world as
well, lectures Philosophy of Social Sciences at Tehran University. He has
authored many books on various philosophical topics and poetry.
Many of his ideas have led to his persecution. Professor Soroush believes
that religious texts should be understood in the context of the age one lives
in and their interpretations are not the monopoly of any one group of people,
meaning the 'ulama. Such views and others, like his views on religion and
state, which he says have been misunderstood - he believes deliberately by his
enemies - have led to claims that he has attacked the concept of the rule of
Wali al-Faqih (The Governance of the Jurisprudent), which is the core
foundation of the current state of Iran. The Wilayat al-Faqih is the supreme
head of the state, currently held by Ayatullah Ali Khamenei.
Dr Soroush is against, what he terms as 'ideologisation of religion', which he
believes leads to totalitarianism. He says religion is not an ideology (like
Marxism). This radical view puts him at odds with sociologists like the late
Dr Ali Shariati who maintained that Islam was an ideology. Dr Soroush says
that the concept of "religious ideology makes it totalitarian" as "ideology
needs an official class of interpreters" and religion "does not need official
interpreters" as "interpretation of religion has to be pluralistic". Just
after he had presented his paper on this topic, Ayatollah Khamenei rebutted
his thesis by announcing that religion does need official interpretation.
His other article on 'Religious Democratic State' also elicited criticism. He
suggested that "no one has a priori the right to rule in Islam" - implying the
'ulama do not have the automatic right to rule. Soroush argues that "the state
is a function of society, a product of it". A government should not impose its
will on the people. "If a society is religious, the government will inevitably
be religious if a society is secular, the government will be secular." In the
West, thinkers first created a secular society and then the government became
secular. A government consists of two pillars - methods and values. The method
of ruling a government needs a rational approach and not religious. However,
the values are derived form religious texts. But there is a relationship
between values and methods. "The method you choose over a society affects the
values; for example, under a despotic regime people are not allowed to
criticise. This method then affects the values and therefore the respect of
the rights of people are affected and therefore you are undermining values."
In a religious democratic society, a person should be free to express his/her
opinion. Dr Soroush however, is not allowed to express his opinions and this
has led to clashes during his public speeches and lectures at Tehran
University.
Dr Soroush denies that he is part of any political opposition group. "I am a
thinker expressing my ideas." It is the ideas that has put him in danger from
certain sections of the society. The day before I met him for the interview,
he was given a threatening letter warning him not to continue with his
lectureship at Tehran University. He describes how they came to the university
(on April 28) just as he was going to give his lecture. "They came with
knives, clubs on their motorbikes intimidating me." This is not the first time
that unknown opponents of his ideas have harassed him at the university. And
this intimidation does not just affect Dr Soroush, it also has an effects on
his post graduate students who feel threatened and uneasy in his classes. The
Dean of the University has, because of the threats, reduced the number of Dr
Soroush's classes from four (with upto 250 students) to only one class (with
only 20 students).
The attacks against Dr Soroush began eleven months ago when he gave a public
talk to mark the anniversary of Dr Ali Shariati in Isfahan. He was invited by
students at Isfahan University but the university officials refused to allow
them the use of the premises. So the meeting was held in a hired hall outside
. However as he began his lecture, he was attacked and he escaped into a
dungeon thinking they would not be able to find him in the dark. But they
managed to get hold of him and attacked him tearing his shirt. However, he
managed to escape after a few hours and he wrote a private letter to the
President complaining about the intimidation. One hundred and seven people -
lecturers, writers, artists - from Tehran and other universities also wrote to
the president expressing their dismay at the treatment meted out to Dr Soroush
and requested him to ensure such incidents do not occur in future. But on
October 11, 1995, he was again attacked by a group of about 150 people, now
calling themselves Ansare Hizbullah, at Tehran University's technical college
under the eyes of the security guards. His glasses were broken. He was
attacked also as he reached the podium to speak. He managed to escape with
some of his supporters. Soroush had been invited by Islamic Society of Tehran
University to speak on mysticism, Rumi's Mathnavi (written in 13th century).
"If my friends had not protected me I would have been killed", said Dr
Soroush. Many students were injured in this incident.
After this incident, students at Tehran University held a protest. This was a
first demonstration of its kind at the university by Islamists. After that Dr
Soroush was interrogated by the Information Ministry and warned not to give
any public lectures and not to write any articles on Wilayat ul- Faqih,
religious government and the 'ulama.
Three weeks ago, Dr Soroush was invited to give a lecture on the anniversary
of Ayatullah Mutahhari, who was martyred just after the revolution, by the
Islamic Society at Amir Kabir University. Ansare Hizbullah again threatened to
disrupt the meeting but the students vowed to defend Dr Soroush and the
atmosphere became tense as both sides said they would fight and become
martyrs. The Dean requested Dr Soroush not to attend. Dr Soroush agreed.
However, on the day, May 10, he was arrested by the security officers and
taken to the Information Ministry for interrogation. He was warned not to
attend the programme, not to give lectures at Tehran University and not to go
abroad. The gathering went ahead. But only students of Amir Kabir University
were allowed to attend the meeting. Minor skirmishes took place outside and
many were arrested. "The Ansare Hizbullah brought with them gallows in their
van", said Dr Soroush.
Professor Abdolkarim Soroush believes the problem began four years ago in
Isfahan. He talked about bringing the unity between Hawza and University. . In
a university, there is, in theory. no limit to criticism whilst there is no
intellectual freedom in Hawza and those who question and criticise the
foundations are boycotted."
Another reason for the problems he is facing, he believes is because before
his speech in Isfahan, Dr Soroush said at a public meeting at the University
of Rasht, that Ayatullah Mutahhari and Sayyid Tabatabai (author of the l9-
volume Tafsir al-Mizan) were the exceptions in Hawza and encouraged the
students to go to Hawza and continue the tradition of these 'ulama of
questioning.
Dr Soroush, after the latest incident of Amir Kabir University, wrote an open
letter to President Hashemi Rafsanjani recounting various intimidative acts by
Ministry of Information and the Ansare Hizbullah. "Has this country gone so
far so that a teacher takes his life into his own hands when attending class
or an academic meeting? Does this country need the likes of Galileo, Giordano
and Bruno?", he asked.
Kambiz Iranpour
http://www.iranian.com/Jan96/Jan_TOC.html
[For the Flower of Freedom]
(Persian image text)
The following is a response by Dr. Abdolkarim Soroush, a
reformist Islamic thinker, to a recent statement by Iran's
Foreign Minister Dr. Ali Akbar Velayati.
Dr. Soroush, who recently returned to Iran after attending
conferences on the Middle East in Europe and the United States,
rejects accusations of creating "scandal" and "weakening the
foundations of national independence and harmony."
"That which will guarantee the permanence of religion and
belief," he says, "is only and only the spread of ideas and that
requires freedom -- a pure principle without which nothing can be
permanent."
And he adds: "Cling to freedom, because among God's favorite
creations, freedom is most beautiful and delicate... Tolerate the
thorn (if there is a thorn) for the sake of the beauty of the
flower."
Dr. Soroush's response was, for the most part, reprinted in
Iran's daily Salam. What follows is the full text of the response
as well as a news clipping containing Dr. Velayati's statements.
In the name of God
He whose thoughts
Solve world problems,
Tell him, "Give me
Better insight than this."
Tell him "Your lips
Are doing me a favor --
A really great favor. But
Do me a better favor..."
Being involved in world issues has apparently not left any time
for the foreign minister of Iran to look closely at domestic
affairs. Until now, many obscurers of the truth and many
deceivers had resorted to various distortions concerning the "Dr.
Soroush issue", all of which I ignored because [as the Qoran
says,] "pass by futility with honorable avoidance."
But this time, irresponsible remarks have been made by a
responsible official of the country, which are so painful to the
heart of the truth that [this Qoranic verse] resounds in my ears:
"Invite all to the path of thy Lord with wisdom and good
preaching."
A student at [Tehran's] Imam Sadeq University asked the foreign
minister this question in an open forum: "Has the Dr. Soroush
issue caused any problems for Iran in international affairs?" And
[the foreign minister] answered: "Yes. The Dr. Soroush issue
definitely affects our foreign policy situation." (Daily Kayhan's
report on Dr. Velayati's comments).
This in itself is an interesting point to hear since it is a
statement that is related to the foreign minister's job, as it is
based on confidential and non-confidential messages which the
minister is naturally informed of, and contains concerns which he
and his ambassadors have been facing around the world.
But when it comes to an assessment of the "Dr. Soroush issue" at
home, the weakness and crudeness [of the foreign minister's
statements] becomes apparent.
From the foreign minister's point of view, the "Dr. Soroush
issue" is that he drags "scholastic issues into public forums"
and he creates "scandals" and "weakens the foundations of
national independence and harmony, as well as the state" and
"harms the people's national and ideological foundations." And
[from the foreign minister's point of view,] not only is this not
a service [to the nation] "but antagonistic toward the nation"
and it is similar to the things Ahmad Kasravi (1) used to do.
The picture that the foreign minister has painted of Dr. Soroush
is one of a sorcerer or a prophet. But is it logical to say that
a person who does not have access to radio or television
stations, to newspapers, to mosques, to Friday prayer tribunes
and to religious gatherings; a person who is constantly pounded
by the mass media with the ugliest attacks and accusations such
as spying, incompetence, treachery, freemasonry, being an
American agent , hypocrisy, liberalism, and being another Salman
Rushdie, Kasravi, Malcolm Khan (2) and so on (including the
latest accusations by the foreign minister), could weaken the
pillars of national independence and harmony and harm the
foundations of the people's national and religious beliefs, and
weaken the state?
[Is it logical to accuse me of these things when] my speeches are
stopped and prohibited by beating me and tearing off my clothes
and when at the same time, thugs are given medals of honor? I am
a person whose only opportunity is to write and publish an
article every two or three months in a specialized magazine with
limited circulation and someone who collects those very same
articles for a book (which is now also being threatened with
censorship).
What happened to all the speeches, articles, films, books,
magazines, newspapers and speakers who loudly work day and night
in the interests of the state and guide the people? Where have
they all gone? And how is it that their efforts to strengthen the
national and religious beliefs of the people is not getting
anywhere and only this writer, with his broken pen and shut up
mouth, who has no freedom of expression and no personal security
(I have many times heard thugs and attackers threatening me with
death and burning and I have read their threatening letters) has
succeeded in casting a dark cloud? God knows that not even
sorcerers have such powers.
Anyhow, Soroush is neither a sorcerer nor a prophet, only one of
God's humble creatures.
The strange picture of Iranian society presented by the foreign
minister is that of a termite-infested orphanage that could
crumble with the slightest shove and whose children's minds would
be in disarray with the lowest cry. And the picture that he has
painted of himself is that of a medieval priest, appointed
foreign minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran at the end of
the 20th century, wielding the weapon of excommunication in front
of the alert eyes and ears of the world, while ignoring his
responsibilities to preserve the cultural interests, integrity
and reputation of this country.
He resorts to such statements for the sake of domestic
consumption in order to remove a rival whom he compares to Ahmad
Kasravi, thus further endangering that person's life. And he does
not even act upon his own words that "nothing should be said to
give pretext to the enemies of this country and people." By
speaking in such a way, he himself is not only giving a pretext
to the enemy but also disgracing a strong culture whose slogan
has been: "show generosity toward friends and caution toward
enemies."
He does not stop to think for one moment that if the "Dr. Soroush
issue" is an international issue, it is precisely because this
case is an example of the lack of security that the pen pushers
of this land experience, and because even the foreign minister
resorts to comparisons and analogies within familiar and
unpleasant contexts.
Yes, Mr. Foreign Minister, the "Dr. Soroush issue" is nothing but
the fact that in this country, whenever a selfless truth teller
starts speaking out of pain and for the sake of religious reform,
he is stripped of his reputation, freedom and security and nailed
so hard with curses, accusations of heresy and threats in
mosques, the press and the radio and television that he is unable
to move in any direction.
And they do not stop at that either. They then send misled
individuals to attack him in broad daylight so that after
breaking his reputation, they could snatch what is left of his
half-alive body. And then people like the foreign minister come
along, blindly opening their mouth and making not the slightest
mention of all those cruel and wicked acts against a servant
among the servants of the pen in the cultural scene, throwing
dust in the eyes of fairness and putting the weight of all the
wrongs, treacheries and condemnations on the weak shoulders of
someone [like me], reminding him of the fearful fate of the likes
of Kasravi, suggesting that he be silent, and in the end
demanding that he be not "antagonistic toward this nation" and
not give pretext to the enemy -- as if those whose violent
actions present this nation as savage, uncultured and abusive of
human rights, are not the enemies of the nation and do not give
pretext to the enemy!
Mr. Foreign Minister! A government and a country cannot claim
virtue or honor if its academic community and artists are
oppressed, intimidated and treated as criminals for expressing
their views, and live in fear and insecurity, and are scared of
exercising their intellectual and artistic talents, and see their
lives, work and reputation attacked by hooligans. [A government
and a country cannot claim virtue or honor] when, at the same
time, a bunch of ignorant individuals mock science and justice
and ruin the reputation of a country and a nation by waving the
whip of fear, and who rely on their ignominious views and ideas
to demand the submission of scholars, and who neither care about
the interests of the country nor of the nation when they act upon
the commands of instigators and puppet masters.
Mr. Foreign Minister! Dr. Soroush thirsts neither for wealth nor
power nor fame, and he does not speak with domestic or foreign
interests in mind. He does not strive to protect a post or seek
any reward from anyone for his (right or wrong) remarks. Rather
he has something to say; he has pain, courage, faith, rights and
responsibility. He has given his heart to a gentle, spiritual,
heavenly and humane religion and wants its glory and splendor.
He believes that the cultural foundations of this land are
stronger than a termite-infested orphanage and sees the people of
this society more mature than school children and strives for the
interests and reputation of this land in such a way that he will
not create a weapon or pretext for the enemy by saying anything
imprudent. And he is so patient toward the indecencies of the
indecent and the threats of those who make the enemy happy by
destroying security, that he ignores them and does not respond to
them.
He has accumulated experiences in time and has learned from great
men, and he assures you that the interests of this country and
its people, and that which will guarantee the permanence of
religion and belief, is only and only the spread of ideas and
that requires freedom -- a pure principle without which nothing
can be permanent.
Mr. Foreign Minister! I advise you not to join voices with groups
that fight against freedom and distort the lofty name and good
image of this country in the eyes of foreigners and future
generations, or with those who worship violence and distort truth
and religion. They add no jewel to this country's crown or bring
more glory to its glories.
Cling to freedom because, among God's favorite creations, freedom
is most beautiful and delicate. Do not give excuses for plucking
the petals of the flower of freedom. Instead, tolerate the thorn
(if there is a thorn) for the sake of the beauty of the flower.
Do not hand over this dear gem to evil forces.
And show Iranians and the world that the words and deeds of
Iran's politicians and policy makers are one; that they are in
deed serious in their freedom-seeking claims, and that they do
not overtly or covertly collaborate with the enemies of freedom.
It is this very thought and freedom which will ultimately uproot
all evil enemies from this land. Appreciate those who speak
justly without expecting anything in return.
To you, I seem
Small and weak.
But I can be an arrow
And thrown at the
Eyes of enemies.
The dervish does not posses
Even a petal compared to
The sultan's palace.
There is only me and my
Wornout garment that could
Set fire to the palace.
[Qoranic verse:] "My Lord! I truly called my people to Your path
day and night. But they learned nothing but escape... and they
brought tricks and more tricks... My Lord! Give thy blessings to
me, to my father and my mother, and to anyone who came to me out
of faith, and there is nothing but humiliation for oppressors."
Abdolkarim Soroush
31 December 1995
-----------------------------------------------------------------
(1) A clergyman in the early part of the 20th century who left
the clergy to become a secular ultra-nationalist. He was
assassinated by the Fedayeen Islam militia. Back to text.
(2) A leading secular intellectual in the Iranian Constitutional
Movement in the late 1800s. Back to text.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From the daily Kayhan, December 26, 1995:
"New Points Regarding Foreign Policy and Domestic Issues in
Foreign Minister Velayati's Discussion with Students"
...In response to a member of the audience [at a question and
answer session at the Imam Sadeq University in Tehran] about
whether the Dr. Soroush issue had become a problem in Iran's
international affairs, [Dr. Ali Akbar Velayati] said:
Yes. The Dr. Soroush issue definitely affects our foreign policy
situation. If someone intends to serve the people, he should
remember that if he says something that will be reflected in
society and in the world, and will give a pretext to the enemies
of this country, he should be fair and not say it.
Public forums are not the place for scholastic issues. Dragging
these issues to the newspapers and public places and creating
scandals and weakening the foundations of national independence
and harmony is not a service, but rather antagonistic toward the
people of this country. If someone says something that creates
problems for this revolution, which is under pressure from all
sides, he has not done this nation a service.
There was a time when Ahmad Kasravi said things and wasted the
spiritual wealth of this nation with his quarrelsome words -- a
time when the spiritual wealth of this country was also being
attacked by Reza Khan [Pahlavi] and the British.
Compared to other Islamic and third world countries, we are very
successful. These kinds of actions are not in the interest of the
country and the people. Therefore, even if there is no
mal-intent, these attitudes certainly do have negative results.
Ruining national and religious beliefs is not a service to the
country, to the people or to Islam.
Kambiz Iranpour
The Guardian - Friday 7 June 1996
Cry for help by Iranian thinker
================================
AS THE gulf widens in Iran between hardline clergy and
reformist thinkers both in and outside the clerical
establishment, a professor at Tehran University has become
the focus of conflict.
Lectures by Abdolkarim Sorush have been repeatedly stopped
or disrupted by militants, apparently with the tacit support
of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
They accuse Dr Sorush, whose reputation as a thinker and
voice of modernism is growing in the
Shi'ite world, of attacking "religious sovereignty under the
guise of scientific discourse".
With the hardliners whipping up sentiment against him, Dr
Sorush has written an open letter to President Hashemi
Rafsanjani seeking protection. The following are extracts
from his appeal.
TO the honourable president of the Islamic Republic of Iran:
No doubt you are aware that for nearly a year now I have
been the target of sensation, violence and destructive
intimidation by certain pressure groups and their affiliated
press. In addition, the information ministry, by resorting
to threats, by setting limits and by serving repeated
summonses, pushed me into a corner, violated my rights as a
human being, and gave a free hand to my enemies.
The threats of violence against me have intensified to such
a degree that I am no longer invited to give lectures. All
doors are closing in my face.
At the start of the current academic year, I was given only
one subject to teach in Tehran University, which I have had
to abandon on several occasions. I am supposed to teach
philosophy and social science to the postgraduates in this
university ... However, every time I set off for the Faculty
of Social Science, I have to face serious threats to my
life. Every time I have to pass through a picket line
comprising motorcyclists and pedestrians, who block my entry
to the university by shouting obscenities. They seem very
determined to initiate violence.
I have had to arrive at the university much earlier than the
time of my scheduled lecture and often in secret. On a
number of occasions I have had to abandon a lecture and
leave my terrified students in the middle of the classroom.
Sometimes, the lecture is cancelled as I am unable to enter
the university.
University officials have tried hard to resolve the problem
but they have failed because the assailants enjoy the overt
and covert support of various authorities, including the
office of the valiye faqih [Ayatollah Khamenei] ...
Mr President: My question, which is in no way aimed at
breaking the law or making trouble or creating mischief. to
you who have spoken many times of the sanctity and safety of
those who live by the pen, is: How long will the academics
in this country be the victims of the unethical behaviour
and law-breaking of irresponsible groups and remain silent;
sit in a corner and listen to abuse and insults, have their
own and their families' safety and security taken away; and
see that those who undermine security are free, and those
who deserve security are deprived of it?
Mr President: How can I tell my students that there is hope
for the future? How can I lecture them on the importance of
free research, on being courageous in their thinking and on
the existence of an open social climate for the growth of
talents when I see that even talking about any of these
subjects is now a deadly sin, for which I am being punished
by the pressure groups and the philistine mob . . ?
Above all, how can we bear witness to the fact that all
these acts of bigotry, treachery, inquisition and imposition
of ideas are carried out in the name of the most beloved
religion . . . ?
I have now come to you to seek justice, not only for myself
but also because of the injustices against the reputation
and excellence of this powerful culture and the betrayal of
people's cultural awareness; [and] because of the crooked
foundation on which scientific-human relations are being
built.
Mr President: I am now mourning a university in which a
group is celebrating the death of science and the birth of
barbarism . . .
This is not only my tale, this is the tale of the country's
culture and hope.
Kambiz Iranpour
-------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, January 27, 1995
COLUMN ONE
"Islamist's Theory of Relativity"
Iranian scholar says faith is open to interpretation, challenging the
dogma of hard-line mullahs. His ideas on religion, democracy could lead
to a Muslim Reformation.
BACKGROUND
Islam accepts the prophets and tenets of Judaism and Christianity as part
of a single tradition that was the precursor to Islam. The Koran is the
holy scripture revealed by God to the prophet Mohammed in the 7th Century.
The five pillars are belief in the supremacy of God, five daily prayers,
charity, fasting during Ramadan and pilgrimage to Mecca. It is the only
monotheistic religion that offers a set of rules not only for establishing
spiritual beliefs but also for governing society.
By ROBIN WRIGHT
Times Staff Writer
Copyright 1995, Los Angeles Times
TEHRAN-Abdol Karim Soroush is an unassuming figure. Small-framed
bespectacled and tenderly soft-spoken he looks almost fragile as he sits
at the big, round oak table in his office at the Research Institute for
Human Sciences here.
But this gentle man is shaking the foundations of a faith that claims a
billion followers-nearly one out of every five people on Earth. Both
supporters and critics now call him the Martin Luther of Islam-a man whose
ideas on religion and democracy could bridge the chasm between Muslim
societies and the outside world.
"Soroush is challenging 13 centuries of thinking," said Nasser Hadian, a
political scientist at Tehran University. "He is proclaiming that
understanding of religion is all relative. Put another way, no one
interpretation is absolute. It is not fixed for all time and place. Who
can say what God meant? This opens the door to all kinds of new ideas,
political as well as religious."
Put still another way, Soroush and an emerging group of Islamic writers
and thinkers are making it possible to be Islamic without being
fundamentalist, according to John Voll, an expert on Islam at the
University of New Hampshire.
"They are creating a comprehensive, late 20th-Century world view that is,
at the same time, authentically Islamic and authentically modern," he
said.
Soroush and contemporaries!such as Tunisia's Rashid Ghannouchi, Egypt's
Hassan Hanafi and Algeria's Mohammed Arkoun-are shaping what may turn out
to be Islam's equivalent of the Christian Reformation: a period of
questioning traditional practices and beliefs and, ultimately, of
upheaval.
Already, Soroush's impact extends far beyond the realm of religion. His
writings are framing a new debate about political change-not just for Iran
but for the Middle East.
"Soroush is profoundly important to an issue facing the entire Muslim
world," Hadian said, "because he says Islam can be interpreted in a way
that is compatible with democracy. And he shows how."
In the region of the globe that has most resisted change, few ideas are
more pivotal to the future than the relationship between Islam and
democracy. Although the Iranian government has not formally reacted to
Soroush's writings and teachings, many senior mullahs and officials are
widely believed to feel threatened by his words. But for all the
acclaim-his work is already the subject of dissertations in places as far
away as Georgetown University in Washington-Soroush does not seek, nor even
welcome, media attention.
A bimonthly magazine called Kiyan, which means source or soul, was founded
in 1991 primarily to air his columns and the debate they have sparked. It
now has subscribers in Asia, Europe and the Americas, including the United
States.
Soroush, otherwise, is almost reclusive-probably wisely so. Friends say
even his dustbin has been picked and probed to keep track of his ideas.
Getting an interview can take years of appeals and pulling strings with
intermediaries.
Against the hustle and honking din of downtown Tehran, the quiet chambers
of the institute where Soroush is dean of faculty seem like a sanctuary.
In his office, soft music plays in the background.
"Islam and democracy are not only compatible," he began. "Their
association is inevitable. In Muslim society, one without the other is
not perfect."
Soroush, who is in his late 40s speaks deliberately and in English. Among
a long list of academic credentials, Soroush did graduate work in
philosophy at the University of London.
"I have given two bases," he said. "The first pillar is this: To be a
true believer, one must be free. To become a believer under pressure or
coercion will not be true belief. And this freedom is the basis of
democracy.
"The second pillar in Islamic democracy is that interpretation of
religious texts is always in flux," he added. "Those interpretations are
also influenced by the age you live in. So you can never give a fixed
interpretation."
Everyone is entitled to an interpretation. Although some may be more
scholarly than others, no one version-by a cleric or layman is
automatically more authoritative than another.
For the Islamic Republic of Iran as well as other Muslim societies, the
practical implications of Soroush's words are profound-although he refuses
to spell them all out. "I will be better served if I do not get entangled
in such political affairs," he said, chuckling knowingly. "Let other
people draw the implications and consequences."
The most basic are equality and empowerment of ordinary believers. As did
the Reformation, Soroush's argument establishes the rights of
individuals-in their relationship both with government and with God. And
like democracy anywhere, the beliefs and will of the majority at the
bottom define the ideal Islamic state. It can't be imposed from the top
or by an elite, such as the clergy.
"No one group of people has exclusive right to interpret or reinterpret
religion. That is something to be abolished," he explained, sitting at
the table, almost buried behind piles of books.
Islam also should not be used as a modern ideology, for it is too likely
to become totalitarian, he said. And the ideal Islamic republic is ruled
not by mullahs or sheiks but by secular leaders.
With haunting similarity to thinking during the Reformation, in which
Protestants split from the Roman Catholic Church, Soroush's arguments in
effect divide the roles and powers of church and state. That would be a
stunning shift for the only major monotheistic religion that provides a
set of rules by which to govern society as well as a set of spiritual
beliefs.
But the change would not be total. Like Luther, the 16th-Century German
theologian who inaugurated the Reformation, Soroush is not abandoning the
values of the faith. He instead argues against rigid thinking and
elitism.
Islam, he says, is a religion that can still grow. He believes in Sharia,
or Islamic law, as a basis for modern legislation. But he views Sharia
less rigidly than does the traditional clergy.
"Sharia is something expandable," he said. "You can't imagine the extent
of its flexibility. And in an Islamic democracy, you can actualize all
its potential flexibilities."
But does not the freedom inherent in democracy ultimately contradict
Islam, which literally translates as submission?
"Just the reverse," he responded, a smile spreading across his face. With
the precision of a logician, he built a philosophical argument as if it
were a mathematical equation.
"If you freely surrender or submit, this does not mean that you have
sacrificed your freedom," he said. "You should be free as well to leave
your faith. It is a contradiction to be free in order to believe-and then
afterward to abolish that freedom."
For a growing group of followers-ranging from young mullahs to regime
opponents, from intellectuals to government technocrats-Soroush represents
the hope of reconciliation, both within Islam and between Islam and the
outside world.
"He is finding ways to reconcile Islam and modernism for educated Muslims
who have had problems with traditional Islam," said Mohammed Reza Bouzari,
a businessman and Soroush follower for almost a decade. "He shows how
understanding changes day by day, year by year. This is the only way to
save Islam in the modern world."
Soroush's Kiyan columns are now the center of a feisty intellectual
debate. His Thursday evening lectures at a local mosque are packed. At
Tehran University's School of Theology, where he teaches the history and
philosophy of science, students wait in the halls just to see him.
At the last national book fair, an anonymous donor contributed enough to
make all copies of Soroush's books available at half price. His most
popular book just ran its fourth printing. Even critics concede that his
writing in Persian is so poetic it draws readers on literary merit alone.
"This is a seed in the ground, and it is going to grow," Bouzari said.
"It's an intellectual revolution," added Reza Tehrani, Kiyan's editor.
But the movement symbolized by Soroush may be on a collision course with
Iran's powerful clergy.
"The debate is between those who accept the idea of a multifaceted,
multidimensional religion that changes across time and space and those who
say Islam has only one essence, and it can't be touched, and therefore
democracy is alien," said Hadi Semati, an analyst at Tehran's Center for
Scientific Research and Middle East Strategic Studies.
In Iran, the latter are now in power.
"The government does not like us, but so far it tolerates us,' Tehrani said.
Many, however, fear for Soroush's future.
"Soroush is a man of some courage, especially given the context in which
he says these things and the direct criticism of the form of government in
Iran today that comes out of his writings and teaching," said Shaul
Bakhash, an Iran expert at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., and
author of an upcoming book on the Islamic debate.
Soroush was originally one of the revolution's own. He returned from
London shortly after the 1979 upheaval that brought the Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini to power.
In the early 1980s, he was part of the cultural revolution, serving on the
seven-man committee that determined Islamically correct university
curricula.
He hosted one of the new regime's early television shows on Persian
poetry. Yet he can also quote vast passages from a cross-section of
Western philosophers.
"We've never had anyone like Soroush," Hadian said. "Very few people
really know both the West and Islam, and can talk about and to both
worlds. Some intellectuals here are familiar with the West but not with
the religious nuances. And some clerics know religion but not the West.
Even in Iran, we can't communicate with each other. But Soroush can bring
together ideas from both worlds because he understands and has lived in
both."
The debate within Iran is echoing throughout the Muslim world. Various
thinkers are looking at how to modernize and democratize political and
economic systems in an Islamic context.
The extensive writings of Egypt's Hanafi, for example, center on "bringing
the faith up to date in a revolutionary way," New Hampshire Islamic expert
Voll said. "He thinks of developing the equivalent in Islam of what
liberation theology was to Catholicism."
Tunisia's Ghannouchi, another philosopher, is working on a book titled
"Public Freedom in the Islamic State."
"Islam did not come with a specific program about our life," he said in an
interview. "It brought general principles. It's our duty to make this
program through interaction between Islamic principles and modernity."
Ghannouchi advocates majority rule, protection of minorities, full women's
rights and equality of all secular and religious parties.
"Freedom," he pronounced, "is superior to Islam."
Yet his views are seen as such a challenge to the state that he was
repeatedly imprisoned in Tunisia before being forced into exile in Europe.
The Reformation did not fully shake out for about 200 years with the
establishment of a welter of Protestant denominations. By that yardstick,
an Islamic Reformation-if that is what it turns out to be-is only in its
incipient stage, and the current debate underscores that the turmoil in
the Muslim world is due at least as much to internal tensions as to
friction with the outside world.
Soroush prefers to avoid comparisons with Luther.
"I'm just a writer and a thinker," he said. "I'm not thinking of doing
things like Luther did.
"Although," he paused, "perhaps Luther did not know what he was doing at
that time."
He laughed easily. "But I am well aware that these ideas, if taken
seriously, might be of some use or help some radical change in the way we
look at religion."