Iran-daily Aug. 26 KHORRAMABAD,Lorestan, Aug. 25--Khorramabad's Governorate issued a communique on Thursday regretting disturbances that led to the cancellation of speeches by prominent political activists, Abdolkarim Soroush and Mohsen Kadivar. Soroush and Kadivar were scheduled to speak during the seventh gathering of the Office to Foster Unity, the country's largest student union. The event was themed 'The Future of Reform Movement in Iran'. A group of people gathered at the Khorramabad Airport, preventing the two from leaving the airport. They also got into physical confrontation with the airport staff and injured the provincial deputy governor in charge of political and security affairs. Mohammad Rezaie, a war veteran, was leaving the airport on a wheelchair when he was attacked and beaten up. Khorramabad's Governor General's Office, also in a statement, termed the gathering as illegal and said those who resort to such illogical and violent acts to impose their ideas on others are rejected by the nation. The statement then criticized the Persian daily Kayhan for the way it covered the news. Kayhan said on Thursday that the people of Khorramabad had prevented Kadivar and Soroush from entering the city. The statement noted that the noble people of Khorramabad had nothing to do with the incident and are, in fact, opposed to such acts, adding that the identity of these individuals who care little about tranquillity and security is known to everyone. Kadivar, a liberal cleric, was recently released from prison. He had been found guilty by the Special Clerical Court of threatening national security and spreading negative propaganda against the Islamic Republic. Soroush has also been occasionally attacked by conservatives for his ideas. His classes at the University of Tehran also were cancelled after a number of individuas attakced the sessions and even threatened to put them on fire. Soroush and Kadivar are also well-known reformists and supporters of President Mohamad Khatami's liberal policies.
Tehran, July 15, IRNA -- Talking over phone with IRNA, politician Dr Abdolkarim Soroush categorically denied on Saturday receiving any sum of money from the Human Rights Watch. The Persian-language evening daily Kayhan having recourse to an article carried by the African site of the international network of Internet published a front-page report with a headline revealing the financial aids granted to two Iranian politicians Soroush and Kadivar by the Human Rights Watch. Upon reading the news in Kayhan daily, Soroush called to IRNA to say that he was completely dumbfounded by the rumors that he was receiving money from the Human Rights Watch. He dismissed gossips in this regard. As for Kadivar, he said in view of the fact that Kadivar's prison term will shortly come to an end the move might have been launched with a purpose to prolong the jailed politician's confinement. The wife of jailed Hojatoleslam Mohsen Kadivar denied saturday the rumors that his husband had received financial aids from the Human Rights Watch. She said his husband called from prison and said he would lodge a complaint with the court against the daily Kayhan for circulating such unsubstantiated gossips.
16 January
KHORASSAN * This daily, affiliated with the Martyrs Foundation of Khorassan Province, reported that after a speech by religious intellectual Abdulkarim Soroush in Mashhad, pressure groups, hardline Ansar-e Hizbollah, attacked the participants in the gathering, wounding some of them and breaking the window pane of a car carrying Soroush.
Iran-daily Jan. 15
MASHHAD, Khorasan province, Jan. 14--A member of the Central Committee of the Islamic Association of Ferdowsi and Mashhad Medical Sciences Universities here on Thursday said Dr. Abdolkarim Soroush escaped unhurt when his car was attacked by " members of a pressure group." Speaking on the condition of anonymity, he noted that after Professor Soroush finished a lecture at Imam Reza (AS) Hospital Auditorium and was trying to get in a university automobile he was attacked by several supporters of the unidentified pressure group. "The group beat up students and broke the windows of the car with clubs and stones." Soroush was visiting Mashhad on the invitation of the aforementioned Islamic association. It was his first official lecture in two years. Attendance was by invitation only. In the past several months meetings and lectures at which Soroush and other dissident intellectuals were present have been broken up by radicals opposed to political and social reforms.
Iran-daily Jan. 3. Abdolkarim Soroush, a former university professor, here on Thursday said that any reform in the country is contingent upon forging a sound understanding of religious values, the Persian daily Asr-e Azadegan reported on Sunday. Soroush, who was delivering a speech on the occasion of Ghaadr night (three nights in the month of Ramadhan during which the Holy Qu'ran came down to the Holy Prophet (PBUH)) said that a meaningful reform in the country would require a new understanding and interpretation of religious values. "If our religious thoughts are dictatorial, then our political structure will be also despotic.But, when our religious thoughts are democratic, the political system will also be democratic," he said. He pointed out that it was only normal that religious thoughts and interpretations be diverse. "The ambition to impose only one interpretation of religious principles is inhumane. The fact that religious interpretations are colorful and diverse is a historical need," he observed. He went on to stress that there are numerous interpretations of Islamic tenets worldwide. "When Islam emerged in Egypt, India and Iran, it became Egyptian, Indian or Iranian Islam. Today we do not have one Islam only but rather many different interpretations (of Islam)." Elsewhere in his speech, the activist referred to the history of Islam and discussed the ways how enemies of the religion tried to promulgate their brand of thoughts in the name of holy ideas. He said that there exists nothing pure in the world even if it had originally come down pure from heaven. "The holy prophets came among the people with a divine message. But like rain, which makes mud when it falls on the planet earth, the second that pure message touched the ground of human culture, it became muddy and contaminated. We are faced with this contamination until Dooms Day," he noted.
Dec 21
ASR-E AZADEGAN * This reformist daily reported that Dr. Abdulkarim Soroush, religious intellectual, voiced readiness for taking part in a debate with Mohammad Taqi Mesbah-e Yazdi, in case his viewpoints are clearly stated before debate. He said, "When I was working, I called on him to write some topics to debate, but he was not willing to do so. Now, however, that I do not have my job, he has decided to ask me to debate him."
ARYA, Iran daily, on December 9 quoted MP Seyed Hussein Marashi commenting on Dr. Abdolkarim Soroush, religious intellectual and university professor as saying that "He is not teaching in university now. Soroush's refusing to teach in university arises from the illogical attitude and narrow-mindedness of those who prevent him from teaching.He added that we cannot tolerate this narrow-mindedness which triggers brain drain and backwardness. Dr. Soroush who stopped teaching in the university due to an unknown group's repeated threats, was precluded to go to the class for the three consecutive years when he went to university to teach.
8 November 1999 - ASR-E AZADEGAN, a pro-reform Irandaily quoted Abdolkarim Soroush, religious intellectual, as saying that the belief that some people are "inner-circle" and others are "outside the circle" is rooted in the culture of pre-Islamic Arabian tribes. They believed any one who is a member of their tribe, deserves being helped, either he is oppressed or an oppressor, and others should not receive their help because they are outside the circle.
The question of `inner circle' and `outside the circle' have recently been raised by political groups. Reformists believe all Iranian citizens are inner circle, while the rightist faction says citizens should be divided as to being inner circle or outside the circle. For instance, On 10 November ARYA, Iranian Newspaper quoted Mesbah Yazdi, traditionalist clergy, as saying that believing in equal rights for all citizens is worse than worshiping cows. "If this belief is right, then Jews or Zoroastrians can become president", he pointed out. On another occasion, Mesbah also stated that the idea of `tolerance' is a thousand times more dangerous than AIDS. Accordingly, Mesbah Yazdi believes citizens should be divided based on being "inner circle" or "outside the circle", while some intellectuals such as Abdolkarim Soroush reject the idea saying all citizens are equal before the law.
Dr Soroush also argues that today, Islamic societies confront identity as well as
rationality crises. Fundamentalism usually treating its opponents in violence results
from these crises. Someone who supposes losing his/her identity tries to express and
achieve identity by violent confrontation. He also pointed out that, as Abn Khaldun argues,
Islamic civilisation declined mainly because it restricted sciences into an Internalist
approach and condensed religious knowledge in juirstprodunce. Accordingly, this approach
towards the knowledge trained jurists and Sufis in a wider range and marginalised experimental
sciences as well as rational philosophy.
For more on his political views see
Emancipation From Certainty and Certainty Of Emancipation.
ASR-E AZADEGAN on Oct 18, 1999 reported that Classes which are taught by religious intellectual, Dr. Abdolkarim Soroush, were closed because of threats by unknown people who said they would set fire to the classes.
Arya on Oct 13, 1999 referred to Dr. Abdul Karim Soroush's statements addressed to Tehran University students. He said that the country requires three kinds of leaders. First, those who should teach the people how to come to terms with others and the advantages of such behavior. Second, those who inform the people about the shortcomings of religious society. And lastly, those who should show the people how they can become pious in modern times.
ABRAR on Sep 27, 1999 Abdolkarim Soroush, religious intellectual, said, "The clergy are traditionalists and absolutists. The relation between universities and the clergy has been cut and after the recent dormitory incident, hostility emerged between them. Clerics considered themselves as being sanctified and expect the people to respect their sanctity, while there is no sanctity for them. The minority to which Khatami belongs are the real clergy and most of them do not have any connection with power centers."
Arya on Sept 21 1999 published the statements of Dr. Abdulkarim Soroush. He was quoted as saying that we cannot achieve political development unless the people come to know about their social rights. Addressing a group of Amir Kabir University students, Soroush noted that the people have not been taught how to respect the rights of others. He noted that civil society is based on two major points. First, civil rights and second pluralism.
Arya on Sept 20 1999 quoted Dr. Abdulkarim Soroush as saying that defaming others is worse than showing pornographic pictures. He noted in Iran people are insensitive towards defamation. Soroush claimed that some people slandered the late Dr. Abdulhossein Zarinkoub during a television program and did not allow him to defend himself against the things falsely attributed to him. Soroush was referring to a television program called Hoveiyat (identity) during which Zarinkoub was insulted.
Arya on Sept 19, 1999 quoted Abdulkarim Soroush as saying that the Information Ministry should not retreat from its previous stances. Soroush noted that the ministry is trying to distance itself from factional rivalry. Regarding his new book named 'Siasatnameh', Soroush said that it criticizes the performance of former president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. He argued that it should become evident to all that Rafsanjani's government did not merely indulge in reconstruction projects, but it also made some mistakes. He observed that the people should know what happened during the years when Rafsanjani was in office.
ABAN, weekly pro-reform in Iran on September 12, 1999 qouted Abdolkarim Soroush as saying that each newspaper is a door to freedom and wisdom, and that closing this door would result in a cultural strangulation. Neshat daily, he added, which was a competent player in the scene of information dissemination, now has been pushed out of the scene. "Now we should wait and see which puppet would be sent into the scene by designers of the cultural strangulation, and which `Neshat-killer' media would send the `infernal message of violence'."
SOBH-E EMROOZ, Iranian Newspaper on Aug 29, 1999 quoted Hojjatoleslam Gholamreza Hassani, Urmia Friday Prayer leader, as saying: "This can be understood from Velayat-e Faqih that the Faqih [jurisprudent] who receives Khoms [20 percent Islamic levy on certain qualifying amount/things] can also cut the hands [of offenders], or implement the ruling for adultery. This is why the United States or Israel are opposed to Velayat-e Faqih. Velayat belongs to God 100 percent. The pens of Dr. [Abdolkarim] Soroush or [Ali] Shariati and Abdolhusseini who are opposed to that interpretation must be broken."
Aban, Tehran Weekly pro-reform on Aug 10 1999 interviewed Dr. AbdulKarim Soroush about the attacks of the violence seekers at the Tehran University dormitory complex. The weekly quoted Dr. Soroush as saying: The incident stemmed from the fact that a political faction realized that they do not possess the needed logic for running the country. It therefore,resorted to violence. After President Khatami took office, the lack of logic of the above-mentioned group, became more clear. In the past few years, they capitalized on all the sacred issues like Hajj, Friday prayers, religion, etc, and when they found nothing else left to capitalize on, they resorted to arms. All this stems from a lust for power.President Khatami has a legal and administrative duty to fulfill. But,under the current conditions, he should involve himself, not as the president but as a compassionate well-wisher of the students. If he is unable to do anything in his administrative capacity, he should at least be compassionate with the students, express his views and pin-point the people he knows have been involved in these atrocities. At present, he has certain means at his disposal and should expose the IRIB for taking the whole incident lightly and ignoring the students and their rights. Mr. Khatami should not allow these aims to be materialized and face the same fate as the serial political murders. He should not let this whole case die a natural death in bureaucratic red tape. At the same time, he has to endeavor towards lifting the imposed limitations on the print media, including Salam. The civil society proposed by Khatami has only two pillars; the press and the students. Right now, both these pillars are under heavy bombardment.
Arya Iran pro-reform Newspaper on August 9, 1999 in an Article entitled `You Should Better Know' quoted Abdulkarim Soroush as saying that if excessive freedom results in corruption, then totalitarianism results in more corruption. "Those who lack strong reasoning always dread the airing of other people's thoughts," he pointed out.
At the invitation of SOAS, London University, St. Anthony College, Oxford University and Islamic Association of Students and Researches in London and Institut Catholique de Lille and Sorbonne in France, Dr Soroush travelled to London and Paris in May and June 1999. He delivered lectures as follows:
Lecture 1
Venue: Nissan Centre, St Antony's College, Oxford Date and time: Wednesday, 2 June 1999 Title of lecture: Islamic Discourses in Iran Chaired by Prof. Eric Hooglund, Middle East centre, St Antony's College,
Lecture 2
Venue: Lecture Theatre, SOAS, University of London Date and time: Thursday, 3 June 1999 Title of lecture: Islam and Civil Society chaired by Dr Ziba Mir-Hosseini
Lecture 3 (in three sessions)
Venue: Board Room, 309 Regent St. Westminster University, London, W1 Date and time: 28 May, 4 June and 18 June 1999 Title of lecture: Religious Discourses in Iranian society chaired by Islamic Association of Students and Researches in London
Lecture 4
Venue: Institut Catholique de Lille, Department de Sciences Des religions, France Date and time: 11-12 June 1999 Title of seminar: Lislam, Quelle modernite? Title of lecture: L`etat Islamique et la modernite
Lecture 5
Venue: E`cole Partique Des Hautes E`tudes, Section Des Seciences Religieuses, Sorbonne Date and time: 14 June 1999, 5.00 p.m. Title of lecture: A Description of the theory of Devolution of Evolution of Religious knowledge
15 November 1997- Abolkarim Soroush was attacked and prevented from speaking at Amir Kabir University earlier today, according to unofficial reports from Tehran.
The event, which was attended by some 3000 students, had been organised
by the Islamic society of Amir Kabir University [The Polytechnic]. Dr Soroush
had been invited to deliver a lecture but, according eyewitness accounts,
when he arrived at the venue with some friends, they were immediately attacked
by a mob of some 100-200 youth, led by Hussein Allah-Karam, claiming to
be members of the so-called Ansar-e Hezbollah. The car in which Dr Soroush
had arrived received sever beating and kicking, and he was forced to return.
He was then accompanied to an unknown location, where a telephone link
was established with the event organisers at the university, and he delivered
his speech over the telephone.
180k!
During the first session, Dr Saeed Barzin spoke on "factions and political development", providing an analysis of the concept of development from different classical and Islamic reformist perspectives. Dr Homayoun Katouzian spoke on "The obstacles to political development in Iran", citing traditional totalitarian system, conspiracy theory, and pan-persianism as the three main causes of lack of development in Iran.
The opening talk of the second session of the seminar was given by Dr Soroush on the "Theological barriers of development". To analyse these barriers, Soroush started with a description of what he saw to be the characteristic features of the phenomenon of development. Development he took to be a continuous process of establishing an equilibrium state among all changing parts and pieces of the modern society, including economy, family, morality and religion. In the light of this description, he then set out to identify the theological factors, existing in the thought of past Muslim scholars, which have had a major share in delaying the dawn of development in most Muslim countries.
As a further preliminary remark, Soroush said reformers have hardly had in mind to uproot religion from society. Rather, their prime concern has been to find for religion a proper and deserving place within the context of morality, economic and political development, and new social order. Contra to the prediction of some philosophers and social scientists that, with the arrival of secularisation, there would remain no role and place for religion, religion has not disappeared from the modern life and has deservedly continued to play its role . It has only been interpreted anew, and thereby it has entered into a new relation with other things. In fact, in some respects, religion has expanded its domain of impact and appeared to be of great power in motivating social movements.
Societies like ours, added Soroush, are of the class of societies which have lost their past equilibrium and no new equilibrium has as yet emerged from the modification and reformation of all components constituting society as a whole. In consequence, religion also is still waiting to be awarded the position it deserves within the categories defining a modern society.
Man's understanding of the divine must be seen as the most pivotal concept in any religious thought. Thus, the way we understand God has a direct impact on every aspect of our life. Most particularly, it shapes the conception we have of ourselves and of our relationship to God and the world we live in. Consider, for example, the image that Asha'ira portrayed of the divinity, as a supreme being who was subject to no principles including logical necessities and authored even moral rules. This image of God led Asha'ira to have considered kings to be the God's delegates on the earth. Obviously, the practical implication of this image of the divine was to expect no justice or compliance with the laws and morals from the kings. Men under such impressions tend to wait for the generosity of the kings rather than demand their justice. In contrast to Asha'ira, Mo'tazilah made great efforts to defend an image of the divine which subjected Him to the principles of logic and ethics. Their efforts failed to succeed.
Dr Soroush also emphasized that the morality dominant in our society has its origins in both Greek and religious sources. Notwithstanding this, religious morality, mainly flourished in the hand of the mystics, has always had the upper hand, with a large share of influence on our everyday life. The ethics of Sufis has made most of us think, among other things, that the more we avoid form the mundane life, the happier we would be in the otherworldly life. This teaching clearly flies in the face of the morality accompanying development. In particular, the ethics of development would not accommodate a concept of contentment if understood in a very restrictive sense.
By taking high respect for learning science, and the ethics accompanying it, to be the most important indicators of development, Soroush emphasized that the low status given by our ancestors to science has been one of the obstacles delaying development in our country. Of science, they mostly understood religious science. The social status of scientists was to a large extent lower than that of theologians and religious scholars. Sufis made scientists to be ashamed of themselves and seeing it of no effect for the achievement of otherworldly happiness.
Respect for learning science, said Soroush, is the most significant indicator of development. Yet, in our society, what our ancestors mainly had in mind of science was religious knowledge. The social status of scientists was thought to be to a large extent lower than that of theologians and other religious scholars. Sufis explicitly publicized the idea that the sciences of this mundane world were of no real effect in the achievement of the happiness of the next life, and thereby made scientists be ashamed of their crafts. Undoubtedly, all these views served to deprive our society from the benefit of development.
Soroush elaborated further on the Muslim scholars' theory of knowledge, referring to the Aristotelian dogma that honour and superiority of a branch of science is entirely determined by the superiority of the subject it studies. This dogma, he added, had led to a classification of sciences according to which theology was seen to be the science of the highest honour, since it studied the most supreme being. And the mundane sciences were accodingly left at a level far lower than those of other religious sciences.
In the closing stage of his speech, Soroush delineated two understandings of religion: One is that which takes religion to be a maximal set of teachings and tenets, adequate to solve most problems human beings may ever encounter in this mundane life and to as well as to guarantee their happiness in the otherworldly life. The other that takes religion to be a minimal collection of beliefs and canons, aiming to resolve only those problems which may be highly risky to subject them to experiment, and thus beyond the reach of normal human beings. The maximal conception, said Soroush, would never lead to economic and social development in the sense understood today. Whereas, the minimal conception lays religion in the place it deserves, and leaves the venue to development quite open.
On 31 July 1996, Dr Soroush spoke at McGill University on the subject of "Truth Islam vs. Identity Islam". He described "Identity Islam" as the version of Islam that is used for gaining an identity, which can then be placed before other cultures and identities and glorified for its past civilisation and power. This, he said, was mostly the Islam of politicians, not true believers. They pay great attention to 'cosmetics' and the appearance of religion, thus making it the subject of pretention, dogmatism and conflict, and making it devoid of its true content.
"Truth Islam" on the other hand, is the version of Islam which is only about the truth and, even if an identity is created as a result, it is subsequent to it. This Islam is in harmony with all truths of all kinds. It is not cosmetic and is not used for the interests of any particular tribe, guild or culture. It is open to dialogue and its followers seek it for its truthfulness not for its utility as a source of identity. Dr Soroush added that, today we Muslim face both identities and truths. These two have to be separated. No truth is the sole property or identity of any group. All truth is public and no one has monopoly over it. However, the elements constituting an identity (such as customs, fashions, minor manners) are devoid of value and not suitable for adaptation.
On 2 August 1996, Dr Soroush spoke at a gathering of Iranians at Toronto on the subject of "Human rights and the Religious man". He said that human rights are among the noblest discoveries that have taken place in the West and unfortunately today, it is being dealt with in the same way as the Church dealt with science in the 16th Century. ie a variety of excuses are given to conceal or tarnish its significance. He added that, when talking of human rights in our society, attention is always drawn to the guileful and hypocritical attitude of Western powers, whereas the originators and discoverers of human rights were in fact Western thinkers, not American and European politicians. The fact that it is abused or misused by some people should not lead us to totally deprive ourselves from it or to deny its significance.
Dr Soroush added that, by resorting to cultural relativism which is itself a product of post-modernism, some people have argued that any society has its own rights and values and no culture has the right to impose its values on others. This is true, but it should also be noted that human rights have some general aspects which are not specific to any particular culture. The essence of human rights is that human beings, by virtue of being human, have certain basic rights which cannot be taken away for any reason and by any power. No one gains any rights or previledges over others by subscribing to a particular belief.
Dr Soroush then spoke of religious totalitariansim (estebdad dini) and pointed out that a religious society is extremely susceptible to this problem and requires constant critique, guidance and reformist activity to cleanse it of this disease. (Source: Kiyan)
Dr Soroush spoke briefly about the role and limitations of Fiqh in Islamic societies. He then went on to suggest that modernity has roots as well as fruits and, in addressing the issue of modernity among Muslims, attention should be focused on its philosophical and epistemological roots (which include scepticism as well as individualism) rather than trying to reconcile the fruits, or manifestations, of modernity with traditional Islamic rulings.
He emphasised that secularism is not fundamental to modernity and it is the Western case of modernity that is secular. Secularism can be in two domains: in the mind and in social institutions. A secular mind cannot possibly be religious. However, it is possible to reconcile secular institutions with a religious society.
He also suggested that in the past, human societies experienced dictatorship of religion. Following the renaissance, this was gradually replaced by dictatorship of reason. Now in the contemporary era, both religion and reason are much humbler and thus the way can be paved for reconciling them. Finally, Dr Soroush cited the "multi-source" nature of research and understanding as one of the distinct characteristics of modernity.
Dr Soroush began by emphasising three distinctions that should be drawn in dealing with religin: essentials vs. accidentals of religion, duties vs. rights, and the period of establishment vs. the time of stability. He then answered a number of questions, addressing various issues of religion, freedom and censorship, human rights in religious societies, as well as recent events in Iranian universities.
On average, each lecture was attended by about 200 people, although in some cases the lecture hall was completely filled and many were unable to secure a place.
Dr Soroush was also invited to a question and answer session held by the Islamic Society of Iranian Students in London, located at Kanoon Tawheed, a place in which he had formerly been a regular speaker during the 1970's when he was studying philosophy of science.
Some clashes took place between Ansar-e-Hezbollah and members of the students' Islamic society. The security forces who were already present at the scene made a number of arrests from both sides. Shortly afterwards, Dr Soroush sent a message to the organisers, stating that becuase of the circumstances at the university and the persistent pressure from the Information Ministry he would not be able to attend the seminar. (Source: Kiyan)
93k.
Return to Seraj Homepage