Religious Intellectualism

Mousavi published a letter on his page, he published a statement, and Ms. Bahareh Hedayat, in response, said "Shut up, old man." You know, in that same statement, Mr. Mir Hossein Mousavi, addressing the people, had called the movement toward dictatorship, a move toward tyranny. So, in 2028, when someone like Ms. Bahareh Hedayat, because of those events, is sentenced to eight and a half or nine and a half years in prison, and spends a significant portion of her youth behind bars, when she comes out, she herself says: when I saw that statement, my eyes were so filled with tears, from the list of those killed and the videos coming out, and I felt so sick, the only word that came to my mind in response to Mr. Mousavi's statement, for me, who because of him spent nine and a half years of my life in prison, the only word that came to mind was: shut up. You know, honestly, I cannot convey this

when she told Mr. Mir Hossein Mousavi to shut up, she effectively expelled him from the political world of our Iranian nation. For me, the word "shut up" from Ms. Hedayat was in reality an expulsion, for Mr. Mousavi. He no longer, for us, the Iranian nation, has any real existence. Whether he remains under house arrest or is anywhere else, when

is anywhere else, when when a person betrays the current of their own nation, and I want to emphasize this, the first nation, the very first nation on earth, we Iranians, this nation, our existence as a people goes back millennia. The concept of "nation" in the Western sense is only a few hundred years old, emerging after the Renaissance.

But the concept of nation for us goes back thousands of years, millennia during which we have spoken about it. When you find a grave of an Iranian in what is now Turkey, of an Iranian in present-day Turkey, a Christian who is Iranian and identifies himself as a son of a certain city of Iran, that means this national identity was understood even in the Sasanian era.

So when you point the finger of accusation at the nation from which you yourself came, you are without question first and foremost expelling yourself. That is one

we have a theology, a contemporary theology called protest theology. The traditional theology of the Semitic world, meaning Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, has a sequence to it. You first declare in words that you have become a Muslim, then you commit certain acts, you pray, you fast, you pay khums, and then you reach salvation.

And on this path to salvation, it is also possible to struggle, meaning technically to wage jihad as well. Protest theology inverts this entire process that the Semitic prophets describe. It begins with protest first, meaning it begins with struggle first, and it begins with armed struggle first. Meaning, the greater your role in the struggle, or the greater your actions at a higher level, the more saved you are.

That is why Mr. Ali Shariati says "either kill or be killed." And Mr. Soroush also falls into this same category. Mr. Soroush is the same way. And many others, for example if we wanted to make a list within protest theology, Mr. Malekian also falls into this same rank, this same position.

I want to put my finger on something, on why Mr. Abdolkarim Soroush should have written these names, why Dr. Ali Shariati, and ultimately why it comes down to the left and the religious, and why I insist we need to surgically examine this point. Why is it that whenever something happens, even when they want to dismiss Persian media or attack it, they say: when we were out there fighting, where were you?

The meaning of struggle, based on the theology of protest on the left, comes back to this point. Look, when we protest at 18 or 19 years old, we do not see salvation in that protest itself. That protest is a corridor toward where we want to go. But for those who operate on the theology of protest, on the literature of the left, salvation lies in the protest itself. That is a very big difference.

in the Islamic Republic we must fight against all the blind orders of the earth. When you ask them: what is your plan for the future, or what do you want to do after this protest, they say: no, I am protesting to be saved, to reach heaven.

Let's take a look at the background of Mr. Abdolkarim Soroush. He studied pharmacy at the University of Tehran. After finishing, he went to the University of London to study chemistry. He left that unfinished and turned to philosophy and history, which he also did not finish. The revolution happened, he came back to Iran. Did he finish pharmacy in Tehran? He finished it at the University of Tehran. You learn

I feel that Mr. Abdolkarim Soroush knows where he stands in history, and that he is too ashamed of the calluses on his feet to admit that he was wrong. That is exactly why, when he publishes this letter on his Instagram, he turns off the comments so he does not have to face what people say about his letter.

This is what Bertrand Russell says as well, and good people have also said it: if we are going to go back down the paths we have already walked, we cannot answer for the calluses on our feet from that same road. Sometimes, perhaps, you cannot go back, but you can stay silent. The fundamental point is this.

The fundamental point is this: you can stay silent. You can choose not to give that interview. If you do not want to say anything about what happened, then do not say anything. But even on this very topic, there was intense discussion, the everyday kind, that Dr. Mousaghaei Nezhad spoke about, and we had spoken about it before him as well.

We said it is over and done with. But was this topic really more important than what actually happened? If you do not want to speak, then do not speak. If you know that you are standing on the wrong side of history, then truly, stay silent. I have to say, the reality is that golden deed