ROHANIYAT

Dear Poya

I am looking forward to reading your article.

Yours,

Ali P.

ضمنا من می تونم

ضمنا من می تونم همین جا در کامنت جواب بدم ولی دوست ندارم سوژه یک نوشتم رو از دست بدم. خصوصا از این نظر که من این مطلب رو نخست در وبلاگم به آدرس ronevesht.com

منتشر کردم و اونجا قول دادم بحث روحانیون و مدرنیته رو پیگیری کنم. نمونه های خوب همراهی جنبش مدرن خواهی ایران در دوره های مصدق هست. با این حال جهت گیری حوزه در طی تاریخ معاصر ما تا زمان پهلوی دوم و حتی تا حد زیادی در اون دوره عدم مداخله در سیاست بوده و چاره ای نداریم تا به استثناها رجوع کنیم. با این حال من در عرض یک هفته اون مقاله رو می نویسم و دوست دارم همگی دوستان بخونن و نظرشون رو بگن

Dear Ali I am so glad you

Dear Ali

I am so glad you asked this question. I will try to write a seprated article about the role of Shia clergy in post-revolutionary iran up to Islamic Republic in a week and invite you to be my first reader. 

Thanks for openning up the discussion

Honesty ham khoob cheezieh!

I have lived in the United States for more than 30 years and have no connections to anyone in the IRI. Having said that, I think that the role of the clergy in Iranian history cannot be ignored. It has had both positive and negative roles.

On the positive side, and this is especially true during the Qajar's times, the clergy were the nations main educators. They were the schools systems- the teachers- the students... You can say for sure, that at the very least, they were as modern as they could be back then. Of course compared to the Qajars, George Bush seems like a modern man too.

The Clergy also offered a free and open forum for speech in form of their masjeds. There were no majlis or community systems that the people could really trust. But the masjids offer them a place to go- to worship and to communicate. How much more modern do you expect them to have been? Who was more modern in the mid 1800s the Qajars or the clergy?

As for the clergy’s negative roles in history, I will leave that up to you modern Iranians to catalogue. It seems that you guys have a talent for describing all things negative.

با توجه به

با توجه به مقالات قبلي اين اقا من شكي ندارم كه ايشون يا يك اقازاده است كه از مفت خوري خوشش امده يا اينكه مثال ان كسي است كه ميگويند ببين ازكجا ميخورد از هر كجا كه ميخورد همانجور هم فكر ميكند . نه اقا زمانه فرق كرده ما انقدر كه شما فكر ميكنيد ساده نيستيم .اخوند مدرن نداريم اخوند اگر مدرن بود نميتوانست نماينده يك عده ادم بيسواد سنتي و مذهبي بشود.

And?

I, too, am interested to get a staight forward answer to Ali P.'s staight forward question; all we read is "blah, blah, blah..."!

To: Jaleho

  Thanks for the post. Very informative. But since you were addressing me, maybe you should have tried to answer my question.

 "Wikipedia" is fine, but I would also recommend you "taareekheh mashrooreh eh Iran", by Kasravi, the most comprehensive and reliable source on the constitutional Revolution of 1906. In history, no one source usually tells the whole story.

Thanks anyway.

Yours,

Ali P.

To: A

My question is, was, and will be:

    Pass the first few years of "mashrooteeyst", and then tell us who "stood up to the traditional monarchy", AND," asked for the rule of the law."

 Tabatabaie, Naaieni, and Behbahani, belong to the "mashrooteeyat" era.

I am STILL waiting on some names!

Yours,
Ali P.

P.S. I am not trying to argue with you. I am genuinely interested to know if there was such a figure, whom I have never heard or read about.
You can always come up with a name, such as "Ayatollah mamaghaanee", or "Hojjatol-eslaam khomrehee", and I would be fine with that! Kee beh keeyeh!

Ali P.

you said: "Am I missing anything?"

I think you miss a bit of Iranian history. The part that there was a hokoomat Estebdadi in Iran (authoritarian monarchy) and then there was a PROGRESSIVE Constitutional Revolution which abolished that rule. The proud Iranians celebrated the creation of a Parliament represented by great nationalists who tried to salvage Iran  from being devoured by the palyers of the Great Game between Russian and British empires. Then came the British backed coup d'etat of Reza khan Pahlavi (the father of last Shah) and he established his very own hokoomat estebdad!

I cut parts from wikipedia for you, but I think you should read those few pages completely:

In 1905, Iran was still under the rule of the Qajar Dynasty
who had ruled Persia since 1781. Over the duration of Qajar rule,
Persia had gradually become a victim of Russian and British imperial
policies in The Great Game.
This international rivalry had caused successive central governments to
become increasingly weak and corrupt. The country's management was
often handled by powerful regional nobles who paid their token respects
to the monarchy. In effect, this resulted in the central government
relying on these nobles for income, justice, and security.

This was particularly true of the brief reign of Mozzafar-al-Din
Shah (1896-1908), during whose rule the Constitutional Revolution
began. Mozzafar-al-Din Shah often relied on his chancellor to manage
his decentralized state, he had also taken out several major loans from
Russia and Britain to pay for his extravagant lifestyle and the costs
of the central government. Despite some attempts to reform the central
treasury during his reign he was continually undermined by both Russia
and Britain. His dire financial situation caused him to sign many
concessions to foreign powers, an example being the D'arcy oil
concession which provided oil to Britain for 60 years at an extremely
low price.

As concessions were granted with increasing frequency on an
expanding list of trade items ranging from weapons to tobacco, the
established noble classes, religious authorities, and educated elite
began to demand a curb on royal authority and the establishment of the
rule of law as their concern over foreign, and especially Russian,
influence grew [1].

Note: One should keep in mind that Britain did not
technically engage in imperialist policies during the Qajar era.
According to established historical doctrine within the Iranian
mindset, the zenith of British imperialism was summed up in the Reuter
contract, where the governing chancellor, Sepahsalar, conceded
unlimited access to Iran's mines in exchange for building a railway
network in Iran. The contract was subsequently cancelled as Reuter had
failed to carry out his promises according to the contract.....

In December 1905, two Iranian merchants were punished in Tehran for
charging exorbitant prices. They were bastinadoed (a humiliating
punishment where the soles of one's feet are caned) in public. An
uprising of the merchant class in Tehran ensued, the clergy following
suit as a result of the alliance formed in the 1892 Tobacco Rebellion.

The two protesting groups sought sanctuary in a mosque in Tehran,
but the government violated this sanctuary and entered the mosque and
dispersed the group. This violation of the sanctity of the mosque
created an even larger movement which sought refuge in a shrine outside
Tehran. The Shah had no choice, and was forced to agree to the
concessions demanded by this larger movement: a "House of Justice".

In a scuffle in early 1906 the Government killed a seyyed
(descendant of the prophet Muhhamed), and a large number of clergy
sought sanctuary in the holy city Qom. Many merchants went to the
British embassy for refuge.

In the summer of 1906 approximately 12,000 men camped out in the
gardens of the British Embassy. Many gave speeches, many more listened.
It is here that the demand for a parliament was born, the goal of which
was to limit the power of the Shah. In August 1906, Mozaffareddin Shah
agreed to allow a parliament, and in the fall, the first elections were
held. In all, 156 members were elected, with an overwhelming majority
coming from Tehran and the merchant class.

October 1906 marked the first meeting of parliament, who immediately
gave themselves the right to make a constitution, thereby becoming a
Constitutional Assembly. The Shah was getting old and sick, however,
and the his son, Muhammed Ali, was not privy to constitutionalism.
Therefore they had to work fast, and by December 31, 1906 the Shah
signed the constitution, modeled primarily from the Belgian
Constitution. The Shah was from there on "under the rule of law, and
the crown became a divine gift given to the Shah by the people. Mozafaredeen Shah died five days later.

Within the decade following the establishment of the new majles a
number of critical events took place. Many of these events can be
viewed as a continuation of the struggle between the constitutionalists
and the Shahs of Persia, many of whom were backed by foreign powers
against the majles.

In summary (to be expanded):

• Persia tried to keep free from Russian influence through resistance via the majles to the Shah's policies.
• Majles brought in Morgan Shuster to reform treasury against initial desires of Russia+Shah. Russia kicked him out.
• Russian & Bakhtiari troops landed and forced majles to temporarily cease when their plans did not come to fruition.
• Reza Shah seized power and curtailed the power of the majles. He effectively turned it into a rubber stamp organization.

Now Ali, click on Reza Shah link and read that part to continue. Pay attention to the 1921 coup d'eta. Here's parts of it:

The coup d'état of 1921 and the emergence of Reza Khan were assisted
by the British government which wished to halt the Bolshevik's
penetration of Iran particularly because of the threat it posed to the
British colonial possession of India. It is thought that British
provided "ammunition, supplies and pay" for Reza's troops.[10]

According to some sources, the involvement of the British Empire through the office of General Edmund Ironside
helped Reza Khan come to power in the 1920s. This was noted as early as
March 1921 by the American embassy and relayed to the Iran desk at the
Foreign Office [11] A British Embassy report from 1932 even states that the British put Reza Shah "on the throne". [12] [13] [14][15]

In a situation report to the War Office dated 8 December 1920,
General Edmond Ironside, the commander of the British Forces in Iran,
noted that a capable Persian officer must command the Cossacks and
"that would solve many difficulties and enable us to depart in peace
and honour."[16]

Lt. Colonel Henry Smyth, the British officer who worked with the
Cossacks, advised Ironside that the Tabriz battalion had performed
remarkably well in pushing back a Bolshevic attack north of Manjeel in
the province of Gilan.
Subsequently Ironside was introduced to the commanding officer of the
Tabriz Battalion, Reza Khan. Ironside was impressed and wrote in his
diaries “I decided to make him Commander of the cossack Brigade at
least temporarily and at once” [17].
Smyth was appointed the administrator and the financial officer of the
Cossacks while Reza Khan was given the task of reorganisation and
training. Ironside wrote “What could Persia do with such a ruler? Was
it a wonder that she had sunk so low. She needed a strong man to bring
her through…It had been a continued mystery to me how she had been able
to persevere her independence .[18]
Ironside diaries show that from January 1921 he was planning for the
installation of strong ruler in Iran and he had found such a ruler in
the person of Reza Khan.

Hope this helps answer your question.

@ Ali P وم همراهی

@ Ali P
وم همراهی روحانیون با جنبش مدرن خواهی نکته ای بود که از مدت ها قبل مورد توجه و تایید روشنفکران نامدار آن دوران نظیر ملکم خان و سید جمال الدین اسدآبادی قرار گرفته بود. این دو در یادداشت های خود در روزنامه قانون که از روزنامه های رادیکال آن زمان بود مدام تلاش برای وارد کردن روحانیون به صحنه مبارزه داشتند. ملکم خان حتی می گفت که روحانیون تنها گروهی هستند که می توانند مدرنیته را به معنای واقعی بفهمند. اینکه او این گفته را از روی اعتقاد قلبی می گفت یا از روی مقاصد سیاسی را به حساب مورخین می گذاریم منتهی همین بس که حتی روشنفکران ما نیز تردیدی نداشتند که "مدرنیته ایرانی" بدون روحانیت محکوم به شکست خواهد بود.

صحبت کردن از نگاه روحانیت تحول خواه به مشروطه بدون ذکر نام نابغه ای به نام علامه نائینی بی ارزش است. در مورد این نخبه فقهی و فرهنگی کشورمان باید بیشتر نوشت شود. فعلا همین بش که وی پاسخی درخور به رساله شیخ فضل الله نوری در نقد مشروطه داد و با هنرمندی توانست به مشروطیت وجهه مقبول حوزوی و مشروعیت فقهی بدهد. معروف است که وی بعد از اعدام شیخ فضل الله نوری در پاسخ به تندروی ها حرفش را پس گرفت ولی دست کم در نقطه ای وی نظراتی داشت که بر تطابق کامل مشروطه با دین استوار بود. رساله او اولین تلاش برای ایجاد مشروعیت حوزوی مشروطه بود..

در صف رهبری مشروطه هم آیات عظام طباطبایی و نائینی دو چهره ای هستند که حتی بعد از پیروزی مشروطه و ظهور برخی تندروی ها پیوند خود با مشروطه را نیز قطع نکردند.
i cant believe u've read the article and not figured this out. I made two examples of Alameh Naieni and two Iranian clerics in Tehran.
Hope this is enough of response 4 u

Teacher Fred, thanks for

reposting parts of my post with no useless addition of your own!

Since you're the author of parts of my post now, I know that at least those parts won't be deleted :-)

You boldfaced cult for me, you don't like it? You prefer fergheh Zalleh?! 

هر دم از بوستان

هر دم از بوستان شوریده فکری ما بری میرسد، تازه‌تر از تازه‌تری میرسد. بعد واژه‌های عجیب و غریبی مانند «انسان ایرانی»، «دمکراسی دینی» و «حقوق بشر اسلامی»، امروز یاد گرفتیم که چیزی هم به نام «مدرنیته ایرانی» وجود داره. فرقش هم با مدرنیته خشک و خالی اینه که در اون متفکر روی دستهایش ایستاده و به دنیا نگاه میکنه. ناگفته پیداست که از این زاویه دید افکار شخصی مثل شاهپور بختیار با تحصیلاتش در رشته‌های علوم سیاسی، فلسفه و حقوق و با نیم قرن سابقه فعالیت ومسئولیت سیاسی باید هم غیرمنطقی به نظر بیایند. مثلاً چرا بختیار میگه «از زمان ساسانی» و نمیگه «از زمان هخامنشی» و اصلاً منظورش از «هر چه بر سر ایرانیان آمده» چیست، مهم نیست. بجاش باید برای درک «مدرنیته ایرانی» رفت پای منبر آخوندهای «تحول خواه» و «طرفدار حکومت قانون» نشت. حالا شما مته به خشخاش نگذارید. خوب قانون، قانون دیگه: «قانون قصاص» یا «قانون شرعی». چه فرقی میکنه؟ هر چی باشه بهتر از اون نظام ارتجاعی و بی بند و بار دوران پهلویه که الحمدالله بساطش به همت همین روحانیت مبارز و مدرن برچیده شد. تصور کنید که اگر اون وضع قرون وسظائی ادامه پیدا میکرد امروز ایران چه وضعی داشت. شاید امروز خدا نکرده مجازات اعدام دیگه وجود نداشت. یا از این بدتر، زبونم لال حتی یک نخست وزیر زن به ایران حکومت میکرد. نه، اینها به هیچ وجه با فرهنگ ایرانی هماهنگ نیستند

To: A

The response that I "would have got- had I only read the rest of the article," according to you- must be hidden in the last two sentences of the article :

 جالب آنجاست که آنچه نهایتا جنبش جوان مشروطه خواهی ما را نابود کرد اتفاقا روحانیت مدرن یا حتی روحانیت سنتی نبود بلکه ظهور ورسیونی جدیدی از مدرنیته بود که مدرنیته را بدون حکومت قانون می خواست. همان مدرنیته رضاخانی ای که تا زمان انقلاب اسلامی بر ساختارهای جامعه ما حاکم بود.

My question was:"Who stood up to the traditional monarchy, AND,(with AND, being the operative word),asked for the rule of law?

Paydaa koneed porteghaal-foroosh raa!

 I am confused.

Am I missing anything?

 Who is the author talking about?

Just fill in the damn blank:

Hazrateh   ayattollah-ol-ozmaa/hojjatol-eslaam-valmoslemeen/shaikh/mollaah/aa seyyed.................

stood up to the traditional monarchy, AND, asked for the rule of law.

Vas'salaam!

Tashakkor,

Ali P.

@ Ali p If you had only read

@ Ali p
If you had only read the rest of the article, u would had got ur response

People & glass houses

The resident Lady Islamist makes a history defying claim by stating:

 “ALL of Iran's progressive uprisings against Tyranny and against colonialism were pushed (sic) and succeeded by revolutionary Islam”

And she concludes by showing off some "progressive" aspects of her ruling political dogma by describing the faith of some of her compatriots as:

 “An example of the latter is the Bahai cult which gathered some disenchanted masses,  however since Bahiism was a political movement which had its allegiance to foreign powers (first the Russian Empire, later to British and Zionists) it lacked the power of political Shiism which was fundamentally anti-colonial.”

آخوند خوب ،

آخوند خوب ، آخوند مرده است
این مهمترین نکته در دل تمام داستانها و روایات است
البته آخوند شامل امامان و حجت ها و ولی ها و فقیه ها میشود

What an oxy moron "TITLE" !

Modernity equalls their extinction! are you kidding me?

I belive there is such a thing when I see an ant walking on it's hind legs!

هه هه..ميبخشی

مشکل اين نيست که اينا مدرنند يا دايناسور, خرند يا ادم, باسوادن يا بی سواد, و و و و..چون همه جورش تو ويران بقول مردم, ايران پيدا ميشه..پرسش اينست که ايا  اينا تخم رستم اند و ايران يا تخم تازی ضحاک و انيران..پاسخ من همونه که جاويد ياد شاهپور بختيار در لپ داستان گفت..حالا پس از اين پاسخ با حال و شيوا پرسش دوم اينست که اين تخم عربا رو بريزيم تو درياچه نمک قم تا بپوسند  يا بمانند شاهپور شاه ساسانی زنجير بندشون کنيم تو قم تا  بپوکند..خوب پويا جان شما با اون نام ايرونی زيبات کدومو ميپسندي..بپوکه يا بپوسه ؟ ..خواست از شما ..انجام با ما..

گر که اخوندی بميرد رويد از قبرش گلی   گر بميرند جملگی  دنيا گلستان ميشود

Yeah? Like who?

بخش هایی از آن در این نقطه از تاریخ در مقابل حکومت سنتی شاهنشاهی ایستادند و خواستار برقراری حکومت قانون شدند

 They did?

  Pass the first few years of "mashrooteeyst", and then tell us who "stood up to the traditional monarchy, AND, asked for the rule of the law!