Table Of ContentI
I
The Tormented
Nativism
Mehrzad Boroujerdi
Syracuse University Press
Copyright © 1996 by Syracuse University Press To tr.i)I mother and the memory of
Syracuse, New York 13244-5160 teachingm e the meaning of
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED fidelity and fortitude
First Edition 1996
96 97 98 99 00 01 6 5 4 3 2 1
This book is part of the Mohammed El-Hindi Series on Arab Culture and Islan:uc
Civilization and is published with the assistance of a grant from the M.E.H. Foun
dation.
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Ll
brary Materials, ANSI Z39 .48-1984. @)
TM
Llbrary of Congress Catal.oging-in-JP'ublication Data
Boroujerdi, Mehrzad.
Iranian intellectuals and the \'Vest : the tormented triumph of
nativism / Mehrzad Boroujerdi. - 1st ed.
p. cm. - (l'v1ohamed El-Hindi series on Arab culture and
Islan:uc civilization)
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
ISBN 0-8156-2726-2 (alk. paper). - ISBN 0-8156-0433-5 (pbk. :
alk. papaer)
1. Iran-Intellectual life-20th century. I. Title. II. Series.
DS316.4.B67 1996
955.05-dc20 96-27371
Manvfacturedi n the United States of America
Mehrzad is assistant professor of political science at the The history of thought and culture is, as Hegel showed
Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University. with great brilliance, a changing pattern of great liberat
ing ideas which inevitably turn into suffocating straight
jackets, and so stimulate their own destruction by new,
emancipating, and at the same time, enslaving concep
tions. The first step to understanding of men is the
bringing to consciousness of the model or models that
dominate and penetrate their thought and action. Llke
all attempts to make men aware of the categories in
which they think, it is a difficult and sometimes painful
activity, likely to produce deeply disquieting results.
- Isaiah Berlin
"Does Political Theory Still Exist?"
Illustrations xi
Prologue Xill
Acknowledgments xvu
A Note on the Text xix
1. Other-ness, Orientalism, Orientalism in and Nativism 1
On Other-ness 1
On Orientalism 6
On Orientalism in Reverse 10
On Nativism 14
2. The Other-in.g of a Rentier State 20
On Intellectuals 20
The Legitimation Crisis of a Rentier State 25
The Secular Militants 34
The Literati 42
3. The Other-ing of the West 52
Seyyed Fakhroddin Shadrnan: The Forgotten Historian 54
Ahmad Fardid: The Oral Philosopher 63
Jalal Al-e Ahmad: The Bohemian Belletrist 65
4. The Clerical Subculture 77
Historical Ambiance 78
Ideological Vigilance 85
Educational Edification 90
Transmutation of Theology 94
5. Lay Religious Intellectuals 99
Mashhad: A Microcosm of Iranian Religious Life 100
Ali Shari'ati: The Aspiring Luther 105
Contents
X
Mojahedin-e Khalq: The Religious Militants 116
Seyyed Hoseyn Nasr: The Theosophist Mandarin 120
6. Academic Nativism 131
Academia 131
Ehsan Naraqi: The Nativist Sociologist 136
Hamid Enayat: The Pensive Political Scientist 140
Illustrations
Daryush Shayegan: The Gypsy Philosopher 147
7. Debates in the Postrevolutionary Era 156
Defining the West 159
Historicism versus Positivism 163
Followingp age 130
Traditional versus Dynamic Jurisprudence 165
Seyyed Fakhroddin Shadman
8. Epilogue 176
Ahmad Fardid
Appendix:C atalogue of Irwian Lntellectual a..ndP olitical Figures 185
Jalal Al-e Ahmad
Glossary 217
Ali Shartati
Works Cited 221
Seyyed Hoseyn Nasr
Index 241
Ehsan Naraqi
Hamid Enayat
Daryush Shayegan
Reza Davari
Abdolkarim Sorush
Xt
Prologue
THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION of February 1979 was undoubtedly a seis
mic political event that heralded the return of religious revolutions to
the annals of modern history. The rapid downfall of a mighty autocratic
regime, the use of religion as the primary agency of political mobiliza
tion, the tremendous level of animosity displayed against the West, and
the esta9lishment of a theocracy in the later decades of the twentieth
century presented serious questions for social scientists to ponder. In
the seventeen years that have elapsed two dominant schools of thought
have emerged on the causes of this popular, turbulent, and controversial
revolution. The first approach views the revolution in terms of socio
economic factors related to Iran's rapid and uneven economic develop
ment. The second emphasizes cultural and ideological factors, notably
the rise of politicized. Islam, Iranians' disenchantment with the West,
and their search for a new cultural identity.
Having wrestled for more than one decade with the considerable task
of investigating the theoretical orientation and social function of mod
_ern Iranian intellectuals, I have come to appreciate both schools of
thought. The political economy and the culturalist perspective by them
selves, however, only capture fragments of the complicated reality of
the Iranian scene. A more profound understanding of the genesis and
trajectory of this revolution requires an epistemological bifocality that
makes allowance for cross-fertilization and thereby makes one privy to
their combined wisdom. I am well aware that this type of eclecticism
does not suit all tastes and that one can be dragged into a deadly schol
arly quagmire. Yet Goethe's maxim, "All theory, dear friend, is gray
the Golden tree of life is green," convinces me to take the risk nonet11e
less. My goal is not so much to foster a compromise but to open a
space for dialogue by demonstrating the insufficiencies of the two ap
proaches. In this book I demonstrate how Iranian intellectuals responded
to the cultural, socioeconomic, and political transformation vlithin their
society from the early 1950s to the mid-1990s. The time interval under
.I xzzz
xzv Prologue Prologue xv
consideration is of utmost importance because it marks an era of tremen something different from the customary unfolding of secularization
dous socioeconomic upheaval and political metamorphosis. makes an examination of lay religious intellectuals a necessity.
I have confined my theoretical investigation of contemporary Iranian With these points in mind I deal in this study primarily with the ideas
intellectual history within a cultural triangle: the impact of Western cul I and practice of secular and lay religious intellectuals. It will be argued
ture and civilization; Iran's (pre)Islamic heritage; and the intellectuals' that what abounded in the Iranian intellectual circles in the years leading
estimate of the latter two. The importance of the first lies in t_he fact to the revolution was a nativist discourse that was much more corpu
that Western philosophical, scientific, economic, and military prowess If lent, encompassing, and ubiquittQhUeS than Shi'a Islam. It is true that
have irrevocably affected the day-to-day way of life and tl:,j_nkingi n Shi'ism is an integral part of Iranian political culture, and it is
contemporary Iran. The second is significant because it constitutes Iran equally valid to maintain that political culture is the background against
ians' primary source of cultural and intellectual identity. The third is which the drama of politics is enacted. Yet the argument that Iranian
crucial because in their capacity as creators and narrators of culture, political culture is Islamic in a sui g~11eris fashion does not pass close
intellectuals have played a vital role in mediating the encounter between scrutiny. My study of the cognitive map, nomenclature, and discursive
Western culture and Iran's (pre)Islamic heritage. Within this cultural tri practices of the modern Iranian intellectual elite demonstrates that the
angle a set of problems have surfaced: What is the West? How should it ideology of the revolution was not ab initio Islamic. In other words,
be approached? What comprises Iranian identity? What is the proper Shi'ism was a key, but not the sole, ideological component of the revo
relationship among religion, science, and philosophy? ls religion an lution. What motivated or dragged many of Iran's intelligentsia to join
anachroPism for a "developing" society such as Iran? Should modern the revolutionary tide was more than religious sentiments. Religion
ity and secularism be viewed as universal principles or as Western intru might have been more a surrogate for Iranian nationalism. It was a
sions that are incompatible wit_h Iranian culture? In the pages that fol rallying cry for those who had been adversely affected by the course of
low I analyze the methods of formulating such questions and the economic and social metamorphosis experienced in the country in prior
responses of Iranian intellectuals. I pursue this task by critically examin decades.
ing intellectuals' discursive practices relative to the state and the West. In line with the theoretical disposition of the present work I present
In light of the revolution's outcome a goodly number of scholarly an integrated analysis of the last five decades of intellectual production
books on Shi'ism and Iranian clergy have proliferated.' Relatively little in Iran by providing both a glimpse into the socioeconomic ambiance
has been done, however, on the contributions by nonclerical religious of the country as a whole and by furnishing a synoptic discussion of ten
intellectuals.2 Still less attention has been devoted to analyzing the leading intellectuals. The criterion used to select the intellectuals is not
thoughts and actions of secularized intellectuals, who have been treated public fame but substantive theoretical contribution. Whereas some of
mostly as marginal actors.3 Unlike in most other modern revolutions, the thinkers examined in this book can be considered leading person
Iranian secular intellectuals did not climb to the top of the revolution alities of the 1979 revolution, I include also those hitherto unknown to
ary movement that came to power in 1979. Nonetheless, it would be a non-Persian-speaking audiences and, alas, also to many Iranians. By
grave mistake not to study the crucial role they played in the political uncovering the ideas and texts of these neglected authors, past and
and ideological dress rehearsals that led to the revolution. It is impossi present, I draw attention to the remarkable continuity in Iranian
ble to understand the genesis of the Iranian revolution without referring thought before and after the 1979 revolution.
to the theoretical reflexes and the political struggles of secular intellec The theoretical predilections of this study are set forth in chapter 1,
tuals. That in modern Iranian intellectual history Hegel's Owl of Mi wherein the central concepts of other-ness,o rientalism, orientalism in re
nerva (symbolizing wisdom or historical understanding) has brought verse,a nd nativism are discussed. An understanding of these ideas is cru
cial for making sense of the chapters that follow. In chapters 2 and 3 I
1. For some of the best examples see Akhavi 1980, Amir Arjomand 1988, Bayat examine how the secular Iranian intellectuals of the 19 50s, 1960s, and
Philipp 1982, Enayat 1982, Fischer 1980, and Mottahedeh 1985. l~' 1970s confronted a dual sense of other-ness with the state and the
2. For a number of competent examples see Abrahamian 1989, Chehabi 1990, and
West, which, respectively, resulted in dissent and nativism. The second
Dabashi 1993.
3. For three hitherto unpublished works that treat the historical plight of Iranian i chapter begins with an examination of the term intellectualsa nd proceeds
to demonstrate how the "rentier" nature of the Pahlavi state brought
secular intelligentsia see Gheissari 1989, Kia 1986, and Shahdadi 1982.
xvi Prologue
about its cns1s of legitimacy, which, in turn, was exploited by secular
militants and literati committed to political activism. In chapter 3 I deal
ll
with the second type of other-ness confronting Iranian intellectuals, the
t1
other-ness of the West. The latter group's search for self-identity is
1,
deconstructed through the literary, political, and philosophical texts of I
three important intellectuals: Seyyed Fakhroddin Shadman, Ahmad Far
Acknowledgments
did, and Jalal Al-e Ahmad. In chapter 4 I present an account of the
changing nature of the clergy's philosophical and political discourse. In
chapter 5 I investigate the discursive practices of a newly emerging class
of lay religious intellectuals whose vision of cultivating an "Islamic alter
native" led to cries for "authenticity" and calls for a "return to the self."
First, to provide an account of the intricate process through which THIS BOOK BEGAN as a doctoral dissertation completed at the Ameri
these Muslim intellectuals contributed to the formation of the religious can University (Washington, D.C.) and recognized by the Foundation
for Iranian Studies as the best of its kind in the Field of Iranian Studies
subculture, I present a case study of the holy city of Mashhad. I then
examine the writings of two more influential thinkers, Ali Shari'ati and in 1990. In the years that have ensued it has undergone a meta
morphosis both in content and in style. A fair amount of the revisions
Seyyed Hoseyn Nasr, as well as the Mojahedin-e Khalq guerrilla organi- .
zation. Combined with chapter 4, this chapter completes the discussion were carried out during my stays at Harvard University (1990-91) and
of how the ascendancy of political Islam became possible. In chapter 6 the University of Texas at Austin (1991-92) where I was, respectively, a
I explain how the Iranian academia contributed to the articulation and Postdoctoral Fellow and a Rockefeller Foundation Resident Fellow in
further popularity of the nativist discourse by looking at the works of Humanities. I thank all of my colleagues at the Middle East Centers of
these two fine institutions, in particular Roy Mottahedeh and Fedwa
Ehsan Naraqi, Hamid Enayat, and Daryush Shayegan. In the final chap
Malti-Douglas, for enabling me to enjoy two efficacious and remunera
ter of the book I elucidate the range of problematics and challenges
tive years of research and writing. My interactions with peers and stu
facing the postrevolutionary intellectual elite in Iran by critically scrutin
izing three consequential sets of debates involving Reza Davari and Ab dents at Syracuse University since September 1992 have allowed me to
reflect upon and refine further some of my earlier arguments.
dolkarim Sorush.
I have been the recipient of numerous intellectual loans from the
following mentors, colleagues, and friends who each kindly read parts or
all of this work and made numerous suggestions for its improvement,
not all of which I have had the forte or wisdom to include: Ervand
Abrahamian, Shah.rough Akhavi, Reza Alavi, Mehdi Aminrazavi, Ahmad
Ashraf, G. Matthew Bonham, Houchang Chehabi, Anna Enayat, Fari
J.
doun Farrokh, Traci A. Fordham, Valerie Hoffman, M. R. Ghanoon
parvar, Naeem Inayatullah, Ahmad Karimi-Hakkak, Serif Mardin, Ali
Mirsepassi, Nicholas G. Onuf, Abazar Sepehri, Mohamad Tavakoli-Tar
ghi, and Prodromos Yannas. In addition, I thank many of the scholars
cited in this book who generously shared with me in lengthy interviews
their experiences and thoughts on the intricacies of Iranian intellectual
life. Needless to say, the responsibility for all the shortcomings of this
book rests on my shoulders alone. The list of individuals who helped
l
l me compile the data for the appendix over the last decade is too lengthy
to summon here. I thank every one of them. I also thank the Routledge
f
J.
and E. Brill publishing houses for their permission to use materials
.I xvzz
Acknowledgments
XVI!/
from chapters 3 and 6 of the present book that were previously pub
lished in Boroujerdi 1992; 1994b. Similarly, I thank all the staff of Syr
acuse University Press and, in particular, the executive editor, Cynthia
Maude-Gembler, for grace, serenity, professionalism, and efficiency.
I am grateful to my colleagues in the political science department of
Syracuse University for inhibiting me from turning the present manu
A Note on the Text
script into yet another penultimate version of that "ideal" .first book of
which so many young scholars innocently dream. On a higher plane, I
hope that members of my immediate family accept this labor of l?ve as
a token of my sincere gratitude for all that they have endured 1n the
course of the last two tempestuous decades. Finally, as a father, I take
THIS BOOK EMPLOYS the transliteration system laid out by Nasser
solace in the thought that this book may help my son, Mateen, better
Sharify in Catalogingo fP ersian Works (1959). To make the book more
understand the nature of a revolution t..hat robbed him, rather unfairly,
accessible to the general reader I have modified Sharify's system in three
of a wise and affectionate grandpa.
ways: (1) with the exception of the ayn and hamza all diacritical marks
for Persian and Arabic terms have been dispensed with, (2) diacritical
marks have been omitted in the initial position, and (3) deference has
been accorded to contemporary/popular rather than classic/scholastic
Persian pronunciations. Anglicized names found in Webster'sT hird New
International Dictionary oft he English Language have been granted prefer
ence where appropriate. Finally, in the materials quoted from English
and French language sources, the respective authors' preferred spelling
of names has also been listed.
For dates I have pursued the following format. For material originally
published in Persian the bibliography provides both the Muslim solar
(Hijri Shamsi) calendar years and the equivalent years in the Christian
Era, respectively. In the body of the text and the notes, however, I only
provide the Christian Era dates. In March 1976 a new calendar system,
which dated back to the establishment of the Achaemenid Empire by
Cyrus the Great in 558 B.C., was instituted in Iran. According to this
imperial calendar, the Iranian solar year 1355~( equivalent to year 1976 in
the Gregorian calendar) became the year 2535. Between 197 6 and 1978
all books and official documents published in Iran were dated according
to this imperial calendar.
Because the number of Iranian intellectuals cited in this book is large,
I give all biographical information on them as part of the Appendix.
Finally, unless otherwise indicated, all translations from Persian and
French are my own.
xzx
1
Other-ness, Orientalism, Orientalism
in Reverse, and Nativism
Contact between cultures always makes for drama: an on
tological, communal drama of human differences or an ex
istential, intellectual drama in the life of an individual.
Superficial contact creates a feeling of strangeness; more
profound encounters risk bringing on the dissolution of
the self, the shattering of its coherence, the end of certi
tude, and a traumatic challenge to one's values.
-Hichem Djiit, Europe and Islam
On Otheir-ness
MOST STUDENTS OF PHILOSOPHY AGREE that the Rene Descartes
(1596-1650) "I think, therefore I am" statement helped usher in a new
era in human history. The rationalistic premise of this short sentence
constitutes a decisive break with premodern thought. Since then, the
Cartesian I, or the thinking ego,h as become an indispensable centerpiece
of Western philosophy by presenting itself as the subject (or agent) of
knowledge, ethical responsibility, and change. "With the Cartesian 'I
think,' an egoity appeared and became the established definition of hu
manity. The I provided an origin from which a certain but egocentric
and dualistic universe was secured for Western experience" (Liberman
1989, 127).
A compatriot of Descartes, the philosopher and historian of thought
Michel Foucault (1926-1984), engaged in a lifetime quest to understand
how the Western self develops knowledge about itself. Studying the
genealogy of human sciences in the period since the eighteenth cen
tury, Foucault maintained that these sciences managed to articulate a
new and positive definition of se!ft hat was radically different from Chris
tianity's notion of self-renunciation. He maintained that the human
sciences' construction of this new self came about through the constitu-
