Ali Mohammad Saberi, an assistant professor at Farhangian University, is known for the speeches he has delivered on Iranian Sufi figures. He is the author of “The Hadith of Love” and “The Sultan of Love”, has edited 108 treatises written by Shah Nematollah Vali, and was the chair of the seminar on “Abo-al-Ghasem Goorkani”.
However, because he follows the Sufi path, he has not been immune to the harmful actions of extremists. He was recently chased by plain-clothes security motorcyclists, who also doused his car with acid in front of his house. The following day, he was summoned by the Ministry of Intelligence and told not to hold the “Ahmad Ghazali Conference” of which he was the organizer. This begs the question of how holding an academic conference about a major Iranian Sufism and literature figure might endanger security in the country to the extent that the only official security organization in Iran would prevent it. Majzooban Noor conducted the following recent interview with Dr. Saberi concerning these events.
-We have heard that the Ministry of Intelligence has prevented the convening of the “Ahmad Ghazali Conference”. First of all, please speak about this conference and the reasons why you wished to convene it. Later we’ll focus on the reasons behind the intervention of the security agency in the convening of an academic conference.
-My colleagues and I have started to conduct extensive research on figures like Sheikh Abo-al-Ghasem Goorkani and Sheikh Ahmad Ghazali Toosi. A prerequisite for this research is holding relevant conferences so that we would get to know about these figures’ other works and also introduce this part of Iran’s cultural heritage to Iranians more effectively. In fact, our main motivation is raising cultural awareness by carrying out research into our history. Our society suffers from gaps of three major types: rationality, spirituality, and awareness of identity. Culture is the only way in which these gaps can be addressed. Unfortunately, however, culture has some interconnections with politics, because some tend to look at cultural issues in terms of politics and security. Obviously, gaining knowledge about Sufism is not the only outcome of investigating the history of Sufism. Some other results of this investigation are increased knowledge about the literature, including poetry and prose, architecture, art, psychology, and even the missing pieces of our history. These were the reasons we embarked on organizing and holding Sufi conferences; however, since those involved in politics, military, and Hawza (the Islamic seminary) have maintained cultural controls, those involved in Sufism and philosophy, who are the core and spirit of religion and morality, have been marginalized. Our scholars, in general, have been marginalized, and the protection of culture has been contaminated with issues related to power. If this perspective on culture is maintained, we shall not make slight progress in our country. Revival of the Islamic Iran and an Iran which maintains its Eastern identity necessitates attention to the cultural resources available in Sufism, which is the only path through which figures, such as Muhyiddin Arabi, Mowlavi, and Hafez, can regain the national attention. Selling five million copies of Masnavi of Mowlavi over a year in the US suggests how much people around the world pay attention to these cultural resources. Our ignorance, however, is leading us down the path of death and destruction. The Mowlavi’s version of Islam, rather than the kind of Islam the IS or Wahabis present, ought to pervade the country. In other words, if we forget the cultural resources I just talked about, we will shift toward those deviated types of Islam.
-Despite this outlook, which you consider cultural and essential, why do you think the Ministry of Intelligence prevents you from holding conferences about Iranian Sufi figures? What are their reasons?
-They consider these events promotional; however, figures such as Abo-al-Ghasem Goorkani and Ghazali Toosi don’t require any introduction. Our main motivation behind these events is raising awareness about these figures’ ways of thinking so there will be thinkers in this country like them in our time. Unfortunately some authorities overlook this perspective, insist on their own interpretations which are the result of consulting with people who are not informed and have evil intentions, and prevent cultural events using security measures. My question is who, other than shallow people, would be threatened by these events? How would this seminar harm the country? Isn’t it all of benefit to Iran? And, why don’t they understand that at the end of the day these interferences will bring benefits to Sufism, benefits which it has not been seeking at all. Unfortunately, shallow people have decided, like they did in the past, to separate religion from Sufism and philosophy.
-Did the Ministry of Intelligence provide any reasons for preventing this seminar? Didn’t it relate this to the rallies the dervishes had in front of the Prosecutor General’s office for their legitimate and legal demands?
-Both on the phone and in person, they told me, given the current conditions, I am not allowed to hold this seminar for the time being. I told them we do not have promotional motivations behind this; rather, we want to organize and hold this seminar within legal constraints and under the supervision of the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. This Ministry had issued the permission for the seminar but the Ministry of Intelligence of the “Government of Moderation” showed strong disagreements with it, which manifested itself in illegal actions like intimidations, chasings, and the dousing of acid. Following the dervishes’ rallies seeking the release of prisoners’ and the end of their hunger strike, on Eid al-Adha, Dr. Pasouki, Mr. Jazbi, and I were chased by motorcyclists with the aim of creating an unsecure atmosphere, which lasted for a couple of days. We were chased wherever we went. And, when I was summoned by the Ministry of Intelligence, I was told “You are not allowed to hold Sufi seminars for the time being. The current conditions are not such that you can hold these types of seminars. It is not a good idea for the moment.” They told me that this decision was temporary and referred to Haghighat Publishing as an example. Haghighat Publishing was previously not allowed to publish books and take part in international book fairs for a while. They said “This year, we allowed them to take part in book fairs and publish some books. We will allow you to hold Sufi seminars next year and in the future. Do not hold them for the time being.”
-Did they assume responsibility for dousing your car in acid?
-They claimed that they had not done that. They said this had probably been done by some civilians who were unknown to them. I hope they had not done that, but I don’t know who these ‘civilians’ were.
-Given that the president’s advisor has said the Ministry of Intelligence does not yet have complete control over the ministry, do you think that this ministry’s preventing of your conference is a general policy or a personal decision?
-I am not completely familiar with these issues and look at political and security-related issues from a cultural perspective. Metaphorically speaking, the Ministry of Intelligence is the nation’s nerves. If nerves transmit wrong information, they adversely affect the brain’s functions. Not all parts of the ministry are involved in disagreements and animosities. It must be one part of it which has penetrated the system. These reactions show that there is a group of shallow individuals who have a political and security-oriented attitude to Sufism and are in a decision making position in the ministry. Personally I do not think that the whole ministry is involved in this but there is this small group which has unfortunately penetrated the system. These people have long born animosity toward Sufism. They are the very people who used to disagree with incorporating philosophy in religious courses in Howza. They consider us their enemies and we consider them ignorant friends. In Sufism, the only enemy is one’s ego, which is why we are required to fight our own egos and be at peace with the world. I’d like to reemphasize that the major consequence of these interferences has always been for Sufism to be highlighted more and more.
-Why are Gonabadi dervishes, who have always insisted on avoiding politics, being considered as a political body?
-Unfortunately, politicians and the security system consider dervishes a social, rather than a spiritual body, and think that more and more people are joining this social group on a daily basis. The point, however, is that each individual dervish is a group and they are not considered a ‘political body’. Not only are dervishes, like other spiritual groups, not political but also the state and the nation can lean upon them. The current attitude toward dervishes presents them as a political and social group and creates the assumption that they are gaining political power, while their power has a spiritual nature. The perception that Sufism is ranged against the dominant religious power has been there for a long time and has made Sufis experience great suffering and even be murdered. The murder of Hossein Mansoor Halaj and Ein al-Ghozat Hamedani and the sufferings inflicted on Ba-Yazid Bastami are some examples. Another is Attar, who suffered the wrath of the shallow religious people in his time because of his respect for Shia Imams (Peace be upon them) and starting his Tazkirat al-Awliya (Memorial of the Saints) with Imam Sadigh. Even now with Shiism as the official religion of Iran, many Shia jurisprudents disapprove of him. These oppositions have long been there. In the Qajar era, murdering Sufis was common, and there were serious objections to Sufism. More seriously these oppositions existed during the Safavid era.
-Despite all of this, it is commonly believed that Safavids were Sufis and the atrocities during their time were committed by Sufis. Please elaborate on this.
-I should first say that we Iranians owe our Shiism to Sufis, while we should consider the fact that this Shiism was later contaminated by issues of power which was then turned into a means of oppression. Before Sufis expanded Shiism, we Iranians were Sunnis. Now, regarding your question, there have always been objections to Sufis assuming that they were involved in the crimes committed during the Safavid era, while Safavid kings murdered many Sufis, such as Qizilbashes. These Sufis were killed because of oppositions and the influence of religious jurisprudents, such as the second Majlesi. While the second Majlesi was in opposition to Sufis, in a response to a cleric from Ghazvin, Majlesi had considered Sufis to have a higher status than philosophers and jurisprudents and had asserted that Sufis have reached high logical and spiritual understanding. However, unfortunately since some Sufis imposters had joined the Sufi community, scholars who were seeking access to the court of kings took advantage of this situation and crept into courts of kings such as Sultan Husayn Safavi. As a consequence, the murder of Sufis became common even in Safavid era, and for more than 200 years Sufis migrated to India during which no major scholars emerged in Iran. These oppositions and influence on the political systems were present not only in the Safavid era but also in Naderi era. Similarly, during Zandieh dynasty, Moshtagh-Ali-Shah Kermani was sentenced to stoning and his followers were also treated harshly. Opposing Sufis has happened in an uninterrupted manner throughout history. The important points are that Sufis in principle do not interfere in jurisprudents’ affairs, they have flourished following the path of peace, and they oppose their temptations but remain at peace with others. Those who control their nafs (egos) remain at peace with the world. This peace was eloquently expressed by Abo-al Hassan Kharaghani who said “Feed everyone who comes to this house and do not ask them about their faith, as those who God thinks worth creating are definitely worth feeding by Abo-al Hassan.”
-Thanks for your time.