Arabo-islamisation of Iranian culture

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Rasputin
    Senior Member
    • Jan 2005
    • 63906

    #1

    Arabo-islamisation of Iranian culture

    While the Islamic Republic was shaping after the 1979 Revolution in Iran, Iranian students continued to resist the new dictatorship. The Islamic regime was initially cautious in its attempt to control the campuses.

    Students were in control of the classroom, the physical space, and campus politics. Short after the revolution, students, employees, and professors could create democratic councils to administer their universities. Elections were held in which a majority of students rejected the IRI-dominated Islamic association.

    The relatively democratic achievement was a thorn in the eye of any dictator. The newborn dictatorship in Iran could not tolerate this state of dual power.

    On April 18, 1980, Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic, in his Friday Prayer sermon, ordered a holy war (jihad) against the students. He accused the students of turning the campuses into “war rooms” against the Islamic state. After the prayers, armed gangs attacked three campuses. Within the next few days, the gangs wounded hundreds of students and killed at least 24. Students were driven off the campuses, and the government took over all the premises.

    On April 19, 1980, the Islamic Republic of Iran launched the Cultural Revolution in Iran. It was the beginning of officially state violence to force islamisation of universities--and in the following years the whole Iranian culture.

    The order to fire started with a fiery speech of President Banisadr, the first President of the IRI, following this speech; the universities in Tehran were assaulted by pro-regime students protected by pro-regime thugs.

    The following decree issued by the Revolutionary Council on April 20, 1980, was meant to crush the achievements once for all:

    1. Within three days, all political groups and related organisations in all universities, colleges and schools must close their offices. If they do not do so, the Revolutionary Council and all its members, including the President, will mobilise the people and go to the universities and destroy these centres of councils.

    2. The universities and colleges must develop a plan to complete final examinations by June 4, 1980, and be closed from that day until the government is able to restructure the educational system based on a revolutionary Islamic philosophy and only will new students be admitted.

    3. The universities must not hire any new staff.

    Following this decree, in the next weeks, universities in Tehran, Shiraz, Mashhad, Rashtese, Bluchistan, Ahwaz, and Isfahan were attacked. Thousands were wounded, hundreds arrested, and more than fifty students were killed. Some of those arrested were later executed.

    The universities were finally closed in June, 1980, and the purification process began. On each campus, an administrative body called the Holy Council of Reconstruction was created. Professors and employees, many with a long history of opposition to Shah’s dictatorship, were fired, forced to retire or refused their salaries. The scholarships of students abroad were revoked. According to statistics collected by Tehran Polytechnic, 40% of all professors were fired or forced to resign in the first year.

    The Islamic “Holy” Councils were to immediately silence the campuses. Students not affiliated with the state run Islamic student associations were no longer allowed to form any organisations. Muslim student associations were given the mandate to spy on students. Academic freedom was completely abolished. Repression was so extensive that a student secular and democratic movement turned into clandestine or apolitical for the coming decades.

    The assault on the universities was the beginning of an Islamic project baptised “the Cultural Revolution”. Khomeini appointed a Cultural Revolution Council to lead the project of integrating the universities into the Islamic state.

    The reopened universities and colleges after two years became fully Islamic with medieval theological seminaries, mosques, gender discrimination, and imposed Islamic hijab. Rules were imposed to thwart any political activity of non-Islamic groups within the campus. New students were admitted only if a “local investigation” could prove that they were loyal to Islam and the Islamic regime.

    Islamic student associations were in a swift growth mushroomed in the country’s universities. These bearded and veiled students not only supported the Cultural Revolution, but were all fanatically attached to the most aggressive and undemocratic values of militant Islam and its new founder, Khomeini. No independent, democratic, and secular group was tolerated on the campus anymore. Unprecedented political control over universities, the suppression or restriction of non Muslims’ students, more gender segregation, forced veil, crush of any secular attitude were the immediate measures to be taken on campuses.

    Another consequence of the Cultural Revolution, which needed a two- year closure of Iranian universities, was the immigration waves of many professors and scientists left Iran to escape the Cultural Revolution and young Iranians hoping to enter universities in other countries.

    Most Iranians don not voluntarily go to Islamic schools, colleges, and universities and since there is no one single free educational institution in Iran, many try to find a way to enter a university abroad.

    Under the IRI, nobody is allowed to claim that students’ rights should override any religious and ideological considerations. Actually, the issue of whether Iranian students have the right to have modern and secular universities stands against the Islamic philosophy of IRI’s constitution.

    The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran considers educational institutions based on Islamic principles and norms. The constitution does not tolerate any modification in form and principle.

    Educational system is of course exemplified by the nature of such an Islamic concept in which gender segregation remains its main characteristic. In other words, Iranian children from primary school are deprived from mixed-sex school and consequently a psychological development of their Oedipus Complex.

    The long-term objective of the Cultural Revolution is to root out any aspect of non-Islamic culture from the society by introducing a greater portion of Arabo-islamisation in its place. It is to promote the existing Islamic educational system into a pure Islamic set of beliefs. What concerns the educational institutions; they should become all the relics of theocracy schools in Qom (Iranian saint city).

    Based on this objective, the process included, among others, a whole change of materials, and books of higher education.-- it weakens the academic values of universities, especially in the fields of human sciences.

    Although, the IRI uses experiences of cultural revolutions under other ideological dictatorships, but comparing Chinese and Iranian Cultural Revolutions through similarities of violence in process between the two is conceptually wrong. The fundamental differences are in goals and orientation: while the Chinese one in 60th was an attempt to hasten a socialist society, the one in Iran is a regression to revaluate the norms and values of primitive clan society of Arabia in the époque of Muhammad, the Prophet.

    Arabo-islamisation of Iranian culture is the ideological goal of the Cultural Revolution for the coming generations in Iran. It stipulates a violent and anti-Iranian process in which any non-Islamic components, including those of pre-Islamic Persian ones, must be rooted out. The process is in fact an negation of most Iranians’ national identity--the case which was once imposed by Muslim Arabs, when they occupied Iran about fourteen centuries ago.

    The IRI’s constitution has implied this goal by saying, “since the language of the Koran and Islamic texts and teachings is Arabic, and since Persian literature is thoroughly permeated by this language, it must be taught after elementary level, in all classes of secondary school and in all areas of study.” Therefore, lesson of Arabic language and reading of the Koran will gain more compulsory character despite abhor of an increasing majority of students.

    The Cultural Revolution was continued by in the following years under “the Supreme Cultural Revolution Council. It became the highest body for general islamisation of culture and education. Though, the body is not even stipulated in the Constitution, but was formed under the pressure of hardliners for more state control over student bodies, arbitrary dismissal of professors, and paving the path for further cultural revolutions.

    Today’s student movement in Iran is another topic. In short, it seems a potential force with a vague and double characteristic, while it is only allowed to exist as long as it remains a relic of the IRI, at the same time, is influenced by the plight of Iranians under the plague of the same IRI.

    All existing Islamic associations, from pro-Ahamadinejad Basiji students to “pro-reformists ”, have roots in various factions of the IRI. Today, three decades after the plague of the IRI, an increasing majority of Iranian students are being conscious of realities and are looking for an independent, democratic and secular student movement.

    Although, in the past years, some members of Muslim student associations, by trying to demand reforms, became less docile sheep of the IRI’s cattle, and some of them were brutally punished, an independent, secular, and democratic student movement does not or cannot officially exist under the totalitarian IRI.

    iran
  • ghalibaf
    Member
    • Oct 2007
    • 154

    #2
    i rather be what i am now than the westernised culture of iran.
    Vote Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf

    Comment

    • Dokhtar Bandari
      Member
      • Oct 2007
      • 1099

      #3
      That is because you have not gotten passed your ignorance...but you will someday when you get tired of your sufferings. Its not about Westernizing or Easternizing...its about evolution...and guess what??? You have 2 choices...Evolution and Involution...the way I see it you are going down way down....maybe that is where you will get to meet your maker..

      Consider how you are viewed by others...how small your mind appears in this article about your treatment of women...this is not what God wants this is what Man wants...why??? ignorance!!!!! The way of the Arabs not the way of the Persians.

      The role of women in a religious society like the Islamic Republic of Iran, pertains, simply, to the question of who and what women are, the answer to which is found in the Koran. In these sacred Islamic verses the role and nature of women have been described by Allah, or God the almighty creator of us all. Despite the traditional multi-ethnicity of Iranian society’s social fabric, however, Islam as a universal religion for the entire country has shaped the structure of Iran’s society and the mentality of its citizens. Within the Islamic religious belief and the Koran, the belief is that women were created for the main purpose of their husbands. The Iranian traditional creeds, enforced by religious beliefs especially after the Islamic revolution in 1979, has given rise to a universal psychological delusion that women are the weak elements of the society and thus, they fall in the category of God’s second-hand creatures. This belief implies the natural and divine condemnation of women, who are inferior to men. This social-religious belief has created a role for women as the mother of the kids and a great companionship for the almighty masculine men.
      Any culture is a combination of religious beliefs and traditional practices. Moreover, a culture can be described, to a certain extent, in relation to its structural language. Persian language has been influenced profoundly by Arabic language, the said-to-be language of Allah, for the last fourteen centuries. In this case, the word "Adam" was adopted from koranic context and is used to mean human being or mankind. The word "Adamiat," from the root Adam, means humanity. Therefore, to define humanity in an Islamic/Iranian sense, we should focus on the characteristics of men rather than women. This masculine-religious notion of humanity reveals that the role of Iranian/Muslim women is limited to whatever they (women) can contribute to the survival of humanity (men).
      The Koran 30.21 states the following:
      “By another sign He (Allah) gave you wives from among yourselves, that you (men) might live in joy with them, and planted love and kindness in your hearts. Surely there are signs in this for thinking men.”
      This verse is then based on fundamental religious notion that God created women in order that their husbands might have the advantage of their company. The astonishing linguistic definition of humanity in Persian language and the direct word of God regarding who and what women would seems to mandate women’s place in a deeply religious society like Iran.
      The daily applications, among men’s conversations, of the word To Zani, which means, you are a woman, is a strong message not only to humiliate but also to impose the demeaning place of women in Iranian society. The inferior social place of the Iranian women has been shaped by the religious belief in which God created Eve from Adam declaring a dependent creation of woman on man. This notion of creation gives a meaning to the role of women in life when one believes that God created Eve to put an end to Adam’s loneliness on Earth.
      The Arabic words naghess al aghl meaning, defected witted person, has been integrated into Persian language as a way to describe the intellectual capability of women in general. The religious taboo of not being capable judges comes from this religious sentiment. The Arabic word zaeefeh, meaning, the weaker, is used directly to address the presence of a woman in a group. This linguistic analysis allows us to glean the portrait of who and what women are in the modern Islamic Iranian society.
      It is the stated duty of a woman to satisfy her husband in any possible way. This religious phenomenon is well justified both by men and by women because a believer should follow Allah’s command: “Give them their dowry for the enjoyment you have had of them as a duty.”(Koran 4.24) In other words, a husband should live with his wife to satisfy his own need and pleasure. Koran 26.166 also says, “Your wives, whom Allah has created for you.” In this verse, “for you” is taken to mean for your men in any possible way; sure enough pleasure is one of those ways. Therefore, God created women for men’s enjoyment.
      The following verse from Koran 4.34 illustrates the status and the nature of woman, as is determined again by Allah:
      “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you take no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme.”
      According to this verse, then, women have no authority because of their divinely determined subordinate nature. Good women are those who obey their husbands unconditionally and those whose sexuality are the property of men that should be protected by any means. It is elaborated that if a woman disobeys her husband, it is necessary for husband to her by not having sex with her (temporarily) and teaching her a lesson by some physical punishment.
      The Koranic description of women determines the role of women in a theocracy-based society, such as is the case in even modern Iran. A so-deemed universal code in the Koran can be used to define women’s role and stature in any time, in any place. The sacred verses put the notion simply, “women are created for men,” and thereby sets forth the limits of women’s roles and rights in a religion-based society. Roohi
      Last edited by Dokhtar Bandari; 11-08-2007, 09:04 AM.
      I would be true, for there are those who trust me;
      I would be pure, for there are those who care;
      I would be strong, for there is much to suffer;
      I would be brave, for there is much to dare.
      I would be friend of all—the foe—the friendless;
      I would be giving and forget the gift;
      I would be humble, for I know my weakness;
      I would look up and laugh—and love—and lift.
      Howard Walter

      Comment

      Working...