Akbar Ganji - Court Clerics on the Payroll: Sacred or Destroyers of Islam?

A note by Akbar Ganji -- Political philosophers of the pre-modern era said to entrust political power to a "just individual" for a good and fair world. Their view of political power was idealistic and utopian. Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) was probably the first to realistically reveal the nature of political power and politicians. In "The Prince," he wrote that he wants to deal only with the truth of matters as they are, not with imaginary concepts. Lord Acton (1834-1902), an English historian, summarized the whole reality and truth of political power in a famous statement in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton on April 5, 1887, saying: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence rather than authority." Charles de Montesquieu (1689-1755) proposed a way out: power must be restrained by power. The separation of powers was the first step to control political power and reduce its harms and corruptions. In fact, the realistic claim of early modern political philosophers was that political power takes away the first virtue from man, which is the power of justice. The relationship of religions with their historically realized forms, Eastern religions (Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, etc.), Western religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc.), and ideologies (socialism, Marxism, communism, liberalism, neoliberalism, capitalism, etc.) shows that when these abstract ideas step into history and land and create political systems, those realized systems have a specific relationship with those religions and ideologies. The left, unable to accept the millions of crimes in the Soviet Union and the former Eastern Bloc, distinguished "realized socialism" from true socialism. Muslims also said: "Islam itself has no flaw; every flaw is from our being Muslim." Thus, one way to escape accountability is to separate the unacceptable historical realizations of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Marxism, liberalism, etc., from the essence of the religion and consider them products of "misreading" and "wrong actions" of the followers. This is what followers of every religion and ideology do. However, opponents and enemies of a religion or ideology reduce all corruptions, oppressions, and war crimes and crimes against humanity to the essence of that religion or ideology. That is, they say all these evils are the result and product of the essence of this ideology (of course, all religions and ideologies lack a fixed Aristotelian essence). The truth is that there is a relationship between a religion and an ideology with its historically realized form. But here, I am not faced with a causal relationship. A narrative is realized from a school, but in any case, the various narratives of a religion or an ideology are readings of that religion or ideology. In each case, it must be shown that "this specific idea" has led to "this specific consequence." For example, class division and widespread inequalities are the consequences of unrestrained capitalism. For this reason, Scandinavian countries, which provide various social services to their citizens, have witnessed the highest rates of equality. The attitude and approach of Ayatollah Khomeini towards political power Ayatollah Khomeini was the theorist of the guardianship of the jurist. He considered political and economic power a "special right" of the jurists. Before the revolution, he naively said to entrust political power to the jurists; they would create paradise by implementing jurisprudential rulings, and then you would understand the meaning of justice. Although his seizure of power led to fundamental changes in his pre-revolution claims, he continued to increase the power of the jurist until the end of his life and transformed the theory of the guardianship of the jurist into the theory of the absolute guardianship of the jurist, effectively turning the jurist not into a successor of the Imam of the Time and the Prophet, or on par with them, but into God (Akbar Ganji, "God is Dead, Long Live the State," in The Being and Appearance of Khomeini, Promises of Paradise, Establishment of Hell, pp. 434-413). Although during Ayatollah Khomeini's leadership the country was engaged in war and the government's meager revenues were spent on the war and the basic needs of the people, he saw that the behavior of the clergy in power was changing, and the natural consequence of that was that the people's perception of the clergy and jurists was also changing. The term "court clerics" was one of Ayatollah Khomeini's expressions. At the end of the 1340s, he ordered in the conclusion of the book "Islamic Government or Guardianship of the Jurist" to take the turbans off the heads of the court clerics, beat them, and expel them from the seminaries. A true jurist is the defender of the rights of the people and their freedom and independence. The clergy must do many things to prove their independence. The most important criterion is public criticism of the tyrannical governance of the lifetime jurist. If the clergy sees itself obliged to enjoin good and jihad, the Prophet of Islam said that the highest jihad and good is to speak the truth and justice in front of a tyrant ruler. But which of the religious authorities and jurists has publicly criticized Ayatollah Khamenei so far? Is Khamenei, who yesterday introduced Ahmadinejad as the closest person in the entire system - intellectually - to himself and today considers him the tongue of the enemy, not subject to criticism? After the revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini again spoke of "court clerics" (when Ayatollah Montazeri announced the week of unity between Shiites and Sunnis and some clerics opposed, he called them "court clerics"). Court clerics were those who, through their speech and behavior, discredited the entire clergy and Islam. He said that opponents with their sharp eyes would from now on generalize every incorrect speech and inappropriate behavior of a cleric in power to the entire clergy and the essence of Islam. The great calamity of the death of Islam Ayatollah Khomeini's claim was simple and clear. Clerics who hold positions in the Islamic Republic can, through their speech and behavior, cause the decline of the clergy and the death of Islam. Consider the following examples: a- The behavior of the clergy causes people to say, "The clerics have created a dictatorship of slippers and turbans," and the Revolutionary Guards have replaced the SAVAK of the Pahlavi regime. If I, the clergy, and the guards take "one wrong step, they will attribute it to Islam" (Sahifeh Imam, vol. 8, pp. 371-370). b- The denial of oppression and the demand for justice was the slogan of the clergy. Now, if we act contrary to justice, the Islamic Republic will fail, and "Islam will be buried," and you will no longer be able to form an Islamic system (Sahifeh Imam, vol. 8, p. 525). c- All eyes are on the clergy who have gained power to see how they will behave with the people. Have we transitioned from the "Pahlavi dictatorship" to the "dictatorship of the robe and turban"? If they do not say and write this inside, they will raise it outside, saying, "These people, until they had power, kept saying there should be freedom; now that they have power, they are busy mistreating the people." All the mistakes of the clerics at the head of power will be attributed to Islam, and "they will say Islam is just like this" (Sahifeh Imam, vol. 9, pp. 475-474). d- He warned the powerful clergy that opponents would say, based on our performance, that the clergy had lacked power until now, and now that they have gained power, they are doing the same things as the previous regime. Opponents will amplify and disseminate our one misstep a hundredfold (Sahifeh Imam, vol. 9, p. 507). e- The clergy, who are "the entourage of Islam," if they commit a wrongdoing, "Islam gets stained." "The greatest calamity" is that our actions as clerics "will kill Islam." Today, Islam is evaluated by our behavior (Sahifeh Imam, vol. 11, pp. 338-337). f- The clergy, who introduced themselves as promoters and interpreters of the commands and rulings of the Quran, why now act in a way that contradicts the Quran? They must be very careful because "this turban is dangerous. This beard is dangerous" (Sahifeh Imam, vol. 11, pp. 503-502). g- Ayatollah Khomeini was against the intervention of the clergy in the executive affairs of the country, except out of necessity. He told the clergy across the country that I have always said before the revolution that the clergy should not interfere in executive affairs. Friday prayer leaders and clerics across the country should not interfere in government affairs. They can only guide. Even now, if a better non-cleric is found, Mr. Khamenei will return to his clerical job instead of the presidency. This is a temporary matter, and when non-clerics are ready to run the country, the clergy will only supervise and guide. The allocation of government budgets to seminaries, religious institutions, and clerics has made them subordinate to the political regime. They are looking to the mouth of Ayatollah Khamenei. They repeat whatever he says: in domestic and foreign policy, in cultural, social, and economic issues. With this situation, is the claim of the independence of the clergy and seminaries not a big lie that adds to the discredit of the clergy? h- On June 6, 1981, Ayatollah Khomeini warned the system's officials that their speech and behavior could lead to a much larger revolution than the February 22, 1979 revolution, and the people would read the funeral prayer for the entire clergy and Islam. He said they must consider the people of the slums who brought them to power. If the people understand your true nature, an explosion will occur. That day will be an "event of God" incomparable to February 22, when "they will read the funeral prayer for all of us" (Sahifeh Imam Khomeini, vol. 14 - p. 380). "Court clerics" and the noble profession of flattering the tyrant When it came to the lifetime rule of Ayatollah Khamenei, the project of state/government/court clericalization of the entire clergy became a "political agenda" of the military/security/financial system. Dozens of new institutions were established for the seminaries and clergy, and with the allocation of huge state budgets, they were made sycophants of the tyrant's court. For example, in the 1397 budget, at least 5 trillion tomans were allocated to religious institutions and the clergy (refer to the article "Jurists: Both Enemies of Reason and Morality, and Plunderers of Public Wealth"). The 39-year performance of the clergy in power has discredited them (refer to the article "The Respected Clergy of the Shah and the Insecure Clergy of the Islamic Republic"). They have done and said more than what Ayatollah Khomeini warned about. One small example of this is the massacre of several thousand political and ideological prisoners, ordered by Ayatollah Khomeini, by the "Death Committee" (Ebrahim Raisi, Mostafa Pourmohammadi, Niri, etc.). Opponents, just as Ayatollah Khomeini predicted, attribute all the thoughts, words, and actions of the clergy to the essence of Islam. They say Islam is just like this. The "court clerics" over the past 39 years have not only lost their independence and become completely obedient to the jurist but have also inflicted numerous damages on Islam. On one hand, they allocate huge state budgets to themselves, and on the other hand, they claim that the clergy are the best segments of society. In the 1397 budget, the government allocated 37 billion tomans to the special prosecutor's office of the clergy (Ebrahim Raisi). The legal commission of the parliament doubled this amount. That is: 74 billion tomans. 303 billion tomans of the budget were allocated to the "Jamia al-Mustafa al-Alamiyah" - headed by Ayatollah Arafi - (for an introduction to the important activities of this institution, refer to the article "The Miracle of 'Converting 50 Million People to Shiism' and 'Martyring' Many of Them in Syria and Iraq"). Hojjat al-Islam Abbas Rafati, spokesman for the management of seminaries, said on December 25, 2017, at a press conference that social media has published the words of some prominent figures in the seminaries, stating that the clergy lacks the previous respect and credibility. In criticizing this reality, he provided this counter-evidence: in the 96 presidential election, 6 candidates (2 clerics and 4 non-clerics) were present, and the two clerical candidates received 95% of the votes. This is the actual credibility of the clergy in society. At the same time, some are seeking to weaken the clergy. He said that enemies, by highlighting the allocation of government budgets to seminaries, raise the issue of the independence of the seminaries. Does the BBC seek the independence of the seminaries? Social media should not play into the hands of the enemy and become the voice of the enemy and counter-revolution. Now the seminaries are independent of the government (executive branch) and criticize the government. The attack on the seminaries and clergy is due to their independence. The Turkish government allocated 4 trillion tomans of the country’s budget to religious institutions and seminaries. The budget for Egypt for Al-Azhar is also very high. Despite all this, there is a campaign against the clergy in Iran. Yes, in Turkey's 2017 budget, 4 billion 368 million lira was allocated to the religious institutions and clergy of that country. Sunni clergy are dependent on governments/political regimes. When they receive money from the government, they either do not interfere in politics, or if they say something, they express the government's opinion. They have no responsibility in the government. They do not implement Sharia either. However, in Iran, the government is the "special right" of the jurists. Shiite clergy have always criticized Sunni clergy for being government-dependent (see, for example, the critiques of Morteza Motahhari). Shiite clergy prided themselves on being the people’s clergy, not the government’s. But now, in receiving money from the political regime, Shiite and Sunni clergy are no different from each other. The difference is that in Iran, the government is under the control of Shiite clergy, and thus, all issues, problems, harms, vices, and oppressions have been transformed into the issues, problems, harms, vices, and oppressions of the clergy and Islam. Independent sacred clergy? Ebrahim Raisi, the custodian of the holy shrine of Imam Reza and the Attorney General of the Special Court for the Clergy, said on December 21, 2017, at the "Preservation of the Sacred Institution of Clergy" conference: "The clergy organization is a sacred organization that derives its sanctity from the sacred essence of the Almighty." As the Attorney General of the Special Court for the Clergy, I testify that the clergy remains among the reference groups of society, and people trust this class.