Durham E-Theses

Sayyed Ahmad Kasravi historian, language reformer

and thinker

Ramyar, Minoo

How to cite:

Ramyar, Minoo (1969) Sayyed Ahmad Kasravi historian, language reformer and thinker, Durham theses,
Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/10016/

Use policy

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or
charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:
• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source

• a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses

• the full-text is not changed in any way
The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.
Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details.

Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP
e-mail: e-theses.admin@dur.ac.uk Tel: +44 0191 334 6107
http://etheses.dur.ac.uk
 ABSTRACT

Sayyed Ahmad K a s r a v i

H i s t o r i a n , Language Reformer and T h i n k e r .

Sayyed Ahmad K a s r a v i was one o f t h e g r e a t e s t scholars

and t h i n k e r s o f 20th-century I r a n , He h a d alreadywon an

international reputation as a h i s t o r i a n and as a l i n g u i s t

b e f o r e he was murdered b y a r e l i g i o u s f a n a t i c i n 19^5*

H i s i d e a s about language r e f o r m , l i t e r a t u r e , r e l i g i o n and

p o l i t i c s c h a l l e n g e d t r a d i t i o n a l I r a n i a n ways o f t h i n k i n g .

The purpose o f t h i s t h e s i s i s t o outline the contents of

K a s r a v i ' s w r i t i n g s , t o quote comments b y h i s a d m i r e r s and

c r i t i c s , and t o express o u r own v i e w s when p o s s i b l e .

I n Chapter I , K a s r a v i ' s b a c k g r o u n d , e d u c a t i o n and

c a r e e r a r e o u t l i n e d , and i n f l u e n c e s w h i c h h e l p e d t o shape

h i s thought are i n d i c a t e d .

Chapter I I c o n t a i n s summaries o f t h e c o n t e n t s o f

K a s r a v i ' s h i s t o r i c a l w o r k s , and quotes I r a n i a n and f o r e i g n

a p p r a i s a l s o f h i s achievements as a h i s t o r i a n .

Chapter I I I c o n t a i n s summaries o f K a s r a v i ' s principal

writings i n t h e f i e l d o f l i n g u i s t i c s and language r e f o r m ,

t o g e t h e r w i t h assessments o f h i s work.

Chapter I V c o n t a i n s summaries o f K a s r a v i ' s writings

as a l i t e r r f f a r y t h e o r i s t , and d i s c u s s e s h i s h o s t i l i t y t o

m y s t i c and p a n e g y r i c p o e t r y .
 Chapter V c o n t a i n s summaries o f K a s r a v i ' s views on
e x i s t i n g r e l i g i o n s and o f M B own. r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s .
Comments by h i s c r i t i c s and some comments of our own a r e
appended*

Chapter V i c o n t a i n s summaries of K a s r a v i ' s views on

m y s t i c i s m , m a t e r i a l i s m and other i d e o l o g i c a l matters*

Chapter V I I contains summaries o f K a s r a v i * s views

on p o l i t i c a l , economic and s o c i a l problems* w i t h comments*

I n the Conclusion an attempt i s made to a s s e s s t h e

importance and i n f l u e n c e of K a s r a v l * s l i f e and work a s a
whole* Various I r a n i a n and f o r e i g n views o f K a s r a v l ' s
achievements a r e a l s o quoted*

I n the three Appendices, f u r t h e r information i s given

on K a s r a v i * s l i f e and p e r s o n a l i t y and t h e sources o f h i s
i d e a s ; and some comparisons a r e made between K a s r a v i ' s
i d e a s on r e l i g i o n , p o l i t i c s , and language, and other
contemporary ideas*
 SayyitPd Ahmad K a s r a v i

H i s t o r i a n , Language Reformer and T h i n k e r

by

Minoo Ramyar

Thesis submitted t o t h e F a c u l t y o f A r t s i n t h e
i' •.
1
University o f Durham f o r t h e degree o f trto^TrS <f
o f kiF&SdJixjtfc.

4ltfLy 1 9 6 ^ . School o f O r i e n t a l S t u d i e s ,
Elvet H i l l ,
Durham.
 I

Table o f Contents.

Page.
Transliteration IV
Preface 1
Chapter One

Kasravi's biography.

Kasravi's p r i v a t e l i f e . H i s f a m i l y , b i r t h p l a c e , and

childhood. K a s r a v i ' s e d u c a t i o n and t e a c h e r s . Kasravi's

j o u r n e y s and o c c u p a t i o n s . Kasravi's journeys t o Tehran,

M^zandarian, Z a n j a n , Khuzestian and DamaVand. College

teaching. K a s r a v i ' s s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s .

K a s r a v i ' s membership o f t h e Democrat p a r t y . Kasravi's

charitable a c t i v i t i e s . Kasravi's. disagreement with

Khiabiani. The liztadegian p a r t y . Parcham newspaper and

Paymian magazine. K a s r a v i ' s r e l i g i o u s and s o c i o l o g i c a l

ideas. Kasravi's r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the m o l l i s .

K a s r a v i ' s s c h o l a r l y achievements. The f i r s t attack.

K a s r a v i ' s l a s t days and h i s d e a t h .

Chapter Two ... ... 32

K a s r a v i as a H i s t o r i a n .

S h a h r i a r a n ~ e Q-omriam, main c o n t e n t s . Kasravi'a

d i f f i c u l t i e s and aims. Plutarch's Lives. Sha.vkh S a f i

va Tahiar-aBh. T a r i k h - e Mosha* sha' iian ya PansacL-sialeh-ye

Khuzestan. Paydayesh-e America. Karnamak-e A r d a s h i r - e

 II
Page

Babak&n. T k r i k h - e Mashruteh-ye I r a n . T & r i k h - e He.1d.ah-

B a l e h - y e Azarh^i.1an. The l a s t phase o f t h e C o n s t i t u -

tional revolution. Some comments on K a s r a v i * s H i s t o r y

of the Iranian Constitutional struggle.

K a s r a v i * s a r t i c l e s on h i s t o r i c a l s u b j e c t s .

1. The A f s h & r s o f Khuzestart.

2. H i s t o r y o f T a b a r e s t a n and Our Researches.

3» C i t i e s and R u l e r s (Shahr-ha va>ShahriaVan)«

4. The Afshiar T r i b e ( I I Afshar)

5. Shams a l - D i n T o g h r i a ' i .

6. Taymur Malek.

7. The B a y o n d o r i s .

8.. H i s t o r y and t h e H i s t o r i a n .

Easravi's s t y l e of h i s t o r y w r i t i n g .

Chapter Three ... ... 107

Kasragi's. l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s - a n d t h e o r i e s .

Kasravi's studies of the Persian language.

Chapter F o u r ... ... 234

Kasravi*s l i t e r a r y studies. Comments.

Chapter F i v e ; ... ... 234

Kasrav^s studies of r e l i g i o n .

Section I . Kasravi's analyses o f d i f f e r e n t

religious beliefs.
 Ill
Page

Section I I . K a s r a v i ' s own r e l i g i o u s " b e l i e f s .

God and c r e a t i o n s p i r i t . The o t h e r w o r l d . Reason.

R e l i g i o n and s c i e n c e . /Atfifii&'JBjd. Life. Prophet

hood. The meaning o f P a k - d i n i . Man's d u t i e s .

I n t e r n a t i o n a l coexistence. C a p i t a l punishment.

Land o w n e r s h i p . Importance o f A g r i c u l t u r e . Social

and g o v e r n m e n t a l o r g a n i z a t i o n .

Section I I I . Some comments on K a s r a v i ' s .

r e l i g i o u s ideas.

Chapter S i x ... ... 307

K a s r a v i ' s views on m y s t i c i s m , p h i l o s o p h y and.

materialism.

Chapter Seven ... ... 328

K a s r a v i ' s p o l i t i c a l and s o c i o l o g i c a l i d e a s .

Comment.

Conclusion ... ... 31h

Bibliography ... ...

 IV

TRANSLITERATION

The t r a n s l i t e r a t i o n i n t h i s t h e s i s i s p h o n e t i c , except

t h a t a few common words, such as I s l a m , I r a n , T e h r a n , Iraq.,

are w r i t t e n i n t h e u s u a l E n g l i s h s p e l l i n g s . We have t r i e d

t o r e p r o d u c e t h e P e r s i a n words as t h e y a r e pronounced i n

I r a n t o d a y and i n such a way t h a t t h e i r P e r s i a n s p e l l i n g s

can he i d e n t i f i e d ; h u t because o f t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f t y p i n g

d i a c r i t i c a l p o i n t s , we have n o t d i s t i n g u i s h e d between t h e

d i f f e r e n t A r a b o - P e r s i a n l e t t e r s w h i c h a r e pronounced e x a c t l y

a l i k e ( t e and t a ; he-ye h o t t i and he-ye h a w a z ; s e , s i n and

sad; z j a l , .ze, z&d and zja), except i n t h e case o f gha.yn and

qiaf i w h i c h we have r e n d e r e d as .gh and £ , even t h o u g h b o t h

are pronounced ,gh. We have marked i n i t i a l *a.vn ( e . g . i n

* A l i ) even t h o u g h i t i s n o t n o r m a l l y pronounced, and we

have shown a moshaddad consonant b y double l e t t e r s ( e . g . i n

bachcheh o r t a s a w o f ) even though i t i s n o r m a l l y pronounced

l i k e an o r d i n a r y s i n g l e consonant. We have r e p r e s e n t e d

t h e unpronounced viav a f t e r khe b y w ( e . g . i n k h w i s h ) . We

have w r i t t e n h f o r b o t h t h e pronounced and t h e unpronounced

he-ye h a w a z a t t h e end o f words; e.g. Ruzbeh-e Payman and

Ruzn'ameh-ye Payman (pronounced Ruzname-ye Payman).

 V
VOWELS

a
> )
o

la

u a- m »

ow

ay

ai

CONSONANTS

j
ch
h
kn
d
>
z

b
z
zh
 VI

8 if

sh
s
z &
i>
t

z
t

gh

q.
k

g
1 .(J.
m . c.
n .3.
V J (consonant)

y (consonant)

1 • Hamzeh i n A r a b i c words: Hamzeh i n P e r s i a n words: ye o r i

( e . g . s o ' a l t Qor'an) ( e . g . bachcheh-ye u; b a c h c h e ' i )

Hamzeh-.ve v a s l i n A r a b i c words: E l i s i o n i n ^Persian words

(e.g. Abu'l-Fazl) ( e . g . m'al-e ma'st)
 1

PREFACE

Human b e i n g s , a c c o r d i n g t o s o c i o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h , a r e
c r e a t e d w i t h d i f f e r e n t p h y s i c a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l c h a r a c -
teristics. Among them we sometimes f i n d people o f g e n i u s ,
who a r e indeed r a r e and e x c e p t i o n a l p e r s o n s . I t seems t h a t
God wishes t o show H i s power when He c r e a t e s such g e n i u s e s .
Although d u r i n g t h e c e n t u r i e s t h e i r numbers have been l i m i t e d ,
t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s caused f a r - r e a c h i n g p o l i t i c a l , scientific
and s o c i a l e f f e c t s . No doubt Sayyed Ahmad K a s r a v i was one
of t h e most b r i l l i a n t geniuses i n t h e I r a n i a n w o r l d o f
learning. Few persons comparable w i t h h i m have appeared i n
recent centuries i n I r a n . As w i l l be mentioned l a t e r i n
4
his biography/ K a s r a v i was b o r n o f an o r d i n a r y f a t h e r and
2
an a b s o l u t e l y i l l i t e r a t e mother; o n l y t h r o u g h h i s own
p e r s o n a l a b i l i t y and e f f o r t d i d he a c h i e v e a w e l l deserved
renown.
On t h e o t h e r hand, h i s t o r y shows t h a t most b r i l l i a n t
men and p e o p l e o f g e n i u s possessed o n l y a l i m i t e d range o f
a b i l i t y , and a c q u i r e d o n l y s u f f i c i e n t knowledge f o r t h e
p a r t i c u l a r subject o f t h e i r i n t e r e s t . They concentrated
t h e i r minds on t h e s u b j e c t w h i c h a t t r a c t e d them, and some-
t i m e s were so obsessed w i t h i t t h a t t h e y remained q u i t e
i g n o r a n t o f o t h e r aspects o f l i f e . T h i s i s n o t t r u e o f
1. K a s r a v i , Zendegani-ye man. Tehran 1 3 2 3 / 1 9 4 4 .
2 . M. K. Azadeh, Chera K a s r a v i r a k o s h t a n d . Tehran 1 3 2 5 / 1 9 4 7 ,
p.23.
 2

K a s r a v i . The v a r i e t y o f h i s i n t e r e s t s and w r i t i n g s i n
w i d e l y d i f f e r e n t f i e l d s was t h e most c o n s p i c i o u s f e a t u r e
o f h i s c h a r a c t e r . I t i s h a r d t o "believe t h a t a s i n g l e
i n d i v i d u a l c o u l d have "been so t a l e n t e d and have possessed
such v e r s a t i l i t y o f e x p r e s s i o n . He was a h i s t o r i a n w i t h
an i n t e n s e i n t e r e s t i n a l l phases o f h i s t o r y , a j o u r n a l i s t
i n a v e r y p r o g r e s s i v e way, a s c h o l a r l y man o f l e t t e r s , and
a proponent o f s o c i o l o g i c a l and p o l i t i c a l i d e a s f o r b u i l d i n g
a more advanced s o c i e t y . Undoubtedly a person w i t h such
e x t r a o r d i n a r y b r a i n - p o w e r and energy deserves a d m i r a t i o n .
He was b r o u g h t up i n a v e r y p r i m i t i v e h o u s e h o l d , where even
t h e n e c e s s i t i e s o f l i f e were l a c k i n g , and h i s mind was
developed and shaped i n a v e r y s i m p l e i n t e l l e c t u a l e n v i r o n -
ment. H i s t e a c h e r was a m o l l a i n t h e maktab (Qor'an
s c h o o l ) o f Hokmabad, a v i l l a g e on t h e o u t s k i r t s o f T a b r i z ,
and t h e o n l y a v a i l a b l e books f o r him were Sa'di's G o l e s t a n ,
a few c h a p t e r s ( s u r e h s ) o f t h e Qor'an, and some r e l i g i o u s
tracts.

No more needs t o be s a i d about K a s r a v i ' s g e n i u s . I

l e a v e t h e r e a d e r t o h i s bodks. The f i e l d o f s t u d y , however,

i s so v a s t t h a t w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s o f t h i s t h e s i s I u n f o r -

t u n a t e l y cannot t r y t o analyse K a s r a v i ' s c h a r a c t e r i n much

detail. N e v e r t h e l e s s i t has been a g r e a t honour f o r me t o

do r e s e a r c h about such an e x t r a o r d i n a r y and distinguished

1 . K a s r a v i , Zendegani-ye man, p.9.

man, e s p e c i a l l y as I appear t o be t h e f i r s t p e r s o n t o

u n d e r t a k e t h i s t a s k i n t h e B r i t i s h I s l e s ; and I hope t h a t

my modest work w i l l be a c c e p t a b l e t o i t s readers.

My t h a n k s go f i r s t and f o r e m o s t t o my supervisor

Mr. F. S. C. Bagley w i t h o u t whose k i n d n e s s and generous

h e l p t h i s t h e s i s would have been i m p o s s i b l e . I would also

l i k e t o t h a n k my f r i e n d Miss R i f f a t Hassan f o r h e r h e l p , and

my f a t h e r and a l s o t h e f o l l o w e r s o f K a s r a v i i n Tehran who

obtained rare material f o r me.

 S i n c e t h e f i r s t submission o f t h i s t h e s i s i n J u l y 1968,
I have gathered some more information about K a s r a v i ' s life
and p e r s o n a l i t y and about t h e sources of h i s i d e a s , and I
nave compared some of h i s ideas w i t h other contemporary i d e a s .

These a d d i t i o n s appear a s Appendixes A, B and C.

I have a l s o made c o r r e c t i o n s i n the t e x t of the t h e s i s
and i n t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y .
I r a n , during Kasuavi's l i f e t i m e underwent profound
p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l changes, which must have g r e a t l y
i n f l u e n c e d t h e development of h i s p e r s o n a l i t y and i d e a s .
These i n f l u e n c e s cannot always be t r a c e d i n d e t a i l , and a
d i s c u s s i o n of them would r e q u i r e a study o f I r a n ' s 20th
Century h i s t o r y which would be f a r too long f o r a t h e s i s
such a s t h i s , e s p e c i a l l y when the r e a d e r i s l i k e l y t o be
well-informed about I r a n i a n h i s t o r y . I n Appendix A,
however, I have included some new information about
i n f l u e n c e s on K a s r a v i , most of which I a t t a i n e d i n Tehran
from persons who knew him.
 CHAPTER ONE

KASRAVI'S BIOGRAPHY
t

Kasravi's P r i v a t e L i f e . H i s F a m i l y , B i r t h p l a c e , and C h i l d h o o d .

I n Hokmabad, j u s t o u t s i d e T a b r i z , t h e r e l i v e d i h t h e

1 9 t h c e n t u r y a f a m i l y o f t h e Moslem ( S h i ' i t e ) c l e r g y .

T h e i r o c c u p a t i o n was f a r m i n g , and t h e y were a l s o m o r a l

leaders i n the v i l l a g e . K a s r a v i ' s g r a n d f a t h e r Aqa M i r

Ahmad was t h e emam ( p r a y e r - l e a d e r ) i n t h e v i l l a g e mosque.

His f a t h e r Aqa M i r Qasem h a d s t u d i e d t h e o l o g y , b u t i n s t e a d

o f succeeding h i s f a t h e r a t t h e mosque, as was t r a d i t i o n a l ,

he went i n t o b u s i n e s s . H i s a m b i t i o n , however, was t o make

one o f h i s own sons t a k e t h e a n c e s t r a l p l a c e i n t h e mosque.

T h i s w i s h was f u l f i l l e d when h i s f o u r t h s o n , t o whom he

2
gave h i s f a t h e r ' s name Ahmad, was b o m i n 1890. The boy
was t h e K a s r a v i who forms t h e s u b j e c t o f t h i s thesis.
K a s r a v i ' s E d u c a t i o n and Teachers.
I n accordance w i t h t h e customs and t r a d i t i o n s o f t h e i r
c l a s s , K a s r a v i ' s p a r e n t s sent h i m t o t h e maktab when he was
s i x years o l d . A t t h a t t i m e maktabB were numerous i n I r a n .
The maktab o f Hokmabad was r u n b y a m o l l a named M o l l a
Bakhsh ' A l i . A f t e r t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n o f 1906
1. The s p i r i t u a l l e a d e r s o f I s l a m i n I r a n a r e i n p r i n c i p a l
only r e l i g i o u s s c h o l a r s , b u t i n p r a c t i c e f u l f i l the;
s o c i a l r o l e , o f a , e l e r g y . The o r d i n a r y clergymen a r e
c a l l e d M o l l a o r Akhpnd, and t h e most l e a r n e d clergymen
are c a l l e d M o j t a h e d .
2. Zendegani-ye man, p . 6 .
and r e f o r m o f t h e government, modern c i v i l i z a t i o n "began

t o p e n e t r a t e i n t o a l l spheres o f l i f e , and particularly

i n t o education. A l t h o u g h most o f t h e m o l l a s disapproved

o f t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f new-model s c h o o l s and introduction

o f r e f o r m e d t e a c h i n g methods, some o f them were v e r y much

f a s c i n a t e d "by t h e p r o g r e s s i v e way o f l i v i n g o f t h e Europeans;

and a c c o r d i n g l y t h e y themselves "began t o e s t a b l i s h new

schools i n the centres of t h e c i t i e s . Nevertheless Kasravi

f i n i s h e d t h e p r e l i m i n a r y p a r t o f h i s e d u c a t i o n , which lasted

f o u r y e a r s , i n t h e maktab. He s t u d i e d t h e Qoran, the;

' * < * 1
G-olestan, and o t h e r books such as t h e Jame -ye Abbasi.
2 ' * 3 .'
t h e T a r a s s o l , t h e Abvab o l - J a n a n , and t h e Monsha * a t o f
* U
M i r z a Mahdi Khan, i n b o t h t h e A r a b i c and t h e P e r s i a n
languages. I f he had wanted t o f u l f i l h i s f a t h e r ' s w i s h ,
he s h o u l d have gone t o N a j a f , t h e b e s t c e n t r e f o r S h i ^ i t e
r e l i g i o u s s t u d i e s , t o get t h e p r o p e r degree (e.iazeh); b u t
he was now averse t o becoming a clergyman, and i n any case;
his f a t h e r ' s d e a t h and t h e f a m i l y ' s r e s u l t a n t financial
d i f f i c u l t i e s d i d n o t a l l o w him t o go t o N a j a f t o c o n t i n u e
his education. K a s r a v i was o b l i g e d t o abandon h i s f o r m a l
s t u d i e s f o r some t i m e , and t o o k over h i s f a t h e r ' s b u s i n e s s ,
a c a r p e t f a c t o r y ; b u t he used t o s t u d y i n h i s l e i s u r e
T. By Shaykh B a h a \ o l - D i n 'Amoli ( 9 5 3 / 1 5 * 4 - 7 - 1 0 3 0 / 1 6 2 ) .
2. By Abd o l - G h a f f a r Hamadani.
3. By M o l l a Mohsen-e Fayz , ( 0 . 1 0 0 6 / 1 5 9 7 - 8 - 1 0 9 . 0 / 1 6 8 0 ) .
k» M i r z a Mahdi Khan A s t a r a b a d i ( I 2 t h / l 8 t h c e n t u r y ) .
g Jhvv& / H W " — f U ^ i u a^'^Se £ -/^~jLaAs£ic^(fa<) //CEK, ^J-jy*^.
 6

moments. The heads o f t h e f a m i l y l a t e r persuaded him t o

resume h i s e d u c a t i o n . H i s f a t h e r ' s f r i e n d and b u s i n e s s

a s s o c i a t e , H a j j M i r z a Mohsen, who was also t h e i r distant

r e l a t i v e ; , d i d most t o change h i s mind, and was most p e r -

sistent i n t h i s respect.

The second p a r t o f K a s r a v i ' s e d u c a t i o n "began when he

e n t e r e d a s c h o o l a t T a b r i z , c a l l e d t h e Madraseh T a l e b i y e h ,

where h i s t e a c h e r was. named M o l l a Mohsen, K a s r a v i i n f o u r

1 2
months r e a d t h e whole o f t h e books S a r f - e M i r . T a s r i f ,
* * "5 „
and Avamel. w h i c h were supposed t o r e q u i r e f o u r y e a r s o f
study. The t e a c h e r was impressed, and t h e o t h e r s t u d e n t s
were j e a l o u s . L a t e r Kasravi entered another school c a l l e d
t h e Madraseh Sadeqiyeh. The f i r s t b r a n c h o f s c i e n c e which
4
a t t r a c t e d h i s a t t e n t i o n was astronomy. He a l s o s t u d i e d
A r a b i c grammar.
At l a s t K a s r a v i reached t h e s t a n d a r d w h i c h enabled him
t o o b t a i n an e.iazeh and t a k e h i s g r a n d f a t h e r ' s p l a c e i n t h e
mosque o f Hokmabad. He d i d n o t remain l o n g i n t h a t office,
a c c o r d i n g t o h i s own w r i t i n g s . He worked as a m o l l a
d u r i n g t h e year 1912; b u t s i n c e he expressed anticlerical
o p i n i o n s , and spoke i n a d i f f e r e n t way from the other mollas,
v e r y soon t h e c o n g r e g a t i o n f o r s o o k h i m , and he was l e f t a l o n e
1. S a r f - e M i r , b y M i r Say,yed S h a r i f J o r j a n i .
2. T a s q i f . b y 'Abdol-Vahab ebn Ebrahim Z a n j a n i .
3. 'Avamel, by *Abdol-Qader J o r j a n i , and i t s Sharh by M o l l a
Mohsen.
4. He s t u d i e d astronomy on ^the b a s i s o f t h e Hay'at-e-Batlamiyus
<>
(Astronomy o f Ptolemy) *from a book known as t h e Astronomy
o f T a l e b o v which was o r i g i n a l l y w r i t t e n by Flammarion i n
F r e n c h ; l a t e r 'Abdol-Rahim Talebov ( 1 8 3 4 - 1 9 1 0 ) t r a n s l a t e d
i t f r o m Russian i n t o P e r s i a n .
5. Zendegani-ye man, Tehran 1 3 2 3 / 1 9 4 4 , p . 3 9 .
 7
i n t h e mosque. Many o f t h e m o l l a s accused h i m o f d e f e n d i n g
-I

the new C o n s t i t u t i o n a l regime. At t h a t time Tabriz was

occupied b y t h e K u s s i a n s , who p u t t o d e a t h a number o f
leading c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s . T h i s was a c o i n c i d e n c e which
enabled t h e m o l l a s t o t a l k about K a s r a v i i n t h e most unsym-
p a t h e t i c manner; and i n consequence t h e mosque g r a d u a l l y
emptied. However, K a s r a v i had come t o h a t e h i s p r o f e s s i o n ,
and he t h e r e f o r e t o o k t h e o p p o r t u n i t y and l e f t i t . He
s t a r t e d e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y t o s t u d y mathematics, a r i t h m e t i c ,
p h y s i c s , a l g e b r a and astronomy. He had nobody t o t e a c h h i m ,
and l e a r n e d t h r o u g h h i s own perseverance and t a l e n t . A t the.
same t i m e he r e a d l i t e r a t u r e , and completed h i s s t u d y o f
Arabic. As he h i m s e l f has mentioned i n h i s a u t o b i o g r a p h y ,
,* 2
he c o u l d r e c i t e t h e whole Qor an b y h e a r t .
The t h i r d and l a s t phase o f K a s r a v i ' s e d u c a t i o n t o o k
p l a c e i n t h e maktab o f Shaykh T u t u n c h i , who was a s t u d e n t
of t h e g r e a t 19th-century Aqa Shaykh Hadi S a b z a v a r i . For
two y e a r s K a s r a v i s t u d i e d p h i l o s o p h y and l o g i c , and reached
the h i g h e s t p o s i t i o n i n t h e s c h o o l b e f o r e he l e f t i n 1915*
He d i d n o t t h e n g i v e up s t u d y i n g , b u t c o n t i n u e d u n t i l he
d i e d , b r i n g i n g t o r e a l i t y t h e p r o v e r b "Seek knowledge f r o m
the c r a d l e t o t h e grave." He s t u d i e d v a r i o u s s u b j e c t s such
as h i s t o r y , law, and languages i n c l u d i n g E s p e r a n t o , Armenian,
and Pahlavi.
1. Zendegani-ye man. Tehran 1323/1944, p.45*
2. I b i d , p.45.
3. See E. C. Browne, L i t e r a r y H i s t o r y o f P e r s i a , v o l . 4 ,
London 1924, 4th ed. Cambridge 1953, PP 436-439.
 8

I n 1915 K a s r a v i "became i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e E n g l i s h
language, and e n t e r e d t h e American Memorial School a t
T a b r i z , a t f i r s t as a s t u d e n t , even though he was o l d
enough t o "be a t e a c h e r ; l a t e r t h e y gave him a l e c t u r e r s h i p
i n A r a b i c . He s t a r t e d t o l e a r n E n g l i s h s i m u l t a n e o u s l y
f r o m " t e a c h y o u r s e l f books" and f r o m a f e l l o w t e a c h e r named

0 0 0 H

J a l i l Hashemzadeh F a l l a h . Kasravi l e a r n t the Pahlavi

language i n a class, r u n by P r o f e s s o r E r n s t H e r z f e l d , t h e
famous American o r i e n t a l i s t , who was i n I r a n as a super-
v i s o r and s p e c i a l i s t i n a r c h a e o l o g y . Kasravi*s i n t e r e s t
and p r o f i c i e n c y i n P a h l a v i were immense. He l a t e r t r a n s -
l a t e d t h e Karnamak-e - A r d a s h i r Babakan f r o m P a h l a v i i n t o
Persian. He l e a r n t Esperanto f r o m a " t e a c h y o u r s e l f book."
K a s r a v i ' s Journeys and Occupations*
K a s r a v i was s h o r t o f money a f t e r h i s f a t h e r ' s d e a t h .
He c o u l d have remained a m o l l a and earned a l i v i n g t h e r e b y ,
but preferred poverty t o being a molla. For a s h o r t w h i l e
he t o o k charge o f h i s f a t h e r ' s c a r p e t f a c t o r y ; b u t he
l o s t t h e c a p i t a l which h i s f a t h e r had l e f t b e h i n d , and t h e n
closed the f a c t o r y . T h i s was h i s f i r s t v e n t u r e i n b u s i n e s s .
B e i n g h a r d p r e s s e d f o r money, he began^ t o s e l l h i s most
p r e c i o u s p o s s e s s i o n s , which were h i s books. His financial
1 • Zendegani-ye man, p.63.
2. Ibid..,v,2k.
3. I b i d . , p.53*
 9
p o s i t i o n g r a d u a l l y became weaker and weaker, and he some-

t i m e s had t o b o r r o w money f r o m h i s f a t h e r ' s f r i e n d s . He

r e s o l v e d t o go back i n t o t h e c a r p e t b u s i n e s s , as t h i s h a d

been h i s f a t h e r ' s b u s i n e s s ; b u t he was n o t r e a l l y interested

in i t , and f i n a l l y gave up t h e i d e a . He t h e n bought a

s t o c k i n g - k n i t t i n g machine , b u t t h e machine was n o t e f f i c i e n t ;

so he a g a i n s o l d some o f h i s books and bought a n o t h e r machine

as a r e p l a c e m e n t . Soon a f t e r w a r d s i t s n e e d l e b r o k e * and no

replacement f o r i t was a v a i l a b l e i n t h e market; so a g a i n h i s

work came t o a s t o p . I t i s remarkable t h a t i n s p i t e o f a l l

t h e s e d i f f i c u l t i e s K a s r a v i never l o s t i n t e r e s t i n h i s s t u d i e s .

D u r i n g t h i s t i m e he was m o s t l y s t u d y i n g h i s t o r y and d o i n g

h i s t o r i c a l research. His f i r s t s a l a r i e d p o s t was t h e

t e a c h i n g j o b which he o b t a i n e d i n 1916 a t t h e American

Memorial S c h o o l , where tie remained one y e a r . A t t h e end o f

the y e a r he f e l t e m o t i o n a l l y and m e n t a l l y exhausted; so he

2
made a j o u r n e y t o R u s s i a n - r u l e d Caucasia, where he s t a y e d

f o r f o r t y - f i v e days and met q u i t e a number o f broad-minded

people and r e f o r m e r s . At t h e beginning o f the next school

y e a r , he went back t o h i s p o s t a t t h e Memorial S c h o o l , b u t

•5

did not stay long. He had, an argument w i t h one o f t h e

Armenian t e a c h e r s , who reprehended h i m i n a most o f f e n s i v e

1 • Zendegani-ye man, p.5^»
2. I b i d . , p.70.
3. I b i d . . p.6U.
 10
way. Mr. Jessop, t h e p r i n c i p a l o f t h e schooL, a t t e m p t e d t o
mediate and make peace between them; h u t K a s r a v i was so
h u r t t h a t he r e s i g n e d f r o m h i s p o s t . A f t e r t h i s he w r o t e
a hook on A r a b i c grammar c a l l e d Al-Na,imat o l - D o r r i y e h . He

r e c e i v e d many a p p r e c i a t i o n s o f t h i s book, and t h e b r a n c h

2
of t h e M i n i s t r y o f Education a t T a b r i z thanked h i m o f f i c i a l l y .
Since t h e c i v i l l a w i n I r a n a t t h a t t i m e had a v e r y c l o s e
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h I s l a m i c l a w , w h i c h was o f t e n a p p l i e d i n
c i v i l cases, K a s r a v i d e c i d e d t o s t u d y I s l a m i c law. After
a f e w y e a r s w i t h o u t any p a i d o c c u p a t i o n , he o b t a i n e d an
•5

employment w i t h t h e M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e a t Tabriz"^ i n 1920.

He s t a r t e d as a p r o s e c u t o r , b u t as w i l l be mentioned l a t e r ,

his s i t u a t i o n became d i f f i c u l t , because he had d i s p u t e s w i t h

1
Khiabani/ " t h e l e a d e r o f t h e Democrats i n A z e r b a i j a n , who h a d

r e b e l l e d a g a i n s t t h e c e n t r a l government. He was o b l i g e d t o

l e a v e T a b r i z and move t o T e h r a n , where he f o u n d employment

1 . Taken f r o m t h e book Ahmad K a s r a y i , b y P a r v i z S h a h r i a r i
and M. , N e m a t o l l a h i , Tehran 1325/1946, p.10.
2. Zendeganj-ye man, p.77.
3. K. M. Azadeh, Chera K a s r a v i - r a k o s h t a n d . Tehran 1324/1945,
p.10.
4. A l e a d i n g m o l l a o f T a b r i z who became a Democrat deputy.
I n 1911 he m i g r a t e d t o Russian Caucasia, b u t r e t u r n e d
i n 1914. He wanted t o f r e e I r a n f r o m f o r e i g n d o m i n a t i o n
and f o u n d e d a new N a t i o n a l Democrat p a r t y a t T a b r i z .
A f t e r t h e c e n t r a l government had s i g n e d t h e A n g l o -
I r a n i a n t r e a t y o f August 19th, 1919» h e , r e b e l l e d and
set up a , r e p u b l i c a n government i n A z e r b a i j a n , which he
c a l l e d "Azadestan" ("Land o f t h e F r e e " ) . He was-defeated
and k i l l e d i n September 1920.
 11

under t h e M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n as t e a c h e r o f A r a b i c i n a
h i g h school c a l l e d Servat. I n t h e w i n t e r o f 1921 the

M i n i s t e r o f J u s t i c e d e c i d e d t o r e f o r m t h e j u d i c i a l system

i n A z a r b a i j a n , and i n v i t e d K a s r a v i t o t h e M i n i s t r y ' s s e r v i c e .

He was appointed a p r o s e c u t o r of the c o u r t a t T a b r i z .

A l t h o u g h he was r e l u c t a n t t o serve t h e government, he

accepted t h i s p o s t because he l i k e d t h e work. Judicial

s e r v i c e was a w o r t h y p o s i t i o n f o r h i m , even i f he was to

have some u n p l e a s a n t memories o f i t , and as he used t o say

i t was a r e a l h e l p f o r t h e mass o f t h e p e o p l e . He left
Tehran f o r T a b r i z i n 1921 when t h e roads between t h e two

c i t i e s were b l o c k e d b y heavy snow; t h e j o u r n e y t o o k t w e n t y

days. As soon as he a r r i v e d he s t a r t e d work. This job
a l s o d i d n o t l a s t l o n g - o n l y t h r e e weeks. On F e b r u a r y 21,

1921, a coup d ' e t a t t o o k p l a c e i n T e h r a n , and Sayyed Zja-Pl-

' * 1
Din Tabatabai became Prime M i n i s t e r . The new government

c l o s e d t h e M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e and sent a t e l e g r a m t o T a b r i z ,

ordering the closure of i t s l o c a l branch. T h i s event caused

K a s r a v i s e r i o u s h a r d s h i p ; b u t he had an amazing a b i l i t y t o
cope w i t h a l l s i t u a t i o n s . He l i v e d a t f i r s t by borrowing

money f r o m h i s r e l a t i v e s . A f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h a number

o f l e a r n e d men, he e s t a b l i s h e d a group f o r s p r e a d i n g and

d e v e l o p i n g t h e Esperanto language a t T a b r i z . A t t h i s t i m e
1 . P a r v i z S h a h r i a r i and Mahdi N e ' m a t o l l a h i , Ahmad K a s r a v i , p.11.
 12
h i s w i f e d i e d , and t h i s sad event was one o f h i s g r e a t e s t
sorrows; he mourned and lamented f o r many days.

> * * * *
K a s r a v i ' s journeys t o Tefaran, Mazandaran. Zan.ian, Khuzestan
and Damavand.
I n 1922 K a s r a v i l e f t h i s two m o t h e r l e s s d a u g h t e r s with
h i s b r o t h e r , and s e t out f o r T e h r a n . A f t e r t w e n t y - t w o days
o f e x h a u s t i n g t r a v e l , he a r r i v e d a t t h e c a p i t a l and p r e s e n t e d
himself t o the Ministry of Justice. The M i n i s t e r a p o l o g i z e d
f o r n o t h a v i n g a vacancy f o r h i m i n T e h r a n , and suggested
t h a t he might serve i n one o f t h e p r o v i n c i a l c i t i e s . In
s p i t e o f h i s d i s a p p o i n t m e n t , he accepted t h e s u g g e s t i o n .
He was sent t o S a r i ^ i n Mazandaran; b u t a f t e r two months

t h e M i n i s t r y a g a i n c l o s e d h i s o f f i c e , and he h a d t o l e a v e
t h e p l a c e , which had i n s p i r e d h i m w i t h i t s n a t u r a l beauty

and r e f r e s h i n g weather and e v e r g r e e n t r e e s . He was t h e n

* 2
sent t o Damavand as p r e s i d i n g Judge o f t h e c o u r t , and n o t
' 3

l o n g a f t e r w a r d s was t r a n s f e r r e d t o Zanjan i n t h e same,

capacity. He was most e f f i c i e n t and courageous i n h i s work.
He f o u n d t h i s t h e most i n t e r e s t i n g p a r t o f h i s j u d i c i a l
career. He c o n t i n u e d h i s s t u d i e s and w r o t e a b o o k , which
r e q u i r e d a g r e a t e f f o r t , on t h e h i s t o r y o f A z a r b a i j a n .
T h i s i s h i s Tarikh-e hejdah-saleh-ye A z a r b a i j a n (Eighteen
y e a r s o f h i s t o r y o f A z e r b a i j a n ) . He a l s o began t o do r e s e a r c h
1 . Chera K a s r a v i - r a k o s h t a n d , p.10.
2. I b i d . , p.11.
3. I b i d . , p . 1 1 .
(f)&. lAl U>^0 Cttxsi^L*.^ , A^ c/ ast-Z UJO-^O i*J^ ^ 0^-^ iv-Ashv*^-* aAJz
 13

about t h e o r i g i n s o f t h e T u r k i s h language.
i n 1921+, a f t e r Sardar-e-Sepah ( l a t e r t o be Reza Shah)
had become p r i m e m i n i s t e r , t h e government resolved t o estab-
l i s h an e f f i c i e n t system o f j u s t i c e i n a l l p a r t s o f the-
c o u n t r y , i n c l u d i n g Khuzestan w h i c h had been governed semi-
independent l y f o r many y e a r s by Shaykh K h a z ' a l . One of the
government's most i m p o r t a n t t a s k s was t o i n s t a l l a b r a n c h
o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e and s e t up r e g u l a r law c o u r t s i n
that province. The M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e d e c i d e d t o a p p o i n t
K a s r a v i t o Khuzestan, t h i n k i n g t h a t he w o u l d be a v e r y
s u i t a b l e p e r s o n t o u n d e r t a k e t h i s mission,, K a s r a v i agreed
t o go t o Khuzestan, b u t i n s i s t e d t h a t he s h o u l d have freedom

of a c t i o n . They gave h i m what he wanted w i t h o u t any h e s i t a t i o n .

' 1
Sardar-e Sepah spoke p e r s o n a l l y t o h i m about t h e i m p o r t a n c e
o f h i s m i s s i o n , and emphasized t h e need t o e s t a b l i s h a s t r o n g
* 2
and e f f i c i e n t j u d i c i a l system i n Khuzestan. Kasravi l e f t
Tehran w i t h t h e p o s t a l c a r r i a g e ( c h a p a r ) , and made h i s way
t o Khuzestan b y way o f Q a z v i n , Hamadan, Kermanshah, Qasr-e-
S h i r i n and Baghdad. Perhaps i t w i l l p u z z l e t h e r e a d e r why
he had t o go o u t o f t h e c o u n t r y i n o r d e r t o r e a c h K h u z e s t a n ;
b u t a t t h a t t i m e t h e r e were no i n t e r n a l r o a d s t o Khuzestan,
and t h e o n l y way open was t h r o u g h Iraq.. Kasravi served f o r
* t

1 . Chera K a s r a v i - r a K o s h t a n d , p . 1 1 .
2. P. S h a h r i a r i and M. N e ' m a t o l l a h i , Ahmad K a s r a v i , p.12.
 Ik

two y e a r s i n K h u z e s t a n , where he s t r o v e v e r y h a r d t o
e s t a b l i s h a j u d i c i a l organisation. A f t e r t h e reform o f
4
t h e M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e b y A l i Akbar Davar, K a s r a v i f o i f
a short time held the p o s i t i o n o f p u b l i c prosecutor i n
Tehran? b u t a© he s t a t e s i n h i s book, Ten Years i n t h e
M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e , h e r e f u s e d t o conform w i t h c e r t a i n
r e q u e s t s o f t h e p o l i c e and o f t h e M i n i s t e r . As a r e s u l t
he r e s i g n e d h i s p o s t i n 1928, and s e t up i n p r i v a t e law

2
p r a c t i c e , w h i c h b r o u g h t h i m m a t e r i a l ease. I n 1929 K a s r a v i
was a g a i n i n v i t e d t o j o i n t h e s t a f f o f t h e c r i m i n a l l a w c o u r t
o f Tehran. He s e r v e d t h e r e f o r t w e n t y - f o u r months, f i n a l l y
a t t a i n i n g the p o s i t i o n of public prosecutor of the criminal
c o u r t o f Tehran. T h i s was h i s l a s t o f f i c i a l p o s t . He
resigned, and t h e r e a f t e r d i s a s s o c i a t e d , h i m s e l f f o r e v e r
from p u b l i c l e g a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . H i s enemies, however,
were n o t s a t i s f i e d , and i n 1933 > when Sadr o l - A s h r a f became
t h e M i n i s t e r o f J u s t i c e , K a s r a v i ' s l i c e n c e t o p r a c t i s e as a
p r i v a t e l a w y e r was w i t h d r a w n .
College Teaching.
A f t e r Kasravi's resignation from the service o f t h e
M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e , he a g a i n s u f f e r e d m a t e r i a l h a r d s h i p .
He c o n t i n u e d w i t h h i s researches i n t o language and h i s t o r y ,
and was i n v i t e d t o t e a c h i n t h e M i l i t a r y Academy, and i n
1 . Pah s a l d a r ' A d l i e h , Tehran 1325/19U7, vx> 237-239.
2. Chera K a s r a v i - r a Koshtand, p.12.
 15
the C o l l e g e o f Theology (Ma*qui va Manqul) i n T e h r a n ,
K a s r a v i ' s S o c i a l and P o l i t i c a l A c t i v i t i e s .

I n t h e y e a r s a f t e r t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e and t h e
f i r s t w o r l d war, t h e d e s i r e f o r change p e r v a d e d I r a n , and
on October 31, 1925, t h e Q a j a r d y n a s t y was deposed.
N a t u r a l l y K a s r a v i WBB d e e p l y s t i r r e d "by t h i s e v e n t . His
e m o t i o n a l involvement l e d h i m t o produce n o t o n l y s c h o l a r l y
w o r k s , h u t a l s o w r i t i n g s o f a s o c i o l o g i c a l and p o l i t i c a l
nature. T a b r i z had been t h e c e n t r e o f r e v o l u t i o n a r y move-
ments i n I r a n , and t h e i n s t i g a t o r s f i r e d t h e minds o f t h e
p e o p l e by denouncing monarchy as a d i c t a t o r i a l and c r u e l
method o f government. T h e i r words b r o u g h t f e v e r t o t h e
h e a r t s o f the people. Sometimes K a s r a v i w o u l d go t o r e v o l u -
t i o n a r y m e e t i n g s , and i t was t h e r e t h a t t h e seeds o f h i s
p o l i t i c a l t h o u g h t s were f i r s t sown. His f i r s t teacher i n
p o l i t i c s had been a broad-minded young man c a l l e d H a j j Aqa
Khan, who was a l s o e x p e r t i n t h e F r e n c h l a n g u a g e . Ha
f a m i l i a r i z e d K a s r a v i w i t h t h e meaning o f monarchy, and
recommended t o h i m two books w h i c h were t o open h i s eyes t o

a w i d e r f i e l d o f p o l i t i c s . These were t h e Siahatnameh-ye

* 1 ' 2
Ebrahim Beg and t h e Ketab-e Ahmad. Under t h e i n f l u e n c e :
o f these two books, K a s r a v i ' s t h o u g h t underwent a r a d i c a l
3
change. H i s f r i e n d s and f e l l o w t h i n k e r s a t T a b r i z were
1 . By H a Z a y n o l - ' A b e d i n Maraghei (d.c.1910).
2. By Haj;j 'Abdol-Rahim T a l e b o v (182+U-1910).
3. Zendegani-.ye man, p.Zj-8
 16
M i r z a ' A l l Hay'at, M i r z a Baqer T a l i ' e h and 'Abdol-Hamid
Qiasi. A f t e r a l i t t l e w h i l e , however, t h e y p a r t e d company

w i t h K a s r a v i because o f h i s disagreement w i t h t h e i r way o f

thinking. L a t e r K a s r a v i began t o a s s o c i a t e w i t h a c i r c l e
o f e n l i g h t e n e d men i n T a b r i z , i n c l u d i n g M i r z a Casern F o y u z a t ,
who was t h e l e a d e r o f A z e r b a i j a n ' s e d u c a t i o n a l r e f o r m
movement, M i r z a J a ' f a r Khamne'i who was a v e r y l i b e r a l l y
minded man, M i r z a Mohammad ' A l i S a f v a t , and Shaykh Mohammad
K h i a b a n i , who was t h e l e a d e r o f t h e l o c a l Democrat p a r t y .
F i n a l l y we must mention Reza S a t t a r z a d e h who was K a s r a v i ' s
•1
best f r i e n d . This; f r i e n d s h i p was n e v e r b r o k e n and l a s t e d
* *

u n t i l Kasravi's death. Sattarzadeh f o l l o w e d Kasravi step

by s t e p i n t h e e v o l u t i o n o f h i s p o l i t i c a l and s o c i o l o g i c a l
ideas. The i n f l u e n c e o f t h e I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n a l move-
ment l a y a t t h e r o o t o f K a s r a v i ' s way o f t h i n k i n g . His.
a d m i r a t i o n f o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m was h e a r t f e l t ; even when
h i s l i f e was i n danger, he never f a i l e d t o u p h o l d i t , and
i n l a t e r y e a r s he c o n t i n u e d t o be a g r e a t defender o f
liberty. F i n a l l y h i s l i f e was s a c r i f i c e d f o r t h e cause o f
freedom.
K a s r a v i ' s Membership o f t h e Democrat P a r t y .
The e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a • C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government i n
I r a n d i d n o t e n t i r e l y f u l f i l t h e hopes and d e s i r e s o f t h e

1 . Zendegani-ye man, p.1+9*

 17

p e o p l e ; and "because o f t h e people's i g n o r a n c e o f t h e meaning

o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m , t h e r e was a great deal of confusion i n

r e g a r d t o t h e need f o r s o c i a l r e f o r m s . A f t e r every great

r e v o l u t i o n , a c e r t a i n amount o f c o n f u s i o n f o l l o w s , depending
on how f a r t h e people have p r o g r e s s e d . As a r e s u l t of the
s u p e r s t i t i o n and i g n o r a n c e i n w h i c h the people o f I r a n were
t h e n s t e e p e d , i t was o n l y n a t u r a l t h a t t h e y were u n a h l e t o
digest t h e new o r d e r of t h i n g s . The Russian r e v o l u t i o n in
1917 had "been b o t h an example and an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r Iranians
t o raise themselves i n t h e cause o f l i b e r t y ; f o r w i t h the
Russians busy w i t h t h e i r own r e v o l u t i o n , i t was unlikely
t h a t t h e y would i n t e r f e r e w i t h I r a n ' s internal affairs. In
Tabriz the r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s became p a r t i c u l a r l y a c t i v e at
that time. Shaykh Mohammad K h i a b a n i i n company w i t h his;
f e l l o w t h i n k e r s formed a new Democrat p a r t y i n 1918, i n
opposition t o t h e l e g a l Democrats, and K a s r a v i j o i n e d him.
p

Between t h e two factions t h e r e was c o n s t a n t disagreement

and d i s s e n s i o n , u n t i l K a s r a v i as m e d i a t o r w i t h a group o f
f r i e n d s made peace between them and e s t a b l i s h e d one party.
Kasravi's Charitable A c t i v i t i e s .
Meanwhile K a s r a v i was busy w i t h h i s s c i e n t i f i c and
h i s t o r i c a l researches. At t h e same t i m e he never n e g l e c t e d
c h a r i t a b l e work, and whenever p o s s i b l e t r i e d h a r d t o h e l p
1 . Zendegani-ye man, p.77»
2. I b i d mi p. 78.
 18
the poor. The l e a d e r s o f t h e Democrat p a r t y used t o h o l d
meetings t o d i s c u s s t h e problems o f p o v e r t y i n I r a n and
1
A z a r b a i j a n and a t t e m p t t o g e t r i d o f i t . Gradually they

o r g a n i z e d s m a l l s o c i e t i e s among themselves and persuaded

w e a l t h y people t o h e l p t h e poor. They c a r e f u l l y a s c e r t a i n e d

t h e numbers and names o f t h e d e s t i t u t e i n a l l p a r t s o f

T a b r i z and i t s s u r r o u n d i n g s , and h e l p e d everybody t o g e t

a c e r t a i n amount o f b r e a d a c c o r d i n g t o a r a t i o n which they

fixed. Hokmabad was t h e o n l y n e g l e c t e d a r e a , because i t

was under t h e c o n t r o l o f m o l l a s who kept the simple peasants

away f r o m t h e s e s o c i e t i e s . They announced t h e i r d i s a p p r o v a l

t h a t t h e people s h o u l d g e t b r e a d f r o m t h e Democrat o r g a n i -
2 **
zation. Soon, however, t h e i n h a b i t a n t s o f t h e Hokmab&d

area c o u l d no l o n g e r r e s i s t , as t h e y had been u n d e r f e d for:'

a l o n g p e r i o d o f t i m e and t h e i r c h i l d r e n were s t a r v i n g .

They d e c i d e d t o appeal t o K a s r a v i , as he was a very

s y m p a t h e t i c person who w o u l d n o t r e f u s e them; and on t h e

f o l l o w i n g day, he managed t o b r i n g them a r a t i o n o f b r e a d .

K a s r a v i ' s Disagreement w i t h K h i a b a n i .
From t h e day when K a s r a v i j o i n e d t h e Democrat p a r t y ,

he was c o n s i d e r e d one o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t f i g u r e s i n t h e

community. H i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h Shaykh Mohammad K h i a b a n i

was v e r y good; t h e Shaykh g r e a t l y r e s p e c t e d K a s r a v i , and

1 . Zendegani-.ye man, p.80. T h i s t o o k p l a c e i n 1918, when t h e r e
was a l o t o f p o v e r t y and s t a r v a t i o n i n T a b r i z .
2. Zendegani-ye man, p . 8 1 .
3» Chera K a s r a v i - r a Koshtand, p.7»
 19
K a s r a v i r e g u l a r l y a t t e n d e d t h e p a r t y ' s weekly m e e t i n g s .

I n 1919, when hunger and p o w e r t y were s t i l l p r e v a l e n t ,

Ottoman T u r k i s h t r o o p s r e p l a c e d t h e Russians i n A z a r h a i j a n .

T h e i r p r i n c i p l e s and purposes were e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t from

those o f t h e Democrats, whom t h e y i g n o r e d f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g .

They a r r e s t e d a number o f Democrats and e x p e l l e d them f r o m

Tabriz. I n t h e hope o f i n c r e a s i n g t h e number o f t h e i r

p a r t i s a n s , t h e Ottoman t r o o p s p u t o u t a g r e a t d e a l o f

p u b l i c i t y , and even a t t r a c t e d a f e w Democrats; t h e y a l s o

o r g a n i s e d an a s s o c i a t i o n c a l l e d E t t e h a d o l - E s l a m . Fortunately

t h e i r occupation o f Tabriz d i d not l a s t long. The f i r s t

w o r l d war ended w i t h t h e d e f e a t o f t h e Ottoman T u r k s i n

October 1918 and o f t h e Germans i n November 1918. The

c e n t r a l government t h e n a p p o i n t e d as governor o f Azarb'aijan

Mokarram o l - M o l k , who was b i t t e r l y opposed t o t h e Democrats.

K a s r a v i and t h e o t h e r members h e l d m e e t i n g s t o decide what

s h o u l d be done. One o f t h o s e who a t t e n d e d was Sayyed J a l i l

A r d a b i l i , who was one o f t h e g r e a t e s t advocates o f l i b e r t y

and r e v o l u t i o n . A t these m e e t i n g s t h e y d e c i d e d t o e x p e l

some members who were n o t b e h a v i n g p a t r i o t i c a l l y . The f i r s t

p e r s o n t o be e x p e l l e d , b y name M i r z a T a q i Khan, was a v e r y

c l o s e f r i e n d o f Shaykh Mohammad K h i a b a n i and h a d wanted t o

g a i n f a v o u r w i t h t h e Ottoman T u r k s when T a b r i z was under

their control. When K h i a b a n i l e a r n e d o f K a s r a v i ' s d e c i s i o n ,

 20

he was annoyed and asked M i r z a T a q i Khan t o r e j o i n t h e p a r t y .

K a s r a v i and s e v e r a l o t h e r members were d e e p l y o f f e n d e d and
c r i t i c i z e d Khiabani's a c t i o n . E v e n t u a l l y they p a r t e d from
t h e Democrats, and K a s r a v i had t o l e a v e T a b r i z ; he s t a y e d
i n Shahin Dagh f o r a s h o r t t i m e , and a f t e r w a r d s i n A p r i l
1920 s e t out f o r Tehran.
The Azadegan (Free Men) P a r t y .

Azadegan (Free Men) i s t h e name o f an a s s o c i a t i o n w h i c h

K a s r a v i founded i n 1933. I t s members t r y h a r d t o spread

K a s r a v i ' s i d e a s about d i f f e r e n t aspects o f l i f e i n I r a n .

T h e i r p o l i t i c s i n some r e s p e c t s were d i f f e r e n t from those of

any o t h e r a s s o c i a t i o n . A l t h o u g h t h e y d i d n o t make a g r e a t

d e a l o f p u b l i c i t y t o a t t r a c t people's a t t e n t i o n , they per-

severed i n p u b l i s h i n g t h e i r o r g a n s , Payman, a m o n t h l y perio-

dical (1933-1942) and Parcham. a newspaper (1942-1944),

because t h i s was t h e o n l y way t o warn t h e p e o p l e about the

r e a l i t i e s of l i f e . T h i s group i s s t i l l active to-day,

a l t h o u g h i t does n o t p u b l i s h a g r e a t d e a l o f propaganda.
1 *
The a s s o c i a t i o n was f i r s t e s t a b l i s h e d i n Tehran i n 1933»

and as i t g r a d u a l l y became more a c t i v e , branches were added

i n almost every c i t y . The c h i e f aim was t o spread K a s r a v i ' s

i d e a s by p u b l i s h i n g h i s books. During the f i r s t seven y e a r s ,

i . e . f r o m 1933 t o 1941, t h e Azadegan, even though t h e y en-

c o u n t e r e d many d i f f i c u l t i e s , were a b l e t o p u b l i s h Payman.

1• Ahmad K a s r a v i , p.14.
 21
They a l s o h e l d weekly meetings i n K a s r a v i ' s house every
F r i d a y n i g h t , as t h e y had no o t h e r p l a c e I n w h i c h t o meet.
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h i s , t h e y managed t o h o l d s m a l l p r i v a t e
m e e t i n g s i n T a b r i z and o t h e r c i t i e s , a l t h o u g h t h e y h a d . t o
be:^ c a r e f u l t o behave d i s c r e e t l y so as n o t t o g i v e any
excuse t o government a u t h o r i t i e s f o r c r i t i c i s m . N e v e r t h e -
l e s s t h e p o l i c e a r r e s t e d K a s r a v i and i m p r i s o n e d him f o r
n i n e days; b u t t h e y r e l e a s e d him when t h e y were u n a b l e t o
f i n d any crime o f w h i c h t h e y c o u l d accuse him. The i n c i d e n t
made K a s r a v i more c o n f i d e n t and encouraged him t o show
g r e a t e r f i r m n e s s and d e t e r m i n a t i o n i n t h e p u r s u i t o f h i s
i d e a l s . T h i s s t a t e o f a f f a i r s p e r s i s t e d u n t i l 19*4-2, when
c e n s o r s h i p o f Pavman and p o l i c e s u p e r v i s i o n o f t h e p a r t y ' s
a c t i v i t i e s were d i s c o n t i n u e d . K a s r a v i ' s f o l l o w e r s t h e n
began t o work w i t h more e n t h u s i a s m , and a t one o f t h e
meetings K a s r a v i emphasized t h e need t o r e c o n s t i t u t e t h e
a s s o c i a t i o n as an o f f i c i a l l y r e g i s t e r e d p o l i t i c a l p a r t y .
The p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e Azadegan p a r t y were l a i d down i n t h a t
meeting. I t was t o be a p a r t y u n l i k e any o t h e r . P o l i t i c s
were t h e main s u b j e c t o f d i s c u s s i o n , because o f t h e i r connec-
t i o n w i t h s o c i a l a f f a i r s , and an a t t e m p t was made t o draw up
a d e f i n i t e p a r t y programme. I t was n o t t h e a m b i t i o n o f t h e
members t o g a i n i m p o r t a n t p o s i t i o n s or occupy p a r l i a m e n t a r y

1 . K a s r a v i , Yakom-e Daymah va Dastan-ash, Tehran 1338/1959*

 22
seats. S i m i l a r l y t h e i r newspaper was n o t t o he l i k e any

other. As t h e c i r c u l a t i o n o f t h e i r newspaper g r a d u a l l y

i n c r e a s e d i n Tehran and o t h e r c i t i e s , t h e y needed a.more

e l a b o r a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n and became more a c t i v e t h a n b e f o r e .

They founded new branches here and t h e r e , and c o n t i n u e d t o

work v i g o r o u s l y u n t i l t h e day K a s r a v i was assassinated.

A t p r e s e n t t h e Azadegan, o r " K a s r a v i y u n " as t h e y are commonly

c a l l e d , c o n t i n u e t o propagate K a s r a v i ' s p o l i t i c a l teachings

w i t h o u t making h e a d l i n e news, and o c c a s i o n a l l y r e p u b l i s h

his books.

Parcham Newspaper and Payman Magazine.

While c a r r y i n g on h i s r e s e a r c h e s i n h i s t o r y and o t h e r

s u b j e c t s , K a s r a v i used t o w r i t e s c h o l a r l y a r t i c l e s f o r news-

papers. They were p u b l i s h e d i n I r a n i a n and a l s o i n f o r e i g n

newspapers, such as a l - M o q t a t a f o f Egypt and a l - ' E r f a n o f

Sayda ( S i d o n ) . As has been n o t i c e d , K a s r a v i t h o u g h t that

the p r e s s was t h e w o r t h i e s t and most e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u m e n t

f o r g u i d i n g I r a n i a n s o c i e t y towards a b e t t e r way of l i v i n g .

He t h o u g h t t h a t i t was a n e c e s s i t y i n every s o c i e t y . He

expressed h i s i d e a s about l i f e and l i b e r t y i n Payman ( P r o m i s e ) ,

1
the f i r s t i s s u e o f which was p u b l i s h e d i n December 1933*
•1

D u r i n g t h e f i r s t years. K a s r a v i f r e q u e n t l y w r o t e about t h e
1 . Ruz beh Payman k2 Tehran 1964 ( p u b l i s h e d b y t h e
t

Azadegan p a r t y ) p.3*
$

2. Chera K a s r a v i - r a Koshtand, p.26.

 23
europeanization of I r a n . He c r i t i c i z e d I r a n i a n suscep-
t i b i l i t y t o European i n f l u e n c e s , and p o i n t e d out t h e f o l l y
o f abandoning I r a n i a n customs and t r a d i t i o n s merely i n
o r d e r t o adopt those o f t h e Europeans. I n t h e second
year o f Payman, K a s r a v i wrote m a i n l y about P e r s i a n poets
and t r i e d h a r d t o show t h e h a r m f u l n a t u r e o f t h e i r ideas,
e s p e c i a l l y f o r t h e young g e n e r a t i o n . Payman's a r t i c l e s
aroused c o n t r o v e r s y and a n i m o s i t y i n those days. Poets i n
particular were r e s e n t f u l and made g r e a t e f f o r t s t o r e f u t e
2
him. I n t h e t h i r d y e a r o f Payman K a s r a v i c r i t i c i z e d
p h i l o s o p h y and m a t e r i a l i s m . Payman was p u b l i s h e d f o r seven
years i n a l l . A f t e r t h e formal establishment o f t h e
Azadegan p a r t y i n 19U1, Parcham^ was b r o u g h t o u t as t h e
p a r t y ' s o f f i c i a l organ. I t c o n t i n u e d t o be p u b l i s h e d
u n t i l 19i+2 when t h e government banned many p u b l i c a t i o n s ,
i n c l u d i n g Parcham. L a t e r , a f t e r b e i n g g r a n t e d f u l l pub-
l i s h i n g r i g h t s , Parcham appeared once a f o r t n i g h t . A total
o f t w e l v e volumes o f Parcham was p u b l i s h e d . I n 19kk
Parcham was a g a i n p r o h i b i t e d . L a t e r i t appeared as a
w e e k l y newspaper, b u t o n l y f o r a s h o r t w h i l e . The a u t h o -
r i t i e s r e f u s e d p e r m i s s i o n f o r K a s r a v i t o c o n t i n u e h i s pub-
l i c a t i o n s , accusing him o f d i s r e s p e c t f o r Islam. Kasravi
1 . Chera K a s r a v i - r a Koshtand. p. 3U.
2. I b i d . p.i*7.
3» Ahmad K a s r a v i , p . l i w
 2b

had t r i e d t o p r e s e n t h i s arguments t o t h e people i n t h e

columns o f Parcham, w h i c h c o n t a i n e d a r t i c l e s about t h e most
p r o f o u n d human problems. H i s aim was t o combat h a r m f u l
i n f l u e n c e s and i n d i v i d u a l d i s h o n e s t y i n I r a n i a n s o c i e t y .
He spoke o p e n l y about d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o n s and d i s c u s s e d
t h e i r respective defects. He a l s o spoke about t h e i n e f f i -
c i e n c y o f governmental a u t h o r i t i e s , and c o u r a g e o u s l y c r i t i -
cized, t h e armed f o r c e s . A l l t h e s e a c t i o n s won h i m many
enemies.

K a s r a v i ' s R e l i g i o u s and S o c i o l o g i c a l I d e a s .

I n 1928, when K a s r a v i l e f t t h e M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e ,

he w i t h d r e w f o r a w h i l e f r o m s o c i a l l i f e and i n t h e same

year t r a v e l l e d t o G i l a n . He was v e r y much impressed b y

the b e a u t i f u l scenery o f t h a t p r o v i n c e , and t h o u g h t a g r e a t

d e a l about God. He came t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t man should,

be a b l e t o l i v e i n peace and h a p p i n e s s , because t h e m e r c i -

f u l God has g i v e n h i m e v e r y t h i n g : so i f t h e r e i s s t i l l

unhappiness, we must s e a r c h f o r t h e r e a s o n and e r a d i c a t e

i t f r o m our l i f e . K a s r a v i thought t h a t t h r o u g h t h e people's

f a i t h he c o u l d f i n d t h e p o i n t e r t o t h e r i g h t way o f l i v i n g .

S c i e n t i f i c advance, however, was u n d e r m i n i n g t h e people's

religious beliefs. K a s r a v i was c o n v i n c e d t h a t b e h i n d a l l

m a t e r i a l t h i n g s there are s p i r i t u a l r e a l i t i e s t o which

h u m a n i t y must t u r n i n i t s quest f o r peace and h a p p i n e s s .

 25

He c o n s i d e r e d t h e s e m a t t e r s f o r t h r e e y e a r s , and e v e n t u a l l y
1
w r o t e a "book Ay i n w h i c h c o n t a i n s h i s i d e a s about l i f e and
about u l t i m a t e t r u t h . T h i s book was banned and has l o n g
been u n o b t a i n a b l e . I n a l l h i s books and w r i t i n g s on
r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l m a t t e r s , K a s r a v i t r i e d t o show t h e
i m m a t u r i t y o f t h e d i f f e r e n t s e c t s o f I s l a m , and a l s o openly
d i s c u s s e d C h r i s t i a n i t y and i t s d e f e c t s . He s a i d t h a t a l l
r e l i g i o n s exercise a benevolent i n f l u e n c e and serve as,
guides f o r s o c i e t y . C h r i s t i a n i t y and I s l a m , i n h i s o p i n i o n
were d e v i s e d s i m p l y t o g u i d e and l e a d mankind towards
1
happiness t h r o u g h t h e ages; b u t people had changed t h e s e
two g r e a t r e l i g i o n s and debased them. H i s t o r y shows t h a t
I s l a m b r o u g h t t h e u n c i v i l i z e d Arabs t o g e t h e r and p r o d u c e d
an empire o u t o f t h e p r i m i t i v e and s i m p l e Arab s o c i e t y .
T h i s was n o t j u s t because o f Mohammad's u n d e r s t a n d i n g , so
K a s r a v i t h o u g h t , b u t thanks t o God's w i l l . K a s r a v i held.
Mohammad i n h i g h r e s p e c t , and c o n s i d e r e d h i m one o f t h e
g r e a t e s t men i n t h e w o r l d . He was f i r m l y opposed t o sects.
w h i c h b r o k e away f r o m I s l a m , such as t h e B a h a ' i s , whose
p h i l o s o p h y and way o f l i v i n g were b o t h repugnant t o h i m .
2
K a s r a v i b e l i e v e d i n God, f o r he says "This organized world

o f ours was c r e a t e d b y God." F o r h i m t h e r e c o u l d be no doubt

1. Ay i n , p u b l i s h e d i n two volumes. Tehran, 1312/l93^-«
2. K a s r a v i , Var.javand Bonyad, Tehran, 1322/19M+, p.6.
 26
t h a t t h i s w o n d e r f u l u n i v e r s e has a c r e a t o r , who is all-
p o w e r f u l and a l s o m e r c i f u l . A l t h o u g h we human b e i n g s are
•i

n o t a b l e t o see God d i r e c t l y , K a s r a v i t h o u g h t t h a t we can

see God t h r o u g h t h e masterpieces of nature. From t h e
r e l i g i o u s p o i n t o f v i e w , K a s r a v i was a realist. He was
e q u a l l y opposed t o m a t e r i a l i s m and t o f a n c i f u l idealism.
He was c o n v i n c e d t h a t humanity's f a i l u r e has been p a r t l y
due t o b e l i e f i n wrong i d e a s .
. ' 3

Kasravi's R e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the Mollas

B e f o r e t h e w i n n i n g o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n and even a f t e r
t h a t t i m e u n t i l t h e b e g i n n i n g o f Reza Shah's r e i g n , m o l l a s
and r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s were i n f l u e n t i a l i n I r a n . They had
a hand i n a l l a s p e c t s o f t h e people's l i f e , and were a l s o
responsible f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of j u s t i c e . To a
c o n s i d e r a b l e e x t e n t , payments had t o be made t o mthllas
where t a x e s a r e now p a i d t o t h e government, and t h e people's
p e r s o n a l a f f a i r s such as m a r r i a g e and d i v o r c e were c o n t r o l l e d
b y them. Consequently even t h e government had t o comply w i t h
t h e wishes o f t h e m o l l a s . R e a l i z i n g , t h a t even t h e Shah was
i n t h e power o f t h e m o l l a s , K a s r a v i f r o m t h e s t a r t o f his;
c a r e e r demanded t h a t t h e y s h o u l d be removed f r o m t h e p o l i -
t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e scene. I n f a c t many o r perhaps-
most o f t h e m o l l a s i n t h o s e days were n o t s i n c e r e and trust-
1. V a r j a v a n d Bonyad, p.15*
2. I b i d . , p.i|2.
3- Zendegani-ye man, pp i;9-53»
 27
w o r t h y r e l i g i o u s f i g u r e s , and r e l i g i o n m e r e l y p r o v i d e d a
cloaik f o r t h e i r d i s h o n e s t y . K a s r a v i s t a r t e d t o open thee,
people's eyes by showing t h e a c t u a l f a c t s , and t h e m o l l a s
"became h i s w o r s t enemies. The mass o f t h e people were t h e n
i l l i t e r a t e , and t h e m a j o r i t y o f them were a b s o l u t e l y
i g n o r a n t . They were s u s p i c i o u s o f a l l c l a s s e s . When t h e
m o l l a s accused K a s r a v i o f d i s r e s p e c t f o r I s l a m , t h e people
were ready t o b e l i e v e t h e i r a c c u s a t i o n s . K a s r a v i and t h e
m o l l a s n e v e r became r e c o n c i l e d . K a s r a v i w i t h s t o o d a l l h i s
d i f f i c u l t i e s s i n g l e h a n d e d and f o u g h t b r a v e l y w i t h i n f l u e n -
t i a l m o l l a s ; h i s books on S h i i s m , Sufism and Baha'ism
( S h i * e h g a r i , S u f i g a r i , B a h a * i g a r i ) prove t h i s . He a l s o
used t o t a l k w i t h d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s . D u r i n g h i s
t i m e as a t e a c h e r i n t h e American Memorial S c h o o l , he met
two Baha i s who were t r y i n g t o g a i n i n f l u e n c e over t h e
s t u d e n t s , and s e t o u t t o demonstrate t h e weaknesses o f
t h e i r i d e a s and i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s o f t h e i r t h e o r i e s .

1
K a s r a v i s S c h o l a r l y Achievements.
The v a l u e o f K a s r a v i ' s researches i n the f i e l d s o f

h i s t o r y and languages has n e v e r been d i s p u t e d , even b y h i s

opponents. Even i f we n e g l e c t o r f o r g e t a l l h i s e f f o r t s

i n o t h e r f i e l d s , we cannot i g n o r e t h e immense work w h i c h

he accomplished i n w r i t i n g t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e I r a n i a n Qons-

1. Zendegarifc-ye man, pp 64-65. One o f them was named M i r z a

Mahdi, t h e o t h e r ^ S o b h i . ( Jkufc ^ c ^ ^ v ^ ^ s^xtnf ^tb'
 28

t i t u t i o n a l movement. H i s method o f r e c o r d i n g h i s t o r i c a l
e v e n t s was e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t o f p r e v i o u s
I r a n i a n h i s t o r i a n s . He searched t o f i n d t h e t r u t h o f
every s t a t e m e n t and n e v e r a c c e p t e d as s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t
the a u t h o r i t y of previous h i s t o r i a n s . His e f f o r t s i n
w r i t i n g o t h e r h i s t o r i c a l "books such as T a r i k h - e Pansad Saleh-rye
Khuzestan and Shahriaran-e G-omnam were a l s o v e r y c o n s i d e r a b l e .
Needless t o say he i s one o f I r a n ' s most i m p o r t a n t h i s t o r i a n s .
H i s v a l u a b l e researches and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n t o language p u t
him among t h e c o u n t r y ' s g r e a t l i n g u i s t s . D u r i n g h i s s h o r t
l i f e he p r o d u c e d more t h a n e i g h t y books on d i f f e r e n t s u b j e c t s ,
i n c l u d i n g h i s t o r y , l a n g u a g e s , p o l i t i c s , s o c i o l o g y , and
l i t e r a t u r e , and a l s o t r a n s l a t i o n s . He d i d a l l t h i s i n s p i t e
o f t h e f a c t t h a t most o f t h e t i m e he had no r e g u l a r means o f
l i v e l i h o o d . There a r e v e r y few examples i n I r a n or e l s e -
where o f such a p r o l i f i c and m e t i c u l o u s w r i t e r . He became
w e l l known n o t o n l y i n I r a n , b u t a l s o i n s c h o l a r l y and
academic c i r c l e s abroad. A l t h o u g h K a s r a v i was c e r t a i n l y an
a m b i t i o u s man, he d i d n o t w r i t e books t o w i n fame o r f a v o u r ,
b u t worked p u r e l y f o r t h e sake o f g i v i n g f u l l e x p r e s s i o n t o
h i s t h o u g h t s and knowledge. He became a member o f t h e
 29

1. Royal A s i a t i c S o c i e t y o f London
2
2. Royal G e o g r a p h i c a l S o c i e t y o f London
3
3. Academy o f Science o f L e n i n g r a d .
K a s r a v i was n o t o n l y one o f t h e most p r o d u c t i v e w r i t e r s i n
I r a n , "but a l s o one o f t h e most v e r s a t i l e . A u t h o r s who can
w r i t e about such a wide range o f s u b j e c t s a r e indeed rare.
In a d d i t i o n t o h i s books he w r o t e a r t i c l e s , w h i c h , as has
been m e n t i o n e d , were p u b l i s h e d i n f o r e i g n and I r a n i a n
newspapers.
The f i r s t a t t a c k .
B e s i d e s b e i n g a h i s t o r i a n and w r i t e r , K a s r a v i was a
p o l i t i c i a n who c r i t i c i z e d t h e f l a w s o f h i s s o c i e t y ; and
such a man cannot hope t o l e a d an u n e v e n t f u l l i f e . Kasravi's
g r e a t e s t enemies, as a l r e a d y s t a t e d , were t h e m o l l a s . At
l a s t ^ " one day, when he was w i t h two f r i e n d s , he was a t t a c k e d
b y t h e l e a d e r o f t h e Feda'ian-e S l a m ( a n e x t r e m i s t p o l i t i c o -
r e l i g i o u s g r o u p ) , namely Navvab S a f a v i , who shot and s t o n e d
5
him. He was t a k e n t o h o s p i t a l . Kasravi s a i d ; " I w i l l not
die. A l t h o u g h I am p h y s i c a l l y f r a i l , I am s t r o n g i n d e t e r -
m i n a t i o n , and I have so much t o do." The d o c t o r s saved
1. K a s r a v i became a,member o f t h i s S o c i e t y a f t e r he had pub-
l i s h e d h i s book A z a r i . L a t e r S i r Denison Ross made a
summarized E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n o f pattt o f i t ( s e e below p.
2. Pah s a l d a r A d l i ^ h , p.2*4-5-
3. The R u s s i a n Embassy bought t e n c o p i e s o f Ka§ravi's book A z a r i
h> T h i s a t t a c k t o o k p l a c e i n 132*4-/19*4-6 i n Tehran.
5. Ahmad K a s r a v i , p.14.
 3°

Kasravi's l i f e , but unfortunately the p o l i c e d i d n o t pro-

secute t h e c u l p r i t s ; t h e y f r e e d them a f t e r f i f t e e n days,
and d e t a i n e d i n s t e a d some o f K a s r a v i ' s i n n o c e n t f r i e n d s .

K a s r a v i ' s l a s t days and h i s d e a t h .

At f i r s t K a s r a v i ' s enemies among t h e mollas; o n l y
a t t a c h e d h i m i n d i r e c t l y ; b u t l a t e r t h e y changed t h e i r tactics.
They c o u l d n o t r e f u t e t h e l o g i c o f h i s arguments and l a c k e d
t h e courage t o be r e a s o n a b l e and d i s c u s s t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s o f
o p i n i o n w i t h h i m , because t h e y knew t h a t t h e y were n o t
m e n t a l l y s t r o n g enough t o w i t h s t a n d him. Already t h e
Feda i a n - e I s l a m had once a s s a u l t e d h i m p h y s i c a l l y , b u t h a d
*

n o t been s u c c e s s f u l . Many m o l l a s t h e n began t o a t t a c k h i s

f o l l o w e r s by c r i t i c i z i n g t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n . E v e n t u a l l y they
accused K a s r a v i h i m s e l f o f h a v i n g b u r n t t h e Qor'an, and made
a c o u r t case o f i t ; b u t K a s r a v i was r e s o l u t e , calm and
u n a f r a i d , and a l s o was a v e r y knowledgeable l a w y e r . He was
c o n f i d e n t o f h i s a b i l i t y t o prove h i s enemies' d e c e i t and
1
m a l i c e t o w a r d s h i m . On t h e 20th E s f a n d 1323/l2th March 19*4-6,
when K a s r a v i was w i t h a f r i e n d c a l l e d Mohammad T a q i Haddadpur
i n t h e Public Prosecutor's O f f i c e i n t h e M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e
a t Tehran> he was a t t a c k e d b y two b r o t h e r s Mohammad Hosayn and
Mohammad ' A l i Emami ( a l s o members o f t h e Feda*ian-e I s l a m )
and was s t a b b e d t o d e a t h . I t was i r o n i c t h a t t h e y s h o u l d have
1. Ohera K a s r a v i - r a Koshtand, p.2.
 31

k i l l e d him i n t h e M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e , f o r t h e r e can he no
doubt t h a t t h e i r t r e a c h e r o u s deed w i l l he permanently
recorded i n h i s t o r y . Even a f t e r K a s r a v i ' s d e a t h , h i s
enemies were n o t s a t i s f i e d . They r e f u s e d h i m Moslem " b u r i a l .
A f t e r t h r e e days h i s f a m i l y and f r i e n d s removed h i s body t o
a p l a c e c a l l e d Abak i n t h e Shemiran ( n o r t h e r n suburbs o f
Tehran). The two Emami b r o t h e r s , h a v i n g completed their
assignment, l e f t the Ministry of Justice quite f e a r l e s s l y .
They were sentenced t o a s h o r t p e r i o d i n p r i s o n , b u t were
soon r e l e a s e d . N a t u r e , however, i s r e v e n g e f u l , and most
c r i m i n a l s have t o pay sooner o r l a t e r f o r t h e i r crimes.
One o f t h e Emami b r o t h e r s was hanged some y e a r s l a t e r f o r
•j
k i l l i n g a f o r m e r Prime M i n i s t e r H a z h i r . Kasravi died i n
t h i s way a f t e r f i f t y - f i v e y e a r s o f s t r u g g l e and honourable
l i f e ; b u t r e a l l y he i s n o t dead, because h i s works l i v e on.

1. 'Abdol-Hosayn H a z h i r (Prime M i n i s t e r i n 19^4-8, l a t e r M i n i s t e r

o f t h e C o u r t ) , was a s s a s s i n a t e d by Emami, t h e murderer o f
K a s r a v i , i n November 19*4-9 a t Tehran.
 32

CHAPTER TWO

KASRAVI AS A HISTORIAN

Although K a s r a v i wrote d i f f e r e n t hooks on v a r i o u s

s u b j e c t s , h i s s p e c i a l i t y was h i s t o r y , and t h i s was

undoubtedly t h e f i e l d i n which he d i d h i s most important

research. He c e r t a i n l y m e r i t s t h e t i t l e o f great h i s t o r i a n .

The Importance and v a l u e o f h i s achievement a s a h i s t o r i a n

w i l l be d i s c u s s e d l a t e r , a f t e r p a r t i c u l a r s of h i s h i s t o r i c a l

works have been b r i e f l y o u t l i n e d . They i n c l u d e the f o l l o w i n g .

1. Shahriarian-e Qomnam (Forgotten r u l e r s ) , Tehran, 1307/1928.

2. Tferikh-e P l u t a r c h A ( P l u t a r c h ' s L i v e s ) Tehran 1316/1937.

3» Shaykh S a f i v a Tabar-ash (Shaykh S a f i and h i s a n c e s t r y ) ,

Tehran 1323/19*44. F i r s t p u b l i s h e d I n Avandeh.

4. T&rikh-e Mosha'sha'ian. y a Pansadsaleh-ye Khuzestan

( H i s t o r y of Mosha'sha*is, o r F i v e c e n t u r i e s of t h e

h i s t o r y o f K h u z e s t a n ) , Tehran 1312/1933» r e p r i n t e d

1325/1946 and 1333/1954.

5. Paydayesh-e America (The d i s c o v e r y o f A m e r i c a ) , Tehran

1324/1946.

6. Karnamak-e A r d a s h l r - e Bahakan (The P a h l a v i Romance of

Ar da s h i r ) ; Tehran 1324/1945.

7» Ttejikh-e Blashruteh-ye I r a n ( H i s t o r y o f t h e I r a n i a n

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Movement), Tctoan 1340/19G1. Sop^Cm^f^ r

 33

8. Tarikh-e he .1dah-saleh-.ve i&zarbki .lian (Eighteen years

of the h i s t o r y of A z a r b a i j a n ) , Tehran 13t|0/lQ6lw ih/i/atjfgj

Shahr i a r an- e Qomnarn-

Main Contents. K a s r a v i ' s d i f f i c u l t i e s and aims.

K a s r a v i begins t h i s book by t r y i n g to e x p l a i n the Arab

domination of I r a n , which l a s t e d about two centuries after
the Arab conquest* I r a n i a n r u l e r s then appeared on the
scene and g r a d u a l l y drove the Arabs out of I r a n . I t was
not u n t i l the middle of the f o u r t h century A.H. (10th century
A.D.) t h a t the I r a n i a n s completely e x p e l l e d the Arabs, who
were never again able to send governors to I r a n from Baghdad.
K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t the Arabs introduced the I r a n i a n f e u d a l
system, which continued without much m o d i f i c a t i o n u n t i l the
Safavid period. I n I r a n ' s h i s t o r y one can o f t e n f i n d ten
k i n g s a t one time i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t s of the country, a l l
f i g h t i n g with each other. Feudalism was thus one of the
many reasons f o r I r a n ' s weakness. As K a s r a v i remarks,
I r a n ' s h i s t o r y a f t e r I s l a m i s o f t e n a mystery, because
nothing i s known about many of the r u l e r s , and none of the
h i s t o r y books, w r i t t e n e i t h e r i n Arabic or i n P e r s i a n , r e c o r d
a l l t h e i r names. The only author who had p r e v i o u s l y w r i t t e n
about the p a r t i c u l a r r u l e r s s t u d i e d by K a s r a v i i n t h i s book

1. Shahriaran-e Gomnam. Tehran 1307/1928. I n t r o d u c t i o n v o l . 1 .

2. Ibid.
 34

was K h a l i f e h Aydi Beg who l i v e d during t h e S a f a v i d p e r i o d

and l e f t a h i s t o r i c a l l y v a l u a b l e r e c o r d ; K a s r a v i mentions
t h a t he had s c a r c e l y any other source f o r w r i t i n g "Unknown
R u l e r s " , which i s i n t h r e e p a r t s . N e v e r t h e l e s s he d i d a
great d e a l of r e s e a r c h t o f i n d out a l l he could about these
r u l e r s . H i s purpose was to supplement t h e works and n o t e s
of other h i s t o r i a n s o r o r i e n t a l i s t s . I n t h e f i r s t p a r t he
speaks about t h r e e d y n a s t i e s , the J u s t a n i d s , Konkorids and
S a l a r i d s ; i n t h e second p a r t about t h e B a w a d l d s o f
A z e r b a i j a n , and i n t h e t h i r d about the Shaddadids o f A r r a n .
The w r i t i n g of t h i s book caused K a s r a v i immense d i f f i c u l t y .
I n i t he has brought t o l i g h t an important p a r t of t h e
h i s t o r y o f northern and north-western I r a n . He h i m s e l f
admitted t h a t t h e r e may be some mistakes i n t h i s bookf but
i t s value h a s been recognized by s c h o l a r s such a s Vladimir
Minorsky and 8 a ' i d N a f i s i . K a s r a v i observes t h a t although
the Arabs a t the h e i g h t of t h e i r powers were able to expand
and advance a s f a r a s F r a n c e , they could not subdue t h e
I r a n i a n peasants i n t h e Daylam a r e a . May be nature helped
the Daylamis t o keep out Invaders; y e t i t was not only t h e
geography o f t h a t a r e a which helped those peasants, but
a l s o t h e i r own courage and f o r t i t u d e . Manliness was one
of the w e l l known c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e people of Daylam.

1. Shahrlaran-e Qomnam. v o l . 1 , I n t r o d u c t i o n . <_,, r 'J.'^-^-^r)

 35

U n f o r t u n a t e l y none of the h i s t o r y hooks t e l l us much about

them* K a s r a v i t r i e d to g a i n some idea of them from the
w r i t i n g s of Arab p o e t s . He gives a p i c t u r e of the enmity
between the Day lamia and the Moslem Arabs. A f t e r t h r e e
hundred y e a r s the Daylamis gave up t h e i r o l d r e l i g i o n , but
defeated the Arabs and even conquered I r a q and Baghdad,
f o r c i n g the C a l i p h to obey them. Another i n t e r e s t i n g s u b j e c t
d i s c u s s e d by K a s r a v i i s t h a t of Arab immigration t o I r a n .
He p o i n t s out t h a t because of the poverty of A r a b i a , Arabs
emigrated i n t o a l l the neighbouring c o u n t r i e s , such as S y r i a ,
I r a q and I r a n . Indeed Arabs had come to I r a n before I s l a m ,
which only appeared i n the l a s t y e a r s of the S a s a n i d dynasty,
and had even accepted Z o r o s t r i a n i s m a f t e r coming to I r a n .
At the same time the S a s a n i d s had always t r i e d to prevent
or r e s t r i c t Arab immigration, because i f i t had not been
checked the Arabs might w i t h i n a short time have overrun and
gained c o n t r o l of I r a n i a n t e r r i t o r i e s such as I r a q , F a r e and
Khuzestan. S i n c e the Arabs were nomads and not v e r y c i v i -
l i z e d , they were considered a great t h r e a t t o I r a n ' s peace
and l i b e r t y . For y e a r s the I r a n i a n k i n g s maintained a s t r o n g
p o s i t i o n , u n t i l the time when the Arabs embraced I s l a m . The
Prophet Mohammad announced i n Madinah t h a t i f the Arabs
accepted h i s t e a c h i n g , S y r i a and I r a n would be t h e i r s . T h i s
aroused the Arab's enthusiasm, and they s e t out t o conquer
 36

other c o u n t r i e s . As the A r a b i c c h r o n i c l e s show, when they

came t o I r a n they not only spread the new r e l i g i o n but alBO
s e t t l e d i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t s o f the country. A z e r b a i j a n was
one of the p r o v i n c e s which a t t r a c t e d the Arabs, who were
extremely powerful i n the e a r l y days o f I s l a m . One o f the
Arab r u l e r s i n A z e r b a i j a n was R a w a d A z a d i , whose sons
r u l e d T a b r i z and e v e n t u a l l y brought a l l the A z a r b a i j a n i s
under t h e i r c o n t r o l . K a s r a v i wrote about the R a w a d i d s i n
the second volume o f Shahriaran-e Gomnam. and produced
evidence t h a t by o r i g i n these r u l e r s were Arabs. T h e i r
dynasty continued t o r u l e p a r t o f Azarbiaijan u n t i l t h e
Mongol i n v a s i o n .

The reader gets the impression t h a t not only i s K a s r a v i

a r e l i a b l e and a c c u r a t e h i s t o r i a n but a l s o t h a t he has a
remarkable g i f t o f b r i n g i n g scenes from the d i s t a n t p a s t t o
life. No other contemporary I r a n i a n s c h o l a r would have spent
so much time and e f f o r t i n r e s e a r c h about these h i t h e r t o
unknown r u l e r s who were i n d i r e c t l y so i n f l u e n t i a l i n I r a n ' s
history.

The l a t e P r o f e s s o r V l a d i m i r Minorsky p r a i s e d Shahriaran-e

' 1
Gomnam i n h i s a r t i c l e Daylam i n the Encyclopaedia of I s l a m ,

and r e f e r r e d i n one o f h i s a r t i c l e s t o K a s r a v i ' s remark t h a t

when the Moslem Arabs had reached a s f a r a s the r i v e r L o i r e

1 . V. ISinorsky, a r t i c l e Daylam i n Encyclopaedia o f I s l a m .
2nd ed., L e i d e n 1965, p.194.
 37

i n northeta. Prance, the Daylamites were s t i l l r e s i s t i n g i n

the mountains o f n o r t h e r n I r a n . K a s r a v i was a l s o p r a i s e d

2
f o r Shahriaran-e Gomnia'm by Vahid D a s t g a r d i , t h e founder

and e d i t o r of Armaghan, which was the foremost learned

p e r i o d i c a l i n I r a n between 1919 and 1944. Harold Bowen,

i n a review of K a s r a v i ' s hook " U n k n o w n - R u l e r s , s a y s t h a t

K a s r a v i had e v i d e n t l y expended, great p a i n s on r e s e a r c h , and

had i n g e n i o u s l y combined the r e s u l t s i n t o a c l e a r and p e r -

suasive n a r r a t i v e .

The two volumes of the book a r e supplemented by u s e f u l

genealogical t a b l e s . I n t h i s book K a s r a v i acknowledges t h a t

he was h e l p e d i n h i s r e s e a r c h by the works of European

o r i e n t a l i s t s , but does not r e f r a i n from e x p l i c i t l y criti-

c i z i n g European o r i e n t a l i s t s . As Bowen remarks, "The present

strong n a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g o f P e r s i a i s r e f l e c t e d not only in.

the author's aims but a l s o i n h i s s t y l e ; he has m e t i c u l o u s l y

c l e a n s e d h i s vocabulary of a l l but i n d i s p e n s a b l e A r a b i c words,

but without ( s o Bowen s a y s ) any unpleasing e f f e c t of s t r a i n . "

Although K a s r a v i expresses h i m s e l f d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h the;

production o f t h i s book (he was even obliged t o change,

p r i n t i n g - p r e s s e s mid-way), m i s p r i n t s a r e not n o t i c e a b l e .

1. V. Minorsky, a r t i c l e L a domination des Daylamites. i n

I r a n i c a . Tehran 1964, p . 2 7 ( U n i v e r s i t y o f Tehran P u b l i -
c a t i o n s , No.775)•
2.. V. Dastgardi, i n Armaghan, year 10 (1308/1939)» v o l . 4 ,
pp 2144-245.
3 . Harold Bowen, Review of The Forgotten R u l e r s by K a s r a v i ,
J . R. A. S., 1929, PP 664-665.
 38

Plutarch's Lives.

T h i s was K a s r a v i ' s f a v o u r i t e hook. He c o n s i d e r e d t h i s

1 ; 2
work of P l u t a r c h , and a l s o the h i s t o r y of Herodotus, both
very trustworthy. H i s t o r y , a s K a s r a v i observes, i s one of

the most ancient of human i n t e r e s t s , and f o r c e n t u r i e s

knowledge of h i s t o r i c a l events was passed on from generation

t o generation by word of mouth only, with the r e s u l t t h a t

h i s t o r y a c q u i r e d something of a f a i r y t a l e appearance.
Kings sometimes recorded h i s t o r i c a l events i n i n s c r i p t i o n s

on 8tone or wood, which a l s o could not be trustworthy

because i t i s not p o s s i b l e t o t e l l the whole s t o r y i n an

inscription. Historiography only began t o progress when

people found out how t o w r i t e on paper or parchment. The

Greeks made great advances i n h i s t o r i o g r a p h y . Not v e r y much

would be known about I r a n ' s h i s t o r y before I s l a m were i t not

f o r the information recorded by Greek h i s t o r i a n s .

K a s r a v i seeB the f o l l o w i n g s p e c i a l m e r i t s i n P l u t a r c h ' s

Lives:
•5

1. Plutarch i s a knowledgeable and o b j e c t i v e w r i t e r .

2. He i s never unreasonable i n h i s p a t r i o t i s m and i s ready
to p r a i s e even enemies o f h i s n a t i o n i f they deserve admira-
t i o n ; f o r example he sometimes p r a i s e s I r a n i a n k i n g s .
3* H i s s t y l e i s remarkably s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d and s i m p l e , w i t h
1. 1 s t century A.D.
2. 5 t h century B.C.
3 . Tarikh-e Plutarch. p.7«
 39

v e r y few ponderous sentences.

P l u t a r c h ' s L i v e s nave been t r a n s l a t e d i n t o most l i v i n g
languages, and a r e everywhere acknowledged to he a great
h i s t o r i c a l and e t h i c a l work, Kasravi translated i t into
P e r s i a n , not from the o r i g i n a l language Greek, h u t from
1
English.

Shaykh S a f i v a Tabar-ash

Another remarkable book which K a s r a v i produced i s

e n t i t l e d Shavkh S a f i v a Tabfrr-ash (Shaykh S a f i and h i s

origin). K a s r a v i ' s b a s i c purpose i s t o show t h a t t h e

S a f a v i d k i n g s were not sayyeds ( i . e . descendant of t h e

Prophet through * A l i and Patemeh), and t h a t t h e i r a n c e s t o r

Shaykh S a f i (1252-1334) was not a S h l ' i t e . I n t h i s book

2
Kasravi r e c o g n i z e s t h a t some o f the S a f a v i d k i n g s such a s

Shah E s m a ' i l (1500-1524) and Shah 'Abbas I (1588-1529) were

most e f f i c i e n t r u l e r s who changed I r a n ' s e n t i r e p o s i t i o n .

Contemporary h i s t o r i a n s o f the S a f a v i d dynasty always t r i e d

to t r a c e t h e i r descent t o the seventh Emam, Musa Kazem, and

thus t o the Prophet. The h i s t o r i a n Eskandar Beg, who wrote

the *iAlam-ara-ye 'Abbas! ( h i s t o r y of Shah 'Abbas I ) i n 1616,

i s p a r t i c u l a r l y i n s i s t e n t about t h i s h o l y S a f a v i d genealogy.

K a s r a v i ^ p o i n t s out t h a t one must a p p r e c i a t e how n e c e s s a r y

1. P l u t a r c h ' s L i v e s was t r a n s l a t e d i n t o E n g l i s h by Arthur
H. Clough.
2 . Shaykh S a f i v a Tabar-ash. 1323/1944, p.3.
3. Ibid.ip.4.
 ho

the t i t l e say.ved was f o r the p r e s t i g e of the S a f a v i d k i n g s .

He quotes t e x t u a l evidence showing t h a t Shaykh S a f i , i n s p i t e

of the c l a i m s of l a t e r h i s t o r i a n s , d i d not i n f a c t l i v e a s a

sa.yyed, and t h a t only a f t e r h i s death i n 133^ d i d h i s son

Shaykh Sadr o l - D i n (1305-1393) usurp t h i s t i t l e . Kasravi 1

showB t h a t during the two hundred y e a r s between Shaykh Safi

and Shah E s m a ' i l , the S a f a v i d f a m i l y , who were t h e s p i r i t u a l

heads of a s u f i order (tarjqat). adopted t h r e e important

change s i
2
1. Shaykh S a f i was not a sayyed by o r i g i n , hut h i s
descendants usurped t h i s title.
2. Shaykh S a f i was a S u n n i t e , but i n the 15th century A.D.
his descendants, and i n p a r t i c u l a r Shah E s m a ' i l , went over
4
to Shi ism.
3. Shaykh S a f i spoke P e r s i a n , but h i s descendants chose
to speak T u r k i s h .
K a s r a v i p o i n t s out t h a t the only remaining h i s t o r y o f
the S a f a v i d s w r i t t e n before they came t o t h e throne i s t h e
«3 *
Safvat ol-Safa w r i t t e n a t an unknown date by Ebn Bazzaz
Ardabili. T h i s book was a l t e r e d during the c e n t u r i e s , and
Shah Tahmasb i n s t r u c t e d Mir Abu'l-Path t o make a c o r r e c t e d
v e r s i o n of i t . * * Other h i s t o r i a n s alsoteiat to prove t h a t t h e
1. Shaykh S a f i v a Tabar-ash. p.ii-.
2. I b i d .
3« I b i d . , p.5.
h. I b i d . , p . 3 1 -
Safavidswere sayyeds t such as t h e Hahih o l - S j y a r w r i t t e n i n

1523 by Khwandamir, 'Alam-*iara-ye 'Abbasl by Eskandar Beg,

Lobb o l - T a v a r i k h by Mir Yahya Q a z v i n i , and S e l s e l a t ol-Nasab

by Shaykh Hosayn Gilfeni ( w r i t t e n about 1 6 6 0 ) . Kasravi criti-

cizes a l l these works, demonstrates t h e i r e r r o r s and

exaggerations, and g i v e s reasons f o r h i s arguments. It is

not p o s s i b l e i n t h e l i m i t e d space of t h i s t h e s i s t o go

f u r t h e r i n t o the d e t a i l s of t h i s i n t e r e s t i n g book.

Tbrikh-e Mosha'Bha'ian ya
Pansad-saleh-ye Khuzestan

T h i s i s one of t h e most important h i s t o r i c a l works

w r i t t e n by K a s r a v i . I t i s an o r i g i n a l work, not t r a n s l a t e d
2
nor taken from any other book. Kasravi d i d a l l the r e s e a r c h
h i m s e l f and t r i e d hard t o c o l l e c t m a t e r i a l from v a r i o u s
sources. He covers t h e f i v e c e n t u r i e s up t o A.D. 1925* and
shows how Arab t r i b e s came t o Khuzestan i n t h e l a t e r middle
ages. He says much about the Mosha*sha'i and K a ' b i (Bani
Ka'h) t r i b e s , which were unknown t o h i s t o r i a n s and o r i e n t a -
l i s t s before K a s r a v i . The book thus c o n t a i n s a great d e a l
of p r e v i o u s l y u n a v a i l a b l e information, and from t h i s point
of view can undoubtedly be considered one o f the most
1 • Shaykh S a f i v a Tabar-ash. pp 3 0 - 3 2 .
2 . K a s r a v i ^ g a t h e r e d h i s information from a. few books, i n c l u d i n g
( 1 ) Ketab-e Sayyed ' A l i , ( 2 ) Mesv^d4eha-ye J a v a h e r i ,
(3) Takmelat ol-Akhbar. by ' A l i ebn Bto'men, (h) Zad o l -
Mosafer by Shaykh F a t h o l l a h • <>~£fcv ^ty^ic-o -^u^^^/TA^ZO^ t*^
 h2

important I r a n i a n h i s t o r i c a l works of recent y e a r s .

The founder o f Mosha'sha'is was a man c a l l e d Sayyed

Mahdi, who introduced h i m s e l f t o the people a s a mahdl

( d i v i n e l y guided p e r s o n ) . Kasravi considers that t h i s

t r i b a l dynasty l a s t e d long because o f i t s r e l i g i o u s I n f l u e n c e

i n Khuzestan. During the S a f a v i d p e r i o d these Arab c h i e f s

were e s p e c i a l l y i n f l u e n t i a l and powerful. The people were

v e r y a t t r a c t e d t o Shi'ism, which the S a f a v i d k i n g s e s t a b -

l i s h e d a s t h e s t a t e r e l i g i o n of I r a n . S i n c e the Mosha'sha'i

t r i b e was organized on a r e l i g i o u s b a s i s , and s i n c e i t s

l e a d e r s claimed descent from the Emam ' A l i and pretended t o

be ardent S h i ' i t e s , they were able t o maintain a s t r o n g

p o s i t i o n a s h e r e d i t a r y governors o f Khuzestan f o r a long
2
time. I n f a c t none of the S a f a v i d k i n g s could d r i v e them

out of Khuzestan, or even reduce t h e i r i n f l u e n c e i n t h a t

area. Moreover t h e S a f a v i d s were confronted by a powerful

enemy, the Ottoman T u r k s , and i f a t any time they had wanted

to subdue t h i s t r i b e , undoubtedly the Mosha'sha'is^ c o u l d

have j o i n e d the Ottomans. When t h e Afghans r e b e l l e d and

overthrew the S a f a v i d s , the Mosha'sha'is took t h e opportunity

to weaken the c e n t r a l government's I n f l u e n c e i n Khuzestan.

1• Mosha'sha'ian, pp 12-20.
2. Ibid.,p.50.
3* Even Shah 'Abbas the Great had not been a b l e t o subdue
them because he d i d not want t o l e t them j o i n I r a n ' s
c h i e f enemy the Ottoman T u r k s .
 43

I r a n had p r e v i o u s l y been r u l e d by one of the weakest S a f a v i d

k i n g s , Shah S o l t a n Hosayn, who was very much attached to
the Mosha'sha'is and g r e a t l y respected their!. leaders. T h i s
Shah's mistaken ideas and p o l i c i e s p a r t l y e x p l a i n why the
I r a n i a n s f a i l e d to defend themselves and were defeated.
K a B r a v i t h i n k s t h a t these t r i b e s d i d great harm and have
been r e s p o n s i b l e f o r Khuzestan's backwardness. Of course
i t must not be f o r g o t t e n t h a t I r a n d i d not have strong and
s t a b l e government i n those days. A government w i t h enough
power t o c o n t r o l a l l p a r t s of the country was r a r e . In
eweiy.pa^t cf J2 ah-thei :e wase l o c a l potentates who were supposed
, v

to obey the c e n t r a l government's orders, but seldom or never

d i d so. Consequently there was never n a t i o n a l u n i t y through-
out I r a n a t any time before the r e i g n of Rezfe Shah. T h i s
book shows how very s u p e r s t i t i o u s I r a n i a n s were before the
C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n , interweaving r e a l i t i e s w i t h
r e l i g i o u s ideas i n such a way t h a t there was no d i s c r i m i n a -
t i o n between r e a l i t y and f a n t a s y . The r e l i g i o u s i n f l u e n c e
i n p o l i t i c s was a t i t s height i n the S a f a v i d p e r i o d , and the
s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l l i f e of the n a t i o n s u f f e r e d g r e a t l y
because of i t . The Mosha'sha'i t r i b e kept t h e i r power i n
Khuzestan only because the mass of the I r a n i a n people were

1 . Mosha'sha'ian. p.88.
so Ignorant t h a t i t was almost impossible t o u n i t e them.

T h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s continued u n t i l Reza Khan, l a t e r Reza

Shah, was able t o get r i d of the l a s t Mosha'sha'i r u l e r

Shaykh Khaz'al i n 1925 • T h i s book does not go i n t o many

d e t a i l s of the h i s t o r y of Khuzestan, as K a s r a v i could f i n d

only very few sources of information; but i t g i v e s a valuable;?

o u t l i n e of the main h i s t o r i c a l developments i n the province

from around 1425 t o 1925• L i k e other works of K a s r a v i , i t i s

w r i t t e n i n a very simple s t y l e w i t h few A r a b i c words.

2
Dr. Laurence Lockhart i n h i s book on the f a l l o f t h e
S a f a v i d dynasty says t h a t among the o r i g i n a l h i s t o r y books
which may be consulted t o advantage i s K a s r a v i ' s T a r i k h - e
Bansad Saleh-ve Khuzestan. He adds t h a t i t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y
v a l u a b l e i n e l u c i d a t i n g the tangled h i s t o r y of t h e great
Mosha'sha* f a m i l y , and f o r what t h e author h a s to s a y about
the I r a n i a n occupation of B a s r a .
' 3
Paydayesh-e America.
The d i s c o v e r y of America marked t h e beginning of a new

e r a and i s regarded by h i s t o r i a n s a s one of t h e g r e a t e s t

events i n t h e h i s t o r y of c i v i l i z a t i o n . Before K a s r a v i ' s

work there was no book on t h i s s u b j e c t i n P e r s i a n , except

1. Mosha'sha'ian. p.123.
2 . Laurence Lockhart, The F a l l of the S a f a v i d Dynasty and the
Afghan Occupation of P e r s i a . Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ,
1958, p.515.
3 . Paydayesh-e America. Tehran 1325/1946.
 h5

a v e r y short booklet t r a n s l a t e d by Mohammad Ahmad Khan

Bahador from E n g l i s h t o P e r s i a n and published a t C a l c u t t a .
T h i s booklet i s j u s t a d e s c r i p t i o n of Columbus' journeys,
of which I r a n i a n s already had some i d e a before i t was
published. For y e a r s K a s r a v i ' s ambition was t o produce a
book on t h i s s u b j e c t . He t h e r e f o r e began to w r i t e a r t i c l e s
on i t i n s u c c e s s i v e i s s u e s of h i s newspaper Parcham.
K a s r a v i ' 8 sources were two books, both by unknown authors,
one of which had been t r a n s l a t e d i n t o T u r k i s h by a c e r t a i n
' A l l Reza, and the other i n French p u b l i s h e d a t P a r i s .
K a s r a v i thought t h a t the T u r k i s h book was the b e t t e r of
the two. A lady named Mrs. N a z i f l helped K a s r a v i i n t r a n s -
l a t i n g the French book. These a r t i c l e s were f r e q u e n t l y
published i n j g ^ y ^ a n - L a t e r K a s r a v i thought t h a t he could
use t h i s c o l l e c t i o n of m a t e r i a l f o r a book. After h i s
r e s i g n a t i o n from the M i n i s t r y of J u s t i c e , as he hated to be
l a z y and had to do something to earn h i s l i v i n g , he wrote
the book although he was i n poor h e a l t h . Kasravi used to
say t h a t u s e f u l books ought to be spread a l l over the country.

A newspaper named A l e f Ba commented on Payda.vesh.-e

America as f o l l o w s :

" I r a n i a n s have long had f r i e n d l y r e l a t i o n s with America.

T h i s f r i e n d s h i p has s c a r c e l y ever been broken. I f any kind

1 • Paydayesh-e America, pp 5-6»

 he

of misunderstanding has a r i s e n between these two n a t i o n s ,

Americans must not t h i n k that i t has been due to enmity or

h o s t i l i t y ; i t may w e l l have been caused by the f o r e i g n

p o l i c i e s of other n a t i o n s . Americans have been most h e l p -

f u l towards our country. They founded s c h o o l s , h o s p i t a l s

e t c . , and a f t e r the second world war they defended I r a n ' s

r i g h t s i n the U.N.O. I t w i l l be w e l l worth while i f

I r a n i a n s pay more a t t e n t i o n to t h i s f r i e n d l y country's

h i s t o r y and l e a r n more about i t s p o l i t i c a l and social

1
structure. K a s r a v i ' s book "The Discovery of America' will

undoubtedly be a good source of information f o r them. In

h i s impressive s t y l e of w r i t i n g he c a r e f u l l y d e s c r i b e s

almost a l l the phases of t h i s great country's discovery.

As he h i m s e l f mentions i n h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n , the d i s c o v e r y

of America was one of the g r e a t e s t turning p o i n t s and opened

a new chapter i n the h i s t o r y of mankind."

Karnamak-e Ardashir-e Babakan

One of K a s r a v i ' s greatest-achievements as a s c h o l a r and

h i s t o r i a n i s h i s t r a n s l a t i o n of the Karnamak-e A r d a s h i r - e

Babakan (Romance of A r d a s h i r Papakan, the f i r s t Sasanid Shah

who reigned A.D. 226-241) from o r i g i n a l P a h l a v i i n t o modern

Persian. T h i s i s one of the v e r y few s u r v i v i n g P a h l a v i t e x t s

which d e a l s w i t h I r a n ' s a n c i e n t h i s t o r y , and i t s importance

 hi

as such has been recognized by the world's foremost s c h o l a r s

1
and h i s t o r i a n s . I t i s the only P a h l a v i source which g i v e s
an idea of the g l o r y o f the I r a n i a n Empire i n S a s a n i d time.
During the 'Abbasid c a l i p h a t e i t was t r a n s l a t e d * * o A r a b i c ,
I t i s a romance c o n t a i n i n g s e v e r a l i n t e r e s t i n g and amusing
s t o r i e s about A r d a s h i r ' s l i f e and h i s s t r u g g l e f o r the throne.
K a s r a v i ' s t r a n s l a t i o n i s good proof o f h i s p r o f i c e n c y i n
the P a h l a v i language. Although t h i s book i s not v e r y t r u s t -
worthy as h i s t o r y , i n p a r t because through the c e n t u r i e s i t
has d e f i n i t e l y been a l t e r e d , i t i s the only r e l e v a n t source
l e f t from the many P a h l a v i books which were destroyed or l o s t

i n the p e r i o d a f t e r the Arab conquest.

'2 _
I n an a r t i c l e i n Armaghan , the w r i t e r , Dr. Kasemi,
expresses great admiration f o r K a s r a v i ' s t r a n s l a t i o n of the
Karnamak-e Ardashir-e Babakan. and f o r h i s a b i l i t y t o give
a c c u r a t e and p r e c i s e information. He says t h a t he cannot
adequately describe the impression which t h i s book made on
him. On the whole, he t h i n k s , K a s r a v i i s a great s c h o l a r w i t h
an immense a b i l i t y f o r doing profound r e s e a r c h . Besides
g i v i n g information about h i s t o r i c a l events, K a s r a v i ' s h i s t o r y

books a r e w r i t t e n i n a very simple s t y l e . Iran's history

1. e.g. Th. NCldeke who t r a n s l a t e d i t i n t o German, E.G. Browne,

and A. C h r i s t e n s e n . E . G. Browne, L i t e r a r y H i s t o r y o f
P e r s i a , v o l . I , pp 137-151.
2. Dr. Kasemi i n Armaghan. year 10 (1308/1939) v o l . U, pp 236-
2hh.
during the Sasanid p e r i o d i s very l a r g e l y undiscovered,
because there a r e simply not enough sources from which t o
obtain information. Fortunately Kasravi's proficiency i n
the P a h l a v i language a s w e l l as f o r e i g n languages such a s
A r a b i c , Armenian and E n g l i s h , has enabled him t o achieve
remarkable s u c c e s s i n t h i s f i e l d o f h i s t o r y .

T a r i k h - e Maahruteh-ye I r a n
Tarikh-e hejdah-saleh-ye A z a r b a i j a n

The most important h i s t o r i c a l work w r i t t e n by K a s r a v i

i s h i s h i s t o r y o f the I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n a l movement. This
i s h i s masterpiece, and a l s o t h e most d e t a i l e d and c a r e f u l
work y e t w r i t t e n on t h i s s u b j e c t * I t c o n s i s t s of two volumes,
and as T a b r i z was the c e n t r e of the r e v o l u t i o n , K a s r a v i
c a l l e d the second volume "Eighteen y e a r s of the h i s t o r y of
Azerbaijan." H i s work i s p a r t i c u l a r l y v a l u a b l e because he
t r i e d to f i n d out about o r d i n a r y , common people who s u f f e r e d
during the r e v o l u t i o n , one of h i s aims being t o inform h i s
readers about the s a c r i f i c e s made by ordinary I r a n i a n s i n
t h i s struggle. K a s r a v i l i s t s a few reasons which l e d him
to w r i t e t h i s book.

1. T h i r t y y e a r s a f t e r the r e v o l u t i o n , nobody e l s e had shown

i n t e r e s t i n w r i t i n g about i t ; so, r e a l i z i n g i t s .
importance, he undertook t h i s work.^
1 • Tarikh-e Mash.ruteh-ye I r a n , pp 3-5.
 49

2. The r e v o l u t i o n s t a r t e d i n a simple and v e r y genuine

way, and ended i n h u m i l i a t i o n . T h i s i s t h e u s u a l out-
come of every great event. Ignorant persons always
Remember t h e powerful f i g u r e s , hut soon f o r g e t t h e r o l e
of the common people. K a s r a v i says t h a t h i s aim i n

t h i s hook was t o r e v e a l t h i s and t o speak about t h e i r

1
great sacrifices.
3. The I r a n i a n s were very confused i n those days, and
the r e v o l u t i o n made the s i t u a t i o n worse f o r them. The
d e s i r e t o c l e a r up t h i s confusion was one of t h e
motives which encouraged K a s r a v i t o w r i t e t h e book.
4. I n t h i s great r e v o l u t i o n , the poor people t o i l e d t o
gain l i b e r t y , while the f r u i t s of t h e i r s t r u g g l e went
to t h e important f a m i l i e s and higher c l a s s e s of s o c i e t y .
5. Although most of the I r a n i a n and f o r e i g n p r e s s
reported the events of the r e v o l u t i o n , they were not
honest enough t o give a l l the f a c t s and p a i n t a t r u e
picture. K a s r a v i t h e r e f o r e thought i t e s s e n t i a l t o
produce a trustworthy study.
6. One of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the I r a n i a n s i s t h a t
they f o r g e t everything soon. Those who e a t the sweet
f r u i t of l i b e r t y today ought t o r e a l i z e how t h e i r
2
f o r e f a t h e r s s u f f e r e d to win t h a t l i b e r t y . The w r i t i n g
f I

1 • Tarikh-e Mashruteh-ye I r a n . p . 3 »
2 . Ibid.» p.5.
 50

of a h i s t o r y of the O o n s t i t u t i o n a l movement was t h e r e -

f o r e n e c e s s a r y from many p o i n t s of view.
I n the f o l l o w i n g pages K a s r a v i ' s account of important
f e a t u r e s of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n and h i s i d e a s about
i t s causes and e v o l u t i o n w i l l be b r i e f l y summarized. K a s r a v i '
i s convinced t h a t even a f t e r the time of Nader Shah (mid 18th
c e n t u r y ) I r a n was s t i l l considered to be one of the g r e a t e s t
empires i n A s i a . Although Karim Khan Zand and h i s s u c c e s s o r s
could not add to I r a n ' s g l o r y , they d i d not lower the
country's r e p u t a t i o n . K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t the Q a j a r k i n g s
r u i n e d the country's economy through t h e i r commercial
p o l i c i e s , and g e n e r a l l y kept I r a n poor and Ignorant. At
t h a t time other c o u n t r i e s were p r o g r e s s i n g r a p i d l y , and great
events such as the Frenchr r e v o l u t i o n , the development of
s c i e n c e , and profound s o c i a l changes were t a k i n g p l a c e . The
Q a j a r k i n g s were ignorant and v i r t u a l l y unaware of the changes
going on i n the world. E a r l y i n Naser o l - D l n Shah's r e i g n
(181+8-1896), when I r a n was threatened by two powerful enemies,
the B r i t i s h i n the south and the R u s s i a n s i n the n o r t h , the
p o s i t i o n of Ohief M i n i s t e r was given to a great and wise

p a t r i o t , Mirza T a q i Khan Amir-e K a b i r , who was a self-made

h.
man. H i s t o r y r e c o g n i z e s him as a v e r y remarkable stateman.

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p..7».
2. I b i d . , pp 7-8.
3» I b l d . i n.7.
h. Ibid.
 1
5
While he h e l d the p o s i t i o n of C h i e f M i n i s t e r , he t r i e d t o
get r i d of the main o b s t a c l e s t o reform and attempted to

remedy I r a n ' s backwardness. He d i d not long hold office,

having gained many enemies who made t h i n g s d i f f i c u l t f o r him.

E v e n t u a l l y he was dismissed, and (on January 3, 1852^ put t o

1
death. I n Kasravi's opinion i t i s obvious t h a t Naser o l - D i n

Shah was not i n t e r e s t e d i n improving the country, or r e a l l y

concerned about I r a n ' s f u t u r e . The I r a n i a n people, however,

g r a d u a l l y became aware o f the advanced way o f l i v i n g i n

other c o u n t r i e s , and t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l c l a s s e s began to t a l k

about the need f o r change i n I r a n . Naser o l - D i n Shah
n a t u r a l l y got t o know of t h e i r aims and wishes, and although

he h i m s e l f d i d not want any change, he was o b l i g e d t o accept

i t up t o a c e r t a i n p o i n t . He summoned the I r a n i a n ambassador

i n I s t a n b u l , Mirza Hoseyn Khan S e p a h s a l a r , and made him
2
M i n i s t e r of J u s t i c e and l a t e r (1872-1873) °hief M i n i s t e r .
T h i s remarkable man was w e l l informed about t h e progress of
the European c o u n t r i e s i n a l l aspects of l i f e , and an admirer
of the reforms (Tanzimat) i n the Ottoman Empire. He decided

to organize t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n on t h e same l i n e s a s i n other

3
countries. He was t h e founder of t h e modern m i n i s t r i e s i n

Iran. T h e i r number was n i n e , a s f o l l o w s :

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh-ve I r a n , p.8.
2. He became M i n i s t e r of J u s t i c e i n 1871*
3. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh-ye I r a n , p.8.
 52

1 - M i n i s t r y of I n t e r n a l A f f a i r s (Omur-e Dakheleh).
1

2 - M i n i s t r y of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s (Omur-e Khiare.leh).

3 - M i n i s t r y of War (Jang).

h - M i n i s t r y of Finance (fflilieh).

5 - M i n i s t r y of J u s t i c e ('Adlieh).

6 - M i n i s t r y of Education COlum).

7 - M i n i s t r y of I n d u s t r y and Trade (Sena'at va Te.ltetrat).

8 - M i n i s t r y of P u b l i c Works (FavaVed-e 'iAmmeh).

9 - M i n i s t r y of Court ( D a r b a r ) .

Sepahsalar a l s o persuaded the Shah to v i s i t Europe i n

1873 and see f o r h i m s e l f the advanced European way of l i v i n g .

Naser o l - D i n Shah made a second journey to Europe i n the

2
l a t e r p a r t of 1878, and a t h i r d i n 1889. From 1885 t o 1897

Mirz£ ' A l i Asghar Khan Amin o l - S o l t a n was the C h i e f M i n i s t e r ,

and i n 1889 he accompanied the Shah on h i s t h i r d journey.

These v i s i t s , i n s t e a d of opening the Shah's eyes and making

him aware of the need f o r reform, c a t e r e d more f o r the Shah's

p e r s o n a l amusement; b u t , a s has been mentioned b e f o r e , the

people were t a k i n g more i n t e r e s t i n the country's affairs

and were a l s o t r y i n g t o f i n d out what was going on.

During t h i s time t h e r e appeared a few broad-minded men

of great a b i l i t y , who aimed to open the people's eyes and

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.8.
2. I b i d . j p.10.
 53

show them the p r i m i t i v e s t a t e of I r a n i a n s o c i e t y . Among

1 * * '
them was Mirza Malkom Khan, an Armenian from Esfahan who

l a t e r became a Moslem; he was an outstanding w r i t e r and

r e f o r m i s t , and was p a r t i c u l a r l y opposed to the numerous

concessions which the government gave to f o r e i g n companies.

2
Another remarkable f i g u r e w a s Sayyed Jamal ol-Din Asadabadi,

whose sermons i n the mosque aroused the I r a n i a n masses and

prepared them f o r r e v o l u t i o n . F o r e i g n companies gained many

concessions during the r e i g n of Naser o l - D i n Shah. For

example, a B r i t i s h company obtained i n 1887 the promise of

a c o n c e s s i o n to b u i l d a r a i l w a y between Bushehrand G i l a n ,

but was not able to proceed with t h i s p r o j e c t . Another

' 3
important concession was the tobacco "Regie" or monopoly.

I n 1890 the government c o n f e r r e d on a B r i t i s h company the

monopoly of s e l l i n g tobacco throughout I r a n and abroad.

T h i s caused an uproar amongst the people, e s p e c i a l l y a t

T a b r i z and a l s o at Esfahan and Tehran; but the Shah was

not i n f l u e n c e d by p u b l i c opinion. L a t e r Mirzfe Mohammad

Hasan S h i r a z i , a great r e l i g i o u s 1 eaderfcio.1tahed) of those

days, who r e s i d e d a t Siamarra i n Ottoman t e r r i t o r y and was

» 9
1 • K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t Mirza Malkom Khan belonged to t h e
Freemasons, because a l l h i s w r i t i n g s give t h i s impression.
2. A l s o c a l l e d Afghani; the w e l l known r e f o r m i s t and Pan-
I s l a m i s t preacher (1838/9-1897)• He v i s i t e d I r a n t w i c e , i n
1886 and 1889-1891 * and was e x p e l l e d by order of the Shah
on bo^h o c c a s i o n s . I n 1891 he was a r r e s t e d i n the s h r i n e
of Shah'Abd ol-'Azim near Tehran, which was supposed to be
an/ i n v i o l a b l e sancjuary. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.10.
3. T h i s was intended as, a means of r a i s i n g revenue from tobacco t

l ^ k e the tobacco "Regies" i n Turkey, I t a l y and F r a n c e .

T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.15. K a s r a v i i n one of h i s many
l e a r n e d a r t i c l e s r e l a t e d the h i s t o r y of Pipes and Hookahs.
 5k
i n touch w i t h Jamal o l - D i n Asadabadi, decreed t h a t Moslems

must give up smoking w h i l e the concession remained i n f o r c e .

The company complained t o the Shah, but the Shah had no
choice and could not d i s r e g a r d the people's f e e l i n g s . He

was o b l i g e d to c a n c e l the concession and borrow the sum of

£ 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 from newly e s t a b l i s h e d B r i t i s h Bank i n I r a n , the

Bank-e Shahanshahi ( I m p e r i a l Bank of P e r s i a ) , and give t h i s

sum as compensation to the B r i t i s h tobacco company. This

was I r a n ' s f i r s t loan from a f o r e i g n l e n d e r . On the other

•i

hand, K a s r a v i c o n s i d e r s t h a t the c a n c e l l a t i o n of the con-

c e s s i o n was a great achievement f o r the I r a n i a n people.

For the f i r s t time the people began to r e a l i z e t h a t they

were capable of r e s i s t i n g the government and reforming the

country, i f only they were u n i t e d .

I n the f i r s t f i f t y y e a r s of Naser o l - D i n Shah's r e i g n ,

I r a n had many connections w i t h Europe, and the numbers of

European-style m i n i s t r i e s and s c h o o l s i n c r e a s e d . The most

important new school was the Dar ol-Fonun, founded by Amir-e

K a b i r i n 1851 and opened i n 1852 s h o r t l y a f t e r h i s death.

T h i s was an i n s t i t u t i o n f o r the promotion of contemporary

higher l e a r n i n g . The f i r s t s t e p s f o r a modern primary

« * 2
e d u c a t i o n a l system were taken by Hajj Mirza Hasan Roshdieh,
a T a mb r i z i who had l i v e d i n I s t a n b u l . A f t e r the1 a s s a s s i n a t i o n
> ———• •
1 . T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p . 1 7 .
2. T h i s was i n 1889; T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.21.
 55

of NaBer ol-Din Shah by a d i s c i p l e of Jamal o l - D i n Asadabadi

*1
i n 1896, h i s son Mozaffar o l - D i n Shah came t o the throne.

The government was s u f f e r i n g from l a c k of f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s ,

and the Shah a l s o wanted to go to Europe f o r medical treatment*

2
I n 1900 the government borrowed the sum of 22,500,000 roubles

a t f i v e p e r cent i n t e r e s t from the R u s s i a n government, and a s

s e c u r i t y f o r the i n t e r e s t and repayment of the loan allowed

R u s s i a t o take the customs revenues i n the n o r t h f o r 75 y e a r s .

The government, however, could not s o l v e i t s financial

problems w i t h t h i s money, because nothing was done to reform

the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n or improve the people's l o t . Eventually

the money was squandered i n such a way t h a t no one b e n e f i t e d .

I n 1902 the government borrowed a f u r t h e r 10 m i l l i o n r o u b l e s

from R u s s i a , and i n r e t u r n promised to r e v i s e the customs

t a r i f f i n a way favourable t o R u s s i a and gave the R u s s i a n s

a concession to b u i l d a road from J o l f a through T a b r i z and

Qazvin to Tehran; but again the money was spent w a s t e f u l l y .

At t h a t time the work of the government was c a r r i e d on mainly

by two groups, the court and the r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s . Both

were d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h the Shah f o r reasons of s e l f - i n t e r e s t

3
r a t h e r than f o r the sake of the people. A B e l g i a n super-
v i s o r named Naus was put i n charge of the customs, which he
1• K a s r a v i c o n s i d e r s t h a t Mozaffar ol-Din Shah was l e s s
a u t h o r i t a t i v e than h i s f a t h e r , but that he sympathized
w i t h the people i n many"ways.
2 . T a r i k h - e Mashruteh, p.2l*.
3* K a s r a v i says that Naus and h i s s t a f f behaved most d i s -
h o n e s t l y towards the I r a n i a n s .
 56

r e o r g a n i z e d along European l i n e s . He and h i s s t a f f made the

businessmen pay f u l l duty on t h e i r goods. They a l s o appeared
to d i s c r i m i n a t e between C h r i s t i a n and Moslem businessmen,
and t h i s aroused great resentment* At the same time the
Russians took the opportunity t o have the customs t a r i f f
r e v i s e d i n a way which was very u n f a i r to I r a n ; indeed i t
was quite as harmful as the E u s s o - I r a n i a n t r e a t y of Torkman
Chay of 1828. The R u s s i a n s p a i d very l i t t l e duty when they
brought t h e i r goods t o I r a n , while goods exported from I r a n
were s u b j e c t e d t o heavy export d u t i e s , and goods imported
from I n d i a and elsewhere were s u b j e c t e d t o h i g h e r d u t i e s
2 f
than R u s s i a n goods. The new t a r i f f not o n l y damaged I r a n s
economy, but aroused resentment i n other c o u n t r i e s such a s
B r i t a i n and I n d i a .

During t h i s time, the I r a n i a n masses were g r a d u a l l y

b e i n g awakened. The establishment of modern s c h o o l s by the
a l r e a d y mentioned Hajj Mirza" Hasan Roshdieh, and by a p a t r i o t i c
mo.1tahed. Seyyed 'Abdollah Behbahani, and another r e l i g i o u s
s c h o l a r , Shaykh Hadi Najmabadi, d i d more than anything e l s e
to shake the p i l l a r s of the Shah's a u t o c r a c y . An important
s i g n of the people's progress was the appearance of newspapers.

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p . 3 7 . T h i s t r e a t y , signed a f t e r I r a n ' s

... defeat by R u s s i a , not only ceded t e r r i t o r y to the R u s s i a n s ,
but a l s o gave them p r i v i l e g e s c a l l e d " C a p i t u l a t i o n s " which
were l a t e r given t o the other European s t a t e s a l s o .
2. P u l l d e t a i l s a r e given by Reza S a f i n l a i n h i s book
E s t e a l a l - e Qomroki-ye I r a n . Tehran, 1308/1929*
 57

Before t h i s t h e r e had t e e n no newspapers except f o r one or

two s t r i c t l y governmental g a z e t t s . Neve and comments on

I r a n * 8 p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n could only he obtained from the
f o r e i g n p r e s s and from P e r s i a n newspapers p u b l i s h e d abroad
such a s Akhtar i n E s t a n b u l , Hekmat i n Egypt, Qanun in
London, and l a t e r Habl ol-Matin i n C a l c u t t a , and Sorayya
and P a r v a r e s h ^ i n Egypt.
The f i r s t independent newspapers i n I r a n were T a r b i a t ^
' 8
in-- Tehran and Adalat i n Tabriz. Books w i t h a reforming
message a l s o e x e r c i s e d great influence; e s p e c i a l l y those o f
Haft 'Abdol-Rahim Talebov (18UU-1910) and Ba&Zayn ol-'Abedin
Maraghe'i. Talebov was born a t T a b r i z , and when young
migrated t o C a u c a s i a , where through h i s own a b i l i t y he made
some money a s a merchant* When he became o l d e r , he began t o
w r i t e books; he was an i n t e l l i g e n t man and had read a l o t
( i n R u s s i a n ) about modern s c i e n c e s such a s p h y s i c s , chemistry
and astronomy. H i s two most remarkable books are the Masaiek
1. Akhtar. p u b l i s h e d i n I s t a n b u l by Mohammad Taher T a b r i z i
(1875-1897). See Browne's L i t e r a r y H i s t o r y , k, p.468.
2* P u b l i s h e d i n Egypt i n the P e r s i a n language by Mirza Mahdi
Khan Za'im ol-Dowleh.
3* P u b l i s h e d i n London by Mirza Malkom Khan Nazem ol-Dowleh
(1890-1893).
h» P u b l i s h e d i n C a l c u t t a f o r f o r t y - s e v e n y e a r s from (1893-1931)
by Mo'ayyed ol-Eslam*
5* P u b l i s h e d i n Cair.0 and l a t e r i n Tehran and Kashan by Mirza
' A l i Mohammad Khan K a s h a n i , 1898-1900.
6. P u b l i s h e d i n C a i r o by Mirza ' A l i Mohammad Parvaresh from
1900-191*1.
7* P u b l i s h e d from I896 by Zoka ol-Molk Mohammad Hosayn
Forughi.
8. A weekly newspaper p u b l i s h e d a t T a b r i z by Mirza Mohammad
Khan Hakim B a s h i .
 58
ol-Mohsenin and Ketab-e Ahmad. I n the former, f i v e mountain
c l i m b e r s d i s c u s s e t h i c s , s c i e n c e and p o l i t i c s on t h e i r way

to the top of Mount Damavand, and i n t h e i r dreams meet fcreat

* 1
f i g u r e s from I r a n ' s p a s t . I n the Ketab-e Ahmad the author

d i s c u s s e s v a r i o u s s u b j e c t s w i t h h i s imaginary son Ahmad, and

teaches him about modern s c i e n c e s and European c i v i l i z a t i o n ,

which he c o n t r a s t s w i t h I r a n ' s backwardness. Ha3) Zayn

ol-Abedin Maraghe'i was the son of a very r e l i g i o u s merchant

of Maragheh i n A z a r b a i j a n . He l i v e d much of h i s l i f e as a

merchant i n R u s s i a and stayed a l s o i n C a l c u t t a , I s t a n b u l

and C a i r o , where he c o n t r i b u t e d t o the P e r s i a n newspapers

p u b l i s h e d i n those c i t i e s . His g r e a t book i s the S i a h a t -

nameh-ve Ebrahim Beg. T h i s i s the s t o r y of an I r a n i a n

merchant*8 son who goes to Egypt to o b t a i n knowledge, and

when he comes back t o I r a n i s shocked by the p r i m i t i v e way

of l i v i n g i n h i s own country. A few poets a l s o b e g a i

w r i t i n g poetry t o encourage the people and t e a c h them p a t r i o -

tism. Among^ them K a s r a v i mentions Hajj Mohammad E s m a ' l l

Monir Mazandarani, Mirzfei Mahdi Khan Hekmat and Mirza Hasan

Khan Badi'.

One of the things: which most worried p a t r i o t i c I r a n i a n s

i n Mozaffar o l - D i n Shah's r e i g n was the great and i n c r e a s i n g

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.45«
2. K a s r a v i considers t h i s a remarkable book, i f one excludes
the poems from i t .
3« T a r i k h - e Mashruteh, p.^7»
 59
power given t o the B e l g i a n Monsieur Naus. I n addition to
•i

h i 8 post a s C o n t r o l l e r o f the Customs, he was appointed

D i r e c t o r of the R e g i s t r a t i o n O f f i c e , and M i n i s t e r o f P o s t s
and Telegraphs. The people, and p a r t i c u l a r l y the m o l l a s .
f e l t more and more s t r o n g l y t h a t he ought t o he removed from
the scene, and were searching f o r a p r e t e x t . They found one
sooner than they expected. Photographs were taken of Naus
and some of h i s c o l l e a g u e s a t a f a n c y d r e s s h a l l c l a d i n
mollas * robes. T h i s aroused a great scandal among the mass
of the people and e s p e c i a l l y among the r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s .
The Shah, however, was q u i t e unmoved. I n the meantime two
influential and very l e a r n e d mo.ltaheds. Sayyed Mohammad
Tabatabai and the already mentioned Sayyed 'Abdollah
* ' 2
Behbahani, had j o i n e d the p r o t e s t e r s , and t h i s gave them
a l o t of encouragement. A l l c l a s s e s of the people were now
demanding reform. The Shah was p r e p a r i n g t o pay a t h i r d
v i s i t t o Europe, when suddenly a number o f merchants who had
been i l l - t r e a t e d by customs o f f i c i a l s took sanctuary a t the )
s h r i n e of Hazrat 'Abd ol-'Azim i n 190l|., i n p r o t e s t a g a i n s t
the conduct of the Customs Department. They asked the Shah
to d i s m i s s Monsieur Naus. As the Shah was about t o depart
on a journey t o Europe, h i s son Mohammad ' A l i Mirza tempo-
r a r i l y assumed the r o y a l powers; he promised t o r e d r e s s t h e
1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.U6.
2. They j o i n e d the p r o t e s t e r s i n 1905. K a s r a v i c o n s i d e r s
t h i s the s t a r t of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l movement.
 60

grievances: o f the merchants, and f o r a short while they kept

q u i e t ; hut the storm was expected t o break a t any time*

C e r t a i n small events a l s o encouraged the people t o t h i n k

t h a t they could r e a l i z e t h e i r wishes* F o r instance, the
Russians had bought an o l d cemetery, which i n c l u d e d a
achool, and they wanted t o c l e a r t h e s i t e and b u i l d an
o f f i c e f o r t h e i r bank on i t * Sayyed Mohammad Tabatab&i

opposed the i d e a , saying t h a t i t was not r i g h t to d e s t r o y

a school or cemetery* The people, who were then v e r y much
i n f l u e n c e d by r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s , s t r o n g l y supported him,
and a s a r e s u l t t h e R u s s i a n s gave up the i d e a o f b u i l d i n g
2
a bank on t h i s s i t e * Kasravi observes t h a t i n a way t h e
common people were l u c k y , because t h e i r r u l e r s were con&*-
P l e t e l y ignorant* They thought t h a t because a f t e r every
uproar t h e people soon calmed down, they could be sure; t h a t
nothing s e r i o u s would happen; whereas i n f a c t t h e calmness
of t h e people was o n l y temporary, l i k e a spark o f f i r e hidden
under a s h e s , which w i l l f l a r e up again*
I n 1905^ the Russo-Japanese war caused a sharp r i s e i n
the p r i c e o f sugar, which I r a n used t o Import mainly from
Russia* The governor of Tehran 'Ale! ol-Dowleh, who waa a
headstrong man, t r i e d u n s u c c e s s f u l l y t o f o r c e t h e merchants
1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.55-
2. Ibid.,p.57.
3. Ibldyp.58.
 61
to reduce t h e p r i c e o f sugar, and then i n December 1905
a r r e s t e d a number o f them and bastinadoed two o f them.
T h i s aroused intense anger amongst t h e o t h e r merchants.
They c l o s e d t h e i r shops, and r e s o l v e d t o v i n d i c a t e the two
i n j u r e d merchants Hajj Sayyed Hashem and Ha j j Sayyed E s m a ' i l
* 1
Khan. Some of them took sanctuary i n t h e Masjed-e Jom'eh

of Tehran.
2
The Emam Jom'eh o f Tehran was working f o r 'Ayn o l -
Dowleh, who was then C h i e f M i n i s t e r . One day when a c e r t a i n
mollia was a d d r e s s i n g the people i n the Masjed-e Jom'eh, t h e
Emam Jom'eh a r r i v e d i n the company o f some s o l d i e r s and
accused him o f d i s l o y a l t y t o t h e Shah, thereby causing a
•x
great scandal i n t h e mosque. The merchants then took

sanctuary a t Hazrat 'Abdol-'Azlm,^ accompanied by a number

of m o l l k s . who thereby showed t h e i r sympathy w i t h t h e

merchants. Although there was s t i l l no s i g n o f any demand

f o r a c o n s t i t u t i o n , the,people began f o r t h e f i r s t time t o

speak openly about the government's d e f e c t s . One o f the

.» i t *
g o a l s o f t h e mollae was the establishment o f an Adalatkhaneh
(House of Justice;) t o reform t h e j u d i c i a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,
because t h e e x i s t i n g l a w c o u r t s were f o r t h e most p a r t not
t
1» T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p . 5 9 » ,
2. The Emam Jom'eh i s t h e Emam (prayer l e a d e r ) o f t h e p r i n c i p a l
mosque (Mas.1ed-e Jom'eh) i n every I r a n i a n c i t y .
3. K a s r a v i Recuses the e d i t o r o f Habl ol-Matin o f b e l i t t l i n g
the m o l l a s i n t h i s matter and o f f a v o u r i n g 'Ayn ol-Dowleh.
U. The students of two schools c a l l e d Dar o l - S h a f a and Sadr
co-operated w i t h t h e merchants.
 62

f a i r and honest i n t h e i r judgements. The government promised

to s e t up an 'Adalatkhaneh; and t h i s was supposed t o he t h e
f i r s t step towards reforming the law and the law-courts
throughout t h e country. I n * r e t u r n f o r t h i s promise, t h e
merchants and molllas who had taken sanctuary l e f t Hazrat
'Abdol-'Azim i n January 1906. The common people welcomed
them hack w i t h much enthusiasm. Reports of t h i s event
appeared i n the p r e s s a t home and a l s o abroad. A l l t h e
newspapers p r a i s e d the mollas and t h e i r great achievement.

Another i n c i d e n t which occurred a t t h i s time a l s o

2 *
s t i r r e d the people's f e e l i n g s . A man named H a j j Mohammad
Hasan promised t o provide the amount o f wheat and meat

needed t o supply Tehran, and a c t u a l l y made a c o n t r a c t w i t h

the government t o do t h i s . He put up the p r i c e s , and the

people p r o t e s t e d , but without r e s u l t . Two r e s o l u t e m o l l a s

then began preaching t o the people about t h i s matter.

K a s r a v i remarks t h a t the n a t i o n and the government stood

l i k e two d i f f e r e n t f a c t i o n s on opposite s i d e s . The

s i t u a t i o n grew worse and worse, u n t i l e v e n t u a l l y a preacher,

B a j j Mohammad, c r i t i c i z e d 'Ayn ol-Dowleh and was a r r e s t e d .

Led by Sayyed 'Abdollah Behbabiani, the people made vigoroua

p r o t e s t s and a g a i n c l o s e d the b a z a a r . 'Ayn ol-Dowleh f e a r e d

1. T a r i k h - e MaBhruteh, pp. 83-84.

2. Ibid.,p.Ik.
3 . I b i d . , p.95.
 63

a popular u p r i s i n g and sent groups of s o l d i e r s i n t o v a r i o u s

s e c t i o n s of Tehran t o c o n t r o l the s i t u a t i o n . Tabatabfei,
Behbahani, and another l e a d i n g mo.ltahed Sadr ol-'Olama,

together w i t h a l a r g e number o f people, then took sanctuary

•i

i n June 1906 i n the s h r i n e of J ^feumeh a t Qom. The 8hah

l a c k e d enough courage t o s o l v e the problem h i m s e l f , and d i d

nothing; i n f a c t he was a t o o l i n 'Ayn ol-Dowleh's hand.

People now began t o speak about the need f o r C o n s t i t u t i o n a l

government (H,okumat-e Mashruteh). A group of t h e o l o g i a n s

and merchants went t o the B r i t i s h L e g a t i o n and asked the

B r i t i s h M i n i s t e r t o urge the government t o grant t h e i r
demands f o r r e c o g n i t i o n o f the people's r i g h t s . Their f i r s t
ambition was f o r the establishment o f an 'Adalatkhaneh, a s
has been mentioned. They drew up t h e i r c l a i m s i n w r i t i n g ,
2
and the B r i t i s h M i n i s t e r d e l i v e r e d the document t o the

government. 'Ayn ol-Dowleh p a i d no a t t e n t i o n t o the popular

demands, and consequently on J u l y 19» 1906 a l a r g e number of

merchants and a r t i s a n s took refuge i n the Legation; e v e n t u a l l y

the number rose t o over 12,000. At the same time the Grown

Prince Mohammad A l l Mirza sent a telegram to h i s f a t h e r

from T a b r i z urging him to approve the people's demands.

T h i s was considered a g r e a t help i n enabling the people t o

1 • T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.106.
2. S i r C e c i l Spring R i c e .
3- T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.113.
ibia»
 6k

gain t h e i r r i g h t s . The Shah i n August 1906 promised t o

grant a c o n s t i t u t i o n and order the e l e c t i o n of a parliament

( M a j l e g ) , and he a l s o d i s m i s s e d 'Ayn ol-Dowleh. Kasravi

r e l a t e s ; t h a t Mohammad ' A l i Mirza had never been on good

terms w i t h 'Ayn elrDowleh, who wanted t o deprive him of

h i s t i t l e o f Crown P r i n c e ; and as a r e s u l t Mohammad ' A l i

Mirza communicated w i t h the popular movement i n the hope

of g e t t i n g r i d of 'Ayn bl-Dowleh. H i s p l a c e as c h i e f

m i n i s t e r was taken by Moshir ol-Dowleh, a l i b e r a l statesman*

2
The B r i t i s h M i n i s t e r , a c c o r d i n g t o K a s r a v i , urged t h e Shah

to agree t o the people*s demands* Consequently on August 5»

1906, the Shah signed the r o y a l decree p r o v i d i n g f o r C o n s t i -

t u t i o n a l government* The people's s u c c e s s was r e p o r t e d i n

the home and f o r e i g n newspapers, i n c l u d i n g those i n I n d i a ,

Europe and Egypt.

I n accordance w i t h the decree of August 5» 1906, and

subsequently agreed e l e c t i o n arrangements, the people of

Tehran duly e l e c t e d t h e i r s i x t y D e p u t i e s . The new situation

was not s a t i s f a c t o r y from the Shah's p o i n t of view, or

the government's? The Crown P r i n c e as governor of A z a r b a i j a n

continued t o govern a t T a b r i z i n an a u t o c r a t i c and r a t h e r

t y r a n n i c a l manner, and i n A z e r b a i j a n the people's demands were

1. T a r i k h - e Mashimteh. p . 1 1 3 .
2. I b i d .
3 . I b i d . , p.136.
 65
not b e i n g s a t i s f i e d . The grant of C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government
only became known t o the people t h e r e through an announce-

ment by Mr. WratislawV t h e B r i t i s h Consul a t T a b r i z . In

some other p a r t s of the country the news l a t e r began t o

cause alarm. Most of the deputies had not been e l e c t e d or

had not a r r i v e d i n Tehran when Mozaffar ol-Din Shah opened

the f i r s t Majles on October 7» 1906. The Majles performed

a memorable s e r v i c e by r e f u s i n g p e r m i s s i o n t o the government

to borrow more money from the R u s s i a n owned Bank-e E s t e q r a z i

(Banque des Pr§ts) and the B r i t i s h owned Bank-e Shahanshahi

( I m p e r i a l Bank).^ At the same time the Majles drew up the

I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n (Fundamental Law), which Mozaffar ol-Din

Shah f o r m a l l y signed on December 3 0 , 1906. Meanwhile the

Deputies from T a b r i z had a r r i v e d On February the 17th, 1907.

When Mohammad ' A l i Mirza became Shah a f t e r the death of

Mozaffar o l - D i n on January i+, 1907* he showed from the

beginning t h a t he was determined t o r u i n the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l
h
regime. Moreover Monsieur Naus and h i s compatriots were

s t i l l working i n the Customs, i n s p i t e of r e s o l u t i o n s by the

Majles c a l l i n g f o r t h e i r d i s m i s s a l . The constitutionalist

a s s o c i a t i o n (an.loman) of T a b r i z , through the T a b r i z Deputies

in the M a j l e s , put forward t h e f o l l o w i n g demands:

1• T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p . 1 6 2 .
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid., p.168.
4. I b i d . , p.203.
 66

1
1 • T h e Shah (Mohammad ' A l i Mirza) must p e r s o n a l l y s i g n
the C o n s t i t u t i o n .

2. The number of M i n i s t e r s must not exceed e i g h t , but i f

more were n e c e s s a r y , permission must be given by the M a j l e s .

3. No f o r e i g n e r should be appointed as a M i n i s t e r .

4. I n every c i t y a l o c a l a s s o c i a t i o n (an.1oman-e m a h a l l i )

should be s e t up to d e a l w i t h the people's d i f f i c u l t i e s .

5. The appointment of Honorary M i n i s t e r s (without port-

f o l i o ) should not be allowed, and s p e c i f i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s

should be a s s i g n e d to the e i g h t M i n i s t e r s only.

6. The Shah must dismiss Naus; and a l s o Prim, the head of

*« 2
the Customs a t T a b r i z , and Sa ed ol-Molk must be dismissed.
E v e n t u a l l y Naus was dismissed, and the cabinet Ministers
assumed s p e c i f i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , i n accordance w i t h the
above demands.
At Tehran, Hasht, and e s p e c i a l l y T a b r i z , supporters of
the C o n s t i t u t i o n became i n t e r e s t e d i n m i l i t a r y t r a i n i n g . On
the other hand, the two Sayyeds, Mohammad Tabatabai . and
'Abdalleh Behbahani had no d e s i r e t o arm the people, because
they thought t h a t t h i s would make the s i t u a t i o n worse.
K a s r a v i r e c o g n i s e s t h a t i n s p i t e of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l move-
1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.215.
2. Sa'ed ol-Molk had been the governor of A r d a b i l but was
d i s m i s s e d because of h i s u n f a i t h f u l n e s s to the c o n s t i t u -
t i o n a l government; l a t e r he became the M i n i s t e r of the
Treasury.
 67

ment the mass of the people s t i l l l i v e d i n absolute ignorance,

and were not ready to accept changes or reforms. He adds

t h a t most o f the great r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s a t T a b r i z were now

opposed t o the new regime, a s indeed were most o f the l e a d i n g

l o c a l p e r s o n a l i t i e s ; one eminent mo.ltahed o f T a b r i z , however,

• 2
always supported i t , namely Seqat o l - E s l a m .

Kasravi p o i n t s out t h a t t h e r e were two main groups,

who were i n favour of the C o n s t i t u t i o n . The f i r s t consisted

of those who were very much impressed by European c i v i l i z a t i o n

and intended t o transform and modernize a l l a s p e c t s o f

I r a n i a n l i f e ; f o r example they wanted to introduce e l e c t r i -

c i t y , r a i l w a y s and f a c t o r i e s , and g e n e r a l l y t o i n d u s t r i a l i z e

the country. The second group were under t h e i n f l u e n c e of

religion. They wanted above a l l t o spread r e l i g i o u s i d e a s

more widely among the people and t o improve t h e orthodoxy

of their beliefs. They a l s o wanted customary law C o r f ) t o

be r e p l a c e d by I s l a m i c l a w ( S h a r i ' a t ) . K a s r a v i ^ remarks t h a t

i n f a c t t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n was o r i g i n a l l y r e l i g i o u s ,

but l a t e r changed and became coloured by p a t r i o t i c i d e a s .

4
Mirza A l i Asghar Khan Atabeg-e A'zam, who again became

Prime M i n i s t e r i n May 1907* and the Shah Mohammad ' A l l Mirza,

were i n t h e i r h e a r t s h o s t i l e t o the C o n s t i t u t i o n and intended

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh% p.259«
2. Ibid.
3* Ibid.,p.295.
iu Ibid.,p.261.
 68
t o f i n i s h w i t h i t a t the f i r s t opportunity* The Majles
appointed a committee which drew up the Supplementary Funda-
mental Law (Motammem): t h i s was approved by t h e whole Majles

4
and e v e n t u a l l y was signed by Mohammad A l i Shah on October y,
1 ?'
1907* When the C o n s t i t u t i o n had thus been completed, many

r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s s t a r t e d t o express d i s a p p r o v a l , a l l e g i n g
t h a t i t was c o n t r a r y t o I s l a m i c law. T h i s gave a great
opportunity f o r the enemies of C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government.
The Prime M i n i s t e r Atabeg-e A'zam t r i e d t o discourage revo-
l u t i o n a r y t e n d e n c i e s , and most mollas d i s a s s o c i a t e d them-
s e l v e s from the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s , whom they even accused
of d i s b e l i e v i n g and denying Cod.

The government had t o d e a l w i t h other d i f f i c u l t i e s .

The Ottoman Turks began t o s t i r up d i s o r d e r among the I r a n i a n
Kurds. Atabeg-e A'zam was not s u f f i c i e n t l y capable t o d e a l
w i t h a l l these problems. People were demanding t h a t he
should give up h i s p o s t , e s p e c i a l l y the people o f T a b r i z ;
they knew t h a t he no longer h e l d any r e a l a u t h o r i t y , but had
been appointed t o c a r r y out the t a s k of overthrowing the
Consitution. Moreover, Kasravi"* s t a t e s , the Shah, Mohammad
'All Mirza, had a s e c r e t agreement w i t h R u s s i a , according to
which he had no freedom t o dismiss Atabeg. E v e n t u a l l y Atabeg

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.1+65.
2. Ibld.,p.375.
3. Ibid., p.ii45.
 69

was a s s a s s i n a t e d on August 31, 1907» when he was going to

the Majles to n e g o t i a t e with the deputies. The a s s a s s i n was

a man from A z e r b a i j a n named 'Abbas Aqa. Immediately a f t e r

Atabeg's a s s a s s i n a t i o n , a number of a n t i - c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t

miollas who had gone to Hazrat 'Abdol-'Azim r e t u r n e d to

* 2
Tehran. Kasravi says t h a t i t was obvious t h a t they were

Atabeg's h i r e l i n g s .

J u s t at t h i s time the R u s s i a n and B r i t i s h governments

signed an agreement by which they agreed to d i v i d e I r a n

i n t o R u s s i a n and B r i t i s h "spheres of i n f l u e n c e . " This

agreement was very much a g a i n s t I r a n ' s i n t e r e s t s , and there-

a f t e r both R u s s i a and England d i d as they wished i n I r a n .

I n K a s r a v i * s opinion, they were both determined t o get r i d

of C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government i n I r a n , and t h i s helped to

* 3
i n c r e a s e Mohammad ' A l i Mirza*8 o b s t i n a c y . Kasravi thinks

t h a t a l l the subsequent bloodshed, the bombardment of the

M a j l e s , the re-establishment of autocracy, and the occupa-

t i o n of I r a n i a n t e r r i t o r y by R u s s i a n troops, were a l l the

r e s u l t of the d i s g r a c e f u l Anglo-Russian agreement of 1907»

and t h a t i n the long run the I r a n i a n s only regained Consti-

t u t i o n a l government because of R u s s i a ' s great r e v o l u t i o n i n

1917» Otherwise, K a s r a v i s a y s , they could not possibly

1. TArikh-e Mashruteh. p.Wl7.
2. Ibld.,T).U58.
3. Ibld.,p.577.
k. I b i d . p.2+58.
 70

have re-es.tablished i t . T h i s agreement, which was r e p o r t e d

i n n e a r l y a l l the newspapers, provoked a tremendous uproar.

A f t e r Atabeg's death, the Prime M i n i s t e r and cabinet

M i n i s t e r s t a l k e d about r e c o n c i l i n g the Shah and the Majles;

but i t was obvious t h a t the Shah and government were only

pretending and were not r e a l l y l o y a l t o the C o n s t i t u t i o n .

The government e s t a b l i s h e d an o r g a n i z a t i o n c a l l e d Fotuvat

which began a g i t a t i n g a g a i n s t c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m . The Majles

•i

was deeply I n v o l v e d . w i t h i t s own d u t i e s . The Shah came

to Majles f o r the o f f i c i a l ceremonies and made promises and

s e v e r a l times swore solemn oaths t o be l o y a l t o t h e C o n s t i -

t u t i o n , a l l o f which he broke not long afterwards. At

T a b r i z enmity between the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s and t h e Shah's

2
supporters was growing deeper. By t h a t time the majority

of the people were armed, and a l l the s t r e e t s were p a t r o l l e d

by s o l d i e r s . The Shah d e c l a r e d t h a t t h e Majles should not

i n t e r f e r e w i t h the r i g h t s o f h i s s u b j e c t s , and a l s o t h a t t h e

existence o f too many a s s o c i a t i o n s (anjomans) and groups

would cause t r o u b l e . The Majles r e p l i e d t h a t i t would

consider the Shah's p o s i t i o n , but that according t o the

C o n s t i t u t i o n a s s o c i a t i o n s and groups were f r e e i n t h e i r

actions. Nevertheless a t T a b r i z the champions o f l i b e r t y

began p r e p a r i n g t o march t o Tehran and j o i n those i n t h e

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.332.
2. Ibid.,p.k58.
 71

capital. G r a d u a l l y people began to speak a g a i n s t the Shah,

' '1
and a newspaper c a l l e d Mosavat published a r t i c l e s criti-

c i z i n g him* At T a b r i z a f i g h t l a s t i n g two days took place;

between t h e champions of l i b e r t y (Mo.lahedin) and the Shah's

partisans. T h i s f i g h t was v e r y important from the point of

view of the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e ; f o r aJiftogeTOw i t

caused a l o t of d i s t r e s s , i t prepared the people f o r the

c o n f l i c t which l a y ahead.
o
As K a s r a v i s e e s i t , Iran's constitutional revolution
passed through t h r e e phases:
1. I n the f i r s t phase t h e r e was unanimity among the whole;
nation.
2. I n the second phase r e l i g i o u s a u t h o r i t i e s e x e r c i s e d
most i n f l u e n c e on the masses, the c h i e f motive of t h e i r
a c t i v i t y being the advancement of r e l i g i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n s .
3» I n the t h i r d phase the people l o s t a l l t h e i r e a r l i e r
enthusiasm, except i n a few b i g c i t i e s such as T a b r i z
and Tehran where they continued t o s t r i v e f o r c o n s t i -
tutional government.
As soon a s the molllas r e a l i z e d t h a t c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
government would be of no use t o them and might perhaps even
decrease t h e i r power, they gave up the s t r u g g l e and j o i n e d
the c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s . The Shah took the opportunity
t o prepare a p l o t t o overthrow the C o n s t i t u t i o n . He ordered
1• P u b l i s h e d a t T a b r i z and e d i t e d by Sayyed Mohammad Beza
Shirazi.
2. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.568.
 72
R
C o l o n e l Lyakhov, the u s s l a n commander o f the I r a n i a n
Cossacks, to bombard the M a j l e s . T h i s deed (which could
not have "been done without the approval of the R u s s i a n s )
was c a r r i e d out on June 23» 1908, and Mohammad ' A l i Mirza
then repudiated the C o n s t i t u t i o n which he had sworn t o
m a i n t a i n . There was not much r e s i s t a n c e except a t T a b r i z ,
where the people never gave up the s t r u g g l e , especially-
a f t e r l e a r n i n g t h a t the great r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s (mojtaheds)
at N a j a f i n Ottoman t e r r i t o r y had condemned Mohammad. ' A l i
Mirza's a c t i o n i n Tehran. Supporters of the C o n s t i t u t i o n
s e c r e t l y founded two a s s o c i a t i o n s c a l l e d the "War A s s o c i a -
t i o n " (An.loman-e Jang) and the " M i l i t a r y A s s o c i a t i o n "
(An.loman-e Nezam) under the l e a d e r s h i p o f Sardar Mo'azzam
Khorasani and other l e a d e r s w e l l acquainted w i t h European
c i v i l i z a t i o n . The bombardment ordered by the Shah and
c a r r i e d out by Lyakhov and h i s troops devastated the Majles
"building (Baharesten p a l a c e ) , and was followed by the a r r e s t
of many Deputies, some of whom were put t o death. The
people gave up the s t r u g g l e a f t e r a while, and the r o y a l
autocracy was r e s t o r e d . The B r i t i s h L e g a t i o n i n Tehran

opened i t s doors t o some of the f u g i t i v e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s .

p
In most c i t i e a the people, when they l e a r n e d what was

happening, gave up the s t r u g g l e , except a t T a b r i z and Rasht.

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.577.
2. K a s r a v i says t h a t the m a j o r i t y o f the c i t i e s pretended t o
h e l p the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s hut a c t u a l l y were not s t r o n g
enough t o put up any r e s i s t a n c e .
 73
A t T a b r i z , t h e R u s s i a n c o n s u l P a k h t i a n o v t r i e d t o a c t as an
i n t e r m e d i a r y and persuade t h e p e o p l e t o n e g o t i a t e w i t h t h e
Shah and s t o p t h e f i g h t i n g . H i s a c t i o n a t f i r s t began t o
undermine t h e i r w i l l - p o w e r ; h u t t h e champions o f t h e C o n s t i -
t u t i o n (Mo^iahedin) were n o t d e c e i v e d b y him. T a b r i z became,
l i k e a b a t t l e f i e l d . The Shah* s p l a n was t o seek t h e h e l p
o f t h e mollias i n overcoming t h e f r e e d o m - f i g h t e r s . C e r t a i n
moll&s; accused t h e defenders o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f b e i n g
Bahia'is and s a i d t h a t t h e shedding o f t h e i r b l o o d was t h e r e -
f o r e l a w f u l . N e v e r t h e l e s s Sattiar Khan and BSaqer Khtan, t h e
tvro l e a d e r s o f t h e T a h r i z i Moj'ahedin, d i d n o t waver i n t h e i r
o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e p e r f i d i o u s Mohammad * A l i Mirzla and h i s
s i p p o r t e r s . O u t s i d e I r a n , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n C a u c a s i a , groups
o f p e o p l e were o f f e r i n g t h e i r h e l p t o t h e I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u -
t i o n a l i s t s . I n t h e extreme c o n f u s i o n , t h e mojtaheds o f
N a j a f i n I r a q , i s s u e d a v e r y i m p o r t a n t r u l i n g (fatv£) • They
d e c l a r e d t h a t t h o s e who a c t e d a g a i n s t t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n were
f i g h t i n g a g a i n s t t h e Emam o f t h e Age ( i . e . t h e T w e l f t h Eralam).
T h i s d e c l a r a t i o n aroused i n t e n s e e x c i t e m e n t amongst the;
p e o p l e . When t h e Shah sent an u l t i m a t u m t h r o u g h 'Ayn o l -
Dowleh, t h e n Governor o f Azarblaidan, t o t h e p e o p l e a t T a b r i z
demanding t h e i r s u b m i s s i o n , t h e y d i d n o t obey.

The s t r u g g l e between t h e Shah's s u p p o r t e r s and t h e

1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh. p.678.
 Ih

c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s l a s t e d f o r e l e v e n months. T h i s i s one o f
the most t r a g i c i n c i d e n t s o f I r a n ' s h i s t o r y ; "but on t h e o t h e r
hand i t forms a v e r y h e r o i p c h a p t e r . Kasravi describes i t
all fully, i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e defence o f T a b r i z b y the:
Mojtahedin. I n t h e end t h e champions o f the. C o n s t i t u t i o n won
the freedom which t h e p e o p l e deserved., t h e r e b y opening a new
chapter i n I r a n ' s h i s t o r y . Kasravi observes t h a t w i t h their
v i c t o r y t h e r e appeared a tremendous change i n t h e people's
way of thinking. For t h e f i r s t time I r a n i a n s had found t h a t
t h e y c o u l d g a i n power and e n f o r c e t h e i r w i l l i f t h e y k e p t
their unity. The s t r u g g l e t a u g h t them t h a t t h e y must n o t
accept any k i n d o f f o r e i g n d o m i n a t i o n o r i n f l u e n c e , b u t must
aim f o r complete independence.

The l a s t phase o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l
Revolution.
I n s p i t e o f the successful resistance o f the T a b r i z i s ,

the government made no move t o r e c a l l t h e M a j l e s . Tabriz

2
was o c c u p i e d i n A p r i l 1909 b y R u s s i a n t r o p p s , who came t o
p r o t e c t f o r e i g n e r s b u t t o o k t h e l i b e r t y o f p e r s e c u t i n g the.
people. Russia and B r i t a i n , a c c o r d i n g t o K a s r a v i , d i d n o t
t h i n k t h a t t h e r e was any p o s s i b i l i t y o f f u t u r e incidents.
Howevefc, men o f t h e B a k h t i a r i t r i b e under t h e l e a d e r s h i p o f
Sardiar As*ad and H a j j N a j a f Q o l i Sams&m o l - S a l t a n e h marched
f r o m Esfahan t o T e h r a n , where t h e y j o i n e d w i t h t h e Moj'ahedin
1 • T<arikh-e Mashruteh, p.906.
2. I b i d . , p.902.
 75

of G i l a n who had marched from Rasht under t h e l e a d e r s h i p of

Yefram Khan, A f t e r t h r e e days of f i g h t i n g , i n which Yefram

Khan showed great b r a v e r y , they defeated t h e Shah's t r o o p s ,

and on J u l y 16, 1909> Mohammad ' A l i Mirza f l e d t o the

Russian Legation, Through t h i s n a t i o n a l v i c t o r y I r a n i a n s

f o r the second time gained C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government.

S u r p r i s i n g l y Colonel Lyakhov, who a f t e r bombarding the-

Majles had been appointed m i l i t a r y governor o f Tehran, became

v e r y a p o l o g e t i c towards t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s ; l a t e r he l e f t

Tehran, The c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t l e a d e r s deposed Mohammad ' A l l

Mirza and p l a c e d h i s t h i r t e e n year o l d son Ahmad on t h e

throne. At t h a t time the Russians r e f r a i n e d from i n t e r f e r i n g ,

though they l a t e r resumed t h e i r o f f e n s i v e p o l i c y . I t was

afterwards d i s c o v e r e d t h a t the R u s s i a n s were h e l p i n g Mohammad

' A l i Mirza*s supporters i n A r d a b i l , which was supposed t o be

the l a s t stronghold of r o y a l i s m i n I r a n ; but they f a i l e d even

t h e r e , because Democrats ( i . e . c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s ) , mainly

from T a b r i z , j o i n e d f o r c e s w i t h B a k h t i a r i troops sent from

Tehran under t h e command o f Sardar Bahador and Yefram Khan and

c r u s h i n g l y defeated t h e r o y a l i s t s , whose l e a d e r Rahim Khan

escaped t o R u s s i a .

The n a t i o n a l v i c t o r y (gath-e M e l l i ) o f J u l y 1909, won

by the I r a n i a n people a f t e r great e f f o r t s and s a c r i f i c e s ,

1 • T a r i k h - e He.1dah-saleh-.ve Azarbal.lan. p.67,

2. I b i d . , p.60.
 76

r e s t o r e d C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government, but caused s o c i a l confu-

s i o n and widespread i n s e c u r i t y which harmed I r a n ' s economy.
I n 1910 the government decided t o ask f o r loans from f o r e i g n
hanks i n order t o remedy t h i s s i t u a t i o n , and a l s o i n order
t o improve the m i l i t a r y p o s i t i o n by strengthening the army.

F o r t h i s purpose n e g o t i a t i o n s were s t a r t e d w i t h the B r i t i s h

2
and R u s s i a n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . At t h a t p a r t i c u l a r time,
Europe was i n a dangerous s t a t e , and consequently the two
c o u n t r i e s were t r y i n g t o secure t h e i r p o s i t i o n s i n A s i a .
K a s r a v i " r e l a t e s t h a t they decided not to grant I r a n ' s
request except under s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s . The I r a n i a n govera-
jnent: would be r e q u i r e d to give them statements of a l l
expenses, and t o employ seven Frenchmen as f i n a n c i a l super-
v i s o r s t o improve the economic p o s i t i o n . The command of the
army was to he e n t r u s t e d to a f o r e i g n e r . I r a n was not to
make any agreements w i t h other f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s , and was to
permit the b u i l d i n g of a r a i l w a y , and t o allow shipping on
Lake Orumiyeh to be e n t i r e l y under R u s s i a n c o n t r o l . Even-
t u a l l y , when the people learned.tif these c o n d i t i o n s , t h e r e
was a great outburst of i n d i g n a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n
Azerbaijan. The Majles a l s o expressed d i s a p p r o v a l . The
R u s s i a n s and B r i t i s h were angry, and most p e r s i s t e n t i n
t h e i r demands. F i n a l l y the government decided to impose
1 • T a r i k h - e he.ldah-saleh. p.119^
2. I b i d , j-p.120.
3. I b i d .
 77

h e a v i e r t a x e s r a t h e r than borrow the money which i t required,

under such h u m i l i a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s .

The I r a n i a n government then engaged American experts

to d e a l w i t h the f i n a n c i a l and economic s i t u a t i o n . They
worked under the s u p e r v i s i o n of W. Morgan S h u s t e r , a former
o f f i c i a l of the United S t a t e s T r e a s u r y , who a r r i v e d i n May
1911. They s e t about t h e i r t a s k s very e a r n e s t l y on S i n i s t e r ' s
recommendation. The government r e c r u i t e d a new armed f o r c e ,
the Gendarmerie, and engaged t h r e e Swedish o f f i c e r s to t r a i n
It. Before long, the Americans began to meet w i t h h o s t i l i t y
and i n s u l t from the R u s s i a n s , and a l s o from the B e l g i a n
Customs o f f i c i a l s who were c o l l a b o r a t i n g w i t h the R u s s i a n s .
1
S h u s t e r s most Important a c t i o n was the establishment of the
Gendarmerie. He planned a f o r c e of 10,000-12,000 men.
Unfortunately h i s enemies i n t e r f e r e d and s p o i l e d a l l h i s
achievements. Shuster wished to give the command of the
Gendarmerie to a M i l i t a r y Attache of the B r i t i s h L e g a t i o n

named Major Stokes.

2 * *
I n 1911 Mohammad ' A l l Mirza decided to come back to
3
I r a n , and the R u s s i a n s gave him some h e l p . Kasravi says

t h a t the R u s s i a n s had been urging him to recover the throne,

because they knew t h a t i f he succeeded they would be able to

g a i n more advantages f o r themselves. The I r a n i a n government

1• Shuster has recorded h i s observations while he worked i n
I r a n i n h i s book The S t r a n g l i n g of P e r s i a . New York, 1912.
2. T a r i k h - e he.ldoh s a l e h . p.160.
3. I b i d . , p.167.
 78

had d e c l a r e d t h a t i t would deprive Mohammad ' A l i Mirza o f

h i s pension i f he should r e t u r n , and i t acted a c c o r d i n g l y .
I n the confusion, the p r o v i n c i a l an.ioman of Tabriz, sent a
telegram t o t h e an.lomans i n a l l I r a n i a n c i t i e s encouraging

the people to stand f i r m and keep t h e i r u n i t y . The R u s s i a n s

' 1
l e t Mohammad ' A l l Mirza go hack t o I r a n i n J u l y 1911 $
a c r o s s the border o f Gorgan and t h e Torkaman steppe, and
i n t e r n a l f i g h t i n g again broke out. F o r t u n a t e l y t h e defenders
of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n were v i c t o r i o u s . Mohammad ' A l l Mirza
f a i l e d i n h i s attempt and had t o r e t u r n t o R u s s i a . Later
another problem appeared i n the west o f I r a n , where Saliar
ol-Dowleh, a b r o t h e r of Mohammad ' A l i Mirza, gathered toge-
t h e r a f o r c e of armed Kurds and L o r s and began marching
towards Tehran and Qom. H i s f i r s t and main i n t e n t i o n was
to h e l p Mohammad ' A l i Mirza, but when he r e a l i z e d t h a t this
would be a f r u i t l e s s undertaking, he proclaimed h i m s e l f Shah,
and prepared t o continue r e s i s t i n g t h e government. He was
defeated by t h e government's f o r c e s , b u t escaped t o B o r u j e r d .
The government decided w i t h the approval o f t h e Majles
to c o n f i s c a t e t h e property o f Saliar ol-Dowleh and another
* 2
b r o t h e r , Sho'a' o l - S a l t a n e h . The B r i t i s h and R u s s i a n
M i n i s t e r s d i d not express any d i s a p p r o v a l , but when Shuster

sent some gendarmes t o c o n f i s c a t e a property which had

1. T a r i k h - e he ,1 d a n - s a l eh. p.172.
2. He had been governor of Kordestan before t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l
r e v o l u t i o n , and had a l r e a d y claimed t h e throne i n 1907•
 79

belonged to Sho'a' o l - S a l t a n e h / the Russians claimed t h a t

i t was R u s s i a n p r o p e r t y . They had been a g a i n s t Shuster from
the beginning and were s e a r c h i n g f o r an excuse t o wreck h i s
p l a n s * They i n s i s t e d t h a t the government should remove
S h u s t e r ' s men from Sho'a' o l - S a l t a n e h ' s garden, and a l l e g e d
t h a t two R u s s i a n o f f i c i a l s had been i n j u r e d by the gendarmes*
The government, i n s p i t e of B r i t i s h urging, d i d not accept
these demands* The R u s s i a n s then sent an army d i v i s i o n from

C a u c a s i a to T a b r i z and Rasht, and on November 11, 1911, gave

2
I r a n an ultimatum* They demanded t h a t Shuster be dismissed,
and t h a t i n f u t u r e whenever I r a n wanted t o employ any f o r e i g n
s u p e r v i s o r , she should f i r s t c o n s u l t w i t h R u s s i a and B r i t a i n *
Furthermore I r a n must compensate R u s s i a f o r the c o s t i n v o l v e d
i n sending troops to I r a n * These demands aroused excitement
and anger i n the people, and crowds rushed to the M a j l e s .
Moreover the government r e c e i v e d many telegrams from I n d i a
and Iraq, encouraging the people to stand f i r m before t h e i r
enemies i n defence of t h e i r r i g h t s . I n Iraq., two mo.ltaheds,
Mollta Mohammad Kazem Khorasani and H a j j Shaykh Mazandarani,
I s s u e d a f a t v a banning R u s s i a n goods. The I r a n i a n s were fond
of d r i n k i n g t e a , which used t o be imported from China through
R u s s i a ; but i n accordance with the ban they gave up d r i n k i n g
t e a , win.the M a j l e s , the deputies unanimously r e j e c t e d
1. T a r i k h - e h e j d a h - s a l e h . p.229.
2. I b i d . , p.235.
 80

R u s s i a ' s ultimatum. On the other hand,^ i t was not easy f o r

I r a n i n those days t o r e s i s t a powerful enemy l i k e R u s s i a .
U l t i m a t e l y , on November 2b$ 1911» the R u s s i a n demands had
t o be accepted. Yefram Khan had gone t o the Majles and
warned the deputies o f the probable r e s u l t s o f h o s t i l i t i e s .
The cabinet r e s i g n e d , and the Majles was d i s s o l v e d . Mean-
w h i l e champions of freedom a t T a b r i z were f i g h t i n g w i t h

2
Russian s o l d i e r s . The R u s s i a n troops, being more powerful,

were able to defeat the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s . They a r r e s t e d

a number of them i n c l u d i n g a l e a d i n g mo.ltahed, Seqat ol-

Eslam, whom they hanged i n Bagh-e Shemal (North Garden) o f

3
-
Tabriz. K a s r a v i ^ i n h i s book speaks of Seqat ol-Eslam a s
a great f i g u r e and champion of l i b e r t y . Undoubtedly h i e
name w i l l be recorded i n I r a n ' s h i s t o r y f o r ever. Tabriz
was a scene o f h o r r o r , with bloodshed everywhere. Liberty
disappeared, and tyranny reigned. A p a r t i s a n o f Mohammad
' A l l Mirza, by name Samad Khan Maraghe'l, who was working
f o r the R u s s i a n s , came t o T a b r i z t o stamp out the l a s t
v e s t i g e s o f freedom. He persuaded c e r t a i n H o l l a s and enemies
of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government t o send a telegram t o the
B r i t i s h and R u s s i a n Legations a s k i n g them t o r e s t o r e Mohammad
* A l i Mirzfc t o the throne. ""Fortunately the B r i t i s h were
1 • T a r l k h - e he.1dah-saleh. p.2Wu
2. P r o f e s s o r E.G. Browne wrote a small booklet about t h i s
i n c i d e n t , c a l l e d Reign of T e r r o r i n T a b r i z .
3. T a r i k h - e he.1dah-saleh. p.273»
 81

opposed to t h i s i d e a , i n s p i t e of the R u s s i a n d e s i r e f o r i t .
According to the newspaper Hekmat. which was p u b l i s h e d i n
Egypt, the number of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s k i l l e d by Samad Khan
amounted to 2h3» Some of the T a b r i z i c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s

escaped to Ottoman t e r r i t o r y , where they were r e c e i v e d very

kindly. The Turks took a l l the refugees to the c i t y of Van
and f r e e d them t h e r e . K a s r a v i quotes a l i n e of P e r s i a n

poetry which an Ottoman Turk s a i d when he saw the I r a n i a n

1
refugees: ;

" T h i s b r i n g i n g of I r a n i a n s to Turkey i s not without justifi-

cation. Time makes the m i r r o r need d u s t . "
The R u s s i a n ultimatum completely changed the s i t u a t i o n
in Iran. The Majles remained shut. A l l c e n t r e s of c o n s t i -
t u t i o n a l i s t and n a t i o n a l i s t a c t i v i t y were suppressed. This
was e x a c t l y what the Russians wanted, and the circumstances
were favourable f o r t h e i r d e s i g n s . According to the Anglo-
R u s s i a n agreement of 1907» these two powers intended to
r e s p e c t I r a n ' s independence, and the I r a n i a n government
thought t h a t a f t e r the acceptance of the ultimatum the
41
R u s s i a n troops would l e a v e I r a n ; but i t was mistaken. Kasravi
r e l a t e s t h a t Samad Khan a t the i n s t i g a t i o n of the R u s s i a n s

1 • T a r i k h - e he j d a h - s a l e h . p.l+l^.
2. Ibid..V.U12.
 82

sent a telegram t o Tehran warning the government t h a t i f the

Majles was reopened, he would t r y to form an independent
s t a t e of A z a r b a i j a n . As a r e s u l t the government had to p o s t -
pone the reopening of M a j l e s .

When the f i r s t world war broke out, i n v o l v i n g Germany,

A u s t r i a , Prance, B r i t a i n , R u s s i a , and l a t e r the Ottoman

empire, the I r a n i a n government d e c l a r e d i t s n e u t r a l i t y . In

s p i t e of t h i s , R u s s i a n and Ottoman troops moved i n t o I r a n i a n

territory. The t h i r d Majles opened i n November 191U, but

A z a r b a i j a n was not represented i n i t . Nothing r e s u l t e d from

the government's n e g o t i a t i o n s w i t h R u s s i a and Ottoman Turkey,

which d i d not withdraw t h e i r troop6 from I r a n as they had

promised. I n the summer of 1915 t h e r e were suggestions t h a t

I r a n might j o i n the Germans a g a i n s t R u s s i a . The Democrats,

who were the l e a d e r s of the n a t i o n a l i s t and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t

movement, and t h e i r deputies i n the M a j l e s , t r i e d t o arrange

t h i s with the German L e g a t i o n . On November 15» 1915» R u s s i a

and B r i t a i n sent another ultimatum t o I r a n . The German,

A u s t r i a n and T u r k i s h Legations were then e x p e l l e d . The

Democrat l e a d e r s l e f t Tehran and went f i r s t to Qom, then to

Kermanshah, and then to Turkey and Germany. The t h i r d Majles

thus came t o an end having l a s t e d only one y e a r .

I n A z e r b a i j a n the s i t u a t i o n then became r a t h e r q u i e t e r .

The R u s s i a n s b u i l t the r a i l w a y between J o l f a and T a b r i z . In

 83

March 19171 however, the Romanov dynasty of R u s s i a was over-

thrown, and i n November 1917 the Bolshevik r e v o l u t i o n took
p l a c e . Most of the R u s s i a n s o l d i e r s i n I r a n went hack to
R u s s i a , l o o t i n g people's food and property as they passed.
The B r i t i s h , K a s r a v i s a y s , hoped to take the p l a c e of the
R u s s i a n s i n northern I r a n . They encouraged the formation of
a combined f o r c e of Armenian and A s s y r i a n s o l d i e r s to f i g h t
a g a i n s t the Ottoman T u r k s , under the command of the A s s y r i a n
h i shop Mar Shimun. T h i s l e d t o i n t e r n a l f i g h t i n g between
the Armenian and A s s y r i a n C h r i s t i a n s and the Moslems;
K a s r a v i * s t a t e s t h a t i n t h i s f i g h t i n g ten thousand people
were k i l l e d . The C h r i s t i a n s s e i z e d Orumleh, and t h e r e was
a l o t of bloodshed a t Khoy and Salmas. Ottoman T u r k i s h
troops then r e t u r n e d to A z e r b a i j a n , and when they reached
Orumieh the C h r i s t i a n s f l e d . The Ottoman Turks t r i e d to
persuade the people of Salmas and Orumieh to j o i n a pro-
T u r k i s h and a n t i - B r i t i s h movement which they c a l l e d E t t e h a d
ol-Eslam (Union of I s l a m ) .

A f t e r the B o l s h e v i k r e v o l u t i o n i n R u s s i a , v a r i o u s

n a t i o n a l i s t groups such as the Democrats became a c t i v e again

in Iran. The m a j o r i t y of them intended t h a t I r a n should

enter the war on the s i d e of Germany and Ottoman Turkey.

C e r t a i n other groups wanted I r a n to s i d e w i t h B r i t a i n .

1. T a r i k h - e he.ldah-saleh. p.725.
 8h

B r i t i s h troops occupied Kermanshah, Hamadan and Qazvin i n

February 1918, t a k i n g the p l a c e of the R u s s i a n s , and they

l a t e r occupied S n z e l i and i n t e r v e n e d a t Baku. T h e i r commander,

General D u n s t e r v i l l e , wrote a hook about t h e i r adventures.^

The B r i t i s h a l s o proposed i n March 1918 t o organize a u n i f i e d

and r e g u l a r army f o r I r a n . The I r a n i a n government, then

headed by Mostowfi ol-Mamalek, was ready t o accept t h e i r

suggestion on c o n d i t i o n t h a t they should e x p e l f o r e i g n troops

and r e s c i n d the Anglo-Russian agreement of 1907. I n s t e a d of

t a k i n g n o t i c e of the I r a n i a n government's demands, the

2
B r i t i s h , so K a s r a v i s t a t e s i n h i s book, t r e a t e d them as
ridiculous. I n 1917, a r e b e l l i o n had broken out i n G i l a n
under the l e a d e r s h i p of Mirza Kuchek Khan, who had formed
and a s s o c i a t i o n c a l l e d Ettehad o l - E s l a m . The r e b e l s were
c a l l e d J a n g a l i s because they came from the f o r e s t s of G i l a n .
They showed great enmity towards the B r i t i s h . They had^
w i t h them a number of A u s t r i a n s o l d i e r s l e d by an o f f i c e r
named Von Pachen, and a l s o some Turks and some r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s .
I n J u l y 1918 they were beaten i n a f i g h t w i t h General
D u n s t e r v i l l e ' s B r i t i s h troops, who then occupied Rasht and
E n z e l i (now Bandar P a h l a v i ) .
When the f i r s t world war ended w i t h the v i c t o r y of
1 . The Adventures of D u n s t e r f o r c e . London, 1920.
2. T a r i k h - e h e j d a h - s a l e h . p.786.
3. I b i d , p.789.
 85

B r i t a i n , Prance and the United S t a t e s i n November 1918, the

Ottoman T u r k i s h troops l e f t I r a n i a n A z a r b a i j a n . At t h a t
time I r a n was i n an awkward p o s i t i o n . New c a b i n e t s were
formed a t Tehran every few months, but they d i d not have
much a u t h o r i t y . The only remarkable achievement of Sarasam
o l - S a l t a n e h ' s cabinet (May-July 1918) was the denunciation
of a l l previous c o n t r a c t s which I r a n had made w i t h T s a r i s t
Russia. The cabinet of Vosuq ol-Dowleh ( J u l y 1918-June
1920) sent a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , Moshaver ol-Mamalek, to the
peace conference which met i n P a r i s (January - June 1919)»
but he was not admitted. The B r i t i s h n e v e r t h e l e s s promised
to d i s c u s s the 1907 agreement w i t h the Russians as soon as
the s i t u a t i o n i n R u s s i a should calm down, and a l s o to hand
over the p o l i c e o r g a n i z a t i o n which they had s e t up i n
southern I r a n (South P e r s i a R i f l e s ) to the I r a n i a n government.
I n August 1919 Vosuq ol-Dowleh*s cabinet signed a d r a f t
t r e a t y with B r i t a i n of which the main p r o v i s i o n s were as
2
follows:
1. B r i t a i n would r e s p e c t I r a n ' s complete independence.
2. B r i t a i n would provide expert a d v i s e r s f o r I r a n .
3. B r i t a i n would provide new war equipment f o r the I r a n i a n
F o r c e s a t I r a n ' s expense.
U. B r i t a i n would make a loan to I r a n .
1. T a r i k h - e hB.1dah-saleh. p.78#.
2. I b i d . , pp 32h-825.
 86

5. B r i t a i n would provide necessary f a c i l i t i e s f o r improve-

ment o f t r a d e .

6. The two c o u n t r i e s would confer about r e v i s i n g t h e

customs t a r i f f i n I r a n ' s i n t e r e s t and about the choice
of f o r e i g n a d v i s e r s . Furthermore B r i t a i n and I r a n would
review a l l t h e i r previous t r e a t i e s and c o n t r a c t s .
B r i t a i n would support I r a n ' s claim f o r war damage
compensation from other b e l l i g e r e n t s . B r i t a i n would
support j u s t i f i a b l e r e v i s i o n s of I r a n ' s f r o n t i e r s .

The I r a n i a n people were not s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h i s d r a f t

t r e a t y , and although Vosuq. ol-Dowleh p a i d no heed t o t h e
people, i t was never r a t i f i e d .

Meanwhile i n A z a r b a i j a n Shaykh Mohammad K h i a b a n l , a

molla who had been a Democrat Deputy i n the second M a j l e s ,
had formed a new Democrat p a r t y w i t h a newspaper Tajaddod

a t Tabriz. When the government wanted t o organize a r e g u l a r

p o l i c e f o r c e a t T a b r i z , IQiiab'ani opposed t h i s p l a n and
persuaded a number of people t o s e i z e the government o f f i c e s
in Tabriz. The l o c a l Gendarmerie supported him, and the two
Swedish o f f i c e r s B y o r l i n g andFokleclo l e f t the c i t y . Khiabani
b o l d l y began t o govern on h i s own i n T a b r i z . He renamed
2
A z a r b a i j a n "Azadestan" OLand of the F r e e " ) , and sent messages
to Tehran asking f o r r e c o g n i t i o n . The Prime M i n i s t e r Vosuq.

1. S t a r t e d a t T a b r i z i n 1916.
2. T a r i k h - e he.1dah-saleh. p.877.
 8
?
ol-Dowleh was eager t o remove K h i a b a n i , but not strong enough
to do s o . The only body of men at T a b r i z which r e f u s e d to

obey Khiabani was the I r a n i a n Cossack detachment, which was

s t i l l commanded by R u s s i a n ( a n t i - B o l s h e v i k ) o f f i c e r s . The

government had no means of removing K h i a b a n i except through

t h i s Cossack f o r c e , Khiabani was k i l l e d i n a f i g h t w i t h

the Cossacks i n September 1920. One of h i s f o l l o w e r s j o i n e d

E s m a ' i l Agja Simko, a K u r d i s h t r i b a l r e b e l i n the country

west of Orumiyeh w i t h a view to t a k i n g revenge on Khiabani's

killers, E s m a ' i l Agja caused a l o t of bloodshed and many

times defeated the government's f o r c e s ,

K a s r a v i ends the second and l a s t volume of h i s r e c o r d

of I r a n ' s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e by mentioning t h a t the

« • 1
M i n i s t e r of War Reza Khan took o f f i c e on A p r i l 25» 1921,
and then, having reorganized the I r a n i a n armed f o r c e s , d e a l t
p
w i t h Simko and other r e b e l s . K a s r a v i does not r e l a t e or
d i s c u s s the great events of t h a t year which marked the
beginning of a new e r a , namely the R u s s o - I r a n i a n t r e a t y of
February 26, 1921, and the withdrawl of the B r i t i s h troops
from I r a n ; but thanks to Reza Khan, peace and order and
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i f e were r e s t o r e d i n I r a n a f t e r a long
p e r i o d of anarchy.
1 . L a t e r Reza Shah.
2. T a r i k h - e he.jdah-saleh. p.900.
 88

Some Comments on K a s r a v i ' s H i s t o r y of

the I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Struggle

I n a took c a l l e d Qlam-e-Azarbai.1an dar Enoelab-e Mash-

r u t l a t r e I r a n ("Azarbaijan's U p r i s i n g i n the I r a n i a n C o n s t i -
t u t i o n a l R e v o l u t i o n " ) * the author, Engineer Karim T a h e r z a d e h * ^
p r a i s e s K a s r a v i ' s work as a h i s t o r i a n . He t h i n k s t h a t
K a s r a v i ' s r e s e a r c h i n t o the d e t a i l s of the constitutional
s t r u g g l e r e a l l y deserves admiration. Although a f t e r the
p u b l i c a t i o n of K a s r a v i ' s second volume "Eighteen y e a r s of
the H i s t o r y of A z e r b a i j a n " ^ a great number of h i s opponents
t r i e d to d i s c r e d i t the e f f o r t s of the A z a r b a i j a n i l e a d e r s ,
honest r e s e a r c h e r s know t h a t the A z a r b a i j a n i s strove to
r e s t o r e I r a n ' s l i b e r t y and f i n a l l y achieved v i c t o r y f o r I r a n .
On the other hand Dr. Mahdi Malekzadeh, author of a s i x -
volume "History of the I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Revolution"
completed i n 1953* w h i l e admiring K a s r a v i ' s work as the
masterpiece i n i t s f i e l d , c r i t i c i z e s i t on a few points.
Although K a s r a v i d i d h i s b e s t to produce an o b j e c t i v e h i s t o r y ,
he was l i v i n g according t o h i s own admission i n A z a r b a i j a n
during the r e v o l u t i o n and was a t t h a t time quite young. He
could not p e r s o n a l l y witness or p a r t i c i p a t e i n most of the
r e v o l u t i o n ' s events, and was consequently not aware or not

v e r y w e l l informed about the p o s i t i o n i n c i t i e s other than

* »
1• Taherzadeh s a y s , t h a t K a s r a v i used the notes of a c e r t a i n
Mohammad ' A l i Nateq. i n h i s r e s e a r c h f o r t h i s book and t h a t
he was the only h i s t o r i a n who had w r i t t e n about the
Mojahedin and -fcheir great achievement. ^
2. T a r i k h - e Enaelab-e Mashrutiat-e I r a n . s±ac v o l s . . Tehran
1328/1949-1332/1953.
 89
Tabriz. Although he took great t r o u b l e over h i s r e s e a r c h ,
e s p e c i a l l y i n the f i e l d of h i s t o r y , he did not have enough
information about a c t i v i t i e s elsewhere during the r e v o l u t i o n ,
and f a i l e d to mention them. Nevertheless he d i d h i s best to
w r i t e a c l e a r account of the events i n A z e r b a i j a n , and h i s
book i s w e l l worth reading. Unfortunately even here he has
made some mistakes. Dr. Malekzadeh t h i n k s that K a s r a v i
has over estimated the r o l e s of some of the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n
the A z a r b a i j a n i s t r u g g l e and underestimated the e f f o r t s of
others. K a s r a v i was o v e r - e n t h u s i a s t i c about the Mojfcthedin
and exaggerated t h e i r importance. Being h i m s e l f a brave and
v e r y outspoken man, K a s r a v i n a t u r a l l y f e l t great admiration
f o r S a t t a r Khan and B'aqer Khan; but these two were not only
defenders of the C o n s t i t u t i o n I n A z e r b a i j a n . Dr. Malekzadeh
a l s o complains t h a t he could not form a p r e c i s e p i c t u r e of
the i n t e r n a l c o n f l i c t s a t T a b r i z by r e f e r r i n g to K a s r a v i ' s
book. He considers t h a t K a s r a v i has exaggerated the impor-
tance of Mr. B a s k e r v i l l e (an American with a B.A. degree from
P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y who was a teacher i n the Memorial School
at T a b r i z and was murdered i n 1909)» and that K a s r a v i iw wrong
i n saying that Mr. B a s k e r v i l l e had a p r i v a t e army of three
hundred men. Furthermore, K a s r a v i has not c o r r e c t l y explained
the v i c t o r y won by Mojahedin a t Qal'eh-ye Saridagh. Dr.
Malekzadeh t h i n k s t h a t the Anjoman-e Sa'adat (an I r a n i a n
 90

p o l i t i c a l club o r i g i n a l l y founded at I s t a n b u l ) gave tremendous

h e l p to the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s at T a b r i z ; K a s r a v i mentions
i t with r e s p e c t , but does not give a l i s t of i t s members.
Dr. Malekz&deh's c r i t i c i s m s are w e l l documented, and seem to
be j u s t i f i e d , though they are r e l a t i v e l y minor. He thinks;
t h a t the t i t l e of K a s r a v i ' s book should have been " H i s t o r y of
the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Revolution i n i&zarbiaijan", because i t i s
i n f a c t a d e t a i l e d n a r r a t i v e of the s t r u g g l e i n that p r o v i n c e .

I n a book on l&zarbiaiJan's l e a d i n g men i n t h i s period,^ Mr.

Mahdi Mojtahedi t h i n k s that K a s r a v i ' s r e c o r d of the I r a n i a n

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n cannot be completely r e l i a b l e ,

because. K a s r a v i i n w r i t i n g h i s book took h i s p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g s

i n t o account as w e l l as the h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s . For instance.,

Mahdi Mojtahedi c o n s i d e r s K a s r a v i ' s estimate of the importance;

of Sattlar Khan and the Mojahedin to be exaggerated. He says

t h a t K a s r a v i admired i l l i t e r a t e people's e f f o r t s f o r t h e

cause of l i b e r t y more than those of h i g h l y educated people,

because he thought t h a t simple people have simple notions

u n s p o i l t by wrong i d e o l o g i e s , and f o r that reason are more

patriotic. Mojfahedi recognizes that Kasravi's researches

gained f o r him a h i g h r e p u t a t i o n at home and a l s o abroad where

he a t t r a c t e d the a t t e n t i o n of many o r i e n t a l i s t s . He l i k e n s

K a s r a v i ' s Tiarikh-e Mashruteh to Ferdowsi's Shahnameh. On the

other hand, he t h i n k s that K a s r a v i b e l i t t l e d great f i g u r e s of

t h e movement such as Taqiziadeh and T a r b i y a t . Mojtahedi

1 . Mahdi Mojtahedi, Re.1ial-e l£zarbai.1&n dar *Asr-e M a s h r u t i a t .
:

Tehran, I32i|/1945.
 91
accuses K a s r a v i of having i n d i r e c t l y encouraged the
A z a r b a i j a n i s - to consider themselves a d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n from

the r e s t of the country; although K a s r a v i d i d not deliberately

urge them to t h i r & i n t h i s way, h i s w r i t i n g s , according to

Mojtahedi could give t h i s impression, Mojtahedi says t h a t

anyone who wishes to understand the events which took p l a c e

when A z a r b a i j a n f e l l i n t o the hands of s e p a r a t i s t r e g i m e s , - i . e .

the Democrat regime of Mohammad Khiabani i n 1920 and the

Russian-backed "Democrat" regime of J a ' f a r P i s h e v a r i in

1945-1946 should c e r t a i n l y r e f e r to K a s r a v i ' s T a r l k h - e

Mashruteh. I n s p i t e of these c r i t i c i s m s , Mojtahedi b e l i e v e s

t h a t s i n c e a r e a l l y trustworthy h i s t o r y of events of the

r e v o l u t i o n has not yet been produced, K a s r a v i ' s book i s most

valuable. He acknowledges t h a t K a s r a v i was a scholarly

researcher i n the f i e l d of h i s t o r y , but t h i n k s t h a t he cannot

be c l a s s e d i n the same category as Taqizadeh, Minovi or

Qazv.ihi, because he was a very s e l f - o p i n i o n a t e d man and a

person w i t h such a mentality cannot be a completely o b j e c t i v e

and honest researcher.

» 2
Dr. F a r i d u n Adamiat, i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n to h i s book on
"The idea of freedom and the o r i g i n s of the Constitutional
u p r i s i n g " pays generous t r i b u t e to K a s r a v i as a , h i s t o r i a n
when he says that of a l l the r e c o r d s of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l
1. Mojtahedi^ - R e j a l A z e r b a i j a n Par Asr Mashruteh. Tehran,
1327/1949, PP 129-131.
2. Feyaydun Adam^Lat, Fekr-e Azadi va Moqaddameh-ye Nehzat-e
I r a n . I n t r o d u c t i o n , Tehran 1340/1961.
 92

movement K a s r a v i ' s Tarikh-e Mashruteh-ye I r a n i s the most

r e l i a b l e and trustworthy. However, Dr. Adamiat a l s o p o i n t s
out that K a s r a v i ' s "book i s not above c r i t i c i s m and cannot
be regarded as being a complete reoond of the events. Since
the r e v o l u t i o n many new f a c t s have been brought to l i g h t .

Another admirer of K a s r a v i i s Dr. Hafez Farmanfarmayan,

who regards K a s r a v i ' s bookas^hsmst comprehensive work yet
w r i t t e n on the s u b j e c t of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n .

K a s r a v i ' s a r t i c l e s on h i s t o r i c a l s u b j e c t s .

I n a d d i t i o n to these books, K a s r a v i wrote v a l u a b l e

2
a r t i c l e s on h i s t o r i c a l s u b j e c t s which were p u b l i s h e d in
d i f f e r e n t newspapers and p e r i o d i c a l s . Among them are The
A f s h a r s of Khuzestan. The H i s t o r y of Tabarestan and My Notes.
C i t i e s and R u l e r s . The Afshar T r i b e . Shams ol-Din T e g h r l ' i .
Taymur Malek. the Bayondoris. H i s t o r y and the H i s t o r i a n .
Each of these i s worthy of a b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n h e r e .
1• The A f s h a r s of Khuzestan (Afshar-ha-ye Khuzestan ) ^
K a s r a v i proves that the A f s h a r s were f o r a long time one of
the important t r i b e s of Khuzestan. O r i g i n a l l y they had come
from C e n t r a l A s i a ( T u r k i s t a n ) . At the beginning of the
S a f a v i d p e r i o d , some of them migrated t o Khuzestan. I n the
1. Dr. Hafez garmanfarmayan. Ketab-shenasi-ye Tarikh-e
Jadid-e I r a n . Tehran, J^Uh/lSb^, p.19*
2. C o l l e c t e d by Yahya Zoka i n Chehel Maaaleh-ye K a s r a v i .
Tehran, 1336/1957.
3. Chehel Maaaleh. pp 80-85.
 93

anarchy f o l l o w i n g the death of Nader Shah, they were d r i v e n

out of t h a t province. At present a s m a l l number of them
remain near Shushtar and s t i l l l i v e a f t e r the t r a d i t i o n of
t h e i r t r i b e , but they have forgotten T u r k i s h which was t h e i r
n a t i v e language and now speak the l o c a l P e r s i a n d i a l e c t ,
Shushtari.

1
2• H i s t o r y of Tabarestan and My Notes. Kasravi

i n s i s t s t h a t t h e t e r r i t o r y of Mazandaran, formerly called

Tabarestan, i s of great importance from the h i s t o r i c a l point

of view, because of i t s high mountains, narrow roads and

natural f o r t i f i c a t i o n s . T h i s p a r t of I r a n always a t t r a c t e d

the i n t e r e s t of r u l e r s . A separate chapter of I r a n ' s

h i s t o r y has been w r i t t e n i n t h i s region w i t h i t s unique

n a t u r a l f e a t u r e s , whose people could defend themselves more

effectively than other I r a n i a n s when they were a t t a c k e d by

enemies. E a r l y i n the 2nd century A.H. ( 8 t h century A.-D.)

the Arabs were able to conquer many t e r r i t o r i e s ; i n A s i a

they advanced as f a r a s the border of China and s e t t l e d on

the coast o f the P a c i f i c Ocean, and i n Europe they reached

the r i v e r L o i r e . The n a t i v e s of Tabarestan, however, s t i l l

s t r u g g l e d hard to r e t a i n t h e i r own customs, and t o save

their ancestral religion. Kasravi describes t h e i r struggle.

As we know, he had v i s i t e d Mazandaran and had been v e r y much

1 • Chehel Maaaleh. pp 12-19. T a r i k h - e T a b a r e s t y i va
Yaddashtha-^ye man.
 94

impressed "by i t s b e a u t i f u l scenery; f o r t h i s reason he took

a special interest i n i t s history. He mentions a number of
t e x t s which he s t u d i e d and used f o r w r i t i n g the h i s t o r y of
* 1
Tabarestan.
> # # o
3» C i t i e s and R u l e r s (Shahr-ha v a S h a h r i a r a n ) . Kasravi
concluded from h i s h i s t o r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y
of h i s t o r i a n s f e l t obliged t o show t h a t t h e founder o f every
c i t y was a k i n g . Geographers such as Yaqut ol-Hamavi (d,1229)
and Hamdollah Mostowfi (d.1349) accepted the popular view
t h a t any c i t y must have been b u i l t by a r u l e r . As a general
p r i n c i p l e , however, a number of people who l i v e together
b u i l d a v i l l a g e i n which the way o f l i v i n g g r a d u a l l y becomes
c i v i l i z e d and the population i n c r e a s e s , u n t i l e v e n t u a l l y a
c i t y comes i n t o being. Most o f I r a n ' s c i t i e s were peopled
a f t e r Islam, K a s r a v i searched t h e records of t h e i r h i s t o r y

1« ( 1 ) T a r i k h Fotuh J e b a l Tabarestan. by Abu'l-Hasan ' A l i ebn

Mohammad ol-Ma^di*. (2) 'Egad ol-Sahar v a Qalayed al-Dorar
by Abu'l-Hasan ' A l i ebn Mohammad ol-Izadi. ( 3 ) Bavandnameh.
by an unknown w r i t e r , , ( 4 ) T a r i k h - e T b a r e s t a n . by Mohammad
a

ebn Hasan ebn E s f a n d i a r Amoli ( P r o f e s s o r E . G. Browne

p u b l i s h e d an abridged t r a n s l a t i o n of t h i s work i n E n g l i s h ,
Leiden 1905). ( 5 ) Tarikh-e Mazandaran by Ebn^Abi Moslem.
(6) Tarikh-e Tabarestan v a Ruyian v a Mazandaran. by Sayyed
Z a h i r o l - D i n Mar'ashi. (7) Al-Tadvin f i J e b a l o l - S h a r v i n .
by Mohammad ebn Hasan Khan Sani* ol-Dowleh. ( 8 ) Tarikh-e
Tabarestan. by Mirza J a ' f a r A r t e ' i . ( 9 ) T a r i k h - e Tabarestan
by Shaykh ' A l i G i l a n i . (10) Tarikh-e Mazandaran. by Mowlana
Owldi ' o l l a h Amoli. (11) Tarikh-e Mazandaran. by ' A l i ebn
Jamal o l - D i n Ruyani.
2. Chehel Maaaleh. pp 114-117.
 95
and found t h a t most of I r a n ' s c i t i e s were e s t a b l i s h e d i n
t h i s way. F o r example, Mashhad was a v i l l a g e c a l l e d Gonabad
u n t i l Hiarun o l - R a s h i d and the Emam Rezia were b u r i e d there
( i n A.D. 809 and 818 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , a f t e r which time i t
g r a d u a l l y became c i v i l i z e d and populous; now i t i s the c h i e f
c i t y o f Khorasan. B a r f o r u s h (now B a b o l ) , the b i g g e s t c i t y
of Mazandaran, was formerly a v i l l a g e c a l l e d Mamatir, but
today i t i s a v e r y important commercial c e n t r e . Abadan i n
Khuzestan was a small v i l l a g e a t the beginning o f the Q a j a r
p e r i o d , and only began t o grow i n importance i n Mohammad
Shah's r e i g n when s h i p s were enabled t o s a i l up the Shatt
ol-'Arab t o i t . Tehran was a v i l l a g e before t h e r i s e o f the

0 0

Q a j a r s , and now i s the c a p i t a l o f I r a n . K a s r a v i proves t h a t

none o f the important modern c i t i e s were founded by k i n g s ,

but f i n d s evidence t h a t some ancient c i t i e s were r o y a l

foundations. Although the b u i l d i n g o f a c i t y i s not an easy

t a s k , even f o r a very strong and powerful k i n g , i t h a s t o be

admitted t h a t the founders o f c i t i e s i n S a s a n i d and Achaemenid

days were mostly k i n g s . K a s r a v i ' s o b j e c t i o n t o other

h i s t o r i a n s i s t h a t they i n s i s t e d t h a t only a k i n g could found

a city.
1
h. The Afshar T r i b e ( I l - e A f s h a r ) . Kasravi i n h i s i n v e s t i -

gations found evidence about the h i s t o r y o f t h i s t r i b e i n the

c h r o n i c l e o f V a s s a f (which covers the p e r i o d 1257-1328). The

1. Ohehel Maaaleh. p.122.
 96

A f s h a r s migrated t o I r a n during t h e S a l j u q i d p e r i o d , i . e . i n
the 6 t h century A.H./I2th century A.D. and f i r s t of a l l
;

occupied p a r t of Khuzestan. L a t e r some o f them moved t o

other p r o v i n c e s . They helped the S a f a v i d k i n g s , "being one
of the Qizilb'ash t r i b e s which brought t h a t S h i ' i t e dynasty
to power.

*. 1
5» ShamB o l - D i n Toghra'i. T h i s brave I r a n i a n twice saved
T a b r i z when t h e Mongols invaded I r a n . During t h a t time t h e
people were s u f f e r i n g great h a r d s h i p , a s the barbarous
Mongols showed no mercy and d i d not spare even innocent
children. When the Mongols advanced towards Azarbaidan,
Shams o l - D i n Toghra'i prepared t o defend T a b r i z , and the
people were ready t o f i g h t . Knowing t h i s , t h e Mongols d i d
not approach T a b r i z but i n s t e a d a t t a c k e d Sarab and k i l l e d
many people i n t h a t a r e a . When they again intended t o
a t t a c k T a b r i z , Shams o l - D i n Toghra'i through h i s c l e v e r n e s s
2
and diplomacy saved the people from the Mongols. Kasravi

p r a i s e s h i s courage, and says t h a t I r a n i a n s should pay more

a t t e n t i o n to such h e r o i c p e r s o n a l i t i e s i n t h e i r country's

h i s t o r y , whose names u n f o r t u n a t e l y have been n e g l e c t e d and

are not known t o the mass of the people.

6. Taymur Malek? One o f the h i s t o r i c a l f i g u r e s whose

1. Chehel Maaaleh. pp 266-273. T h i s a r t i c l e was a l s o r e p r i n t e d
i n a c o l l e c t i o n of, K a s r a v i ' s w r i t i n g s c a l l e d Nik o Bad f

published by t h e Azadegan p a r t y , Tehran 1327/19^8.

2. Chehel Maaaleh. p.266.
3. Chehel Maaaleh. pp 27*+-279.
 97

name should he remembered i s Taymur Malek. He was a brave

man who showed h i s courage and valour when the Mongols
attacked Khojand, a town i n Farghana ( C e n t r a l A s i a ) . He
f e a r l e s s l y met t h e i r a t t a c k , and k i l l e d enormous numbers
of them. L a t e r he j o i n e d S o l t a n Mohammad Khwarazmshah, and
e v e n t u a l l y he became a mystic and went t o Damascus. After
a w h i l e , when the s i t u a t i o n i n I r a n was q u i e t e r , he returned
to Farghan, but was k i l l e d by a Mongol whom he had e a r l i e r
blinded i n b a t t l e . K a s r a v i s t r e s s e s the importance o f
r e c o g n i s i n g such brave men, and says that i f I r a n had had
more men o f t h i s s o r t , the Mongols could not have conquered
the country by treachery and t e r r o r . He again deplores the
ignorance of modem I r a n i a n s about such f i g u r e s .
* 2
7« The Bavondoris. I n t h i s a r t i c l e K a s r a v i observes t h a t
I r a n ' s h i s t o r y from the time of the S a l j u q i d s t i l l the
S a f a v i d s i s f u l l of Vurmoil and i n s e c u r i t y . One o f the most
d i f f i c u l t periods was during the r e i g n of the Bayondoris,
which l a s t e d f o r t h i r t y - f i v e years (1466-1501). This period
has a l s o been neglected by h i s t o r i a n s . I r a n became weaker
during the Bayondori p e r i o d . The founder of the l i n e was
Hasan Beg, who was o r i g i n a l l y from the Aq. Qoyunlu Torkoman
tribe. He was known as Uzun Hasan and was t h e i r g r e a t e s t
r u l e r (d.1478). T h e i r c a p i t a l was T a b r i z , and they r u l e d i n
1. Chehel Maaaleh. pp279.
2. Chehel Maqaleh, pp 303*309.
 98

A z a r f r a i j a n , Arran, F a r s and Iraq.. They were c o n s t a n t l y a t

war. The l a s t r u l e r of t h e l i n e , S o l t a n Morad, was defeated
and k i l l e d by Shah E s m a ' i l ( i n 1503). The t r o u b l e s of the
Bayondori dynasty exemplify the many d i f f i c u l t i e s of I r a n
at t h a t time.

1
8. H i s t o r y and t h e H i s t o r i a n ( T a r i k h v a Tarikh-negar)-

T h i s i s one of the most valuable a r t i c l e s w r i t t e n by K a s r a v i .

At the beginning he speaks of h i s i n t e r e s t i n h i s t o r y , and

says t h a t there a r e many methods of w r i t i n g a h i s t o r y book.

One i s t h a t the h i s t o r i a n simply d e s c r i b e s an event, which

to K a s r a v i seems inadequate and i n s i g n i f i c a n t . Another

method i s that of i n t e r p r e t i n g a h i s t o r i c a l event; K a s r a v i
2
thinks t h a t although t h i s method i s often used to deceive

readers, nevertheless i t i s sometimes u s e f u l , because i t

can give moral guidance t o r e a d e r s , and he p r e f e r s i t t o

the f i r s t method. The t h i r d method, which i s t o give

r e a d e r s the idea of a b e t t e r way of l i f e and of avoiding

p a s t mistakes through t e l l i n g them about h i s t o r i c a l i n c i d e n t s ,

i s t h e b e s t method of a l l . I t enables the reader t o l e a r n

the f a c t s of h i s t o r y and t o l e a r n l e s s o n s from them, Kasravi

says t h a t i t i s very d i f f i c u l t to w r i t e such h i s t o r y and t h a t

J
very few h i s t o r y books of t h i s nature can be found. There

are a l s o s e v e r a l other methods. From the beginning o f

1. Chehel Maaaleh.
2. Ibid.,pp 314-315.
3. Ibid., p.316.
 99

recorded time, k i n g s or r u l e r s have f o l l o w e d s p e c i a l p o l i c i e s

of t h e i r own. Research i n t o t h e i r p o l i c i e s and 'diplomacy i s

called political history. K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t hooks on

p o l i t i c a l h i s t o r y a r e u s e f u l , hut not f o r the mass of t h e

people.^ Sometimes people t h i n k t h a t dimplomacy h a s d e t e r s

mined the caurae of events through the c e n t u r i e s , a s i f a l l

the i n c i d e n t s which happen i n t h e world have "been the r e s u l t

of s e c r e t designs o f r u l e r s which h i s t o r y can uncover.

K a s r a v i t h i n k s that t h e f i r s t world war was the r e s u l t of

many such hidden p o l i t i c a l designs; but even though a simple

r e c o r d of these would alone be v a l u a b l e , a search f o r t h e

deeper causes of such a great h i s t o r i c a l event would be much

2
more admirable. There i s no need however, f o r a h i s t o r i a n

to r e f r a i n from w r i t i n g about a h i s t o r i c a l event because he

i s ignorant of i t s c a u s e s . I t i s h i s duty to r e c o r d events

h o n e s t l y and s i n c e r e l y so t h a t f u t u r e generations may know

the f a c t s . F o r example, when K a s r a v i began t o w r i t e the

h i s t o r y o f the I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n a l movement, some c r i t i c s

had denied the value of h i s e f f o r t s and accused him o f n o t

understanding the o r i g i n s of t h i s great r e v o l u t i o n ^ but i n

r e p l y he s a y s , " I f I take your a d v i c e , I w i l l never be a b l e

to w r i t e any s o r t of h i s t o r y a t a l l . A h i s t o r y of t h e r e v o -

l u t i o n i n I r a n , even i f a l l the d e t a i l s of i t s causes and

-• »
1 • Chehel Maaaleh. p.316.
— •
2. Ibid., p.317.
3. -ibid., p.318.
 100

o r i g i n s are n e g l e c t e d , can s t i l l be a r e c o r d of the most

important phase of t h i s country's h i s t o r y . " He a l s o says t h a t
i t w i l l a t l e a s t give an i d e a of the number o f people who
sacrificed their lives for liberty. Other c r i t i c s had
asked how h i s t o r i a n s could be t r u s t e d t o t e l l the t r u t h i n
such c a s e s . He r e p l i e s , " I f we use our reason, we w i l l f i n d
2
the f a l s e elements i n h i s t o r y . " He s t r e s s e s the f a c t t h a t
he d i d not depend only on what other people had w r i t t e n or
s a i d , and adds, "We have t o use our b r a i n s and s e a r c h deeply
to get an accurate p i c t u r e . " He i s convinced t h a t a h i s t o r i a n
must be honest i n h i s way of r e c o r d i n g h i s t o r y , because,
otherwise h i s w r i t i n g s w i l l have no v a l u e .
I n K a s r a v i ' s opinion,^ the h i s t o r y o f the Ghaznavids by
Bayhaqi (d.1077) shows t h a t i t s author was a trustworthy man.
Besides r e c o r d i n g events h o n e s t l y , a h i s t o r i a n should i f
p o s s i b l e look f o r the causes o f an event. Those who c o n s i d e r
every h i s t o r i c a l work a ; ^ r e l i a b l e source from which t o
draw one's knowledge o f a h i s t o r i c a l i n c i d e n t are very much
mistaken. K a s r a v i ^ t h i n k s t h a t not everybody i s capable of
w r i t i n g h i s t o r y ; one must be very shrewd i n order t o avoid
mistakes. P l u t a r c h , whose aim i n w r i t i n g h i s t o r y was t o
i l l u s t r a t e the progress o f the Greek people, i s i n K a s r a v i ' s
1• Chehel Maaaleh. p.319.
2
» I b i d . , -p.320.
3 . I b i d . , p.322.
h. I b i d . p.323.
f
 101
eyes one of the g r e a t e s t h i s t o r i a n s . I n Plutarch's l i v e s we
can see how he t r i e d to compare Greek s o l d i e r s and rulers
with Romans. K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t i n the P e r s i a n language
the only outstanding and profound h i s t o r i c a l works are
Bayhaqi's h i s t o r y of the Ghaznavids and Eskandar Beg's
h i s t o r y of Shah 'Abbas ('Alamara-ye 'Abbas!) composed i n
l6l6. He p o i n t s out t h a t there are P e r s i a n h i s t o r y books
which are of l i t t l e or no v a l u e , such as the Uasekh o l -
T a v a r i k h ^ w r i t t e n ( i n 1424) by Sharaf o l - D i n ' A l i Y a z d i , who
wrote about Taymur and always t r i e d t o conceal h i s c r u e l t y .
K a s r a v i says t h a t such persons had no r i g h t to c a l l their
4
books h i s t o r y . He mentions the names of a few other h i s -
t o r i a n s who d i d not care whether or not they wrote the t r u t h ,
such as 'Emad o l - D i n Kateb E s f a h a n i (d.1201), who wrote about
the S a l j u q i d dynasty and c r i t i c i z e d t h e i r way of governing
and t h e i r c r u e l t y , although he admired t h e i r devotion and
g r e a t respect f o r r e l i g i o n .
K a s r a v i ' s S t y l e of H i s t o r y W r i t i n g .
K a s r a v i wrote books and a r t i c l e s on many d i f f e r e n t
s u b j e c t s , but h i s g r e a t e s t e f f o r t was i n the f i e l d of h i s t o r y ,
and he i s undoubtedly one of the g r e a t e s t I r a n i a n h i s t o r i a n s .
He remarks t h a t many previous I r a n i a n h i s t o r i a n s had tried
to r e c o r d the events of t h e i r own ages, but having developed
1. Chehel Maaaleh. p.321.
2. K a s r a v i had probably not been able to read the General
H i s t o r y (Jame' o l - T a b a r i k h ) of Rashid o l - D i n (d.1318).
3. According to E. G. Browne, L i t e r a r y H i s t o r y of P e r s i a . V o l . 3 i
T
PP 362-365, Sharaf o l - D i n ' A l i Y a z d i s c h r o n i c l e of Taymur
i s c a l l e d ^afarnameh.
4. Chehel Maaaleh. p.325.
 102

a v e r y r h e t o r i c a l l i t e r a r y s t y l e , they always wanted to w r i t e

about h i s t o r i c a l events i n t h i s s t y l e and were q u i t e unable
to r e c o r d them i n simple language. K a s r a v i h i m s e l f s t r o v e
above a l l to v e r i f y the f a c t s of h i s t o r y .

Although one cannot deny that K a s r a v i ' s c r i t i c i s m s of

former h i s t o r i a n s are i n themselves j u s t i f i e d , they do not
take i n t o account a l l the a s p e c t s of the matter. Since
those h i s t o r i a n s l i v e d i n v e r y d i f f e r e n t circumstances when
t h e r e was no freedom of speech or w r i t i n g ( f o r no such f r e e -
dom e x i s t e d i n I r a n before the G o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n ) ,
they had to be c a r e f u l about what they wrote and could not
p o s s i b l y have d i s c u s s e d the f a c t s openly. Secondly, the
value p l a c e d on a book i n those days depended so much on
i t s s t y l e of composition t h a t most h i s t o r i a n s had no choice
except to w r i t e i n a v e r y r h e t o r i c a l way. They could not i n
those circumstances have w r i t t e n f r a n k l y and simply.
A
While K a s r a v i ' s c r i t i c i s m s of former h i s t o r i a n s were
thus r a t h e r u n f a i r , h i s own great e f f o r t s i n o b j e c t i v e h i s t o r y
w r i t i n g deserve the h i g h e s t admiration. He used to say that
h i s t o r y was h i s f a v o u r i t e s u b j e c t , whatever country i t con-
cerned, ' and he never abandoned h i s h i s t o r i c a l s t u d i e s . He
never t r u s t e d what previous h i s t o r i a n s had s a i d , but always
p e r s o n a l l y searched f o r the t r u t h . He never t r i e d t o impress

1 • Chehel Maaaleh ( T a r i k h va Tarikh-neg&rl pp 314-324.

 103

h i s readers "by w r i t i n g e l a b o r a t e r h e t o r i c a l sentences. He

mentions Mirza Mahdi Khan A s t a r a b a d i ' s two h i s t o r i e s of
Nader Shah as good examples of the s t y l e favoured "by famouB
h i s t o r i a n s of the p a s t , f u l l of verbiage but not so f u l l of
trustworthy information. K a s r a v i ' s c h i e f aims, as has been

s a i d , were to v e r i f y h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s and t o n a r r a t e and

2
e x p l a i n them i n simple language; h i s success i n these aims
made him i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y known.
I n K a s r a v i ' s opinion, no trustworthy h i s t o r y of I r a n
had y e t been written.-* He c a l l s upon h i s compatriots to
f i n d out a l l they can about t h e i r country's p a s t l i f e
through the c e n t u r i e s , and w r i t e i t down. He observes t h a t
I r a n ' s h i s t o r y a f t e r I s l a m i s very confusing, indeed almost
dark, because the numerous h i s t o r i a n s who appeared i n I s l a m i c
times d i d not i n general w r i t e o b j e c t i v e l y ; t h e i r main i n t e n -
t i o n was to speak about the k i n g s or r u l e r s of t h e i r own day,
and they n e a r l y always p r a i s e d them i n an exaggerated faskon.
K a s r a v i looks upon few of them as r e a l h i s t o r i a n s ; he says
t h a t t h e i r statements cannot be accepted a s they stand and
should not be r e f e r r e d to as prima f a c i e evidence. One of
K a s r a v i ' s methods was t o p i e c e together from documents the
1. Zaban-e Pak. Tehran 1323/£l9W+, p.U. Mirza Mahdi Khan's two
works are the Tarikh-e Naderi and the Dorreh-.ve Naderieh.
2. Chehel Maaaleh ( T a r i k h va T a r i k h - n e g a r ) . p.314.
3. tbift.1
 104

p a r t i c u l a r s of h i s t o r i c a l events which no previous h i s t o r i a n

had recorded. He t h i n k s t h a t i t i s wrong to reproduce an

imaginary image of a k i n g or r u l e r u n l e s s one has proof.

I n the p a s t everybody thought that h i s t o r y was concerned

only with kings and r u l e r s and h i s t o r i a n s ; they used "to c a l l

t h e i r works "History of the dynasty..." (Khandan-»nameh), or

"History of the King..." (Shahnameh). Most of the h i s t o r i a n s

who wrote about I r a n ' s h i s t o r y a f t e r I s l a m d i d t h i s ; they

thought t h a t i t was q u i t e s u f f i c i e n t i f they wrote only

about k i n g s and t h e i r t a t t l e s . Kasravi thinks that h i s t o r i o -

2
graphy should cover a much v a s t e r f i e l d , though he admits

t h a t k i n g s and r u l e r s have "been great makers of h i s t o r y ,

e s p e c i a l l y i n the p a s t times when the mass of the people

possessed no power or i n f l u e n c e i n any sphere. He compares

3
h i s t o r y w i t h a s t a t u e and k i n g s w i t h i t s frame. The

general s i t u a t i o n of c o u n t r i e s i n past t i m e s , t h e i r s e c u r i t y ,

r e b e l l i o n s , f r i e n d s h i p s or h o s t i l i t i e s w i t h t h e i r neigbours

e t c . , cannot be understood without r e f e r e n c e to the c a r e e r s

h

of kings or r u l e r s . For i n s t a n c e , K a s r a v i remarks that the

way i n which the I r a n i a n s got r i d of the Arabs cannot be
understood without r e f e r e n c e to the c a r e e r s of r u l e r s who
came t o power i n the 3 r d and l+th c e n t u r i e s A.H. ( 8 t h and 10th
1 . e.g. In,the T a r i k h - e Mosha*sha*ivan .va Pansad-saleh-ye
Khuzestan.
2. Shahgriarai-eGomnam. v o l . 1 , I n t r o d u c t i o n .
3. I b i d .
k. I b i d .
 105

centuries and t h a t the s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n i n I r a n i n the

8 t h century A.H. (li+th century A.D.) can be b e t t e r understood

w i t h the help of a study of Shaykh S a f i ' s l i f e - s t o r y and the

power which he e x e r c i s e d .

K a s r a v i recognises that European o r i e n t a l i s t s have done

a great d e a l of r e s e a r c h about I r a n ' s h i s t o r y and have

produced many u s e f u l books, but t h i n k s t h a t long y e a r s will

be r e q u i r e d before the whole p i c t u r e can be made c l e a r .

I r a n i a n s must not depend e n t i r e l y on what t h e o r i e n t a l i s t s

have l e f t behind, but must themselves work t o throw l i g h t

on t h e dark corners o f t h e i r country's h i s t o r y .

On t h e whole, K a s r a v i t h i n k s , I r a n i a n h i s t o r i a n s have

not put t h e i r researches on a l o g i c a l and n a t i o n a l b a s i s .

On the other hand, i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of I r a n ' s h i s t o r y by

European and American o r i e n t a l i s t s have not been 100 p e r cent

acceptable. I r a n i a n h i s t o r i a n s must t r y t o do t h e i r r e s e a r c h e s

i n a more up-to-date way. I n p a r t i c u l a r they must use the

h i s t o r y of other c o u n t r i e s , and e s p e c i a l l y neighbouring

c o u n t r i e s , f o r checking I r a n i a n h i s t o r y ; t h i s can be very

h e l p f u l i n s o l v i n g h i s t o r i c a l problems, i n view of the c l o s e

connections between these peoples and the I r a n i a n s i n past

times. K a s r a v i himself, w i t h h i s knowledge o f f o r e i g n languages,

made use o f t h i s method i n h i s own h i s t o r i c a l researches.

1• Shahriaran-e Gomnam, v o l . 1 , Introduction.

 106

Without doubt K a s r a v i ' s g r e a t e s t s i n g l e achievement

as a h i s t o r i a n was the compilation of h i s two volume T k r l k h - e

Mashruteh-ye I r a n ( H i s t o r y of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Movement).

T h i s book i s p a r t i c u l a r l y v a l u a b l e , f i r s t l y because of the

unique importance of i t s s u b j e c t , and secondly because; K a s r a v i

was a w i t n e s s of many of the events which he has recorded. He

h i m s e l f had d i r e c t contact with the 6 o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s i n

Tabriz, which was the main centre of the movement, and he

g i v e s a trustworthy even i f incomplete account of the e v e n t s

at other c e n t r e s such as Tehran, Rasht and E s f a h a n . Even

now, a f t e r s i x t y y e a r s , many f a c t s about the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l

r e v o l u t i o n remain unknown. K a s r a v i was the f i r s t scholar

who d i d r e s e a r c h i n t o t h i s s u b j e c t and s t u d i e d i t s s i g n i f i -

cance. His book i s s t i l l the best and f u l l e s t account of

t h i s great r e v o l u t i o n . I t w i l l c e r t a i n l y be u s e f u l i f

present-day I r a n i a n h i s t o r i a n s t r y to w r i t e more about the

causes and r e s u l t s of I r a n ' s great C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n ,

and to produce a complete h i s t o r y of i t ; but they w i l l hardly

f i n d any mistakes or f a l s e statements of f a c t i n Kasravi's.

account. I n t h i s , as i n a l l h i s h i s t o r i c a l works, he did

h i s best to be accurate and o b j e c t i v e . He d e f i n i t e l y deserves

t o be c a l l e d an e f f i c i e n t and c o n s c i e n t i o u s h i s t o r i a n .

1 • Tlarikh-e Mashruteh-ye. Irian, p. 6.

 107

CHAPTER THREE

KASRAVI*S LINGUISTIC STUDIES AND THEORIES

As K a s r a v i mentions a t the beginning of h i s book Zabten-e

Pak (Pure Speech),^ the p u r i f i c a t i o n of the P e r s i a n language

was one of h i s c h i e f aims. He suggests two ways of reaching

t h i s goal:

1, The d e f i c i e n c i e s of the P e r s i a n language must be

understood.

2. Research i s n e c e s s a r y to f i n d pure o l d P e r s i a n words

w i t h which t o r e p l a c e Arabic words.

As regards h i s f i r s t suggestions, K a s r a v i considers that

the use of Arabic words has s p o i l t the P e r s i a n language and

2
i s almost always unnecessary. I n a sentence of ten words,
f i v e words are l i k e l y to be A r a b i c , and t h i s r u i n s the
o r i g i n a l i t y of the P e r s i a n language.
We should bear i n mind that the i n f l u e n c e of Arabic
upon P e r s i a n d i d not a r i s e e i t h e r from the Arab conquest
and the two c e n t u r i e s of Arab r u l e i n I r a n , or from the great
r e s p e c t of the I r a n i a n s f o r I s l a m . When the Arabs were most
1. K a s r a v i , Zaban-e Piak. Tehran 1323/19WJ-, pp 2-h»
2. Zaban-e Pak. p.3«
 108

powerful and the I r a n i a n s "became profoundly a t t a c h e d to

I s l a m , the P e r s i a n language s t a y e d r e l a t i v e l y pure, as
can he seen i n the works of e a r l y w r i t e r s such a s Rudaki
(d. 9I4.O-I) and Perdowsi ( d . 1025-6). T h i s proves t h a t
the Arabs d i d not i n t e n d to a d u l t e r a t e the P e r s i a n language,
and t h a t i t was not they, hut l a t e r I r a n i a n w r i t e r s , who
introduced the i m p u r i t i e s . Knowledge of A r a b i c was
regarded as an honour, and most I r a n i a n w r i t e r s who knew
i t t r i e d to show t h e i r p r o f i c i e n c y by w r i t i n g books i n
A r a b i c or even composing A r a b i c poetry. They used to
compete w i t h one another i n w r i t i n g A r a b i c , and even today
mollas and r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s s t i l l use A r a b i c very o f t e n .

1
I n K a s r a v i ' s o p i n i o n , a language i s independent i f i t
c o n t a i n s a number of words which belong to i t , and i f people
obey the same r u l e s i n t h e i r way of w r i t i n g and reading it.
The P e r s i a n language, however, has been l i k e a toy i n the
hands of the w r i t e r s , who have shaped i t i n any way they
liked. One w r i t e r would use a moderate amount of A r a b i c
words, another would use them to excess,and another would make
a mixture of the two languages. There a r e many examples of
t h i s confusion, as one can see by reading e.g. Perdowsi's
Shahnameh. w i t h i t s simple s t y l e and pure P e r s i a n vocabulary,
and the Anvar-e S o h a y l i . a h i g h l y ornamented and a r a b i c i z e d
v e r s i o n of the animal f a b l e s K a l i l e h va Demneh composed by

1. Zaban-e Pak. p. k.
 109

Hosayn Va'ez K a s h e f i ( d . 15OI4.). T h e i r s t y l e s of w r i t i n g a r e

1
so d i f f e r e n t that they have nothing i n common; y e t both a r e
supposed to be P e r s i a n . A person capable of reading and
understanding the Shahnameh w i l l not n e c e s s a r i l y be a b l e to
r e a d the Anvar-e S o h a y l i . Anyone- who compares the two
h i s t o r y books, T a r i k h - e Jahangosha and Dorreh-ye Naderi,
both w r i t t e n by the 18th century h i s t o r i a n Mirza Mahdi
Khan, might conclude t h a t they a r e too d i f f e r e n t i n B t y l e
to be from one author. K a s r a v i says t h a t f o r a thousand
y e a r s the P e r s i a n language has been shaped by the hands of
individuals. Even the h i s t o r i a n s p l a y e d w i t h i t , preferring
grandiloquence of s t y l e to d e s c r i p t i o n of h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s .
T h e i r innocent or ignorant readers thought t h i s to be an
a r t and admired t h e i r s t y l e and even c a l l e d i t m i r a c u l o u s .
I n the p a s t w r i t e r s p a i d l e s s a t t e n t i o n to the meaning of
sentences than to t h e i r ornamentation w i t h A r a b i c words.
I n the present age, we cannot c l a i m t h a t modern P e r s i a n
2
i s e i t h e r complete or pure. Even today, i f one wants to
l e a r n P e r s i a n p r o p e r l y , one ought to know A r a b i c . Although
the P e r s i a n language i s one of the e a s i e s t i n the world,
when mixed w i t h A r a b i c i t becomes d i f f i c u l t . Kasravi
observes^ t h a t while a number of new words such as
1. Zaban-e Pak. pp £|.-8.
2. Zaban-e
3. Ibid., p. Pak.
8. p. 12.
 110

mehmankhaneh ( h e t e l ) , balakhaneh (upper s t o r y ) , rah-e ahan

( r a i l w a y ) , durbln (camera). do-charkheh ( b i c y c l e ) , are
c l e a r enough to those who speak P e r s i a n , there a l s o are
words such as mashruteh ( c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government), Par
ol-Showra (house of p a r l i a m e n t ) , t a s v i b (parliamentary
approval) which are o r i g i n a l l y A r a b i c and are only l e a r n t
with d i f f i c u l t y . As a r e s u l t the P e r s i a n language has
become u n p r a c t i c a l ( b i - k a r e h ) . K a s r a v i ' s opponents, however,
d i d not t h i n k t h a t h i s i d e a s were a t a l l p r a c t i c a l , and they
1
raised various objections. One of these was t h a t poets and
w r i t e r s such as Sa'di or Hafez, whose works are the p r i d e of
I r a n , d i d not w r i t e i n pure P e r s i a n ; so i f I r a n i a n s today
were to use P e r s i a n words i n s t e a d of A r a b i c , these great
works would no longer be i n t e l l i g i b l e to them and to f u t u r e
generations. K a s r a v i ' s r e p l y i s t h a t Hafez and Sa*di m i s l e d
the people and t h a t today I r a n i a n s need a strong and p r a c t i c a l
2
language.

K a s r a v i ' s S t u d i e s of the P e r s i a n Language

K a s r a v i was one of the few I r a n i a n s who made a s e r i o u s

e f f o r t to do s c h o l a r l y r e s e a r c h i n t o the P e r s i a n language and

to f i n d n a t i v e P e r s i a n words i n s t e a d of A r a b i c ones. His

r e s e a r c h e s i n t h i s f i e l d were very e x t e n s i v e . I n order to

1. Zaban-e Pak. pp 8-29.

2. I b i d . , p. 9.
 Ill

f i n d or invent p u r e l y P e r s i a n words, he s t u d i e d n e a r l y a l l
the P e r s i a n d i a l e c t s spoken i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t s of I r a n ; and
he appears to have "been the f i r s t I r a n i a n t o do t h i s . His
immense i n t e r e s t i n the subject helped him to achieve a
great deal of what he had i n view. Apart from h i s
enthusiasm, t h e s e c r e t of h i s success l a y i n h i s p r o f i c i e n c y
1
in Pahlavi, Armenian and A r a b i c , a s w e l l a s P e r s i a n . He
put h i s knowledge o f a l l these languages to good use i n h i s
r e s e a r c h e s , which a r e s o l i d l y based and c a r e f u l l y reasoned.
The books which he has l e f t behind on these s u b j e c t s have
been a great help to subsequent l i n g u i s t s . They a r e the
following:

1. Namha-ye Deh-ha va Shahrha-ye I r a n ( V i l l a g e and C i t y

Names o f I r a n ) , 2 v o l s . , Tehran 132I4./19I4.5.
2. A z a r l . y a Zaban-e Bastan-e i.zarbai.1an (Azari, or the
ancient language of Azarbaijan), Tehran 1035/1926.
3. Kafnameh ( T r e a t i s e on the l e t t e r K a f ) , e d i t e d by Yahya
Zoka, Tehran 1331/1952.
4. Zaban-e Pak (Pure Language), Tehran 1323/191414..
5. Zaban-e F a r s i va Rah-e Rasa va Tavana gardanidan-e an
(The P e r s i a n language and the way to make i t e x p r e s s i v e
and s t r o n g ) , e d i t e d by Yahya Zoka, Tehran 1335/1956.
1. K a s r a v i was one o f the very few contemporary I r a n i a n
scholars^who s t u d i e d the O l d P e r s i a n languages. Others
were Ebrahim Pur Davud, Malek ol-Sho'ara Bahar, and i n
the younger generation Sadeq. Hedayat.
 112

K a s r a v i ' s r e s e a r c h e s i n t o the P e r s i a n language and h i s

s t u d i e s of p l a c e names were c l o s e l y connected and may he
reviewed together. He s t a t e s i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n to h i s
1
hook on p l a c e names t h a t the I r a n i a n s are becoming v e r y
europeanized, and tend to b e l i e v e whatever Europeans say.
I f a European does r e s e a r c h about I r a n i a n h i s t o r y or
produces a book about the P e r s i a n language, the I r a n i a n s w i l l
accept i t without h e s i t a t i o n . T h i s shows how much they are
i n f a t u a t e d by European c i v i l i z a t i o n . I t would not be r i g h t
however, to put a l l o r i e n t a l i s t s i n t o the same c l a s s .
I r a n i a n s can seldom measure up to s c h o l a r l y o r i e n t a l i s t s such
as Marquart or Darmesteter; but most o r i e n t a l i s t s a r e not
2
trustworthy. Kasravi s t a t e s t h a t although r e s e a r c h i n t o
p l a c e names i s not such an important s u b j e c t t h a t l i f e would
be any worse without i t , he had n e v e r t h e l e s s w r i t t e n h i s
f i r s t study of t h i s k i n d , on the names Tehran and Shemiran,
i n h i s l e i s u r e time w i t h the main pupose of proving to
o r i e n t a l i s t s h i s c a p a b i l i t y to do s c h o l a r l y r e s e a r c h .
P h i l o l o g y , however, i s not r e a l l y e s s e n t i a l ; two or three
p h i l o l o g i s t s i n a century w i l l be q u i t e s u f f i c i e n t .
The names of most I r a n i a n c i t i e s and v i l l a g e s are derived
from o l d P e r s i a n languages, and are t h e r e f o r e not generally
i n t e l l i g i b l e or not c o r r e c t l y understood. K a s r a v i c l a s s i f i e s
1. K a s r a v i . Namha-ye Deh-fha va Shahriha-ve I r a n , v o l . 1,
Tehran 132U/19Z+5. PP 2-5.
2. I b i d , p. 3.
 113

I r a n i a n p l a c e names by t h e i r s u f f i x e s as f o l l o w s :
1. Van, avail, v i n : e.g. Madavan,Marvan, Andavan, Khiavan,
Shirvan.
2. gan, kan, ghan, yan, j a n , g i n , y i n ; e.g. Zangan,
A z a r b a i j a n , Ardakan, Mamaaaru.
3. han, han. Vargahan, Ardahan, Zarhan.
U. Khan, khun. khanat e.g. Haftkhun, Kordkhun,
5. dan; e.g. Ramadan; Sardan.
6. zan, zan; e.g. Zuzan, Razan.
7. I a n , a l a n , lam; e.g. Maralan, Sulan.

8. r a n , a r a n , or ram, rom; e.g. Shemiran, Tehran, Gahrbm.

9. an, i n ; e.g. I r a n , G i l a n , Mahan.

10. ban, e.g. Safidban.

11. san; Slisan, S i s a n .

12. v a r , a v a r , v a r ; e.g. Sabzvar, Dinvar.

13. v a , ava; e.g. T a r v a , Bordva, Mardva.
XL4.• &, ay, e.g. Hasanav, Jamlav, Sarv..

15. gur. kur; e.g. Nainakur, Shamkur.

16. z a r , z a r ; e.g. Kordzar, E.sfzar.
17. b a r ; e.g. Rudbar, Zangbar.
18. vil. Ml; e.g. Z u v i l , A r d a b i l .
19. v i r : e.g. Armavir.
20. B a r , s a r ; e.g. Sangsar, Nasar, S i s a r .
 114

These s u f f i x e s resemble each other and a r e a l l combina-

t i o n s of two or t h r e e l e t t e r s , which suggest t h a t they are
l i n g u i s t i c a l l y r e l a t e d . I n the e v o l u t i o n of languages
transformation of words i s a very important f a c t o r . The
P e r s i a n language i n the course of i t s h i s t o r y has passed
through so many consonant and vowel changes t h a t Old P e r s i a n
( P a h l a v i ) i s u n i n t e l l i g i b l e to speakers of modern P e r s i a n
and appears to have no s i m i l a r i t y with i t . For example, the
modern P e r s i a n dan(estan) ("to know") was i n ancient times
used only i n southern I r a n ; i n the north i t was pronounced
2an. and i t i s s t i l l pronounced zan i n some p l a c e s . I n the
K u r d i s h language, which i s one of the many d i a l e c t s of
P e r s i a n , i t i s pronounced z'anin. I n K a s r a v i ' s opinion, the
twenty -place-name s u f f i x e s which he has l i s t e d are a l l
o r i g i n a l l y one word, which was modified through the c e n t u r i e s
i n accordance w i t h d i f f e r e n t accents and d i a l e c t s . He proves
h i s point by c i t i n g names of towns and v i l l a g e s i n d i f f e r e n t

p a r t s of I r a n which incorporate names of r u l e r s .

2
In h i s conclusion, Kasravi says?"We do not have much
d i f f i c u l t y i n f i n d i n g the meanings of these s u f f i x e s at the
end of v i l l a g e names. They a s s u r e d l y have meanings such as
r e g i o n , f a t h e r l a n d , country*, and some of them are s t i l l used
1. K a s r a v i , Namha-.ve Deh-ha va Shahrr-ha-ve I r a n , v o l . 1 , p.4.
2. I b i d . V o l 2, p.12.
 115

as ordinary s u f f i x e s i n P e r s i a n or r e l a t e d languages. Even

i f the meanings are not i d e n t i c a l , they are e v i d e n t l y v e r y
similar."

* 1
I n the l i t e r a r y p e r i o d i c a l Armaghan, a certain

Mr. Talebzadeh wrote an a r t i c l e i n 1311/1932 on the subject

of I r a n i a n v i l l a g e and c i t y names. I n i t he mentions

K a s r a v i * s work on t h i s s u b j e c t and p r a i s e s K a s r a v i ' s profound

and d e t a i l e d s c h o l a r s h i p . He n o t e s that K a s r a v i was one of

the ftew contemporary I r a n i a n s c h o l a r s whose r e s e a r c h drew

the a t t e n t i o n of European o r i e n t a l i s t s . Among these was a

R u s s i a n P r o f e s s o r Beyovski who had expressed admiration f o r

K a s r a v i * s great achievement and had d e s c r i b e d K a s r a v i * s

r e s e a r c h e s i n the f i e l d of language as unique.

f
K a s r a v i 8 book on A z a r i , or the Old Language of Azar-
* ' 2
baijan, i s one of the most i n t e r e s t i n g of h i s many works.

I n i t he t r i e s to prove t h a t the people of A z a r b a i j a n are

of I r a n i a n o r i g i n and Aryan r a c e , and to r e f u t e i n a l o g i c a l

and reasonable way the arguments of those who claim t h a t the

A z a r b a i j a n i s are not I r a n i a n s but Turks. The book i s both

a h i s t o r i c a l and a l i n g u i s t i c study. The evidence assembled

1 . Armaghan. founded by the d i s t i n g u i s h e d s c h o l a r Vahid
Dastgerdi (1896-1942) and continued by h i s son Naslm.:., was
the p r i n c i p a l I r a n i a n l i t e r a r y p e r i o d i c a l during i t s 25
years' e x i s t e n c e (1919-1944).
2. K a s r a v i , A z a r i ya Zaban-e Bastan-e Azarbaijan, Tehran,
1305/1926
3. I b i d , p.6.
 116

by K a s r a v i i s very weighty; he s u c c e s s f u l l y proves h i s case.

•i

I n the i n t r o d u c t i o n , K a s r a v i mentions t h a t twenty

y e a r s p r e v i o u s l y a number of Ottoman Turks and Caucasians

had w r i t t e n a r t i c l e s about t h i s matter, and t h a t when the

Union and Progress party (Ettehad v a T a r a q q i ) came to power

i n Ottoman Turkey, one o f i t s aims had been t o a t t r a c t and

u n i t e Turkish-speaking people i n other c o u n t r i e s . The

I r a n i a n p r e s s , which was ignorant and probably incapable o f

r e p l y i n g i n a reasonable way, argued the point very s t u p i d l y .

They s a i d that the Mongols brought the T u r k i s h language t o

A z e r b a i j a n and spread i t among the people; but t h i s was not

a c o r r e c t answer because t h e Mongol language i s very d i f f e r e n t

2
from T u r k i s h . Kasravi states that the t r u t h about the A z a r i
language became c l e a r t o him a f t e r he had s t u d i e d the Grapar^
and P a h l a v i languages f o r three y e a r s .
The f i r s t chapter of the book** i s e n t i t l e d "Azerbaijan
at the dawn o f h i s t o r y . " Everyone f a m i l i a r with h i s t o r y
knows t h a t f o u r thousand y e a r s ago the people c a l l e d Aryans
migrated from t h e i r o r i g i n a l homeland and spread i n t o p a r t s
of A s i a and Europe where they defeated the n a t i v e peoples of
the d i f f e r e n t t e r r i t o r i e s and s e t t l e d down. A number of them
migrated t o I r a n , and one s e c t i o n became the r u l i n g power i n
1 1
# * 7 7 i i ""i 9
1. A z a r i ya Zaban-e Bastan-e A z e r b a i j a n , p.6.
2. Ibid.,p.3.
3. Ancient Armenian.
4. A z a r i . pp 5-8.
 117

the n o r t h west p a r t of I r a n , i . e . A z e r b a i j a n , Ramadan,

Kermanshah, Qazvin, E s f a h a n and Tehran. These people were
c a l l e d Medes (Mad) and t h e t e r r i t o r y which they r u l e d was
c a l l e d L i t t l e Media (Mad-e Khord). The I r a n i a n t e r r i t o r i e s
beyond t h e i r c o n t r o l were c a l l e d Great Media (Mad-e Bozorg).

KaBravi r e c o g n i s e s that t h e people of I r a n have sprung

from a mixture of many n a t i o n s and r a c e s , and that i t i s
quite i m p o s s i b l e to f i n d any pure r a c e i n the world today.
The Aryans themselves mixed w i t h the n a t i v e s of I r a n as
seon as they a r r i v e d . Today the best way of l e a r n i n g about
a n a t i o n ' s o r i g i n i s t o study i t s language; and t h i s a p p l i e s
to A z a r b a i j a n .
K a s r a v i accepts the view, h e l d by most modern s c h o l a r s ,
t h a t Zoroaster probably o r i g i n a t e d from lAzarbai j a i F and t h a t
*3 li-
the language o f the Avesta i s a n o r t h I r a n i a n language.
When Alexander the Great invaded I r a n , a l e a d e r i n A z a r b a i j a n
named Aturpat saved the p r o v i n c e , which came t o be c a l l e d
Aturpatagan ( i n Greek, Atropatene) a f t e r him. One of the
most important c l u e s i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of a n a t i o n ' s
o r i g i n i s the language of the names of i t s mountains, rivers,
v i l l a g e s and t o w n s . P l a c e names i n A z a r b a i jan may be
1. A z a r i , p.6.
2. Ibid.,p.7.
3. The. e a r l i e s t Z o r o a s t r i a n s c r i p t u r e s .
4« Perhaps Median.
5. A z a r i , pp 8-9. I n the p e r i o d i c a l Afemaghan. y e a r 24, v o l s -
1 and 2, pp 89-94, Mr. I z a d y a r p u b l i s h e d an a r t i c l e on the
#

a n c i e n t A z a r i language, which e x p r e s s e s ideas s i m i l a r t o

Kasravi's i n this respect.
 118

d i v i d e d i n t o three categories.

1. Names whose meanings have not y e t "been c l a r i f i e d , such

as T a b r i z , Khoy, Salmas.

2* Names whose meanings have been c l a r i f i e d through

l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h , such a s Marand, Arvanaq., Maralan.

3. Names which are not a l t o g e t h e r c l e a r , but presumably

come i n many c a s e s from the language of the pre-Aryan

inhabitants. The names i n the f i r s t two c a t e g o r i e s a r e

understandably derived from the Aryan language, and they

are the most numerous. K a s r a v i i n f e r s from t h i s t h a t the

A z a r b a i j a n i s were predominantly Aryan.

K a s r a v i then moves on t o the main s u b j e c t o f the book,

namely t h e o l d language of A z e r b a i j a n . ^ He remarks t h a t

I r a n ' s h i s t o r y becomes much l e s s obscure a f t e r t h e coming
o
of I s l a m . When t h e Arabs invaded I r a n , they were d e l i g h t e d
by the p l e a s a n t conditions and good p a s t u r e s o f iAzarb&ijan
p r o v i n c e , where they s e t t l e d and r u l e d f o r three centuries.^
The n a t i v e A z a r b a i j a n i s nevertheless, p r e s e r v e d t h e i r language
and g r a d u a l l y a s s i m i l a t e d the Arabs. Arab geographers
mention the language o f A z e r b a i j a n as an independent language
and c a l l i t A z a r i .

1. A z a r i , pp 9-11.
2. I b i d . , p.13.
3. I n the e a r l y days a l l these t e r r i t o r i e s were under one
governor's r u l e .
 119

1. Ebn Howqal (d.877) i n h i s Ketab ol-Masalek v a ' l -

Mamalek^ d e s c r i b e s Azarbai^an, Arran and Armenia, and
mentions t h a t the people of t h e s e p r o v i n c e s spoke P e r s i a n
and seldom knew A r a b i c .

2. Mas'udi ( d . 9 5 6 ) , the famous h i s t o r i a n and t r a v e l l e r ,

* *2
d e s c r i b e s i n h i s Ketab ol-Tanbih v a 1-Esh.raf t h e great
I r a n i a n c i t i e s of Khorasan, A z a r b a i j a n , Rayy and Tabarestan,
and s t a t e s t h a t a l l of them had f o r m e r l y been r u l e d by one
k i n g under one f l a g , and t h a t the people a l l spoke one
language.
3. The great and l e a r n e d t r a v e l l e r Abu 'Abdollah (d.1000)
d i v i d e s I r a n i n t o eight p r o v i n c e s i n h i s book Ahsan ol-
* 3
Tagjasim, and says t h a t the people spoke one language.
iu Yaqut ol-Hamavi (1179-1222) s t a t e B i n h i s great geo-
g r a p h i c a l encyclopaedia Mo .1am ol-Boldan t h a t the Azar-
b a ^ j a n i s spoke A z a r i .
These r e p o r t s prove that the people of A z a r b a i j a n then
spoke a language c a l l e d A z a r i which was a branch of P e r s i a n .
5
I n the next chapter, K a s r a v i asks "How and when d i d

the T u r k i s h language come t o Azarbaidan?" I t i s clear that

1. Al-Masalek va'l-Mamalekff^Hawqal. L e i d e n , 1873i P.250.
2. Al-Tanbih v a * l - E a h r a f . Mas'udi. C a i r o , 1938, p . 8 7 .
3. Ahsan ol-Taq'asim. Moqadassi, L e i d e n , 1877» p.259.
k. A z a r i . pp.13-15.
5. I b i d . , pp. 13-15.
 120

the people of A z a r b a i j a n were predominantly of Aryan r a c e ,

and t h a t as l a t e as the 6 t h century A . H . / l l t h century A.D.

* 1
they s t i l l spoke A z a r i , The question a r i s e s how and when

they began to speak T u r k i s h ? H i s t o r i c a l evidence shows

t h a t the T u r k i s h language was "brought i n t o I r a n during the

S a l j u q i d p e r i o d by the immigration of T u r k i s h t r i b e s .

Before t h a t time there were e i t h e r no Turks or only a s m a l l

number of Turks l i v i n g i n the v a r i o u s p a r t s of I r a n , After

the defeat of S o l t a n Mas'ud of Ghazneh by the S a l j u q i d s ( i n

10U0), a l a r g e immigration of Turks took p l a c e . Under the

great k i n g s of t h i s n a t i o n , the Turks spread w i t h i n twenty

y e a r s over a l l p a r t s of I r a n and Iraq, and l a t e r a l s o i n t o

S y r i a and A s i a Minor.
2
I n the next chapter, Kasravi discusses the first
settlement of Turks i n Azarbiaijan. Although the boundaries
of I r a n were opened to T u r k i s h immigration by the Saljjuq,
conquest, K a s r a v i f i n d s evidence^ t h a t a l i m i t e d number of
T u r k s had s e t t l e d i n Azarbaijtan before t h a t time. Soltan
Mahmud of Ghazneh, a f t e r invading Bokhara and Transoxianat
i n 1025, brought back a group of Turks and s e t t l e d them i n
Khoriasan, A minority of them separated and made t h e i r way
v i a Kerman to Esfahan, Mahraud ordered 'Ala ol-Dowleh, t h e
governor of EsfabJan, to r e t u r n them or k i l l them, but some
1• A z a r i . pp 5-17«
7
2. I b i d .x>.17 .
f

3 . Ibid., p.19.
 121
of them l e a r n t of t h i s and escaped to A z a r b a i j a n . These

were the f i r s t Turks t o migrate i n a group to A z a r b a i j a n .

1
I n the next chapter, K a s r a v i examines the p o s i t i o n i n
A ^ a r b a i j a n during the S a l j u q i d p e r i o d . Within a short p e r i o d
# » » p
A z a r b a i j a n was conquered by the S a l j u q i d s , whose army con-
s i s t e d e n t i r e l y of T u r k i s h tribesmen. Turks s e t t l e d every-
where i n I r a n ; but i t i s c e r t a i n t h a t Azarbaijfen a t t r a c t e d
them more than other p r o v i n c e s . Prom then u n t i l the Mongol
i n v a s i o n of I r a n the r u l e r s of A z a r b a i j a n were T u r k s .
Although the Turks g r a d u a l l y spread t h e i r language and gave
T u r k i s h names to c e r t a i n v i l l a g e s where they s e t t l e d , the
#

A z a r i language continued to be spoken by the mass of the

people i n A z a r b a i j a n during the S a l j u q i d p e r i o d ; T u r k i s h was
spoken only by the new-comers.
3 *
K a s r a v i ' s next chapter i s a study of Azarbaij'an under
Mongol r u l e . Most of the Mongols i n the invading armies
s e t t l e d i n A z a r b a i j a n ; i n r a c e and language they were e n t i r e l y
d i f f e r e n t from the T u r k s . A f t e r they became Moslems ( i n 1295)»
they mixed w i t h the Turks and ceased to speak Mongol.
Although the I t a l i a n t r a v e l l e r Marco Polo i n h i s account of
his v i s i t to T a b r i z ( i n 1271-2) does not mention the T u r k s ,
t h i s i s probably because they were only a m i n o r i t y . On the
1. A z a r i , pp.17-18.
2. Mainly i n the y e a r s 1049 and 1054.
3. A z a r i . p.18.
h. Ibid.,pp. 18-20.
 122

other hand, the Moorish t r a v e l l e r Ebn B a t t u t e h , who came t o

T a b r i z i n the r e i g n of the Mongol k i n g Abu S a ' i d (1316-133*0,
mentions the Turks i n the c i t y , Ebn BazzJaz, who i n the l a t e
15th century wrote Safvat o l - S a f a . a "biography of Shaykh
S a f i ol-Din (d.1334; the founder o f S a f a v i order and ances-
t o r o f the S a f a v i d k i n g s ) , t e l l s many s t o r i e s i n which he
speaks of the Turks and T a j i k s ( i . e . I r a n i a n s ) a s two:
d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n s . Hamdollah Mostawfi (1281-2-1349), i n the
geographical t h i r d p a r t of h i s Nozhat ol-Qolub. quotes some
sentences i n ( o l d ) A z a r i ; as he knew A z a r h a i j a n w e l l and was
i n a p o s i t i o n t o give accurate information about i t s people
and t h e i r language, the quotations prove t h a t a number of
the n a t i v e s l i v i n g i n h i s time a t T a b r i z s t i l l spoke t h e
( o l d ) A z a r i language.

•1
I n t h e f o l l o w i n g chapter, K a s r a v i s t u d i e s the p o s i t i o n
i n A z a r b a i j a n a f t e r the f a l l o f the Mongol I l k h a n i d dynasty.
T h i s occurred when Abu S a ' i d died i n 1334 l e a v i n g no h e i r t o
the throne. There ensued a great s t r u g g l e amongst the Mongol
l e a d e r s , i n which t h e i r c a p i t a l T a b r i z was badly damaged. I n
the f o l l o w i n g period, a great number o f Turks came to Azar-
b a i j a n , p a r t i c u l a r l y with the armies of Timur-e Lang (1381-
li+05). Although the Turks were always; f i g h t i n g among them-
s e l v e s , they became the dominant power, and a s a r e s u l t t h e i r
1 . A z a r i . p.20.
 123
• »

language was widely used. I n the next chapter, on Azar-

h a i j a n during the S a f a v i d p e r i o d , K a s r a v i f i n d s t h a t "by the

10th century A.H./l6/£century A.D., when the Saf a v i d s r o s e

to power under Shah Esmla'il (1501-1524), T u r k i s h had a l r e a d y

' * 2
become the language of the masses i n A z a r h a i j a n . Moreover
the S a f a v i d p a r t i s a n s were a l l from T u r k i s h t r i b e s , and the.
important p o s t s were given to T u r k s . The T u r k i s h language
was used i n the S a f a v i d c o u r t , whether a t T a b r i z (1501-1530),
Qazvin (c.l53>-1598), or Esfahan (1598-1722). The titles
c o n f e r r e d by the S a f a v i d s were o f t e n T u r k i s h , such a s Qardash
( b r o t h e r ) , Yuldash (companion). During t h e i r wars w i t h the
Ottoman T u r k s , who were of course a l s o T u r k i s h - s p e a k i n g ,
they ceded (by a t r e a t y of 1590) a l l A z a r b a i j a n except
A r d a b i l ^ to the Ottomans (who r e s t o r e d i t to I r a n by a t r e a t y
of 1612). The ( o l d ) A z a r i language g r a d u a l l y ceased t o be
spoken i n A z e r b a i j a n except by a few f a m i l i e s and i n a s m a l l
number of v i l l a g e s . The S a f a v i d regime strengthened the
p o s i t i o n of the T u r k i s h language, which had taken root i n
A z a r b a i j a n under the S a l j u q i d s ; and thus i t rose i n the
course of seven c e n t u r i e s to predominance. I n the c o n s t i -
t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e (1906-1909), one of the many wishes of the
A z a r b a i j a n i people was that P e r s i a n should be r e i n t r o d u c e d
in their land.
1. A z a r i . pp. 21-23.
2. I b i d . , p.22.
3. Ibid.,PP,21-25.
 12k

The languages of Southern and n o r t h e r n I r a n form the

s u b j e c t of the next chapter. K a s r a v l emphasizes t h a t the

spoken and w r i t t e n P e r s i a n of today i s b a s i c a l l y the same

language which the f o r e f a t h e r s of the modern I r a n i a n s have

used s i n c e thousands of years ago. T h i s language was brought

to I r a n by the Aryan i n v a d e r s . No language ever remains

pure and untouched by the v i c i s s i t u d e s of h i s t o r y , and the

language of the I r a n i a n s changed as the c e n t u r i e s p a s s e d .

I f the language of the Avesta, which K a s r a v i dates from

p
about three thousand y e a r s ago, i s compared w i t h the l a n -

guage of the Achaemenid i n s c r i p t i o n s of B i s o t u n , marked

d i f f e r e n c e s between them are seen. Nevertheless i t i s c l e a r

t h a t A v e s t i c , P a h l a v i and P e r s i a n are b a s i c a l l y one and the

same language, even though d i f f e r e n t l y w r i t t e n and changed

by the passage of time. I t must a l s o be borne i n mind that

the s u c c e s s i v e empires of ancient I r a n were founded by t h r e e

d i f f e r e n t groups, the Medes, the P e r s i a n s and the P a r t h i a n s .

The Medes came from northern I r a n , the P e r s i a n s from southern

I r a n , the P a r t h i a n s from e a s t e r n I r a n . They n e v e r t h e l e s s had

a l i n g u i s t i c u n i t y , because the language they spoke was the

same apart from small d i f f e r e n c e s i n the pronounciation of

words: e.g. the southerners s a i d Samiran, the northerners

Shamiran. A v e s t i c was a n o r t h I r a n i a n form of the language.

1• A z a r i . p.26.
2. I b i d ; , pp. 26-27.
K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t A v e s t i c can he taken as the f i r s t
' ' ' 1
example of the language of A z e r b a i j a n .
K a s r a v i then d i s c u s s e s the emergence of the I r a n i a n
2
dialects. He draw a t t e n t i o n to the need f o r r e s e a r c h i n t o
3
the d i f f e r e n t modern d i a l e c t s of I r a n . Apart from the

P e r s i a n language, which i s the e s s e n t i a l n a t i o n a l language,

a great number of d i a l e c t s are spoken such as Samnani,

Mazandarani, Q-ilaki, S h u s h t a r i , e t c . Archaeology has shown

t h a t when the Aryans came to I r a n , n a t i v e s of different

o r i g i n s were already l i v i n g i n the country and t h a t t h e i r

languages a l s o were d i f f e r e n t from one another. The Aryans

d i d not e l i m i n a t e these people, but intermingled w i t h them

and mixed t h e i r own language with t h e i r languages. As a

r e s u l t d i a l e c t s emerged, such as Samnani. Kasravi thinks,

however, t h a t t h i s does not apply t o ( o l d ) A z a r i , ^ which he

maintains was o r i g i n a l l y the language of the Medes, though

a f t e r t h e i r immigration to A z a r b a i j a n i t must have been

mixed to some extent with the language of the n a t i v e s .

5
I n another chapter, K a s r a v i asks where are the p l a c e s

i n which A z a r i i s s t i l l used. A z a r i ( i . e . old A z a r i ) d i d

not completely vanish; as r e c e n t l y as s i x t y or seventy y e a r s

1• A z a r i , p.27-
2. I b i d . , pp. 27-28.
3. I b i d . p.32.
f

4. I b i d , i pp 27-28.
5. I b i d . pp. 28-29.
;
 126

ago, there were s t i l l some f a m i l i e s and d i s t r i c t s which used

' 1
t h i s language, e.g. around Zonuz and i n K h a l k h a l . I n the

19th century A z a r i was s t i l l quite w i d e l y known i n Azar-

b a i j a n , but was spoken d i f f e r e n t l y from p l a c e t o p l a c e .

When a language i s used only f o r speaking and not f o r

w r i t i n g , i t soon forms many branches, each of which begins

to develop independently. As a r e s u l t A z a r i became a

d i a l e c t l i k e K u r d i s h or T a l e s h i .
2
In another chapter, K a s r a v i quotes a few examples of

the ( o l d ) A z a r i language. S i n c e A z a r i was used only f o r

speaking, w r i t t e n t e x t s of t h i s language a r e not a v a i l a b l e ,

3
but here and there K a s r a v i has come a c r o s s a few examples.
Ebn Bazz&z i n h i s Safvat o l - S a f a mentions that Shaykh Sadr
o l - D i n (d.1392) asked h i s f a t h e r Shaykh S a f i o l - D i n , "When
you saw Hazrat Shaykh Zahed, d i d you know what was i n h i s
heart?" Shaykh S a f i o l - D i n r e p l i e d d/X^/^'
which has the hidden meaning: ^

"0 prosperous householder, t h e work i s f i n i s h e d , but the

Quide's warning i s s t i l l v a l i d " . These sentences show t h a t

A z a r i was spoken w i t h d i f f e r e n t d i a l e c t s , of which A r d a b i l i

w
was one. CjS. a s used i n A z a r i , because i n the A z a r i

language d a l ( d ) changed t o r g ( r ) .
1. A c e r t a i n Mr. Naser Rava'i sent a few examples of the
K h a l k h a l i d i a l e c t of A z a r i t o K a s r a v i , which K a s r a v i
found very u s e f u l f o r h i s r e s e a r c h e s i n t h i s f i e l d .
2. izsSl, P.34. ,
3. Safvat ol-Safa: . p.25.
 127

Hamdollah Mostowfi i n p a r t I I I of h i s Nozhat ol-Qolub.

speaking o f Orumiyeh, says t h a t i n that c i t y one can f i n d

f > / y 1 Propnet 8
<&J)~tf/^^S ' ^l/uJ^^J -™* " '
p e a r s ( i . e . the best pears$* Today when the T a b r i z i s see

a person w i t h a bad and unpleasant appearance, they say

Kholuqi grapes (the best grapes, from E e z a ' i y e h ) i n a

broken baBket. The word czf presumably i s w r i t t e n i n a

wrong way; i t should be w r i t t e n CJ*. which i s used i n

many d i a l e c t s i n c l u d i n g L o r i . The word i s also
found i n Shaykh S a f i o l - D i n ' s s u r v i v i n g q u a t r a i n s (do-ba.vti-
ha). K a s r a v i goes on t o s a y that t h e famous E n g l i s h

o r i e n t a l i s t Le Strange, who p u b l i s h e d and t r a n s l a t e d t h e

t e x t of p a r t I I I o f the Nozhat-ol-Qolub. thought t h a t t h e

2
above mentioned sentences were i n T u r k i s h . He made t h i s

mistake because, l i k e o t h e r s , he thought t h a t the language

of i^Barbaijan was then T u r k i s h . I t i s probable- t h a t t h e s e

q u a t r a i n s a r e by Shaykh S a f i o l - D i n , and i t i s a l s o c l e a r

t h a t they a r e i n the A z a r i language, though t h e i r meanings

are not understood.

I n the next chapter^ K a s r a v i d i s c u s s e s Shaykh S a f i ' s

q u a t r a i n s . A c e r t a i n Shaykh Hasan, the grandson o f Shaykh

1. Nozhat ol-Qolub. 3rd d i s c o u r s e , ed. Guy L e Strange,
E.J.W. Gibb Memorial S e r i e s , X X I I I , 1, L e i d e n 1915.
2. A z a r i , p.34.
3 . I b i d . , p.36.
 128

S a f i ol-Din's s p i r i t u a l guide Shaykh Zahed G i l a n i , quotes

e l e v e n q u a t r a i n s o f Shaykh S a f i i n the S e l s e l a t ol-Nasab

o l - S a f a v i e h , which was w r i t t e n during the r e i g n of Shah

Solayman S a f a v i (1666-1694). Although i t i s not s t a t e d i n
the S e l s e l a t ol-Nasab t h a t these q u a t r a i n s a r e i n A z a r i ,
K a s r a v i has no h e s i t a t i o n i n t a k i n g them as examples o f
2
t h a t language, because i n them a r e found words which a r e
s t i l l used i n the language o f t h e A z a r b a i j a n i s , e.g. i n
the following:

T h i s means "God i s Almighty, and the world i s only t h i s

p l a t e a u and d e s e r t . I need God's f a v o u r , but everywhere

I go there i s t r o u b l e . "
3
K a s r a v i then, i n another chapter, c o n s i d e r s what
i n f l u e n c e s may be drawn from the examples j u s t quoted.
He r e c o g n i s e s that the q u a t r a i n s a r e a v e r y l i m i t e d source
of information about A z a r i and cannot be a c o n c l u s i v e t e s t i -
mony f o r A z a r i ; but they b r i n g t o l i g h t c e r t a i n words which
K a s r a v i proceeds to d i s c u s s .
1• A z a r i . pp 40-49.
2 . They might perhaps be o l d G i i a k i (Gi^an d i a l e c t ) , because
Shaykh S a f i spent a long time i n G i l a n studying under
Shaykh Zahed u n t i l the l a t t e r ' s death.
3 . A z a r i , p.46.
 129

*
Azari English Persian
1
(fj - f>\ tear

)ys> I tomorrow

p you

z/c>)/J sorrowful ^jsjyj

J
OyV, horse <_^ I

Even today the word y y <>>yj i s used by A z a r b a i j a n i s .

Os^h to t e l l (JvJ
y
/ j j j J desert £j \j U

The syntax of A z a r i forms the s u b j e c t of the next

chapter. K a s r a v i f i n d s t h a t i t resembles the syntax of

i
other I r a n i a n d i a l e c t s . The c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between

a l l the d i a l e c t s i n t h i s r e s p e c t gives f u r t h e r evidence

t h a t o r i g i n a l l y they were one language.

1• I n the P e r s i a n language the a d j e c t i v e i s p l a c e d after

the noun, as i n \. U/ >S (the good man); but in Azari

the opposite i s done.^ Baba Taher of Hamadan (whose d i a l e c t

quatrains w r i t t e n i n the 11th century A.D. still survive)

says "0 you whose neck i s laden

w i t h musk-scented l o c k s ! "

2. I n P e r s i a n the t h i n g possessed i s p l a c e d a f t e r the

p o s s e s s o r , e.g. (J^s (mu-ye e a r ) , and the same i s

1 . A z a r i . p.49.
2. I b i d .
 130

done i n A z a r i , as can be seen i n the names of the v i l l a g e s

and r i v e r s dating from old times.

3. The p r e f i x he i s used i n P e r s i a n f o r the imperative,

hut i n A z a r i bu i s used: e.g. hu-.1 inam = be-chinam ( l e t me
pick).

4. The p r e f i x mi, used i n P e r s i a n f o r the present tense,

1
i s not seen i n A z a r i ^ ^Ss (J<3 CJ^ • ^ q ^
azva.iam - mi-guyam

5. Both i n the verb and i n the noun the P e r s i a n s u f f i x

am - " I do" or "my"-is replaced by im i n A z a r i : e.g.

' ~ ' ( I came)

amadam amarim

K a s r a v i next d i s c u s s e s consonant changes and transposition

* 1
which d i f f e r e n t i a t e A z a r i from P e r s i a n . He p o i n t s out that
such change i s a very important l i n g u i s t i c phenomenon and
that i t u s u a l l y takes p l a c e i n accordance w i t h identifiable
rules.
1. I n s t e a d of d ( d a l ) i n P e r s i a n , r ( r e ) i s often seen i n
A z a r i , e.g. : amarim » 'amadam ( I came).
2. Sometimes ( t a ) i s r e p l a c e d by r ( r e ) i n A z a r i , e.g. :
delar - d e l a t (your h e a r t ) .
3. Ch (chim) i n most words i s changed i n A z a r i to j(.1lm),
e.g. : bu-.1 inam = be-chinam ( l e t me p i c k ) .

1. A z a r i , pp 50-51.
 131

4. S ( s i n ) i s often changed i n A z a r i todichim) e.g. today i n

A z e r b a i j a n they pronounce the word (_J^y~^ s e r i s h (_J~^
c h e r i s h (gum).

5. I n i t i a l b ( b a ) i n most words i s changed tom(mim). Today

A z a r b a i j a n i s pronounce bahaneh p W (excuse) mahana. I"
6. Initial 6(&e&) i n some words i s changed t o ^ b (ba) e.g.
even today pas (behind) i s pronounced b a s . The p r o n u n c i a -
t i o n of the name of the province Atorpatgan has been changed
to A z a r b a i j a n a .
7. D ( d a l ) i s changed to z ( z e ) at the beginning of some
words, e.g. z a n i r = danad (he knows).
K a s r a v i goes on to d i s c u s s the verb budan (Persian to
be). I n modern P e r s i a n two d i f f e r e n t stems, a s t or h a s t and
bash, are sued f o r the p r e s e n t tense. I n A z a r i the stem i s
bud or bur i n s t e a d of a s t . Bur i s sometimes used i n s t e a d of
shod (became) e.g. y j ) i f ^ ^ (^-^ " ^ ^ ^ ^ and sometimes
i n s t e a d of b a shad ( w i l l b e ) . I n one of the above quoted
l i n e s of Shaykh S a f i , b u r i was used i n s t e a d of bud - kar
2
tamam b u r i (the t a s k was f i n i s h e d ) . K a s r a v i then quotes
some other examples which he t h i n k s are probably from ( o l d )
Azari.^ I t may be assumed that when the people of A z a r b a i j a n
spoke A z a r i they a l s o wrote poetry i n that language. Apart

1
• A z a r i . p.52. My heart i s a l i v e with l o v e f o r the prophet.
2. Ibid.,p.53.
3 . I b i d . , p.54.
 132

from simple v e r s e a which can he found i n almost every d i a l e c t ,

some higher and. more l i t e r a r y poetry, p a r t i c u l a r l y q u a t r a i n s ,
was w r i t t e n i n t h i s language, hut n e a r l y a l l of i t has
vanished. Nevertheless a small amount has s u r v i v e d , i n c l u -
ding seventy l i n e s by an unknown poet. A c e r t a i n K h a l i f e h
* 1

Sadeq, who l i v e d during the S a f a v i d p e r i o d , wrote some l i n e s

p r a i s i n g the S a f a v i d k i n g s . The name of another poet, des-
c r i b e d only a s Adam ("a man"), i s not known at a l l ; but the;
0 * 3
names of two more A z a r i poets a r e given a s K a s h f i and
. 0 h 5
Ma'ali. The f o l l o w i n g i s a quatrain by K a s h f i .

How your eyes have c a p t i v a t e d my h e a r t !

Your l i p s have drunk the blood ( i . e . anguish) of my h e a r t .
Was blood mixed with every (djrop o f ) milk which you drank?
Have you accustomed y o u r s e l f 5 to d r i n k i n g blood.
These v e r s e s are by Ma'ali6

1• A z a r i , p.54.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
k. Ibid.
5. Ibid., -p.56. The t e x t has mja ( u s ) , but K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t
i t must have been corrupted because the meaning c a l l s f o r
teh (you).
6. A z a r i . p.57.
 133

My b r e a s t , my h e a r t and my l i v e r are aflame

In my s o u l no p l a c e remains without f i r e ,
At every breath you renew my o l d wounds
At every moment you add f u e l to the flames.
* 1
Two l i n e s from Adam:

^ O ^ (J* ^ 6 ^ )JJ>

0 h e a r t , where s h a l l I come?
0 t e a r f u l , b l o o d - s t a i n e d eyes, where s h a l l I go
A l l the people d r i v e me from t h e i r doors,
I f you a l s o d r i v e me from your door, where s h a l l I go?

A poet c a l l e d R a j i from K h a l k h a l , a small town i n the east

» » » * 2
of A z a r b a i j a n , a l s o wrote a few l i n e s i n A z a r i :

(])/ ) )ss y y

The world i s a warehouse, i t s people form a caravan

One day i s springtime, f u l l of w i l d t u l i p s , and one day
i s autumn,
Man digs a b l a c k hole and c a l l s i t a tomb
(The f o u r t h mesra' which i s u n i n t e l l i g i b l e to u s , and
which K a s r a v i has not e x p l a i n e d i t i n a footnote, i s
1 }
as f o l l o w s : (J^ 0^ Cf^ O ^ <^
* 3
K a s r a v i then c i t e s examples of present day spoken A z a r i . ^

The (<old) A z a r i language d i d not become e x t i n c t a l l at once,

1. A z a r i . p.58.
2. Ibid., p.59.
3 . Ibid., p.60.
 134

and there a r e s t i l l a few v i l l a g e s i n A z a r h a i j a n where i t

i s used. Through the c e n t u r i e s A z a r i changed l i k e any other
language, and i t was a l s o s u b j e c t e d to the i n f l u e n c e of
A z a r b a i j a n i T u r k i s h ; moreover, being a d i a l e c t i t was used
d i f f e r e n t l y i n d i f f e r e n t p l a c e s , and these l o c a l v a r i a t i o n s
can s t i l l be t r a c e d today. The word A z a r b a i j a n itself
suggests that the people of t h e province were o r i g i n a l l y f o r
the most p a r t Aryans. As already mentioned, Alexander the
Great recognized Aturpat as the governor of A z a r b a i j p a n ,
and from him the l a n d got i t s name Aturpatagan. T h i s name
0 0

i s made up from two components, or indeed s i n c e Aturpat i s

i t s e l f a compound of the two words Atur and p a t , from three
components.
- r'
1. Atur ( /j)) ) means f i r e , and today has been modified
•

to a z a r ( yj> ) ) . The consonant t i n p a h l a v i i s o f t e n

changed t o z (zjal) i n Persian.^
2. The meaning of p a t i s not c l e a r .
3. Gan. T h i s word can be found a t the end of many names
of v i l l a g e s and c i t i e s , e.g. ArzanganrZangan, sometimes w i t h
the g ( g a f ) changed t o j d i m ) , e.g. Zanjan.
K a s r a v i then considers t h e names of c e r t a i n v i l l a g e s
2
and towns of A z a r b a i j a n which a r e of ( d i d ) A z a r i o r i g i n , e.g.:
1. A z a r i . pp.64-67.
2 . I b i d . p.64.
;
 135

Arvanaq ( J>/ ) ) , a v i l l a g e i n the western p a r t of

Tabriz j/ d i s t r i c t , f o r m e r l y pronounced Aranak. This means
" L i t t l e Aran". As we know, Aran i s t h e name o f a province
mentioned i n both Arabic and Persian books; i t i s t h e
t e r r i t o r y today c a l l e d Caucasian, i . e . Russian, Azerbaijan.
According t o some Armenian w r i t e r s , t h e meaning o f Aran i s
"place w i t h hot c l i m a t e , " and the name was given t o t h a t
p a r t o f Azerbaijan because the people used t o make t h e i r
w i n t e r quarters t h e r e . I n Armenian books the name g r a d u a l l y
changed t o Aranak.

Aznab ( v^*L* yj ) . A place i n Azarbaijan;. meaning n o t

clear.
1 2
ak (^V
Bak Y ) .).
' I- — t h—i s
n Pahlavi —
meant "God",'' but i n
o l d A z a r i i t means " g r e a t " .
B aku ( ) . This was o r i g i n a l l y Bekvan, e compound
of the two words bak and Van. I n Armenian t e x t s we come
across t h i s form of Jhe name. Van ( means a place o r
land; Bekvan ( O )j V ) meant " c i t y o f God".
Dilmaqan ( 3 ) i s a small town i n A z e r b a i j a n .
The c o r r e c t pronounciation was Dsylamagan ( (^)^X>^> ) , and
the name was a compound o f Day1em and gen, given t o the town
because a number o f Daylemites l i v e d i n i t .
Z e r i n Rud ( x>S (jf'J ) • The meening o f t h i s neme i s
not c l e e r . The piece wes f o r m e r l y c e l l e d Q i z i l Owzen.
1 . c . f . Begh i n Beghded ( " g i f t o f God").
2. A z a r i , p.68.
 136

Sard Rud ( JJSjjS ), a place two miles out o f T a b r i z ,

meaning not c l e a r .

T
Maralan ( ) , a q u a r t e r of T a b r i z . h e name i s
a compound o f t h e two s y l l a b l e s Mar and lSan. Mar i s the
word Mad (Medes). I n (Old) A z a r i d ( d a l ) was o f t e n changed
to r (r&). Lan ( (DJJ ) i s another word f o r place; so
Maralan means "place o f the Medes".
Maragheh ( (S )/> ) . The c o r r e c t o r i g i n a l p r o n u n c i a -
t i o n was Marava ( )/j^> ) , meaning "land o f the Medes."
Hashtad sar ( ^CSj* ) , meaning e i g h t y peaks, was
the name o f a mountain i n A z a r h a i j a n , today c a l l e d Hash<teli~-
Sar ( ^ > ).
S i r Edward Denison Ross t r a n s l a t e d a passage o f Kasravi's
book A z a r i i n a review^ which was published i n the Journal
of the Royal A s i a t i c Society o f London i n 1321. He describes
Kasravi as a man o f great l e a r n i n g , versed not only i n Arabic
and Persian l i e t e r a t u r e b u t also i n t h e w r i t i n g s o f Western
scholars. He f e l t t h a t i t would be a p i t y t h a t a s c h o l a r l y
work o f t h i s nature should r u n the r i s k o f passing unnoticed,
f o r i t was r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h a t new s p i r i t o f l i t e r a r y and
h i s t o r i c a l research which had only r e c e n t l y begun t o manifest
i t s e l f among the Persians, and which deserved a l l p o s s i b l e
encouragement. Kasravi had p a t i e n t l y devoted h i m s e l f t o the

1. E. Denison Ross, ff.R.A.S., 1927» p.11+8.

 137

study of A z a r i .
* * 1
At the "beginning o f h i s book Kafnameh, Kasravi l i k e n s
the Persian language t o a t r e e , which i f i t i s t o be fruitful
must have v i t a l i t y i n i t s v e i n s , and these, according t o
K a s r a v i , are i t s p r e f i x e s (•plshvand) and s u f f i x e s (pjysyand).
The Eastern languages have evolved i n two ways: f i r s t l y by
the compounding of words, and secondly by the a d d i t i o n o f
p r e f i x e s and s u f f i x e s t o them. I n these ways vocabulary can
be increased. Sometimes two words, each w i t h i t s own meaning,
are compounded t o form a t h i r d word w i t h a new meaning. For
instance the word rah (road) can be compounded w i t h other
words t o form new words such as: b i - r a h ( m i s l e d ) , gom-rah
( l o s t ) , rah-zan ( b a n d i t ) , rah-bar ( l e a d e r ) , r'ah-shenas (road
e x p e r t ) , rah-nama. ( g u i d e ) , rah-row (passage), rah-var (easy
g o i n g ) , rah-namun ( g u i d e ) , Shah-rah (main r o a d ) , rah-avard
(present brought back from a j o u r n e y ) , B a r be-rah ( d o c i l e ) ,
chahar-rah (cross roa<3$, rah-se-par (bound f o r ) , rah-gozar (
(passer-by). The disease which has i n j u r e d Persian and h e l d
back i t s progress i s c o r r u p t i o n w i t h Arabic, and the treatment
w i l l depend on study o f the meanings and o r i g i n s o f the
Persian p r e f i x e s and s u f f i x e s . Cure by means o f p r e f i x e s and
s u f f i x e s w i l l a f t e r a short time f r e e the Persian language
from the need t o use Arabic words, or words from any other
language.
1. K a s r a v i , Kafnameh. e d i t e d by Yahya Zoka, Tehran 1331/1952.
 138
As regards t h e h i s t o r y o f Persian s u f f i x e s , many words
end w i t h t h e l e t t e r h ( h a ) , which i n t h e spoken language i s
not pronounced a t a l l , "but i n t h e w r i t t e n language has t o he
w r i t t e n : e.g. reshteh ( s t r i n g ) , .1ameh (garment), nameh
( l e t t e r ) , s'ayeh (shadow), f e r e s h t e h ( a n g e l ) . I n the P a h l a v i
language, which was the n a t i v e language o f t h e I r a n i a n s
during t h e Ashkanid ( P a r t h i a n ) and Sasanid p e r i o d s , i n s t e a d
o f h the l e t t e r k was used. This i s proved "by a passage from
the Karnamak-e Ardashir Babakan,^ which Kasravi quotes,
c o n t a i n i n g the two wards r a k and do-ganak. today pronounced
and w r i t t e n r a h ( r o a d ) , do-ganeh ( t w o - f o l d ) . Afterwards, a t
the end o f t h e Sasanid p e r i o d , g was s u b s t i t u t e d f o r k, and
l a t e r i n southern I r a n t h e g was changed t o j . The f a c t must
be borne i n mind t h a t there has always been a d i f f e r e n c e
between t h e d i a l e c t s o f southern and n o r t h e r n I r a n . Signi-
f i c a n t instances o f t h i s d i f f e r e n c e a r e :
1. Most n o r t h e r n words c o n t a i n i n g the l e t t e r shin (sh) are
pronounced i n the south w i t h s i n ( s ) : e.g. i n t h e n o r t h they
say f e r e s h t a n ( t o send), but i n the south ferestadan.
2. Instead o f t h e l e t t e r ze ( z ) , d a l (d) i s used i n
southern I r a n , and t h i s d i f f e r e n c e i s also seen i n t h e o l d e s t
Persian d i a l e c t s and i n t h e Jewish Persian o f Hamadan: e.g.
i n t h e south they say damad (son-in-law) and i n the n o r t h
1. Kasravi ( t r . ) , Karnamak-e Ardashir Babakan, Tehran 13W/
I96I1.5 p.22.
2. Kafnameh. p.6.
 139
*

zuma.
3. % o s t n o r t h e r n words "beginning w i t h gaf (g) change t o
,ilm ( j ) i n the south: e.g. G-ahram, the name o f a v i l l a g e i n
the n o r t h , becomes Jahrom, the name o f a town i n the south.
On the other hand, the Arabs, who were i n close touch w i t h
the Persians through the c e n t u r i e s , replaced the gaf w i t h
e i t h e r q'af ( q j or Jim. They had t o do t h i s because there
i s no l e t t e r f o r g i n the Arabic alphabet: e.g. khandaq
( t r e n c h ) from Persian kandeh ( d u g ) , f i r u z a . i ( t u r q u o i s e ) from
Persian f i r u z e h . For a long time these n o r t h e r n and
southern forms o f the s u f f i x remained unchanged, but even-
t u a l l y the gaf and the .1im gave place t o he (h) which i s
used today. I n the o l d A z a r i language, which was the n a t i v e
* * *

language o f Azarbaijan f o r several c e n t u r i e s but g r a d u a l l y

l o s t i t s place t o T u r k i s h , there i s evidence t h a t before
the f i n a l k a f the long a sound ( l e t t e r a l e f ) was used. Today
the k a f has been dropped and only the a l e f i s pronounced:
e.g. astana ( t h r e s h o l d ) , Astara (a town on the Caspian c o a s t ) ,
a'shkara ( m a n i f e s t l y ) . A sentence from the geography o f
* 2
Hamdollah Mostowfi (1281-132+9) proves t h i s p o i n t ; he;
# » *

mentions a v i l l a g e between the I r a n i a n Iraq, and Azarbaijan

named Khunaj, and s t a t e s t h a t i t s i n h a b i t a n t s pronounced t h e
name Khuna ( i t s name today, Kasravi adds, i s Kaghaz Konan;.
1 . Kafnameh. pp 7-10.
2. I b i d . , p.8.
 iko
Very o f t e n "between the noun and the s u f f i x eh ( f o r m e r l y ak)
a chim (ch) i s i n s e r t e d i n modern Persian: e.g. Saracheh
(small house), daryacheh ( l a k e ) ; i n P a h l a v i , however, t h e
l e t t e r gflffifr was i n s e r t e d instead o f chim. I n (61d) A z a r i ,
chim (not Jim) was i n s e r t e d , and instead o f k a f , gaf was
used as the s u f f i x , while as already mentioned a l e f was
placed before i t . For example i n the ( b i d ) A z a r i language
#

ehaq was said i n s t e a d o f the s u f f i x chak, and l a t e r was

changed t o .juq. which today occurs f r e q u e n t l y i n names o f
A z a r b a i j a n i v i l l a g e s , such as Moghan.luq. Ala .jug. Mahmud.iuq.
The B u f f i x k a f i n the Persian language o f t e n has a d i m i n i -
t i v e meaning, and t h i s i s why the word chug>which has evolved
from i t , i s so mommon i n Azarbaijan; i t passed from ( o l d )
A z a r i i n t o Ottoman T u r k i s h , b u t i s not a Turkish word as
some l i n g u i s t s t h i n k . I n the ( e l d ) A z a r i language t h e l e t t e r
chim also appears before the s u f f i x as i n yavashcheh (some-
what s l o w l y ) , balacheh ( s m a l l ) , guycheh (green). The s u f f i x
keif d i d not change, however, i n some words such as dastak
( s t a f f ) , mar.lomak ( l e n t i l ) , mardomak ( p u p i l o f the eye).
As f o r the meanings o f the Persian s u f f i x k a f and i t s
d e r i v a t i v e s , two or t h r e e are commonly recognized b u t i n
f a c t there are many more; f o r even though i t consists o f one
l e t t e r , i t i s attached t o thousands o f other Persian words,
and much o f the vocabulary o f Persian has been b u i l t up w i t h
 Ikl

i t s help. Kasravi l i s t s 18 meanings o f the s u f f i x k a f and

i t s derivatives.
2 * *
1. Diminutive: e.g. chahak ( c e s s - p i t ) , khaneh (house, d i m i -
n u t i v e of khan, i n n ) , tashtak ("basin), shahrak (small town,
o f t e n used by e a r l y w r i t e r s ) . I n the Roman h i s t o r y "books the
name o f one of the Ashkanid ( P a r t h i a n ) kings i s mentioned as
Phraataces ( P a h l a v i , Pharahatak), which i s the d i m i n u t i v e o f
Farhad (name of Queen S h i r i n ' s l o v e r i n the Shahnameh).
Chupuq. meaning the I r a n i a n tobacco-pipe, i s o f Persian
o r i g i n d e r i v e d from chubak ( l i t t l e s t i c k ) , even though i t
appears i n the Divan-e Loghat ol-Tork, the d i c t i o n a r y o f
T u r k i s h words w r i t t e n ( i n Arabic i n 1077) by Mahmud o l -
Kashghari. Chupua i s the A z a r i form of chubak. and the word
acquired i t s present meaning when tobacco smoking entered
I r a n through Azarbaijan d u r i n g the Safavid p e r i o d .
2. Derogatory: e.g. nadanak (ignoramus), mardak ( g u y ) ,
sha'erak (rhymer), zanak (wench). The f o l l o w i n g l i n e gives
an example (from Sa'di's Gole&an):

"How o f t e n has a s w i f t running horse stayed behindI How

o f t e n has a lame l i t t l e donkey (kharak) c a r r i e d you s a f e l y
1,3
home!
3. P a t h e t i c : e.g. .iavanak (poor young f e l l o w ) , f a q i r a k
(poor beggar), t e f l a k (poor c h i l d ) .

1• Kafnameh, pp 12-15.
2. I b i d . , pp 12-13.
3. I b i d . , p.15.
 Ik2

" A f t e r weeping;the d e s t i t u t e man s a i d t o h e r , "0 h e a r t -

cheering l i t t l e mother! (mamak)".
h» Analogous: e.g. chashmak ( w i n k ) , mikhak ( c l o v e ) ,
*aqrabak (clock-hand); t h i s use i s not common today.
5» To form a d j e c t i v e s ( p a r t i c i p l e s ) from verbs: e.g.
istadeh (standing), khofteh (asleep).^
6. To form nouns from a d j e c t i v e s : e.g. sorkhak (measles),
zardak ( c a r r o t ) . * *
*

7« To form nouns of instrument from verbs: e.g. nameh

( l e t t e r r ) ) paymaneh (measure), maleh (trowel).**
8. Onomatopoeic: e.g. f e r f e r e h ( s p i n n i n g t o p ) , gharghareh
( g a r g l e ) , badbadak ( k i t e ) . ^
9. To form v e r b a l nouns: e.g. naleh ( g r o a n ) , khandeh
( l a u g h t e r ) , geryeh (weeping), muyeh ( l a m e n t ) . This i s very
rare.
10. To form nouns of q u a n t i t y : e.g. chekeh ( d r o p f u l ) , dasteh
( h a n d f u l ) , changeh ( f i s t f u l ) . This also i s very r a r e .
11. To form (concrete) nouns from verbs: e.g. kharasheh
( f i l i n g s ) , tarasheh (shavings).^
12. L o c a t i v e : e.g. t u t a k (mulberry p l a n t a t i o n ) , bidak ( w i l l o w
grove), an.1 I r a k ( f i g o r c h a r d ) .
» » "—' ——~*——
1• Kafnameh, p . l p .
2. I b i d . , ppl 16-22.
3. Ibid.> p.82.
iu I b i d . , pp 23-26.
5. I b i d . , p.26.
6. I b i d . , pp 27-29.
7. I b i d . , p.30.
8. I b i d p.31.
v
 Ih3

13« Possessive: e.g. seh-payeh ( t h r e e - f o o t e d , t r i p o d ) , seh-

saleh (three years o l d ) .
Ihm Adverbial: e.g. yavaahak ( s l o w l y ) , narmak (gently),
ashkara ( m a n i f e s t l y ) .
15• flamiliafr. This use i s n o t found i n l i t e r a r y language
"but appears i n c o l l o q u i a l expressions, e.g. kaseh-eh-ra be-
y-ar ( b r i n g t h e b o w l ) .
16. Although n e i t h e r modern n o r ancient Persian has forms
o f gender, a l l languages have some means o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g
between male and female, and i t seems t h a t t h e s u f f i x k a f
was sometimes used t o i n d i c a t e f e m i n i n i t y . As evidence f o r
t h i s , Kasravi mentions t h a t a r u l e r named Shahrban ( i n o l d
Persia Kh^sh^ar^avan, which means the guardian o f t h e c i t y )
i s reported t o have had a queen named Shahrbanu; t h i 6 i s
c l e a r l y the feminine o f Shahrban, and Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t
the feminine s u f f i x u has been modified from t h e k a f ( i . e .
from a k ) .
17. Temporal: e.g. daheh (ten-day p e r i o d ) , sadeh ( c e n t u r y ) ,
hazareh (millennium).
18. Miscellaneous a d j e c t i v a l meanings: e.g. chashmak ( w i n k ) ,
sangak (a s o r t o f bread baked on hot stones).
Kasravi p o i n t s out t h a t the meanings o f c e r t a i n words
are n o t y e t p r o p e r l y understood: e.g. siaheh ( i n v o i c e ) ,

1• Kafnameh. p.36.
2
" I ^ i d . , p.37.
3. I b i d . , pp 39-te.
 ihh
T
.1ameh (garment), khameh ( o l d word f o r pen). here i s nothing
t o show t h e meaning o f t h e p a r t preceding t h e s u f f i x . These
words are very o l d , and i n the course o f t h e ages t h e i r
o r i g i n a l meanings have "been f o r g o t t e n , Kasravi draws a t t e n -
t i o n t o t h e need f o r o b j e c t i v e , and not f a n c i f u l , study o f
the evolutions, o f such words. He also mentions t h a t t h e
* * * 1 m
s u f f i x k a f i s sometimes replaced "by kan o r gan. This i s
seen i n the names o f many I r a n i a n v i l l a g e s and c i t i e s , e.g.
Zangan (Zanjan).
I n an important "book c a l l e d Zaban-e Pak (Pure language),
Kasravi begins by discussing t h e problem o f v a r i a n t forms of
Persian y&£j&*d, which has caused a l o t o f confusion. Many
verbs have two forms o f theirout***, and Kasravi regards this
3
as a great defect o f t h e Persian language. For example, i n
the verb " t o w r i t e " (neveshtan) J* we f i n d p a r t s o f the verb
such as (m:0-nevesht (he was w r i t i n g ) , (beVnevis ( w r i t e ) ,
neveshteh ( w r i t t e n ) , (mi)nev|sad (he w r i t e s ) , nevisandeh
(writer). Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t t h i s defect ought t o be
remedied by forming the p a r t s o f t h e verb from one root o n l y ,
e.g. n e v i s i d a n ( t o w r i t e ) , ( m i - ) n e v i B i d (he was w r i t i n g ) ,
(be-)nevis (write), nevisideh (written). This treatment
must be a p p l i e d g r a d u a l l y , Kasravi says, i n order t h a t the
1 . Kafnameh. p.ij-1.
2. K a s r a v i , Zaban-e Pak. Tehran 1323/19^4.
3. I b i d . , p.12.
k. I b i d . , pp. 12-13.
5. I b i d . , p.13.
6. I b i d . , pp. 13-14.
 145
ears may get t h e h a b i t o f i t .
Another serious defect o f Persian i s i t s possession of
t o o many a u x i l i a r y verbs, most o f which are q u i t e unnecessary.
Thus, instead o f saying khandeh namud (he laughed), naleh
kard (he groaned), z a r i kard (he lamented), one should say
khandid. n a l i d . z a r i d . Kasravi considers t h a t t h e excessive
use of a u x i l i a r i e s was a r e s u l t o f the m i n g l i n g o f Persian
w i t h many other languages.
Lack o f v a l i d r u l e s i s another defect o f Persian d i s -
cussed by K a s r a v i . For c e n t u r i e s t h e I r a n i a n s have been
i n c l i n e d t o use f o r e i g n words instead o f Persian words, and
the language has consequently become r a t h e r s l a c k and i n e f -
ficient. For instance, I n Persian three a c t i v e p a r t i c i p l e s
can be made from each v e r b a l r o o t r e.g. juyan, .iUya. juyandeh
( a l l meaning "seeker"))or ravandeh ( g o e r ) , ravan ( f l o w i n g ,
also s o u l ) , rava ( p e r m i s s i b l e ) .
Another great d i f f i c u l t y i s t h e disordered s t a t e o f
p r e f i x e s and s u f f i x e s . Transitiveness or i n t r a n s i t i v e n e s s
o f verbs also presents problems. C e r t a i n verbs i n Persian
are used sometimes t r a n s i t i v e l y and sometimes i n t r a n s i t i v e l y ,
and t h i s causes a l o t o f complication i n the language. The
use o f the past p a r t i c i p l e w i t h passive and a c t i v e meanings
3
i s y e t another source o f c o n f u s i o n . There i s an i r r e g u l a r
1 . K a s r a v i , Zaban-e Pak. p.13.
2. I b i d .
3. I b i d . , p. 15.
h T-. p
 ike

r u l e t h a t t h e past p a r t i c i p l e may sometimes he used w i t h an

a c t i v e meaning: e.g. neshasteh ( s e a t e d ) , i s t a d e h ( s t o o d ) ,
or i n khabideh k i s t ? (who i s t h i s sleeping man?). Kasravi
* 1
t h i n k s t h a t instead one should say i n khabandeh k l s t ? The
only way t o remove t h i s i r r e g u l a r i t y i s t o use the a c t i v e
participle. There would he no inconvenience i n saying
neshinandeh ( s i t t i n g ) , istandeh ( s t a n d i n g ) , which are c o r r e c t ,
instead o f neshasteh. i s t a d e h . Imprecision i s another defect
p

which Kasravi notes. Many Persian words do not have a p r e -

cise meaning. Thus the I r a n i a n s say d i v a r - e kutah ( t h e short
w a l l ) ; t h i s i s i n c o r r e c t , f o r the simple reason t h a t kutah
( s h o r t ) i s act t h e opposite o f deraz ( l o n g ) , bul£^6he opposite
of hoiand ( h i g h ) . The meaning w i t h reference t o " w a l l " i s
not "high", and one should t h e r e f o r e say " d i v a r - e past" ( t h e
low w a l l ) .
I t i s o f t e n s a i d t h a t t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f Arabic words
has enriched Persian. Kasravi r e p l i e s t h a t richness does
not mean t h a t a language i s s t r o n g , and t h a t the s t r e n g t h o f
a language does not n e c e s s a r i l y depend on the vastness o f i t s
vocabulary. A language, he says, i s l i k e a t r e e , which i f i t
i s strong w i l l be able t o produce branches. Those who t r y t o
increase the vocabulary o f a language by borrowing words from
other languages are l i k e persons who cut branches from t r e e s
1• Zaban-e Pak. p.15*
2. I b i d .
 ihl

and t i e them w i t h s t r i n g t o a bare t r e e . I t i s also s a i d

t h a t when two languages are r e l a t e d t o each o t h e r , they can
use each other's words; b u t i n Kasravi's opinion such
borrowing must have a l i m i t . Although t h e European languages
are a l l r e l a t e d t o one another, they have not opened t h e i r
gates t o an u n l i m i t e d i n f l u x o f f o r e i g n words. Admittedly
the Arabs came t o I r a n and i n f l u e n c e d t h e Persian l i t e r a t u r e
and language; a t t h e same time i t must n o t be f o r g o t t e n t h a t
Persian had an i n f l u e n c e on Arabic. Nevertheless t h e two
languages d i d not fuse. Although the Arabs a f t e r conquering
I r a n were i n f l u e n c e d by the g l o r i o u s I r a n i a n c i v i l i z a t i o n
and c u l t u r e , they p r o t e c t e d t h e i r language-from t o o much
mixing w i t h Persian and kept i t on t h e whole pure. As regards
the European languages, which are s a i d t o be very much i n t e r -
mixed, Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t t h i s c l a i m cannot be accepted,
because the Western European languages have a l l borrowed from
\ 2
L a t i n (but n o t so much from each other); t h a t i s t h e reason
why they have a great deal o f common vocabulary. Even so,
i f a European w r i t e r uses t o o many L a t i n words, people con-
s i d e r him unreasonable. I n Persian, on t h e other hand,
borrowing has been c a r r i e d so f a r t h a t t h e r e are I r a n i a n
v i l l a g e s where n i n e t y percent o f t h e people's vocabulary, (so
Kasravi says) i s found t o c o n s i s t o f Arabic words.
1 * Zaban-e Pak. p.9.
2. I b i d . , p.10.
 12+8

To c o r r e c t t h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s , Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t
1
several remedies are needed:
1. Some words of Arabic o r i g i n , such as ketab (book), .ield
(volume), do not need t o be replaced, as t h e i r meanings are
c l e a r and everywhere understood; they may be allowed t o
remain.
2. Old Persian words can be found and brought back i n t o use
w i t h t h e i r proper meanings; t h i s task must be c a r r i e d out
gradually.
3. Words must be made capable of showing a d e f i n i t e meaning,
which i s o f t e n not t h e case i n Persian, and i n c o r r e c t usages
must be e l i m i n a t e d ; f o r example the use o f dorost-kar ( c o r r e c t
doer) w i t h the meaning "honest" i s wrong and should be r e -
placed by r a s t - k a r ( r i g h t d o e r ) . Many Persian words have no
c l e a r meanings but are s t i l l used i n a vague and imprecise
way. Kasravi c i t e s as an instance the word farhang, which
2
means education; b u t i f somebody i s asked i t s meaning, he
w i l l say "'elmofazl o adab" ("science, l e a r n i n g and l i t e r a -
t u r e " ) , which suggests t h a t he i s puzzled!
The question a r i s e s , how have Persian words l o s t t h e i r
meanings? Kasravi regards t h i s phenomenon as a great defect
of t h e Persian language, and t h i n k s t h a t i t was caused by
the mixing of Persian w i t h a l i e n languages. For i n s t a n c e ,
1 . Zaban-e Pak. pp.11-12.
2. The word also means d i c t i o n a r y .
3« Zaban-e Pak. pp. 3k-h0.
 149

bakhshidan o r i g i n a l l y meant " t o d i v i d e " , "but has l o s t i t s

correct meaning and today means sometimes amorzidan ("to
"bless" or " t o f o r g i v e " ) and sometimes dadan ("to g i v e " ) .
Many words which are today used as synonyms o r i g i n a l l y had
d i f f e r e n t shades of meaning: e.g. him, t a r s , and bak ( a l l
meaning " f e a r " ) . Tars, f o r example, means f e a r o f damage,
which might b e f a l l one, and should p r o p e r l y be used as t h e
contrary o f omid ("hope").
Loss o f the root meaningB o f words has gone so f a r t h a t
i n many words t h e root meaning i s now f o r g o t t e n . For
example, people say "di-shab negaran kh'abideh bud" ("last
n i g h t he s l e p t w o r r i e d l y " ) , and completely f o r g e t t h a t
negaran i s a p a r t of the verb n e g a r i s t a n ("to l o o k " ) . The
proper expression i n t h i s sentence would be bimniak ( " a f r a i d " ) ,
instead o f negaran ( " l o o k i n g " ) , which he could not do when
asleep.
Ambiguity i n the use o f words i s another defect of the.
Persian language a r i s i n g from the disappearence o f o l d v e r b a l
forms. As Kasravi says, modern Persian s u f f e r s from a s h o r t -
p
age o f verbs. For example, i f somebody says "man f a r s h
mi-kharam." i t i s not known whether he means " I buy carpets
p r o f e s s i o n a l l y , " or only " I am going t o buy some carpets now".
I n other languages these two meanings are d i s t i n g u i s h e d by
1 . Zaban-3 Pak, p.21.
2. I b i d . , p.34.
 150

d i f f e r e n t tenses o f the verb. I n Persian also these meanings

•i
were a t f i r s t d i s t i n g u i s h e d , but l a t e r they became confused.
Confusion o f n e a r l y s i m i l a r meanings i s another wide-
2
spread phenomenon i n Persian. Kasravi mentions a number o f
examples, e.g. neveshtan and negashtan. These two words are
used w i t h t h e i d e n t i c a l meaning " t o w r i t e " . I n fact
negashtan means " t o p a i n t " or " t o d e p i c t " , and c o r r e c t l y i t
should be used w i t h t h i s meaning alone. Bakhshidan and
amorzidan. As already mentioned, bakhshidan c o r r e c t l y means
" t o d i v i d e " ; i t ought not t o be used w i t h the meaning o f
amorzidan ("to b l e s s " or " f o r g i v e " ) or o f dadan ("to g i v e " ) .
Arastan and p i r a s t a n . Both these verbs mean t o " b e a u t i f y " ,
b u t arastan has t h e sense o f t o b e a u t i f y or adorn something
by adding good p o i n t s t o i t , w h i l e p i r a s t a n means t o b e a u t i f y
or clean something by removing d i r t from i t . Farmudan and
goftan. Both are used w i t h t h e meaning o f g o f t a n ("to s a y " ) ,
when c o r r e c t l y farmudan means only " t o order". G-ereftan and
setandan. These two v e r b s , which are. both used w i t h t h e
meaning " t o g e t " , c o r r e c t l y have quite d i f f e r e n t meanings:
g e r e f t a n means " t o s e i z e " , whereas setandan means " t o acquire"
(without using violence or power). Dasteh and goruh. These
two words are also commonly used as synonyms. Goruh
c o r r e c t l y means a group o f people who gather somewhere witheut
1. Zaban-e Pak. p.22.
2. I b i d . , pp . 34-40.
 151

any s p e c i a l aim or purpose, while dasteh means a number o f

people who have some purpose i n t h e i r gathering. Chandin
and chandan. These two words are used synonymously t o
express measurement. C o r r e c t l y , chandin should "be used when
the meaning i s "that amount" (which w i l l "be mentioned), and
ehandan when the meaning i s " t h a t amount" (which has "been
mentioned.)

There are many such words i n Persian, and Kasravi t h i n k s

t h a t t h e i r use should be g r a d u a l l y confined t o t h e i r exact
meanings. Only i n a pure language, he says, i s each word
used f o r a s i n g l e meaning, and each meaning expressed "by a
s i n g l e word. Those who t h i n k t h a t the existence o f l a r g e
numbers o f synonyms i n a language i s a sign o f i t s s t r e n g t h
are t e r r i b l y mistaken. Such persons want merely t o p l a y
w i t h d i f f e r e n t words; b u t a language i s an instrument f o r
mutual understanding and exchanging ideas so t h a t the'
business of l i f e may be c a r r i e d on.
P r e f i x e s and S u f f i x e s . Apart from the already mentioned
d e f e c t s , the Persian language i s r e s t r i c t e d i n scope. A much
wider p r a c t i c a l vocabulary i s needed. Kasravi envisages two
2
ways of achieving t h i s purpose.
1• Compounding two or three words together and g e t t i n g a
new meaning from the compound.
1 . Zaban-e Pak. p.39.
2. I b i d . , p.lj.0.
 152

2. Adding p r e f i x e s and s u f f i x e s t o words. This i s a p a r t i -

c u l a r l y h e l p f u l method, "by which thousands o f words w i t h new
menings can be created: e.g. p a s - r a f t an ( t o d e c l i n e ) , pjLsh-
r a f t ( p r o g r e s s ) , nik-andish o r nik-khwah ("benevolent), bad-
andish or bad-khwah (malevolent) and so on.

There are a great number of p r e f i x e s and s u f f i x e s I n

Persian % but as Kasragi points, o u t , they are o f t e n wrongly
used o r ambiguous.
1• Some o f them are not s y s t e m a t i c a l l y used; f o r example
i t i s p o s s i b l e t o say sud-mand ( p r o f i t a b l e ) / but the c o n t r a r y
*
ziyan-mand i s seldom used.
2. Many o f them have d i f f e r e n t meanings: e.g. nak L.ih 1

dardnak ( p a i n f u l - t h i n g ) and Kheshmnak (angry - person).

3» Some o f them have no c l e a r meaning: e.g. f a r a amad.
fara rasid.
I f the best p o s s i b l e use i s t o be made o f the Persian
p r e f i x e s and s u f f i x e s , these defects must be e l i m i n a t e d .
How can t h e Persian language be made stronger and more
2
expressive? I n h i s book on t h i s s u b j e c t , Kasravi mentions
t h a t before the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l movement i n I r a n , murmurs
were heard about the need f o r p u r i f y i n g t h e Persian language,
and t h a t a f t e r the r e v o l u t i o n , a r t i c l e s on t h i s subject began
1. Zaban-e Pak. pp ^0-41.
2. K a s r a v i , Zaban-e F a r s i va Rah-e rasa va Tavania gardanidan-e
a n t e d i t e d by Yahya Zoka, Tehran 1335/1956, pp 1-2.
 153

t o appear i n t h e newspapers. U n t i l Kasravi's t i m e , however,

nobody had done any s i g n i f i c a n t research i n t o the language
f o r the purpose of f i n d i n g genuinely Persian words w i t h
which t h e borrowed Arab words might be replaced. Kasravi
remarks that some p r e j u d i c e d persons, who a t t r i b u t e d t h e
defects o f Persian t o the Arab conquest, were s t r i c t l y
against Islam and the Arabs; w h i l e on the other hand t h e r e
were many who had s t u d i e d Arabic and had become so attached
t o i t t h a t they were not ready t o give up t h e i r heavy A r a b i -
c i z e d s t y l e o f w r i t i n g Persian, They even urged t h e people
t o use Arabic words as much as p o s s i b l e . The r e s u l t , Kasravi
observes, i s t h a t several s t y l e s o f w r i t i n g Persian have come
1
i n t o being. I n newspapers, f o r i n s t a n c e , d i f f e r e n t
a r t i c l e s are o f t e n w r i t t e n i n completely d i f f e r e n t styles.
Kasravi p o i n t s out t h a t i n s p i t e o f t h e spread o f Islam
i n I r a n , there was no h i s t o r i c a l connection between t h i s
development and the c o r r u p t i o n o f t h e Persian language.
2
through excessive borrowing o f Arabic words. The l a t t e r
process was s t a r t e d by ignorant and shallow-minded persons
long a f t e r the I r a n i a n s had become Moslems (as can be seen
from t h e p u r i t y o f t h e language used by the e a r l i e r Persian
w r i t e r s o f the Moslem p e r i o d . ) According t o K a s r a v i , a
language must be independent i f i t i sto surviveotherwise
» »
1 . Zaban-e F a r s i . p.12.
2. I b i d . , pp. 1-9.
3. I b i d . , p.7.
 15b

i t can "become so dependent on f o r e i g n words t h a t i t w i l l

soon die a n a t u r a l death. The Persian language, he t h i n k s ,
i s now s u f f e r i n g from such a l a c k of independence. He;
compares languages w i t h c o u n t r i e s , and says t h a t j u s t as
the people of a country must not l e t strangers get c o n t r o l
of i t , they must not l e t them get c o n t r o l of t h e i r language
either. I f Persian i s t o be saved and improved, i t must
be f r e e d from the domination o f Arabic grammar and vocabulary.
Today, f o r a good knowledge o f Persian, Arabic grammar h a s i t o
be l e a r n t ; and t h i s causes a l o t of t r o u b l e and waste of
time. Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t the M i n i s t r y of Education ought
2
t o assume r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r improving t h i s s i t u a t i o n . The
f i r s t steps should be taken i n the primary school programme.
Kasravi acknowledges t h a t the m a j o r i t y of l i v i n g
languages are impure, being mixtures of two and o f t e n three
d i f f e r e n t languages; but even so he i n s i s t s t h a t there should
be some l i m i t and t h a t every language should gradually be
made independent. He mentions the names of c e r t a i n learned
persons who allowed themselves t o w r i t e Persian i n a heavy
s t y l e , using u n l i m i t e d numbers o f Arabic words and o f t e n also
»

sentences. One of them was the i l l u s t r i o u s scholar Mirza

Mohammad Q a z v i n i ^ (1877-19^9)• At the same time Kasravi
1 • Zaban-e ffarsi. p.5.
2. I b i d . , p.6.
3. I b i d . ,
k» I b i d . , p.10.
 155

recognises t h a t at t h i s stage i t i s impossible t o remove a l l

the Arabic words from Persian, Some of them are now very-
u s e f u l i n d a i l y conversation, and the people are attached t o
them. They can t h e r e f o r e be l e f t as they are. Moreover,
p u r i f i c a t i o n of a language i s not an easy t a s k . I t must
d e f i n i t e l y be undertaken by learned s c h o l a r s , and i t w i l l
r e q u i r e concentrated e f f o r t and take a long t i m e . Those
responsible cannot be allowed t o create words out o f t h e i r
own mind^; they must f i r s t have a sound knowledge of the
meanings and use of words. I n the sentence Khaneh tamaman
sukhteh (" the house i s completely b u r n t " ) * the use of the

Arabic word tamaman ("completely") i s , i n Kasravi's o p i n i o n ,

2
incorrect. One should search f o r a s u i t a b l e Persian word;
and the proper word can u s u a l l y be found i n the c l a s s i c a l
l i t e r a r y woijks such as Sa'di's Golestan. Sa'di used the
word pak (Mclean") i n the sense of "completely", and the
modern I r a n i a n s could adopt i t instead of tamaman. Kasravi
mentions c e r t a i n c l a s s i c a l works which he regards as p a r t i -
c u l a r l y valuable sources of pure Persian words,^ namely the
w r i t i n g s of Naser Khosraw, Bayhaqi's h i s t o r y , the Farsnameh
of Bm o l - B a l k h i , Sa'di's Golestan. the Asrar ol-Towhid.
and above a l l Perdowsi's Shahnameh. He repeatedly emphasizes
Ferdowsi's greatness^" both as a great scholar and as a poet,
1• Zaban-e F a r s i . p . i u
2. I b i d . , p.15.
3. I b i d . , p.19.
h. I b i d . , p.18.
 156

and p r a i s e s him "because he avoided using too many Arabic

words. As regards the w r i t e r s who l i v e d under the Mongol
dynasty, and s h o r t l y before t h a t t i m e , Kasravi d i v i d e s them
i n t o two groups. One group a c t u a l l y t r i e d t o increase t h e
number o f Arabic words i n Persian: e.g. the h i s t o r i a n s Vassaf
( e a r l y 14th century) and Jovayni (d.1229/1230), and, N a s r o l l a h
Kateb (Nasrollah ebn 'Abd61-Hamid; mid 12th c e n t u r y ) , t h e

t r a n s l a t o r o f the celebrated animal f a b l e s K a l i l e h va Demneh.

Kasravi has a very low opinion o f these authors. The second
group, although they were attached t o A r a b i c , also used a
r i c h vocabulary o f Persian words. Among t h e i r works, Kasravi
notes two as being very u s e f u l sources o f Persian words.^
One o f them i s the Asrar ol-Towhid f i Maqamat ol-Sha.ykh Abu
Sa'id; t h i s book i s a biography o f the celebrated S u f i s a i n t
Abu Sa'id Abu'l-Khayr (967-1049) w r i t t e n i n a very simple;
s t y l e by h i s great grandson Mohammad towards t h e end o f t h e
12th century. Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t perhaps the reason f o r i t s
s i m p l i c i t y i s t h a t t h e S u f i s were very simple people i n t h e i r
way o f l i f e and mutual d e a l i n g s , and t h a t t h i s s i m p l i c i t y i s
reflected i n t h e i r style of writing.^ I f t h i s book i s compared
w i t h the K a l i l e h va Demneh o f N a s r o l l a h Kateb, t h e i r s t y l e s
appear e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t , even though the two authors l i v e d
\• Zaban-e F a r s i , p.18.
2. I b i d . , pp 12-13.
3. I b i d . , p.19.
k. I b i d . , p.19.
 157

at n e a r l y the same t i m e ; Nasrollah's work i s very super-

f i c i a l and heavy. Another "book from t h i s p e r i o d which
provides a u s e f u l store o f Persian vocabulary i s Sa'di's
Golestan.
Kasravi p o i n t s out t h a t Persian could be one of t h e
easiest languages t o l e a r n , and could also be a l u c i d means
1
of expression, however much Europeans may a l l e g e t h a t
A s i a t i c languages are n o t c l e a r i n meaning. While r e c o g n i s i n g
t h a t some people w i l l disagree w i t h t h e conclusions which he
has drawn from h i s researches i n t o t h e Persian language,
Kasravi concludes by assuring h i s readers t h a t he has t r i e d
t o do h i s best.
Mohammad Qazvini (1877-1949)» t h e founder of modern
I r a n i a n l i t e r a r y and h i s t o r i c a l s c h o l a r s h i p , who was a close
f r i e n d of Professor E. G. Browne, admired Kasravi as a
l i n g u i s t i c scholar but not as a language reformer. In his
p

book B i s t Maqaleh-ye Qazvini •> he praises Kasravi's book

A z a r i f o r i t s t r u s t w o r t h y research and precise i n f o r m a t i o n .
Kasravi has shown on the basis o f h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s how
* * *

T u r k i s h came t o Azarbaijan and how the people gave up t h e i r

n a t i v e A z a r i Persian language f o r T u r k i s h . E a r l y Arab
geographers such as Ebn Howqal and Mas'udi mention t h e e x i s -
tence of A z a r i , and from t h e i r statements i t v£as possible t o
1 . Zaban-e F a r s i . p.19.
2. B i s t Maaaley-ye Qazvini. Bombay 1306/1928, pp 11+1-145.
 158

i n f e r t h a t i t was the spoken language o f Azerbaijan from t h e

4 t h / 9 t h t o 7 t h / l 2 t h c e n t u r i e s and t h a t i t was Persian; b u t
t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n was so scarce t h a t these inferences were
based on p r o b a b i l i t y r a t h e r than c e r t a i n t y . The question

0 0 0

what language the people o f Azarbaijan o r i g i n a l l y spoke was

not an urgent problem, and no scholars before Kasravi p a i d
attention to i t . Recently some ignorant and i l l - i n f o r m e d
persons had a t t r i b u t e d a d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n a l i t y t o t h e
A z a r b a i j a n i s because they converse i n T u r k i s h . T h e i r argu-
ments had been disproved by the precise arguments which
Kasravi had gathered from so many sources and presented i n
such a l o g i c a l way. From both the h i s t o r i c a l and the p o l i -
t i c a l viewpoints Kasravi had performed a most valuable
service. At t h e end o f t h i s a r t i c l e Qazvini touches on
Kasravi's s t y l e . I t i s unpopular w i t h I r a n i a n readers, he
says, because i t i s p r a c t i c a l l y u n i n t e l l i g i b l e t o them.
Consequently they cannot grasp the ideas i n Kasravi's valuable
works such as h i s book A z a r i . Kasravi d i d not w r i t e either
1
i n the oldfashioned s t y l e , l i k e the Hasekh o l - T a v a r i k h . n o r
» » o

i n pure Persian, l i k e the Nameh-ye Khosrovan , b u t t r i e d t o

create a unique s t y l e o f h i s own combining t r a d i t i o n a l pure

1Persian
. A c h rwords
o n i c l eand modern
o f the words.
Qarjars and hHe
i s tdoirdy not r e a l Emams
o f the i z e t hby
at the
Mohammad Taqi Sepehr (d.1880), who was court h i s t o r i a n
t o Naser o l - D i n Shah.
2. A h i s t o r y o f I r a n up,to the Zands, w r i t t e n i n 1891-1894
by J a l a l o l - D i n Mirza, a son o f Fath ' A l i Shah. I t
contains no Arabic words.
 159

r e s u l t would look strange and u n n a t u r a l . Qazvini then s t a t e s

t h a t he once came across a book c a l l e d Qahveh-khaneh-ye,
Surat(?) by B e m a r d i n de Saint P i e r r e , which had been t r a n s -
l a t e d by Kasravi from Esperanto i n t o the most b e a u t i f u l
Arabic. Only by reading t h i s book can one appreciate the
2
extent of p r o f i c i e n c y i n A r a b i c . I n conclusion, Qazvini
asks why a great scholar l i k e K a s r a v i , whose valuable r e -
searches had drawn the a t t e n t i o n of the w o r l d of l e a r n i n g ,
should be so i n d i f f e r e n t and unsympathetic t o the language
and l i t e r a t u r e of h i s own fatherland.
A number of a r t i c l e s by v a r i o u s authors were w r i t t e n
on the subject of defects i n the Persian language and
p o s s i b l e remedies, and were published i n the newspapers and
periodicals. I t seems worthwhile t o mention one of them a t
t h i s p o i n t , because i t s ideas are s i m i l a r t o Kasravi'B.
This i s an a r t i c l e by the d i s t i n g u i s h e d scholar Abbas Eqbal
( A s h t i y a n i ) (d.1334/1955) e n t i t l e d "Language P o l i c y , " which
* » 3

was published i n the p e r i o d i c a l Yadgar. I n t h i s he says t h a t

there have been times when the Persian language was under-
stood from China and I n d i a t o Albania, and was the language
of l i t e r a t u r e and business i n many c o u n t r i e s . As t h e
I r a n i a n c e n t r a l government l o s t i t s s t a b i l i t y through the
c e n t u r i e s , the i n f l u e n c e of the Persian language g r e a t l y
1. B i s t Maqaleh-ye Qasvini, pp 147-148.
2. 1737-1814. Author o f the very popular novel Paul et
V i r g i n i e . which has been t r a n s l a t e d i n t o most languages.
3 . Yadgar. year 2, No.6, 1329/1946, pp 1-7.
 160

decreased. I f the n a t i o n wants t o s u r v i v e , i t must have a

language p o l i c y . I f I r a n f a i l s i n t h i s matter and the
Persian language d i e s , the n a t i o n w i l l also d i e . Two dangers
t h r e a t e n Persian at present. F i r s t l y , i f a powerful European
n a t i o n were t o defeat I r a n and become p o l i t i c a l l y dominant,
they would n a t u r a l l y spread t h e i r language i n the country,
and the Persian language would f i n a l l y be e l i m i n a t e d f o r ever.
Secondly, European governments (so 'Abbas Eqbal says) are
t r y i n g f o r t h e i r own purposes t o destroy our g l o r i o u s l a n -
guage, and t o replace i t by l o c a l languages or d i a l e c t s .
I r a n i a n must r e a l i s e t h a t Persian i s t h e i r s t a t e language
(zaban-e d o w l a t i ) and the means o f expression o f t h e i r learned
scholars and men o f l e t t e r s . I r a n i a n governmental leaders
should t r y t o spread the Persian language i n the t e r r i t o r i e s
which once belonged t o I r a n , and whose i n h a b i t a n t s are s t i l l
a t t r a c t e d towards I r a n , because they have kept s i m i l a r t r a -
d i t i o n s and s p i r i t u a l and mental a t t i t u d e s . Needless t o say
the governmental a u t h o r i t i e s are responsible f o r the f u r t h e r
development of the Persian language. There cannot, however,
be any question of removing the T u r k i s h and Arabic languages
from the country. The government should t r y t o maintain a
very t o l e r a n t p o l i c y towards the I r a n i a n s who remain attached
t o those two languages. The main purpose o f the government's

1 . Yadgar, year 2, No.6, 1324/1946, pp 1-7. He probably

Seferijed/to the Soviet government's p o l i c y i n I r a n i a n
Azerbaijan d u r i n g and a f t e r the Second World,War, and
perhaps also t o t h e i r p o l i c i e s i n Caucasian. Azarbaijan
and C e n t r a l Asia.
 161

p o l i c y should "be t o encourage them t o stay I r a n i a n , t o t h i n k

I r a n i a n , and t o have I r a n i a n sympathies. I n t h a t case i t w i l l
not "be important i f a m i n o r i t y o f I r a n i a n s speak Arabic or
T u r k i s h . As Hafez, says:

"Arabic and T u r k i s h i n t h i s matter are j u s t the same. ^

0 Hafez, t e l l t h e t a l e o f love i n whatesrerr language you know."
There had been a rumour t h a t Azarbaijan might be sepa-
r a t e d from t h e r e s t o f t h e country because i t s i n h a b i t a n t s
2
speak Turkish. Foreign powers had been t r y i n g t o promote
* * *

separatism among the A z a r b a i j a n i s and Kurds by spreading wrong

ideas among them. The I r a n i a n s , 'Abbas Eqbal says, must
f i r s t l y r e a l i z e t h a t i n most cases there i s no connection a t
a l l between people's language and t h e i r race. There i s always
a p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t a nation's language may be changed by
p o l i t i c a l or h i s t o r i c a l developments. For instance English
i s the language o f about two hundred m i l l i o n people i n the
world. O r i g i n a l l y i t was a G-ermanic language; two German
t r i b e s , the Angles and the Saxons, conquered England and
r u l e d f o r a p e r i o d o f time during which they spread t h e i r
language amongst the people. There are s t i l l people i n Great
B r i t a i n , however, who speak d i f f e r e n t languages, such as
1 . Yadgar, year 2, No.3, 132k/19h5 pp 1-12. t

2. I b i d .
 162

Welsh and G a e l i c , Switzerland also i s a good example i n t h i s

respect. Although three d i f f e r e n t languages are spoken i n
t h a t country, the Swiss are r u l e d "by one government, and they
are a l l e q u a l l y ready t o defend t h e i r country.

I f a few i n s i n c e r e persons i n s i s t on a t t r i b u t i n g t o
Azarbaijan a d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n a l i t y and considering the
» » * »

A z a r b a i j a n i s a d i f f e r e n t race, or i n saying t h a t the Azar-

b a i j a n i s were once r u l e d by Turks and t h a t Turkish i s t h e i r
language, we can always ask why they have named t h e i r
villages and r i v e r s i n pure Persian. This alone i s enough
t o convince a reasonable mind t h a t the A z a r b a i j a n i s are
Aryans, who a c c i d e n t l y adopted the language of the Turks.
Yaqut ol-Hamavi i n h i s Mo'.jam ol-Boldan has l e f t a r e c o r d o f
the pure Persian names of the v i l l a g e s of t h a t I r a n i a n p r o -
vince seven hundred years ago; and even today we very seldom
come across a T u r k i s h v i l l a g e name. Abbas Eqbal i s q u i t e
sure t h a t the m a j o r i t y of A z a r b a i j a n i s are of pure Aryan race,
w i t h h a r d l y any Turk or Mongol blood i n t h e i r v e i n s . No
doubt there was a m i n o r i t y of Turks, such as the Turkomans,
Taymuris, Qara Qoyunlu and Aq, Qoyunlu; but as t h e i r numbers
were l i m i t e d , they were very soon absorbed by the l o c a l
Iranians. The language of l i t e r a t u r e and poetry i n Azarbaijan
has always been Persian. Large numbers o f scholars from
 163
* * * . *

Azarbai jan have w r i t t e n books i n Persian. The ((Old) A z a r i

language of Azarbaijan was a Persian d i a l e c t . 'Abbas Eqbal
praises Kasravi's remarkable achievement i n h i s research
i n t o the A z a r i language.
Abbas Eqbal i n another a r t i c l e says t h a t he had found
proof of («ibld) Azari's having been the language of Azarbaijan
before T u r k i s h i n a Resaleh by an author named Ruhi A n a r j a n i ,
1 *

about whom n o t h i n g i s known. I n one p a r t of t h i s Resaleh

the author speaks about the governors and r u l e r s of Azar-
b a i j a n , and t h i s p a r t i s a l l i n A z a r i . According t o 'Abbas
Eqbal, d i d A z a r i became e x t i n c t from the middle of the 8 t h
century A.H./li)-th century A.D.
'A&&. Bozorg ' A l a v i , the well-known n o v e l i s t and scholar
who was one of the founders of the Tudeh and now l i v e s i n
East B e r l i n , also has a h i g h o p i n i o n of Kasravi as a scholar
and language reformer. K a s r a v i , he w r i t e s , was one of the
most d i l i g e n t and profound I r a n i a n scholars. Except f o r a
few p o l i t i c a l and r e l i g i o u s c o n t r o v e r s i a l pamphlets, h i s
works are almost a l l of great importance f o r the h i s t o r y of
2
I r a n and i t s l i t e r a t u r e . Kasravi maintained t h a t a language
m i r r o r s the understanding and t h i n k i n g of a people, and t h a t
the defects o f Persian can only be corrected by s c h o l a r l y
1. Yadgar. year 2, No.3, 1324/1945, PP 1-12.
2. Bozorg ' A l a v i , G-eschichte und Entwicklung der modernen
Bersischen L i t e r a t u r , p.178.
 164

means and not by new i n v e n t i o n s . Bozorg ' A l a v l emphasizes

t h a t Kasravi was not alone i n h i s aim of p u r i f y i n g Persian
from A r a b i c ; he mentions an i n f l u e n t i a l Z o r o a s t r i a n deputy
who wanted t o rename the Ma.iles (Parliament) Kangashestan.^
The movement was s t r o n g l y supported by generals close t o
Reza Shah; and K a s r a v i , together w i t h the p l a y w r i g h t Zabih
p
Behruz., was appointed t o the commission which p e r s i a n i z e d
the t e c h n i c a l terms and names of ranks i n the I r a n i a n armed
forces.^
Mr. Mahdi MxDjtahedi, i n h i s book on Outstanding Azar-
* ' b
b a i j a n i s d u r i n g the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l S t r u g g l e , praises
Kasravi's researches i n the f i e l d of language f o r t h e i r .
trustworthiness. He considers t h a t Kasravi's book A z a r i i s
a remarkable piece of research. On the other hand he t h i n k s
t h a t Kasravi made a mistake when he invented new words f o r
the purpose of p u r i f y i n g Persian, and he f i n d s Kasravi's
s t y l e of w r i t i n g s i l l y and t i r i n g .
I n 1314/1935, Reza Shah's M i n i s t e r o f Education, Dr. 'Ali
Asghar Hekmat, set up the Farhangestan ( I r a n i a n Academy),
whose main purpose was t o compile a d i c t i o n a r y which would
c o n t a i n new words needed f o r new purposes or i n replacement
of Arabic words. This step meant t h a t the government accepted
1 • Bozorg ' A l a v i , Geschichte und Entwicklung... pp 182-183.
2. Author of the popular p l a y J a ' f a r Khan az .Farang amadeh and
of the popular c h i l d r e n ' s plays Shah-e I r a n va Banu-v-e Armai
and Ji.jak ' A l i Shah. Zabih Behruz s t u d i e d a t Cambridge
w i t h Professor E.G. Browne. He was born i n 1911.
3. Bozorg ' A l a v i , Geschjchte .und Ent\yicklung, p.183.
4. Mahdi Mojtahedi, Rejal-e Azerbaijan dar 'Asr-e Mashrutiat.
Tehran, 1327/1948, pp 130-131.
 165

Kasravi's views on language p o l i c y . Kasravi h i m s e l f , however,

d i d not "become a member o f the Farhangestan. Some o f the new
words accepted by the Farhangestan were a r t i f i c i a l o r even
r i d i c u l o u s , and some w r i t e r s such as Dr. Fakhr o l - D i n Shadman
i n h i s book Taskhir-e Tamaddon-e Farangi (Tehran, 1326/1947) have
made jokes about them; b u t i n g e n e r a l , the Farhangestan d i d
not exaggerate too much, not n e a r l y so much as the c o r r e s -
ponding body Turk D i l Karumu ( T u r k i s h Language A s s o c i a t i o n )

i n Turkey. This was thanks t o the moderation o f i t s chairman

Mohammad ' A l i Forughi (1878/1942), who was a d i s t i n g u i s h e d
scholar and twice Prime M i n i s t e r ( i n 1926 and 1 9 4 1 ) .
Another o f those who c r i t i c i z e d the views o f Kasravi and
the language reformers i n the Farhangestan was a c e r t a i n
(/jdj
0 0
Hushang Henavi, who wrote t h a t the Farhangestan had not been
•j
able t o r e g i s t e r any s i g n i f i c a n t achievements. I f anyone
0

were t o f o l l o w the Farhangestan i n h i s s t y l e o f w r i t i n g , p r e -

sumably no European o r i e n t a l i s t would be able t o understand
very many o f h i s words.
0

Another c r i t i c was Sayyed Hasan Taqizadeh, the great

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t leader and scholar. I n 1326/1948 he made
a speech t o r e p r e s e n t a t i v e teachers about t h e necessity o f
safeguarding the expressiveness o f the Persian language. He
opposed the removal o f Arabic words from Persian, on the ground
1 . Yadgar. year 5 , No.1-2, 1327/1948, pp 9-11.
2. Yadgar. year 5 , No.6, 1326/1948, pp 1-40.^
 166

t h a t Persian l i t e r a t u r e depends on Arabic words. Moreover

the Persian language has been mixed w i t h many other languages
such as Armenian and T u r k i s h , and has taken words from them.
"The l i n g u i s t s " , he says "fio not attempt t o a b o l i s h those
languages; i n s t e a d they seek t o s p o i l the s t r u c t u r e of our
own language by removing i t s Arabic words. I f everybody were
t o t r e a t Persian i n t h i s way, our language would become one
of the poorest i n the w o r l d . Persian was not a strong
language before the Arab conquest."
Dr. P. N. K h a n l a r i , i n h i s book on L i n g u i s t i c s and the
Persian Language, c r i t i c i z e s Kasravi's work i n t h i s f i e l d ,
without s p e c i f i c a l l y mentioning Kasravi by name. He shows
c l e a r l y t h a t he does not regard Kasravi as having been a
s c i e n t i f i c l i n g u i s t and does not see any j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r
h i s attempts t o p u r i f y Persian from Arabic and other f o r e i g n
words. Dr. K h a n l a r i t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi used the method of
analogy. The laws and grammar of any language, however, are
based upon i t s use i n d a i l y conversation; we cannot p o s s i b l y
b u i l d the grammar before the language. Dr. K h a n l a r i says t h a t
although Kasravi was convinced t h a t he was the most i n t e l l i -
gent man i n the w o r l d o f l e a r n i n g , he never r e a l i z e d t h a t
there i s no p e r f e c t language i n the world. The world's great
progressive n a t i o n s have not been able t o remove the

1. Dr. Parviz N a t e l K h a n l a r i , Zabanshenasi "va Zaban-e P a r s i .

Tehran, 1343/1964, pp 182-183. (Payk-e I r a n p u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
 167

d e f i c i e n c i e s o f t h e i r languages, which contain numerous

irregularities. This was one o f the reasons which cansed
Dr. Zamenhof, who was a great scholar, t o invent Esperanto
as an i n t e r n a t i o n a l language; "but t h e nations have not shown
much enthusiasm f o r l e a r n i n g i t .
Kasravi was n o t a man who shrank from p r a c t i s i n g what
he preached. I n h i s own w r i t i n g s he used words o f pure
Persian o r i g i n and words o f h i s own i n v e n t i o n compounded from
pure Persian r o o t s . He obtained these n o t only from t h e
e a r l y c l a s s i c s such as Ferdowsi's Shahnameh and Sa'eli's Bus tan
hut also sometimes from P a h l a v i . As a r e s u l t , a good deal o f
what he wrote i s n o t f u l l y i n t e l l i g i b l e t o most I r a n i a n s . The
reader must get help from a " D i c t i o n a r y of Kasravi" (Farhang-e-
Kasravi) composed "by h i s devoted f o l l o w e r Yahya Zoka and
published a t Tehran i n 1326/19U7. Because o f t h i s , Kasravi' s
way o f w r i t i n g i s d i s l i k e d "by many people and h i s hooks are
l e s s w i d e l y read than they might have "been otherwise. I n
other respects he d i d much t o improve t h e p r e c i s i o n o f modern
Persian w r i t i n g . The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f h i s s t y l e may be
summarized as f o l l o w s :
1. Avoidance o f r e p e t i t i v e synonyms.
2. Minimum use o f ( y a s f i ) verbs
3. Minimum.,.use of ; Cafnf.d.ttiftfil verbs. .. i.. Lv ..
h» Use o f each word w i t h a d e f i n i t e meaning.
 168

5» Use o f short single-verb sentences.

6. C l a r i t y o f meaning.
7. Avoidance o f rhythmic phrases and other l i t e r a r y devices.
8. Occasional i l l u s t r a t i o n of ideas through proverbs o r
short s t o r i e s .
9. Avoidance o f t o o many r e p e t i t i v e sentences expressing
the same idea.
10. Accurate terminology even a t the expense o f l i t e r a r y
elegance.
11. Going s t r a i g h t i n t o t h e subject w i t h o u t a long preamble.
12. Use o f Persian grammar even w i t h words o f f o r e i g n o r i g i n .
Today, most though by no means a l l I r a n i a n s hold the
same views as Kasravi d i d about the need f o r b r e v i t y and
p r e c i s i o n i n Persian prose. His i n f l u e n c e would have been
greater i f people had not been r e p e l l e d by the p e c u l i a r words
which he used; e.g. akhshe.i ( f o r Zedd) " a g a i n s t " , a.voft ( f o r
ehtia.i)"need". On t h e other hand, some o f h i s words are now
widely understood, even i f they are n o t i n general use; e.g.
vazheh (word) i n s t e a d o f kalemeh. ak ( f a u l t ) i n s t e a d of 'ayb.
bah^mad ( a s s o c i a t i o n ) f o r j a n & a t . The acceptable words are
mostly those which Kasravi took and r e v i v e d from Ferdowsi's
Shahnameh and Sa'di's Bustan.
1
On t h e other hand, K a s r a v i s l i n g u i s t i c theories incurred
the disapproval o f an opponent named Naser Makarem S h i r a z i ,
 169
A

1
who was p a r t i c u l a r l y c r i t i c a l o f K a s r a v i s s t y l e o f w r i t i n g .
He s a i d t h a t Kasravi used so many u n f a m i l i a r words i n h i s
w r i t i n g s t h a t people could not understand h i s meaning.
Kasravi i n h i s book Zaban-e Pak also discusses an idea
which busied the minds o f many people, e s p e c i a l l y i n the
2
l a s t century, namely the c r e a t i o n of a u n i v e r s a l language.
A great deal o f e f f o r t has been made i n t h i s f i e l d , but no
p o s i t i v e r e s u l t has been achieved. Today w i t h new inventions
and easier t r a v e l l i n g , the remotest p a r t s o f the world are i n
touch w i t h one another. Indeed the w o r l d has become a small
place. The maintenance o f so many d i f f e r e n t ways o f speaking
i s consequently r a t h e r unwise. According t o the researches
of the l i n g u i s t s (so Kasravi says), we cannot choose one o f
the present languages as a u n i v e r s a l one, because i t would
be d i f f i c u l t t o l e a r n and would need too much time and con-
c e n t r a t i o n t o be r e a d i l y used. For t h i s reason a number o f
l i n g u i s t s t r i e d t o create a new language. Dr. Zamenhof, a
P o l i s h l i n g u i s t , invented Esperanto, which i s very easy t o
l e a r n j f o r an average person t h r e e months would be enough.
Although Esperanto i s so easy, i t has not made much progress,
and Dr. Zamenhof's hope has not been f u l f i l l e d . His r e -
searches showed t h a t a language only becomes d i f f i c u l t
rK
^i Dav Pasokh-e Kasravian. Tehran 1335/l966>B3.DaVati, pp 11-12.
2. Zaban-e Pak. pp 6 l - 6 I u
3. I b i d .
k. I b i d . , p.77.
 170

through d i a o r d e r l i n e s s ; when a language i s c o r r e c t l y formed,

i n keeping w i t h i t s own r u l e s , i t w i l l not he d i f f i c u l t ,
" I f we could put the Persian language i n order," Kasravi
continues, "and clean i t o f unnecessary c o m p l i c a t i o n s , i t
would he one o f the easiest i n the w o r l d . Although Esperanto
was introduced i n t o a l l c o u n t r i e s , i n t e r e s t i n i t soon d i e d
down, even a f t e r the f i r s t w o r l d war when the League o f
Nations attempted unsuccessfully t o spread i t . We should
recognise t h a t a language becomes i n t e r n a t i o n a l and u n i v e r s a l
through i t s l i t e r a t u r e . F o r t u n a t e l y Persian i s a very r i c h
language from the l i t e r a r y p o i n t o f view; moreover, when i t
i s spoken p r o p e r l y , i t sounds very sweet and melodious. So
there i s hope f o r "better a p p r e c i a t i o n o f i t s m e r i t s i n t h e
future."
 171

CHAPTER FOUR

1
KASRAVI S LITERARY STUDIES

Kasravi also d i d research i n the f i e l d o f l i t e r a t u r e ,

•i

and wrote books i n which he c r i t i c i z e d Persian p o e t r y . I t

i s important t o understand what he means by l i t e r a t u r e . The
word used i n Persian f o r l i t e r a t u r e , adab, i s o f Arabic
origin. Among the Arabs an adlb ( l i t e r a r y man) was a person
who could speak i n a h i g h l y l i t e r a r y and decorative way.
Kasravi holds t h a t there are two categories o f words i n a
language. One c o n s i s t s of words used i n a simple way i n
d a i l y conversation, which form the language o f the mass o f
the people. The other consists o f decorative words used i n
order t o make the w r i t e r s and o r a t o r s seem more impressive,
as can be seen i n some examples o f p o e t r y . For instance
there, i s a short saying e&ributed t o the Emam * A l i , J
J e t o ) } <J& \>- (J*v
which means ( i n Arabic) "do not be sweet or you w i l l be
eaten, and do n o t be b i t t e r , or you w i l l be spat out." This;
sentence has come t o be regarded as a proverb. I t i s a very
f i r m and b e a u t i f u l combination of words, and one can appre-
c i a t e i t s meaning. I n the e a r l y days o f Islam, a great
i ;
1 . I n h i s book Dar Payramun-e Adabiat, Tehran 1323/lSkh, and
i n other books and a r t i c l e s .
2. Par Pa.yramun-e Adabiat, pp 2-3.
number of people t r i e d t o f o l l o w the Qor'an and the Holy
Prophet i n producing short but meaningful sentences, and
one can e a s i l y see t h a t i n those days people were always
simple i n t h e i r d e s c r i p t i o n s . Gradually, however/their
successors began t o give a heavy appearance t o t h e i r
sayings and w r i t i n g s . They s t a r t e d t o p l a y w i t h words,
l e a v i n g behind them thousands of useless volumes of p o e t r y .
Although poets of t h i s type were very popular i n t h e i r own
time, Kasravi classes them as p a r a s i t e s and gives them no
c r e d i t whatsoever. He t h i n k s t h a t t h e i r works are value-
l e s s , and t h a t although the contemporary s o c i e t y was very
much i n f l u e n c e d by them, i t d i d not gain any b e n e f i t from
2
them. He e s p e c i a l l y c r i t i c i z e s poets who were attached
to r o y a l courts and whose poetry i s c h i e f l y concerned, w i t h
p r a i s i n g kings.^ At the beginning of the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l
movement i n I r a n , the mass of the people d i d not pay much
a t t e n t i o n t o such poets; but a f t e r a few years a movement
to spread the study of poetry sprang up. As a f i r s t step;
p o e t r y was put i n t o the school programme as a basic s u b j e c t .
Kasravi^" says t h a t i n the western w o r l d l i t e r a t u r e means
the language of the masses, and t h a t i f one wants, t o know
about a western country's way of l i f e and t r a d i t i o n s , one
1 . Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.5.
2. I b i d . , pp 6-9.
3. I b i d . , p.10.
h* I b i d . , pp 12-13 .
can get a general idea through i t s l i t e r a t u r e . But i n I r a n
l i t e r a t u r e does not have the same meaning. For example,
one w i l l not get any idea of mediseval I r a n i a n l i f e from
reading the divan ( c o l l e c t i o n of poems) of Anvari ( d . 1189
or 1191), the c e l e b r a t e d court poet of the Sal jug, Soltan
Sanjar. Kasravi i s convinced t h a t one of the many reasons
f o r the backwardness of the I r a n i a n s i n past and present
times has been t h e i r attachment t o poisonous poetry books.
Through the centuries the n a t i o n , and e s p e c i a l l y the young
g e n e r a t i o n , has been too much preoccupied w i t h p o e t r y .
Kasravi's views on poetry and l i t e r a t u r e may be con-
c i s e l y summarized as f o l l o w s :
1. Amongst the e a r l y Arabs, adab meant a d e c o r a t i v e way
of speaking and w r i t i n g which i n i t s e l f was quite;
2
harmless.
2. Some l a t e r Arab w r i t e r s l o s t a l l s i m p l i c i t y i n their
w r i t i n g and merely played w i t h words. Kasravi regards
such w r i t i n g s as q u i t e w o r t h l e s s .
•5
3. Adab came t o I r a n i n t h i s worthless form.
U» " D i s l o y a l " I r a n i a n s spread the t a s t e f o r worthless
l i t e r a t u r e and harmful poetry among t h e i r compatriots J
5« I n modern times, I r a n i a n " t r a i t o r s " conspired w i t h
1 . Par Pa.vramun- e Adab i at,p.15.
2. I b i d . , p.18.
3. I b i d . , p.19.
4. I b i d . , p. 20.
 Hh

:•: European o r i e n t a l i s t s t o d i g up more and more poets

: from the past and t o spread even f u r t h e r the t a s t e
f o r poetry and p o e t i c a l ideas.
2
Kasravi o f t g n p o i n t s out t h a t he f e l t no h o s t i l i t y
towards I r a n i a n poets as such; hut he emphasizes t h a t p o e t r y
i s a k i n d of speech, and every s o r t of speech should have a
purpose. A m a j o r i t y o f the poets neglected the needs o f
p o e t r y , and merely combined rhythmic words i n t o l i n e s o f
verse whenever they f e l t i n the mood t o do so. Furthermore
they debased the Persian language by p r a i s i n g the kings and
-
r u l e r s of t h e i r time. I n one place Kasravi ^ says: " I must
admit t h a t poetry i s the language of f e e l i n g s . But i n I r a n
j u s t the opposite o f t h i s has been witnessed. Dishonest
persons, by spreading poisonous p o e t r y books, have been able
€o impress the mind of the young generation. T h e i r energies
and a b i l i t i e s ought t o have been spent u s e f u l l y instead."
Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t another o b j e c t i o n a b l e f e a t u r e of the
works o f Persian poets i s t h e i r exaggerated p r a i s e of wine.
I n a speech t o a l i t e r a r y s o c i e t y (An.1oman-e Adabi)
Kasravi s a i d t h a t young people should n o t waste t h e i r time
i n useless ways. The world's events f o l l o w one another, and
when n a t i o n s go . . .
1. Par Pa.yriamun-e Adabiiat» p.l9«
2. I b i d . . p.20.
3- Ibid.
k. Hafez cheh mi-guyad. Tehran 1326/19^+7» V»5»
5. Sokhanrani-ye Kasravi dar Anjoman-e Adabi, ya G-oftlari az
Payman, published at Tehran 13UU/1965, p.19-
down and remain i n degradation, t h i s i s because of t h e i r
involvement i n useless a c t i v i t i e s . " I can", he continues,
" f u l l y appreciate those poets who t r i e d t o avoid w r i t i n g
useless p o e t r y , but i n s t e a d wrote t h e i r books w i t h the aim
of l e a d i n g and g u i d i n g s o c i e t y t o a b e t t e r way of l i v i n g ;
they t r i e d t o teach m o r a l i t y , and also a sense o f humour.
1 1
U n f o r t u n a t e l y the number of them i s very l i m i t e d .
I n Kasravi's o p i n i o n , the Sh'ahnameh o f Ferdowsi
(d.1020) i s a good example of u s e f u l p o e t r y , and one of the
1
great masterpieces o f the world's l i t e r a t u r e . Ferdowsi s.
•5

c h i e f i n t e n t i o n , Kasravi t h i n k s , was t o produce a book

which would s t i r the n a t i o n t o p a t r i o t i s m . He also rendered
a most valuable service t o the Persian language by writing
the Shahnameh at a time when the language was i n danger of
dyUig o u t , and by avoiding the use of t o o many heavy i n d i -
g e s t i b l e Arabic words. Kasravi goes on t o say; " I have?*"
accepted the view t h a t l i t e r a t u r e i s the language of t h e
masses. I n t h a t case i t should express the f e e l i n g s of
the masses and describe t h e i r a f f a i r s . During the Mongol Con-
quest, the I r a n i a n s were l i v i n g i n a miserable c o n d i t i o n ;

1. Par Payriamun-e Adabiiat, p.Z*0.

2. Ibid., p.li|.l.
3. I b i d . , pp 141-1U2.
h. I b i d . . pp 12-38.
 176

"but h a r d l y any idea of the s i t u a t i o n i n those days can

ever he got by r e f e r r i n g t o the works o f t h e poets. The
I r a n i a n poets i n those days not only neglected the masses,
but became c l o s e l y attached t o the Mongol k i n g s , and even
began t o admire them." Kasravi says- t h a t t h i s sort of
poetry i s not only harmful t o read but ought even t o be
b u r n t . There are many examples of i t . During the; i n v a s i o n
of Taymur Lang, when t h i s f o r e i g n conquerer attacked
Esfahan and had a minaret b u i l t w i t h the s k u l l s of seventy
thousand innocent people, a poet whose name i s unknown
2
wrote: ^/ ^ .

' •- < ^>

"When the f l a g of k i n g Taymur G-urkan became the f l a g o f

f a b l e i n the whole w o r l d , h i s r u l e went beyond the p o r t i c o
of the universe; h i s j u s t i c e went beyond a l l humans and
animals." Kasravi^ observes t h a t t h i s s i l l y poet ignored
Taymur's hideous c r u e l t y , and i n s t e a d o f c r i t i c i z i n g him
p r a i s e d him i n a most absurd way. Under the Safavids and
Qajars, the s i t u a t i o n became worse,the poets were even more
extravagant i n t h e i r praises o f the k i n g s . During t h e

1 . Par Pa.yramun-e Adabiat, p«51»

2. Sokhanrani-ye Kasravi dar .An.joman-e Adabi, p.31»
3. Par Payramun-e She'r o Sha'eri, p.^sTH
 177

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e , when t h e r e was r e b e l l i o n a l l over

I r a n and the people were t r y i n g t o get r i d o f the t y r a r f i c a l
autocracy, scarcely t e n poets can be found who worked w i t h
1
the people i n t h i s great n a t i o n a l cause.
Kasravi's c r i t i c i s m s o f c e r t a i n famous I r a n i a n poets
are summarized below.
* '2
Omar Khayyam. Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t Khayyam was t h e
founder o f k h a r a b a t i g a r i , "the c u l t of t h e t a v e r n . " He.
cared about n o t h i n g i n t h i s w o r l d , and denied the value o f
l i f e and e v e r y t h i n g connected w i t h i t . Throughout his
p o e t r y we o f t e n come across h i s questions "Where do we come
from?" "Where are we going?" and h i s advice "Do not t h i n k
about the f u t u r e , d r i n k wine and t h i n k only about t h e
present moment." This i s one p a r t o f Khayyam's philosophy.
I n Kasravi's o p i n i o n , Khayyam made a t e r r i b l e mistake, and
completely m i s i n t e r p r e t e d the w o r l d when he denied human,
f r e e w i l l and maintained t h a t every person has a d e s t i n y
w r i t t e n and arranged by God, which no human being i s capable
of changing. Thus Khayyam says:
^)g f-?Oil* <Jcf)
Is

1 . Kasravi's c r i t i c i s m i s u n j u s t , because many famous poets of

modern I r a n such as Bahar, 'Eshqi, and 'Aref Qazvini,
championed the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l cause i n t h e i r poems.
2. Hakim 'Omar ebn Ebrahim Khayyam (or Khayyami) of Nishapur,
101^8-1123. # '
3. Par Payramun-e Adabiat. p.^0.
 178

"O uninformed, t h i s sculptured arch i s n o t h i n g , t h i s n i n e -

skyed f i g u r e d v a u l t i s n o t h i n g . Be merry, f o r i n t h e abode
of being and decaying, we are t i e d t o one moment, and t h a t
1
too i s n o t h i n g . "

"Today you have no power over tomorrow, and a n x i e t y about

tomorrow only b r i n g s you melancholy. Waste n o t t h i s moment,
unless your heart i s d i s t r a u g h t ; f o r there i s n o t h i n g t o
p
show t h a t the r e s t of your l i f e w i l l l a s t long."

" S i t w i t h your wine, f o r t h i s i s Mahmud's empire, and l i s t e n

t o the harp, f o r t h i s i s David's tune. Stop t h i n k i n g o f
what has not come and of what has gone. Be merry r i g h t now,
•5
f o r t h a t i s t h e purpose."

1 . Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.tt-5-

2. I b i d .
3. I b i d .
 179

"Long "before now what i s t o "be has "been marked down f o r ever.
The pen w r i t e s t i r e l e s s l y of good and "bad. Destiny, gave you
•i

whatever had t o he given; our g r i e f and our e f f o r t s are v a i n . "

This was the wort of lesson which Khayyam taught t o
society. I n Kasravi's o p i n i o n , i t i s , i n the f i r s t p l a c e ,
shameful t o say t h a t t h i s w o r l d i s v a l u e l e s s ; and w h i l e i t is,
t r u e t o say t h a t we d i d not come i n t o t h i s w o r l d of our own
f r e e w i l l , t h a t i s a very poor excuse f o r i n d i f f e r e n c e
towards l i f e . God armed us w i t h the g i f t s of freedom o f
choice and reason. Secondly, Khayyam was fond of wine and.
composed a great number of verses about i t . F i n a l l y Khayyam
minimized human f r e e w i l l and p e r s i s t e n t l y argued t h a t a l l
events i n the w o r l d are predestined and decided by God and
cannot i n anyway be changed or i n f l u e n c e d by human beings.
Kasravi admits t h a t Khayyam's poetry i s very pleasant and
beautiful but considers i t s meanings very harmful. Here
5
again, as so o f t e n elsewhere, Kasravi r e i t e r a t e s t h a t the .
I r a n i a n s were defeated w i t h wrong d o c t r i n e s , such as
1S u.f iPar
g a r iPayramun-e
( t h e c u l t Adabiat,
of mysticism)
p.U<?. and B a t e n i g a r i (the c u l t
2. I b i d . / p.hS.
3. I b i d . , p.i+U.
h. I b i d . , p,?5.
5. Sbkhanranif-'ye Kasravi dar Anjoman-eAdabi, pp 26-28.
 180

of the hidden meaning, e s p e c i a l l y among the E s m a * i l i t e s ) .

He t h i n k s t h a t the influence of ideas of t h i s s o r t on the
people's minds caused them t o lose t h e i r manliness and
courage. They consequently f a i l e d t o put up any defence
against the u n c i v i l i z e d Mongol "barbarians. Kasravi also
t h i n k s t h a t Europeans p r a i s e Khayyam's quatrains because;
they want t o keep the I r a n i a n people preoccupied w i t h poetry
such as t h i s , and thereby take advantage t o e x p l o i t them.
He says t h a t i f a poet l i k e Khayyam were t o s t a r t producing
p
s i m i l a r poetry i n a country l i k e England and teaching
l a z i n e s s i n the same way t o the young people i n t h a t country,
the English leaders would c e r t a i n l y t h r o t t l e him.
1
Sa'di.^ Kasravi remarks t h a t although Sa'di" . i s
supposed t o have been a s t r i c t Moslem, he was always very
i n t e r e s t e d i n the mystic c u l t ( S u f i g a r i ) and was r e a l l y no
b e t t e r than Khayyam. Sa'di toyed w i t h a l l aspects of l i f e ,
without having any knowledge of them. He wrote verses on
many d i f f e r e n t s u b j e c t s , i n c l u d i n g p o l i t i c s , theology and
culture. Kasravi observes that Sa'di, who l i v e d d u r i n g
the Mongol conquest, never t r i e d t o warn the I r a n i a n people
about the r e a l i t i e s of t h e i r p o s i t i o n , but i n s t e a d persuaded
them t o remain s i l e n t . He himself accepted employment i n
1 • Par Pa.vramun-e She'r o Sha'eri, pp 1+8-51.
2. Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.51»
3. Shaykh Mosleh o l - D i n Sa'di of Shiraz, d.1291.
 181

the Mongols' s e r v i c e . He was also one o f the most p e r s i s t e n t

of the poets who repeated, the idea o f man's i n a b i l i t y t o
change t h i s w o r l d . For i n s t a n t he says:

"He has based the world on water and man on wind. I am i n

bondage t o the purpose o f Him, who has n o t set h i s heart on
mankind and t h i s world."

"The r i c h man goes a t n i g h t t o h i s home; wherever n i g h t

p
f a l l s , there i s the poor man's home."

(f&j I ;j c^yj ^
" I f you wish t o cast o f f the cares o f s t a t e , begging i s
b e t t e r than k i n g s h i p . " ^

"Wealth does not stay long i n the hands of noblemen, no more

than patience i n l o v e r s ' hearts or water i n sieves."^"

1. Par Pa.yramun-e Adabiat, p.5U.

2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
k» I b i d . p.55»
 182

I n Kasravi's opinion^ Sa'di's c h i e f aim i n w r i t i n g

•1
p o e t r y was d e f i n i t e l y t o p l a y w i t h words. The ideas which
he expresses i n verse are an i r r a t i o n a l mixture o f r e a l i s m
2
and i d e a l i s m . No doubt, as Kasravi p o i n t s o u t , t h e world
of Islam i n c l u d i n g I r a n was very impure and confused i n t h e
6th century A.H./I3th century A.D.; so i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g
t h a t Sa'di should have produced the f i f t h chapter o f the
Golestlan,^ which i s f u l l o f harmful ideas and unashamedly
against m o r a l i t y . Kasravi regards Sa'di's p o e t r y as most
h
b e a u t i f u l and very melodious, but at t h e same time o f t e n
extremely dangerous f o r s o c i e t y .
Mowlavi ( J a l a l o l - P i n Rumi).^ Kasravi puts Mowlavi
i n the same class as Khayyam. He recognizes t h a t Mowlavi
was one o f the great leaders o f the mystic c u l t (Sufigari),
which he says came t o the East from Rum ( i . e . Constantinople
or Asia M i n o r ) . U n f o r t u n a t e l y mysticism had l o s t i t s s i m p l i -
c i t y by the time t h a t i t began t o i n f l u e n c e the w o r l d o f
Islam and the minds o f innocent people i n the Eastern
countries. Kasravi summarizes Mowlavi's philosophy as f o l l o w s :
1. Mowlavi b e l i e v e d i n pantheism and s a i d t h a t u l t i m a t e l y
humans w i l l j o i n God.
1• Par Payramun-e Adabiiat, p.57«
2. I b i d . , p.58.
3. Ibid.
h. Ibid.,p.6Q.
5. Author o f the mystic Masnavi-ye Ma'navi and o f the Pivan-e
Shams-e T a b r i z and other works; died a t Konya 1273•
6. Par Payramun-e Adabiiat, p.61.
 183

Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t t h i s i s merely a fantasy and not

worth our a t t e n t i o n .
2. Mowlavi shared the view of many other poets t h a t man's,
whole d e s t i n y depends on p r e d e s t i n a t i o n "by God.
3. Mowlavi condemned l i f e and a l l m a t e r i a l t h i n g s , and
s a i d t h a t we should not waste time i n t h i s w o r l d "by
concerning ourselves w i t h i t s a f f a i r s . Certain l i n e a
of poetry show h i s a t t i t u d e i n t h i s respect, f o r instance
the opening l i n e s of h i s Masnavi:

"Hearken t o the reed when i t speaks, when i t t e l l s the tale;

o f separations. Since they cut me from the reed-bed, men
and women have "been grieved "by my trumpet." s

"God's curse i s on a l l t h i s world's people, great and small."

The I r a n i a n s , being impressed by such p o e t r y , behaved
according t o the philosophy of such poets, and remained
inactive. Kasravi considers Mowlavi's Masnavi t o be one o f
ZJ.
the books which have done most harm t o the I r a n i a n s .
1. Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.62.
2. S u f i g a r i , Tehran 1332/19^3, p.19.
3. K a s r a v i . S u f i g a r i , Tehran 1323/19W+, p.13.
k» Par Payramun-e Adabiat» pp 62-63.
 18k

Hafez* 1 Kasravi shows more enmity towards Hafez than any

other poet. His mind, i n Kasravi's view, was f u l l of wrong
1a
ideas; one can never achieve any c l e a r idea from reading
*

his poetry. Kasravi made h i s comments about Hafez i n a

2
"book c a l l e d Hafez cheh mi-gayad? (What does Hafez s a y ? )
He p o i n t s out t h a t Hafez, l i k e many other poets, t r i e d t o
impress the people "by w r i t i n g b e a u t i f u l l y rhymed and
rhythmic verses. He professed t o "be a Moslem, "but proved
h i m s e l f the opposite i n h i s poems, e.g. when he says:

" I f at n i g h t words of penitence come t o my tongue, l e t me

3
r i n s e my mouth of t h e i r i m p u r i t y w i t h wine."
Hafez indeed simply poured scorn on Islam. The sub-
j e c t s o f which Hafez had gained knowledge are worth
mentioning.^
1. The Qor'an and i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
2. Greek philosophy.
3. Sufism ( S u f i g a r i ) , and i t s harmful d o c t r i n e s .
k» H i s t o r y of I r a n .
5* Astronomy.
6. Fatalism ( j a b r i g a r i ) .
1. Khwajeh Shams oX-Din*Mohammad Hafez of Shiraz,c.i320-c.ij59±.
13» Par Pavramun-e Adabxat, pTby.
2. K a s r a v i . Hafez x?hehmi-guyad. Tehran 1323/19^6.
3» Hafez cheh mi-guyad, p.5»
h. I b i d , p.6.
 185

Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t Hafez confused h i m s e l f w i t h h i s own

A

knowledge. He could not give any c o r r e c t or precise idea

o f any o f these subjects. Kasravi i n f e r s t h a t having such
a v a r i e t y o f subjects i n the mind was the cause o f h i s con-
f u s i o n and h e s i t a t i o n ; he never a c t u a l l y knew which course
he wished t o f o l l o w . 2 At d i f f e r e n t times Hafez ' was drawn
t o a l l o f them. Sometimes he was i n t e r e s t e d i n Greek p h i l o -
sophy, as when he says:

" A f t e r t h i s there w i l l be no blemish i n my i n d i v i d u a l essence.

Your l i p s are a good proof o f t h i s p o i n t . " Sometimes
Sufisra i n f l u e n c e d him:

"The dust o f my body i s becoming the v e i l covering the f a c e

of my s o u l . Happy the moment when I w i l l cast o f f the v e i l
from my f a c e . " ^
Sometimes Hafez wrote poetry prompted by mysticism o f the
tavern (kharabatigari):

1. Hafez cheh mi-guyad, p.8,

2. I b i d . , p.9.
3. ifibid. p.7»
7
k. Ibid.
 186

" T e l l t a l e s o f m i n s t r e l s and wine, worry less about t h e

secrets o f f a t e ; f o r nobody has solved, nor w i l l s o l v e ,
t h i s r i d d l e by means o f science."
Sometimes he was i n s p i r e d by o l d I r a n i a n t a l e s :

"Take the cup as p o l i t e n e s s r e q u i r e s , because i t i s made

* 2
from the s k u l l s o f Jamshid and Bahman and Qobad."
Sometimes he p a i d a t t e n t i o n t o astronomy:

"Grasp the tresses o f a moon-faced beauty, and g r i e v e n o t ;

f o r good l u c k and i l l l u c k a r i s e from the i n f l u e n c e o f Venus
and Saturn."
Sometimes he became i n t e r e s t e d i n p r e d e s t i n a t i o n ( . i a b r i g a r i ) :

"Since God has placed my l o t i n the t a v e r n , say, 0 s a i n t l y man,

what f a u l t o f mine i t i s t h a t I l i v e i n such surroundings."^
Hafez used a l l these m a t e r i a l s i n h i s p o e t r y , without
b e l i e v i n g i n any of them. Although people have always
thought o f Hafez as a mystic o f the t a v e r n (kharabati) in

1 . i . Hafez cheh mi-guyad, p.7.

2. Ibid.
3. I b i d , p.8.
k. Ibid.
5- I b i d , p.29.
 187

Kasravi*s opinion he was r e a l l y never concerned w i t h any-

t h i n g of the s o r t . He always disparaged t h i s lower w o r l d ,
and o f t e n s a i d t h a t God i s not completely p e r f e c t . The
world and everything connected w i t h i t , he s a i d , are a l l
lies. Consequently t h e reading o f h i s poetry causes people
t o "become i n a c t i v e and t o cease t r y i n g t o improve t h e i r
i n d i v i d u a l s i t u a t i o n s or those o f t h e i r fellow-men. Many
I r a n i a n s f o l l o w e d the d o c t r i n e s o f Hafez and "became t i m e -
servers. Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t Hafez i s one of the most
unacceptable and harmful o f the Persian poets. He l i s t s -
the defects o f Hafez as f o l l o w s :
1• Hafez admired wine i n j u s t t h e same w y as Khayyam d i d .
a

His extravagances i n t h e way of p r a i s i n g wine reached the

verge of madness, f o r instance when he says:

"0 cup-hearer give me t h a t f i e r y wine, so t h a t I may f i n d

2
r e l i e f from sorrow."
2. I n accordance w i t h the ideas o f the mysticism of the
tavern ( k h a r a b a t i g a r i ) , Hafez thought t h a t t h e world i s
q u i t e unstable, and was most p e r s i s t e n t i n s t r e s s i n g t h i s
point. He says:

1 • Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.89«

2. Hafez cheh mi-guyad, p.31.
 188

"The product of t h i s workshop of the universe i s a l l n o t h i n g .

B r i n g out t h e wine, f o r t h i s world's goods are a l l n o t h i n g . "

Like the S u f i s , Hafez l e d people towards l a z i n e s s and

weakness, and sometimes even t o l d them how t o "beg and earn
a l i v i n g thereby. For example he says:

" I am the slave of Him, who "beneath the azure dome i s f r e e

of any t i n g e o f attachment ( t o w o r l d l y t h i n g s ) . "
His poetry " b e l i t t l e d Islam, For example i t i s w r i t t e n
i n the Qor'an: ^9?\SJ^JP*

"He (God) i s f o r g i v i n g and compassionate."^ Hafez i n f e r s

from t h i s t h a t God w i l l f o r g i v e and "bless everybody, even
>
the drunkard, and thus he says: ^/ ^yi

"Drink wine t o the sound of the harp and grieve not; i f

anyone t e l l s you not t o d r i n k wine, r e p l y 'He i s f o r g i v i n g . ' " ^
A reader of the poetry of Hafez who seeks i t s meaning
w i l l face great d i f f i c u l t y . Of course t h i s does not apply

1. Hafez chgh mi-guyad,.p.31.

2. Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.90.
3. I b i d . , p.91.
h» Ibid..p.92.
 189

only t o Hafez, because the m a j o r i t y o f I r a n i a n poets deserve

c r i t i c i s m f o r t h e i r o b s c u r i t y . For example, when Hafez says:

-V O^tfU (Sy ^js/ OV ^ ( J ^ . i p < W f-/^

"Set out w i t h a resolve t o reach the stage o f l o v e , f o r you
w i l l gain much i f you can complete t h i s journey," Kasravi
t h i n k s t h a t we cannot understand what Hafez means by t h e
word "love" Ceshq.), as there are various kinds of l o v e .
We can never recognise whether love according t o Hafez's
d e f i n i t i o n means human love or love f o r God. Apart from
t h a t , a person who admires wine i n a most b l a t a n t wayoannot
love God deeply, and most probably w i l l s u f f e r by reason of
h i s i n d i f f e r e n c e t o God. Some poets t h i n k t h a t poetry i s
a p e a r l of l i t e r a t u r e . Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t t h i s depends on
"5
what we want i n l i t e r a t u r e . I r a n i a n poets produced
thousands o f l i n e s o f poetry, b u t wasted t h e i r l i v e s .
I t i s always s t a t e d that poets l i k e Hafez and Sa'di
loved God. Kasravi considers t h a t Sufism,^ which includes
and emphasizes love f o r God, was founded by the Greek
philosopher P l o t i n u s (c.205-c.262 A.D.), and he acknowledges
t h a t what Hotinus h i m s e l f said was decent and acceptable; i t
was t h a t i f one wants t o draw near t o God one must behave
;

1. Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.72.

2. Hafez Cheh mi-guyad, p.28.
3. Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.38.
4. S u f i g a r i , p.9«
 190

w o r t h i l y . The poets, however, witnessed the invasion o f

I r a n and b r u t a l slaughter of great numbers of I r a n i a n s by
the Mongols, and y e t they remained i n a c t i v e and s i l e n t and
scarcely made the s l i g h t e s t comment.

As Kasravi sees i t , Sufism» i s derived from the p h i l o -

sophy of P l o t i n u s who s a i d t h a t the human soul has come from
eternity. He acknowledges t h a t P l o t i n u s ' s main i n t e n t i o n
i n saying t h i s was t o warn the people about God.
Centuries l a t e r , Sufism began t o elaborate P l o t i n u s ' s
philosophy, and f i n a l l y b u i l t up a very complicated system
on the basis of h i s simple concept.
A f t e r t h i s , poets began w r i t i n g poetry about the ideas,
o f Sufism.
F i n a l l y , "dishonest" people persuaded the young generation
t o absorb a l l these ideas, and thereby weakened t h e i r s t r e n g t h
of w i l l .
On s i m i l a r grounds, Kasravi attacks European o r i e n t a l i s t s ,
saying t h a t they wanted t o keep the I r a n i a n people weak and
ignorant by spreading poisonous ideas among them, so t h a t the
2
Europeans might be b e t t e r able t o defeat them i n a l l f i e l d s .
3
The. o r i e n t a l i s t s knew i n what c o n d i t i o n the I r a n i a n people
were l i v i n g , and t h i s was t h e i r way o f demoralizing the
1 . Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.112.
2. I b i d . , pp 116-117.
3. S u f i g a r i , pp 6-8.
 191

innocent I r a n i a n people. The same p o l i c y was f o l l o w e d "by

almost a l l the European c o u n t r i e s . The Russians worked
p a r t i c u l a r l y hard i n t h i s respect, and t h e i r o r i e n t a l i s t s
showed a l o t of i n t e r e s t i n some I r a n i a n poets, p a r t i c u l a r l y
• 1
Nez'ami, who they say was a s o c i a l i s t . Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t
Nezami i s no "better than the other poets and cannot f i n d any
p
s p e c i a l value i n h i s works. What "benefit, he asks, has the
w o r l d of s o c i a l i s m t o gain from Nezami's poetry?
Kasravi's study of the Persian poets f i n a l l y l e d him t o
these two conclusions:
1. The poets p r a i s e d themselves, and the European o r i e n t a -
l i s t s p r a i s e d them i n accordance w i t h the European p o l i c y of
keeping the Eastern w o r l d "backward.
2. The m a j o r i t y of the I r a n i a n people were q u i t e innocent,
and p r a i s e d the poets simply i n order t o keep i n step w i t h
the p r e v a i l i n g f a s h i o n . Prom the time when Kasravi s t a r t e d
t o make h i s c r i t i c i s m s of Persian l i t e r a t u r e i n 1921, n e a r l y
everybody thought t h a t he was showing a senseless enmity
towards poets as a class and t h a t he was d e n i g r a t i n g I r a n ' s
II

greatest p r i d e and g l o r y . Some people said t h a t p o e t r y

cannot obey reason and must issue from the f e e l i n g s r a t h e r
than from the b r a i n . Kasravi r e p l i e d t h a t the Persian poets
1 . Par Payramun-e Adabiat, p.121. Nezami (d.1203), the greatest
Persian romantic poet, l i v e d at G-anjeh i n the p a r t of
Azerbaijan annexed by Russia i n 1812.
2. I b i d , p.125.
3. i b i d , p.128. ,
k» *Isa Sadiq, ' A l i Asghar Hekmat, Porughi and Ra'di Azarakhshi
were among those who s t r o n g l y opposed Kasravi's c r i t i c i s m s
o f p o e t r y and the poets.
 192
only express c a p r i c e s , not deep f e e l i n g s . His opponents
a n g r i l y r e j e c t e d h i s c r i t i c i s m s of Hafez, Sa'di, Khayyam,
e t c . , and said t h a t they could not see any harm i n reading
p
the works of these poets. Kasravi r e t o r t e d t h a t he had
had every r i g h t t o "be c r i t i c a l . He p a r t i c u l a r l y objected
t o those who put Hafez and Sa'di i n the same range as
Shakespeare and V i c t o r Hugo. He s a i d t h a t V i c t o r Hugo was
a great w r i t e r who t r i e d t o understand the French people's
p o s i t i o n i n h i s time and t o warn them through h i s books of
the r e a l i t i e s f a c i n g them. Kasravi thought t h a t the only
I r a n i a n poet r e a l l y deserving praise i s Ferdowsi,^" w i t h o u t
whose e f f o r t the Persian language would have been even more
impure than i t i s now. Kasravi also respects Naser Khosrow
(d.1088). Apart from a number of poems on B a t e n i g a r i ( i . e .
E s m a ' i l i r e l i g e o u s themes), Naser Khosrow can be considered
a remarkable poet, Kasravi t h i n k s . On the other hand,
Kasravi asks how anyone can deny the d i s g r a c e f u l character
of the p o e t r y of Anvari (d.cJ.190) I n every respect, Kasravi
t h i n k s , he was a c o r r u p t poet, f o r example when he s a y s j ^

"When death has k i l l e d him w i t h the sword of your ( i . e . Soltan

S a n j a r i ' s ) s p i t e , God w i l l not r e s t o r e him t o l i f e , not even

1 . Par Payramun-e She * r o Sha'eri, p.3*+.

2. Par Pa.vramun-e Adabiat, p.lij.0.
3. Ibid.
k. I b i d . , pp I U I - I U 2 .
5. Sokhanrani-ye Kasravi dar Anjoman-e Adabi, p.25*
 193

w i t h the b l a s t of the (Herald Angel's) trumpet." "How can

one accept," Kasravi asks, " t h a t God w i l l not r e i n c a r n a t e
the dead bodies k i l l e d by Sanjar's sword?" Kasravi c o n t r a s t s
Anvari's a t t i t u d e w i t h t h a t of Ferdowsi, who s a i d :

"When I r a n ceases t o e x i s t , may my body cease t o e x i s t . "

"Art belongs t o the I r a n i a n s , and t o them only."

Kasravi l i k e w i s e a t t a c k s Qatran of Tabriz ( d . 1 0 7 2 ) , who
2
spent a l l h i s l i f e p r a i s i n g kings or r u l e r s . Such books
deserve t o be b u r n t , Kasravi t h i n k s . He admits t h a t the
I r a n i a n poets were not i n t e n t i o n a l enemies of t h e i r country;
they were j u s t shallow-minded persons. We cannot depend on
11
t h e i r w r i t i n g s f o r guidance. "Right now, he says, " i t i s
time t h a t I r a n i a n s should woirk hard t o f i n d a new and b e t t e r
way of l i f e . We must b u i l d a w a l l between our past and our
f u t u r e , i n order t o keep the young generation away from
dangerous poetry books."^
Kasravi*s disapproval of the p o e t r y of Hafez p a r t i c u l a r l y
angered h i s opponents. One of the most outspoken among them
was Ebrahim Monaqqah,who i n X52h/I3h5 wrote a book "Hafez's
Tavern, the clue t o i t s explanation - A r e p l y t o K a s r a v i . The
1
key t o the language of Hafez," i n r e f u t a t i o n o f K a s r a v i s
1 . Sokhanrani-.ve Kasravi dar An.ioman-e Adabi, p.2U.
2. I b i d , p.25.
3. Ibid.'p.29.
h. I b i d p . 3 7 .
v . ,
5. Ebrahim Monaqqah, MaykhaneEr-ye Khajeh Hafez, Meftah-e Bayan.
Pasokh-e K a s r a v i . ya K e l i d Zaban-e Hafez, Tehran 1325/l9Z;6.
 194

book Hafez cheh mi-guyad ("What does Hafez say?"). Enrahim

Monaqqah maintains t h a t poets are l i k e p a i n t e r s by n a t u r e ,
and t r y t o p o r t r a y f e e l i n g s which w i l l impress other men.
A poet's c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , he says, are f i r s t l y a strong
imagination and secondly a wish t o l e a d people towards
happiness and teach them t r u t h and r e a l i t y . Rejecting
Kasravi's idea o f poets, he says t h a t Kasravi i s a simpleton
2
where poetry i s concerned and has no understanding o f i t ;
He denounces a p a r t i c u l a r school of poets without g i v i n g
any reason other than some feeble and q u i t e unacceptable
arguments. I f poets such as Hafez or Sa'di o f t e n b r i n g
wine and love i n t o t h e i r p o e t r y , they do n o t mean wine i n
the sense o f d r i n k i n g and g e t t i n g drunk, or love i n a merely
p h y s i c a l sense, but use them as symbols and speak o f them i n
connection w i t h higher t h i n g s . For instance when Mowlana
Rumi (Mowlavi) says:

"0 brother, you are mind alone, f o r t h e r e s t you are only

3 *
bone and beard," Ebrahim Monaqqah t h i n k s t h a t Rumi wants
t o t e l l us of the existence of a s p i r i t u a l w o r l d beyond t h i s
e a r t h l y w o r l d and also t o t e l l us t h a t we can f i n d the r e a l i t y
of t h e s p i r i t u a l w o r l d by using our minds, whereas the f l e s h
1• Maykhaneh-ye Kha.jeh Hafez, pp h-1 •
2. I b i d , pp h-1*
3. I b i d , p.34.
 195
1
and skeleton of our bodies serve only f o r t h i s l i f e . The
only valuable t h i n g i n a man i s h i s mind, n o t h i n g e l s e .
Mowlana Rumi, who was one of the great mystics of h i s time
and s t i l l stands h i g h i n the world of mysticism, has also
s a i d , i n the Divan-3 Shams-e Tabriz: ^

" I am drunk, and you are mad; who w i l l c a r r y us home? A

hundred times I t o l d you, d r i n k two or three wine cups l e s s . "2
I n t h i s l i n e , according t o Monaqqah, Mowlavi t e l l s h i s
s p i r i t u a l guide Shams how much he disaproves of wine i n the
sense of d r i n k i n g . Monaqqah ways t h a t the poets whom Kasravi
attacked and sought t o b e l i t t l e i n the eyes o f i l l - i n f o r m e d
people are the p r i d e and g l o r y of I r a n , and not only o f I r a n ,
&
f o r they are known and esteemed a l l over the w o r l d . They
have added, he says, a great deal t o the world's "knowledge."
Kasravi by w r i t i n g nonsense about them had not only achieved
n o t h i n g , but had also degraded h i m s e l f . Monaqqah observes
h
t h a t Kasravi objected t o Hafez more than t o any other poet,
a l l e g i n g t h a t Hafez had merely amused himself by p l a y i n g w i t h
words and had w r i t t e n h i s verses w i t h no plan or coherent
meaning, but simply w i t h the aim of combining words i n a
1 . Maykhaneh-ye Khajeh Hafez, p.34.
2. I b i d , p.50
3. I b i d . • . :
r

k. I b i d .
 196

rhythmic and rhyming way. Kasravi p a r t i c u l a r l y objected t o

the f o l l o w i n g l i n e "by Hafez:

"Intending t o repent, I s a i d at dawn, I w i l l open the Qor'an

f o r an omen. Now t h a t repentance-smashing spring i s coming,
what am I t o do?"
Kasrayi s a i d that Hafez, who was a Moslem, ought not t o have
spoken i n t h a t way, and t h a t t h i s l i n e shows how ignorant he
was of the Holy Book which he was supposed t o know "by h e a r t ;
"but Kasravi had not understood i t s meaning. I n f a c t Hafez,
2
who was a symbolic poet, when speaking about love means love
of God, not love i n i t s common and wordly sense. Kasravi
also objected t o another verse by Hafez:

"Last n i g h t I dreamt t h a t angels knocked on the tavern door;

3
t h a t they mixed human clay and poured i t i n t o the wine cup."
I n t h i s verse, Hafez (according t o Ebrahim Manaqqah)^" is.
t r y i n g t o show t h a t the world i s a storehouse f i l l e d w i t h t h e
r e a l i t y of God, and every creature d r i n k s from the wine cup
of t h i s r e a l i t y ; he then sets out on the s p i r i t u a l p a t h , and
1. Maykhaneh-ye Khajeh Hafez, p.k»
2. I b i d . , p.27.
3. Hafez cheh mi-guyad, P..27*
j

4. Maykhaneh-ye Khajeh Hafez, p.28.

 197

a f t e r passing through many stages e v e n t u a l l y a t t a i n s the

union w i t h God which i s the highest aim. Human beings remain
a combination of clay and water u n t i l they d r i n k t h i s wine of
r e a l i t y and "become one w i t h God, when they w i l l lose t h e i r
lower n a t u r e . Hafez's t r u e mening i s t h e r e f o r e "Le;t us
"become drunk w i t h t h i s wine of r e a l i t y . "
Although Kasravi recognises t h a t poetry i s the a r t of
•i
decoration w i t h words, he complains t h a t i n I r a n most of
the poets have cared only about the decoration and not at."all
about the meaning of the words; whereas a l l poets, i n h i s
o p i n i o n , ought t o be conscious of two main p o i n t s , f i r s t l y
the need t o be meaningful, and secondly the need t o arrange,
t h e i r meaning coherently. Poetry must not be mere h a l l u c i n a -
t i o n , but something w i t h r e a l meaning, and the arrangement
of the l i n e s of a poem must be considered more important than
i t s v e r b a l decoration. "Why has Persian l i t e r a t u r e , and
p a r t i c u l a r l y Persian p o e t r y , so l i t t l e value i n the modern
world?" Kasravi asks. He r e p l i e s , "This i s because the poets
f o r g o t or d e l i b e r a t e l y ignored these two p r i n c i p a l s . Not
only poets, however, but also h i s t o r i a n s committed the same,
* 2

fault." Kasravi c i t e s as examples the Dorreh-ye Naderi,

1 • Hafez cheh mi-guyad, p..U5.

2. By Mirza Mahdi Khan Astarabadi, who was Nader §hah's c/ourt
h i s t o r i a n ; t h i s and h i s other book ^Brikh-e <Jahan-gQsha-ye.
Naderi are the most important sources f o r Nader Shah's
reign.
 198

m* *1 * 2
the Tarikh-e Vassaf and the Tarikh-e Mo .jam, whose authors
were a l l more i n t e r e s t e d i n w r i t i n g f l o w e r y language than i n
recording h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s . To Ferdowsi, however, Kasravi
as already s a i d , gives ample p r a i s e . He t h i n k s t h a t Ferdowsi
rendered the highest service t o I r a n "by p u t t i n g the n a t i o n a l
epic (Shahnameh) i n t o Persian verse. I n t h i s great poem,
Kasravi says, Ferdowsi t r i e d t o arouse the people's p a t r i o t i s m ,
"by showing them how precious l i b e r t y i s and how mighty I r a n
had once been; he thereby encouraged the people t o f i g h t f o r
t h e i r freedom and defend themselves against t h e i r enemies.
Kasravi observes t h a t the a r t o f w r i t i n g Persian poetry
was f i r s t p r a c t i s e d a t the courts o f k i n g s , who were t h e
great patrons, and t h a t consequently the poets, i n order t o
earn t h e i r l i v i n g , busied themselves w i t h p r a i s i n g the k i n g s ;
1 . W r i t t e n , f o r the Ilkh§n Oljay^u Khoda-bandeh (13-5-1316) ,by
'Abdoll^iebn F a z l o l l a h S h i r a z i who h e l d the l i t t l e Vassaf;
an important source f o r the I l k h a n i d p e r i o d , but n o t o r i o u s l y
the most verbose and tedious h i s t o r y book ever w r i t t e n i n
Persian.
2. W r i t t e n i n 730, 1330 by Hamdollah Mostawfi Qazvini.
3. Abul-Qasem Hasan-ebn * A l i Ferdowsi (c.932-1020). He was
commissioned by Soltan Mahmud o f Ghaznah, who according
t o the s t o r y promised a,reward o f one g o l d dinar f o r
every l i n e o f the Shahnameh» but when a f t e r t w e n t y - f i v e
years i t was f i n i s h e d , o f f e r e d him only one s i l v e r derham
f o r each o f the 60,000 l i n e s . Ferdowsi spurned t h i s
o f f e r and f l e d ; he afterwards wrote a famous s a t i r e (to
Mahmud's meanness, According t o the Ohahar Ma^aleh o f
the secretary Nezami 'Aruzi ( w r i t t e n 1160), Ferdowsi
was a S h i * i t e .
 199

f o r t h i s reason t h e y w r o t e about u n r e a l t h i n g s o r i n exagge-

rated styles. Some o f t h e worst P e r s i a n l i t e r a t u r e was p r o -
duced i n t h i s way. The p o e t s c a r r i e d e x a g g e r a t i o n j u s t as
f a r when t h e y w r o t e l o v e poems ( g h a z a l s ) , w h i c h became v e r y
popular. I n t h i s k i n d o f p o e t r y the poet pretended t o lower
h i m s e l f , i n o r d e r t o "be more i m p r e s s i v e i n t h e eyes o f h i s
beloved. Some p o e t s c a l l e d themselves a f l y o r a dog.
There was no l i m i t t o t h e i r v e r b a l extravagance. A normal
m i n d , K a s r a v i says, w i l l c e r t a i n l y t h i n k t h a t t h e p o e t s were
i n s a n e , o r a t l e a s t t h a t w i t h two o r t h r e e e x c e p t i o n s t h e y
were v e r y weak-minded. What does Nezami r e a l l y mean,
Kasravi asks, when he says t h i s i n p r a i s e o f one o f t h e
kings?

1/
"When y o u s i t a t t a b l e w i t h d e s t i n y , t h r o w me some bones.
For I boast o f b e i n g y o u r dog, I boast o f t h e g l o r y o f b e i n g
2
your slave;."
As f o r S u f i s m (Moslem m y s t i c i s m ) , K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t i t

1. Nezami G a n j e ' i (llUO/2+1-1203), t h e g r e a t e s t , P e r s i a n r o m a n t i c

p o e t . The q u o t a t i o n i s ^ f r o m Makhzan o l - A s r a r , t h e f i r s t a n d
3sast i n t e r e s t i n g o f Nezami's f i v e poems (Khamseh); i t i s
m y s t i c and m o r a l i s t i c , n o t r o m a n t i c .
2. Sokhanrani-ye K a s r a v i dar An.joman-e A d a b i , p.26.
 200

became e x t r e m e l y h a r m f u l f o r I r a n i a n s o c i e t y . The e a r l i e s t

S u f i s had a d m i t t e d l y "been v e r y simple p e o p l e w i t h t h e "best

intentions. The b a s i s o f t h e i r f a i t h was t o h e l p o t h e r

p e o p l e , and n o t t o s t r i v e f o r m a t e r i a l w e a l t h b u t t o t r y t o

b e t t e r t h e i r s o u l s b y d o i n g good deeds. Unfortunately they

a f t e r w a r d s changed. I n K a s r a v i ' s words, "They even went so

f a r as t o g i v e up work a l t o g e t h e r and seek t h e i r livelihood

from begging. Shaykh ' A t f a r , i n h i s Tazkerat ol-Owlia,

,:
{ B i o g r a p h i e s o f t h e Saints), d e s c r i b e s how one S u f i persuaded

a n o t h e r S u f i t o become a beggar i n t h e b a z a a r . G r a d u a l l y some

o f t h e m y s t i c s began t o w r i t e p o e t r y i n w h i c h t h e y combined

p o e t i c a l themes w i t h t h e i r own s t r a n g e i d e a s and u n r e a l t h o u g h t s ,

I n K a s r a v i ' s v i e w , t h e y degraded I s l a m , I r a n and S u f i s m

} itself.

The excuse f o r t h e i r p o e t r y was t h a t i t was supposed t o p r o v e

God's u n i t y ; b u t these p o e t s c o u l d n o t p r o v e i t i n any adequate;

and a c c e p t a b l e way. I n s t e a d , K a s r a v i says, b y s p r e a d i n g their

v i c i o u s and h a r m f u l i d e a s , t h e y i n f l u e n c e d and poisoned t h e

i n n o c e n t p e o p l e ' s minds. They s p o i l e d t h e p e o p l e ' s simple

and harmless v i e w s o f God and o f C r e a t i o n o f t h e w o r l d , e t c .

p
Out o f t h e thousands o f I r a n i a n p o e t s , K a s r a v i says, only a

1. Shaykh F a r i d o l - D i n ' A t t a r N i s h a p u r i ( s a i d , t o have l i v e d .

1120-1230); famous f o r h i s T a z k e r a t o l - O w l i a ( b i o g r a p h i e s
o f S u f i S a i n t s ) i n rhymed p r o s e and h i s Manteq o l - T a y r
(Language o f t h e B i r d s ) ^ i n v e r s e .
2. Par Payramun-eShe'r o S h a ' e r i , p.32.
 201

h a n d f u l w r o t e r e a s o n a b l e o r harmless p o e t r y . The o t h e r s w r o t e
p e r n i c i o u s verse which continues t o poison t h e I r a n i a n people's
•j
mind. Above a l l , K a s r a v i says, i t i s important that future
g e n e r a t i o n s s h o u l d n o t r e a d such s t u f f and s h o u l d n o t he
persuaded b y i t t o g i v e up a c t i v i t y and f e e l indifferent
towards t h e w o r l d . The young people o f I r a n must r e f o r m
t h e i r way o f t h i n k i n g . A complete change o f i n t e l l e c t u a l
o u t l o o k i n I r a n i a n s o c i e t y i s u r g e n t l y needed; and w i t h t h i s
i n view, K a s r a v i presents h i s suggestions f o r t h e reform o f
P e r s i a n p o e t r y and l i t e r a t u r e .
p

1. Every k i n d o f poem must be m e a n i n g f u l ; otherwise i t i s

rubbish or h a l l u c i n a t i o n .
2. The v e r s e s o f a poem must be c o h e r e n t l y a r r a n g e d ; o t h e r -
w i s e t h e i r meaning i s s p o i l e d .
3» P a n e g y r i c and e x a g g e r a t i o n must be c o m p l e t e l y e l i m i n a t e d .
k» E x t r a v a g a n t language and symbolism s h o u l d be a v o i d e d .
5« The g h a z a l ( t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m o f l o v e o r wine poem i n
monorhyme) i s n o n s e n s i c a l and more p e r n i c i o u s t h a n any
other form o f Persian p o e t r y .
6. Abusive s a t i r e , w i t h t h e use o f shameful words i n
condemnation o f o t h e r s , i s n o t a p e r m i s s i b l e f o r m o f
poetry.
1 • Par Pavramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i . p.33«
2. I b i d ^ p p 32-33.
 202

7« Today, "besides: u s e l e s s m a t t e r s such, as t h e n o t i o n s o f

m y s t i c i s m or t h e i d e a s o f t h e g h a z a l , t h e r e a r e a l s o
b e n e f i c i a l themes w h i c h can "be used as s u b j e c t s f o r
poetry.

S u b j e c t t o these c o n d i t i o n s and p r o v i d e d t h a t t h e poet

possesses r e a l p o e t i c t a l e n t , p o e t r y i s i n K a s r a v i ' s o p i n i o n
p e r m i s s i b l e and even d e s i r a b l e ; b u t o t h e r w i s e i t s h o u l d n o t
be tolerated.
1
W r i t i n g i n Payman, year 2, No.2, K a s r a v i p o i n t s out
t h a t t h e p a n e g y r i c p o e t s , who w r o t e exaggerated praises of
t h e m i g h t and g l o r y and magnanimity o f k i n g s , t r o d a p a t h
w h i c h was v e r y f a r f r o m r e a l i t y . They pretendedi t o show
how devoted t h e y were t o t h e k i n g , and how strongly they
f e l t f o r him. " I p e r s o n a l l y " ; says K a s r a v i , " c a l l them l i a r s .
I n o t o n l y blame t h e p o e t s who t h u s demeaned themselves; I
a l s o blame t h e k i n g s who encouraged such persons by paying
them so much a t t e n t i o n . " For example, K a s r a v i blames S o l t a n
S a n j a r (1118-1157) f o r i n d u c i n g t h e poet A n v a r i t o come t o
his court, b u t n o t A n v a r i f o r a c c e p t i n g t h e inducement. I t
was S a n j a r , K a s r a v i says, who encouraged and persuaded A n v a r i
1. Par Payramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.70.
2. One o f t h e S a l j u q T u r k i s h r u l e r s o f I r a n , and p a t r o n o f
t h e poets Mo'ezzi and A n v a r i , who w r o t e odes ( q a s i d e h s )
i n h i s honour. The h i s t o r i a n s a l s o p r a i s e d h i s . c h i v a l r y
and g a l l a n t r y . K a s r a v i , however, t h i n k s t h a t S a n j a r d i d .
n o t deserve a l l t h i s p r a i s e .
 203

t o w r i t e t h e nonsense which he w r o t e , A n v a r i was so c o n f i -

dent and sure o f h i s a r t t h a t he even says i n one l i n e :

| | I do n o t know what name t h i s s o r t o f p o e t r y s h o u l d have.

•i
I cannot c a l l i t p r o p h e t h o o d , n o r can I c a l l i t magic."
A t t h e same t i m e K a s r a v i emphasizes t h a t he i s n o t
2
h o s t i l e t o p o e t s as such. "My a m b i t i o n , " he d e c l a r e s , " i s
t o warn them and g u i d e them t o r e a l i t y . " I n t h i s world
e v e r y t h i n g ought t o have a b e n e f i c i a l u s e , because t h e r e
i s no p o i n t i n p r o d u c i n g u s e l e s s t h i n g s , even i f t h e y a r e
not p o s i t i v e l y harmful. One o f K a s r a v i ' s l e a r n e d f r i e n d s ,
Sayyed ' A l i Akbar B o r q a ' i o f Qom, o b j e c t e d t o h i s , arguments,
s a y i n g t h a t K a s r a v i had maligned. P e r s i a n l i t e r a t u r e and hacL
n o t a p p r e c i a t e d . i t s v a l u e ; t h e r e was no j u s t i f i c a t i o n i n
K a s r a v i ' s argument t h a t p o e t r y i s u n r e l i a b l e o r u s e l e s s j u s t
because i t s words a r e chosen and a r r a n g e d i n an i m p r e s s i v e
and b e a u t i f u l manner. Another f r i e n d o f K a s r a v i ' s , whose
name i s n o t m e n t i o n e d , w r o t e a s k i n g why K a s r a v i p e r s i s t e d i n
denouncing m y s t i c i s m . K a s r a v i admits t h a t p o e t r y has n o t
always been h a r m f u l and can sometimes be v e r y u s e f u l , ^ b u t
t h i n k s t h a t t h e number o f p o e t r y books which cause no harm
1 . Dar Payramun-e She'r o S h l ' e r i , p.37*
2. I b i d . ,p JToI "
3» Sokhanrani-ye K a s r a v i d a rAn.1oman-e A d a b i , p.39«
r

h* Dar Pa.yramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , pp h3-Uk.

 20Z+

and w h i c h b r i n g b e n e f i t b y s t i r r i n g p e o p l e t o p a t r i o t i s m
o r h e r o i s m i s v e r y s m a l l . U n f o r t u n a t e l y many p o e t s have,
p e r s i s t e d i n d e s c r i b i n g t h e i r f e e l i n g s and d e s i r e s i n a
v e r y immoral way. K a s r a v i r e c o g n i s e s t h a t p o e t r y i s an
a r t so s t r o n g l y r o o t e d i n t h e I r a n i a n people's mind t h a t
i t can n e v e r be c o m p l e t e l y e l i m i n a t e d ; b u t he i n s i s t s t h a t
immoral p o e t r y books s h o u l d be banned o r e x p u r g a t e d and
t h a t contemporary p o e t s s h o u l d be u r g e d t o w r i t e i n a more

r e s p e c t a b l e way. K a s r a v i n o t e s t h e words o f one o f h i s ;

c r i t i c s named Rava'i , who had s a i d t h a t human m e n t a l i t i e s

and d e s i r e s a r e c o m b i n a t i o n s o f d i f f e r e n t f e e l i n g s , such as

l o v e , h a t e , f e a r , happiness, sadness, e t c . I n some people

these f e e l i n g s a r e much s t r o n g e r and more c o m p l i c a t e d t h a n

i n others. As a r e s u l t t h e y d e s c r i b e t h e i r m e n t a l and s p i -

r i t u a l s t a t e s i n a more s e n s i t i v e way, and t h e y a l s o want

t o impress t h e i r r e a d e r s ; t h e y t h e r e f o r e compose p o e t r y ,

which i s t h e f i n e s t instrument o f expression. The t a l e n t

f o r w r i t i n g p o e t r y i s somehow i n n a t e . Human b e i n g s have

possessed t h i s t a l e n t s i n c e t h e stone age, and as t i m e

passed t h e a r t p r o g r e s s e d beyond t h e p r i m i t i v e s t a g e . Blame

i s o n l y t o be p u t on t h o s e p o e t r y books w h i c h have harmed

s o c i e t y f r o m t h e e t h i c a l and moral v i e w p o i n t . K a s r a v i
3
r1 e•p lPar
i e s Payramun-e
as f o l l o w s .She'r" A ol lSmy
h a ' oe br ji e, cpp
t i oU3-hk*
n s are against those
2. I b i d , .-p. 50.
3. I b i d . J p p U-5-U-6.
 205

p o e t s who t r i e d t o w r i t e t h e i r poems i n ways w h i c h were

a r t i f i c i a l or n o t respectable; f o r instance against poets

who wanted t o w r i t e about n a t u r e ' s b e a u t y b u t t r i e d t o

d e s c r i b e i t s s i m p l e grace i n heavy and pompous words o r

w i t h p e c u l i a r supernatural ideas. T h e i r aim i n w r i t i n g

i n such ways was c e r t a i n l y t o c r e a t e a deeper impression

and t o e x e r c i s e more i n f l u e n c e . H a r d l y any o f o u r p o e t s

have w r i t t e n about h i s t o r i c a l , s o c i a l , o r n a t i o n a l v i c t o r i e s .

Once a group o f l e a r n e d men h e l d a meeting at which

t h e y d e c l a r e d t h a t p o e t r y i s t h e language o f n a t u r e and
p

t h a t K a s r a v i had no r i g h t t o a t t a c k p o e t s . He r e p l i e d : "To

t h o s e who s i m p l y want t o . speak and d e s c r i b e t h e b e a u t y o f

n a t u r e , I have no o b j e c t i o n . My main r e a s o n f o r o p p o s i n g

them i s t o warn them how h a r m f u l t h i s p o e t r y can be f o r o u r

s o c i e t y i f t h e y w r i t e about immoral m a t t e r s . I cannot

remain s i l e n t about those p o e t s who always w r i t e about wine

and d r u n k n e s s , o r who c a l l t h e w o r l d u s e l e s s . They know how

t o w r i t e i n a v e r y p l e a s i n g and p e r s u a s i v e way, w i t h t h e

r e s u l t t h a t t h e p e o p l e , e s p e c i a l l y t h e younger g e n e r a t i o n ,

become f a s c i n a t e d and t h e n soon t a k e t h e wrong r o a d . A poet

s h o u l d n o t j u s t w r i t e about h i s i m a g i n a r y f e e l i n g s o r h a l l u -

c i n a t i o n s ; he can become u s e f u l and be a good m o r a l l e a d e r

1 . Sorur Khan f r o m A f g h a n i s t a n , Rypka f r o m C z e c h o s l o v a k i a ,
S a f i n i a f r o m I r a n , Mohammad^Taher R a z a v i f r o m I n d i a ,
Khazeni f r o m I r a n (Par Pavramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , y.k-S,)
2. Par Payramun-e She'r o S h a ^ r i , p.U6.
i f he w i l l w r i t e about r e a l t h i n g s , t r u e e v e n t s , and a c t u a l
facts. One can s c a r c e l y f i n d a poet who w r o t e a s i n g l e
l i n e about t h e Mongols and t h e i r hideous c r u e l t y when t h e y
a t t a c k e d I r a n , k i l l i n g even i n n o c e n t b a b i e s , women and
animals. Yet t h e p o e t s c o u l d have w r i t t e n thousands o f
laments about t h i s d i s a s t e r . What can one say about t h e s e
p o e t s who produced books p r a i s i n g Chengiz Khan, even g i v i n g
him t h e t i t l e o f God?"
2
K a s r a v i i n s i s t s on t h e need f o r m o d e r n i z a t i o n o f the.
a r t of poetry i n I r a n . Today; he m a i n t a i n s , t h e r e a r e many
u s e f u l m a t t e r s and f i e l d s f r o m w h i c h a poet may draw
i n s p i r a t i o n . He says t h a t e x a g g e r a t i o n and w r i t i n g about
f i g m e n t s o f t h e mind are s t i l l r e g a r d e d as p r i v i l e g e s o f
3
I r a n i a n poets and have l o n g been c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f them.
T h i s h a b i t o f e x a g g e r a t i o n may even be u s e f u l , i f a poet
uses i t t o encourage t h e people t o have s e l f - r e s p e c t , as
d i d F e r d o w s i , ^ who i s d e f i n i t e l y one o f I r a n ' s g r e a t e s t
p o e t s ; b u t K a s r a v i cannot be i n d i f f e r e n t towards p o e t s who
exaggerated about u n r e a l t h i n g s and d i d so m a i n l y f o r t h e
5

purpose o f g e t t i n g money o r more money. He cannot tolerate

poets, who are l i a r s , who p r a i s e c r u e l governors and call
1 • Par Pa.yramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.£j-7»
2. Sokhanrani-ye K a s r a v i dar An.joman-e A d a b i , p.l5«
3. I b i d p . 2 3 .
v

4. Par Payramun-e She'r o Sha e r i , p.5°.

5* I b i d . , p p U7-U9.
 207

them as honest as p r o p h e t s . E x a g g e r a t i o n can t h u s "be e i t h e r

u s e f u l or harmful. I n every c l a s s o f our s o c i e t y , K a s r a v i
observes, we can see those who t r y t o get money or w e a l t h
o r p o s i t i o n "by e x a g g e r a t i o n . I f I r a n i a n s today analyse
t h e i r d a i l y conversation, they w i l l n o t i c e t h a t f i f t y per-
cent o f i t c o n s i s t s o f p r a i s i n g and a d m i r i n g f a l s e t h i n g s o r
people. T h i s h a b i t , he says, i s t h e d i r e c t r e s u l t o f P e r s i a n
p o e t r y and l i t e r a t u r e ; i t has ended by becoming p a r t o f t h e
national l i f e . As t o Rava'i's. argument t h a t t h e mass o f
the people s h o u l d be blamed, K a s r a v i s t a t e s t h a t i n f a c t t h e y
a r e t h e dupes o f t h e p o e t s and have been m i s l e d by r e a d i n g
and a d m i r i n g t h e i r poems. The masses o f t h e p e o p l e , where-
v.

ever t h e y a r e , i n t h e West or E a s t , i n A s i a o r Europe, a r e

n o t capable o f deep u n d e r s t a n d i n g . They must be warned by
t h e i r leaders.
A c e r t a i n Sayyed Mohammad ' A l i M o r t a z a v i sent a l e t t e r
t o K a s r a v i , i n which mentioned t h a t a l t h o u g h he h i m s e l f had
n o t h i n g t o do w i t h p o e t r y , he t h o u g h t i t u n f a i r t o a t t a c k
* 2
a r t i s t i c I r a n i a n p o e t s such as Sa'di and Hafez. Kasravi i n
r e p l y quoted a l i n e by Hafez:

"That b i t t e r - l i k e ( s u b s t a n c e ) , w h i c h t h e S u f i c a l l s , t h e mother

1 • Par Payramun-e She*/r o S h a ' e r i , p.62..

2. I b i d . p.61.
;
 208

o f v i c e s , i s sweeter and t a s t i e r t h a n t h e cheek o f my

s e d u c t i v e "beloved." Kasravi p o i n t e d out t h a t although
every word i n t h i s v e r s e may have a symbolic meaning, Hafez
n e v e r t h e l e s s p r a i s e d t h e " b i t t e r n e s s o f wine i n a most e l o q u e n t
way, c a l l i n g i t sweet as sugar i n s p i t e o f t h e f a c t t h a t he
p

was a Moslem and was w r i t i n g f o r a Moslem audience.

K a s r a v i h a d no doubt whatever t h a t t h r o u g h t h e c e n t u r i e s
I r a n has d e c l i n e d a g r e a t d e a l , b o t h m a t e r i a l l y amd m o r a l l y ,
and t h a t one o f t h e main,indeed t h e most i m p o r t a n t , reasons
has been t h e e x i s t e n c e o f many h a r m f u l p o e t s who g r e a t l y
3
demoralized t h e people. T h e i r poems poisoned t h e mind o f
t h e masses. They wrote so many books i n w h i c h t h e y c a l l e d
t h e w o r l d t r a n s i e n t and u s e l e s s t h a t t h e p e o p l e were d i s -
couraged. " I n s p i t e o f t h e i d e a s o f t h e o r i e n t a l i s t s , who
have c a l l e d t h e p o e t s t h e p r i d e and g l o r y o f I r a n , I c a l l
them u s e l e s s f i g u r e s , " he says. As a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d , i n
h i s o p i n i o n t h e o r i e n t a l i s t s * a d m i r a t i o n f o r t h e p o e t s has
been c a l c u l a t e d and d e l i b e r a t e , ^ " t h e i r b a s i c m o t i v e being
t o keep t h e E a s t e r n n a t i o n s i n darkness so t h a t t h e Western
n a t i o n s may e x p l o i t t h e i r i g n o r a n c e .
K a s r a v i a l s o remarks t h a t some p o e t s have sought o n l y
to match words t o g e t h e r i n harmonious and r h y t h m i c l i n e s o f
1. Par Pa.vramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.62.
2. I b i d . , pp 62-65.
3. Ibid.
k. Farhang C h i s t . Tehran 1325/19*4-6, p.36.
 209

verse, without paying the s l i g h t e s t a t t e n t i o n t o the

meaning. No doubt p o e t s , who are not s u p e r i o r t o o r d i n a r y
p e o p l e , d i d n o t always spend a g r e a t d e a l o f e f f o r t on t h e i r
w o r k s , "but r e l i e d on t h e i r i n n a t e t a l e n t s . Poetry i s not
d i f f e r e n t f r o m p r o s e , a c c o r d i n g t o K a s r a v i , except t h a t prose
is a simple method o f e x p r e s s i o n , w h i l e p o e t r y i s more
complicated. For example, K a s r a v i c o n s i d e r e d t h e e t h i c a l
poems o f Sana'i ( d . l l i j - l ) t o he j u s t as v a l u a b l e as t h e
e t h i c a l prose t r e a t i s e (Akhlaq-e N a s e r i ) o f Khwajeh N a s i r
o l - D i n T u s i ( d . 1273); h u t he r e f u s e s t o p r e f e r S a ' d i ' s
prose G o l e s t a n t o h i s v e r s e Bust'an o r v i c e - v e r s a , because
t h e c o n t e n t o f each i s on t h e same l e v e l . Out o f t h e
thousands o f I r a n i a n p o e t s , K a s r a v i as a l r e a d y mentioned
t h i n k s t h a t o n l y one deserves a d m i r a t i o n and r e s p e c t ,
namely Ferdowsi (932-1020), whose p o e t r y i s v i t a l and full
o f h e r o i c deeds. I t reminds I r a n i a n s o f t h e i r glorious
a n c i e n t empire. Moreover Ferdowsi t r i e d hard t o w r i t e i n
a simple s t y l e and pure P e r s i a n language. Although Kasravi
t h i n k s t h a t Ferdowsi's work i s so g r e a t t h a t no I r a n i a n can
f a i l t o be impressed by i t , he a l s o h e r e cjfa»n c r i t i c i z e s
Ferdowsi because h i s r e c o r d o f events i s n o t a c c u r a t e and
historical. N e v e r t h e l e s s t h e Shahnameh remains t h e model o f
* f

1 . Par Payramun-e A d a b i a t , p.115.

2. Par Payramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.72.
3. I b i d . . p . 7 3 .
 210

good P e r s i a n language.
K a s r a v i observes t h a t t h e f o u n d a t i o n s o f p o e t r y were

l a i d i n t h e palaces o f " d i c t a t o r - k i n g s " and t h a t l a t e r i t

was c u l t i v a t e d a l s o i n t h e Jai'anqah (monastery) and t h e

ma.ykadeh ( t a v e r n ) . "What have we g a i n e d o u t o f t h i s rich

s t o r e o f p o e t r y ? " he asks. Since t h e r e was no a u t h o r i t y t o

c o n t r o l p o e t s , t h e y were a b s o l u t e l y f r e e t o say what t h e y

chose and d i d n o t s t i c k t o any p r i n c i p l e i n t h e i r p o e t r y ,

2
writing. A c e r t a i n Mr. N a b a v i w r o t e a l e t t e r o f p r o t e s t t o

K a s r a v i , a s k i n g "Why s h o u l d you s p o i l t h e names o f g r e a t

p o e t s such as 'Omar Khayyam when t o d a y i n t h e East and West

people a v i d l y r e a d h i s p o e t r y and b e n e f i t f r o m i t ? I n any

case y o u have no r i g h t t o censure ' A t t a r o r Mowlavi, who

are t h e p r i d e o f our community; b u t i n s t e a d o f h o n o u r i n g

them you defame t h e i r c h a r a c t e r s and i g n o r e them." Kasfcavi

r e p l i e s , ^ s a y i n g "Your o b j e c t i o n i s n o t l o g i c a l . Firstly

you ought t o know t h e meaning o f g r e a t n e s s . What q u a l i t i e s

does a person need i n o r d e r t o be g r e a t i n your eyes? ± A

poet s i t s i n a c o r n e r and f o r g e t s a l l h i s d u t y t o s o c i e t y .
He becomes a b s o l u t e l y i n a c t i v e , b u t e a t s t h e f r u i t o f o t h e r

p e o p l e ' s h a r d work and j u s t p l a y s w i t h words l i k e t o y s . To

me t h i s i s n o t b e i n g g r e a t . We I r a n i a n s as a n a t i o n have

n o t g a i n e d t h e s l i g h t e s t b e n e f i t f r o m Mowlavi's t h i c k and
1 . Dar Pa.vramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.73.
2. I b i d . , p.79.
3. I b i d . , p p 79-8U.
 211

heavy Masnavi or ' A t t a r ' s works. The p o e t s f o r g o t their

"basic d u t y , which was t o l e a d the n a t i o n t o a b e t t e r life.

They spent a l l t h e i r t i m e w r i t i n g about t h e c r e a t i o n o f t h e

w o r l d , t h e c r e a t i o n o f man, and t h e end o f t h i s l i f e . Yet

nobody can draw any c o n c l u s i o n f r o m t h e i r w r i t i n g s on these

complicated metaphysical matters. To my mind i t i s n o t

a p p r o p r i a t e t o dabble i n such f i e l d s t o no purpose." Kasravi

d e c l a r e s t h a t he r e s p e c t s Khayyam (d.1123) as a mathematician

•j
and s c i e n t i s t ; b u t i f one accepts t h a t t h e I r a n i a n s are a
Moslem n a t i o n , what i s t h e p o i n t o f p u b l i s h i n g Khayyam's
p o e t r y , w h i c h i s a b s o l u t e l y a g a i n s t I s l a m and i t s d o c t r i n e s ?
Can anyone r e a l l y l i v e a c c o r d i n g t o Khayyam's p h i l o s o p h y o f
life?"
p

Another p o i n t w h i c h K a s r a v i makes i s that i n Iranian

h i s t o r y t h r o u g h t h e centuries t h e r e are f i g u r e s whose names

ought t o be k e p t a l i v e i n t h e people's minds; b u t u n f o r t u n a t e l y

the m a j o r i t y o f t h e people are q u i t e i g n o r a n t o f them, and

i n s t e a d o f t h e names o f such men t h e y know t h e names o f p o e t s

who have w r i t t e n v a r i o u s w o r t h l e s s p o e t r y books. I s not i t

u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t v a l i a n t men such as S a t t a r Khan and Baqer

Khan, who f o u g h t so h a r d i n the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e , are

now f o r g o t t e n , even though t h e i r g r e a t n e s s cannot be denied?

1 . Par Payramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p . 8 1 .
2. Par Payramun-e A d a b i a t , p . l i i - .
 212

A newspaper c a l l e d . Da'vat-e E s l a m i ( I s l a m i c Appeal"), w h i c h

' * 1-
used t o he p u b l i s h e d a t Kermanshah, reproduced an a r t i c l e
f r o m Pa.yman, Year 8, w h i c h K a s r a v i had c o n t r i b u t e d . A
* 2
c e r t a i n man named Fakhr o l - T o j j a r o r Fakhr-e Samadi, who
a l t h o u g h he was n o t h i m s e l f a p r o f e s s i o n a l poet used t o
w r i t e p o e t r y i n h i s l e i s u r e t i m e , sent a l e t t e r t o Payman as
f o l l o w s : " A f t e r r e a d i n g K a s r a v i ' s a r t i c l e about p o e t s and
p o e t r y ; my whole a t t i t u d e has been changed. I can no longer
c o n t i n u e w r i t i n g p o e t r y even o c c a s i o n a l l y . I f you ask a
poet what h i s p o e t r y means, he cannot g i v e you a s t r a i g h t -
f o r w a r d answer. I have t o confess t h a t I m y s e l f do n o t know
3
t h e meaning o f my own p o e t r y . " Kasravi r e p l i e s : "It is
n o t o n l y you who do n o t know t h e meaning o f p o e t r y . I f the
famous p o e t s were a l i v e t o d a y , t h e y themselves c o u l d n o t
e x p l a i n t h e i r own p o e t r y or even d i s c o v e r t h e i r meaning."
A n o t h e r correspondent, Sayyed Hoseyn Badla w r o t e f r o m Qom t o
y

K a s r a v i , s a y i n g how g r a t e f u l he was t o Kasravi a f t e r reading

h i s ideas about t h e p o e t s . He added t h a t today p l e n t y o f
I r a n i a n s accept t h a t p o e t r y can be v e r y dangerous i f i t s
themes are immoral; indeed i t can d r a g s o c i e t y t o w a r d s
complete darkness and d e g r a d a t i o n . While a c c e p t i n g t h a t thet
t a l e n t f o r w r i t i n g p o e t r y i s something i n n a t e , he c o n s i d e r s
1 . P u b l i s h e d a t Kermanshah by Sayyed Mghammad T a q i V ^ h e d i Badla
i n 19^9 (Sadr Hashemi, T a r i k h - e J a r a y e d va Ma,1allat-e I r a n ,
Esfahan, 1327/19^8-1332/1553, V o l . 2 ) .
e

3.
2. DarI b i d .Payramun-e
, p.87. She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.85.
 213

t h a t i t ought n o t t o "be g i v e n u n l i m i t e d scope, "but must he

r e s t r i c t e d ; and he a p p r e c i a t e s K a s r a v i ' s e f f o r t s i n t h i s

respect. He a l s o mentions t h e names o f a few o t h e r men who

gave up w r i t i n g p o e t r y a f t e r "becoming f a m i l i a r w i t h K a s r a v i ' s
11

ideas. Others who w r o t e t o Pa.yman s a y i n g t h a t t h e y had "been

c o n v i n c e d "by K a s r a v i and had f o r t h w i t h g i v e n up w r i t i n g

p o e t r y were Mr. Z o n u b i , Mr. A n s a r i and Mr. Mohammad M i r z a

' '< 2
Homayunpur. A c e r t a i n Mr. Va ezpur w r o t e : "Nobody can deny

t h a t h a r m f u l n a t u r e o f , f o r i n s t a n c e , I r a j Mirza's c o l l e c t e d

works.^ They are p o t e n t i o n a l l y most dangerous, e s p e c i a l l y f o r

t h e minds o f t h e young g e n e r a t i o n . The p u b l i c m o r a l i t y i s

g e t t i n g worse and worse every day, y e t t h e M i n i s t r y o f

E d u c a t i o n assumes t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f such

books." Mr. Va'ezpur admires K a s r a v i ' s e f f o r t s t o combat

such p o e t s . A c e r t a i n Mr. Z a b i h o l l a h z a d e h a l s o w r o t e a
h
letter s a y i n g how g r a t e f u l he was to Kasravi. Before;

r e a d i n g Payman, he had been a d e v o t e d and enthusiastic

a d m i r e r o f Hafez; b u t K a s r a v i ' s a r t i c l e about p o e t r y and

' 5
p o e t s had c o n v i n c e d him. He t h e n r e f e r s t o a v e r s e o f Hafez:

1. Par Pavramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.88.

2. I b i d , p.82-
3. I r a j M i r z a J a l a l ol-Mamalek (1874-1924).
4. Par Payramun-e She'r o Sha'eri,pp.91-94.
5. I b i d . , p.92.
 21k

" I f t h e wine s e l l e r concedes t h e d r u n k a r d s ' p r a y e r s , God

w i l l f o r g i v e t h e i r s i n s and ward o f f d i s a s t e r . "

1
"How c o u l d a Moslem," he asks, "dare t o w r i t e such words?"
K a s r a v i remarks t h a t i n a l i n e o f p o e t r y t h e words a r e

t h e s k e l e t o n and t h e i r meanings a r e t h e l i f e and s o u l . A

poem s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e combine these two elements; o t h e r w i s e

i t w i l l be w o r t h l e s s . A poet f r o m A r a k named Ahmad F a r z i n

w r o t e a poem w h i c h was p u b l i s h e d i n Payman. I n one o f i t s

l i n e s he p r a i s e s K a s r a v i ' s e f f o r t as f o l l o w s :

" K a s r a v i ' s o n l y aim i s t h e r e f o r m a t i o n o f p o e t r y . Enough

2
c a r p i n g and c h i d i n g a t t h i s honest man." Mr. M i r Mahdi

Mufoad, who i n 1336/1957 e d i t e d and p u b l i s h e d Kasravi's

w r i t i n g s on p o e t r y i n t h e book Dar Payramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i

(On P o e t r y and P o e t r y - w r i t i n g ) , was a n o t h e r devoted admirer;

i n a l e t t e r t o Payman he s t a t e d t h a t as soon as he became

f a m i l i a r w i t h K a s r a v i ' s i d e a s , he s t a r t e d t o w r i t e respectable

ve'rse. K a s r a v i ' s f a v o u r i t e p o e t s a r e those who have w r i t t e n

about s o c i a l , moral and r e l i g i o u s m a t t e r s . Here a g a i n he

r e i t e r a t e s t h e importance of Perdowsi, t h e greatest n a t i o n a l

p o e t o f I r a n , and c a l l s upon modern I r a n i a n s t o r e c o g n i s e t h e

1 . Dar Payramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.92.
2. I b i d . , p. 132.
 215
c o n t i n u i n g v a l u e o f Ferdowsi's work. Other p o e t s who
a t t r a c t e d K a s r a v i ' s f a v o u r a b l e a t t e n t i o n are Abu-Hanif eh

E s k a f i (11th c e n t u r y A.D.), some o f whose poems K a s r a v i

'2 3 '

p u b l i s h e d i n Payman; Naser Khosrow, t h e Esma i l i t e poet

and t r a v e l l e r ( d . 1 0 8 8 ) ; Sana'i o f Ghazneh (d.11^0), who
a d m i t t e d l y as a p r o f e s s i o n a l poet earned money by p r a i s i n g
S o l t a n Mahmud, b u t l a t e r l e f t h i s c o u r t and w r o t e some v e r y
h

good e t h i c a l poems. Among t h e modern poets K a s r a v i has.

h i g h o p i n i o n s o f 'Aref Q a z v i n i (1882-1933), who helped
I r a n ' s C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n and w r o t e poems and songs
i n p r a i s e o f t h e n a t i o n ' s freedom, b u t d i e d i n p o v e r t y w i t h -
5
o u t any e a r n i n g money whatever f r o m h i s poems, and Parv/in
E'tesami (1906-19^1), a poetess w i t h g r e a t d e p t h and purity
o f f e e l i n g and a t t h e same t i m e w i t h a s t r o n g sense o f humour.
K a s r a v i i n h i s book Dar Payramun-e Roman ("On the Novel")^
r e i t e r a t e s t h a t he i s s t r i c t l y a g a i n s t books w h i c h are u s e l e s s
or harmful t o read. A c o u n t r y ' s l i t e r a t u r e and i t s w r i t e r s
r e p r e s e n t i t s c u l t u r e and i t s people's a t t i t u d e towards l i f e .
1 • Par Payramun-e She'r o S h a ' e r i , p.135.
2. I b i d . , -p.Ig5"7 \
3. Born i n Qobadian somewhere near B a l k h . He l e a r n e d t h e Qor'an
by h e a r t and a l s o s t u d i e d astronomy, a r i t h m e t i c , and
p h i l o s o p h y (Dar Payxamun-e, She * r 6 Sha* e r i , p . l 4 8 ) .
U. Dar^Payramun^e She r o S h a ' e r i , P.15&T
5. Born a t Qazvin. H i s d i v a n was f i r s t p u b l i s h e d by
Mr. Sayfzadeh B e r l i n i n 1923, b u t i t was banned f o r
some time, i n I r a n . ,
6. Par Payramun-e Roman ( c o l l e c t e d a r t i c l e s by K a s r a v i f r o m
Payman and Parcham), Tehran 1315/19U6.
 216

N o v e l i s t s who w r i t e p u r e l y i m a g i n a r y s t o r i e s come i n f o r

severe c r i t i c i s m f r o m K a s r a v i , i i i > s p i t e o f t h e i r g r e a t

popularity. He r e c o g n i s e s t h a t t h e n o v e l i s r e g a r d e d as
•i
a b r a n c h o f l i t e r a t u r e i n Europe, Where n o v e l - w r i t i n g , he
says, i s even t a u g h t t o s t u d e n t s i n t h e s c h o o l s . Neverthe-
2
less Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t n o v e l w r i t i n g i s on t h e whole use-

l e s s , and he i s s o r r y t h a t t h e E a s t e r n peoples;, i n t h i s as

i n o t h e r aspects o f l i f e , f o l l o w European examples even when

t h e s e a r e wrong. "What i s t h e p o i n t o f w r i t i n g n o v e l s ? " he

asks, Reading i l l u s i o n s and i m a g i n a r y u n t r u e s t o r i e s i s a

c h i l d i s h occupation n o t s u i t a b l e f o r a d u l t s . Even i f t h e

n o v e l i s t wants t o g i v e moral l e s s o n s , t h e n o v e l i s u s e l e s s

for t h i s p u r p o s e , because people w i l l n o t t a k e n o t i c e o f

i m a g i n a r y s t o r i e s , whereas t h e y w i l l t a k e n o t i c e o f t r u e

events. Today w r i t i n g n o v e l s has become a h a b i t o f t h e

Iranians. I n every newspaper one can f i n d space t a k e n up

by a n o v e l . People a r e c a p t i v a t e d by n o v e l s , most o f w h i c h

are n o t only useless b u t extremely h a r m f u l . When we l e t

young g i r l s o r boys r e a d s e n s a t i o n a l l o v e s t o r i e s , we d r a g
them towards i m m o r a l i t y , because t h e i r minds a r e immature,

and t h e y t a k e t h e s t o r y as a f a c t . One o f t h e w o r l d ' s ,

;
famous n o v e l i s t s i s A n a t o l e France. Kasravi thinks that
1 . Par Pa.yramun-e Roman, p.22.
2. I b i d . , p.5.
 217
•\

a l l h i s hooks a r e f u l l o f i l l u s i o n s . "What use i s i t , " he

a s k s , " t o r e a d t h i s a u t h o r ' s n o v e l s ? He has even m i s g u i d e d

p e o p l e and persuaded them t o deny God and abandon t h e i r

beliefs." As f o r A l e x a n d r e Dumas, h i s n o v e l s a r e no b e t t e r

t h a n those o f A n a t o l e France and have t h e same b a d i n f l u e n c e ^

on p e o p l e ' s minds. K a s r a v i asks why, i f n o v e l i s t s r e a l l y

wanted t o guide t h e n a t i o n s towards an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f

r e a l i t y and a b e t t e r way o f l i f e , have t h e y produced such
p

abominable and u n t r u e s t o r i e s ? They c o u l d have g u i d e d

p e o p l e b y w r i t i n g t r u e h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s and a d v e n t u r e s ,
such as Napoleon's l i f e o r George Washington's s a c r i f i c e s
for h i s country. I n I r a n novel w r i t e r s could f a m i l i a r i z e
t h e p e o p l e w i t h g r e a t h i s t o r i c a l e v e n t s such as t h e C o n s t i -
t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n and i t s v i c i s s i t u d e s , and t h e s u f f e r i n g s
and s a c r i f i c e s o f t h o s e who gave t h e i r l i v e s f o r t h e cause
of l i b e r t y . K a s r a v i i s p a r t i c u l a r l y d i s g u s t e d by h i s t o r i c a l
n o v e l i s t s who t a k e h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s and change them i n
3
accordance w i t h t h e i r own w i s h e s , So many h i s t o r i c a l events

are n o t p r o p e r l y known o r u n d e r s t o o d because t h e y have been

confused w i t h t h e i m a g i n a r y s t a t e m e n t s o f w r i t e r s . Even

T o l s t o y and J u r j i ZaJtdan, whom K a s r a v i o t h e r w i s e a d m i r e s ,

* *
1. Par Payramun-e Roman, pp 8-17.
2. I b i d . , p.10.
3. I b i d . p. 1 1 .
;

h» K a s r a v i says t h a t J u r j i Zahdan (I86l-191L|.; a C h r i s t i a n

S y r i a n who l i v e d and w r o t e i n E g y p t ) i n h i s books S e l s e l a t
T a v a r i k h el-Eslam mixed f a l s e h o o d w i t h t r u t h and showed
contempt f o r I s l a m and t h e A r a b i c language.
 218

s p o i l t t h e i r work (so he says) by d a b b l i n g w i t h h i s t o r y and

a l t e r i n g h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r own t a s t e s .
K a s r a v i complains t h a t no I r a n i a n s had t r i e d t o w r i t e books
about t h e men who gained I r a n ' s l i b e r t y and t h e i r b r a v e r y .
I f P r o f e s s o r E.G. Browne had n o t w r i t t e n such a book i n
Europe, nobody w o u l d r e a l i z e how much these men, and p a r t i -
c u l a r l y the Azarbaijanis, suffered during the revolution i n
Iran. "When we have such g r e a t f i g u r e s t o w r i t e about,"
2
K a s r a v i a s k s , "why s h o u l d we w r i t e about u n r e a l t h i n g s ? "
A l a d y named Mrs. S. Sayyah wrote an a r t i c l e " M e r i t s o f t h e
N o v e l " i n t h e newspaper " I r a n " i n w h i c h she d i s p u t e d K a s r a v i ' s
criticisms of the novel. While agreeing w i t h K a s r a v i that
t h e success o f a n y t h i n g i n Europe does n o t mean t h a t i t i s
n e c e s s a r i l y u s e f u l , Mrs. Sayyah argued t h a t h i s t o r y i s a
r e c o r d o f events w h i c h happened l o n g ago, whereas t h e n o v e l
t e l l s t h e s t o r y o f events w h i c h may happen i n t h e f u t u r e .
K a s r a v i r e p l i e d t h a t we can depend on what has happened, b u t
cannot be sure o f what i s g o i n g t o happen.^" Such b e i n g t h e
case, how can we depend on A n a t o l e Prance's s t o r i e s o r be
5
sure t h a t t h e y w i l l ever come t r u e ? K a s r a v i a d m i t s , however,
t h a t t h e r e a r e c e r t a i n n o v e l i s t s whom he can t o some e x t e n t
1 • Chehel Maqaleh, p*279; an a r t i c l e about Taymur Malek,
p u b l i s h e d i n Payman i n 1316/1937.
2. Par Pa.yramun-e Roman, p . l U .
3. I b i d . , -p-p 18-32.
h» I b i d . , pp 26-28.
5. I b i d . , p . 2 1 .
 219

r e s p e c t , such as V i c t o r Hugo and T o l s t o y . V i c t o r Hugo can

be accepted as a remarkable w r i t e r , who t r i e d t o awaken h i s
n a t i o n by h i s w r i t i n g s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , i f we l o o k a t t h e
n o v e l s i n c i r c u l a t i o n t o d a y , we see t h a t n i n e t y - n i n e p e r c e n t
o f them c o n t a i n t h e most v u l g a r l o v e s t o r i e s , w h i c h a r e sure
t o have b a d e f f e c t s on t h e morals o f t h e simple-minded young
people. T h a i s , t h e famous and v e r y p o p u l a r n o v e l o f A n a t o l e
F r a n c e , i s a m i x t u r e o f t r u e h i s t o r y and t h e w r i t e r ' s i m a g i -
n a t i o n ; we cannot e a s i l y d i s t i n g u i s h between t h e t r u t h and
f a l s e h o o d i n i t , b u t i f we s t u d y t h i s book c a r e f u l l y , we see
t h a t A n a t o l e France's p r i n c i p a l aims were f i r s t l y t o deny
God and s e c o n d l y t o spread i m m o r a l i t y . B a l z a c , i n t h e i n t r o -
d u c t i o n t o h i s s e r i e s o f n o v e l s "La Comedie Humaine". i s
r e p o r t e d t o have s a i d t h a t t h e t a s k o f l i t e r a t u r e i s n o t i n
any way h i g h e r t h a n t h e t a s k o f h i s t o r i o g r a p h y , and t h a t t h e
one complements t h e o t h e r : h i s t o r i a n s w r i t e about political
e v e n t s , and n o v e l i s t s w r i t e about t h i n g s n o t mentioned b y
h i s t o r i a n s , and p a r t i c u l a r l y about m o r a l t r a d i t i o n s . Kasravi
t h i n k s t h a t a l t h o u g h t h i s t h e o r y sounds i p l a u s l b l e . , i f we

l o o k d e e p l y i n t o i t , we s h a l l s t i l l f i n d i t i l l o g i c a l and
-i

untenable; f o r i f t h e morals and t r a d i t i o n s r e a l l y existed,

t h e y w i l l have been r e c o r d e d i n t h e h i s t o r i e s , w h i l e i f t h e y
a r e something i m a g i n a r y , t h e y w i l l be o f no use whatever.
1 . Par Payramun-e Roman, p.28.
 220

A l t o g e t h e r , I n Kasravi's view the vast f i e l d of f i c t i o n

1
c o n t a i n s almost n o t h i n g o f v a l u e . I n I r a n , he continues,

we can f i n d thousands o f hooks which are as h a r m f u l as

A n a t o l e France's n o v e l s . How can a w r i t e r such as S a ' d i ,

who produced t h e f i f t h c h a p t e r o f t h e G o l e s t a n , t e a c h t h e

nation morality? Yet we i g n o r e g r e a t f i g u r e s such as

Z o r o a s t e r , who was t h e f i r s t Prophet and who l e d the people

t o God. I n the Persian language, Kasravi concludes, there

i s o n l y one o u t s t a n d i n g n o v e l , namely t h e Siyahatnameh-ye

Ebrahim Beg ("by H ^ j j Zayn o l - ' A b e d i n M a r a g h e ' i ) , w r i t t e n

just before the Iranian C o n s t i t u t i o n a l revolution.

 221

Comments.

The Main i m p r e s s i o n g a i n e d "by t h e r e a d e r o f K a s r a v i ' s

w r i t i n g s about p o e t r y i s t h a t he c o n s i d e r e d t h e I r a n i a n p o e t s

t o have s t o o d i n t h e way o f t h e n a t i o n ' s p r o g r e s s , and t o

have h e l d "back t h e people t h r o u g h t h e c e n t u r i e s "by s p r e a d i n g

u s e l e s s i d e a s among them. According t o Kasravi's d e f i n i t i o n ,

any k i n d o f l i t e r a t u r e i s u s e l e s s u n l e s s a m o r a l or m a t e r i a l

advantage i s t o he g a i n e d f r o m i t . K a s r a v i ' s ideas on t h i s

s u b j e c t can b e s t be a p p r e c i a t e d and c r i t i c i z e d i f t h e y are

d i v i d e d i n t o segments and commented on s e p a r a t e l y .

1. K a s r a v i i n h i s . books Dar Payramun-e A d a b i a t and Hafez

cheh mi-guyad c r u e l l y a t t a c k s I r a n i a n p o e t s and i n p a r t i c u l a r

Hafez, S a ' d i , and Khayyam, who are g e n e r a l l y r e g a r d e d as t h r e e

o f t h e most d i s t i n g u i s h e d f i g u r e s i n P e r s i a n l i t e r a t u r e ; f o r

most people Hafez, Sa d i and Khayyam are t h e p r i d e o f I r a n .

I n K a s r a v i ' s o p i n i o n , however, t h e i r i n f l u e n c e i s one o f

2
t h e reasons f o r I r a n ' s backwardness. No doubt w r i t e r s do
e x e r c i s e g r e a t i n f l u e n c e on a n a t i o n ' s mind. For i n s t a n c e ,
i f t h e r e had been no V o l t a i r e o r Rousseau, perhaps t h e g r e a t
French r e v o l u t i o n would n e v e r have happened. Nevertheless
K a s r a v i e x a g g e r a t e s , and i s i n d e e d g r o s s l y u n f a i r , when he
r e p r e s e n t s t h e g r e a t p o e t s o f I r a n as such h a r m f u l f i g u r e s .
A d m i t t e d l y t h e m y s t i c i s m o f Hafez and t h e pessimism of
1 . Dar Payramun-e A d a b i a t , p.56.
2. I b i d . , p.58.
 222

Khayyam were i n f l u e n t i a l up t o a p o i n t ; "but t h e r e were many

o t h e r reasons f o r I r a n ' s backwardness, such as g e o g r a p h i c a l

location. Theae f a c t s are t o o obvious and u n d e n i a b l e t o

need d i s c u s s i o n .

2. K a s r a v i l a y s g r e a t s t r e s s on t h e i m m o r a l i t y o f t h e

f i f t h c h a p t e r o f Sa'di's Golejstan, w h i c h , as he r i g h t l y

says, may p o i s o n t h e people's minds; b u t he does n o t take;

i n t o account t h e h i g h moral s t a n d a r d o f t h e a d v i c e w h i c h

Sa'di giveB i n o t h e r c h a p t e r s o f t h e G o l e s t a n . The famous

l i n e s i n t h e f i r s t c h a p t e r a l o n e s u f f i c e t o redeem Sa'di*s

sins; ^ ^

"The sons o f Adam are each o t h e r ' s l i m b s , f o r t h e y are

c r e a t e d f r o m t h e same substance. When f a t e makes one l i m b
p

ache, t h e o t h e r l i m b s have no peace." I t i s preposterous

t h a t K a s r a v i s h o u l d condemn Sa'di's G o l e s t a n j u s t because o f
i t s f i f t h c h a p t e r ( w h i c h i n c i d e n t a l l y c o n t a i n s a few n o b l e
v e r s e s , such as t h e l a s t poem about t h e u n s e l f i s h drowning
l o v e r , as w e l l as many immoral v e r s e s ) . Not o n l y I r a n , b u t
1. Par Payramun-e A d a b i a t , p.56.
2. I b i d . , -p.58.
 223

t h e whole w o r l d admires Sa*di as a g r e a t w r i t e r and p o e t .

3» Needless t o say everybody's p e r s o n a l i t y and way o f

t h i n k i n g depends v e r y l a r g e l y on h i s e n v i r o n m e n t . Every

w r i t e r ' s o r p o e t ' s work depends t o some e x t e n t on t h e needs

of t h e s o c i e t y i n w h i c h he l i v e s ' . - I f S a ' d i o r Hafez wrote;

m y s t i c p o e t r y , t h i s was because m y s t i c i s m was p r e v a l e n t i n

t h e i r t i m e s and i n t h e i r s o c i a l e n v i r o n m e n t s . They d i d n o t

encourage t h e people t o move towards m y s t i c i s m , b u t r e f l e c t e d

the mood o f t h e contemporary s o c i e t y . T h e i r m y s t i c poems may

w e l l have g i v e n some s p i r i t u a l r e l i e f t o t h e people o f t h a t

s o c i e t y , who had been b a d l y h u r t b y t h e Mongol conquest.

b» K a s r a v i t r i e d t o demonstrate weaknesses i n t h e p o e t r y

of Sa'di and H a f e z , b u t was v e r y u n f a i r i n h i s judgements.

He says t h a t Hafez composed h i s l y r i c poems w i t h o u t any

purpose w h i l e i n a s t a t e o f h a l l u c i n a t i o n , and t h a t he m e r e l y

a r r a n g e d words i n a r h y t h m i c and r h y m i n g way. K a s r a v i quotes

a few l i n e s o f t h e p o e t r y o f Hafez, b u t n e g l e c t s o t h e r s .

Even i f we accept K a s r a v i ' s i d e a s i n t h i s r e s p e c t , we have

t o admit t h e incomparable b e a u t y o f Hafez's p o e t i c a r t .

K a s r a v i n o t o n l y a t t a c k e d H a f e z , Sa'di and Khayyam, b u t

c r i t i c i z e d t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e p o e t s , i n c l u d i n g even F e r d o w s i ,

the one poet whom he on t h e whole admired. His objection t o

Ferdowsi's Shahnameh was t h a t i t s s t o r i e s have no h i s t o r i c a l
•1

value. I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o u n d e r s t a n d why a s c h o l a r l i k e

1 . Par Payramun-e Roman, pp 35-36.

 22k

K a s r a v i s h o u l d make such an u n f a i r judgment. He i g n o r e d

the f a c t t h a t t h e Shahnameh, w h i c h i s one o f t h e master-
p i e c e s o f w o r l d l i t e r a t u r e , was n o t w r i t t e n as a source f o r
h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s . Perdowsi, I r a n ' s g r e a t e s t p o e t , t o i l e d
t h i r t y y e a r s t o c r e a t e t h i s m a s t e r p i e c e , which as K a s r a v i
h i m s e l f r e c o g n i s e s , s t r e n g t h e n e d t h e P e r s i a n language,
encouraged t h e people t o s t a n d f i r m "before t h e i r enemies,
and t a u g h t them p a t r i o t i s m . K a s r a v i i n h i s d e n u n c i a t i o n
o f t h e p o e t s seems t o have f o r g o t t e n t h a t t h e human s o u l
cannot "be s a t i s f i e d "by m a t e r i a l i s m a l o n e , b u t a l s o needs
s p i r i t u a l nourishment. Today, when t h e w o r l d i s p r o g r e s s i n g
r a p i d l y from the m a t e r i a l p o i n t of view, t h e r e i s s t i l l a
g r e a t need f o r s p i r i t u a l l i f e . Most t h i n k e r s have p r e d i c t e d
t h a t man w i l l s u f f e r i f ever he becomes an a b s o l u t e machine
w i t h o u t sense or f e e l i n g .

5. Those who a r e f a m i l i a r w i t h Western l i t e r a t u r e will

admit t h a t a l t h o u g h many books have been w r i t t e n which a r e

j u s t as immoral as p a r t s o f t h e G o l e s t a n , none o f them have

done s e r i o u s harm t o t h e people o r caused them t o f a l l into

backwardness. K a s r a v i ' s t h e o r y i n t h i s r e s p e c t cannot

r e a s o n a b l y be accepted. We know t h a t i n t h e p a s t , r i g h t up

to and even a f t e r t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l movement, t h e mass o f

the I r a n i a n people were i l l i t e r a t e and i g n o r a n t , a l t h o u g h

some might know by h e a r t a few l i n e s o f Perdowsi o r Sa'di o r

 225

Hafez. They were n o t i n t o u c h w i t h t h e w o r l d o f p o e t r y and

literature, and c o u l d n o t have been d e m o r a l i z e d by t h e

p o e t r y o f Sa'di o r Hafez, w h i c h o n l y a v e r y l i m i t e d number
o f them were a b l e t o r e a d . The g r e a t c i t i e s , where most o f
the - l i t e r a t e people l i v e d , were n o t i n c l o s e t o u c h w i t h t h e

v i l l a g e s n o r w i t h each o t h e r , and t h e l i t e r a t e people were

n o t a b l e t o spread i d e a s among t h e masses. As K a s r a v i

•i

himself admits, t h e o n l y r e a d e r s o f p o e t r y were t h e k i n g s and

c o u r t i e r s and c e r t a i n l i m i t e d c l a s s e s o f s o c i e t y , because
t h e y alone r e c e i v e d e d u c a t i o n .
6. I f a l i t e r a r y phrase e i t h e r i n v e r s e o r p r o s e i s w r i t t e n
i n an i m p r e s s i v e and b e a u t i f u l way, t h e r e i s no p o i n t i n
l o o k i n g a t i t s o l e l y f r o m a moral a n g l e , though o f course i f
it expresses a good m o r a l i t w i l l be a l l t h e more admirable.
I f we l o o k a t a p a i n t i n g which shows a c r u e l e x e c u t i o n e r
c u t t i n g o f f t h e head o f an i n n o c e n t p e r s o n , b u t w h i c h is
p a i n t e d b e a u t i f u l l y , we w i l l n o t deny i t s m e r i t s even though
it shows a v e r y inhuman scene. As f o r b e a u t i f u l m u s i c , i t
i s d o u b t f u l whether any c o n n e c t i o n between music and m o r a l i t y
can e x i s t a t a l l . I t seems t o us t h a t p o e t r y i s an a r t l i k e
music o r p a i n t i n g , and t h a t K a s r a v i was wrong t o c o n s i d e r
p o e t r y and l i t e r a t u r e i n t h e same l i g h t as s c i e n c e . A r t and.
s c i e n c e a r e concerned w i t h d i f f e r e n t aspects o f l i f e , and
1 . Par Payramun-e A & a b i y a t , pp 22-24.
 226

cannot be c l a s s e d t o g e t h e r , anymore t h a n l o v e and r e a s o n ; b u t

b o t h a r e necessary t o human l i f e .

7» A c c o r d i n g t o K a s r a v i , many p o e t s produced t h e i r p o e t r y

c a r e l e s s l y and w i t h o u t any purpose; but t h i s view i s

p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y wrong i n s e v e r a l ways. Human b e i n g s , and

a n i m a l s a l s o , a c t under t h e i n f l u e n c e o f b o t h emotion and

r e a s o n ; o n l y i n e x c e p t i o n a l cases, such as drunkness o r

u n c o n s c i o u s n e s s , do humans a c t w i t h o u t purpose. Even K a s r a v i

cannot prove t h a t S a ' d i w r o t e t h e G o l e s t a n i n a s t a t e o f

hallucination. We must admit t h a t t h e G o l e s t a n and many

books were produced when t h e w r i t e r o r poet was a b s o l u t e l y

c o n s c i o u s o f what he was d o i n g . Kasravi furthermore objects

t h a t p o e t s d i d n o t c o n s i d e r t h e people's needs when t h e y

produced t h e i r p o e t r y . T h i s i s a l s o an u n f a i r criticism,

because t h e i r work, l i k e a l l human a c t i o n , was l a r g e l y

d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e i r c i r c u m s t a n c e s and environment; t h o u g h

o f course K a s r a v i i s r i g h t i n s a y i n g t h a t Hafez o r S a ' d i

p r a i s e d k i n g s t o g a i n something f r o m them.

8. There can be no doubt t h a t man s h o u l d be a c t i v e and f a c e

difficulties. I n any s o c i e t y , however, n o t a l l t h e p e o p l e

are p r o d u c e r s o r d i r e c t l y a c t i v e i n t h e n a t i o n ' s economy;

and because t h e y a r e i n d i v i d u a l s , t h e i r p e r s o n a l i t i e s , minds

and environments d i f f e r . A p r o g r e s s i v e s o c i e t y ought t o be

1. Dar Payramun-e A d a b i - a t , p.Ij-3*

£. I b i d . , p.20.
v a r i e d , f o r i t needs n o t o n l y w o r k e r s , . f a r m e r s and t r a d e r s ,

"but a l s o s c i e n t i s t s , t h i n k e r s , a r t i s t s and a l s o p o e t s . I f

a p o e t l i v e s i n h i s own s h e l l o r h i s own s m a l l g r o u p , t h i s

i s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y wrong o r o h j e c t i o n a b l e . Most p o e t s

r e q u i r e a q u i e t and calm s o r t o f l i f e , q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from

a f a c t o r y worker's e x i s t e n c e , f o r t h e sake o f t h e i r a r t .

9. K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t as t h e p o e t s l i v e d on s a l a r i e s f r o m

k i n g s , and were under an o b l i g a t i o n t o p r a i s e t h e i r patrons,

t h e r e f o r e , i n order t o earn t h e i r l i v i n g , they wrote poetry

t o please t h e k i n g s and n o t f o r t h e mass o f t h e p e o p l e . Yet

b e a u t i f u l p o e t r y i s t o be admired f o r i t s own sake, whether

i t s i n s p i r a t i o n came f r o m a k i n g o r a beggar; and s i n c e t h e

mass o f t h e p e o p l e i n I r a n were n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n p o e t r y ,

it i s d i f f i c u l t t o see how t h e p o e t s c o u l d have t a k e n t h e

people's: needs i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n . K a s r a v i * s m i s t a k e was

t h a t he confused p o e t and p o e t r y . He f o r g o t t h e A r a b i c

proverb

"Pay heed t o what he s a i d , n o t t o who s a i d i t . " Kasravi

i s q u i t e r i g h t i n emphasizing t h a t p o e t r y i n I r a n was n o t
•i

t h e language o f t h e masses; b u t he i s n o t r i g h t i n s a y i n g
that i t i s therefore valueless.
10. K a s r a v i r e a d t h e p o e t r y o f Khayyam, Sa'di and H a f e z ,
and censured c e r t a i n passages. He d i d n o t concern h i m s e l f
1 . Sokhanrani-ye K a s r a v i d a r An.joman-e A d a b i , pp 27-30.
 228

w i t h t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m . Already i n Kasravi's time experts

had shown t h a t t h e t e x t s o f c l a s s i c a l P e r s i a n p o e t r y are n o t
always pure and o f t e n c o n t a i n l i n e s or passages w h i c h t h e
p o e t s themselves d i d n o t w r i t e . T h i s i s t h e case w i t h
Khayyam's q u a t r a i n s i n p a r t i c u l a r . I f Kasravi i n t e n t i o n a l l y
i g n o r e d t h i s problem, h i s c r i t i c i s m s o f ( f o r i n s t a n c e )
Khayyam cannot t h e n he c o n s i d e r e d j u s t and f a i r , and i f he
u n i n t e n t i o n a l l y d i s r e g a r d e d i t , h i s c r i t i c i s m s cannot t h e n
he c o n s i d e r e d s c h o l a r l y .

11. K a s r a v i i s v e r y h o s t i l e t o t h e o r i e n t a l i s t s who admired

Iran's poets, because he t h i n k s t h a t t h e i r a d m i r a t i o n was

2
prompted by a m a l i c i o u s p u r p o s e ; they misled the Iranians

and o t h e r E a s t e r n p e o p l e s , so he s a i d , i n o r d e r t h a t the

Western p e o p l e s might e x p l o i t t h e i r weakness. Although

K a s r a v i was p r o b a b l y r i g h t i n t h i n k i n g that some European

o r i e n t a l i s t s worked f o r t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e i r own govern-

ments and f e l t l i t t l e sympathy f o r t h e s t r u g g l e s o f t h e

modern I r a n i a n and o t h e r E a s t e r n peoples t o achieve freedom

and p r o g r e s s , t h i s c e r t a i n l y was n o t t r u e o f a l l o r i e n t a l i s t s .

P r o f e s s o r E. G. Browne o f Cambridge, f o r example, d i d e v e r y -

t h i n g he c o u l d t o s u p p o r t t h e I r a n i a n people i n t h e i r C o n s t i -

t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e . Moreover c e r t a i n o r i e n t a l i s t s t o i l e d h a r d
1 . Dar Payramun-e A d a b i a t , pp 116-128.
2. I b i d . , p. 119.
 229

t o g a i n a c c u r a t e knowledge o f I r a n i a n p o e t r y , l i t e r a t u r e ,
h i s t o r y and c i v i l i z a t i o n , and p u b l i s h e d t h e i r knowledge i n
v a l u a b l e books, w h i c h t o d a y are s t u d i e d and a p p r e c i a t e d by
I r a n i a n s as w e l l as f o r e i g n e r s . Mr. M h d i M o j t a h e d i , a u t h o r
a

o f a u s e f u l book on the notable p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f i/Czarbiaijan

i n t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e , i s one of the I r a n i a n w r i t e r s
who has c r i t i c i z e d K a s r a v i ' s a t t i t u d e t o European o r i e n t a l i s t s .
I n h i s opinion, Kasravi's accusation that a l l o r i e n t a l i s t s
worked f o r t h e i n t e r e s t o f t h e i r own c o u n t r i e s cannot p o s s i b l y
by a c c e p t e d . K a s r a v i was p a r t i c u l a r l y u n f a i r when he said
I r a n ' s g r e a t s c h o l a r s were b r i b e d by f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s t o r e -
p u b l i s h e d p o e t i c a l t e x t s and w r i t e books about t h e ideas of
philosophers.
Not u n n a t u r a l l y , K a s r a v i ' s d e n u n c i a t i o n s o f most o f the,
P e r s i a n c l a s s i c s o f t e n i n s p i r e d v e r y extreme r e a c t i o n s . To
some modern p o e t s he i s t h e symbol o f e v e r y t h i n g infamous and
d e g e n e r a t e , whose i n f l u e n c e c o u l d o n l y be e v i l and perverse.
For i n s t a n c e Malek ol-Sho*ara Bahar (1850-1951), by general
consent t h e g r e a t e s t poet o f modern t i m e s , and A d i b o l - S l a n t a n e l
Sami'i b o t h wrote poems i n w h i c h t h e y b i t t e r l y criticiased
,* 2
kasravi. Bahar i n these v e r s e s c a l l s him
0 \)£s(f> rs^s'
(J
" s t u p i d , ignorant, befuddled w i t h rebelliousness and
1. M o j t a h e d i , Re.jial-e i & z a r b a i j a n dar a s r M a s h r u t i a t , p.126.
2. Malek ol-Sho'aria Bahar, Divan-e Ashar, v o l . 2 . Tehran
1336/19U7, PP 507-508.
 230

f r u s t r a t i o n , a man whose h e a r t was Satan's workshop, wtee-

wao a d i o g r a o o t o t h o people o f T a b r i z . " Same'i i n one o f
h i s poems c a l l e d K a s r a v i

f_ ^>'y ^y ^
"an i g n o r a n t , i l l i t e r a t e Sayyed, who w i t h h i s l a c k o f thought

and reason u n f o r t u n a t e l y i n f l u e n c e d some p e o p l e , who r e j e c t e d

l o v e and r e j e c t e d good t a s t e , who d i s t i n g u i s h e d h i m s e l f by

his i n s u l t s t o people of f e e l i n g . "

I h x s p i t e o f such c r i t i c i s m s , K a s r a v i b e l i e v e d , and h i s

f o l l o w e r s the "Kasravian" s t i l l b e l i e v e , t h a t many P e r s i a n

c l a s s i c s such as t h e w r i t i n g s o f Sa'di and Khayyam a r e

s o c i a l l y h a r m f u l and s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e be c o m p l e t e l y e r a d i c a t e d .

For t h i s purpose t h e K a s r a v i a n h o l d annual g a t h e r i n g s i n

w h i c h t h e y b u r n t h e s e books. They are o f course f r e e t o h o l d

t h e i r own o p i n i o n s ; b u t i n our v i e w b u r n i n g any k i n d o f book

i s an unworthy and f o o l i s h a c t i o n . I f a book c o n t a i n s harm-

f u l t h i n g s , a w i s e r e a d e r w i l l n o t be a f f e c t e d by i t . At

t h e same t i m e , i n I r a n as i n many o t h e r c o u n t r i e s , t h e

M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n has power t o c o n t r o l book p u b l i c a t i o n ,

and i f t h e r e s p o n s i b l e a u t h o r i t i e s c o n s i d e r a book t o be

p o l i t i c a l l y or s o c i a l l y h a r m f u l , t h e y can ban i t or r e s t r i c t i t ,

1 . Adib, o l - S a l t a n e h Hasayn Sami i , Asar-e manzum ya Divan-e

Ashar, T e h r a n , 1335/1946, E l m i p u b l i c a t i o n , pp 211-212.
 231

P r i v a t e b u r n i n g of "books i s t h e r e f o r e u s e l e s s as w e l l as
foolish.

T h i s was a weak p o i n t i n Kasravi's c h a r a c t e r which

provoked a great d e a l of outcry, e s p e c i a l l y from groups

who admired c l a s s i c a l P e r s i a n p o e t r y . Many I r a n i a n i n t e l l e c -

t u a l s today are extremely c r i t i c a l of K a s r a v i . He would

have "been w i s e r i f he had limited himself to pointing out

t h e h a r m f u l f e a t u r e s of c e r t a i n p o e t i c a l works w i t h o u t going

so f a r a s t o "burn them; and t h e r e was no n e e d to continue

t h i s p r a c t i c e a f t e r h i s death. H i s w r i t i n g s about H a f e z and

o t h e r p o e t s were a l r e a d y sufficiently critical. This conduct

prompted a group t o r e t a l i a t e "by "burning a l a r g e number o f

K a s r a v i ' s books a t t h e house of a c e r t a i n Mr. Eslam-nla.

The scene i s d e s c r i b e d i n a book c a l l e d A t e s h - e E n q e l a b

( " F i r e of R e v o l u t i o n " ) by Qasem E s l a m i . To us such b e h a v i o u r ,

w h e t h e r by K a s r a v i or by h i s opponents, was fanatical and

discreditable. K a s r a v i ' s opponent S e r a j A n s a r i , i n h i s book

Nabard b a B i - D i n i ("The struggle against irreligion"),

c r i t i c i z e s K a s r a v i f o r h i s b u r n i n g o f b o o k s , and then says

t h a t a l l Moslems ought t o c o l l e c t and b u r n K a s r a v i ' s b o o k s .

Kasravi himself i n h i s book Dadgah a d m i t s t h a t many p e o p l e

had b i t t e r l y opposed him b e c a u s e of h i s b o o k - b u r n i n g ^ e.g.

' A l i A k b a r Davar ( M i n i s t e r of J u s t i c e and F i n a n c e 1927-1936;

committed s u i c i d e 1936), 'Abdol-Hosayn H a z h i r (Prime Minister

 232

1948; a s s a s s i n a t e d 1949)> and Mohammad Sa'ed Mar&ghe'i

(Prime M i n i s t e r 1944 and 1948-1950). K a s r a v i n e v e r t h e l e s s
i n s i s t s on t h e T i g h t n e s s o f h i s conduct. He t h i n k s t h a t t h e
t w e n t y m i l l i o n i n h a b i t a n t s o f I r a n s h o u l d "be k e p t away from
the p o i s o n o u s books. He says t h a t he ought n o t t o be blamed
f o r b u r n i n g t h e d i v a n o f t h e poet I r a j Mirzia. (1874-1925)>
because i t c o n t a i n s t h e p o s t p e r n i c i o u s and immoral m a t t e r .
These poems o f I r a j Mirzia had been p u b l i s h e d b y t h e M i n i s t r y
o f E d u c a t i o n i n an e d i t i o n o f 25*000 c o p i e s and were d i s -
t r i b u t e d a l l over t h e c o u n t r y . I n n o c e n t young minds were
b e i n g dragged t o d e g r a d a t i o n b y r e a d i n g them. K a s r a v i goes
on t o say t h a t I r a n i a n s b e l i e v e t h a t a poet who possesses
s p e c i a l t a l e n t f o r v e r s i f i c a t i o n must have some c o n n e c t i o n
w i t h s p i r i t u a l l i f e , aaid must c o n s e q u e n t l y have b e t t e r
knowledge t h a n an average man. I r a n i a n s pay t o o much
a t t e n t i o n t o t h e p o e t s . One r e s u l t i s t h a t t h e r e c o u l d
appear p o e t s such as Sahabi A s t a r a b a d i (d.1010/1602), who
composed 70,000 poems, o r Sa'eb E s f a h a n i (d.1088/1678) who
composed 100,000 l i n e s . K a s r a v i denounces *Abd ol-Hosayn
H a z h i r because he had n o t as M i n i s t e r o f E d u c a t i o n p r o h i b i t e d
the p u b l i c a t i o n o f such books.

Some o f K a s r a v i ' s enemies accused K a s r a v i o f b u r n i n g

the Qor'an. I n h i s book Dadgiah^ he d e n i e s t h i s and says how

g r e a t l y he r e s p e c t s t h e Qor'ian.

1 . K a s r a v i , D&dgjah, pp 27-28.
 233

K a s r a v i ' s book b u r n i n g was t h e most conspicuous example

o f t h e tendency t o over emphasize and exaggerate w h i c h he

o f t e n shows when he w r i t e s l i k e a p r e a c h e r , b u t seldom i f

ever shows i n h i s s c h o l a r l y w r i t i n g s . I t was an u n f o r t u n a t e

tendency, because i t made h i m appear a f a n a t i c i n h i s own

way, when h i s r e a l purpose v/as t o combat s u p e r s t i t i o n and

i d l e n e s s and f a n a t i c i s m ; b u t i t was n o t a b n o r m a l , as a l l

I r a n i a n p r e a c h e r s and p r o p a g a n d i s t s i n t h o s e days used

v i o l e n t and exaggerated language because t h e y t h o u g h t t h a t

t h e people would n o t l i s t e n t o moderate language.

 23k

CHAPTER FIVE

KASRAVI'S STUDIES OP RELIGION

K a s r a v i d i d a g r e a t d e a l o f r e s e a r c h on r e l i g i o u s matters.

He always h e l d t h a t one o f t h e m a i n reasons, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n

t h e East, f o r t h e p e o p l e ' s "backwardness has "been t h e i r

enthralment t o t r a d i t i o n a l ideas i n the f i e l d o f r e l i g i o u s

faith.^ He was s t r i c t l y opposed t o s u p e r s t i t i o n , and i n a l l

p
h i s w r i t i n g s h e expressed s t r o n g f e e l i n g s about i t . For the

sake o f convenience, t h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f K a s r a v i ' s studies

of r e l i g i o n i s d i v i d e d i n t o three s e c t i o n s .

The f i r s t s e c t i o n i s a summary o f K a s r a v i ' s analyses o f

different religious beliefs.

The second s e c t i o n g i v e s an o u t l i n e o f Kasravi's personal

religious beliefs.

The t h i r d s e c t i o n s e t s f o r t h t h e o p i n i o n s o f r e l i g i o u s

spokesmen and o t h e r c r i t i c s , and a l s o o u r own comments, on

Kasravi's r e l i g i o u s ideas.

U n f o r t u n a t e l y we have been unable t o o b t a i n a copy o f

K a s r a v i ' s book Ayin, w h i c h i s one o f h i s i m p o r t a n t works i n t h e

f i e l d of r e l i g i o n . After i t was banned and c o n f i s c a t e d , a l l

c o p i e s seem t o have disappeared. I have been t o l d , however,

t h a t t h e i d e a s o f t h i s book resemble those which K a s r a v i

expressed i n another book, Var javand-e-gj Bonyad.

1. K a s r a v i . Rah-e Rastcaarl, Theran, 132U/1945.
2. I b i d . p. 8.
r
 235

SECTION I

K a s r a v i ' s a n a l y s e s of d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s .
K a s r a v i i n a book c a l l e d Rah-e R a s t e g a r i ("The Path to

S a l v a t i o n ^ s t r o n g l y c r i t i c i z e s c e r t a i n s e c t s o f I s l a m , and
1
f i r s t of a l l the E s m a * i l i t e or B a t e n i t e s e c t . I n h i s opinion,

the f o l l o w e r s o f t h i s s e c t were not brave enough t o face

r e a l i t y , and d i d not wish to behave i n the way l a i d down f o r

them by I s l a m . F o r t h i s reason they had to f i n d an excuse

f o r t h e i r misbehaviour. They s a i d t h a t r e l i g i o u s r u l e s ,
b e s i d e s having an e x t e r n a l form, a l s o have an i n t e r n a l (baten)
meaning. T h i s was why they were named B a t e n i t e s . Their ideas,
which K a s r a v i c a l l s " B a t e n i g a r i " . were contrary t o reason and
common sense. Moreover t h e i r behaviour was somehow a g g r e s s i v e .
They b e l i e v e d t h a t the people should f o l l o w the Emam unquest-
ioningly. T h e i r founder Hasan Sabbah ( d . 11214.)/ who began
i n v i t i n g the people t o j o i n h i s s e c t , used to say t h a t "the
source of every a c t i o n should be e n t i r e l y i n the hands o f the
Emam. The others should r e s p e c t h i s i d e a s whatever they may
be, and obey him". K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t such b l i n d obedience
2
i s u t t e r l y i r r a t i o n a l and has nothing to do with Islam.
L a t e r i n the same book, K a s r a v i d i s c u s s e s another Moslem
group, the Kharabatian.^ T h e i r ideas were p a r t l y d e r i v e d from
1. K a s r a v i , Rah-e R a s t e g a r i . Tehran 1 3 2 V 1 9 4 5 , p.68.
2. Ibid., p. 7 3 .
3 . Ibid., p. 7h-75.
 236

Greek philosophy, and t h e i r main motto was "we do not know

whence we have come nor whither we a r e going". They
t h e r e f o r e b e l i e v e d t h a t i t was "better to think only of the
present moment than to prepare and provide f o r the f u t u r e .
They a l s o had another d o c t r i n e , namely t h a t every human
being's f u t u r e i s predestined; and they t h e r e f o r e b e l i e v e d
t h a t s i n c e everything has been arranged before our coming
to t h i s world, there i s no need f o r u s to make any e f f o r t .
K a s r a v i regards these notions a s absurd and morally degrading.

As f o r the present s t a t e of I s l a m , K a s r a v i examines i t

* * 2
i n h i s book Par Payramun-e Eslam ("About I s l a m " ) . We have

before u s , he says, two kinds of I s l a m , the k i n d introduced

by the Prophet Mohammad n e a r l y a millennium and a h a l f ago,

and another k i n d which i s the r e l i g i o n of the people i n t h i s

present age. I n f a c t present day I s l a m i s d i v i d e d i n t o many
branches, Sonnites, S h i ' i t e s , * A l i E l a h i s , E s m a * i l i s , Karim
Khanis, Shaykhis, and so on. When Mohammad announced h i s
prophetic mission, he s e t out to teach the people f a i t h i n
one God, and u n i t y and brotherhood i n t h i s f a i t h . He thereby
u n i t e d the beduin Arabs i n t o a great nation.
Unfortunately, through the c e n t u r i e s I s l a m changed g r e a t l y ,
so much so t h a t now we have to d i s c u s s a d i f f e r e n t k i n d of I s l a m .

1. Rah-e R a s t e g a r i . p. 73.
2. K a s r a v i , P a r Payramun-e Eslam. Tehran ,3325/191+6.
 237

Today Moslems shut t h e i r minds t o r e a l i t y . A t the same time

the o r g a n i z a t i o n and s t r u c t u r e of I s l a m are v e r y u n s t a b l e .
Not a s i n g l e country i n the modern world i s a genuinely
I s l a m i c country. I n most s t a t e s which a r e supposed to he
r e g u l a t e d by I s l a m i c p r i n c i p l e s , the laws l a i d down by God
i n the Holy Book are ignored or no longer enforced. I n their
p l a c e have been put c i v i l s t a t u t e s , which a r e more or l e s s
i m i t a t e d from the laws o f European s t a t e s . The u n i t y o f the
Moslems, t h e i r common obedience to the c a l i p h , and the common
s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t i n f i d e l i t y , which a r e t h e fundamentals of
Islam, are a l l forgotten.

K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t the worst f a i l i n g of the Moslems i s

1
t h e i r ignorance of the r e a l meaning o f t h e i r r e l i g i o n .
Knowledge o f God i s e s s e n t i a l t o r e l i g i o n , but Moslems do not
know God i n the r i g h t way. Nor do they understand the
meaning o f prophethood and God's message. They t h i n k t h a t
the only way i n which they can recognise a prophet a s a r e a l
messenger i s through h i s miraculous a c t i o n and doing i m p o s s i b l e
things. About the l i f e i n the other world they have a complex
of confused i d e a s . I t must be r e a l i z e d t h a t knowledge o f God
and knowledge o f H i s commandments a r e i n s e p a r a b l e . T h i s
world i s always moving, and human beings a r e not wise enough
to understand the changes which t h i s movement r e q u i r e s . They

1. P a r Payramun-e Eslam. p. 5.
 238

value t h e i r p a s t l i f e more than they value t h e i r f u t u r e .

K a s r a v i "believes t h a t i t i s God's w i l l t h a t every other

century there w i l l be a renewal which w i l l show a new way

1
of l i f e to the people." " Moslems g e n e r a l l y , however, t h i n k

t h a t God has f a i l e d to make any renewal s i n c e the r e v e l a t i o n

of I s l a m .

K a s r a v i then complains t h a t Moslems today do not think

2
about t h e i r freedom. I n f a c t the p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of
I s l a m i s u n s u i t a b l e f o r modern l i f e . The g l o r i o u s epoch
of I s l a m i s over. Now the great and powerful c o u n t r i e s
behave a g g r e s s i v e l y towards the underdeveloped I s l a m i c
societies. R e l i g i o n ougftt to teach good p r i n c i p l e s to the
people. When a r e l i g i o n ceases to be strong enough to do
t h i s , i t loses i t s authority. Today, i n K a s r a v i ' s opinion,
I s l a m has l o s t i t s former s t r e n g t h . ^ I t i s no longer capable
of standing f i r m a g a i n s t e r r o r . Moslems no longer accept
I s l a m as the guide to honest conduct, f o r themselves and f o r
t h e i r nation. They t r e a t the Qor'an as a t o o l i n t h e i r own
hands, and even change the meaning of v e r s e s i n i t which do
not accord with t h e i r own ideas. I n s t e a d of comparing t h e i r
own behaviour w i t h I s l a m , they compare the Qoi^an w i t h their
own a c t i o n s . T h i s great book, which once was the moral guide
1. Par Payramun-e Eslam, p. 8.
2. Ibid., p. 9.
3. I b i d , pp 10-11.
 239

f o r the whole community, today has no r e a l value i n people's

eyes. T h i s i s because the system which I s l a m f o l l o w s today

i s wrong and harmful, as i t has "been mixed w i t h erroneous

and u n s c i e n t i f i c i d e a s ; according to K a s r a v i , i t i s c o n t r a r y
1
to God's w i l l .

K a s r a v i d i s c u s s e s Shi*ism i n a hook Be-khwanand va d a v a r i

konand ("Read and j u d g e " ) , p u b l i s h e d i n Tehran i n 1323/19UU-

For "Shi*ism" he u s e s a term of h i s own i n v e n t i o n S h i ' e h g a r i .

which sounds somewhat contemptuous and may perhaps be

t r a n s l a t e d T h e Shi'ism business".
p
K a s r a v i begins w i t h a h i s t o r i c a l s k e t c h . S h i * i s m arose

i n the Omayyad p e r i o d , a f t e r the death o f 'Osman when Mo*avieh

fought the Emam * A l i and wickedly ustctped h i s p l a c e , and then

made the c a l i p h a t e h e r e d i t a r y i n h i s own f a m i l y . Some of the

Moslems disapproved of the Omayyad regime, and two groups

worked to overthrow i t ; to an end; they supported the 'Abbasids

and the *Alavids, descendants of *Abbas and * A l i r e s p e c t i v e l y .

The 'Abbasids were s u c c e s s f u l . During t h i s s t r u g g l e the

*Alavid8 were known a s the S h i * e h . i . e . f o l l o w i n g , of * A l i .

The S h i * i t e movement was a t f i r s t j u s t a p o l i t i c a l campaign,

hut l a t e r became more complex. A group of S h i ' i t e s who

d i s l i k e d the memory of *Omar and 'Osman began to say t h a t 'Ali

1. Par Payramun-e Eslam. p. 37.
2. Be-khwanand va d a v a r i konand, p. 1.
 2k0

should have "been chosen a s the f i r s t c a l i p h ; K a s r a v i thinks

l
t h a t t h i s was the f i r s t involvement o f the S h i e h i n e r r o r ,
because i n f a c t h i s t o r y shows t h a t * A l i behaved very nobly
towards those two c a l i p h s and d i d not deny t h e i r r i g h t to
rule. Gradually the S h i * i t e s a c q u i r e d a number of wrong
ideas about l i f e and death: e.g. that i f a person d i e s
without r e c o g n i z i n g the Emam * A l i he w i l l die l i k e an i n f i d e l ;
t h a t God c r e a t e d the S h i * i t e s out o f a b e t t e r c l a y and water;
t h a t the meaning of the Qor'an i s known only to S h i * i t e s ;
t h a t a l l people w i l l go to h e l l except S h i ' i t e s and t h a t
p a r a d i s e i s f o r S h i ' i t e s alone. Having adopted such b e l i e f s ,
they completely separated t h e i r community from the r e s t of the
Moslems.
K a s r a v i goes ton to say t h a t another s t o r y which the
* 2
S h i * i t e s t o l d was about the eleventh Emam, Hasan o l - ' A s k a r i .

T h i s Emam had not begotten any c h i l d r e n , but when he d i e d the

S h i * i t e s s a i d t h a t he had l e f t a f i v e - y e a r o l d son who was

hidden i n a c e l l a r and was c a l l e d the Mahdi. I n the f u t u r e the

Mahdi would emerge and l e a d the people to the b e t t e r l i f e . The

French o r i e n t a l i s t Darmesteter has made a study o f the Mahdi

idea among Jews and Moslems. T h i s idea was f i r s t thought of

by the Jews, when they had l o s t t h e i r l a n d and freedom, and

1. Par Payramun-e Eslam. p. 2.

2. Be-khwanand v a d a v a r i konand. p. 7.
 22+1

were f o r c e d t o obey the A s s y r i a n s and Chaldaeans ( i . e .

Babylonians). One of t h e i r prophets then announced t h a t

i n the f u t u r e a Messiah would appear and save t h e Jews,

who would r e g a i n t h e i r freedom.

K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t the two main f a c t o r s i n the progress

of Shi'ism were the noble p e r s o n a l i t y o f * A l i , and the t r a g i c

adventure o f K a r b a l a , which was a l s o important from the

1
p o l i t i c a l p o i n t of v i e w . S h r i n e s were b u i l t over 'Ali's

afid the other Emams' tombs, and people began worshiping a t

them.

The next p o i n t which a r i s e s i s how Shi*ism grew i n I r a n .

p
Kasravi's explanation i s as follows. When the Arabs
conquered I r a n , the I r a n i a n s f e l t great enmity towards them.
Descendants of ' A l i , being opposed to the Omayyads, came to
I r a n and s e t t l e d i n G i l a n and Mazandaran. Many I r a n i a n s
supported them and r e s p e c t e d t h e i r r i g h t s . The Buyid dynasty
(322/930 - 2+k7/l055) extended t h e i r sovereignty from Daylam
i n northern I r a n to Baghdad and supported Shi*ism; they made
a great deal o f propaganda f o r i t . Under the S a l j u q i d
dynasty ( 5 t h / l l t h - l l t h / l 2 t h c e n t u r i e s ) , Shi*ism made v e r y
l i t t l e progress, because these r u l e r s were S o n n i t e s ; and under
the Mongols, who were not a t t a c h e d to any d e f i n i t e r e l i g i o n ,
1. Be-khwSnand va d a v a r i konand. p. 13.
2. Ibid., p. 12+.
 2k2

i t s advance remained slow. Only when Shah E s m a ' i l S a f a v i

rose to power and e s t a b l i s h e d Shi'ism as the offical
r e l i g i o n d i d t h i s form of I s l a m take root among the I r a n i a n
people (907/1501-1135/1722). L a t e r Nader Shah t r i e d hard
to r e c o n c i l e the Sunnites and S h i ' i t e s ; hut s i n c e h i s
murder i n 1160/17U7» Shi'ism has kept i t s p o s i t i o n i n I r a n
till today.

Shi'ism o f f e r s a v a s t f i e l d f o r study. Kasravi sees

t h a t , i f he i s to speak t r u e l y , he must s t a t e t h a t the

1
d e f e c t s of t h i s branch of I s l a m are numerous. The basic

p r i n c i p l e of Shi'ism i s t h a t the c a l i p h should be chosen by

God. I n the Qor'an however, no such commandment can be found.

I f we accept t h a t the c a l i p h i s to be chosen by God, then the

s e l e c t e d person should introduce h i m s e l f to the people,

d e c l a r e h i s proofs, and u l t i m a t e l y guide the I s l a m i c nations

and save them from t h e i r enemies; he should not hide h i m s e l f .
Such an i d e a , K a s r a v i t h i n k s , i s contrary to r e a s o n and a l s o
d i s r e s p e c t f u l to God. The S h i ' i t e s often name the Emams on
the same page as the Prophet, and sometimes even r e s p e c t them
more than the Prophet, because they think t h a t the Emams are
capable of anything and everything. For K a s r a v i , the shrines
2
of the Emams are symbols of i d o l a t r y . He disapproves no l e e s
1. Be-khwanad va d a v a r i konand, p. 18.
2. Xb_M, p. 30.
;
 21+3

s t r o n g l y of the S h i ' i t e p r a c t i c e of mourning and c r y i n g about

the tragedy of K a r b a l a .

As f o r the i d e a s of the S h i ' i t e s about the a f t e r - l i f e ,

1
K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t these a r e v e r y c h i l d i s h . They b e l i e v e
t h a t the Emams w i l l be f o r g i v e n f o r whatever s i n they commit
i n t h i s world, and t h a t such s i n s w i l l be l a i d upon the
Sonnites. Contempt f o r the Prophet Mohammad's companions i s .
another o b j e c t i o n a b l e f e a t u r e o f Sh'ism. Shah E s m a ' i l , who
was f u l l o f h a t r e d f o r the Sonnites, t r i e d hard to i n c r e a s e
t h i s sort of anti-Sunnite prejudice. Kasravi p a r t i c u l a r l y
disapproves of the S h i ' i t e p r a c t i c e of t a q i y e h (keeping their
r e l i g i o n hidden). I t shows d i s r e s p e c t f o r the Qor'an, which
was sent f o r the people t o read and f o l l o w openly. The
S h i ' i t e s , however, b e l i e v e t h a t i t s meaning i s known only by
the Eraams. They even changed the meaning o f some v e r s e s of
the Qor'an which do not agree w i t h t h e i r i d e a s .
R e v e r t i n g t o the S h i ' i t e doctrine of the hidden Emam,
K a s r a v i asks how i t can be p o s s i b l e that an Emam should be a
c h i l d and should be i n v i s i b l e . ^ An Emam i s a person who
appears amongst the people. Furthermore, how can a human
being l i v e f o r a thousand y e a r s ? God does not keep a person
a l i v e so long and does not need such a person to change the
1. Be-khwanaifl va daVari konand. p. 3k.
2. Ibid., p. 1+5.
3. I b i d . p. 50.
/
 2kk

world. The "belief i n the Mahdi i s j u s t a figment o f the

imagination. With i t have been mixed some s i l l y stories.
I t i s s a i d t h a t before the Mahdi emerges the sun w i l l rise
from the west, t h a t a s soon a s he s t a r t s h i s c a r e e r he w i l l
be k i l l e d by a bearded woman, and t h a t a f t e r h i s death a l l
the Emams w i l l become a l i v e . T h i s b e l i e f i n the Mahdi has
1
caused much confusion and t r o u b l e . Babism, K a s r a v i says,
arose when a man from S h i r a z presented h i m s e l f a s the Mahdi;
h i s f o l l o w e r s are s t i l l numerous today.

K a s r a v i concludes the book by saying t h a t t h e S h i ' i t e s

always use God and h i s commandments a s a t o o l i n t h e i r own
2
hands. The Qor'an and Shi'ism are two d i f f e r e n t things,
indeed they are i r r e c o n c i l a b l e . F o r example the Qor'An says
a

( V e r i l y I anuhuman being l i k e you), whereas the S h i ' i t e s

b e l i e v e that the Prophets and Emams have been c r e a t e d out o f
a b e t t e r c l a y and water. They i n t e r p r e t i n accordance w i t h

t h e i r own b e l i e f s e.g. they say

( V e r i l y God has c r e a t e d us from the h i g h e s t heaven}^" The

Qor'an says t h a t there i s no t h i r d person or intermediary

between God and man, whereas the S h i ' i t e s b e l i e v e i n mediation.

1. Be-khwanand va davari konand. p. 52.

2. Ibid., p. U9.
3. Sureh v e r s e 6.
2+. Be-khwanand v a d a v a r i konand. p. 5.
5. I b i d . , p. 10.
 2L5

Drinking alchohol i s s t r i c t l y forbidden by the Qor'an,

whereas today, so K a s r a v i says, S h i ' i t e s drink a l c h o h o l i c
drinks i n s t e a d of water. Fighting against i n f i d e l i t y i s
an e s s e n t i a l p r i n c i p l e of I s l a m , but the S h i ' i t e s have
forgotten i t . The Prophet who made I s l a m known to the
world never pretended t h a t he was able to do miraculous
works; the Qor'an says

(or i s i t not s u f f i c i e n t t h a t we have sent down t h e book

1
to y o u ? ) The S h i ' i t e s on the other hand, b e l i e v e t h a t
miracle-doing i s one of the s i g n s of prophethood.
I n a book Payam man be-Sharq ("My message to the E a s t " ) ,

K a s r a v i emphasizes h i s hope t h a t I s l a m w i l l be reformed, not

superseded. He f i r s t remarks t h a t t h e progress of s c i e n c e i n
3
Europe has obsessed the E a s t e r n peoples. When they r e a l i z e d
t h a t the s u p e r s i t i t i o u s ideas which have been mixed w i t h t h e i r
r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s a r e a b s o l u t e l y i n c o n s i s t e n t with science,
they began to n e g l e c t t h e i r r e l i g i o n , and many even became
atheists. The East, however, i s the home of b e l i e f i n God.
C h r i s t i a n i t y and Judaism a r e a l s o o r i e n t a l r e l i g i o n s , and
t h e i r b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s a r e s i m i l a r to those of I s l a m . A l l
1. Sureh 51 a l Ankabut,, v e r s e 29.
2. K a s r a v i , Payman-e man be-Sharq. Tehran, 13I4I4/1965.
3. I M i k PP i+2-1+5.
 2k6

t h e s e r e l i g i o n s seek t o promote t h e happiness o f human

"beings and t o save them f r o m i d o l a t r y . I s l a m i s t h e most
p e r f e c t o f t h e s e r e l i g i o n s , and n o t h i n g new can "be added t o i t .

K a s r a v i t h e n says t h a t h i s c r i t i c s who imagined t h a t

he was opposing I s l a m and t h a t he wished t o i n t r o d u c e a new
r e l i g i o n were m i s t a k e n . He knew t h e language o f t h e Qor'an
and aimed t o show i t s r e a l meaning t o t h e p e o p l e . Islam i s
an e v e r l a s t i n g r e l i g i o n . A l l i t s commands a r e s i m p l e and
intelligible. I t would be absurd t o d i s a g r e e w i t h I s l a m and
t o f o u n d a n o t h e r r e l i g i o n . What i s needed i s a p r o p e r
understanding o f Islam.

Today t h e w o r l d i s confused, and t h e p e o p l e , especially

i n t h e East, are perplexed. They s h o u l d cure t h i s p e r p l e x i t y
by p r a c t i s i n g I s l a m . The E a s t e r n p e o p l e s ought t o keep t h e i r
own t r a d i t i o n s and customs; t h e r e i s no need t o i m i t a t e
European ways o f l i v i n g . I f t h e Europeans a r e advanced i n
t h e s c i e n c e s , t h a t does n o t n e c e s s a r i l y mean t h a t t h e y a r e
a l s o advanced i n h u m a n i t y . The w o r l d ' s i l l s cannot be c u r e d
by i n d u s t r y and s c i e n c e a l o n e . K a s r a v i t h e n suggests five
g u i d i n g r u l e s f o r t h e Eastern peoples:

1. They s h o u l d conduct t h e i r a f f a i r s i n accordance w i t h

theii? r e l i g i o n .

_Y
1. K a s r a v i , Payman-e man be-Sharq, Tehran 13W+/1965, pp ^0-1+8.
 2^7

2. They should r e a l i z e t h a t European laws a r e only good

for European s o c i e t i e s , and t h a t European c a p a b i l i t y i n
machine -"building does not imply European e x c e l l e n c e i n
legislation.

3. They should r e a l i z e t h a t the foundation of l i f e i s

religion.
k. They should change the language of t h e i r newspapers, which
today a r e mostly c r i t i c a l of the E a s t e r n way of l i v i n g .

5. They should stop the spread among them o f "Europeanism" and

harmful European p h i l o s o p h i c a l ideas.
I n a number of a r t i c l e s which have "been c o l l e c t e d i n a
*- 2
pamphlet D i n va Danesh ("Religion and S c i e n c e " ) Kasravi
contrasts r e l i g i o n with science. He t h i n k s t h a t they a r e two
d i f f e r e n t s u b j e c t s , which do not c o n f l i c t w i t h each othery*

indeed they go hand i n hand. Man's l i f e has progressed from

ignorance to knowledge, from i n c a p a b i l i t y to c a p a b i l i t y .

K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t t h i s progress has been the r e s u l t of both
r e l i g i o n and s c i e n c e , and has depended on co-operation between
the two. There i s no reason why r e l i g i o n and s c i e n c e should

be h o s t i l e towards each other. Co-operation i s the essence of

l i f e , and t h a t i s what r e l i g i o n t r i e s to b r i n g about. Science

alone i s not enough. R e l i g i o n and s c i e n c e should approach

our problems s i d e by s i d e .

1. K a s r a v i , Din va Danesh. Tehran 1339/1960.

 2hQ

1
K a s r a v i ' s book Baha* i g a r i i s important because i t i s a
s c h o l a r l y h i s t o r i c a l study o f the development o f the Baha'i
s e c t , and ( a s f a r a s we know) the only study of t h i s k i n d
w r i t t e n and p u b l i s h e d in Iran. While c r i t i c i z i n g Baha'ism
s e v e r e l y , K a s r a v i t r i e s to be o b j e c t i v e .

K a s r a v i obtained a great p a r t of h i s information from a

book Mahdi w r i t t e n o r i g i n a l l y i n French by Darmesteter and
t r a n s l a t e d i n t o P e r s i a n by Mohsen Jahansuz. The idea of the
Mahdl ( f u t u r e d e l i v e r e r ) arose among the homeless Jews and
f i r s t came t o the Moslems from the I r a n i a n s among whom i t
2
had spread f o r v a r i o u s reasons. A t f i r s t i t was a simple
b e l i e f , b u t l a t e r i t became complicated. The S h i ' i t e s
b e l i e v e d s t r o n g l y t h a t there must be an Emam ol-Zaman (Emam
of the Age), and formed the notion t h a t the t w e l f t h Emam i s
l i v i n g i n concealment and w i l l re-emerge a s the Mahdi. Katfim
Khan Zand, who r u l e d I r a n from 116^/1750 t o 1193/1779» s t r u c k
c o i n s i n honour o f the Mahdi with the f o l l o w i n g v e r s e on them:

("The sun and moon have become gold and s i l v e r on e a r t h , a s

c o i n s of the r i g h t f u l Emam, the Lord o f the Age").

1. K a s r a v i , B a h a * i g a r i . Tbhran 1321/19U2.
2. Mr. P e t e r Avery i n h i s book Modern Iran.Iiondon 1965, pp 5L4.—55.
quotes K a s r a v i ' s a n a l y s i s of the spread o f the Mahdi idea
in Iran.
3. B a h a ' i g a r i . p. 12.
 249

Before the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l movement, K a s r a v i says,"*"

I r a n i a n s were expecting the mergence of t'he T w e l f t h Emam a t
any time; and even w h i l e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n was i n
progress, the p u b l i c a t i o n o f a "booklet c a l l e d S i a s a t
ol-Hose.vni.yeh a t MasMaad and T a b r i z l e d t o the formation o f
groups of "Expecters" ( E n t e z a r i y u n ) a t v a r i o u s p l a c e s .

K a s r a v i then p o i n t s out that the Bah'ais arose from

among the B a n i s , t h a t the B a b i s began a s a branch o f the
2
Shaykhis, and t h a t the Shaykhis were a p a r t o f the Shi'eh:
The Shaykhi b e l i e f s , according t o K a s r a v i , a r e a combination
of some i d e a s from Greek philosophy w i t h S h i ' i t e i d e a s .
K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t Ahmad A h s a ' i ( d . 121+3/1827), the founder
of the Shaykhi s e c t , probably obtained h i s i d e a s about the
Mahdi from a book c a l l e d Kalam ol-Mahdl by Sayyed Mohammad
f
Mosha sha'i^ L a t e r the Shaykhi s e c t s p l i t i n t o two groups.
Sayyed Mohammad ' A l i (the Bab) from S h i r a z , who claimed to
be the Na'eb (Agent) o f the Emam, founded the Babi s e c t .
I n 1263/1847 H a j j i Mirza A g b i s i , the C h i e f M i n i s t e r o f
Mohammad Shah, arranged a meeting which i s h i s t o r i c a l l y
important. The great mollas of T a b r i z were i n v i t e d to
question Sayyed Mohammad ' A l i Bab. Contemporary h i s t o r i c a l
books, such a s Nasekh o l - T a v a r i k h by Mohammad Taqi Sepehr
Lesan ol-Molk, and Qesas ol-'Olama by Mirza Mohammad
1. B a h a ' i g a r i . p. 12.
2. I b i d . , p. 7. ,
3. Ibid., p. 8. Concerning the Mosha'sha'is3n Khuzestan, see p . 4 l
above.
 250

Tonokabuni, shows t h a t the Bah f a i l e d i n t h i s d i s c u s s i o n .

When Naser o l - D i n Shah succeeded Mohammad Shah i n 1264/I8I4.8,
c o n f l i c t s between Moslems and f o l l o w e r s o f the Bab caused a
l o t of bloodshed. The Shah c o n s u l t e d h i s c h i e f M i n i s t e r
Amir K a b i r , and they decided to l i q u i d a t e the Bab. After
the Bab's death i n 1257/1860, Mirza Yahya N u r i , known among
the Babis as Sobh-e A z a l , took h i s p l a c e . The book o f the
Bayan ("Explanation"), which c o n t a i n s the r u l e s o f the Babi
s e c t , was w r i t t e n by Sayyed Mohammad ' A l i Bab during h i s
imprisonment. K a s r a v i d e s c r i b e s i t a s f u l l o f e r r o r s and
says t h a t the Baha'is afterwards t r i e d to supress it."*" I n
t h i s book the Bab speaks about man yozhero-ho'llah ("him who
God w i l l make m a n i f e s t " ) . L a t e r Mirza Yahya A z a l ' s brother
Baha'ollah announced h i m s e l f to be "he whom God w i l l make
manifest", and u l t i m a t e l y , K a s r a v i s a y s , claimed t h a t he was
God. Bahaollah t r i e d to i m i t a t e the Qor'an i n a book c a l l e d
al-Ketab ol-Aqdas. which he wrote when he was l i v i n g i n
e x i l e a t 'Akka i n P a l e s t i n e . A f t e r Baha'ollah's death i n
(1310/1892), h i s son 'Abd_pl-Baha, and a f t e r him h i s grandson
Showqd . E f f e n d i , accepted the l e a d e r s h i p of the Baha'is.

A f t e r t h i s h i s t o r i c a l o u t l i n e , K a s r a v i p o i n t s out the
d e f i c i e n c i e s of the Baha'i s e c t a s he sees them. He t h i n k s
1. B a h a i g a r i . p. U2.
2. Ibfld.. p. 51.
 251

t h a t i t s d o c t r i n e s are "based on imaginary i a d e a s and

hallucinations. A b e n e f i c i a l r e l i g i o n ought to combat

i l l u s i o n s and t r y to e l i m i n a t e them; but Baha'ism appeared

i n an age when I r a n was s u f f e r i n g from mental confusion and

disunity. People belonged to d i f f e r e n t s e c t s such a s the

S u f i s , Shaykhis, S h i ' i t e s , e t c . Baha'ism not only d i d not

temove t h i s contusion i n I r a n , but a c t u a l l y i n c r e a s e d i t .
1
According to K a s r a v i Baha ( i . e . Baha'ollah) d i d not r e a l i z e
t h a t the Holy Prophet Mohammad was s e l e c t e d by God, and t h a t
an ordinary person producing a book or two cannot take the
Prophet's p l a c e . Nevertheless the Baha'is t h i n k t h a t a l l
the u n i v e r s e w i l l one day b e l i e v e i n t h i s f a n t a s t i c r e l i g i o n .
The most r e p u l s i v e aspect of Baha'ism,so K a s r a v i s a y s , i s
t h a t Baha c a l l e d h i m s e l f God. He t h i n k s t h a t Baha d i s r e g a r d e d
the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e , and t h a t , a l l he d i d was to i m i t a t e

other people's work. K a s r a v i i s not s u r p r i s e d a t t h i s , because

Shi'ism was tending towards such a r e s u l t , having a l r e a d y
2
been permeated w i t h so many wrong i d e a s . K a s r a v i c a l l s the
Bab and Baha great l i a r s . ^ Why should they both have thought,
he a s k s , t h a t a prophet must speak and introduce h i s r e l i g i o n
i n Arabic? I n any case n e i t h e r of them knew the A r a b i c
language p r o p e r l y , and t h e i r books i n i t are f u l l of grammat-
ical mistakes.
1. B a h a ' i g a r i . p. 55.
2. Ibid., p. 63.
3. I b i d . p. 69.
 252

Showqi E f f e n d i i n h i s hooks orders every Baha'i to go

i n t o the v i l l a g e s and c i t i e s i n order to spread the Baha'i
sect. K a s r a v i acknowledges t h a t the s e c t has progressed i n
I r a n , and t h i n k s t h a t t h i s i s due to the former weakness of
1
the I r a n i a n government. During the r e i g n of Path 'AliShah
(1211/1796 - 1250/1831+), I r a n had to f a c e the R u s s i a n s and
l o s t seventeen c i t i e s i n the north. L a t e r Mohammad Shah
(1250/183U - 1269/18U8) and Naser o l - D i n Shah (126L/18L8 -
131U/1896) had to f i g h t with B r i t i s h s o l d i e r s a t Harat
and i n the South. The c e n t r a l government l o s t i t s a u t h o r i t y
i n the p r o v i n c e s , and people were desperate. Consequently
when the Bah began to i n v i t e them to h i s new r e l i g i o n , they
had l i t t l e or no s t r e n g t h to r e s i s t . Although R u s s i a or

B r i t a i n i s sometimes blamed f o r the c r e a t i o n of the Baha'i

2
s e c t , K a s r a v i t h i n k s that t h i s cannot be t r u e . The background
of the s e c t shows t h a t i t i s a d i r e c t product of Shi'ism.
Admittedly the R u s s i a n s l a t e r supported the Baha'i l e a d e r s ,
while the B r i t i s h helped the Babi l e a d e r Mirza Yahya A z a l
who had separated from the Baha'is and of course they d i d
t h i s s o l e l y because they hoped thereby to keep I r a n under t h e i r
c o n t r o l ; but i n i t s o r i g i n the s e c t was S h i ' i t e and I r a n i a n .
At the end of t h i s book, K a s r a v i says t h a t he f e e l s no
s p e c i a l h o s t i l i t y towards the B a h a ' i s . ^
1. B a h a ' i g a r i . p. 71.
2. Ibid., pp 89-90.
3. I b i d . , pp 92-93.
 253

1
I n a pamphlet Qoft va Shanid (Dialogue); Kasravi

r e i t e r a t e s h i s views about the harm done to I s l a m by the

i n f i l t r a t i o n of extraneous i d e a s s i n c e the 3rd/9th century;
about the i n f l u e n c e of wrong r e l i g i o u s n o t i o n s , which he
sees as the cause of E a s t e r n and p a r t i c u l a r l y I r a n i a n
2
backwardness; and about the need f o r u n i t y of thought and
b e l i e f , without which a n a t i o n cannot be happy and strong.
Besides a d d r e s s i n g h i s I r a n i a n readers on these themes,
which so deeply i n t e r e s t e d him, K a s r a v i i n 1321/191+2, when
the second world war was a t i t s height, wrote a b o o k l e t ,
which was t r a n s l a t e d i n t o E n g l i s h , c a l l e d "A Message to
European and American S c i e n t i s t s . " ^ I n i t he speaks of the
danger t h a t s c i e n c e may become an instrument of human misery
and d e s t r u c t i o n , and urges the s c i e n t i s t s to t u r n to r e l i g i o n .
S c i e n c e , he s a y s has no knowledge whatever of such t h i n g s as
heaven and a n g e l s . I t regards the world as "an automatic
i n s t a l l a t i o n with e v e r y t h i n g contained and combined in it".
The disagreement between r e l i g i o n arid s c i e n c e had ended i n
the defeat of r e l i g i o n . Everywhere mollas, r a b b i s and p r i e s t s
have t r i e d to block science, but without s u c c e s s . Large numbers
of people have abandoned r e l i g i o n , and i n consequence every
i n d i v i d u a l looks f o r h i s own p l e a s u r e . Science has reduced
1. K a s r a v i , Qoft va Shanid. Tehran 1322/19U3.
2. Qoft va Shanid, p. 6.
3. K a s r a v i , A message to European and American S c i e n t i s t s ,
r e p r i n t e d by the Azadegan, Tanran JL34*/19°3.
 25k

the q u a l i t y of sympathy and h e l p f u l n e s s to weaker people.

1
K a s r a v i then says to the s c i e n t i s t s : "You have achieved
the i n v e n t i o n o f new equipment such a s r a i l w a y s , telegraphs,
telephones, automobiles, c o n s t r u c t i o n machines, e t c . , hut
they have i n c r e a s e d man's t r o u b l e , because these wonderful
new machines are used i n the course of f i g h t i n g and f o r the
purpose of i n t e n s i f y i n g i t . " Science has changed people's
l i v e s , but they a r e not b e t t e r o f f than before, i n spite of
so many schools, c o l l e g e s , books, and l e a r n e d men. I n the
p a s t Prophets arose, and taught human beings how to l i v e i n
a co-operative manner and introduced r u l e s f o r a b e t t e r
existence. Consequently the wandering t r i b e s developed i n t o
a c i v i l i z e d community. People a r e always making progress,
by two methods:

1. by making t o o l s and g e t t i n g to know t h e f o r c e s of nature,

which i s the way of s c i e n c e .
2. by g e t t i n g to know the true meaning of l i f e and the world,
which i s the way of r e l i g i o n .
I n a d d i t i o n to s c i e n t i s t s , we need i n t h i s world godly
men to inform i t s people of the s e c r e t of l i f e and the way
to t r a n q u i l l i t y and happiness. Some people say t h a t s c i e n c e
has destroyed God; but K a s r a v i says t h a t the r e a l God i s known

1. A message to European and American S c i e n t i s t s , p. 8.

 255

1
to us through s c i e n c e . The human being i s God's chosen

creature. God has c r e a t e d the world f o r the human being,

and has endowed him w i t h a mechanism c a l l e d "spirit".
K a s r a v i then d i s c u s s e s the tendency of s c i e n c e and i n d u s t r i a l -
2
i z a t i o n to produce war and s o c i a l d i s t r e s s . He appeals to
the European and American s c i e n t i s t s to r e a l i z e t h a t war
should be fought a g a i n s t e v i l , not between human beings.
He a l s o appeals to them to teach the E a s t e r n peoples u s e f u l
knowledge, not to send them new e d i t i o n s o f harmful books
such a s Khayyam's q u a t r a i n s and 'Attar's "Biographies of the
Saints". F i n a l l y he a s k s them to see i n t h e i r d i s c o v e r y of
the laws of nature evidence of the higher law of God.

SECTION I I
K a s r a v i ' s own r e l i g i o u s beliefs.
K a s r a v i i n h i s important books A y i n ("The Model"),
Var.lavand Bonvad ("Basic H o l i n e s s " ) , ^ and Rah-e R a s t e g a r i
4
("The Path to Salvation"),* " has s e t f o r t h h i s own r e l i g i o u s
b e l i e f s , which he c a l l e d P a k d i n i ("Pure F a i t h " ) . As
mentioned above we u n f o r t u n a t e l y c o u l d not obtain a copy of
Ayin. K a s r a v i i n the other two books summarizes h i s b e l i e f s

1. A message to European and American S c i e n t i s t s , pp 2U-25.

2. Ibid., p. 28. " '
3. K a s r a v i , Var.lavand Bonyad Tehran 1322/1943.
y

2+. K a s r a v i , P a r Rah-e R a s t e g a r i . Tehran 132i+/19k5.

 256

as f o l l o w s : r e l i g i o n shows the road to happiness, and c o n s i s t s

of knowledge of the r e a l i t y of l i f e and conduct according to
reason. I n the f o l l o w i n g paragraphs we o u t l i n e K a s r a v i ' s
main t e a c h i n g s on the b a s i s of what he has w r i t t e n i n these
two books and elsewhere.

God and c r e a t i o n

The world i s an organism and i t s c r e a t i o n has not been

purposeless. The system which we f i n d i n the world i s the
b e s t proof t h a t t h i s organism has been c r e a t e d by a c r e a t o r .
When we see how the world goes on according to r u l e s which
do not change, common sense t e l l s us of the e x i s t e n c e of one
almighty and a l l - p o w e r f u l God.

As f o r the s t a r t of c r e a t i o n , K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t t h i s i s
1
not w i t h i n the range of the human i n t e l l e c t . I n t h i s world
we a r e not capable of knowing e v e r y t h i n g . Man has been
t r y i n g to l e a r n about God s i n c e the stone age, and earlier
people used to worship a p i e c e of stone or wood and b e l i e v e t h a t
i t was s u p e r i o r to them; they even s a c r i f i c e d t h e i r innocent
c h i l d r e n f o r the sake of these wooden or stone gods. Greek
p h i l o s o p h e r s proved God's e x i s t e n c e by l i n k i n g cause and
e f f e c t ; they s a i d t h a t God i s the cause of c r e a t i o n . Some
s a i d t h a t cause and e f f e c t a r e i n s e p a r a b l e , l i k e f i r e which i s

1. Varjavand Bonyad, p. 9.
 257

the cause of smoke. K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t the Greek philosophers

i n t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n s concerning God and the world spoke about
1
s u b j e c t s which are beyond human power to know. Their
arguments never l e d to any conclusion and only caused perplex-
1
i t y i n people's minds. He regards mysticism as a product
of Greek philosophy. The mystic philosopher P l o t i n u s taught
the p a n t h e i s t i c doctrine that we a r e a l l from God and will
e v e n t u a l l y r e t u r n to God. When t h i s philosophy came to the
E a s t , K a s r a v i says, every i n d i v i d u a l who adopted i t thought
t h a t he himself was God.

Spirit
K a s r a v i i s convinced t h a t man i s the highest of a l l
c r e a t u r e s and t h a t Darwin was wrong i n t h i n k i n g t h a t man is
merely a decendant of monkeys.^ Even i f we accept Darwin's
theory from the b i o l o g i c a l viewpoint, we must admit that the
human being possesses something superior to the r e s t of the
creatures. Man does not c o n s i s t of f l e s h and blood alone;
i n a d d i t i o n to h i s p h y s i c a l strength, he has the power of
thought. Materialism c l a i m s t h a t the source of human a c t i o n
i s i n d i v i d u a l s e l f i s h n e s s ; but we cannot p o s s i b l y accept this
view. Although we come acuoss the man who k i l l s h i s brother
to get h i s wealth, we a l s o come a c r o s s the man who on a c o l d

1. K a s r a v i , NiK o Bad ( e d i t e d by the Azadegan p a r t y ) , Tehran

1326/1947 P. 18.
2. K a s r a v i , S u f i g a r i . Tehran 1322/19U3, p. 8.
3. Var.lavand Bonvad. pp 21-24.
 258

wintery night gives h i s coat to a beggar. When a sheep i s

being slaughtered, the other sheep watch i t without showing

any emotion; but men cannot remain i n d i f f e r e n t when t h e i r
k i n d are s u f f e r i n g or being t o r t u r e d . Man must, t h e r e f o r e ,
b e s i d e s h i s s e l f i s h q u a l i t i e s , have some t h i n g e l s e . This,
according to K a s r a v i , i s what we c a l l s o u l , or spirit.
Man's s o u l i s the cause of h i s s u p e r i o r i t y over other c r e a t u r e s .
M a t e r i a l i s t s , who ignore the e x i s t e n c e of the s o u l , deny t h a t
man i s capable of b e t t e r i n g h i s nature. K a s r a v i , however,

t h i n k s t h a t i n the human s o u l both good and bad q u a l i t i e s

e x i s t , and t h a t every human being can develop the good

2
q u a l i t i e s and overcome the bad ones. He b e l i e v e s t h a t when
man d i e s h i s soul continues to l i v e . L i f e i s not j u s t i n
t h i s world; there i s another l i f e , beyond t h i s one, which i s
more v a l u a b l e . Man i n h i s p h y s i c a l q u a l i t y i s not f r e e ; but
h i s soul i s free. The nature of the soul cannot be known;
but i t has the power of reason and thinking.
The other world.
The d i s t i n c t i o n between s o u l and body shows that there
are two k i n d s of world, the e a r t h l y world and the spiritual
world. Man's happiness i n the other, depends on h i s behaviour
i n t h i s world. There i s a connection between these two worlds.
1. K a s r a v i , Par Payramun-e Ravan (About the S o u l ) , Tehran
1325/19M>.
2. Par Payramun-e Ravan. p. 31.
 259

Reason
Some groups of r e l i g i o u s people, e s p e c i a l l y m y s t i c s ,

hold t h a t we cannot know God through reason, and have

therefore shown h o s t i l i t y to reason. K a s r a v i asks the
1
mystics, i f man cannot know God "by h i s mental power, what
other means of knowing God can he r e l y on i n i t s p l a c e ? What
f
other means i s more trustworthy than the human mind? Kasravi s
view i s j u s t the opposite of the mystic view. He holds t h a t
2
man should r e l y on h i s mind and take i t as h i s guide. There
are two ways of human progress. One i s through s c i e n c e and the
other i s through man's s p i r i t u a l power. K a s r a v i t h i n k s that
these two ways are separate "but p a r a l l e l . ^
R e l i g i o n and Science
The r a p i d progress of s c i e n c e , and new conceptions of
nature's o r i g i n and powers, have weakened the foundations of
many r e l i g i o n s which are "based on s u p e r s t i t i o n . A great
disagreement between s c i e n c e and r e l i g i o n has a r i s e n . When
people l e a r n t about the d i s c o v e r i e s made by s c i e n c e , they
began to n e g l e c t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s . K a s r a v i i s sure t h a t
4
there i s no c o n t r a d i c t i o n between s c i e n c e and r e a l religion.* "
The only ideas which c o n t r a d i c t r e a l r e l i g i o n a r e confused
p h i l o s o p h i c a l and m y s t i c a l ideas.
1. Var.lavand Bonyad. p. UO.
2. K a s r a v i , Par Payramun-e Kherad, Tehran 132k/l9k5, P. 16.
3. Var.lavand Bonyad, pp 66-69.
k. K a s r a v i , Din va Danesh ( c o l l e c t e d a r t i c l e s from Payinan and
Parcham) Tehran 1319/19U1. r e p r i n t e d 1339/1960, p. 6.
 260

Infidelity
Today, according to K a s r a v i , the m a j o r i t y of people have
got the notion t h a t they no longer need r e l i g i o n . He i s
1
convinced t h a t they a r e m i s t a k e n . R e l i g i o n , he b e l i e v e s ,
shows the main road to happiness. I t i s "the language of
nature;" A l l r e a l i t y can be understood through r e l i g i o n .
R e l i g i o n i s f o r humanity, not humanity f o r religion,Human
beings need r e l i g i o n , and r e l i g i o n can never be e l i m i n a t e d
from human l i f e .

Life
K a s r a v i b e l i e v e s t h a t God's main i n t e n t i o n i n c r e a t i n g

man was to l e t him l i v e i n t h i s world so t h a t he may arrange

2
his l i f e according to h i s reason. M y s t i c s do not value
t h i s world, and m a t e r i a l i s t s regard t h i s world a s a b a t t l e -
field. E s s e n t i a l l y t h e different r e l i g i o n s teach t h a t man
should make preparations i n t h i s world f o r the a f t e r l i f e .
I n K a s r a v i ' s opinion, a l l o f these ideas have misguided mankind.
Human l i f e i s f u l l o f e f f o r t . K a s r a v i d i v i d e s human e f f o r t
i n t o two categories.^" One i s man's e f f o r t a g a i n s t n a t u r e , the
other i s e f f o r t a g a i n s t h i s own k i n d . The f i r s t , category i s
c r e d i t a b l e , but the second one i s a cause of t r o u b l e . We
ought to r e a l i s e t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l ' s happiness depends on
1. Var.javand Bonyad. pp 78-79.
2. P a r Payramun-e Kherad. pp 30-31.
3. K a s r a v i . Khoda ba mast. Tehran 1321+/191+5* p. H .
!+• Par Payramun-e Ravan. p. 1+2.
 261

the r e s t of the people's happiness. That i s why K a s r a v i

t h i n k s t h a t harmful hooks which propagate s u p e r s t i t i o n s and
1
the imaginary ideas of p h i l o s o p h e r s should be banned.

Pro-phethood

K a s r a v i b e l i e v e s t h a t God chooses a man, and having warned

him about the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e according to the needs of the
2
time, sends him to guide mankind. Prophethood i n i t s e l f i s
a very miraculous t h i n g , which can a l s o be seen as a proof
of God's e x i s t e n c e . A prophet i s an o r d i n a r y man l i k e any
other i n t h i s world, but i s superior to the r e s t of the
people because of h i s unique power and e x t r a o r d i n a r y t a l e n t .
The f o l l o w e r s of the d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o n s agree i n saying t h a t
a prophet i s superior to man but i n f e r i o r to God. They ask him
to perform impossible m i r a c l e s as proof of h i s prophethood.
I n K a s r a v i ' s view, t h i s i s a wrong t h i n g to do. The
f a c t that God s e l e c t s a man and g i v e s him i n s t r u c t i o n s can be
taken as s u f f i c i e n t proof. While God g i v e s prophets power to
guide the people, only God h i m s e l f has the r i g h t to be wor-
shipped. K a s r a v i i n s i s t s that God i s c l o s e enough to h i s
people, and there i s no need f o r any intermediary.^ God's
messengers (prophets) are a l l i n the same high i n t e l l e c t u a l
range, and one i s not p r e f e r a b l e to any other; but Mohammad i s
1. Var .1 avand Bonva d. pp 75~77»
2. I b i d . p.,83.
3. Par Payramun-e Eslam. p. 37.
k. Be-khwanand va d a v a r i konand, p. 30.
 262

the l a s t o f the prophets. According to K a s r a v i , t h e word

"&mam" (imam) means only "guide" and i s a p p l i e d to a

1
person who f o l l o w s i n the path o f a p r o p h e t .
The meaning o f P a k d i n i .

For h i s own r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s , K a s r a v i a s a l r e a d y
mentioned invented the name P a k d i n i ("Pure R e l i g i o n " ) .
An e s s e n t i a l p r i n c i p l e o f P a k d i n i i s t h a t man should face
the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e and t r y t o solve i t s problems, and
should a v o i d t h i n k i n g about u s e l e s s t h i n g s . Of course
P a k d i n i i s concerned with much more than j u s t the r e a l i t i e s

of l i f e . K a s r a v i always h e l d t h a t P a k d i n i i s p a r t o f I s l a m
2
and t h a t i t s foundation i s p u r e l y I s l a m i c . I t d i f f e r s from
wrongly understood and corrupted forms of I s l a m , but not
from the r e a l I s l a m .
Everybody i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the conduct o f h i s l i f e i n
t h i s world; h i s happiness or otherwise depends ori h i s own
initiative. Human beings, however, are c r e a t e d w i t h d i f f e r e n t
p h y s i c a l and mental powers, and l i v e i n d i f f e r e n t environments.
Man's d u t i e s .
Men and women l i v i n g i n a n a t i o n , who have chosen a
l a n d a s t h e i r country, should be l o y a l to t h a t l a n d and t r y
to develop i t i n every .way. The sources o f l i f e , according to
1. Be-khwanand va d a v a r i konand. p. &5.
2. K a s r a v i . . Par pasokh-e bad-khwahan. Tehran, n.d. pp 1+8H$9. y
Kasravi, are land, water, and a i r ; man should value them
and t r y to make use of them. Every individual should take
the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of a job, not merely because he needs t o
earn h i s l i v i n g , but also as a contribution to human progress.
Man must t r y t o eliminate wickedness from h i s society. He
must also t r y to eliminate disease. Every individual should
t r y to l i v e hygienically and look a f t e r h i s health, because
only with a healthy body can a person think correctly.
Religion gives some i n s t r u c t i o n i n t h i s respect and people
should submit t o i t s commands, which enjoin care about
personal cleanliness and s t r i c t abstention from any kind of
alchohol.
2
International Coexistence.
Every nation should be free t o l i v e i t s own l i f e i n i t s
own land. Patriotism means devotion t o one's country, and
does not mean h o s t i l i t y towards other nations, whidh i s very
far from being p a t r i o t i c . Nations can l i v e peacefully
together j u s t as members of a family can. I t i s most
important that representatives of the d i f f e r e n t nations
should meet t o discuss t h e i r mutual a f f a i r s and to work f o r
peaceful relationships amongst a l l nations. The main reason
why man's l i f e today i s not as happy as i t should be, i n
1. Varjavand Bonyad, pp 109-111.
2. Ibid., pp 50-52.
spite of tremendous improvements Drought "by science, i s that
man i s ignoring the importance of international coexistence.
Capital Punishment
Kasravi thinks that punishment of persons who have
committed crimes i s necessary, hut that keeping criminals
i n prison f o r long periods never produces good r e s u l t s .
I n Europe and America prisons are becoming resthouses f o r
2
criminals. Kasravi divides lawbreakers i n t o two groups.
The f i r s t consists of those who commit crime impulsively;
they should d e f i n i t e l y be punished but they can and should
be r e h a b i l i t a t e d . The second group consists of those who
deliberately commit crime out of wickedness and bad
characterj f o r them imprisonment, or a l t e r n a t i v e l y ,
corporal punishment, are necessary. Those whose existence
i s harmful to a society and whose minds cannot be cured
should be punished by death, j u s t as scorpions and dangerous
snakes have to be put to death. Deliberate murder, i n
p a r t i c u l a r , deserves the death penalty.
Land Ownership
Land must be c u l t i v a t e d and u t i l i z e d to supply food f o r
mankind. Ownership of land should belong solely to those
who actually c u l t i v a t e i t .
1. Var.lavand Bonyad. pp 15L-157.
2. Ibid. pp 158-160.
;
 265

Importance of agriculture.
Kasravi regards agriculture as a peculiarly admirable
1
vocation. He feels strongly that there ought not to he any
difference between c i t i e s and v i l l a g e s (whereas i n Iran
farming villages were impoverished and wealth was concentrated
i n the b i g c i t i e s ) . He thinks that we must develop the
v i l l a g e s and even impose l i m i t s on the development of the
big cities. God w i l l appreciate those who make use of the
land and water.
Social and governmental organization.
Every society needs a r u l e r , who should be one of i t s
members, and also a number of elected representatives of the
masses. They should communicate with each other about the
problems of the people's l i f e . God w i l l bless those rulers
who are devoted to t h e i r country and who l o y a l l y and
d u t i f u l l y f u l f i l l t h e i r tasks.
Kasravi lays p a r t i c u l a r stress on the social duties of
2
government. There must be control over prices. There must
also, he says be a l i m i t a t i o n on the number of businessmen..^
The i n d i v i d u a l businessman's capital must not be allowed to
exceed a certain amount. A g r i c u l t u r a l lands must be divided
and d i s t r i b u t e d i n accordance with the needs of the i n d i v i d u a l
1. Kar ya Pisheh ya Pul, p. 32.
2. Var.lavand Bonyad. p. 12+3.
3. Kar va Pisheh va Pul, p. 1+3.
 266

farmers. The use of heavy machinery i n factories i s not

desirable, according to Kasravj^ because few people could
a f f o r d i t and many workers might be put out of work by i t .
The government must appreciate and encourage the e f f o r t s of
physicians, artiats~and cultured men. Culture, Kasravi says,
means f i n d i n g out and teaching facts. Every individual should
receive education between certain ages. Responsibility f o r
the establishment of schools l i e s with the government. A l l
classes should have equality of opportunity t o study. The
government should protect the nation from sickness, and
should assume r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r looking a f t e r invalids and
mentally handicapped people. The government should also
prevent the people from being lazy. When able-b<bdied persons
are i n need, the government should lend them money. Every
society needs an organized j u d i c a l system, with good judges,
prosecutors and police. Obviously a judge must be honest;
but i t i s equally important that before reaching h i s decision,
he should study the case profoundly i n order not t o make a
mistake.
I n his book Ma cheh mi-khvahim fl'What do we want?)^ which
i s a c o l l e c t i o n of a r t i c l e s reprinted from Pa.vman, s i x t h year,
Kasravi begins by saying that his main intention i s t o help
to solve the problems of humanity, and i n p a r t i c u l a r of Eastern

1. Kasravi, Ma cheh mi-khvahim. Tehran 1319/19UO.

 267

societies. I t i s above a l l important that c o n f l i c t among

human "beings should he reduced t o the minimum. Civilization
does not mean a struggle f o r l i f e among people, as some
Europeans have mistakenly thought. The Eastern countries
have suffered f o r more than a thousand years because
European c o l o n i a l i s t countries have behaved aggressively
towards them.
During the l a s t t h i r t e e n centuries, Islam has influenced
the Eastern societies. I n Kasravi's often repeated view,
i t was the spread of Greek philosophy to the East which
ruined the authority and glory of Islam and introduced a
succession of wrong ideas into the Moslem world. He thinks
2
that the most ignominious chapter of Iran's history i s the
period stretching from the Mongol invasions i n the early 7 t h /
13th century u n t i l Shah Esma'il Safavi's reign i n the early
10th/l6th century. The mass of the people then l i v e d i n abject
misery, and because of the wrong (philosphical and Sufi) ideas
which were prevalent, they d i d not r e s i s t t h e i r conquerors
and oppressors.
During the constitutional movement i n the early H;th/20th
eentury, Iranians became f a m i l i a r with European ideas. This
f a m i l i a r i t y was useful from some points of view, and harmful
1. Kasravi, S u f j g a r i . Tehran 1322/19U3* P. 10.
2. Ma cheh mi-khvahinu p. 30.
 268

from others. Kasravi thinks that the Iranians made f i v e

p r i n c i p a l acquisitions from the Europeans, as follows:"''
1. Constitutional government and a change of administration.
2. Modern sciences such as physics and chemistry* etc.
3. Use of modern i n d u s t r i a l machinery.
k. An i n f a t u a t i o n with the deceptive c i v i l i z a t i o n of the
Europeans and a tendency to imitate them i n more or less
a l l points.
5. F a m i l i a r i t y with materialism, the greatest error of which
i s i t s mistaken "belief that human characters are determined
by material forces and cannot be changed f o r the b e t t e r .
Kasravi recognises that the majority of people do not
2
know the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e , and he believes that t h i s ignorance
l i e s at the root of a l l the trouble among the nations. The
people must therefore be helped to get correct knowledge. As
already mentioned, Kasravi frequently censures scholars who
republished books which he regards as harmful, such as Naser-
Khosrow's Va.ih-e Din^ and Ghazzali's Nasihat ol-Moluk.
Kasravi remarks that a great number of highly educated
people i n I r a n today have no r e l i g i o u s f a i t h . He thinks
that t h i s i s because they have been influencedby ideas from
1. Ma cheh mi-khvahim. p. 3k.
2. Kasravi, Khoda ba mast.^Tehran 132k/l925,^p.^16.
3. Edited by Kazemzadeh Iranshajir, B e r l i n yCaviani press),
13U3A.H./I9h3. This i s a Batenite (Esma'ilite) work,
k. Edited by J a l a l ol-Din Homa'i, Tehran,(Majles press),
,1317/1938.
5. Ma cheh mi-khwahim. p. 80.
 269

Europe. Since the 18th century various European thinkers

such as Voltaire have "been t r y i n g t o f i n d solutions t o the
problems of human l i f e , and t h e i r e f f o r t s have been quite
fruitless. They have not been able t o solve the problems of
religion. As a r e s u l t , many people have l o s t interest i n
t h i s v i t a l l y important matter.
1
Kasravi then says, "To me r e l i g i o n simply means a way
of l i f e . Today the European societies, while following a
very progressive material way of l i f e , are nevertheless
unhappy. There i s bloodshed i n the b a t t l e f i e l d s of Europe.
This proves that science alone cannot relieve human suffering;
we need something superior, and that i s r e l i g i o n i t i t s real
meaning. Different religions such as C h r i s t i a n i t y , Judaism
amd Islam accept the idea that r e l i g i o n i s concerned with the
l i f e i n the next world, and not with happiness i n t h i s world.
Moslem religious leaders opposed philosophy i n the early phase
of Islam, but were l a t e r l e d astray by i t and t r i e d to combine
2
the r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s with philosophical notions.
Kasravi i s convinced that although r e l i g i o n and science
deal with two d i f f e r e n t aspects of l i f e , they need each other's
support f o r mutual survival."^ He repeats that r e l i g i o n i s the
1. Ma cheh mi-khwahim. p. 81.
2. I b i d ^ . p . 91.
3. I b j J ^ p . 92.
 270

language of nature. There have been frequent c o n f l i c t s

between r e l i g i o n and science ever since the dawn of history;
but t h i s has been because people have not known the real
meaning of r e l i g i o n .
The basis of r e l i g i o n i s b e l i e f i n the existence of
God; and according to Kasravi, t h i s has been undermined by
2
materialism. The growth of materialism, he thinks, dates
from the r i s e of philosophy. I n recent times i t was adopted
by many thinkers; within a short period i t spread rapidly,
and there was no e f f i c i e n t r e l i g i o n to stand and combat i t .
Egypt was the f i r s t country i n the East which received
materialism with enthusiasm. Egyptian scholars such as
Shebli Shomayyel (d. 1916) and Salameh Musa (1887-1959)
welcomed materialist ideas and propagated them. Although the
French astronomer and thinker Plammarion, who t r i e d t o refute
materialism i n his book! "After death", d i d not have much
•5

success, Kasravi thinks that he deserves admiration.

T
I n Kasravi s view, we ought to consider the p o s s i b i l i t y
that t h i s world i s connected with the other world, even though
r e l i g i o n t r i e s t o prove the opposite.** I t i s inevitable, he
thinks, that one's behaviour i n t h i s l i f e should count i n one's
1. Ma cheh mi-khwahim, p. 93.
2. I b i d , p. 103.
3. I b i d , p. 108.
k. I b i d , p. Ik5.
 271

after-death l i f e i n the other world. He "believes that the

secret of happiness i s compatibility between r e l i g i o n and
life.^" As f o r Islam, Kasravi declares unequivocally that
i n i t s present form i t i s the main cause of the backwardness
2
of the Eastern nations. I t has been mixed with superstition,
and has consequently l e d to much confusion. At the same time,
-IT"

the European nations show no desire to enlighten the minds

of the Eastern peoples, because they gain greater advantage
by leaving these peoples i n ignorance than they could by
mobilizing armies against them. Islam at the dawn of i t s
history,^ however, had brought the u n c i v i l i z e d Arabs t o unity
and made a strong army out of them which enabled them t o
defeat and conquer formerly stronger nations.
Kasravi then says that the following groups opposed him
4
over religion:* "
1. Those who were orthodox and i n some way f a n a t i c a l i n t h e i r
religious beliefs.
2. Those who earned t h e i r l i v i n g out of r e l i g i o n .
3. Those who had a moderate amount of knowledge of modern
sciences or of Greek philosophy.
k. Those who were h i s r i v a l s ( i . e . i n regard to reform).
1. Ma cheh mi-khwahim, p. 152.
2. Ibid., p. 162.
3. Ibid.,p. 178.
k. I b i d / p p 183-18k.
 272

Kasravi had often said that Islam has l o s t i t s early-

v i t a l i t y , and some of his opponents had suggested that i t
1
should he restored to i t s o r i g i n a l s t a t e * Kasravi not only
fears that t h i s delicate operation w i l l he d i f f i c u l t hut has a
presentiment that i t may he impossible. The idea of p u r i f y i n g
Islam f i r s t appeared i n I r a n i n the time of Sayyed Jamal ol-Din
2
Asadabadi. Later, when Constitutional government was
established, some unthinking Mollas disapproved and worked t o
overthrow t h i s system of government, f o r the sake of t h e i r own
interests; they not only f a i l e d to take any effective action,
but also caused great harm and disaster. Kasravi reiterates
that his basic aim i s t o l i n k r e l i g i o n and the natural sciences,
so that through nature we may believe i n the existence of God.
Kasravi again discusses these problems i n a booklet
Porsesh va Pasokh (Question and Answer)^. He begins by
arguing with two of h i s c r i t i c s , and rejects the accusation of
being a prophet. He mentions an a r t i c l e i n the periodical
4
Kavehf" by Mr. Hasan Taqizadeh urging Iranians t o follow
European ways i n a l l aspects of t h e i r l i v e s . Kasravi believes
5
that Taqizadeh i s t e r r i b l y mistaken. On the surface,
1. Also known as Afghani. He l i v e d c. 1838-1897.
2. Ma cheh mi-khwahim. p. 210.
3-. Kasravi, Porsesh va Pasokh. Tehran I326/19I4.7.
U. This periodical was published at B e r l i n ffeom I $ l 6 t9 1921, and
edited f i r s t by Hasan Taqizadeh and l a t e r by Kazemzadeh
Iranshahr. The a r t i c l e referred to by Kasravi appears to be
Taqizadeh's a r t i c l e i n the f i r s t issue of the new series of
Kaveh dated January 22, 1920, which E. G. Browne quotes i n his
L i t e r a r y History of Persia, v o l . IV, pp Lj.85-lj.86.
5. Porshesh va Pasokh. pp 1-6.
 273

European l i f e shows a l o t of excellence, hut deep down the

Western nations suffer anguish and do not know how to achieve
happiness, Kasravi claims that he has indicated the r i g h t
d i r e c t i o n towards happiness f o r a l l existing nations.
Ever since the sciences "began to make progress, European
scientists generally have i n Kasravi's view given up t h e i r
r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s , because they have no longer been able to
1
accept C h r i s t i a n i t y which i s f u l l of s u p e r s t i t i o n . The Bible
and i n p a r t i c u l a r the Old Testament contain stories which do
not agree w i t h modern s c i e n t i f i c knowledge. Nevertheless
anyone who seeks to understand t h i s world and everything
2
connected with i t musttry to know God. Unfortunately, i n
Kasravi's opinion, Iranians today b e l i t t l e the world by paying
i n s u f f i c i e n t attention to i t s a f f a i r s .
I n a booklet called Khoda ba mast ("God i s with us"),^
Kasravi answers one of his followers named Mr. Minu'i who had
asked him "How does God help man?" His reply i s that God i s
almighty and that He created t h i s world and everything i n i t
for man. At the same time man must use his b r a i n and gain
4
knowledge so that he may improve his l i f e . * "
To s a t i s f y his natural c u r i o s i t y , man seeks to f i n d out
1. Porshesh va Pasokh. p. 13.
2. I b i d .
3. Kasravi, Khoda ba mast. Tehran, 1325/191+6.
k. I b i d ^ pp 2-5.
 27ft

about the d i f f e r e n t phenomena of nature which God has

provided f o r his use. Man makes progress i n two ways. The
f i r s t way brings him material comfort, the second way
s p i r i t u a l comfort. Although the Europeans can boast of
having made many discoveries i n nature, of having b u i l t
advanced machines and of having modernized material l i f e ,
these things have not brought happiness, but have actually
increased the number of humanity's problems.

Kasravi believes that to defeat e v i l and wickedness, an

army of facts and truths must be mobilized instead of armies
1
of soldiers.
In another pamphlet Par Pasokh-e Bad-khwahan. ( i n reply
to ill-wishers^,Kasravi states that h i s paramount aim i s not
merely to lead the Eastern societies towards a b e t t e r l i f e ,
but something higher, namely to guide a l l humanity towards
happiness. Kasravi repeats that he has no i n t e n t i o n of
3
introducing a new r e l i g i o n , but aspires to r e v i t a l i z e Islam
and p u r i f y i t as i t was at the dawn of i t s h i s t o r y .
I n 1328/1939 a person named Azadeh wrote h o s t i l e l e t t e r s
to Kasravi under a pseudonym Haqiqatgu ("Truth-Teller").
Kasravi published his replies i n a booklet Par Pasokh-e
Haqiaatfiafr. He begins by saying that a l l the l i v i n g religions
1. Khoda ba mast, p. 25.
2. Kasravi, Par Pasokh-e Bad-khwahan. Tehran 13ft5/l9ft6.
3. I b i d . , p. ft9.
#

ft. Kasravi, Par Pasokh-e Haqiqatgu. Tehran 132ft/l9ft5.

 275

have caused man's degradation instead of progress. History

shows that C h r i s t i a n i t y was very i n f l u e n t i a l i n i t s early
stages, but gradually, as the natural sciences were developed,
began to lose i t s authority u n t i l ultimately a great number
of people became i n f i d e l s . During the Constitutional struggle,
the newspaper Habl ol-Matin published a pamphlet called
Resaleh-ye Hosaynieh. which included some a r t i c l e s w r i t t e n by
European scholars. Kasravi thinks that i t was published
merely i n order t o d i s t r a c t the people's attention fromthe
faigt that c o l o n i a l i s t societies have t r i e d to take advantage
of the weakness of the Eastern peoples caused by t h e i r
r e l i g i o u s beliefs, i n order t o exploit these peoples as much
1
as possible. There are many examples of t h i s kind. The
French w r i t e r Gustave Lebon ( i n the late 19th century) praised
the Arab nations, p a r t i c u l a r l y the Syrians, with special
reference t o t h e i r religious b e l i e f s ; obviously, i n Kasravi*s
2
opinion, he did t h i s because France had a great ambition to
make Syria into a French colony. Gustave Lebon was only
following the same o l d method used by other European scholars;
he admired Islam, although being a good h i s t o r i a n , he was well
9tware that Islam had been combined with superstition. His
admiration f o r Islam was therefore, Kasravi says, dishonest;
1. Be-khwanad va davari konand. p. 82.
2. Par Pasokh-e Haqiqatgu, pp 25-26.
 276

and dishonesty cannot he forgiven.

Kasravi thinks that today there i s no compatibility
between l i f e and r e l i g i o n . I n the Iranian Constitutional
struggle, despite the disapproval of most mollas. two great
r e l i g i o u s leaders Hajj Shaykh Mazandarani and Xkhond
Khorasani, supported the revolutionaries because they were
broad-minded enough t o realize that modern l i f e requires good
administration by a Gonstituional government, and that
r e l i g i o n alone cannot f u l f i l people's needs.
Kasravi then says that i n t h i s present age, when there
i s such great confusion of thought, he has decided to combat
2
various misguided b e l i e f s and ideas, and that God's grace
and help have enabled him t o endure many hardships and to
withstand a l l his opponents. Meetings and international
conferences have been held to discuss r e l i g i o n and f i n d s o l -
utions to i t s problems; but c o n f l i c t s of b e l i e f have rendered
such attempts f r u i t l e s s . One thousand three hundred years ago,
r
the Holy Prophet Mohammad arose and introduced Islam; but
only s i x t y years passed before the people l o s t t h e i r strong
f a i t h , with the r e s u l t that Islam s p l i t i n t o many d i f f e r e n t
factions. The h i s t o r i a n and t r a v e l l e r Mas'udi (d. 3I+5/956)
states that the Arab w r i t e r Jahez (d. 255/868) produced three
1. Par Pasokh-e Haqiqatgu. p. 33.
2. Ibid., pp h&-h9.
 277-

d i f f e r e n t books, about the Omayyad emamate, the 'Abbasid

emamate and the *Alavid emamate respectively. Kasravi thinks
that obviously Jahez must have been paid by each f a c t i o n f o r
1
each book. Such people simply commercialized Islam.
Shahrestani (d. 5ij.8/ll53)» the h i s t o r i a n of sects, describes
how a f t e r four centuries Islam had become divided and the
Moslems had formed seventy two d i f f e r e n t sects. I n t h i s way
Islam, a dynamic and at f i r s t morally and materially useful
r e l i g i o n , became stagnant and p r a c t i c a l l y i n e f f e c t i v e .
Kasravi then says that Haqiqatgu and h i s other opponents
could not convince him with t h e i r ways of argument. They
claimed to be defenders of Islam, but were unable to solve
anybody's d i f f i c u l t i e s . Their silence about these difficulties
could not serve t h e i r purpose of strengthening Islam. Kasravi
believes that the future l i f e of the Eastern societies w i l l
3
depend on reform i n the f i e l d of r e l i g i o n ; i f they proceed i n
the present way, they w i l l c e r t a i n l y face more confusion and
even greater hardship.
Kasravi does not think that regular prayer and f a s t i n g ,
v i s i t i n g holy places, and r i t u a l worship, i n other words
leading a formal r e l i g i o u s l i f e , can improve the backwardness
of the Eastern nations.** History shows that the Mongol
1. Par Pasokh-e Haqiqatgu, p. 5U.
.2. Ibid., pp 58-59.
3. Ibid., p. 59.
k. Ibid., pp 71-73.
 278

invaders defeated the Iranians at a time when they were

strongly attached to Islam and i t s r i t u a l s . Most Iranians
at that time prayed regularly to God and were deeply
concerned with r e l i g i o n ; hut they were somehow exaggerating
and showing o f f , as i f Islam was a t o o l to play with. Kasravi
goes on to say that l i b e r t y and unity are the two great
1
prerequisites f o r an independent n a t i o n . There has never been
unanimity of b e l i e f among the Iranian nation, and I r a n has
consequently had to sustain a tremendous struggle through the
centuries i n order to save her freedom.
Kasravi ends the booklet by r e i t e r a t i n g his b e l i e f that
the natural sciences are essential f o r a prosperous l i f e , but
2
inadequate to bring happiness to mankind. Man needs something
superior to science, and that i s obviously f a i t h . A scientist,
despite a l l his information, needs r e l i g i o n to f u l l y s a t i s f y
his t h i r s t f o r knowledge of the universe.
* 3
I n another booklet Par Pavramun-e Kherad (About Reason),
Kasravi observes that Hasan Sabbah (the Esma*ilite "assassin"
leader, d. 518/1121+) considered the disagreement among the
various sects and r e l i g i o n s to be due to the inadequacy of
man's i n t e l l e c t . Kasravi thinks, however, that i t i s due to
superstition, which has pervaded a l l the l i v i n g r e l i g i o n s and
1. Par Pasokh-e Haqiqatgu. p. 92.
2. Ibid., p. 108. ,
3. Kasravi, Par Payramun-e Kherad. Tehran, 1325/191+6.
made them deviate from the p a t h o f reason.
Kasravi places the highest value upon human reason.
He t h i n k s t h a t I r a n i a n s have mistakenly d i s c r e d i t e d i t ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y the S u f i s , who deny i t s value and importance i n
human l i f e . For instance the poet Mowlavi ( J a l a l o l - D i n
Rumi, d. 672/1273) simply r e j e c t s the power o f reason when

"Love came, and man's reason f l e d . _s> 1 _. , < v r~^sf

Morning came, and man's candle was h e l p l e s s "
* 2
Dr. Taqi A r a n i , who was a p e r s i s t e n t b e l i e v e r i n m a t e r i a l i s m ,
had argued t h a t man's b r a i n c o n s i s t s o f matter and t h a t t h i s
matter w i l l change according t o circumstances. I n the m a t e r i a l -
i s t view, human a c t i o n s are determined s o l e l y by m a t e r i a l i n f l u -
ences and by s e l f i s h i n s t i n c t s . Kasravi cannot accept t h a t
t h i s i s t r u e i n man's case, even i f i t may be,true i n the case
3
of animals. He remains f i r m l y convinced t h a t God has
equipped man w i t h s p i r i t a l s o . A l l the c i v i l i z a t i o n which
man has achieved depends on h i s b r a i n and power o f thought;
but although man must obey h i s reason a t a l l times i n h i s
l i f e , he also needs a guide f o r h i s reason, and obviously
r e l i g i o n could be the best guide i n t h i s respect.
Kasravi sees r e l i g i o n not o n l y as the guide, b u t a l s o as
a support f o r man's i n t e l l e c t . ^ " He i s confident t h a t i f human
1. K a s r a v i , Par Payramun-e Kherad. Tehran, p. 3.
2. The founder o f the i l l e g a l Tudeh (Communist) p a r t y i n I r a n ;
s e e
3. Par Payramun-e Kherad. p. 7. l- P«325 below.
h. I M d . p. 23.
;
 280

"beings use t h e i r "brains i n t h i s l i f e w i t h support from

r e l i g i o n , they w i l l c e r t a i n l y solve most o f t h e i r problems.
I f human h i s t o r y i s a long record o f "bloodshed on " b a t t l e f i e l d s ,
t h a t i s because man has h i t h e r t o never madeproper use o f h i s
reason. Socialism, fascism, communism e t c . , are poor
consolations f o r man's unhappiness. Kasravi b e l i e v e s t h a t
only a t r u e and reasonable f a i t h w i l l solve humanity's
problems and b r i n g happiness t o mankind."^
SECTION I I I
Some comments on Kasravi's r e l i g i o u s ideas.
Kasravi d i d a great deal o f research i n the f i e l d o f
r e l i g i o n , and had a s c h o l a r l y knowledge o f many r e l i g i o u s
subjects. His p r i n c i p a l goals were t o combat wrong b e l i e f s
and s u p e r s t i t i o n s , and t o combat i n f i d e l i t y . He strove and
fought f o r these goals very hard. His success ( i n so f a r as
he achieved any success) was due p a r t l y t o h i s scholarly
research, and p a r t l y t o h i s a b i l i t y as a w r i t e r , b u t above a l l
t o h i s courage.
N a t u r a l l y Kasravi's research centred on Islam and i t s
branches. He s t u d i e d deeply i n t h i s f i e l d and was able t o
f i n d out a great deal about the weak p o i n t s o f c e r t a i n branches
of Islam. I f we look deeply, we see t h a t he was f i g h t i n g

1. Varjavand Bonyad, pp 7O-7I4..

 281

against e x p l o i t a t i o n o f Islam. U l t i m a t e l y he gained a great

number o f enemies. He was the f i r s t person i n modern I r a n
who fought openly and "bravely against wrong r e l i g i o u s ideas.
I t i s always hard t o be c r i t i c a l o f people's b e l i e f s , which
they have l e a r n t from t h e i r f o r e f a t h e r s from generation t o
generation. Other learned men i n Kasravi's time were
c e r t a i n l y n o t ignorant or i l l informed about the weaknesses o f
d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o n s and p a r t i c u l a r l y o f d i f f e r e n t branches o f
Islam; b u t only a strong p e r s o n a l i t y l i k e Kasravi could
express and p u b l i c i z e these t h i n g s bravely and p e r s i s t e n t l y .
He was so p e r s i s t e n t t h a t e v e n t u a l l y he p a i d w i t h h i s l i f e .
A t the same time Kasravi was always l o y a l t o Islam, or
t o what he regarded as the r e a l Islam. He always declared
t h a t the teachings and r u l e s o f Islam were acceptable and
p r a c t i c a l a t the beginning, b u t t h a t as time passed Islam l o s t
i t s S i m p l i c i t y and became mixed w i t h harmful and s u p e r f i c i a l
ideas. He used t o say t h a t we must f i g h t w i t h t h e " t r a i t o r s "
who have deprived Islam o f i t s o r i g i n a l q u a l i t y , and he himself
made a great deal o f e f f o r t i n defence o f Islam. For example,
among the many books which have been w r i t t e n c r i t i c i z i n g
Baha'ism and i t s d o c t r i n e s , none has been so weighty as Kasravi's
book Baha'igari. Kasravi also defended Islam against a t h e i s t i c
materialism. He thought t h a t obstinacy and disobedience are
 282

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f human n a t u r e , and t h a t experience through

the centuries has proved the inadequacy o f man-made c i v i l
law; t o r e s t r a i n people from misconduct. Although man
through science i s able t o conquer the s k i e s , he s t i l l needs
to "believe i n a higher source of guidance. C i v i l law, and
p o l i c e and other governmental a u t h o r i t i e s , can punish a
c r i m i n a l or an aggressor, "but only r e l i g i o u s law and m o r a l i t y
can i n f l u e n c e the c r i m i n a l ' s h e a r t and mind. C i v i l law and
moral law w i l l always "be separate, and s p i r i t u a l guidance
i n t h i s w o r l d w i l l always be necessary.
I t seems t o us t h a t Kasravi was s i n c e r e l y r e l i g i o u s and
genuinely anxious t o defend and reform I s l a m , but t h a t h i s
emphasis was too negative. He condemned the s u p e r s t i t i o n s
and wrong b e l i e f s which have entered Islam and i t s branches,
but s a i d very l i t t l e about what the pure o r i g i n a l Islam r e a l l y
was. His own teachings, which he c a l l e d Pak-dlni ("Pure
R e l i g i o n " ) were e t h i c a l s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l , r a t h e r than
r e l i g i o u s i n the s t r i c t sense.
Before saying any more about our own views, we w i l l
mention some o f the numerous books which have been w r i t t e n
i n o p p o s i t i o n t o Kasravi's r e l i g i o u s studies and teachings.
I t seems t h a t none o f the eminent r e l i g i o u s a u t h o r i t i e s could
r e f u t e h i s p e n e t r a t i n g c r i t i c i s m s ; i n any case, they remained
 283

silent. These books are the work o f unscholarly persons,

who were probably i n s t r u c t e d by c e r t a i n groups t o concoct
them.
1
I n a book c a l l e d Nabard ba B i - d i n i ("The Struggle
against I r r e l i g i o n " ) the author, Seraj A n s a r i , says t h a t many
confusions i n people's minds have p u l l e d them towards
i n f i d e l i t y , and t h a t a l l our backwardness i s the d i r e c t
r e s u l t o f our carelessness about our r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s . He
recognizes, however, t h a t today the l i v i n g r e l i g i o n s have
l o s t t h e i r o r i g i n a l v i t a l i t y and are no longer regarded as
authoritative. He considers Kasravi a complete pessimist and
n e g e t i v i s t , and t r i e s t o prove t h a t Kasravi's r e l i g i o u s
ideas are much the same as the ideas o f m a t e r i a l i s m . For
estample, according t o Sera j , when Kasravi t a l k s about the
u n i t y o f God he f a i l s t o g i v e any acceptable reason why one
God should e x i s t . I n Seraj's view, Kasravi t r i e d t o teach
sociology i n the dress of r e l i g i o n . He also says t h a t Kasravi
m i s i n t e r p r e t e d passages of the Qor'an and o f t e n made u n j u s t
c r i t i c i s m s o f the Holy Book i n the same way as Jews and
C h r i s t i a n s had done before him. Kasravi and h i s f o l l o w e r s ,
being incapable of knowing God p r o f o u n d l y , had invented an
imaginary and impotent God. Kasravi had claimed t o b e l i e v e

1. Seraj A n s a r i , Nabard ba-Dini, Tehran 1323/19U5.

 284

t h a t God i s almighty, b u t had s a i d i n Bar Payramun-e Eslam

and i n Var.iavand Bonyad t h a t God's powers are l i m i t e d and
God's a c t i o n s are s u b j e c t t o r u l e s . S i m i l a r l y Kasravi had
claimed t o b e l i e v e t h a t the Qor'an i s a Holy Book, b u t had
l a t e r s a i d t h a t i t was invented by the Prophet. His way o f
reasoning, according t o S e r a j , i s f u l l o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n s .
Seraj then argues t h a t the Prophet was q u i t e capable o f
performing miraculous a c t i o n s t o prove h i s prophethood.
According t o nature's r u l e s , he says, i t i s c l e a r l y impossible
t o change a walking s t i c k i n t o a dragon; b u t f o r God, who i s
not subject t o r u l e s , i t i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e ; so Kasravi's
ideas i n t h i s respect are not j u s t i f i e d . The Qor'an i n i t s e l f
i s an e v e r l a s t i n g m i r a c l e , because a l l i t s surehs (chapters)
are w r i t t e n i n language o f such eloquence t h a t no human can
produce even a s i n g l e l i n e resembling i t . Eor more than
f o u r t e e n c e n t u r i e s t h e Qor'an has been g u i d i n g and e n l i g h t e n i n g
people's minds. The enemies o f Islam have t r i e d t o d i s c r e d i t
i t , b u t have not been successful; and t h i s can be taken as the
greatest m i r a c l e .
According t o Kasravi's views, the Emams are not capable
of foreseeing the f u t u r e . Seraj accuses Kasravi o f having
 285

quoted the "beginning o f the verse1

without the end o f i t . He then himself quotes another verse

"(God) i s the knower o f the unseen and r e v e a l s i t t o nobody

2
except Prophets whom He i s pleased w i t h " .
S e r a j , l i k e K a s r a v i , t h i n k s t h a t a l l r e l i g i o n s were
3
o r i g i n a l l y pure b u t gradually became mixed w i t h s u p e r s i t i o n .
This has enabled enemies t o c r i t i c i z e them, and Seraj regards
Kasravi as ene o f the enemies.^ Kasravi picked on weak p o i n t s
i n the S h i * i t e form o f the I s l a m i c r e l i g i o n and b e l i t t l e d i t ;
but he was t e r r i b l y mistaken, Seraj says, because the s t r u c t u r e
of Islam cannot be r u i n e d or shaken by u n j u s t a t t a c k s such as
his.
Seraj Ansari then quotes the Qoranic verse-'

"We only send prophets who speak the language o f the people,

1. Sureh 6, a.3Lr.An_' am. verse 50

2. Sureh 72 > al?rJenn,verse 26
3. Nabard ba B i - d i n i , p. 1+8.
h. I b i d , pp WH%.
5. Sureh 14, Ebrahlto.verse k.
 286

to e x p l a i n c l e a r l y t o them". The Qor'an i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s ,

according t o Seraj,^ "because even i l l i t e r a t e Arab beduins
could d i g e s t i t s sayings, whereas Kasravi's book
Varjavand Bonyad i s w r i t t e n i n such an obsure s t y l e t h a t
h a r d l y anybody can get the s l i g h t e s t idea o f i t s meaning.
Today the only r e l i a b l e r e l i g i o n i s Islam. Kasravi and
others l i k e him have t r i e d t o undermine i t s foundations
by spreading poisonous ideas about i t . They c e r t a i n l y
have more or l e s s i n f l u e n c e d many innocent people's minds.
We must t h e r e f o r e work hard t o r e b u i l d Islam.
Kasravi's great mistake, i n Seraj .:.. Ansari' s o p i n i o n ,
was t o say t h a t a r e v o l u t i o n i n r e l i g i o n i s needed. R e l i g i o n
i s not j u s t a t o o l , but something basic and profound.
Kasravi's n o t i o n t h a t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s can be changed w i t h
the changing times i s q u i t e unacceptable.^ Seraj b e l i e v e s
t h a t a l l the teachings and r u l e s o f Islam are a p p r o p r i a t e
f o r the present century and w i l l be appropriate f o r f u t u r e
generations.
The progress o f science during the l a s t two c e n t u r i e s
has had important consequences. I n the f i r s t p l a c e , r a p i d l y
growing s c i e n t i f i c knowledge r u i n e d o l d t h e o r i e s . Secondly,
s c i e n t i s t s t r i e d t o eliminate r e l i g i o n . Later there was a
1. Nabard ba b i - D i n i , p. U2
2. I b i d , pp 56-57.
 2tsy

movement towards r e c o n c i l i a t i o n "between these two, hut

i t soon d i e d down. Undoubtedly science has p r e v a i l e d .
This has enabled u n b e l i e v i n g men t o i n f l u e n c e the people,,
and Seraj counts Kasravi as one o f them.
Seraj Ansari i s convinced t h a t Islam i s t h e only
r e l i g i o n which does not c o n t r a d i c t science. The Prophet
Mohammad's saying (hadis)

( " I t i s t h e duty o f every Moslem man and woman t o acquire

knowledge") shows how co-operative Islam's a t t i t u d e i s
towards science. This i s probably the secret o f Islam's
freshness a f t e r f o u r t e e n c e n t u r i e s . Kasravi's c l a i m t h a t
the Prophet's knowledge was l i m i t e d i s not i n t e l l i g i b l e t o
S e r a j , who a l l e g e s t h a t Kasravi's c h i e f i n t e n t i o n i n saying
t h i s was t o p u t the Prophet on the same l e v e l as h i m s e l f ,
because Kasravi was incapable o f a c q u i r i n g a l l t h e world's
knowledge.
Kasravi had o f t e n s a i d t h a t today's Islam i s e n t i r e l y
d i f f e r e n t from the Islam o f t h e past. Seraj Ansari r e p l i e s
t h a t Islam was made known t o the people by the Prophet, and
 288

t h a t i f the mass o f the people today ignore i t s r u l e s and

s p o i l i t by not p r a c t i s i n g i t p r o p e r l y , t h i s does not
mean t h a t Islam has l o s t i t s a u t h o r i t y . Seraj holds t h a t
the s e c u r i t y , t r a n q u i l l i t y and p r o s p e r i t y o f a n a t i o n
1
depends on organized r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f ^ . The government
ought t o e s t a b l i s h a r e g u l a r system f o r teaching t h e
people the r e a l i t i e s o f l i f e and t r u t h s o f r e l i g i o n . As
f o r Pak-dini (Kasravi's r e l i g i o n ) , Seraj considers i t
equivalent t o B i - D i n i (irreligion).
Prophethood i s given by God t o a s e l e c t e d person whom
God i n s p i r e s so t h a t he may become t h e s p i r i t u a l guide
of the people. Seraj accuses Kasravi o f being an ambitious
man, who t r i e d t o a l l u r e people by tampering w i t h t h e i r
r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s ; ^ e.g. i n t h e book Var.javand Bonyad.
where Kasravi s a i d t h a t j u s t as people accept and t r u s t a
doctor's p r e s c r i p t i o n or a s c i e n t i s t s ' theory i n the l i g h t
of t r i a l and experience, they ought t o b e l i e v e a Prophet
4
i n the same way.*" S e r a j , on the other hand, argues t h a t the
only ground f o r t r u s t i n g a prophet i s h i s performance o f a
miraculous a c t i o n . A s c i e n t i s t or a doctor i s n o t c a l l e d
upon t o be moral guide t o s o c i e t y ; b u t a prophet has t h e

1. Nabard ba B i - d i n i . p. 128.
2. Ibid..pp 130-133.
3. I b i d . , pp 135-H+O.
U. I b i d . p. mi.
 289

duty o f warning the people about the r e a l i t i e s o f existence

and must t h e r e f o r e be an e x t r a o r d i n a r y human being w i t h
unique a u t h o r i t y .
Sera3 Ansari then repeats the charge t h a t Kasravi o f t e n
c o n t r a d i c t e d himself i n h i s w r i t i n g s . Kasravi had s a i d t h a t
i n t r o d u c i n g a new r e l i g i o n and undermining Islam are a
d i s g r a c e f u l t h i n g s t o do, b u t according t o Seraj he had showed
1
t h a t he despised Islam by w r i t i n g against i t . At this point
Seraj declares, " I have two aims. One i s t o prove t h e
unreasonableness o f Kasravi's judgments about the Qor^an.
Secondly, I want t o warn the innocent young people and guide
them towards t h e t r u t h . Kasravi has m i s i n t e r p r e t e d the
2
Holy Qor'an and defamed I s l a m . " Seraj goes on t o say t h a t
Kasravi's views about t h e human soul and body i n h i s book
» 3
Varjavand Bonyad are wholly wrong. I t i s not possible t o
separate body and soul completely, because each i n f l u e n c e s
the other. Kasravi t a l k e d about t h e human being's selfish
tendency t o seek s a t i s f a c t i o n a t t h e expense o f h i s own
k i n d and other creatures. Against t h i s , Seraj argues t h a t
human behaviour i s motivated, not by mere s e l f i s h n e s s , b u t
by the w i l l t o l i v e , and t h a t Kasravi's judgment i n t h e
matter i s unreasonable. A t the same time Kasravi boasted
1. Payman. year 1 , v o l . 8,pp 12-13.
2. Nabard ba B i - d i n i . p. 160.
3. Varjavand Bonyad. p. 19.
 2S0

about h i s h o s t i l i t y t o m a t e r i a l i s m and o f t e n spoke about

the existence of the other world; but t h i s cannot be
admitted unless the existence of the soul i s proved, and
1
i n S e r a j s view Kasravi f a i l e d t o prove t h a t the soul
exist8. Seraj h i m s e l f t h i n k s t h a t the soul can be
i d e n t i f i e d i n two ways; by experiments, and through
religion.^ "To me", he says, " i t seems easier t o do t h i s
through r e l i g i o n , r a t h e r than by experiments. Camille
2
Flammarion a f t e r f i f t y years of experimentation could not
succeed i n g e t t i n g s l i g h t e s t evidence o f the existence o f
the soul. Not only Flammarion f a i l e d ; ever since 181+8
m a t e r i a l i s t s and s c i e n t i s t s have been arguing about i t
without any r e s u l t . ^
Seraj Ansari concludes by saying t h a t he respects
Kasravi f o r one t h i n g o n l y , namely h i s b e l i e f i n the other
w o r l d , but t h a t even on t h i s p o i n t Kasravi's way o f reason-
ing i s unfortunately f a l l a c i o u s . A person who c a l l e d h i m s e l f
a "Guide""* ought t o possess more knowledge so as t o be
capable o f meeting h i s opponents i n a l o g i c a l way.
Another opponent o f Kasravi named Mahdi Shari*atmadar
b i t t e r l y attacked Kasravi i n a pamphlet Zarabat-e Bi-dinan
ya 'Ashura-ye Din. (The Blows of the I n f i d e l s , or the Day
1. Nabard ba B i - d i n i . p. 178.
2. A French astronomer o f the l a t e 19th and e a r l y 20th century.
3. Kasravi, Yakom-e A z a r (pamphlet), p. 17.
 291

of R e l i g i o n ' s Martyrdom). He askedthe governmental

a u t h o r i t i e s t o a r r e s t and punish Kasravi f o r h i s
malevolent and contemptuous a t t i t u d e t o Islam, which i s
'Iran's s t a t e r e l i g i o n .
A pamphlet w i t h a f a c e t i o u s t i t l e Ka.1ravi-ha ye
p

Kasravi (Kasravi's Crooked Talk) hy Parhang Nakha*i

presents somewhat b e t t e r argued c r i t i c i s m s o f Kasravi's
r e l i g i o u s views. The author states i n h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n
t h a t people today do not care about t h e i r r e l i g i o n and
t h a t there i s no r e g u l a r propaganda f o r Islam. Contemporary
b e l i e v e r s i n Shi*ism have no knowledge o f t h e i r c u l t . At
a time when the I r a n i a n n a t i o n needs u n i t y more than ever
b e f o r e , Kasravi's books have misled the people and
endangered the n a t i o n a l u n i t y . There i s a verse i n the
Qor'an (XVT, 126): " I n v i t e (the people) t o the way o f your
Lord w i t h wisdom and preaching, and dispute w i t h them i n the
way which i s best". "We S h i * i t e s " , says Nakha*i, "should
obey t h i s s t r a i g h t - f o r w a r d command, and t r y t o overcome
infidelity".^ He p o i n t s out t h a t the r e l i g i o u s a u t h o r i t i e s
have not made the s l i g h t e s t e f f o r t t o eradicate wrong ideas
from people's minds, and t h a t the teaching o f r e l i g i o n t o
1. Zarabat-e Bi-dinan ya 'Ashura-ye Din. Tehran 13224./19§.5.
2. Farhang Nakha'i, Kanravi-ha-ye Kasravi. Tehran 1335/195$.
3. Kajravi-ha-ye K a s r a v i , p. k.
 29'2

young people i s neglected i n present-day I r a n . I n Nakha*i's

o p i n i o n , r e l i g i o n means t h e systematic o r g a n i z a t i o n which
1
God has created f o r man's happiness. He also t h i n k s t h a t
while man has t o l i v e i n a community, human beings or human
s o c i e t i e s are n o t capable o f devising c o r r e c t and equitable
2
rules. Man i s c o n s t a n t l y challenged by two innate forces:
h i s reason, and h i s i n s t i n c t i v e desires which form h i s
animal nature. Since man cannot obey h i s reason a l l t h e t i m e ,
he i s incapable o f c r e a t i n g sound r u l e s . Consequently man
needs t o be r u l e d by a superior power. Moreover, since the
extent o f man's reason i s l i m i t e d , he cannot e s t a b l i s h r u l e s
which are p r a c t i c a b l e i n every time and place. Man-made
r u l e s never have any s t a b i l i t y .
Nakha'i then remarks t h a t those who speak against
r e l i g i o n always ask why, i f r e l i g i o u s laws are so good, have
3
not t h e i l l s o f human s o c i e t i e s been cured by them? Such
persons do not r e a l i z e t h a t w h i l e r e l i g i o n provides guidance
t o the r i g h t p a t h , human beings are not a l l on the same l e v e l
of i n t e l l i g e n c e ; consequently some o f them absorb and digest
r e l i g i o u s laws and other remain ignorant. One o f t h e
questions asked by n e a r l y a l l opponents o f Islam i s whether
or not Islam can be adapted t o present-day c o n d i t i o n s o f l i f e .
1. Ka.iravl-ha-ye Kasravi. p. 9.
2. I b i d . , p. 10.
3. I b i d . , pp 19-27.
 293

" I f we take a b r i e f l o o k " , Nakha'i continues, "at t h e

m a t e r i a l i s t philosophy, a t Baha'ism, a t the communist
arguments, and f i n a l l y a t Kasravi's views about I s l a m , we
immediately n o t i c e t h a t a l l o f them have something i n common.
They have attacked Islam mainly because they t h i n k t h a t i t
J.
i s not s u i t a b l e f o r the present age.~
Nakha'i then a l l e g e s t h a t i n f a c t Kasravi was a f o l l o w e r
of m a t e r i a l i s m and a Baha'i. Kasravi had s a i d " I do not
claim t o be a prophet o f God", but by c a l l i n g himself a moral
leader f o r the Eastern s o c i e t i e s and showing contempt f o r a l l
the l i v i n g r e l i g i o n s , he had (so Nakha'i says) proved the
opposite. 2 Nakha c i r e f e r s t o a p a r t o f the Ketab *
o l - I q a* n
of Baha'ollah (d. 1892) as evidence t h a t Kasravi's views are
very close t o those o f the Baha'is^ and t h a t Kasravi f o l l o w e d
the same method t o d i s c r e d i t Isiam. The Iqan s t a t e s t h a t
God guides human beings by sending prophets, t h a t t h i s i s
done continuously, and t h a t Moslems make a mistake i n t h i n k i n g
t h a t God would not commision anybody else t o undertake t h e
task o f guidance a f t e r the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f Islam by Mohammad.
According t o Nakha*i, Kasravi had c l e a r l y declared t h a t he
J
was i n s p i r e d by God when he began t o organize P a k - d i n i .

1. Ka.iravi-ha-ye Kasravi. p. 30.

2. I b i d . , p. 31.
3. I b i d . , p. 5k.
k. I b i d . , p. 56.
5. I b i d p. 57.
v
 29U .

This was d e f i n i t e l y meant t o be a r e v o l u t i o n i n the w o r l d

o f r e l i g i o n . Kasravi had s a i d t h a t a l l the newly organized
r e l i g i o n s are branches o f I s l a m , and t h a t Pak-Dini i s a
branch o f Islam. He l i k e n e d them t o minor roads, and Islam
t o the major road which no longer e x i s t s . Therefore,
1
Nakha'i argues, Kasravi indirectly c a l l e d h i m s e l f a p r o p h e t .
Speaking o f prophets i n general, Nakha'i says t h a t they
must have appropriate knowledge t o guide people, and must
a l s o be i n s t r u c t e d by God. A prophet's duties are f i r s t t o
inform mankind o f God's existence and u n i t y , then t o inform
them about the a f t e r - l i f e . For doing a l l t h i s , a prophet
must be an e x t r a o r d i n a r y man. People i n s t i n c t i v e l y ask f o r
miracles from a man who claims t o be a messenger o f God.
I n Nakha'i's o p i n i o n , no one can deny t h a t the Prophet
Mohammad performed many miracles. The Qor'an i n i t s e l f i s
a great m i r a c l e . A l l the surehs (chapters) o f t h e Qor'an
are w r i t t e n so e l o q u e n t l y t h a t no human can produce anything
l i k e them. Needless t o say, Nakha'i adds, t h a t e a r l i e r prohets
such as Moses and Jesus performed t h e i r miracles according
to the standards o f the people's minds i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r
times.^ I n the time o f Islam, the Arabs, although they l e d
a very b a r b a r i c l i f e , possessed a remarkable a b i l i t y t o
1. Ka.iravi-ha-ye Kasravi, pp 58-60.
2. Ibid., pp 59-60.
3. I b i d ; p. 105.
 233

express themselves e l o q u e n t l y . I n these circumstances

Mohammad performed h i s miracle "by t r a n s m i t t i n g t h e Qor'an,
which surpassed a l l the great w r i t i n g s o f scholars and poets
i n the w o r l d o f l i t e r a t u r e . Consequently Kasravi's c l a i m
t h a t the Prophet Mohammad did not perform miracles i s nonsense."
Another opponent o f Kasravi was a c e r t a i n Mohammad
Towhidi, who wrote a "booklet on the "Contradictions o f Payman
2
and Parcham". On t h e one hand, he says, Kasravi s t a t e d
t h a t Islam has spread a l l over the w o r l d "because i t was made
3
known through a great book, t h e Qor'an, and t h a t a l l people
today ought t o b e l i e v e i n Islam because i t i s an e v e r l a s t i n g
4
religion.* ' He had also s t a t e d t h a t a l l the world's Moslem
nations ought t o communicate w i t h one another and eradicate
infidelity. On the other hand, Kasravi had c o n s t a n t l y s t a t e d
t h a t there i s only one way t o cure people and save them from
confusion, and.that i s t o f a m i l i a r i z e them w i t h a new r e l i g i o n
5

founded on s c i e n t i f i c and r a t i o n a l p r o o f s . Furthermore he

had s t a t e d t h a t i n today's c o n d i t i o n s i t i s not appropriate
t h a t r e l i g i o n s leaders should receive zakat (alms t a x ) from
the r e s t o f the n a t i o n and r u n the s t a t e . ^ He had even
denied t h a t any l i v i n g r e l i g i o n can l e a d nations towards a
1. Ka.jravi-ha-ye Kasravi p. 1^5. t

2. Mohammad Towhidi, Tanaqoz-ha-ye Payman va Parcham, T a b r i z ,

1323/1944.
3. Parcham, year 1, v o l . 11, p. li+.
i+. I b i d . / year 2, v o l . 1, p. 6.
5. I b i d . , year 5, v o l . 6, p. 261+.
6. Payman, 9» v o l . p. 521+.
 296

happy and prosperous l i f e . "How i s i t p o s s i b l e " , Towhidi

asks, " t h a t a person l i k e Kasravi, who claims t o he the
moral leader o f the u n i v e r s e , should c o n t r a d i c t h i s own
statements and oppose h i s own p r i n c i p l e s ? " Kasravi's
argument about zakat was completely wrong. Islamic states
do not o b t a i n funds s o l e l y by c o l l e c t i n g zakat. During t h e
f i r s t s i x c e n t u r i e s o f I s l a m , the Moslem community's wealth
was so great t h a t i t more than covered a l l s t a t e expenses,
even though a great deal o f i t was spent by extravagant
caliphs. Towhidi i s convinced a l l the I s l a m i c laws are
socially beneficial. I f people do n o t make proper use o f
them, t h i s does not mean t h a t Islam has become weaker.
Kasravi had s a i d i n Parcham t h a t people need an honest leader
because t h e Qor'an by i t s e l f cannot teach them the r e a l i t i e s
of l i f e , and he had added: " I have o f t e n confessed t h a t I do
1,1
not want t o choose a t i t l e o f l e a d e r s h i p . According t o
the I s l a m i c t e x t s , God introduced the Prophet Mohammad by
sending t h e angel G a b r i e l from the s k i e s , and Gabriel took
Mohammad t o t h e skies and arranged f o r him t o meet God.
Kasravi had said: "God i s not a body, so how can anyone meet
p
him?" He had also s a i d t h a t God's l o c a t i o n i s not known,
and t h a t God i s powerful enough on His own t o commission and
1. Parcham, year 5, v o l . 7, p. 286.
2. Tanaqoz-harve Payman va Parcham. p. 2I4..
 29?

i n s p i r e a prophet w i t h o u t sending an angel. I n reply t o

t h i s , Towhidi declares t h a t God sent G a b r i e l t o Mohammad,
b u t t h a t i n no sureh o f the Qor'an i s i t s t a t e d t h a t
Mohammad was taken t o God's presence.^" The Qor'an ( V I I , l )
only r e p o r t s t h a t Mohammad was taken on a n i g h t journey.
I n any case according t o Towhidi, God i s almighty and
capable o f doing any a c t i o n which might look impossible t o
2
us.
Another opponent o f Kasravi named Mortaza Mahdavi wrote
two volumes e n t i t l e d Ka.jravigari, Par Pasokh-e Ahriman,
5
(Crooked t a l k , i n r e p l y t o the E v i l S p r i t ) . I n the f i r s t
volume^ he accuses Kasravi o f doing great i n j u s t i c e t o Islam
and says t h a t Islam n o t only agrees w i t h modern science b u t
has always favoured sciences. , , . ^,' , .
0
'All (the f i r s t Emam) s a i d : ) Ct^f t > ^j ' (J^
("He who teaches me a word makes i t easy f o r me t o be h i s
slave". )** Mahdavi i n h i s second volume r e p r i n t s an a r t i c l e
' 5

about Kasravi from a newspaper named Haraz by a w r i t e r who

signed h i m s e l f only by h i s i n i t i a l s Gh.S. This man a t t a c k e d
Kasravi i n a most malicious and abusive way, c a l l i n g him a
t r a i t o r t o h i s n a t i o n and h i s country.^ He says t h a t Kasravi
1. Tanaqoz-ha-ye Pavman va Parcham, p. 26.
2. I b i d . , n. 29.
3 . Mortaza Mahdavi, Ka.iravigari Par Pasokh-e Ahriman. Tehran
1325/19U8.
5. Haraz, v o l . 13, 132U/19U5.
6. Ka.lravigari. v o l . 2, pp 1+-5.
 £98

had f i r s t - t r i e d t o s a t i s f y h i s e v i l nature "by o r g a n i s i n g

a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y (the Azadegan), and a f t e r f a i l i n g i n t h i s ,
had l a t e r t r i e d t o tamper w i t h the innocent people's
r e l i g i o u s "beliefs "by c r e a t i n g a new r e l i g i o n . "We must now,"
says Gh.S., " f i g h t and conquer t h i s u n f a i t h f u l man, and save
1
the people from the danger o f involvement w i t h h i s ideas".' '
Mahdavi h i m s e l f also c a l l s Kasravi a t r a i t o r and f o r e i g n
agent, "because Kasravi was a member o f the Roya\L A s i a t i c .
2
Society o f London. According t o Mahdavi, t h i s Society's
c h i e f aim i s t o keep the Eastern nations down by spreading
u n r e a l i s t i c ; i d e a s and i n f l u e n c i n g innocent people's r e l i g i o u s
b e l i e f s , and Kasravi worked under i t s s u p e r v i s i o n t o t r y t o
3
save the B r i t i s h Colonies.
Kasravi's r e l i g i o u s views are attacked by a w r i t e r name
Qasem Eslami i n a book Atesh-e Enqelab (The F i r e o f
4
Revolution).* " He says t h a t Kasravi's motive f o r denying
miracles was personal because not being a r e a l prophet o f God
5

he could not p e r s o n a l l y perform m i r a c l e s ; so he t r i e d t o

increase h i s own importance i n the eyes o f the group o f
shallow-minded young people who surrounded him through h i s
r e f u s a l t o accept t h a t God i n s p i r e d Mohammad by sending
1. Ka.iravigari. v o l . 2. p. 6.
2. Ibid., p. 3 .
3 . J&A V PP 8-10. ,
!+. Qasem Eslam Atesh-e Enqelab. Tehran 1325/1946.
5. I b i d . , p. 52.
 299

G a b r i e l t o t h i s lower world. According t o K a s r a v i , the

Moslem b e l i e f s t h a t God's Prophet was informed o f h i s duty

by an angel and t h a t he i n f l u e n c e d the people by doing

miraculous t h i n g s are ideas which no reasonable mind can

1
accept; but Eslami, p e r s i s t s i n accepting them and t h i n k s

t h a t Kasravi's d e n i a l o f them was only a ..pretext t o j u s t i f y

the foundation o f h i s own spurious P a k - d i n i . As p r o o f o f
the existence o f p r o p h e t i c i n s p i r a t i o n form God (vahy),
Eslami quotes the Qor'an, I V , 162:

"And apostles whose s t o r i e s we t o l d you b e f o r e , and apostles

whose s t o r i e s we have n o t y e t t o l d you, and God spoke
p
d i r e c t l y t o Moses".
Eslami t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi could not d i f f e r e n t i a t e between
prophetic i n s p i r a t i o n (vahy) and o r d i n a r y i n s p i r a t i o n (elham),
and t h a t he completely denied the existence o f prophetic
inspiration.^ I n denying i t , Kasravi was i n Eslami's view
imputing falsehood t o t h e Qor'an.
Eslami also accuses Kasravi o f having s a i d t h a t Islam
4 -
i s not p r a c t i c a b l e i n today's c o n d i t i o n s o f l i f e . *
1. Qasem Eslami Atesh-e Enqelab. Tehran 1325/192+6, p. 63.
2. Sureli IV^al-Kesa,verse 161+.
3. Atesh-e Enqelab, p. 77.
1+. I b i d .
 300

He t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi was q u i t e unaware of the r e a l meaning

o f r e l i g i o n ; otherwise he would not have attacked and
c r i t i c i z e d the "beliefs of over f o u r hundred m i l l i o n o f t h i s
world's i n h a b i t a n t s ( i . e . the Moslems). As Eslami sees i t ,
Kasravi analysed r e l i g i o n i n a way s i m i l a r t o the way o f the
1
m a t e r i a l i s t i c p h i l o s o p h e r s , without r e a l i z i n g t h a t only
r e l i g i o n can e x p l a i n the o r i g i n , purpose, and d e s t i n a t i o n o f
life. Every creature knows i n s t i n c t i v e l y how t o s a t i s f y h i s
m a t e r i a l needs; b u t r e l i g i o n serves a higher purpose.
At the end o f h i s book, Eslami has added a chapter
c o n s i s t i n g o f a discussion between the f o l l o w e r s o f Kasravi
2

and an opponent c a l l e d Pur A f s a r . This man describes

Kasravi as a c r i m i n a l , because (so he says) Kasravi b u r n t
the book Mafatih ol-Janan (Keys t o the Gardens" i . e . of
paradise) which includes seventeen surehs of the Holy Qor'an.
I n an appendix, Eslami declares t h a t Kasravi was assassinated
s o l e l y because the r e l i g i o u s people wanted t o punish him.^"
He t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi deserved such punishment, and expresses
5

a d m i r a t i o n f o r the courage of Kasravi's murderers.

Another h o s t i l e book, Par Pasokh-e Kasravian ( i n reply
to Kasravi's f o l l o w e r s ) by Mir Abu*l-Path P a ' v a t i , ^ includes an
1. Atesh-e Enaelab, p. 115.
2. I b i d . , p. 124.
3. I b i d . , p. 124.
h. I b i d . , p. 161.
5. I b i d . , 162.
6. Mir Abu'l-Path Pa*vati Par Pasokh-e Kasravian, Tehran
13W1965.
 30%

i n t r o d u c t i o n "by a c e r t a i n Naser Makarem S h i r a z i , who gives

a "brief biography o f Kasravi and describes him as a man
who s u f f e r e d a l l through h i s l i f e from an i n f e r i o r i t y
complex. As a r e s u l t , he says, Kasravi formed some
i d i o t i c notions about Islam and p a r t i c u l a r l y Shi'ism, and
went on t o invent new ideas about r e l i g i o n g e n e r a l l y .
Kasravi gives h i s ideas about Shi*ism i n h i s book Be-
khwanand va d a v a r i konand. I n i t he has published some
photographs which i l l u s t r a t e s u p e r s t i t i o n s and p r e j u d i c e s ,
of simple people; b u t r e a l Moslems, i n Naser Makarem's
o p i n i o n , w i l l be q u i t e unimpressed.
Mir Abu'l-Fath Da'vati declares t h a t t r a i t o r s such as
Baha ( i . e . Baha'ollah) and Kasravi have t r i e d t o r u i n the
2
I r a n i a n natioris u n i t y . He t h i n k s t h a t Islam i s a d i g n i f i e d
r e l i g i o n w i t h no weak p o i n t s and t h a t the defect i n I r a n i a n
s o c i e t y i s the l a c k o f n a t i o n a l w e l l - b e i n g . I f the standard
of l i v i n g can be r a i s e d and every i n d i v i d u a l can be enabled
t o earn a good average subsistence, the enemies ( i . e . o f the
r e l i g i o n ) w i l l no longer be able t o i n f l u e n c e and mislead
people.
Towards the end o f the book, Da'vati contests Kasravi's
view t h a t the t w e l f t h Emam cannot have been l i v i n g i n
1—'—bt»y U»l6fl aDoVe. ; ~
2. Par Pasokh-e Kasravian. p. 76.
concealment f o r a thousand years, and cannot he expected
t o emerge a t some f u t u r e date and overcome h i s enemies,
without any army or supporters. Pa'vati r e p l i e s t h a t
Almighty God, who has created the t o r t o i s e w i t h a l i f e - s p a n
o f two hundred years, i s c e r t a i n l y capable o f doing
2
exceptional t h i n g s such as h i d i n g an Emam f o r a long t i m e .
As f o r Kasravi's other arguments, namely t h a t Uhe T w e l f t h
Emam should have presented h i m s e l f during h i s l i f e - t i m e ,
Da'vati r e p l i e s t h a t t h e r e are m i l l i o n s o f people who are
3 *
born unknown and who die unknown. Eventually the Emam w i l l
overthrow his. enemies by the sword o f h i s knowledge and
understanding, which i s always sharper than any m a t e r i a l
weapon,
Mr. Mahdi Mojtahedi i n h i s s c h o l a r l y book Re.ial-e
i£zarbai.iian dar 'Asr-e Mashrutiat has w r i t t e n an essay about
K a s r a v i , ^ which he says t h a t Kasravi's a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h
C h r i s t i a n s w h i l e he was teaching i n the American Memorial
School drew h i s mind towards r e l i g i o u s matters. Mojtahedi
t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi intended t o devise an " i d e a l c i t y "
(madineh-ye- f a z e l e h ) , i . e . a k i n d o f i d e a l s o c i e t y whose
i n h a b i t a n t s would b e l i e v e i n a form o f r e l i g i o n having no
connection e i t h e r w i t h mysticism or w i t h p h i l o s o p h i c a l
n o t i o n s . Such a r e l i g i o n , i n Mojtahedi's view, could not
1 . Par Pasokh-e Kasravian, pp 95-96.
2. I b i d . . pp 97-98.
3 . I b i d . , p.99.
h» Mahdi Mojtahedi, Rejal-e • Azarbiaijan dar 'Asr-e M a s h r u t i a t ,
pp 130-131.
 303

p o s s i b l y e x i s t or survive i n p r a c t i c e . A l l the religions

of the world are i n one way or other conventional; they
cannot do without t r a d i t i o n a l b e l i e f s and r i t u a l s .
Mojtahedi regards Kasravi as an extremist;-, who never
b e l i e v e d i n mental freedom f o r every i n d i v i d u a l , b u t only
f o r those who p r a c t i s e d Bak d i n i (pure r e l i g i o n ) . Mojtahedi
1
likens K a s r a v i s r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s t o those o f the Wahhabites.
He.attached olSma very sharply and q u i t e u n m e r c i f u l l y , and
e v e n t u a l l y he p a i d f o r t h i s w i t h h i s p a t h e t i c death.
We now r e v e r t t o our own views about Kasravi's w r i t i n g s
on r e l i g i o u s subjects. I t seems t o us t h a t h i s c r i t i c i s m s
o f present day Islam and Moslem sects, and o f s u p e r s t i t i o n s
and wrong ideas which they have absorbed, are very accurate
and profound. Admittedly these c r i t i c i s m s are mainly negative
and i n s u f f i c i e n t l y p o s i t i v e . Even so they are t r u e , and
Kasravi deserves great c r e d i t f o r h i s courage i n speaking the
truth. None o f the e s t a b l i s h e d r e l i g i o u s leaders could r e f u t e
h i s c r i t i c i s m s . The many books which were w r i t t e n against him
have come mostly from i n e p t persons, who do not answer him
but simply repeat o l d dogmas or pour out abuse.
At the same time, we t h i n k t h a t Kasravi was wrong t o go
beyond t h i s stage and s t a r t a new " r e l i g i o n " or s e c t , Pak-dini.
I t seems t o us t h a t there i s nothing o r i g i n a l i n Pak-dini and
 30U

t h a t i t i s i n f a c t only a c o l l e c t i o n o f e t h i c a l ideas.
Admittedly Kasravi d i d not claim t h a t i t was o r i g i n a l , h u t
regarded i t a a s a branch or "road" o f Islam. As we have
mentioned e a r l i e r , he h i m s e l f deserves c r i t i c i s m because he
does not e x p l a i n what the "pure" Islam o f e a r l y Moslem times
r e a l l y was, nor what the p u r i f i e d Islam or "Pure R e l i g i o n "
(Pak-dini) o f modern times ought t o be. He also leaves other
problems unanswered; e.g. are the Qor'anic laws o f marriage,
divorce and i n h e r i t a n c e wholly s u i t a b l e i n modern c o n d i t i o n s ,
and what should a modern Moslem or Pak-din do about these
problems?
U n f o r t u n a t e l y K a s r a v i , when he wrote Var.javand Bonyad.
chose the name Pak-dmi f o r h i s p a r t i c u l a r r e l i g i o u s and
e t h i c a l ideas. Although modern man r e j e c t s s u p e r s t i t i o n and
h a l l u c i n a t i o n , and does not f o l l o w h i s r e l i g i o n as b l i n d l y
as h i s f o r e f a t h e r s d i d , up t o now a l l attempts t o put new
r e l i g i o n s i n Islam's place have u l t i m a t e l y f a i l e d . When
Pak-dini was i n t r o d u c e d , people suspected Kasravi o f wanting
t o r u i n Islam and put a f a l s e new r e l i g i o n i n i t s place.
Some I r a n i a n s were reminded o f Mirza Mohammad * A l i Bab
( d . 1267A®S2)) and h i s successor Baha'ollah ( d . 1310/1892),
who completely broke away from Islam and provoked a l o t o f
disorder and bloodshed. For these reasons Kasravi's w r i t i n g s
 305

encountered a great deal o f h o s t i l i t y , and he himself i n

s p i t e o f h i s great p a t r i o t i s m was denounced as a t r a i t o r
working f o r a f o r e i g n power. I n our o p i n i o n , t h e adoption
of the name Pak-dini was Kasravi's worst mistake. I t gave
an excuse f o r h i s opponents t o denounce him as an enemy o f
Islam. There was n o t , as we see i t , any need whatever f o r
Kasravi, who was a scholar and a moral and socio - p o l i t i c a l
reformer, t o l a b e l h i s ideas w i t h a name l i k e P a k - d i n i . He
had o f t e n s a i d and emphasized t h a t he had no i n t e n t i o n o f
assuming the f u n c t i o n o f a prophet; b u t by choosing the
name Pak-dini he appeared t o c o n t r a d i c t t h i s d e n i a l . I f
Kasravi had not made t h i s mistake, h i s moral teachings would
receive more a t t e n t i o n . People today have not only ceased
t o f o l l o w r e l i g i o u s leaders b l i n d l y as they d i d i n the middle
ages; they also f i n d i t impossible t o b e l i e v e i n supernatural
t h i n g s which stand outside s c i e n t i f i c laws. A moral leader
must t h e r e f o r e t r y t o i n f l u e n c e people, not as a prophet or
superior man, b u t through the m e r i t o f h i s teachings. To us
Kasravi's moral teachings, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n h i s book
Var.lavand Bonyad. are important and valuable. One o f h i s
p r i n c i p l e s , namely t h a t l a n d should be awarded by those who
c u l t i v a t e i t , has become the law o f I r a n under t h e Land Reform
Act o f 1314.1/1962. Some o f h i s p r i n c i p l e s , such as f a v o u r i n g
 306

country v i l l a g e s r a t h e r than c i t i e s , and l i m i t i n g the size

of business c a p i t a l , are not altogether appropriate now
t h a t I r a n and other countries have seen the need f o r
i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n ' , h u t i t i s s t i l l important t h a t farmers
and v i l l a g e r s should he j u s t l y t r e a t e d , and t h a t p r i v a t e
monopolies should not be allowed. We also t h i n k t h a t Kasravi
exaggerated the harmfulness o f Sufism, even though there
i s some t r u t h i n what he s a i d , and t h a t he was too i n t o l e r a n t ,
e s p e c i a l l y i n h i s burning o f books. I n general, however, we
agree w i t h Kasravi's teachings about p r i v a t e conduct and the
need f o r honesty, s i n c e r i t y and hard work, and w i t h h i s teachings
about s o c i a l j u s t i c e , democracy and i n t e r n a t i o n a l g o o d w i l l .
We t h i n k t h a t a n a t i o n which f o l l o w s these teachings i s l i k e l y
to have a happy, and prosperous f u t u r e .
 307

CHAPTER SIX

. KASRAVI'S VIEWS ON MYSTICISM.

PHILOSOPHY AND MATERIALISM

Kasravi's book S u f i g a r i . about mysticism (Sufism) and

i t s development i n the East, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n I r a n , i s one o f
h i s most i n t e r e s t i n g works. He begins by saying t h a t t h e
w o r l d faces many d i f f i c u l t i e s , which people have t o deal
with. On t o p o f these d i f f i c u l t i e s , people have t o f i g h t
against two i d e o l o g i e s , each o f which causes a m u l t i t u d e o f
troubles. They are mysticism and m a t e r i a l i s m . I n Kasravi's
2
opinion n e i t h e r o f them can be e l i m i n a t e d by science. This
i s proved by the f a c t t h a t even a s c i e n t i s t can be devoted t o
Sufisra. The only e f f e c t i v e way t o get r i d o f m a t e r i a l i s m and
Sufism, Kasravi t h i n k s , i s through the guidance o f f e r e d by
true r e l i g i o n . ^
Kasravi holds t h a t Sufism came o r i g i n a l l y from Greece
and was founded (as a system) by P l o t i n u s (c.205-262 A.D.),
who t r i e d t o introduce mystic b e l i e f s i n t h e dress o f
philosophy.** P l o t i n u s , he says, attempted t o prove t h a t man
i s a sign o f God and t h a t i f he t r i e s t o p u r i f y h i s s p i r i t
he w i l l e v e n t u a l l y be able t o f i n d h i s way back t o h i s o r i g i n ,
1. K a s r a v i , S u f i g a r i . Tehran 1322/19U3.
2. I b i d . , pp 3-5.
3. I b i d . , p.20.
k. I b i d , p.9.
 308

which i s God. But we cannot depend on what P l o t i n u s says,

for the simple reason t h a t he gives no proof o r acceptable
reason. Kasravi goes, on t o say t h a t God has p e r m i t t e d man
•i
to enjoy h i m s e l f i n t h i s w o r l d ; b u t according t o t h e b e l i e f s
o f P l o t i n u s and t h e S u f i s , man must t r y hard t o r e j e c t a l l
the enjoyable t h i n g s i n l i f e i n order t o r e t u r n t o God.
Some o f the S u f i s were even more extreme and went so f a r as
to say t h a t man can become a God. P l o t i n u s i n h i s own l i f e
a t t r a c t e d some o f t h e people by t h i s d o c t r i n e .
During t h e e a r l y centuries o f Islam, Greek philosophy,
2
which also included Sufism, came t o t h e East. Some o f i t s
f o l l o w e r s c a r r i e d the r e j e c t i o n o f w o r l d l y t h i n g s so f a r
t h a t they became a b s o l u t e l y i n a c t i v e . They were j u s t amusing
themselves, Kasravi t h i n k s , w i t h t h e i r own h a l l u c i n a t i o n s .
According t o t h e i r ideas, r e l i g i o n s were good f o r simple
people and u s e f u l t o s o c i e t y , whereas Sufism was f o r a
selected class who are i n t e l l i g e n t and c l e v e r i n t h e i r way
of t h i n k i n g . I n t h e East, P l o t i n u s ' s philosophy d i d n o t
keep i t s e a r l y s i m p l i c i t y . Eastern S u f i s began t o ignore
t h e i r duties t o society. They never worked t o earn t h e i r
l i v e l i h o o d , and some o f them degraded themselves t o t h e
extent o f begging. Far from being ashamed o f t h e i r behaviour,
they were proud o f i t . I n the e a r l y phases o f Islam, Moslems
1
» S u f i g a r i . pp 10-11.
2. I b i d . p.11.
;
 309

had "been a f r a i d t o accept S u f i d o c t r i n e s and had even shown

•j
enmity t o S u f i s ; b u t afterwards Sufism increased everywhere
i n the East, i n I r a n , I n d i a , Iraq,, S y r i a and Egypt. One o f
the many reasons, and probably an e s s e n t i a l one, why the
I r a n i a n s f a i l e d t o r e s i s t when the Mongols attacked was t h a t
the people were l a z y ; having been spellbound by Sufism, they
l o s t t h e i r manliness. Their minds were poisoned by t h e
wrong S u f i a t t i t u d e t o l i f e and t h i s w o r l d . During the r e i g n
o f the Safavids (1501-1722), the S u f i s became l e s s powerful
i n I r a n and g r a d u a l l y l o s t much o f the i n f l u e n c e which they
had possessed b e f o r e . Nevertheless a t the present time we
can s t i l l see S u f i groups i n some p a r t s o f I n d i a and also a
few i n I r a n , Such, i n b r i e f , has been the h i s t o r y o f Sufism,
U n f o r t u n a t e l y , Kasravi continues, Sufism i n t e r f e r e d n o t
2.
j u s t w i t h one aspect o f l i f e , b u t w i t h every aspect. One
o f the ways by which the S u f i s t r i e d t o introduce t h e i r
philosophy or way o f t h i n k i n g was through p o e t r y , A large
number o f poets who were devoted t o Sufism appeared i n I r a n .
Kasravi f i n d s many bad p o i n t s i n Sufism.
1. The S u f i s never agreed on a s i n g l e d e f i n i t e idea. They
were at variance w i t h each other on many p o i n t s o f t h e i r
teaching,
1 . S u f i g a r i , p.15.
2. I b 15.
3. Poets such as ' A t t a r , Mowlana J a l a l o l - D i n Rumi, Owhadi,
*Eraqi and Jami.
 310

2. L i f e today (and Kasravi s t r o n g l y emphasizes t h i s p o i n t )

does not permit anybody t o give up t r y i n g and t o "become;
absolutely i d l e , S u f i s were a group o f i d l e r s who used t o
l i v e unashamedly on other people's c h a r i t y . Even t h e i r best
known leaders used t o beg. From the f i n a n c i a l p o i n t o f view,
S u f i s depended on what they could get from other people.

3. Many S u f i s remained s i n g l e and d i d not get married; t h i s

was s i n f u l behaviour, because marriage and c h i l d b e a r i n g are
duties: o f every normal man and woman, and as a r e s u l t immo-
r a l i t y c o n s t a n t l y increased among the S u f i s .
k» The major s i n o f the S u f i s , which has also been t h e i r
most n o t i c e a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s t h e i r o u t l o o k on the
world. They used t o speak of the unworthiness o f t h i s lower
world and always looked a t the d i f f i c u l t i e s and black spots
of l i f e . They were thoroughly p e s s i m i s t i c , and misjudged
almost e v e r y t h i n g .
2
Aa Kasravi recognises, we cannot deny t h a t l i f e i s f u l l
of d i f f i c u l t i e s , and t h a t i n nature there i s u g l i n e s s as w e l l
as beauty, harshness as w e l l as gentleness, b i t t e r n e s s as w e l l
as sweetness; but t h i s does not mean t h a t a person should g i v e
up hope and be i d l e . L i f e has ups and downs, and an a l i v e
person must t r y t o remove l i f e ' s woes. Only through a c t i o n
1. S u f i g a r i . p.20.
2
» rpia*} PP 23-2l|-.
 311

and s t r u g g l e can we overcome d i f f i c u l t i e s and achieve any-

thing creditable.
5» Another abominable h a b i t o f which the S u f i s were very
fond was s i n g i n g and dancing i n a most p e c u l i a r way w i t h
the purpose o f l o s i n g consciousness. They thought t h a t i f
they could make themselves unconscious, the soul would f l y
out o f the f l e s h and skeleton and t h a t they would then r e -
j o i n e t e r n i t y which i s God. T h i s very idea was a s i n s u f f i -
c i e n t t o degrade them.
6. F i n a l l y , t h e S u f i s thought t h a t wisdom and i n t e l l e c t
have no value. They always emphasized the unworthiness o f
the human mind. Yet no one can s e r i o u s l y deny how precious
i s t h i s p a r t o f the human "brain. A l l t h e achievements which
man has won are t h e product o f h i s i n t e l l e c t and h i s wisdom.
I n Kasravi's o p i n i o n , t h e Sufis can never "be f o r g i v e n f o r
a l l the harm they did. "by denying the value o f the human mind.
T h e i r outlook and t h e o r i e s about almost e v e r y t h i n g are
2
inadmissible. Unfortunately*Kasravi goes on t o say, i n s t e a d
of doing away w i t h t h e i r r e l i c s , which are t h e i r books,
c e r t a i n persons are e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y r e p u b l i s h i n g S u f i works
such as ' A t t a r ' s Tazkerat o l - O w l i y a i Mowlana Rumi*s Masnavi
and Jami*s Nafahat ol-Ons.
1* S u f i g a r i , p.20.
2. Kasravi, Parhang ast ya Nayrang. Tehran 1325/1946, pp 5-6.
 312

Kasravi considers t h a t t h e S u f i s d i d great harm t o

Islam. The d o c t r i n e s o f Sufism not only have n o t h i n g i n
common w i t h Islam, he t h i n k s , "but are e n t i r e l y opposed t o
it. Moslems b e l i e v e i n one a l l - p o w e r f u l God, who created
the world and possesses knowledge o f everything hut has no
d i r e c t connection w i t h humans. S u f i s , on the other hand,
b e l i e v e t h a t God and humans are e s s e n t i a l l y the same. They
even consider man t o be as mighty and powerful as God, and
thus conceive t h e n o t i o n o f being themselves God. Although
the I s l a m i c a t t i t u d e t o l i f e i s e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t from
t h e i r s , they l a t e r f o r t h e i r own convenience t r i e d t o l i n k
Islam w i t h Sufism. At the same time they misunderstood t h e
Qor an, and used t o e x p l a i n and i n t e r p r e t i t i n accordance
2
w i t h t h e i r own philosophy. There i s a Qor^inic sentence
("Wherever you are, He i s w i t h
you")* The S u f i s changed the meaning according t o t h e i r
t a s t e and made i t out t o be "Everywhere I am i n you." Since
t h e i r c h i e f i n t e n t i o n was t o l i n k Islam w i t h Sufism, they
were always p u z z l i n g which idea should be accepted. There
was also a group o f S u f i s who were BO devoted t o ' A l i t h a t
they went t o the p o i n t o f g i v i n g him the t i t l e "God".

1 . K a s r a v i , Par Rah-e S i a s a t , Tehran 1328@/l9'6I, pp

2. Sureh 57, al-Hadid, verse k.
 313

Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t Sufism debased the people's minds

i n a very s i g n i f i c a n t way. He recognizes t h a t not a l l the
S u f i s were wicked or narrow-minded persons; but since the
path which they f o l l o w e d was not r i g h t , they not only f a i l e d
t o achieve anything worthy but also developed strange and
i r r a t i o n a l ideas about human l i f e . T h e i r excuse f o r begging
and n e g l e c t i n g t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d was t h a t they were supposed
t o purge the p e r s o n a l i t y o f s e l f i s h n e s s ; but they could not
invent any excuse f o r t h e i r l a z i n e s s . Furthermore, Kasravi
2
says, they were not a f r a i d o f t e l l i n g and spreading l i e s .
I n order t o impress people, they used t o p r a c t i s e magic,
l i k e speaking w i t h animals, walking on the surface o f water,
f o r t u n e - t e l l i n g , making dead persons a l i v e again, e t c .
K a 8 r a v i then says t h a t we must r e a l i z e t h a t the world*s

s t r u c t u r e has been created by God and t h a t we human beings

cannot change or i n t e r p r e t any p a r t o f i t merely according
t o our own t a s t e s . I f g o l d could be made out o f stones,
Kasravi asks, why beg?'' That would d e f i n i t e l y not be l o g i c a l .
Such a t t i t u d e s show how the S u f i s were against God and His
c r e a t i o n , j u s t as they were r e b e l l i o u s i n many other ways.
Kasravi then r e v e r t s t o the question, how d i d the
I r a n i a n s become i n f e r i o r t o the Mongols?** By naturae the
1 . K a s r a v i , Dadgah, Tehran 1325/1946, p.10.
2. S u f i g a r i . p.hi*
3. I b i d . , p.53.
h. I b i d . pp 56-66.
;
I r a n i a n n a t i o n i s "brave. Through most o f t h e i r h i s t o r y , t h e
I r a n i a n s have fought against t h e i r enemies, but when t h e
Mongols invaded I r a n and k i l l e d thousands upon thousands o f
innocent women and c h i l d r e n , the I r a n i a n s f a i l e d t o defend
t h e i r country. E a r l i e r , during t h e f o u r t h and f i f t h
centuries., o f the Moslem era, the I r a n i a n s a f t e r accepting
Islam had become more and more brave and p a t r i o t i c , because
Islam teaches people t o f i g h t f e a r l e s s l y and save t h e i r
country. A t the beginning o f the seventh century; when the
Mongol invasion took p l a c e , the f a i l u r e o f the I r a n i a n s w s a

obviously connected w i t h the ideas and a t t i t u d e s and the

philosophy o f l i f e then prevalent among them. By t h a t time
Sufism had spread a l l over I r a n . The people had become
attached t o i t , and i t s philosophy had degraded t h e i r minds
and made them u t t e r l y lazy and i n d i f f e r e n t t o t h e world*s
affairs. Having become p e s s i m i s t i c under the i n f l u e n c e o f
Sufism about almost e v e r y t h i n g , they could not face t h e
facts of l i f e . As a r e s u l t t h i s n a t i o n , which had so o f t e n
been v i c t o r i o u s , f a i l e d t o r e s i s t and showed i t s e l f i n f e r i o r
to the Mongol invaders. For f o u r years Chengiz Khan went on
k i l l i n g the people and d e s t r o y i n g t h e i r b e a u t i f u l c i v i l i z e d
c i t i e s , while thousands o f I r a n i a n women were c a r r i e d o f f
as slaves t o Mongolia. Yet nobody had the courage t o f i g h t
and defend the c o u n t r y . The people*s mind had been poisoned
 315

"by wrong ideas and above a l l by the v i l e philosophy o f

Sufism, which had e l i m i n a t e d manliness from the n a t i o n a l
character and had turned I r a n i a n s i n t o submissive slaves.
Kasravi. next observes t h a t u n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e Moslem
leaders o f t h a t time were n o t aware o f the r e a l i t y ; they
not only d i d n o t h i n g t o eradicate t h i s poisonous philosophy,
but p o s i t i v e l y encouraged the S u f i s by h u i l d i n g s p e c i a l
schools f o r them and paying them l a r g e amounts o f money t o
develop t h e i r philosophy. For instance t h e C a l i p h a l -
Mostanser b e ' l l a h (1226-12U2), grandson o f al-Naser l e -
D i n e ' l l a h (1180-1225), b u i l t a school a t Baghdad f o r t h e
purpose of spreading S u f i philosophy, and the people r e -
garded t h i s school a symbol o f I s l a m i c c i v i l i z a t i o n . I n s t e a d
o f t r a i n i n g s o l d i e r s t o f i g h t the Mongols and u r g i n g t h e
people t o be p a t r i o t i c , t h e Moslem leaders busied themselves
p
w i t h such useless t h i n g s . Kasravi remarks t h a t Sa'di,
who l i v e d during t h e Mongol i n v a s i o n , wrote h i s Golestan
without even mentioning t h i s t r a g i c event. The S u f i s ,
Kasravi maintains, took advantage o f t h e Mongol conquest.^
Most o f them supposed t h a t Chengiz Khan was a sign o f God's
wrath and had been sent by God t o punish the people. I n
r e a l i t y , according t o K a s r a v i , t h e S u f i s were o p p o r t u n i s t s .
1.
2. SIbid.,
u f i g a p.62.
r i . p.13.
3. Ibid., p.72.
 316

They used t o say t h a t i f anybody t r e a t e d a S u f i c r u e l l y he

would e v e n t u a l l y come t o g r i e f . As the n a t i o n was most
s u p e r s t i t i o u s i n those days, and as the S u f i s knew the
people's weakness, they were able t o get money out of them.
I f somebody refused t o help them, they soon showed h o s t i l i t y
t o him. Shaykh Majd o l - D i n Baghdadi (d.606/1209-10 or 616/
A

1219-20), who w.es-awell known S u f i , was k i l l e d d u r i n g the

reign of Soltan Mohammad Khwarezmshah on t h i s r u l e r ' s order.
L a t e r , when the Mongols defeated the I r a n i a n s , the S u f i s
made a s t o r y out of the event: they s a i d t h a t God had sent
Chengiz Khan t o punish the I r a n i a n s f o r t h e i r S u f i f r i e n d ' s
death, and t h a t the defeat was a s o r t of revenge which God
had arranged.
Kasravi acknowledges t h a t P l o t i n u s , whom he regards as
the founder o f Sufism, was a sincere philosopher, even
though h i s philosophy i s objectionable from many p o i n t s of
view. Kasravi can f i n d one t r u t h i n i t w i t h which he agrees,
and t h i s i s P l o t i n u s ' s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t man i s not only f l e s h
and s k e l e t o n , but s p i r i t a l s o . This i s the only sound p a r t
of P l o t i n u s ' s philosophy, i n Kasravi's view. Later Plotinus
f o l l o w e d h i s own h a l l u c i n a t i o n s and made a very complicated
system out o f them. I n t h i s respect he t r o d i n the f o o t s t e p s
1. E. G. Browne,quoting Jami, t e l l s the s t o r y i n L i t e r a r y
H i s t o r y of P e r s i a . V o l . I I , pp &94-U95.
 317

of other philosophers and was not b e t t e r or worse than they

were. U l t i m a t e l y , however, he went t o the p o i n t o f saying
t h a t we human beings are a p a r t o f the c r e a t o r o f t h i s w o r l d
and t h a t there i s u n i t y between man and God. Kasravi thinks:
t h a t P l o t i n u s became v i r t u a l l y a p a n t h e i s t . According t o
t h i s p a r t o f P l o t i n u s ' s philosophy, we human beings should
refuse every s o r t o f enjoyable t h i n g s , and become a b s o l u t e l y
i n d i f f e r e n t t o t h i s world; we should keep ourselves i n hard-
ship because i t w i l l p u r i f y our s o u l s , so t h a t e v e n t u a l l y we

may j o i n God. Kasravi considers these ideas almost w h o l l y

2
wrong. God created a l l t h e enjoyable t h i n g s i n t h i s world
f o r the use o f human beings, n o t i n order t h a t they should
1
remain untouched. They are God s b l e s s i n g s t o man. Weed-
l e s s t o say every man should t r y t o purge h i B character o f
selfishness. This i s one o f P l o t i n u s ' s simple and reasonable
ideas, which we can a l l accept*, b u t even t h i s was afterwards
confused and s p o i l t by h i s successors. Kasravi ends by
p o i n t i n g out t h a t even today many centres o f Sufism still
e x i s t and S u f i s s t i l l l i v e on other people's c h a r t i y , w h i l e
u n f o r t u n a t e l y no one t r i e s t o get r i d o f them. They are s t i l l ,
3
he f e a r s , as s t r o n g as they were b e f o r e .
Kasravi expresses disapproval o f philosophy i n a short
1. S u f i g a r i , pp 72-73.
2. I b i d . , p.73.
3. I b i d . , pp 76-77-
 318

book Par Payramun-e Falsafeh (About Philosophy).^ He p o i n t s

out t h a t the word philosophy has a Greek o r i g i n and t h a t i t
i m p l i e s t h a t philosophers are persons who have more than
o r d i n a r y depth o f mind. Philosophy developed w i t h great
r a p i d i t y i n Greece, where any new idea was considered a
philosophy. Although philosophy began as a simple search
f o r t r u e knowledge, i t d i d not remain i n t h a t p o s i t i o n ,
Kasravi asserts t h a t he has never intended t o c r i t i c i z e .
genuine philosophers, i . e . l o v e r s of knowledge, such as
2
Socratea; but i n h i s view the h i s t o r y o f philosophy shows
t h a t people w i t h the oddest n o t i o n s were also acknowledged
as philosophers.
Kasravi goes on t o say t h a t a l l profound knowledge has
t o do w i t h a subject; but Greek philosophy d i d not g e n e r a l l y
deal w i t h any s p e c i f i c s u b j e c t . The philosophers never
used t o experiment or do research. H i s t o r y proves t h a t
Greece l o s t i t s s u p e r i o r i t y by becoming i n v o l v e d and obsessed
w i t h philosophy. Kasravi t h i n k s ^ t h a t p h i l o s o p h i c a l concepts
have v i t i a t e d man's i n t e l l e c t t o a very considerable e x t e n t .
One d i r e c t legacy o f philosophy i s l o g i c , which he regards
as a useless or a t l e a s t a not u r g e n t l y needed s u b j e c t . He
t h i n k s t h a t people are capable o f s o l v i n g t h e i r problems by
1. K a s r a v i , Par Payramun-e Falsafeh. r e p r i n t e d Tehran 1345/
1966, pp ^6-7.
2. Par Pavramun-e Falsafeh, p.6.
3. Ibid.t p.40.
4. I b i d . , p.10.
 319

t h e i r simple common, sense. Anyone who reads the Sharh-e

Matale' (an o l d Persian textbook o f l o g i c ) w i l l d e f i n i t e l y ,
so Kasravi says, do harm t o h i s mind. Kasravi s t a t e s t h a t
he opposes philosophy "because the d i f f e r e n t philosophers
argued about t h i s world and existence of God w i t h o u t the
2 * *
slightest proof. The Ekhvan ol-Safa (4th/l0th c e n t u r y ) ,
who used t o study philosophy s e c r e t l y , produced many books
3
which c o n t a i n t h e i r imaginary and unsubstantiated ideas.
The philosophers discussed n a t u r e , the sky, the e a r t h e t c . ,
and conceived n o t i o n s which l a t e r were almost completely
r e j e c t e d by the s c i e n t i s t s . Kasravi i n s i s t s t h a t man ought
t o t r y t o acquaint h i m s e l f w i t h u s e f u l subjects through
which he can improve h i s l i f e . ^ The study of s c i e n t i f i c
subjects such as astronomy, chemistry and geology has .>
reached a h i g h l e v e l i n advanced European c o u n t r i e s , because
the Europeans have observed and reasoned a c c u r a t e l y and t h e i r
s c i e n t i s t s have used experimental methods o f research.
Philosophy, on the other hand, i s not based on experimental
research, but according t o Kasravi i s based merely on
imagination.
Kasravi p o i n t s out t h a t t h e r e has h a r d l y ever been any
5
c o r d i a l i t y between two philosophers; even when they l i v e d
1.. This book i s mentioned by E.G. Browne i n h i s A year among
the Persians, London 1893/, p.lU7.
2. Par Payramun-e Falsafeh. pp 12-16.
3- Ibid.> p.12.
k. I b i d . , p.25.
5. I b i d . , pp k8-h9'
 320

i n s i m i l a r circumstances they always opposed one another i n

t h e i r never-ending arguments. For example Ghazzali ( d . l l l l )
wrote h i s hook Tahafot ol-Falasefeh t o show t h a t a number o f
philosophers h e l d s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y ideas, and Ebn Roshd
(d.1198) r e t o r t e d i n h i s book Tahafot ol-Tahafot t h a t
Ghazzali's ideas were s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y .
Although the t i t l e philosopher was supposed t o designate
h i g h l y i n t e l l i g e n t and s c h o l a r l y men who were l o v e r s o f
knowledge, i t was given d u r i n g the c e n t u r i e s , so Kasravi says,
t o the most shallow-minded persons. He i s convinced t h a t t h e
p
b a s i s o f most philosophy i s h a l l u c i n a t i o n , and n o t h i n g else.
When Greek philosophy came t o t h e East, the people w i t h t h e i r
v i v i d imaginations changed i t . They consequently found them-
selves more puzzled than ever, and t h i s upset the s t a b i l i t y o f
t h e i r minds.
Kasravi concludes by saying t h a t t h e ( r e a l ) philosopher
i s a man who can impart v i t a l i t y and l i f e t o the minds o f h i s
f e l l o w men by t e l l i n g them the t r u t h . ^
* * * 2i
I n a s h o r t book Par Pa.vramun-e Janvaran Kasravi speaks
about animals and man's dealings w i t h them. Through t h e
5
centuries man evolved and l e a r n t how t o capture w i l d animals
1 . Par Payramun-e Falsafeh, p,>55^ -' Z.
2. I b i d * , p.56.
3. I b i d . , v.62. ,
h. K a s r a v i . Par Payramun-e Janvaran, Tehran 1325/1946.
5. Par Payramun-e Janvaran. p . l 6 .
 321

and tame them i n order t o make use o f them. Animals have

been o f great value t o man i n i n d u s t r y , a g r i t i u l t u r e , housing
and t r a v e l l i n g . Kasravi goes on t o say t h a t man's way o f
t r e a t i n g animals has been very c r u e l and aggressive. He
c r i t i c i z e s man f o r e a t i n g and n o u r i s h i n g h i m s e l f by
p
s l a u g h t e r i n g animals. Kasravi f i n d s the w o r l d o f b i r d s
3
particularly attractive. Some b i r d s are very e x o t i c and
w o n d e r f u l l y b e a u t i f u l ; we can keep and breed them w i t h o u t
h

e a t i n g them. He -also i s s t r i c t l y against h u n t i n g b i r d s ;

i f man keeps on h u n t i n g them, t h e i r race w i l l g r a d u a l l y
become e x t i n c t .
Kasravi goes on t o discuss the idea o f some philosophers
5
t h a t the w o r l d i s an o r g a n i z a t i o n o f "eater and eaten," and
t h a t weaker animals have t o be s a c r i f i c e d and k i l l e d so t h a t
stronger ones may be able t o e x i s t i n t h e w o r l d . The idea
has been h e l d since the s t a r t o f history', b u t when Darwin
and the m a t e r i a l i s t i c philosophers came onto t h e scene, i t
was elaborated by them and f u r t h e r strengthened. Kasravi
then p o i n t s out t h a t although the r e l i g i o n s have not objected
t o man's n o u r i s h i n g himself on the f l e s h o f v a r i o u s animals,
no r e l i g i o n has r e q u i r e d man t o eat meat. Kasravi t h i n k s
t h a t t h e r e are s t i l l p l e n t y o f f r u i t s and vegetables which
1 • Par Pavramun-e Janvaran. p«18.
2. Ibid./ p.27.
3. rbid., p.38.
k. I b i d . , ppl|.0.
5. I b i d . , p.58.
6. I b i d . , p.62.
 322

man can e a t , w i t h o u t needing f l e s h . He says t h a t although

1
i n Islam people may slaughter animals such as sheep, cows
and camels, t h e r e i s r e a l l y no p o i n t i n c a r r y i n g on such a
p r a c t i c e ; Islam also allowed s l a v e r y , hut t h a t can no longer
he p r a c t i s e d .
An anonymous correspondent wrote a l t t e r t o K a s r a v i ,
censuring him f o r p r o h i b i t i n g people t o eat the f l e s h of
2
animals. Kasravi r e p l i e d t h a t man i s superior t o a l l
c r e a t u r e s , and t h a t j u s t as no reasonable person today w i l l
p r a c t i s e s l a v e r y even though the Qor'an p e r m i t t e d i t , man
today should l i k e w i s e r e f r a i n from e a t i n g f l e s h .
I n h i s book Par Payramun-e Ravan (On the S o u l ) , ^ Kasravi
discusses m a t e r i a l i s m as a philosophy and outlook on l i f e .
He regards materialism-as one o f the worst i l l s which have
h
appeared i n our w o r l d . I n the f i r s t place i t degrades human
beings, making them b e l i e v e t h a t they have no power t o
improve themselves and t o choose b e t t e r ways o f l i f e . Mater-
i a l i s m denies the existence of good and e v i l i n the u n i v e r s e .
5
I t holds t h a t the o n l y source from which a human being can
get knowledge and understanding i s h i s b r a i n and t h a t the
human b r a i n i s p u r e l y m a t e r i a l and a b s o l u t e l y subject t o
m a t e r i a l i n f l u e n c e s from i n s i d e and o u t s i d e . This philosophy
1. Par Payramun-e Janvaran. p;l8Q.
2. Mentioned i n Par Pasokh-e Bad-Khwahan.
3. K a s r a v i . Par Payramun-e Ravan, Tehran 1325/1946.
4. Par Payramun-e Ravan. p.10.
5. Ka§ravi here r e f e r s t o the ideas expressed by Pr. Taqi
AMl ra at net rie ir a'(see t foot-no^e
ls i sbookP r i'Erfan s1) .Osul-e
n c i p l eva on p.325^Chapter 6) b e l o wand
Maddi (Mysticism ) i n the
 323

gives no value t o the human mind; according t o i t , life

c o n s i s t s of a s t r u g g l e , i n which people only work t o s a t i s f y
t h e i r s e l f i s h wants and must c o n s t a n t l y f i g h t one another.
No value i s placed on the great men who strove t o prepare
mankind f o r a "better f u t u r e , such as Mohammad, Jesus, Moses,
I n the second p l a c e , Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t a l l the e l e -
ments of the m a t e r i a l i s t philosophy c o n f l i c t w i t h the
observed f a c t s o f human "behaviour. Approval o f m a t e r i a l i s m
i s t h e r e f o r e a very great mistake. The main cause o f
humanity's "backwardness has undoubtedly been the spreading
o f such baseless ideas. We cannot accept t h a t a l l people
work only w i t h s e l f i s h motives. Kasravi admits t h a t absolute
s e l f i s h n e s s may be a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f animals, but denies
•j

t h a t i t i s o f humans. There i s p l e n t y of evidence t h a t the

human being i s n a t u r a l l y k i n d and h e l p f u l t o h i s own species.'
What i n f l u e n c e other than t h i s could there be i n a man's
character which would make him take o f f h i s own coat i n c o l d
w i n t e r weather and give i t t o a poor i l l - c l a d man? Such
behaviour cannot be explained by s e l f i s h n e s s , but only by
man's tendency t o be a f f e c t i o n a t e towards h i s own k i n d . The
human being i s not a mere combination of f l e s h and bcaies:; he
also has a s o u l . Admittedly among animals the male shows
a f f e c t i o n towards the female; but t h i s a f f e c t i o n springs from
1 . Par Pa.vramun-e Ravan. p*8.
2. I b i d . , p.12.
 32k

s e l f i s h n e s s , n o t from r e a l sympathy or a f f e c t i o n . Animals

take care o f t h e i r c h i l d r e n u n t i l a c e r t a i n age, a f t e r which
the parents become complete strangers t o the c h i l d r e n .
Kasravi has no o b j e c t i o n t o Darwin's theory t h a t human beings
are descendants o f monkeys, b u t t h i n k s t h a t we must a l l
admit t h a t man i s a t t h e same time a s p e c i a l creature o f God.
Man has been evolved by God w i t h a unique b r a i n and power
o f reasoning, and cannot t h e r e f o r e be i n c l u d e d i n t h e
category o f animals. The human mind alone makes man superior
t o animals, because i t g i v e e him a very t r u s t w o r t h y judgment.
The m a t e r i a l i s t philosophy, which places man on a par w i t h
animals) i s absurd and w h o l l y unacceptable.
Kasravi emphasizes t h a t we human beings can equip our-
selves w i t h good humour and good c h a r a c t e r , whereas animals
2
are n o t capable o f doing any such t h i n g . The most poisonous
aspect o f m a t e r i a l i s m i s i t s disparagement o f t h e human mind.
The mind and the f a c u l t y o f reason belong t o t h e s p i r i t u a l
p a r t o f the human b e i n g , which i s n o t m a t e r i a l . I n our
human l i f e , a l l actions ought t o be under the control, o f
reason. Kasravi considers war and f i g h t i n g t o be a d i r e c t
3
result o f materialism. M i l l i o n s o f young people were k i l l e d
i n the war j u s t because t h e whole world was moving r a p i d l y
towards a m a t e r i a l i s t outlook.
1 • Par Payramun-e Ravan. p.17*
2. I b i d . / T>T> 19-20.
3. I b i d . v.kl.
;
 325

While condemning materialism as a f a l s e philosophy,

Kasravi recognized t h a t many m a t e r i a l i s t s such as Dr. Taqi
* 1
A r a n i had a great deal o f sympathy and f e e l i n g f o r humanity;
*

hut he regarded t h e i r ideas as s e l f c o n t r a d i c t o r y . Dr. A r a n i

was against c a p i t a l i s m ; y e t he and many^others who opposed i t
never r e a l i z e d t h a t t h i s o p p o s i t i o n was i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h
t h e i r support f o r materialism. I f they accepted the view
t h a t t h i s l i f e i s a struggle f o r s u r v i v a l i n which the
weaker creature must be s a c r i f i c e d f o r t h e s t r o n g e r , they
ought n o t t o oppose t h e ownership o f c a p i t a l o r f a c t o r i e s
or l a r g e sums o f money by i n d i v i d u a l s . L o g i c a l l y a materia-
l i s t should accept t h e motto o f t h e German w r i t e r Nietzsche
(1844-1900), who s a i d : "Happiness comes t o you when you f i n d
a weaker man and make y o u r s e l f superior t o him." Materia-
l i s t s t h e r e f o r e have no j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n
to the c a p i t a l i s t system.
Kasravi goes on t o say t h a t i f man adopts m a t e r i a l i s m ,
science w i l l never give him complete s a t i s f a c t i o n . Accor-
ding t o Dr. Arani's ideology, t h e source o f a l l human
a c t i o n s i s the b r a i n . Ancient Greek philosophers such as
Hippocrates b e l i e v e d t h a t man's soul i s l o c a t e d i n h i s
nervous system; Descartes b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e human soul i s a
l i q u i d , and mystics compared the r e l a t i o n between soul and
1 . The founder o f t h e Tudeh (Communist) p a r t y i n I r a n ; he
died i n p r i s o n i n 1317/1938. He was a German-trained
professor o f engineering. He also published a p e r i o d i c a l
c a l l e d Donya (World), i n which he expressed h i s ideas.
See also note 5 on . Pabove.
3 2 2
 326

body w i t h the r e l a t i o n between two l o v e r s ; b u t according t o

Dr. A r a n i , modern science has disproved a l l these n o t i o n s
and has proved t h a t t h e s o u l does not e x i s t a t a l l as an
independent f a c t o r , b u t i s only a m a t e r i a l q u a l i t y o f t h e
human body. Kasravi t h i n k s t h a t t h e arguments o f Dr. A r a n i
and other exponents o f m a t e r i a l i s m are not conclusive. I t
i s n o t , as they c l a i m , an advanced philosophy, because very
many modern t h i n k e r s r e j e c t i t . For example, Flammarion
(the French astronomer); i n h i s book "The Mystery o f Death";
w r i t e s t h a t i f p h y s i o l o g i s t s suppose t h a t t h e human being's
b r a i n i s t h e only source o f h i s v i t a l i t y , they are c e r t a i n l y
mistaken. Many b r a i n operations and experiments have been
performed, and the p a t i e n t s have recovered and continued t o
l i v e normally throughout t h e i r l i v e s . There must be some-
t h i n g else which r u l e s the human being's l i f e , and which i s
undoubtedly superior t o h i s b r a i n . The worst e r r o r o f
m a t e r i a l i s m , however, i s i t s claim t h a t man does and should
l i v e according t o the desires and needs o f h i s body, w i t h
p h y s i c a l s e l f - s a t i s f a c t i o n as h i s only purpose. The
m a t e r i a l i s t s , I n Kasravi's view, c a l l upon man t o act l i k e
a mere animal.
I n a newspaper named Pand (jAdvice"), an anonymous w r i t e r
contested Kasravi's views on m a t e r i a l i s m . K a s r a v i , he s a i d ,
was moving i n a wrong d i r e c t i o n . He wanted t o deny man's
 327

i n s t i n c t i v e d e s i r e s and p u t reason i n t h e i r p l a c e ; b u t

modern p s y c h o l o g y has l i n k e d r e a s o n and i n s t i n c t , and has

p r o v e d t h a t t h e human r a c e must f o r t h e sake o f i t s w e l l -

b e i n g t r y t o s t r e n g t h e n i t s i n s t i n c t i v e f e e l i n g s and f u l f i l

i t s i n s t i n c t i v e desires. K a s r a v i r e p l i e s t h a t t h e "reason"

about w h i c h such m a t e r i a l i s t s speak i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t f r o m

"reason" as he d e f i n e s i t . When t h e y say t h a t man must

t r y t o s t r e n g t h e n h i s i n s t i n c t s f o r t h e sake o f h i s w e l l -

b e i n g , t h e y a r e c o n t r a d i c t i n g t h e m s e l v e s , because bad and

good i n s t i n c t s a r e combined i n every person's c h a r a c t e r .

K a s r a v i i s c o n v i n c e d t h a t i f we a r e t o e l i m i n a t e e v i l and

r e p l a c e i t w i t h good, we need a t r u s t w o r t h y g u i d e t o super-

v i s e u s , and t h a t t h i s g u i d e i s r e a s o n i n i t s r e a l meaning.

Only b y t h e power o f reason can man overcome h i s bad i n s t i n c t s .

1. Par Pa.yramun-e Ravan, p.62.

 328

CHAPTER SEVEN

KASRAVI'S POLITICAL AND

SOCIOLOGICAL IDEAS.

A number o f K a s r a v i ' s a r t i c l e s f r o m Parcham have "been

c o l l e c t e d b y t h e Izadegan p a r t y i n a book c a l l e d Enqelab

c h i s t ("What i s R e v o l u t i o n " ? ) J I n the f i r s t article,

p
Kasravi discusses c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government. He t h i n k s
t h a t i t s b a s i c meaning i s t h a t a group o f p e o p l e who l i v e
i n one c o u n t r y co-operate w i t h one another i n a l l processes
of life. To K a s r a v i t h i s i s t h e b e s t f o r m o f government.^
I f i t has n o t f l o u r i s h e d i n I r a n , t h i s has been because o f
t h e people's i g n o r a n c e . I r a n i a n s are burdened w i t h a g r e a t
many f a l l a c i o u s and o f t e n h a r m f u l beliefs.
Every n a t i o n c e l e b r a t e s c e r t a i n days as f e s t i v a l s i n
r e c o g n i t i o n and a p p r e c i a t i o n o f g r e a t events i n i t s h i s t o r y .
In I r a n , o n l y two i m p o r t a n t f e s t i v a l s are now c e l e b r a t e d :
Nowruz (New Year's Day on t h e v e r n a l e q u i n o x ) , and C o n s t i -
t u t i o n Day c e l e b r a t e d on t h e H r t h o f t h e month o f Mordad
( e q u i v a l e n t t o August 5 t h o r t h e r e a b o u t s ) , t h e a n n i v e r s a r y o f
t h e day on which I r a n i a n s g a i n e d t h e i r l i b e r t y . Here K a s r a v i
makes a d i g r e s s i o n , ^ " and proves t h a t t h e day on w h i c h Mozaffar
1. K a s r a v i , Enqelab c h i s t , e d i t e d b y t h e iAzadegan p a r t y ,
Tehran 1337/1958.
2. Enqelab c h i s t , p.ij..
3. I b i d p.8.
v

h. I b i d . / p.6.
 329

o l - D i n Shah s i g n e d t h e c h a r t e r o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government

was r e a l l y t h e 13th o f Mordiad, n o t t h e l U t h , and t h a t when

the c a l e n d a r was changed ( i n 1925) t h e date was wrongly cal-

culated. T h i s i s an a n n i v e r s a r y which a l l I r a n i a n s s h o u l d

always c e l e b r a t e i n remembrance o f g r e a t f i g u r e s such as

Behbahani, T a b a t a b a i , S a t t a r Khan and many others> who fought

f o r t h e i r freedom; b u t a c c o r d i n g t o K a s r a v i , nobody, n o t even

•i

t h e educated c l a s s e s , seems t o care about them any l o n g e r .

I t must be a d m i t t e d , K a s r a v i c o n t i n u e s , t h a t t h e g r e a t

m a j o r i t y o f t h e people are s t i l l u n a c q u a i n t e d w i t h G p n s t i -

t u t i o n a l government and i t s advantages. The f i r s t step

which w e l l - i n f o r m e d I r a n i a n s s h o u l d t a k e i s t o a l e r t t h e

people and t e a c h them t h e r e a l meaning o f government, p a r t i -

c u l a r l y C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government. K a s r a v i goes on t o say

t h a t some p e o p l e d i s a g r e e w i t h him s o l e l y because he b e l i e v e s

p
t h a t i n any s o c i e t y p r o g r e s s s h o u l d be a c h i e v e d g r a d u a l l y ,

w h i l e t h e y say t h a t a p r i m i t i v e s o c i e t y needs a r e v o l u t i o n ;

t h e y s h o u l d r e a l i z e , however, t h a t a r e v o l u t i o n , i f i t i s t o

be good, ought t o t a k e p l a c e a c c o r d i n g t o a d e f i n i t e p l a n ,

f o r an u n p l a n n e d and u n o r g a n i z e d r e v o l u t i o n w i l l g i v e no

r e s u l t except anarchy. Moreovetr, i n a r e v o l u t i o n t h e r e ought

t o be u n i t y among t h e p e o p l e . I n the I r a n i a n Constitutional

r e v o l u t i o n , a g r e a t number o f m o l l a s d i s a p p r o v e d o f i t s aims,
1. Parcham, y e a r 1, v o l . 10, 1322/19U3*
2. gnqelab c h i s t . p.10.
 330

and were v e r y h o s t i l e t o w a r d s t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s . As a

r e s u l t , t h e r e v o l u t i o n d i d n o t w o r k , and t h e p e o p l e were

u l t i m a t e l y disappointed. The m o l l a s c o n t i n u e d t o oppose

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government f o r y e a r s , i m a g i n i n g t h a t this

s o r t o f government i s i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h I s l a m i c laws and

altogether contrary t o Islam. The f a c t o f t h e m a t t e r i s

t h a t i n I r a n C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government i n i t s t r u e meaning

d i d n o t come i n t o b e i n g . The I r a n i a n n a t i o n i s j u s t as

capable o f becoming s t r o n g as any o t h e r n a t i o n i n t h e w o r l d ;

b u t a n a t i o n w i l l o n l y g a i n s t r e n g t h i f i t has u n i t y , and

u n f o r t u n a t e l y i n I r a n everybody seems t o be an i n d i v i d u a l i s t

who does n o t co-operate w i t h o t h e r s f o r t h e improvement o f

the country. I n f a c t I r a n i a n s do n o t seem t o care about

s a v i n g t h e i r freedom. A t any t i m e so many d i f f e r e n t

factions arise. A n a t i o n can o n l y p r o s p e r i f i t follows a

s i n g l e aim. C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government has h a d g r e a t r e s u l t s

i n o t h e r communities, where i t s success has depended on t h e

people's p a t r i o t i s m .

K a s r a v i t h e n d e f i n e s p a t r i o t i s m as concern f o r one's

own c o u n t r y ' s r i g h t s and honest w i l l i n g n e s s t o work f o r i t s

betterment and p r o g r e s s i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h one's f e l l o w

•1

compatriots. I f a group o f p e o p l e t h i n k i n t h e same way,

t h e y can c o - o p e r a t e and f o r m a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y . L e n i n and

1. Parcham. s p e c i a l volume, y e a r 1, 1322/19U3.
 331

his f o l l o w e r s , who were a i m i n g t o achieve communism, h a d

u n i t y and e v e n t u a l l y succeeded i n o v e r t h r o w i n g t h e power-

f u l dynasty o f Romanovs,

I n 19U3» d u r i n g t h e second w o r l d wary K a s r a v i spoke t o

a s o c i e t y about t h e d u t i e s o f I r a n i a n s t o t h e i r c o u n t r y i n
•i
the then e x i s t i n g circumstances. Being a p r o f o u n d and
p
remarkable speech, i t was l a t e r p r i n t e d and p u b l i s h e d . He

b e g i n s b y s a y i n g t h a t t o d a y t h e I r a n i a n s must p r e s s f o r

t h i n g s which t h e y r e a l l y need. I n the f i r s t place, the

c o u n t r y ' s a f f a i r s must be based on c o r r e c t v a l u e s , and t h e

masses o f t h e p e o p l e must be t r a i n e d f o r C o n s t i t u t i o n a l

political life. The members o f p a r l i a m e n t must be e l e c t e d

i n accordance w i t h t h e laws and must d i s c u s s t h e n a t i o n ' s

problems and decide how t h e y a r e t o be s o l v e d . Sound p o l i -

c i e s must be f o l l o w e d . I r a n needs t o be i n peace and t o

have d i p l o m a t i c r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e n e i g h b o u r s .

I n I r a n , great f i g u r e s s a c r i f i c e d t h e i r l i v e s f o r the

sake o f l i b e r t y , and e v e n t u a l l y a c h i e v e d t h e i r g o a l , t h e r e b y

w i n n i n g a g r e a t v i c t o r y f o r t h e whole n a t i o n . The I r a n i a n s

s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e a p p r e c i a t e and r e s p e c t t h e i r G o n s t i t u t i o n a l

government. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , being i g n o r a n t , they played

w i t h i t l i k e a t o y J and as a r e s u l t i t seemed no d i f f e r e n t

from anarchy. I n t h e o l d e r days, a u t o c r a t i c r u l e by a k i n g

o r l o r d c o u l d work because men were s i m p l e ; t h e y f a i t h f u l l y P

1. I n a b o o k l e t ^ c a l l e d Emruz cheh bayad k a r d , Tehran 1337/1958.

2. Bmruz cheh bayad k a r d . p.2.
 332

f o l l o w e d t h e i r l e a d e r s and were c o n t e n t w i t h t h e i r l o t .

G r a d u a l l y , however, men have r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e y t h e m s e l v e s

can decide t h e i r c o u n t r y ' s f u t u r e . The q u e s t i o n a r i s e s , do

t h e people b e l o n g t o t h e government o r does t h e government

b e l o n g t o them? I n an a u t o c r a t i c s o c i e t y where a" k i n g i s

t h e s o l e commander, t h e people o b v i o u s l y w i l l n o t make any

e f f o r t f o r t h e good o f the. c o u n t r y , because t h e y a r e s l a v e s

w o r k i n g f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f one man. I n a Constitutional

s o c i e t y , t h e o p p o s i t e i s t h e case, because t h e good o f t h e

c o u n t r y i s t h e i r own good. Since a l l t h e p e o p l e cannot

t a k e a c t i o n f o r t h e common b e n e f i t , t h e y e l e c t a c e r t a i n

number o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s t o a c t on t h e i r b e h a l f . This

t y p e o f government r e q u i r e s and produces p a t r i o t i s m . In

I r a n , however, t h e g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f t h e p e a s a n t s , moll'as.

e t c . , do n o t know t h e r e a l meaning o f p a t r i o t i s m . They

have d i f f e r e n t and c o n t r a d i c t o r y i d e a s , and cannot appre-

c i a t e t h e v a l u e o f freedom f o r t h e i r c o u n t r y . Although

I r a n has a C o n s t i t u t i o n , t h e masses, b e i n g s t i l l immature,

a r e n o t aware o f i t .

K a s r a v i i s s t r o n g l y opposed t o t h o s e I r a n i a n s who t r y
•i

t o f o l l o w t h e Europeans i n a l l departments o f l i f e . They

a r e mere i m i t a t o r s , he t h i n k s . One o f t h e i r f a u l t s i s t h a t
t h e y c l a s s i f y d i f f e r e n t forms o f government d o g m a t i c a l l y ,
s a y i n g f o r i n s t a n c e , t h a t s o c i a l i s m i s s u p e r i o r and more
1 • Emruz cheh bayad k a r d , p.18.
 333

advanced than democracy, or t h a t f a s c i s m i s s u p e r i o r still.

K a s r a v i holds t h a t i n I r a n i t i s u s e l e s s t o organize

different p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s . Since the 6 o n s t i t u t i o n a l

r e v o l u t i o n , v a r i o u s people have foundWparties, hut w i t h no
2
lasting result. He h i m s e l f t h i n k s that among these p a r t i e s ,

the Mojahedin (Freedom F i g h t e r s ) ^ were the "best, because they

strove f o r l i b e r t y and won. They had t o contend with the

E'tedaliyun (Moderates), who he says always supported

4
Mohammad A l i Mirza, and e v e n t u a l l y they defeated them.

K a s r a v i r e p e a t s that a n a t i o n can only s u r v i v e and prosper

i f i t has u n i t y . ^ P o s s e s s i o n o f a strong army does not help

u n l e s s the people are thoroughly u n i t e d . He t h i n k s t h a t t h e

French r e v o l u t i o n i s a good example of how the masses, when

u n i t e d by common f e e l i n g , can win v i c t o r y and freedom.

I n h i s book MasHruteh b e h t a r i n shekl-e hokumat v a akharin

5
nati.1eh-.ye andisheh-ye adami'st, K a s r a v i again d i s c u s s e s con-
s t i t u t i o n a l government. He says t h a t nowadays, when every
i n d i v i d u a l i n a n a t i o n i s r e s p o n s i b l e and the people can
communicate w i t h one another, C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government i s
possible. The e s s e n t i a l p r i n c i p l e of C o n s t i t u t i o n a l govern-
ment i s freedom. Unfortunately i n I r a n s c a r c e l y one person
1. Emruz cheh bayad kard. pp 18-19•
2. I b i d , p.18.
3. The more m i l i t a n t champions of l i b e r t y or "Democrats" during
the struggle f o r the C o n s t i t u t i o n (1906-1909), and i n
p a r t i c u l a r the defenders of T a b r i z .
k» Emruz cheh bayad k a r d . p.27*
5. T h i s book c o n s i s t s of c o l l e c t e d a r t i c l e s from Parcham,
r e p r i n t e d a t Tehran 1336/1957.
 33h

i n a thousand i s aware o f t h i s . Some p e o p l e c o m p l a i n t h a t

• C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government i s an o l d f a s h i o n e d method o f r u l i n g

t h e c o u n t r y and l o o k f o r a new r e g i m e ; "but t h e y do n o t g i v e

a c c e p t a b l e reasons f o r t h e i r arguments. They do n o t r e a l i z e

that Iran's Constitution i s based on democracy. The d i f f e r e n c e

between C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government and d i c t a t o r s h i p i s n o t

s i m p l y t h e e x i s t e n c e o f law, b u t a l s o t h e f a c t t h a t i n a

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l regime, the country's r i g h t s are looked a f t e r

by t h e mass o f t h e p e o p l e . I n I r a n , however, t h e p e o p l e have

n o t been ready o r a b l e t o make d e c i s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r

rights. K a s r a v i here a s s e r t s t h a t one I r a n i a n p o l i t i c a l party

w h i c h deserved a good name was t h e Democrat p a r t y , b u t t h a t

even t h e y d i d n o t r e a l l y u n d e r s t a n d t h e n a t u r e o f Q o n s t i t u -
•i

t i o n a l government.

K a s r a v i always remained c o n v i n c e d t h a t Constitutional

monarchy ( M a s h r u t i y a t ) i s t h e b e s t f o r m o f government, p r o -
2
vided t h a t i t s values are followed s t r i c t l y and i n d e t a i l .
He p o i n t s o u t i n s e v e r a l o f h i s books t h a t t h e I r a n i a n s d i d
n o t l e a r n t h e t r u e meaning o f C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m , but instead
p o s i t i v e l y misused i t . A l t h o u g h t h e change f r o m a u t o c r a c y t o
C o n s t i t u t i o n a l monarchy was a g r e a t event i n I r a n ' s history,
t h e c o u n t r y ' s p r o g r e s s under C o n s t i t u t i o n a l government was
v e r y s l o w , f i r s t l y because many o f t h e l e a d e r s were d i s h o n e s t ,
1 . garcham, No.8, 1319/19^0, p.20.
2. Mashruteh b e h t a r i n s h e k l - e hokumat, p.12.
 335

and secondly because t h e masses o f t h e people were q u i t e

u n f a m i l i a r w i t h t h i s t y p e o f government.
K a s r a v i remarks t h a t i f man l e d t h e same l i f e as o t h e r

animals', he w o u l d n o t need any e s t a b l i s h m e n t o r o r g a n i z a t i o n ,

b u t b e i n g s o c i a b l e by n a t u r e , he wants t o mix w i t h o t h e r s

and l i v e i n a community, and t h i s r e q u i r e s l a w and s t a b l e

1
government. F o r c e n t u r i e s men were d e p r i v e d o f freedom o f

c h o i c e , and had t o l i v e a l i f e o f s l a v e r y under t h e s t r i c t

control o f kings. As t i m e passed, even u n s o p h i s t i c a t e d

people "began t o r e a l i z e t h a t t h i s c o u l d n o t l a s t f o r ever.

G r a d u a l l y t h e laws and f o r m o f government were changed, and

the a u t o c r a t i c r u l e o f s e l f - o p i n i o n a t e d k i n g s such as L o u i s

X V I , Mohammad ' A l l Mirza and S o l t a n 'Abdol Hamid was "brought

to an end. K a s r a v i r e i t e r a t e s t h a t t h e I r a n i a n people must

"be t a u g h t t h e r e a l meaning o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government, and

at t h e same t i m e be h e l p e d t o g e t r i d o f t h e h a r m f u l and
c o n t r a d i c t o r y ideas w h i c h now confuse them. He n o t e s t h a t
a f t e r t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l regime, Iran
became e n t a n g l e d w i t h Russia and B r i t a i n , because t h o s e two
p o w e r f u l c o u n t r i e s were a b l e t o t a k e advantage o f t h e I r a n i a n
people's ignorance. He f e a r s t h a t t h e I r a n i a n s a r e n o t y e t
2
m e n t a l l y mature enough t o r e s i s t s i m i l a r h a r m f u l t r e a t i e s .

K a s r a v i w r o t e these words d u r i n g t h e second w o r l d war. The

1. Parcham. No.8, 1319/19^0, p.18.
2. Parcham, No.6, 1319/19^0.
t r e a t i e s ; t o w h i c h he r e f e r s appear t o he t h e Anglo-Russian

t r e a t y o f 1907 f o r d i v i d i n g I r a n i n t o spheres o f i n f l u e n c e ,

the A n g l o - I r a n i a n t r e a t y o f 1919* t h e S o v i e t - I r a n i a n treaty

o f 1921, and t h e T r i p a r t i t e ( A n g l o - R u s s i a n - I r a n i a n ) t r e a t y

o f 191*2.
•1

K a s r a v i f e e l s s t r o n g l y t h a t I r a n ' s most p r e s s i n g need

i s f o r a s i n g l e common aim w h i c h t h e whole n a t i o n will

follow. H i s t o r y , so he says, p r o v e s t h a t advanced and de-

veloped countries such as Germany, Russia and Great B r i t a i n

achieved t h e i r p o s i t i o n w i t h t h e help o f p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s ,

w h i c h t o i l e d and made s a c r i f i c e s f o r t h e n a t i o n a l good. I n

I r a n , t h e t y r a n n y o f Mohammad ' A l i M i r z a was removed t h r o u g h

• 2
t h e e f f o r t s o f t h e Mojahedin, who came i n t o b e i n g w i t h a

s i m p l e aim and were v e r y a c t i v e i n i t s p u r s u i t . A f t e r them

came t h e Democrats, whose a c t i v i t i e s t o some e x t e n t deserve

admiration, t h o u g h t h e y a l s o made m i s t a k e s . Kasravi thinks

t h a t a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c o u n t r y s h o u l d be l e d by a s t r o n g

party. Unity i s e s s e n t i a l f o r a p a r t y and can o n l y be main-

t a i n e d as l o n g as t h e members t h i n k i n t h e same way. As

r e g a r d s h i s a c t i o n i n f o u n d i n g a p a r t y o f h i s own, namely,

t h e Azadegan p a r t y i n 1933» he s t a t e s t h a t h i s b a s i c i n t e n -

t i o n was t o g u i d e t h e masses t o w a r d s r e a l i t y . He had f i r s t

s t a r t e d t o p u b l i s h p o l i t i c a l and s o c i o l o g i c a l a r t i c l e s i n a
1. Mashruteh b e h t a r i n s h e k l - e hokumat, p.67.
2. See f o o t n o t e 3 1S& page 333 •
 22 (

newspaper c a l l e d Shafaq-e Sorkh ("Red Dawn"), and he thanks

i t s e d i t o r Mayel T u y s e r k a n i f o r l e t t i n g him p u b l i s h them i n i t .

As f o r t h e economy o f a c o u n t r y , K a s r a v i "believes t h a t i t
2
depends b a s i c a l l y on a g r i c u l t u r e and can o n l y "be improved i f

t h e l a n d i s b e t t e r farmed. I r a n m i g h t be one of the r i c h e s t

c o u n t r i e s i n t h e w o r l d , he says, as i t has abundant n a t u r a l

r e s o u r c e s , good c l i m a t e , and f e r t i l e soils. In his opinion,

I r a n ought t o be an a g r i c u l t u r a l s t a t e r a t h e r t h a n an indus-

t r i a l one. He also recognises t h a t e x p o r t a t i o n and impor-

t a t i o n are v e r y i m p o r t a n t i n t h e economic l i f e o f a c o u n t r y ,

and t h i n k s t h a t i n p r e s e n t circumstances I r a n i a n s must t r y t o

i n c r e a s e t h e i r e x p o r t s and o n l y "buy e s s e n t i a l goods f r o m

abroad. One o f t h e i d e a s which some people p e r s i s t i n

e x p r e s s i n g , and w h i c h K a s r a v i c o n s i d e r s wrong and harmful,

i s t h a t I r a n i s a poor c o u n t r y . "God", he s a y s , "has provided

us w i t h a l l t h e n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s , and we can be one o f the

w e a l t h i e s t n a t i o n s i n t h e w o r l d i f we make use o f them."^

T h i s w i l l o n l y be p o s s i b l e i f t h e p e o p l e work f o r t h e common

good*, and K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t t h e r e a l meaning o f p a t r i o t i s m

i s w i l l i n g n e s s t o co-operate. He i s sure t h a t t e n t i m e s more

l a n d can be c u l t i v a t e d and t h a t I r a n can become one o f t h e

most advanced a g r i c u l t u r a l c o u n t r i e s i n t h e w o r l d . In his

o p i n i o n , v i l l a g e s s h o u l d be expanded, i n s t e a d o f b i g c i t i e s

w h i l e a t t h e same t i m e t h e peasant must be p r o v i d e d w i t h a l l

1 . I t s e d i t o r s were f i r s t ' A l i D a s h t i , and l a t e r Mayel
T u y s e r k a n i . I t was p u b l i s h e d a t Tehran i n 1300/1922.
#

2. Emruz cheh bayad k a r d , p.36.

3. I b i d . , pp37»|
k. Parcham. No.U, 1319/1951.
 338

the necessities of l i f e .
K a s r a v i ' s s o c i o l o g i c a l and p o l i t i c a l ideas were o r i g i n a l
and were n o t t a k e n f r o m t h e s o c i o l o g i s t s , even though he
agrees w i t h them i n some ways, w h i l e r e j e c t i n g t h e i r m a t e r i a -

l i s t i c philosophy. He s t r e s s e s t h a t one s h o u l d have an

independent mind and t h a t I r a n i a n s s h o u l d n o t " b l i n d l y f o l l o w
p
the Europeans. I n t h e o l d days, he says, man had v e r y
l i m i t e d needs, h u t i n t h e course o f t i m e he o r g a n i z e d a
civilized life. People exchanged t h e i r goods, and so b u s i -
ness grew; t h e n t h e y i n v e n t e d money as a c o n v e n i e n t means
o f exchange, and l i f e became more c o m p l i c a t e d . Kasravi
t h i n k s t h a t any k i n d o f p r o f e s s i o n w h i c h does n o t have a
b e n e f i c i a l e f f e c t s h o u l d be suppressed. Governmental
a u t h o r i t i e s s h o u l d be answerable i n t h i s r e s p e c t l i k e anyone
else. O n l y l i m i t e d numbers o f people who r e a l l y work s h o u l d
be employed i n government o f f i c e s . Being l a z y and i d l e , i n
K a s r a v i ' s o p i n i o n , i s a g r e a t s i n , except i n t h e d i s a b l e d
and sick.**" He r e c o g n i s e s t h a t i n any n a t i o n t h e people are^
n o t a l l on t h e same l e v e l o f i n t e l l i g e n c e , and t h a t t h e y
d i f f e r mentally not less than p h y s i c a l l y . Every i n d i v i d u a l ' s
success depends on h i s a b i l i t y and t a l e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h h i s
effort. The people must be f r e e t o choose t h e i r own j o b s ;
1. Parcham, Nos 5 3 , 5 4 , 5 5 , 1320/1942.
2. Parcham. No.62+, 1320/l94l, pp 4 5 - 4 8 .
3. K a s r a v i , Var.javand Bonyad. Tehran 1323/1944, c h a p t e r 3 .
4. Parcham, Nos 32, 3 3 , 3 4 , T e h r a n , 1 3 1 9 / 1 9 4 1 , quoted i n
Mashruteh b e h t a r i n s h e k l - e hokumat.
 339

t h e r e must not be any f o r c e d labour. The governmental

a u t h o r i t i e s , however, must maintain e f f e c t i v e s u p e r v i s i o n

and must not a l l o w any person to d i s r e g a r d the law. The

government ought t o d i s t r i b u t e t h e lands amongst the farmers

according t o t h e i r needs. I n d u s t r i a l machines should be

made a v a i l a b l e f o r the craftsmen. F a c t o r i e s should be

e s t a b l i s h e d by i n d i v i d u a l s p o s s e s s i n g adequate c a p i t a l .

C i v i l s e r v a n t s should get r e g u l a r s a l a r i e s from the govern-

ment. The e f f o r t s of a r t i s t s and s c i e n t i s t s should be

o f f i c i a l l y acknowledged, and t h e i r work should be f o s t e r e d .

K a s r a v i a s k s why a v a s t country l i k e I r a n , w i t h an area f i v e

times bigger than France and population ( i n those days) f i v e

times s m a l l e r , should s u f f e r from l a c k of s u f f i c i e n t food.

He then shows that the lower c l a s s e s i n I r a n a r e undernou-

r i s h e d , and c a l l s f o r a great expansion of a g r i c u l t u r e and

improvement of the l o t of the peasants.

K a s r a v i emphasizes t h a t the I r a n i a n s w i l l have t o t o i l

f o r a long time t o come i n order t o make up f o r t h e i r b a c k -
2
wardness. He notes t h a t i n great h i s t o r i c a l e v e n t s , such

as the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n , i l l i t e r a t e people made

b i g g e r s a c r i f i c e s than the h i g h l y educated people; t h i s , he

thinks/was because t h e i r minds were not confused w i t h c o n t r a -

d i c t o r y p h i l o s o p h i c a l and p o e t i c a l i d e a s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y i n
1• S a l a r i e s of c i v i l s e r v a n t s i n I r a n used t o be very low and
often months i n a r r e a r .
2. Parcham. v o l . lh, 1319/1940.
 340

I r a n n e i t h e r the government l e a d e r s nor the people have any

i d e a how the backwardness of the s o c i e t y can he corrected.

1
The only remedy, i n K a s r a v i s opinion, i s to educate the
people. The e d u c a t i o n a l system must he expanded, hut the

c u r r i c u l a of the schools and u n i v e r s i t i e s must be completely

' 1
changed. He cannot accept the sentence of J u r j i Zaydan
"Teach them and that w i l l s u f f i c e . "
Perhaps Zaydan simply meant t h a t education i s an e s s e n t i a l

remedy f o r the E a s t e r n s o c i e t i e s ; but the type of education

must be s u i t a b l e .

K a s r a v i d i s c u s s e s education i n a pamphlet Farhang a s t

ya nayrang ( C u l t u r e or & a u d ? ) . He d e c l a r e s t h a t every

i n d i v i d u a l has a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o h i s f a t h e r l a n d . The

f u t u r e generation's p r o s p e r i t y depends on the achievements

of the present day. I n I r a n the people were m i s l e d f o r

centuries. Now i t i s time to wake them up and create awareness

i n them. He then denounces a number of people who were (and

a r e ) considered to be eminent s c h o l a r s , such as Dr. Qasem

2 4
Ghanl, Mohammad ' A l i Forughi,^ and ' A l i Asghar Hekmat.* " The

M i n i s t r y of Education, founded as a r e s u l t of the C o n s t i t u -

t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n , i s the a u t h o r i t y which has the power t o

decide and c o r r e c t the teaching programme. Why whould t h i s

1. A S y r i a n w r i t e r who l i v e d i n Egypt i n the l a t e 19th century.

2. d. 1959.
3. d. 1942; prime m i n i s t e r i n 1925-1946 and again i n 1941.
4. b. 1892.
M i n i s t r y help Dr. Ghani to p u b l i s h a book about the Sufism
1
of Hafez? I n s t e a d of paying Dr. Ghani f o r the p u b l i c a t i o n
of such a u s e l e s s and moreover harmful book, the Ministry
ought to provide the schools with modern l a b o r a t o r i e s .
Forughi had opposed K a s r a v i , saying t h a t European i d e a s
and the western way of l i f e are spreading so r a p i d l y i n I r a n
that the I r a n i a n s must take a c t i o n to save t h e i r c u l t u r e and
get r i d of m a t e r i a l i s m . According to K a s r a v i , Forughi had
argued that the best way of doing t h i s i s to teach the people
p
Sufism and m y s t i c a l i d e a s . Kasravi's reply i s that mysti-
cism and m a t e r i a l i s m are two extremes of human ideology, and
that one of them cannot be a remedy f o r the other. What i s
a c t u a l l y needed i s that the students be taught how to earn
a living. Moreover, i n present conditions, I r a n requires
s c i e n t i s t s and experts q u a l i f i e d i n modern s c i e n c e s such as
chemistry, p h y s i c s e t c . The schools should a l s o teach the
t r u e meaning of democracy and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government;
K a s r a v i regards t h i s as an e s s e n t i a l duty of the M i n i s t r y of
L
Education.
I n another book Dadgah (Court of J u s t i c e ) , ^ K a s r a v i
c a l l s upon the M i n i s t r y of Education to c a r r y out i t s r e s -
p o n s i b i l i t y by a l t e r i n g the school c u r r i c u l a . The s t o c k - i n -
1. Bahs dar a s r a r va a f k a r va ahval-e Hafez. 2 v o l s , Tehran
1321-1322/1942-1943.
2. Farhang a s t ya nayrang. p.l5»
3. I b i d , pp 15-1§.
4. K a s r a v i , Dadgah. Tehran 1326/1947» p.12.
5. Ibid.
 342

trade of c u l t u r e i n I r a n , he s a y s , comprises S a ' d i ' s and

1
Khayyam s p o e t i c a l works and i s f u l l of wrong p h i l o s o p h i c a l

ideas. Removing a l l these and r e p l a c i n g them with accurate

and s u b s t a n t i a l knowledge w i l l not be an easy t a s k . The

M i n i s t r y of Education must be d e s t r u c t i v e on the one hand

and c o n s t r u c t i v e on the other. K a s r a v i complains t h a t too

often i n I r a n the government l e a d e r s are not honest and

f o l l o w wrong p o l i c i e s ; he c a l l s them " t r a i t o r s . " In parti-

c u l a r they p e r s i s t i n spreading wrong i d e a s and harmfully

i n f l u e n c i n g the young people's minds.

I n a pamphlet Nik o Bad (Good and E v i l ) , Kasravi again

d i s c u s s e s the confusion of ideas i n I r a n . He complains t h a t

today the moral guides and l e a d e r s who ought to be t r y i n g t o

c o r r e c t the people's minds are themselves even more confused

w i t h wrong i d e a s .

K a s r a v i again d i s c u s s e s economic problems i n a pamphlet

2
e n t i t l e d Kar o pisheh o p u l (Labour, p r o f e s s i o n and money).

Man f i r s t l i v e d i n caves and was s a t i s f i e d with a p r i m i t i v e

way of l i f e , but g r a d u a l l y became c i v i l i z e d and began t o

provide h i m s e l f w i t h b e t t e r s h e l t e r and a m e n i t i e s . As a

r e s u l t , the d i f f e r e n t p r o f e s s i o n s came i n t o being, and people

had to l i v e i n a communal way because they needed one

another's h e l p . Through the c e n t u r i e s man took b i g s t e p s t o

1. K a s r a v i , Nik o bad, r e p r i n t e d at Tehran 1327/1948.

2. K a s r a v i , Kar o pisheh o p u l . Tehran 1323/1944.
 3U3

develop h i s c i v i l i z a t i o n , one of which was t h e i n v e n t i o n of

money. Needless t o say everybody i n a human s o c i e t y must

p l a y a u s e f u l p a r t ; we cannot a l l l i v e by s t e a l i n g t h e f r u i t s
of other people's l a b o u r . K a s r a v i here again v e r y s t r o n g l y
•j
denounces i d l e r s . He a l s o condemns c e r t a i n p r o f e s s i o n s
which, he s a y s , a r e u s e l e s s and v i r t u a l l y e q u i v a l e n t t o
i d l e n e s s : e.g. p o e t r y - w r i t i n g by sycophants who used t o earn
t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d through f l a t t e r i n g p a t r o n s , d i s h o n e s t
j o u r n a l i s t s who p u b l i s h harmful a r t i c l e s , and merchants and

businessmen who unscrupulously r a i s e t h e p r i c e of goods i n

order t o make high p r o f i t s . K a s r a v i * s s e v e r e s t censure i s

f o r the Mo.ltaheds (top-ranking S h i ' i t e c l e r g y ) , who, he s a y s ,

l e a d the l i f e of a k i n g without performing t h e s l i g h t e s t

2
useful service. He r e p e a t s again and again t h a t a c o r r e c t l y
and e f f i c i e n t l y organized government i s a n a t i o n ' s most
v i t a l need, and t h a t government s e r v i c e must not be a refuge
for parasites. Another point on which K a s r a v i again i n s i s t s
here i s t h a t nobody should be allowed t o own l a n d u n l e s s he
works on It? A p r o f e s s i o n i s not a means of earning money,
but a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o s o c i e t y and a duty to the f a t h e r l a n d .
K a s r a v i then r e i t e r a t e s h i s view t h a t I r a n i s v a s t and f e r t i l e ,
w i t h r i c h r e s o u r c e s capable (so he s a y s ) of feeding a t l e a s t
two hundred and f i f t y m i l l i o n people.** Today t h e I r a n i a n s
1 • E a r o p i s h e h o p u l , pp 11-12.
2 . I b i d . , p.8.
3 . Ibid./ pp 12-13•
U. I b i d . y p . 3 7 .
 3kh

are d i v i d e d i n t o two groups; a t r a d i t i o n a l and somehow p r e -

j u d i c e d group who f o l l o w the same way as t h e i r f o r e f a t h e r s ,

and a group who have been i n f l u e n c e d by European c i v i l i z a -

t i o n and by the advanced European standard of l i v i n g . Both,

1
i n K a s r a v i s view, a r e extremists concerned only w i t h t h e i r

own i n t e r e s t s and u n w i l l i n g to take any step f o r t h e improve-

ment of I r a n i a n s o c i e t y . Without doubt present-day European

s o c i e t i e s a r e very e f f i c i e n t economically, and produce

s c i e n t i s t s and experts i n many d i f f e r e n t f i e l d s ; but they

s t i l l do not know the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e . I r a n i a n s should

t h e r e f o r e n e i t h e r d i s r e g a r d European c i v i l i z a t i o n completely

nor i m i t a t e i t b l i n d l y .

On t h e s u b j e c t o f money, K a s r a v i emphasizes t h a t i t i s
2
only an instrument of exchange and otherwise u s e l e s s . Gold
and s i l v e r i n themselves a r e not a s v a l u a b l e a s people t h i n k .
I n s t e a d of these two, i t would be q u i t e p o s s i b l e t o use other
metals. Businessmen say that t h e l e v e l of exports must be
i n c r e a s e d i n order t o b e t t e r the c o n s t i t u t i o n ; K a s r a v i agrees
with them, but a l s o t h i n k s t h a t t h e purchase of luxury goods
from abroad should be p r o h i b i t e d . He b e l i e v e s that a country's
l a n d i s i t s b a s i c wealth and c a p i t a l , and that t h e I r a n i a n s
could l i v e i n p r o s p e r i t y i f they would make g r e a t e r e f f o r t s
to u t i l i z e the n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s of t h e i r l a n d . I n I r a n , he
1• Kar o p i s h e h o p u l , p.14.
2 . I b i d , p.38.
3 . I b i d , pp 21-23.
 3k5

t h i n k s , i t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important to t r y to modernize

a g r i c u l t u r e and to expand the v i l l a g e s ( r a t h e r than the

cities). He does not of course deny the need f o r i n d u s t r y ;

indeed he says that t h e r e w i l l have to be a r e v o l u t i o n i n

the i n d u s t r i a l l i f e of I r a n . Perhaps he d i d not know how

huge the s c a l e of some modern i n d u s t r i e s has become. I n any

c a s e , K a s r a v i thought t h a t the f i r s t step should d e f i n i t e l y

be the improvement of a g r i c u l t u r a l life.

K a s r a v i ends w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n of the problem of

2
equality. I n p r a c t i c e people cannot be t r e a t e d e q u a l l y i n
society. Every i n d i v i d u a l w i l l get a c e r t a i n share of wealth
i n h i s l i f e , according to h i s p e r s o n a l a b i l i t y and t a l e n t .
K a s r a v i opposes the s o c i a l i s t s i n so f a r a s they a s s e r t t h a t
the government must have c o n t r o l over people's dobs and f i x
t h e i r wages. H i s own view i s t h a t people must have freedom
to choose t h e i r jobs and t h a t they should be p a i d according
to the nature and amount of t h e i r work.
K a s r a v i begins h i s book Par rah-e s i a s a t (methods of
p o l i t i c s ) ^ p u b l i s h e d i n 19^5 by s a y i n g that p o l i t i c s c o n s i s t
of human r e l a t i o n s w i t h i n a n a t i o n and between n a t i o n s . In
I r a n , g e n e r a l l y speaking, the l e a d e r s have had no understan-
ding of p o l i t i c s , and t h e r e f o r e sound p o l i c i e s have not been
f o l l o w e d . Although many changes have taken p l a c e i n the world
1. Kar o p i s h e h o p u l . pp 3 5 - 3 6 .
2. I b i d , pp 38-kk.
3. K a s r a v i , P a r rah-e s i a s a t . Tehran 1331/1962.
during t h e l a s t h a l f - c e n t u r y , i n I r a n the o l d methods of

p o l i t i c s have n o t been changed. The mass of t h e people

remain ignorant of t h e i r country's p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n

and f o r e i g n r e l a t i o n s , Mirza Mallcom Khan, whom K a s r a v i

admires a s an enlightened and "broad-minded man, had saidi

" I r a n ' s p o s i t i o n i s l i k e t h a t of a ship t o s s e d by t h e t i d e s

i n a rough and stormy s e a , and those who a r e i n t h e s h i p

have t o s t e e r i t so that they may reach the shore,"

K a s r a v i thought that t h i s was s t i l l t r u e i n h i s own day.

I n the h i s t o r y o f I r a n , K a s r a v i f i n d s few kings o r

l e a d e r s who had sound p o l i c i e s f o r r u l i n g t h e country. One

was Nader Shah (1736-17^7), who t r i e d t o u n i f y and s t r e n g -

then I r a n and showed I r a n i a n power by conquering I n d i a ,

Another was Karim Khan Zand (1750-1779)* who was a good

r u l e r , but l a c k e d f o r e s i g h t and d i d not p l a n f o r t h e f u t u r e .

K a s r a v i c o n s i d e r s Amir K a b i r ( d . 1851) t o have been one o f

the few r e a l l y f o r e s e e i n g p o l i t i c i a n s i n I r a n ' s h i s t o r y .

K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t i n a monarchical system of govern-

ment , the k i n g should not have the r i g h t to make d e c i s i o n s

a f f e c t i n g the n a t i o n ' s d e s t i n y , but t h a t the people them-

1 . Mirza Malkom Khan, Nazem ol-Dowleh (1834-1908). A f t e r
s e r v i n g a s M i n i s t e r t o Great B r i t a i n , ,he r e s i g n e d and
p u b l i s h e d the i n f l u e n t i a l newspaper Qanun i n London (1891-
1 8 9 2 ) , He a l s o wrote p l a y s . He,was of,Armenian o r i g i n
from Esfahan. (Taken from Par rah-e s i a s a t . p . 3 6 ) .
2 . He became chief m i n i s t e r i n 1848 a t the beginning of Naser
#

o l - D i n Shah's r e i g n , and attempted t o reform the f i n a n c e s

and the armed f o r c e s . He a l s o founded the Dar ol-Ponun,
I r a n ' s f i r s t modern educational i n s t i t u t i o n . I n 1851 h i s
opponents persuaded the Shah to d i s m i s s him and have him
murdered i n the bath o f F i n near Kashan,
(Dar rah-e siaB&t.PP 7 - 9 ) .
 3h7

s e l v e s should make such d e c i s i o n s . At the time of the

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n there were a number of a b l e p o l i -

t i c i a n s i n I r a n , who knew the country's p o s i t i o n and thought

out s e v e r a l p o l i c i e s f o r i t . They b e l i e v e d that i f the

system of government could be changed by e l i m i n a t i o n of the

autocracy and establishment of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r u l e , I r a n

would w i t h i n a few y e a r s become a s prosperous as Germany,

Prance or England. The I r a n i a n s , however, had no under-

standing of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government, and were consequently

unable t o make proper use of i t . Indeed f o r a long time

they s u f f e r e d many disadvantages from i t . Dishonest l e a d e r s

began to misuse the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l system f o r p e r s o n a l g a i n .

The s i t u a t i o n , i n s t e a d of becoming b e t t e r , became worse.

K a s r a v i ' s own i d e a s about the r i g h t p o l i c i e s , f o r I r a n

were based on three p r i n c i p l e s .

1. The people's minds must f i r s t be enlightened and

brought out of darkness through a h i g h e r standard of
1
education.

2. The country's d i f f i c u l t i e s must be f a c e d courageously,

and the neighbouring great powers, England and R u s s i a , must

be t r e a t e d as equals of I r a n (not as m a s t e r s ) .

3* C o r r u p t i o n and immorality must be combatted, and a l l

I r a n i a n s r e a l l y i n t e r e s t e d i n reforming the country's l i f e

p
must work together.
'"j. .
2. Par
1. Ibid., p.20.
rah-e s i a s a t . p.18.
 348

K a s r a v i a d v i s e s the I r a n i a n s t o take a broad view o f

their politics. What i s most needed i n modern c o n d i t i o n s i s

a great e f f o r t t o b u i l d up a strong I r a n ; otherwise t h e

n a t i o n w i l l be unable to f a c e i t s d i f f i c u l t i e s and f i g h t f o r

i t s rights. I f a l l the people of I r a n could communicate

w i t h one another, they would not f e e l so weak, because p a t r i o -

t i s m i s i n the I r a n i a n ' s n a t u r e . I n the o u t s i d e world, great

r e v o l u t i o n s had occurred and new i d e a s of communism and

s o c i a l i s m were spreading.; but I r a n i a n s d i d not know where

they stood because they had no d e f i n i t e i d e a s about t h e

p o l i c i e s needed i n t h e i r country,

K a s r a v i goes on t o say that democracy brought new i d e a s

to the.world, and t h a t i n I r a n e f f o r t s were made to promote

democracy, but u n f o r t u n a t e l y w i t h u n s a t i s f a c t o r y r e s u l t s ,

I r a n i a n s have not y e t achieved anything of v a l u e from

democracy. H i s t o r y w i l l n e v e r t h e l e s s remember the men who

s t r u g g l e d f o r the cause of freedom and decent government i n

I r a n , such a s Sayyed Mohammad K h i a b a n i , Mirza Kruchek Khan

Jangali, and C o l o n e l Mohammad T a q i Khan; they e a r n e s t l y

1. A G i l a k i w i t h a r e l i g i o u s education who formed a s o c i e t y
c a l l e d Ettehad-e Eslam t o f r e e I r a n from f o r e i g n i n t e r -
f e r e n c e . He a l s o championed the peasants a g a i n s t oppressive
landowners. He f i r s t r e b e l l e d i n G i l a n i n ^915» A f t e r
fi
ussian Bolshevik troops had landed i n G i l a n , he proclaimed!
a S o v i e t r e p u b l i c i n June 1920, At f i r s t he r e c e i v e d h e l p
from the B o l s h e v i k s , but l a t e r he q u a r r e l l e d w i t h them. He
was defeated and d i e d i n December 1921,
2, A Gendarmerie o f f i c e r who ( l i k e many other Gendarmerie
o f f i c e r s ) was an ardent Democrat and r e f o r m i s t . He objected
to the amalgamation o f the Gendarmerie and Cossacks i n t o
the new I r a n i a n army, and r e b e l l e d i n June 1921, but was
defeated and k i l l e d . (Dar rah-e s i a s a t . pp 35-37.)
 349

wished t o improve t h e country's s i t u a t i o n , and t r i e d t h e i r

h a r d e s t , hut d i d not succeed.

I n K a s r a v i ' s view, d i f f e r e n c e s of r e l i g i o u s "belief and

c o n f l i c t s over such d i f f e r e n c e s , which have been v e r y common

i n I r a n , were one of t h e reasons f o r the n a t i o n ' s weakness.

I r a n i a n s have a d e f e n s i v e manner towards one another, l a r g e l y

because they h o l d d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s and a t t i t u d e s .

U n l e s s they give up t h i s mutual s t r i f e , matters w i l l not

improve.

K a s r a v i s t r e s s e s v e r y s t r o n g l y t h a t education must be

made a v a i l a b l e f o r the masses of the people. He notes that

i n the I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n n i n e t y p e r cent o f

the r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s were from the uneducated c l a s s e s , and

i s sure t h a t t h e ways of t h i n k i n g of these c l a s s e s a r e

g e n e r a l l y b e t t e r than those of the educated people, ^his

i s because education i n i t s t r u e meaning h a s not been pro-

vided. I n I r a n the educated man's mind has been f i l l e d w i t h

so many u s e l e s s and sometimes harmful n o t i o n s , t h a t he

becomes h e s i t a n t and cannot decide what i d e a s t o adopt.

Therefore, while i t i s e s s e n t i a l t h a t education should be

spread throughout the whole n a t i o n , i t i s even more important

t h a t i t should be of a s u i t a b l e type; otherwise i t w i l l

poison the people's minds. I r a n i a n s must l e a r n the r e a l

meaning o f work: i n d u s t r i a l work, a g r i c u l t u r a l work, and a l l

1• P a r rah-e s i a s a t , pp 39-40.
 350

other kinds of work. When the members of the n a t i o n know

t h e i r d u t i e s i n the s o c i e t y and are capable of observing

the r u l e s of t h e i r work, the l e a d e r s w i l l no longer have

such d i f f i c u l t y i n leading them. The f u n c t i o n of a govern-

ment i s to open the people's eyes and show them the t r u t h

as i t a f f e c t s the d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s of t h e i r lives.

K a s r a v i then t u r n s to i n t e r n a t i o n a l p o l i t i c s . Today,

he wrote i n 1945» world a f f a i r s are dominated by three

powerful c o u n t r i e s , R u s s i a , England and America. As a

r e s u l t of h i s t o r i c a l events, R u s s i a became I r a n ' s neighbour

i n the n o r t h and England i n the south. Not knowing which

of these neighbours i s t h e i r enemy and which t h e i r f r i e n d ,

I r a n i a n s are not sure what i s the b e s t or l e a s t harmful

f o r e i g n p o l i c y f o r t h e i r country. They c o n s t a n t l y puzzle

over the problem, but reach no c o n c l u s i o n . Another d i f f i -

c u l t y i s that the two neighbouring powers have d i f f e r e n t

p o l i t i c a l i d e o l o g i e s ; R u s s i a i s a communist s t a t e , England

f o l l o w s c a p i t a l i s m , and they compete with each other. I r a n ' s

s i t u a t i o n today could be improved e i t h e r by a group of,

capable l e a d e r s or a d i c t a t o r . There are no other ways, so

2
Kasravi says. L i b e r t y means t h a t a n a t i o n i s f r e e to choose
3
-
i t s own way of l i v i n g . ' I t i s not an imaginary t h i n g , but
1. Par rah-e s i a s a t , p . 7 7 »
2. Ibid., p.79.
3. I b i d . , p.83.
 351

something which has many p r a c t i c a l r e s u l t s . A f r e e man can

l i v e i n h i s own way and make h i s own decisions, while a

s l a v e must obey comebody e l s e ' s orders and has no freedom

of choice. L i b e r t y i s a very p r e c i o u s p o s s e s s i o n . Iranians

must be ready to f i g h t i n defence of the l i b e r t y and integ-

r i t y of I r a n and a l l i t s . t e r r i t o r i e s , because i t i s t h e i r

own country and i t s l i b e r t y i s t h e i r own freedom. "There i s

no need t o f e a r R u s s i a ' s or England's t a k i n g our l a n d from

u s " , K a s r a v i says; " i f we maintain s t a b i l i t y of government,

they w i l l not then be able t o e x p l o i t us and i n f r i n g e upon

our l i b e r t y , " He thought t h a t s i n c e the end of the second

world war R u s s i a and England had become f r i e n d l y and that

they would not want to s p o i l t h i s f r i e n d s h i p . I t seemed t o

him that t h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s gave I r a n the b e s t opportunity

f o r c e n t u r i e s to improve her s i t u a t i o n . I r a n i a n s must stand

and behave as equals with the R u s s i a n s and w i t h the E n g l i s h .

At the same time they must not show any p r e f e r e n c e f o r one

of t h e s e two f o r e i g n s t a t e s over the other.

K a s r a v i remarks t h a t there are s t i l l some I r a n i a n s who

have no r e s p e c t f o r C o n s t i t u t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y , who evade

9

paying t a x e s , and who disobey r e g u l a t i o n s . The government

must enforce the law and must a t the same time improve the
economy and the people's standard of l i v i n g . K a s r a v i then
1• Dar rah-e s i a s a t . p.92.
2* Dffid. -
s a y s t h a t s o c i a l i s m was f i r s t conceived by humanitarian

t h i n k e r s anxious t o help the lower c l a s s e s of s o c i e t y , and

i s today r a p i d l y spreading i n t h e world. I n England, he

thought, the Labour p a r t y was being v e r y s u c c e s s f u l . He:

c o n s i d e r s the economic and s o c i a l o b j e c t i v e s of t h e s o c i a -

l i s t s t o be g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t a b l e , but cannot approve of

2
e v e r y t h i n g that they s a y . According t o the s o c i a l i s t s ,

the government ought t o decide almost a l l matters; i n

K a s r a v i ' s opinion, the people ought t o be f r e e t o decide

t h e i r way of l i f e but a t the same time the government ought

to s u p e r v i s e them.^ Secondly, t h e s o c i a l i s t s t h i n k t h a t a l l

c a p i t a l should be i n t h e hands of the government, whereas

K a s r a v i suggests t h a t t o a c e r t a i n extent c a p i t a l should be

l e f t i n the hands of the people, so t h a t they may make use

of it. T h i r d l y , the s o c i a l i s t s t h i n k t h a t a l l l a n d should

be the property of t h e government, i n which case; a l l farmers

would become l a b o u r e r s working f o r the government. Kasravi

t h i n k s t h a t p r i v a t e landownership i s a very natural thing

h

and should not be a b o l i s h e d . While expressing sympathy f o r

the i d e a of s o c i a l i s m , K a s r a v i says t h a t h i s defence of t h i s

theory of government does not mean t h a t he i s t a k i n g R u s s i a ' s

5
side.
K a s r a v i next p a s s e s t o the s u b j e c t of i n t e r n a t i o n a l
1. P a r rah-e s i a s a t . p.107.
2. I b i d . p.108.
;

3. Ibid. p.IIP.
;

h» Ibid..p.64.
5. Ibid. p.109.
;
 353

conflicts. He notes t h e beginning of an effort t o a i d the

underdeveloped countries. He does not t h i n k that war i s

a p a r t of human n a t u r e . I f a d i s p u t e between two s t a t e s

a r i s e s , they can always s e t t l e i t without f i g h t i n g o r

u s i n g f o r c e ; they can take i t to a c o u r t w i t h honest judges,

who can decide and suggest a reasonable way to end t h e

difficulty. The U n i t e d Nations O r g a n i z a t i o n should be a.

v e r y u s e f u l forum f o r s o l v i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l problems. The

i d e a o f e s t a b l i s h i n g such a meeting p l a c e f o r a l l t h e
•j
n a t i o n s seems t o K a s r a v i a l t o g e t h e r praiseworthy.
K a s r a v i then observes t h a t even today the m a j o r i t y o f
2
p o l i t i c i a n s t h i n k i n a v e r y m a t e r i a l i s t i c way. They assume
that t h e i r own country must become strong i n order to over-
come other c o u n t r i e s , A f t e r s i x y e a r s of f i g h t i n g and des-
t r u c t i o n and untold thousands of deaths ( i n the 1939-1945
w a r ) , Europe was s t i l l s u f f e r i n g from hunger. As long a s
c o n f l i c t continues t o be the b a s i s of i n t e r n a t i o n a l life,
no improvement on the p r e s e n t s t a t e of a f f a i r s i s l i k e l y t o
be achieved. People a r e l i v i n g i n constant f e a r of a t h i r d
world war, which w i l l be atomic, and w i l l probably d e s t r o y
the human r a c e a l t o g e t h e r . The need f o r an i n t e r n a t i o n a l
seat of j u s t i c e i s t h e r e f o r e urgent, but obviously t h i s
wish w i l l not be brought t o r e a l i t y without difficulties*
1, Dar rah-e siasat.PP.116-127.
2. I b i d . , p.119.
 354

Meanwhile every n a t i o n ought t o "be c o n s i d e r a t e towards t h e

other n a t i o n s .

One day, K a s r a v i continues, an i n t e r n a t i o n a l government

>e 1

f o r a l l t h e world w i l l perhaps^set up. Today, however,

t h e r e a r e c o n f l i c t s , between West and E a s t , between d i f f e r e n t

r a c e s , and between d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n s . These c o n f l i c t s ought

t o be s o l v e d d e c e n t l y .

K a s r a v i discusses: communism and s o c i a l i s m i n h i s book

2
Sarnevesht-e I r a n cheh khwahad bud ( I r a n ' s d e s t i n y ) . He

begins by saying t h a t communism and s o c i a l i s m seek t o b r i n g

w e l f a r e t o the working c l a s s e s , and i f there a r e d e f e c t s i n

communism, t h a t does not mean t h a t t h i s system o f government

i s completely wrong. I t has no i n t r i n s i c c o n t r a d i c t i o n w i t h

r e l i g i o n , he t h i n k s . K a s r a v i then speaks about t h e Tudeh

(Masses) party** i n I r a n . He c o n s i d e r s t h i s p a r t y harmful t o

I r a n i n many ways, and f i n d s numerous d e f e c t s i n i t s s t r u c -

t u r e and p o l i c y .

1• The Tudeh p a r t y has not been organized i n response t o

the needs o f I r a n i a n s . ^ I t s l e a d e r s have been c a l l i n g f o r

economic improvements i n I r a n only i n order t o b u i l d up t h e

p a r t y ' s connections among people i n d i f f e r e n t walks of l i f e .

2. The Tudeh p a r t y does not have a sound ( f o r e i g n ) policy."'

1 . Dar rah-e si&safr:;-, p 1 2 2 . #

2 . K a s r a v i , Sarnevesht-e I r a n cheh khwahad bud. Tehran 1 5 2 V

1945.
3. A l e f t i s t p a r t y i n I r a n , founded i n October 1941.See p.325>
4 . Sarnevesht-e I r a n cheh khwahad bud, p.10. Note
5 . I b i d , p.15.
 355

I t s l e a d e r s Bay t h a t I r a n ought to move towards R u s s i a and

he a s f r i e n d l y with R u s s i a a s w i t h England, and t h a t R u s s i a

ought t o be a s i n f l u e n t i a l i n I r a n a s England i s . Kasravi

t h i n k s t h a t t h i s a t t i t u d e o f the Tudeh l e a d e r s i s completely

wrong. Why should I r a n i a n s be anxious about a powerful

state l i k e Russia? Why should not they e l i m i n a t e E n g l i s h

i n f l u e n c e i n t h e i r country? F o r t h i s t a s k I r a n needs s t r o n g -

minded p o l i t i c i a n s . I f R u s s i a and England again become

powerful and i n f l u e n t i a l i n I r a n , e v e n t u a l l y something l i k e

the agreement o f 1907 w i l l again be t h e r e s u l t . Therefore

t h i s Tudeh suggestion cannot p o s s i b l y be a remedy f o r I r a n ' s

ills.

K a s r a v i goes on t o say: "There i s a l o t o f exaggeration

about E n g l i s h p o l i t i c a l i n f l u e n c e i n I r a n . I f anything goes

wrong, we t h i n k that i t i s due t o England's p o l i c y . This

a t t i t u d e has become p a r t of our p o l i t i c i a n s * n a t u r e . They

want t o blame others f o r every mistake. The Tudeh p a r t y i s

most p e r s i s t e n t i n t h i s r e s p e c t . They say t h a t Reza Shah

the Great was a t o o l i n t h e E n g l i s h government's hand. In

f a c t they deny what he d i d f o r t h i s country. He was one of

the most p r o g r e s s i v e men whom I r a n has seen. He organized

an e f f i c i e n t army f o r I r a n , b e t t e r e d t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f l i f e t

f r e e d the women, and brought t h e d i f f e r e n t t r i b e s under t h e

"1 • The Anglo-Russian agreement of 1907 by which t h e two powers
d i v i d e d I r a n i n t o a R u s s i a n "sphere of i n f l u e n c e " i n t h e
n o r t h , a B r i t i s h "sphere of i n f l u e n c e " i n the south, and a
" n e u t r a l zone" i n t h e c e n t r e .
2. Sarnevesht-e I r a n cheh khwahad bud, p.23.
c e n t r a l government's r u l e . A l l t h a t he d i d was against the

wishes of the E n g l i s h government." "We Iranians," Kasravi

continues, "do not know the value of l i b e r t y and do not .

respect i t as i t should "be r e s p e c t e d . L i k e many other

t h i n g s , i t s v a l u e and meaning are not c l e a r to us."'

K a s r a v i emphasizes that he never agreed w i t h the s o c i a -

l i s t idea t h a t the whole world should he put under one

government i n order to preserve peace. He t h i n k s t h a t t h i s

i s an i m p r a c t i c a b l e wish and that even i f one day socialism

b r i n g s i t t o r e a l i t y , d i v i s i o n s must s t i l l continue. The

e x i s t e n c e of many s t a t e s i s not i n i t s e l f harmful; only

s t r i f e between them i s harmful. K a s r a v i ' s suggestions f o r

2
a permanent peace are twofold:
t . No s t a t e should take advantage of the weakness of any
other s t a t e .
2. An i n t e r n a t i o n a l body should be s e t up t o safeguard the
r i g h t s and promote the i n t e r e s t s of a l l s t a t e s .
On the s u b j e c t of the a c t i v i t i e s of the (so-called)
Democrat p a r t y of i i z a r b a i j a n , during and a f t e r the second
world war, K a s r a v i f i n d s t h a t these were aimed a g a i n s t I r a n ' s
liberty. The Democrats demanded freedom in, the conduct of
internal provincial affairs. T h i s demand could soon be.
extended to the other p a r t s of the country, and c o u l d damage
1• Sarnevesht-e I r a n cheh khwahad bud, p.38.
2. K a s r a v i , Az Sazman-e Melal-e Mottafeq cheh n a t i j e h tavanad
bud, Tehran 132k/13h5»
 357

the s t a b i l i t y of the s t a t e and the c e n t r a l government.

Needless to say, K a s r a v i continues, the " r e b e l l i o n " of the

Democrats of Azarbaij'an was i n accordance w i t h R u s s i a n

p o l i c y and to R u s s i a ' s b e n e f i t . K a s r a v i then says that i f

he complains about p o l i t i c i a n s , t h i s does not mean t h a t he

o b j e c t s t o p a r t i c u l a r i n d i v i d u a l s ; he has no .enmity w i t h

any of them. The r e b e l l i o n of the Democrats of A z a r b a i j a n ,

however, could only i n c r e a s e bloodshed i n I r a n and could

not p o s s i b l y b e n e f i t the country, but would do nothing but

harm.

K a s r a v i has a l s o l e f t an i n t e r e s t i n g pamphlet Az Sazman-e

Melal-e Mottafeg . cheh nati.leh tavanad bud? (The U n i t e d

A
Nations O r g a n i z a t i o n and i t s p o s s i b l e outcome). He t h i n k a
t h a t there are c e r t a i n d e f i c i e n c i e s i n t h i s O r g a n i z a t i o n .
2
According to a r t i c l e 29 of i t s c h a r t e r , d e c i s i o n s of the
S e c u r i t y C o u n c i l can only be taken i f seven of the C o u n c i l ' s
members approve, and one of the permanent members ( F r a n c e ,
China, the U.S.A., B r i t a i n and R u s s i a ) can veto the d e c i s i o n s .
For Kasravi, t h i s r a i s e s a d i f f i c u l t y . ^ He does not complain
because these p a r t i c u l a r s t a t e s have been chosen, but t h i n k s
t h a t obviously no important d e c i s i o n w i l l ever be approved!
when these s t a t e s u s u a l l y disagree w i t h each other because
t h e i r i n t e r e s t s c l a s h . Defects of t h i s s o r t w i l l f r u s t r a t e
1. K a s r a v i , Az Sazm'an-e Melal-e Mottafeq cheh n a t i j e h tavanad
1
bjid., Tehran 1324/1945.
2. I b i d . J p.24.
3. Ibid. p.27.;
 358

any improvement and progress of the U.N.O. Indeed K a s r a v i

f e a r s t h a t i f a r t i c l e 29 i s not amended, there w i l l be no

1
more use i n having such a great O r g a n i z a t i o n . A l l the

s t a t e s which have obtained membership f o l l o w t h e i r own aims

and i n t e r e s t s ; t h e i r a t t i t u d e s to one another are not abso-

l u t e l y i m p a r t i a l and d i s i n t e r e s t e d . I t i sdifficult to

b e l i e v e t h a t any s t a t e w i l l renounce i t s own r i g h t s and

favour a weaker s t a t e i n the event o f war or any other

difficulty. K a s r a v i here again r e j e c t s the n o t i o n t h a t war

2
i s an e s s e n t i a l p a r t of human n a t u r e . He t h i n k s t h a t men

have no need t o make war and should t r y t o avoid i t , just

as they t r y to avoid many other harmful t h i n g s e x i s t i n g i n

n a t u r e , such as i l l n e s s e s . As regards the widespread talk

of e s t a b l i s h i n g a world government, he r e i t e r a t e s h i s view

t h a t t h i s wish i s u n l i k e l y to be r e a l i z e d when so many

d i f f e r e n t r a c e s , r e l i g i o n s and t r a d i t i o n s stand i n the way,

and t h a t even i f a l l the n a t i o n s were under one government,

d i s s e n s i o n s between them would be bound t o continue. Never-

t h e l e s s he b e l i e v e s t h a t the world today i s improving i n

t h i s r e s p e c t , and that a time w i l l e v e n t u a l l y come when a l l

c o u n t r i e s a r e under one f l a g .

I n t h i s pamphlet, K a s r a v i d i s c u s s e s the a c t i v i t i e s o f

the Democrat p a r t y of A ^ a r b a i j a n w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o I r a n ' s

1. Az Sazman-e Melal-e Mottafeq cheh n a t i j e h tavanad butt.
P. 27.
2. I b i d . , pp 29-38.
 j559

•i
membership of the United Nations O r g a n i z a t i o n . A f t e r the
second world war, t h i s p a r t y s e i z e d c o n t r o l i n A z e r b a i j a n ,
and when a f o r c e of I r a n i a n troops was sent out ( i n November
1945) to stop i t s i l l e g a l a c t i v i t i e s , R u s s i a complained and
prevented them from e n t e r i n g the p r o v i n c e , I r a n then asked
f o r h e l p from the United Nations O r g a n i z a t i o n . K a s r a v i

2
goes on t o say the d i f f i c u l t y i n I r a n i s l a c k of p o l i c y .
The people do not know where they stand. T h i s country i s
run "by M i n i s t e r s who are not as capable as they should he.
Most I r a n i a n l e a d e r s , K a s r a v i s a y s , have been l i k e t o o l s i n
the E n g l i s h government's hand. They have even f o r g o t t e n
t h e i r b a s i c duty, which i s to take care of I r a n ' s i n t e r e s t s .
I n s t e a d they have worked e x c l u s i v e l y f o r the E n g l i s h govern-
ment. As a r e s u l t , I r a n has become weaker? day by day. At
the same time R u s s i a c a r r i e s on a great r i v a l r y w i t h England,
and does not l i k e t o see England become i n f l u e n t i a l i n I r a n .
K a s r a v i here as elsewhere i n s i s t s t h a t the only wise p o l i c y
f o r I r a n i s t o remain a l o o f from "both R u s s i a and England.^
I r a n i s a l s o t o r n between c a p i t a l i s m and s o c i a l i s m . On the
other hand, I r a n p o s s e s s e s a very important geographical
position. K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t membership of the U.N.O. i s
very important f o r I r a n , which needs i t s p r o t e c t i o n . ^ At
1 • Az Sazman-e Melal-e Mottafeq cheh n a t i j e h tavanad hud, p.1+6.
2. I b i d , pp ii.6-64.
3« Par rah-e sifesat. pp 78-79•
i+. Az Sazman-e Melal-e Mottafeq cheh nati.jeh tavanad bud, p.56.
 360

the same time, t h e I r a n i a n s themselves must t r y to reform

t h e i r ways and improve t h e i r country's p o s i t i o n . The U.N.O.

upheld the I r a n i a n case when I r a n complained about R u s s i a ' s

i n s t i g a t i o n o f the Democrat p a r t y i n A z e r b a i j a n ; but I r a n

cannot depend f o r e v e r on the United Nations, The I r a n i a n s

themselves must follow a strong p o l i c y i f they want t o keep

t h e i r enemies out of t h e i r country and behind i t s b o r d e r s ,

Khwaharan va Dokhtaran-e Mia (Our S i s t e r s and Daughters)^

i s one of K a s r a v i ' s most i n t e r e s t i n g books from a s o c i o l o -

g i c a l point of view. I t s s u b j e c t i s the l i f e o f women,

p a r t i c u l a r l y I r a n i a n women, t h e i r customs, h a b i t s , dress etc.

I n i t K a s r a v i g i v e s h i s ideas about marriage and the r o l e of

women i n I r a n i a n s o c i e t y .

The f i r s t chapter i s on the s u b j e c t o f women's d r e s s ,

K a s r a v i d i s c u s s e s t h e f a c t t h a t f o r c e n t u r i e s I r a n i a n women
p
were v e i l e d from head t o t o e . During the I r a n i a n C o n s t i -

t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n , a few broad-minded men f i r s t advocated

t h a t women should be u n v e i l e d . I n K a s r a v i ' s view, i t i s

t r a g i c t h a t " h a l f of our n a t i o n should have been kept i n

darkness through the c e n t u r i e s and deprived of any oppor-

t u n i t y t o h e l p i n s o c i a l work." He p o i n t s out t h a t the v e i l

3
was not o r i g i n a l l y an I s l a m i c requirement,"' but was made
orthodox by wrong-headed m o l l i s i n l a t e r times. I n no chapter
1.
2. KKhwaharan
a s r a v i , Khwaharan v a Dokhtaran-e
v a Dokhtaran-e Ma. Tehran 1323/1944.
Ma. pp 1-9.
3. I b i d , pp 12-14.
 361

of the Holy Qor'an i s t h e r e any r u l i n g which o b l i g e s a.

woman t o cover h e r s e l f completely. He a l s o s a y s that he i s

not a g a i n s t the v e i l a s a garment, but a g a i n s t the behaviour

and a t t i t u d e of men who t h i n k t h a t such a garment makes

women more d i g n i f i e d or r e s p e c t a b l e . A v e i l e d woman can.be

u n f a i t h f u l t o her husband and so can an u n v e i l e d woman. Men

who t h i n k t h a t by covering t h e i r daughters o r wives they can

keep them secure are mistaken, because the v e i l w i l l never

make a bad woman good or l o y a l .

Among the e a r l y advocates o f the u n v e i l i n g of women,

K a s r a v i mentions Mirza Hosayn *Adalat (one of the l e a d e r s o f

the Constitutionalists at Tabriz); he t r i e d hard t o b r i n g

l i g h t t o the women, but the o b s t i n a t e mollas who opposed any

change or reform i n s o c i e t y made h i s p o s i t i o n d i f f i c u l t , and

so h i s e f f o r t s made no headway. Reza Shah the G r e a t , among

h i s many v a l u a b l e s e r v i c e s t o the n a t i o n , brought about a-

complete change i n the l i f e of I r a n i a n women. He f i r m l y and

p e r s i s t e n t l y r e s i s t e d the narrow-minded m o l l a s . and on

January 7 , 1937 (17 Dey, 1315) u n v e i l e d the n a t i o n ' s women.

Although t h i B caused a great uproar and widespread disapp-

r o v a l i n the country, Rezfe Shah was s u c c e s s f u l . T h i s was

one of h i s most remarkable achievements i n the t a s k o f

modernizing I r a n . He l e d I r a n i a n women t o a new world, and

1 • Khwharan v a Dokhtaran-e Ma, p.12.

2. Ibid.,p.4.
3 . I b i d , pp 8 - 9 .
and (so K a s r a v i s a y s ) changed t h e i r outlook completely. The

n a t i o n ' s women, who had "been degraded f o r c e n t u r i e s and were

i n general almost completely ignorant, began t o change and

t o improve t h e i r p o s i t i o n .

K a s r a v i r e c o g n i s e s that i n t h e v i l l a g e s and t r i b e s o f

I r a n the women had always been u n v e i l e d and had f u l l y

a s s o c i a t e d w i t h men and worked s i d e by s i d e w i t h them.

V e i l i n g had been p r a c t i s e d only i n the b i g c i t i e s and among

the townsfolk. I n K a s r a v i * s o p i n i o n , the v e i l was an excuse

f o r townswomen t o behave i r r e s p o n s i b l y and ignore t h e i r

duties. As a r e s u l t , they became i n a c t i v e and completely

r e l i a n t on the husbands; e s p e c i a l l y i n the upper c l a s s e s of

s o c i e t y t h i s e f f e c t was very v i s i b l e . I n t h e great events

1
of I r a n i a n h i s t o r y , such a s the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n ,

the women had not been able t o show t h e i r a b i l i t i e s or even

to p l a y any p a r t a t a l l .

K a s r a v i goes on t o say that women should above a l l be

compassionate and r e s p o n s i b l e mothers and good companions

2
t o t h e i r husbands." They should be d u t i f u l wives and stand
by t h e i r husbands i n every d i f f i c u l t y . S i n c e God c r e a t e d

women with c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i f f e r e n t from those o f men,

p u b l i c and governmental work, commercial b u s i n e s s , and many

of the p r o f e s s i o n s a r e n o t , i n K a s r a v i ' s opinion, appropriate

1. Khwaharan v a Dokhtaran-e Ma. pp 8-9.
r

2. I b i d . , vv 27-28.
 363

A
for women. person cannot be e f f i c i e n t i n two completely
d i f f e r e n t f i e l d s of work, and a woman cannot simultaneously
be s u c c e s s f u l i n an outside job and i n her work i n the home;
t a k i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n both jobs w i l l be too heavy as.
burden f o r any woman t o c a r r y . At t h e same time, K a s r a v i
t h i n k s that a wife c l e a r l y ought t o a s s o c i a t e with her hus-
band i n every aspect of h i s l i f e (and not j u s t i n the home).
I n some c o u n t r i e s women were then being e l e c t e d a s members of
parliament and appointed t o p o l i t i c a l and governmental p o s t s .
2
K a s r a v i says about t h i s : " I s t i l l think that t h i s i s a
mistake i n today's conditions of l i f e . At the present moment
every s o c i e t y and government f i n d s i t very d i f f i c u l t t o
ensure t h a t enough employment i n s o c i a l l y u s e f u l a c t i v i t i e s
and p u b l i c s e r v i c e s i s a v a i l a b l e f o r the men. When employ-
ment i s l a c k i n g even f o r men who are expert i n t h e i r j o b s ,
why should women be engaged? Needless t o say t h i s would make
the t r o u b l e worse." While i n s i s t i n g t h a t g i r l s must be
educated a s w e l l a s boys, K a s r a v i t h i n k s that t h e curriculum
for g i r l s should be d i f f e r e n t . I t should i n c l u d e the t e a c h i n g
of domestic s c i e n c e and mothercraft.
I n t h i s book, marriage and i t s laws and customs are a l s o
discussed. K a s r a v i c o n s i d e r s g e t t i n g married t o be a duty
which no man or woman should a v o i d . A boy becomes p h y s i c a l l y
1. KMwiaharan v a Dokhtaran-e p.U3«
2. Ibid./pp 28-29.
3. Ibid..v.hG,
 364

•J

capable of marriage a t the age o f s i x t e e n , but i n K a s r a v i ' s

opinion he should not assume the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and get
married u n t i l he i s twenty f i v e . According t o K a s r a v i , the
men i n h i s day o f t e n had no sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and were
too s e l f i s h and s e l f - c e n t r e d t o be w i l l i n g t o look a f t e r a
family. I n t h i s d i f f i c u l t s i t u a t i o n , e i t h e r polygamy would
have t o remain p e r m i s s i b l e , or men would have t o be compelled
to marry. Polygamy, however, i s an unsound way o f married
l i f e , and h i s t o r y shows that i t s r e s u l t s have always been
bad. Moreover today, w i t h a l l the present f i n a n c i a l diffi-
c u l t i e s , men cannot accept too heavy r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . One
man i s only capable o f looking a f t e r one w i f e , and polygamy
can no longer be p r a c t i s e d . At the same time, K a s r a v i s a y s ,
the number of unmarried women i n every s o c i e t y i s i n c r e a s i n g
rapidly. The moral l e a d e r s of every n a t i o n must t h e r e f o r e
persuade the men t o get married. A woman needs s e c u r i t y ,
and a supporter w i l l give h e r not only m a t e r i a l but a l s o moral
security.
2
K a s r a v i i s against marriage between blood r e l a t i v e s ,
which i s not approved i n any r e l i g i o n and u s u a l l y produces
c h i l d r e n w i t h mental o r p h y s i c a l d e f o r m i t i e s or a t l e a s t w i t h
l e s s than normal i n t e l l i g e n c e . He t h i n k s i t important that
p1.
a r Khwaharan
e n t s shouldv at Dokhtaran-e
e a c h t h e i r c Mia,
h i l d p»36.
r e n the f a c t s of l i f e , from
2. I b l d . p.49*
;
 365

i n f a n c y onwards. They must prepare the c h i l d r e n t o stand

up t o the d i f f i c u l t i e s which l i e ahead of them. Another
point which he emphasizes i s the importance of r e q u i r i n g a
h e a l t h c e r t i f i c a t e before marriage, both f o r the man and
f o r the woman. Those who s u f f e r from i n c u r a b l e d i s e a s e s
should be prevented from marriage, because they w i l l not
only t r a n s f e r t h e d i s e a s e to t h e i r p a r t n e r s , but l a t e r w i l l
produce c h i l d r e n a f f l i c t e d (through no f a u l t on the c h i l d -
ren's p a r t ) w i t h d e f o r m i t i e s . K a s r a v i t h i n k s t h a t marriages
ought to be solemnized and r e g i s t e r e d by the c i v i l autho-
rities. ( T h i s was made o b l i g a t o r y by Vol.2 of the I r a n i a n
C i v i l Code i n 1935)• Close r e l a t i v e s and two witnesses
should always be present a t the ceremony. Since marriage
i s such a great event i n the l i v e s of the p a r t n e r s , i t should
be c e l e b r a t e d f e s t i v e l y , but w i t h i n the l i m i t s of f i n a n c i a l
c a p a c i t y , so that they may value t h e i r marriage more h i g h l y
and a p p r e c i a t e i t l a t e r .
Turning to the s u b j e c t of d i v o r c e , K a s r a v i mentions
that according t o I s l a m i c law a man can divorce h i s wife a t
3
any moment and without any s p e c i f i c reason. I n exchange he
i s supposed t o pay a sum of money (the mahr) i n order t o
support h i s w i f e u n t i l she s e t t l e s down again. A woman, on
the other hand, cannot a s a general r u l e divorce h e r husband.
1 • Khwaharan v a Dokhtarian-& Mia, pp 54-55.
2. Ibid.,pp 58-59.
3. jbid..p. 28.
K a s r a v i s t r e s s e s t h a t marriage i s not purchase and s a l e ; i t s

essence i s co-operation between a man and a woman. Nobody

should marry j u s t f o r the sake o f money, which however u s e -

f u l i t may be, most d e f i n i t e l y cannot b r i n g happiness. The

only s e c u r i t y f o r the Moslem women i s t h e amount of money

which her husband has agreed to pay her i n case he wants t o

get r i d of her; but i t has been proved that t h i s i s not a

100 p e r cent secure guarantee. Although t h i s system c o u l d

probably work i n a p r i m i t i v e s o c i e t y , i t seems out of p l a c e

i n the world today.

K a s r a v i then says that both the husband and the w i f e

should be c o n s i d e r a t e of each other*s f e e l i n g s and w i s h e s .

A man must not expect h i s w i f e t o be submissive t o him. In

the o l d days, and even today i n backward s o c i e t i e s , men used

to c o n s i d e r themselves s u p e r i o r t o t h e i r wives and behave i n

a p a t r o n i z i n g way. As time passed, men came t o v a l u e t h e i r

wives, more h i g h l y ; a t the same time women have proved that

they a r e not i n f e r i o r t o t h e i r husbands any more.

K a s r a v i r e p e a t e d l y emphasizes that marriage i s e s s e n t i a l

f o r both men and women, and that a d u l t e r y i s the d i r e c t

2
r e s u l t o f not marrying a t the proper time. He t h i n k s t h a t
the most important purpose of marriage i s p r o c r e a t i o n o f
3
children, and l i k e n s a c h i l d l e s s marriage t o a f r u i t l e s s
1. Khwaharan v a Dokhtaran-e Mia, pp 63-65.
2. I b i d . . T>T> 78-80.
3. I b i d . , vv 83-81*.
 S)0 (

tree. He c o n s i d e r s s t e r i l i t y i n e i t h e r the husband o r t h e

wife t o be a v a l i d ground f o r d i v o r c e .

At t h e end of t h i s book, K a s r a v i rebukes parents who

chose o b j e c t i o n a b l e and u n a t t r a c t i v e names f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n .

Why should they saddle them with names such a s Chengiz o r

Taymur, who were t h e country's c r u e l e s t enemies? There a r e

p l e n t y of b e a u t i f u l names which I r a n i a n s can g i v e to t h e i r

c h i l d r e n ; names of s t a r s , flowers and other b e a u t i f u l t h i n g s

i n nature can be used.

K a s r a v i dedicated another of h i s books t o the women <bf

Iran. I t s t i t l e i s Mowhuma't v a Kharafat ( F i c t i o n s and Super-

s t i t i o n s ) , ^ and h i s c h i e f i n t e n t i o n i n i t i s t o combat

s u p e r s t i t i o n , which has a h o l d on l a r g e numbers o f people,

p a r t i c u l a r l y women, i n I r a n .

Many people imagine t h a t they can get t o know the f u t u r e

by f o r t u n e - t e l l i n g , whereas i n r e a l i t y i t i s impossible f o r

anybody t o f i n d out h i s f u t u r e l o t . Today a l l countries;

attempt t o d i s c o v e r the i n t e n t i o n s of other c o u n t r i e s , and

for t h i s purpose they t r a i n s p i e s and c a r r y on v a r i o u s

activities. I f they could get t o know these i n t e n t i o n s from

f o r t u n e - t e l l e r s , s u r e l y they would not bother t o i n c u r such

great expenditure. "Why then", asks K a s r a v i , "should not

the B r i t i s h government employ I n d i a n Yogis in. i t s i n t e l l i -

gence s e r v i c e ? . " I f f o r t u n e - t e l l e r s knew anything about the

1. Khwaharan va Dokhtaran-3 M'a, p.82.
2. Sureh 6, JalKAn'am. v e r s e 5©-'
f u t u r e , they could a t l e a s t improve t h e i r own standard o f

life. I t i s a great misfortune ( f o r I r a n ) t h a t people

v a l u e the p r e d i c t i o n s of f o r t u n e - t e l l e r s i n so many s i t u a -

tions. Even though t h e Qor'ian says VI1JL*>M ^ \^

( I do not know the f u t u r e ) , the m a j o r i t y of people only wear

a mask of r e l i g i o n and s t i l l s u p e r s t i t i o u s l y b e l i e v e t h a t

man i s capable of p r e d i c t i o n . The main purpose of r e l i g i o n

p
according to K a s r a v i , i s to combat s u p e r s t i t i o n . The two-
are d i r e c t o p p o s i t e s . H i s t o r y proves t h a t f o r t u n e - t e l l i n g
s t a r t e d thousands of y e a r s ago when people d i d not b e l i e v e
i n the e x i s t e n c e of one God and worshipped i d o l s . They used
t o ask an intermediary c a l l e d a kahen ( s o o t h - s a y e r ) t o speak
to t h e i r Gods on t h e i r b e h a l f . L a t e r they came to b e l i e v e ;
t h a t one can l e a r n about one's f u t u r e through i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
of dreams, and through other phenomena which they regarded
as symbols o f a p a r t of t h e i r d e s t i n y , such a s s t a r s and
t h e i r movements, f l o w e r s , b i r d s , e t c . Sometimes they used
s p e c i a l equipment f o r f o r t u n e - t e l l i n g .
A s t r o l o g y i s l i k e w i s e a r e l i c from the e r a of idolatry."^
I n the second and t h i r d century A.D., Greek philosophy came
to the E a s t and w i t h i n a short while spread r a p i d l y . Astro-
logy was i n great demand not only by t h e masses of t h e people,
but a l s o by kings and r u l e r s , who r e g u l a r l y p r a c t i s e d i t and
1• Sureh 6, al-An'am, v e r s e 50.
2 . Mowhumiat va K h a r a f a t . p.17.
3- Ibid.,pp25p
i n every important event obtained and followed t h e i r court

a s t r o l o g e r ' s advice* Yet i n r e a l i t y , no matter who the

fortune t e l l e r might be or what method he might use, i t was'
and i s impossible to inform anybody about h i s f u t u r e .
K a s r a v i then notes t h a t I r a n i a n s today use the Divan
( c o l l e c t e d poems) of Hiafez a s an augury-book f o r t h e i r
1
decisions. Some even go f u r t h e r , and a t every step i n
t h e i r l i v e s r e f e r to a mollla. a s k i n g him t o decide t h e i r
problem by t a k i n g an augury from the Qor'an. Sometimes they
a l s o use the r o s a r y f o r t h i s purpose. Kasravi emphasizes
that by such use of the Qor'tan, people show contempt f o r
2
the Holy Book and d i s r e s p e c t f o r God.
Besides f o r t u n e - t e l l i n g , other e v i l p r a c t i c e s a r e
c a r r i e d on, such a s magic. Some people have a b s o l u t e f a i t h
in i t . Magic has l i k e w i s e come down from a n c i e n t times
before s c i e n c e s evolved. F o r example, when a person fell
i l l , magic was p r a c t i s e d i n the hope of saving h i s l i f e .
Magicians were thus i n great demand. A f t e r s c i e n c e s had
come onto the scene, people i n some p a r t s of the wdLd s t i l l
continued to p r a c t i s e magic. I n I r a n , according t o K a s r a v i ^ ,
t h e r e a r e s t i l l a great number of women, and i n some e n v i r o n -
ments a l s o men, who b e l i e v e i n i t s power. They go t o magi-
c i a n s whenever they have t o deal w i t h a d i f f i c u l t y , and a r e
1. Mowhumlat v a Khar&fiatt p.39«
2. Ibid. p.40.
r

3. I b i d . p . 4 6 .
f
 370
i

quite s a t i s f i e d when they get a do'a ( w r i t t e n i n c a n t a t i o n )

or a t a l i s m a n , Mollias were the f i r s t who began b e l i e v i n g
that i n c a n t a t i o n s can cure people's s u f f e r i n g s . The w r i t i n g s
of famous mollas such as M a j l e s i (d.1699-1700) and Mohsen
Peyz (d, 1680) contain numerous i n c a n t a t i o n s f o r the remedy
of pains and i l l n e s s e s . Furthermore, p a r t i c u l a r days and
t h i n g s are s t i l l considered i n I r a n to be lucky or unlucky
s i g n s . For example, the 13th day of Nawruz i s an unlucky
day on which t o s t a y at home, and a l l the people customarily
go out of doors. The owl i s an unlucky b i r d , and people
a v o i d looking at i t . There are thousands of s i m i l a r examples.
Many people are s t i l l great b e l i e v e r s i n the s i g n i f i c a n c e of
dreams. Although psychology proves t h a t a person who has to
handle a p a r t i c u l a r matter i s l i k e l y to dream about i t ,
K a s r a v i t h i n k s that such a person's dreams do not n e c e s s a r i l y
mean anything. Some people h o l d s e s s i o n s f o r the i l l u s o r y
purpose of g e t t i n g i n t o touch with the s p i r i t s of the dead.
S p i r i t u a l i s t s i n p a r t i c u l a r do t h i s ; they imagine t h a t the
s p i r i t can p r e d i c t t h e i r f u t u r e f o r them.

The majority of the people i n I r a n , according to K a s r a v i ,

s t i l l b e l i e v e i n f a t e (qesmat) and p r e d e s t i n a t i o n ; they say

t h a t man has no freedom to make d e c i s i o n s a f f e c t i n g h i s own

l i f e , a l l of which depends s o l e l y on God. T h i s idea was spread

1. Mowhumiat va kharaf a t , p.50.

 371

i n t h e name of r e l i g i o n , and e s p e c i a l l y o f I s l a m . After-

wards poets with t h e i r poisonous poems persuaded people t o

b e l i e v e i n absolute p r e d e s t i n a t i o n and give up e f f o r t f o r

the improvement of t h e i r l i v e s . The g r e a t e r p a r t of P e r s i a n

poetry and l i t e r a t u r e , which I r a n i a n s regard a s t h e i r

country's p r i d e and g l o r y , expresses t h e i d e a . Such w r i t i n g s

threw t h e n a t i o n i n t o i d l e n e s s and impotence. K a s r a v i ends

by expressing h i s b e l i e f that God c r e a t e d man with a f a c u l t y

of reason to d e a l w i t h h i s problems and a s u b s t a n t i a l measure

of f r e e w i l l .

Comment.

K a s r a v i * s ideas i n the f i e l d of sociology and p o l i t i c s

a r e g e n e r a l l y o b j e c t i v e , and a t t h e same time dynamic and

flexible. Some of them could be a p p l i e d t o a l l k i n d s of

s o c i e t i e s , from t h e advanced t o t h e p r i m i t i v e . Today the

world i s i n a confused s t a t e . The p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l

t h e o r i e s which t h i n k e r s have put forward through t h e cen-

t u r i e s do not help much t o c l e a r up t h i s confusion, because

they a r e not s u i t a b l e f o r a l l s o c i e t i e s a t a l l times and a r e

often mutually contradictory. Some a r e i n s p i r e d by r e l i g i o u s

b e l i e f s , others by i d e a s of m o r a l i t y ; being more or l e s s

c r e a t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l minds, they have no common standard

of good and e v i l . The n a t i o n s of the world are p u z z l e d by

 372

them, K a s r a v i formed h i s ideas a f t e r c a r e f u l study of

v a r i o u s t h e o r i e s and deep thought. He a l s o s t u d i e d d i f f e r e n t

types of government, and l e a r n t a great deal from h i s h i s t o -

r i c a l researches. His ideas are not a b s o l u t e l y o r i g i n a l ,

because more or l e s s s i m i l a r ideas can be found i n Other

books on e t h i c s and p o l i t i c s . , and i n r e l i g i o u s laws; but

he adapted them i n h i s own way.

One c r i t i c i s m which can be made i s t h a t K a s r a v i has not

p a i d enough a t t e n t i o n to the p r a c t i c a l s i d e of p o l i t i c a l

and s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s ; e.g. he might have s a i d something

about the p r a c t i c a l problems of making C o n s t i t u t i o n a l govern^

ment work i n I r a n and of t e a c h i n g i t s true meaning to the

masses of the people and i n the schools.

I t a l s o seems to us t h a t K a s r a v i does not a t t a c h enough

importance t o psychology. The n a t i o n s , w i t h t h e i r d i f f e r e n t

c u l t u r e s , geographical situations, social characteristics,

and standards of l i v i n g , w i l l probably never a l l choose the

same type of government and economic system. Perhaps i f the

nations co-operate, they w i l l one day reduce the d i f f e r e n c e s

i n l i v i n g standards between them to a minimum; but even so

they w i l l s t i l l not agree on everything. Kasravi himself

recognised t h i s when he s a i d that a world government w i l l be

i m p r a c t i c a l f o r a long time. Yet he was t r y i n g to present

u n i v e r s a l p r i n c i p l e s , v a l i d for a l l s o c i e t i e s . Although
most of h i s ideas are admirable i n theory, many of them are

mainly r e l e v a n t to I r a n or any B i m i l a r country.

1
I t I s d i f f i c u l t to a s s e s s the i n f l u e n c e of K a s r a v i s

ideas on I r a n i a n p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l thought s i n c e h i s

death; "but probably i t has been f a i r l y c o n s i d e r a b l e . For

example, he was one of the f i r s t I r a n i a n s who argued that

only the a c t u a l c u l t i v a t o r s should be allowed t o own agri-

c u l t u r a l land. T h i s proposal has been c a r r i e d out in Iran

by the land reform approved i n 1963. K a s r a v i may be cri-

t i c i z e d because he did not see the importance of large-

s c a l e modern i n d u s t r i e s , which are n e c e s s a r i l y urban; but

he was r i g h t i n condemning the neglect of a g r i c u l t u r e and

d e r e l i c t i o n of the v i l l a g e s and small towns i n I r a n and

other E a s t e r n c o u n t r i e s . He would c e r t a i n l y have approved

the present I r a n i a n government's e f f o r t s to h e l p the v i l l a g e s

through the L i t e r a c y Corps, the Health Corps, and the Plan

Organization. He would a l s o have approved the Family Pro-

t e c t i o n Law of 13^6/1967, which r e s t r i c t s divorce and

v i r t u a l l y p r o h i b i t s future polygamy i n I r a n .
 374

CONCLUSION

A country's c u l t u r a l and s o c i a l l i f e c o n s t a n t l y evolves

i n accordance w i t h i t s people's changing a t t i t u d e s and

demands; hut i n general such changes take p l a c e slowly and

g r a d u a l l y over long p e r i o d s . I r a n i s a country which posses-

ses a h e r i t a g e of c i v i l i z e d l i f e going hack t o ancient times.

•j

Many s c h o l a r s , both I r a n i a n and f o r e i g n , have observed t h a t

although I r a n s u f f e r e d d e v a s t a t i n g i n v a s i o n s and conquests,

i t s people have kept t h e i r r i c h c i v i l i z a t i o n a l i v e through

a l l these t r i a l s r i g h t up t o the present day, and t h a t i n so

doing they have made important c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o the s t o r e of

human knowledge and a r t and c u l t u r e .

L i k e other n a t i o n s , the I r a n i a n people do not change;

t h e i r a t t i t u d e s q u i c k l y ; and with t h e i r deeply rooted civi-

l i z a t i o n and v e r y broad background, they a r e i n c l i n e d t o be

s c e p t i c a l about new i d e a s put forward by s c h o l a r s and

thinkers. K a s r a v i d i d h i s b e s t t o e n l i g h t e n the minds of t h e

I r a n i a n masses by showing them f a c t s and t r u t h s and by d i s -

p e l l i n g s u p e r s t i t i o n s and i l l u s i o n s . No s c h o l a r , however,

could have brought about any immediate change i n the people's

mentality. Moreover, the circumstances i n which K a s r a v i rose

and d e c l a r e d h i s thoughts were p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t . In

1. e.g. Dr. ' I s a Sadiq, Sa.yr-e ffarhang dar I r a n va Maghreb-
zamin. Tehran 1333/1954; Rene Grousset, L'Empire des
Steppes, P a r i s 1939; e t c . g t c .
those days the I r a n i a n s , a f t e r passing through the t r i a l s
o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u g g l e and the agonies o f the first
world war, yearned f o r r e l i e f from t h e i r s u f f e r i n g s and
wanted t h e i r problems t o "be reduced t o a minimum. Many
people were more or l e s s starved o r undernourished, and
t h e i r only aim was t o keep a l i v e . A f t e r Rezia Shah's r i s e
t o power, the c e n t r a l government t r i e d hard t o save I r a n
from d i s o r d e r and hunger, and w i t h i n a short time succeeded
i n c l e a r i n g up some o f the country's worst t r o u b l e s . The
masses o f the people, however, were then s t i l l ignorant and
almost i l l i t e r a t e . Schools were b u i l t t o combat i l l i t e r a c y ,
Tehran U n i v e r s i t y and many other i n s t i t u t i o n s o f l e a r n i n g
were e s t a b l i s h e d , and important steps were taken t o improves
the n a t i o n ' s h e a l t h and w e l l - b e i n g . Rezia Shah the Great
p e r s o n a l l y strove t o r a i s e the standards o f m a t e r i a l and
c u l t u r a l l i f e i n I r a n ; he wanted t o f a m i l i a r i z e the people
w i t h modern methods o f work and modern ways o f l i v i n g . After
the Anglo-Russian invasion and Rezia Shah's a b d i c a t i o n , I r a n
entered a new p e r i o d o f t r i a l and s u f f e r i n g , which l a s t e d
u n t i l w e l l a f t e r Kasravi's death.
Although Kasravi's ideas were very relevant t o I r a n ' s
needs d u r i n g and a f t e r Rezfe Shah's r e i g n , they d i d not gain
r a p i d acceptance. On the whole they were unpalatable t o h i s
contemporaries. Most I r a n i a n s i n those days clung t o
 376

orthodox ways o f t h i n k i n g , and some were s t i l l i n the g r i p

of f a n a t i c i s m and s u p e r s t i t i o n . Consequently any new idea
seemed t o them a k i n d of r e b e l l i o n and sabotage. They were
p a r t i c u l a r l y dismayed "by Kasravi's r e l i g i o u s opinions and
s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r i e s . To us, Kasravi appears as a great
r e v o l u t i o n a r y t h i n k e r , who f e l t t h a t the contemporary s t a t e
of I r a n and humanity was had, hut d i d not l a c k hope f o r the
future. He was c e r t a i n l y an i n d i v i d u a l i s t i n h i s way o f
thinking. His t e n a c i t y i s also very n o t i c e a b l e throughout
his voluminous w r i t i n g s . Above a l l he was an extremely
brave man i n h i s unquenchable eagerness t o announce o r i g i n a l
concepts and d o c t r i n e s .

As we have j u s t s a i d , the t h e o r i e s o f any great scholar

and t h i n k e r can only become i n f l u e n t i a l a f t e r a r a t h e r long
time; and the e l i m i n a t i o n o f o l d ways o f t h i n k i n g takes
s t i l l longer. Even now, less than a quarter of century has
passed since Kasravi was k i l l e d . At t h a t time only a small
m i n o r i t y of upper and middle class people had any o p p o r t u n i t y
of r e g u l a r study, while the r e s t o f the n a t i o n were s t i l l
i l l i t e r a t e or b a r e l y l i t e r a t e . The great m a j o r i t y of I r a n i a n s
thus remained q u i t e unaware o f Kasravi and h i s w r i t i n g s , w h i l e
the upper classes and the government o f f i c i a l s were cautious
and reserved, because i n t h e i r hearts they were f r i g h t e n e d
of change. Kasravi's w r i t i n g s have thus had l e s s i n f l u e n c e
 377

than he hoped and expected; hut i n t e r e s t i n them seems t o

he growing, and seems l i k e l y t o grow f u r t h e r now that
I r a n i a n s o c i e t y i s advancing and the number of broad-minded
educated people i s increasing r a p i d l y .
Kasravi's valuable works of scholarship and o r i g i n a l
-i
research, e s p e c i a l l y i n the f i e l d s o f h i s t o r y and lin-
g u i s t i c s , have always been h i g h l y esteemed by experts i n
these f i e l d s . Although some of h i s suggestions f o r language
reform were r a t h e r a r t i f i c i a l , a number o f the pure Persian
words which he recommended have come i n t o d a i l y use i n the
conversation of o r d i n a r y people. As regards Persian p o e t r y
and l i t e r a t u r e , Kasravi's ideas, while not l a c k i n g an e l e -
ment o f t r u t h from the e t h i c a l and s o c i a l v i e w p o i n t , are
exaggerated and one-sided; they are t h e r e f o r e never l i k e l y
t o have much i n f l u e n c e on I r a n i a n s , who f o r c e n t u r i e s have
been devoted t o p o e t i c and l i t e r a r y a r t . We t h i n k t h a t
Kasravi also made a great mistake i n denying the value of
the researches i n t o I r a n ' s h e r i t a g e done by European and
American o r i e n t a l i s t s . He may have been r i g h t i n saying
t h a t some o r i e n t a l i s t s were not sincere scholars and t h a t
they worked f o r the b e n e f i t of t h e i r own c o u n t r i e s and d i d
not want I r a n t o advance; but we are sure t h a t t h i s i s not
t r u e of a l l o r i e n t a l i s t s . E. G. Browne, f o r instance, proved
through h i s s c h o l a r l y works and through h i s e f f o r t s on b e h a l f

1 • His Tiarikh-e Mashruteh-ye Irian ( H i s t o r y o f the I r a n i a n

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Struggle) was r e p r i n t e d i n 1344/1965, by
the lAzadegian (see below, p.
 378

of I r a n i a n freedom t h a t he was a devoted l o v e r o f I r a n , We

do not t h i n k t h a t many scholars i n I r a n today share Kasravi's
views about o r i e n t a l i s t s . This i s one example of a f a i l i n g
which can o f t e n he seen i n Kasravi's pamphlets and newspaper
a r t i c l e s , though n o t i n h i s s c h o l a r l y works. We r e f e r t o h i s
tendency t o exaggerate and sometimes t o overemphasize a
one-sided viewpoint. He also sometimes uses very strong
language. This must have h u r t some people's f e e l i n g s , espe-
c i a l l y when i t was a matter o f r e l i g i o u s f e e l i n g s . Perhaps
Kasravi's reasoned arguments would have impressed more people
i f they had "been presented i n more moderate language; but
r i g h t l y or wrongly he thought t h a t strong language would make
the deepest impression. I n those days, t h i s view was gene-
r a l l y h e l d i n I r a n , and p a r t i c u l a r l y by p o l i t i c i a n s and
j o u r n a l i s t s who used t o employ extremely v i o l e n t and abusive
language ( f o h s h ) .

Kasravi's books i n the f i e l d o f sociology contain many

up-to-date ideas, and also a few ideas which are not so up-
to-date. One o f h i s most important p o i n t s was the need f o r
land reform. He regarded a g r i c u l t u r e as the basic human
economic a c t i v i t y , and thought t h a t the government has a duty
t o r e c l a i m land f o r c u l t i v a t i o n and also t o introduce a g r i -
c u l t u r a l mechanization. At the same time he f e l t very s t r o n g l y
t h a t a g r i c u l t u r a l land ought t o be owned by the person who
 379

works oh' i t . I d l e l a n d l o r d s who ate the f r u i t o f hardworking

farmer's e f f o r t d i d not i n h i s opinion deserve any sjcmpathy,
"but ought t o be deprived o f t h e i r r i g h t o f e x p l o i t a t i o n . Of
course the problem was very complicated, because l a n d l o r d s
were supposed t o i n v e s t i n the l a n d , e s p e c i a l l y i n qariats
( i r r i g a t i o n t u n n e l s ) ; a few good l a n d l o r d s d i d i n v e s t ; i n
t h i s way but the m a j o r i t y only e x p l o i t e d . Although Kasravi
did not study these complications, he was one o f the f i r s t
I r a n i a n t h i n k e r s t o see the importance o f t h i s problem. I t
was not r i g h t , he thought, t h a t a v i l l a g e o f say t h r e e
hundred i n h a b i t a n t s who s t r u g g l e d t o earn a l i v e l i h o o d should
be owned by an i n d i v i d u a l who had no i n t e r e s t i n t h e i r wel-
fare. At t h a t time none o f the p o l i t i c i a n s and government
o f f i c i a l s took any n o t i c e o f the problem. They must have
resented Kasravi's views, because u n t i l 13*1-0/1961 most o f
the parliamentary seats were c o n t r o l l e d by b i g i n f l u e n t i a l
landlords. For a long time the idea of l a n d reform was h e l d
back and no improvement was seen i n the l i f e o f the farmers,
u n t i l f i n a l l y i n 13^1/1963 land reform took place i n I r a n ,
and Kasravi's dream came t o r e a l i t y . I n spite of d i f f i c u l -
t i e s w i t h the f i n a n c i n g o f qani^ts and f o r m a t i o n o f co-opera-
t i v e s , and attempts by some former l a n d l o r d s t o obstruct t h e
reform through spreading f a l s e rumours among the v i l l a g e r s ,
the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the a g r i c u l t u r a l lands t o the new peasant
 380

owners has been proceeding i n a l l p a r t s o f I r a n and i s now

n e a r l y complete. I t seemB probable that Kasravi's ideas
and w r i t i n g s about the need f o r l a n d reform had some i n f l u e n c e
on I r a n i a n p u b l i c o p i n i o n and perhaps also on t h e government's
d e c i s i o n ; b u t i t i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o judge how important t h i s
i n f l u e n c e was. Whether i t was important o r unimportant,
Kasravi deserves great admiration f o r having been the f i r s t
t o w r i t e c l e a r l y and v i g o r o u s l y i n support o f j u s t i c e f o r t h e
farmers. Before Kasravi wrote, some s o c i a l i s t s had condemned
the then e x i s t i n g l a n d system i n I r a n and had objected t o any
s o r t of p r i v a t e l a n d ownership. K a s r a v i , however, proposed
peasant ownership as the most e q u i t a b l e and most human and
t r u l y Iranian solution.
Kasravi's importance was as a t h i n k e r and s c h o l a r , n o t
as a p o l i t i c i a n . Although he founded a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , t h e
Az&degan (Free Me^Oin 1933 > i t s members were never p a r t i -
c u l a r l y a c t i v e i n the p o l i t i c a l l i f e o f I r a n ; even d u r i n g
his l i f e t i m e , t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s centred on e t h i c a l and s o c i a l
matters r a t h e r than p o l i t i c s . The lAziadegian s t i l l e x i s t t o -
day, b u t no longer as an o f f i c i a l l y recognized political
party. They have small o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n the major c i t i e s ,
and are a c t i v e on a l a r g e r scale i n lAzarb&ijan. The members
h o l d t h e i r gatherings i n p r i v a t e houses, n o t i n clubs or
f i x e d places. They do not now pffblish any s p e c i a l p e r i o d i c a l .
They mainly concentrate on studying Kasravi's books and
 381

w r i t i n g s , and from time t o time they r e p u b l i s h them. Their

new e d i t i o n o f h i s H i s t o r y o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l S t r u g g l e ,
published i n 1965; has been p a r t i c u l a r l y v a l u a b l e . I t would
have been d i f f i c u l t f o r us t o compose t h i s t h e s i s without
these new e d i t i o n s .
As we mentioned e a r l i e r , there seems t o be a growth o f
i n t e r e s t i n Kasravi's w r i t i n g s , both among broad-minded young
I r a n i a n s and among foreign, scholars. I n recent years, several
a r t i c l e s about him and h i s books have appeared, and i t may be
worthwhile i f we r e f e r t o some o f them.
Dr. Amin Banani i n h i s book "The modernization o f I r a n "
•i
w r i t e s as f o l l o w s : Once there was considerable misgiving
among I r a n i a n i n t e l l e c t u a l s about i n d i s c r i m i n a t e adaption o f
the m a t e r i a l i s m o f the West... I t was Kasravi who emerged as
the c h i e f spokesman of these views. The appearance of his.
2
book Hvin ("The Greed") i n 1932 created a s t i r i n t h e i n t e l -
l e c t u a l c i r c l e s o f the t i m e . Although t h i s book contains
many i m p l i c i t c r i t i c i s m s o f t h e reforms of Rez£ Shah, i t was
allowed t o c i r c u l a t e because i t s c e n t r a l message was a con-
demnation o f t h e m a t e r i a l i s m o f the West. Furthermore, i t
was c r i t i c a l o f t r a d i t i o n a l Islam and p a r t i c u l a r l y o f t h e
S h i * i t e c l e r g y i n I r a n . I n a long succession o f subsequent
1 . Dr. Amin Baniani, The Modernization o f I r a n . Stanford
( C a l i f o r n i a ) , U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1961, pp 49-50.
2. See above, p.
 382

"books and a r t i c l e s , Kasravi developed these ideas at l e n g t h .

The regime of Reza Shah could n o t , of course, permit the
existence of a d i s t i n c t and independent ideology; but
Kasravi's d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h the o f f i c i a l ideology were not
serious, and the regime found them easy enough t o ignore.
He soon acquired a l a r g e f o l l o w i n g , mainly composed o f pro-
f e s s i o n a l men ( i n c l u d i n g government o f f i c i a l s ) and students,
who managed t o give h i s ideology the a t t r i b u t e s of a pseudo-"
f r a t e r n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . His p o p u l a r i t y amongst the nationa-
l i s t elements was p a r t i c u l a r l y great a f t e r the a b d i c a t i o n of
Rezla Shah. But w i t h the re-emergence of r e l i g i o u s i n f l u e n c e s
i n the p u b l i c l i f e of I r a n , Kasravi and h i s f o l l o w e r s were
subjected t o p e r s e c u t i o n , and Kasravi himself was assassinated.
I t i s important, however, (se Banani says) t o keep i n mind t h a t
the a r t i c u l a t e urban I r a n i a n , despite being soundly critical
of Western m a t e r i a l i s m , displayed an endless a p p e t i t e f o r a l l
the Western comforts and amenities o f l i f e . "
•i
Professor Leonard Binder i n h i s book on I r a n w r i t e s :
" I t h i n k i t s i g n i f i c a n t indeed t h a t such widely divergent
w r i t e r s as Maududi o f Pakistan, Kasravi of I r a n , Aflaq. of
S y r i a and Nasser of Egypt have such s i m i l a r n o t i o n s of revo-
lution. A l l i n s i s t on the need f o r fundamental changes. For
1 . Leonard Binder, I r a n : p o l i t i c a l development i n a changing
Society. Berkeley and Los Angeles U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a
Press, 1962, p.56.
 383

a l l f o u r , r e v o l u t i o n means n o t merely the s e i z i n g o f power,

i t i s also the changing of the people's "beliefs and behaviour."
As regards the Tudeh (Communist) p a r t y , Binder t h i n k s t h a t i t
succeeded " i n reaching the i n d u s t r i a l workers and some
peasants, a t the same time appealing t o the i n t e l l e c t u a l
snobbery o f the students w i t h p u b l i c a t i o n s i n c l u d i n g avant-
garde p o e t r y , discussions o f new Western a r t , and p h i l o s o -
phical tracts. They emphasized the e v i l r e s u l t o f t h e
a l l i a n c e o f feudalism and i m p e r i a l i s m . " At the same t i m e ,
Binder observes t h a t "the primer o f modernization f o r most
of t h e i r non-foreign t r a i n e d members was Kasravi and h i s
outragious iconoclasm."

Later i n h i s book Binder says: (Today i n I r a n ) "there

are also remnants o f the f o l l o w e r s o f K a s r a v i , who meet
occasionally and r e p r i n t h i s w r i t i n g s f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n . These
c a l l themselves p a t r i o t s , and they seek the s a l v a t i o n o f t h e i r
country i n the p u r i f i c a t i o n o f Islam and the establishment o f
true Constitutionalism. Feudalism and i m p e r i a l i s m are not so
much the problems as are t h e s u p e r s t i t i o n s and f a l s e f a i t h s
of imamism, sufism, i m p r a c t i c a l p h i l o s o p h i c a l s p e c u l a t i o n ,
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the Persian poets, and the study o f
a l l e g o r i c a l enegetics. Obviously the work o f Kasravi (so
Binder says) was l a r g e l y n e g a t i v e , i n t h a t i t shook the;
foundations of t r a d i t i o n f o r h i s young readers. His own
" r e l i g i o n o f p u r i t y " and h i s C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m
1. Binder, I r a n , p.81.
 381+

did not replace t h a t t r a d i t i o n , hut the way was opened f o r

;
new secular ideologies. '
1
I n a new Persian p e r i o d i c a l named Kaveh, published a t
Munich (second year* 1965), a c e r t a i n Hormoz Ansiari wrote an
a r t i c l e about Kasravi e n t i t l e d Sokhan-i chand dar blareh-ye
Farzand-e Ar.1omand-e I r a n . Sayyed Ahmad Kasravi (A few words
about a worthy son of I r a n , Sayyed Ahmad K a s r a v i ) . AnsaVi
admires Kasravi f o r having been an extremely hard-working
research scholar, and f o r h i s great courage i n t e l l i n g the
truth. Kasravi was always devoted t o h i s p r o f e s s i o n and
honest i n i t . At the same time he was f e a r l e s s l y outspoken,
and t h i s q u a l i t y l a t e r became h i s worst p e r i l . He was sur-
rounded by numerous foes and e v e n t u a l l y s a c r i f i c e d h i s l i f e
for the sake of honesty and t r u t h . A l l through h i s l i f e he
t r i e d hard t o e x p l a i n what he b e l i e v e d would be the most
e f f e c t i v e remedies f o r the Eastern s o c i e t i e s and p a r t i c u l a r l y
for Iran. He was not p r e j u d i c e d and he t r i e d t o understand
the r e a l meaning of l i f e ; at the same time he possessed a
very h i g h degree of i n t e l l i g e n c e . He challenged h i s enemies
and also many government leaders, whom he considered d i s l o y a l .
He l e f t behind a l a r g e number of books. AnsaVi p r a i s e s
Kasravi's open-mindedness as a h i s t o r i a n and t h i n k s t h a t h i s
h i s t o r i c a l researches are of very great v a l u e , above a l l h i s
1. This new p e r i o d i c a l , s t a r t e d ^ i n 1967» has taken the name of
the i l l u s t r i o u s p e r i o d i c a l KaVeh published at B e r l i n i n
I 9 I 6 - I 9 2 I under the e d i t o r s h i p f i r s t of Sayyed Hasan
Taqizladeh and then of Kiazemziadeh Irlanshahr.
 385

masterpiece on I r a n ' s C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n , but a l s o

b i s book on the "Unknown Rulers" and h i s account of "Five
hundred years of Khuzestan's H i s t o r y . " His achievements i n
the f i e l d of Persian l i n g u i s t i c s and d i a l e c t o l o g y are a l s o ,
i n Anslar's o p i n i o n , very considerable. Already before
Kasravi a few scholars had t r i e d t o p u r i f y Persian from
A r a b i c ; but Kasravi was much the best of them.
I n 1966, a c e r t a i n Mr. Hosayn Yazdaniian wrote an a r t i -
cle i n Kiaveh under the t i t l e Rah-e Kasravi (Kasravi's P a t h ) .
I r a n i a n s i n g e n e r a l , he says, and young people i n p a r t i c u l a r ,
t h i n k t h a t a l l great changes.have been s t a r t e d by Europeans.
They never b e l i e v e t h a t the Eastern n a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g the
I r a n i a n s , are a l s o capable o f c r e a t i n g o r i g i n a l ideas.
There are a number of I r a n i a n s who are w e l l informed,about
Iran's s o c i a l h i s t o r y , and also about the weak p o i n t s of the
I r a n i a n n a t i o n a l character; but according t o Yazdianian,
these persons are dishonest and f o r the sake of t h e i r own
i n t e r e s t s do not r e a l l y want the n a t i o n t o make progress.
That was the main reason, i n h i s o p i n i o n , why they banned
Kasravi's books. Yazdanian t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi's books
should be read and compared w i t h the evidence of reason,
h i s t o r y and c i v i l i z a t i o n , so t h a t ttnth may be l e a r n t from
them. I n the present age, the c u l t u r e d class ought t o have
b e l i e f s , p r i n c i p l e s and goals. Among the more than e i g h t y
 386

books which Kasravi wrote, Yazdanian considers Var.liavand

Bonyard, which sets f o r t h Kasravi's fundamental b e l i e f s and
concepts, t o be the most i n t e r e s t i n g and b e n e f i c i a l . He
t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi's works i n the f i e l d of sociology can
c o n t r i b u t e as much t o the s o l u t i o n of s o c i a l problems as
E i n s t e i n ' s and Newton's works c o n t r i b u t e d to physics. He
also t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi i s a good moral guide. Many
European t h i n k e r s look upon t h i s l i f e as merely a b a t t l e -
f i e l d , and have a low opinion of t h i s world; the p e s s i m i s t i c
philosopher Schopenhauer (I788-I860) even recommended c e l i -
bacy and s u i c i d e as the best consolations f o r man's sorrow.
K a s r a v i , on the other hand, has hope f o r t h i s world and
b e l i e v e s i n the value and d i g n i t y of l i f e .
A f t e r Kasravi's death a number of speeches by h i s
f o l l o w e r s were c o l l e c t e d i n a booklet Huzbeh-e Payman
("Anniversary o f the B i r t h of Payman"), which was published
1
at Tehran i n 1342/1963). Mr. Bani Ahmadi s a i d t h a t Kasravi
had e s t a b l i s h e d Payman, and had devoted and then s a c r i f i c e d
his l i f e f o r the sake of making known the t r u t h . The great
m a j o r i t y of newspapers, i n Bani Ahmadi's o p i n i o n , are v a l u e -
l e s s , because they are merely commercial; but Payman was not
i n the same category. I t was l i k e a guide f o r the masses o f
the people. I f Iranians w i l l pay a t t e n t i o n t o Kasravi's

1. Azadegan p a r t y , Ruzbeh-e Payman, Tehran 1342/1963, pp 3-6.

w r i t i n g s , they w i l l very soon, Bani Ahmadi t h i n k s , "become
a great and powerful n a t i o n i n the world. The i^zladegan
(Kasravi's f o l l o w e r s ) are t h e r e f o r e t r y i n g t o make Kasravi's
ideas more widely known by r e p u b l i s h i n g h i s books,
Mr. Yazdanian, another f o l l o w e r o f Kasravi who has
already been mentioned, said i n h i s speech t h a t Kasravi
w i t h God's i n s p i r a t i o n and grace had announced h i s ideas
and i n v i t e d people t o h i s p a t h , but had never pretended t o
be a prophet. Kasravi's way o f t h i n k i n g i s not e x c l u s i v e l y
f o r the Eastern n a t i o n s , b u t i s a p p l i c a b l e t o a l l c o u n t r i e s
and n a t i o n s o f the world.
Another d i s c i p l e o f K a s r a v i , Mr. A s g h a r i , s a i d that
h i s t o r y has shown t h a t great leaders exercise very l i t t l e
influence when they f i r s t embark on t h e task of g u i d i n g t h e
masses, and t h a t t h i s i s t r u e of Kasravi. Even so, Asghari
i s convinced t h a t Kasravi p o i n t e d t o the r i g h t path and
d i r e c t i o n f o r people. No doubt sooner or l a t e r people will
begin t o pay more a t t e n t i o n t o t h e w r i t i n g s o f t h i s great
thinker.
A c e r t a i n Mr. Siavoshi said t h a t Kasravi came pure and
departed pure. He d i e d a c r u e l death, b u t h i s name w i l l
always l i v e .
Mr. Qorbani, another speaker, s a i d t h a t the I r a n i a n s
throughout t h e i r h i s t o r y have been d i v i d e d i n t o d i f f e r e n t

1. Ruzbeh-e Payman. pp 17-25.

2. I b i d , pp 25-30.
 388

groups and have p r a c t i s e d various r e l i g i o n s . Ultimately a

great leader arose who t r i e d t o put an end t o t h i s mental
confusion; he was Ahmad Kasravi. I n h i s w r i t i n g s Kasravi
had i n s i s t e d t h a t man must have a t r u e and sincere convic-
t i o n so t h a t he may "be able t o cope w i t h t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s
of t h i s l i f e . Kasravi was a great genius who perceived t h e
s t a t e o f confusion, and t r i e d t o discover t h e r e a l i t i e s o f
l i f e and f i n d e f f e c t i v e remedies f o r i t s d i f f i c u l t i e s . "
Although Kasravi was d i s l i k e d by c e r t a i n groups f o r
h i s f r a n k expression o f strong ideas about l i t e r a t u r e , poetry
and r e l i g i o n , h i s death caused intense d i s t r e s s and sorrow.
The deplorable circumstances o f h i s assassination shocked
people, whether or not they agreed w i t h h i s views. We quote
below some comments which were published a t t h e time about
t h i s t r a g i c event and which show how g e n e r a l l y Kasravi was
admired, not o n l y by h i s s p e c i a l f o l l o w e r s but also i n wlder:>
circles.
I n 1947 the w e l l known l i t e r a r y magazine Sokhan pub-
l i s h e d an a r t i c l e saying that t h e death o f Kasravi was one
o f the most t r a g i c events o f the present age. He was assas-
s i n a t e d i n the M i n i s t r y o f J u s t i c e , which i s supposed t o
f i g h t against crime and provide s e c u r i t y f o r the country. He
was one o f the greatest scholars i n t h e I r a n i a n w o r l d o f
l e a r n i n g , without an equal i n h i s time. His valuable researches
1. Sokhan. N o . l , year 3» 1325/19^7• Sokhan was founded i n
1333/19WI by Dr. Parviz Fat e l K h a n l a r i .
 389

i n d i f f e r e n t f i e l d s of knowledge are h i g h l y esteemed not

only by I r a n i a n s , b u t also by o r i e n t a l i s t s a l l over the
world. Kasravi was the f i r s t scholar who s t u d i e d t h e
o r i g i n s o f the o l d A z a r i language and ascertained t h a t i t
was a pure Persian d i a l e c t . H i s books on h i s t o r i c a l sub-
j e c t s are outstanding, and are p a r t i c u l a r l y valuable because
they are so t r u s t w o r t h y . Kasravi always searched f o r a l l
the a v a i l a b l e evidence and examined i t w i t h the utmost care.
He s t u d i e d Armenian, because he r e a l i z e d that f o r thorough-
going research i n t o I r a n ' s h i s t o r y t h i s language i s very
useful. The great value o f h i s l i n g u i s t i c researches iB
l i k e w i s e undeniable. He was c e r t a i n l y a very accomplished
and accurate l i n g u i s t i c scholar, as h i s work on I r a n i a n c i t y
and v i l l a g e names shows. I n h i s newspaper Pa.vm'an he
courageously expressed h i s views on r e l i g i o n and s o c i e t y .
His c r i t i c i s m s angered h i s enemies and were t h e cause of
h i s death. A f t e r r e c e i v i n g one serious i n j u r y , he stood
f i r m i n the face o f h i s enemies, and f i n a l l y l o s t h i s l i f e .
The anonymous w r i t e r o f the a r t i c l e goes on t o say t h a t
although he i s not a f o l l o w e r o f Kasravi and e n t i r e l y d i s -
approves o f Kasravi's views about Persian p o e t r y and l i t e r a -
t u r e , t h i s does not prevent him from admiring K a s r a v i . His
murder was a n a t i o n a l disgrace. Kasravi was a t l e a s t more
honest than many o f h i s c r i t i c s . His f r a n k outspokenness
was i n i t s e l f a valuable s e r v i c e .

1. General Hasan A r f a ' , i n h i s book Under Five Shahs (London

1964), .391, mentions Kasravi's murder and says t h a t he was
P

a d i s t i n g u i s h e d h i s t o r i a n and p a t r i o t , but t o whose p e c u l i a r

r e l i g i o u s views exception had been taken.
 390

I n a magazine c a l l e d Bashar b€rt»a-ye Danesh.jnyan (Huma-

nity Otudonto), Mr. Abu'l-Fazl Mosaffa wrote t h a t
Kasravi's death was a great l o s s t o the w o r l d o f l e a r n i n g .
His murder showed t h a t the r i g h t o f freedom o f thought d i d
not e x i s t i n I r a n . He had t r i e d t o e l i m i n a t e old-fashioned
d o c t r i n e s and ideas which harmed the people's minds, and
had s t r u g g l e d against s u p e r s t i t i o n ; hut u n f o r t u n a t e l y he was
not appreciated. His numerous enemies had f a l s e l y accused
him o f disparaging Islam and burning the Qor'an, i n t h e
expectation that i f they muddied the water they could catch
the f i s h . Mosaffia compares Kasravi's death w i t h t h e deaths
- 2
o f Amir Kabir and Dr. A r a n i who, he says, were also great
p a t r i o t s . Mosaff-a hopes t h a t f u t u r e generations w i l l pay more
a t t e n t i o n t o Kasravi's w r i t i n g s . He puts Kasravi i n the
same category as the Protestant leaders W y c l i f f e i n England,
Jan Hus i n Czechoslovakia, and M a r t i n Luther i n Germany, and
sees a p a r t i c u l a r l y close s i m i l a r i t y o f character "between
Kasravi and Hus. Kasravi's death showed t h a t no s i n g l e i n d i -
v i d u a l can cope w i t h a l l problems. Future generations must
t r y t o u n i t e so t h a t they may achieve the goals o u t l i n e d by
Kasravi.
I n a newspaper c a l l e d Paymian-e Ir'an. Mr. Mohsen Atesh
wrote t h a t Kasravi's death showed once again t h a t a great
deal o f backwardness s t i l l e x i s t e d i n I r a n . The m a j o r i t y o f
1 . Bashar Twta4-ye^nneohjuyiatt. No.3, 1325/19^6.
2. See f o o t n o t e 3 on p.325.
the people s t i l l l i v e d i n a s t a t e o f a b s o l u t e i g n o r a n c e and

r e s e n t e d any new i d e a . Nobody as knowledgeable as K a s r a v i

was l i k e l y t o appear on t h e scene a g a i n .

In. a newspaper c a l l e d D a r y a l Mr. F a r i d u n 'Adl d e c l a r e d

t h a t K a s r a v i was c e r t a i n l y n o t an o r d i n a r y man, b u t a genius

who had t o f i g h t enemies a l l t h r o u g h h i s l i f e and f i n a l l y

d i e d f o r t h e sake o f l i b e r t y . K a s r a v i was u n d o u b t e d l y very

w e l l i n f o r m e d , and w e l l aware o f t h e I r a n i a n p s y c h o l o g y and

the n a t i o n ' s weak p o i n t s . H i s most v i r u l e n t enemies were

shallow-minded mollias whom he had c r i t i c i z e d .

A w r i t e r who s i g n e d h i m s e l f J . M. w r o t e i n t h e newspaper

I r a n - e Ilia t h a t K a s r a v i spent a l l h i s l i f e t r y i n g t o g u i d e

the people and h a d f i n a l l y d i e d because he was such a good

and honest moral guide.

An a r t i c l e i n a magazine c a l l e d P u l a d s a i d t h a t many

people c o n c e a l t h e i r weaknesses and f a u l t s under a c l o a k .

K a s r a v i ' s murderers had d e c l a r e d t h a t t h e y committed t h e

murder because he opposed t h e i r r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s ; t h i s ,

showed t h e e x t e n t o f i g n o r a n c e i n I r a n i a n s o c i e t y . Kasravi's

enemies c o u l d n o t t o l e r a t e h i s g r e a t s k i l l i n refuting their

arguments and i n l o g i c a l l y d e m o n s t r a t i n g h i s own i d e a s . He-

l i v e d courageously and d i e d courageously. Undoubtedly t h e

f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n would s u f f e r even more t h a n t h e p r e s e n t

through t h i s l o s s .
 392

A f t e r K a s r a v i ' s murder, a memorial ceremony was h e l d

a t Tehran i n 132h/^-3h5 b y K a s r a v i ' s f a m i l y and f o l l o w e r s .

Some o f t h o s e p r e s e n t made f u n e r a l o r a t i o n s , o r l a t e r

w r o t e o b i t u a r i e s , and t h e s e were p u b l i s h e d i n a Memorial

1
Volume. P o i n t s f r o m some o f them a r e quoted b e l o w .
Mr. Qiane' s a i d t h a t K a s r a v i ' s s o u l c o u l d r e s t i n peace.
H i s enemies by k i l l i n g h i m had p r o v e d t h e i r own weakness;
but he was n o t dead. He would l i v e f o r e v e r , because h i s
p r e c i o u s books w o u l d keep h i s name a l i v e i n t h e h e a r t s o f
f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s f o r c e n t u r i e s t o come.
Mr. Rahim S a f f a r i , e d i t o r o f a newspaper named A l e f Bta.
s a i d t h a t f r e e d o m - l o v e r s must s t r i v e t o overcome t h e s h a l l o w -
minded f a n a t i c s , o t h e r w i s e t h e cause o f l i b e r t y might soon
fail. K a s r a v i ' s d e a t h was t r a g i c and u n f o r g e t a b l e .
Mr. ' A l i H&shemian, e d i t o r o f a n o t h e r newspaper Saliah-
s h u r , s a i d : " I weep b i t t e r l y f o r t h e n a t i o n w h i c h r e p l i e s
w i t h t h e sword t o t h o s e who a r e honest and t r u t h f u l . "
Mr. A f r a s y a b Azlad, e d i t o r o f t h e newspaper Aziad, s a i d :
"To me K a s r a v i ' s d e a t h i s a v i c t o r y f o r h i s i d e a s . They w i l l
soon spread a l l over t h e c o u n t r y , sooner t h a n he h i m s e l f
expected."
Mr. ' A l i Akbar S a f i p u r , d i r e c t o r o f t h e p e r i o d i c a l
P a r v a r e s h , s a i d t h a t K a s r a v i had d i e d , b u t h i s i d e a s and

1 . Ahmad K a s r a v i , pp 106-108.
 393

t h o u g h t s were s t i l l w i t h u s ,

A c e r t a i n Mr. 'Abdollah. F a r y a r s a i d : "Those who imagine

t h a t "by k i l l i n g a g r e a t t h i n k e r t h e y can keep t h e I r a n i a n

n a t i o n i n darkness a r e t e r r i b l y m i s t a k e n . They must r e a l i z e

t h a t humanity has been g u i d e d by g r e a t t h i n k e r s f r o m t h e

f i r s t b e g i n n i n g up t o now. K a s r a v i was a g r e a t h i s t o r i a n ,

a s c h o l a r l y r e s e a r c h e r , and a courageous advocate o f t h e good.

He n e v e r c o v e t e d w e a l t h o r p o s i t i o n . His w r i t i n g s revolu-

t i o n i z e d many people's t h i n k i n g , and t h i s w i l l continue."

A science s t u d e n t , Mr. Hushang I r a n i , a a i d : " I hope t h a t

f
one day t h e I r a n i a n s w i l l r e c o g n i z e K a s r a v i s w o r t h and f u l -

f i l l h i s w i s h e s by p u t t i n g h i s i d e a s i n t o p r a c t i c e . "

A l a w s t u d e n t w r o t e : "Shame on t h e n a t i o n w h i c h , i n s t e a d

of punishing the dishonest, k i l l s a great scholar l i k e

Kasravi."

I f we g l i m p s e a t t h e b i o g r a p h i e s o f g r e a t t h i n k e r s , we

f i n d t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f them t o i l e d a l l t h r o u g h t h e i r lives,

b u t were b e a t e n i n t h e end by t h e i r own n a t i o n . I n a l l pro-

b a b i l i t y t h e masses o f t h e people i n I r a n have s t i l l n e v e r

h e a r d o f K a s r a v i , o r , i f t h e y have, a r e m i s i n f o r m e d about

him. C e r t a i n groups have opposed and p r o b a b l y s t i l l oppose

his i d e a s , because t h e y assume t h a t these i d e a s t h r e a t e n

t h e i r m a t e r i a l i n t e r e s t s or t h e i r r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s ; w h i l e

e n l i g h t e n e d I r a n i a n s have n o t e n j o y e d f u l l freedom t o express

t h e i r t h o u g h t s about K a s r a v i ' s hooks on account o f censor-

s h i p and c l e r i c a l hostility. Nevertheless the existence

o f such a d i s t i n g u i s h e d s c h o l a r and such a f o r w a r d - l o o k i n g

t h i n k e r has "been a g r e a t honour f o r t h e I r a n i a n n a t i o n .

The c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f h i s d e a t h showed t h a t I r a n was then

s t i l l l i v i n g i n t h e m i d d l e ages. European n a t i o n s have

passed t h r o u g h s i m i l a r phases "but have f i n a l l y responded

to ideas o f g r e a t r e f o r m e r s . I r a n seems l i k e l y t o do t h e

same. Today K a s r a v i ' s i d e a s are becoming known i n t h e

major c i t i e s o f I r a n , and a r e b e i n g spread a l l over t h e

c o u n t r y by h i s f o l l o w e r s . We f e e l sure t h a t h i s many

v a l u a b l e t e a c h i n g s w i l l soon be b e t t e r a p p r e c i a t e d , and

t h a t h i s t o r y w i l l not forget h i s great services.

 395

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Works b y K a s r a v i .

,
1. T a r i k h - e Mashruteh-ye I r a n . Tehran 13l|>i/1Q^5 (Amir K a b i r ) .
2. T a r i k h - e He.idah-saleh-ye Azarbai.lan. Tehran 1314,0/1961 /S
(Amir K a b i r P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

3. Paydavesh-e A m r i k a . Tehran 132k/l9k5 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

k» Ketab-e P l u t a r k h . 2 v o l s . , Tehran 1315/1936 (Azadegan
Publications).
5. Karnamak-e A r d a s h i r Babakan. Tehran I32I+/19I4.5 (Payedar
Publications).

6. Shaykh S a f i va Tabar-ash. Tehran 1323/19144-.

7. T a r i k h - e Mosha'sha*iyan. ya Bakhsh-i az T a r i k h - e
Pansad-saleh-ye Khuzestan. Tehran 13214-/19U5 (Parcham
Publications)•
8. S h a h r i a r a n - e Gomnam. 2 v o l s , Tehran 1307/1928 (Modern
Publications).
9. Zendegani-ye man. Tehran I323/I9I4.5.
10. Pah s a l dar * A d l i e h . Tehran I325/19I4-6 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

11. Par Payramun-e Ravan, Tehran 132k/l9k5 (Payman

Publications).

12. Hafez cheh mi-guyad. Tehran 1325/19U6 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

13. Par Payramun-e A d a b i y a t , Tehran 1323/19kh (Payman
Publications).
Ik. Sokhan-rani-ye K a s r a v i dar An.joman-e Adabi-ye T e h r a n ,
Tehran 13k3/l96k (Chapak P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
 396

15. Par Payramun-e She*r o S h a ' e r i . e d i t e d by M i r Mahdi

Mubad, Tehran 1335/1956 ( T a h u r i P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

16. A z a r i ya Zaban-e Bastan-e Azarbai.lan, Tehran 1305/19^,6

(Payedar P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

17. Zaban-e Pak. Tehran 1322/19U3 (Payedar P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

18. Kafnameh. e d i t e d b y Yahya Zoka, Tehran 1330/1951 ( S h i v a
Publications).
19. Zaban-e F a r s i va Rah-e Rasa va Tavana gardanidan-e a n ,
e d i t e d b y Yahya Zoka, Tehran 133U/1955 (Rangin
Publications).

20. Nam-harye Shahr-ha va Peh-ha-ye I r a n , 2 v o l s . , Tehran

1323/19kk (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

21. Kar va P i s h e h va P u l . Tehran 1323/19UU (Payman

Publications).
22. Parhang c h i s t . Tehran 132k/l9k5 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
23. Par Rah-e S i a s a t . Tehran I3I+O/I96I (Payedar P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
2k. Mashruteh B e h t a r i n Shekl-e Hokumat va Akharin
Nati.1eh-ye Andisheh-ye Adaroi a s t . Tehran 1335/1956.
(Chapak P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
25. Az Sazman-e M e y L a l ^ j ^ M o t t a ^ e ^ cheh Nati.ieh taVianad b u d .
Tehran 132U/1955 ( O r d i b e h e s h t P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
26. Sarnevesht-e I r a n cheh khwahad bud. Tehran 132k/l9k5.

27. Enqelab c h i s t . Tehran 1336/1957.

28. Khwaharan va Pokhtaran-e Ma. Tehran I323/19I4I4. (Chapak
Publications).
 397

29. Mowhumat va K h a r a f a t . Tehran 1339/1960 (Gutenberg

Publications).
30. Farhang a s t ya Nayrang. Tehran 1325/l9k6 (Payman
Publications).

31. Dadgah. Tehran 1325/19k6 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

32. Emruz cheh bayad k a r d . Tehran 1336/1957 (Mihan .
Publications).
33. Ruzbeh-e Payman k2, e d i t e d b y t h e Azadegan P a r t y ,
Tehran 13U2/1963 (Chapak P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

3k. Be-khwanand va D a v a r i konand. Tehran 1323/l9kk

(Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

35. Khoda ba Ma'st. Tehran 132k/l9k5 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

36. Porsesh va Pasokh, Tehran 1325/19U6 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

37. Payam-e man be-Sharq. Tehran 13kk/l965 (Payedar

Publications).

38. Dar Payramun-e J a n v a r a n , Tehran 132k/l9k5 (Payman

Publications).
39. Dar Pasokh-e Bad-khwahan. Tehran n.d.
kO. Rah-e R a s t e g a r i . Tehran 132k/l9k5 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) ,
kl. Dar Payramun-e Kherad. Tehran 132k/l9k5 (Payman
Publications).

k2. N i k o Bad, e d i t e d by t h e Azadegan P a r t y , Tehran 1326/l9k7

(Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
1+3. A Message t o European and American S c i e n t i s t s ,
r e p u b l i s h e d by t h e Azadegan P a r t y , T e h r a n 1963
(Mihan P r e s s ) .

. D i n va Panesh, Tehran 1339/1960 (Payedar P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

1+5. Ma cheh mi-khwahim. Tehran 1319/191+0 (Payedar
Publications).

2+6. B a h a ' i g a r i , Tehran 1321/191+2 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) . .

i+7. G o f t o s h a n i d . Tehran 1322/19U3 (Chapak P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
1+8. Par Payramun-e F a l s a f e h . Tehran 131+1+/1965 (Payedar
Publications).

U9. Var.iavand Bonyad. Tehran 1322/191+3 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

50. Par Pasokh-e H a q i q a t g u . Tehran 13 23/191+1+ (Chapak
Publications).
51. S u f i g a r i , Tehran 1322/19^3 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
52. Par Payramun-e Eslam. Tehran 1325/191+6 (Payman
Publications).
53. Par Payramun-e Ravan. Tehran 1325/191+6 (Payman
Publications).

51+. Chehel Maqaleh-ye K a s r a v i . e d i t e d b y Yahya Zoka, Tehran

133^/195^:

55. Yakom-e Paymah va Pastan-ash. Tehran 1337/1958

(Payedar P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
2. Works by o t h e r a u t h o r s . *
1. Yahya Zoka, Farhang-e K a s r a v i . Tehran 1326/19U7.
2. P a r v i z S h a h r i a r i and Mahdi N e ' m a t o l l a h i , Ahmad K a s r a v i ,
Tehran 1326/191+7 (Mobarez P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
 399

3. M. K. Azadeh,iChera K a s r a v i - r a Koshtand. Tehran

1325/19U6 (Payman P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
I4.. Ebrahim Monaqqah, Maykhaneh-ye Khwa.ieh Hafez. Meftah-e
Bayan ya K e l i d - e Zaban-e Hafez. Tehran 132U/19U5.
5. M i r A b u ' l - F a t h P a ' v a t i , Par Pasokh-e K a s r a v i a n ,
Tehran 13144-/1965.
6. Qasem E s l a m i , Atesh-e Engelab, Tehran 1325/19U7
(Aftab P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
7. Mortaza Mahdavi, K a j r a v i p c a r i , 2 v o l s . , Tehran 1325/19U5
(Sepehr P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

8. S e r a j A n s a r i , Nabard ba B i - d i n i . Tehran 1323/19UU

(Taban P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
9* M. T o w h i d i , Tanaqozat-e Payman va Parcham, T a b r i z
1323/19UU ('Elmieh P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

10. Farhang N a k h a l j . K a j r a v i - h a - y e K a s r a v i , Mashhad 1377

(lunar)/l957.

11. Mahdi S h a r i ' a t - m a d a r , 'Ashura-ye P i n ya Z a r a b a t - e

B i - d i n a n . Tfehran 132k/l9k5.
c
12. Mahdi M o j t a h e d i , Re.ial-e A z a r b a i j a n dar A s r - e
M a s h r u t i a t . Tehran 1327/19U8, (Naqsh-e Jahan P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
13. Mohammad T a q i Bahar (Malek o l - S h o ' a r a ) ^ Pivan-e Ash'ar,
Tehran 1336/1957 (Amir K a b i r Publications).
Ik. Hosayn Same'i (Adib o l - S a l t a n e h ) (Asar-e Manzum ya
Pivan-e Ash'ar, Tehran 1335/1956 ('Elmi P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
 koo

15. Bozorg ' A l a v i , G e s c h i c h t e und E n t w i c k l u n g der modernen

p e r s i s c h e n L i t e r a t u r , B e r l i n 196k.

16. Dr. Hafez I'Farmanfarmayan, Eetab-shenasi-ye T a r i k h - e

J a d i d , Tehran 13kk/l965 ( T a h u r i P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

17. Sadr Hashemi, T a r i k h - e J a r a y e d va Ma.1allat-e I r a n ,

k v o l a , Esfahan 1327/19h8 - 1331/1953.

18. Dr. *Isa Sadiq,, Sayr-e Farhang dar I r a n va Maghreb-zamin,

Tehran 1333/l95k.
19. V. M i n o r s k y , I r a n i c a , t w e n t y a r t i c l e s , p u b l i s h e d by t h e
U n i v e r s i t y o f T e h r a n , 196k.
20. L. L o c k h a r t , The f a l l o f t h e S a f a v i d y n a s t y and t h e
Afghan o c c u p a t i o n o f P e r s i a . Cambridge 1958 (University
Press).
21. Feraydun Adamiat, Fekr-e A z a d i va Moqaddameh-ye Mehzat-e
M a s h r u t i a t Tehran 1 3 k 0 / l 9 6 l .
22. Dr. Mahdi Malekzadeh, T a r i k h En,qelab-e M a s h r u t i a t - e
Iran, 7 vols. 1328/19U9 - 1332/1953 ( S e p e l r P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
23. E n g i n e e r Karim Taherzadeh Behruz, Qiam-e Azarbai.ian dar

Engelab-e M a s h r u t i a t - e I r a n . Tehran 1332/1953.

2k. S i r E. Denison Ross, Review o f K a s r a v i ' s book I z a r i ,

i n J o u r n a l o f t h e Royal A s i a t i c S o c i e t y , London, 1927,

p. I k 8 .
25. Mohammad 'Abd ol-Vahhab Q a z v i n i , B i s t Maqaleh-ye
Q a z v i n i , e d i t e d by E. Pur-Davud, v o l . 1, Bombay 1306/
1928 (Zoroastrian Society P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .
 UOl

26. Dr. P a r v i z N a t e l . K h a n l a r i , Zaban-shenasi va Zaban-e

F a r s i , Mabahes-e Adabi va H o n a r i . Tehran 13U3/196J+
(Payk-e I r a n P u b l i c a t i o n s ) .

27. Amin Bamani, The m o d e r n i z a t i o n o f I r a n . Stanford

C a l i f o r n i a , 1961 ( U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ) .

28. L. B i n d e r , I r a n , Los Angeles 1962 (University of

California Press).

29. P. A v e r y , Modern I r a n . London, 1965.

30. Armaghan ( p e r i o d i c a l ) , e d i t e d by V a h i d D a s t g a r d i , Year

10 (1308/1929), v o l . U, a r t i c l e by Dr. Kasemi, pp 236-05.

31. Yadgar ( p e r i o d i c a l ) , e d i t e d b y 'Abbas Eqbal A s h t i a n i ,

Tehran 1323/19UU.

32. Kaveh ( p e r i o d i c a l ) , Munich, 1965» y e a r 2.

33. Sokhan ( p e r i o d i c a l ) , y e a r 3, N o . l , Tehran 1333/l9l|4.

3U. Hasan A r f a * , Under F i v e Shahs, London, I96U.

 APPENDIX A

F u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n on K a s r a v i ' s l i f e and
p e r s o n a l i t y and t h e sources o f h i s i d e a s .

The most i m p o r t a n t f o r m a t i v e i n f l u e n c e s on K a s r a v i w e r e
his t r a i n i n g and e a r l y s e r v i c e s as a mollia; h i s s t u d y and
t e a c h i n g a t t h e American Memorial School, and h i s u p b r i n g i n g
i n t h e contemporary environment o f T a b r i z .

Dr. Mohammad Javad Mashkur, ' who was a s t u d e n t o f K a s r a v i

and one o f h i s c l o s e f r i e n d s , t h i n k s t h a t K a s r a v i ' s e a r l y
p r o f e s s i o n as a mollia was p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t . Kasravi a l l
t h r o u g h h i s l i f e was i n t e n s e l y i n t e r e s t e d i n r e l i g i o u s matters
tu.-'. -''nrays h a d a s t r o n g f a i t h i n God. H i s stay a t t h e

>3ricc i s c h o o l , w h i c h was a m i s s i o n a r y s c h o o l where r e l i g i o u s

m i s t e r s were f r e e l y and e a g e r l y d i s c u s s e d , broadened and deepened
this interest. A t t h e same t i m e Kasravi'8, i n s t i n c t i v e patriotic
f e e l i n g s were s t r e n g t h e n e d b y h i s s t u d i e s o f t h e P a h l a v i
language and a n c i e n t I r a n i a n c i v i l i z a t i o n w i t h D r . H e r z f e l d .
Tabriz, before the f i r s t w o r l d war, was I r a n ' s most i m p o r t a n t
commercial c i t y . The T a b r i z i merchants d i d a g r e a t d e a l o f
b u s i n e s s w i t h R u s s i a and Turkey and o t h e r f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s ,
and many T a b r i z i s went t o l i v e and work a t Baku, and I s t a n b u l .
A l t h o u g h most o f t h e merchants were v e r y r e l i g i o u s , and many
were r e l a t e d t o m o l l i s . , some o f them p i c k e d up new i d e a s f r o m

1• I n t e r v i e w w i t h D r . Mashkur a t Tehran U n i v e r s i t y , F e b r u a r y I969.

 2

Russian l i b e r a l s and s o c i a l i s t s and f r o m T u r k i s h r e f o r m i s t s

(who t h e n had t o work i n s e c r e t ) . These i d e a s were expressed,
i n t h e w r i t i n g s o f 'Abdol Rahim Tlalebov and Zayn ol-'iAbedin
Maraghe'i. K a s r a v i h i m s e l f has r e l a t e d t h a t t h e two booka
w h i c h most i n f l u e n c e d h i m , were Tlalebov* s Ketlab-e Ahmad and
Zayn o l - ' A b e d i n ' s Siiahatniameh-ye Ebrahim B e g . ^ ^ Among t h e
l i b e r a l - m i n d e d T a b r i z i s who a c q u a i n t e d h i m w i t h t h e i d e a o f
2
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government, K a s r a v i has m e n t i o n e d ^ ^ Mirz& ' A l i
H a y ' a t , who a f t e r t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n became a judge
o f t h e H i g h C o u r t (Divlan-e ' A l i - y e K e s h v a r ) , Mirzia J a f ' a r
Khiamne' i , who was a merchant, and Mirzia Qlasem F o y u z a t , who was
the l e a d e r o f t h e movement t o s e t up r e f o r m e d s c h o o l s i n
Azarb&iJan.

Dr. Mashkur spoke o f two o t h e r books w h i c h i n f l u e n c e d

K a s r a v i : Ket&b-e J a l a l o l - D o w l e h , by Mirzia Agja Khan N u r i Kermani,
and T a h r i r ol-'Oaalla. b y Shaykh H a d i Najm A b a d i .

Even more t h a n i n o t h e r E a s t e r n c o u n t r i e s , t h i n k i n g people

i n I r a - and e s p e c i a l l y a t T a b r i z were s t i r r e d b y Japan's v i c t o r y
over R u s s i a i n 1902+ and b y t h e Russian c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n
o f 1905. K a s r a v i was o l d enough t o know about t h e s e e v e n t s ; b u t
he was t o o young t o have known about B r i t a i n ' s d i f f i c u l t i e s i n
the A n g l o - T r a n s v a a l war o f 1899-1902, w h i c h a l s o impressed some
people i n I r a n .

1. See above, p«15»

2. See above p , l 6 .
 3.

Kasravi's support f o r t h e I r a n i a n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s , a n d
i n p a r t i c u l a r f o r t h e T a b r i z ! Mojahedin and t h e Democrats,
need n o t be r e i t e r a t e d h e r e . What i s l e s s c l e a r i s h i s
a t t i t u d e towards t h e "October" r e v o l u t i o n i n R u s s i a and t h e
Communist S o v i e t r e g i m e .

As mentioned on page 9 above, K a s r a v i a f t e r l e a v i n g t h e

American s c h o o l i n 1917 made a 45-day . v i s i t t o R u s s i a n - r u l e d
Transcaucasia... I t i s s u r p r i s i n g t h a t he has l e f t no detailed
account o f t h i s v i s i t , because he i s l i k e l y t o have w i t n e s s e d
e x c i t i n g events and t o have t a l k e d w i t h N o r t h e r n A z a r b a i j a n i
l i b e r a l s and s o c i a l i s t s and p a t r i o t s . We have n o t been a b l e
t o f i n d out e x a c t l y when t h i s v i s i t t o o k p l a c e . (The Tsar's
a b d i c a t i o n t o o k p l a c e i n March 1917> and was f o l l o w e d by
Kerensky's p r o v i s i o n a l government. The communist October
r e v o l u t i o n a c t u a l l y t o o k p l a c e on November 7, 1917* The Russian
S o v i e t government d i d n o t conquer T r a n s c a u c a s i a u n t i l 1920. In
the meantime independent G e o r g i a n , Armenian and (Northern)
A z a r b a i j a n i r e p u b l i c s came i n t o b e i n g . Kasravi's only expression
of o p i n i o n about t h e Russian communist r e v o l u t i o n appears i n
T a r i k h - e he jdah-s'aleh-ye A z a r b a i jan»^ ^ where he says t h a t t h e
b l o o d y r e v o l u t i o n i n Russia was d e s t i n y ' s revenge on t h e T s a r i s t
regime f o r a l l t h e b l o o d s h e d i t had caused i n I r a n , This
suggests t h a t K a s r a v i d i s a p p r o v e d o f t h e b l o o d t h i r s t i n e s s o f
the Russian communists; and he p r o b a b l y a l s o d i s a p p r o v e d o f t h e i r
1 . T a r i k h - e He.idah S a l e h .
atheism.

On p.10 we m e n t i o n e d t h a t K a s r a v i a t f i r s t actually
s u p p o r t e d Shaykh Mohammad K h i a b a n i when t h e Shaykh f o u n d e d a
new Democrat p a r t y a t T a b r i z , b u t b r o k e away f r o m h i m even
b e f o r e he r e b e l l e d a g a i n s t t h e C e n t r a l Government and s e t up
the " R e p u b l i c o f Azladestan" (February-September 1 9 2 0 ) . Sayyed
A l i A z a r i , i n h i s book on Khiablani's r e v o l t ^ m e n t i o n s t h a t
Khiabiani f e l t a g r e a t r e s p e c t f o r K a s r a v i and s a i d t h a t modern
I r a n needed men such as h i m , w h i l e K a s r a v i a f t e r K h i a b a n i * s
d e f e a t and d e a t h p r a y e d f o r g i v e n e s s f o r i Khiabani's s o u l .
K a s r a v i , b e i n g b o t h a r e f o r m i s t and a n a t i o n a l i s t , p r o b a b l y
sympathized w i t h KhiablanL' s p l a n f o r r e f o r m b u t f e a r e d t h a t
his p l a n s f o r r e v o l t might endanger I r a n i a n s o v e r e i g n t y i n
A z a r b & i j a n ; he may a l s o have t h o u g h t t h a t K h i a b a n i and h i s .
f o l l o w e r s were t o o much i n f l u e n c e d b y Russian i d e a s .

K a s r a v i ' s n a t i o n a l i s m a l s o need n o t be r e i t e r a t e d h e r e ;

b u t i t must be s t r e s s e d t h a t K a s r a v i was a l s o an i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t ,
because he b e l i e v e d t h a t a l l t h e n a t i o n s s h o u l d r e c o g n i s e each

o t h e r ' s r i g h t s and independence and t h a t t h e y s h o u l d n o t o n l y

s e t t l e t h e i r d i s p u t e s i n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o u r t o r forum b u t

s h o u l d a l s o a c t i v e l y h e l p one a n o t h e r . A l t h o u g h K a s r a v i was
so d e v o t e d t o t h e I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n and so h o s t i l e t o
despotism, i t i s perhaps t r u e t h a t he v a l u e d , n a t i o n a l
independence even more t h a n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l government.

1. S a y y e d ' A l i i ; . . Qiam-e Shaykh Mohammad K h i a b a n i dar A z e r b a i j a n ,

T a b r i z , 1329/1950.
 5.
1
Mr. Ebrahim T a y m u r i ^ ^ t h i n k s t h a t " K a s r a v i was n o t so
much i n t e r e s t e d i n democracy as he was i n t h e independence
o f I r a n . F o r him t h e ( c o n s t i t u t i o n a l ) r e v o l u t i o n i s j u s t i f i e d ,
"by i t s g o a l o f making I r a n f r e e , s t r o n g and p r o s p e r o u s once
more. I n d i v i d u a l r i g h t s , C o n s t i t u t i o n , p a r l i a m e n t , even a
f r e e p r e s s , appear a t l e a s t "by i m p l i c a t i o n t o he sought o n l y
as i n s t r u m e n t s o f n a t i o n a l i s m . "

F o r K a s r a v i , Re&a Shah was t h e symbol o f an a c t i v e man.

He always a p p r e c i a t e d Reza Shah's s e r v i c e s t o I r a n . They met
on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s . When K a s r a v i d e c i d e d t o w r i t e h i s
T a r i k h - e pansad-saleh-ye K h u z e s t a n , he asked t h e Shah f o r a
copy o f t h e Shah's t r a v e l d i a r y o f t h e e x p e d i t i o n i n 1925
w h i c h subdued Shaykh Khaz'al, and h i s r e q u e s t was granted.
We were t o l d , however, t h a t a f t e r Rez& Shah's a b d i c a t i o n
K a s r a v i c r i t i c i z e d h i s d e c i s i o n t o r e s i s t R u s s i a and B r i t a i n
when t h e y p r e s e n t e d t h e i r demands t o I r a n i n S h a h r i v a r 1320/
August 1921. We were a l s o t o l d t h a t K a s r a v i once met t h e
p r e s e n t Shah Mohammad Rezia and a d v i s e d him t o f o l l o w t h e
same p a t h as h i s f a t h e r , namely t h e p a t h o f n a t i o n a l i s m and
of building factories i n Iran.

A t t h e same t i m e , K a s r a v i s i n c e r e l y b e l i e v e d i n t h e need!
f o r i n d i v i d u a l freedom. I n Rezia Shah's r e i g n , and p a r t i c u l a r l y
a f t e r t h e passage o f a l a w a g a i n s t communist subversian i n
1931» freedom o f speech was s e v e r e l y r e s t r i c t e d b y censorship,
and t h e number o f newspapers w h i c h were p e r m i t t e d t o appear

1 . Ebrahim T a y m u r i , i n F i r u z Kiazem-Zadeh, ed., I r a n i a n

H i s t o r i o g r a p h y . pp JL4.3I—ij3I4-•
 6.

was s m a l l . K a s r a v i could not have got and kept p e r m i s s i o n t o

p u b l i s h Paymlan u n l e s s some of t h e h i g h c i r c l e s i n the government,
or even perhaps t h e Shah h i m s e l f , had approved the g e n e r a l
nature of h i s i d e a s . On t h e other hand, K a s r a v i , as we have
mentioned, had d i f f i c u l t i e s when he worked i n t h e M i n i s t r y o f
J u s t i c e , and a f t e r h i s r e s i g n a t i o n the a u t h o r i t i e s r e f u s e d
him permission t o p r a c t i s e as a lawyer. K a s r a v i ' s hook A y i n ,
which was h i B most important hook on r e l i g i o n , seems t o have
disappeared soon a f t e r i t s p u b l i c a t i o n i n 1322/1933• must
have "been banned and c o n f i s c a t e d by Reza Shah's censorhip,
and i t continued t o be banned a f t e r Reza" Shah's f a l l . Another
noteworthy point i s that K a s r a v i ' s other important books on
re&igion and p o l i t i c s such a s Var.iavand Bonyad, Be khwanand v a
d a v a r i konand, S u f i g a r i , P a r payramun-e-Ravan» were a l l
p u b l i s h e d i n the y e a r s 1320/19^4-1-132Vl9U5»i.e. a f t e r Reza's f a l l .

A f t e r the Anglo-Russian i n v a s i o n , the I r a n i a n censorship

was suspended and r e p l a c e d by a Russo-Anglo-Iranian censorship,
which allowed freedom of p u b l i c a t i o n , except about the war and
about t h e S o v i e t a c t i v i t i e s ( e . g . i n A z e r b a i j a n ) . While we v
cannot know d e f i n i t e l y , we t h i n k t h a t probably Rezla Shah's
censorship would not have allowed p u b l i c a t i o n of K a s r a v i ' B
c o n t r o v e r s i a l books about r e l i g i o n and p o l i t i c s . Communism
was: banned by the law of 1931 and even the mention of i t i n a
book c r i t i c i z i n g m a t e r i a l i s m would p o s s i b l y not have been
allowed. The f a c t that K a s r a v i wrote nothing about Caucasia
 7.
and Northern A z e r b a i j a n , when he probably knew so much, may
perhaps a l s o be explained by censorship, because the
government d i d not want to make r e l a t i o n s w i t h Soviet R u s s i a
worse.

I n regard to r e l i g i o n Reza,Shah's ideas were probably

somewhat s i m i l a r to K a s r a v i ' s : he beiievjedin God, but was
determined not to l e t o b s c u r a n t i s t m o l l i s keep I r a n backward
and go on c o n t r o l l i n g the schools and law c o u r t s . The most
s e r i o u s opposition which Reza Shah had to f a c e came from
mollias. A f t e r the compulsory u n v e i l i n g of women on 17 Bay
1315/7th January 1937 > molllas caused r i o t s at Mashhad which
were suppressed w i t h bloodshed. Probably Reza" Shah's
government ftavlng a l r e a d y so much t r o u b l e on i t s hands w i t h
the mollias# d i d not want to add f u e l to the flames by letting
K a s r a v i p u b l i s h books which the mollias would have c a l l e d (and
l a t e r d i d c a l l ) "grodless."

I n the y e a r s 1941-1945, as we have explained, there was

no ban on such p u b l i c a t i o n s . K a s r a v i i n f a c t never denied
God, nor I s l a m , as the mollias f a l s e l y a l l e g e d . On the other
hand, i t i s perhaps t r u e t h a t he sometimes wrote and spoka
?
and preached i n the manner of a'prophet". ( I t i s s a i d that
the s c h o l a r and Prime M i n i s t e r Porughi was the f i r s t who
c r i t i c i z e d K a s r a v i f o r speaking l i k e a "prophet")

Dr. Mashkur t h i n k s that i n f a c t K a s r a v i was moving

unconsciously towards a new b e l i e f , and that Plak-Dini i s v e r y
 8.

d i f f e r e n t from a l l e x i s t i n g forms of I s l a m , Dr. Mashkur

1
e x p l a i n s the matter a s f o l l o w s . I n K a s r a v i s time any s o c i a l
reform i n I r a n s t i l l had t o he expressed i n r e l i g i o u s terms.
K a s r a v i ' 8 fundamental aim,he thinks, was t o "bring about s o c i a l
reform, but h i s upbringing and way o f thought made him uncon-
s c i o u s l y give i t a r e l i g i o u s c o l o u r .

As regards K a s r a v i ' s p r i v a t e l i f e , we l e a r n t that he

married four times. As mentioned on p.12,his f i r s t w i f e died
l e a v i n g two daughters. H i s second marriage d i d not l a s t long
and ended i n divorce; " i n s p i t e of t h i s h i s former second w i f e
continued l i v i n g i n h i s house." While s e r v i n g a s a judge, he
decreed the divorce of a baker from h i s w i f e , and l a t e r he
married t h i s woman a s a temporary wife ( s i g h e h ) . T h i s gave;
his enemies an opportunity t o say t h i n g s damaging to h i s repu-
tation. H i s f o u r t h marriage was t o a l a d y s e c r e t a r y . Dr. Maahkur
(1 )
s a i d t h a t K a s r a v i was a v e r y a s s e r t i v e and o b s t i n a t e man. '
A f t e r .Kajaraydhad been a t t a c k e d f o r the f i r s t time, he was taken
to the Najmieh h o s p i t a l where t h e C h i e f of the Tehran P o l i c e ,
B r i g a d i e r - G e n e r a l Z a r r a b i , and the M i n i s t e r of the Interior,
Sayyed Mohammad Tadayyon, went t o v i s i t him. Although he was
badly wounded with one b u l l e t remaining i n h i s body, he d i d

a l l the t a l k i n g and gave h i s v i s i t o r s no chance t o open t h e i r

1. Dr. Gholam Hosayn Zarrin-kub says t h e same i n h i s book

Naqd-e Adabi, Tehran, 1338/1959.
 9.

mouths. A f t e r l e a v i n g the h o s p i t a l , K a s r a v i i s s u e d a broad-

sheet i n which he described h i s a t t a c k e r a s a "second Ebn
u )
,,v
Moljam. ' When he was dismissed from the M i n i s t r y of
J u s t i c e , he r e c e i v e d a l e t t e r t e l l i n g him that he had been
placed "on the r e s e r v e l i s t " (montazer-e khedmat; l i t e r a l l y ,
"waiting f o r s e r v i c e " ) ; he wrote back s a y i n g "Khedmat
montazer-e man biashad" ("The s e r v i c e can wait f o r me.")

1• Ebn Moljam (Tbn ^Muljam) was the K h a r e j i t e a s s a s s i n who

a t t a c k e d the Emam 'Al|i.
 APPENDIX B

Some comparisons o f K a s r a v i ' s r e l i g i o u s and

p o l i t i c a l ideas w i t h other contemporary i d e a s .

I t may he worthwhile i f we compare some of K a s r a v i ' s

r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l ideas with those of a few other
I r a n i a n and f o r e i g n w r i t e r s .
Mr. Ebrahim Taymumi, w r i t i n g i n the hook I r a n i a n H i s t o r i o -
graphy e d i t e d by F i r u z Kazemzadeh, s t a t e s that the moll&s of
I r a n were, w i t h few exceptions, f a n a t i c a l and uninformed.
T h i s group opposed everything new, even c o n s i d e r i n g European
s c i e n t i f i c d i s c o v e r i e s harmful t o I r a n . For the sake of t h e i r
own i n t e r e s t s they kept the people of I r a n i n ignorance and
(A )
v 1
superstition.
Although t h i s condemnation of the molllas may sound
exaggerated, we t h i n k that i t i s undoubtedly c o r r e c t . With
the exceptions o f the great r e l i g i o u s l e a d e r s who worked so
hard f o r the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t cause, such as Sayyed 'Abdollah
Behbahani, Sayyed Mohammad T a b t a b a i , and Seqat ol-Eslam, I r a n
has produced few reforming c l e r g y . One of the few was S h a r i * a t
S a n g a l a j i ( d . 1322/1943)* who had ideas r a t h e r l i k e those of
Shaykh Mohammad 'Abdoh i n Egypt. He founded an I s l a m i c
Missionary S o c i e t y (Anjoman-e Tabligh-e E s l a m i ) a t Tehran and
wrote K e l i d - e Pahm-e Qor'an (2nd ed., Tehran, I363 lunar/1944) and
1 • Ebrahim Taymuri, i n P i r u z Ktazemzadeh ed., I r a n i a n
Historiography, pp 1*31-434.
 2

many other hooks; hut he was denounced a s a h e r e t i c because

he b e l i e v e d i n r e s u r r e c t i o n of the s o u l but not of the body,
and d i d not b e l i e v e that the T w e l f t h Emam i s s t i l l alive.
Mr. Taymuri t h i n k s t h a t K a s r a v i was a provocative? but
u n d i s c i p l i n e d and confused t h i n k e r and that he went much
f u r t h e r i n h i s a t t a c k s on the mollias and on t h e e s t a b l i s h e d
r e l i g i o n than anyone before him had done. He even began t o
question some of the fundamentals of I s l a m , thus: earning the
h a t r e d of t h e r e l i g i o u s f a n a t i c s , who f i n a l l y brought about
his assassination. K a s r a v i was a n a t i o n a l i s t , and i t i s
u s u a l l y assumed that contemporary I r a n i a n n a t i o n a l i s m i s of
Western o r i g i n . There can be l i t t l e doubt t h a t Western
i n f l u e n c e s were instrumental i n f a s h i o n i n g the type of n a t i o n a l -
ism which e x i s t s to-day i n I r a n ; but i t would be naive t o c l o s e
one's eyes t o i t s n a t i v e r o o t s . As Mr. Kazemzadeh observes,
the sense of n a t i o n a l i t y , p r i d e i n I r a n ' s p a s t and hopes f o r
her f u t u r e , love of the P e r s i a n language, and t h e conscious-
n e s s of being a people apart from the Arabs or T u r k s , a r e
f e e l i n g s which predate the b i r t h , of European n a t i o n a l i s m . ^ ^

Although K a s r a v i ' s n a t i o n a l i s m shows signs of Western

in
i n f l u e n c e , i t was e s s e n t i a l l y I r a n i a n ^ o r i g i n . K a s r a v i ' s views
and those of h i s opponents were d i s c u s s e d i n a r t i c l e s i n
Payman, which continued to appear f o r a short while a f t e r h i s
death.
1 • P i r u z Kazemzadeh.'Asr-e H.khab.ari r y!a T a r i k h i - e Emtiazat dar
I r a n . Tehran, 133271953, p.22.
 A w r i t e r u s i n g the pen name Foruha emphasized the great
e f f o r t which K a s r a v i made to combat m a t e r i a l i s m . ' (The

theory of m a t e r i a l i s m i s a l s o u s u a l l y thought to have come

from Europe). As Foruha observes, K a s r a v i was not so much
concerned with the theory of m a t e r i a l i s m i n i t s e l f as w i t h
(2)
its evil results. '
A w r i t e r named Karshlad, author of a book e n t i t l e d
"Mr. K a s r a v i and the concept of m a t e r i a l i s m , " says t h a t
K a s r a v i d i d not have s u f f i c i e n t knowledge about m a t e r i a l i s m ;
so how could he argue t h a t i t i s a wrong philosophy and talk
about i t 8 r e s u l t s ? Klarshad t h i n k s t h a t K a s r a v i confused
m a t e r i a l i s m with anarchy. H i s biggest mistake was t h a t he
considered N i e t s z c h e and Schopenhauer m a t e r i a l i s t s . ^ ^
Karshiad believes: t h a t m a t e r i a l i s m i s a very progressive^
philosophy and that the m a t e r i a l i s t d i a l e c t i c i s approved
by the educated c l a s s of every s o c i e t y . N i e t s z c h e never
b e l i e v e d i n co-operation i n a s o c i e t y , but based h i s p h i l o -
sophy on the idea t h a t a man should make h i m s e l f strong and
consider only h i s own interests. According t o Kiarshad,
N i e t s z c h e ' s t h e o r i e s are more or l e s s s i m i l a r t o H i t l e r ' s
(5)
and Rosenberg's; they each b e l i e v e d i n a constant struggle
between the weak and the strong, and i n the s u p e r i o r i t y of
1. "Foruhia", i n t r o d u c t i o n to h i s t r a n s l a t i o n Ayia Adami az buzineh
bar khasteh. a r t i c l e i n monthly Payman, 1326/1947» P»29«
2. C.f. Par Payramun-e Raven, p.2.
3 . KiarsbJad, lAq&-ye K a s r a v i va mafhum-e m a t e r i a l i s m , T a b r i z ,
1324/1947» Sho'levar P u b l i c a t i o n s , p.5.
4. I b i d . . p.6.
5» i&qla-ye K a s r a v i ... pp 7-8.
the r u l i n g c l a s s i n every s o c i e t y .
(1)
'
Schopenhauer was a p a n t h e i s t who b e l i e v e d t h a t man must
abandon a l l enjoyments i n t h i s world; so K a s r a v i was wrong
(2)
N
i n c o n s i d e r i n g him a m a t e r i a l i s t . ' K a s r a v i had emphasized
t h a t man's reason i s an honest judge between God and e v i l and
that man must r e l y on h i s reason; ^ and the m a t e r i a l i s t s ;
(so Karshad s a y s ) agree w i t h K a s r a v i t h a t reason i s what
d i s t i n g u i s h e s man from t h e r e s t of the c r e a t u r e s .
K a s r a v i had b e l i e v e d t h e source of human a c t i o n i s not
mere s e l f i s h n e s s , but that man i s l e d by other i n s t i n c t s apart
from s e l f i s h n e s s and that man i s thus a combination \ of body
and s o u l . ^ Kiarsha'd emphasizes t h a t K a s r a v i has l e f t one
point unexplained. He has n e g l e c t e d t o s t a t e whether man's
body i s a m a t e r i a l product or something e n t i r e l y separate
from m a t e r i a l .
According t o Kiarshlad, d i a l e c t i c m a t e r i a l i s t s do not deny
man's s e l f i s h d e s i r e , but consider i t s l o g i c a l evolution
through t h e h i s t o r y o f mankind. He goes on t o say t h a t
" r e a l " democracy i s the one system which a b o l i s h e s s e l f i s h -
n e s s and c l a s s d i s t i n c t i o n ; but i n most s o c i e t i e s c o n f l i c t
(8)
between the i n t e r e s t s of the c l a s s e s s t i l l continues.
1 • Acta-ye K a s r a v i ... pp 7-8 •
2. I b i d . . p.10.
3. Par Payramun-e-Kherad. p.7»
4. Aga-ye K a s r a v i ... pp 33-34.
5. P a r Payramun-e Raven.
6. Aga-ye K a s r a v i ... p.31-
7. I b i d ^ p.54.
8. I b i d . . p.62.
 5.

Karshiad's c r i t i c i s m s prompted a defence of K a s r a v i by a

f r i e n d o f h i s u s i n g the pen name Negara, who wrote a book
e n t i t l e d " I n r e p l y t o Kiarshad, The school of K a s r a v i and
(1)
v
materialism". ' He begins by saying t h a t people a r e
pre judiced. not only i n t h e i r r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s , but sometimes
a l s o i n t h e i r s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s . He t h i n k s t h a t
Kiarshlad was n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y o b j e c t i v e about K a s r a v i , and was
not r e a l l y capable of understanding the t r u e meaning o f
Kasravi's i d e a s . ^ Kiarshlad's c r i t i c i s m o f K a s r a v i resembles
( i n Negara's view) those of the persons who c r i t i c i z e d ! t h e
ancient Greek p h i l o s o p h e r s . I n f a c t K a s r a v i ' s ideas were? j u s t
a s d i f f e r e n t from those o f the philosophers a s they were from
those of t h e t h e o l o g i a n s . K a s r a v i had d i s c u s s e d only those
p h i l o s o p h i c a l notions which are contrary t o mankind^ i n t e r e s t s ,
and had aimed t o show that man i s a s u p e r i o r c r e a t u r e who
w /
possesses a s o u l «
Karshad's views were a l s o c r i t i c i z e d i n an a r t i c l e by t h e
already mentioned Foruha./^ who considers that Kiarshlad did; not
understand the r e a l meaning o f K a s r a v i ' s w r i t i n g s . For
i n s t a n c e he misunderstood what K a s r a v i had w r i t t e n about
e v o l u t i o n ( j e h e s h ) i n n a t u r e . K a s r a v i ' s explanation o f
1 . Negark, Dar Pasokh-e Kiarshadt maktah-e K a s r a v i v a m a t e r i a l i s m .
Tehran, 1327/1948. ~
2 . Dar Pasokh-e Kiarshad ... pp 10-15.
3. I b i d . , p. 15.
4 . I b i d . , p. 1 8 .
_ — — 0 in ,
5« Par Pa.vramun-e J-ehesh. M Foruha/llonthly Payman 1326/1948,
pp 25-28. "
 6

e v o l u t i o n i s d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of s y n t h e s i s and a n t i t h e s i s

(ettesial va enfes&l) i n m a t e r i a l i s m . K a s r a v i had recognised

that long ago t h e r e were no s i g n s of l i f e of any k i n d on t h e
e a r t h , and t h a t g r a d u a l l y t r e e s and p l a n t s , and l a t e r animals.
(1 )
v
of v a r i o u s k i n d s appeared, and e v e n t u a l l y man. ' All
phenomena i n l i f e depend on one another and are interconnected.
When we t a l k about e v o l u t i o n , we mean that e v o l u t i o n opens a
new chapter i n l i f e on t h i s p l a n e t , and p a r t i c u l a r l y i n human
life. K a s r a v i had explained h i s ideas i n t h i s r e s p e c t v e r y
clearly.
K a s r a v i ' s a t t i t u d e was i n d i c a t e d i n an a r t i c l e published
i n 1958 i n t h e p e r i o d i c a l ' E l m v a Zendegi. T h i s begins by
s a y i n g that today's world i s run by s c i e n c e and not by super-
fa)
stitions. ' The R u s s i a n s have made great progress w i t h i n
short p e r i o d of time because they threw away r e l i g i o u s
fanaticism. R e l i g i o n connects man and God together, and i s
i n t r i n s i c a l l y q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from s u p e r s t i t i o n . The R u s s i a n s
b e l i e v e that we must teach the young generation whatever we
t h i n k w i l l be u s e f u l . I n I r a n a complete change i n t h e
programme of the schools i s u r g e n t l y r e q u i r e d . Mollias disagree
w i t h any new p e n e t r a t i n g i d e a , and t h a t i s the reason why they
disapproved of K a s r a v i . They could not r e p l y t o K a s r a v i i n a
moderate way (and so resofeted t o t e r r o r ) . S u b j e c t i n g people's
1 • Varjiavand Bonyad, p.8.
2. 'Elm va Zendegi, vol.2, Tehran, 1337/1958.
 7

i d e a s to an i n q u i s i t i o n i s an abominable t h i n g to do i n t h i s
present age.
On the other hand, K a s r a v i was denounced by a member of
the Tudeh p a r t y named Jahandar i n a pamphlet c r i t i c i z i n g h i s
book Sameveshfr*e I r a n cheh khwahad bud. According to
Jahandar, K a s r a v i showed i n t h i s book t h a t he d i d not know
(1 )
v
the r e a l meaning of p o l i t i c s , ' and consequently was not
w e l l informed about p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s . I n Jahandar*s opinion,
K a s r a v i ' s c r i t i c i s m of the Tudeh p a r t y i s not j u s t and honest. '
The Tudeh p a r t y ' s aim (according to Jahandiar) was t o save
I r a n ' s independence, and i t was the most p r o g r e s s i v e p a r t y
(3)
w /
ever organized i n I r a n .
K a s r a v i had b e l i e v e d t h a t the Tudeh p a r t y never considered
I r a n ' s needs; but Jahandiar t h i n k s t h a t t h i s p a r t y always
r e a l i z e d the extent of poverty i n I r a n and t r i e d hard to
(h.} ' * the
eliminate i t . * ' Jahandar p o i n t s out that/Tudeh p a r t y made
progress during the f i r s t few y e a r s a f t e r i t s establishment,
whereas K a s r a v i ' s p a r t y (founded i n 1933) was s t i l l i n i t s
infancy. He goes on to say t h a t such movements ( i . e . such as
K a s r a v i ' s p a r t y ) have no s o l i d b a s i s and consequently cannot
b r i n g about b i g changes i n a n a t i o n ' s l i f e . We must f i r s t
produce the bare n e c c e s s i t i e s f o r the s o c i e t y , Jahanda*r s a y s ,

1. Jahandar, Pasokhbe yak I r a n i . Tehran 132V1945.

2. See p. 325» note 1.
3* Pfesokh ... p*3*
4. I b i d . , p.5»
 8

and then we may he able t o teach people the r e a l i t i e s and

(1 )
f a c t s of l i f e and c l e a r t h e i r minds of s u p e r s t i t i o n s .

The R u s s i a n s , according t o Jahandar, won everything i n l e s s

than t h i r t y y e a r s because they changed t h e i r economic

structure. The R u s s i a n peasants, whose minds were f u l l of

r e l i g i o u s f a n a t i c i s m s , became w e l l educated when they were

(o)
v
given m a t e r i a l comforts. ' Without doubt the R u s s i a n s had
great d i f f i c u l t i e s to deal w i t h a f t e r the r e v o l u t i o n i n 1917 >>
but they used the mottos:
(1) Bread f o r everybody.
(2) Hygiene f o r everybody.
(3) Culture and education f o r e v e r y b o d y . ^
K a s r a v i c r i t i c i z e d the Tudeh p a r t y f o r having followed
the same method of establishment used by p a r t i e s i n European
that
c o u n t r i e s ; but Jahandar t h i n k s / a l l l e f t i s t p a r t i e s have to
consider c e r t a i n r u l e s and that t h i s i s why they a l l f o l l o w a
c e r t a i n programme? He c l a i m s that the Tudeh p a r t y r e a l i z e d
(h)
the t r u e meaning of democracy. He a l s o s t a t e s t h a t the
I r a n i a n Tudeh p a r t y has never objected to r e l i g i o n , and t h a t
i t r e s p e c t s " r e l i g i o u s p e r s o n a l i t i e s who do not work f o r the
(5)
x /
b e n e f i t of f o r e i g n a g e n t s . "
K a s r a v i had always a t t r i b u t e d B r i t a i n ' s i n f l u e n c e i n
1• Pasokh .•. p.7»
2. Ibid., p.7-
3. Ibid., p.9«
k* Ibid., p.10.
5. Ibid., p.12.
 9.

I r a n to two reasonst
(1) The l a c k of s i n c e r e and well-informed p o l i t i t i a n s .
(2) The l a c k of a s t r a i g h t path and d i r e c t i o n t o follow.
Jahandar t h i n k s t h a t K a s r a v i was r i g h t i n t h i s , hut that
he forgot that c o l o n i a l powers s e c r e t l y use agents to win
dominance i n under-developed s t a t e s . H i s t o r y proves t h a t men
l i k e Dr. A r a n i and Amir K a b i r were put to death because they
refused t o c a r r y out the d e s i r e s of these s p i e s and to work
f o r the b e n e f i t of f o r e i g n e r s . '
A s c i e n c e student w r i t i n g i n Payman i n 1946 observed
t h a t i n I r a n many things have l o s t t h e i r r e a l meanings.
Molias throughout h i s t o r y were the group who supressed the
people's f e e l i n g s and the ideas of anybody with a new and
progressive outlook. They behaved l i k e the b r u t a l men who
used t e r r o r t o enforce the i n q u i s i t i o n i n Europe i n the
2
Middle A g e s / )
For a long p e r i o d r e l i g i o n was a t o o l i n the hands of
dishonest people. A group of jnollias had accused K a s r a v i of
t r y i n g to destroy I s l a m and t o introduce a new religion in
i t s place. When Nader Shah had t r i e d to b r i n g about a
reformation i n order to make peace between I r a n and the
Ottoman Empire and Afghanistan, he had been accused i n j u s t
the same way.

1. Pasokh ... p.12.

2. A. A. Par Payramun-e Shah'adat-e K a s r a v i , i n Payman,
Year 1325/1946, pp 3-6.
 Another w r i t e r i n Payman i n 1946 pointed out t h a t K a s r a v i
was very w e l l aware o f the ways of mollas and t h e i r dishonesty.
He wanted t o b r i n g about a reform i n I r a n ' s s o c i a l life.
K a s r a v i ' s school (maktah) stands above the v a r i o u s religions.^^
"Kasravism" i s not a r e l i g i o n , but a s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l
principle.

Another w r i t e r i n Payman remarked that m i l l i o n s o f people

i n h e r i t r e l i g i o n , but do not have a t r u e c o n v i c t i o n and do not
even p r a c t i s e i t . They must be informed of the r e a l i t i e s o f

life. "Kasravism" i s a p r o g r e s s i v e phenomena opposed t o a l l

the f a n a t i c i s m s o f r e l i g i o n ; i t t r i e s t o narrow the bridge

between r e l i g i o n and s c i e n c e , and a c t u a l l y wants t o combine

(2)
7
s c i e n c e and r e l i g i o n together.
The author of another a r t i c l e t h i n k s t h a t a f t e r t h e
O o n s t l t u t i o n a l movement, I r a n ' s o r i g i n a l i t y o f c u l t u r e was
endangered, and t h a t both Dr. Arani and K a s r a v i were
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of t h i s d e s t r u c t i v e tendency.
Although they had a l t o g e t h e r d i f f e r e n t ways o f t h i n k i n g ,
each s t r o n g l y opposed Suf ism i n the E a s t , i n c l u d i n g I r a n .
A r a n i was a f o l l o w e r of the extreme m a t e r i a l i s t s ; indeed he
was a d i s c i p l e of K a r l Marx. He expressed h i s n o t i o n s i n a
very s c h o l a r l y way i n h i s book Hesaleh-ye ' s r f a n v a osulTte
(3)
w /
maddi . K a s r a v i , however, w h i l e he was d e s t r u c t i v e on
1. E . B., Kasravism mazhah n i s t , i n Payman, 1325/1946, pp 9-10.
2. A. J.,Jahan-e konuni va c h i s t a n - e k i s h h a , Payman 1325/1946,
pp s-igr.
3 . Sahabdel, Payman. 1324/1946.
 v
the one hand, was a l s o c o n s t r u c t i v e on the o t h e r . A
w r i t e r named B. Darya complained t h a t i n I r a n they k i l l
honest men l i k e Amir K a b i r . I n s t e a d of e l i m i n a t i n g the d i s -
honest they a s s a s s i n a t e d a s c h o l a r l y r e f o r m i s t l i k e K a s r a v i ,
who had s a i d t h a t i t i s b e t t e r t o forget the tragedy of
K a r b a l a and t h i n k about the b a t t l e f i e l d s of B e r l i n and
Stalingrad. But the k i l l i n g of men such as K a s r a v i cannot
stop the thoughts of the people. H i s t o r y cannot be put back.
Jan Hus was b u r n t , but the advance of s c i e n c e could not be
cut short.
scholar,
The T u r k i s b / P r o f e s s o r , Kemal H. Karpat, who works at
New York State U n i v e r s i t y , observes t h a t the modernization
reforms i n the Ottoman Empire and i n Egypt and I r a n i n the
19th century aimed t o r e - e s t a b l i s h p o l i t i c a l and social
cohesion by simply r e o r g a n i z i n g government i n s t i t u t i o n s .
T u r k s , Arabs and I r a n i a n s r e i n t e r p r e t e d h i s t o r y t o prove
t h a t they preserved t h e i r n a t i o n a l i d e n t i t y and c r e a t i v e :
genius, which were not destroyed by a l i e n i n f l u e n c e s , but
were only prevented from keeping abreast of modern c i v i l i -
zation. Turks and I r a n i a n s d i d not h e s i t a t e to blame;
r e l i g i o n f o r the backwardness of t h e i r s o c i e t y . Arabs, being
i n t i m a t e l y i d e n t i f i e d w i t h I s l a m , accused the I r a n i a n s and

1. See p. 322 above.

2. F . B. Darya. K h a r a f a t - r a ba goluleh mohafezat mi-konand. i n
Payrtan, 132V1946, pp 31-32.
 12.
Turks of i m p r i n t i n g on I s l a m t h e i r a u t h o r i t a r i a n concepts
(1)
of government and r i g i d c l a s s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . '
P r o f e s s o r Karpat continues s a y i n g t h a t the independent
s t a t e s of I r a n and Turkey had the i l l u s i o n t h a t they decided
f u l l y what t o take from the West. Assured of p o l i t i c a l
sovereignty and a corresponding n a t i o n a l i d e n t i t y , they c o u l d
p l a y down the I s l a m i c h e r i t a g e and f o r e s t a l l the o b j e c t i o n s
of Moslem t h e o l o g i a n s t o i m i t a t i o n of i n s t i t u t i o n s from the
(2)
v
n o n - I s l a m i c world. '
Kernel Karpat t h i n k s t h a t I r a n ' s s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e i s
probably the most complex both i n the Middle E a s t and i n the
Moslem world. Reform and change i n I r a n have not profoundly
e f f e c t e d the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e , as they have i n Turkey
and the Arab r e p u b l i c s .
The beginnings of p o l i t i c a l modernization i n I r a n were
w /
encouraging. The f i r s t t r u l y democratic movement f o r
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l monarchy i n the Middle EaBt took p l a c e i n
1905-6. Because i t s l e a d e r s were m i d d l e - c l a s s elements,
merchants, r e l i g i o u s men and i n t e l l e c t u a l s , i t d i f f e r e d from
the Ottoman c o n s t i t u t i o n a l experiment of I 8 7 6 , which was
promoted by the b u r e a u c r a t s .
Most p o l i t i c a l e f f o r t s i n I r a n to-day a r e d i r e c t e d a t
e s t a b l i s h i n g a t r u e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l monarchy and a f r e e
1. Kemal H. Karpat, P o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l thought i n thee
contemporary Middle E a s t . 1967, London, P a l l Mall P r e s s , pp h-5•
2. P o l i t i c a l and 'Social ... p.2h»
3. I b i d , pp 375-376.
 13.

p o l i t i c a l l i f e and c a r r y i n g out s o c i a l reforms. A l l p a r t i e s ,

despite t h e i r widely divergent i d e o l o g i e s , are u n i t e d i n t h e i r
desire t o achieve the r e a l i t y o f a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l regime. The
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t s may he described as l i b e r a l n a t i o n a l i s t s
and a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s t s . Among these, so Karpat says, t h e
i n f l u e n c e o f the l a t e Ahmad Kasravi, "the advocate o f
1
modernism and a r e t u r n t o Zoroastrianism", i s s t r o n g l y f e l t . ^ ^

I t i s o f course t r u e t h a t Kasravi was an advocate o f

modernism,and he was also a Pahlavi scholar and an admirer o f
pre-Islamic I r a n ; but Professor Karpat i s q u i t e wrong i n saying
t h a t Kasravi advocated a r e t u r n t o Zoroaatrianism.
Kasravi and the great Egyptian scholar Shaykh Mohammad
*Abdoh ( d . 1905) deserve t o be compared because they shared!
the idea t h a t man can combine r e l i g i o n and science. 'Abdoh
l i k e w i s e b e l i e v e d i n reason as man's God—given characteristic•-.,
and i t was n a t u r a l , h i s a t t i t u d e towards reason being what i t
was, t h a t he showed desire t o promote the development o f a l l
(2)
v
the s c i e n t i f i c subjects among the Moslems. ' He considered
t h a t i f reason were exercised i n the study o f phenomena o f
n a t u r e , there would r e s u l t , on the one hand, a knowledge o f
God which would be o f r e l i g i o u s and s p i r i t u a l b e n e f i t , and on
the other, a discovery o f the secrets of nature which would
r e s u l t i n many p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s . Such was h i s respect f o r
1. P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l ... pp378•
2 • C. C. Adams, Islam and Modernism i n Egypt, Oxf ordt U n i v e r s i t y
Press, London, 1933, P". 134.
 14.

science t h a t he urges upon h i s f e l l o w Moslems, i n a l l h i s

w r i t i n g s , the duty o f the acquirement o f the science i n
1
which Western n a t i o n s e x c e l , i n order t o "be able t o compete
(1 )
w i t h these n a t i o n s . '
Kasravi's ideas (see above, p.59 and pp 278-280) a r e
thus very s i m i l a r t o those o f 'Abdoh, and also t o those o f
Sayyed Jamfcl o l - D i n Asad Abadi or Afghani ( c . 1839-1897) who
d u r i n g h i s stay i n Egypt worked c l o s e l y w i t h 'Abdohi but 'Abduh,
who remained w i t h i n the f o l d of the Moslem c l e r g y ('olama)
and e v e n t u a l l y became Grand M u f t i of Egypt, t r i e d (not
a l t o g e t h e r s u c c e s s f u l l y ) t o reform the c l e r g y from w i t h i n ,
while Kasravi l e f t the f o l d and c r i t i c i z e d the molljas from
without. Kasravi and 'Abdoh b o t h agreed w i t h the idea t h a t
Islam i s capable of reform, and can adapt i t s e l f t o modern
c i v i l i z a t i o n and science, They both thought t h a t the Moslem
peoples would be able t o work out f o r themselves a new and
g l o r i o u s order of a f f a i r s , without dependence on, o r
(2)
i m i t a t i o n o f , European n a t i o n s . '
Kasravi may also be compared w i t h Ziya Gokalp (1875-1924),
great T u r k i s h s o c i o l o g i s t and n a t i o n a l i s t t h i n k e r . Qokalp was
a Moslem and at the same time was always reaching f o r the new
w
l i f e t o be b u i l t upon s c i e n t i f i c b a s e s . ' He thought t h a t
the Moslems had d e c l i n e d , f i r s t l y because o f t h e i r d i s r e g a r d
1. P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l ••• p. 135-
2. Islam and Modernism ... p . l 3 «
3. N i a z i Berkes, The Development o f Secularism i n Turkey»
MacGill U n i v e r s i t y Press, Montreal, 1964, p. 348.
 15.

f o r t h e changes i n t h e i r l i f e r environment and t h e i r r e f u s a l

t o r e a l i z e t h a t r e l i g i o n had t o he i n t e r p r e t e d i n terms o f
the new c o n d i t i o n s i n order t o maintain a l i v i n g significance:,
and secondly because o f t h e l o s s o f the n a t i o n a l culture
1
through I s l a m 8 tendency t o superimpose i t s e l f as a
(1)
civilization. '
Gokalp regarded c u l t u r e and c i v i l i z a t i o n as two separate
things. He thought t h a t the Turks must adopt Western ( i . e .
s c i e n t i f i c and n a t i o n a l ) c i v i l i z a t i o n , and t h a t r e l i g i o n has
n o t h i n g t o do w i t h c i v i l i z a t i o n . At the same time he thought
t h a t Islam i s an important p a r t o f T u r k i s h c u l t u r e (though
not t h e o n l y p a r t ) . Kasravi's views seem e s s e n t i a l l y s i m i l a r
t o Gokalp's, except that Gokalp c a r r i e d h i s arguments t o
t h e i r l o g i c a l conclusion o f secularism ( o r l a i c i s m ) , i . e .
separation o f s t a t e and r e l i g i o n , while Kasravi nowhere i n
h i s w r i t i n g s makes any mention o f secularism or o f t h e f a c t
t h a t t h e I r a n i a n C o n s t i t u t i o n declares Twelver Shi'ism t o he
Iran's state r e l i g i o n .

1 • K i a z i Berkes, The Development o f Secularism i n Turkey%

MacGill U n i v e r s i t y Press, Montreal, 196i+, p.353S.
 APPENDIX C.

Some comparisons o f Kasravi's ideas on

language w i t h other contemporary ideas.

The idea o f p u r i f y i n g the Persian language and o f u s i n g

as f a r as p o s s i b l e only pure Persian ( F a r s i sereh) words was
not e n t i r e l y new. As mentioned above (p.158, n . l ) , the
h i s t o r i a n Jalial o l - D i n MirzJa had w r i t t e n a work i n pure Persian
i n 1891-1894, and the poet Yaghmia (1782-1859) had composed most
o f h i s verses i n pure Persian. The c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e v o l u t i o n
gave a great impetus t o the use o f c o l l o q u i a l language (zablan-e
'avammameh ) i n w r i t i n g , e s p e c i a l l y through the work o f ' A l l
Akbar Dehkhodia (1880-1345/1956) and Sayyed Mohammad * A l i Jamlal-
zladeh (b.o<1890). Kasravi was not i n t e r e s t e d i n c o l l o q u i a l i s m s ,
but i n making Persian i n t o a " s t r o n g " and more p r e c i s e
instrument o f expression f o r modern use. Although l i n g u i s t i c
studies have advanced much f u r t h e r since World War I I , Kasravi
was i n h i s time the foremost l i n g u i s t who t r i e d t o f i n d out
the s t r u c t u r e s o f Persian words and t h e i r r o o t s .
i n 1935,
The Parhangestan was established/at the request o f Reza
Shiah and under the chairmanship of Mohammad ' A l i Porughi, t o
undertake the formidable task of modernizing the language and
p r o v i d i n g a d i c t i o n a r y of new words; but nothing considerable

1. Negarja. Arayesh va Pjggffesb>e Zaban-e P a r s i . Tehran,

1327/1949. (Payman p u b l i c a t i o n s ) , p . 3 0 .
 2.

r e s u l t e d from the work o f t h i s vast o r g a n i z a t i o n . Kasravi

was not i n v i t e d t o become a member o f i t , though he was
appointed t o one of i t s committees. (See p. 1624- above).
Kasravi's f r i e n d Negaria t h i n k s t h a t the members o f the
Farhangestan made the mistake of t h i n k i n g t h a t the Persian
language s u f f e r s o n l y from being mixed up w i t h f o r e i g n and.
p a r t i c u l a r l y Arabic words, when i t has o t h e r , probably more
important, defects such as the l a c k of s u f f i c i e n t r e g u l a r
s u f f i x e s and p r e f i x e s .
Another of Kasravi's f r i e n d s , Dr. Mohammad Javad Mashkur,
t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi wanted t o produce a new k i n d o f grammar'
f o r the Persian language, and was prompted t o t h i s by h i s
knowledge of T u r k i s h and Esperanto. As Kasravi knew T u r k i s h
thoroughly he was under the i n f l u e n c e of t h a t language.
According t o Dr. Mashkup, Kasravi created t h i r t e e n kinds o f
past p a r t i c i p l e f o r Persian on the analogy o f T u r k i s h .
Kasravi thought there was a p r e j u d i c e d group who opposed
any change i n t h e Persian language i n any circumstances because
they thought t h a t the works o f Hiafez, Sa'di e t c . would then
become u n i n t e l l i g i b l e t o modern I r a n i a n s . On the other hand,
that
he recognised/Persian cannot be wholly pure any/imqrB than the;
European languages, which are mixed w i t h one another and w i t h
4
Latin. Among h i s opponents were Mohammad A l i Porughi and
other d i s t i n g u i s h e d scholars such as Hasan Taqizladeh and

1. Negarbt AraVesh va ... p. 31»

Mohammad Qazvihi;and as they were i n f l u e n t i a l i n t h e
governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e idea o f language reform soon
died d o w n . ^
Kasravi h i m s e l f remarked t h a t f o r more than three years
f i f t y members gathered and made plans i n the Farhangesttan. and
that a l l they d i d was t o remove some European and T u r k i s h and
Arabic words from Persian language, b u t n o t h i n g whatever t o
strengthen Persian. Kasravi also s t a t e d t h a t h i s r e l a t i o n -
ship w i t h the members o f Farhangestan was n o t f r i e n d l y ; they
had i n v i t e d him t o co-operate w i t h them, but he had refused.
E v e n t u a l l y the Farhangestan ended up w i t h no r e s u l t . I t seems
t h a t Kasravi must have been on p a r t i c u l a r l y bad terms w i t h
Forughi who i s s a i d t o have been t h e f i r s t person who accused
Kasravi o f " t a l k i n g l i k e a prophet."
A w r i t e r i n t h e p e r i o d i c a l Khusheh using t h e pen-name
@asheh-gir c r i t i c i z e d Kasravi's views. Narrow-minded people,
he says, never give any c r e d i t t o t h e i r own c u l t u r e and
t r a d i t i o n s , b u t f o r g e t them as soon as they become attached,
t o a new idea. The language o f a n a t i o n i s one o f t h e
h e r i t a g e s which pass from generation t o generation; i f a few
narrow-minded persons c h i l d i s h l y t r y t o s p o i l t h e structures
o f t h e language, t h i s means t h a t they are i n d i r e c t l y d e s t r o y i n g
r
the n a t i o n ' s c u l t u r e . Gusheh- gir t h i n k s t h a t Persian became?
mixed w i t h Arabic because, a f t e r t h e Arab invasion, the I r a n i a n s
had t o l e a r n Arabic i n -order t o understand the Qor'an and
1. Parcham. F i r s t year, v o l . 1 , 1322/1944. P.27.
2. Gusheh-gir (pen name) i n Khusheh. v o l . 4 8 , pp 12-57. Tehran.
 k

and Mohammad's prophetic message; hut poets such as Rudaki

and F a r r o k h i S i s t a n i had t r i e d t o elaborate the Persian
language and save i t from domination by A r a b i c , Unfortunately
Kasravi and h i s miserable f o l l o w e r s d i d not appreciate t h e
Persian language and the great number of books l e f t by Persian
l i t e r a r y men and s c h o l a r s . They could not begin t o understand
the beauty o f Hafez's poems* Kasravi was insane when he, f o r
example, used the word sahesh i n s t e a d o f ehslas ( f e e l i n g ) .
Gusheh-gir accuses Kasravi o f being exceedingly aggressive,
and says t h a t Kasravi s t u d i e d the language from two aspects.
F i r s t o f a l l he was convinced t h a t a l l I r a n i a n s must have
language u n i t y . Secondly, although he was attached t o ]£zari
( i . e . A z a r b a i j a n i Turkish),he preferred Persian t o T u r k i s h , and
though t h a t pure Persian words should be used. I t could be
said t h a t Kasravi made a mistake i n not r e a l i z i n g t h a t a
language i s an instrument o f understanding and t h a t the r i g h t
words are those which are accepted by the s o c i e t y . Kasravi
had two methods f o r p u r i f y i n g Persian;
(l) He t r i e d t o f i n d the o r i g i n a l r o o t s o f Persian words{ f o r
instance, he found the word hudeh from i t s opposite bi-hudeh
(useless),and wanted people t o say hudeh i n s t e a d o f n a t i j e h
(result). This was a r i g h t method used by Kasravi (Gusheh-gir
thinks)•
 5

(2) Kasravi's greatest mistake (according t o Gusheh-gir) was

t h a t he t r i e d t o invent words whenever he could not f i n d
o r i g i n a l Persian words t o replace Arabic ones, and even some-
times t o replace Persian words which he apparently d i d n o t
l i k e ; e.g. shalap f o r s h i r l n (sweet). N a t u r a l l y some o f
Kasravi's words were accepted and used by the people; b u t
most were n o t .
Gusheh-gir t h i n k s t h a t Kasravi's s t y l e o f composition
sometimes sounds q u i t e n i c e when one gets used t o i t , b u t
t h a t h i s strong n a t i o n a l i s t i c f e e l i n g s l e d him t o t r y t o
express a l l h i s thoughts i n a more or l e s s pure Persian which
o f t e n sounds a r t i f i c i a l , and as a r e s u l t people cannot
understand,his ideas. Kasravi had accused some people, and
i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e Farhangestan of i n v e n t i n g new words i n s t e a d
f

of f i n d i n g o r i g i n a l words, b u t he had not r e a l i z e d t h a t he

h i m s e l f was unconsciously doing t h e same t h i n g . He had even
a l l e g e d t h a t t h e members o f t h e Farhangestan were t o o dishonest
for such a heavy t a s k .
Kasravi's devoted f o l l o w e r Mr. Yahya Zoka r e l a t e s t h a t
Kasravi also thought t h a t t h e I r a n i a n s must change t h e i r
alphabet,but t h a t as t h i s i s a very s e n s i t i v e o p e r a t i o n they
(1)
v
must consider t h r e e p o i n t s : '

1. Yahyi'Zoka, Taghvir-e K h a t t r e g a r s i . Tehran, 1329/1951

 6.

(1) A c l e a r alphabet must be drawn up.

(2) The new alphabet must be easy t o l e a r n .
(3) The new alphabet must be s h o r t .
I n Turkey, a f t e r the change of regime from the Ottoman
monarchy t o t h e r e p u b l i c , t h e government decided t o change
the alphabet i n t o t h e L a t i n characters. Kemal A t a t u r k , t h e
founder o f t h e republic,was most determined t o undertake
t h i s task, even though o r i e n t a l i s t s i n p a r t i c u l a r were
opposed t o the change and even accused Turkey o f being
u n f a i t h f u l t o Islam.
The T u r k i s h language reform has been s t u d i e d by Dr.
Heyd. He observes t h a t n a t i o n a l i s m , the c e n t r a l p i l l a r o f
Kemalist ideology, found i t s expression i n a s t r o n g demand
f o r t h e p u r i f i c a t i o n of the Ottoman language by r e p l a c i n g
(1 )
v
i t s f o r e i g n elements w i t h genuine T u r k i s h words, o l d or new. '
The f l o o d i n g of Ottoman T u r k i s h by innumerable Arabic
and Persian words was now regarded as a n a t i o n a l d i s g r a c e ,
and i n the words o f t h e Gazi ( i . e . A t a t u r k ) , ||The T u r k i s h
n a t i o n , which knew how t o defend i t s country and noble
independence, must also l i b e r a t e i t s language from the yoke
of f o r e i g n languages." The romantic, almost m y s t i c a l ,
desire t o discover the n a t i o n a l genius o f t h e T u r k i s h people
and t o base t h e new c u l t u r e on t h e a n c i e n t , p a r t l y p r e - I s l a m i c ,

1• U r i e l Heyd. Language reform i n Modern Turkey, Jerusalem,

1954, p.19.
 7.
t r a d i t i o n s o f the n a t i o n also played i t s p a r t . Many T u r k i s h
n a t i o n a l i s t s could not agree w i t h the o p i n i o n o f previous
generations t h a t the T u r k i s h language was incapable o f
s e r v i n g , w i t h o u t l a r g e - s c a l e "borrowing from others, as a
Kultursprache. T h e i r p r i d e i n i t s harmony, l o g i c a l
s t r u c t u r e and morphological richness was a f u r t h e r i n c e n t i v e
t o r i d i t o f f o r e i g n elements. S i m p l i f i c a t i o n o f the
language, t h e slogan o f the Young Turk language reformers,
was now represented by the d e s i r e f o r t h e c r e a t i o n o f a pure
(2)
or genuine T u r k i s h . '
to
The l i n g u i s t i c reform r e f l e c t e d only^a c e r t a i n extent
the change i n the c u l t u r a l outlook o f T u r k i s h s o c i e t y .
E s s e n t i a l l y i t seemed as a means o f c r e a t i n g such a change.
The f e r v e n t b e l i e f i n the omnipotence o f the human w i l l and
i n the c r e a t i v e elan o f the r e v o l u t i o n gave r i s e t o t h e
c o n v i c t i o n t h a t language, l i k e any other s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n ,
could be reshaped according t o a preconceived p l a n . ^ ^ Like
other r e v o l u t i o n a r y changes i n Kemalist Turkey, language
by
reform was prompted both by i r r a t i o n a l a n d ^ r a t i o n a l motives,
by ardent n a t i o n a l i s m and by p r a d t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . These
d i f f e r e n t , a n d , t o some extent c o n t r a d i c t o r y , f a c t o r s may be
responsible f o r some o f t h e i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s i n t h i s ,
m o v e m e n t . I n the tanzimat p e r i o d attempts were made t o
1. Language reform i n modern ... p.20
2. I b i d , p.20.
3 . I b i d , p.21.
4. I b i d , p.22.
 8.

oust some Arabic and Persian words, which were u n f a m i l i a r

even t o the educated. The Young Turk reformers banned c e r t a i n
f o r e i g n f o r m a t i o n s , and those superfluous f o r e i g n elements
f o r which there were current T u r k i s h synonyms. The
(1 )
v
Linguistic Society ' has gone much f u r t h e r . I n f a c t i t has
always refused t o commit i t s e l f on t h e f i n a l l i m i t s o f i t s
purification efforts. I t has never.drawn a d e f i n i t e d i s -
t i n c t i o n between a l i e n words which would most l i k e l y be ( o r
(2)
K
not be) r e t a i n e d . '
I n I r a n , i t was d u r i n g the r e i g n o f Reza Shah, who t r i e d
u n t i r i n g l y t o f a m i l i a r i z e I r a n i a n s w i t h modern European
d i s c o v e r i e s , t h a t the idea of changing t h e alphabet first
appeared; b u t according t o Mr. Yahya Zoka, S i r Denison Ross,
the famous E n g l i s h o r i e n t a l i s t , opposed the idea and d i s -
w y
suaded the I r a n i a n leaders from doing i t .
We t h i n k t h a t Kasravi committed a b i g mistake i n i n t r o -
ducing h i s ideas i n a language u n f a m i l i a r t o the I r a n i a n
society o f h i s time. As a r e s u l t o f t h i s , h i s ideas d i d not
become p r o p e r l y known t o the people. I n order t o understand
h i s w r i t i n g s one must r e f e r t o Yahya Zoka's s p e c i a l d i c t i o n a r y
(Farhang-e K a s r a v i , Tehran, 1326/1947)J otherwise i t would be
q u i t e impossible t o understand the nature o f h i s thoughts.
1 . Turk Dil:' Kurumu.
2. Language reform i n ... p.57*
3 . Tagfayjp-e Khatt-e F a r s i . pp 149-151.
 9

The t i t l e o f Kasravi's important hook Varjavand Bonyad iffi

meaningless t o most people, even though varjavand i s n o t a
an
word invented "by K a s r a v i , but^already e x i s t i n g word.
I n regard t o language, Kasravi came close t o "being an
extreme n a t i o n a l i s t . One i s hound t o agree w i t h F i r u z
Kazemzladeh and "Gusheh-gir" t h a t Kasravi's attempt t o use
a pure Persian vocabulary l e d t o h i s w r i t i n g i n an a r t i f i c i a l
(1 )

s t y l e which can o f t e n be r a t h e r unpleasant. ' On t h e other

hand, when Kasravi does not exaggerate so much i n t h e use o f
pure Persian, h i s s t y l e , f o r those who have become accustomed
t o i t , i s very agreeable and f l u e n t .

1. P i r u z Klazemziadeh, I r a n i a n H i s t o r i o g r a p h y , pp 431-43U.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1. Sayyed ' A l i A z a r i , Qiam-e Shaykh Mohammad Khiabani»

Tabriz, 1329/1950, Na<jsh-e Jahan P u b l i c a t i o n s .

2. Dr. Gholam Hosayn Zarrin-Kub, Nagd-e Adabi. Tehran,

1338/1959, .Tabesh P u b l i c a t i o n s .

3« N i a z i Berkes, The Development of secularism i n Turkey,

Montreal M a c g i l l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 19614..

k» Kemal, H. Karpat, P o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l though i n the

contemporary Middle East, London, P a l l M a l l Press.

5« C.C. Adams, Islam and Modernism i n Egypt, Oxford

U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1933*

6. U r i e l Heyd, Language reform i n Modern Turkey, Jerusalem,

1954, published by I s r a e l O r i e n t a l Society.

7» Yahya Zoka, Par Payramun-e Taghyir-e Khatt-e F a r s i .

Tehran, 1329/1950, Na&sh-e Jahan P u b l i c a t i o n s .

8. Monthly Payinan, a r t i c l e by Foruha, 1326/1947*

9. P e r i o d i c a l Rhusheh, a r t i c l e by. Gusheh-gir, v o l . 1 2 ,

Tehran.

10. 'Elm va Zendegi, v o l . 2 , Tehran, 1337/1958.

11. P e r i o d i c a l Iran-e ma, year 3 , vol.i4.85, I32I4/I9I4.5.

12. Jahandar, Pasokh be-yak I r a n i , Tehran, 13214./1945*

 2

13. Payman, a r t i c l e by 'A. B., 1325/1946.

14. Payman. a r t i c l e by 'A. J . , 1325/1946.

15. Paymian. a r t i c l e by K. H., 132V1945.

16. Payman. a r t i c l e by P. B. Darya", 1324/1945.

17. Kiarshlad, i£qia-ye Kasravi va mafhum-e m a t e r i a l i s m , Tabriz

Sho«leh-var P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1324/1946.

18. Negarlia, Dar Plasokh-e Kiarshlad, Maktab-e Kasravi va

m a t e r i a l i s m , Tehran, no date.

19. Parcham, a r t i c l e by K a s r a v i , year 1, 1322/1943*