When he came to Tufts on Tuesday, Dr. Abdulkarim Sorush brought with him the experience of having been fired, banned from lecturing, and attacked by hard-line Islamic militants for questioning the religious Iranian regime.
Sorush, a leading intellectual in the Iranian Revolution of 1979, fled the country to escape persecution. In America, he has continued to examine the possibility of democracy in Iran as a professor at the Harvard Divinity School while occasionally visiting Iran to lecture.
In Sorush's talk before a diverse audience in Cabot auditorium, he said that those calling for democracy in the Middle East should look to combine Islam and democracy.
"Since Sept. 11, Islam has become a national issue," Sorush said. "Too often though, Islam is characterized as being intolerant. [The public] needs to recognize that we are experiencing emerging democracy."
Sorush described the current views of groups that do and do not support democracy in Islam.
"The prophet was a political man who had to respond and react to his enemies and friends... Islam had to become politicized," Sorush said, explaining the origins of Islam and government.
"In this world, the supernatural can enter into the world without being corrupted by man," Sorush continued. "These fundamentalists believe that only God is both creator and legislator."
This strict interpretation has been a driving force in the Islamic world, inspiring various movements such as the 1979 revolution in Iran, the National Salvation Party of Turkey, and the Taliban.
Some fundamentalist groups like the Taliban, Sorush said, interpret the Koran to oppose democracy. "There are many Muslims who believe that democracy is foreign and there are many verses [of the Koran] that seemingly support this statement," he said. "To paraphrase - 'Only God can rule' or ' No one else but Him can judge.'"
Sorush was appointed as chair of the Cultural Revolution Institute by political leader Imam Khomeini in Iran in 1980, but the activist resigned soon afterwards. Though he had to leave Iran because of harassment for his ideas, other Iranian political figures, such as Khomeini, have admired Sorush's books, according to the political organization Seraj.
However, other scholars, including professor Sohrab Behdad of Denison University, have attacked Sorush for his involvement in the revolution.
In an open letter to the Middle East Studies Association, Behdad wrote that, post-revolution, Sorush was in a position of power and could have but did not protect the rights of others.
"I find it delightfully ironic... that my association defends a man who could, but did not, defend my academic freedom and human rights and those of many of my colleagues and many more of my students, when their freedom and rights were brutally violated by the Cultural Revolution of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the spring of 1980 and the years that followed," he wrote.
But Tufts comparative religion professor Farzin Vahdat defended Sorush, saying that Sorush had to resign because the institute's stated and eventual missions changed. According to Sorush, the institute intended to review syllabi for compatibility after the revolution, but it eventually turned into a search to get rid of certain academicians.
"Professor Sorush's claim is that he resigned from the [institute] as soon as he discovered that it's purpose was an academic purge," Vahdat said. "The issue has not been resolved, but he is the leading authority on democracy and the Middle East."
In his talk, Sorush also examined modern theorists who say that democracy has already been established in holy duties like thikr and baia, daily tasks that Muslims practice to remember their submission to Allah.
"These theorists who wish to view Islam as a 'theo-democracy' are mistaken, because these concepts were here long before the advent of Islam," Sorush said.
Sorush also drew a distinction between religion and government, a line which the current government blurs. "The emphasis of religion is on obligation," he said. "In a democracy, the emphasis is placed on rights. In fact, Islamic jurists have defined the sharia (Islamic holy law) as 'The Science of Obligation.'"
Since Islam is "politicized," Sorush said it would be impossible to separate faith from government in the Middle East. He promotes an "extra-religious" perspective on government - a governing body that integrates religion, but brings in an outside force to "protect interpretation."
"Pure religion is a myth," he said. "Purity is our own creation. Islam is a series of interpretations and so is Christianity... Diversity of interpretation must be recognized."
This view directly clashes with organizations like the Taliban or the Iranian government, which use religious police to enforce their interpretation of Islamic law. "Once we allow liberty of interpretation, and license of interpretation, then you can begin to move forward," Sorush said.
He said that basic Muslim convictions, like the obligation to "do good," establishes the concept that those who are evil must be resisted. This makes government accountable. "From the beginning, criticism is already a part of the Koranic text," Sorush said.
One student in attendance said that he felt the lecture "was good, but was somewhat abstract. It dealt very much with ideas and beliefs, but didn't explain how this change was to come about."
