British Society for Middle Eastern Studies

Mohsen Kadivar, an Advocate of Postrevivalist Islam in Iran Author(s): Yasuyuki Matsunaga Reviewed work(s): Source: British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 34, No. 3, Iranian Intellectuals (19972007) (Dec., 2007), pp. 317-329 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20455533 . Accessed: 18/01/2012 23:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. and British Society for Middle Eastern Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

British Journalof Middle Eastern Studies, December 2007

34(3), 3 17-329

Routledge
Group Tayior&Francis

Mohsen

Kadivar,

an Advocate Islam in Iran

of Postrevivalist
YASUYUKI MATSUNAGA*

ABSTRACT This article seeks to place Mohsen Kadivar in thecontext broadly of as new modern Iranian (Shi-iteIslamic) religiousthinkers a postrevivalist defined thinker religion, and to illustrate characterizationthrough examination this an of and what he terms ofhis advocacy of 'spiritual goal-orientedIslam'. Committedto the 'way the in modem era', religiosity the of men of reason' as he triesto 'defend ways and the Kadivar seeks tostrike balance between a modern, secular, rational of 'principal message of Islam'.Afterdistinguishing four types modern religious thinkers Iran, thearticle examineshis 2002 article 'From in Historical Islam to whichKadivar outlinedan approach that contends 'would he Spiritual Islam', in Islamic thought'. solve a great deal of difficulties befallen to contemporary

I. Introduction Among the so-called reform-seeking'religious intellectuals' (rawshanfekran e dini) of postrevolutionary Mohsen Kadivar (1959-) standsout on several Iran, of who participatedin the1979 Coming fromthat generation youngsters counts.1 IslamicRevolution as religiouslyleaning student Kadivar was among activists, thosefew who actuallyleftthe campuses for trained university Qom tobe formally in itstraditional Islamic seminary (hawzeh-ye 'elmiyyeh).2 Afterproceedingto the advanced (kharej) level in jurisprudential studies at the top of his class, he became-in 1997-one of thevery few long-attending students Ayatollah al of whom theelder clerichas handed out 'Ozma,Hossein-'Ali Montazeri (1922-) to
*Fellow, Center for Interdisciplinary Study of Monotheistic Religions, Doshisha University, Kyoto Japan. E-mail: ymatsung@aol.com 1 For the 'pro-Second of Khordad' reformist religious intellectuals, see Hamidreza Jalaeipour, in Negin Nabavi, ed., Intellectual Intellectuals and Political Action in the Reformist Movement', 602 8580,

the least studied contemporary Iranian intellectuals, especially outside Iran. To date, the only substantial study in ofMohammad Mojtahed Shabestari and English remains that of Farzin Vahdat, 'Post-revolutionary Discourses Mohsen Kadivar: Reconciling the Terms ofMediated Subjectivity. Part II: Mohsen Kadivar', Critique, 17 (Fall 2000), pp. 135-157. 2 Kadivar was born on June 8,1959, in the city of Fasa in Fars province and received his primary and secondary education in Shiraz, its provincial capital. From the fall of 1977 until the nation-wide university closures in the summer of 1980, he attended Shiraz University (former Pahlavi University) as an undergraduate student in the Faculty of Engineering; in 1981, he permanently left Shiraz for his seminary studies inQom. For his biographic 112 (January 13, 1999), pp. 9, 13; and Zahra Rudi (Kadivar), ed., Baha-ye azadi: Ma, information, see (Asr-e Vlzheh-ye Ruhaniyyat (Tehran: Nay, 1999), pp. 17-19. Defa'iyyat-e Mohsen Kadivar dar Dadgah-e

'Religious Trends in Twentieth-Century Iran: A Critical Survey (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2003), pp. 136-146. For a good book-length analysis of the religious intellectual movement in Iran, see Abbas Kazemi, Jame 'eh-shenasi-ye rawshanfekran-e dini dar Iran (Tehran: Tarh-e Naw, 2004). Despite his fame, Mohsen Kadivar remains among

ISSN 1353-0194 print/ISSN 1469-3542 online/07/030317-132007British ( Society Middle Eastern of Studies DOI: 10.1080/13530190701388333

YASUYUKI MATSUNAGA

hiswritten While stillbased in permissiontopracticeejtehad (ejazeh-ye ejtehad). Qom, Hojjat al-Islam Kadivar was selected in 1991 as directorof the Islamic at thought department Tehran's Center forStrategicResearch, an institute then belonging to the Presidencyand a nestof theformer'Imam's line' (khatt-e Imam) studentactivists such as Sa'id Hajjarian (1954-) and 'Abbas 'Abdi (1956-). During the 1990s,Kadivar evenmanaged to teach-albeit relatively briefly-at theconservativelyleaningImam Sadeq University inTehran.He was forcedout, he however,after published, in the leftist Salam daily inAugust 1997, an article asserting that the people in the presidential election threemonths earlier overwhelmingly voted down 'the governmental religion (din-e dawlati), privileged-classism(qeshrgeri), violence,wisdom-bashing,despotismof opinion, and populist society'.3 The restof his career, whose course during theeight-yeartenure reformist of president Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005) paralleled those of several of his of fellow activists/writers his generation such as 'EmadeddinBaqi (1956-), Hashem Aghajeri (1957-) and Akbar Ganji (1959-) and of 'AbdollahNuri well known.4 was summonedand arrested theSpecial He (1949-), is relatively by Court ofClergy (Dadgah-e Vizheh-ye Ruhaniyyat)inFebruary1999. Two months later,Kadivar was found guilty and sentenced to 18 months in prison for 'propagatingagainst the sacred systemof the Islamic Republic of Iran' and untruths disturbing and publicminds'. Although the specificcharges 'publishing thattheauthorities brought againsthim in theSpecial Court ofClergy relatedonly toa lecture gave in the he Hosseinabad mosque inEsfahan inJanuary a three and with thereformist Khordad daily inFebruaryin thesame year.5 Yet part interview theanimosities thattheconservativeclerical establishmentinQom and Tehran harboredagainstKadivar stemmedfromthe seriesof analytical he writings that published from1994 onwards on theShi-ite religious theorieson government, of includinghis hitherto-incomplete lengthyrefutations the semi-officialstate doctrine the 'absoluteruleof theappointedjurisprudent' of (velayat-eentesabi-ye
motlaqeh-ye

While closely associated with some of the Imam's line, or the Islamic left, of Kadivar never formally activists/intellectuals his generation, joined anyof their politicalgroupsorparties,suchas theIslamicRevolution Mojahedin Organization
3

faqih).6

'Ta'ammoli dar Payam-e Entekhab-e Dovvom-e Khordad-e 76', Salam, August 17,1997, pp. 6,10. The article The is reprinted inMohsen Kadivar, Daghehdagheh-ha-ye hokumat-e dini (Tehran: Nay, 2000), pp. 630-635. chancellor of Imam Sadeq University was Ayatollah Mahdavi-Kani, then Secretary of Jame 'eh-yeRuhaniyyat-e Tehran and themain overt backer of the losing candidate 'Ali-Akbar Nateq-Nuri. Mobarez-e 4 of Religion Against Iran's Rulers', The New York 'Cleric Uses Weapon See, for example, Elaine Sciolino, 'Words of Hope in the "Hotel"', The Financial Times, August 25, Times, September 18, 2000; Guy Dinmore, 2001; and Robin Wright, 'Keeping Faith inReform, and Islam, in Iran: As Secular Movement Crumbles, Defiant 'Muslim Cleric Spreads Blame With a Smile', The Washington Post, December 15, 2004; Carla Power, Democrat: A Modernist in Robes', Newsweek, Special Edition: Issues p. 12. 5 The full texts of the lecture, entitled 'The Shar'i Prohibition against the interview regarding his views on the 20-year 'report card' of the indictment and sentence, are reprinted inBaha-ye azadi, pp. 31 -35,131 2005 (December 2004-February 2005),

pp. 1-41; Nazariyyeh-ha-ye dawlat dar feqh-e shi'eh (Tehran: Nay, 1998); and Hokumat-e vela'i (Tehran: Nay, 1999). Kadivar had planned to publish a series ofmonographs critically appraising all four aspects of the doctrine of the 'absolute rule of the appointed jurisprudent', or vel?yat, entes?b, etl?q, and faq?hat. The authorities, however, have so far refused to issue the required publication licenses for his books. In July 2004, the authorities

Terror' (Hormat-e Shar'i-ye Teror), and Islamic Republic, as well as those of his -198. The Hosseinabad mosque was the long-term base of Ayatollah Jalal al-Din Taheri, then Friday Prayer Leader of Esfahan. Khordad daily was run by former InteriorMinsiter 'Abdollah Nuri, also from Hosseinabad. 6 Mohsen Kadivar, 'Nazariyyeh-ha-ye dawlat dar feqh-e shi'eh (1)', Fasl-nameh-ye Rahbord, 4 (Fall 1994),

318

MOHSEN KADIVAR, AN ADVOCATE OF POSTREVIVALIST ISLAM

(Sazman-eMojahedin-e Enqelab-e Eslami) and the Islamic Iran Participation unlikemany of his like Mosharekat-e Iran-eEslami).7 In fact, Front (Jebheh-ye Kadivar has never served in any and religious intellectuals, minded reformists he on official position in theIslamicRepublic.He even prideshimself thefactthat More that now criticizes.8 he has never received salaries directlyfromthe state maintained independence from factional however, his carefully importantly, Iran in affiliations thecomplicatedweb of political circles of postrevolutionary as revealshis primaryself-identification a religious scholar-and an innovative of thinker-well-versedin the tradition Shi-ite Islamic sciences.Before moving Qom to Tehran in 1997, due reportedlyto some political his residence from pressure exerted on him inside theholy city,Kadivar taughtfor 14 years the principles of Islamic jurisprudence(osul-e feqh), logic, Islamic jurisprudence at madrasas inQom, and (feqh),Qur'anic interpretation literature several famed in theseminariesinsideIran, While exclusivelyeducated Feiziyyeh. includingthe tradition Najaf, as his former of he is also well versed in the jurisprudential Ayatollah al-'Ozma Mirza JavadTabrizi (1926-2006), teachersin Qom included himself a formertop studentof Ayatollah al-'Ozma Abu al-Qasim al-Kho'i (1899-1992) inNajaf. background,however,Kadivar followinghis Despite his extensive seminary madrasas, but only atuniversities move toTehran has notbeen allowed to teachat wear Modarres.9He nonethelesscontinuesto such as ShahidBeheshti andTarbiat his his clerical garb inpublic, and has justified various socioculturaland political activities,at least in part, on the religiousobligation 'enjoining the good and the forbidding evil' (amr behma'ruf va nafyaz monkar). In thisconnection,the not 1999 arrestand theensuing 17-monthimprisonment only failed to sway his scholarly conviction; theyonly brought to him the currentfame and wider Evin prison in July2000, Kadivar resumed After his release from recognition. of begun servingas president thenewly at Modarres University, teaching Tarbiat Defa' Defense of Press Freedom (Anjoman-e Association forthe foundedIranian az Azadi-ye Matbu'at), and traveled abroad for conference presentations, in US, Japan, academic appointments the and short-term workshopparticipation, and the UK, among others. (1) The goal of thisarticle is two-fold: toplaceMohsen Kadivar in theproper modem Iranian (Shi-ite Islamic) perspective,in the contextof broadly defined
Footnote continued 6 also suspended themonthly Aftab that had published Kadivar's critique of hokumat-e entes?bi in a series of nine articles between December 2000 and April 2002. 7 In terms of personal relationships, Kadivar is said to be particularly close toHashem Aghajeri, a member of a reformistwriter/activist also from Sazman-e Mojahedin-e Enqelab-e Eslami, and 'Alireza 'Alavitabar (I960-), Shiraz. Kadivar has also been close toAta'ollah Mohajerani (1954-), a former fellow campus activist at Shiraz University during the Revolution and a founding member of the pro-Rafsanjani Executives of Construction on to become (Kargozaran-e Sazandegi) group. Mohajerani married Kadivar's younger sister, Jamileh, who went a reformist deputy in the Sixth Parliament (2000-2004) from Tehran. 8 and Hasan Yusefi-Eshkevari That is notable, considering that even Mohammad Mojtahed-Shabestari (1950-), two of his fellow 'new thinkers', once served in the state as elected deputies in the firstParliament (1980-1984), and also that so many politically ambitious mid-ranking clerics can get various official assignments, especially Mecca. Kadivar did seek to run, however, for a seat during themonth of moharram and the annual pilgrimages to

in the thirdLeadership Experts Assembly (Majles-e Khobregan-e Rahbari) in itsOctober 1998 election, but the Guardian Council did not approve his qualification despite his seminary credentials. 9 Under the current government of President Ahmadinejad (2005-), Kadivar was pressured into leaving his tenured position in theDepartment of Philosophy at Tarbiat Modarres University and requesting a reassignment of Philosophy). See E'temad-e Me Hi, in the Iranian Institute of Philosophy (the former Imperial Academy October 31, 2006, p. 13. Hammihan, June 19, 2007, p. 24, and http://www.kadivar.com/.

319

YASUYUKI MATSUNAGA

religiousthinkers (din-andishan-e motajadded), as a postrevivalist new-thinker of religion,and (2) to illustrate thischaracterization through examinationof his an Islam' (eslam-e advocacyof 'spiritual goal-oriented and ma'navi va ghayat-madar) as an appropriatesolution to the challenges thatIslam as religion faces in the postrevolutionary Iranian context.Among the contemporaryIranian religious thinkers-often dubbed religious intellectuals-Kadivarhas been compared,and grouped together, with 'AbdolkarimSoroush (1945-) and Hojjat al-Islam Mohammad Mojtahed-Shabestari (1936-).1o Alternatively, Kadivar may be better on with someof thosereligiousintellectuals of comparedand contrasted, one hand, his own generation, suchas Sa'id Hajjarian. On theother hand,hemay well be also schooled but innovativeShi-ite compared with some of those traditionally of jurisprudents thepast century,such as Akhund [MullaMohammad-Kazem] Khorasani (1839-1911), Mirza Mohammad-HosseinGharavi-Na'ini (1860-1936), Mohammad-Hossein Tabataba'i (1903-1981), ImamRuhollahMusavi 'Allamah Khomeini (1902-1989), and AyatollahMuhammad-Baqir al-Sadr (1935-1980). Most importantly, withoutplacinghim in someof these it however, propercontexts, that is not possible to fully appreciatethearguments Kadivar has put forward-as well as theirpotential impact-on such issues as the incompatibility between between Islam, on theone velayat-efaqih and democracy,and thecompatibility on and hand,andmodernity(secular)human rights, democracy, theother. II. Kadivar as a PostrevivalistNew-Thinker ofReligion of a Figure 1 below represents heuristic illustration the respectiverelationships in between fivedistinguishable groups ofmodern religious thinkers the (Shi-ite modernists (naw Islamic) Iraniancontext.In thepre-1979 period,both religious gerdyan-e dini) and religious revivalists (ehyd-gerayan-e dini) separated themselves socioculturally from traditionalists (sonnat-geraydn) in thatboth consciously dealt-albeit differently-withmodernity.12 It was, however, secularistsof various kinds thattypicallyset off both religious modernists and revivialists organizing themselveson the sociopolitical level.As has been well Mehdi Bazargan (1907-1995) and his fellow religious modernists documented, activitiesduring theperiod between 1941 and 1953 when began theirformative thecommunist Tudeh partydeveloped and became a powerfulforce.13 Ayatollah Ruhollah Musavi-Khomeini, a religious revivalist par excellence in the postrevolutionary political discourse of Iran, famously rebukedMohammad Reza Shah and the 'colonialists'for what he termedthefabricated talk,or slogan,
Mohsen see Farzin Vahdat, of Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari and 'Post-revolutionary Discourses the Terms ofMediated Reconciling Subjectivity', Critique, 16 (Spring 2000), pp. 31-54, and of 17 (Fall 2000), pp. 135-157; and Mahmoud Sadri, 'Sacred Defense of Secularism: The Political Theologies Soroush, Shabestari, and Kadivar', International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 15(2) (Winter 2001), op. 257-270. Many texts of his recent articles and speeches on these subjects are found on his website, http://www.kadivar. 10 For example, Kadivar:

com/. 12 Classifying individual thinkers into one of these categories may cause a dispute. For example, some consider Morteza Motahhari a modernist, while others regard him primarily as a revivalist. For a useful distinction among the orientations of these three groups, see Abbas Kazemi, Jame 'eh-shenasi-ye rawshanfekran-e dini dar Iran, pp. 7-8,72-80, 13 See H.E.

117-119. The Liberation Movement of Iran under the Chehabi, Iranian Politics and Religious Modernism: and Shah and Khomeini (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990); and Forough Jahanbakhsh, Islam, Democracy in Iran (1953-2000) (Leiden: Brill, 2001). Religious Modernism

320

MOHSEN

KADIVAR,

AN ADVOCATE

OF POSTREVIVALIST

ISLAM

[(Various)Secularists]

Traditionalists<

>

Religious Modernists . > Religious Intellectuals

Religious Revivalists

Postrevivalist New-Thinkers ofReligion Figure 1. Intellectual Mapping ofModem Religious Thinkers in Iran

of 'separating religion from politics' (jodd'i-ye din az siydsat) and obliged his studentsto 'propagate(true) Islam'.14 By contrast,in the postrevolutionary period, it is from the now dominant religiousrevivalist current both religiousintellectuals that and 'postrevivalist new thinkers of religion' (naw-andishdn-edini-ye post-e.hydgerdneh) have been to struggling set themselves apart.In thissense,botharepostrevivalist-albeit ina The religiousrevivalismthat became dominantin Iran in the different manner.15 wake of the 1979 Islamic Revolution shared several characteristics with other revivalist movements in thewider Islamic world, such as theirclaims to the of inseparability religionand politics and to (potential)solution to all problems, and their desire to remaketheexistingsociety intoa religiousone (dini-kardan-e role that jdme'eh).Yet, as theoverarchingleadership AyatollahKhomeini came to assume followingtheIslamicRevolution and theofficialadoptionof his doctrine of 'the rule of jurisprudent'(velayat-efaqih) indicated,the postrevolutionary Iranianreligiousrevivalism placed a unique emphasis on feqh and faqih both as the means to tackle,and thesolution to,all problems. For theirturn, both religiousintellectuals and new thinkers religion-rather of thanremaking societyon the the basis of religion-typically striveto renovate and reconstruct religion (naw-sdzi va bdz-sdzi-yedin) in response to certainnewly foundchallengesand exigencies.16In thepostrevolutionary Iraniancontext the of expanded realm of religion to cover politics and governing,both religious intellectuals and new thinkers religionoften seek to cut down the realm of of religion(kuchek-sdzi-ye din)-and, thus,therolesoffeqhandfaqih-and tofocus, primarily,on its spiritualdimension.17 Admittedly, the boundaries between
See Imam Khomeini, Velayat-e faqih: Hokumat-e eslami (Tehran: Mo'asseseh-ye Tanzim va Nashr-e Athar-e Imam Khomeini, 1994), pp. 15-16, 115-119; and also Sahifeh-ye nur, Vol. 21 (Tehran: Sazman-e Madarek-e Farhangi-ye Enqelab-e Eslami, 1990), p. 91. 15 Some of the religious intellectuals of this period, particularly those termed ideological religious intellectuals, however, may still retain a revivalist frame of reference. 16 See Kazemi, Jame'eh-shenasi-ye rawshanfekran-e dini dar Iran, pp. 79-80. 17 Kazemi, ibid., pp. 8, 140-141. 14

321

YASUYUKI MATSUNAGA

religious intellectuals and new thinkers religion are sometimes of murky. It is nevertheless useful todistinguish between thetwo, ifonly forheuristic purposes. Like religious modernists in thepre-1979 period, religious intellectuals various of By coming strandstendnot to come fromthe religiousestablishment. contrast, typically fromwithin the religious establishmentor at least having formal new thinkers religion are, to some extent, of seminary background in training, in Owing also to comparable to thepast innovativethinkers Shi-ite jurisprudence. new thinkers religion closeness to thereligiousestablishment, of may their relative be more self-consciously postrevivalist than their peers among religious intellectuals. Growing up in the ideologized era of the 1970s,Mohsen Kadivar as a young university studentundoubtedly belonged to the broader religious revivalist and scholarly current. However, afternearly two decades of seminarytraining Kadivar had, by the late 1990s, joined those researches, writing and teaching, few clerics inside Iran who publicly lamented the perceived negative consequences of the clerical takeoverof statepower, includinga shifttoward in outward religiosity,in lieu of enhanced spirituality, society.18Following with the Islamic state's clerical authority and a series his own hostile encounter marked the early years of Khatami's troubled of other similar incidents that Kadivar emerged,bymid-2001, as a full-fledged advocate ofwhat he presidency, termed 'spiritualand goal-orientedIslam' (eslam-ema'navi va ghayat-maddr). In a 2003 interview with the (now banned) monthlyAftab on the subject of Kadivar recountedhis intellectual human rightsand religious intellectualism, way: journey in the following
From around 1989, I embarked on focused researches in the fieldof political thought in Islam. This researchprogram has not reached its mid-point yet; I have not even succeeded inpublishing what I have alreadywritten up on thisground. It seems that theobstacles to discussion, dialogue and publishing in this field increase day by day, although I have not losthope and Iwill continuemy efforts. My first writing on human rightstook shape from the angle of political thought in Islam. On the occasion of fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights, a conferencewas held inTehran adoption of the [in 1998]. I singled out the rightto determine [one's] destiny (haqq-e ta'in-e sarnevesht) as [among] thepivotal political rightsof thepeople in Islam, and made a necessary and while without going intocritiquing thepast thinkers' thoughton corroboratingcase for it, murders of several alternative thinkers(digar-andishan) by some the subject. The horrible security agents in the fall of 1998 severely preoccupied my mind. 'Religion, Tolerance, and Violence', 'The Right to Life in Civil Society', 'The Shar'i Prohibition against Terror', were the titlesof the three arguments I made in protest against the breach of human rights,and the last lecturegotme inprison [in 1999]. The argumenton the rightto was a necessity from thebeginning [of Islam], not life and theprohibition against terror [simply] a demand of some modern program. During [my] last year in prison, I was All at once, I felt thatall my studies on the gradually led to thedirection of human rights. critical discussion of violence became concentrated on human rights,on one hand, and on the field of religious thought,on the other. The terrorattack on Dr [Sa'id] Hajjarian March 2000] by hired hands of thepressure group in thewinter of 2000 added fuel to [in these studies. I conducted a complete round of reexamination and note-taking of Islamic jurisprudence (feqh) from the angle of human rights. I reflected long and hard on the viewpoints of the Islamic jurisprudents (foqaha va motasharre'dn) on the rightsof the
18 See, for example, his aforementioned February pp. 137-158. 1999 interview with daily Khordad, reprinted inBaha-ye azadi,

322

MOHSEN

KADIVAR,

AN ADVOCATE

OF POSTREVIVALIST

ISLAM

human being (hoquq-e ensan). I studied once again the religious texts,particularly the noble Qur'an, thenarratives of theProphet (PBUH) and thehadiths of the Imams (AS), fromtheangle of human rights.I readmore and wrote less. [My] article 'Imam Sajjad and theRights of thePeople' (April 2000) was a product in thatperiod. I shouldmention one importantpoint from the conclusions of that article: a right that a [practical] guide on rights(resaleh-ye hoquq) and some other religious sources talk about is in the sense of a divine obligation and an ethical duty of human being, and has a fundamentaldifference with [a rightdiscussed] in the common idiom in human sciences and [in the field of] my new-thinker (naw-andish) human rights.The issuance of an execution sentence for Hasan Yusefi-Eshkevari on theoffence of apostasy was theprincipal reason behind friend [my April 2001 paper] 'Freedom of Belief and Religion (dzadi-ye 'aqideh va mazhab) in Islam and theHuman Rights Documents'.19 In thatpaper, in addition to criticizing the penalties of execution for an apostate in traditional Islam (esldm-e sonnati), I defended [the position ofl absolute denial of earthly penalties for changing religion and belief (taghyir-edin va 'aqideh) on thebasis of a new readingof Islam (bar asas-e qarai'ati tczeh az eslim). Finally, in themiddle of 1380 [2001], I wrote an article [entitled] 'FromHistorical my own academic career point in Islam toSpiritual Islam'. I consider thatarticle a turning or (zendegi-ye 'elmi-yekhod). In thatarticle, I presented a theory, a model thatI suppose would solve a great deal of difficulties thathave befallen contemporary Islamic thought. My works thereafter The research program [thatyou asked about] was now put together. are all based on thatresearch program.As an example, the discussion-provoking article 'The Problem of Slavery in Contemporary Islam' can be mentioned. [In that article, I may be established as per demonstrated that] theprohibitionof slavery in thepresent time theprimaryordinance-not the secondary or state ordinance-for the reason thatslavery is unjust and unreasonable. I have [thus] recently started tackling thevast issue of Islam and human rights,and hope to succeed in completing it.20

of While undoubtedly being part of thebroader current postrevivalistreligious intellectualism in postrevolutionary Iran, Kadivar is, nonetheless, best of characterized as a new-thinker religion. It is so not simply because he continues towear a clerical robe and acts as a conscientious social critic of political power-a role that he considers the Iranian clerics best played way he reasons andmakes his case thatrenders historically.2'It is primarilythe him a new-thinker of religion. Despite his critique of the revivalist of of reinterpretation the 'guardianship the jurisprudent'(velayat-e faqih) in Kadivar continues to relyon feqh modem state, favorof a clerical reignof the as based argumentation, his own referencein the above interviewto his 2003 The best of articleon the 'prohibition' slavery in thepresent time indicated.22 statuscan be found,as he himself new-thinker of illustration his postrevivalist and goal-oriented in suggestedin theabove interview, his advocacy of 'spiritual Islam'.
19 Originally presented in a conference in Tehran, the paper was later published inAftab, 23 (February-March 2003), pp. 54-63. For an English translation, see Mehran Kamrava, ed., The New Voices of Islam: Rethinking Reader (London: LB. Tauris, 2006), pp. 119-142. Politics and Modernity?A 20 bashar va rawshanfekran-e dini: Goftogu ba Mohsen Kadivar', Aftab, 27 (June-July 2003), p. 54. 21 'Hoquq-e See 'Ruhaniyyat va qodrat: Goftogu ba Mohsen Kadivar,' Jame'eh-ye Madani, October 7, 2000, pp. 4-5. 22 Mohsen Kadivar, 'Mas'aleh-ye bardeh-dari dar eslam-e mo'aser', Aftab, 25 (April-May 2003), pp. 80-89.

323

YASUYUKI MATSUNAGA

III. Kadivar as an Advocate of Spiritual Islam Besides publishinghis carefullyresearchedand criticallycomposed academic works in the fieldsof Islamic jurisprudenceand philosophy, Kadivar has been actively lecturing writing articleson somewider socio-religious issues that and have been criticallyrelevanttocontemporary Iraniansociety,including balance a between thespiritual message and socialmission of Islam, and freedom, tolerance and religiouspluralismunder the religious state.Such activities may well have been long expected from Kadivar as a formerstudentactivist-turned-'alim in Iran. It was, however, not until in themid-1990s when his postrevolutionary professionalactivities began extending beyond thehawzavi circles in Qom that his views on suchmatters began findingtheir ways to a wider audience through certain newspapers and weeklies.23 As noted above, his outspokenness-in particular, sociopoliticalcritiquesof authoritarian his modus operandiwithin the IslamicRepublic's religio-political establishment-intensified followingthe May 1997 electionof Mohammad Khatami, a developmentthatincurred him arrest and in imprisonment February1999. Even in this context, Kadivar's article 'FromHistorical Islam to Spiritual Islam', inwhich he first advocatedwhat he termed 'spiritual and goal-oriented Islam', represented departurefrom previouspublishedworks. For, unlike in a his his previousworks,Kadivar went on topresentan unequivocal alternative after critiquingtwo existingapproaches in Islamic jurisprudencefordealingwith the problem at hand. The articlewas originallydelivered as a speech to theannual national convention of the pro-reformist Islamic Associations of University Students(Daftar-eTahkim-e of Vahdat) in thesummer 2001, andwas published in thefollowing year ina book entitled 'Tradition Secularism'-an anthology and of works fromfourfamedreligious intellectuals postrevolutionary of Iran.24 In the article, Kadivar initially problematized modernityby contendingthat relations between religiosity (din-dari)andmodernitycame intoconflict some as of the religious accounts (gozareh-ha-yedini) became incompatible with the achievementsand productsof modernity, while the latter became the 'way of the men of reason' (sireh-ye 'oqala).25 While dismissing both thetraditionalist and the secularist (or laicist) reactions to the perceived problem, Kadivar then contended that,in theShi-ite-Iranian context,religious thinkers had found such incompatibilitiesprimarily in the area of Islamic law (shari'at), or the jurisprudence covering non-devotional, inter-relationalordinances (feqh-e mo'dmalat), and much less in the areas of creed and faith (e'teqdd va iman), ethics (akhlaq), andmanners (manesh).ThenKadivar went on tocontendthatthree important proposed solutions,or approaches,existvis-a-vis theconflicts between the 'practical ordinancesof Islam and theproprieties the of modernworld'.26
hokumat-e dini, pp. 188-195, and 585; See, for example, Kadivar, Daghehdagheh-ha-ye 419-434, Doktor 'Abdol-Karim Sorush va Hojjatol-Eslam Mohsen Kadivar darbareh-ye pluralizm-e dini Monazereh-ye (Tehran: Salam, 1999). 24 Mohsen Kadivar, 'Az eslam-e tarikhi beh eslam-e ma'navi', inMo'asseseh-ye Ma'refat va Pazhuhesh, ed., Sonn?t va sekularizm: Goftar-ha-i az 'Abdol-Karim Sorush, Mohammad Shabestari, Mostafa Mojtahed Malekian, Mohsen Kadivar (Tehran: Serat, 2002), pp. 405-431. 25 a technical term in osul al-fiqh denoting 'the understanding or inArabic?is sireh-ye 'oqala?sirat al'uqala' the conduct prevalent among themost knowledgeable of all mankind at a certain age'. While both are set against vahy (revelation) and subject to change, sireh-ye 'oqala is different from 'orf (custom) in that it is a type of human knowledge or conduct not specific to one place. 26 Sonn?t va sekularizm, pp. 407-408. 23

324

MOHSEN

KADIVAR,

AN ADVOCATE

OF POSTREVIVALIST

ISLAM

The first approach, which had been the most commonamong theShi-ite-Iranian 'ulamd' in thelastcentury, divided the 'Islamicordinances' (ahkam-eeslami) into The former the 'fixed' (thabet)and the 'changeable' (motaghayyer). denoted the and unannulableprecepts that made up the text shari'ah,while the of permanent latterrepresented time-bound precepts thataddressed certain interests and that, although 'obligatoryto implement', may come to lapse. The proponentsof this approach sought to cope with the modem-day exigencies bymaking the above distinctions and allowing the lattertypeof shar'i ordinances tobe establishedor rescindedaccording to public interests (maslahat-e 'omumi). Kadivar examined three differentformulationsof this approach, namely, ones by 'Allamah Mohammad-Hossein Tabataba'i, Mirza Mohammad-Hossein Gharavi-Na'ini, and each formulation certain left AyatollahMuhammad Baqir al-Sadr, and foundthat similarquestions unresolved.27 The most serious difficulty Kadivar found that with these threeformulations was not so much over the fact that all threedelegated the responsibility of enacting those ordinances theyconsidered 'changeable' to either the 'Islamic ruler' (vali-ye eslami)-namely, the rulingjurisprudent (vali-yefaqih)-or the elected parliament. Rather he was troubled by how each of these three proponents demarcated the 'fixed'ordinances. All three jurisprudents considered all theordinances thatare contained in the Qur'an and sunnah 'fixed'.That is, they considered all the revelation thatGod sent down to mankind through ProphetMuhammad, as well as those ordinances laid down by the Prophet Kadivar repeatedly bothunchangeableand unrescindable. askedwhether himself, all theshar'i ordinances that ketab and sunnah contain, in fact,represented such ordinances,andwhether some of thoseprecepts 'laid down' by theProphet,and also of those 'reported' the infallibleImams,are also dividable intofixedand by of changeable ordinances. In the end, Kadivar found these formulations the 'fixedand unchangeable' approachwanting. For, althougheach sought to deal with modem-day exigencies and found ways to accommodate public interests, none of these formulations, in his view, solved the aforementioned incompatibility problem.28 Kadivar thenconsidered the second approach, namely, thefeqh-e hokumati (or feqh al-maslahah) approach advocated by Ayatollah Khomeini in his late what Ayatollah Khomeini put forward years. 9Kadivar contended that was, in over Islamic fact, a doctrine of the 'absolutemandate of the jurisprudent jurisprudence' (velayat-emotlaqeh-ye faqih bar feqh). That is, the underlying drive forthisapproach was a need foran 'effective ejtehad' (ejtehad-ekar-amad) in lieu of the common, ineffective ejtehad. And, for thatreason, the doctrine 'vastauthority' that may 'securetheinterests so he assigned theruling jurisprudent

Ibid., pp. 408-420. Ibid., p. 420. 29 In response to a claim by then President Khamene'i that the Islamic Government could lay down an obligatory provision only within the framework of the accepted ordinances of Islam, Ayatollah Khomeini famously declared on 6 January 1988 as follows: 'The state (hokumat), which constitutes a part of Prophet Mohammad's vel?yat-e motlaqeh, is one of the primary ordinances of Islam and has precedence over all the secondary ordinances, and 28

27

even prayer, fasting and pilgrimage... The state is empowered to unilaterally revoke any shar'i agreement that it has concluded with the people when that agreement is contrary to the best interests (ma??leh) of the country and it devotional or non-devotional?when Islam. It can prevent any matter?be it contravenes the best interests of Islam for the duration that it is so'. See Imam Khomeini, Sahifeh-ye nur, Vol. 20, pp. 170-171.

325

YASUYUKI MATSUNAGA

Kadivar contendedthat AyatollahKhomieni's of the people and expand justice'.30 problem' foundbetween the innovativedoctrinedid solve the 'incompatibility' to shar'i ordinancesandmodernity allowing therulingjurisprudent annul any by with shar'i ordinance-be it 'fixed'or 'changeable'-that is deemed inconsistent of the exigencies of the time and place, or not securing thebest interest the political system,foras long as it remainsso. problemswith thisapproach as Kadivar, however, foundseveral fundamental of well. First,he questioned the suitability allowing the fateof theentireshar'i ordinances-and, for thatmatter, the religion of Islam-to depend on the of on of 'personal'understanding the partof theruling jurisprudent the 'conditions the timeand place'. Second, he questionedhow religiousnesscould come out of of best interests theruling jurist'spursuit the 'exigenciesof thetimeand place, the of thesystem, theinterests thepeople'-a pursuitthatis essentially 'matters or of men of reason' (omur-e 'oqald'i) and is,by necessity,conductedoutside forthe the 'textof religion' (matn-e din). Third, Kadivar contended that,given the enormous importancethat this approach attached to the state (hokumat) and of political power, theordinanceswould soon startfollowing the interests the Then theend resultof thisapproachwould be a 'governmental latter. religion' would destroy thedomain of 'religious faith, (din-e dawlati), an outcome that and passion' (iman-edini,ma'naviyyat va vajdan-emazhabi). Fourth, spirituality and Islamic jurisprudence particular, in he it isuntenable, contended,that religion, can be expected to solve all the social, political, economic, culturalandmilitary problemsforall human societies; religionsimplycannot takeon an expectationas In world andmanaging society.31 other words, in theview huge as upkeeping the ofKadivar, the innovative approachof feqh al-maslahah,while itdid offera way more out for the incompatibility problem,had created anotherset of potentially of asfeqh became seriousproblems-the religiousness Islam is set tobe destroyed with the stateand political power and entertainedtheexpectation too entangled thatitcould solve all problems.3 and goal-orientedIslam' For its turn,the third approach, called the 'spiritual Kadivar advocated, promised to solve both problems approach and theone that some of For problem,itpromised to reclassify simultaneously. theincompatibility considered 'fixed'ordinances thatindisputably failed to meet two thosehitherto ordinances.Kadivar argued that criteriaof reason and justice as non-permanent of mattersof creed and faith, theprincipalpartof thereligion Islam comprises the theordinances in devotional jurisprudence, theethical values, and some of the jurisprudence(feqh-emo'dmalat), and thatall these principles in inter-relational ordinanceswere the are perpetual.For their part, thebulk of thenon-devotional All of them were of issuance. products theexigencies at thetimeand place of their God had not issued although clearly considered 'wise, just and reasonable' then, ordinanceswere 'signed on' them. Kadivar contended that the inter-relational in the sense thatIslam endorsedmany of theconventionalordinances (emzd'i)
30 Sonn?t va sekularizm, pp. 423-424. The doctrine is apparently open to various interpretations. One interesting was destined to be?a victory of the secularizing logic of the reading by Sa'id Hajjarian was that itwas?or Islamic state. See his Az shahed-e qodsi ta modern state over both Shi-ite jurisprudence and thefaqih-headed shahed-e bazari: 'Orfi-shodan-e din dar sepehr-e siyasat (Tehran: Tarh-e Naw, 2001), pp. 425-426. 31 Sonn?t va sekularizm, pp. 25-426. 32 This line of critique is in good contrast to his more noticed critical arguments of the doctrine of ve/?yai-based statecraft. See his Hokumat-e vela'i (Tehran: Nay, 1999).

326

MOHSEN

KADIVAR,

AN ADVOCATE

OF POSTREVIVALIST

ISLAM

(ahkam-e 'orf)inpre-IslamicArabia and elsewhere so as to achieve justice and interests human societies. of fulfill this-worldly have resultedbecause thematters in the social Problems of incompatibility in theconventions human societieshave undeniablyand intensely of domain and had been changingandmany of thoseissues that been considered 'just,reasonable and and appropriate'are todayconsidered 'unjust,inappropriate incontravention since argued that oqal1)'. Kadivar then men of reason" (sireh-ye of the"wayof the of 'justice is thestandard religion' ('eddlatmeqyas-e din ast), not vice versa, and that 'beingreasonable' ('oqald'i budan) is thestandardinhuman societiesand in conditions the may be set: jurisprudential inter-relational jurisprudence, following (dara-ye e'tebar va hojjatiyyeh)as long as ordinancesare valid and authoritative are (moqtadd)of justiceand do not contravenethe 'wayof the they a requirement contravention with the asserted thatan indisputable men of reason'. He further of men of reason or thecriteriaof justice,or a confirmation being a way of the bishtarbudan-e benefit mofased az mosaleh), will cause ofmore evil than (ithbat-e be an indicator(kashef) thatan ordinance is time-bound(movaqqat) and not his was not that the all da'emi). Kadivar noted that contention perpetual(ghayr-e but that potentiallylack validity, ordinances in thenon-devotionaljurisprudence heed [ought to be taken]of a serious possibility [thata commonlyconsidered out 'fixed'ordinance may turm tohave been time-bound].33 As for the problems thatKadivar attributedto feqh-e hokumati, the third the by approachpromised toaddress them (1) limiting issuerof shar'i ordinances toGod and theProphet and (2) confiningthe scope of 'religiousordinances' to those 'just,reasonable, fixed'ordinances thatexist in ketab and sunnah', on the one hand, and (3) replacing thoseshar'i ordinances found to have lapsedwith democratically enacted 'reasonable laws' (qavanin-e 'oqald'i), and (4) stop new legislations to be related to religionor shari'ah, on the other. requiring each of theseproposed steps is theclear opposite of thevery steps Interestingly, making Ayatollah Khomeini took in declaring his feqh-e hokumatidoctrine, and goal-oriented' Islam,but also of Kadivar not only theadvocate of 'spiritual postrevivalistIslam.Kadivar contended thatthepoint of these stepswas to (1) of keep the 'religiousness religion' in tactand notplace it in theshadow, (2)make the 'realm of religion' (qalamru-ye din) smaller than in the two previous realm to increase,and approaches,evenwhile allowing thedepth in theremaining modermera by meet theexpectationin the the (3) strengthen abilityof religionto removing out of the 'realm of religion' many of those elements that are of with theproprieties modermity.34 incompatible Although, as articulated in the 2002 article,Kadivar' s 'spiritualand goal oriented Islam' approach still remainedon the level of the enunciationof an of outlineand thejustifications someof itselements,some of itsinnovative-and, thus,controversial-elementswere already highly notable. One of themost controversialaspects of Kadivar's proposed approach clearlywas his call for some of thoseshar'i ordinancescontained in ketab reassessingand reclassifying considered 'fixed'as the 'changeable'.Kadivar defended and sunnahand hitherto shar'i ordinancesare a 'path' (tariq) forattainingthe his approachby arguingthat what are desired in of religion' (ghayat-e mota'ali-ye din) and that 'lofty goals
33 34 Ibid., pp. 426-429. Ibid., pp. 426, 428-429.

327

YASUYUKI MATSUNAGA

contended that while thepath itselfare thegoals, not theordinances.He further that God and the Prophethave showed is the 'religious path', therouteto reach the otherpaths is not 'blocked' and that humans have no other same goals through on route before themthanthe 'secularpath' relying the 'wayof the men of reason' and justice tounderstandtherevelation.35 was his assertionthat Similarly,anotheraspect thatis likelyto face opposition the 'secular knowledge' ('orf)of layreligiousscholars(din-shendsan) and ulama', whether a shar'i and not only of the jurisprudents (faqihan), are to determine of meets the twocriteria justice and the 'wayof the men of reason'.36 ordinance While his argument that the secular knowledge of ulamd' and specialists of best various fields human scienceswould serveas the of method todetect the 'way is of the men of reason' is cogent,a strong opposition fromthejurisprudents very of on well expected. While the doctrinalsupremacy thejurisprudents thedebate on Iran (most the Islamic state had been challenged before in postrevolutionary Soroush in the on notably, by 'Abdolkarim mid-1990s), Kadivar's contention this a matter,coming fromsomeonewho is amojtahed himself,appeared toconstitute more seriousdiscursivechallenge to Iran'smulti-centered clerical potentiallyfar establishment. IV. Conclusion This article sought to place Mohsen Kadivar in the contextof broadly defined as modem Iranian(Shi-iteIslamic) religious thinkers a postrevivalist new-thinker an of religion,and to illustratethischaracterization through examinationof his and that advocacy of 'spiritual goal-orientedIslam'. Itwas my contention without placing him in these appropriatecontexts, it is not possible to fullyappreciate Kadivar has put forward both as an academic scholar on various argumentsthat and philosophy,and as a new-thinker religion. of Islamic jurisprudence ThatKadivar is best characterized a postrevivalist as new-thinker religionin of Iran implies that combines elementsfromthe he thecontextof postrevolutionary modernist, revivalistand post-revivalisttendencies. In the 2002 article 'From Historical Islam toSpiritual Islam,'Kadivar did not define what hemeant by the goal of Islam in its 'lofty goals of religion'.Elsewhere, he asserted thatthe lofty most total sense is 'humandignity' (karamat-e ensani), which may also be 37 understoodas 'thenearness toGod' or 'ultimate happiness'. Togetherwith his may paraphrases argumentfor making the realm of religion smaller, the latter Kadivar is a modernist in favorof making Islamic faitha totally suggest that matter.However, he is clearly opposed to theso-called 'privatization' of private Islam 'a la French laicitemodel, or in his own words, a 'total submission to with the most privatecornersof life'.38 modernityand depositingreligion a Similarly,despite his original problematicof finding way tomake Islam Kadivar has contended thathe is not the kind of compatiblewith modernity, Islam thoseelementsthat not fit modernist who seeks to selectively removefrom do
Ibid., pp. 430-431. 36 Ibid., p. 430. 37 Mohsen Kadivar, 'Goftogu-ye enteqadi ba moderniteh,' daily Iran, April 11, 2005, p. 10. This was a slightly abridged version of a paper he presented at a conference at theUniversit? Libre de Bruxelles inOctober 2004. The unabridged Persian version of the paper, entitled 'Osul-e sazegari-ye eslam va moderniteh', is available at: http:// www.kadivar.com/ Sonn?t va sekularizm, pp. 405-406. 35

328

MOHSEN

KADIVAR,

AN ADVOCATE

OF POSTREVIVALIST

ISLAM

withmodernityso as toproduce something mightbe called 'modemIslam'.39 that Yet his evident commitment the 'wayof the to men of reason' (sireh-ye'oqald) that demonstrated indicates Kadivar genuinely that theabove examination strives hard to strikea balance between the modem, secular, rational ways and what he terms the 'principal in message of Islam' inhis larger goal of 'defending religiosity the modem era'. On his positionvis-a-vis thesecularist(laicist) and therevivalisttendencies, his followingremarks revealing: are
I am in favorof separating the institution religion fromgovernment. I do not, however, of believe in separating religion frompolitics (man beh jodd'i-ye nahad-e din az dawlat qa'elam, amma beh jodd'i-ye din az siyasat mo'taqed nistam).i

he These indicatethat although ismuch criticalof theconsequences ofAyatollah Khomeini's revivalist drivecenteredaroundpreservingtheIslamic state, Kadivar is stillpart of the largertrend post-1941 religious revivalismsthatproduced of both religiousmodernists likeMehdi Bazargan and religious revivalists like Kadivar' s unique characteristics includethe AyatollahKhomeini. In addition, way he strivesto speak in the tradition innovativeIslamic jurisprudents of fromthe time of the Iranian Constitutional Movement, and to make innovative That he built his own approach of contributions his own to that tradition. of and 'spiritual goal-orientedIslam' partiallyon theearlierefforts Mirza Na'ini by and AyatollahMuhammad-Baqir al-Sadr was an interesting indicationof that characteristic. Kadivar's well-rootedposition in thetradition thelargertrend of of Iranian religious revivalism(a laMorteza Motahhari andMahmud Taleqani) is also seen from frequent his lectures and speeches at places such as Hosseiniyyeh is ye Ershad and Kanun-e Tawhid in Tehran. Particularlyinteresting his most recent Ershad. SinceMarch 2005, Kadivar has been activitiesatHosseiniyyeh-ye deliveringa series of biweekly lectures-55 lecturesto date-on the themeof 'TheQur'an and the Human Being' (Qur'dn va Ensan-eMo'dser), Contemporary clearly demonstratingthat the activities of new-thinker religion, of Mohsen is continuing.42 Kadivar,

39 Kadivar, 'Goftogu-ye enteqadi ba moderniteh', p. 10. Sonn?t va sekularizm, p. 431; see also Kadivar, Daghehdagheh-ha-ye hokumat-e dini, p. 189. 41 Remarks from his address to an event of the Islamic Iran Participation Front party, as reported by daily Sharq, November 'Mafhum-e jame'eh-ye madani va jame'eh-ye taht-e hakemiyyat-e 18, 2003, p. 4. See also Kadivar, 40 Nashr va Tahqiq-e Zekr, ed., Nesbat-e din va jame'eh-ye madani Mo'asseseh-ye qanun', in pp. 251-252. The texts of some of these lectures are available at: http://www.kadivar.com/ (Tehran: Zekr, 1999),

329