In order to understand great incidents and transformations that have an impact on history, time should pass. The same could be said about the deaths. What makes time the best referee is the patience that time has. Mortals sometimes leave outlasting marks with their deaths, they become more meaningful or add new extents to the layers of the meaning.

As a leader of revolution, a quarter century passed since the death of Iran’s Ayatullah Khomeini. The revolution he actualized has completed its 35th year, same as the age a human enters his maturity years in his life. What the Islamic revolution promised in Iran and what have they carried out, along with their claims in what way did, their reflections in practice have appeared. What does the personnel who carried out the revolution think nowadays? These are all important questions. Moreover, all the answers to these questions, the meaning of the revolution for the generation born into it and what’s left from the excitement and hope since the beginning of the revolution, will give us the accounting of this revolution.

Maybe the gap between the heritage left behind by the revolution and the original ideals and opinions of the revolution can be examined unaggressive today and a better accounting of the revolution can be done. Even which part of Khomeini’s expressions does the Iran state and the officials who actualized the revolution stands is interrogable. This is a valid interrogation for all humane revolution and ideal design. In this interrogation, regardless of the outcome, the reality is this; Iran succeededly kept the revolution alive by relying on their ancient state customs. While we can say that the excitement and the idealism are the reasons why the revolution is still standing regardless of the military and economical clasps, we cannot disregard the impact of the historical experience Iran has.

And the continuity feature in the ancient Iran state customs, had molded and even transformed the revolution. The expression, which Khomeini developed independent from geographical and ethnical ties, was enough to create a new excitement wave in the Islamic world. By blowing out a revolutionist breath, this would become a sound that is more different than all the Islamic movements till that day. Moreover, it would even have great feedback from the contrarian intellectuals in the West. Being in Iran during the revolution days, Foucault, couldn’t stop himself from saying ‘The soul of the soulless world’ when he was commenting on the revolution.

Before being a revolutionist leader, having a wise personality with his thoughts, along with his comments on Shi’a in political views are topics that should be talked about and discussed even now. The desire to clinch Khomeini in a sectarian parenthesis with a Sunni reflex is actually the fruit of the objective to oppress his universal statements and precisely his statements against the West under the cold war conditions.

The dense propaganda, that marginalize Khomeini and that tries to show him as some kind of a deviant in the eyes of the Islamic community specifically because of the American-driven ideological derivation, had become an obstacle in the way of healthy critics.

No matter the results, when Khomeini’s remarks are evaluated within his own political and religious climate, it will be clear that he had bravely vocalized his opinions that have the characteristics of a revolution inside the Shi’a.

After a quarter of a century has passed since the death of Khomeini, the difference between the opinions of Khomeini and the truths of the revolution should be discussed by the generation that actualized the revolution. However, the existence of a cultural infusibleness between Khomeini’s message and the personnel that carried out the revolution will come into light. Still, Khomeini’s expression that open up Iranian revolutionist’s horizons should have been considered as important. Sadly, this expression will be oppressed under different formats in both the Sunni world and between the generations that carry the revolution. What are the answers of the Iranian philosophers on the question ‘What are the theoric, political and practical reasons for Iran being compressed in a nation cycle which have an Islamic rhetoric in a short time following the revolution?’

This anecdote, that explains the distance between the leader that vocalizes the revolution ideals and the addressee masses, seems to clarify many things…

In the first years of the revolution a commission, which was made up of intellectuals coming from different geographies of the Islamic world, meet with Khomeini. Inside the commission, names like the deceased Ismail Raci Faruki and Hami Algar exists. Khomeini accepts the commission one day at his house during the dawn prayer. They perform the prayer with the congregation, the oldest person among all, Khomeini, serves them tea. Islam Faruki reads the opinions and suggestions of the Muslim intellectuals about the revolution on their behalf.

It’s remarkable that the revolution being inclusive for all Muslims and avoidance of Sunni-Shiah discrimination are few of the suggestions. After listening, Khomeini states that he completely agrees with all the suggestions and that they want to actualize this principles.

Meeting ends like this. When the commission leaves the house to inform the related people, who helped setting up the meeting, they will feel that the approach is not as surrounding as Khomeini’s.

Today, whether the people who actualized the Iran Islamic Revolution defend the same ideals or not is quite doubtful. In the same manner there are some congregations in Turkey which builds their existence based on Iran hatred. While they cling on to an instigative language that worsens this difference, the outcome of this on the Muslims is obvious.

To look at where the people, who were accused of being ‘Khomeinist’ with every Islamic demand they’ve made then, and where their demands, stand now can be quite interesting.

While on one hand the Iranian officers are doing politics over Middle East with the nation reflex they are withdrawn into, on the other hand using a sectarian language at the same time, is the picture of the gap after quarter century.

Ýlgili YazýlarEnglish