Speech [Assessment of the nation's uprising and both the sweet and bitter events of 1962 and the beginning of 1963 (1341 and 1342 AHS)]

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

O Lord, save us from vain discourse and lies (the audience cries" Amen") . O Lord, illuminate our hearts with the light of Islam and spirituality (the audience cries" Amen") . Grant a listening ear to the university heads of Muslim governments; to the Presidents of Muslim governments; to the representatives of Muslim governments; to the ministers of Muslim governments; to the prime ministers of Muslim governments; and to the managers and workers of Muslim governments. O Lord, grant them

I have to say that in one sense this was an extremely bad year for the clergy, yet in another it was a good year. It was bad because Iran, instead of being presented to the world as a just country which enjoys a good and honest judiciary and which has judicial courts, a judicial tribunal and an administration of justice, or as a country whose economy is healthy and whose agriculture is thriving, or again as a country which is known for its equity and integrity- instead of these, she has been introduced to the world as a center of corruption and even worse still. Were we to say that the present resembles the time of the Mongols, it would be wrong to insult the Mongols so. They were a people who perhaps believed it acceptable to spill our blood which they regarded as heathen. «1» They entered the country (Iran) as a part of their crusade to seize foreign states and even then it was a country which didn't hold the same beliefs as they did. The crimes they then went on to commit here are well-known. «2» Those «3» here today however, claim to be Muslims. They claim to have a faith and to be Shi`ah; and while making these assertions time passes by and they continue to live their everyday lives unchallenged. Theirs are the deeds that one would expect to see from the Mongols, or from Genghis Khan. They storm the centers of learning; «4» they spill the blood of sixteen- and seventeen-year-old youngsters; «5» they destroy the centers of learning; they affront the `ulama' and vilify their honor; they imprison, persecute, wound, kill and commit atrocities, yet at the same time they deliver speeches, feign Islamism»

and Shi`ism and pretend to have realized greatness.«6» «7» The Mongols (at least) never professed to be Shi`ah. They were our enemies, having entered our country by invasion. These here, however, committed crimes and still continue to commit crimes while at the same time they avouch friendship and profess to be Shi`ah or even a station higher still.

That which I would like to say is not a recent matter relating to the past few months only, but rather it is one which has a long history, having first developed several years ago. If not forty-odd years, then it was at least twenty years ago that it was decided that Qum must be wiped out. It was during the lifetime of the late Ayatullah Buroujerdi (may he rest in paradise) that they in fact decided to do away with both the Ayatullah as a religious authority and Qum as a religious center. «8» They believe Qum is against their interests. Qum is the center of truth. Satan's followers believe that their aims are opposed by the followers of truth. Hence, at the time of the late Ayatullah Buroujerdi, the latter was seen by some in a certain light; but this is not the place to elaborate upon this. It was at this time that foreigners were also against the continued existence of Qum, because without it they would be free to do as they wished without anyone objecting, criticizing or protesting.

Therefore, it is safe to say that if not forty-odd years ago then at least twenty years ago, from the time of the late Ayatullah Buroujerdi this intention was harbored by them; yet they realized that trouble would arise if they took action whilst he was alive. Once he had ascended to the abode of the blessed, they immediately began to attack this religious center of Qum under the pretext of respecting another religious center, in Najaf. This they did, not because they felt any affection for that center since these people feel no affection for any religious center, and again, not because they were fond of Najaf, but rather these attacks were made because they wanted Qum not to exist. Qum was a thorn in their flesh; being close to them (in geographical proximity) it was able to quickly discover their corrupt dealings. Hence, they were against Qum, but because they couldn't openly say" no" to Qum, they instead said" yes" to Najaf and" yes" to Mashhad. At first they imagined that nothing important ever really happened in Qum, «9» but then they realized that certain things indeed were happening; certain things were seen, said and heard. Thus, they came to realize that things weren't as they initially believed them to be. Thenceforth they made plans to destroy the clergy and then to destroy Islam and afterwards to realize the interests of Israel and her agents.

This was the case from the beginning but it was concealed, their plans not being publicized. To a certain extent they had in fact informed the public of their intentions, but they spoke of their infidel program in very mild, diluted terms. Following the demise of Ayatullah Buroujerdi, they initially devised an evil scheme which involved Iran as a whole. From what I was told, they wanted people to promise to send telegrams to other theological centers «10» and especially to one other city in particular, not because they were actually fond of that center but because they weren't fond of this one. However, the people disregarded them. Subsequently other schemes were devised and there was in fact a change in government. «11» Who knows, perhaps the proposals were presented to these governments and were dismissed by them because they found such indecency to be beyond even them. Perhaps they were indeed virtuous, learned intellectuals who could not bring themselves to oppose all of the centers of learning. However, the conclusion eventually reached was that the government should be an ignorant, unlearned one; one which does not realize or appreciate the value of learning and one whose members have not received education above that offered in the fifth grade- even then having acquired their qualification certificates fraudulently. «12» These members of the government are not to know the meaning of learning nor of religiousness and honesty. They are not to know of the preservative role played by the clergy in this country. They are not to be aware of what is happening. They are to be dictated to as if blind and are not to really understand what is being said; and they are to be given orders, but must act without being fully aware of what they are doing.

We saw that the target of this illiterate and dishonorable government from the very onset of its involvement was Islam. In the press they wrote in bold print that ladies have been given the right to participate in elections. «13» In fact this was part of an evil plan to distract the public's attention away from the main issue; that being the elimination of Islam and the Qur'an. For this reason, as soon as they became aware of the situation, people banded together and the `ulama' formed a united front in order for appropriate steps to be taken. Initially our attention too had been drawn to the issue of the female vote, but on closer inspection we realized it was not just a matter concerning women for this was only a minor concern (by comparison) . The real issue was about opposition to Islam. «14» Thus it was not necessary for either the voter or the candidate to be Muslim; nor was belief in the Qur'an a prerequisite- what was the Qur'an needed for anyway?! However, when dealt a slap in the face from the Muslim nation they changed their tune, maintaining that by" Holy Book" they had meant the Qur'an; and according to our religious law we of course had no choice but to accept their assertion. Once again however, as soon as they saw a group of ignorant people gathered around them shouting" long live this" and" long live that" they resumed their fiendish campaign, restating all that which they had previously revoked. They yet again espoused full and identical rights of the sexes which in fact is to deny several of the most unequivocal and imperative Qur'anic injunctions. Afterwards, they again saw that this was the cause of certain resentment, objection and difficulties and so once more they denied the issue; it was disclaimed by the minister in one place and by the commanding official in another. «15»

In the press it was quite explicitly reported that women's conscription was in the process of being legislated. Nevertheless, when they saw that the matter gave rise to opprobrium and that the people and even the regime's henchmen were truly perturbed, again they said that it was a lie. «16» Indeed, they wanted to open a lawsuit because of it- a most foolish, ludicrous intention. «17»

This was a bad year because Islam and the Qur'an too came under increasing attack. They ravaged the centers of learning mistakenly believing that they are destructible; they beat and broke the limbs and necks of our children and loved ones, killing some «18» by flinging them from the roof. «19» If the perpetrators of these crimes were peasants as you claim, then why were members of the armed forces helping them? «20» This was something plain for all to see. A hundred thousand people from the streets and from within the courtyard and madrasah clearly witnessed the police force's direct support of the peasants. If, as you claim, it really was the peasants who did all this, then why did the police attempt to intimidate those in the hospitals where our injured had been taken, saying:" How dare you have taken His Majesty's enemies to hospital? We will make you pay for this. They must be discharged at once"? If it was the peasants who were to blame then where does His Majesty come into all this? If, however, it was in fact paratroopers and those who work for him (the Shah) and are a part of his regime who committed the assault, then was it his doing? Did he give the command for this action or did it take place without his knowledge and without his having given the order? If he was aware of the affair, then inform us so we know where we stand with him; so we may know if we are confronting one person or more than one. If it is more than one person, then tell us so that we may realize that these paratroopers came of their own volition without any reason whatsoever; or maybe the security forces «21» sent them, or the police force, or perhaps the Prime Minister gave the orders, or a certain minister or commanding official. Come on; tell us who is responsible for these crimes. Why do they deny it? Whoever is approached for an answer lays the blame on someone else. Whoever we voice objections to denies involvement and implicates another. The police force accuses the security forces and vice versa; and both of them claim that it was His Majesty who ordered for the attack to be made. Is it really true that His Majesty gave instructions for such a thing? Does His Majesty oppose the religion of Islam? Is His Majesty truly hostile to the Qur'an as their claims would suggest? If this is so, then what were those things you said before in favor of Islam? What were those revelations and miracles of which you spoke? If His Majesty is not hostile then why doesn't he prevent such savagery? Why doesn't he chastise these policemen, organizations and prime ministers? He who is in supreme command enjoys absolute authority to do as he will. He should scourge those who firstly commit misdeeds and act against religion and Islam, and then lay the blame on him. He should exonerate himself. How can the sultan of Islam be opposed to Islam? Surely this is not feasible. Then if he does not oppose Islam let him show it; let him show his regret and sorrow that a reprobate «22» has gone and demolished the Faydiyyah Madrasah.

I myself have not yet seen the graves of our dear youngsters, but I intend to do so once this session «23» is over. I shall go and recite a chapter of the Qur'an (Sourah al-Fatihah) for the repose of the souls of those they killed (the audience weeps) ; and I shall publicly demonstrate my grief for them. We are not even allowed to hold a mourning ceremony for them (the audience weeps) ; but why is this so, if, as you say, it was the peasants who committed this atrocity (the audience weeps) ? Why do you disrupt the mourning ceremonies held in Tehran (the audience weeps) ? «24»

Yes, indeed, it was a bad year because the rulers of the day were disgraced and the tyrannical system shamed; and this is not what we wanted. We don't want our country to be introduced abroad as a country ruled by evil elements; this is not what we wanted. We would like everyone in our country without exception to behave and live in such a way as to be a source of pride and honor; to proudly boast such scholars as Amir Kabir. «25» In fact, in the past it was the `ulama' such as `Ali ibn Yaghtin «26» and at times even the Immaculate Imams, «27» who were the ministers and advisers to the Muslim rulers. «28»

But who are the advisers now? Israel! Our counselors are Jews! In the Dunya newspaper they themselves acknowledged the donation of five hundred dollars to each of two thousand Baha'is «29» (the wretch «30» hadn't better deny this since it was actually in the press) ; that's five hundred dollars from the wealth of this Muslim nation- in addition to offering a one-thousand-and-twe tumans discount on each of their air fares. And what was this for? It was for their journey to London to participate in an anti-Islamic meeting. They were thus afforded the highest respect. On the contrary, our pilgrims have to bear the most severe hardships and sometimes even have to offer bribes just to obtain permission «31» for their journey; and even then only a few are actually successful. What intimidation they are subjected to on the outward journey and how many difficulties they have to face during their return journey! Moreover, whilst there at Minah and Mecca, they have to tolerate the objections and protests of a contemptible official who demands the apprehension of someone for truthfully stating that Islam is threatened by the Jews. My God man, are you indeed a Jew? And our country, is that Jewish too?

Woe to this country and to the regime in power! Woe unto us and to the rest of the world! Woe to those mute `ulama' and to the silent cities of Najaf, Qum, Tehran and Mashhad. This deadly silence will cause our country and our honor and dignity to be trampled beneath the boots of the Israelis by means of these very Baha'is. Then woe to us; woe to this Islam; woe to these Muslims. O you `ulama', do not remain silent; don't claim to be following in the Shaykh's path (may he rest in paradise) . «32» I swear by God that if the Shaykh «33» was now among us he too would adopt this stance. «34»

Silence! Do not choose to remain silent since to do so today is to support the tyrannical system. I was informed that Thabit Pasal «35» was given a discount in a deal made between himself and the Oil Company, in which he made a profit of twenty-five million tumans; or in truth it was those who were sent to the anti-Islamic meeting in London who actually profited. That is the current state of our oil industry, our foreign currency, our national airline and our ministers; and that is how things are for all of us. Then are we still to say nothing?! Ought we really remain silent and not complain? They destroy our homes, yet we are not to make a murmur?!

That good-for-nothing sends the chief of police, the head of that rotten institution, «36» to the homes of the `ulama' «37» to threaten that if they, the `ulama', should so much as breathe a word about certain matters,»

then the police have been ordered by His Majesty to ransack their homes, assault their families and to kill the `ulama' themselves. Unfortunately on that day when they came to my home I turned them away. I now wish I had allowed them to enter so that I could have punched them in the mouth. This is what we have to tolerate from His Imperial Majesty; that is of course if what they say is true. If they are lying however, then let him state that this is the case. Let him declare that the governors of Qum «38» have told lies so that I can give those governors what for! Let him tell us that the chief of police has told lies «39», so that I can send some religious students to teach him a lesson. The problem is of course that he makes no such claim.

There again, this year was a good year because the clergy let the world know of its value and significance. It made the world realize that it is the clergy alone which speaks out against and confronts both oppression and the oppressor and injustice and the unjust. It is the clergy and the theological centers which take the beatings, cry out, sacrifice their lives and make protests. They destroy the clergy's Faydiyyah Madrasah but the clergy continue relentlessly. The clergy say what they believe must be said regardless of what happens to them. The clergy have made the entire world aware of their existence. Therefore, it could be said that this year was a bad year since Iran became an object of ridicule throughout the world because of the regime in power; or again, it could be said to have been a good year because the propriety of the clergy was proven to the world. The clergy let the world know that we (too) are human; we are spiritual leaders. We don't just concern ourselves with preaching and praying, but we also make our voices heard. We serve to admonish and advise you, the people.

I gave the Shah some advice; I sent someone to see him. «40» In the days before the referendum I sent messages to him via Behboudi «41» and Pakravan «42» advising him not to hold a referendum nor to attempt to alter the law «43» since it was not in his interests to do so. I warned him that if today Arsanjani «44» can bring a group of peasants and make them do as he tells them so that they cry" long live so and so", then tomorrow another group can be brought to cry" death to so and so"! «45» So again I advised him not to go ahead with this since it was not in his interests. However, he didn't listen and we all saw what happened. They didn't even manage to win two thousand votes; and those they did obtain were obtained by force. It is common knowledge that the bazaars of Tehran and Qum closed down in order to avoid having to vote and that in other cities too the turnout was extremely poor. They couldn't even attract two thousand votes without the need for force.

We didn't want you to suffer such humiliation in this way; neither did we wish for the nation's repudiation of you. We wanted you to be the kind of person who, when he cries out to his nation, receives a wholehearted response from all of the people. This is how we would like our Shah to be. We would also like our minister to be a person in whose opinions the entire nation had confidence, rather than one who insists that six million votes were cast «46» whereas I guarantee you they failed to amount to even a few thousand- the ballot boxes having been filled by the regime itself. Perhaps the Shah didn't actually hear the truth of the matter. Maybe he was told that an" overwhelming majority" vote of six million had been achieved. Since the Shah doesn't tell lies then this must be the case, otherwise why should he make claim to an" overwhelming majority" throughout the entire country of Iran? What about the bazaars of Tehran? Aren't they a part of the country? The streets of Tehran, the city of Qum, other provinces, the clergy, are these not all parts of Iran? Where is this Iran that you refer to? Where did all those votes that you lay claim to actually come from?

It was unfortunate that such events should have occurred this year. Yet it was fortunate that you, the respected clergy, by confronting oppression gave new life to Islam. Had you not shown resistance, God knows that by now they would have fully executed all of their evil schemes. It was your resistance which caused them to deny their former intentions, whereby they said:" Of course divorce is a man's prerogative, when did we ever say otherwise?" «47» Whilst one voice from the" People's Party" «48» can be heard advocating full and equal rights, another voice from the other Party asks:" When did we say that divorce is a woman's prerogative?" Hence, on one occasion they espouse equality in all spheres of life, but on another they advocate something quite different. Again they speak in similar terms with regard to inheritance and women's conscription, advocating one thing one minute and denying it the next. As for women's conscription, we read about it in your (the Shah's) very own newspapers which write whatever the security forces dictate to them.The editor-in-chief of Kayhan «49» is said to have remarked that the paper's journalists now have no problems to contend with, because in the past they were the ones who did the writing and certain persons «50» would make" comments" of approval or disapproval, but now these persons actually do the writing themselves, thus easing the task of the journalist. Here, however, I feel an objection must be voiced asking this person where his self-respect is if he allows others to dictate to him whilst he merely writes. Why should our press be so abject?

So why don't you (the `ulama') speak out and say what they are actually doing? «51» Now that Islam is threatened by Judaism and the Jewish Party, which in fact constitutes the Baha'i Party, it is time for all of the `ulama' of Islam to speak with one voice; and for the orators, speakers and religious students to jointly declare unequivocally that they don't want Judaism to determine the destiny of their country; nor do they want their country to align itself with the Jews in opposition to an Islamic alliance. «52» Whilst elsewhere the Muslims are uniting, those here are making pacts with Judaism! What state of affairs is this? If you must be a lackey to others, then why must you be such a dedicated one?! I shall end here so that I can go to the Faydiyyah Madrasah to recite a sourah of the Qur'an (Sourah al-Fatihah) for the repose of the souls of those who died in the assault. May God grant you good health.