ôhariati and Marx: A Critique of an "Islamic" Critique of Marxism A&sef Bay at in Many have described Ali Shariati as the "ideologue" or the "architect" of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 '. He has been represented as both an intellectual, who from a radical Islamic viewpoint, offered a vigorous critique of Marxism and other "Western fallacies" 2, and as a reformationist Islamic writer who was simultaneously "influenced by Marxist social ideas"-*. There is little disagreement on Shariati's role in transforming and refining the ideological perspective of millions of the literate Iranian youth. Shariati provided his audience with a firm and rigorous ideological means, by re-interpreting Islam through "scientific" concepts employed by the modern social sciences, an interpretation which the traditional Islamic clergy were incapable of formulating. Back in the late 1970s, when the University students in Tehran were involved in Islamic versus left debates, I observed how the rival "Islamic students" would rely almost totally on the c teachings of the mu allim (Jbc« (or the teacher) to support their fierce discussions. At that time each ideological camp had its own organization, meetings, study groups, library, mountaineering trips, dress code and most importantly, a distinctive discourse. Both groups would compete avidly in their activities. However, at times they had to make an ad hoc tactical alliance, for instance during strike-planning, leafleteering and similar sensitive activities. Both groups had heroes too. We had our own heroes , and they had theirs. The men we praised were internationally known: Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Fanon, Che Guevara, Mao, and similar people. Their heroes were as diverse as ours, if not 19 more. They ranged from AI-Afghani, Iqbal Lahouri, Imam Musa Sadr to Janghali , the Re/.aii brothers, Khomeini and Masoud Rajavi. For them, however, Shariati, was the greatest of heroes. Shariati's seeming intellectual sophistication was intertwined with his radical political stand which would capture the spirit of his audience in those tense and repressive conditions in Iran. Such an intellectual sophistication reflected itself perhaps in the fact that not one serious critical assessment of his works has thus far appeared by Iranian intellectuals4 . On the other hand, Shariati's political stand was manifested in his massive popularity in the anti-monarchy revolution of 1979 when thousands of his lecture-tapes and pamphlets were circulated among the basically Islamic youth. His reputation travelled beyond Iran, and the bulk of his works were translated into English, Arabic, German, Malay and other languages. He was regarded as one of the most prominent contemporary Islamic- thinkers. [2] Ali Shariati was born in 1933 in a village located in the northern Khorasan where he completed his primary and secondary schools education S. HJS mother was from a land-owning family, and his father, a well-known local Islamic thinker and teacher who introduced modern critical thinkers to his students. Shariati's lather had formed a short-lived Movement of God-Worshiping Socialists, in which Ali was a member and through which he acquired his first critical Islamic education. During his college years in the Mashad Teachers' College, he studied Arabic, and translated in 1956 Abu Zarr Ghafari: 'I'hc God-Worshipping Socialist, c~~JL~^ C~.^!JL> :^jLu j> #\ the story of the famous companion of the Prophet, who was critical of the early Caliphs. Shariati continued his studies in Mashad University in the Arabic and French languages. In the meantime, he was involved, together with his father's group, in reviving the outlawed National Front, originally founded by the nationalist Prime Minister Mossadeq, in the late 1940s. For this activity, Shariati and his comrades spent eight months in prison. He travelled in 1956 to Paris, then the capital of a major 20 Alif 10 (I WO) colonial power, where he spent some several years. This move proved to be a watershed in Shariati's political activities and intellectual development. This period coincided with the intense anti-colonial struggles throughout the world. He began to study philology at the Sorbonne, became engaged in anti-imperialist and student politics, edited two anti-regime Persian journals and translated a few books by radical and Marxist as well as Orientalist writers including: Ouzagan, Che Guevara, Jean-Paul Sartre, Frant/ Fanon, and Louis Massignon (a famous expert on Islamic mysticism), and developed a keen interest in Western Orientalism and radical Catholicism. He was also exposed to the ideas of French sociologists such as Raymond Aron, Roger Garaudy, Georges Politzer, and specially the eminent French dialectician, Georges Gurvitch. In 1965, he returned to Iran where he was immediately put in jail for eight months for his political activities abroad. In the following years he spent five years in Mashad, teaching at the College of Literature, and most of the remainder of his life in Tehran where he began the most productive period of his political and intellectual life. From 1969 until 1972, he lectured at the llusseinieh Irshad, a modern Islamic center in northern Tehran. His lectures were either taped or published in several do/ens of volumes, the most important of which being multi-volume Islam S/iiii<isi (_r-Li fXJ (Islanwloxy ). They were circulated widely among Muslim youth. The Husseinieh center was shut down in 1972 by the government on the grounds (hat it had become a breeding ground for the Mujahedin Khalq, a radical Muslim group which had launched armed struggle against the Shah's regime. Ervand Abrahamian, an Iranian historian, believes that the conservative clergy also played a part in stopping Shariati's lectures, since they feared that Shariati was not promoting Islam, but Western philosophies, especially Marxist sociology. After the closure of the Husseinieh center, Shariati was arrested, and charged with having connections with the Mujahedin. He was released from prison after eighteen months. Upon his release, a series of essays was published in the widely-circulated daily paper, Kayhan j Alif 10 (I WO) 21 The essays, entitled, Insan, Islam va Marxism ,t.....u.,.fjL«j (Manjslam and Marxism), were attributed to Shariati. In 1977, he managed to leave the country. A month after arriving in England, he suspiciously died in London. At the time in Tehran, we, both the leftists and the Islamic groups, never doubted the involvement of SAVAK in his death, although the British authorities related his death to a massive heart-attack. Whatever the cause, SAVAK was to be blamed. His death, contrary to the hopes of those who disliked him increased his popularity, and made Shariati a virtual legend among his supporters. [3] While there is little disagreement on Shariati's ideological and political role and popularity, the nature of his ideological and political stand, and his intellectual perspective have been a matter of debate. More precisely a confusion surrounds his "Islamic Marxism", his attempt to utilize certain modern Marxist concepts such as: "class exploitation", "class struggle", "classless society", "imperialism," etc. -- linking them with the teachings of the shiite leaders such as Imam Ali, Imam Hussein and Abu Zarr Ghafari (whom Shariati called the the first "God-worshipping socialist")6. In those tense days of the pre-revolutionary conjuncture, and against the background of the grand left-Islamic division , Shariati's ideas provided, on the one hand, the grounds for a possible discursive link between the two tendencies, and on the other, a deep confusion among us -- a confusion around what Shariati indeed stood for. Adding to this confusion was the appearance in 1977 of the pamphlet entitled : Insan, Islam va Marxism in which Shariati systematically dealt with Marxist principles. About ten years later I had a chance to read, in a less confused state of mind, an English version of the very same text under a new title Marxism and Other Western Fallacies, in a book-like collection by the same name, which was published by Mi/an Press in Berkeley, California. Since this text is believed to represent Shariati's most intense discussion of Marxism an attempt will be made to deal with it in some detail. 22 Alif 10 (1990) [4] In general, the text, which is a critique of the existing humanist philosophies including Marxism, draws upon a radical Islamic conception of man. On the whole the book consists of four major themes which will be discussed in turn. First : The Western philosophies — Western liberalism, Existentialism, and Marxism — do possess an humanistic perspective. But their conception of humanism is materialistic. According to the text, Western humanism rests firmly upon the mythological perspective of ancient Greece. In this perspective there exists a constant struggle between humanity and the gods who want to maintain man in darkness and ignorance. Here, man is praised and is given a high value in contrast to the gods. This humanism, therefore, establishes a distance between man and god. The text argues that all these great humanists -from Diderot and Voltaire to Feuerbach and Marx - have indeed equated the Greek gods which are tyrannical and anti-human with the spiritual conceptions of God such as Ahurmazda, Rama, the Tao, the Messiah and Allah. Since these philosophers have wrongly generalized the Greek contradistinction of human versus God and spirituality, their humanism is earthly, un-heavenly and in a word materialistic. No wonder the communist societies are not much different from the bourgeois ones in their conception of man. In both, everything culminates in man; both disregard "the spiritual dimension of the human essence" 7. Western humanism is considered atheist in another sense, for it considers man to possess, as his human nature, a moral conscience which determines his moral values and which acts as a substitute for God. The text contends that Western humanist philosophies which postulate a distance between man and God are ignorant of the Eastern religions such as Hinduism, Islam and sufism.