Statements in Meeting with Members of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

I am very pleased with this meeting and this session, and as Dr. Habibi mentioned, the enthusiasm of meeting scholars and intellectuals and people of high intellectual rank—like you, esteemed attendees—brings excitement to anyone to participate in your sessions and work. I am very happy that, thanks be to God, this sacred and very necessary institution has emerged in the Islamic Republic. Although we do not have very sweet memories and experiences from the Academy over the past decades—as one hears and knows from the informed and those involved—we hope that this time the Academy will truly undertake fundamental, serious, and active work and advance it; this is also hoped for.

The composition of the attendees is very beautiful and good, and I have known some of the attendees—like Mr. Ahmad Aram, Mr. Moheet Tabatabaei, and others—from long ago and have devotion to them, and I am happy to see their presence in this assembly. Thanks be to God, one sees that this assembly is a collection of thought, opinion, enthusiasm, and passion for the Persian language.

We must admit that there has been negligence in the work of the Persian language. Not only in these first few years after the victory of the revolution, when everyone was busy with something and this important matter was not much addressed, but also in the past, greater and more significant negligence occurred. Despite the presence of great literati, poets, and Persian speakers in this country, the Persian language did not achieve the growth it should have and did not gain the breadth it should have in the world.

As you pointed out, one day from China to Rome and this very Asia Minor formed the borders of the Persian language. One sees that during the Ottoman period, their court and correspondence were in Persian, and they had poets in Persian. The best poets of part of the Ottoman period were Persian-speaking poets; the situation in India and the Indian subcontinent is also known. Therefore, the influence of the Persian language was extensive.

Any language with a wide range of influence naturally carries a culture with it. What colonial and domineering governments today want to do with great expenses and extensive influence in the world, the Persian language did with its natural influence.

It cannot be believed that the influence of the Persian language was due to the political power of the Persian-speaking country. When Persian was the official language in India, the Mughal and Timurid kings of India, if not more powerful than the Safavid kings in Iran, were not less powerful. Aurangzeb was much stronger than his contemporary in Iran; he had a very wealthy country at his disposal, was politically strong, and was almost dominant over the entire East Asian region; but the language of those people was Persian. It cannot be said that they accepted the Persian language, which these kings, families, courts, women, and subjects accepted with enthusiasm, because, for example, the country of Iran and the Safavid or Naderi government had influence over them; no, the issue is not political influence; it must be sought in something else. Iran never had influence in the Ottoman state for our political influence to take the Persian language there; they themselves were a powerful government; they were always at war and conflict with Iran. Interestingly, the period when the Persian language had influence in Turkey was almost the same Safavid period when the Persian language did not have much prominence in Iran itself. Our good poets fled during that period and left Iran; but we see that in the Ottoman country of that day, the Persian language was the language of the court, poetry, science, and literature; so it is not due to political influence; it cannot be assumed that the reason for the spread of the Persian language is the political influence of the Persian government of Iran. Moreover, many of the Iranian kings were not Persian at all. The Ghaznavids and Seljuks perhaps did not even understand Persian correctly. Neither the Safavids nor the Qajars were Persian-speaking; they did not have much affinity with Persian.

Therefore, the reason for the influence of the Persian language lies in something else; perhaps partly in the very nature of this language; that is, the unique composition and melody that this language has. I have heard from some people who frequently attend international gatherings and listen to various speeches that the melody of the Persian language and Persian speeches is more captivating than the melody of other languages. We also sometimes see that some people who come to Iran from various countries and speak here do not convey the beauty and delicate ups and downs of the Persian language in their speech. Of course, linguists should say these things; it is not something that can be understood by ear; it must have standards and criteria that linguists understand.

Another reason for the influence of the Persian language is the semantic load that this language carries with it. The Persian language has carried a rich culture with it; this culture is in our possession today; it is mainly Islamic culture; that is, Islam in this eastern region of the world, from the Indian subcontinent to China and wherever else it has gone, has gone with the Persian language. It seems very close to the truth that one of the factors for the spread of the Persian language in the world—and at least in this region—is its accompaniment with religion and the message of religion and religious knowledge; that is, the one who accepts this religion and this knowledge also accepts the language that carries it. I have seen that in India, at the shrine of Shah Waliullah, qawwali singers sit and sing poems in Persian. Of course, they sing Persian very poorly; that is, their voices are good, but their singing is very incorrect; nevertheless, the poems are the same mystical and spiritual Persian poems; they either sing from the poems of Shah Waliullah himself or from the poems of others. Therefore, we can consider the mystical content and the Islamic culture, which had its delicate and beautiful form in Iran, as a factor for the spread of the language.

Today, too, the Persian language has truly found a new attraction in the world. I have seen people from Arab and non-Arab countries who learned Persian through the radio of the Islamic Republic. The attraction of Imam's words and the truths of the revolution and revolutionary concepts made them familiar with the Persian language, and they understood this language. We saw this both in the eastern region of Arabia, where our voice reaches, and in Pakistan, especially in India, and also in Africa. I was in India in 1980; there I saw people who understood Persian because of revolutionary songs; surely this meaning exists in other places as well. Therefore, wherever the attraction of this culture and this thought can open a way and make an influence, the Persian language is also present.

In such conditions, at the center of the Persian language, this language must be attended to. This language has great breadth and capacity. Of course, in this regard, I have no new words for the attendees of this assembly. In my opinion, the Persian language is exceptional in one respect. The Arabic language, with its extensive vocabulary, does not have the characteristic of the Persian language, which is the combinability of the Persian language. With good tastes, one can create infinitely good combinations from the Persian language. Of course, bad and incorrect combinations can also be made, and today we are afflicted with this calamity; that is, everyone creates a combination! Of course, in the past, they used to create words, which were easier to dismiss.

I had seen that in the gatherings of the literati and poets of Mashhad—where there were knowledgeable and perceptive people—they recognized these fabricated and artificial words; they would say from the sound of the word that it was fabricated; and it was correct; they would investigate, and it would be found that it was indeed so. However, we do not have fabricated combinations. Now, combinations are in everyone's hands, and everyone creates combinations! The strange thing is that some of these common people accept a good combination much later and more difficultly than an incorrect combination!

We repeated so much, said on the radio and television not to say 'it is necessary to mention'; but whatever we do, it does not work! We officially said, they also announced, in speeches we said not to say this combination 'it is necessary to mention'; but they still say it! One day in a session at the radio and television—where perhaps some of the gentlemen were present—I made a speech and said not to say 'we have' so much; we have this picture of so-and-so, we have this voice of so-and-so, we have this negotiation with each other; this is an incorrect borrowing from a foreign language; we do not have such a thing in Persian. For example, instead of saying I will have a conversation with you, they say I will have a conversation with you; they constantly use this verb 'to have' as non-native and incorrect and non-original auxiliaries in the Persian language; no matter how much we say, it is of no use! This is the great calamity of the Persian language at present. Truly, a regulation is needed; a place is needed to address these problems of the Persian language and not allow, in the name of language, from incorrect paths and currents, swamps to enter the lake of the Persian language and pollute this language; truly, a correct purification should exist.

If the radio and television do not watch their language, they constantly broadcast corrupt waves. Truly, one sometimes sees that some words are pronounced incorrectly; for example, the name of a city in Algeria is not pronounced correctly—of course, this is also bad—but sometimes they read a poem by Hafez or Saeb incorrectly; one wants to tear one's collar! They read such a beautiful poem—especially on television—incorrectly, wrongly, and ugly; this is while they recite these poems as entertainment and relaxation between two programs! After all, what insistence is there for someone to read a poem they do not know how to read?! Unfortunately, these problems exist. Incidentally, if the Academy addresses this issue and pays attention to it, it will be very, very good and beneficial; God willing, these matters will also be corrected.

It is said that 'a famous mistake is better than an obscure correctness'; of course, this is correct in some places. In these combinations where at one time a common person came and said something, another common person imitated it, and common people repeated it successively, it really cannot be taken as a criterion and said because it has become famous, we accept it; it must be eliminated; otherwise, the language will be completely ruined.

Another point is advancing the language. We now need thousands of new words in scientific environments for those sciences that have entered our country from Europe and the West. If, as it is today, we constantly use foreign words, we block the way for the authentic Persian language in environments.

Now you board a plane in Iran and see that the person in the control tower, who is Iranian, speaks English with this pilot, who is also Iranian! I said that in the plane I board, this is forbidden! Why don't they speak Persian?! After all, there is a time when you are with a foreign tower—who is, for example, Chinese and you are Persian and do not know each other's language—you use the common English language; but for example, when I go to Mashhad, for what reason do you speak English?! The reason is that the words are English, and they only have to connect these words to each other; they do not bother themselves anymore; they give the same English connection! So we must provide words so that the language is not isolated in environments; unfortunately, it has become isolated. In hospital environments, it is often the same; in other places, it is the same; these are places we have seen. For example, they say did you get your medicine? We do not get medicine; we take or drink medicine. Or suppose they say did you take a bath? We do not take a bath; why should we take a bath? We go to the bath, or we bathe. These incorrect foreign combinations of the Persian language have been brought in like this, and the upper echelons and people with names and scholars also use them; common people also think they should speak this way to be learned; unaware that no, this is ignorance; this is not knowledge!

Word creation for the language and advancing and promoting the language is a very important matter. In my opinion, the great art of people like Saadi or Hafez or Ferdowsi is that seven hundred years ago or a thousand years ago, they spoke in such a way that today when we repeat those words, we do not feel alienation and savagery at all; the language is the language of today; that is, it can truly be said that they spoke a thousand years ahead of their time. Certainly, the people of Saadi's time did not speak with the clarity and eloquence of 'Bustan'; the prose of those periods is at our disposal, and we are seeing it. 'Bustan' or 'Gulistan' is so fluent and smooth. Today, when one reads the poetry of that time, it is as if two people are speaking to each other in the sweet Persian language of today; it is the same with Hafez; it is the same with some of the prominent and good poets of the Indian style. In any case, the language must be advanced; that is, just as they moved ahead of their time, we must also move.

In any case, I personally, as a person who is passionate and enamored with the Persian language, have placed great hope in your assembly; I hope that this assembly, God willing, can accomplish great and fundamental tasks regarding the Persian language.

These branches and groups that have been formed for various tasks and you referred to them, seem to be all necessary tasks. Fortunately, there have been many individual efforts here and there; which can reach a fundamental place in this assembly.

In your gathering, Mrs. Safarzadeh is also present, who, thanks be to God, has a very high and prominent poetic rank; this is very pleasing. Of course, some gentlemen also compose poetry, but incidentally. I do not know if we have a poet dedicated to poetry and a professional poet in your gathering or not—of course, we have benefited from the poems of Dr. Habibi, Dr. Haddad, and Mr. Moheet Tabatabaei—but nevertheless, the scale of poetry should not be placed in a minority. Mrs. Safarzadeh, thanks be to God, has a very good language; that is, the level of her poetry is really very high. If you can further enrich this aspect of 'Persian-speaking' among the remaining poets in that gathering, it is much better. You know that poets are also different; some are truly Persian-speaking, some are not very Persian-speaking and do not have much affinity with Persian. Therefore, poetic talent is not always accompanied by mastery of the language.

Regarding prose, let me say a few words. Some prose, in terms of beauty and eloquence, is truly no less than poetry; there are very strong prose works as well. About thirty or forty years ago, I myself entered the field of translation and used a writing by Mr. Aram. What encouraged me to engage in translation and become familiar with translation was his work. At that time, he apparently found a text in Beirut and translated it; I looked at that text and saw that his writing was really strong and solid and without redundancy and superfluous words; which one enjoyed. Even now, when we sometimes see his writings, it is the same; of course, the rest of the gentlemen are the same.

At that time, I had a problem that I came to you; you probably do not remember. Yes, I was translating a book, and I did not understand a word; I thought about whom to ask. At that time, I happened to be in Tehran; so I remembered him. I inquired from friends about where he was; they said he was at the Franklin Institute. I went there and saw him; he was very serious and stern and did not pay much attention to me! But I had no problem; I had gone there because I had a task and wanted my problem to be solved. He solved our problem; we thanked him and left. Last year, I saw that Mr. Aram was interviewed on television; I was truly happy from the bottom of my heart to see him lively and energetic, thanks be to God, he is standing. May God, God willing, give him and all our valuable old elements a long life, so that they can be used more in society.

His translation of the Quran is also really very good. Before this translation, I had not seen any translation as good as his. Of course, later many translations came out that if one wants to judge, one must pay a little attention and consideration; but certainly, before his translation, as far as I saw, no translation as good as this had been done; it is a very good and solid translation. You have done a great service. Translating the Quran is truly a very important and valuable thing.

We hope that God will grant you success and help you lift this heavy burden.

Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings