Statements in the Question and Answer Session with Responsible Managers and Editors of Student Publications

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

Dear brothers and sisters! Welcome; God willing, may you be successful. These two or three months - from that meeting to this meeting - have passed very quickly, and like all other parts of life, this period has also passed swiftly. Tonight, thanks be to God, we have the opportunity to sit and talk with you.

In the name of God, the All-Knowing of the innermost thoughts. To all the people and rulers of other countries who receive the content of my words, I say that they should know that there is no country in this earthly world where its people can so easily and sincerely sit directly with their leader, president, and high-ranking officials and talk; they should know that this is a blessing of the teachings of the Quran that is in effect in the Islamic Republic.

I will speak frankly in the preamble of my speech, as I cannot bring you joy and happiness in this short time; however, I want you to be a soothing water on the fire within me by listening to my words. Where should I start, as there is enough tremor to let my words flow like lava from the erupting volcano of my heart? And you surely know that a volcano brings destruction. You know, when a patient stone is not found, the situation does not improve, and now that I have found a patient stone and an opportunity to express my pain, allow me to shorten the introduction and open the table of my heart:

Since I can remember, I have been forbidden from lying and guided towards truthfulness and correctness; however, after some time, I have seen that those who forbade me from lying are the most deceitful people in my life! Those who advised me against cheating and stabbing from behind now cannot live without doing so! Without giving bribes, without making deals, without writing letters to you! I do not know why this "individual-centric" approach has become prevalent among our officials, among our students and seminarians, and in short, in our society! Every group sits to see what is being said by such and such person, to align all their plans with that! It is unclear where the position of truth is in this regard. The great Ali, the foundation and pillar of existence, says: "You do not recognize truth and falsehood by the measure of their men; recognize the truth, then you will know its people; recognize falsehood, then you will know its people"; truth and falsehood are not recognized by the power of their men. Recognize the truth, and you will know its people; recognize falsehood, and you will know its people. One says: "Our president supports you," another says: "Supporting the leadership is supporting the Imam." I say you have already understood the presence of the Imam of the Ummah. And it is said that the art is to rise in the way of God without political noise and satanic self-display and to sacrifice oneself for the goal, not for desire, and this is the art of the men of God. Then one says: "So-and-so, your path continues" and others throw the blame for such and such murder onto each other. You surely know when Imam Khomeini said this sentence; this message was on the occasion of the martyrdom of Dr. Chamran. I wish a few men of God - like Chamran - were now a source of encouragement for someone like me. I wish our officials would sell goods like martyr Rajai and be squeezed among the doors of buses to understand the true meaning of pain. I sincerely ask you to intervene so that the presence of passenger vehicles every other day with even and odd license plates is not implemented in the streets; because at that time, everyone must buy two cars to presumably attend to the affairs of the people! I wish some rigid individuals would not use religion as a club for their incompetence! I wish the people and their problems would disappear from the scene of the world so that we could finally see if a group of people would also become tools for others! I wish youth were not just a phase, and some youth would remain so that we could see if anyone who comes along can use the youth as a means to establish their foothold or not! I wish it were always night so that the unworthy would be asleep and the worthy awake! I wish it were always night so that I could pour my sorrows into its lap; and how big is this lap; a lap full of sorrow, pain, and desire; the desire for a country with its own culture; the desire for a country that everyone envies.

Dear Sir! When I see those who express friendship towards you, my heart suddenly sinks, and I wonder about the end of this story, and I do not know whether "Sayyid Ali" is tired of the advice of these individuals or if the pressures have opened the door to expediency. I wish someone would be accountable for the waste of our energies and material and spiritual costs that were spent in political disputes; while there are many like me who are fed up with these quarrels.

Indeed, if we flip through the newspapers, we will see that a vast volume of them has addressed answering matters that exist in other publications and instead of aiming to elevate the people's thoughts from scientific, cultural, and political perspectives, as Imam of the Ummah, may God have mercy on him, said: "The press should be mobile schools," they have placed these false disputes in front of them. The most political individuals in councils - who are supposed not to engage in political work - have been nominated; with beautiful slogans of green and life and youth. And how beautifully said that friend who said, "The value of each person is as much as their desire." And woe to the one whose desire does not even rise above the wall of their own breath. I wish decisions in our society did not remain at the level of slogans and words; economic savings, work ethics, marriage of youth, and a thousand other talks and discussions. I could not find a better place than this to cry out the lamentations of my heart; but the time of the session does not allow for more than this. We are a publication, to be an opportunity for others; therefore, since others also want to use this opportunity, I will shorten my words and we will benefit from your guidance.

Since you did not raise a question in your talks, there is naturally no answer; however, in that phrase you quoted from Amir al-Mu'minin (peace be upon him) - which is also a very good phrase - "The measure of men is not their power; rather, it is the measure of their worth." Consider a person; assume a measure for him and consider his words to be true; that is, make a pre-judgment about him, then say his words are true because of this truth. Consider another person; set a measure for him in your mind and consider whatever he says to be false. This is the meaning of "The measure of men." The criterion and standard must be the same.

Although you expressed a burning desire in your introduction; however, the words do not have that much burning desire. There are deeper pains in society; however, now you deemed it necessary to express this much, and some of it, of course, yes, is truly correct. The only point I want to convey to you is that within you as a youth, there may be a point of strength and a point of weakness. The point of weakness is that you have not seen these events. Generally, when you face such events for the first time, they seem strange, unbelievable, and sometimes terrifying to you, and it causes your confusion; however, God willing, as a few years are added to your life and you encounter these issues, you will see that no, in every society there are bad people and good people. Among the officials of the country and among ordinary people, there are all kinds of people. In terms of morality, people are not uniform; there are also those who are truly around you and with you who, just as they forbade you from lying, they themselves are truly forbidden from lying; that is, they do not act and do not lie. They must also be seen, as they are the bright manifestations of life and society, and the rest of the things are the same.

Yes, there are also bad people; however, when a person sees bad people in society, they must do two things, which relates to your point of strength that you are young. The enthusiasm and energy and ability to do anything that a person intends, is here. Therefore, you must do two things: one is that first, sincerely return to yourself between you and God - not out of pretense, or for someone else to think this way - evaluate yourself and see if this flaw exists in you or not; and if it does, seriously decide to eliminate it; even if it cannot be done all at once, gradually try. From the worst and most reprehensible characteristics that you see in others and find in yourself, make a list and only you know it; every once in a while, try to eliminate one of them in yourself. You, being young, can do this very well and easily. I know self-made personalities who truly did this. They had weaknesses - whether moral weaknesses, behavioral weaknesses, or personality weaknesses - they would write them down. In psychology, it is said that if a shy person wants to overcome their shyness, what should they do. Moral characteristics are the same; that is, the very things that being them causes you or any healthy person distress.

The second task is that you should try to lead society towards the opposite. You really complain about how much you talk. Speaking has its applications; a person must speak to clarify the mind of the other and to assert a right; otherwise, just talking and talking and not paying attention to which matter is not precise, complete, comprehensive, and does not lead to anything. This is your task; that is, your youthful art must be demonstrated here, that as soon as you observe something bad, those two actions must be performed: first, to purify your environment, and second, God willing, to strive for the purification of the environment and society. In any case, you, thanks be to God, have a good pen, and your taste is good. God willing, you will progress even more than this.

As you are aware, these days we are witnessing the electoral propaganda of the candidates for the councils. It seems that the vast volume of this propaganda has created two concerns among some people: the first concern is that it is observed that some incorrect methods are being employed by some candidates, which causes people to doubt the intentions of these individuals that perhaps instead of the intention to serve the people, they have other interests and purposes. On the other hand, with this vast volume of propaganda, the second concern is that perhaps in the elections, capital and money will speak first, not commitment and expertise; that is, those who do not have the means for propaganda - especially the youth or university sectors - may not be able to introduce their thoughts and consequently may not be elected. What suggestions do you have to solve this problem and alleviate these concerns?

What you say is the voice of my heart. I do not like this situation at all. Of course, propaganda is a necessary task; however, propaganda has a correct, Islamic, and human meaning, and that is conveying. Ultimately, a person must convey what they have in their heart to their intended audience. This is not a problem; that is, they can use ordinary methods and convey it. One meaning of propaganda that is prevalent in the world today is the Western meaning of propaganda; that is, what is common in the capitalist system of the West. Propaganda there does not mean transferring a truth from somewhere to a mind; rather, it means influencing hearts and minds with scientific and psychological methods. For example, suppose somewhere fifty pieces of photos are placed together; a person looks at them, and naturally, it stays in their mind. This hinders thinking and reasoning.

There is a time when you tell me something, you work on my mind, meaning that you direct my mind towards a truth. Very well; I also think if I see it is correct, I accept it from you; if not, I do not accept it. It depends on what level of thought I am at. There is also a time when you influence me so much with the repetition of images and words that my mind loses its ability to analyze. Sometimes a person is completely unconsciously influenced by such propaganda - this famous Western propaganda - and without their mind working, they act according to what the propagandist wants. This is certainly against the opinion of Islam and against the correct human logic, and we do not like this. Unfortunately, this has become common in our collective propaganda, and gradually they have learned these things from the West! Of course, it is not to that extent; what is done in Western countries is extraordinary and strange. Suppose they want to advertise a perfume and say in its description that it is a colorless and odorless perfume! Naturally, the characteristic of perfume is its smell; however, they advertise it so much in various forms that a person goes and pays money to buy this perfume, which is called colorless and odorless! This work is being done now. I consider this work wrong.

Of course, in the matter of the councils' elections, some of the actions that our press commits in this regard are not without effect. Undoubtedly, part of the blame for this work falls on the press; the press that truly does not recognize a responsibility for itself, or does not consider an Islamic and popular responsibility for itself; they have defined a goal for themselves and are pursuing this purely political goal. It is natural that this goal encourages them. This amount of paper and this amount of facilities do not easily come by. I am truly puzzled where they get this and how they advertise so much! It is worth it for the relevant authorities of the country to sit down and think about this issue. At the same time, this is one of our constant recommendations to those we have connections with - whether officials or non-officials of the country - and we usually advise them regarding propaganda; but this should become a culture. They must make people understand that this work is not good. It should be said openly and clearly. We have said it; God willing, we will say it again. They must understand that this amount of work and this kind of wrong movement is a wrong imitation. In any case, I confirm the objection you have in your mind. I also have the same objection in my mind. Some of the pictures on the walls of the city were brought to me; truly, it was not something desirable for me and seemed very unpleasant. Of course, I said, propaganda in its correct meaning is not problematic. For example, they can write their words and goals in a newspaper and publish them somewhere. They can even put them on walls, so that propaganda is in its true meaning; however, these methods are wrong methods.

We all know that the most important mission of the university is to address scientific issues. Unfortunately, the mismanagement of universities, the lack of proper communication between society and the university, and especially the weak educational system have caused us to witness a very bad stagnation in universities. Although we have brilliant talents in the country, the bad educational system has caused us to unfortunately lose them. We also know that knowledge in Islam is a value, but in the evaluations of individuals, it is not considered as a parameter. What is your opinion on this matter?

My opinion is that the university must be strengthened scientifically. Of course, the "bad state of the scientific situation of universities" that you mention does not completely align with the reports that official and ordinary authorities give me. However, if all of you who are students truly repeat this statement and say, "The scientific situation is bad," it may be a new thought and a fresh news; but our friends who are responsible for university affairs - such as ministers and other officials - come and give reports that, in any case, the result is not a bad result; it is a good result. In any case, good scientific efforts must be made. For this scientific issue, I have so far advised the gentlemen who have come here two or three times and told them to give professors a little more freedom; because a professor who teaches thirty-five hours a week and sometimes forty hours has no breath left to interact with students. We said, for example, by increasing professors' salaries, they should ensure that they do not have to go outside the university to teach. The purpose was that when a professor teaches in class, they should go sit in their office and have an opportunity for the relevant authorities to go and talk to them, seek advice and opinions, and consequently increase scientific growth in universities.

Long before we came to your service, a question had occupied my mind that I was seeking an answer for; until a few days ago when I saw a research work - which apparently was a thesis - and encountered truly strange statistics, I decided to ask this question from your presence today. In a research work conducted by one of the students regarding expensive and high-end cars in the city of Tehran, and it seemed to be a well-organized and calculated work, it was stated that unfortunately a very high percentage of these cars belong to the children or families of high-ranking officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In the past, there was class disparity in this country. With the establishment of the Islamic Republic, many people had a glimmer of hope in their hearts that this class disparity, if not completely, would be greatly reduced; but unfortunately today we see that this gap is from earth to sky. Some truly have everything they want, at any price and in any form, while others have to struggle for a day or more to get a kilo of meat or other essential items of their lives; they go to a store ten times, come out, until they finally manage to procure something away from the eyes of the people. Now the poor of our country are not those who have a begging bowl in front of them and sit at intersections or streets; rather, they are those who truly have a suitable social status and face, but unfortunately keep their faces red with slaps. We are aware of the economic problems of the country and know that oil prices are low and annual revenues have decreased; but I think some of the weak managements we have in some parts of the country exacerbate these problems and we do not use the resources we have properly. I wanted you to provide your guidance in realizing social justice - which has been one of our slogans and God willing, we hope that the grounds for it will be provided more and more every day - and reducing class disparities.

The question is correct and important. The important issue of our society is the one you raised. Despite the fact that some try to downplay the issues related to social justice and the emergence of a new class of affluent people, the main issue and the main danger is this. This is not related to just one or two years; unfortunately, it has roots in several years and in some methods; or we can say it has roots in the negligence that has been shown regarding this issue. For several years, I have repeatedly raised this issue; now what is the role of the leadership in this matter? You know that the leadership sets policies for the country's programs; the government lays out the program and the government executes and supervises. Of course, in many cases where a complaint is made, or I become aware of something, I do not wait for someone to investigate and come to inform me. I send for investigation myself, and if I see that there is injustice, I act within the limits of my legal authority. That is, I do not just rely on the initial policymaking; however, the essence of the work is policymaking. The policy of this second program, which is now almost coming to an end and this year is the last or the penultimate year of it, we previously announced; that is, the policy of ensuring "social justice"; this very issue you referred to; that is, preventing the emergence of new classes and reducing class disparities. We have communicated this policy to both the government and the parliament. Of course, the duty of the parliament is legislation; the duty of the government is execution.

The issue of worldliness that I emphasize so much - and unfortunately whenever a person speaks about it, some get hurt and upset - is because of this. Worldliness is a slippery slope that knows no bounds except piety, or a firm and strong oversight that forces people to adhere to certain things. Even they may commit illegal acts through illegal and smuggling means. A few years before this, I sent a message to a group of students; because they were students who were gradually entering government structures. I told them to be careful that the sweet and creamy temptations of the world do not distract you. That is, a young student can be exposed to such a slip; just as a responsible person can also be exposed to a slip. This issue of windfall wealth that we have raised and the judicial system has started a movement in the early stages, and then these newspapers that you see, have tried to cloud the atmosphere and not let it reach anywhere, is related to this issue.

Yes; I believe that people must speak earnestly and logically about the issue of social justice and the demand for social justice with their officials. They must hold accountable those who proclaim social justice and demand it from them. They must pay attention to the one who places social justice in fifth place and puts other titles in place of social justice; he ignores and overlooks the greatest need of a society. Of course, what you say about the gap being greater than before is not correct. The past you refer to may be ten years ago - this may be - but the times we know and have seen, no. Those times were different; those times the gaps were much deeper than today. During the tyrannical regime, the majority of the people lived at a very low standard, and a minority had the privileges you mentioned. Today, there is a middle class that is doing well in any case; even if it does not have those legendary wealth; however, there are also some who have a lot of privileges.

The same issue of the cars you mentioned, I invited the government officials to a meeting, talked to them about this issue, and said some things. Of course, they acted a little, and finally, some of them set aside the expensive cars; however, gradually they are doing these things again. The agencies responsible for these matters must be vigilant; managers and leaders must be vigilant; people must also demand action in this regard. In my opinion, discussing these issues in the student environment and in the face of officials is itself a warning and a help to ensure that, God willing, it will lead to results. In any case, you should know that in the Islamic Republic, the foundation is "social justice".

I once said that when we say we are waiting for the Imam of Time, the most mentioned characteristic of the Imam of Time is that "he will fill the earth with justice and fairness"; we do not say: "he will fill the earth with religion and prayer and fasting." Although that is also true, and justice and fairness find their best and greatest realization within the framework of religion, it becomes clear that this justice is a long line of human demands, and if this method that some blindly pursue, which is to take the Western lifestyle as a model, becomes widespread, this situation will worsen day by day. The remedy is that we must completely free ourselves from following the Western culture in economic matters and save ourselves. It is not the case that if a country has a high per capita income, it means that this per capita income reaches everyone. Now you see in the statistics that are given, for example, they say in a certain developed country - like America or Canada - the temperature reached forty-two degrees and so many people died. Does anyone die in Tehran at forty-two degrees? Or for example, it is said that in a certain country the cold reached five degrees, ten degrees below zero, and so many people froze to death. Who are those who die from excessive heat or freeze in winter? Those who are in buildings that are managed with such heat and cold do not freeze; those who have shelter do not freeze or die from heat. This means that there are classes there whose lives are hard. Brazil today is the seventh or eighth economic power in the world; however, there are several million children there who have neither parents nor shelter, nor housing; they sleep in the streets at night, grow up in the streets, and either get killed or die in those streets! We should not follow this lifestyle. We should not follow this economy. Economic prosperity does not mean this. Economic prosperity means enabling the government to eliminate poverty from society; this is good economics. We must eliminate not just the poverty of a specific group, but the general poverty. The economy is Islamic economics, and this must be realized.

Of course, we should not overlook the truth; some officials that I know and are aware of are pursuing this. Early in the work of this new government, I was told that there is an effort to make the banking system one hundred percent Islamic - of course, it is Islamic law, but there are methods in execution that unfortunately take it out of that Islamic state - this point was also included in the economic organization plan; I also approved it. We hope, God willing, they can do such a thing. Of course, when the hands are empty, these works are a little harder to accomplish. This decrease in income that you mentioned, which relates to this year and last year, has an impact. It must be understood that if the government is financially strong, it can carry out many of these works more easily; however, when it is not, it is harder to accomplish. We hope, God willing, these ideas remain alive in you dear ones. You must be careful not to lose these demands and aspirations. Keep them in your mind from now on; when you become responsible, when you get a good opportunity in life, remember these words.

Considering that twenty years have passed since the establishment of the Islamic Republic and we are now in the stage of consolidating the system, and given the proximity of the council elections, which is the highest manifestation of the more widespread and institutionalized presence of the people in the decision-making and execution arena, my question to you is what place do the people hold in your thoughts, and which mechanism do you consider more effective and better for the participation of the people in their own destiny?

Very well; this is a good question. You mentioned councils; first, I will say a sentence about these councils. These councils that are foreseen in the constitution, if realized correctly and well, will be a very beneficial and sweet product for the country and the nation. Of course, the condition is that this law is executed well; we hope it will be executed correctly. If people get used to choosing those who manage their daily affairs in cities or villages with knowledge, this will greatly help; both in advancing the affairs of the country and in familiarizing people with the duties that are upon them and must be performed, and of course, its benefit returns to the people themselves.

When we say it should be executed correctly, there are two important meanings in this matter: one is that the regulations and laws that exist in this regard must be precisely observed and the law must not be violated; tastes, desires, and orientations must not affect the implementation of this great and comprehensive work. The second - which is the responsibility of the officials - is that the people's choice must be based on a correct understanding of expediency; they must see for what purpose they want to choose this person and what kind of person is needed for this work. They should seek individuals who, while being capable, are truly pious, caring, and interested in the interests of the people; they should not be those who use this as a means to gain name, bread, position, and fame. If they feel that someone is like this, or if there is doubt about him, they should not go after him; they should go after someone they know. When we want to treat ourselves, or our children, or someone from our family, we go to a doctor we know. We investigate from one or two people until we find a good doctor. All the matters we want to entrust to someone are like referring to a doctor, and a person must go to someone who knows that he can handle this task, or at least his chances are higher than others. This must be established. The criteria of piety, caring, not being showy, not entering for oneself, and not taking a bag for oneself are important. People must seek righteous individuals. So there are two characteristics; one is the responsibility of the government and one is the responsibility of the people, which if fulfilled, good elections will take place.

And as for the question you asked about where people are in our minds. In our view, people are the essence of the matter and the main actors. In Islamic thought and Islamic interpretation, the idea of God-centeredness does not contradict the idea of people-centeredness; these two are complementary. First of all, until people are religious and believe in a religion, a religious government does not come into existence in that country, and a religious society does not form. Therefore, the existence of a religious government in a country means the religiosity of the people; that is, the people wanted this government to come. When we say a religious government - which the Islamic Republic is also based on divine commandments and teachings - does it mean that people are nothing? No. If people do not pledge allegiance to a ruler and do not want him - even if he is Amir al-Mu'minin (peace be upon him) - will he come to power? In the Islamic Republic, the role of the people is clear.

In religious thought, the basis of the authority of religion and the influence of religion and the power of religion in carrying out its methods to achieve its goals is what? What is the main reliance? It is on the people. Until people do not want, until they do not have faith, until they do not have belief, can it be? If the people of Medina did not want the Prophet and did not wait for him and did not go after him repeatedly, would he come to Medina and form a civil society? The Prophet did not go to conquer Medina with a sword. Just as the Islamic conquests were carried out correctly - because not all conquests were carried out in the right seasons; at times, conquests took on the form of the conquests of the kings - the Islamic warriors went and removed the obstacle of the corrupt and oppressive government from the path; the people themselves welcomed the warriors - both in the eastern and western regions - and this is clearly specified in our histories. There are many beautiful examples in this regard that are not suitable to be mentioned here, but they are in the books; if you want, you can refer to them. Therefore, the will and faith of the people, even more than this, their emotions, are the main foundation of government. This is the opinion of Islam, and we also believe in this. In the constitution of the Islamic Republic, this point is logically and reasonably and legally incorporated. The fact that we said is an idea and a thought, and if we want to turn a thought into an executable law, it naturally has problems; however, the problems have been solved in the best possible way in our constitution. In the constitution, the distribution of power exists logically and correctly, and all centers of power, directly or indirectly, are connected with the votes of the people, and the people are the decision-makers; and if the people do not want a government, this government has, in fact, lost its legitimacy. Our view about the people is this.

First of all, I sincerely present my innermost feelings to you. There is a painful question that has been bothering me for a while; I thought perhaps you could find an answer for it. There was a time when in the discussion of the type of hijab, it was asked what "the better hijab" is; but now for a long time, the issue of the type of hijab and bad hijab is being dragged towards nudity, and a series of new ideas that are detrimental to religion are very cunningly and gradually infiltrating among the people and unfortunately leaving very lasting effects on the minds of the people. Perhaps I, as a student, may have conditions that have allowed me to be more familiar with this slogan-like term "cultural invasion"; but it seems to me that ordinary people cannot grasp the depth of the catastrophe, meaning that they are really not being informed. How do you think this issue should be dealt with seriously? Why is there no serious confrontation in society? Can the beliefs that our elders have tried to transfer to us be questioned so easily under the pretext of creating diversity and vitality in the spirits of the youth and be justified so easily?

The better hijab that you mentioned - which refers to our Iranian chador - is truly the better hijab; there should be no doubt about this. Of course, I have never said that the chador should be made compulsory in any place; however, I have always said that the chador is an Iranian hijab, and Iranian women have chosen it, and it is a good hijab and can provide complete protection and cover. Now there are some who are upset with anything Iranian and native; they are unhappy and want to go for things that are further away from being native! In any case, if they maintain hijab, they have not committed any unlawful act; however, they have lost something better.

But as for how you say we should deal with it? You should work with propaganda. That is, use the same weapon that the individuals you are concerned about use to undermine belief in hijab. That is, you should sit down and truly investigate about hijab, think about it, discuss it from a religious perspective, or use discussions that have been made. From a social perspective, also focus on the quality of hijab; promote your viewpoint; say what you think is right; do not worry about this concern that they come and eliminate the inclination towards hijab in the hearts of the people; hijab will not disappear. Of course, if a power like the power of Reza Khan is above it, or as I have heard in some countries like Tunisia, no one has the right to be in the street with hijab, and human rights are no longer raised here as to why you forced people to be without hijab - those who are responsible for these things just watch and say nothing! - finally, the unveiling of the Reza Khan era will come back; but as soon as this force is lifted, people will return to hijab.

Hijab is a value that aligns with human nature. Nudity and the movement towards the mixing of the two genders more and more and the exposure of these to each other is an unnatural movement and contrary to human desire. The holy Sharia of Islam has also set limits for this, and those who are believers cannot behave this way with hijab. Of course, there may be those who are unaware and uninformed; these must be acquainted with hijab. I clearly realized in these early years of the revolution that some women who are veiled do not appreciate the value of hijab; they are completely unaware of the ruling of hijab, the philosophy of hijab, and the benefits of hijab; that is, they have been spoken to less about this. Of course, some have written things; we have recommended, and some works have been done. Even now, I think it is the same; especially in the university environment. Thanks be to God, I have heard that your university environment is a good environment. The university officials are also vigilant and committed officials; we hope that as time goes on, it will improve.

In your university, in your publications, talk with women's publications - which now in Iran there are several publications related to women - with other common publications, write things, distribute them, spread thoughts in society; but with reasoning, with logic. The best way to secure hijab is that it should be addressed logically. Of course, if something becomes part of the regulations and someone behaves contrary to those regulations, there may be laws that the government will deal with; which it must do. Meanwhile, what is fundamentally necessary and more important than all is that you must familiarize this young girl or this young woman - who are mostly young women - with the importance of hijab; that is, make them understand that hijab is this from a religious and logical perspective. Establish the correct reasoning in their minds regarding the observance of hijab. We hope that, God willing, it will improve day by day. Of course, one of the factors that has negative effects in this regard is some of these films that make some Western lifestyles accessible to everyone. These are not without impact on weakening people's mentality regarding hijab. Of course, warnings should be given regarding the distribution of these films.

With greetings and respect and thanks for giving us your time. One of the current discussions is the position of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist in civil society and the republic, and we see that many books have been written on this subject. In your opinion, does the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist conflict with civil society and the republic? Another question is what is your opinion regarding individuals and groups that exploit the position of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist and your speeches for their political goals?

What is the definition of civil society? If civil society means the society of Medina, then the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist is certainly at the head of all affairs in the society of Medina; because in the society of Medina, the government is a religious government, and the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist is not the government of a person; it is the government of a standard and, in fact, a personality. There are criteria that, wherever these criteria are realized, this characteristic can be found in the society to address the duties assigned to the Islamic Jurist. In my opinion, we should pay attention to and be proud of this point that contrary to all the regulations of the world regarding government - where in their laws the authorities have an unassailable status - in the Islamic system, the one who is designated as the Islamic Jurist, since his responsibility is fundamentally based on the criteria, if he loses these criteria, he will automatically be dismissed. The duty of the Assembly of Experts is to determine this matter. If they determine that yes; there is no Islamic Jurist, they will understand that there is no Islamic Jurist; they must go look for another Islamic Jurist. There is no need to dismiss him; he will dismiss himself. In our opinion, this is a very important point.

Civil society is a term that has not been clearly defined and is, of course, a Western term. Civil society is actually another term and a literal translation of the foreign term and does not have much history in our culture. Of course, they have another meaning that we absolutely do not accept. The civil society that the Westerners speak of is absolutely incompatible with our criteria and does not align with our culture; however, civil society in the sense of a people’s democracy, is a society in which regulations and laws prevail. The Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist in such a society can absolutely have the legal position it has; that is, it is elected indirectly by the people, as long as the criteria remain, and with the decline of the criteria, it is dismissed from its position. The Islamic Jurist plays a primary role in policymaking; it does not interfere at all in execution; and other things mentioned in the constitution.

But as for your statement that some exploit our words; many exploit the Quran. You ask what should we do?! Should we remove the verses that they exploit? Imam Khomeini (may his soul be sanctified) also said in his will that today, while I am here, they give me accusations - meaning they exploit those words - surely after my death, it will be more. He expressed this in his will in a way. Therefore, there are all kinds of people; however, fortunately, the words we want to convey to the people are our main words. These are not words we say within four walls to individuals; these are the same words we say on loudspeakers and are broadcasted all over the country. When you hear these words, when people hear them, anyone who hears them, if someone exploits them, they should say this is exploitation. The very fact that someone, just because they misunderstood a meaning and wanted to misrepresent it and convey it, people understand, this itself will be a significant barrier. There are always individuals who exploit. There are always people who may exploit anything - from a narration, from a verse, from a hadith - they may exploit. This should not worry us too much. Of course, if we understand who has exploited and how they have exploited, if there is a legal follow-up path, we will not let it go - you should know this - unless they are very clever and do not give us a legal excuse.

Thank you for the opportunity to be with you again. Sixteen years have passed since the establishment of the Islamic Azad University - of which you are a founding member and board member - considering the regulations for the establishment of non-profit universities and that according to the charter of the Islamic Azad University, the board of trustees and the presidency of the university and also its cultural council have supreme oversight, what should be done to address the deficiencies in administrative, financial, educational, and cultural management of this university? I explain in parentheses that the implementation of specific policies and regulations that are inconsistent with the unified system of higher education in the country and sometimes even violate the charter of the university, are among the clear examples of these deficiencies that have led to the creation of a somewhat closed intellectual atmosphere and uncritical towards other higher education centers and consequently, a kind of discrimination among students and universities, especially in their recruitment and employment and allocation of educational and educational assistance facilities. In fact, the focus of our discussion is this gap that has arisen between the two large sectors of public and private higher education - of which the private sector is mainly the Islamic Azad University, and you have also been one of its founders. This point I mentioned is not a personal problem; other students share the same opinion. Mr. Mozaffari and other gentlemen are also present in this session. I kindly ask that a thorough investigation be conducted on this matter. Now, truly, the smoke of this problem is going into the eyes of the students. Unfortunately, despite all the efforts we have made and the words we have said, we have not achieved much. What do you think should be done to get out of this deadlock?

What is the summary of this "deadlock" you are mentioning?

There are some issues; there is a lack of transparency, and there is also a somewhat closed atmosphere...

Does it not have regulations?

Yes, it does; that is why I am saying.

It is official now.

It is certainly official; however, the difference in the atmosphere, facilities, and conditions that exist between the Islamic Azad University and other universities - especially public universities - has caused some unintended consequences. A clear example is the type of activities of the organizations or cultural and political activities that are not very much in line with the regulations; or even if there are regulations, unfortunately, they are not fully adhered to.

Look, my dear! If there were no Islamic Azad University, you would now be unemployed; that is, you should not be studying. This is a fact. I mean you type; that is, the one hundred and some thousand people who are in the Islamic Azad University. Public universities did not have the capacity. We could not perform a miracle and suddenly increase the capacity of public universities from two hundred thousand to four hundred thousand; that cannot be done. The Islamic Azad University was established for this purpose. Of course, the fact that you say I am a member of the founding board and board of trustees, no; I have not been in a meeting of the board of trustees for about ten or twelve years, and I do not have any information about how it is going. Yes, from the beginning, they put our name there as a blessing in the board of trustees! I do not even remember whether I attended one or two meetings of the board of trustees from the very beginning or not. Therefore, I do not interfere in the policymaking there. Of course, Mr. Dr. Jassbi has had constant communication with us; he also comes here sometimes; however, regarding the university, if we say something to him, it is advice we give him. For example, complaints that are made are reminded to him by the office. I have no interference in university work.

You should keep in mind that the Islamic Azad University was created from the resources of the people. For example, suppose in a remote city where it was impossible for the government to establish a university there, the people there gathered money and provided a small building that was perhaps for a school, and established a university. Very well; certainly, this university did not have the criteria of a real university regarding educational space, laboratory, and other facilities; but it was better than nothing. Therefore, the issue should be viewed this way.

I hope that one day our university - whether public or Islamic Azad - reaches a point where students are immersed in facilities. Truly, we must strive for this. Now our students in public universities unfortunately do not have many facilities. Many of our public universities - like this Alzahra University, which was discussed here a few days ago - how much do they have problems in terms of facilities, educational space, and other things? Many other universities are the same, and this is a reality. These problems must be resolved, and gradually these issues must be pursued. The Islamic Azad University is the same; it also has few facilities. Of course, recently they took a place in western Tehran; we sometimes go for a walk in the morning to the mountains, and once we went to see that place. They have made a very spacious place, which is available to you; you gentlemen who are studying in Tehran and I do not know if you are using that environment or not. In any case, this is how the Islamic Azad University is growing and expanding day by day.

Of course, there is a serious opposition from caring people - not malicious - against the Islamic Azad University, with the claim that since we have few professors, the Islamic Azad University attracts professors, and their time is filled, and they do not reach work. Such things are said by such people; they have been saying this since the very beginning of the establishment of the Islamic Azad University. Of course, we have heard this less for a few years; because apparently now there are more professors; however, in any case, they have such problems. What is a reality is that this university has been able to attract students almost equivalent to public universities in the country. This is a very good thing. If this were not the case, you would have had to remain at the same level after high school and look for work at that level; but now you are looking for work with a degree. In any case, this is more beneficial for the country. Of course, the shortcomings it has must be resolved, and I now ask you that if you truly have a documented and precise report based on statistics, give it to me; I will give it to my office and say to discuss it with the officials; ask them to either respond or correct any shortcomings.

Friends have put a dangerous question for me and approved it to ask! The question is about the principle of criticism regarding all components of the country and all officials of the system, including the leadership. Of course, we have a narration from Imam Ali (peace be upon him) that says: "Criticize me, and I am not above making mistakes." In any case, today, after twenty years of the victory of the revolution, the youth who have been nurtured and grown in this revolution and in this Islamic Republic have reached a point where they can ask questions; they want to criticize; because the spirit of youth is a revolutionary spirit. One of the thinkers says: If a young person is not revolutionary in their youth, they are dead. However, due to some of the exclusionary approaches and some of the issues that have arisen, the youth have doubts about questioning the Islamic Republic and its officials. There are multiple questions regarding past events and these twenty years that the system has gone through; we have seen some of them, and some of them have been told to us by the elders. For example, one of the principles of the constitution has been left unaddressed for twenty years, and no reaction has been taken regarding it. The Foundation of the Oppressed apparently is not accountable to anyone, and people are never informed about what is done in that section. The media distorts the news to some extent and does not convey accurate news and information to the people. The Ministry of Intelligence has reached a point where apart from spying and informing on this and that, some of its individuals commit murder. The discussion of the judiciary is another matter. According to the statistics and figures that they themselves announced and the newspapers printed, every five Iranians have one case in the judiciary; that is, we have more than eleven million cases in the judiciary! There are a series of laws that have become cumbersome, one example of which we saw in the recent murders. One of these laws is that if a murderer comes and proves that he acted according to his religious duty in the murder, he is exempt from the punishment of retribution. The regulations that the Central Bank passes, the issue of social justice that friends discussed, the bills that the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Finance submits to the parliament and then gets approved there, the budget issue of this year, the laws that were passed in the parliament this year, selling Pars oil for twenty-one billion dollars - something similar to the Darioush contract for which there was uproar and the scholars rose up - all these are shortcomings that the youth feel exist in society. Today we see that in the Islamic society, we are witnessing a regression and apparently following the previous trend.

We have a lot to say about the so-called reconstruction period. During this period - as our friend pointed out - universities have become almost unscientific, isolated, and students have become apolitical. On the other hand, dams have been built that were not based on expert principles. Power plants have been built that were not based on expert principles. Today in the world, a dam is an outdated industrial technology for generating electricity and even irrigation; but during the reconstruction period, one of the honors of its commanders was that we built many dams. In our revolution, the slum dwellers were the main defenders. Imam said that our revolution was carried out by the slum dwellers; but now we do not know what role the slum dwellers have in the Islamic Republic; apparently, we know that in the southern part of Tehran and even in the northern part, in some areas, those slums still exist, and people live in misery and hardship. All these are criticisms that arise in my mind and many others, and we want to ask and want someone to be accountable and answer these questions as to why we have become this way? Why are we still the first importer of wheat in the world after twenty years? Why should we have thirty billion dollars of foreign debt after twenty years, when the system has reached the stage of consolidation? Why can various countries easily attack our borders; Afghanistan from the east, Iraq from the west, America from the south? This indicates that there is not much stability in the borders of the country. In the same way that they have divided people into first-class and second-class citizens, they have also divided criticisms into destructive and constructive, and this has dealt a severe blow to a large part of society and caused a specific class in society to be able to take power and governance into their hands. The question that arises here is whether you think that the elimination of criticisms and especially critics and the division of questions into destructive and constructive will not lead to the destruction of the system? And if you do not believe in this kind of thinking and obedience, what actions have you taken or will you take to improve the critical atmosphere and expand the culture of criticism?

Very well. Look, my dear! What does criticism mean? If criticism means fault-finding, this is neither a good thing nor does it require much art, nor does it require much information; rather, a person can criticize better with ignorance; as you see, many of the things you said are not correct at all; it is clear that your information is weak. Of course, we have a defect in information dissemination. For example, regarding Pars oil, what you said is not like that. Regarding the country's debt, what you said is not like that. The issue of the dam, what you say is not like that; you have incorrect information in your mind. You see, my dear! Criticism, meaning fault-finding, has no value. You can sit and criticize me, and I can criticize you; what benefit does it have? Criticism means measuring the quality; it means seeing something good that is good, seeing something bad that is bad. If this is the case, then when you see the good points, you summarize them with the bad points, and then from the summary, you must see what results.

This that you said, your country has no government, no economy, no borders, no security, no ministry, no leadership, nothing, is not the case; this is the opposite of what reality is. You see, now our situation in terms of managing the country, in terms of the presence of youth, in terms of the prevalence of what you say - that is, criticism - how it is. Now newspapers are published, they criticize everyone; you say why they do not criticize the leadership! First of all, what benefit does it have to criticize a leadership? A leadership that in the Islamic Republic, the point of its finger must be able to lead people to sacrifice in a dangerous and sensitive moment, is it expedient for someone to come and stand and criticize him without right and without cause?! Is this a very good thing in your opinion?! This is very bad; it is better that it is not prevalent.

Regarding the media and the judiciary and the Foundation of the Oppressed that you mentioned, the newspapers constantly write about this, and this is not a problem; there is no obstacle; because the leadership is not the head of the media; the leadership appoints the head of the media. What can be asked of the leadership is whether you did not have someone better to put there; or do you not have someone to put there? The leadership must also answer. But the question of why it has that program, or why it distorted the news, or why it did this, cannot be asked of the leadership; that is, according to no law, no regulation, no logic, can the leadership be questioned. Of course, I do not want to close the door to your question; because I am someone who is eager to hear discussions and questions and criticisms; I am not upset at all. This session you have here with me, I have similar sessions - of course, with non-youth, sometimes with youth - repeatedly. Individuals come here, speak, ask questions, present their words, raise objections, write letters, call me; I am also informed about it; however, keep in mind that criticizing means fault-finding, is not a value that we should now say this is not in our society. Of course, this exists, and unfortunately, it is in an illogical form! Criticism means that every human being should sit and measure the quality, see where the weakness is, where the strength is; then see where this weakness - if it can find the cause - goes back to, and go after that; that is, find the root, find the origin. If this work is done, it is correct; this is what is expected from the youth; exactly what political factions do not believe in these things. Political factions work in a dominant, line-drawn manner and without examining the issues.

My recommendation to all of you is to be careful not to sacrifice your youthful purity and youthfulness - now being a student in the second degree, being young in the first degree - for the sake of these interests and illusions and fantasies that four people gathered together defined a benefit and interest for themselves - which sometimes has no connection to the interest of the country.

Now the society is a free society, and people can speak; they speak; they even speak about the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist - that is, the principle and foundation - you see how much has been written! Those who wrote, did not all defend. A person wrote a book of interpretation, also got permission, was printed, and was in everyone's hands! He denied the principle of the Guardianship; however, since the responses were crushing, he retreated. He wrote that there is no Guardianship even in the infallible! Why? Because Guardianship means guardianship! Guardianship over whom? Over minors, over the incompetent; thus, the people are incompetent! This means a complete distortion indicative of ignorance and lack of understanding of the issue and not knowing the issue was presented; however, it was presented in a scientific manner. No one opposed them; that person also lives in Tehran; no one asked why you wrote this?! Is this society not free? Is this country not free? Is there no freedom of expression and thought here? What is freedom of thought? Must four people come, without referring to any evidence, logic, or reason, to insult three or four people for it to mean freedom? This is very good?!

You see; when I say that youth must have analytical power, I mean this. Be careful not to fall into the trap of snowballing words. Just turning something over and over in your mind does not have much virtue. Look for that right point; the one that truly satisfies your heart and convinces your mind. Yes, we consider the society to be a free society. We consider criticism, meaning the same "measuring quality," to be a very good thing. I agree with that; however, I never agree with the pretense and the explicitness of badmouthing individuals; this is never correct.

These gentlemen who are today the officials of the country, all their actions are not one hundred percent approved by me. I have many criticisms; I also remind them; in private meetings, in writing, or in recommendations. Therefore, there are criticisms in their work, and I tell them; but the fact that we explicitly criticize an official, this work is not expedient and not correct.

Some think that "expediency" is opposed to "truth"; whereas expediency is also a truth; just as truth is expedient. In fact, truth and expediency are not separate from each other. The imagined and personal expediencies are bad. When it is not a personal expediency, when it is the expediency of the people and the expediency of the country, this becomes a sacred matter, a good matter, a precious thing; why should we flee from it? Therefore, I do not consider this to be expedient at all.

Of course, this work is now done explicitly and openly; they stand and say the parliament must be dissolved! This statement is against the law; it is an incorrect statement. Why should the parliament be dissolved?! How has it happened? Has its election been invalid and fraudulent? Has someone come to the parliament by force? Why should the parliament be dissolved?! You should criticize these statements. The criticism that I say means "measuring quality"; that is, see how much this statement weighs.

The judiciary is not worse now than it was ten years ago; it is not worse than it was fifteen years ago; in some respects, it is certainly better. Of course, it has many flaws that you are unaware of, but I am aware. Speaking and judging from afar about issues is easy; however, entering the field and taking on the responsibility is difficult. A person in their imagination builds a very prosperous world, creates an ideal city; however, when they take the work into their hands and see how difficult it is, then the situation changes! Human beings are not like electrical devices that you press a button, and suddenly, for example, ten devices start working! Every human has a will. For example, when you refer to the Minister of Economy, or the Governor of the Central Bank, or some other responsible body, do you know that when work is done, considering the hierarchy of this responsible person down to the bottom, there may be ten intermediaries: there is a policymaker, a minister, an assistant, a director-general, a department head, until it reaches the person who wants to act on this case. Each of these has a will. Each will is also subject to a thought, a worldview, a set of interests and evils, and a temperament. It is very difficult for a manager to have all these hierarchies under his supervision and not make mistakes - of course, this is necessary; this is what I always recommend to them - it is not easy at all. If a person enters and sees the problem of work, then many of the shortcomings are excused.

I have been in executive work for almost twenty years, and although my legal duty is not executive now, some executive works - such as those related to the armed forces and other things - are naturally directed towards me; therefore, my executive experience is continuous. I was also president for eight years; before that, I was doing government work in the Revolutionary Council and everything. Therefore, I know that when a person wants to criticize an official for why there was a mistake in their area of work, they must consider all the obstacles that exist in the proper execution of work for an ordinary person; and see whether this is due to his negligence or not; if he has been negligent, he should not be overlooked and forgiven. This is my belief. In my direct powers, I also act in the same way. If I see negligence from someone and understand that they are at fault, I do not overlook it. I always recommend to officials and say that if you do not keep your inner self under scrutiny and do not see the flaws, you cannot complain about why they said, why they saw; naturally, they will say.

Of course, it is truly a difficult task. I am sure you who are now studying in this comfortable and calm environment; you have no responsibilities and no one asks you to do anything - your job is just to study and perhaps a little talking and listening and learning and teaching - one day you will enter this field and that day you will acknowledge the truth of this statement and will admit that it is not like that. Many criticize individuals, but when a person is put in charge of something, they see that these individuals also have their own criticisms. Now if that criticism is not valid, another criticism is valid. This indicates that there are many weaknesses.

And as for the state of our country. No, it is not like that; it is not the case at all. The state of our country in terms of security is, without exception, better than all neighboring countries. Our borders are strong borders. Do you think that we are attacked from the sides?! Which attack?! A foolish person attacked, but of course, if he felt alone, he would certainly not dare to attack; but they encouraged him, supported him, and cheered him on. You must believe this. I do not know if you know or not; but I know and have close information. Throughout the war, we received very special reports that some leaders of countries spoke with Saddam, especially, and told him to do this! Of course, some said do not do it. Those who told him not to do it and warned him that this would be dangerous for him - of course, not for our sake; for his own sake - we also have information about them. A number of Arab countries - and behind them America - equipped him; not because we did something wrong. I heard in some corners that some individuals, who are looking for excuses, say why the Islamic Republic should do something that would cause them to attack! We truly did not do anything. Our great sin(!) was that we overthrew the tyrannical monarchy and then did not want to become dependent. Those gentlemen who were at the head of affairs at the beginning of the revolution believed that we had to become satellites of America; there is no other way! Of course, now they have no shame in doing this; but at that time, from some of their negotiations - which they did not speak very explicitly about - it became clear that their belief was that unless we connect with America, the affairs of the country will not progress! Connecting with America means opening the foothold of America in the country and following the same domination and influence; little by little, day by day, more and more; that is, giving the country back to the Americans. Why did we really have a revolution? Why were so many people killed? Therefore, we did not commit a sin that we would say it was because of our sin that Iraq attacked us; rather, it was because there was an Islamic government, an independent government, and a wave of awakening spread in the Islamic world - in Iraq, in Arab countries, in Islamic countries - all felt that when Islamic awakening came, it might also take their skirts; thus, they united. In other words, it was because of a strength in us that they attacked us, not because of a weakness in them. Then they exerted pressure for eight years and spent all this immense power, but they could not take an inch of Iran's soil from us. They wanted at least to take all of Khuzestan. Of course, they said they would go to Tehran; but if they only took Khuzestan, it would have been enough for them. Is this a small thing?!

You know what the youth of this country did during these eight years, that now you sit and say that we do not have security?! If an attack occurs on this country, I do not know if you will go to the field or not; but you should know that this nation and the youth of this country will again go to the field; they will defend again and will not allow any harm to come to Islam and the territorial integrity of the country. This is because the country has a good stature; that is, today among the officials of this country, we do not have anyone who is not among the people and does not belong to the people. I am proud that my life is a life of the people, and my situation has not changed from the time before the revolution when I was in Mashhad and lived in those conditions. The officials of the country, those who are now - with some differences - are from the people, they know the pains of the people, they know the words of the people. Of course, some are more committed, some are a little less committed in the areas they previously pointed out, which is a flaw and must be treated. To prevent cancer from spreading, it must be stopped at the beginning; either chemotherapy must be done, or surgery must be done!

Currently, the security situation of the country is good. Do you think that in the security services of the world, such things exist that may only happen in Iran? Such things happen everywhere. In countries that boast of freedom and democracy, these issues are abundant. Now two or three bad individuals have appeared and have done something, do not attribute this to the entire organization. Of course, you should know that I said from the very first day, and now their investigations show the same that the issue does not remain within the Ministry of Intelligence; it certainly has an external origin. The very first day I said this, some were incredulous; but now the reports that reach us strengthen this thought that this work is not unrelated to the foreign intelligence services. The enemy does these things.

In the MI6 of the British Intelligence Service, one of their highest and most senior figures was a Soviet spy! In this regard, a book has been written that has been translated into Persian, and I once referred to it. Or for example, recently in America, one of their high-ranking officials was caught who was a spy for Russia! Such things happen and occur.

In any case, you must adjust your mind regarding some phenomena. Do not say that the Ministry of Intelligence has no other work than spying. What else does the Ministry of Intelligence have to do besides spying? That is its job; why do you complain?! The Ministry of Intelligence does not come after you; it does not come after your friend; it searches for enemies if there are any, and finds them. Is this bad? Do you dislike that it is called spying?! Is it a defect of the Ministry of Intelligence that it brings news and takes news? It is natural that it must bring and take news. If it were not so, we would criticize it. Our criticism is that in these areas, the Ministry of Intelligence acts a little weakly; it should act a little stronger. This criticism is valid from that side. In society, there are groups, there are hidden leaders, there are very dangerous individuals that the Ministry of Intelligence must identify and punish.

I apologize to you. If you allow me, I would like to mention a point regarding his question. My friend at the beginning of their speech mentioned that this question was given to him by everyone; however, I must say that none of us agreed with the proposal of such a question with this intensity...

I am not at all upset with him; do not think such a thing. There is absolutely no problem; if it had not been approved, in any case, know that I am not upset at all. If I have any impression, it is that why should someone think incorrectly about this matter?

At first, I apologize to friends; because it was not supposed that I would speak now; but in continuation of your statements and the issue that arose for me today, I will mention something I saw. I think many of the things you called criticism arise from the ambiguities that arise for us, and this is due to a lack of information dissemination. For example, I will mention an ambiguity that arose for me today.

We have been sitting since morning discussing to determine some axes. We specified some questions so that the discussion would be more coherent and we could use it better. When we came here, a paper was brought - I do not name who brought this paper - some axes were written on this paper as a question; they said this must be asked as the first question; it was the same first question that was asked from you.

What was the question?

It was about the propaganda of the councils.

Was this your real question?

It was not approved in the assembly. Here it was given, and it was not supposed to be raised.

You did not suffer from raising it?

I think there is a criticism regarding the assembly that did not react to this action. We believe that in any case, the principles must be more observed. If a question is prepared and typed, and we also raise it here, we have missed the opportunity to raise our own questions...

Now, after all, I will ask a question from your assembly: Is this question that he refers to not a question of any of you?...

Then it was not a question that someone gave you from here.

This morning, all these friends were present. In the meeting, Mr. Alamolhoda and others were also present. The discussion was that the questioning from your side is free and there is no problem. It was decided that the friends would raise some axes. Each question was raised, and the axes were specified. We noted the axes, then voting was done, and the proposal of these questions was approved by the friends present...

Excuse me, I interrupt your words. I saw with my own eyes that the questions were typed on a paper, and this question was not supposed to be raised. I expressed my opinion; it does not create any ambiguity that the questions were given by the office.

Now do you have an objection to its not being raised?

The discussion is about criticism; we also criticize.

Very well; it is not a very important thing. Of course, it is better that if you made an agreement, that agreement should be acted upon; this is really very necessary.

This ambiguity exists for me that this question, which was not among the approved questions of the friends, why was it raised? Of course, not that we do not want to raise this question; no, you also gave good answers, and we also benefit from them; but the fact that in such a gathering, with this lack of time, this question is raised in this way; while the friends sat until about four in the afternoon and discussed and eliminated many axes due to lack of time, was not a correct action.

Very well; now that the time is passing more! Let us use the time; especially since the hour is gradually - as you say - approaching those red lines! Let another one of the gentlemen ask their question.