Statements in Meeting with Central Council of Representatives of the Supreme Leader in Universities and Office Heads

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

I am very grateful for your kindness, gentlemen, in accepting the burden and taking on this heavy responsibility. I also endorse the remarks of Mr. Gilani. God willing, the piercing meteor of your expression, thought, knowledge, action, and ethics in the universities should pursue the devils and limit or eliminate their domain. This has been the case and will continue to be so, and God willing, it will improve and become better.

I will receive the letter you mentioned, and God willing, I will study it carefully. I will certainly implement anything from it that is possible for me and is deemed beneficial according to my judgment. Of course, where judgments differ, it may remain. It is up to you, dear and respected gentlemen, to correct our judgment if necessary or to give a reminder.

Regarding university issues, I have previously spoken with this group—albeit with slight differences—during my presidency, and most of you are familiar with my views. I believe that the work concerning universities is very important and extremely sensitive due to the scope of the work. It makes a difference how we perceive the scope of the work. What I imagine and repeatedly express, if it exists, is very important.

A cleric who actively and non-passively participates in the university and goes there to make an impact must possess several characteristics, aside from the general conditions. Ultimately, someone who goes to the university must be knowledgeable and possess piety and caution in action, among other things. Besides these obvious things, two or three other conditions are also necessary to be beneficial.

The first condition is to know the university environment and student issues. Without this characteristic, one will not be beneficial, or will be of very little benefit. Suppose a cleric wants to go to the university. If he does not pay attention to the mental, spiritual, practical, and intellectual differences between the university and, for example, the market or mosque, and goes to the university with the same spirit, characteristics, and topics as he would to the market or mosque, he will likely make a mistake in his approach. He must know the university as it is and understand the students' issues and comprehend what the students' problems and issues are, which I will refer to some of them. Therefore, the first point is to understand the environment and the audience.

The second condition is interest and belief in the student. If someone is disgusted by the appearance of students and young people like this, he should not set foot in the university. If someone considers the sciences prevalent in the university as ignorance and does not consider them as knowledge at all, he should not go to the university. He must believe in the mission of the student and the mission and lessons of this environment; he must show affection to the student and know that he is like the young person who is our son. There, our own children are present. Our child sometimes behaves badly; he also behaves badly. Our child sometimes falls under the influence of something; he also falls under the influence. Therefore, he must look at them as his own children and relatives. I am not saying he should have as much affection as for his own child—which is often neither reasonable nor practical—but he should have affection and look at this group with compassion, interest, and love, and have an interest in this knowledge, this lesson, and this environment.

In the past, there were some good scholars who were not familiar with the issues of modern sciences and did not consider them as knowledge at all! I have truly seen such a case; this is not an imagination. I have seen a pious, faithful, and virtuous scholar who did not consider these as knowledge at all; rather, he even considered anything written in a non-Arabic book as ignorance! He considered Persian books as ignorance and said, what are these! See, this is a way of thinking. Of course, today these thoughts do not exist. Those beliefs have other aspects that, if I say, you will be more surprised. Although those beliefs belong to the old era, I have personally encountered such a person. He was someone who did not consider printed books readable! He said these books are irrelevant and should be written on large sheets, with the handwriting of Abdul Rahim or someone else, and lithographed!

I mentioned this as a clear example. It is clear that among the present scholars, especially those who deal with new revolutionary environments, especially those who go to the university, these thoughts do not exist; but I want to say that if you want the least sign of separation between you and that student not to exist in the university environment—a separation that has been created over fifty, eighty years, with the enmity of the enemies and with the same thoughts I mentioned—base your relationship with the student on love and interest and believe in his mission and his lessons and educational environment.

Does this way of thinking that I mentioned not create separation between the new and old intellectual environments? The enemy also helped. If you want the effects of this separation to disappear and this wound to heal, at least in relation to you personally in the university, you must have love and belief to the required extent. These dear, pure, and useful young people, who are worthy of great compassion in confronting some corrupt intellectual currents and others, must be kept with interest and love and protected like a hen that protects its chicks and should not be abandoned. You must go to the university with this spirit.

The third condition—which is also very important—is that the person who goes to the university must know that his relationship with this environment and this audience, both positively and negatively, has a very significant impact on important matters. Do not say it is like going to the pulpit. We used to travel here and there for the pulpit, and in some places, we realized that the pulpit was ruined. A person understands on his pulpit that he has ruined it. At that time, we said, well, it is ruined, no problem; at most, they will not invite us for the next decade; or if they wanted to give a heavier envelope, they will give a lighter one; or they will say this cleric is a novice, and as a result, they will invite another preacher instead of me. Therefore, the impact of my poor speaking and ruining is just that. Sometimes it is not like that, and a person understands that if he ruins it here, its effect is decisive.

Suppose your child, in terms of political or ideological thought, has first fallen into the trap of a group of cunning thinkers, and they have directed him to things that are, of course, satanic and wrong but attractive, and you did not allow your young person to get close to the radius of these things. A doubt has arisen for this child, and he comes to you—who are a spiritual father and scholar and trusted by this son—and says: Father! How is such and such a matter? Here, what feeling do you have? You feel that if I make a slight mistake in answering this child, I have lost my child.

This is the first slippery slope. Here, you no longer neglect, you do not act with anger, you do not let the reins of thought be released to light or weak speech or even weak expression. If you see you cannot handle answering this young person, you say it is okay, we will go to so-and-so. You find a more competent person so that he can respond to the cunning of the enemy. You must face the student with this feeling. The student is not just one person; they are a vast multitude.

The person who is in the university today is not like us, whose actuality is seventy years away from his potential. The potential and actuality of this student are fifteen or ten years apart, and in the near future—not a distant future—his potential will become actual; that is, in two years, he will become a bachelor, in five or six years, he will become a doctor, he will also take a specialized field, he will spend two years wandering, and after these ten years, he will be a specialist whom all the institutions pay a hefty sum to and want him with all their being. At that time, he will be an expert in the planning and budget organization, or a high-ranking engineer in the Ministry of Housing, or the director of a certain political department, or he will set up a certain developmental and agricultural section, and so on; that is, the country's work will be in the hands of this individual. Do not look at this student as insignificant.

If you can raise this student to be religious, faithful, and sincere—and I will later explain what expectations we should have from the student and how we should raise him—he will become fruitful and will have a good judgment about the clergy. But if, God forbid, you fail to do this work, and it turns out that in terms of thought, or in terms of action, or in terms of emotion, there is a rift between him and you, it is unlikely that he will distinguish between you and the clergy. For example, if you and I are riding in a car and traveling on a road, and a gendarmerie officer arrives and curses four times, you will unconsciously and without wanting to, make this unjust judgment in the depths of your heart and dislike any gendarmerie officer you see tomorrow on the street; it is inevitable. This is an unjust judgment; but it exists.

An active cleric, as a symbol and representative of the clergy—this is different from a cleric who, for example, walks on the street and has made a mistake; not everyone is like him—if, God forbid, there is a flaw in his work, it is unlikely that the young person will not make this unjust judgment and will not compare the rest of the clergy with me who is in the university. That is, the impact of the work is so great. The cleric in the university must also know this impact. Therefore, the third condition is awareness and knowledge of the deep impact of the positive or negative role of the cleric in the university. Whoever enters the university must know these three conditions.

Of course, I cannot explain the psychology of the student. The reason is that I myself do not have much information and awareness. Of course, I have had many interactions with students; but I cannot say, for example, analytically describe the characteristics of the student. Nevertheless, we see some characteristics in students that are internal or external problems of students and are problematic.

One problem is the problem of falling into triviality and indifference and being susceptible to foreign and harmful cultures. The student is exposed to these cultures, and this is a problem of the universities. I have repeatedly said in these student and university gatherings, why is it that when someone enters the seminary, he usually comes out religious; but when he enters the university, he usually does not come out religious?! Why should it be this way? It is indeed a correct expectation, and it should ultimately be this way; but the reality of the matter is different. The reality is that the university is an environment that, due to the abundance of young people at certain ages and the presence of men and women, is exposed to various unhealthy moral and cultural motivations and tendencies.

The student is different from the young person in the market who is not at all aware of foreign magazines, foreign books, and knowledge outside these borders. The student usually becomes informed and aware and is exposed to the world's knowledge. Therefore, this individual is susceptible to cultural harms and negligence in the face of religion and indifference to religious and revolutionary values. This is one of the problems of the student and the student environment.

Another problem—close to the previous problem—is vulnerability to intellectual deviations and errors. In the past, when Marxism was very active and vibrant, anyone who had contact with the university really found this clearly. In the university, it was very rare to find even that Muslim student whose mind had not been affected by Marxist thoughts.

Some of these well-known intellectual elements who are among the Muslims—alive and dead—and you criticize their thoughts today—which are also justified criticisms—the point of their intellectual flaw is the same thing that was characteristic of their student and university period. Marxist thought would enter, and Zayd would see that he wanted to refute Marxism; to refute it, he would use Marxist knowledge; that is, "he is given from where he flees from it!"

This was often seen in the thoughts and statements of those who, two decades before the revolution, entered the field of Marxism without complete Islamic knowledge and awareness. Marxist thoughts had penetrated them and had been absorbed into all their minds and brains. At that time, such a thing was noticeable; but today it is not, or at least it does not exist in its doctrinal form; although its remnants still exist and have not yet disappeared. Nevertheless, today there are new deviations.

The world has not only been deviated by Marxism; before Marxism, there were wrong and deviant and anti-Islamic thoughts, and after Marxism, they exist and are present now. These same thoughts that are spread today by some European philosophers or pseudo-philosophers in the world—which, of course, I do not want to name, so that our general words do not get close to anything—are the carriers of the wood of democracy in the form of Western social democracies.

Currently, there are thoughts in the world that pave the way for the new colonial domination of America and Europe over the whole world; that is, creating democratic societies in the Western style and the same thing that you see the world is sensitive to. If there is a slight exposure to the clothing of individuals in these societies in the direction of creating a veil, the whole world will be in an uproar; but if there is exposure to someone's clothing in the direction of unveiling, one-hundredth of that uproar will not occur in the world! This is a reality. Today, one of the signs of the civilization and new system that the world of arrogance wants to quietly impose on the whole world is this.

Of course, they have advanced a lot, and it does not belong to today; but today it takes the form of a thought and a doctrine and an idea and a creed. The "open society" plan is one of these examples. What does an open society mean at all? What opens society, and what, if absent, makes society no longer an open society and useless, even if there are a thousand signs of democracy? These are deviant and wrong thoughts that exist in the world today. I do not want to enter this discussion right now about what we should do in the face of these. In general, the young student is exposed to the onslaught of these thoughts—from all kinds and sorts.

The third problem is this problem of credentialism and excessive attention to material life and the dreams and fantasies of youth. In the seminaries, traditionally, such a thing does not exist—although sometimes it is present in an incidental form—but the young student whose job is to acquire knowledge has been driven and pushed in this direction to think about the future and the future shop and future work and money and which field is more lucrative and which field gives more capabilities to a person. This is also a big problem that needs to be thought about because it harms knowledge.

Another problem is the problem of becoming a tool for political currents and political maneuvering in the university. Sometimes, the student himself has no specific political idea or motivation; but he becomes a tool for a political current and a political group that uses him as a club to hit whoever they want. This is also a very big and sensitive problem.

Another problem is the problem of ambiguity in currents and actions. The student is naturally an intellectual; that is, he is among the inevitable intellectual groups and is an opinion holder and thinker and has an opinion about the current affairs of the country and wants to express an opinion. The student is not satisfied with being told that we have determined this way and want to act. His knowing and expressing an opinion does not conflict with devotion. He also devotes himself, but he wants to know the reason for this action to which he has devoted himself. If he does not know, he gradually becomes doubtful and ambiguous. This ambiguity even weakens his devotion, and his devotion gradually weakens. So, this is one of the student's problems. Students, because they are often unaware of the currents and do not know the depths of the work, if news is broadcast on the radio or in the newspaper, their minds start working. This is in the case that there is no external influence; if there is, then it is a disaster!

And finally, the problem that some consider perhaps the most important problem is the problem of identitylessness and not understanding the real mission in relation to society, in relation to oneself, and in relation to history and the future. The student truly does not know what his role is. He does not know what his role is now and what role he will have in the future; like a businessman who runs after bread and fame and lives. In other words, the true mission of the student is not clearly defined for himself. These are the student's problems.

We mentioned some of these problems; but certainly, there are more than these, and there are many other issues and problems and numerous subtleties: various interactions between teacher and student, manager and student, various student groups, the conflict between irreligious and religious students, even the conflict among the religious themselves, and various other problems that exist.

The religious scholar has entered the university. What should he do in this university? This is truly an important issue. These duties that you gentlemen have compiled are very good duties and are truly comprehensive and good and strong and fulfill many of the demands in the university, and I have no negative opinion; but what I believe is the essence of the matter in the university is that the cleric in the university environment becomes that pole to which the student turns in these problems we mentioned and other than these problems, seeks refuge in him, hopes in him, seeks a remedy from him, and if he cannot remedy, at least the student can find solace.

If we held many sessions in the university, gave speeches, went to the mosque, participated and intervened in selection, were present and observed in determining the teacher of knowledge, and performed the duties I mentioned—all of which are good and necessary and important—but from the student's side, we did not gain trust and confidence and hope and reliance, we cannot say we have succeeded.

Unfortunately, from a few years ago when the issue of clerical representatives in universities was raised, perhaps some currents were also present—it was probably not an individual issue—that thought either they should take control of this clerical element or they should eliminate it! In some universities, this issue was observed. Of course, I am not saying all universities; but perhaps in many universities, a struggle and power struggle of this kind arose.

Such things are truly a very big obstacle in the way of fulfilling the duty of the respected cleric and scholar who resides and stays in the university and drags him into unwanted tasks; but in my opinion, as much as possible, one should avoid entering unwanted fields; even if some do not want to let and act in a way that seems to force a person. Nevertheless, where we should be, we must be present.

You gentlemen in the universities, your main effort should be to belong to all students; even that student who, in terms of line and connection, is not to your liking. Of course, it is a difficult task, perhaps in some places it may even become impossible; but it is not like this everywhere.

In my opinion, in many places and perhaps we can say in most places, it is possible for the cleric to act in such a way that even that student who, in terms of political conduct and thought and—as they say—line and connection, does not accept this cleric, says he is truly a good gentleman. If there is a heartache, or a psychological problem, or a grievance in his mind and thought, he still sees that this gentleman is a refuge. If he ever wants to pray correctly, he goes behind this cleric and prays in the mosque. In universities, this direction should be pursued; not that the representative office should be on one side of the issue against some. This is not advisable.

Of course—as I said—sometimes they drag you. I am not unaware of this meaning. Some of you gentlemen who are present here know that I have been informed of the detailed issues of the universities where you are responsible for several years, and I know that they harass, do not let, create problems, and sometimes drag the cleric into incidents; but as much as possible, one must resist; that is, one must enter from above these conflicts and keep all groups.

Islamic associations are truly a good place for gathering Muslim forces and should be arms for the cleric who is present in the university. If indeed the Islamic association accompanies the cleric who is in the university, obeys him, sees his words and guidance as paternal and accepts it, and does something so that the cleric is his support and refuge, I think it is very good to spread religious thought in the university environment. Currently, we are informed in some cases that it is not like this; that is, the Islamic association stands against the cleric, or it creates a conflict. Naturally, forces are divided and sometimes even friction occurs and they destroy each other.

I think we should do something so that in our society, the student is among the selected religious classes. That is, our goal should be to transform students in the university, both in terms of awareness and knowledge and in terms of the strength of faith, into elite selected religious elements. Naturally, these will also guarantee service for the Islamic Republic in the future. God willing, we must move in this direction.

Of course, mosques must be given a lot of attention. I am very much in favor of this tradition of leading prayers. Perhaps some really do not accept it; but since I have been a prayer leader for a long time and have led prayers, I know how good and effective and active and diligent leading prayers is. Often those who have not led prayers do not know what leading prayers means. Some who have prayed in the mosque and immediately ran out and pursued another task also do not understand the taste of leading prayers.

Leading prayers means that a person truly considers the mosque as his place of work; he goes there before time, even before others; he sees the conditions of the mosque; if there are any problems in the apparent condition of the mosque, he resolves them; he spreads his prayer rug; he waits for people to come; he contacts each individual who comes as much as he can; he shows affection to them; he inquires about their well-being; if they have a problem, he resolves it to the extent that is possible for him, not that he becomes a servant of people's service tasks—such things exist in some mosques, which are certainly wrong—he sits there, people refer to him, confide in him, he offers himself to the people, puts himself in the way of people's referrals; when he finishes the prayer, he tells the people a matter and an interpretation, says something, and gets up and goes out; that is, he spends an hour of his time there.

In my opinion, such leading prayers is a very beneficial and effective and blessed and emotion-attracting individual. Under the shadow of such leading prayers, when he points out to those who have contact and interaction with his mosque; even those who do not have time to go to the mosque but know from afar and have heard from others that this gentleman is a good gentleman, that such and such work must be done, it requires neither a budget, nor legal power, nor a directive; that work will be done according to his opinion and words.

In the university mosque, if this cleric becomes the owner of this mosque and goes there and sits and discusses, students will certainly be attracted. Of course, they may not come for a while and some may act maliciously; but the student absolutely needs someone who treats him like a father and resolves his problems. If such a cleric is there, it is impossible for students not to refer to him. This student inevitably refers; because he has a spiritual grievance.

Youth is a strange thing. All the gentlemen have passed the period of youth and know that those feelings of youth absolutely require a spiritual support. This gentleman sits there, with wisdom and knowledge and logic and dignity and broad-mindedness, listens to the words and responds; the first and second and third customer... "the customer boils over him." Then it is that this gentleman will have spiritual influence in the university. Now the university president, or the head of a certain revolutionary organization, or the head of a certain association, suppose they say something else; what this person says will be what happens. When it is said, if you go to that gentleman's lesson, I fear for your religion, the student no longer goes to that gentleman's lesson. When it is said, this president is not suitable for this university, the children no longer accept him as president. The influence of the word will be like this.

Of course, it is natural that in the Islamic Republic, a good cleric does not do anything that causes trouble for the government apparatus and the country's administrator and creates a problem for the university president. I do not want it to be placed in minds, God forbid, in this way; but I say this because such a cleric will become the owner of the hearts of the university people, or a large number of them, and especially the youth. This is good. My inclination is more towards this side. I consider this more important. Although I said, those duties that have been mentioned and I have also been informed of them are important and necessary duties and good works; but your hope should be more in what I said.

We hope that God, God willing, will grant success and support to you gentlemen and reward you for the efforts you endure. I know that your work is hard. Sometimes they act in a partisan manner and make a person tired and weary; but this also exists that the more effort there is, naturally the more reward there will be.

I sincerely thank the gentlemen, Mr. Mohammadi, Mr. Mahfouzi, and Mr. Jannati; the dignitaries who, despite all the various engagements and responsibilities directed at them, have paid attention to the importance of this important work and have accepted this responsibility. God willing, may God preserve your noble existence, sustain your blessings, and God willing, make us all more aware of our duties and grant us the success to act.

Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings