The semantics of Resistance 

Sayed Hadi: What do you think about the future of the Resistance today on the global scale, on the international level, and in the Islamic world?

Alexander Dugin: Thank you very much. First of all, I would like to express my best wishes to the Iranian people in this New Year (not the Iranian New Year, but the internationally accepted moment of the new year on the solar calendar). Please, accept my congratulations for this moment.

I would put the problem of Resistance in a wider context. 

The Resistance in a narrow sense as is accepted in Arabic countries or in the Middle East, in Iran, is the fight of Islamic countries against the Israeli occupation of Palestine, against Israeli policy in Lebanon, Syria and so on. 

On the other hand, Resistance also means the fight against Takfiri tendencies, against Salafi movements, and against Western hegemony and American imperialism in general.

So, Resistance is a multi-layered concept. When we pronounce this term “Resistance”–  in the Middle East, in Iran – we mean often this general understanding, where the fight against Israeli occupation of Palestine is implicitly connected with the fight against Western hegemony. 

I would like to emphasize one point: outside of this area, the term “Resistance” is used differently. For example, from a Russian perspective there are three independent layers of this problem, and we couldn’t accept the term “Resistance” exactly with the same meaning as in Shi’a regions, in Iran, in Lebanon, in Syria, in the Middle East. 

In order to understand each other better, we need to establish some kind of mutual vocabulary, to translate correctly the main and most important concepts. Because what youmean by «Resistance» is not exactly what we mean by it. So, there are different aspects of this problem.

There are three levels: 

1.    The level of American or -- wider -- Western hegemony. This already represents a problem, because today we see what is going on in the US – a new civil war. There is no more united West, nor United States – there are at least two Wests. And accordingly two United States. We have to make a clear distinction between the globalist agenda(neoconservative politicians, the authors of the Greater Middle East Project, world democracy promotion, and so on) and American nationalism. The globalist West is represented in the US by Biden and the oligarchy of international “progressists”. The nationalist West is represented by Trump and his supporters. These are two opposite poles inside American society. If we don`t perceive these changes, don’t pay enough attention to the manifestation and consolidation of these two poles, we are obliged to stay outside this reality. For example, on the 6^th of January  there was a huge rally in favor of Trump. And its outcome, the assault on Capitol hill, can be considered the beginning of a radical confrontation between the two Americas. BLM and armed Antifa groups are an extension of the globalists. Trump supporters who have shown their readiness to resort in extreme cases to violence are the core of the radical wing of the opposite pole.

Considering the Middle East, there is no huge difference between the plans of the globalists and the Trumpists - they both support Israel, and both support American hegemony.  But the way to interpret American hegemony is very different in both cases. In order to keep in line with geopolitical reality we need to understand this inner split. This split into two parts is important for the very semantics of the term “Resistance” in all senses – for Russians, for Iranians, for all partisans of national sovereignty, for the future of the Middle East. The globalist vision is one thing, the nationalist vision is another thing. They can coincide in concrete cases, but they are profoundly different in their structure and principles. They are essentially antagonistic and are becoming more and more so. 

There is also a growing difference between American and European politics. 

So, global players in the West are undergoing profound change. Their positions are mutating. All of this ongoing process is crucial for the perspectives of “Resistance”.

2.    The position of Israel. For the Islamic world, Israel may represent a bigger threat than the West, but this is not the same case for Russia. Russia sees Israel as part of the West. But Russia doesn`t see the geopolitical image of Israel as total aggressor, like Iran or Lebanon do. If for the Resistance movement in the narrow sense Israel is enemy number one, then for the Russian Federation, for Putin personally, Israel doesn`t represent an enemy at all - not to mention any “greater enemy”.

That is the difference. So, if we could agree about Western hegemony and share in full scale this concern over globalization, neoconservative aggressiveness, unipolarity, and the globalists’ fight against all kinds of sovereignty - and Russia is ready to fight against all this - then our understanding of the role of Israel is very different. It is important to understand how we, Russians, are considering this aspect of the Resistance, and this difference should be taken into consideration on both ends. Israel is a very important factor in local politics, but not the key factor – at least not for Russia. 

3.    Sunni islam and Shi’a islam. Russia obviously has its own relations with the Sunni world. 

The “Resistance” means different thing for Sunni countries (like Qatar, Turkey or Saudi Arabia) and for Shi’a players (Iran, Syria, Lebanon, the Shi’a part of Iraq, Houthis in Yemen). They could partly share rejection of Israel and our common rejection of Western hegemony, but at the same time I think that their understanding is quite different. For example, recent alliances between the Gulf countries and Israel, and their coordination with US, clearly contradict the very nature of Resistance. They are playing more the role of proxy powers for Western hegemony and imperialism. 

At the same time Russia (Putin and the Kremlin) is trying to find a new way for mutual understanding with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the Gulf countries, and Turkey in order to get this Sunni pole out of the zone of influence of Western globalism and hegemony. 

But the rejection of radical Salafism and radical Sunni forms of political islam as ISIS and Al-Qaeda brings together Russian positions with Shi’a once more.

So, the game in the Middle East is multi-layered. 

Anyway the Resistance in the eyes of Iran and the Shi’a world in general doesn`t totally coincide with the vision of Russia. 

I wouldn’t like to argue whose understanding is more correct, but I invite you to think more about the semantic difference in the meanings of some key geopolitical concepts. If we take into consideration the position of Iran, Lebanon, and the Shi’a world, but also the position of the Sunni world, Russia, the EU and other players, the whole picture becomes more complicated. And when this picture becomes more complicated, our prognosis may differ as well. We are obliged to follow a multi-layered reality.

Personally I would like to stress what unites us. And what is most certain in this fight, is the wish to stop American hegemony and Western imperialism. That is the common denominatorfor all of us. And here we can make our relations deeper and wider. 

But in the narrower sense of the term “Resistance”, the situation could change. 

So, I would like to emphasize more what unites us more than what divides us. 

The future of the Resistance in a narrow sense, or in the sense for Iranians, depends in large part on the possibility to revise this concept and to find other global players who could (under certain conditions) support this Resistance. So, the Resistance needs additional power. I think that local energy is almost exhausted. The Resistance in its early form has reached its limit. It is good news that you can still resist, but it is bad news that you cannot win, neither against Israel nor Western hegemony relying only on yourself. In order to win, we need to make the concept of Resistance wider, and this is possible only if we take into consideration the position of others – first of all those countries who regard politics in a less regional and more global perspective (as does Russia).

We also need to include China in this fight against Western imperialism. It is a strategic mistake to regard China as just a partner of Western globalization. China is a very particular player, different from Russia and the Islamic world. But still, China is trying to resist the same enemy – globalism and Western hegemony. 

Only the creation of new kind of alliance between different powers (local, global, regional) resisting this global hegemony can grant us victory. So, in my opinion, the victory of theResistance in the concrete sense depends on the possibility of putting this Resistance in the wider context. The Resistance can hope to win only in the context of a multipolar world. We need to fight together for multipolarity against unipolarity, and that is the main geopolitical condition to win.

Types of Islam: what divides and what unites Muslims?

Babaee: And now the question of comparison between Sunni Islam, Shi’a Islam and Salafi Islam. If you compare aspects of these branches of Islam, is it possible to take the Salafi movement to be a religious tendency capable of confronting globalization? 

 

Alexander Dugin: I think now we are seeing that the globalists want to organize a new Fitna, a new civil war inside of islam, in order to weaken Islamic civilization. I agree that we have mainly three major tendencies in Islam as you have mentioned.

There is 1) Shi’a Islam, 2) moderate Sunni Islam and 3) Salafi radical Sunni Islam. There are big differences between moderate Sunni Islam and Salafism. Technically, Salafis were used by the West in the last century against Soviet and nationalist tendencies, as their geopolitical tools in the Islamic world.  But after the collapse of the USSR and the end of the “Cold War”, when the capitalist camp won, the Salafis were abandoned by the West. Occasionally they were still used for technical solutions, such as to overthrow Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi. But they were abandoned in general. For example, the Taliban movement – or rather its predecessors - in the beginning was a tool of the West in its fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and later, at a certain point, became the main enemy of the US occupational presence in Afghanistan. Pakistan as well was the main ally of the US with Salafi groups supported by the West, but finally there was a total – anti-Western - turn in Pakistani politics. 

The will of Shi’a Islam to fight against American hegemony, for multipolarity, is clear. There is no doubt in their sincerity to fight to the end. That is part of Shi’a teaching, the fight against Dajjal, for the return of Mahdi. All of that is the religious and geopolitical part of Shi’a identity. 

Salafi Islam, on the contrary, has been used as a tool of Dajjal, of the West, and not only against Iran, but also against Russia and China (in the case of the Uyghurs of Xinjiang) and against all countries and regimes choosing multipolarity. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood was used against the independent politics of Nasser, against Egyptian nationalism, against anti-Western movements in Arab world. 

Almost always in modern history, Salafis have been the main ally of the Western side in the Islamic world. This is the Trojan horse of Western hegemony. 

But we have to understand that after the fall of the USSR Salafis were abandoned by the West, and in this moment there reappeared the anti-Western sources and origins of Salafism. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt were anti-Western, they defended the ways of Islamic civilization. The founding fathers of Muslim Brotherhood, such as Hassan al-Banna or Sayyid Qutb, were extremely critical of Modern Western societies, values and politics.

But in concrete geopolitical circumstances, in special and historical conditions, they were used by the West in spite of their anti-Western principles. The core and the origin of the Salafis was anti-Western. 

So, I think that now we could be witnesses to some kind of transformation of Salafi Islam – in geopolitics and in ideology. The anti-Western aspects, traditionalism and anti-Modern tendencies in Salafism – although not so clearly as in the case of Shi’a and traditional islam – will reappear. 

Originally Salafis were anti-Western, and today the anti-Western layer of Salafism could be used in our favor. But we have to think about this more and more. You could easily argue that wherever there are Salafis, there is an anti-Shi’a tendency, Fitna, problems of terrorism inside the Islamic world, attacks against anti-globalist poles, and so on. But at the same time, I think that the process of the West abandoning Salafis is a very important tendency. We need to follow it, to use it for our gain. This is a strategic game. The war against Dajjal is not technical – it  is an ontological war, and we need to revise, to think more about the forces we`re dealing with in eschatological war. 

Now let’s consider traditional or moderate Islam. In reality such Islam has generally Sufi roots. Often these Sufi roots are closely related to the Shi’a tendency. As was the case with the Turkish Bektashi order, Alevites and Janissaries.

This traditional Islam, sometimes it can choose the West, sometimes Resistance to the West, as Erdogan’s policies, for example, testify. 

We also need to revise our strategy concerning traditional Islam. And here we need to explore more the Sufi roots and Shi’a connections of traditional Islam. 

We have to try to unite all three Islamic tendencies. And to not let the enemies of Islam incite one to fight against another. First of all, we should try to create a common front against the West. That will mean a real Islamic Resistance. We need to explain somehow to Salafis, to traditional Sunni Islam and to Shi’a Islam the real meaning of the fight we`re involved in. We need to explain to all the necessity of creating a united front against the West. 

We could hope to solve somehow the inner problems within the global Resistance afterwards, but first of all we need to obtain multipolar independence against Western hegemony. When the West is within, there`s no hope for peaceful and harmonious decisions based on religion, on traditional norms and rules, on the demands and aspirations of real societies and communities.  The civilization of Dajjal refuses any transcendence, any God, any tradition in their culture. 

That is not paganism, it is much worse – it is not religion at all, it is the demonic subversion of all traditional values. Such is the modern West. 

The Modern West should die. In order to destroy its hegemony, we need to unite all the forces we can, to win the fight against the greatest enemy, the Great Shaitan, as Imam Khomeini said. 

There is no more small Shaitan, no Soviet Union as before in bipolar world. Now we should all stay united in the fight against the Great Shaitan. 

We are different - not only Islamic people, but also Christian people, Chinese people, Indian people, different cultures and religions, participating in this greatest eschatological war against Western hegemony. It is enemy number one. Whoever challenges that and says «Let`s fight Israel first of all», or «Let`s fight Christians/Salafi/Shi’a first of all», is working for Shaitan. Only those who affirm clearly and directly «Let`s fight the Great Shaitan first, and only afterwards we`ll see who is right, who is wrong», are the real fighters on the side of God and against Shaitan/Satan. 

If we invite to join our front Salafi and traditional Islam as well as different Christian confessions, it is because we are all in the same fight. There are many differences between us, even between several Christian branches, but we have to understand where is theabsolute evil. 

Now we see that the US is split into two parts, and we have to identify where Satan is clearly seen. It is the side of the Democrats, the globalists, Biden. There are so many contradictions with Trump as a supporter of Israel, who is not, by the way, pro-Russian. But Trump is the lesser Shaitan. He is rather bad, but not absolute evil. 

Now there`s a great fight inside the US. We should find the real identity of Great Shaitan. It is the Democratic Party, Big Finance, the global oligarchy, the promoters of gender politics and post-humanism, the owners and masters of social services and global control.

Obstacles to unity and the future eschatological front

Babaee: What are the obstacles that do not allow these countries to be united and more organised in the fight against the same enemy – Western hegemony?

Alexander Dugin: These obstacles are different. First of all, there is historical inertia. For example, when we look into the past, we see so many obstacles which prevent new alliances and hinder mutual confidence. There`s always someone who reminds – «Oh, we had fights with Russia/China/Turkey/Iran, so we should be very careful dealing with them, they will betray us». So, there is a lack of confidence based on historical experience.

In order to overcome this obstacle, we have to look into the future, not into the past. The past prevents us from coming into the future. The present is the moment when the future is fighting against the past, and the past is fighting back against the future.  The arrival of Mahdi, the second coming of Jesus Christ, the positive eschatological scenario is in the future. The past is the greatest obstacle that tries to not let this happen. That is the initial semantic meaning of the Hebrew word “satan” – the obstacle.

At the same time, those who consider the situation only in the narrow religious sense, they are on the side of the past. For example, they say – «How can Christians or Chinese fight together with Muslims? They belong to different religions, cultures – so, they are threats to each other, not the West». I’ve heard this many times from Iranians, that Russians are not reliable, they represent a different religion, etc. The same refrain is common in Russia vis-à-vis Muslims and so on. 

There are absurd, unrealistic – extremist -- expectations that are also creating new obstacles in the way of our mutual understanding. Some have illusions that unity can arrive only on the condition of total conversion to one particular religion (whether Islam, or Christianity or secular Chinese socialism).

Chinese civilization is totally different, not like Christian or Islamic – and the Chinese have the same fear in front of monotheistic societies. So, the natural limits of religion create a second level of obstacles. 

In the End Time, in the final battle, we should overcome all limits, at least on the strategic level. We need some supra-human leader that could lead us outside of these traditional obstacles (historical, religious, ideological and so on). 

There`s still nationalism. This is one more level of obstacles in front of the creation of a united front of Tradition. 

We should understand Iran not just as country, not just as a State, but as a Civilization, as the core of the Islamic – and, more broadly, planetary - awakening in the end times. But sometimes Iran behaves like just a nation-state, and that confines the scale of Iran, and creates artificial obstacles that do not allow seeing the universal mission of the Iranian Revolution. The Great Iranian Revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini was not only an Iranian or Shi’a event, it was the beginning of a global awakening, the last call (da‘wah) to fight against the Great Shaitan, against Dajjal. 

In order to make this mission universal, we need to keep it alive, to live with it, to constantly interpret it anew.

The same stands in the case of Christianity – Christianity should be alive, its mission in history should be open for the future. It should possess an eschatological dimension and not be only a recollection of the past and nostalgia. 

So, we have as obstacles historical issues, religious limitations, and various kinds of nationalisms. Here we need to add Modernity.

We have modernization deep inside our societies. From the standpoint of sacred Tradition, Modernity is poison, a deadly virus. It is the creation of the West. We have Modernity in the way of thinking, in behavior, in technology. Modern science is poisoned by the Western understanding of reality, which is based on the denial of the Creator, of God. It is not reality, it is illusion. 

So, we have to restore the sacred, spiritual, theological understanding of being, of reality, of matter, of the soul, of the spirit. We have to revise our science in order to accept the existence of demons and angels. We can`t fight against Satan and demons if we deny their existence. So, we have to restore the traditional understanding of reality, and reject Modernity with its perverted image of reality. That is one more obstacle preventing us from creating this front, because this front should be based on a perfect and correct ontology, the teaching of being with its transcendental dimension. Modern Western science, with its corrupted ontology, prevents that. We need make revisions of science and liberate our societies from its colonial and “universalist” presumptions. 

And the last obstacle: the 5^th and 6^th columns.

The 5^th column is represented by those globalist modernist Westerners inside our societies who fight openly against more or less traditional, conservative and sovereign regimes. They are openly funded by Soros, globalist networks. They are open enemies of traditional societies. We should treat them with all severity, in order to destroy these inner agents of Satan. 

But there`s also what we call in Russian the “6^th column”. Such people are formally loyal to government, to administration, to a country’s leader, but they are not real believers. They do not believe in the mission, they are just functionaries. They are used by the West as Trojan horses inside our societies.  This is a deep-rooted and very operative network, inside Russia, inside Iran, inside China and so on. They are working hard against the very possibility of our front, trying to our common strategic center from being established. Using thousands of tricks, they try to subvert and discredit the appearance of the global headquarters of the eschatological fight against Western hegemony. There is also the inertia of nation-states as bureaucratic organizations that help – not intentionally -- the 6^th column to achieve this goal.

In order to overcome all these obstacles, we need to establish an informal, intellectual structure, a kind of global network, based on spiritual groups, not too much engaged in formal structures of government. We need to promote the dialogue between intellectual spiritual leaders, philosophers, thinkers, cultural activists and artists in order to create an informal headquarters of global Resistance against hegemony. It should be based on spirituality, theology, and deep culture, not only on existing bureaucratic structures. All the existing structures in the world are somehow controlled by Western hegemony. They were created in the image of Western society. Capitalism, the market economy, political organizations – all of them are imitations of Western liberal democracy. All that is as well poisoned by modern science. 

We have to create a new eschatological structure that should promote the global eschatological front against the Great Shaitan. That is the task for the future for informal intellectuals of all societies. 

First of all, we have to promote this spiritual core. We need generals of thought, not soldiers – because we already have soldiers. We need generals like Soleimani – he was not only a military general, but also a general of spirituality, wisdom, religion. We need people like him, brave and independent, capable to act on deep conviction, not only for formal orders received from above. We need free fighters – not soldiers, but warriors. 

The greatness of Iran: the fight for the Great Light

Dr. Babaee: Another question is about Iran as a civilization. Do you see any common perspectives in the future regarding cooperation between the Russian and Iranian civilizations? Not only in the Islamic region, but on a global scale? Is Russia not culturally and intellectually close to the West with no grounds for rapprochement with Iran?

Alexander Dugin: I consider Iran precisely as you have said – as a civilization. Iran is not a country, not only an historical nation-state tate, it is not just an Empire - it is a civilization. I have written a book about Iranian civilization – «The Iranian Logos».

I think Iran is one of the key metaphysical elements in global culture. Iran is really an underestimated factor in the emergence of culture, philosophy, art, history and so on. Historically we - that is the West and all of humanity - traditionally see the history of Iran through Greek eyes. The Greeks were the enemies of Persia. The Greeks suffered from Iranian interventions, and Iranians suffered from Greek interventions. But the main interpretation of Iran and its identity in the past has been the Greek one.  That gave a perverted image of Iranian culture as something “barbaric”. This is pardonable because of Greek ethnocentrism, but it is totally incorrect.

We need to restore the dignity of Iranian civilization. In order to do that, we need to get through all the limitations – transcending Western-centric limitations and modernist traditions in Iran itself. Iran is also touched by this anti-Iranian understanding. It has nothing to do with nationalism, but Iranian civilization is misunderstood by modern Iranians themselves. We need to restore the real treasure of Iranian identity. Iranian identity is almost unknown. But starting from pre-Islamic times and going through all the types of Islamic history this identity is so beautiful, so profound, so paradoxical... And in all these phases, all the ages of Iran’s history, there are so many ignored treasures of this civilization. This is first of all a task for Iranians themselves. But the help of true Iranophiles who love Iran and Iranian identity could be also very useful. 

Iranians created the concept of time, the concept of a goal of history. And all the messianic aspects of Western -- Jewish and Christian -- traditions have their roots in ancient Iranian culture. Iranian thought created Shi’a metaphysics.  We need to review Islamic civilization in order to fully appreciate the role of the Iranian factor. Such authors as Henry Corbin started this work. It should be continued.  

So, ties between Russia and Iran should be established first of all on this metaphysical level. Alexey Khomyakov, one of the founding Slavophiles (a philosophical tendency in 19^th century that defended the independent nature and special mission of the Russian civilization) wrote the book “Semiramis” about two types of civilizations – Cushitic (material) civilization and Iranian civilization. He considered the Iranian Logos to be the main Indo-European form of the vertical patriarchal – solar -- tradition. In that sense, according to Khomyakov, Russia as an Indo-European culture is part of the Iranian metaphysical paradigm. 

In order to establish real mutual understanding between Russia and Iran, we should study our cultures in depth. I am partisan of this metaphysical alliance, first and foremost between eternal Iran and eternal Russia. 

But we also need to review and revise relations between Iran and Turan in the old times, because Turan was not just the Turkish ethnic space. The concept of Turan is much older than the arrival of the Turks on this Eurasian territory. The metaphysical dualism between the nomadic and sedentary Iranian tribes was one of the main motifs of ancient Iranian lore. So we should start with sacred geography. 

Thus, we will prepare the ground for a clear vision of the common fight for multipolarity. Then we have to deduce from this common map our common goal. Operating with this map, we can determine our full-scale partners for liberating more and more space on the Eurasian continent from Western hegemony. 

After that we can deduce from higher levels also lower ones -- economy and commercial partnership (but those should be the last consequences, not the first goal). We should start with beliefs, metaphysical principles, and not with the applications of these principles. We should start with Heaven, and deduce from it some technological – earthly -- applications. 

And now we are doing the opposite, proceeding from below and forgetting about the heights. And when we meet obstacles, we give up, resign. 

That is not the way of the Iranian or Russian Logos. We need the perspectives of spiritual light in order to not fall easily into materialistic traps. This fight against materialistic obstacles, against  the power of darkness, should go first. In order to accomplish our mission on this earth, we need to restore the transcendental dimension. Our fight is the fight for the Great Light.

The Iranian Revolution: the universal dimension of the miracle

Sayed Hadi: Do you see Iran’s new face? What is its role for civilization? How do you see the relation between the Iranian Islamic Revolution and the fate of modern civilization?

Alexander Dugin: I see the relation between the Iranian Islamic Revolution and the fate of modern civilization as the spiritual fulfillment of the mystery of history. The Iranian Revolution is not just another political event, or just the liberation of Iran from American influence. I consider the coming to power of Ayatollah Khomeini, the adoption of  the Shi’a Constitution, and the installation of the Wilayat al-Faqih system as the fulfillment of the eschatological expectations of Iranian culture. 

Iranian identity was always directed to the future. And once the future became the present, that was precisely the moment for the Iranian Revolution. I think that is not just the continuation of tradition, or just one more element of the chain. It is something more than that. In the Iranian Revolution I recognize the eschatological sign of Zuhur, accomplishment, fulfillment of the mission, the beginning of the last fight. When we look at this revival of the spiritual perfection of political order - that never existed before! - we realize that it is a real political, historical, and cultural miracle. 

I think it is something universal, the beginning of the Great Resurrection. I consider the Iranian Revolution as the sign of the time. 

But after there was a kind of difficult period, when spiritual life began somehow to fade out. That was the period of some occultation of the meanings of the Iranian Revolution. The Iranian Revolution began to lose the real spiritual life of Great Awakening. 

Now there is, maybe, the last test for Shi’a, for Iranians – the last call to return to the universal roots of Ayatollah Khomeini`s vision. We need to restore the energy, the power, the spiritual life of the Iranian Revolution now – we are approaching the last moment when the Great Awakening is coming – inside and outside of Iran. 

I observe some split inside Iranian society – some Iranians interpret the Iranian Revolution in a narrow sense, as something that concerns only Iran. But there are those – much fewer - who are still loyal to the original meaning of the Revolution. General Soleimani was one of the examples of this second type of Iranians - true Iranians.

I think the moment of the real test is approaching, and we have to concentrate on restoring or maybe rendering fully explicit the universal dimension of the Iranian Revolution. We need to find new words, new terms, new concepts, new phrases for it. We can`t use anymore what was said literally by Ayatollah Khomeini. We need to find the hidden meaning, interpret anew, discover the deep semantics. We need the full scale ta'awil of Ayatollah Khomeini`s message.

We need to refresh his mission, to reestablish the real dimension of the Iranian Call (da‘wah) for universal Revolution. And that concerns everybody on the planet, every entity in the whole cosmic structure. It is a call for men, women, animals, plants, elements, for angels and demons. It is the call for the Great Zuhur,  and  we need to reopen this hidden dimension of the Iranian Revolution. 

I consider that a sign of the Great Awakening – not only for Muslims - that was addressed to all of us. But each culture should find the proper way to translate this Call (da‘wah). It is not just about literal translation – to translate the Call (da‘wah) is not the same as to translate a text. We need to translate the Iranian Revolution as the Event (Ereignis) in Heideggerian sense. So, we have the Event but we still need its correct interpretation. 

The concept of history was discovered or created by Iranian civilization. The beginning and the end converge, and I think that Iran has a crucial role – in the past, in the future, and in the present time. 

Now we are living in the moment when the present is becoming the future. This is a very special moment of the ontological transformation of reality.  It is not just an expectation of the coming future. It is its fulfillment.