The wars between Iran and Russia were like a great shock, making Iranians realize their backwardness. Sparks of progressive thinking, whether willingly or unwillingly, were combined with justice, rule of law, and the will of the people, and intellectuals became familiar with the idea of “human rights”.

It seems that the oldest poem about human rights in constitutional literature was written by Mirza Agha Khan Kermani, one of the enlightened thinkers of the Constitutional Revolution.

Come and see the amazing work.

You can easily achieve success.

But until you know good from evil.

It is necessary to read human rights.

So that you may know the customs and ways.

Good and bad are not the same in nature.

If your knowledge is a hundred or less.

See everything in your own hands.

“Human rights” in the words of the constitutional pioneers, naturally did not fully encompass its modern meaning, but in Iran at that time it was a very progressive concept. Most advocates of this concept tried to establish a balance between human rights and Islam. They either tried to prove that there was no conflict between the two, or claimed that human rights were derived from Islamic laws and that Europeans had learned to govern their societies through their experience with the Crusades and familiarity with Muslims.

Mirza Yousefkhan, the state advisor, completed writing a treatise in the year 1287 AH, which is essentially a translation of the principles of the Declaration of Human Rights and the French Citizen with Islamic explanations that he deemed more important.

His question is about the reason for Europe’s progress and Iran’s backwardness. He writes:

As I was lost in thought one day, my intense thinking stole my sleep. I thought that a hidden caller from the west, between the earth and sky, had become aware of the Islamic nation and was loudly proclaiming:

Why are you sitting so ignorant and idle, and why don’t you think about the progress of other nations? Your neighboring wild mountain people have been brought into the circle of civilization, yet you still deny the advancements of the West. In the smallest villages near you, there are organized hospitals and schools for both males and females, yet in your most esteemed city, there is not even one hospital or school.

And it goes on to say that the progress of Europeans did not come from industry and steam engines, but rather this advancement is based on a word, which is none other than law. He writes:

Some of you are familiar with the order and progress of Europe and imagine some of the sciences and industries, such as telegraph, ships, steam engines, and military equipment, as results rather than prerequisites; and you only consider simple theories and ignore practical operations. And if you want to launch the means of progress and civilization in Iran, you neglect the determination of the basic unit at the beginning of your work.

The word “unit” was a law. He then brings up 21 articles from the Declaration of Human Rights and Citizen and tries to prove their compatibility with the laws of Sharia in his message.

Seyed Javad Tabatabai says that in criticizing the approach of constitutionalist intellectuals, he says that the Iranian intellectual movement was formed in the absence of a traditional legacy and in the best case, it was able to explain “some aspects of the history and history of thought in Iran with some concepts of the history of thought in Iran”.

However, in the book “The Freedom of Thought and the Introduction of the Constitutional Movement”, Adamiat writes: The state advisor was one of the first writers to consider the source of power as the will of the people and wrote that the consent and acceptance of the nation is the basis of all government measures, and this term comes from social discourse. He was also the first to speak about the separation of state power from clerical power. He introduced this new and progressive idea in Iran that both Muslims and non-Muslims are equal in terms of fundamental rights and that the king and the poor are equal before the law.

The State Advisor then explains in his letter to Akhoondzadeh, who had harshly criticized the drafting of this thesis based on tradition, that: “I have found evidence in the Noble Quran, authentic hadiths, verses, and proofs for all means of progress and civilization, so that it can no longer be said that such and such thing is against the religion of Islam or that Islam hinders progress and civilization.”

In any case, he touches upon the translation of the Declaration of Human Rights and the French Citizen, which has been discussed in another section of the magazine, and pays a heavy price for it. “When they chained him, exiled him to Qazvin and imprisoned him, they beat him so much with a book that his eyes watered from the effects of it.”