TEHRAN -- Culture stood at the very heart of the intellectual and civilizational vision of the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei—may his soul be sanctified. 
His legacy is not defined solely by political and religious leadership, but by a profound and unwavering commitment to culture, knowledge, literature, and the written word. 
For him, culture was never a secondary expression of society or a decorative element added to political life; rather, it was the foundation upon which national identity, collective consciousness, and civilization itself were built. 
In the landscape of contemporary Islamic thought, he emerged as a towering intellectual figure who regarded culture as the first line of defense for a nation and the essential source of its strength, resilience, and continuity.
This understanding of culture formed the basis of his concept of “cultural piety”—a form of societal self-care through which a nation protects its inner character, preserves its intellectual foundations, and develops immunity against external efforts to reshape its identity. 
Scholarly analyses of his thought have emphasized that culture, in his worldview, was not merely an area of artistic activity or social expression, but the foundation upon which a society’s ability to resist external pressures depended. 
A nation that safeguards its culture safeguards its existence; a nation that neglects it risks losing the very qualities that define it.
From this perspective emerged one of the central pillars of his cultural thought: the principle of “cultural independence.” He viewed cultural independence as inseparable from genuine national sovereignty, stating that political and economic independence could not be sustained without the preservation of a nation’s intellectual and cultural foundations. 
His warnings regarding “cultural invasion” reflected his belief that soft power could be used to weaken societies by gradually eroding their identity, historical awareness, intellectual confidence, and ideological foundations. For him, this was not an abstract concern, but a practical reality requiring awareness, resistance, and cultural responsibility.
The Persian language occupied a unique and central position within this vision. For the martyred Leader, Persian was far more than a means of communication; it represented “the framework of cognition and the connecting thread of thought and the identity borders of Iranians.” 
Language, in this understanding, was the vessel through which a civilization preserved its memory, transmitted its values, and maintained its connection with its historical roots. His lifelong advocacy for strengthening Persian reflected
 this conviction, and his proposal that Persian become the second language of the Islamic world demonstrated his broader vision of a culturally confident and intellectually connected Ummah.

He regarded linguistic integrity as a fortress protecting national identity from gradual erosion, expressing this concern through the powerful warning that “when a nation loses identity, it melts in the palm of enemies.”  

Perhaps the most profound expression of this cultural commitment appeared in his extraordinary relationship with Persian literature. His life reflected the habits of a deeply engaged intellectual: a serious and relentless reader whose interests extended across philosophy, mysticism, history, social sciences, poetry, and literature. 

Yet his engagement with literature was not merely that of a reader or admirer. He was also a poet himself, with a refined literary sensibility and a deep appreciation for the artistic and intellectual power of the written word.