Steven Wasserstrom characterizes Corbin’s work as an attempt to “re-enchant” an overly rationalized world by injecting into it a “mytho-centric” vision. This chapter refutes that assessment. Wasserstrom’s historicist position, I argue, renders him less than reliable as a reader of the arch anti-historicist Corbin, who encouraged us to understand Islamic philosophy’s major achievement as one of profanation. I pursue my case through examinations of various texts by Corbin, while returning frequently to one essay in particular, “Apophatic Theology as Antidote to Nihilism,” which he delivered in Tehran at a colloquium titled “Does the Global Impact of Western Thought Make a Real Dialogue between Civilizations Possible?” which was held shortly before the outbreak of the Iranian Revolution. The final section of the chapter takes up a challenge Wasserstrom lays down in his book: let the Iranian Revolution, the facts on the ground, decide whether Corbin or Khomeini was a better reader of Islamic philosophy and the true champion of the Iranian people. In this section, I offer an analysis of a film by the Iranian filmmaker, Abbas Kiarostami, First Case, Second Case, which was begun as that Revolution was winding down and radically remade several months after Khomeini returned to Iran and delivered his first public address to the nation at Bihisht-i Zahra. In this address, the new leader championed cinema as a particularly useful tool for restoring the sensorium of the Iranian people, which had been damaged by Westoxification. Seizing on Khomeini’s firm endorsement of cinema, my analysis deploys cinematic strategies and psychoanalytic insights to unpack major concepts of Islamic philosophy.