Kamangir (Archer)
An Iranian looking at Iran as a foreigner…
Did you know that Kamangir turns four tomorrow? See the classic "Hello World" dated October 17, 2008!
“The Problem With Islam Today”, Or When Every Word Is Published
Kamangir | November 28, 2006 | Category Iran
This post is updated, please refer to the end for a follow up.
My first impression from democracy, and the fabulous society in which it is implemented, was based on a picture in a history book that I read when I was almost twelve. There, a man was leaning against a wall, passionately discussing with a group. Everyone can talk, that’s fantastic! But, is it? Does it lead to anything good if everyone talks?
Recently, I came upon the book “The Problem With Islam Today”. I thought, this should be a good book about Islam. So, I advocated for it here, and I got an angry comment about it (see). In that thread, I continuously asked for what the commenter found untrue in the book. He kept using words which I had heard from all my ideology teachers. He failed to give any worthy complaint about the book, but I think I have one.
Journalism, to me, is the technique to communicate with people. In this sense, a journalist is a person who seeks truth and unveils it. But, why? What is the reason behind spending so much money to send reporters to the front? If it is all about truth, then I suspect CNN, “The Most Trusted Name In News”, must have hired an army of philosophers, in addition to the historians, sociologist, and psychiatrists, they are consulting with for any subject they are broadcasting. If it is so, why does CNN always try to sell me Anderson Cooper, and his colorful eyes, and not those genius people? Is CNN anything more than Larry King and the silly questions he asked George W. Buch?
Who is Irshad Manji? Does she hold any graduate degree in history, politics, or social sciences? I am afraid not. What is she selling us? Thoughtful ideas about the Islamic World and its problems, or unrelated personal stories interrupted by sentences to carry her hatred and frustration?
The pop culture, backed heavily by the Internet, generally, and blogging, specially, means everyone will have a voice. But these voices are not echoed similarly. Irshad is talking about serious problems. But I am afraid she does not deserve the attention she is receiving. When I started reading her book, which is generously translated into Persian and is available in her website for free, I soon realized that I am listening to a person who does not have any academic background on the topic. She is frustrated and points at deep problems in the Islamic Society, but I am afraid, after all, she is a TV host.
If they are going to pick you to be a TV host, which one is more important, your power to analyze a problem and ask important questions, or your look and how much talkative you are?
By the way, do you have any idea why the cover page of the book is decorated with her face? Also, what does it tell you that she was awarded by Oprah Winfrey? I am not a conspiracy theorist. This is not a Jewish or Zionist conspiracy against Islam. This is the pop culture using legitimate means to say “we are more than a bunch of singers and actors”. This is Angelina Jolie adopting a poor African kid. Have you ever asked an African how they think about her?
Update (29 Nov.): It seems that people are engaged in a discussion about Islam in the comments. Please give me a short answer to these questions:
1- Has Islam resulted in any misery in the entire history?
2- If so, don’t you think God has done a not-so-perfect job?
3- If yes, why is this “God” so human-like?
This piece is also posted in here.
You should really read “The Shia Revival’ by Vali Nasr (who is professor at George Washington University).
Most of what passes for journalism, at least as far as television is concerned, is what we call ‘infotainment,’ i.e. ‘information entertainment.’
Manji’s book has any number of problems in it but I think her title best represents one of her primary issues. Islam, as it is practiced in many communities and continents throughout the world is not a monolith. It is impossible, therefore, to speak about the problem with Islam as though adherents of its tenets only observe their religion in one, universal way. The title of her book merely underscores the mainstream American assumption that Islam is the same in every part of the world. Read Gatje’s book on Qur’anic Exegesis and the diversity of thought within and about Islam throughout history becomes much more manifest.
Apologies for the sermon, taking a break from paper writing. What is the address of your wife’s blog again?
Matthew,
It is this. Thanks! :)
And yes, I agree with you that her approach is too simplistic and as you say infotainment-oriented.
I have read a few chapters of the book and my feeling was so much similar to yours. By the way I like the idea behind the cover page of the book as it shows the main problem of Islam is that moslems don’t talk and criticize it as much as needed.
In the first chapter of the book she asked a few questions and talked about her concerns which are very familiar and important for me too, but she did not answer them which is not a good sign. By the way, since we dont hear so many moslems talking about problems with Islam, I like to hear any critical voice even if it is not strong in drawing a conclusion.
Getting rid of “Rejaal” Science!(just considering Quran) Can you give me some unreasonable statements in the Quran? At most you can come with a handful of problems. But they are not enough to harshly criticizing the Islam. Have you ever compared the Quran with the Bible? Have you ever read them? It is reasonable that European people are deriding the religion(because of its dark history in the Europe), but why should we do the same?
You are not a conspiracy theorist but I am! From when muslim people became trrorists? 1990.
Capitalism defeated the Communism and now, it is facing with another enemy.
Kamangir:
The section “about Irshad†on this woman’s blog tells you about her background/education/experience. I haven’t read her book and, perhaps, it is simplistic. However, she is a Muslim and I assume she is expressing her perspective.
Ali:
About my earlier comment re: “religion and cults†& your reply to it:
Firstly, I’m rather neutral towards Islam. Secondly, I lived in the Mideast long enough to know many things about it. Thirdly, I have read a few books (including the ones by Bernard Lewis) and do have Muslim friends. However, I’m not a theologian nor do I intend to become one.
You said: “educate yourselfâ€. I say: I am being educated by many Muslims (both Sunni and Shiite) – the power of observation.
Now, I have a few questions for your since you seem and claim to know more than I and I take it that you are a practitioner of this faith?
Do you deny that the Koran and Hadiths look to regulate every single aspect of one’s life including and for example, how a person should enter a toilet? Why is that?
I know about Sharia Law - but, do you think it is appropriate (especially in the 21st century) to bury a woman half way in the ground and get a bunch of people (including children) to throw stones at her until she is, gradually, killed?
Do you think it is justifiable to pull a knife and cut an innocent someone’s head off while taping the action and then broadcasting it for the world to see?
Do you think that a nine year old girl is mature enough to be married off to a man, often, significantly older than her?
Did the prophet Mohammad ever advocate that women shouldn’t drive (as the case in S.Arabia) and that they should walk around in a sack, e.g. a burqa? If he did, what was the logic or reasoning behind it? Note: I’m not simply talking about dressing conservatively.
I realize that the prophet Mohammad has two phases in his life; the first phase in Mecca where he was “authoritarian and quietist†and second when he moved to Medina where he was “radical & activistâ€. Since then, do you deny that the history of Islam, to this date, has been, mostly, about wars, politics, violence, subjugation, death, and destruction?
There are many other questions.
Now, many Muslims I know disagree with and dispute the above. They say Islam is not a monolith. They also say Islam respects women; I wish that “respect†was more visible. They believe Islam is going through a crisis and must reform or go through some sort of renaissance similar to what Christianity went through long ago. Otherwise, the future looks grim.
shaghaiegh,
About the cover page, yes you are right. But I don’t see it very relevant to put the author’s picture on the cover of a book concerning the problem with Islam. I would rather suggest a more thoughtful picture conveying the same idea. And yes, I agree with you, she may not be a very deliberated voice, but she has important questions which I have not heard any reasonable answer to, yet.
Yasin,
Come on! I am no historian, but I do remember the Afghan Holy Fighters, backed by the US. We are living in a dynamic world where ties are made and are broken instantly. Just think of Iran-Contra. Does that mean US is IR’s best friend?
I don’t know what you might call “unreasonable”, but as your name implies that you are a female person and I am not sure how you would like it if you would be beaten by your (potential) husband in the basis of Quran. Need more examples?
I am really happy that I am Atheist. I can’t even imagine thinking of an Almighty Allah who has made “a handful of problems” in his holy book.
So, God is a shoe, you look at the available ones and pick the best. Is that how divinity works?
Sm,
I referred to wikipedia.
Kamangir:
I was responding to this comment in your main post:
“Who is Irshad Manji? Does she hold any graduate degree in history, politics, or social sciences? I am afraid not.”
Yes, her website confirms that she has an honor’s degree in history.
Btw - I like your nickname “Arash Kamangir”, I speak Farsi and am familiar with Persian mythology.
Sm,
Thanks. :)
Kamangir, you need to focus more on content and less on personal comments.
“So, I advocated for it here, and I got an angry comment about it (see). In that thread, I continuously asked for what the commenter found untrue in the book. He kept using words which I had heard from all my ideology teachers. He failed to give any worthy complaint about the book, but I think I have one”
59 words of the post content
“Ali:
About my earlier comment re: “religion and cults†& your reply to it:
Firstly, I’m rather neutral towards Islam. Secondly, I lived in the Mideast long enough to know many things about it. Thirdly, I have read a few books (including the ones by Bernard Lewis) and do have Muslim friends. However, I’m not a theologian nor do I intend to become one.
You said: “educate yourselfâ€. I say: I am being educated by many Muslims (both Sunni and Shiite) – the power of observation.
Now, I have a few questions for your since you seem and claim to know more than I and I take it that you are a practitioner of this faith?
Do you deny that the Koran and Hadiths look to regulate every single aspect of one’s life including and for example, how a person should enter a toilet? Why is that?
I know about Sharia Law - but, do you think it is appropriate (especially in the 21st century) to bury a woman half way in the ground and get a bunch of people (including children) to throw stones at her until she is, gradually, killed?
Do you think it is justifiable to pull a knife and cut an innocent someone’s head off while taping the action and then broadcasting it for the world to see?
Do you think that a nine year old girl is mature enough to be married off to a man, often, significantly older than her?
Did the prophet Mohammad ever advocate that women shouldn’t drive (as the case in S.Arabia) and that they should walk around in a sack, e.g. a burqa? If he did, what was the logic or reasoning behind it? Note: I’m not simply talking about dressing conservatively.
I realize that the prophet Mohammad has two phases in his life; the first phase in Mecca where he was “authoritarian and quietist†and second when he moved to Medina where he was “radical & activistâ€. Since then, do you deny that the history of Islam, to this date, has been, mostly, about wars, politics, violence, subjugation, death, and destruction?
There are many other questions.
Now, many Muslims I know disagree with and dispute the above. They say Islam is not a monolith. They also say Islam respects women; I wish that “respect†was more visible. They believe Islam is going through a crisis and must reform or go through some sort of renaissance similar to what Christianity went through long ago. Otherwise, the future looks grim.”
and a 418 word comment reply to a post this guy never made in this thread. If you were replying to his other post why not post in that thread? I’m just trying to give you advice so you don’t look childish.
Matthew:
“It is impossible, therefore, to speak about the problem with Islam as though adherents of its tenets only observe their religion in one, universal way. The title of her book merely underscores the mainstream American assumption that Islam is the same in every part of the world.â€
True. There are a few faces of Islam. Political & Radical Islam seem to be the order of the day – at least, in visible terms. Khomeini, in particular, brought “political Islam†to the fore in Shia terms.
Actually, in strict Koran and Hadith terms, everything a Muslim ought to do, in every single aspect of his/her life, is specified and regulated. Therefore, many Muslims would argue that there is, in fact, a “universal Islamic way†to observe & practise the religion and its tenets.
Those Muslims who do not strictly observe the words of Koran, interpret it differently, and/or want to live a non-radical/quietist life are not considered Muslims by the more radical & fundamentalist elements. Guess who is winning?
We in the West may want to play a catalyst role for Muslims to reform or embrace a more spiritual faith, but that must come from within Islam. At present, Islam is a monolith.
Unfortunately, unless this difference in observing the tenets of the religion is resolved, life will grow increasingly difficult, especially for the Muslims.
See my questions/remarks to Ali in this section.
I read her book and found it valuable simply because I believe she’s giving her perspective, which I’m sure many others share. The title may be overstated relating to “Islam” in general, but each Muslim has their own Islam, through practice, culture, and history. In her family life, and in her part of the world, she’s calling it like she sees it. I don’t feel it’s pernicious in any way, or that she must have a theological background to share her experiences and what she sees as major stumbling blocks for Islam as she encountered it through life. It’s also interesting to note that she is openly Lesbian on canadian tv and has faced quite a bit of Muslim backlash for this lifestyle.
Have any of you read Walid Phares’ “Future Jihad” ?
1. One of my bigest problems is my name. I am a boy! Yasin is not a female name.
2. I didn’t mean that Allah has made a handful of mistakes. But there is a few “Ayeh”s that people are arguing about them. Just a few.
3. Wife punishment is one of those arguments.
4. The point is that Islam is not in the same category as Judaism or Christianity are. If you read Bible, you can see that it is against the science, logic and common sense. Unfortunately, we are looking at the religion from the Western people’s point of view(As a metaphor consider the human sciences departments in Iranian universitis: they are studying all tribes in the world except iranian tribes! since they are studying textbooks written by other people). Then we ask: are religion and science compatible? this is not our question…this is Bible’s believers(or criticizers) question.
5. I am asking my question again: Regarding those disputable “Ayeh”s(maybe at most 4 or 5 “Aye”s), Then, is your treatment fair enough?
6. I think God is a shoe.
To Sm:
Since I know anything about Islam! I can give you some responses:
1. Toilet Problem:
I don’t believe in Hadiths. The earliest ones have been written more than 300 years after the death of Mohammad(I am not sure in this number). So, They are all deniable. The only true islamic resourse is Quran.
2. “Sangsaar” Problem:
Quran hasn’t mentioned “Sangsaar”. Please don’t tell me that Mohammad has done it several times. As I told you in 1, most of the Islamic stories are fake. And consider that “Sangsaar” was being practiced in middle earth before the emergence of Islam. So, it is a tradition.
3. I agree your third and fourth objections. Yet, I think you can not find them in Quran.
4. I don’t know if Hijab is mentioned in the Quran.
5. Christianity hadn’t any renaissance. People simply ignored it. It was too flawed to be corrected.
6. And your most important objection: Islam and Violence.
I don’t give you a complete response. Just some hints:
6.1. More than 90% of our history(Islam and Iran) is pure lie. You can go and find out who has written these shit. Maybe it would have some meaning for you…
6.2. Ok! people was forced to accept Islam. Why did they change their language to Arabic(in middle east, north Africa,…)? why didn’t they change their religion after defeating Arabs?(Arabs were defeated after a few years in most of their territory)
6.3. For more information you can refer to naria.blogfa.com. There are some articles titled “Islam va Shamshir”. The Blog owner is a revolutionary historian!(specially about ancient history of Iran)
You mentioned that she does not have an academic degree….my question to you is; does one need an “academic” degree to have a valid point. Most of Prophets did not have any. Jesus, Moses, Mohammed or Buddha were not educated at all…..I am not comparing her to our prophets..but we have many highly educated academic people with nothing valid to say.
I have not read her book, but seen her in person and she comes across very passionate and someone that do want to bring the moderate voice of Islam to the arena…for that alone, I applaud her. She may not be the perfect one, can you suggest anyone else that is trying to bring the voice of Islamic moderation to Western people?? please let me know.
SM, many responses…
“Now, many Muslims I know disagree with and dispute the above. They say Islam is not a monolith. They also say Islam respects women; I wish that “respect†was more visible. They believe Islam is going through a crisis and must reform or go through some sort of renaissance similar to what Christianity went through long ago. Otherwise, the future looks grim.”
I’d just like to state at the outset here that I am Catholic, not Muslim. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that Islam has monolithic features–the five pillars of faith, a belief in angels and the hereafter, etc. But there are huge differences in opinion, from the very first days of Islam until now, about the practice of the faith, what is meant by the Qur’an, the organization and ‘final’ of the Qur’an (compiled during the time of the third Caliph, Uthman)…
“Did the prophet Mohammad ever advocate that women shouldn’t drive (as the case in S.Arabia) and that they should walk around in a sack, e.g. a burqa? If he did, what was the logic or reasoning behind it? Note: I’m not simply talking about dressing conservatively.”
Actually, no. His wife Aisha, who was nine when they were married, was known to ride on a camel in a covered litter. The first letter written from Ali to Mu’awiyya is named, كتاب علي الى معاوية بعد وقعة الجمل , or, ‘The Letter of Ali to Mu’awiyya after the Battle of the Camel,’ which was so named because Aisha watched the battle from the back of her camel which she rode. The Qur’an advocates that the prophet’s wives and daughters, and other believing women, veil themselves so that no harm will come to them at the hands of non-believers. The question of what constitutes a veil has been discussed at great length by many Qur’anic scholars throughout the centuries and the vast majority of these scholars advocate that veiling means to dress modestly in obsevation of social morays. Nowhere in the Qur’an does it say to put women in sacks.
I don’t disagree with you that many schools of thought in Islam are being phased out by the Hanbali and Salafist schools of fiqh which predominate in Saudi Arabia and are funded worldwide by Saudi petrodollars. Still, Sayed Qutb or Muhammad Abduh would be aghast at the ways in which their writings advocating an Islamic modernism have been perverted by Wahabi Islamists to instigate for a pan-Islamic return to the Caliphate through violent uprising. Abduh, who first advocated for a modern ‘Islamic state’ would vomit on Khomeini’s grave. It is clear from his writings that his hope is that Muslims is majority Muslim countries will use their faith to inform their structuring of society. Many of the first works on what we’d now call ‘Islamic nationalism’ were a response to the reforms of Ataturk who insisted that Muslims reject much of their faith in structurign their society. Both Abduh and Qutb, who built upon the writings of Ibn Taymiyya, largely rejected Hadith literature out of hand and insisted upon ‘tafsirul-qur’an bil-qur’an,’ exegesis of the Qur’an by the Qur’an, wherever possible.
Islam is practiced in significantly different ways in Malaysia, India, Saudi Arabia, California, Morocco, etc. 25% of Muslims in the US are black muslims who orginally came to the faith via the Nation of Islam. The remaining 75% is mostly composed of Muslim immigrants whose sects were not recognized as ‘Islamic’ by the ijma’ of the Muslim community in their home countries. Most notably, compared with the sunni community which comprises 90% of the world’s muslims, a significant proportion of American Muslims are Shi’a, asharite, druze, and ismaili.
“Those Muslims who do not strictly observe the words of Koran, interpret it differently, and/or want to live a non-radical/quietist life are not considered Muslims by the more radical & fundamentalist elements. Guess who is winning?”
Each Muslim is encouraged to read the Qur’an for what is meaningful to them. That a small portion of the world’s Muslims advocate unrestrained violence does not mean that this portion is ‘winning’ over the other 95% of the 1 billion muslims. They do however, make all Muslims look like radical idiots in the eyes of Westerners. Read Abdulaziz Sachedina’s “Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism,” Amina Wadud’s book on Islamic Feminism or anything by Fouad Ajami to get a sense of the current dialogue within Islam.
Yasin,
The ayaat that people argue the most about are those considered ‘mutashabihaat.’ The number of these ayas ranges anywhere from 50 to 135 depending on which scholar and which point in history you refer to. The majority of the Qur’an is considered ‘muhkam’ or ‘mubin,’ with an unambiguous and clear meaning, even among non-Muslim American scholars.
Shaghiegh,
Wafa Sultan is one of the many voices of dissidence in the Muslim community. She even got into an all out shouting match with a mufti on al-Jazeera last spring, very entertaining. Mariam Memarsadeghi at Freedom House has also worked diligently on the issue of women’s rights in the Muslimg world and in Islamic communities in non-muslim countries. Kanan Makiyya is a personal favorite. He wrote a novel two years ago entitled, ‘The Rock,’ about the early muslim community. It upset many muslims but was based on much historical research.
Arash and Sm,
You’d both enjoy ‘Haggarism’ and ‘Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam.’ Haggarism especially triggered much debate regarding muslims’ assumptions about the early history of their faith. The authors of the book place the birth of Islam in Syria, not the Hijaz, and credit many people with developing the Qur’an based on the call to monotheism brought to them by a single man.
I’m a bit a bookworm/library rat…
Matthew:
Many thanks for the details & the reference in your second post.
I ‘d like to clarify two points and reinforce what I said in my previous posts:
Islam is practiced in significantly different ways in Malaysia, India, Saudi Arabia, California, Morocco, etc. 25% of Muslims in the US are black muslims who orginally came to the faith via the Nation of Islam.
I am aware of it and don’t doubt it at all. Actually, before the arrival of Mullah driven regime in Iran and the introduction of “Velayat e Faghiq†by Khomeini, your average Iranian practiced Islam a lot differently as well to what is currently happening.
Each Muslim is encouraged to read the Qur’an for what is meaningful to them. That a small portion of the world’s Muslims advocate unrestrained violence does not mean that this portion is ‘winning’ over the other 95% of the 1 billion muslims.
Well, there is a concept called “Ijtihad†in Shia doctrine. Ijtihad encourages debate about Islamic principles and the interpretation of Koran. Sunnis gave up Ijtihad a long time ago.
As I said in my previous post, those Muslims who wish to live a quiet, peaceful and spiritual life need to be more vocal and resolve the differences and influence the more radical and political Islam elements. We can’t continue saying that it is only a small portion that is violent and dismiss the issue. After all, only a small number of clerics and their supporters control a country of 70 million in Iran, as an example. You get my meaning?
To Yasin:
Thanks for your reply – here are mine:
1. You may not believe in Hadiths but many Muslims do, don’t you think?
Can you, unequivocally, say that the Koran you know now is the only version of it and that it was, in fact, written 1400 years ago during the life of Mohammad?
My main point in the previous post was to question whether or not a Muslim believes that Islam regulates every aspect of one’s life or not. ‘Toilet’ was an example. By the way, in Iran, if you are Iranian, you must know that the Mullahs impose rules regarding toilet training, in public toilets. I’m not being tongue in cheek, by the way.
2. Again, I wasn’t suggesting that Mohammad did “sangsaar†but, the fact is that it is practiced in Islamic Republic of Iran. Cutting off hands for thieves and maiming are also still practised in certain Islamic countries under Sharia Law. Where do you think they get their guidance and practises from? If “sangsaar†was practised in middle earth as you say before Islam, then, these very Islamic countries are not very Islamic, shall we say?
3. Christianity hadn’t any renaissance. People simply ignored it. It was too flawed to be corrected.
There was both Catholic reformation and counter-reformantion as well as Protestant Reformation. Despite the fact that there are some similarities between Islam and Christendom, there are some major differences.
However, my previous point was to highlight that Islam is a monolith at present, even though, different Muslims may choose to practise or interpret the Koran their own way. At present, political and radical Islam seem dominant, or at least, much more vocal.
4. Many and many have written about Islam, its sheer force, its violence, its intimidations, the deceit, the heavy taxes non Muslims had to pay and the general humiliation of non-muslims – Are you suggesting that they are all lies or based on ignorance? I’m referring to Iran and especially Iran. There is also no denying that some people willingly accepted it.
The Arab conquest of Iran lasted more than a “few years†you mention. By the time the Arabs Caliphate was defeated, Islam had become fairly embedded. Note: Persians actually did persianize Islam. Actually, the reason Iranians don’t speak “Arabicâ€, similar to say Egyptians or North Africans is due to many reasons. It is a subject that will take too long to outline here, but am sure you know the reasons, if not, you can find out.
The only people who were invaded by Muslim Arabs but don’t speak Arabic are mostly Europeans. No doubt you know the reason for that too.
Finally, Islam is based on the character and deeds of its prophet. The second phase of Mohammad’s life after moving to Medina (as per my previous post) should give you a clue. I have also no doubt that there are many Muslim who like to live a peaceful, quiet and spiritual life. Those need to exercise more influence on the radical & political elements of Islam.
Matthew:
Qur’an based on the call to monotheism brought to them by a single man.
Monotheism, That single man, was it Zoroaster? ;-)
کمانگیر: تو اسلام Ù¾Û’ Ú¾Ù…ÛŒØ´Û Ø®Ø±Ø§Ø¨ÛŒ بات کیوں کرتے Ûیں؟ اسلام دین ٠امن Ùˆ Ù…Øبت٠مخلوقات ÛÛ’Û” تو دشمن٠مومنین کیوں Ûیں؟
Translation (from Dari I think, and the translation may not be correct word-by-word): Kamangir! You are always looking for problems in Islam. Islam is the religion of peace and love. Why are you hostile with believers?
Sm, about Zoroaster, am actually in the process of writing a paper on this. Will send to you if you’re interested when I am finished.
Reply to Reply to Reply to…(and endless loop):
To Sm:
1. It is obvious that Muslim people have lots of wrong beliefs. I believe that current Quran is the only version of it.
Most of these annoying rules(that some of them are unreasonable) are not originated from Quran. Some people call “Feghh” as “Israa’eeliyaat”. Most of them are being taken from Talmud.
2. It is obvious that Islamic countries are not very Islamic.
3. I advocate my definition of Islam and not yours or “Ayyath’olaah X”’s
4. “its sheer force, its violence, its intimidations, the deceit,…”: give me some evidence please.
“the heavy taxes non Muslims”: non-muslims must pay “Jaziye” but they are free from “Khoms”. Is “Jaziye” heavier than “Khoms”? I don’t know.
Hi Sm, this point is a really critical. You claim that you have some reasons and yes! I know them!
mmmmm….that can be too long. My view of history is totally different from yours. There is a book titled “ta’ammoli dar bonyan’haye taarikhe Iran” by “Naaser poorpiraar”. How would you feel if he proves you that some of the “Saasaani” “Kateebe”s are fake! forged by fucking “Mostashregh”s in recent times. The point is that we have not written our history…There were actually no war between Arabs and Iranian people.
Maybe it would be helpful to study the situation of Jews in Islamic Spain and their situation after the leaving of muslims…
As a final point: The first written history book in Islam world(I guess) is “Taarikhe Tabari”. He has written his book 400 years after the events based on gossips….Oh! it is too long! If you are really interested in this topic and you want to know more about your identity, you can refer to that book, or to his weblog(naria.blogfa.com)…
Atishkhana,
Well, it seems that I can’t talk about myself in my own blog. :)
I don’t see your point. Answer to Sm’s questions. And thank for the advice, although, I never asked for one.
Mat59,
I am just trying to draw the line between deeply thought material and “infotainment”, courtesy of Matthew.
Yasin,
1- Sorry! :)
2- I can not even think of a god who makes mistakes. Such a god is too much artificial for me.
3- I think it is a shame for a god to say things which make half the human beings suffer.
4- So, is there any contradiction between Islam and the science or not?
5- Hey! This God, and not a shoe.
6- Fine! You know what? I wear shoes and get rid of them once every while. Do you treat his almighty similarly?
Yasin,
1- That’s great!
2- Did Islam regulate stoning or not? And I think it is even mentioned in Quran. Cutting hands is sure mentioned there.
3- Unfortunately, Quran is written in a very ambiguous language. Thus, people draw outrageous conclusions based on it. I think this is a very serious shortcoming for a book phrased by God.
4- It sure has.
5- Come one! I am in Canada and I do not know one person who can say he does not believe in God. And I don’t think their God is called Allah.
6.1- This is just great. Whenever we have no other answer, it’s zionists.
6.2- So?
6.3- Who is this guy?
Freida,
About the prophets, with all respect, I have no idea why people are following shepherds who lived a thousand years ago.
It is obvious that you do not need any degree to be entitled to talk. In my post, I tried to show why her voice, which I am not saying is illegitimate, is not very thoughtful. She sure has the right to talk. The thing is, I do not think her journalist approach has too much to offer. In other words, I tried to pay off my previous passion for her book. And yes, the world is full of Ph.D.s who do not have anything to say.
I suggest you read the book “Invitation to the Sociology of Religion” by Phil Zuckerman see and then compare for yourself.
Matthew,
Give me one straight answer, please. I don’t care how Quran might be read. Tell me, how is it read today? Don’t you blame whoever has written this book for the miseries it has made, and is making?
Yasnin,
I have a more than “unreasonable comment” for you in the Koran.
Quran (4:34) orders a man to beat his wife if she doesn’t obey him:
Quran 4:34: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
I am very to eager to see what you, as a woman, will have to say about this. And this is a direct translation by 6 different scholars so don’t make excuses about the context.
To Arash,
1. Thanks!
2. Me too!
3. That “Ayeh”, is not too horrible. It is not forcing men to punish their wives. But I agree that is highly disputable.
4. There is no contradiction between Islam and science. But what do you mean by science? In my view, only those that are reducable to physics(like chemistery, biology,…) are science.
5,6. I will get rid of the God whenever I felt that is a useless or wrong concept. The same treatment is applicable to my shoes.
Yasin,
I love your approach. Keep in touch! :)
Arash,
2. Islam has not regulated stoning(At least I think so). Where is the hand cutting mentioned in Quran?
3. I don’t accept this point.
4. Suppose that Quran has such “Ayeh”s about Hijab. Then what? has it indicated that women must be forced to obey those regularities? They are free to choose it(supposed to be free!).
5. It is really hard to believe in Bible’s God!
6.1. My answer is that these story like materials is not history.
6.2. So, people were not forced to accept Islam.
6.3. This guy has no academic degree in history! But he is doing a really great work. I strongly recommend you to read his books(a sery titled “Ta’ammoli dar bonyanhaye tarinkhe Iran”). Then you will accpet that more than 90% of our history is lie.
Thanks Arash! have you a gmail account?
To Arian:
Once Again, I am not a woman! Yasin is not a female name!
Please refer to my discussion with Arash and Sm in this page.
Arash, one quick response and then a straight answer.
“2- Did Islam regulate stoning or not? And I think it is even mentioned in Quran. Cutting hands is sure mentioned there.”
The is yes and no. The Qur’an forbids stoning as punishment but the Caliph Umar was so convinced that he heard this in the Qur’an that his Hadith on stoning abrogated the Qur’anic verse against stoning. And so began a long history of distorted Islamic law.
“Matthew,
Give me one straight answer, please. I don’t care how Quran might be read. Tell me, how is it read today? Don’t you blame whoever has written this book for the miseries it has made, and is making?”
The Qur’an is read in many ways today. That being said, governments in Western Asia and North Africa use the Qur’an to legitimize their disregard of basic human rights. I do not blame the Qur’an, nor the writer of the Qur’an for what these people do. I blame the people themselves who conciously choose to legislate brutality based on belief in their religion as the one true way.
Yasin,
You can contact me in kamangirblog@yahoo.ca.
Matthew,
That’s why you are a Muslim! :) This discussion does not lead to anywhere.
Yasin,
2- Islam has discriminated. That’s offensive to me.
3- Why?
4- They sure are free…
5- It is really hard to understand why people think of such things as Dracula, UFO, and God.
6- Come on! Do you want me to give you bunch of other people who have “theories” which prove that 1+1 is seven?
Few tidbits on stoning in Islam, including a quote from Muhammad himself.
Since when did monkeys get married and punished for adultery?
Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 188:
Words of Muhammad, narrated by ‘Amr bin Maimun:
“During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I SAW A SHE-MONKEY SURROUNDED BY A NUMBER OF MONKEYS. THEY WERE ALL STONING IT, BECAUSE IT HAD COMMITTED ILLEGAL SEXUAL INTERCOURSE. I TOO, STONED IT ALONG WITH THEM.”
Since when did monkeys start getting married? Was Muhammad really so insane that he participated in stoning a monkey for adultery? Nevertheless, this shows Muhammad’s obvious awareness and acceptance of the practice of stoning to death as an acceptable form of punishment for an adulterer.
————-
Article 116: Stones used in stoning should neither be so big as to kill the adulterous at the first or second blow, nor as small as a pebble.
“In Iran, stoning a person to death is not against the law. Using the wrong stone is.”
-Amnesty International
Arash,
2. Explain more.
3. Quran is umambiguous, but corrupted people need some nice interpretations of it to do their horrible activities. If someone was blind(for any reason), then being umambiguous is not too much helpfull.
5. Oh Man!
5.1. Science can not help us in believing in God or denying it(even slightly).
5.2. For me there are three possibilities: Believing in God, denying it, or being a dangling structure! I have examined all of them and based on my personal experience, it is quite fair to give a chance to the first alternative.
6. First time that I read one of his books, he seemed to be a man, but after exactly one year, I accepted it! It is really hard to redefine your identity.
The methodology is important not the result. If the argument was strong, you must accept its results(even if it was “1+1=7″).
To Arian:
Please don’t bother yourself with those “Hadith”s. Just throw them away!
Atrocities committed in the name of religion are more often than not an issue of power, rather than theology. Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Janists, Shintoists and Muslims have all killed in the name of religious superiority. This is not God’s fault. It is the fault of the people who kill in the name of God. The case of Northern Ireland is less about a conflict between Catholicism and Protestantism; it is a territorial fight between two separate ethnic groups. Even the Israeli Palestinian conflict at the end of the day is less about religion and more about land rights. I won’t deny that awful things have happened in the name of Islam, but they have also happened in the name of Christianity.
1- Has Islam resulted in any misery in the entire history?
2- If so, don’t you think God has done a not-so-perfect job?
3- If yes, why is this “God†so human-like?
_______
1. Yes, plenty.
2. God is greater than religion. God exists eternally, religion only temporally. People do a terrible job of supporting and caring for one another, in spite of God’s command to do so.
3. God is not human-like. God gave humans free will to choose to do good or evil. I believe that most people, irrespective of their religion, ere on the side of doing evil.
Sm,
“Well, there is a concept called “Ijtihad†in Shia doctrine. Ijtihad encourages debate about Islamic principles and the interpretation of Koran. Sunnis gave up Ijtihad a long time ago.
As I said in my previous post, those Muslims who wish to live a quiet, peaceful and spiritual life need to be more vocal and resolve the differences and influence the more radical and political Islam elements. We can’t continue saying that it is only a small portion that is violent and dismiss the issue. After all, only a small number of clerics and their supporters control a country of 70 million in Iran, as an example. You get my meaning?”
One of the greatest problems with Islam, in my opinion, is that the Qur’an does seem to advocate for a unification between church and state, or government by religious authority. No government should dictate the religion of its citizens nor should any religious system dominate the government. The government of all countries should be a secular institution, rooted in the rule of law which respects the human rights of its citizens.
My question, and the question of many Americans for nigh on three decades, is why hasn’t there been a democratic revolution against the mullahs in Iran? When will the 70 million Iranian people rise up against the “small number of clerics and their supporters” to insitute a democratic government? http://www.tondar.org
Matthew, this is the answer to your question excerpted directly from my blog in my post about “The Generation of Iranians Overseas”. Ironically, I just wrote it yesterday and it specifically mentions that question that you and most Americans ask.
“Unlike the Shah’s era, where thousands of protesters could pour into the street, place flowers in soldiers’ barrells, and scream death to the shah, such actions today would land you, your spouse, or you infant child, a quick ticket to Evin (if you’re lucky) or more likely, the gallows (better known as construction cranes). Many people ask (mostly non-Iranians), “Why don’t the Iranians just have another revolution like they did with the Shah? If they did it then why can’t they do it now?” It is for this very reason, genuine fear. Fear of death, of torture, fear for your family. Iran has been held captive by the chains of fear and religious manipulation for almost three decades, and by this point, the people will do just about anything just to feed their families, let alone worry about politics.”
1. “Islam” (i mean the actual revelations, practices of the Prophet, etc) has not. But i believe many things have been MISINTERPRETED by people with poor or insufficient knowledge of what is fitting in one culture but not in another, thier own agendas, etc. In short, it seems to me that a few people have screwed things up so bad that it’s now difficult, if not impossible, to find the original “Islam,” and interpret it properly. People who try to do so run up against a lot of opposition, especially since they’re not considered to be qualified scholars unless they first go through training by processes that may be flawed (learn the rules before you break them, etc), and many people don’t have the patience for that. I’m listening to a few scholars who are trying to reinterpret some things which may have been misinterpreted for a long time. I know it is hard work for them, and i hope they get a wide enough audience that people follow in their footsteps.
2. It wasn’t God’s fault; humans have free will to make a mess of things, and they do it well.
3. He’s not.
Interesting post, though i didn’t have time to read all the comments. I felt that Manji had brought out some interesting points, but like you said, she is just telling her own story and opinion, and does not have the knowledge to speak for a very large group of people, although i’m sure there are others who feel the way she does. Her experience seems typical of any homosexual person brought up with any religious background.
Arian,
The regime is oppressive, but America can no longer topple dictatorial governments abroad. Britain, France, China, Russia and India, and myabe Germany, are the other countries capable of carrying out a large scale military operation and they will likely never invade Iran to get rid of the rule by the clerics. Which leaves the burden to the Iranian people to either overthrow the clerics or reform the government, or continue to live in the current state of affairs. Is something like http://www.tondar.org going to change it?
I’m not in support of the U.S. overthrowing the regime in Iran, I wasn’t saying that. What I was saying was that it’s not so cut and dry like most Americans make it out to be. Iranians want revolution, they want democracy, but it’s not something that can happen over night. Iranians don’t want America to get involved in an actual revolution but they do want political support and public attention. They just want the world to be aware of their plights, not directly interfere with Iranian affairs.
So yeah, I was just trying to explain to you why it’s not so simple for Iranians to have a revolution like the last one. There are fundamental differences that exist right now that didn’t exist when the Shah was in power. Things are much trickier now and are going to take much longer to solve.
Yasin,
As you think God is a shoe I have nothing more to say to you. I love your approach, it is insane, personal, and passionate and I do not think you can kill people. So, go ahead and deep bury yourself in your shoe, oops! God. :)
Matthew,
With all respect, I can not respect a God who can not even protect his own word. Religion, to my understanding, is an instrument with no manual and a lot of hazards. Do you have any suggestion how to work with this fancy killing machine? :D
Matthew,
Let’s define Islam-I as what you are talking about, more of a personal journey, and Islam-II as what Ahmadinejad, Bin Ladan, and any suppressive parent who forces their kids to recite Quran represent. This way, I am only attacking Islam-II. Is that fine, my friend? :D
Matthew,
And Who where these funny guys in http://www.tondar.org? They are hilarious! Just see this, where they talk about their “brave operation”. :D
Matthew,
Most Iranians are in a total confusion about their beloved religion and the suppressive regime which declares to be representing Allah. On top of this, they are poor and any political movement will make everything worse.
Arian,
I think your narration is very simplistic. Have you been in Iran, lately?
Musical Chef,
What does this mean?
Arian,
I am not sure many Iranians have very clear minds about democracy and other big names. They need a good life. What that means, is still an open problem to most Iranians.
I have not been to Iran in a few years yet much of my family still resides there and I have relatives who visit with me here, so I am constantly recieving first-hand news of what is going on. I am in fact up-to-date on the situation. Obviously becuase I am trying to outline the situation in Iran in a few sentences and squeeze it into this tiny post, it will appear to come off as simplistic. I am not going to delve into every aspect of the situation and go into the details for the sake of “political correctness” simply because that is unnessessary and time-consuming.
As I mentioned in my blog excerpt, I state, “Iran has been held captive by the chains of fear and religious manipulation for almost three decades, and by this point, the people will do just about anything just to feed their families, let alone worry about politics.”
And this is essentially what you are saying, so I don’t see where the conflict of opinion is.
Arash Jaan,
Please attack Islam II, it has no place in our world. =^)
As far as the thunderous tondaris, a friend of mine at school pointed it out. Ludicrous huh?
Arian,
Now we understand each other. :)
Matthew,
Chakerim. :)
Atishkhana:
About my post to Ali: Ali replied to my original comment in a previous thread under the heading “Scenes from Friday Payersâ€.
I couldn’t initially find the “reply†field in that earlier, so I posted my reply in this thread. In any case, “Ali†should know what my post here means, AND my questions to Ali are very appropriate for and relevant to topic of this thread.
Matthew:
Yes, I’d be very interested in your paper about Zoroaster. Thanks.
Matthew, Arian & Kamangir:
I was away yesterday so just got to read your posts about democratic revolution in Iran.
I agree with Arian and what he says in his posts including #50 & #59. I also agree that many Iranians, especially in Iran need to be seriously educated about the concept of “Democracyâ€. So, I agree with Kamangir there.
In addition, I believe that Europeans, China and Russia are keeping Mullahs in power through lucrative business deals and other support.
Islam II, to me, is the radical and political Islam that are problematic and that is what I am against as well.
Yasin:
Re your post #25, I see that you advocate your own definition of Islam, that’s great. I don’t have my definition of Islam, as you suggest, only what I see and hear from many Muslims. Anyway, I think it is much more important for “other Muslims” to be in agreement with your version of Islam, not me.
Also, I disagree with your version of history. You gave me one obscure reference, whereas many and many historians and scholars’ account of history is very different.
Sm,Arash,Matthew,Arian,…
This is my conclusion of this long long discussion:
1. Islam is not the goal. A world in which people don’t know anything about Isalm but are enjoying their life is not a horrible thing for me. The goal of any religion is people(must be). However, the goal of an individual can be the God or another man.
2. As I can see, we agree in most basic concepts. But the problem originates from our different sources of information.
These kinds of disagreements can aslo cause big wars between nations. Just consider the role of “Aryan theory” in World WarII.
History defines our identity and we are just easily trusting on our enemies’(at least my enemies’) account of it.
Sm, “many and many historians and scholars” were agents of great Britain or its modern counterparts. Sm, please first read his books and then judge.
Our problem won’t be resolved without establishing an agreement in what we believe as history.
Yasin:
The point is that we have not written our history…There were actually no war between Arabs and Iranian people.
Now you are really beginning to sound like Ahmadinejad and his ilks.
So, there was no WWII, no Holocaust, Eskandar didn’t invade Iran and almost burn down Perspolis, Iran was really part of Arabia and Darius II was really a Muslim in disguise…..
Yasin:
Let me say that I’m not a fan of Britain and am aware of their colonial efforts and ambitions, similar to France. But, I’m not into blaming everything on Britain either or foreign agents either.
Ok Yasin, I’ll read the book and get back to you. :-)
I don’t know how can you be so confident in rejecting those claims when you have not read his arguments!
I love Mathematics, since when you prove an equation(for example), then you have proved it!
But we have no evidence for lots of theories in our history. For example, The only evidences presented for “Aryan Theory” are 1.some linguistic similarities between some languages 2.One or two statements by Darius: “I am Pars son of Pars, I am Aryan son of Aryan”. I can’t remember another one.
How convincing is this theory? And what was the purpose of those fucking historians by proposing it?
Lots of other theories in our history is like this one.
Sm,
The paper will be ready on Tuesday. Send me your e-mail address at mtr9m at yahoo dot com
Kamangir (re: comment 57)
I mean that many homosexuals (i know some personally, mostly Christians) who have grown up in religious traditions experience an identity crisis. Most religions in their “orthodox” form reject homosexuality, leading the person to either:
A: struggle with their homosexual tendencies for the sake of their religious teachings, and possibly suppress those tendencies.
B: join one of those newer churches or religious communities that welcome gays.
C: stay with their religion, but agree to disagree with religious leaders on the topic of homosexuality, and possibly hide it from them.
D: leave the religion.
E: question the religion and try to change it (often leading to the formation of one of the groups in point B). This was Manji’s approach, although i don’t think she’s qualified to do so. She seems to be just repeating many things the folks on the news, Oprah, etc, say about Islam.
No war with Arabs? Have you ever heard of the Shahnameh? Or better yet, have you ever picked up a history book? Now that’s just ridiculous. I guess next you’re going to say that the holocaust was really a myth as well. Just in case you really need to be reinforced and aquainted with the facts:
13 centuries ago (1370 years) a decisive battle took place that would be named the “Battle of Qadesiyeh”. Dispatched to this battle-scene, by Sasanian Shahanshah (”King of Kings”) Yazdgerd III, was Commander of the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces -Rostam Farokhzad- who gathered what is said to be 60,000 troops to the fringes of the desert south of the town “Hilla”, present day Iraq, to face the Arabo-Muslim Army- which was advancing from its homeland in the Saudi Arabian deserts. By doing so he took the battle to the Arabs “own ground” - the desert environment; the decision by Shahanshah Yazdgerd III to send Commander Farokhzad to meet the Arabo-Muslim army at this location has been criticized by many. Despite reservations on the succes of such a campaign Commader Farokhzad obeyed his Commander-in-Chief’s orders and was hell-bent on crushing the growing threat, to the Empire, of the vicious Bedouin tribes who where now savagely spreading their new-found faith -Islam- by the tip of their swords.
So yes, history has been written down, and YES there WAS a war with Arabs. If it wasn’t for Arabs, Iranians would still Zoroastrians, amongst other things…
And as far as the Aryan comment is concerned. Aryan theory? I am sorry, no theory here. And wow, you just love rejecting the existence of pre-Islamic Iranian history don’t you? I smell bias…
Wikepedia:
Since ancient times, Persians have used the term Aryan as a racial designation in an ethnic sense to describe their lineage and their language, and this tradition has continued into the present day amongst modern Persians (Iranians) (Encyclopedia Iranica, p. 681, Arya). In fact, the name Iran is a cognate of Aryan and means “Land of the Aryans.”
Dictionary.com: definition of Aryan:
1)A member or descendant of the prehistoric people who spoke Indo-European.
2)Indo-Iranian.
3)A member of the people who spoke the parent language of the Indo-European languages. (persian/farsi)
“It is one of the ironies of history that Aryan, a word nowadays referring to the blond-haired, blue-eyed physical ideal of Nazi Germany, originally referred to a people who looked vastly different. Its history starts with the ancient Indo-Iranians, Indo-European peoples who inhabited parts of what are now Iran, Afghanistan, and India. Their tribal self-designation was a word reconstructed as *arya- or *rya-. The first of these is the form found in Iranian, as ultimately in the name of Iran itself (from Middle Persian rn (ahr), “(Land) of the Iranians,” from the genitive plural of r, “Iranian”).”
Whether you like it or not, Iranians are Aryans,always have been always will be, and we were certaintly attacked and infected by the vileness and backwardness of Arab “culture” and you can refute those facts all you want. Arabs are semites, Iranians are Aryans. Except for oil, Islam, and kabob, we have nothing in common. Stop discrediting the glory of the Persian Empire due to your own prejudice. When you begin to deny fact, you begin to lose credibility.
Dear Arian,
I am so sorry that your comment is totally pointless.
I am not dedicated to anything(including God, Islam, Iran, humanhood,…) but the truth.
“Have you ever heard of the Shahnameh? Or better yet, have you ever picked up a history book?”
Yes! I have read all of the Shahnameh. And I have studied lots of books in history.
But please look at your references(my knowledgable friend): Wikepedia,Dictionary.com
Now, I am asking my question: have you ever picked up a history book?!
If yes, Have you ever looked at their evidences for such stories? or maybe you just accepted anything they were telling you?
It is obvious that people have some definitions for Aryan and have some nice stories for that battle. But what is the truth? Please go and look at their evidences. Who first spoke about “Battle of Qadesiyehâ€? when? then, who gave reference to him?….ask yourself big questions, you will get big answers.
I told you all available evidences for “Aryan theory” in one of those comments. If they are sufficint for you, then our logic system is totally different and we have nothing more to do with each other.
I am a human, not a Muslim, not an Iranian and not any other shit. And the only thing that is important for me, is the TRUTH.
“I am not dedicated to anything (including God, Islam, Iran, humanhood,…) but the truth.” I am sorry, I wish life was so simple, but it is not. You want to live your life without culture, and heritage and history, and just be “human”, go ahead. You’re whole monist philosophy that you are simply human and nothing else is in fact counterproductive to humanity and contradicts what humanity really represents. Humanity is diversity, and difference, and individuality, different people with different cultures and ways of life. The TRUTH as you so eloquently put it, is that HUMANITY is in fact Iranian, or Arab, American, European, Muslim, or Christian. This is humanity. Culture. And I truly regret the day the culture is forgotten, and the day we live in the absence of our heritage, whatever that may be.
However, I merely pointed to due populary reconized sources of reference like Wikipedia and Dictionary.com as a means to credibility. I picked a source generally accepted and aknowledgd by the public, so to provide less grounds for disagreement on source. I ALSO chose to outline a excerpt of the Battle of Battle of Qadesiyeh from the Shahnameh, a more obscure source, but nevertheless more than regarded as credible by the historian community. You “have read all of the Shahnameh and have studied lots of books in history” This battle is also referenced in ANY credible history book, whether recorded by an Iranian historian, Western, or Arab, it is found in any literary text. It is beyond apparent if in fact you have read a lot of history books then it would be COMMON FACT that Arabs attacked Iran during the Sassanian era in the 6th century. This battle and many others battles like it would be find in a countless array of historical sources, written by authors of all cultures. Your problem is you want to refute everything. You deny established fact. Iranians and Arabs DID FIGHT. Iranians ARE Aryans. The sky IS blue and the grass IS green. Don’t argue over the aspects of history that are established historical fact.
f.. everyone that has f…d history(or established some myths as facts). In contrary with what you think about me, the problem of identity(or heritage or culture…) is really important for me. And because of this importance I won’t accept any shit as my identity. I am aware of its importance, so, I am not trusting to anybody. Why don’t US universities give admissions in some fields to international students? because of their importance. The identity is more strategic than anything else. We shouldn’t let other people to define our identity based on their purposes. I really like to be proud of my real heritage. But only my real heritage.
Arian, I have read those books that you are pointing. But you have not read the books that I am recommending you. So, we are just wasting our energy. If you have access and have enough time, read that sery of books that I mentioned in previous comments. Then, at least we know what is the problem that must be resolved.
The Arabs did invade Sassanid Persia…
Suliman Bashear’s ‘Arabs and Others in Early Islam,’ Fred Donner’s ‘The Early Islamic Conquests,’ or Abd al-Husayn Zarrin’kub ’s ‘Ruzgaran : tarikh-i Iran az aghz ta saqut saltnat Pahlvi,’ and any other number of texts will confirm this historical fact. Ali ibn Abi Talib was in Iraq when he was murdered because his detachment of the Muslim army functioned as the “tip of the spear” for Arab inroads into what had been a Byzantine and Sassanid Middle East. His correspondence with Mu’awiyya is one of the primary sources documenting early Muslim expension into Byzantine Christendom and Mazdean Persia.
Matthew,
Where can I find those letters? Have we those original letters or maybe they have been mentioned in other books? Which books?
I know that we have some letters from Mohammad to some emperors, but his letter to Iranian king is interestingly different from others(content,length,style,…).
Can you please give me you references?
Yasin,
If in fact you are a proud Iranian as you say, why are you so eager to discredit the evil doings of Iran’s greatest enemies (the Arabs) throughout Iranian history? In fact, you are the only person I have ever heard, Iranian, American, or Arab, that has claimed that Arabs and Iranians never fought eachother during Sassanian Persia. How could you claim something so ridiculous? How the hell do you think Islam came to Persia? Why do you think they’re are so many Arabic words imbedded into the Persian language? Because Iranians just loved Arabs so much? Or because we were forced to speak Arabic for 200 hundred years and forced to practice Islam for a millenia after that. Even if you’re so bent on claiming that what 99% of all credible historians agree on, at least you could derive your own perceptions about the past from facts about the present.
Yasin, glad you asked,
You can find the letters in Hamidullah’s “la lettre du Prophete a Heraclius et le sort de l’original,” (1955) and, more recently, in ‘Six originaux des lettres du prophete de l’Islam,’ (Paris 1985).
RB Serjeant questioned the authenticity of the letters in his chapter entitled “Arabic Prose” found in ‘Arabic Literature to the end of the Umayyad Period,’ (Cambridge 1983). Suhaila al-Jaburi likewise doubts the authenticity of the documents in “risaalat an-nabi ilaa Heraql malik ar-rum,” found in Hamdard Islamicus I (1978).
In 1977, King Hussein of Jordan announced in a TV broadcast that he had the letter in his possession. He then put a team of scholars and archeologists, both Muslim and non-Muslim to the task of testing their authenticity. The letters were found to be authentic and a synopsis of the findings of the group can be found in Muhammad Mahdi Shams al-Din’s, “Ba’da husul al-malik Husayn ‘ala an-nuskha al-asliyya li risaalat an-nabi ila hiraql,” found in al-’Usbu’ al-’arabi, 4-25-1977, number 90, page 320.
Hope that helps
Arian and Matthew,
I have taken all of these information from my lovely historian!
1. A dumb Empire:
Let me list all that we know about the language of iranian people 1400 years ago:
a. “Alfehrest” written by “Ebn Nadim” contains some description of those languages.
b. A few “Katibeh”s(I don’t know the word in English!)
“Ebn Nadim” is not giving any refernce for his claims.
He lists thousands of books claimed to be written by Iranian scholars in Sassanian times. None of them has been found (Yeah, those disgusting Arabs have burned all of them!).
Tens of different languages and their structure is also mentioned in this book. I don’t know if you have read his discription, but that is RIDICULOUS. Such languages can’t exist(just based on his discription!). Pure mythology.
The interesting fact is that this guy was discovered just 150 years ago. Before that, nobody has mentioned him. But now, those credible historians are extensively refering to his book. You know? I am a conspiracy theorist!
What about “a few Katibeh”s? It is not so difficult to prove that they are all forged in recent times. Even if you look at their pictures, you can find some funny “Sooty”s! In one case there is a picture of “Ka’beye Zartosht” that in the place of current “Katibe”s, you can find an “Ivaan”! You know? I am a conspiracy theorist!
An Empire has ruled Iran for more than 400 years, but we don’t know how they were speaking, where is their documentations? just one book from that age? …
An Empire is supposed to be an Empire! It must prove itself with a strong presence…
2. A Virtual Empire:
An Empire needs some facilities (Bridges,”Kaarvaansara”s,roads,…). Where are they? About “Karvansaraa”, it is not sufficient to just showing one isolated building in a desert, you must find a chain of them connecting two cities…
3. …
Let me conclude that Sassanian is another myth! So, there couldn’t be any war between them and Arabs.
Arabs are not our enemies. Do you like to know your enemy?
Do you know that there were lots of “Ilaami” buildings around “Takhte Jamshid”? And those credible “Mostashregh”s has destroyed all of them (see “Miraase Farhangi” website, also some pictures of those buildings are available). Why? maybe they didn’t like some parts of our history to be revealed… They are our enemies, not those poor Arabs.
What famous roads and monuments? Oh, you mean aside from the Silk road, the Khorasan highway, the most famous and renowned and widely used roads in Ancient Asia? Roads Alexander the Great and Chinese Emperors recorded traveling?
And what about Perspolis? Or the Persian capital at Ecbatana, Babylon? Yeah, must’ve been the same the aliens who built the pyramids…
Sassanian period didn’t exist huh? Well how would you explain the carvings and engravings of Emperor Valentine of the Roman empire bowing beforeSassanian emperors like Shapur II at Pasarguard? I guess the same aliens must’ve carved those figures.
You are truly the incarnate of Salman-e Farsi. You disgust me, and there is no reason why you should bother calling yourself an Iranian becuase you most certaintly aren’t one. Go join your Taazi brothers in the Jihad against mankind, fool.
You claim your a conspiracy theorist, who is ironically “proud of his heritage”, but in reality, you are neither. You are a pawn of the Islamic Republic, satifying either yours or their deceptive agenda. It takes a few posts to find people like you out, but it’s clear now.
You guys have no shame, strategically planting yourself into particular blogs, with the aim of distorting Iranian indentity in a time of crisis to confuse and manipulate public image of Iranian history and Iranian politics for the benefit of the dirty Islamic Republic. Clever Iranians and non-Iranians would see through your lies, particularly such farfetched ones like “the Sassanian period of Persia never existed”.
Regardless, I have nothing more to say to you other than you are not a real blogger, you are a tool of the Islamic Republic in disguise, and that you have been redflagged.
Khak bar saret, marg bar shoma.
Yasin,
Your words in this thread:
There is a book titled “ta’ammoli dar bonyan’haye taarikhe Iran†by “Naaser poorpiraarâ€. How would you feel if he proves you that some of the “Saasaani†“Kateebeâ€s are fake! forged by … “Mostashreghâ€s in recent times. The point is that we have not written our history…There were actually no war between Arabs and Iranian people. this topic and you want to know more about your identity, you can refer to that book, or to his weblog(naria.blogfa.com)…This guy has no academic degree in history! But he is a revolutionary and is doing a really great work. I strongly recommend you to read his books(a sery titled “Ta’ammoli dar bonyanhaye tarinkhe Iranâ€)….. Sm, “many and many historians and scholars†were agents of great Britain or its modern counterparts.
Your “beloved†Naaser Poorpiraar (has a series of books titled “Twelve Centuries of Silence”. The title I believe has been chosen to contrast the “Two Centuries of Silence” by Mr.Zarrinkoub.) is unqualifed as a historian and has no credibility. But, he has a lot of fantasies and pathologies.
Poorpirar is apparently a member of Tehran University faculty and his articles have been published in Keyhan, the conservative fundamentalist newspaper in Iran. A significant parts of his so-called “theories of history†blame much of the misrepresentation on Jews and Jewish conspiracy! You Yasin, seem to blame it on Britain and foreign agents. All of this says volumes about both his and your own motives, so very aligned with Islamic Republic of Iran lunatics and their revisionist approach to history of Iran, with a clear aim for “disinformationâ€.
A couple of comments from his blog “hagh va Sabr†on naria.blogfa.com:
â€1. Saddam is a hero middle-eastern warrior against the filthy West ruled by Zionists! 2. the word ‘Persian’ is from the the same root as barking of dogs.)â€
Yasin, I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt but you continuously seem to ignore many of the points and evidence given here by others about Iranian history including the Arab/Islam invasion of Iran in the 7th Century, including Matthew’s and Arian’s last posts. This leads me to believe that a) you are genuinely naïve or b) you are on the same page as mullahs are their cohorts. Most likely, both a & b apply to you.
Poorpirar needs to call for a coherent, & professional debate with “qualified†scholars and historians, to prove his ‘theories†and to gain credibility outside of his Islamic Republic circles and their naïve believers. Nothing else will convince me that he is genuine.
Don’t bother replying to me.
Arian:
I totally agree with you. (censored)
Ba Sepas Sm, I appreciate your post. Eventually fools like this get found out and give up and move to other blogs, but as long we don’t give them the oppurtunity they want to insult and corrupt the truth behind our grand and noble ancient and modern culture, and our fight for democracy, we have done our jobs. It is bad enough that history books passed out throughout Western schools contain half a page on ancient Persia and 3 chapters on the accomplishments of the Greeks and Romans and their contributions to humanity. We dont need what little is left of our ancient public image to be tainted and corrupted by e-Basiji pawns like this fool, Yasin. In time the sun will set on a free and prosperous Iranian soil, and we will be able to start over with the pride and dignity our forefathers had strived so hard to create so many years ago. But until then, we will continue to fight corruption, and continue to seek truth.
Payandeh Bad Iran,
Zende Bad Iran
Marg bar doshmanhayeh Iran!
Disappointing! As I can see, anybody has found something to be obssesed with. Some people with Islam, and you …
Hey! You have no right to judge me. Don’t pretend to be a modern man and still behaving like most fundamentalist people.
You don’t need to read any book in history. Please go and read a book in Dialogue.
Be proud of yourself, your history, your polite language, your “Aryamehr”, your pennis, your open-mindedness…
… that wasted my time with these people (censored)
Yasin,
If wish to continue to post, could you write in Persian or Arabic from here onwards? Your English is garbage.
Lullaby for the Islamists
http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/revolution/khomeini.shtml#01
Writing in Persian is really time consuming for me. Please tolerate my bad English!
Mathew and Yasin,
I am really enjoying reading your comments. Keep the good work! :D
Kamangir:
What’s this -(censored)- thing you put at the end of my post #84?
Yasin, what is your native language?
I think Yasin would feel more comfortable writing in the language of his true brothers, Arabic.
Sm,
I am sorry that I had to edit your comment. I try to keep my blog swear-free. I hope it is fine for you.
Arian,
Come on! This is very silly. :D
Yasin,
“1. A dumb Empire:
Let me list all that we know about the language of iranian people 1400 years ago:
a. “Alfehrest†written by “Ebn Nadim†contains some description of those languages.
b. A few “Katibehâ€s(I don’t know the word in English!)”
I have not read the fehrest by Ebn Nadim, but there were three ‘official’ languages of the Persian Empire in which all inscriptions were written:
Elamite
Assyrian
Persian
Kamangir:
I’m sure you know that there were and have been no swear words in any of my posts in this or other threads. However, there have been plenty in Yasin’s posts.
Arian,
The majority of the citizens of Arab countries (60% in the most conservative censuses) are illiterate, according to the UN’s first ADHR report. This presents a big problem when it comes to making clear, and justifiable arguments.
Kamangir:
Oh I see what you mean about swear words. In my post #84, the first paragraph, in italic, is cut & paste from original Yasin’s posts in this thread, refer to Yasin’s post #25 - He swears in that post and I copied and pasted.
Perfectly understand your swear-free policy, would be great to apply it throughout and non-selectively too. ;-)
Haha yes Matthew, however, I think the census gives them too much credit. Unfortunately, as much as Yasin wishes, he doesnt not come from an Arab country but rather and Aryan one. Btw, the three languages you mentioned were the official ones, yes, but there were tens of other Iranian-based languages spoken by the indigenous inhabitants of Iran, Avestan being one of them.
Kamangir, I read Sm’s post before you edited it, and there were no swear words in it, so where did the censored come from? I was also curious to know whether you agree with Yasin’s general point of view or not, judging by your response to my post about Yasin speaking Arabic. I don’t understand how someone who denies an attack from Arab invaders, and who claims Arabs have not been the enemies of Iran, wouldn’t have an affinity for their language as well, amongst other things. It is obvious where Yasin’s loyalties lie, so the real question is, where do yours?
And if I come off condescending I don’t mean to, it was a genuine question with no connotations. :-) I read a few of the posts from above and I am also an atheist and a harsh critic of Islam, so in that regard I see where your coming from.
Sm,
You are right. Sorry. Actually, I censored at least one of his/her comments, too. And please do not accuse me of being selective. You know I am not. Chakeirm. :D
My native language is Persian. But still Arab people are my brothers.
Kamangir,
Thanks. #70 too. Not an accusation, just a reminder since I agree with swear-free policy and its thorough application. :-)
Arab people are your brothers? Well, you just proved my point…
Jeez, you could’ve just said that before and spared me the energy.
Matthew,
The only reference for studying iranian ancient languages is “Alfehrest”(I am not sure!). Just three languages?! read his book and you will learn that we, as proud racist Iranians, were speaking with more than 20 languages in the same time!
Arian,
All people are my brothers and sisters, even racist people like you.
Matthew, please don’t try arguing with Yasin, he’s just trying to promote his agenda of misinformation and deceit. He’s a liar and traitor, and when you argue with him your just giving him more oppurtunity to open his mouth and let out an avalanche of bullshit.
Thank you
In the post above, you just called Iranians racist people. That’s a pretty racist comment in itself, you hypocrit.
Comment 110 was directed towards Yasin.
Yasin,
I have no doubt that twenty languages were spoken in ancient Persia, but I doubt that ALL people living in the empire spoke twenty languages. Nearly every spoken language is represented in New York City for instance, but most New Yorkers, native or otherwise, only speak 2: English, and something else. The three official languages can be understand as the three lingua franca, and the other 17 could rightly be considered related languages or minority languages.
Yasin, are Israelis your brothers?
Arash, an interesting link on the death of the Persian language in Pakistan.
http://www.dawn.com/weekly/books/archive/061119/books4.htm
Yasin,
Another question, why “Marg bar Amrikaa” every Friday? That scares a lot of us, and makes many Americans trigger happy.
Matthew, I have my doubts that Yasin is even an Iranian, more likely a Arab who spent some time in Iran and learned to speak Farsi. Just discount anything he says as bullshit and Islamo-fascist propaganda.
Matthew,
Yep! Israelis are my brothers too.
Why do you think that I am advocating Iranian government?!
It is quite strange for me!!
Apparently, such slogans(Marg bar Amrikaa) are wrong.
So Israeli’s are your brothers, so you advocate a regime that has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. Yo, you truly make no freaking sense at all.
Matthew,
You must read “Ebn Nadim”’s discription of ancient iranian languages. Then maybe you accept that BASED ON HIS DISCRIPTION, such languages can not exist.
In his Iran, King is speaking in one language, army in another, secretaries in another, farmers in another,….
Is it rational?!
Yasin,
Probably so you can treat the Israeli Jews like the Islamic Republic does the Jews Yazd. Go out on the street tomorrow and sing “Israeli-ha baroudar-ha-am hastand” so you can end up in Evin.
You advocate Iranian government because you are a mindless drone.
Saying death to America is very wrong.
Arian, you are right.
Arian,
Please! I am not advocating Iranian government.
“You must read “Ebn Nadimâ€â€™s discription of ancient iranian languages. Then maybe you accept that BASED ON HIS DISCRIPTION, such languages can not exist.
In his Iran, King is speaking in one language, army in another, secretaries in another, farmers in another,….
Is it rational?!”
I doubt I would trust a single source to draw a judgement about an entire period in history. And yes, it is perfectly rational. Roughly 25% of the American military speaks English as a second language while our President has trouble speaking one language.
Matthew,
I am not in Iran right now, so I think there is no danger for me saying such things! thanks for your kind language!
Yasin,
I guess you have been smoking too much Arabian hashish. It was only 5 minutes you said:
“Yep! Israelis are my brothers too.
Why do you think that I am advocating Iranian government?!”
Now you say:
“Arian, Please! I am not advocating Iranian government.”
Interesting…maybe your smoking opium as well.
Matthew,
You are speaking about different nations in US army. So, can we conclude that in ancient Iran, army were from one nation, farmers from another, secretaries from another…?
Arian,
Maybe this is my bad English!
“Why do you think that I am advocating Iranian government?!”: I didn’t mean that I am advocating Iranian government!
No, only Americans and permanent residents (Green Card holders) may serve in the US military, i.e. we are one nation and have no official, though a majority of Americans speak English.
We can not conclude that in ancient Persia (there was no Iran until the 1920s) that the various professional classes were from different nations.
Arian,
I read that comment the same way you did.
Matthew,
“You advocate Iranian government because you are a mindless drone.”
You have misunderstood my sentence too.
Matthew,
“We can not conclude that in ancient Persia (there was no Iran until the 1920s) that the various professional classes were from different nations.”
So, why they had different languages for themselves?(not different dialects)
Matthew, Iran is Persia, always has been. Persians have been calling their country Iran since the ancient times. The only thing that changed in the 1920’s was that the ruler of Iran asking the rest of the world to stop calling us by our western name (Persia) and start calling us by the name we’ve been callin ourselves for thousands of years (Iran). However, for practical purposes they are synonomous.
And Yasin, if you didn’t mean you are advocating the Iranian government, what did you mean exactly? And may I also ask what the basis for your name is?
Simple, because they spoke their mother tongue and then one of the three official languages.
Arash, the part of your title, “When every word is published,” is quite apt regarding this conversation.
Yasin is the “heart and soul” of the Qur’an, the 36th surah of the book.
Arian,
Thanks by the way for correcting me on that.
Matthew,
None of iranian and muslim scholars has mentioned “Ebn Nadim” and his book. Also, he is not giving any refernce. It means his book is totally worthless(if not being forged just 150 years ago).
Yasin,
I just felt that you believe that I am advocating iranian government. So, I asked you why do you think so?!
This is my actual name. Yasin is one of the Quran’s “sooreh”s. You must ask my parents why did they choose this name for me.
No problem, Matthew. :-)
I have a feeling Yasin is not his real name in which case, Yasin has another meaning.
The Yasin (Arabic: ياسين ) anti-tank rocket launcher is a weapon developed by Hamas’ Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, named after the group’s spiritual leader, Sheik Ahmed Yassin, who was assassinated by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) on March 22, 2004. Apparently first used during the battle of Jabalya in October 2004, the Yasin was reportedly developed by Hamas’ engineers under the direction of Adnan al-Ghoul, assassinated in Gaza by the Israeli military on October 22, 2004.
Interesting…
Matthew,
Please answer my question:
According to “Alfehrest”, farmers were speaking language X(so, their nationality was X1), accountants were speaking language Y(so, their nationality was Y1),…
Is it rational that nationality of farmers, accountants, militias, … were different?
Oh!
How dangerous I am!