Tajiks Worldwide Community: Paniranism or pantajikism? - Tajiks Worldwide Community

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox

Parsistani Icon : (04 January 2016 - 10:02 PM) Someone here?
parwana Icon : (30 April 2014 - 05:21 PM) Posted Image
Parsistani Icon : (22 July 2013 - 04:02 AM) good morning :)
Gul agha Icon : (03 May 2013 - 04:29 PM) Sohrab, Tajikam doesn't only consist of a forum. We have two major sections in this website. One is in Persian which is updated frequently and the other is in Persian (Cyrillic). Additionally, the English page is still running and has a vast amount of information on Tajiks and Persians.
Gul agha Icon : (03 May 2013 - 04:27 PM) http://www.facebook.com/Tajikamsite
Sohrab Icon : (01 May 2013 - 06:31 AM) Tajikam on facebook?
SHA DOKHT Icon : (01 May 2013 - 12:12 AM) Like our page on Facebook: https://www.facebook...541604162529143
Sohrab Icon : (29 March 2013 - 08:31 AM) H again, I thought the site would be closed, but it's still running.
Gabaro_glt Icon : (26 March 2013 - 10:17 AM) Tajikistan was inhabited by the races of Cyrus the great (Sultan skindar Zulqarnain). The achmaniend dynasty ruled the entire region for several thousnd years.Cyrus the great's son cymbasis(Combchia)with forces migrated to Balkh ancient Bactaria or Bakhtar. Sultan Sumus the desecndant of Cyrus the great faught war against Alaxander of Macdonia in Bakhtar current tajikistan.
this ruling class was inhabited in the areas, like Balkh,fargana,alai,Tajikistan,badakhshan,Kabul,Takhar,Tashkorogan,Khutan,kashkar,Swat,Kashmir,Peshawar, hashtnager,Dir, Bajour,Gilgit,for serveral thaousand years.
Gabaro_glt Icon : (26 March 2013 - 10:16 AM) hellow
Gabaro_glt Icon : (26 March 2013 - 10:00 AM) Tajikistan was inhabited by the races of Cyrus the great (Sultan skindar Zulqarnain). The achmaniend dynasty ruled the entire region for several thousnd years.Cyrus the great's son cymbasis(Combchia)with forces migrated to Balkh ancient Bactaria or Bakhtar. Sultan Sumus the desecndant of Cyrus the great faught war against Alaxander of Macdonia in Bakhtar current tajikistan.
this ruling class was inhabited in the areas, like Balkh,fargana,alai,Tajikistan,badakhshan,Kabul,Takhar,Tashkorogan,Khutan,kashkar,Swat,Kashmir,Peshawar, hashtnager,Dir, Bajour,Gilgit,for serveral thaousand years.
Gabaro_glt Icon : (26 March 2013 - 09:46 AM) hellow
Gabaro_glt Icon : (25 March 2013 - 10:48 AM) Asssssssssalam o Alaikum
Gabaro_glt Icon : (22 March 2013 - 05:22 AM) I would like to here something from a tajik brother/sister living in Tajikstan
Gabaro_glt Icon : (22 March 2013 - 05:20 AM) I have traced my ancestors migrated from Panj and Balkh ancient
Gabaro_glt Icon : (22 March 2013 - 05:19 AM) I am desendant of Sultan behram Gabari Tajik living in GilGit pakistan
Gabaro_glt Icon : (22 March 2013 - 05:17 AM) Salam to all brothers
Parsistani Icon : (01 June 2012 - 10:48 AM) we are on facebook. Tajikam on facebook
Parsistani Icon : (01 June 2012 - 10:47 AM) salam guys.
Azim-khan Icon : (19 May 2012 - 11:19 AM) salom bachaho )
Resize Shouts Area

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Paniranism or pantajikism? Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Afrasiab Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
472
Joined:
29-October 07

Posted 22 May 2008 - 11:40 AM

In this forum a part of our Tajik patriots support ideas of paniranism and other part - support ideas of unity of Tajiks (Persians of Khorasan). Certainly, paniranism and pantajikism both protect interests of our nation. But in my opinion today we Tajiks of region should think more about pantajikism and pahkhorasanism, then about paniranism. I think, that pantajikism is a first step to unity of all iranian nations. What do you think about it?
0

#2 User is offline   Parsistani Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Research Group
Posts:
2,094
Joined:
22-May 07

Posted 22 May 2008 - 02:54 PM

[QUOTE=Afrasiab;9355]In this forum a part of our Tajik patriots support ideas of paniranism and other part - support ideas of unity of Tajiks (Persians of Khorasan). Certainly, paniranism and pantajikism both protect interests of our nation. But in my opinion today we Tajiks of region should think more about pantajikism and pahkhorasanism, then about paniranism. I think, that pantajikism is a first step to unity of all iranian nations. What do you think about it?[/QUOTE]

Of course, Pan-Iranism is not asked (at the moment) in our situation. We are looking first only for Pan-Tajikism, primarly because Tajiks share much more with eachother than to our Iranian brothers. The first thing that make Tajiks to Tajiks are their dialect. Also ''isolated'' by geography we understand eachother without any problems while we would have some problems with a Tehrani Persian. Also what considerable is is our faith, Tajiks are mostly of sunni-hanafiyya faith and since some Tajiks are manipulated and contaminated by dirty Awghan minds so they would never be Pro-Tajiks if we would support Pan-Iranism. Historically, sometimes Tajiks had also their own seperate history, for example the last 200 years was a seperate era of Tajik history, cut from the Iranian one. I also dont believe Iran would help us since theyself have problems and need economic and social support. Same for Tajiks. See how Tajikistans developement is dragging and about Afghanistans we dont need talk. From the geography, the language, faith and even in some parts also in cultural points Tajiks should first make steps for Pan-Tajikism than to Pan-Aryanism or ''Pan-Persianism''. If we are strong enough and we have a Khurasanzameen again and we are again united than we can talk about ''Pan-Iranism'' in form of ''United European Nations'', shortly ''EU''.
0

#3 User is offline   Afrasiab Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
472
Joined:
29-October 07

Posted 22 May 2008 - 03:47 PM

[QUOTE=Parsistani;9369]Of course, Pan-Iranism is not asked (at the moment) in our situation. We are looking first only for Pan-Tajikism, primarly because Tajiks share much more with eachother than to our Iranian brothers. The first thing that make Tajiks to Tajiks are their dialect. Also ''isolated'' by geography we understand eachother without any problems while we would have some problems with a Tehrani Persian. Also what considerable is is our faith, Tajiks are mostly of sunni-hanafiyya faith and since some Tajiks are manipulated and contaminated by dirty Awghan minds so they would never be Pro-Tajiks if we would support Pan-Iranism. Historically, sometimes Tajiks had also their own seperate history, for example the last 200 years was a seperate era of Tajik history, cut from the Iranian one. I also dont believe Iran would help us since theyself have problems and need economic and social support. Same for Tajiks. See how Tajikistans developement is dragging and about Afghanistans we dont need talk. From the geography, the language, faith and even in some parts also in cultural points Tajiks should first make steps for Pan-Tajikism than to Pan-Aryanism or ''Pan-Persianism''. If we are strong enough and we have a Khurasanzameen again and we are again united than we can talk about ''Pan-Iranism'' in form of ''United European Nations'', shortly ''EU''.[/QUOTE]

You are right, idea of paniranism is known and we Tajiks should support it. But we today should develop new idea - PanTajikism and the concept of Khorasan. We have basis for development of this idea. And we today need more Pantajikism, than Paniranism. Because today's Iran is known as government by shiizm ideology and more people from ours very religious sunnit nation will not like idea of unity with Iran. We first should should achieve unity of Tajiks, and then to think about all iranian world.
0

#4 User is offline   Parsistani Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Research Group
Posts:
2,094
Joined:
22-May 07

Posted 22 May 2008 - 04:52 PM

[QUOTE=Afrasiab;9371]You are right, idea of paniranism is known and we Tajiks should support it. But we today should develop new idea - PanTajikism and the concept of Khorasan. We have basis for development of this idea. And we today need more Pantajikism, than Paniranism. Because today's Iran is known as government by shiizm ideology and more people from ours very religious sunnit nation will not like idea of unity with Iran. We first should should achieve unity of Tajiks, and then to think about all iranian world.[/QUOTE]


I didnt say we should support Pan-Iranism. I only said that for us Tajiks it is much more important first to find to eachother than to others and what the religion tackles its not the concept of Shiism that make most Tajiks taking distance from it since Shiism is actually the same as sunni-hanafi school, except maybe some 3% (role of the Imam, ''self-hostage'' and some traditions that is still exiting in Shia Islam that in Sunni Islam is already forbidden for 1000 years ago (''Sigha'')), and part of our own identity, culture and nationalism. The problem both schools have today is Safaviyya Shia is turning today much to arabic bedouine Islam (instead to the original Khuramiyya or Ayyar ''movement''), to that of cruel and brute Omar who had forgotten the preaches and the original laws of Islam and its prophet. I mean we Tajiks have also Shias (Ismaelis and Qezelbashs) and our Shias are totally different than those Mullahs of Iran and we had never problems with them (except Awghan dogs and Arabs) and even some of our greatest thinkers were of Shia faith, Firdowsi, Sanai, Saadi, Al-Farabius, Rudaki and Mawlana (maybe ''Alevi'' or Bektashi Shia). However, Shia-Sunni BS should never be our job nor part of our culture, mentality or identity. Me, myself dreaming from that day were all Tajiks, or the majority, drop Shia Sunni crap and follow only ONE path of Islam. From Kandahar to Khesh, from Sistan to Sanjar, from Herat to Nangahar and Paktia. Inshallah, the day will come one day.

On the otherside, as i said before, Iran has many problem in its own society that should be cleared, including submission of Arabs and nationalistic Turks and retaking of the central-government. The same as we have to do. Today, if you would go there out with the banner of ''Pan-Iranism'' noone would support you, neither Iranians nor specially Tajiks who have made some bad experiances with Iranians but if you go with a banner of Pan-Tajikism every Tajik will support you and additional to that we are supported passively by great artists, poets, singers and musicians of Tajikistan who are one of the reason why young Tajiks search for their own roots and identify themself with Tajikism. The idea of Khurasan should be kept in the background so our enemies, also they know about the plans of a future Khurasanzameen, are not able to do something against our actions and plans. Today, it is very important for Tajiks to have the greatest distance from Wahabi-Salafi Dogzais than ever with the time Awghans will also destroy themself so we are on the green side and can only look their savage and barbaric actions against eachother and how they are tearing themself to pieces from a far distance with a smile on the face. Steps of Tajikism needs also education, making Tajiks clear who they are and show them their own beautiful culture and confronting them with the lies, false-brothership, benamoosi ect of Awghans that shines for indoctrinated Tajiks as a warm, bright and beautiful light, mainly the dirty spastic term ''Awghan''. Lte Awghan bleeding! That was from me.
0

#5 User is offline   Nader Shah Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Research Group
Posts:
1,155
Joined:
13-October 07

Posted 23 May 2008 - 01:34 AM

I agree that Tajiks need to first get their own act together, especially in Afghanistan. However, I believe that Tajiks in Afghanistan should seek to reunite with all Persian speaking people and even other groups (Turkmens, Ouzbeks) if they can be persuaded to join them, in order to get off the yoke of Pahstuns. Tajiks of Tajikistan seem to be doing fine, except for regionalism from what I gather, and they need to create more awareness of Tajik identity among Tajik of Uzbekistan to prepare them for long-term unification.

Pan-iranism is a distant dream, and it requires Afghanistan to be fixed before even thinking about it. And it also requires long term educational work among Iranians to develop a much better appreciation of the cousins in Tajikistan and Afghanistan, and start to love them and respect them for who they are.
0

#6 User is offline   Ahhangar Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
316
Joined:
03-February 08

Posted 23 May 2008 - 06:32 PM

TAJIKS need to unite - especially within Afghanistan - this is where it is most critical for the future of PanTajikism.

When they are one united block - they will have considerable influence and will be able to persuade many of the other groups to ally with them or at least to be neutral.

It was the lack of unity between Western Tajiks and Easter/Northern Tajiks in Afghanistan's last 30years of war that resulted in much of the difficulties they faced being much harder to deal with than it would otherwise have been. Even within the Northern Tajiks - there was disunity - with Badakhshis sticking together - and Panshiris the same - and the Kohistanis being totally erratic and totally disunited. It was not until the Western/Saudi sponsored Taliban started their atrocities and expressed their intent on erasing Tajiks - that Tajiks of the north and in Ghor started acted with a bit of unity.

Can you people believe that some of ISI pashtunist agent Gulbuddin's most feared and loyal commanders were Tajiks of Kohistan?

Unity is very important - we can achieve great feats with it - feats that we cannot imagine being possible at the moment.
0

#7 User is offline   Independent Icon

  • Newbie
  • Pip
Group:
Members
Posts:
1
Joined:
30-May 08

Posted 30 May 2008 - 03:57 AM

[QUOTE=Ahhangar;9435]

Can you people believe that some of ISI pashtunist agent Gulbuddin's most feared and loyal commanders were Tajiks of Kohistan?

[/QUOTE]


Dear Ahhangar!

You are forgetting that during the Jihad, ethnicity was not really that major factor. Most of Jamiat commanders in south and southeast were Pashtuns. The most prominent was Mullah Naqibullah in Kandahar who was ousted.

Gulbudin and his radical Hezbe Islami did not enjoy much support among Pashtuns till the fall of Najibullahs regime and the advent of Rabbani, Masoud and Co. Their wrong policies drove a wedge in the once very strong Jamiat party based on ethnicity.
0

#8 User is offline   chapandaaz Icon

  • Member
  • PipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
27
Joined:
04-March 08

Posted 30 May 2008 - 05:27 AM

ahhanger-e gerami
i agree with you 110 % . we need unity more then ever .unity and selve awarnies is crocials for our sarvival .
dear independent
there were a couple of importent factors to what hapend to jamiat in the south . it was pakistan ISI who promoted pashtoon nationalizm & fudimitalizm , thats why they created taliban and alquida . with the help of alquida & taliban they can promot thier agenda in the region mainly against india and tajiks .any pashtoon nationalist & fundimentaist was one way or the other way suported by ISI . there were thousands of pakistanies fighters from public and army ,ISI OFFICER fighting alongside of talibans ans alquida .they were captured by the thousand in panjsheer and the north, thies all will dacumented facts .
0

#9 User is offline   Ahhangar Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
316
Joined:
03-February 08

Posted 30 May 2008 - 12:49 PM

[QUOTE=Independent;9755]Dear Ahhangar!

You are forgetting that during the Jihad, ethnicity was not really that major factor. Most of Jamiat commanders in south and southeast were Pashtuns. The most prominent was Mullah Naqibullah in Kandahar who was ousted.

Gulbudin and his radical Hezbe Islami did not enjoy much support among Pashtuns till the fall of Najibullahs regime and the advent of Rabbani, Masoud and Co. Their wrong policies drove a wedge in the once very strong Jamiat party based on ethnicity.[/QUOTE]

Dear Independent,

Thank you for the reply.

I understand that during the Jihad - especially amongst our own Tajiks the concept of ethnicity was not at the forefront of our mind - as faithful muslims that was the correct policy. But we all know that Gulbudin did not have Jihad as his real agenda - he along with his ISI backers had a distinct ethnic agenda - assassinating Massouds men whenever they had the chance - Gulbudin worked with his fellow Pashtun - General Shahnawaz Tanai to constantly launch raids on Tajik areas and especially the PAnjshir - both of them in concert trying to kill off the Massoud.

The Tajiks whom were part of the communist government also closed their eyes to the blatant ethnic agenda of the Pashtuns within the government.

Hezb Wahdat had no other agenda than an ethnic one - even though it did not say it did - which is why many Shia Tajiks refused to be a part of them.

The Tajiks were committed to the cause on which ever side they were on - not realizing that they were all contributing to the destruction of Tajiks in the long term.

The best thinkers - fighters - on which ever side - were Tajiks - if only they were all under one movement - united they would obliterate all of their enemies and make state which respected all. We need to learn to organize ourselves into one block - and vigorously eliminate those whom oppose our intension to unite.


Ahhangar
0

#10 User is offline   Ahhangar Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
316
Joined:
03-February 08

Posted 30 May 2008 - 01:04 PM

[QUOTE=chapandaaz;9756]ahhanger-e gerami
i agree with you 110 % . we need unity more then ever .unity and selve awarnies is crocials for our sarvival .
dear independent
there were a couple of importent factors to what hapend to jamiat in the south . it was pakistan ISI who promoted pashtoon nationalizm & fudimitalizm , thats why they created taliban and alquida . with the help of alquida & taliban they can promot thier agenda in the region mainly against india and tajiks .any pashtoon nationalist & fundimentaist was one way or the other way suported by ISI . there were thousands of pakistanies fighters from public and army ,ISI OFFICER fighting alongside of talibans ans alquida .they were captured by the thousand in panjsheer and the north, thies all will dacumented facts .[/QUOTE]

YES indeed my brother Chapandaz,

WE NEED TO UNITE UNDER ONE ENTITY WITHIN AFGHANISTAN - and to get rid of the parasites that pretend to be our friends today and back stab us tomorrow.

If just the Tajiks of the three neighboring provinces of Parwan-Kapisa-Panjsher unite completely under one ideology - they can take over the reigns of power in Afghanistan. It may be hard to imagine due to all the propaganda against us - but believe me when these people unite they can achieve things we find hard to imagine. One of the main reasons why these three provinces has had so destruction poured on to it and so much propaganda spread about it is simply because of it potential strength.

Jamiat's Pan-Islamist agenda is what held back Massoud from destroying Gulbudin in 1993 totally. Rabbani whom was under the influence of Saudis and other Islamist would always relent hold Massoud back from finishing off our foes.


Ahhangar.
0

#11 User is offline   Parsistani Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Research Group
Posts:
2,094
Joined:
22-May 07

Posted 30 May 2008 - 04:11 PM

[QUOTE=Independent;9755]Dear Ahhangar!

You are forgetting that during the Jihad, ethnicity was not really that major factor. Most of Jamiat commanders in south and southeast were Pashtuns. The most prominent was Mullah Naqibullah in Kandahar who was ousted.

Gulbudin and his radical Hezbe Islami did not enjoy much support among Pashtuns till the fall of Najibullahs regime and the advent of Rabbani, Masoud and Co. Their wrong policies drove a wedge in the once very strong Jamiat party based on ethnicity.[/QUOTE]

Do you have any kind of ''proof'' Awghans and their arab brothers were also ''Jihadists'' against the Soviet-Power or shall i show you some interesting videos and facts about them? Of course not, instead fighting russians they were occupiying Tajik and Non-Pashtun lands by looting, destruction, killing ect.
0

#12 User is offline   arshak Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
461
Joined:
12-January 08

Posted 31 May 2008 - 09:43 AM

Persian Empire = Glory of our civilization, for the sake of bringing once again glory and become superpower, Baluchs & Kurds should put down their arms and unite with Persians, Pushtuns should stop this "baradar-koshi" and unite with Persians, then Taleshi, Ossetians will join us... then other people such as Turkmens, Uzbeks, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Georgians, Dagistani, Iraqi, Bahraini, people of Sharjah, Omani will also join. Aryana Federative Republics :D then do you think Angal, Microbes, Shotors and others can even dare to open their mouth and label us?

Tajik, Hazara, Farsiwan, Farsi label has to vanish forever and replaced by Parsi.
As for nation Aryana :-)
Shiite, Sunni, Ismaili, Sufi, etc has to vanish, division = weakness, this is what those Angals and other Microbes are enjoying for our people to fight themselves while themselves build their wealth.

Spirit of Cyrus the Great will live forever. One big happy family :-)
0

#13 User is offline   Rostam Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
447
Joined:
17-May 07

Posted 31 May 2008 - 11:29 AM

Any progress in any of them.....is good :)

btw: Pashtuns/Afghans I dont consider as Iranian.....

If pan-iranism includes pashtuns/afghans....than I am extremly anti pan-iranism! :D
0

#14 User is offline   Ahhangar Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
316
Joined:
03-February 08

Posted 31 May 2008 - 07:52 PM

[QUOTE=Rostam;9823]Any progress in any of them.....is good :)

btw: Pashtuns/Afghans I dont consider as Iranian.....

If pan-iranism includes pashtuns/afghans....than I am extremly anti pan-iranism! :D [/QUOTE]

Dear Rostam,

Tribal Pashtun culture is not Iranian - it is Mongolic - hence its anti Iranianess, but the Pashto language is a part of the Iranian languages. Pashtuns need to be reformed and turned into proper Iranians before they are admitted as part of greater Iran.

If through Pan-Iranism we can kill of the Mongolic culture of the Pashtuns and turn them into staunch Iranists - then I am for it!

The trouble is that Pan Iranism is not so developed or at least I am not aware that it is that developed to have policies for dealing with these complexities that prevail in what was once Greater Iran. After all with so many invaders - many things have been turned upside down and don't make sense.

Lets not reject Pan Iranism outright - it does have benefits - but also lets think of ways to develop it so that it can deal with problems such as the tribalism of the Pashtuns - Baluchs - Hazaras - Uzbeks - Turkmen and all other enemies of IRAN e KABEER.
0

#15 User is offline   koorosh_jam Icon

  • Newbie
  • Pip
Group:
Members
Posts:
2
Joined:
12-June 08

Posted 13 June 2008 - 06:55 PM

Dear friend I am koorosh from Iran I think the only thing that satisfy all of us is friendship we (persian speaking nations) are the same and from the same race we are a big familiy living in different places
0

#16 User is offline   Dushanbe Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
189
Joined:
22-October 07

Posted 14 June 2008 - 12:01 PM

I do not think the word "pan" will bring any good to us. It sounds threatenning to others and most probably will make othres to create something like anti-pan-iranism/tajikism.

We are supposed to protect our culture (in which language is included), and not destroy others.

Afghanistani Tajiks have all the right (and must) to take the initiative of protecting what is theirs (lands, culture), because they are most affected (after Tajiks of Uzbekistan). So far Iran and Tajikistan are doing farely good in taking care of their history and culture, and trying to develop them.

I think the best way for us is to develop self-awareness. I believe that when people become educated, they will ask themselves about their roots and their identity.
0

#17 User is offline   Kambiz Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
720
Joined:
13-January 08

Posted 17 June 2008 - 03:36 PM

Dushanbe-jan,

I am sure none of our Persianate countries are doing well in the field of protecting our cultural values, history etc. Iran is Islamic, Afghanistan is ruled by Pashtuns (mostly ignorant, but Iranian themselves too), Tajikistan is miles away from embracing its Persian identity. Tajikistan is trying to create 'something new', 'something purely Tajik'. Rahman has not succeeded to forge anything new yet and people are really lost in idetifying themselves. Tajiks of Uzbekistan are forgotten and culturally/linguistically dying out.

[QUOTE=Dushanbe;10295]I do not think the word "pan" will bring any good to us. It sounds threatenning to others and most probably will make othres to create something like anti-pan-iranism/tajikism.

We are supposed to protect our culture (in which language is included), and not destroy others.

Afghanistani Tajiks have all the right (and must) to take the initiative of protecting what is theirs (lands, culture), because they are most affected (after Tajiks of Uzbekistan). So far Iran and Tajikistan are doing farely good in taking care of their history and culture, and trying to develop them.

I think the best way for us is to develop self-awareness. I believe that when people become educated, they will ask themselves about their roots and their identity.[/QUOTE]
0

#18 User is offline   Dushanbe Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
189
Joined:
22-October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 04:06 PM

Of course Tajikistan is not going to be like Iran, which pay more attention to its Islamic history. What I can agree whith you, is that Tajikistan is on the way of something new. By "purely Tajik" I undertan "Purely Persian". As of alphabet.... I do not think we will return to the past.

In reality, we do not have problems in identifying ourselves (as you say), the discussions and debates start when other Persions start questioning us.

One of Tajik student, my friend who studies at another university, told me about his debate with an Iranian student. As he told me, the Iranian student claimed that all Central Asia was their colony and Rudaki was not Tajik but an Iranian who colonised Central Asia.

Honestly speaking about the reality, average Tajik students believe that all those who wrote in Persian were Tajiks only.
And the other interesting thing is that I have never met any Tajik calling himself/herself Persian. So, purely Tajik, means purely Persian.
0

#19 User is offline   PORS Icon

  • AZADANDESH
  • Icon
Group:
Administrators
Posts:
740
Joined:
30-May 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 06:11 PM

Dushanbe i gerami,

Thank you for participating in this forum and your thirst to broaden your knowledge. It's good to see that. However, there are several things I would like to comment and suggest regarding your post. I have put numbers and highlighted them, so it could be easy following for you.

1) Firstly, as a Persian of Tajikistan (Tajik) please don't compare Tajikistan with Iran, secular versus islamic. Although, I do share your thoughts on islamic regime of Iran, yet it does not give me, you or anybody else the right to regard Iran like that: "Of course Tajikistan is not going to be like Iran". It seems awkward. Please, refrain yourself from using such statements regarding Iran, Tajikistan and Khorasan. It is not respectful to you or any of us here.

2) Agree with you on that matter. Yet we should not think of "Tajik" as something new. Persian and Tajik are one things used interchangeably to mean, Tajik, as a Central Asian Persian. As you said, understand "purely Tajik" as "purely Persian" which basically Tajik is Persian. Tajik is a term that came out recently, if you think in terms of history, but we were inhibited for thousands of years and we were known as Persians of CA. We, Persians of CA (Tajiks) should not develop and coin such terms as Tajik, instead foster "Persians" of CA amongst each other. Tajik should be less used as interchangeable term for Persian, and Persian should be used instead of Tajik. Anyways, it will take time and I hope we will facilitate this process.

3) I understand that your friend might had no intentions to change your mind about Iran and the concept of Irane Bozorg, yet I would like to suggest you to use your own rational mind to analyze and interpret things. Stand on your own feet and think for yourself! Don't just get one word as a complete sentence. Let your family, friends and compatriots be a source of knowledge for you, and don't let others to make decisions for you. Use your critical reasoning and stop believing in everything without any proof.

4) To be honest, I personally think your friend was not knowledgeable enough about our history, culture, and literature to argue with an Iranian student. Why doesn't an Iranian argue about Tajikistan being a colony of Iran in the past with Darius, Nader Shah, Rooyintan or any knowledgeable person? Just because they know the answers? I think so. I am sure that you won't meet any Iranian who will argue about our past whenever you will learn about our history sufficiently. As for Iranian student, I think he was just close-minded guy who doesn't go beyond what he has heard from others or has been taught in school. These people will ponder if they have been questioned beyond the common sense.

5) That's what I was talking before. Persian is what should be understood by our compatriots, not "Tajik." Tajik is just an interchangeable term for Persian. As soon as it will be understood by average CA Persian (as you say Tajik students) people, then they have an understanding of Roudaki, Ferdousi and others along. It is our responsibility to educate each other and I think you and me are not exceptions.

6) If you haven't had a chance to meet any CA Persian (Tajik) calling himself Persian, then now you can hear it here: "I am Persian".

Finally, Dushanbe i gerami I hope we will constantly learn about our past and don't let other make decisions for us. We are capable to think for ourselves and other's perspective should be seen as a valuable source. One more thing, I would also add is that we should stop living the past, i.e. only talk about the history and what great thinkers we had, instead be one of those Ferdowsi, Roudaki, Khayyam and others ourselves.


Tandorostu perooz bemani,




Pors.

[QUOTE=Dushanbe;10372]
(1)Of course Tajikistan is not going to be like Iran, which pay more attention to its Islamic history. (2)What I can agree whith you, is that Tajikistan is on the way of something new. By "purely Tajik" I undertan "Purely Persian". As of alphabet.... I do not think we will return to the past.

In reality, we do not have problems in identifying ourselves (as you say), the discussions and debates start when other Persions start questioning us.

(3)One of Tajik student, my friend who studies at another university, told me about his debate with an Iranian student. (4)As he told me, the Iranian student claimed that all Central Asia was their colony and Rudaki was not Tajik but an Iranian who colonised Central Asia.

(5)Honestly speaking about the reality, average Tajik students believe that all those who wrote in Persian were Tajiks only.
(6)And the other interesting thing is that I have never met any Tajik calling himself/herself Persian. So, purely Tajik, means purely Persian.[/QUOTE]
0

#20 User is offline   Dushanbe Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
189
Joined:
22-October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 08:51 PM

PORi aziz,

Thank you for your response. I really hope that this forum is capable of broadening the knowledge of its members.
I truly appreciate your comments and see it as an opportunity for myself to develop my points by making them clearer.

1) The comparison is usually made in order to see the differences. Of course the differences between Iran and Tajikistan are really big and there is no point to stress it. I love Iran and I did not have any negative intention while saying that Tajikistan is not going to be like Iran. What I believe is that we have our own way and they have their own way. Additionally, what I believe is that due to our common interests (cultural, economic, political, educational, etc.) our roads will often meet. We are two friendly countries with common past. What is more, it is for the People of Iran to decide what kind of government they should have. We respect their choice.
2) Tajik is viewed something new basically by those non-Tajikistani Persians. I view terms Persian and Dari older. But, you see, we speak about them when we talk about our classic literature and history. I am not a historian, but the term Tajik already exits and nobody can change the situation right now. Believe me, I am so much in love with it, that it is difficult to me to call myself Persian. I can call myself Persian at home when there is nobodybut present myself as Persian to others (?)I doubt.
Of course we are not new, we did not appear recently (I am thinking about Darwins theory of evolution). Anyways it is not important. The interesting thing is your thoughts about the usage of the terms Tajik and Persian which I do not share.


3) Thanks for your advice. I just wanted to bring you some examples from real life when speaking about my friend. By the way, my friend is a young teacher (23years) of Tajik language and literature and originally from Samarqand. We know that present Persian language developed in our lands, Khorasan and then spread to other parts of, as you say Bigger Iran.
What I whish for the people of my country is not to be involved into history like some peoples. General school understanding is enough. Past does not exist anymore and no need to repeat it.

Thanks
0

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users