Tajiks Worldwide Community: marry other races - 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

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

marry other races Rate Topic: -----

#41 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 03 November 2009 - 10:17 AM

View PostParsistani, on 03 November 2009 - 03:00 AM, said:

There are two Safi ''group in Afghanistan. One group belong to the dirty Ghalzai Mongols and the other of the north are Tajiks. The term Safi self drived from the name of the local chief (some other assume it´s just a loan name of the local mountain). The Pashtun Safis live in Kandahar and Pashtunwa while Tajik Safis can be find in Afghanistan and Uzbekistan. One group speak Farsi e Afghanistan and Farsi e Bukhari, including Chagatai the other a hybtrid language (''Pashtu''). Pushtun Jats and their Kuchi nomads have adoptet in the last 500 years many Persian terms for their tribes. Also most Psahtun individuals use Persian names..a result that their original fathers and rulers were and are always Tajiks/Persian/Iranians and altayic people as some Indian tribes. I do not need to mention tribes´ names like Durrani and Niazi, names that are actually used by some Tajik and Iranian familes as surnames (eastern-Tajiks use them alot). For example one of my aunth´s name is ''Afghani'' but she is of Tajik ethnicity (remember also Jamaludin Afghani) from parental and maternal side. That means that names do not tell one the ethnicity and background of a district, people or origine. In Afghanistan, in that case Gul Agha is absoultely right, there are many Tajik families in eastern and southern Afghanistan where Tajiks became Pashtunized. For example in Kandahar, sure, Persian is driving Pashtu out there but in other smaller regions or towns like Tarin Kot or in Nangahar or Farah and Helmand ca. 1/3 of Tajiks are forced to use Pushtu because of the ethnical dominance of Pushtuns there (since the Pashtun immigration). They are counted automatically to the Jews (as Daus Khan did). But inshallah, the day of reconquest and revange will come and our enemies´blood will flow down to the Indus and their heads will roll down from Arghandaab down to Quetta and Sri Lanka..., once the foreigners are out there. This time we are prepared for all of them. The Taliban culture and identity is not more dominante since today even Tajiks got Taliban and a opposite power to the Taliban culture.

Laghman is original a Pashai and Tajik region. The Pushtuns migrated there in the mid of the 19th/2
th century, most of them belong to the Ghalzai Mongols. To the Tajik group we can count the Furmals, the original Laghmanis and in some cases even the Pashais (''Kohistani'') who are related with us ethnical and cultural. The Pushtun population (urbanized one) make a minority. The Tajiks along the Pashais and the 'Laghmani TRibe'' share mostly Persian as their language. In some cases, Laghmani speak also in their own idiom. Some Pahtun nationalist movements like AughanMellat and WAK Foundation propagate Afghanistan as a Pushtun state with a number of 80-90% of Pashtun ethnicity, specially WAK foundation who even declared 150 Mio. Indians of Muslim faith as original Pshtuns that became ''indianized''. So you can look and take a bit time to think about this kind of Pushtun logic. Who wonders why all our neighbours, no matter how poor they are, they are still much developed than us (200 years, at least). In general, Tajiks in eastern and southern Afghanistan are sometimes forced to speak in the language of the nomads but they have not lost their ethnical identity and culture. Actually, those who live in such regions are mostly very aware of their situation and they are the first ones who join anti-Pushtun movements (Parcham fraction was such one).

Since you´ve gripped Ahmad Zahir´s background so I can tell you he was a Furmal. His father was one of those Tajiks and ''Qezelbash'' Tajiks who:
1. were of Shia belief
2. belonging of the Ismaeli or Imamite community
2. covered their non-Pashtun identity from the ethnocentric Pushtun ursupators (Mohammadzaia), tough some Tajiks were to brilliant for the infamous family full of thiefs. Some of them have even married daughters from the royal families

Ahmad Zahirs heritage is a deep integral part of Tajik society and culture. His children are all married into Tajik families and are still patrons of Persian language. That´s why he or his father never talked about their origine, but were thought as Pushtuns while they were in fact working against Pashtu, Pashtunism and Pashtunization. Interestingly, his father was a close friend of the Uzbekistani Tajik whos name I unfortunately have forgotten (i will look for the name on googlebook page and send it) who was a memberof the bashmati movement? in Central Asia and who came to northern Afghanistan, Kunduz to fight with Uzbeks and Tajiks against the Pashtunization.

Abdullah is again someone who is actually a Tajik. His father belong to the Shia community of Kandahar who had ties to the royal house. To see through the facts and lies you need either to be political brilliant or you need to know the mentioned persons individually or another way is to read some intersting documents uploaded on foreign defence servers. You have to see the scene behind the game Abdullah is playing as some other did before him (f.ex. his father). Karmal was a Qezelbash Tajik but was considered by the uneducated ''Pashtun elite'' to the end of his life as ''Pushtun''. After his death the secret about his and that of his father´s (a high ranked general) original ethnicity was not more a secret. Remember Musa Khan. Why are they do such things? It´s because playing with a certain population means taking more power and more supporter. In the case of Abdullah, he is actually hated by nearly all (southern) Pushtuns because of his ''actions'' against the Pushtuns and some know the truth about his origine (as some know about Khalilzad´s original background). The story about your Tajik family who speak or spoke Tajik is not really imaginable and so I guess it´s your own anekdote.

Ps: The reason why Tajiks do not need or do not want to speak Pushtu but Pushtuns have is because imigrants have always and everywhere and eevrytime to learn the indigine and original language of a region. If you live in spain you have to learn spanish but Spainish people will not learn your language. Do you understand what I mean? Btw, why should someone learn a language that have no history, not really deep roots, is backward and not related to the region, does not reflect the history of the region, is not the language of any urban world and any civilization, in plus, Pushtu is a language dying out in all corners of Central Asia and SE Asia. Only the strong and the dominant one will survive. A natural law


I never knew that there was two groups of Safis, i just thought that there was the one Safi group who were pushtunized Tajiks in Kunar something along that line,and iv never heard of Safis in Uzbekistan at all. Also another thing i want to know is about the so called Tajiks of Kandahar, and Helmand, are these groups actually indeginious to the region, just like the Tajiks of Ghazni and Gardez or are they the remmenants of Nadir Shahs soldiers who were left back and also Qizilbash, if this is the case we cant consider them Tajik because they are simply from Iran in other words western persian not eastern persian Tajik like us

any idea? ??? ?
0

#42 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 03 November 2009 - 10:39 AM

View PostParsistani, on 03 November 2009 - 03:00 AM, said:

There are two Safi ''group in Afghanistan. One group belong to the dirty Ghalzai Mongols and the other of the north are Tajiks. The term Safi self drived from the name of the local chief (some other assume it´s just a loan name of the local mountain). The Pashtun Safis live in Kandahar and Pashtunwa while Tajik Safis can be find in Afghanistan and Uzbekistan. One group speak Farsi e Afghanistan and Farsi e Bukhari, including Chagatai the other a hybtrid language (''Pashtu''). Pushtun Jats and their Kuchi nomads have adoptet in the last 500 years many Persian terms for their tribes. Also most Psahtun individuals use Persian names..a result that their original fathers and rulers were and are always Tajiks/Persian/Iranians and altayic people as some Indian tribes. I do not need to mention tribes´ names like Durrani and Niazi, names that are actually used by some Tajik and Iranian familes as surnames (eastern-Tajiks use them alot). For example one of my aunth´s name is ''Afghani'' but she is of Tajik ethnicity (remember also Jamaludin Afghani) from parental and maternal side. That means that names do not tell one the ethnicity and background of a district, people or origine. In Afghanistan, in that case Gul Agha is absoultely right, there are many Tajik families in eastern and southern Afghanistan where Tajiks became Pashtunized. For example in Kandahar, sure, Persian is driving Pashtu out there but in other smaller regions or towns like Tarin Kot or in Nangahar or Farah and Helmand ca. 1/3 of Tajiks are forced to use Pushtu because of the ethnical dominance of Pushtuns there (since the Pashtun immigration). They are counted automatically to the Jews (as Daus Khan did). But inshallah, the day of reconquest and revange will come and our enemies´blood will flow down to the Indus and their heads will roll down from Arghandaab down to Quetta and Sri Lanka..., once the foreigners are out there. This time we are prepared for all of them. The Taliban culture and identity is not more dominante since today even Tajiks got Taliban and a opposite power to the Taliban culture.

Laghman is original a Pashai and Tajik region. The Pushtuns migrated there in the mid of the 19th/2
th century, most of them belong to the Ghalzai Mongols. To the Tajik group we can count the Furmals, the original Laghmanis and in some cases even the Pashais (''Kohistani'') who are related with us ethnical and cultural. The Pushtun population (urbanized one) make a minority. The Tajiks along the Pashais and the 'Laghmani TRibe'' share mostly Persian as their language. In some cases, Laghmani speak also in their own idiom. Some Pahtun nationalist movements like AughanMellat and WAK Foundation propagate Afghanistan as a Pushtun state with a number of 80-90% of Pashtun ethnicity, specially WAK foundation who even declared 150 Mio. Indians of Muslim faith as original Pshtuns that became ''indianized''. So you can look and take a bit time to think about this kind of Pushtun logic. Who wonders why all our neighbours, no matter how poor they are, they are still much developed than us (200 years, at least). In general, Tajiks in eastern and southern Afghanistan are sometimes forced to speak in the language of the nomads but they have not lost their ethnical identity and culture. Actually, those who live in such regions are mostly very aware of their situation and they are the first ones who join anti-Pushtun movements (Parcham fraction was such one).

Since you´ve gripped Ahmad Zahir´s background so I can tell you he was a Furmal. His father was one of those Tajiks and ''Qezelbash'' Tajiks who:
1. were of Shia belief
2. belonging of the Ismaeli or Imamite community
2. covered their non-Pashtun identity from the ethnocentric Pushtun ursupators (Mohammadzaia), tough some Tajiks were to brilliant for the infamous family full of thiefs. Some of them have even married daughters from the royal families

Ahmad Zahirs heritage is a deep integral part of Tajik society and culture. His children are all married into Tajik families and are still patrons of Persian language. That´s why he or his father never talked about their origine, but were thought as Pushtuns while they were in fact working against Pashtu, Pashtunism and Pashtunization. Interestingly, his father was a close friend of the Uzbekistani Tajik whos name I unfortunately have forgotten (i will look for the name on googlebook page and send it) who was a memberof the bashmati movement? in Central Asia and who came to northern Afghanistan, Kunduz to fight with Uzbeks and Tajiks against the Pashtunization.

Abdullah is again someone who is actually a Tajik. His father belong to the Shia community of Kandahar who had ties to the royal house. To see through the facts and lies you need either to be political brilliant or you need to know the mentioned persons individually or another way is to read some intersting documents uploaded on foreign defence servers. You have to see the scene behind the game Abdullah is playing as some other did before him (f.ex. his father). Karmal was a Qezelbash Tajik but was considered by the uneducated ''Pashtun elite'' to the end of his life as ''Pushtun''. After his death the secret about his and that of his father´s (a high ranked general) original ethnicity was not more a secret. Remember Musa Khan. Why are they do such things? It´s because playing with a certain population means taking more power and more supporter. In the case of Abdullah, he is actually hated by nearly all (southern) Pushtuns because of his ''actions'' against the Pushtuns and some know the truth about his origine (as some know about Khalilzad´s original background). The story about your Tajik family who speak or spoke Tajik is not really imaginable and so I guess it´s your own anekdote.

Ps: The reason why Tajiks do not need or do not want to speak Pushtu but Pushtuns have is because imigrants have always and everywhere and eevrytime to learn the indigine and original language of a region. If you live in spain you have to learn spanish but Spainish people will not learn your language. Do you understand what I mean? Btw, why should someone learn a language that have no history, not really deep roots, is backward and not related to the region, does not reflect the history of the region, is not the language of any urban world and any civilization, in plus, Pushtu is a language dying out in all corners of Central Asia and SE Asia. Only the strong and the dominant one will survive. A natural law


How are Pashayis related t0 us cultrually and ethnically, they are dardic people, speaking dardic languages they are more related to the people of kashmir then us in terms of their language. Originally Laghman is a Tajik region but contrary to what you said unfonately Pushtuns are the largest ethncicity in Laghman not Tajiks http://en.wikipedia....ce#Demographics ( though it could also include Tajiks who speak pushto). Yes Ahmad Zahir was reckon is Furmuli, or Qizilbash one of the two but this dosnt mean he was ismaili shia. Ismalia shia are the Pamiri Tajiks and also some Hazaras and Tajiks of Hazarjat and Baghlan aswell. Qizilbash were shhia but they were not ismalia they were Twelver Shi`ism which is differnt from Ismalia. You said that Karmal was a Qezelbash Tajik, how that make sense but Qezelbash are immigrants from Iran there not the orginal eastern Tajiks of Afghanistan so you cant just call him a Qezelbash Tajik. By the way the furmuli dont they speak a completely differnt dialect from normal Tajiks, more closely related to Pamiri ???

The Tajiks actually before the persian migration to Eastern persia ( Bactria, Sogdiana etc) didnt even speak persian we speak a eastern iranian language more closely related ot modern day pusho and Pamiri so you have to consider that aswell and you shouldnt just call the pushto language hybrid because once supon a time we spoke a language closely related ot it

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Tajik_people

The Tajiks trace their ancestry to the East Iranian-speaking Bactrians, Sogdians, and Parthians (or Aryans), which means that the historical ancestors of the Tajiks did not speak Persian - the southwestern Iranian language, today known as 'Farsi' in Iran and Afghanistan. However, due to their Aryan roots, they spoke an Indo-Iranian language. The 'Tajiks' adoption of the now dominant southwestern branch Persian language is believed to have as its root cause, the dominance of the Persian empire in the region during the Achameanian dynasty. This conquest sent large numbers of Persians fleeing into Central Asia. Subsequently, many Persians, after conversion to Islam, entered Central Asia as military forces and settled in the conquered lands. As a result of these waves of Persian migration (Zoroastrian and Muslim) over the course of more than 200 years, the Tajiks have ethnic Persian ancestry in addition to their original East-Iranian ancestry. Cultural dissemination through Persian literature also helped to establish the new language, as well as intermittent military dominance. According to Iranologist Richard Nelson Frye, the Persian migration to Central Asia may be considered the beginning of the "modern" Tajik nation, and ethnic Persians along with East-Iranian Bactrians and Sogdians, as the main ancestors of "modern" Tajiks.
0

#43 User is offline   Parsistani Icon

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

Posted 03 November 2009 - 06:09 PM

View Posttajik kabuli, on 03 November 2009 - 10:17 AM, said:

I never knew that there was two groups of Safis, i just thought that there was the one Safi group who were pushtunized Tajiks in Kunar something along that line,and iv never heard of Safis in Uzbekistan at all. Also another thing i want to know is about the so called Tajiks of Kandahar, and Helmand, are these groups actually indeginious to the region, just like the Tajiks of Ghazni and Gardez or are they the remmenants of Nadir Shahs soldiers who were left back and also Qizilbash, if this is the case we cant consider them Tajik because they are simply from Iran in other words western persian not eastern persian Tajik like us

any idea? ??? ?



What have the term ''Qezelbash'' to do with ethnicity? ''Qezelbash Movement'' was an military movement of it elites. The Tajiks of Kandahar and Helmand are Ismaelis. Kandahar was in the 17th century a centre of Ismaelism and most of the Tajiks were Ismaelis, except Sistan, Farah and Herat are following the 12th Imams, but all other eastern regions. The Tajik Ormurs of Peshawar are still Ismaelis. The Roshanian Movement of middleage which became famous for it´s condition against the Mughals started with the Ormurian Tajik Bayazid Roshan from there. The Qezelbashs were 200 years earlier recruted from eastern Iran (Khorasan, down to Kabul and Badakhshan) before the creation of Durranis. The 14 years old Abbas was not only a genious diplomate but also a strategists and a religious fanatician. According to your logic, the Abdali Pushtuns are also from Iran since they were part of the Qezelbashs. The Pashais who share with Kabulistanians the same history, geographic and today even the same culture have a lot in common. Ethnically, they are descandants of Aryans and not of Turks or Arabs as you think so. Unlike Indo-Aryans, Brahuis and Pushtuns they do not reflect any Dravidian origine and are descandants and next neighbours of Bactrians, Kabulians and Gandharians as for a small part of Tajiks. The Non-Pushtun population of Laghman is in dominance, and mostly the Tajiks.Compared to the Pushtun im migrants, the number of Tajiks who are urban people, much higher and Persian is widespreaden. The number of Pashtunized Tajiks is not as high as some believe. The dirty Pushtunist bastards were always trying to fool the non-Pushtuns with their utopic dominance and their falsified sources. The Khalki hounds were one of such a group that always were seeking with lies for a Pushtun dominance. Why did Khar-Zai not allowed to take a deep look on the demographic situation of Afghanistan and specially of eastern regions? Why was he afraid about? These mordagawa will play their dirty games as long as people believe them everything (like you). To Ahmad Zahir I ddi not say he or his father was a Ismaeli (Shia of the 6 Imams) but he was a Shia (12 Imamites). But since you have a wrong image about the people and you still have the dirty and backward Pushtun mind you will never go forward. Who was Karmal? Karmals ancestors were driven out of Khorasan by Pushtun nationalists and sunni clerics because their actions against the thiefs from the Sulaiman Mountains. Today, there are at least 30 000 Tajiks in Kashmir, descandants of Tajiks of eastern and southern Afghanistan who were drived out and sent to exile, thanks to your heroes. In that war only the great Shughnani Tajiks were able to cut Pushtun tails and show them their borders and which padarnalat mordagaw amanullah khank** a painfull and low-caste death. The Furmals speak an eastern dialect of Persian, not a conservative dialect as Wakhan Tajiks or Yaghnobi Tajiks do. Baraki Baraks do also not speak an old dialect, but Sucha Persian. One problem of you is you have no idea who Tajiks are. The Tajiks are not only descandants of Bactrians, Soghdians, Choresmian, Parttians etc. but also of Tocharians and Persians. All these mentioned people spoke once one language, differed only regionally, shared the same gods, the same traditions and customs, followed the same system and had the same origine. They were assimilating themself. The Eastern and Western Iran did not existed during the Sassanians as different parts of their empire but as one great civilization. ''Persians'' were already assimilated into eastern Iranians and in the turn way too. The Islamic expansion and the Persian imgration from western- to eastern Iran just vanished the regional identity (Bactrian, Soghdian...). It was the beginning when people identified themself not to their regional origine like as Bactrian or Sistani but as Persian/Tajik. You missunderstand the message of Frye and do not recognize the past events. All those people who once shared the same identity, the same language (according Strabo the languages were even closer to eachother than the greec language and it´s dialects), the same culture still speak and share the same factors as they did for 4000 years ago. Except those who had never to do with our ancestors speak today another language (Pushtu, a mish-mash of different languages, particularely of Persian and Arabic language with some own archaic features). So no, our ''eastern'' ancestors did not spoke another language, just another regional dialect (compare the Greeco-Bactrian or Sogdian ''language'' of Kushans with the Palavi and you will know what I mean). Who were the original ''Parthians''? They were ethnic Persians forced to leave greater Pars province because of the over-population in Iran but settled them on an older built oasis civilization (Parsa-Partha, Parsi-Parthi...). The later semi-nomadic sakas, the dahae, who became known for their dynasty of the arsacid were assimilated by the Persian population of ''North-estern Parsa'' but where in their ruling house not identical with the 08/15 (normal) Persians since they had their own myth of their origine and were direct descandants of sakas. The New Persian language is a result of eastern- and western Iranian dialects AND is not the result of importing. In Ferdowsis shahnama you can find many words than you can call as a south-western version but in fact they are north-eastern words, such as Bactrian and Sogdian. Btw, before the upcoming of Islam, Soghdian dialect was lingua franca after Sassanik Palavi in all central asia and western china. Even Turks were forced to use it. In general, someone who speak Persian, have Persian customs and traditions (the term ''Persian'' is used here as synonym for Aryan), whos ancestors have a Persian history is considered as Persian. According to your logic, since you did not really understood Frye´s statements, everyone in Iran outside of the province of Pars are non-Persians. Shirazis are Shirazis, the Luris and Bakhtaris are Bakhtrians but Mazandarans are not Persians. May you ask now yourself why are Persian speaking Tajiks ''Persians'' but eastern-speaking Tajiks are Wakhis, Yaghnobis ect. It´s because modern Persian is a result of chronical modernization, it became developed while the original toungs of Bactria, Sogdia, Choresmia kept old and compared to Persian conservativ. According to your ''hero'' frye, we have to see Sogdian and Parthian as ONE ''language'' or at least as dialects of the same level. In addition, Wakhan Tajiks are descandants of north-eastern Bactrians (sakas), originally from Khotan, the north-eastern bactrian region, today part of China. Your contente our ancestors (eastern one) spoke languages related with Pushtu is ridicolous. Pushtu self is born out of Persian and many Indo-Aryan idioms, Arabic, Turkic, Dravidian etc. Of course it is related with Persian...since Persian is the father of Pushtu and PUSHTU just a deformed off-shot. To understand what I mean when I talk about the dagh a pagh a language than go on Youtube and listen to Wakhan, Yaghnobi, Shughnani language and songs in these conservative dialects (also take a look on Aserbaidjanian Tat dialect). You will see these ''languages'' do not sound like Pushtu...but more closeley to Persian. I do not know if you understand what I am writing here for you but at least you should realize that no matter where Persian speaker live, they are all Tajiks and Tajiks are all Persians and we are all one of a greater family devided by our hungry and flesh-eating enemies. United Tajikistan, Uzbekistanis, Iran and Afghanistani PERSIANS. We are all ONE...united we are stronger and noone can stop nationalism in today Central Asia, specially in Iran and Afghanistan/Tajikistan. What is actually your view about Tajiks in Pakistan and India? Aren´t they Tajiks because they live outside Greater Khorasan?
0

#44 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 04 November 2009 - 09:25 AM

View PostParsistani, on 04 November 2009 - 04:09 AM, said:

What have the term ''Qezelbash'' to do with ethnicity? ''Qezelbash Movement'' was an military movement of it elites. The Tajiks of Kandahar and Helmand are Ismaelis. Kandahar was in the 17th century a centre of Ismaelism and most of the Tajiks were Ismaelis, except Sistan, Farah and Herat are following the 12th Imams, but all other eastern regions. The Tajik Ormurs of Peshawar are still Ismaelis. The Roshanian Movement of middleage which became famous for it´s condition against the Mughals started with the Ormurian Tajik Bayazid Roshan from there. The Qezelbashs were 200 years earlier recruted from eastern Iran (Khorasan, down to Kabul and Badakhshan) before the creation of Durranis. The 14 years old Abbas was not only a genious diplomate but also a strategists and a religious fanatician. According to your logic, the Abdali Pushtuns are also from Iran since they were part of the Qezelbashs. The Pashais who share with Kabulistanians the same history, geographic and today even the same culture have a lot in common. Ethnically, they are descandants of Aryans and not of Turks or Arabs as you think so. Unlike Indo-Aryans, Brahuis and Pushtuns they do not reflect any Dravidian origine and are descandants and next neighbours of Bactrians, Kabulians and Gandharians as for a small part of Tajiks. The Non-Pushtun population of Laghman is in dominance, and mostly the Tajiks.Compared to the Pushtun im migrants, the number of Tajiks who are urban people, much higher and Persian is widespreaden. The number of Pashtunized Tajiks is not as high as some believe. The dirty Pushtunist bastards were always trying to fool the non-Pushtuns with their utopic dominance and their falsified sources. The Khalki hounds were one of such a group that always were seeking with lies for a Pushtun dominance. These mordagawa will play their dirty games as long as people believe them everything (like you). To Ahmad Zahir I ddi not say he or his father was a Ismaeli (Shia of the 6 Imams) but he was a Shia (12 Imamites). But since you have a wrong image about the people and you still have the dirty and backward Pushtun mind you will never go forward. Who was Karmal? Karmals ancestors were driven out of Khorasan by Pushtun nationalists and sunni clerics because their actions against the thiefs from the Sulaiman Mountains. Today, Why did Khar-Zai not allowed to take a deep look on the demographic situation of Afghanistan and specially of eastern regions? Why was he afraid about?there are at least 30 000 Tajiks in Kashmir, descandants of Tajiks of eastern and southern Afghanistan who were drived out and sent to exile, thanks to your heroes. In that war only the great Shughnani Tajiks were able to cut Pushtun tails and show them their borders and which padarnalat mordagaw amanullah khank** a painfull and low-caste death. The Furmals speak an eastern dialect of Persian, not a conservative dialect as Wakhan Tajiks or Yaghnobi Tajiks do. Baraki Baraks do also not speak an old dialect, but Sucha Persian. One problem of you is you have no idea who Tajiks are. The Tajiks are not only descandants of Bactrians, Soghdians, Choresmian, Parttians etc. but also of Tocharians and Persians. All these mentioned people spoke once one language, differed only regionally, shared the same gods, the same traditions and customs, followed the same system and had the same origine. They were assimilating themself. The Eastern and Western Iran did not existed during the Sassanians as different parts of their empire but as one great civilization. ''Persians'' were already assimilated into eastern Iranians and in the turn way too. The Islamic expansion and the Persian imgration from western- to eastern Iran just vanished the regional identity (Bactrian, Soghdian...). It was the beginning when people identified themself not to their regional origine like as Bactrian or Sistani but as Persian/Tajik. You missunderstand the message of Frye and do not recognize the past events. All those people who once shared the same identity, the same language (according Strabo the languages were even closer to eachother than the greec language and it´s dialects), the same culture still speak and share the same factors as they did for 4000 years ago. Except those who had never to do with our ancestors speak today another language (Pushtu, a mish-mash of different languages, particularely of Persian and Arabic language with some own archaic features). So no, our ''eastern'' ancestors did not spoke another language, just another regional dialect (compare the Greeco-Bactrian or Sogdian ''language'' of Kushans with the Palavi and you will know what I mean). Who were the original ''Parthians''? They were ethnic Persians forced to leave greater Pars province because of the over-population in Iran but settled them on an older built oasis civilization (Parsa-Partha, Parsi-Parthi...). The later semi-nomadic sakas, the dahae, who became known for their dynasty of the arsacid were assimilated by the Persian population of ''North-estern Parsa'' but where in their ruling house not identical with the 08/15 (normal) Persians since they had their own myth of their origine and were direct descandants of sakas. The New Persian language is a result of eastern- and western Iranian dialects AND is not the result of importing. In Ferdowsis shahnama you can find many words than you can call as a south-western version but in fact they are north-eastern words, such as Bactrian and Sogdian. Btw, before the upcoming of Islam, Soghdian dialect was lingua franca after Sassanik Palavi in all central asia and western china. Even Turks were forced to use it. In general, someone who speak Persian, have Persian customs and traditions (the term ''Persian'' is used here as synonym for Aryan), whos ancestors have a Persian history is considered as Persian. According to your logic, since you did not really understood Frye´s statements, everyone in Iran outside of the province of Pars are non-Persians. Shirazis are Shirazis, the Luris and Bakhtaris are Bakhtrians but Mazandarans are not Persians. May you ask now yourself why are Persian speaking Tajiks ''Persians'' but eastern-speaking Tajiks are Wakhis, Yaghnobis ect. It´s because modern Persian is a result of chronical modernization, it became developed while the original toungs of Bactria, Sogdia, Choresmia kept old and compared to Persian conservativ. According to your ''hero'' frye, we have to see Sogdian and Parthian as ONE ''language'' or at least as dialects of the same level. In addition, Wakhan Tajiks are descandants of north-eastern Bactrians (sakas), originally from Khotan, the north-eastern bactrian region, today part of China. Your contente our ancestors (eastern one) spoke languages related with Pushtu is ridicolous. Pushtu self is born out of Persian and many Indo-Aryan idioms, Arabic, Turkic, Dravidian etc. Of course it is related with Persian...since Persian is the father of Pushtu and PUSHTU just a deformed off-shot. To understand what I mean when I talk about the dagh a pagh a language than go on Youtube and listen to Wakhan, Yaghnobi, Shughnani language and songs in these conservative dialects (also take a look on Aserbaidjanian Tat dialect). You will see these ''languages'' do not sound like Pushtu...but more closeley to Persian. I do not know if you understand what I am writing here for you but at least you should realize that no matter where Persian speaker live, they are all Tajiks and Tajiks are all Persians and we are all one of a greater family devided by our hungry and flesh-eating enemies. United Tajikistan, Uzbekistanis, Iran and Afghanistani PERSIANS. We are all ONE...united we are stronger and noone can stop nationalism in today Central Asia, specially in Iran and Afghanistan/Tajikistan. What is actually your view about Tajiks in Pakistan and India? Aren´t they Tajiks because they live outside Greater Khorasan?


Yeh well your like Qezelbash Tajiks, how are they Tajiks when they come from Iran, you cant just generalise everything and call it Tajik when there not, and yes i know the Qezelbash were a shia Militancy, Tajiks are the inhabitants of Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, China and disapora communities in China. People of Iran arent Tajiks. There are no Ormurs in Peshawar there in Waziristan along side the pushtun tribe Mahsud, im talkin about the Qezelbashes that a kurdish, afshari, azeri, turkoman and the others such as the Tats mazandaranis they are not Tajik either. I never said the Pashayis are turk or arab i said their DARDIC people, modern day descccedants of the Gandharian people, and actually some pashayis dont even regard themselves Pashayis instead they think there pushtun and alot of them are billingual in pushto aswell rather dari
(http://www.sil.org/asia/ldc/parallel_papers/ju-hong_yun.pdf)
Pashai:
There is very little useful data on the Pashai, outside of some intense research on their language. They inhabit Nuristan, parts of Laghman, and northern Nangarhar, seemingly between the Pashtun and Nuristanis. Many consider themselves Pashtun. They speak a Dardic language referred to as Pashai. Often they are associated with or referred to as Kohistani. The majority of Pashai in Laghman rely on the livestock and timber business
http://www.nps.edu/P...c_identity.html


What are you saying that i believe they say i dont believe anything, my point is we cant just generalise and call everything Tajik, for example the Qezelbash, if there from Iran remmants of Nadir Shahs army we cant call them Tajik because they are simply not indeginous Tajiks (excluding the ones from Eastern Iran)

What do you mean by this Parsistani

(Why did Khar-Zai not allowed to take a deep look on the demographic situation of Afghanistan and specially of eastern regions? Why was he afraid about?)


What do you mean i have the wrong image about the people and i have a backward pushtun mind, im not even pushtun im a tajik from kabul hwat im saying is just to be honest and dont regret everything as Tajiks, and my grandfather and great grand father fought alongside Habibullah Kalakani so im propaly more Tajik then you.
I know Tajiks Descen ds are also Tocharians and perisna but for the most part we have ancient Eastern Iranian traditions which mean we have more Bactrians, Sogdian, aswell as Tocharians awell and others that was my point so dont try and misinterpret the same thing i said. They never spoke the one language until the Achaemid dynasty establihsed power in the Easrtern borderlands of the Iranian plateu, before the Bactrians, Sogdian and other spoke a eastern divergent language of the Indo Iranian language tree, just like the Pushtuns and Pamiris do now, whiel western persian such as Medes, Kurdish, Balouchi,Mazandarani, Tats and other etc. Our persian language aswell as loan words from arabic turkish and hindi so you cant say just pushto is mish mash. They diodnt leave Iran because of over population, they left pars because of the Islamic Arab invasion, they went to lands further in the Eastern periphery of the Irnaian world to take refuge because it wasnt invaded yet by the Arabs. Lisaten psuhto is a eastern iranian language, just like wakhan, pamiri, and ossetic aswell and yaghnobi aswell so that means it is related to the ancient eastern iranian languages such as bactrians and sogdian etc. Our ancestors in the most part and our tradtions copme from the eastern iranian groups like bactrians and sogdians, and linguists confirm thtta they spoke the easrtern indo iranian language and puhsto is also eastern indo iranian language so that means the two are RELATED. Maybe we speak persian now but still genetically, our tradtion and culture are overwelmingly eastern Iranian and we are unique in our own ways, dont compare Tajiks to persians, we are different from them and we should be proud.

Btw are you shore ormurs and furmulis and Kandahari and heland Tajiks are ismalia because i have never heard of this usualyyy when i see ismalia in Afghanistan they are the Pamiris and the Hazaaras and Tajiks that are around Bamian and Baghlan. But iv never seen any information that says furmuli, ormurs and southern Tajiks are Ismalia ??? ? ??? ?
0

#45 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 04 November 2009 - 11:55 AM

Parsistani you say that Eastern Tajiks havent become as pushtunized as we thing. Then may i ask you a question how many percentage of Jalalabad city is Tajik ??? can you answer that
0

#46 User is offline   Gul agha Icon

  • Sar Dabeer
  • Icon
Group:
Administrators
Posts:
557
Joined:
17-May 07

Posted 04 November 2009 - 07:32 PM

Tajik Kabuli you are confusing yourself. Tajik is not a term only used in Eastern Iran but it is widely used in Iran also. There are tons of Iranians who have the surname "Tajik". Tajik in the past simply meant Persian-speakers of Aryan descent. During the Safavid Dynasty the Qizilbash were separated in two groups the Turkomens (Turk-like) Azeris and the Tajik Persians,Lurs,Tats, and Kurds. When you read the history of the safavids you wont encounter terms like Fars or Lur but you will encounter "Tajik". Even great Western Iranian intellectuals like Saadi uses Tajik for Sherazis. Till today most non-Azeri Turks in Iran uses the term "Tajik" for Persians.

In LughatNama (book of words) of Alama Ali Akbar DehKhoda, one of Iran's great scholars, we read: تاجیک غیر عرب و غیر ترک را گویند. ایرانی و فارسی زبان.

Tajik refers to non-Arab and non-Turk. Iranian and Farsi-speaking.

Farhange Farsi Moein says: تاجیک (تاژیک)و تات - رعیت -و جیک پسوند- تصغیر - بوده عموماغیر ترک یعنی فارسی. انکه ایرانی باشد نه ترکی و مغولی.

Tajik (Tazhik) and Tat- with Jik suffix- is generally non-Turk, meaning Persian. He who is Iranian and not Turk and Mughal

In Farhange Nafisi, a very credible work, we read: تاجیک: غیر عرب...غیر ترک...یعنی مردم پارسی

Tajik: non-Arab, non-Turk, Persian people

The author of Farhange Nizaam, another great dictionary with credible authority, writes: تاجیک: نسل ایرانی و فارسی زبان

Tajik: Iranian and Farsi-speaking

In Gheyaas-ul-Loghaat (غیاث اللغات), published in Hindustan by Mohammad Gheyaasuddin Mostafa Abaadi (Hindustaani) in 1828, we read the following:

غیر عربی و غیر ترکی باشد و در لغات ترکی به معنای اهل فارس (فارسها)امده است.....

Non-Arab and non-Turk and in collection of Turk words [of Mahmoud Kaashghari] refers to people of Persia or Persians...

According to Iranian scholar Ali DiwaanaQol, over 160 scholars from Iran, Tajikistan and Khorassan researched and investigated the origin of the term TAJIK and what it means and the highlights of their findings are:

واژه تاجیک در ابتدا به عنوان نام ایرانی های خراسان بزرگ و سپس به تمام فارس زبانان دنیا اطلاق گردید و تمام علما و ادبای مشرق زمین از زمانهای قدیم تا سده 19 کلمه تاجیک را متعلق به همه فارسی زبانان دانستند...

Another Iranian scholar, Ustad Mohit TabaaTabaayee, writes under the title of در باره لفظ تاجیک
....دوازهم. ...چاپ تهران...مجله آینده....سال

This is the last and concluding part of his long article:

"تات غالباً در تعریف یا شناسایی ایرانیانی به کار رفته که زبان ترکی نمی دانسته اند...در صورتی که تاجیک از ایرانیانی گفته میشود که به زبان فارسی سخن می گفته اند. ولی هرگز قومی و ملتی در تاریخ سه هزار سال گذسته در گذرگاه زمان و مکان به نام تاجیک وجود نداشته که بیرون از قلمرو وجود ایران کیان مستقلی داشته باشد. بلکه تاجیک صفتی برای ایرانی فارسی زبان بوده و به غیر ایرانی اطلاق نمی شده است.

در این صورت نمیدانم کوشش اراتسکی خاورشناس روسی را در کتاب فقه اللغه ایرانی او برای معرفی ملتی بنام تاجیک در مقابل ملت ایران باید بر چه نکته ای حمل کرد؟ زیرا اختلاف مخارج حرکات روی حروف کلمات فارسی...در سراسر نواحی ایران به درجه ای محسوس و متطور است که لهجه گوینده گان شهرهای دوشنبه...کابل...بخارا...هرات و....به گوش شنوندگان مشهد و تبریز و تهران...گاهی از لهجه گویندگان شهرهای اصفهان و اهواز و رشت...مأنوستر و مطلوبتر می آید...."

Dr Dabir Seyaaqi writes:



هفتم: انکه 'تاجیک' و 'تاژیک' در شواهد غالبا همراه با واژه 'ترک' به کار رفته اند...مثلا 'ترک و تاژیک' و یا 'ترک و تاجیک'...و غیره...و انجا که با کلمه ترک همراه نیامده اند یا از زبان ترک بر فارس اطلاق شده است و یا فارس در سخن از ترک و یا در مقابل ترک و یا در محیط ترک بر خود اطلاق کرده است. پیوستگی این واژه ها به واژه ترک ایجاب می کند که اشاره ای به ترکان دهنده این عناوین به فارسی زبانان بشود:

ترک عنوانی است که به همه اقوام ترک زبان ساکن سرزمینهای میان دریای سیاه تا دیوار چین داده شده است...بی انکه مفهوم نژادی از ان بر اید............


In examples [that are given]..... 'Tajik' and 'Tazhik' are often mentioned alongside 'Turk'.....for example, 'Turk and Tajik' or 'Turk and Tazhik' and etc...and whenever the term 'Tajik' is not mentioned with the word Turk, it is used to describe, or referred to, a Persian from the tongue of a Turk, or a Persian uses it to point, or refer, to himself when speaking about Turks or against Turks or in a Turkic environment. The connection of the word (Tajik) with the Turk makes it necessary for us to explain to Farsi-speaking what or who the Turks are:

Turk is a title that is given to all Turkic speaking tribes residing in lands between Black Sea until the Great Wall of China...without deriving any racial understanding from it....



Examples of the usage and meaning of the words Tajik and its variants in Farsi literature:

5- تاجیکانه: (Tajikaana)

صفت یا قیدی است که از تاجیک ساخته شده است به معنی همانند تاجیک...چون تاجیک. و در شاهد زیرین صفت روی/صورت/چهره قرار گرفته است و مراد رخسار زیبا و خوش اب و رنگ...شرم الود و ملیح است در برابر ترک:

روی تاجیکانه ات بنمای تا داغ حبش
آسمان بر چهره ای ترکان یغمایی کشد

(سعدی...کلیات...ص 432)

5- Tajikana:

....is an adverb or an adjective made from the word Tajik and means 'like Tajik or 'as Tajik'. In the below example the word performs the role of an adjective for face/countenance and means beautiful or handsome, again used against Turk...

(Saa'di Shiraazi, Kalyaat, page 432)

Saa'di's Farsi poetry which emphsizes and stresses the human bond adorns the entrance of the UN building in New York.


Another example:

چو یکسانست آنجا ترک و تاجیک
هم از ایران هم از توران دریغا

(عطار...دیوان...ص 675)

In that couplet by Attar, the Tajik is equaled with Iran/Aryana and Turk with Turan.

Fariddudin Attar Neshapouri was a Tajik Sufi mystic poet who blessed young Jalaluddin Balkhi and his father Bahawuddin Walad when they were on their way towards West. Attar told Bahaddin Walad that his son, Jalaluddin, will one day engulf the world with the fire of his wisdom and love. Centuries later, Jalaluddin's words of wisdom and books are best-sellers in America and Europe...

Basically, Tajik first meant the Iranians of greater Khorassan and then it was used to identify or define Farsi-speaking people all over the world and all scholars and intellectuals of west from 10th century onwards until 19th century used the term Tajik as synonym, equal or in parallel with the words Iranian and Farsi-Zabaan..

As we mentioned earlier, Tajik is mostly used against and as opposed to a Turk and Arab and refers to Iranian or Persian. To back that up, we present poems from Tajik masters present and past. The great Tajik master and world renowned great literary figure, Sheikh Saa'di Shiraazi, who was a native of Fars province and an Iranian and Farsi-Zabaan, identified himself as TAJIK with special pomp, haughtiness and pride in his masterpiece Bostaan, when complaining about his Turk girlfriend, for bleeding him in her love.

شاید که به پادشه بگویند
ترک تو بریخت خون تاجیک

....or, Amir Khesrow Dehlawi, in his masterpiece Quran-ul-Sa'addin, whom you claimed to have been an Indian in another forum, and that maybe so, praises the valor and courage of his TAJIK people on the battlefield as such:

تاجیک گردنکش و لشکر شکن
بیشتری نیزه ور و تیغ زن

....or the heart of Mawlana Sahib in his Diwaane Kabir - whom you claimed to have been a Turk, which he definitely was NOT, and he himself makes it clear that he is not a Turk- sinks and becomes frustrated from the passive, gentle and civilized nature of his people and cries to his people to be more assertive and even aggressive like Turks if needs arise...

یک حمله و دو حمله شب امد و تاریکی
چستی کن و ترکی کن نه نرمی و تاجیکی

...or we read in Diwaane Shams, where again the term TAJIK stands out as opposed to a Turk and Arab, the following:

ترک و تاجیک و عرب گر عاشقند
همرهند از روی معنی در ثواب

As you may know, the Mongol invasion hit the great Tajik nation very hard and dropped us to our knees. We tried not to hit the ground and fought back very hard, but for an urbanized, highly cultured people who are used to books and reading and writing, it's very hard to organize resistance against a savage desert horde who has no value for human being. It hit us very hard and still we cannot recover from its bad affects.

If you read the masterpiece of history writing that is the book of Tajik master historian Mohammad Bin Yaqoub Saifi Herawi, you'll know how the great Iranian and Khorassani nation fought the Golden Mongol Horde. In Tarikhnama-e-Herat of Saifi Herawi, we read that Changez Khan advises his successors:

....هر تاجیک هروی را که دستگیر نمایید زنده نگذارید و بر تاجیکان اعتماد نکنید که در اقالیم جهان به دلیری و کین خواستن به سر امده اند...سخن من بشنو و تاجیکان سر کوفته دار...دل من از غصه تاجیکان خون شد...تاجیک را چه زهره و یارا و توانایی ان بود که تخلف و تصلف زند و دعوی اقدام و انتقام کند....هنوز صفحات زمین از خون تاجیکان گلگون است....

The surfaces of earth is still red from the Tajik blood - Changez Khan

In Qaamoos-ul-Elaam-e-Turki, written by Shamsuddin Saami, at the end of 19th century, we read the following:

...طایفه اهالی ایرانی الاصل خراسان و ایران که با فارسی گپ می زنند. اینها در شهر ها با بازرگانی و پیشه وری (کاسبی و هنرمندی) و در دهات با کشاورزی مشغول بوده...فعال.....ماهر....صاحب استعداد و نسبت بر سایر طایفه ها شهرنشینی تر و مدنی تر اند و مانند ترک...ازبک...افغانی و دیگر قومهای کوچ کننده جسور و جنگاور نیستند...بنابراین تاجیکها به نظر اینها (قومهای کوچی) خوار می باشند...


...pure Iranians of Khorassan/Iran who speak in Farsi. They live and work in urban cities and villages as merchants, professionals, and artists and in villages they're busy with agriculture. They're active, skilled and talented and are more urbanized and cultured than other races. But, unlike Uzbeks, Afghans and Turks and other nomadic races, they're not savages and for that reason, they're looked down upon by them (nomadic and tribal races)....

William Barthold, in his article "Tajikan", writes:

Turks could not have lived without Tajiks. They depended on Tajiks and needed them. Tajiks were the representatives of industry, trades and, over all, the whole culture and civilization of Iran and for that reason Turks needed them. Even Turkic nationalist author Mahmoud Kashghari has written this: "There is no such thing as a Turk without a Tat and a head without a hat" [Turkish: تاتسیز ترک بلماس...باشیسیز برگ بلماس].

It is clear that the situation of Iranians under the rule of desert dwellers from time to time were very hard. According to historian Rashidduddin Fazelullah, Ghazaan Khan, the Mongol ruler of Iran, who was known as a man of principle and justice, used to say to his Mongols: it's easy to plunder and loot Tajiks but after that, it'll be hard for us to make ends meet or bring food on the table, because Tajiks run the economy of the lands. We murder Tajik women and children and destroy their homes, and never remember how much we ourselves love our women and children and that "Tajiks are also human beings".
Ba Naam e Khudahvand e Jan o Kherad, Kazeen Bartar Andisha Bar Nagzarad

به نام خداوند جان و خرد، کزین برتر اندیشه برنگذرد
0

#47 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 04 November 2009 - 11:23 PM

View PostGul agha, on 05 November 2009 - 05:32 AM, said:

Tajik Kabuli you are confusing yourself. Tajik is not a term only used in Eastern Iran but it is widely used in Iran also. There are tons of Iranians who have the surname "Tajik". Tajik in the past simply meant Persian-speakers of Aryan descent. During the Safavid Dynasty the Qizilbash were separated in two groups the Turkomens (Turk-like) Azeris and the Tajik Persians,Lurs,Tats, and Kurds. When you read the history of the safavids you wont encounter terms like Fars or Lur but you will encounter "Tajik". Even great Western Iranian intellectuals like Saadi uses Tajik for Sherazis. Till today most non-Azeri Turks in Iran uses the term "Tajik" for Persians.

In LughatNama (book of words) of Alama Ali Akbar DehKhoda, one of Iran's great scholars, we read: تاجیک غیر عرب و غیر ترک را گویند. ایرانی و فارسی زبان.

Tajik refers to non-Arab and non-Turk. Iranian and Farsi-speaking.

Farhange Farsi Moein says: تاجیک (تاژیک)و تات - رعیت -و جیک پسوند- تصغیر - بوده عموماغیر ترک یعنی فارسی. انکه ایرانی باشد نه ترکی و مغولی.

Tajik (Tazhik) and Tat- with Jik suffix- is generally non-Turk, meaning Persian. He who is Iranian and not Turk and Mughal

In Farhange Nafisi, a very credible work, we read: تاجیک: غیر عرب...غیر ترک...یعنی مردم پارسی

Tajik: non-Arab, non-Turk, Persian people

The author of Farhange Nizaam, another great dictionary with credible authority, writes: تاجیک: نسل ایرانی و فارسی زبان

Tajik: Iranian and Farsi-speaking

In Gheyaas-ul-Loghaat (غیاث اللغات), published in Hindustan by Mohammad Gheyaasuddin Mostafa Abaadi (Hindustaani) in 1828, we read the following:

غیر عربی و غیر ترکی باشد و در لغات ترکی به معنای اهل فارس (فارسها)امده است.....

Non-Arab and non-Turk and in collection of Turk words [of Mahmoud Kaashghari] refers to people of Persia or Persians...

According to Iranian scholar Ali DiwaanaQol, over 160 scholars from Iran, Tajikistan and Khorassan researched and investigated the origin of the term TAJIK and what it means and the highlights of their findings are:

واژه تاجیک در ابتدا به عنوان نام ایرانی های خراسان بزرگ و سپس به تمام فارس زبانان دنیا اطلاق گردید و تمام علما و ادبای مشرق زمین از زمانهای قدیم تا سده 19 کلمه تاجیک را متعلق به همه فارسی زبانان دانستند...

Another Iranian scholar, Ustad Mohit TabaaTabaayee, writes under the title of در باره لفظ تاجیک
....دوازهم. ...چاپ تهران...مجله آینده....سال

This is the last and concluding part of his long article:

"تات غالباً در تعریف یا شناسایی ایرانیانی به کار رفته که زبان ترکی نمی دانسته اند...در صورتی که تاجیک از ایرانیانی گفته میشود که به زبان فارسی سخن می گفته اند. ولی هرگز قومی و ملتی در تاریخ سه هزار سال گذسته در گذرگاه زمان و مکان به نام تاجیک وجود نداشته که بیرون از قلمرو وجود ایران کیان مستقلی داشته باشد. بلکه تاجیک صفتی برای ایرانی فارسی زبان بوده و به غیر ایرانی اطلاق نمی شده است.

در این صورت نمیدانم کوشش اراتسکی خاورشناس روسی را در کتاب فقه اللغه ایرانی او برای معرفی ملتی بنام تاجیک در مقابل ملت ایران باید بر چه نکته ای حمل کرد؟ زیرا اختلاف مخارج حرکات روی حروف کلمات فارسی...در سراسر نواحی ایران به درجه ای محسوس و متطور است که لهجه گوینده گان شهرهای دوشنبه...کابل...بخارا...هرات و....به گوش شنوندگان مشهد و تبریز و تهران...گاهی از لهجه گویندگان شهرهای اصفهان و اهواز و رشت...مأنوستر و مطلوبتر می آید...."

Dr Dabir Seyaaqi writes:



هفتم: انکه 'تاجیک' و 'تاژیک' در شواهد غالبا همراه با واژه 'ترک' به کار رفته اند...مثلا 'ترک و تاژیک' و یا 'ترک و تاجیک'...و غیره...و انجا که با کلمه ترک همراه نیامده اند یا از زبان ترک بر فارس اطلاق شده است و یا فارس در سخن از ترک و یا در مقابل ترک و یا در محیط ترک بر خود اطلاق کرده است. پیوستگی این واژه ها به واژه ترک ایجاب می کند که اشاره ای به ترکان دهنده این عناوین به فارسی زبانان بشود:

ترک عنوانی است که به همه اقوام ترک زبان ساکن سرزمینهای میان دریای سیاه تا دیوار چین داده شده است...بی انکه مفهوم نژادی از ان بر اید............


In examples [that are given]..... 'Tajik' and 'Tazhik' are often mentioned alongside 'Turk'.....for example, 'Turk and Tajik' or 'Turk and Tazhik' and etc...and whenever the term 'Tajik' is not mentioned with the word Turk, it is used to describe, or referred to, a Persian from the tongue of a Turk, or a Persian uses it to point, or refer, to himself when speaking about Turks or against Turks or in a Turkic environment. The connection of the word (Tajik) with the Turk makes it necessary for us to explain to Farsi-speaking what or who the Turks are:

Turk is a title that is given to all Turkic speaking tribes residing in lands between Black Sea until the Great Wall of China...without deriving any racial understanding from it....



Examples of the usage and meaning of the words Tajik and its variants in Farsi literature:

5- تاجیکانه: (Tajikaana)

صفت یا قیدی است که از تاجیک ساخته شده است به معنی همانند تاجیک...چون تاجیک. و در شاهد زیرین صفت روی/صورت/چهره قرار گرفته است و مراد رخسار زیبا و خوش اب و رنگ...شرم الود و ملیح است در برابر ترک:

روی تاجیکانه ات بنمای تا داغ حبش
آسمان بر چهره ای ترکان یغمایی کشد

(سعدی...کلیات...ص 432)

5- Tajikana:

....is an adverb or an adjective made from the word Tajik and means 'like Tajik or 'as Tajik'. In the below example the word performs the role of an adjective for face/countenance and means beautiful or handsome, again used against Turk...

(Saa'di Shiraazi, Kalyaat, page 432)

Saa'di's Farsi poetry which emphsizes and stresses the human bond adorns the entrance of the UN building in New York.


Another example:

چو یکسانست آنجا ترک و تاجیک
هم از ایران هم از توران دریغا

(عطار...دیوان...ص 675)

In that couplet by Attar, the Tajik is equaled with Iran/Aryana and Turk with Turan.

Fariddudin Attar Neshapouri was a Tajik Sufi mystic poet who blessed young Jalaluddin Balkhi and his father Bahawuddin Walad when they were on their way towards West. Attar told Bahaddin Walad that his son, Jalaluddin, will one day engulf the world with the fire of his wisdom and love. Centuries later, Jalaluddin's words of wisdom and books are best-sellers in America and Europe...

Basically, Tajik first meant the Iranians of greater Khorassan and then it was used to identify or define Farsi-speaking people all over the world and all scholars and intellectuals of west from 10th century onwards until 19th century used the term Tajik as synonym, equal or in parallel with the words Iranian and Farsi-Zabaan..

As we mentioned earlier, Tajik is mostly used against and as opposed to a Turk and Arab and refers to Iranian or Persian. To back that up, we present poems from Tajik masters present and past. The great Tajik master and world renowned great literary figure, Sheikh Saa'di Shiraazi, who was a native of Fars province and an Iranian and Farsi-Zabaan, identified himself as TAJIK with special pomp, haughtiness and pride in his masterpiece Bostaan, when complaining about his Turk girlfriend, for bleeding him in her love.

شاید که به پادشه بگویند
ترک تو بریخت خون تاجیک

....or, Amir Khesrow Dehlawi, in his masterpiece Quran-ul-Sa'addin, whom you claimed to have been an Indian in another forum, and that maybe so, praises the valor and courage of his TAJIK people on the battlefield as such:

تاجیک گردنکش و لشکر شکن
بیشتری نیزه ور و تیغ زن

....or the heart of Mawlana Sahib in his Diwaane Kabir - whom you claimed to have been a Turk, which he definitely was NOT, and he himself makes it clear that he is not a Turk- sinks and becomes frustrated from the passive, gentle and civilized nature of his people and cries to his people to be more assertive and even aggressive like Turks if needs arise...

یک حمله و دو حمله شب امد و تاریکی
چستی کن و ترکی کن نه نرمی و تاجیکی

...or we read in Diwaane Shams, where again the term TAJIK stands out as opposed to a Turk and Arab, the following:

ترک و تاجیک و عرب گر عاشقند
همرهند از روی معنی در ثواب

As you may know, the Mongol invasion hit the great Tajik nation very hard and dropped us to our knees. We tried not to hit the ground and fought back very hard, but for an urbanized, highly cultured people who are used to books and reading and writing, it's very hard to organize resistance against a savage desert horde who has no value for human being. It hit us very hard and still we cannot recover from its bad affects.

If you read the masterpiece of history writing that is the book of Tajik master historian Mohammad Bin Yaqoub Saifi Herawi, you'll know how the great Iranian and Khorassani nation fought the Golden Mongol Horde. In Tarikhnama-e-Herat of Saifi Herawi, we read that Changez Khan advises his successors:

....هر تاجیک هروی را که دستگیر نمایید زنده نگذارید و بر تاجیکان اعتماد نکنید که در اقالیم جهان به دلیری و کین خواستن به سر امده اند...سخن من بشنو و تاجیکان سر کوفته دار...دل من از غصه تاجیکان خون شد...تاجیک را چه زهره و یارا و توانایی ان بود که تخلف و تصلف زند و دعوی اقدام و انتقام کند....هنوز صفحات زمین از خون تاجیکان گلگون است....

The surfaces of earth is still red from the Tajik blood - Changez Khan

In Qaamoos-ul-Elaam-e-Turki, written by Shamsuddin Saami, at the end of 19th century, we read the following:

...طایفه اهالی ایرانی الاصل خراسان و ایران که با فارسی گپ می زنند. اینها در شهر ها با بازرگانی و پیشه وری (کاسبی و هنرمندی) و در دهات با کشاورزی مشغول بوده...فعال.....ماهر....صاحب استعداد و نسبت بر سایر طایفه ها شهرنشینی تر و مدنی تر اند و مانند ترک...ازبک...افغانی و دیگر قومهای کوچ کننده جسور و جنگاور نیستند...بنابراین تاجیکها به نظر اینها (قومهای کوچی) خوار می باشند...


...pure Iranians of Khorassan/Iran who speak in Farsi. They live and work in urban cities and villages as merchants, professionals, and artists and in villages they're busy with agriculture. They're active, skilled and talented and are more urbanized and cultured than other races. But, unlike Uzbeks, Afghans and Turks and other nomadic races, they're not savages and for that reason, they're looked down upon by them (nomadic and tribal races)....

William Barthold, in his article "Tajikan", writes:

Turks could not have lived without Tajiks. They depended on Tajiks and needed them. Tajiks were the representatives of industry, trades and, over all, the whole culture and civilization of Iran and for that reason Turks needed them. Even Turkic nationalist author Mahmoud Kashghari has written this: "There is no such thing as a Turk without a Tat and a head without a hat" [Turkish: تاتسیز ترک بلماس...باشیسیز برگ بلماس].

It is clear that the situation of Iranians under the rule of desert dwellers from time to time were very hard. According to historian Rashidduddin Fazelullah, Ghazaan Khan, the Mongol ruler of Iran, who was known as a man of principle and justice, used to say to his Mongols: it's easy to plunder and loot Tajiks but after that, it'll be hard for us to make ends meet or bring food on the table, because Tajiks run the economy of the lands. We murder Tajik women and children and destroy their homes, and never remember how much we ourselves love our women and children and that "Tajiks are also human beings".


Then exactlyt to which people does the term actualyy apply to, because when ever i look up on sources about Tajiks it only applies to those of Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, China, Pakistan and disapora communites in india and else. They never catergorise persian speakers of Iran as Tajiks do they, arent they called Iranians??? if thats the case then are you saying that the people of Tehran are of the same stock as the people of Kabul for example. And if you are saying Iranians are Tajiks are you saying they all are of just the ones who inhabit the eastern provinces ??

Btw i never claimed that Amir Khurow was Indian or Mawlana Sahib was Turk i think you got me confused with someone else Gul Agha
0

#48 User is offline   Gul agha Icon

  • Sar Dabeer
  • Icon
Group:
Administrators
Posts:
557
Joined:
17-May 07

Posted 05 November 2009 - 04:50 AM

sorry I pasted those passages from another post. ignore those comments :D

Modern-day Tajiks are the Indo-Iranians of Central Asia who speak Persian, Pamiri, and Yaghnabi. The Qizilbash in Afghanistan are known to be Tajik because they came to Khorasan more than 400 years ago making them central asian today and when the Qizilbash came into Khorasan (many were Khorasan by the way) Tajik had a different definition. However, the non-Azeri Turks in Iran still use "Tajik" for all Persian and Kurdish speakers. The term "Tajik" was originally designated for any Indo-Iranian who spoke Persian, Kurdish, Pamiri, and Yaghnabi and this term was first used by the Chinese in the form of Ta-Yeuzhi and they used this term for the Sakas and Indo-Iranians and later on the Turks used it for all Persian-speakers and Kurdish-spakers. I hope this explanation made it more clear for you.
Ba Naam e Khudahvand e Jan o Kherad, Kazeen Bartar Andisha Bar Nagzarad

به نام خداوند جان و خرد، کزین برتر اندیشه برنگذرد
0

#49 User is offline   Parsistani Icon

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

Posted 05 November 2009 - 10:49 AM

Shabir, you have no idea about Tajiks, so why don´t you keep your interests out of them? ''Kohistani'' is not a tribe, it´s a term describes people who live in higher regions. There are in eastern Afghanistan called as Kohistanis because they live around or on mountains, also known as Pashais. Tajiks north of Kabul, living in Kapisa, Parvan, Panjsher are also called as Kohistanis. Pushtuns are called by NATO also as ''mountain people''. In Iran and Pakistan the term is usually used for Pushtuns (Mardom e Koh). There is even a district called as ''Kohistan''. I have no idea from where you have your false informations. According to your bird logic, Kabulis are another tribe than Balkhis and Heratis are different than Takhari...are you sure you are not an real Pushtun?
0

#50 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 05 November 2009 - 12:43 PM

View PostGul agha, on 05 November 2009 - 02:50 PM, said:

sorry I pasted those passages from another post. ignore those comments :D

Modern-day Tajiks are the Indo-Iranians of Central Asia who speak Persian, Pamiri, and Yaghnabi. The Qizilbash in Afghanistan are known to be Tajik because they came to Khorasan more than 400 years ago making them central asian today and when the Qizilbash came into Khorasan (many were Khorasan by the way) Tajik had a different definition. However, the non-Azeri Turks in Iran still use "Tajik" for all Persian and Kurdish speakers. The term "Tajik" was originally designated for any Indo-Iranian who spoke Persian, Kurdish, Pamiri, and Yaghnabi and this term was first used by the Chinese in the form of Ta-Yeuzhi and they used this term for the Sakas and Indo-Iranians and later on the Turks used it for all Persian-speakers and Kurdish-spakers. I hope this explanation made it more clear for you.


Yeh but the point i am asking is wether or not the Tajiks of Southern Afghanistan are indeed indeginous to that region like the Tajiks of Ghazni and Gardev are as they withstood the Pushtun invasions

ARE THE TAJIKS OF SOUTHERN AFGHNISTAN INDEGINOUS TO THAT REGION OR NOT JUST LIKE THE GHAZNAWIS ARE IN GHAZNI GARDEZI ARE IN GARDEZ JALALABADIS ARE IN JALALABAD AND SO ON

Theres alot of debate to wether or not they Pamirs are even Tajiks, as in because the language they is not understood by normal tajiks is not a dialect like Herati is or like Ghaznichi is. Could the Pamiris be a more Authentic unmixed version of Tajiks who took refuge in the mountains and retained their cultuer and customs from 2000 years ago while we are more mixed and we lost our language ot the persian migration that came
0

#51 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 05 November 2009 - 12:48 PM

Is SAMA also known as Sazman e Asadbakhshi Mardom Afghanestan i know its a political group but what kind of Political group is it. Is it Tajik orientated just like Setammi Milli, Congress Party, Paykar and Parcham ??? Because i know that it was lead by The Great Emir of Khorason Habibullah Kalakanis brother Majid Kalakani but im not shore of its Policies

Any help please ??? ???
0

#52 User is offline   Parsistani Icon

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

Posted 05 November 2009 - 03:31 PM

Tajik Kabuli, Gardezi, Ghaznavi, Qandahaari (mostly known as Diqaani as Pushtuns call the indigine population) are the indigene population of the mentioned regions, including the Hindu remnants. Don´t you want to understand it or can´t you understand it? Tajiks are of eastern- and western Iranian origine. Tajiks have surely also a small ''Hindu'' or for sure Buddhist origine. The area of Kandahar was once known as Arachotara (Arachosia). The survived and indianized population today call themself as ''Roh'', ''Arokha'' and ''Archat'' and they still live in India and Pakistan. Even the Arabs called the region Kandahar as Arokha. About the origine of the term there are three popular theories. One theory is that it drives from Sogdian and describe all Perso-Irania population dinstingtly from Turks and the Arabs. The second theory is that the term comes from Chinese and describe the Dahee (Parthians/Sacas from the house of Suran Palau), Asiani and Tocharian confederation (Ta-Chue, from Ta-Yuechi) that established the Kushano-Sassanian civilization (indeed, the Indians used in their folklores the term Taayi and the third and mostly favoured theory is that it comes from Mille Persian (Taj-crown, and ik-head) and describe the entire population of Sassanian Iran and it stand for the Sassanian´s house self. An older theory assumed the term is of chinese origine and described the arab tribe Teyy that moved to Central Asia to islamize the region and beyond (China, South Russia, India), so the term became synonym for ''Muslims'' of Central Asia of Persian origine. The Yaghnobi etc. are also ethnical Tajiks, except the fact that their dialects did not became devedloped in the last 600-800 years since they live isolated. If you have read what I´ve written above and on the past pages you would know that. They are originally fromSoghdian, Bactria, Kabul. The Wakhis are for example of Sacae origine and speak an older Bactrian dialect called (identified is the better choice) by scholars as Khotani (Khotan-Sacaes), while Yaghnobis are moved to the mountains from Bukhara, Samarkand, Tashkent from Mongols. Their dialects are not heavy to understand as you think. Just listen to them. The Wakhi Tajiks have vene officially an own homepage. Listen to their language and their music and you will see what I mean. You write only BS here..it´s pure ignorance. I have the feeling you want to devide Tajiks..by your false statements.
0

#53 User is offline   Gul agha Icon

  • Sar Dabeer
  • Icon
Group:
Administrators
Posts:
557
Joined:
17-May 07

Posted 05 November 2009 - 08:32 PM

View Posttajik kabuli, on 05 November 2009 - 12:43 PM, said:

Yeh but the point i am asking is wether or not the Tajiks of Southern Afghanistan are indeed indeginous to that region like the Tajiks of Ghazni and Gardev are as they withstood the Pushtun invasions

ARE THE TAJIKS OF SOUTHERN AFGHNISTAN INDEGINOUS TO THAT REGION OR NOT JUST LIKE THE GHAZNAWIS ARE IN GHAZNI GARDEZI ARE IN GARDEZ JALALABADIS ARE IN JALALABAD AND SO ON

Theres alot of debate to wether or not they Pamirs are even Tajiks, as in because the language they is not understood by normal tajiks is not a dialect like Herati is or like Ghaznichi is. Could the Pamiris be a more Authentic unmixed version of Tajiks who took refuge in the mountains and retained their cultuer and customs from 2000 years ago while we are more mixed and we lost our language ot the persian migration that came


Tajiks were the dominant group in Southern Afghanistan (then Khorasan and Sistan) 300 years ago and they were indeed the natives.

Pamiris are definitely Tajiks and all of them identify themselves as Tajiks. We have many Tajik Pamiris from China on Tajikam and they love Tajiks so much that they made a Pamiri and Chinese page for Tajikam. www.Tajikam.cn
Ba Naam e Khudahvand e Jan o Kherad, Kazeen Bartar Andisha Bar Nagzarad

به نام خداوند جان و خرد، کزین برتر اندیشه برنگذرد
0

#54 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 06 November 2009 - 09:42 AM

View PostParsistani, on 06 November 2009 - 01:31 AM, said:

Tajik Kabuli, Gardezi, Ghaznavi, Qandahaari (mostly known as Diqaani as Pushtuns call the indigine population) are the indigene population of the mentioned regions, including the Hindu remnants. Don´t you want to understand it or can´t you understand it? Tajiks are of eastern- and western Iranian origine. Tajiks have surely also a small ''Hindu'' or for sure Buddhist origine. The area of Kandahar was once known as Arachotara (Arachosia). The survived and indianized population today call themself as ''Roh'', ''Arokha'' and ''Archat'' and they still live in India and Pakistan. Even the Arabs called the region Kandahar as Arokha. About the origine of the term there are three popular theories. One theory is that it drives from Sogdian and describe all Perso-Irania population dinstingtly from Turks and the Arabs. The second theory is that the term comes from Chinese and describe the Dahee (Parthians/Sacas from the house of Suran Palau), Asiani and Tocharian confederation (Ta-Chue, from Ta-Yuechi) that established the Kushano-Sassanian civilization (indeed, the Indians used in their folklores the term Taayi and the third and mostly favoured theory is that it comes from Mille Persian (Taj-crown, and ik-head) and describe the entire population of Sassanian Iran and it stand for the Sassanian´s house self. An older theory assumed the term is of chinese origine and described the arab tribe Teyy that moved to Central Asia to islamize the region and beyond (China, South Russia, India), so the term became synonym for ''Muslims'' of Central Asia of Persian origine. The Yaghnobi etc. are also ethnical Tajiks, except the fact that their dialects did not became devedloped in the last 600-800 years since they live isolated. If you have read what I´ve written above and on the past pages you would know that. They are originally fromSoghdian, Bactria, Kabul. The Wakhis are for example of Sacae origine and speak an older Bactrian dialect called (identified is the better choice) by scholars as Khotani (Khotan-Sacaes), while Yaghnobis are moved to the mountains from Bukhara, Samarkand, Tashkent from Mongols. Their dialects are not heavy to understand as you think. Just listen to them. The Wakhi Tajiks have vene officially an own homepage. Listen to their language and their music and you will see what I mean. You write only BS here..it´s pure ignorance. I have the feeling you want to devide Tajiks..by your false statements.


Hhahahaha Paristani why are you so paranoid, no ones trying to split no one, and my statements are not false, look it up Pushto, Bartangi · Ishkashmi · Khufi · Munji · Oroshori · Ormuri · Ossetic (Iron · Digor · Jassic) · Parachi · Roshani (Roshni) · Sanglechi · Sarikoli · Shughni · Wakhi · Vanji · Yaghnobi · Yidgha · Yazgulami · Zebaki are all eastern Iranian languages while Balochi · Bashkardi · Central Iran dialects · Dari (Zoroastrian) · Deilami · Taleshi · Gorani · Gilaki · Mazandarani · Kurdish (Sorani · Kurmanji · Southern Kurdish) · Laki · Luri · Bakhtiari Lori · Sangsari · Persian (Dari · Tajik · Hazaragi) · Tat · Tati · Zazaki · Dialects of Fars are all western iranian languages. So in terms of linguistically pushtun are closer to the Wakhi and other Pamiri people and vis versa then they are to Tajiks, thats a fact live with it deal with it, which means our ancestors spoke a similar language perhaps along the line of them.

And then if you take alook at the ancient Iranian languages that existed during the Achamenid Dynasty and earlier the eastern languages were Avestan · Old Scythian, Bactrian · Khwarezmian · Ossetic · Khotanese · Tumshuqese · Scythian · Sogdian while the western ones were Median · Old Persian, Parthian · Middle Persian which again as you see Bactrian is also Eastern Iranian alongside Soghdian and others.

And if the Wakhi are the modern day decsendants of Bactrians, the Yagnobi are the modern day desccendants of Sogdians at least lingistically then who are the shugni modern day desendants of or the Shighnani, or the Ishkamishi, or Zebaki, or the Munjani or the roshani, the Sanglechi and so on ??? ???
0

#55 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 06 November 2009 - 09:47 AM

View PostGul agha, on 06 November 2009 - 06:32 AM, said:

Tajiks were the dominant group in Southern Afghanistan (then Khorasan and Sistan) 300 years ago and they were indeed the natives.

Pamiris are definitely Tajiks and all of them identify themselves as Tajiks. We have many Tajik Pamiris from China on Tajikam and they love Tajiks so much that they made a Pamiri and Chinese page for Tajikam. www.Tajikam.cn


If the Tajiks were dominant group in Southern Afghanistan then were did the pushtuns come from, isnt Kandahar like their traditional homeland?

Btw Gul Agha you made a mistake when you said they were indeed the natives YOUR SUPPOSE TO SAY THE ARE STILL INDEED NATIVE TO THEIR.

Im not saying Pamiris arent Tajik but within the Tajik ethnicity they are one sup- group of it and we the Dari zaban Tajik are another, plus others such as furmuli, Baraki,

CAN SOMEONE ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT SAMA Sazman Azad Bakhshi Mardom Afghanestan
0

#56 User is offline   shabir Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
111
Joined:
15-September 09

Posted 06 November 2009 - 01:32 PM

View PostParsistani, on 05 November 2009 - 10:49 AM, said:

Shabir, you have no idea about Tajiks, so why don´t you keep your interests out of them? ''Kohistani'' is not a tribe, it´s a term describes people who live in higher regions. There are in eastern Afghanistan called as Kohistanis because they live around or on mountains, also known as Pashais. Tajiks north of Kabul, living in Kapisa, Parvan, Panjsher are also called as Kohistanis. Pushtuns are called by NATO also as ''mountain people''. In Iran and Pakistan the term is usually used for Pushtuns (Mardom e Koh). There is even a district called as ''Kohistan''. I have no idea from where you have your false informations. According to your bird logic, Kabulis are another tribe than Balkhis and Heratis are different than Takhari...are you sure you are not an real Pushtun?

ye I'm sure I'm not a real pashtun, I'm a mixed one & trying to pashtunize this forum, just like we pashatins did to entire afghanistan! muwahahaha! :D

dude, where the hell did I divide tajiks with my comments? badakhsis, heratis, panjsheris etc 're all tajiks & that 'll remain so, but I'm not the one who created ''groups'' like pamiris, kohistanis, pashais or etc who according to urself 're tajiks, they themselves did that. I 've seen panjsheris feeling superior to all other tajiks, I 've seen kabulis feel superior to all other tajiks & samewise I 've seen it with heratis. now u tell me, whose fault is it if tajiks themselves divide themselves into various of groups 'cause of which they 're known by different ''ethnic groups''? alot of tajik areas 're for their own interest & thats the thing which divides tajiks, this is also the case with pashtuns but atleast they didnt divide themselves in several groups like we did. if u think all tajiks should exactly be aware whose a tajik & whose not then ur extremely wrong. there 're millions of tajiks who dont know what kohistanis, pashais, nurestanis & etc 're & those who 've heard about them think they 're non tajiks. so u tell me, they 're pashtuns as well? simply 'cause they lack knowledge about their own history or culture?
0

#57 User is offline   tajik kabuli Icon

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Members
Posts:
64
Joined:
06-October 09

Posted 07 November 2009 - 08:39 AM

View Postshabir, on 06 November 2009 - 11:32 PM, said:

ye I'm sure I'm not a real pashtun, I'm a mixed one & trying to pashtunize this forum, just like we pashatins did to entire afghanistan! muwahahaha! :D

dude, where the hell did I divide tajiks with my comments? badakhsis, heratis, panjsheris etc 're all tajiks & that 'll remain so, but I'm not the one who created ''groups'' like pamiris, kohistanis, pashais or etc who according to urself 're tajiks, they themselves did that. I 've seen panjsheris feeling superior to all other tajiks, I 've seen kabulis feel superior to all other tajiks & samewise I 've seen it with heratis. now u tell me, whose fault is it if tajiks themselves divide themselves into various of groups 'cause of which they 're known by different ''ethnic groups''? alot of tajik areas 're for their own interest & thats the thing which divides tajiks, this is also the case with pashtuns but atleast they didnt divide themselves in several groups like we did. if u think all tajiks should exactly be aware whose a tajik & whose not then ur extremely wrong. there 're millions of tajiks who dont know what kohistanis, pashais, nurestanis & etc 're & those who 've heard about them think they 're non tajiks. so u tell me, they 're pashtuns as well? simply 'cause they lack knowledge about their own history or culture?


There is always going to be regional differences this is a fact in every country around teh world. In germany the germans from Berlin are not exactly the same as the germans from munich or in italy the people of milan are not exactly the same as the people of sicily. There is alwys going to be regional differences due to the fact that they live in diferent enviros around different people. For example the Panjsheris have different dialect, but also have light phenotypes in them such as blue eyes, this indicates their isolation in the valleys but also there proximity to the Nuristani people. Then there is Ghaznawis whom are also have diferent accent dialect, but also differnt tradtions due to history but also the geographic proximity aswell, and look different aswell. This is a normal thing for a ethnicity and it occurs everywhere for example look at the Tajiks of Northern Afghanistan who live in close proximity to the Uzbeks. Because they have mixxed so much you cant tell the other apart from eachother, this has altered the Tajiks physical appearance. Look at Emomali or Karimov. they dont even look look Tajiks Tajik when compared ot our Great Hero,s Avincena, Rumi, and other who display cauasoid appearances.

My point is there is always going to bbe regional differences, and thsi is normal, due to geographic isolation, neighbooring tribes, topogrpahy and soon on, science even states this DIVERGENT evolution, CONVEGENT evolution and soon on. But to conclude what we have common is our shared history, and the culture whos glory we all Bask in and diplay with Great Pride and passion and no doubt that we are the MOST pretigious ethncity in Afghanistan with our great culture and Arts.

By the way someone said abdullah abdullah dad is Tajik from Kandahar, if this is indeed true can you please put the link up because my dad wants to see
0

#58 User is offline   TajikGunner Icon

  • Newbie
  • Pip
Group:
Members
Posts:
8
Joined:
18-September 09

Posted 18 November 2009 - 07:32 PM

Blood mixers and ethnic/race traitors should be identified and encouraged not engage in such controversial practices. After identification, and if they do not heeds the calls, they should be shunned and sidestepped by the main Tajik community.

Ethnic oneness must be preserved and kept intact through maximum efforts. Weak and feeble families, who are not confident with themselves, and are without any character and personality, marry outside their ethnicity.

We're at our best, our boldest and most effective when we marry from within our own ranks.

I implore, encourage and stress out the need for more and more inter-marriages between Balkhis, Tajik Ghaznawis, Kabulis, Heratis, Gardezis, Tajik Laghmanis, Panjsheris, Badaskhshis, Tajik JalalAbaadis, Ghoris and etc.
A Real Deal
0

#59 User is offline   Parsistani Icon

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

Posted 16 January 2011 - 01:07 PM

Gul Agha, you are right

Quote

Although the Safi are placed within the overall putative tribal genealogy of the Pashtun (Caroe, 1958, p. 19), it is likely that a substantial portion of the present-day Safi are pashtunized Pashai or Dehgan/Tajik who have been ...

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Afghanistan, University of Nebraska at Omaha. Center for Afghanistan Studies - 1980 - Snippet-Ansicht
0

#60 User is offline   قزلباش Icon

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
Group:
Research Group
Posts:
325
Joined:
26-October 10

Posted 16 January 2011 - 02:44 PM

View PostGul agha, on 04 November 2009 - 02:32 PM, said:

Tajik Kabuli you are confusing yourself. Tajik is not a term only used in Eastern Iran but it is widely used in Iran also. There are tons of Iranians who have the surname "Tajik". Tajik in the past simply meant Persian-speakers of Aryan descent. During the Safavid Dynasty the Qizilbash were separated in two groups the Turkomens (Turk-like) Azeris and the Tajik Persians,Lurs,Tats, and Kurds. When you read the history of the safavids you wont encounter terms like Fars or Lur but you will encounter "Tajik".


This is true.

The term "Tajik" has been used among Qizilbash since the late 15th century to designate the Iranian-Speaking and Persian-Speaking members of the confederation like Lurs.
Even today, it is considered the most appropriate term by which turkic Qizilbash like Shamlu, Ashar and Qajar refer to Iranian-speaking Qizilbash like Lurs (Bakhtiari, Zand, etc.).
In the past it was considered a derogatory term for Lur Qizilbash but that changed as the Tajik Qizilbash gained power; first under Karim Khan Zand and later under Ali Qoli Khan Bakhtiari.

In my own family, my father uses the term "Tajik" to refer my mother's side almost as often as he uses the word Lur.

The etymology of the word "Tajik" is clear and it has no connection, as some have claimed, to the word "Tazi" which refers to the the muslim Arab invaders.
The idea that the usage of the word "Tajik" is confined to Eastern Iran and Central Asia is false because many of Lur tribes and groups which identify as Tajiks live in Western Iran and along the border with Iraq.

I take pride in being a Tajik.
هیچ وقت به خدا نگو یه مشکل بزرگ دارم
به مشکل بگو من یه خدای بزرگ دارم


Go tell the wolves that although the father has been killed,
The father's gun is with us still
Tell them that although all the men of the tribe have been killed,
There is a young boy in the cradle still

Bakhtiari Proverb
0

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users