Sign In
Register
Help
http://www.iranian.c...er-out-marriage
Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Page 1 of 1
- You cannot start a new topic
-
This topic is locked
Woman Naked on Webcam OK - Ayatollah MS Rohani
Rate Topic:
#1
Nader Shah 
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Research Group
- Posts:
- 1,155
- Joined:
- 13-October 07
Posted 11 May 2008 - 04:19 AM
MultiQuote
#2
Nader Shah
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Research Group
- Posts:
- 1,155
- Joined:
- 13-October 07
Posted 11 May 2008 - 04:20 AM
Maybe Tajiks should convert to Shia Islam so as to benefit from the directive of Ayatollah Rohani 
It would also help unity with Iran
It would also help unity with Iran
#3
Faridun
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 121
- Joined:
- 15-February 08
Posted 11 May 2008 - 05:30 AM
[QUOTE=Nader Shah;8857]Maybe Tajiks should convert to Shia Islam so as to benefit from the directive of Ayatollah Rohani It would also help unity with Iran[/QUOTE]
Tajiks would better to be in persianazed sunni Islam- Hanafizm.
I want to add that Shiizm is herecy. The root of shii islam can be found in persian revolt against arabic oppression and nationalizm. Shiite islam is truely persian islam. Even the doctrine of hereditary ruling by Imams was the reflection of monarchic system of governing of persian people. We know that arabs before islam did not have either kings or any individual rulers whose legitimasy for ruling could be supplied just by the fact of birth.
In history shiizm did a lot for persian people to keep their identity and to struggle for independence from arabs. One of the best persian who for the first time created an independent shiite state within Omeyad khalifate in Kufa was Mukhtar, whom, still now, the wahabbis hate and insult in their books calling him "Mukhtara- Al-Kazzab"(i.e.Mukhtar Lier"). They say that he claimed to be prophet. But it is a bulls..., He was a persian and wanted just to be free from arabs abusing shiite version. But unfortunately Omeyads from west and Abdullah ibn Zubair (independent ruler of Hijaz) from?North succeded in suppressing his revolt. His head was cut off and sent to Abdullah ibn Zubair on the plate. Her wives were compelled to blame Mukhtar in his having called himself a new prophet. One of his wives refused and thus was killed with her 4 kids. I heard once that Iran made a great movie about him. You see, the same is being repeated even now. Arab Wahabies blame Mukhtar in their books in kufr, but Iran makes a movie to glorify him and his deeds.
we can find many examples in history showing us that many persians used shiite islam for expressing their national identity. I dont remember the name But I know that one of Samanid rulers converted to Qaramatia sect within Shiizm.
Even great poet Roudaki converted to qaramatia shiizm. It is understandable. He was nationalist and wanted to have the religion free from arabic nationalistic elements. That is why he was blinded by fanatic sunni ulamas.
Nasiri Khisrav became ismailite just because to struggle against turks in favour persian people. He painfully wrote this:
The house of Qarun has now made all Khurasan
A model for the world entire of how sinister fate unfolds.
Their slaves at one time were the Turks,
But sometimes things turn this way and that,
And now they themselves are slaves of Turks.
We must not ignore the significance of Shiite version in persian history.?
??Unfortunately the sect which expressed the hope of persians for freedom and independense in the whole history, now has become the tool of oppresion over this nation. Iranians must get rid of this sect as soon as possible.
I hope in the near future Iran will be secular. It is my wish.
It would also help unity with Iran[/QUOTE]Tajiks would better to be in persianazed sunni Islam- Hanafizm.
I want to add that Shiizm is herecy. The root of shii islam can be found in persian revolt against arabic oppression and nationalizm. Shiite islam is truely persian islam. Even the doctrine of hereditary ruling by Imams was the reflection of monarchic system of governing of persian people. We know that arabs before islam did not have either kings or any individual rulers whose legitimasy for ruling could be supplied just by the fact of birth.
In history shiizm did a lot for persian people to keep their identity and to struggle for independence from arabs. One of the best persian who for the first time created an independent shiite state within Omeyad khalifate in Kufa was Mukhtar, whom, still now, the wahabbis hate and insult in their books calling him "Mukhtara- Al-Kazzab"(i.e.Mukhtar Lier"). They say that he claimed to be prophet. But it is a bulls..., He was a persian and wanted just to be free from arabs abusing shiite version. But unfortunately Omeyads from west and Abdullah ibn Zubair (independent ruler of Hijaz) from?North succeded in suppressing his revolt. His head was cut off and sent to Abdullah ibn Zubair on the plate. Her wives were compelled to blame Mukhtar in his having called himself a new prophet. One of his wives refused and thus was killed with her 4 kids. I heard once that Iran made a great movie about him. You see, the same is being repeated even now. Arab Wahabies blame Mukhtar in their books in kufr, but Iran makes a movie to glorify him and his deeds.
we can find many examples in history showing us that many persians used shiite islam for expressing their national identity. I dont remember the name But I know that one of Samanid rulers converted to Qaramatia sect within Shiizm.
Even great poet Roudaki converted to qaramatia shiizm. It is understandable. He was nationalist and wanted to have the religion free from arabic nationalistic elements. That is why he was blinded by fanatic sunni ulamas.
Nasiri Khisrav became ismailite just because to struggle against turks in favour persian people. He painfully wrote this:
The house of Qarun has now made all Khurasan
A model for the world entire of how sinister fate unfolds.
Their slaves at one time were the Turks,
But sometimes things turn this way and that,
And now they themselves are slaves of Turks.
We must not ignore the significance of Shiite version in persian history.?
??Unfortunately the sect which expressed the hope of persians for freedom and independense in the whole history, now has become the tool of oppresion over this nation. Iranians must get rid of this sect as soon as possible.
I hope in the near future Iran will be secular. It is my wish.
#4
PORS
- AZADANDESH
-
- Group:
- Administrators
- Posts:
- 740
- Joined:
- 30-May 07
Posted 11 May 2008 - 06:11 PM
Doorood Nader Shahe arjmand:
It's a very good question and I think the best thing for Tajiks would be rationalism, reasoning and spiritualism. Not necessarily religious. Free from all kinds of prison thinking, yet based on wisdom, morally, and ethically accepted actions and decisions would be far better of than any other religious. In the course of history, we know what religion has done, especially when it is being used for political purposes. One doesn't have to be religions in order to have high spirit. One can be spiritually and morally strong person, by rational reasoning, not necessarily religious.
"Religion does three things: 1) Divides people, 2) Controls people, 3) Deludes people" - Carlespie MacKinney.
"Religion is just mind control." - George Carlin
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by wise as false, by the rulers as useful." - Seneca
Unfortunately, these are true in our days and in our country. When you got your own spirituality based on your rational thinking and reasoning, then I salute to you.
I apologize if I was harsh in my post to some one, but i did not and do not have any intentions to insult one's belief.
Tandorost o pirooz bemaned,
Pors.
[QUOTE=Nader Shah;8857]Maybe Tajiks should convert to Shia Islam so as to benefit from the directive of Ayatollah Rohani It would also help unity with Iran[/QUOTE]
It's a very good question and I think the best thing for Tajiks would be rationalism, reasoning and spiritualism. Not necessarily religious. Free from all kinds of prison thinking, yet based on wisdom, morally, and ethically accepted actions and decisions would be far better of than any other religious. In the course of history, we know what religion has done, especially when it is being used for political purposes. One doesn't have to be religions in order to have high spirit. One can be spiritually and morally strong person, by rational reasoning, not necessarily religious.
"Religion does three things: 1) Divides people, 2) Controls people, 3) Deludes people" - Carlespie MacKinney.
"Religion is just mind control." - George Carlin
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by wise as false, by the rulers as useful." - Seneca
Unfortunately, these are true in our days and in our country. When you got your own spirituality based on your rational thinking and reasoning, then I salute to you.
I apologize if I was harsh in my post to some one, but i did not and do not have any intentions to insult one's belief.
Tandorost o pirooz bemaned,
Pors.
[QUOTE=Nader Shah;8857]Maybe Tajiks should convert to Shia Islam so as to benefit from the directive of Ayatollah Rohani
It would also help unity with Iran[/QUOTE]
#5
PORS
- AZADANDESH
-
- Group:
- Administrators
- Posts:
- 740
- Joined:
- 30-May 07
Posted 11 May 2008 - 06:19 PM
Fariduni gerami:
I find it (below video) very interesting and thus wanted to share with you.
Paarsi Version:
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=_E9iVj62XtY
English Version:
http://youtube.com/w...feature=related
Share your thoughts on that Cheers bro.
Pors.
[QUOTE=Faridun;8858]Tajiks would better to be in persianazed sunni Islam- Hanafizm.
I want to add that Shiizm is herecy. The root of shii islam can be found in persian revolt against arabic oppression and nationalizm. Shiite islam is truely persian islam. Even the doctrine of hereditary ruling by Imams was the reflection of monarchic system of governing of persian people. We know that arabs before islam did not have either kings or any individual rulers whose legitimasy for ruling could be supplied just by the fact of birth.
In history shiizm did a lot for persian people to keep their identity and to struggle for independence from arabs. One of the best persian who for the first time created an independent shiite state within Omeyad khalifate in Kufa was Mukhtar, whom, still now, the wahabbis hate and insult in their books calling him "Mukhtara- Al-Kazzab"(i.e.Mukhtar Lier"). They say that he claimed to be prophet. But it is a bulls..., He was a persian and wanted just to be free from arabs abusing shiite version. But unfortunately Omeyads from west and Abdullah ibn Zubair (independent ruler of Hijaz) from?North succeded in suppressing his revolt. His head was cut off and sent to Abdullah ibn Zubair on the plate. Her wives were compelled to blame Mukhtar in his having called himself a new prophet. One of his wives refused and thus was killed with her 4 kids. I heard once that Iran made a great movie about him. You see, the same is being repeated even now. Arab Wahabies blame Mukhtar in their books in kufr, but Iran makes a movie to glorify him and his deeds.
we can find many examples in history showing us that many persians used shiite islam for expressing their national identity. I dont remember the name But I know that one of Samanid rulers converted to Qaramatia sect within Shiizm.
Even great poet Roudaki converted to qaramatia shiizm. It is understandable. He was nationalist and wanted to have the religion free from arabic nationalistic elements. That is why he was blinded by fanatic sunni ulamas.
Nasiri Khisrav became ismailite just because to struggle against turks in favour persian people. He painfully wrote this:
The house of Qarun has now made all Khurasan
A model for the world entire of how sinister fate unfolds.
Their slaves at one time were the Turks,
But sometimes things turn this way and that,
And now they themselves are slaves of Turks.
We must not ignore the significance of Shiite version in persian history.?
??Unfortunately the sect which expressed the hope of persians for freedom and independense in the whole history, now has become the tool of oppresion over this nation. Iranians must get rid of this sect as soon as possible.
I hope in the near future Iran will be secular. It is my wish.[/QUOTE]
I find it (below video) very interesting and thus wanted to share with you.
Paarsi Version:
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=_E9iVj62XtY
English Version:
http://youtube.com/w...feature=related
Share your thoughts on that
Cheers bro.Pors.
[QUOTE=Faridun;8858]Tajiks would better to be in persianazed sunni Islam- Hanafizm.
I want to add that Shiizm is herecy. The root of shii islam can be found in persian revolt against arabic oppression and nationalizm. Shiite islam is truely persian islam. Even the doctrine of hereditary ruling by Imams was the reflection of monarchic system of governing of persian people. We know that arabs before islam did not have either kings or any individual rulers whose legitimasy for ruling could be supplied just by the fact of birth.
In history shiizm did a lot for persian people to keep their identity and to struggle for independence from arabs. One of the best persian who for the first time created an independent shiite state within Omeyad khalifate in Kufa was Mukhtar, whom, still now, the wahabbis hate and insult in their books calling him "Mukhtara- Al-Kazzab"(i.e.Mukhtar Lier"). They say that he claimed to be prophet. But it is a bulls..., He was a persian and wanted just to be free from arabs abusing shiite version. But unfortunately Omeyads from west and Abdullah ibn Zubair (independent ruler of Hijaz) from?North succeded in suppressing his revolt. His head was cut off and sent to Abdullah ibn Zubair on the plate. Her wives were compelled to blame Mukhtar in his having called himself a new prophet. One of his wives refused and thus was killed with her 4 kids. I heard once that Iran made a great movie about him. You see, the same is being repeated even now. Arab Wahabies blame Mukhtar in their books in kufr, but Iran makes a movie to glorify him and his deeds.
we can find many examples in history showing us that many persians used shiite islam for expressing their national identity. I dont remember the name But I know that one of Samanid rulers converted to Qaramatia sect within Shiizm.
Even great poet Roudaki converted to qaramatia shiizm. It is understandable. He was nationalist and wanted to have the religion free from arabic nationalistic elements. That is why he was blinded by fanatic sunni ulamas.
Nasiri Khisrav became ismailite just because to struggle against turks in favour persian people. He painfully wrote this:
The house of Qarun has now made all Khurasan
A model for the world entire of how sinister fate unfolds.
Their slaves at one time were the Turks,
But sometimes things turn this way and that,
And now they themselves are slaves of Turks.
We must not ignore the significance of Shiite version in persian history.?
??Unfortunately the sect which expressed the hope of persians for freedom and independense in the whole history, now has become the tool of oppresion over this nation. Iranians must get rid of this sect as soon as possible.
I hope in the near future Iran will be secular. It is my wish.[/QUOTE]
#6
Kambiz
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 720
- Joined:
- 13-January 08
Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:17 AM
Torkan pishe mardan z-in pish dar Khorasan
Budand xaar o ajez hamchon zane sarai
Emruz sharm n-aayad azadezadegan ra
Kardan be pishe torkan posht az tama' dotai
Naser Khosrow
?? ?? ??
?? ? ? ? ?? ?? ??
?? ? ?? ??
? ?? ?? ??
? ?
?? ? ?-?? ?
? ? ? ??
?? ? ?- ? ?
?? ? ? ?? ?? ??
[QUOTE=Faridun;8858]Tajiks would better to be in persianazed sunni Islam- Hanafizm.
I want to add that Shiizm is herecy. The root of shii islam can be found in persian revolt against arabic oppression and nationalizm. Shiite islam is truely persian islam. Even the doctrine of hereditary ruling by Imams was the reflection of monarchic system of governing of persian people. We know that arabs before islam did not have either kings or any individual rulers whose legitimasy for ruling could be supplied just by the fact of birth.
In history shiizm did a lot for persian people to keep their identity and to struggle for independence from arabs. One of the best persian who for the first time created an independent shiite state within Omeyad khalifate in Kufa was Mukhtar, whom, still now, the wahabbis hate and insult in their books calling him "Mukhtara- Al-Kazzab"(i.e.Mukhtar Lier"). They say that he claimed to be prophet. But it is a bulls..., He was a persian and wanted just to be free from arabs abusing shiite version. But unfortunately Omeyads from west and Abdullah ibn Zubair (independent ruler of Hijaz) from?North succeded in suppressing his revolt. His head was cut off and sent to Abdullah ibn Zubair on the plate. Her wives were compelled to blame Mukhtar in his having called himself a new prophet. One of his wives refused and thus was killed with her 4 kids. I heard once that Iran made a great movie about him. You see, the same is being repeated even now. Arab Wahabies blame Mukhtar in their books in kufr, but Iran makes a movie to glorify him and his deeds.
we can find many examples in history showing us that many persians used shiite islam for expressing their national identity. I dont remember the name But I know that one of Samanid rulers converted to Qaramatia sect within Shiizm.
Even great poet Roudaki converted to qaramatia shiizm. It is understandable. He was nationalist and wanted to have the religion free from arabic nationalistic elements. That is why he was blinded by fanatic sunni ulamas.
Nasiri Khisrav became ismailite just because to struggle against turks in favour persian people. He painfully wrote this:
The house of Qarun has now made all Khurasan
A model for the world entire of how sinister fate unfolds.
Their slaves at one time were the Turks,
But sometimes things turn this way and that,
And now they themselves are slaves of Turks.
We must not ignore the significance of Shiite version in persian history.?
??Unfortunately the sect which expressed the hope of persians for freedom and independense in the whole history, now has become the tool of oppresion over this nation. Iranians must get rid of this sect as soon as possible.
I hope in the near future Iran will be secular. It is my wish.[/QUOTE]
Budand xaar o ajez hamchon zane sarai
Emruz sharm n-aayad azadezadegan ra
Kardan be pishe torkan posht az tama' dotai
Naser Khosrow
?? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ?? ? ?-?? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ? ?- ? ? ?? ? ? ?? ?? ?? [QUOTE=Faridun;8858]Tajiks would better to be in persianazed sunni Islam- Hanafizm.
I want to add that Shiizm is herecy. The root of shii islam can be found in persian revolt against arabic oppression and nationalizm. Shiite islam is truely persian islam. Even the doctrine of hereditary ruling by Imams was the reflection of monarchic system of governing of persian people. We know that arabs before islam did not have either kings or any individual rulers whose legitimasy for ruling could be supplied just by the fact of birth.
In history shiizm did a lot for persian people to keep their identity and to struggle for independence from arabs. One of the best persian who for the first time created an independent shiite state within Omeyad khalifate in Kufa was Mukhtar, whom, still now, the wahabbis hate and insult in their books calling him "Mukhtara- Al-Kazzab"(i.e.Mukhtar Lier"). They say that he claimed to be prophet. But it is a bulls..., He was a persian and wanted just to be free from arabs abusing shiite version. But unfortunately Omeyads from west and Abdullah ibn Zubair (independent ruler of Hijaz) from?North succeded in suppressing his revolt. His head was cut off and sent to Abdullah ibn Zubair on the plate. Her wives were compelled to blame Mukhtar in his having called himself a new prophet. One of his wives refused and thus was killed with her 4 kids. I heard once that Iran made a great movie about him. You see, the same is being repeated even now. Arab Wahabies blame Mukhtar in their books in kufr, but Iran makes a movie to glorify him and his deeds.
we can find many examples in history showing us that many persians used shiite islam for expressing their national identity. I dont remember the name But I know that one of Samanid rulers converted to Qaramatia sect within Shiizm.
Even great poet Roudaki converted to qaramatia shiizm. It is understandable. He was nationalist and wanted to have the religion free from arabic nationalistic elements. That is why he was blinded by fanatic sunni ulamas.
Nasiri Khisrav became ismailite just because to struggle against turks in favour persian people. He painfully wrote this:
The house of Qarun has now made all Khurasan
A model for the world entire of how sinister fate unfolds.
Their slaves at one time were the Turks,
But sometimes things turn this way and that,
And now they themselves are slaves of Turks.
We must not ignore the significance of Shiite version in persian history.?
??Unfortunately the sect which expressed the hope of persians for freedom and independense in the whole history, now has become the tool of oppresion over this nation. Iranians must get rid of this sect as soon as possible.
I hope in the near future Iran will be secular. It is my wish.[/QUOTE]
#7
Nader Shah
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Research Group
- Posts:
- 1,155
- Joined:
- 13-October 07
Posted 12 May 2008 - 01:00 AM
I hope you did not take me seriously ... I was just joking about naked bride on webcam ... meaning that Shiite ayatollahs can be liberal too ... and Tajiks need to become more liberal ... maybe by converting to Shia Islam just kidding ... actually, it would be much better if we could uncondition our minds and clean it up of all organized religions' s memes (if you know what that means) that have been injected like a virus over centuries ... it is like a cure, we need to cure ourselves from the nefarious influence of these barbaric religions who force people to conform to a bunch of beliefs and superstitions and rituals of barbaric desert nomads ... sorry if I offended some, but you are free to think otherwise
just kidding ... actually, it would be much better if we could uncondition our minds and clean it up of all organized religions' s memes (if you know what that means) that have been injected like a virus over centuries ... it is like a cure, we need to cure ourselves from the nefarious influence of these barbaric religions who force people to conform to a bunch of beliefs and superstitions and rituals of barbaric desert nomads ... sorry if I offended some, but you are free to think otherwise
#9
Faridun
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 121
- Joined:
- 15-February 08
Posted 12 May 2008 - 06:38 AM
[QUOTE=Darius;8919]Torkan pishe mardan z-in pish dar Khorasan
Budand xaar o ajez hamchon zane sarai
Emruz sharm n-aayad azadezadegan ra
Kardan be pishe torkan posht az tama' dotai
Naser Khosrow
?? ?? ??
?? ? ? ? ?? ?? ??
?? ? ?? ??
? ?? ?? ??
? ?
?? ? ?-?? ?
? ? ? ??
?? ? ?- ? ?
?? ? ? ?? ?? ??
[/QUOTE]
Thank you, Brother! I found this poem in english in the internet. I was looking for persian version but in vain. Thank You for share. I am grateful.
Budand xaar o ajez hamchon zane sarai
Emruz sharm n-aayad azadezadegan ra
Kardan be pishe torkan posht az tama' dotai
Naser Khosrow
?? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ?? ? ?-?? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ? ?- ? ? ?? ? ? ?? ?? ?? [/QUOTE]Thank you, Brother! I found this poem in english in the internet. I was looking for persian version but in vain. Thank You for share. I am grateful.
#10
Faridun
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 121
- Joined:
- 15-February 08
Posted 12 May 2008 - 07:04 AM
[QUOTE=PORS;8899]Fariduni gerami:
I find it (below video) very interesting and thus wanted to share with you.
Paarsi Version:
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=_E9iVj62XtY
English Version:
http://youtube.com/w...feature=related
Share your thoughts on that Cheers bro.
Pors.[/QUOTE]
Thank You Porsjon! I have listened and come to the conclusion which I had before. The king was right. He actually had wonderfull speech. And I wonder why Umar ibn Al-Khattab did not convert to Zoroastrizm after this:).
The politicians are politicians. Their words differ drastically from their deeds. I dont think He was a true worshipper of Ahura Mazda like nowadays arabic sheykhs are not true followers of Muhammad. If it were Zardusht himself or Mazdak who had sided with poor persian people I would have believed them. At that time persian society was ruined economicaly and morally. Shah could not find strong support of his folk. The deep disappointment ruled over persians. The preversed shah government could not tackle increasing social problems and shield society from the great blows of Fate. All of these solemn words to austere Umar ibn Khattab who unlike king of Persia clouthed ragged shirt and slept on the straw bed and by his deep?devotion to the IDEA inspired ignorant, fanatic, passionate and energetic arab bedouins to the victory did not make a sence.
The second. Truth doesnt belong to one nation. Only Hitler and like can claim this, depriving other nation`s right for having truth. Ahura doesnt belong only to persians. If He chose the prophet among bedouins for revealing Himself, we have no choise but accept it. It doesnt mean that we must not blame arabs for all of their crimes and atrocities committed to persians in the name of Allah (Ahura). Arabs betrayed the wishes and hopes of Muhammad as Yazdigird and mags did to the hopes of Zardusht.
Thank You, Brother!
I find it (below video) very interesting and thus wanted to share with you.
Paarsi Version:
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=_E9iVj62XtY
English Version:
http://youtube.com/w...feature=related
Share your thoughts on that
Cheers bro.Pors.[/QUOTE]
Thank You Porsjon! I have listened and come to the conclusion which I had before. The king was right. He actually had wonderfull speech. And I wonder why Umar ibn Al-Khattab did not convert to Zoroastrizm after this:).
The politicians are politicians. Their words differ drastically from their deeds. I dont think He was a true worshipper of Ahura Mazda like nowadays arabic sheykhs are not true followers of Muhammad. If it were Zardusht himself or Mazdak who had sided with poor persian people I would have believed them. At that time persian society was ruined economicaly and morally. Shah could not find strong support of his folk. The deep disappointment ruled over persians. The preversed shah government could not tackle increasing social problems and shield society from the great blows of Fate. All of these solemn words to austere Umar ibn Khattab who unlike king of Persia clouthed ragged shirt and slept on the straw bed and by his deep?devotion to the IDEA inspired ignorant, fanatic, passionate and energetic arab bedouins to the victory did not make a sence.
The second. Truth doesnt belong to one nation. Only Hitler and like can claim this, depriving other nation`s right for having truth. Ahura doesnt belong only to persians. If He chose the prophet among bedouins for revealing Himself, we have no choise but accept it. It doesnt mean that we must not blame arabs for all of their crimes and atrocities committed to persians in the name of Allah (Ahura). Arabs betrayed the wishes and hopes of Muhammad as Yazdigird and mags did to the hopes of Zardusht.
Thank You, Brother!
#11
Ahhangar
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 316
- Joined:
- 03-February 08
Posted 12 May 2008 - 07:14 AM
[QUOTE=Nader Shah;8857]Maybe Tajiks should convert to Shia Islam so as to benefit from the directive of Ayatollah Rohani It would also help unity with Iran[/QUOTE]
Nader Shah man - that is pretty lame. The prime reason for the disunity amongst Persian speakers and the persian speaking world started with the fundementalist Shiasm of the Safawis whom imposed changed the vast majority of Sunni Iranians into Shias and split them off from their brothers in what is Afghanistan now. They also - contributed to fall of the decay of the area - since they were prhibitive of the East West land route trades - from India via the Iranian plateau to Anatolia and Europe.
Nadir Shah - the man you admire - attempted to reverse much of these destructive tendencies - through actively promoting Shia Sunni toleration and the moderation of those views on each side which were considered extreme by the other.
These current Ayatollahs have raped Iran - they are driving millions away from Islam with their stupidity - and not only that - they are driving them into destructive practices - part of the widespread use of heroin in Iran is due to the shared interests of the Ayatollahs and the drug dealers - namely one keeps them under control by drugging them - and the other makes money from supplying them with druggs.
We must condemn such stupidities by these so called Mullahs. Afterall they are disrespecting and encouraging the disrespect of the namoose of IRAN. I do not know why that would not make you angry.
We need to act to remove these swines from their positions of influence.
They are TURKS whom promote ARAB culture using the PERSIAN language. Everyday they are in power is a stain on the honour of the nation of Iran.
Take care.
Ahhangar
It would also help unity with Iran[/QUOTE]Nader Shah man - that is pretty lame. The prime reason for the disunity amongst Persian speakers and the persian speaking world started with the fundementalist Shiasm of the Safawis whom imposed changed the vast majority of Sunni Iranians into Shias and split them off from their brothers in what is Afghanistan now. They also - contributed to fall of the decay of the area - since they were prhibitive of the East West land route trades - from India via the Iranian plateau to Anatolia and Europe.
Nadir Shah - the man you admire - attempted to reverse much of these destructive tendencies - through actively promoting Shia Sunni toleration and the moderation of those views on each side which were considered extreme by the other.
These current Ayatollahs have raped Iran - they are driving millions away from Islam with their stupidity - and not only that - they are driving them into destructive practices - part of the widespread use of heroin in Iran is due to the shared interests of the Ayatollahs and the drug dealers - namely one keeps them under control by drugging them - and the other makes money from supplying them with druggs.
We must condemn such stupidities by these so called Mullahs. Afterall they are disrespecting and encouraging the disrespect of the namoose of IRAN. I do not know why that would not make you angry.
We need to act to remove these swines from their positions of influence.
They are TURKS whom promote ARAB culture using the PERSIAN language. Everyday they are in power is a stain on the honour of the nation of Iran.
Take care.
Ahhangar
#12
Nader Shah
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Research Group
- Posts:
- 1,155
- Joined:
- 13-October 07
Posted 13 May 2008 - 04:44 AM
There were many Shiites in Iran even before the Safavids, including some of the most "asil" iranians were shiite to begin with (including Gilan). So, let's not blame Azeris again for everything. I am against organized religion, but the Safavids are also credited for reviving Iran once again from its ashes, and no they were not simply Azeri Turks, but had tati, gilaki, kurdish, and other ancestry. Without Safavids, Iran may not have existed except as a bunch of "stans". However, I agree there were many excesses in forcibly converting people and also alienating Sunni Persians and other Sunnis.
I am not supporting ayatollahs ... this was a kind of joke posted on iranian.com ... please have a sense of humour. However, unlike Sunni preachers, some Ayatollahs do give new fatvas which allow for evolution and change in the thinking of people, which is why Shiism will be better able to modernize and evolve than Sunnism ... although ideally, I would like both to be dead ... sorry
[QUOTE=Ahhangar;8946]Nader Shah man - that is pretty lame. The prime reason for the disunity amongst Persian speakers and the persian speaking world started with the fundementalist Shiasm of the Safawis whom imposed changed the vast majority of Sunni Iranians into Shias and split them off from their brothers in what is Afghanistan now. They also - contributed to fall of the decay of the area - since they were prhibitive of the East West land route trades - from India via the Iranian plateau to Anatolia and Europe.
Nadir Shah - the man you admire - attempted to reverse much of these destructive tendencies - through actively promoting Shia Sunni toleration and the moderation of those views on each side which were considered extreme by the other.
These current Ayatollahs have raped Iran - they are driving millions away from Islam with their stupidity - and not only that - they are driving them into destructive practices - part of the widespread use of heroin in Iran is due to the shared interests of the Ayatollahs and the drug dealers - namely one keeps them under control by drugging them - and the other makes money from supplying them with druggs.
We must condemn such stupidities by these so called Mullahs. Afterall they are disrespecting and encouraging the disrespect of the namoose of IRAN. I do not know why that would not make you angry.
We need to act to remove these swines from their positions of influence.
They are TURKS whom promote ARAB culture using the PERSIAN language. Everyday they are in power is a stain on the honour of the nation of Iran.
Take care.
Ahhangar[/QUOTE]
I am not supporting ayatollahs ... this was a kind of joke posted on iranian.com ... please have a sense of humour. However, unlike Sunni preachers, some Ayatollahs do give new fatvas which allow for evolution and change in the thinking of people, which is why Shiism will be better able to modernize and evolve than Sunnism ... although ideally, I would like both to be dead ... sorry
[QUOTE=Ahhangar;8946]Nader Shah man - that is pretty lame. The prime reason for the disunity amongst Persian speakers and the persian speaking world started with the fundementalist Shiasm of the Safawis whom imposed changed the vast majority of Sunni Iranians into Shias and split them off from their brothers in what is Afghanistan now. They also - contributed to fall of the decay of the area - since they were prhibitive of the East West land route trades - from India via the Iranian plateau to Anatolia and Europe.
Nadir Shah - the man you admire - attempted to reverse much of these destructive tendencies - through actively promoting Shia Sunni toleration and the moderation of those views on each side which were considered extreme by the other.
These current Ayatollahs have raped Iran - they are driving millions away from Islam with their stupidity - and not only that - they are driving them into destructive practices - part of the widespread use of heroin in Iran is due to the shared interests of the Ayatollahs and the drug dealers - namely one keeps them under control by drugging them - and the other makes money from supplying them with druggs.
We must condemn such stupidities by these so called Mullahs. Afterall they are disrespecting and encouraging the disrespect of the namoose of IRAN. I do not know why that would not make you angry.
We need to act to remove these swines from their positions of influence.
They are TURKS whom promote ARAB culture using the PERSIAN language. Everyday they are in power is a stain on the honour of the nation of Iran.
Take care.
Ahhangar[/QUOTE]
#14
Nader Shah
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Research Group
- Posts:
- 1,155
- Joined:
- 13-October 07
Posted 13 May 2008 - 05:37 AM
Yes, some clergymen were brought from Jabal Amel region of Lebanon, and their ancestors still live in Iran (family name Jabal Ameli survives), due to the lack of clergymen at that time. But I doubt Shiism was imported wholesale from Lebanon - where is your evidence ?
[QUOTE=Gul agha;8999]Modern Jafari Shiaism in Iran was imported from Lebanon during the Safavid rule.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Gul agha;8999]Modern Jafari Shiaism in Iran was imported from Lebanon during the Safavid rule.[/QUOTE]
#15
Ahhangar
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 316
- Joined:
- 03-February 08
Posted 13 May 2008 - 06:54 AM
[QUOTE=Nader Shah;8996]There were many Shiites in Iran even before the Safavids, including some of the most "asil" iranians were shiite to begin with (including Gilan). So, let's not blame Azeris again for everything. I am against organized religion, but the Safavids are also credited for reviving Iran once again from its ashes, and no they were not simply Azeri Turks, but had tati, gilaki, kurdish, and other ancestry. Without Safavids, Iran may not have existed except as a bunch of "stans". However, I agree there were many excesses in forcibly converting people and also alienating Sunni Persians and other Sunnis.
I am not supporting ayatollahs ... this was a kind of joke posted on iranian.com ... please have a sense of humour. However, unlike Sunni preachers, some Ayatollahs do give new fatvas which allow for evolution and change in the thinking of people, which is why Shiism will be better able to modernize and evolve than Sunnism ... although ideally, I would like both to be dead ... sorry[/QUOTE]
Nader Shah,
I still think it is not a joke - especially when you consider the stories of the vast numbers of Iranian girls being sent - sold - to brothels in Dubai and the Arab world. Dubai is full of Iranian girls - and no prizes for guessing which ethnicity they are mostly from...
Regarding the freedom of thought and sophistication of theology - it is very clear that in general in today's world that under general Shia Islam many practices are allowed that are not under general Sunni Islam. There tens of different movements which fall under the Shia name and even more which fall under the Sunni name - they are not one and the same. The Sunnism of the Deowbandi inspired Hanafis whom hate all Shia , is not representative of the original Abu Hanifa inspired Hanfaism - something which was very open and liberal - one of the reason why it become so widely adopted.
And most people forget that Imam Abu Hanifa had the Imaam Jaffar (6th Imam of Shias) as one of his teachers.
I agree with your sentiment that these religious difference are too entangled and confusing - it is better to attempt to focus on secularist notions of cooperation. We cannot ignore the religious element all together aswell - there needs to be reform and renewal in all the Mazhabs and all the trash removed from them.
By the way did you guys know that Abu Hanifa made a suggestion for prayers to be conducted in which ever language was mother language of the Muslim - he called for Persians to be able to pray in Persian so that they may know its meaning. It was this that promoted the first official translation of the Quran into another language - namely Persian at the Samanid court.
Imagine how reduced the influence of the stupid mullahs would be if the prays were in Persian - and the whole practice of the religion of Islam in Persian.
In Europe when Latin was the only acceptable language of religion - the bloody priests made many false uses of it - until the reformation.
I am not supporting ayatollahs ... this was a kind of joke posted on iranian.com ... please have a sense of humour. However, unlike Sunni preachers, some Ayatollahs do give new fatvas which allow for evolution and change in the thinking of people, which is why Shiism will be better able to modernize and evolve than Sunnism ... although ideally, I would like both to be dead ... sorry[/QUOTE]
Nader Shah,
I still think it is not a joke - especially when you consider the stories of the vast numbers of Iranian girls being sent - sold - to brothels in Dubai and the Arab world. Dubai is full of Iranian girls - and no prizes for guessing which ethnicity they are mostly from...
Regarding the freedom of thought and sophistication of theology - it is very clear that in general in today's world that under general Shia Islam many practices are allowed that are not under general Sunni Islam. There tens of different movements which fall under the Shia name and even more which fall under the Sunni name - they are not one and the same. The Sunnism of the Deowbandi inspired Hanafis whom hate all Shia , is not representative of the original Abu Hanifa inspired Hanfaism - something which was very open and liberal - one of the reason why it become so widely adopted.
And most people forget that Imam Abu Hanifa had the Imaam Jaffar (6th Imam of Shias) as one of his teachers.
I agree with your sentiment that these religious difference are too entangled and confusing - it is better to attempt to focus on secularist notions of cooperation. We cannot ignore the religious element all together aswell - there needs to be reform and renewal in all the Mazhabs and all the trash removed from them.
By the way did you guys know that Abu Hanifa made a suggestion for prayers to be conducted in which ever language was mother language of the Muslim - he called for Persians to be able to pray in Persian so that they may know its meaning. It was this that promoted the first official translation of the Quran into another language - namely Persian at the Samanid court.
Imagine how reduced the influence of the stupid mullahs would be if the prays were in Persian - and the whole practice of the religion of Islam in Persian.
In Europe when Latin was the only acceptable language of religion - the bloody priests made many false uses of it - until the reformation.
#16
Nader Shah
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Research Group
- Posts:
- 1,155
- Joined:
- 13-October 07
Posted 14 May 2008 - 02:36 AM
There are tons of cheap Central Asian prostitutes flooding the world market, especially from Uzbekistan, and unfortunately I suspect many from Tajikistan as well. You should not single out Iranian girls and insult Iranians with this kind of talk. Look in the mirror, and you will see a nation of potential prostitutes waiting for more marketing. Poverty is the main problem, and what Ayatollah Rohani says is not the problem (although what he said was about marriage and it is an established custom in Muslim countries even for women to ensure the man is sexually functional or to their liking before marriage, and they can inspect to some extent). The problem is that Iran's population is poor despite the oil wealth ... and the few liberal Ayatollah's liberals fatwas have nothing to do with it.
[QUOTE=Ahhangar;9001]Nader Shah,
I still think it is not a joke - especially when you consider the stories of the vast numbers of Iranian girls being sent - sold - to brothels in Dubai and the Arab world. Dubai is full of Iranian girls - and no prizes for guessing which ethnicity they are mostly from...
.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ahhangar;9001]Nader Shah,
I still think it is not a joke - especially when you consider the stories of the vast numbers of Iranian girls being sent - sold - to brothels in Dubai and the Arab world. Dubai is full of Iranian girls - and no prizes for guessing which ethnicity they are mostly from...
.[/QUOTE]
#17
Faridun
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 121
- Joined:
- 15-February 08
Posted 14 May 2008 - 03:22 AM
[QUOTE=Nader Shah;8996]There were many Shiites in Iran even before the Safavids, including some of the most "asil" iranians were shiite to begin with (including Gilan). So, let's not blame Azeris again for everything. I am against organized religion, but the Safavids are also credited for reviving Iran once again from its ashes, and no they were not simply Azeri Turks, but had tati, gilaki, kurdish, and other ancestry. Without Safavids, Iran may not have existed except as a bunch of "stans". However, I agree there were many excesses in forcibly converting people and also alienating Sunni Persians and other Sunnis.
I am not supporting ayatollahs ... this was a kind of joke posted on iranian.com ... please have a sense of humour. However, unlike Sunni preachers, some Ayatollahs do give new fatvas which allow for evolution and change in the thinking of people, which is why Shiism will be better able to modernize and evolve than Sunnism ... although ideally, I would like both to be dead ... sorry[/QUOTE]
Ahangar is right. Jaafari Shiizm which exists in Iran is not liberal.?May be in some questions of Fiqh it gives people a slight freedom but as a political doctrine is considered as heretical and antiliberal and antiindividual sect. Jaafari Shiizm is the product of westernpersian reaction to Omeyad sunni islam. Shiizm was formed among those persians who lived in western part of Iran - Iraq, syria, lebanon etc. But due to our open-minded ancestor who did not assent to his national emotions the northern persians- Khorasanians became untouched by shiizm. Hanafizm is persianized orthodoxial sunnizm. It is the most liberal schoool in Islam. Abu Hanifa persianized sunni islam. He took into account many iranians customs and traditions during passing fatwaas. He was the first man who used qiyas - analogy in fiqh which meant the ratiolanalization of religion. Imam Jaafar blamed him in herecy claiming that it was Satan who had used qiyas before by not bowing to Adam. Ahmad ibn Hanbal the father of pure arabic traditional sunni islam also cursed him.
Unfortunately the disciples of Abu Hanifa , especially Abu Yusuf did not adhere to Abu Hanifa method of thinking and since that time this school became rigid and the process of persianization was stoped.
I advise all of Iranians to become hanafits.
I am not supporting ayatollahs ... this was a kind of joke posted on iranian.com ... please have a sense of humour. However, unlike Sunni preachers, some Ayatollahs do give new fatvas which allow for evolution and change in the thinking of people, which is why Shiism will be better able to modernize and evolve than Sunnism ... although ideally, I would like both to be dead ... sorry[/QUOTE]
Ahangar is right. Jaafari Shiizm which exists in Iran is not liberal.?May be in some questions of Fiqh it gives people a slight freedom but as a political doctrine is considered as heretical and antiliberal and antiindividual sect. Jaafari Shiizm is the product of westernpersian reaction to Omeyad sunni islam. Shiizm was formed among those persians who lived in western part of Iran - Iraq, syria, lebanon etc. But due to our open-minded ancestor who did not assent to his national emotions the northern persians- Khorasanians became untouched by shiizm. Hanafizm is persianized orthodoxial sunnizm. It is the most liberal schoool in Islam. Abu Hanifa persianized sunni islam. He took into account many iranians customs and traditions during passing fatwaas. He was the first man who used qiyas - analogy in fiqh which meant the ratiolanalization of religion. Imam Jaafar blamed him in herecy claiming that it was Satan who had used qiyas before by not bowing to Adam. Ahmad ibn Hanbal the father of pure arabic traditional sunni islam also cursed him.
Unfortunately the disciples of Abu Hanifa , especially Abu Yusuf did not adhere to Abu Hanifa method of thinking and since that time this school became rigid and the process of persianization was stoped.
I advise all of Iranians to become hanafits.
#18
Tehran
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Members
- Posts:
- 68
- Joined:
- 17-February 08
Posted 14 May 2008 - 03:35 AM
[QUOTE=Faridun;9028]
I advise all of Iranians to become hanafits. [/QUOTE]
Over my dead azeri body
Even though i am secular, i still greatly respect the shia faith because it is part our heritage. Esphehan would be nothing without shia islam and most importantly, iran would be incomprehensible without shia islam
I advise all of Iranians to become hanafits.
[/QUOTE]Over my dead azeri body
Even though i am secular, i still greatly respect the shia faith because it is part our heritage. Esphehan would be nothing without shia islam and most importantly, iran would be incomprehensible without shia islam
#19
Nader Shah
- Advanced Member
-
- Group:
- Research Group
- Posts:
- 1,155
- Joined:
- 13-October 07
Posted 14 May 2008 - 03:43 AM
Your Taliban and other Sunni fundamentalists in power did even worse that Shiites ... but pardon me for the pun ... they are all Shiiiiit.
I advise all Iranians to reclaim their brain and stop believing in Islam. None of the sects of Islam offer anything but 99% trash with a few good sayings here and there that even a 6 year old could come up with. Many of our fundamental problems start and end with Islam - I advise that we all put an end to Islam (or similar religions such as Christianity or Judaism). It will take time, but injecting children with Arab-Islam virus is one of the greatest unpunished crimes in this world. It is one of the most vicious crimes to take an innocent child's mind and forever pollute it with Islam, or any other religion as a matter of fact. Watch PORS's videos if you prefer the word of a Tajik.
[QUOTE=Faridun;9028]Ahangar is right. Jaafari Shiizm which exists in Iran is not liberal.? I advise all of Iranians to become hanafits. [/QUOTE]
I advise all Iranians to reclaim their brain and stop believing in Islam. None of the sects of Islam offer anything but 99% trash with a few good sayings here and there that even a 6 year old could come up with. Many of our fundamental problems start and end with Islam - I advise that we all put an end to Islam (or similar religions such as Christianity or Judaism). It will take time, but injecting children with Arab-Islam virus is one of the greatest unpunished crimes in this world. It is one of the most vicious crimes to take an innocent child's mind and forever pollute it with Islam, or any other religion as a matter of fact. Watch PORS's videos if you prefer the word of a Tajik.
[QUOTE=Faridun;9028]Ahangar is right. Jaafari Shiizm which exists in Iran is not liberal.? I advise all of Iranians to become hanafits.
[/QUOTE]
Page 1 of 1
- You cannot start a new topic
-
This topic is locked