Who Is Your Favorite Tajik Personality? (View original topic)



Neo Bactra

Posted 02 March 2008 - 05:09 AM

Respected Readers,

In an attempt to refresh, celebrate and commemorate our human and glorious heritage, please post the name of your most favorite Tajik personality here.

Mine are Rodaki, Rumi, Saadi, Firdawsi, Behzadaan(Abu Muslim Khorasani), Korosh The Great, Massoud The Great, Imaam Ali Rahman, and Pedraam.

With respect

Wsalam

PS: Dear Moderator,

Earlier on the previous format there was a thread under the heading (hope I remember the exact wording) "Most favorite Tajik Personality."

I hope if you had saved those posts, you would be kind enough to upload it here.

Kambiz

Posted 02 March 2008 - 05:27 AM

Cyrus the Great (Old Persian: K?ruš, modern Persian: ??? ?? ??? ?, Kurosh-e Bozorg or ??? ?? ??? ? Kurosh-e Kabir (c. 590 BC or 576 — August 529 BC or 530 BC), also known as Cyrus II of Persia and Cyrus the Elder, was a Persian ruler. He was the founder of the Persian Empire under the Achaemenid dynasty. The empire expanded under his rule, eventually conquering most of Southwest Asia and much of Central Asia, from Egypt and the Hellespont in the west to the Indus River in the east, to create the largest state the world had yet seen.

During his twenty-nine year reign, Cyrus fought against some of the greatest states of his time, including the Median Empire, the Lydian Empire, and the Neo-Babylonian Empire. Cyrus did not venture into Egypt, as he himself died in battle, fighting the Massagetae along the Syr Darya in August 530 BC. He was succeeded by his son, Cambyses II, who managed to conquer Egypt during his short rule.

Beyond his nation, Cyrus left a lasting legacy on Jewish religion (through his Edict of Restoration), politics, and military strategy, as well as on both Eastern and Western civilization.

Neo Bactra

Posted 02 March 2008 - 05:40 AM

[quote=Darius;6661]Cyrus the Great (Old Persian: K?ruš, modern Persian: ??? ?? ??? ?, Kurosh-e Bozorg or ??? ?? ??? ? Kurosh-e Kabir (c. 590 BC or 576 — August 529 BC or 530 BC), also known as Cyrus II of Persia and Cyrus the Elder, was a Persian ruler. He was the founder of the Persian Empire under the Achaemenid dynasty. The empire expanded under his rule, eventually conquering most of Southwest Asia and much of Central Asia, from Egypt and the Hellespont in the west to the Indus River in the east, to create the largest state the world had yet seen.

During his twenty-nine year reign, Cyrus fought against some of the greatest states of his time, including the Median Empire, the Lydian Empire, and the Neo-Babylonian Empire. Cyrus did not venture into Egypt, as he himself died in battle, fighting the Massagetae along the Syr Darya in August 530 BC. He was succeeded by his son, Cambyses II, who managed to conquer Egypt during his short rule.

Beyond his nation, Cyrus left a lasting legacy on Jewish religion (through his Edict of Restoration), politics, and military strategy, as well as on both Eastern and Western civilization.[/quote]

Thanks Darius,

No doubt Cyrus The Great was one of the greatest of all Tajiks.
Will you mind sharing some of your contemporary favorite Tajik personages as well?

Pedrood.

Faridun

Posted 02 March 2008 - 05:53 AM

Hello. dear Brother!

How about Hassani Sabboh?! :)

Here information about him:

http://en.wikipedia....Hassan-i_Sabbah

You, as tajik/persian, must be proud of havin such ancestor like Hassani Sabboh:)

LONG LIVE TAJIKS!

Kambiz

Posted 02 March 2008 - 05:57 AM

Layeq Shir-Ali (1941-2000, Tajiki/Persian: ??? ? ??? ???/ ??? ? ??? ???) was a Tajik poet, Iranologist and one of the most celebrated Persian literary figures of Tajikistan and Central Asia.

Layeq Shir-Ali had expertise in classical Persian poetry. The influence of Firdowsi, Khayyam and Molana Jalaleddin-e Balkhi is evident in Shir-Ali's works. He also translated several literary master pieces into Persian.

He was the head of Tajik-Persian Language International Foundation in Middle Asia and he was called as Shah-Poet of Tajikistan. A chosen collection of his works is published in Iran, 1994. Another collection, "Rakhsh's Spirit" is published in Iran, 1999, by Mirzo Shakurzoda.

??? ? ? ??? ??? ? ??? ?? ??? ? ?? ?? ??? ??? ? ?? ?? ?? ??? ???

http://www.bbc.co.uk...eerali-pr.shtml

Neo Bactra

Posted 02 March 2008 - 06:07 AM

??? ? ? ??? ??? ? ??? ?? ??? ? ?? ?? ??? ??? ? ?? ?? ?? ??? ???

Very true and impressive.

Thanks Hasan Sabah and Darius, but special thanks to Darius for introducing me to a poet whose touching lines I just memorized. Let this prophetic poet continue to inspire and unify the Tajik souls whereever they are.

Kambiz

Posted 02 March 2008 - 06:19 AM

[quote=Neo Bactra;6669] ??? ? ? ??? ??? ? ??? ?? ??? ? ?? ?? ??? ??? ? ?? ?? ?? ??? ???

Very true and impressive.

Thanks Hasan Sabah and Darius, but special thanks to Darius for introducing me to a poet whose touching lines I just memorized. Let this prophetic poet continue to inspire and unify the Tajik souls whereever they are.[/quote]
Thank you Neo Bactra.
But sadly, we lost him in 2000. I hope his patriotic verses will inspire others.

marmol

Posted 02 March 2008 - 06:38 AM

my favorite tajiks heros are the one who made so much sacrifice financialy,intelectualie,to promote and defend our culture and heritige.sieforah niazi who was behind mazari sharef rallies against the minister of culture,wasef bakhtari who stood up and defend the farsi language and condemn the minister on khorasan tv.hamed qhadiri the owner of khorasan tv who spend 15 to 20 thousand dollar of his own pocket to defend and promote our culture.and the administer of such websites as this one and the one like this that day and night are working really hard to make sure our voices heard around the globe.

Neo Bactra

Posted 02 March 2008 - 06:44 AM

[quote=Darius;6667]Layeq Shir-Ali (1941-2000, Tajiki/Persian: ??? ? ??? ???/ ??? ? ??? ???) was a Tajik poet, Iranologist and one of the most celebrated Persian literary figures of Tajikistan and Central Asia.

Layeq Shir-Ali had expertise in classical Persian poetry. The influence of Firdowsi, Khayyam and Molana Jalaleddin-e Balkhi is evident in Shir-Ali's works. He also translated several literary master pieces into Persian.

He was the head of Tajik-Persian Language International Foundation in Middle Asia and he was called as Shah-Poet of Tajikistan. A chosen collection of his works is published in Iran, 1994. Another collection, "Rakhsh's Spirit" is published in Iran, 1999, by Mirzo Shakurzoda.

??? ? ? ??? ??? ? ??? ?? ??? ? ?? ?? ??? ??? ? ?? ?? ?? ??? ???

http://www.bbc.co.uk...eerali-pr.shtml[/quote]

[quote=marmol;6674]my favorite tajiks heros are the one who made so much sacrifice financialy,intelectualie,to promote and defend our culture and heritige.sieforah niazi who was behind mazari sharef rallies against the minister of culture,wasef bakhtari who stood up and defend the farsi language and condemn the minister on khorasan tv.hamed qhadiri the owner of khorasan tv who spend 15 to 20 thousand dollar of his own pocket to defend and promote our culture.and the administer of such websites as this one and the one like this that day and night are working really hard to make sure our voices heard around the globe.[/quote]

You are right. We owe these courageous men and women a great deal of gratitude for their heroic acts. Thanks for sharing that with us.

Neo Bactra

Posted 02 March 2008 - 06:21 PM

My Dear Tajik Zealots,

If you read these lines, I sincerely request you to show your zeal and post and share some of the Tajik leaders and scholars whom you find extraordinary and whom you consider a hero. There might also be many Tajiks world wide who might have done alot to the promotion of Tajik culture and awareness and we are unaware of them. Let even those men and women be heard of. Take a minute please and reply to this post. As I am typing these lines, one Tajik personality that keeps haunting my mind like a passion is Amer Sahib Shaheed, legendary commander and winner of the Cold War, Massoud The Great. May be it's because I am, as i type these lines, filled with alot of Khorasani patriotism. May his soul rest in peace and may he be dwelling the heaven that is known to Muslims as Firdaws (that also a Farsi name). Amen

Sohrab

Posted 02 March 2008 - 07:05 PM

Those who are not among us, is A.S.Masoud, those who are living are: Wasif Bakhtari, Pedram, Rahnaward Zariab, and i think many more.

Neo Bactra

Posted 02 March 2008 - 07:34 PM

Thanks for posting.

Neo Bactra

Posted 02 March 2008 - 07:41 PM

[quote=Rika Khana;6701]Those who are not among us, is A.S.Masoud, those who are living are: Wasif Bakhtari, Pedram, Rahnaward Zariab, and i think many more.[/quote]

Add to the list Khowaja Bashir Ahmad Ansari and any doubt that Khorasan has ceased to have renowned scholars will be instantly removed. While I greatly admire Wasif Bakhtari for standing up so firmly in the face of the latest attack on our language, I believe Ansari is an Abu Muslim in the literary front. His logic is powerful. his reasoning is very persuasive.

Please also share with us some of your "historical" Tajik men and women. I am so eager to know.

Wsalam/Pedrood

Sohrab

Posted 03 March 2008 - 07:34 AM

[quote=Neo Bactra;6703]Add to the list Khowaja Bashir Ahmad Ansari [/quote]

havent heard of him, please give us more information about him.

Neo Bactra

Posted 03 March 2008 - 09:46 AM

[quote=Rika Khana;6723]havent heard of him, please give us more information about him.[/quote]

www.bashiransari.com

His contributions are also on the following websites:

www.sarnavesht.com

www.paymanemeli.com

www.khawaran.com

Neo Bactra

Posted 11 March 2008 - 05:31 PM

The following was an interesting discussion between two respectable fellows, Hassani Sabboh and Rointanjon. I found it fit for this thread and for the benefit of those who browse this website to get insight on the lives of Tajik personalities. I dont necessarily share or reject the views of the two posters:[quote=Hassani Sabboh;7182]Hello, Rointanjon. I can understand when you blame MY HERO- Abu Muslim. Because you are not muslim. And every muslim persian warior for you is traitor. It is not good. We must judge everything in the historical context and not to blame from the point of dogmas. Do you know why arabs could win persian empire? They had the IDEA- Islam which containd everithing to encourage arabs to the great sacrafices- even to DEATH. Death meant nothing to arabs, for Islam guaranted paradise for them in the heaven. Moreover they had spiritual leaders who showed the deepest devotion to Umma and Islam by both their tounge and way of life. It is the main factor for victory of arabs. But Sassanid empire was in economical, social and cultural crisis. Zoroastrizm was turned into the cloack of oppresson by zoroastrian mags. The Mazdak rebelion happened not in vain. It embodied the tough social protest of the middle class- dehqans against Sasanid authorities and zoroastrian clerics. The empire was being eaten from every parts by crisises. A lot of treasures were spent for war while a lot of people lived in mizery. The Zoroastrianizm could not stimulate persians to sacrafices any more. Antagonistic trends got their highest degree in persian society. And there had needed only one blow, and Empire would have been smashed into pieces. This blow was beaten by arabs. When arabs invaded all of persian territories and set up a stict control over them, how could persians fought against them being zoroastrians? Of course they could not. And they used Islam in the face such heroes -Abu Muslim and etc. and smashed back arabs.
About Behafarid. He was not a true zoroastrian. he taught herecy with zoroastrian elements. Even he allowed the marriage of brothers and sisters. Abu Muslim could not stand this and killed him.
Abu Muslim just wanted to separate himself from Abbasid Khalifate. He gaind a great influense among persians and this case encouraged him to lead independent policy without any dictate from arabs. But his separatist actions ailed arabs and they called him to Baghdad and killed him there.

I dont mind accepting your mentioned heroes. But I want you to add the name of the HERO of the heroes- Abu Muslim Khorasani in your list.

Abu Muslim is not dead. He is alive. He will come to open the gate for Mahdi. [/quote]

Neo Bactra

Posted 11 March 2008 - 05:43 PM

Dorood,

One thing I want to add is in the school text books in Afghanistan, Abu Muslim Khorasani was hailed as a hero. Untill now I had accepted him as a Khorasani hero without a question. But I believe with the current ethno-fascist minister of education and culture, the enemies of
Tajiks will ensure that no text book validates or teaches the pre-Pashton history and essence of Khorasan (Afghanistan). So they might just drop his name from the history or literature text books.

Sohrab

Posted 11 March 2008 - 06:54 PM

[quote=Neo Bactra;7214]Dorood,

One thing I want to add is in the school text books in Afghanistan, Abu Muslim Khorasani was hailed as a hero. Untill now I had accepted him as a Khorasani hero without a question. But I believe with the current ethno-fascist minister of education and culture, the enemies of
Tajiks will ensure that no text book validates or teaches the pre-Pashton history and essence of Khorasan (Afghanistan). So they might just drop his name from the history or literature text books.[/quote]

Brother, these fascists have already done this. it started from the time of Nadire Ghadar, his son Zahire Kal and his nephew Daud kaseef. if you see in all the school text books, the history of the country begins with Ahmad Shah Abdali and Mirwaise Hotaki, as if before nothing happned.

Faridun

Posted 12 March 2008 - 04:42 PM

[quote=Neo Bactra;7213]The following was an interesting discussion between two respectable fellows, Hassani Sabboh and Rointanjon. I found it fit for this thread and for the benefit of those who browse this website to get insight on the lives of Tajik personalities. I dont necessarily share or reject the views of the two posters:[/quote]

Thanks my Brother Neo Bactra! I appreciate it.

To Rooyintanjon!!!!!!

With a deep respect to you, my Brother, I must say that you are totally mistaken about your ancestor Hassani Sabboh claiming that He was terrorist or hash smoker. It is far from justice. Before judging a person's behaviour we must scrutinise all of the social, economical factors and psychological motives which cause his behavior. Clean your mind from western christian stereotips which see in every ancient eastern movemen the elements of brutality and unhumanity. I dont know what is the reason of your deep antipathy to Hassani Sabbah, but I want you to know that He was a great man and his sacred name is written in the history of persians with an ink which will be not washed with any dirty hands of mentally deficient "professors" who want to blacken the face and the history of the great people.
And you instead of praising your ancestor who sacrificed all he had, even his two sons, and ignored the happiness of this dark world for the sake of destroying the turkish opressors and bringing the freedom for persians, keep accusing him in crimes which were far from his saint and mystical body. May God forgive you and show you the right path.

In order to put the light on the facts we must go the historical background to see how situation was. I refer to the book "The assasins of Alamut" by Anthony Campbell. Look at the title in his book:

Hasan-i-Sabbah and the revolt against the Turks

Doesnt this tell you anything. It says revolt against Turks. We should have finished this discussion after this, but we'll continue.

"""Iran in the eleventh century was part of the vast territories ruled by the Seljuq Turks (the forerunners of the later Ottoman Turks who captured Constantinople, changed the name to Istanbul, and came close to conquering Western Europe). The Seljuqs were invaders from the Asian steppes who united most of the fragmented world of the Abbasid Caliphate from the Western frontier of Afghanistan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west. Their arrival reduced the Caliph in Baghdad virtually to a figurehead with no real power.
The Seljuqs were Sunni Muslims and soon came into conflict with the Fatimid Isma'ilis, who ruled Egypt as well as much of North Africa and Syria. But the Fatimid influence was not confined to the territories under their direct domination; it had long been extended by their missionaries to many other areas, but especially to Iran. This activity continued after the arrival of the Seljuqs.

Many Isma'ili missionaries, and many Isma'ili intellectuals in Cairo, were Iranians, so it was natural that there should be a determined effort to spread Isma'ilism in Iran. However, the Seljuq Turkish conquest made this more difficult, for the Seljuqs were deeply hostile to Isma'ilism. Nevertheless, the Isma'ilis by no means lost heart; indeed, if anything, they became more ambitious. Isma'ili cells were to be found in many cities and towns throughout the country, spreading their ideas and making converts. The Ismaili term for missionary is da'i.

The Iranian Isma'ilis were preparing a revolt against the Seljuqs, but they did not intend to form a single army and march to power as the Fatimids had done in Egypt; given the different situation in Iran, this would hardly have been possible. Rather, they hoped for a multiplicity of risings planned to occur simultaneously, which would deprive the Seljuqs of their power base and be impossible to crush by virtue of their widespread nature. This revolt would have been essentially urban. But in the eleventh century the plan was to take on a different character, with a shift in emphasis from town to country. This development occurred thanks to Hasan-i-Sabbah. """"


Look, under the cloack of Ismailizm there hid nationalistic feelings. Since the ofissial seljukid ideology was sunni islam iranians should have found something differnt and counterweight-Ismailizm to enable the people raise aganst state with its ideology.

"""Hassani Sabbah was an earnest seeker after truth, and is said to have been passionately fond of study from the age of seven (a significant age), becoming learned in mathematics, astronomy (and therefore astrology), and occult matters.
At about the age of seventeen he encountered an Isma'ili missionary called Amir Zarrab. No doubt a young man of Hasan's ability seemed a fine prize, and Amir Zarrab tried hard to convert him, but Hasan-i-Sabbah was not convinced. Nevertheless, after Amir Zarrab's departure Hasan-i-Sabbah continued to read Isma'ili books and his mind was troubled.

Then, as often seems to have happened in the lives of mediaeval people, his conversion was brought about by a near-fatal illness. Alarmed at the possibility that he might die without having realized the Truth, he sought out another Isma'ili, nicknamed the Saddler, and asked for further instruction. Fully convinced at last of the truth of the Isma'ili doctrines, he took the oath of allegiance.
The senior Isma'ili in Iran, Ibn Attash, came to Ray soon after this and was impressed by Hasan. He drew him into Isma'ili activities and, a few years later, sent him to Cairo, where he was well received. However, there were political tensions in Cairo at this time, which were to have momentous consequences for Hasan-i-Sabbah some years later, and there is a suggestion that he got into some kind of difficulty there. In 1080 he returned to Iran, surviving a shipwreck on the Syrian coast in the process, and became very active as an Isma'ili propagandist. He travelled extensively, especially in the north-west of the country, and he had a large number of men under his command who covered other areas. He was by now a wanted man, but he evaded his would-be captors, and, in 1090, carried out the coup which made him famous and launched the Assassins on their romantic career: he gained possession of the Castle of Alamut. """


Look at his lofty moral qualities:


What kind of man was Hasan?[/


"""The Isma'ili missionary was a very special person. He was intensively trained in Isma'ili doctrine and was expected to lead an exemplary life so as to attract people through his piety. Any shortcomings in the missionary would not only put off potential converts but would be a threat to the very existence of the organization. He was expected to take great pains with his own spiritual advancement, punishing himself when he behaved badly and rewarding himself if he did well. He behaved in a similar manner towards the people for whom he was responsible. He had to be skilled in a number of professions - carpenter, sailor, oculist, and so forth - so that he could earn his living and also have a cover for his activities, for being an Isma'ili missionary was dangerous.
The role of the Isma'il missionary, in fact, must have been something like that of a Catholic priest in England in penal times. In those years priests were regarded by the authorities as dangerous subversives under the control of a foreign power, Rome, and if captured they were liable to be put to a very unpleasant death. From their own point of view, however, they were bringing the true religion to the people who were capable of appreciating it. The Isma'ili missionary, likewise, owed his allegiance to a hostile foreign power and saw himself as a bringer of salvation to those who were willing to listen. And both priest and missionary looked forward to the day when their religion would become the dominant belief system of the land in which they operated.

The Isma'ili missionary must have a deep knowledge of both the exoteric and the esoteric aspects of his religion. In character he must be kindly and compassionate, modest, reasonable, noble, generous, and truthful; he must have an outstanding intellectual capacity, be capable of keeping secrets, and be an agreeable companion, with a noble soul to lend dignity to his manner and to attract people to him and allow him to get on with them. He should associate only with ascetic and religious men and have nothing to do with the dissolute. He must not fool about or tell dirty jokes or use bad language. In short, he was expected to be a paragon of every conceivable virtue, and it is permissible to doubt if any such individuals actually existed. However, at least we know what constituted the Isma'ili ideal, and Hasan, in particular, seems to have embodied a good deal of it.

In recompense for the high demands made of him, the missionary was given a good deal of authority over his flock, but this, too was a source of possible spiritual danger and he was forbidden to use his position for his own advantage or to show favouritism. He was expected to be an affectionate but impartial father-figure. In all of this his role was that of the Imam writ small, for he was the Imam's representative and vicar on earth.


And one point. As Hassan was considered as the enemy to seljukids, the sunni ulama -the ideological suppliers did their best to discredite him in the eyes of the people in order to reduce his increasing influense. A lot of books were written wich said bad about him and many ignorant historians lead research on the base of this miserable and false books. But the wise man goes another way. He knows that those hypocrite ulama wrote books for money and degree in the palace. that is why they could not tell the truth.

""""From Isma'ili texts of the time there emerges a picture of Isma'ilism that is very different from that painted by its Sunni critics. Isma'ilism appears to have been a serious attempt to raise human consciousness to a higher plane. Whether this is possible at all, and, if so, whether the Isma'ili method was a good one for achieving that goal, are open questions, but at least we can say that the Isma'ilis were not the irreligious libertines they are often represented as being. Far from offering its adepts a holiday from morality, the Isma'ili Proclamation, as it was called, summoned people to a dedicated life of service and self-improvement. It promised a great deal, but the way was hard and the goal was a wholly spiritual one.


Hasan-i-Sabbah became known as a severe and austere ruler. He remained within his house, writing, thinking, and planning; he is said to have gone out only twice, and to have gone up on the roof only once. At one time, when things were difficult, he sent his womenfolk away to another castle, where they had to spin like the other women, and he never brought them back. He had both his sons executed, one for drinking wine, the other on a charge of murder which later proved false. Von Hammer, the nineteenth-century historian who attributed all kinds of wickedness to the Assassins, cited these sentences as evidence of Isma'ili depravity and Hasan's want of natural affection, but it seems more plausible to regard them as instances of his impartiality. They also make it clear that in Hasan's time the Muslim law (sharia) was enforced at Alamut with full rigour.

Look he had executed his son for breaking the ismaili law -prohibition of wine. After this how can you claim that he smoked hash? ??? ?


Hassan Sabbah was neither terrorist nor hash smoker. These qualities were attributed to him by ignorant sunni and christiian clerics having seen the unprecedent heroism and devotion of Hassan's followers.

"The name 'assassin' is, of course, synonymous with political murder. In 1092 the famous statesman Nizam al-Mulk was on his way to Baghdad when he was approached from a youth from Daylam (the region of Alamut) in the guise of a suppliant. The man suddenly drew a knife from his robe and wounded the minister fatally. This is generally supposed to have been the first assassination carried out by Hasan's orders. The Isma'ilis claimed it was done to avenge the death of a carpenter, but doubtless there were more important political reasons. Murder as a political weapon was not, of course, an Isma'ili invention, and indeed it appears that a number of groups in Iran were making use of it at the time. The Isma'ilis, however, undoubtedly took the trend further than most. They may have believed that it was more humane to kill one man selectively than a multitude in a battle. In this respect they were significantly different from modern terrorists. In any case, given the fact that they were so enormously outnumbered by their enemies, terrorism was a logical enough expedient.
It is usually said that a special corps of assassins - the fida'is - existed, but this is doubtful, at least until a much later date. Marco Polo, who visited the site of Alamut in the thirteenth century, after its destruction by the Mongols, relates the romantic legend of how the fida'is were trained by the Grand Master. The 'Old Man', as Marco Polo calls him, following the Crusader usage, was said to have constructed a fantastic pleasure garden, flowing with wine, honey, milk, and water, and populated by beautiful women. This was a representation of Paradise as described in the Koran. The Old Man was supposed to drug his future Assassins and bring them, unconscious, into the garden; after a time they were once again rendered insensible and brought out into the ordinary world. They were thus convinced that they had been given a foretaste of the joys to come if they obeyed the Old Man's orders, which they naturally did unquestioningly, certain that they would once more find themselves in Paradise after their death.

It need hardly be said that this is a total fantasy. There is no need to suppose that any such elaborate method of preparation was needed; like other Muslim soldiers the assassins would be told, and would unquestioningly believe, that if they were killed they would go straight to Paradise. A similar belief motivates modern suicide bombers among the Palestinians and other minority groups who lack other means of getting at their enemies. Death on an assassination mission was counted a great honour by the Isma'ilis. There is an often-repeated story of the mother of a fida'i who rejoiced greatly and put on her best clothes when she heard that her son had been killed on a mission, but changed into mourning when he came home safely after all.

The fida'is were at least not underhand in their assassinations; they did not poison their victims or stab them in the back in dark alleys, but killed them openly in public. A favourite occasion seems to have been at Friday prayers in the mosque. Publicity, in fact, was an important part of their aim, and they were successful in attaining this. Prominent men took to wearing armour under their clothes, and sometimes the Isma'ilis could achieve their purpose merely by a threat. Isma'ilis would insinuate themselves into the households of their victims, ready to assassinate them if necessary or perhaps merely to make it clear that they could do so if they wished. Sultan Sanjar made a truce with Alamut, persuaded, it is said, by a dagger thrust into the ground next to his pillow. And an amusing story concerns a professor of theology who made a practice of reviling the "heretics" of Alamut. At length, one of his students, who had impressed him by the attention he paid to his lectures, revealed himself as a fida'i and offered the professor alternative inducements to mend his ways: a dagger or a bag of gold. The professor wisely chose the gold; and, when subsequently twitted about the reason for his changed attitude to the Isma'ilis, he replied that he had been convinced of his error by arguments that were "both weighty and pointed".

In the aftermath of an assassination the Sunni population of a town would often catch and kill anyone they suspected of being an Isma'ili, so massacres were frequent at times, and were followed by further assassinations as the Isma'ilis took revenge on the leaders. In 1093 a number of suspected Isma'ilis were burned alive in Isfahan. Such events offered a chance for people to denounce others against whom they had a grudge, so doubtless many innocents perished along with the Isma'ilis. The systematic used of terror tactics helped to foster the image of the Isma'ilis as supremely wicked and capable of any imaginable infamy.

Assassination as a political weapon may be hard to justify morally (although what about the bomb plot to kill Hitler?), and certainly it was this practice that made the Isma'ilis' name so execrated among both Muslims and Christians. Even so, one cannot help sensing the intensity of their devotion to their cause and the feeling of comradeship that inspired their heroism. [COLOR=red]For heroism it was: few fida'is survived, and their deaths were seldom easy
.

There is no need to comment any more.

Piruz bosh!!!!!

Neo Bactra

Posted 13 March 2008 - 06:34 AM

[quote=Rika Khana;7223]Brother, these fascists have already done this. it started from the time of Nadire Ghadar, his son Zahire Kal and his nephew Daud kaseef. if you see in all the school text books, the history of the country begins with Ahmad Shah Abdali and Mirwaise Hotaki, as if before nothing happned.[/quote]

Rika Khana Jan,

Salam/Dorood,

You have got it, bro. They want the residents of Afghanistan to think that the political geography and history of that country starts with those Pashton usupers of power. That Pashtons are the natives, and thus the rulers, of that country. You have said it all in the last line of your paragraph. Bravo! The epicenter of the century-long Pashton stormy history fakery is the content of that line.

Rikha Khana Jan, please never hesitate to post your thoughts and experiences here. It's now very clear for both of us to conclude that the best way to block this Pashton history fakery is by emphasizing on the emergence of the Pashton rule, their occupation of Tajik land, their conspiracy against modern Tajik leaders, their alien presence in Kabul and other Tajik cities, their insistance on imposing the name Dari on the Farsi language, and their abuse of Islam for political aims. We can also block their hilariously forged history by making Tajiks loudly say that they are Tajiks when they are told that they are Afghans. We will explore other ways of blocking their forgery at a later time.

Wish your success,

Wsalam/Pedrood

Rostam

Posted 13 March 2008 - 06:36 AM

All have died :( ...I dont have any favourite Tajik now......hate the most!

Nader Shah

Posted 13 March 2008 - 06:42 AM

My favorite Tajik personality is ....
.
.
.
.
.
.
hold your breath :D
.
.
.
.
.
who could it be :confused:
.
.
.
.
of course,
none other
than
the
great
.
.
.
.
NADER SHAH
;)

Neo Bactra

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:05 AM

[quote=Nader Shah;7316]My favorite Tajik personality is ....
.
.
.
.
.
.
hold your breath :D
.
.
.
.
.
who could it be :confused:
.
.
.
.
of course,
none other
than
the
great
.
.
.
.
NADER SHAH
;) [/quote]


Dear Nader,

Which Nader Shah are you talking about? Are you joking with Rostam jan? Do you mean yourself or you mean Nader Afshar? :) Just want some clarification.

Nader Shah

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:20 AM

I mean the real one ... not myself of course.

PORS

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:39 AM

Why not yourself, first? You should be a hero and a favorite personality for yourself first. Cultivate and nurture personality you want to see in yourself and then talk about doing good deed to others, as your favorite personality did. ;) hope you won't get me wrong.

[quote=Nader Shah;7321]I mean the real one ... not myself of course.[/quote]


I like this quote by Dalai Lama: "This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness." - No comment or question about religion. I don't point anything to religion here, but like the emphasis of Dalai Lama on personal wisdom and personal philosophy.

Rostam

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:54 AM

Nader Shah Afshar was a Turk... ;)

Rostam

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:55 AM

...............

Neo Bactra

Posted 13 March 2008 - 08:01 AM

Dorood All,
Dorood Rostam Jan,

Cyrus The Great must have been great. Persians must have rallyed behind him. Who is a better hero: Firdowsi? or Rustam? I am sure we will say both. But did we rally behind one hero whom the enemies of both Firdowsi and Rustam murdered? He is Massoud. What would have Firdowsi said of him if he saw him in his real life playing football, reciting Hafiz, smiling, cracking jokes, speaking in his mother tongue in its purest dialect, praising education, condemning occupation, teaching freedom, preaching co-existance, displaying humility, exuding confidence and valour, and humbling down the White Bear? Aren't we contemporary Tajiks fortunate to have had a hero like him whom we can easily see at the click of the mouse? How many more do we need to have to make us stand up and fight?

Nader Shah

Posted 13 March 2008 - 08:02 AM

Did we not have this discussion before, with idontknow coming and calling Tajikistanis turks and mongol ? Look at paintings of Nader Shah and see if he looks Turk. I bet you are more Turk than Nader Shah was :D take a look in the mirror.
[quote=Rostam;7327]Nader Shah Afshar was a Turk... ;) [/quote]

Neo Bactra

Posted 13 March 2008 - 09:05 AM

[quote=Hassani Sabboh;7301]Thanks my Brother Neo Bactra! I appreciate it.

To Rooyintanjon!!!!!!

With a deep respect to you, my Brother, I must say that you are totally mistaken about your ancestor Hassani Sabboh claiming that He was terrorist or hash smoker. It is far from justice. Before judging a person's behaviour we must scrutinise all of the social, economical factors and psychological motives which cause his behavior. Clean your mind from western christian stereotips which see in every ancient eastern movemen the elements of brutality and unhumanity. I dont know what is the reason of your deep antipathy to Hassani Sabbah, but I want you to know that He was a great man and his sacred name is written in the history of persians with an ink which will be not washed with any dirty hands of mentally deficient "professors" who want to blacken the face and the history of the great people.
And you instead of praising your ancestor who sacrificed all he had, even his two sons, and ignored the happiness of this dark world for the sake of destroying the turkish opressors and bringing the freedom for persians, keep accusing him in crimes which were far from his saint and mystical body. May God forgive you and show you the right path.

In order to put the light on the facts we must go the historical background to see how situation was. I refer to the book "The assasins of Alamut" by Anthony Campbell. Look at the title in his book:

Hasan-i-Sabbah and the revolt against the Turks

Doesnt this tell you anything. It says revolt against Turks. We should have finished this discussion after this, but we'll continue.

"""Iran in the eleventh century was part of the vast territories ruled by the Seljuq Turks (the forerunners of the later Ottoman Turks who captured Constantinople, changed the name to Istanbul, and came close to conquering Western Europe). The Seljuqs were invaders from the Asian steppes who united most of the fragmented world of the Abbasid Caliphate from the Western frontier of Afghanistan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west. Their arrival reduced the Caliph in Baghdad virtually to a figurehead with no real power.
The Seljuqs were Sunni Muslims and soon came into conflict with the Fatimid Isma'ilis, who ruled Egypt as well as much of North Africa and Syria. But the Fatimid influence was not confined to the territories under their direct domination; it had long been extended by their missionaries to many other areas, but especially to Iran. This activity continued after the arrival of the Seljuqs.

Many Isma'ili missionaries, and many Isma'ili intellectuals in Cairo, were Iranians, so it was natural that there should be a determined effort to spread Isma'ilism in Iran. However, the Seljuq Turkish conquest made this more difficult, for the Seljuqs were deeply hostile to Isma'ilism. Nevertheless, the Isma'ilis by no means lost heart; indeed, if anything, they became more ambitious. Isma'ili cells were to be found in many cities and towns throughout the country, spreading their ideas and making converts. The Ismaili term for missionary is da'i.

The Iranian Isma'ilis were preparing a revolt against the Seljuqs, but they did not intend to form a single army and march to power as the Fatimids had done in Egypt; given the different situation in Iran, this would hardly have been possible. Rather, they hoped for a multiplicity of risings planned to occur simultaneously, which would deprive the Seljuqs of their power base and be impossible to crush by virtue of their widespread nature. This revolt would have been essentially urban. But in the eleventh century the plan was to take on a different character, with a shift in emphasis from town to country. This development occurred thanks to Hasan-i-Sabbah. """"


Look, under the cloack of Ismailizm there hid nationalistic feelings. Since the ofissial seljukid ideology was sunni islam iranians should have found something differnt and counterweight-Ismailizm to enable the people raise aganst state with its ideology.

"""Hassani Sabbah was an earnest seeker after truth, and is said to have been passionately fond of study from the age of seven (a significant age), becoming learned in mathematics, astronomy (and therefore astrology), and occult matters.
At about the age of seventeen he encountered an Isma'ili missionary called Amir Zarrab. No doubt a young man of Hasan's ability seemed a fine prize, and Amir Zarrab tried hard to convert him, but Hasan-i-Sabbah was not convinced. Nevertheless, after Amir Zarrab's departure Hasan-i-Sabbah continued to read Isma'ili books and his mind was troubled.

Then, as often seems to have happened in the lives of mediaeval people, his conversion was brought about by a near-fatal illness. Alarmed at the possibility that he might die without having realized the Truth, he sought out another Isma'ili, nicknamed the Saddler, and asked for further instruction. Fully convinced at last of the truth of the Isma'ili doctrines, he took the oath of allegiance.
The senior Isma'ili in Iran, Ibn Attash, came to Ray soon after this and was impressed by Hasan. He drew him into Isma'ili activities and, a few years later, sent him to Cairo, where he was well received. However, there were political tensions in Cairo at this time, which were to have momentous consequences for Hasan-i-Sabbah some years later, and there is a suggestion that he got into some kind of difficulty there. In 1080 he returned to Iran, surviving a shipwreck on the Syrian coast in the process, and became very active as an Isma'ili propagandist. He travelled extensively, especially in the north-west of the country, and he had a large number of men under his command who covered other areas. He was by now a wanted man, but he evaded his would-be captors, and, in 1090, carried out the coup which made him famous and launched the Assassins on their romantic career: he gained possession of the Castle of Alamut. """


Look at his lofty moral qualities:


What kind of man was Hasan?[/


"""The Isma'ili missionary was a very special person. He was intensively trained in Isma'ili doctrine and was expected to lead an exemplary life so as to attract people through his piety. Any shortcomings in the missionary would not only put off potential converts but would be a threat to the very existence of the organization. He was expected to take great pains with his own spiritual advancement, punishing himself when he behaved badly and rewarding himself if he did well. He behaved in a similar manner towards the people for whom he was responsible. He had to be skilled in a number of professions - carpenter, sailor, oculist, and so forth - so that he could earn his living and also have a cover for his activities, for being an Isma'ili missionary was dangerous.
The role of the Isma'il missionary, in fact, must have been something like that of a Catholic priest in England in penal times. In those years priests were regarded by the authorities as dangerous subversives under the control of a foreign power, Rome, and if captured they were liable to be put to a very unpleasant death. From their own point of view, however, they were bringing the true religion to the people who were capable of appreciating it. The Isma'ili missionary, likewise, owed his allegiance to a hostile foreign power and saw himself as a bringer of salvation to those who were willing to listen. And both priest and missionary looked forward to the day when their religion would become the dominant belief system of the land in which they operated.

The Isma'ili missionary must have a deep knowledge of both the exoteric and the esoteric aspects of his religion. In character he must be kindly and compassionate, modest, reasonable, noble, generous, and truthful; he must have an outstanding intellectual capacity, be capable of keeping secrets, and be an agreeable companion, with a noble soul to lend dignity to his manner and to attract people to him and allow him to get on with them. He should associate only with ascetic and religious men and have nothing to do with the dissolute. He must not fool about or tell dirty jokes or use bad language. In short, he was expected to be a paragon of every conceivable virtue, and it is permissible to doubt if any such individuals actually existed. However, at least we know what constituted the Isma'ili ideal, and Hasan, in particular, seems to have embodied a good deal of it.

In recompense for the high demands made of him, the missionary was given a good deal of authority over his flock, but this, too was a source of possible spiritual danger and he was forbidden to use his position for his own advantage or to show favouritism. He was expected to be an affectionate but impartial father-figure. In all of this his role was that of the Imam writ small, for he was the Imam's representative and vicar on earth.


And one point. As Hassan was considered as the enemy to seljukids, the sunni ulama -the ideological suppliers did their best to discredite him in the eyes of the people in order to reduce his increasing influense. A lot of books were written wich said bad about him and many ignorant historians lead research on the base of this miserable and false books. But the wise man goes another way. He knows that those hypocrite ulama wrote books for money and degree in the palace. that is why they could not tell the truth.

""""From Isma'ili texts of the time there emerges a picture of Isma'ilism that is very different from that painted by its Sunni critics. Isma'ilism appears to have been a serious attempt to raise human consciousness to a higher plane. Whether this is possible at all, and, if so, whether the Isma'ili method was a good one for achieving that goal, are open questions, but at least we can say that the Isma'ilis were not the irreligious libertines they are often represented as being. Far from offering its adepts a holiday from morality, the Isma'ili Proclamation, as it was called, summoned people to a dedicated life of service and self-improvement. It promised a great deal, but the way was hard and the goal was a wholly spiritual one.


Hasan-i-Sabbah became known as a severe and austere ruler. He remained within his house, writing, thinking, and planning; he is said to have gone out only twice, and to have gone up on the roof only once. At one time, when things were difficult, he sent his womenfolk away to another castle, where they had to spin like the other women, and he never brought them back. He had both his sons executed, one for drinking wine, the other on a charge of murder which later proved false. Von Hammer, the nineteenth-century historian who attributed all kinds of wickedness to the Assassins, cited these sentences as evidence of Isma'ili depravity and Hasan's want of natural affection, but it seems more plausible to regard them as instances of his impartiality. They also make it clear that in Hasan's time the Muslim law (sharia) was enforced at Alamut with full rigour.

Look he had executed his son for breaking the ismaili law -prohibition of wine. After this how can you claim that he smoked hash? ??? ?


Hassan Sabbah was neither terrorist nor hash smoker. These qualities were attributed to him by ignorant sunni and christiian clerics having seen the unprecedent heroism and devotion of Hassan's followers.

"The name 'assassin' is, of course, synonymous with political murder. In 1092 the famous statesman Nizam al-Mulk was on his way to Baghdad when he was approached from a youth from Daylam (the region of Alamut) in the guise of a suppliant. The man suddenly drew a knife from his robe and wounded the minister fatally. This is generally supposed to have been the first assassination carried out by Hasan's orders. The Isma'ilis claimed it was done to avenge the death of a carpenter, but doubtless there were more important political reasons. Murder as a political weapon was not, of course, an Isma'ili invention, and indeed it appears that a number of groups in Iran were making use of it at the time. The Isma'ilis, however, undoubtedly took the trend further than most. They may have believed that it was more humane to kill one man selectively than a multitude in a battle. In this respect they were significantly different from modern terrorists. In any case, given the fact that they were so enormously outnumbered by their enemies, terrorism was a logical enough expedient.
It is usually said that a special corps of assassins - the fida'is - existed, but this is doubtful, at least until a much later date. Marco Polo, who visited the site of Alamut in the thirteenth century, after its destruction by the Mongols, relates the romantic legend of how the fida'is were trained by the Grand Master. The 'Old Man', as Marco Polo calls him, following the Crusader usage, was said to have constructed a fantastic pleasure garden, flowing with wine, honey, milk, and water, and populated by beautiful women. This was a representation of Paradise as described in the Koran. The Old Man was supposed to drug his future Assassins and bring them, unconscious, into the garden; after a time they were once again rendered insensible and brought out into the ordinary world. They were thus convinced that they had been given a foretaste of the joys to come if they obeyed the Old Man's orders, which they naturally did unquestioningly, certain that they would once more find themselves in Paradise after their death.

It need hardly be said that this is a total fantasy. There is no need to suppose that any such elaborate method of preparation was needed; like other Muslim soldiers the assassins would be told, and would unquestioningly believe, that if they were killed they would go straight to Paradise. A similar belief motivates modern suicide bombers among the Palestinians and other minority groups who lack other means of getting at their enemies. Death on an assassination mission was counted a great honour by the Isma'ilis. There is an often-repeated story of the mother of a fida'i who rejoiced greatly and put on her best clothes when she heard that her son had been killed on a mission, but changed into mourning when he came home safely after all.

The fida'is were at least not underhand in their assassinations; they did not poison their victims or stab them in the back in dark alleys, but killed them openly in public. A favourite occasion seems to have been at Friday prayers in the mosque. Publicity, in fact, was an important part of their aim, and they were successful in attaining this. Prominent men took to wearing armour under their clothes, and sometimes the Isma'ilis could achieve their purpose merely by a threat. Isma'ilis would insinuate themselves into the households of their victims, ready to assassinate them if necessary or perhaps merely to make it clear that they could do so if they wished. Sultan Sanjar made a truce with Alamut, persuaded, it is said, by a dagger thrust into the ground next to his pillow. And an amusing story concerns a professor of theology who made a practice of reviling the "heretics" of Alamut. At length, one of his students, who had impressed him by the attention he paid to his lectures, revealed himself as a fida'i and offered the professor alternative inducements to mend his ways: a dagger or a bag of gold. The professor wisely chose the gold; and, when subsequently twitted about the reason for his changed attitude to the Isma'ilis, he replied that he had been convinced of his error by arguments that were "both weighty and pointed".

In the aftermath of an assassination the Sunni population of a town would often catch and kill anyone they suspected of being an Isma'ili, so massacres were frequent at times, and were followed by further assassinations as the Isma'ilis took revenge on the leaders. In 1093 a number of suspected Isma'ilis were burned alive in Isfahan. Such events offered a chance for people to denounce others against whom they had a grudge, so doubtless many innocents perished along with the Isma'ilis. The systematic used of terror tactics helped to foster the image of the Isma'ilis as supremely wicked and capable of any imaginable infamy.

Assassination as a political weapon may be hard to justify morally (although what about the bomb plot to kill Hitler?), and certainly it was this practice that made the Isma'ilis' name so execrated among both Muslims and Christians. Even so, one cannot help sensing the intensity of their devotion to their cause and the feeling of comradeship that inspired their heroism. [COLOR=red]For heroism it was: few fida'is survived, and their deaths were seldom easy
.

There is no need to comment any more.

Piruz bosh!!!!![/quote]

Shoma ham peroz basheed, Sabboh Jaan,

This is a very interesting piece. I read it all. I hope our friend responds to your post. Let's hear his thoughts.

Mofaq Basheed.

arshak

Posted 13 March 2008 - 09:24 AM

[quote=Hassani Sabboh;7301]Thanks my Brother Neo Bactra! I appreciate it.

To Rooyintanjon!!!!!!

With a deep respect to you, my Brother, I must say that you are totally mistaken about your ancestor Hassani Sabboh claiming that He was terrorist or hash smoker. It is far from justice. Before judging a person's behaviour we must scrutinise all of the social, economical factors and psychological motives which cause his behavior. Clean your mind from western christian stereotips which see in every ancient eastern movemen the elements of brutality and unhumanity. I dont know what is the reason of your deep antipathy to Hassani Sabbah, but I want you to know that He was a great man and his sacred name is written in the history of persians with an ink which will be not washed with any dirty hands of mentally deficient "professors" who want to blacken the face and the history of the great people.
And you instead of praising your ancestor who sacrificed all he had, even his two sons, and ignored the happiness of this dark world for the sake of destroying the turkish opressors and bringing the freedom for persians, keep accusing him in crimes which were far from his saint and mystical body. May God forgive you and show you the right path.

In order to put the light on the facts we must go the historical background to see how situation was. I refer to the book "The assasins of Alamut" by Anthony Campbell. Look at the title in his book:

Hasan-i-Sabbah and the revolt against the Turks

Doesnt this tell you anything. It says revolt against Turks. We should have finished this discussion after this, but we'll continue.

"""Iran in the eleventh century was part of the vast territories ruled by the Seljuq Turks (the forerunners of the later Ottoman Turks who captured Constantinople, changed the name to Istanbul, and came close to conquering Western Europe). The Seljuqs were invaders from the Asian steppes who united most of the fragmented world of the Abbasid Caliphate from the Western frontier of Afghanistan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west. Their arrival reduced the Caliph in Baghdad virtually to a figurehead with no real power.
The Seljuqs were Sunni Muslims and soon came into conflict with the Fatimid Isma'ilis, who ruled Egypt as well as much of North Africa and Syria. But the Fatimid influence was not confined to the territories under their direct domination; it had long been extended by their missionaries to many other areas, but especially to Iran. This activity continued after the arrival of the Seljuqs.

Many Isma'ili missionaries, and many Isma'ili intellectuals in Cairo, were Iranians, so it was natural that there should be a determined effort to spread Isma'ilism in Iran. However, the Seljuq Turkish conquest made this more difficult, for the Seljuqs were deeply hostile to Isma'ilism. Nevertheless, the Isma'ilis by no means lost heart; indeed, if anything, they became more ambitious. Isma'ili cells were to be found in many cities and towns throughout the country, spreading their ideas and making converts. The Ismaili term for missionary is da'i.

The Iranian Isma'ilis were preparing a revolt against the Seljuqs, but they did not intend to form a single army and march to power as the Fatimids had done in Egypt; given the different situation in Iran, this would hardly have been possible. Rather, they hoped for a multiplicity of risings planned to occur simultaneously, which would deprive the Seljuqs of their power base and be impossible to crush by virtue of their widespread nature. This revolt would have been essentially urban. But in the eleventh century the plan was to take on a different character, with a shift in emphasis from town to country. This development occurred thanks to Hasan-i-Sabbah. """"


Look, under the cloack of Ismailizm there hid nationalistic feelings. Since the ofissial seljukid ideology was sunni islam iranians should have found something differnt and counterweight-Ismailizm to enable the people raise aganst state with its ideology.

"""Hassani Sabbah was an earnest seeker after truth, and is said to have been passionately fond of study from the age of seven (a significant age), becoming learned in mathematics, astronomy (and therefore astrology), and occult matters.
At about the age of seventeen he encountered an Isma'ili missionary called Amir Zarrab. No doubt a young man of Hasan's ability seemed a fine prize, and Amir Zarrab tried hard to convert him, but Hasan-i-Sabbah was not convinced. Nevertheless, after Amir Zarrab's departure Hasan-i-Sabbah continued to read Isma'ili books and his mind was troubled.

Then, as often seems to have happened in the lives of mediaeval people, his conversion was brought about by a near-fatal illness. Alarmed at the possibility that he might die without having realized the Truth, he sought out another Isma'ili, nicknamed the Saddler, and asked for further instruction. Fully convinced at last of the truth of the Isma'ili doctrines, he took the oath of allegiance.
The senior Isma'ili in Iran, Ibn Attash, came to Ray soon after this and was impressed by Hasan. He drew him into Isma'ili activities and, a few years later, sent him to Cairo, where he was well received. However, there were political tensions in Cairo at this time, which were to have momentous consequences for Hasan-i-Sabbah some years later, and there is a suggestion that he got into some kind of difficulty there. In 1080 he returned to Iran, surviving a shipwreck on the Syrian coast in the process, and became very active as an Isma'ili propagandist. He travelled extensively, especially in the north-west of the country, and he had a large number of men under his command who covered other areas. He was by now a wanted man, but he evaded his would-be captors, and, in 1090, carried out the coup which made him famous and launched the Assassins on their romantic career: he gained possession of the Castle of Alamut. """


Look at his lofty moral qualities:


What kind of man was Hasan?[/


"""The Isma'ili missionary was a very special person. He was intensively trained in Isma'ili doctrine and was expected to lead an exemplary life so as to attract people through his piety. Any shortcomings in the missionary would not only put off potential converts but would be a threat to the very existence of the organization. He was expected to take great pains with his own spiritual advancement, punishing himself when he behaved badly and rewarding himself if he did well. He behaved in a similar manner towards the people for whom he was responsible. He had to be skilled in a number of professions - carpenter, sailor, oculist, and so forth - so that he could earn his living and also have a cover for his activities, for being an Isma'ili missionary was dangerous.
The role of the Isma'il missionary, in fact, must have been something like that of a Catholic priest in England in penal times. In those years priests were regarded by the authorities as dangerous subversives under the control of a foreign power, Rome, and if captured they were liable to be put to a very unpleasant death. From their own point of view, however, they were bringing the true religion to the people who were capable of appreciating it. The Isma'ili missionary, likewise, owed his allegiance to a hostile foreign power and saw himself as a bringer of salvation to those who were willing to listen. And both priest and missionary looked forward to the day when their religion would become the dominant belief system of the land in which they operated.

The Isma'ili missionary must have a deep knowledge of both the exoteric and the esoteric aspects of his religion. In character he must be kindly and compassionate, modest, reasonable, noble, generous, and truthful; he must have an outstanding intellectual capacity, be capable of keeping secrets, and be an agreeable companion, with a noble soul to lend dignity to his manner and to attract people to him and allow him to get on with them. He should associate only with ascetic and religious men and have nothing to do with the dissolute. He must not fool about or tell dirty jokes or use bad language. In short, he was expected to be a paragon of every conceivable virtue, and it is permissible to doubt if any such individuals actually existed. However, at least we know what constituted the Isma'ili ideal, and Hasan, in particular, seems to have embodied a good deal of it.

In recompense for the high demands made of him, the missionary was given a good deal of authority over his flock, but this, too was a source of possible spiritual danger and he was forbidden to use his position for his own advantage or to show favouritism. He was expected to be an affectionate but impartial father-figure. In all of this his role was that of the Imam writ small, for he was the Imam's representative and vicar on earth.


And one point. As Hassan was considered as the enemy to seljukids, the sunni ulama -the ideological suppliers did their best to discredite him in the eyes of the people in order to reduce his increasing influense. A lot of books were written wich said bad about him and many ignorant historians lead research on the base of this miserable and false books. But the wise man goes another way. He knows that those hypocrite ulama wrote books for money and degree in the palace. that is why they could not tell the truth.

""""From Isma'ili texts of the time there emerges a picture of Isma'ilism that is very different from that painted by its Sunni critics. Isma'ilism appears to have been a serious attempt to raise human consciousness to a higher plane. Whether this is possible at all, and, if so, whether the Isma'ili method was a good one for achieving that goal, are open questions, but at least we can say that the Isma'ilis were not the irreligious libertines they are often represented as being. Far from offering its adepts a holiday from morality, the Isma'ili Proclamation, as it was called, summoned people to a dedicated life of service and self-improvement. It promised a great deal, but the way was hard and the goal was a wholly spiritual one.


Hasan-i-Sabbah became known as a severe and austere ruler. He remained within his house, writing, thinking, and planning; he is said to have gone out only twice, and to have gone up on the roof only once. At one time, when things were difficult, he sent his womenfolk away to another castle, where they had to spin like the other women, and he never brought them back. He had both his sons executed, one for drinking wine, the other on a charge of murder which later proved false. Von Hammer, the nineteenth-century historian who attributed all kinds of wickedness to the Assassins, cited these sentences as evidence of Isma'ili depravity and Hasan's want of natural affection, but it seems more plausible to regard them as instances of his impartiality. They also make it clear that in Hasan's time the Muslim law (sharia) was enforced at Alamut with full rigour.

Look he had executed his son for breaking the ismaili law -prohibition of wine. After this how can you claim that he smoked hash? ??? ?


Hassan Sabbah was neither terrorist nor hash smoker. These qualities were attributed to him by ignorant sunni and christiian clerics having seen the unprecedent heroism and devotion of Hassan's followers.

"The name 'assassin' is, of course, synonymous with political murder. In 1092 the famous statesman Nizam al-Mulk was on his way to Baghdad when he was approached from a youth from Daylam (the region of Alamut) in the guise of a suppliant. The man suddenly drew a knife from his robe and wounded the minister fatally. This is generally supposed to have been the first assassination carried out by Hasan's orders. The Isma'ilis claimed it was done to avenge the death of a carpenter, but doubtless there were more important political reasons. Murder as a political weapon was not, of course, an Isma'ili invention, and indeed it appears that a number of groups in Iran were making use of it at the time. The Isma'ilis, however, undoubtedly took the trend further than most. They may have believed that it was more humane to kill one man selectively than a multitude in a battle. In this respect they were significantly different from modern terrorists. In any case, given the fact that they were so enormously outnumbered by their enemies, terrorism was a logical enough expedient.
It is usually said that a special corps of assassins - the fida'is - existed, but this is doubtful, at least until a much later date. Marco Polo, who visited the site of Alamut in the thirteenth century, after its destruction by the Mongols, relates the romantic legend of how the fida'is were trained by the Grand Master. The 'Old Man', as Marco Polo calls him, following the Crusader usage, was said to have constructed a fantastic pleasure garden, flowing with wine, honey, milk, and water, and populated by beautiful women. This was a representation of Paradise as described in the Koran. The Old Man was supposed to drug his future Assassins and bring them, unconscious, into the garden; after a time they were once again rendered insensible and brought out into the ordinary world. They were thus convinced that they had been given a foretaste of the joys to come if they obeyed the Old Man's orders, which they naturally did unquestioningly, certain that they would once more find themselves in Paradise after their death.

It need hardly be said that this is a total fantasy. There is no need to suppose that any such elaborate method of preparation was needed; like other Muslim soldiers the assassins would be told, and would unquestioningly believe, that if they were killed they would go straight to Paradise. A similar belief motivates modern suicide bombers among the Palestinians and other minority groups who lack other means of getting at their enemies. Death on an assassination mission was counted a great honour by the Isma'ilis. There is an often-repeated story of the mother of a fida'i who rejoiced greatly and put on her best clothes when she heard that her son had been killed on a mission, but changed into mourning when he came home safely after all.

The fida'is were at least not underhand in their assassinations; they did not poison their victims or stab them in the back in dark alleys, but killed them openly in public. A favourite occasion seems to have been at Friday prayers in the mosque. Publicity, in fact, was an important part of their aim, and they were successful in attaining this. Prominent men took to wearing armour under their clothes, and sometimes the Isma'ilis could achieve their purpose merely by a threat. Isma'ilis would insinuate themselves into the households of their victims, ready to assassinate them if necessary or perhaps merely to make it clear that they could do so if they wished. Sultan Sanjar made a truce with Alamut, persuaded, it is said, by a dagger thrust into the ground next to his pillow. And an amusing story concerns a professor of theology who made a practice of reviling the "heretics" of Alamut. At length, one of his students, who had impressed him by the attention he paid to his lectures, revealed himself as a fida'i and offered the professor alternative inducements to mend his ways: a dagger or a bag of gold. The professor wisely chose the gold; and, when subsequently twitted about the reason for his changed attitude to the Isma'ilis, he replied that he had been convinced of his error by arguments that were "both weighty and pointed".

In the aftermath of an assassination the Sunni population of a town would often catch and kill anyone they suspected of being an Isma'ili, so massacres were frequent at times, and were followed by further assassinations as the Isma'ilis took revenge on the leaders. In 1093 a number of suspected Isma'ilis were burned alive in Isfahan. Such events offered a chance for people to denounce others against whom they had a grudge, so doubtless many innocents perished along with the Isma'ilis. The systematic used of terror tactics helped to foster the image of the Isma'ilis as supremely wicked and capable of any imaginable infamy.

Assassination as a political weapon may be hard to justify morally (although what about the bomb plot to kill Hitler?), and certainly it was this practice that made the Isma'ilis' name so execrated among both Muslims and Christians. Even so, one cannot help sensing the intensity of their devotion to their cause and the feeling of comradeship that inspired their heroism. [COLOR=red]For heroism it was: few fida'is survived, and their deaths were seldom easy
.

There is no need to comment any more.

Piruz bosh!!!!![/quote]

Let me clarify a few things:
Yes, Seljuqs were Muslim and Turkmen. They did put an end to Buyid Empire whcih was ruled by Persian Daylamite Buyid Dynasty who were Shiites. Buyid period was one of Iran's glorious periods, among the medieval persian dynasties I can tell you if we rank them by what each of these dynasties did in terms of bringing back Persian Cultures for the Persian people the so called Persian rennaissance period.
I would rank them as follow:

1. Buyid: This great dynasty was established by the 3 sons of Buyeh the fisherman from Daylam. These three brothers invaded Baghdad the capital of the Muslim world, the second time that Abbasid's capital was invaded by Persians, the first was by Taher Zolyaminayn in 809AD who did it to put half-persian Mamun on the Islamic throne. So yeah Buyids made Caliph to become subordinate to the Buyid Shahanshah. So in fact this was the first time that the page had turned and Arabs came under Persian rule once again.
Please note Yaqub Lais tried many times to conqueror Baghdad but failed!
Buyids were tolerant, they promoted Shiite Islam in Persia. Science and culture continued to grow just like Samanid times.

2.Samanid: This great dynasty revived Persian language and Culture. Just brilliant a fantastic period in Persian History. Although few negative points about Samanids was them being subordinates to Abbasid caliphs and paying taxes to them, the other being their continual use and dependancy to use Turkmen soldiers in their army at which various Turkmen generals revolted against Samanid Shahs such as Alptegin, Sebuktegin, Mahmoud Qarategin and finally Sultan Mahmoud Ghaznevi who alied with Qarakhanid ruler of Balasaghun and captured Bukhara and put an end to Samanid Dynasty! The third weakness being the Samanids desire to be the only Persian Empire and their wars against fellow Persian dynasties of Ziyarids and Saffarids.

3.Saffarid and Ziyarid: I will rank them third, Yaqub Lais was a Saffar by occupation and a Persian from Zaranj Sistan. This great man was of humble origins but he always spoke Persian and purposefully never learnt the Arabic language. Ziyarid were former zoroastrians of Tabarestan(newly converts to Islam just like the Samanids, the also were related to Persian nobility such as Bavand dynasty through marriage, they were converted to Islam by Hasanid Amirs(Shiite Arab Dynasty who were descendants of a grandson of second Shiite Imam Hasan Mojtab Ibn Ali Ib Abu Taleb) of Tabarestan) and they were some of the bravest men of Persia. Mardavij, Vashmgir & Qabus were the greatest rulers of this dynasty. The negative point about this dynasty is their continual rivalry with Samanids for ruling Khorasan(the part that is in Iran now), if they had united with Persian brothers would have been better. The other neg pt is their recognition of Abbasid caliphs and paying taxes to them.

and traitors were Abu Moslem Khorasani who was an ambitious man, served arab masters and killed any Zoroastrian Persians in the name of Islam. He did nothing for Persian people, everything he did was for himself to become an independant ruler of Khorasan. The 5 years he was in power many zoroastrians lost their lives.

Tahirids were other traitors who served Arab masters. The Tahirid rulers only spoke Arabic and never wanted to speak Persian! Why were they ashamed to be Persian!!! They did nothing for Persian Culture and persian people. Thank god Yaqub Lais arrived from Sistan and put an end to such disgraceful Persian Dynasty.
So yeah once a Mawali always a Mawali. Taher was a mawali, his father Hossein was a mawali(persian servant of an arab master) and his grandfather Musab was a mawali.
Abu Moslem was a mawali, and his father was a mawali. Afshin was a mawali and so was his dad.

Now back to Seljuq period: FYI. Nizamolmolk and Tajolmolk were great tajik Viziers of Seljuq period. Turkmen Seljuqs became persianised and the Seljuq period up until Malik Shah's death was one of the greatest period in Middle east & Central Asia. Nowrouz celebrations reached its peak in Seljuq period, science and persian culture continued to develop just like Samanid times, the current persian solar calendar(hejri Shamsi) was established as official calendar of the empire. If Nizamolmolk was assasinated by Sabah's order it surely places Sabah on my list of traitors.
The word assassin comes from Hashishiyun which was the name of Sabah's sect and group. They were known to get high on Hashish and strike the govt officials and soldiers. They killed so many innocent Persian as well as Turkmen officials in the name of Ismaili Islam...they are traitors and terrorists on my book...

Faridun

Posted 13 March 2008 - 03:25 PM

[quote=rooyintan;7335]So yeah once a Mawali always a Mawali. Taher was a mawali, his father Hossein was a mawali(persian servant of an arab master) and his grandfather Musab was a mawali.
Abu Moslem was a mawali, and his father was a mawali. Afshin was a mawali and so was his dad.

Now back to Seljuq period: FYI. Nizamolmolk and Tajolmolk were great tajik Viziers of Seljuq period. Turkmen Seljuqs became persianised and the Seljuq period up until Malik Shah's death was one of the greatest period in Middle east & Central Asia. Nowrouz celebrations reached its peak in Seljuq period, science and persian culture continued to develop just like Samanid times, the current persian solar calendar(hejri Shamsi) was established as official calendar of the empire. If Nizamolmolk was assasinated by Sabah's order it surely places Sabah on my list of traitors.
The word assassin comes from Hashishiyun which was the name of Sabah's sect and group. They were known to get high on Hashish and strike the govt officials and soldiers. They killed so many innocent Persian as well as Turkmen officials in the name of Ismaili Islam...they are traitors and terrorists on my book...[/quote]

Seeing your post I find that all of your onrushes on Abu Muslim and Hassani Sabbah are based on your negative relation to one thing - Islam. You dont even take into account a small piece of their deeds for the sake of persians and their services for the favour of persians. Please, take it easy. To be mavaly is not a sin and dont humiliate a person who suffered a lot from being mavali. And as a wise man you must not condemn person because of his social status. If you want to find betrayers I wiil show them to you. The first it was Yazdigurd himself who had his empire corrupted and preversed, upholded only the interests of his bearuacracy, separated himself from the rest of his people, made stupid and needles wars, imposed high taxes on dehqans for filling his pocket which undermined his authority, strengthened the protest of the people, betrayed the hope and wishes of persians according to which he should have been the servant of the people. To cut it short He only He with his beruacracy destroyed the stability and economical welfare of persian society which could not stand the invasion and fell to arab bedouins. How can you be proud of such a man? Now I know that it has become the mode to condemn arabs and islam in every dirty crimes, but they never ask themselves why such a great empire with monoteistic religion could not resist the ignorant and uncivilised bedouin tribes? Why?? But they dont see their past shortcomings and guilts and put the guilt on Salman Farsi and a tiny number of so called persian betrayers. If it had been a great empire It would not habe been coleapsed because of two or three betrayers.
We must analyze everything with a open mind and objectively, not from our emotions.
Regarding Abu Muslim Khorassani I told you that the ideological atmosphere cold not enable the opressed persian people to take their own under the cloack of Zoroastrizm. Zoroastrizm had already lost its past purity because of mags who were the counterpart of nowadays akhunds and mullas. At that time Islam was a newly appeared ideology without mags-mullas-akhunds which could persuade arabs to the great sacrafices. That is why all of persian revolt with zoroastrian ideas cold not achieve their aims and were easily destroyed.
And you keep saying that Abu Muslim killed mags. He did a great work. You think that there is a difference between those mags and nowadays mullahs and akhunds? ??? ?
You are mistaken. All of them are of one nature, but their means of deceiving and oppressing the people(I mean religion) have different colour. Abu Muslim knew the wicked nature of mags=mullas and saved this world from their burden. That is why your argument cannot find support in the eyes of the wise men.
Abu Muslim tore Umayad khaliphate into pieces and wanted to separete persians from arab dictatorship. But you say that he did it only for himself. How do you know that? How can you prove this? Were you with him at that time?
But lets suppose that He did it only for satisfying his arrogance. Was it not good for persians to live under arrogant persian rather than being slaves of arabs???
And else. There is no logic in your thoughts. You condemn Abu Muslim according to the criteries which Samanids did not lack. But samanids are respected by you. They also obeyed arabs, but when they began separatist actions arabs destroyed them wih the help of the turks.
About hasshish. On the basis of what sources you bravely claim that? You didnt even disapprove my arguments above? Dont use your fantazy and bring me relieble evidences and valid arguments! Here what Anthony Campball, a historian writes:

""""The Assassins were a heretical Islamic sect. They were a potent source of myth and legends; this emerges in an imaginative account written by Marco Polo, who visited the site of their castle at Alamut in Iran just after its destruction by the Mongols. He repeats the legend of how the future assassins were supposedly prepared for their missions by being drugged with hashish, brought into a secret pleasure garden, and told they had visited Paradise, to which they would return if they were killed in action.
By the time Marco Polo reached Alamut, the prevailing view of the sect as supremely wicked yet dangerously alluring was already well established in people's minds. Alamut was already well past its heyday when it fell to the Mongols, but the legend of depravity and license had arisen much earlier, when the castle was the centre of a widespread and, from the orthodox point of view, most dangerous heresy.
Even before Marco Polo, the West had encountered the Assassins through their Syrian branch, which was known to the Crusaders. The great contemporary historian of the Crusades, William of Tyre, had written about them in a way that reveals a fair amount of understanding, and a remarkable embassy from the Assassins had gone to the King of Jerusalem offering their conversion to Christianity. At one time the Syrian Assassins were in loose alliance with the Franks against Saladin, whom they attempted more than once to murder, though later -- and especially after the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin in 1187 -- they took part in the Muslim struggle against the Franks. In 1192 Conrad of Montferrat was murdered by men disguised as monks, and it is generally supposed that these were Assassins, though the English King Richard I has also been suspected of instigating the murder. From this time on, it seems, the Crusaders, already severely demoralised by the loss of Jerusalem, became more fearful of the Assassins, to whom they ascribed devilish cunning, a mastery of disguise, and a knowledge of various Frankish languages.

Stories such as these made up the legend of the Assassins that persisted in the West until quite recently. In the nineteenth century a Viennese amateur historian called von Hammer Purgstall wrote a book about the Assassins in which he ascribed to them, if not quite every conceivable form of infamy, at least most of those that could be openly referred to in print at the time. Whenever more than one possible interpretation of a statement or event existed, von Hammer automatically preferred the one that showed the Assassins in the worst possible light. His motive in writing seems to have been as much to emphasize the wickedness of all secret societies (including the Jesuits and Freemasons of his day) as to make a historical study of the Assassins, and his book has little historical value; nevertheless, it remained the standard reference work on the sect as late as the 1930s, when Freya Stark went to Alamut.
Since that time, however, much new information has come to light, some of it material preserved by descendants of the Assassins themselves. This has been extensively studied and edited by the Russian scholar W. Ivanow, who apparently has had access to a large number of documents and manuscripts that are not generally available. The other main authority on the sect is the American M.G.S. Hodgson.

From all this modern scholarship has emerged a picture of the Assassins which, if it lacks some of the lurid qualities of the legend, has at least the merit of credibility. Moreover, the truth turns out to be more enthralling than the fiction. No longer can we believe in the Old Man of the Mountain hatching his evil plots and sending forth his murderous emissaries drugged with hashish. Such a state of mind hardly seems compatible with the legendary accomplishments of the assassins -- their superlative cunning, patience, knowledge of languages, and so forth -- and in any case our modern experience of terrorism does not suggest that its perpetrators require any narcotic stronger than fanaticism itself. Besides, if the claims of modern users of hashish are to be believed, the effects of the drug tend more towards pacificism than murderousness. But there is no real evidence that the Assassins used hashish at all, at least for this purpose. (It is possible that they used it as a psychedelic agent for religious reasons, but that is another matter.) The term "hashishin", from which our word Assassin probably derives, was not used by members of the sect themselves but was a nickname applied by their enemies; even so, it was not in common use. The usual names for the Assassins were "esotericists" (batinis), Isma'ilis, or Nizaris.


My friend, make your emotion be the servant of your mind. Ther is no logic in your words: you condemn persian AbuMuslim in being mavali but at the same time you praise seljukid turks in flourishing of not persian-zoroastrian culture, but of persian-muslim culture. There is no difference between them and Abu Muslim. Both of them were muslims. But the priveleige of Abu Muslim is to have been true persian. No logic.
You say that Seljukid did not destroy persian culture. Monghols also did not do that, They even adapted to the culture. But before that they had cut millions of persian head off. I mean dont mix political, military and economical issues with the cultural one. The turks had not their own great culture and this persuaded them to get adapted to persian one and to promote its flourishing.
But at the same time millions of persians suffered under the oppresion of turks, millions were tortured, millions were deprived of their lands for the favour of turkish soldiers.

And only the clean and soft heart of Hassani Sabbah could perseive the great pain of the persians, the big economical and moral burden on the back of the oppressed persians. He only He handed his hand to persians to reliefe their sufferings with a smiling face and kind eyes.

And you,after many years, allow your tounge utter such bad words about him?! You have lost your way and you need to be saved from the instigation of those people who khow nothing to do but, sitting in the warm place with a fed stomach, accuse such great men like Hassani Sabbah and Abu Muslim in murdering and drugging. I hope God will not let ahriman to lead you to the wrong way and will show you the right path.

Faridun

Posted 13 March 2008 - 03:48 PM

[quote=Rostam;7315]All have died :( ...I dont have any favourite Tajik now......hate the most![/quote]


If all have died, both of us are alive!! :) Now You are my favourite, but after Abu Muslim and Hassani Sabbah of course. But your privielege is that You are alive, my "Rahbar". :) What is your order, Rahbar?

Az Rahbar yak ishorat, az mo ba sar davidan!!! :)

PORS

Posted 13 March 2008 - 06:00 PM

After all, I found two things about us. First, one that separates us; and this is religious misconception. Second, one that unites us; and this is our wisdom and knowledge that we use quite seldom.

Sohrab

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:09 PM

[quote=PORS;7353]After all, I found two things about us. First, one that separates us; and this is religious misconception. Second, one that unites us; and this is our wisdom and knowledge that we use quite seldom.[/quote]

That is the most stupid of us to be divided because of religion. it doesnt matter what we believe but should still stick toghether. we have to respect each other and our beliefs to achieve this unity.

Rostam

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:30 PM

[quote=Hassani Sabboh;7349]If all have died, both of us are alive!! :) Now You are my favourite, but after Abu Muslim and Hassani Sabbah of course. But your privielege is that You are alive, my "Rahbar". :) What is your order, Rahbar?

Az Rahbar yak ishorat, az mo ba sar davidan!!! :) [/quote]
Brothar......you are also my favourite with this mentality :)
But point is ...that majority of us :( ....specially Tajiks of Afghanistan! Its just too sad for words!

Hassani gerami, I just want to meet you....so we can talk live :)
Probably that will be in 2010 ;) ....if both of us...alive!
You are a great patriot and person!

PORS

Posted 13 March 2008 - 07:48 PM

Dear Rika Khanae arjmand:

With all my respect to you and others, I think it is not good to blame others or even ourselves, for just being stupid. It is better for us to focus on positive things and talk more about what unites us. Of course, we shall talk openly about negative and dangerous things to Persians, be it Persians of Afghanistan, Persians of Iran, and/or Persians of Tajikistan, and be aware of their negative consequences. However, I think it is more productive when we concentrate on positive, stay positive, and do positive things for ourselves. I hope everybody here in this forum will leave with positive thought about Persians and will eventually do something for the prosperity of Persians. Thank you for your comment.

Pedrood,




Pors.

[quote=Rika Khana;7357]That is the most stupid of us to be divided because of religion. it doesnt matter what we believe but should still stick toghether. we have to respect each other and our beliefs to achieve this unity.[/quote]

Kambiz

Posted 13 March 2008 - 08:34 PM

Hassane Sabbah, Rostam, Rooyintan, Pors and all other Persian/Iranian participants of this thread. I love you all as my next of kins and my patriot brothers. That's why I'd like to ask some of you to restrain from deviding us into patriots vs non-patriots, islamophils vs islamophobes etc. The only thing we need right now is unity against those who hate all of us regardless of our stance. And I'd love to see all of you in 2010 as proposed by Rostam-jan. All the best dustane gerami.

Rostam

Posted 13 March 2008 - 08:53 PM

[quote=Darius;7366]Hassane Sabbah, Rostam, Rooyintan, Pors and all other Persian/Iranian participants of this thread. I love you all as my next of kins and my patriot brothers. That's why I'd like to ask some of you to restrain from deviding us into patriots vs non-patriots, islamophils vs islamophobes etc. The only thing we need right now is unity against those who hate all of us regardless of our stance. And I'd love to see all of you in 2010 as proposed by Rostam-jan. All the best dustane gerami.[/quote]

Dear Darius,

I absolutely do not agree....with NOT dividing into patriots and non-patriots!
I do believe we should NOT divide....due to...personal believe, looks or whatever!

But yes we have to divide into PATRIOSM!


The patriot Persian/Tajik is ALIVE and PROUD....the non-patriot is DEATH and ASHAMED!
Thats the difference!

Faridun

Posted 14 March 2008 - 01:26 AM

[quote=PORS;7353]After all, I found two things about us. First, one that separates us; and this is religious misconception. Second, one that unites us; and this is our wisdom and knowledge that we use quite seldom.[/quote]

I totally agree with you, my Brother!! We must not let our religious feelings prevail during our discussion and during judging historical issues. Thoug I am religious but I am secularist at the same time. I accept past non-muslim great tajiks- Zardusht, Muqana, Bobak and etc., as my eternal Heroes. I dont mind wheather they were in my belief or not. But some zoroastrians deny great muslim tajiks just because of their belief and claiming them to be traitor and something like that. It is not good. They must take into account that most of our past great ancestors were muslims and must respect them.

Faridun

Posted 14 March 2008 - 01:32 AM

[quote=Rostam;7361]Brothar......you are also my favourite with this mentality :)
But point is ...that majority of us :( ....specially Tajiks of Afghanistan! Its just too sad for words!

Hassani gerami, I just want to meet you....so we can talk live :)
Probably that will be in 2010 ;) ....if both of us...alive!
You are a great patriot and person![/quote]

Thanks, brother! It doesnt matter where you are from. That you are tajik and are from my BLOOD is important for both of us. Dont let the warrior of sadnees win your tajik strong will and faith.
I also want to meet you and talk. Whenever you come to your MOTHERLAND- Tajikistan I am at your service.
I look forward to see you.

Kambiz

Posted 14 March 2008 - 01:45 AM

Dear Rostam,

It depends how you define the term. What is 'patriotism' to you? Do you paint it in religious colors as well as some do? How do you think a patriot should defend his land?

One of our shortcomings in this kind of discos is absolutism and declaring 'the final truth' that no-one has ever reached thus far. That's why I asked you to concentrate on things that unite us, rather than devide since
Ma baraye wasl kardan amadem
Ne baraye fasl kardan amadem.

So do not 'fasl' please under a certain understanding of a term.

[quote=Rostam;7368]Dear Darius,

I absolutely do not agree....with NOT dividing into patriots and non-patriots!
I do believe we should NOT divide....due to...personal believe, looks or whatever!

But yes we have to divide into PATRIOSM!


The patriot Persian/Tajik is ALIVE and PROUD....the non-patriot is DEATH and ASHAMED!
Thats the difference![/quote]

Nader Shah

Posted 14 March 2008 - 02:29 AM

Dooste Gerami, PORS: Very well said !

I might even add that religion is made up of misconceptions due to the lack of wisdom, insight, and real knowledge in the human beings who interpret it. This is really the sad part, otherwise spirituality is the best antidote to many of our ills, but we need to understand it thoroughly and from within.

However, to each their own interpreatation. I am fine with that as long as no one uses violence or coercion to impose upon others. Believe in what you like ! In fact, why not believe even in fairy tales, that is what children do, and they are quite happy because of it !!!

[quote=PORS;7353]After all, I found two things about us. First, one that separates us; and this is religious misconception. Second, one that unites us; and this is our wisdom and knowledge that we use quite seldom.[/quote]

Neo Bactra

Posted 14 March 2008 - 05:22 AM

Dorood All,

There are two Tajik popular names that, I guess, represented Tajik resistance against Arab? rule some centuries ago. One is Hamza Pesar e Azarak e Sistaani and the other is Ibn e Moqne. I wonder if anyone has any information on either of the two. Perhaps Rooyintanjon is able to help.

Pedrood

arshak

Posted 14 March 2008 - 07:34 AM

[quote=Hassani Sabboh;7348]Seeing your post I find that all of your onrushes on Abu Muslim and Hassani Sabbah are based on your negative relation to one thing - Islam. You dont even take into account a small piece of their deeds for the sake of persians and their services for the favour of persians. Please, take it easy. To be mavaly is not a sin and dont humiliate a person who suffered a lot from being mavali. And as a wise man you must not condemn person because of his social status. If you want to find betrayers I wiil show them to you. The first it was Yazdigurd himself who had his empire corrupted and preversed, upholded only the interests of his bearuacracy, separated himself from the rest of his people, made stupid and needles wars, imposed high taxes on dehqans for filling his pocket which undermined his authority, strengthened the protest of the people, betrayed the hope and wishes of persians according to which he should have been the servant of the people. To cut it short He only He with his beruacracy destroyed the stability and economical welfare of persian society which could not stand the invasion and fell to arab bedouins. How can you be proud of such a man? Now I know that it has become the mode to condemn arabs and islam in every dirty crimes, but they never ask themselves why such a great empire with monoteistic religion could not resist the ignorant and uncivilised bedouin tribes? Why?? But they dont see their past shortcomings and guilts and put the guilt on Salman Farsi and a tiny number of so called persian betrayers. If it had been a great empire It would not habe been coleapsed because of two or three betrayers.
We must analyze everything with a open mind and objectively, not from our emotions.
Regarding Abu Muslim Khorassani I told you that the ideological atmosphere cold not enable the opressed persian people to take their own under the cloack of Zoroastrizm. Zoroastrizm had already lost its past purity because of mags who were the counterpart of nowadays akhunds and mullas. At that time Islam was a newly appeared ideology without mags-mullas-akhunds which could persuade arabs to the great sacrafices. That is why all of persian revolt with zoroastrian ideas cold not achieve their aims and were easily destroyed.
And you keep saying that Abu Muslim killed mags. He did a great work. You think that there is a difference between those mags and nowadays mullahs and akhunds? ??? ?
You are mistaken. All of them are of one nature, but their means of deceiving and oppressing the people(I mean religion) have different colour. Abu Muslim knew the wicked nature of mags=mullas and saved this world from their burden. That is why your argument cannot find support in the eyes of the wise men.
Abu Muslim tore Umayad khaliphate into pieces and wanted to separete persians from arab dictatorship. But you say that he did it only for himself. How do you know that? How can you prove this? Were you with him at that time?
But lets suppose that He did it only for satisfying his arrogance. Was it not good for persians to live under arrogant persian rather than being slaves of arabs???
And else. There is no logic in your thoughts. You condemn Abu Muslim according to the criteries which Samanids did not lack. But samanids are respected by you. They also obeyed arabs, but when they began separatist actions arabs destroyed them wih the help of the turks.
About hasshish. On the basis of what sources you bravely claim that? You didnt even disapprove my arguments above? Dont use your fantazy and bring me relieble evidences and valid arguments! Here what Anthony Campball, a historian writes:

""""The Assassins were a heretical Islamic sect. They were a potent source of myth and legends; this emerges in an imaginative account written by Marco Polo, who visited the site of their castle at Alamut in Iran just after its destruction by the Mongols. He repeats the legend of how the future assassins were supposedly prepared for their missions by being drugged with hashish, brought into a secret pleasure garden, and told they had visited Paradise, to which they would return if they were killed in action.
By the time Marco Polo reached Alamut, the prevailing view of the sect as supremely wicked yet dangerously alluring was already well established in people's minds. Alamut was already well past its heyday when it fell to the Mongols, but the legend of depravity and license had arisen much earlier, when the castle was the centre of a widespread and, from the orthodox point of view, most dangerous heresy.
Even before Marco Polo, the West had encountered the Assassins through their Syrian branch, which was known to the Crusaders. The great contemporary historian of the Crusades, William of Tyre, had written about them in a way that reveals a fair amount of understanding, and a remarkable embassy from the Assassins had gone to the King of Jerusalem offering their conversion to Christianity. At one time the Syrian Assassins were in loose alliance with the Franks against Saladin, whom they attempted more than once to murder, though later -- and especially after the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin in 1187 -- they took part in the Muslim struggle against the Franks. In 1192 Conrad of Montferrat was murdered by men disguised as monks, and it is generally supposed that these were Assassins, though the English King Richard I has also been suspected of instigating the murder. From this time on, it seems, the Crusaders, already severely demoralised by the loss of Jerusalem, became more fearful of the Assassins, to whom they ascribed devilish cunning, a mastery of disguise, and a knowledge of various Frankish languages.

Stories such as these made up the legend of the Assassins that persisted in the West until quite recently. In the nineteenth century a Viennese amateur historian called von Hammer Purgstall wrote a book about the Assassins in which he ascribed to them, if not quite every conceivable form of infamy, at least most of those that could be openly referred to in print at the time. Whenever more than one possible interpretation of a statement or event existed, von Hammer automatically preferred the one that showed the Assassins in the worst possible light. His motive in writing seems to have been as much to emphasize the wickedness of all secret societies (including the Jesuits and Freemasons of his day) as to make a historical study of the Assassins, and his book has little historical value; nevertheless, it remained the standard reference work on the sect as late as the 1930s, when Freya Stark went to Alamut.
Since that time, however, much new information has come to light, some of it material preserved by descendants of the Assassins themselves. This has been extensively studied and edited by the Russian scholar W. Ivanow, who apparently has had access to a large number of documents and manuscripts that are not generally available. The other main authority on the sect is the American M.G.S. Hodgson.

From all this modern scholarship has emerged a picture of the Assassins which, if it lacks some of the lurid qualities of the legend, has at least the merit of credibility. Moreover, the truth turns out to be more enthralling than the fiction. No longer can we believe in the Old Man of the Mountain hatching his evil plots and sending forth his murderous emissaries drugged with hashish. Such a state of mind hardly seems compatible with the legendary accomplishments of the assassins -- their superlative cunning, patience, knowledge of languages, and so forth -- and in any case our modern experience of terrorism does not suggest that its perpetrators require any narcotic stronger than fanaticism itself. Besides, if the claims of modern users of hashish are to be believed, the effects of the drug tend more towards pacificism than murderousness. But there is no real evidence that the Assassins used hashish at all, at least for this purpose. (It is possible that they used it as a psychedelic agent for religious reasons, but that is another matter.) The term "hashishin", from which our word Assassin probably derives, was not used by members of the sect themselves but was a nickname applied by their enemies; even so, it was not in common use. The usual names for the Assassins were "esotericists" (batinis), Isma'ilis, or Nizaris.


My friend, make your emotion be the servant of your mind. Ther is no logic in your words: you condemn persian AbuMuslim in being mavali but at the same time you praise seljukid turks in flourishing of not persian-zoroastrian culture, but of persian-muslim culture. There is no difference between them and Abu Muslim. Both of them were muslims. But the priveleige of Abu Muslim is to have been true persian. No logic.
You say that Seljukid did not destroy persian culture. Monghols also did not do that, They even adapted to the culture. But before that they had cut millions of persian head off. I mean dont mix political, military and economical issues with the cultural one. The turks had not their own great culture and this persuaded them to get adapted to persian one and to promote its flourishing.
But at the same time millions of persians suffered under the oppresion of turks, millions were tortured, millions were deprived of their lands for the favour of turkish soldiers.

And only the clean and soft heart of Hassani Sabbah could perseive the great pain of the persians, the big economical and moral burden on the back of the oppressed persians. He only He handed his hand to persians to reliefe their sufferings with a smiling face and kind eyes.

And you,after many years, allow your tounge utter such bad words about him?! You have lost your way and you need to be saved from the instigation of those people who khow nothing to do but, sitting in the warm place with a fed stomach, accuse such great men like Hassani Sabbah and Abu Muslim in murdering and drugging. I hope God will not let ahriman to lead you to the wrong way and will show you the right path.[/quote]


All I said is that just like you who have Abu Muslim and Hasan Sabah as your heros, I have my own. Just because I disagree with you about considering those two as being heros does not mean my saying don't make sense.

I'm not supporting Sasanid Emperors, in fact I only like two of them Shapur I and Yazdgird I as these two just like Cyrus the Great were tolerant rulers.

About Seljuqs I balanced all the goods and all the bads they did. Goods were the most than bad. Persian Culture flourished under them.

Abu Moslem ruled for 5 years maybe it was too little time to do anything about reviving persian culture but during that 5 years he killed so many innocent zoroastrians and mazdakites.

Let me just conclude this discussion here...

My favourite pre-Islamic heros are: Cyrus the Great, Arsaces I, Mithridates the Great, Surena.

My favourite midieval heros are: Buyid brothers, Yaqub Lais Saffar, Shah Ismail Samani, Babak Khorramdin, Mardavij Ziyar, Maziyar Qaren, Ostad Sis, Moqana,Sundpadh, Ishak Turk.

My favourite modern heros are: Pesyan, Mossadegh, Ahmad Shah Masood.

I have others too(some viziers, poets, literary figures, other statesmen and military people) but these people I listed were the greatest for what they did for Iranzameen and Persian Culture.

Sohrab

Posted 14 March 2008 - 07:36 AM

[quote=Neo Bactra;7385]Dorood All,

There are two Tajik popular names that, I guess, represented Tajik resistance against Arab? rule some centuries ago. One is Hamza Pesar e Azarak e Sistaani and the other is Ibn e Moqne. I wonder if anyone has any information on either of the two. Perhaps Rooyintanjon is able to help.

Pedrood[/quote]

I think Hamza after a long struggle retreated to a city called Gardez in south of Afghanistan and it is still got the same name. The persian speakers of Gardiz, i believe to be the offsprings/troops of this great man.

arshak

Posted 14 March 2008 - 07:38 AM

[quote=Rika Khana;7357]That is the most stupid of us to be divided because of religion. it doesnt matter what we believe but should still stick toghether. we have to respect each other and our beliefs to achieve this unity.[/quote]

Rika Khana jan,

I totally agree with you. Persian Unity is first priority and is the only way to bring success.

arshak

Posted 14 March 2008 - 07:41 AM

[quote=Nader Shah;7380]Dooste Gerami, PORS: Very well said !

I might even add that religion is made up of misconceptions due to the lack of wisdom, insight, and real knowledge in the human beings who interpret it. This is really the sad part, otherwise spirituality is the best antidote to many of our ills, but we need to understand it thoroughly and from within.

However, to each their own interpreatation. I am fine with that as long as no one uses violence or coercion to impose upon others. Believe in what you like ! In fact, why not believe even in fairy tales, that is what children do, and they are quite happy because of it !!![/quote]

Nader Shah e Gol,

I totally agree with you. I can see and feel "pendar-e Nik, goftar-e Nik, kerdar-nik" in your words. You are a true son of Iran o Khorasan Zameen.

arshak

Posted 14 March 2008 - 07:44 AM

[quote=Neo Bactra;7385]Dorood All,

There are two Tajik popular names that, I guess, represented Tajik resistance against Arab? rule some centuries ago. One is Hamza Pesar e Azarak e Sistaani and the other is Ibn e Moqne. I wonder if anyone has any information on either of the two. Perhaps Rooyintanjon is able to help.

Pedrood[/quote]

Sorry people I never heard of this person. If anyone has details please post and I'll be glad to know about him.

Neo Bactra

Posted 14 March 2008 - 08:02 AM

[quote=Rika Khana;7393]I think Hamza after a long struggle retreated to a city called Gardez in south of Afghanistan and it is still got the same name. The persian speakers of Gardiz, i believe to be the offsprings/troops of this great man.[/quote]


Sepaas Rika Khana Jan, it was interesting. I am still looking around to see if I can get more information about him. Thanks again.

Neo Bactra

Posted 14 March 2008 - 08:04 AM

[quote=Darius;7366]Hassane Sabbah, Rostam, Rooyintan, Pors and all other Persian/Iranian participants of this thread. I love you all as my next of kins and my patriot brothers. That's why I'd like to ask some of you to restrain from deviding us into patriots vs non-patriots, islamophils vs islamophobes etc. The only thing we need right now is unity against those who hate all of us regardless of our stance. And I'd love to see all of you in 2010 as proposed by Rostam-jan. All the best dustane gerami.[/quote]

Nicely put. Bravo! It just looks very inspiring to see all Tajik posters treating each other with respect and affection. That's what takes to be a Tajik/Persian--tolerance and respectfulness. However, in Afghanistan, Tajiks will do better if they come across as Abu Muslim Khorasani, Babak, Hasan Sabah, Cyrus, Yaqbob Lais Safar, Massoud, and RUSTAM. Their tolerance is always exploilted by Pashtons in the name of Islam and patriotism. So let's be Rumi in love and Rustam in wars. And let's be both at the same time. Let's learn to never compromise one for the other.

Kambiz

Posted 14 March 2008 - 01:25 PM

Thanks Neo Bactra. But what I meant was a bit different. I am not advocating compromise with our adversaries in Afghanistan or elsewhere. I just don't like the way we divide ourselves - Tajiks (Persians) even here, just because our visions on some topics don't match each other. I'm sure all Persians in the forum are somehow concerned over their nation's future. That's the reason they take part in discussions. So, it's better to attract more of them whatever religion/belief they stick to. All of them are patriots deep in their hearts. That's why be careful when alleging that some of us in here are patriots and some are not. It's better to have reasonable discourses rather than accusing each other of lack of vigour, patriotism etc. and shaping tiny 'fractions of patriots' by dismissing our real strength in unity.

All the best

[quote=Neo Bactra;7402]Nicely put. Bravo! It just looks very inspiring to see all Tajik posters treating each other with respect and affection. That's what takes to be a Tajik/Persian--tolerance and respectfulness. However, in Afghanistan, Tajiks will do better if they come across as Abu Muslim Khorasani, Babak, Hasan Sabah, Cyrus, Yaqbob Lais Safar, Massoud, and RUSTAM. Their tolerance is always exploilted by Pashtons in the name of Islam and patriotism. So let's be Rumi in love and Rustam in wars. And let's be both at the same time. Let's learn to never compromise one for the other.[/quote]

Sohrab

Posted 14 March 2008 - 03:38 PM

[quote=Darius;7418] I just don't like the way we divide ourselves - Tajiks (Persians) even here, just because our visions on some topics don't match each other. I'm sure all Persians in the forum are somehow concerned over their nation's future. That's the reason they take part in discussions. So, it's better to attract more of them whatever religion/belief they stick to. All of them are patriots deep in their hearts. That's why be careful when alleging that some of us in here are patriots and some are not. It's better to have reasonable discourses rather than accusing each other of lack of vigour, patriotism etc. and shaping tiny 'fractions of patriots' by dismissing our real strength in unity.

All the best[/quote]

Very Mature.

Rostam

Posted 14 March 2008 - 03:54 PM

There should be no division based on....crap and bullshit!
But yes...there should be competition in patriotism! ;)

Neo Bactra

Posted 14 March 2008 - 06:13 PM

[quote=Darius;7418]Thanks Neo Bactra. But what I meant was a bit different. I am not advocating compromise with our adversaries in Afghanistan or elsewhere. I just don't like the way we divide ourselves - Tajiks (Persians) even here, just because our visions on some topics don't match each other. I'm sure all Persians in the forum are somehow concerned over their nation's future. That's the reason they take part in discussions. So, it's better to attract more of them whatever religion/belief they stick to. All of them are patriots deep in their hearts. That's why be careful when alleging that some of us in here are patriots and some are not. It's better to have reasonable discourses rather than accusing each other of lack of vigour, patriotism etc. and shaping tiny 'fractions of patriots' by dismissing our real strength in unity.

All the best[/quote]

Respectable Darius,
In fact, I had quoted you in my previous post due to your fine message. I also added a short note of my own observation of Tajiks' attitude and behavior with respect to their collective identity as Tajiks. That had nothing to do with the message that was contained in your quoted post. Thus, your post quoted here is the result of your own inference which I can only see how irrelevant it is to what I was implying. I only use "Tajiks/Persians" to include "Persians of Iran" (I assume you are from Iran) in my messages. And I do so because I believe the Iranian Persians might not easily identify with the word "Tajik" as the name of their identity. It is simply of out of good will. From now on, however, I will only use the term Tajiks to mean Tajiks of all countries including Iranian Persians. I will strictly confine my texts to keeping up with the spirit and purpose of the forum and continue to address my Tajik brothers and sisters as Tajiks, without the addition of the term Persians. With all due respect, please refrain from using words such as "allegation", "accusation",etc. Before you put those divisive terms in your post next, please ask for clarification first.

Let me emphasize that Tajiks in Afghanistan do need mobilization. They do need to develope a sense of oneness and solidarity with one another. They need to unite there first before they can "effectively" be equal zealots with their brothers and sisters outside Afghanistan. (And of course they can continue to collaborate with their Tajiks worldwide.) I speak based on my own experiences with Tajiks in Afghanistan. They are not politically active enough. Thus, they are exploited at every turn of political change because they are not unified. They are divided along reglious lines. That needs to be addressed. And hence the need for a strong sense of solidarity among them. Their solidarity and political participation alone will ensure their prosperity and progress, let alone their survival.

Darius, I do believe that you have good intentions. It's your prose that made me conclude that you draw hasty inferece without noticing the context of a poster's content.

Mofaq bashid.

Parsistani

Posted 14 March 2008 - 09:07 PM

actually, the cause why most Persians are Muslims were the Shaffarids and not Abu Muslim or Tahirids. The Shaffirids islamized mio. of Tajiks, specially those in Kabul and Kandahar who were believing in Buddhism

Neo Bactra

Posted 15 March 2008 - 07:15 AM

Shaffirids? Elaborate please.

Sohrab

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:36 AM

[quote=Parsistani;7439]actually, the cause why most Persians are Muslims were the Shaffarids and not Abu Muslim or Tahirids. The Shaffirids islamized mio. of Tajiks, specially those in Kabul and Kandahar who were believing in Buddhism[/quote]

Safaris? i dont think so, Yaquob was a great tajik hero who revived the tajik/persian pride as it used to be in the past, he even droped arabic as a court language and brought farsi back.

Parsistani

Posted 15 March 2008 - 01:42 PM

[quote=Rika Khana;7477]Safaris? i dont think so, Yaquob was a great tajik hero who revived the tajik/persian pride as it used to be in the past, he even droped arabic as a court language and brought farsi back.[/quote]

Of course he was an anti-arabi (as ''shia-muslim'') but he also islamized mio. Tajiks of Khurasan who were buddhists and zoroastrians, specially in the own country Sistan and modern Helmand. He also was the cause of the islamization of Sindh and the islamic Dynasty of so-called Sayyids of Ind (Arabs) who served him as governeurs over modern Pakistan and Punjab. Farsi was never dead nor our culture. Even during Abu Muslim it was used by himself and even by his arabic army (he forced them to speak Farsi). The Tahirids, another great Tajiks who gave persian culture and language again it´s pride and using instead of arabic as ''court language''. Those older dynasties were the cause of persian renessance. There are a lot lies about the earlier islamic past which are created by so-called new ''zoroastrians'' and those who are from birth against Muslims. Arabic was, like latin in europe, only the language of science and cleric education while Farsi was still used by Persians and those who were nationalistic enough they wrote cassides, shahnama, poems, histories...or do you think Firdowsi and Abbas Merv were creating a new language that is called today as Farsi? Arabs did a lot of bad thinks including killing, looting, buring..the same what their today awghanic sons do but killing a language was and is not able...

Kambiz

Posted 15 March 2008 - 10:35 PM

Neo Bactra-ye gerami,

It seems you are the one who's drawing hasty conclusions and even deciding for yourself on my whereabouts. No, I'm from Tajikistan mate. And it is in my habbit to call all Tajiks and Persian-speakers simply "Persian" or Tajik (Persian). "

And ostensibly you have misunderstood me again brother. Next time before quoting me or replying back to my message please try to read and digest it thoroughly. The message was not addressed to you only. I just spoke out and you put forward your view that did not reflect what I meant and I got back again to elaborate it further.

I've been witnessing here divisions like this and that are patriots implying that others should be known as non-patriots. It's a regressive and sectarian approach I believe, definition of the word "partiotism" is quite diverse. I'm well aware of our mobilization problems throughout my country (Iran, "Tajikistan", "Afghanistan", "Uzbekistan"...) and we can overcome them by putting aside this kind of divisions between ourselves with constructive discourses without blaming each other for meagre things.

[quote=Neo Bactra;7434]Respectable Darius,
In fact, I had quoted you in my previous post due to your fine message. I also added a short note of my own observation of Tajiks' attitude and behavior with respect to their collective identity as Tajiks. That had nothing to do with the message that was contained in your quoted post. Thus, your post quoted here is the result of your own inference which I can only see how irrelevant it is to what I was implying. I only use "Tajiks/Persians" to include "Persians of Iran" (I assume you are from Iran) in my messages. And I do so because I believe the Iranian Persians might not easily identify with the word "Tajik" as the name of their identity. It is simply of out of good will. From now on, however, I will only use the term Tajiks to mean Tajiks of all countries including Iranian Persians. I will strictly confine my texts to keeping up with the spirit and purpose of the forum and continue to address my Tajik brothers and sisters as Tajiks, without the addition of the term Persians. With all due respect, please refrain from using words such as "allegation", "accusation",etc. Before you put those divisive terms in your post next, please ask for clarification first.

Let me emphasize that Tajiks in Afghanistan do need mobilization. They do need to develope a sense of oneness and solidarity with one another. They need to unite there first before they can "effectively" be equal zealots with their brothers and sisters outside Afghanistan. (And of course they can continue to collaborate with their Tajiks worldwide.) I speak based on my own experiences with Tajiks in Afghanistan. They are not politically active enough. Thus, they are exploited at every turn of political change because they are not unified. They are divided along reglious lines. That needs to be addressed. And hence the need for a strong sense of solidarity among them. Their solidarity and political participation alone will ensure their prosperity and progress, let alone their survival.

Darius, I do believe that you have good intentions. It's your prose that made me conclude that you draw hasty inferece without noticing the context of a poster's content.

Mofaq bashid.[/quote]

arshak

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:02 PM

[quote=Parsistani;7480]Of course he was an anti-arabi (as ''shia-muslim'') but he also islamized mio. Tajiks of Khurasan who were buddhists and zoroastrians, specially in the own country Sistan and modern Helmand. He also was the cause of the islamization of Sindh and the islamic Dynasty of so-called Sayyids of Ind (Arabs) who served him as governeurs over modern Pakistan and Punjab. Farsi was never dead nor our culture. Even during Abu Muslim it was used by himself and even by his arabic army (he forced them to speak Farsi). The Tahirids, another great Tajiks who gave persian culture and language again it´s pride and using instead of arabic as ''court language''. Those older dynasties were the cause of persian renessance. There are a lot lies about the earlier islamic past which are created by so-called new ''zoroastrians'' and those who are from birth against Muslims. Arabic was, like latin in europe, only the language of science and cleric education while Farsi was still used by Persians and those who were nationalistic enough they wrote cassides, shahnama, poems, histories...or do you think Firdowsi and Abbas Merv were creating a new language that is called today as Farsi? Arabs did a lot of bad thinks including killing, looting, buring..the same what their today awghanic sons do but killing a language was and is not able...[/quote]

Abu Moslem and Tahirid rulers spoke only Arabic. As for Tahirids they were ashamed to speak Persian!
Rik Khana is correct, Yaqub Lais was the first persian to bring back usage of Persian language. Yaqub unlike others like Abu Moslem, Taher Ibn Hossein, Abdollah Ibn Taher, etc.. who knew persian but would not speak it and only spoke arabic, Yaqub purposefully never learnt Arabic, this is written by many historians that Yaqub did not know a word of Arabic :-) So most probably when he wanted to communicate with those Arab army he was fighting against used translators. Tahirid rulers and Abu Moslem were fundamentalist Sunni Muslims and they not only forced persian population into accepting Islam by force but also seized properties or even killed anyone who refused to accept Islam. Most of Khorasan was islamised under Abu Moslem & later Tahirids.

Yes, many historians wrote that Yaqub was a shiite but there's no written evidence that suggests he spread shiite islam in the region. In midevial times
Alawids(who were descendants of Imam Hasan Mojtaba(PBUH)) introduced Shiite Islam into Mazandaran, Gorgan, Gilan and parts of Khorasan. Actually at the time Khavarej Muslims(proto-Ibadis) were most active in Sistan. For those people who have not heard about Ibadi Islam is the islam practiced by Omani people which reached its peak under Imamate of Muscat in the 17th and 18th century.

As for Zoroastrians & Jews: Ghaznevid Turks and later Seljuq also started killing zoroastrians and Jews by forcefully converting them into Islam. That's when many Zoroastrians those had survived the massacres migrated into India from Sangan(in Iranian khorasan) and found their own city in india calling it Sanjana :-) Later on Safavid rulers also started killing zoroastrians, that's why now i believe there are not many zoroastrians left in Khorasan.

Shiite Islam was further spread under Buyid Dynasty and their relatives Kakuyid Dynasty, then later on in 14th century under the Sarbedarid but shiite islam always remained as minority in Khorasan. With Safavid Empire established in Iran, shiite islam became official religion of the state, so Khorasan(this is Iranian part of Khorasan, rest of khorasan remained Sunni majority) finally became shiite majority.

Neo Bactra

Posted 16 March 2008 - 03:06 AM

[quote=Darius;7507]Neo Bactra-ye gerami,

It seems you are the one who's drawing hasty conclusions and even deciding for yourself on my whereabouts. No, I'm from Tajikistan mate. And it is in my habbit to call all Tajiks and Persian-speakers simply "Persian" or Tajik (Persian). "

And ostensibly you have misunderstood me again brother. Next time before quoting me or replying back to my message please try to read and digest it thoroughly. The message was not addressed to you only. I just spoke out and you put forward your view that did not reflect what I meant and I got back again to elaborate it further.

I've been witnessing here divisions like this and that are patriots implying that others should be known as non-patriots. It's a regressive and sectarian approach I believe, definition of the word "partiotism" is quite diverse. I'm well aware of our mobilization problems throughout my country (Iran, "Tajikistan", "Afghanistan", "Uzbekistan"...) and we can overcome them by putting aside this kind of divisions between ourselves with constructive discourses without blaming each other for meagre things.[/quote]

Darius Aziz,

Salam/Dorood,

I honestly read your post twice in an attempt to "digest" it. It is ironical to see that we ask for the same thing. I asked you to ask for "clarification" and you ask me for "digestion". It Look as if we were on the same page. I just dont wish to personalize the thread any more. Going forward, if there is anything that requires further clarification, I will simply send you a private message and request you to do the same if that is ok with you. Of course, except for times that we deem that the subject matter is of a public nature and is essential for the Tajik common good. I am delighted to know that my Tajik brother hails from Tajikistan. However, I may sincerely request you to bear in mind that Tajiks of Afghistan have been subjected to unimaginable cruelty and hardships by the descendents of the Abdalis. Though we have common anscestors and culture, our degree of experiences differs. That difference psychologically affects our beharior and attitude. Hence, politically speaking, we have Tajik hawks and Tajik ducks (I hope this hawk and duck catagorization should not be interpreted as a "divisive" statement ;) ). It's a very common phenomenon in every nation.

My Tajik brother, I wish you and the rest of our Tajiks success, unity and prosperity.

Wsalam/Pedrood

Faridun

Posted 16 March 2008 - 03:15 AM

[quote=rooyintan;7513] With Safavid Empire established in Iran, shiite islam became official religion of the state, so Khorasan(this is Iranian part of Khorasan, rest of khorasan remained Sunni majority) finally became shiite majority.[/quote]

You'd better say that turkish Safavid spread shiite islam by killing, torturing, and exploiting poor persian people. In 16 century turkish Qizilbash warriors kiilled most of the tajiks in Qarshi near Samarqand just because of their believes. Sunni Uzbek Shaibanid also killed a lot of persians in Khorasan.
These turks always brought seriouse problems to tajiks/persians in history abusing both sunni or shiite islam.

Kambiz

Posted 16 March 2008 - 03:40 AM

Neo Bactra,

Good advice, but hope you will practice it yourself first. Your last message had nothing to do with the public yet you'd chosen to publicize it.

There is no need to be delighted of my Tajikistani origin since all Persians are equally our brothers and sisters. There is yet less need to say "Darius is great and someone else is greater" in a different thread. Your evaluations hardly can change the picture. I don't see anything productive coming out of your derogatory tone brother.

If you are up for a change in our lives please try to change people's prejudice about us. Are you just trying to punch and run or would it be better to make them tell black from white? Some of them are really in need to be educated and directed, not told off. Being from Afghanistan doesn't justify your approach either. Tajikistani Persians have had the same share of misery if not more under Slavic and Turkic rulers and have lost many things to be counted. And I'm not sure if we are here to count them indeed. I thought we were trying to find a way to unity to fight for our sole cause. I haven't come here to face 'hawks and ducks' as you offensively put it. Since you might know that the term is 'hawks and doves'. I'd rather call ill-tempered, out of control minds 'ducks' as their ideas do not reach the height they might deserve and finally they turn into 'lame ducks'.

Now cease your fire and get back to constructive discos bro.

Pedrud

[quote=Neo Bactra;7523]Darius Aziz,

Salam/Dorood,

I honestly read your post twice in an attempt to "digest" it. It is ironical to see that we ask for the same thing. I asked you to ask for "clarification" and you ask me for "digestion". It Look as if we were on the same page. I just dont wish to personalize the thread any more. Going forward, if there is anything that requires further clarification, I will simply send you a private message and request you to do the same if that is ok with you. Of course, except for times that we deem that the subject matter is of a public nature and is essential for the Tajik common good. I am delighted to know that my Tajik brother hails from Tajikistan. However, I may sincerely request you to bear in mind that Tajiks of Afghistan have been subjected to unimaginable cruelty and hardships by the descendents of the Abdalis. Though we have common anscestors and culture, our degree of experiences differs. That difference psychologically affects our beharior and attitude. Hence, politically speaking, we have Tajik hawks and Tajik ducks (I hope this hawk and duck catagorization should not be interpreted as a "divisive" statement ;) ). It's a very common phenomenon in every nation.

My Tajik brother, I wish you and the rest of our Tajiks success, unity and prosperity.

Wsalam/Pedrood[/quote]

Kambiz

Posted 16 March 2008 - 03:43 AM

That is the very reason why we ought to forget this silly Sunni/Shia and whatever divisions.

[quote=Hassani Sabboh;7524]You'd better say that turkish Safavid spread shiite islam by killing, torturing, and exploiting poor persian people. In 16 century turkish Qizilbash warriors kiilled most of the tajiks in Qarshi near Samarqand just because of their believes. Sunni Uzbek Shaibanid also killed a lot of persians in Khorasan.
These turks always brought seriouse problems to tajiks/persians in history abusing both sunni or shiite islam.[/quote]

Neo Bactra

Posted 16 March 2008 - 04:07 AM

[quote=Darius;7527]Neo Bactra,

Good advice, but hope you will practice it yourself first. Your last message had nothing to do with the public yet you'd chosen to publicize it.

There is no need to be delighted of my Tajikistani origin since all Persians are equally our brothers and sisters. There is yet less need to say "Darius is great and someone else is greater" in a different thread. Your evaluations hardly can change the picture. I don't see anything productive coming out of your derogatory tone brother.

If you are up for a change in our lives please try to change people's prejudice about us. Are you just trying to punch and run or would it be better to make them tell black from white? Some of them are really in need to be educated and directed, not told off. Being from Afghanistan doesn't justify your approach either. Tajikistani Persians have had the same share of misery if not more under Slavic and Turkic rulers and have lost many things to be counted. And I'm not sure if we are here to count them indeed. I thought we were trying to find a way to unity to fight for our sole cause. I haven't come here to face 'hawks and ducks' as you offensively put it. Since you might know that the term is 'hawks and doves'. I'd rather call ill-tempered, out of control minds 'ducks' as their ideas do not reach the height they might deserve and finally they turn into 'lame ducks'.

Now cease your fire and get back to constructive discos bro.

Pedrud[/quote]

:) I find it funny. Let our Tajik brothers judge.

Kambiz

Posted 16 March 2008 - 04:49 AM

What part of it particularly made you laugh, bro? The tale on 'lame ducks' or the tail of the ducks? hehe

[quote=Neo Bactra;7531] :) I find it funny. Let our Tajik brothers judge.[/quote]

Neo Bactra

Posted 16 March 2008 - 05:01 AM

[quote=Darius;7534]What part of it particularly made you laugh, bro? The tale on 'lame ducks' or the tail of the ducks? hehe[/quote]

Check your "privates" :) Hopefully you wont find a tail there. lol
I have sent you a message there.

Kambiz

Posted 16 March 2008 - 05:06 AM

[quote=Neo Bactra;7536]Check your "privates" :) Hopefully you wont find a tail there. lol
I have sent you a message there.[/quote]

Sadly, I did find a feather in my box and sent it back to you dude.

Parsistani

Posted 16 March 2008 - 12:02 PM

[quote=Hassani Sabboh;7524]You'd better say that turkish Safavid spread shiite islam by killing, torturing, and exploiting poor persian people. In 16 century turkish Qizilbash warriors kiilled most of the tajiks in Qarshi near Samarqand just because of their believes. Sunni Uzbek Shaibanid also killed a lot of persians in Khorasan.
These turks always brought seriouse problems to tajiks/persians in history abusing both sunni or shiite islam.[/quote]

Safavids weren´t Turks, but of kurdish-persian origine.

arshak

Posted 17 March 2008 - 11:56 AM

[quote=Parsistani;7554]Safavids weren´t Turks, but of kurdish-persian origine.[/quote]

that's from father's side :-) But Shah Ismail's mother was of Turkish(Aq Qoyounlou Turkmen) and Greek(Trebizond/Byzantine) origins. So yes Shah Ismail and his descendants spoke Azerbaijani.

Kambiz

Posted 17 March 2008 - 02:58 PM

[quote=rooyintan;7637]that's from father's side :-) But Shah Ismail's mother was of Turkish(Aq Qoyounlou Turkmen) and Greek(Trebizond/Byzantine) origins. So yes Shah Ismail and his descendants spoke Azerbaijani.[/quote]

Yes, Rooyintan-e gerami. It is well-documented by historians.

Parsistani

Posted 20 March 2008 - 06:34 PM

[quote=Darius;7645]Yes, Rooyintan-e gerami. It is well-documented by historians.[/quote]

actually it is documented as persian aka iranian dynasty. Also their language was Tati, Aserbaidschani dialect of Persian...middle age Persian. They only had beside Persians, Turkish... also many turkish, in fact Turkmen soldier. In no book it is documented they were of ''turkish'' origine. Only Turks claim that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid


read what User Tajik wrote on the discuss page. He use very good preferences. Abbas mother was not a Turk but the princes of Greec (or his grandmother?). Just read.

arshak

Posted 20 March 2008 - 11:49 PM

[quote=Parsistani;7753]actually it is documented as persian aka iranian dynasty. Also their language was Tati, Aserbaidschani dialect of Persian...middle age Persian. They only had beside Persians, Turkish... also many turkish, in fact Turkmen soldier. In no book it is documented they were of ''turkish'' origine. Only Turks claim that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid


read what User Tajik wrote on the discuss page. He use very good preferences. Abbas mother was not a Turk but the princes of Greec (or his grandmother?). Just read.[/quote]

Please view Safavid's family tree:
http://www.4dw.net/r...sia/safawi2.htm

As I said, from father's side, Shah Ismail I was son of Sheikh Haydar descendant of Sheikh Safi (a descendant of Firuz Shah) and from Mother's side(Halima Begi Agha) was daughter of Turkmen Uzun Hasan Shahanshah of Persia and Greek Princess Theodora Comnena(of Trebizond in Turkey).

Iranian historians write in history books that Safavid court language was Azerbaijani Turkish but official language of Persia was Persian.

Kambiz

Posted 22 March 2008 - 02:40 AM

[quote=Parsistani;7753]actually it is documented as persian aka iranian dynasty. Also their language was Tati, Aserbaidschani dialect of Persian...middle age Persian. They only had beside Persians, Turkish... also many turkish, in fact Turkmen soldier. In no book it is documented they were of ''turkish'' origine. Only Turks claim that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid


read what User Tajik wrote on the discuss page. He use very good preferences. Abbas mother was not a Turk but the princes of Greec (or his grandmother?). Just read.[/quote]

They were not Turkish, but of Azeri/Kurdish descent and it's written in all proper history books.

Neo Bactra

Posted 24 March 2008 - 09:02 AM

Salam/Dorood All,

Mirza Abdul Qadir Bedil is another Tajik from Badakhshan, Afghanistan. He has been given the penname of Dehlavi. It is believed that since he lived and died in Delhi, he is known as Bedil Dehlavi. I invoke Tajiks to avoid using the term Dehlavi beside his name. His poetry is full of longing for his origin. To be honest, as some Bedil scholars contend, Bedil's literary genius far surpasses that of even Rumi's. The man is the greatest Farsi linguist. He has employed words and phrases that are frequently used in that part of Afghanistan, words and phrases that were uncommon and vague in Farsi spoken in Delhi and even in Persia at the time. Perhaps this is The main obstacle to a deserving recognition that has long been due to him.

There will be more literature on this Tajik Farsi linquistic genius in the coming days.

Wsalam/Pedrood

Parsistani

Posted 24 March 2008 - 09:19 AM

He was born in Khwaja, Kabul. His parents, originally from B., moved to Kabul and later to India, Delhi.

Neo Bactra

Posted 24 March 2008 - 09:22 AM

[quote=Parsistani;7896]He was born in Khwaja, Kabul. His parents, originally from B., moved to Kabul and later to India, Delhi.[/quote]

Interesting stuff. Post more information on him if available please. Thank you.

Neo Bactra

Posted 24 March 2008 - 09:29 AM

Let's Read On Shaheed Massoud, another Tajik leader murdered by nomads' conspiracy:

Taken from: http://www.khawaran.com/

An Eyewitness Report on the Assassination

of Commander Massoud

Nasrine Gross

I have just returned from a five-week stay in Afghanistan. I was in Khoja Bahauddin when Commander Massoud was assassinated on September 9, the signal for terrorist operations in the US two days later. In fact, I lived two doors down from the two terrorists, in the guesthouse-cum-office next to the newly inaugurated guesthouse where Commander Massoud was staying. That Sunday, around 12:00 noon, as my American friend and I were getting ready to go to the village square to buy Afghan clothes, from the common patio that ran the length of the guesthouse rooms I watched the two terrorists go for the 'interview', their camera(s) in a brown-mustard color briefcase carried by Abdul, the waiter. They were accompanied by Fahim Dashti, the Afghan photographer, and Assim Suhail, the official of the ministry of Foreign Affairs in charge of both buildings. Of course, within 30 minutes, Commander Massoud was dead. So was Assim Suhail. Dashti and Massoud Khalili, the Afghan Ambassador to India were badly burned and injured. One of the terrorists was dead, split from the waist by the explosion in his belt, top part of his body partly burnt and stuck to the wall of the reception hall. The other terrorist whose first camera had shot Commander Massoud had taken his second camera and non-chalantly had walked out of the building and the courtyard, the shocked guards thinking he was still filming and was not part of the problem. He had reached the street before he was caught and locked in his room, guards staying outside the door. He had climbed the little window and jumped into the cemetery adjacent to the guesthouse. From there he had ran down the plateau towards the Panj River, a fifth of a mile away. That is when officials realized he had gotten away. Two guards with kalashnikovs and several other officials, some of them barefoot (Afghans take off their shoes when they are inside) ran after him. The pursuers wanted to catch him alive but he was more than six feet tall and very strong and was able to snatch one of the kalashnikovs. That is when the second kalashnikov fired on him, the fifth bullet dropping him in the river. By the time they took him out of the water, he was dead.

When we returned around 1:30 p.m., all was silent. The square and all the shops, the women in the fields, the village water carriers, the girls picking up dung for fuel, the men going to the public bath, the workers erecting the new hospital, the mullahs' call to prayer, all had fallen silent. I think even the babies had stopped crying. The silence was palpable, like the sun pounding on the Sahara at noon. As if life had deserted the village. Like a face turning blank, the entire scenery, the homes on the dry dusty plateau, the river banks full of rice paddies and corn fields, the fruit orchards further out, the refugee camps nearby, the mountains in the distance, even the sun and the sky, all felt desolate and abandoned.

When you are in a state of war for as long as these people have lived you develop a sixth sense. Nobody told these people what had happened; they had heard an explosion and seen a plume of smoke coming from the two-building compound at the edge of the village. Their ears differentiate the types of explosions and smokes. They had known instantaneously what had occurred. My American friend and I could not tell. In the compound, only Nasser was softly crying and told me that Assim was killed but that Commander Massoud was not hurt (He would not change his story for the next six days).

We waited all afternoon in the hot dusty sun. I asked to go in and take pictures to bring back to the world about the atrocities outsiders are committing in Afghanistan but was told that security was still busy searching and I would get my chance later. By late afternoon, one of the vans came bringing Assim's coffin, scheduled to be flown to Panjsher the next morning. There are no morgues and so the challenge was how to keep the dead cool until morning. The solution after much discussion was to keep the coffin in the courtyard, in front of his office and our rooms. They had to scrounge around to find something to serve as a table for the coffin and a cloth large enough to serve as a covering over it to keep away the ever-present dust, flies, bees and mosquitoes (too poor to have desks and chairs Afghans now mostly work, eat, sleep and visit on the floor). And for coolness, they scrambled to find enough oil for the generator (their allotment is for two hours of electricity per night) and hooked their only electric fan to it, after creating a makeshift extension cord and making another contraption for a table high enough for the fan to blow over the coffin for the duration of the night - - until around early morning, when the heat lets up a bit for a short spell.

My heart was bleeding for a myriad of reasons: For the forgotten Afghanistan, for the lack of basic necessities, for the curse that even death does not bring comfort, for Assim's terrifically-promising future cut short, for such a tragic death; and for a life where everyone has to pitch in to find a table, a covering, food for all present, room for all to sleep in, security for all to be safe, guards to prevent another disaster, alert that the Taliban don't attack; for insuring that there is enough water, brought from the river in big pitchers on the back of donkeys, to keep the canisters in the washroom full (there are no bathrooms with running water), enough broken mud-brick pieces that serve as toilet paper in the latrine; for no telephones, radios, cars... There was no time to mourn, digest, even pray, everyone was busy doing the work that was needed to be done in the compound. What a life that you cannot spare a moment to shed a tear over your dead! These officials, very few in number, were doing all the work cheerfully; that was their duty not to show that Commander Massoud was also dead. Even after they returned with Assim's coffin and I could see that their shirts were bloodstained, they told me it was from washing Assim's body... On this day in Virgo, the month of Commander Massoud's birth, how their hearts must have felt, those who knew the truth!

People were coming into the compound in ones and twos, Assim's brothers, other fighter friends, village elders, their faces now indistinguishable as the sun was going down. Zubair who had finished the arrangements for his boss's coffin, came to me and asked me to convey to the two non-Afghan guests that we would be spending the night elsewhere. His gracious explanation was that Assim's friends were planning to hold an all-night vigil of reciting the Koran and he did not want our sleep to be disrupted. I knew that it was really an even more gracious concern that was pushing them to send us away: They did not know if they were going to be attacked that night and wanted to spare the lives of the three westerners (Barbara Bick, my Jewish American friend, Roland, a Frenchman and me, an Afghan American)! We took our night stuff and were driven in a jeep to a far away dark serai of totally dark rooms. I could not tell where in relation to the village we were but we were shown to two rooms, Roland by himself and Barbara and I in a corner room that boasted a washroom inside. A gas lantern, water pitcher and basin, hot green tea, skewered kabob with bread, grapes and cut up water melon were quickly brought in by the help, an Uzbek boy of 13. Two hours later Zubair and Daud showed up to apologize for the inconvenience. I could not hold my tears at the warmth of this hospitality during such a time - - as if they had no other worry. They assured us that a guard would be outside our door all night long and that we would go back to the compound for breakfast.

That was the longest night of my life. When you see the living face of terror, you become weary of all faces, all movement, not knowing who else might also be evil, where else another attack might come and when. In the dark I kept listening for another terrorist lurking outside while trying not to move so as not to wake up Barbara. And when you are anticipating the worst, even little things become sources of further fear and anxiety. I was smoking and trying to keep my hair, face, body and feet totally covered with the sheet that was my cover -- an impossible and really hazardous task. You see, earlier, I had noticed the ceiling made of crude reefs held by cruder tree trunks across, and was sure that scorpions and all sorts of crawlies would fall from the cracks of such a rustic and primitive construct. What gave me sustenance was the dim glow of the gas light, now outside with the guard, coming through a tiny opening of a window high in the wall and covered with dried thistle instead of glass. The sound of roosters, donkeys and cows singing, an otherwise annoying regular nightly serenade, also comforted me that I was in the middle of the village surrounded by a human population of my own Afghans.

Still, I could not shake from my mind the image of the two terrorists, one, tall, with light-colored slightly plump face and curly dark hair of North Africa, wearing khaki jeans and plaid blue and green shirt checkered with some red, maybe 28 to 30 years old; the other, a shorter man of about 35-38 years old, with darker chiseled face, long high nose, almond eyes and extremely straight hair of a couple of shades lighter than dark with wide shoulders and muscles like a body-builder's, wearing very expensive and slick pants of medium dark green and over it, a tailored shirt of dark ecru with long sleeves with cuffs and open collar, throwing self-conscious glances over his shoulder like a country bumpkin in his Sunday best (actually worried about that belt of his), not looking at all like a North African but rather more like a Yemeni or a Libyan or a Berber... Even the Arabic I heard them speak was different to my ears from Moroccan dialect but I could be wrong as my friend Shoukria Haidar, a teacher of Moroccan and Algerian students in France for twelve years, who spoke with them for forty minutes in French on our first day of arrival thought they were Moroccan but found it odd that Moroccans who are so preoccupied with their own country would come this far in search of just an interview. In the helicopter that had brought her, our friend Francoise and them from Panjsher her eye was caught by the fact that in this hot hot land the shorter man was wearing very thick corduroy pants. I realized that the tall one must have become worried that someone spoke Arabic and had heard their conversations when that morning I saw him come out of the washroom and asked him in Arabic if there was enough water left. He was very taken aback and answered with one tiny word of two-letters (fi, meaning there is) and bolted into his room, leaving me thinking what a non-Arab behavior and what a shy journalist!

On the following Thursday, Barbara was flown to Dushanbe to catch her flight to the US and me, still not knowing Commander Massoud had been assassinated, to Panjsher to join the rest of our delegation. In Panjsher, Sara Felix, another member of our American fact-finding team, on seeing me held me in her arms for five full minutes. She was shaken by the news of the terrorists and by the Taliban bombing the day before that had fallen on top of the mountain beside her, now our, guesthouse. The next day, with the help of our hosts from the ministry of Foreign Affairs we were able to send back Sara, Mary MacMakin and the other three guests to Dushanbe (where they arrived six days later just in time to catch their plane to Europe, only Mary who went to Faizabad by road through the Anjoman Pass returned from half-way, to finally go by helicopter. Her story of going from Faizabad to Pakistan, one of the most interesting journeys I have heard can be read at www.Parsa.com).

On Saturday Commander Massoud's assassination was announced and the funeral set for Sunday. As is the Afghan custom, Dr Nilab Mobarez, an Afghan woman living in France and now visiting Panjsher to inspect her clinic, and I went to his house to extend our condolences to his wife. On our return I asked that we, the women at the guesthouse be allowed to attend the funeral, normally a men-only ceremony. My reasoning was that Commander Massoud was the first Afghan leader to have signed the Declaration of the Essential Rights of Afghan Women, a document my association, NEGAR-Support of Women of Afghanistan helped three hundred Afghan women draft and sign in June of 2000 and a document which we are trying to make part of the peace process in the United Nations so it gets to the next constitution of Afghanistan. I said I wanted to personally pay my respect to this fallen friend of Afghan women. They accepted and so we were four women who attended the funeral, two journalists, Nilab and myself.

Early Sunday morning, we were driven to the village of Jangalak, Commander Massoud's ancestral village. We walked down to the plain adjacent to the Panjsher River across from Commander Massoud's house perched on the side of the mountain. On our way we drove by school girls on balconies, with their uniform on, with pictures of Commander Massoud or flags or flowers waving and with tears flowing down their cheeks; we heard and saw women on rooftops, their colorful dresses aflutter in the small breeze, and wailing; and groups of grief-stricken men walking towards the plain from every direction, some in military garb, most dressed in everyday clothes, many wearing the patou (shawl) over their piran-tunban (shirt and long pants of the same light material, always worn by Afghan villagers but now, in their poverty and villagized state, worn by urban populations as well), many wearing the pakol hat that Commander Massoud made famous, others wearing the regular turban of Afghanistan or bare-headed, many carrying large banners or holding pictures. Beautiful voices from slow moving cars were reciting glorious poetry of Afghanistan; uniformed security patrols gently guiding the multitude. And all along this sole Panjsher road, there were the bulky, upturned and rusted carcasses of Soviet artillery, tanks and armored personnel carriers, silently but unmistakably reminding us of Commander Massoud's greatest victory and successful partnership with America.

The plain area was very large, along the riverbank, with several sections to it, defined by rows of trees. To the right of us were all military people. To the left it was cordoned off by plastic mesh, reserved for the dignitaries and for the helicopter that was to bring Commander Massoud's body. We were taken to this area. We watched and photographed the famous and mighty of the free Afghanistan as they came in groups: President Rabbani, Mr. Sayyaf, Haji Qadir, Mr. Hamoon, Commander Bismillah Khan, Mr. Qanooni, Commander Khoshal Qol, Mr. Sabawoon, Mr. Imad... We scrambled to get pictures of Ahmad, Commander Massoud's 12-year old son, who came a little later. He had arrived from a private viewing of his father's body. Dressed in a khaki suit and walking with serious steps, Ahmad was quickly surrounded by the media. His mannerisms, style and gait are completely like his father's. His words were the most effective. Composed and with gestures reminiscent of his dad's, he said, "my father's killing was unjust and despicable. Now the world knows that his struggle was just and his words true. His untimely death will not cut short our fight for an independent Afghanistan. We will continue with more fervor. I will not rest but work to realize his dream." His composure and his confident knowledge of the situation made me understand what this war of independence has done to every man, woman and child living this war inside Afghanistan. I felt so unprepared and awkward by comparison.

When the helicopter finally landed and the dust and wind subsided the crowd could no longer keep back its emotion. By now there were thousands of men in the plain area (the official count later was 24000) and every one to a man, moaning aloud like thunder, rushed in unison to hold the coffin. Dr. Abdullah who came with the copter, tears streaming down his cheeks too, kept begging them to hold back so the helicopter door could be opened. No way. The weeping multitude was chanting endearments mixed with verses of the Koran and was pushing. Finally, the security in charge of the plain reached the copter; pushed the crowd aside and the pilot opened the door to bring out this hero of Afghanistan and this beloved of all of them for his final journey. The coffin draped in the green, black and white flag and verses of the Koran and people throwing flowers on it was carried to the widest part of the plain, tenderly like a most cherished son, thousands of hands reaching to touch it once as if that one touch would give them a piece of him forever. In front, Mr. Qanooni was standing on a jeep and through a loudspeaker directing the emotional and totally heedless crowd to set the coffin before them and form long rows for the funeral prayer. I respectfully kept near the jeep, facing the massive crowd and taking pictures, and approached the coffin and prayed only after the men's prayer had finished. The solemnity of the prayer, broken only by the rush of the Panjsher, had a calming effect. But, again all wanted to carry the coffin to the road and place it on the armored personnel carrier that was to take it to Saricha, the designated gravesite. Again Dr. Abdullah managed to get up first and direct the pallbearers, thousands of emotional feet rushing as if a flood was drowning the plain.

Saricha is a mountaintop where Commander Massoud kept his command post. It is several hundred feet higher than the surrounding villages of Khanayz and Tulkha on the river bank. It is several kilometers from Jangalak and you had to pass the villages of Bazarak, Shekhan, Rahman Kheyl, Mullah Kheyl and Laghana - - all uphill. Its beauty lies not only on its command of the entire valley up to Sangana and down to Dashtak, with vistas of many lush green villages jutting out of the mountainsides, and the rushing Panjsher River winding past it. Saricha's immediate horizon to the south east is the magnificent peaks of the Hindu Kush with stark majesty unparalleled, a fitting place: That which makes Afghanistan eternally unconquerable is now holding in its arms one of its own, an undefeated son of Afghanistan.

I was separated from the other women but found the BBC reporter clutching at a small tree trunk and hesitant to pass the throngs. We held arms and we walked for about one village until she left me to get up the mountainside to get a larger view of the procession. I remained among my Afghan people, thousands of men of all ages who upon noticing me would tell those in front 'let our sister pass', 'take her hand to cross the ditch', 'watch for her that she doesn't slip over the rocks', 'help her go over the bridge' and many other warm acknowledgements. With their backs hunched in sorrow and many still wiping their tears, not the moment to engage them in my banalities, but I could tell by their words and their faces that I was shoulder to shoulder with Pashtuns and Hazaras and Uzbeks and Turkmens and Noorestanis and Tajiks and Baluchis and. That day, along the road to Saricha, and at Saricha, around the gravesite, the whole of Afghan mosaic was a single human quilt unified in their grief and bonded by the memory of one of their own.

On the third day of the mourning which is the "women's day' (also called the wake), Nilab and I went to Mrs. Massoud's. The house is on a mountainside. The driveway is around a high hill hiding the house from the view. Then you enter the gate and go up several sets of flagstone steps, each reaching a terrace and each lined with fruit trees, their golden delicious apples still green and hanging onto their branches to ripen. Each terrace is a garden of many colored flowers planted in large sections, reminiscent of Paghman, the summer resort of my days (37 years ago), petunias of many pink and red hues, phloxes of white and salmon, tall asters of delicate purple, large and small marigolds, riots of pansies and grand rose bushes both damask and grandiflora. Each terrace also has small fountains and waterfalls drowning the receding sound of the Panjsher. The last terrace turns into a large patio that through an orange painted wooden fence opens into the inner courtyard. Then you finally see the house, a large structure, its three stories taller than normal, and with its light blue paint and large white windows unlike the houses of Panjsher but again much like what I remember of Paghman's homes. And yet, what you actually notice is the mountain, as if the house and its gardens are pasted on it, close, colossal and in its stony barrenness, beautiful.

We arrived around 11:15 a.m. and as we walked into the inner courtyard were engulfed by sound of explosions, airplanes flying overhead and by pandemonium of hundreds of women running to the basement. Ahmad was standing in the courtyard urging them to be calm and asked us to enter the shelter as the Taliban were bombing the house and although as yet none had fallen on the house specifically, the women were panicky and he wanted them to go to the shelter and we should too. When we found out that his mother was still upstairs in the formal mourning room, we said we would join her. After a half-hour the sounds stopped. I later learned that the bombs had fallen a kilometer away, in Padrukh.

Inside, Mrs. Parigul Massoud could not show her face, her beautiful green eyes shot from crying and her cheeks swollen, she kept a large thick white scarf over her, mostly covering her face. She talked about the hardest and loneliest night of her life, when she was informed about his death but due to security no one could come to see her. She and her mom spent the whole night crying and comforting the scared and sobbing children. She talked about how good he looked in the coffin. And about his wounds, how his heart area had a two inch scar and scattered around it thousands of red pellets on his chest, but that his neck area was completely void of scars, his moon-colored skin still beautiful; the scar in his back, larger, about five inches long. His face had scratches and his hair and beard were a little scorched. She said she was wracking her brain but found not one angry word uttered by him at home in all the years they were married. He had told her she could wear whatever she wanted in whatever color she wanted and run the house however she preferred. I asked and she gave me permission to take pictures of the wake and get signatures for our Declaration from the hundreds of women that had also come to share this moment of common grief and tragedy. She told me 'start right away because people leave early to get home before dark."

All through the day, her five daughters, ages ten to three, on seeing and hearing their mother cry, would come to her every other moment and she would hug and caress them and tell them to go out and be with the guests, only she had a bottle for the youngest, and she would feed her and rock her to sleep in her lap. She told us that her husband was very fond of the youngest and whenever home would bathe her himself, kiss her tiny feet and tell her a story before putting her to sleep. She mentioned that he was interested in the children's education and was happy when she renovated the destroyed mosque of Jangalak into a village school and sent the kids there. He often asked the children what they wanted to become when they grew up. One time, Ahmad had said he wanted to be a soldier like him and he had said "don't become one because then you will be like me, away from home all the time, become a medical doctor;" another time a daughter had said she wanted to become a pilot and he had said "and you will be shot down and I will lose a daughter; become a teacher instead." How they all missed him!

During lunch I asked Mrs. Massoud what dishes her husband had liked best. She said he did not like doughy foods and was partial to 'shorba' (Afghan soup) but never complained. She said that she could not find enough variety to prepare for him to take to the fronts (sometimes as long as six months, once a whole year and most often several weeks to three months) as he liked non-fatty things that didn't spoil or get rancid. On my way back, in Khoja Bahauddin, I stayed in the same fateful guesthouse and had a conversation with one of his bodyguards that had been with him for eight years and now kept watch over the closed reception hall, who mentioned that Commander Massoud also liked fresh fruit, his proud eyes filling up with tears at the thought of his cherished Amer Saheb (dear boss, in Dari, Commander Massoud's nickname throughout the area). And I remembered Dr. Abdullah's story too, of how one day, on the spur of the moment, the two of them had gone mountain climbing and Commander Massoud had taken an apple with him. On the way up he had gone faster and Dr. Abdullah was way behind. But on trying to catch up, tired and thirsty, he had come upon half of an apple, stuck on the crack of a stone with Commander Massoud's penknife, waiting for him.

The official mourning room was the living room, L-shaped and large with a wall for TV and videocassettes, among them, Mission Impossible, Gandhi, The Sniper and Martial Arts. Upstairs, I visited some men of the family in a small office full of shelves. Right above the living room and almost as large, was Commander Massoud's library, the only room of the house that had furniture instead of the mats used for sitting. He is known to have loved to read and was fond of writing. In fact, the night before his assassination he stayed up very late reading poetry with Massoud Khalili; and he kept a diary for over 20 years, writing every night.

Two walls of the library have continuous shelves, a third, shelves and a window. The fourth wall is all windows overlooking the valley and the Panjsher. His desk, still with pens and note pads on it, in the corner of these two window walls, takes in the panorama, this Afghan symphony of mountain, river and countryside, forever enduring, pristine and unchanged. On the side of the desk, stands a large bookshelf that only has dictionaries, from very small sizes to the largest (I had never seen such large Dari dictionaries before). On the other shelves, I spotted the translated works of Ibn Khaldun, many books by Ali Shariati, many copies of the Koran and texts on Islam, shelves full of poetry books, many many books on politics and diplomatic relations, many works about history of countries, especially neighbors of Afghanistan, Kalilah darna, translations of works by Freud and Sartre, tomes on philosophy, books in Arabic. I was surprised that I did not find a lot about military or warfare or famous biographies or books written by Afghans. Also missing were pictures, tableaus and other ornaments on the walls; completely missing were his own mementos. Except for the dictionaries shelf the other shelves were not full to the brim, rather more like a work in progress. He may not have had time to open all his book cartons as I later learned that Commander Massoud had lived in the house for only twenty days before he was assassinated (his wife also lamented that for the first time in their life they had a house of their own and what she would do with it now that he was gone). He had apparently designed it himself, his first love being architecture, he had selected the paint colors and he had even installed the thin cheap carpeting so common in Panjsher himself (he had to borrow the cutting knife from a relative and upon returning it had boasted that he might have a future as a carpet installer)!

I sat at his desk to get a better feel and realized it was a desk for writing. I sat at the sofabed in front of the windows and realized that is where he must have read (that is also where Dr. Abdullah slept when he was visiting). I thought of all the books written about him, all the pictures taken of him, of his exploits, victories, trials, and mistakes, of him as a political leader, as a military genius, of him as a husband, a father, a friend, of the span of his life so important for Afghanistan and the world. And I thought how wonderful it would be to have a library built in his name. He had built his own dream house and library. It would be a marvelous affirmation of our Afghan life if there is also a national library for him, this freedom fighter of Afghanistan who built with his life the history of our times.

Sohrab

Posted 24 March 2008 - 10:10 AM

Bedil a great persian poet was originally from Arlas and Barlas tribe of the Moghuls.

Parsistani

Posted 24 March 2008 - 10:39 AM

[quote=Rika Khana;7904]Bedil a great persian poet was originally from Arlas and Barlas tribe of the Moghuls.[/quote]

From persianized Barlas of Badakhshan. A typical persianized and urbanized mongolic-persian relationship. The best examples of such relationships we have in India when mio. mongolian soldier married indian women and became farmer or shopkeeper.

Abul Ma'?ni Mirz? Abdul-Q?der Bedil or Mawl?n? Abul Ma'?ni Abdul Qader Bedil also Bidel Dehlavi (1642–1720) (Persian: ??? ??? ??? ? ??? ??? ??? ? ??? ?? ??? ?) was a famous Persian poet and Sufi born in Azimabad (present day Patna, India); his family was from Badakhshan (present day Afghanistan). According to some other sources, he was born in Khwaja Rawash, an area of Kabul province in today's Afghanistan.

He mostly wrote Ghazal and Rubayee (quatrain) in Persian. He is considered as one of the prominent poets of Indian School of Poetry in Persian literature, and owns his unique Style in it. Both Mirza Ghalib and Iqbal-e Lahori were influenced by him. His books include Telesm-e Hairat ( ??? ?

Khurasani

Posted 24 March 2008 - 11:53 AM

Good Topic, Nice informations, Best share; Result : A Sticky Topic.

Thanks and Continue..

Khurasani

Posted 28 May 2008 - 10:11 AM

Tajik personalities : http://members.tripo...alitiesMenu.htm

and Quiz :

http://members.tripo...outTajiks1.html

Do test yourself ..

Pur e Zaal

Posted 03 August 2008 - 05:35 AM

If I add to the list, at this time that I am viewing youtube, I'd like to say that my favorite Tajic is Afzal Shah. He is one singer that had we had 10, we would have been in a better place now ;) The song "samarqand o bokhara"

shabir

Posted 19 October 2009 - 10:13 AM

herati singers mozhdah & ghazal loll :$

Sultan Faghal Gabari

Posted 24 August 2010 - 08:27 AM

Korish e Buzarag (sultan Sikander Zulqarnain) Sultan Basoos (Besus Ardshir ) Sultan Shamoos Sultan Pakhal Gabari Kunar and Sultan Behram Jahangeeri Gabari Nangrahar Papin

Parsi_zaban

Posted 26 September 2010 - 04:03 AM

My modern Persian/Tajik hero is Mohammad Mossadeqh
My ancient Persian/Tajik Hero is Koroush e Kabir.

BACHE.KABULI

Posted 06 July 2011 - 01:45 AM

.