100s murdered in Karbala Iraq

[Star]

Rattle rattle rattle!! but no answers again!!tch tch!!

with your "tch tch"'ing if there's a rattlesnake in here, it's you.

i don't think my posts require your analysis - i've made my points, highlighted intances of your trickery - and will leave it to readers of this thread, to form their own conclusions.

Btw, nobody has stopped you from questioning hinduism....You dont do it, probably coz, you dont know much about it, not coz you respect it!!Okie!!

No - like you - i could do a quick net search - find some sites which attack hinduism - copy and paste them here - or i could make some crass comments about hindus based on generalisations, which i'm quite familiar with but like i said i'm not like you.

[Hasan_Ali_Imam]

Br. Desi Soul,

Peace. Thanks for your responses. My response is longer than expected, so I have classified them into different topics:

1. Unquotable Quotes and Objectivity
2. Arabs! Invaders or Liberators?
3. Dari – the open secret language
4. Britannica and selectiveness
5. Why celebrate a Zoroastrian New Year?
6. Ali (R) and Aisha (R)
7. Uncertainties that need Verification
8. Request for information and sources


1. Unquotable Quotes and Objectivity

There were a couple of statements which you referred to that I had allegedly made or implied. These are as follows:

a) “And Asad seif becomes a nationalist who twist history!!!”
b) “As long as the man was paising islam, he was good and fair and honest!!”

I had not made such claims nor implied it. When examining a claim one needs to look at both sides of an argument and then draw ones conclusion. In my original post I did say that the IranChamber website was not anti-Islam and this only supported your assertion to the same effect. There are articles that appear to be supporting Islam, and others that appear not to. One such articles that was slightly positive toward Islam is entitled, ‘Fatima is Fatima’ by Massoume Price. I also noticed the same title written by Ali Shariati, a well known Muslim philosopher. I drew your attention to this because your original quotes from the website only dealt with Asad Seif’s article and you quoted a part of it that supported your argument but didn’t quote others that went against your argument. I simply flipped the coin to present the other side....from the very website you referred us to. In any case I also dealt with your specific quotes from Asad Seif’s assertions about Arab Barbarian invaders and oppression on Persians. I then flipped the coin again and presented T.W. Arnold which presented an alternative rendition of history.

I agree that we do not need Asad’s or Arnold’s help. But we must ask who first brought in Asad Seif into the discussion and why? You said you hadn’t read Arnold’s book. Would you like to?


2. Arabs! Invaders or Liberators?

You drew an example of the recent US invasion of Iraq in analogy to Arab invasion of Persia. Because the US is seen as an invader and not a liberator (depends who you ask) therefore you conclude that the Arab armies were also invaders and oppressors. The analogy is wrong on 2 accounts:

a) A poll of the Iraqis were done last week and 70% of them said that life now was better than under Saddam Hussein, whatever side one takes regarding the pros and cons of invasion.

b) The other reason why your analogy is wrong is that you selected the analogy that appeared to support your argument (‘appeared’ to because in reality it doesn’t as mentioned in a) above). I flip the coin again and draw an example of the Allied Troops wiping out Nazis. The indiginous populations there did cheer the Allied troops as liberators. So this renders your example null and void.

US invasion in Iraq or Allied liberation of Europe are irrelevant. Were the Arabs invaders or liberators? In my previous response I did quote Arnolds book which showed the circumstances surrounding the Persians pre and post invasion. The Zoroastrians were allowed to practice their faiths. You asked why the Arabs burnt Fire Temples. I did state that there was freedom of religion, and when there was a case of a fire temple being burnt down to build a mosque in its place, the Muslim general was punished. We don’t see fire temples today because the vast majority of people became Muslims. Churches and Synagogues still exist in Iran. Likewise there are 10 million Coptic Christians living in Egypt, the Serbian Orthodox Church exists in Bosnia....these are examples of tolerance of other religions by Muslims because it is a part of Islamic faith to protect other faiths.

Now your burning rhetorical question, why did the Zoroastrians leave Iran and go to India? This question leads one to think that it was because of oppression that they left Iran. But this question can be answered by asking a counter-question, ‘Why did the Zoroastrians stay in India during Muslim rule?’. But asking rhetocial questions doesn’t answer anything. Objective evidence is required to support the argument that Zoroastrians were oppressed under Muslim rule. I will come to this later as part of my series of questions to you.


3. Dari – the open secret language

You said that the secret Dari language was spoken between Zoroastrians shielded from Arabs. This also implies that they spoke the secret language to preserve the Zoroastrian identity. If there are some people who speak it today, and you know about it, it’s not much of a secret is it? What you are implying is that Dari and Zoroastrianism are intertwined. Does that mean that if a Zoroastrian does not know Dari, therefore he is not Zoroastrian? It doesn’t. Likewsise if someone learns Dari, it doesn’t automatically make him a Zoroastrian. Hence language has nothing to do with religion or identity of a person, language is the medium to express thoughts and feelings. What I also found out is that dari is the Afghan dialect of Farsi and is written in a modified Arabic alphabet and contains many Arabic and Persian loanwords. About 5 million – 7 million people in Afghanistan speak Dari. The reference for this bit of information is:

http://www.sabawoon.com/afghanpedia/Language.Dari.shtm

They quoted from Britannica (remember you used this source to support your arguments before!) as well and it contains the same info about Dari. Furthermore I have also found out that the Dari language was used in the Sassanian court in Ctesiphon and was a continuation of Middle Persian. Later, Dari Persian language became the official language of the Safavid Dynasty. This info is from the website:

http://www.iranianlanguages.com/newi...newpersian.htm

So we can conclude that Dari was no longer secret, it didn’t hide from the Arabic language as there are some words loaned from Arabic, and present day Dari is written in modified Arabic. Furthermore, this has nothing to do with Zoroastrianism nor a reaction against Arabs.

But as you suggested we forget Dari, then it is forgotten and lets move on to something else....


4. Britannica and selectiveness

I was interested to read your response about our discussion on Britannica. You will recall that you had originally cited a statement from Britannica which seemed to support your argument, that Husain (R) was a pretender to the throne. I then drew your attention to the fact that there were other references in Britannic that described Husain (R) in a different and more positive light, which you chose to ignore. This is not objective, neither is it rational. It is easy to select one point that agrees with you and ignore the points that contradict you. Objectivity demands that both sides are looked into and then a decision made. So when you cited Iran Chamber website, I was seeing the same approach, picking one element that supported you but ignoring the rest of the website which was positive toward Islam. So I drew your attention to the positive elements within the website and also answered your quotation from Asad Seif (as I argued in point no. 1 above).


5. Why celebrate a Zoroastrian New Year?

You asked why Navroz is celebrated in Iran. Again you are implying that the new Muslims in Persia were not real Muslims but kept to teh Zoroastrian creed by celebrating Navroz. Another way you could have looked at it was that Muslims did respect the Zoroastrian tradition of Navroz rather than to destroy it. Is if Navroz was preserved under Islamic rule, how do you conclude that the Zoroastrians were oppressed?


6. Ali (R) and Aisha (R)

You said that Ali (R) staged a revolt against Aisha (R). I cannot see the relevance of this to the preceding discussion. As br. Star mentioned, Ali (R) did not start the revolt against Aisha (R). Likewise, you mentioned Fatima (R) going to Abu Bakr (R) for share of inheritence. Again this is not relevant to our discussion.


7. Uncertainties that need Verification

There are some uncertainties you admitted to which needs to be verified and would request you to do so. The relevant statements you made are:

a) “ASAD seems to be a muslim himself”
b) “According to some zorastrian scholars Shahbanu did not willingly married hussain. But
than i am not so sure”


8. Request for information and sources

You have raised a few points and made claims which I would like to investigate further. I would be grateful if you could direct me to the appropriate source which you got your info from pertaining to my following questions:

a) Where can I find the source that states that Zoroastrians left Iran to India because of oppression and what proof does that source use? You cited the dialogue between the Hindu King and persecuted Zoroastrians, I would like to get hold of that source of info.

b) Please give examples of fire temples being burnt down after Muslim conquest of Persia

c) Please provide the source that states that Ali (R) and Husain (R) were oppressors and murderers

d) Please furnish data on the treatment of Zoroastrians in Iran today

e) Please point me to the source that cites evidence that Dari was a secret language that was utilised between Zoroastrians


Thanks again for reading.

Peace

Hasan

[Hasan_Ali_Imam]

Br. Desi Soul,

Peace.

Any further comments on our discussion?

Peace
Hasan