From: arash@sunee.waterloo.edu (Arash Jahangir)
Subject: Forcing a culture (was Re: Rostam)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 23:20:35 GMT


With no insult intended and trying to set aside my prejudisms, here we go!


In article <1992Apr5.023250.1037@ucbeh.san.uc.edu> minhaszt@ucbeh.san.uc.edu writes:
[... previous exchanges deleted]
>
>In case you haven't forgotten there is something the british, and all colonial
>European powers implemented over the Asian and especially muslim nations, its
>called divide and conquer. It worked very well in India where one Sultan would
>fight against another, and it worked very well against sultanat-e-usmania in
>the formation of Arab nationalism. In case you haven't forgotten the state of
>Israel was formed as a result of this thing. When have the Arabs ever tried to
					      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>shove their culture down your throats? 1300 years ago? 1400 years ago? Is your
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>brain still stuck there? Islam took 200 years to spread in Iran. How can you
			  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>say it was shoved down your throat? It would have taken a much shorter time if
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>the sword was really used.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

We need to take note of a few things here.  1) Islam did not spread peacefully.
There is a very large body of Islamic/Arabic history that indicates this.  Most
of the expansions (if I have my history right) were during Omar's time.
Though it is true that Islam took 2 centuries to spread among the people of 
Iran, the political boarders of the "Islamic" empire were well defined within
the first 50 years of Islam.  What do you think was going on for that 150 years
and actually the years after?  What right did the "Islamic pioneers" have to 
force their religion on others?  You mentioned the case of messengers to the
King at the time Yazgird III.  I think he was a real idiot and no fit to lead
a country.  He was probably very cruel too.  But if YOU were the king at the
time (with all the glory and pride and palace and ...) and some desert deuler
would tell you to give up your religion and start obiding some other desert
deuler that you've never met because he says he is a messenger of God, WOULD
YOU DO IT?  And if you refuse, is that suficient reason to attack the people
of those countries?

Tell me (we are talking about areas that makes me have nothing to do with
Islam) what are the rights of "PAGANs" and none-moslims according to Islam?
Do you care to read the section in Qouran about the civil limitations of them?
With all that in mind, do still think that Iranians and other none-moslims
(and even recently moslims) of that era were treated nicely, fairly, just a
little roughly?  Or were they deprived of all rights.

It also bothers me that you think it would have taken less time to spread
Islam in Iran if force had been used.  Force was used and to the extream.
Otherwise Islam would not have made it in 200 years.  Iranians are not easy
to control.  This statement is not made out of emotions, rather it is the
message you will get when you read Iran's history.  With the exception of the
200 years you mentioned, Iran has never been a colony, not by the Brits, not
by Russians, not by Ottomans, not even by the Monghoulians.  In the case of 
Monghoulian invasions (2 of them), although the monarchs were monghoulian,
very soon the capitals were moved within Iran, the monarchs started to speak
(and later encourage) Parsi language, and the very majority of the govrnment
was from Iranians.  Another proof that Arabic culture was really forced upon
the none-arab nations, is that Arabs were limited to the Arabia pninsula 
prior to the Islamic empire.  How is it that all those nations that "accepted"
Islam, not only lost their old religions (which may well have been inferior
to Islam) but they also lost their language and their identity and today
they all call themselves arabs though it is clear they are not from the same
origin.  Iran (and countries influenced by Iran) were the only ones to maintain
their identity.  There is a good book about the history of Iran during that
200 years by Abdul-Hossein-Zarinkoob.  It is called "2 centuries of silence".

> Even if it were true that Arabs forced themselves
>upon you, are they posing a threat now to Iran as far as ideologies go? Islam
>or westerism? Islam is already part and parcel of Iran. Is complete acceptance
>of Westernism going to be good for Iran? I don't think so. The experience of it
>has already proven to be bad. Why do you have to hate a culture so much that
>doesn't threaten you? Persian culture influenced Arab culture more than Arab
>culture influenced Iran. Persian culture has a strong influnce on the
>language and culture of India and Pakistan. So don't worry, you should not feel
>threatened by them and hate them so much.
>

This is very true.  There are a large number of Iranians who hold unjust and
unhealthy grudges against Arabs.  What happened 1300 years ago cannot be 
changed and IMHO the prime victim of hatred is its owner himself.  But this
is not a one way thing.  From my associations with the Persian Gulf countries,
I have noticed that there are a very large number of people there who hate
Iran and Iranians just as much as their counter parts in Iran.

The issue of culture is separate from this hatred though.  Islam has always
been used as a means of undermining Iranian culture and destroying it as much
as possible.  This has regretably done mostly by the religious figures in 
Iran because there is such close ties between Arabic culture and the Islamic 
culture that they can almost be used interchangably.  Here are a few rather
recent examples of the above by the current "religious" leaders of Iran.  I 
can bring you older examples too if you want.

After comming to power.  The current regime of Iran did its very best to
undermine every reference to Iranian culture.  It started by cutting down on
the size of Persian literature in high schools and mandetory teaching and 
learning of Arabic.  It stopped as much as possible to use the Iranian solar
calendar and most official statements were dated by Arabic lunar calendar.
It insisted on refering to all great Iranian humanitarians and scientists 
which Iranians have been proud of as Islamic scientists (although there is no
logical conflict between the two ways of refering to those people, I hope
you realize that those people were speaking Parsi and were something that we
as Iranians are proud to have offered the world).  Furthermore, the regime
proceeded by removing all references to those figures who emphasized Iranian
culture.  I can go on and on, but I think you get the picture.  You would not
have liked it if somehow you were to lose all your identity and were to be
identified only as a say Christian.

The above behaviour is something that has caused a lot of grief among many
Iranians and has caused some to hate Arabs or Islam, more than some war 1300
years ago.  It's not very logical but it is very human.  Anyways, I hope now
you realize why some Iranians feel a cultural threat from Islam and Arabs.

>
>zafar

Regards,
 Arash