Posted on 10/12/2006 5:40:31 PM PDT by freedom44
Flicking through photographs of immigrant Zoroastrian friends in sunny California, 40-year-old Farzad Dehnavizadeh sighs and wishes the young people of his faith would stop leaving Iran for the west.
His 40,000-strong Zoroastrian community has survived centuries of conquest, oppression and forced conversion to keep their 3,200-year-old monotheistic faith alive and guard ancient traditions in Shiite Muslim majority Iran.
Having withstood the ravages of history, the community is now threatened by emigration, which is day by day robbing the Zoroastrians of their precious youth.
Precise figures on the scale of the exodus are not available but sources in the community estimate that at the very least hundreds of young Zoroastrians are leaving Iran for the United States or Canada every year.
Some of the resettlement has also been encouraged by a US programme for religious minorities -- the HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society) -- which originally facilitated the immigration of Jews.
"I am very sad that they are leaving, their second generation will have no idea of Iran and Zoroastrian culture," said Dehnavizadeh, a successful engineer and an active member of the Zoroastrian community.
"I do not like the term 'religious minority' for us. Iran can be home to all world Zoroastrians," he said of some 200,000 followers of the Zoroastrian prophet Zarathustra.
GGG?
I feel sorry for this guy, but I would still encourage, Zoroastrians to come west.
In Iran
Zoroastrians in Iran have, like other religious minorities, survived centuries of persecution. Communities exist in Tehran, as well as in Yazd and Kerman, where many still speak an Iranian language distinct from Persian. They call their language Dari (not to be confused with the Dari of Afghanistan). Their language is also called Gabri or Behdinan (literally "Of the Good Religion"). Sometimes their language is named for the cities in which it is spoken, Yazdi or Kermani. Iranian Zoroastrians were historically derogatorily called Gabar (roughly translated as 'infidel') by Muslim neighbours. The term is still used but has lost much of its derogatory meaning.
In India
Parsi Navjote ceremony (rites of admission into the Zoroastrian faith)Main article: Parsis, the Zoroastrians of the Indian subcontinent.
Subsequent to the fall of the Persian Empire, after which Zoroastrianism was gradually supplanted by Islam, many Zoroastrians fled to other regions in the hope of preserving their religious tradition. Among them were several groups who migrated to Gujarat, on the western shores of the Indian subcontinent, where they finally settled. The descendants of those refugees are today known as the Parsis.
In contrast to their co-religionists elsewhere, in India the Zoroastrians enjoyed tolerance and even admiration from other religious communities. From the 19th century onward, the Parsis gained a reputation for their education and widespread influence in all aspects of society, partly due to the divisive strategy of British colonialism which favored certain minorities. As such, Parsis are generally more affluent than other Indians and are stereotypically viewed as among the most Anglicised and "Westernised" of Indian minority groups. They have also played an instrumental role in the economic development of the country over many decades; several of the best-known business conglomerates of India are run by Parsi-Zoroastrians, including the Tata, Godrej, and Wadia families.
Famous Zoroastrians
Famous Parsis include the founder of Indian Civil Aviation and legendary industrialist J. R. D. Tata; Indian freedom fighters Pherozeshah Mehta, Dadabhai Naoroji and Bhikaiji Cama; musicians symphonic conductor Zubin Mehta and rock icon Freddie Mercury (Farrokh Bulsara); nuclear scientist Homi J. Bhabha, the similarly-named philosopher Homi K. Bhabha; the first field marshall of India Sam Manekshaw, screenwriter Sooni Taraporevala (of the films Salaam Bombay and Mississippi Masala), both directed by Mira Nair, as well as author of a photography book on the Parsi community entitled Parsis: The Zoroastrians of India: a Photographic Journey); and authors Rohinton Mistry, and Bapsi Sidhwa. Indian industrial families Tata family, Godrej family and Wadia family are also of Parsi Zoroastrian background.
Famous Zoroastrians from the more recently arrived Irani community include legendary Bollywood director Ardeshir Irani, the actress Aruna Irani, the cricketer Ronnie Irani, the comedian-actor Boman Irani, the Indian TV actress Smriti Irani (famous for playing Tulsi on Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi), the famous Indian spiritual master Meher Baba and the actress Perizaad Zorabian.
One of the most famous Iranian Zoroastrians is Dr. Farhang Mehr, former deputy prime minister of Iran, Boston University professor emeritus, longtime activist for religious freedom, and subject of the biography "Triumph Over Discrimination" by another Zoroastrian (of Parsi and Haitian descent), Lylah M. Alphonse.
I'd bet that if they opened the borders that Zoroastrians aren't the only people who would flee Iran. The country would probably empty out.
Zoroastrians were historically derogatorily called Gabar (roughly translated as 'infidel') by Muslim neighbours. 
"I am very sad that they are leaving, their second generation will have no idea of Iran and Zoroastrian culture," said Dehnavizadeh
I disagree. Although I empathize with his view/sentiments, it is also easy to be reminiscing about the faith & what is happening in Iran while sitting in “sunny California”.
About the second quote: If anything, by leaving IR ruled Iran, the current and new generation of Zoroastrians will be able to maintain their culture much more freely.
The exodus of Zoroastrians is nothing new (look at the Parsis and Iranis). By leaving the first Arab-Islam invasion of Iran, they were able to preserve their culture much more effectively. And, I have no doubt that the “second generation” will have every idea and knowledge about Zoroastrian culture and Iran. But, perhaps, not of Islamic Republic of Iran.
As one Zoroastrian community leader, Mr Dehnavizadeh will have a role to play in contributing to the process of cultural maintenance and promotion of this faith including among current and new generations of Zoroastrians outside of Iran.
I am also certain that once IR is permanently gone from Iran, Iran will be the true home for all Zoroastrians from around the world, as it has always been.
What about the great Freddie Mercury?
I assume you got the above from wikipedia? A minor point to clarify is that "Gabar" or "Guebre" was a term originally used for Zoroastrians, after the Arab-Islam invasion of Iran in the 7th Century, and it means "fire-worshippers".
Perhaps, a derogatory term, but mostly a term used by the Bedouin Muslim Arabs in ignorance, since they really didn't understand nor cared to understand the philosophy behind the faith.
Meant to include you on posts # 8 and 10.
About the spoken language: In Iran, they, mostly, speak Parsi/Farsi (standard Persian language of Iran) not Dari. Though, there are some differences in dialect & accents in Yazd and Kerman.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
I'd like to see more Zoroastrian immigrants to this country. They really seem like cool folks.
"You got a funny profile page. I know it's completely off topic. ;>P"
lol, thanks! :-)
Can we get a rim shot...? :>P
Very Funny!
I have met a couple of California Zoros. One of their beliefs is that the Magi mentioned in the Gospel account were Zoroastrians.
"the Magi mentioned in the Gospel account were Zoroastrians."
The Magi = Zoroastrian Priests, originally Medes in ancient Iran, adopted Zoroastrianism when the faith spread throughout Iran (Persia). They were also known as early Astrologers/Astronomers. Apparently, they predicted the birth of Christ before it happened.
They were the 3 wise men who travelled to Bethleham for the birth of Jesus Christ.
Typo correction:
Bethleham = Bethlehem
I guess you missed this line:
"...musicians symphonic conductor Zubin Mehta and rock icon Freddie Mercury (Farrokh Bulsara)."
:^)
Some Zs had little to no respect for Christians, especially since Christians were considered to not be warriors, would not fight. At the same time it was thought that Alexander was Christian, which presents a minor historical puzzle.
Actually he hated Zoroastrians. Thus he spoke :). The book was about what he saw as the false creation of a 'monotheistic God' by the Zoroastrians.
Alexander the Great was a Christian? I seriously doubt that. Where did get that information? Documents points towards him being a pagan. Or is this another twist on history?
Anybody that can get a copy of Shahnameh can read it for themselves. Amazon is one place.
"Alexander the Great was a Christian? I seriously doubt that. Where did get that information? Documents points towards him being a pagan. Or is this another twist on history?"
Since Alexander was born about 300 years before Christ I'd say you're right.
Alexander wasn't, but the anachronism could have resulted from two things -- one, he was Macedonian, but quite a bit of his army was Greek, and two, later Moslem stupidity. Moslems still claim that he literally had horns growing out of his head, apparently a consequence of some of his coins which portrayed him as a bull (after his trip to the oracle at the Siwa oasis).
Moslems didn't write Shahnameh. It cuts off abruptly with the Moslem military invasion.
How was he a Christian when Christianity didn't even exist at the time?
Ask the Zoroastrians. They wrote it.
Are you sure about that? How sure are you? Remember there has been considerable controversy about pre-Christian devlopments in the region in the couple centuries leading up to Jesus.
Most interesting.
Moslem/Arab invasion of Iran took place in the 7th Century. Ferdowsi wrote the Shahnameh (Book of Kings) not Zoroastrians. Ferdowsi wrote this literary masterpiece in the 10th Century, during the Samanid Dynasty in Iran.
Although Ferdowsi was of Zoroastrian heritage like most other Persians before the Moslem/Arab invasion, by the time he wrote the Shahnameh his ancestors had already converted to Islam.
The purpose of Shahnameh was twofold:
First & foremost, was to revive the Persian identity and especially the language (if you ever read Shahnameh in Persian you will notice that it is written in almost pure Parsi [Persian language] and not mixed with any Arabic words.) He actually says so rather eloquently in Persian. I'd quote it but assume you don't speak Persian.
Second, to tell the tales about a pre-Islamic Iran & her Kings.
Shahnameh comes in three parts: the Mythical Age, the Heroic Age and the Historical Age.
The tale of Alexander (Eskandar in Persian) - a Macedonian - belongs in the “heroic age” of the Shahnameh. The reason Alexander is disliked is because he & his partly Greek army invaded Iran (Persia) and almost completely destroyed Persepolis (capital of Persia), looted the treasury and generally caused a great deal of destruction, carnage and havoc. Apparently, he even took on the traditional royal title of a Persian King (Shahanshah). Now, most would consider such an act as adding insult to injury.
Alexander was not disliked because he was a Christian (he was pagan and lived in the year 356 B.C.) – Reasonably, one can only be called a ‘Christian’, at least, after the birth of Jesus. Besides, there is no historical data to suggest that he was in any way associated with Christianity nor did the Persians perceive him as a Christian.
Monotheistic? Perhaps. But did Ahura Mazda create Angra Manu?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Very interesting point thats been questioned. Manu similar to Ahura Mazda 'created', but he created evil things like snakes. Zoroastrians only worship Ahura Mazda, so I guess the question is can a religion be monotheistic and believe that there be two creators - one creating Good and the other evil.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Yes, you are right. Ferdowsi has been credited, and rightly so, for reviving Iranian culture and language. Many people believe that he is largely responsible for preventing Iranians/Persians from becoming totally Arabized similar to say Eygptians.
I've read parts of the Shahnameh in English but think some nuances can be overlooked or not conveyed well when translated. Either way, I love reading it.
The reason Alexander is disliked is because he & his partly Greek army invaded Iran (Persia) and almost completely destroyed Persepolis (capital of Persia), looted the treasury and generally caused a great deal of destruction, carnage and havoc.Payback's a beeotch. The Persian Empire was built on conquest, just as other empires have been, which means destruction, carnage and havoc. As everyone knows, the Persians tried to conquer Greece with large land and sea forces, and wound up beaten back. The Persian rulers then tried to keep the Greek cities in check by intrigue, particularly during the Peloponnesian War.
Apparently, he even took on the traditional royal title of a Persian King (Shahanshah). Now, most would consider such an act as adding insult to injury.He defeated the last of the native emperors (who was attacked and left for dead by his own entourage, dying as it were in Alexander's arms), and chased down the pretender. Alexander took the capital and the crown, and was accepted as the ruler; he had the most trouble in (where else?) Central Asia, but wound up whipping his enemies there, and cementing his ascendancy with a marriage.
Well, yes. I wasn’t focusing exclusively on the wars. Historically, there are no shortages of conquests and expansions in that part of the world. Some wars were obviously won and some were lost. Some conquests were bloodier than others.
As far as I know, Alexander, to this date, is still viewed as an invader and not very much favoured by the Persians – at the end of the day and regardless of adopting Persian customs and a royal title, he wasn’t a Persian. Perhaps, the Greeks and others would have similar views of the Persian conquerors.
By the same token, one could also mention someone such as Cyrus the Great who conquered the Babylonian Empire and finally freed the Israelites from Babylonian captivity allowing them to return to Jerusalem (Promised Land) together with an edict to rebuild the temple. This edict is fully reproduced in the Book of Ezra. As a result of Cyrus' actions, the Jews honored him as a dignified and righteous king. He is the only Gentile to be designated as a messiah, a divinely-appointed king, in the Tanakh.
My purpose, in the previous post, was to indicate why Alexander was disliked and what is mentioned in the Shahnameh (note: Ferdowsi included Alexander in the 'heroic' part of the Shahnameh) and the previous poster’s reference to Christianity and Alexander. The point was that Alexander wasn’t disliked because of being a Christian or being perceived as one.
Alexander the Great? That certainly is a puzzle since he lived some 300 yrs BC.
Weren't the Magi Zoroastrians? And what about Abraham, didn't he supposedly come from that tradition?
Correction, apparently Abraham was around quite a bit before Zoroaster.
Thanks for the post.
I remember learning about this faith while attending private Catholic college. The world religions class was taught by a Catholic "Brother". It was fascinating!
I do believe that any faith can be brought to the West and thrive. This is nothing new.
LOL, Thanks. Scary isn't it?
He did like the idea of the Persian archer: "To tell the truth and to shoot well with arrows: that is Persian virtue..."
Thanks for the explication; it appears to be accurate. The writing of the Shahnameh is most likely similar to the writing of other epic histories. At some point the verbal transmission of traditional stories is reduced to writing, and at that point the poetic skills of the writer come into play. Still, the stories of the blind poet Homer were taken as mere stories until Troy was rediscovered. A man's academic career could be ruined if he insisted that Helen were a real historical figure, or if he insisted Helen were mythological. This is a contest that cannot be ultimately won until a time machine is invented.
That's actually why I mentioned it. History isn't as tidy as it ought to be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
