Posted on 05/10/2011 3:03:04 AM PDT by Cronos
Over a phone conversation with one of the Saudi Arabian newspapers, he said: “there were not many Zoroastrians in history, but they have been well-known (so what! who has assigned you to be historian without documentation and authenticity, let's see what you have to say and what are your proves to the lies this time!!!).
History knows them as a nation full of hate and oppression (lie, if you meant history of Iran, for you ignorant mind, it is good to say and let you know that Iran has been known as cradle of civilization, just check this link, if you meant the country in general, you are diluting the historical fact to manipulate the reality that each and every country have had had good days and bad days and indeed your country and Bahrain are in the age of oppression and you are the puppets in the hands of the colonialism puppet master. If you are truthful tell me who is the puppet master of Iran, who are running the destiny of Iran and Iranian nation? I guarantee your answer would be no one but themselves opposite to you. Good or bad they have their destiny in their own will, and will not receive their orders from Tel Aviv or Washington. DC).
They have always tried to oppress Islam and the Sunnis (lie. If you meant Iranian Muslims or even Zoroastrians, that is a lie. Iranian originally were Sunnis when Islam came to Iran and people of Iran embraced Islam with kindness and love due to oppressions were taking from king of the time. Later in time Iranian educated themselves more and more with Islam and they found the path of Imam Ali (as) preferable to join. So, they dedicated to the Shia school of thoughts which was directly rooted and connected to the last prophet of Allah(swt), Muhammad (saw) via his family (Ahlul-Bayt).”
He added: “we must be wise in front of them (lie. If you are truthful why have you not accepted the public debate with Shia scholars in TV and radio with documentary evidence so people see the truth where are you rooted and where Shia Islam is rooted?!!!). We cannot accept their claims to Islam because they are hypocrites (another lie. This is nothing but a scapegoat and an old style of Wahhabis slander to dodge the truth by labeling opposition).
They are saying things out of hypocrisy while trying to harm the roots of Islam and Sunnis (lie again. Iranian in search of truth changed the school of thought to Shia, if you were honest and truthful you would accept the public debate)”
he continued: “the officials of the Islamic republic of Iran are of this nature (lie. It is you and your coward and mischievous masters are rooted in corruption).
They opposed sending soldiers to Bahrain (lie. Who are you think you are fooling?! Have little respect to public intelligence, Iran was not asked, even if asked, will Iran accept your and approve tyranny and invasion?!!! You are indeed blind to see the truth & light of Allah (swt).
While they claim to be Muslim (indeed Iranians are Muslims and very proud of it and proved in 8 years of imposed was that you and other tyrants of your like were supporting and encouraging Saddam in war against Iran’s fresh and young Islamic revolution, but where is Saddam now, by Allah’s will you will join Saddam soon), they desired to harm Islam and Sunnis in Bahrain. (Biggest of the lies. Iran supported and will continue supporting all oppressed people in the world regardless of their nationality, race, ethnicity, religion, financial status, language..., but you Wahhabis are so twisted in your hearts with hypocrisy and deceptions that you made it your way of lifestyle and cannot tolerate or handle the truth).”
Please note: The fonts in green are Wahhabi words and the fonts in dark blue inside parenthesis are our comments.
hmmm... where did you get that, if i might ask? And i’m talking about the present, not 1700 years ago
Well, I know an ex-Zoroastrian who despises Moslems, but he was in Bombay and that was after the 2008 Mumbai attacks
however, FARS is correct -- Zoroastrianism is based on positiveness, on light, the God of light, Ahura Mazda, quite in contrast to Al
As Fars said their DNA is based on “goodness” not hate.
I found that a problem, but one needs to realise the socio-political reasons: before 313 (when Christianity was no longer being outlawed in the Roman Empire), Christians actually had it better in the Parthian Empire rather than in the Roman Empire and they thrived and spread.
When Theodosius declared Christianity as the state religion of the Roman Empire, this became a problem -- if members of your empire follow the faith of the neighboring, enemy empire, that can be a problem.
The persecutions followed
however, when the Church of the East broke off contact with the Church based in the Roman Empire then the Parthian authorities went back to being benign...
The rest of your post I completely agree with
P.S. - In mainstream Zoroastrian Faith as taught by Zoroaster, there are 3 main essentials & qualities, within broader concept/philosophy of “wisdom”, in addition to the core tenets you mentioned i.e. “good thoughts, good words & good deeds”.
These are very much part of basic Zoroastrian belief & include:
- Truthfulness (honesty or aka purity incl.) in speaking, thinking & doing
- Bravery
- Gender Equality
If any Zoroastrian or ex-Zoroastrian has to despise Moslems, it shouldn't be because of 2008 Mumbai Moslem attacks.
Zoroastrians, in general, have been raped, killed, maimed & more in Moslem ruled Iran for 13 centuries, and right up to early 20th century, even in their own communities, in particular.
Yet, Zoroastrians in Iran are & have been tolerant & non-violent, because that's what their faith has always taught. Though, Zoroastrians are also human. One can't expect to be raped & pillaged and yet not be resentful, though still Zoroastrians are not violent.
So, sorry to be blunt, but Mumbai affected victims (Zoroastrian or otherwise) have only experienced the tip of the iceberg, and can go cry me a river.. call me very UN-Zoroastrian words an sentiments... but that's my point.
True. They’ve probably been toooo nice...
It’s an issue of LEADERSHIP, just like in socalled “Christian” countries. All leaders of Iran since muzzie arab invasion have been moslems & almost all too weak also to stand up to muzzie ideology, for various fears, economics & geopolitics, among them, just like the west.
The guy is highly charged in addition to lack of knowledge. That’s how ‘friendly fire’ often happens.
maybe. Maybe it’s just Zoros are Mexicans... ;-P
lol...
cronos, is your tagline in Polish now?
Tak jest! What gave it away?
It looks like Polish to me!
Btw, I’m away for most of w/e starting now, so have a good w/end!
The Talmud actually depicts Zoroastrians as being the most difficult of people, and speaks of times when lighting Hanuka candles were prohibited because of a Zoroastrian holiday that sometimes coincided with it on which no fires were permitted, and the Zoroastrians were most intolerant about enforcing this. I don’t remember the exact citation, but in terms of dealing with gentiles, in ascending order, Zoroastrians were the worst, pre-Christian(?) Europeans were considered next up, and pre-Islamic Arabs were regarded as the most affable.
I’m sure you know what the Talmud says, but I can also tell you that lighting candle(s) for any religion, pagan, jew, or otherwise has never been prohibited in Zoroastrianism. And there is no such prohibition in Zoroastrian faith due any Zoroastrian holiday . More so because Zoroastrians actually believe in Light (candles incl.) as a symbol of goodness, as opposed to darkness.
In terms of other stuff about dealing w/ “gentiles”, let me know when you remember the exact citation. I’d be interested. Thanks.
p.s. - I’ll get back to any later posts of yours in a day or two. Have a good w/e
I wish.
The exact term used was “Haber,” which referred to a religion which had a holiday in which fires were forbidden, and the Talmud speaks of emergency situations when the “Haberim” were persecuting Jews for lighting Hanuka candles, when it was permitted to light in your own home, rather than at a door adjacent to the street, as is preferred. These were people who worshiped the sun and the fire, a dualist theology, one good and one evil, perhaps a pre-Christian form of Manicheanism. Is this Zoroastrianism? Perhaps the name Haber refers to some other Persian religion. It was most definitely Persian, though, and still going strong in the post-Julian Roman Empire. To the best of my recollection, the discussion about which gentiles are the most obstreperous and which the least was somewhere in Tractate Shabbat, which is voluminous.
Sounds like a game of Yo Mama, Muslim style.
Then I must not have read the same description of the religion that y’all did, because the one that I read stated their belief that Jews and Christians were of the Devil, and needed to be wiped out.
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.