The arrival of Islam in Iran, and then Turkey

[King Solomon]

S-19 just read this thread i bet you would die laughing at the mentality of several pakistani members here
http://www.defence.pk/forums/general-images-multimedia/167462-zaid-hamid-wagah-border.html

Interesting. Thank you for the link. Going through each and every post. Lets see...

 

[r3alist]

Indias weaknesses have always been exploited by outside powers, this is some funny spin to make the weakness seem like kindness.

 

[Mirza Chusulla Toork]

In Hadith "Sunan an Nisai" (which was composed in 300 years after Islam was founded), Ghazwa-e-Hind is mentioned as, "those people who will conquer Hind(India) and Sindh will be spared from hellfire".

So, it was given propaganda angle in Pakistan that Pakistanis will conquer India and hoist Pakistani flag on "Red Fort" in Delhi. Even mainstream politicians and army-personals in Pakistan fanfare this propaganda in Pakistan. To give strength to this propaganda, some more hypothetical hadiths were invented in recent years.

All hadees are invented ones, in subsequent years though, as post mohammad No authority was there to endorse/reject authencity of the same.

Indias weaknesses have always been exploited by outside powers, this is some funny spin to make the weakness seem like kindness.

Fact remains that India is still India.

Ancient Rome, Ancient Mossapatami, Ancient Egypt, ancient Iran, have all been lost. Ancient India still thrives and will continue to.

And you are the last ones to be commenting. You have been only here since 60 years and all signals coming out of your country suggests that your nation will not be able to complete even 100 years in history. Watch out this space.

 

[Luffy 500]

Decline??? Annihilation is correct word.

Falsehood is bound to be annihilated in front of truth.

 

[Mirza Chusulla Toork]

Falsehood is bound to be annihilated in front of truth.

Classic example, American War on Islamic terrorism.

We are happy with the annihilation of the "Falsehood"

 

[Luffy 500]

The persecuters were same, the Arab Musalmans and the doctrine of Conversion by barbaric force, Mass rape and allurement/ (tax)Jiziya.

The meager and weak collapsed outright (Iran, Buddhist Gandhara, etc). The barbaric invaders however, even after mutliple efforts tried to claim India but their efforts did not materialise. The final prey to this cultural onslaught were the brave pashtoons and the timid punjabi mussalmans.

Although these barbaric invaders inspired by the evil doctrine did cause nuisance and damage, still India houses millions of its faithfull followers.

Even during partition, it could have been so easy to push all muslims into pakistan as the later was supposed to be created exculsively for Muslims. Still India chose to keep Muslims who wanted to stay back.

Some people find pride in naming thier missiles and weapons in honour of the same barbaric invaders who killed and raped their ancestors and forced them to convert from their faith.

Aren't there any indian/RSS forums to show your ignorance.

 

[Android]

Aren't there any indian/RSS forums to show your ignorance.

aren't there any islamic forum to show your arrogance

 

[Luffy 500]

aren't there any islamic forum to show your arrogance

People can easily judge who the ignorant and arrogant ones here. Indians reek of arrogance and
ignorance which is shown by their islamophobic rhetoric. You guys have successfully diverted this
thread in to so called Islamic "invasion" and "barbarism". Shameless Indians.

 

[bindaas]

All hadees are invented ones, in subsequent years though, as post mohammad No authority was there to endorse/reject authencity of the same.

The word Hind was obtained from Sindh and both of them never existed as separate entity in ancient time, so it seems a faulty one. I read somewhere that Arab governor of Ramallah intentionally got it added for military ambitions.

 

[King Solomon]

S-19 just read this thread i bet you would die laughing at the mentality of several pakistani members here
http://www.defence.pk/forums/general-images-multimedia/167462-zaid-hamid-wagah-border.html

I went through the thread. Funny indeed.

But the thing which alarmed me is this guy's facebook page... It has friggin FIFTY THOUSAND likes! My God, i wonder how many youths this guy has ruined and forced towards mental destruction and psychiatric delusion..

 

[Mirza Chusulla Toork]

The word Hind was obtained from Sindh and both of them never existed as separate entity in ancient time, so it seems a faulty one. I read somewhere that Arab governor of Ramallah intentionally got it added military ambitions.

Also there is no real name of India. British coined the name "India" from "Indus" ie Sindhu river.
Arabis and mid-eastern adulterated "sindhu" to "Hindu" and "Hind".

Thus is the name made prevelant as "Hind" or "India" and our religion came to be known as "Hindu" religion for you outsiders.

Basically there is no name to our religion. In our vast religious literatures there is not a *single* mention of the word "Hindu". The religion is only refered to as "Sanatan Dharm" or eternal religion as no one knows the roots of the religion, not even its name.

 

[bindaas]

I went through the thread. Funny indeed.

But the thing which alarmed me is this guy's facebook page... It has friggin FIFTY THOUSAND likes! My God, i wonder how many youths this guy has ruined and forced towards mental destruction and psychiatric delusion..

Watch out this video.

 

[Kambojaric]

Interesting post. Persians heavily influenced Central Asia, and when these Central Asians (primarily Turks) started their conquests (in the shape of Seljuks, Ghaznavids, Mughals) they had essentially become Persianized Turks. That is why the arabic word for prayer "Salat" is not used by Turks, Iranians and Central/South Asian Muslims who instead use the Persian word "Namaz". That is why Khoda Hafez was the term used in orignial Urdu, not Allah Hafiz as is commonly used today by Urdu speakers as well which is a result of the more recent "arabizing" of Pakistan.

Regarding the extent of the Persian empires, there have been some horribly inaccurate maps on this thread. Persian rule was mostly limited to the river Indus. That is why in Pakistan today, the people living on the west banks of the river Indus are roughly speaking "Iranic" i.e. Pakhtuns, Balochis etc whilst those on the eastern banks are "Indic". Though on various occasions Punjab and Sindh fell to Persian dominance as well but this was a rarity.

 

[King Solomon]

Watch out this video.

[video=youtube;zBKZbngJqvg]http://www.youtube.com/ideo]

Oh my holy goodness! Don't make me laugh more pls!

But seriously, it is very easy to shift blame to others. It seems this trend of shifting blame is commonplace in pakistan's mainstream media, which in turn influences the population.. Very alarming trend.

 

[Cloakedvessel]

signed,

Emperor Yazdgird III of Sasanid

- The Original copy of this letter (632 AD - 651 AD) is in London Museum -

Sorry to break up your party, but this letter is most definitely a modern time forgery.

------------------------------

Faking Yazdgerd
Anti-Arab forgery

January 26, 2005
iranian.com

[Last night I got an email with an attachment claiming to be Yazdgerd III's letter to Omar ibn Khattab, during the final days of the Sasanian Dynasty. I thought I had seen the letter before and might have even published it. I emailed Khodadad Rezakhani and asked for his expert opinion. He's studying for a PhD in Sasanian history from UCLA. Here's what he wrote. -- J. Javid]

"The Letter of Yazdgerd III to Caliph Omar" is one of the many urban legends circulating the internet. I have personally seen four different versions of this letter, their tone and content differing from quite absurd and offensive to more believable and somehow historical. This text fits somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

Generally, forgery of historical documents and artifacts has been one of the oldest human practices. The purpose of various forgeries has differed from one to another. The famous forgery of the Edict of Constantine was done by the Church fathers to increase the political influence of the Roman Church. Other forgeries were made for financial reasons or to gain fame.

During the past few years, we have had several historical forgeries in Iran. The most famous one of them was the "discovery" of the mummy of the so-called Achaemenid princess that attracted the attention of many people around the world. It almost ended up in a fight between the Pakistani and Iranian authorities.

Our letter here is another example of forgery. While the aforementioned mummy was forged in hopes of financial reward, this letter and its variations carry no such promises. It seems that the point of the person(s) who wrote this letter is to further a political/cultural agenda, one that carries an anti-Arab weight.

The reasons for proving that this letter is a forgery are several, but the simplest criterion is that we have never seen the original text. Our corpus of Middle Persian texts is quite limited and is known to anyone who works with Middle Persian documents. Some Arabic or Persian translations of the original Middle Persian texts (quoted in various histories and books) are also known.

Furthermore, anyone working in the field of Sasanian history would know the existence of such a letter and certainly know the definitive translation, most likely done by a well-known philologist. However, none of these sources present us with a letter as such.

However, by simply reading the text and having a basic knowledge of the history and language of the supposed time of the composition of the letter (ca. 635-650 CE), one can also conclude that the letter is quite a recent forgery.

This introduction would not allow detailed criticism of the content of the letter, but a few examples would suffice to illustrate the point.

-- For starters, the letter is a perfect example of anachronism. It projects the ideas and ideals of modern anti-Arabism and anti-Islamism into the history and has them come out of the mouth of Yazdgerd III.

The tone of the letter is obviously a contemporary, Iranian nationalist tone which thinks of Arabs as desert dwelling people with no culture. That is indeed the "Jaheli"/Beduin Arab culture that Islamic history now teaches us about. However, for an average Sasanian of that time, "Arab" would not have brought the picture of a desert dwelling, daughter killing Beduin, of the kind who lived 1000 km south of the Sasanian border. Instead, the Arabs most familiar for the Sasanians were the Hira Arabs who ran a government under the protection of the Sasanians and were mostly either Zoroastrian or Christian, living in cities and urban centres.

-- The second paragraph has Yazdgerd blaming Omar for not knowing about the Iranian religion (Zoroastrianism). Yazdgerd here boasts of his "monotheistic" religion. It is easily demonstrable that the efforts to make Zoroastrianism a monotheistic religion were taken under the cultural influence of Islam. A pre-Islamic Iranian Zoroastrian mowbed would have easily admitted that Zoroastrianism is a dualistic religion.

Since there was no cultural pressure to consider "monotheism" to be superior to other forms of religion, our supposed mowbed would not have felt bad about admitting this. In essence, the person who forged this letter has made a disservice to his patriotism by giving the superiority to the monotheistic Islam and becoming an apologist for dualistic Zoroastrianism.

-- For the reasons mentioned above, it is most improbable that Yazdgerd would have known about the traditions of Beduin Arabs and been able to criticize them as such. This again is putting the products of modern knowledge in the context of ancient history.

-- In the same way, it seems hard to believe that Omar would have called Yazdgerd "fire-worshipper". The adjective "fire-worshipper" itself was created many years after the advent of Islam, in order to stigmatize Zoroastrianism. It is most unlikely that it was a term in use during the time of early Islam.

-- Again, the next two paragraphs are the self-congratulatory sentences that are most unlikely to have been uttered by Yazdgerd for a few simple reasons. One is that again, it is quite improbable that Yazdgerd would have known so much about Islam and the background of Muslims at the time, or would have cared to know. Second, the phrase "because your Allah o Akbar only speaks Arabic" is problematic.

That sentence, in form of blame, would have been quite unusual coming from a Zoroastrian who has to say his prayers in Avestan! Avestan was used by Zoroastrian clergy, but was completely incomprehensible to ordinary citizens of the Sasanian era. Also, the Sasanian Empire was the first target of the armies of Islam, so naturally, the comments on the paragraph before last about the bloody conquests of Islam would be out of place, since they had not yet happened.

-- The last paragraph really needs no explanation. Just enough to point out that its anachronism is obvious from its reference to "Aryans", a term not in use during Sasanian times.