Abortive Shiism in Iran

Weakened by continual wars against the Byzantine empire, Persia was militarily vulnerable enough to be invaded by the Moslem of Arabia in 637. The first undone of Persia in Ghadessieh marks the beginning of the end of the Sassanide empire and the bootjack of the submissiveness of a big civilization to the Moslem nomads. After this defeat, the Sassanide dynasty failed to defend his/her/its territory and fell after a second defeat to the battle of Nahavand in 642.

As others big civilizations in Syria and in Egypt, the Persian civilization was immediately dismantled by the Moslem invaders. The cities populated that symbolized this civilization were totally destroyed. As permied by their religion and as usual, the Moslem slaughtered the non Moslem ” men ” robbed their goods and enslaved their wives and their children aswar- booty.

Those that could not escape of the massacres and the slavery and that could not flee toward another country of refuge as India only had two choices: either the conversion to the Islam, or the payment of a tax named ” Jizya “, a humiliating tax imposed on non-Muslims ” dhimmis ” (the non Moslem citizens of a territory directed by the Moslem).

The invasion was disastrous, the whole country was occupied in 650 by the Moslems that tried to spread their ” Dar – Al – Islam ” (the territory of the islam) at any genocidal price. For this ambition, Persians lost their national identity, their language, and their religion—the Zoroastrisme—. The civil population decreased because of the perpetual massacres and because a big part of them should have escaped their country and because a big number of women and children became slaves and deported toward the slavery markets of Arabia to be sold like other loots of war.

Iran remained occupied by the Moslem Arabs during two centuries and finally fell under a Shiite dynasties during the last five centuries.

The ” Shiitisation ” of Iran started with the Dynasty Safavide in the beginning of the sixteenth century. Shah Esmai’l Safavide, the first king of the Turkman origin dynasty and himself a militant soufi, imposed the conversion violently to Shiism to the Iranians that were Sunnite in majority. This conversion is for the creation of a national identity against his rival Sunnite of the Ottoman empire who threatened his reign.

The separation of the Shiism of the Sunnisme and then the subdivisions inside of Shiism results from the definition of the lineage of the Imams. Most Shiites are duodécimains or imâmites. Their ” imâmat ” starts with Imam Ali and his line ends by the twelfth, the Mahdi – the Hidden Imam.

Shiism that is a historically political current, fundamentalist and sectarian, dispute since its apparition the political power in religious terms, bending solely on the theocratic tradition ( state power detained by the religious) of the Moslem state. The Shiites don’t recognize the same legacy that the Sunnite after the Prophet’s death in 632: for the Shiites, it is imam Ali, cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet, who are the tutelary face; for the Sunnite, it is Abou Bakr, mate of Mohammed. Follow of the liturgical and doctrinal differences, but especially in terms of politics.

To stuff a people’s skull, Shah Esmai’l sends his agents in the Arabian countries to recruit some ” Sayyedses ” (descendants of the Prophet Muhammad). Indeed, they must have facilitated the tasks for the Shah’s repressive administration. It is by the slaughters of Shah Esmai’l and the sermons of his accomplices Sayyeds that Iran becomes suddenly Shiite. An event that cost lifves to hundreds of thousands of Iranians massacred under the Safavi reign. The unfaithful ” Iranians ” were not this time slaughtered by the Moslem of the peninsula of Arabia but forced to convert by an Iranian king for the reason of his political and personal goals.

Shah Esmai’l considered himself the representative of the ” Mahdi ” (the twelfth Imam who is hidden since one thousand years ago and is waited by the Shiites to bring the Islamic justice on Earth). In this context, the monarch becomes a semi divine, what all kings pretended to be and this until the emergence of the Islamic Republic, where this pretension is baptized ” Valy-e-Faqih ” (Leader Suprême).

It is under the Safavids that the culture of mourning revealed itself in Iran. Achoura is the day where the third Imam Hussein, killed by the troops of Yazid, the cursed that was Caliph omeyyade in 680. Some centuries later, under the Safavids and the Qadjars, this event took a dimension symbolically too much exaggerated.

During the first ten days of Moharram, the month of mourning, and especially the ninth and the tenth certain day Shiite dedicate themselves to the ceremonies of mourning in to remember the martyrdom of imam Hossein and his partisans in Kerbela, a dram of more than thirteen centuries ago. Corteges of men clothed of black stroll in the streets to the sound of the drums rhythmized by the beating of the chests and chains and preceded by standard bearers and the groups of funeral music. They even slash the skull so that sprang blood: all competes to mean the mourning and also to a culture of hate and violence. At the same time as the religion in West yields the place at the Renaissance, Shiism invents these ceremonies of mournings.

Under the Qadjars, some new religious ceremonies emerged. It is about Ta’ziyeh that is inspired by the events of the day of the Achoura, whose impression is too strong in the Shiite mentality. The Ta’ziyeh is a theatrical representation of these events, accompanied by laments and narrations of mourning. Although these narrations and the infinite laments are only sermons imaginary of the Shiite Mullahs, it is an opportunity to stuff the skull of those that must prove their faith and their attachment to the Prophet’s descendants.

Under the Qadjars, the Mullahs controled the religious and cultural institutions as madressehs (religious schools for the boys), the justice, those that ridicule the rights of liberty, woman’s equality, of the arts and modern sciences and traditionally the identity of pre-islamic Iran.

Nevertheless, one testifies a gradual formation of a new social caste in Iran. That is the caste of Sayyeds: they wore black, or sometimes green turbans. They were only at that time several hundreds recruited from the Arabian neighbouring countries, and today they are several millions whose disproportionate propagation shows that a big majority of Sayyeds had to be the opportunist impostors who snakeded into the rank of the Prophet’s ” descendants” to take advantage. The “descendants of Mohammad and the disciples of Ali”, son-in-law and cousin of the Prophet Mohammed, invent their myth of supremacy so that the people sink in the eternal repentant, haunt by the apostasy and so had to forget this injustice and this swindle.

The Shiites have been oppressed a long time and have been maintained under the narrow control of the Sunnite through the Moslem world. Since his/her/its apparition, Shiism was a sect of persecuted and of exclude. The Safavids prepared a favorable land henceforth to make come them in Iran. The Shiite minorities, often isolated to the cœur of the populations majority Sunnite, became of new citizens of the Shiite, True or false, among them, a lot of Sayyeds with a black or green turban that allow them of advantage to form a new strong caste.

Under the Qadjar dynasty (1786-1925) – also religious – that followed to the Safavids, then under the last Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (1925-1979), the Mullahs increased their power again– unless under sixteen years of the Reza Shah reign where Mullahs lost their political influence relatively. While in Iran, put aside this short period of Reza Shah, the influence of the Mullahs grew, to the point that ayatollah Khomeiny asked for the institution of an Islamic regime in 1979, then, the third invasion of islam begins. The ” caliph ” of this Shiite islam is called ” Vely-e – Faqih ” that means a ” Ayatollah ” (Shiite religious title) and political leader at a time with the total monopolization of the power.

The disaster on an uprooted people triples itself: less than fourteen centuries after the invasion of the Moslem Arabs at Qadessiehs and less than five centuries after the ” bloody shiitisation ” of the Safavids, and since 1979, the Shiite Mullahs impose themselves while singing their triumph d ‘ Allah Akbar (the god is big) through the ravaged country.

More that a political religion and less that an ethical order, more that a social order and less that a faith of liberty – divided also through political conflicts, more various that could be a religion – Islam, or rather the “iislams ” exists and develops itself demographically in the modern world, and its precepts intervine in the private life Moslems.

Today, the Shiite Mullahs in power in Iran take themselves for the leaders of all Moslems. They extol a return in the sources of the Charia and at the age of gold of the Prophet Mohammad. The ideal society of the Mullahs is a Moslem community, Umma. Like the At the Golden Age, it has to be symbolised by the bearded men, women caged in their black chador and the intoxicated ardent hordes of medieval rituals. For it all is permitted, even the holy war, the Jihad.

Of this fact, the Shiite Mullahs consider their regime like State of all Moslem, scornful sect inside Islam and the political choices of the most Iranian Shiites. It has all sens of barbarism ( written in the constitution of the Islamic Republic) that the Mullahs dare to impose themselves.

Today as in the time of the first invasion of the Moslem Arabic of the former Persia, and then that of the massacres of the Iranian Sunnites under the reign of Safavid dynasty, the complete application of the Islam and its laws, the Chariah, to all aspects of the daily and political life is imposed against women, the youth, intellectuals, religious and ethnic minorities, and all those who only ask the right to live in a a free and laic society in Iran.