|
|
|
|
The Role of Zoroastrianism in the Development of Shiaism They call the Sahaba who overrun the Sassanid Empire as uncivilized Bedouins. Al-Ihqaqi said, ”The catastrophes that befell both the Iranian and Roman Empires were because of the Muslim invasion and the Arab treatment. The newly converts who were not accustomed much with the spirit of Islam, had implanted in their hearts hate to the Arabs and to their customs. This was because the conquerors were uncivilized Bedouins who ravaged and destroyed their beautiful cities and cultivated lands, in the east and the west. The thirsty worshippers of carnal desires raided the chastity and honour of these two empires...... (Risalatul Emaan,p.323, Mirza Hasan al Haieeri al-Ihqaqi, As Sadiq library, Kuwait) According to this Shiite al-Ihqaqi, the noble companions who conquered Persia ,the superpower of the time, with zeal and faith were early Bedouins, who worshipped their carnal desires and they spread havoc and destruction. And this is the main reason why many Shiite Iranians have hatred towards Umar ibn al-Khattab because the later overrun the mighty and arrogant Persian Empire. In the Iranian city of Keyshan, there is a street by the name of Firouzi. By the side of this road lies the ground of Firouzi which holds the tomb of Abu Lu’lu al-Majusi the killer of Umar. The Shiite Iranians call him “Baba Shujahudeen” or the “brave of religion” and they present their respect and condolences to him on the day he died. By giving the attribute of “Baba Shujahudeen” to Abu lu’lu leaves two impressions: Firstly it makes it clear the Abu Lu’Lu is the spiritual father of the Shiites. Secondly the attribution of “Shujahudeen” shows that the Zoroastrian religion is the real religion for them. Thus the religion of the Rawafid is a mere Magian sect. The same is the reason behind the exaltation of the descendents of Imam Hussein(ra) solely, and not of the progeny of Imam Hassan(ra). This is because the descendents of Hussein are their own Persian brethren as Imam Hussein(ra) was married to ShahrBano the daughter of Yazgard who was the last Persian Empire. [Shiite source: Bihaarul Anwar 45:329] One is amazed to see that the Shiites weep over the martyrdom of Imam Hussein(ra) whereas they never weep over the martyrdom of his brother Abu Bakr ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib and over the martyrdom of his son Abu Bakr. Those who bear those names are from the Ahlul Bayt also. Why negligence? Is it because they have names which are disliked by the Rafadhis and by announcing it to their Shiite listeners would expose the love of the Ahlul Bayt to the companions especially to Abu Bakr and Umar?
Shiite muhaditeen like Abu Faraj al-Isfahani in his Muqatil at-Talibeen-p.88,142,188; Al-Arbali in his Kashful Ghumamah vol.2,p.64; and Majlisi in Jila el-ou’ioun 582 stated that amongst those who were martyred with Hussein in Karbala were Abu Bakr ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib and Abu Bakr ibn Hussein ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib. Is it because that the likes of Abu Bakr and Umar wiped out the Sassanid arrogance and for this reason mentioning their names are unbearable? Muhammad Ali Mu’zi, an Iranian Shiite researcher in France has stated with pride: “The basic fundamentals of the Zoroastrian religion has entered into Shiaism even in some minute issues. The marriage of Imam Hussein with the daughter of the last Sassanid Empire is a symbol of ancient Iran as Shahrbano became the first mother or lady for the Iranian nation. And this relationship marked the brotherhood between Shiaism and the ancient Magian Iran.” For this reason they exalt Salman al-Farsi regardless of the other companions in so much that they claimed about him that he used to receive revelations because he was a “Persian”. (Shiite source: Rijaal Kashshi) For this reason we see in their works that Ali ibn Abi Talib said with respect to Kisraa: “God has saved him from the punishment of hell fire, and hell is made forbidden for him.” [Shiite source: Bihaarul Anwar 41:14] |
