Tag Archives: persia

About Iran and the Iranians

Someone just wrote to ask me what I’ve got against Iran.

I wrote to ask what he meant by that and he replied, saying, that I seem to have a lot of material on the blog that could be considered anti-Iranian or anti-Muslim. 

So, this is probably a good time to address the issue.

I am emphatically pro-Iranian and pro-Iran. Not the government bigwigs, but the guy running the fruit stand; the bakery; the neighbourhood taxi; or the woman getting her kids off to school in the morning; the young girl dreaming of her wedding; the young poet, whether she is writing about music… or dancing about architecture. 

Iran is a big country, with over 65 million people spread over an area about one-fifth the size of the United States. It has a brilliant culture that has woven itself together (with strands from many faraway places) over thousands of years. It has, at various times, made great strides in science, design, mathematics, human rights and political thought. I just don’t happen to consider the past 30 years of its history to be its crowning renaissance. And I think that most Iranians would—even if reluctantly—have to agree with me on that. 

As for being anti-Muslim: Anyone who can remember to give thanks to G-d five times a day is all right by me. The Lord Eternal is my Rock and Redeemer, too.

The crew presently running the show in Iran are not evil because they are Muslim. They are misguided because they would risk the whole world to advance their theological interpretation of the Mohammedan scriptures. They see “their way” as the best exemplar of the will of G-d (Allah), which is intrinsically arrogant. 

The reigning political cabal in Tehran bears strikingly resemblance to a sophisticated doomsday cult that would harness the national pride of its people and the broader surety of Islam in service of its own self-declared objective of hastening the appearance of the Messiah (al-Mahdi) by bringing the world to the brink of absolute chaos.

And that’s just not fair to the guy at the fruit stand. Not to mention the rest of us.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Conflict, Life, Reason

Sadducees, Pharisees & Essenes

jbookThe roles and significance of the Sadducees, Pharisees and Essenes in Jewish religious history has been much discussed and – more often than not – hotly debated. From whence did these three influential sects arise?

Here’s a brief article on the origin of their respective names.


The Sadducees were the Hasmonean priests of the Second Temple period (516 BCE to 70 CE) in Jerusalem. The name comes from the Hebrew name Tzadok, the high priest who anointed King Solomon and who was selected by the him to oversee the affairs of worship. The name in Hebrew (צדוק) means “righteous”. In the Greek histories, since there is no single Greek letter that makes the sound “tz” (the letter tzadi צ in Hebrew), the word gradually became more Hellenic.

That’s the easy one that everybody knows.

The Essenes, whose name we also obtain from the Greeks, is a case of language evolving in the opposite direction. The moniker began as the Greek term xénos (ξένος – stranger) and became incorporated into the local parlance between the time of Alexander’s Middle Eastern campaigns until the Roman occupation of the region. Koine Greek was widely spoken in the area, especially in commercial and cultural centres. Because there is no single letter in Hebrew to represent the sound “x“, a common “s” sound (samech: ס) was substituted with a placeholder vowel (aleph: א) standing at the head of the word – resulting in the Aramaic-Hebrew word Esseni (אסני). Transliterated back into Greek, this resulted in the word Εσσηνοι (Essenoi), as recorded in the histories of Josephus.

Neither Josephus, nor Philo, nor Pliny the Elder recognised how the term came into being; never suspecting that it originally came from Greek! The question would seem to be why the Essenes, a sect of religious ascetics who studied almost exclusively in Hebrew would choose to call themselves by a Greek word. And the short answer is that they didn’t; they were called that by the rest of the population. Often living and studying in caves or other rough shelters, they ventured out only to attend select discussions and ceremonies at the Temple in Jerusalem. No wonder everyone called them ‘strangers’. They lived most of their lives below the radar since the time when the armies of Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed the Temple of Solomon in 586 BCE, when they fled to the desert regions with as many scrolls as they could carry and sought shelter in caves. Ironically, they also considered themselves Tzadokites (Sadducees) since they were largely descended from the line of Tzadok – unlike the Hasmonean high priests who later came to hold that name themselves.

The Pharisees were generally composed of those returning from the Babylonian exile after Cyrus the Great, King of Persia and Media, conqueror of Babylon, granted them leave to return to Jerusalem and rebuild their Temple – as prophesied by the prophets Jeremiah and Daniel. During the time that they were separated from the activities in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, they resurrected the oral traditions to a degree not seen among the Israelites since the time of Moses. They had little choice. They had but fragments of their sacred texts that they were able to smuggle with them into captivity; a situation that eventually led to the creation of the Babylonian Talmud and the development of the Rabbinic tradition. Without an acknowledged central authority, religious instruction quickly devolved into a new, more distributed format. The term Pharisee comes from the Hebrew word פרושים (perushim), meaning ‘separated ones’.

Upon their return to Jerusalem and environs (having lived for almost 50 years in exile under a combination of Babylonian, Median and Persian rulers) they found that they didn’t immediately fit in. The Sadducees initially rejected their new teaching methods and the mostly Aramaic-speaking population wasn’t quite sure what to do with so many now-Farsi-speaking immigrants. This makes a double entendre of the name, since it can refer to their time of ‘separation’ and to the language (Parsi/Pharsi/Farsi) that they predominantly spoke.


In the end, it would take the efforts of all three sects to keep their common faith alive through many years of repression and persecution by Rome; the period during which the Second Holy Temple would be defiled and destroyed.

© 2009

Leave a comment

Filed under Esoterics, Life