A few days ago a commentator inquired about the meaning of the word "Aryamehr" which I've chosen as a title to my blog, so I thought it would be appropriate to actually make an entry explaining the meaning of "Aryamehr".
Aryamehr is a persian term meaning "Light of the Aryans". This term was granted as a secondary title to the Shahanshah (Emperor) of Iran by a session of the joint Houses of the Iranian Parliament on 15 September 1965 before his coronation at Tehran (26 October, 1967).
When Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi nominally succeeded his father (in exile because of the Islamist Revolt of 1979 which made Iran into an Islamic Republic) he assumed as Reza Pahlavi II the titles of Shahanshah and Aryamehr together with the style of His Imperial Majesty, on 27 July 1980.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryamehr
Coronation ceremony (Tehran, 1967)
I also include this link on the word "Aryan" as not everyone is knowledgeable about the meaning and history of this term and might have a very limited/distorted understanding on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan
Posts
8 comments:
Thanks for the explanation but I'm afraid many people will think : "oh this is further evidence of the Shah's megalomaniacal ego".
Let's hope their biased understanding of the Pahlavi era will soon be a thing of the past.
----
I read the article on the Anjoman Padeshashi (what does Padeshashi mean?). This is encouraging but i'm skeptic.
It sounds like they're preparing something big but in the end nothing happens.
Is a subtantial numbre of iranians likely to stop being muslims anytime soon? You say 90% don't pratice islam but it is different than ceasing to submitting to the authority of those who claim they act of God's behalf.
Many muslims never prey but when faced by a mullah/imam, they tend to vest them with a high degree of authority.
Do you think the Iranians are going to reject Islam (a religion) like the Poles rejected communism (an ideology)?
Fantastic post. I think you would like this:
"... It is a remarkable fact that, with few exceptions, most Muslim scholars... in the intellectual sciences have been non-Arabs... thus the founders of grammar were Sibawaih and after him, al-Farisi and Az-Zajjaj. All of them were of Persian descent... they invented rules of (Arabic) grammar... great jurists were Persians... only the Persians engaged in the task of preserving knowledge and writing systematic scholarly works. Thus the truth of the statement of the prophet becomes apparent, 'If learning were suspended in the highest parts of heaven the Persians would attain it"... The intellectual sciences were also the preserve of the Persians, left alone by the Arabs, who did not cultivate them... as was the case with all crafts... This situation continued in the cities as long as the Persians and Persian countries, Iraq, Khorasan and Transoxiana (modern Central Asia), retained their sedentary culture." The Muqaddimah, Translated by F. Rosenthal (III, pp. 311-15, 271-4 [Arabic]; R.N. Frye (p.91)
really sad to see that iran is no occupied by arabist clerics
Winston, I may agree with you. Can you explain your comment a bit more, i.e. context and a point of reference? “Arabist clerics”, what does that mean and compared to which present or 20th century Arab/Islam country, even before that? Are you thinking of Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Oman, Turkey or which countries do you see as a model and supreme example of a successful Arab/Islam ideology, ruled by Islam and Islamic laws? Did they have a reformation of some kind? Forgive me, but your comment is very vague to me and open to much interpretation & assumptions.
Leviathan,
"Megalomaniacal ego"? The title was bestowed upon him by the parliament of the country as an honorary gesture. These titles might seem "megalomaniacal" to someone coming from a 200 year old "republic" but not to a country with over 6000 years of civilization and history - 2500 years of that being monarchical and with Great Kings having reigned over that land. Those who have a distorted view on history, culture, and political systems (amongst other things) need to step outside of the cocoons they have built for themselves.
In regards to your question on what "Anjomane Padeshahi Iran" mean it translates into "Kingdom/Monarchy Assembly of Iran"; (Anjoman = Assembly - Padehshahi = Kingdom/Monarchy). In regards to this organizations activities they have carried out operations successfully in the past which has has gained my trust in them. We will see what happens towards the end of this month.
The end of the Islamic Republic will lead to the end of an era when Islamic beliefs had a devastating strangle-hold on Iranian society. There might not be "mass-conversions" immediately but with a free press/media available to a greater number of people this backward faith/ideology will loose its stranglehold of Iran and Iranians.
Your so-called "muslim"/imam example is an excellent example in countries under Islamic domination where mullah's rule. If you are a weak commoner you will not dare stand up to a mullah knowing that they are the ones in power - that is unless you want to face lashes, torture, beheadings, amputations, or death!
Islam is not just a religion but is also an ideology of communism. It's a political doctrine which can also be looked upon as a tool of Arab Imperialism. Islam penetrates into every sphere of your private life and dictates how you should behave, dress, eat etc. And yes, with the Islamic Republic gone and a free press/media Iranians will reject Islam.
Correction:
*an ideology LIKE communism (not "of")
Aryamehr, I agree with your explanation and I am glad so many iranians are waking up and facing the alienation brought upon them by the shiite clergy.
Other people from other countries are looking at Iran in the hope that something happens that will eventually topple islam as the main provider for the values of the common people.
I'm thinking about Tadjikistan, Afghanistan & other muslim countries who are still suffering from the yoke of the clerics.
All kings, if Competent and Just have the right to be exalted. Ceremony is an important process of Kingship and nationality, therefore it is not out of place, such a display of pomp as those pictures display.
Kurosh and Darayawush both engaged in grand displays of Ceremony, but did they not deserve it? Did their tireless efforts, together with those of their generals not yield a beautiful homeland for you people?
So, in the end, which would you preffer? A Persia free to think and do, or an Iran told to shut up, keep quiet and submit?
Honestly, how many of the Islamic Republic's soldiers do you think would support those bearded butchers, if ALL of Iran gathered up in Myriads of men and women, armed with whatever they could get their hands on, comming for them?
They all need to face Justice, that is the only think that can save Iran from the wrath of the oil crazed western war machine. There would be nothing worse for the average intellectual in your country than having to fight against two enemies at the same time, the Islamists on one hand, and the Americans on the other. If Iran unites again, it will withstand anything, as it has done so in the ancient past {Remember, The Seleucids, The Romans, The Byzantines, e.t.c all were kept from expanding by either the Parthians and later the Sassanids}
If you unite and eliminate the Mullahs, you'll keep America at bay as well as regain your freedom. If not, what happened after Alexander's victory at Gaugamella will likely happen yet again, with much more dire consequences this time around.
V
Post a Comment