Loose reply to Yifan's comment
Yes it's clearer now, as I read on, that the ancient Persian intellectual prowess had been very impressive and has always been preserved. The Persians have managed to internalise and alter a lot of foreign culture.
Haven't read till recent years. But they've been through a lot of blood baths throughout. I don't know why is there such a lot of blood involved. Seems a lot like it's related to Islam but I really shouldn't go there. Maybe it's just coincidence or the dead righteous nature of the people of Central Asia. From the beginning it seems the people's belief (Zoroastrian philosophy) was rooted in one word - "justice". And this belief is not shallow at all, but deeply spiritual. I imagine when justice is violated it can get really frustrating. Perhaps that's why hatred had always flown so freely whenever there was change of dynasty. The ex-ruler always gets violent treatments - chopped up, head made into drinking cup, etc. When you think about the good old days of ex-rulers such as Li3 hou4 zhu3 getting lavishly imprisoned, you would not complain about humaneness of the Chinese.
Suffrage in 19th century was akin to that of the Chinese. Mainly due to military backwardness. Shut off from western enlightenment and science for pragmatic social development; miring in medieval religion, philosophy and literature. So there were scholars who embraced Western learnings and religious leaders who defended the spirituality. The Iranians are indeed smart or would not have felt and pondered over the impact of Westernization at all. However, I think they are keen to guard their own identity.
"...the Iranians as a people felt a new foreign invasion descending on a country repeatedly subjected to the alien. In its presence, they sensed that the Western invasion would be different from those of the Arabs, the Turks, and the Mongols. After all, the Arabs brought Islam and the Persians altered it. The Turks embraced Ferdowsi [Iranian poet who exalted Persian myths and kings]. And the Mongols built a shrine to Imam Ali [martyred descendent of Mohammed]. But Westerners seemed impervious to Iranian culture. They were simply too powerful and too sure in their own culture to give way as previous invaders had to the civilisation of the Iranians. As important, the West presented the Iranians with a block of ideas so alien to their culture that it could not be absorbed without destroying the Iranians' own identity."
Iranians are acutely aware of the difference in their own culture as compared to that of the West. Their sense of nationalism is more defined than that, say, of the Chinese. I think that's because of the tangible practices and teachings of a well-established religion that binds the nation. For the Chinese it's just Confucianism, a set of "unwritten rules" that molded behaviour and thought. And then there was Communism that dashed a substantial amount of spirituality. I should think that's why Iranians had had a tougher time. Too smart, and more importantly, too zhi2 zhuo2.
Haven't read till recent years. But they've been through a lot of blood baths throughout. I don't know why is there such a lot of blood involved. Seems a lot like it's related to Islam but I really shouldn't go there. Maybe it's just coincidence or the dead righteous nature of the people of Central Asia. From the beginning it seems the people's belief (Zoroastrian philosophy) was rooted in one word - "justice". And this belief is not shallow at all, but deeply spiritual. I imagine when justice is violated it can get really frustrating. Perhaps that's why hatred had always flown so freely whenever there was change of dynasty. The ex-ruler always gets violent treatments - chopped up, head made into drinking cup, etc. When you think about the good old days of ex-rulers such as Li3 hou4 zhu3 getting lavishly imprisoned, you would not complain about humaneness of the Chinese.
Suffrage in 19th century was akin to that of the Chinese. Mainly due to military backwardness. Shut off from western enlightenment and science for pragmatic social development; miring in medieval religion, philosophy and literature. So there were scholars who embraced Western learnings and religious leaders who defended the spirituality. The Iranians are indeed smart or would not have felt and pondered over the impact of Westernization at all. However, I think they are keen to guard their own identity.
"...the Iranians as a people felt a new foreign invasion descending on a country repeatedly subjected to the alien. In its presence, they sensed that the Western invasion would be different from those of the Arabs, the Turks, and the Mongols. After all, the Arabs brought Islam and the Persians altered it. The Turks embraced Ferdowsi [Iranian poet who exalted Persian myths and kings]. And the Mongols built a shrine to Imam Ali [martyred descendent of Mohammed]. But Westerners seemed impervious to Iranian culture. They were simply too powerful and too sure in their own culture to give way as previous invaders had to the civilisation of the Iranians. As important, the West presented the Iranians with a block of ideas so alien to their culture that it could not be absorbed without destroying the Iranians' own identity."
Iranians are acutely aware of the difference in their own culture as compared to that of the West. Their sense of nationalism is more defined than that, say, of the Chinese. I think that's because of the tangible practices and teachings of a well-established religion that binds the nation. For the Chinese it's just Confucianism, a set of "unwritten rules" that molded behaviour and thought. And then there was Communism that dashed a substantial amount of spirituality. I should think that's why Iranians had had a tougher time. Too smart, and more importantly, too zhi2 zhuo2.
posted by Azzurra | 6:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home