Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:29:13.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Zoroastrians In Muslim Iran: Selected Problems of Coexistence and Interaction During the Early Medieval Period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Jamsheed K. Choksy
Jamsheed K. Choksy*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Arab conquest of the Sasanian empire (633-651 A.D.) provided the Iranian peoples with their first extensive contact with Islam. Prior to this, encounters between Zoroastrians and Muslims had generally been restricted to the lower reaches of the Mesopotamian plain. More importantly, this conquest installed Islam as the religion of the new rulers, replacing Zoroastrianism, referred to as the good religion (Phl. weh dēn) by its followers, which had enjoyed royal favor under the Sasanians. The conquest of the Sasanian empire resulted in large numbers of Arabs entering and eventually settling on Iranian territory. The presence of these Arabs on the Mesopotamian plain and Iranian plateau, and their eventual settlement there, naturally resulted in coexistence and social interaction between Muslims and the native Zoroastrians. This interaction would initially have been slow, as the Arab troops were confined to military garrisons (Ar. Amşār).

Type
Articles
Information
Iranian Studies , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , 1987 , pp. 17 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Iranian Studies 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 I am grateful to Professors Richard W. Bulliet, Richard N. Frye, and Roy P. Mottahedeh for their advice and suggestions.

2 Abd al-Husain Zarrīnkūb, “The Arab Conquest of Iran and Its Aftermath”, in The Cambridge History of Iran 4, ed. Richard N. Frye (Cambridge, 1975), p. 27.

3 Donner, Fred M., The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton, 1981).Google Scholar

4 Hinds, Martin, “The First Arab Conquests in Fars”, Iran 22 (1984), 39-53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Morony, Michael G., Iraq After the Arab Conquest (Princeton, 1984).Google Scholar

6 Morony, Iraq, p. 7.

7 Boyce, Mary, Zoroastrians: Their Beliefs and Practices (London, 1979).Google Scholar

8 Boyce, Zoroastrians, pp. xiii, 145-46.

9 The Cambridge History of Iran 4, ed. Richard N. Frye (Cambridge 1975); and The Cambridge History of Iran 5, ed. J. A. Boyle (Cambridge, 1968).

10 Frye, Richard N., The Golden age of Persia: The Arabs in the East (London, 1975).Google Scholar

11 Dennett, Daniel C., Conversion and the Poll Tax in Early Islam (Cambridge, Mass., 1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Bulliet, Richard W., Conversion to Islam in the Medieval Period: An Essay in Quantitative History (Cambridge, Mass., 1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Dennett, Conversion, p.2.

13 Wellhausen, J., Das Arabische Reich und sein Sturz (Berlin, 1902), pp. 151-53, 169-87, 297-300CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Frede Lokkegaard/stowz'c Taxation in the Classic Period (Copenhagen, 1950), pp.128-31, for another critique of Wellhausen's conclusions.

14 Dennett, Conversion, pp. 41-42, 120-21, 128; and Boyce, Zoroastrians, p. 148.

15 Bulliet, Conversion p. 4.

16 Bulliet, Conversion, p. 19.

17 Ibid.

18 Pierre Jean de Menasce, P., “Zoroastrian Literature After the Muslim Conquest,” in The Cambridge History of Iran 4, ed. Frye, Richard N. (Cambridge, 1975), p. 543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 See Choksy, Jamsheed K., “Purity and Pollution in Zoroastrianism,” The Mankind Quarterly 27,4 (1987), pp.171-79,Google Scholar for a detailed discussion of the crystallization of the codes of ritual purity.

20 Bulliet, Conversion, pp. 43-44.

21 Morony, Iraq, pp. 298-99, 302.

22 Dādestān ī Dēnīg 40.2, ed. Tahmuras D. Anklesaria, as Datistan-i Dinik 1 (Bombay, n.d.).

23 Dādestān ī Dēnig 40.5.

24 Dādestān ī Dēnig 41.2.

25 Dādestān ī Dēnīg 40.5

26 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Ašawahištān 26.2-3, ed. Behramgore T. Anklesaria, as Rivāyat-ī Hēmīt ī Asavahistān 1 (Bombay, 1962)

27 Pahlavi Rivaāyat of Ādurfarnbay and Farnbaysrōš 43.2, ed. Behramgore T. Anklesaria, as The Pahlavi Rivāyat of Āturfarnbag and Farnbarg-Srōš 1 (Bombay, 1969).

28 Yahya b. Adam, Kitāb al- Kharāj trans. Ben Shemesh, A., as Taxation in Islam, 1 (Leiden, 1958), p.32Google Scholar; and Qudama b. Ja‘far, Kitāb al-Kharāj, trans. Ben Shemesh, A., as Taxation in Islam, 2 (Leiden, 1965), p.30.Google Scholar

29 Pahlavi Rivāyat of Ādurfarnbay and Farnbaysrōš 52.1-2.

30 Cf. Persian Rivāyats 1.281, lines 1-2, ed. Manockji R. Unvala, as Dārāb Hormazyār's Rivāyats 2 vols. (Bombay, 1922).

31 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Ašawahištān 4.4-5.

32 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Ašawahištān 4.6.

33 For example, Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Asawahištān 1.1-6, 2.1-2; and Pahlavi Rivāyat of Ādurfarnbay and Farnbaysrōš 1.1-2, 2.1-2, 3.1-2, 5.1-2.

34 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Ašawahištān 1.6; and Pahlavi Rivāyat of Ādurfarnbay and Farnbaysrōš 2.2.

35 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Ašawahištān 1.3, 2.2.

36 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Ašawahištān 1.1.

37 Cf. Persian Rivāyats 1.55, lines 10-14.

38 Dādestān ī Dēnīg 56.2-4, ed. Anklesaria, Pishotan K., as A Critical Edition of the Unedited Portion of the Dātistān-i Dīnīk (University of London Dissertation, 1958).Google Scholar

39 Boyce, Mary, A History of Zoroastrianism 1, Handbuch der Orientalisk (Leiden, 1975), p. 294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40 Cf. Persian Rivāyats 1.78, lines 3-4.

41 Choksy, “Purity,” pp. 173-74.

42 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd i Ašawahištān 42.2 A tanāpuhl sin prevents the soul from crossing the Bridge of the Separator. Atonement for this sin cost three hundred staters.

43 Rivāyat ī Ēmēd ī Ašawahištān 19.6-7.

44 Cf. Persian Rivāyats 1.261, lines 16-18.

45 Dādestān ī Dēnīg 52.1-5.

46 Dādestān ī Dēnīg 49.3.

47 Ibid.

48 At-Tabari, Ta'rīkh ar-rusul wa l-mulūk, ed. de Goeje, M. J. (Leiden, 1879), 1.2261.Google Scholar

49 Dennett, Conversion pp. 116-18, See also Yahya b. Adam, Kitāb al-Kharāj, p.44.

50 Dennett, Conversion, pp. 116-18.

51 Morony, Iraq, p.109.

52 Dennett, Conversion, p. 119; and Morony Iraq, p. 110.

53 Boyce, Zoroastrians, p.148. Tabari, Ta'rīkh, 1.1507-10, however states that seven thousand Sogdians abandoned their superficial profession of Islam upon their sincerity being subject to inquiry. The veracity of this account is questionable, especially because the number of individuals said to have been involved is extremely large. Further, it is not clear whether any of these Sogdians were originally Zoroastrians.

54 Tabari, Ta'rīkh, 1.1509-10, describes the treatment of Zoroastrians who appeared before the Muslim authorities to pay the poll tax. Abu Yusuf Ya‘qub b. Ibrahim, Kitāb al-Kharaj, trans, Ben Shemesh, A., as Taration in Islam, 3 (Leiden, 1969), pp. 93, 99Google Scholar, describes the sealed lead rings and other items which Zoroastrians were compelled to wcar in order to denote their low social status.

55 Yahya b. Adam, Kitāb al-Kharāj, pp.51-52.

56 Tabari, Ta'rīkh, 1.3423-24.

57 Qudama b. Ja‘far, Kitāb al-Kharāj, pp. 26, 38.

58 Greater Bundahišn, ed. Anklesaria, Tahmuras D., as The Būndahishn (Bombay, 1908), p.1Google Scholar, line 10; p.2, line 4.

59 Frye, The Golden Age, pp. 61-62.

60 Narshakhi, Tārīkh-e Bokhārā, trans. Frye, Richard N., as The History of Bukhara (Cambridge, Mass., 1954), pp. 47-48.Google Scholar

61 Narshakhi, Tārīkh, pp. 20-21.

62 Tabari, Ta'rīkh, 1.2371.

63 Dennett, Conversion, p. 127; and Bulliet, Conversion, pp.41, 81-82.

64 Boyce, Zoroastrians, p. 147.

65 Tabari, Ta'rīkh, 1.2467-68, 2.458.

66 Dennett, Conversion, p.127. see also the conversion curve in Bulliet, Conversion, p.44, which indicates that the rate of conversion began its accelaration under the Abbasids.

67 Morony, Iraq, p. 202.

68 Narshakhi, Tārīkh, pp. 47-48.

69 Mahmud b. ‘Uthman, Die Vita des Scheich Abū Isẓāq al Kāzarūnī, ed. F. Meier (Leipzig, 1948), pp 27-29.

70 Ibid. Indeed, once when a mob of Zoroastrians attempted to murder the Shaykh, Muslims plundered and burnt the Zoroastrian quarter of the town.

71 al-Mulk, Nizam, Siyar al-Mulūk or Siyāsatnāmeh, ed. Drake, Hubert (Tehran, 1962), p. 202.Google Scholar

72 Nizam al-Mulk, Siyāsatnāmeh, p. 211.

73 Khadduri, M., The Islamic Law of Nations: Shaybānī's Siyar (Baltimore, 1966), pp. 226-27.Google Scholar

74 Boyce, Zoroastrians, p. 159.

75 Zarrinkub, “The Arab Conquest,” p. 31.

76 Ibid.

77 For the Hanafi ban on intermarriage and consumption of Zoroastrian food see also Morony, Iraq, p. 301, with n. 122.

78 Tabari, Ta'rīkh, 1.3350.

79 Abu Yusuf, Kitāb al-Kharāj, pp. 66-67, 88-89; and Qudama b. Ja‘far, Kitāb al Kharāj, p. 47.

80 Morony, Iraq, p. 255.

81 Fischer, Michael M. J., Iran: From Relgious Dispute to Revolution (Cambridge, Mass., 1980), p. 106.Google Scholar

82 Nizam al-Mulk, Siyāsatnāmeh, p. 23031.

83 Frye, The Golden Age, p. 209. This protection is generally attributed to Buyid tolerance of religious diversity.