Last news : Kurds are not Aryan !

[raman82]

One of my cousins is married to a Iranian Zoroastrian so Im very familiar with Zoroastrian customs which are very similar with Aryanman rudr sect which I come from in Kashmir , very similar , and since I am from a family of priests ,we learn sanskrit , so I can immediately relate words in avesta and verses in gathas and you get excellent books on Zoroastrianism in India ,who have meticulously put so many details in these books . In fact lots of these books are considered a standard for Zoroastrians abroad. Zoroastrians come of 3 orders , Farsi speaking Zoroastrians from central Iran ,
Parsis who came to Western India in medieval times and 2nd wave called Iranis who came in the 18th century during the Najaf persecution . In any case , by Zoroastrian I mean the peoples living in South Central Iran today , who lived their prior to Arab conquests, who remained Zoroastrian , so through endogamy they have more or less preserved some archaic iranic traits ,similar to the Copts in Egypt. Actually earlier it was thought Zoroaster was from Western Iran but its been accepted by most scholars and even Zoroastrians that, he originally was from Eastern Iran or Bactria(Western Afghanistan) , which if you think about it makes sense. Avesta and Rig Ved are very similar at this time with Ved being written about 1800-1500 bc and Avesta 1200-1000 bc , and geographically the areas consisting of Panjsher valley , Potohar peninsula match up,since they are not too far but a little distant,so a linguistic deviation will occur over time but still considerably similar . Baluchis reside in these areas(Eastern Iran and West Afghanistan) and at the time the Avesta was written Kurds and Baluchi could be regarded as the same ,so it would be more correct to call Zoroaster, Ancient Iranian but essentially a Kurd , but a Baluchi could make the arguement he was Baluchi too lol so Iranian encompasses the too and a Persian can claim likewise . Now I will say the region which consists of Kurdistan played a tremendous role in the Zoroastrian religion and development.

[raman82]

I meant to say Hurrian substratum ,also Sohrab my information isnt biased or based on inaccurate information , lot of it is based on readings of credible sources , you must understand at the time of Zoroastrianism , the concept of separate Iranic groups wasnt there , think about it they had just separated from Indo Aryans living in Eastern Afghanistan and North west Pakistan (Potohar). The forebearers of Kurds , Persians , Baluchis and other Iranic groups were pretty much similar group of Indo Iranian tribes at the time between 1500 -1000 BC . So any Iranic person be it Persian ,Kurd , Baluchi ,etc can claim Zoroaster is theirs .

[raman82]

Another thing which complicates the history of the region of Kurdistan is the presence of Mittani , who are not even Iranic at all but Sanskrit speaking Indo Aryans who had come from the Northern part of the Indian subcontinent ruling over areas of what are Kurdistan. How do I know they are not Iranic , is the fact "Z" syllabant isnt present in MIttani treaties , Z sound doesnt exist in Sanskrit and the names of certain gods evoked in treaties and lessons, clearly point to a group which is not even Iranic at all .Another odd thing is the particular divinity given to peacocks ,a bird which doesnot exist in the middle east but come from the northern part of the Indian subcontinent. This is still practiced in Yezidism though ,whose members are entirely Kurdish. Added to this they are other cultures living in the area in tandem , so Kurdistan is a complicated place .

[Arashi]

Yes, that area has had a alot of names throughout time...including Iran, Persia, Media, Elam, Azarbaijan, etc, which would make him and his religion Iranian, Persian, Median, Elamite, Azari, etc. I sincerely doubt that area was called Kurdistan at the time of Zoroaster...

I find it odd that a speaker of the eastern branch of Iranic languages, at a time when there were no mention of Medes, Persians, Kurds, etc, would infact be a Kurd, especially at a time when the Kurds didn't speak an Iranic language...Which points to him either not being in contact with these tribes, or they didn't exist at that time...

Furthermore, Zoroastrianism is a sort of a revolt against a primitive form of Hinduism. Were the Kurds Hindus? You're making kinda uneducated guesses here. If you care so much about "your" prophet, maybe you should think about taking up the Avesta sometime.

I wasn't aware that Rey was included in Kurdistan.

What are you on about????

I said: one of the claim is that Zerdesht was from Afghanistan/Khorasan and the OTHER two claims are that he was from Kurdistan - one saying he was from Hewraman and the other saying he was from Ûrmiye. And this is not my OPPINION - but what some scholars say! Now get over yourself...

I'm making uneducated guesses? Why do you always have to be so impolite and use such inciting language? Why don't you just disagree without the tantrums?

Rey? Where is that? Is that the area in Afghanistan/Khorasan people talk about?

ÛRMIYE has NEVER been known as "PERSIA", "ELAM" or "AZERBAIJAN" - that is simply ridiculous...

Rey is in the Tehran area. Rey and the "Western Iran" idea has long since been rejected by scholars...

Ehh...I wasn't aware I was throwing a tantrum... was just presenting some facts...Sorry! You shouldn't be so sensitive, perhaps. "You're making uneducated guesses" must be the lamest insult ever, if you thought that was my intention.

[raman82]

Diri vs Arashi ding ding lets get ready to rumble lol jk

[Johny Bravo]

the modern jews are NOT semitic, look at they, they are mixed with europeans. the gentest is a fake or they analyized only jews they live in kurdistan or otherwhere. kurds are nearer to persians, arabs or armenians. but NOT to jews.

[Jaff Sassani]

We believe that we are part of the Indo-European's language in the Middle East, our genetic very close with the Hebrew Jewish because we might be the same people, I don't see any thing is wrong with that the Arab claimed many ethnic group in the Middle East to be Aramaic people, may be the Hebrew Jewish people are not Aramaic people after all.

We don't need to pay to much attention to the Arab opinion, we Aryan people in the Middle East are more than Arab's so what is the point.

Please support the econamic union of Aryan people in Middle East.

SKDC
Nov-25-07



Glory, Glory the Aryan Union (AU) will be here just like The European Union (EU), Long live United Aryan People

The Japanese people does not have atomic bomb yet they are the most powerful nation on earth today, even they were under United State occupation. So why the Islamic republic of Iran want to build the atomic bomb, they claming to get the Islam independent without taking order from USA or European Union but smarty Russian did have a lot of atomic bombs without to much accomplishment for their people.

Please read the cote by former President of the United State of America Mr. Bill Clinton when he said, “It is economy Stupid”.


Ērānšahr[58] [58]
Sassanid Empire



The Aryan, Eransahr (Iranian) need healthy economy not Atomic Bombs, the people starving under the Arab ruler of Iran (Sayedi Arabi the children of the Prophet Mohammad from his daughter Fatima wife of Ali Bin Abo-Talib).

Why people of Iran blind the ruler in Iran all Sayedi Arabi except Ayatullah Ali Akbar Hashmi Rafsanjani who is Mongol origin, so why you are blind when you going to understand, look they are trying to liberate Palestine, ask your self what is the benefit of that fight for Iran and Iranian people.

Arab under Islamic pretext destroyed our culture, our independent, our economy, our life when you will get the picture.

Wake up build your economic Union to liberate your people from poverty, disease, hunger, million of other problems, rebuild your union, your independent, get your dignity back among other nation in the world.

The western country and United State of America are not your enemy, it is you don’t blame others for your problem.

[nuray]

welcome to rbk, jaff!

[xosere]

@Diri

Good, then you should not brand Zazas Kurdish cause I don't see any Zaza branding himself/herself
Kurdish. But there are millions of Kurds who accept Turkish identity. Just watch this video

http://www.zaman.com.tr/haber.do?haberno=616538

They look pretty happy...

You're so wrong... I know MANY Zazakî Kurds... And they are proud of being Kurdish...

Your problem is that you think it has to be either this OR that... Which shows how narrow-minded you are...

You feel that it's a defeat for your Zazaistan if some Zazakî call themselves "Kurds"... That's your problem. I have no problem with Kurds who say they are Turks. To me, they are not Kurds - but Turks... Because they CHOSE to be Turks, not Kurds... Get it?

There is nothing I should get from you, you bigot nationalist.
According to your logic, you should not say "Zaza Kurds" too
if you really claim there are "Zaza Kurds." Then they are just Kurds.

I don't realy care if people call themselves Kurds, but you cannot say
"Zaza Kurds." That is at least what you say.

Do you really consider those Kurds Turkish. If so, your Kurdistan
is out the window baby. Then there are not enough majority to
form Kurdistan in any SE vilayets.

[xosere]

If these people claim Zoroaster is Kurdish,
I claim Zoroaster is Zazaish.
My bet is as good as their bet.

Why do you use the GERMAN form of the name and not the Zazakî form of the name: Zazaki/Zazakî...?

Why do you say "Zazaish"?

And your bet is a bet, while what I've said is based on what some scholars say - scholars = professors and people with Ph.D's - not bets...

First, it is not the German form; its is the English form. Second, I
can use whatever form I want. Obviously you use the English form
of Kurdish. How about that? Are you disturbed by the word Zazaish?

I don't use the "Zazakî" form because in Zazaish alphabet we
don't have that weird looking "î" letter.

Scientific? Who are those science guys? Are they the same guys
who claim Zazas are Turkish, or those who claim Zazas are Armenian,
or Kurds.

The name "Kurd" does not appear anywhere before Islam. So, your
"scholars = professors and people with Ph.D's" is garbage. However,
the name "Zaza" appears some 2500 years ago, Darius, the great,
talks about about Zazas and their city Zazana. So, the probability that
Zerdesht is a Zaza is one million times higher than your claim.

Mey bet beats your scientific bet

[Sirwan]

Nice topic and excellent book by Dr Ferdinand.


I noticed there are a lot of wrong and non-scientific info often fuelled with nationalistic tendencies posted by some members of the forum which actually tempted me to register and answer to some if had enough time.

To begin with I just reply to last comment posted by the dude before me.

If these people claim Zoroaster is Kurdish,
I claim Zoroaster is Zazaish.
My bet is as good as their bet.

Why do you use the GERMAN form of the name and not the Zazakî form of the name: Zazaki/Zazakî...?

Why do you say "Zazaish"?

And your bet is a bet, while what I've said is based on what some scholars say - scholars = professors and people with Ph.D's - not bets...

First, it is not the German form; its is the English form. Second, I
can use whatever form I want. Obviously you use the English form
of Kurdish. How about that? Are you disturbed by the word Zazaish?

I don't use the "Zazakî" form because in Zazaish alphabet we
don't have that weird looking "î" letter.

Scientific? Who are those science guys? Are they the same guys
who claim Zazas are Turkish, or those who claim Zazas are Armenian,
or Kurds.

The name "Kurd" does not appear anywhere before Islam. So, your
"scholars = professors and people with Ph.D's" is garbage. However,
the name "Zaza" appears some 2500 years ago, Darius, the great,
talks about about Zazas and their city Zazana. So, the probability that
Zerdesht is a Zaza is one million times higher than your claim.

Mey bet beats your scientific bet

Mr, for a very clear reference to the Kurds in pre-Islamic times read the book of Karnamki Ardahsiri Babakan which covers the last years of parthian period and the earlier sassanid period.

Secondly the toponym of Zozana which actually does not refer to a people but just is a place name in the highlands of upper Mesopotamia, in Kurdish simply means Highland and also was the name used by Arab geographers to refer to the land of Kurds as Zozan al Akrad i.e. Highland or mountainous country of the Kurds. The word Zazaistan is a modern neologism and no history book contains such a term, nor Zazas ever were regarded as an separate ethnic group in the history of mankind.

[Diri]

Excellent...

Xoş hatî birayê Sîrwan/Sirwan (which one is it?)

Thank you for this very interesting piece of information...

Please be sure to check out the "Introduce Yourself" section - as I've opened a welcome thread for you there!

[xosere]

@Sirwan

It is not "Zozana", he says Zazana. He doesn't say high lands.
He says, "there (is) a town Zazana by name along the Euphrates…”
Get your facts straight, then create your own theories.

In fact, you are good at creating theories. Go work with Turkish
"scholars," you'll can use your imagination with hell a lot.

ccording to Turkish scholars, there was no Kurdish language ever
no separate Kurd ethnicity. You are just like them, dump nationalists.

[Diri]

I meant to say Hurrian substratum ,also Sohrab my information isnt biased or based on inaccurate information , lot of it is based on readings of credible sources , you must understand at the time of Zoroastrianism , the concept of separate Iranic groups wasnt there , think about it they had just separated from Indo Aryans living in Eastern Afghanistan and North west Pakistan (Potohar). The forebearers of Kurds , Persians , Baluchis and other Iranic groups were pretty much similar group of Indo Iranian tribes at the time between 1500 -1000 BC . So any Iranic person be it Persian ,Kurd , Baluchi ,etc can claim Zoroaster is theirs .

Thanks for all your information - which I appreciate and find very interesting... (and for correcting that "Semitic substratum" comment)

But let us not forget: Kurds are made up of many other peoples - which are non-Iranic - such as the Mittanis, the Hurrians, the Hittites, the Halaf culture and many more... These have all set their prints on Kurdistan - leaving us with what we have today - although much of it has gone lost due to the assimilation policies of the occupying countries and their systematic oppression = ethnocide.

Kurds are "Iranic" to the extent that they are linguistically and to some extent also culturally related to Iranic peoples. A significant part of our culture is non-Iranic - from Hurrian roots, Mittani roots etc... We can't be categorized as Aryan/Iranic... It is inaccurate...

[Diri]

@Sirwan

It is not "Zozana", he says Zazana. He doesn't say high lands.
He says, "there (is) a town Zazana by name along the Euphrates…”
Get your facts straight, then create your own theories.

In fact, you are good at creating theories. Go work with Turkish
"scholars," you'll can use your imagination with hell a lot.

ccording to Turkish scholars, there was no Kurdish language ever
no separate Kurd ethnicity. You are just like them, dump nationalists.

The difference between him and you, you know what that is?

He doesn't deny your existence. Neither do I... Yet you continue braying and moaning like we were some Turks - comparing us to ülkücü people... This just goes to show that you have no sense of proportion, nor do you comprehend the larger frame at work here...