Rationality in a Work of the Classical Perio

Rationality always been a dominant subject or a predominant mode of thinking and acting in the Persianate world (or many other parts of the world for that matter), however, occasionally one comes across works from the past that were devoted to the topic. In a book entitled Aiin Akbari (which is the third volume of Akbar Nameh (The Book of Akbar), its author, Abolfazl 'Allami (1551-1602), Akbar Shah's minister, is preoccupied with the question of rationality. 

He believes rational person has fourteen qualities (as rendered by H. S. Jarrett):

1) intellect 2) pleasure 3) pain 4) desire 5) aversion 6) effort 7) merit 8) demerit 9) thinking 10) number 11) quantity 12) individuality 13) conjunction 14) disjunction

Photo is from Here

The author goes on to explain that the first nine of these qualities are interconnected, and others including number, quantity, individuality conjunction, disjunction, and sound, compliment them. 

He also categorizes and attributes these qualities according to the elements of air, fire, water, earth, and odor; a predominate way of categorizing phenomena in the classical period. 

No wonder the author strove, as a minister, more than anything else to encourage his king, Akbar, to pursue peace and tranquility.  

Persian Poet Khayyam and Music

Tony Gatlif pays homage to the Persian poet, Khayyam Nayshaburi, at the Fez Festival of World Sacred Music.

http://liveweb.arte.tv/fr/video/Tony_Gatlif_rend_hommage_a_Omar_Khayyam_au_Festival_des_musiques_sacrees_de_Fes/

It is an impressive performance for its multilingual and harmonious performances, all indicative of the universality of Khayyam's message.

There is however some chanting that is not part of Khayyam's poetry and is somewhat contrary to the Khayyam's poem highlighted on the program's website: "Sois heureux un instant. Cet instant c'est ta vie." This Zoroastrian concept is more reflected in the final parts of the performance when the music takes on a happier rhythm.  

Here are a few lines of Khayyam's poetry as rendered by Fitzgerald that convey his meanings very well.

Wake! For the Sun who scatter'd into flight

The Stars before him from the Field of Night,

Drives Night along with them from Heav’n, and strikes

The Sultan’s Turret with a Shaft of Light.

Before the phantom of False morning died,

Methought a Voice within the Tavern cried,

“When all the Temple is prepared within,

“Why nods the drowsy Worshipper outside?”

Yesterday This Day's Madness did prepare;

To-morrow’s Silence, Triumph, or Despair:

Drink! for you know not whence you came, nor why:

Drink! for you know not why you go, nor where.

(From Omar Khayyam, The Astronomer-Poet Of Persia, By Edward Fitzgerald)

Khayyam.Tomb.anobanini.ir

The Chahar Maqaleh

A short passage on the concept of Logic from book of Chahar Maqaleh written by Aruzi Samarqandi (1110 and 1161 AD)

From The Chahar Maqaleh	از کتاب چهار مقاله
Unless the physician knows logic, and knows the meaning of species and categories, he cannot distinguish between what belongs to the category and what is peculiar to the individual, and so will not be able to diagnosis the disease. And, failing to find the cause, he will fail in his treatment. Page 107	تا طبیب منطق نداند و جنس و نوع نشناسد در میان فصل و خاصه و عرض فرق نتواند کرد و علت نشناسد و چون علت نشناسد در علاج مصیب نتواند بود. صفحه 107

Chahar Maqaleh in Swedish

Sadeh Feast

As the Iranians prepare to celebrate the feasts of Yalda and Noruz, I would like to recall an ancient festivity that is less frequently remembered, even less than Mehrgan, and yet is in all likelihood the oldest of all. The celebration of Sada is more ancient than many of the other Iranian traditions.

Photo from HarfeRooz.com 

Sade or Sadeh (سده) or Satak (in Pahlavi or Middle Persian), meaning one hundred (and some understand it as towing fire), is an ancient Iranian tradition celebrated 50 days before Noruz. It is named one hundred because on the day of this feast, there are fifty days plus fifty nights left before the New Year; i.e., before March 21. In this celebration, people used to honor fire as a means of cleansing and as a way of defeating the darkness and cold (thus its natural Zoroastrian association). Based on some sources, it is believed that this is perhaps the oldest festivity in Iran and even older than Zoroastrianism. It may well be the oldest festivity in the world. It is interesting to note that in recent decades, the Iranians living outside Iran often observe these ancient festivities more earnestly. 

Presidential Debates in the USA: Game, Race, Match, or Debate?

I am flabbergasted how much emphasis is given to the performance and presentation in the October 3, 2012 American presidential debate in which the major cable networks as well as major supporters of President Obama in the media declared him the loser in the match. I am even puzzled why Americans see the debates as a match.

Perhaps because I am among those few viewers who did not see the debate as a match, as a competition, as an entertainment event, I came away with an absolutely different feeling: Obama debated better, and debate was what he was supposed to do, not performing in a match and not theatrical entertainment, only debate. 

In other democratic countries in Europe, the substance and the content are judged by the viewers of the debates. Even in Iran where elections are still not held in a true democratic way, people pay more attention to the content rather than performance. This in fact explains why Mahmood Ahmadinejad's fundamentalist supporters had to fix the results to announce him the winner of the 2009 election; that is, despite Ahmadinejad's theatrical and entertaining performances, it was M. Mousavi who won the heart of the people with a boring performance. He was simply because he had better and more democratic ideas, the very reason he has since been under the house arrest. 

Which one of these is snake?

The recent American presidential debate (on October 3, 2012 between President Barak Obama and his Republican challenger) is the only time in which lack of theatrical finesse and pretentions causes the better debater to be labeled the loser. In 2000, Al Gore whom I believe was almost overqualified for the job was given the same score as was given to President Obama in the first of the 2012 debates. But the reality is that both of them talked about issues and presented arguments and facts.

President Obama answered all the moderator's questions fully, honestly, and made it clear that his tax cuts plans, his health care vision, and his job creation programs are real and superior. His opponent offered no specific plans to be considered good or bad.

Yes, in dealing with the deficit, President Obama could have had a historical moment by saying that his opponent wants to cut Big Bird instead of cutting subsidies to the oil companies. And yes, it would have created laughter and headlines. But people heard this in two different segments of the debates by their ears and if they were really looking to hear substance, they would not need their President to do standup comedy.

So, the experts may continue to say that President Obama lost because unwillingness to go after his opponent aggressively (or because of fatigue, climate change, lack of preparation, the rival's well preparation, etc). I would say, if we do not define the debate as a race, a game, or a match, President Obama won in terms of presenting a substantiated, consistent debate, while there is no doubt that he could have been better. So, my question is: are we not placing way too much emphasis on representation in places where it should not be the major criterion?

Who is to Blame for Iran's Bad Economy

In his article "Is Ahmadinejad Scapegoat for Iran’s Economy?," Mr. Mehdi Khalaji states that “Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was responsible for bringing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the presidency in 2005 and paid a hefty price for keeping him in that job in 2009. These days, however, the Supreme Leader has chosen to make the president a scapegoat for Iran’s deepening political and economic crisis.”

(See Mr. Khalag's article in Al-Monitor here:
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/iran-president-supreme-leader.html)

While everyone can agree with the first part of this statement, the second part needs evidence or examples; that the IRI leader "has chosen to make the president a scapegoat for Iran’s deepening political and economic crisis" is a sheer postulation. Members of the judiciary and members of the parliament have made such an attempt but the IRI leader has often blamed the West and the USA for the calamity. 

Photo from Asr-e Iran

In fact, on a number of occasions the former has supported the latter in recent years offering, for example, praise of Ahmadinejad for his “performance in defense of the IRI’s values abroad.” Moreover, to answer the question posed in the title of the article, one must accept that with or without support, the president thought he could govern the country without any knowledge of management, economics, politics, market, and culture, just to name a few areas in which he and his appointed cabinet members had no education or experience.

Thus, incompetence and confronting the west (indeed almost the whole world) which has resulted in sanctions as well as incompetence should be equally blamed. Indeed they are closely related.

American Dollar vs Iranian Rial

The joke on the street of Tehran is:

Q: what is the price of dollar?

A: do you mean now or……Now?

But seriously, I do not know much about economics, however, none of the explanations for the dollar crisis in Iran circulating around seems satisfactory to me. I believe a dollar's true price in Iran was 30,000 Rials until several months ago and despite the fact that it was kept at a much lower rate. It was thus traded for less (anywhere from 8500 ten years ago to 12000 nearly a year ago) because the government could subsidize it. And the government could do so because it could easily sell oil on the international market and receive a record amount of dollar bills. Given the economic sanctions against IRI and the state of the country's economy today which began to decline since the 2005 elections (and will continue to decline into the near future), the price of each dollar has gone up to 40,000 Rials in recent weeks. The high demand for foreign currencies is also driven by a new class of rich people who became rich due to their affiliation with the power and who have been transferring their new fortunes to western countries and in particular to Canada. This has created a shortage of foreign currencies at the same time that the country faced the decline in oil sales thus contributing to the crisis to the point that the situation has caused riots and strikes in and around central Tehran and a couple of other major cities.  

Photo from Akhbar

But the real value of a dollar in Iran has always been higher than officially traded. Given the current situation, I would predict that  its value could reach 70,000 Rials in the black/free market unless the next election which is to be held in the end of spring 2013 changes the political dynamics inside the country and on foreign policy. And when the value of Rials declines to such a low point, the Iranian economy will be entirely disconnected from the rest of the world except from those countries who may be able to trade oil directly for merchandise and food.

Another interesting point is that in Iran, the dollar has been going up since the 1979 Revolution before which time, it was exchanged at 70 Rials at the banks, and there was no need for a black/free market. The increasing trend was has been going on even when the value of the dollar was falling in other parts of the world.