Al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda (also al-Qaida or al-Qa'ida or al-Qa'idah) (Arabic: القاعدة‎ al-qāʕida, translation: The Base) is an international alliance of militant Sunni jihadist organizations. Its roots can be traced back to Osama bin Laden and others around the time of the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989.[1] Al-Qaeda's objectives include the elimination of foreign influence in Muslim countries, elimination of Israel, and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate[citation needed].Al-Qaeda has been labeled a terrorist organization by the United Nations Security Council,[2] the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,[3][4] the European Union,[5] the United States,[6] Australia,[7] Canada,[8] Israel,[9] Japan,[10] the Netherlands,[11] the United Kingdom,[12] Russia,[13] Sweden,[14] and Switzerland.[15] Its affiliates have executed attacks against targets in various countries, the most prominent being the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. Following the September 11 attacks, the United States government launched a broad military and intelligence campaign known as the War on Terrorism, with the stated aim of dismantling al-Qaeda and killing or capturing its operatives.Due to its structure of semi-autonomous cells, al-Qaeda's size and degree of responsibility for particular attacks are difficult to establish. However, this may also be because its size and degree are exaggerated. Although the governments opposed to al-Qaeda claim that it has worldwide reach,[16] other analysts have suggested that those governments, as well as Osama bin Laden himself, exaggerate al-Qaeda's significance in Islamist terrorism.[17] The neologism "al-Qaedaism"[18] is applied to the wider context of those who independently conduct similar acts through political sympathy to al-Qaeda ideology or methods or the copycat effect.

Neo-Nazism

Neo-Nazism (literally new Nazism) is the ideology of post-World War II political movements seeking to revive Nazism.
The exact ideals adopted by neo-Nazi movements differ, but they often include allegiance to Adolf Hitler, anti-Semitism, racism, xenophobia, nationalism, White nationalism, militarism, and homophobia. Neo-Nazis often use the symbols of Nazi Germany, such as the Swastika, Sig Runes, and the red-white-black color scheme. Some groups and individuals who support the ideology openly declare themselves as Nazis or neo-Nazis, but others eschew those terms to avoid social stigma or legal consequences. Some European countries have laws prohibiting the expression of pro-Nazi, racist or anti-Semitic views, thus no significant political party would describe itself as neo-Nazi in those countries.
Neo-Nazi activity appears to be a global phenomenon, with organized representation in almost every western country, as well as international networks. Despite this, modern Nazi groups are extremely marginalized by the stigma inherent in their politics. Individuals who have attempted to revive Nazism include Colin Jordan, George Lincoln Rockwell, Savitri Devi, Francis Parker Yockey, William Pierce, Eddy Morrison, and David Myatt.

socialism in mazdak religion

The Mazdakites were socially radical religious sectarians who dominated Iranian politics in the late V / early VI Centuries. Mazdak of Fasa, building on foundations laid by earlier heterodox religious leaders from the same part of the country, apparently taught that good and evil are everywhere randomly mixed, even in the nature of God, and that the adept who mastered the occult correspondences governing the universe had no need of outward religious formalities. Mazdak advocated a social program of vegetarianism, pacifism, anti-clericalism, and utopian communism. When the shah Kavad, locked in struggle with the high aristocracy and perhaps seeking lower class support, converted to the new religion, Mazdak was able to start putting these theories into practice on a vast scale, opening government warehouses to the poor and closing all but three of the kingdom's Fire Temples. Amid rumors (not altogether improbable) that the abolition of private property and of marriage were next on Mazdak's agenda, conservative Zoroastrians rallied behind the feudal lords to overthrow Kavad in 496. The shah managed to regain his throne, but increasingly distanced himself from the Mazdakites; in 528 Crown Prince Chosroes launched a pogrom to eliminate them entirely. Among those killed in the massacres were Mazdak himself and Kavad's first-born son, whom the shah declined to protect. In remote areas, however, Mazdakism lingered for centuries, eventually becoming hard to distinguish from Central Asian Buddhism which it had always in some ways resembled. Later Islamic writers often use "Mazdakite" (like "Manichee") as simply a generic word for "heretic".

Sexual Communism: the Rebellion of Mazdak

Sexual Communism: A New Look at the Rebellion of Mazdak


For the Sasanian Empire of Iran (224-650 CE), early 6th century CE marked a critical point. This era, the reign of Kawād I and Xosrō I, started with a major rebellion and concluded with fundamental changes in the administration of the Sasanian Empire. These changes were so significant that they are often seen by scholars as forming a major break-point in the Sasanian history and obscuring our view into the world that preceded it.

The rebellion that was the initial cause of these reforms is commonly attributed to a certain Mazdak, a neo-Manichean reformer who preached a 'religion' of social equality. What made Mazdak's ideas particularly important is that he initially managed to convert the newly crowned Emperor, Kawād I, into his religion, an incident that enraged the established nobility and the Zoroastrian priesthood. The affects of this conversion and eventual re-conversion that signaled the beginning of socio-political reforms of Kawād and his son Xosrō are beyond the scope of the present work.

This paper will try to concern itself with one particular aspect of Mazdakite 'communism', notably the issue of sexual communism or communal sharing of partners. This is a feature of Mazdak's religion that put it most significantly at odds with the norms of the society in which it appeared. Sexual Communism of the Mazdakite religion made it most easy for its enemies, the established Zoroastrian clerical system and the nobility, to discredit the whole movement.

As we will see, Mazdakism and its later post-Islamic reincarnations, is particularly interesting since it is only known through the writings of its enemies and no first hand account of the religion has survived to our day. This paper will study various Sasanian, and early Islamic accounts of Mazdakism, as well as Byzantine and modern interpretations of it, and try to show that 'sexual communism' was indeed not an inbuilt feature of this movement and was rather attributed to Mazdakism in order to discredit the religion in the eyes of the public and the administration.

mazdakism

Just as Mani's eclectic Faith was a pointer at the germs of decay in the Sasanian body-politic, so also Mazdak's teaching was a pointer at the inevitable downfall towards which the Sasanian Empire was heading. Mani came within one generation of the establishment of Sasanian rule in Iran; Mazdak came towards the end of that rule, about a century before the Empire was overthrown by the Arabs. Both these movements were fiercely and ruthlessly uprooted in the land of their origin, and to all outward appearance it seemed as if the authority of the theocratic state was amply vindicated. But the triumph over Mazdakism was short-lived. There is another similarity between these two movements: Zoroastrian, Christian and Islamic writers have poured unbounded vituperation against both. These unfriendly writings are our only sources of information regarding the teachings of Mazdak. As regards Mani a great deal of new and valuable information has come to light since the Turfan discoveries in 1902. These have shown Mani to have been a really great personage and the founder of a new Faith. But no such finds have yet been discovered to rehabilitate Mazdak.
Still Mazdakism may be viewed as a symptom which indicated a deep-seated cancer in the body-politic of Sasanian Iran. Therefore we should judge this movement after accepting the principle embodied in the saying, "By their fruits shall ye know them".
The founder of the Sasanian dynasty was one of the supermen of history. He was a born leader of men and he led his country and his people to a renovated existence. A man of great fixity of purpose, he carried out to the full the task he had set before himself, and he left to his son a newly established empire, a renowated religion and hundreds of well-trained and enthusiastic men and women ready to carry on the work to its fulfilment. Shapur I, the son of the founder, Ardashir I, was worthy of his father, for he also was a great leader, far above the average. He established the new empire and completed the task of the revival of Zoroastrianism to the satisfaction of all concerned. He loyally carried out his father's admonition, regarding Faith and Royalty as brothers. He fixed firmly and finally the theocratic constitution of the newly established Sasanian empire. By this Zoroastrian clergy acquired powers second only to those possessed by the king himself. And naturally also the landed aristocracy of Iran came in for a good share of political power and emoluments.
Of course, it was never the intention of either Ardashir I or of Shapur I that these two great sections of Iranian society the Zoroastrian clergy and the landowners - should become the oppressors of the masses. As long as the king at the top was a strong man he could hold both these sections in check and could stand between them and the masses. Both Ardashir I and Shapur I understood that the masses would give full support and would be loyal to the state provided they got justice from their king, and so both these rulers were eager to see that justice was done to the meanest of their subjects.
But once the strong hand of the king at the top was removed the two powerful sections would naturally try to consolidate their own power over the masses and to gain new privileges. In justice, however, to the Zoroastrian clergy it must be mentioned that the spread of Christianity throughout Iran was a constant and growing menace to the newly-revived Zoroastrian religion. To add to these difficulties the Christian Roman empire was steadily growing more and more menacing and triculent. Rome was always trying to find some pretext to make war on Iran, nor was Iran at all behind to find excuses for a fight. Armenia, which held a strategic position between the two empires, was itself torn by the religious strife of the Armenian Zoroastrians and Christians; and Rome and Iran being both theocratic, the affairs in Armenia almost always kindled the flames of war. And in these wars the landholders were ever an important factor for they ensured the victories of Iran. And so we find the power of both the Zoroastrian clergy and of the Iranian landholding aristocracy daily growing stronger and more firmly established. When the king was a man of easy-going and pliable temperament both these sections consolidated their gains and tried to acquire yet more. And all this was at the expense of the masses.
Ardashir I and Shapur I did all they could to ensure that the masses got a fair deal. But when they were gone a succession of weaker men ruled the empire from 272 to 309 A.D., which gave time enough to the vasted interests to work their will in the state.
Then came Shapur II (the Great), a unique figure in history. He was a posthumous son, and the succeeded to the empire before he was born. The vested interests naturally looked forward to a fairly long period of minority (at least fifteen years) and they had hopes of moulding the baby king's character to suit their own purposes. But Shapur was a superman, even greater than the first two rulers of his line and at a very early age he gave clear indications that he had a mind of his own and a will also to get whatever he wanted, and that he was a true-born ruler of men. Shapur II wished to curb the powers of the Zoroastrian clergy and of his landholders, for he was wise enough to appreciate the dangers if these were left unchecked. But other events outside Iran forced him to side with his clergy and his aristocracy. Constantine, the Roman Emperor, carried away by his zeal for Christianity, proclaimed himself to be the spiritual head of all the Christian in the world (including, of course, the Christians of Iran). This was more than Shapur II, the proudest of the Sasanians, could tolerate. The poor Christians of Iran found themselves placed in a very false position, torn between two loyalties, to the king of their own country and to the head of their faith, the Roman emperor. Whenever there was war between Iran an Rome (which was practically always0 the Christian of Iran looked upon as foes and "fifth columnists" and had to pay the penalty. This gave the vested interests of good opportunities to launch fierce persecutions agaist the Christians, to which Shapur II, with his offended pride, was not unwilling to lend his support. So on the whole during the long reign of Shapur II (lasting for seventy years) the vested interests had their own way more or less in spite of the strong king.
After Shapur II came a long succession of very ordinary kings and during over one hundred years (379-487 A.D.) there was only one king who was really well above the average. That was Bahram V (Bahramgore, the Hunter of the Wild Ass), but he was busy most of the time with wars with the Huns. One important event happened in the days of Bahram V and that was the final separation of the Iranian Christian Church from the Orthodox Church of Byzantium. The fratricidal strife between the Christians and the Zoroastrians had been going on with ever-increasing ferocity and bitterness ever since the days of Shapur II. Thousands had lost their lives; the manhood of Iran was slowly but surely being bled to death. But after the separation of the Iranian Christian Church from Byzantium the Christians found comparative peace. Still the religious hatred and fanaticism on both sides were of too long a growth to die out completely. Violent polemical writings continued on both sides.
Meanwhile the masses were being ground down relentlessly by the vested interests and seem to have sunk to the deepest depths of poverty and misery. The unsuccessful wars of Firuz I (459-483) against the Huns added to the prevailing discontent. The conditions in Iran soon after the death of Firuz I were almost exactly the same as those prevailing in France on the eve of the French Revolution or in Russia at the end of the First World War. The fruits of these centuries of oppression were soon to be visible in the revolutionary and communicate preaching of Mazdak, who began his work about 488 A.D.
We can but make a guess at the social conditions of Iranian masses by observing the extra violent language in the preaching of Mazdak and in the extremes to which his doctrines went. Even more significant was the extreme rapidity with which Mazdak's teaching was accepted by the masses. Within the course of a few months his followers could be counted by the hundred thousand: and in every part of the vast empire they were drawn from every stratum of society from the king downwards. The king at that time was Kawadh (488-531 A.D.) and in the beginning he openly declared his sympathies with the new preaching. But the vested interests were seriously perturbed and so strongly were they entrenched that the king was forced to leave his throne for a few years (499-501).
Charles Dickens has given a wonderful passage in the last chapter of his A Tale of Two Cities, in which he indicates the connection between revolutions and their causes. Describing the rolling of six tumbrils through the streets of Paris bearing unhappy victims of the guillotine he says:"Six tumbrils roll along the streets. Change these back to what they were thou powerful enchanter, Time, and they shall be seen to be the carriages of absolute monarchs, the equipages of feudal nobles, the toilettes of flaring Jezebels, the churches that are not my Father's house, but dens of thieves, the huts of millions of starving peasants. No; the great magician who works out the appointed order of the Creator, never reverses his transformation". Further on he adds:"Crush humanity out of shape under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the seed of rapacious license and oppression over gain and it will yield the same fruit according to its kind". By their fruits, indeed shall ye know them. We do not have any historical records of the seeds sown in Iran, but we possess ample evidence of the hideous fruit, from which we may infer the nature of the seed if the Laws of God have any meaning.
Mazdak might well be termed the first Bolshevik in history. Indeed, in some respects Bolsheviks might be regarded as lukewarm compared to Mazdak; he not only preached communism in worldly possessions but he also advocated an equal division of women among men.
When Kawadh was restored to the throne in 501 A.D. he was made wiser by experience and he withdrew his open support of the Mazdakites. He clearly recognized the seed from which this terrible tree of Mazdakism had grown, and he tried his best during the remaining thirty years of his reign to see that the conditions of the masses were made more tolerable. But he was not strong enough to remove the root causes of Mazdakism. That was reserved for a far greater man than Kawadh. It was his son Khusrav I, known to all Orient by his title Noshiravan, who freed Iran from the Mazdak frenzy.
Khusrav was the favourite son of Kawadh and had been his father's closest friend and consellor during the closing years of Kawadh's reign. Khusrav was easily the greatest ruler Iran ever had. Indeed, he may rank among the six greatest kings in the history of the world. He clearly saw the imminent danger to both the state and the religion from Mazdak's teaching and the first thing he did was to suppress the movement with an iron hand. But at the same time he saw justice done to the masses. Like a good physician he removed not merely the symptoms of the disease but he removed the disease itself. With equal firmness he brought under control the oppressors of the masses. Quite early he won the title of 'Adl' (the Just), for Justice was his watchword. Under his strong and just rule peace and prosperity returned to Iran, and the masses were satisfied. For this achievement his grateful subjects with one voice called him Anushak-Ruban or Noshirwan (he of the immortal soul). To posterity he is known as Noshirwan alone, the most glorious name ever bestowed upon an earthly ruler.
Mazdak was certainly a successor of Mani, because his movement was not merely social but was essentially religious. His extreme ideas were certainly a menace both to society and to religion. They certainly threatened the very existence of Zoroastrian priesthood, and so very naturally he was violently abused by Zoroastrian writers. He has been called Ashemaogha (a disorter of truth) and one commentator on a religious text explains this epithet by adding, "like Mazdak, the Son of Bamdad". The mildest epithet used for him by Zoroastrians is "accursed".
Mazdak's ideas are a natural corollary to the state of Iran in his days, and to the condition of the masses that he had seen with his own eyes. He felt himself obliged to preach extreme communism and an absolute community of possessions, including women. Very likely he was moved by the idea that desperate diseases need desperate remedies. At the same time he also preached a higher ideal of life. He pointed out the value of self-restraint and renunciation of all sense-pleasures including animal food. For this last teaching he has been called "the devil who would not eat". He asserted that the desire for pleasure and possessions constituted the universal cause of all hatred and strife. He also like Mani laid stress on Zoroaster's teaching of the two essential principles of Good and evil which pervade our life on earth. He also enjoined the strict purity of God's "elements", fire, water and earth. But we have very scanty positive knowledge of what he actually taught.
Mazdak was treacherously murdered and many of his closest adherents lost their lives at the same time. Then followed a systematic suppression of all Mazdakites, often with much bloodshed. But though outwardly uprooted and completely destroyed the teachings of Mazdak continued to flourish for several centuries after his murder. Under the rule of the Islamic caliphs of Baghdad several "heretical sects" have been noted by historians. They all seemed to get their inspiration from the teachings of Mazdak, for they cite him as their authority. But what is more surprising and very significant is that many of these "heretical sects" have coupled the name of Mazdak with that of Zoroaster, the Prophet of ancient Iran.

mazdak a mobad

The economic basis of his religious reform. The second great heretic of this period who had a considerable following was a pious Mobad named Mazdak, son of Bamdat.68 A Pahlavi treatise named Mazdak Namah, Book of Mazdak, is said to have been rendered into Arabic by Ibnul Muqaffa. The work has been lost, but its contents have been preserved in other Arabic works.69 The author of Dabistan says that he met some Mazdakites who practised their religion secretly among the Mohammedans. These showed him a book called Desnad, written in Old Persian.70 There are references to Mazdak and his teachings in Greek and Syriac, Arabic and Persian. He is called the accursed heterodox who observes fasts,71 who ap­peared to cause disturbance among the faithful.72 He was con­temporary with Kobad.73 Mazdak agreed with the fundamental doctrine of Zoroastrianism in respect to the indelible antithesis between the two principles, Light and Darkness, or Ohrmazd and [349] Ahriman.74 Masudi calls him a Zendik.75 Tabari, Mirkhond, and others accuse him of teaching the doctrine of the community of wives.76 The Dabistan repeats the statement.77 Mazdak's revolutionary reform, however, was not so much religious as it was social and economic, for he preached communism, pure and

the pre-islamic mazdak movement

The Pre-Islamic Mazdak Movement
Mazdak is the founding father of Iranian intellectual tradition of communalism and populism. His movement lasted about 30 years (494 - 524 A.D.), and his ideas were instrumental in inspiring many future movements that challenged the Arab rule in Iran and called for equality and justice. It has been said the creation of new ideas usually occurs at times of deep social and historical crisis. This is certaily true of the emergence of Mazdak's theology. The prevailing conditions prior to the emergence of Mazdak were marked by the Sassanids closed society of the caste system; by deep social inequities; by famine, wars, and defeat; and by Piruz's (the Sassanid king 459 - 484 A.D.) high taxation of the poor.
Mazdakism, a Gnostic religious movement, originated as an offshoot of Manichaeanism (Mani, the painter who rose as a prophet some 200 years ago), and there are lines of continuity in Mazdak's dualistic perception of the world that can be traced to Zoroaster. In contrast to unwordly and fatalistic character of Mani's religion, Mazdak's theology was more worldly and optimistic. Unlike Mani, Mazdak did notbelieve in predistination, and sought social solutions in overcoming "the forces of darkness". Mazdak asserted that the world consisted of 3 material elements - soil, water, and fire. Goodness and evil resulted from these elements. Like Mani, he valued spiritual enrichment over material wealth. Yet Mazdak, unlike Mani, preached enjoyment of the pleasure of life without harming others. He forbade a meat diet because he did not believe in bloodshed and slaughtering of animals (just look how far we have gone now today!!!). He preached removal of suffering, called for peace and corporation, and opposed war because he valued human life supremely.
Social issues was a radical move by him. Mazdak asserted that since most communal conflicts are either over property or over women, both of these must become public property to prevent unnecessary bloodshed. Inequality was created through force and violence. (A remark: the great contemporary scholar Ehsan Yarshater contends that Mazdak's call for the distribution of women was in response to the harems of the aristocracy and their acquistion of the wives and daughters of others.)
Kavad (Sassanid king 488 - 531 A.D.) joined his religion and passed new laws easing the tax on the poor and distributing the wheat among them. But soon, the clergy (mobadan) and the aristocracy (ashraf)soon mobilized themselves against Kavad, dethroning him and putting his brother, Jamasb, in power. Kavad fled from prison and musteredenough patronage to seize the crown again. This time, frightened by the increasing independent power of Mazdakis, he sided with mobadan against Mazdakis. When drought brought scarcity of wheat and threat of new famine was imminent, Mazdak encouraged his followers to loot the storage houses of the aristocracy. The nobility appealed to Kavad's son, Khosrou Anushiravan, who was known for his anti-Mazdaki sentiment, for help. Under the pretext of arranging a debate, Anushiravan gathered Mazdak and his followers in the royal garden and buried them alive.
Mazdakism did not die with Mazdak - it lasted for years after his death and inspired other movements for social equality and justice. Arabs came to Iran with this excuse. But perhaps you all heard of movements like Abu-Muslim Khorasani, Babak Khoramdin, and Sarbedaran in later years.

mazdak a zoroastrian

Mazdak
Mazdak was a Zoroastrian priest who in 494 AD rose up against Sasanian wealth and corruption. Mazdak advocated justice and equality. He believed that the rich should share their wealth with the poor.
The Sasanian king, Kavad I (on the right), joined Mazdak's movement. But the Zoroastrian priests and the nobility, who were afraid to lose their wealth and power, imprisoned the king and put his brother on the throne.
Eventually, King Kavad managed to escape and reclaimed his throne. But he had to give up Mazdakism. In 524 AD, the Crown Prince Khosrow Anushiravan ordered Mazdak's execution. Many of his followers were also put to death.
Mazdak's movement, however, remained very popular in Central Asia for many centuries.

mazdak movement

The most authoritative book of history about the Sassanid is entitled, "The Cambridge History of Iran," Volume 3, The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Period," edited by Ehsan Yarshater, Parts 1 and 2, Cambridge University Press, 1983.
The Chapter 27 (a) of the book is entitled "Manichaeism and its Iranian Background." The following chapter, Chapter 27(b), is entitled "Mazdakism," and is writtend by Prof. Yarshater, pages 991-1024.
Prof. Yarshater begins the chapter by some general comments, then elaborates on the sources for studying the movement, then divides the movement into "the Early Stage of Mazdakism," "the Second Stage of Mazdakism," and "the Third stage of Mazdakism." He then describes the doctrine of the movement in detail, followed by the conclusion section.
The following is the beginning of the "Conclusion" section (page 1018):
We may then chart the course of the Mazdakite movement as follows. Sometime in the course of the 5th century, presumably during or soon after the reign of Bahram V, Zardusht Khurragaan, a mobad or possibly a chief mobad of Fasaa, began reform movement in Zoroastrian religion; he claimed to offer a correct interpretation of the Avesta. It is also possible that, claiming, to be an incarnation of an earlier leader, he only renewed and elaborated a movement begun previously by one Bundos, who had resided in Rome for a while and who had come under the influence of some gnostic religions there. The assigning of inner meaning to Zoroastrian scriptures early branded the followers of the movement as Zandiks.
Zardusht's interpretation of the Avesta disguised a set of beliefs, widely spread in late antiquity, which postulated a remote supreme deity and attributed the creation and management of the world to two demiurges. [The rest of this paragraph is about the religious belief of the said interpretation].
[Page 1019] We do not know how the movement fared between its inception and the time of Kavaad. We may assume that it continued to attract followers through quiet missionary work, which prefigured the Baatini da'wa. During Peerooz's reign Iran was afflicted with a number of disasters, and when he was killed in 484, during a catastrophic war with the Hephthalites, Iran was facing formidable social, economic and political problems. The coutry had been weakened by successive wars and heavy taxation, and now was subjected to the humiliation of having to pay tribute to the Hepthalites, while territory was lost to the victors and much of the army destroyed.
About this time the leadership of the sect passed to Mazdak son of Baamdaad, a man of chrisma and revolutionary temper, deeply committed to the notion of social justice and the welfare of the poor. Under his leadership te movement assumed a pronounced social colouring. Capitalizing on popular discontent, Mazdak questioned the enormous privileges of the noble classes and the clergy. He not only envisaged an egalitarian society, but as a man of action also planned to carry out his communistic ideas. The peasants, the artisans and the "have-nots", in general, welcomed his teachings and flocked to his side. His movement was called that of "justice". (However, he did not include the slaves in his scheme, else our sources would not have missed the point as grounds for further invectives against him; cf. below, p. 1024).
Whether any outside influence affected the formulation or the spread of the Mazdakite revolutionary attitude is hard to say; our sources are silent on that. [The rest of this paragraph discusses this outside influence possibility].
[Page 1020] Kavaad, a capable and ambitious king, but also a man of liberal tendencies and with a passion for justice, who resented the restricting power of the nobles and the Church, sided with Mazdak and accepted the movement's interpretation of the good religion. He promulgated a number of laws curtailing the privileges of the nobles and introducing unprecedented social reforms. The king's support gave heart to the sectarians, and disturbances resulted from the Mazdakite mob attacking granaries, storehouses, and the mansions of the affluent and their harems. The nobles reacted sharply and Kavaad was deposed.
When Kavaad returned to the throne with the help of the Hephthalites and the assistance of some of the nobles inclined to Mazdakism, he had been somewhat sobered and acted more cautiously; but there is no reason to believe that he had undergone a drastic change of heart. His acceptance of Mazdakism must have been based on religious grounds, as much as anything else, and he presumably continued his faith, even though the Mazdakites' excesses drove him gradually to agree to their restriction and finally to their suppression.
Mazdak's end and the downfall and massacre of the Mazdakites have been recounted with some element of fiction and fantasy. The Mazdakites were trying to ensure the succession of Kaavus, the elder son of Kavaad and a sympathizer, against Khusrau, Kavaad's younger and favorite son. Khusrau, who was supported by the Zoroastrian priesthood and anti-Mazdakite nobles, eventually persuaded the king to give in to his plans for putting down the sect. By this time the Mazdakite disruptions and possibly also Mazdakite mismanagement of common properties must have alienated many of their earlier supporters, and the desire for a return to law and order was probably spreading. Khusrau arranged for a typical religious debate in which the Mazdakite leader was foredoomed. Most sources mention a massacre of the Mazdakites in Ctesiphon, which apparently took place under Kavaad in about 528 but was directed by Khusrau, who was now assuming de facto royal powers. The massacre must have been followed by a wave of persecutions in the provinces, repeated again at the beginning of Khusrau's reign. The sect lost much of its following and strength, particularly since Khusrau combined his suppression of the Mazdakites with far-reaching social, administrative, and fiscal reforms, carried out with an iron hand. The sect went underground, but survived, particularly outside urban centers.
Pages 1022-1024 discusses the Mazdakite movement, and its influence on uprising against moslem invaders after the fall of the Sassanids upon the arab conquest. The most interesting statement is on page 1022, first paragraph:
With the Muslim conquest and the fall of the Sasanian state the Mazdakites resumed their activities. In the period of sever persecution under the late Sasanians the Mazdakites seem to have developed or refined a system of beliefs which we find later adopted also by the extremist Shi'is.
Thus, the research of Prof. Yarshater comes to a conclusion exactly the same as Dehkhodaa's. That due to certain conditions in Iran, internal and external, both the Sassanid kings and the early Madzak movement promoted reforms. Then, Mazdakites took a reactionary direction, leading to people demanding and supporting their suppression. In fact, their behavior was like the reactionary, fundamentalist, extremist Shi'ites. Mazdak movement was dangerous!
Another note. Nowhere in the book there is a mention of polygamy by the kings, nobles, or the commoners during the Sassanid period. When Prof. Yarshater refers to "harem" above, that's not meant to be the indication of polygamy, but a section of the house of nobles where women were kept: the wife, daughters, and female servants. There is also no evidence to dispute that concubines were not held by nobles - most probably they did hold concubines, the same as in Rome.
Also, this entire chapter includes numerous references in the form of footnotes. None of the references includes the book written by Morteza Ravandi. Since Ravandi's book was written in 1968, 1969, or 1976, it predates this book of Prof. Yarshater which was written in 1983. Apparently, Prof. Yarshater did not find a value in the content of that book as a reference...

Mazdakism religion of persia

Mazdakism Religion of Persia, popular in the 5th and 6th centuries, and surviving until the 8th century.The founder of the group was Mazdak of Fesa (died 524 or 528), who started preaching his new religious concepts sometime around 484, a year of much suffering in the Sassanid Empire. It is usually assumed that Mazdak himself was originally a Zoroastrian priest, mobed, but his teaching had its roots in other contemporary religions too, where Manichaeism appears to have been the most important.Mazdakism share the dualistic cosmology/theology with Manichaeism. There were two original principles of the universe: Light, the good one; and Darkness, the evil one. These two had been mixed by a cosmic accident, and man's role in this life was through good conduct to release the parts of himself that belonged to Light. But where Manichaeism saw the mixture of good and bad as a cosmic tragedy, Mazdak viewed this in a more neutral, even optimistic way. Mazdak preached that the mix of good and evil had touched everything, including God.The two distinguishing factors in Mazdak's teaching was to reduce the importance of religious formalities, claiming that the true religious person was one who understood and related correctly to the principles of the universe; and a criticism of the strong position of Zoroastrian clergy which had resulted in suppression of the Persian population and much poverty. In many ways can Mazdak's teaching be understood as a call for social revolution, and he has been called the "first Socialist in history".Mazdak emphasized good conduct, which involved a moral and ascetic life, no killing and not eating flesh (which contained substances solely from Darkness), being kind and friendly and live in peace with other people.Despite the concepts of good conduct, the followers of Mazdak raided the palaces and harems of the rich, removing the valuables they believed they had equal rights on. Facing the unrest in the empire, the King Kavadh 1, ruling from 488 until 531, converted to Mazdakism. With his backing could Mazdak embark on a program of social reform, which involved pacifism, anti-clericalism and aid programs for helping the poor. Mazdak had government warehouses opened to help the poor in the society. Mazdak had most Zoroastrian fire temples closed, save 3.His programs were so dramatic that there rumours told that he planned to have all private property confiscated, and replace marriage with free sex.Fear from among the nobles and Zoroastrian clergy grew so strong that Kavadh was overthrown in 496, but he managed to get the throne back 3 years later with the help of the Hephthalites. Scared by the resistance among the powerful, he chose to distance himself from Mazdak. He allowed his son and crown prince Khosrau to launch a great campaign against the Mazdakis in 524 or 528, culminating in a massacre killing most of the adherents, including Mazdak himself and Kavadh's oldest son. Some survived, and settled in remote areas. Small pockets of Mazdaki societies survived for centuries, but eventually be absorbed by Central Asian Buddhism.We have no direct sources of Mazdakism, none of their books have survived. Our knowledge is made up of brief mentions in Syrian, Persian, Arabic and Greek sources, and much of the information is written by opponents of Mazdakism.

mazdak

Mazdak (in Persian مزدک) (died c. 524 or 528) was a proto-socialist Persian philosopher and/or religious reformer who gained influence under the reign of the Sassanian king Kavadh I. He was probably hanged and most of his followers were massacred by Khosrau I, Kavadh's son. He was the founder of the philosophy called Mazdakism, whose adherents share the dualistic cosmology/theology with Manichaeism. Under this dualism, there were two original principles of the universe: Light, the good one; and Darkness, the evil one. These two had been mixed by a cosmic accident, and man's role in this life was through good conduct to release the parts of himself that belonged to Light. But where Manichaeism saw the mixture of good and bad as a cosmic tragedy, Mazdak viewed this in a more neutral, even optimistic way. Mazdak preached that the mix of good and evil had touched everything, except God.
The two distinguishing factors of Mazdak's teaching were the reduction of the importance of religious formalities -- the true religious person being the one who understood and related correctly to the principles of the universe -- and a criticism of the strong position of Zoroastrian clergy, who, he believed, had suppressed the Persian population and caused much poverty. In many ways Mazdak's teaching can be understood as a call for social revolution, and he has been called the "first Socialist in history".[citation needed]
Mazdak emphasized good conduct, which involved a moral and ascetic life, no killing and not eating flesh (which contained substances solely from Darkness), being kind and friendly and living in peace with other people.
Despite the concepts of good conduct, the followers of Mazdak raided the palaces and harems of the rich, removing the valuables to which they believed they had equal rights. Facing the unrest in the empire, the King Kavadh I, ruling from 488 until 531, converted to Mazdakism. With his backing Mazdak could embark on a program of social reform, which involved pacifism, anti-clericalism and aid programs for helping the poor. Mazdak had government warehouses opened to help the poor. Mazdak had most Zoroastrian fire temples closed, save three.
His programs were so dramatic that rumours told that he planned to have all private property confiscated, and replace marriage with free love.
Fear from among the nobility and Zoroastrian clergy grew so strong that Kavadh was overthrown in 496, but he managed to get the throne back three years later with the help of the Hephthalites. Scared by the resistance among the powerful, he chose to distance himself from Mazdak. He allowed his son, crown prince Khosrau, to launch a great campaign against the Mazdakis in 524 or 528, culminating in a massacre killing most of the adherents, including Mazdak himself and Kavadh's oldest son. Some survived, and settled in remote areas. Small pockets of Mazdaki societies survived for centuries, and were eventually absorbed by Central Asian Buddhism.
We have no direct sources of Mazdakism: none of their books have survived. Our knowledge is made up of brief mentions in Syriac, Persian, Arabic and Greek sources, and much of the information is written by opponents of Mazdakism. Many problems thus remain unsolved.