A look at the jurisprudential and legal views of early Islam towards Zoroastrians

A look at the jurisprudential (Fiqh) and legal views of early Islam towards Zoroastrians
Ali Hozhabri
Abdolreza Mohajeri Nezhad 

Introduction

The Umayyad caliphs, especially, paid attention to adopting and adapting the administrative and governmental methods of the Greeks and Iranians. In recent periods, some of the techniques and customs of the Sasanian administration became prevalent in their governance systems, a trend that accelerated during the Abbasid period. The status of the caliphs was more influenced by their Iranian predecessors. Artistic themes in the early Islamic period were significantly influenced by the arts of the Byzantine Empire and the Sasanian Empire. However, with the replacement of new social values, the position of the Zoroastrian priests and Sasanian nobility diminished, putting pressure on lower classes. Many people were drawn to the caliphate apparatus, leading to tensions between Iranians and the Umayyads. These tensions spread to some Arab tribes, leading to uprisings such as the Ibn Ash'ath revolt. Iran became a haven for opponents of the Umayyads. The trend of boasting about being Arab based on Islamic teachings was challenged, giving rise to a cultural movement that replaced the derogatory term "Magi" used by Arabs with the term "Shu'ubi". The participation of Arab and Iranian dissidents had significant consequences for the Umayyad government, ultimately contributing to the victory of the Abbasids, with support from Iranian peasants. The most significant opposing Arab groups to the caliphate included the Kharijites, Alawites, and the tribes who migrated to Iran to manage the state treasury. With the gradual transition of the caliphate to a monarchy during the Umayyad period, experts in various fields were drawn into the caliphate apparatus, leading to a decline in any inclination towards an Iranian-style government system. The main factor in weakening Iranian forces was economic power. Arab governors often did not differentiate between the taxes of non-Arab Muslims and those of the dhimmis. This economic trend greatly reduced the economic power of Iranians. In these circumstances, Muslim rulers ordered the destruction of Iranian temples at an accelerated pace.
 

Methods and materials

This research article is fundamental and based on a historical-analytical approach. I rely mostly on information extracted from religious-historical texts in this research.
Most historians during the Islamic period have considered Zoroastrians to be synonymous with Magi: Dinvari (283 AH) considers Zoroaster as the prophet of the Magi, while Yaqut Hamawi and Hasani Razi also identify Zoroaster as the prophet of the Magi. Some contemporary writers often consider Magi as followers of the Mithraic or Zoroastrian religion. Additionally, there are narrations in Shia traditions that mention a prophet for the Magi who was killed, and their book was burned. Despite this, today Magi is often referred to as followers of Zoroaster or at least constitute a significant portion of the Magi. Zoroastrians have been referred to by various names in historical texts such as "Magi," "Gabr," and "Parsi," and it is mentioned that they had a book written on twelve thousand cowhides.
Indeed, interpreters do not always refer to Zoroastrians as People of the Book. For example, in the interpretation of verse 30 of Surah At-Tawbah, they have mentioned: "A person was found among them who claimed to remember your scripture, then he produced something out of his imagination and desires, and wrote it, and they said that this is how your scripture was and this is your religion, and all the Magi followed them." Sometimes, in their quest to validate Islam, they even resorted to superstitions.
The Zoroastrian dignitaries sometimes participated in religious debates alongside the followers of other religions to safeguard their faith. The book "Mâtikân Gujastak Abâlish" in Pahlavi language describes the gathering of Ma'mun with the presence of clergy from other religions. In the 3rd century AH, Zoroastrians also engaged in theological discussions and wrote works refuting other religions, such as the "Shkand Gumanig Vichar" by Mardan-farrokh. They occasionally awaited the return of the greatness of their religion and the power of their empire, often making satirical remarks about the Arabs. It seems that despite all the authentic religious references, Muslims still believed that Zoroastrians were Magi and fire-worshippers, depicting the construction of their fire temples as a means to attack their beliefs.
 

Results

After the approach of the Prophet and the Rashidun Caliphs towards the People of the Book in the conquered territories, Islamic jurisprudence gradually became more complex. The views and fatwas of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) somewhat addressed the ambiguities and questions regarding the People of the Book. In a narration from Imam Ali (AS), when asked about the ruling on the Magi, he responded: "They are People of the Book." However, at times, the opinions and actions of the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs were incorporated into Islamic jurisprudence as unchangeable principles, despite the order of the Prophet to treat the People of the Book according to their customs.
 

Conclution

In response to the question of how Islamic jurisprudence addressed Zoroastrians, it can be said that with the fall of the Sassanians and the establishment of the Arabs, historical texts reveal instances of the silencing of Iranian fire temples by the Arab conquerors. The Arabs were Muslim and, based on their own principles and beliefs, considered the adherence of the subjects or residents of the conquered lands to their ancestral religion and customs as defiance against the new rulers. Therefore, in dealing with Zoroastrian temples, they usually had two options: 1- To preserve the sacred space by converting the religious buildings from fire temples to mosques; 2- The simplest way was to destroy them. In response to the question "What benefits have rulers gained from Islamic jurisprudence," by examining some historical texts used in this article, it is possible to refer to the destruction of fire temples based on Islamic jurisprudential principles and legal sources during various Islamic eras. These principles were established by religious figures such as the Prophet, the Rashidun Caliphs, and the Imams, and various interpretations of them emerged over the centuries. The continuity of religious injunctions during different Islamic periods may be attributed to the swift transformation of Islamic law into Islamic governance, which occurred during the lifetime of the Islamic Prophet. This did not happen in the case of other prophets or, at best, as in Christianity, it took place centuries after the Prophet's passing. Therefore, various Muslim sects, sometimes with significant differences in their hadiths, resorted to strictness and exerted pressure on the inhabitants of the conquered lands to submit to their own beliefs. In response to the question of how Islam views Zoroastrians, it can be said that considering Zoroastrians as impure and the intense judicial differences between Muslims and Zoroastrians led to many hardships for followers of the Zoroastrian faith. Consequently, Zoroastrians throughout history were forced to migrate to various regions of Iran and other parts of the world, but they never forgot their customs and traditions, remaining steadfast in their beliefs. Under these circumstances, their temple architecture became more inward-looking to minimize interaction with their surroundings. Similarly, in the urban fabric of cities, Zoroastrian neighborhoods were secluded. Since most of the jurisprudential principles related to the People of the Book involved paying certain amounts to Muslims, it seems that one of the most significant motivations for Muslim rulers to strengthen jurisprudence regarding the People of the Book may have had economic foundations.