Chapter Twelve of Deception and Divine Religion by Sadeq Khademi

Chapter Twelve: The Divine Charisma of Cyrus the Wise

The Name and Title of Cyrus

It is said that the original name of Cyrus was Agradatus. According to Strabo, upon ascending the throne of the empire, Agradatus adopted the regal name Cyrus. The term Cyrus, signifying one who possesses light, radiance, and transparency, or akin to brilliance, evolved in meaning after Cyrus’s reign to denote a just ruler. The grandeur of Cyrus’s name, intertwined with his expansive and triumphant sovereignty, equated his name with the concepts of supremacy and kingship. The populace recognized no emperor other than Cyrus; their cultural slogans, intellectual consciousness, and fervent emotions proclaimed that the king and sovereign was none other than Cyrus alone.

Cyrus’s Divine Governance and Wisdom

Through the accurate discernment of the Iranian Magi, Cyrus possessed divine governance and bestowed charisma. He was trained under the tutelage of the Magi and accepted as their disciple. The most prominent attribute ascribed to Cyrus in historical sources is his renown for wisdom and divine charisma in governance—a quality that rendered him a Magian-spirited, chivalrous nobleman and a leader endowed with divine charisma and inner radiance, namely Cyrus. This foundation enabled him to govern his realm with inner virtue and triumph, ensuring perpetual victory over adversaries and fostering peace, security, and tolerance for all. In the Cyrus Cylinder, as translated by Shahrokh Razmjou, it is stated: “I established all the lands in peace (security).”

Xenophon, in his Cyropaedia, attributes Cyrus’s popular governance to his divine charisma and sagacity, writing: “In the realm of Cyrus’s rule, diverse nations and ethnicities were all in obedience to him, united in purpose and striving willingly to come under the banner of his state.” Divine governance, though fundamentally akin to religious and philosophical charisma, as well as sacred virtue, chivalry, and bestowed nobility, varies in intensity and may be lesser or shared with these qualities. Will Durant, in the first volume of The Story of Civilization, considers Cyrus among those seemingly created for leadership, stating: “Cyrus possessed a regal spirit and acted regally; he was as adept in administration as he was in his astonishing conquests.” This suggests that Cyrus’s governance was rooted in character and innate disposition, not in coercion, dominance, or mere instruction.

Durant emphasizes that Cyrus treated the vanquished with magnanimity and showed kindness to former enemies. To the Greeks, he was the greatest hero in the world. Although Greek sources lack comprehensive knowledge of Iranian Magian history and are thus less authoritative, they still note that Cyrus held the Magi in high esteem, regarding their charismatic figures as those who understood and fulfilled the divine will. The religion of the Magi was propagated through Cyrus.

Anshan of Pars

Historical information about Cyrus, given the vastness of his empire and the grandeur of his persona, allows for a clear and documented identification of his true character. In 558 BCE, Cyrus assumed rule in the land of Pars, centered in Anshan. Archaeologists identify Anshan with the Dasht-e Bayza region, located northwest of Shiraz. From this fertile land, other illustrious figures of Khosravani tradition emerged, such as Hossein ibn Mansour Hallaj (858–923 CE), the great Magus Salman the Persian (568–653 CE), and Khwaja Hafez Shirazi (1326–1389 CE), all charismatic Magian figures of Pars. The archaeological site of Malyan in Bayza, spanning approximately 200 hectares and located 48 kilometers from Persepolis, is renowned as a residence of the Achaemenids.

Cyrus’s rule began in Anshan Bayza, though Herodotus and Xenophon describe his lineage as a blend of Persian and Median. The Behistun Inscription states: “Says Darius the King: My father was Vishtaspa, Vishtaspa’s father was Arshama, Arshama’s father was Ariaramnes, Ariaramnes’ father was Chishpish, Chishpish’s father was Achaemenes; hence we are called Achaemenids.”

Cyrus’s Comely Appearance

Divine charisma enhances physical beauty. Xenophon emphasizes Cyrus’s extraordinary beauty and comely appearance, a trait affirmed by Will Durant, who notes: “Cyrus was beautiful and well-proportioned, and Iranians, until the final days of their ancient art, regarded him as an exemplar of physical beauty.” Physical health, vitality, and beauty are hallmarks of inner charisma. Sages possess balanced physiques and robust health, rarely falling ill.

Magian Education

Here, we discuss Cyrus based on academic works, foundational propositions, and documented evidence of the character of Khosravani sages and the philosophy of the charismatic. Nicholas asserts that Cyrus learned justice and truth from the Magi. Xenophon reports that Cyrus followed the Magi’s guidance in religious matters, and it was the Magi who educated him. Cyrus acquired esoteric wisdom and the philosophy of the Magian religion under their supervision, drawing inspiration from this education in his governance, which led to his just rule.

It should be noted that esoteric Magi possessed prophetic abilities. For one of them to undertake the education of the future king of kings during his youth, preparing him for governance, aligns with the forward-thinking and purposeful educational system of reformist and ancient indigenous priests. These Magi, deeply rooted in the political and royal system, wielded influence and held religious authority. They were responsible for educating princes destined for emperorship. Charismatic governance provides a roadmap, managerial strategy, faith, and insight to the charismatic ruler, clarifying their responsibilities. Divine charisma dispels ambiguity, darkness, confusion, doubt, and hesitation in action, granting clarity, confidence, recognition, self-awareness, purposeful movement, and foresight to the charismatic ruler.

Wisdom and charisma bestow vision, light, faith, and assurance in the correctness of one’s path and choices, as well as resolute authority in action. Xenophon attributes this distinguished quality to Cyrus, quoting him: “A ruler, in my view, must distinguish himself not by a life of ease and splendor, but by foresight, wisdom, and zeal for work.” Purposeful, enlightened movement and informed decisions bring authority, successful governance, security, and tranquility.

Other Greek sources state that Zoroastrian Magi held significant importance for Cyrus. Nevertheless, his religion can be aligned with the same prophetic tradition followed by Zoroaster, suggesting he could be considered among the leaders of the Hanif religion of Abraham. The religion of a charismatic ruler aligns with their natural disposition, divine governance, and functional role in divine rule. This Iranian king, adhering to this philosophy of power, has no other religion and considers the welfare, public satisfaction, and survival of his populist state as his creed. He does not allow his political domain and governing authority to be curtailed by influential religious elites who, under the guise of religion—sometimes a non-charismatic, superficial, or anti-charismatic religion—interfere in affairs, occasionally wielding greater influence than the king and becoming kingmakers. Ultimately, what matters is that Cyrus’s governance was imbued with charisma, granting him human virtues such as peace-seeking, universal tolerance, safeguarding freedoms, promoting security, prosperity, satisfaction, and public joy, constituting a unique and divine form of governance in his era.

Cyrus: The Worthy Choice of Freemen for Leadership

Not only was Cyrus chosen and selected by the Magi, but he was also elevated to rule over the lands and territories of the Median realm through the choice of Median commanders and warriors. He designated Pasargadae, the center of Persian tribes and the residence of the Achaemenid clan, as his capital. Additionally, Cyrus was the chosen leader of the Babylonian priests. Supported internally by Babylonian priests and amidst public discontent with internal turmoil, Cyrus conquered Babylon peacefully, without bloodshed, and liberated the exiled Jews, allowing them to return to their homeland.

Commanders and free soldiers in conquered territories, recognizing Cyrus’s charismatic persona, willingly accepted his leadership. By prioritizing Cyrus, they submitted to peace, devotion, and contentment, not through force, coercion, dominance, war, chaos, or bloodshed.

The circumstances of Cyrus’s environment have been described by others and are available on the internet, serving as a collective memory and a citable source for this book.

Cyrus’s Magnanimity and Compassion

A ruler endowed with charisma is free from pettiness, shortsightedness, hostility, and belligerence, and does not become self-satisfied, arrogant, or autocratic. Instead, inner charisma bestows a grand and magnanimous character. Due to his persona, Cyrus preserved the political, administrative, and religious structures of surrendered lands and states, neither humiliating nor destroying them. He did not seek to alter them through savagery, plunder, destruction, violation, or violence, a trait that made him a distinctive and global ruler.

Charisma imparts gentleness and kindness to a ruler. Cyrus’s most effective weapon was his universal compassion for all people and adherents of all religions—a selfless, unwavering love akin to that of a devoted father. Persians, Medes, and the greater Iran of that era called Cyrus their father. This compassion, gentleness, and religious and political tolerance stemmed from his bestowed chivalry and charisma.

A charismatic individual, at the height of power, conquest, and expansion, provides security to all creation. They consider the vast land of the Iranian nation and greater Iran a sanctuary and a place of dignity for all, as the very name Iran signifies love and embraces every Iranian without exception. According to Xenophon, Cyrus stated: “The way to win and bind people’s hearts is not through harshness and ill-temper but through caring and compassionate kindness. Show love to your friends, and this love will grant you the strength to overcome your enemies.”

Cyrus’s authority in governance made people and nations devoted and desiring of him, as well as resilient, formidable, and powerful. Cyrus’s greatness elevated his people. They felt gratitude toward him and faith in themselves, recognizing his wisdom, charisma, sound decisions, constructive and uplifting management, compassion, tolerance, and gentleness. They found in him a secure refuge in an era of primitive savagery and plunder, where warfare and dominance were sources of pride, ensuring widespread security and immunity wherever he went.

Charismatic governance crafted from Cyrus a noble, chivalrous, and humble man, free from arrogance. Through his inner charisma, Cyrus was both devout and refined, making Iran a pinnacle of Iranian nobility. A truly great individual remains great everywhere; neither does the throne of kingship overshadow them with desires and madness, becoming their master, nor do they feel small or humiliated elsewhere, resorting to domination and autocracy to belittle others.

Cyrus possessed the essence, foundation, virtue, charisma, resilience, honor, and inner perfections necessary for governance. He did not rise to power through the detached force of his armies, nor was his rule ordinary or wholly human. Cyrus governed through character and inner disposition. A ruler of inner virtue, being magnanimous and chivalrous, never becomes a dominator or hegemon. Such a ruler combats the agents of domination, particularly poverty and strife, fostering a pure, healthy, and prosperous society. A society plagued by deprivation and widespread poverty descends into insecurity, strife, and disordered collective thought, engaging in negative struggles against an isolated, dominant individual who lacks true statehood. Such a figure, even if appearing to command a vast empire, collapses under the assault of an angry mob—lacking civilization—because they lack the support of public devotion, a true state with harmony between officials and people, and divine charisma and favor. They are merely an isolated, deceitful façade, whose moment of solitude—i.e., decline and fall—arrives suddenly and unbelievably.

Cyrus’s Philanthropy in Jewish Sources

Jewish sources affirm Cyrus the Great’s philanthropy through the prophet Daniel in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). Cyrus’s name appears explicitly 23 times, particularly in the books of Ezra, Isaiah, and Daniel, with special reverence and the epithet Mashiah, meaning savior. Jews believe that God granted him sovereignty. In Isaiah 41–45, Cyrus is described thus: “He must be the one who holds dominion over others. Gates will open before him. Cities will welcome him. The peoples of the world will find peace through him. He is a man chosen and guided by God to achieve victory after victory and fulfill his true mission.”

In this narrative, Cyrus is portrayed as God’s power, conquering lands and their gates, ensuring no gate remains closed. Jews attribute Cyrus’s victories to Yahweh, the God of the Jews, calling him the Messiah of the Jews. Babylonians attributed his victories to their god Marduk, considering them auspicious and blessed.

In the Book of Isaiah, it is stated that God established Iran to fulfill divine purposes, and Cyrus, its king, will bring all of God’s joy, delight, and satisfaction to fruition: “He (Cyrus) is my shepherd and will accomplish all my pleasure” (Isaiah 44:28). Although Jewish texts lack historical authenticity and divine sanctity, written years after the conquest of Babylon, they serve as historical documents of their time, indicating that their authors recognized Cyrus as an unparalleled figure with a divine nature. In the Book of Ezra, Cyrus is quoted: “Cyrus, king of Persia, says: The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and has charged me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah” (Ezra 1:2).

Architect of the Greatest Harmonious Empire and Global State

Cyrus the Wise founded the greatest empire in the world for the first time, in which the state and people were inseparably united. Cyrus was among the most successful statesmen, whose achievements expanded daily through respecting the natural freedoms of the people and ensuring their contentment and joy through security, health, prosperity, and development. Other states aligned with the central government, and while they paid tribute to the Iranian king and adhered to his law, they were neither autonomous nor arbitrary.

Cyrus’s empire was not merely rule over a vast territory or an emperorship over disparate kings. He united diverse and opposing cultures and religions into political unity and devotion, establishing the first global state in the form of the vast and expansive Iranian empire. Cyrus’s empire was unique, liberating, and noble, characterized by generosity, integration with all peoples, tolerance, sweetness, and joy, beloved sincerely by the people who called him father. This integration and harmony, which upheld freedom, included sages. Plato, in his Laws, explicitly states: “In Cyrus’s time, if a sage offered wise counsel, the king did not envy or frown upon him but granted him freedom of expression, allowing him to speak freely. He honored all who provided wise advice, valuing most those whose counsel was most enlightening. In that era, all state affairs progressed, and the land flourished daily due to the freedom, friendship, and synergy of ideas among the people.”

Cyrus created the first global state, elevating and advancing civilizations with the support of the Magi, the backing of charismatic figures, and the synergy of sages. His rule was not merely characterized by militarism or conquest devoid of governance, statecraft, or development, nor did it destroy cultures, religions, or civilizations. However, in war, he fought with the strategy of charismatic leaders, setting no limits against obstinate enemies who chose war over peace and reconciliation. War against a stubborn foe succeeds only through surprise and deception, leading to victory, safety, security, and peace.

Freedom and Religious Tolerance

Cyrus, with his formidable nature, felt no weakness or fear, neither constantly proclaiming enmity nor restricting freedoms. Empowered by inner charisma and authority, free from fear of others, he granted freedom to all, fostering a pluralistic society through tolerance and magnanimity. This allowed people to hear diverse voices of thought and religion, choosing the best ideas and faiths through voluntary pursuit of truth, achieving natural and free growth and perfection. A charismatic ruler uses inner light practically and beneficially for their people, not as a mere symbol or rhetorical flourish.

In the vision of divine charisma and esoteric insight, the entire world is a shared, common home, and Iran belongs to all Iranians, each endowed with dignity, even if they follow a heretical faith. The security of this collective home is established through universal respect and honor. According to Xenophon in Book Eight of the Cyropaedia, Cyrus said: “Throughout my life, I have been a lover of humanity.”

A charismatic ruler respects all religions, and religious tolerance is a policy for sustaining governance with universal and global legitimacy. Cyrus, with wisdom, did not make religion state-sponsored or officially aligned with governance, living his tolerant, Hanif, and charismatic faith. Such a ruler, even when meeting prophets or saints, does not obstruct them out of chivalry and charismatic insight, respecting their prophetic or saintly sanctity and divine grandeur in proportion to their own greatness, as he did by preserving the sanctity of true Jewish prophets.

Based on his policy of religious tolerance, Cyrus permitted the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild their temple without financial support or state funding and without endorsing the distorted Jewish religion. The exiled Jews deemed the temple’s reconstruction essential to provide a dwelling for Yahweh in the holy land, thereby benefiting from His presence.

The Babylonian Cylinder, currently housed in the British Museum, speaks of religious freedom. Written by Babylonian priests in accordance with their religious customs, this first-rate document narrates and introduces Cyrus’s ethos, particularly his magnanimity and liberalism. Cyrus respected both religions and abstract ethical foundations that perfect religion and humanity, regardless of faith or creed. Cyrus was a reformer of Iranian religious beliefs and ancient customs across the Iran of that era, implementing fundamental societal changes and social and political reforms. He engineered culture to enhance leadership authority, curbing the power of anti-charismatic priests and Median leaders by granting limited influence to Zoroastrian Magi and Pars leaders, who were empowered by charisma.

As evidence, one may cite the rebellion or protest of Gaumata the Magus against Darius, documented in Darius’s inscription. Gaumata, a Median Magus from western Iran, sought to restore power to the Medes and western Magi, who had been ousted by Cyrus. A translation of this inscription states that Darius declared: “Thus, I restored the rituals that Gaumata the Magus had destroyed.” In this inscription, the name Ahura Mazda appears seventy times, and the phrase “by the will of Ahura Mazda” thirty-four times, reflecting the profound influence of religion on politics in the Achaemenid era and Darius’s efforts to legitimize his reign and actions following the killing of this Magus, though the reasons for Gaumata’s rebellion against Darius lack further narrative.

A society of charismatic chivalrous individuals is harmonious and compassionate, with universal and pervasive love. A chivalrous ruler upholds the right to freedom for all, regardless of religion or creed, and by safeguarding general freedom and immunity, eliminates hypocrisy, sanctimony, and tyranny, preventing the emergence of strife.

Cyrus and his statesmen represented the splendor and grandeur of a civilized nation, a charismatic emperorship, and wise Magi and clergy. In an era where national pride and the display of a nation’s greatness and authority relied on knowledge, ethical values, cultural refinement, nobility, piety, and martial prowess, Cyrus embodied all these qualities exceptionally, showcasing the nation’s authority and national pride to the world and contemporaries. He established an ancient model of Iranian power and its endurance through authority and the illumination of charismatic governance.

Deception in War and Disregarding Prohibitions

If Cyrus excelled in knowledge, intelligence, and the ability to engage in dialogue, unite states and nations, mobilize the Magi and scholars, and uphold harmony and freedom, he was equally formidable in deceiving adversaries, waging war, and dominating the battlefield, emerging preeminent in all these domains. War is nothing but stratagem, deception, and guile. One who imposes red lines or forbidden zones in war, grants amnesty or trust to a belligerent and hostile enemy, offers opportunities, or naively shows mercy, is destined for defeat.

In the ancient society of his time, where martial prowess was a display of national power and honor, Cyrus strategically outmaneuvered his enemies, compelling their submission through diplomacy rather than violence, unless faced with the obstinacy of a malevolent adversary. In such cases, he resorted to defense and active countermeasures, swiftly concluding conflicts with authority, creative deceptions, and surprise tactics, ensuring a favorable outcome. Cyrus succeeded in bringing three of the four major empires of his era—Media, Lydia, and Babylon—under Persian dominion. His son, Cambyses, annexed Egypt to the Persian Empire after Cyrus’s death. According to the Old Testament, the Achaemenid Empire spanned 127 provinces, from India to Ethiopia.

The greatness and majesty of Cyrus lie in the fact that his vast power, successive and widespread victories, and conquests did not lead to arrogance, madness, personality disorders, corruption, bloodlust, or oppression. Nor did they result in the blindness, aimlessness, confusion, or tyranny associated with corrupt and unjust rule. Instead, he adhered to the principles of justice and law. For such immense power, Cyrus possessed the charismatic fortitude, divine illumination, resilience, and clarity to endure and govern justly.

Cyrus’s Grandeur and the World

The world was not too grand for the charismatic Cyrus, nor did it appear so. Rather, Cyrus was grand for the world, and thus he became Cyrus the Great. Wherever he conquered, he bestowed upon the people freedom, prosperity, comfort, and joy, alleviating their sorrow, hardship, and suffering.

Bounded Justice and Description

In the material realm, absolutism is unattainable, as absolute righteousness is impossible. This is an inherent principle of the material world. Cyrus, despite his grandeur, was a charismatic ruler, not an infallible absolute. Governing such an expansive empire, it is inevitable that mistakes and damages occurred, and it cannot be claimed that he was always just in every instance or immune to prosecution. Although historical records, tainted by conspiracies, forgeries, and discontinuities, are unreliable, what matters is that, according to the consensus of historians, Cyrus possessed a sacred and divinely charismatic persona. He was not afflicted by arrogance, domination, autocracy, pervasive self-aggrandizement, pettiness, or narcissism. Nor did royal pride and desires blind or deafen him, leading to erroneous judgments and decisions that imposed numerous flawed outcomes on the nation, plunging his people into deprivation, poverty, oppression, suppression, loss of freedoms, injustice, insecurity, exhaustion, defeat, and decline.

While Cyrus recognized democracy and popular election, by virtue of his charismatic and innate appointment, he was both the choice of the Magi and freemen and enjoyed widespread public legitimacy. The people were joyful and content with him, viewing his charisma as the source of their prosperity and comfort. The result of Cyrus’s rule was profound popular authority, resilience, steadfast resistance, a sense of national honor, widespread awareness, universal wisdom, and pervasive sincerity and compassion. His nation did not succumb to weakness, pessimism, deprivation, resentment, despair, exhaustion, or apathy.

Cyrus granted such freedom and power to all that they could utilize and benefit from everything, unleashing every talent. Possessing inner authority and the essence of governance, Cyrus drew all to his power, fostering dependency and a desire for his rule.

The worth of every individual lies in their commitment to justice, truth, and the extent, quality, and sincerity of their pursuit and alignment with righteousness and honesty. Beyond material existence, humans face the afterlife, the intermediate realm, and the reckoning of deeds, where it must be determined whether one’s actions hold value before God. Only proximity to God holds true worth and brings eternal salvation.

However, anti-religious antiquarians, ignorant of both religion and ancient figures, and uninformed zealots and ritualists who feel inferior and weak before charismatic historical heroes and wise archetypes, obscure society’s intellectual landscape, plunging it into ambiguity, confusion, and deception. They cast veils of delusion over the pure truth of prophethood, divine sanctity, and bestowed charisma, harming charismatic figures and perpetrating injustice against truth-seeking Iran, whose innate identity is rooted in wise-centered religiosity and God-seeking. If national management falls to superficial ritualists or antiquarians lacking inner authority and intellectual vigor, a great and ancient nation of sages and devout individuals becomes so vast for them that their minds and spirits collapse into arrogance, madness, tyranny, and autocracy, damaging themselves, religion, wisdom, knowledge, the people, and Iran itself.

Cyrus’s Monogamy

Cyrus is regarded as monogamous. His wife, Cassandane, of Achaemenid lineage, was the queen of 28 Asian nations and the love of Cyrus’s life. Upon her death in 538 BCE, all these nations mourned for five days. Charismatic Cyrus remains a model for Iranians in monogamy. Although there is no legal prohibition on polygamy in Iranian society, it traditionally and through exemplars like the chivalrous Cyrus imposes a customary ban on polygamy, viewing it as shameful, reprehensible, and contrary to nobility and grandeur. Society shows high sensitivity and resistance to it. In this context, polygamy brings no fulfillment or happiness to Iranians, leaving all parties involved dissatisfied, joyless, and distressed. Moreover, it is the hallmark of chivalrous individuals to avoid harming their spouse and to ensure their comfort and happiness.

Cyrus: The Singular Phenomenon of the Achaemenids

The legacy of Cyrus II (the Great), marked by economic prosperity, political splendor, freedom, freethinking, justice, and security, as the unrivaled superpower of its time, was not passed on to the sages and chosen devotees of Ahura Mazda. Subsequent Achaemenid rulers were ordinary, devoid of charisma, and embroiled in oppression, injustice, heavy taxation, and burdens on the weak, indulgence in luxury, or personal inadequacy and low religious culture. This led the dynasty and its state to tyranny, injustice, extravagance, corruption, and decline. An example is the influence of Bagoas, the eunuch, chamberlain, confidant, and minister of Artaxerxes III, in the Achaemenid court, who poisoned and killed Artaxerxes III and his son Arses. The Achaemenid court, hollowed out, devoid of true statehood, public devotion, harmony, freedom, and reliant on Bagoas, lost its ability to accurately assess Greece and understand Alexander’s character after Bagoas’s assassination by Darius III. Consequently, Darius III’s vast army was easily defeated by the Greek commander Alexander of Macedon, with a far smaller force.

Alexander, from his youth, possessed cunning, mischief, and a mania for conquest. Trained under Aristotle, one cannot study in a school limited to rationalism and detached from esoteric wisdom without fostering domination and hegemony, as such a philosophy lacks the essence of love and compassion, the foundation of charismatic order. If governance is not in the hands of sages and charismatic figures, the system of rule and power institutions systematically perpetrate injustice, moral corruption, arrogance, tyranny, suppression, and exploitation, stripping people of freedoms. Due to oppression, theft, and squandering of public resources, unjust distribution of privileges, and resources, the people become deprived and impoverished, and the military lacks identity, national attachment, faith, and motivation for defense. They no longer believe in an autocratic, narcissistic, hollow, self-aggrandizing, and weak king who lacks oversight and control, as a victorious and charismatic commander. This is because the governance system lacks innate justice and divine law, failing to align with the nation’s natural disposition, social and national necessities, and enlightened reason, resorting instead to arbitrariness and autocracy. The people have no bond with such dominators, do not love them, and such a system garners no popularity. The relationship between the dominant individual, their system, and the people is severed, true statehood vanishes, and national identity, collective attachment, and living truth shift to social disobedience, negative resistance, or disintegration.

By the end of the Achaemenid dynasty, the religion of religious leaders and society underwent deviation and distortion. If Herodotus once asserted that Iranians never engaged in idolatry, dismantling idol temples and eradicating idol worship—“Iranians never make idols for their gods”—by the end of the Achaemenid era, when true statehood was lost, Greek domination gradually introduced idolatrous practices in Iran, and Ahura Mazda, with semantic shifts, became the great deity of lords. According to Herodotus, idolatry entered Iran from Arabia. The first Iranian idol was Anahita, and Berossus notes that Artaxerxes Longimanus (465–424 BCE), son of Xerxes and the sixth Achaemenid king, first instituted the worship of such a statue in Iran. “Longimanus” may signify capability, not merely a physical defect, as rulers in the Magian political tradition were required to be free of physical imperfections or ugliness.

Uninformed Critique of Cyrus Amid the Decline of Extremist Ritualists

It was stated that Hanif Magi were monotheists, believing in a benevolent God while recognizing evil as an existential reality, not a mere absence, attributing its source to Ahriman. The Gathas contain no mention of dualistic worship of good and evil, and the unity and self-sufficiency of Ahura Mazda are eloquently praised. The notion that ancient Magi were dualists is a superficial and literalist historical interpretation. Dualism, the belief in two principles of good and evil, differs from dualistic worship. The Magi believed in two principles of goodness and evil, termed Ormazd and Ahriman.

In the Magian tradition, particularly in the cold northern regions of the Iranian plateau where obtaining water and fire was arduous, fire was revered. As fire aided in cooking raw food and warding off animals and pests at night, efforts were made to keep it burning in fire temples, built near water sources, as rekindling fire was challenging. Constructing fire temples does not equate to fire worship or sun worship; the light of fire and the sun served as a qibla or direction. The qibla represents the pinnacle of thought, the height and depth of the soul, directed toward the Exalted God. The qibla is the aspiration for divine proximity. Fire always held a place to remain perpetually lit for communal use, serving people day and night.

Zoroastrians gradually transformed fire temples into venues for religious gatherings, education, social assemblies, sacred spaces for worship, festival halls, medical clinics, courts, gymnasiums, libraries, and registries. Sassanian Magi endowed them with religious sanctity, turning them into pilgrimage sites.

After Zoroaster emerged as a Magian imam and follower of the Magian tradition, endowed with divine inspiration and speaking with divine authority, bearing the pure law of Ahura Mazda, his followers continued to revere fire, earth, and water, preventing the dead from contacting water or soil. They regarded Ahura Mazda as the Light of Lights. With the rise of Zoroastrianism, many Magian beliefs initially permeated this religion. Zoroastrians reinforced these beliefs as their own, while some Magi incorporated them back into the Magian tradition. Later, superficial and narrow-minded priests, supported by governments, reduced many wise teachings to superficiality, populism, and superstition, distorting or deviating them.

Thus, critiques of the Magian religion should not use the beliefs, rituals, traditions, and practices prevalent among the masses or superficial, non-charismatic, or anti-charismatic priests during Cyrus’s rule as evidence against his charismatic wisdom, as the sophistry of such arguments has been previously addressed. The beliefs of the masses and ritualistic priests do not represent the pure, scholarly essence of the Magian tradition or the divine mission of charismatic Magi. Rather, they reflect distortions by followers, a form of populism, and the specific appeal to the masses, an affliction common to all religions and inevitable due to the relativity of human understanding.

Moreover, dominant governments and powerholders, by interfering in religious stewardship to bind incompetent, non-charismatic, sycophantic, and deceitful priests to themselves, contaminated religion, knowledge, and priesthood with profiteering superstitions, sacrificing the purity and sincerity of the faith for survival, greed, and ambition.

Ultimately, referencing the masses or state-sponsored religion, both of which hold social legitimacy, does not equate to accessing the true, pure essence of religion as divinely bestowed upon a chosen servant and legitimized by God. As previously stated, to grasp the true essence of religion, one must directly access its wise origin. The interpretations of ordinary people do not constitute specialized, professional, or divine religion.

Eternal and Immortal: Natural Iran

Although Alexander plunged Iran into universal mourning, its innate essence remained eternally Iranian. Iranians, coexisting with a culture of charisma and sages, attained such a resilient and enduring culture and knowledge that they remained loyal to the Iranian nation’s ethos. Neither Alexander’s invasion nor the two-hundred-year Greek (Seleucid) domination—often marked by violence, terror, and intimidation—led them to submit to Hellenistic culture or religion. Nor did the dominance of the uncharismatic Christian church, devoid of messianic charisma, sway them toward distorted Christianity. Nor did the Arab invasions and the onslaughts of caliphal Islam, which, instead of monotheistic knowledge, saintly devotion, and divine proximity, cast the shadow of sword and tribute over this ancient land, break their identity’s resilience and resistance. The relentless assaults of Rome against this enduring Eastern power and the thousand-year efforts of Byzantium (Eastern Rome) to penetrate Iran’s borders and culture consistently met defeat, and Iran remained eternal.

Iran was never truly conquered by the religion or culture of the Greeks, the theology of Christianity, Byzantine invasions, or the Islam of the Umayyad, Abbasid, or Ottoman caliphs. Neither Iran nor the Iranian nation ever became Greek, Roman, Christian, or caliphal, nor did they submit to foreigners. The Greeks (Seleucids), Roman clergy, and Sunni Muslim emirs and caliphs dominated Iran by force. In 637 CE, when the Sassanian Empire collapsed in the Battle of Qadisiyyah on the Euphrates against Umar’s martyrdom-seeking Muslim army, lacking faith and motivation, Iranians witnessed the defeat of a throne and crown severed from divine charisma and devoid of true statehood. However, Umar’s authoritarian army and the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs could neither govern nor exert political influence in this land, nor gain Iranian legitimacy, nor were the sage-descended Iranians receptive to the decadent royal culture of an Arab empire alien to wisdom.

The Language of the Holy Quran: The Language of Hanif Charismatics

With their truth-seeking ethos and devout nature, Iranians, by choosing the true religion and the Shia school, found their perennial identity and the ancient path of wisdom. The deep-rooted Hanif Magian system, under the aegis of the immaculate knowledge of divine imamate, shattered all yokes of falsehood, ignorance, tyranny, injustice, and oppression in every era. Post-Islam, through their scholarly writings in the language of the Holy Quran, Iranians made this divine book’s language the official language of knowledge and a global tongue, embracing the authority of the Quran’s scholarly and revelatory knowledge, not the Arabs. The Arabic of the Holy Quran is the language of God, wisdom, and sagacity. The assignment of meaning to words in this living, dynamic system is not merely conventional but follows nuanced and philosophical alignments, such that the language grows through the utmost harmony between words and meanings. When reduced to mere convention, it declines and ceases to be a language of science and philosophical precision.

In the Magian system, both the transnational Persian language, the tongue of the Iranian nation, and Arabic have been consistently refined, preserving their sagacious form, except in periods when the scholarly and philosophical Magian language fell into isolation under the dominance of superficial scholars, succumbing to weakness and decline, producing fewer luminaries like the saintly Hafez or the eloquent Saadi.

Despite all vicissitudes, Iranian sages have remained centers of spiritual guidance and intellectual leadership. The system of character-driven sages, even when sidelined by ignorance, the dominance of superficial thinkers, or the tyranny of adversaries, never ceased. This system even captivated Arabs with the knowledge and culture of Iranian Islam. Arab caliphs were compelled to bow to Iranian culture and knowledge to manage their courts and occupied lands with the prowess of Iranian administrators.

The saga of post-Islamic character-driven sages like Salman the Persian, the philosopher Al-Farabi, the genius Avicenna, and other rational, heartfelt, or beloved luminaries of the Islamic world must be explored separately. The spiritual and intellectual stature of the immaculate leaders of the charismatic sage system, the Household of the Prophet (peace be upon them), is discussed in Knowledge and Divine Humanity, where I have elucidated the finality of prophethood and sainthood, drawing every sage to self-awareness, devotion, and love for this divine school.

Post-Islamic Iranian sages, through their innate saintly disposition and divinely bestowed sanctity, chose devotion to the Prophet’s Household, Shiism, and the divine knowledge of the Holy Quran. Shiism is not only the culture of divine sages and charismatics but also the school of sanctity and divine immaculate endowment. Iranians, with their saintly disposition, and their nation, innately and character-driven, are devoted to this culture, practicing a system of enlightened wisdom and saintly knowledge intrinsically and naturally, without acquisition. However, acquisition polishes, flourishes, and enhances this divinely endowed essence in the material realm of contingency and freedom, where complete causality and definitive, enduring outcomes are not inherent.

The devout nature and truth-seeking instinct of the Iranian nation reject anyone who embodies falsehood or opposes truth, regardless of titles or names, refusing to be swayed or captivated by complex labels concealing deceit or dominant hypocrisy. The faith-driven Iranian nation is an enemy of falsehood, tyranny, and domination, innately and instinctively desiring truth, following enlightened sages of righteousness endowed with divine legitimacy.

The Foundation of Iran’s Authority and the Peril of Division

So long as the Khosravani wisdom of Iran’s sages was embodied by living, truly charismatic figures, it was so rooted in truth that no culture could withstand it. Likewise, the Immortal Army of the Achaemenid era was among history’s invincible forces. Westerners acknowledge that Iran, in every period, triumphantly repelled aggressions against it. However, what undermined Iranian authority was discord and division among the Magi and the royal court. Disunity among Iranians was deep-rooted and grounded in reality, though with the advent of constitutionalism, the 1979 Revolution, and the gradual growth of public awareness, this historical discord is being eradicated.

Knowledge, industry, religion, military power (weaponry), wealth (capital), and, most crucially, popular legitimacy as the sentiment of the masses have consistently been factors of empowerment across Iran’s historical periods. Scholars, sages, industrialists, religious clergy, military commanders, capitalists, and public favor, along with free and devotion-driven harmony with the state, shape Iran’s power system and state. Among these, wealth, military power, popularity, and public alignment are not natural, enduring forms of authority. The authority of wealth and force is conventional, deriving vitality and management from the natural perfections of religion and knowledge, especially in Iran’s faith-driven society, which integrates worldly power and divine religion, forming a synthesis, not a division. If wealth (economy) and weaponry (militarism and authoritarianism) derive legitimacy from the true powers of religion, wisdom, knowledge, and industry, the state gains true authority. Otherwise, wealth and weaponry, lacking natural power, become mere coercion.

Religion, wisdom, knowledge, and industry, if methodical and committed to scholarship and inquiry, converge on a single source, uniting in knowledge, awareness, and alignment with reality and truth. Otherwise, to the extent they stray from reality and become tainted, they sow discord and conflict. If weaponry, religion, knowledge, wisdom, and industry do not serve one another, fail to unite, or become divisive rather than submissive, they erode each other’s power, leading to weakness and incapacity. Inefficiency and collapse are the inevitable outcomes of discord and conflict.

This outlines the theoretical framework of power’s core. In practice, externally and in reality, knowledge and wisdom—lawmaking—resided with priests, clergy, and Magi, while weaponry, the army, and law enforcement were with kings. Both groups possessed wealth, the market system, and the economy. Meanwhile, rival powers and colonialists, seeking to subjugate Iran, exploited this deep fault line through the British policy of “divide and rule,” fanning the flames of division and dragging one or both power centers into ignorance, corruption, and tyranny, keeping Iranians weak.

The astute Saadi states: “Ten dervishes may sleep on a single mat, but two kings cannot fit in one realm: If a godly man eats half a loaf, he gives the other half to dervishes. A king seizes one realm, yet remains covetous of another.”

The pragmatic Roman statesman Cicero (Marcus Tullius Cicero, 106 BCE, Italy), familiar with Greek philosophy, who dubbed Herodotus the “father of history” and witnessed the Republic of Rome’s instability and fall due to internal strife and intrigue, deemed civil war a nation’s most tragic event. Civil war and fratricide destroy unity, cohesion, and centralized power, leading to ruin and tempting malevolent rival powers.

“Divide and rule,” the strategy of Alexander’s father in governance, sustains and expands power by fragmenting another’s centralized authority, rendering its parts weaker against the dominant power. During World War I (1914–1918 CE), Britain, an established power, viewed the emerging Ottoman Empire in the Middle East as a formidable adversary. Through a policy of division, inciting Arab revolts against the Ottomans, Britain fragmented this power into smaller, weaker entities like Iraq, Palestine, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, and Qatar, confining the Ottoman state to Anatolia and a small part of Europe, creating a new Middle East.

Later, in 1948, the British, claiming stewardship over Palestine through this fragmentation, facilitated the establishment of Israel for Jews, providing them a homeland. This served colonial powers like Britain, enabling periodic war-making and destruction to prevent the rise of dominant Asian and Eastern powers. Israel, as a sustained strategy, enjoys the unwavering support of the United States, the dominant post-World War II power, to destabilize, wage war, destroy, fragment, and weaken any emerging power.

The global Jewish population, fewer than fifteen million, with their legendary wealth and political and media influence in the United States and other governments, supported by enduring British and American policies, has built one of the world’s most armed militaries. To maintain dominance in the Middle East, Israel resorts to any action and spares no crime. Their ancient motto, “the end justifies the means,” guided their conquest of the Canaanites after Moses’s death, seizing their lands, particularly Palestine.

Palestine, the finest region of Canaan, holds a strategic and geopolitical position, a hub for caravans, merchants, and warriors. Palestinians and the Israelites were enemies from their first encounter, with Hebrews calling them “Pelisht” (vile), from which “Palestine” (wild) derives.

Two rival powers in one place, incompatible, will inevitably clash, with one eliminating the other. In Christianity and Europe, where spirituality has not been deeply rooted or innate, the secular state and populace sidelined the church and its uncharismatic clergy. In Iran, religion remains intrinsic to the people’s essence. Kings endure if they gain legitimacy from clergy as sources of knowledge, religion, and godliness, or if they are charismatic and wise administrators. Otherwise, without such legitimacy or title, or if resorting to deceit, they lack true statehood and authority, fostering domination.

During the Pahlavi II era, the clergy largely rejected the monarchical system, gaining widespread popularity, aligning with intellectuals, academics, and even secularists. The 1979 Revolution ostensibly ended segments of detached coercion and militarism. If the military does not genuinely serve true religion, wisdom, knowledge, and industry, but instead seeks their submission for itself or for those lacking divine legitimacy and resorting to religious deceit, it will lack popular legitimacy and social acceptance. Such a representative will not merely be ousted but eradicated by the authority of the masses, whose growing awareness, fervent passion, and commitment to knowledge, wisdom, and religion fuel a rebellious uprising, annihilating them. With the 1979 Revolution, the more Iranians adhere to religion, wisdom, knowledge, industry, ethics, populism, tolerance, harmony, and knowledge-driven peace, following God’s path and His men—law, competent executors, and guardians of law—breaking the horns of ignorance and corruption and seizing the whips of arrogance and tyranny, the more they uproot their historical discord and weaknesses, emerging stronger, a superior, dominant power in the global community.

The clergy, by the same principle, will endure if they share religion with the people through wisdom, knowledge, and industry, truly embodying godliness and knowledge, not insatiable, provincial, superstitious kings or religious deceivers. The people, committed to true knowledge, wisdom, and sagacity, reject talentless individuals, hollow titles, or meaningless authority devoid of truth, power, or connected virtue. Such a figure is a blind torchbearer, casting fire and smoke upon all, their incompetence breeding ignorance and madness. An unfit ruler is unworthy of leadership, and their possessions and religious deceit collapse under collective protest, public rejection, and the masses’ negative sentiments. The people will undoubtedly despise and abhor a talentless, opinionless, deceitful king or leader, while loving and remaining loyal to a godly man whose truth, wisdom, beauty, virtue, and judgment reside in their enlightened soul, divine beloved, and divine connection.

Iran Today and the Fault Line of Division

Although Iran, through the 1979 Revolution, achieved unity and centralized power, it faces a serious fault line: the discord between unscientific, superstitious religion, mingled with desire and falsehood, and scientific religion, transparent knowledge, enlightened wisdom, and truth. Each has its proponents, neither tolerating the other based on the criterion of one’s truth and the other’s falsehood. They cannot achieve social harmony in religion, augmenting their soft power, cultural influence, diplomatic capacity, and economic strength to bolster their hard power and stability, maximizing their potential. Moreover, the pressures from this discord, compounded by colonial powers’ machinations and persistent economic sanctions, erode social support and public backing, especially as Saadi notes: “It is impossible for the virtuous to perish and the unvirtuous to take their place: No one shelters under the owl’s shade, even if the phoenix vanishes from the world.”

Saadi deems the absence of a ruler preferable to living under an incompetent one lacking the qualifications for governance. This sound judgment merits separate discussion. Governance and management require charisma, divine illumination, and the worthiness of sages and philosophers. The leadership of an unfit individual institutionalizes systemic chaos and corruption, worse than the complete absence of a qualified ruler, leaving the people and realm to their own devices. Ferdowsi states: “Why plant a tree whose fruit is poison and leaves are bitter? O world, are you blind and deaf, giving the fox the place of noble lions?”

Just as royal tyranny was ultimately ousted from the superficial layer of power in the struggle between religion and monarchical despotism, if Iranian society becomes entangled in unscientific religion and its superstitious tenets in the seat of power, it will not attain true knowledge, power, consensus, unity, tranquility, or standard progress, nor triumphantly and proudly enter the global stage of competition. In this regard, Saadi’s words apply: “The wolf’s head must be severed first, not after it tears the people’s sheep.”

However, if a predatory wolf hides in the familiar guise of a shepherd, cloaked in deceit, it becomes a slaughterhouse for sheep who willingly and proudly sacrifice themselves to ignorance, corruption, greed, arrogance, and the tyranny of a dominant king. Such a king spares no one, not even godly men who recognize his predatory nature, exploiting God’s name for personal gain. In the critical matter of governance, tied directly to people’s lives and destinies, the unfit cannot replace the virtuous. The fox’s tail betrays the thief of religion, the deceiver of faith, and the enemy of the realm. Even if it blooms, it bears no fruit.

“Indeed, Allah does not guide one who is a liar and ungrateful” (Quran, Az-Zumar 3).