The Persians inherited old, strange habits, that illustrate their tendency to philosophy, mostly. And the fact that justifies the many religious doctrines, that they have transferred to their Islam, so their doctrines abound in it as well.

They conspired against the Arabs, and worked in secret. Sometimes, they conspired through carrying out revolutions, and other times, through logical, tempting speeches.  And they did canonized their kings, that they believed that it was their kings’ divine right to rule.

There  were many different movements and races in the Islamic countries, but the problem of some of those countries are the ones loyal to the Iranians. And, indeed, the historians’ opinions, about them, differed because the way they dealt with the Arab race was based on pure segregation. Therefore, being called Persians is considered to be a generalized term, and must be replaced by the Iranians because Iran includes all the people that converted to Islam, from Khorasan and elsewhere , and it includes the Turkish people from beyond the river, and the Persians, who lived in the south, northwest and others.

They have had a disharmonious and destructive movement since the time of the Abbasid state, and this has caused them historical problems and psychological complex, that they inherited from the Sassanid state and Zoroastrianism, which are the Manichean and Zoroastrian movements.

The social teachings of Mizdak – an ever- rejuvenating ancient system – were provoking the lower and middle classes of them, and it, almost, undermined the Sasani rule  at the time in the quarter century AD. These problems extended to the era of the Abbasids and after them. Following, the doctrine of Manichean dualism, which was of a Sufi nature, caused terror and trouble in the Sasani era, as it promoted misguided, deviant thought, since the first Abbasid era. Those who, thoroughly,  search into these movements shall find that the teachings of the ancient Iranian heretics are keen to spread the teachings of a mixture of Mazdakism and other extreme thoughts.

Al-Jahiz and Ibn Abd Rabbo stated that with the emergence of populism, which depended on foreigners to have it formed, degraded the Arabs. They claimed that they were the weakest of nations, and that they had no credit, and they believed that all Arabs had no advantage when compared to the Romans and the Indians or the Persians. And they added that the Arabs had nothing to be proud of. And to prove their degraded state, they attempted to compare them to pharaohs, the giants, Khosrow, and tsars. And, If they were to be proud of Islam, then, it is a religion for all people. Indeed, this is surprising that they ignore the history of the Arabs and the neighboring nations before religion reaches all people.

It is strange that those who promoted such ideas and despised the Arabs: either remained in their ancient religion, or converted to Islam, yet they did not, truly, believe in it , and ancient tendencies have had its prevailing inflnce over them, and Allah knows best,.

What is more surprising is that there are writers who promoted the  forementioned thought, including Saeed bin Hamid Al-Bakhtkan and his book “the foreigners revenge against the Arabs”, and the book “The favor of foreigners over the Arabs and their Pride”, other books that tackled the the Arabs are: “The Arabs’ Flaws” and “The Virtues of Persia” . At that time, the Arabs did their best to stand against the populist ideology. They documented and responded to rumoured falsehoods. People, such as the Al- Hamadani, have written about their ancient history. The Khalifs and speakers supported each other to resist this destructive movement. with those historical events, we may point out  .