The subjunctive tense has to do with elements of doubt, tentativeness, uncertainty, and vagueness. These characteristics make the subjunctive tense stand in contrast with such tenses as the indicative or the imperative. We will first begin with the general present subjunctive, and continue with past and perfect forms.

Unlike Persian, French, and some other languages, in English this tense is less productive. In English the subjunctive verb form can be very difficult to detect because it is spelled like other tenses of the verb. It may be found in hypothetical constructions such as “if he were here” as opposed to “if he was here,” in such expressiona as “So be it!”, and in certain clauses introduced by ‘that,’ as in, “I suggest that she go to see a dentist.”

Compare the following English sentences:

To understand the subjunctive in Persian, English is of little help. In addition to the orthography, there are syntactic and grammatical differences between the two languages. For instance, the English past subjunctive, “I should have gone” corresponds with the Persian perfect subjunctive; and, therefore, it is difficult for an English speaker to recognize the difference between, باید می رفتم bāyad mi raftam ‘I had to go’ and باید می رفتم bāyad mi raftam ‘I should have gone,’ by just reading or listening to the Persian phrase باید می رفتم.

Compare the following sentences with their English translations:

باید پنچره را می بستی
bāyad panjare rā mi basti
“You should have closed the window.”
English past subjunctive (perfect in form) Persian past subjunctive

باید پنچره را بسته باشی
bāyad panjare rā mi basti
“You must have closed the window.”
English past subjunctive (perfect in form) Persian perfect subjunctive

In Persian a verb in the subjunctive has a particular form and—once you have learned the construction—it is easy to recognize. The basic features for the subjunctive are as follows:

With the exception of the jussive and optative moods, in Persian, a verb in the subjunctive form is always a complement to a main verb in the sentence or clause. That is to say, it always falls secondary and complementary to a primary verb in the indicative mood.

The subjunctive of simple verbs is constructed by the addition of a [bé-] prefix to the present stem, and the addition of the personal endings:

خریدن xaridan ‘to buy’ → present stem – خر- -xar- → present subjunctive بخرم bexaram ‘(I) buy;’ as in باید بخرم bāyad bexaram ‘I must buy.’

In behavior, this [bé-] prefix functions exactly as the [bé-] prefix as seen in Imperatives. It also follows the same euphonic rules.

There are two distinct differences between the construction of the subjunctive and the imperative:

Unlike the imperative, subjunctive applies to all six persons, while the imperative only applies to the second person singular and plural.

In the imperative, the second person singular does not take any ending while in subjunctive it takes the regular second person ending ـی [-i] ([-yi] after vowels):

The negative is constructed by replacing the [bé-] prefix with [ná-]:

بروم béravam > نروم náravam, بگویی béguyi > نگویی náguyi, بخواهی béxāhi > نخواهی náxāhi, etc.

As mentioned in Imperatives, the two verbs بودن budan ‘to be’ and داشتن dāštan ‘to have’ are irregular in Persian, and in most phonetic contexts they behave differently than other verbs:

The subjunctive of budan takes the different verbal stem باش, whose historical infinitival form (that is, * باشیدن bāšidan) is obsolete and does not exist in New Persian any more. In the subjunctive this verb never takes the [be-] prefix:

Example:

باید آنجا باشم
bāyad ānjā bāšam
“I must/have to be there.”

!بهتر است در همین اتاق باشی تا من برگردم
behtar ast dar hamin otāq bāši tā man bar gardam!
“You’d better stay in this (very) room, until I return!”

The subjunctive of the verb داشتن dāštan ‘to have’ is constructed with the past participle of this verb and the subjunctive of budan, that is, bāšam, bāši, bāšad, bāšim, bāšid, bāšand:

می خواهی این را داشته باشی؟
mi xāhi in rā dāšte bāši?
“Do you want/would you like to have this?”

ما باید این مسأله را در نظرداشته باشیم
mā bāyad in mas’ale rā dar nazar dāšte bāšim
“We must bear this in mind.”

The two verbs باید bāyad ‘must, have to’ and شاید šāyad ‘perhaps, maybe’ are frozen in the third-person singular, similar to the English “it is necessary,” in “it is necessary that I go there.” They are referred to as “impersonal” verbs, because they can be applied to any of the six persons in the table; as in, in English I must go, you must go, he must go, etc., باید برود، باید بروی، باید بروم, etc.

Originally باید and شاید are the third singular present tense of the now obsolete infinitives بایستن ‘to be imperative’ and شایستن ‘to be appropriate.’ But in Modern Persian باید simply means ‘must, should, it is necessary, etc.’ and شاید means ‘perhaps, maybe, it is possible, etc.’

An alternative form of باید is بایست bāyest. Technically, this form is the past stem as well as the third singular in the past (that is, بایستن > بایستـ); however, in Modern Persian it is used alternatively as a substitute for باید; as in, باید بروم bāyad beravam ‘I have to go, must go, etc.’ = بایست بروم.

Both باید and بایست may be prefixed with می as می باید and می بایست. In Modern Persian, all four forms are the same; that is to say: باید = بایست = می باید = می بایست

To assume that باید بروم means ‘I have to go’ and بایست بروم means ‘I had to go’ is erroneous and based on analogy.

Another form of بایست as بایستی and alternatively as می بایستی is also used.

As a rule Subjunctive is always the anterior verb, dependant on a main verb in the sentence, which also sets the tense (past and perfect subjunctive are discussed in other sections):

مصمّم است که بیاید
mosammam ast ke biyāyad
“He is determined to come.”

مصمّم شده است که بیاید
mosammam šode bud (ke) biyāyad
“He has been determined to come.”

The subjunctive is used in the following situations:

When the object of a clause or sentence is indefinite. Compare and contrast the following pairs:

به دنبال معلّمی می گردم که فرانسه بداند
be donbāl-e mo’allemi mi gardam ke farānse bedānad
“I am looking for a teacher who would know French.”

به دنبال معلّمی می گردم که فرانسه می داند
be donbāl-e mo’allemi mi gardam ke farānse mi dānad
“I am looking for the teacher who knows French.”

به دنبال کسی می گردم که رانندگی بلد باشد
be donbāl-e kasi mi gardam ke rānandegi bedānad
“I am looking for someone who would know how to drive.”

به دنبال آن کسی می گردم که رانندگی بلد است
be donbāl-e ān kasi mi gardam ke rānandegi mi dānad
“I am looking for the person who knows how to drive.”

With relative pronouns and conjunctions, such as هروقت harvaqt ‘whenever,’ هرجا / هرکجا harjā/harkojā ‘wherever,’ هرکس / هرکه / هرکی (colloquial) hark as/harke/harki ‘whoever,’ هرچه / هرچی (colloquial) hace/harci ‘whatever,’ and هرچند harcand ‘however much, however many’ (always followed by a counting word, otherwise it means “although”). As definite, these words respectively mean, ‘when, every time that,’ ‘everywhere,’ ‘everybody who, everyone who,’ ‘everything that.’ Compare and contrast the following pairs:

هروقت بیاید، خوب است
harvaqt biyāyad xub ast
“Whenever he may come it is fine.”

هروقت می آید خیلی می ماند
harvaqt mi āyad, xeyli mi mānad
“Every time she/he comes, she/he stays for a long time.”

هرجا / هرکجا برویم بهتر از اینجا است
harjā/harkojā beravim behtar az injā ast
“Wherever we may go it is better than here.”

هرجا / هرکجا می رویم یک چیز قشنگ می بینیم
harjā/harkojā mi ravim yek ciz-e qašang mi binim
“Wherever we go we see something beautiful.”

هرکه/هرکی/ هرکس را ببینم، به او می گویم
harke/harki/harkas rā bebinam, be u mi guyam
“Whomever I may see, I shall tell him/her.”

هرکه/هرکی/ هرکس را می بینم، به او می گویم
harke/harki/harkas rā mi binam, be u mi guyam
“I say it to whomever I see.”

هرچه بگویم برای خود تو است
harce beguyam barā-ye xod-e to ast
“Whatever I may say, it is for your own sake/good.”

هرچه می گویم برای خود تو است
harce mi guyam barā-ye xod-e to ast
“Everything I say is for your own sake/good.”

هرچند جلد کتاب بخواهد به او می دهم
harcand jeld ketāb bexāhad, be u mi daham
“However many books he/she may want, I shall give them to him/her.”

هرچند جلد کتاب می خواهد به او می دهم
harcand jeld ketāb mi xāhad, be u mi daham
“However many books he/she wants, I give them to him/her.”

Compare the functions of هرچند in the above sentences with the following sentence:

هرچند فرانسه قشنگ است، امَّا ایتالیا قشنگ تر است
harcand farānse qašang ast, ammā itāliyā qašang tar ast
“Although France is beautiful, Italy is more beautiful.”

With کسی که kasi ke ‘whosoever’. Compare and contrast the following pair:

کسی که چیزی بخواهد، برایش زحمت می کشد
kasi ke cizi bexāhad, barāyaš zahmat mi kašad
“If someone/whosoever wants something, he/she would work hard for it.”

کسی که چیزی می خواهد، برایش زحمت می کشد
kasi ke cizi mi xāhad, barāyaš zahmat mi kašad
“He/she who wants something, would work hard for it.”

In descriptive clause with مثل…ـی که mesl-e …i ke ‘like …that…’. As we can see, in this case the noun is in indefinite:

مثل کسی که خواب باشد، اصلاً تکان نمی خور د
mesl-e kasi ke xāb bāšad, aslant takān nami xord
“Llike someone who is asleep, he did not move at all.”

مثل کسی که چیزی بخواهد، به من نگاه می کرد
mesl-e kasi ke cizi bexāhad, be man negāh mi kard
“(just) Like someone who wants something, he was looking at me.”

With the comparative of the “too…to” kind:

او قوی تر از آن است که بازی را ببازد
u qavi tar az ān ast ke bāzi rā bebāzad
“She/he is too strong to lose the game.”

تو باهوش تر از آن هستی که به این حرف ها گوش بدهی
to bāhuš tar az ān hasti ke be in harf hā guš bedahi
“You are too intelligent to listen to these sayings.”

The formula is, complement adjective + az ān + copula + ke…

As the complement of any positive or negative expression. Compare the following pairs:

کسی را دیدم که پول را به او بدهم
kasi rā didam ke pul rā be u bedaham
“I did see someone to give him/her the money.”

هیچکس را ندیدم که پول را به او بدهم
hickas rā nadidam ke pul rā be u bedaham
“I did not see anybody so I would give him/her the money.”

قرار بود (که) او به اینجا بیاید
qarār bud (ke) u be injā biyāyad
“She/he was supposed to come here.”

قرار نبود (که) او به اینجا بیاید
qarār nabud (ke) u be injā biyāyad
“She/he was not supposed to come here.”

در اینجا چیزی هست که او بخواهد
dar injā cizi hast ke u bexāhad
“There must be something here that would interest him/her,” literally, “There is something here that she/he would want.”

در اینجا چیزی نیست که او بخواهد
dar injā cizi nist ke u bexāhad
“There is nothing here that she/he might possibly want.”

One of the instances in which the subjunctive tense is used may be compared with the English infinitival clause (that is, the to-infinitive), as in “I have to go;” for example, باید بروم! bāyad beravam ‘I have to go, I must go.’

The verb شدن šodan ‘to become’ has an impersonal form az می شود mi šavad (frozen in the third person singular), which may be compared with the English “it is/is it possible.” Within a regular syntax it calls for the subjunctive. Compare the following sentences with شدن with the English translations:

می شود من هم بیایم؟
mi šavad man ham biyāyam?
“Could I come too? is it possible that I come too?”

از آنجا می شد آن را ببینیم
az ānjā mi šod ānjā rā bebinim
“From where we were it was possible to see it.” (literally, “Trom there it was possible for us to see it.”)

می شود بچّه را هم بیاوریم؟
mi šavad bacce rā ham biyāvarim?
“Could we bring the child too?”

A different historical construction exists in Persian in which a gerund is used instead of the subjunctive. In New Persian this gerund has lost its [-an] suffix:

می شود این را خورد؟
mi šavad in rā xord?
“Is it possible to eat this;” that is, “may I eat this;” from the classical می شود این را خوردن.
باید این کار را کرد bāyad in kār rā kard ‘It is advisable to do this.”

There are a number of conjunctions which call for the subjunctive in adverbial clauses, as in when a conjunction of purpose is either present or inherent within the context. In this case the subjunctive is invariably in the present tense, regardless of the tense of the main verb:

Simple Past:

Present Perfect:

Past Perfect:

Past Progressive:

With the formal future (خواهم آمد) the conjunction is always present:

Future:

خواهم آمد که شما را ببینم
xāham āmad ke šomā rā bebinam
“I shall come to see you.”

خواهم آمد تا شما را ببینم
xāham āmad tā šomā rā bebinam
“I shall come to see you.”

In the present tense, it follows the conjunctions of exception, condition, concession, provision, etc. In the past tense the syntax changes. Compare and contrast the following pairs:
Present:

اگر هم بمیرم بازهم می روم
agar ham bemiram bāz ham mi ravam
“Even though I may die, I am still going.”

Past:

اگر هم می مردم بازهم می رفتم
agar ham mi mordam bāz ham mi raftam
“Even though I would have died, I would have gone.”

Present:

به شرطی که تو بگویی من می آیم
be šarti ke to beguyi man mi āyam
“I would come only if you say so.”

Past:

به شرطی که تو می گفتی من می آمدم
be šarti ke to mi gofti man mi āmadam
“Only if you had told me I would have come.”

Present:

مگر این که خودش نخواهد، وگرنه من می آیم
magar in ke xodaš naxāhad, vagarna man mi āyam
“Unless he (himself) doesn’t want it, otherwise I shall come.”

Past:

مگر این که خودش نمی خواست، وگرنه من می آمدم
magar in ke xodaš nami xāst, vagarna man mi āmadam
“Unless he (himself) didn’t want it, otherwise I would come.”

With temporal conjunctions:

From the prepositions Arabic قبل qabl and Persian پیش piš ‘before’ are derived the conjunctions قبل از این که qabl az in ke and پیش از این که piš az in ke ‘before.’ These conjunctions are both followed by the present subjunctive, regardless of the tense of the main verb:

پیش از این که / قبل از این که برسید، آنجا را تمیز می کنم
qabl az in ke/piš az in ke berasid, ānjā rā tamiz mi konam
“I shall clean that place before you arrive.”

پیش از این که / قبل از این که برسید، آنجا را تمیز کرده بودند
qabl az in ke/piš az in ke berasid, ānjā rā tamiz karde budand
“They had cleaned that place before you arrived.”

Another conjunction is تا tā, which has many different meanings according to its syntactic role, as follows: ‘until’, ‘so long as’, ‘as soon as’, ‘by the time that’, all of which is followed by a negative present subjunctive:

Until, so long as…

تا تو حرکت نکنی او تکان نمی خورد
tā to harekat nakoni, u takān nami xorad
“He/she won’t move until you set out.”

تا دَرسَت را نخوانی نمی توانی تلویزیون تماشا کنی
tā darsat rā naxāni, nami tavāni television tamāšā koni
“You cannot watch the TV until you have done with your studies.”

نشسته ام تا تو بیایی
nešaste am tā to biyāyi
“I am sitting here waiting for you to show up.”

من اینجا خوابیده ام تا آن ها برسند
man injā xābide am tā ān hā berasand
“I am lying down/sleeping here until they arrive.”

By the time

تا شما به خانه برسید مهمان ها رفته اند
tā šomā berasid mehmān hā rafte
and “By the time you get home, the guests will have gone.”

تا او را ببینیم دو هفته گذشته است
tā u rā bebinim, do hafte gozašte ast
“By the time we see him/her, two week will (already) have passed.”

So long as

تا تو حرکت نکنی او تکان نمی خورد
tā to harekat nakoni, u takān nami xorad
“He/she won’t move until you set out.”

As soon as

تا برسید به راه می افتیم
tā berasid be rāh mi oftim
“As soon as you arrive we shall set out.”

تا بیایند خبر را به آن ها می دهم
tā biyāyand xabar rā be ān hā mi daham
“As soon as they arrive I shall give them the news.”

Although as a rule subjunctive is always dependant on another main verb in the sentence, there are specific instances in which it is used independently, as follows:

When it is used as a jussive:

!برویم
beravim!
“Let’s go!”

!بگذار باشد
bogzār bāšad
“Let it be!”

In the optative mood (mostly governed by “may” in English):

!خدا بیامرزدش
xodā biyāmorzadaš
“May God have mercy on his soul.”

!خدا نکند
xodā nakonad
“God forbid.”

As the deliberative interrogative, which in English is governed by “should” and “shall”:

چه کنم؟
ce konam
“What should I do?”

برویم؟
beravim?
“Shall we go?”

چه بگویم؟
ce beguyam?
“What should I say? what can I say?”

The subjunctive “باشد!”, that is, the third person singular subjunctive of the verb بودن budan ‘to be,’ is also used as a term of agreement, and equates to the English formula as “Alright! O.K.!, Fine!, So be it!”:

!امشب به خانهٔ ما بیا
emšab be xāne-ye mā biyā
“Come to our house tonight!”

!باشد
bāsad
“Alright!”

!اگر خدا این طور می خواهد، خوب، باشد
agar xodā in towr mi xāhad, xob, bāšad
“If it is God’s desire, then so be it!”

Since in Persian the present tense also governs the future tense, a particular present subjunctive construction expresses constraint, necessity, obligation, etc. in the future tense. It may be compared with the English, “…going to have to….” The most frequently used modal verb in this kind of construction is باید. In addition to باید, such obligatory full verbs as مجبور بودن majbur budan and ناچار بودن nācār budan ‘to have to, to be obligated to, to be constrained to.’ Just like its English counterpart, it expresses uncertainty about the result of ones action. That is to say, when one says, “I am going to have to call them…,” the ultimate connotation is that he or she does not know what the result of that call would be.

Example:

باید به آن ها تلفن بزنم
bāyad be ān hā telefon bezanam
“I have to call them, I am going to have to call them.”

مجبورم به آن ها تلفن بزنم
majburam be ān hā telefon bezanam
“I am obligated to call them, I have to call them, I am going to have to call them.”

ناچارم به آن ها تلفن بزنم
nācāram be ān hā telefon bezanam
“I am obligated to call them, I have to call them, I am going to have to call them.”