Zoroastrianism

[mayamolly]

I'm interested in corresponding with a Zoroastrian... so PM me if you are! I'm writing a novel set in ancient Persia, whose rulers had recently converted to Mazdaism, or early Zoroastrianism. This is a long shot, but thanks in advance if you are Zoroastrian or can direct me to resources!

Maya

 

[Ruv Draba]

A friend of a friend is Zoroastrian. We spoke about it a fair bit. She told me that it's a religion to which you must be born, though I understand that in India, some Zoroastrians accept non-ethnic members. Regardless, they generally try to marry into the religion. In my own readings Zoroastrianism predates Christianity and had significant influence on all the Abrahamic faiths. It's monotheistic, with a god and a devil, a heaven and hell, a saviour with a virgin birth, and a resurrection. Zoroastrian myths have shaped Judaism, Christianity, Islam and probably some pagan myths too. In the opinion of some, it has been the most influential religion in the history of the world.

Other than the obvious Wikipedia links, I'd suggest this BBC link for an overview, the Avesta ('Authoritative Utterance') web-site for the eponymous Avesta scriptures, and Mary Boyce's book for detail.

Good luck finding an ethnic Zoroastrian -- there are said to be less than 200,000 left in the world. It's a Persian religion, with the oldest Zoroastrian sites in Iran and surrounds -- but the rise of Islam pushed it into India, where they are called Parsis. A significant proportion of Zoroastrians are in the English-speaking world too.

Hope that helps.

 

[semilargeintestine]

I'm sorry that I seem to be stalking you, Ruv, but you find the good threads.

I'm not sure I understand something that you wrote, and it's actually a problem that has bothered me with Chr-stianity for a while as well. How can you believe in G-d and a devil as separate, competing entities, but call yourself monotheistic?

Also, I know someone who has a lot of information on Zoroastrianism. I forget most of what he told me, but it was pretty interesting I remember.

 

[Ruv Draba]

I'm not sure I understand something that you wrote, and it's actually a problem that has bothered me with Chr-stianity for a while as well. How can you believe in G-d and a devil as separate, competing entities, but call yourself monotheistic?

An atheist is probably the least equipped to explain that, but 'monotheism' means literally 'one god'. Here I take 'god' to mean 'a supernatural being that is worshipped'. There may be other supernatural beings that aren't worshipped, among them, angels, demons and divers spirits.

In Zoroastrianism there are certainly angels and demons. As I recall their eschatology, dead souls are required to cross a razor-thin bridge while angels and demons debate their relative virtues and vices. If you are 'ashna' ('just') then you pass on to heaven where if I remember rightly, good things happen involving milk. If you're 'druj' I believe that a fate involving oil awaits you someplace else.

According to Mary Boyce, Zoroastrianism emerged as the Persians were moving from Stone age to Bronze Age. Their beliefs combine stone age cult elements (like water and fire for purity) with Heroic Bronze Age abstractions and ideals.

The Boyce book is illuminating and very readable. I've bought a reference copy.

 

[semilargeintestine]

Ah, I know what monotheism means. I was always under the impression that G-d and the devil were at odds or something. To me, that means the devil is a separate entity who is at the level of a deity and who tries to overcome G-d. That sounds pretty polytheistic to me, whether one worships the devil or not (and some do).

ETA: that is my impression of xtianity and other religions with a "devil", not my personal belief, as there is no "devil" in Judaism.

 

[Ruv Draba]

The narrative has looked a little odd to me too at times, SLI... What's the difference between god-fearing and devil-fearing, for instance? My answer is that gods are supreme moral authorities, and other spirits aren't. This is one reason that even if there were shown to be powerful supernatural spirits, I'd still be an atheist -- my humanism doesn't let me subborn my conscience to other moral authorities.

 

[GeorgeK]

Ah, I know what monotheism means. I was always under the impression that G-d and the devil were at odds or something. To me, that means the devil is a separate entity who is at the level of a deity and who tries to overcome G-d. That sounds pretty polytheistic to me, whether one worships the devil or not (and some do).

ETA: that is my impression of xtianity and other religions with a "devil", not my personal belief, as there is no "devil" in Judaism.

No.
Satan is/was an angel, not a deity.

 

[Ruv Draba]

No.
Satan is/was an angel, not a deity.

Sure, GK, but angels are what angels do and gods are what gods do. So the key question is: what do angels and gods do differently that makes them worthy of distinguishing from one another?

Angels and gods both create; destroy; preserve; work transformations; intervene; judge; punish; reward; accept supplications, prayers and sacrifices; and keep the world turning. Angels and gods both have authority; both can have bosses; both can betray or rebel.

The only difference I can see is that gods have supreme moral authority, while angels don't. An angel is deputised to do a job; a god intrinsically is its own authority. This is why gods inspire and set rules while angels and other spirits police the rules.

 

[GeorgeK]

Sure, GK, but angels are what angels do and gods are what gods do. So the key question is: what do angels and gods do differently that makes them worthy of distinguishing from one another?

Angels and gods both create; destroy; preserve; work transformations; intervene; judge; punish; reward; accept supplications, prayers and sacrifices; and keep the world turning. Angels and gods both have authority; both can have bosses; both can betray or rebel.

The only difference I can see is that gods have supreme moral authority, while angels don't. An angel is deputised to do a job; a god intrinsically is its own authority. This is why gods inspire and set rules while angels and other spirits police the rules.

Angels do not create out of nothing

 

[Ruv Draba]

Angels do not create out of nothing

Bear in mind that in ancient Abrahamic myth, rain (say) doesn't just happen -- it's created. The idea of a deity being a watch-maker who sets machinery in motion came much later, in the Enlightenment. So when angels are changing the weather or conjuring food etc... they may well be creating -- albeit on God's behalf.

There's one angel that bears special mentioning here too -- the angel Metatron. In ancient Jewish myth, Metatron is the most favoured of all angels -- a celestial scribe known as "Lesser YHVH", who in some accounts has dominion over the earth, and is in charge of its 'sustenance'. According to myth the rabbi Elisha ben Abuyah mistook Metatron for being a second authority in the universe, and got in trouble for that -- because Metatron was a servant, not a master.

The important function of angels is of course their message-carrying (the Greek root angelos means "a messenger"), but the god Hermes was a message-carrier too. So what's the difference between Hermes and Metatron, say? I think that it comes down to that master/servant relationship. Hermes defers to Zeus on occasion, but has no master. He's his own moral authority. Hermes is the ultimate inspiration and final refuge of boundaries and the travelers who cross them, of shepherds and cowherds, of thieves and road travelers, of orators and wit, of literature and poets, of athletics, of weights and measures, of inventors, of general commerce, and of thieves and liars. Hermes has supreme moral authority over his domain.

As a supreme moral authority Hermes happens to have a creative power (Hermes created fire, for instance), but I'd argue that the power derives from Hermes' moral authority, and not the reverse. Shiva, who leaves the creating to Brahma, still has uncontestable moral authority over destruction and change. Like Hermes, Shiva has no master.

 

[GeorgeK]

Bear in mind that in ancient Abrahamic myth, rain (say) doesn't just happen -- it's created. The idea of a deity being a watch-maker who sets machinery in motion came much later, in the Enlightenment. So when angels are changing the weather or conjuring food etc... they may well be creating -- albeit on God's behalf.

There's one angel that bears special mentioning here too -- the angel Metatron. In ancient Jewish myth, Metatron is the most favoured of all angels -- a celestial scribe known as "Lesser YHVH", who in some accounts has dominion over the earth, and is in charge of its 'sustenance'. According to myth the rabbi Elisha ben Abuyah mistook Metatron for being a second authority in the universe, and got in trouble for that -- because Metatron was a servant, not a master.

The important function of angels is of course their message-carrying (the Greek root angelos means "a messenger"), but the god Hermes was a message-carrier too. So what's the difference between Hermes and Metatron, say? I think that it comes down to that master/servant relationship. Hermes defers to Zeus on occasion, but has no master. He's his own moral authority. Hermes is the ultimate inspiration and final refuge of boundaries and the travelers who cross them, of shepherds and cowherds, of thieves and road travelers, of orators and wit, of literature and poets, of athletics, of weights and measures, of inventors, of general commerce, and of thieves and liars. Hermes has supreme moral authority over his domain.

As a supreme moral authority Hermes happens to have a creative power (Hermes created fire, for instance), but I'd argue that the power derives from Hermes' moral authority, and not the reverse. Shiva, who leaves the creating to Brahma, still has uncontestable moral authority over destruction and change. Like Hermes, Shiva has no master.

So in order to refute a Christian belief you are sideswiping a variety of non Christian and or pre-Christian thought processes that are tangential to even the religions you are quoting?

 

[semilargeintestine]

Sure, GK, but angels are what angels do and gods are what gods do. So the key question is: what do angels and gods do differently that makes them worthy of distinguishing from one another?

Angels and gods both create; destroy; preserve; work transformations; intervene; judge; punish; reward; accept supplications, prayers and sacrifices; and keep the world turning. Angels and gods both have authority; both can have bosses; both can betray or rebel.

The only difference I can see is that gods have supreme moral authority, while angels don't. An angel is deputised to do a job; a god intrinsically is its own authority. This is why gods inspire and set rules while angels and other spirits police the rules.

In Judaism, angels are all agents of G-d. They were all created by G-d and do his will without question--they have no free will. This includes the Satan, who is simply another angel who does the bidding of G-d.

Bear in mind that in ancient Abrahamic myth, rain (say) doesn't just happen -- it's created. The idea of a deity being a watch-maker who sets machinery in motion came much later, in the Enlightenment. So when angels are changing the weather or conjuring food etc... they may well be creating -- albeit on God's behalf.

This is not true. G-d does not create the rain, and neither do the ministering angels. He created everything at the instant of creation, and thus He brings the rain using the laws of nature--which He also created. It is more proper to say that rain is "brought forth," which is not an act of creation; however, this is done completely in accordance with G-d's will.

It is interesting to note that the true form of idol worship involves praying to the ministers of things like rain, etc. They knew how to induce the angels to bring the rain without appealing directly to G-d. And so, these people put the angels up on the same level as the Holy One, Blessed be He, worshiping them as gods; in addition, they were in effect bypassing G-d to get what they wanted. Because people don't know how to do this anymore, we say that there are no true idol worshipers today.

There's one angel that bears special mentioning here too -- the angel Metatron. In ancient Jewish myth, Metatron is the most favoured of all angels -- a celestial scribe known as "Lesser YHVH", who in some accounts has dominion over the earth, and is in charge of its 'sustenance'. According to myth the rabbi Elisha ben Abuyah mistook Metatron for being a second authority in the universe, and got in trouble for that -- because Metatron was a servant, not a master.

It's interesting you bring him up, because I just had a dream about him last week. It's something that I have been wrestling with, as it has a pretty profound effect on disagreements in Chabad Judaism right now.

The important function of angels is of course their message-carrying (the Greek root angelos means "a messenger"), but the god Hermes was a message-carrier too. So what's the difference between Hermes and Metatron, say? I think that it comes down to that master/servant relationship. Hermes defers to Zeus on occasion, but has no master. He's his own moral authority. Hermes is the ultimate inspiration and final refuge of boundaries and the travelers who cross them, of shepherds and cowherds, of thieves and road travelers, of orators and wit, of literature and poets, of athletics, of weights and measures, of inventors, of general commerce, and of thieves and liars. Hermes has supreme moral authority over his domain.

As a supreme moral authority Hermes happens to have a creative power (Hermes created fire, for instance), but I'd argue that the power derives from Hermes' moral authority, and not the reverse. Shiva, who leaves the creating to Brahma, still has uncontestable moral authority over destruction and change. Like Hermes, Shiva has no master.

People ask why did G-d create angels if He is capable of doing everything Himself; however, we can look at a similar situation that is more concrete to understand a little better. Let's take the human body. The brain is a fascinating organ that is responsible for the entire body--every single function that goes on is under control of the brain. And yet, certain things are delegated. For example, the heart has a bundle of nerves inside it known as the AV node, also called the pacemaker because it keeps the heart going. Now why, if the brain is perfectly capable of making the heart pump, is there a lesser "brain" that does the job for it? It is a menial task that requires no real power to do, and can certainly be handled by an underling.

Now of course, G-d created us that way; but, I think that it is a built-in analogy. G-d created angels to take care of certain tasks. There are angles that deal with certain things, and others that does with other things. However, none of them have free will--the do exactly as G-d commands them without question. Even the Satan is under G-d's complete control, as he is just another agent of G-d with a job to do (we can see this in the book of Job, when the Satan reports directly to G-d and requires permission before doing anything).

 

[Ruv Draba]

G-d does not create the rain, and neither do the ministering angels. He created everything at the instant of creation, and thus He brings the rain using the laws of nature. [...] It is more proper to say that rain is "brought forth," which is not an act of creation; however, this is done completely in accordance with G-d's will.

The first occurrence of 'natural law' I'm aware of was with Socrates -- whose disregard for theology got him killed. It was developed further with Aristotle. I'm not aware of any pre-Socratian thought talking about nature having laws -- rather, whatever laws or principles guided the world was by the will of deities or spirits.

But regardless, it sounds like you're trying to make a distinction between 'conjured' and 'created'. I don't see the distinction myself. I'm persuadable, but would need to see some qualified scholarship on the topic. Ancient thought in every culture I've read sees the world as being continually created and maintained, and not simply created at the outset and set in motion.

 

[GeorgeK]

In Judaism, angels...have no free will. This includes the Satan, who is simply another angel who does the bidding of G-d.

It is interesting to note that the true form of idol worship involves praying to the ministers of things like rain, etc. They knew how to induce the angels to bring the rain without appealing directly to G-d. And so, these people put the angels up on the same level as the Holy One, Blessed be He, worshiping them as gods; in addition, they were in effect bypassing G-d to get what they wanted.

These statements are incongruous. If the angels have no free will then it would be impossible to get any benefit from praying to them. In order for an angel to do anything as a result of prayer then they either have to be doing what God wants or it has to be of their own accord. If the former then God apparently is ok with it and there maybe is some sort of Heavenly corporation and God is the CEO. You don't go to the CEO to ask for more paperclips. There's a beaurocracy for that. If it is the latter, then angels must have free will.

Because people don't know how to do this anymore, we say that there are no true idol worshipers today.



It's interesting you bring him up, because I just had a dream about him last week. It's something that I have been wrestling with, as it has a pretty profound effect on disagreements in Chabad Judaism right now.



People ask why did G-d create angels if He is capable of doing everything Himself; however, we can look at a similar situation that is more concrete to understand a little better. Let's take the human body. The brain is a fascinating organ that is responsible for the entire body--every single function that goes on is under control of the brain. And yet, certain things are delegated. For example, the heart has a bundle of nerves inside it known as the AV node, also called the pacemaker because it keeps the heart going. Now why, if the brain is perfectly capable of making the heart pump, is there a lesser "brain" that does the job for it? It is a menial task that requires no real power to do, and can certainly be handled by an underling.

Now of course, G-d created us that way; but, I think that it is a built-in analogy. G-d created angels to take care of certain tasks. There are angles that deal with certain things, and others that does with other things. However, none of them have free will--the do exactly as G-d commands them without question. Even the Satan is under G-d's complete control, as he is just another agent of G-d with a job to do (we can see this in the book of Job, when the Satan reports directly to G-d and requires permission before doing anything).

So then if you believe in the Heavenly Corporation, how is it idolatry for someone to pray through an angel if the person rightlyso is humble enough to realize that they are likely too unimportant to bother God with some piddly request?

 

[semilargeintestine]

These statements are incongruous. If the angels have no free will then it would be impossible to get any benefit from praying to them. In order for an angel to do anything as a result of prayer then they either have to be doing what God wants or it has to be of their own accord. If the former then God apparently is ok with it and there maybe is some sort of Heavenly corporation and God is the CEO. You don't go to the CEO to ask for more paperclips. There's a beaurocracy for that. If it is the latter, then angels must have free will.

They're not incongruous at all. I said people knew how to induce--that's the key word--the agents into doing what they wanted. I never said they prayed and the angels decided.

So then if you believe in the Heavenly Corporation, how is it idolatry for someone to pray through an angel if the person rightlyso is humble enough to realize that they are likely too unimportant to bother God with some piddly request?

For one thing, if you are worshiping something other than G-d, you are guilty of idol worship. It's not a question of bothering G-d. G-d is not bothered when you pray to Him. G-d wants you to pray to Him as much as possible. Prayer is a connection to Him, and He longs for that connection. Ask Him to make sure the lights all turn green. Ask Him to stop the state trooper from pulling you over or writing you a ticket. Ask Him to make sure your Chinese food was cooked right. He may not be able to say yes to everything you ask for, but simply by acknowledging that He alone is sovereign over the universe and connecting to Him through your prayers and blessings, you cause Him great joy.

 

[GeorgeK]

I said people knew how to induce--that's the key word--

What do you mean by induce?

if you are worshiping something other than G-d, you are guilty of idol worship..

Asking someone for a favor is not the same as worshipping them. Is English your native language?

 

[semilargeintestine]

What do you mean by induce?

I mean exactly what induce means. To lead or cause something to happen by persuasion. In this case, a certain ritual that could cause the agents to do something without G-d's command.

Asking someone for a favor is not the same as worshipping them. Is English your native language?

Is it yours? I never said worship and praying based on the merit of something were the same. When a very holy person dies, we often pray to G-d with the hope that they will help give our prayers more weight based on their merit. However, we are not praying to them. Our prayers are still directed at G-d. When you pray to something, you are worshiping it.

Worship - v. to render religious reverence and homage to (an object)

 

[GeorgeK]

I mean exactly what induce means. To lead or cause something to happen by persuasion. In this case, a certain ritual that could cause the agents to do something without G-d's command.

So there's a magic formula to bypass God's will if you are dealing with Angels?

Is it yours? I never said worship

actually you did

and praying based on the merit of something were the same. When a very holy person dies, we often pray to G-d with the hope that they will help give our prayers more weight based on their merit. However, we are not praying to them. Our prayers are still directed at G-d. When you pray to something, you are worshiping it.

Worship - v. to render religious reverence and homage to (an object)

Obviously you have a different dictionairy