37 replies to this topic

[Reshad]

macisaac, on 13 July 2012 - 07:27 PM, said:

Considering the Zoroastrians believe in many gods and goddesses (Ahura Mazda is supreme but he is not the only deity according to their texts nor the only one to whom worship is offered in their liturgy), and in fact earlier in their history Zoroastrian temples even contained idols (later these were removed with worship being exclusively directed to the sacred fires instead), I can't see how they would thus be counted as "monotheist" by any stretch of the imagination.

well, most historians and Zoroastrians themselves consider them/ themselves Monotheistic. Infact they are said to have influenced Judaism  heavily. I  dont think idols were ever big in Persian culture, but i think these early temples you are describing may be from other groups such as the Elamites and Median empire before the Zoroastrianism. If there were, i think it is influence from the Mesopotamian civilizations in Iraq.

La, on 13 July 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

I'd like to see the source for this. Don't remember reading such a thing in the Yasna (or the Avesta in general) but then again I skipped a few pages when reading some of the content of the vendidad.

  well If you read the avesta im quite impressed , since i haven't read it myself .

"The orthodox will pray during each of the five divisions of the day (see our page on the Zoroastrian calendar) or gahs (see our page on the Avesta, scriptures) including reciting a special set of prayers before and after bathing. "

http://www.heritagei...rship/index.htm

[Lanatin]

Reshad, I just checked L.H. Mill's translation of the zend avesta and there is a section entitled "gahs". You're right, they have a special prayer allocated to each gah (portion) of the day.  The original pure deen of Allah of the previous prophets is shown by the Quran to include prayers allocated to different portions of the day as well. Hmm, I wonder if they bow and prostrate as well.

One thing for sure though, there doesnt seem to be a speck of monotheism in the avesta. Mithra is always invoked as the one "of the thousand ears, of myriad eyes etc etc." and many obscure saints are seen as objects worthy of worship. The avesta is also loaded with nature worship, and we know in our creed there is nothing worthy of worship except God. Check out the following:

4. Yea, we worship the Creator Ahura Mazda and the Fire, Ahura Mazda's son, and the good waters which are Mazda-made and holy, and the resplendent sun of the swift horses, and the moon with the seed of cattle; and we worship the star Tistrya, the lustrous and glorious; and we worship the soul of the Kine of blessed endowment, (5) and its Creator Ahura Mazda; and we worship Mithra of the wide pastures, and Sraosha (Obedience) the blessed, and Rashnu the most just, and the good, heroic, bountiful Fravashis of the saints, and the Blow-of-victory Ahura-given (as it is). And we worship Râman Hvâstra, and the bounteous Wind of blessed gift, (6) and (its) Creator Ahura Mazda, and the good Mazdayasnian Religion, and the good Blessedness and Arstât.
And we worship the heaven and the earth of blessed gift, and the bounteous Mãthra, and the stars without beginning (to their course), self-disposing as they are. -Yasna XVI (SP. XVII).


But they have taken besides Him gods which create nothing, while they are created, and possess not for themselves any harm or benefit and possess not death or life or resurrection. - (Holy Quran 25:3)

Edited by La'nat Ma Man, 16 July 2012 - 01:14 PM.

[Haydar Husayn]

I really find the obsession with some Iranians in sticking up for Zoroastrianism to be very strange. I can understand correcting some obvious misunderstandings, but some people really seem to bend over backwards to defend this religion, and get quite upset when it is attacked.

Is it out of a desire to prove that their ancestors were monotheists?

Edited by Haydar Husayn, 16 July 2012 - 01:21 PM.

[Lanatin]

Jebreil, on 16 July 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

La'nat



This is a mistake. The Avesta is a mixture of liturgies, one which is believed to be the songs of the prophet himself. The Gathas; the oldest section of the book. They are all songs he composed for Mazda Ahura, the Wise Creator.

He does reserve some praise for natural phenomenon (think wash-shamsi wa ḍuḥāhā or wat-tīni waz-zaytūn) but his songs (and as he sings, his whole being) is devoted to Mazda Ahura.

It should be remembered that the book was scattered and burnt and was re-collected many hundreds of years later by the command of Ardeshīr Babakān the first Sassanian king. Much had been corrupted, and the religion is, perhaps, in a rather sorry state. The Gathas, however, still stand as exceptional devotional prayer.

I've quoted the yasna's verses from the avesta that explicitly call for worship of natural phenomenon. Sacrifices are even made to natural phenomena.  As for supernatural beings being associated with God, well there's mithra for that.

Quote

I really find the obsession with some Iranians in sticking up for Zoroastrianism to be very strange. I can understand correcting some obvious misunderstandings, but some people really seem to bend over backwards to defend this religion, and get quite upset when it is attacked.

Is it out of a desire to prove that their ancestors were monotheists?

If this is also directed to me, then know that I wasn't defending zoroastrianism and in fact showed its canonical texts are loaded with pagan leanings. And i'm iraqi and my homeland was the capital of the persian empire, so my ancestors were most likely zoroastrians.

[Lanatin]

Jebreil, on 16 July 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

La'nat

The Gathas are distinct from the rest of the Yasna, as they are directly referenced to Zoroaster.

Oh yes, the gathas are a very interesting case. Unfortunately conservative zoroastrianism takes the avesta as a whole, it has to take in the whole package if it wants to be given the label "zoroastrianism". This isnt the denkard unfortunately. Herodotus - from way back around the 5th century BC - reported that persians worshipped natural phenomena. Manichaean and/or mazdakean  dualism is certainly absent, but the amount of shirk is more akin to what the vedic hymns espouse.

The gathas, however, may be the remains of a truly monotheistic deen.

Edited by La'nat Ma Man, 16 July 2012 - 03:49 PM.

[macisaac]

Jebreil, on 16 July 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Having said all this, there is some ḥadīth evidence that Zoroaster was not a prophet

Even minus that's, it's pretty hard to conceive he would have been one while there is no affirmation of such in the Quran or hadith, while the Majus do get a fair bit of mention.  Considering how major Zoroastrianism was as a religion at that time, you'd expect that somewhere it would have been mentioned that it's central figure was in fact a prophet (as was the case with Musa (a) and `Isa (a)).

[Haydar Husayn]

La, on 16 July 2012 - 03:18 PM, said:

If this is also directed to me, then know that I wasn't defending zoroastrianism and in fact showed its canonical texts are loaded with pagan leanings. And i'm iraqi and my homeland was the capital of the persian empire, so my ancestors were most likely zoroastrians.

Of course it wasn't directed at you. I'm aware that you aren't Iranian, and can obviously tell that you are not sticking up for Zoroastrianism.