Zoroastrian Religion, Philosophy and History

[Ars Moriendi]

Not finished watching, but I made sure to check the credentials of both the channel, and Dr. Irani. Enjoy.

[arcticwolf]

Very old Indo-European religion. Predates, Abrachamic religions, which borrowed from Zoroastrianism liberally it seems. First monotheistic religion, afaik. Appeals to me much more than any Abrachamic religion, but like all religions based on blind faith, falls short for those who want to know for themselves, and refuse to surrender their own ability to get to know reality to believes.

[Ars Moriendi]

Very old Indo-European religion. Predates, Abrachamic religions, which borrowed from Zoroastrianism liberally it seems. First monotheistic religion, afaik. Appeals to me much more than any Abrachamic religion, but like all religions based on blind faith, falls short for those who want to know for themselves, and refuse to surrender their own ability to get to know reality to believes.

Have to disagree on it being blind.
Zoroastrianism doesn't condemn other religions, and it actually says that they have inner good in themselves. Furthermore, those that choose to join it, are asked to only do so if they accept the tenets of the religion. In other words, the free will of individuals, which is a pillar of the whole set of beliefs, has to be the present when someone decides to join the community.

That explains why forced conversions never happened, and religious persecutions were so rare in Persia, only taking place during Sassanian days (the only State in history to be officially Zoroastrian) being mostly aimed against Roman (Catholic+Orthodox) Christianism seeing as it was presumed to be an extension of Roman/Byzantine interests. For example, Nestorian Christianity (Assyrian) was actually favoured against the latter, as Assyrians were presumed to not be a political problem.

[Ars Moriendi]

A very quick summary of all the ritualistic (not philosophical) aspects of Zoroastrianism:

[arcticwolf]

Have to disagree on it being blind.
Zoroastrianism doesn't condemn other religions, and it actually says that they have inner good in themselves. Furthermore, those that choose to join it, are asked to only do so if they accept the tenets of the religion. In other words, the free will of individuals, which is a pillar of the whole set of beliefs, has to be the present when someone decides to join the community.

That explains why forced conversions never happened, and religious persecutions were so rare in Persia, only taking place during Sassanian days (the only State in history to be officially Zoroastrian) being mostly aimed against Roman (Catholic+Orthodox) Christianism seeing as it was presumed to be an extension of Roman/Byzantine interests. For example, Nestorian Christianity (Assyrian) was actually favoured against the latter, as Assyrians were presumed to not be a political problem.

Any time you take something on belief it is a step into darkness, in the sense, that you must convince your mind about it, by logic, force, free will,etc it does not matter, what matters is you are agreeing to something which you do not know is real or true.

As to free will, this may surprise you, but free will exists for, how do I put it nicely, those who do not know what the optimal action is for any given situation. It is said that evolved minds do not really have free will, as those minds will do the right thing every single time. In their case there is no choice of action, they never make the wrong choice, there is no free will for them, their understanding of reality, leaves no choice, their action, for the lack of a better term can be called singular, or aligned with the laws of reality, not the apparent manifestation of it, but the real thing.

[Methmatician]

First monotheistic religion, afaik.

That's Judaism.

[Ars Moriendi]

That's Judaism.

"The central founding myth of the Israelite nation is the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt under the guidance of Moses, followed by the conquest of the Promised Land (Canaan). There is little or no archaeological or historical evidence to support these accounts, and although they may in part originate as early as the 10th century BCE, according to the Wellhausen hypothesis they reached something like their present form only in the 5th to 4th centuries BCE, when they are alleged to have been edited to comply with the theology of Second Temple Judaism."

= 500 - 400 BC


"The precise date of the founding of Zoroastrianism is uncertain. An approximate date of 1500–1200 BCE has been established through archaeological evidence and linguistic comparisons with the Hindu text Rig Veda. However there is no way of knowing exactly when Zoroaster lived, as he lived in what, to his people, were prehistoric times. Depending on different approaches, it is thought that he lived some time between 1700 BCE to 500 BCE."

= 1700 - 500 BC, with the most probable lapsus being 1500-1200 BC

-------

Such difference explains why Judaism does sport Zoroastrian influence, mainly the Theophany of fire. Older influences newer.

[Ars Moriendi]

The city of Yazd, centre of Zoroastrianism.

[Ars Moriendi]

I will try to either upload or provide links for the Gathas, and other parts of the Avesta, as well a different scholarly studies about Zoroastrianism in the course of the following days.

On the meantime, here are a couple of interesting quotes for you to ponder about:

Mary Boyce, Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices, (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1979)

Zoroastrianism is the oldest of the revealed world-religions, and it has probably had more influence on mankind, directly and indirectly, than any other single faith.

Zoroaster was thus the first to teach the doctrines of an individual judgment, Heaven and Hell, the future resurrection of the body, the general Last Judgment, and life everlasting for the reunited soul and body. These doctrines were to become familiar articles of faith to much of mankind, through borrowings by Judaism, Christianity and Islam; yet it is in Zoroastrianism itself that they have their fullest logical coherence

[Svipdag]

While other religions, notably, the arch-enemy of civilisation,Islam, are growing in membership, Zoroastrianism is declining. I have seen it both asserted and denied that Zoroastrianism does not accept converts, i.e., one must be born into Zoroastrianism. Its decline in numbers has been attributed to this exclusivity . Could someone who knows clarify this point, please ?

It would be tragic if this noble and ancient religion were to become extinct through failure to proselytise.