FOOD FOR THOUGHT: "Even educated can be ignorant."
	YOU ARE IN DARKNESS.
zoroastrianism page 1 zoroastrianism page 2

 ZOROASTRIAN CODE BOOK

 FIRST WE HAVE TO WRITE IT DOWN!

Nothing was written until hundreds of years after the death of Zarathustra. When the need to write down the oral tradition was felt, the tradition was living in the Avestan. But this language, the Avestan, was already dead in 1st century AD. The oral tradition was supposed to relate the whole of Avesta identical with the 'revelation' received by the 'messenger' Zarathustra. But only 17 hymns (Gathas) can be associated with Zarathustra himself. Some of the hymns (Yashts) seem to predate Zarathustra whereas some others belong to periods after his death, but all of them are in Avestan. Threequarters of Avesta was destroyed during the periods of occupation one after the other, and only a quarter survived. The Avesta which is mostly ritual and used in ceremonies has two parts: The original sacred Avesta, written in the sacred ancient Persian language called Avestan. And the texts written in mostly middle Persian. The Avesta which the Europeans know as Zend Avesta is currently used by Parsees. (Zend/Zand means the 'translation' and is used to denote the Pahlavi translation of Avesta). The meaning of 'Avesta' (in its old form 'Avistak') is not known. Avesta cannot be taken beyond the Sassanian period. According to the tradition there should be a grand Avesta coming from the Sassanian period to our times, which is comprised of 21 books called either 'nasks' or 'nosks'. A summary of this is in Pahlavi Denkard (Dinkard -'Acts of the Religion') of 9th century AD. The Avesta we have today has three parts: The Gathas (Zarathustran hymns in the main ritual); Yasna (Izeshne,Yasht - sacrificial hymns addressing many 'supreme beings.'); Vendidad or Videvdad (the antidemonic law - related to ritual pureness). Vendidad is the only one existing in whole out of all the nasks/nosks, and it is a corruption of 'vi-daevo-datem', 'the antidemonic law.' Avesta was translated to Sanskrit for the first time in the 12 th century.

Zarathustran prays five times a day in front of the fire. Before praying he washes and cleans himself. (Moslems pray five times a day as well). Since Zarathustrans did not have a temple until the later periods of the belief system, worshipping is done either in the open air - on top of a hill/on high ground or near a running water - or at home near the fire. Fire became the the central point of purification. (The fire in hell has a function of cleaning/purifying the evil souls). In the later period of the belief system there were 'outside' prayers, performed in open air on a clean ground and 'inside' prayers performed in the fire temple, at a place of ritual, by purified priests. Cleanliness/purification is a must. There is a ritual of purification before prayers. Birth is believed to be an event of joy but in the orthodox families a woman is isolated from other members of the family immediately after giving birth to a child. This isolation period was 40 days. (This practice exists in Judaism and Islam as well. Where the woman is considered either unclean or untouchable. In other words, the woman becomes a taboo for that period.) Both males and females can enter the temple, there are no restrictions based on gender. When they reach the right age they are accepted into the society. The youth to be accepted into the society (like the initiation ceremonies of the ancient times) takes a bath, cleans himself/herself, takes a purifying drink, puts on a sacred shirt (sudreh). A 'kusti' is given to him at a simple ceremony. This is a rope which is wound around the body three times and tied to a knot over the shirt. Only the initiation/acceptance and marriage ceremonies necessitate communal prayer. Most of the worshipping is done alone. The ceremonies performed in public by the priests are for pleasing the Bounteous Immortals and Yazatas (with the aim of keeping the world clean, and pleading for the unification of the material and spiritual worlds - as it would happen at the judgement day. The most important ceremony is related to death. The ceremony at death has a dual purpose: First, isolating the 'dirty' dead person from the living and secondly to help the soul which has to pass the Chinvat/Chinwad Bridge to move on to the other life. Due to the belief that the soul stayed on earth for three more days, prayers continued for this period. Before the sunrise on the fourth day the family and the friends of the dead come together to say good-bye to the departed and make good wishes. The dead person is remembered every month for a period of twelve months. For the next 30 years the dead person is remembered once every year. At the end of this period the soul is believed to have joined the group where all the souls stay together, and remembered once a year in honour of these souls.

 WHAT THE ZARATHUSTRANS WORSHIP TODAY?

Spenta Mainyu (the author) pointed out in the beginning of this chapter that Zoroastrianism was possibly the greatest contributor to our present day 'belief systems,' but of course as it is customary in the world of 'belief systems' Zoroastrianism took something over from its predecessors as well. What were these? Look at these similarities and wonder whether you are reading notes on Moses or Zarathustra: Both Moses and Zarathustra had their 'sacred fire.' Zarathustra had royal blood in his veins like Moses, was taken away from his mother and left exposed to the wild again like Moses. When he was thirty years of age he became the 'messenger' of a new religion. This occasion was heralded by thunder. The 'supreme being' appeared to him robed in 'light,' seated on a throne of 'fire' on the holy mountain Albordj-Albruz, encircled by flames (How about all these similarities with Moses?) There the 'supreme being' bestowed on him his sacred law, which Zarathustra called Nosks (It is almost like the story of Ten Commandments. Is it not? When Moses and his entourage arrived at the Sinai massif. It was probably on the mountain which is now called as 'Jebel Musa,' Moses mountain or Tur-u Sina(?) where YHWH impressively demonstrated himself in a fiery display. According to some researchers 'Jebel Musa' is a volcanoe and at that time it was alive and spewing fire, and smoke). That is not all! Finally Zarathustra wandered with his followers to a remote 'promised land.' (It is as if we are listening to the story of exodus). No, the similarities are not finished yet. Zarathustra and his followers came to the shores of a sea where, with the 'supreme overseer's' help, the 'waters parted' so that Zarathustra's 'chosen' people might 'cross the sea on foot.' (This is the replica of the famous story where the waters of the Red Sea parted - according to some researchers, the waters of the 'Sea of Reeds' receded by the pressure of the wind - and left a dry land for the people to cross). Spenta Mainyu heard you say 'this is enough.' But this is only the beginning. Wait for more titles and pages. Whole history of 'belief systems' is full of these. So who got what from whom? Who lived earlier, Moses or Zarathustra? Did they live at all? Since the Old Testament is written over a period covering hundreds of years, could we say that attributes of Zarathustra were mixed with those of Moses or the story of Moses was adopted by the Zarathustran belief system? Or better still, these attributes may have belonged to a more distant and ancient figure than both Moses and Zarathustra and duly taken over by both belief systems. Where is the truth? There must be an original. But where?

But in the meantime Ahriman was not standing by idly. He planned to destroy Yima. Dahhak, one of his satans killed the good shepherd Yima. Yima played a role in his end. He got carried away in arrogance. Yima is the well known ruler, Jemshid, in Iranian mythology. Dahhak was thought to be the Assyrian commander Zohak, who was well known also in Iranian mythology. But Dahhak was accepted as a leading satan. Feridun (one of Jemshid's grand children) captured Dahhak, put him into prison and saved Iran. Dahhak is believed to be in prison on Mount Demavend-Denbavend-Denbavand since and teaching magic to those who visit him. This belief is thought to be one of the origins of the 'Harut and Marut' story in Qoran, who were presented as 'teachers of magic.'

God vs. Devil (The Antichrist Myth) has its root in the apocalypses of Iran. These apocalypses are based upon the conflict between Ahura Mazda and Ahriman. This Iranian dualism entered late the Jewish eschatology in the 2nd cent BC., as is shown by the Dead Sea Scrolls. There Devil's name appears as Belial. If you want to know the origin of this concept of a battle between god and the devil get yourself familiar with the myth derived from the Babylonian religion of the conflict of the supreme god (Marduk) with the dragon of chaos (Tiamat) (As far as we know Tiamat is the first 'evil', 'devil,' 'satan' in the long story of mankind's attempt to create a 'higher' order in which the mankind may find a purpose for being alive and to win an afterlife). The author of Revelation made use of this antichrist as a worker of wonders and a seducer.

With the Babylonian exile Judaism was influenced by the Zarathustran demonology, angelology and eschatology. This influence and the consequent change of belief is most prominent about Satan. In the pre-exilic period (before the Babylonian exile) in the Job (1:6-12) and Zechariah (3:1-2) Satan is presented as a servant acting like a prosecutor upon orders of the god. In other words subservient to god. In the post-exilic period (after the Babylonian exile) Satan is presented as the opponent of the god (II Samuel 24:1 and I Chron. 21:1). The Jewish apocalypses spoke at first (Book of Jubilees, 2nd cent. BC) of a judgement of rebellious angels, of the sons and spirits of Belial and Mastema, as well as of those angels who had misused their power of punishment. Later in the assumption of Moses the final decision is conceived as a struggle between the god and the demon. In Sybilline literature and the Ascension of Isaiah (probably 1st cent AD) Belial appears as god's adversary.

Only after the period of exile did the idea of a redeemer became a key element in jewish eschalatogical belief - the redeemer that Zarathustra had prophesied, whose appearance would be accompanied by the last days with a great battle and victory over the powers of darkness. You may read the Apocalypse described in the Book of Daniel which is simply an adaptation of the Persian apocalypse with minor alterations. The Late Jewish fourth Book of Ezra talks of seperation of families on the Day of Judgement - a typically Iranian motif.

The sacredness of fire mentioned by Heraclitus (500 BC.) seem to be a sign of the Zarathustran influence on the Greek philosophy. There is no doubt that Empedocles and Plato, and especially Plato did know about this dualism in Iran. But while the dualism in Iran is between the supreme creator and the satan, the Greek dualism is between the substance and the spirit. This dualism is the underlying principle in all the Gnostic systems.

Christians always remembered Iran as the the land of the three Magi who came to Bethlehem to worship Jesus. As the continuation of the Jewish tradition Christian writers identified Zarathustra with Ezekiel, Nimrod, Seth and Baruch It is very difficult to determine which ideas of Iranian origin influenced Christianity diretctly and through Judaism. For instance Apocalypse (Rev. 1:4) although deriving from the books Enoch and Tobit, go back ultimately to the Beneficient Immortal Ones that we see in Zoroastrianism. On the other hand, belief in the guardian angels is something that does not exist in the Judaeo-Christian tradition before the New Testament. It may be a combination of the Zoroastrian belief in the fravashis and the Greco-Roman belief in the protective Genii. But the most likely Zarathustran influences are related to the eschatology. The idea of resurrection, which was known to Judaism, but only became a general belief among the Christians had long been in existence in Iran. (Surely you remember that Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu are fighting for the souls of the living and the dead. They are at each other's throats to win over the 'earthlings' when they are alive and their souls when they are dead. The goal? They wish to be sovereign and establish their own rules. Using mankind as soldiers for themselves and their 'deputies' - the angels as - overseers). This fight may have had an influence on the reference in the New Testament to Michael and the devil fighting for the corpse of Moses (Jude 9). This is a resemblence accentuated in the Midrash Rabba where Samuel and Michael struggle not for moses' body but for his soul. The comparison between the resurrected body and the paradisely garment (Rev. 3:5) recalls the numerous investitures of Zoroastrian ritual; declaration that 'the righteous will shine like the sun' (Matt. 13:43) seems closely connected with the Persian emphasis on the affinity between holiness and light. The Messianic Meal for communion (the last supper) which the believers all know brings to mind the food of immortality made of white haoma and the fat of a sacrificial bull which will be prepared by Saoshyans and dispensed to mankind at the 'Renewal'. St Matthews' description of hell as the 'outer darkness' (Matt. 8:12, 22:13, 25:30) have a hazy correspondence with the Zarathustran 'hell without fire.' (Moslem belief in hell has a similar 'cold' section as well). That's not all folks! Read the following: St Paul demands that a sinner should be delivered to satan (by being put to death) so that his soul may be saved on the Judgement Day (I Cor. 5:5). According to the Avesta and one Pahlavi treatise a mortal sinner condemned to death by the high priest escapes his punishment in the supposed 'afterlife' which expresses the Zarathustran notion of atonement and forms a vivid parallel with the St. Paul story. We shall discuss in detail, under the title of Christianity, the influence of Zoroastrianism on the Gospels as we proceed. But Spenta Mainyu will just point out at this juncture that there is a large community of scholars who maintain that a large part of the gospels was probably written in or around Alexandria where gnosticism, inliftrated by Buddhism and Zoroastrianism, was strongly represented.

Islam has common points with the Zarathustran belief system. For example, Al-A'raf is a place intermediate in between paradise and hell, destination for those whose good thoughts, words and deeds evenly balance the evil; in Zoroastranism a similar abode is called Hamestagan. The Islamic Al-Sırât is the Zarathustran 'Bridge of the Requiter', which the soul must cross to reach paradise but as explained earlier the wicked souls would fall into hell. And as it is with the Zarathustran belief system, after death the soul will come face to face with its good and evil deeds. This is not all! We will try to find more common points, parallels etc., as we go along.