|
Zoroaster was a Iranian prophet, one of the great teachers of the East and the founder of Zoroastrianism, which was the national religion of Persia from the time of the Achaemenidae to the close of the Sassanid period. The name Ζωροάστρης is the Greek transliteration of the Avestan Zarathustra which is diectly transliterated into English from the Modern Persian as Zartosht or, alternatively, Zardosht: زرتشت). The name is a Bahuvrihi compound, of zarəta- "feeble, old" and utra "camel", translating to "He with the old camels". Zoroaster is generally accepted as a historical personality, but efforts to date Zoroaster vary widely with current scholarship hovering around 1400 BCE, making him a candidate as the founder of the oldest monotheistic religion.
Zoroaster in History
Modern scholarship presents seven methods of dating of the life of Zarathushtra.
- Mythic: Based on Persian mythology, mainly the Shahnameh Ferdowsi, and oral tradition.
- This method is used by Manly Palmer Hall in his book, Twelve World Teachers who espouses a rough estimate ranging from 10,000 BCE to 1,000 BCE.
- These dates suggest 6,500 BCE to 6,000 BCE and are the dates which members of the Parsi Zoroastrians subscribe.
- Archeological: Based on archeological excavations and inscriptions.
- There is a paucity of archeological evidence with which to base claims, however a Russian archaeologist cites excavations in Uzbekistan to 2,000 BCE (Asgarov, 1984).
- Philological: This approach uses comparative textual analysis of the Avesta and Gathas with the Vedas. This approach relies on the similarity between the Gathic and Sanskrit languages as well as textual content of each. This approach cannot place an exact date, but are widely considered to be the best approximations of such.
- 1,400-1,000 BCE is cited by Mary Boyce in her A History of Zoroastrianism 1989.
- Historical: This approach compares social customs described in the Gathas to what is known of the time and region through other historical studies.
- This dating lies close to 1,000 BCE and is used by Gherardo Gnoli.
- Traditional: The Bundahishn, an important text within the religion, cites the time of Zarathushtra 258 years before Alexanders conquest of Persia (i.e, 588 BCE).
- There are instances of other scholars using other methods, but flaws in these methods have long been argued and outed, e.g., Darmesteter reports 100 BCE; before 458 BCE is cited by H.S. Nyberg in his Die Religionen des Alten Iran 1938.
Zoroaster was famous in classical antiquity as the founder of the religion of the Magi. His name is cited by Xanthus, and in the Alcibiades of Plato as well as by Plutarch, Pliny, and Diogenes Laertius.
Life of Zoroaster
What we know of the life of Zoroaster is from the Avesta, the Gathas, the Greek texts, oral history (which is a significant method of teaching in the tradition), what can be inferred, and archeological evidence.
The 13th section of the Avesta or Spena Nash, was the description of his life, has perished over the centuries. The biographies in the 7th book of the Dinkard (9th century CE), The Shahnameh, and the Zardusht-Nãma (13th century), are mythic.
It is fair to say that Zoroaster lived in the NE area of what is now Iran.
The Greeks refer to him as Bactrian, a Median or a Persian about 3-5,000 years ago. His wife was named Hvovi, and they had three daughters, Freni, Friti and Pouruchista, and three sons, Isat Vastar, Uruvat-Nara and Hvare Chithra. His mother was Dughdova; his father was Pourushaspa Spitama, son of Haechadaspa Spitama. His illumination from Mazda came at age 30. His first converts were his wife and children and a cousin named Maidhyoimangha.
The Greek writers recount a few points regarding the childhood of Zoroaster and his hermit-life. According to tradition and Nat. Hist. Zoroaster laughed on the day of his birth and lived in the wilderness. He seems to have enjoyed exploring the wilderness from a young age. Plutarch compares him with Lycurgus and Numa Pompilius (Numa, 4). Dio Chrysostom relates Zoroaster's Ahura Mazda to Zeus. Plutarch, drawing partly on Theopompus, speaks of Zoroastrianism in Isis and Osiris.
Here he is a mortal, empowered by trust in his God and the protection of his allies. He faces outward opposition and unbelief and inward doubt. These human qualities support a historical Zoroaster, despite a lack of historical detail. The Gathas are poetic admonitions and prophecies, cast in the form of dialogues with God and the Amesha Spentas however they seem to contain allusions to personal events, overcoming obstacles in life imposed by competing priests and the ruling class. He had difficulty spreading his teachings, and was even treated with ill-will in his mother's hometown (an exceptional insult in his culture and time).
It is important to note the differences between the Zoroaster of the later Avesta and the Zoroaster of the Gathas. In the later Avesta he is depected wrestling with demons and, in remarkable prescience of Jesus in the New Testament, is tempted by Ahiriman to renounce his faith. (Yasht, 17,19)
The historical Zoroaster, however, eludes categorization as a legendary character. The Gathas within the Avesta make claim to be the ipsissima verba of the prophet. The Vendidad also gives accounts of the dialogues between Ahura Mazda and Zoroaster. They are the last surviving account of his doctrinal discourses presented at the court of King Vishtaspa.
Placing Zoroaster in a Historical Context
Textual evidence regarding the birthplace of Zoroaster is conflicting. Yasnas 9 & 17 cite Airyanem Vaejah, on the river Ditya, as the home of Zoroaster, and the scene of his first appearance. The Bundahish (20, 32 and 24, 15) says that the river Dhraja lay in Airan Vejah was his birthplace and the home of his father. According to the Bundahish, Airan Vejah can be identified with the district of Arran on the river Aras (Araxes), close by the north-western frontier of Media. According to Yasna, 59, 18, the zarathushtrotema, or supreme head of the Zoroastrian priesthood, had at a later (Sassanian) time, his residence in Ragha. The Arabic writer Shahrastani endeavours to solve the conflict by arguing that his father was a man of Atropatene, while the mother was from Rai.
According to Yasnas 5 & 105, he prayed for the conversion King Vishtaspa. He then appears to have left his native district. Yasnas 53 & 9 suggest that he ventured to Rai and was unwelcome. Eventually he met Vishtaspa, king of Bactria. In the Gathas he appears as a historical personage.
The court of Vishtaspa included two brothers, Frashaoshtra and Jamaspa; both were, according to the later legend, vizirs of Vishtaspa. Zoroaster was nearly related to both: his wife, Hvövi, was the daughter of Frashaoshtra, and the husband of his daughter, Pourucista, was Jamaspa. The actual role of intermediary was played by the pious queen Hutaosa. Apart from this connection, the new prophet relies especially upon his own kindred (hvaëtush). His, first disciple, Maidhyoimaongha, was his cousin: his father was, according to the later Avesta, Pourushaspa, his mother Dughdova, his great-grandfather Haecataspa, and the ancestor of the whole family Spitama, for which reason Zarathushtra usually bears this surname. His sons and daughters are repeatedly spoken of. His death is not mentioned in the Avesta; in The Shahnameh he is said to have been murdered at the altar by the Turanians in the storming of Balkh.
Placing the date of King Vishtaspa is difficult. Antiquated sources suggest Vishtaspa was Hystaspes, father of Darius I. Hutaosa is the same name as Atossa: Atossa was, apparently, the Queen consort of Cambyses II, Smerdis as well as of Darius I. The matriarchal name is the only link to the Achaemenidian lineage.
According to the Arda Viraf, Zoroaster taught an estimated 300 years before the invasion of Alexander. Assyrian inscriptions relegate him to a more ancient period. Eduard Meyer (v. Ancient Persia) maintainins that the Zoroastrian religion must have been predominant in Media, therefore, estimates the date of Zoroaster at 1000 BCE, in agreement with Duncker (Geschichte des Altertums, 44, 78). Zoroaster may have emanated from the old school of Median Magi, and appeared first in Media as the prophet of a new faith, but met with sacerdotal opposition, and turned his steps eastward. Zoroastrianism then seems to have acquired a solid footing in eastern Iran where it continues to survive in dwindling numbers.
The Religion of Zarathushtra
Main article: Zoroastrianism
The Gathas of Zoroastrianism
The teachings of Zoroaster is presented in 17 liturgical, texts, or "hymns", the yasna which is divided into groups called gãthãs.
If basic precepts of Zoroastrian are to be distilled into a single maxim, the maxim is Humata, Hukhta, Huvarshta (Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds).
A cosmic struggle between Truth (asha) and The Lie (druj) is presented as the foundation of our existence. This is often related to a struggle between good and evil in a Western paradigm. This may also be conceptualized as a battle between darkness and light or God (Ahura Mazda) and The Devil -- two opposing forces. In the yasnas, Zoroaster refers to these forces as "the better and the bad."
Zoroaster describes Ahura Mazda in a series of rhetorical questions, "Who established the course of the sun and stars? ... who feeds and waters the plants? ... what builder created light and darkness? Through whom does exist dawn, noon and night?" (Yasna 44, 4-6).
- Vohu Manu (efr'oia), good sense, i.e. the good principle, the idea of the good, the principle that works in man inclining him to what is good;
- Ashem, afterwards Ashem Vahishtem (Plutarch's ?&?oiOaa), the genius of truth and the embodiment of all that is true, good and right, upright law and rule — ideas practically identical for Zoroaster;
- Khshathrem, afterwards Khshathrem Vairim (dwouia), the power and kingdom of Ormazd, which have subsisted from the first but not in integral completeness, the evil having crept in like tares among the wheat: the time is yet to come when it shall be fully manifested in all its unclouded majesty;
- Armaiti (8c~t'ta), due reverence for the divine, verecundia, spoken of as daughter of Ormazd and regarded as having her abode upon the earth;
- Haurvatat (,rXo~3ros), perfection;
- Ameretãt, immortality. Other ministering angels are Geush Urvan ("the genius and defender of animals"), and Sraosha, the genius of obedience and faithful hearing.
As soon as the two separate spirits (cf. Bundahish, I, 4) encounter one another, their creative activity and at the same time their permanent conflict begin. The history of this conflict is the history of the world. A great cleft runs right through the world: all creation divides itself into that which is Ahura's and that which is Ahrirnan's. Not that the two spirits carry on the struggle in person; they leave it to be fought out by their respective creations and creatures which they sent into the field. The field of battle is the present world.
In the centre of battle is man: his soul is the object of the war. Man is a creation of Ormazd. who therefore has the right to call him to account. But Ormazd created him free in his determinations and in his actions, wherefore he is accessible to the influences of the evil powers. This freedom of the will is clearly expressed in Yasna, 31, II: "Since thou, O Mazda, didst at the first create our being and our consciences in accordance with thy mind, and didst create our understanding and our life together with the body, and works and words in which man according to his own will can frame his confession, the liar and the truth-speaker alike lay hold of the word, the knowing and the ignorant each after his own heart and understanding. Armaiti searches, following thy spirit, where errors are found." Man takes part in this conflict by all his life and activity in the world. By a true confession of faith, by every good deed, word and thought, by continually keeping pure his body and his soul, he impairs the power of Satan and strengthens the might of goodness, and establishes a claim for reward upon Ormazd; by a false confession, by every evil deed, word and thought and defilement, he increases the evil and renders service to Satan.
The life of man falls into two parts — its earthly portion and that which is lived after death is past. The lot assigned to him after death is the result and conseqtience of his life upon earth. No religion has so clearly grasped the ideas of guilt and of merit. On the works of men here below a strict reckoning will be held in heaven (according to later representations, by Rashnu, the genius of justice, and Mithra). All the thoughts, words and deeds of each are entered in the book of life as separate items — all the evil works, etc., as debts. Wicked actions cannot be undone, but in the heavenly account can be counterbalanced by a surplus of good works. It is only in this sense that an evil deed can be atoned for by a good deed. Of a real remission of sins the old doctrine of Zoroaster knows nothing, whilst the later Zoroastrian Church admits repentance, expiation and remission. After death the soul arrives at the chinvat peretu, or accountant's bridge, over which lies the way to heaven. Here the statement of his life account is made out. If he has a balance of good works in his favour, he passes forthwith into paradise (Garo dernana) and the blessed life. If his evil works outweigh his good, he falls finally under the power of Satan, and the pains of hell are his portion for ever. Should the evil and the good be equally balanced, the soul passes into an intermediary stage of existence (the Ham~stakans of the Pahiavi books) and its final lot is not decided until the last judgment. This court of reckoning, the judicium particulare, is called 6/ia. The course of inexorable law cannot be turned aside by any sacrifice or offering, nor yet even by the free grace of God.
But man has been smitten with blindness and ignorance: he knows neither the eternal law nor the things which await him after death. He allows himself too easily to be ensnared by the craft of the evil powers who seek to ruin his future existence. He worships and serves false gods, being unable to distinguish between truth and lies. Therefore it is that Ormazd in his grace determined to open the eyes of mankind by sending a prophet to lead them by the right way, the way of salvation. According to later legend (Vd., 2, 1), Ormazd at first wished to entrust this task to Yima (Jemshid), the ideal of an Iranian king. But Yima, the secular man, felt himself unfitted for it and declined it. He contented himself therefore with establishing in his paradise (vara) a heavenly kingdom in miniature, to serve at the same time as a pattern for the heavenly kingdom that was to come. Zoroaster at last, as being a spiritual man, was found fit for the mission. He experienced within himself the inward call to seek the amelioration of mankind and their deliverance from ruin, and regarded this inner impulse, intensified as it was by long, contemplative solitude and by visions, as being the call addressed to him by God Himself. Like Muhammad after him he often speaks of his conversations with God and the archangels. He calls himself most frequently manthran ("prophet") ratu ("spiritual authority"), and scoshyant ("the coming helper" — that is to say, when men come to be judged according to their deeds).
The full contents of his dogmatic and ethical teaching we cannot gather from the Gathas. He speaks for the most part only in general references of the divine commands and of good and evil works. Among the former those most inculcated are renunciation of Satan, adoration of Ormazd, purity of soul and body, and care of the cow. We learn little otherwise regarding the practices connected with his doctrines. A ceremonial worship is hardly mentioned. He speaks more in the character of prophet than in that of lawgiver. The contents of the Gathas are essentially eschatological. Revelations concerning the last things and the future lot, whether bliss or woe, of human souls, promises for true believers, threatenings for misbelievers, his firm confidence as to the future triumph of the good — such are the themes continually dwelt on with endless variations.
It was not without special reason — so Zoroaster believed — that the calling of a prophet should have taken place precisely when it did. It was, he held, the final appeal of Ormazd to mankind at large. Like John the Baptist and the Apostles of Jesus, Zoroaster also believed that the fuiness of time was near, that the kingdom of heaven was at hand. Throurh the whole of the Gathas runs the pious hope that the end of the present world is not far distant. He himself hopes, with his followers, to live to see the decisive turn of things, the dawn of the new and better aeon. Ormazd will summon together all his powers for a final decisive struggle and break the power of evil for ever; by his help the faithful will achieve the victory over their detested enemies, the daëva worshippers, and render them impotent. Thereupon Ormazd will hold a judicium universale, in the form of a general ordeal, a great test of all mankind by fire and molten metal, and will judge strictly according to justice, punish the wicked, and assign to the good the hoped-for reward. Satan will be cast, along with all those who have been delivered over to him to suffer the pains of hell, into the abyss, where he will henceforward lie powerless. Forthwith begins the one undivided kingdom of God in heaven and on earth. This is called, sometimes the good kingdom, sometimes simply the kingdom. Here the sun will for ever shine, and all the pious and faithful will live a happy life, which no evil power can disturb, in the eternal fellowship of Ormazd and his angels. Every believer will receive as his guerdon the inexhaustible cow and the gracious gifts of the Vohu maljã. The prophet and his princely patrons will be accorded special honour.
History and later development
For the great mass of the people Zoroaster's doctrine was too abstract and spiritualistic. The vulgar fancy requires sensuous, plastic deities, which admit of visible representation; and so the old gods received honour again and new gods won acceptance. They are the angels (yazala) of New Zoroastrianism. Thus, in the later Avesta, we find not only Mithra but also purely popular divinities such as the angel of victory, Verethraghna, Anãhita (Angitis), the goddess of the water, Tishrya (Sirius), and other heavenly bodies, invoked with special preference. The Gathas know nothing of a new belief which afterwards arose in the Fravas/zi, or guardian angels of the faithful. Fravashi properly means "confession of faith," and when personified comes to be regarded as a protecting spirit. Unbelievers have no fravashi.
On the basis of the new teaching arose a widely spread priesthood (athravano) who systematized its doctrines, organized and carried on its worship, and laid down the minutely elaborated laws for the purifying and keeping clean of soul and body, which are met with in the Vendidad. To these ecclesiastical precepts and expiations belong in particular the numerous ablutions, bodily chastisements, love of truth, beneficial works, support of comrades in the faith, alms, chastity, improvement of the land, arboriculture, breeding of cattle, agriculture, protection of useful animals, as the dog, the destruction of noxious animals, and the prohibition either to burn or to bury the dead. These are to be left on the appointed places (dakhmas) and exposed to the vultures and wild dogs. In the worship the drink prepared from the haoma (Indian soma) plant had a prominent place. Worship in the Zoroastrian Church was devoid of pomp; it was independent of temples. Its centre was the holy fire on the altar. The fire altars afterwards developed to fire temples. In the sanctuary of these temples the various sacrifices and high and low masses were celebrated. As offerings meat, milk, show-bread, fruits, flowers and consecrated water were used. The priests were the privileged keepers and teachers of religion. They only performed the sacrifices (Herodotus, i. 132), educated the young clergy, imposed the penances; they in person executed the circumstantial ceremonies of purification and exercised a spiritual guardianship and pastoral care of the laymen. Every young believer in Mazda, after having been received into the religious community by being girt with the holy lace, had to choose a confessor and a spiritual guide (ratu).
Also in eschatology, as may be expected, a change took place. The last things and the end of the world are relegated to the close of a long period of time (3000 years after Zoroaster), when a new Saoshyant is to be born of the seed of the prophet, the dead are to come to life, and a new incorruptible world to begin.
Zoroastrianism was the national religion of Iran, but it was not permanently restricted to the Iranians, being professed by Turanians as well. The worship of the Persian gods spread to Armenia and Cappadocia and over the whole of the Near East (Strabo, xv. 3, 14; xi. 8, 4; 14, 76). Of the Zoroastrian Church under the Achaemenides and Aeracides little is known. After the overthrow of the dynasty of the Achaemenides a period of decay seems to have set in. Yet the Aeracides and the Indo-Scythian kings as well as the Achaemenides were believers in Mazda. The national restoration of the Sasanides brought new life to the Zoroastrian religion and long-lasting sway to the Church. Protected by this dynasty, the priesthood developed into a completely organized state church, which was able to employ the power of the state in enforcing strict compliance with the religious law-book hitherto enjoined by their unaided efforts only. The head of the Church ~Lara-5husbtrotema) had his seat at Rai in Media and was the first person in the state next to the king. The formation of sects was at this period not infrequent (cf. Manichaeism). The Islamic invasion (636), with the terrible persecutions of the following centuries, was the death-blow of Zoroastrianism. In Persia itself only a few followers of Zoroaster are now found (in Kerman and Yezd). The Parsees in and around Bombay hold by Zoroaster as their prophet and by the ancient religious usages, but their doctrine has reached the stage of a pure monotheism.
Zarathustra in the West
The German philospher Friedrich Nietzsche used the name of Zarathustra in Also sprach Zarathustra. Nietzsche fictionalizes and dramatizes Zarathustra toward his own literary and philosophical aims, presenting him as as a returning visionary who repudiates the seperation of good and evil and thus declares the death of God.
Richard Strauss's Opus 30, is also called Also sprach Zarathustra which was memorably used to score the opening sequence of Stanley Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey.
See also
External links
This article incorporates text from the public domain 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica.
)
|
