Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Is Zoroastrinism: Monotheistic or Dualistic ?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is Zoroastrinism: Monotheistic or Dualistic ?
    Posted: 05-Jun-2007 at 23:07
There are controvesrial interpretations of Zoroastrinism. Do you think it is a Monotheistic or a Dualistic religion?
 
 


Edited by Sarmat12 - 05-Jun-2007 at 23:08
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jun-2007 at 09:58

The correct answer is probably that there are two (or have been) two schools of Zoroastrian thought, one of which is monotheistic and the other dualist. (Similarly there have been non-Trinitarian schools of Christian thought.)

Most (at least) modern Western claimants to be Zoroastrians are monotheists, but arguably that's rubbed off from the intellectual fashionability of monotheism ove the last several centuries (polytheism is pass).
 
According to this view, the dualists who also claim to be Zoroastrians are heretics belonging to the Zurvanist cult. This is said to have died out somewhere in the middle ages, though it was the version that first reached the West (the Magi were dualist), and that's why the West always thought of Zoroastrianism as dualist.
 
According to the dualists of course, they are the original pure tradition, and the monotheists who believe Ahura Mazda was the 'creator of all' are the heretics.
 
In the dualist version Ahura Mazda (the good one) and Ahriman (the bad one) were born as twins. Personally I go along with this probably being the older version, since it parallels the pre-Zoroaster belief in the twin gods Spenta Mainyu (the good one) and Angra Mainyu (the bad one).
 
It's also true that monotheist Zoraostrians will say that the "druj" (Lie or lies) were not created by Ahura Mazda, even though Ahura Mazda is the creator of all. This is an intellectual quagmire I resist treading in.
 
So basically it seems to me that the answer is Zoroastrianisn started out dual and ended up mono. But don't expect many modern Zoroastrians to agree with that. (Don't expect wikipedia to either.)
 
Moreover it seems to me that Zoroastrianism probably developed out of a polytheistic religion similar to that common among the Indo-European peoples.
 
 
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jun-2007 at 15:55
Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu can be interpreted as battling angels - the supreme being is Zurvan who does not meddle in their or our petty worldly affairs.
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2007 at 23:45
One could ask is monotheism dualistic at the core? The God/Devil belief goes on despite having a battering over recent years. If God is good, then why allow bad to happen - because he likes to watch a bit of variety on his all-seeing TV network in the sky? No, there must be an alternative explanation, but please don't ask anybody what that alternative is for even God has forgotten the answer to that one!

Perhaps the devil is in the independent voice that is raised from time to time before being silenced. I like that one about druj, there really are lies and liars all over the place!
elenos
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 02:14
First, I would like to point out that the thread is incorrectly titled. The question is whether Zoroastrianism is monotheistic or ditheistic (having a belief in two deities). Dualism, on the other hand, is the beliefe in a cosmic strugle between good and evil, with no consideration for the nature and number of the divine.
 
Elenos, I would have to flat out disagree with the interpretation that Monotheism is inherintly dualistic. Judaism, my own faith, is (normally) most certainly not. We do not believe that there is a constant strugle between a force of good and a force of bad; for one thing, such a struggle would be impossible as HaShem (G-d) is too omniscient for any such struggle to exist. Now, that is not to say that theyre aren't some Jewish theologians will argue for dualism (which, BTW, came to Judaism via Zoroastrianism during the Babylonian Exile), but Judaism is not definatively dualist. One Jewish theory of evil (which I summarise in my sig) holds that that which is good falls in line with and accepts HaShem and his love, while that which is evil does not accept His love; this happens not because some foe acts in opposition to HaShem, but because people  have free will and will choose whether or not to accept his offer of love. Besides this one theory, there are also numerous others. Oh, and even the most dualistic Jewish theology does not accept the existence of Satan (there is an angel named Satan in Judaism who is something of a trickster figure (see the Book of Job), but beyond the name he has little to no resemblance to the Christian and Muslim figures) or any such "Prince of Darkness". So, basically, no, monotheism is not tied to dualism, which is itself not tied to ditheism, which is the original topic of this discussion.
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 04:23
Welcome to AE B'tzalel,
I have a couple of off topic questions,
1) Does HaShem mean God in Hebrew
2) Why are you writing G-d instead of God?
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 06:30
Hi B'tzalel, No Satan you say?  Who was the snake that tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden and why could whatever creature it was talk? Is this not one of the most basic tales of your faith?
elenos
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 12:28
@Omar al Hashim -
Thank you for the welcome. In regards to your questions, it has to do with the fact that in Judaism we consider HaShem's name (the Tetragrammaton) to be too holy to ever utter or write (I never heard it myself until I attended a Catholic school). For this reason, we refer to him as Adoshem (replace "shem" with "nai"), literraly "Lord", in prayer, but we will not refer to him as such outside of prayer. In stead, we refer to him as HaShem which means, litterally, "the Name" in reference to the Tetragrammaton. If necessary to use another name (as I did above) we will slightly alter the word to make it jibberish (such as replacing "nai" with "shem"). There are also numerous other less common terms used, but those are the three main ones. Similarly, in English we will replace the "o" in "G-d" with a dash out of deference to the holliness of His name. Some people will go so far as to replace the "o" in "Lord" with a dash, but I was never taught to do that. For more info on HaShem's name in Judaism, this Wikipedia article is pretty good.
 
@Elenos- The snake was just that, the snake, nothing more, nothing less. The tradition holds that the snake at this time was the cleverest of all animals, but for his sins his position as the cleverest of beasts was taken away (along with his legs). Here, what happened was not a dualistic clash of the supernatural forces of good and evil, but one creature (the snake) using its free will to deny the commandments of HaShem by leading others to similarly use their free will to deny His commandments. What is important to keep in mind here, however, is that the story is generally seen as symbolic in Jewish interpretation. Judaism holds that nothing in the Torah (Pentateuch) and Tanakh (Hebrew scriptures considered cannonical in Judaism) can be read literally, everything must be interpreted. I would, in fact, argue that Judaism has the richest tradition of scriptural interpretation of any religion (if you saw the average library of a small synagogue and the texts that (Orthodox) rabbis must learn by heart you would probably agree with me). Judaism leaves no room for fundamentalism and literallism.
 


Edited by B'tzalel91 - 11-Aug-2007 at 12:30
Back to Top
Theodore Felix View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 10-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 769
  Quote Theodore Felix Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 16:39
According to Olmstead, in his History of the Persian Empire: "Other divinities from dim Indo-European times - the sun-god Mithra, for example -- might be cherished by kings and people, but to Zoroaster these daevas were no gods but demons worshiped followers of the Lie. Ahura-Mazda was in no need of minor divinities over whom to rule as divine kings"(96).

Zoroastrianism, according to the teachings of Zorothrustra, seems to have been very much a monotheistic oriented religion(the only god that was to be worshiped was Ahura-Mazda). Most of the older God's(such as Mithra) were turned into what we would consider to be angels and demons. However, shortly following his death, the religion was seriously corrupted as Zorothustra himself was turned into a diety along with many other God's(Mithra for example).



Edited by Theodore Felix - 11-Aug-2007 at 16:40
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 18:43

The way I see it God created a whole world without forethought of how a snake would become a tempter of other creations. The snake used its free will to corrupt man. But thats only a literal translation.Forgive me for being skeptical but this view is full of inconsistencies. In my opinion understanding and compassion tell more than words for a kind heart needs no translation.



Edited by elenos - 12-Aug-2007 at 20:47
elenos
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Aug-2007 at 00:24
Please Elenos, sarcasm and rudeness helps no one. Let's try to keep this civil and remain respectful of each other's beliefs.
 
Anyhow, I hardly see what inconsistencies you speak of. The story is a metaphor, and one that can be interpreted in numerous ways. Probably my personal favorite takes the story as a metaphor demonstrating what it is to be human. In this interpretaion the whole story focuses around HaShem's gift of free will, which is specifically highlighted in this part of Genesis as being the defining difference between the angels and humanity. In this story we see humans given the opportunity to use their free will to either uphold HaShem's commandments, or to deny them. In the end Adam and Eve, as we know, disobey His commandments, and they come to regret it, loosing their life of bliss and grace for a life of hard work and darkness. Similarly, the rabbis teach that each of us is given free will and the choice to either deny HaShem and His commandments, or accept them, and that if we, like Adam and Eve, deny them, we will live a life without grace and joy.
 
Now, that is a very short explanation I gave you, but I think it gives an idea of what I mean. Judaism teaches that through intense interpretation we may, hopefully, gain a knowledge of the numerous teachings HaShem is communicating while not falling into the pitfalls of human ineptness  that has so plagued religion, ie fundamentalism. I'm afraid that I really do not understand your criticism.
 
EDIT: While this is a very interesting discussion, we should probably stop threadjacking and move this to a seperate thread if you want to continue the conversation.


Edited by B'tzalel91 - 12-Aug-2007 at 00:25
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Aug-2007 at 02:03
I'm not trying to be rude or sarcastic. I'm being honest in the way the story reads to me. We never were all meant to think in the same ways. I don't think work is a "curse" but is something we must do to make a living and keep us honest. Both good and evil come from within us, the individual is dualistic in their nature. We must define what our higher side is and work towards that our attitudes and behavior to make a better world.
elenos
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Aug-2007 at 13:35
You can be honest without being disrespectful, but that is besides the point.
 
The main problem between what we are saying is that you believe evil to be a force in and of itself, I see it as simply the absence of good. HaShem created us with the capacity to choose our actions, to follow His Law or not to. By following His Law we do good, by ignoring it we do not do good, and in that sense we do evil. In Judaism we believe that the root of evil comes down to humanity, not to Satan or some other supernatural force.
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Aug-2007 at 19:39
Exactly what I was saying B'tzalel. The root of all evil comes down to humanity and so does the essence of doing good. Evil as a force in itself? That would mean good is also a force in itself. We are human and do things in ways that add to the way we are or subtract. We grow and learn to obey inherent natural law inside us. Some of them  have been written down in the Holy books of the world. The books now need updating for we have gone too far along the path of materialism without a safety net.

We have caused climate change and we know that is a bad thing. But why do we keep on doing it after all the present times warnings, signs and protests? Because we are "dualistic" creatures that want to achieve the "good"  of having more energy sources and so on. For thousands of years now monotheistic religions have tried to correct the balance in our actions but put  the doing of good or evil as somehow separate from ourselves.

Wasn't Zoroastrianism the religion that called the doing and thinking of evil as "the great liar?" To me that is the best definition out of all the rest. People do tell untruths to justify their actions. Not always in way that is harmful to others, but in ways that have a negative effect on the growth of the self.
elenos
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2007 at 19:00

Zoroastrianism is monotheistic, with the basic concepts surprisingly similar to those in the Abrahamic faiths. Even the fire of Ahura Mazda is symbolism for the 'one' beyond form, one free from impurity.

Angra Mainyu although diametrical to Ahura Mazda does not have parity with the latter. He will be destroyed at the end of time, much like the Devil/Satan/Shaitan.
 
More intriguing is the character Saoshyant(saviour), who will be born miraculously of a virgin, will resurrect the dead, in the 'second existence'  he will remove all evil `Ring any bells..!!
 
BTW, welcome to AE B'tzalel.
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2007 at 04:22

Quite true, mazizaim that story does start bells ringing and there are more.  For many years Zoroaster had thought of a better way of religion for his people, but for many years the only person he could convince was his brother in law. But his relative had royal connections, finally introduced him to the monarchy and so the new way of faith was born and is still going strong whether in direct or indirect form.


This basic heaven/hell connection went to the top in the popular imagination and stayed there. The faith became modified as it spread into other lands. Jesus surprisingly referred to Zoroaster when he said "You kill the prophets between the temple and the altar". This is exactly how Zoroaster died, stabbed by an assassin between the temple and the altar. Another connection is the Magi are said to be Zoroastrians.

Zoroaster had been influenced by the worship of Osiris. This Egyptian god was born as the promised savior of mankind and died by being nailed into a wooden box by his brother Set, who became the lord of evil. A brother murdered his sibling to gain his lands. Set became foul of features and developed a goats head (according to some authorities) and used pigs as his vassals, therefore they are always unclean.

His son Horus went out to avenge his father and after many archetype adventures finally smote the head of evil with his mighty sword of justice. Yet the evil one could not be so easily slain. His spirit had escaped before death and entered into a snake to further tempt mankind with his wicked ways. Set now as the lord of darkness gathered his allies to march against the sons of light. He turned into a red hippopotamus and ordered a great flood. Darkness fell upon the earth as a monster tsunami came ripping up the Nile to smash the fleet of Horus and flood the lands.  

But Horus standing in his golden boat became transfigured into the light that beats back the darkness to blind the evil one and sailed up to kill and cast his spear of destiny to kill the evil red hippo and so peace came to rule for a thousand years  Horus had ruled but finally died of old age. From that time on the Egyptians embalmed the bodies of their dead. They knew the day would come when Horus under guidance from his father Osiris would return to earth from the Duat (heaven). He shall fight the last and greatest battle against Set and overthrow the usurper forever. All the spirits of the righteous dead who had passed under the earth to through the twelve regions to the place on high shall return with him to re-inhabit their bodies in the day of the new heaven and earth where all can live in peace forevermore..

elenos
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2007 at 04:39
Originally posted by elenos

Jesus surprisingly referred to Zoroaster when he said "You kill the prophets between the temple and the altar". This is exactly how Zoroaster died, stabbed by an assassin between the temple and the altar. Another connection is the Magi are said to be Zoroastrians.


In the quote you mention from Matthew 23 Jesus was referring to Zechariah the prophet or, according to another tradition, Zacharias the father of John Forerunner. Other than that, interesting stuff. Smile The magi are, indeed, often thought to have been Zoroastrians. I'm not all that familiar with Egyptian mythology, but the stories surrounding Horus have always intrigued me.

-Akolouthos


Edited by Akolouthos - 15-Aug-2007 at 04:45
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2007 at 07:58
Thankyou, Akolouthos, it is a fascinating field of study and not well known  in the simplified terms used. We need to get the core of what the religion was about rather than beat around the bush. Some say comparisons are odious, to others they bring out more rather than less and indicate what could be called an overall scheme of the ages. The huge schools of hereditary priests had more interest in performing ritual that covered over the religion than helping people along a more spiritual path.

From a theological point of view these early stories from the beginnings of civilization add new dimensions in understanding how God's love for his creation has remained constant through the ages. The message is if men reach out there always was a lifeline offered and that belonged to all.


elenos
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.