Read e-book Im Banne des Hasses (Western) (German Edition)

Such a position follows clearly from tiie beginning strophe of the forty- fifth Gat hie hyrnn: Now hast Thou made evident all, O Mazda! In order that no false teacher shall again destroy the life of our mind Through false beliefs, a wicked person who speaks forth evil texts. In this assembly the Kavis and the Karapans may have delivered their songs in which they revered the daevas, the gods of storm and thunder, of the sun and stars. Pro- bably they, too, brought offerings to their gods to gain their assistance in any enterprise, or to propitiate their wrath.

But now Zarathushtra steps forward and ad- dresses the assembly. Not bloody offerings or senseless customs constitute the true wor- ship of God ; but the moral purity of the mind, an ardent fulfilment of the duties to which man is invited in this life, as well as piety and industry. Whenever the prophet meets with an open opposition, and all preachings and expositions prove fruitless, then he denounces upon his opponents the full burden of divine wrath. The good shall hate the evil. There is no reconciliation, no forbearance, no connivance. Every act of forbearance in such a case would be a sin, because it encourages evil rather than destroys it.

This spirit of intense hatred against the wicked stands, I believe, parallel to the ideas of the Old Testament. In the latter scriptures Moses, too, summonses the Levites to draw their swords and to kill the apostates who instead of holding firmly to the worship of Jehovah made a golden image and adored it 2 Moses 32, 25 seq. How long shall the wicked triumph, Jehovah? They congregate to threaten the life of the righteous, and con- demn the innocent blood.

But Jehovah is my citadel, and my God is the rock of refuge. He shall repay them their injustice, and shall annihilate them on account of their malice. Jehovah our God shall extirpate them. Through perverseness Jehovah's indignation will he excited ; now he grows angry and pays with the sword those who revolted from him Psalms 78, 56 seq. When the sans of Korah rebelled against Moses, Jehovah split the earth, and Korah with his relations, family, and property, was swallowed by it 4 Moses 16, 1 seq.

These passages from the Old Testament are culled at random. It would be easy to multiply them tenfold. The hatred which does not tolerate con- nivance with the sinner ; but demands and expects his immediate punishment, yea, even his total annihilation by the divine justice, is even a trait of the old Israelitish spirit.

We cannot refuse it our admiration. There is vigour and energy free from all feeble wavering, rising to violence and fanaticism. Arid now when Zarathushtra proclaims in the Gathas: No, grip your sword and cut them down! All this vividly puts us in mind of the spirit of the Old Testament. In fact, the opposition between the pious and the impious, the believers and the unbelievers, seems very often to have led to open combat.

That the Reform of Zarathushtra called forth a lively agitation of the mind, that it even gave occasion to bloody combats and wars, is easily understood from the contents of the Gathas. It brake away almost entirely from all ideas extant before the Gathic period, and offered in fact something quite new. It placed itself in a conscious opposition to the religion of nature which had been handed down from the old Arian times, and was still cherished by the people ; and whatever it took over from the nature- worship and retained in itself, was exalted into a far higher moral sphere and penetrated with its spirit ; and thus the form acquired a new substance.

Here we speak of the Gathas and their contents, not of the entire A vesta, because it seems to me -and t! If the present Parsees, the modern professors 29 of the Zoroastrian religion, would learn to be familiar with its contents and spirit, as it originated directly from the prophet, they would always have to refer to the Ga- thas ; and they ought to endeavour to penetrate deep into the meaning which is indeed often obscure and difficult, I helieve that it will also have an important practical effect in increasing their love and esteem, and in preserving in a pure state this religion as a rare and valuable pos- session.

The revelation he announces, is to him no longer a mere matter of sentiments, no longer a merely undefined pre- sentiment and conception of the Godhead, but a matter of intellect, of spiritual perception and knowledge. It is the unbelieving that are unknowing ; on the contrary, the believing are learned, because they have penetrated into this knowledge Yasna XXX, 3.

Every one that is able to distinguish even spiritually between what is true and what is untrue, will enlist himself on the side of the prophet Yasna XL VI, Between the truthful adrujyanto, "not speaking lies" and the liars there is strictly the same antithesis as between the believers and the unbelievers, the adherents and the opponents of the new religion Yasna XXXI, 15, etc.

It is thereby expected from every individual that he or she should take a place in the 30 great question, and come to a decision on the one or the other side. Clearly enough it is an open hreach with the old national religion. We will again mention the Old Testament where belief and perception, unbelief and folly, are likewise regarded as identical ideas. I need only refer to the famous passage of Psalms 14,: There is no God.

Corrupt and abomi- nable are their works ; there is none among them, that doeth good. But Jehovah looks down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that seek God ; but ail are apostatized, all are corrupted; none is there that doeth good, no, not one," Cfr. But wherein consists the new doctrine " unknown till then " of the Zoroastrian religion, as it clearly emanates from the Gathas? It exists in the prepon- derating monotheistic character of this religion. Its founder has got rid of the plurality in which the Godhead had been split up by the popular belief and naturalism, and elevated himself to the preemption SI of 'the divine unity which pervades nature in manifold ways.

It is sufficiently known that in the Zoroastrian religious system Ahum Mazda is conceived as the Ruler and Commander in heaven and on earth, and as the Highest and the First of the Genii. This double name 4 in the given consecutive order, occurs in the later A vesta as the constant and established designation of God, Exceptions to this use are not found in it, or are certainly met with very seldom only. The case is different in the Gathas, and I come thereby to a most highly significant distinction between the old hymns and the younger fragments of the Zoroastrian religious documents Such a name as became afterwards stereotyped for the Godhead, does not yet exist in the Gathas.

It seems even that in the Gathas the appellative signi- fication of the two names had been felt still more than in the later writings. The Mazddongho then evidently form the totality of the heavenly spirits. If we further consider the fact that in tho old Persian Cuneiform Inscriptions of the Achaemenian dynasty occurs the name of God, Auramazda, as a single word which is only inflected at the end, it certainly follows hence that we have to deal here with the results of development in different historical epochs.

Generally speaking, Zara- thushtra had not found out originally any exact proper 32 tiame for the Godhead. In a still later period the two names blended into one, because they were continually used in the same succession as though they formed a compound. Nevertheless, both the component parts are still discernible from the name Auramazdd, since they are both declined in one passage only of an Inscription of Xerxes.

The last phase of development is represented by the forms of the name used in middle and modern Iranian dialects: Pahlavi Auhar- mazd, and modern Persian Ormazd. The blending of the two words is here so complete that they do no longer bear an independent meaning in the final form. Now the essence of polytheism consists in the religion in which man exalts the different powers of nature separately to individual godheads, and fixes the limit of their sphere of activity against each other. Generally speaking, we can, therefore, call the religion of the Rigveda a polytheistic doctrine.

Indra is the god of weathers ; Agni rules over the fire ; the Maruts are the genii of storms. However, there exist already in the Vedic hymns ideas which lead us gradually upwards from polytheism to monotheism. We can observe how the virtue or efficiency of one or more gods is here and there transferred to an individual god. This is especially the case in many of the hymns 33 dedicated to Varuna. In other sacred songs the same qualities and powers are transferred to other gods: Of the last mentioned god, Agni, it.

Thus we can observe in the Rigveda how the singers and priests search after the conception of the divine unity, and how they are kept away from it for this reason only that they have not the moral courage to break with the notions, conceptions, and names, which are handed down since ages. In the Gathas the position. The important step which the Vedic singers lingered to take, was adopted by the Gathic Iranians.

The plurality of the nature-gods is set aside, and one God is selected in their place, who compre- hends all, and is as great and as powerful as the Jehovah of the Old Testament, and at any rate not more anthropomorphous than the latter. In the th Psalm, Jehovah is extolled as the creator and regent of the world. He stretcheth out the heaven like a tent. He vaulteth his chamber with water. He maketh the clouds his chariot and ascendeth upon the wings of the wind. He maketh the winds his messengers and the fire-flame his ministers. He propeth the earth upon its foundations so that it quaketh not for ever.

He 5 3,4 created the moon to regulate the seasons, the sun knovveth his going down. Thou makest darkness that there will be night, wherein all the beasts of the forest stirabout. The young lions roar after their prey and seek their meat from God. The sun riseth ; these beasts runaway and coucli themselves in their dens, when the man gotth out to his work and keepeth himself to his daily labour until the evening.

Who was the Generator and the first Father of the world-system f. Who showed the sun and stars their way? Who established it, that the moon thereby waxes and wanes, if Thou doest not? These things all, Mazda! Who hath firmly sustained from beneath the earth and the atmosphere, That they do not fall down? Who created the waters and the plants? Who hath given their swiftness to the winds and the clouds? Who hath created, O Mazda! Who hath made skilfully sleep and activity? Who hath made the auroras, the midday, and the evening, Which remind the discerning man of his duties?

Who hath created the blus;cd earth together with the sky? I will call Thee, Mazda! The conformity to law in nature, such as the course of the stars, the waxing and the waning of the moon, and the succession of the day-time during which man's activity is fixed, attracted the attention of both the poets. As such Mazda is freely and frequently mentioned in the Gatlias, He is " the essen- tial Creator of the Order of the World. As we have already re- marked Ahura Mazda is the Holy and All-just; He hales the evil or wicked, and punishes them in this world as well as in the next according to their due; but He takes the pious under His protection, and bestows etfiMal life upon them.

It means nothing more than saying: God is the Father of all goodness, yea, He is "our Father. It would be ridiculous if we were to trace therein any anthropomorphism whatever. Such phrases Zarathushtra could use as naturally as the Christian does, when in his prayers he lays all his cares and wishes in the fatherly hands of God. However, any traits which would allow us to infer that Ah ura Mazda had been represented in a certain figurative form in the oldest period of Zoroast nanism, o 7 are certainly not to be derived from the Gathas. If we find in later times, as for example, in the monuments of the Achsemenian kings a figurative representation ofAhura Mazda, I think we ought not to lay much stress upon it.

THE EQUALIZER 2 Trailer German Deutsch (2018)

We have seen that Zarathushtra has arrived at the idea of an Almighty, All- wise, and All-just God, of a Creator and Preserver of the world ; and he has thereby provided his people with the monotheism in the place of a poly- theistic nature-worship. Further, we have seen that the manner in which this sole Godhead is conceived, vivid-, ly reminds us of the representations of Jehovah in the Old Testament, and indeed so well in the general as in the many particular characteristic features.

Never- theless, I declare it as an entirely mistaken assumption that Zarathushtra borrowed the Jehovah idea directly or indirectly from the Israelites. We find nowhere else in the entire A vesta any traces of actual contact between the Iranians and the Semites, which would justify a theory of a borrowing of religious notions or conceptions from one another.

Again the cult of Ahura Mazda has yet its genuine national stamp in spite of all resemblances 38 with the Jehovah-worship. Let us only consider the close connection of the religions and economical life, which plays so prominent a part already in the Gat has, and forms a characteristic feature of the entire Avesta. If Ahura Mazda and Jehovah bear a certain affinity in idea and comprehension, that is plainly owing to the reason that we have to deal with a monotheism among the Iranians as well as among the Jews. But when monotheism is once firmly established, then certain similar ideas are sure to be forthcoming, which are peculiar to monotheism and form part of its essence.

He who does not altogether deny that a people or a pre-eminent genius at. It might be asked: Is then Zoroas- trianism, indeed, a positive monotheism? Does not the Avesta extol and profess the existence of a complete list of good spirits such as the Amesha-spentas, Mithra, Sraosha, Verethraghna, Haoma, Ardvi-sura, and others?

Have not several of these good spirits, as for example 30 AJithra, forms which are derived from the pre-Zoro- astrian times and are also met with in the Indian Vedic hymns, and which consequently belong, no doubt, to the Avian nature-worship? We do not wish to misapprehend the importance of these objections. We are willing to concede to them even a certain justification and truth.

But here is the point where we have surely to distinguish between the Gdthds and the rest of the Avesta, between the doctrine as it comes directly from Zarathushtra himself and as it developed among the people later in the course of time. If, indeed, we consider the Gabhas alone, we light on a far purer monotheism. In the later Avesta the doctrine appears confused and restricted in different ways. Even to-day the Parsee will have to prefer the Gathas, if he wishes to understand his religion not only in the oldest, but also in the purest form.

How sharp and definite the representation of the genius Mithra appears in the later Avesta, especially in the Mihir Yasht dedicated to him. He is the genius of the morning-sun, who brings hither the light. As such he is the enemy and vanquisher of the demons of night. But he is also the yazata of truth, of rights and con- tracts. The sphere of his might ranges still further. He is prince and king of the earth, the helper in battles whom the warriors invoke at tho commencement of fighting, and who helps them onto victory. Lastly, lie takes vengeance on the wicked.

He especially inflicts punishment on liars and violators of promise. To him is attri- buted the power of distributing rain on dry fields. He fights against the demon of aridity and barrenness. That he has generally in his hands the dominion of the stars cannot be surprising. In short, we have in the later Avesta to deal with genii who vividly remind us of the gods of the. If we now turn again to the Gathas, the subject appears to us in quite a different light.

Here the names of a Mithra or Tishtrya are not mentioned even once. The Fravashis, too, are never directly alluded to ; so also Haoma, or Verethraghna the angel of victorious battles, or Anahita the angel of the waters. Are we to explain this as a simple accident? I would regard such a supposition, of course, as an error, although I am convinced on the other side, however doubtful or critical every documentum e silent io is. There are sometimes circumstances under which we arrive at nothing by the assumption of an accident, and by which much obscurity and confusion is caused.

If in the Gathas we could nowhere find a convenient occasion for mentioning Mithra or Tishtrya or the Fravashis generally, it might be explained as an accident when their names do not occur. But such opportunities of 3 Gomp. Why is Mithra, for example, not alluded to in the passages where the conflict against the unbelievers is mentioned 7 It is said of Mithra in Yasht X, Besides, the Gathas speak very often of fields and herds ; but even with such an opportunity Tishtrya is never referred to.

Similar is the case with regard to the other good spirits of whom, too, the Gathas make no mention. One cannot say that in general no occasion is found to name them ; but their non-mention is evidently the result of an object aimed aL The entire character of the Gathas is so philosophical, abstract, and transcendental, that such yazats or angels as are mentioned above would be quite unsuitable in their theology. I do not say that Zarathushtra and the other poets of the Gathas knew altogether nothing about Mithra or Tishtrya or Anahita.

These yazats were, no doubt, much revered by the people ; but the prophet did not approve of such a cult. He wished to substitute higher and more philosophical ideas in the place of these good spirits, who in their entirety too much resembled the gods of the old Arian nature- xvorship.

All those genii that are named in the Gathas along with Ahura Mazda, are in point of fact such abstract conceptions ; their position with reference to the 6 42 monotheistic doctrine of the Gathas as is set forth by me, will be indicated later on. Mithra, Tislitrya, and other yazats, who are not men- tioned in the Gathas, are in the later Avesta pretty strongly anthropomorphized.

They are conceived and described quite in the same way as the godheads of the Rigveda. They are represented in human form, as man or woman like Anahita , wearing armour and clothing, bearing weapons, driving in chariots, and dwell- ing in palaces. Sometimes they appear even in the shape of animals. Bat, as we have observed, such anthro- pomorphous conceptions are quite foreign to the Gathas. Those genii, on the contrary, who with Ah lira Mazda are mentioned in the Gathas, especially the Amesha- spentas, are very little, or properly speaking not at all, anthropomorphized even in the later Avesta.

Sraosha perhaps forms only an exception. In the Gathas he is wholly an abstract figure ; but, in the later Avesta he is described as a jvenius whose attributes o exhibit many resemblances to those of Mithra. Hence, we are able to establish an authoritative distinc- tion between the theology of the Gathas and that of the later Avesta. In the former only such genii have their place near God as are principally nothing more than abstract ideas; in the latter, on the contrary, are also mentioned such genii as appear in more plastic forms and may be compared with the gods of the Indians who were originally of the same tribe as the Iranians.

How did those genii who are more and more anthropomorphized like Mithra, etc. I believe that it is not at all difficult to explain this. The Zoroastriau Reform is an energetic opposition against the ancient Arian nature- worship. Consequently, not a single one of the genii that belong to the latter cult, occurs in the Gatbas.

Every opposition naturally goes to the extreme point and seeks its success in the absolute annihilation of the existing system. In a passage of the Gathas Yasna XLVIU, 10 the cult of Haoma, at least in the form in which it was at that time practised, is even put clown as something despicable and abominable.

The results to which this reaction led, are placed before us in the theological system of the later A vesta. Here we light on a compromise with tho older national reli- gion. The gods, who were revered in the latter, are, notwithstanding their altered and spiritualized form, taken back into the new religious system, in order to form to a certain extent the holy retinue and court of Ahura Mazda. However, as we have said, the ideas undergo many transformations ; they are adapted to the new circumstances, and this is effected particularly by placing more in the foreground the moral side in the nature of an individual genius than the physical side.

This corres- ponds with the essence of the Zoroastrian system in general, which is principally founded on an ethical basis. It will place the philosophical element of his faith in the front just in the 1 [Doubtful. The Fahlavi seems to have understood "magic. In Germany, too, the lirst pro- elaimers of Christianity proceeded with the object of extir- pating heathenish beliefs. The old conception of a god bringing down the rain has even been retained, but connected with the person of Peter, as Thor r s name had no lono-ep a place in the new church.

We must here remark that Farsiism is y however, an outcome of the old Iranian nature-religion, while the old German national belief was something foreign to Christianity. Thus a compromise was entered into between Christendom and Heathendom by the former accepting many popular 45 ideas which are deeply rooted in the heathenish belief, but impregnating them with the Christian spirit. Now, the celestial beings whom the Gathas mention along w jth Ahura Mazda, are, as I have alieady stated, principally the six Amesha-spentas: It is not my intention to explain in detail the conceptions that are connected with these Amesha-spentas.

It would be an idle re- petition. Armaiti is the " humility" and ''devotion," the preserver of the earth. Sraosha is "obedience," especially to the will of God and the precepts of the holy religion. Also Ashi appears to bear a similar meaning in the later Avesta. Now the question which here interests us is: In what relation do these Amesha-spentas stand to Ahura Mazda? Will the monotheism, admitted by us in the theology of the Gathas, be not impaired and restricted through them, or perhaps even be abandoned?

If we take an external view of the matter, we must concede that the Amesha-spentas scarcely seem to play a part inferior to Ahura Mazda. The word Asha, for example, occurs in 1 Cfr. It is not the number of times that a name is mentioned, which enables us to conclude from external evidences as to the varied value of the different ideas ; and still there exists such adislinct difference, that it is quite impossible to place Mazda and Asha in one and the same grade, nay, even to compare them with one another.

Mazda has become, indeed, a proper name to designate the Highest and only One God, less than Jehovah in the Old Testament, or Allah in the Muhammedan reli- gion. Asha, on the contrary, and even the other Arneslia- spentas named above, can only occasionally attain to a sort of personification, the original abstract signification being still clearly perceived.

In the majority of passages the abstract idea is the only right meaning; in others we would hesitate to fix the correct import of the word, nay very often the double meaning is perhaps aimed at by the poets of the Gat lias. Similar personifications of abstract ideas are occasionally noticed also in the Psalws vide 85, Mercy and truth have met together ; and righteousness and peace do kiss one another.

Truth shall spring out of the earth ; and righteousness shall look down from heaven. Jehovah, too, shall grunt happiness, and our land shall yield her produce. Justice shall go before his sight and stalk forward upon her path. Such is at all events the original idea; but we do not wish to argue that these Amesha- spentas never and nowhere arrived at a certain indepen- dence.

This is particularly the case in those passages where the Amesha-spentas are named together with Mazda, and stand perfectly parallel to Him. In that case 1 might compare them with the angels of the Old Testament.

Appalachian Values.
Conscience and Conscientious Objections | Anders Schinkel - theranchhands.com.
.
The language of the Mississaga Indians of Skugog. A contribution to the linguistics of the Algonkian tribes of Canada.
Full text of "Zarathushtra in the Gathas, and in the Greek and Roman classics".
Old French Fairy Tales - Illustrated by Virginia Frances Sterrett.
Songs of Sea and Sail.

The latter were, likewise originally, only phenomenal forms of Jehovah Himself, and later on I hey constituted to a certain extent His followers and companions or His court. Where God is regarded as the Creator of the spiiits existing by and outside of Himself, there can be no reference to any kind of polytheism. The question then Whether 48 there are any spiritual existences outside of God, who stand to a certain extent as intermediaries between Him and man has nothing to do with the definition of the idea of monotheism.

In reference to the theology of the Gathas it is still to be fully maintained that the names of the Amesha-spentas are chiefly abstract conceptions. When Mazda is called the Father of Asha, it only signi- fies that He ha-s created the moral p,nd the cosmic order. Hence He is also designated Ashd hazaosli " of one will with Asha;" since what He does is in accord with the world ordained by Him.

Or when He is called the Father of Vohu-mano and Annaiti, it signifies that all good inten- tions and all humble devotion, that is, every life which is agreeable to God, depends upon Him or emanates from Him. Consequently, the belief in the Amesha-spentas does not interfere with the monotheism of the Gatldc theology. He is of one nature with them all, or, as the poet puts. They issue from Him, and go back unto Him. Ahnra Mazda existed first of all. Such powers only emanate from Him. He stands far above them: Who hath created the blessed Armaiti together with Khshathra? Who, through his wisdom, hath made the son in the im.

How much the theology of the Gathas differs from that of the later Avesta is plainly manifested by these yazats. In the former Ashi can scarcely be considered the name of a genius as in the latter. The word has in the Gathas rather its original abstract signification: I cannot specify any Gathic passage where ashi may be conceived with some probability as a proper name. The progress of the development of an abstract idea into the name of a yazata is clearly perceptible as regards the word ashi in the period which intervenes between the epoch of the Gathas and the age of the later Avesta.

Similar is the case with Sraosha. In the later Avesta the word denotes throughout a genius of a pretty fixed and permanent nature with distinct individual charac- teristics. In a still later time he is described as the messenger of God, who has to convey His orders unto man. However, no such traits are observable in the Gathas. Here we discover only the first beginnings of the personification of the word in such passages as Yasna XXXIII, 5 where the poet invokes the "mighty Sraosha, " and Yasna XLIY, 16 where the author implores the bestowal of a commander for protection against enemies, and wishes that " Sraosha with Vohu- mano" may accompany him, in other words obedience to the holy religion and pious mind.

This term we are, however, only then authorized to apply to it, when we understand under dualism a religious system wherein the existence of a power working in opposition to the good-creating and good-wishing Godhead, is also assumed besides 51 Him. In this sense the Old Testament religion may, likewise, be denoted a dualistic system.

Strictly speak- ing-, we could only then point to a religion as a dualism when both the good and evil principles stand one against the other with equal rights, and are equally mighty; when both influence the world to an equal ex tent ; and when man feels himself equally dependent upon and acted on by both of them.

But where man can, by the power of his moral freedom of choice, decide upon goodness, and turn himself away from evil or vice, as is conspicuously often manifest in the Gathas, the term " dualism " is no longer justified in my opinion. The existence of a dualism would, as I believe, require, among other things, that man should persevere in evincing the same veneration to the evil spirits as to the good spirits, that he should offer to the former sacrifices and prayers in order to propitiate them and to avert all sorts of mischief caused by them, as in their turn he offers them to the good spirits in order to share in their blessings.

The assumption of his existence should be the solution of the question, which every philosophic mind will naturally dwell upon, as to how evil comes into the world, if the Deity is essentially good and can, accordingly, produce only good things. Whence originate crimes and sins ; whence all the misery and imperfections, which cling unto man as well as to the whole creation? Zarathushtra and the other poets of the Gathas have endeavoured to solve that question in a philosophical way, and I will make an attempt, 52 in the following pages, to expound briefly their system as it seems to unfold itself from the Gathas.

I Bay " seems," because the Gathas have not at all in view the object of developing a system of philosophy. Their composers do not mean to address individuals from amongst the people, but the whole community ; because they chiefly take into their consideration the practical side of reli- gion, viz. We must, therefore, assay to construe from the brief indications and isolated passages of the hymns the ideas which may have presented themselves before the minds of these poets upon the question of evil.

Naturally, these are distinct passages wherein the prophet is led by the context to speak of the nature of evil. But in regard to this we must at once renounce all claims to be able to represent clearly all the individual traits of the philosophical system which Zarathushtra may have established for himself. In reference also to the principal points, such as I shall attempt to describe, opinions might frequently differ.

Others will very easily find out certain passages, of which the meaning has not been sufficiently established by me, or which appear to be not quite consistent with my own views. In the later Avesta, the opposition between the spirits of the good and the evil world is also carried through formally and most precisely. As Ahura Mazda stands at the head of the former, so Angra Mainyu stands at the head of the latter. Then follows the army of the good spirits oflight against the band of the daeva and druj. Agra Mainyu occurs here only once as the name of the evil spirit, and of course in a single passage Yasna XLV, 2 where spanydo mainyush and not, as one would expect, Ahura Mazda, is mentioned as his opponent.

All these names evidently denote, without any distinction, the evil spirit who is called simply Agra Mainyu in the later Avesta. Thus, for example, in Yasna XXXII, 3, the daeva, are designated as the brood cithra of Akem- mano who must be, in such a context, manifestly the highest and the head of the world of evil spirits. The same is probably the value of Achishtem-mano, when it is said in Yasna XXX, 6, that the demons flock together around him, while the good spirits are associated with, or collect around, Spenta Mainyu Yasna XXX, 7, andcomp. Nay, it even appears that in the same passage Aeshma, too, which is otherwise the name of a particular demon, serves only as the appellative of Agra Mainyu.

The names which serve as designations of the evil spirit, stand rather as counterparts of the name Spenta-mainyu or Vohu-mano. The essential function of Spenta-mainyu himself does not even seem fully clear in the Gathas. If we were to compare all these data we should be able to characterize the philosophy of Zarathushtra approxitmately as follows: He is by nature good, and only goodness emanates from Him.

Evil is the negation of goodness; it exists only in relation to the latter, just as darkness is only the negation of light. Now so far as Ahura Mazda is the positive, to whom evil forms the negative, He is called Spenta-mainyu, while evil or its personification is Agra-mainyu or Ako- mainyu. Both Spenta-mainyu and Ako-mainyu are hence represented as twins Yasna XXX, 3 ; they do not exist alone for themselves, but each in relation to the other; both are absorbed in the higher Unity, Ahura Mazda.

They existed before the beginning of the world ; their opposition is exhibited in the visible world. Ahura 55 Mazda is the Creator of the universe, but as He, in the form of Spenta-mainyu, creates anything, the negative counterpart of Him is given, i. The first thing which the twins produced, is life or death, or, as it may perhaps be philosophically expressed, the being and not being, wherein the double side of their nature is marked.

Thus, if Spenta-mainyu creates light, the darkness, or the not being, or the absence of light, is the contrary creation of Agra-mainyu ; if the former gives warmth, the negation of warmth, viz. All evil is, consequently, to the Zoroastrian not something properly realistic, existing in and for itself, but only the failure of goodness. Therefore, it is self-evident that good and evil throughout are not parallel ideas of equal value, but the latter has a purely relative existence.

If we admit this, we must also assert that Zoroas- trianism cannot be called a dualism in the proper sense of the term. Now, as soon as we ask the question: How does man stand in relation to these two opposite principles? But when we interrogate: What is the final end at the last judgment of this opposition between good and evil? Both ethics and eschatology are specially weighty points of the Zoroastrian religion. Both naturally stand in a close reciprocal relation. So early as in the Gathas we discover numerous and important hints upon ethics and eschatology.

This, indeed, presupposes a high standard of moral culture, when the sin in thought is placed on the same level with the sin in action, and, therefore, the root of all actions as well as the mea- sure of every moral discernment is perceived in the mind. We must hence aver that the founders of the Avesta religion at least attain to that stage in ethics to which only the best parts of the Old Testament rise, and that they display an inclination towards that depth of moral intuition which is perceptible in Christianity.

Now, we must emphasize this fact that at a very early period the Gathas knew about this ethical triad which also sways over the entire later Avesta. There is no doubt, therefore, that the foundation of thjs ethical system had been laid by Zaratluishtra himself. The character of these ethics is thus in fact so personal and individual that we are involuntarily forced to as- sume that it is the product of an individual super- eminent spirit which, endowed with special moral gifts of nature, has attained to such a keenness and preciseness in the conception of the moral laws.

That this doctrine developed out of a whole nation, so that it was to a certain extent the property of a community, and gradually took the form in which it is represented in the extant Avesta, seems to me quite incredible. The poet says in Yasna XXX, 3, that the two spirits that had existed from the beginning, the twins, had announced to him in a vision what is good and what is evil in thoughts, words, and actions.

In like manner, Yasna LI, 21 designates piety as the fruit 57 of tli e thoughts, words, and deeds of an humble mind. In the service of God this ethical tripartition is manifested in the devout feeling which the adorer shall foster, in the good speech which he utters, and in the offering ceremony which he performs.

But it would be- only a limitation which is not vindicated by the A vesta- texts, were we to regard this triple moral idea exclu- sively as ritual expressions. That the mind or thought settles the fundamental tone of this moral triad, so that speech and actions must be dependent upon it, and judged according to it, is clearly enough declared by; the prophet when he speaks of the words and deeds of a good mind Yasna XLV, 8.

Now as to the position of man in relation to good and evil, the most conspicuous point in the ethics of the Gathas is the complete free choice which belongs to every individual. According to the Zoroasfcrian stand- point, no man stands under any ban whatever of destiny, of a destiny originating from eternity, which binds him and oppresses his will. There is here no original sin for which he has to suffer as the result of the faults of his parents, and which cripples his strength in struggling against evil. The evil lies not in him but out of him. He can let evil approach him and admit it in himself, but at the same time he can keep it off from himself, and struggle with it.

This is certainly a sound moral standpoint which places all responsibility upon man himself, and deprives him of the possibility of making any excuse for his laxity by saying that the matter did not lie in his power or was a result of destiny. They are, therefore, not evil by nature, but they become so by foolishly declaring themselves in opposition to Ahura Mazda Yasna XXX, 6.

This doctrine of the free volition of man conforms with the opinion already expressed by me above that religion is a matter of understanding or judgment, and that righteousness and truth on the one hand, and impiety and falsehood on the other hand, naturally stand in the closest connection. According to the Zoroastrian idea, moreover, man is not fettered with a blind fate, nor prejudiced in his judgment by hereditary sins. God has given him his power of judgment, aud he who has ears may hear, and he who has intellect may choose, what is right and true. The sinner is a fool, and the fool a sinner.

The Zoroastrian well understands how great the danger is for each individual, and in how many differ- ent ways evil manifests itself in the visible world arid threatens to cause the downfall of the pious. His life is, therefore, a constant and indefatigable struggle or combat against evil. It would be superfluous here to cite all the Gathic passages which touch upon this ear- nest conception of life as an everlasting combat in the 59 fulfilment of the true obligations.

The exhortation that every one shall persevere in righteousness and devotion, and shall not get tired of it, forms rightly and precisely the fundamental tone of most of the Grathic hymns. He implores Armaiti that she may let him firmly adhere to the faith asha , and that she may grant him the blessing of a p. The faith is the highest goodness vahishtem which he can acquire from God.

The high- est goodness is the property of Mazda. In this respect the Gathic hymns stand far higher than those of the Eigveda. In the Gathas the gifts or possessions which the poet longs for, are almost exclusively spiritual and moral ones; it is ooly in isolated cases that material gifts form the object of his wish.

The Vedic singers, on the contrary, pray for hore. The absence of cult and ceremonies is a conspicuous feature of the Gathas when contrasted with the later Avesta. The guardians of these numerous precepts are the priests, who have to watch over their fulfilment, and to impose the due penance upon the negligent and tardy people who trans- gress them. The whole life of the Zoroastrian is governed by these precepts of purification and their minute obser- 60 vances. But if we glance at the Gathas, we discover no trace of all these precepts and customs.

The Legends of Washoe : (The Saga of Samuel Calhoun Part Five ) (C.E. Borjas Epic Westerns Collection Book 10);
Buy for others.
!

The ethics of the Gathas are in such a high degree internal or mental ; they recognize so decidedly or precisely the piety in a hnly course of life and in an energetic struggle against evil, that the idea seems to be hardly compatible with the belief that a reward can be gained by the conscientious observance of external ceremonies at any time.

The Gathas do not mention even Gl once a common name for the priesthood. They, of course, refer to the whole community of the believers, and particularly, as it seems, to the teachers and pro- claimers of the new religion, by a distinct word saoshyanto. This word, however, bears quite a different meaning in the later Avesta, in which the priest is denoted by dthravan, an expression which is entirely wanting in the Gathas.

Without the existence of a priestly institution, however, the observance and manage- ment of a ritual entering so much into minute details, just as the Vendidad teaclies, is inconceivable. The absence of any reference to the priesthood as well as to a well -organized system of ritual and ceremonies can be quite easily explained by the general condition of civilization such as is described in the Gathas. Herein the Zoroastrian community is represented as a rising generation, the doctrine is still a new one, not long known to the people, nor spread among them.

However, those two phenomena, viz. They presuppose a certain tradition, a longer period of deve- lopment in which it became possible to place the system on a firm footing not merely as regards its general characteristic principles, but also its finish in details. The principal traits of Zoroastrianism are, nevertheless, presented in the Gathas, its detailed outward structure being found in the later Avesta. There seems to be no doubt that this outward structure certainly corresponds in all points to the spirit which permeates the Gathas.

As we have already observed, the Gathas did originate in an epoch of ardent conflict. Very often we find the 62 believers in need and distress, while the godless and disbelievers in the doctrine rejoice and seem to claim the victory in the fight. When the thought naturally occurs: How are the righteous indemnified for the wrong which they endure here on earth, and how are the impious who appear to enjoy good luck and success, punished for their crimes?

Hence, in the earliest period of Zoroastrianism the conception of a com- pensating justice meted out in the next world, was already strong. It formed one of the ground-pillars of the entire system ; for without this hope the faithful adherents of the doctrine would scarcely have overcome triumphantly all the persecutions which they must have suffered at the beginning.

Like the Christian martyrs of the first century, they forbore all the afflictions of this world in the hope of the joy and happiness which awaited them in the next world Yasna XLV, 7: But never will end the torments of the disbeliever; Thus Mazda hath established according to His power. This judgment is twofold, one individual, and the other general. The individual judgment is administered to every individual soul after its separation from the body ; the general judgment, on the contrary, to the whole body of the souls at the end of the world, viz.

With the latter follow, as it would seem, the perfect separation of the wicked from the good, and the abolition of the negative after which the positive, realistic, and the good alone will survive. So far s we can conclude from the indications in the Gathas regarding the fate of the souls after their separa- 63 fcion from the body, the ideas of this epoch correspond to those of the later A vesta. The judgment takes place at the Chinvat Bridge which connects this world with the next. The pious soul crosses this bridge in communion with the souls of all those who have zeal- ously striven for the good on earth Yasna X.

Yonder it shares in the highest beatitude, which consists principally in the soul beholding Mazda and the heavenly spirits face to face, and dwelling with them together in Eternal Light. Whosoever has overcome lying and deceit by dint of truth, will receive from Mazda the heavenly kingdom and the eternal bliss Yasna XXX, 8 ; and whosoever has adhered firmly to the Veh-Din "Good Religion," will enter unhindered the dwelling of Vohu- mano, Asha, and Mazda Yasna XXX, Further, we observe that the Gathas, consistently with their entire character, consider the blissfulness in the next world as an essentially spiritual one, just as in the Christian religion it rests in the " beholding of God " schauen Gottes , in the close communion with the 64 Godhead.

We hardly find any such traces among the Indians. Here Zoroastrianism exhibits a strong opposi- tion to the natural religions, which conceive the life after death as a continuation of the future life with all its joys, advantages, and habits; but without its sufferings and pa in ful ness. While the soul of the righteous joyfully crosses the Chinvat Bridge, which leads him to the Kingdom of Heaven, the soul of the sinful is stricken with fear and terror, in the presentiment of the penal retribution awaiting him Yasna LI, The Divine Judgment exiles the soul into Hell.

Just as the Kingdom of Heaven is pure light, so is darkness the abode of the demons Yasna XXXII, 10, achishtahyd demdne mananglw " in the abode of the evil spirit," is the formal and real antithesis to the vangheush d demdne manangho in strophe It is in the abode of the demons that the sinful soul is received by the evil spirits with scoffing and disgrace, and entertained with loathsome food Yasna XLIX, But as pure spiritual joys make up the essential constituent of Paradise, so there are, likewise, essential spiritual torments under which the soul of the wicked has to pine after his death.

Such a soul is severed from Mazda and the blessed spirits ; it dwells with the demons in eternity ; it is particularly tormented by its own conscience which accuses it and condemns it Yasna XLVI, Thus tranquillity and serene joy ful ness are for the blessed on the one side, and trouble and remorse and repentance for the damned on the other. Such is the compensation in the next world for the disproportion between reward and punish- ment which we so often perceive in the life of man here on earth. G5A Such a recompense or retribution is allotted to each individual immediately afrer death.

The material work, however, is not destined to last for ever. It will in the future be annihilated. Thus the final judgment is united with the end of the world. Already in the Gathas this idea of the next world is clearly observable. The general judgment does not stand in contradiction to the individual judgment. The latter finds its solemn confirmation in the former, and we may probably assume that at the final judgment evil will be annihilated and banished from the world. As such he is the enemy and vanquisher of the demons of night.

But he is also the yazata of truth, of rights and con- tracts. The sphere of his might ranges still further. He is prince and king of the earth, the helper in battles whom the warriors invoke at tho commencement of fighting, and who helps them onto victory.

Lastly, lie takes vengeance on the wicked. He especially inflicts punishment on liars and violators of promise. To him is attri- buted the power of distributing rain on dry fields. He fights against the demon of aridity and barrenness. That he has generally in his hands the dominion of the stars cannot be surprising. In short, we have in the later Avesta to deal with genii who vividly remind us of the gods of the. If we now turn again to the Gathas, the subject appears to us in quite a different light.

There are sometimes circumstances under which we arrive at nothing by the assumption of an accident, and by which much obscurity and confusion is caused. If in the Gathas we could nowhere find a convenient occasion for mentioning Mithra or Tishtrya or the Fravashis generally, it might be explained as an accident when their names do not occur. But such opportunities of 3 Gomp. Why is Mithra, for example, not alluded to in the passages where the conflict against the unbelievers is mentioned 7 It is said of Mithra in Yasht X, Besides, the Gathas speak very often of fields and herds ; but even with such an opportunity Tishtrya is never referred to.

He wished to substitute higher and more philosophical ideas in the place of these good spirits, who in their entirety too much resembled the gods of the old Arian nature- xvorship.

Opera: A Research and Information Guide, 2nd Edition (Music Research and Information Guides)

In a passage of the Gathas Yasna XLVIU, 10 the cult of Haoma, at least in the form in which it was at that time practised, is even put clown as something despicable and abominable. The results to which this reaction led, are placed before us in the theological system of the later A vesta. Here we light on a compromise with tho older national reli- gion.

The gods, who were revered in the latter, are, notwithstanding their altered and spiritualized form, taken back into the new religious system, in order to form to a certain extent the holy retinue and court of Ahura Mazda. However, as we have said, the ideas undergo many transformations ; they are adapted to the new circumstances, and this is effected particularly by placing more in the foreground the moral side in the nature of an individual genius than the physical side. This corres- ponds with the essence of the Zoroastrian system in general, which is principally founded on an ethical basis.

It will place the philosophical element of his faith in the front just in the 1 [Doubtful. The Fahlavi seems to have understood "magic. In Germany, too, the lirst pro- elaimers of Christianity proceeded with the object of extir- pating heathenish beliefs. The old conception of a god bringing down the rain has even been retained, but connected with the person of Peter, as Thor r s name had no lono-ep a place in the new church. We must here remark that Farsiism is y however, an outcome of the old Iranian nature-religion, while the old German national belief was something foreign to Christianity.

Thus a compromise was entered into between Christendom and Heathendom by the former accepting many popular 45 ideas which are deeply rooted in the heathenish belief, but impregnating them with the Christian spirit. Now, the celestial beings whom the Gathas mention along w jth Ahura Mazda, are, as I have alieady stated, principally the six Amesha-spentas: It is not my intention to explain in detail the conceptions that are connected with these Amesha-spentas.

Will the monotheism, admitted by us in the theology of the Gathas, be not impaired and restricted through them, or perhaps even be abandoned? If we take an external view of the matter, we must concede that the Amesha-spentas scarcely seem to play a part inferior to Ahura Mazda. The word Asha, for example, occurs in 1 Cfr.

It is not the number of times that a name is mentioned, which enables us to conclude from external evidences as to the varied value of the different ideas ; and still there exists such adislinct difference, that it is quite impossible to place Mazda and Asha in one and the same grade, nay, even to compare them with one another. Mazda has become, indeed, a proper name to designate the Highest and only One God, less than Jehovah in the Old Testament, or Allah in the Muhammedan reli- gion.

Asha, on the contrary, and even the other Arneslia- spentas named above, can only occasionally attain to a sort of personification, the original abstract signification being still clearly perceived. In the majority of passages the abstract idea is the only right meaning; in others we would hesitate to fix the correct import of the word, nay very often the double meaning is perhaps aimed at by the poets of the Gat lias. Similar personifications of abstract ideas are occasionally noticed also in the Psalws vide 85, Mercy and truth have met together ; and righteousness and peace do kiss one another.

In that case 1 might compare them with the angels of the Old Testament. The latter were, likewise originally, only phenomenal forms of Jehovah Himself, and later on I hey constituted to a certain extent His followers and companions or His court. Where God is regarded as the Creator of the spiiits existing by and outside of Himself, there can be no reference to any kind of polytheism. The question then Whether 48 there are any spiritual existences outside of God, who stand to a certain extent as intermediaries between Him and man has nothing to do with the definition of the idea of monotheism.

Who, through his wisdom, hath made the son in the im. How much the theology of the Gathas differs from that of the later Avesta is plainly manifested by these yazats. In the former Ashi can scarcely be considered the name of a genius as in the latter. The word has in the Gathas rather its original abstract signification: I cannot specify any Gathic passage where ashi may be conceived with some probability as a proper name. The progress of the development of an abstract idea into the name of a yazata is clearly perceptible as regards the word ashi in the period which intervenes between the epoch of the Gathas and the age of the later Avesta.

We can now sum up the results of this chapter in a series of propositions as follows: It represents the oldest and most primitive form of the Mazdayas- nian religion. The cult of these yazatas was first adopted in a later epoch by a sort of compromise with the popular religion. Mazda Ahura is the Godhead per se. The Zoroastrian religion has often been called a dualistic religion. This term we are, however, only then authorized to apply to it, when we understand under dualism a religious system wherein the existence of a power working in opposition to the good-creating and good-wishing Godhead, is also assumed besides 51 Him.

In this sense the Old Testament religion may, likewise, be denoted a dualistic system. Strictly speak- ing-, we could only then point to a religion as a dualism when both the good and evil principles stand one against the other with equal rights, and are equally mighty; when both influence the world to an equal ex tent ; and when man feels himself equally dependent upon and acted on by both of them.

Zarathushtra and the other poets of the Gathas have endeavoured to solve that question in a philosophical way, and I will make an attempt, 52 in the following pages, to expound briefly their system as it seems to unfold itself from the Gathas. I Bay " seems," because the Gathas have not at all in view the object of developing a system of philosophy. Their composers do not mean to address individuals from amongst the people, but the whole community ; because they chiefly take into their consideration the practical side of reli- gion, viz.

We must, therefore, assay to construe from the brief indications and isolated passages of the hymns the ideas which may have presented themselves before the minds of these poets upon the question of evil. Naturally, these are distinct passages wherein the prophet is led by the context to speak of the nature of evil.

No customer reviews

But in regard to this we must at once renounce all claims to be able to represent clearly all the individual traits of the philosophical system which Zarathushtra may have established for himself. In reference also to the principal points, such as I shall attempt to describe, opinions might frequently differ. Others will very easily find out certain passages, of which the meaning has not been sufficiently established by me, or which appear to be not quite consistent with my own views.

In the later Avesta, the opposition between the spirits of the good and the evil world is also carried through formally and most precisely. As Ahura Mazda stands at the head of the former, so Angra Mainyu stands at the head of the latter. Then follows the army of the good spirits oflight against the band of the daeva and druj.

Agra Mainyu occurs here only once as the name of the evil spirit, and of course in a single passage Yasna XLV, 2 where spanydo mainyush and not, as one would expect, Ahura Mazda, is mentioned as his opponent. All these names evidently denote, without any distinction, the evil spirit who is called simply Agra Mainyu in the later Avesta.

Thus, for example, in Yasna XXXII, 3, the daeva, are designated as the brood cithra of Akem- mano who must be, in such a context, manifestly the highest and the head of the world of evil spirits. The same is probably the value of Achishtem-mano, when it is said in Yasna XXX, 6, that the demons flock together around him, while the good spirits are associated with, or collect around, Spenta Mainyu Yasna XXX, 7, andcomp.

Nay, it even appears that in the same passage Aeshma, too, which is otherwise the name of a particular demon, serves only as the appellative of Agra Mainyu. The names which serve as designations of the evil spirit, stand rather as counterparts of the name Spenta-mainyu or Vohu-mano. The essential function of Spenta-mainyu himself does not even seem fully clear in the Gathas.

If we were to compare all these data we should be able to characterize the philosophy of Zarathushtra approxitmately as follows: He is by nature good, and only goodness emanates from Him. Evil is the negation of goodness; it exists only in relation to the latter, just as darkness is only the negation of light. Now so far as Ahura Mazda is the positive, to whom evil forms the negative, He is called Spenta-mainyu, while evil or its personification is Agra-mainyu or Ako- mainyu.

Both Spenta-mainyu and Ako-mainyu are hence represented as twins Yasna XXX, 3 ; they do not exist alone for themselves, but each in relation to the other; both are absorbed in the higher Unity, Ahura Mazda. They existed before the beginning of the world ; their opposition is exhibited in the visible world. Ahura 55 Mazda is the Creator of the universe, but as He, in the form of Spenta-mainyu, creates anything, the negative counterpart of Him is given, i.

The first thing which the twins produced, is life or death, or, as it may perhaps be philosophically expressed, the being and not being, wherein the double side of their nature is marked. Thus, if Spenta-mainyu creates light, the darkness, or the not being, or the absence of light, is the contrary creation of Agra-mainyu ; if the former gives warmth, the negation of warmth, viz. All evil is, consequently, to the Zoroastrian not something properly realistic, existing in and for itself, but only the failure of goodness.

Therefore, it is self-evident that good and evil throughout are not parallel ideas of equal value, but the latter has a purely relative existence. If we admit this, we must also assert that Zoroas- trianism cannot be called a dualism in the proper sense of the term. Now, as soon as we ask the question: How does man stand in relation to these two opposite principles? But when we interrogate: What is the final end at the last judgment of this opposition between good and evil?

Both ethics and eschatology are specially weighty points of the Zoroastrian religion. Both naturally stand in a close reciprocal relation. So early as in the Gathas we discover numerous and important hints upon ethics and eschatology. This, indeed, presupposes a high standard of moral culture, when the sin in thought is placed on the same level with the sin in action, and, therefore, the root of all actions as well as the mea- sure of every moral discernment is perceived in the mind.

We must hence aver that the founders of the Avesta religion at least attain to that stage in ethics to which only the best parts of the Old Testament rise, and that they display an inclination towards that depth of moral intuition which is perceptible in Christianity. Now, we must emphasize this fact that at a very early period the Gathas knew about this ethical triad which also sways over the entire later Avesta. There is no doubt, therefore, that the foundation of thjs ethical system had been laid by Zaratluishtra himself.

The character of these ethics is thus in fact so personal and individual that we are involuntarily forced to as- sume that it is the product of an individual super- eminent spirit which, endowed with special moral gifts of nature, has attained to such a keenness and preciseness in the conception of the moral laws. That this doctrine developed out of a whole nation, so that it was to a certain extent the property of a community, and gradually took the form in which it is represented in the extant Avesta, seems to me quite incredible.

The poet says in Yasna XXX, 3, that the two spirits that had existed from the beginning, the twins, had announced to him in a vision what is good and what is evil in thoughts, words, and actions. In like manner, Yasna LI, 21 designates piety as the fruit 57 of tli e thoughts, words, and deeds of an humble mind. In the service of God this ethical tripartition is manifested in the devout feeling which the adorer shall foster, in the good speech which he utters, and in the offering ceremony which he performs.

According to the Zoroasfcrian stand- point, no man stands under any ban whatever of destiny, of a destiny originating from eternity, which binds him and oppresses his will. There is here no original sin for which he has to suffer as the result of the faults of his parents, and which cripples his strength in struggling against evil. The evil lies not in him but out of him.

He can let evil approach him and admit it in himself, but at the same time he can keep it off from himself, and struggle with it. This is certainly a sound moral standpoint which places all responsibility upon man himself, and deprives him of the possibility of making any excuse for his laxity by saying that the matter did not lie in his power or was a result of destiny. They are, therefore, not evil by nature, but they become so by foolishly declaring themselves in opposition to Ahura Mazda Yasna XXX, 6.

Nay, it is even a free voluntary act of the Evil Spirit himself that he chose sin as his sphere of action, while Spenta-mainyu made the choice of piety and truth for himself Yasna XXX, 5 , And, likewise, it is only the pious and faithful who make the right choice of the good thoughts, good words, and good deeds; but not the impious Yasna XXX, 3. This doctrine of the free volition of man conforms with the opinion already expressed by me above that religion is a matter of understanding or judgment, and that righteousness and truth on the one hand, and impiety and falsehood on the other hand, naturally stand in the closest connection.

According to the Zoroastrian idea, moreover, man is not fettered with a blind fate, nor prejudiced in his judgment by hereditary sins. God has given him his power of judgment, aud he who has ears may hear, and he who has intellect may choose, what is right and true. The sinner is a fool, and the fool a sinner. The Zoroastrian well understands how great the danger is for each individual, and in how many differ- ent ways evil manifests itself in the visible world arid threatens to cause the downfall of the pious.

theranchhands.com: Sitemap

His life is, therefore, a constant and indefatigable struggle or combat against evil. It would be superfluous here to cite all the Gathic passages which touch upon this ear- nest conception of life as an everlasting combat in the 59 fulfilment of the true obligations. The exhortation that every one shall persevere in righteousness and devotion, and shall not get tired of it, forms rightly and precisely the fundamental tone of most of the Grathic hymns.

He implores Armaiti that she may let him firmly adhere to the faith asha , and that she may grant him the blessing of a p. The faith is the highest goodness vahishtem which he can acquire from God. The high- est goodness is the property of Mazda. In this respect the Gathic hymns stand far higher than those of the Eigveda. In the Gathas the gifts or possessions which the poet longs for, are almost exclusively spiritual and moral ones; it is ooly in isolated cases that material gifts form the object of his wish. The Vedic singers, on the contrary, pray for hore.

The absence of cult and ceremonies is a conspicuous feature of the Gathas when contrasted with the later Avesta. The guardians of these numerous precepts are the priests, who have to watch over their fulfilment, and to impose the due penance upon the negligent and tardy people who trans- gress them. The whole life of the Zoroastrian is governed by these precepts of purification and their minute obser- 60 vances. But if we glance at the Gathas, we discover no trace of all these precepts and customs.

The reason of the absence of any such trace may be explained in two ways. I believe that we should feel no hesitation in following the latter explanation. The Gathas are, indeed, not completely silent as regards the external forms of the divine worship. But these are quite general ideas. The ethics of the Gathas are in such a high degree internal or mental ; they recognize so decidedly or precisely the piety in a hnly course of life and in an energetic struggle against evil, that the idea seems to be hardly compatible with the belief that a reward can be gained by the conscientious observance of external ceremonies at any time.

Product details

There seems to be no doubt that this outward structure certainly corresponds in all points to the spirit which permeates the Gathas. As we have already observed, the Gathas did originate in an epoch of ardent conflict. Very often we find the 62 believers in need and distress, while the godless and disbelievers in the doctrine rejoice and seem to claim the victory in the fight.

When the thought naturally occurs: How are the righteous indemnified for the wrong which they endure here on earth, and how are the impious who appear to enjoy good luck and success, punished for their crimes? Hence, in the earliest period of Zoroastrianism the conception of a com- pensating justice meted out in the next world, was already strong.

It formed one of the ground-pillars of the entire system ; for without this hope the faithful adherents of the doctrine would scarcely have overcome triumphantly all the persecutions which they must have suffered at the beginning. Like the Christian martyrs of the first century, they forbore all the afflictions of this world in the hope of the joy and happiness which awaited them in the next world Yasna XLV, 7: But never will end the torments of the disbeliever; Thus Mazda hath established according to His power.

This judgment is twofold, one individual, and the other general. The individual judgment is administered to every individual soul after its separation from the body ; the general judgment, on the contrary, to the whole body of the souls at the end of the world, viz. With the latter follow, as it would seem, the perfect separation of the wicked from the good, and the abolition of the negative after which the positive, realistic, and the good alone will survive. So far s we can conclude from the indications in the Gathas regarding the fate of the souls after their separa- 63 fcion from the body, the ideas of this epoch correspond to those of the later A vesta.

The judgment takes place at the Chinvat Bridge which connects this world with the next. The pious soul crosses this bridge in communion with the souls of all those who have zeal- ously striven for the good on earth Yasna X. Yonder it shares in the highest beatitude, which consists principally in the soul beholding Mazda and the heavenly spirits face to face, and dwelling with them together in Eternal Light. Whosoever has overcome lying and deceit by dint of truth, will receive from Mazda the heavenly kingdom and the eternal bliss Yasna XXX, 8 ; and whosoever has adhered firmly to the Veh-Din "Good Religion," will enter unhindered the dwelling of Vohu- mano, Asha, and Mazda Yasna XXX, Further, we observe that the Gathas, consistently with their entire character, consider the blissfulness in the next world as an essentially spiritual one, just as in the Christian religion it rests in the " beholding of God " schauen Gottes , in the close communion with the 64 Godhead.

Such is the compensation in the next world for the disproportion between reward and punish- ment which we so often perceive in the life of man here on earth. G5A Such a recompense or retribution is allotted to each individual immediately afrer death. The material work, however, is not destined to last for ever.

It will in the future be annihilated. Thus the final judgment is united with the end of the world. Already in the Gathas this idea of the next world is clearly observable. The general judgment does not stand in contradiction to the individual judgment. The latter finds its solemn confirmation in the former, and we may probably assume that at the final judgment evil will be annihilated and banished from the world. The Gathas, nevertheless, do not speak definitely upon this subject, but the later Avesta contains this doctrine, and we dare say that without it the notion of a judgment at the end of the world would be almost without any object.

In the hymns the final judgment is apparently not quite distinguished from the individual judgment. Mazda Who existed from the beginning of the world has laid it down that in His power evil shall be the retribution of the evil, and good the reward of the good at the end of the world.

The pious will entf-r the heavenly kingdom of Mazda at the end of the world Yasn;i XLIII, ; LI, 6 , that is, he will outlast the destruc- tion which evil and the evil people will be subject to. I now come to the end of my survey. It appeared to me indeed adapted to the spirit of the age, and worth my while to point at once to the Gathas as the oldest parts of the Avesta, and to treat the contents of their doctrine separately. The task itself may furnish us with the proof that such a treatment of the subject is practicable.

It may prove at the same time to be a contribution to the argument that a deep cleft separates the Gathas from the other books of the Avesta, and that 66e the Parsees bave been led rightly and by important grounds to ascribe already in an early period a special sanctity to these old hymns. My task appeared to me the more useful as in the Gathas a particularly original and antique form of the Zoroastrian doctrine can be discovered ; and this form is the purest and sublimest that we know of. It is still free from many later additions, and permits us to observe in a favourable light the personality of Zarathushtra, his moral earnest and yet human intentions, and his philosophical system which ventures to solve the highest and most important pro- blem in religious philosophy.

We recognize in Zara- thushtra a man who was far in advance of his times, who proclaimed already in a remote antiquity a monotheistic religion to the people, who conceived from a philoso- phical standpoint the Being of the Godhead, the rela- tion in which man stands to Him, and the origin of evil ; and who perceived the chief point not in offer- ings and external ceremonies, but in a pious mind, and in a life conforming to such a pious mind.

This discourse is addressed to the Parsees of India on the one hand, and to those amongst Europeans on the other who take a warm interest in India and its inha- bitants. It will bring before them the oldest end to a certain extent the ideal form of the doctrine, as it was thought out and conceived principally by its founder and author himself. It will at the same time enable also the European who is himself not in a position to study the original texts of the Sacred Writings of the Parsees, to form a correct estimate and to give an un- biased criticism of the Parsee religion and its moral standard.

May it prove a foundation stone in the Bridge which will unite the West and he East with one another. Whilst ancient and modern writers vary as to the year of the birth of this sage, and place it at one time in or , at another in B. If the statements of the chroniclers 1 were true, according to which Pythagoras is said to have served in the army of Assarhaddon, he might have had, already in his earliest youth, an opportunity of conversing with the Magi ; but that is evidently an anachronism.

Stellen der Alien uber Zoroastrisches. He stayed there for another 32 years and went afterwards to Samos, when he was about 56 years of age. The campaign of Cambyses in Egypt falls in the Olympiad 63,4 B. During this interval, therefore, Pythagoras must have come to Babylon, where he remained until B.

That Pythagoras had been in Egypt is affirmed by Herodotus and I socrates ; but that a man so curious in religious matters should visit also Babylon, the metropolis of Asiatic knowledge, and should make acquaintance with the Chaldaeans and the Magi, is a fact so very evident in itself, that I cannot conceive how the very numerous statements of antiquity could be rejected for no other reason than their being found in writers of a later period.

Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromata, I. He was in Egypt when Polycrates recommended him by letters to Amasis. He learned their language, as is stated by Antiphion in his book on those men who excelled in virtue, and afterwards he went to the Magi and Chaldseans. G7 distinguish between the Chaldaeans and the Magi.

Porphyrius 1 says in his Life of Pythagoras: If we do not regard the high veneration of the Persians and the Magi for truth, a fact often confirmed elsewhere, the distinc- tion of a body and a soul in God is truly Zarathush- trian. In the Farvardin Yasht, 80 to 81, it is said of Ahura Mazda: Moreover, we are justified in thinking of Mithra as morally truth and physically light, and as a being who may be regarded as a likeness of Ahura. Yasnal, 1 khrathwishtahe huJcereptemahe. On the other hand, the same authority 1 relates other facts about the intercourse of Pythagoras and the Chaldeans: Origenes, edition of Lammazsch, volume XXV y page seq.

Aristoxenus narrates that Zaratas set forth his doctrine to Pythagoras: He learnt there also his Zabratas's doctrine about nature and the first principles of the G9 the dry, the light and the swift ; but the parts of darkness are the cold, the wet, the heavy and the slow ; of all these is composed the world of male and female. But the world is a musical harmony, wherefore the sun has a harmonical circulation. In another passage, too, Hippolytus mentions Zaratas B. Thus Plutarch also relates.

It is, therefore, not without meaning that Porphyrius distinguishes the doctrine of the Magi from 1 It is very remarkable that the prohibition of bean-eating, which Pythagoras is said to have learnt from the Chaldsean Zaratas, is found in the Old Babylonian or Chaldsean documents. It is sufficient to state that they knew the difference between the Magian and the Chaldcean. The same correct distinction bet- ween the Magi and the Chaldeans, Zoroaster and Zara- tas, is found also in Clemens of Alexandria, as well as in the passage already referred to, and also in Stromata, I, page , Potter's edition, 1 where he explicitly calls Zaratas, an Assyrian, whilst he says a few lines above 3: It is self-evident that " emulating" does not express any personal intercourse between Pythagoras and Zoroaster.

It is consequently to be ascribed to want of accuracy? Some fancy that this was Ezekiel a prophet of the Old Testament: It is true that zelotes is also employed in the sense of "a true disciple;" comp. On the contrary, in Strabo, XVI, p. Nothing is proved by the fact that some later writers, e. Better informed writers knew too well that such a personal intercourse between Zoroaster and Pythagoras was impossible. It is very probable that Pythagoras came to Babylon, and that he had there come in contact not only with Chal- daGjans and their sage Zaratas, but also with the Magi properly so called, and became acquainted with the Zarathushtrian doctrine ; but no documental authority asserts that he had formed a personal acquaintance with Zoroaster, and it is a mere mistake of the moderns to confound Zaratas with Zoroaster.

If Pythagoras came to Babylon at the latest under Cambyses for those who antedate the year of his birth must likewise antedate his travels back to the beginning of the Persian Empire under Cyrus , it follows, hence, that the Zara- thushtrian Reform was not an institution which had just originated, for the authorities do not say a word about it, but only place the wisdom of the Magi, emulated by Pythagoras, directly on a level with the Egyptian and Chaldaean sciences renowned in antiquity.

And if we might concede that the whole account of the acquaint- ance of Pythagoras with the Zarathushtrian system is a later amplification of his travels though indeed it is already met with in Aristoxenus , still these amplifica- tors have supposed it as historically certain, that the Zarathushtrian Magisni had existed long before the period when Pythagoras was still in his prime of life, and thus they consequently ba.

The fact that Pythagoras became acquainted with the Magi at Babylon, and that there existed, no doubt, Zarathushtrian schools in this capital in conse- quence of the Persian conquest, induced the later writers to directly call Zoroaster and Ostanes, Baby 73 lonians. This may be some transference from the Chaldtean to Zoroaster ; yet similar conceptions concerning the chief stars are also met with in the Bualahish, Chapter V. It is almost impracticable to determine whether there is anything Zarathushtrian, and, if so, what in the doctrines of Pythagoras, since what Pythagoras had taught himself and what his later disciples added, is quite obscure.

Among the Pythagorean "beliefs" there are some which remind us of the Zarathuslitrian doctrine, for instance: Here I may add what is related about the travels of DemocrLtus who was born about B. He wandered about, according to liis own testimony, until his eightieth year, and saw the greatest portion of the known world. Tatianus 2 says that he praised Ostanes the Magus. It might be supposed that the travels of Pythagoras w r ere fabricated in imitation of the indis- putable migrations of Demoeritus ; but with equal right we may also assume that Demoeritus had been induced by that very example of Pythagoras to search after the wisdom of all nations at its source.

In general we have very little idea of the closeness of intercourse existing in earlier times between the Orient and the Occident, and, therefore, we can calculate little upon the active intermediaries between both, i. But when, in consequence of the Per- sian wars, and still more of the conquests of Alexander the Great, more abundant and more faithful news re- ferring to Persian affairs came across to Europe, the attention of learned Greeks was more and more drawn also to Zarathushtra and his system. The earliest Greek writer who mentions Zoroaster, is Xanthus the Lydian, granting that the latter's age and authorship are accepted as fully established.

For there are well-founded reasons to doubt especially the time in 1 Far. As in his book a fact which happened under Artaxerxes I. If he was, as Suidas relates, gegonbs epi tes Jialoseos Sardeon i born at the time when Sardis was conquered," and if the conquest of Sardis took place under Croesus, B. Here we have to choose whether we should take gegonbs in the sense of "born," in which case Xanthus at the beginning of the reign of Artaxerxes might not yet have attained 40 years ; or in the sense of " flourishing," in which case he must have been about 30 years old at the time of the said conquest of Sardis, his birth in which city should be placed in B.

The testimony of Dionysius of Halicarnassus 3 respecting Xanthus, that " he is one of those historians who were born some time before the Peloponnesian wars and lived to the 1 Strabo I, p. According to Xanthus there was a great drought under Artaxerxes. On account of similarity I follow the Fasti of Clinton.

Reiske, 76 era of Thuoydides," might render it possible to regard the conquest of Sardis Olympiad 70, 2 as having taken place in the year of his birth ; in this case he was at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war Olympiad 87, 2 not yet 70 years, and was 28 years old at the birth of Thucydides.

But if Xanthus was born about B. But we are not compelled to believe that Xanthus was still living at the beginning of the said war. It is at all events certain that he did not finish his work before Olympiad 79, and that he was an older contemporary of Herodotus, and influenced, according to Ephorus,! As to the authenticity of the; works of Xanthus a later critic, Artemon of Cassandra, advanced some doubts and believed that they were by Dionysius Skytobrachion.

Yet so early a writer as Athenayus, who is named in the above passage, directs our attention to the fact that Xanthus is mentioned as early as in Ephorns B. We know as little about the time of this Dionysius. Suetonius in his book De Grammaticis, chapter 7, says of 1 In Athen. He was "in Alexandria, as some relate, and taught together with Dionysius Scyto- brachion ; but I can hardly believe this, for their times do not agree. If, therefore, Dionysius had really forged the Ludiaka ' Lydian Matters ' under the name of Xanthus, we are compelled to assume that the genuine Ludiakd lay before Ephorus and Eratosthenes, and that later authors, such as Dionysius of Halicar- nassus and Strabo, either drew from that genuine work, or that they were deceived by a book which had been fabricated a few ages before them, during which time, moreover, the Ludiakd of Xanthus, still known to Eratosthenes, must have been supplemented by the spurious Ludiaka of Diqny?

The attempt of my venerable teacher, F. Welcker, 1 to prove the falsification from the fragments of Xanthus, is not at all cogent, nay he must even confess that several of them transmit to us popular and very antique legends. But why should a man who has spent his whole life under the Persian sway, and consequently in daily intercourse with Magianism, have been unable to write such a book, whilst Herodotus, soon after him, treats the Persian religion in a very detailed manner?

Welcker, and after him Miiller, hold it to be a cha- racteristic of the Alexandrine period, that Xanthus speaks of the Diadoclii u successors " or " disciples " of Zoroaster ; however, in the Zarathushtrian system this very tradition is proved by the original documents yet they seem to be the words of Hermodorus, and not of Xanthus. It is self-evident that the conclusion of the fragment in Diogenes: But even if we admit hypothetical ly that the Ludiakd of Xanthus was written by Dionysius Scyto- brachion, what is proved by it against the Magikd? The doubt of Artemon exclusively refers to the former book.

Creuzer, it is true, has adduced a proof for the authenticity of the Magikd from the fact that in the narrative of Cyrus and Croesus as it is apparently borrowed from the Ludiakd of Xanthus , Zoroaster, too, and likewise his logid "sayings" are mentioned. But even without this help we are justified in believing that Xanthus the Lydian had treated of matters relating to the Magi, as long as the contrary opinion has not been proved.

Welcker's objections to that narrative are, in- deed, exaggerated ; even they ascribe to the text an error- that is evidently not contained in it. It is of course evident that the dramatical embellishment of the story of the cremation of Croesus is not the work of Xanthus, but of the vain-glorious rhetorician Nicolaus. Nevertheless, there does not exist the contradiction found therein by Welcker, that on the one hand the Persians, at the rising storm, remember logid or pro- phetic sayings of Zoroaster ; while, on the other hand, Zoroaster is supposed to be still living to forbid the 1 Comp.

Ill, 18 in Spiegel's Translation of the Avesta. For the loyid or say- ings of Zoroaster, which occur to the minds of Persians, are designated by this very circumstance as something very old and forgotten, and in the next passage the author says, "as for Zoroaster, the Persians learned from him not to burn dead bodies, not to sully fire on any account, thus confirming the practice that had been established from ancient times. We are, therefore, confirmed in our opinion that the authentic Xanthus could simply relate in his Ludialtd concerning Croesus nearly what Nicolaus, according to his manner, has embellished, and that, consequently, the mention of the Zoroastrian prohibition against the burning of the dead bodies can be drawn from him.

We must not, however, forget that Nicolaus does nob explicitly quote from the book of Xanthus, but that it is only most probable 1 that he has drawn from that source. However, it might be objected, how is it possible that the older Xanthus made mention of Zoroaster and his laws, whilst the later Herodotus, who treats in so detailed and expert a manner of Persian life and Persian religion, entirely keeps silent upon this matter? Here I will lay no stress upon the fact that Herodotus, too, contains some information drawn from Xanthas, as, e.

Ill, 16 ; the marriage with one's sister III, 31 which he traces back, it is true, to Cambyses. Bather we must insist upon the fact that all those who either consider Zoroas- ter to be far older than, or contemporary with the father of Darius, all those who think Xanthus to be either authentic or forged, have to solve the enigma. The Auramazdian religion existed as early as the time of Darius and predominated in the Persian Empire, and yet Herodotus does not mention Zoroaster or Ahura- Mazda. This problem cannot, I believe, be explained by those who make Zoroaster a contemporary of Hystaspes, the father of Darius.

For, how could it be possible that Herodotus had not mentioned so powerful a religious crisis happening hardly two generations before his birth? However, not taking into consideration the Zarathush- trian epoch, how was it possible that Herodotus did not even know the prophet Zoroaster, whilst Plato, who flou- 11 82 rished 55 years after Herodotus, was accurately informed about Zarathushtra, and apparently must have drawn from sources which were at least as old as Herodotus?

The description given by the latter concerning Persian customs and religion Bk. I, 40 contains, moreover, a series of features truly Zarathushtrian ; as, for instance, the worship of the deities without images or temples ; the offering of sacrifices to Zeus who is evidently Ahura Mazda , to the Snn, Moon, Earth, Fire, Water, and Winds vide Yasna XVI, 4 ; the worship of Ana- hita, whom he calls Mithra ; the description of the sacrifice at which a Magus standing near sings the theogony, which points to sacrificial prayers, such as the Yasna and the Yashts; the victims which were, according to him, bulls, horses, camels, and asses, whilst the poor offered " small pieces of mutton," just as in the Yashts horses, cattle, and smaller animals are offered Abaii Yasht.

XXII, 3, horses,- camels, cattle, and smaller animals are vowed. Ill, 16 ; the marriage with one's sister Bk. Ill, 31 2 ; the necessity of exposing 1 Heraclides Cumanus, a writer of uncertain elate comp. He says in one of the Fragments in Athenaeus IV, p. That lie does not mention the name of Zarathuslitra, whose religion he interprets, is, we may hence infer, a mere matter of chance, or he had some special reason unknown to us, perhaps because Xanthus had already treated of it.

Or should we conceive that Herodotus became acquaint- ed with the Mugian belief merely from oral tradition recounted by men who were not well disposed towards the Magi, and who, therefore, kept secret the name of the founder of their religion? Suffice it to observe that in the silence of Herodotus concerning Zara- thushtra we have a remarkable instance of how little value is to be attached to the argumentum a silent io, even where, as here, the most direct occasion of men- tioning him might be given. After Xanthus the Lydian had explicitly treated of Zoroaster, after Herodotus had described the religious system founded by him, and after Plato's predecessors in philosophy, Pythagoras and Democritus, had been in intercourse with the Magi, we should not be surprised if we find Zoroaster and the God proclaimed by him in the works of Plato 1 vide supra, p.

This story is as- 84 The fact indeed need not be ignored that the authen- cribed by Clemens Alexandrinus Stromata V, p. He here perhaps metaphorically implies a resurrection, as well as the idea that through the way across the 12 zodiacal signs the soul is taken up, and says that by the same way the souls come down when they come into ma- terial existence.

Or can Hep have been reckoned as a Zoroastrian and called himself Zaratliusli- trish comp, Yasna 1, 23? From which reasons have the later writers made him Zoroaster himself? The story itself scarcely contain any Zarathushtrian reminiscences. ProbL IX, 5, 2: As for the rest Arnobius, too, makes use of this passage adv. He seerns to have died of the wounds which he had received in battle. On the 12th day after his death he was to have been honoured with the last rites of the pyre together with others who had fallen victims with him ; but suddenly he revived or had perhaps retained his life.

He proclaimed to mankind whatever he had seen or done during this time, Cicero, as if he were conscious himself of its truth, regrets the ridicule cast upon this tradition by unlearned people, and while believing it to be true, he prefers the idea of awakening to that of reviving, as if he would avoid the reproof of dulness. For our purpose it will suffice to assume that Zoroaster was known in Greece in the time of Plato.