GUEST POST: The Roots of Zoroastrianism, part 2

What spoke Zarathushtra?

Hey everybody, Derek here. Today I’m pleased to bring you the long-delayed (by me, not him) sequel to L. C. Nielsen’s examination of the roots of Zoroastrianism. Last time, L. C. discussed Zoroastrianism’s origins in the same early Indo-European tradition to India’s ancient Vedic religion. This time out, he walks us through Zoroastrianism’s fundamental texts. Enjoy!

One of my goals with FX is to host more guest writers on a variety of topics. If you would like to publish something at Foreign Exchanges, contact me at fx.submissions@gmail.com or just click the button:

And if you enjoy these guest posts, which are always free to the public, please support them with a subscription today:

---

Having established the fundamental religious Indo-Iranian framework, it is time to look more specifically at what Zoroastrians traditionally regard as their holy “texts.” I put quotation marks around “texts” because it is crucial to understand that most of these very ancient traditions, collectively known as the Avesta (from Middle Persian abestag, possibly meaning “praise”), were written down only in the early centuries CE (the exact point in time is not known, but it was probably in the Sasanian era). By then, the oldest of these traditions had been transmitted for nearly 2000 years. The language of these traditions is known as Avestan. There is no one Zoroastrian canon of Avestan texts; instead, different communities focus on different texts and place differing amounts of weight on the other large category of Zoroastrian tradition, Middle Persian theology and exegesis. The Avestan traditions can be broken up into a few categories (with some overlap).

Yasna (“liturgy”)

The term Yasna refers to both the communal ceremony that constitutes the central ritual of worship in Zoroastrianism (serving a purpose that can be loosely compared to Communion in Christianity), and the set of hymns recited during it, with a complete recital taking about two hours.

A Yasna ritual, courtesy of 19th century French Orientalist James Darmesteter (Wikimedia Commons)

The oldest and most important parts of the Yasna are the Gathas (“verses”), the seventeen hymns attributed to Zarathushtra himself; and the Yasna Haptanghaiti (“seven-chapter liturgy”), attributed to his students. This is the only part of the Avesta universally considered holy by modern-day Zoroastrians. These constitute chapters 28-51 and 53 of the Yasna. Y. 30 discusses Spenta Mainyu and Angra Mainyu, two primal forces in the world:

These are the two mainyu in the beginning, twins who have become famed as two dreams, the two thoughts and words, the two actions, the better and the evil.

And between these two, the generous discriminate rightly, the miserly do not.

And when these two mainyu come together, the choice decides then what the beginning will be, life or un-life, and what the end will be: for the deceitful the worst, but best thought for the truthful one.

…

The Daevas do not at all discriminate rightly between these two. Because delusion comes over them when they take counsel, so that they choose the worst thought,

therefore they gather with Wrath, with which the mortals sicken existence.

Most commonly, Mainyu is translated “spirit,” but it could also be rendered “mentality,” hinting at the Gathic understanding of the spiritual world as being linked to thought. Spenta and Angra can be rendered variously; “Good” and “Evil” or “Holy” and “Destructive” are common choices. Gathic verse is highly cryptic and there are many interpretations of the meaning of each verse. The above is based on Helmut Humbach’s 1991 translation.

The rest of the liturgy can be grouped as follows:

• Y. 1-8: Highly formulaic and lengthy invocation of the many divinities that are to receive the benefit of the ceremony.

• Y. 9-11: The Hom Yasht, or hymn to Haoma, a variously identified psychoactive substance of ritual importance. In this section one finds the phrase “Thus spoke Zarathushtra” (aat aokhta Zarathushtro) frequently repeated.

• Y. 12: The “Zoroastrian creed”, which repeats the most important tenets of the “Mazda-worshipping way of life” (daena Mazdayasni). Its contents suggest it was originally a pledge for converts.

• Y. 13-27: A mixture of dedications, commentary (zand), and other declarations relating to ritual sacrifice.

• Y. 52: General prayers

• Y. 54: Prayer for Airyaman

• Y. 55: Declaration of the conclusion of the Gathas

• Y. 56-57: Hymns to Obedience (Sraosha)

• Y. 58-70: Various prayers, fragments and repetitions of earlier verses.

• Y. 71: Conclusion of the Yasna.

There are also 23 chapters of extensions to the liturgy collectively known as the Visperad, containing invocations to divinities similar to those that make up much of the ordinary Yasna. Reciting the entire Yasna takes a cleric about 2-3 hours, depending on how many extensions are included.

Yashts (Hymns)

The 23 yashts, hymns to individual divinities (yazata), are somewhat more “epic” in character than the highly formulaic invocations of praise that pervade much of the Yasna. They vary widely in length, from a few lines to the 9,000-word Mihr Yasht or hymn to Mithra, yazata of the covenant:

26. 'Who breaks the skulls of the Daevas, and is most cruel in exacting pains; the punisher of the men who lie unto Mithra, the withstander of the Pairikas; who, when not deceived, establishes nations in supreme strength; who, when not deceived, establishes nations in supreme victory;

27. 'Who confounds the ways of the nation that delights in havoc, who turns away their Glory, takes away their strength for victory, blows them away helpless, and delivers them unto ten thousand strokes; he, of the ten thousand spies, the powerful, all-seeing, undeceivable Mithra.

Mithra is in Iranian tradition associated with the vazra, or club, which in Indic tradition is the weapon of Indra (the vajra). This, and Mithra’s association with the sun, likely owes much to conflation with Shamash, the Babylonian solar deity of law, most famous for handing Hammurabi the scepter of kingship in reliefs. The yashts are hymns of praise rather than narrative poems, and allude to, rather than tell of, mythological events that would have been familiar to their original audience (and may be familiar in some form to readers of the Shahnameh). The longer hymns consist of multiple layers, which can to some extent be separated into several dialects of Avestan (generally called Old, Middle and Younger). Some of the hymns contain toponyms, most notably the Zam Yasht (“Hymn to the Earth”); these toponyms refer to places in Central Asia, rather than Mesopotamia or West Iran. This suggests that the core traditions predate the Achaemenid era, during which they probably took a “canonical” form.

Vendidad (from the Avestan videvdad, “against the daeva”)

The Vendidad is an eclectic collection in 22 Fargard (sections, chapters) of texts mostly composed in a young, heavily Persian-influenced Avestan with simplified grammar. Except for the first chapter, which is probably pre-Achaemenid by its toponyms, the Vendidad contains what appears to be Sasanian-era material on law, ritual purity, the myth of Yima (or Jamsheed) the first king, the many virtues of the dog, and some other mythical narratives. Some of the “laws” in the text are outright absurd, such as that of Fargard 14, which details a mind-boggling number of herculean trials to be undergone by, and punishments to be meted out to, anyone who commits the heinous crime of murdering a “water-dog”, i.e., an otter:

1. Zarathushtra asked Ahura Mazda: 'O Ahura Mazda, most beneficent Spirit, Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! He who smites one of those water-dogs that are born one from a thousand dogs and a thousand she-dogs, so that he gives up the ghost and the soul parts from the body, what is the penalty that he shall pay?'

2. Ahura Mazda answered: … 5. 'He shall kill ten thousand snakes of those that go upon the belly. He shall kill ten thousand Kahrpus, who are snakes with the shape of a dog [possibly cats]. He shall kill ten thousand tortoises. He shall kill ten thousand land-frogs; he shall kill ten thousand water-frogs. He shall kill ten thousand corn-carrying ants; he shall kill ten thousand ants of the small, venomous mischievous kind.

The wildlife that is to be slaughtered constitutes “noxious creatures” (khrafstar); serpentine, venomous, disease-carrying and insectoid pests associated with the “counter-creation” of Angra Mainyu detailed in Fargard 22.

Perplexing as it often is, the Vendidad is one of the more interesting texts to peruse, since it is a prosaic snapshot of a living Zoroastrian tradition probably compiled in the 6th century.

Pahlavi texts

The Pahlavi (from Parthava, Parthian) tradition is composed in Middle Persian and ultimately so named because the language is written using “Parthian” script, which consists of slightly modified Achaemenid Imperial Aramaic glyphs. The full corpus of extant Middle Persian literature is substantial, so I will limit this review to religiously important texts.

• Bundahishn (“Genesis”): A cosmogony which exists in two variants (Iranian and Parsi), detailing Ahura Mazda’s perfect creation and Angra Mainyu’s assault on it. This is an accessible text written in straightforward prose. Its composition dates to about the 8th century.

• Denkard (“acts of religion”): A 9th-century compilation of exegesis and wisdom, including a wide range of interesting material, such as quotations from now-lost Avestan material.

• Riwayats: A tradition of letters containing legal and religious opinions attested from the 9th century onwards. These, and parts of the Denkard, are reminiscent of contemporary Islamic writings (indeed, riwayat is a loanword from Arabic meaning “narration”) and influences between Islamic and Zoroastrian tradition went both ways in the early centuries of Islamic rule.

• Arda Wiraz (“the righteous Wiraz”): an Inferno-esque vision of punishment in the afterlife, possibly dating to the late Sasanian era, that is, the 6th or early 7th century. This punishment is more akin to Purgatory than Hell - its purpose is to cleanse evil from the souls of the dead.

Excerpt from chapter 1 of the Bundahishn:

2. As revealed by the religion of the Mazda-worshippers, so it is declared that Ohrmazd [Ahura Mazda] is supreme in omniscience and goodness … 3. Revelation is the explanation of both spirits together ... Ahriman [Angra Mainyu] is in darkness, with backward understanding and desire for destruction, was in the abyss, and it is he who will not be; and the place of that destruction, and also of that darkness, is what they call the ‘endlessly dark.’

Avestan and Persian traditions

Whereas much of the ancient Avestan tradition is cryptic, esoteric and hard to comprehend, Middle Persian literature is generally easy to read and depicts a vivid, living Zoroastrian tradition with a highly active intellectual life. The central question that occurs to anyone reading texts from the two traditions is bound to be what exactly the connection between them are. They share concepts (such as the body-soul and good-evil dualities), fundamental tenets (e.g., Ahura Mazda as the creator of the material and spiritual world), and cultural values (e.g., the centrality of fire, water and animal husbandry). But what about more complex traditions, such as eschatology (finality of humanity’s destiny)? There are two extreme positions, which I will call “Orthodox” and “Orientalist”:

• Orthodox position: The Middle Persian and Young Avestan texts represent ancient traditions going back to the days of Zarathushtra and so represent a continuation (or sometimes distortion) of the teachings and ideas alluded to in the Gathas, Yashts and so on.

• Orientalist position: The Middle Persian and Young Avestan texts represent medieval or late antique exegesis of ancient Avestan traditions, the language of which was no longer properly understood, and they can be disregarded as far as understanding the roots of Zoroastrianism is concerned. To understand the Gathas and Yashts, we must focus on the Rgveda.

Few people, besides some conservative Parsis on the one hand, and old-school Orientalist philologists on the other, hold either of these positions, which represent a spectrum of interpretation. Those who lean toward the Orientalist view (e.g., the philologist Jean Kellens) tend not to read the Gathas as alluding to moral teachings or the lived experience of Zarathushtra and his tribe, but instead understand them to consist of mantras and formulae which relate to the ritual of sacrifice, the purpose of which is to mend the world.

On the other hand, those who lean toward very Orthodox readings (such as the late, great Mary Boyce) prefer to understand Zoroastrianism in terms of an internally consistent “orthodoxy” formulated by Zarathushtra and “heresies” which lacked this consistency. 

Most scholars today take a more balanced approach, treating Zoroastrianism as a diverse, dynamic religious tradition that continuously evolved over the centuries. The older Avestan material can in this approach be read to allude to myths and teachings that would have been familiar in more developed forms to contemporary audiences. The writings of late antiquity and the early medieval era, rather than representing imaginative ex nihilo exegesis of older texts, are understood to combine living, evolving descendants of such earlier traditions with interpretation of older Avestan material. While this nuanced approach leaves us with fewer straight answers, it also has far greater explanatory power than either extreme position.