DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ZOROASTRIANISM
you are invited to join!

# 62) Q:  Can you please detail the similarities between Zorastrianism and Hinduism, more particularly with reference to fire worship?

A: Basically in Hinduism Atar ( fire) is a god and in Zoroastrianism Fire is just a symbol of the Aspects and Power of God for enlightenment. The Parsisist version of Zoroastrianism , goes as far as saying that Fire is a son of Ahura Mazda , but even so, is not an entity but a Materialization of
Divinity which has the Divinity as its source and symbolizes it.

# 63) Q:  How does Zoroastrianism view violence? Is there an equivalent of "Thou shall not kill/murder" in this religion? Is there a concept of a just war, or is all war condemned?

A: Well let's hear what Zarathushtra said:
" Put down fury, check violence, you who wish to strengthen the promotion of good mind through righteousness ... " Y48.7 ( Spenta Mainyu 2.7)

" The evil teacher destroys with his teachings the doctrine of the wisdom of life. He prevents people from the precious acquisition of good mind. I appeal to You, Wise Lord, and to Righteousness, expressing my mind in words. Indeed, he devastates the doctrine, who considers it the worst to look at the world and the sun with plain eyes, who sets the just against the wrongful, who destroys settlements, and who hurls a deadly weapon at the righteous. " Y 32.9-10 (Ahunavaiti 5. 9-10)

" Therefore, let none of you listen to the messages and teachings of the wrongful, because he brings danger and destruction to the house, settlement, district and land, Therefore, correct him with weapons. " Y 31.18 ( Ahunavaiti 4.18)

Fury and violence are going to be put down. But in defense of the wrongful , who destroys , it can be used. Thus not 'just' wars, but necessary wars, are acceptable but only for protection. There are no, 'Thou shall nots' at all. There is a standard of goodness one is supposed to conform with, there is wrong to be eliminated, and there is free and informed choice.

# 64) Q:  Is it not possible to recognize Zarathustra as the first prophet, while recognizing Muhammad as the last?   The Gathas do not contradict the Qur'an or viceversa, and given the influence of Zoroastrianism on Islam and the revelation from the Qur'an that many cultures besides the jews recieved prophets, is it not unreasonable to practice Mazdayasni Islam?

A: The Gathas and Koran or not very similar. One has  a explicit set of laws. The other's words are Manthra Thought Provoking message, given a by a Manthran, a Thought Provoker. One says do  this, follow this book and Allah will be merciful to you and give you a garden  with 72 virgins, when you die.  The other says, Think for your self. Evaluate every angle, meditate and reflect on it and then, each man and woman for him or herself, hoose between, what two Minds? Mentalities in man. Between right and wrong, it advices that you choose Right and good and then defines what those are, but regardless of what you do with that information, God does not send you to hell.

As a matter of fact,  He cannot He is All Good and cannot harm. Besides he is also All Wise and has designed a better way. The law of returns, a part of Asha, delivers to you according to what you have chosen to do, right for right, wrong for wrong, good for goo , evil for evil. But not for revenge or punishment, but for teaching us what and how to choose.

I do not want to dismiss any one's claims to prophet hood and I respect opinions. But those who follow Zarathushtra and experience the way his doctrine actually works, for it is a practical, every day,  get down to nuts and bolts religion, do not have room for more teachers, let alone prophets. Z was
not a prophet in the sense that he was not a predictor of the future. It is Mazda Ahura who is the Knower, and it is  in their vision of God's nature, that Daena Vanguhi, differs from all religions that consider Abraham either their father, their prophet or the first believer in the true God.

Allah, like Yahweh, orders and commands. Mazda partners with men, teaches and persuades. Mazda is all Good and Yahweh and Allah give both evil and good.

Mazda is Most Powerful. Allah & Yahweh are claimed to be All Powerful. Its not, my friend, that there are three gods, it is that these are three conflicting views of God. They cannot be harmonized. For certain you cannot accept a trinity. I cannot accept a God that condemns to hell Fire, or gives evil and, certainly, Xianity cannot accept either of us, since after all the Bible is the word of God.

So I cannot see where you see that there is no contradiction between Islamic Theology and Zarathushtra's. Maybe  in a few thousand years we will all agree. However all I know is that I am not guilty, that  I have nothing to fear from God , that God does  not condemn me to hell fire. That he is willing to share his Ethical essence with mortals, that He is our friend and Partner and that He is the God of the eternal second chance. That is the God I know through Zarathushtra's Daena ( Conception/Vision/ Ethical Consciousness of) Vanguhi/Good.

One thing I do know, the Jewish Rabbi from Galilee had it right when he said. I cannot serve two Masters. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Mazdayasna is not about laws and regulations of what to wear , what to eat, where to go, how to pray, where to do it and in what language to do it. As a Mazdayasni I am free to choose where, when, how to, dress, eat, worship et al, I am even free to choose Islam and leave the Din. Islam is not quite as free, is it? So, how can I ever be an Islamic Mazdayasni?

# 65) Q: I am suprised no one has mentioned this yet. We are in the day and age of minlging faiths, and many people are exploring faith in a comnination of religions. Is there a way to be both a Christian and a Zarathushti at the same time?

A: Not within the core doctrines of both faiths , for to paraphrase 'THE' Rabbi from Galilee. 'One cannot hold to different doctrines, because he would do disservice to one while upholding the other' That however, has never stopped the Eclectics among mortals from synthesizing. What was Manichaeism but an amalgam of Xianity, Zism, Buddhism and Babylonian and fringe Gnostic beliefs? What is Islam if not an amalgam of Xianity, Judaism, Zism and fringe cultic Jewish and Xian sects, mixed in with Arab Imperialism and customs?

Indeed, a study of all religions will show at least adaptations of former beliefs into their doctrines. Once the  printing press has come though, there is more readily available knowledge of the original teachings of all religions. It is then that the differences, as well as the similarities become clearer and make Eclecticism, in my opinion, hypocritical.

I could , technically, claim , for example, (as the Bahai's actually do, and with a lot more substance and backing from 'our' scriptures), that we can see Zarathushti teachings in all religions. Certainly I will argue that the Final Body ( Resurrection) was openly taught in the Avesta, hundreds, if not thousands, of years before it even appeared in the Bible. Based on that I could basically pre-empt all Xian interpretations of Resurrection and I could do the same with Reincarnation in Hinduism/Buddhism and many other doctrines, in most, if not all, faiths.

Heck, I could even argue that the Lake of Fire is a variation of the Stream of Molten Metal in the Avesta , that Jesus 3 days in the grave is nothing but the three days the Soul remains with the body before going on to self judge itself at the Bridge of Separation. That Amen is just Ashem, a form of Asha , they certainly share  a common literal meaning, sound alike and are used in prayer.

So  any one who would want to allegorize, beyond all accepted limits , the texts of the Bible and the texts of the Avesta, for example, would be at least partially successful in creating a Hodge podge doctrine. But is this proper? Does it leads to truth? Is it honest?

Don't think so!

Besides much of Abrahamic doctrines are based on very different suppositions as to the nature of God, reality and of the relationship between mortals and God, than the assumptions in Zarathushtra's Good Faith. So it would not only be a matter of harmonizing doctrinal contradictions, but of theological positions and central differences in the way God is viewed.

I just finished teaching on the subject of the relationship of God to man in the Good Faith, to one of my study groups. However, I will simplify here. Simply put, the relationship between God and man in the Abrahamic religions is that between of a servant to his master. Indeed, in the New Testament, the word that is translated from the original for servant is the same as the word for slave ( doulous) Xianity superimposes the Father allegory on this, but, even Jesus parables base themselves, in several instances, on this master/servant relationship.

In the Good Faith, the Most Wise is our urvato  our soul mate ( from urvan, meaning self or soul). Man is created to partner with the Superior Being in the fight against wrong. He is referred to, constantly as our friend, All Good, Incapable of harm, etc. Never is there any implication of a Master/servant relationship between the Most Wise Superior Being and mortals.

# 66) Q: Much debate has come regarding conversion to the religion.  According to tradition, only those born into the religion may practice it as they are the true "Aryans". No conversion is allowed. I believe this does not hold up to the historical fact that the religion was widespread before the Islamic conquest. It was found in Central Asia, Iran, and the Middle East. Considering the beauty of theology, I believe Zoroastrianism would make a stronger comeback if this restriction (which is incorrect historically) were lifted.

A: What can I say? We are agreed 100% We have lifted it. In reality it never existed, but in the last 200 plus years in India , Iran , even under persecution, always welcomed New Zartoshties.

next page