Courtesy...........................Ronald Delavega. Q: Are you of the Mazdaznan Movement of Zoroastrianism? It would seem that, as well as the Parsis, there are also at least 6 other Sects of Zoroastrianism. They all seem to have different ideas on how important the Avesta is, how other, later writings are considered Holy and Scripture just like the Avesta & some have beliefs in minor deities that seem to be contradictory to a Monotheistic belief. Which Sect has a strictly monotheistic belief in Ahura Mazda/God/Yahweh/Lord? A: No Mazdasnam is not a truly Zarathushtian movement . It follows the supposed teachings of some enlightened ones, that the founder of the movement discovered in some isolated village, somewhere in the mountains of South Central Asia. It takes Aaramaiti, which was never a godess or a person, and makes her the Precursor of Zarathushtra and some sort of priestess. Besides, they have largely become a Profit based organization, selling some tapes and books of spiritual exercises. I do not know were you get 6 sects. Offically there are none. In practice there are only three, which are Restorationists, Progressives and Isolationist, or Closed Religion. There are 2 occultist groups , but certainly they are as Zarathushtrian as Santeria is Catholic. In general, of all three groups, the breakdown as to the Avesta is as follows: Most Progressives accept some of the Yashts, the Vispered and the Haptanghaiti as binding. Some do not. No progressive believer accepts the Vendidad, nor the Pahlavi writings as binding. The Isolationists are almost exclusively Parsis and called themselves Traditional Mazdayasnies ( They even mispell the name of the religion, which is kind of ironical to me). They claim to believe in all the so called 21 Nasks of the Sassanian, recompiled Avesta, most of which are NOT extant. (the Sassanian recompiled the Avesta and by their own admissions, elected themselves the arbiters of what to include and what not to include in it). In practice they do not keep most of the regulations of the Vendidad. Their main interest is to avoid conversions, so that their caste is not polluted by the inferior raavans of Non-Zarathushtis ( Raavan is the Parsi perversion of the Old Avestan Urvan, which means self, or soul). The Restorationists simply have returned to the only compositions of Zarathushtra. In doing so they have discovered many things. Chief among them is, that the New Avesta directly contradicts the teachings of Zarathushtra in many instances and violates the spirit in which they were given. They also fail to find no elaborate rituals in the Gathas. So the Restorationists make Zarathushtras Gathas, the sole rule and authority for faith and practice. The Haptanghaiti and other fragments in Old Avestan have value only as far as they expand on some Gathic point and not directly contradict a Gathic teaching. The Visperad is seen as a description of the Festivals and practices of some early Zarathushtis, but not in anyway authoritative. The Yashts and Nyashes are seen as largely unacceptable, as are the Vendidad and the Pahlavi writings. The Korde Avesta, is a prayer book with rote prayers which traditionally are recited by priests; but are not even understood by most of them, let alone by the laity. It is written, basically in Middle Persian and Gujerati, with a sprinkle of Pahlavi, New Avestan and Old Avestan words, often misspeled and mispronounced. Having said, this there are many passages, often isolated ones, in almost every book of the New Avesta and even in Pahlavi writings, that are in harmony with Zarathushtras teachings. Therefore Restorationists value these writings from a historical and anthropological point of view. The term scriptures I use as a term you can understand, but not one with the same sense as it has in the Abrahamic based religions. This is so because Zarathushtras Gathas are poetic songs, akin to the Rig Vedda and the Nordic Rhunes and thus were sung, perhaps for millennia, before they were actually written. Indeed, a special Alphabet with 48 letters was created for the Gathas, so that the pronunciation would remain the same. Neither is it claimed to be the Word of God, like the Bible and The Quran are claimed to be. True, Seraosha is said to be in the very words of the Gathas, but Seraosha is more like a dicovered insight and/or inspiration, than God speaking. The Gathas are said to be Zarathushtras words . Of course they do explain the Message of Mazda , but they are not a direct communication from Her/Him, nor is Holy their right appelation. The Gathas are introduced as Righteous. It is the Sassanians that mistranslate Asha as Holyness, and so do many Parsi writers. Indeed, the concept of Holy, in the Abrahamic sense, is not present in the Gathas . Yes the whole of creation is seen as sacred as is God , but sacred is not Holy. For Holy connotes radical pureness and separation from any impurity (Specially in the Old Testament). This does not exist in the Gathas, although it is present, in an extreme sense, in some of the latter literature, like the Vendidad. Now to answer you about which group is Monotheist. Most Progressives are Monotheists, some are Henotheists. Most Isolationists are Henotheists, some are Monotheists and some are Sassanian Dualists. Restorationists are almost all Monotheists, but we do have some Atheists, that metaphorize God as an excuse used by Zarathushtra, to explain his doctrine. They are very few but they are out there and must be acknowledged. One more explanatory point. Mazda means Wisdom or Wise One and Ahura has been translated as Lord by most translators. However, like Yahweh, Ahu refers to being; indeed to a being of high position and ra is an augmentative particle, so this is a very High Being. Sovereign and Lord are thus used for him, but Supreme could also. Having said this, Mazda is not a Lord that lords over Her/His creatures. tenets.zoroastrian-fire-temple/discussions_5.html
Posted on: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 20:01:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015