/lit/ - Literature

>>19431762
>Nearly everything written about zoroastrianism is just the ceremonies
Yeah, because it is just soulless ritualism like most religions prior to Christianity

>>19431837
do you have a single fact to back tgat up

>>19431837
What for did people perform this "soulless ritualism" for?

>>19431852
>what for did people for
kekd at my own autism

>>19431852
>What for did people perform this "soulless ritualism" for?
Invoking fallen angels for worldly benefits

>>19431922
Damn you are retarded

>>19431926
Nice rebuttal, fren. This is a well-known fact. The gods of ancient ritualistic / sacrifice-based religions were dependent on sacrifices for their nourishment and well-being, and the whole thing was a reciprocal exchange. That they were fallen angels is also obvious, but I know you will never accept this and will continue to cope

>>19431944
Why the believers of these early religions were punished by lack of knowledge of true God and thus misled to worship fallen angels?

>>19431952
They got unlucky and were born too early, so they get the hellfire.

>>19431952
These people made the mistake of being dazzled by the beauty of the creation and instead took the sun, stars, and various natural phenomena as gods instead of the actual Creator. This is what is said in the Wisdom of Solomons Fallen Angels were among these, and tricked people into worshiping and sacrificing to them, and to making idols. I think that these people will be judged in accordance with what they knew. If they adhered to the natural law and the basic covenant made with Noah and his sons they are fine, I’d say

>>19431994
That isnt the case for zoroastrianism though

>>19431998
Yes it is. Zoroastrianism is a very ritualistic religion, and in actual practice Ahura Mazda was sidelined, little more than a ‘deus otiosus’. The people turned to the yazatas more immanent within the world as their gods, as the Israelites themselves were prone to do. By this I mean gods like Mithra, Rashnu, Wərəthragna, Sraosha, Anahita, etc. So basically as time went on they fell further and further from the truth.

>>19431994
do christcucks ever get tired of their schizo delusions?

You can ignore the LARPer and check out the Gathas. Get M.L. West's translation of the Gathas and the Liturgy in 7 Chapters; it's on libgen. Zoroaster is pretty clear about what he wants. No, it isn't "soulless ritualism", which is ironically exactly what he was against. It's also the primary point of disagreement later Zoroastrians had, and really still have, with Abrahamic religion (which is pretty much the definition of "soulless ritualism").

The Gathas are a series of poems written by Zoroaster outlining his philosophy, theology, and the "why" of both; the Liturgy in 7 Chapters is a series of poems written by members of the Zoroastrian community immediately following Zoroaster's death. The differences between the two are also of note, because Zoroaster's Gathas have moments mirroring Confucius' "Tian has abandoned me" momens, whereas the Liturgy in 7 Chapters is absolutely cheering and optimistic. In this sense, they're a signal of the success of Zoroaster's mission.

>>19432167
This is Jewish rather than Christian theology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah

>>19432195
Thank you anon for a useful answer

>>19432216
You're welcome.

I should add for clarity: M.L. West actually goes over what each part of the Gathas and Liturgy means, so it's not JUST a translation. This is important because, as you wanted, it has actual theology and philosophy in it. Each Gatha is a 4 line poem, and he goes over each (I believe there's 52 Gathas in total, but I could be wrong), so it's not quite line by line, but it is Gatha by Gatha.

>>19432195
This. We know that the early Vedic religion was extremely ritualistic thanks to the Rig Veda. We also know that prior to Zoroaster's reforms the ancient Irano-Persian religion was close to Vedic Hinduism. So Zoroaster built his movement against a set of antiquated practices. Incidentally post-Vedic Hinduism also evolved away from ritualism (though it's till highly ritualistic).

>>19432195
What is the scholarship like on the Gathas being authentic and well transmitted over so many centuries? Aren't the oldest manuscripts and sources like ca. 1000 AD and peope like Anquetil Duperron had to go beg the few remaining caretakers of the old traditions to even give a shit enough to teach him to read them?

>>19431762
from what ive heard there is very little remaining of ancient persian documents which to survive history. most of what we know comes from romans/byzantines/arabs

>>19431944
>>19431837
Christianity would not exist without the influence Zoroastrianism had on the development of Yahwism, which itself in would also not exist in the form it is recognized in OT writings today

>>19432307
>Muh atheistic historical analysis
No one cares, heathen.

>>19432233
I'm a bit confused about the chronology of Zoroaster and the pre-Zoroastrian (?) religion. I know dating Zoroaster is a nightmare with divergences as much as a thousand years (1700 BC to 600 AD) in proposed dates. I also know the Avestas have a lot in common with the Vedic religion of the Rigveda, like the haoma/soma parallel and the asuras/devas parallel. How exactly does this all get hashed out?

Is the ritualism that Zoroaster rebelled against related to the late Vedic religion's shift to "manipulating" Ṛta using precise ritual formulae, a shift away from seeing the gods as personal beings?

And how does all this relate to the Andronovo/BMAC complex's actual religion? What the fuck was going on up there in Central Asia in the early and 1000s BC?

>>19432029
>in actual practice Ahura Mazda was sidelined, little more than a ‘deus otiosus’. The people turned to the yazatas more immanent within the world as their gods, as the Israelites themselves were prone to do
Would you happen to have a source for this? I am interested in the degradation of religions into mere ritual technologies and amoral contractualism with daemons. Did this take place in later Zoroastrianism a well?

>>19432324
cope
israelites were polytheists who only became monotheists because of Zoroastrian influence, and Zarathustra far exceeds Jesus (every other religious prophet for that matter) in historical relevance

>>19432343
Yawn.

>>19431944
not like the bible has whole chapters about how to properly do ritual sacrifice

>>19432273
This is a two part question. Firstly, we know that they're old because the language in them is ancient. Avestan is from around 1000BC, Sanskrit is from around 1200BC. There's clear phonological differences, but like, the Sanskrit work for 5 is "pancha", and in Avestan it's "panj". Milk is "Ksheera" in Sanskrit, and "Shir" in Avestan.

You could argue that they're just something from 1000AD composed in a very old tongue, because after all Hindus write stuff today in Sanskrit. However, there are actually two Avestan traditions, one in Iran and one in India, that started separately. We can compare the two. What we end up seeing is two things:

Firstly, they agree with a lot. This makes sense if they're writing down an oral tradition, where they're just repeating things verbatim. Oral traditions are really good at preserving things rote, far better than writing, because the meaning of a given line is separate from a given line (in Hinduism, this is ostensibly what the Upanishads are for in regards to the Vedas). This means that a line itself is preserved, and no one tries to edit it. However, with a written tradition, every scribe is at risk of altering the text because they think that when the Bible says "Don't pick your nose" it actually is saying "Don't pick your hose" or whatever. Additionally, because there's a 1:1 information transfer between books, but a repeated line transfer between minds in an oral tradition, there's error catching.

Secondly, what errors we do see differ in the two traditions precisely because when they do start writing this stuff down, it's two separate sources that DON'T KNOW AVESTAN applying their existing linguistic usage to the Avestan manuscripts. So, when a Persian scribe thinks that word A should actually take form X, which is clearly a correction done because "that's how it works in today's Persian Farsi", the Indian scribe would have it take form Y, which is either "how it's done in today's Indian Farsi" or is NOT how it's done in the Indian Farsi of the day.

>>19432353

>>19432365
Icons are idolatrous, glad you agree.

>>19431837
ritualism is the only thing that gives religion soul
christianity without rituals is just people staring at a book and insisting everyone else is wrong

>>19432375
fair enough, you're not an orthodog larper
you're still utterly retarded though

>>19432388
Academic consensus is a mutable hypothesis that has no intrinsic relation to truth. We like to think we have everything right today, but you're just the idiot of tomorrow.

>>19432362
So, we can compare these two traditions and see how they differ. Now, you are correct, we have very little of Zoroastrianism. The Christian equivalent of this is "a fucking struggle just to get the Gospels, ignoring the Old Testament, the Church Fathers, etc".

>>19432328
Zoroaster can very clearly be dated to before Alexander, so he lived at most 356BC. The 600AD figure is from an old Evangelical screed, it has no validity what so ever. We know this because there are attestations of Zoroaster dating to before Alexander was born. After that, it gets murky. Avestan is obviously a very old language (as I said here >>19432362), but again, Hindus write stuff in Sanskrit today, so Zoroaster could be somewhere between 1000BC BC and 353BC. There are camps that put it even older, to around 1500BC, because of stuff regarding the Rig Veda, but let's just roll with 1000-353BC for now. We can actually push that maximum date back to around 500BC because of stuff involving Darius, but again, let's brace ourselves.

The problem is confounded by two things: One, internal Persian chronology, and two, Alexander. The Zoroastrians appear to have developed some kind of cyclical cosmology in which the universe moves in units of around 12,000 years, and Zoroaster was thus stated to have been born in the prior cycle. This would make Zoroaster walking around in like, 13,000BC, which is just absurd. Another post-Alexander theory stated that Zoroaster was born 300 years before Alexander, but that Alexander's failures would result in Zoroastrianism (or, more specifically, the Magi) would rule for 1,000 years. This would put him around 600BC.

>>19432395
and you've been the idiot of the past century, believing that the israelites have maintained a uniform and unchanging religion with zero outside influence for some 2000 years from abraham (who didn't exist) up until jesus christ

>>19432403
>The Christian equivalent of this is "a fucking struggle just to get the Gospels, ignoring the Old Testament, the Church Fathers, etc".
There are substantial amounts of ancient New Testament manuscripts, far more than any other ancient text.

>>19432405
I have no fear of being ridiculed by man.

>>19432403
The story of Zoroaster is that he goes around looking for a good King to take up his religion (galaxy-brain time, he's trying to find a warrior-caste leader who he can use to reject sedentary agriculturalism and use to enforce nomadic pastoralism). He succeeds. This man is named Vishtaspa (we have poems praising this man in the Gathas and the Liturgy). Here's where it gets fucky: Darius's father was named Vishtaspa (Greeks called him "Hystaspes", which we will for clarity as I believe that there are two Vishtaspas) as well. Hystaspes lived around 550BC. So, Persian chronologists end up saying that the two Vishtaspas are the same, meaning that Zoroaster was around somehwere near 600BC.

You'll notice that while this lines up, the Persians are also spitting out a bunch of theories here. This is true; the Persian world got fucking SHREKT by Alexander, and it's only after this that the Magi become an institution that could actually deny people from calling themselves "Magi" akin to how the Catholic Church can. Before this, Magis were just a sort of loose Brahmin caste. This means that the Persians themselves only have a sort of murky intellectualism of pre-Alexander Persian (Alexander trying to destroy Persian intellectualism didn't help).

It should be noted that the Greeks and later Christians spit out all sorts of stupid shit about Zoroaster. The simple fact is that Westerners had basically no idea what Zoroastrianism entailed until the British conquered India. Aristotle's student Aristoxenus posits Zoroaster as a flying fire-breathing Babylonian King who lived around 800BC and could talk to rivers, for example.

>>19432362
>>19432403
Thanks for these fren. So are you more comfortable with a circa-Cyrus date for Zoroaster, yourself? Or do you prefer it closer to 1200-1000 BC? This is the kind of holistic analysis I always feel robbed of when I read an "everything and the kitchen sink" Wikipedia article and I can't tell the 13000BC guys apart from the "Zoroaster never existed and if he did I'd kill him now read my 51 books on him" Bart Ehrman types at the other extreme.

Would you happen to have any recommendations for reading about Achaemenid Zoroastrianism and earlier? Especially its interaction with other Near Eastern traditions. Or is the BC record so sparse and muddled that every reconstruction is kind of its own "just so story?"

I've read similar things with the Buddha, in that Beckwith guy. Apparently the whole discourse on chronology is like a crackhead hoarder's apartment. Total tear down job, not just about cleaning up here and there anymore.

>>19432438
>Here's where it gets fucky: Darius's father was named Vishtaspa
That is a dilly of a pickle. Thanks again for the effortposts.

So would you say the Magi are kind of a stagnant pharisee caste past that point, or headed towards one? From what I understand the Brahmins remained somewhat informal as long as they were attached to local kings, but as this led to divergent recensions and probably as they became indispensable to administration, they became more self-conscious of "themselves" as a corporate entity. I guess this parallel wouldn't necessarily mean anything about either Brahmins or Magi since you are right, a similar process takes place with the Christian clergy and it's probably just a sociological constant across cultures that mandarin castes start to police entry.

Also do you think he was really a flying fire-breathing river whisperer?

>>19432418
The more power to you I guess, if you want to believe schizo interpretation of history to feel better about yourself I can't stop you

>>19432438
Recent archaeology has demonstrated that Zoroastrianism very clearly predates Darius, and by a wide margin. Monuments of what is clearly Zoroastrianism have been uncovered, as has a material tradition. Additionally, because of Zoroaster's pastoralism (he's very clearly upset about the moral depravity that sedentary agriculture brings with it; he's also clearly a nomad himself, frequently bringing up horse racing), we have a sort of dating here based on when the area that Zoroaster and his people (the Spitamas) were inhabiting (roughly Uzbekistan) was inhabited by Iranic nomads. This lines up with the linguistic evidence of around 1000BC.

I do not necessarily reject the idea that Zoroaster was a Homer figure, a pseudo-historical person who was the last to recurse upon a tradition. Given that Zoroaster actually gets his Holy King in the end, I have to imagine there were many people who felt similar to him. If that's the case, all he's really innovating here is renaming a bunch of deities. Even that doesn't really seem to be too out there for Iranics, as if we look at Assianism we can see a lot of similarities (such as the "tiers of co-equal deities" thing). Much like Homer, there's a lot of "personalism" to him. This could be part of the tradition, however.

>>19432442
You posted this before I could get out the above, which sort of answers this. I'm an IE-boo, not really a Persiaboo, so after Zoroaster himself I'm not much help. We don't have a lot, because of Alexander and then Islam, both of which wanted to wipe out Persia and remake it anew. When it comes to influence upon other religions, we're in a gray area. Much is made of Zoroastrian influence on Judaism, but it's hard to nail down particulars that aren't vague, like "monotheism" (I would argue that Zoroastrianism is not monotheistic). The Jews wouldn't want to admit such a thing, and the inner workings Semitic polytheism are very vague. Dumezil wrote a text (that's untranslated from French) comparing the Amesha Spentas to Christian Angels.

>>19432478
Oh no, an atheistic theory that will in all likelihood be disproven and forgotten in the future is held by people who think I'm a schizo. What will I do.

>>19432493
>What will I do.
continue to make an ass of yourself online?

>>19432475
I think that originally Iranian polytheism (however much it can be separated from Zoroastrian) had a loose division of pseudo-hereditary Brahmins, much like Vedic Hinduism. These would be spiritual and ritual technicians, and like the Druids, would have all sorts of internal divisions. We know of two types, Kavis (Vishtaspa is actually one of these, but he's also a military leader, which demonstrates the fluidity here) who are a kind of seer, and Karpans (who are priests that lead rituals, particularly cattle sacrifice). There were undoubtedly more. When Zoroastrianism comes along, it absorbs this structure, creating the Magi (in whatever usage that term might be useful), and integrates it. You thus get ritual and spiritual specialists. Many of these would be philosophers and "spiritual caretakers", as a lot of Zoroastrianism is about the mental state of the worshiper (even the fire rituals involve this).

With Alexander, however, the Magi, alongside all of Persia, are shocked to the core, and allow themselves to rebuild. The top-down ideological structure of Alexander gives them a sort of mirror to base their own developments off of. The end result appears to be some kind of cross between the Catholic Church and Hindu Brahmins. There is not necessarily a high priest or a true hierarchy, but you can't just go around calling yourself a Magi, and "the Magi" are now a sort of corporate body separate from any individual Magi. As you say, a lot of this is probably in response to trying to help secular power. The kind of temporal centralization of "The Pope" doesn't seem to be something these guys were interested in.

>>19432493
Yes, holding on to a belief because of faith instead of evidence spares you the potencial pain of coming to the realization you are wrong.
If thinking the world was created in 6 days 6000 years ago by an antropomorphic god who loves you makes you feel better I cannot stop you.

>>19432519
And no, I don't think he had any kind of special powers. Zoroastrianism appears to downplay Zoroaster as anything more than "just a man". There's an interesting book, I believe it's "Religion of Zoroaster", but I could be wrong. It's on libgen. It's rather old, and is by a Zoroastrian who, among other things, goes over historical references to Zoroaster by Greeks. I haven't read it all, but while flipping through it he makes an interesting point about Zoroastrian and whether it is "dualistic" or not. His argument is that it is not because, unlike in Abrahamic religion, you cannot actually make a deal with Angra Mainyu, or any of the Daevas, because if you summon them to you then they'll just immediately start fucking shit up instead of bothering to listen and plot how to fuck you over. Obeying contracts is inherently good, so of course the evil anti-Gods don't do it. For a religion to be "dualism", it would need to have the Good Gods that you ask for things from, and the Bad Gods that you ask to leave you alone, and even talking to a Daevas will just cause you trouble in Zoroastrianism.

I'm sure you could bring up any of the whacky dualistic sects that originate in Iran as a counter, but it's an interesting argument none the less.

>>19432541
How many people have held to theories supported by "evidence" that are now in the dustbin? Those of today are nothing special. There is no correlation to truth.

>>19432561
theory based on evidence have the capacity to grow and evolve based on new discovery yes.
You can indeed argue that we can't know any truth without presuposing whatever theology you hold because of where you were born to make yourself feel better, I can't stop you.

>>19432380
>christianity without rituals is just people staring at a book and insisting everyone else is wrong
This covers 99% of the christlarpers trying to colonize /lit/

>>19432587
It's the nature of the methodology itself. Everything is mutable in the face of new evidence, new insights, new tools of investigation. At its best this would represent an asymptotic relationship to truth, that of theory continually refined and approaching truth, but never reaching. But there is no guarantee that even an asymptote will form, as these movements can regress just as easily. If anyone is deluded it is you. "The best we can do at the moment given our current information and presumptions" is the best you can ever have, and it is most likely wrong.

>>19432561
>There is no correlation to truth.
None for your theo-ry either.

>>19432614
>no u

>>19432620
I don't have to prove an angry volcano wants my foreskin and sacrificed his son to himself so I would be allowed into his cosmic country club

>>19432612
You are completely right, faith based conception of the world allow for greater confidence in their conclusion if you buy into it.

>>19432629
Neither do I.

>>19432195
I checked out M. L. West's translation of the Gathas, and I don't think it's as good as the one done by Humbach. The latter keeps the original names and has the original text in Old Avestan on the left page.

>>19432648
So on what basis are you trying to convert anyone?

>>19432343
You have to be quite delusional to think that anybody exceeds Jesus Christ in historical influence, unless your definition of historical influence is "stuff that came before = more influential"

>>19432693
I'm not. And if I were I would not try to "prove" anything to you.

>>19432681
I don't know Avestan, so I can't comment on that. However, I DO know that M.L. West has explanations of the Gathas. Does Humbach have that?

>>19432710
The degree to which some of you retreat when you are challenged is remarkable. Why did you bother spouting off your beliefs if you had no interest in a response. I have to assume /lit/'s christers are just trolling for (You)'s at this point, otherwise they really are chinese room tier automata /npcs. If you had nothing to contribute to a thread about Zoroaster except your unrelated articles of faith, why are you here?

Sidenote: the greater majority of modern "Zoroastrians" are just rootless liberalized ex-Muslim Iranians who are desperately reaching for a sense of identity by larping as the followers of a dead religion all the while indulging in all sorts of modern degeneracy. Truly a sad state of affairs.

>>19432725
So they're swarthy wiccans? That is pretty sad

>>19432724
Who said I wasn't interested in your response? I wanted to talk about the unreliability of academia. It was not I who brought up the historical issue in relation to Christianity. In order for me to converse with anyone do I need to engage in active proselytism? I doubt you would actually prefer that. Anyway, if you don't like what I had to say, that is ultimately not my problem.

>>19432719
It has both an introduction that outlines the transmission of the Gathas, the pertinent problems with the translation of the Gathas, and an explanation of the socio-cultural context. I think it's what the Encyclopedia Iranica recommends as well.

>>19432736
Most Iranians are on the whiter side, but yeah it more or less parallels the neo-pagan phenomenon. Sad indeed.

>>19432763
Fingers with moustache length hair typed this post

>>19432744
Weren't you the one rejecting "atheist" explanations of how different religious beliefs influenced one another in a genealogical sense, because these theories evolve over time? So what is your assumption, that the religious belief(s) in question are beyond human origin? You think you can just slip that in without being challenged whatsoever? Now that you've said we can't have man-made theories, please I insist, prove your divine theory

>>19432776
Keked, not true though. I have little body hair.

>>19432794
You must be one of those Mongol Persians then

>>19432793
There is no divine "theory." Theory concerns natural phenomena.

>>19432793
You literally cannot argue somebody out of a deeply held religious position, because for them the fact that they believe in it is in itself proof of it's veracity

>>19432797
Ah no divine theo-ry, yes of course. Are you a spinozachad pulling my leg after all?

>>19432806
I know, I just want him to admit it and fuck off back to his hypermonastery. I otherwise found the topic interesting as Zoroastrianism is seldom discussed

>>19432813
I don't support monasticism, sorry bro.

>>19432195
>>19432681
OP here, these will check these recommendations out, sad to see christposters seethe, can you just make your own threads and not derail other discussion?
>>19432554
What book made you find out that for example you cant make deals with the evil spirits in Zoroastrianism? That's the kind of stuff I'm looking for, just explaining the philosophy and theology of Zoroastrianism while the ceremonies are not very interesting for me

>>19432681
>>19432860
What is the Humbach's translation called? Can't find it on libgen

>>19432934
The Heritage of Zarathushtra. I don't think the libgen version has the original Old Avestan text though, only the scribd version seems to have it.

>>19433084
There are no results on libgen

>>19433107
http://library.lol/main/94BA5FF123804004A51D4ECE5627E57A
Try this link. It works for me.

>>19433127
wtf I was using libgen.li and couldnt find it. What website did you search on?

>>19433127
>>19433137
Also epub is preferred

>>19432748
How do I become a warrior of light, bros? This shit breaks my heart.

>>19433127
I used libgen.rs, but I could also find it on b-ok.org

This >>19433184 was meant as a reply to this >>19433137

>>19433107
>>19433152
Btw, if you guys are interested in delving deeply into iranology, you should check out Prods Oktor Skjærvø. He's a Harvard professor who uploaded a bunch of his intro books on his main page for free (intro to Zoroaatrianism, Avestan, Persian, Manicheism, etc.). Here's the link: https://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~iranian/

>>19433198
Fucking hell it's just scans of a printed book, literal shit

>>19433305
We have to make do fren

>>19432736
Yes and no. Catholicism has an organized institution dedicated to eradicating competing belief systems. Islam, meanwhile, is a decentralized method of ensuring a global economic free-trade zone. Islam is great at enforcing itself upon people who want to participate, but actually quite terrible at enforcing itself upon people who do not want it. Hindus, Slavic Pagans, Zoroastrians, weirdos like the Druze, Yazidis, and Alawites, and even Christians and Jews have all been able to exist within the Dar al-Islam. That isn't to say that they coexist, but rather, that Islam can either wipe them out to a man (as was done with Greek polytheists in both Greece and North Africa), or it just sort of has to leave them be in their hinterland. In China, the Hui were created as a demographic to do business with the Islamic world, and only really accepted Islam as a means of accessing it. In Spain, Islam never really took off among Spaniards because the peasantry were unable to access to riches of the Islamic markets, so they had no interest in it. Even Iranian Shiism is an example of this.

Zoroastrianism has been persecuted, but it does still exist. There's about 120,000 Parsis plus Iranian Zoroastrians. With the Islamic Revolution, Zoroastrianism has become a schelling-point for anti-Islamic sentiments among the Iranian diaspora. The question of numbers is thus problematic, as there are 3 million Iranians outside of Iran. So, the number varies.

This (a dissident schelling point) makes it something separate from Wicca, which is a system to craft communities of people to perform magic with, and stuff like Asatru, which is an ethnoreligion meant to create a dissident spiritual framework. While Liberalism puts forth Liberal Zoroastrians as a way to attack the Islamic Republic, it also does this with ALL religions. Ask any Iranian their views on Jews and Israel, and they'll spit out stuff that might as well be from /pol/, even if they themselves are Liberals who hate the Mullahs.

>>19431762
Read the Bundahisn, OP. It’s terrific and the best you’re going to get for Zoroastrian cosmology and ontology. Unfortunately, a lot of the more philosophical texts were destroyed over time, beginning with Alexander’s conquest, and what were left were ritualistic texts, often passed down through oral tradition.

>>19431837
Have some respect. The Magi proclaimed the glory of the Christ’s birth and the first converts in Acts were former Zoroastrians. Zoroastrianism is closer to Christianity, both philosophically and historically, than your modern chauvinism would have you think.

>>19432681
A question, do you think West's translation might be good enough for someone if they also want some explanation alongside it? Im willing to go with a somewhat inferior translation if it makes me grasp the context of the verses more.
Or does Humbach's translation also have explanatory notes?

>>19431762
Mardanfarrokh's Doubt Removing Book is good too.
The Gathas, Bundashihn, and Doubt Removing Book are good combos.
The monist sect Zurvanism is interesting to look into also, but they were much more fatalistic, which probably came from Buddhist influence. Olam-ye Islam has Muslims question a Zurvanite mystic from Khorasan.
The reliefs of early Achaemenid kings also conform to the message of the Gathas and mention liken enemies of the empire to daevas.
Zoroastrianism feels a lot like a Shin Megami Tensei game with the forces of law vs chaos. I can't tell if it was initially ditheistic, monotheistic, or a qualified nondualism (e.g. Vayu-Vata exists in gap of both Ohrmazd and Ahriman and can be simultaneously angelic and demonic).
I think based on the Gathas alone, Zoroaster was focused on giving a ground or justification for the view that reward in afterlife is brought from following asha, Ohrmazd's order and absolute truth. This kind of stuff did influence Judaism as Qumran Cave fragments indicate influence from Chinvat Bridge.
What you have to understand is that Jews were a completely irrelevant tribe and took influences from Egyptian religions, Zoroastrianism, and Mesopotamian religions. Nothing in Judaism developed organically and was just haphazardly taken from others.
That's why I avoid Abrahamic religions altogether. I do not consider myself a liberal.
The end goal of Zoroastrianism is very similar to the law ending of SMT Strange Journey (DS version) minus the cross of Zenelin, so in that aspect Christianity and Zoroastrianisn are similar. However, Zoroastrianism is more eco-minded, and Mazdak the Younger was reforming the negative aspects away (e.g. he promoted animal welfare).
The reason Zoroastrianism died is because Mazdak was probably very popular among the peasants and people were getting tired of the oppressive mobed.

>>19431762
>>19435308
And the number one book I recommend is Textual Sources of Zoroastrianism by Mary Boyce. I also recommend Piloo Nanavutty's translation of the Gathas.
The Doubt Removing Book by Mardanfarrokh can be read online.

>>19433599
>>19435308
>>19435314
good posts

>>19432324
Fundamental facts don't care about your feelings

>>19432763
This seems an inappropriate comparison when there is a continuous Zoroastrian tradition inside of both Iran and India, plus surviving texts. Neopagans are reconstructing dead traditions from scratch.

>>19433894
Honestly, West's translation seems quite close to Humbach's, it's just that West replaces "Ahura Mazda" with "Mindful Lord". Humbach does have explanatory notes, here's an example:
>>19432748

>>19432725
>>19432736
That's not true in the slightest, in fact conversion is incredibly rare. Zoroastrianism is essentially an ethnic religion now, they are a separate community from Muslims in Iran and discourage marrying outside the community. Similarly for the Parsis in India, they form their own ethnic group and don't readily accept converts.

>>19435308
Anon, please understand, it's entirely understandable to avoid Abrahamics if you think they're derivative, but you seem to be obsessed with a fucking generic anime video game franchise to the point where it is affecting your metaphysical stances.
You are giving off a bit of a mixed message in that regard

>>19435659
This is often the case for communities that are surrounded by Muslims, they initially accept converts but then either they or the ruling elite start to fear that each of them threatens the beliefs of the others, so they just decide not to accept any converts (look at the Mandeans, for instance)

>>19435701
When I tried to search the names of some Avestan deities, I often got a link to some random anime wikia pages. Is Zoroastrianism really that popular among anime fans?

>>19433599
Christians won't consider you an ally. They'll just call you a filthy hearhen and convert you.

>>19435714
It's more that Zoroastrianism is just that obscure. The names of its mythological beings are used in media franchises, that says nothing about the religion itself.

>>19431762
Have you read this?
https://www.amazon.com/Zoroastrian-Tradition-Introduction-Ancient-Zarathushtra/dp/1568591101
I recommended it in another thread

https://matrix.to/#/#ElysianFieldsVerify:matrix.org
Join the Matrix group for pagan/polytheistic religions if you're interested in paganism or practice one of the pagan religions. We need new members to rebuild the community after getting deplatformed by Discord for taking the piss out of their holy cows (trannies).
Download Element for a decentralized, secure and pro-free speech alternative to Discord:
https://element.io/
/pol/tards stay the fuck out

>>19435709
This is entirely true. There’s nothing in Zoroastrianism or Mandeanism against converting like there is in Judaism. It’s just because of the law against apostasy in Islam (for which execution is the punishment obviously) that they take positions against conversion.

>>19435659
>>19435605
I have nothing against genuine Zoroastrians with ethnic genealogy in Iran and India. I was referring to liberal ex-Muslims pretending to be Zoroastrians while following none of its laws. You may not have met them, but they are a disgusting bunch.

>>19431837
Removing the ritual aspects of Christianity was the death blow to religion in the west.

>>19435637
Do you think West's translation is sufficient? It's like 20 dollars cheaper to buy in my cuntry

>>19436240
Yeah, you can compare them on libgen and you'll see that they are quite similar in their wording. West's also has an epub version

>>19435701
SMT Strange Journey (DS version) and Nocturne don't really feel anime-y. IV and V do, sure.
The lore and dialogue in Strange Journey is actually pretty well written.

>>19435801
Adding onto this, Persians fleeing Islam to India were granted permission to live there on the condition that they didn't proselytize. There's an old, and rather obscure, conflict between Zoroastrianism and Hinduism that we're not 100% sure the nature of, but the point is that Hindus got exactly what "conversion" entailed, and they didn't want it. The Persian refugees agreed, and in so doing became Farsis. So, Iranian Zoroastrians can't convert outsiders, and Farsi Zoroastrian don't want to (there's a bunch of socioeconomic stuff here but tl;dr they became one of the many "basically the Jews" populations of India so they actually don't want to increase their population too much).

There also seems to have been a hesitancy to let non-Iranics "into" Zoroastrianism. Groups like the Armenians (and, presumably, Indians) were subjected to it, but it was something explicitly foreign forced upon them. They were neither allowed to integrate into the Zoroastrian world or to create "their own" form of it. Given their small numbers today, conversion would likely mean "becoming part of this small and weird ethnic community". There's little incentive to do this unless you want to marry a rich Farsi girl, because outside of very specific niches the Zoroastrians have basically zero power.

>>19435819
>ex-Muslims
Based, by definition.

>>19431848
Iranians switched to arab worship because Zoroastrianism was just that unfulfilling

>>19432487
>Recent archaeology has demonstrated that Zoroastrianism very clearly predates Darius
Achaemenids worshiping Anahita and Mithra. "Zoroastrianism" is Sassanid

seriously, my issue:
>read bible
>first lines are about the 3 magi telling of the forthcoming birth of Christ and that he will be the king of jerusalem
>christianity itself is based on the admission that zoroastrian magi priests did indeed have supernatural abilities and were amicable to Jesus and in tune with God's voice
Christianity jumped the shark and I think the new testament should be paired with zoroastrianism.
>>19432725
actually there are huge numbers of zoroastrians in india. after the muslim invasion of iran a lot of them fled to china and india. so the modern idea that no one can convert to zoroastrianism is utter bullshit because most practitioners were converts to begin with. or even going back far enough, all of them were.

>>19437495
all zoroastrianism including achaemenid period is monotheistic. Anahita and Mithra are the aspects of live-giving water and fire, they are not separate gods. yazatas are not gods, they're "the honored ones".

christians worship mary and the saints, right, but it is still monotheism and they are not gods. it's the same concept but the yazatas are more mythical/conceptual rather than factual historical people. for all we know at least since it was entirely oral transmitted until the sasanians wrote it down.

>>19437495
No. See >>19432487.

>>19437545
He's a Muzzie doing the
>ackthyually Islam is BASED because the Wahhabis take Israeli money to BTFO THOTS so you should ditch Christianity and become a Muslim
bit. You can ignore him. Ever Zoroastrian thread gets these types. You can tell because they're really eager to make a connection between Zoroastrian and "Neopaganism" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to be), thereby trying to make Islam look positive. Because, you see, taking Constantinople was just in the interest of BTFOing LARPagans (this is actually a point that Muslims argue, mind you).

>>19437570
>Anahita and Mithra are the aspects of live-giving water and fire, they are not separate gods. yazatas are not gods, they're "the honored ones
This cope was invented by parsis after coming into contact with Europeans

>>19437577
Muslims are the hordes of satan, change my mind. Just read Raymond Ibrahim's works to learn how much muslims have stolen from the world.

>>19437739
nooooooooooooo you can't stealerino it's wrongerino!!!!! it says so in the bibleroni!!!!
pathetic christniggershit

>>19437570
The proper word for that is henotheism. I actually edited the Wiki page on henotheism a long time ago and added Zoroastrianism:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henotheism#Zoroastrianism
Prods Oktor Skjærvø actually argues Zoroastrianism is henotheistic.
However, it is hard to tell what Zoroastrianism originally was because in Mardanfarrokh's Doubt Removing Book, he argues for ditheism/dualism. The question is whether or not Ahura Mazda created Ahriman, which is hard to determine from the Gathas alone.
>>19437482
As I've explained, Mazdak the Younger was most likely popular among the underclass, and Iranians were becoming tired of oppressive mobed.
Mazdak was not a socialist or supporter of promiscuity. The former came from Soviet propaganda and the latter was common slander in the past.
It was actually due to one traitorous noble house Islam grew. The descendants of this noble house still exist, so there was some hostility from some aristocrats towards the priestly caste.

>>19432725
You make a valid point, but I hope you realize Zoroastrians were more ruthless to homosexuals and other kinds of deviants.
Those liberalized Iranians are probably descendants of Qajars. For some odd reason, a lot of descendants of Qajars are rabid socialists and communists. They are also the reason why Iran is very anti-intellectual now.

>>19438021
why did they hate homosexuals so much? What is their theological reasoning, and does it differ from abrahamics?

>>19437972
>one traitorous noble house
Which one

>>19438075
It's something I've read in multiple sources but never bothered to record.
>>19438032
I think it's due to how anal sex is unhygienic and leads to higher prevalence of intestinal parasites. Past research showed that.
Most old cultures have remedies for intestinal parasites such green black walnut tincture, black garlic (Iranians eat this a lot), sauerkraut, etc.

>>19437755
i was more referring to the genocides, rapes, murders, pederasty, sodomy (bacha bazi), wanton destruction, etc.

>>19431837
This. Read Alister Crowley. He'll explain to you full well how all occultism is simply mindless rituals

>>19437972
couldnt one argue most religions are henotheistic. even the bible speaks of mammon etc.

>>19437739
>pretends to ignore centuries of Christian colonialist crimes
You aren't fooling anyone, idolater.

>>19437545
>>19438021
See: >>19435819
>>19437577
Seethe.

>>19435819
Yeah, I don't like liberals either, but I don't think ethnic genealogy was important to Zoroastrianism during Sassanian empire unless you become a mobed or high-caste priest.
I prefer a mix of ecofascism and theocracy.

>>19438543
>ecofascism and theocracy
ecofascism and theocratic monarchism*

>>19432195
>it's on libgen
i search for gatha west
i search for gathas west
no result
are you talking out of your ass again?
VERY BAD commercial for what you are shilling

>>19439171
>Gathas Liturgy
>Gatha Liturgy
same for these
it's official, zoroastrian theology equals watery shit giving you cholera!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111

>>19439171
West's translation is called "Hymns of Zoroaster"

>>19439577
and how the fuck should i have known that, retard?
just proves you pay zero attention not only to your life but also for the thing you give your life to

>>19440124
Calm down. He was being polite...

bump

>>19438543
Yes, but as other anons have pointed out, nowadays Zoroastrians do not accept new converts, especially not from Muslims. That means those who do not have uninterrupted ethnic lineage but claim to be Zoroastrian are precisely those outsider larpers we spoke of earlier.

>>19432725
Literally not true. Many zoroastrians still exist in places like India where they were given refuge after the ummayad conquest on the condition that they won't proselytize

>>19441684
A few other anons before you raised the same objection. If you read a little further, I clarified here: >>19435819

>>19441690
>if they aren't le original ethnicity, they are le larpers
So what nigger? Do you take Muslims less seriously because they aren't Arabs? Or do you disregard all Christfags because they aren't Israelites?

>>19441725
Christians and Muslims today do accept converts, but Zoroastrians do not. These people are outside of the Zoroastrian community, share none of its values, adhere to none of its laws, and only use Zoroastrianism as an accessory to cope with being rootless liberals.

>>19441731
By your own retarded logic, most Christian denominations are filled with rootless liberals

>>19441744
Yes.

bump

>>19441612
I don't care what they do nowadays.
Also, Parsee don't have a monopoly on Mazdan traditions. That's like saying Theravadans have a monopoly on Buddhism and ignores Mahayana.

There were different Mazdan traditions popping up near mid to end of Sassanian empire, and it was thanks to the Orthodox mobed they constantly got demolished. Even Islam allowed for a more flexible approach, hence why it eventually grew over Orthodox Zoroastrianism.

Idgaf the Parsee are dying out. They are all inbred, low IQ, and arrogant assholes who are the reason Zoroastrianism died out in the first place. They are karapans. Zoroaster wouldn't like them.

I think the directions Zoroastrianism was developing during Sassanian empire were more interesting than what these inbred Parsee did with it.

Each time I think of the Parsee with their disgusting inbred look and acting like gatekeepers towards this tradition, I consider just adopting a more impartial philosophical approach and just dropping all religion together.

Did you read the gathas yet? The vendidad sucks, it's only good to illustrate one very important thing in excruciating detail: death is evil and unnatural.

>>19431944
>That they were fallen angels is also obvious, but I know you will never accept this and will continue to cope
>someone was a christcuck near me

Ewww...

>>19432725
>modern degeneracy
Virgin hands typed this

>>19439171
>>19439187
>>19440124
ngmi

>>19442844
Yeah, I am reading ML West's translation. I've already read Mary Boyce and the translation on avesta.org. I also read parts of other translations.
I like ML West's explanations for the verses. It's pretty much how I interpreted it.
The way he interprets the Soul of the Cow is well-done too.
The Vendidad needs to be abrogated especially the stuff about incest.