What is Zoroastrianism?

In terms of the major religions of the world, we all know about Christianity and Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. These are traditions that have shaped our world to significant degrees and which still have billions of followers worldwide. But one religion that isn't as large today, but might still represent one of the most influential and important religious traditions in history, is Zoroastrianism.

Being associated primarily with Iran and Central Asia, and serving essentially as the state religion for some of the great Persian Empires, Zoroastrianism also probably had a major influence on certain key features of the Abrahamic faiths. Many have, of course, heard about Zoroastrianism, but knowledge about the details of this religion is often very limited and shallow. Uh, people will maybe know that this is the religion that Freddy Mercury belonged to, or that it is a religion that has an essentially dualistic worldview, uh, concerned with the fight of good against evil, light against darkness. This is all true, but there's so much of Zoroastrianism that most people aren't aware of. A long history of development with unique teachings that have, of course, evolved and changed over the centuries and millennia, but the core of which stretches back far into antiquity to some of the earliest religious literature in the history of the world.

So, in this episode, let's spend some time and dive deep into the fascinating and very important religion of [Applause] Zoroastrianism.

Veteran viewers will perhaps be aware that I've already made an episode like this about Zoroastrianism way back in the very early days of this channel. And while there's not necessarily anything wrong about that episode, or anything that I think is, is, you know, bad that I would change necessarily as such, um, the production value of this channel, the videos here, has significantly increased and gotten better since then. And I feel like an important topic like Zoroastrianism deserves a video that is, uh, more pleasing to look at and listen to. Uh, you know, coupled with the fact that both, uh, research on this topic generally and my own knowledge of this subject has also significantly increased and and and developed over the years since that video. So, for both of these reasons, I felt that it was, uh, necessary, that it was, uh, appropriate to do another video about Zoroastrianism that goes even deeper and takes into account all these, uh, nuances and and new understandings and more complex aspects of its history, development, and teachings.

Zoroastrianism is a very old religion, in terms of an organized religion, so to say. It could be considered one of the oldest in the world, and many indeed consider it the first monotheistic religion in history. There are caveats to this, especially the latter statement, as we will see, but for sure, it is a tradition that stretches back very far into the past. But for this reason, it has, of course, evolved and changed over the millennia too, giving rise to different and sometimes competing interpretations of its theology, literature, and practices. Most of the text of the Zoroastrian religion was written down or codified for the first time during the Sasanian Empire, around the middle of the first millennium AD or CE, although these texts had been orally transmitted for a long time before that. It is also around this time, probably in relation to this, that some of the core characteristics of the religion's teachings that we are familiar with became more formally organized and established, a kind of, quote unquote, orthodoxy, if you will. What I mean to point out with this is that our common understanding of Zoroastrian belief and practice is often primarily based on these developments during the Sasanian Empire, the the codified and and sort of official teachings that were set down at this particular period in time. Thus, the teachings that had been established by then is the lens through which much older texts and aspects of the religion, such as the Gathas, are interpreted by most people.

In any case, the basic features of Zoroastrianism as most people know it is that there is some kind of combination between a monotheistic faith with a dualistic cosmology. The worldview of Zoroastrianism is that of a clear cosmological dualism between the forces of good and evil, between light and darkness, often represented by the forces of Ahura Mazda on the one hand, and Angra Mainyu on the other, or between Asha and Druj. We'll return to these terms and concepts later. But this also means that Zoroastrianism is a heavily ethical religion, concerned with the individual's ethical actions in this world. So, living according to the principles of good thoughts, good words, and good deeds to promote the forces of Asha, of order and goodness in the world, and also promising an afterlife of pleasure or punishment depending on how the person acted during their lifetime. These characteristics of the religion are largely true, although some may need to be nuanced a little bit. But we need to go a little deeper and from different perspectives to get a proper understanding of the complexities of this tradition. I think it might serve us well to, as we often do, do this in a chronological order.

So, with that said, what is the origin or early development of Zoroastrianism? Well, at the core of Zoroastrian ritual and belief are a set of writings, a group of poems or songs called the Gathas. This, for all intents and purposes, is considered the oldest source and beginning of Zoroastrianism in some way. The Gathas serve as the basis for much of the core teachings of the religion and as an important part of ritual and practical life for Zoroastrians to this day. The Gathas are ascribed to an ancient figure called Zarathustra, sometimes referred to in Greek as Zoroaster, a poet and sage who was considered the original founder, quote, of Zoroastrianism. Depending on who you ask, Zarathustra is described as a prophet, a poet, sage, a philosopher, or perhaps all of the above. But all agree that if he is a historical person, he is indeed a core figure for the formation and origins of the religion.

Scholars, both within and outside the Zoroastrian tradition, greatly disagree on dating the life of Zarathustra and the Gathas. Some placing him at a very early date, around the middle of the second millennium BC, while others place his life in the middle of the first millennium BC, so around the year 500 BC or so, at the very early days of the Achaemenid Empire. Based on the linguistic features of the Gathas themselves, the majority of scholars today, I would say, and I do tend to agree with them, favors the earlier date, thus placing the life of Zarathustra sometime around the year 1500 BC, give or take. This makes his poems or songs, the Gathas, roughly contemporary with the composition of the Rigveda in Vedic culture in India, making it some of the oldest religious and philosophical literature in the history of the world. And indeed, this connection is important in other ways too, because the context of early Zoroastrianism is very much connected to the Vedic culture in India, the Indo-Aryan language group that migrated into Northern India, which became central to the formation of, quote unquote, Hinduism or the Vedic culture. And the Proto-Iranians that migrated to the West share a common origin, both linguistically and culturally, you could say. And we can see this in the similarity of many terms and concepts shared between Zoroastrianism and Indic religion, such as words like Devas, Asura versus Ahura, and Soma, etc.

So, we should imagine Zarathustra growing up and living in a society not unlike that of the Vedic culture in India. And when we read the Gathas, for instance, I think it's much more fruitful to do that through this particular lens, rather than reading it through more of an Abrahamic lens that I think a lot of people tend to do today. While we aren't sure about much of Zarathustra's life at all, all we have to go on are the many later legends, as well as clues in the Gathas themselves. It's widely argued that he was from what is today Northeastern Iran. The Gathas are composed in a language referred to as Old Avestan, and the poems use imagery and metaphors that point to a society of mobile pastoralism, as there are many references to horses and livestock, including the important notion of the so-called soul of the cow as some kind of cosmic concept. The soul of the cow in the Gathas represents the soul of the world in some way, and Zarathustra talks about the shepherd as an ideal person that takes care of the livestock. And in a similar way, the good person is someone that takes care of the soul of the cow, that is nature itself and the world at large, as a shepherd would take care of his animals. So, Zarathustra figured in a mobile pastoral society with a religious tradition that was probably strongly related to the Vedic one, with a heavy focus on ritual and probably things like sacrifices and offerings, and an essentially polytheistic theology with many different gods or deities. Indeed, it seems that this culture shared certain gods with its neighbors in India, such as Indra and Vayu, among others. Although it's also interesting to consider that the terms for the gods are sort of reversed. So, the good gods in India, in the Indian context, are referred to as the Devas, whereas the Asuras are the bad gods. In the Iranian context, it's it's reversed. So, here the Ahuras are the good gods, whereas the Daevas, as we will see, are a term that refers to evil spirits or evil gods. So, in that way, they're reversed, but we can see still that this religious tradition was shared. They they share a common ancestry, a common origin, and are very much like each other.

Later legends about Zarathustra tell of how he was a priest of this older religion, thus he would have been in charge of performing rites and other related things. But as he traveled around the region, he was struck by the violence and unethical behavior of many of the people. Something was wrong, but he wasn't quite sure what it was or how to solve it. This is one of the key themes that we find in the Gathas when we read these texts attributed to Zarathustra, that is very much concerned with with with ethics and pointing out how leaders and people around the world, what was his world, which was, you know, Iran at that time, uh, were sort of corrupted and evil and egotistical, you know, violent, all these things. This is a very common theme in these texts. But then something very dramatic happened, which would change his life and, if it is a historical event, changed the course of the world.

[Music]

It is said that during a spring festival, where he might have been working in his function as priest, he went down to the river to fetch some water. But as he was stepping out of the water, he suddenly had an intense vision of light. Then a shining being, referred to as Vohu Manah, good purpose, spoke to him. Zarathustra was given a kind of revelation, with the truths about reality and its workings was revealed to him, just as they are. And at the center of this revelation was a quite radical concept. Rather than the more polytheistic religion that he was taught in, it was revealed to him that there is only one creative, absolute force and source in reality called Ahura Mazda. Ahura Mazda is often translated as the wise Lord or the Lord of wisdom, and represents one of the key concepts in Zoroastrianism. Magically, later, Ahura Mazda is often seen as somewhat equivalent to the monotheistic God, the sole creator and sustainer of the world. But it isn't entirely clear just how it should be conceived in these earliest sources. Some translators and scholars today, favoring a more, quote unquote, philosophical interpretation of the Gathas and the teachings of Zarathustra, such as Ashk Dahlén, who recently published a translation of the Gathas into Swedish, choose to translate Ahura Mazda as something like "the High Wisdom," thus giving it a more abstract, philosophical ring compared to the more theological interpretations of Ahura Mazda as a God in the more conventional sense that seem to have become the norm later on.

Whether or not this story about Zarathustra's revelation on the riverbank is historically true or not, it serves as a popular legend about his life that also legitimizes his role as a kind of enlightened sage. But scholars aren't sure of just how to categorize Zarathustra. It used to be popular to refer to him as a prophet, thus the prophet of Zoroastrianism, similar to, um, Muhammad being the prophet and founder of Islam. Indeed, many Muslim scholars in history also chose to look at Zarathustra precisely as one of the many prophets sent by God mentioned in the Quran, also thus legitimizing placing these Zoroastrians under the category of the People of the Book. And it's still popular today to talk about him in such a way. But this might be a bit anachronistic, in a way, reading his life through an Abrahamic lens, so to say. Perhaps he can better be compared to the Rishis or sages of ancient India that originated the Vedas. Some, as we saw, also choose to categorize him as a philosopher, and this can have a significant impact on how we read the Gathas. I think what we can be most safe in claiming is that he was a poet or a singer, maybe. After all, the one direct, probably direct source that we have of him is the Gathas themselves, a collection of poems, songs. So, clearly, he was some kind of sage poet, blessed with unique insight into the workings of reality and the universe.

There is a term in Old Avestan which is used self-referentially in the Gathas themselves called a "mantran." This means something like "a person that uses words like poetry to convey deep existential truth with clarity." I think this, if anything, is perhaps what we can most surely ascribe to Zarathustra, not least because it is a term that he seemingly uses for himself too. The insight that Zarathustra was given about reality, whether through the famous story at the riverbank or not, is what he expresses in the Gathas, and which serves as some of the most key aspects of Zoroastrian thought and belief. The Gathas also serve as the core of the wider corpus of Zoroastrian sacred scriptures known as the Avesta, which, aside from the Gathas, include many other texts such as the Yashts, or hymns to divine powers, the Vendidad, the Visperad, among many other texts. And these texts are all written in a language group or groups known as Old Avestan, which is from roughly 1500 to 1000 BC, and Young Avestan, which is from 1000 BC to around 500 BC. In general, the Zoroastrian scriptures are very varied, and new ones appeared as late as the Islamic period, around the 8th to 9th centuries AD. But the Avesta, the oldest and most important collection of sacred scriptures, which includes the Gathas, make up what we could consider the the the core of the tradition. And it was only transmitted orally until the first few centuries AD. While we should remember that Zoroastrianism, just like any religion, is a tradition that changed and evolved over the centuries and millennia, so the religion practiced by Darius the Achaemenid emperor, uh, was quite different in many ways from the religion, uh, practiced by the Sasanian Empire a few centuries later. Still, if we look at these oldest sources in these texts, we might be able to reconstruct a kind of a core, uh, set of teachings and characteristics that are true for the most part, at least across the board, uh, for most of Zoroastrian history.

So, with this in mind, what can we say about the teachings of Zoroastrianism? I think we can begin by looking at the scriptures themselves. In fact, the very opening of the first Gatha, or song, ascribed to Zarathustra, where he says, "In reverence for him, with hands outstretched, at first I entreat you all, O Ahura Mazda, for the actions of support of the spirit holy through truth, or Asha, through whom you may gratify the intellect of good thought and the soul of the cow. I approach you with good thought, thought, O Mazda Ahura, so that you may grant me the blessings of the two existences, the material and that of thought, the blessings emanating from truth, with which you can put your supporters in comfort. I extol you as ever before, O truth, Asha, and good thought, Vohu Manah, and Mazda Ahura, for all of whom right-mindedness increases, also unfading power. May you come to my cause for support, inspired by good thoughts, and being a witness for Mazda Ahura, I have mind, one soul for his commendation by my song, as well as the rewards for his actions, for as long as I can and am able. I shall look out in my search for truth."

Already in this opening of the Gathas, recited as a key part of the Zoroastrian liturgy or Yasna, we already have some clues to the key teachings of the religion. First of all, there is only one creative force or God in reality, Ahura Mazda, the Lord of wisdom, who is called upon constantly in the text. He's the source of all good, all light, all creation, and wisdom. This is why many have referred to Zoroastrianism as essentially monotheistic, or even the first monotheistic religion in the world. But things are also a lot more complicated than that, as we will see. Secondly, what lies at the very core of these Zoroastrian scriptures and teachings is essentially an ethical message. This is the key message that is hammered home again and again: humans have free will, and there is a very clear idea of right and wrong, of good and evil. Indeed, inherent in this ethical message is a very strong dualism. This is not the mind-body dualism of Descartes, or the horizontal dualism of certain strands of Platonism or say Christianity, but rather a vertical dualism. All of created reality is divided into truth and falsehood, into right and wrong, light and darkness. Both of the two worlds mentioned in the quote above, that of material and that of thought, are included in this dualism. So, it's not a matter versus spirit situation, as in Christianity, for example.

On the one side, there is Asha, a concept meaning truth, or that which is right, real, or things like order and harmony. This can be compared to the Vedic idea of Rta, or perhaps even Ma'at in ancient Egyptian religion. The creation of Ahura Mazda is essentially good, beautiful, and harmonious. It is perfect because Ahura Mazda himself is perfect and good. Asha, or truth, is the principle of that goodness and order in the world, the way things are supposed to be according to the wisdom of Ahura Mazda. But on the other side of the coin, there is also Druj, which means the lie or deception. This is the very opposite of Asha, and it is conceived, at least in later Zoroastrianism, as a force that has been introduced to the perfect creation of Ahura Mazda from the outside, so to say. And the human being, and all of creation, is caught in this place that contains both good, the domain of Ahura Mazda and Asha, and evil, that of Druj and its forces. So, our world of creation contains both good and evil, at least in this current state. These forces or concepts are often also personified in different ways, especially as we get into the Younger Avesta and later Zoroastrian writings.

In the Gathas themselves, it isn't always entirely clear how we should think of these concepts. Some readings by scholars, such as John Kelly and the aforementioned Ashk Dahlén, see much of these things as simply, uh, psychological and internal concepts and workings within the human person. The creation of Ahura Mazda is essentially good in its totality, but within the human soul, there exist inclinations in two directions. On the one hand, there is Spenta Mainyu, often translated as "beneficent inspiration" or "beneficent spirit," which leads you to work for the benefit of Asha and goodness, and almost as a kind of faculty of Ahura Mazda. And on the other hand, there is Angra Mainyu, the destructive spirit that inclines to evil, deception, and destruction. However, this oldest text should be interpreted. Later Zoroastrian writings and teachings have a more cosmological perspective on this dualism. Ahura Mazda is the one Creator God of the cosmos, whose creation is perfect and good, and Angra Mainyu becomes a kind of personified spirit himself, as the opposite of Ahura Mazda, the force in reality that has infiltrated the perfect creation of Ahura Mazda to spread Druj, lies, and deception, things like violence, death, and decay. So, the world we live in today is one in which both of these forces, Asha and Druj, represented to some degree by Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu respectively, are at work simultaneously. And it is our work, our job as human beings, to choose the path of Asha, of truth and order, and to dispel the darkness of Druj from the world.

In the Gathas, Zarathustra talks a lot about the shepherd as a kind of ideal person, one who takes care of the livestock and of nature, as the image of the person who follows the path of Asha. This he compares to people who instead are misled by the Daevas, the evil gods or or deities, to seek power, money, or destroy the world in different ways through violence. So, you see what I mean when I say that the Zoroastrian message is an essentially ethical one. This fight between good and evil, between truth and deception, Asha and Druj, is the very core of the religion and the Avestan scriptures. And the human being promotes Asha partly through performing these Zoroastrian rituals, of course, such as the Yasna liturgy or the daily prayers, etc. But on a more personal, practical level, this is done by adhering to the main, you could say, the main mantra or instruction that people are to follow: "Humata, Hukhta, Hvarshta," which means good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. This is a pretty neat and simple instruction, but this also, of course, requires knowing what makes up good deeds, for instance, by being able to identify which aspects of the world are part of the good creation of Ahura Mazda and which are the result of Angra Mainyu. So, there are certain things in the world that are seen as pure and sacred, such as fire and running water, that must not be defiled in any way. At the same time, there are certain things in the world, like some animals, seen as impure or evil. This includes snakes and frogs and things like this, and it is sort of, um, encouraged that you are supposed to kill these animals of evil to promote Asha in the world.

The goal of the Zoroastrian is thus to live his or her life in accordance with Asha, or truth, to devote themselves to Ahura Mazda, the Lord of wisdom, or high wisdom, and to worship Him and the goodness that He represents in thought, speech, and action. The person who has accomplished this, who adheres to Asha in their life, is known as an Ashavan, thus representing this ultimate goal of the human being. This stands in contrast to the Dregvant, the follower of Druj, who spreads evil and falsehood in the world. In the Gathas, Zarathustra says, "I replied, firstly, I am Zarathustra, a veritable opponent of the evildoer, but a powerful friend of the good am I. So long as I can sing my songs of praise for thee, O Mazda, so long shall I strive to enlighten and awaken all to the realization of thy eternal dominion."

And this also figures into the larger cosmogonical and eschatological picture as well, especially if we take into account later Zoroastrian writings too, such as the important and fascinating Vendidad. This is a Young Avestan text from, well, again, from around 1100 to 500 BC. Here, there's a clear account of sacred history that is presented. It begins with the creation of the world by Ahura Mazda as a perfect creation. This, uh, wonderful situation lasts for a while, often sometimes considered 6,000 years, before the evil spirit Angra Mainyu sort of infiltrates or infects this perfect world, spreading Druj and creating the situation that we have now, a world of both good and evil. This fight between good and evil continues, but reaches a kind of turning point with the life and, you could say, mission of Zarathustra himself, and the establishment of Zoroastrian rituals and worldview that sort of starts the process of Asha's victory over Druj, the gradual victory of light over darkness. In the end, and connected with the arrival of a savior figure called the Saoshyant, the world will be revitalized at last, an event or concept called Frashokereti. This word is connected, as you can probably hear, with the English word "fresh," and we can kind of imagine it as the world becoming fresh again, the darkness of Angra Mainyu and Druj finally being dispelled, and the creation of Ahura Mazda once again being able to be what it was from the beginning: a perfect world of harmony and order.

At this juncture, the Zoroastrian scriptures also imagine, because of its strong ethical nature, of course, that the individual human being will also face a kind of retribution here after the world is redeemed. Every human being will be judged based on their actions in life. This was quite unique at this time, the idea that our ethical actions affect our afterlife directly, rather than things like status or other features that were more common in other traditions. So, including the ancient Iranian religion, the Ashavan, the person who has followed and promoted Asha in their life, will live a pleasant life in the company of Ahura Mazda in this perfect world. Whereas the Dregvant, who promoted deception and evil in the world, he will be punished and face a very unpleasant afterlife in a place called the House of Lies. It is taught that at this point, the dead person will be forced to walk across a bridge. On the other side is paradise, for all intents and purposes. But on the bottom, below the bridge, is the House of Lies, what can essentially be considered hell. For the Ashavan, or righteous person, this bridge will be very wide and easy to cross. But for a, quote unquote, bad person, the bridge will contract to be as thin as the edge of a blade, making it almost impossible to cross and causing the person to basically inevitably fall down into eternal punishment. Zarathustra says, "The Kavi priests and the Kavis, so worldly leaders, have tyrannized over humanity. Their evil actions are destructive of life. Verily, the conscience of such a one shall torment his soul. And thus, when they shall come to the bridge of judgment, their abode for endless ages shall be in the House of the Lie."

For those of you that are familiar with the Abrahamic faiths, a lot of this will, of course, feel right at home, because these features are basically identical to certain eschatological beliefs in religions like, particularly in, in Islam and Christianity. And we'll return to these similarities and possible connections later on in the episode.

Two, at this point, I, I think it is also worthwhile to discuss more in detail the theology at play here, because it can be a little complicated. Like we said, Zoroastrianism is often called the first monotheistic religion in the world, and this isn't without reason. Indeed, as we saw, the Gathas and Avestan scriptures consider Ahura Mazda to be the one creator of the world. As far as we consider a God with a capital G, Ahura Mazda is it, and no one compares with him. But things aren't really this simple and neat, especially if we try to look at it and define monotheism through the lens of the Abrahamic religions and the kind of monotheism that we find in, say, Judaism or Islam.

First of all, we have already been introduced to the concept of Angra Mainyu, the evil spirit that stands on the, you could say, the opposite end of Ahura Mazda, as a kind of spirit of darkness and evil. Doesn't this kind of paint the picture of two gods with opposing qualities? The relationship between Angra Mainyu and Ahura Mazda changed according to different theologies and developments across the centuries and millennia, and sometimes they do indeed seem to be equal in some way, such as with the so-called Zurvanite movement during the Sasanian Empire, when the two basically became seen as two sons of an even higher divine figure called Zurvan, or time. On the other hand, in the Gathas themselves, one could interpret it in a very different way, where Ahura Mazda is the one God, and Angra Mainyu is only a personification of some other force that exists in creation, either ontologically or simply in the human psyche.

Secondly, and this is even more confusing to some, while Ahura Mazda is the one creator God and the highest Lord in reality, on his side, we also find other divine forces or concepts such as the Amesha Spentas and the Yazatas. The Amesha Spentas, the Holy Immortals, is a concept that we find already in the Gathas themselves, even though this term isn't used there. And here they appear as certain, you could say, attributes or manifestations, perhaps to use philosophical language. You see them as emanations of Ahura Mazda that are manifested in the world and in human actions in different ways. The scholar Jenny Rose says, "The Gathas introduced the notion that the Ashavan should further certain qualities besides Asha that are associated with promoting the best existence. This leads to the consideration that these may be separate entities which, along with other abstract forces found in the Gathas, form part of a complex web of interrelationships with Ahura Mazda." So, these Amesha Spentas are qualities of Ahura Mazda that should be embodied by the person as part of that goodness and wisdom that make up God and His creation. In the Gathas, there is no set number for the Amesha Spentas, but in later writings, they're defined as seven. Asha, or truth, is one of them, as is Spenta Mainyu, which we mentioned earlier. This is translated as "beneficent inspiration" or "beneficent spirit." There is Vohu Manah, "good thought" or "good purpose." There is Asha Vahishta, "holy devotion" or "love." There is Harvatat, "wholeness" or "perfection," and Ameretat, or "immortality." While in the Gathas themselves, these can be read as emanations or aspects of Ahura Mazda in some way, in later periods, they often became seen as figures or spirits in themselves. Spenta Mainyu was usually identified outright with Ahura Mazda himself, whereas the rest were often individual divine entities that were also often the object of worship in different ways. Each of them would also be associated with certain aspects of the natural world or other abstract concepts. So that, um, Asha, for instance, was associated with fire, and devotion to this Amesha Spenta Asha was through fire, so to say. This can be a pretty complicated idea and definitely complicates the theology, especially if we're looking for a more strict monotheism in the Abrahamic sense.

And furthermore, these Amesha Spentas, and even Ahura Mazda himself, was also seen as part of a wider group of beings called the Yazatas, which literally means "those worthy of worship." The Yazatas are divine beings that can be worshiped, and also include other popular divine entities such as Mithra and Anahita, among others. So, what's going on here? If there are multiple gods that are worshiped, what role does Ahura Mazda actually play, and can we then actually call this a monotheism? Well, this is pretty complicated, as you can see. I'm usually careful to use terms like monotheism because it can become quite anachronistic to use it in this way and thus project certain expectations from a completely different context onto something that really doesn't fit. For sure, the Yazatas were the object of worship for Zoroastrians throughout history, but not everyone wants to call them gods necessarily. Some have referred to them as something akin to angels in the Abrahamic situation. Indeed, the term Yazata seems to be used for a wide array of different things, such as, um, everything from healing plants to Fravashi, to this, a concept that we'll return to later. So, Yazatas can mean a broader category of things that are worthy of worship, which can include, um, natural things, but also the Amesha Spentas, and it can also sometimes even include Ahura Mazda himself, although he is usually sort of considered as above or transcendent of all these other categories. Some might perhaps be tempted to use a term like henotheism to describe it, where, um, multiple gods are recognized as existing, but only one God being exalted and worshiped as the sort of highest God in existence. But again, I think this is a sort of an anachronistic way of looking at it. It's trying to to fit something into to our preconceived categories and boxes, whereas this is, it's more complicated than that, right? This is a completely different, um, way of of looking at the relationship between these different divine beings and how the cosmos functions. In that way, I think, uh, while it can be helpful to use these terms and to discuss them like we are now, monotheism or henotheism or whatever you want to have it, um, I think at the end of the day, the best way to do this is simply to look at it for what it is, right? We look at this as a unique case in itself. The Zoroastrian theology is unique. Right? They have this high God, this, um, somewhat monotheistic idea, right, that is the one God, but there are other divine beings too. And it's not like Ahura Mazda is one among the same category of divine beings and that he is just exalted above the others, as in other henotheism. Perhaps, um, Ahura Mazda seems to be in a sort of a category of his own, completely. He is, he is God with a capital G, whereas the others are divine beings, maybe not even gods, some many people not even want to call them gods, they call them angels or simply, uh, divine beings. Or, in the case of scholars, in in many textbooks, they will just use the the Avestan term Yazatas, which I think is pretty wise, right? Because it, it avoids many of these problems that we run into, uh, by using terms like gods or deities. Uh, so maybe we should do that too, simply call them for what they are, which is the Yazatas, and Ahura Mazda is his sort of own category. I don't know, it's, it's a complicated situation, but I think that's worth, um, keeping in mind all these aspects and things when we discuss this topic. Like I said, the Yazatas, including the Amesha Spentas, are an integral part of the religion since the earliest period and significantly nuances our understanding and reminds us not to oversimplify based on our preconceived categories. It should be pointed out also that some have argued that the idea of the Yazatas and the Amesha Spentas, at least as separate entities, is a later invention of the religion that is not present in the Gathas themselves. But that, of course, isn't for us to decide here. What we should remember is that the teachings of the religion, including this topic, changed and evolved over time, making it hard to pin it down into a set doctrine, so to say, at least until much later in history.

So, in summary, Zoroastrianism, at least in the Avestan scriptures, teaches that there is a cosmic drama. Created reality is a vertical dualism, divided between the two forces. On the one hand, there is Asha, ruled over by the one good God, Ahura Mazda, and represented by his Amesha Spentas and the various Yazatas. And on the other hand, there is Druj, deception, ruled over by Angra Mainyu and represented by him and the other evil gods or spirits referred to as Daevas. The role of the human being is to worship Ahura Mazda and to become an Ashavan, one who follows and spreads Asha through ritual action and adhering to the principles of good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. By doing so, we are gradually removing the stain of darkness and evil from the world until we reach Frashokereti, when the world will once again be perfect, and where human beings will be resurrected, judged based on their actions, and then spend the rest of eternity in either pain or pleasure. This, in essence, with some clarifications and additions from later institutionalized theology, can be seen as what Jenny Rose refers to as the Avestan worldview, which lies at the center of Zoroastrianism.

[Music]

Zarathustra, the probable author of the Gathas and the founder of Zoroastrianism, proved to be a very influential figure in the history of religion and philosophy, perhaps one of the most significant in all of history. But during his lifetime, this wasn't necessarily the case at all. We find references in the Gathas to the idea that he was shunned and rejected by people of Eastern Iran as he traveled around. But he did find one supporter in the ruler Vistaspa and his queen Huta, who became his patrons and seem to have adapted his religious reform. Whatever was the case, when other historical records start showing up around a millennium later after Zarathustra lived, it becomes clear that his writings and teachings had become very widespread across greater Iran. While we should be careful to think about it as a unified, quote unquote, religion as we think of it today, it's clear that some form of developing Zoroastrianism was being practiced by a large swath of the Iranian population and would become central to the great Persian or Iranian Empires, such as the Achaemenids, the Parthians, and the Sasanians.

So, to move on chronologically, then, let's talk about the famous Persian Empire. Did the Achaemenids practice Zoroastrianism? Well, the short answer is yes. We have to remember, and I hammer this down so much because it is important to remember, that Zoroastrianism was always evolving and changing. And at this relatively early stage, we can't think of Zoroastrianism as an institutionalized religion with clearly delineated doctrines and borders. But when we look at the sources, both internal ones, such as documents or rock inscriptions, as well as outside sources, such as from the Greeks, we can clearly see that the Achaemenid rulers adhered to a version of that Avestan worldview that we mentioned earlier. Many names of royals and officials carry names related to Zoroastrian scriptures and ideas, and the emperors like Darius saw themselves as playing an important role in this cosmic drama of representing the wisdom and and authority of Ahura Mazda and Asha on Earth against its enemies. In the inscription at Behistun, Darius I makes clear his devotion to the God and what this means: "By the grace of Ahura Mazda am I King. Ahura Mazda has granted me the kingdom." "A great God is Ahura Mazda, who created this excellent thing which is seen, who created happiness for man, who set wisdom and capability down upon King Darius. King Darius says: By the grace of Ahura Mazda, I am of such a sort. I am a friend of the right, not of the wrong. I am not a friend. It is not my wish that the weak should have harm done him by the strong, nor is it my wish that the strong should have harm done him by the weak. The right that is my desire. To the man who is a follower of the lie, I am no friend." In other words, he's clearly placing himself within the Avestan worldview and ethical framework. And this can be said to be true generally for the Achaemenids. In fact, we see in the Achaemenid period a few of the most prominent features of Zoroastrianism for the first time.

So, what did Zoroastrianism actually look like on the ground during this period? Well, if you're looking for a neat and simple to grasp answer, you won't find it here. In general, it seems that Zoroastrian worship, for the most part, took place outside rather than in temples or other dedicated buildings. Worship was, according to the Greek historian Herodotus, directed at certain natural elements such as fire, water, and wind, and rituals could be performed on mountaintops or other places in nature. As we saw, Ahura Mazda was still seen as the high God who creates and sustains the universe, but worship on the ground often focused on these other forces in the form of Amesha Spentas or Yazatas, the divine beings worthy of worship and who were associated with natural phenomena. As you probably know, one of the things most strongly associated with Zoroastrianism is a reverence for fire, and this starts to become visible for the first time here in the Achaemenid period, where fire, along with water, seems to have been a particularly strong focus of reverence. Fire, along with running water, was seen as pure and represented the light of Ahura Mazda and Asha, a pure expression of that good aspect of the world that we are all to aim for in our lives. Many, including later Muslim critics, have often called Zoroastrians fire-worshippers in a derogatory way, but this thus needs to be clarified and nuanced. The fire is turned to as a symbol, an expression of light, of goodness, and by extension of Ahura Mazda. While we don't find any examples of fire temples in this period, which would become so prominent in later periods, there are examples of sacred fires that were kept perpetually burning as an important part of ritual or worship in some way. Indeed, on rock carvings, one of the most prominent themes is often a three-part image of the king standing in front of a burning fire altar, and above both of them is the famous figure called the Fravashi, which we'll return to later. In other words, two of the most prominent and famous symbols of Zoroastrianism had thus emerged, and this seems to have pointed to a kind of three-part, uh, vision of authority in the world, right? The king represents Ahura Mazda in the world, his authority, and the sort of spreading of of Asha in the world. The fire also represents divinity and light and goodness and Asha in some way. And then the Fravashi above, uh, also has a very significant meaning in symbolism, again, which we'll return to later, because it's pretty complicated. Sometimes it's thought to represent Ahura Mazda himself, but this isn't entirely sure. Uh, but these, these three sort of symbols were very important at this time, and particularly the latter two, the fire and the Fravashi, have remained sort of key symbols for the religion to this very day. We are pretty sure that fire served a ritual function already at this time, because there are mentions of something called "Atar-berez" or guardians of fire as some kind of important functionaries in the religion.

In general, it is also in the Achaemenid period that we also see the appearance of the main religious experts of Zoroastrianism, what we could call the, um, the Zoroastrian priests, which are called Magi. These Magi would become very famous across the ancient world, and among other things, they probably show up in the Gospel of Matthew as the three Magi or wise men that bring gifts to baby Jesus. It is also from the word Magi that we get terms like "magic," as these figures became associated outside of Iran with things like astrology and different kinds of, you know, what we would refer to as magic, even if this wasn't always necessarily an accurate association. But the appearance of the Magi tells us some important things. We mentioned that at least in the early Achaemenid period, worship took place outside and was directed at natural forces and the Yazatas that were associated with them. Well, these Yazatas, or divine beings, really was a key aspect of religious practice in this period. Fire and water were important points of reverence, and these forces were associated with particular divine beings. And the two most popular in this period were Mithra and Anahita. Mithra was associated with the sun, and thus to some degree with fire, even though fire often had symbolized something even higher than any of the individual Yazatas, but still, Mithra was important. And Anahita was a Yazata that was primarily associated with water. The cult of these two divine figures, especially in the later Achaemenid period, became very prominent, and there even started appearing temples dedicated to them, where the Magi would work as functionaries in these temples.

The Persians had been famous from outside as having a religion that didn't have any images. Ahura Mazda was never depicted unless the Fravashi was supposed to symbolize him, and other forces were often rather associated, as we said, with natural forces or abstract concepts rather than images or or statues and things like this. But in this later period of the Achaemenid Empire, um, perhaps because of influence from the outside, such as from Greece or Babylon, maybe we do start to see images of the Yazatas in these temples too. Not to mention the fact that when the Persian Emperors conquered new territories, such as Egypt, they sometimes adopted worship of the local gods in these regions too. Was this a political move? For sure. But it also shows that, quote unquote, Zoroastrianism in this period was quite complicated and chaotic, and it didn't really have the defined borders that it would gain much later in history. Even, you know, even if the rulers and population of Iran generally held to the so-called Avestan worldview and some of the basics of the Avestan teachings, this is still true to some degree.

So, then, did the Achaemenids practice Zoroastrianism? Again, the short answer is yes, but as I've hopefully shown, there's a significant amount of nuance and complexity to be added to that answer if we want to understand the situation more properly. But with that said, this is, of course, a very important period for the wider development of Zoroastrianism. However, the Yazatas, or Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu, were supposed to be interpreted in the Gathas and the older texts. At this point, it becomes pretty clear that they are viewed as akin to what we could call gods or spirits in a theological sense, and by the time it appears that the very strong dualistic worldview had been firmly established, as we can see from outside sources writing about the religion of the Persians, even Aristotle himself describes.

The Zoroastrian dualistic doctrines, according to Diogenes Laërtius in *The Lives of the Philosophers*, he says: "Aristotle, in the first book of his work on philosophy, says that the Magi are more ancient than the Chaldeans, and that they have two principles, a good spirit and an evil spirit. The former is called Zeus and Oromasdes; the latter Hades and Arimanius."

Zoroastrianism continued to play a role even after the fall of the Achaemenids to Alexander the Great and during the later Parthian Empire, which lasted between 247 BC to around 224 AD. During the later Sasanian Empire, this period, the Parthians, was often seen as one where the practice and devotion of Zoroastrianism was relatively abandoned, or that it stagnated until the Sasanians sort of revived it again and brought it back to its former glory. But looking at the historical record, this doesn't seem entirely true.

The Parthian period did see a lot of contact with cultures outside Iran, not least the Hellenic world as well as India. Religious practice, including Zoroastrianism, was impacted by this environment in different ways. For example, the increased contact with religious traditions from Greece and, you know, things like Buddhism in India, might be one of the reasons that we seem to see an increase in things like, uh, images and icons of the Yazatas as a focus of worship. Both the Greeks and the Indians loved to depict their deities with images of different sorts, whereas the earlier Zoroastrian practice had been without images and a focus on worshiping outside. And even though, as we saw, we do seem to find a few examples of images in the, uh, in the later Achaemenid period, this seems to flourish even more in the Parthian age, very significantly.

It is also during the Parthian period that we see the emergence of fire temples, *atash*, sometimes large complexes dedicated to fire and Magi, or priests, that would attend to the fire as well as make offerings to it, including animal sacrifice during the very important *Yasna* liturgy. So, in the Parthian period, aside from individual practices, the religious cult was focused on two kinds of sacred buildings: the fire temples and the individual temples dedicated to Yazatas, which would often include images, as we saw.

We should also mention that during the Parthian period, an attempt seems to have been made to write down and preserve the old scriptures of the Avesta, which had been scattered and the, uh, oral tradition taking a hit with the invasion of Alexander. Of course, this collection and writing down of scripture and its exegesis is attributed to the reign of Vologases I, who lived between, who ruled between 51-78 AD. But this process of canonizing Zoroastrian scriptures and creating something close to an "orthodoxy," clearly defining the religion and its principles, really started most properly to happen under the Sasanians, who ruled Iran between around 224 to 652 AD.

It was during the Sasanian dynasty that Zoroastrianism reached the peak of its power and prestige, in a way, because it is here that the religious experts and kings put a huge emphasis on establishing a strong Zoroastrian religion that can stand up against its rivals in the region and serve as a solid foundation for the empire. To fully grasp what is happening here, we need to consider the context. By the time these Sasanians came to power, some significant things had happened in the Middle East which shaped its religious and philosophical landscape, not least of course, the birth and increasing popularity of religions like Christianity and Manichaeism, religions that are heavily scriptural in nature and with a very clear, delimited set of doctrines and practices and orthodoxy based on those scriptures. Although this is relative, of course, since, you know, Christianity at this time was also incredibly diverse with many different schools and with different scriptures and interpretations of scriptures. But in general, um, the Zoroastrians and the Sasanians were faced with an enemy and with other religions that were very heavily scriptural and with a very sort of clear, again, relatively orthodoxy and beliefs based on those scriptures. And especially after the events of the 4th century, with Christianity suddenly being the state religion of the Roman Empire, who of course were the Sasanian's perhaps foremost geopolitical enemy, this of course had a major impact on the Zoroastrian self-image, being challenged intellectually by these scriptural religions. Zoroastrians realized that they needed to clearly establish a set canon of scripture and to collect those scriptures in writing, which they did.

The religious experts and priests of the religion, the Magi, were also given an increasingly high status at this time. In this period, the high-ranking religious clergy were often known as *Mowbeds*. The fire temples became wealthy institutions, and the religious clergy were very close to the king and his court, thus playing a role in politics too. And this can be compared to the increasingly important role of bishops in the Roman Empire. Some of the highest-ranking people of the clergy, the high priest or *Mowbedan Mowbed*, the priest of priests, became famous in their own right as very powerful men with significant power, such as Kirdir and Adur-Narseh.

Connected to all of this, there was also a concerted effort to more clearly delineate what the Zoroastrian orthodoxy was. As we have seen, Zoroastrianism, historically, while retaining some basic Avestan features at their core, could be quite varied in different ways. But here, in this period, we see a strong conscious effort of getting rid of heterodoxy and perceived heresy. For instance, the Sasanians authorized what basically amounts to a kind of iconoclasm. All images of the Yazatas that were found in temples around the region were destroyed and instead were replaced by fire altars. So, the temples to the Yazatas were kept intact, but the images themselves were replaced by fires. Fire and fire temples became the main center and focus of worship to the Sasanians, with the symbolic function of the fire we talked about before being kept in mind, of course.

Similarly, there had appeared at this time certain, um, interpretations of Zoroastrian doctrine that were deemed heretical and were thus also counteracted. This includes what is known as Zurvanism, where the concept of Zurvan, or time, was seen as the highest principle in reality, Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu in this system being two equal beings being born from Zurvan, as sort of sons of Zurvan. There was also Mazdaism, which some have compared to a kind of quasi-communist social movement within the religion. Now, both of these movements, Zurvanism and Mazdaism, uh, are so fascinating, they probably deserve episodes of their own where you can focus more particularly on them. I have, uh, I have hopes to do those episodes in the future. But in any case, uh, there were clear, um, sort of attempts, clear, uh, efforts at this time to get rid of all these, what was seen as heretical cults, heretical interpretations of the religion, and thereby, through getting rid of these heterodox views, establish a sort of unified, true Zoroastrianism.

And aside from the collecting and canonization of the sacred Avestan scripture, this was also done through new original texts and scriptures that clarify the doctrines and interpretations of Zoroastrianism in sort of according to this, uh, orthodoxy, so to say. These new scriptures were all written in the language known as Middle Persian. So, this is a further development of the old language. So, um, probably it'll probably be good to, to put up on the screen a kind of, um, chronology of, of language. So, the Persian language is divided into these different periods. We have Old Avestan, which is the oldest, again, we said this is between maybe 1500 to 1000 BC. This is the very earliest Zoroastrian scriptures, like, like the Gathas, for instance, are written in this language. Then we have Young Avestan, so from 1000 to 500 BC, uh, also some of the most significant scriptures, the Avestan scripture are in this period and written in this evolution of the language. Then from, you know, 500, from the Achaemenid period, we have what is known as Old Persian, again, a further development of this language, uh, which is then replaced in, in this period in the Sasanian period, what is known as Middle Persian, uh, for the sort of Sasanian period. And then from, you know, usually a good dividing point here is *Shahnameh*, which was written, I think, in the 11th century. That's the start of New Persian, which is basically the language that is still spoken, you know, the official Persian in, in Iran today, right? It comes. So that is the chronology of the different languages.

At this point, we're talking about new scriptures written during the Sasanian Empire, which would have been written in Middle Persian. This includes the very important works called the *Bundahishn* and the *Denkard*. Although at least part of these books may originate in the early Islamic period, much of the details and interpretations that we know about cosmology and the great, um, cosmic drama that we talked about earlier is greatly dependent on these Middle Persian texts, in particular, thus serving as key sources for Zoroastrian doctrine, despite being such late compositions. In other words, even though the religion had technically existed for thousands of years before this, it is in this period that it becomes more clearly, uh, defined, codified, and institutionalized, probably as a classic example of defining oneself in opposition to the other. Because at this time, again, we see the emergence and prominence of many of these other religions, both inside and outside Iran, such as Christianity, uh, often also in the case of Christianity, as the very religion of the political enemy. And so there is an effort to sort of define more clearly what Zoroastrianism is supposed to be in opposition to the other, right, these other movements and and religions.

And indeed, while the level of tolerance varied from ruler to ruler, this is also a period when we often see the oppression of religious minorities such as Christians, Buddhists, and Hindus on the part of the Zoroastrian clergy and royalty. Critique was aimed at these other religions as "deaf, blind, and deceitful by the *Daevas* or Ahriman or Angra Mainyu," and we see cases where the temples and idols of other religious groups, such as Buddhists, Hindus, and others, were destroyed. For example, the famous high priest Kirdir, that we mentioned earlier, says in an inscription that: "While the *Daevas* were punished and rebuked, and the teachings of Ahriman and the *Daevas* departed from the empire and were abandoned, and Jews, Shamans, Brahmins, Nazarenes, Christians, Makaks, and Zandiks in the empire were smitten, and destruction of idols and scattering of the stores of the *Daevas* and God's seats and nests were abandoned. And in kingdom after kingdom and place after place, many divine services in magnificence and many *Vahram* fires were established, and many Magi became happy and prosperous, and many fires in Magi were imperially installed."

But we should, of course, remember that this attitude wasn't true across the board. Many rulers of the Sasanian Empire were quite tolerant of different groups living in their realms too. And looking more broadly, the Persian rulers, especially those of the Achaemenid Dynasty, such as Cyrus the Great, were generally known across the board as tolerant, merciful, and wise. So, we should see these things more as signs of the times rather than as an inherent aspect of the religion itself. Religions, as we know, are always what its practitioners make them out to be and thus change and evolve depending on how it is performed in different times and places, no one form being more true than any other, at least from a neutral academic standpoint.

Whatever the case, this dominance of Zoroastrianism was to become significantly altered with one of the most dramatic events of late antiquity or early Middle Ages, namely, of course, the Arab conquest and the advent of Islam.

It was with the sudden invasions of the Arab armies beginning in the 630s, which were very successful partly because of the weakened Sasanian army after long periods of war with the Byzantines, that the landscape of Greater Iran and Central Asia was to change forever. But this topic is often over-sensationalized too, and from both fronts. On the one hand, you have people saying that the Muslims completely decimated the Zoroastrian population, forcing them to convert or die, and destroying nearly all the fire temples and Zoroastrian buildings. On the other hand, you have people saying that the Arab conquests and Islamic takeover were completely without any such violence or destruction at all. And of course, neither of these two extremes are true.

Generally, after the conquest, the Zoroastrians were considered among the so-called "People of the Book," *Ahl al-Kitab*, and were obliged to pay the *jizya* tax, just like Christians, Jews, and other groups. This meant that they fell under the category of *dhimmi*, and they and their sacred places, including temples, were technically protected under Islamic law. In theory, as long as you paid the tax, you were exempt from military service and were equal to Muslims in society. Of course, in actual practice and reality, things were often quite different. But it is true that generally during the Umayyad Caliphate, the Zoroastrian population continued to flourish, and those that had been in power previously were kept in their positions, only now, of course, under the higher authority of the Caliph. Forced conversions didn't really happen, as the Umayyads had a policy of basically not wanting any non-Arabs to convert to Islam for various reasons.

But with the advent of the Abbasid dynasty, things started to change a little bit, especially from the rule of the Caliph al-Ma'mun and forward. More strict rules regarding the status of *dhimmi* were enforced in the empire. So, in this period, several fire temples were destroyed or converted to mosques, and many other such things. And even though the treatment of *dhimmi* waxed and waned and changed depending on who was in power and in what period, groups like Zoroastrians were to some degree always second-class citizens and had to withstand oppression from time to time. For these reasons, many people did start converting to Islam, making the Zoroastrian population dwindle more and more. But they did remain a significant presence for a long time, until at least the invasion of the Mongol armies, and this decimated much of the Zoroastrian world that remained at that time.

So, we should recognize that history is less black and white than we are sometimes taught. Zoroastrians remained in the region and were allowed to continue worshiping for the most part, but at the same time, there is no denying that there were periods of oppression and general second-class treatment of the Zoroastrians under many of the Islamic dynasties, so much so at least that many chose to either convert to Islam or to move elsewhere, basically most of them going to India and would then make up the Parsi community, which still stands today. But many Zoroastrians remained in Iran too and went through periods of persecution under the Sasanians, as well as more positive periods, such as during the late 19th to 20th centuries.

The Parsis in India are very significant. Um, they seem to have established themselves at a very early date. Um, some say that the, the Parsis sort of fled or immigrated from Iran sometime in the 8th or 9th centuries, and then they have established themselves as a very prominent Zoroastrian community all the way until today. Um, now, because they have, uh, been in India over all these centuries, they of course developed unique practices because of that region and because of that sort of, uh, at least in periods, lack of contact with their Zoroastrian kin in Iran. Uh, and, and today, actually, the Parsis are the majority community. It's the largest community of Zoroastrians in the world. Um, in some periods, they've also been seen, even by the Iranians, Zoroastrians, as a kind of the guardians of the true faith, and many priests from Iran sort of travel to India to learn from the Parsis because they had, uh, preserved many of these scriptures and traditions to a larger degree than had been possible in Iran. Right. So the Parsis are really, really important, and they kind of really deserve an episode of their own too. Uh, you know, I make my, my mention here about them more brief than it perhaps should be, but, you know, I, you know, keep in mind the Parsis are very important for this story, uh, as they have been the, the most, you know, in terms of population, the most significant, the most populous Zoroastrian community for, you know, centuries at this point.

So now that we have a basic understanding of the teachings and cosmology of, of Zoroastrianism, as well as a good understanding of the basic chronology, so where it originated and how it has developed over the different periods and empires and, and so on across history, now we can sort of start to dive into the actual practices of Zoroastrianism. So, what does Zoroastrianism look like to a regular person? How is this religion practiced on a day-to-day basis? Well, we should first look at one of the most long-lasting aspects of Zoroastrianism, which is the liturgy known as the *Yasna*. We mentioned this briefly in the beginning of the episode. This is a rather complex ritual liturgy performed by priests daily. This is always in the morning and can take several hours. The *Yasna* liturgy takes place in the fire temple and involves the preparation of the sacred drink known as *haoma*, and in ancient times, at least, also involved animal sacrifice. Today, this latter aspect is represented only by the clarified butter that is consumed with bread. The ritual also involves things like water and a focus on purity, much like, you know, the rest of Zoroastrianism.

But one of the main aspects of the liturgy involves reciting the hymns and scriptures that make up the *Yasna*. In terms of, you know, the *Yasna* as a collection of liturgical scriptures, so the *Yasna* is a ritual that is performed daily by the priest, but the, the word *Yasna* is also used for the, the recitations, the scriptures that are recited, uh, that are recited during this ritual. The *Yasna* in total consists of 72 sections with varying types of styles. It is, for example, in this *Yasna* collection that we find the five Gathas, those earliest writings attributed to Zarathustra, as well as other hymns, the, the *Yashts*, and, um, other early Zoroastrian compositions, many of which were probably preserved because of its use in this daily *Yasna* liturgy. So, we probably wouldn't have the, oh, I shouldn't say probably, but it's, it's possible that we wouldn't have the Gathas, that they would have survived if they weren't used in this very important ritual that is probably a key reason why they were preserved for so long. After all, these sections are recited with the actions associated with them. The liturgy ends with a "quote offering to the waters." This ritual has been very important for the Zoroastrian worldview. It is believed that this is one of the most effective and important ways that we humans strengthen *Asha* and help it become victorious over the darkness in the world.

As for regular lay people, Zoroastrianism involves daily prayers. To be precise, there are five daily prayers to be performed over the course of the day. The scholar Mary Boyce describes the prayer like this: "First, the believer prepares himself by washing the dust from face, hands, and feet. Then, untying the sacred cord, he stands with it held in both hands before him, upright in the presence of his Maker, his eyes on the symbol of righteousness, fire. Then he prays to Ahura Mazda, execrator flicking the ends of the cord contemptuously as he does so, and re-ties the cord while still praying. The whole observance takes only a few minutes, but regular repetition is a religious exercise of the highest value, constituting both a steady discipline and a regular avowal of the fundamental tenets of the faith."

As you can see, fire plays an important role, not just in the temple, but for the individual practitioners as well. And the cord that she mentioned is also a very important part of Zoroastrian practice. This is known as a *kusti*, and it's a cord that is worn around the waist by all invested or, um, initiated Zoroastrians. This initiation ceremony that Zoroastrians go through usually takes place for kids at age 15. The *kusti* is made of 72 threads, representing these 72 sections of the *Yasna* liturgy that I mentioned earlier.

Another key aspect of Zoroastrian practice is the seasonal festivals that take place annually. The main ones are seven in number. Six of them collectively being known as the *Gahambars*, and they are an excuse to... [pronunciation here may vary] Midspring, *Mid-Spring*, *Midsummer*, *Bringing in the Corn*, *Homecoming*, *Midwinter*, and *Hamaspathmaidyem*, which has unknown meaning. As you can tell, with the exception of the last one, all these festivals celebrate the different seasons and things like harvest. They also represent the six Amesha Spentas, aside from the seventh, Spenta Mainyu, which is identical to Ahura Mazda, as we said before. The sixth of the one mentioned, the last one, is not directly connected to the calendar year, but is rather a celebration of the so-called *Fravashis*.

So, finally, then, we have to tackle this topic: what is a *Fravashi*? Honestly, this is one of the more complex and difficult concepts in this religious system because it's kind of unlike anything we recognize from other religions. The *Fravashi* is like the higher self of a human being. So, before we are born, we sort of live with Ahura Mazda in his world as *Fravashis*, almost like divine beings ourselves. But when we are born, our soul becomes separated from the *Fravashi* and travels down to this world to gain experience and knowledge and to help strengthen *Asha*, for example. But we are still in contact, so to say, with our *Fravashi*, our higher self. And once we die, we will reunite with it. And the *Fravashis* became an important part of the religion, often being revered or even worshiped in themselves, particularly *Fravashis* of righteous or important people and ancestors of the past. And that perhaps most common symbol for Zoroastrianism, the winged being that we find in so many ancient inscriptions and thumbnails for YouTube videos, is at least, according to most, a *Fravashi*. Some have believed that it is a depiction of Ahura Mazda, but this seems unlikely, given the fact that Ahura Mazda is very rarely depicted in image. So, the jury seems to be out still on exactly what the symbol is, and it might have symbolized different things in different periods, for example. But mostly it is known as a *Fravashi*.

In any case, the seventh yearly festival stands apart from the others in some way. It doesn't represent a single Amesha Spenta, but represents fire itself, that force which, at least symbolically, lies at the core of all the Amesha Spentas, being their "pervasive life force." This festival of fire, which also often serves as the Iranian New Year, is known as *Nowruz*, literally meaning "new day." *Nowruz* takes place every year on the Spring Equinox and appears to have been, in a way, the most important and popular of the festivals. Indeed, even though Zoroastrianism hasn't been the majority religion in Iran for many centuries, the celebration of *Nowruz* is still very prevalent among its people, both in the region and in diaspora communities, and for different religious denominations in the region too. There are elaborate ways of practicing this festival, and it still serves as an important day for Iranian and Central Asian people around the world.

Lastly, another famous aspect of Zoroastrian practice that we should mention involves their burial customs. If you remember when we talked about fire, we said that this natural element is seen as pure and thus representing light and goodness, and there has been a huge emphasis on not polluting things like fire and water in any way. For this reason, things like cremation of dead bodies has been completely out of the question for Zoroastrians across history, as that would of course pollute the pure fire with dead human flesh, and death of course being one of the main symbols and results of *duj* and Angra Mainyu of evil and and this decay in the world. Instead, the Zoroastrian custom has been what is known as a sky burial. There often exists dedicated places known as *dakhmas*, or towers of silence. These were often located far away from humans and pure things like fire and water, and dead bodies would be taken here. They would be left out in the open for vultures to consume the carcass. When this process was over, the bones were sometimes collected and then put in a sort of proper grave. The reasoning for this, as we said, is that dead human bodies are impure. They are a part of the *duj* aspect of the world, and thus do not let that come into contact with pure things such as water, fire, and even earth, making any other kind of burial can have been appropriate. This practice and the towers of silence has indeed become one of the most famous aspects of Zoroastrianism to the wider public.

With that said, it's also true that many today, many Zoroastrians, especially in diaspora communities, will bury their dead in cemeteries. Uh, and, and, you know, there's probably an interesting, uh, discussion or video to be made about the internal, uh, conversations about those burial customs, how that is justified, how one adapts to new situations in diaspora communities, for example. But, you know, just putting that out there that many of these customs that were maybe prevalent in, in ancient times aren't always necessarily, um, practiced by Zoroastrians today.

So that is a general overview of Zoroastrianism, its teachings, history, and practices. As you can tell, this is a deep and complex religion that really needs a lot more time to cover fully or properly. But I hope that this has given you a better understanding of the tradition and maybe inspired you to do further research on your own.

Now, one of the most widely discussed aspects of the Zoroastrian legacy is, of course, its relationship with other religions, particularly the Abrahamic ones. Indeed, Zoroastrianism is probably one of the most important and influential religions in history, and sometimes indirectly, I'm sure many of you, as I've gone through their teachings, have recognized many aspects from religions that are more popular today. And this is an important and significant point. The general dualistic cosmology with a clear idea of good versus evil, represented by a good God and His lower divine beings on the one hand, and an evil demon and his minions on the other, of course, reminds us a lot about the theologies of religions like Christianity and Islam and their concepts of God and angels versus the devil and his demons.

Furthermore, the eschatological teachings about a final judgment where the dead will be resurrected and based on their actions in life will be sent to either a paradisal life or an eternity of agony. This is essentially identical to teachings of Christianity, at least parts of Judaism, and in Islam. Even the particular teachings about the bridge that must be crossed, which to evil people becomes thin like a blade's edge and causing them to fall down into hell, we find an almost direct parallel here in Islamic lore. So, what is going on here? Well, we should remember that Zoroastrianism was a major and important religion in the ancient world, represented by one of the largest empires in history. During the period of the Babylonian exile and afterwards, the Jews were often in direct contact with Zoroastrians and generally seem to have quite liked them. The Bible basically has nothing but good things to say about the Achaemenids, even calling Cyrus the Great "Messiah" for allowing the Jews to return to Judea. And indeed, it is after and during this period of direct contact that we see Israelite literature, such as that of apocalypticism, where many of these eschatological and, um, theological ideas appear for the first time, including the concept of Satan or the devil, as well as the day of judgment and heaven and hell. It is thus quite probable that Zoroastrianism in some way had a direct impact and influence on these major religions of the world and their teachings.

Even aspects like the *Saoshyant*, the sort of savior figure in Zoroastrianism, there's actually multiple *Saoshyants*, usually, so it's not like there's just one savior figure, but this idea of a savior figure that will come, um, partly at the end of time to, to, uh, instigate or to be part of this, um, reinvigorating of the world, making it good again, of course, has been used by many Christians as being a kind of prophecy, um, that, um, that talks about the coming of Jesus, and that this is sort of, um, a Messianic concept in some way that also sort of made its way into Judaism and Christianity. Uh, so there's a lot of these different concepts that are very similar to the Abrahamic, uh, traditions.

But we should also remember that things aren't black and white, and that this isn't a one-way street. Zoroastrians in antiquity lived in close proximity with Christians, Jews, Mandaeans, Hellenes, and many others. And it's quite likely that just as Zoroastrianism influenced them, so they also influenced Zoroastrianism in turn, impacting the way that that religion was shaped, especially in periods like during the Parthian and Sasanian Empires. However we choose to look at it, there's no denying that Zoroastrianism plays a very important role in the history of religion and philosophy. It serves as one of the oldest surviving religious traditions in the world, and one that has changed and evolved over the millennia, from the Gathas of Zarathustra, some of the oldest religious literature in the world, all the way until today. Zoroastrians have shaped our world. They still make up a significant community, even if they aren't as prominent as they used to be. The largest community today are again the Parsis living in India, but there are also significant communities in Iran, in Europe, and in North America. Estimates have shown that there are around 100,000 Zoroastrians in the world today, but the actual numbers are often thought to be significantly higher.

I hope this has been an interesting and educational, hopefully entertaining, episode on Zoroastrianism. If you want more content like this, then you can, uh, subscribe to the channel, check out my other stuff, uh, leave a comment, let me know what you think. Uh, as always, of course, I would like to extend a special thank you to all my patrons who support the channel monetarily and keep the channel going. None of this would be possible without you, of course. So thank you all so much. Uh, Patreon is again the best way to support this channel, so I would highly appreciate it if anyone else wanted to become a patron too. So I will leave links to that in the description. Uh, you can find me on my socials if you're interested, on Instagram and TikTok and so on. I also, of course, have my other channel, Philip Palm, where I post mostly music and music content, so check that out if you're interested too. For now, thank you all so much for watching, for, uh, staying passionate about learning new things. Uh, hope to see you, um, soon again with more content similar to this, and I'll see you next time. [Music]