A crash course in Zoroastrian ethics: Why we recite the Ashem Vohu!

Dear Tomash

The problem is that "good thoughts, good words, good deeds" is such a sloppy and outright poor translation.
It invokes simplicity and moralism where Zarathushtra instead understood that life is complex and one should be ethical and not moralizing (ethics is values that refer to cause and effect, morality is values that are just blindly obeying the orders of superiors, such as the Abrahamic gods).
So a much better translation would be: "A constructive mindset fosters a constructive language which in turn fosters constructive actions which in turn fosters constructive thoughts." A strictly ethical feedback loop putting causes and effects together, exactly the way the world works.
What is the right thing to think, say and act then? Well, it is what inside of you which makes you truly you. It is that which you define yourself with. What kind of person are you to yourself? It is not even what you should do but in a deeper sense what you WILL do.
Which is why it is so crucial to us as Mazdayasni to FIRST decide who we are to ourselves. This is why we meditate and this is what we meditate on in the mornings.
Who are you today? How do you plan to meet and greet the world? This is what we focus on when we recite the Ashem Vohu.
Plato wrote a lot of great stuff. But his dualism is problematic to us as Zoroastrians. The same thing goes for Aristotle. Among the Greeks, the Stoics and Heraclitus have much more in common with Persian philosophy.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/15 Tomash



Dear Dino,

I'm having hard time understanding what is good and what is bad. In a moralistic sense it is easy to understand it: what the society sees as good or bad. But I still haven't grasped what it means in Zoroastrianism. What does Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds actually mean. And whether this is an accurate rendition into modern languages.

Ushta,
Tomash / still a pathfinder


--- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Special Kain wrote:
>
> Dear Tomash
>
> If there's an infinite number of worlds and there's always a smaller or bigger world, you could easily remove all judgments and drop the words "better" and "worse", simply because they don't make any sense anymore. It's a multi-layered world, and each layer is fascinating and beautiful in its own right! There's no better or worse dimension, there's a multitude of dimensions that we celebrate and enjoy and curiously examine!
> And there are no absolutes. What used to be good can easily become bad. We succeed with different strategies everytime the conditions and circumstances change. There's nothing timeless about good and bad.
>
> Ushta, Dino // a Zoroastrian, not a Platonist
>
> --- Tomash schrieb am Mo, 14.12.2009:

>
> Von: Tomash
> Betreff: [Ushta] Re: Zoroastrianism and the Greeks
> An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
> Datum: Montag, 14. Dezember 2009, 23:16



> > Dear Dino,
>
> I personally believe in an infinite number of worlds and realities, but in a monistic way. I theorize that some of these worlds are better and some are worse, because the ladder on which our world stands has no ending in both directions. There is always something bigger and something smaller. What is bigger than the known universe? What's behind it? Using computer terms from video games, we could "Zoom Out" forever. What is smaller than the subatomic particles? We could "Zoom In" forever. This is all speaking in our 3D perception of the world, but scientist claim there can be an indefinite number of dimensions. In what way one could move forever then?
>
> But I all see that as one. We are here and now. Even though our dreams are realities on their own, we can only be in this world and not striving for something we aren't even sure what it is can only lead to a path of misery in this world.
>
> Plato may have been a dualist, undoubtedly, but he was here and now and didn't dream of going into the afterlife because his afterlife, the world of ideas was only a place from where we will eventually come back into this world again. I think this is the most crucial point in his philosophy: the emphasis on this world and not the other ones we aren't even sure exist. Plato didn't worship the afterlife. He just created it as an explanation for some of his ideas, nothing more. Under the influence of Abrahamic faiths however, later Neo-Platonists turned this world ideas into Paradise, it was not what Plato had in mind, much like later Zoroastrian Magi corrupted the teaching of Zarathushtra and created a dualist faith.
>
> Ushta,
>
> Tomash
>
> --- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, Special Kain wrote:
>
> > Dear Tomash
>
> > I agree!
>
> > But there's no dualism in Zoroastrianism as we understand it. Fariborz Rahnamoon wrote about this in his brilliant and fascinating way, and quite convincingly so. But Plato was a dualist: there's the supreme original "X" and here's the stained and imperfect copy "x". I don't see any of this in Zoroastrianism, so Plato creatively invented something new and profoundly influential.
>
> > Secondly, Zarathushtra didn't say anywhere that one world was superior to another. That's why I've recently said that the question whether there's only one world or a multitude of different worlds is less important than the fact that he didn't impose any hierarchical relationships between them. And Plato most certainly did.
>
> > To Zarathushtra Asha applies to all that is, so the doctrine of Asha is monistic. Whether it's the natural world or any other world - Asha applies to all of them. If anybody claims that this world is inferior to another, why should people care about this world at all? But, as you've clearly understood, Zarathushtra placed great emphasis on our natural world. Only if you believe in another superior world far away, you wouldn't place such great emphasis on this world.
>
> > I 100% agree with anything else, dear Tomash!!! Especially the bits on noocracy and sophocracy are 100% in tune with Zoroastrianism. If people choose and strive for wisdom, they will increasingly attain more freedom and experience much more pleasure and happiness. If people choose stupidity, they will most certainly do many stupid things tomorrow. So what good would it be to remain stupid?
>
> > It's a pity that Western philosophy was much more concerned with gloom'n'doom than the joys of life. It's very common to think of intelligence and science as related to melancholy and nerdy seriousness - as if depressed people would see things for what they are (that would make the world a horribly miserable place!!!), which isn't true at all. Happiness is related to learning and also to intelligence via Dopamine. For example, I judge people by their intellectual integrity and how well they've managed to cope with contingency.
>
> > So if someone chooses to see thinking as something boring and a complete waste of time that's counterproductive, they're doomed to do stupid things and enjoy less freedom than the nerds! Because the nerds are the ones that get better jobs and make much more money. ;-)
>
> >
>
> > Ushta, Dino
> > Betreff: [Ushta] Re: Zoroastrianism and the Greeks
>
> > An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
>
> > Datum: Montag, 14. Dezember 2009, 19:44
> > > I didn't say he's teaching were like that of Zarathushtra, but I think it is of little relevance whether he thought there is another perfect world and that our is just a shadow. What I think is more important is that his teachings placed great emphasis on wisdom and ethnics. He after all created a political system in which the wisest rule, called Noocracy (rule of mind) or Sophocracy (rule of wisdom) and that all humans should strive towards wisdom. His ethics are also important since in his works he abolished a sexist, racist and a slave-owning system and created an idea of a world where all humans had equal rights. This he took from the ever so tolerant Persia and its Zarathushtran philosophy which all of the wisest Greek philosophers praised for being ethically and culturally much more advanced than their City States, especially placing emphasis on how well-mannered and good the Persians were in all the situations of life. Despite his dualism,
>
> > his cheerful attitude towards life and his preoccupation with ethics rather than moralism shows Plato was not a worshipper of afterlife, even if theorized there was one.
>
> > Ushta,
>
> > Tomash
>
> > --- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, Special Kain wrote:
>
> > > Dear Tomash
>
> > > Plato was the great dualist in human history, but there's no ontological dualism in Zoroastrianism. According to Plato, our natural world is nothing but a shadow and stained copy of The Supreme Reality behind the curtain. There's no such notion of our world in Zoroastrianism. There's only one world: the natural world as we know it. Zoroastrian dualism (if there is any) is all about choosing between Asha and Druj, it's about developing constructive or destructive mentalities, but there are many paths that lead to Asha.
>
> > > Stoicism has a lot in common with Zoroastrianism, as I've already explained, but the Stoics are indifferent towards the world, whereas Zoroastrians are joyfully amazed by the fact that there is something rather than nothing. We have positive feelings for existence, the Stoics try not to have any feelings for existence at all.
>
> > > Ushta, Dino

The concept of the illuminating bridge in Zoroastrian Faith, Norse Mythology and the al Sirat in Islam

Dear Ardeshir and Dino

1. Bahman Varza is a leading Zoroastrian scholar who is unfortunately not with us here on Ushta so there is no point in discussing his ideas since he can not explain them to us here. We hope to be able to have him with us at a later stage when he can develop his theories further and we can then accept of refute them. Until then, I don't see any reason why Ardeshir should not be right on this issue.

2. Ardeshir of course has a point which in turn leads us to a possible third option: Namely that Ardeshir is right that the text in question fits into The Gathas perfectly, but that the text is METAPHORICAL rather than meant to be taken literally. I personally believe strongly in this view as it fits in with everything else Zarathushtra states in The Gathas. Perhaps this possibility never even struck Varza?

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/14 Special Kain
- Dölj citerad text -



Dear Ardeshir

Well, you're taking this far too personally! ;-)
Bahman Varza is a really clever guy whose translation is philosophically precise. He doesn't impose his own biased opinions on others, but discusses his doubts in footnotes. And he's a scientist, since he's a doctor.
The most important thing is to present Zoroastrianism as what it is and get rid of that heavily Christianized misunderstanding. It's not some primitively proto-Christian faith! And that's what we have to tell the world. So I guess that you and Varza and most Zoroastrians I know (whether you personally like their translations or not) share the same enthusiasm.

Ushta, Dino

--- ardeshir farhmand schrieb am Mo, 14.12.2009:


Von: ardeshir farhmand
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Fwd: The concept of the illuminating bridge in Zoroastrian Faith, Norse Mythology and the al Sirat in Islam
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Montag, 14. Dezember 2009, 22:28



Dear Dino,

if there is an allegation of insertion there must be "credible evidence" to substantiate such allegation, otherwise it is HEARSAY. now, making repeated allegations without proof or slightest evidence to back it up is not constructive, and shows rather personal bias and lack of interest in an obective approach.

i can not pass any opinion on Mr. Varza's translation since i have not read his work. i believe a good translation would be an objective and comparative study of the songs, and then adding ur conclusions as footnotes, and let the readers draw their own conclusions.

i can cite taraporewala's translation as such an example. although the reader may differ and disagree with him on a number of points, he provides an in-depth discussion of the songs and allows us to explore the original by ourselves. the aforementioned approach is fair and objective and should be followed by all those interested in translating and/or researching the gathas.

furthermore, we are here to brainstorm and OBECTIVELY discuss the gathas and the zoroastrian philo. it is not about personal bias, personal critic and/or anything personal.


Ardeshir






On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Special Kain wrote:



Dear Ardeshir

So let me please repeat what I've said already: I can't speak for Bahman Varza. We invited him several weeks ago, but he's obviously not interested in discussing Zoroastrian issues and his philosophically precise German translation of the Gathas with us.
And please don't preach to the already converted: you're talking to a scientist here. ;-)


Ushta, Dino

--- ardeshir farhmand schrieb am Mo, 14.12.2009:


Von: ardeshir farhmand
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Fwd: The concept of the illuminating bridge in Zoroastrian Faith, Norse Mythology and the al Sirat in Islam
An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
CC: "mehrdad farahmand"
Datum: Montag, 14. Dezember 2009, 18:58

Dear Dino,

concerning the alleged insertions in the gathas, i need to see the citings, the reasoning behind the suggestion that it is an insertion, the linguistic and poetic evidence, the comparative literature, and in short strict adherence to the "scientific method" of research and study. since u persist on this notion of the "alleged insertions," i have to emphasize that any scientific study will prove the insertion suggestions to be INVALID.

the problem we have here ,is that some people pen their own ideas under the name of zarathushtra ,and when presented with an in-depth rebuttal, they are just dismissive.

their response is that, o such and such theme is inserted by karpans, greeks,..... .. without providing the slightest proof, evidence, linguistic, cultural and/or comparative study to substantiate their PERSONAL OPINIONS. please, note, that i call it an opinion, because it even fails to meet the definition of a weak theory.

my educational background is LAW, and we call all such noise HEARSAY. in US courts HEARSAY is DISMISSED. especially when it can not provide even the remotest possibility for it to be admitted into evidence.

my question for proponents of such HEARSAY arguments is this, if many of these concepts that are displeasing to their taste, are insertions and/or inventions, how come there is no precedence for them prior to zarathushtra, especially in the twin vedic religion???? ?

how come these ideas/concepts start uniquely with the seer z, and there is no vidence of their lively presence somewhere else???? the closest we come to such concepts are the norse mythology. that is why the arab/moors called the vikings majus or zoroastrians. they figured the similarity, but again the basic norse concepts take a brilliant and ingenious form in zarathushtrian songs. the ideas take a brilliant, genial and life-affirming, luminous form without ANY substanial prior precedence in any other philo or literature.
hence the persistence of early missionaries to greatly lower the age of zarathushtra, to prove the supemacy of western christian thought .

it is one thing not to like or agree with what u read. it is completely another matter when u come up with the idea to call it an insertion or later, unrelated addition.

please keep in mind, zarathushtra was a bard, seer-poet, he composed his VISIONS in melody and song. if u want to understand his gathas, u can not afford to overlook this fact. he had visions of higher realm of consciousness, wisdom, awareness and understanding. visions that are based on "meta-knowledge." alexander bard, used this phrase when talking about difference between info and wisdom to understand the info and i think it fits here rather well.

it is of paramount importance to understand his vocabulary, words like "manoe," are more than just our minds, and good brains in his ancient language. it means spirit, awareness, consciousness, undestanding which our today's definition of mind is only a part of the above.

again, if someone throws an allegation concerning insertions in the gathas, or alleges that such and such book is a greek idea, he/she MUST support his/her allegation by the scientific method, otherwise it is HEARSAY and lacks any scientific weight or credibility.



ardeshir

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Special Kain wrote:



Dear Ardeshir

I can't speak for Bahman Varza. He's sure to have discovered passages in the Gathas that were inserted by the Kaplans decades after Zarathushtra's death. And I don't believe in any spooky and astral theme parks, by the way. It's important to study and cross-read the Gathas and as many translations as possible, but we also have to bear the latest scientific findings in mind. Only because Zarathushtra once said this and that doesn't make it any more real than science.

Ushta, Dino

--- ardeshir farhmand schrieb am Mo, 14.12.2009:


dear dino

and what is the basis of such assertion and how could be this explained when the occurences of such poems in gathas are in complete harmony with the rest of poetry, both metriclayy and linguistically? ??? and how u explain that beside zarathushtra and norse mythology u find it nowhere else??????

it is easy for these people to claim to follow the scientifc method but when they are presented with a rebutta, they are just dismissive without following the scientific mthod themselves!! !!

my entire fortune

ardeshir

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:43 AM, Special Kain wrote:

Dear Ardeshir and Alexander

As I understand him, Bahman Varza believes that such passages about a bridge connecting our natural world with astral theme parks were inserted in the Gathas many, many years after Zarathushtra's death. He thinks that such passages don't fit with the rest of the Gathas, because there's no talk about such an astral paradise or hell. And when being already dead, people couldn't change their behavior towards the natural world anymore, so any final judgment wouldn't make much sense.

My two cents,
Dino

Direct or representative democracy?

Dear Rory

I believe you have a rather naive idea of direct democracy.
It might have helped temporarily to get Robert Mugabe out of power in Zimbabwe. But taht's about it. And you still have the problem of a far too low level of education and a plurality of opinions to make democracy work as intended anyway.
Looking at how much conservatism and shortsightedness direct democracy generates in many countries where it is in use, it is no model and certainly not any better than representative democracy.
Scandinavaians have been offered direct democracy many times but always opted for representative democracy instead. They firmly believe that politics is too complicated for people to decide on every issue themselves all the time. better then to outsource politics to trusted experts, in other words: Representative democracy is superior! The more educated we are as a people, the more we realize who complex the world really is!
Switzerland is an exception from this rule, being a country speaking four official languages and with a strong historical need for decentralization. But most countries are not like Switzerland.
Please take your time to study the current massive financial and legal mess in California and I believe your rosy ideas of direct democracy will go out the window. That's my ten cents on the issue.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/14 Rory

Dear Dino,

Amazing. One would expect people to become more appreciative of education the more educated they become. What is causing it? Is there strong populist propoganda being used by poiticians?


Ushta,
Rory

--- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Special Kain wrote:
>
> Dear Rory
>
> I know that it's a fairly pretty picture, but it's quite exhausting. There's way too much anti-intellectualism amongst Swiss people. University students are constantly being dissed and discriminated against: to the vast majority of people university students are theorists only that have spent too much time in their ivory towers, being completely detached from «the real world».
> I've recently graduated, but I still get same rejection. University equals bullshit, that's how people see me. Anti-intellectualism as a problem in democratic societies is as long as the notion of democracy itself, see Plato. All opinions and whims are treated as equal, as if the political equality of all people would justify such nonsense. But there's anti-intellectualism anywhere, simply because both dictatorships and democracies live in fear of a bright mind's smart conclusions.
> It's really tiring. I wonder if it's resentment. Anyone who's different and has a strong desire to stand out is discriminated against. That's why there's no praise of plurality in Switzerland. And what are democracies without pluralism - or with pluralism «on the paper», but not in their thick heads? It's nothing. But Switzerland is famous for its xenophobia and dismissal of individualism. You can't help but becoming a cultural radical when living in Zurich. ;-)
>
> Ushta, Dino

The concept of the illuminating bridge in Zoroastrian Faith, Norse Mythology and the al Sirat in Islam

Dear Ardeshir

I agree 100%!!!
I also believe that when looking at the ENTIRE Gathic message it becomes evident that what Zarathushtra meant with "good" was the capacity and willingless to take the LONG-TERM VIEW when making "wise" decisions.
What frustrates Zarathushtra is the SHORT-SIGHTED IMPULSIVENESS of what he regards as "evil". For example the plundering of the fruits of OTHER people's hard work.
This has indeed nothing at all to do with Christian or Islamic good vs evil. Better words in contemporary English would be the opposites "wisdom" versus "stupidity". And we should speak here of ETHICS rather than regular morality since Zarathsuhtra goes all the way deep down to our very PATHOS to get at why we do what is right and why we do what is wrong in life.
If we don't get our pathos right, we can basically forget about everything else. That's truly hardcore ethics!

Ushta

Alexander

2009/12/14 ardeshir farhmand

Dear Alexander,

in my last article on good and evil in the enchanting gathas, i cited the gathic verses and clearly demonstrated that good is the action and words of Vohumanoe, in other words good and evil depends on foresight and level of understanding and consciousness. evil is inconscience and lack of vision. also what "we call good" has an infinite potential of growth and getting ever better; while evil is afflicted, limited and frozen in our worldview.

i have demonstrated that in my last article. furthermore, i strongly believe in discussing the original words, their root and a comparative study of their meaning and history. this enables every reader to draw their own conclusion based on the solid facts of the original melodies and not wild speculations. i think it is only fair to say that my trans, comment, has been consistently true to this approach which by the way is the approach of the ancient exegesis.

now, regarding chinvat and the bridge of the aesir, there is no mention of "good and evil" in biblical sense. it all about illumination, awareness and higher knowledge.

it is very important to remember that when we talk about renovation of the universe, good/evil, angels, the bridge, afterlife, and...... to figure out their TRUE GATHIC MEANING and SPIRIT. because they could be very different than what they are known for in biblical terminology.

ardeshir




On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Alexander Bard wrote:



Dear Ardseshir

In norse mythology, there is no such thing as good or evil people. Humans, just like gods, are a bit of both, most of all they are all "human" in the sense that they are complex and personal more than anything else.
The concepts of good and evil PEOPLE as such did not develop in European thinking until the Christians introduced the idea. It was alien to all the polytheisms (Greek, Roman, Germanic, Norse, all related with the same origin in the original Indo-European polytheism). This is why there is a Satan in Christianity but not in for example Norse mythology. Without good or evil gods, why would there be purely good or evil people?
But there is a concept of ENLIGHTENMENT at play here. The crossing of the "Bridge of the Asars" is a metaphor for reaching enlightenment, of being one with the gods and their world. Also any possible after-life world.
I guess this would also have an effect on exactly how we translate the text in question in The Gathas. Nope?

All the very best
Alexander

2009/12/14 ardeshir farhmand





---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: ardeshir farhmand
Date: Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 1:44 PM
Subject: The concept of the illuminating bridge in Zoroastrian Faith, Norse Mythology and the al Sirat in Islam
To: mehrdad farahmand
Cc: Bahmann Taheri


One of the rather fascinating ideas in the enchanting songs of
Zarathushtra is the idea of “chinvat peretu” or the chivat bridge, a
“passage or channel from lower worlds to higher realms of divine
genius and inspiration.”

We read in fargard/chapter 15.9 of the "Baghan Nask," wriiten as a on
Yasna 46.10. 5th Line: "That through Chinvat passage (Chish-vidarg) it
is taught that the men and women disciples of Zarathushtra shall step
forth (frovamand) and go on through anything (chish) openly/with
complete illumination, on the straight path to the house of songs,"

Direct reference or allusion to this bridge between countless worlds
and levels of consciousness, occurs in the following passages in the
gathas or the enchanting compositions of Zarathushtra; Yasna 33.5,
Yasna 46.10, Yasna 46.11, Yasna 50.4, Yasna 50.7 and Yasna 51.13.
There are numerous additional references in the avestan literature to
the same concept including vispered 7.1.

“chinvat” comes from the root “chi,” “ki” namely to discern, sort out,
clarify, elucidate. “Peretu” on the other hand denotes bridge,
passage, crossing over.

Zarathushtra teaches about a brilliant bridge or link between our
finite material realm of rigidities and limitations to the domains of
infinite possibilities and ever greater lights. Through this bridge
man's soul widens to cosmic dimensions and establishes a beaming
pathway to the celestial house of music (garoe-demane.)

This bridge links up the most rudimentary and fragmented levels of our
material knowledge with the highest levels of superb wisdom,
understanding and consciousness. Through it we can have access to a
realm where all consciousness meets, an undiminishing great light of
super-knowledge and innovation.

We read in fargard/chapter 15.3 of sud-kar nask which was written as a
commentary to Yasna 46.10: “That the inner seer and spirit alone see
the reward and the elucidating bridge to the spiritual realm, and
embodied it does not see such things,"

The “chivat bridge” rises beyond time and space and reveals all the
future possibilities. It is an all-seeing measureless link, it is all
vision, a channel for the superb clarity. The entire universe and all
the worlds are seen through it. All becomes clear, revealed and sorted
out!

We read in fargard/chapter 10.4 of varsht-mansr book of gathic
commentaries: “About the bridge on which there is access to
All-Knowledge/Omniscience, and he who aspires the most wondrous
existence is visibly or invisibly crossing.........

We read also in fargard/chapter 16.18 of varsht-mansr book of gathic
commentaries, how the chivat bridge reveals “the signs of the last
times, which are the millenniums of the future saviors/sons of
Zartosht.” It should be added that throughout zoroastrian literature
the knowledge of the future possibilities is exclusively that of Ahura
Mazda and demonic forces are incapable of seeing with clarity the
conclusion of things.

The idea of the chinvat bridge has an almost identical counterpart in
the norse mythology. The Aesir (Same as Avestan “Ahura” or Sanskrit
“Asura”) made a bridge with great skill and knowledge and ride this
bridge which is called As-Bru (Aesir-bridge.)

It crosses over to the "urda-brunn" (well of urd or original
knowledge,) where the Aesir go to make judgments. Apparently an
intense, illuminating fire burns over the bridge to keep the evil
forces away. We read in the eddas; “Because the “As-Bru” burns all
with fire, the holy waters move.”

In Norse mythology the bridge/or link to the Aesir's realm is
inaccessible to the wicked and is only open to the noble souls. Also,
in the Zoroastrian holy writings the vile because of their own actions
(destoying the world of men/mortals) and lack of vision are unable to
cross over the bridge and are cast back into the domain of lies that
have consumed them through all ages. (Yasna 46.11 and Yasna 51.13)

We read in the allegorical language of Sud-kar nask
fargard/chapter19.3: “the Chinvad bridge which is the route (vidar) of
every one, righteous or wicked; the width across the route of the
righteous is a breadth of nine spears, each one the length of three
reeds,but the route for the wicked becomes like the edge of a razor.”

The purpose of Sud-kar (beneficial work) was, as its name imparts to
extract “useful” instructions from the gathic chants and to illustrate
them with LEGENDS and MYTHOLOGICAL LANGUAGE.

The striking similarity between the norse beliefs and the zoroastrian
faith was not lost to the arabs. In fact, in al-Andalus, or Islamic
Spain, the arabs called Vikings, Al-Majus or Magis, Zoroastrian
Fire-Worshipers!

According to the zoroastrian lore three angelic beings/concepts
preside over this "illuminating bridge." It should be added that the
line between angels and divine names/concepts is blurry in the
zoroastrian religion and they easily merge into each other. The three
angels that guard the bridge are: "Mithra" or "alliance" with the
divine, a "loving bond" between the world of mortals and the higher
immortal reality. "Rashnu" or justice, fairness to all and "Seraosha"
or spiritual inspiration.

If a person can not forge a bond with the angelic realm and does not
fulfill his contract here on earth or becomes a breaker of mithra
(mithr-druej,) that person can not pass the bridge to the wonders and
amazing new horizons beyond. Neither can a person pass if he is not
equally fair/just/straight (rashnnu) to both good and vile, nor if a
person does not LISTEN to higher inspirations and has no aspiration
for betterment and progress (seraosha.)

There are many parallels between the Zoroastrian and Norse concept of
an interconnecting/brilliant world bridge and the idea of AL-Sirat in
Islam. In islamic tradition there are many details given about this
bridge, which is said to be finer than a hair and sharper than a
sword. It stretches right over the abyss of hell, and is the only way
of passing from earth to heaven on the Judgment Day. All will be
commanded to cross it. The pious will do so without difficulty, guided
by the angels ; but the wicked, unable to cross, will fall headlong
into hell fire.
The above descritiptions seem to be ALMOST identical to the chapter 19
of the gathic Sud-kar Nask that explains the gathic chants in a
metaphorical language.

The word "Sirat" is used in the Koran in the sense of a straight way,
as in the phrase of "Sirat ul Mustaqim" or " the straight way," as it
occurs in Surah I or Al-Fatiha. A comparable concept can be seen in
Yasna 33.5, where there is mention of "erezauesh pathoe" or "straight
path" to the All Knowledge and Omniscience where Mazda Ahura dwells in
glory.

Koranic phrase "sirat" it is NOT an Arabic word and does not come from
any semitic root. It comes from the latin "strata," or "straight," and
its derivation shows the parallel idea with the the zoroasrtian
concept of chinvat bridge.

The reference to this "straight path" to the abode of celestial music
where Ahura Mazda dwells and creates the countless worlds with his
beautiful melody; can be seen throughout zoroastrian prayers. Among
which is the important "Kushti" or holy belt prayer that every
zoroastrain must wear as a symbol of determination to renew the
creation and must be recited few times everyday. "I keep pure my
conduct by keeping pure the six powers of life, act,
speech, thought, intellect, reasoning and mind. In justice do I
perform it, that worship of thine, in good thought and speech and
deed, in order that I may remain in the bright
way, that I may not arrive at the house of lies, but may cross over
Chinvat and may
attain to that blessed abode which is full of perfume, wholly
pleasant, always brilliant."

I find the idea of a bridge connecting our world with the celestial
house of songs (Garoe Demane,) or Asgarth (Enclosure of the Aesirs)
fascinating. The concept behind it seems to be that the upper levels
of consciousness constantly inspire our plane with new ideas,
creativity and progress. There is an invisible gate, it is our choice
to be inspired by it and evolve or reject it and devolve.


Ardeshir

Wisdom vs Populism in the Internet Age

When I wrote Netocracy with Jan Söderqvist in 2000 we pointed out this problem with the internet society. It was quite easy to see that there would be phenomena like Google and Wikipedia around soon which would radically alter the way we look at knowledge and the processing of knowledge. I believe the way to fight the increasing anti-intellectualism (Dino is 100% correct about this problem) is to emphasize WISDOM rather than knowledge. And wisdom in this new environment is the talent to PROCESS information and then ANALYZE it! This is not something that comes automatically with having Wikipedia available in your iphone. Rather it takes an awful lot of meta-knowledge, skill and talent to do. So while there are many people who can quote and refer to sources nowadays by sneeking onto a computer screen, analyzing material and thereby become a WISE rather than an OPPORTUNISTIC leader is a unique skill. The way to go about this is to FIGHT against relativism and instead propagate probabilism and pragmatism as the OPPOSITES of relativism!!!
Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/14 Special Kain

Dear Rory,

Yes, it's either right-wing populism or left-wing populism. But the world has become much more complicated in the meantime. Secondly, it's not only populistic propaganda thanks to the increasing medialization of politics (see Thomas Meyer, Winfried Schulze, Otfried Jarren and Patrick Donges), it's a simplistic and arrogant attitude that comes with political egalitarianism: expert knowledge is being rejected, because everybody feels they have the right to speak their minds and voice their concerns - so there's no opinion «truer» or «more valid» than somebody else's. With anti-intellectualism comes radical relativism: «Well, that's your opinion, but I think that ...»

And there's also a strong and increasingly anti-elitist attitude manifesting - thanks to knowledge-sharing platforms such as Wikipedia. All information is available out there. University professors are nolonger the authorized gatekeepers of expert knowledge. Their part has changed functionally: now they're gatekeepers of information management skills. They have to explain their students that research stretches further than Wikipedia and whatever Google spits out.

This has become a major issue in Switzerland. The political equality of all people is something formal only, but it's contemporary narcissism that tricks them into believing that their opinions and whims would be just as important and valid as an expert's. And they also think that thought isn't productive: it's only material goods that make a difference, but thinking itself has no value (and criticism is a counterproductive waste of time).

This problem hasn't been dealt with properly. The next step in philosophy will be to defeat anti-intellectualism, simply because we'll live in an increasingly networked global society soon. Heavy problems require smart solutions. And hairdressers don't know a thing about loop quantum gravity. ;-)

Ushta, Dino


--- Rory schrieb am Mo, 14.12.2009:


Von: Rory
Betreff: [Ushta] Re: Zoroastrianism in Tajikistan - Regarding Democracy
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Montag, 14. Dezember 2009, 5:58



Dear Dino,

Amazing. One would expect people to become more appreciative of education the more ducated they become. What is causing it? Is there strong populist propoganda being used by poiticians?

Ushta,
Rory

--- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, Special Kain wrote:
>
> Dear Rory
>
> I know that it's a fairly pretty picture, but it's quite exhausting. There's way too much anti-intellectualis m amongst Swiss people. University students are constantly being dissed and discriminated against: to the vast majority of people university students are theorists only that have spent too much time in their ivory towers, being completely detached from «the real world».
> I've recently graduated, but I still get same rejection. University equals bullshit, that's how people see me. Anti-intellectualis m as a problem in democratic societies is as long as the notion of democracy itself, see Plato. All opinions and whims are treated as equal, as if the political equality of all people would justify such nonsense. But there's anti-intellectualis m anywhere, simply because both dictatorships and democracies live in fear of a bright mind's smart conclusions.
> It's really tiring. I wonder if it's resentment. Anyone who's different and has a strong desire to stand out is discriminated against. That's why there's no praise of plurality in Switzerland. And what are democracies without pluralism - or with pluralism «on the paper», but not in their thick heads? It's nothing. But Switzerland is famous for its xenophobia and dismissal of individualism. You can't help but becoming a cultural radical when living in Zurich. ;-)
>
> Ushta, Dino

Zoroastrianism in Tajikistan - Regarding Democracy - Afghanistan

Dear Rory

Western eyes??? I'm only referring to what Central Asians have tought me and to how they see things!
If European forces had not intervened in Afghanistan in the 19th century (and basically created the country), it would have made a lot more sense if northern Afghanistan had belonged to current Uzbekistan and Tajikistan (as the population there is 99% Uzbeks and Tajiks), while western Pakistan and southern Afghanistan could have constituted a Pushtun homeland. The current mess is very much dependent on the creation of an Afghan kingdom in the 19th century that has little or no bearing historically. And in any case, we have to deal with the facts on the ground as they are now. Just don't expect Tajiks and Uzbeks in northern Afghanistan to feel any commitment to a Kabul-lead government and don't expect peace anytime soon in Waziristan in western Pakistan. Waziristan was conquered by the British in the 19th century but has historically never been a part of Indian or Pakistani culture at all. An old mess creating a modern mess. Naivety wasz never a good medicine for solbing political dilemmas. That's just the way it is.

Zambia and Zimbabwe are very different cases. You know them much better than me. I trust you on that one.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/14 Rory

Dear Alexander,

Regarding your assessment of Afghanistan, I think you are completley wrong and looking at it through Western eyes. What makes a country? A common language, common religion, common culture and so on? My own country consists of 72 tribes and 56 languages! I am a part of one of the myriad of tiny minorities that are not a part of the 72 tribes (there are only a couple of hundred Zambian citizens of European ancestry). It is for this very reason that my country is peaceful and democratic. Look at some of our our neighbours, Angola, DR Congo, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, yet we have never been to war since WWII which wasn't our decision anyway...

In tribal societies blood-ties are paramount and if Afghanistan or my own country for that matter were broken up along ethnic lines then the laws of kinship would dominate and democracy wouldn't stand a chance. If you want to make the region more democratic then make sure the ethnic groups are represented in the whole and that the country has enough diversity of tribes to make tribalism a weak force. Zimbabwe is completely dominated by the Shona who are a larger group than all other ethnic groups combined. For this reason the entire country is effectively at the mercy of Mugabe's clan, tribe and linguistic group in that order of dominance.

If Afghanistan and its region are ever going to be a democracy (and the same applies to large parts of Africa) then the same needs to happen as did in India, take all those smaller groups and combine them into one and make them a nation. Afghanistan is not ready for "one man one vote" but it is ready for "one tribe one vote". Unfortunately the Pashtuns dominate in numbers. That imbalance needs to be adjusted. If Afghanistan and Pakistan were one entity I believe there would be much greater chance of a form of Democracy developing.

Ushta,
Rory

--- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Alexander Bard wrote:
>
> Dear Friends
>
> I actually think representative democracy is even better than any system of
> direct democracy.
> Simply because political issues these days are co complex that often only
> experts can view them properly.
> While Switzerland works rather well, California has practiced a form of
> dorect democracy in the last 10-15 years which has now practically ruined
> the state. Simply because people again and again vote for new expenditures
> but also constant tax cuts.
> The sums do not add up. And do you think the voters take the blame? Nope,
> they blame the politicians!
> With freedom comes not only rights but also obligations. Like the rule that
> the sums must add up at the end of the day, even if that means giving people
> bad news.
> This is why representative democracy is better. And explains why
> Scandinavians left a system of directr democracy and changed to a system of
> representative democracy.
> Even when it comes to democracy, we must be pragmatic. Democracy only works
> as an organic system, not as a superimposed principle. Afghanistan is not
> even a country, just a historically unfortunate combo of cultures that are
> extremely uncomfortable with each other. In a free and fair election in such
> a country, the first thing people would vote for is for the country itself
> to split!
> Democracy and naivety do not match.
>
> Ushta
> Alexander
>
> 2009/12/13 Special Kain
>
> >
> >
> > Dear Rory
> >
> > I know that it's a fairly pretty picture, but it's quite exhausting.
> > There's way too much anti-intellectualism amongst Swiss people. University
> > students are constantly being dissed and discriminated against: to the vast
> > majority of people university students are theorists only that have spent
> > too much time in their ivory towers, being completely detached from «the
> > real world».
> > I've recently graduated, but I still get same rejection. University equals
> > bullshit, that's how people see me. Anti-intellectualism as a problem in
> > democratic societies is as long as the notion of democracy itself, see
> > Plato. All opinions and whims are treated as equal, as if the political
> > equality of all people would justify such nonsense. But there's
> > anti-intellectualism anywhere, simply because both dictatorships and
> > democracies live in fear of a bright mind's smart conclusions.
> > It's really tiring. I wonder if it's resentment. Anyone who's different and
> > has a strong desire to stand out is discriminated against. That's why
> > there's no praise of plurality in Switzerland. And what are democracies
> > without pluralism - or with pluralism «on the paper», but not in their thick
> > heads? It's nothing. But Switzerland is famous for its xenophobia and
> > dismissal of individualism. You can't help but becoming a cultural radical
> > when living in Zurich. ;-)
> >
> > Ushta, Dino

Zoroastrianism and the Greeks

Dear Friends

Regarding the ancient Greek philosophers, we should keep in mind that they were extremely divided.
Plato for example was a strict dualist whose philosophy really has nothing in common with Mazdayasna. Plato rather was an Egyptian thinker whose influence on Christianity and Islam was enormous.
But the Stoics and especially Heraclitus were the forebearers of process philosophy and definitely deeply inspired by Iranian philosophy. This also explains why Stoicism was enormously popular and the dominant philosophy in the Hellenistic empire. It also explains why Mithraism spread so easily and had such success later in the Roman Empire. Mithraism was ethically speaking a Zoroastrian religion with its focus on ethics rather than moralism, and a monistic worldview.
The irony of course being that although Alexander the Great conqeuered everything east of Greece all the way to the Indus Valley (including Persia) his Hellenistic Empire was then dominated by Persian culture and philosophy.
It should rather have been called the Hellenistic-Persian Empire instead...

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/14 ardeshir farhmand



Dear Fariborz,

as i said in the beginning, there is nothing personal here. i provided an in-depth study of the gathic poems, with comparative study of both the literature and etymology. my objection was over certain passages, that could have not been possibly justified by the actual text.

now concerning varsht-manthar being a greek product per ur allegation, i have to strongly object and emphasize that the brightest of the greek philos were proud to call themselves disciples of zarathushtra, and while their philos share a number of crucial points with zoroastrian philosohy, their views had hardly much in common with the native greek religion. so it is more the other way around.

anyway, i fully inderstand that we have different views on the true meaning of the gathas, but whatever i said about the subject, i fully backed it up by a number of sources and allowed the reader to draw his/her own conclusions without my own specualtions.

being an iranian zoroastrian myself, and quiet familiar with the culture, i have a feeling how u view my rebuttal. To me the Gathas are just ADORABLE, hence i feel very strongly about the subject.

furthermore, "nar" and "nair-ik" mean valiant originally, and applies to both sexes. in fact, nairi-ka used to be a female name among zarthushtis of not a too long past. the is still used among the armenians.


my best wishes for ur success and radiant happiness

Ardeshir

PS. "yan," is the same as "yanim manoe, yanim vachoe.... formula" in the beginning of the gatha intro. and does mean gain, profit, blessing. i have provided some etymology on the word and it has been translated as such by even Dr. Jaffary.



On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Fariborz Rahnamoon wrote:



Dear Ardeshir

The Persians (Achemanians) were the only ones that understood the Gathas correctly and followed it. That is why they did not leave behind any temples but instead they joined the Red Sea to the Mediterranean built an highway between Sush and Sardis, measured the depth of the ocean to have safe passage for the boats etc. They were for progress here on earth.

After their defeat by Alexander the mind set of the world has been based on Greek religion and the anthropomorphic God.

It is the choice of words that change the whole concept of the Gathas from being a practical earthly book to being a heavenly one where one has to wish and pray to get the blessing of some higher power to succeed.

The "varsht-manthar gathic commentary book" fall into the Greek category.

In the Gathas Zarathushtra tells us in very clear earthly terms to use our mind fully in the good way, understand the Wisdom in Creation, and use it to make good rules to guide our path toward perfection. Thereby converting this planet Earth into a Paradise where everyone lives a full life in peace and heavenly tranquility.

Zarathushtra says it is you and your deeds not the will of Ahura Mazda that brings evil or good.

Perfection is what Zarathushtra professes. The aim in life should be Perfection. He says, use your Vohumana, your good mind, understand the wisdom in creation and go hand in hand with it, not against it. The aim should be perfection in whatever profession you are. That is what will make our lives worth living on this planet; we can either create a heaven or a hell right here on this Earth. Zarathushtra’s Heaven and Hell are right here on this planet. There is no need for any bridge for we don't have to go anywhere.

Remember he speaks even of Ahura Mazda only eight times.
Nothing to do with the brilliant spirit or Superb Vouhuman or the blessings of the higher truth/ashâ.

When you have these concepts then the need for rituals to evoke these spirits also do arise.

Thanks any ways

P:S:
And BTW " Nar" even today means male. So I don't know how correct it is to say worthy men and worthy women.

That is why I prefer Person by Person.


With Regards & Best Wishes
Fariborz Rahnamoon
http://www.ancientiran.com

http://www.wzccbc.com


--- On Sun, 12/13/09, ardeshir farhmand wrote:


From: ardeshir farhmand
Subject: [Ushta] Ardeshir's Rebuttal to Fariborz translations of Yasna 30.2 and Yasna 28.9

To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Cc: "mehrdad farahmand"
Date: Sunday, December 13, 2009, 3:08 PM


Dear Fariborz and other fellow Zoroastrians

I like to start my rebuttal by emphasizing that there is nothing personal in my constructive criticism. my whole point is an OBJECTIVE and COMPARATIVE STUDY of the HIGHLY POETIC songs/ melodies of the seer/prophet Zarathushtra. The Enchanting Manthras or GATHAS are not scriptures in the biblical sense, but INSPIRED VISIONS of AHURA MAZDA, his AMAZING SPIRIT, VIRTUES and POWERS. i ask all u to read my study carefully. fariborz have translated Yasna 30.2 and 28.9, here is my rebuttal to insertion of personal speculations and invalid conclusions.

Enchanting Gathas – Yasna 30.2; the original goes as follows:

Let there be a listening (gêushâish)
to what is HEARD/ to what is INSPIRED (sraotâ)
as what is the best/the most beautiful (vahishtâ)
( the ancient commentary adds a word play and says: "as what is prospering growth/increase/vakhsh.")

in other words: "listen to inspiration, as what is the best and most beautiful growth,"

fariborz translation: "Listen with your ears to the best" --very close

i need to add that "gêushâish" here is related to Spanish "escuchar" sometimes pronounced as esguchar; "to listen with ears." it could also be said that it simply means "ears" as in modern Persian. Yet, it appears that the ancient word meant both.
Hence "a listening by the ears to what is heard," seem to be closer to the original.

"en-vision with a brilliant spirit and glowing awareness,"
have a vision (..-vaêna-..) with sûcâ manañghâ,

fariborz translation: "Consider with open mind" --somehow close

manañghâ is NOT quiet the same as mind, it is really more accurate to call it: SPIRIT, UNDERSTANDING, AWARENESS. this is true of the usage of the word in rigveda, old norse myths and eddas, in addition to all other ancient indo-germanic languages. let us remember that many words change their original meaning over time, and what "mind" means today is NOT EXACTLY what it meant 3700 years ago.

Also sûcâ is O.E. scinan "shed light, be radiant," from P.Gmc. *skinanan, O. H.G. skinan, O.N. skina, Ger. scheinen, Goth. skeinan "to shine, appear"), from PIE base *skai- "to gleam, shine, flicker. The beautiful prayer of Yasna 68.4 has been written as a footnote/commentary to the above verse.

our desires/wills (â-var-e-nå) are to be discerned with foresight (vîchi)
"vichi" to discern, is from the same root and meaning as of O.Ger. wikken, wicken " to use foresight," wikker, wicker "soothsayer").

fariborz translation: "Among the paths before deciding" --distant

"worthy men and worthy women, each for own selves (khva) and bodies (tanuyê,)" It is very important to realize that Zarathushtra talks both about "self" and "physical embodiment" here. Compare (tanuyê) with L. textura "web, structure," from stem of textere "to weave.

fariborz translation: "Person by person for his own self " --close enough

prior to the great contest/activity/ major event (mazê yåñghô)

"mazê yåñghô" or "great activity," "major event," comes from the root "yah," struggle, strong effort, to make room, progress." compare with weiden "to MAKE ROOM" and O.N. and PIE *wei "to strive after." The word refers to a "great battle" and "widening of consciousness" or "new vast horizons" at the time of the renovation of the existence. This is extremely similar to the nordic idea of Ragnarök, a series of "major events," including "a great battle" foretold, which will result in the ultimate resurfacing of a new and amazing existence. the same phrase "mazishtâi yåñghâm" comes again in Yasna 36.2, where the seer/prophet asks for the "flame of joy and growth," to come to him prior to this "major event." The ancient commentary translates this as "mas kar," opus work and adds that it refers to the future, evolved physical body or "tan-e-passin." Note that the emphasis is on amazing progress and new unimagined physical possibilities.

fariborz translation: "Before greatness of this message" ---?????!!!! !!

awaken (baodantô) to the prize of our foresight/teachings (sazdyâi.)

baodantô comes from PIE base bh(e)udh- "to be aware, make aware" (Skt. bodhati "awake, watchful, observant," buddhah "awakened, enlightened;" O.C.S. bljudo "to observe;" Lith. budeti "to be awake;"

fariborz translation: "Is truly spread understand each one" --somehow approx.

the "varsht-manthar gathic commentary book" says concerning the poetic Yasna 30.2: It is "About the choice of will (var) by the brave (nar,) and the existence of a way to "amazing progress" (mazê ýånghô) through foresight (vichi and baoda)."

the "baghan gathic commentary book" concerning the third line of Yasna 30.2 says is about: "the great progress "mazê ýånghô" of the will "â-varenå "of the adorable beings, from the great progress of the will of the adorable beings arises widening/awakening of the teachings of the beautiful religion in the worlds." The avestan commentary further adds concering the second line; This, too, that by him who possesses virtuous will-power "â-varenå," foresight "vîcithahyâ" as to the performance of opus work is taught to mankind; even for this reason, because the possessor of virtuous will-power is a person who becomes a decider and ruler, and mankind thus learn and practice to exercise the disposition, habits, and custom of god-rulers. Notice, how the ancient exegesis beautifully demonstrates that by exercising our will-power and foresight, by choosing our higher wills/desires, we become god-rulers and masters of our own destiny and not victim of circumstances and events.

I STRONGLY DISAGREE with the following claim or rather WISHFUL THINKING by Dr. Farhang Mehr; "Zoroastrianism may have contributed to the world, the theory of Heaven and Hell and the Creation of the World etc, that scholars claim, but none of these are the contribution of the person of Zarathushtra. For the simple fact that if he had done that the Mobeds would not have commissioned Mobed Arda Viraf to write about heaven and hell." this is nothing but FANTASY. This is simply an injection of the outdated ideas of the 50's into objective gathic studies.

Those who expose such BASELESS assertions should ask instead, if the "gathic heaven and hell" are rather states of "superb awareness and creativity" verses fragmented and stricken inconscience! The APOLOGISTS should instead ask if "zoroastrian angels" are rather luminous manifestations of the ahuric will power, virtues and superb, ingenious qualities; rather than benign divine bureaucrats! People who invent such EXCUSES should really consider, if the gathic "major event" is a time/day of "amazing manifestations" and "opus achievements" for the material universe, or instead a day/time of destruction and gloom!

Furthermore, the suggestion about "Mobed Arda Viraf" suggests a real lack of familiarity with his story. THE STORY goes; that the council of sassanid priests chose "arda viraf" to travel via "chinvat bridge" to a questioning/ conference with "Vohumanoe." It is a STORY, yet asserts the gathic concept of accessing higher knowledge/levels of awareness through the chinvat passage. i wrote an article on the subject on FB and its connection to the "nordic bridge of the aesir," which i will post here later.

Furthermore, in my article on the true meaning of "ahura mazda," i explained clearly the brilliant idea behind this zoroastrian divine concept. i showed that based on detailed linguisti c evidence, and comparative vedic and norse literatures, as well as established zoroastrian exegesis, that Zarathushtra saw "intuitive wisdom, vision, and all the brilliant possibilities that have to be realized as MAZDA," and declared MAZDA to be the "true power supreme or AHURA."

Hence, i absolutely disagree with your following quote: "What I understand about creation (and I may not be right) is that Ahura Mazda created Mazda Ahura in other words The Creator of Wisdom (Ahura Mazda) created The Wisdom in Creation (Mazda Ahura) that wisdom which is everywhere."

Now, let us examine the original version of the Enchanting Gathas of Yasna 28.9:

As regards NOT coming "anâish," to You Ahurmazd, this i could not "nôit" do,

"anâish" throughout gathic exegesis has been translated as "not coming," it occurs twice in the "rig vedas," and could alternatively mean "these." in this context, "these" refers to ahurmazd, asha, and vohumanoe.

Fariborz translation : These, you, not Ahura Mazda, ---very vague

I will not waste away "zaranaêmâ" the blessings "yânâish"of the higher truth/ashâ.

"yânâish" from the root "yân," means "gain," and could possibly be related to the O.Fr. gaaigne, from gaaignier "to gain," also "cultivate land." The original O.Fr. sense enfolds the notions of "profit from agriculture." Hence, i think "blessing' would be a close translation.

"zaranaêmâ" from the root "zarn" is a cognate of german "zorn," "rage," and the persian "azordan." In its ancient avestan form it means: "a wasting away," "withering," "decay," "weaken," "to make old," harm."

Fariborz Translation: "Asha also brings fury" --?????????? ??!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !

and the Superb Vouhuman,
It could also be alluding to "the most beautiful and superb (vahishtem,) state of consciousness (manas-châ.)"

Fariborz translation: "Mind also is the best," --somehow close

who gives your praisers "stûtãm," energy/activity "yôithemâ" or in better english: who energizes your praisers to activity.

"yôithemâ" is from the root "yat/yah," activity/energy/ work is identical to the third line of Yasna 30.2. Ancient exegesis adds that this line refers to the conference of Vohuman with the 3 saviors to come and their act of manifesting ever better worlds. Also, of great interest is the connection between "stûtãm/stû" to praise, in the enchanting gathas and the idea of bringing to existence, CAUSE TO STAND, appear, which is inherent in the word.

Fariborz translation: "which strives' to give good guidance" --approx

For You are the most worthy of invocation and beoved "zevîsht-yånghô,"

"zevîsht-yånghô" is from the avestan root "zu" to invoke. it might be very interesting to add that from the same root, comes the word for "God," O.N. guð, Goth. guþ, from PIE *ghut- "that which is invoked" (Skt. huta- "invoked," an epithet of Indra), from root heu(e)- "to call, invoke. the ancient zoroastrian exgesis has added another word/sound play here with "zaosh/zush" lovely, pleasing, good. The persian word dusti/love is from the same root.

Fariborz translation: "For you are to be worthy'--- distant


toward the wish and prayers of those who use their powers (khshathrem-châ) for weal and happiness (sava.)

Avestan "Khshatrem," to wield power, to master, is cognate with Skt. kšatra "dominion;"
Gk. krasthai "to acquire, get," kektesthai "to possess." The line above is related to the avestan commentary of the first half, of the third line of ahun-var.

Fariborz translation: "Mighty, satisfied, also worthy of praise---??? !!!"

The Gathic Varsht-manthar book of commentaries says concerning Yasna 28.9 : About the laudation of Zartosht there is this, too, that is: 'Thou art not astray from us, neither in life, nor in inquiry, nor in openly announcing, even when demonstrating the religion to others, nor in anything whatever, O Spitaman.

With best wishes

Ardeshir