I can't say I really "want" any of these things. However, I believe that's exactly how things are.
What is the truth about the world and what is the truth about Mazdayasna, before, including and after Zarathushtra.
I probably would have reached this conclusion myself on the nature of things and would have been happy to join a religion presenting these beliefs and made friends with those who share my beliefs within such a religion.
But why found a new religion when there has been one for 3,700 years with these beliefs already in place?
So I share your beliefs even if we have come to our conclusions for very different reason and through very different methods.
And that's what counts. At the end of the day, what a majority of Zoroastrians believe will also constitute what contemporary and future Zoroastrianism is. We canät accept interpretations of old texts that run counter to our own beliefs because then we would also kill or faith and our religion.
The debate will only sharpen our minds and force us to be more precise. And that can only be for the good.
2008/7/26 Parviz Varjavand
I want my Mazdaism school to have:
Ahoora to mean "That Which IS".
Mazda to mean "That Which THINKS".
Asha to mean "The force that animates all of the cosmos".
I want Asha and Ahoora Mazda to be one and the same.
I want Asha to be present in every particle of the cosmos.
I SEE ASHA PRESENT IN EVERY PARTICLE OF THE COSMOS; so why should I say that Asha dwells somewhere outside the cosmos!?
It is sad that I have to repeat what "I WANT" so many times, it is ugly and it is selfish, I know. But there is no other way. If you know where it is that you want to go, it is up to YOU to stir your car and go there. Others will take you where they want to take you, and if you yank the stirring wheel from them haphazardly, the car will hit a tree or have a crash and you don't want that.