This is correct!!!
Actually, without change, existence itself would be impossible. Or rather: Existence is Change! Existence is Evolution! Our perception actually only works through the registration of changes. That which does not change at all can not be perceived. So change is FUNDAMENTAL.
I believe the built-in relativism of the concept of asha is precisely what saves Zoroastrian philosophy from becoming dated and defunct. Your insights below only add to this understanding.
And don't worry about Mehran Gheibi, he's our little joker in this crowd, not really understanding scientific reasonings like evolutionism etc. But we love our mobed Mehran anyway.
2008/10/11 Special Kain
I'm still new to Zoroastrianism and learning to understand it better every day. This is something that once striked me, and I'd like to share this thought with you. Please correct me if I got anything wrong.
There's a highly nuanced range of meaning to the concept of asha, but it seems to be an attribute, if not the core element of Ahura Mazda. Since it can be seen as the laws of nature, we could assume that asha as emanating from Ahura Mazda also means that the laws of nature have evolved over time.
Charles Sanders Peirce already proposed an evolutionist understanding of nature at a time when the universe was seen as a big, well-oiled machine, consisting of eternally valid laws and regularities. So the law was first. But today it is a scientific fact that even the laws of nature have by chance evolved out of something else - which seems to fit in with Zarathushtra's concept of asha as one of Ahura Mazda's attributes. Thus, Ahura Mazda is best compared with Alfred North Whitehead's concept of GOD as the totality of existence and reality as a PROCESS. There's nothing static about Ahura Mazda or asha. Just because things change slowly doesn't mean that they don't change at all!
Since there's nothing eschatological about evolution, change is good in itself.
Have a nice weekend,