Mehran and Ron are right. There is no Ahriman to be found in The Gathas, not even any proto version of Ahriman. The concept of a cosmological rather than mental Zoroastrianism (a folk Zoroastrianism rather than a Mazdayasna Zoroastrianism) is of a far later date, probably belonging to the Sassanid era. I believe Ushta is a forum where we all agree that we see the mental Zoroastrianism as the only meaningful and credible one for us. Pantheists or Panentheists, we deal with one divinity, Ahura Mazda, and see the other divinities in folk Zoroastrianism merely as personifications of the foces of nature.
2009/1/26 MoobedyAr Mehran Gheibi
It may that ahriman is some how like satan. Such concept is however a Sassanid concept, but not a Zoroastrian gAthA-ic concept. In gAthA, angrahe is versus to spenta, and both are mental/spiritual (=mainyoo). In my own point of view, if human being is not able of doing good or bad things, freedom would become meaningless. God has given the two abilities to human being and left him/her free to do everything and ......
Nik-o shAd bAshid
MoobedyAr MehrAn Gheibi.
--- On Mon, 1/26/09, osred90
Subject: [Ushta] Re: Fw: Renovate (Kill) the World!
Date: Monday, January 26, 2009, 3:44 AM
I am taking it you accept that Zoroaster introduced the concept of
Angra Mainyu even if he didn't actually use the word.
Angra Mainyu became Ahriman which was the basis for the Satan of
Christianity and Satanism (I can't speak for Islam).
Of course Angra Mainyu is opposed by Spenta Mainyu rather than
Aramazda. Also Z. has the concept of 'Druj' which is different from
Angra Mainyu. This distinction may be glossed over in Christianity.
However we can distinguish them in English by using 'The Devil'
(Greek: Diabolos) to translate Druj (responsible for all Evil by
definition) - and 'Satan' to translate Angra Mainyu (destructive
mentality in people)
If we go with what Satanists mean - then Satan is a god who is a pure
embodiment of a destructive mentality - i.e. Angra Mainyu.
--- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, "ztheist"
> Ushta Osred
> I see where we are going to have some debates. Zarathushtra
> introduced Satan? Are you serious? My friend, in the Gathas there
> NO SATAN , evil is a possibilty inherent in any ethical choice AND
> Mazda Ahura has nio opposition and thus no Satan. I can supply
> innumerable and extensive evidentiary proofs for all the above. Can
> you supply evidence that Z created satan? Or are you reading Young
> Avesta deviation unto Z's true doctrines?
> Ushta te