The substance of spirit

Egyptian thinking!
Dualism was invented by the Egyptians. It was their big contribution to the Abrahamic faiths and importantly it ocurred around 1,200 BC - 500 years AFTER Zarathushtra!
Parviz is right: Zoroastrian dualism was introduced by the Manicheans, it is a heritage from Manicheism and NOT from Zarathushra. What Zarathushtra is discussing is different EXPRESSIONS of the very same substance, the substance of ASHA. Nowhere does Zaratushtra discuss an opposition between any two substances.
Because the same second you start discussing two DIFFERENT substances you also have to address HOW do these two substances communicate with each other???
What does spirit use to communicate with materia? Spirit or materia? Or some mysterious THIRD substance? What does materia use to communicate with spirit?
The only solution is of course to realise that the Egyptians were dead wrong. There is only one substance with an infinite possibility of expressions. As Zarathushtra and the pre-Manichean Zoroastrians believed.
But why refer to this only substance as materia? Why not settle for spirit instead??? Modern physics believes that materia is illusionary anyway, that materia is just our perception applied on the substance of spirit.
Ushta
Alexander

2009/1/8 Special Kain
- Dölj citerad text -

Dear Parviz,

I'm going to make breathtaking generalisations, so please hold your breath! :-))
Christianity, Judaism and Islam (and many others, but let's stay with the Holy Trinity of monotheism) all take the soul for granted. It does exist, it is separate from the physical body, it will survive my body's death.
In much older mythologies the soul wasn't taken for granted. You had to EARN immortality through being a folk hero and becoming godlike through heroic thoughts, heroic words and heroic deeds. In Daoism only the ones who did perform certain rituals and experimented with their bodies' paranormal energies properly were able to survive their physical death - as immortalised and godlike beings. And in some Daoist schools they were even trying to come up with the perfect diet, so we could live forever in our physical bodies. Most - if not all - Daoist schools were striving for immortality, and their heaven was on top of a mountain ("the immortal man" is composed of two Chinese signs for "mountain" and "human being").
At one moment in time, the immortal soul got democratised. Suddenly everybody had or even WAS such an immortal soul. Without having put in any effort.

--- Parviz Varjavand schrieb am Do, 8.1.2009:

Von: Parviz Varjavand
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] What if materia is spirit???
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Donnerstag, 8. Januar 2009, 15:15

Ushta Alex,

What you say is extremely important. The "Minoo" world does not mean "the Spirit" world, it means "of the Mind" or "Mental" world. Sure, any mind can create it's own reality, but it does not mean that it would be a Real reality. The "Ravan" or "Urvan" comes from a root that means "To Move". To Move is the distinction that begins when you exit the Plant kingdom and enter the Animal kingdom. A cat has Ravan because it can go hunt a mouse, the geranium plant can not.

The first line of attack you will receive would be from the Linguists who will tell us that we are wrong philologically and Parviz is making these things up as he goes. I have what I say from the best philologists familiar with the roots of the Iraji (Aryan) languages who presented your point of view and defended it some sixty to seventy year ago. Their main argument was that if you take the spirit as something separate than the material away from other religions, they will collapse, while if you do it to Mazdayasna, it only gets stronger and more beautifully logical.

Zoroastrianism of post Mani is full of the Manichean concepts of separation of the material world from the spiritual. Pre-Zoroastrian Mazdayasna (I can see Ronald dancing in his chair!) and even the Mazdayasna of Zarathushtra will only become more logical (more Mazdayasna) if you make the body and the soul to be one. A soul separate from a body is not logical, so it is not Mazdayasna. The healthy logical mind can not swallow this spoofy separation when it can not find the fifty percent of the equation. It does not have the tools to locate such distinction. Madam Zuzu with her crystal ball has the tools, she will bring the soul of the departed back and talk to it, but science has not the tools.

Enters the clan of Moobeds and Moobedyars shouting "Do you mean that anything that science has no tools for its measurement does not exist?". "YES" we should shout back, "otherwise Jiins have to be as real as bacteria for us and that is not scientific and it is not Mazdayasna". Our minds can not celebrate its own intelligence if fed such nonsensical foods. Hang in there Alex, you are saying something big. Your mind must be extremely healthy to get to this point all by itself.

Ushta Te,
Parviz Varjavand