Haurvatat is indeed a STATE OF BEING and one that we can, if only briefly, reach in our everyday lives. Haurvatat is when our thinking, our speaking and our acting is in harmony with who we think we should be to ourselves. It can occur during an everyday activity, for example during gardening. Therefore the translation of Haurvatat as "perfection" is unfortunate as it points us in the wrong direction in English. You are all three consequently right!
So we should stop think "Haurvatat " as an Abrahamic concept (as an eschatological concept), which it obviously is not. Haurvatat is instead the Zoroastrian ethical ideal, closely related to "freshokereti". I have often proposed (and will do so again) that we refuse to translate haurvatat (like I would prefer people not to try to translate asha and amordad) as to instead force westerners to think fresh and new (the way they do with the Chinese concepts of dao, yao and ying and the Indian concept of kharma).
This does not mean that "death" can not be "haurvatat", I think it very much is (in a Deleuzian way, exactly like Dino has described it) but it's a description on which I would be happy to disagree with other Zoroastrians for now. The poetic description of death as "the return to the world-as-one" or "the part of the whole" as Jehan says, points us in this direction, according to me. Death is after all the horizon against which we enjoy life to its fullest and that which provides us with (the proper and not subordinated) humility towards Ahura in everything we do. So haurvatat would be better translated as "completeness in our humanity" than as "perfection".
Ushta
Alexander
2009/10/24 Jehan Bagli
Dear Rory:
Please let me clarify the situation.
When I wrote last about this aspects of Mazda, I explained Haurvatat as follows:
Haurvatat is the fulfillment of the spiritual manifestation that leads to the harmony, to the Oneness of the physical personality, with the innate spiritual, to bring forth wholeness/completeness of Haurvatat. It is indeed as you said ….. actually our return to a part of the whole.
I do NOT see the association of Haurvatat or completeness with the concept of death. My understanding of Haurvatat is a state of being that mankind must tend to achieve in this corporeal life. To work and tend towards, the realization in thought, words and actions, the Good rule (Vohu Khshthra) that is achievable through Truth (Asha) and Good thinking (Vohu Manah) in the corporeal existence. Mankind must tend to completeness or wholeness, to attain the Oneness of the innate Divine energy with the physical.
Zarathshtra in his hymns barely speak about death. The term death is only used just once (Ys 53.8) in the Gthas and that too in context of his hope to conquer the phenomena. I understand death as a transition and not a completion of life. Yes, it is the end of material existence, but to me, it is the end of the terrestrial and the beginning of the celestial journey of life. The organic return to water and carbon dioxide, the inorganic returns to earth and then there is the Mental/Spiritual that as I see continues the life. Here Perhaps I may find disagreement with views of others on Ushta. However that is a part of Zarathushtra's teaching. It is the concept of winning death over (Ys 53.8) that Zrathushtra expresses in the aspect of A-meretat (non-death-ness) when time may stand still. This can happen in microcosm for an individual and in the macrocosmic fashion for the entire humanity. That is when the corporeal existence will evolve to a level where it will be one with Mazda.
Peace and Light
Jehan
On 24-Oct-09, at 11:29 AM, Rory wrote:
> Dear Jehan (and friends),
>
> Many thanks, you're clear explanations are very enlightening. They are themselves even more thought provoking I'm afraid!
>
> I agree with Dino's comment that one enters the realm of eschatoloy when discussing Haurvatat as meaning the end of time and the idea of a resurrection. The question is whether our own end of time at our death is a microcosm of the end of time in all existence and whether the completeness/perfection/wholeness applies to all and of course, most importantly, what this "completeness" could actually be?
>
> It may sound like lunacy to some, especially modern minds, but it is quite easy to see how the ancients could logically (in their minds) have arrived at a doctrine of resurrection if one believes in a doctrine of "completeness". If death was seen as a "lack of" or some form of "incompleteness" then it would be reasonable if one believes in a doctrine of final completeness that a final completeness of the universe would logically have meant the individual also being made whole/complete/perfect again. One's own time would stand still at death whilst the time of all existence would continue till reaching an entirety of Haurvatat which would, in order to be complete have to include completeness also of man's mind and body and thus to achieve this resurrection would be "necessary". And if resurrection becomes "necessary" one can then see the need for a "resurrector" and so on...
>
> What if the completeness is actually our return to a part of the whole? In other words, not resurrection but death itself is Haurvatat? I hope I am making sense! Was the idea of resurrection possibly a later misunderstanding? Is/was this idea of death as Haurvatat via a return to the whole via death itself believed by any Zoroastrians?
>
> Also, could the instant of death be the actual "eternity" some believe in whereby time stops at that instant? Do they see eternity as never ending time or time itself being stopped/frozen? If at the instant of death our own time stops then that instant in some minds could actually be an instant of eternity? I don't necessarily believe this myself but am trying to understand how these ideas came in to being and why they persist unless there is a deeper meaning I don't myself understand.
>
> Ushta and thanks again,
>
> Rory
>
> --- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Jehan Bagli
> >
> >
> > Dear Rory:
> > You have some very thought provoking questions let me attempt to
> > handle them one at a time.
> >
> > Here I am taking your first and last question together.
> >
> > what is the key message of Farshokereti and is it in conflict with
> > the Gathas?
> > The key message of the concept in my view is consistent with the core
> > of the Gathas, since the objective of the Gathic teachings is to
> > refresh, renovate and render righteous the corporeal existence.
> > Farshokereti just exemplify in a legendary fashion how it will happen
> > at the end of Time.
> >
> > Were the Gathas so far ahead of their time that men were incapable
> > and probably still are incapable of fully understanding the deeper
> > meanings. That they were conceived 3700 years ago beggars belief!
> > One thing we must remember at the outset that here we are dealing
> > with a language -Avesta - that is extinct centuries if not millennia
> > ago. It has no grammar of its own and was orally transmitted for some
> > 2000 years. The reason we are able decipher anything of the Gathas at
> > all, is because the language was very closely cognate with Sanskrit.
> > It is the Sanskrit grammar that has helped us understand Gathas as
> > much as we do today. As if that was not enough of a hurdle, these
> > hymns are full of allegories and metaphors, and with layers of
> > meanings. This is why we have so much difficulties in understanding
> > these poems. To answer your query 'Were the Gathas so far ahead of
> > their time" I would absolutely YES. The fact that prophet himself
> > expresses his frustrations in Ys 46.1 when he asks/prays to the Lord
> > Wise
> > " To what land shall i flee? where should i turn to? They exclude
> > me from my family and my clan
> > ....How then shall i satisfy thee Wise Lord".
> > This to me clear expression that what he had to say was far from the
> > comprehension of the society of his time. He did not have meny
> > followers until he moved eastward to Bactria where his teachings found
> > roots in the court of King Vistaspa.
> >
> > If it was developed after the Gathas, then was it a step forward,
> > building on the wisdom of the Gathas, or a step in the wrong direction
> > for whatever reason?
> > Individual Salvation is mentioned in the Gathas (Ys 46.10,11).
> > However based on the Gathic teaching (Ys 43.5) of rewards for good
> > and retribution for the evil, not all individuals attain their Oneness
> > with Mazda at the end of terrestrial life. The later evolved concept
> > of Farshokereti is believed to purify all individuals (souls)
> > irrespective of their actions in cororeal existence to render the
> > entire human race to immortality/Godliness or One with Mazda.
> >
> > I think it is very important that such doctrines be understood
> > clearly before anyone hastily dismisses them...
> > I believe one must be prudent to evaluate any concept of a
> > tradition, as old Zorastrianism is, before reaching conclusions to be
> > eclectic with any aspect of tradition.
> >
> > is the universe in the process of gaining completelness in some way?
> > In his hymns Zarathushtra repeatedly uses the spenta, spentem and
> > their derivatives. I am no philologist but based on my reading the
> > word is derived from Avestan/Sanskrit root spi/shvi meaning "to
> > expand ,swell or increase". However another reputed sanskrit/ Avestan
> > scholar Stanley Insler interprets it as 'Virtuous or Benevolent'.
> > There are other reputable scholars who interpret it as 'Holy'.In fact
> > in Ys 43.5,7,9,11,13 and 15 the Prophet addresses Ahura Mazda as
> > Spentem. In the Gathas the word qualifies various Divine
> > abstractions. I have concluded that the term represents a quality of
> > "Progressively Benevolent" way of thinking, speaking and acting -
> > Being. For me the entire creation, the whole Universe is in the state
> > of flux of being 'Progressively Benevolent' - continuously evolving to
> > perfection, through the knowledge of science and culture.
> >
> > Is our own micro A-meretat reflected in or a reflection of a macro A-
> > meretat happening in all existence?
> > I think that is very true. In oder to bring about the A-meretat state
> > of being in the corporeal existence, it is incumbent that each one of
> > us attain our microcosmic Oneness of the physical and the spiritual-
> > wholeness, completeness -Haurvatat. For only through that we can
> > relate to the same in others, to attain the state in Marocosm. That is
> > absolutely essential to before we step to that last stage of Eternal
> > Bliss A-meretat.
> >
> > I hope all of the above is of some help.
> >
> > With Peace and Light fro Mazda
> >
> > Jehan
> >
> >
> >
> > On 19-Oct-09, at 9:55 AM, Rory wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Jehan,
> > >
> > > Thank you. This helps greatly. The key questions for me are, if
> > > Freshokereti came about after the Gathas then, mythological
> > > embellishments aside, what is the key message of Farshokereti and is
> > > it in conflict with the Gathas? I am a firm believer in "if it ain't
> > > broke don't fix it". If it works for the common man as a myth and we
> > > can interpret it into modern scientific and philosphical terms then
> > > we should do so. If it was developed after the Gathas, then was it a
> > > step forward, building on the wisdom of the Gathas, or a step in the
> > > wrong direction for whatever reason? From what I can understand the
> > > essential message was clearly a positive development and rather than
> > > being in conflict with was in keeping with Gathic doctrine. With the
> > > trend in certain areas to re-invent Zoroastrianism I think it is
> > > very important that such doctrines be understood clearly before
> > > anyone hastily dismisses them...
> > >
> > > What you say about the legend of final purification evolving as an
> > > explanation of how universal existence will attain the state of A-
> > > meretat I find very interesting, is the universe in the process of
> > > gaining completelness in some way? Is our own micro A-meretat
> > > reflected in or a reflection of a macro A-meretat happening in all
> > > existence?
> > >
> > > I am more and more facinated with how Gathic principles in many ways
> > > seem to have devolved into mythology and even into the scriptures of
> > > other belief systems. Yet we must be grateful or a lot of this
> > > wisdom might never have reached us if this had not happened. Without
> > > Tradition the Gathas would never have reached us. It is a source of
> > > wonder to me that so many non-Zoroastrian "scholars" can have seen
> > > Zoroastiranism as "the roots of the tree" with regards their own
> > > faiths and even primintive forms of their own ideas rather than the
> > > other way round. How much profound wisdom is veiled behind
> > > superstitious stories? Were the Gathas so far ahead of their time
> > > that men were incapable and probably still are incapable of fully
> > > understanding the deeper meanings. That they were conceived 3700
> > > years ago beggars belief!
> > >
> > > I can see how the myth could have brought about the doctrine of the
> > > resurrection in Christianity specifically as well as messianic
> > > thought generally in Judaism, Islam and Christianity. So many times
> > > Zoroastrians over millenia must have fully understood the old saying
> > > "where ignorance is bliss t'is folly to be wise"!
> > >
> > > So if A-meretat is our desire then Freshokereti is one of the ways
> > > we go about achieving it?
> > >
> > > Ushta,
> > > Rory
> > >
> > > --- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Jehan Bagli
> > > >
> > > > Rory:
> > > > Farshokereti (ph Farshogard) is a Myth that evolved in the
> > > > Zoroastrian religion centuries, if not a millennium after the time
> > > > Zarathushtra. Whereas the concept of individual salvation of soul
> > > > pervades through the Gatha, these hymns say nothing about he
> > > Universal
> > > > salvation or Final purification of all souls that Farshokereti
> > > > represents. In the Gathas, which are uniannimously conidered by the
> > > > academicians as the words of prophet Zarathushtra, the word
> > > > Farshokereti does not even appear in these hymns.
> > > >
> > > > The legend goes that three Saoshyants will appear after the prophet
> > > > and renovate he existence. Their names are:1) Ukhshyat-ereta (Ph.
> > > > Ushider) -he who makes Righteousness grow, 2) Ukhshyat-nemah (Ph.
> > > > Ushider Mah) - he who makes Reverence grow and 3) Astvat-ereta (Ph.
> > > > Soshyosh) - he who embodies righteousness. The first two are
> > > believed
> > > > to be born, each sequentially, a millennium after Zarathushtra while
> > > > the last one is to arrive 57 years before the end of time (12000
> > > > years). It is the last Saoshyant who is believed to preside over the
> > > > process of renovation to purify the universe through final
> > > > dispensation of the evil to render mankind immortal. They are all
> > > > linked will Zarathushtra in that they will be born of virgin maids
> > > who
> > > > will be impregnated while bathing in a lake Ksaoya, where the
> > > seeds of
> > > > Zarathushtra are mystically preserved in the waters of a lake.
> > > >
> > > > It is difficult to determine when the Zurvanite scheme of a linear
> > > > time line of 12000 years infiltrated "main-stream" religion of
> > > > Zarathushtra. However, all this will start to happen in the tenth
> > > > millennium and end at the end of 12th millennium. That will be the
> > > end
> > > > of time, that is when all evil will be vanquished and the era of
> > > > "Making Wonderful" begins. When the existence will be renovated to
> > > its
> > > > state of being ever prosperous. When there will be no aging , no
> > > > sickness and no death. The time will have stopped and the entire
> > > > existence will have reached the state of A-meretat -a state of non-
> > > > death-ness. That is the concept of Farshokereti.
> > > >
> > > > Let me hasten to point out that the Saoshyants mentioned in the
> > > > Gathas has no relevance to the saoshyants of this legend.
> > > According to
> > > > Zarathushtra all man and women who live their life through
> > > truth,love,
> > > > kindness and bringing happiness to others are Saoshyants. They are
> > > the
> > > > benefactors and the true saviors. To the prophet they are the
> > > > renovators of existence. However i believe the legend of final
> > > > purification evolved as an explanation how universal existence will
> > > > attain the state of A-meretat.
> > > >
> > > > In the Ninth century texts of the Pahlavi era such as Bundahisn,
> > > > Dinkard, and Dadestan-e-Denik the doctrine of Universal Salvation is
> > > > so vividly elaborated that it may well have caused the
> > > insemination of
> > > > Messianic thought in Judaism, Christianity, and Mahayana Buddhism.
> > > >
> > > > Personally i look at it as a legend. However, we must realize that
> > > > the mission of Zarathushtra was to eradicate evil from the physical
> > > > existence, not through punishment but by changing the thinking of
> > > the
> > > > individual -by changing their mind. The notion is to bring the
> > > > physical world - Getig in close proximity to the Divine- Monog
> > > world.
> > > > Basically most zoroastrian rituals depict an expression of this
> > > > purification. Farshokereti is an expression of that final
> > > attainment.
> > > >
> > > > I hope this helps
> > > >
> > > > Jehan Bagli
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 17-Oct-09, at 8:14 AM, Rory wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Dear Parviz, Alexander, Bahman, everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > There seem to be so many greatly varying definitions and
> > > > > explanations for Freshokereti.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wiki says this: 'Frasho.kereti (fraðô.kərəti) is the
> > > > > Avestan language term for the Zoroastrian doctrine of a final
> > > > > renovation of the universe, when evil will be destroyed, and
> > > > > everything else will be then in perfect unity with Ahura Mazda.
> > > The
> > > > > term probably means "making wonderful, excellent".'
> > > > >
> > > > > Another says this: 'In the final analysis, frasho-kereti is seen
> > > as
> > > > > the transformation to an ultimate and ideal future existence
> > > both in
> > > > > the material and spiritual existences - the realization of the
> > > goal
> > > > > of creation. Goodness will reign supreme over evil. Frasho-
> > > kereti is
> > > > > also a time when all human beings will have realized their
> > > khvarenah
> > > > > - their full potential in grace. For the living, the culmination
> > > of
> > > > > their efforts and the efforts of preceding generations will result
> > > > > in the best possible existence on earth.'
> > > > >
> > > > > Alexander says 'Freshokereti is the metaphysical horizon against
> > > > > which we value everything and set our priorities in life. As such,
> > > > > it is not some event brought to us by some father figure outsider,
> > > > > but much more the potentiality of our best thoughts, words,
> > > actions'.
> > > > >
> > > > > Parviz says 'I consider Freshokereti more a discipline and an
> > > > > attitude than an ideal'.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bahmansays:"This eventual triumph of Good over Evil or Ahriman in
> > > > > later Avesta is the Farshogard, of the Gathic Freshokereti. One
> > > must
> > > > > mention that some have interpreted the Gathic Freshokereti, a
> > > > > continuous state of rejuvenation and refreshing of the world and
> > > not
> > > > > a one time event!"
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia defines the meaning of "ideal" in ethics as "values that
> > > > > one actively pursues as goals". The POTENTIALITY that Alexander
> > > > > refers to I find can be misunderstood if applied as a goal but I
> > > > > note he describes it as a priority so am not too sure if this is
> > > or
> > > > > is close to an ideal or not because it is unclear whether by
> > > calling
> > > > > it a priority it is also a goal, I suppose not? It depends on
> > > > > whether with regards these priorities Alexander means we also
> > > > > implement them. On the other hand what I understand Pariviz is
> > > > > referring to is a set of standards and the process of maintaining
> > > > > and implementing them. Bahman's points of the eventual triumph of
> > > > > good over evil also makes sense also possibly as a triumph of
> > > order
> > > > > over disorder for example and could be applied in all sorts of
> > > ways
> > > > > from evolution to conduction. Can we put a clear definition/
> > > > > description together that we can all agree on? Just so idiots like
> > > > > myself don't get cross-eyed?
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been reading about the social disorder anomie which you
> > > could
> > > > > say arises from a lack of Frashokereti:
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia says the following:
> > > > > The nineteenth century French pioneer sociologist Émile Durkheim
> > > > > borrowed the word from French philosopher Jean-Marie Guyau and
> > > used
> > > > > it in his influential book Suicide (1897), outlining the social
> > > (and
> > > > > not individual) causes of suicide, characterized by an absence or
> > > > > diminution of standards or values (referred to as normlessness),
> > > and
> > > > > an associated feeling of alienation and purposelessness. He
> > > believed
> > > > > that anomie is common when the surrounding society has undergone
> > > > > significant changes in its economic fortunes, whether for good or
> > > > > for worse and, more generally, when there is a significant
> > > > > discrepancy between the ideological theories and values commonly
> > > > > professed and what was actually achievable in everyday life.
> > > This is
> > > > > contrary to previous theories on suicide which generally
> > > maintained
> > > > > that suicide was precipitated by negative events in a person's
> > > life
> > > > > and their subsequent depression.
> > > > >
> > > > > In Durkheim's view, traditional religions often provided the basis
> > > > > for the shared values which the anomic individual lacks.
> > > > > Furthermore, he argued that the division of labor that had been
> > > > > prevalent in economic life since the Industrial Revolution led
> > > > > individuals to pursue egoistic ends rather than seeking the good
> > > of
> > > > > a larger community. Robert King Merton also adopted the idea of
> > > > > anomie to develop Strain Theory, defining it as the discrepancy
> > > > > between common social goals and the legitimate means to attain
> > > those
> > > > > goals. In other words, an individual suffering from anomie would
> > > > > strive to attain the common goals of a specific society yet would
> > > > > not be able to reach these goals legitimately because of the
> > > > > structural limitations in society. As a result the individual
> > > would
> > > > > exhibit deviant behavior. Friedrich Hayek notably uses the word
> > > > > anomie with this meaning.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anomie as a social disorder is not to be confused with anarchy.
> > > > > Anarchy denotes lack of rulers, hierarchy, and command, whereas
> > > > > anomie denotes lack of rules, structure, and organization. Many
> > > > > proponents of anarchism claim that anarchy does not necessarily
> > > lead
> > > > > to anomie and that hierarchical command actually increases
> > > > > lawlessness (see e.g. the Law of Eristic Escalation). As an older
> > > > > variant, the Webster 1913 dictionary reports use of the word
> > > anomie
> > > > > as meaning "disregard or violation of the law".
> > > > >
> > > > > Ushta,
> > > > > Rory
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar