The difference is between those who see Zoroastrianism as a dualist faith (Panentheism) and those who see Zoroastrianism as a monist ethical system (Pantheism). I firmly believe we can encompass both convictions within the Zoroastrian community, we always have in the past. But it takes two to tango so we'll have to see where this all ends up. To me, difference of opinion is often a sacred good and not something to be despised and avoided with any means possible. We have a lot to learn here from the tolerance of Cyrus The Great!
Ushta
Alexander
2009/11/3 Zaneta Garratt
Dear Parviz, Alexander, Dino, Mehran and friends
the way I see it there are two important schools of thought represented -
Group 1-those of Mr Jafarey, Ron Delavega and Mehran (and I am among this group) that see Ahura Mazda more in the light of a Wise and Good Creator God-
Group 2-those of Parviz, Alexander and Dino- that see a more philosophical approach to Zoroastrainism-
From the first group-To quote Mr.Jafarey in part-
God is wise. He is the wisest. He is knowing, the most knowing. He knows best. He knows best the past, present, and future. He remembers all that exists. He knows the secrets of life. He is wide-viewing and all-watching. He watches every move, open or hidden. He is, above all, MAZDA, super-intellect, supreme-wisdom. (Songs 2:6, 6; 4:5, 8, 13-14; 5:6-7; 6:13; 10:3-4, 8, 10; 11.19)
God "dwells in progress." He is progressive, the most progressive. He is the continuous creator, maintainer, and promoter of the universe and all that is in it -- the sky, stars, sun, moon, earth, everything. It means that He is not a static god who has finished with his creation and is only maintaining or guiding it to a given destiny. He regulates the universe through "asha," the law of precision. His "spenta mainyu," progressive mentality, continues to create and promote his creation. He possesses "vohu manah," good mind, the wisdom that maintains it. He establishes "khshathra," the divine dominion, in which all is well and everything is good and every creature enjoys "âramaiti," serenity. He grants "haurvatât," wholeness, and "ameretât," immortality, to the creation.
God is of one-accord with asha. He does not violate the very laws he has so wisely ordained. His laws entertain no exceptions. It means no unexplained freaks, no never-understood miracles. (2:7)
God is kind. He is friendly, a good friend, an ally. He is loving. He is loved. (4:21; 5:6; 8:14; 9:1; 11:2)
-Ali A. Jafarey- Reposted: 11 Aban 3747 ZRE = 2 November 2009 CE
And to quote Mr.Delavega-
In the Gathas, which you constantly refuse to debate, there is a Creator who created everything through Her-His Most Edifyingly Progressive Mental Nature (Ushtavaiti 2.7) You stick to yout monist 'philosophers', Parviz, I am a simple man I will stick to the Thought Provoker Asho Zarathushtra Spitama- 2 november 2009 19:28:37-Ron Delavega
Now to quote the more philosophical Zoroastrain views-
-We believe that the universe is a manifestation of intelligence (we as humans certainly are exactly that), the Mazda added to the Ahura of Ahura Mazda (therefore, we are Mazdayasni) so whether we refer to ourselves as Pantheists or Panentheists, to us The Universe appears from within itself (much like we do ourselves in relation to the Universe), not as some object created by an outsider who remains distant from his or her creation.- Alexander Bard -den 2 november 2009 20:35:38
Ahura is existence, Mazda is the wise mind that transcends our naked existence and gives meaning to it.-Dino- den 2 november 2009 16:04:34
Dear fellow Mazdayasni Philosophers, (I have explained before why I believe Mazda-Yasna and Philo-Sophia mean the same thing, Lovers of Thinking)- Parviz Varjavand: den 1 november 2009
Somewhere in between the above two groups views are the following very interesting and important opinions-
Dina’a views-
In my view, Zarathushtra's idea of "God" is that of a life
> force that has evolved from a mixed state of being to a
> purely 'good' ashavan state of being. This state of
> being is his notion of 'heaven'. This state of being
> is his notion of 'God'. That which Zarathushtra
> calls 'Mazda' (Wisdom personified) are those
> parts of the life force which have so evolved to a state of
> perfect goodness, perfect wisdom -- truth, its comprehension
> (vohu manah), it embodiment in thought, word and action
> (aramaiti) -- which generate good rule (vohu xshathra),
> completeness and non-deathness (haurvatat / ameretat).
> That (in my opinion) is why he sometimes refers to Mazda in
> the singular and also in the plural.Dina-Friday, October 30, 2009,
Jehan Bagli’s and Mobed Kamran Jamshedi’s views-
As i believe, Ahura Mazda is the absolute Truth, the absolute Purity, the absolute Love and Benevolence. I regard Ahura mazda as the Divine energy that pervades through the Universe. That is the Omnipresence of Ahura Mazda, hence it is in each one, as part of us.- 2009/10/30 Jehan Bagli
I believe in a monist view of the world.
For me, Ahura Mazda, is the seed/essence/ start point/ sub total of everything
As it is the seed/essence then it IS inside every creation/being
It is ONE with everything.- Mobed kamran Jamshidi
Now I am not so smart sometimes but it seems to me that all of us are united by our desire to better the world through good thoughts which lead to good words and consequently to good deeds,which is the desired result of Zarathustra’s teachings,
Kindest regards from Zaneta
To: monarch.parkeast@gmail.com; ushta@yahoogroups.com; zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com
From: solvolant@yahoo.com
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:16:11 -0800
Subject: [Ushta] Ron has been found!
Dear friends,
Ron has been found!? He is at Park East Security!?
AND, What a pleasure it is that he is kicking me out of his brand of frozen mind Zoroastrianism. It could not have been done by a better person. Thank you Ronald Delavega for kicking me out of your brand of Zoroastrianism. Moobedyar Mehran Gheybi needs you, so please come back and help him with your brilliant Zoroastrian observations. I obviously can not help him as I am now officially kicked out of your (and I am afraid his) brand of Zoroastrianism.
Nice to hear from you!
Parviz Varjavand
--- On Mon, 11/2/09, Park East Security
From: Park East Security
Subject: Fwd: [zoroastrians] Re: AW: [Ushta] Fw: Re: A Question for dear Dina
To: zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 2, 2009, 11:17 AM
From: Park East Security
Date: Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: [zoroastrians] Re: AW: [Ushta] Re: A Question for dear Dina
To: zoroastrians@ yahoogroups. com
Ushta Parviz
Seeing that you claim to have 'evolved beyond Zarathushtra' I want to congratulate you. You have now admitted what most of us have known for a very long time. Yes, by 'evolving beyond Zarathushtra', YOU ARE NO ZOROASTRIAN! !! You have now, admitted it whether you realize it or not, so the only things left for you to do, if you are intellectually honest, are two.
1. Stop calling yourself Zoroastrian
2. Find a Non-Zoroastrian name for what you believe (I have suggested you name your belief Varjavandism but you might choose from a literally endless list of names)
Once again, congrats!
Ron
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Parviz Varjavand
Dear Dina,
I have to agree with Dino.
"Intelligent Design" has come to mean the stance that the Creationists take. They mean an "Intelligent Designer" must be behind and outside that which is created. The Intelligence embedded in creation is not what the use of the word "Intelligent Design" brings to mind these days.
For me Ahoora Mazda is Asha and Asha is Ahoora Mazda. The creationists amongst us argue that Ahoora Mazda MADE Asha, and then run away leaving Asha to operate the mess He/She had created. This does not make sense to me and I do not feel like believing in it even if you show me a hundred references from the Gathas that Zarathustra saw it this way. I am an evolved Zoroastrian, I have evolved beyond the intelligence level of Zarathustra! Why can't this be done, we are not the cult of the frozen minds like the other religions, or are we?
We miss your wonderful posts at Ushta,
Parviz Varjavand
--- On Sun, 11/1/09, Special Kain
From: Special Kain
Subject: AW: [Ushta] Fw: Re: A Question for dear Dina
To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 2:38 PM
Dear Dina,
I love your brilliant mind, but I don't like your use of the word "intelligence" here.
The word always refers to cognitive faculties, so even other animals like dolphins or gorillas are intelligent in one way or another, but never as intelligent as university professors. The problem here is that intelligence indicates a self-aware lifeform that actually has a choice and whose choices are based on past learning experiences. And I simply don't see any of that at the beginning of time when our universe started to take shape and first habits were taken.
So why not drop the whole "intelligent design" vocabulary once and for all? It's not getting us anywhere.
Ushta, Dino
--- Parviz Varjavand
Von: Parviz Varjavand
Betreff: [Ushta] Fw: Re: A Question for dear Dina
An: ushta@yahoogroups. com, zoroastrians@ yahoogroups. com
Datum: Sonntag, 1. November 2009, 21:38
With permission from Dina, I am re posting her writing. Parviz.
--- On Fri, 10/30/09, dinamci@aol. com
> From: dinamci@aol. com
> Subject: Re: A Question for dear Dina
> To: solvolant@yahoo. com, jafarey@aol. com
> Cc: kamran.jamshidi@ gmail.com, zgarratt@hotmail. com
> Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 7:07 PM
> Dear Parviz,
>
> I agree with Mobed Kamran Jamshidi's view below in all
> respects:
>
> 1. I agree when he says that there is no definitive
> answer, the best we can do is give our opinions of what
> Zarathushtra' s thought may have been on these issue; and
>
> 2. I agree when he says that "Ahura Mazda, is the
> seed/essence/ start point/ sub total of everything. As
> it is the seed/essence then it IS inside every
> creation/being It is ONE with everything. One is all, all is
> one." Although Kamran says this is his opinion, in my
> view I see evidence in the Gathas, that it is also
> Zarathushtra' s opinion, and it is a view that makes more
> sense to me than the notion of a 'God' who is separate
> and apart from the rest of us, was perfect from the
> beginning, but created us imperfect (i.e. a mix of wrong and
> more good).
>
> It is significant that in more than one verse, Zarathushtra
> uses the verb 'zatha-' in connection with Mazda's creation
> of the world. This word 'zatha' means
> 'birthing'. Thus we see an idea of creation
> by birthing, by emanation. So as Kamran says, this
> life force is the seed, and is in everything, is a part of
> everything -- all is one and one is all.
>
> You asked me about intelligent design. I agree with
> Hoyle that it is impossible to (logically) view the natural
> order of things -- in biology, in physics, in chemistry, in
> all existence -- without concluding that there is some
> order, some principles, some rules, some laws, call it
> whatever you want, but some principles that result in a
> design that makes things work the way they do -- even chaos
> is a part of that order (an interesting paradox!).
> That is how I understand 'intelligent design'. There
> is an intelligence which generated this order, this design.
>
> But where I disagree, with due respect, from Jehan and Dr.
> J, is that I do not think this 'order' of the universe was
> created by an agency that is separate and apart from the
> rest of what exists -- i.e. a separate 'God'.
>
> In my view, Zarathushtra' s idea of "God" is that of a life
> force that has evolved from a mixed state of being to a
> purely 'good' ashavan state of being. This state of
> being is his notion of 'heaven'. This state of being
> is his notion of 'God'. That which Zarathushtra
> calls 'Mazda' (Wisdom personified) are those
> parts of the life force which have so evolved to a state of
> perfect goodness, perfect wisdom -- truth, its comprehension
> (vohu manah), it embodiment in thought, word and action
> (aramaiti) -- which generate good rule (vohu xshathra),
> completeness and non-deathness (haurvatat / ameretat).
> That (in my opinion) is why he sometimes refers to Mazda in
> the singular and also in the plural.
>
> I know you don't like long answers, so I will not
> elaborate. That, in a nutshell, is what I see in the
> Gathas -- ideas that I find a lot less problematic than any
> other notion of 'God' or 'creation' that I have come
> across.
>
> I hope I have answered your questions.
>
> Wishing you the best,
>
> Dina G. McIntyre.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar