The point here is that as we as Zoroastrians believe in the miracle of the universe, we truly LOVE and are amazed at the world and embrace it with curiosity. This is an attitude that runs through ALL aspects of Zoroastrian life and does so within all different variations of the religion (despite our other differences). I have never met a Zoroastrian who did not share this attitude of amazement, openness and curiosity towards Existence. It is what unites us all. I call it the ZOROASTRIAN PATHOS. The Pathos from which we in turn take our ETHOS (the other thing we therefore all have in common), our system of values.
And while western discourse is torn in the endless debate between the existence of intelligent design or not, this is a non-issue for us. 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.
It is not only a more imaginative view of the world, it is also and always was in coherence with modern science. Which is why our set of values remains, independent from any culturally specific moralisms as they are. Zoroastrianism's greatest contribution to human history was therefore the creation of the UNIVERSAL human rights, as seen in the entrance of the U.N. building in New York.
Ushta
Alexander
2009/10/31 Jehan Bagli
Dear Alexander:
I just took the quote right out of Hoyle's talk. I fully appreciate what you are saying and I agree with you. Personally i am myself uncomfortable with the term 'design' as used by Hoyle. You are absolutely right in pointing out that "Asha is the manfestation of intelligence, not the design of intelligence....".
Thank you for the clarification.
Peace and Light
Jehan
On 31-Oct-09, at 12:40 PM, Alexander Bard wrote:
>
> Dear Jehan
>
> You are clearly a monist, buit please not that if you separate the intelligence from the design, you have also separated Ahura Mazda from The Universe. If you however mean that design and intelligence are one and the same thing, you are a monist. But in that case, using and supporting the term intelligentr design is a bit unfortunate. It would be better in English to speak of "intelligence manifested". Just a recommendation! Even Hoyle may have been a bit sloppy with his words, or he may honestly have been just a good old Christian dualist.
>
> Ushta
> Alexander
>
> 2009/10/30 Jehan Bagli
>
>
>
> Daer Parviz:
>
> I am sorry Parviz if I gave you a wrong impression. The intelligent design is just a concept of human thought. It does NOT IMPLY someone up there in the sky is sitting with a potters wheel shaping things to send them down.
>
> 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. Zarathushtra may have anthropomorphized it for the sake of understanding but that is only to bring the concept within the realm of comprehension of the mankind. Fortunately or unfortunately mankind has a wide spectrum of intellectual capacity. In order that everyone can fathom, the concept needs to be dressed in some way to reach the entire mankind.
>
> I hope this clarifies the matter.
>
> Mehr Afzoon
>
> Jehan
>
>
>
>
> On 30-Oct-09, at 6:11 PM, Parviz Varjavand wrote:
>
>>
>> Dear Jehan,
>>
>> You are not giving me a clear answer as to YOUR position such as the one Moobed Kamran Jamshidi gave. So he is the only Monist Moobed we have so far that I know of. You and Mr. Jafarey do also imply that Zarathustra was teaching Intelligent Design and an Ahoora Mazda separate from His/Her creation, that he was a Monotheist rather than a Monist. This is what I gather from your complex post, if I am wrong, please do correct me.
>>
>> I wish Dina would be kind enough to share with us her views on Intelligent Design. Please Dina, if you read this post, give us an answer as to YOUR view on this.
>>
>> Ushta te,
>> Parviz Varjavand
>>
>> --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Jehan Bagli
>>
>>
>> From: Jehan Bagli
>> Subject: Re: [Ushta] A question for dastoor Bagli
>> To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
>> Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:43 PM
>>
>>
>> Dear Parviz:
>>
>> I believe that Hoyle was proponent of Order in Nature. He said so in his Omni Lecture to the Royal Society that,
>>
>> "...biomaterial with their amazing measure or order must be the outcome ofINTELLIGENT DESIGN. No other possibility I have been able to think of..."
>>
>> Hoyle's mention of INTELLIGENT DESIGN is yet another case of a scientist accepting existence of knowledge/intellige nce beyond the realm of the physical. In a sophisticated manner Hoyle is trying to tell us what Mobedyar from Kerman is telling you in his own way.
>>
>> The above anouncement only confirms the statement of Hoyle, that you have quoted. These confirm that Hoyle was staunch believer in the Order of Nature. His statements only reinforces the concept of Asha that pervades Zarathushtrian theology.
>>
>> The concept of Asha that clearly embodies the Truth that is vested in the Immutable Order of Nature demonstrates beyond all doubts the strength of the philosophy of life delineated by Zarathushtra.
>>
>> Peace and Light
>>
>> Jehan Bagli
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30-Oct-09, at 3:58 AM, Parviz Varjavand wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Moobed Jehan Bagli,
>>>
>>> The astronomer Fred Hoyle says, "the likelihood of even the simplest biological cell arising via random process is comparable to that of a tornado sweeping through a junkyard assembling a Boeing 747".
>>>
>>> As a learned Zoroastrian Moobed, what do you think the position of Zoroastrianism is with regards to this issue?
>>>
>>> Yours sincerely,
>>> Parviz Varjavand
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar