The idea that there is a perfect world superior to our imperfect world is dead. This is death of OBJECTIVITY and the realisation that all truths are by necessity subjective and this is something we have to deal with.
Nietzsche's dead God certainly does NOT include Ahura Mazda. Instead, Nietzsche would be a strong proponent of Ahura and quite likely of Mazda too. His central ethical concept of "amor fati" is as Zoroastrian as anything could possibly be. It could just as well have come from Zarathushtra's own mouth in The Gathas.
The widespread idea that Nietzsche picked Zarathushtra by chance has repeatedly been proven wrong. Nietzsche was well versed in Sanskrit and Avesta since he was a professor of PHILOLOGY rather than Philosophy and there was a tremendous scholar interest in all things Indo-Iranian in Germany in the mid 19th century.
Nietzsche also confirms this himself in his later work "Ecce Homo" where he states that he picked Zarathushtra as his lead figure since he saw Zarathushtra's deliberations as the Birth of Ethics in human history (or the birth of moral philosophy, as most translations to English would suggest). Who would then be better suited to ask the questions confronting modern man than Zarathushtra himself?
2010/2/10 Parviz Varjavand
I feel that there are two Zarathustras. One is the Zarathustra of the Gathas, the other is the Zarathustra of Nietzsche. When Nietzsche's Zarathustra said that "God is Dead", was he also talking about Ahoora Mazda? When so many of us talk about Ahoora Mazda, we argue very hard that He/She is not dead like the others, but why is there a slight smell of death in the air? We will not get rid of that smell if we do not make a clean break with the other Dead Paradigms. Who amongst us is doing this? We need a new Zoroastrianism that Nietsche would want to convert to, not one that fools would gravitate to in order to dull the pain of their meaningless existences.