"Religion" is a social endeavor, not a school. The concept of religion as a school is very Bahai but not a universal idea. So a "religion" is rather an excuse for people like you and me to share an interest and become friends.
If somebody already preached the truth 3,700 years ago - is it not then the ultimate intellectual and social position to JOIN the train of truth that already exists rather than claim to seek the truth all over again?
If you want take a stance against the stupidities of this world, including the secular and atheist stupidities - is it not then the best position to take a position which PREDATES them all and still has complete and utter credibility today?
That's what I think. And the other Mazdayasni converts I know. You don't have to become a Zoroastrian. Zoroastrians do not believe in any heaven, so they don't missionize. Which is precisely why it is the ultimate "religion" to join. It just makes life easier. So why not???
Of course Zoroastrianism is not more of a religion than Daoism and Buddhism are. It is a philosophical tradition. Actually the opposite of the Platonist tradition which has dominated western thought since the Greeks. The true "Zoroastrian" among the Greeks was instead Heraclitus.
Brotherly love
Alexander
lördag 20 oktober 2007
måndag 8 oktober 2007
What really interested Nietzsche - about Zarathushtra
Dear Amir
I absolutely agree, and so does Nietzsche himself. He discusses this in his later work "Ecce Homo".
The character "Zarathustra" in his opus "Also Sprach Zarathustra" is a fictional character and quite different from the historical figure Zarathushtra, the author of The Gathas.
What inspired Nietzsche however to choose the name Zarathustra was that the historical character Zarathushtra was the first great ethicist in human history, even earlier than Lao Tze in China. And ethics rather than the existence of God is what interests Nietzsche. Nitezsche is not really interested in atheism or theism. He is interested in how modern man handles an increasingly godless world, a world where the foundation for morals is gone and pure ethics is all that remains. This interpretation of Zarathushtra is actually correct. So Nietzsche did not choose the character without a good reason, and it was a proper one too.
Ushta
Alexander
2007/10/8, Amir Kasra Naji <amirosphere@yahoo.se>:
I absolutely agree, and so does Nietzsche himself. He discusses this in his later work "Ecce Homo".
The character "Zarathustra" in his opus "Also Sprach Zarathustra" is a fictional character and quite different from the historical figure Zarathushtra, the author of The Gathas.
What inspired Nietzsche however to choose the name Zarathustra was that the historical character Zarathushtra was the first great ethicist in human history, even earlier than Lao Tze in China. And ethics rather than the existence of God is what interests Nietzsche. Nitezsche is not really interested in atheism or theism. He is interested in how modern man handles an increasingly godless world, a world where the foundation for morals is gone and pure ethics is all that remains. This interpretation of Zarathushtra is actually correct. So Nietzsche did not choose the character without a good reason, and it was a proper one too.
Ushta
Alexander
2007/10/8, Amir Kasra Naji <amirosphere@yahoo.se>:
Dorood
Dear Alexander
This is true. Hitler himself did not have any connection to
Zoroastriansim, but he was familiar with Nieztche, If he read the
whole book or not, I cant say, but his Ideas about The Superman did
infact come from Nieztche; of course this was not Nieztchs intentions;
but nonetheless Hitler did misinterpret Nieztche.
Zartosht did not come up with the idea of Superman or Atheism, this
was due to Nieztche. And most Iranians Agree with me that Nieztches
version of Zarathustra is his own creation and ideas and not the
thaughts of the prophet Zartosht
All the Best
Amir Kasra
söndag 7 oktober 2007
Zarathushtra, Nietzsche and Hitler
Dear Amir
I don't think Hitler understood Nietzsche at all. For example, Nietzsche absolutely loathed the common antisemitism of the German people and once expressed his wish that all German anti-semites should be rounded up and excecuted. So Nietzsche would clearly have hated the Nazis. He was even so ashamed of being a German and the bigotry of Germans that he often claimed to be a baron Polish when he travelled around Europe. He also broke with Wagner due to Wagner's fascination with German nationalism and instead began to listen to French opera and composres like Bizet. So I don't see any connection between Nietzsche and Hitler (it is true that Nietzsche had a sister who became a Nazi after Nietzsche died, but she definitetly did not understand what her brother had written before he died, so the sister had nothing to do with his writings).
What interested Nietzsche with Zarathushtra was not his theology (which by the way does open for the interpretation that we are if not gods ourselves then at least definitely potentially godlike, which is the Zoroastrian concept of "ahuravatat") but his ETHICS. Nietzsche was opposed to the MORALISM of Judaism and Christianity and what fascinated him with Zarathushtra was that Zarathushtra preached an ethical rather than a moralizing system (what happens is always a result of causes and effects and never a result of divine intervention, as it is in Christianity). Nietzsche wrote about this himself in "Ecce Homo", his biographical text which he published after "Also Sprach Zarathustra". This is is where he refered to Zarathushtra as "the father of all ethics" and Spinoza as his "brother of ethics". Which explains why Western converts to Zoroastrianism often come through studies of Nietzsche and Spinoza first.
I hope this clarifies the issue so that we get the Zarathushtra-Nietzsche connection right. Hitler never spoke of Zarathushtra at all and never read any Zoroastrian scriptures. Actually he didn't read much books at all. So let's just be a little bit careful with connecting Hitler with Zoroastrianism or Western interest in Zoroastrianism. There seems to be no historical connections whatsoever.
Ushta
Alexander
I don't think Hitler understood Nietzsche at all. For example, Nietzsche absolutely loathed the common antisemitism of the German people and once expressed his wish that all German anti-semites should be rounded up and excecuted. So Nietzsche would clearly have hated the Nazis. He was even so ashamed of being a German and the bigotry of Germans that he often claimed to be a baron Polish when he travelled around Europe. He also broke with Wagner due to Wagner's fascination with German nationalism and instead began to listen to French opera and composres like Bizet. So I don't see any connection between Nietzsche and Hitler (it is true that Nietzsche had a sister who became a Nazi after Nietzsche died, but she definitetly did not understand what her brother had written before he died, so the sister had nothing to do with his writings).
What interested Nietzsche with Zarathushtra was not his theology (which by the way does open for the interpretation that we are if not gods ourselves then at least definitely potentially godlike, which is the Zoroastrian concept of "ahuravatat") but his ETHICS. Nietzsche was opposed to the MORALISM of Judaism and Christianity and what fascinated him with Zarathushtra was that Zarathushtra preached an ethical rather than a moralizing system (what happens is always a result of causes and effects and never a result of divine intervention, as it is in Christianity). Nietzsche wrote about this himself in "Ecce Homo", his biographical text which he published after "Also Sprach Zarathustra". This is is where he refered to Zarathushtra as "the father of all ethics" and Spinoza as his "brother of ethics". Which explains why Western converts to Zoroastrianism often come through studies of Nietzsche and Spinoza first.
I hope this clarifies the issue so that we get the Zarathushtra-Nietzsche connection right. Hitler never spoke of Zarathushtra at all and never read any Zoroastrian scriptures. Actually he didn't read much books at all. So let's just be a little bit careful with connecting Hitler with Zoroastrianism or Western interest in Zoroastrianism. There seems to be no historical connections whatsoever.
Ushta
Alexander
2007/10/7, Amir Kasra Naji <amirosphere@yahoo.se>:
Dorood
Dear Ferri
The way I have come to view this issue is such:
Zartosht the first person in history that discovered the One God,
Ahura Mazda, Spread his knowledge in order for people to discover God
forthemselves, by giving them directions instead of manipulating them
with miracles or brainwashing Leaders to force their beliefe on
others, I will not go further by naming historical figures.
Zartosht believed that there was One God, and that the Universe he
created; Perfect. We just need to discover it and become a part of it
and manifest Gods creation in all walks of life. We should aspire to
achieve Perfection in our lives Being next to God in his creation,
instead of fearing him or being "Goul-oriented"; Heaven and Hell.
That is tabood in the west, more or less; "nobodies perfect".
We don´t need Priests, Rabbis or Mullas to talk to God, He is always
present; we just need to open our eyes.
We are all perfect right from the start; however we happen to be or
look like with all our flaws; it´s the flaws that makes us perfect;
thei´re there to remind us that we should focus only on the blessings.
Nietzche, in my opinion, misunderstood Zartoshts teachings, and saw
zoroastrianism as a kind of zen buddism for example where we become
Gods, this is not what Zartosht preached; We can only take part of
Gods creation or become One with God, not become Gods ourselves.
Unfortunately there are those Zartoshties that believe the latter.
Nieztches Zarathustra sais "God is Dead" and "We must take the leap
into being Supermen"; With other words: Elevate ourselves beyond good
and Evil. The God Niezche talks about is the Abrahamian God;God;
Jehova; Allah. So we could interpret it that he means: if Zarathustra
lived today he would claim that This God The Biblical one is dead; but
nonetheless this can be misunderstood.
And So we come to Hitler, who misunderstood Nieztche further; The
Superman; the Supreme race.
No Iranian believes himself to be of the supreme race; We are Aryans
and very proud of this, but never intolerant of other beliefs or
cultures, and History is the witness of this.
So I see the whole Nieztche, Hitler association as a big cultural
crash between, Well Lets Call It; East and West.
Of course the similarities over weigh the differences.
In hope of a brighter Fuiture
All the Best
Amir Kasra
lördag 15 september 2007
Mazdayasna vs Simplistic faiths with ready answers to everything
Dear Zaneta
Most people are actually attracted to a religion which provides them with simple and straight-forward answers to all questions in life, regardless of whether the answers are correct or not. Bahai and Jehovah's Witnesses are perfect examples of such faiths with simle answers to every question. They are devoid of critical thinking,. Shia Islam is another example, as is Catholicism. We have encountered people who have tried to change Zoroastrianism into such a sloganeering religion too. But the problem is that it doesn't work, it's not compatible with the Mazdayasna focus on independent thinking and the celebration of good mind. However, this fact probably explains why Mazdayasna has remained a small and rather sophisticated religion and philosophy, stuck in between simplistic faiths such as Islam, Bahai and Christianity, with their huge followings. The true miracle is that Mazdayasna still has managed to survive through all of this in all its complexity.
Ushta
Alexander
2007/9/15, Zaneta Garratt <zgarratt@hotmail.com>: Hi Dan, you have great courage and wisdom, I DO admire you, we have a form of so-called Christianity CALLED the Jehovah Witnessese, and in my view they are far worse than Bahai and I cannot understand why people convert to their boring religion, I have told some of them that they are telling a lot of lies and they are reallly boring when they have tried to convert me, but some people still get caught by their crappy message which is also that you should follow them blindly, I also knew one girl whose family saw through them and left,and if you do this they freeze you out,sadly enough you will always find people that fall for rediculuous cults that demand this kind of blind faith, Best wishes Zaneta
Most people are actually attracted to a religion which provides them with simple and straight-forward answers to all questions in life, regardless of whether the answers are correct or not. Bahai and Jehovah's Witnesses are perfect examples of such faiths with simle answers to every question. They are devoid of critical thinking,. Shia Islam is another example, as is Catholicism. We have encountered people who have tried to change Zoroastrianism into such a sloganeering religion too. But the problem is that it doesn't work, it's not compatible with the Mazdayasna focus on independent thinking and the celebration of good mind. However, this fact probably explains why Mazdayasna has remained a small and rather sophisticated religion and philosophy, stuck in between simplistic faiths such as Islam, Bahai and Christianity, with their huge followings. The true miracle is that Mazdayasna still has managed to survive through all of this in all its complexity.
Ushta
Alexander
2007/9/15, Zaneta Garratt <zgarratt@hotmail.com>: Hi Dan, you have great courage and wisdom, I DO admire you, we have a form of so-called Christianity CALLED the Jehovah Witnessese, and in my view they are far worse than Bahai and I cannot understand why people convert to their boring religion, I have told some of them that they are telling a lot of lies and they are reallly boring when they have tried to convert me, but some people still get caught by their crappy message which is also that you should follow them blindly, I also knew one girl whose family saw through them and left,and if you do this they freeze you out,sadly enough you will always find people that fall for rediculuous cults that demand this kind of blind faith, Best wishes Zaneta
Baha'i and Zoroastrianism
Dear Dan and Mr Khosraviani
From what the two of you are telling us - which is very much in line with my own experiences of the Bahai faith - nothing can be further from the foundation of Mazdayasna than the Bahai faith in its current form. We have no such thing as obligations and blind faith in Mazdayasna. The Bahai must have covered up their true message, and the Mazdayasni in Iran at the end of the 19th century must have been very naive about their own faith, to have enabled the mass exodus of Mazdayasna to Bahai that occured at the time. I'm happy we experience no such exodus today, perhaps we even begin to experience its exact opposite.
Ushta
Alexander
From what the two of you are telling us - which is very much in line with my own experiences of the Bahai faith - nothing can be further from the foundation of Mazdayasna than the Bahai faith in its current form. We have no such thing as obligations and blind faith in Mazdayasna. The Bahai must have covered up their true message, and the Mazdayasni in Iran at the end of the 19th century must have been very naive about their own faith, to have enabled the mass exodus of Mazdayasna to Bahai that occured at the time. I'm happy we experience no such exodus today, perhaps we even begin to experience its exact opposite.
Ushta
Alexander
2007/9/15, Dan Jensen <kaweah@yahoo.com>:
Dear Mr. Khosraviani,
It makes me very happy to hear that your mother
converted to Mazdayasna from Baha'ism, and that you
discovered the truth about it.
The most holy Baha'i book, Kitab-i-Aqdas, says that
the most important duty for all people is to (1)
become Baha'is, and once they've converted, (2) to
obey Baha'i law.
Another very holy Baha'i book, the Iqan, says
something like "to ask why or wherefore is blasphemy!"
Ushta
Dan--- "m.kh." < mjshj@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Zaneta , Dan , Yuri and other friends shaad
> zivid
> My mother borne Bahaayee but was converted to
> Deene Behi , Mazdeyasni by my father, I had in mind
> to marry a Bah. 's girl in my mother's family
> therefore I studied Bah. but the more I studied ,
> more uncommon things I found . primary it was known
> as BAABY which later on was changed to BAHAAYEE .
> the first thing you are asked is to have faith
> (eemaan ) to Bah. which means to follow blindly and
> close the eyes of your Mind ( kherad ) which is
> against the Deene Behi's which states listen ,
> study and accept whatever your mind tells you .
> their appearances is excellent , they are ordered to
> be nice and societive and welcome the newcomer
> warmly . their children are sent to ethics' school
> (darese Akhlaagh) at the age of 3 . which are taught
> that every good things are produced by Abdol-bahaa (
> their prophet ), therefore hardly you could prove
> other wise . Their holly books namely Aghdas ,
> Bayaan , Eeghaan ,… are in Arabic and somehow
> duplicate of Ghoraan (holly book of
> Islam ) . the number of 9 and 19 are holly to them
> because for each Arabic alphabet associated with a
> number (ABJAD , HAVAZ, HOTI,..) i.e. A=1 ,B=2,.. ,
> therefore the summation of alphabet of BAHA and
> BAHAOLAH becomes respectly 9 and 19 . for this
> reason their calendar is 19 months and 19 days in
> each month of any year . their way of praying ,
> fasting ,… are more or less similar to Islam . I
> recommend those who are interestee in Bah. to read
> their books and study their ritual with open mind !
> Paayandeh o pooyaa bemaanid .
> M.Khosraviani
fredag 14 september 2007
Navjote
Since many readers are curious on how a navjote is performed.
Here is a web link to a good short film which shows how a navjote (or sedreh pooshee in Farsi) is performed:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Dojwc8httLw
Thank you to the Gatha Group for making this film and making it available on the web!
Ushta
Alexander
Here is a web link to a good short film which shows how a navjote (or sedreh pooshee in Farsi) is performed:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Dojwc8httLw
Thank you to the Gatha Group for making this film and making it available on the web!
Ushta
Alexander
tisdag 11 september 2007
Why Ahura Mazda is not a father figure god (Mazdayasna - and the four desert religions)
Christians, Judaists and Muslims alike have always tried to claim Zoroastrianism as some kind of forebearer to their own "truths". But the historical reality is that Zoroastrianism is far closer related to Hinduism and Indian philosophy than to any of the three (four) desert religions to the west. As Mazdayasni, we need to work towards a correction of the history ascribed to us and our religion. For example, Zarathushtra's understanding of Ahura Mazda has a lot more to do with the Hinduist concept of Brahman than with any of the father-figure gods. Look for example how Ahura Mazda is a combination of a masculine and a feminine word in the Avestan language. Ahura Mazda clealy has no gender, no human characteristics. This is why Ahura Mazda is compatible with modern science whereas the father figure gods are not.
Ushta
Alexander
Ushta
Alexander
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)