onsdag 23 december 2009

Asha vs Salam/Shalom

Dear Parviz and Ardesir

Parviz is right. The only time asha can be translated as"truth" is in connection to science. When asha is applied to art its proper translation is "beauty" or "aesthetics". When asha is applied to ethics its proper translation is "righteousness". The reason why asha should not be translated as truth is precisely because it limits its meaning and we will then get it all wrong. Better then to import asha to the European languages to make them all the richer for it. And Parviz is right that asha is a meningless concept unless we LIVE it. Which was of course also Zarathushtra's point. The concept of "salam/shalom" is always hypocritical. As Mazdayasni we have always recognized that the world is full of antagonisms. It is how we deal with those antagonisms rather than how we hide them and pretend they don't exist that matters. That is why we don't greet each other with "Peace" in Mazdayasna, we greet each other with a wish for "Wisdom" or rather "Sanity".

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/22 Parviz Varjavand

Dear Ardeshir,

You are a great scholar and I appreciate very much your post. I, however hate how religions take men hostage to their confused and confusing ideas. Take the concept of Salam and Shalom in Islam and Judaism. While many Muslims and Jews can lecture you until the cows come home about what a profound concept they have in Salam, Shalom, the bottom line is that when it comes to actually doing it, they can not do it, and maybe because they do not know what they were talking about all the while that they were wasting our time pontificating about ideological hogwash.

"Truth" in Science means that "Water boils around a certain temperature". This Truth is not open to millions of interpretations and manipulations. I call this "Asha in Science". Am I wrong? The rest of the pontifications about Asha, I would like to throw as far away as I can. Why? Because men have hurt each other in the name of abstract Truths they can never define properly. If I want to make my car run well, I use the ASHA of how to take care of parts of my car. But there are no ASHA involved in how I can take good care of my love relations with my wife and children. There I have to go to "ASHA-VAHISHTA" and choose amongst millions of ASHA that may or may not work for me. To confuse ASHA and ASHA-VAHISHTA is to be dumb in the most profound way (as far as I am concerned).

"Thou shallt know Asha and Asha shall set you free"; I wish I could punch who ever said this in the mouth, and feel good about it!

Yours,
Parviz Varjavand

--- On Sun, 12/20/09, ardeshir farhmand wrote:


From: ardeshir farhmand

"to make true/realize wonder & beauty; ashá/artá, Vedic ŗtá, Norse Urðr,"

"ashá" is a fascinating concept in Zarathushtra's teachings, and is the most repeated in the enchanting Gathas or the poetic songs of the seer/prophet. Yasna 27.14 or "ashem vohü" manthra is dedicated to ashá, and is the second most effective manthra in the enchanting songs. The aim of this article is to demonstrate the true meaning of ashá according to the poetic gathas, the ancient exegesis, and a comparative study of ashá in the vedic and norse literature.

ashá, is the second of "ameshá/amertá spentá" or auspicious immortals, hence one of the eternal spiritual aspects, emanations or creations of ahura mazda through which all other creation is realized.

ashá comes from the root ah/as, Proto Indo European "es," meaning: essence, underlying principle, truth, the inward intention, origin, source. Greek "ousia" is a cognate. The ancient commentaries translate ashá/artá as "rásti ahurmazd" meaning the truth of ahurmazd, or the divine essence. As i said in my earlier articles, ashá and ahurá come from the same root, and the ancient commentaries translate ashá also as ahuric virtues, ahuric efficacy, ahuric skill, ahuric excellence, ahuric ability to make true or "ahráyih."

In Avestan the sound "sh" is interchangeable with the sound "rt." Thus, ashá is also interchangeably pronounced as artá. ashá/artá is very closely connected to the idea of ease, flow, skill, creativity in workmanship. It should be added that the ancient exegesis always adds the words "kar o kar-op," or creativity, opus, master-work as a footnote to ashá, ahráyih or ahuric essence/virtues.

ashá/artá 'close connection to "ease in producing the intended effect," is demonstrated in many passages in the enchanting Gathas including; second line of Yasna 27.14 and second line of Yasna 51.8. The word ushtá, meaning "fulfillment of wish/desire," "radiant happiness," an epithet of ashá, is fundamental to both demonstrating this connection and understanding the concept of ashá.

The Vedic equivalent ŗtá in the Rig Veda also means: truth, true essence and skill in workmanship, and is closely associated with rhythm, verse and the cosmic order.
It might be additionally illuminating to compare the inherent idea of divine virtue/skill/ ease inherent in the idea of ashá/artá with the Proto Indo European ar-ti (Skt. rtih "manner, mode;" Gk. artios "accomplish,complete ;" Armenian arnam "make;" Ger. art "manner, mode"), from the base ar- "fit together, join"

The Norse Urðr is also very close. Urdor is not "fate"[as believed by many. It is rather a continuous FLOW of happenings, actions, abilities and powers that SHAPE and CREATE future and the fabric of reality. Urðr is a a conceptual mystery and refers to how the intentions and activities, are capable of weaving reality. The word seem to carry the inherent idea in ashá/artá in the sense of "to make true" and "to bring to realization. It comes in the same sense in the second line of Yasna 30.9, when it refers to ashá/artá in bringing about the continuous renovation of the existence.

According to Denkard 3.13-14, vöhü manö/consciousness is active in good thoughts, seraosha/inspiratio n in good words, and ashá/artá in good deeds. Ashá is thus "represented as active and effective. In addition, by a word play and referring to the first line of Yasna 33.1 and the first line of Yasna 28.11, Denkard exegesis calls ashá, the discerning eye/áish of life/existence.

The idea of ease and skill to realize and make true, seems to be the underlying principle of ashá. ashá is closely connected to, but is NOT the cosmic order. it is instead the creative and ingenious principle behind the cosmic order and the ethical rules of the humanity. ashá is the flame and spark of the existence, an animating and creative principle of infinite intelligence.

It is important to remember that time and space are relative. At a given moment, in a certain circumstance, there are impossibilities. But from the eternal point, the point beyond time and space, in the infinity of time, NOTHING is IMPOSSIBLE, and the existence is an amazing field of magical and awesome possibilities. There is nothing impossible in the existence except what is outside manö/consciousness/ bewusstsein. What is not in our consciousness today, may be in our consciousness after some time for the consciousness can grow and become ever wider/vöhü manö. And this potential possibility of infinite wonder, beauty and awe/vohü is the truth of ahurmazd or "ashem vohü." This wondrous and truly magical essence is at the core of the existence.

According to the third line of "ashem vohü" manthra, the truth/ashá of our being is related to, but different from all others, it is truly unique. But in the truth of our being, according to our own formation, our growth/progress is unlimited. It is LIMITED only by our IGNORANCE of the true ahuric essence of the existence.
ardeshir

måndag 21 december 2009

Asha vs Dao

Dear Dino and Ardeshir

Very well written!
To better understand the concept of asha, let's look at how western philosophy has come to see human ideals:

- Science deals with the pursuit of truth
- Art deals with the pursuit of beauty
- Politics deals with the pursuit of the good
- Love deals with the pursuit of passion

Now, asha is all four at the same time. Asha is both truth, beauty, the good and passion and more specifically the pursuit of them all, therefore a term which we should insist on as just asha and not translate too easily to other languages than Avestan.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/21 Special Kain



Dear Ardeshir

It's so perfectly clear now that Daoist philosophy and Zoroastrian philosophy have so much in common!

http://www.iep.utm.edu/daoism/

It seems that Asha and Wu-Wei are almost the same: the Dao (the process of reality) as expressed through Wu-Wei (effortless action).

Ushta, Dino

--- ardeshir farhmand schrieb am Mo, 21.12.2009:


Von: ardeshir farhmand
Betreff: [Ushta] "to make true/realize wonder & beauty; ashá/artá, Vedic ŗtá, Norse Urðr,"
An: "mehrdad farahmand"
CC: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Montag, 21. Dezember 2009, 5:01



"to make true/realize wonder & beauty; ashá/artá, Vedic ŗtá, Norse Urðr,"

"ashá" is a fascinating concept in Zarathushtra's teachings, and is the most repeated in the enchanting Gathas or the poetic songs of the seer/prophet. Yasna 27.14 or "ashem vohü" manthra is dedicated to ashá, and is the second most effective manthra in the enchanting songs. The aim of this article is to demonstrate the true meaning of ashá according to the poetic gathas, the ancient exegesis, and a comparative study of ashá in the vedic and norse literature.

ashá, is the second of "ameshá/amertá spentá" or auspicious immortals, hence one of the eternal spiritual aspects, emanations or creations of ahura mazda through which all other creation is realized.

ashá comes from the root ah/as, Proto Indo European "es," meaning: essence, underlying principle, truth, the inward intention, origin, source. Greek "ousia" is a cognate. The ancient commentaries translate ashá/artá as "rásti ahurmazd" meaning the truth of ahurmazd, or the divine essence. As i said in my earlier articles, ashá and ahurá come from the same root, and the ancient commentaries translate ashá also as ahuric virtues, ahuric efficacy, ahuric skill, ahuric excellence, ahuric ability to make true or "ahráyih."

In Avestan the sound "sh" is interchangeable with the sound "rt." Thus, ashá is also interchangeably pronounced as artá. ashá/artá is very closely connected to the idea of ease, flow, skill, creativity in workmanship. It should be added that the ancient exegesis always adds the words "kar o kar-op," or creativity, opus, master-work as a footnote to ashá, ahráyih or ahuric essence/virtues.

ashá/artá 'close connection to "ease in producing the intended effect," is demonstrated in many passages in the enchanting Gathas including; second line of Yasna 27.14 and second line of Yasna 51.8. The word ushtá, meaning "fulfillment of wish/desire," "radiant happiness," an epithet of ashá, is fundamental to both demonstrating this connection and understanding the concept of ashá.

The Vedic equivalent ŗtá in the Rig Veda also means: truth, true essence and skill in workmanship, and is closely associated with rhythm, verse and the cosmic order.
It might be additionally illuminating to compare the inherent idea of divine virtue/skill/ ease inherent in the idea of ashá/artá with the Proto Indo European ar-ti (Skt. rtih "manner, mode;" Gk. artios "accomplish,complete ;" Armenian arnam "make;" Ger. art "manner, mode"), from the base ar- "fit together, join"

The Norse Urðr is also very close. Urdor is not "fate"[as believed by many. It is rather a continuous FLOW of happenings, actions, abilities and powers that SHAPE and CREATE future and the fabric of reality. Urðr is a a conceptual mystery and refers to how the intentions and activities, are capable of weaving reality. The word seem to carry the inherent idea in ashá/artá in the sense of "to make true" and "to bring to realization. It comes in the same sense in the second line of Yasna 30.9, when it refers to ashá/artá in bringing about the continuous renovation of the existence.

According to Denkard 3.13-14, vöhü manö/consciousness is active in good thoughts, seraosha/inspiratio n in good words, and ashá/artá in good deeds. Ashá is thus "represented as active and effective. In addition, by a word play and referring to the first line of Yasna 33.1 and the first line of Yasna 28.11, Denkard exegesis calls ashá, the discerning eye/áish of life/existence.

The idea of ease and skill to realize and make true, seems to be the underlying principle of ashá. ashá is closely connected to, but is NOT the cosmic order. it is instead the creative and ingenious principle behind the cosmic order and the ethical rules of the humanity. ashá is the flame and spark of the existence, an animating and creative principle of infinite intelligence.

It is important to remember that time and space are relative. At a given moment, in a certain circumstance, there are impossibilities. But from the eternal point, the point beyond time and space, in the infinity of time, NOTHING is IMPOSSIBLE, and the existence is an amazing field of magical and awesome possibilities. There is nothing impossible in the existence except what is outside manö/consciousness/ bewusstsein. What is not in our consciousness today, may be in our consciousness after some time for the consciousness can grow and become ever wider/vöhü manö. And this potential possibility of infinite wonder, beauty and awe/vohü is the truth of ahurmazd or "ashem vohü." This wondrous and truly magical essence is at the core of the existence.

According to the third line of "ashem vohü" manthra, the truth/ashá of our being is related to, but different from all others, it is truly unique. But in the truth of our being, according to our own formation, our growth/progress is unlimited. It is LIMITED only by our IGNORANCE of the true ahuric essence of the existence.
ardeshir

torsdag 17 december 2009

Asha-Vahishta

Dear Parviz

No, luckily I do not ignore this at all. I have always said that there are two ashas.
The external asha of the laws of the universe and the asha-vahista that is concerned with the mental and therefore with ethics.
The two are both connected and separate, that is precisely why the term asha should not to translated to any European language, at least not to only one word in English. That would miss the genius and the complexity of the concept.
So I believe we actually agree, strongly, on this issue.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/17 Parviz Varjavand



Dear Alex,

What is science and who is a scientist?
I consider a scientist an Ashavan and science the filed of dealing with Asha.
You keep ignoring this aspect of Asha is to keep mixing Asha and Asha-Vahishta and remaining confused.
While physics is the art of dealing with Asha, psychology is the art of dealing with Asha-Vahishta. This kind of distinction between the art of dealing with sciences that are physical in nature and sciences that are mental in nature (Guity and Minoo) will clarify this chapter in Zoroastrianism thought while mixing the two realms together will only help us talk in loops endlessly.

Ushta,
Parviz Varjavand

--- On Thu, 12/17/09, Alexander Bard wrote:


From: Alexander Bard
Subject: [Ushta] Farsightedness vs Shortsightedness (another take on Asha vs Druj)
To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, December 17, 2009, 5:16 AM



Dear Friends

Looking at the examples Zarathushtra uses in The Gathas som other good terms for "asha" and "druj" in English would be the opposites of FARSIGHTEDNESS versus SHORTSIGHTEDNESS. Living in accordance with asha means using our best minds to look at the long-term effects of our behavior and let that be the judge of what is the right thing to do (which explains why Zoroastrianism is an ethical and an ecological ideology) whereas "druj" is acting merely on impulse while ignoring the effects of one's behavior. So there is a strong agreement here between Zarathushtra and the process philosopher Gilles Deleuze when Deleuze states that "the problem with humanity is not evil but plain stupidity". We celebrate wisdom, that is precisely what Mazdayasna means!

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/17 ardeshir farhmand



Dear Rory and Dino,

the concept of evil being stupid and short-sited is a very interesting aspect of zoroastrianism. please note, that good/bad has to do with growth, ability to progress, widening of horizons and being dynamic or static according to the gathas.

it is all a matter of vision, foresight, awareness and/or bewusst-sein or lack thereof. i posted an article on the same subject here before. according to the gathas, Yasna 30.3, bad is bad devil because it has stopped growing, and therefore is incapable of ultimate foresight and vision.

there is NOWHERE in zoroastrianism the idea of hairy monsters being responsible for our mistakes. the concept is that when we lose awareness, stop to grow in understanding, we make choices that are ultimately clumsy and purely stupid. look at the corporate world, banking crisis, the environment, and see if our collective choices have been anything but

ardeshir

Farsightedness vs Shortsightedness (another take on Asha vs Druj)

Dear Friends

Looking at the examples Zarathushtra uses in The Gathas som other good terms for "asha" and "druj" in English would be the opposites of FARSIGHTEDNESS versus SHORTSIGHTEDNESS. Living in accordance with asha means using our best minds to look at the long-term effects of our behavior and let that be the judge of what is the right thing to do (which explains why Zoroastrianism is an ethical and an ecological ideology) whereas "druj" is acting merely on impulse while ignoring the effects of one's behavior. So there is a strong agreement here between Zarathushtra and the process philosopher Gilles Deleuze when Deleuze states that "the problem with humanity is not evil but plain stupidity". We celebrate wisdom, that is precisely what Mazdayasna means!

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/17 ardeshir farhmand



Dear Rory and Dino,

the concept of evil being stupid and short-sited is a very interesting aspect of zoroastrianism. please note, that good/bad has to do with growth, ability to progress, widening of horizons and being dynamic or static according to the gathas.

it is all a matter of vision, foresight, awareness and/or bewusst-sein or lack thereof. i posted an article on the same subject here before. according to the gathas, Yasna 30.3, bad is bad devil because it has stopped growing, and therefore is incapable of ultimate foresight and vision.

there is NOWHERE in zoroastrianism the idea of hairy monsters being responsible for our mistakes. the concept is that when we lose awareness, stop to grow in understanding, we make choices that are ultimately clumsy and purely stupid. look at the corporate world, banking crisis, the environment, and see if our collective choices have been anything but

ardeshir

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Special Kain wrote:



Dear Rory

I agree. It all leads to nurturing and petting one's self-victimization, so you can't be held responsible for your own choices: «Oh, it wasn't me! It was the devil who has tempted me ... and everybody is doing it, too!»
We can't take integrity, intelligence or self-criticism for granted. Frankly, I don't know who's truly capable of seriously and honestly criticizing themselves if they got something wrong. We have to act as good narcissists and have a good time. It's our duty to have fun (see Slavoj Zizek and Peter Sloterdijk). We have to buy «identity goods» and act as decently hysterical consumerists that are allegedly aware of what they truly want in life (which is to go shopping and be like the Photoshop kings and queens on the cover of the magazine).
I also agree that the opposite of prise isn't humility (which is only self-destructive), but insecurity!!! Good point! Success entails resentment. There are some petty losers that are jealous of me and want me to «degrade» myself. And pride isn't arrogance, either.

Ushta, Dino

--- Rory schrieb am Mi, 16.12.2009:


Von: Rory
Betreff: [Ushta] Re: Definitions of ethics and moralism
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Mittwoch, 16. Dezember 2009, 20:52



Dear Alexander and Dino,

It's not the good instead of right I see as important personally but rather the evil/bad instead of wrong that causes so much trouble in the world. It is the concept of intelligent evil that is so alien to Zoroastrianism. Even "folk Zoroastrianism" treats Ahriman as "mindless" and random. The idea that their are hairy beasties out there trying to divert us from "God's will" or whatever is the world so many people on the planet live in.
Another example of a trouble-causing duality is humility being the opposite of pride. I heard someone say that the opposite of pride is actually insecurity.. .

Ushta,
Rory

--- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, Alexander Bard wrote:
>
> Dear Dino
>
> According to the vast majority of philosophers - from Baruch Spinoza via
> Ludwig Wittgenstein and Jürgen Habermas to Slavoj Zizek - yes, these people
> have got it all wrong. Even Habermas makes the distinction that morality is
> the opposition of good vs evil and ethics the division between right vs
> wrong and thereafter concerns himself only with ethics, leaving morals to
> theologians. So should we. Why add to the confusion when we can be part of
> the clarification? Especially as we want to communicate that Zoroastrianism
> is not moralizing and not Abrahamic but is ethical and concerned with cause
> and effect within a probabilistic universe as its basis for values and
> valuations.
>
> Ushta
> Alexander
>
> 2009/12/15 Special Kain
>
> >
> >
> > Dear Alexander
> >
> > I know philosophers who claim that "morals" are concerned with one's
> > character and what's right and wrong in relation to one's personality and
> > that "ethics" are concerned with behavior in relation to social systems,
> > such as professional ethics at the workplace. Would you now say that they
> > got it all totally wrong?
> >
> > Ushta, Dino
> >
> > --- Alexander Bard ** schrieb am *Di, 15.12.2009:
> > *
> >
> > *
> > Von: Alexander Bard
> > Betreff: [Ushta] A crash course in Zoroastrian ethics: Why we recite the
> > Ashem Vohu!
> > An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
> > Datum: Dienstag, 15. Dezember 2009, 1:55
> >
> > *
> > * * * *
> > * *
> >
> > *Dear Tomash
> >
> > The problem is that "good thoughts, good words, good deeds" is such a
> > sloppy and outright poor translation.
> > It invokes simplicity and moralism where Zarathushtra instead understood
> > that life is complex and one should be ethical and not moralizing (ethics is
> > values that refer to cause and effect, morality is values that are just
> > blindly obeying the orders of superiors, such as the Abrahamic gods).
> > So a much better translation would be: "A constructive mindset fosters a
> > constructive language which in turn fosters constructive actions which in
> > turn fosters constructive thoughts." A strictly ethical feedback loop
> > putting causes and effects together, exactly the way the world works.
> > What is the right thing to think, say and act then? Well, it is what inside
> > of you which makes you truly you. It is that which you define yourself
> > with. What kind of person are you to yourself? It is not even what you
> > should do but in a deeper sense what you WILL do.
> > Which is why it is so crucial to us as Mazdayasni to FIRST decide who we
> > are to ourselves. This is why we meditate and this is what we meditate on in
> > the mornings.
> > Who are you today? How do you plan to meet and greet the world? This is
> > what we focus on when we recite the Ashem Vohu.
> > Plato wrote a lot of great stuff. But his dualism is problematic to us as
> > Zoroastrians. The same thing goes for Aristotle. Among the Greeks, the
> > Stoics and Heraclitus have much more in common with Persian philosophy.
> >
> > Ushta
> > Alexander

Zoroastrianism and sexuality Part 2

Dear Ardeshir and Dino

Thank you for the kind words!
I leave Dino's last question to the archeologists and anthropologists.
What is clear however is that the fertility rituals coupled with explicitly sexual images disappeared in Iranian culture following the move from pre-Zoroastrian polytheism to Zoroastrianism monotheism (by contrast, the Indians kept the lingams in the Hindu temples as they kept polytheism too).
But contrary to the move from Paganism to Christianity in Europe and Islam in the Middle East - and its consequent turning of sexuality into a moralistic taboo - the change in Iranian culture had nothing to do with moralizing against sexual behavior. It was just that with the arrival of Zoroastrianism, explicit sexual images disappeared from religious rituals.
Fertility instead became a part of the cycle of the seasons, for example through the prominence of the nowruz table. because it was not worshipped but rather seen as a PRODUCT of what was worshipped or celebrated: Wise Mind!

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/16 ardeshir farhmand

wonderful analysis alexander, very well put.

thanks

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Alexander Bard wrote:



Dear Dino

To begin with, the whole concept of "pornography" is a western and modern concept.
The idea that material which is deemed unsuitable for public viewing needs a category all its own, which is what pornography is, needs a Christian or Post-Christian or Islamic culture deeming such material as immoral (all pictures of humans are immoral in Islam) to have a category called pornography to begin with.
Consequently, in Indo-European cultures, where you have lingams in just about every temple, the whole point with this separation of decent and indecent pictures becomes irrelevant. To my knowledge, Zoroastrians have never had any problem with such material, many Zoroastrians are perfectly comfortable for example visiting lingam temples in India. So any values in terms of opposition to pornography have little or no Zoroastrian origin, but should rather be regarded as "petit-bourgeois morality" imported from westerners or from Islam.
Basically, categories like "art", "poetry", "literature", and even "pornography" (whatever that is) are regarded as secular expressions of culture with little or no effect on religion or philosophy. And this counts for all cultures east of "The Abrahamic Domain". China and Japan as much as India or Iran. But THAT is of course sociologically interesting in itself.
For example: It was the British colonizers who introduced "sexual taboos" in India (with the 19th century invention of the category of pornography being the sexual taboo for visual material), this was not a morality inherent to a Hindu culture full of sexually explicit visualisations.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/15 Special Kain



Dear friends,

I watched Bill Condon's film «Kinsey» about the American zoologist Albert C. Kinsey (played by Liam Neeson) last night. One statement made by the actor (as Dr. Kinsey) was quite interesting: We can study different cultures through their pornography. So is there anything known about Zoroastrian pornography or sexual ethics?
Sociology has ignored pornography, because it's sort of stigmatizing to conduct research on how pornography has changed over time and how it has affected societies and their members. There has been some research on how media content (sex on TV, YouPorn, online dating websites etc.) affects teenagers and adults when it comes to their attitude towards sexuality and romance and their behaviors.

Ushta, Dino

onsdag 16 december 2009

Definitions of ethics and morality

Dear Dino

According to the vast majority of philosophers - from Baruch Spinoza via Ludwig Wittgenstein and Jürgen Habermas to Slavoj Zizek - yes, these people have got it all wrong. Even Habermas makes the distinction that morality is the opposition of good vs evil and ethics the division between right vs wrong and thereafter concerns himself only with ethics, leaving morals to theologians. So should we. Why add to the confusion when we can be part of the clarification? Especially as we want to communicate that Zoroastrianism is not moralizing and not Abrahamic but is ethical and concerned with cause and effect within a probabilistic universe as its basis for values and valuations.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/15 Special Kain

Dear Alexander

I know philosophers who claim that "morals" are concerned with one's character and what's right and wrong in relation to one's personality and that "ethics" are concerned with behavior in relation to social systems, such as professional ethics at the workplace. Would you now say that they got it all totally wrong?

Ushta, Dino

--- Alexander Bard schrieb am Di, 15.12.2009:


Dear Tomash

The problem is that "good thoughts, good words, good deeds" is such a sloppy and outright poor translation.
It invokes simplicity and moralism where Zarathushtra instead understood that life is complex and one should be ethical and not moralizing (ethics is values that refer to cause and effect, morality is values that are just blindly obeying the orders of superiors, such as the Abrahamic gods).
So a much better translation would be: "A constructive mindset fosters a constructive language which in turn fosters constructive actions which in turn fosters constructive thoughts." A strictly ethical feedback loop putting causes and effects together, exactly the way the world works.
What is the right thing to think, say and act then? Well, it is what inside of you which makes you truly you. It is that which you define yourself with. What kind of person are you to yourself? It is not even what you should do but in a deeper sense what you WILL do.
Which is why it is so crucial to us as Mazdayasni to FIRST decide who we are to ourselves. This is why we meditate and this is what we meditate on in the mornings.
Who are you today? How do you plan to meet and greet the world? This is what we focus on when we recite the Ashem Vohu.
Plato wrote a lot of great stuff. But his dualism is problematic to us as Zoroastrians. The same thing goes for Aristotle. Among the Greeks, the Stoics and Heraclitus have much more in common with Persian philosophy.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/15 Tomash


Dear Dino,

I'm having hard time understanding what is good and what is bad. In a moralistic sense it is easy to understand it: what the society sees as good or bad. But I still haven't grasped what it means in Zoroastrianism. What does Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds actually mean. And whether this is an accurate rendition into modern languages.

Ushta,
Tomash / still a pathfinder

Zoroastrianism and sexuality

Dear Dino

To begin with, the whole concept of "pornography" is a western and modern concept.
The idea that material which is deemed unsuitable for public viewing needs a category all its own, which is what pornography is, needs a Christian or Post-Christian or Islamic culture deeming such material as immoral (all pictures of humans are immoral in Islam) to have a category called pornography to begin with.
Consequently, in Indo-European cultures, where you have lingams in just about every temple, the whole point with this separation of decent and indecent pictures becomes irrelevant. To my knowledge, Zoroastrians have never had any problem with such material, many Zoroastrians are perfectly comfortable for example visiting lingam temples in India. So any values in terms of opposition to pornography have little or no Zoroastrian origin, but should rather be regarded as "petit-bourgeois morality" imported from westerners or from Islam.
Basically, categories like "art", "poetry", "literature", and even "pornography" (whatever that is) are regarded as secular expressions of culture with little or no effect on religion or philosophy. And this counts for all cultures east of "The Abrahamic Domain". China and Japan as much as India or Iran. But THAT is of course sociologically interesting in itself.
For example: It was the British colonizers who introduced "sexual taboos" in India (with the 19th century invention of the category of pornography being the sexual taboo for visual material), this was not a morality inherent to a Hindu culture full of sexually explicit visualisations.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/12/15 Special Kain

Dear friends,

I watched Bill Condon's film «Kinsey» about the American zoologist Albert C. Kinsey (played by Liam Neeson) last night. One statement made by the actor (as Dr. Kinsey) was quite interesting: We can study different cultures through their pornography. So is there anything known about Zoroastrian pornography or sexual ethics?
Sociology has ignored pornography, because it's sort of stigmatizing to conduct research on how pornography has changed over time and how it has affected societies and their members. There has been some research on how media content (sex on TV, YouPorn, online dating websites etc.) affects teenagers and adults when it comes to their attitude towards sexuality and romance and their behaviors.

Ushta, Dino