Practiced Zoroastrianism shows a rich variety of beliefs. There are Indian Parsees who are more or less Hinduist (with even beliefs in a caste system and reincarnation). There are Iranis who believe in a conscious after-life. There is the Gathas-only teachings of The Zarathushtrian Assembly with its dualist interpretation of The Gathas. Some Zoroastrians are happy to decalre their "Atheism" with Ahura Mazda merely as an ethical ideal. Then there are Gathas-centric beliefs there are monist and pantheist (like my own Mazdayasna beliefs) and then there are Zoroastrians who refuse to decide what their beliefs are and rather walk in and out of the different options. We've come to accept this as a more-the-merrier situation. It is quite natural in a large religion with a 3,700-year-old history located geographically and culturally between East and West, North and South. Nothing else should have been expected. What is, however, unifying is the strict ethics of Zoroastrianism. In practice, the religion is actually very uniform around the world. The world is fundamentally a good and sacred place and it's our job to keep it that way.
I hope I am not wearing you all out. I looked around alittle on the internet etc. What I am understanding is that there are Parsis who do believe in an afterlife etc that have alot of additional literature besides the Gathas. Then there is the Zarthustrian Assembly that is into "The Gathas Only". Is that right? That would be a huge reason for real differences in theological thought etc.
Now what exactly is the difference between Parsis and Zartouche's in Iran (that are not part of the Zarthustrian Assembly)?
Ok Thank you again. I'm sorry for being a pest but not sorry enough to not ask. (I don't have anyone else to ask.)