torsdag 17 december 2009


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.


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.

Parviz Varjavand

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

From: Alexander Bard
Subject: [Ushta] Farsightedness vs Shortsightedness (another take on Asha vs Druj)
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!


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


1 kommentar:

Gilaki sa...

Nice site, might like my blog as well, which is about Persian arts & culture.