Ideas and strategy against extremism

Dear Parviz

Good questions, here are my answers.

I believe that with this kind of "attitude of superiority" there will be no movement to speak of. You are just creating another extremism against the previous extremism, and what have you then gained? What we instead have to do is to recognise that Zoroastrianism is a 3,700-year-old religion which is OPEN to conversions but with many poles of power and interpretation and a desperate need for lots of tolerance involved. I will therefore act on behalf of all those who are pro-conversion - mobeds or not - and THEN take the philosophical dicussion with them on what constitutes Mazdayasna and what does not. And I will always do this with an open mind. The Mazdayasna we know is winning the cause anyway.

I'm tired of people promoting some kind of truth in the extreme at the price of just making themselves obsolete (regardless of which assumed truth). It is not true, it is not better, it is just extremist and deep down driven by a rather disgusting desire to feel superior to others. Well, I never did care for that. I feel all people are equal but that some IDEAS are superior to others. That includes that some STRATEGIES are superior to others. That is what I'm up to, Parviz, winning people over for the good cause, and I intend to also have you with me in this effort. Because with you I have got everything right: history, philosophy, religion, traditions, respect, integrity, knowledge. Just don't ever think that extremism on our part is any better than the extremism of others.

Ushta and brotherly love
Alexander

2009/8/9 Parviz Varjavand


Dear Alex,

Jafarey converted you to Zoroastrianism and Moobed Jamshidi did your initiation of Sedre-Pooshi. Now you are congratulating different Moobeds for their actions. Moobeds when progressing a thousand times from where they are become thinkers like Jafarey or Dina or Ronald or Mehran Gheybi. Are you of the same religion as the persons I named? I do not think you are. So what are you doing hanging on to them as if you belong to their clan? I was born and raised in the Zoroastrian fold and I have washed my hands off of all Moobeds and those who hang on to their sacred Books. My relationship to them is only to be diplomatically correct with my roots. They have very little that is intellectually stimulating to offer me anymore.

The new Zoroastrian movement has to break free of the Moobed Clan. If they join us, fine, but we can not act as if we belong under their banner if we want to hold on to beliefs that we cherish. If they show that they want to belong under our banner, fine, but you are seriously mistaken if you feel that they will ever progress to the positions that are sacred to you and those who look up to you.

Ushta te,
Parviz Varjavand

Liturgy to the Moon: Zoroastrianism at its poetic best part 2

Dear Parviz

This is a perfect ritual practice that works in a modern society too.
Anything that is contemplative and keeps our minds on the right mind is good for us.
And if it is also a practice going back thousands of years - then why not connect with that tradition?

Ushta
Alexander

2009/8/8 Parviz Varjavand



Dear Hamdins,

I love the Mah Niyayesh too. The moon is strongly associated with Cow and the Waters. We do not eat meat on the days of Bahman, Good Mind, Mah, Moon, Goosh, Cow, and Ram, Peace and Harmony. They all have very beautiful and profound concepts attached to them and they are all on the feminine side of the spectrum of creation.

Bah-Man or Good- Mind (Vohoo Mana) is what combats Ahri-Man or the Angy-Mind (Angra-Meynoo). It is also the soul of the animal kingdom as it is Bahman who protects all animals (man included).

Mah or the Moon relates to the feminine cycles of growth and fertility, waxing and waining, up and down of the tides and the growth of plants. My grandfather (on my mothers side) was a very rich merchant and powerful master of the household and his many servants. Yet the same man would cook food and take it to my grandmother on the days of her menses when she would not approach the fire to cook. We saw nothing dirty or humiliating in this as many Zoroastrians try to present those old customs now. We saw it as the woman having a special status because of her cycles of fertility and that the most powerful man of the tribe would go out of his routine of power to show respect towards her mate on those special days by cooking for her and taking the food to her.

Goosh or Gavoush or Gaw means the Cow. The Cow represents the soul of the Earth. When Zarathustra wants to compose the Gathas, first it is the Cow that has to sanction it. This is very important, the animal soul of the earth has to approve and validate the work of Zarathustra and Ahoora Mazda has to listen to the laments of the Cow as it is not happy with what men are doing to it!

Ram or Ramesh means Peace, Harmony, and Prosperity. Music is the soul of Ram and Musicians are called Rameshgar or those who usher in Ram. AryaRamna was the title of ancient Aryan kings as those who brought forth Ram to the Aryans.

As it is hard for my family now to observe the Zoroastrian calender with its thirty different names for the days of the month, so we have decided to not eat meat on Mondays as it is the day of the Moon. This custom is called Nabor or days of not killing and thinking upon The Mind without Anger (Bahman), The Moon (Mah), The Soul of the Animals (Goosh), and Harmony (Ram).

May Bahman and Mah and Goosh and Ram be with you,
Parviz Varjavand

Mobeds Mirza and Madin in Mumbai as Heroes

Actually, in principle, THIS is the major theological move: Once you decide that children with only one Zoroastrian parent are allowed to CHOOSE Zoroastrianism (in other words: choose Zoroastrianism BEFORE the religion of the non-Zoroastrian parent), you have moved from a religion of ancestry to a religion of choice. And once you have accepted a religion of choice you have accepted that the religion is open for all to choose. This is precisely why I call Mirza and Madon heroes, because their practice is the long awaited opening towards the embrace of religion of choice among Parsees in India. And precisely why it is causing such enormous controversy.
Ushta
Alexander

2009/8/7 wagnerian1
Worthy of support and applause and all the rest, yes. Heroes, not enough evidence yet. The hero is the mobed willing to initiate the rest of us. But then that's easier to do in, say, the diaspora than in the middle of Mumbai. Nonetheless, I hope all of you "cradle" Zoroastrians tell them how happy you are, and that you also have some friends who would love to join you around the Fire too. A crack in the dam is welcome news.

--Clint


--- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Alexander Bard wrote:
>
> Mobeds Mirza and Madon are real heroes!!!
> Is there any way we can reach them and express our support from around the
> world?
> Ushta
> Alexander
>
> 2009/8/7 Zaneta Garratt

> > Publication: Mumbai Mirror ;
> >
> > Date: Aug 4, 2009;
> >
> > Zoroastrian priest banned by the apex community trust challenges its
> > decision; says he will not stop conducting rituals for mixed-marriage Parsis

Liturgy to the Moon: Zoroastrianism at its poetic best

Dear Clint

I LOVE this text, this is Zoroastrianism at its poetic best. To see Asha in everything that surrounds us and then praise Asha for being a part of this miraculous process. Thank you for sharing this contemplation with us here on Ushta!

Ushta
Alexander

2009/8/7 wagnerian1 :

Ushta y'all,

The moon was so lovely last night, that I resolved to read over the "Litany of the Moon" (which is not a litany lol) from the Kordeh Avesta and from the old translation, create a liturgical piece in response. I plan on using it whenever the beauty of the moon inspires me. Keep in mind that this is like a jewel without a setting, for I have no idea what prayers surround and lead up to this and then lead out of it, nor do I yet have any idea what larger liturgical rite this piece could adorn when the situation merits. But nonetheless, here it is:

Praise to Ahura Mazda.
Praise to the Amesha Spentas.
Praise to the Moon, we when look upon her.
Praise to the Moon, when she looks upon us.
For your brightness and glory, O Moon,
I will offer a hymn worthy of being heard.
How do you wax? How do you wane?
For 14 days, you wax, and for 14 days you wane.
It is Asha that moves you through waxing and waning.
Here I behold the moon, here I behold the light of the moon.
The Amesha Spentas sustain the glory of the moon,
they pour it out upon the good Earth which Ahura Mazda has fashioned.
When the moon waxes warmer, the lovely golden-hued plants
grow up from the earth in the Springtime.
Thus I perform a liturgy for the new moon,
I perform one for the full moon.
I sing hymns to all the beautiful phases of the moon,
the holy and master of holiness,
bright and glorious,
mover of the waters,
giver of wisdom,
inspirer of thoughtfulness,
refresher,
healer.

Gayti and Minoo

Dear Parviz

I know. Of course! But I don't think what I'm saying is contradicting the concepts of Gayti and Minoo. Rather this division only strengthens the argument. Gayti and Minoo is how things actually work, the strange fantasy here is Plato's division between ideals and reality where ideals are superior to reality as if ideals represent "the world as it should be". This is exactly the opposite of Zoroastrian thought. We believe that Minoo adjusts itself to Gayti since Gayti is sacred and the starting point (the realness of reality). Minoo is not a representation of Gayti - as Plato wrongly assumed - we do not think of Gayti or Minoo as representations of anything and least of all each other. Minoo has its value precisely as its own entity - for example in art and poetry. It is when Minoo is applied as if it were Gayti that we get things wrong (for example when Minoo is wrongly assumed to have anything to say about science). As Zarathushtra and others have pointed out.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/8/4 Parviz Varjavand



Dear Alex,

The world that the mind is capable of constructing for itself becomes real in an unreal sense. Pegasus is a horse that flies and is real as far as the mind constructing such a horse goes. The separation of Gayti and Minoo or the world as it is constructed by physics and the world that is constructed by the mind is not the same as the separation of body and soul or heaven and earth. The Jinn is a real creature in the minds of those who have constructed such a creature and implanted it in the mind of others. If you miss this first step in understanding how Z.ism correctly separates these two and deals with them, you will lecture much, but not in the right direction.

Ushta,
Parviz

--- On Mon, 8/3/09, Alexander Bard wrote:


From: Alexander Bard
Subject: [Ushta] Asha and Monism
To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 3:31 PM




Dear Clint

I absolutely agree.
Even if Mazdayasna as a complete message gets corrupted over the centuries and Zarathushtra is quite possibly the most misquoted and misunderstood philosopher ever, the monism in early Mazdayasna culture stays for centuries and only gets challanged with the frontal confrontation with the Abrahamic faiths from the 9th century AD onwards. And then we should still point out that early Judaism also shows signs of monism. It appears dualism really arrives in the Middle East with Helenic culture, then developed by the Greeks as an idea originally developed by the Egyptians. Dualism was always alien to Indo-European thought, it ws alien to Paganism in Europe and alien to Brahmanist philosophy in India too. So why should we assume that Zoroastrianism was dualist when it clearly never was. The MATERIAL is sacred to all of Zoroastrianism, this is what all Zoroastrian diversions have in common. And you can not regard that as sacred which you have earlier assumed to be seondary in grade to whatever else is primary. Mazdayasna is all about manifestations of forces (mentalities) with The Universe as the manifestation of Ahura Mazda (pantheism or panentheism) and with the Mazdayasna congregation as the manifestation of asha in harmony. Think forces, and you get at how Zarathushtra and his contemporaries viewed the world. This is of course also why they understood the actual world better than the Greeks or the Egyptians.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/8/3 wagnerian1



Ushta,

This is what I have discovered too, and reading translations of the liturgical texts, even some of the later Magian-crafted junk, you still get phrases alluding to how the gorgeousness of the universe is the body of Ahura Mazda. Usually in these passages there are references to the starry heavens, etc. There appears to be a monism that is somewhere between pantheism and panentheism, yet breaks open the categorical limits those two terms impose. Whatever the case, the ancient texts seem to point us toward emanation as the way in which Ahura Mazda creates the uni/multiverse.
Also Alexander's point about the search for Truth to find the ethical Right is also a theme in Buddhism, where one of the primary goals of meditation is to see things as they really are without judgment or what have you, so that you don't miss anything and can make the kind of decision afterwards that is useful and, as Z's would say, progressive. The reality, and the process that leads to it, and the decisions made that are truly in accordance with this reality, are all included in the word "Dharma", in which all Buddhists take refuge every day, all the time. I can't help but see a deep similarity between Dharma and Asha. Asha is the True, it is the Right, and the Teachings concerning how to get there.

--Clint

Asha and Monism Part 2

Dear Clint

I absolutely agree.
Even if Mazdayasna as a complete message gets corrupted over the centuries and Zarathushtra is quite possibly the most misquoted and misunderstood philosopher ever, the monism in early Mazdayasna culture stays for centuries and only gets challanged with the frontal confrontation with the Abrahamic faiths from the 9th century AD onwards. And then we should still point out that early Judaism also shows signs of monism. It appears dualism really arrives in the Middle East with Helenic culture, then developed by the Greeks as an idea originally developed by the Egyptians. Dualism was always alien to Indo-European thought, it ws alien to Paganism in Europe and alien to Brahmanist philosophy in India too. So why should we assume that Zoroastrianism was dualist when it clearly never was. The MATERIAL is sacred to all of Zoroastrianism, this is what all Zoroastrian diversions have in common. And you can not regard that as sacred which you have earlier assumed to be seondary in grade to whatever else is primary. Mazdayasna is all about manifestations of forces (mentalities) with The Universe as the manifestation of Ahura Mazda (pantheism or panentheism) and with the Mazdayasna congregation as the manifestation of asha in harmony. Think forces, and you get at how Zarathushtra and his contemporaries viewed the world. This is of course also why they understood the actual world better than the Greeks or the Egyptians.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/8/3 wagnerian1



Ushta,

This is what I have discovered too, and reading translations of the liturgical texts, even some of the later Magian-crafted junk, you still get phrases alluding to how the gorgeousness of the universe is the body of Ahura Mazda. Usually in these passages there are references to the starry heavens, etc. There appears to be a monism that is somewhere between pantheism and panentheism, yet breaks open the categorical limits those two terms impose. Whatever the case, the ancient texts seem to point us toward emanation as the way in which Ahura Mazda creates the uni/multiverse.
Also Alexander's point about the search for Truth to find the ethical Right is also a theme in Buddhism, where one of the primary goals of meditation is to see things as they really are without judgment or what have you, so that you don't miss anything and can make the kind of decision afterwards that is useful and, as Z's would say, progressive. The reality, and the process that leads to it, and the decisions made that are truly in accordance with this reality, are all included in the word "Dharma", in which all Buddhists take refuge every day, all the time. I can't help but see a deep similarity between Dharma and Asha. Asha is the True, it is the Right, and the Teachings concerning how to get there.

--Clint

--- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Alexander Bard wrote:
>
> Asha is the combination of the two. Therefore meaningless to translate to
> English.
> In a MONIST universe this makes sense, because what is right and what is
> true is and SHOULD BE interconnected. This only becomes a problem in
> dualism.
> Which again strengthens the idea that Zarathushtra and early Zoroastrians in
> general were all monists. They sought that which was true in order to find
> that which was right as the two are interconnected in a world which is ONE
> and not fundamentally divided.
> Ushta
> Alexander

Asha and Monism

Asha is the combination of the two. Therefore meaningless to translate to English.
In a MONIST universe this makes sense, because what is right and what is true is and SHOULD BE interconnected. This only becomes a problem in dualism.
Which again strengthens the idea that Zarathushtra and early Zoroastrians in general were all monists. They sought that which was true in order to find that which was right as the two are interconnected in a world which is ONE and not fundamentally divided.
Ushta
Alexander

2009/8/3 Special Kain



Right as in ethics, true as in science.

--- Parviz Varjavand schrieb am Mo, 3.8.2009:


Von: Parviz Varjavand
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Re: Asha is Not.
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Montag, 3. August 2009, 3:58



Dear Rory and Dino,

Is Asha "What is Right" in Science or is it "What is Right" in a Moral and Legal way?
The two are not the same!?

Parviz

--- On Sun, 8/2/09, roryyoung15 wrote:


From: roryyoung15
Subject: [Ushta] Re: Asha is ...
To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Date: Sunday, August 2, 2009, 10:56 AM



Dear Dino,

Yes, I believe you are correct.

Ushta, Rory

--- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, Special Kain wrote:
>
> Dear Rory,
>
> But there's nothing more to it. It's the order of things (we see that trees grow and people refine what nature has given to them), it is whatever is objectively true, normatively right and genuine. And it applies to all that is - whether in the heavens or down here on Earth. That's why there can't be any hierarchical relationship between the physical world as we know it and those fancy astral amusement parks.
>
> Ushta, Dino
>
> --- roryyoung15 schrieb am Fr, 31.7.2009:
>
> Von: roryyoung15
> Betreff: [Ushta] Re: FAQs, data base
> An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
> Datum: Freitag, 31. Juli 2009, 8:28
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Dino,
>
>
>
> Agreed, we can't travel back in time. However because the Gathas are written in a dead language they will retain their original meaning to a large extent because a dead language is no longer evolving. I don't believe anyone is trying to elevate the word Asha above all else. What led you to that idea? As it is such a crucial part of the religion does it not deserve special attention? I agree that the meaning has to change or rather that the meaning/understandi ng of "Asha" should progress and become more precise in keeping with the principles of the Amesha Spentas.
>
>
>
> Ushta, Rory
>
>
>
> --- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, Special Kain wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Dear Clint and Rory,
>
> >
>
> > We can't travel back in time to dig up the original and true meaning of much cherished words and concepts. All we have are words and concept that we're using today. Words take their meanings from social uses. Times change, and words change with them, so to speak. Radically elevating the word "Asha" above all else and beyond the conceivable doesn't get us anywhere in this context. All we can do is throwing the concepts we live with at the word "Asha" and see what fits historically and linguistically.
>
> > Taken this radically pragmatic stance for granted, doesn't the meaning of the word "Asha" change, too? Yes, it does, it changes with everything said about and everything acted upon it.
>
> >
>
> > Ushta, Dino