What is Mazda?

Dear Bahman and Dino

I agree with Dino 100%.
As far as I know, the human minds are the ONLY manifestations of Mazda we have enocuntered so far.
This does not exclude that there could be other intelligent beings out there. But humanity has not met any of them so far.
This is of course the Zoroastrian stance on the issue. We only believe what we can experience, no more hocus pocus. Mazda means "Mind" and is not LITERALLY one person.
The idea that there is huge father in the sky with an enormous penis to match is ABRAHAMIC. It is NOT Zoroastrian. Zarathushtra's concept of The Divine was far more sophisticated.

Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/19 Special Kain

Dear Bahman
So what was first, then? The chicken or the egg?
So far we only know that Mazda means "great wisdom". As Mazdayasni we are worshipping and celebrating great wisdom. And Mazda is therefore the total sum of all wise minds in this world. Everytime someone has learned to cope with existence creatively and intelligently, to make wise decisions that turn out to be constructive in the long run, it's a good excuse for another party.
We don't know about other wise minds yet, so until some highly intelligent alien lifeform appears on this planet, we fallibilistically claim that we're the only wise minds there are.
There are priorities and statements that are most important. For example, the doctrine of Asha is 100% monistic. Secondly, Asha means two things: the true order of things and the relentless pursuit of the truth.
So theres no reason to take someone's fairy tales for granted if their stories have turned out to be nothing but fairy tales. Even if it were Zarathushtra's very own fairy tales!

My ten cents,
Dino

--- Bahman Noruziaan schrieb am Sa, 19.6.2010:

Von: Bahman Noruziaan
Betreff: RE: [Ushta] Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense

An: "Ushta Ushta"
Datum: Samstag, 19. Juni, 2010 02:43 Uhr


Aleander:

"But he would have taken us all to Cern in Switzerland to see how marvelous modern science is and what a magnificent world it is exposing."

I have a very strong feeling that he would! But I can not assure anyone, that is too strong to claim!

"And don't degrade the human mind. It is the OUTMOST MANIFESTATION of Mazda". So what then, is Mazda human mind itself or human mind is a manifiastation of Mazda?

Bahman



To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
From: bardissimo@gmail. com
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 01:41:33 +0200
Subject: [Ushta] Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense


Dear Ardeshir

The texts are absolutely useless if you read them without using your MIND.
They are not there to be followed, they are there to inspire you to THINK for yourself and to think fresh.
Otherwise you have just turned Zoroastrianism into Shia Islam.
And what's the point then? If we are to worship books instead of minds, then why be Zoroastrians at all and not just go Shia?
I can assure you one thing, if Zarathushtra was alive today and had joined us here he at Ushta he would not even mention the term "angel". But he would have taken us all to Cern in Switzerland to see how marvelous modern science is and what a magnificent world it is exposing.
Now, THAT is what motivated Zarathushtra! THIS is what his worship is all about.
And don't degrade the human mind. It is the OUTMOST MANIFESTATION of Mazda. It is sacred and not something marginal in Zarathushtra' s worldview.

Ushta
Alexander

Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense Part 2

Dear Ardeshir

The texts are absolutely useless if you read them without using your MIND.
They are not there to be followed, they are there to inspire you to THINK for yourself and to think fresh.
Otherwise you have just turned Zoroastrianism into Shia Islam.
And what's the point then? If we are to worship books instead of minds, then why be Zoroastrians at all and not just go Shia?
I can assure you one thing, if Zarathushtra was alive today and had joined us here he at Ushta he would not even mention the term "angel". But he would have taken us all to Cern in Switzerland to see how marvelous modern science is and what a magnificent world it is exposing.
Now, THAT is what motivated Zarathushtra! THIS is what his worship is all about.
And don't degrade the human mind. It is the OUTMOST MANIFESTATION of Mazda. It is sacred and not something marginal in Zarathushtra's worldview.

Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/18 ardeshir farhmand
Dear Alexander,

mazda is the genius, creativity, wit and vision at the root of being/existence. it is not just limited to the minds of human beings. and for ur info i am reading the gathas with passion and as if i have conversation with the bard himself. in fact, the poetry is composed as such. the point is the gathas are not MOLDY old books as some MOLDY, old, bored minds suggest here, they are fresh, timeless expressions of a brilliant genius who communicate with us.

ardeshir

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:32 AM, Alexander Bard wrote:

Dear Ardeshir and Bahman


In ALL Indo.-European cultures, forces of nature are given PERSONALITIES as to be explained.
This does NOT mean that they actually ARE or are INTENDED TO BE PERCEIVED as personalities.
Zarathushtra was actually VERY clear about this: Whatever Mazda IS, this is what it IS, it is NOT what we GUESS it to bem, IT IS WHATEVER IT IS!!!
To be a Mazdayasni, a true Mazdayasni, is therefore to be INTELLIGENT ENOUGH (in other words: To use YOUR VERY OWN MIND WISELY) to UNDERSTAND that REALITY is more important than your very own private guesses of what somebody believed 3,000 years ago.
STOP READING THE GATHAS THE WAY MUSLIMS ARE READING THE QORAN!
Read it WIT your minds in FULL USE. Not with your midns TURNED OFF. OK?
Read The Gathas as if you are HAVING A CONVERSATION with its author, not as if he is some stupid messiah giving you orders what to believe.
Otherwise, you are as silly as fundamenalist Muslims and Christians and I will lose all hope of ever being able to share religigion with you guys with my decency intact. Honestly!
This is not about etymology, Ardeshir, this is about saving us all from shortsighted idiocy.

Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/18 ardeshir farhmand

Dear Alexander,

so to be clear are u saying that"limited human mind" is mazda????? and before humanity there was no mazda?????? is this mind something wholly human or includes other known/unknown intelligences???? furthermore, can u tell me how u equate mazda with mind/limited human mind etymologically????



On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Bahman Noruziaan wrote:

Alexander:

The history of Zoroastrianism proves that this statement of yours:
"this is why he presented and preached a new religion called MAZDYASNA (The Worship of Mind)." is false!
He preached a religion in which a being is the source of existence and mind, an he called it, Mazda or Mazda Ahura!
Calling your religion of worship of mind as Mazdayasna, is very misleading indeed!

Regards




To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
From: bardissimo@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:51:56 +0200
Subject: [Ushta] Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense


Let me just once anf or all state the very BASIC PREMISE of all Zarathustra's teachings:
Zarathushtra believed in the power of the sound mind, this is why he pressnted and preached a new religion called MAZDYASNA (The Worship of Mind).
Zarathushtra was not interested in HIS OWN BELIEFS. He was totally obsessed with TRUTH adn perfectly open to the possibility that his beliefs may be wrong but that THE POWER OF MIND would always rule at the end of the day.
Whether ZAATHUSHTRA believed in the existence of angels or not is therefore of NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER, neither for us and NEITHER FOR ZARATHUSHTRA HIMSELF.
Zarathushtra wanted us to follow HIM as WORSHIPPERS OF MIND. He did NOT, I repeat NOT, want it to SLAVISHLY copy HIS BELIEFS or the beliefs of his contemporaries.
Rather he wanted US to PROVE HIM WRONG!!! This would make him HAPPY! Because only by following Zarathushtra IN ATTITUDE are we true ZOROASTRIANS.
It totally and absolutely beats me that after all these years Parviz and Arthur and Rory and Dino and a few others are CAPABLE of understanding the very basic premise of ZARATHUSHTRA's TEACHINGS.
Too many people still want to make Zarathushtra into a boring know-it-all divine messiah figure.
But HE WAS NOT and he was very VERY clear on this point.
Have I made myself clear on what Mazdayasna is all about?
As for angels, people who still believe in the existence of angels in 2010 are complete and utter idiots! Hiding behind quotes from 3,000 years ago to defend such nonsense only makes it even more idiotic. And that's that.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/17 Bahman Noruziaan

Hello Alexander,

Ignoring the word angel that in my opinion reflects the Abrahamic view of spiritual world (mainyoo in Zoroastrian teminology), how do you know that Zarathushtra did not beleive in other spiritual entities? How are you so ceratin?

Regards
Bahman


To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
CC: mehrdad.12@gmail.com
From: bardissimo@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:54:21 +0200
Subject: [Ushta] Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense


Dear Friends
Well, I certainly do not believe in the existence of any angels and neither did Zarathushtra.
This may be popular within some folk religion, but it is not a practice that we as contemporary science-minded Zoroastrians should endorse. Angels are humbug.
That's my ten cents on this issue.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/16 ardeshir farhmand

Dear Zaneta


the spell/formual manthra for well-being/weal is traditionally Yasna 68.11. also according to vendidad Yasna 54.1 has healing energy. In addition, a less known, but extremely powerful formula is Yasna 31.21.

the spells/formulas/manthras MUST be chanted in the holy speech or the mysterious, ancient and most enchantingl avestan language.

regarding choosing a divine attribute/angel by each zoroastrian, the practice is well and alive among the iranians. this is reported in a number of places including revayats and sad-dar or one hundred gates, but the source is the gathic commentaries book of SUDGAR.

if u need the correct spelling of the above prayers with the actual umlauts, let me know and i will send them to u privately.

ardeshir

Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense

Dear Ardeshir and Bahman

In ALL Indo.-European cultures, forces of nature are given PERSONALITIES as to be explained.
This does NOT mean that they actually ARE or are INTENDED TO BE PERCEIVED as personalities.
Zarathushtra was actually VERY clear about this: Whatever Mazda IS, this is what it IS, it is NOT what we GUESS it to bem, IT IS WHATEVER IT IS!!!
To be a Mazdayasni, a true Mazdayasni, is therefore to be INTELLIGENT ENOUGH (in other words: To use YOUR VERY OWN MIND WISELY) to UNDERSTAND that REALITY is more important than your very own private guesses of what somebody believed 3,000 years ago.
STOP READING THE GATHAS THE WAY MUSLIMS ARE READING THE QORAN!
Read it WIT your minds in FULL USE. Not with your midns TURNED OFF. OK?
Read The Gathas as if you are HAVING A CONVERSATION with its author, not as if he is some stupid messiah giving you orders what to believe.
Otherwise, you are as silly as fundamenalist Muslims and Christians and I will lose all hope of ever being able to share religigion with you guys with my decency intact. Honestly!
This is not about etymology, Ardeshir, this is about saving us all from shortsighted idiocy.

Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/18 ardeshir farhmand
- Dölj citerad text -

Dear Alexander,

so to be clear are u saying that"limited human mind" is mazda????? and before humanity there was no mazda?????? is this mind something wholly human or includes other known/unknown intelligences???? furthermore, can u tell me how u equate mazda with mind/limited human mind etymologically????



On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Bahman Noruziaan wrote:

Alexander:

The history of Zoroastrianism proves that this statement of yours:
"this is why he presented and preached a new religion called MAZDYASNA (The Worship of Mind)." is false!
He preached a religion in which a being is the source of existence and mind, an he called it, Mazda or Mazda Ahura!
Calling your religion of worship of mind as Mazdayasna, is very misleading indeed!

Regards




To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
From: bardissimo@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:51:56 +0200
Subject: [Ushta] Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense


Let me just once anf or all state the very BASIC PREMISE of all Zarathustra's teachings:
Zarathushtra believed in the power of the sound mind, this is why he pressnted and preached a new religion called MAZDYASNA (The Worship of Mind).
Zarathushtra was not interested in HIS OWN BELIEFS. He was totally obsessed with TRUTH adn perfectly open to the possibility that his beliefs may be wrong but that THE POWER OF MIND would always rule at the end of the day.
Whether ZAATHUSHTRA believed in the existence of angels or not is therefore of NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER, neither for us and NEITHER FOR ZARATHUSHTRA HIMSELF.
Zarathushtra wanted us to follow HIM as WORSHIPPERS OF MIND. He did NOT, I repeat NOT, want it to SLAVISHLY copy HIS BELIEFS or the beliefs of his contemporaries.
Rather he wanted US to PROVE HIM WRONG!!! This would make him HAPPY! Because only by following Zarathushtra IN ATTITUDE are we true ZOROASTRIANS.
It totally and absolutely beats me that after all these years Parviz and Arthur and Rory and Dino and a few others are CAPABLE of understanding the very basic premise of ZARATHUSHTRA's TEACHINGS.
Too many people still want to make Zarathushtra into a boring know-it-all divine messiah figure.
But HE WAS NOT and he was very VERY clear on this point.
Have I made myself clear on what Mazdayasna is all about?
As for angels, people who still believe in the existence of angels in 2010 are complete and utter idiots! Hiding behind quotes from 3,000 years ago to defend such nonsense only makes it even more idiotic. And that's that.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/17 Bahman Noruziaan

Hello Alexander,

Ignoring the word angel that in my opinion reflects the Abrahamic view of spiritual world (mainyoo in Zoroastrian teminology), how do you know that Zarathushtra did not beleive in other spiritual entities? How are you so ceratin?

Regards
Bahman


To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
CC: mehrdad.12@gmail.com
From: bardissimo@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:54:21 +0200
Subject: [Ushta] Healing, angels and other superstitious nonsense


Dear Friends
Well, I certainly do not believe in the existence of any angels and neither did Zarathushtra.
This may be popular within some folk religion, but it is not a practice that we as contemporary science-minded Zoroastrians should endorse. Angels are humbug.
That's my ten cents on this issue.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/6/16 ardeshir farhmand

Dear Zaneta


the spell/formual manthra for well-being/weal is traditionally Yasna 68.11. also according to vendidad Yasna 54.1 has healing energy. In addition, a less known, but extremely powerful formula is Yasna 31.21.

the spells/formulas/manthras MUST be chanted in the holy speech or the mysterious, ancient and most enchantingl avestan language.

regarding choosing a divine attribute/angel by each zoroastrian, the practice is well and alive among the iranians. this is reported in a number of places including revayats and sad-dar or one hundred gates, but the source is the gathic commentaries book of SUDGAR.

if u need the correct spelling of the above prayers with the actual umlauts, let me know and i will send them to u privately.

ardeshir


On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:53 AM, yazed kapadia wrote:


This is a prayer that we have been taught to pray daily for the good health and well being of the family. It is also chanted on special occasions for the well being of the whole community.

Yezad
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Zaneta Garratt wrote:


Hi,
Here is a question that has puzzled me and I wonder if someone could tell me more-

The beautiful prayer-
Doa Tan-Dorostri (blessing)-at-

http://www.avesta.org/ka/ka_part1.htm#doatan

is as I understand it used as a healing and also a blessing prayer-is this correct? Do folk pray this prayer themselves if they or another are sick or does the priest pray it for them?

Also there are a number of places in the Gathas that speak of wholeness/healing-can you use these verses in prayer for healing?Is it best to say them in Avestan?

Also the Yazata-

Airyaman:
Yazad of friendship and healing. (Indo-Iranian in origin) –

Is also connected to healing somehow?

I would be grateful if someone could describe how healing prayers are said and when and by whom?
Sorry I know so little about this-also this passage is of interest-

In practice (cf. Sad Dar, chapter 26), Zoroastrians pick a patron angel for their protection, and throughout their lives are careful to observe prayers dedicated to that angel.
http://www.avesta.org/angels.html


Do folk carry out this practice still today?


Best wishes from zaneta

Vegeterianism and Zoroastrian ethics

And I would like to add to Rory's excellent posting that what is "natural" or not is totally irrelevant to us as Zoroastrians. Zoroastrian ethics is based on existentialism: We are what we think, what we say and how we act. We IDENTIFY with all those things. But it is not the other way round: Nature does not force us to act in any particular way. We do not have to behave like apes seem to behave just because we are related to them. We should find our own way to exist and cherish exactly that. This is what the Mazdayasna way is all about. If vegetarianism is healthy and saves the planet, then it should be encouraged. But nature does not tell me whether I enjoy a lamb curry or not. I know that myself, from my own very natural taste buds, thank you very much! So thereby by my own nature! And the same thing goes with who I go to bed with etc. Nature as a guide for ethics is just banal moralism and does not belong on a Mazdayasni agenda. Sometimes going against nature (as in not killing people because I happen to hate them for a moment) is actually the ethucally correct thing to do. So let's avoid the N-word in our ethical discussions. Vegetarianism is such a good cause anyway it does not need to be defended from that angle.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/4/29 Rory

Hmmmmm....

Human beings are NOT "by nature herbivorous, just like their cousins, apes and monkeys" as Dr jafarey puts it. It is a well known fact that the reason we were able to develop these big brains of ours is because we were able to eat large amounts of protein which came from hunting. Early man were hunter-gatherers not vegetarians! ALL of the most ancient tribal societies still in existence such as the Biaka, the Twa, the San hunt and consume large amounts of meat. The Baka for example, although they live in one of the most species diverse rain forests on earth eat a wide variety of animals, fruits and nuts but the leaves of only one tree. Man is by nature omnivorous, and so are most of our closer ape relatives such as chimps. The only members of the diverse Hominidae family in Africa that are exceptions to the rule are Gorillas and Geladas. However we do need to TRANSFORM ourselves to become more herbivorous because of our developing situation. This happens in nature, a good example is Side-Striped Jackals in Southern Africa. In areas where they compete with Black-Backed Jackals over 70% of their diet is vegetable matter, for example fallen fruits whereas in areas where their is less competition then carrion and kills make up the majority of their diets. If man is going to change then somehow we need to change the instincts of our species or adapt our food to fool ourselves and make meat MORE EXPENSIVE and keep it something special. 1st world countries have reached a ceiling. The growing danger is developing nations. In the third world the first thing you do when you can afford it is buy meat or fish to eat and with growing populations and more money there is going to be more and more pressure on the environment. Telling these people not to eat meat when they can do so "just don't work". Most importantly alternative sources of protein such as Soya have to be improved encouraged among these populations in order to reduce the need for meat. Telling them to become vegetarians is as likely to succeed as offering a yoghurt to a leopard. It's nice that a few people around the world become vegetarians but to have a real impact something more needs to be done.

In a nutshell, vegetarianism is NOT natural but we do need to evolve if we are going to save our environment.

Ushta,

Rory

P.S.Regarding Boars. They are not found in Africa outside of Egypt and certainly not is South Africa (although Boers are but I doubt they would be please to be called pigs-although right now there is a fellow called Julius Malema who would probably agree wholeheartedly!!!)). However I agree 100% removing carnivores upsets the equilibrium. Biodiversity is critical.

--- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Parviz Varjavand wrote:
>
> Dear Ostad Jafarey,
> Â
> I like to keep the Nabors, but it is hard to keep the old Z. names of the days in mind with all else that one needs to do in a day. So by remembering that Monday is the Moon day, I just do not eat meat on Mondays. I do love and cherish each of the names of the Zartoshti days, but to make life easier for those who come in contact with us, can we tie each of the seven days of the week to an Amshaspand's name, like Monday to Vohu Mana, the Moon, Ram, and Gawush?Â
> Â
> It will also make teaching children about the concepts behind each name a lot easier too. Children love routines and a weekly schedule and this will help them keep that. I know many will say that "what is wrong with teaching them to observe the 30 day calendar". But when we make a road too hard, many will stop traveling it (like telling the parents, "teach them the Din Dabireh script, teach them Persian, teach them Shahnameh, teach them this, teach them that", the end result becomes that both parents and children give up all-together and go play video games).
> Â
> Ushta te,
> Parviz Varjavand
> --- On Mon, 4/26/10, Jafarey@... wrote:
>
>
> From: Jafarey@...


> Subject: Re: [zoroastrians] Re: Food Inc and Vegeterianism in Zarathushti faith
> To: zoroastrians@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, April 26, 2010, 5:15 PM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
>
> Dear Capt. Daroowalla,
> Â
> Ushta!
> Â

> I am sorry to give a short reply because of my religious and cultural engagements. The life on our good earth has been created by Vohu Manah and Asha. It is all good. The herbivorous and the carnivorous animals are living side by side and keeping the environment as natural as possible. Take away the carnivorous and the whole earth will stink of petrified dead bodies. The carnivorous help the ailing animals by a quick death and not a long suffering. This has been proven. Years back, the authorities in South Africa killed the preying carnivorous and the result was the increase of boars that made life difficult for others. The death of vultures has brought the increase of many noxious animals. The nature knows how to proceed. The creation on the earth could not be without the environmental law of Asha for the living. It is Evolution under Asha that has created the two.
> Â

> Human beings are by nature herbivorous, just like their cousins, apes and monkeys. Circumstances have turned them into carnivorous, and today we realize that becoming "vegetarian, " we are helping our selves and the environment.
> Â

> And when, we comprehend the Gathas, we understand that we should be progressively as natural as possible to make the living world "fereshotemem -- most fresh."
> Â
> Ushta, Ali A. Jafarey

Zoroastrianism, the Vendidad and The Issue of Homosexuality

Dear Ardeshir

Excellent clarification!!!
Which also means that we once and for all can get rid of all ideas that there is inherent homophobia within Zoroastrianism. We all know that Zarathushtra was certainly not homophobic (that which is done out of love and is good for mankind can never be wrong in Zoroastrian ethics; which is also tied to the fact that Zarathushtra was opposed to al discrimination of women, especially evident in the last chapters of The Gathas). But this also goes to show that even the authors of the Vendidad had little or no interest in pursuing a homophobic agenda.
Still, we should differentiate between that which is ethical (timeless and valid for all mankind) and that which is merely cultural (transcient values of a specific epoch). The Gathas is concerned with the former, the Vendidad with the latter.

Ushta
Alexander/plans to go to Mumbai again this coming winter

2010/4/19 ardeshir farhmand
Vendidad or more accurately "vi-daävö dátá" is an interesting and culturally valuable document that beside incantations, myths, medicine and animal husbandry deals strictly with hygienic codes and beliefs of the ancient indo-europeans. Its purity customs are followed almost verbatim among the kalash and nuristani people of nortwestern pakistan-afghanistan.
Also, many imaginative and very interesting legal arguments of "shia islam" soundly trace their root back to Vendidad. Vendidad consists of an ancient corpus of purity codes and a much later addendum of punishments. The prescribed punishments show numerous grammatical errors. It is doubtful that such lengthy and graphic punishments were ever carried out. However, it is certain that monetary substitution were paid instead, to fund the newly built temples. As we read in Herodotus, Persians had NO temples and offered their prayers at the summit of the mountains or by waterfalls. However, after conquering Babylon, it appears that Zoroastrians slowly borrowed the concept of temples from subjugated nations.
The name Vendidad itself consists of 3 parts; "vi-daävö,"without/free of demonic forces and “ dátá" decisions, judgments. Vendidad purity codes were designed to hold back/defeat disease, decay, rot and putrefaction; for rot and decay are accordingly the embodiment of the demonic forces and the afflicted spirit is all death and decay (vispa mahrkö.)

An objective understanding of Vendidad is impossible without grasping its sole-preoccupation with "rot, decaying/dead matter and infection."According to Vendidad; Sin is that which was once in place, and now it is out of place and causes rot and waste. Hence, sin is a great deal of disease, infection, WASTE and misapplication.
It should be added that Vendidad is the last of, and belongs to the "Dátic" Category of nasks or writings. And "Dátic"nasks deal according to the Holy Denkard; with decisions/rulings concerning an ever evolving and changing, temporal world and subjects that change and evolve over time.
Also, Yasna 17.13, Yasna 22.25, Yasna 25.6, and Yasna 59.13 all refer to 3 distinct sources of jurisprudence:
"Daatem Ví-döyüm," or decisions against demons;"Daatem Zarathúshtri," or ZOROASTRIAN DECISIONS and "Dareghaam Upayanaam," or longstanding tradition. All the cited Yasna quotes would be part of the "staót yasn," or the most sacred writing of the ancient canon. The same sentence is repeated in Prelude to Yasna.10, Yasna 1. 13, Yasna 2. 13, Yasna 3.15, Yasna 4.18 and Yasna 71.5.
Now, does Vendidad deal with homosexuality as it is commonly believed or focuses on something different ??? The word commonly understood to mean homosexuality is "vaäpayö," and appears twice in the vendidad text namely chapter 1.12 and chapter 8.26-32.

The word also appears frequently in the vedic hymns as “vipra” and also appears once in the poetic gathas, the first line of Yasna 51.12 in the sense of a well-versed poet, one fluent in vedic hymns. Also it comes in Yasna 10.12 with the prefix “para,” where we read: liberate/free me from an evil teacher. The root of the verb seem to mean to spring, gush forth, flow.

It has been designated in its first occurrence in vendidad as “a-perethö” meaning unable to pass, referring to inability to pass the chinvat bridge. Although the term has been translated as a sin that can not be atoned; yet it is important to remember that in Mazdyasni literature the above term refers to a childless person. Whenever, a person dies childless or without adopting children; his relatives must appoint him a designated adopted child for his soul to pass the bridge. The process is known as creating a pass/bridge for the deceased.

The second occurrence of the term relates to the release of semen/khshvdra into anus and reception/deposit of semen into anus. In vendidad commentaries it is emphasized that the focus is on “anal intercourse and deposit of semen into anus” and is condemned equally whether the recipient be a female or male partner. It should be added that semen is considered alive and very precious in vendidad and its misapplication is a great waste.

It is important to look at this ruling from 2 points, vendidad rules against all “bare” anal sex due to its barrenness; the high concentration of disease causing waste articles in the anus and the possibility of bleeding/dead matter. Majority of the vendidad commentators judged all anal sex to be WASTEFUL, while a minority condemned it only as long as it was unprotected.

ardeshir

Persian Propaganda vs Historical Fact?

Dear Mickey

There was no clear cut theology to be followed anywhere in ancient Persia simply because Zoroastrianism has never been a dogmatic religion. So there were always a VARIETY of isms in circulation, often popularised by kings and courts and then followed by the middle classes etc. I believe it is wise to refer to this myriad of beliefs as "folk Zoroastrianism" and Mithraism is one of the most prominent examples of it. This also explains why it is hard to follow any specific idea like "human rights" within such a multitude of thinking and beliefs. The fact that Cyrus The Great was inspired by Zarathushta's IDEAS when he authored the Babylonian cylinder is without doubt. It is also without doubt true that Cyrus was as cruel and cynical in his methods as any emperor of that age.

Ushta
Alexander

2010/4/5 mickey patel

Alexander/Dino

Do you academic/concrete sources which you can share to prove if the Achimenian
Kings were indeed Zoroastrians or followed Mithraism?

I have read different articles with no unanimous agreement if indeed Zoroastrianism
was followed by Achemanians
Same applies with Parthians - who might have followed Mithraism instead of Zism.
Why would Sassanians be so cruel to Parthians labelling Arsacids Pagans at times?



--- On Mon, 5/4/10, Alexander Bard wrote:

From: Alexander Bard

Subject: Re: [Ushta] Persian propaganda vs. historical fact?
To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 5 April, 2010, 11:33 PM



Good, agreed!!!
Any enlightenment on the issue from you or anybody else here on this forum would be much appreciated.
Whether Cyrus The Great really was the innovator of human rights or not will eternally be an issue of debate.
Let's just agree we have a very strong case for the innovator of the IDEA that human rights are not merely rights but also a good for society as a whole, or rather a sacred exercise, was Zarathushtra.
Cyrus The Great is after all secondary to us as Zoroastrians.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/4/5 Special Kain

Dear Alexander

Please don't confuse the messenger with the sender. I was simply asking for the truth, reliable sources, feedback, etc. I did not stand up for anyone's truth here, neither for that alleged campaign against Cyrus The Great nor for anyone else's agenda. I just wanted to discuss whether Cyrus The Great was the originator of human rights. Nothing more, nothing less.

Best wishes,

Dino

--- Alexander Bard schrieb am Mo, 5.4.2010:

Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Persian propaganda vs. historical fact?
An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Datum: Montag, 5. April, 2010 14:36 Uhr


Dear Dino

Nobody has claimed that Cyrus The Great was good-hearted or noble. And The Bible is as good or bad as any other source. The Jews being liberated by the Persians in Babylonia is by the way not a Biblical myth but rather an established historical fact from a myriad of sources. One of them of course being The Talmud which is NOT in The Bible.
The claim is rather that Cyrus introduced a more efficient way of running an empire where multitude was included as principle, where several nations were included under one central rule. The model was later copied by both the Hellenists and the Romans. We all know that the model itself ORIGINATED within Zoroastriant thinking which is PRECISELY beyond good and evil and just an ethical pragmatism.
And human rights has its origin precisely in this principle.
You have nasty habit of telling people off with a condescending attitude and then we you are opposed you don't argue for your statements but rather just tell people off in return.
This is hardly the best way to network and learn from and inspire each other, don't you agree?
I'm not saying that I'm necessarily any nicer, but at least I TRY not to put people off because I frankly don't see the point. What do you think? Do you think I'm overreacting?
Or do you think you have a successful way of communicating?
Either you think Zoroastrianism is a grand principle that needs to be put to use. Or you are just wasting other people's valuable time. What is your ambition?

Ushta
Alexander

2010/4/5 Special Kain

Dear Alexander

I have never claimed that somebody else had claimed that Cyrus The Great was a democrat. So please stop making me look more stupid than I ever was, OK?
And I'm not talking about the fulfilment of the human rights, but exactly their birth. And there's still little evidence that Cyrus The Great was that good-hearted and noble liberal - no matter how eagerly one chooses to see such critical remarks as Islamic or Eurocentric propaganda. I just don't count The Bible as evidence.
Secondly, I am merely suggesting to see him as a brilliant strategist and much more Machiavellian in acting rather than humanistic. Not everyone who's a Zoroastrian is automatically a better person, too.
But all of this is futile. I just wanted to know the truth, but raising such questions makes people go mad and see me as a poor victim of (usually) Islamic propaganda. What a pity.

Best wishes and good-bye,

Dino

--- Alexander Bard schrieb am So, 4.4.2010:

Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Persian propaganda vs. historical fact?
An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Datum: Sonntag, 4. April, 2010 22:42 Uhr


Well, I strongly disagree simply because you are now distorting the facts to fit ANOTHER political agenda.
Sure, Cyrus was no western democrat from the late 20th century. But nobody ever claimed that he was.
We are dicussing the birth of the concept of human rights here, not its fulfilment.
And I would be very happy to see which other inventors of human rights predated Cyrus. I have never seen any. None whatsoever. Not even Akhhanten was the slighest bit interested in letting people choose religion and ethnicity for themselves. Babylonian historians were shocked about Cyrus kissing Marduk's feet. That's not even Iranian history-writing.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/4/4 Special Kain

Yes, the cylinder is there. It's not made up. But it's how we CHOOSE to read the text that matters in this context. And some of the liberal ideas ascribed to Cyrus The Great had already been in practice hundreds of years before his birth. Thirdly, such liberal texts were no exception, but often the rule. So there's only little originality left with the alleged originator of human rights.
The only fact we can draw from this picture - combined with all the other evidence - is that Cyrus The Great was an incredibly successful ruler. He was a pragmatist and a brilliant strategist. And he tortured his enemies brutally and mercilessly. So why not act like a decent and good-hearted person as long as there's no threat, but turn to inhuman practices as soon as someone stands up against the ruler? It's perfectly Machiavellian.

Ushta,
Dino

--- Alexander Bard schrieb am So, 4.4.2010:

Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Persian propaganda vs. historical fact?
An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Datum: Sonntag, 4. April, 2010 14:19 Uhr


Dear Dino

I will happy to look into Fragner's theory please, especially as I'm likely to disagree with him. Any links you could provide are most helpful.
I'm not a Christian, dear Dino, and I resent being called one. I just don't think German Iranologists are necessarily any better than Iranian Iranologists. What counts is the facts.
And the question remains unanswered: Who originated the concept of human rights if Cyrus The Great did not? I have read the Babylonian cylinder, it's an undeniable historical fact. So who explored those ideas prior to Cyrus (unless we count Zarathushtra himself)?
That I would indeed like to know.

Ushta
Alexander

Jamshed Barucha (Zoroastrianism and Neuroscience)

Dear Arthur and Parviz

Thank you for your brilliant and most interesting postings!
If somebody can get hold of an email address to Jamshed Barucha, I would of course be happy to invite him here to Ushta so that he could join us and share his wisdom with us in his spare time.
Barucha's work reminds me both of my favorite contemporary philosopher Thomas Metzinger (who is both a philosopher and a neuroscientist) and also of Jan Söderqvist's and my own new book "The Body Machines" which will come out first in French and then later in English later this year.

Ushta
Alexander

2010/3/15 Parviz Varjavand

Dear Arthur,

It is nice to hear from you, and what you tell us is very informative. I hope to get to know more about this very interesting Zoroastrian, but for now we have you, and a bird in hand is worth two in the bush.

What is very interesting is how we humans bond together around a central teem such as religion, nationality, or what have we. Once bonded in this Barsam or Fascia, we many times remain slaves to it even when we grow mentally and know that what we are a part of is an inferior structure.

There is a very nice city in Iran called Kazeroon and it is near Shiraz and there is a magnificent temple to Anahita next to this city. The inhabitants of Kazeroon are very dedicated Muslims, just the same as the inhabitants of Yazd. Bastani Parizi, the famous Iranian writer and historian tells us about how the Kazeroonis would not change their ways and would pay the very high Jezye tax but remain Zoroastrians for a very long time after the Islamic conquest of Iran. One governor of Kazeroon, a Moslem, decided that it was worth committing some sin if a greater good would come out of it at the end. So he declared that even though he knew that it was a sin that he was about to commit and perhaps God would never forgive him, but he would to do this bad deed for the greater good that would come out of it at the end.

He declared that he would personally cut the throat of one innocent Kazerooni Zoroastrian every day until the rest would give up their stubborn ways and convert to Islam in earnest. He would tie his butcher's apron (Long) around his waist and cut the throat of one randomly chosen Zoroastrian each morning, then he would take a bath, pray, and start crying, lamenting, and begging the populous not to force him to do the same bad deed the next day too. So he pleaded and cried and begged forgiveness so hard, yet he also cut one throat each day, until the Zoroastrians gave up and converted in earnest and he got his way and his wish. The problem with this episode is that this method WORKED! All the Kazeroonis are very devout Muslims today.

Is this not how Christianity won in Europe, all the bonfires of the church at which heretics were burned WORKED. So it remains a puzzle how we can be so proud of our mind and its freedom, yet how ineffective our intellect is compared to our herd instinct that bonds us together often in illogical ways.

We Iranian Zoroastrians are very unified and proud and all that. Yet below this surface of unity, there is a lot of division. At first you may think that these divisions are a joke, because often they are presented as jokes. Kermanis have jokes about Yazdis and each village and town has its jokes about the next group. Yet starngly it is at time of marriage that you will see the divisions surface. I was witness to the hard work a Z. cuple had in wanting to get married. The parents of the guy did not like the village where the parents of the girl were from, even though both families have lived in Tehran for most of their lives. The stink both families raised was monumental and the lovers had to do without both their families and get married with just a few friends as witnesses. So what is it that binds us so strongly, yet divides us also over small matters? Hamazoori (unity of force) that we pray for, at what cost do we tie our Barsams?

Please write to us more Arthur,
Parviz


--- On Mon, 3/15/10, Arthur Pearlstein wrote:

Dear friends,

I have long had a strong interest in emerging developments in neuroscience and related fields as they pertain to the Zoroastrian concept of mind and particularly as they apply to my own professional field of conflict analysis and resolution. I believe this has implications for tolerance and acceptance as we examine these concepts in terms of connection between minds (or perhaps more accurately within mind).

Recently, I had been doing some research for a presentation I was to give on mind and networking and potential applications for conflict resolution when I came across a scholar who apparently has done some research and writing that tie some key concepts together. He posits that the increased understanding of the synchronization of human brains is one of the most important developments in modern science. As he puts it: "just around the corner is an explosion of research that regards individual brains as nodes in a system bound together by multiple channels of communication. Information technology has provided novel ways for brains to align across great distances and over time." He acknowledges that this can lead to very positive or very negative results (creative and productive on the one hand, or in the hands of a manipulative dictator, potentially very destructive) .

While I have only begun to take an interest in his work, it was only on the morning of my presentation that realized the scholar in question is apparently a Zoroastrian. His name is Jamshed Bharucha, a professor of psychology and Provost of Tufts University (one of the top universities in the U.S.). Does anyone know much about him other than what I can easily find on the web? Does he maintain his connections to the Parsis? Has he participated in any discussions about interpretations of Mazdayasna and/or the acceptance of converts? A link to a short piece by him in the Edge Foundation's latest scientific question ("what will change everything?") is here: http://www.edge. org/q2009/ q09_14.html. His piece is called "The Synchronization of Brains" (you will need to scroll 3/4 of the way down the page, though there are some other pieces worth reading).

Thanks in advance for any information you may have. And I'd love to hear other perspectives if any of you are familiar with his work or that of others as it pertains to the synchronization of brains.

Ushta,

Arthur