Expert: Rohinton Irani - 7/30/2009

Question
Your information was much clearer and it anwsered alot of questions. Though with regard to Duelism, that was not exactly what I was thinking of, (If I am getting this right you venerate the Angels because they have authority from God and by honoring them, you honor Ashura Mazda indirectly.Am I correct? Catholicism also venerates Saints as prayer warriors for God. I am guessing that you regard the Yasnas (I fear that I mispelled that), as lesser servant spirits rather than demi-gods.Can the Yasnas act on their own authority, or are they like intercessors?)), what I was thinking of was the the accusation that until the 18th century, Angru Mainyu was regarded as the equel of Ashura Mazda, Angru Mainyu being the God of Evil and Ashura Mazda being the God of good. Below find the text I found on wikipedia that argues this.
"Although Zurvanism had died out by the 10th century the critical question of the "twin brothers" mentioned in Yasna 30.3 remained, and Haug's explanation provided a convenient defence against Christian missionaries who disparaged the Parsis (Indian Zoroastrians; originally Iranians that migrated to India and retained their Zoroastrian faith) for their 'dualism'. Haug's concept was subsequently disseminated as a Parsi interpretation, thus corroborating Haug's theory and the idea became so popular that it is now almost universally accepted as doctrine."
Haug's theory was that Zoroastrianism was originally monothiestic. The accusation was that Zoroastrians adopted Monothieism because they wanted to avoid persecution from Christian missionarys.

With Regard to Mazdayasian going to Zarathushtrianism and then to Zoroastrianism. How did they differ? Was it like change over from Judaism to Christianity, (New Covenant) or from Catholicism to Prodestantism, (Reformation of theology).

I have aslo heard that the Sassanids persecuted Christians and Manichiens in their empire? is this true?

Pax Christi
Henry

ps. Your response to my last email was the very definition of, "Good thoughts, Good words, Good deeds" for this I thank you. I also apologise for any future comments that I may make that may not have such a manner about them. The most Holy trinity has allowed Lucifer to give me an argumenmtitive spirit to struggle with to keep me humble. also, to correct a cdomment that you made. Not all Religons believe in salvation through, "good thoughts, good words, good deeds." I am in particuler refering to my own faith. While catholic Christianity requires this to get to Heaven, We Regard no man as perfect and therefore good enough to get to Heaven. We therefore put a high emphasis on God's mercy. Most Prodestant denominations, however have rejected, "Good thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds" as nessecery for Salvation, but they do believe that these are the signs of true believers.


Answer
Dear Henry, Ushta
Please don't get me the wrong way. I am not at all offended by what you have said but this might sound a bit rude. But trust me, I don't mean it. This is the only way I can explain.

Recently I read that Jesus was black. Then I read that there was nobody as Jesus. This was a hypo critic story created by the Church for people to start believing in God. And many more rubbish articles that I read on the internet.

What I want to say is that people write whatever they want. You have to check out their authenticity. Wikipedia is written by authors who sometimes have no background on the research subject. I have found that with relation to health too. So, I personally do not trust Wikipedia completely even though some points turn out to be genuine.

You have written Haug has said this.. Now who the hell is he? Has he read the old scriptures? Does he know the Avestan language?????????????? See your source.

Yasna was written much before Zurvanism. And even before that were the songs of Asho Zarathushtra, which are known as the Gathas. What people interpret is their problem? I cannot answer all the interpretation of different authors or supposedly intellects on the subject. There might be 1000 authors, who are just interpreting without actually learning the texts. Our research work is based on the ancient scriptures.

As for Zarathushtrianism going to Zoroastrianism, it is not exactly like Judaism to Christianity. You cannot compare this. It's like saying when mangoes get sour, oranges get sour too. Judaism did not change and neither has Christianity. They are two different religions with different sets of rules.

Zoroastrianism is the mixture of Zarathushtrianism and Mazdayasnia with more flavor of the latter because it has the authoritative taste for the benefit of the priests. Gathas has spoken more about democracy. Again, let me emphasize on this point. If you check historical evidence and in the chronological form, Zarathushtra was the first philosopher to emphasize on monotheism. Where did Christianity come here? I am talking about a good 1700 years before Christ?

And I want to once again point out, Henry, I am not being rude. I am just making my point that  your points should be corroborated with more sources. Pardon me if I am sounding rude. But it is difficult to explain over the internet.

Hope it is a bit clearer. And write to me at rohinton@spenta.edu if you have further points to discuss.

With Vohuman
Rohinton

PS: I am not in office till the 4th August. SO, even if you want to write, go ahead. I will respond after the 4th. Thanks.