Zurvanism is interesting. It was basically an attempt to rationalize the original Zoroastrian creation myth, and why both good and evil exist in the first place. >The "classic" Zurvanite model of creation, preserved only by non-Zoroastrian sources, proceeds as follows: In the beginning, the great God Zurvan existed alone. Desiring offspring that would create 'heaven and hell and everything in between,' Zurvan sacrificed for a thousand years. Towards the end of this period, androgyne Zurvan began to doubt the efficacy of sacrifice and in the moment of this doubt Ohrmuzd and Ahriman were conceived: Ohrmuzd for the sacrifice and Ahriman for the doubt. Upon realizing that twins were to be born, Zurvan resolved to grant the first-born sovereignty over creation. Ohrmuzd perceived Zurvan's decision, which He then communicated to His brother. Ahriman then preempted Ohrmuzd by ripping open the womb to emerge first. Reminded of the resolution to grant Ahriman sovereignty, Zurvan conceded, but limited kingship to a period of 9000 years, after which Ohrmuzd would rule for all eternity (Zaehner, 1955:419-428).
>>573336 absolutely retarded in that they refuse to take converts not because of their religious doctrine (in fact, in the days of the Sassanian empire , Zoroastrians were quite active in seeking converts) - but simply because back in the day, the Indian prince whom they sought protection under decreed that they were free to stay as long as they didn't try to convert the locals. for some reason , the Parsi Zoroastrians have stuck by this to this day because of "muh pure bloodline" and are doomed to extinction.
>>573405 >monotheistic religion >with strong dualism Zoroastrianism never was a monotheistic religion, Judaism developed pure monotheism independently. If anything, Jews borrowed idea of Messiah and huge battle at the end of time, later reinterpreted by Christianity. Also Satan's role became more prominent by the early middle ages, turning Christianity almost back to dualism.
>>573400 To ride, shoot straight and speak the truth Moderation in worldly pleasures, both celibacy and lechery, gluttony and temperance is not encouraged Charity and love for all human beings Industry and honest toil Forgiveness, mercy and tolerance
Arrogance, greed, petty quarrels, wrath and jealousy are discouraged
>>573418 Parsi zoroastrians are too proud to ever allow converts, even tho the religion itself is of great appeal to many people. I was curious, however, of the status of other Zoroastrians in the world.
>>573466 Yeah though Zoroastrianism encourages the accumulation of wealth in a way Christianity doesn't (rich man, eye of the needle etc). That said Mazdakism rose out of Zoroastrianism and it basically taught proto-socialism and free love.
>>573570 The incest thing is over emphasised by paradox to give them game mechanics different from Muslims and Christians but damn if it isn't funny. I cheated and made a super fertile demigod character who became Saoshyant. Every duchy and kingdom was owned by one of my children. Three generations later and the family tree looked more like a gnarled bush, was funny af
>>573880 >>573923 The Yazata. The Fravashis are a subset of them, but the "angels" were basically mostly pre-Zoroastrian lesser deities that crept back into the pantheon.
>>573923 >Yea, remember that the Three Wise-Men from the East were Zoroastrian Priests (Magi) from either Persia, Armenia or the northern Subcontinent. Pic related. That's a later tradition though. Initially it wasn't even sure if there were 3 of them. But Bar Hebraeus mentions their names (different from Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar) and they're definitely Persianate.
>>573882 In particular the idea of basic human dignity and free will is largely derived from Zoroastrianism via Judaism. The idea that Satan is God's enemy rather than his go-to dude for doing dirty work is influenced by them as well. The idea of a messiah might be too. And remember that Cyrus the Great is the only non-Jew to be called "annointed of God" by the Old Testament.
>>573882 Judaism ripped off the entire "monotheism" thing from Zoroastrianism.
The polytheistic Israelite kingdom got it's ass kicked by the Babylonians. The Babylonians would take conquered peoples and move them away from their homeland and force them to marry Babylonians (Thereby breeding them out of existence). The cult of Yahweh had long been a force in Israel, but now it's followers were whipped into a frenzy, adamant that a messiah would come.
And one did. Cyrus the Great came by and kicked over Babylon like a sandcastle, freeing the captured peoples, namely the Jews. The Cult of Yahweh, now empowered by the whole "Hey, we were right about a man sent by a single god to come save us!" thing, slowly eradicated the cults of the other gods, even Yahweh's wives, taking the monotheism even further than the Zoroastrians.
Then, of course, Christianity comes along.
There is, by the way, a Jew who can read Biblical Hebrew that occasionally posts here. If you're curious about the Three Magi (Because translations are ass), I'd ask him. Hell, I'll ask him next time I see him posting.
Ahriman is not an equal to Ohrmazd in orthodox zoroastrianism and it literally cannot win. No dualism, that's for heretics and manicheans. Anyways, this orthodox zoroastrianism is fairly young so we can't know who was right when Zoroaster invented the whole show.
In Sasanian times (and those are the times where the texts we have were collected) zoroastrianism supported a caste/state society not so different from the indian one.
>>573507 And while it didn't have this eye of the needle thing, merchants were the lower caste. Lower than farmers. They didn't even have a big fire, unlike the other three states. This is why iranian merchants were often not zoroastrian.
>>577389 Nope. Ahura Mazda was only equal to Angra Mainyu in Zurvanism, which was a version of the creed that was supported by the Sassanid empire. Before that, Ahura Mazda was stronger. Unless you mean pre-Zoroastrian, or even early Indo-Aryan times, when they were just two deities, one belonging to the Asuras, and other to the Daevas, who were later demonized (pretty much the opposite of what happened in India).
>>577809 Not following the creed of Zoroastrianism automatically puts you on Angra Mainyu's side. There's no neutral party in this war. Precisely because it's a battle than Angra Mainyu cannot win, you have to follow Zoroastrianism.
Why would you not side with Angra Mainyu if he is Ahura Mazda's equal?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.