I am not so sure about this. Some people cant seem to accomplish this
lol, Jeeze Americans....
I understand alot of what your saying 3J and its pretty interesting. You got any books you would recommend? I am a 100% dedicated Christian no even could ever change that. But I was in school to be a history teacher before switching over to Personal Training and going for Health and Fitness fields. My views on God could never change, but my understanding of how these views relate to people can.
Judaism Meets Zoroastrianism
just to start..
Zoroastrian Influence on Judeo-Christian Belief
The story of that given religion usually holds a creation story and complex history based upon its deity and its interactions or lack thereof with the human world. It is made to seem that the story is all that is, all that can be. As if the rest of the world does not exist in molding the faith. If the only evidence of the faith was truly through some sacred story of itself, then one could not be blamed for presuming there are no outside influences and the story is original in its own right. The Judeo-Christian story does just that. There comes Genesis, the creation story, and everything after that which presumes originality. Judeo-Christian texts, when original, are the word of God though man. Yet this is not how Judeo-Christianity should be looked at. Past the complex history of the sacred texts and laws comes an even more complex history of assimilation, acculturation, and syncretism between a many cultures and faiths. It cannot be said that there is no originality to the Judeo-Christian belief, but simply that outside factors have played a role in molding these Abrahamic beliefs. The specific interaction between the Zoroastrian Persian Empire and the Jews of the post-exilic era in the 5th century B.C. is rich with evidence of syncretism. Y. Masih in his book, A Comparative Study of Religions, seems to believe there is a distinct differentiation in Jewish monotheism and Persian monotheism. He feels the Persian monotheism is weaker in the sense. But the Jews acquired universalism from the Persian Zoroastrians, showing signs of syncretism. If the idea of God becomes and his relation is the same, there should be no difference in monotheism. There is an abundant amount of evidence which gives rise to theories of influence in Judaic belief by the large numbers who followed Zoroastrianism. This syncretism gave rise to demonology, angelology, apocalypticism, universalism in deity, and afterlife in the Jewish faith.
In order to even begin a comparison of Jewish and Persian scripture there must be some sort of contact between the two cultures and their respective faiths. In the fifth century B.C. the Jews were in exile from their holy land of Jerusalem due to Babylonian conquest. Between 597 and 587 B.C. all the Jew’s in Judea were exiled from their land and deported to Babylonia (King pg.36). They were not allowed to return to their land under Babylonian control. In 539 B.C. Cyrus, the Achaemenid king of Persia, conquered Babylon (Nodet 17). His empirical policies based upon an administrative system of government allowed him to return the land of Judea to the Jew’s while keeping province in the area (Nodet 17). The Jews were so grateful that they called Cyrus the “anointed of Yahweh” (Isaiah 45:3-4). Making a Persian Zoroastrian king a Messiah of Yahweh is a clear indicator of contact between the two faiths. It was said that Yahweh “stirred up the spirit of Cyrus” (Nodet 19) Cyrus even had it proclaimed throughout his kingdom that “Yahweh, the God of heaven, has given me all he kingdoms of the earth and has appointed me to build the temple at Jerusalem in Judah…” (Nodet 19). And so the plans to build the temple were made, though the completion of the temple did not come in Cyrus’s lifetime. Darius, the next Persian King decided to continue the building of the Jewish temple (Nodet 337). One of the three pillars of Judaism is the temple. The return to their land and the building of their temple was a blessing of Persian kings. Also, similarities like monotheism in both faiths were more than enough reasons for Jews to be accepting of Persian influence.
When comparing faiths, it only makes sense to start with the deities. The Zoroastrian faith is more or less monotheistic. Ahura Mazda is the supreme God of the faith and is described as “the creator, the radiant and glorious, the greatest and the best, the most beautiful, the most firm, the wisest, and the one of all whose body is the most perfect, who attains His ends the most infallibly….” (Yasna. 1:1). This presents the concept of universalism. Ahura Mazda being the creator, the greatest, and supreme puts him on the top of the Hierarchy in Persian belief. This also weakens the notion that Zoroastrianism is strictly monotheistic. Rather, it seems that there is evidence to show that other deities may be around and are tolerated to some extent. He is considered one of the seven immortals called the Amesha Spentas who hold governance over the universe (Sirozah 2:1). In order to explain the battle of good and evil in the world, Ahura Mazda has an evil twin who’s named Angra-Mainyu (Yasna 31:12). This limits Ahura Mazda’s powers in the Persian idea of their deity. They can easily suppose that his powers must be limited or he would not allow evil in the world. He is considered to be omniscient (Yasna 31:13), and omnipresent (Yasna. 31:7). He is known to be Holy and good in every sense (Yasna. 38:7). He is known to be an interactive God, one who cares for the health and well being of his followers (Yasna. 31:21, 28:2). Ahura Mazda was thought of as an endless light, pure and high in all senses (Yasna. 28:5). Around his throne, it is said that he is surrounded by angels or the Amesha Spentas (Yasna. 30:9) who govern the universe with him. These ideas of omnipresence, omnipotence, a figure of fatherliness, and a deity of interaction with the human world can be paralleled with the Jewish deity Yahweh in post-exilic scripture.
Yahweh, the God of the Israelites, was a tribal God who was solely for the worship of the Israelites early on in Jewish history. He grew into a universalistic God with Persian influence. The Hebrew’s were the one people of Yahweh. This early understanding of the Jewish deity shows little universalism, a lack of interaction in human affairs, and a weaker understanding of monotheism. The prophets of the eighth century B.C. do not give express representation that Yahweh is the sole God. Instead, such universalism was brought to tradition by the contact and syncretism of the Persian Empire. To see a presence of such change, one must read from Deuteronomy on. With universalism rose the concept of interaction in human affairs by Yahweh. The books of Isaiah, Zechariah, and Psalms give such evidence (Isaiah 56:3-8, 66:1-2, Psalms 67, Zechariah 2:2). With the syncretistic effect of the Persian Zoroastrian Empire, Yahweh transforms from a tribal God exclusively made for the Jews to a universal God who was supreme above all other gods and gives anyone a chance to prey in his house (Deuteronomy 32:39). Then comes a very parallel presence of Yahweh to Ahura Mazda through the gain of attributes such as eternal wisdom (Job 12:13, 28:24-27, Psalms 104:24), omnipotence (Isaiah 46:10, Psalms 115:3), justice (Job 34:12, 37:23), and holiness (Isa 43:15, 49:7, Leviticus 11:44). Also, the interactivity of Yahweh in a personal and spiritual sense is represented (Isaiah 48 16-17, 62:5, Psalms 103:13, Job 33:4). These books were written at or after the time of Cyrus and the return of the Jews to their Holy land. With such similarities in the two faiths, it’s not farfetched that the Jewish people would be accepting and peaceful with Zoroastrianism. The concept of Ahura Mazda; benevolent, omnipresent, omnipotent, interactive, and a God of love is not too far from their own ideas of Yahweh and his characteristics. It’s as if though Ahura Mazda/The Persian Empire has given the Jewish people the gift of better understanding their own God. Yahweh went from an impersonal and tribal God in pre-exilic times to an interactive and personal God in post-exilic times. The interpersonal relationship between the worshiper and worshiped seemed to even surpass Zoroastrian tradition in Jewish practice (Deuteronomy 4:29, 6:5, Psalms 38:1).
The big difference between Ahura Mazda and Yahweh early on in pre-exilic times was dualism. Ahura Mazda was always plagued by his evil twin Angra-Mainyu. The Jewish faith had nothing to offer in order to explain evil in the world. There was no evil counterpart in Jewish scriptures. Yahweh was supreme. But the benevolence of Yahweh seems to be lacking in certain passages, especially the one addressed to Cyrus in Isaiah 45:5-7; “I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace and create evil; I am the Lord, that doeth all these things.” There seems to be a lack of dualism in pre-exilic Jewish writing. The affirmation of dualism in post-exilic Jewish writing is another clear indicator of Zoroastrian syncretism. As stated before, Ahura Mazda is all that is good in the world. His evil counterpart, Angra-Mainyu is all that is evil. Such dualism can only be contributed to the issue of evil and how we can explain its presence in the world. Zoroastrian good is eternal light, evil is endless darkness. One can find strong evidence of this in Vendidad 1, 3:7-11, and 22. Ahura Mazda rules with the Spenta Mainyu over all that is good and what the Zoroastrians call the Druj, which translates to falsehood, is the devil. What Ahura Mazda creates with good, Angra-Mainyu destroys and corrupts with his evil. With such dualism, the people of Zoroastrianism are given the chance to choose between good and evil with free will. With Judaism, the idea of the devil or Satan unveils itself in post-exilic writing, as does a strong reference of angelology and demonology.
The rise of angel/demonology in post-exilic Jewish writing is one of the strongest indicators of syncretism between the two faiths. Ahura Mazda is the creator of the Amesha Spenta (Yashts 1:25). He creates these six archangels to help him in his works with humanity. The Amesha Spenta receive their own worship through ritual, but are never separated from the idea that Ahura Mazda is the supreme God and the six archangels are agents of his. Each archangel has a purpose and specific job given to them by Ahura Mazda. In retrospect, Angra-Mainyu has demons to do his bidding much like Ahura Mazda. Anrgo-Mainyu, like Ahura Mazda, has six arch-demons who are the rivals of the six archangels in heaven (Nigosian pg.86). Goodness injures evil, evil injures goodness. The tug of war ideology of good and evil are ever so present in modern day Christianity and Judaism.
The Jewish understanding of angels early on was shallow. Messengers from God would appear to biblical characters like Hagar (Genesis 16:7-13) and Joshua (Joshua 5:13). We cannot say that the messengers of God were God himself because that is not a Jewish belief. One can logically imply that these messengers of God, given divine authority, are angels. Yet the book of Genesis was not written till the 5th century B.C. which gives room for Zoroastrian influence. In pre-exilic times, there isn’t much talk of angels and demons. The later books which were written past the 5th century B.C. show stronger influences of Zoroastrian angel/demonology. After the exile, the presences of angels greatly increase and become a part of Jewish traditional characteristics. The books of Ezekiel and Zechariah show a growing presence of Angels. Also, Yahweh is shown to have a large amount of angels who are agents of his bidding (Psalms 68:17, 2nd Macabees 10:29). Yahweh, the once tribal god, is not a universal God with a hierarchy of angels. Amongst this hierarchy are the archangels (Daniel 4:13, 17, 23, Timothy 5:21) who have at times been called the seven archangels (Tobit 12:15, Enoch 20 ). The parallel of these seven archangels of Yahweh with the seven angels of the Amesha Spenta in Zoroastrian belief cannot be ignored. Ahura Mazda was one of the seven angels of the Amesha Spenta. These seven Abrahamic archangels much have come from Zoroastrian influences. The book of Enoch, which was written in post-exilic times, gives names to all seven angels (Enoch 20).
The rise of demons in Judaism also came with the post-exilic era and Persian influence. Early on in Jewish history, Yahweh was considered to be both the one that causes good and evil. If there was a lie that was made by an angel, it was done so with Yahweh’s command. 1st Kings 22:19-23 gives scene to a spirit that is said to be a lying spirit. In 1 Chronicles 21:1, the first notion of the word “Satan” is used. Satan the better develops in the story of David numbering Israel (Samuel 24:1). How strange that Yahweh, a being that is all good, is now surround by spirits that do evil biddings for him (Enoch 7:9). Further on in Enoch you have a some sort of beginning of all evil given to these demons or evil spirits (Enoch 69) and Satan is the ruler of these spirits (Enoch 9, 10, 53:3). A dualism is forming in the Jewish faith. It cannot be ignored that Zoroastrianism has a strong sense of dualism. The Jew’s did not seem to pick up on this dualism until they came in contact and were influenced by Zoroastrian dualism. Though the dualism of Zoroastrianism which makes Ahura Mazda weak in the sense that he cannot stop Angra-Mainyu from committing evil deeds seems weaker then the short lived triumph of the devil in Judaic belief, the similarities stand. There is no other explanation as to where the Jewish faith was to get such a strong sense of dualism in comparison to its past belief.
Apocalyticism and afterlife in Jewish scripture was, to say the least, non-existent in pre-exilic times. Though there was expectation in a savior, it was in a weaker sense before Persian influence. In Zoroastrianism, there is a strong belief in a redeemer. This savior of the Zoroastrian people is called the Saoshyant (Visperad 5:1, Ys. 46:3). The Saoshyant will be the one to bring resurrection to the good people of Zoroastrianism, those deemed worthy by judgment. He will restore the world, making evil and death a thing of the past and immortality and good all that is (Boyce pg.90) The birth of Saoshyant comes from a virgin mother (Vendidad 29:5), much like the Christian birth story of Jesus. The Jewish conception of Messiah seemed to lack the same passion and virtue of the Zoroastrian Saoshyant before Persian influence. Post-exilic writing sees a rise in the idea of a prophet (Enoch 60:4-10, 14-18, Daniel 7:9, 13, 18, 22). There is even a passage that refers to “the son of man”; One who is righteous, given divine authority, and will “break the teeth of sinners” (Enoch 46:1-3, 47:3-4). If there is a savior, then there must be an end to times. The apocalypticism of Zoroastrian faith comes with Ahura Mazda and the Saoshyant overcoming the evils of Angra-Mainyu (Boyce pg.92). With the Jewish faith, it seems that Cyrus was considered for a while to be a deliverer. He is the cause of the Jewish peoples return to Jerusalem, which is their holy land and what some say is the only place they believe God can hear them. After Cyrus came Zerubbabel, who helped restore the temple. He too was seen as some sort of hand of God. Other biblical figures, like Simon Macabees was thought of some sort of prophet (Macabees 14:41). We can see an advance in such an end of times with passages from Psalms (Psalms 21:9-10). Psalms was a book in the bible which was heavily influenced by the 400 years of Persian contact. Since it was written post-exilic times, one can come to a theoretical conclusion about its sources being influenced by the Persians.
One of the most influential impacts that Persian Zoroastrianism had on Judaic belief was life after death. In Zoroastrianism, once one is deceased he is judged. The book of Arda Viraf, a story that can be compared to Dante’s Inferno, gives insight as to what occurs as a soul leaves the body. The three days at Chinwad bridge (Viraf 4:7), the sweet scent on the third day followed by the voluptuous woman who was a reflection of his good deeds in his life (Viraf 4:18-36) shows judgment. If the women were to be ugly, old, and decrepit, the man would surely know he is going to hell (Vendidad 7:2, 30). On the fourth day, the soul passes over Chinvat Bridge. The soul then passes through three steps; the star, the moon, and the sun track (Viraf 7, 8, 9). These are also known the steps of good thought, words, and deeds. Then they reach the fourth level of heaven, the level of endless light where Ahura Mazda resides (Viraf 11). In Chapter 11 of Viraf’s journey, he is met by one of the Amesha Spenta. The angelology in the book of Viraf is strong. It is the archangel of fire who leads Viraf to Ahura Mazda (Viraf 11). The impious soul receives just the opposite of what occurs to the pious. He feels a cold wind, is taken off by demons after being presented an ugly hag who is the reflection of his evil thoughts, words, and deeds. He is then taken through the three steps of hell; evil thoughts, evil words, evil deeds, only to end up in the final level where Angra-Mainyu resides. From chapter 16 to 99 of Viraf’s vision is a lengthy presentation of different people in hell being tortured for the different sins they have committed. The details of these tortures are not necessary for the relation to Judaism.
Early Judaism shows frail indication of judgment in the afterlife which gives promise of reward or punishment. Even the idea of immortality was in shadows, though there was the notion of being close to Yahweh. There is the concept of Sheol, the final resting place of the body, of the good and the bad (Psalms 88:12, Job 14:21). Sheol does not satisfy the definition of a fiery hell in afterlife. As the Persian period of Jewish scripture came to be, so did the belief in immortality, reward, and punishment (Daniel 7:9-10, 12:2-3, Judith 26:17). Words of a coming messiah and a new heavens and a new earth shows more than substantial proof of a rise in afterlife and a promise of heaven (Isaiah 65:17, 66:18-24, Enoch 52:4). Further proof of resurrection and heaven can be found in the book of Isaiah, Daniel, and 2nd Maccabeus (Isaiah 26:19, 2nd Maccabeus 7:14, Daniel 7:2-3). A close communion with Yahweh is also mentioned in later writings (Psalms 49:15, 27:15, 26:10-11, 73:24-28). Much reference to afterlife and a communion with God in heaven comes from a post-exilic writings, the Psalms. How can it be explained? How is it that the Jewish faith had no focus on afterlife, on heaven, and on hope until it came across Persian Zoroastrian influence? Ahura Mazda promises communion, heaven, paradise, and eternal life. Not until post-exilic times did Yahweh take on these attributes and promises. There cannot be another explanation with such supporting evidence.
The history of Judaic belief does in fact rely on Zoroastrian influence to explain some attributes. The rise of heaven with paradise, the rise of Satan and his demons who are Gods adversary, the rise of Yahweh’s interpersonal relationship with his people and all people through universalism, and the rise of apocalyptic ideology all can be traced back to Zoroastrian influence. A historical analysis of Zoroastrian and Judaic scriptures has shown the rise of similarities in the two faiths which are undeniably caused by historic contact between the two faiths and syncretism.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Boyce, Mary Textual Sources for the Study of Zoroastrianism Manchester University Press 1994
King, Philip J. Jeremiah: An Archaeological Companion Westminster John Knox Press, 1993
Masih, Y. A Comparitive Study of Religion Shri Jainendra Press 2000
Nigosian, S.A The Zoroastrian Faith Tradition and modern research Mcgill-Queens University Press 1993
Nodet, Etienne A search for the Origins of Judaism From Joshua to the Mishnah Sheffield Academic Press
The Avesta Zoroastrian Archives Online
AVESTA -- Zoroastrian Archives 2010
Viraf, The Book of Arda Viraf, The AvestaZoroastrian Archives Online
The Book of Arda Viraf 2010
OTHER BOOKS
Dadachanji, K. Speeches and Writings on Zoroastrian Religion, Culture, and Civilization Ehtesham Processes Press 1993
McCasland, Religions of the World Random House New York 1969
Mugambi, J.N.K A Comparative Study of Religions Nairobi University Press 1990
