• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Zoroastrianism (religion of Prophet Zarathushtra) a revealed religion?

MD

qualiaphile
Really? You always seemed to me to be a more liberal Zoroastrian. I wonder, though, Since you acknowledge that it is dying, do you think converts should be accepted?

I've always felt that Zoroastrians are liberal with the wrong things and conservative with the wrong things.

I am liberal in the sense that I do fully think converts should be accepted and that anyone who wishes to be Zoroastrian should be allowed to do so. I believe mixed Zoroastrian kids should be allowed to be Zoroastrian.

But I'm conservative in the sense that I believe we need to have more kids. I'm conservative in the sense that we need strong morals and foundations and should be more focused on building our faith. Too many Zoroastrians (especially Indian Parsis) are like Europeans, living open and hedonistic lives without purpose. Many don't have kids. Too much focus on career. I don't agree with many of these things. I think I am a minority in such thinking however. Most Parsis don't care, and continue to live their hedonistic liberal lives. It will be our undoing, just like it will eventually ruin the West as well.
 
Last edited:

MD

qualiaphile
Before answering, I'd like to say that I love the Zoroastrian culture. I've attended their festivals that were held by Iranis and Parsis in Florida and it affected me profoundly. That said, I would say it is dying a natural death since the things that are contributing to it's decline are not coming from an outside force but instead are things that the Zoroastrians could change. Just things like allowing people to convert or marry into Zoroastrianism or allowing members to marry outside of the faith would go far to slowing it's decline.

Furthermore, it isn't just that it's members are dying out. A great many stop identifying with it of their own accord and instead adopt Islam or Hinduism because they begin to feel like those faiths can fulfill their spiritual needs better. The marketplace of ideas at work, I suppose.


All this said, though, I don't thing it would be dying this natural death, had, as Shaz mentioned, the Arab armies not dealt such a severe blow to the religion by getting rid of many of their writings and by not allowing the Sages and Magis to teach and spread their, now lost, knowledge.

Anyway, to answer your question, yes, I believe it is, and find that to be a shame.

I haven't really met any who identify as Hindu, but I do personally know some Parsis who converted to Islam or Christianity. Hinduism is a pretty open faith, many Parsis in India believe in Hindu Gods and Goddesses. The Abrahamic faiths proselytize strongly to Parsis and I've known two people who converted to Christianity and many women who married Muslim men and left my faith.

The Arabs damaged Zoroastrianism but it was the Persian dynasties that came later which themselves destroyed the religion and adopted Islam. Shia Islam is an attempt by Iran to Persianize Islam. Any attempt to revive Zoroastrianism was brought about by the Pahlavi dynasty, which again was quashed by the Revolution in Iran. Although my ethnicity is mostly Persian, I've always seen Iran as the abusive parents while India were the adoptive parents who treated us with love and kindness and helped us thrive.

That being said I think Zoroastrianism has a small chance in Iran and Kurdistan. If Iran was a free and open society many would convert, even just in name. The Kurdish flag has a sun on it, which has 21 rays, a number holy in Zoroastrianism as it represents the 21 Nasks. The Kurds also opened a new fire temple in Sweden, but I haven't read much about it. They also have a religion known as Yezidism, which is an offshoot in Zoroastrianism. However many Yezidis are being killed off by ISIS. It's a matter of pride for some people in Iran. Nouroz is a Zoroastrian holiday which is a nationali holiday. Khoda is the Zoroastrian word for God and Namaz is the Zoroastrian word for prayer. Iran is really the only hope we have, if the country did become secular. However, I don't see that happening for a long time and going by the aggressive anti religious movements in the West, I don't think we have much of a future here either.

I do feel the Parsis are finished in India for good due to poor planning by the ruling Parsi panchayat and the general backwardness of Parsi thinking. The continuous blocking of new Iranian converts is generally done by Parsis who have no other plan but to armchair criticize with no actual plans or options.
 
Last edited:

Ryujin

Dragon Worshipper
I haven't really met any who identify as Hindu, but I do personally know some Parsis who converted to Islam or Christianity. Hinduism is a pretty open faith, many Parsis in India believe in Hindu Gods and Goddesses. The Abrahamic faiths proselytize strongly to Parsis and I've known two people who converted to Christianity and many women who married Muslim men and left my faith.

The Arabs damaged Zoroastrianism but it was the Persian dynasties that came later which themselves destroyed the religion and adopted Islam. Shia Islam is an attempt by Iran to Persianize Islam. Any attempt to revive Zoroastrianism was brought about by the Pahlavi dynasty, which again was quashed by the Revolution in Iran. Although my ethnicity is mostly Persian, I've always seen Iran as the abusive parents while India were the adoptive parents who treated us with love and kindness and helped us thrive.

That being said I think Zoroastrianism has a small chance in Iran and Kurdistan. If Iran was a free and open society many would convert, even just in name. The Kurdish flag has a sun on it, which has 21 rays, a number holy in Zoroastrianism as it represents the 21 Nasks. The Kurds also opened a new fire temple in Sweden, but I haven't read much about it. They also have a religion known as Yezidism, which is an offshoot in Zoroastrianism. However many Yezidis are being killed off by ISIS. It's a matter of pride for some people in Iran. Nouroz is a Zoroastrian holiday which is a nationali holiday. Khoda is the Zoroastrian word for God and Namaz is the Zoroastrian word for prayer. Iran is really the only hope we have, if the country did become secular. However, I don't see that happening for a long time and going by the aggressive anti religious movements in the West, I don't think we have much of a future here either.

I do feel the Parsis are finished in India for good due to poor planning by the ruling Parsi panchayat and the general backwardness of Parsi thinking. The continuous blocking of new Iranian converts is generally done by Parsis who have no other plan but to armchair criticize with no actual plans or options.

I agree that Iran and Kurdistan could be a chance for Zoroastrianism's survival. Also,from what I gather, I think that Zoroastrians in Iran are actually more in line with your thinking, but they are hindered by there government. Actually I think I agree wholeheartedly with all you've said. Truly, it seems, we think alike!

We are also in agreement in regards to the modern hedonistic lifestyle that many now live. I believe that people should be more observant of the customs and laws and beliefs of their culture, rather than sacrificing them for fleeting pleasures and conveniences.
 

Ryujin

Dragon Worshipper
I haven't really met any who identify as Hindu, but I do personally know some Parsis who converted to Islam or Christianity. Hinduism is a pretty open faith, many Parsis in India believe in Hindu Gods and Goddesses. The Abrahamic faiths proselytize strongly to Parsis and I've known two people who converted to Christianity and many women who married Muslim men and left my faith.

The Arabs damaged Zoroastrianism but it was the Persian dynasties that came later which themselves destroyed the religion and adopted Islam. Shia Islam is an attempt by Iran to Persianize Islam. Any attempt to revive Zoroastrianism was brought about by the Pahlavi dynasty, which again was quashed by the Revolution in Iran. Although my ethnicity is mostly Persian, I've always seen Iran as the abusive parents while India were the adoptive parents who treated us with love and kindness and helped us thrive.

That being said I think Zoroastrianism has a small chance in Iran and Kurdistan. If Iran was a free and open society many would convert, even just in name. The Kurdish flag has a sun on it, which has 21 rays, a number holy in Zoroastrianism as it represents the 21 Nasks. The Kurds also opened a new fire temple in Sweden, but I haven't read much about it. They also have a religion known as Yezidism, which is an offshoot in Zoroastrianism. However many Yezidis are being killed off by ISIS. It's a matter of pride for some people in Iran. Nouroz is a Zoroastrian holiday which is a nationali holiday. Khoda is the Zoroastrian word for God and Namaz is the Zoroastrian word for prayer. Iran is really the only hope we have, if the country did become secular. However, I don't see that happening for a long time and going by the aggressive anti religious movements in the West, I don't think we have much of a future here either.

I do feel the Parsis are finished in India for good due to poor planning by the ruling Parsi panchayat and the general backwardness of Parsi thinking. The continuous blocking of new Iranian converts is generally done by Parsis who have no other plan but to armchair criticize with no actual plans or options.

I would urge you, though, not to think so harshly of the Parsis. Since they were forced to sign a treaty when they arrived in India that inhibited them severely. For instance, they could not teach the Indians of their faith or try to convert them. It is only natural that they would be hesitant to deviate from this treaty that they've long abided by.
 

Poeticus

| abhyAvartin |
I would urge you, though, not to think so harshly of the Parsis. Since they were forced to sign a treaty when they arrived in India that inhibited them severely. For instance, they could not teach the Indians of their faith or try to convert them. It is only natural that they would be hesitant to deviate from this treaty that they've long abided by.

The way you worded that statement makes their arrival in Gujarat, and subsequent treatment by the Raja present there (which was, in contrast, quite amicable in terms of historicity), sound pretty bad.
 

Ryujin

Dragon Worshipper
The way you worded that statement makes their arrival in Gujarat, and subsequent treatment by the Raja present there (which was, in contrast, quite amicable in terms of historicity), sound pretty bad.

lol. Yeah, in retrospect, I suppose I should have worded it differently. Ultimately, the survival all these hundreds of years in Gujarat is rather remarkable and speaks to the Hindus tolerant and accepting nature.

Or maybe it speaks to the nature of Gujarat as a whole, lending itself to diversity. With the great degree of civilization on the coast since ancient times with the great city of Dwarka(said to be the domain of Krishna) in contrast with nomadic Maldharis living in close contact with the asian lion(in the only place that it yet still lives), it follows naturally that Gujarat would welcome more diverse peoples and religions.
 

Poeticus

| abhyAvartin |
lol. Yeah, in retrospect, I suppose I should have worded it differently. Ultimately, the survival all these hundreds of years in Gujarat is rather remarkable and speaks to the Hindus tolerant and accepting nature.

Or maybe it speaks to the nature of Gujarat as a whole, lending itself to diversity. With the great degree of civilization on the coast since ancient times with the great city of Dwarka(said to be the domain of Krishna) in contrast with nomadic Maldharis living in close contact with the asian lion(in the only place that it yet still lives), it follows naturally that Gujarat would welcome more diverse peoples and religions.

You sir, have humbled me. :namaste
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Really? You always seemed to me to be a more liberal Zoroastrian. I wonder, though, Since you acknowledge that it is dying, do you think converts should be accepted?

I was also amazed at this acknowledgement. First the language of the Zoroastrian scriptures died.

Regards
 

MD

qualiaphile
I would urge you, though, not to think so harshly of the Parsis. Since they were forced to sign a treaty when they arrived in India that inhibited them severely. For instance, they could not teach the Indians of their faith or try to convert them. It is only natural that they would be hesitant to deviate from this treaty that they've long abided by.

My mom is Parsi, I've lived in India in a Parsi colony and visit from time to time. This has nothing to do with India. Without India we would have died off a long time ago, India protected us and we thrived there. Many Parsis have Gujarati blood in them, this was published in a genetic study a few years ago where it was found that 60% of Parsi mtDNA is Gujarati.

It has to do with other things:

a) the inability to accept the children of Parsi women who married non Parsi men into the community
b) The focus on ridiculously old notion that we will never accept a convert
c) The focus on the achievements of a few old Parsis, rather than building a newer stronger future
d) Closing off our temples to Parsis only
e) The focus on being Western, instead of constructing our own identity
f) The ethnocentric views that Parsis are spiritually superior due to being 'pure'

I find conservative Parsis in the religious sense extremely irritating. No one in the younger generation thinks like them and if they do they're quickly ostracized.
 

MD

qualiaphile
I agree that Iran and Kurdistan could be a chance for Zoroastrianism's survival. Also,from what I gather, I think that Zoroastrians in Iran are actually more in line with your thinking, but they are hindered by there government. Actually I think I agree wholeheartedly with all you've said. Truly, it seems, we think alike!

We are also in agreement in regards to the modern hedonistic lifestyle that many now live. I believe that people should be more observant of the customs and laws and beliefs of their culture, rather than sacrificing them for fleeting pleasures and conveniences.

There has to be a major change and I am getting involved in implementing these changes.

In Iraq there is an active genocide against a religious group known as the Yezidis by ISIS. Yezidism is an offshoot of Zoroastrianism. This is getting attention from many Zoroastrians. Fear is an excellent catalyst for change.
 
Last edited:

Ryujin

Dragon Worshipper
My mom is Parsi, I've lived in India in a Parsi colony and visit from time to time. This has nothing to do with India. Without India we would have died off a long time ago, India protected us and we thrived there. Many Parsis have Gujarati blood in them, this was published in a genetic study a few years ago where it was found that 60% of Parsi mtDNA is Gujarati.

It has to do with other things:

a) the inability to accept the children of Parsi women who married non Parsi men into the community
b) The focus on ridiculously old notion that we will never accept a convert
c) The focus on the achievements of a few old Parsis, rather than building a newer stronger future
d) Closing off our temples to Parsis only
e) The focus on being Western, instead of constructing our own identity
f) The ethnocentric views that Parsis are spiritually superior due to being 'pure'

I find conservative Parsis in the religious sense extremely irritating. No one in the younger generation thinks like them and if they do they're quickly ostracized.


So many Parsis have Gujarati blood? I had heard that perhaps the treaty I spoke of was myth or exaggerated, but that may prove that it was a myth. Since, presumably, that implies that Parsis did originally accept convert and marriages to those outside the faith, right?


Also, one more thing. Have you ever met a Yezidi? How simialar do you think their version of Zoroastrianism is to yours? For instance, could a Parsi and a Yezidi worship at the same temple?

Thanks!
 

MD

qualiaphile
So many Parsis have Gujarati blood? I had heard that perhaps the treaty I spoke of was myth or exaggerated, but that may prove that it was a myth. Since, presumably, that implies that Parsis did originally accept convert and marriages to those outside the faith, right?


Also, one more thing. Have you ever met a Yezidi? How simialar do you think their version of Zoroastrianism is to yours? For instance, could a Parsi and a Yezidi worship at the same temple?

Thanks!

Parsis have been in India for centuries, there was bound to be mixing. Gujarat was a trading area between India and Persia, it's why it was chosen. Since the Y chromosome was found to be Persian while some mitochondrial DNA were Gujarati, the theory is that some Gujarati women married Iranian Parsi men centuries ago when they first arrived. Mitochondrial DNA is an indicator of female inheritance.

Many Gujaratis have Persian blood too, I remember reading some studying saying that some populations have up to 30% Persian DNA, but that might be more so in the Muslim populations.

Yezidis are to Zoroastrians in the way Christians are to Jews. Similar but different faiths, they have their own temples and worship a Yazata or an angel, while we worship Ahura Mazda. Sadly they are being heavily massacred now.
 

xkatz

Well-Known Member
The focus on ridiculously old notion that we will never accept a convert

TBH I have never understood this. Coming from a Jewish background, I understand why certain faiths are against active proselytization and spur-of-the-moment conversions. But to say that converts are never accepted? Seems odd to me b/c one would think that Zarathustra would've had to convert his followers from their previous faith. One what grounds do Parsis reject conversion?
 

Poeticus

| abhyAvartin |
Parsis have been in India for centuries, there was bound to be mixing. Gujarat was a trading area between India and Persia, it's why it was chosen. Since the Y chromosome was found to be Persian while some mitochondrial DNA were Gujarati, the theory is that some Gujarati women married Iranian Parsi men centuries ago when they first arrived. Mitochondrial DNA is an indicator of female inheritance.

One of the stipulations for Parsi [male] refugees, if I recall correctly, was that they take local females as wives.

Many Gujaratis have Persian blood too, I remember reading some studying saying that some populations have up to 30% Persian DNA, but that might be more so in the Muslim populations.

Not just the Muslim Gujarati-s, but other Gujarati-s of various religious backgrounds as well. Here is something of interesting note:

In terms of ancestry, Gujaratis share identical genes with the rest of the Indian populations, but show a significant relationship with Western Asia.

A 2004 Stanford study conducted with a wide sampling from India, found that over 33% of genetic markers in Gujarat were partially of West Eurasian origin, the second highest amongst the sampled group of South Asians with Punjabis at 42%, and Kashmiris at 30%.[11]

mtDNA Haplogroup U7 is found in Iran, the Near East,[11] Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan; with extremely low frequencies in neighboring countries Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Iraq. Its frequency peaks at over 12% in Gujarat, 9% in Iran, 9% in Punjab, 6% in Pakistan and 6% in Afghanistan. Elsewhere in India, its frequency is very low (0.00% to 0.90%).[11] Outside of the Near East, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Northwestern Indian states, Haplogroup U7 is non-existent. Expansion times and haplotype diversities for the Indian and Near and Middle Eastern U7 mtDNAs are strikingly similar.[11]

The possible homeland of this haplogroup likely spans the coverage of Iran to Western India. From there its frequency declines steeply both to the east and to the west. Its equally high frequency as well as diversity in Gujarat favors a scenario whereby U7 has been introduced by the coastal Gujarat to areas of Iran.[12]

Some preliminary conclusions from these varying tests support some of the highest degrees of Indian mtDNAs found in Western Asia, with a particular close relationship between Iran and Gujarat, supporting a theory of trade contact and migrations out of Gujarat into West Asia.[11] Gujarati people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

MD

qualiaphile
TBH I have never understood this. Coming from a Jewish background, I understand why certain faiths are against active proselytization and spur-of-the-moment conversions. But to say that converts are never accepted? Seems odd to me b/c one would think that Zarathustra would've had to convert his followers from their previous faith. One what grounds do Parsis reject conversion?

In Iran it was to prevent further religious discrimination. We were slaves in Iran for centuries and the fact that I have recent African DNA is a testament to the mixture my ancestors had with African slaves in Iran.

In India historically it was to stand out as a neutral community with all the Hindu Muslim conflicts. For example after Gandhi was assassinated, a Parsi headed the investigation.

In India there are two kinds of Zoroastrians: Iranis and Parsis. Iranis are usually taller and more sturdy built, they're recent Zoroastrian immigrants to India in the last 100 years. They are the descendants of Iranian slaves and villagers and they look very Middle Eastern and the stereotype is that they're aggressive and rowdy. Parsis look more Indian and their stereotype is of refinement, education and intellect. Even in my grandparents generation it was a taboo for an Irani to marry a Parsi. However that taboo is gone now, my dad is an Irani and my mom is a Parsi. But it just goes to show you how xenophobic members of my community were.
 

xkatz

Well-Known Member
In Iran it was to prevent further religious discrimination. We were slaves in Iran for centuries and the fact that I have recent African DNA is a testament to the mixture my ancestors had with African slaves in Iran.

In India historically it was to stand out as a neutral community with all the Hindu Muslim conflicts. For example after Gandhi was assassinated, a Parsi headed the investigation.

In India there are two kinds of Zoroastrians: Iranis and Parsis. Iranis are usually taller and more sturdy built, they're recent Zoroastrian immigrants to India in the last 100 years. They are the descendants of Iranian slaves and villagers and they look very Middle Eastern and the stereotype is that they're aggressive and rowdy. Parsis look more Indian and their stereotype is of refinement, education and intellect. Even in my grandparents generation it was a taboo for an Irani to marry a Parsi. However that taboo is gone now, my dad is an Irani and my mom is a Parsi. But it just goes to show you how xenophobic members of my community were.
Yes but is there any theological basis for it?
 

MD

qualiaphile
Yes but is there any theological basis for it?

Not from a Gathic perspective no. The Gathas are the words of Zarathrustra which he received from Ahura Mazda.

From the Iranian cultural /historical context though, it does have some basis.
 
Top