Daeva-Asura War

[Aupmanyav]

Is the Daeva/Asura war in Hinduism a remembrance of the rise of Zoroastrianism in Central Asia? Zoroaster was opposed by Kavis and Krpans. In Hinduism the writers/seers of RigVedic hymns are known as Kavis (which corresponds to Rishis). Krpan, according to Encyclopedia Iranica may have its derivation from 'Karb' (the 'mumbler') and may correspond to 'adhvaryu' in Vedic Yajnas.

Zoroaster, himself, was a Maghavan, Magi. Maghavan in Vedas is Indra. How come he went against Daevas? Anyone wants to add information or give an insight?

 

[Kalibhakta]

I remember that way early on, Asuras where not a negative term until later on. Much like how American English wasn't changed from old-timey British English, that the British themselves changed and our English is more like how it used to be, I am not sure this is a matter of chicken and egg. The Hindu Kush are not very permeable when it comes to lasting trade routes and such, so I think it was simply a matter of both words meaning different things. Devas where more gods of the natural order and Asuras where gods of social status. Zoroastrianism is all about social order and harmony, and Vedic Religion was about making sure the natural order flowed.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Is the Daeva/Asura war in Hinduism a remembrance of the rise of Zoroastrianism in Central Asia? Zoroaster was opposed by Kavis and Krpans. In Hinduism the writers/seers of RigVedic hymns are known as Kavis (which corresponds to Rishis). Krpan, according to Encyclopedia Iranica may have its derivation from 'Karb' (the 'mumbler') and may correspond to 'adhvaryu' in Vedic Yajnas.

Zoroaster, himself, was a Maghavan, Magi. Maghavan in Vedas is Indra. How come he went against Daevas? Anyone wants to add information or give an insight?

I am inclined to believe there was a split. Puranic stories of Asuras and Devas having a common father (Kashyapa) may be based on the memory of this split. Indra (Inder), in Zoroastrian affects the mind, but in a negative way.

Xerxes (5th century BCE) - By the favour of Ahura Mazda I destroyed that establishment of the daivas and I proclaimed, 'The daivas thou shalt not worship!

 

[Vishvavajra]

It's a good question. Clearly each side of the Indo-Iranian cultural divide seems to have picked one of the two tribes of gods to favor early on, for whatever reason. Maybe just coincidence, maybe the memory of a prehistoric sectarian dispute, maybe a case of each culture absorbing the neighboring culture's gods but with a less favorable status compared to the native gods.

The conflict is acknowledged in Buddhist cosmology, as the Devas live in paradise at the summit of Mt. Meru and eat the fruits of the wish-fulfilling tree, whereas the Ashuras are exiled to the foot of the mountain and are always depicted as shooting arrows up at the Devas, presumably because they think that place ought to belong to them. This conflict gets rationalized in terms of the Devas' representing a blissful state of mind in which one is oblivious to suffering (not just of others, but even of one's own capacity for suffering), whereas the Ashuras represent a state of mind in which one sees the happiness of others and is envious, wishing them harm instead of being happy for them.

Both are considered "high" births, since they're both wise and powerful and capable of understanding the Dharma, but the Ashuras basically run on anger, while the Devas are blissfully ignorant to their own detriment. Ultimately neither is ideal, but even so I think you can see the remnants of a tradition that favors the Devas.