The Ground level situation faced by Zarathushtra can be summed up as follows:
During the Indo_Iranian Era the religious doctrine referred to a Single Creator who was both Creator and Destroyer. This exclusive CREATOR was called Ahu-ra (Vedic Asu-ra) or Independent Life Force, and exemplified as Shiva/Rudra.
Artists' conception of Gonur (BMAC) based on archeological data.
See: http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/merv/gonur.htm
Starting from an initial expansion to his spouse (Parvati) and his Son (Ganesh); over a period of time, the term Asura became plural and a galaxy of Asuras take stage, each with his/her own independent existence. This expansion of God-hood ended up encompassing negative and destructive entities, such as Bhairava, (the wrathful destroyer), Mahakala, (wrath, druj, adorned with snakes and bones) Kuvera, (4 armed, God of wealth) , Asura-maya (the builder of illusions), Rahu-Ketu (astrologically, the 2 extreme malefic, positions of the moon’s orbit), Vasuki and Vritra (Serpents-Gods).
This philosophy, exemplified by the Priest-Warrior caste split, spread as far as the Middle East (Assur = Assyria. See M Monier Williams Sanskrit-English dictionary, Page xii for elaboration) where it was identified as the Mesopotamian Ashura the warrior God, whose attribute was his destructive power. This name survives even today from Arabia to Afghanistan.
As the concept of a single exclusive Creator was usurped by a host of Asuras; over time, under Sage Brihaspati, a competing class of "Gods" , namely the Day-vas, the shining, visible, Mortal ones (originally temporal lords, literally lord of the land); came about as theological rivals. This philosophy was challenged by Sage Usana (Ushana) who led the Ahura worshipers back to the original single Creator concept embedded in free choice and ethics.
These were times when belief in multiple Gods was the norm. Each God was feared for his/her wrath, jealousy; and obedience was demanded in ways so demeaning that man was reduced to a thoughtless entity, a plaything for the perverse games of the Gods.
Devas were originally mortal and are called “Mashya” (mortal) in the Gathas, Avesta and the Vedas. Thus Kings of the land, based on their material wealth and power appointed themselves God. We see this similarity also in the Pharaohs of Egypt.
Daevas included Indra,(mainly) and others. Indra, was a warrior based entity whose attributes were expanded from the original Aryan hero Thrita (who defeated Vrita, the snake Asura).
Indras' rise to God-head in the early Vedas harks back to a very ancient timeline represented by the "Warrior" caste rebellion against the priestly hegemony.
As per Mary Settegast : "When Zarathustra Spoke" http://www.mazdapublisher.com/BookDetails.aspx?BookID=37)
Society ended up fragmented with supporters of :
A single Ahura :The Avestics under Sage Usana.
Multiple Asuras : The current flavour of the time; elements of which can be seen in Assyria (Assur) , South and East India (Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and Sri Lanka [Ravana of Ramayana fame])
Devas : Accomplished mortals anointed to divinity status-The early Vedics under Sage Brihaspati.
For the Ahu/Asu-ras; the term Day-vas (followers of Light) became Dev-as (the cheats), where Dev means dice players proficient in cheating. For the Devas, the Ahu-ras/Asu-ras (followers of the Wise Creator); became A-sura; meaning impure.
Zarathushtra enters in this the frame when the predominant philosophies, both Asuric and Devic were based on multiple divinities.
Zarathushtra challenged the existing definition of Asuras as numerous demi-gods under one supreme, and placed Ahura-Mazda, the Loving, compassionate, lord of intellect & wisdom, as the supreme creator.
While Ahura Mazda is fashioned along the lines of Rudra/Shiva, being all powerful, self created, there is a vital distinction. Whereas Asura’s attributes is also that of destroyer, Ahura Mazda is the Loving, compassionate God who knows no wrath and whose strength is EDUCATION (NOT Instruction). He rules through knowledge and wisdom. Unlike Shiva who parades around with a Damroo (Drum) made of skulls, Zarathushtra carries a staff with a Gao-mukh (face of a cow) to represent the selfless mother earth (Gey-ush Urvaan). So while Shiva represents a dualist nature of both creator and destroyer, Ahura Mazda is the absolute creator and epitome of perfection (Ha-urva-tat) . Being a loving God, there is no provision for him to be destructive; as destruction is considered evil. Death itself is considered a temporary victory of evil over good.
For Zarathushtra, the only source of destruction is poor, unintelligent, un-righteous choices made by man (Angra-Mainyu: -Deviant mentality/attitude). He maintains the definition of Ahu-ra as the formless, self created ONE, jettisoning the independent multitude into one single entity. He also purges all negative entities such as Vrita (evil snakes), association with bones, destruction and wrath (Asura Bhairav, Mahakala) that have crept into the then existing philosophy. This pits him against his own (multiple Ahura worshiping tribe).
In Ys30.10 Zarathushtra mentions “Skenda” (identified in the hindu scriptures as the son of Shiva, and subject to various trials and tribulations during his lifetime), allegorically, as the self destructive fate of those willfully opposing or denying Truth.
He focused on acts of selflessness (Shyothnaa) being the true form of worship and shifted the focus of devotion to the Almighty out of Love and friendship not fear. Intelligent deduction became the prime requirement as opposed to blind obedience.
Work is worship (epitomized in the Yenghe Hatam mantra) therefore becomes the epitaph of the Day-na, underlining the real reason for preference of worship, facing a living, breathing fire (Atar-sh) as opposed to an idol or image worship. An image although a good focal point of devotion, obscures the true aim of worship, namely the necessity of continuous, Intelligent (Wise), compassionate acts of Selflessness; in a way mimicking the requirement to regularly and diligently feed (Boi) the consecrated temple fire (Atar-sh).
The Times of Zarathushtra
The original Atharwaan priestly tribe had by Zarathushtras’ time split into two sections, the Angirasas, who worshipped Devas and the Brighus (Spitamaas of the Avesta), who worshiped Asuras.
One may note that Brighu means blazing white flame and Spitamas means brilliantly bright. We see the Vedics (Bharatas) and the Avestics (Persians) use such linguistically interchangeable terms to describe each other throughout. The Brighus had a calender based on the orbit of Venus (Sage Shukra-Kava Usana) and the angirasas had one based on Jupiter (Sage Brihas-pati) reflecting their alliance to the specific philosopher.
The Puranas allude to a cosmic war between the Devas, led by Brihaspati of the Angirasa line of seers and the Asuras (Ahuras), led by Shukra (our Kava Ushana) of the Brighu line of seers. As such the Asura-Daeva split was already in place by Zarathushtras’ time.
Philologically, both sides “adjusted” word structure to indicate their pre-dispoition. Ahu-ra/Asu-ra; the Creator, became “A-sura”, meaning impure for the Vedics. Day-vas or the mortals who had victoriously achieved or gained Light (knowledge), became Dev-as, meaning people who play dice and cheat; as per the Avetics. By making it sound close to “Div” the destructive aspect of Vedic Gods, another un-desirable aspects of Life was attached to this word.
While the devas identified in Mazdayasna are the same as the Vedic devas and Zarathushtra inverted the deva-asura dichotomy of the Vedic period, one should keep in mind that this term Deva refers exclusively to Indra and his associates. In reality, the situation is much more complex with the Vedic Gods changing their theological attributes over time. We thus find that the Vedic (middle and later) and the Zarathushtrian systems are much less diverse than is generally assumed.
On the Indian side, over time (the Vedas being composed over 6000 years) previous “asuras” such as Varuna, Shiva, Savitr (our Khwtr), Agni,(our Atar-sh), Soma (our Hoama) , Mithra and Saraswati (our Ha-urva-tat) were re-incorporated as devas, over time.
Interestingly, Kashmiri (Pandit) scriptures distinguish Divs as evil and opposed to the Day-vas who are Gods.
Nothing can exemplify the hostility faced by Zarathushtra from the Asuras than the fact his chief enemy from infancy, childhood to adulthood was an evil magician, Dur-asuran.
On the other hand the Vedas refer to their enemies, the Asuras, as militant, unethical, prone to violence, the almost clinical definition of Middle Eastern Ashuras, who possibly represent a split amongst Indo-Iranian times in an earlier time frame. Interestingly this term Asur is what Assyria was called and the term Ashura is used in the middle-east (Arab-Semitic) as honorable blood letting, a concept abhorrent to both Hindus and Zarathushtis.
This connection across huge distances is confirmed by Monier Williams from language based lineage.
"The Aryan languages (Sanskrit being the eldest sister and English, one of the youngest) proceeded from a common..........placed somewhere in the region of Balkh (Bactria)..... From this center, radiated 8 principal lines of speech (2 Asiatic lines-Avesta and Vedic; and 6 European lines-Keltic, Hellenic, Italic, Teutonic, Slavonic and Lithuanian). It is this Asiatic and European ramifications of the Aryan languages which has led to their being called Indo-European"
Archaeological evidence is documented in:
However the main enemy is defined as the Druj; or the Vedic Druh/Drugh/Dhroga , a word/term derived from the root “Dru” meaning to deceive, to lack conscience and thriving on violence and identifying the inimical tribe Druhyus . Reference to them occurs throughout the Gathas and Rigveda in the sense of “demonic deceiver”
From the Vandidad portion of the Kem-na Maz-da Prayer:
: “ Apa-nasyat Druksh, nasyat druksh, dvarat druksh vinasyat, apaakhedhre apa-nasyehe, maa merin-chainish gaethaao, astavaitish ashaahe.”
May the liar, the demonic destructive deceiver, perish, rendering the Truth seekers free from its depravations?
It is therefore clear that Zarathushtra arose at this time of multipolar spiritual confusion, to raise the ancient faith out of its degenerative failings.
This is brought out in Yasna 32.9 (as translated by Dasturji Minocher Homji in "My Life's companion"): …."and appeal for my recovery of the lost heritage (Saas-teesh) of light & truth & bring back the old Mazdayasni ideal of the “Arya”.
The word Arya expressed a particular ethical and social ideal, an ideal of well-governed life, candor, courtesy, nobility, straight dealing, courage, gentleness, purity, humanity, compassion, protection of the weak, liberality, observance of social duty, eagerness of knowledge, and respect for the wise and learned. Anything that departed from this ideal, anything that tended towards the ignoble, mean, obscure, rude, cruel or false, was termed un-aryan or anarya (colloq. Anari, stupid). It was not a race or a tribe. The Vedic expression jyotir-agrah describes the Aryans as the noble people led by Light –of knowledge. Nowhere in the Vedas or the Avesta, is the word Arya used in a racial or ethnic sense. As such the word Arya is an epithet of respect, reflected in designations such as Sri or Shree in India, a Knight in medieval times and gentleman today.
In the Avesta, the Arya-maan, sometimes translated as a close friend, personifies hospitality and household. One may note that Zarathushtra always addresses Ahura Mazda as his close friend. Aryaman presides over matrimonial alliances and being the protector of tradition, custom and faith is invoked during marriage ceremonies.
From the Atar-sh Neyash: Airyanaam khvareno Mazda dhatanam
The ethical radiance of the Aryans, whose actions (leading by example) exemplify Mazdas’ Postulates.
Genetic studies indicate that the Vedic Aryan community was not a homogenous group, rather it was split into small tribes scattered over a vast area incorporating different gene pools, and resulting in several sub castes within the Brahmanic group. The Bhargavas are genetically more related to Uzbeks and Ukrainians, while Punjabis are genetically closer to Iranians and Iraqis. The Iyers show closer genetics to people from Central Asia near Eurasian steppes. The Saraswats are genetically identical to eurasian residents around the Black Sea.
It has recently been found that the Haplo group R1a gene previously associated with Indo-Europeans is not only present amongst some Indian tribal populations, but may have even originated in India. These results not only put a big question mark on the so called white skinned Aryan Invasion Theory, but also reinforce the traditional accounts of the Avesta and Vedas having been composed in what is now Afghanistan and that the Aryan civilization was indigenous to the land of the 7 Rivers (Sapta-Sindhu or Hapta Hendu) stretching along the path of River Saraswati (Harah-wati) from greater Afghanistan to Saurashtra.
Referring to the famous Battle of the Ten Kings in the Rig Veda, Frawley states: "The Vedic war is a question of values, not race. It is a conflict between spiritual values and materialistic values, which occurs in all societies. Sometimes arya people become an-arya by a change in values, as indicated in the battle of Sudas.
According to Sayana, the word dasyu (the Asura followers) is derived from the word "das", i.e., "one who must be overcome". The RgVedic (6-22-10) prayer to Indra, thus appeals for grant of that glory by which the dasyus can become Aryans; that is, by converting the dasyus to ideal, cultured human beings.
We thus find famous Vedic kings, such as Sudas and Devadasa have the name ending of das or dasa; meaning that at some stage they or their ancestors were dark (evil) minded. This word has no connection to the color of the skin as sought to be made out by some historians of the last century. Sudas ruled the land of Sapta Sindhu, centered around the mighty Sarasvati river, which flowed from the Himalayas to the Rann of Kutch. The Battle of the Ten Kings saw a major cataclysm between the Indo_Iranian tribes, resulting in massive migration westwards into Iran and beyond.
The Vedic Das-yus, which some historians have mistakenly labeled dark skinned are none other than the Avestic Dakhyus (Vedic Sa = avestic Kh) . In the Avesta, Dakhyus were considered respectable inhabitants of some mountainous regions , traders/business people by caste/vocation who become one of Zarathustra's earliest followers, and financiers. They are referred to as Dakhyuma ( temporal Lord) and Dakhyuma Suro (Farvardin Yasht.90). where “Suro” ( from Sur – the pure) means the ethically pure.
On the Vedic side, the Dasyus are cursed in no uncertain terms, clearly indicating their early loyalty to Zarathushtra and not financing the Vedic Sages. As per the Avesta therefore, the Dakhyus are bonafide Aryans.
Zarathushtra also identifies other supporters as Khvaetus (Ys33.3, 33.4, ), the vedic Vaishya, meaning one who is an self reliant, an active worker, a merchant, who works independently. Prone, however, to materialistic tendencies and blind pursuit of wealth (ends justifying the means) and a paralyzing apathy (Tara-maiti) to holding up righteous causes when faced with financial implications.
Mercantile communities in India (Rajasthan-Gujarat) would be an apt example. These communities are Krishna devotees who follow the Bhagwad Geeta theology, of Love and compassion (Vohu Manah) which has no vedic reference.
In the Vedas we find the word Varna (caste) indicative of the “energy” of the person. Society is therefore identified by colors; white (purity-sattwa) for priests, red (energetic activity) for warriors, yellow (fence sitters) for traders and black for ignorance & servility. Color of the skin is simply not factored into these divisions. .
Cities states like Samarkand, with their sophisticated industry (metallurgy, described vividly in the Vedas as Asura strongholds) were said to be such areas ruled by such Traders/business castes .
Zarathushtra also refers to the Turaniya tribe, possibly the Turiya tribe identified in the Vedas as a ferocious tribe taken to pillage and plunder of the Aryan tribes, from their homelands south of the Hapta-Hendu (Punjab). As per Griffith, their leader Turyanyana, meaning ‘quickly going’ is also an epithet of Divodasa . One of these Turanian tribes under their leader Frayana are successfully re-oriented back to Mazda-yasna by Zarathushtra.
Zarathushtra died at the age of 77 while praying at the royal temple, at the hands of a Turanian named Turbaratur, working under Kava Arjaspa.
This is the critical element for locating the life and times of Zarathushtra, as his assassin was under the command of one Kava Arjaspa, (a rival turanian tribe) who is also mentioned in the Rig Veda.
After him, the chief priests of the Day-na were referred to as Zarathushtro-tema, a title-designation similar to that of the catholic Pope.
These Zarathushtro-temas who are said to have compiled the remaining Yasnas and other liturgy are invoked in the Avisruthrem Geh prayer [Fra-daat Vis-paam Hu-jyaai-te-e, Zarathushtro-temem-chaa] asking for them to bless the devotee with a higher consciousness.
Jamasp was the first Zarathushtra-tema. It was this designation that caused confusion in many historians as to the date and time of our saviour Zarathushtra.
According to Talageri:
An examination of the Rigveda shows a striking difference in the positions of Angirasas and the Brighus the two priestly families who wrote the Atharva Veda:
a. The Angirases are the dominant protagonist priests of the Rigveda.
b. The Bhrgus are more or less outside the Vedic pale through most of the course of the Rigveda, and gain increasing acceptance into the Vedic mainstream only towards the end of the Rigveda.
The situation is particularly ironic since not only are both the families equally old and hoary, but it is the Bhrgus, and not the Angirases, who are the real initiators of the two main ritual systems which dominate the Rigveda: the fire ritual and the Soma ritual.
One very important feature which must be examined, in order to get a proper perspective on Indo-Iranian history, is the special position of, and the symbiotic relationship between two of the ten families of Rishis in the Rigveda: the Angirases and the Bhrgus.
While all the other families of Rishis came into existence at various points of time during the course of composition of the Rigveda, these two families alone represent the pre-Rigvedic (or pre-Gathic) past: they go so far back into the past that not only the eponymous founders of these families (Angiras and Bhrgu respectively) but even certain other ancient Rishis belonging to these families (Brhaspati, Atharvana, Usana) are already remote mythical persons in the Rigveda; and the names of the two families are already names for mythical and ritual classes. As Griffith puts it in his footnote to Rig I.1.6: the Angirases are deified as “a race of higher beings between Gods and men”
The ancient Bhrgus are synonymous with fire-priests & also similarly deified as a semi-divine race participating in the celestial activities of the Gods (VIII.3.16; IX.101.13).
Ancestral Bhrgu Rishis include Atharvana, (after whom the priestly Athrawan tribe are named) , Dadhyanc, Kavya, and Usana (also referred to as Shukra-acharya).
The Bhrgus are specifically referred to as Gods (X.92.10) and named along with other classes of Gods such as the Maruts (VIII.35.3; X.122.5).
The eponymous Bhrgu (VIII.3.9) is referred to as a recipient of the special favours of the Gods.
There are also, of course, references to the introduction of the fire ritual by the Bhrgus (X.39.14; 46.2, 9; as well as X.122.5 above); and in one reference, a Bhrgu composer refers to his ancestors (X.14.6) in a manner similar to that in the Farvardin Yasht.
The overwhelming majority of the Rig Vedic mantras are attributed to pre-Rigvedic Bhrgu Rishis. The Bhrgu hymns in Mandalas VIII and IX are all old hymns (with the exception of IX.62, 65), codified into the Vedas by descendants of Jamadagni, who was originally considered “asuric” and kept outside the Vedic corpus. They were included in it Only in the Late Period when the domination of the Bhrigus was complete.
In the Early Vedic Period, we find only 3 verses (III.62.16-18) by a Bhrgu (Jamadagni), all of which are jointly composed with Visvamitra , the eponymous Rishi of the Mandala.
By all traditional accounts, Jamadagni is a half Puru (Persian): his mother is the sister of Vishva-mitra* who belongs to a branch of Purus (from which the name Pour-asp is derived) who also call themselves Bharatas.
As per (Aitareya brahmana) AB VII.18, “Most of the Dasyus (Asura followers) are descendents of Vishwa-mitra”
* The warrior prophet, Jamad-agni, (derived from the root “Jam” meaning to consume, and agni, meaning fire), is one such major historical personage, following Zarathushtras’ philosophy (of verejna; - a righteous warrior- priest-householder). He was the father of Parasu-Rama, a famous Rishi in his own right and possibly our Ram Yazad, after whom a Yasht and a day in every month is dedicated.
Parsu/Partha Rama (The Rama of Parthia/Persia), a fair complexioned Rebel (dissident), is identified as the leader of the Maghas (Mazoi Maghai) and a friend of the Kava in the Vedas (Rig: 5-34-3).
In the Puranas, a scripture parallel to the Vedas, the only Rishi to be accorded the highest dignity that Hindu mythology can give any person - the status of being recognized as an Ava-tara (re-incarnation) of Vishnu- is a Bhrgu :Parasu-Rama , son of Jamad-agni.
* “Vishnu”, meaning “All Pervasive” is also reflected in the 3rd name of Ahura Mazda (of 72 names in Hormazd Yasht …Ai-vee Taanyo…….whose body covers all earth). Both words are derived from the same root 'vish', (to pervade), as is King “Visht-aspa”, the first royal supporter of Zarathushtra.
In the Middle Vedic Period, we find only 4 hymns (II.4-7) by a Bhrgu (Somahuti), and it is clear in this case also that the composer is closely associated with the family of Mandala II: as in the very first of these hymns, he identifies himself with the Grtsamadas (II.4.9).
All the Bhrgus of the Rigveda (excluding, of course, the pre-Rigvedic Bhrgus whose hymns are accepted into the corpus in the Late Period) and of later Indian tradition are clearly members of one single branch descended from Jamadagni, or of groups later adopted into this branch.
Rig VII.18.6 contains the only contemporary reference to the Bhrgus wherein they are referred to, as enemies.
This also brings into focus the similarity of ethical concepts espoused in the Gathas with that of the middle and later Vedas; in spite of the political disagreement and later separation of the Bharatas from the Indo-Iranian Puru tribes, and the tantalizing possibility that the later Mandalas authored by Brighu priests, but referring to times immemorial are also commentaries on the Gathas, and possibly Zarathushtras’ lost compositions . It is these Brighus, that Sukhtankar has conclusively proved , to have been responsible for the final development and shaping of the Mahabharata, as we know it today.
Robert P. Goldman , in a detailed study of the history of the Bhrgus, says: The characteristic feature which sets the Bhrgus apart is “open hostility to the gods (Daevas) themselves.
“This association of the sage Sukra (Kava Usana), one of the greatest of the Bhrgus, who served as the priest and chaplain of the asuras, the demon enemies of the Vedics, is one of the strangest peculiarities of the Bhargava corpus”
“That one of the greatest Bhargava sages should regularly champion the asuras, the forces of chaos and evil - in short, of adharma - against the divine personifications of dharma is perplexing and has no non-Bhargava parallel in the literature. The origin of the relationship was evidently puzzling to the epic redactors themselves, for the question is raised at least twice in the Mahabharata (circa 3138 BC). In neither case is the answer given wholly satisfactory. This identification of Sukra as the purohita and protector of the asuras may shed some light on some of the most basic problems of early Indian and even early Indo-Iranian religion. If, as has been suggested on the basis of the Iranian evidence, the asuras were the divinities of Aryans for whom, perhaps, the devas were demons, then Sukra and perhaps the Bhargavas were originally their priests, and whose descendants switched sides at a later date”.
It is therefore clear that Jamadagni and Parshu-rama are early followers of Asho Zarathushtra; and Shukra (Kava Ushana) is one of the pioneer sages who inspired Zarathushtras reformation.
In fact, down the ages, it is persons from Bhrgu gotras (sub-castes) who appear to have given shape to the most distinctive and prominent positions of Hindu thought on all aspects of life: Kaama, Artha, Dharma and Moksa; from Vatsyayana to Kautilya to Adi Sankaracharya.
It is this dichotomy that in fact gives us a tool in gauging Zarathushtras’ time, because all these concepts are rooted in Zarathushtras’ philosophical concepts highlighted in the Gathas and incorporated, at a later stage, into the Vedas by the Brighus.
By the middle Rig Vedic period, Zarathushtras’ philosophy was gaining support and his supporters the Brighu-athrawans, displaced the angarisas as the vedic composers and priests, and completed the middle and latter section of the later Rig Veda.
Sections composed by Shukra (Kava Ushana) and Jamad-agni, who were earlier considered asuric and un-vedic were, at this stage, introduced into the Rig Vedic corpus posthumously.
It is at this point in history that we see the concept of “Indra”, the maleficent, un-ethical God (might is right philosophy ), finally being jettisoned; and Varuna and Vishnu gain ascendancy, albeit as Devas. In other words selected Asuras (Ahuras) who are ethically minded are now incorporated into Hindu scriptures as Devas. Thus Asuras are the ground on which the devas emerge; along the same logic of the Avesta that without consistent ethical activities, one can slip into the false path. The ethical oriented philosophy of Zarathushtra, could logically be assumed of having influenced the reformation reflected in the Later Vedas, the Puranas and the Bhagwad Geeta, with the relegation of Indra, the main vedic Mortal God to a direct worship of the Great immortal Lord (Vishnu – Varun-Shiva, who were originally Asuras)
By the period of the later Rig Vedas, The Bhrigus, are now completely accepted into the Vedic mainstream (Mandala VIII & X), with their old hymns being included in the Mandalas and the references to them acquiring a friendly, respectful, and contemporary air. The Grtsamadas of Mandala II are classified as “Kevala-Bhrgus” (kevala means exquisite in Avestan) and have a separate AprI-sukta from both the Angirases and the Bhrgus. It is, however, clear that they are actually full-fledged Angirases who have adopted some specifically Bhrigu practices and hence formed a separate family.
As such in the post Zarathushtra era we see a lot of philosophers and their devotees changing sides and we have a unique sutra in the Vedas which says that Divinity can be invoked either through the 3 fold path (espoused in the Vedas) or the 5 fold path. This could be a veiled reference to the Avesta.
During the Indo_Iranian Era the religious doctrine referred to a Single Creator who was both Creator and Destroyer. This exclusive CREATOR was called Ahu-ra (Vedic Asu-ra) or Independent Life Force, and exemplified as Shiva/Rudra.
See: http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/merv/gonur.htm
Starting from an initial expansion to his spouse (Parvati) and his Son (Ganesh); over a period of time, the term Asura became plural and a galaxy of Asuras take stage, each with his/her own independent existence. This expansion of God-hood ended up encompassing negative and destructive entities, such as Bhairava, (the wrathful destroyer), Mahakala, (wrath, druj, adorned with snakes and bones) Kuvera, (4 armed, God of wealth) , Asura-maya (the builder of illusions), Rahu-Ketu (astrologically, the 2 extreme malefic, positions of the moon’s orbit), Vasuki and Vritra (Serpents-Gods).
This philosophy, exemplified by the Priest-Warrior caste split, spread as far as the Middle East (Assur = Assyria. See M Monier Williams Sanskrit-English dictionary, Page xii for elaboration) where it was identified as the Mesopotamian Ashura the warrior God, whose attribute was his destructive power. This name survives even today from Arabia to Afghanistan.
As the concept of a single exclusive Creator was usurped by a host of Asuras; over time, under Sage Brihaspati, a competing class of "Gods" , namely the Day-vas, the shining, visible, Mortal ones (originally temporal lords, literally lord of the land); came about as theological rivals. This philosophy was challenged by Sage Usana (Ushana) who led the Ahura worshipers back to the original single Creator concept embedded in free choice and ethics.
These were times when belief in multiple Gods was the norm. Each God was feared for his/her wrath, jealousy; and obedience was demanded in ways so demeaning that man was reduced to a thoughtless entity, a plaything for the perverse games of the Gods.
Devas were originally mortal and are called “Mashya” (mortal) in the Gathas, Avesta and the Vedas. Thus Kings of the land, based on their material wealth and power appointed themselves God. We see this similarity also in the Pharaohs of Egypt.
Daevas included Indra,(mainly) and others. Indra, was a warrior based entity whose attributes were expanded from the original Aryan hero Thrita (who defeated Vrita, the snake Asura).
Indras' rise to God-head in the early Vedas harks back to a very ancient timeline represented by the "Warrior" caste rebellion against the priestly hegemony.
As per Mary Settegast : "When Zarathustra Spoke" http://www.mazdapublisher.com/BookDetails.aspx?BookID=37)
these were neolithic times where the nomadics raided the more settled & advanced tribes, a fact validated by the Vedas which describes their Asura/Ahura enemies as residing in structural settlements on mountain tops and pocessing metallic implements (jewelry and armaments).
It was possibly in this early time frame that Indo-Europeans started migrating out of the aryan heartland in Central Asia and colonized what is now Europe.
Society ended up fragmented with supporters of :
A single Ahura :The Avestics under Sage Usana.
Multiple Asuras : The current flavour of the time; elements of which can be seen in Assyria (Assur) , South and East India (Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and Sri Lanka [Ravana of Ramayana fame])
Devas : Accomplished mortals anointed to divinity status-The early Vedics under Sage Brihaspati.
For the Ahu/Asu-ras; the term Day-vas (followers of Light) became Dev-as (the cheats), where Dev means dice players proficient in cheating. For the Devas, the Ahu-ras/Asu-ras (followers of the Wise Creator); became A-sura; meaning impure.
Zarathushtra enters in this the frame when the predominant philosophies, both Asuric and Devic were based on multiple divinities.
Zarathushtra challenged the existing definition of Asuras as numerous demi-gods under one supreme, and placed Ahura-Mazda, the Loving, compassionate, lord of intellect & wisdom, as the supreme creator.
While Ahura Mazda is fashioned along the lines of Rudra/Shiva, being all powerful, self created, there is a vital distinction. Whereas Asura’s attributes is also that of destroyer, Ahura Mazda is the Loving, compassionate God who knows no wrath and whose strength is EDUCATION (NOT Instruction). He rules through knowledge and wisdom. Unlike Shiva who parades around with a Damroo (Drum) made of skulls, Zarathushtra carries a staff with a Gao-mukh (face of a cow) to represent the selfless mother earth (Gey-ush Urvaan). So while Shiva represents a dualist nature of both creator and destroyer, Ahura Mazda is the absolute creator and epitome of perfection (Ha-urva-tat) . Being a loving God, there is no provision for him to be destructive; as destruction is considered evil. Death itself is considered a temporary victory of evil over good.
For Zarathushtra, the only source of destruction is poor, unintelligent, un-righteous choices made by man (Angra-Mainyu: -Deviant mentality/attitude). He maintains the definition of Ahu-ra as the formless, self created ONE, jettisoning the independent multitude into one single entity. He also purges all negative entities such as Vrita (evil snakes), association with bones, destruction and wrath (Asura Bhairav, Mahakala) that have crept into the then existing philosophy. This pits him against his own (multiple Ahura worshiping tribe).
In Ys30.10 Zarathushtra mentions “Skenda” (identified in the hindu scriptures as the son of Shiva, and subject to various trials and tribulations during his lifetime), allegorically, as the self destructive fate of those willfully opposing or denying Truth.
He focused on acts of selflessness (Shyothnaa) being the true form of worship and shifted the focus of devotion to the Almighty out of Love and friendship not fear. Intelligent deduction became the prime requirement as opposed to blind obedience.
Work is worship (epitomized in the Yenghe Hatam mantra) therefore becomes the epitaph of the Day-na, underlining the real reason for preference of worship, facing a living, breathing fire (Atar-sh) as opposed to an idol or image worship. An image although a good focal point of devotion, obscures the true aim of worship, namely the necessity of continuous, Intelligent (Wise), compassionate acts of Selflessness; in a way mimicking the requirement to regularly and diligently feed (Boi) the consecrated temple fire (Atar-sh).
The Times of Zarathushtra
The original Atharwaan priestly tribe had by Zarathushtras’ time split into two sections, the Angirasas, who worshipped Devas and the Brighus (Spitamaas of the Avesta), who worshiped Asuras.
One may note that Brighu means blazing white flame and Spitamas means brilliantly bright. We see the Vedics (Bharatas) and the Avestics (Persians) use such linguistically interchangeable terms to describe each other throughout. The Brighus had a calender based on the orbit of Venus (Sage Shukra-Kava Usana) and the angirasas had one based on Jupiter (Sage Brihas-pati) reflecting their alliance to the specific philosopher.
The Puranas allude to a cosmic war between the Devas, led by Brihaspati of the Angirasa line of seers and the Asuras (Ahuras), led by Shukra (our Kava Ushana) of the Brighu line of seers. As such the Asura-Daeva split was already in place by Zarathushtras’ time.
Philologically, both sides “adjusted” word structure to indicate their pre-dispoition. Ahu-ra/Asu-ra; the Creator, became “A-sura”, meaning impure for the Vedics. Day-vas or the mortals who had victoriously achieved or gained Light (knowledge), became Dev-as, meaning people who play dice and cheat; as per the Avetics. By making it sound close to “Div” the destructive aspect of Vedic Gods, another un-desirable aspects of Life was attached to this word.
While the devas identified in Mazdayasna are the same as the Vedic devas and Zarathushtra inverted the deva-asura dichotomy of the Vedic period, one should keep in mind that this term Deva refers exclusively to Indra and his associates. In reality, the situation is much more complex with the Vedic Gods changing their theological attributes over time. We thus find that the Vedic (middle and later) and the Zarathushtrian systems are much less diverse than is generally assumed.
On the Indian side, over time (the Vedas being composed over 6000 years) previous “asuras” such as Varuna, Shiva, Savitr (our Khwtr), Agni,(our Atar-sh), Soma (our Hoama) , Mithra and Saraswati (our Ha-urva-tat) were re-incorporated as devas, over time.
Interestingly, Kashmiri (Pandit) scriptures distinguish Divs as evil and opposed to the Day-vas who are Gods.
Nothing can exemplify the hostility faced by Zarathushtra from the Asuras than the fact his chief enemy from infancy, childhood to adulthood was an evil magician, Dur-asuran.
On the other hand the Vedas refer to their enemies, the Asuras, as militant, unethical, prone to violence, the almost clinical definition of Middle Eastern Ashuras, who possibly represent a split amongst Indo-Iranian times in an earlier time frame. Interestingly this term Asur is what Assyria was called and the term Ashura is used in the middle-east (Arab-Semitic) as honorable blood letting, a concept abhorrent to both Hindus and Zarathushtis.
This connection across huge distances is confirmed by Monier Williams from language based lineage.
"The Aryan languages (Sanskrit being the eldest sister and English, one of the youngest) proceeded from a common..........placed somewhere in the region of Balkh (Bactria)..... From this center, radiated 8 principal lines of speech (2 Asiatic lines-Avesta and Vedic; and 6 European lines-Keltic, Hellenic, Italic, Teutonic, Slavonic and Lithuanian). It is this Asiatic and European ramifications of the Aryan languages which has led to their being called Indo-European"
Archaeological evidence is documented in:
When Zarathustra Spoke: The Reformation Of Neolithic Culture And Religion (Bibliotheca Iranica: Zoroastrian Studies) [Hardcover] by Mary Settegast]
However the main enemy is defined as the Druj; or the Vedic Druh/Drugh/Dhroga , a word/term derived from the root “Dru” meaning to deceive, to lack conscience and thriving on violence and identifying the inimical tribe Druhyus . Reference to them occurs throughout the Gathas and Rigveda in the sense of “demonic deceiver”
From the Vandidad portion of the Kem-na Maz-da Prayer:
: “ Apa-nasyat Druksh, nasyat druksh, dvarat druksh vinasyat, apaakhedhre apa-nasyehe, maa merin-chainish gaethaao, astavaitish ashaahe.”
May the liar, the demonic destructive deceiver, perish, rendering the Truth seekers free from its depravations?
It is therefore clear that Zarathushtra arose at this time of multipolar spiritual confusion, to raise the ancient faith out of its degenerative failings.
This is brought out in Yasna 32.9 (as translated by Dasturji Minocher Homji in "My Life's companion"): …."and appeal for my recovery of the lost heritage (Saas-teesh) of light & truth & bring back the old Mazdayasni ideal of the “Arya”.
The word Arya expressed a particular ethical and social ideal, an ideal of well-governed life, candor, courtesy, nobility, straight dealing, courage, gentleness, purity, humanity, compassion, protection of the weak, liberality, observance of social duty, eagerness of knowledge, and respect for the wise and learned. Anything that departed from this ideal, anything that tended towards the ignoble, mean, obscure, rude, cruel or false, was termed un-aryan or anarya (colloq. Anari, stupid). It was not a race or a tribe. The Vedic expression jyotir-agrah describes the Aryans as the noble people led by Light –of knowledge. Nowhere in the Vedas or the Avesta, is the word Arya used in a racial or ethnic sense. As such the word Arya is an epithet of respect, reflected in designations such as Sri or Shree in India, a Knight in medieval times and gentleman today.
In the Avesta, the Arya-maan, sometimes translated as a close friend, personifies hospitality and household. One may note that Zarathushtra always addresses Ahura Mazda as his close friend. Aryaman presides over matrimonial alliances and being the protector of tradition, custom and faith is invoked during marriage ceremonies.
From the Atar-sh Neyash: Airyanaam khvareno Mazda dhatanam
The ethical radiance of the Aryans, whose actions (leading by example) exemplify Mazdas’ Postulates.
Genetic studies indicate that the Vedic Aryan community was not a homogenous group, rather it was split into small tribes scattered over a vast area incorporating different gene pools, and resulting in several sub castes within the Brahmanic group. The Bhargavas are genetically more related to Uzbeks and Ukrainians, while Punjabis are genetically closer to Iranians and Iraqis. The Iyers show closer genetics to people from Central Asia near Eurasian steppes. The Saraswats are genetically identical to eurasian residents around the Black Sea.
It has recently been found that the Haplo group R1a gene previously associated with Indo-Europeans is not only present amongst some Indian tribal populations, but may have even originated in India. These results not only put a big question mark on the so called white skinned Aryan Invasion Theory, but also reinforce the traditional accounts of the Avesta and Vedas having been composed in what is now Afghanistan and that the Aryan civilization was indigenous to the land of the 7 Rivers (Sapta-Sindhu or Hapta Hendu) stretching along the path of River Saraswati (Harah-wati) from greater Afghanistan to Saurashtra.
Referring to the famous Battle of the Ten Kings in the Rig Veda, Frawley states: "The Vedic war is a question of values, not race. It is a conflict between spiritual values and materialistic values, which occurs in all societies. Sometimes arya people become an-arya by a change in values, as indicated in the battle of Sudas.
According to Sayana, the word dasyu (the Asura followers) is derived from the word "das", i.e., "one who must be overcome". The RgVedic (6-22-10) prayer to Indra, thus appeals for grant of that glory by which the dasyus can become Aryans; that is, by converting the dasyus to ideal, cultured human beings.
We thus find famous Vedic kings, such as Sudas and Devadasa have the name ending of das or dasa; meaning that at some stage they or their ancestors were dark (evil) minded. This word has no connection to the color of the skin as sought to be made out by some historians of the last century. Sudas ruled the land of Sapta Sindhu, centered around the mighty Sarasvati river, which flowed from the Himalayas to the Rann of Kutch. The Battle of the Ten Kings saw a major cataclysm between the Indo_Iranian tribes, resulting in massive migration westwards into Iran and beyond.
The Vedic Das-yus, which some historians have mistakenly labeled dark skinned are none other than the Avestic Dakhyus (Vedic Sa = avestic Kh) . In the Avesta, Dakhyus were considered respectable inhabitants of some mountainous regions , traders/business people by caste/vocation who become one of Zarathustra's earliest followers, and financiers. They are referred to as Dakhyuma ( temporal Lord) and Dakhyuma Suro (Farvardin Yasht.90). where “Suro” ( from Sur – the pure) means the ethically pure.
On the Vedic side, the Dasyus are cursed in no uncertain terms, clearly indicating their early loyalty to Zarathushtra and not financing the Vedic Sages. As per the Avesta therefore, the Dakhyus are bonafide Aryans.
Zarathushtra also identifies other supporters as Khvaetus (Ys33.3, 33.4, ), the vedic Vaishya, meaning one who is an self reliant, an active worker, a merchant, who works independently. Prone, however, to materialistic tendencies and blind pursuit of wealth (ends justifying the means) and a paralyzing apathy (Tara-maiti) to holding up righteous causes when faced with financial implications.
Mercantile communities in India (Rajasthan-Gujarat) would be an apt example. These communities are Krishna devotees who follow the Bhagwad Geeta theology, of Love and compassion (Vohu Manah) which has no vedic reference.
In the Vedas we find the word Varna (caste) indicative of the “energy” of the person. Society is therefore identified by colors; white (purity-sattwa) for priests, red (energetic activity) for warriors, yellow (fence sitters) for traders and black for ignorance & servility. Color of the skin is simply not factored into these divisions. .
Cities states like Samarkand, with their sophisticated industry (metallurgy, described vividly in the Vedas as Asura strongholds) were said to be such areas ruled by such Traders/business castes .
Zarathushtra also refers to the Turaniya tribe, possibly the Turiya tribe identified in the Vedas as a ferocious tribe taken to pillage and plunder of the Aryan tribes, from their homelands south of the Hapta-Hendu (Punjab). As per Griffith, their leader Turyanyana, meaning ‘quickly going’ is also an epithet of Divodasa . One of these Turanian tribes under their leader Frayana are successfully re-oriented back to Mazda-yasna by Zarathushtra.
Zarathushtra died at the age of 77 while praying at the royal temple, at the hands of a Turanian named Turbaratur, working under Kava Arjaspa.
This is the critical element for locating the life and times of Zarathushtra, as his assassin was under the command of one Kava Arjaspa, (a rival turanian tribe) who is also mentioned in the Rig Veda.
After him, the chief priests of the Day-na were referred to as Zarathushtro-tema, a title-designation similar to that of the catholic Pope.
These Zarathushtro-temas who are said to have compiled the remaining Yasnas and other liturgy are invoked in the Avisruthrem Geh prayer [Fra-daat Vis-paam Hu-jyaai-te-e, Zarathushtro-temem-chaa] asking for them to bless the devotee with a higher consciousness.
Jamasp was the first Zarathushtra-tema. It was this designation that caused confusion in many historians as to the date and time of our saviour Zarathushtra.
According to Talageri:
An examination of the Rigveda shows a striking difference in the positions of Angirasas and the Brighus the two priestly families who wrote the Atharva Veda:
a. The Angirases are the dominant protagonist priests of the Rigveda.
b. The Bhrgus are more or less outside the Vedic pale through most of the course of the Rigveda, and gain increasing acceptance into the Vedic mainstream only towards the end of the Rigveda.
The situation is particularly ironic since not only are both the families equally old and hoary, but it is the Bhrgus, and not the Angirases, who are the real initiators of the two main ritual systems which dominate the Rigveda: the fire ritual and the Soma ritual.
One very important feature which must be examined, in order to get a proper perspective on Indo-Iranian history, is the special position of, and the symbiotic relationship between two of the ten families of Rishis in the Rigveda: the Angirases and the Bhrgus.
While all the other families of Rishis came into existence at various points of time during the course of composition of the Rigveda, these two families alone represent the pre-Rigvedic (or pre-Gathic) past: they go so far back into the past that not only the eponymous founders of these families (Angiras and Bhrgu respectively) but even certain other ancient Rishis belonging to these families (Brhaspati, Atharvana, Usana) are already remote mythical persons in the Rigveda; and the names of the two families are already names for mythical and ritual classes. As Griffith puts it in his footnote to Rig I.1.6: the Angirases are deified as “a race of higher beings between Gods and men”
The ancient Bhrgus are synonymous with fire-priests & also similarly deified as a semi-divine race participating in the celestial activities of the Gods (VIII.3.16; IX.101.13).
Ancestral Bhrgu Rishis include Atharvana, (after whom the priestly Athrawan tribe are named) , Dadhyanc, Kavya, and Usana (also referred to as Shukra-acharya).
The Bhrgus are specifically referred to as Gods (X.92.10) and named along with other classes of Gods such as the Maruts (VIII.35.3; X.122.5).
The eponymous Bhrgu (VIII.3.9) is referred to as a recipient of the special favours of the Gods.
There are also, of course, references to the introduction of the fire ritual by the Bhrgus (X.39.14; 46.2, 9; as well as X.122.5 above); and in one reference, a Bhrgu composer refers to his ancestors (X.14.6) in a manner similar to that in the Farvardin Yasht.
The overwhelming majority of the Rig Vedic mantras are attributed to pre-Rigvedic Bhrgu Rishis. The Bhrgu hymns in Mandalas VIII and IX are all old hymns (with the exception of IX.62, 65), codified into the Vedas by descendants of Jamadagni, who was originally considered “asuric” and kept outside the Vedic corpus. They were included in it Only in the Late Period when the domination of the Bhrigus was complete.
In the Early Vedic Period, we find only 3 verses (III.62.16-18) by a Bhrgu (Jamadagni), all of which are jointly composed with Visvamitra , the eponymous Rishi of the Mandala.
By all traditional accounts, Jamadagni is a half Puru (Persian): his mother is the sister of Vishva-mitra* who belongs to a branch of Purus (from which the name Pour-asp is derived) who also call themselves Bharatas.
As per (Aitareya brahmana) AB VII.18, “Most of the Dasyus (Asura followers) are descendents of Vishwa-mitra”
* The warrior prophet, Jamad-agni, (derived from the root “Jam” meaning to consume, and agni, meaning fire), is one such major historical personage, following Zarathushtras’ philosophy (of verejna; - a righteous warrior- priest-householder). He was the father of Parasu-Rama, a famous Rishi in his own right and possibly our Ram Yazad, after whom a Yasht and a day in every month is dedicated.
Parsu/Partha Rama (The Rama of Parthia/Persia), a fair complexioned Rebel (dissident), is identified as the leader of the Maghas (Mazoi Maghai) and a friend of the Kava in the Vedas (Rig: 5-34-3).
In the Puranas, a scripture parallel to the Vedas, the only Rishi to be accorded the highest dignity that Hindu mythology can give any person - the status of being recognized as an Ava-tara (re-incarnation) of Vishnu- is a Bhrgu :Parasu-Rama , son of Jamad-agni.
* “Vishnu”, meaning “All Pervasive” is also reflected in the 3rd name of Ahura Mazda (of 72 names in Hormazd Yasht …Ai-vee Taanyo…….whose body covers all earth). Both words are derived from the same root 'vish', (to pervade), as is King “Visht-aspa”, the first royal supporter of Zarathushtra.
In the Middle Vedic Period, we find only 4 hymns (II.4-7) by a Bhrgu (Somahuti), and it is clear in this case also that the composer is closely associated with the family of Mandala II: as in the very first of these hymns, he identifies himself with the Grtsamadas (II.4.9).
All the Bhrgus of the Rigveda (excluding, of course, the pre-Rigvedic Bhrgus whose hymns are accepted into the corpus in the Late Period) and of later Indian tradition are clearly members of one single branch descended from Jamadagni, or of groups later adopted into this branch.
Rig VII.18.6 contains the only contemporary reference to the Bhrgus wherein they are referred to, as enemies.
This also brings into focus the similarity of ethical concepts espoused in the Gathas with that of the middle and later Vedas; in spite of the political disagreement and later separation of the Bharatas from the Indo-Iranian Puru tribes, and the tantalizing possibility that the later Mandalas authored by Brighu priests, but referring to times immemorial are also commentaries on the Gathas, and possibly Zarathushtras’ lost compositions . It is these Brighus, that Sukhtankar has conclusively proved , to have been responsible for the final development and shaping of the Mahabharata, as we know it today.
Robert P. Goldman , in a detailed study of the history of the Bhrgus, says: The characteristic feature which sets the Bhrgus apart is “open hostility to the gods (Daevas) themselves.
“This association of the sage Sukra (Kava Usana), one of the greatest of the Bhrgus, who served as the priest and chaplain of the asuras, the demon enemies of the Vedics, is one of the strangest peculiarities of the Bhargava corpus”
“That one of the greatest Bhargava sages should regularly champion the asuras, the forces of chaos and evil - in short, of adharma - against the divine personifications of dharma is perplexing and has no non-Bhargava parallel in the literature. The origin of the relationship was evidently puzzling to the epic redactors themselves, for the question is raised at least twice in the Mahabharata (circa 3138 BC). In neither case is the answer given wholly satisfactory. This identification of Sukra as the purohita and protector of the asuras may shed some light on some of the most basic problems of early Indian and even early Indo-Iranian religion. If, as has been suggested on the basis of the Iranian evidence, the asuras were the divinities of Aryans for whom, perhaps, the devas were demons, then Sukra and perhaps the Bhargavas were originally their priests, and whose descendants switched sides at a later date”.
It is therefore clear that Jamadagni and Parshu-rama are early followers of Asho Zarathushtra; and Shukra (Kava Ushana) is one of the pioneer sages who inspired Zarathushtras reformation.
In fact, down the ages, it is persons from Bhrgu gotras (sub-castes) who appear to have given shape to the most distinctive and prominent positions of Hindu thought on all aspects of life: Kaama, Artha, Dharma and Moksa; from Vatsyayana to Kautilya to Adi Sankaracharya.
It is this dichotomy that in fact gives us a tool in gauging Zarathushtras’ time, because all these concepts are rooted in Zarathushtras’ philosophical concepts highlighted in the Gathas and incorporated, at a later stage, into the Vedas by the Brighus.
By the middle Rig Vedic period, Zarathushtras’ philosophy was gaining support and his supporters the Brighu-athrawans, displaced the angarisas as the vedic composers and priests, and completed the middle and latter section of the later Rig Veda.
Sections composed by Shukra (Kava Ushana) and Jamad-agni, who were earlier considered asuric and un-vedic were, at this stage, introduced into the Rig Vedic corpus posthumously.
It is at this point in history that we see the concept of “Indra”, the maleficent, un-ethical God (might is right philosophy ), finally being jettisoned; and Varuna and Vishnu gain ascendancy, albeit as Devas. In other words selected Asuras (Ahuras) who are ethically minded are now incorporated into Hindu scriptures as Devas. Thus Asuras are the ground on which the devas emerge; along the same logic of the Avesta that without consistent ethical activities, one can slip into the false path. The ethical oriented philosophy of Zarathushtra, could logically be assumed of having influenced the reformation reflected in the Later Vedas, the Puranas and the Bhagwad Geeta, with the relegation of Indra, the main vedic Mortal God to a direct worship of the Great immortal Lord (Vishnu – Varun-Shiva, who were originally Asuras)
By the period of the later Rig Vedas, The Bhrigus, are now completely accepted into the Vedic mainstream (Mandala VIII & X), with their old hymns being included in the Mandalas and the references to them acquiring a friendly, respectful, and contemporary air. The Grtsamadas of Mandala II are classified as “Kevala-Bhrgus” (kevala means exquisite in Avestan) and have a separate AprI-sukta from both the Angirases and the Bhrgus. It is, however, clear that they are actually full-fledged Angirases who have adopted some specifically Bhrigu practices and hence formed a separate family.
As such in the post Zarathushtra era we see a lot of philosophers and their devotees changing sides and we have a unique sutra in the Vedas which says that Divinity can be invoked either through the 3 fold path (espoused in the Vedas) or the 5 fold path. This could be a veiled reference to the Avesta.
6 comments:
this was very very interesting-the origins and the connections between Zoroastrainism and the Vedas - the meaning of the word Ayrian - and the influence of Zarathustra on the later Veda messages and the Bhagavidgita which are more ethical-a lot to think about and much of this is unknown to many-thanks again for this revealing blog
Yes, it is a factual situation that has amazed me. How a mere Mortal developed this momentous philosophy that influenced all that came in contact with it; All in just one lifetime.
Your level of insights and research are excellent... But you seem to suffer from the same desert bloc mentality of one prophet one messiah one man with the message.... As you have rightly pointed out the rigid religious boundries that exist today were not present in the ancient times.... India even today does not have a word for religion (dharma is used but its not religion )
Hindu is what the people living west of Sindhu called the people living to the east.... None of the Indian texts uses the word hindu.... Where ever the world could find one originator /one prohphet/one messiah they formed a religion under his name.... Zoraster..Christ...Mohammed.....Moses....Budhha....Mahavir Jain....Guru nanak...... rest all fall into the hinduism bucket... BTW Vishnu was formost of aditya's not an asura.... Kasyap (maybe caspian sea is named after him)rishi had 3 wives aditi (adityas mother) .... diti (daityas) ...dhanu(danavas) ... daityas + danavas formed asuras...
Bharat,
You seem to have missed the point of the compilation that the philosophy of the Zarathushti faith has been built up over time, first by the Sages or Kavas, specifically Kava Thrita & Kava Usana (in the 9000BC time range); & then given a coherent direction by Zarathushtra after societies' fall from grace. In the generations following Zarathushtra significant additions were made (by authors, now unknown) into the bulk of what is today called Avesta & Pahlavi.
The Hindu past follows a similar path; in that its earliest philosophy was propounded by Sage Brihaspati; in direct oppostion to that of Sage Usana.
This is the Indra & assistants ; proposing the might is right philosophy. This was, over time, superimposed by the descendants of Sage Usana who switched political sides (around 5000BC). The divinities you have identified were later additions to accommodate this 180 degree turn around.
Thus the Vedas are a unique scripture where previous errors are admitted (much like Zarathushtra propounded) & progress achieved in the resultant direction.
The Bhagwad Geeta goes a step further & highlights two concepts dear to Zarathushtra, namely Bhakti-Love or Vohu Manah & Energetic Persistence or Aramaiti(called Mata or Vaishno Devi in India).
So, both philosophies derive their basis not from one personality as you seem to think, but by a multitude of philosophers. Whereas Hinduism did not suffer the destruction of its scriptures as Z`s did; the names of the sages are known today. This is not the case with Z`s. Thus while we rightly pledge alliance to Zarathushtra & his philosophy, we recognize that his philosophy was a reformation of existing ethos, aimed at regaining the old glory.
In conclusion it is incorrect to equate the Z faith to the Biblical faith; inspite of its influence on them. The Z faith & hinduism are more similar to each other than you think.
Along the lines of UK & USA being nations separated by the same language; so too are Hinduism & Zoroastrianism, philosophies separated by the same building blocks.
You have given a very good analysis on this topic. It would be very nice if more & more people of both the nations came to realise & appreciate their common origins.
One point on which I have to disagree with you is the antiquity you assign to Zarathustra.
Infact, the Iranian Zoroastrian religion is a reformation of the old shared Indo-Iranian religion. It is for that reason that all Indo-european mythologies can be found in the Vedas but this is not so in the case of Avesta.
I am of the opinion that Jamadagni & Parasu-Rama were subsequent to Kavi Usanas but preceded Zarathustra.
No doubt, as argued by Shrikant Talageri, The Later Rigveda seems contemporaneous to Old Avesta (Gathas) and therefore perhaps Zarathustra is atleast as old as that period of time. Nevertheless I feel it is not possible to see any Zoroastrian reformatory influences in Vedic religion. What is found in the Vedas is a Pre-Zoraostrian value-system.
Jaydeep,
Kava Usana (Shukracharya) was the philosophical rival to Sage Brihastaspa, which led to the Avestic_Vedic split. So no matter how individuals are placed historically, the times of both become reference point zero.
Yes the Z faith is a reformation and this is confirmed by a verse seeking to regain the ancient glory.
Keep in mind that the Z scriptures were wiped out except for what had been memorized so one cannot comment on it not being as exhaustive as the Vedas.
Overall the message is of oneness of humanity and the thinking, choice making segments' quest for ethical high ground.
Post a Comment