History of Zoroastrianism/Chapter 17

by Maneckji Nusservanji Dhalla

 

CHAPTER XVII

 

THE YOUNGER AVESTAN RELIGION

 

From the Gathas to the Later Avesta, a retrograde step. We now enter upon a new field of investigation, and move in an entirely changed atmosphere as we proceed. The buoyant spirit of the Gathic hymns is preserved to a great extent in the prose composition of the Haptanghaiti, or the section of 'Seven Chapters' in the Avestan Yasna, written in the Gathic dialect during the transition period that intervened between the close of the Gathic age and the opening of the Avestan period. The lofty tone of the earlier compositions gradually declines, and the greater part of the Yasna, Yashts, and Vendidad becomes heavy and monotonous. On only rare occasions do the texts exhibit sudden flashes of transcendent beauty and devout fervour. The growing tendency is for complexity and concreteness. The Gathas generally dealt with the abstract concepts. Every one of the Amesha Spentas, as we have already seen, impersonated some cardinal virtue. Though Asha, the genius of righteousness, and Haurvatat, that of perfection, have each a Yasht consecrated to them in the Younger Avesta, the abstract virtues of these archangels do not receive any recognition in these hymns. The secondary and concrete qualities with new associations loom larger in the thoughts of their composers than do the primary qualifications. Rather than dealing with the righteousness of Asha Vahishta and the perfection of Haurvatat, the later texts expatiate upon their healing powers by means of the recital of the various formulas of magical efficacy and the spells to drive away the demons of diseases and death. This general tendency of drifting towards the concrete and material in religion is the characteristic feature of the times and endures throughout the Younger Avestan as well as the subsequent Pahlavi period, in which it reaches its climax.

Daena, Chisti, Mithra, Raman, Rata, Manthra, Airyaman, Asha, Hvare, Maonghah, Asman, Ushah, Atar, and Zam furnish us with instances in which terms that were used in the Gathas to connote the ordinary meanings are now personified as angels.

The angels that outshine the archangels. Some of the Yazatas, both those of pure Iranian extraction and those of Indo-Iranian origin, have risen to such a great popularity during this period that they are honoured more than the Amesha Spentas. The angels Anahita and Tishtrya, Mithra and Verethraghna figure more prominently than the archangels Vohu Manah and Asha Vahishta, Armaiti and Ameretat. Some of the longest Yashts, or sacrificial hymns, are composed in their honour. The Yasht dedicated to Mithra, for example, is eight times larger than the one composed in honour of Ahura Mazda himself. The archangels, who are higher in the spiritual hierarchy, who occupied a unique position in the Gathas, and whose glory the prophet ever sang with his clarion voice to the people of Iran, have now either to content themselves with short laudatory compositions or go entirely without any special dedication. Some of the attributes that are the prerogative of Ahura Mazda alone are lavishly applied to the leading angels; but the authors are sparing even to parsimony when they confer honorific epithets on the Amesha Spentas.

Their imprecations upon their careless votaries. A few of the Yazatas, or Adorable Ones, are conjointly honoured with Ahura Mazda in the same strain. They are eager to help man and stand by his side in the hour of his need, if they are invoked. They help man, if man remembers them. Moreover, they arc themselves strengthened in their work by man's offerings. Tishtrya despondently complains to Ahura Mazda that he is worsted by his adversary Apaosha because mankind do not propitiate him with sacrifices as they ought to. If they did so, Tishtrya would be emboldened and enabled to conduct his warfare with the demon of drought more vigorously. Tishtrya complains that people do not sacrifice unto him to the extent that they do unto the other angels, who are more popular among them. Mithra, likewise, complains of man's occasional neglect of his invocation, which evokes his displeasure. And Mithra is terrible when angered. Unless man appeases his wrath by abundant sacrifices, he punishes his wretched victim mercilessly. Similarly, the Fravashis, or Guardian Spirits, are the most helpful genii, but on condition that man propitiates them with sacrifices. When satisfied, they are of indescribable help, but once offended they are hard to deal with. They are to be approached with religious awe. They are to be feared, rather than loved. This fear of the celestial beings may engender obedience in man, but not devotion. And devotion is the higher of the two virtues.

Ahura Mazda invokes his heavenly ministers for help. In the Gathas we saw Ahura Mazda co-operating and holding conferences and working in consort with his heavenly subordinates. The Younger Avesta gives a picture of a step in advance in this direction. Here Ahura Mazda is often depicted as sacrificing unto the minor divinities, and asking for boons from them. For instance, he prays to Ardvi Sura, Mithra, and Vayu for favours, and they grant him these boons.^[1] Vayu even goes further and says he does good to Ahura Mazda.^[2] The Fravashis helped Ahura Mazda, and the Lord himself says that had he not received their help, great would have been the difficulty.^[3] But even here it is expressly said that all these beings whom Ahura Mazda invokes for help are his creations. It is he himself who has made Tishtrya and Mithra as worthy of honour, sacrifice, and prayer as himself.^[4] Rather than commanding his envoys and viceroys as the sovereign ruler to put his orders into execution, he solicits their co-operation in his work. Besides, Ahura Mazda's offering sacrifices unto other beings turns out a source of help to them. Tishtrya in his distress looks to Ahura Mazda for help. Mazda, thereupon, sacrifices unto him, which gives Tishtrya renewed vigour and strength to fight his adversary Apaosha.^[5]

Ceremonial implements, textual passages, and objects and expressions that share invocation. In common with the Vedas, the Avestan texts deify the ritual implements, textual passages of the scriptures, and other like objects. The expressions of invocation and sacrifice applied to them are the same as those used in honour of Ahura Mazda, the Amesha Spentas, and the Yazatas. The following are the objects that come in for a share of invocation in the ritual: Haoma, Aesma or the wood for the fire altar,^[6] Baresman or the sacred twigs, Zaothra or libations, one's own soul and Fravashi,^[7] the Gathas, the chapters of the Yasna Haptanghaiti,^[8] metres, lines, words of the chapters of the Haptanghaiti,^[9] intellect, conscience,^[10] knowledge,^[11] and even sleep.^[12] Thus the creator and his creature, angel and man, ceremonial implements and secriptural texts are all alike made the objects of adoration and praise.

Zarathushtra's monologues in the Gathas as against his dialogues in the Avesta. In the Gathas the prophet addressed several questions to Ahura Mazda, but the replies were left to be inferred from the context. An advance is made upon this method, and now we have Zoroaster depicted as putting questions, and Ahura Mazda himself as answering them categorically. To invest their compositions with divine sanction and prophetic authority, the later sages wrote in the form of a dialogue between Ahura Mazda and his prophet. The greater part of the Vendidad and some of the Yashts are composed in this style. Escorted by the celestial Yazatas, Ahura Mazda comes down to Airyana Vaejah to attend a meeting of mortals convened by Yima, and warns him of the coming destructive winter and frost.^[13]

The Avesta looks with unrelenting abhorrence upon idols and images of divinities. Idolatry in any form is sin. The Shah Namah abounds in passages depicting the Persian kings and heroes as conducting a crusade against idols and idol-worship. The conquering armies of Persia always destroyed the idols and razed their temples to the ground. Herodotus writes that the Persians did not erect idols.^[14] Sotion adds that they hated idols.^[15] The statues of different divinities were, however, not unknown among the Achaemenians. The winged figure floating over the head of Darius on the rock sculptures at Behistan is probably a representation of Auramazda. We have it on the authority of Berosus that the Achaemenian king Artaxerxes Mnemon (b.c. 404–358) had statues erected to Anahita in BabyIon, Ecbatana, Susa, Persepolis, Bactria, Damascus, and Sardis.^[16] Strabo describes the image of Omanus, that is, Vohu Manah, as being carried at a later period in procession in Cappadocia.^[17]

We find no traces of such open disregard of the genuine teachings of the faith, when the priesthood firmly established its influence. Orthodox Zoroastrianism never sanctioned any form of idol-worship in Iran.

The Yazatas, or angels, Tishtrya, Verethraghna, Dahma Afriti, and Damoish Upamana introduce a novel feature in the theology of this period. They are pictured as assuming various forms of man, horse, and other objects in the performance of their allotted work.

 

1. Yt. 5. 17-19; 10. 123; 15. 2-4.
2. Yt. 15. 44.
3. Yt. 13. 12, 19.
4. Yt. 8. 52; 10. 1.
5. Yt. 8. 25-29.
6. Ys. 6. 18; 7. 26.
7. Ys. 59. 28; 71. 18.
8. Ys. 71. 12, 18.
9. Vsp. 16. 3.
10. Yt. 13. 74.
11. Ys. 22. 25; 25. 6; Yt. 2. 1; Sr. 1. 2, 29; 2. 2, 29.
12. Vsp. 7. 3.
13. Vd. 2. 21, 22.
14. 1. 131.
15. Diogenes Laertius, Prooem. 6.
16. Cited by Clemens Alexandrinus, Protreptica, 5, 65, 3.
17. P. 733.