Zoroastrianism and Islam

[Neithan]

Hello! I was reading a bit about Zoroastrianism lately and it seems quite similar to Islam in some ways. There was a main prophet, Zarathustra, who taught that there is one God and one adversary, and that the human person will be judged according to his or her deeds, some will be granted to paradise, and some left to hell. There are Zoroastrian scriptures and fire is seen as a sacred symbol of the divine to which they direct their worship but it is not an object of worship.

Christianity came later and taught that there is one God, but three divine persons, one of whom incarnated and can forgive sins (Jesus) so that people can be reconciled with God and resurrected at some point in the future. Christians worship Jesus as divine and even sacrifice what they believe to be his body and blood on an altar in the form of bread and wine meant to be consumed. This seems more like ancient pagan religions that had sacrificial rituals compared with the relative simplicity and purity that Zarathustra preached.

Islam came after Christianity and taught that actually, the Christians had fallen into blasphemy and idolatry by teaching that God is not alone, or that the Creator would become a creature for any reason. Muslims revere their scriptures (Quran) as divine and the Kaaba is a sacred symbol to direct their worship but is not an object of worship itself.

Could Islam be understood as sort of "correction" of Christianity, and more in line with what Zarathustra taught?

Thank you for your thoughts and the opportunity to discuss them here.

 

[Zafran]

Islam started with Adam pbuh according to Muslims so its possible that there is truth in Zoroastrianism Just like the Quran accepts that the Jews and Christians are followers of true prophets although your right that the Quran corrects the Jews by reclaiming Jesus pbuh as the messiah and criticizes the Trinity. Its the reasons why the prophet Muhammad pbuh was sent to Guide people back to Monotheism.

 

[Neithan]

I read in another thread that Islam teaches there were prophets sent to all nations? I wonder if Zarathustra would qualify. After all, the three magi in the gospels are understood to be from Persia and followers of Zoroastrianism.

Zorastrian understanding differs from Judeo-Christian-Islam because he taught that God did not create the material world, but the devil did. So everything material, including the body, is evil, and there is no teaching about the resurrection of the flesh. I think the Abrahamic tradition was the first to teach that everything, visible and invisible, is from one God and it is essentially good, but perhaps corrupted by sin.

 

[azc]

I read in another thread that Islam teaches there were prophets sent to all nations? I wonder if Zarathustra would qualify. After all, the three magi in the gospels are understood to be from Persia and followers of Zoroastrianism.

Zorastrian understanding differs from Judeo-Christian-Islam because he taught that God did not create the material world, but the devil did. So everything material, including the body, is evil, and there is no teaching about the resurrection of the flesh. I think the Abrahamic tradition was the first to teach that everything, visible and invisible, is from one God and it is essentially good, but perhaps corrupted by sin.

So according to their religion :

a : Devil is as powerful as God or more powerful than God

b: Since body Is an evil therefore founder of their religion was also an evil let alone be a prophet

 

[anatolian]

According to some hadiths Zoroaster was a Prophet but people corrupted his religion. Zoroastrianism basically teaches one God but a very powerful Satan which makes theoligians to regard it a dual God concept.

In the Gospels some Zoroastrian clerics came to find Jesus after he was just born.

 

[azc]

According to some hadiths Zoroaster was a Prophet but people corrupted his religion. Zoroastrianism basically teaches one God but a very powerful Satan which makes theoligians to regard it a dual God concept.

In the Gospels some Zoroastrian clerics came to find Jesus after he was just born.

Will you quote these hadith bro,

 

[space]

after watching the documentary films about an endless University makes me think it's impossible to send all the prophets only to Semitic peoples when there are many many many other ethnocultural diverse groups like native indians, papua, zulu, japanese etc in the different corners of the world and they needed them the most. As in the Quran said the humans have the equal rights despite their ethnic background and racial features, but some people tend to worship and idolize human beings because of their ethnic background, in my case - the semits, every ethnicity had their own prophet and holy Quran proves it

 

[Neithan]

So according to their religion :

a : Devil is as powerful as God or more powerful than God

b: Since body Is an evil therefore founder of their religion was also an evil let alone be a prophet

That's a really good point demonstrating inconsistency (and how can truth be inconsistent?) — if a proposed teaching states that the material world and the body are evil (very common amongst pagans actually) then that means also their tongues are evil and the sounds they make (language) so how can we trust what they say?

On the other side of that coin, that reminds me of how materialists (atheists) say that our brains are just cause-and-effect machines that move randomly with no free will. If that's true, then their thoughts are random, without meaning or logic, and we have no reason to believe what they say (or anything at all).

These are issues I find in Dharmic traditions, which teach that life is a kind of evil from which we must escape, and reality is an illusion. If that's true, then their own supposed ideas about reality are also an illusion.

- - - Updated - - -

after watching the documentary films about an endless University makes me think it's impossible to send all the prophets only to Semitic peoples when there are many many many other ethnocultural diverse groups like native indians, papua, zulu, japanese etc in the different corners of the world and they needed them the most. As in the Quran said the humans have the equal rights despite their ethnic background and racial features, but some people tend to worship and idolize human beings because of their ethnic background, in my case - the semits, every ethnicity had their own prophet and holy Quran proves it

It is possible that Abraham was the one who answered the call with complete fidelity and God rewarded him with revelation, though as Zafran mentioned it's possible that there is some truth amongst other ancient people, but almost all of them were mixed with man-made errors. I'm not sure how much of the Bible that Islam trusts but in Genesis there are stories about how people fell from grace and even their cultures and civilizations became confused as they spread apart (Tower of Babel).

 

[HakimPtsid]

So according to their religion :

a : Devil is as powerful as God or more powerful than God

No, no, no. Angra Mainyu (Equivalent of "Devil" or Shaitan) is BELOW Ahura Mazda (God), in this religion. The religion is dualistic (battle between good and evil) and they do believe it manifests on the divine planes, as it does in our world but it doesn't believe that they are equal. In Zoroastrianism Good, or Light - is the prevailing and therefore the ultimate of the two. Evil is just a necessity, nothing more.

- - - Updated - - -

That's a really good point demonstrating inconsistency (and how can truth be inconsistent?) — if a proposed teaching states that the material world and the body are evil (very common amongst pagans actually) then that means also their tongues are evil and the sounds they make (language) so how can we trust what they say?

What type of Pagans? I've never come across this personally. In my experience, Pagans are very pro-nature - to the extent that Pagans are often "Nature-worshipers" who deify nature as their chosen gods and goddesses.

These are issues I find in Dharmic traditions, which teach that life is a kind of evil from which we must escape, and reality is an illusion. If that's true, then their own supposed ideas about reality are also an illusion.

Depends very specifically on the schools of thought withing Dharmic Traditions (there are more than most people will ever comprehend). Buddhism is more closer to what you're saying, than the general Hindu conception. In Buddhism, life is suffering, so one needs to transcend suffering to reach enlightenment. In Hinduism, there are just too many schools of thought (again) to give a comprehensive overview. But Maya in general, is about the subjective experience to the absolute reality. Many schools of Hindu thought believe consciousness is above the material, so our lives are just part of the process that the soul makes - either into a new incarnation, or to become one again with God. In this light, life is seen as a chance for perfection, to reach Moksha. Don't get try to interpret Dharmic traditions via our Abrahamic traditions though (although, Judaism gets close in areas)

 

[Zafran]

I read in another thread that Islam teaches there were prophets sent to all nations? I wonder if Zarathustra would qualify. After all, the three magi in the gospels are understood to be from Persia and followers of Zoroastrianism.

Yes every nation was given a prophet but some people forgot or went astray, rebelled etc. There is nothing definitive about Zarathustra, unlike the biblical prophets in Islam but its plausible - a monotheistic religion with Truth corrupted over time.

 

[Neithan]

What type of Pagans? I've never come across this personally. In my experience, Pagans are very pro-nature - to the extent that Pagans are often "Nature-worshipers" who deify nature as their chosen gods and goddesses.

Yes "pagan" is an umbrella word and there are many different kinds; I mean mostly the ancient pagans we know from Greco-Roman, Indo-Iranian and Norse-Gael sources. They held animistic beliefs about the natural world, but also commonly understood the physical body to be a kind of cage for the soul, which must be freed of it (cf. Plato's Phaedo). A famous quote from the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius is when he said, "Death is the release from the hard service of the flesh." It's this common element that what is essentially good is invisible, and the visible is somehow a problem to overcome. This might also be why some pagan cultures were so willing to die in battle as a kind of sacred act, sacrificing themselves, like Vikings looking to enter Valhalla. My guess is it's a natural reaction to the "problem of pain."

Modern neo-pagans are more like spiritual environmentalists, and don't typically engage in the kinds of ritual sacrifices of atonement that the ancients did, as far as I know (maybe they do in secret, I'm not sure).

Depends very specifically on the schools of thought withing Dharmic Traditions (there are more than most people will ever comprehend). Buddhism is more closer to what you're saying, than the general Hindu conception. In Buddhism, life is suffering, so one needs to transcend suffering to reach enlightenment. In Hinduism, there are just too many schools of thought (again) to give a comprehensive overview. But Maya in general, is about the subjective experience to the absolute reality. Many schools of Hindu thought believe consciousness is above the material, so our lives are just part of the process that the soul makes - either into a new incarnation, or to become one again with God. In this light, life is seen as a chance for perfection, to reach Moksha. Don't get try to interpret Dharmic traditions via our Abrahamic traditions though (although, Judaism gets close in areas)

I don't think I have enough time in my life to study all of Dharma and try to weigh it against the revelation we have from Abraham. It seems more like a collection of ideas, some of them contradictory, but a common pattern is reincarnation and the cycle of material existence that must be escaped from through some balance of karma. How does Judaism get close? That's interesting.