4 ms·
This reminds me of an essay I was just reading, "Zoroastrian Survivals in Iranian Folklore"[1], by the eminent religious scholar R. A. Zaehner (who I knew bette
by pmoriarty 5y ago
This reminds me of an essay I was just reading, "Zoroastrian Survivals in Iranian Folklore"[1], by the eminent religious scholar R. A. Zaehner (who I knew better for his famous debates in the 1960's and 1970's arguing that mystical experiences occasioned by psychedelics weren't true mystical experiences).
From the introduction to the paper:
"Visitors to the Vatican Museum in Rome will remember that the very first monuments, flanking the entrance to the first room in the vast gallery that leads ultimately to the Sistine Chapel, are neither saints not angels but what appear to be devils: for at each side of the entrance door, guarding it with their baleful presence, stand two most un-Christian deities with the head of a lion and gaping jaws. In both hands they bear keys, a snake encircles their bodies, and the Signs of the Zodiac are impressed on their limbs.[2] Coming face to face with these awesome figures Christians may well recall the words of St. Peter: "Be sober and watch; because your adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, goeth about seeking whom he may devour" (i Pet. 5 . 8 ). The serpent too which envelops the body of the lion-headed deity is all too familiar, and one is tempted to identify it with that selfsame serpent which tempted our first mother, Eve, to eat of the forbidden fruit.
Yet, interesting though the Christian parallels may be, we have long known that this rather repulsive deity has nothing to do with the Christian devil, for he figured in a cult that was for long Christianity's most potent rival in the early Roman Empire. This rival religion which has left monuments throughout the length and breadth of the Roman Empire is known as Mithraism, and its roots were originally in Iran; for the god Mithra, from whom the New Persian word mehr, meaning both the "sun" and "affection" derives, was, in the Zoroastrianism of the later Achaemenian Empire, second only to the supreme Deity, Ahura Mazdah himself."
The paper concerns a discovery in the 1960's of an incomplete 600,000 word story written during WW2 by a mysterious Iranian by the name of Ali Mirdrekvandi[3], which Zaehner deduced must have been a retelling of ancient Zoroastrian myth and which, Zaehner argued, confirmed his identification of the lion-headed figure (the "Lionish god" in the story) as Ahriman, the false deity and enemy of their true god, Ahura Mazdah (Ohrmazd).
[1] - https://archive.org/details/ZaehnerZorSurvivalsFolklore https://archive.org/details/ZaehnerZorSurvivalsFolklore
[2] - http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/images/cimrm545.gif http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/images/cimrm545.gi...
[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Mirdrekvandi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Mirdrekvandi
- aruggirello 5y agoYou can visit a Mithraeum at Sutri (VT), ~50 Km north of Rome: (in Italian) https://www.tripadvisor.it/Attraction_Review-g1064663-d10823177-Reviews-Il_Mitreo-Sutri_Province_of_Viterbo_Lazio.html https://www.tripadvisor.it/Attraction_Review-g1064663-d10823...
- emmelaich 5y agoThey're everywhere. As far north as Hadrian's Wall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraeum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraeum
- selimthegrim 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Arda_Viraf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Arda_Viraf
- mr_toad 5y ago> Christianity's most potent rival in the early Roman Empire Christianity’s rivals in the early Roman Empire were basically every other faith, because, unlike most Roman religions they were monotheistic. Arguably their most potent political rival was the imperial cult. The Persians, who were mostly Zoroastrian, were a major rival, but mostly for more mundane reasons.
- Ericson2314 5y agoThe story refers to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism, not Zoroastrian proper. The old synthetic polytheisms were all pomp and circumstance, with the elite atheists, and poor treating it more like fortune telling + some light collective obligations for sacrifices and whatnot + entertainment. They weren't a serious competitor on religious grounds as there was no fervor of belief. Mithraism, on the other hand, was another "new-age cult". Like today's, the older religious origins (Zoroastrianism) probably did more to legitimize it / add mystique than actually reflects a strong continuity of belief. Mithraism had the zeal and singular focus to be an actual competitor to Christrianity.