16 ms·

Alexander the ‘Accursed’ and Zoroastrianism

66 points by benbreen 4y ago

mxxc 4y ago
not sure to which degree current islamic republic brainwashing has messed up with this but many "modern not too or not at all religious iranians" call alexander the great just "alexander" and don't have a good view of him.
- projectramo 4y ago
  That could just be part of the secular trend of re-assessing the records of "conquerors" across the world. Some people consider Napoleon, Alexander and so on to be glorified warlords who happened to win but are essentially mass murderers like non-western conquerors (Attila the Hun and so on).
  - eternalban 4y ago
    No, it is not. Alexander was/is (ridiculously, par per course in this matters) considered by "doctors of religion" to be Zal Qurnain (the Two Horned one) mentioned in Sura 18 (The Cave) in the Qur'an. I personally think Carl Jung had a firmer grasp on the meaning of Sura 18 than most of these scholars. But anyway, the two-horned one was a "servant of God" who had 'divine proxy power' to "punish or reward as you see fit". He sets up the molten metal wall to protect against "Gog and Magog" (which should cause spiritual discomfort vis a viz IRI & CCP /g). He travels far and wide. Two horns in spiritual context: https://aleteia.org/2021/08/23/the-reason-why-michelangelos-moses-has-horns/ https://aleteia.org/2021/08/23/the-reason-why-michelangelos-... There is a distinct pro-Roman anti-Persian element to the Qur'an which (regrettably for the divine word set) maps exactly to geopolitical alliances of client states of the contemporary contending Roman and Persian Empires at the time of Islam's arrival on the scene. (It is fascinating that Rome 2.0 -- British Empire and then US -- also have an affinity for Arabs vs Persians.) So, obviously no son or daughter of Iran would care to celebrate the person that caused the demise of the Hakhamanesh empire. -- "that must be Eskandar!" -- https://carm.org/islam/quran-surah-18/ https://carm.org/islam/quran-surah-18/ 83. And they ask you about Dhul-Qarnain. Say: “I shall recite to you something of his story.” 84. Verily, We established him in the earth, and We gave him the means of everything. 85. So he followed a way. 86. Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people. We (Allah) said (by inspiration): “O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness.” 87. He said: “As for him (a disbeliever in the Oneness of Allah) who does wrong, we shall punish him; and then he will be brought back unto his Lord; Who will punish him with a terrible torment (Hell). 88. “But as for him who believes (in Allah’s Oneness) and works righteousness, he shall have the best reward, (Paradise), and we (Dhul-Qarnain) shall speak unto him mild words (as instructions).” 89. Then he followed another way, 90. Until, when he came to the rising place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We (Allah) had provided no shelter against the sun. 91. So (it was)! And We knew all about him (Dhul-Qarnain). 92. Then he followed (another) way, 93. Until, when he reached between two mountains, he found, before (near) them (those two mountains), a people who scarcely understood a word. 94. They said: “O Dhul-Qarnain! Verily! Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Magog) are doing great mischief in the land. Shall we then pay you a tribute in order that you might erect a barrier between us and them?” 95. He said: “That (wealth, authority and power) in which my Lord had established me is better (than your tribute). So help me with strength (of men), I will erect between you and them a barrier. 96. “Give me pieces (blocks) of iron,” then, when he had filled up the gap between the two mountain-cliffs, he said: “Blow,” till when he had made it (red as) fire, he said: “Bring me molten copper to pour over it.” 97. So they [Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Magog)] were made powerless to scale it or dig through it. 98. Dhul-Qarnain) said: “This is a mercy from my Lord, but when the Promise of my Lord comes, He shall level it down to the ground. And the Promise of my Lord is ever true.” 99. And on that Day [i.e. the Day Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Magog) will come out], We shall leave them to surge like waves on one another, and the Trumpet will be blown, and We shall collect them all together.
    - tboyd47 4y ago
      This is because the Romans practiced a form of Christianity (and still do), which Islam recognizes as a revealed (yet corrupted) religion, while the Persians were idol-worshipers. I agree that it is fascinating that this geopolitical orientation is still in place since the time of the Qur'an's revelation. I don't think you're correct in saying that the scholars agree that Dhul-Qarnain is Alexander. The opinions I've heard rule Alexander out. What I've always heard is that the identity of Dhul-Qarnain is one of those details in Qur'anic exegesis that are not known with total certainty, like the identity of Al-Khidr in the same surah. Cyrus the Great has been floated as another candidate, though [0]. --- [0] https://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/zolqarnain_cyrus_quran.php https://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/zolqarnain_cyru...
      - glitchc 4y ago
        Calling Persians idol worshippers sounds revisionist and is materially incorrect. Persians were more attuned to natural symbols. Noting that Muslims pray to a stone in Mecca, would you call that idol worship?
        derecho1412 4y ago
        Muslims don't pray to a stone, they pray towards the Mosque in Mecca, where the stone happens to be and is only used as part of a ritual during the Hajj pilgrimage. There was a period of history where the stone had been removed from its current place and that did not change the direction of prayer. Also, idol worship is a misnomer and mistranslation. From an Islamic perspective, associating anything other than God alone in worship would fall into the category of polytheism and paganism, it does not have to be literal idols. Hence, zoroastrians are included in our definition of pagans or polytheists. Frankly, it's really telling how the HN crowd is speaking so confidently about Islam all over this thread while not really having any idea.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 4y ago
- neaden 4y ago
  I mean, Alexander was if nothing else a pretty bad guy to be be around. Just ask his friend Cleitus who saved Alexander's life but would later get killed by him in a drunken fight.
  - Ialdaboth 4y ago
    To be fair, binge drinking (and its share of drawbacks) when celebrating military victories was very much a big feature of Macedonian culture.
  - Eumenes 4y ago
    yeah, he was a young violent warlord, not unlike his contemporaries, but had some redeeming qualities of honor and respecting the culture of places he conquered, which was unusual for the time.
    - boomboomsubban 4y ago
      Isn't the original article an example of him disrespecting the culture of the place he conquered?
      - pegasus 4y ago
        Some level of respect, higher than the average warlord of the time.
  - SuoDuanDao 4y ago
    An Elon Musk of the ancient world.
    - bigbillheck 4y ago
      Not really, Alexander actually did stuff.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ZephyrP 4y ago
  Do you see this is an expression of secular "neo-Persian" nationalism, or as part of a reaction to Iran's religious conservatives who'd read literal truth in the Quran's story of a heroic Zuul al Qarayn (whom I've heard is identified with Alexander)?
  - mxxc 4y ago
    i enjoyed the shitstorm i unintentionally created but i don't think most people (even religious ones) make the connection with dhu-l-qarnayn. it's probably, like someone else said, something that has to do with softer or harder persian nationalism. after all, even religious iranians are still iranians.
- fakedang 4y ago
  Not much with the Islamic Republic than with the Shah regime, which went on a run glorifying the old Achaemenid and Sassanid empire over even the Safavid empire.
throw1234651234 4y ago
Zoroastrianism is very confusing. As is Hinduism. Getting to the central tenants is rough.
- adictator 4y ago
  [dead]
- yazaddaruvala 4y ago
  Was brought up Zoroastrian. AMA Some central tenets: - Good thoughts lead to good words lead to good deeds. - Life shouldn’t be a zero sum game. Therefore don’t loot and pillage, don’t tolerate looting and pillaging, no more sacrificing animals or people, instead grow food and grow populations. - The representation of god cannot be known, and best showcased through fire (or energy). I’d bet a lot of money that a Tesla Coil would also be an acceptable representation. - Otherwise, think critically and question intention and motivation of yourself and others to ensure it’s “towards god rather than towards the devil”.
  - 082349872349872 4y ago
    Does Herodotus' characterisation sound rooted in Zoroastrianism? > παιδεύουσι δὲ τοὺς παῖδας ἀπὸ πενταέτεος ἀρξάμενοι μέχρι εἰκοσαέτεος τρία μοῦνα, ἰχνεύειν καὶ τοξεύειν καὶ ἀληθίζεσθαι. [The Persians] educate their boys from five to twenty years old, and teach them only three things: riding and archery and honesty (iow "sit straight, shoot straight, and speak straight") NB. https://lsj.gr/wiki/ἰχνεύω https://lsj.gr/wiki/ἰχνεύω suggests possible issues with the received (1920) english translation above, but I'd easily believe hunting (as to hounds) to imply riding.
    - yazaddaruvala 4y ago
      > Does Herodotus' characterisation sound rooted in Zoroastrianism? My assumptions: The Zoroastrian Persians of that time were "Zoroastrian" like today's Christian Americans are "Christian". > educate their boys from five to twenty years old, Based on how me, my family, and friends were all raised, yes education is paramount. It falls into "make life a positive sum game" or "grow". That seems fundamentally Zoroastrian. The exclusion of women strikes me as anti-Zoroastrian. Maybe this is a more modern ethos even for Zoroastrians. Every Zoroastrian, regardless of sex/gender, that I know is educated at least till 20, and past that if they desire it/finances accamodate). > and teach them only three things: riding and archery and honesty Making it exclusive to riding, archery and honesty seems non-Zoroastrian. Likely just pragmatic for their army or something. Even that seems off to me - they had farmers and mathematicians and engineers, etc. If I were guessing this is selection bias from likely his Greek roots, the ongoing wars, and living in a smaller city (I assume closer to the borders of the empire). The honesty does resonate, but its likely an incomplete translation. I'd assume they actually meant "noble"[0], which would be rooted Zoroastrianism. Where specifically they taught honesty as important, but caveated with pragmatism to withheld to ensure "high moral outcomes". "High moral outcomes" is very rooted in Zoroastrianism. [0] having or showing fine personal qualities or high moral principles and ideals.
ogogmad 4y ago
How much do we know about pre-Islamic Zoroastrianism, and is it something that modern Zoroastrians care about? I've heard that while modern Zoroastrianism is "dualist", this might have started as a concession to Islam, to prevent followers from being persecuted for idolatry.
- glitchc 4y ago
  I recommend the Heritage Institute website if you are keen to learn more: http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/ http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/
- SuoDuanDao 4y ago
  I always assumed that the dualism of modern Christianity and Islam came from Zoroastrianism - it's not an obvious feature of a monotheistic religion and it must have come from somewhere. That said, I suppose we're removed enough from the source material that it's very hard to be sure. But is there a competing theory for the origin of dualism in these religions?
  - monocasa 4y ago
    What I've heard from religious scholars is that they think Christianity's dualism seems pretty inspired by Zoroastrianism, with the added insight that Judaism was originally polytheistic. There's therefore a lot of underlying assumptions in the religion primed for the idea of multiple god-like entities.
    - dc-programmer 4y ago
      The theory I’ve heard is that Christianity’s dualism was inherited from Second Temple Judaism’s cosmology. During that time there was a lot more interest in angels and demons among certain Jewish sects. In turn these beliefs may have been a result of syncretism with Zoroastrianism.
      - wahern 4y ago
qersist3nce 4y ago
In Sassanian sources he was refereed as "Alaksandar ī hrōmāy" and "Eskandar the Gajostak [accursed]". Note they used hrōmāy (Roman) in spite of him being Greek, possibly due to Hellenic influence on Roman civilization. Accursed cause he burned the original Avesta and plundered ērān-šahr (country of Iran) and moved all its gold to the original homeland. Fun fact, in Persian, the name of the country Greece is Yunan referring to the Iona region in western Anatolia (current day Turkey).
- _glass 4y ago
  Roman, because that's how the Greeks named themselves at the time of the Sasanian Empire, being the time of Romania (a.k.a. the Byzantine Empire).
  - boomboomsubban 4y ago
    Wow. I'm fully aware that the Byzantines called themselves the Romans until at least the fall of Constantinople, and still found that section of the article confusing. For some stupid reason it never occurred to me other people would call them Roman.
    - alephnerd 4y ago
      Same way a large number of European and Islamic empires continued to use some variation of Caesar to mean King or Emperor (eg. Tsar in Slavic cultures, Kaiser in Germanic cultures, Geysar/Qeysar/Kesar in Indo-Iranian and Ottoman culture)
      - boomboomsubban 4y ago
        I've always attributed that to the full Roman empire, though it probably was both, as I was under the impression Basileus was more commonly used when speaking Greek like the Byzantines did. I think this comes from my modern perspective, where I think "nobody considers the Byzantines 'Roman' though that's what they called themselves." Of course that wouldn't be true in 1000 AD.
glitchc 4y ago
The biggest harm Alexander inflicted on Zoroastrianism was to kill all of the priests. Zoroastrianism has a tradition of oral transmission from priest to navar (newly minted priest), which is maintained to this day. Mass killing disrupted an entire generation and we are still grappling with the aftermath today, as we gather snippets from here and there to reconstitute what was lost.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  A while back I read a book called Heirs to Forgotten Kingdoms about disappearing, often-obscure (at least to Westerners) Middle Eastern religions, which stretched its scope over to Iran/Persia at times and IIRC did treat of Zoroastrianism (maybe the least-obscure and least-nearly-extinct of the bunch). Reading it, a pattern emerged of common elements to most or all of these religions: 1) Not seeking converts—in some cases, not permitting them at all—and 2) mostly or purely oral transmission of traditions, often with a "mystery" element—i.e. steps of initiation required to learn the "deeper" levels, which were regarded as secret.
  - mistrial9 4y ago
    Western Freemasons, I am looking at you
  - dylan604 4y ago
    > 1) Not seeking converts—in some cases, not permitting them at all How does this not mean that ultimately, you run out of practitioners? Are only direct descendants allowed to take part? >often with a "mystery" element—i.e. steps of initiation required to learn the "deeper" levels Does this include things like having special glasses that allows decryption of the text until they were lost before ultimately losing the text itself?
    - glitchc 4y ago
      Not seeking converts is relatively recent in Zoroastrian history, correlated largely with their move to the Indian subcontinent. In ancient Persia, Zoroastrians were free to proselytize and priests free to convert. It is believed that there were multiple factions of Zoroastrianism at the time.
sandGorgon 4y ago
For those who dont know, Zoroastrians migrated to India to escape persecution, where they are today called Parsis. The cool thing is that they are India's smallest (officially) ethnic population, however have had an OUTSIZED impact on India and the World. The unique culture (and names) are a signature element in Bollywood. And Zoroastrian food is an essential part of what defines Mumbai as a city - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/t-magazine/parsi-food.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/t-magazine/parsi-food.htm... . But beyond that, Tata (which owns Jaguar Land Rover), Serum Institute of India (world's largest maker of vaccine including COVID vaccines), Godrej Industries, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre ...and many others are all Indian Zoroastrian enterprises. And of course, Farrokh Bulsara...also known as Freddie Mercury ! But the really interesting thing is about how they treat their dead - Zoroastrians have their dead eaten by vultures. So the Indian govt operates one of the largest vulture breeding programs in the world, specifically for this purpose. These special "Towers of Silence" exist in every major city in India - especially in Mumbai, where the active Tower of Silence sits in the middle of what is considered the most expensive piece of real estate of the world.

66 points by benbreen 4y ago

mxxc 4y ago

not sure to which degree current islamic republic brainwashing has messed up with this but many "modern not too or not at all religious iranians" call alexander the great just "alexander" and don't have a good view of him.

projectramo 4y ago
That could just be part of the secular trend of re-assessing the records of "conquerors" across the world. Some people consider Napoleon, Alexander and so on to be glorified warlords who happened to win but are essentially mass murderers like non-western conquerors (Attila the Hun and so on).
- eternalban 4y ago
  No, it is not. Alexander was/is (ridiculously, par per course in this matters) considered by "doctors of religion" to be Zal Qurnain (the Two Horned one) mentioned in Sura 18 (The Cave) in the Qur'an. I personally think Carl Jung had a firmer grasp on the meaning of Sura 18 than most of these scholars. But anyway, the two-horned one was a "servant of God" who had 'divine proxy power' to "punish or reward as you see fit". He sets up the molten metal wall to protect against "Gog and Magog" (which should cause spiritual discomfort vis a viz IRI & CCP /g). He travels far and wide. Two horns in spiritual context: https://aleteia.org/2021/08/23/the-reason-why-michelangelos-moses-has-horns/ https://aleteia.org/2021/08/23/the-reason-why-michelangelos-... There is a distinct pro-Roman anti-Persian element to the Qur'an which (regrettably for the divine word set) maps exactly to geopolitical alliances of client states of the contemporary contending Roman and Persian Empires at the time of Islam's arrival on the scene. (It is fascinating that Rome 2.0 -- British Empire and then US -- also have an affinity for Arabs vs Persians.) So, obviously no son or daughter of Iran would care to celebrate the person that caused the demise of the Hakhamanesh empire. -- "that must be Eskandar!" -- https://carm.org/islam/quran-surah-18/ https://carm.org/islam/quran-surah-18/ 83. And they ask you about Dhul-Qarnain. Say: “I shall recite to you something of his story.” 84. Verily, We established him in the earth, and We gave him the means of everything. 85. So he followed a way. 86. Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people. We (Allah) said (by inspiration): “O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness.” 87. He said: “As for him (a disbeliever in the Oneness of Allah) who does wrong, we shall punish him; and then he will be brought back unto his Lord; Who will punish him with a terrible torment (Hell). 88. “But as for him who believes (in Allah’s Oneness) and works righteousness, he shall have the best reward, (Paradise), and we (Dhul-Qarnain) shall speak unto him mild words (as instructions).” 89. Then he followed another way, 90. Until, when he came to the rising place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We (Allah) had provided no shelter against the sun. 91. So (it was)! And We knew all about him (Dhul-Qarnain). 92. Then he followed (another) way, 93. Until, when he reached between two mountains, he found, before (near) them (those two mountains), a people who scarcely understood a word. 94. They said: “O Dhul-Qarnain! Verily! Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Magog) are doing great mischief in the land. Shall we then pay you a tribute in order that you might erect a barrier between us and them?” 95. He said: “That (wealth, authority and power) in which my Lord had established me is better (than your tribute). So help me with strength (of men), I will erect between you and them a barrier. 96. “Give me pieces (blocks) of iron,” then, when he had filled up the gap between the two mountain-cliffs, he said: “Blow,” till when he had made it (red as) fire, he said: “Bring me molten copper to pour over it.” 97. So they [Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Magog)] were made powerless to scale it or dig through it. 98. Dhul-Qarnain) said: “This is a mercy from my Lord, but when the Promise of my Lord comes, He shall level it down to the ground. And the Promise of my Lord is ever true.” 99. And on that Day [i.e. the Day Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Magog) will come out], We shall leave them to surge like waves on one another, and the Trumpet will be blown, and We shall collect them all together.
  - tboyd47 4y ago
    This is because the Romans practiced a form of Christianity (and still do), which Islam recognizes as a revealed (yet corrupted) religion, while the Persians were idol-worshipers. I agree that it is fascinating that this geopolitical orientation is still in place since the time of the Qur'an's revelation. I don't think you're correct in saying that the scholars agree that Dhul-Qarnain is Alexander. The opinions I've heard rule Alexander out. What I've always heard is that the identity of Dhul-Qarnain is one of those details in Qur'anic exegesis that are not known with total certainty, like the identity of Al-Khidr in the same surah. Cyrus the Great has been floated as another candidate, though [0]. --- [0] https://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/zolqarnain_cyrus_quran.php https://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/zolqarnain_cyru...
    - glitchc 4y ago
      Calling Persians idol worshippers sounds revisionist and is materially incorrect. Persians were more attuned to natural symbols. Noting that Muslims pray to a stone in Mecca, would you call that idol worship?
      - derecho1412 4y ago
        Muslims don't pray to a stone, they pray towards the Mosque in Mecca, where the stone happens to be and is only used as part of a ritual during the Hajj pilgrimage. There was a period of history where the stone had been removed from its current place and that did not change the direction of prayer. Also, idol worship is a misnomer and mistranslation. From an Islamic perspective, associating anything other than God alone in worship would fall into the category of polytheism and paganism, it does not have to be literal idols. Hence, zoroastrians are included in our definition of pagans or polytheists. Frankly, it's really telling how the HN crowd is speaking so confidently about Islam all over this thread while not really having any idea.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 4y ago
neaden 4y ago
I mean, Alexander was if nothing else a pretty bad guy to be be around. Just ask his friend Cleitus who saved Alexander's life but would later get killed by him in a drunken fight.
- Ialdaboth 4y ago
  To be fair, binge drinking (and its share of drawbacks) when celebrating military victories was very much a big feature of Macedonian culture.
- Eumenes 4y ago
  yeah, he was a young violent warlord, not unlike his contemporaries, but had some redeeming qualities of honor and respecting the culture of places he conquered, which was unusual for the time.
  - boomboomsubban 4y ago
    Isn't the original article an example of him disrespecting the culture of the place he conquered?
    - pegasus 4y ago
      Some level of respect, higher than the average warlord of the time.
- SuoDuanDao 4y ago
  An Elon Musk of the ancient world.
  - bigbillheck 4y ago
    Not really, Alexander actually did stuff.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ZephyrP 4y ago
Do you see this is an expression of secular "neo-Persian" nationalism, or as part of a reaction to Iran's religious conservatives who'd read literal truth in the Quran's story of a heroic Zuul al Qarayn (whom I've heard is identified with Alexander)?
- mxxc 4y ago
  i enjoyed the shitstorm i unintentionally created but i don't think most people (even religious ones) make the connection with dhu-l-qarnayn. it's probably, like someone else said, something that has to do with softer or harder persian nationalism. after all, even religious iranians are still iranians.
fakedang 4y ago
Not much with the Islamic Republic than with the Shah regime, which went on a run glorifying the old Achaemenid and Sassanid empire over even the Safavid empire.

throw1234651234 4y ago

Zoroastrianism is very confusing. As is Hinduism. Getting to the central tenants is rough.

adictator 4y ago
[dead]
yazaddaruvala 4y ago
Was brought up Zoroastrian. AMA Some central tenets: - Good thoughts lead to good words lead to good deeds. - Life shouldn’t be a zero sum game. Therefore don’t loot and pillage, don’t tolerate looting and pillaging, no more sacrificing animals or people, instead grow food and grow populations. - The representation of god cannot be known, and best showcased through fire (or energy). I’d bet a lot of money that a Tesla Coil would also be an acceptable representation. - Otherwise, think critically and question intention and motivation of yourself and others to ensure it’s “towards god rather than towards the devil”.
- 082349872349872 4y ago
  Does Herodotus' characterisation sound rooted in Zoroastrianism? > παιδεύουσι δὲ τοὺς παῖδας ἀπὸ πενταέτεος ἀρξάμενοι μέχρι εἰκοσαέτεος τρία μοῦνα, ἰχνεύειν καὶ τοξεύειν καὶ ἀληθίζεσθαι. [The Persians] educate their boys from five to twenty years old, and teach them only three things: riding and archery and honesty (iow "sit straight, shoot straight, and speak straight") NB. https://lsj.gr/wiki/ἰχνεύω https://lsj.gr/wiki/ἰχνεύω suggests possible issues with the received (1920) english translation above, but I'd easily believe hunting (as to hounds) to imply riding.
  - yazaddaruvala 4y ago
    > Does Herodotus' characterisation sound rooted in Zoroastrianism? My assumptions: The Zoroastrian Persians of that time were "Zoroastrian" like today's Christian Americans are "Christian". > educate their boys from five to twenty years old, Based on how me, my family, and friends were all raised, yes education is paramount. It falls into "make life a positive sum game" or "grow". That seems fundamentally Zoroastrian. The exclusion of women strikes me as anti-Zoroastrian. Maybe this is a more modern ethos even for Zoroastrians. Every Zoroastrian, regardless of sex/gender, that I know is educated at least till 20, and past that if they desire it/finances accamodate). > and teach them only three things: riding and archery and honesty Making it exclusive to riding, archery and honesty seems non-Zoroastrian. Likely just pragmatic for their army or something. Even that seems off to me - they had farmers and mathematicians and engineers, etc. If I were guessing this is selection bias from likely his Greek roots, the ongoing wars, and living in a smaller city (I assume closer to the borders of the empire). The honesty does resonate, but its likely an incomplete translation. I'd assume they actually meant "noble"[0], which would be rooted Zoroastrianism. Where specifically they taught honesty as important, but caveated with pragmatism to withheld to ensure "high moral outcomes". "High moral outcomes" is very rooted in Zoroastrianism. [0] having or showing fine personal qualities or high moral principles and ideals.

ogogmad 4y ago

How much do we know about pre-Islamic Zoroastrianism, and is it something that modern Zoroastrians care about? I've heard that while modern Zoroastrianism is "dualist", this might have started as a concession to Islam, to prevent followers from being persecuted for idolatry.

glitchc 4y ago
I recommend the Heritage Institute website if you are keen to learn more: http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/ http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/
SuoDuanDao 4y ago
I always assumed that the dualism of modern Christianity and Islam came from Zoroastrianism - it's not an obvious feature of a monotheistic religion and it must have come from somewhere. That said, I suppose we're removed enough from the source material that it's very hard to be sure. But is there a competing theory for the origin of dualism in these religions?
- monocasa 4y ago
  What I've heard from religious scholars is that they think Christianity's dualism seems pretty inspired by Zoroastrianism, with the added insight that Judaism was originally polytheistic. There's therefore a lot of underlying assumptions in the religion primed for the idea of multiple god-like entities.
  - dc-programmer 4y ago
    The theory I’ve heard is that Christianity’s dualism was inherited from Second Temple Judaism’s cosmology. During that time there was a lot more interest in angels and demons among certain Jewish sects. In turn these beliefs may have been a result of syncretism with Zoroastrianism.
    - wahern 4y ago

qersist3nce 4y ago

In Sassanian sources he was refereed as "Alaksandar ī hrōmāy" and "Eskandar the Gajostak [accursed]". Note they used hrōmāy (Roman) in spite of him being Greek, possibly due to Hellenic influence on Roman civilization. Accursed cause he burned the original Avesta and plundered ērān-šahr (country of Iran) and moved all its gold to the original homeland. Fun fact, in Persian, the name of the country Greece is Yunan referring to the Iona region in western Anatolia (current day Turkey).

_glass 4y ago
Roman, because that's how the Greeks named themselves at the time of the Sasanian Empire, being the time of Romania (a.k.a. the Byzantine Empire).
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  Wow. I'm fully aware that the Byzantines called themselves the Romans until at least the fall of Constantinople, and still found that section of the article confusing. For some stupid reason it never occurred to me other people would call them Roman.
  - alephnerd 4y ago
    Same way a large number of European and Islamic empires continued to use some variation of Caesar to mean King or Emperor (eg. Tsar in Slavic cultures, Kaiser in Germanic cultures, Geysar/Qeysar/Kesar in Indo-Iranian and Ottoman culture)
    - boomboomsubban 4y ago
      I've always attributed that to the full Roman empire, though it probably was both, as I was under the impression Basileus was more commonly used when speaking Greek like the Byzantines did. I think this comes from my modern perspective, where I think "nobody considers the Byzantines 'Roman' though that's what they called themselves." Of course that wouldn't be true in 1000 AD.

glitchc 4y ago

The biggest harm Alexander inflicted on Zoroastrianism was to kill all of the priests. Zoroastrianism has a tradition of oral transmission from priest to navar (newly minted priest), which is maintained to this day. Mass killing disrupted an entire generation and we are still grappling with the aftermath today, as we gather snippets from here and there to reconstitute what was lost.

yamtaddle 4y ago
A while back I read a book called Heirs to Forgotten Kingdoms about disappearing, often-obscure (at least to Westerners) Middle Eastern religions, which stretched its scope over to Iran/Persia at times and IIRC did treat of Zoroastrianism (maybe the least-obscure and least-nearly-extinct of the bunch). Reading it, a pattern emerged of common elements to most or all of these religions: 1) Not seeking converts—in some cases, not permitting them at all—and 2) mostly or purely oral transmission of traditions, often with a "mystery" element—i.e. steps of initiation required to learn the "deeper" levels, which were regarded as secret.
- mistrial9 4y ago
  Western Freemasons, I am looking at you
- dylan604 4y ago
  > 1) Not seeking converts—in some cases, not permitting them at all How does this not mean that ultimately, you run out of practitioners? Are only direct descendants allowed to take part? >often with a "mystery" element—i.e. steps of initiation required to learn the "deeper" levels Does this include things like having special glasses that allows decryption of the text until they were lost before ultimately losing the text itself?
  - glitchc 4y ago
    Not seeking converts is relatively recent in Zoroastrian history, correlated largely with their move to the Indian subcontinent. In ancient Persia, Zoroastrians were free to proselytize and priests free to convert. It is believed that there were multiple factions of Zoroastrianism at the time.

sandGorgon 4y ago

For those who dont know, Zoroastrians migrated to India to escape persecution, where they are today called Parsis. The cool thing is that they are India's smallest (officially) ethnic population, however have had an OUTSIZED impact on India and the World. The unique culture (and names) are a signature element in Bollywood. And Zoroastrian food is an essential part of what defines Mumbai as a city - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/t-magazine/parsi-food.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/t-magazine/parsi-food.htm... . But beyond that, Tata (which owns Jaguar Land Rover), Serum Institute of India (world's largest maker of vaccine including COVID vaccines), Godrej Industries, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre ...and many others are all Indian Zoroastrian enterprises. And of course, Farrokh Bulsara...also known as Freddie Mercury ! But the really interesting thing is about how they treat their dead - Zoroastrians have their dead eaten by vultures. So the Indian govt operates one of the largest vulture breeding programs in the world, specifically for this purpose. These special "Towers of Silence" exist in every major city in India - especially in Mumbai, where the active Tower of Silence sits in the middle of what is considered the most expensive piece of real estate of the world.