Ahura Mazda (Ahura Mazdā) is the Avestan
language name for a divinity exalted by Zoroaster as the one uncreated Creator, hence
God.
The Zoroastrian faith is thus described by its adherents as Mazdayasna, the
worship of Mazda. In the Avesta, "Ahura Mazda is the highest object of worship"[1], the first and most frequently
invoked divinity in the Yasna liturgy. In Zoroastrian cosmogony and tradition, all the lesser
divinities are also creations of Mazda. (eg Bundahishn III)
Ahura Mazda is 'Auramazdā'[2] in Old Persian, 'Aramazd' in Parthian[3] and Armenian (cf. also
Aramazd). Middle- and New Persian language usage varies, but 'Hormizd', 'Hormuzd', 'Ohrmazd' and 'Ormazd' are common
transliterations.
Nomenclature
'Mazda', or rather the Avestan stem-form Mazdā-, nominative Mazdå, reflects Proto-Iranian *Mazdāh. It is
generally taken to be the proper name of the deity, and like its Sanskrit cognate medhā,
means "intelligence" or "wisdom". Both the Avestan and Sanskrit words reflect Proto-Indo-Iranian *mazdhā-, from Proto-Indo-European *mn̩sdʰeh1, literally meaning "placing (dʰeh1) one's mind (mn̩-s)", hence "wise".
'Ahura' was originally an adjective meaning ahuric, characterizing a specific
Indo-Iranian entity named *asura.[4][5][6] Although traces of this figure
are still evident in the oldest texts of both India and Iran,[7] in both cultures the word eventually appears as the epithet of other
divinities.
In the Gathas (Gāθās), the hymns thought to have been composed by Zoroaster himself, the two
halves of the name are not necessarily used together, or are used interchangeably, or are used in reverse order. However, in the
younger texts of the Avesta, both Ahura and Mazda are integral parts of the name Ahura Mazda, and
which are conjoined in other old Iranian languages.
Perceived origin
Although Ahura Mazda is accepted to be the conceptual equivalent of a proto-Indo-Iranian divinity, the details are a matter of
speculation and debate. Scholarly consensus identifies a connection to the prototypical *vouruna and *mitra, but
whether Ahura Mazda is one of these two, or both together, or even a superior of the two has not been conclusively
established.
One view[8] is
that the proto-Indo-Iranian divinity is the nameless "Father Asura", that is, Varuna of the
Rigveda. In this view, Zoroastrian mazda is the equivalent of the Vedic medhira,
described in Rigveda 8.6.10 as the "(revealed) insight into the cosmic order" that
Varuna grants his devotees. It has also been suggested[9] that Ahura Mazda could be an Iranian development of the dvandvah expression
*mitra-*vouruna, with *mitra being the otherwise nameless 'Lord' (Ahura) and *vouruna being
mazda/medhira as noted above. In this constellation, Ahura Mazda is then a compound divinity in which the favorable
characteristics of *mitra negate the unfavorable qualities of *vouruna.
In another view, Ahura Mazda is seen as the Ahura par excellence, superior to both *vouruna and *mitra,
and the nameless "Father Asura" of the RigVeda is a distinct divinity (see etymology above) to whom Ahura Mazda may or may not be
related. In a development of this view,[10] the dvandvah expression *mitra-*vouruna is none other than the
archaic 'Mithra-Baga' of the Avesta. But while in the Vedas Bhaga is a minor divinity in its own
right, in proto-Indo-Iranian times this was an epithet of *vouruna's concept and in Greater Iran continued to be a cult
title for *vouruna and eventually replaced it.[11] It has also been noted that on Persepolis
fortification tablet #337, Ahura Mazda is distinct from both Mithra and the Baga.[12]
In Zoroaster's revelation
Although the principle of a creator divinity was not new to the two Indo-Iranian cultures, Zoroaster gives Ahura Mazda an
entirely new dimension by characterizing the Creator as the one uncreated God (Yasna 30.3,
45.2). "No satisfactory evidence has yet been adduced to show that, before Zoroaster, the concept of a supreme god existed among
the Iranians."[13]
Central to Zoroaster's perception of Ahura Mazda is the concept of asha, literally
"truth", and in the extended sense, the equitable law of the universe, which governed the life of Zoroaster's people, the nomadic
herdsmen of the Central Asian steppes.[14] For these, asha was the course of everything observable, the
motion of the planets and astral bodies, the progression of the seasons, the pattern of daily nomadic herdsman life, governed by
regular metronomic events such as sunrise and sunset. All physical creation (geti) was thus a product of - and ran
according to - a master plan, inherent to Ahura Mazda, and violations of the order (druj)
were violations against creation, and thus violations against Ahura Mazda.
This concept of asha versus the druj should not be confused with the good-versus-evil battle evident in western
religions, for although both forms of opposition express moral conflict, the asha versus druj concept is more
subtle and nuanced, representing, for instance, chaos (that opposes order); or 'uncreation', evident as natural decay (Avestan:
nasu) that opposes creation; or more literally 'the Lie' of Yasna 31.1 (that opposes truth, righteousness).
In Zoroaster's perception of Ahura Mazda's role as the one uncreated Creator of all (Yasna 44.7), the Creator is then not also the creator of 'druj', for as anti-creation, the druj
are not created (or not creatable, and thus - like Ahura Mazda - uncreated). "All" is therefore the "supreme benevolent
providence" (Yasna 43.11), and Ahura Mazda as the benevolent Creator of all is consequently the Creator of only the good
(Yasna 31.4). In Zoroaster's revelation, Ahura Mazda will ultimately triumph (Yasna 48.1), but cannot (or will not)
control the druj in the here and now. As such, Zoroaster did not perceive Ahura Mazda to be omnipotent. Zoroaster did not
hypostasize either good or evil (see asha
for details).
Throughout the Gathas Zoroaster emphasizes deeds and actions, for it is only through "good
thoughts, good words, good deeds" that order can be maintained, and in Zoroaster's revelation indeed the purpose of
humankind is to assist in maintaining the order. In Yasna 45.9, Ahura Mazda "has left to men's wills" to choose between
doing good (that is, good thoughts, good words and good deeds) and doing evil (bad thoughts, bad words and bad deeds). This
concept of a free will is perhaps Zoroaster's greatest contribution to religious philosophy.
In Zurvanite Zoroastrianism
In Zurvanism, a now-extinct doctrine within greater Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda was not the
transcendental God, but one of two equal-but-opposite divinities under the supremacy of Zurvan, 'Time'. This belief, which
from a Mazdaen point of view is an apostasy, rests on an interpretation of Yasna 30.3, that makes Ahura Mazda and
Angra Mainyu twin brothers that had co-existed for all Time.
Although Zurvanism appears to have thrived during the Sassanid era (226–651), no traces of it remain beyond the 10th
century. Accounts of typically Zurvanite beliefs were the first traces of Zoroastrianism to reach the west, which misled
European scholars to conclude that Zoroastrianism was a monist faith.
In present-day Zoroastrianism
In 1884, Martin Haug proposed a new interpretation of Yasna 30.3 that provided an
escape from (what was considered to be) the dualism implicit in the Gathas. According to Haug's interpretation, the "Twin
spirits" of 30.3 were Angra Mainyu and Spenta Mainyu, the former being the 'Destructive Emanation' of Ahura Mazda
and the latter being His 'Creative Emanation' (see Amesha Spenta for details on the
relationship).
In effect, the Angra Mainyu versus Spenta Mainyu theory was simply a rediscovery of the precepts of Zurvanism,
with the difference that Angra Mainyu was now not Ahura Mazda's equal, but an emanation of Him. Haug also developed the
idea further, interpreting the concept of a free will of Yasna 45.9 as an accommodation to explain where Angra
Mainyu came from since Ahura Mazda created only good. The free will, so Haug, made it possible for Angra Mainyu to
choose to be evil.
There is no trace of such philosophy in Zoroastrian tradition,[12] but Haug's interpretation was gratefully accepted by the Parsis of Bombay since it provided a defence against Christian missionaries who were attacking the Zoroastrians
for the dualism inherent to the idea of (substantiated) Evil that was as uncreated as God was. Notwithstanding the
oversight that Zoroastrianism, as an eastern religion, did not hypostatize evil as western religions did, Haug's ideas were
subsequently disseminated as a Parsi interpretation, thus corroborating the theories. Haug's ideas were so popular that they are
now almost universally accepted as doctrine.
In West-Iranian iconography
From the reign of Cyrus the Great down to Darius III, it was apparently customary for an empty chariot drawn by white horses to accompany the
Persian army. According to Herodotus, who first described the practice, this chariot was
sacred to "Zeus" who was presumably believed to position himself at the head of the army. (Ahura Mazda was frequently named
Zeus by the Greeks; Aristotle refers to Zeus-Oromasdes being opposed by Hades-Aremainius.)
The earliest reference to the use of an image to accompany devotion to Ahura Mazda is from "the 39th year of the reign of
Artaxerxes Mnemon" (c. 365 BCE) in which
a Satrap of Lydia raised a statue (according to the Greek
commentator) to "Zeus" the Lawgiver.
The worship of Ahura Mazda with accompanying images is known to have occurred during the Arsacid era (250 BCE–226 CE), but by the beginning
of the Sassanid period (226–651), the custom appears to have fallen out of favor. A few images from Sassanid times that depict "Ohrmazd", reveal
a male figure wearing a high crown.
In other religions
In Manichaeism, the name Ohrmazd Bay ("god Ahura Mazda") was used for the primal
figure Nāšā Qaḏmāyā, the "original man" through whose fall the original Light became tainted with
dark matter.
In Sogdian Buddhism, Xwrmztʔ (Sogdian was written without a consistent representation
of vowels) was the name used for the Buddhist ruler-deity Śakra. Via contacts with
Turkic-speaking peoples like the Uyghurs, this
Sogdian name came to the Mongols, who still name this deity Qormusta Tengri; Qormusta (or
Qormusda) is now a popular enough deity to appear in many contexts that are not explicitly Buddhist.
References
- ^ Dhalla
1938, p. 154.
- ^ Kent 1945,
p. 229ff.
- ^ Boyce 1983,
p. 684.
- ^ Thieme
1960, p. 308.
- ^ Gershevitch 1964, p. 23.
- ^ Kuiper
1983, p. 682.
- ^ Thieme 1960, pp. 308-309.
- ^ cf. Kuiper 1976, pp. 33ff.
- ^ Kuiper
1983, p. 683.
- ^ Boyce
2001, pp. 239-257.
- ^ Boyce
2001, pp. 243-244.
- ^ a b Boyce 1983, p. 685.
- ^ Boyce
2001, p. 243, n.18.
- ^ Boyce 1975,
pp. 1ff
Bibliography
-
Boyce, Mary (1975), History of Zoroastrianism, Vol. I, The
early period, Leiden: Brill
-
Boyce, Mary (1982), History of Zoroastrianism, Vol. II, Under the Achamenians, Leiden:
Brill
-
Boyce, Mary (1983), "Ahura Mazdā", Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 1, New York: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, pp. 684–687
-
Boyce, Mary (2001), "Mithra the King and Varuna the Master", Festschrift für Helmut Humbach zum
80., Trier: WWT, pp. 239–257
-
Dhalla, Maneckji Nusservanji (1938), History of Zoroastrianism, New York:
OUP
-
Humbach, Helmut (1991), The Gathas of Zarathushtra and the other Old Avestan texts,
Heidelberg: Winter
-
Kent, Roland G. (1945), "Old Persian Texts", Journal of Near Eastern Studies 4 (4):
228-233
-
Kuiper, Bernardus Franciscus Jacobus (1983), "Ahura", Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 1, New
York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 682–683
-
Kuiper, Bernardus Franciscus Jacobus (1976), "Ahura Mazdā 'Lord Wisdom'?", Indo-Iranian
Journal 18 (1-2): 25-42
-
Schlerath, Bernfried (1983), "Ahurānī", Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 1, New York: Routledge
& Kegan Paul, pp. 683–684
Further reading
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)