Jenny Rose. Worldmark Encyclopedia of Religious Practices. Editor: Thomas Riggs, 2nd Edition, Volume 1, Gale, 2015.
Overview
The religion now known as Zoroastrianism had its beginnings at least 3,000 years ago. It is named for an eponymous ancient Persian founder, Zarathushtra, also known as Zoroaster, from the Greek “Zoroastres.” The religion became established among Iranians before their arrival on the Iranian plateau, and survives in present-day Iran, India, and in diasporic communities around the world. The earliest texts of the religion are the Gathas, hymns ascribed to Zarathushtra. The focus of praise in the Gathas is Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord, who created the universe and established asha, or “order, right, and truth,” in both the “thought” (spiritual) and “physical” worlds. The followers of “Good Religion” are called ashavan (“maintainers of order, right and truth”). The Gathas exhort each person, male and female alike, to reflect with a clear mind in differentiating between the path of good and that of evil.
Early supporters of Mazda worship, as promulgated by Zarathushtra, are thought to have lived on the central Asian steppes prior to migration onto the Iranian plateau, which took place sometime in the early first millennium BCE. The kings of the first Iranian empire, members of the Achaemenid dynasty (550-330 BCE), were Mazda worshippers. After the invasion of Alexander the Great (356-323 BCE) and a brief period of Greek rule, the second Iranian empire, that of the Parthians (c. 247 BCE-224 CE), also adhered to the religion, as did the Sasanian dynasty (224-651 CE), under whom the Mazdean religion became more institutionalized and systematized. After the fall of the Sasanians to the Arab Muslims in the seventh century CE, the religion and its practitioners were demoted in status, but it has survived in Iran into the 21st century. Some Iranian Zoroastrians chose to migrate to India, where the first wave of immigrants became known as Parsis (because they came from Pars province), while those who arrived from Iran in recent centuries are known as Iranis.
In the modern period, Zoroastrians have dispersed from Iran and India and spread throughout the world. Although the worldwide population is now only about 120,000, the impact of this tradition on the formation of Iranian culture and of other Near Eastern religions, including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, has been enormous.
History
The internal sources for reconstructing the history of the Zoroastrian religion before the fall of the Sasanians are both textual and archaeological, although the interpretation of both elements tends to be contested. The surviving literature in Avestan, an Old Iranian language belonging to the Indo-European language family, is the starting point.
According to one tradition, Zarathushtra lived 258 years before Alexander the Great, which has led some scholars to date him to the sixth century BCE. That date is questionable, however, and most scholars now believe that the religion originated in the middle to late part of the second millennium BCE, following the separation of the Indo-Iranian peoples. There is no certainty about the original homeland of the religion, although an Avestan reference to the Airyana Vaejah (“the place where the Iranians live”) as having ten months of cold winter indicates that it was located somewhere in central Asia. The modern central Asian republics of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan all claim to be the locus of Zarathushtra’s original teaching;he is also connected by tradition to Balkh, in northern Afghanistan, as well as to the region of Sistan in southeastern Iran. Later lore also associates Zarathushtra with sites in northwestern Iran.
The earliest source of information about the religion is the Gathas, long poems of praise loosely divided into five sections according to meter. The Gathas are traditionally ascribed to Zarathushtra, and his name appears in them. Because the Gathas are manthras—verbal expressions of a spiritual insight—they do not present much historical information. Their setting, however, seems to reflect a semi-nomadic pastoralism, with many references to cattle and those who care for, or are cruel to, the herd. In addition, the Gathas also mention individuals with names denoted by the Avestan suffix aspa, meaning “horse,” such as Jamaspa, Vishtaspa, and Haechataspa. Vishtaspa was a powerful figure who supported Zarathushtra. Evidence of pastorialism can also be seen in the name Zarathushtra: although some translate it as “golden light,” its most accurate meaning is “one who possesses old camels.”
The Indo-Iranians separated into two distinct groups (the Indo-Aryans and the Iranians) at the end of the third millennium BCE. However, their earliest texts contain some similar religious praxes and concepts. For instance, the Rig Veda, the most ancient text of the Indo-Aryan religious tradition, shows significant parallels to the Gathas and parts of the Iranian Avesta (a collection of sacred texts in the Avestran language), particularly the notion of the cosmos as having an order—referred to as rta by the Indo-Aryans and as asha by the Iranians—which provides a criterion for judging actions. A major difference between the two textual traditions, however, is the collective name for the divinities. In the Gathas, the daevas are false gods, whose bad choices and evil inclination are castigated, and who are demonized in the Avesta, whereas in the Rig Veda and the later Hindu tradition, the daevas are divinities to whom reverence is due. At some point, the Iranians demoted that category of divinities and elevated other divinities called ahuras (“lords”) in the Old Avestan language. In texts written in the later Avestan language, also known as Young Avestan, it is the yazatas (“beings worthy of worship”) who are pitted against the daevas. Several Vedic deities, including Indra, are demonized in later Iranian sources. Another difference between the Vedas and the Avestan texts is the Iranian worship of a single god, Ahura Mazda.
“Ahura Mazda” is a two-part name: ahura is used as a title meaning “lord” and mazda is an agent noun meaning “the one who keeps in mind” or “the one who is wise.” There remains contention among scholars as to whether the earliest form of Mazda worship can be identified as Zoroastrianism. This is partly because the name Zarathushtra appears in no tangible Iranian documentation until centuries after Persian king Darius I (ruled 522-486 BCE) had claimed that his rise to power was due to the support he had received from Ahura Mazda. It has recently been demonstrated, however, that the phraseology and outlook of Darius is similar to that of the Avesta, although his inscriptions are of a different genre and language. This connection between the inscriptions of Darius and the concepts of the Avesta is close enough for the ancient Persian religion of the time to be understood as belonging within the framework of evolving Zoroastrianism.
Iranians settled on the Iranian plateau in the early first millennium BCE. It is not until information concerning the Achaemenid Empire, founded by Cyrus II (Cyrus the Great; ruled c. 559-30 BCE) in around 550 BCE that the Iranian plateau, and the culture and religion of the Persians living in its southwest region, are brought more clearly into the light of history. The inscriptions left by Achaemenid kings from Darius I onward articulate a consciousness of Iranian identity and testify to the devotion of the royal house to Ahura Mazda. They also suggest a familiarity with the view of the world presented in the Avesta. The Achaemenid Empire was noted in both contemporary biblical and Greek literature for its respect of the religious traditions of its subject peoples. Cyrus the Great is especially celebrated in the biblical books of Isaiah, 2 Chronicles, and Ezra for his role in liberating Jews from Babylonian rule and allowing those who had been deported by the Babylonians to return to Jerusalem in the Persian satrapy of Yehud, in order to rebuild the Temple that the Babylonians had destroyed in 586 BCE. A similar respect for the gods, sanctuaries, and cult practices of other Near Eastern religions appears on the Cyrus cylinder, a clay brick that was inscribed as a foundation deposit for the main temple precinct in Babylon after Cyrus took the city in 539 BCE. Evidence indicates that, under ancient Persian rule, local religions were generally granted a degree of autonomy for the sake of maintaining social order.
Two features of Achaemenid inscriptions are central to reconstructing the religion of the empire. First, Ahura Mazda was the sole god, divinity invoked by name in the earliest royal inscriptions of Darius I and Xerxes I (ruled 486-65 BCE), although Darius also refers to “the other gods who are,” and Xerxes castigates those places where the daevas are worshipped. Clay tablets found in the fortifications of Persepolis, dating to around 500 BCE, contain information about offerings made to Ahura Mazda and to several of the yazatas. A later Achaemenid king, Artaxerxes II (ruled 405-358 BCE) invoked three divinities: Ahura Mazda, Anahita, and Mithra. It is difficult to know what this elevation in status of the yazatas Anahita and Mithra means, but it may relate to their association with water and fire, respectively. Writing around the end of the reign of Artaxerxes II, the Greek historian Dinon noted that the Persians’ only images of gods were fire and water. Second, the Achaemenid inscriptions make no mention of Zarathushtra. Because the inscriptions are brief and largely formulaic, this should not be over interpreted, but it is a reminder that the Achaemenids did not proclaim their worship of Ahura Mazda in Zarathushtra’s name. The fact that the name Zoroaster appears in Greek writings during the Achaemenid period is evidence that knowledge of him had been conveyed to the western edge of the Achaemenid Empire, including Ionia, the region of Anatolia inhabited by Greeks.
According to contemporary Greek sources, particularly the mid-fifth-century historian Herodotus, the Achaemenids rose to prominence by defeating another western Iranian people, the Medes. Herodotus notes that the Medes included a hereditary priestly tribe known as the Magi. This term also was used by the Achaemenids for their own priestly officiants, who played an important political role both at the court and throughout the empire.
Herodotus’s description of religious practices in the western part of the Persian Empire serves as an invaluable source of information. He reported that the Persians did not erect statues, altars, or temples to their gods but that they worshipped their chief god, Zeus (undoubtedly Ahura Mazda), on the tops of mountains and also worshipped the sun, the moon, the earth, fire, water, and winds as their other deities, suggesting a devotion to those particular Iranian yazatas.
The Achaemenids left significant archaeological remains, the earliest at Pasargadae, a palace complex constructed by Cyrus the Great on the Dasht-e Morghab plain in southwestern Iran. There, excavations revealed a “sacred precinct” with two large limestone plinths, as well as the remains of two or three fire holders. It has been suggested that a fire holder would have been placed on top of one of the plinths and that the king would have climbed the steps onto the other plinth to offer worship, just as he is depicted in the reliefs over the tombs of ancient Persian kings from Darius I onward. The symbol of the fire holder is also found on cylinder seals from Persepolis, another important Achaemenid site. Persepolis was established by Darius I as a royal capital of the region of Pars and functioned as a central court until the conquest of Alexander the Great in 330 BCE, when the Greeks razed it to the ground. That terrace palace complex was devoted to the celebration of imperial rule over the many diverse subject peoples. Stone friezes on the steps up to the apadana (great audience hall) at Persepolis depict tribute-bearers from across the empire bringing gifts to the king.
Another aspect of the Zoroastrian religion is reflected in the funerary practices of the Achaemenid kings. Cyrus the Great’s tomb is a freestanding stone mausoleum atop a six-stepped ziggurat-like stone plinth, and the tombs of later kings from Darius I onward were carved directly into the rock face of cliffs. Young Avestan texts stipulated that the elements of fire, earth, and water should not be polluted by “dead matter,” particularly a corpse; interment in solid rock would prevent such pollution. The impetus not to pollute fire, earth, or water led to the practice of exposure of the dead rather than cremation or burial—a practice that Herodotus remarked was continued by the Magi and some male Persians.
After the fall of the Achaemenids to Alexander and his Greek troops in 330 BCE, Mazda worship ceased to have imperial sponsorship but survived in the region of Pars and other parts of the empire during Seleucid (Greek) rule, which began in 312 BCE. Iranian peoples living in the former satrapies to the east and northeast of the empire continued to practice the religion, as did those in Anatolia to the west. The northeastern satrapy of the Parthians, stimulated by the arrival of other Iranians from the steppes, threw off Greek rule in the mid-third century and rose to form a second Iranian empire, the Parthian Empire (c. 247 BCE-224 CE). At its height, Parthian rule extended from western Mesopotamia as far as India. The dynasty was named after an eponymous leader, Arshak, which may relate to a Babylonian form of the Achaemenid name Artaxsaça (Greek: Artaxerxes), meaning “one who rules through order.” Inscribed Parthian ostraca (potsherds) from Nisa in Turkmenistan provide evidence of the continued use by Parthians of Avestan personal names and of the Avestan calendar, with months and days named for Ahura Mazda and the yazatas. The ostraca from Nisa also refer to sanctuaries and priests, including those attached to temples and those who tend the fire. In the middle of the Parthian period, Strabo (63 BCE-24 CE) wrote about the development of fire temples and the rituals of the Magi in his region of Anatolia, and Plutarch (46-120 CE) provided the earliest written summary of Zoroastrian eschatology. The descriptions by these two observers of the religion are valuable sources of information, which support the notion that the Parthians maintained many of the religious practices of their precursors.
The establishment of the Sasanian Empire (224-651 CE) brought the institutionalization of the Zoroastrian church. With the rise of the Sasanian dynasty, the Zoroastrian priesthood emerged as an ally of the royal house and an embodiment of Iranian imperial ideology. The Sasanians came to power in Fars (formerly Pars) province, the homeland of the ancient Persians. While historical memory of the Achaemenid Empire had dissolved into myth, the Sasanians seem to have considered themselves as the carriers of an ancient Iranian glory. They centralized control of the Iranian plateau and from their western capital of Ctesiphon posed a constant threat to the Byzantine Empire. Given the potentially disruptive presence of universalizing religions that had taken root within the boundaries of the empire—specifically Christianity, Buddhism, and Manichaeism—the Sasanians relied on the official Zoroastrian church to support the ideology that a symbiotic relationship existed between rule and religion; that is, that the two institutions should mutually support each other if the empire is to prosper. The notion that the “divine fortune or glory” (Avestan: khwarenah; Persian: farr) rested with the monarch, alongside Avestan lore relating to the patronage of the religion by the ruler Vishtaspa, provided a prototype for this relationship.
Under the Sasanians, the organized priestly hierarchy had several official titles for priests, including herbad (“teaching priest”) and mowbed (“chief priest”), the latter apparently with higher ecclesiastical authority. It is likely that state-supported priests conducted the religious life of the community, including the daily practice of the yasna, or the liturgy. Important in Zoroastrianism was the construction of fire temples, known as atashkadehs (“house of fire”), examples of which have since been discovered in present-day Iran, as well as in non-Iranian lands ruled by the Sasanians, presumably for the Iranians who lived there. In their simplest form, fire temples were single, square, domed buildings built on four arched walls known as chahar taqs (“four arches”). The late third-century CE inscriptions of a chief priest named Kerdir tell how he founded many Vahram fires, named for the yazata Verethragna (Middle Persian: Vahram), which means “victory.” This remains the name for the most important fire temples in India and Iran, which are known as an Atash Bahram, or “Victory Fire.” Individual sacred fires were sometimes endowed by and named after the monarch or members of the monarch’s close family. According to the inscriptions of Kerdir, and later Arab Muslim historiographies, the Sasanian dynasty was particularly connected with a fire temple dedicated to the yazata Anahita at Estakhr, located near Persepolis.
It is assumed that the establishment of a Zoroastrian ecclesiastical hierarchy led to the development of a religious orthodoxy, which is reflected in Middle Persian inscriptions from the third century CE, and particularly in the Middle Persian Zoroastrian texts from the sixth to tenth centuries. These sources provide evidence of heterodox movements and heresies. The most significant and troubling of these challenges to the established Zoroastrian religion was Manichaeism, a religion that was founded in the early third century CE within the boundaries of the Persian Empire. The eponymous founder, Mani, taught that the world was the battleground between good, represented by a divine light, and evil, found in the material world; it thus rejected the material world, arguing that good could be released from its entanglement with matter through continual purification. A couple of the earlier Sasanian rulers took an interest in Manichaeism but, at the urging of the high priest Kerdir, Mani was imprisoned. He died in prison in 276, and the Manichean religion then largely disappeared from within Iran but remained active in northern Egypt (then part of the Roman Empire), as well as in central Asia and China.
There seems to have been another heterodox movement from Iran that focused on Zurvan, a remote god of “time” (from the Avestan word zruwan), as the primal creator. According to Sasanian-era Armenian and Syriac accounts, one myth related that Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu were the offspring of Zurvan. Recent scholars have expressed strong reservations about whether this construction was regarded as a heresy by Zoroastrians or as an acceptable interpretation of existing “orthodox” cosmology. Middle Persian texts do not refer to any organized system of belief centered on Zurvan, and the Middle Persian Zoroastrian text the Denkard (Acts of the Religion) rejects as false teaching the idea of the “twinning” of Ohrmazd and Ahriman as brothers from one womb.
Throughout the Sasanian era, Zoroastrianism was primarily the religion of the Iranians, although Armenia, which had been a satrapy of the Achaemenids and then the Parthians, adhered to the Zoroastrian religion before converting to Christianity in 301 CE. During the late-Parthian and Sasanian periods, Armenia became a buffer state between the Roman and Iranian empires. Under the Sasanian king Yazdegird II (ruled 438-57 CE), there were several attempts to persuade Armenia to return to the Zoroastrian religion (and, by extension, to pledge fealty to the Sasanian Empire), but Armenian identity remained closely tied to Christianity. Christian communities had been established in Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia by the late second century CE, and although Zoroastrianism continued to be the official religion of the Sasanian Empire, there were significant numbers of converts to Christianity among the Iranian population.
A later heterodox movement was led by Mazdak, a Zoroastrian activist who, in the late fifth century CE, proclaimed what seems to have been a social revolutionary movement against the Sasanian state and its elitist social order, including that of the priesthood. The Sasanian crown prince Khosrow I (ruled 531-79 CE) suppressed the movement, executing Mazdak and many of his followers in 524 CE.
The death of Yazdegird III, the last Sasanian king, in 651 CE brought the Iranian plateau under Arab Muslim rule, initiating the conversion of the area to Islam. In the first century of Muslim rule, northeastern Iran became a center for opposition movements to the Umayyad caliphate based in Damascus, in present-day Syria. These movements included recent Iranian converts to Islam, as well as Arab Shia Muslims. Unrest continued in the region, with periodic local revolts, often accompanied by anticipation of a savior-type figure along the lines of Zoroastrian eschatological expectation. The Abbasid dynasty (c. 750-1258 CE), which succeeded the Umayyads, moved its capital from Damascus to Baghdad (in present-day Iraq), and this was accompanied by an increasing assimilation of Persian culture.
The status of Zoroastrians under Arab Muslim rule was clarified by the caliph Umar, who declared that Zoroastrians were “People of the Book,” along with Jews and Christians, who would be protected by the Islamic government if they abided by the rules of their status and paid the jizya, a poll tax levied on non-Muslims. The social position of the Zoroastrian community became increasingly difficult, however, especially as conversion to Islam began to take hold.
According to the legend preserved in a late 16th-century book, Qesse-ye Sanjan (Story of Sanjan;), a group of Zoroastrians from Pars province fled to northeastern Iran, where they lived for a century and, eventually, led by a priest who was frustrated by the declining fortunes of the community, left the country by boat from the Persian Gulf. They arrived at the coast of the Gujarat region in northwestern India and won the support of the local ruler. These early Parsis (Zoroastrians “from Pars”) founded the city of Sanjan. They are said to have travelled with one of the sacred fires that they had rescued from Iran and founded the highest level of fire temple for this fire, named Iranshah (“King of Iran”). The fire was later moved to the Gujarati town of Udvada, where it survives as one of the most holy fires of the religion. The Parsis flourished in the seaport communities and inland rural villages of Gujarat. When the British acquired the region of Bombay (present-day Mumbai) from the Portuguese in 1662, they encouraged the Parsis to settle there, and the majority of the Indian Zoroastrian community is now located around Mumbai, although there are still communities in Gujarat and in parts of the northern Indian subcontinent, including present-day Pakistan.
Many Zoroastrians remained in Iran, however, where the religion survived, especially in the central cities of Yazd and Kerman, located on the edge of the desert. The Iranian Zoroastrian priesthood remained the authoritative source of the tradition through the mid-18th century, and Parsis in India consulted Zoroastrian priests in Iran for guidance in their religion up until this time. This relationship changed in the 19th century, when Parsis, who had become wealthy through shipbuilding and mercantile activities during British rule in India, were able to support their own educational and religious institutions. In British India, the Parsis became a financially and politically powerful minority group, able to exercise increasing influence on their surrounding environment and society, as well as to support their coreligionists in Iran. Iranian Zoroastrians who migrated to India in the modern period are known as “Iranis” and constitute a distinct subgroup of Indian Zoroastrianism.
As early as the mid-19th century, opportunities for education and the development of trade encouraged some Parsis to move to other parts of the British Empire. Several moved to the United Kingdom for business or education, and others immigrated to Sri Lanka, Singapore, Hong Kong, and East and South Africa, although most left East Africa during the political upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s. They also ventured to China in pursuit of business opportunities. In the 20th century, both Parsis and Iranian Zoroastrians began to settle in other regions of the world, particularly North America and Australasia. The Iranian Revolution of 1979, and the establishment of Iran as an Islamic Republic, led to a significant exodus of Zartoshtis (Iranian Zoroastrians) to western European countries, the United States, and Canada. In the early 21st century, there are approximately 120,000 Zoroastrians worldwide, with India as the home of the largest number (about 61,000).
Central Doctrines
The concept of religious doctrine is one that fits better with the Christian tradition than any other. The Zoroastrian tradition has few examples of concise, systematized expressions of belief. One early Zoroastrian statement of faith is the short Young Avestan text known as the Fravarane. The statement begins with the phrase, “Let me profess that I am a Mazda worshipper,” immediately followed by the expression “Zarathushtrish,” which may be translated as “a Zoroastrian” but which is closer in meaning to “a supporter, or follower, of Zarathushtra.” The declaration should be understood as: “I will choose to worship Mazda, as Zarathushtra did.” As such, it is in keeping with the primary focus of Zoroastrian praise and worship from the Gathas onward—that is, Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord who generates the good creations in both “thought” and “physical” forms.
Ahura Mazda is accessible to humans through the menog (“spiritual” or “thought”) world, which was the initial form of the world prior to the generation of the getig, or “living,” existence—the arena in which the struggle between good and evil is played out. Both existences are constantly being threatened by evil, and it is an ethical mandate for humans who dwell in this material world to participate in the fight by mindfully choosing good over evil. This tension between “order, right and truth” and that which is “chaos, confusion, and the lie” pervades the Gathas nd the Young Avestan texts, as well as the Achaemenid inscriptions.
The concept of Ahura Mazda as the sole creator of the universe in a state of perfection and goodness continues through the Avesta into Middle Persian texts, and raises the thorny question of how to account for the presence of evil. Either Ahura Mazda is responsible for the presence and power of evil in the world and is omnipotent as well as omniscient, or evil has a completely separate source from Ahura Mazda, who is entirely good but therefore not able to control evil fully, since their two essences are mutually exclusive. The latter is the traditional position presented in most of the texts, although this has been challenged at various points in history, including the modern period.
The language of the Gathas identifies the essence of evil as being completely other than that of good. The former is characterized as aka (“bad”), angra (“dark” or “destructive”), duzdah (“maleficent”), and drugvant (“inherently deceptive” or “possessed by the lie”), whereas the latter is spenta (“life giving” or “beneficent”) and vohu (“good”), realizing the vahishta manah (“best thought”). Several passages in the Gathas suggest an initial opposition of choice between two fundamentally different cosmological forces, or “inspirations”: the one is “life giving,” the other “evil,” bringing “not life.” This tension between “life giving” and “not life” is more than a moment in the past and is an ongoing process. In the Gathas, it is through the “false gods” (daevas) that the lie (druj) comes into being, denoting that evil is not limited to humanity but operates in the broader “thought” or “spiritual” sphere. It is through the bad choices of both the daevas and those who “follow the lie” that evil is able to latch onto the material world.
Although the Gathas present no direct negative opponent to Ahura Mazda, statements in the later Avestan and Middle Persian texts indicate that the normative Zoroastrian position came to emphasize an immediate opposition between Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu (Middle Persian: Ahriman), the evil spirit, at both a metaphysical and physical level, although the two by their nature could not exist in the same spiritual or physical space. For this reason, Ahura Mazda deliberately created the physical world as the domain where the battle could take place, knowing that Angra Mainyu would be defeated through the material aid of human beings. For Zoroastrians then, the physical world is an important locus for the religion—a place where good, creative acts are to take place, not acts of asceticism or avoidance.
The notion of a clear separation between the respective sources for good and evil seems to have had a significant impact upon neighboring religions, particularly in terms of the development of concepts relating to angels and demons, and to a place of rewards or punishment, as well as to the anticipated restoration of wholeness or perfection to the world after evil has been dispelled.
In the Gathas, Ahura Mazda interacts with and works through a number of abstract entities, which may be understood as emanations of divine qualities—such as asha (“order”), vohu manah (“good mind”), or sraosha (“readiness to listen”). These qualities are not only available to Ahura Mazda but also related to human faculties, through which Ahura Mazda and human beings connect to one another. The entities are not systematized or given a collective name in the Gathas, but in the Old Avestan Yasna Haptanghaiti (“worship in seven sections”) they are referred to as the Spenta Amesha (“life-giving/beneficent immortals”). In one Young Avestan hymn, they are listed as a group of six Amesha Spentas (“immortals who are beneficent”), comprising the named entities Vohu Manah (“good thought”), Asha (“order, right, truth”), Khshathra Vairya (“desired rule”), Spenta Armaiti (“beneficent right-mindedness”), Haurvatat (“wholeness”), and Ameretat (“immortality” or “undyingness”). Ahura Mazda, at the apex of the group, is later replaced by Spenta Mainyu, the “life-giving spirit/inspiration” that is the connecting link between Ahura Mazda and humanity.
In their abstraction, these seven good agents can be understood as the means by which Ahura Mazda interacts with both the conceptual and the material world. In the Gathas, Vohu Manah, Spenta Mainyu, and Spenta Armaiti (all described as “fathered” by Ahura Mazda) seem to have aided the communication between Ahura Mazda and Zarathushtra. All seven of the Amesha Spentas came to be linked with various elements of the material creation, which are also represented in both inner and outer rituals. This connection took the form of guardianship of the natural elements so that, in the Middle Persian Bundahishn (Creation) Khshathra Vairya was associated with the sky (originally thought to have been made of stone, then metal), Spenta Armaiti with the earth, Haurvatat with water, Ameretat with plant life, Vohu Manah with cattle, Asha with fire, and Spenta Mainyu with humanity. In the Bundahishn, this organization of good forces is arrayed against a counter-organization of seven evil forces headed by Angra Mainyu.
A number of other yazatas (“beings worthy of worship”) are also active in the world, most of whom are praised in individual yashts (Young Avestan hymns). The 21 yashts present a world in which Ahura Mazda is aided by a number of yazatas, who hypostatize abstract qualities (such as Mithra, yazata of the contract; Verethragna, yazata of victory; and the fravashi (the “pre-souls of the faithful”), or natural elements, including Aban (the waters), Mah (the moon); and Khorshed (the sun).
These yashts belong to an Indo-European genre of oral, formulaic poetry, which would have been memorized and performed rather than written down; their wording was probably composed and improvised over an extensive period of time. Some of the yashts are presented as spoken by Ahura Mazda to Zarathushtra; the Tishtar yasht is one example. The yashts appear to be connected with the development of the Zoroastrian liturgical calendar, a cycle of months and days named after Ahura Mazda, the Amesha Spentas and yazatas. A 12-month, 30-day calendar was in existence during the Achaemenid period and is the model for the calendar that survives, with some modifications, to the present day. The hymns to the yazatas are recited by the laity on the days assigned to their associated divine beings, and the yasht to haoma (a sacred plant) is recited on a daily basis by priests when they perform the yasna ceremony.
The yashts delineate the beneficent activity of the various yazatas and preserve some narrative material relating to the ancient history and mythology of the Iranians, including stories of heroes and rulers who vie for power and who defend Iranians against their enemies, known as the Turanians. Collectively, alongside the Young Avestan text Videvdad, the yashts sketch a coherent epic history that features the arrival and activity of Zarathushtra in the world and outlines the unfolding of the future. This scheme is systematized in the Middle Persian Zoroastrian text the Bundahishn, where history is divided into three main eras. The first era is that of “creation” (Middle Persian: bundahishn), when Ahura Mazda (Middle Persian: Ohrmazd) establishes first the “thought” (Middle Persian: menog), or spiritual, world and, from that, the “physical” (Middle Persian: getig), or living, world, including the seven aspects of sky, water, earth, plant, animal, human and fire. Both forms of existence are in a state of perfection. The second period is that of “mixture” (Middle Persian: gumezishn), when evil infiltrates and corrupts the good creations. According to the Bundahishn, Ahriman pierces the shell of the sky to invade the living world, setting the sun in motion so that “limited” (historical) time began and darkness falls, bringing salt to water; upheaval to the earth; disease and death to the plant, animal, and humanity; and smoke to fire. At this point, the yazatas act to save creation by preserving the seed of all living things and enabling them to be purified and reintegrated into the material world.
The birth of Zarathushtra is a turning point in the struggle between good and evil during the time of mixture. According to another Middle Persian Zoroastrian text, the Denkard (Acts of the Religion), it is Zarathushtra’s revelation that guarantees the eventual triumph of good over evil. His legend begins with the miracles connected with his birth—including the light that glowed brightly around his pregnant mother and then himself, and his escape from attempts by demons to kill him—and continues with his reception of revelation, his early teaching, his defeat of enemies, and his kindness to animals. Zarathushtra’s alliance with Vishtaspa, who becomes the first patron of Mazda worship, lays the groundwork for the spread of Zoroastrianism. According to Middle Persian legend, Zarathushtra was killed during a Turanian attack by a priest of a rival cult. The Bundahishn describes how each of the next three millennia following the death of Zarathushtra brings a saoshyant (“one who will be strong”), born of a virgin who has bathed in Lake Hamun in the region of Sistan (southeastern Iran), where the seed of Zarathushtra is preserved.
The concept of the saoshyant, which occurs in the Gathas, continued to have central significance within the eschatological schema. In the Gathas, the term appears in the singular and could refer to Zarathushtra, but it also occurs in the plural, denoting the possibility of several future benefactors of the religion, who will combine their knowledge with practical action to dispel evil. Some Young Avestan texts allude to a final saoshyant, whose arrival will benefit the whole material world and will bring about the ultimate defeat of evil. In Middle Persian Zoroastrian texts, the arrival of this last saoshyant brings in the time of judgment, when the dead are raised and judged and Ahriman and his cohorts are utterly defeated. This final era is one of separation and resolution (Middle Persian: wizarishn), marking the end of “limited” time, when evil is removed from the world once and for all, and the world is returned to its pristine state of wholeness and “undyingness.” This transformative moment of “perfecting the world” (Middle Persian: frashegird), or “final renovation,” is marked by the performance of a final yasna led by Ahura Mazda.
Until this time of final judgment, each soul at the end of its life is said to arrive at “the crossing place of reckoning,” (Avestan: chinvat pereto). The Gathas allude to the fate of the good and the bad “at the end”; those who bring benefit to the world will end up in the “house of song,” the “house of good thought,” and the “best existence”, but those who bring chaos and disorder will find themselves as guests in the “house of the lie,” the “house of worst thought,” and “the worst existence.” In later Avestan texts, the place of reckoning is where the individual soul meets the yazatas Mithra, Sraosha, and Rashnu. The soul’s thoughts, words, and deeds appear in the form of a beautiful or ugly woman, depending on whether they are good or bad. Those whose good conduct outweighs the bad take three steps across the divide (by the time of the Middle Persian texts this is depicted as a wide bridge) to arrive in the realm of infinite lights, where Ahura Mazda dwells. Those who have been evil fall off the bridge, which has become as thin and sharp as a sword or narrow as a hair’s breadth, down into the darkness below. One Middle Persian text describes how those whose good and bad conduct is evenly balanced dwell in an intermediate region where there is neither joy nor torment, only subtle changes in the atmosphere between warm and cool. In the same text hell is described as dangerous, frightening, and evil smelling. Although full of the wicked, hell is so silent and dark that each soul feels it is entirely alone. This fate exists as a postmortem state for the individual only until the time when those suffering in hell complete their torments, all evil is cleansed from the world, and all receive the rewards of a transformed world.
Moral Code of Conduct
The Gathic concept of the ashavan—the man or woman who upholds order, right, and truth—contains the expectation that the individual will pursue the straight path at all times, while aware of the forces of confusion and deception that can twist that path into an obstacle course. The Old Avestan maxim “good thoughts, good words, good deeds” underlines the deeply ethical basis of the religion. Zoroastrians believe that the purpose of human existence is to constantly promote good, so as to keep evil at bay and to lead to its eventual defeat.
A Middle Persian Zoroastrian catechism called Chitag Andarz i Poryotkeshan (The Selected Counsels of the Ancient Sages) summarizes what every Zoroastrian should understand of his or her faith. It states that each person is a created being, belonging to Ahura Mazda not Angra Mainyu, to the yazatas not the devs (the Middle Persian form of Avestan daeva), and that Ahura Mazda’s kingdom is undying, whereas Angra Mainyu will be destroyed. The duty of every Mazda worshipper is to keep the faith in the “Good Religion,” always discerning goodness from evil and bringing increase to the world, through marrying and having children, cultivating the earth, treating livestock justly, and spending time studying the religion and attending the fire temple, as well as at home eating, resting, and being hospitable. There is a special premium placed upon the cultivation of the land and the care of livestock. This attitude is reflected in the observations of European travelers in both Iran and India during the 17th and 18th centuries. These Europeans comment on the agricultural vocation of the Zoroastrians in both countries. The function of humans while in the “living” world is to participate in similar creative activity to that of Ahura Mazda.
Also important is the cultivation of individual and civic virtues. The virtues called asha (“order, right, and truth”) are central; they entail upholding the good order of the world and avoiding lying (the great opponent of order). Herodotus noted that one of the three things a Persian boy was taught, alongside riding a horse and shooting a bow, was to tell the truth. Education and the quest for knowledge are also important, as is bringing practical and material benefit to all living creatures, especially humans who are in need. The Old Avestan prayer Ahuna Vairya speaks of upholding the good creation and basing one’s thought and action on the guiding model established by Ahura Mazda, who is “pastor for the poor.”
Sacred Books
The central texts for all Zoroastrians are the Gathas, the “songs” identified as the utterances of Zarathushtra. The Gathas represent the most ancient form of the Avestan language, referred to as Old Avestan. There are a few other texts in Old Avestan, including the Yasna Haptanghaiti (Worship in Seven Sections) and two prayers that are attached to the Gathas and are still recited by Zoroastrians daily. The Gathas were preserved orally for many centuries, until they were written down in the form that exists now, at the center of the Yasna, the main liturgical text of the religion. Most of the Yasna was composed in Young Avestan, a later form of the language.
The yashts form a separate corpus of Young Avestan texts. These “hymns of praise” to Iranian yazatas (“beings worthy of worship”) were compiled into a prayer book known as the Khordeh Avesta (Short Avesta) along with various other important prayers. Another separate Young Avestan text is the Videvdad (also known as the Vendidad), meaning “the law dispelling the demons.” The Videvdad begins and ends with ancient Iranian mythical narratives about the beginning and end of the world and contains rules for combatting the disorder and destruction brought by “dead matter” (bodily excreta or death itself). The Videvdad is recited during one occasionally performed ritual, which includes a night-time recitation by priests of the text of the Videvdad interspersed with that of the Yasna and another text known as the Visperad. This ceremony, which takes place through the night, is intended to remove evil from the physical world and to heal both existences. There are also a number of smaller texts that function as liturgical and ritual guides for the priesthood and laity.
Opinion differs among modern Zoroastrians as to the importance of non-Gathic texts. The fact that the Gathas and the most ancient prayers, as well as the Yasna Haptanghaiti, have all been preserved at the core of the longer 72-section liturgy (Yasna) indicates that, from an early date, the Old Avestan texts formed a liturgical core of Zoroastrian praxis. The remainder of the Yasna contains materials in Young Avestan, and the entirety of the yasna performance is thought by traditionalist Zoroastrians to be effective in keeping away the forces of evil until the final renovation. The traditionalist perspective is that Ahura Mazda remains the supreme God but has many divine beings that help keep the balance toward the good. These Amesha Spentas (the “immortals who are life giving/beneficent”) and yazatas are often translated into English as “archangels and angels,” respectively. For some reformist Zoroastrians, however, the Gathas are the only authoritative texts of the religion, and any reverence to individualized yazatas or hypostatized Amesha Spentas is understood as a challenge to the supremacy of Ahura Mazda. From this Gatha-only perspective, these entities are conceived of as qualities of Ahura Mazda, which can be emulated by humans, and all post-Gathic texts as of historical interest but of minimal value for the spiritual progress of modern Zoroastrians.
Zoroastrian textual tradition holds that all these texts began to be retrieved in the Parthian period (c. 247 BCE-224 CE) and were eventually compiled into a corpus and written down in a special script based on Imperial Aramaic sometime toward the end of Sasanian rule (224-651 CE). The collection originally contained 21 nasks, or “bundles,” of scripture and was known as the “Avesta,” which is best translated as “praise” or “sacred utterance.” Both Old and Young Avestan had ceased to be living languages at this point. Much of the Avesta was lost during the conquest of Iran by the Arab Muslims, beginning in the seventh century CE. Only one book, the Videvdad, appears to have remained intact, but remnants of some of the other collections survive. Several Middle Persian commentaries dating to around the ninth century CE claim to summarize and interpret the material of the Avesta, including some of that which has been lost.
Sacred Symbols
The most ancient symbol identified with Mazda worship is that of fire. One passage in the Gathas associates Ahura Mazda with the sun, the greatest cosmic fire. Both Avestan and Middle Persian Zoroastrian texts allude to fire as emblematic of the order of Ahura Mazda that pervades the world. In the Yasna Haptanghaiti the ritual fire is “the fire of Mazda Ahura” and “his most beneficent spirit,” indicating that Ahura Mazda is somehow present within it. Fire is not, however, the object of Zoroastrian worship, even though outsiders from the time of the Greek historian Herodotus have often described it in such terms.
Reliefs carved above the tombs of the ancient Persian kings from Darius I onward show the king standing on top of a stepped plinth facing a fire holder with a blazing fire on another plinth. The king holds his hand up toward the fire in a gesture of reverence. Actual examples of such plinths have been discovered at Cyrus the Great’s palace complex at Pasargadae along with fragments of fire holders, suggesting that the Achaemenids held fire to be sacred from the beginning of their rule. Several seals from Persepolis and remnants of fire holders from elsewhere throughout the Empire point to the centrality of the motif of fire to ancient Persian religious ideology and practice.
The tomb reliefs portraying the king before the fire include another ancient motif above the scene, which has become an important symbol in modern times. It is the image of a figure holding a ring of power and rising out of a winged solar disc. The figure seems to be an emblem of the “divine glory or fortune” bestowed upon Iranian rulers, which is known in the Avesta as the khwarenah and in modern Persian as the farr. It first appears in a Persian context on Darius I’s relief at Bisutun and is then found on the buildings at Persepolis, as well as on cylinder seals. It is currently called the Fravahar, from the Avestan fravashi, the term for the “pre-soul” of Mazda worshippers. The image did not recur in Iranian representation until the mid-19th century, when it was rediscovered and began to be replicated on fire temples, along with many other features of Achaemenid art and architecture, such as double-headed bull capitals. The emblem has since been adopted as a key Zoroastrian symbol but has also been co-opted by Iranians to represent the past glory of the country.
Early and Modern Leaders
Beginning with the Sasanian period, the priesthood has been the primary source of leadership for the religion, although legends relating to the first Sasanian king Ardashir I (ruled c. 224-40 CE) and a long inscription by his successor, Shapur I (ruled c. 240-72 CE), portray both as supporters of the “Good Religion” and its institutions, including fire temples. During Sasanian rule, several priests played a crucial role in reorganizing the tradition, and the names of a number of them survive in Middle Persian texts, suggesting the intellectual vitality of Zoroastrianism during that period. One such priest is Tosar (or Tansar), head of the priestly establishment, whose advice and counsel were sought by King Ardashir I. A letter attributed to Tosar but composed in its existing form several centuries later emphasizes the interdependent relationship between royalty and religion; each must reinforce the other for prosperity and peace to reign. In the Denkard, Tosar is said to have organized and edited the Avesta, helping the early Sasanians to establish orthodoxy.
Tosar’s putative successor was Kerdir, who rose to prominence under Shapur I and continued to be a powerful religious leader into the reign of Bahram II (ruled 276-93 CE). Kerdir is known from four self-promoting rock inscriptions, in which he tells of his rise to power, his governance of the state church, and his persecution of foreign religions in the Sasanian realm, including Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Aramaic- and Greek-speaking Christians, “baptizers,” and “revisionists.” It was under Kerdir’s influence that the Sasanian court turned against Mani, the founder of the Manichaean religion, and imprisoned him.
A century after Kerdir a high priest named Adurbadi Mahraspandan was influential during the time of Shapur II (ruled 309-79 CE). Some of the “wise sayings” (Middle Persian: andarz) of Adurbad-i Mahraspandan survive, and in the Denkard he is said to have been instrumental in restoring the 21 nasks of the Avesta. Adurbad-i Mahraspandan is epitomized as a priest who strengthened both the religion and the kingdom, upholding the faith in both word and deed to the extent of undergoing the ordeal of having molten metal poured on his chest to prove the truth of Mazda worship and the falsity of other religious traditions.
While priests have retained their authority as both interpreters of the tradition and ritual officiants, in modern times a number of lay leaders have played essential roles in sustaining the communities in India, Iran, and the diaspora. Several prominent Parsis and Zartoshtis from the mid-19th to mid-20th centuries illustrate the range of activities of prominent lay members, whose political impact had significant repercussions for the status of the religion in the existing power structure.
Manekji Limji Hataria (1813-1890), the Parsi delegate of the Bombay-based Society for the Amelioration of the Zoroastrians of Persia, traveled to Iran to investigate and document the state of the Zartoshti communities there. Hataria helped to facilitate efforts for education and the building of fire temples and dakhmas (funerary sites). Along with other leading Zoroastrians, he was responsible for convincing the shah of Persia to relieve the burdensome jizya tax on the Zartoshtis.
Kharshedji Rustamji Cama (1831-1909) was a Parsi businessman from a distinguished family in Europe who established contact with leading European scholars and studied Avestan and Pahlavi with Friedrich Spiegel (1820-1905), a scholar of Iranian philology, at the University of Erlangen. Cama later translated some of Spiegel’s works into English and was instrumental in bringing European scholarly research back to India, where he started classes in his own house for Parsi priests and established athornan (colleges) to train priests. He also founded a society for the study and teaching of the Zoroastrian religion to the laity. Cama’s daughter-in-law, Bhikaji Rustom Cama (1861-1936), was a leading Indian nationalist and a critic of the British colonization of India. She famously unfurled the first Indian flag at the International Socialist Conference in Stuttgart in 1907.
The first three Asian Members of Parliament (MPs) in the United Kingdom were all Parsis, although each represented a different political party. The first was Dadabhai Naoroji (1825-1917), who sat from 1892 to 1895, following a term as president of the Indian National Congress. Naoroji took his oath of office as the Liberal MP for Finsbury Central with his hand on a copy of the Khordeh Avesta, the Zoroastrian prayer book. He was one of the founding members of the Zoroastrian Trust Funds of Europe (now ZTFE Inc.) and its second president. While in London he was also a mentor to two young lawyers (one Hindu, one Muslim) from the Indian subcontinent, who were to become leading political figures: Mohandas Gandhi (1869-1948) and Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948). The next Parsi MP was Sir Muncherji Bhownagree (1851-1933), who served as a Conservative representative from 1895 to 1905. He was followed in the 1920s by Shapurji Saklatvalla (1874-1936), a Communist MP supported by the Labour Party.
Around this time, a Constitutional Revolution in Iran saw the creation of majles (elected parliament), to which a community advocate from Yazd named Jamshid Jamshidian (1851-1933) was elected as the first Zoroastrian representative. In the second majles of 1909, Jamshidian was succeeded by Kaykhosrow Shahrokh (1875-1940). Such self-representation enhanced the standing of Zoroastrians throughout Iran, particularly in urban communities.
After the arrival of several Parsi businessmen in New York early in the 20th century, the first Zoroastrian Association in North America was founded there in 1929. Among notable Zartoshtis who moved to the United States during the 20th century were the entrepreneur and philanthropist Mehraban Zartoshty (1917-2012) and his wife, Paridokht, who came to New York from Iran in 1947. Thirty years later, two of their compatriots, Arbab Rustam and Morvarid Guiv (1888-1980), arrived. Rustam was a businessman from Yazd, who had become president of the Tehran Zoroastrian Anjuman (“association”) from 1940 and then the member of parliament representing the Zartoshtis in 1942. He had also supervised the repair and construction of fire temples and led many charitable and educational initiatives for the community in Iran. Guiv established a Zoroastrian center in New Rochelle, New York, in 1977 and became involved in the construction of fire temples in Chicago; Westminster, California; Toronto; and Vancouver to meet the needs of the growing number of Zoroastrians from both India and Iran.
Major Theologians and Authors
The history of Zoroastrian thought since the fall of the Sasanians in the seventh century CE can be divided into three periods, each marked by a powerful ruling culture, under which Zoroastrians lived with a degree of uncertainty.
The first period spans the early centuries of Islam. The Middle Persian Zoroastrian works of that era, compiled mostly in the ninth century, include the Denkard (“Acts of the Religion”), which was ultimately edited by Adurbad Emedan; the Bundahishn (Creation), which survives in two slightly different forms (one longer than the other); and Wizidagiha i Zadspram (Selections of Zadspram). All three books are collections designed to preserve and, to an extent, regularize the tradition. Another ninth-century text, the Shkand-Gumanig Vizar (Doubt-Dispelling Exposition) by Mardanfarrokh i Ohrmazddad, is a handbook elevating the “Good Religion” and discussing the shortcomings of the scriptures of other religions, specifically Jews, Christians, and Manichaeans. Various collections of Zoroastrian legal decisions reveal a community wrestling with the problems of conversion and the religion’s diminished status. These include the Dadistan-i Denig (Religious Decisions) by the priest Manushchihr, the Sad Dar (A Hundred Doors), and the Shayast ne Shayast (Proper and Improper), each reflecting the deteriorating condition of the Zoroastrian community under Muslim rule.
After the emigration of some adherents of the religion from Iran to India, a second period of Zoroastrian thought began among the Parsis, influenced partly by the majority Hindu, as well as Indo-Muslim, culture. From the moment of their arrival on the coast of Gujarat, Parsis attempted to address the concerns of their Indian rulers in terms of the social impact of their religion. The Mughals (1525-1748), who were Muslim, took a wide interest in the religions of their territories in India. In 1573 the Mughal emperor Akbar (ruled 1556-1605) summoned a learned Zoroastrian priest named Meherji Rana, from the town of Navsari in Gujarat, to his court in Delhi to testify about his Zoroastrian beliefs. Akbar’s attempt to integrate all religions into a new faith, Din-i Ilahi, bore the mark of Zoroastrian influence.
Interaction with Europeans—particularly the British, who had established rule over most of India by the mid-19th century—marked the third period of intellectual development. The British presented three areas of stimulus to which the Parsis responded. The first of these was the effort of Christian missionaries in Bombay in the early 19th century, epitomized by the Reverend John Wilson, whose missionizing activities and publications challenged the theology, ritualism (most notably the emphasis on purity), and the divine authority of Zarathushtra. In response, Parsis began to defend the religion using the tools of Western education. One priest, Maneckji Nusserwanji Dhalla (1875-1956), went to Columbia University in New York to study the religion under the guidance of A. V. Williams Jackson (1862-1937), the chair of Indo-Iranian Studies there. On his return, Dhalla became the dastur (high priest) in Karachi. He published several important books summarizing the religion for his fellow Zoroastrians, prompting a dynamic reinvestigation of the religion from within. Although Dhalla viewed the tradition as an ethical monotheism and downplayed the role of ritual, his own priestly duties included the performance of the yasna and the recitation of the prayers to the yazatas.
The second stimulus was provided by the Theosophical Society, which was brought to Bombay by Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891) and Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907) toward the end of the 19th century and quickly drew the attention of many Parsis. An esoteric movement soon emerged from within the Parsi community. The most important figure in this trend was Behramshah Naoroji Shroff (1858-1927), who claimed initiation by Iranian Zoroastrian masters and presented a highly spiritualized focus on the occult significance and power of the Avestan manthras (verbal expressions of a spiritual insight). Shroff considered Zoroastrianism as the highest stage of religious evolution. The movement he founded is known as Ilm-i Khshnoom (“the science of spiritual satisfaction”), invoking a term that appears once in the Gathas. Deeply influenced by Hindu teachings, Shroff also taught that Zoroastrians should be vegetarian.
The third incentive for change came through the philological study of Zoroastrian texts by British and other European scholars, which in turn led to the rediscovery of the historical complexity of the religion’s evolution. A number of Zoroastrian scholars, including priests, have made significant contributions in this field, tending to support a view of the religion that emphasized the importance of the priesthood and both priestly and lay ritual in its preservation and perpetuation. These scholars include Darab Dastur Peshotan Sanjana (1857-1931), Jivanji Jamshedji Modi (1854-1933), and, more recently, Ervad Ratanshah R. Motafram, Hormazdyar D. K. Mirza, Firoze M. Kotwal, and Khaikhusroo M. JamaspAsa. Lay thinkers such as Khojeste Mistree have made this view widely available to the laity
In Iran a vocal advocate of modern nationalism, Ibrahim Pour-e Davoud (1886-1968), who had studied in Europe and India, introduced the study of the Avesta with the publication of his own Persian translation of the Gathas. In this enterprise, Pour-e Davoud was assisted by Dinshaw J. Irani, the Parsi president of the Iranian Zoroastrian Anjuman of Bombay, whose own translation of the Gathas into English remains popular. Other Iranian scholars who had also studied at European universities, including Mehrdad Bahar (1930-94) and Ahmad Tafazzoli (1937-97), translated some of the major Middle Persian Zoroastrian texts into New Persian. One of their students, Katayoun Mazdapour, was the first Iranian academic scholar of the religion who came from a Zoroastrian background. Another Zartoshti, Bahman Moradian, studied in Paris and has contributed to modern Zoroastrian scholarship coming out of Iran.
Several other Zoroastrians have received doctorates at SOAS, University of London, and at Harvard University in Massachusetts. One Parsi graduate from Harvard, Jamsheed K. Choksy, is a full professor at the Department of Central Eurasian Studies at Indiana University and has written several important books on the religion. Another, Yuhan Vevaina, teaches classes relating to Zoroastrian studies at Stanford University.
Organizational Structure
Urbanized Zoroastrians in both Iran and India manage their affairs through councils of lay leaders, whose representatives are partly hereditary and partly elected. The most significant governing body in India is the Bombay Parsi Punchayat, which was first established in 1787. Such councils provide financial or practical assistance to those in need, encourage education, and help to maintain the priesthood. Zoroastrians elsewhere have established local organizations throughout Europe, North America, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and the Gulf States. The Federation of Zoroastrian Associations of North America (FEZANA) is an umbrella organization that collects and circulates material relating to the understanding, perpetuation, and practice of the Zoroastrian religion. Twenty-six Zoroastrian organizations and 11 small groups across the United States and Canada are affiliated with FEZANA, which celebrated its 25th anniversary in 2013.
The World Zoroastrian Organization (WZO), originally founded in the United Kingdom in 1980 to represent Iranian Zoroastrian refugees seeking asylum after the Iranian Revolution, now provides practical aid to Parsi farmers in Gujarat and sponsors the education of deserving Zoroastrian students. So that it might serve as a world body, WZO permits both individual and group membership, including that of non-Zoroastrian spouses. Partly in reaction to the inclusiveness of WZO, in 2005 the World Alliance of Parsi and Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) was founded in Mumbai with the goal to “strengthen the voice of tradition and protect and preserve the Unique Parsi Irani Zarthoshti identity.” WAPIZ has initiated schemes to provide financial aid to mobeds (ordained priests) and to ensure that rituals in the fire temples and at the dakhmas (funerary sites) are maintained.
The Zoroastrian priesthood is traditionally hereditary through the paternal line, but in Iran in the latter part of the 20th century this was extended to the maternal line. Only men are currently initiated as priests at both navar and martab levels. A navar is able to perform the lesser ceremonies, and the martab can perform the yasna as well. Training for the priesthood, which begins at a young age with the mastery of the sacred texts, includes extensive language training in both Avestan and Middle Persian and in the performance of the yasna. The continued decline of the full-time hereditary priesthood in Iran has led to the training of males from non-priestly families as mobedyars (lay “assistant priests”), and in many Iranian Zoroastrian communities by the beginning of the 21st century the priest in charge of the religious affairs was not a mobed but a mobedyar. Parsi communities in India sometimes have para-mobeds (trained lay assistant priests), who are able to tend the lower-grade fires.
In Tehran in February 2011, eight female mobedyars of varying ages were officially certified by the Council of Mobeds. As the first such initiation of women, this action caused some controversy throughout the Zoroastrian world. In 2008 the North American Councils of Parsi and Iranian mobeds allowed laywomen to begin to train as mobedyars, and the first two female mobedyars to fulfill the prerequisites were initiated and invested in Ontario, Canada, in early December 2012.
Houses of Worship and Holy Places
The primary religious activity of practicing Zoroastrian priests in India and Iran is the daily maintenance of the fire in the fire temple. All fire temples in India, and a few in Iran, have an enclosed chamber that contains a continuously burning fire on a metal grate or in a large metal vase-shaped holder called an atashdan. The fire is continually fed with dry wood, often sandalwood, and sometimes with incense. Some of the major fires have survived for centuries, and to allow the fire to be extinguished would be a catastrophe. There are various levels of fire, the most important being the Atash Bahram (“Victory Fire”), which is sometimes referred to as a “cathedral fire.” The higher-ranking fire temples have an inner room that contains a pawi, a rectangular consecrated space of stone that is marked off by deep carved furrows. Each pawi contains a fire vase and two platforms; on one platform the zot (officiating priest) sits, and on the other the raspi (assistant priest) prepares the offerings that are consecrated during the yasna.
Some fire temples in India have schools attached, where boys can train to be priests. Both Iranian and Indian Zoroastrian communities have sacred sites that are associated with either legends or historical memory and that have become popular pilgrimage destinations.
The main act of worship, prayer (ideally five times a day), is not necessarily performed at the fire temple but may take place anywhere facing a source of light, such the sun or a fire of some kind, including an oil lamp.
What is Sacred
Because of the importance of fire in the Zoroastrian religion, it has often been characterized erroneously as “fire worship.” Fire is seen as a living entity that makes physically present the divine light of Ahura Mazda. The connection of fire to asha (“order, right, and truth”), one of the Amesha Spentas, places fire—including the greatest cosmic fire, the sun—as Ahura Mazda’s most potent emblem in the material world. Other material elements linked with the Amesha Spentas—the animal kingdom, the earth, the sky, plants, and water—are also considered sacred and not to be polluted in any way.
For some Zoroastrians, particularly priests, the words of the Avesta, especially the Gathas, possess their own sacredness when recited mindfully and carefully.
Holidays and Festivals
The Zoroastrian calendar is composed of 12 months of 30 days; each month and day bears the name of a divinity. In addition, there are five Gatha days at the end of the year that are named after the five poetic divisions of the Gathas.
There are six gahambars (five-day seasonal festivals) spread throughout the year: Maidhyoizaremaya (mid-spring feast), Maidhyoishema (midsummer feast), Paitishahya (feast of “bringing in the harvest”), Ayathrima (“bringing home the herds”), Maidhyairya (midyear/winter feast), and Hamaspathmaedaya (All Souls). The last festival is held during the five Gatha days and is now known as Farvardigan by the Iranian Zoroastrians (named in ancient times for the fravashis; the “pre-souls of the faithful”) and as Muktad by the Parsis. Each gahambar is a period when Zoroastrians focus on worship and do only necessary work. Originally these festivals appear to have marked the change of seasons, and they came to be connected with the six elements of creation: sky, water, earth, vegetation, animals, and humanity, with the seventh element, fire, being connected with Now Ruz (New Year’s Day), the first day of spring. Now Ruz is now a pan-Iranian festival that begins the New Year and is the most important festival of the year.
There are several other festivals of praise and thanksgiving, or jashans (a word derived from yasna), which occur when the name of the day and name of the month coincide. The jashans to celebrate aban (the waters), adur (fire), and Mithra (the bond of contract and friendship) are all times for family gatherings and the sponsorship of ceremonies in the home.
In some Parsi and Zartoshti communities, the 365-day calendar has lost its seasonal connection. Presently there are three calendars in use. The fasli (“seasonal”) calendar, based on similar lines to the Gregorian calendar, places Now Ruz at the time of the spring equinox, around March 21. The qadimi (“old”) calendar, which is followed by some Zartoshtis in the province of Yazd, as well as by some Parsis, has Now Ruz in late July. The third calendar, adopted by the majority of Parsis in India, is the Shenshai (perhaps, “imperial”) calendar, in which Now Ruz falls a month later, in August.
Mode of Dress
There are two pieces of dress that every Zoroastrian wears at initiation, and many continue to wear until they die. The sudreh (Persian: sedreh) is a thin white cotton shirt that is worn under clothes, and the kusti is a woven wool cord composed of 72 threads in recollection of the 72 sections of the Yasna. The kusti is wrapped around the body, over the shirt, three times as a reminder of the ethical mandate always to choose “good thoughts, good words, and good deeds.” It is untied and retied during daily prayers and each time one goes to the bathroom; the retying marks an intensification of commitment to dispel evil and to promote good.
Dietary Practices
Zoroastrians do not have a set dietary code. Indeed, they are encouraged to eat anything that is nourishing and beneficial from the good part of creation. In former times silence was maintained while eating so as not to confuse the two functions of the mouth, eating and speaking, and also to show respect to the two Amesha Spentas associated with vegetation (ameretat) and water (haurvatat), which were traditionally thought to be present at communal meals. As a result of Hindu influences, some Parsis practice vegetarianism. In the Avestan texts, Zoroastrians are admonished not to eat the xraftsra (“creeping animals”) miscreated by Angra Mainyu and are permitted to kill such animals, which include snakes and insects.
Rituals
Some Zoroastrians and Western scholars maintain that the Gathas denounce ritual activity, particularly those connected with sacrifice or with the preparation and consumption of haoma (Middle Persian: hom; known in the Rig Veda as soma), which is pressed and mixed with water, or milk and water, and is said to have healing qualities. The pressing of haoma is a central part of the preparation for, and celebration of, the yasna. Today it is pressed from ephedra. Since it seems that Zarathushtra was engaged in the religious practices of his community, it is more likely that it was the erroneous or badly performed ritual of opponents, rather than ritual itself, that is denounced in the Gathas.
Priests are responsible for the ritual life of the community. Rituals are of two kinds—those that take place in the sanctified space of a fire temple (such as the inner ceremonies of the yasna) and those that occur outside, in the public arena. The yasna is the main inner ceremony, which is performed daily in Parsi fire temples by two priests. In the ceremony, which lasts more than two hours, the 72 sections of the Yasna text are recited. The yasna takes place before a fire, with water at the right hand of the zot, the chief priest who performs the ceremony. The assistant priest, the raspi, feeds the fire during the ceremony.
The ceremony progresses with both ritual action and words. The ritual action begins with an invocation to Ahura Mazda, the Amesha Spentas, and the yazatas, followed by the consecration of the dron (bread), the litany to haoma, and the drinking of parahom, a mixture of haoma and water. During the yasna itself, a second preparation of haoma is made, mixed with the juice of pounded pomegranate leaves, milk, and consecrated water, then poured into a well outside the fire temple at the conclusion of the ceremony, in order to strengthen the water’s power and to sustain life. After the ceremony, the bread may be distributed to the sponsors of the ceremony and other laity.
The purpose of the yasna is to strengthen both the material world and its inhabitants and the “thought” (spiritual) world. The seven elements of creation are represented in the ceremony. Zoroastrian tradition holds that the world was created in a primordial yasna and that at the end of time of “mixture,” Ahura Mazda will perform a final yasna, which will herald the frashe-gird, or renewal of the world, marking evil’s defeat. The daily yasna ceremony performed by the priests recollects the original yasna and looks forward to this final yasna.
Priests also conduct the outer ceremonies, including jashans and initiations, which are now generally performed outside the fire temple in the home or a public venue, and may therefore be witnessed by both Zoroastrians and non-Zoroastrians. The most important such ritual is the afrinagan (“distribution of blessings”) in which fresh or dried fruit, wine, milk, wheat bread, flowers, and water are placed, along with a metal fire vase, on a clean cloth on the floor or on a table, and are blessed by the zot (officiating priest). The primary ritual in the Parsi version of the ceremony is the exchange of flowers between the zot and the raspi (assistant priest), which is understood to be an exchange between the getig (physical, or “living,” world) and the menog (spiritual, or “thought,” world). In the Iranian form of the afrinagan ceremony, the priest holds sprigs of greenery, such as myrtle instead of flowers, and takes up two of the leafy twigs four times. This circle of connection generated between the priest and plant reminds participants that the ritual looks toward a time when the ameretat (“undyingness”) that the plant represents will be brought about and the perfection of the material world is restored. A jashan can be adapted for many occasions, including honoring a dead person, blessing a new home, or welcoming the installation of a new mobed.
The main act of worship practiced by many Zoroastrians is daily prayer. During prayer, which ideally takes place five times throughout the day, the Ahuna Vairya (Middle Persian: Ahunvar) is recited anywhere before a source of light. The holiest prayer of the religion, it is said to have been first uttered by Ahura Mazda to immobilize Angra Mainyu and then taught to humanity by Zarathushtra. The Ahuna Vairya functions as a manthra, a verbally expressed spiritual insight. It venerates the two existences, invokes those who serve Asha (“order, right, and truth”) and Vohu Manah (“good thought”), and promises Ahura Mazda’s special protection of the poor.
The two other life-cycle rituals after birth and initiation (which are discussed below), solemnize marriage and death. A wedding traditionally takes place over several days. The bride and groom each prepare for the marriage ceremony itself by taking a ritual bath beforehand. In the ceremony, the consent of both partners is witnessed in a public pledge of affirmation, but no vows are made. The marriage takes place in the presence of an officiating priest, who admonishes the couple to acknowledge Ahura Mazda and to follow the spiritual guidance of Zarathushtra, helping each other to pursue good in all elements of their life together so that they will be blessed with children and a fulfilling and long life. As at all public or private ceremonies, a fire burning in a fire holder is present.
The customs surrounding death are perhaps the best-known feature of Zoroastrianism, since they have been the source of outsider comment since the time of Herodotus. Death is the most egregious evidence of the power of the destructive spirit Angra Mainyu. It is the most harmful source of pollution since it directly counteracts the life-giving activity of Ahura Mazda. Because the elements of fire, water, and earth should not be polluted with dead matter of any kind, ancient tradition stipulated that a corpse should not be burned or buried but exposed to be devoured by birds of prey or wild animals. The practice of exposure currently continues in Mumbai and in other Parsi communities in India, including the state of Gujrat and in the city of Poona (in Maharashtra), as well as in the city of Karachi in Pakistan, but it ceased entirely in Iran in the early 1970s and is not practiced elsewhere.
A special group of Zoroastrians is responsible for transporting a corpse up to and into the place of exposure, and they take on the inevitable pollution such work entails. The corpse is first washed and dressed in an old sudreh and kusti before being taken to the dakhma (site of exposure, or “tower of silence”), a large, round tower on a hilltop, which is open to the elements. There the corpse is excarnated by birds of prey. The remaining bones are then gathered in a common pit in the dakhma, from where they will be reassembled and reunited with their individual souls at the time of resurrection.
Although an ancient custom, the practice of exposure of the dead has encountered opposition in urban areas. It has also recently been adversely impacted by the decimation of the Southeast Asian vulture population. As a result, there has been a trend to replace exposure with burial in a cemetery (as in Iran, the United Kingdom, and North America, where the body is interred in a tomb lined with concrete slabs) or cremation, with the use of electricity rather than natural fire.
One ritual practice to eliminate pollution is the barashnum i no shab. This nine-day ceremony of ablution and purification is composed of three ritual baths in a carefully laid out area. Traditionally all Zoroastrians sought to undergo this ceremony at least once, but now it is almost exclusively restricted to Parsi priests, who will undergo this ritual upon initial ordination and at later time of life as needed.
Rites of Passage
During the fifth month of a woman’s pregnancy, a lamp is lit, representing the divine light that Zarathushtra’s mother manifested during her pregnancy. Shortly after birth, a newborn may be given a taste of parahom (a mixture of haoma and water) if it is available. After delivery, the mother traditionally remains away from the fire temple and formal religious ceremonies for 40 days until the so-called “impurities” of birth have diminished. At the end of this time, new Parsi mothers may be symbolically reintegrated into the community through nahn, a ritual bath. (The Iranian equivalent is called sar shostan, meaning “washing the head.”) These practices have been in decline in the 20th and early 21st centuries.
The primary ritual for a child is initiation, which is the same rite for girls and boys. The Parsis call the initiation navjote (commonly translated as “new initiate” or “new birth”), while the Zartoshtis refer to it as sedrehpushun (“putting on of the sacred shirt”). The age of initiation varies but is usually between seven and eleven years old, before the onset of puberty. The child must learn to recite the prayers that accompany the tying, untying, and retying of the kusti (sacred cord), as well as the rudiments of the religion. In the ceremony he or she puts on the sudreh and the kusti, and recites the prayers aloud in the presence of one or more priests. The child then receives the officiating priest’s blessings. The ceremony is usually followed by a festive meal provided by the family of the newly initiated boy or girl.
Membership
In general, Zoroastrian communities in both Iran and India do not favor conversion, although the reasons differ due to the historical divisions between the two communities.
Contemporary Zoroastrian self-definition in both countries is largely circumscribed by the ever-decreasing numbers of adherents and by the related internal debate concerning conversion, interfaith marriage, the locus of authority, and the role of ritual. A legal ruling in Bombay from 1908, concerning who is a Parsi, is still accepted by the Parsis as definitive. This ruling determined that “Parsi” referred to the child of two Parsi or Irani parents who professed the Zoroastrian religion or the child of a Parsi male by a woman who had been “properly admitted into the religion.” The wife who had converted to Zoroastrianism could not, however, be considered a Parsi. Although many Parsis accept this ruling, others reject the patriarchal definition as counter to the Indian constitution, maintaining that the children of Parsi women by non-Zoroastrian spouses should also be considered Parsis. An Association of Inter-Married Zoroastrians (AIMZ) was formed in 1991 to advocate for equal treatment for the spouses and children of interreligious couples in terms of initiation, marriage, and disposal of the dead.
There is no similar historical or practical definition in Iranian law as to who is a Zoroastrian. In North America, however, a resolution passed by the Mobeds Council at its annual general meeting in 2000 read, in part: “A ‘Zoroastrian’ is a person who believes and follows the teaching of Zoroaster. It is recognized that ‘Zoroastrianism’ is a universal religion. It is further recognized that a Zoroastrian is not necessarily a Parsi.”
Since the mid-20th century, thousands of Zoroastrians have emigrated from India and Iran to Europe, Australia, and North America. In these diaspora countries, members of the Parsi and Iranian Zoroastrian communities have often come together in a single association, such as the ZTFE in London, and learned about what they share and where they differ. For all Zoroastrians, wherever they are in the world, perhaps the most significant issues are the survival of the religion and what should be passed on to the next generation.
Religious Tolerance
As a minority group, Zoroastrians in Iran and India have, at various times in the last millennium, experienced discrimination and persecution. This experience, along with the narrative of the respect shown toward the religions and culture of non-Iranian peoples by Cyrus II and the ancient Persian kings, has encouraged Zoroastrians across the globe to work for broader religious awareness and deference, both for themselves living within a wider community, and also between members of their own tradition. Many local and national interfaith groups in both the United Kingdom and North America now have a Zoroastrian representative.
Social Justice
According to the Zoroastrian ethic, the maintenance of social justice must be a central focus of both men and women, for it anticipates the final state when the world and its divisions are healed and order and right prevail for eternity. The pursuit of social justice is woven into the guiding principles and eschatology of the Gathas. The ancient sacred prayer, the Ashem Vohu, which is still recited on a daily basis, presents a reminder of this obligation to promote the “best good.”
The strong ethical orientation of the tradition has inspired the Zoroastrian community to seek social justice for all. The Parsi community has provided leaders of a number of political and social reform movements in India, including the movement for independence from British rule (1917-47). Under the Pahlavi dynasty in Iran (1926-79), Zartoshtis supported social development initiatives and played a significant role in the formulation of an Iranian national ideology, which emphasized modernization but also drew upon the country’s Zoroastrian past.
All Zoroastrians embrace the notion of engaging in philanthropic activity on behalf of the fravashi (“presoul”) of a deceased member of the family, which is thought to be concerned with the welfare of living family members. Often, a charitable endowment is made following the death of a loved one, which may be used for local medical, educational, and social services to benefit the wider community or for a fire temple or festival, which will enhance the well-being of Zoroastrians.
Social Life
A commitment to learning has characterized Zoroastrians in both Iran and India, where adherents of the two communities are highly educated. In the modern era, Zoroastrian women have risen to prominence in many fields, although they have often had to confront the broader social obstacles that are still prevalent. Since growth and increase is considered to benefit the good creation, marriage and the production of children have traditionally been regarded as a religious duty, as well as a cultural ideal; since the early 20th century, however, many women have chosen to pursue their education and to establish a career, marrying later (if at all) and having fewer children than their precursors. Among more conservative Zoroastrians, marriage within the community is strongly encouraged.
Controversial Issues
One social aspect that particularly impacts Zoroastrian women and has caused discussion within the community for decades is the traditional code of practice relating to purity and pollution. Modern rationalist discourse concerning the definitions of “purity” and “pollution” that date back to the Young Avestan Videvdad has led many women to reject these regulations as antiquated and gender-biased. Some rationalize that the concept of “purity” should not be understood in terms of sustaining physical boundaries but is more about hygiene or even mental clarity and focus. Despite contemporary intellectual skepticism, however, many women still choose to isolate themselves for a few days after the birth of a child or during menses, out of sensitivity to others and to the religious tradition.
The issue of conversion also remains highly controversial. Traditional Zoroastrians are convinced that the religion has neither encouraged nor widely accepted converts. Both Parsi and Iranian Zoroastrian communities have tended to resist conversion for different reasons. Parsi self-identity, partly influenced by the Hindu caste system, has supported a strong sense of endogamy and exclusiveness. The Iranian Zoroastrian community, on the other hand, is more concerned that it might violate the Islamic prohibition on proselytizing; apostasy has serious social and legal repercussions. Although some Iranian Muslims identify themselves as belonging to the religion and have even been initiated in diaspora communities, this status is not declared when those so-called “new Zoroastrians” return to Iran.
In the traditionalist Parsi context in India in the early 21st century, conversion to the religion by spouses does not grant converts access to fire temples or to the dakhma. This prohibition and related social sanctions, wherein the children of Parsi women who marry outside the community are denied initiation and the women themselves sometimes denied Zoroastrian funerals, have been challenged by the Association of Inter-Married Zoroastrians. In 2005 the Association for the Revival of Zoroastrianism purchased a meeting hall for the public performance of interreligious wedding ceremonies and for the navjotes (initiations) of the children of those marriages.
Some diaspora communities accept the conversion of non-Zoroastrian spouses and welcome them, along with the children of mixed marriages, into all communal activities. This approach acknowledges the different circumstances for Zoroastrians living outside the two ancestral homelands, where there is limited institutional structure and the community may not have access to an established priesthood. The acceptance of those who desire to follow the religion is seen by many as a practical solution to the problem of dwindling numbers. Conservative Parsi communities in both India and in diaspora are concerned, however, that opening the doors wide in this manner has already led to assimilation to the majority culture and a corresponding challenge to the original culture and identity of what is perceived as an ethnically linked tradition, preserved over the millennia from Zarathushtra to the present day.
The controversy over conversion has tended to pit a conservative priesthood against a liberal laity, which has led to a larger question concerning the identity of the religion. Some see Zoroastrianism as primarily characterized by the priests, who serve the community and whose ritual activities sustain not only the community but also the entire cosmos established by Ahura Mazda. Others view the priests as cut off in many ways from modern life and unable to provide the much-needed teaching and guidance that the laity seeks. In communities outside Iran and India, priests, trained mobedyars, and dedicated lay members work with each other to coordinate religious education classes for local Zoroastrians.
Another source of concern regarding the locus of authority and the role of the priesthood relates to the interpretation of what constitutes the core of the religion. Some reformists, both Parsi and Zartoshti, consider that the Gathas contain the entirety of the religion. This perspective, based on the premise that the inner truth of the religion is to be found only in the Gathas, tends to downplay or dismiss later Avestan and Middle Persian texts that are concerned with priestly ritual, purity regulations, and lay religious practices; it promotes a rationalism that centers on individual understanding and practice rather than perfunctory ritual, including that observed by the priesthood.
Cultural Impact
Zoroastrianism is one of the world’s oldest religions, with an early internally coherent cosmological scheme that appears to have had a considerable impact on the religious thought of neighboring peoples. One particular cultural impact was through the iconographic and architectural expressions of the Sasanian period—such as the chahar taq (the square, domed fire temple with four arched walls)—that have survived as a fundamental form of Iranian architecture. The significance of the dome as a symbol of the cosmos was a model for subsequent Christian and Muslim architecture, and it may also have played a role in the development of the Buddhist stupa, a relic shrine with a domed roof.
The opulent art and textiles of the Zoroastrian Sasanian court, as well as its coinage, also had a legacy in the Islamic world, particularly in caliphal palaces and royal symbolism. The emergence of the New Persian language—beginning in the ninth century CE in northeastern Iran—helped to preserve Zoroastrian epic history, with its central themes of the interdependence of royalty and religion and the Iranian hero defending the realm against assault. The epic Persian Shahnameh (Book of Kings) by Ferdowsi (935-1020 CE) reworks ancient Zoroastrian narrative to fit within an Islamized context, including the story of Zarathushtra. Persian poetic and musical forms later drew upon this history and many of its themes.
Many contemporary Zoroastrians have made major contributions to local, national, and international culture. Those who are internationally renowned and who actively support their coreligionists or whose literary output relates to the religion include Zubin Mehta, musical director for Life of the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra; Lord Karan Bilimoria of Chelsea, maker of Cobra beer and the first Zoroastrian to become a member of the British House of Lords; the postmodern theorist Homi K. Bhabha; the philosopher Kaikhosrov D. Irani; the Indian-born Canadian author Rohinton Mistry; and the Pakistani-born author Bapsi Sidhwa, who resides in the United States.