Such speculations are guess-work, but that the primitive religion of
Persia was essentially monotheistic is an opinion which is likely to
survive all attacks upon it. On less sure grounds stands the
identification of that primitive religion with Zoroastrianism. The great
authorities of a former generation, and amongst them my distinguished
old friend, Professor Jules Oppert, believed that Cyrus was a Mazdean.
But there is a good deal to support the view that Zoroastrianism did not
become the State religion till the time of the Sásánians, who, as a new
dynasty, grasped the political importance of having under them a strong
and organised priesthood. Before that time the Magians seem to have been
rather a sort of Salvation Army or Society of Jesus than the directors
of a national Church.
As late as the reign of Darius the Persians frequently buried their
dead, a practice utterly repugnant to the Mazdean. Again, from Greek
sources we know that the Persian kings sacrificed hecatombs of animals;
thousands of oxen, asses, stags, &c., were immolated every day. Darius
ordered one hundred bullocks, two hundred rams, four hundred lambs to be
given to the Jews on the dedication of the new Temple (as well as twelve
he-goats as sin-offerings for the twelve tribes) so that they might
offer “sacrifices of sweet savours unto the God of heaven and pray for
the life of the king and his sons.” Evidently Darius considered profuse
animal sacrifices as a natural part of any great religious ceremony. Can
it be supposed that such slaughter would have pleased a strict
Zoroastrian? The Mazdeans retained the sacrifice of flesh as food: a
small piece of the cooked meat eaten at table was included in the daily
offering with bread, grain, fruits and the Homa juice, which was first
drunk by the officiating priest, then by the worshippers, and finally
thrown on the sacred fire. The small meat-offering was not animal
sacrifice or anything at all like it. The Parsis substitute milk even
for this small piece of meat, perhaps because the meat was usually beef,
which would have caused offence to their Hindu fellow-citizens. I asked
a Parsi High Priest who lunched with me at Basle during the second
Congress for the History of Religions, what viands were eschewed by his
community? He replied that they avoided both beef and the flesh of
swine, but only out of respect for their neighbours’ rules: to them oil
alone was forbidden—probably because of its virtue as a light-giver. In
the Zoroastrian sacrifice it was never lost sight of that the outward
act was but one of piety and obedience; the true sacrifice was of the
heart: “I offer good thoughts, good words, good deeds.” It is hardly
needful to say that the Mithraic taurobolium was in sheer contradiction
to Mazdean law. Heretical sects were the bane of Zoroastrianism, and
with one of these sprang up the strange practices which the Romans
brought into Europe. Possibly its origin should be sought in some
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account