Spiritual terms

[Marco19]

Dear Majusi & all!

i have some spiritual terms, and would like to know the Zoroastrian definition...
so let start with my classical question, normally i ask it when start to meet different faith members

how do you define Soul, Spirit, Mind
what are the differences between Soul & Spirit?
which remains after death?

what about mind? is it immortal? part of Soul or/and Spirit? has a role after death?

Thank You.

 

[El_Majusi]

Hello Marco!
At first: body and soul are not strictly separated during our earthly life in Zoroastrianism. There is no desecration of the body: the body and the soul have the same weight, and one should be careful and "seek happiness of the body without harming the soul, and seek happiness of the soul without harming the body".
Soul, Spirit and Mind are the very same thing: the intellect, in which there are the deep insight and the insight. There is also the Fravashi, which is our angel and individuality at once. It is very holy. The main difference is between intellect and consciousness. While intellect follows our own decisions and will, consciousness is always righteous. It is our own consciousness that will judge us (after our death). After death our fravashi and soul will be united.
" what about mind? is it immortal? part of Soul or/and Spirit? has a role after death?"
All these things are mixed. The good nature of man preserves us from destruction, we rest after our death.

 

[nocturnalavalonian]

Would you say then that the Fravashi is pure consciousness without the emotions attached? If so does this mean that Zoroastrians make a definite distinction between the "everyday" self that goes through the daily routines of life, and a higher self who sort of observes life from a slight distance, somewhat indifferently? If I'm on the right track here then I would assume that when Soul and Fravashi reunite, the result should be a superconscious person, able to experience the full essence of each moment whilst also being able to see the entire picture simutaneously.

 

[El_Majusi]

Nocturnalavalonian you've got hard but subtle questions.
What you said is right, but your terminology is wrong. The Fravashi is holiness, etc. but it is not the pure consciousness you talked about, it is more like an angel. The pure consciousness does exist, but is not called "fravashi". Save that point, all you said is right, there is a distinction between our everyday self and the higher self which is our essence and consciousness, judges us. We need such a consciousness to judge us because if there wasn't, we wouldn't be judged anyway, as Ahura Mazda is pure bounteousness and cannot punish anyone, and the domain of Ahriman is out of these places of judgement: Ahriman does not judge. This consciousness is our essential being, out of our daily thoughts words and deeds.
"If I'm on the right track here then I would assume that when Soul and Fravashi reunite, the result should be a superconscious person, able to experience the full essence of each moment whilst also being able to see the entire picture simutaneously."
Again, it's "consciousness" and not fravashi. The soul and consciousness reunite after our death, to make someone different of us, but with the same essence. The rest is your personal interpretation, which I cannot refute (because it is not formally wrong at any point), that I do respect and even appreciate, but which is an interpretation.

 

[nocturnalavalonian]

Thank you for clearing that up for me Majusi, and I appologise if my misunderstanding of Fravashi may have caused me to blaspheme against your faith in any way, I want to learn, not to offend. When I speak of a person in the afterlife having superconsciousness, I am thinking along the lines of the person no longer being restricted to the viewpoint of physical space and time, and therefore able to perceive things in their absolute entirity, including of their (to us) invisible dimensions and their total duration through time in a single instant, like a neverending perpetual now-ness. But I do not know if a Zoroastrian could see it in that way, it is, as you say, just a personal idea.

 

[El_Majusi]

Yes, I misunderstood your interpretation. It's my point of view, and everything you said is certainly correct, but only Ahura Mazda and Its Holy Prophet Zarathushtra the Spitaman know, and he didn't explicit it in the Gathas, so all we can do is interpret. Your misunderstand of "fravashi" is my fault (I didn't explain it enough), and you didn't blaspheme, Nocturnalavalonian, it's just that I wanted things to be clear. "[...] like a neverending perpetual now-ness" yeah, that's great, that's what I think. You could be an excellent Avesta-commentator, if you were a Zoroastrian!http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/members/nocturnalavalonian-31334.html

 

[nocturnalavalonian]

And you'd make a great Unitarian Zoroastrian!

 

[El_Majusi]

Hehe!