hindupridemn
Defender of the Truth
Is it a sect within Zoroastrianism or its own religion? what sets in apart?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Zurvanism
- Thread starter hindupridemn
- Start date
El_Majusi
Member
It was a religion that was rather mystical and not the main religion of the place before the time of the birth of Ashu Zarathushtra, and the beginning of the Sassanians (or even the very end of the Achemenids) introduced Zurvanian concepts into Zoroastrianism, making Zoroastrianism-Zurvanism a special religion, that does not exist anymore. Many Zoroastrians think it is heretical (it places Zurvan, god of time, above Ahura Mazda) and, indeed, it is.
nocturnalavalonian
Seeker of Knowledge
It may depend on whether Zoroastrians view Ahura Mazda as operating within time or beyond it. If he functions within time then it would make sense to put Zurvan above him, but if he fuctions beyond or outside of time then it would make no sense at all to have Ahura Mazda subservient to Zurvan.
Last edited:
El_Majusi
Member
Ahura Mazda is the Highest. There is nothing above It. And yet, It is not totally separated from the Yazatas, nor is It totally separated from Its own creation. That's one point. This is the first reason why Zoroastrianism and Zurvanism are two different religions. For example, you cannot call yourself a Christian if you believe there is a god higher than Yehovah or Elohim or whatever you people call it.
Ahura Mazda possesses time, amongst other things; It works within and outside of it. To make it short: Zurvanism hasn't its place in the Zoroastrian doctrinal world.
Ahura Mazda possesses time, amongst other things; It works within and outside of it. To make it short: Zurvanism hasn't its place in the Zoroastrian doctrinal world.
nocturnalavalonian
Seeker of Knowledge
I see what you mean, I think. Would you say then that Ahura Mazda is basically the foundation of being itself, then? That would be my ultimate view of God, if it's actually possible to have a view of God's nature at all. Would this also imply that Zurvanism is not just a heresy of Zoroastrianism, but an entirely different religion that just happens to share a common root, like with Judaism, Christianity and Islam , different faiths derived from an earlier religion of Abraham?
El_Majusi
Member
Yes, Ahura Mazda is self-consistent and Its own foundation. Zurvanism is, on my mind, a different religion; but if people believe in it while claiming they are Zoroastrians, it is a heresy. On my mind and on that of a lot of Dasturs (like the pope) the punishment for heresy is: nothing. But it's still a heretical thought.
GabrielWithoutWings
Well-Known Member
This is actually incorrect. I would refer you to the Nag Hammadi writings.
nocturnalavalonian
Seeker of Knowledge
I think El Majusi means that it would not be consistent with the mainstream orthodoxy, which the Nag Hamadi people wouldnt be. Many of the more conservative Christians regard we Unitarians to be heretical, and many nontrinitarians would regard mainstream Christianity as heresy, but since the trinitarians have the greater numbers, theirs is taken as the orthodox position. I imagine it to be the same with Zurvanism within Zoroastrianism, since Zurvanism wouldn't be compatible with the mainstream Zoroastrian position, it would be a heresy.
hindupridemn
Defender of the Truth
Who founded Zurvanism?
Dear Friends,
As a Zoroastrian and as a researcher in ancient Iranian history, I am fascinated although also repelled by the theme of Materialist Zurvanism. This strange atheistic heresy, which fortunately died out many centuries ago in Persia itself, has pre-Mazdean roots which apparently begin in Babylonia. Materialist Zurvanism later borrowed certain concepts from Greek philosophy, Aristotle in particular but also from the rationalist pre-Socratics.As time went on, it degenerated more and more into mechanical atheism: diametrically opposed to the genuine Zoroastrian principles of the providence of a unique loving deity, personal human responsibility to God and fellow man, and morality. Many people today, who may never have heard of this pseudo-Zoroastrian sect, do not realize what enormous influence Materialist Zurvanism has exercised over subsequent philosophical and religious movements. The most extreme forms of Kabbalism, such as the entire episode of the false Messiah Sabbatai Tsevi, are permeated with this heresy. Spinoza's philosophical thought, halfway between pantheism and atheism, is imbued with it. The godless Ranters of 17th century England, exact contemporaries of Spinoza and Sabbatai Tsevi, borrowed Materialist Zurvanism as a monolithic creed and practiced it to the letter. The modern-day Syntheists, who also claim to have intimate ties to Zoroastrianism, are among the most direct heirs of atheistic Zurvanism.
A weird, perilous belief, this Zurvanism, the basis of which is an abstract, amoral, vaguely defined force of nature which can only be called Non-God: Zurvan, "eternal time".
Syntheists, who have just about as much warmth, joyous emotions and spiritual fervour as Mr Spock, deny the existence of a personal loving God, just as the Materialist Zurvanists did. Syntheists, indeed, claim that man generates his own divinity from within. So every man can become a god in their charming atheistic paradise.
Please write and share your opinions about Zurvanism with me.
Thanks!
Blessings,
Maria
As a Zoroastrian and as a researcher in ancient Iranian history, I am fascinated although also repelled by the theme of Materialist Zurvanism. This strange atheistic heresy, which fortunately died out many centuries ago in Persia itself, has pre-Mazdean roots which apparently begin in Babylonia. Materialist Zurvanism later borrowed certain concepts from Greek philosophy, Aristotle in particular but also from the rationalist pre-Socratics.As time went on, it degenerated more and more into mechanical atheism: diametrically opposed to the genuine Zoroastrian principles of the providence of a unique loving deity, personal human responsibility to God and fellow man, and morality. Many people today, who may never have heard of this pseudo-Zoroastrian sect, do not realize what enormous influence Materialist Zurvanism has exercised over subsequent philosophical and religious movements. The most extreme forms of Kabbalism, such as the entire episode of the false Messiah Sabbatai Tsevi, are permeated with this heresy. Spinoza's philosophical thought, halfway between pantheism and atheism, is imbued with it. The godless Ranters of 17th century England, exact contemporaries of Spinoza and Sabbatai Tsevi, borrowed Materialist Zurvanism as a monolithic creed and practiced it to the letter. The modern-day Syntheists, who also claim to have intimate ties to Zoroastrianism, are among the most direct heirs of atheistic Zurvanism.
A weird, perilous belief, this Zurvanism, the basis of which is an abstract, amoral, vaguely defined force of nature which can only be called Non-God: Zurvan, "eternal time".
Syntheists, who have just about as much warmth, joyous emotions and spiritual fervour as Mr Spock, deny the existence of a personal loving God, just as the Materialist Zurvanists did. Syntheists, indeed, claim that man generates his own divinity from within. So every man can become a god in their charming atheistic paradise.
Please write and share your opinions about Zurvanism with me.
Thanks!
Blessings,
Maria