CHAPTER VII

PERSIAN THEORIES OF THE SOUL AND ITS DESTINATION

THOUGH to-day if we wish to learn of Parseeism, the origin of which is attributed to Zoroaster, we must visit India rather than Persia, and seek for information in Bombay, where a famous Parsee colony has enjoyed an unbroken continuity of existence for over 1,200 years, it is to a still remoter period than that which marks the foundation of that ancient and venerable colony that we must turn if we would inspect any of the roots of the still flowering tree of Parseeism, a religion which disputes the palm for antiquity with even its eldest contemporaries. The story of Zoroaster, the reputed founder of the Parsee faith, is veiled in considerable mystery, and until quite recently scholars have had much difficulty in attempting to reconcile seemingly conflicting dates, which have been found so divergent as to prove ultimately irreconcilable on any basis of belief that there has been but one great teacher in all time who has borne the title of Zoroaster, as his period has been placed as early as the days of the Jewish Abraham and as late as the time of the Greek Pythagoras. It is now beginning to be understood that there has been a long line of highly enlightened spiritual teachers, running through the ages, and that Zoroaster is a title of dignity rather than a proper name.

That very instructive writer and lecturer on theosophy, Annie Besant, has in one of her many books, “Four Great

Religions," sought to explain how one after another, as the ages have rolled by, highly illumined teachers have appeared on the stage of the world's great theatre and imparted instruction specially adapted to the times and places when and where they have ministered, then left the good seed they had sown and watered to germinate and bear fruit, which it always does at the end of a cycle, at which time there is demand for another great enlightener who comes in his turn as his predecessors have come and gone before him.

According to this theory, which is authenticated by almost universal testimony furnished by students of the Mysteries the wide world over, we have swept away the major portion of the perplexing difficulty concerning Zoroaster and have found that Parseeism is founded, like many other ancient systems of religion and philosophy, not upon one sole teacher but upon a succession of spiritual enlighteners who, according to universal theosophy, are commissioned by celestial guardians of this planet's destiny to convey to a special section of this earth's inhabitants such portions and aspects of heavenly wisdom as they are ready to receive, assimilate and propagate. Though Parseeism is not an ideal system as we find it expounded by its best known modern exponents, and some of its doctrines, as set forth by its appointed delegate from Bombay at the World's Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in 1893, seem inferior to the highest inculcations of prophetic Judaism and Christian Universalism, we must admit that the sacred books of the Parsees termed Zend-Avesta abound in excellent teachings, and also present a view of good and evil far more reasonable than that which overspread beclouded Europe in the mediæval period, and which still survives as a blighting element in orthodox phases of Christianity.

We hear and read much of dualism whenever we hear of the Parsee or Iranian religion, but the dualistic theories of all Zoroastrians are resolvable into an original and ultimate monism, because the contending forces of good and evil, even when these are personified in their respective fountain-heads, Ormuzd and Ahriman, are only finite and temporal. There is no such absurd belief as faith in sempiternal evil in the Parsee creed or doctrine, for it teaches that Ormuzd and Ahriman are brothers who have had a dispute and are now engaged in works of diametrically opposite character, but as the two sprang from one source so they will return to the state of harmony which was originally their blissful portion and from which they have fallen, not everlastingly, but only for a limited period.

The Persian Ahriman and the Hebrew Satan (Accuser) are so practically identical that we may well discover traces of Parseeism in the book of Job, one of the most instructive and comforting of all the books which make up the Hebrew Bible. This book of Job commended itself very largely to the sympathies of Thomas Paine, who alludes to it in a friendly spirit in that much abused treatise, “The Age of Reason,” which contains many assaults upon much that the Bible contains but never calls in question the unity of God or denies a good hope of human immortality.

If Milton when he wrote “Paradise Lost” was not familiar with the Zend-Avesta, he at least shows familiarity with much of its incidental teaching, though the English poet never rose high enough in his theology to reach the spiritual altitudes which are the peaks and crowns of the Zoroastrian faith. The Christian apostle Paul, who was a classic as well as Hebrew scholar, shows much familiarity with the essentials of the Iranian as well as of the Egyptian religion in his noblest utterances, for after having conceded to the “powers of darkness” all that any well-instructed Parsee would attempt to claim, he launches forth into those glorious and magnificent declarations of faith in the perfect triumph of infinite goodness which are simply paralyzing to all believers in the possibility of the ultimate victory being gained, even in a single instance, by any spirit which opposes itself to the rule of the perfect righteousness which dwells at the centre of the universe.

Even Robert Browning's perfect optimism as expressed in “Abt Vogler” is none too grand for a consistent Parsee to endorse, for should one make an earnest and searching study of the Zend-Avesta he might well rise from his researches with the jubilant exclamation on his lips, “There shall never be one lost good, and for evil so much good more.” Browning may speak of a few “musicians” into whose ears divine secrets are specially whispered, but who are those sublimely privileged and singularly enlightened ones but they who have learned the mighty lesson of transmutation, and have indeed resolved discords into harmonies, thereby proving that evil is only misplaced good, that evil is a state or condition only, never a fundamental reality or an essential of universal life.

Quite a number of modern metaphysicians would be helped to greater clarity of statement if they would study the Parsee doctrine which, when rescued from degenerate accretions, is found to be an ambitious, and by no means unsuccessful, attempt to explain the origin, nature and destiny of relative discord in a universe which is absolutely good at core and in essence.

To give some idea of the antiquity of the fame of Zoroaster we have only to be reminded that Pliny, agreeing with Aristotle, asserts that Zoroaster flourished 6,000 years before Plato. Gibbon, Volney, and many other distinguished historians concur largely in this view, which, as we have already intimated, is easily accepted on the basis suggested by Annie Besant and other theosophical interpreters; for when we consider that several illustrious teachers have borne the same high appellation among the followers of the doctrines they proclaimed, we should not be staggered if we discovered statements to the effect that Zoroaster lived even 100,000 years ago, perchance in the mighty island-continent Atlantis, which was probably in the height of its glory while the lands we now call ancient were resting beneath the ocean waves, precisely as Atlantis is now slumbering. Many historians have assigned Zoroaster to a period as recent as about 700 B. C., when no doubt some great enlightenment came to the Iranians and a revival of ancient wisdom took place among them, led by a special master-guide. However ancient may have been its origin, or however comparatively modern, it is certain that Parseeism flourished in the Babylonian Empire and that Judaism was largely tinctured with it during the time of the Babylonian Exile.

Portions of the book of Isaiah were undoubtedly written after the Jews had returned from Babylon to Palestine, and the author who is often styled “the second Isaiah” (vide Isaiah 45) protested vehemently against the infiltration of Babylonian doctrines into the Jewish creed, at least in so far as those tenets were out of harmony with the simple faith of ancient Israel, which admitted no rival with God upon the throne of the universe. Though much of the ancient history of Zoroastrianism may be draped in uncertainty, scholars have not encountered anything like insuperable difficulties in their endeavors to trace the history of the Parsee faith during the Christian era.

Max Müller—whose monumental contributions to the science of comparative religion and philology entitle him to rank among the very greatest scholars of the nineteenth century—has thrown much light on this interesting subject in the course of his elaborate commentaries upon the various sacred writings of the East, and to his voluminous and fascinating works we advise all of our readers to turn who have both desire and leisure to pursue their studies to a far greater length than is possible for those whose occupation is such that they can only find time for a study of the briefest condensations. For our immediate purpose we need only refer to a few important facts which throw light upon the special subject we are now considering. In the fourth century B. C., Alexander of Macedon overran the Persian Empire and with his rule the old faith and ritual declined or became obscure. In the following centuries this decadence became more and more marked, and it was not till about 700 years later that a great revival of Parseeism occurred; this was in the days of Ardeshir, who overthrew the Parthian dominion in Persia and established the Sassanian dynasty. To quote the words of William Alger, "One of his first acts was, stimulated doubtless by the surviving Magi and the old piety of the people, to reinaugurate the ancient religion. A fresh zeal of loyalty broke out, and all the prestige and vigor of the long-suppressed worship were restored."

The Zoroastrian Scriptures were now sought for, whether in manuscript or in the memories of the priests. It would seem that only remnants were found. The collection, such as it was, was in the Avestan dialect, which had grown partially obsolete and unintelligible. The authorities accordingly had a translation made of it in the speech of the time, Tehlevi. This translation—most of which has reached us written in the original, sentence after sentence —forms the real Zend language, often confounded by the literary public with Avestan. The translation of the Avestan books, probably made under these circumstances as early as 350 A. D. is called the “Huzvâ-resch.” It is probably from this source rather than from one of greater antiquity that floating theories concerning the original Parsee faith are commonly drawn, therefore it would be unwise to speak dogmatically, when scanning such translations, concerning the highest and purest concepts of a remote original.

To quote once more from William Alger, “The source from which the fullest and clearest knowledge of the Zoroastrian faith, as it is now held by the Parsees, is drawn, is the Desatir and the Bundehesh. The former work is the unique vestige of an extinct dialect called the Mahabadian, accompanied by a Persian translation and commentary. It is impossible to ascertain the century when the Mahabadian text was written: but the translation into Persian was, most probably, in the seventh century of the present era.” After descanting upon the improbability that those speculations are well-founded which seek to attribute the teachings of modern Parseeism to Jewish, Christian, or even later Mohammedan origins, Dr. Alger proceeds to summarize the tenets of Magian theology and from that summary (“A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life,” pages 133 et seq.) we have compiled the following extremely abbreviated narrative. In the deep background of Magian theology there looms belief in an infinite first Principle-Zeruana Akerana, the meaning of which is Absolute Duration or Indivisible One. But the beginning of vital theology furnishing the actual ethics of Zoroastrianism is the idea of the antagonistic forces—Ormuzd and Ahriman—which constitute the first emanation from the Absolute. These are said to divide between them the unresting striving of the universe. Ormuzd is the principle of light; Ahriman is the principle of darkness. From Ormuzd proceed all virtue and all beauty; from Ahriman proceed all wickedness and deformity. There is some dispute as to whether these antagonistic powers have always been at variance; different views have doubtless prevailed at different times, the more pessimistic theories belonging, no doubt, to an age of spiritual declension and mental obscuration, the more optimistic ground having been always taken by the more enlightened in intellect and the more advanced in spirituality among the numerous exponents of Zoroastrianism who have risen from age to age, all claiming to interpret the original faith no matter how widely, in some instances, their commentaries may have departed from it.

Dr. Alger holds to the view entertained by clear-sighted students in general and emphasized most powerfully and beautifully by Marie Caithness, Duchesse de Pomar, in her splendid treatise, “The Mystery of the Ages, Contained in the Secret Doctrine of All Religions,” in which valuable volume we are informed, on the basis of deep spiritual insight coupled with profound scholarly research, that uncorrupted Parseeism teaches that Ormuzd and Ahriman are indeed true brothers, originally harmonious, but during a long age called a Gahambar they are in a state of active antagonism, though when the cycle ends they will become fully reconciled, then Pralaya or the Golden Age will result from their return to harmony.

Dr. Alger does not omit to trace the close connection which certainly exists between Ahriman and the Satan of the book of Job, which is a splendid epic poem, intended to set forth the glorious ancient doctrine that no spirit of evil in reality exists, as Satan (or the Accusing Angel) is only a messenger of Heaven and receives a commission from the Most High, or he could work nothing among the inhabitants of earth. Job personifies the typical human soul, individualized in every human being, and as the poetic narrative most clearly shows, its author's object was to convince all readers that nothing befalls humanity except for ultimate good and when we see what looks to us like unmitigated disaster we are, in our temporary blindness, misinterpreting some perplexing phenomena which will yet be explained to us as a part of our education, a means of discipline the outcome of which will be a glorious and wonderful enlightenment, impossible of achievement except through its seemingly evil though, in reality, benignant agency.

The Parsee delegate at the World's Parliament of Religions had no hesitation in telling the multitudes who heard his speech or read the published report of it, that Parsees to-day believe that every noxious creature and poisonous plant is the work of Ahriman, while all that is amiable and wholesome is the work of Ormuzd. This is an easy disposition of phenomena, and it may not be an incorrect statement, but even though Ormuzd and Ahriman have each created a multitude of emissaries and sent them forth to people this material globe, the ultimate question of the final outworking of all for good remains quite undisturbed. All that we have need to consider, even if we accept this popular version of Parsee doctrine, is a method by means of which the goal is reached, the object finally accomplished.

The Parsees' teaching that every soul embodied on earth is attended by a light and dark unseen attendant, (a ferver and a dev) and that every star is peopled with spirits of light and darkness, is in complete accord with the almost universal opinion of mankind, though such a doctrine is easily subject to so much rational modification that it may eventually be accepted, as already taught in many schools of theosophy, only in the sense that light is positive and symbolizes wisdom, while darkness is negative and symbolizes ignorance. Gerald Massey's able pamphlet, "The Devil of Darkness," bears a title which throws much light on the primal question which still sorely perplexes the bulk of enquirers into the nature of the universe—Whence cometh evil? We cannot falter in our own allegiance to the blessed concept that absolutely good is all in all, and we find nothing, even in Persian Dualism, to shake our confidence in the truth of that mighty declaration, nor do we discover any historic evidence that any truly illumined teacher ever taught the contrary. Only a corrupted priesthood allied with a similarly corrupted temporal power ever invented the false, hideous, irrational dogma of an endless, and therefore useless, hell together with the insane and frightful notion that God was an angry tyrant who doomed a large portion of his own creation to everlasting misery. The nightmare theology which seeks to enslave and terrify the world with such atrocious fictions may have its origin in the dark land of shades, in which the unenlightened dwell until they have risen out of the murky shadows in which their ignorance and ill-will may have plunged them; but never once has a radiant messenger from any sphere of light suggested anything to humanity which casts a slur on the character of the Almighty, or that leads sensitive natures to despair, while it arouses the worst passions of the cruel and the relentless. We make no apology for condemning the doctrine of endless or perpetual evil, whether personified or not, as an insult to intelligence as well as a flagrant contradiction of all that enlightened morality is willing to accept. That there are unsolved problems and mighty mysteries in the universe no sane thinker will for an instant dispute, but to make capital out of these for the purpose of exploiting a doctrine of sempiternal evil is a crime against humanity and an insult to our common sense.

The precise views which Zoroastrians entertain concerning the future life are rather difficult to describe in limited space, but it may safely be decided that there is an idea of purgatory among them, and also some idea of hell, though not necessarily any idea which is at variance with the ultimate salvation of every spirit in the universe. Parseeism, in common with practically every other religion, teaches concerning a great variety of states or conditions in the world beyond death, and, as Dante has taught in the Divine Comedy, if it take four or five centuries, or even longer, to purge a soul from the dross of avarice, envy, or any other stain, so long must it be subjected to some cleansing discipline called "purgatorial fire." The root of the doctrine of purgatory is found in all religious systems, and if it be separated from all belief in damnation, with which the thought of purgation is never properly allied, it may well be accepted as a means of illustrating the consequences of error, and the purifying ends of penalty.

Having already taken a glance at Egyptian eschatology, we find Persian views of life beyond death extremely similar and we must not forget that after the overthrow of the Pharaonic or native Egyptian dynasty Egypt became subject to Persia, consequently the religious beliefs and symbols of both nations became greatly intermingled. The bull, always greatly venerated in ancient Egypt, looms large upon the Persian horizon, the origin of all manifested life being presented under the figure of that powerful animal. Among Persian practises throwing light upon the popular belief concerning the future life, is the ancient "Festival of the Dead," which is still celebrated by Parsees during the last five days of every year, at which season it is believed that the sinners in the spirit-world who are undergoing expiatory penalties proportioned to their offenses, are permitted to visit their relatives and friends who are yet on earth, after which respite those who are not sufficiently purified to pass on to Paradise must return to "Dutsakh." Annually, it is taught, "Ormuzd empties hell," and at this great solar feast (observed by all Occult Societies the world over, which can boast of any respectable antiquity) multitudes are finally released from the shadows of Hades and conducted to brighter realms on their way to the ultimate bliss of Heaven.

To every student of comparative religion who is not swayed by prejudice, the striking similarity of one creed to another must prove convincing that prevailing Christian doctrines are all derived from earlier sources, and that this is the case the gospel narratives themselves most clearly testify. In the Apostle’s Creed (usually regarded as the oldest, as well as the simplest and concisest, of all the creeds of Christendom) the much-disputed passage (which some Protestants disapprove of and omit), “ He descended into hell,” shows unmistakably the complete sympathy which existed between primitive Christianity, which was highly eclectic, and other older and widely prevailing faiths.

Again do we insist that in their original purity or simplicity all religious systems taught the purification of departed souls, through suffering indeed whenever such is necessary, but never final extinction or, what is far worse, endless misery. The Parsees of old declared that the present order of the world was fixed at 12,000 years duration, divided into four equal parts. During the first three thousand years Ormuzd reigns triumphantly, during the second three thousand years Ahriman reigns. The third three thousand years is occupied in strife between them, and the fourth three thousand years is to be a period of Ahriman’s victory, when the earth will be the scene of all manner of awful tragedies. This dark period will, however, be triumphantly overcome, for Ormuzd will rise in majestic might and put a complete stop to all calamities and all atrocities. Ormuzd will send to earth a saviour, Gosiosch, to deliver mankind and to bring the arch-enemy to judgment. Then comes the resurrection, when all the departed will reappear and friends will gladly recognize each other. Great difference of opinion among scholars still prevails as to the exact nature of the resurrection, but all agree that Parseeism teaches individual immortality.

Every doctrine taught in Christendom concerning the disobedience and fall of man can be found paralleled in Parseeism. Though it seems fairly clear that Dualism is inextricably interwoven with the Zoroastrian faith, Rawlinson argues—and sustains his argument by powerful proofs —that the Dualistic doctrine was a heresy which broke out among primitive Aryans who were the ancestors of subsequent Iranians and Indians. It is contended, almost universally, that the Jewish Scriptures are honey-combed with Persian doctrines but the only book in the Old Testament which lays any clear stress upon the doctrine of resurrection is Daniel, which is replete with Chaldean and Persian allusions. This apocalyptic treatise (which the book called Revelation or Apocalypse in the New Testament strongly resembles) is usually attributed to a period not earlier than 200 B. C. The spiritual idea of the resurrection which prevailed among thoughtful and educated Zoroastrians in the days of the famous Plutarch is clearly shown in his quotation from Theopompus who gives it as the opinion of the Magi that when Ahriman is subdued and men are restored to life "they will need no nourishment and cast no shadow." Such is undoubtedly the original Magian doctrine and it comports well with the idea of a purely spiritual body not dependent upon material elements for sustenance and not subject to the limitations of time and space.

Every reader is doubtless familiar with the Towers of Silence, the Parsee burying places, and many travelers have seen them. The dead body is not permitted to be thrown into water or fire or to be buried in the earth lest it contaminate an element, it is therefore placed at a high elevation above the ground and subjected to the action of birds of prey, which Parsees believe have a necessary mission to fulfil and are properly endowed with a taste for carrion. The dead body is treated with no indignity by these scrupulously cleanly people who make cleanliness an essential part of their religion. Bodies are placed in dry, pure, open places upon a summit where fresh winds blow and the vultures which devour the flesh, leaving the bones completely harmless, are accounted sacred.

Though there is much attributed to Parseeism which is not altogether charming, a stern sense of justice, coupled with a proclamation to the effect that righteousness alone will eventually triumph, runs through all doctrines which claim Zoroaster and the Zend-Avesta for their source. At the time of judgment a complete separation will be made between the virtuous and the vicious, but though the latter will be condemned to penal sufferings their anguished cries will rise to heaven and find pity in the soul of Ormuzd, who will eventually release all from their sufferings. The awful words in a Christian gospel, attributed to Jesus, “Depart ye cursed into everlasting (aionian) fire, prepared for the devil and his angels,” though by no means delightful reading, are susceptible, and that without the slightest straining, of a reasonable and even a benevolent meaning, for we have a right to challenge theologians to debate the question: For what purpose is the fire prepared? Who shall dare to deny that a just Deity has wisely prepared it for the express purpose of purifying and enlightening those who are unclean and dark in their spiritual condition? Fire enters largely as a highly expressive symbol into all religions, and as fire accomplishes on earth three useful and beneficent ends—it enlightens, it warms and it purifies—we have not the slightest right or reason to suppose that Zoroaster, Jesus, or any enlightened spiritual teacher or Messiah at any time in the world’s history, ever intended to teach any other doctrine than the ultimate enlightenment and purification of every individual spirit in the universe.

Parseeism is essentially in union with Universalism, and though the Universalists of to-day would probably refuse to endorse a good deal they might find in ancient Parsee documents, they have publicly announced in two great sentences, included in the Confession of Faith of the American Universalist denomination, their complete agreement with the essence of Zoroastrianism, for they profess belief in the certainty of retribution, and the final harmony of all souls with God. Here we have arrived at a complete synthesis of acceptable spiritual philosophy and no matter how widely some of us may differ among ourselves as to the means whereby universal harmony may be effected, we can all endorse the noble sentiment voiced by Hosea Ballou, the father of American Universalism, in a still popular hymn:

“ In God’s eternity,
There shall a day arise
When all of Adam’s race shall be
With Jesus in the skies.”

And equally in the glorious words of Epes Sargent, the stalwart Spiritualist, which are also found in many well-compiled hymnals:

“ The soul that sinneth, it shall surely die,—
Die to the sin that did its life confine.”

Again quoting from Dr. Alger, we will sum up our all too superficial glance at the Parsee faith. In the following sentences we behold a glorious picture of the future which awaits our planet and its multitudinous inhabitants: “The earth-wide stream of fire, flowing on, will cleanse every spot and everything. Even the loathsome realm of darkness and torment shall be humbled and made a part of the all-inclusive Paradise. Ahriman himself, reclaimed to virtue, replenished with primal light, abjuring the memories of his envious ways, and furling thenceforth the sable standard of his rebellion, shall become a ministering spirit of the Most High, and together with Ormuzd, shall chant the praises of Time-without-Bounds. All darkness, falsehood, suffering, shall flee utterly away, and the whole universe be filled by the illumination of good spirits blessed with functions of eternal delight. In regard to the fate of man —

“Such are the parables Zartusht addressed
To Iran’s faith, in ancient Zend-Avest.”

To this sublime picture we invite the earnest, prayerful attention of every benighted traveler along earth’s highway, who doubts that “Good will be the final goal of ill.” Universal salvation is the only salvation conceivable in a sane universe, and it has been the glorious mission of modern, as of ancient, Spiritualism to proclaim this blessed truth, not only as a postulate of philosophy or a reasonable religious faith, but as a demonstrated certainty based upon progressive life in the immortal spheres of Spirit.