2019-01-31T14:22:00-08:00
In the previous article, we talked about Zoroaster and current Zoroastrianism briefly, according to official references and the reality today. We talked about some Zoroastrian beliefs to remove the negative perception towards them.
Logical question
Why do religions try to find a place for themselves in time and history? Why is religion not just a general space for belief without the presence of a historical story and time that speaks about the beginning of religion?
A very logical question. The story of religion is necessary to link it to a higher or spiritual authority. It becomes the nucleus that preserves religion’s meaning in people’s souls, and religion without a historical narrative for it becomes just an unconvincing idea.
Why can’t religion and belief just be an innate nature from ancient times, without the need for a historical story?
This is the essence of the matter, because the relationship of time and religion is necessary as a basis for the first natural nature…the beginning…and anything else becomes not from the natural nature.
Therefore, the relationship of religions to history and time is a necessary relationship, to link religion to the first truth (the first nature).
It is true that religion and belief are specific to a group of people and people’s beliefs must be respected, but the problem is that history and time are not a belief and are not the property of a group, but rather a public matter that concerns everyone, and the existence of an imaginary date and time and imposing them as reality and we must respect them as a matter of respect. Belief, this would deny another real history and another time.
This is the reason for our conversation about the subject of Zoroaster, which is a conversation that discusses history and does not discuss religion or belief. We have no relation to belief at all, and we do not care at all about the beliefs of others. We are discussing history.
But because religion is linked to history and time, we are excused if the topic is misunderstood as an attack on the beliefs of others.
—————————————-
Why is Zoroaster a fictitious character and his story is pure fiction? A power that wanted to create an imaginary new world and Iran did not know this religion at all in the past?
Let us first discuss the history of Zoroaster
■ The name Zoroaster. Not all sources agree on the meaning of his name. Even the followers of the religion itself differ from the meaning of the name. This indicates that the name is strange. Rather, all sources agree that he got his name because of a characteristic or an incident that happened to him. This means that it is not his name. Real.
For me, I believe that it is a Greek name and nothing but a reverse translation of the name of King Darius, which is found in Greek and Jewish documents.
– Darais = Darais
(The letter “S” is pronounced “Z” like the word “Caesar” is pronounced “Caesar”)
– Dariz = Zerad
– Zerades = Zeradesh
(Sin is pronounced Shin in different dialects) The same name as King Corus, which is pronounced Cyrus.
– Ziradesh = Zerathustra (ta’ is a famous addition in the Iranian language)
We believe that the name is a reverse translation of King Darius, because the history written about this king says that he was a very religious king and brought religion in Iran to the peak of glory and the pinnacle of perfection, and he is considered the first king of the first monotheistic empire in the ancient world.
The character of Darius in the writings of the Greeks and Al-Yahoud, who was characterized by religiosity and faith, was the gateway from which the name Zoroaster came. To create a central religious character around which a religion revolves.
What makes us more certain is the sources’ insistence on pronouncing his name according to the Greek language, even though the Greek historical documents never spoke of a person named Zoroaster, nor did they speak of a religion called Zoroastrianism.
So why do the sources write the name Zoroaster in Greek pronunciation if they never talk about a Zoroastrian religion or a prophet named Zoroaster?
■ Zoroaster lived from 628 BC – 550 BC
Notice his date of birth. Don’t you find it very similar to the date of the Prophet Muhammad according to the Gregorian calendar, but in reverse (570 AD – 632 AD)?
The time of Zoroaster was determined according to what the sources said, on the basis of an old Persian calendar, and after comparison, they found that he lived in that period according to the Roman calendar.
But where is this ancient Persian calendar? And where are the documents that confirm that it existed and was in effect, despite the story of Zoroaster stating that most of the intellectual production was burned, so that the book of Zoroaster was rewritten approximately 600 years after its disappearance?
But the question is….. Did coincidence make Zoroaster live in the period of the beginning of the novel The Appearance of Persia, according to the sources of Greek and Jewish history? There was a prior awareness that wanted the story of religion to begin from this time. It was not a local awareness, but rather a Jewish and Western awareness.
Zoroaster died in the year 550 BC. At the time of his death, Persia was ruled by a king named Kashtasp. He was the king who believed in Zoroaster, spread his teachings, and swore to support and strengthen the religion of Zoroaster after the news of Zoroaster’s death reached him……but According to official historical sources, Persia was ruled in 550 BC by King Cyrus (Cyrus).
Who was ruling Persia when Zoroaster died? Was it Castasp or Cyrus?
It will be said that the calendar is inaccurate. Perhaps Zoroaster died before Cyrus and this resolves the contradiction, but the death of Zoroaster before the appearance of Cyrus will not end the contradiction either, because all the Greek historical sources that were written about Cyrus do not talk about the personality of Zoroaster and do not talk about a religion called Zoroaster.
Very important note:
If you look at the history of religions… you will find that all the pivotal figures that it founded appeared in the same period as Zoroaster, the sixth century BC, from Buddha to Mahawira to Confucius to Zoroaster to Cyrus to the Al-Yahoud. You feel as if a general global agreement occurred according to which a religion was established. Religions for the whole world, except for Islam, which deviated from the rule and appeared in a different time period… in the sixth century AD.
The appearance of Zoroaster in the same period as the appearance of Persia in history, according to Greek and Jewish sources, makes us feel when we read his story as if we are inside a world that is well aware of the Gregorian calendar, and gives us indications that we are facing a Greek and Jewish product, and there is an awareness that is very keen to place its products in the same time period. And it does not exceed it until another time.
■ Zoroaster went to someone to learn religion.
What is the nature of the religion that Zoroaster had? That is, Zoroaster came out of an ancient religious context, but history does not talk about the name of the religion and what was the religion before Zoroaster?
Here we ask the question: Did Allah Ahuramazda only inspire Zoroaster to be a prophet and messenger, or were there prophets and messengers who preceded him before Zoroaster? If the topic were an ancient context of a religion that existed before Zoroaster, then the Zoroastrian doctrine would talk about previous prophets and messengers, and Zoroaster would be a messenger. Like the other messengers, Zoroastrianism speaks of Zoroaster and that he alone is the messenger of the Allah Ahuramazda. Zoroaster became the one who created Ahuramazda, not the other way around.
We said that we have nothing to do with the faith, but we raised this point, to find out whether Zoroastrianism is a religion created by Zoroaster, or is it an ancient religion that exists so that we know its history.
■ Zoroaster, messenger of Allah Ahuramazda
According to history, it is said that people in Persia worshiped Ahuramazda, and it is said that Ahuramazda is composed, according to the ancient Avestan language, of the syllables (Ahu)(Ra)(Mazda).
The truth is that the explanation is not convincing to me, especially since the official historical sources say that the Avestan language is very difficult and incomprehensible… …..and for this reason the book Zoroaster was translated into the Pahlavi language. Therefore, I cannot be convinced by interpreting this name according to a language that is difficult, complex, and incomprehensible to followers of the religion itself.
I believe that Ahuramazda is a purely Greek name, and it is derived with a distortion from the name Hormuz, who is the Allah of wisdom in the Greek books.
So far, we have three pieces of evidence that make us believe that we are facing a Greek product (that is, Greek history), with a function and mission to confirm Greek history.
■ Zarasht was born in Aras, Azerbaijan
Although he was born in Azerbaijan, the religious adherents there are very few. This, on the one hand, and on the other hand, is the same place where Cyrus, the prophet of the Al-Yahoud, was born… the Aras region… a coincidence?! ….But we did not hear Cyrus, according to historical sources, talking about Zoroaster.
When Zoroaster died, Zoroastrianism was the religion of all those regions, and the matter continued from 550 BC until 333 BC…that is, 200 years. During this period, the city of Astakhr was formed as a spiritual center.
200 years create generations and peoples in which religion is deep and solid, but what is strange is that Alexander the Great, according to history, came and ended all religion completely.
Of course, a belief cannot end in a country, at all
I had spoken in a previous article about the story of Alexander and its role in history, and we talked about it as a fictitious character whose job is to create a historical journey across the region to survey history and time and create a new history and time, and this is what happened with the story of Zoroastrianism. Alexander’s job is to make the story appear. It makes sense if you ask questions about the reasons for the lack of an original copy of Zoroaster’s Avesta and about the heritage of Zoroastrianism, where it is, then the answer would be that Alexander burned it all, and there the questions end.
Of course, if a person thought logically, he would imagine Alexander the Great with an army in Iran… How big would his numbers be and what was the nature of the nuclear weapons that made him get there… And he would forget the whole world and get busy burning the heritage of Zoroastrianism… The whole world is focused on Persia… And his army has swords like the rest of the peoples of the world… but he was able to penetrate the geography, reach Persia, and burn all their books.
But the writer of the story found a way out for the reader… by confining Zoroastrianism to a spiritual center in which all the heritage of Zoroastrianism is present, and when you burn the center, it means that you have burned the entire world of Zoroastrianism from existence in all of Persia.
I mean, if you burned Mecca and all the books there, you would have obliterated the Islamic faith among the people. Is this the same logic?
Persia became a pagan…and throughout 600 years of burning Zoroastrian books, not even a single person wrote about Zoroastrianism. Completely finished. Does it make sense ?
Imagine Alexander in your city now… and he has an army with swords, and you and the people of your region have swords… and you surrender to them for 600 years, forget Islam, and Islam disappears from your minds. The idea that there is a Allah in the universe and that there is another life disappears.
the important
Zoroaster’s Avesta was written on 12,000 cow hides.
Can you imagine this number? A huge number, and a person needed this number to understand that life has a Creator and there is another day.
This number is in order to give another logical dimension, as it is impossible to write a book again with the size of 12 thousand cowhide… Therefore, it becomes logical that 12 thousand cowhide needs to wait 600 years until a Persian king comes out and revives the religion and collects the book of the Avesta.
But the strange thing is that Persia remained under Greek rule for 600 years and then returned again and became independent when the Persian ruler Shahpur ascended.
In the year 222 AD, Greece no longer existed in history, and the Romans were the only ones who had power at that time. How did Iran live under the rule of the Greeks for 600 years, who were able to end the religion? The Greeks are busy with Persia, but they do not have a presence in the vicinity of Persia in the region. They do not have a presence anywhere in the region except in Persia.
According to history, seven senior clerics carried out a search and combing operation in Persia to collect the heritage of Zoroastrianism. Is it possible that clerics are searching for their religious book from the people? The topic was related to popular stories and proverbs that they were looking for to write down.
As long as the topic is related to research, it is assumed that 600 years does not prevent anyone from knowing their religion and writing religious books, but all people, including the clergy, are inactive and uninterested in religion, until a king came and ordered the clergy to carry out the task.
The clergy collected what they could and obtained parts of the book of the Avesta. This means that there were copies of the book, not just one copy, until Alexander burned it and the religion ended.
But once they have collected what they were able to collect, they decide to translate it into another, different language, because the original language is complex, difficult, and incomprehensible.
Is it possible that 600 years can erase a language and replace it with a different and new language? Is it possible? We are 1,400 years old and have been subjected to many invasions and ruled by the Turks, but we can still read sacred religious books and there is no problem.
As I mentioned previously, the function of the fictitious figure of Alexander in history is to erase times, worlds, and languages and replace them with new worlds.
The book was collected and translated from its original language, Avesta, into the Pahlavi language, with explanations, additions, and comments by scholars and writers in the new book.
This means that the original copy does not exist….and we are facing a new copy approved by scholars…in the year 222 AD………but what is strange is that the oldest copy of the new book after the translation is from the year 1258 AD.
Note the date 1258 AD, in the same period in which the Mongols invaded Baghdad, according to history…. Doesn’t the topic surprise you?
how
The Mongols and Tatars burned all the books according to recorded history. It was a coincidence that the book of the Avesta appeared with this event.
But the most important question… Why did they replace the language of the original book with a new language? ……. Or the question more correctly… Why were they written in history that they replaced the language of the original book with a new language?
I will tell you the real and logical reason
Western scholars have given Persia three languages in history…in an official and approved manner, and every reader or student of history must memorize this information.
These are the languages that have passed into Iran throughout history, in order from oldest to newest.
Ancient Iranian language (Avesta)
Intermediate Iranian language (Pahlavi)
Modern (current) Iranian language
If the Avesta was written in the current Iranian language… the issue would cause a major historical problem… and would destroy the historical structure on which Kayan in the West worked for many centuries.
Is it necessary to invent another language and make it the language of the Book of Avesta?
Why ?
60% of the vocabulary of the current Iranian language is shared with the Arabic language
And what does it mean?
This means that the vocabulary of the Arabic language appeared in ancient history before Christ in the same language as today, and this represents a major disaster. It is strictly forbidden for the Arabic language to appear in ancient history………. It is forbidden to make the Arabic language exist and coexist with Greek history. Because then there will be awareness of the existence of Arabic in ancient times…..while the plan of history wants the Arabic language to appear only in Mecca.
What is the importance?
So that time does not come close in people’s imagination, the history must be ancient and not belong to today, so that the people do not feel that the story is modern and not very old, and so that awareness is not created among the people, who can think of the existence of an ancient book whose verses are detailed in the Arabic Quran.
He follows
.
.