Readers' Forum
Priests in our prayers
Through your columns, I would request religious scholars and historians to kindly explain why in our prayers we mention Jamasp Hakim, Dasturji Aderbad Maraspand, Ardaveeraf, etc but do not remember Dastur Tansar who collected scattered Avesta texts during the reign of the first Sasanian king Ardeshir Babekan and also Dastur Kerdar (Kartir) who consolidated the religion during the reigns of later kings?
Dastur Kerdar is so far the only religious head whose inscription has been found in Iran along with those of the kings. In his inscription, he mentions Ahura Mazda several times and also the establishing of fire temples, driving out Christians and other propagandists, etc. He does not mention Prophet Zarathushtra. Why? Zarathushtra preached in the court of King Gustasp who was defeated later on by Cyrus the Great many years before Kerdar. So why has Kerdar (Kartir) not mentioned his name even once? Do we have any explanation?
Dastur Kerdar is so far the only religious head whose inscription has been found in Iran along with those of the kings. In his inscription, he mentions Ahura Mazda several times and also the establishing of fire temples, driving out Christians and other propagandists, etc. He does not mention Prophet Zarathushtra. Why? Zarathushtra preached in the court of King Gustasp who was defeated later on by Cyrus the Great many years before Kerdar. So why has Kerdar (Kartir) not mentioned his name even once? Do we have any explanation?
PHIROZE J. KUTAR
pjekutar@hotmail.com
pjekutar@hotmail.com
Zoroastrian scholar Farrokh Vajifdar of London responds at Parsiana’s request:
Phiroze Kutar’s two-part query can be dealt with on "religious” grounds only if the historical background is clarified. Kutar’s use of "Dastur” for just about every ancient personality leads to confusion. Let me sort this out as follows:
The mention of Jamasp as Hakim straightaway tells us that this could only have come about in post-Sasanian times (224-652 CE) when prayers included religious heroes whose names could have been easily lost had they not been preserved in Pazand prayers composed most probably during the early Indian diaspora. Hakim is an Arabic honorific — it usually refers to a learned person, a sage or "doctor.” Jamaspa was traditionally regarded as Zarathushtra’s son-in-law to whom the Mazdaic revelation was imparted. He, together with Frashaoshtra, his brother, could be seen as the first apostles of the faith. So Hakim is quite relevant. (Incidentally, Vishtaspa/Gushtasp was never "King,” but kavi! Cyrus/Kurush had nothing to do with Vishtaspa or even Zarathushtra — they were centuries apart!)
In Denkard IV is a kind of potted, very slanted history of the faith after Zarathushtra. It is very important to know that scattered Avesta and Zand written or oral texts were firstly brought together by Valakhsh V (or maybe VI), the Parthian ruler (a dynasty detested on political grounds by the Sasanians) in the late second century. Thereafter Tosar/Tansar is mentioned as Rast-dastawar or religious authority of the Sasanian founding dynast Ardashir I, son of a provincial ruler Papak, son of Sasan. Tosar is reported to have selected from this collection whatever suited him, leaving out the rest! Tosar was not the collector, but the first editor.
Kirdir/Kartir was an altogether different sort of career priest. He had served under five Sasanian monarchs, rising from herbadh all the way to ayenbadh — a supreme pontiff over all Iran. He was also a supreme politician — maneuvering and manipulative — who actually interfered in the royal succession after Ardashir I’s grandson Hormazd. Kirdir effectively dislocated the legitimate order by marginalizing the rightful heir Narseh (Shahpuhr I’s legitimate son) and installing the son by a concubine as Bahram I. From that time onwards Kirdir became all-powerful, to the extent that he could instigate murder (Mani) and have his own inscriptions placed alongside the great Sasanian rock reliefs (Naqsh-i Rustam and Ka’ba-ye Zardusht), and on his own account, complete with his portraiture, elsewhere! How’s that for one-upmanship!
It is also important to know that Kirdir did not "drive out Christians and other propagandists, etc” but pressured and forcibly converted them! He tells us so in his own words! So much for the prevalent myth of Sasanian religious tolerance! When Narseh finally managed to gain the throne (after Bahram I, II, and III), Shahpuhr I’s rightful heir, understandably miffed at Kirdir, was noted for his religious laxity. When asked why he did not visit the fire temples, he replied that his service to God left him with little inclination to serve the fire! He evidently regarded priests with suspicion, and had had Kirdir retired and his memory was henceforth erased from official proclamations and documents. A dastur in fact, but no dastur in memory.
The case of Adarbadh, son of Mahraspand bears some re-casting. Using an official document, the author of Denkard IV reports on the true nature of the good dastur’s feat at the first known interfaith congress (c.350 CE). Concerning Adarbadh’s victorious contribution, the exact wording is "pad gowishn i passakht” — "by seemly discourse” or "by force of argument.” Later, by retelling of the event at several hands, it became "ordeal by molten brass!” What that great priest, the headstrong Shahpuhr II’s minister for religion, had actually used was not a cheap exhibitionist trick but the straightforward teachings of the Gathas with which he was evidently very well acquainted!
Adarbadh’s memory survives in two longish texts on ethics, morality and right behavior. Indeed he was truly a great dastur by any reckoning.
With "Ardaveeraf” — actually Arda Wiraz — we enter a different religious aspect. Wiraz was not a priest but a very well informed, pious layman. His particular feat was to ingest an inordinate amount of a ferocious cocktail, followed by a rapid unconsciousness, and visions ranging from the sublime to the absolutely horrendous. It should be noted that his "history” is paralleled in Denkard IV, indicating its late date of composition. Wiraz himself must have lived around the times after Alexander the Macedonian, and his visionary journey into the Hereafter must have then gained much horror in its retelling over the centuries.
Lastly, a great irony: both Wiraz and Kirdir had undertaken visionary "journeys” into the after-worlds, the former through the agency of strong drugs, the latter through special preparatory rituals and a certain surrogacy. Yet Wiraz is remembered; Kirdir is carefully "forgotten” (but his rock inscriptions still bear witness to him!). In the matter of remembering the great dasturs of the past in our prayers, there is no reason not to add others, just because nobody in India had heard of them. How about Khosro I’s mobadhan mobadh Weh-Shahpuhr who brought together the 21 Nasks; and Dasturan-dastur Manushchihr-i Juvanjam or even his strong-willed brother Zadspram, both of whom had so valiantly striven for Mazdayasna in the 9th century — well into the era of a fiercely proselytizing Islam?
(I can think of several unmentionable "Dasturs” whose names will be best forgotten from our prayers — but let those pass!)
Phiroze Kutar’s two-part query can be dealt with on "religious” grounds only if the historical background is clarified. Kutar’s use of "Dastur” for just about every ancient personality leads to confusion. Let me sort this out as follows:
The mention of Jamasp as Hakim straightaway tells us that this could only have come about in post-Sasanian times (224-652 CE) when prayers included religious heroes whose names could have been easily lost had they not been preserved in Pazand prayers composed most probably during the early Indian diaspora. Hakim is an Arabic honorific — it usually refers to a learned person, a sage or "doctor.” Jamaspa was traditionally regarded as Zarathushtra’s son-in-law to whom the Mazdaic revelation was imparted. He, together with Frashaoshtra, his brother, could be seen as the first apostles of the faith. So Hakim is quite relevant. (Incidentally, Vishtaspa/Gushtasp was never "King,” but kavi! Cyrus/Kurush had nothing to do with Vishtaspa or even Zarathushtra — they were centuries apart!)
In Denkard IV is a kind of potted, very slanted history of the faith after Zarathushtra. It is very important to know that scattered Avesta and Zand written or oral texts were firstly brought together by Valakhsh V (or maybe VI), the Parthian ruler (a dynasty detested on political grounds by the Sasanians) in the late second century. Thereafter Tosar/Tansar is mentioned as Rast-dastawar or religious authority of the Sasanian founding dynast Ardashir I, son of a provincial ruler Papak, son of Sasan. Tosar is reported to have selected from this collection whatever suited him, leaving out the rest! Tosar was not the collector, but the first editor.
Kirdir/Kartir was an altogether different sort of career priest. He had served under five Sasanian monarchs, rising from herbadh all the way to ayenbadh — a supreme pontiff over all Iran. He was also a supreme politician — maneuvering and manipulative — who actually interfered in the royal succession after Ardashir I’s grandson Hormazd. Kirdir effectively dislocated the legitimate order by marginalizing the rightful heir Narseh (Shahpuhr I’s legitimate son) and installing the son by a concubine as Bahram I. From that time onwards Kirdir became all-powerful, to the extent that he could instigate murder (Mani) and have his own inscriptions placed alongside the great Sasanian rock reliefs (Naqsh-i Rustam and Ka’ba-ye Zardusht), and on his own account, complete with his portraiture, elsewhere! How’s that for one-upmanship!
It is also important to know that Kirdir did not "drive out Christians and other propagandists, etc” but pressured and forcibly converted them! He tells us so in his own words! So much for the prevalent myth of Sasanian religious tolerance! When Narseh finally managed to gain the throne (after Bahram I, II, and III), Shahpuhr I’s rightful heir, understandably miffed at Kirdir, was noted for his religious laxity. When asked why he did not visit the fire temples, he replied that his service to God left him with little inclination to serve the fire! He evidently regarded priests with suspicion, and had had Kirdir retired and his memory was henceforth erased from official proclamations and documents. A dastur in fact, but no dastur in memory.
The case of Adarbadh, son of Mahraspand bears some re-casting. Using an official document, the author of Denkard IV reports on the true nature of the good dastur’s feat at the first known interfaith congress (c.350 CE). Concerning Adarbadh’s victorious contribution, the exact wording is "pad gowishn i passakht” — "by seemly discourse” or "by force of argument.” Later, by retelling of the event at several hands, it became "ordeal by molten brass!” What that great priest, the headstrong Shahpuhr II’s minister for religion, had actually used was not a cheap exhibitionist trick but the straightforward teachings of the Gathas with which he was evidently very well acquainted!
Adarbadh’s memory survives in two longish texts on ethics, morality and right behavior. Indeed he was truly a great dastur by any reckoning.
With "Ardaveeraf” — actually Arda Wiraz — we enter a different religious aspect. Wiraz was not a priest but a very well informed, pious layman. His particular feat was to ingest an inordinate amount of a ferocious cocktail, followed by a rapid unconsciousness, and visions ranging from the sublime to the absolutely horrendous. It should be noted that his "history” is paralleled in Denkard IV, indicating its late date of composition. Wiraz himself must have lived around the times after Alexander the Macedonian, and his visionary journey into the Hereafter must have then gained much horror in its retelling over the centuries.
Lastly, a great irony: both Wiraz and Kirdir had undertaken visionary "journeys” into the after-worlds, the former through the agency of strong drugs, the latter through special preparatory rituals and a certain surrogacy. Yet Wiraz is remembered; Kirdir is carefully "forgotten” (but his rock inscriptions still bear witness to him!). In the matter of remembering the great dasturs of the past in our prayers, there is no reason not to add others, just because nobody in India had heard of them. How about Khosro I’s mobadhan mobadh Weh-Shahpuhr who brought together the 21 Nasks; and Dasturan-dastur Manushchihr-i Juvanjam or even his strong-willed brother Zadspram, both of whom had so valiantly striven for Mazdayasna in the 9th century — well into the era of a fiercely proselytizing Islam?
(I can think of several unmentionable "Dasturs” whose names will be best forgotten from our prayers — but let those pass!)
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive