Zorastrianism is one of the ancient Religions of the world and it was founded by Zarathustra.
The religion came into being in Persia, now Iran.
There is a view that Zorastrianism had its echo in Islam.
The Avestan word Athra has its equivalent Agni, in Sanskrit; and Ignis, in Latin. The cult of ever burning fire seems to have been wide spread among the Indo-Iranians. Since the sun by day and the fire by night were the only sources of illumination, the Indo-Iranians came to realize the brightness of their own hearth fires to that of the sun in the sky. The sun was also necessary for the growth of plants, just as fire was necessary to prepare the food that nourished them, and they became aware of the central role played by the sun and fire in sustaining their life. The regular pattern of the rising and setting of the sun helped them to realize the established truths within the universe and a link between sun and fire was formed. Fire came to be recognized as the symbol of Truth and Order (‘ASA’ in Avestan and ‘RTA’ in Sanskrit). This in turn led to the use of fire as the tester of truth and fire ordeals were used to establish a person’s innocence. According to Pahalvi texts, molten metal was poured on the chest of the accused or the person was made to drink hot fiery ‘soogand’ (burning sulphur). If the person survived the ordeal it was taken as a sign of innocence’
Mary Boyce (1700 BC-1200 BC) and Gherhardo Gnoli (1000 BC) have considered linguistic and socio-cultural evidence to place Zoroaster between 1500 and 500 BC. The basis of this theory is based primarily on proposed linguistic similarities between the Old Avestan language of the Zoroastrian Gathas and the Sanskrit of the Rigveda, a collection of early Vedic hymns. For both texts to have a common Indo-Iranian origin, it is implausible that the Gathas and Rigveda could have been composed more than a few centuries apart, thus these scholars suggest that Zoroaster lived and composed the Gathas much earlier than the 6th century BC.
Classical scholarship first attests to Zoroaster in the 5th century BC. Zoroastrian sources themselves (the Bundahishn, “258 years before Alexander”) place Zoroaster in the 6th century BC, which coincided with historiographic accounts (Ammianus Marcellinus xxiii.6.32, 4th century CE). The Traditional Zoroastrian date originates in the period immediately following Alexander the Great‘s conquest of theAchaemenid Empire in 330 BCE. The Seleucid kings who gained power following Alexander’s death instituted an “Age of Alexander” as the new calendrical epoch. This did not appeal to the Zoroastrian priesthood who then attempted to establish an “Age of Zoroaster”. To do so, they needed to establish when Zoroaster had lived, which they accomplished by counting back the length of successive generations until they concluded that Zoroaster must have lived “258 years before Alexander”. This estimate then re-appeared in the 9th- to 12th-century texts of Zoroastrian tradition’
In the Gathas, Zoroaster sees the human condition as the mental struggle between aša (truth) and druj (lie). The cardinal concept of aša—which is highly nuanced and only vaguely translatable—is at the foundation of all Zoroastrian doctrine, including that of Ahura Mazda (who is aša), creation (that isaša), existence (that is aša) and as the condition for free will.
The purpose of humankind, like that of all other creation, is to sustain aša. For humankind, this occurs through active participation in life and the exercise of constructive thoughts, words and deeds.
Elements of Zoroastrian philosophy entered the West through their influence on Judaism and Middle Platonism and have been identified as one of the key early events in the development of philosophy. Among the classic Greek philosophers, Heraclitus is often referred to as inspired by Zoroaster’s thinking.
It may be noted that Persia was a part of Bharatavarsha and Gandhara , now Afghanistan, extended its empire to The area we call Iran now.
Like in the Vedas Fire was worshiped .
There are sscolarly papers that propose that the Zend Avestha is from the Rig Veda.
And the Parsis perform a ceremony similar to Upanayana of Hinduism.
Again there is the Hitties connection to the Tamils and the Persians.
Plus the prevalence of Tamil Dialects , even today,around Afghanisthan and Iran.
Please refer my post on this.
The customs and cultural behaviour of the Zoroastrians indicate the Vedic roots of Zoroastrianism.
A treaty signed by the Hittites and Mitannis dating to the fourteenth century BC calls upon Indara/Indra, Mitras(il)/Mitra, Nasatianna/Nasatya and Uruvanass(il)/Varuna, all known toRig-Veda and Avesta.
Hittites and Mitannis were from North Syria.
I had posted articles about the Vedic /Tamil origin of these people.
Though there are similarities the roles of the Devas seem to have been reversed.
(haoma (soma), daha(dasa), hepta (sapta), hindu (sindhu), and Ahura (Asura) inAvesta)
Indra and the devas are demonic inAvesta,and Ahura/asura is considered the highest deity.
“At the time of composition of the Vedas, Varuna was losing his importance to Indra. In Avesta, Ahura Mazda is the main divinity and some people think that he is thesame as Varuna. Varuna sat with his spies who flew all around the world and bought back reports on the conduct of mortals. He abhorred sin and loathed evil deeds prompted by anger, drink and gambling.”
Probably a sect left on this issue and had a role in this difference.
Rig Veda is dated around 5000 BC while Avesta is dated around 1000 BC.
The Chief God worshiped in the Vedas is Agni,Fire.
Zoroastrians are Fire worshipers.
Another important connection is Upanayana ceremony which is the primary duty of a Hindu.
Zoroastrians have a similar Ceremony ‘Navjote’
‘The Navjote[pronunciation?] (Persian:سدرهپوشی, Sedreh pushi) ceremony is the ritual through which an individual is inducted into theZoroastrian religion and begins to wear the Sedreh and Kushti. The term navjote is used primarily by the Zoroastrians of India (theParsis), while sedreh pushi is used primarily by the Zoroastrians of Iran. Zoroastrians from Pakistan consisting of both Parsis andIranis use both terms…
Although there is no upper limit to the age of the individual for which the ceremony takes place, in common practice it occurs before a girl or boy reaches maturity. Under no circumstances is it permitted to be done for a child less than seven years of age since the child at that age range cannot comprehend the significance of the event.
In Vendidad 18.54, individuals above the age of 15 (once considered the age at which one attained adulthood) who are not yet been invested are said to be likely to fall into evil ways. In the 9th-12th century texts of Zoroastrian tradition, the same group are said to bekushad davarashni, literally “running about improperly clothed”. So for instance Menog-i Khrad 2.35 and theBook of Arda Viraf(25.6.10). The latter considers such a thing to be a service to demons (the daevas). Other texts of tradition that define adulthood as the boundary include the Sad-dar 10.1 andShayast na-Shayast 10.13. ,.
The ceremony is traditionally the first time a Zoroastrian wears the sedreh undershirt and kushti belt, which they then continue to wear for the rest of their life. The sacred clothing signifies parental responsibility as well as responsibility for the one who is undergoing this ceremony. When the child wears the sacred clothes, it means the parents are now obligated to morally and religiously educate the child. If the child commits a wrongful act, it is their responsibility, as they may also take some pride in themselves when their child commits a righteous act. The sacred thread and shirt also teach the child responsibility, as they are to be untied before certain practices, such as prayer, bathing, and before meals, and re-tied shortly after the task is completed.
The shirt has a construction extremely specific to this culture.
“According to tradition, Guru Nanak said to contemporary theologians of Islam during his visit to Mecca….” According to Makke-Madine di Goshati edited by Prof. Kulwant Singh, Guru Nanak said: “Mecca is an ancient place of pilgrimage, and there is a Linga of Mahadeva here. It was presided over by the Brahmanas. One of the Brahmanas, though born among them, became a Musalman… . His own name was Mohammed, which means the same as Mahadeva… . He floated some sort of a creed, and taught it… .”
Mohammed—A Sanskrit-speaking Vedic Indian
Islam Vedic khatre mein hai
FOR the last some days Satiricus has been wondering. Satiricus has been wondering if he has been mentioned by name in the Bhavishya Purana. No, it is not a frivolous thought. For if, as it seems, the Bhavishya Purana mentions so many people who are going to come in the future, why should Satiricus not be one of them? Is that because he does not deserve to be mentioned? True, he is not a mentionable founder of a religion—a religion that is not only non-Hindu but anti-Hindu enough to force a Hindu scripture to mention its founder. Take this recent seminar in Mumbai, organised by a forum called Islamic Education Centre and prominently reported by the English-language Press (who else?) under the heading “All religions speak of Mohammed, say scholars”. Did you notice? They are scholars, real scholars, because they say all religions speak of Mohammed. Strangely enough, Guru Nanak does not seem to qualify as one such scholar. For what, according to tradition, he said to contemporary theologians of Islam during his visit to Mecca sounds utterly unscholarly. According to Makke-Madine di Goshati edited by Prof. Kulwant Singh, Guru Nanak said: “Mecca is an ancient place of pilgrimage, and there is a Linga of Mahadeva here. It was presided over by the Brahmanas. One of the Brahmanas, though born among them, became a Musalman… . His own name was Mohammed, which means the same as Mahadeva… . He floated some sort of a creed, and taught it… .” Fortunately there are scholars who know better, and one of them is Mirza Afzal Baig of Jamaat-i-Islami. For, inaugurating this seminar with his erudite oration Baig reportedly revealed that various prophecies contained in the scriptures of different religions hinted at the arrival of Prophet Mohammed. Then, beginning with Hindu scriptures, Baig said: “In the Bhavishya Purana there is a verse that declares the arrival of a mleccha spiritual teacher, whose name would be Mohammed.” Is Satiricus surprised? He is, and he is not, He is not surprised because even Zarathushtra, who antedates Mohammed by thousands of years, has been mentioned in the Bhavishya Purana. Why, even his mother has been named, writes Madalasa Devi Agrawal in her book Age of the Bharat War. She relates a legend according to which a Brahmin woman by name Nikshubha got the boon of a son. The boon said, “Your son will become famous by the name Maga. His name will be Zarathushtra, and he will bring glory to the dynasty. His descendents will worship fire and will be known by the name Maga, and being worshippers of ‘Soma’ will be Maga Brahmins.” Well, now, the curious cuss that Satiricus is, he is struck by the curious coincidence that both Prophet Zarathushtra and Prophet Mohammed have been called Brahmins. Anyway, Satiricus is not surprised at the possibility that if the Bhavishya Purana mentioned one Brahmin founding a religion of his own, it could well have mentioned another Brahmin doing the same. What, at the most, surprises him is, how could the learned lady Madalasa Devi mention one and miss the other? Oh well, perhaps she and Janab Baig read different editions of the Bhavishya Purana. In fact there may even be a third edition of the Purana. For the late Balshastri Hardas, a reputed Sanskrit scholar, had once said in a public lecture that the Bhavishya Purana referred not only to Queen Victoria but even to a multi-millionaire of Nagpur by name Shri Buti. So, says Satiricus’ Sanskritist friend Dr Waradpande, why Mohammed alone, even Christ may have been mentioned, although he cannot check it out, because “as far as I know there is no word index of the Bhavishya Purana”. What does that show? It shows that when Waradpande says “as far as I know” obviously he does not know far enough, and by no means as far as Janab Baig, who may have either found or himself prepared such an index. So then, what is the consolidated list of the Bhavishya Purana? It is Zarathushtra, Chris.
Independent research into these aspects shallbth
Citations and references.