Talk:Ahura Mazda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Ahura Mazda was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
August 1, 2010 Good article nominee Not listed
WikiProject Zoroastrianism (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoroastrianism, which is a collaboration of editors who thrive to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Zoroastrianism-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Religion (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Good versus Evil[edit]

There is more to this religion than is mentioned here. For instance, there is supposed to be a clash between good and evil. I can remember the name Ahrima in the role as demon. I checked this out. --Wereldburger758 07:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

It is now there in the article. So my previous remark is not longer relevant. -- Wereldburger758 06:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Looking at the sections which describes 'the Lie' as chosing to reject Ahura Mazda does anyone else see the parallels with the Christian idea of the rebellion of Lucifer against God? Its worth noticing that Lucifer means 'Born of the Light' and that the word Devil comes from the Greek word Diabolos which means 'Liar'. The verbal parallels are very interesting. The Dualistic Christian sect known as the Cathars saw the created world as coming about through the rebellion of Lucifer/Satan who was the Darkness against God who was the Light. As in this acticle's description of the principle idea of Zoroastrianism, the Cathars' task was to reconnect with God who was separated from us by Lucifer's world of created matter. The imagery of Light vs Darkness is very similar. Some commentators trace the Cathars back to Mani who was himself a prophet who grew out of the Persian tradition, uniting Zoroastrian ideas with Christianity. Very interesting. --ThePeg 17:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Check Lucifer for a discussion on that name. The concept of druj as 'the Lie' is fascinating to me, as an amateur philosopher. I've been focusing lately on a semi-materialistic interpretation of such things. This section:

"chaos (that opposes order); or 'uncreation', evident as natural decay (Avestan: nasu) that opposes creation; or more literally 'the Lie'"

reminds me of entropy. The equivalent concept in Christianity might be the sin nature of Adam's children. It describes the wasting and dispersal of energy from a system, the reduction of order and usability, the increase of unusable chaos and disorder, and the fatigue and breakage of materials. Of course, I can't think of a decent way to add this to the article at the moment. --BlueNight 07:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
actually, take a look at Devil, in particular the Judaism section. -- Fullstop 05:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

"This concept of asha versus the druj should not be confused with the good-versus-evil battle evident in western religions, for although both forms of opposition express moral conflict, the asha versus druj concept is more subtle and nuanced."
This appears to me--how its written--a value statement. The main difference between the two concepts is the focus; asha vs druj refers to something materially universal; while good and evil refers to the realm of the psyche. Whats more nuanced is the implications of the concept, because you have to explain asha vs druj extends to a lot of different spheres. Good vs evil is more direct. But as a religious concept itself isn't more nuanced. The reason Christianity, for instance, focuses on good vs evil, because it treats the world as governed by Logos, so everything in nature is inherently treated as a product of reason, and the focus shifts to the psyche and human volition (the psyche doesn't recognize the order behind things), with conflict in free will, even though thats generally thought of as part of God's plan. While here, everything thats in disorder is out of Ahura Mazda's control. The difference can easily be explained in a way that doesn't sound like its talking down on the good vs. evil concept. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brianshapiro (talkcontribs) 20:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC).
I'm not certain that your assessment is entirely correct. In particular the view that Christianity sees the world governed by reason; On an intellectual plane this could be one way to explain it, but for the common man and until the 21th century certainly for most clerics as well, faith is not dealt with on an intellectual plane, and indeed could safely be considered to be the sphere opposing reason. Also, the observation that "everything thats in disorder is out of Ahura Mazda's control" is quite ingeneous. :) In Zoroaster's view of Free Will, God does not control. Period. That disorder is out of Ahura Mazda's control is simply a logical consequence of that idea. The way you put it however sounds as if Ahura Mazda has everything but disorder under control. ;)
Nonetheless, you are quite right in observing that from a philosophical point of view "is more subtle and nuanced" could be interpreted to mean "more intellectually appealing [than plain old good vs. evil]". That is, as you also point out, an issue of semantics and could be rephrased, for instance as "not as concrete as". The question is however whether any rephrase would change anything for the world at large,... after all, its all a matter of interpretation, and hence subject to the eye of the beholder. -- Fullstop 12:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
ps: I'm having a hell of a time coming up for a simple coherent and yet comprehensive explanation of the philosophical concept of asha/arta in all its senses of "right" (equitable, fair[ness], honest[y], law[ful], just[ice], accurate, true/truth, proper, moral, virtue[ousness], rightful/right[eousness], integrity, equity, rectitude). Can you help?
    The angra maiynu is the evil side of your mind.  The sapanta maiynu is the good side.  I would know because I am Zoroastrian.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC) 

Wishmaster movies[edit]

Ahura Mazda is referenced heavily in some of the Wishmaster movies... should there be a paragraph on this? --Ifrit 09:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you link me to "wishmaster movies"? Is it Wishmaster (film)? Sure we can have a part about it under popular media section or something --K a s h Talk | email 10:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

What is Name's origin?[edit]

I doubt that name is Indo-European origin. Although I don't believe in connection between Indians & Europeans(anthropologically).
Well, I heard Buryat shamanistic(probabily Tengriistic origin) prayer on New Lunar Year celebration(Sagalgaan). It starts & ends by this verse: Xaan Hormasta(Aramazd?) huhe nomyn tenger manai.
I also think that Zarathushtra have anciet Altaic or Proto-Turkic origin. He was born in Central Asia & only Altaic people live there & ever lived.
I know that some of you'll claim that Indo-European people emmigrated from Centra Asia to Europe & India, and I respect your opinion. But I'm find such version very strange, because if it's really so, then where did Kipchaks(Turkic) came from?
P.S: I also know that ancient Turkic people were monotheists(tengriists) & called God with different names: Tenger (Tanri, Tengri, Tener) Alla (this name means - the One who gives & takes, from turkic word 'al' - take) Gozbodi (I doubt about correctnes of this, origin for russian word Gospodi(The Lord))
--—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 21:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC).
The name 'Ahura Mazda' is not of Indo-European origin, and the article does not presume to say so. As for the name appearing in Buryat recitation...
the name "Hormasta (Aramazd?)" could derive from pre-Zoroastrian times, and/or ...
Zoroastrian influence (or even Zoroastrian derivation) is also quite possible. After all, Zoroastrianism was once the predominant religion throughout the Greater Iranian world, and its quite possible that ritual invocations have survived to the present day even if they have little (if any) relationship to Zoroastrianism any more.
-- Fullstop 05:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

In Popular Culture[edit]

I've erased this section partly because polluting articles with encyclopedic knowledge of comic books, Wonder Woman and other fiction is not encyclopedic, and partly because it was embarassing and irrelevant. Wikipedia administrators should reconsider permitting users to start headings in articles titled "In Popular Culture" and take a stand against this stupid fad. Scary Monster

I have suggested this be moved to Zoroastrianism in popular culture, in line with other cultural depictions of deities. (talk) 10:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)


Is Ahura Mazda the same as the Abrahamic God, or is there no way to determine this?--The4sword 01:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

There are a couple of ways to answer this question, but in short, no. They are seen as distinct entities originating in differenet cultures and worshipped in different ways. Flutterman (talk) 17:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


Is the Persian Hormuz really derived from Ahura Mazda? The reason is that it was the name of several Sassanid Kings. I believe the Shahnameh has ارمزد (Ormazd) and Hormuz (هرمز) which might signify different meanings. Indeed Hor/Khwar means Sun as in Khwurshid or Hurakhsh (Suhrawardi's term for highest light) --alidoostzadeh (talk) 02:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The distinction between o(h)r- and (h)or- is negligible and can simply be attributed to dialectal differences. The theophoric name of the Sassanid kings could be written either way. Its not as if there is a phonetic distinction that needs to be preserved.
or- is distinct from kho-, which is a gutteral consonant (xo, xɔ, xa).
Notwithstanding the later conflation of Mazda with light, the roots are different and developed differently:
  • The IIr root of ahura is asu "to be", hence asura, "to make/facilitate being." asu -> Av:ahu -> MP:ho -> o(h)
  • The IIr root of hvar is sva "to shine," hence "hvara" "to make/facilitate shining." sva -> Av:hva -> MP:khwa -> kho
Given that Perso-Arabic is essentially an abjad, its rather silly to pretend to represent "correct" pronunciation using it. Just sticking it in is worthless nationalistic preening. Instead of saying "In Shahnameh <chapter:verse> the word is rendered XYZ" and so actually contributing something of substance, the word just hangs there doing nothing. Not that ارمزد is even correct per the Shahnameh. It has a vau, اورمزد.
-- Fullstop (talk) 21:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually I am referencing Dehkhoda's dictionary. Under ارمزد it has

يکی کودک آمدش ارمزدروز بنيک اختر و فال گيتي‌فروز (فردوسی) It is referring to the day of Ormazd Of course there is the more popular اورمزد as well. شب اورمزد آمد و ماه دی So both versions are represented. I'll include both. I think it is important to have this word, since Old Persian and Middle Persian and Modern Persian all have the native word for it. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 03:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

  • You will never get it, will you?
OR #1: Claiming a source different from the one you are using. (Shahnameh is not Daekhoda)
OR #2: Using a source out of context. (reference to Ormazd roz & Ormazd mah when the subject is neither)
  • >>"I think it is important to have this word since since Old Persian and Middle Persian and Modern Persian all have the native word for it"
Please don't insult my intelligence. If you can't think of a reason, then don't come up with a stupid one. Your (plural) parochial/tribal/petty pride/exuberance/naivete is not a secret. That you (plural) are bored is not a secret either. So, unless you have something encyclopedic to discuss/contribute, go bother someone else.
  • It doesn't matter if you provide 1 or 2 or 10 "versions." They are all useless. They don't do anything for anyone.
-- Fullstop (talk) 09:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I am not sure what you are arguing about. Of course Shahnameh is not Dekhoda, but the Dehkhoda dictionary quotes Shahnameh, Sanai and Abu Shukur Balkhi. So in essense, I am quoting the Shahnameh via Dehkhoda. I would read the dictionary before trying to make a point, just for the sake of argument. Second Ormazd is separate from the word from Rooz. Sanai anyhow does not connect it to the day. Both ارمزد and اورمزد Have been used as shown in the Dehkhoda dictionary, so both are correct.--alidoostzadeh (talk) 19:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

'Hence God'?[edit]

Is it necessary for the opening paragraph to suggest that Ahura Mazda is the same deity as Yahweh? If there is a parallel between the two then shouldn't this be drawn under an appropriate subheading? (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Why do you assume that the word "God" is a synonm of Yahweh? -- Fullstop (talk) 15:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Historical lineage and mythological structure do suggest that the Abrahamic 'diety' did evolve from this God, which itself almost certianly evolved from the Sethian religion's Demiurge (in which it was part of a greater pantheon, but was hidden in a cloud with a throne shortly after birth, and thus, belived itself to be the only god in existance, with no superiors), seeing as the mythology and personality of the diety remains consistent. Iconography of the diety also has a flow to it: a lion-headed diety (which, in turn, created 'archeons/angels' with similar physiology--- say, a lion, an eagle, a man, and a bull, ahem) depicted in a ring-like halo, to the Old Man In the Ring that is this god, to the Old Man With Halo of the Abrahamic god.--Xavier Orona (talk) 09:46, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

variety of names[edit]

dear Warrior. I think the variety of names in Parthian, Armenian, Georgian and new Persian deserve a place in the article. Ahura Mazda was an integral part of their belief system (which may or may not be considered Orthodox Zoroastrian). There these local names sound too different than the original Avestan name they definitly deserve to be mentioned. I know why Xashaiar opposes them. He only likes Persian and looks down on everything non Persian and non-Tehrani.You see this too in the Nowruz article. He reacts allergical to the flags of Turkic speaking countries (which are culturally Iranian nay way). But why do YOU oppose them?--Babakexorramdin (talk) 21:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't. The names are put in the first sentence of the lead in brackets, where they have a much better chance of being seen. -- warrior4321 21:53, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
They do nor refer to certain languages and according alphabet. I want to let see how vast was bthe realm that worshipped Ahura Mazda. Moreover I think it is an answer who try to deny and neglact the zoroastrian legacy of these nations and cultures. If you do not like it in the lead, then find another place for them, but they definitely deserve a place. In any case they are more relevant than all those irrelevant sanskrit terms, put in the zoroastrian terms by our Indianized Zoroastrian lost cousins. The danger is to orientalize the Iranic topics. Iranic topics should preserve their Iranic identity.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
We are not here to promote "Iranian topics". The deniance of Zoroastrian legacy in these nations is to reason to ruin an article. That paragraph is clunky and hard to read. The other names that Ahura Mazda was called by is in the lead, there is no need to have a seperate paragraph on it. Are the Sanskrit terms that you refer to in the perceived origin paragraph? -- warrior4321 22:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Am I ruining this article or am I improving it? Those names were there for a long time and you removed them. The choice is yours. Whether you include thopse names or I will remove those Sanskrit terms. That will be fair.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 04:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Confusing non-sentence[edit]

Under "In other religions" the first sentence reads: In Manichaeism, the name Ohrmazd Bay ("god Ahura Mazda") was used for the primal figure Nāšā Qaḏmāyā, the "original man" and emanation of the Father of Greatness (in Manicheism called Zurvan) through whom after he sacrificed himself to defend the world of light was consumed by the forces of darkness.

Should there be an "it" and a comma after "defend" or what? I'm not familiar with the doctrine, and I don't want to misrepresent it, but the sentence as presented is mis-structured. For a moment I thought just deleting "through" would do it, but it doesn't! GeorgeTSLC (talk) 21:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

    Ahura Mazda has 101 names.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC) 

image is not correct[edit]

The investiture of Ardashir I and Bahram II and other is Anahita and Amesh Spenta Asha no Ahura Mazda--Yolycool (talk) 06:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ahura Mazda/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz Talk 14:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
Yes check.svg Done
  • Lead:
    • Can "Old Iranian religion" be linked?
Yes check.svg Done
    • "Images of Ahura Mazda began in the Parthian period, but were stopped and replaced with stone carved figures in the Sassanid period."
Yes check.svg Done What's wrong with it?
  • Jargon is a big issue in this article.
    • explain jargon like Frashokereti, Amesha Spentas, Frātadāra, xvarənah with a short summary like asha (truth)
Yes check.svg Done
    • What are "seven creations"?
    • explain roles of other deities like Mithra, Anahita etc. like "god of light _______ "
  • Add dates to Behistun Inscription, Parthian period, Zoraster etc.
Yes check.svg Done There is no date for the life of Zoroaster, the Behistun inscription except that it was written by Darius during his reign, and what dates in the Parthian period. Very little is known about the Parthian period, so exact dates are hard to locate.
Give approx (circa) dates. --Redtigerxyz Talk 04:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Nomenclature: para 1 and para 3 need refs, else can be treated as WP:OR
Yes check.svg Done Nope, it has multiple references to support that claim. It is not OR.
  • Faravahar seems to be related with Ahura Mazda. The commons category Ahura Mazda has images of Faravahar in it. Why is it not discussed in the article? Is the winged symbol with a male figure = Faravahar?
Yes check.svg Done It's not related to it.
  • Italic all text names
  • "Previously, the winged symbol with a male figure who was formerly regarded by European scholars Ahura Mazda has been shown to represent the royal xvarənah. However, it was customary for every emperor from Cyrus till Darius III to have an empty chariot drawn by white horses to accompany the Persian army on battles." The context of this para is unclear. Is the empty chariot = Ahura Mazda?
Yes check.svg Done
  • Can a section about the iconography of Ahura Mazda (especially more info on worship images) be written?
X mark.svg Not done Barely anything is known on the iconography. Whatever is known is written in the current article.
  • Nomenclature should also discuss the other names of Ahura Mazda, which are pointed out in the lead.
Yes check.svg Done
  • The article switches from past to present and vice versa. Please go through the article once again to rectify this. There are some typos, cumbersome constructions and improper grammar usages. It needs a through copyedit.
X mark.svg Not done Could you give some examples?
"Through most of Darius' reign and till Artaxerxes II, Ahura Mazda is invoked alone as the deity of Zoroastrianism. Under the reign of Artaxerxes II, royal inscriptions stopped the sole invocation of Ahura Mazda and began" -> was invoked. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:10, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • How is Xwrmztʔ related to Ahura Mazda
Yes check.svg Done
  • What was Spenta Mainyu's role before Haug's explanation?
Yes check.svg Done Further, in Haug's scheme Angra Mainyu was now not Ahura Mazda's binary opposite, but—like Spenta Mainyu—an emanation of Him. That sentence states that.
Like Angra Mainyu is evil spirit, what is Spenta Mainyu exactly? --Redtigerxyz Talk 04:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Missing page numbers in ref 9, 10, 11 (complete range is missing), 12.
Yes check.svg Done You added ref 9 and 10, how ironic. 11 and 12 are not missing pages. Please look again.
Sorry, my mistake. I copy-pasted it with the image, but ref 11 now 13 still needs the complete range of pages (not 182ff). --Redtigerxyz Talk 04:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Is Ahura Mazda male (Ahura Mazda remained a dignified male figure) or female ("Mazda's binary opposite, but Her subordinate")?
Yes check.svg Done
  • Did you intend this to be in a note " For a scholastic review of the theological developments in Indian Zoroastrianism, particularly with respect to the devaluation of Angra Mainyu to a position where the (epitome of) pure evil became viewed as a creation of Mazda (and so compromised their figure of pure good), see"
Yes check.svg Done

RESULT: GA FAIL. --Redtigerxyz Talk 15:51, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Why a fail? All issues were fixed in less than an hour. This article should have been put on hold. Would you please continue the nomination, or shall I go to WP:GAR warrior4321 22:16, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
It is the discretion of the reviewer if the article is put on GA hold or failed. I choose to fail the article if it fails two criteria. You have done a good job in referencing. You may have observed that I was editing the article to fix typos and copyediting. There are copyediting issues like "Although Ormuzd is freed from the world of darkness his "sons" often called his garments or weapons remain." (missing comma), "This may be in part [ ] Mani was born in the greatly Zoroastrian Parthian Empire." (missing words), "However another reason for why this may be is that in Manicheism the religions of Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Buddhism were in fact deviations of the true religion that Mani taught and in a way they were the same religion, hence making it easier to identify the cosmological figures of Mani with the cosmological figures of Zoroastrianism." (too cumbersome) I suggest you re-read the whole article and do a copyedit on your own or approach Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests for a copyedit. A [citation needed] still needs to be resolved. You may go to WP:GAR now or renominate the article after addressing all issues. --Redtigerxyz Talk 03:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I understand that, but to fail an article that could have been fixed within a week (the recommended time given for an On Hold) seems a little harsh. After all, reviewing good article nominations is about improving the encyclopedia, not getting articles out of the queue. warrior4321 04:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The decision lies with the reviewer. I considered that the referencing issues and copyedit to be major issues, but the referencing issue was settled every quickly, which I did not anticipate. Most authors need time to search references, but you had the resources to quickly provide references, which is good. In normal circumstances (The experience with other editors), it takes more than a week to consider this. Lesson learnt: Some editors are more diligent more than others. I will give at least 3 days unofficial on hold period in the future. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! That's all I ask in the future. warrior4321 14:15, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed that you said you failed it because it failed two criteria. It didn't though. There never was any OR, you stated para 2 was OR, yet it had 5 references. All citations were present, the 3 references I added beside heretic were extra, as the reference for the entire paragraph covered it. Only the prose needs a little work, and failed. That's 1 criteria, not two. warrior4321 05:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Paras 1 and 3 (not para 2, which was referenced) were unreferenced + [citation needed] tags (criterion 2) and prose (criterion 1). Instead of further discussing this, why don't you go for reassessment or fix the remaining issues and renominate? Thanks. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The intangible nature of Ahura Mazda[edit]

1.It is revealed by a passage of the Avesta that Zartosht, seated before Ohrmazd, always wanted information (vac) from him; and he spoke to Ohrmazd thus: 'Thy head, hands, feet, hair, face, and tongue are in my eyes just like those even which are my own, and you have the clothing men have; give me a hand, so that I may grasp thy hand.' 2.Ohrmazd said thus: 'I am an intangible spirit; it is not possible to grasp my hand.' 3.Zartosht spoke thus: 'Thou art intangible, and Vohuman, Ardwahisht, Shahrewar, Spandarmad, Hordad, and Amurdad are intangible, and when I depart from thy presence, and do not see thee nor even them -- since of the person whom I see and worship there is something -- should thou and the seven archangels be worshipped by me, or not?'

by Shayest Na-Shayest Chapter 15. --Yolycool (talk) 06:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

The following are certain Persian customs which I can describe from personal knowledge. The erection of statues, temples, and altars is not an accepted practice amongst them, and anyone who does such a thing is considered a fool, because, presumably, the Persian religion is not anthropomorphic like the Greek. Heredoto--Yolycool (talk) 23:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hindu God Varuna[edit]

Numerous scholars have proposed a connection between Ahura Mazda and Varuna, the Hindu god of water. One piece of evidence supporting this theory is the fact that both deities are paired up with the god Mithra.

From Part 1 of the Mihir Yast of the Zend Avesta:

1. Ahura Mazda spake unto Spitama Zarathustra, saying: 'Verily, when I created Mithra, the lord of wide pastures, O Spitama! I created him as worthy of sacrifice, as worthy of prayer as myself, Ahura Mazda

From Part 7 of the Zamyad Yast:

35. The first time when the Glory departed from the bright Yima, the Glory went from Yima, the son of Vîvanghant, in the shape of a Vâraghna bird. Then Mithra seized that Glory, Mithra, the lord of wide pastures, whose ear is quick to hear, who has a thousand senses. We sacrifice unto Mithra, the lord of all countries, whom Ahura Mazda has created the most glorious of all the gods in the heavens.

From the Khoresed Nyayis of the Zend Avesta:

7. We sacrifice unto Mithra, the lord of all countries, whom Ahura Mazda made the most glorious of all the gods in the world unseen.

So may Mithra and Ahura, the two great gods, come to us for help!

We sacrifice unto the bright, undying, shining, swift-horsed Sun.

From the Mihir Nyayis:

7. We sacrifice unto Mithra, the lord of all countries, whom Ahura Mazda made the most glorious of all the heavenly gods.

So may Mithra and Ahura, the two great gods, come to us for help! We sacrifice unto the undying, shining, swift-horsed Sun.

12. We sacrifice unto Mithra and Ahura, the two great, imperishable, holy gods; and unto the stars, and the moon, and the sun, with the trees that yield baresma. We sacrifice unto Mithra, the lord of all countries.

From Yasna 1 of the Zend Avesta:

11. And I announce and complete (my Yasna) to the two, to Ahura and to Mithra, the lofty, and the everlasting, and the holy, and to all the stars which are Spenta Mainyu's creatures, and to the star Tistrya, the resplendent and glorious, and to the Moon which contains the seed of the Kine, and to the resplendent Sun, him of the rapid steeds, the eye of Ahura Mazda, and to Mithra the province-ruler. And I celebrate and complete my Yasna to Ahura Mazda (once again, and as to him who rules the month), the radiant, the glorious, and to the Fravashis of the saints.

From Yasna 2:

11. And in this Zaothra with this Baresman I desire to approach Ahura and Mithra with my praise, the lofty, eternal, and the holy two; and I desire to approach the stars, moon, and sun with the Baresman plants, and with my praise, and with them Mithra the governor of all the provinces, and Ahura Mazda the radiant and glorious, and the good, heroic, bountiful Fravashis of the saints,

From Yasna 3:

13. And I desire to approach Ahura and Mithra, the lofty and imperishable two, the holy, and with the Yast of those stars which are the creatures of Spenta Mainyu, and with the Yast of the star Tistrya, the radiant, the glorious, and with that of the moon which contains the seed of cattle, and with that of the resplendent sun, the eye of Ahura Mazda, and of Mithra, province-lord of the provinces, and with that of Ahura Mazda (as He rules this day) the radiant, the glorious, and with that of the Fravashis of the saints, (who rule this month),

From Yasna 4:

16. And these we announce and we present to Ahura and to Mithra, the lofty, and imperishable, and holy two, to the stars, the creatures of Spenta Mainyu, and to the star Tistrya, the radiant, the glorious, and to the Moon which contains the seed of cattle, and to the resplendent Sun, of the swift horses, Ahura Mazda's eye, and to Mithra, the lord of provinces, for their sacrifice, homage, their propitiation and their praise; yea, these we present hereby to Ahura Mazda (as he rules this day) and to the Fravashis of the saints (as they rule this month), for their sacrifice, homage, their propitiation and their praise.

From Yasna 6:

10. And we worship Ahura and Mithra with our sacrifice, the lofty, and imperishable, and holy two, and the stars, moon, and sun, among the plants of the Baresman, and Mithra, the province-lord of all the provinces, even Ahura Mazda, the radiant, the glorious, and the good, valiant, and bountiful Fravashis of the saints.

From Yasna 7:

13. And I offer with a complete and sacred offering to Ahura and Mithra, the lofty and imperishable, and holy two, and to the stars which are the creatures of Spenta Mainyu, and to the star Tistrya, the radiant, the glorious, and to the Moon which contains the seed of cattle in its beams, and to the resplendent Sun of the fleet horses, the eye of Ahura Mazda, and to Mithra, the lord of the provinces. And I offer with a complete and sacred offering to Ahura Mazda, the resplendent, the glorious, (who rules this day), and to the Fravashis of the saints (who name the month).

From Yasna 68:

22. Praise (be) to Ahura Mazda, and to the Bountiful Immortals. Praise (be) to Mithra of the wide pastures. Praise to the fleet-horsed sun. Praise to (the star which so we name, and with this sun) Ahura Mazda's eyes.

Note that in the Yasnas, the Sun is referred to as "the eye of Ahura Mazda". This is similar to the Hindu Vedas, where Surya is referred to as "the eye of Mitra-Varuna".

From Book 1, Hymn 115 of the Rig Veda (Hymn to Surya):

1. THE brilliant presence of the Gods hath risen, the eye of Mitra, Varuṇa and Agni. The soul of all that moveth not or moveth, the Sun hath filled the air and earth and heaven.

From Book 6, Hymn 51 of the Rig Veda:

1. THAT mighty eye of Varuṇa and Mitra, infallible and dear, is moving upward. The pure and lovely face of holy Order hath shone like gold of heaven in its arising.

From Book 7, Hymn 63 of the Rig Veda:

1. COMMON to all mankind, auspicious Sūrya, he who beholdeth all, is mounting upward; The God, the eye of Varuṇa and Mitra, who rolled up darkness like a piece of leather.

From Book 10, Hymn 37 of the Rig Veda:

1. Do homage unto Varuṇa's and Mitra's Eye: offer this solemn worship to the Mighty God, Who seeth far away, the Ensign, born of Gods. Sing praises unto Sūrya, to the Son of Dyaus.

From Book 4, Verse 35 of the White Yajur Veda:

Do homage unto Varuna's and Mitra's eye: offer this solemn

worship to the Mighty God, Who seeth far away, the Ensign born of Gods. Sing praises

unto Sûrya, to the Son of Dyaus.

From Book 7, Verse 42 of the White Yajur Veda:

The brilliant presence of the Gods hath risen, the eye of

Mitra, Varuna, and Agni. Soul of all moving, soul of all that moves not, the Sun

hath filled the air and earth and heaven.

From Book 13, Verse 46 of the White Yajur Veda:

The brilliant presence of the Gods hath risen, the eye of

Mitra, Varuna, and Agni. The soul of all that moveth not or moveth, the Sun hath

filled the air, and earth and heaven.

From Book 13, Hymn 2 of the Atharva Veda:

35. He hath gone up on high, the Gods' bright presence, the eye of

Mitra, Varuna and Agni. The soul of all that moveth not or moveth, Sūrya hath filled the

earth and air and heaven,

From Book 20, Hymn 107 of the Atharva Veda:

14. The brilliant Presence of the Gods hath risen, the eye of Mitra,

Varuna, and Agni. The soul of all that moveth not or moveth, Sūrya hath filled the

earth and air and heaven.

Hokie Tech (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

sure, fwiiw it is a common theory that Ahura Mazda may originate as the Iranian cognate of Varuna. Of course this doesn't mean that Ahura Mazda "is" Varuna, any more than the Abrahamic God "is" the Iron Age Canaanite strom god Yahweh.

Shri Chaitanya-mangala[edit]

In Sri Caitanya Caritamrita adi lila, chapter 17 verse 166 Caitanya Mahaprabhu confirms: go-ange yata loma tata sahasra vatsara go-vadhi raurava-madhye pace nirantar Cow killers and cow eaters are condemned to rot in hell for as many thousands of years as there are for each hair on the body of every cow they eat from. ‘chaitanya-mangala’ shune yadi pashandi, yavana seha maha-vaishnava haya tatakshana If even a great atheist hears Shri Chaitanya-mangala (previous name for Shri Chaitanya-bhagavata), he immediately becomes a great devotee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

zoroasterian false claims[edit]

It is rediculous to claim that Zoroaster proclaimed Ahura-Mazda as the monothiest god of mankind for the first time in history, just in the times of Cyrus and the father of King Darius the great around 700 BC.there was monothiesm in iran before Zoroaster and elsewhere. The word Ahuramazda was found itched on stones archaeologically circa 1500 BC in the Sascrit language which died as a spoken language around 1500 BC hence Ahura Mazda was known even thousands of years earlier at least (ie when Sanscrit language was actually spoken and written at the same time!) It is more rediculous that in no time Zoroaster the so-called declarer of monothiesm declared yet another unborn god Ahriman yet as another god ,hence Dualism.

It is known that the FIRST EVER writings of Zoroaster (lived around 600 BC) was of his dream of seeing Ahuramazda (the one god well known to him and so to the iranians for time immmemorial!) , then declaring seeing another god like a shadow to ahura mazda in the second dream two weeks later as he writes.

It is well known that Zoroaster is the first man claiming another unborn god hence he is the father of the Dualist religion Zoroaster better known to the people of Iran and the area as Magusis). he was no revealed-religins-prophet like monothiestic religion (Noah, Abraham= Judaism, christianity and islam) for he declares getting his knowledge from only dreams, he never spoke to god or a messenger of god and angel by the name holy spirit or Gabriel). It is impossible to associate the one-god Ahoramazda to Zoroaster and his fellow Magusis the adherants of Dualism (two gods not one god), of whom King Darius the Great clearly declared a war on them magusis by killing the Magusi Sardis the usurpur of the kingship and declaring a yearly day celebration called (the day of the killing of the magusi= Magus mortis) in which he allowed his people to kill any magusi (dualism adherant or priest ) in that day every year even in the magusi's own house!, this is why magusis used to hide in that day in other places in that day of the year. Darius the great mentions that in the Behustan Inscriptions inscribing the word (magusi) as the title of Sardis. Moreover Darius the great mentioned the name of Ahuramazda as the sole god, never mentioning ahriman or mithra) he even mention the name of Ahuramazda even more times than he mentions his own name! ( unprecedented in history) Clearly Darius the great and his peoples were Monothiest who never acknowledged any other God contrary to Zoroaster claims (or raher his followers who are writing wikipedia falsifying history openly (in your face)

Obviously much later after Darius the Great (500 BC) that the Magusis (adherants of Zoroaster) managed to take control of the great Achamaedian Persian kingdom ,obviously caused its demise , the magusis continued control of the poor persian people who hated the ruling class magusis until Islam freed them from those magusis and deported them back to their home land : India.

It was well reported by Arab conqueres of Iran 630 AD) that Persians hated Magusis ( Dualists) so much by throwing stones on them to actually killing them while they were escorted by Arabs to safety in the remote eastern city of Yazd. It is known that Magusi word in semitic ( and current living semitic language:Arabic) means the same same as Nagusi (intercheangable letters in all semitic languages: M and N)( Magusi ie dirty person: a person who uses magic and witchcraft and sorcery by invoking evil spirits by using dirty (=Nagis) stuff such as wolf's tail ( evil spirits inhabit dirty places such as these things)or putting urine in foood or drink to do favours to desparate women for money (like a woman who wants her husband to love her again or to get pregnant etc). It is well known that the magusis were not from Persia but a low cast from India like gypsies who used to do dirty works for the Persians namely slaughter of animals(dirty job)) .That is when they started making future predictions (fortune-telling) by studying the signs on the liver of the slaughtered animals. Zoroaster was one of those Magusis who was a great Magician (do magic by dirty stuff) and he proclaiming for the first time in history of manking the ideas of Dualism in an official religion (Zoroasteran or Magusi religion). Arabs said in their ancient writings before islam that Zoroaster so disgusted people of his time that they gave him the nick-name "Shuraik" (ie one who adds another god to G-d) since Pagans and polythiests since ancient times did believe that the other gods they worship were not but representations (spirits) of the one mighty god, however Zoroaster was the first to declare blasphemously and bluntly, a shadow god to the mighty g-d hence "God of light and god of darkness" to explain the inequality and injustise in the world (remember they were a low cast from india avoided by people (magusis used to live away from villages just like gypsies because they were considered dirty lowly (=heathen) by the villagers, posessed by the evil spirits they possess them from the animals they slaughter for the persian villagers). Even the word Magic, Magician, Magi (plural of Magusi in English) come from the magusis of Persia who were not native of Iran but gypsies from India who use Magis=Nagis=Dirty stuff to do their witchcraft and favors to stressed women and men throughout history).even in our times!!

Conclusion : Ahura Mazda The name of the Monothiest God in Ancient Persia has nothing to do with Zoroaster prophet of Dualism who appeared circa 700 BC, very very late in the history of mankind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Inscription from Xerces the Great referening other gods[edit]

The article currently states:

Beginning from Darius' reign until Artaxerxes II, Ahura Mazda is invoked alone.

However, an inscription from Xerces at Van Fortress mentions "other gods". (talk) 13:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

This article makes no mention of the connection to Yahweh and the emergence of biblical monotheism.[edit]

Why? The god of the jews in the Bible was never shown as monotheistic explicitly until after contact with the Persians in the post-exilic texts. In the book of Isiah is found the first reference to true monotheism, along with Yahweh's proclamation that Cyrus is a Messiah and savior of Israel. Much in the same mode as the Cyrus Cylinder. It has been argued by many authors, correctly, that the still polytheistic Jews in Babylon equated Yahweh/El with Ahura Mazda. The evidence is highly suggestive that this was endorsed or actively engaged in by the Zoroastrian persians as a way to pacify their conquered subjects.

I will be adding a section about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:31, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I read the page on Zoroastrianism, as well as the encyclopedia britanica page that was cited. I found that Angra Mainyu is very specifically NOT created by Aharu Mazda, only perfect goodness was created by Aharu Mazda and Angra Mainyu was not created and exists only as a contrast to Aharu Mazda's goodness (still physically on many accounts) - even Angra Mainyu's demons were not said to be "created." I mention this because the introduction to Aharu Mazda's page says otherwise and quickly contradicts itself in the other sections - somebody fix that please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:38, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

"Ahura Mazda surge"[edit]

I would like to know what an Ahura Mazda surge is. Tom Wolfe references it in "The Right Stuff" in the context of watching a rocket launch, and I googled up a further reference that has the same context, but that's it. --Nat (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2014 (UTC)