From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Zoroastrianism was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Zoroastrianism (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoroastrianism, which is a collaboration of editors who strive 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.
WikiProject Religion (Rated C-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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Iran (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Central Asia (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Zoroastrianism is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Zoroastrianism and the Kurds[edit]

I'm not an expert on Zoroastrianism, so I thought I'd start on the talk page with this question: ought Zoroastrianism among the Kurds get mentioned in this article? There's this article [1] and this one [2], as well as the relationship of the Yazidi religion to Zoroastrianism. Tom Radulovich (talk) 16:46, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I think you're thinking of Yazdanism. I'll add a mention in the introduction. I think it's fitting to add comparative section, but I don't know at the moment where it ought to go. If someone starts a section I'll try and help edit it.FourLights (talk) 17:32, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

There have since been further inclusion of related faiths.FourLights (talk) 09:31, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Mithraic/Kurdish sentence (introduction)[edit]

This is sentence that I wrote. It is below. It was removed recently from the introduction by a pseudo-anonymous user. If you don't think it should be here, say so and I'll leave it out of the introduction. It could also be put elsewhere, if thought more better or more approriate. The inclusion of related Kurdish faith in the article has been discussed in the past. I consider it's inclusion informative.

The statement reads "Besides the Zoroastrian diaspora, older Mithraic faith like Yazdanism is still practised amongst the Kurds." It's note reads: "As a kind of proto-Zoroastrianism, both worship "Seven Angels" alongside the primary deity and have a high regard for the concept of truth."

On the other hand, I do not believe that precise discussion of demographics like "The change over the last decade is attributed to a greater level of reporting and open self-identification more so than to an actual increase in population" is relevant or appropriate for the introduction, which is why it is now a note. An introduction is a universalistic overview, not a discussion of demographics, for which there is a demographics section. This is discussed in section V: Number of adherents.FourLights (talk) 12:58, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

vedic religion - blended in local culture[edit]

zoroastranism is Vedic religion absorbed by the iranians evident in similarities of deities, customs etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:17, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Get a source and try and write something about it. I can help, but there isn't a team here to up and respond to your every suggestion, and I already have a page that I write. Help a guy out.FourLights (talk) 19:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2016[edit]

"In the Cappadocian kingdom, who's territory was formerly an Achaemenid possession" "who's" should be "whose" Fliingdutchmn (talk) 23:24, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:38, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Date of origin of Zoroastrianism[edit]

In the section 'History', subsection 'Classical antiquity', it says:

'The prophet Zoroaster himself, though traditionally dated to the 6th century BC, is thought by many modern historians to have been a reformer of the polytheistic Iranian religion who lived in the 10th century BC.'

But one of the most well-known (and respected?) experts on Zoroastrianism, Mary Boyce, writes:

'Zoroaster's date cannot be established with any precision, since he lived in what for his people were prehistoric times. The language of the Gathas is archaic, and close to that of the Rigveda (whose composition has been assigned to about 1700 B.C. onwards); and the picture of the world to be gained from them is correspondingly ancient, that of a Stone Age society. Some allowance may have to be made for literary conservatism; and it is also possible that the 'Avestan' people (as Zoroaster's own tribe is called for want of a better name) were poor or isolated, and so not rapidly influenced by the developments of the Bronze Age. It is only possible therefore to hazard a reasoned conjecture that Zoroaster lived some time between 1700 and 1500 B.C.'

Mary Boyce. Zoroastrians. Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. Routledge. London 2001. (First published 1979.) ISBN: 978-0415239035. Page 18.

Maybe this date of origin (and the quote) can be included in the section as well?

The Flying Fox (talk) 22:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Monochrome Monitor due to recent edit, would note that Brian Arthur Brown is United Church of Canada minister (disputed neutrality), and that Zoroastrianism was not established in 6th century and there's no consensus on it, yet as the authority on it Mary Boyce wrote "cannot be established with precision... language is archaic close to Rigveda... 1700 B.C. onwards... Zoroaster possibly lived between 1700 and 1500 B.C.". There 6 sources by Boyce used in the article, while there's almost none consideration on the history and origin of the religion by the same scholar, yet by a Christian minister and some unknown scholar Gerardo Eastburn who has the same POV. The article with such a important topic should have at least a section or paragraph with scholars opposing considerations. I once read, but I can not remember in which source, that as both language, rituals and teaching are similar to the Vedas, it was initially the same belief of the Indo-Europeans, one who migrated to India established Hinduism, while those to Persia the Zoroastrism. Many elements from Zoroastrianism can be found, due to probable influence, in the Abrahamic religions - concept of reward for "doing" good (heaven) and bad (hell), angels, archangels, messiah, doomsday among others. The teachings were temporarily lost with conquest of Alexander the Great, and would return in Sasanian Empire, but again destroyed by the Muslims invasion. However, both Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam have in its core one monotheistic religion from around 3500 B.C., part of Semitic-Indo European vibration. The age of origin of Zoroastrianism is obviously older than 6th century B.C., but such age was not in the interest of the scholars whose simplified dogma followed the concept that first monotheistic religions were Abrahamic, thus intentionally although erroneously mention that the Zoroastrianism and the Zoroaster emerged in the same period as Judaism. And again, on the article "Monotheism", section "Origin and development", the consideration "Judaism became strictly monotheistic in the 6th century BCE as a result of the Babylonian exile, Zoroastrianism, also monotheistic (though not monist), was founded by Zoroaster around the time of Cyrus the Great" is cited from the previously mentioned Christian scholar Brian Arthur Brown.--Crovata (talk) 07:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Same edit at Zoroaster. After second time reading the source, it seems that the topic is controversial ("dramatic politicking among scholars of Zoroastrianism who recognized the impact this issue could have on world history"), the source has biased POV and intention, scholars are open "adherents or affiliates of the Church" and thus should be approached critically. Would note that the source does not use reference to confirm other scholars POV, thus could doubt the authenticity. It mentions how the Axial Age theory partly recognized the 628-551 BCE age of Zoroaster, however in 1977, Mary Boyce considered that the mythical dates of 6500-6000 BCE should be replaced by 1200-1000 BCE minimum. Some 21st century Italian, British and German scholars support the Persian-Arabic dates after dramatic scholarship discussion, and that in spite of some "consensus" (if there is some consensus, then other POV should be appropriately included in both intro and text of the article), says that many respected scholars still cling around or before 1000 BCE due to philological reasons. I am concerned by the neutrality and scientificity of the source which openly states "the study will work backward from Judaism to Zoroastrianism... start with Judaism in Babylon... show evidence positioning Zoroaster immediately before Cyrus the Great, just before consolidation of the Torah... this begins with the Torah as the original touchstone of God's revelation to the family of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar, and through them to the nations, to subsequent religions, and to individual people, as Zoroaster discovered". Existence of God alone is a huge debate, stating in such a irresponsible way his "revelation", and then to be seriously considered as a "reliable" source... The same can be seen "Foreword" (IX), that "Jewish monotheism predates Zoroaster", "Moses or other Hewbrew prophet inspired Zoroaster". It does reveal the Zoroastrianism influence on the Abrahamic religions, and others or connection with other around the world, but it mixes them in ideological constructions "Epiloge" pg. 603-606: "in a manner similar to these discoveries [comparing to the confirmation of Illiad events, and 2008-2011 discovery of Atlantis (!?)], need to verify 1) Zoroaster got monotheism from Israeli exiles in the time of the prophet Jeremiah 2) Zoroastrian tradition impacted Jesus messianic mission 3) Sabaeans in the Quran are Zoroastrians". Using only one and biased source in multiple articles for sentence implying that scholars "have recently changed their position on the time when he likely lived", and that "that there is an emerging consensus", think is not supported by WP:NPOV principles.--Crovata (talk) 11:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
As Encyclopaedia Iranica notes, "One of the most vexing problems for a history of Zoroastrianism is the location of Zarathustra in time and place. While there is general agreement that he did not live in western Iran, attempts to locate him in specific regions of eastern Iran, including Central Asia, remain tentative. Also uncertain are his dates. Plausible arguments place him anywhere from the 13th century BCE to just before the rise of the Achaemenid empire under Cyrus II the Great in the mid-6th century BCE, with the majority of scholars seeming to favor dates around 1000 BCE, which would place him as a contemporary, at least, of the later Vedic poets (see, e.g., Boyce, 1975-82, I, pp. 190-91; Duchesne-Guillemin, pp. 135-38; Gnoli, 1980, pp. 159-79; Henning; Hertel; Herzfeld; Jackson, 1896; Klima, 1959; Shahbazi, 1977 and 2002)". Think that the consensus is nonexistent, and the major/minor consideration varies between cited scholars, and date of sources.--Crovata (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I'll revert then. :) --Monochrome_Monitor 20:43, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Population figure[edit]

List of countries by Zoroastrian population , Time ,Keep the Faith, and Keep Dwindling New York Times ,This ,Telegraph Calcutta ,Last of the Zoroastrians Time and this .The number of Zoroastrians in the World is between 100000 to 250000 .Now where does 2.6 million come from Zoroastrians in Iran states there are 26000 Zoroastrians.Guinness Book of World Records lists Zoroastrianism as the "major religion nearest extinction". per here .We need a better than this given .In India they are declining as per this and In Iran a rise of 2 Million is not backed by census or any source going back to 1900.In Iraq there have been reports of Kurds turning to Zoroastrian but still it not in Millions or any other Middle East or central Asian nation.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:44, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

the prophet[edit]

the prophet was actually kurdish but lived in the area we call iran now he isn't iranian. his name is actually zardasht in kurdish and there is a town in iran called zardasht wich is a kurdish town. Kingking268 (talk) 21:01, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Whether Zoraster was Kurdish or not is debatable (a source would be helpful). However even if he was Kurdish that wouldn't mean he wasn't Iranian, since many reliable sources classify Kurds as an Iranian people (the Wikipedia page on Kurds provides some references).Ff11 (talk) 01:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)