Rune Stone Deciphered

.
The mysterious rune stone found under a church floor in western Norway has been identified.

The stone, found under the floor at Hausken church in Rennesøy, Rogaland, was used as part of the foundation when the church was built in 1856.

Archeologists at first believed they had found a new rune stone that was nearly 1,000 years old, but they now have identified it as part of a large tombstone that was previously reported in 1639 and 1745.

The stone lay outside the door of the old stave church, and the remains of this stone have now been found under the floor, beneath the pulpit.

"We thought at first that we had found a completely unknown stone, and we misread one of the runes," archeologist Helge Sørheim told Aftenposten.no.

James Knirk at the Rune Archive at the University of Oslo's Museum of Cultural History correctly identified the 'new' find. One of the unclear runes can be read as an 'f' and not as a 'k' as first thought.

By examining the text on the stone identified in the 17th and 18th centuries, one inscription can be formed, reading: "Åsolv on Helland's requiem is 4 nights after Hallvard's mass".

This means that Åsolv, who lived on the farm Helland, near the church, died on the 19th of May. The feast of St. Hallvard was celebrated on May 15 in medieval times, and Åsolv died four days later. Knirk believes that Åsolv died in the 13th or 14th century.

"We don't know who Åsolv was because the village records do not go so far back, but he must have been quite a prosperous farmer since he got a tombstone. It was not very common to have relatives who could write runes then either," Sørheim said.

The archeologists now hope to find the first part of the tombstone, which disappeared after being recorded in the 17th and 18th centuries.

"Now we are making a cast of the stone we have found and trying to find the first part, which perhaps was also used in building the foundation of the new church," Sørheim said.

Aftenposten

.

Ta Hiera: Notes on Hellenic Worship

.

Since acts of worship in Hellenism, like those in other modern pagan religions, are usually called "rituals" in English, it will be helpful to define just what we mean by that word in a religious context:

A ritual is a complex of actions effected by, or in the name of, an individual or a community. These actions serve to organize space and time, to define relations between men and the gods, and to set in their proper place the different categories of mankind and the links which bind them together. [1]

The main type of ritual in Hellenism is the sacrifice, in which material things are offered to the gods to assure their goodwill and blessings, or to thank them for the gifts they have already given us. From the earliest phases of Hellenic religion, "the bond between man and the sacred is consummated in the continuous exchange of gift for gift." [2] Just as human social bonds are reaffirmed by gift-giving, the voluntary aid of the gods is sought through sacrifice.

Jan Bremmer writes:

...we reach a better understanding when we consider the relationships between gods and mortals as analogous to those between princes and commoners. Although gods did uphold the rules of justice, their obligations to kin and friends had priority. [4]

The goal of sacrifice, then, is to establish the bonds of friendship between gods and humans, and so encourage divine goodwill.

How do Hellenes imagine the gods responding to their offerings? Since the gods are in a wholly different order of being from mortals, it is apparent that their needs are different from ours. Homer tells us that the gods enjoy ambrosia and nectar, not human food and drink. Indeed, human blood does not run in their veins, but a substance called ikhor. We may further imagine that even this anthropomorphism, which scholars tell us is so characteristic of Hellenic religion, is one of the greatest "true lies" of myth: Few moderns truly believe that Zeus is sitting in the clouds taking deep, appreciative whiffs of the roasted barley on our sacrificial fires, and many thoughtful ancient people arrived at the same conclusion.

Looking at what we can surmise of divine nature, we can say that

...the sense in which men need the gods is quite different from the sense in which the gods need men. Men live by the hope of reciprocal favour, charis. 'It is good to give fitting gifts to the immortals'--they will show their gratitude. But it is never possible to count on this with certainty. The ritual, it is true, is attended by the expectation that it will produce certain effects, but the Homeric gods can always say no without giving any reason. [4]

Does this mean that ritual is a waste of time, an exercise in futility? Hardly. The human spirit needs a point of focus in order to fulfill its potential, and religious ritual provides just such a focal point. In ritual we express, with potent symbols, our understanding of our place in the world and how that place relates to the state of being we call "divine." We give voice to feelings of eusebeia, piety: We display our gratitude, our hopes, our fears, our joy in life, all in a context that sanctifies our human experience. This we do as a community, a community of mortals:

This is not an exchange of gifts celebrated by a hierarchical society of gods, priests, and commoners: together at the same level, men and women stand here about the altar, experience and bring death [in animal sacrifice], honour the immortals, and in eating affirm life in its conditionality: it is the solidarity of mortals in the face of the immortals. [5]

Types of Sacrifice

The centerpiece of Hellenic worship is an offering of food—formerly animals, now primarily grain, fruit, and other bloodless foodstuffs—and its common counterpart, libation (drink-offerings or spondai). The offering of food, some of which is normally burned, is called thusia, and is the typical form of sacrifice to the Olympians.

A sacrifice can be as simple as a little barley meal or incense prayerfully cast into the fire [6] and a few drops of wine poured out onto the ground, or as elaborate as the hecatombs (hundreds) of cattle that the ancients offered on special feast days. (Of course, today we would substitute wheat cakes or loaves of bread for the cows!) Since most modern Hellenic ritual is performed on a small scale, our sacrifices will consist of common foodstuffs—bread, fruit, wine, milk, honey, olive oil—and incense. We may also dedicate our own handicrafts to sacred use. This is in keeping with the fundamental practice of "first-fruit" offerings: "The pious man takes to a sanctuary a little of everything which the seasons bring, seasonal gifts (horaia), ears of corn or bread, figs and olives, grapes, wine, and milk." [7]

Whatever is offered should be of the highest quality possible given our circumstances: This is our gift to the gods and expresses our esteem for them. It should be, in fact, a sacrifice: a giving of your life energy, whether in the form of time, effort, or money. Although a few organic apples might cost the same as a big bag of potato chips, the former is an appropriate offering, and the latter, most people would agree, is not. Just as you make special efforts to please guests with a pretty table with flowers and your best linens, tasty food and drink, and a comfortable, inviting atmosphere, so in sacrifice we show our hospitality to the gods, our honored guests.

In addition to festival sacrifices which occur on a regular basis and on behalf of the whole community, individuals may make private offerings to the gods. One common type is a votive offering, one made as the result of a previous vow. [8] Who has not prayed in desperation, "If you get me out of this mess, I promise I'll pay you back!" For Hellenes, such a prayer is an oath and places a sacred obligation on the one who so swears. For this reason we find monuments to military victories that consist of votive offerings of weapons—war making prayers in desperation a daily necessity—and healing sanctuaries full of thank-offerings from successfully healed patients. Today, we may promise a special ritual, a new home-shrine, a change of lifestyle, or many other things should our prayers be answered.

So far we have been discussing sacrifices made to the Olympian gods. But there is another type of sacrifice, that offered to chthonic (earthly or underworld) deities, to the heroes, and to the dead. There are a number of signficant differences between the two types of sacrifice, although it should be borne in mind that usage varies enough that these distinctions cannot be considered absolute. The primary differences are as follows:

• When sacrificing to the Olympians one speaks of thusia; sacrifice to the Khthonioi is called enagisma.
• In animal sacrifice, the animal's throat faced upward for the Olympians and downward for the Khthonioi, so that the blood would flow directly into the ground.
• Altars to the Olympians, called bomoi, are set up from the ground; offerings to the Khthonioi are placed on a low altar called an eskhara or into a trench (bothros) dug in the earth.
• Animals offered to the Olympians--usually cows and oxen--were white; the Khthonioi received black animals associated with the earth, such as rams and pigs. Bloodless offerings of crops and especially honey are common to the Khthonioi.
• A drink-offering to the Khthonioi is called a khoe; the entire contents of the pitcher is spilled out onto the earth.
• The Olympians were honored at temples, often set on high ground; the Khthonioi in caves or underground sites.
• Olympian sacrifice typically happens in the morning; Khthonic in the evening or night.
• When praying to the Olympians, one raises one's hand upward in supplication; to the Khthonioi, one faces the palms down toward the earth. [9]

Other Types of Worship

Ancient Hellenic worship consisted of more than just straightforward sacrifice. In fact, one of its unusual features were the agones, or contests, held in honor of the gods. These might be athletic contests, such as the famous Olympic Games, or dramatic, poetic, or musical contests. It may be difficult for modern people to imagine a sports event as a religious service—although we certainly bring enough fervor to them today!—but this notion was intrinsic to the Hellenic idea of worship.

Today, sadly, our numbers are still too few to revive the agones on a grand scale, but we can integrate the idea into our worship in small ways. Instead of writing and acting full-scale dramas, we can memorize and present a single speech from one of the great dramatists at the City Dionysia. We can tell jokes instead of acting in comedies. [10] In place of extensive torch races, young people can run a short course with a lit candle. Where there are not enough children for a chorus, individuals can sing solo or in small ensembles. Poets may offer their best efforts to the gods. In Hellenism, personal achievement, when dedicated to the glory of the Immortals, is a cause for celebration, and a celebration in itself.

Notes

[1] Bruit/Schmitt, p. 27.
[2] Burkert, p. 35. (Gendered language as in original.)
[3] Bremmer, p. 11.
[4] Burkert, p. 189. (Gendered language as in original.)
[5] Burkert, p. 53.
[6] Burkert, p. 62: "to strew a granule of frankincense in the flames is the most widespread, simplest, and also the cheapest act of offering."
[7] Burkert, p. 67. (Gendered language as in original.)
[8] Burkert, p. 68.
[9] Guthrie, pp. 221-222. Guthrie's entire chapter on the Khthonioi is well worth reading.
[10] My thanks to Pyrokanthos of Thiasos Olympikos for this idea.



By Drew Campbell, "Old stones, new temples", Chapter 8.


.

Parallels between Jesus and Horus, an Egyptian God

.


Quotations:

• "The Christian myths were first related of Horus or Osiris, who was the embodiment of divine goodness, wisdom, truth and purity...This was the greatest hero that ever lived in the mind of man -- not in the flesh -- the only hero to whom the miracles were natural because he was not human." 1
• "...I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me." Hosea 13:4, King James Version. This passage may have an additional and completely different meaning from that usually assigned.

Background:

About Yeshua of Nazareth: He is commonly referred to as Jesus Christ, although Joshua would be a more accurate translation of his first name. "Christ" is not his last name; it is simply the Greek word for "Messiah," or "anointed one." Theologians have discovered about 50 gospels which were widely used by Jewish, Pauline and Gnostic groups within the early Christian movement. Only four of these were chosen by the surviving group, Pauline Christianity, and were included in the Bible. Those four Gospels describe Jesus as a Jew who was born to a virgin in Palestine circa 4 to 7 BCE. He is portrayed as a rabbi, teacher, healer, exorcist, magician, prophet, and religious leader who had a one year (according to Mark, Matthew and Luke) or a three year (according to John) ministry in Palestine, starting when he was about 30 years old. Most Christians believe that he was executed by the Roman occupying army, visited the underworld, was resurrected, spent 40 days with his disciples, and then ascended to heaven. Most Christian denominations view Jesus as God, and as the Son of God, the second person in the Trinity.|

Conservative Christians view the Gospels as being inerrant whose authors were inspired by God. The Gospels and other passages in the Bible are mostly interpreted literally. Muslims revere Jesus as a great prophet -- next only to Muhammad in importance. They regard the assertion that Jesus is God to be blasphemy.

About Horus: Various ancient Egyptian statues and writings tell of Horus, (pronounced "hohr'-uhs;" a.k.a. Harseisis, Heru-sa-Aset (Horus, son of Isis), Heru-ur (Horus the elder), Hr, and Hrw), a creator sky God. He was worshipped thousands of years before the first century CE -- the time when Jesus was ministering in Palestine. 2 Horus was often represented as a stylized eye symbol, symbolizing the eye of a falcon. He was also presented "in the shape of a sparrow hawk or as a man [or lion] with a hawk's head." 3 He is often shown as an infant cradled by his mother Isis. He was considered to be the son of two major Egyptian deities: the God Osirus and and the Goddess Isis. In adulthood, he avenged his father's murder, and became recognized as the God of civil order and justice. Each of the Egyptian pharaohs were believed to be the living embodiment -- an incarnation -- of Horus. 4

Isis with Horus 5 Horus 5

"A list of the names of all the gods of Egypt would fill pages. But all these gods were only forms, attributes or phases of Ra, the solar god, who himself was the supreme symbol or metaphor for God....Horus, the son of Osirus and Isis, is himself an aspect of Ra." 6

Life events shared by Horus and Jesus

Stories from the life of Horus had been circulating for centuries before Jesus birth (circa 4 to 7 BCE). If any copying occurred by the writers of the Egyptian or Christian religions, it was the followers of Jesus who incorporated into his biography the myths and legends of Horus, not vice-versa.

Author and theologian Tom Harpur studied the works of three authors who have written about ancient Egyptian religion: Godfrey Higgins (1771-1834), Gerald Massey (1828-1907) and Alvin Boyd Kuhn (1880-1963). Harpur incorporated some of their findings into his book "Pagan Christ." He argued that all of the essential ideas of both Judaism and Christianity came primarily from Egyptian religion. "[Author Gerald] Massey discovered nearly two hundred instances of immediate correspondence between the mythical Egyptian material and the allegedly historical Christian writings about Jesus. Horus indeed was the archetypal Pagan Christ." 7

Comparison of some life events of Horus and Jesus:

Event	Horus	Yeshua of Nazareth, a.k.a. Jesus
Conception:	By a virgin. There is some doubt about this matter	By a virgin. 8
Father:	Only begotten son of the God Osiris.	Only begotten son of Yehovah (in the form of the Holy Spirit).
Mother:	Meri. 9	Miriam (a.k.a. Mary).
Foster father:	Seb, (Jo-Seph). 9	Joseph.
Foster father's ancestry:	Of royal descent.	Of royal descent.
Birth location:	In a cave.	In a cave or stable.
Annunciation:	By an angel to Isis, his mother.	By an angel to Miriam, his mother. 8
Birth heralded by:	The star Sirius, the morning star.	An unidentified "star in the East."
Birth date:	Ancient Egyptians paraded a manger and child representing Horus through the streets at the time of the winter solstice (typically DEC-21).	Celebrated on DEC-25. The date was chosen to occur on the same date as the birth of Mithra, Dionysus and the Sol Invictus (unconquerable Sun), etc.
Birth announcement:	By angels.	By angels. 8
Birth witnesses:	Shepherds.	Shepherds. 8
Later witnesses to birth:	Three solar deities.	Three wise men. 8
Death threat during infancy:	Herut tried to have Horus murdered.	Herod tried to have Jesus murdered.
Handling the threat:	The God That tells Horus' mother "Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child."	An angel tells Jesus' father to: "Arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt."
Rite of passage ritual:	Horus came of age with a special ritual, when his eye was restored.	Taken by parents to the temple for what is today called a bar mitzvah ritual.
Age at the ritual:	12	12
Break in life history:	No data between ages of 12 & 30.	No data between ages of 12 & 30.
Baptism location:	In the river Eridanus.	In the river Jordan.
Age at baptism:	30.	30.
Baptized by:	Anup the Baptiser.	John the Baptist.
Subsequent fate of the baptiser:	Beheaded.	Beheaded.
Temptation:	Taken from the desert of Amenta up a high mountain by his arch-rival Sut. Sut (a.k.a. Set) was a precursor for the Hebrew Satan.	Taken from the desert in Palestine up a high mountain by his arch-rival Satan.
Result of temptation:	Horus resists temptation.	Jesus resists temptation.
Close followers:	Twelve disciples. There is some doubt about this matter as well.	Twelve disciples.
Activities:	Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. He "stilled the sea by his power."	Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. He ordered the sea with a "Peace, be still" command.
Raising of the dead:	Horus raised Osirus, his dead father, from the grave. 10	Jesus raised Lazarus from the grave.
Location where the resurrection miracle occurred:	Anu, an Egyptian city where the rites of the death, burial and resurrection of Horus were enacted annually. 10	Hebrews added their prefix for house ('beth") to "Anu" to produce "Beth-Anu" or the "House of Anu." Since "u" and "y" were interchangeable in antiquity, "Bethanu" became "Bethany," the location mentioned in John 11.
Origin of Lazarus' name in the Gospel of John:		Asar was an alternative name for Osirus, Horus' father, who Horus raised from the dead. He was referred to as "the Asar," as a sign of respect. Translated into Hebrew, this is "El-Asar." The Romans added the prefix "us" to indicate a male name, producing "Elasarus." Over time, the "E" was dropped and "s" became "z," producing "Lazarus." 10
Transfigured:	On a mountain.	On a high mountain.
Key address(es):	Sermon on the Mount.	Sermon on the Mount; Sermon on the Plain.
Method of death	By crucifixion.	By crucifixion.
Accompanied by:	Two thieves.	Two thieves.
Burial	In a tomb.	In a tomb.
Fate after death:	Descended into Hell; resurrected after three days.	Descended into Hell; resurrected after about 30 to 38 hours (Friday PM to presumably some time in Sunday AM) covering parts of three days.
Resurrection announced by:	Women.	Women.
Future:	Reign for 1,000 years in the Millennium.	Reign for 1,000 years in the Millennium.

Comparison of some characteristics of Horus and Jesus:

Characteristics	Horus	Yeshua of Nazareth, a.k.a. Jesus
Nature"	Regarded as a mythical character.	Regarded as a 1st century CE human man-god.
Main role:	Savior of humanity.	Savior of humanity.
Status:	God-man.	God-man.
Common portrayal:	Virgin Isis holding the infant Horus.	Virgin Mary holding the infant Jesus.
Title:	KRST, the anointed one.	Christ, the anointed one.
Other names:	The good shepherd, the lamb of God, the bread of life, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, the winnower.	The good shepherd, the lamb of God, the bread of life, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, the winnower.
Zodiac sign:	Associated with Pisces, the fish.	Associated with Pisces, the fish.
Main symbols:	Fish, beetle, the vine, shepherd's crook.	Fish, beetle, the vine, the shepherd's crook.

Comparison of some teachings of Horus and Jesus:

Characteristics	Horus	Yeshua of Nazareth, a.k.a. Jesus
Criteria for salvation at the place of judgment:	"I have given bread to the hungry man and water to the thirsty man and clothing to the naked person and a boat to the shipwrecked mariner." 11	"For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me..." Matthew 25:35-36 (KJV).
"I am" statements	"I am Horus in glory...I am the Lord of Light...I am the victorious one...I am the heir of endless time...I, even I, am he that knoweth the paths of heaven." 12 "I am Horus, the Prince of Eternity." "I am Horus who stepeth onward through eternity...Eternity and everlastingness is my name." "I am the possessor of bread in Anu. I have bread in heaven with Ra."	"I am the light of the world....I am the way, the truth and the life." "Before Abraham was, I am" "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today and forever." "I am the living bread that came down from heaven." (From the Gospel of John)

Was Horus born of a virgin?:

Acharya S. quotes priest and author Joseph McCabe's:

Whatever we make of the original myth�Isis seems to have been originally a virgin (or, perhaps, sexless) goddess, and in the later period of Egyptian religion she was again considered a virgin goddess, demanding very strict abstinence from her devotees. It is at this period, apparently, that the birthday of Horus was annually celebrated, about December 25th, in the temples. As both Macrobius and the Christian writer [of the "Paschal Chronicle"] say, a figure of Horus as a baby was laid in a manger, in a scenic reconstruction of a stable, and a statue of Isis was placed beside it. Horus was, in a sense, the Savior of mankind. He was their avenger against the powers of darkness; he was the light of the world. His birth-festival was a real Christmas before Christ. _13,14

Acharya S. mentions a number of other references to Egyptian virgin births in his essay on Horus. _14.

James Frazer's writes in The Golden Bough: ₁₅

The ritual of the nativity, as it appears to have been celebrated in Syria and Egypt, was remarkable. The celebrants retired into certain inner shrines, from which at midnight they issued with a loud cry, "The Virgin has brought forth! The light is waxing!" The Egyptians even represented the new-born sun by the image of an infant which on his birthday, the winter solstice, they brought forth and exhibited to his worshippers. No doubt the Virgin who thus conceived and bore a son on the twenty-fifth of December was the great Oriental goddess whom the Semites called the Heavenly Virgin or simply the Heavenly Goddess." ₁₆

On the other hand, Christian theologian Ward Gasque surveyed twenty contemporary Egyptologists. He asked them about the relationship whether Horus experienced a virgin birth. Ten responded, They all agreed that there is no evidence that Horus was born of a virgin ₂

Did Horus have 12 disciples:

Glenn Miller wrote:

...my research in the academic literature does not surface this fact. I can find references to four "disciples"--variously called the semi-divine HERU-SHEMSU ('Followers of Horus'). I can find references to Sixteen human followers. And I can find reference to an unnumbered group of followers called mesniu/mesnitu ('blacksmiths') who accompanied Horus in some of his battles. ... But I cannot find twelve anywhere." ₁₇

Of course, the early Christian movement might have imported the concept of disciples from Egypt and changed the number so that the number of Jesus' disciples matched the number of the tribes of Israel.

Again, Gasque's survey came up blank on the matter of Horus' disciples as well.

References:

1. Gerald Massey, "The Natural Genesis," Black Classic Press, (Reissued 1998). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store.
2. Tom Harpur, "The Pagan Christ; Recovering the Lost Light," Thomas Allen, (2004), Page 5. Read reviews or order this book.
3. "Egyptian god Horus, The Louvre, Paris," at: http://ancienthistory.about.com/
4. Information taken from essays linked to "Horus - Egyptian God," at: http://ancienthistory.about.com/
5. Images copied from the web site of the Dark Forest of Ulcron, a supplier of Pagan and New Age items, from Athames to Tarot Cards. See: http://www.ulcron.com/ Images used by permission.
6. Op Cit., Tom Harpur, Page 69.
7. Ibid, Page 85.
8. Ibid, Page 80. Items as seen in the Temple of Luxor, built by Amenhotep III, a pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty, before 1700 BCE.
9. Ibid, Page 89.
10. Ibid, Pages 128 to 136.
11. Ibid, Page 74. From the confession that humans made in the presence of Horus at the Hall of Maat -- the place of judgment for all.
12. "The Ritual: The Egyptian Book of the Dead."
13. Joseph McCabe, "The Story of Religious Controversy," Stratford Co, (1929). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store
14. Acharya S., "Born of a Virgin on December 25th: Horus, Sun God of Egypt," at: http://www.truthbeknown.com/
15. James George Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion." Oxford University Press, (1998). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store
16. Les Carney, "Krishna born of a virgin?," at: http://www.lescarney.com/
17. James Patrick Holding, "Comparing Osiris, Horus and Jesus," at: http://tektonics.org/

By "ReligiousTolerance.Org"

.

Notes On Fear And Fearlessness

.

“They are afraid of Nature
They are afraid of reasoning
They are afraid of eroticism
They are afraid of the truth
They are afraid of joy
They are afraid of the Gods
They are afraid of man
They are afraid of antiquity
They are afraid of thought
They are afraid of freedom
They are afraid of variety
They are afraid of quest
They are afraid of their end
and for that purpose, they sow
fear in the souls of their slaves.”

I
The human violence, hatred, anger aggressiveness, superstition are deeply rooted in fear and insecurity. The last two notions are the greatest obstacles for every man who seeks to pursue freedom, internal tranquility, autarky and bliss.

II
In turn, fear is rooted in the ignorance and the self-deceit of a non-existing, egotistical individualism (ie: atomistic soul) that deceives us by making us believe that we are separated from the universe, its processes and its Substance, separated and alienated from the notion of the Whole.

III
Fear is rooted into an arbitrary cluster of personality characteristics that the philosophy aversive (non philosophical) humans consider as their “ego.” A finite and shallow “ego” completely deprived of any kind of unifying relationship that comes to experience the natural World as something incomprehensible, alarming, impenetrable and threatening. The feelings of alienation and differentiation constitute the basic precondition of fear.

IV
Fear and insecurity are synonyms. Individuals (and systems) become phobic when they realize that they are unable to form a cohesive image of their real “selves” which shouldn’t be shrunk in a non-existing “ego.”

V
Whoever feels insecure, he backfolds himself towards his atomistic personality, frightfully takes cover behind the fortress of his “ego” and ends up becoming an egoist. A classical example of such a “fortress” that the insecure use, is Christianity that steers and directs the faithful individual towards exclusively saving only his very own soul.

VI
This not only applies to ordinary people but also to nations, religions and/or other forms of collective human actions. The notion of egoism in religions is expressed through “dogmatic malevolence”, in other words, the determining definition of the supposed orthodoxies and the persecution of the supposed unorthodoxies. Christianity, which is not only alienated from the natural world but also its declared enemy, officiates at this procedure as well.

VII
The basic and final fear is the fear for the unknown (which often is pictured as darkness where the human mind can imagine almost everything, good or bad). The fear for the unknown is in reality the fear felt for everything outside of the sphere of “ego” or outside “ego’s” traceable parts. The fear for the unknown is the corridor leading to heterophobia (fearing everything different from yourself).

VIIΙ
The heterophobic individual or collectivized group feels “threatened” by unknown situations or unknown people. Racial hatred, religious intolerance and all forms of unprovoked attacks are rooted in this threat illusion.

IX
The phobic is scared by the per excellence normal, that is the notion of the world as pure motion. He gets scared towards the idea of an eternal transformation of everything and refuses to accept it by denouncing everything that scares him as being or related to the “unknown”. The fear for this “unknown” includes the primary fear, the greatest fear of all, the ultimate fear of losing one’s “ego”, the fear of death.

X
Fear floods people with a double, contradictory emotion and pushes them towards a form of schizophrenia, where the full detachment from reasoning and reality correlates with an absorption in delirium and delusion. Fear abolishes reasoning and distorts perception. Thus, it can only be fought off through Knowledge and familiarization with the natural world or with Recta Ratio, in other words, with respect towards Nature or philosophical cogitation.

XI
Every egotistical individual and every egoistic collectivized group are destined to waste endless amounts of energy, thought, time and materials to secure a delusional sense of external insecurity.

XII
Every back-folding towards the atomistic personality is fatefully full of delusions. The fear of losing “ego” (which is one way or another, one more delusion) provokes an attraction to every form of further delusions.

XIII
Every denudation of people from their collective support of their identity, every detachment of theirs from the -deified and political in its dimension- organic collectivity that had been established by the pre-Christian world leads them to the deprivation of every substance as well as the deprivation of their very own existence’s background. The void is transformed into fear and then into hatred for the extraneous (these two last forms constitute what we previously called “heterophobia”). The phobic individuals (and the phobic collectivized groups) detest the truth, the objective reality, the direct contact with the internal and external nature and in general, they hate everything extraneous and different from their internal void that haunts them.

XIV
Whoever has fear, fatefully ends up exporting fear.

XV
The oppressors use Religions that propagandize fear as well as Mass Media dedicated to form consciences, aiming at increasing the distrust, the weakness feeling and the fear among the oppressed.

XVI
Fear is an inexhaustible source from where each system of oppression and exploitation of life draws energy. The most devious forms of fear are the ones who distribute fear equivalently, so as to be considered as a natural condition of humans.

XVII
The mediation of fear distribution mechanisms makes the phobic individuals to be classified according to their form of fear: the ones suffering from “self-generated” fear and the others who are “fear-programmed.”

XVIII
The flow of fear seems (without necessarily being) endless. At the same time, however, it is absolutely certain that it is fragile. Most of the “fear-programmed” phobic individuals fear the simple possibility of experiencing a Fear Void (lack of fear) and from the realization of the tragic fragility of what they have been programmed to consider their supposed “natural” condition.

XIX
The “fear programmed” phobic individuals are in a brace of shakes when facing either a mandatory self- responsibility or the possibility of having their languor terminated.

XX
In general, whoever fears ends up a fanatic.

XXI
A part of fanaticism results from the fear of the fanatic who is afraid of being wrong. The fanatic is destined to support in fits and starts an (usually non-existing) identity while he worships it almost fetishistically.

XXII
The fanatic attempts to reassure himself that what he believes is supposedly right by having the illusion that the more people believe the same things, the more correct and right these things are. The fanatic is haunted by a missionary spirit, a spirit of conversion.

XXIII
The phobic individual and the phobic collectivized groups almost never have the courage to try something completely new or completely unknown. On the contrary, they stubbornly remain attached to their familiar habits and ways. Their lives are deprived of the element of evolution, they are boring, cyclical, dormant, tasteless, and meaningless. For that purpose, the phobic turns to illusion and attempts to escape through daydreaming.

XXIV
This phobic attachment to only familiar matters shouldn’t be confused with the natural respect towards Tradition which is a system of values and consuetude that someone follows as an organic part of a living nation. Culturally, nations belong to Paganism, in other words to the part of human civilization that clings to an overall view of matters, as well as fearlessness, complaisance and openness.

XXV
The amplitude of nations, the Ethnosphere, incarnates polymorphism and Paganism blesses and secures it. Polymorphism is the sole element that serves communication and tolerance.

XXVI
One truly loves only when he tolerates others and simultaneously fights against those who do not tolerate others. Indeed, tolerance can be expressed both passively (by tolerating others) and actively (by fighting against those who don’t tolerate others).

XXVII
Besides its pompous declarations, Christianity both as a collective system and as groups of separate and distinct individuals that comprise it, due to its phobic nature and insecurity, is completely incapable of tolerating others and contributing to the social well-being. On the contrary, it is always attempting to make copies of itself while it simultaneously makes grand efforts to grab material goods and human souls. Complaisance is a completely unknown notion to the phobic individual. The real complaisance is something incomprehensible to Christianity.

XXVIII
It is impossible for someone to be open or feel internal balance, amenity, tranquility and joy when he is afraid of every sort of threats from the world surrounding him, from different people, from people that belong to different religions or from a supposed… “Satan.”

XXIX
Tolerance requires good knowledge of the cosmic and human matters and trust towards BEING. Only the powerful exposure to the Very Being and the acceptance of the sanctity of nature (either through the Hellenic Philosophy and Humanism or through a healthy polytheistic religiosity) can strengthen the limits of tolerance of every man towards the others and towards life itself.


By Vlassis G. Rassias

.

The Nachtzehrer

.

Germany is a country that has macroscopical variations of vampire traditions. Much of this can be accredited to the divergent history of the region and the many cultures that have contributed to shaping Germany’s character. Most of Germany’s vampire traditions distinctively resemble those of the Slavic people, who, around the tenth century had spread out into Eastern region of Germany along the Jeetze River. The Slavic and Germanic people have integrated since that time, so it is a very difficult task to recognize the differences between the vampire traditions of Germany and that of it’s neighboring countries.

The most well known of the German vampire was the Nachtzehrer translated as “night waster” (also referenced as nachzehrer.) The Nachtzehrer was prominent in the Northern region of Germany including Silesia and Bavaria and also with the Kashubes of Northern Europe. The Nachtzehrer is distinguishable in it’s coffin by it’s curious custom of holding the thumb of one hand in the other and keeping it’s left eye open. This species was believed to have the ability to kill family members through some type of long-range magic. The Nachtzehrer, while in the grave, would eat it’s own shroud, nibble by nibble, moving on to feed on it’s own flesh. While this is going on, the family members of the deceased would begin to waste away due to their life force being drawnout from them. It is also said that sometimes the Nachtzehrer would rise from it’s grave and feed on the bodies of other corpses. The Nachtzehrer would often be accompanied by the corpse of a woman who had died in childbirth. The Nachtzehrer was often tracked down by a sucking sound most often familiar with the same sound as a woman nursing a baby.

Some Kashubes believed that the Nachtzehrer would leave it’s grave, shapeshifting into the form of a pig, and pay a visit to their family members to feast on their blood. In addition, the Nachtzehrer was able to ascend to a church belfry to ring the bells, bringing death to anyone who hears them. Another lesser known ability of the Nachtzehrer is the power it had to bring death by causing it’s shadow to fall upon someone. Those hunting the Nachtzehrer in the graveyard would listen for grunting sounds that it would make while it munched on it’s grave clothes.

The cause of becoming a Nachtzehrer was attributed to unusual death circumstances such as suicide or accidental causes. The Nachtzehrer was associated with outbreaks of epidemic illnesses as well. When a number of people would die from the same illness, survivors would blame the first one who died as the cause of all the others’ death. Also, those that were born with a caul(the amniotic membrane that surrounds the baby in utero) were destined to be a vampire upon their death, especially if the caul was red.(caused by hemorrhages). To prevent the child from becoming a vampire and provide protection from an attack, the caul was preserved and dried and gradually was crumbled into the child’s food and fed to them. Another belief of cause is that if a person’s name was not removed from their burial clothing, that person could return from the dead as a vampire.

Other preventive measures were practiced such as the following: Placing a chunk of earth under the chin of the deceased, placing a coin or stone in their mouths, tying a handkerchief tightly about the neck, placing nets or stockings inside the grave (vampires in northern Germany were said to be compulsive untiers of knots), or being buried face down to avoid it’s potentially dangerous gaze(The Silesians). Some extremists would go as far as to decapitate the head of the deceased, drive a spike in it’s mouth to fasten the head to the ground, or fixed the tongue so it couldn’t move.


By Larae of Darkness Embraced

.

Fire in Northern Mythology

.


Fire, a concept that is very present in Northern mythology and also a concept that I have broken my head over for some time now. The symbology is multi-layered and however I still haven’t fully worked out the subject, I want to present some thoughts and come to an interpretation of some elements of Northern mythology.

Creation

There are two primal forces in Nordic myths, two forces that are known under the names, “fire” and “ice”. Before there was anything, there was Ginungagap, a “yawning gap”. In the south of it, fire ‘resided’ and in the north, ice. When these two came together, everything started. So, fire is the primal force, one side of the Divine. Some symbology!

It is not strange that fire keeps coming back in the symbology of Nordic mythology. What may be strange is that fire is much better represented than ice, but this is not the subject of this article.

Later in the creation myth, the triple divinity Odin, Hænir (sometimes Hoenir, or Hnir) and Lodur give capacities and make man. “Spirit gave Odin, “óður” gave Hoenir, “lá” gave Lodur and the form of gods”. This is how Rydberg translates Völuspa 18. More often you will read something like “Soul gave Othin, sense gave Hnir, Heat gave Lothur and goodly hue”. (Ari Odhinnsen) In the Prose Edda it is Odin, Vili and Vé who are the givers of these things.

Loki

Lodur is often said to be Loki. In the preface to the Reginsmal Odin, Hænir and Loki are named together, so this is not strange. Loki is the most famous of ‘fire Gods’ from the Northern pantheon. The name Loki has been explained in different ways of which two are most interesting in our story. “Logi” supposedly means “flame” and the terms “liuhan” (Gothic) and “lecht” (Anglo-Saxon) are linked to the English word “light”, but also to the term “flame”. The same goes for the term “Lód”.

Fiery triplicity

When you think of it, there are three Gods connected to the concept of fire and also connected to eachother: Heimdallr, Balder and Loki. Heimdallr is the “white As”, the watchman on the Bifrost bridge and is therefor the middleman between the world of men and the world of the Gods. Heimdallr is not only the connecting smoke-pillar representing the Irminsul in the fire ritual, but also unchanging fire. He is the metaphysic flame, beyond time and space. In this regard Heimdallr can be equated with Brahman of the Hindus.

The second name that I mentioned is that of Balder. Balder is Heimdallr, but on another plane. We can place Heimdallr on the godly level, Balder on the human level and Loki on the underwordly level (or Asgard, Midgard and Utgard). Balder is the incarnated fire, the fire in ‘our world’ so to say. He is the warmth of our heart, the sun, the ancestral hearth-fire. To use another Hindu term, Balder may be seen as Atman.

I have already said a few things about Loki, but you can imagine that in regard of the previous, Loki is the destructive, incinerating, consuming fire. Loki is longing and desire.

When I draw this line further, I can say that Balder and Loki are dual aspects of Heimdallr, but on other levels.

Lightning

Lightning is often connected to fire and when I say lightning, I say Thor. Lightning is sparks of fire when Thor’s hammer hits something. The hammer makes an interesting connection, since with his Mjölnir, Thor kills giants (ice-giants!), but the Mjölnir is also connected with right (the judge’s hammer), consecration (for example of marriages) and initiations (a ‘higher’ form of consecration).

Ragnarök

To bring the above together, we get the following picture. Loki, the lower self, turns against the higher self (Balder), causing Ragnarök. During this Ragnarök, Thor kills the Midgard-snake (’manifestation’), Heimdallr (our divine spark) fights Loki and all this in order to have our higher self ‘become divine’ (in other words: to develop and realise our Balder to become Heimdallr).

An interesting point that does not fit completely in the above is that Surtr, the leader of the fire-giants who raise up to fight the Aesir, also seems to be the cause of the sparks coming from Muspelheimr and thus creation. During Ragnarök Surtr destroys the Bifrost-bridge (Heimdallr’s ‘domain’), kills Freyr and sets the world to flames. Whereas Heimdallr seems to be some ‘overhuman’ fire-aspect, Surtr is more of an ‘underhuman’ aspect. Both larger than our petty selves, but completely opposital. In this regard Surtr maybe represents the outside forces that try to disconnect us from our divine origin. Whatever we may call “evil” maybe. Surtr seems to have always been there and whereas Loki, Balder and Heimdallr are ‘part of us’, Surtr is not.

Of course there are more figures that can be connected to fire, but here I present a certain aspect that may shed light on some of the symbolism in Northern mythology.



By "Gangleri".

.

The Religion Of Mazdak

.

Just as Mani's eclectic Faith was a pointer at the germs of decay in the Sasanian body-politic, so also Mazdak's teaching was a pointer at the inevitable downfall towards which the Sasanian Empire was heading. Mani came within one generation of the establishment of Sasanian rule in Iran; Mazdak came towards the end of that rule, about a century before the Empire was overthrown by the Arabs. Both these movements were fiercely and ruthlessly uprooted in the land of their origin, and to all outward appearance it seemed as if the authority of the theocratic state was amply vindicated. But the triumph over Mazdakism was short-lived. There is another similarity between these two movements: Zoroastrian, Christian and Islamic writers have poured unbounded vituperation against both. These unfriendly writings are our only sources of information regarding the teachings of Mazdak. As regards Mani a great deal of new and valuable information has come to light since the Turfan discoveries in 1902. These have shown Mani to have been a really great personage and the founder of a new Faith. But no such finds have yet been discovered to rehabilitate Mazdak.

Still Mazdakism may be viewed as a symptom which indicated a deep-seated cancer in the body-politic of Sasanian Iran. Therefore we should judge this movement after accepting the principle embodied in the saying, "By their fruits shall ye know them".

The founder of the Sasanian dynasty was one of the supermen of history. He was a born leader of men and he led his country and his people to a renovated existence. A man of great fixity of purpose, he carried out to the full the task he had set before himself, and he left to his son a newly established empire, a renowated religion and hundreds of well-trained and enthusiastic men and women ready to carry on the work to its fulfilment. Shapur I, the son of the founder, Ardashir I, was worthy of his father, for he also was a great leader, far above the average. He established the new empire and completed the task of the revival of Zoroastrianism to the satisfaction of all concerned. He loyally carried out his father's admonition, regarding Faith and Royalty as brothers. He fixed firmly and finally the theocratic constitution of the newly established Sasanian empire. By this Zoroastrian clergy acquired powers second only to those possessed by the king himself. And naturally also the landed aristocracy of Iran came in for a good share of political power and emoluments.

Of course, it was never the intention of either Ardashir I or of Shapur I that these two great sections of Iranian society the Zoroastrian clergy and the landowners - should become the oppressors of the masses. As long as the king at the top was a strong man he could hold both these sections in check and could stand between them and the masses. Both Ardashir I and Shapur I understood that the masses would give full support and would be loyal to the state provided they got justice from their king, and so both these rulers were eager to see that justice was done to the meanest of their subjects.

But once the strong hand of the king at the top was removed the two powerful sections would naturally try to consolidate their own power over the masses and to gain new privileges. In justice, however, to the Zoroastrian clergy it must be mentioned that the spread of Christianity throughout Iran was a constant and growing menace to the newly-revived Zoroastrian religion. To add to these difficulties the Christian Roman empire was steadily growing more and more menacing and triculent. Rome was always trying to find some pretext to make war on Iran, nor was Iran at all behind to find excuses for a fight. Armenia, which held a strategic position between the two empires, was itself torn by the religious strife of the Armenian Zoroastrians and Christians; and Rome and Iran being both theocratic, the affairs in Armenia almost always kindled the flames of war. And in these wars the landholders were ever an important factor for they ensured the victories of Iran. And so we find the power of both the Zoroastrian clergy and of the Iranian landholding aristocracy daily growing stronger and more firmly established. When the king was a man of easy-going and pliable temperament both these sections consolidated their gains and tried to acquire yet more. And all this was at the expense of the masses.

Ardashir I and Shapur I did all they could to ensure that the masses got a fair deal. But when they were gone a succession of weaker men ruled the empire from 272 to 309 A.D., which gave time enough to the vasted interests to work their will in the state.

Then came Shapur II (the Great), a unique figure in history. He was a posthumous son, and the succeeded to the empire before he was born. The vested interests naturally looked forward to a fairly long period of minority (at least fifteen years) and they had hopes of moulding the baby king's character to suit their own purposes. But Shapur was a superman, even greater than the first two rulers of his line and at a very early age he gave clear indications that he had a mind of his own and a will also to get whatever he wanted, and that he was a true-born ruler of men. Shapur II wished to curb the powers of the Zoroastrian clergy and of his landholders, for he was wise enough to appreciate the dangers if these were left unchecked. But other events outside Iran forced him to side with his clergy and his aristocracy. Constantine, the Roman Emperor, carried away by his zeal for Christianity, proclaimed himself to be the spiritual head of all the Christian in the world (including, of course, the Christians of Iran). This was more than Shapur II, the proudest of the Sasanians, could tolerate. The poor Christians of Iran found themselves placed in a very false position, torn between two loyalties, to the king of their own country and to the head of their faith, the Roman emperor. Whenever there was war between Iran an Rome (which was practically always0 the Christian of Iran looked upon as foes and "fifth columnists" and had to pay the penalty. This gave the vested interests of good opportunities to launch fierce persecutions agaist the Christians, to which Shapur II, with his offended pride, was not unwilling to lend his support. So on the whole during the long reign of Shapur II (lasting for seventy years) the vested interests had their own way more or less in spite of the strong king.

After Shapur II came a long succession of very ordinary kings and during over one hundred years (379-487 A.D.) there was only one king who was really well above the average. That was Bahram V (Bahramgore, the Hunter of the Wild Ass), but he was busy most of the time with wars with the Huns. One important event happened in the days of Bahram V and that was the final separation of the Iranian Christian Church from the Orthodox Church of Byzantium. The fratricidal strife between the Christians and the Zoroastrians had been going on with ever-increasing ferocity and bitterness ever since the days of Shapur II. Thousands had lost their lives; the manhood of Iran was slowly but surely being bled to death. But after the separation of the Iranian Christian Church from Byzantium the Christians found comparative peace. Still the religious hatred and fanaticism on both sides were of too long a growth to die out completely. Violent polemical writings continued on both sides.

Meanwhile the masses were being ground down relentlessly by the vested interests and seem to have sunk to the deepest depths of poverty and misery. The unsuccessful wars of Firuz I (459-483) against the Huns added to the prevailing discontent. The conditions in Iran soon after the death of Firuz I were almost exactly the same as those prevailing in France on the eve of the French Revolution or in Russia at the end of the First World War. The fruits of these centuries of oppression were soon to be visible in the revolutionary and communicate preaching of Mazdak, who began his work about 488 A.D.

We can but make a guess at the social conditions of Iranian masses by observing the extra violent language in the preaching of Mazdak and in the extremes to which his doctrines went. Even more significant was the extreme rapidity with which Mazdak's teaching was accepted by the masses. Within the course of a few months his followers could be counted by the hundred thousand: and in every part of the vast empire they were drawn from every stratum of society from the king downwards. The king at that time was Kawadh (488-531 A.D.) and in the beginning he openly declared his sympathies with the new preaching. But the vested interests were seriously perturbed and so strongly were they entrenched that the king was forced to leave his throne for a few years (499-501).

Charles Dickens has given a wonderful passage in the last chapter of his A Tale of Two Cities, in which he indicates the connection between revolutions and their causes. Describing the rolling of six tumbrils through the streets of Paris bearing unhappy victims of the guillotine he says:
"Six tumbrils roll along the streets. Change these back to what they were thou powerful enchanter, Time, and they shall be seen to be the carriages of absolute monarchs, the equipages of feudal nobles, the toilettes of flaring Jezebels, the churches that are not my Father's house, but dens of thieves, the huts of millions of starving peasants. No; the great magician who works out the appointed order of the Creator, never reverses his transformation". Further on he adds:
"Crush humanity out of shape under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the seed of rapacious license and oppression over gain and it will yield the same fruit according to its kind". By their fruits, indeed shall ye know them. We do not have any historical records of the seeds sown in Iran, but we possess ample evidence of the hideous fruit, from which we may infer the nature of the seed if the Laws of God have any meaning.

Mazdak might well be termed the first Bolshevik in history. Indeed, in some respects Bolsheviks might be regarded as lukewarm compared to Mazdak; he not only preached communism in worldly possessions but he also advocated an equal division of women among men.

When Kawadh was restored to the throne in 501 A.D. he was made wiser by experience and he withdrew his open support of the Mazdakites. He clearly recognized the seed from which this terrible tree of Mazdakism had grown, and he tried his best during the remaining thirty years of his reign to see that the conditions of the masses were made more tolerable. But he was not strong enough to remove the root causes of Mazdakism. That was reserved for a far greater man than Kawadh. It was his son Khusrav I, known to all Orient by his title Noshiravan, who freed Iran from the Mazdak frenzy.

Khusrav was the favourite son of Kawadh and had been his father's closest friend and consellor during the closing years of Kawadh's reign. Khusrav was easily the greatest ruler Iran ever had. Indeed, he may rank among the six greatest kings in the history of the world. He clearly saw the imminent danger to both the state and the religion from Mazdak's teaching and the first thing he did was to suppress the movement with an iron hand. But at the same time he saw justice done to the masses. Like a good physician he removed not merely the symptoms of the disease but he removed the disease itself. With equal firmness he brought under control the oppressors of the masses. Quite early he won the title of 'Adl' (the Just), for Justice was his watchword. Under his strong and just rule peace and prosperity returned to Iran, and the masses were satisfied. For this achievement his grateful subjects with one voice called him Anushak-Ruban or Noshirwan (he of the immortal soul). To posterity he is known as Noshirwan alone, the most glorious name ever bestowed upon an earthly ruler.

Mazdak was certainly a successor of Mani, because his movement was not merely social but was essentially religious. His extreme ideas were certainly a menace both to society and to religion. They certainly threatened the very existence of Zoroastrian priesthood, and so very naturally he was violently abused by Zoroastrian writers. He has been called Ashemaogha (a disorter of truth) and one commentator on a religious text explains this epithet by adding, "like Mazdak, the Son of Bamdad". The mildest epithet used for him by Zoroastrians is "accursed".

Mazdak's ideas are a natural corollary to the state of Iran in his days, and to the condition of the masses that he had seen with his own eyes. He felt himself obliged to preach extreme communism and an absolute community of possessions, including women. Very likely he was moved by the idea that desperate diseases need desperate remedies. At the same time he also preached a higher ideal of life. He pointed out the value of self-restraint and renunciation of all sense-pleasures including animal food. For this last teaching he has been called "the devil who would not eat". He asserted that the desire for pleasure and possessions constituted the universal cause of all hatred and strife. He also like Mani laid stress on Zoroaster's teaching of the two essential principles of Good and evil which pervade our life on earth. He also enjoined the strict purity of God's "elements", fire, water and earth. But we have very scanty positive knowledge of what he actually taught.

Mazdak was treacherously murdered and many of his closest adherents lost their lives at the same time. Then followed a systematic suppression of all Mazdakites, often with much bloodshed. But though outwardly uprooted and completely destroyed the teachings of Mazdak continued to flourish for several centuries after his murder. Under the rule of the Islamic caliphs of Baghdad several "heretical sects" have been noted by historians. They all seemed to get their inspiration from the teachings of Mazdak, for they cite him as their authority. But what is more surprising and very significant is that many of these "heretical sects" have coupled the name of Mazdak with that of Zoroaster, the Prophet of ancient Iran.


By I. J. S. Taraporewala

.

Yezidism: Historical Roots

.

Kurdistan, the cradle of ancient civilizations, has seen many races, people, religions and cultures during the past few thousand years. From the beginning of classical history two old-world civilizations, Aryan and Semitic, met, formed bonds, and were mutually influenced on the soil of Kurdistan. To a lesser or greater extent, they left their marks on this soil, particularly in the religious beliefs of the people of Kurdistan.

Along with the religions that came from outside, notably Christianity, Islam and Judaism, those native to Kurdistan continue to exist on Kurdish soil. Yezidism, Yarsanism and Alewism still have large numbers of adherents and defenders. To better understand the history and culture of the people of Kurdistan, it is imperative to conduct research into these religions. Unfortunately, to date, such research is all too rare.

Scholarly study of the Yezidis began in 1850 when German Scholar Dr. August Neander read a paper on Yezidi religion at the Prussian Academy of Science. (1) Thereafter, many books and commentaries on the topic were published; but to this day it is not clear when and on what foundations Yezidism came into existence.

Yezidis believe their religion to be ancient and to predate Islam by at least a thousand years. Although some foreign scholars maintain that Yezidism began with Sheikh Adi and view him as its founder, no Yezidi accepts this claim. In fact, Yezidis believe that prior to accepting Islam, all Kurds belonged to Yezidism. Here I examine the basis of this conviction.

Today most Kurds believe that before accepting Islam, Kurds were Zoroastrians. Spread by Kurdish intellectuals and continuing to gain credence, the belief is predicated on the following: Zoroastrianism is an Iranian religion; the Kurds are also Iranian. Therefore their pre-Islamic religion must be Zoroastrianism. In addition, it is easier for Kurds, the majority of whom are Muslim, to accept the belief that their pre-Islamic religion was Zoroastrianism rather than Yezidism.

In line with its belief in people of the Book, Islam does not recognize Yezidism as a religion. Moreover, the negative view of Muslims with regard to the Angel Peacock--who in the religion of the Yezidis is second only to God--has been the cause of conflict between Muslims and Yezidis for a thousand years or more. Consequently, the belief that Kurds were Yezidis prior to the advent of Islam has not been accepted by most Muslims. Undoubtedly, a significant reason for the refusal to recognize Yezidism as the ancient religion of the Kurds is that there are no significant studies on Yezidism. Along with foreigners, most Kurds know virtually nothing of its foundations, nor do they know what Yezidis hold sacred. The study of Yezidi history and religion and the clarification and dissemination of its belief system would serve to facilitate understanding, thereby rectifying the causes of hundreds of massacres and deportations.

Between the 8th and 9th centuries BC, Iranian tribes settled in today's Kurdistan. They were followers of Aryan and Indian religious beliefs. According to Kurdish scholar Taufiq Wahbi, their main deity, which symbolized the good and the wholesome, was Baba Asman. He was the counterpart of the Indian god, Diyaus Pitar. (2) Secondary gods (sun, moon, stars) were called "Diva" or "Divas," i.e., those that give light.

Zoroastrianism was for hundreds of years the reigning religion and exerted considerable influence on the Kurds and their beliefs. But I believe that while some Kurds in the east accepted Zoroastrianism, the majority did not. They remained faithful to their own ancient religion.

R. Reshid writes that during the 6th century BC, Zoroastrianism spread to the land of the Medes, but did not become dominant because already in place was an indigenous and powerful religion preceding Zoroastrianism. (3) Later, when Zoroastrianism gained strength, those who remained faithful to the old religion were called "Deva Yasna," meaning the "Slaves of Dew." According to a number of Kurdish researchers, with some variations "Deva Yasna" has survived among the Kurds. The word "dasni," which is the name of a tribe of Yezidi Kurds and was the name of a Yezidi principality, is a variation of "Deva Yasna." (4) Throughout history all Yezidis have been called "dasini." It is evident that the dasinis were at some stage dispersed throughout a large area. A.H. Layard writes that there is a tribe called dasini in the mountains near Silemani [Sulaimania in south/Iraqi Kurdistan]. (5) It is likely that the name "dewperest" [dew-worshippers; many regard "dews" a degree below angels], which is used to refer to some Yezidis, comes from that era.

In the "Zend Avesta," dews are called "diva" in Pehlevi [or Pahlavi, people from which the fallen Shah of Iran claimed lineage] language. In Semitic languages the word "Seyd" like the word "diva" becomes "seydan" among many people. (6) It is evident that when Zoroastrianism was spreading, the people of the Median Empire, who were called "dewperest," were able to defend their religion and did not accept Zoroastrianism. Later the name "dewperest" among the Semitic peoples and the leaders of religions that accepted the principles espoused by the Semites became "seytanperest" [Satan-worshippers]. It became convenient for the Zoroastrians to equate the name of Risti Vega-Azhi-Dahak, the emperor of the Medes, with evil. Wahbi is of this belief. The evil king "Zohak" in [Persian poet] Firdousi's epoch story "Shahname" is Azhi Dahak. (7)

According to Zoroastrian legend, god would stop the flow of water through cities, leaving residents with no alternative but to sacrifice selected maidens. Then god would restore the water flow. (8) Later, they depicted god as a serpent. This is the source of the Yezidi practice of swearing by the yellow serpent. To the Yezidis, Azhi Dahak does not represent evil. They have not accepted Zoroastrian religious beliefs.

Nikolay Marr, an expert on the east and the Kurds, maintains that Yezidism is a distinct religion. "Here we see the remnants of an ancient religion, an original one," he writes. (9) Although some researchers, Qanate Kurdo, for example, (10) note that fire and hearth are sacred to the Kurds, some scholars view this sanctity as a remnant of Zoroastrianism (11). However they forget that in the religion of the Yezidis, fire and hearth are sacred as well.

According to Wahbi, during the 4th and 5th centuries AD the majority of Kurds east of the Zagros, Cizir, Botan, Kirkuk, and those in the mountains of southeast Kurdistan were not Zoroastrians. (12) We see that the people of the Medes' Empire, whom we regard as the ancestors of the Kurds, were not Zoroastrians. Moreover, the last emperor of the Medes, Rishti Vega-Azhi Dahak, killed Zoroaster, ruled his followers and overthrew Vishtaspa. His army reached the southwest of Afghanistan. During that attack, the army of the Medes inflicted cruelties on Zoroastrians. No doubt this explains in large measure why the Zoroastrians equated the name Azhi Dahak with oppression and cruelty.

In the Persian language large serpents are called dragons. Dragon is the name given to the emperor, Azhi Dahak. It is linked to Newroz as well, for the name of the cruel ruler is Dahak. Three years later, in 549 BC, the founder of the Akkadian Empire, Cyrus the Great, grandson of Rishti Vega-Azhi Dahak, conquered the capital city Ekbatana and put an end to the Median Empire. Because it was three years or so after the attack by Azhi Dahak, it is not far fetched to assume that on this occasion the Zoroastrians took revenge on the locals and forced the angel-worshippers to pack up and leave.

The name of the Median Empire has not remained in history. Moreover, it has been forgotten by its own people. The religion of the Medes was supplanted by three religions emanating from it, which remain to this day: Yezidism, Yarsanism and Alewism.

M. R. Izady surmises that the name of that religion was Yazdani, but he is not 100% convinced. (13) Nevertheless, in his research to differentiate it from Yezidism, he uses the name. Both names refer to angels. The name might have been Yazdani, but it could also have been Yezidi. To differentiate between the two, I will call the religion of the Median Empire Yazdani.

Undoubtedly, over the past thousands of years and owing to significant changes introduced by Sheikh Adi, neither religion could have remained intact and unchanged. Nevertheless, they have much in common. The foundation of Yezidism is that there is but one God, with neither partner nor equal, and seven angels headed by Angel Peacock. Among the Yazdani sects of our day, Alewis and Yarsanis, beliefs are founded on the worship of seven angels.

Yezidis believe in the shedding of one's skin, that purity comes from pure skin. This belief also existed in the Yazdani religion, wherein those who come out of pure skins are called "Bab" or "Baba." (Baba is an Aramaic word, meaning gate. Baba is the gate where 'truth' manifests itself.) This name has survived to our day among the Yezidis; for example, Baba Sheikh, Baba Qewal, and Baba Chawish. Those unfamiliar with the meaning and origin of the word "Baba" confuse it with the word "Bav," which means father. They say Bave Sheikh, Bave Qewal, Bave Chawish. But this is incorrect. As mentioned above, when the Iranian tribes arrived in today's Kurdistan during the 7th to 9th centuries BC, their supreme deity was called Baba Esman.

Like the Yezidis, Yazdanis hid their religious beliefs from foreigners. But neither has ever harbored animosity toward other religions. They believe that God sends a new prophet for each era to teach humans the correct path, to protect themselves from evil. Therefore, the appearance of new religions has an auspicious purpose: keeping them from that which is false and that which is evil. Though the Yezidis and Yazdanis share the belief that from time to time a new prophet emerges to protect humanity, the religions are not always known by the name of the prophet. The Yazdani religion has absorbed beliefs from other religions, new denominations have emerged from within it, and over a thousand years it has undergone major changes. Yezidis easily adopted the beliefs and interpretations of Sheikh Adi and his disciples. However, it becomes apparent that having done so, the religion did not remain the same. Nevertheless, Yezidi religion harbors no animosity toward new religions.

Throughout history the color red has been a symbol for Yazdanis and their denominations. In Yezidi religion, it is said, "Religion is the religion of the red Yezidi". When a Yezidi boy is circumcised, he is required to say, "I am a lamb of the red Yezidi". The Yezidi New Year is celebrated on "Red Wednesday." Among the Yazdanis there was a weekly celebration of "Cam" followed by the major annual celebration of "Cam." According to Pir Xidir e Sileman, before the attack of the Prince of Rewanduz in 1832, Yezidis held a weekly "Cam." Sheikh Rostem says that Friday is the get-together day for men. (1414) The name of this annual Yezidi celebration appears in two forms: Cam and Cum.

He too believes that "Cam" was a weekly event. But in recent years only the large annual celebration is held during the time of the Yezidi pilgrimage. Both Yezidis and Yazdanis fast for three days, as do Yarsanis and Alewis. Like the Yezidis, Yazdanis have no holy book.

Among Yazdanis, the dog symbolized the good, and the serpent symbolized the bad. The serpent with the head of a dog symbolized progress. Depictions of dogs and serpents appear on the walls of Holy Lalish [the Yezidi Holy Temple in south/Iraqi Kurdistan]. On the other hand, Yezidis do not view the serpent as a symbol of the bad. Quite the contrary; the serpent commands respect because a serpent saved the boat of Nu Nebi from sinking. In fact, Yezidis believe that killing a serpent is sinful.

According to Yazdani belief, the good and the bad are of equal importance in the material world and are fundamental to its existence. Yazdanis believe that one is not possible without the other. If there is no cold then there can be no warm; if there is no low then there can be no high; if there is no darkness there can be no light. In this belief we find the seeds of Hegel's dialectics.

There was no hell and no heaven in physical form among the Yazdanis. Today, the belief in heaven and hell exists among the Yezidis, but it is not fundamental to their religion. The Yezidi believes that the souls of good men go first to heaven and then return in other good men. After complete purification, the soul joins God, but does not go to heaven. Apparently this belief in heaven and hell became a part of the Yezidi belief system following changes introduced by Sheikh Adi. But they are not essential. Like the Yazdanis, Yezidis hold sacred the numbers 7 and 3. In both religions, drinking alcohol is permissible.

I believe that these examples from the religions of the Yazdanis and the Yezidis, which are essential beliefs, provide evidence that both religions have the same origin. Even if the Medes were not Yezidis, the Yezidi religion originated in their empire and therefore represents a branch of the empire's religion.

There is an interesting belief about Prophet Zoroaster. Sheikh Dewresh Kelesh would say that Zoroaster was a Yezidi who left us. When he returned we did not accept his religion. It is evident from Iranian history that Zoroaster came from the people who lived around Lake Ourmiya. He remained on Mt. Ararat for two years and then returned to his people as a prophet preaching a new religion. He spent ten years recruiting converts among the people around Ourmiya, but his efforts drew only one person to his beliefs. Finally, he went to the Persians, among whom he found fertile ground for his teachings. This lends credibility to the claim that the sayings of Sheikh Dewresh are not baseless.

The similarities between Yezidism and Zoroastrianism are numerous. Moreover, contrary to the writings of some scholars, Yezidism did not emanate from Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism originated from Yezidism. Before Zoroaster became the prophet of a new religion, he was either a Yezidi or belonged to Yezidism.

ENDNOTES:

(1) Neader, A., Uber die Elemente, aus denen die Lehran der Yezidies harrorgegagen zu Sein scheinen. Berlin: Wissenschaftliche Abhandlugen, Berlin, 1851, pp. 112-39.

(2) Wahbi, Taufiq, Dini caranay kurd. Baghdad: Kov. Gelawej, N 11-12, 1940, pp. 51-52.

(3) Reshad Sebri Reshid (Reshad Miran) Etnokonfessionalnaya situasiya v sovremennom Kurdistane. Moskva-Sankt-Peterburg: Nauka, 2004, p. 16.

(4) Mehmed Mesud, Risalek li risali zimanekeman. Baghdad: Kovari Nusari Kurd, No. 6, 1986.

(5) Layard, A.H., A Popular Account of Discoveries at Nineveh. New York: J.C. Derby, 1854, p. 206

(6) Nebez, Cemal, Saricdanek li mitolociyeyi kurd. Stockholm: 1986, p 53.

(7) Wahbi, Taufiq, Li nawcuni madakan kirdareki din bu, kov. Gelawej, 1940, N 8 Bexda, p. 35.

(8) Yahiya 'Ebdulxani' Eli, al-Imlak zu al-ruus al-sab'a, (dewe hevt seri), kov. Karwan, 1983, N13, Hewler, 121-130. (Me ev jederk ji pirtuka R.S. Re Oid, Etnokonfessionalnaya situasiya v sovremennom Kurdistane, 'Nauka' Moskva-Sankt-Peterburg, 2004, p. 66, hildaye

(9) N. Marr, YeOco o slove celebi., ZBOPAO, XX, Sankt-Peterburg, 1912, p. 189.

(10) K.K. Kurdoyev (Qanate Kurdo), Kurdi. Moskva: Narodi predney Azii. 1957, p. 252. (In Russian)

(11) Reshad Sebri Reshid, p. 18.

(12) Wahbi, Tawfiq, Dini carani kurd, Kovara Gelawej, 1941, jim. 11-12, p. 67

(13) Mehrdad R. Izady, The Kurds; A concise Handbook. Washington: Taylor & Francis, 1992.

(14) The name of this annual Yezidi celebration appears in two forms: Cam and Cum.

By Tosine Reshid

.