Sacred Texts Study Group

Gerry – yes, it makes sense to look at other ways of expressing the dichotomy of good and evil.

Perhaps part of the problem here is that terms like Good and Evil tend to reflect moral judgements with regards to the actions or motives of sentient beings, whereas terms such as Spirit and Matter, Form and Formless etc are descriptions of the c…[Read more]

Gerry – yes, it makes sense to look at other ways of expressing the dichotomy of good and evil.

Perhaps part of the problem here is that terms like Good and Evil tend to reflect moral judgements with regards to the actions or motives of sentient beings, whereas terms such as Spirit and Matter, Form and Formless etc are descriptions of the…[Read more]

Agreed.

No doubt, the system of Zarathustra is the same as that of the Wisdom-Religion. I do find that some of the analogies Gerry provided in his comment below are somewhat better constructed and do not invite the unnecessary idea of strife into people’s minds. It is a subtle point, and it may have been hard to predict how it would be…[Read more]

My suspicions are that the good and evil dichotomy is better expressed as Spirit and Matter, Formelessness and Form, Thought and Vehicle. Christianity (Churchanity), which made hay with a Bogeyman of Evil, saw advantages in creating an immortal source of Evil. To be saved you needed the church’s help. Krishna says that Light and Darkness are…[Read more]

Notice how the Moon is divided twice, both into “Light” and “Dark”- notice the associated names, Spenta and Angra mainyu. They are not independent from each other anymore than the light and dark sides of the moon are independent.

Let us consider the text we are studying to draw our conclusions.

Pavel, with all due respect, if you are looking at resources that come from a far later date than the Gathas, you will come up with some serious degradations of the original philosophy of Zarathustra. We must consider the Gathas to be the original representation of Zoroastrian philosophy to establish some fundamental basis of its teachings, hence…[Read more]

Gerry,
A few links appearing on the first Google search page for “zoroastrianism” and “evil” will likely provide at least some corroborating information. I am not posting the links here, as in my experience a post gets blocked if there are links to other sites present.

The concept of evil in Zoroastrianism is personified by Angra Mainyu (the…[Read more]

Where in Zoroastrianism is the idea of Absolute Evil, as a force in the universe, presented?

My understanding from a study of the SD, is that evil is essentially a concept relevant only to the human plane and in the human arena. There is no force in the universe that is evil. There is the interplay of Spirit and Matter. But both are…[Read more]

Thanks, Peter. If you look at the comment that started this thread, however, it is the discussion I initiated on Zoroastrianism being, historically, the religion that introduced the idea of Absolute Evil. Perhaps it is an over-simplification, but I find it relevant in my conversations with friends, and, as I have tried to point it out, a system of…[Read more]

“I was just trying to drive this point home.” – Sure – no problem, Pavel. I just wondered if you might have been questioning a suggestion somewhere along the thread that there was Absolute Evil in Theosophy.

Agreed – your questions re the claims of Neo-Platonism are exactly the kinds of questions that the metaphysical system of every rel…[Read more]

>> Hi Pavel – I don’t believe HPB or Theosophy does advocate a notion of Absolute Evil.

Of course not. I was just trying to drive this point home. Thanks for elaborating on the Neo-Platonic doctrine. Not sure I understand it. If the One is the source for everything, how can anything be not ultimately derived from it? (I would add that, acc…[Read more]

Hi Pavel – I don’t believe HPB or Theosophy does advocate a notion of Absolute Evil. What are you thinking of here?

I’m not sure that Plotinus and the Neo-Platonists are saying that ‘ultimately, everything is Good,’ though the The One is both the source and support for everything. If we take Plotinus’ view, we have the Three Hypostase…[Read more]

I am sure that the Theosophical view ultimately does not include an Absolute evil. As HPB defines Theosophy (What is Theosophy, Theosophist, Vol. 1, No. 1) as

belief in the Deity as the ALL, the source of all existence …

I cannot see how an idea of Evil fits into that.

Of course, on the relative levels there are good and evil things, and…[Read more]

so, that explains why our world today is riven with so much heartless competition, conflict, wars, and also underscores the importance of diffusion of Theosophical influence. She says somewhere (probably Key) that brutality and selfishness that rages in mankind at this stage of its evolution is abnormal. Every advancement that is made in science…[Read more]

My understanding is that the Absolute is unconditioned and that spirit and matter are both aspects. We can reflect on the 3 fundamental principles of Theosophy to help us gain a better understanding of universal concepts. Here is a quote from H.P.B. from the Secret Doctrine Dialogues beginning on page 507 that may shed some light on the current…[Read more]

Hello Peter-

“…our acts of love and hate, creation and destruction, would necessarily have their roots in some more primal source or essence. That’s not to say the outward acts are identical to the primal source, nor simply reflections, rather that they are derived in some way from them.”

Just based upon inspiration and my own reflections, I a…[Read more]

I’m not familiar enough with Zoroastrian philosophy to make a useful comment on that score. As a general reply on good and evil, below is an extract from a post I made to one of our discussion groups here a few years ago when the topic arose. The questioner asked, “….could you give an example of an evil prototype in nature? Do you see these pro…[Read more]

The Zoroastrian religion is contemporary with the Hindu religion. Here is a quote from H.P.B from The Secret Doctrine Dialogues that may shed some light on this discussion.

Mme. Blavatsky: Because I am not a mystic writer, and I try to make you understand things a little less misty than they are. And you instead in thanking me, criticize me. The…[Read more]

Thank you. You have managed to alter the course of my thinking regarding Zoroastrianism. In due time, if the need arises, I hope that I will be able to familiarize myself further with its ideas. For now, though, I will attempt to refrain from casting further judgment on the subject, based on secondary (at best) sources.

I will reply to you Pavel-

You are right, it is possible to argue the doctrine of ‘good and evil’ rooted in Zoroastrianism. However, when we read the Gathas- the original source of Zoroastrianism, we find little to no definite distinction of an explicitly good vs. and explicitly evil principle. If one finds such distinction, it is due to the…[Read more]