{"id":159987,"date":"2025-11-03T14:43:47","date_gmt":"2025-11-03T11:13:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/?p=159987"},"modified":"2025-11-03T14:43:47","modified_gmt":"2025-11-03T11:13:47","slug":"zoroastrian-philosophy-regarding-animal-sacrifice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/?p=159987","title":{"rendered":"Zoroastrian philosophy regarding animal sacrifice"},"content":{"rendered":"

At the outset, it should be noted that this article is written as a response\u2014or more accurately, guidance\u2014for readers who shared their views on my previous Amordad article, \u201cA Look at the Book on Sacrifice in Zoroastrianism\u201d (1 Aban 1404). Since addressing every comment is not feasible, I will focus on the most important points and the central question: Did Zoroaster ever advocate killing animals for God?<\/strong><\/p>\n

A few preliminary observations are necessary:<\/p>\n

First, all research should be grounded in knowledge, sound methodology, and scholarly rigor, particularly when addressing issues that affect society. Studies that apply clear objectives, proper methods, reliable evidence, and accurate conclusions can meaningfully contribute to societal improvement. Inquiry into our ancient historical heritage is valuable, even when interpretations differ; acceptance or rejection of conclusions is a matter of personal judgment. Research conducted with integrity and adherence to truth, however, is inherently worthwhile.<\/p>\n

Regrettably, a small group of critics has attacked the author of the book using inappropriate language. Such behavior is unacceptable in a cultural and news platform for Zoroastrians. Even if one disagrees with a work entirely, using harsh or offensive terms is improper, particularly in a cultural or scholarly context.<\/p>\n

From a cultural perspective, the prevalence of such reactions\u2014especially on social media\u2014can be linked to developments in the past fifty to sixty years of cultural discourse, offering insight into why these responses occur.<\/p>\n

Many readers have shared their comments, but it is not feasible to respond to each individually. The main reason is that some did not read my article carefully or misunderstood it, so I have no direct replies for them.<\/p>\n

The author of the book mentioned that my discussion of their work amounted to \u201cpromotion or advertisement\u201d, which is correct, and I acknowledge that this occurred unintentionally.<\/p>\n

Another reader wrote: \u201cIt is wrong to accept an idea before reviewing, analyzing, and critiquing it. Therefore, if you wish to debate or write about devil-worship, you do not need to accept or validate that belief.\u201d<\/p>\n

The first part of this comment is valid, but the second is flawed. They implied that attributing a particular custom to a historically significant prophet, or linking it to a book, would call the prophet\u2019s credibility into question, which is not the case. For example, saying that practices like burning opponents or their books stemmed from evil forces does not mean one believes in those forces.<\/p>\n

I remind readers that my discussion focused only on three pages of the book\u2019s conclusions, and the entire previous article was just one and a half pages. Many issues raised in the comments are not addressed in that short text.<\/p>\n

Lastly, this will be my final response to these readers. Given the current sensitivities, there is little space for open debate among different ideologies, beliefs, or religions. Readers should not expect ongoing exchanges. However, in more suitable circumstances, such discussions\u2014especially in the presence of students and the public\u2014can be highly valuable.<\/p>\n

I will now turn to the book\u2019s conclusion, highlight what I mentioned in my short article, and include a few notes from esteemed Mobeds.<\/p>\n

In the conclusion of his book (page 256), Mr. Navadari writes:
\n“However, if the intended meaning of these terms is taken literally, there is no verse in the Gathas that explicitly forbids the sacrifice of cows, other livestock, or birds.”
\nHe also notes:
\n“The author does not intend to portray the composer of the Gathas as opposed to animal sacrifice at all costs, since neither the attribution of the Gathas to Zoroaster nor Zoroaster\u2019s prophethood is certain.”<\/p>\n

My discussion focused on these statements. Given the uncertainty regarding both Zoroaster\u2019s prophethood and the authorship of the Gathas, one might ask: what relevance does proving the existence or absence of animal sacrifice in Zoroastrianism hold?<\/p>\n

For centuries, the practice of sacrifice (in a sacred sense) persisted among many Zoroastrians in Iran and India, much of it derived from pre-Zoroastrian ceremonies such as Mithraism or the cult of Mehr. Most sacrifices, to my knowledge, were offered to Mithra, particularly on Mehr Day. I have previously noted instances of sheep slaughter in Zoroastrian temples\u2014none of which were intended for Ahura Mazda (the one Wise God). These acts were typically vows or associated with auspicious events\u2014such as weddings, acquiring a house, fulfilling personal wishes like having children, or recovering from illness\u2014and were never performed in the name of God.<\/p>\n

Importantly, the Gathas do not discuss the killing of animals for God. To clarify, I have used the term \u201csacrifice\u201d to convey the sacred significance (sepanta) it holds in people\u2019s minds, not as literal killing. In essence, the Gathas make no reference to animal sacrifice for God, and thus such acts are not a requirement in Zoroastrianism.<\/p>\n

However, it is important to note that in Gatha 32.12, Zoroaster himself emphasizes\u2026<\/p>\n

In Gatha 32, verses 12\u201314 (pages 32\u201333, Shahzadi translation), Zoroaster warns:<\/p>\n

“Deceivers lead people away from good deeds, sacrificing animals with cries of joy, and mislead the public, inciting chaos among the blind and deaf to maintain power through oppression.”
\nHe adds:
\n“These misguided groups seek followers to convince people that offering the flesh of sacrificed cows and drinking Haoma can ward off destruction and death.”<\/p>\n

Readers should reflect carefully: do these verses suggest that Zoroaster, as a wise thinker and prophet, endorsed animal sacrifice? Clearly, he did not.<\/p>\n

It is important to recognize that Zoroastrianism, with a history of around four thousand years, contains traces of earlier customs\u2014such as Mithraism or the cult of Mehr. While these appear outside the Gathas, for example in the Avesta\u2019s Aban Yasht (milk, water, Haoma, plants, and sometimes domestic animals offered to Ardvisur Anahita), they do not reflect Zoroaster\u2019s teachings.<\/p>\n

Today, in Iran, religious leaders of different faiths gather for interfaith events or to honor martyrs, including young Zoroastrians of the Iran-Iraq war. Yet some authorities continue to criticize practices that Zoroaster himself sought to abolish.<\/p>\n

Zoroastrianism\u2019s cornerstone, Frashgard, emphasizes that religion evolves with time, intellect, and culture. Changes in ceremonials or outward forms do not contradict the faith\u2019s essence.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

At the outset, it should be noted that this article is written as a response\u2014or more accurately, guidance\u2014for readers who shared their views on my previous Amordad article, \u201cA Look at the Book on Sacrifice in Zoroastrianism\u201d (1 Aban 1404). Since addressing every comment is not feasible, I will focus on the most important points […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":159988,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[1304,1305],"class_list":["post-159987","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-zoroastrians","tag-animal-sacrifice","tag-zoroastrian-philosophy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159987","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=159987"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159987\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/159988"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=159987"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=159987"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.amordadnews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=159987"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}