ABSTRACT
Commonly taken as a Zoroastrian “heresy,” the accentuation of Zurvan (divinity of Time) as generating the two Great Spirits, the beneficent Ohrmazd and malevolent Ahriman, as a singular primordial deity behind them, bears the appearance of “a Gnostic turn” in ancient Iranian religious history. Mainstream Zoroastrian dualism has Ahura Mazda, the “Wise Lord” behind all things, bringing forth “Twin Spirits” (mainyū) (Gathas, Yasn. 30. 3–4), first an extension of Himself as Holy Spirit (Spenta Mainyu) and then his own Adversary (originally “the Lie” or Drug, later named Angra Mainyu, Ahriman, etc.) (e.g., 45. 2; 47. 2; 49. 2; Avestan yasht 15. 43; [Greater] Bundahishn 12; with Aristotle apud Diogenes Laeertius, Vitae philosophorum 1.2.6). The teaching of Zoroaster (Zarathustra) in traditional (Medo-) Persian understanding is that of a distinctly ethical dualism: followers are enjoined to choose Ahura Mazda or Ohrmazd (Wise Lord) and Asha, the truth and righteous way, against the evil of the Destroyer (Angra Mainyu) or false one (Drujvant). If in Zoroaster’s hymns the Spenta Mainyu is Creator of our world (e.g., 46. 9; 51. 7), He is an extension of Ohrmazd, who alone in due course is taken in the mainstream tradition as “the Creator” (Boyce 1975–1991: vol. 2, 119–20) as well as final Victor over the “accursed one” (as a still recited later creed has it: Pandnāmak-i Zartusht, 2, 12). The question as to when, how, and why the principle or creative being of Zurvan was posited as prior both to the good Ahura Mazda and wicked Ahriman has been a matter of scholarly controversy (starting from Spiegel 1871–1878: vol. 2, 175–87), and one impinging on continuing attempts to fathom so-called Gnosticism.
