What if the Aryans who settled down in Persia, and Central Asia to a lesser extent managed to create a religion similar to Hinduism, with castes and karma? How could this be possible, and what would effects of this be like?
What if the Aryans who settled down in Persia, and Central Asia to a lesser extent managed to create a religion similar to Hinduism, with castes and karma? How could this be possible, and what would effects of this be like?
This would require the absence of Zoroaster. The religion of the pre-Zoroastrian Iranic peoples was very similar to the pre-Vedic Indic peoples (same gods, ceremonies, myths, hallucinogenic plants (soma/homa))...theres a reason why the proto-Indo-Iranians are very well understood, because they were a clearly identified single ethnic group prior to their migrations. However, as the Iranians move further west in the Iranian plateau, they would undoubtedly come into contact with Mesopotamian civilizations; whose religious beliefs would influence them, in the same manner that the Indus valley civilizations influenced the development of Hinduism: as a merger between Aryan spirituality and Indus valley civilization religious beliefs.
This would require the absence of Zoroaster. The religion of the pre-Zoroastrian Iranic peoples was very similar to the pre-Vedic Indic peoples (same gods, ceremonies, myths, hallucinogenic plants (soma/homa))...theres a reason why the proto-Indo-Iranians are very well understood, because they were a clearly identified single ethnic group prior to their migrations. However, as the Iranians move further west in the Iranian plateau, they would undoubtedly come into contact with Mesopotamian civilizations; whose religious beliefs would influence them, in the same manner that the Indus valley civilizations influenced the development of Hinduism: as a merger between Aryan spirituality and Indus valley civilization religious beliefs.
Agreed. By the very nature of arriving in Persia Aryan beliefs won't become Vedic proto-Hinduism but something else instead. Mark Muesse believes the concepts of karma and reincarnation were absent from Aryan spirituality, so there's something to chew on.
Whatever appears in Persia will be more influenced by Mesopotamian beliefs. The Mesopotamians had more interest in the balance of genders and beliefs - counterpart deities, etc.
Cheers,
Ganesha
I'm sure you know much more about Hinduism than I do, so I'll defer to you on that point. I'll also note that Zoroastrianism (the "Persian Aryan" religion) has a linear time scale. Souls are judged on the Chinwad Bridge (however you want to spell it) rather than reincarnated, so you don't have samsara or anything like that in that religion. The Parsis may be different, but the scope of my studies was mainly Zoroastrianism up until the Abbasid Caliphate or so.
Good post, Ganesha!
I'm not so sure I know more about Hinduism at all. Some of my family members are Hindu, but any knowledge I have beyond that is purely from curiosity and Wikipedia.
Cheers,
Ganesha
That would be true as well. Hinduism has a way of assimilating stuff (some Hindus regard the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu, etc.) I had forgotten to mention that the Indus Valley Civilization might last longer without the Aryans in their territory.
That would be true as well. Hinduism has a way of assimilating stuff (some Hindus regard the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu, etc.) I had forgotten to mention that the Indus Valley Civilization might last longer without the Aryans in their territory.
Yes, the Aryans were very open to outside influence. As you are studying Zoroastrianism as part of your thesis, maybe you can answer this. From my understanding, orthodox Zoroastrianism never penetrated too deeply among the Iranic peoples of the Zagros mountains, and their beliefs were very heterodox, right? I'm thinking of sects like Mazdakism and Zurvanism. I'm also thinking of modern groups like the Ali-Ilahi, Ahl-Haqq, Yezidis, Alevis, Khurammites, and Qizilbash (who later became mainstream Shia)..who seem to have been open to beliefs from everywhere.
One interesting POD might be if Asoka had A) stayed Hindu, B) continued conquering and c) turned west into Persia and Mesopotamia. Orthodox Hinduixm might well have gianed a following in parts of the Middle East and Asia Minot, particularly if Asoka conquers as far as Egypt and coastal Arabia Neoplatonism in particular might well be very open to Hindu beliefs in karma and reincarnation expressed directly and there would be many syntheses of Greek and Hindu gods and goddesses under a Mauryan Empire just as Greek and Italian pantheons synthesized under Roman rule.
Any listmembers care to hazard how these classical--Hindu gods equivalences might work out?
That would be true as well. Hinduism has a way of assimilating stuff (some Hindus regard the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu, etc.) I had forgotten to mention that the Indus Valley Civilization might last longer without the Aryans in their territory.
One reason Ashoka converted to Buddhism in the first place was that he was appalled at the high casualty rates, indicating that even subduing northern India was difficult. How would he still have enough troops to go on large scale conquests? You have a very interesting POD, and I can see Ashoka wanting to conquer more territory, but finding a way for him to do it can be difficult. His ancestor may have defeated the Seleucids, but they are not a paper tiger even by Ashoka's time. Apparently the Seleucids had problems in the west though, so maybe he could take some eastern territory while they're distracted in another war.
I think in non-Zoroaster world you will end up seeing a religious continuum that encompasses the indo-iranian sphere. One that has a base in Aryan myths and spirituality that incorporates indigenous beliefs to varying degrees. Considering themajor influence that Zoroastrianism had on forming the strict monotheism of the Jews, we probably also wont see the rise of Abrahamic religions. This will make for a world with a lot less religious zealtory.