Ahuramazda

It is interesting how a single word can be used to distort a statement out of recognition. Lendering states:

�Ahuramazda was not, as Farrokh says on p.46, the single god, but a supreme god - Mithra and Anahita are mentioned as divinities in Avestan and Achaemenid sources, which also call Ahuramazda "the greatest of all gods" (plural).�

This statement is somewhat petty (�single� versus �supreme�) with Farrokh�s observation being quoted completely out of context:

First, Farrokh never states anywhere in his book that Ahura-Mazda is the sole god of the Iranian pantheon.

Second, Lendering carefully neglects to mention that Farrokh does indeed discuss the other gods (Mithra and Anahita) of Zoroastrian and pre-Zoroastrian mythology in his book (p.130, 191-194).

Third, Lendering may be confusing the critical distinction between the �divinities� versus the all powerful Mazda. If Lendering is unable to read Avestan, we recommend:

Hoffman, K. (1979). Das Avesta in der Persis [The Avesta in Persis]. In J. Harmatta (Ed.), Prologomena to the sources on the history of Pre-Islmaic Central Asia, Budapest:, pp. 89-93.

Pour-Davood, E. (translated by D.J. Irani) (1927). Holy Gathas: Zarathustra The Prophet of Ancient Iran. Tehran: Sazman e Entesharat e Faravahar.

Fourth, this is Farrokh�s actual statement:

��the concept of an all powerful single god�� �

Note that Lendering drops off the words �all powerful� in his report. Mithra and Anahita were certainly important gods, but only Ahura-Mazda is all powerful in that he supersedes the lesser gods. This definition is provided in:

Nigosian, S.A. (1993). The Zoroastrian Faith: Tradition and Modern Research. MontreaL: McGill-Queen�s University Press. See pages 71-73.

����������� Taraporewala, I.J.S. (1980). The Religion of Zarathustra. Tehran: Sazman e Entesharat e Faravahar. See pages 38-39.

This statement on Farrokh�s p. 46 is part of a 2 page discussion of the relationship between Zoroastrianism and Achaemenid rule. Ahura Mazda is the single Zoroastrian god of all gods (or as Lendering prefers �supreme�) of the Iranian pantheon.

We also recommend the following texts on Zoroastrianism by Professor Mary Boyce, as these will assist Lendering in helping to rectify his misconceptions between �the divinities� and Ahura Mazda:

Boyce, M. (2001). Zoroastrians: Their religious Beliefs and Practices. London: Routledge.

Boyce, M., & Grenet, F. (1989). A History of Zoroastrianism.� E.J. Brill.

Boyce, M. (1977). A Persian stronghold of Zoroastrianism. London: Clarendon Press.

Lendering also alleges Farrokh of �ignoring the secondary resources� on the subject. This is not true, especially if the reader consults Farrokh�s footnotes and references.

To bolster his allegation, Lendering cites Harmatta in his Note 2 as a major source that Farrokh has not consulted. This is untrue: Harmatta is cited by Farrokh in Footnote 50 on page 294 of his book.