Forum Monk
Once again, thanks for giving such interesting food for thought. Here is my reply to the first of your posts on Mithraism and Christianity. I’ll reply to the others later.
Forum Monk wrote:At the start, I would like to point out that if one is to suggest that Christianity imitated or borrowed from Mithraism, one must consider the practice of Mithraism in the early centuries of the common era. Further the idea, that Iranian Mithraism was imported by the Romans is speculatory at best. It is a somewhat dated theory proposed by Franz Cumont (or at least popularized by him). In fact the connection between the Roman Mithra and Iranian of Mitra is more based upon a linguistic similarity in names but not necessarily similar attributes.
I’ve answered this point in my previous post. I think there is too much similarity for it to be a coincidence, and religions change and “evolve” the further they spread from their source.
Forum Monk wrote:Precious little is firmly known about diety in ancient Iran. In the Iranian version of Mitra, he is a god of light or illumination and in my opion more closely related to Venus.
In the Avesta, Mithra is the genius of the celestial light. He appears before sunrise on the rocky summits of the mountains; during the day he traverses the wide firmament in his chariot drawn by four white horses, and when night falls he still illumines with flickering glow the surface of the earth, "ever waking, ever watchful."
In the Iranian pantheon, there is no evidence that Mitra was a supreme being. In fact apart from Zoasterism, very little is really known about his nature apart from his association with light and the idea that he was suspended in the air between a higher and lower diety.
Again, as I said in the last post, this could be explained by the fact that he was a begrudged add-on to a religious story that had already been developed. That was a character from another religion that somehow had to be incorporated into this one. “Suspended in the air between a higher and lower deity”. In other words, a sort of no man’s land to stick someone in if you don’t know what else to do with them!
In the Indian Vedas, which is where the Iranians got him from, he is identified with the sun, as is the Roman Mithras.
Forum Monk wrote:
Nevertheless, the possible influence of Mitra on the ever evolving pantheons of Asia Minor, and to a lesser extent, Greece is not entirely discounted, but it is clear that a strong link between Roman Mithraism and Iranian adoration of Mitra may be overstated.
I disagree for the reasons stated above. Mithras is Vedic, not Iranian – where he was merely an unwelcome gatecrasher at the party.
Forum Monk wrote:
There are several competing theories about the origins of Mithraism in Rome. The once popular theory of Cumont it no longer considered viable.
Cumont's ideas, though in many respects valid, had however one serious problem with respect to the author's theory on the origins of Mithraism: If the Roman religion was an outgrowth of an Iranian one, there would have to be evidence of Mithraic-like practices attested in Greater Iran. However, that is not the case: No mithraea have been found there, and the Mithraic myth of the tauroctony does not conclusively match the Zoroastrian legend of the slaying of Gayomart, in which Mithra does not play any role at all. The historians of antiquity, otherwise expansive in their descriptions of Iranian religious practices, hardly mention Mithra at all (one notable exception is Herodotus i.131, which associates Mithra with other divinities of the morning star).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithras
This is interesting. The tauroctony (for those that don’t know) is the recurring mofit of the Roman Mithras slaying the bull. I agree with Ullansey that the slaying of the bull was probably an astrological metaphor for leaving the Taurean age.
But the Primal Bull does figure in the Iranian mythology, and the Nandi Bull is central to the Vedic mythology:
Iranian:
http://www.themystica.com/mythical-folk ... of%20.html
The myth of Gayomart is the myth of the Primal Man. According to Zoroastrian tradition ,Gayomart was created immediately after the Primal Bull that was to supply him with food and help him. These two primal beings stood on the banks of the river which flowed from the center of the world, the good Daiti. Here they are attacked by Ahriman for they have withstood his attempts to spread world-wide destruction. Ohrrmazd foreseeing the Bull's death administers a soporific to ease the pain. First the Bull is killed, then Gayomart, who foretells as he dies, that despite his death the human race will be born.
Vedic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nandi_Bull
Nandi in Hinduism
1. A primary god: This can be traced back to Indus Valley Civilization, where dairy farming was the most important occupations, thus explaining the appearance of various artifacts indicating a deity much like Shiva. This deity also called as Pasupati is believed to have been worshipped as the keeper of herds. Some purans describe Nandi or Nandikeshvara as bull faced human body and that resembles Siva, but with four hands, two hands holding the Parasu (the axe) and Mruga (the antelope) and the other two hands joined together in the Anjali(obeisance).
2. Carrier of Shiva: It seems he was later converted into the present day Siva, with the bull Nandi as his primary vehicle. The Idol of Siva will be placed on an Idol of Nandi during festival processions.
3. Gate keeper of Siva's place: The close association of Shiva and Nandi explains the presence of a statue of Nandi at the gate of many temples dedicated to Siva. It also explains why the word "nandi" in the Tamil language is used as a metaphor for a person blocking the way. In Sanskrit, a bull is called "vrisha", which has another connotation - that of righteousness or Dharma. It is important to seek the blessings of Nandi before proceeding to worship Lord Siva.
4. Chief in Shiva's army: Some Puranas mention that Nandi lead the Siva Ganas, Siva's attendants.
5. A Guru of Saivism: In addition to being his mount, Nandi is Shiva's foremost disciple. In the Natha/Siddhar tradition, Nandi is the one of the primal gurus. He was the guru to Siddhar Thirumulanathar, Patanjalinathar and others.
The most noticable parallel between Roman and eastern Mithraism is that they share the name of the same god, and his appearance in Roman iconographic remains is indicative of Persian origins, particularly, the Phrygian cap (which is reminiscent of the East, especially Asia Minor, where Mithraic worship strongly took hold) that he invariably wears. Also, the notion of the bull sacrifice is shared. Because Cumont's thesis of strong association can no longer be held as reasonable, an alternate explanation of the origins of Roman Mithraism must be derived.
http://www.mithraism.org/cgi-bin/displa ... =1&total=8
This doesn’t mention the Vedic Mithras, and it was one of the most common faults in most research done in the West. Most Western researchers fear delving into India and you can’t get them to venture any further east than Babylon. If only they would, they’d get answers to many of their questions.
Forum Monk wrote:
Looking fully at the references cited above, including Cumont, what we see is evolution of the nature and importance of Mithra at various places and periods of time. For this reason, it is important to realize that if Christianity imitated Mithrasim, it would have been the Roman version of the practice. The Roman version being derived (as the latest theory proposes) from the Asian Minor version (where once again Mithra was not the chief among Gods) which was probably derived from a Greek influenced version of the ancient practice mixed with a healthy dose of Zoasterism. I have not bothered to detail the evolution in the interest of brevity as I am sure you also realize the cultic practices have evolved significantly. But I do concede that any documentation of the full evolution of Mithraism is speculation to a degree, since very little evidence of the origins in ancient Persia or India exists.
I agree that there is a lot of speculation, and that none of this can be proved. But there are some interesting commonalities between the Roman Mithras and the Vedic one.
Forum Monk wrote:
Further it needs to be noted that Mithraism did not enjoy a wide-spread following until after the first century CE. While that does not discount the idea that Christianity borrowed from the cult of Mithra it is clear that Christianity had already established some foundational principles prior to the first century and may have swallowed Mithraism later in order to eliminate what it deemed, pagan practices.
I think that’s a good point – except that it was Constantine who adopted Christianity as the state religion, and thus would have grafted many of the features of of whatever were existing then, in the 4th century CE.
I’ll reply to your other posts anon.