Review

Reviewed Work(s): The Zoroastrian Faith. Tradition and Modern Research by S. A. Nigosian
Review by: Manfred Hutter
Source: Numen, Vol. 42, No. 2 (May, 1995), pp. 207-209
Published by: Brill
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3270178
Accessed: 27-04-2020 08:15 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Numen

This content downloaded from 134.76.21.204 on Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:15:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Book reviews 207

"apocalyptic", and Enoch is clear

angels, the "giants", and the "
cisely and competently, althou
Peters. The title of the publicat
is somewhat misleading (quite
figure among the canonical bi
of all religions, Manichaeism,
literature (cf. Mani's version of
trek through Central Asia Enoc
mean, in addition to prophet, sa
dha. The title is clearly inspi
article (ZRGG 32, 1986) and is
Christ of Light with which Klim
M.A. thesis (the title of which,
resides not so much in the rather incidental Buddha-theme as in the com-

petent summary of the whole Enochian complex (sources as well as secon-

dary literature). The author deserves special praise for not limiting herself
to texts but including also iconography. The very full bibliography (pp
160-180, up to 1988) is equally useful. What is needed now is a study o
the subsequent history of the Enochian literature, and more specifically
of the "watchers", especially in the late 19th cent. occultist renaissance

Hebrew University R.J.Z. WERBLOWSKY

Faculty of Humanities
Department of Comparative Religion
Mount Scopus 91905, Israel

S.A. NIGOSIAN, The Zoroastrian Faith. Tradition and Modern Research-

Montreal & Kingston, London, Buffalo: McGill-Queen's University
Press 1993 (154 p.) ISBN 0-7735-1133-4 (cloth) ? 33.95; ISBN 0-
7735-1144-X (paper) ? 15.50.

Nigosian's book intends to serve as "an instructive analytical work on

the Zoroastrian faith" (p. xi) but it only can be recommended with much
hesitation to a very general readership. Even the undergraduate student
of history of religions can easily find better books on Zoroastrianism.
In five chapters N. deals with his subject: In the first one (pp. 3-24) he
describes the life, date and place of Zarathustra reaching the tentative
conclusion that Zarathustra preached somewhen before Cyrus II., proba-
bly at the end of the seventh or at the beginning of the sixth century BCE

NUMEN, Vol. 42 (1995) ? E.J. Brill, Leiden

This content downloaded from 134.76.21.204 on Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:15:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 208 Book reviews

in Iran, without specifying

homeland. But it is worth menti
has been a growing consensus
lifetime the end of the 2nd or t
Thenext chapter (pp. 25-45) is an
from the Achaemenian era up to
conquest is very short focussing
to the "History of Sanjana" (qiss
Dating the exodus from Iran t
is too early; the first leaving
(pp. 46-70) introduces the Zoro
N.'s conclusion that some part
time in the fifth century CE (p
different parts of the Avesta an
passages at some length, but
translations (e.g. Darmesteter
4 and 5 are the more interest
outline of Zoroastrian teachings
Although both parts are not alw
are worth to be read because N
view-point of faithful Zoroas
"inside" information that somet
analytical view. Endnotes (pp.
the arguments often not used
(pp. 151-154) conclude the boo
The most serious limitation o
Just some flaws: The names khsh
have quite different meanings (
words xvaetu, verezena and airya
conclusion based thereupon (p.
made the Pahlavi language ...
shows that the author has only
thian. The sentence "The agent t
Mainyu" (p. 85) makes clear
"Ahriman" and "Angra Mainy
dle Persian equivalent to Av
sentence becomes nonesense. I must conclude: Writing on
Zoroastrianism-even on an introductory level-depends on at least some
rudimentary knowledge of Iranian philology. The above mentioned
mistakes give the impression that the author has not been fully aware of
this starting point. Therefore his "Zoroastrian Faith" can give some

This content downloaded from 134.76.21.204 on Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:15:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Book reviews 209

interesting aspects of "Trad

Research".

Institut fiir Religionswissenschaft MANFRED HUTTER

Karl Franzens Universitiit
Attemsgasse 8
A-8010 Graz

JACOB NEUSNER, Judaism and Zoroastrianism at the Dusk of Late A

Two Ancient Faiths Wrote Down Their Great Traditions (So
Studies in the History of Judaism, no. 87)-Atlanta, Georgia:
Scholars Press 1993 (XII + 202 p.) ISBN 1-55540-889-3 (cloth)
$ 59.95.

The interrelations between Judaism and Zoroastrianism are a classical,

though controversial, topic in the history of religions. Nevertheless, the
prolific, renowned-and disputed-Talmudic scholar, Jacob Neusner,
seems prepared to tackle this subject, having studied Pahlavi with Ily
Gershevitch and Richard Frye in the early 1960s.'
Unlike most of his predecessors, Neusner is not concerned with the
quest for 'influences' of any kind. His approach is strictly comparativ
Neusner compares neither a (presumed!) common 'phenomenon' of bot
religions nor the two religions as such. Instead he compares the Talmu
of Babylonia with two ninth century Zoroastrian Pahlavi-texts, namel
the Rivayat of Aturfarnbag and the Rivayat accompanying the Dadestan
I Denig. Neusner justifies this comparison mainly because the Judai
sages and the Zoroastrian priests did their work in comparable cir-
cumstances (at the end of a long period of stable development) and
because their writings attain a comparable purpose ("that of organizin
and putting down in fixed and official writing a full and authoritativ
statement of the received tradition and faith" [19]; 'writing down th
Great Tradition').
Apart from an introduction of some thirty pages and an index the boo
has three parts. Part one compares the Babylonian Talmud to the Rivayat
of Aturfarnbag, part two, the Babylonian Talmud to the Rivayat accom-
panying the Dadestan I Denig while part three presents sort of
systematic conclusion.
'Writing down great traditions' turns out to consist of writing dow
rules. Neusner distinguishes between three types of representations of th
rules of the 'Great Tradition' in late antique Israel and Iran: [1] the ru
unadorned, [2] the rule attached to a myth, [3] the rule joined to it

NUMEN, Vol. 42 (1995) ? E.J. Brill, Leiden

This content downloaded from 134.76.21.204 on Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:15:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms