Some questions on Asuras

[Steve Farmer]

Bjarte Kaldhol writes:

> I can see some difficulties in measuring "the level of abstraction of
> theistic concepts" at different times, and names like Artadama (if from
> Rta-dhaman) in the fourteenth century BC would reveal some degree of
> abstraction among Indo-Aryans already in the second millennium. Also, in
> the Ancient Near East, abstractions (as well as physical objects, for
> instance a kinna:ru at Ugarit!) were regarded as gods and received
> offerings.

All points granted. Levels of abstraction are relative, and
ancient peoples worshipped many levels of them. There are also
difficulties in precisely measuring abstractness. But, despite
these problems, every serious premodernist recognizes that such
differences exist -- and would have no difference distinguishing
(say) Indra beating up Vrtra or YHWH stolling in the garden from
abstract concepts of Virtue or Justice or abstract pantheons or
the One. Moreover, I think that pretty good methods can be worked
out distinguishing such things.

My original comment also stands: We find obvious differences in
levels of abstraction in theistic concepts when we compare early
RV strata with later RV strata or with the Gathas. Do you
*really* mean to dispute that?

> According
> to Hutter, Zarathustra was not a monotheist; Ahura Mazda is merely "an der
> Spitze der Ahuras", and in OA "Ahura Mazda" is not even a fixed name at
> Zarathustra's time.

No one in this thread has claimed that the Mazdeans (let alone
"Zarathustra" -- which always makes me want to ask, with Pliny
and Humbach, "Which one?") were monotheists. (For references, see
Humbach 1991: 48-9.)

Best regards,
Steve Farmer