Amesha Spenta

Amesha Spenta (Aməša Spənta) is an Avestan language term for a class of divinity/divine concepts in Zoroastrianism, and literally means (in reverse word order) "Bounteous Immortal."^{[1][n 1]} Later middle Persian variations of the term include Ameshāspand and the specifically Zoroastrian Mahrāspand and Amahrāspand.

Contents 1 Etymology 2 In non-specific usage 3 As the great "divine sparks" 4 The doctrine 5 Notes 6 Bibliography and References

Etymology

Although the expression does not occur in the Gathas, "it was probably coined by Zoroaster himself. Spenta is a characteristic word of his revelation, meaning 'furthering, strengthening, bounteous, holy'."^[1] Aməša or amerta is formed by negative prefix a+merta(mortal) so amerta simply means immortal. Hence the phrase means something on the line of the immortal hallows(holy ones). The oldest attested use of the term is in Yasna 39.3, which is part of the Yasna Haptanghaiti and in which the two elements of the name occur in reverse order, that is, as Spenta Amesha. Like all other verses of the Yasna Haptanghaiti, Yasna 39.3 is also in Gathic Avestan and is approximately as old as the hymns attributed to Zoroaster himself.

In non-specific usage

In non-specific usage, the term Amesha Spenta denotes all the divinities that furthered or strengthened creation and all that are bounteous and holy. It not only includes the ahuras (a term that in the Gathas is also used in the plural but only includes Ahura Mazda by name), but also all the other divinities that are alluded to in the Gathas. In this non-specific sense of the term, Amesha Spenta is then equivalent to the term yazata.

This meaning is particularly evident in the 9th-14th century texts of Zoroastrian tradition, but there are also instances in the Avesta proper where it is used this way. In Yasna 1.2 for instance, the yazata Atar is declared to be "the most active of the Amesha Spentas." Even in present-day Zoroastrianism, the term is frequently used to refer to the thirty-three divinities that have either a day-name dedication in the Zoroastrian calendar or that have a Yasht dedicated to them (or both).

This general, non-specific, meaning of the term Amesha Spenta also has an equivalent in the Vedic Sanskrit Vishve Amrtas, which is the collective term for all supernatural beings (lit: 'all immortals').

As the great "divine sparks"

Significantly more common than the non-specific meaning of Amesha Spenta is a restrictive use of the term to refer to the great six 'divine sparks' of Ahura Mazda. In Zoroastrian tradition, these are the first six emanations of the noncreated Creator, through whom all subsequent creation was accomplished. This fundamental doctrine is only alluded to in the Gathas, but is systematically described in later middle Persian language texts, in particular in the Bundahishn (3.12), an 11th or 12th century work that recounts the Zoroastrian view of creation.

As enumerated in Yasna 47.1 of the Gathas, the "divine sparks" are

• [Vohu] Manah, approximately meaning "[Good] Purpose"
• Asha [Vahishta] (Aša Vahištā) "[Best] Truth/Righteousness"
• Kshathra [Vairya] (Xšathra Vairya), "[Desirable] Dominion"
• [Spenta] Armaiti (Spənta Ārmaiti), "[Holy] Devotion"
• Haurvatat (Haurvatāt), "Wholeness"
• Ameretat (Amərətāt), "Immortality"

In later tradition, the attributes (like vohu "good" and vahishta "best") in four of the names are integral to the names themselves. This is not always the case in the oldest texts, where the adjectives—if they appear at all—do not necessarily appear immediately before to the noun.^{[n 2]}

While Vohu Manah, Asha Vahishta, and Kshathra Vairya are consistently of neuter gender in Avestan grammar; in tradition they are considered masculine. Armaiti, Haurvatat, and Ameretat are invariably feminine.

In the Gathas, each Amesha Spenta represents a good moral quality that mortals should strive to obtain. Thus, the doctrine of the great six is that through good thoughts, words, and deeds, each individual should endeavor to assimilate the qualities of an Amesha Spenta into oneself.

Each of the six has an antithetical counterpart, and four of the six are already assigned one in the Gathas:^[2] aša/arta- is opposed to the druj-, vohu-mahah is opposed to aka-manah-, kshathra- to dushae-kshathra-, and armaiti- to taraemaiti-. Not evident in the Gathas and first appearing in the Younger Avesta (e.g. Yasht 19.96) are the oppositions of haurvatat- "wholeness" to tarshna- "thirst", and ameretat- "life" to shud- "hunger." These latter assignments reflect Haurvatat's identification with water and Ameretat's identification with plants.

In the Gathas, aša/arta is the most evident of the six, and also the most commonly associated with wisdom (mazda-). In the 238 verses of these hymns, aša-/arta- appears 157 times. Of the other concepts, only vohumanah- appears nearly as often (136 occurrences). In comparison, the remaining four of the great sextet appear only 121 times altogether: kshathra-: 56 times; armaiti-: 40; ameretat-: 14; haurvatat-: 11 times.^[2]

In the context of Zoroastrian view of creation, the group of the Amesha Spenta is extended to include Ahura Mazda, together with (or represented by) Spenta Mainyu. However, in most scholastic texts, an unqualified referral to the "Amesha Spenta" is usually understood to include only great six. In Yasna 44.7, 31.3, and 51.7, Ahura Mazda's Spenta Mainyu is the instrument or "active principle" of the act of creation. It is also through this "Bounteous Force", "Creative Emanation", or "Holy Spirit" that Ahura Mazda is immanent in humankind (Yasna 33.6), and how the Creator interacts with the world (Yasna 43.6).

The doctrine also has a physical dimension, in that each of the heptad is linked to one of the seven creations, which in ancient philosophy were the foundation of the universe. These physical associations are only alluded to in the Gathas, and then so subtly that they are usually lost in translation.

A systematic association is only present in later middle Persian texts, where each of the seven is listed with its "special domain":

• Ahura Mazda → Middle Persian Ohrmuzd (together with, or represented by, Spenta Mainyu) is the guardian of humankind
• Vohu Manah → MP: Vahman or Bahman of cattle (and all animal creation)
• Asha Vahista → MP: Ardwahisht of fire (and all other luminaries)
• Kshathra Vairya → MP: Shahrevar of metals (and minerals)
• Spenta Armaiti → MP: Spendarmad of earth
• Haurvatat → MP: Hordad or Khordad of water
• Ameretat → MP: Amurdad of plants

In the Gathas, Kshathra [Vairya] does not have an association with a specific creation, and it is only in later texts that this Amesha Spenta is considered the guardian of metals. This anomaly is explained in modern scholarship by the fact that, in Stone Age cosmogony, the sky was considered to be the first of the creations (and thought to be of stone), but metal has no place among the creations (the bronze and Iron Ages were yet to come). This is also reflected in Zoroaster's revelation, where the sky is "of the hardest stone" (Yasna 30.5). Later, with the event of bronze and then iron tools, this sky evolved to being of crystal, which was seen as both of stone and of metal (Yasht 13.2). In due course, Kshathra's association with a stony firmament was eclipsed by the association with a metallic sky, and thence to metals in general.

The doctrine

The doctrine of the 'divine sparks', through their connection with creation, unites ethereal and spiritual concepts with material and manifest objects in a "uniquely Zoroastrian"^[1] way: Not only as abstract "aspects" of Ahura Mazda, but also worthy of reverence themselves, and personified or represented in all material things.

The relationship between Ahura Mazda and the Amesha Spenta is an altogether subtle one. In Yasna 31.11 of the Gathas, Ahura Mazda is said to have created the universe with his "thought". In other passages such as Yasna 45.4, Ahura Mazda is described as the metaphorical "father" of the individual Amesha Spenta, which, even though figurative, suggests a familial closeness. In particular, the relationship between Ahura Mazda and Spenta Mainyu is multifaceted and complex, and "as hard to define as that of Yahweh and the Holy Spirit in Judaism and Christianity."^[3]

A veneration for the 'divine sparks' through the living world is still present in modern Zoroastrian tradition and is evident in every religious ceremony where each of the Amesha Spenta is visibly represented by objects of which they are the guardians. In addition, the first seven days of the month of the Zoroastrian calendar are dedicated to the great heptad and to creation, so acknowledging the preeminence of the Amesha Spenta, and so ensuring the inculcation of their doctrine.

Spiritual and material dualism in the same entity "accounts for the difficulty which some aspects of the doctrine have presented for Western scholars."^[1] The reverence of the Amesha Spenta has been frequently attacked as de-facto polytheism, not only in modern times, but in the Sassanid era as well. While the "worship of the elements" was a repeated accusation during the 4th and 5th centuries,^[4] Christian missionaries (such as John Wilson^[5]) in 19th century India specifically targeted the immanence of the Amesha Spenta as indicative of (in their view) Zoroastrian polytheistic tradition.^[6]

A frequent target for criticism was the Zoroastrian credo in which the adherent declares: "I profess to be a worshiper of Mazda, follower of the teachings of Zoroaster, ... one who praises and reveres the Amesha Spenta" (the Fravaraneh, Yasna 12.1). Whether one who reveres the Amesha Spenta is, by that definition, a polytheist is subject to interpretation. Zoroastrians themselves note that ethereal spirit and physical manifestation are not separatable, and that a reverence of any of Ahura Mazda's creations is ultimately a worship of the Creator.^[4]

In the second half of the 19th century, Martin Haug proposed^[7] that Zoroaster himself had viewed the Amesha Spenta as philosophical abstractions, and that a personification of the heptad was really a latter-period corruption. The Parsis of Bombay gratefully accepted Haug's premise as a defence against the Christian missionaries, and subsequently disseminated the idea as a Parsi interpretation, so corroborating Haug's theory. The "continuing monotheism" principle eventually became so popular that it is now almost universally accepted as doctrine.^[3][6]

Notes

Bibliography and References