5. To the category of direct references belongs, according to general belief, the storj' of the MaGI
• .See a close parallel in F. II. Groome's (Vy/»jji/ Folk-Taiei, No. 1. In his note he pivcs a list of jtarallelH elsewhere. Add Hinton Knowles, Fotk.Tales of Katifiinir, p. 40. A folk-tAle closely connected with ToOit may be seen in T/iS Utory qf AkXkarivi. Harris, Lewis, and Conyhearo).
t See ()e:i.'er. Cieiligntwn of K. I'ranvnitt, 1. 85 ff.
t West, SBE V. 283 f. Also cf. Ilarlland, Ugmd <if Pertna, U. 2i«S-312.
5 Technically known by the Pahlavi term KhvHitk.dcu.
i Assuming the truth of Kendcl Harris's thesis, .^ ;ner. 7oum. 0/ Thent. ISllll, p. 641 ff., esp. p. 654.
Ii Geiger's Jiul. Zcittfc-h. .\. To this jmper, vitiated by an im- possible theory of aiiti-rar.'dc polemic and s very late dftte fol TobU, are due several points in (UH^) here.
990
ZOROASTRIANISM
ZOROASTRIANISM
in Mt 2. The assumption that the name is strictly used is as old as the early Syriac commentators on Matt.,* but it is curious that there is so little cor- roborative evidence. Discussion here is hampered by the necessity of assuming the investigation of Alagianism in general. The difficulty lies in the very limited attestation which the most authentic sources of orthodox Parsism give to the connexion of tlie stars with /ravas/iis. We have a very strik- ing identification of stars with representative spirits of a community in Kev l-^. Aleanwhile, we may note tliat although tlie Avesta and the Pahlavi scriptures but faintly encourage this association, there is a remarkably strong consensus of tradition connecting the Magi witli star-lore. It is a side of theiractivitywhicli would naturally be strengthened by connexion with Babylon (see § 3, above). The extent to which these Magi were ortliodox Zoro- astrians must remain doubtful. It seems fair to assume that the star did for them represent the frnvfiM of a great one just born. If we insist on Avestan doctrine, that star must have been a brilliant new star, and not a planet, for these were considered malign ; there seem, however, to be traces of an ojiposite view, so that this need not be decisive against Kepler's theory. The question remains why they expected a king, and a king of the Jews; a prophet or 'saviour' (saoshyant) would seem a more natural idea. It is possible that we may fall back on the oneiromancy tradi- tionally associated with the Magit (cf. Mt 2''), and suppose that they interpreted the meaning of this new star by the help of an unrecorded dream. It must be noted, however, that both dreams and star-lore are extra-Avestan, though not inconsist- ent developments of the sj'stem as we know it. It is only provisionally that we may cherish the belief that the earliest Gentile homage to the Lord Christ was paid by priests of the loftv re- ligion which in earlier times was perhaps privileged to stimulate within Judaism the growth of the doctrine of the Resurrection.
6. Such are the biblical passages in which direct allusion to Parsism may be traced or reasonably suspected ; sundry more doubtful examples may be left to the end of this article. We pass on to a much more important question. It being granted that during and after the Exile great numbers of Jews were living in Mazdayasnian countries, have we reason to believe tliat the development of certain doctrines among these Jews was stimulated by what they knew of corresponding doctrines in Parsism, and that in this way the history of doctrine in Judaism was vitally attected? The essential parts of our problem may be stated in terms of Ac 23', where (if we may include demons under ' spirits ') the Sadducees represent the older Judaism, the Pharisees the newer, which arose after the Jews came in contact with Parsism. Pout hoc, obviously : is it also projitcr hoc ! A detailed examination of Parsism will show the marked likeness between the two religions in respect of eschatology and spirit-lore. Is this coincidence, or has one religion atfected the other ? If the latter, which is the debtor, or is the obliga- tion mutual? Finally, if foreign influence on Judaism is to be postulated, liave the claims of Babylon or Hellas a prior right to be heard ? The last question is rather beyond our present range ; but we may at least plead that Parsism is in- comparably nearer to the faith of Israel than any other religion can pretend to be, and that its influence is antecedently more likely to have been felt. The ease for the independent develop- ment of Judaism may be seen in the articles on
* See Oottheil, 'References to Zoroaster' lo the Dritler CloJfSicai aiudies, pp. 24-61. I X.g. in HdL i. 107.
EscHATOLOCv, Angel, and Demon. But weighty authorities bespeak at least respectful hearing for the theory that the development of Jewish doctrine was stimulated by the knowledge of a ;reed which contained full-grown dogma that within Judaism was only in germ.* It is natural to assume that gratitude to the Persians as their deliverers, to whom the Jews owed the protection which made the birth of the Jewish Church possible, may have predisposed them in favour of religious ideaa wherein thinkers could recognize what was latent in their own faith.
7. In Exchatolugy one ground of hesitation to accept a measure of Parsi influence has been the doubt whether the Resurrection is a truly ancient doctrine in Parsism. t The doubt is entirely ground- less : the mere fact that Darmesteter himself, the great champion of a late date for the Avesta, acknowledges the Resurrection as a doctrine of Achaemenian antiquity, might silence questioning. The important diflerences between Parsi eschat- ology and the various systems which struggled for recognition among the Jews during the last centuries B.C. are drawn out by Charles, Eschat. p. 135 f. These divergences are fatal to any theory of borrowing, but they do not afiect the assertion that the Jewish belief 'can hardly have developed without Persian stimulus' (Cheyne). It is generally conceded that OT passages speak- ing of an individual resurrection do not appear until a period when Persian stimulus is historically possible, when the knowledge that the Persians held this belief could encourage thoughtful Jews to develop their own doctrine in a thoroughly Jewish form. In this case the foreign influence would show itself by the absorption of details, minor doctrines or illustrations of doctrine. Now these are forthcoming, if not beyond dispute iu individual cases, yet to an extent making coin- cidence improbable. Amon^ these are the follow- ing.J Is 24-"- is allowed by Charles, a hostile witness [Eschat. pp. 116 n., 159), to show probable traces of Parsism : the imprisonment of evu powers before their flnal punishment may be compared with Bund. 3-* (SBE v. 19), which seems to repre- sent an Avestan picture of war in heaven, followed by the binding of the fiend, as in the Apocalypse. In Is 05" 66^ a new heaven and earth, following the final judgment and destruc- tion of evil, is parallel with the frasho-kereti, 'renewing,' which in Parsism follows the 'ordeal of molten metal ' (§ 1). This last, the ayo-khshusta, somewhat resembles the tigure of Mai 3-' 4'. The four periods in Daniel have a very close parallel in the Pahlavi Buhman Yasht (HBE v. 193) ; but in this very late work it seems more reasonable to assume indebtedness to the Bible, as on p. 197 there is an apjiarent imitation of Lk IG'""-, and on p. 203 of Mic 7".§ A characteristic of Parsism from the Urst is, however, recogniz- able in the new manner of looking upon general human history, and in the reckoning of millennia, which became prominent in apocalyptic. Parsi