Friends and Friendships in Iranian Society: Human and Immortal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Iranica Antiqua, vol. XLVI, 2011 doi: 10.2143/IA.46.0.2084422 FRIENDS AND FRIENDSHIPS IN IRANIAN SOCIETY: HUMAN AND IMMORTAL BY Jamsheed K. CHOKSY (Indiana University) Abstract: Constructs, permutations, functions, and bases of friends and friend- ships in society and sociopolitical hierarchies are analyzed within the context of religiosity in Iran and Iranian regions of Central Asia. Keywords: Friendship, society, knowledge, wisdom, religion, ritual, art, Iran, Central Asia, Zoroastrianism, Manicheism, Islam, Persians, Medes, Scythians, Achaemenians, Sasanians Clearchus the Spartan general, governor, tyrant, and mercenary leader of the Peloponnesian delegation in the Army of the Ten Thousand serving the Achaemenian or Persian prince Cyrus the Younger declared, during the march to Cunaxa on the east bank of the Euphrates river northwest of Babylon, in 401 BCE: “Never shall any man say that I, after leading Greeks into the land of the Barbarians, betrayed the Greeks and chose the friend- ship of the Barbarians” (Xenophon, Anabasis 1.3.5). The essentiality of making friends and maintaining friendships is regarded as an implicit aspect of life in diverse societies separated by geography, chronology, and culture. Iranians utilize many terms for friends and friendship of which mihr (mehr), erman (erman), ayar (yar), dost (dust), and mihrih (mehri), ermanih (ermani), ayarih (yari), dostih (dusti), in Middle Persian or Pahlavi (and New Persian or Farsi), respectively, are among the most important for those words bridging both Zoroastrian and Muslim societies. An existential question each person was expected to ask, according to ancient Iranian sages whose words were rendered into Middle Persian writing by an anon- ymous ninth-century CE Zoroastrian magus or priest, was: U-m ke dost? “And who is my friend?” (Cidag Handarz i Poryotkesan or Select Counsels of the Ancient Sages 1). One response, in the form of Pahlavi handarz/ andarz or “advice, wise sayings” codified during the ninth century CE but IA46011.pdf 1 24/06/11 11:31 94066_Iran_Antiqua_46_11.indd 251 21/06/11 12:34 252 J.K. CHOKSY attributed to the fourth-century CE chief magus Adurbad the son of Maraspand, extols: drost (i) kahwan owon homanag ciyon may (i) kahwan, ka harw cand kahwantar pad xwarisn i sahryaran wes weh ud sazagtar sayed “An old friend is like old wine, which becomes better and more appropriate for drinking by rulers the more aged it is” (handarz or “advice” in the Pahlavi Texts 1.101). Another response to that question was: pad xwesih i Ohrmazd ud Amahraspandan dastan “Maintain amity with Ahura Mazda (the Wise Lord) and the Am¢+a Sp¢∞tas (Holy Immortals)” (Cidag Handarz i Poryotkesan 3). Yet the basic question remains as to why friends and friendships were, as they still are, so vital for human existence? Moreover, how did individuals in Iran and Central Asia during ancient and medieval times establish, value, and make the most of actual friendships with others humans and symbolical friendships with divine beings? Clearchus’ words from the fifth century BCE plus those attributed to Adurbad and to anonymous magian sages approximately twelve centuries later serve as apt introductory anecdotes for the investigation of notions of friendship among the Barbarians, a Greek slur for Iranians, because those sayings highlight the possibility of choices and the consequence of choices. Configuring Both the Corporeal and Spiritual Worlds Perhaps the issues can be approached by examining, first, how the notion of friends and friendship is acquired. Advice from the priestly author of the Cidag Handarz i Poryotkesan may prove instructive: Pad frahang xwastarih tuxsag bawed, ce frahang toxm i danisn u-s bar xrad, ud xrad har do axwanig rayenisn “Be diligent in the acquisition of learn- ing, for learning is the basis of knowledge and its product is wisdom, and wisdom determines the configuration of both worlds” (42). Educating oneself with the correct knowledge that provided the wisdom essential for discerning judiciously between a+a/arta (Avestan/Old Persian; Middle Persian arda) or “order” on the one hand and drug/drauga (Middle Persian drug, druj, druz, droz, New Persian doruq) or “confusion” on the other hand was, as is known, integral to Iranian socioreligiosity. Yet it also determined each person’s material deeds which, in turn, were believed to shaped interpersonal relations, connections within corporeal societies, and conjunctions with spiritual beings. Essentially, the furtherance of a+a/arta involved facilitation and regulation of friendships that were IA46011.pdf 2 24/06/11 11:31 94066_Iran_Antiqua_46_11.indd 252 21/06/11 12:34 FRIENDS AND FRIENDSHIPS IN IRANIAN SOCIETY:HUMAN AND IMMORTAL 253 expected to paywand or “connect” all facets of orderly existence together through life, individual apocalypse, and collective eschatology to the final afterlife. One way in which a bond (mihr, mehr) and connection (paywandih, paywandi) between friends arose, became systematic, and remained firm seems to have been through learning about orderly conduct via scripture, advice, example, and behavior. The fundamental importance in Iranian society of humata (humat) or “good thoughts” for generating huxta (huxt) or “good words” and rendering them into huuarsta (huwarst) or “good deeds” to sustain fraternity and order had been emphasized to his friends and followers by the ancient poet and spiritual leader Zarathushtra (Zardosht, Zoroaster) in his Gaqas or Devotional Songs of the Avesta: A† ta vaxsiia is¢∞to ya mazdaqa hiia†ci† viduse, staotaca ahurai yesniiaca va∞h¢us mana∞ho, hum∏zdra a+a.yeca ya raoc≠bis dar¢sata uruuaza. Sraota.g≠us.ais vahista auuaenata suca mana∞ha, auuar¢nÇ viciqahiia nar≠m.nar¢m xvahiiai tanuiie, para maz≠ yÇ∞ho ahmai n≠ sazdiiai baod¢∞to paiti. A† ta mainiiu pouruiie ya y≠ma xvaf¢na asruuat¢m, manahica vacahica /iiaoqanoi hi vahiio ak¢mca, Çsca hudÇ∞ho ¢r¢s vi/iiata noi† duzdÇ∞ho. A†ca hiia† ta h≠m mainiiu jasaet¢m paouruuim dazde, gaemca ajiiatimca yaqaca a∞ha† ap≠m¢m a∞hus, acisto dr¢guuat∏m a† a+aune vahist¢m mano. AiiÇ mainiuuÇ varata y≠ dr¢guuÇ acista v¢r¢ziio, a+¢m mainiius sp≠nisto y≠ xraozdist≠∞g as≠no vaste, yaeca xsnaos≠n ahur≠m haiqiiais /iiaoqanais fraor¢† mazd∏m. AiiÇ noit ¢r¢s vi/iiata daeuuacina hiia† is a d¢baoma, p¢r¢sman≠∞g upa.jasa† hiia† v¢r¢nata acist¢m mano, a† aes¢m¢m h≠∞duuar¢∞ta ya b∏naii¢n ahum mar¢tano. O persons who seek, now I shall speak of praise for the Ahura (or Lord) and worship-worthy good thought, (words) to which even the learned should pay attention. O attentive persons, (I also shall speak) of order, the bliss of which can be gleaned through illumination. Listen, with your ears, to the best words. Contemplate through illumina- tion, each person individually with your mind, the consequences of dis- cernment. (Do so) before the great gathering, in anticipation of it being declared to us. IA46011.pdf 3 24/06/11 11:31 94066_Iran_Antiqua_46_11.indd 253 21/06/11 12:34 254 J.K. CHOKSY These two spirits, who are the original twins, revealed their distinc- tion in a vision. They are the better one and the worse one in thought, word, and deed. Between these two the judicious discern appropriately, not so the confused. When these two spirits come together, from the beginning they create existence and nonexistence. So, at the end, there will be the worst existence for followers of confusion but the best dwelling place for followers of order. Of these two spirits, the confused one chooses to do the worst things (while) the holiest spirit who is clothed in the hardest stones chooses order (as do those persons) who satisfy Mazda (or Wise/Wisdom) the Ahura through good deeds. The demons cannot discern appropriately between these two spirits for, as they deliberate, delusion comes upon them resulting in their choos- ing the worst thought. Then they scurry together with acrimony (Avestan aesma, Pahlavi xesm, Farsi kheshm < Indo-Euopean *ak- “acrimony,” as in Latin acer, “bitter, sharp;” probably comparable to Old Persian arika- “irksome;” rather than the traditional translations as “anger, delusion, wrath;” on *ak- see Watkins 2000: 2) through which mortal existence is afflicted. (Yasna or Sacrifice, Worship 30.1–6) Acquisition of learning, knowledge, and wisdom cannot occur without societal and confessional frameworks nor without the amity that permits sharing of ideas and institutions (cross-culturally consult Benedict 1934/1959: 35–38, 47–48, 251–254; Brown and Duguid 2000: 117–140) — as Zara- thushtra’s words suggested. So free-willed alliance can be understood broadly as the foundation of Iranian civitas in ancient and medieval times amidst Zoroastrians, Manicheans, and Muslims even though intercommunal rela- tions periodically were strained and even hostile. Friendships and other rela- tionships formed in this world were and still are important means of con- structing and maintaining the societal fabric (compare generally Tylor 1958/1970: 26–69). Assistance supposedly earned from beneficent divine entities or immortal spirits was and is another factor with the same goals. Together, such human and immortal friends seem to have provided individuals with the means to fulfill obligations by acquiring and utilizing the learning, knowledge, and wisdom necessary to maintain the order that was essential for universal wellbeing. It is instructive, therefore, to examine some of the frameworks of friendship and facets of archetypical friends. IA46011.pdf 4 24/06/11 11:31 94066_Iran_Antiqua_46_11.indd 254 21/06/11 12:34 FRIENDS AND FRIENDSHIPS IN IRANIAN SOCIETY:HUMAN AND IMMORTAL 255 Human Friends According to evidence in the Avesta (Abestag) or Praise, the social and confessional frameworks of Proto-Iranians and the earliest Iranians included two hierarchical series or systems of patriarchal organization (Geiger 1882: especially 425–443; more recently followed by Schwartz 1985: 649–650).