Criticism of Zoroastrianism has taken place over many centuries not only from the adherents of other religions but also among Zoroastrians themselves seeking to reform the faith.
In the early 19th century, a Christian missionary based in British India, John Wilson, claimed that Zoroaster never had a genuine divine commission (or ever claimed such a role),[1] never performed miracles, or uttered prophecies and that the story of his life is "a mere tissue of comparatively modern fables and fiction."[2] [3] Others assert that all the available Zoroastrian sources regarding Zoroaster only provide conflicting images about him,[4] especially between earlier and later sources.[5]
Darius clearly states in the Biston Inscription that “I am the king by the will of Ahuramazda, and Ahuramazda has entrusted me with power.” (Paragraph 5) This stone inscription does not give us much information about the religious issues of the time. This raises the question: Is the religion mentioned in this stone inscription a type of Zoroastrian religion.[6]
What is common between the Zoroastrian inscriptions and the Achaemenid inscriptions is the name of Ahuramazda, the presence of the Divan, and the principles of falsehood and falsehood. But in these inscriptions other gods are mentioned[7]
The orientalist Arthur Christensen in his book ''Iran During The Sassanid Era'', mentioned that the sources dating back to the era of the Sasanian state in ancient Persian that refer to the Zoroastrian doctrine do not match the sources that appeared after the collapse of the state, such as the Pahlavi source and others. The reason is that because of the fall of the Sasanian state, the Zoroastrian clerics tried to save their religion from extinction through modifying it to resemble the religion of Muslims to retain followers in the Zoroastrian religion.[8]
The Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies comments that the Islamic conquest of Persia caused a huge impact on the Zoroastrian doctrine.This provides an explanation of why there is numbers of parallels have been drawn between Zoroastrian teachings and Islam. Such parallels include the evident similarities between Amesha Spenta and the archangel Gabriel, praying five times a day, covering one's head during prayer, and the mention of Thamud and Iram of the Pillars in the Quran.
Henrik Samuel Nyberg, an Iranian-Swedish scholar, considered discussions and opinions on Achaemenid Zoroastrianism to be full of partisan prejudice and superstition among scholars of his time and referred to these debates as some of the most painful and misleading. Which did not occur in the human sciences [9] and believes that none of the essential characteristics of Zoroastrianism can be seen in the basic constructions of the Achaemenid religion[10] .
Also there is no other material that could give these inscriptions a Zoroastrian color.[11]
The Encyclopædia Iranica indicates that the stories of Zoroaster's life were distorted by quoting stories from Christianity and Judaism and attributing them to Zoroaster, but the most quotations were from Islam after the entry of Muslims into Persia, as it was a means for the Zoroastrian clergy to strengthen their religion.[12]
The Dasatir-i-Asmani, while being accepted by Zoroastrian communities in Iran and India as genuine, especially by the Kadmi, it is generally believed to be a forgery.[13]
Wilson argued that the Avesta could not be divinely inspired because much of its text was irrevocably lost or unintelligible[14] [15] and Martin Haug, who greatly helped the Parsis of India to defend their religion against the attacks of such Christian missionaries as Wilson, considered the Gathas to be the only texts and only authoritative scriptures that could be attributed to Zoroaster.[16]
John Wilson attacked the Zoroastrian reverence of the Amesha Spenta and Yazatas as a form of polytheism, although the Parsis at the time immediately refuted this allegation and insisted that he had in fact addressed the Bundahishn, a text whose relevance to their practice was remote.[17] [18] Critics also commonly claim that Zoroastrians are worshipers of other deities and elements of nature, such as of fire—with one prayer, the Litany to the fire (Atesh Niyaesh),[19] stating: "I invite, I perform (the worship) of you, the Fire, O son of Ahura Mazdā together with all fires"—and Mithra.[20] Some critics have charged Zoroastrians with being followers of dualism, who only claimed to be followers of monotheism in modern times to confront the powerful influence of Christian and Western thought which "hailed monotheism as the highest category of theology."[21] Critics insist that the monotheistic reformist view is seen to contradict the conservative (or traditional) view of a dualistic worldview most evident in the relationship between Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu.[22] and arguing that Zoroastrians follow a belief system influenced by henotheism. Other Western scholars such as Martin Haug, however, have dismissed the concept of theological dualism as a corruption of Zoroaster's original teachings, gradually added by later adherents of the faith.[23] Critics add that the fact that such differing views have proliferated is a sign of the enigmatic nature of the Zoroastrian beliefs regarding the divinity.[24]
Zoroastrian reformers, such as Maneckji Nusserwanji Dhalla, have argued that literary precedence should be given to the Gathas, as a source of authority and textual authenticity. They have also deplored and criticized many Zoroastrian rituals (e.g. excessive ceremonialism and focus on purity,[25] [26] using "bull's urine for ritual cleansing, the attendance of a dog to gaze at the corpse during funerary rites, the exposure of corpses on towers [for consumption by vultures and ravens]")[27] [28] and theological and cosmological doctrines as not befitting of the faith.[29] This orthodox versus reformist controversy rages even on the internet.[30]
Divisions and tensions also exist between Iranian and Indian Zoroastrians and over such issues as the authority of a hereditary priesthood in the transmission and interpretation of the faith, ethnicity and the nature of Ahura Mazda.[31] Historically, differences also existed between the Zoroastrian branches of Zurvanism, Mazdakism and Mazdaism.[32]
Much like the question of who is a Jew?, Zoroastrian identity, especially whether it is adopted through birth or belief (or both), "remains a cause for tension" within the community.[33] [34] Reformers have criticised the orthodox refusal to accept religious converts as one reason for the communities' declining population.[35]
Zoroastrians have been criticized by Muslim authors for their rejection of predestination.[36] [37] This follows a famous hadith of Muhammad in which he negatively associates the Qadariyah Islamic sect with the Magians.[38] [39]
Zoroastrianism has been criticized for the perception that it promotes a patriarchal system, expressed through such avenues as an all-male priesthood and its historical allowance of polygamy—practiced by Zoroaster himself.[40] [41] [42]