Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-7kmtv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-08-16T04:50:32.153Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The concept of the creational body in Iranian mythology: transformation and theological reinterpretations in Zoroastrian texts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2026

Mohamad Bayani Open the ORCID record for Mohamad Bayani [Opens in a new window]
Mohamad Bayani*
Affiliation:
Persian Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
*
Email: cb.bayani2@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores the evolution of the “creational body” motif in Iranian mythology, focusing on its transformation within Zoroastrian theological contexts. Drawing on Indo-European and Indo-Iranian cosmogonic narratives, the article examines two primary representations: Gayōmard, the human prototype, and āsrō-kirb, an enigmatic body described as the “form of fire”. While the original Indo-Iranian myths often portray the creation of the cosmos through the sacrificial dismemberment of a primordial being, Zoroastrian texts adapt this narrative to align with their dualistic theology. The dismemberment of Gayōmard is attributed to Ahriman and his demonic forces, dissociating Ohrmazd and the Beneficent Immortals from acts of violence. By contrast, āsrō-kirb’s narrative presents an abstract, faceless body dismembered by Ohrmazd, whose act is sanitized of its grotesque sacrificial elements. Through textual analysis of Pahlavi sources, this article investigates the theological motivations behind these alterations, highlighting how Zoroastrian priests sought to reconcile inherited cosmogonic myths with their ethical and doctrinal imperatives. The findings reveal a dual adjustment: the reinterpretation of Gayōmard’s narrative to condemn Ahriman, and the abstraction of āsrō-kirb to obscure its violent origins, while maintaining its creational function. These adaptations underscore the dynamic interplay between inherited mythology and evolving theological frameworks in the Zoroastrian tradition.

Keywords

creational bodyGayōmardāsrō-kirbPahlavi textsIranian mythologycosmogonyZoroastrianism

Information

Type
Article
Information
Bulletin of SOAS , First View , pp. 1 - 10
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS University of London.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agostini, D. and Thrope, S. (eds and trans). 2020. The Bundahišn. The Zoroastrian Book of Creation. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780190879044.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anklesaria, E.P.K. 1958. “A critical edition of the unedited portion of the Dādestān ī Dēnīg”, PhD thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Bailey, H.W. 1943. Zoroastrian Problems in the Ninth-Century Books. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bayani, Mohamad. 2024. “A comparative analysis of Ahreman’s assault and Alexander’s invasion: exploring narrative themes in Pahlavi sources”, History of Religions 64/2, 86–108. https://doi.org/10.1086/732298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayani, Mohamad. 2025. “creating is cutting: a conceptual metaphor in Avestan and Pahlavi texts”, BSOAS 88/2, 243–65. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X24000715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1967. “Hommes et dieux dans l’Avesta”, in Festschrift für Wilhelm Eilers, 144–7. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Boyce, M. 1975. A History of Zoroastrianism: Volume I: The Early Period. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Christensen, Arthur. 2013. Nemooneha –ye- Nokhostin Ensan va Nokhostin Shahryar dar Tarikh –e- Afsanei –e- Iranian (Les Types du Premier Homme et du Premier Roi dans L’histoire Legendaire des Iraniens) (trans A. Tafazzoli and J. Amoozegar). Tehran: Cheshmeh.Google Scholar
Duchesne-Guillemin, J. 1964. “The ‘form of fire’”, in Dr. J. M. Unvala Memorial Volume, 14–16. Bombay.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Karl. 1992. “Mārtāṇḍa and Gayōmart”, in Glauch, Sonja, Plath, Robert and Ziegler, Sabine (eds), Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik. Band 3. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert.Google Scholar
Jamison, S.W. and Brereton, J.P.. 2014. The Rigveda: The Earliest Religious Poetry of India, 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kreyenbroek, Philip G. 1993. “Cosmogony and cosmology i. In Zoroastrian/ Mazdaism”, Encyclopedia Iranica. https://iranicaonline.org/articles/cosmogony-iGoogle Scholar
Kreyenbroek, P.G. 1994. “Mithra and Ahreman in Iranian cosmogonies”, in Hinnells, J. (ed.), Studies in Mithraism: Papers Associated with the Mithraic Panel Organized on the Occasion of the XVIth Congress of the International Association for the History of Religions, Rome 1990. Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider.Google Scholar
Lincoln, B. 1975. “The Indo-European myth of creation”, History of Religions 15/2, 121–45.10.1086/462739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, Bruce. 1986. Myth, Cosmos and Society; Indo-European Themes of Creation and Destruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/harvard.9780674864290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, Bruce. 1997. “Pahlavi kirrēnīdan: traces of Iranian creation mythology”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 117/4, 681–5.Google Scholar
Lincoln, Bruce. 2024. “Indo-European cosmogony: fifty years later”, History of Religions 64/2.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, D.N. 1971. A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Madan, D.M. 1911. The Complete Text of the Pahlavi Dinkard, 2 vols. Bombay.Google Scholar
Mayrhofer, Manfred. 1992. Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen. Vol. 1. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universität.Google Scholar
Mirfakhrayi, Mahshid. 2011. Pahlavi Rivāyat. A Text in Middle Iranian Language. Transcription, Critical Apparatus, Persian Rendering, Commentary and Glossary. Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies.Google Scholar
Mirfakhrayi, Mahshid. 2018. Dādestān ī Dēnīg. Part II (pursišn ī 42-92). Introduction, Transcription, Persian Translation, Commentary. Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies.Google Scholar
Molé, M. 1963. Culte, mythe et cosmologie dans l’Iran ancient; Le problème zoroastrien et la tradition mazdéenne. Paris: Universitaires De France.Google Scholar
Pakzad Soraki, Fazlolah. 2005. Bundahišn; Zoroasrische Kosmologie und Kosmogonie. Band I. Tehran: Centre for the Great Islamic Encyclopaedia.Google Scholar
Shaked, S. 1994. Dualism in Transformation: Varieties of Religion in Sasanian Iran. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar
Sturluson, Snorri. 1966. The Prose Edda (trans. J.I. Young). Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
West, E.W. 1882. Pahlavi Texts; Part II. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Alan. 1990. The Pahlavi Rivāyat Accompanying the Dādestān ī Dēnīg, 2 vols. Translation, Commentary and Pahlavi Text. Copenhagen: Commisioner Muksgaard.Google Scholar
Zaehner, R.C. 1955. Zurvan: A Zoroastrian Dilemma. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Zaehner, R.C. 1961. The Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism. New York: Putnam.Google Scholar