Saoshyant

← Encyclopedia

A lake in the desert of Seistan, where the Helmand spends itself into marshes before the salt takes it, holds a secret in its water. Beneath the surface, watched by ninety-nine thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine guardian-spirits, lies the seed of the prophet, preserved against decay since the world fell into its long contention. When the last age turns, a young woman will go down to bathe — a virgin who has known no man — and the water will quicken in her. From that conception comes the one who sets the world right. The Avesta calls him Saošyant, “the one who will bring benefit,” and the future he carries is not a rescue from the world but a remaking of it.

The figure is easy to mistake for a borrowed messiah, a Persian double of expectations more familiar elsewhere. He is older and stranger than that, and the logic that produced him belongs entirely to the Iranian frame: a cosmos that began perfect, was invaded, and is fought back, over twelve thousand years, toward a perfection that this time cannot be lost. The Saoshyant is the hinge of that final turn.

A common noun becomes a name

The word comes first, and the word is humble. Saošyant is an Avestan participle built on the verbal root sū-, “to swell, to profit, to be of use” — at root, “one who will benefit,” “future benefactor.” In the Gathas, the seventeen archaic hymns of the Avesta that the tradition assigns to Zarathustra himself, the term is not yet a proper name. It is a common noun, and it is plural as often as singular. The saoshyants are those who further the good — who strengthen truth against the lie, who labor on the side of Ahura Mazda. The prophet appears to use it of his own circle, and at moments of himself: the benefactor is whoever brings the renewal nearer. There is, at this stratum, no single eschatological savior waiting at the end of history. There is a category of helpers, and a confidence that their work tends somewhere.

That tendency had a name too. The Gathas speak of frašō.kərəti — Younger Avestan and Middle Persian frašegird, the “making-wonderful” — built on the adjective fraša, “wonderful, excellent, perfected.” The one who makes the world fraša is the Saošyant. So the savior and his work were lexically twinned from the start, before either had hardened into the personalized figures of the later books. To read the Gathas honestly is to find a verb where the tradition would later find a person: not yet the Saoshyant who comes once, but the steady labor of making existence wonderful, carried by anyone who chooses truth.

The Younger Avesta — the hymns to individual divine beings, composed in a later phase of the language — begins to fix the figure. The Frawardīn Yašt, the long hymn to the guardian-souls, and above all the Zamyad Yašt (Yašt 19, the hymn to the earth and to the xᵛarənah, the divine glory that crowns rightful kings) name a specific victorious one to come: Astuuaṱ.ərəta. The name is theology compressed into a word. Astuuaṱ derives from ast-, “bone,” and so “having bones,” “corporeal,” “embodied”; ərəta is the Younger Avestan form of aša, the cosmic Truth. Astvat-ereta is “he who embodies Truth,” or, read through the verb, “he who makes Truth corporeal” — the one in whom aša, until now a principle and an order, finally takes flesh and walks. The Zamyad Yašt describes him rising up out of the water of Lake Kąsaoya, the xᵛarənah attending him, to make the world wonderful at last. The savior who began as a common noun has, by this stratum, a body and a name.

The seed, the lake, and the three who come

The Pahlavi books of the ninth and tenth centuries — the Bundahišn, the Dēnkard, the Selections of Zādspram — take the Younger Avestan hint and build it into a full apparatus. Here the single coming becomes a sequence, set inside the great chronology of the cosmos.

That chronology runs twelve thousand years, in four acts of three thousand. In the first, Ahura Mazda’s creation exists only in spirit, motionless and ideal. In the second, he gives it body and matter. In the third, Angra Mainyu — Ahriman, the destructive mind — breaks in, and the world enters gumēzišn, the state of “mixture,” in which good and evil are tangled together in every living thing and the long war is fought across the fabric of creation. The fourth and final three thousand years are the time of wizārišn, “separation,” when the mixture is undone strand by strand and the saviors come.

The seed makes the sequence possible. When Zarathustra lived, the tradition holds, his seed was gathered up and given into the keeping of the waters of Lake Kąsaoya — the Avestan name for the body of water in Seistan that the Pahlavi books call Frazdān or Kayānsih, identified with the Hāmūn marshes of the lower Helmand, on the present Iran–Afghanistan border. There it waits, guarded by 99,999 fravašis, the celestial guardian-souls of the righteous, who keep it whole and undefiled through the millennia. At the turn of each of the last three thousand-year stretches, a virgin descends to bathe in the lake, conceives from the preserved seed without a man, and bears a son. Three sons in all, brothers across the ages, each a Saošyant — and the line runs, by the logic of the seed, straight back to the prophet.

The first, born at the opening of the tenth millennium, is Uxšyaṱ.ərəta, “he who makes Truth grow.” In his thousand years the false religions fade and the wolf species diminish. The second, Uxšyaṱ.nəmah, “he who makes reverence grow,” opens the eleventh millennium; in his age the great serpent Aži Dahāka, bound since the dawn of history beneath a mountain, breaks loose for a final terror before being slain. The third and greatest is Astvat-ereta, the Saoshyant proper, born of the virgin Ərədaṱ.fəδrī, “she who fulfills the father,” at the dawn of the twelfth and last millennium. The names of the sons, and of the three mothers, are transparent theological constructions — Iranian scholars have long noted that they read as doctrine rather than legend, each name a sentence about what its bearer does. The tradition is candid, in its own grammar, that these figures are the future spelled out in advance.

The winged-disc relief at Persepolis, later identified — in modern readings of contested certainty — with the fravashi or the human soul that aspires upward. — Photo Napishtim, via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0)

The making-wonderful

What Astvat-ereta comes to do is the Frashokereti itself: the final renovation, the event toward which the whole twelve-thousand-year scheme has been moving. The Pahlavi books, especially the closing chapters of the Bundahišn, narrate it as a sequence of acts, each undoing one wound of the long mixture.

He raises the dead. This is the doctrine the tradition calls tan ī pasēn, “the future body” — not a survival of the soul alone, which Zoroastrian thought had always affirmed, but the resurrection of the flesh itself, bones reassembled, the dead restored bodily to a transformed earth. The Saoshyant begins with Gayōmart, the primal man from whose body the metals and the human line descended; then Mašya and Mašyānī, the first human couple; then, generation by generation, all who have ever lived. The bones rise from the earth, the blood from the water, the hair from the plants, the breath-soul from the wind, and each is rejoined to its body. The dead stand again in their own flesh, and recognize one another — parent and child, friend and friend — across the whole span of human time, gathered on a renewed earth.

Then comes the judgment, and it is a judgment by fire. The metals in the mountains and the hills melt under a final heat and flow together into a single incandescent river that runs across the whole face of the world. Every soul that has ever lived must pass through it. The image is exact and terrible and merciful at once: to the righteous the molten flood is felt as warm milk, a bath that cleanses without harm; to the wicked it is the burning that purifies. For this is not a damnation. The wicked are not consumed and discarded — they are scoured clean. The Zoroastrian eschaton is universalist: the river is the last purification, after which even the souls dragged down to the House of the Lie are made whole and brought up into the renewed world. Hell is emptied. The intermediate place, the Hamēstagān where the evenly-balanced waited out the age, is emptied. No soul is finally lost.

And then the war ends. Angra Mainyu and his counter-creation of demons, defeated act by act through the renovation, are at the last rendered powerless — driven back through the breach by which they first entered, or annihilated, or sealed away impotent forever; the texts vary in the image and agree in the substance. The molten metal pours down into the breach and stops it. With evil unmade, the world is restored to the deathless perfection Ahura Mazda first intended and Ahriman first spoiled — but with a difference that is the whole point of the long detour through history. The first perfection was untested and could be lost. This one has passed through the war, and the possibility of evil is gone with the evil. The renewed creation is fraša: wonderful, immortal, incorruptible, and incapable of falling again. Here the dualism of the tradition shows its true shape. It was never a balance of two eternal equals. It was a bounded war with an end already known, and the end is not a truce but the unmaking of one side.

Naqsh-e Rostam, the cliff of Achaemenid tombs and Sasanian rock-reliefs near Persepolis — the monumental face of the empire whose priesthood transmitted the eschatological scheme. — Photo Diego Delso, via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

For the worshipper, the Frashokereti is not only a distant terminus. The daily ethic of humata, hūxta, huvaršta — good thoughts, good words, good deeds — is, in the tradition’s own accounting, participation in it. Every truthful act strengthens aša in the cosmos and brings the renovation nearer; every lie strengthens druj and delays it. In this sense the Gathic meaning never disappeared under the Pahlavi machinery. The Saoshyant who comes at the end is the embodiment of a labor that every behdin, every “one of the good religion,” is already performing. The benefactor is still, as in the oldest hymns, whoever furthers the good — and the one who comes from the lake is the sum and seal of all of them.

The afterlife of a savior

What happened to this figure outside Zoroastrianism is one of the most argued questions in the study of religion, and it has been argued for two centuries without settling.

The features are striking when laid side by side with the apocalyptic and messianic literatures of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam: a savior who appears at the end of history; a bodily resurrection of the dead; a last judgment; a cosmic adversary who is finally defeated; a renewed creation that replaces the spoiled one; fire as the agent of eschatological purification; even, in the Saoshyant’s case, a miraculous virgin conception. The maximalist reading — associated above all with Mary Boyce, and with R. C. Zaehner, Geo Widengren, and Shaul Shaked — holds that the Achaemenid centuries, when Judah was a province of the Persian empire and Judean elites lived under Iranian rule, brought sustained contact between Jewish and Zoroastrian thought; that Zoroastrian eschatology was already developed by then; and that the new features visible in post-exilic Jewish literature — the developed Satan, the angelic hierarchy, the resurrection of Daniel 12, the dualism of the Qumran War Scroll — are best explained as catalyzed by that contact. On this reading the Saoshyant stands somewhere behind the whole later family of end-time saviors.

The minimalist reading answers that the chronology will not bear the weight. The Zoroastrian texts in which the savior and the resurrection appear in full detail — the Bundahišn, the Dēnkard — were redacted in the ninth and tenth centuries CE, more than a millennium after the doctrines they parallel are already attested in Jewish and Christian sources. If one dates the texts rather than the presumed oral tradition behind them, the arrow of influence could run the other way, or both could descend from a shared ancient Near Eastern matrix, or each could have developed on its own. The whole argument turns on a thing that cannot be directly observed: how old the oral form of Zoroastrian eschatology really is. The Younger Avestan name Astvat-ereta is genuinely ancient; the elaborated narrative of the three saviors and the molten river is attested late. Between those two facts the debate lives, and competent specialists divide. The honest statement is that the parallels are real and the direction of dependence is not established.

The Atash Behram of Yazd, in the central Iranian plateau where the Zoroastrian community endured — the living tradition that still awaits the world-renewer. — Photo Zenith210, via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Within the living tradition the Saoshyant has not faded into archaeology. Among the Parsis of India and the Zoroastrians of Iran and the diaspora, the world-renewer remains a real object of expectation, and the resurrection of the body and the final defeat of the Lie remain articles of faith. Modern Zoroastrian thought has tended to read the figure in two registers at once, and without contradiction. There is the literal Saoshyant who will come from the seed in the lake. And there is the Gathic saoshyant recovered: the savior understood as a potential carried by every righteous person, the renovation as a work performed in ordinary moral life, the coming one as the name for what the community is collectively becoming. A nineteenth-century reform current within Parsi thought leaned hard on this second reading, finding in the oldest hymns a savior who is less a person to be awaited than a vocation to be assumed. The two readings are the two ends of the figure’s own history — the common noun and the proper name — held together. The benefactor at the end of time and the benefactor in the next truthful act are, in the tradition’s accounting, the same word, and the lake in Seistan keeps both meanings waiting in its water.

→ Related: Zoroaster · Ahura Mazda · Angra Mainyu · Avesta · The Magi · Zurvan · Naqsh E Rostam · The Parsis · Persepolis · Ostanes · Harran · Sasanian Iranian Wisdom Tradition · Mithraic Mysteries · The Mandaeans