The generally most clear-cut accounts of Zoroastrian traditional views of dogs come from Fargard 13 and 14 of the Videvdad, a collection of moral guidances, pseudo-legal judgments, etc. Fargard 13 begins with the two verses:
[Thus spake Zarathustra:] “Which is the good creature among the creatures of the Spenta Mainyu that from midnight till the sun is up goes and kills thousands of the creatures of the Angra Mainyu?”
Ahura Mazda answered: “The dog with the prickly back, with the long and thin muzzle, the dog Vanghapara, which evil-speaking people call the Duzaka; this is the good creature among the creatures of Spenta Mainyu that from midnight till the sun is up goes and kills thousands of the creatures of the Angra Mainyu.”
…
“Which is the evil creature among the creatures of the Angra Mainyu that from midnight till the sun is up goes and kills thousands of the creatures of the Spenta Mainyu?
Ahura Mazda answered: ‘The daeva Zairimyangura, which evil-speaking people call the Zairimyaka, this is the evil creature among the creatures of the Angra Mainyu that from midnight till the sun is up goes and kills thousands of the creatures of the Spenta Mainyu.
Now, “prickly back” and “long and thin muzzle” might bring a slightly odd “dog” to mind, and Middle Persian literature (Bundahishn 19:28) confirms our suspicion:
The hedgehog is created in opposition to the ant which carries off grain, as it says, that the hedgehog, every time that it voids urine into an ant’s nest, will destroy a thousand ants; when the grain-carrier travels over the earth it produces a hollow track; when the hedgehog travels over it the track goes away from it, and it becomes level.
Meanwhile, Rivayat 218 speaks of the “good hedgehod” and the “evil tortoise”. The evil name Zairimyangura is glossed in West’s 120-year old translation as “probably meaning” devourer of greens – a destroyer of Ahura Mazda’s lush creation? Regardless, the Videvdad’s Fargard 13 covers the more canine varieties of “dog” as well. It’s the evil and impure creations of Angra Mainyu. These are, for example, vermin and poisonous arachnids. On the one hand, it is considered a service to good to destroy such a creature. On the other hand, doing so risks polluting the Earth. Dogs, hedgehogs and “water-dogs”, i.e., otters (the entirety of Fargard 14 is dedicated to a long list of increasingly implausible and unfeasible trials the killer of an otter must undergo).
Being considered creations of Ahura Mazda, they presumably kill the evil creatures in the most ritually pure way possible; one may compare this to the Zoroastrian practice of burial by exposure, letting scavengers pick off the unclean flesh (see e.g. Fargard 5:1-3.) Cf also Bundahishn 21:
Also other beasts and birds are created all in opposition to noxious creatures, as it says, that when the birds and beasts are all in opposition to noxious creatures and wizards, etc. … 23. Regarding the white falcon it says, that it kills the serpent with wings. 24. The magpie (kaskinak) bird kills the locust, and is created in opposition to it. 25. The Kahrkas, dwelling in decay, which is the vulture, is created for devouring dead matter (nasai); so also are the crow (valak) and the mountain kite.
This is why dogs, among other animals are virtuous in Zoroastrian thought. I’ve talked about dogs already in dogs-in-islam , and in the Qu’ran, they’re presented in a positive connotation. Hadiths are more criticizing of them. Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, two of the most (or even the two most) widely accepted collections of Hadith among Sunni Muslims of various schools, both attribute via either Abu Hurayrah or Ibn ‘Umar (in the case of Muslim, both), the quote to the Prophet:
“Whoever keeps a dog, a qiraat [literally, a recitation] from his good deeds will be deducted every day, except a dog for farming or herding livestock.”
Let’s look at Near East skepticism towards dog.
In the Talmudic Bava Kamma 79.b it is glossed:
…Furthermore, one may not raise pigs anywhere, and a person may not raise a dog unless it is tied with chains. …
The baraita [Jewish oral tradition] continues: Just as the Sages said that one may not raise small domesticated animals i.e., sheep and goats, so too they said that one may not raise small undomesticated animal. Rabbi Yishmael says: One may raise village dogs, cats, monkeys, and genets, because they serve to clean the house of mice and other vermin.
While some rationalize “tied with chains” to suggest restraining in order not to frighten people, I suspect it is meant to indicate the animal’s status as a servant or labourer. We may trace the roots of this scepticism all the way back to Leviticus 11:16-27:
26 “‘Every animal that does not have a divided hoof or that does not chew the cud is unclean for you; whoever touches the carcass of any of them will be unclean.
27 Of all the animals that walk on all fours, those that walk on their paws are unclean for you; whoever touches their carcasses will be unclean till evening.
Dogs, of course, walk on paws – as do cats- and hence should be unclean by this decree. But mentioning “carcasses” just as in the more famous 11:26, suggests that it refers to consumption, and thus there is considerable ambiguity as to whether the mere ownership of a dog is something to be sceptical of. But Leviticus 11:29-30:
Of the animals that move along the ground, these are unclean for you: the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon.
More on dogs and Zoroastrianism:
I (1-7). The dog of Ohrmazd and the dog of Ahriman.
(a. 1-4). Holiness of the dog Vanghapara (‘the hedgehog’).
(b. 5-7). Hatefulness of the dog Zairimyangura (‘the tortoise’).
II (8-16). The several kinds of dogs. Penalties for the murder of a dog.
III (17-19) On the duties of the shepherd’s dog and the house-dog.
IV (20-38). On the food due to the dog.
V (29-38). On the mad dog and the dog diseased; how they are to be kept, and cured.
VI (39-40). On the excellence of the dog.
VII (41-43). On the wolf-dog.
VIII (44-48). On the virtues and vices of the dog.
IX (49-50). Praise of the dog.
X (51-54). The water-dog.
Leave a Reply