A Comparative Study of the Notion of “Covenant” in Judaism and Zoroastrianism

In the ancient world, the covenant was a serious agreement that societies attempted to regulate the behavior of individuals and institutions, especially in areas where there was not enough social control in them. Therefore, in the history of religion, the concept of the Covenant is the longstanding concept, which has been emphasized especially in monotheistic religions. The God of the Old Testament sets his own behavior with his servants according to the covenant. The treaty in the Zarathustrianism can be study by the principle of Asha / Artah (Truth) and the practice of Mithra. It is a supernatural law that is one with natural law. This doctrine is considered a metaphysical supporter to all treaties and then, it has played a decisive role in maintaining the moral and social order. The concept of these words and their reflection in these religions are the issues that have been investigated in this study. Despite the considerable differences between these oldest religions in Western Asia, they seem to regard these doctrines as fundamental and have shown it with various shapes and symbols. The essential differences in this regard, are related to the origin of the Covenant, its inclusion, repetition and being exclusion or graduality and significant similarities related to the concept, importance and educational aspect of them. This research has been done by comparative and analytical method with the aim of understanding of this common doctrine to enhance mutual understanding between religions.   If we consider the covenant and the covenant as the axis of the relationship between God and man, all events, as well as human affairs, are interpreted on the same basis. However, this concept can be considered in terms of similarities and differences in two different fields. First, the Covenant and treaty have a single meaning in both religions. In both of them, with the closure of the treaty, the parties are obligated to perform their duty, and if they fail to do so, they must bear the consequences of it. Second, the covenant that first appeared between God and man has become an interactive model of intercourse between human beings and has become a moral concept and the basis of human communication. Of course, God's covenant with Man is fundamentally different from human contracts. Because firstly, Man and God are not equal parties, on the other hand, God is the leader and the source of that grace and love. In Judaism, there are different views about human freewill. However, in Zoroastrianism, everything is based on man's freewill. Another common point in these two religions is the tradition of salvation. The understanding of salvation in the light of understanding the Covenant is easily possible. In both religions, salvation requires observance of the Covenant with all its aspects, and non-salvation means any violation of the Covenant of any size and extent. Based on what has been said, in the sense of both religions, the covenant or treaty with God is the supreme linkage that has taken place, and this is the origin of the emergence of many customs and habits. The most important difference is that the origin of the treaty in Zoroastrianism is the principle of Asha and Mithra is the guardian of it, but in Judaism, the origin of his covenant is God, and there are no rules beyond him and God is the guardian of that. Historically, the belief in the Covenant and its beliefs in the Zoroastrian religion is roughly stable, while undergoing radical transformations Judaism. In terms of modeling, in both religions, this kind of relationship between man and God affects the relationships between human being. In this way, it has found a moral concept, In addition to religious authenticity. Therefore, the covenant between God and Man is the source of morality, so, the human morality has a superlative guarantee.