Scholars have learned to recognize which parts have remained static and why, and which have adapted to the times. Even then, there are other versions of the same narrative that show different lines of oral transmission. Only when an oral text is finally committed to writing is it possible to discern the length of its transmission and the various historical eras it may represent. And in both cases, one of the problems concerns exegesis in other words, how to interpret or attribute meaning to oral texts that are literally “moving” through time and making themselves relevant to the different social, political, and religious eras they pass through. In both cases, the idea of orality and how to deal with it is an issue that demands attention. Arguably, the problems of studying modern Zoroastrianism are not dissimilar to those associated with the study of Zoroastrianism in the ancient world.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |