A Zoroastrian priest in Yazd tends a fire that has burned continuously for centuries. A Kabbalist in Safed writes of the Ein Sof, the infinite light that contracts to make room for creation. These two traditions, separated by geography and language, both place light at the center of their cosmology. But they mean something different by it.
Zohar vs Zoroastrianism compares two systems that share a preoccupation with light, evil, and the structure of the unseen world. The Zohar is the foundational text of Jewish mysticism, a 13th-century commentary on the Torah written in Aramaic. Zoroastrianism is the ancient Persian religion revealed through the prophet Zarathustra, with roots reaching back to the second millennium BCE. Both describe a cosmos divided between luminous and dark forces, but they disagree on where the darkness comes from and what humans are meant to do about it.
What the Zohar Actually Says About Light
The Zohar (ספר הזוהר, “Book of Splendor”) emerged in 13th-century Castile, attributed to the 2nd-century sage Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. Modern scholarship, led by Gershom Scholem in his 1941 work Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, places its authorship with Moses de León (c. 1240–1305). The text circulated in manuscript form among Jewish communities in Spain before being printed in Mantua in 1558.
The Zohar’s cosmology begins with the Ein Sof (אין סוף, “the Infinite”), a God so utterly transcendent that no attribute can describe it. Creation happens through tzimtzum, a contraction: the Infinite withdraws into itself to create a vacant space where finite existence can occur. Into that space flows a ray of divine light, which passes through ten sefirot (spheres or emanations) before reaching the material world.
The light in the Zohar is not physical. It is divine energy, the substance of God’s own being made accessible. The Zohar describes it as or ein sof (אור אין סוף), the light of the infinite, which must be filtered through vessels. Some vessels break. That breaking, the shevirat ha-kelim, scatters sparks of divine light into the material world, where they become trapped in shells of impurity called klipot (קליפות).
This is where evil enters the Zohar’s system. Evil is not a separate power. It is the residue of divine light that has been shattered and encased. The klipot are like the bark of a tree: they exist only because the light inside them exists. Evil has no independent reality. It is a byproduct of the cosmic accident that made creation possible.
What Zoroastrianism Actually Says About Light
Zoroastrianism begins with a different premise. The prophet Zarathustra (Zoroaster in Greek) received his revelation sometime between 1500 and 1000 BCE, likely in the region of eastern Iran or Central Asia. The oldest texts, the Gathas, are seventeen hymns composed in an archaic Avestan dialect and preserved orally for centuries before being written down.
The central Zoroastrian claim is that the universe is a battlefield between two primordial spirits: Spenta Mainyu (the Holy Spirit, associated with light and truth) and Angra Mainyu (the Destructive Spirit, associated with darkness and the lie). These two are twins, born of Ahura Mazda (the Wise Lord), the supreme deity. Ahura Mazda is all-good and all-knowing, but he is not all-powerful in the present age. He created the world as a trap for Angra Mainyu, a physical arena where the forces of good and evil would meet in direct combat.
Light in Zoroastrianism is physical fire, the visible presence of asha (truth, cosmic order). The Avesta, the Zoroastrian scripture compiled over centuries, prescribes prayers said before a fire. The Yasna liturgy, still performed today, involves the preparation of haoma (a sacred plant juice) and the tending of a ritual fire. Fire temples in Iran and India maintain flames that are never allowed to die. The fire is not a symbol of the divine. It is the divine, made material and accessible.
Evil in Zoroastrianism is a real, independent force. Angra Mainyu is not a broken vessel or a residue of light. He is a conscious being who chose to oppose Ahura Mazda. He created his own army of daevas (demonic beings) and his own realm of darkness. The material world is the stage for their war, and every human action either strengthens one side or the other.
Where the Two Systems Agree
Both traditions share a cosmology organized around light and darkness. Both see the material world as a place of struggle. Both assign humans a critical role in that struggle.
The Zohar teaches that every mitzvah (commandment) performed with proper intention repairs a broken vessel and releases a trapped spark. The tikkun olam (repair of the world) is the human task: to gather the scattered light and restore it to its source. The Zoroastrian Fravashi (guardian spirit) tradition holds that each person chooses between truth and the lie, and that choice determines the fate of the cosmos. Good thoughts, good words, good deeds — the Zoroastrian ethical triad — advance the cause of light.
Both traditions also share a concern with purity. The Zohar’s klipot attach themselves to impurity: corpses, menstrual blood, semen, certain foods. Contact with these requires ritual purification. Zoroastrian purity laws are equally elaborate. The Videvdad, a Zoroastrian legal text, prescribes detailed procedures for handling the dead, who are considered the most potent source of impurity because they have been touched by Angra Mainyu’s corruption.
Where They Diverge
The fundamental disagreement is about the origin of evil. For the Zohar, evil is an accident. It has no will, no intention, no independent existence. It is the shadow cast by the breaking of the vessels, and it will be absorbed back into the light when the repair is complete. The Zohar’s God is ultimately responsible for everything, including the evil that exists in the world, because the breaking was a necessary stage in creation.
For Zoroastrianism, evil is a choice. Angra Mainyu chose to oppose Ahura Mazda. The daevas chose to follow him. Humans choose which side to serve. Ahura Mazda is not responsible for evil; he is fighting against it. The war will end when Frashokereti (the final renovation) arrives, when the forces of good defeat Angra Mainyu and the world is purified. But that victory is not guaranteed. It depends on human cooperation.
This difference has practical consequences. The Zohar’s practitioner works inward, repairing the self and the divine structure through contemplation, prayer, and the study of Torah. The Zoroastrian practitioner works outward, maintaining ritual purity, tending the fire, and performing acts of charity and truth. The Zohar’s evil is something to be dissolved. Zoroastrianism’s evil is something to be fought.
How the Traditions Influenced Each Other
The question of influence is delicate. Jewish communities lived under Persian rule from the 6th century BCE, when Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon and allowed the exiled Jews to return to Jerusalem. The Persian period left clear marks on Jewish thought: the figure of Satan as an accuser, the concept of a resurrection of the dead, and the angelology that appears in the Book of Daniel all show Zoroastrian parallels.
Scholars have debated whether the Zohar’s dualism owes anything to Zoroastrianism. The 19th-century historian Wilhelm Bousset argued in The Antichrist Legend that Jewish apocalyptic literature absorbed Zoroastrian ideas about cosmic conflict. The 20th-century scholar Geo Widengren went further, claiming that the Zohar’s sefirot system was a Jewish adaptation of Zoroastrian Amesha Spentas (the holy immortals, divine emanations of Ahura Mazda).
The evidence is circumstantial. The Amesha Spentas are six beings who serve Ahura Mazda: Vohu Manah (Good Mind), Asha Vahishta (Best Truth), Khshathra Vairya (Desirable Dominion), Spenta Armaiti (Holy Devotion), Haurvatat (Wholeness), and Ameretat (Immortality). They resemble the sefirot in number and function: both are emanations of the divine, both mediate between the transcendent source and the material world, both can be mapped onto the human body and the cosmos.
But the Zohar’s sefirot are not beings. They are aspects of God, channels through which divine energy flows. The Amesha Spentas are distinct entities, created by Ahura Mazda, who act as his agents. The resemblance may be a case of parallel development rather than direct borrowing. Both traditions faced the same theological problem: how to connect an infinite God to a finite world. Both solved it by positing a chain of intermediaries.
Common Misconceptions
The Zohar is not a single book. It is a library of texts, composed over decades by multiple authors, edited and expanded by later hands. The core of the Zohar is a commentary on the Torah, but it includes sections on the sefirot, the soul, reincarnation, and the mystical meaning of the Hebrew letters.
Zoroastrianism is not extinct. The Parsis of India and the Zoroastrians of Iran continue to practice the religion. The Yazd fire temple in Iran has maintained its flame since 470 CE. The global population is estimated at 100,000 to 200,000 people.
Neither tradition is purely dualist. The Zohar’s dualism is qualified: evil has no independent existence. Zoroastrianism’s dualism is qualified: Angra Mainyu is not equal to Ahura Mazda, and he will be defeated at the end of time. Both traditions affirm the ultimate victory of good.
The Zohar and Zoroastrianism do not share a single text. No Zoroastrian text is quoted in the Zohar. No Zoharic passage appears in the Avesta. The parallels are structural, not textual.
FAQ
Is the Zohar’s light the same as the Zoroastrian fire? No. The Zohar’s light is divine energy, a metaphor for God’s presence. Zoroastrian fire is a physical substance, the visible form of truth and order.
Did Zoroastrianism influence the Zohar directly? There is no direct evidence. The parallels are likely mediated through Jewish apocalyptic literature and Hellenistic philosophy, both of which absorbed Persian ideas.
Which tradition is older? Zoroastrianism. The Gathas date to the second millennium BCE. The Zohar was written in the 13th century CE.
Can a person practice both? The traditions are exclusive in their claims. The Zohar is a Jewish text, and its practice requires adherence to Jewish law. Zoroastrianism requires acceptance of Zarathustra as the prophet and Ahura Mazda as the supreme deity.
The Thread That Connects Them
The Zohar and Zoroastrianism both ask the same question: why does light exist in a world that contains so much darkness? They answer differently. The Zohar says the darkness is an illusion, a shell that will crack open when enough light is gathered. Zoroastrianism says the darkness is real, and the fire must be kept burning until the last shadow falls.
Both answers have consequences for how a person lives. The Zohar’s practitioner studies and prays, trusting that the repair is already happening. The Zoroastrian practitioner tends the fire and speaks the truth, knowing that the outcome depends on what they do next. The two traditions do not agree. But they stand on common ground: the conviction that light matters, and that humans are the ones who must carry it.
For a deeper look at the Zohar’s structure, see our guide to the Kabbalah. To understand the sefirot and their Zoroastrian parallels, read about the tree of life. For the full context of Jewish mysticism, explore the Kabbalah vertical hub.