Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 3 Tarsadalomkutatas (Social Science Research)

Years help

  1. 3 2006

Authors help

  1. 3 Jany J.

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Zoroastrian penal law - I: The theory of punishment

100%
Jany J.
Tarsadalomkutatas (Social Science Research)
|
2006
|
vol. 24
|
issue 2
217-233
EN
The first part of a series of articles concerning Zoroastrian penal tradition deals with the theoretical background of legal thinking. According to the Zoroastrian theory of penal law the aim of the punishment was the salvation of the soul of the delinquent, while the idea of compensation of the offended party is also discernable. The crimes and sins called 'winah i ruwanig' affected above all the soul and salvation of the delinquent. By contrast, those misdemeanours which caused harm to third parties, too, were known as 'winah i hamemalan'. The penitence of the delinquent was of crucial importance in light of his afterlife and salvation. The crimes were classified by three different methods, reflecting both religious and political considerations. The former was elaborated in the 'Videvdad' and a priestly work called 'Sayast-ne-sayast', while the latter in a historical writing, 'The Letter of Tansar'. The horror caused by different crimes led to the description of hell in an apocalyptic work, the 'Arda Wiraz Namag'.
2

Zoroastrian penal law II: Substantive law and law of procedure

100%
Jany J.
Tarsadalomkutatas (Social Science Research)
|
2006
|
vol. 24
|
issue 3
359-378
EN
In the first essay concerning Zoroastrian penal legal tradition we established two theories of punishments, one secular and one religious. Basing on these results we now turn to the substantive law and law of procedure. Zoroastrian penal law distinguishes different types of crimes and sins (framan, agrift, oyrist, ardus, khwar, bazay, yat, tanapuhl) according to the severity of each crime. Some of these categories (agrift, oyrist) reflect ancient tradition going back to remote antiquity. The delinquents of the capital crimes were called 'margarzan' (worthy of death) who offended the basic norms of Zoroastrian ethics and ritual or threatened the political interests of the state. Since every crime was enlisted in one of the above categories, they were generic terms. Criminal procedure was either accusatorial or inquisitorial, depending on the nature of each crime. In cases of importance the king passed the judgement, never, however, without the assistance of the priestly class. Jails served to prevent the accused to flee, although he could be released on bail. Punishments were severe, including several types of capital punishment such as crucifixion, stoning, beheading by the sword and burning. As the Syriac Acts of Martyrs show members of non-Zoroastrian minority groups, above all Christians, were prosecuted by the means of criminal law. In the forthcoming third part of the series of essays we examine the impact of modernity on the Zoroastrian legal tradition.
3

Zoroastrian penal law III: the impact of Modernity

100%
Jany J.
Tarsadalomkutatas (Social Science Research)
|
2006
|
vol. 24
|
issue 3
455-467
EN
In the third and last essay concerning Zoroastrian penal law the impact of modernity is the point of interest. After the demolition of a Zoroastrian state in Iran Zoroastrians became the subjects of the Muslim rulers. Following mass conversions Zoroastrianism was now in defence which modified also the role of criminal law in everyday practice. Although the ancient wisdom of Zoroastrianism was maintained during the centuries, the delicate distinctions in criminal terms and legal theory eclipsed. The religious and judicial tradition was embodied and carried on in a literary genre called 'rivayat'. The modern period bears witness to the disappearance of priestly authority in penal law, and the rising of a corporate judging body called 'panchayet' in India. Although these organs still exist today, their relevance in penal jurisdiction has vanished. Nowadays penal law does not play a vital role in debates among Zoroastrians, it was replaced by other important questions of modernity.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.