The prominent monotheism of Zoroaster’s instruction is evidently exasperated by an articulated dualism: the Wise Lord has an adversary, Ahriman, who epitomises the rule of wickedness, and whose supporters, having uninhibitedly picked him, likewise are abhorrent. This moral dualism is established in the Zoroastrian cosmology. He showed that first and foremost there was a gathering of the two spirits, who were allowed to pick – in the expressions of the Gathas- – “life or not life.” This unique decision brought forth a decent and a malevolent standard.
Comparing to the previous is a Kingdom of Justice and Truth; to the last mentioned, the Kingdom of the Lie (Druj), populated by the daevas, the detestable spirits (initially conspicuous old Indo-Iranian divine beings). Monotheism, in any case, beats the cosmogonic and moral dualism since Ahura Mazda is father of the two spirits, who were isolated into the two contradicted standards just through their decision and choice. The Wise Lord, together with the amesha spentas, will finally vanquish the soul of fiendishness: this message, suggesting the finish of the astronomical and moral dualism, appears to establish Zoroaster’s primary religious change.
His monotheistic arrangement settle the old strict dualism. The dualist standard, in any case, returns in an intense frame in a later period, after Zoroaster. It is accomplished just to the detriment of Ahura Mazda, by then called Ohrmazd, who is conveyed down to the level of his rival, Ahriman.
Toward the get-go, the world was isolated into the territory of the great and of the insidiousness. Between these, each man will undoubtedly choose. He is free and should pick either the Wise Lord and his lead or Ahriman, the Lie. The same is valid for the other worldly creatures, who are great or awful as indicated by their decisions. From man’s opportunity of choice it takes after that he is at long last in charge of his destiny. Through his great deeds, the noble individual (ashavan) gains an everlasting prize, in particular uprightness and eternality. He who settles on the lie is denounced by his own inner voice and in addition by the judgment of the Wise Lord and should hope to proceed in the most hopeless type of presence, one pretty much relating to the Christian idea of damnation. As indicated by Avestan conviction, there is no inversion and no deviation conceivable once a man has settled on his choice. Subsequently, the world is partitioned into two unfriendly hinders, whose individuals speak to two warring domains. In favor of the Wise Lord are the settled herders or agriculturists, watching over their cows and living in a clear social request. The devotee of the Lie (Druj) is a stealing traveler, an adversary of methodical farming and creature cultivation.