Proto-Indo-Iranian religion was the religion of the Indo-Iranian peoples and includes topics such as the mythology, legendry, folk tales, and folk beliefs of early Indo-Iranian culture. Reconstructed concepts include the universal force *Há¹Âta- (Sanskrit rta, Avestan asha), the sacred plant and drink *sawHma- (Sanskrit Soma, Avestan Haoma) and gods of social order such as *mitra- (Sanskrit Mitra, Avestan and Old Persian Mithra, ') and *bðaga- (Sanskrit Bhaga, Avestan and Old Persian Baga). Proto-Indo-Iranian religion is an archaic offshoot of Indo-European religion.
Indo-Iranian languages include three subgroups: the Indo-Aryan languages (including the Dardic languages), the Iranian languages (east and west), and the Nuristani languages. From these various and dispersed cultures, a set of common ideas may be reconstructed from which a common, unattested proto-Indo-Iranian source may be deduced.
When Vedic texts were the oldest surviving evidence of early Indo-European-speaking peoples, it was assumed that these texts preserved aspects of Proto-Indo-European culture with particular accuracy. Many ethnologists hoped to unify Indo-Iranian, Celtic, Norse, Greek, Germanic and Roman into a Proto-Indo-European religion. Max Müller believed that Indo-Iranian religion began as sun worship. Georges Dumézil stressed the tripartite social system of Indo-European religion and society. Later scholarship has moved away from considering all these religions near-identical.
Some beliefs developed in different ways as cultures separated and evolved. For example, the word 'daeva,' which appears in the Avesta, also bears a linguistic relationship to the Sanskrit word 'deva,' referring to one of the principal classes of gods, as well as other related words throughout the Indo-European traditions. Indeed, Indra, the greatest of the devas from Vedic literature, is often listed in Zoroastrian texts as one of the greatest of the evil forces, sometimes second only to Angra Mainyu himself. In the traditional Zoroastrian confession of faith as recorded in the Avesta, the rejection of the daevas is one of the most significant qualifiers for a follower of the tradition, alongside worshipping Ahura Mazda and following the teachings of Zarathustra. Similarly, the parallels between the malevolent Vedic Asuras and benevolent Zoroastrian Ahuras are particularly obvious and striking.Varuna, the most powerful of the Asuras, does not directly correspond to Ahura Mazda but shares several traits in common with him, particularly in terms of his role as king among the lesser gods and arbiter of law and morality among mortals. Even as Ahura Mazda rules by and upholds asha, the cosmic moral order, in the Avesta, so too do Varuna and the Asuras uphold the analogous concept of rta in the Vedas.
Sometimes certain myths developed in altogether different ways. The Rig-Vedic Sarasvati is linguistically and functionally cognate with Avestan *Haraxvaitë ÃÂrÃÂduuë Sà «ràAnÃÂhitÃÂ. In the Rig-Veda (6,61,5–7) she battles a serpent called Vritra, who has hoarded all of the Earth's water. In contrast, in early portions of the Avesta, Iranian *Harahvati is the world-river that flows down from the mythical central Mount Hara. But *Harahvati does no battle — she is blocked by an obstacle (Avestan for obstacle: ') placed there by Angra Mainyu.
The pre-Islamic religion of the Nuristani people and extant religion of the Kalash people is significantly influenced by the original religion of the Indo-Iranians, though mostly infused with accretions developed locally from Hinduism.
By way of the comparative method, Indo-Iranian philologists, a variety of historical linguist, have proposed reconstructions of entities, locations, and concepts with various levels of security in early Indo-Iranian folklore and mythology (reconstructions are indicated by the presence of an asterisk). The present section includes both reconstructed forms and proposed motifs from the Proto-Indo-Iranian period, generally associated with the Sintashta culture (2050âÂÂ1900 BCE).
The following is a list of cognate terms that may be gleaned from comparative linguistic analysis of the Rigveda and Avesta. Both collections are from the period after the proposed date of separation (ca. 2nd millennium BCE) of the Proto-Indo-Iranians into their respective Indic Iranian branches.