Mae'n bwysig iawn i gweithio'r awtfyrdd yn ddwy i ni'n gweithio'n gweithio'r Ffelly Philip Crenbroeck. Ffelly Crenbroeck wedyn o'i bwysig gennych 1988 a 1996, ac wedi gweithio'n gwneud i ffnodd i'n gwneud i'r ffordd, ac yn gweithio'n gweithio'r amser wedi'i gwneud i'r gweithio'r gweithio'r beithio'r gweithio'r amser. Mrs Shanaz Munshi, ond y bwysig, Llyfrgell, Arastrionism, Parsee yn ymdodd yn ymdodd. Rydyn ni'n ymdodd y ffost, y ffost ymdodd yw'r ysgrifennu cyfnodd yn ymdodd, yn ymdodd, yn ymdodd, yn ymdodd, yn ymdodd, yn ymdodd. I think of Professor Crenbroke as a sort of pioneer of that particular methodology which many of us have continued afterwards and indeed he's published widely on minority Iranian religions, particularly the al-Ahak and the Yazidis. So I think I'm just going to turn over to him now and please join me in welcoming him again. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed, Dr Stewart. Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to start by congratulating the organisers of this exhibition, especially of course Dr Stewart, which also Professor Williams and Professor Hinzer, for this exhibition and this conference and congratulate them on the success in carrying out the heroic task of realizing an enterprise like that. Drawing attention to a religion to which, in my view, we may well owe the very concept of religion as we understand it in the West today. Zoroastrianism it seems may have been the first social movement in history to claim identity on the basis of adherence to beliefs rather than tribal or traditional adherence and practices. The individual is invited to join a community of men and women whose worldview Dinah, as Professor Hinzer already mentioned, whose worldview differentiates them from those around them. That is new, that is not known before that in the Indo-Iranian tradition and I can't think of any tradition outside the Indo-Iranian area where such a community of believers would have existed. If one joined that group and pronounced a formal profession of faith, one belonged to what must originally have been a novel social category which later came to be called a Dean, a religion in our modern western sense of the world word. That refers to ancient practice, to ancient ideas, it's nothing to do with modern ideas about conversion and so on. That is a matter for the Zoroastrians themselves to decide. But in the early days we see Zoroastrianism maybe being the first religion in our sense. But that's as we shall see is not all. This new worldview encompassed several other postionates that followers of the Abrahamic religions have come to take for granted but without which their beliefs might not have developed as they did. And several of those key beliefs have to do with looking back and that's what we're talking about. I call this return to the past but I mean of course looking back. Then Zoroastrianism then as the late lamented Professor Mary Boyce often said is worth studying. But then what we mean when we speak of Zoroastrianism, once upon a time the concept conjured up an image of a static, undifferentiated and essentially unchanging system of beliefs and observances which started with the prophet Zaratustra and essentially continues down to our day. Now one can certainly think of Zoroastrianism in this way. It makes sense but it does mean that one loses another perspective namely that of development and change which was probably at least as significant for the history of Zaratustra. One of the great questions facing the modern student of Zoroastrianism is precisely that of the balance between continuity and change of the long history of the diner which came into being because of the message of Zaratustra's pitama. This question is all the more intriguing because for approximately the first 2000 years of its existence that religion was transmitted by word of mouth in a context of laymen consulting priests who had undergone a rigorous training but could not fall back on a solid body of written exegesis. They couldn't consult books. They had to trust to their combination of religious knowledge and their common sense of members of their own period in history. Both elements of continuity and development, ladies and gentlemen, can be aptly illustrated by examining the question of looking back. While the traditional orientalist informed by Christian or Islamic culture may have expected Zoroastrians of all ages to have looked back first and foremost to the period of the founder of their faith, I hope to show this afternoon that the reality was in fact more complex and more interesting. Of course when one thinks about looking back in the context of religion the question arises to what extent looking back is common to all religions. Religious teachings generally originated in the past and most religions tend to look back in some ways. Still a closer look shows that looking back can serve a range of different purposes and each case needs to be examined individually. Some religions look forward to an ideal future which represents the return to an ideal primeval time whose perfection was disrupted by a fall from grace which humanity must now strive to restore. You may recognise many forms of Christianity here, Paradise and the end of time, as well as Shiite Islam. This, looking back to the past as a blueprint for the future, is also found in several periods of the history of Zoroastrianism, but as we shall see it's not the only reason the Zoroastrians had for looking back to the past. The past could also be seen as a time when religious knowledge was still intact and which therefore needs to be studied so as to help one define one's religion of the present. There again different questions may be asked. One may wish to know about rules and rules and the workings of the church so to speak when the religion was still in its prime. One may have questions regarding the original teachings and the validity of religious leadership wondering to what extent it's representative of the original teachings which brings the whole question of religious authority into the equation. Alternatively, one may look for religious inspiration in the early teachings of the faith which can be done either with a view to renewing one's current religion and modernising it or in order to prove the orthodoxy or one's traditional beliefs. All those reasons for looking back can be found in the history of Zoroastrianism. Many, many groups have looked back but their ideas of the past were as different as their motives for studying it. Now, ladies and gentlemen, in my view, the greatest looker backer of all was probably the prophet Zaratustra himself. Zaratustra, who started out as a priest of perhaps somewhat conservative, cattle-reading community sometime around or before 1000 BCE, was forced by circumstances to look back. His community, it seems, had settled in a territory whose culture was dominated by cognate people, whose language and practices were comprehensible to Zaratustra and his followers, but seemed to them utterly misguided. Zaratustra's songs or garthas have long been thought of as being largely incomprehensible or at least very mysterious, but a number of recent publications, including the work of Professor Hintzer, shows that if we focus on what can be known rather than on an unknowable, we can in fact infer a great deal of information from them. Zaratustra's community, when I realised, was involved in a very real conflict with members of a related culture who were more powerful than they, but whom they regarded first of all as deceitful, not righteous, and amongst whom there was, I quote, no decent life for the cattle breeder, end of quote, Ysler 29.5. Zaratustra, who was a highly trained priest, sought to understand this conflict in religious terms and arrived at a number of very stapling insights. Now, in order to understand Zaratustra's teaching, we do need to take into account that he lived not in 2013, but in a very different culture from ours. As has been very clearly shown by Keanu Shrezzanya, early Zoroastrianism clearly distinguishes between two times, as they call it, which I would call two concurrent modes of reality. One, called limited time, refers to our everyday reality with good, alternating with bad, heat with cold, etc. That is to the dynamic, ever-changing, time-bound reality we all experience. But underlying that mundane perception of the world was unlimited time, or timeless time, as Rezzanya calls it, which represents a parallel, unchanging, absolute reality that's distinct from, but nevertheless plays a role in our everyday affairs. One might compare the two to our actual daily personality, our daily life, on the one hand, and our soul to the other. The former being dynamic, changing all the time, and the latter, the soul, I expect being more or less unchanging. I don't know very much about the soul, but I think that's the idea. Absolute reality, remote, though it is, could be accessed by an able priest such as Zaratustra, who was thus capable of being in touch with absolute truth or the divine, if you prefer. Now my own recent work on the garther suggests that this distinction between an unchanging archetypal mode of being and a mundane one was vital to Zaratustra's thinking and is a key to his interpretation of the reality of his day. By looking back to the traditions of his own people, he sought to understand how it was possible for a far-from-righteous group to dominate his own righteous followers and make life impossible for them. Now Zaratustra, as you all know, connects this antagonistic state of affairs with the distinction between two groups of supernatural beings, the divers who appear to have been as anthropomorphic, unpredictable and self-willed as their Greek and Roman counterparts, theoi and dei. These were gods whose attitudes inspired the morals and behaviour of Zaratustra's opponent. But Zaratustra's group, on the other hand, predominantly worshipped the so-called Ahuras, who, as I've argued elsewhere, were originally personifications of what we would call abstract concepts, as well as natural phenomena such as the sun. All of these personifications were bound to the laws of truth or righteousness, Asha. And just as truth underlies all manifestations of what's good, absolute reality or timeless time has been present from pre-eternity, is present now in our time of trials and tribulations and will still exist when the problems of life have been overcome and limited time will no longer play a role. Now, Zaratustra, stressing the superiority of what one might call the moral Ahuras over the self-willed divers, regarded all abstract qualities that could help the righteous as being embodied by good Ahuric divine beings, until then some beings like contract had been personified, Mithra. But Zaratustra seems to call on all the qualities that he needs in his struggle against evil. These good Ahura, Ahura divine beings, owed their origin to the greatest Ahura of all, Lord Wisdom, or Ahura Mazda. Furthermore, and that's very important, in order to play a role in this physical world, the qualities of those spiritual divinities had to be embodied, that is to say internalised, by human beings who opened themselves up to them. Only humans, it seems, could act freely in our physical world, and in the battle against evil the divinities needed them as much as they needed divine inspiration and guidance. Now, ladies and gentlemen, in later Zaratustra sources, there's absolutely no doubt that Ahura Mazda is a creator. But, as some of you know, Jean Kellence has argued with some justification that this does not appear to be the case in the Gathos. Ahura Mazda nid pas ond diw Creador, which has provoked strong reactions among many students of Zoroastrianism, including some of those present here. But my own work suggests that whenever the verb da to create titami is used for Ahura Mazda's creative activity, the word consistently refers to laying down the fundamental laws of existence called data. Later the word data came to be used for a law, but it could also be called a mantra, a sacred word to bring something into being. It could also refer the data to the creation of prototypes such as the soul of the cow and the Amishaspanthas, or, if you like, archangels, although that is always difficult. In other words, Ahura Mazda created beings that essentially belong to timeless time. And Ahura Mazda himself, moreover, as far as I can see, is not normally represented in the Gathos as intervening directly in the affairs of our time or reality. He belongs even more strictly to the sphere of timeless time than the other divine beings which he created. Still his laws or concepts may be actualised through these other divine beings who were capable of acting, in a sense, in our world, and who represent Ahura Mazda. Zarathustra's teaching clearly implies that before our time began, that is, in the beginning, pa o ru ye, which I take to mean just that and nothing esoteric, in the beginning, the fundamental laws of existence were laid down by Ahura Mazda and all was ideal for a brief time. Think of the big bang and the fact that the laws of nature were established during the first second, nothing to do with each other but similar maybe. At first everything was all-deal but Ahura Mazda's laws were just that, laws that can either be obeyed or ignored. Although the eternal structure is sound, in other words, it's up to human beings to realise its perfection or not as the cash may be. Humans, of course, must understand these laws in order to be righteous and be part of the world of righteousness and go to heaven. And choose to follow them. The divers and their followers did neither and Zarathustra's claim is that after the beginning the world was damaged by the divers and their followers. Moreover, Zarathustra fears that these powers of evil may damage the world a second time in his day and exalts his own Ahura worshipping group to resist this, knowing that the ultimate reality to which the world must one day return is the one established by Ahura Mazda. Ahura Mazda, in 2018-11, prays that Ahura Mazda may teach him the mantras, the sacred words, teachings or commands through which, quote, the world will be as it was at the beginning. End of quote. Now, what is so important in my view, ladies and gentlemen, is that this may well be the first time in the history of religion that a consistent world view was proposed implying that the world we live in is not as God or the source of existence wishes it to be. And that it's up to humans to embody the virtues represented by the holy beings who emanated from this source of existence and thereby to bring the world back into harmony with its fundamental laws of existence. Of course, we have Adam and Eve in Christianity Judaism, but it's not quite as consistent and clear as in the Gathas if one reads them simply without interpreting too much. So, in other words, Zaratustra claimed that everything had been ideal in the beginning, but it was because of misguided divinities and the followers that it elapsed into a state that was very different from the one intended by Ahura Mazda. Mazda himself was too holy to interfere directly, and the Gathas indicate that the divine beings who can help can only do so if their qualities are embodied by human followers. So, Zaratustra, if I'm right, was the first religious leader who came to the conclusion that we now take for granted, but without which, if you think about it, neither Christianity nor Islamic theology would make much sense. Instead of believing as older religions often did, the world was, as the gods had decreed, Zaratustra came to the conclusion it was not, and that the current conditions of our world are the result of wicked misinterpretations of the truth and needed to be made whole again, which could only be achieved if humans lent the Ahuric beings their physical power. Men and women, in other words, needed to choose to embrace the diner proposed by Zaratustra. Zaratustra expected that an ideal existence would come into being when the forces of evil in the form of the worshipers of the deceitful divers had been overcome. That ideal state would mirror Zaratustra's idea of an ideal world in the beginning. As we shall see, the pattern of looking back, so as to elucidate the future, repeatedly played a role in the history of Zoroastrianism as it does in many other religions. Now, Zaratustra's age must logically have been followed by a long period, if you lived around 1000 BCE, during which the founder's teachings gave rise to the formation of a religious community that, uniquely for early Indian and Iranian cultures, was able to spread. It could travel beyond the confines of a single people or tribe. Since, as we find in Ysrana 39.2, it would accept believers wherever they came from provided their sherds Zaratustra's diner. We have no accurate information as to what happened exactly during those dark centuries, but it's clear that many of the developments that characterised this period are reflected to some extent in what we call the young of Esther. That is in the text that continued to evolve as to language and contents, probably in my view until Achaemenid times in 500 BCE. So, what happened to the question of looking back? It's important to stress that Zaratustra's revelation appears to have been regarded by the Zoroastrian community as the only source of religious knowledge. He talked, Zaratustra talked to Ahura Mazda, and this is how the world can know anything. That in turn gave rise to the belief that all knowledge had been revealed to Zaratustra. So, the members of this newly developing religion expressed their joint veneration for Ahura Mazda and his prophet by looking back on the one hand to the time of creation, but also, and more particularly, to a time when Ahura Mazda tut Zaratustra the truth. The confession of faith says, as Ahura Mazda tut Zaratustra, at all discussions, at all meetings at which Mazda and Zaratustra are conversed, even as Zaratustra rejected the authorities of the divas, so I also reject as a Mazda worshipper and support of Zaratustra the authority of the divas, even as he, Roger Zaratustra rejected it. So, the community started looking back perhaps more to Zaratustra than to the beginning, whereas Zaratustra looked back to the period of creation. This goes on because as the period when Zaratustra was in contact with God preceded into the remote past, one has the impression that expectations about the end of time came to be predicted further into the future. Legends developed about the events leading up to the end of time, which depict a sequence of events that was a mirror image of that of creation. Now, since Zaratustra played such a key road in communicating the truth to the world, it was apparently felt that he should also be prominently represented at the end of time. But the problem was that Zaratustranism does not teach reincarnation and the resurrection of all the dead, which does occur, will occur according to Zaratustran mythology, but it was expected to take place when the process leading to the end of time was already well advanced, so Zaratustra could not play as a role as an initiator of those events. The solution that was found was to have implications for Christianity as well as Arustranism. A legend developed claiming that Zaratustra's seed was preserved in a lake and in the fullness of time a virgin would bathe there and give birth to a saviour who miraculously is Zaratustra's son. Native speculation came to believe that three such saviours would appear before the end of time, each at the end of a long period of decline. When the authors or transmitted of the Young of Eastern Text looked back, they still saw Zaratustra as a pivotal figure in the history of their religion. But curiously, this appears not to be the case in the Iranian sources that reflect the next stage in the history of Zaratustranism, that is the Achaemenid inscriptions which begin under the reign of Darius I, 521-484 BCE. Now, when Darius and his successors, the sovereigns of a new empire, took back, it was to the recent past and not least to their own great exploits.  Now, there are good grounds for the assumption that the Achaemenids were at least profoundly influenced by Zaratustranism from the time of Darius I onwards. We don't find a single mention of the prophet in the inscriptions. Pierre Briand has drawn attention to a single seal which Professor Canterra has just shown this morning, that is inscriptions in Aramaic script with a name which Briand reads as Zaratustres and he may well be right. But one seal, one swallow doesn't make a summer, one seal can hardly be taken as evidence of a strong tendency to look back to the time of the prophet. But although the fact that there is no mention of the Zaratustre has led to many speculations that the early Achaemenids were not Zaratustrans at all, which for reasons given elsewhere are regarded as intenable, but the true explanation may be that all those Zaratustranism became the religious of choice for the Achaemenid elite and gradually for the people generally. The nobility was not overly preoccupied with the founder of that faith or with its early history. So if we accept the early Achaemenids were indeed Zaratustrans or on the way to becoming that, does that mean that the founder of the religion was no longer felt to be relevant or was he just not very relevant to the majesty of the Achaemenid kings? Interestingly, when we look at the Greek sources, we find that Zaratustres' name in its Greek versions, Zorasta, crops up for the first time in the works of two Greek authors of the 5th century BCE, that is precisely at the time when one would expect Zorastranism to have been in the process of becoming dominant in western Iran, namely in the work of Xanthus of Lidia, in the Lidiaka, and of Plato in the first Assybiades. Plato has the following to say about him. At 14 years of age he, that is the king's son, is handed over to the royal school masters as they are termed. These are four chosen men reputed to be the best among the Persians of a certain age and one of them is the wisest, another justest, a third the most temperate and a fourth the most valiant. The first instructs him in the majornism of Zorasta, the son of Oromasus, which is the worship of the gods and teaches him also the duties of his royal office. Clearly, the Greeks can only have learned about this figure, Zorasta, the son of Oromasus from Iranians. They weren't clairvoyant, they can't have made it up. The fact that Zorasta's name is mentioned in the works of two Greek authors of the 5th century BCE, or strongly suggest, I would think, that the Persians' new preference for the Zorastian tradition had generated a great deal of discourse about religion and that Zaratustra did indeed play a key role there, which in turn suggests that many ordinary believers were more interested in looking back to the early days of their religion than their royal masters. No, Zaratustra stressed, as you all know, that a righteous person does not necessarily meet with success and happiness in this world. But that part of his teaching does not appear to have been taken on board by the Achaemenids, whose inscriptions state that they owe their position to Ahura Mazda because they were so righteous. That comfortable view of the world came to an abrupt end when Alexander the accursed, perhaps known better to you as Alexander the Great, defeated the Achaemenid Empire. When the Zorastians looked back after the second half of the 4th century BCE, they saw that a good period had given way to a bad one. Given that they'd always been taught that God had supported the Achaemenids because they, and obviously their religion was so righteous, this new state of affairs needed an explanation. Zorastians who believed that God rewarded the righteous could hardly accept that God had switched the legions from Zorastianism to Greek cults. An answer was found that involved a novel way of understanding the past of looking back, if you like, which was to influence a range of other religions, notably Judaism, but others as well. This new view of history implies that history follows a preordained course and that good periods will inevitably be followed by a time of decline until things have become so bad that a saviour is needed to restore the world to a more or less ideal condition after which another period of decline can be expected to follow. Those preordained periods came to be thought of as lasting 1,000 years, and these speculations gave rise to a view of history now known as millennialism, thinking in periods of 1,000 years, which plays a role in several religions as well as Zorastianism. Such myths may have already existed in later Achaemenid times, but they appear to have acquired a particular significance after Alexander. According to Plutarch, 45-125 CE, who cites the opompous 4th century BCE, the magens believed that a series of periods of 1,000 years would succeed each other in which the good and the evil gods would dominate alternately. In other words, here again current religious problems were solved by proposing a different view of the past. At this stage, in the history of Zorastianism, ladies and gentlemen, I unfortunately have to skip two important periods, those of Alexander's successors, the seducers, and of the Parthians, because in spite of the very valuable efforts of Dr Curtis, among others, we still don't know enough about the Parthians to make any pronouncements. It seems likely that the Parthian successors, the Sasanians, did their best to make sure that nobody would look back to their immediate predecessors of Parthians, but that's another matter. We're on firmer ground with the Sasanians who ruled Iran from, I hope I'm right, to 124 until around 650 CE. To understand the development in their view of history, we need to consider a few points. Firstly, in a culture where the legitimacy of the king was regarded as a key consideration, the Sasanians had succeeded to the throne through a military victory, which in itself was not sufficient to warrant acceptance by the Iranian people. The Sasanians and their councillors successfully solved this problem by means of a propaganda campaign based on two main points, both of which involved the construction of an appropriate view of the past. The Sasanians claimed to be the legitimate successors to the Achaemenids including an improbable genealogy, which Professor Darioi also referred to, but it was apparently enough to satisfy the people, not least because, after all, the Sasanians held the power. Secondly, they presented themselves as the champions of true Zoroastrianism, and that's a new concept, arguing that owing to the incursion of Alexander, the original true form of the religion had been lost, and only the Sasanians had the qualifications to restore the religion to its true form. That is, whereas in fact everything points to the idea that a range of local Zoroastrian cults and of Zoroastrian beliefs must have existed at this time, the Sasanian political and religious leadership looked back to a hypothetical ideal period when a true form, the one true form of the religion existed, thereby introducing a new concept. A striking case, in other words, of interpreting the past according to the requirements of the present, and one that was to have far-reaching consequences because it led to the assumption that a true form of Zoroastrianism could indeed be re-established and some form of centralized authority was needed to achieve this. The Sasanians were good politicians after all. The ideas and questions can be found in the works of the first two great religious leaders of the time, Tansar and Kertair. The first of these, Tansar simply claims that the Sasanians have absolute religious authority because they're so good. In combination with the physical fact that they were also so powerful, apparently that was enough for his time, but a successor, Kertair, who was a dominant force in Iran in the third century CE, the question of religious authority was much more of a challenge, perhaps because two rival religions, Manichaeism and Christianity raised their heads, claiming to be based upon direct divine revelations that had taken place recently enough for them to be able to look back to it. Kertair could not count this with a similar claim for Zoroastrianism. He couldn't just say, oh well, in Zarathustra's revelation, it said so and so. In Sasanian times it seems Zarathustra had become a figure shrouded in legend and mystery, but the ultimate source of religious authority referred to in the Pahrewe book tends to be the ancient teachers, generally Poryot Kishon, rather than Zarathustra. Definitely neither Kertair nor Tansar explicitly refers to Zarathustra as a source of authority. The essential conditions for being a good Zoroastrianism were that one should be, according to the Pahrewe Vendidad, eri o'r Poryot Kishi, which I would loosely translate as belong to Iranian culture and be a follower of the first teachers. However this may be, Kertair's own inscription implied that Kertair really thought that the ultimate authority and all practical questions of religion was his alone. He didn't suffer from an inferiority complex. As Professor Darioe also said, I thought I'd been the only one to think of this, but he did too, in order to prove that like the Christian and Manichaean authorities, he too had some form of direct access to the divine, Kertair claimed that his alter ego had visited heaven and hell. This does not automatically make him a shaman, but the claim I think was in fact intended to underpin his religious authority by claiming direct knowledge of the divine. This question of the authority of the Zoroastrian leadership came up again during the reign of Sharper II, whom we've just seen in Professor Russell's presentation and others. That is a little after the time of Kertair, with the appearance of Adorbar-e-Mahras Pandan, who, according to the tradition, underwent an ordeal by Milton Metal in order to prove his claims to religious authority. In other words, he needed to prove it. In late, as a Sasanian Zoroastrianism, of course, Adorbar came to be regarded as one of the great authoritative figures next to the teachers of old, meaning that the counter was no longer satisfied with the idea that once upon a time there was Aratostra, and that's enough for all of us, they wanted some proof that what people were saying was based on actual experience of something divine. Later, again, a number of priestly lineages of schools, Charles Stagg, emerged, each member of which claimed authority from the founder of his school. All this, as I said, suggests that, in view of the strength and immediacy of rival claims to divine knowledge in Sasanian times, claims of looking back to Zoroastra were no longer felt to be adequate. The unspecific Poryod Keshon carried greater weight, and later there was a tendency to demand that religious leaders have some direct or indirect connection with the divine. The Ordeen of Adorbar di Maras Pandong, and possibly Kere's visit to heaven and hell, became points of reference to which Zoroastrianism could look back in questions of religious authority. Of course, Zoroastra remained a legendary figure, the founder of the faith, for his direct contact with Hora Mazda. Myth developed about his life, which shows that Zoroastrians did indeed look back to the period of Zaratusta, and he was the more or less mythical source of all religious authority and knowledge, but apparently no longer the primary figure to look back to when it came to deciding actual questions in the field of religion. The problem of authority continued to haunt the Sasanian Zoroastrians, and the next problem to crop up was the appearance of Mazda, who died around 524, who challenged the status quo, apparently on the basis of his understanding of the true Zoroastrian teaching as reflected in the Middle Persian translation and exegesis of the Avesta, the Zand. His revolt, which at first enjoyed great popularity, was quashed, and as a result, Khorthrow I banned the laity from studying the Zand. That blocked the road to a sense of empowerment in religious affairs among wide sections of the people and left the priesthood as the only body capable of looking back in search of religious authority. Among further relevant developments under the Sasanians is the increasing role that writing began to play. Writing, of course, affords a fundamentally different view of the past from that based on oral tradition. Since it became possible to consult contemporary sources for the past, objective historical truth slowly came to play a greater role in the Iranian's view of the past. One result of the increasing role of writing and Sasanian culture was that a need came to be felt for a written scripture. Interestingly, when this question was addressed, it was claimed that written versions of the Avesta had already existed in the past, that an ideal past had indeed existed until it was destroyed by Alexander the Accust, who is, you know, guilty of a great many sins. There are good grounds for guarding this as a myth. Such claims clearly represented tendency to legitimise new phenomena by claiming they had already existed in an earlier, better period. That means, incidentally, that when the later Sasanians look back to their past, their understanding of it must have differed considerably from that of their ancestors of future generation earlier. They believed in a past where a true form of Zoroastrianism had existed and where a written Avesta had also been available. All this would not have been known to Zoroastrians in early Sasanian times, I wouldn't have thought. Another important result of the increasing role of writing in Sasanian culture brought with it the desire to have a proper history of Iran, perhaps on the model of Greek histories. It's hard to overestimate the difficulty of achieving a profound transformation, the profound transformation that this required. From a set of narratives that were transmitted already and thus, in a sense, existed side by side set in the same undifferentiated past, people now began to wonder how various traditions, heroic, religious, historical, associated with the past could be fitted together so as to make something like a book, and a book is something, as you well know, that has a linear sequence with a beginning, a middle and an end. Oral tradition does not. I mean not in the same sense. That meant a very different way of looking back. Just imagine having to construct a linear history when all one has is, say, tales about Romeo and Juliet, Santa Claus, narratives from the Old Testament and the history of the Tudors. How does one fit these various storylines into a linear sequence who came first, Romeo or Santa Claus? Still, attempts to look back in a more historical linear way evidently began to be made at some stage in the Sasanian period, and the results of these attempts were referred to, in my view, by the term Fwydai Namag, book of kings, which I believe to have been originally a generic term for the whole range of such texts that tried to combine various traditions, a genre rather than a single word text of Fwydai Osishon army. However, the contents of the Fwydai Namag continued to be regarded as part of the Iranian cultural heritage, an essential part, long after the Sasanian empire had been defeated by the armies of Islam, and part of its contents eventually came to be included in a work that was to shape and determined the way Iranians looked back to their pre-Islamic past, Ferrosi's work integrated ancient Iranian traditions into Islamic Iranian culture, thus allowing the Iranians to look back to their past with pride, which probably played a key role in the development of a distinct Iranian Islamic identity, which in turn contributed to the emergence of other Islamic cultural identities, such as the Turkish or Indian ones. Now, we can only speculate, ladies and gentlemen, as to how much Ferrosi's Shahnawme itself meant for Zoroastrian communities at this early period. But there are good indications to show that Zoroastrians were familiar with many of the storylines found there. After the Arab conquest of Iran, the Zoroastrian community experienced something akin to the and ancestors' reaction to the time of Alexander. Millenialist ideas and other religions that prophesied that this bitter period would come to an end and would be followed by a restoration of Zoroastrian dominance. Once more came to appear very meaningful. Speculations about the saviour figure Bahram-e-Bazawand, which are alluded to in the Zandi-Bahmanyast, seemed to have become an important part of the living tradition of the community. Apart from that, after some two to two-and-a-half centuries, the Zoroastrian priesthood had become aware of the difficulty of keeping religious knowledge alive as a living oral tradition. Instead, they proceeded to write down whatever they felt was most relevant in their traditional knowledge. When doing this on the whole, they only had time and opportunity to commit to writing some text that formed part of a living and developing oral tradition, which was intended to be interpreted by a living dastur. But they were unable to develop this into a legal system such as feq in Islam of the type one normally finds in written cultures. It was an oral tradition fixed in written form. That meant that in certain fields their efforts to save the religious tradition resulted in the transformation of a living tradition that needed the personal input of a dastur into what appeared to be a fixed, somewhat archaic and exclusive legalistic system. After Khosro's reaction to the revolt of Mazdak, the laity never recovered its right to participate in religious debates as equals to the priesthood, which contributed to the difficulty of developing Zoroastrian teaching in a way that took current conditions into account. As the religion lost some of its sense of the official religion, I must say, lost some of its sense of actuality, an official religion focused mainly on questions of ritual and observance, looking back to an imagined ideal past, may well have become all the more important for the Zoroastrian community, but it did not have a voice at the time. We don't know exactly when the past is emigrated or indeed how this migration took place, but since there were an Iranian community on new land, Iran obviously became an ideal they looked back to with veneration, also in the form of having a sacred fire that came from Iran. At a later stage, from the 15th till the 18th century, leaders of the Iranian and Indian communities corresponded, and their correspondence, the Revniads, gives us some insight into, I wonder what, into what. Oh yes, the preoccupations of the priesthood, sorry. The knowledge those priests discussed were still of the same kind of that as that of the Pahlavi books, questions of ritual and observance. Essentially, then, these priests sought to look back at the religious knowledge of the Sasanian and early post-Sasanian ancestors without much reference to earlier and later times. But from the 16th century onwards we hear of a new religious movement in which Zoroastrianism played a role, such as the school of Azar Kevan, who lived around from 1530 to 1618 C.C.E., an Iranian who migrated to India during the time of the Emperor Akbar and became the founder of a school which Corban calls a representative of Zoroastrian Ishrach, or Illuminative Philosophy, in which he says, quote, helped produce a sort of philosophical and mystical revival in the Zoroastrian milieu. I know that we shall hear more about Azar Kevan tomorrow, and I can't really judge Corban's claims, but it wouldn't be surprising to find that in the heady climate of Akbar's religious policies, some Zoroastrians became interested in the teachings rather than rituals of their faith. Later, we see the appearance in India of other figures who claim divine inspiration for a new interpretation of Zoroastrian teaching, such as Behram Shah Shroff, the founder of Ilmik Shnoom and Ibanji Pundol. Now, one way of explaining this parallel development in Zoroastrian's perceptions of their religion would be simply to say that the cultural environment the Parsis lived in from the 16th century onwards lent some of them to seek new horizons. One might also put it in another way and say that the appearance of new religious teachers afforded those who needed it an opportunity of finding a more recent reference point to look back to. In fact, when we examine the spectrum of modern tendencies in Parsis Zoroastrianism, we notice that conditioned by the present perceptions of what the religion is or should be, various sections of the community are looking back to different kinds of the past, different forms of the past. For instance, there's what's usually called the Orthodox community who focus on the tradition as a whole and implicitly regard their Dastouls as the legitimate representatives of the spiritual lineage that began with Zarathustra. Others prompted perhaps by a more Christian concept of religion feel that the essence of a faith lies in its teaching and aimed to look back at Zarathustra's original message alone, rejecting the evidence of later sources as more or less irrelevant. Some occultist groups, one might say, believe that the past is still with us in a mysterious way and its representatives may materialise as they did, apparently, in the case of Behran Ramshar Shroff. Although a great veneration of the Prophet Zarathustra is common to all or most groups and myths and legends are told about him, the fact that this historical figure is shrouded in the mists of the remote past has clearly given rise in some quarters to the need to look back to more recent authority figures. In Iran, the Pahlavi dynasty represented the Iranian people with an ideal image of the pre-Islamic past in which Zoroastrianism played an important role. For many Iranians, that religion still symbolises their cultural independence and identity. This clearly affected the Zoroastrian community and helped it emancipate in a certain way. I have not enough evidence to attempt to sketch how the cultural climate of the Pahlavi dynasty and that of the Islamic Republic affected the Iranian Zoroastrians and we're all waiting for Dr Seras Tewit to publish a much-needed material on that subject, so I won't try to touch it. So, ladies and gentlemen, I'm coming to an end. You'll be relieved to hear. We've been looking back at the ways the Zoroastrians look back. Now, if we look back ourselves, what do we owe, what is important to us as Westerners? I'll take it. We're all Westerners at the moment here. I think, as I said, that Zarathustra have founded the first, well, you know, that came up with something that developed in what we would call a religion as opposed to a tribal cult or whatever. I think he offered the world a coherent worldview that implied that the world is not, as God intended it to be, and made it stick, made it coherent, which is a major thing. Zarathustrnism gave us the idea of heaven and hell, the rebirth, the fact that people will rise again at the end of time, and of a saviour born of a virgin. Zarathustrnism clearly contributed considerably to millennial-list ideas, and, as we all know, Zarathustra became an object of speculation for the Greeks and for many later thinkers in Europe. Finally, when we think of the achievements of the Achaemenids, the Sasanians and the Parsees, we can say that Zarathustrnism has offered us a view of the lofty ideals a religion can inspire in its followers. That religion, in short, has given its followers and the world at large a great deal. May it live long. Thank you. Professor Crenbroke, thank you for a fascinating lecture and for addressing the theme of our conference so succinctly with reference to the figure of Zarathustra and his teachings. So, from the idea of the two times and the major innovation of Zarathustra, namely that the world has not as God would have wished it to be and that it is up to human beings to restore it to its former perfect state, we've been taken through the entirety of the history of Imperial Iran, the post-Sarab conquest and the various ways in which Iranians have engaged with the past in order to preserve the authority of the teachings of their prophet. Ending with the Parsees in India, this has been a real tour de force and thank you very much again. Thank you very much.


Your credit application doesn't seem to be complete, Mrs. Howard. Oh, that's what I answered everything. Here, we need this information about your husband. They may not be aware of it, but Federal Reserve regulations say married women can apply for credit on their own. Boy, I waited a long time for a car like this. Well, you got it. Just sign these forms. Well, what's this one? It's flying. Some government red tape. I didn't want to hold you up any longer. They may not be aware of it, but Federal Reserve regulations say you must be told credit costs and the terms before you sign the contract. What's this about being passed due on our bank credit card? There's a purchase at the Star Shop two months ago that wasn't paid for. That's the dress I returned, remember? Oh, yes. And you called the bank to explain when last month's statement came, right? Yes. I explained it to them on the phone. They may not be aware of it, but Federal Reserve regulations say there is a right way to correct billing errors. We may not be able to make your loan for you, Mr. Boyle. The bank requires creditor insurance on all loans. And I'm afraid you won't be able to qualify for that insurance. Well, why? Your age. They may not be aware of it, but Federal Reserve regulations say you cannot be discriminated against because of age. Most violations of the Federal Reserve's new consumer credit regulations are inadvertent, but they do sometimes happen. That's why knowing your rights can be to your credit. Credit has become part of our lives. It helps us buy the things we need when we don't have the ready cash. Currently, American consumers are paying off more than $200 billion in personal loans, credit card bills, auto loans, and other installment credit, excluding mortgages. Now there are new regulations to help you and protect you when you borrow. Congress has passed a number of consumer protection laws in recent years and directed the Federal Reserve to draft the regulations that put them into effect. These regulations are enforced by 12 government agencies, including the Federal Reserve. One of the most important of these is the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which states that you cannot be discriminated against because of your race, color, religion, national origin, marital status, sex, age, or if your income is from public assistance. Until Equal Credit Opportunity, many married women had little opportunity to build credit records of their own, even though they may have managed family finances or held jobs. Working women were once the rarest, but today they account for more than 40% of all job holders. Now, under Federal Reserve regulations, women can apply for credit on their own and build their own credit records. May I help you? Yes, please. I'd like to apply for a personal loan. I want to buy some furniture for my new apartment. Please, sit down. May I have your name? Yes, it's Jenny Franklin. Is that Mr. or Mrs.? Don't answer that, Jenny. The new regulations say your marital status and childbearing plans have no place in this transaction because you're asking for an unsecured loan, one that does not require collateral. The lender must judge your creditworthiness on the same standards he uses for all other borrowers. These could be... How long have you lived at your present address? I've lived there... Length of residence? What is your present salary? I'm making between... Your income? How long have you been employed at your current job? I've worked there for... Stability of employment? Do you have a charge at any department store? Yes, I have two charges at department stores. Do you have any major credit cards? Yes, I do. Have you ever had a loan before? Yes, when I was in college I had a school loan. How you've handled credit in the past? Do you have any other loans outstanding? Yes, I have a car loan. And present debts? Thank you. We'll give you an answer in a couple of days. Listen to that, Jenny. The Federal Reserve says you must be notified of the lender's decision within 30 days after receiving a completed application. And if the loan is refused, you must be given the reason in right. That's not fair. That doesn't make any more than I do. And they gave him a loan. And if you think you've been discriminated against, talk to the creditor. If you can't work it out, you may file a complaint with a proper government agency. What about the married woman? How have Federal Reserve regulations affected her? Once credit reports were made in her husband's name only. Now, generally whenever she uses her husband's credit account or is co-applicant on a loan, the credit history must be reported in her name as well as here. And that's vital, because one of the factors in qualifying for new credit is how you've handled credit before. Now a married woman may apply for credit on her own without her husband. Here, we need this information about your husband. Oh, I'm buying the washer and dryer out of my own salary. My husband has nothing to do with it. Equal credit opportunity also forbids credit discrimination solely because of age. Well, Mr. Boyle, as I said before, we normally require creditor insurance on all our loans, but you won't be able to get that insurance. But since everything else is in perfect order, we will make that loan for you. Oh, gee, that's great. In addition to equal credit opportunity, the Federal Reserve has issued other important regulations. For example, truth in lending requires that you be told how much your loan costs before you sign for it. Let's go back to the car dealer and see how it should happen. Boy, I've waited a long time for a car like this one. Well, you've got it. Just sign right here and you can drive it away. Well, what's this for? There's some government red tape, a statement of finance charges and other terms. You mean this is how much I'm paying for the loan? Yeah. Wow, that's really high, isn't it? Does everybody charge this much? If you want to shop around and find a cheaper loan, that's okay with me. All I can tell you is we wrap the whole thing up for you right here. It's for your convenience, but up to you. Exactly. It's up to you. Truth in lending doesn't tell a lender how much to charge, but the regulation says the lender must tell you how much the loan will cost, both in dollars and an annual percentage rate. You should find this disclosure on all credit contracts. It's there to help you shop for the best credit buys. So look for it. First National, can you please give me your current rate on auto loan? I'd also like some information on leasing a car. Another Federal Reserve regulation requires fuller disclosure of the terms and cost of leasing consumer products such as cars and furniture. Remember them? The young couple with the merchandise they return but are still being billed for? Billing errors can happen, and there's a Federal Reserve regulation to help you get them corrected promptly, but you have to know how to use it. That's the dress I returned. Remember? Oh yes, and you called the bank to explain when last month's statement came, right? Yes. I explained it to them on the phone. Oh, I see. It says here we have to write about billing errors. What's wrong with calling? It's faster. A call can be forgotten. What's more, what proof do we have that we complained about the bill? We can keep a copy of the letter. And they can't charge interest on the $65? Not if we're right. I did return the dress. I know. Look, we still have time. Do you have the receipt? Yes. Great. Do you have some paper? Yes. Remember the creditor must receive your letter within 60 days after the bill was mailed to you. The creditor must acknowledge your letter within 30 days and correct the error within 90 days or show you why the bill is right. And once you've written to dispute the bill, the creditor cannot report you as being delinquent on this loan. Periodically, you'll get a statement like this that explains the procedures to follow to correct errors. Read it and become familiar with it to preserve your credit rights. But credit rights do not mean that you have a right to credit. In order to obtain credit, credit worthiness must be established and it must be preserved. Well, according to your own figures, Mr. Mrs. Allen, you have considerable debt. Are you making payments on time? Well, we haven't made one or two months, but... I really don't think it would be wise for you to take on any more financial obligations at this time. Look, clear up some of your present bills and we'll be glad to reconsider your application. The Equal Credit Opportunity Regulation does not guarantee that you will get a loan. You must show credit worthiness to qualify. But it does require that the lender apply the same credit standards equally to all applicants. Your credit worthiness is affected by the way you have handled credit in the past. Almost every time you borrow or charge, the transaction and how you handle it is reported to a credit bureau for the information of other lenders. I'm sorry, Mr. Alvarez. The credit bureau report indicates you've had some problems in the past. Oh, me? Hey, I've always tried to pay my bills on time. Now, if you think there's an error in the report, Mr. Alvarez, I have a suggestion. Now, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you have the right to ask the bureau to explain to you what your file contains and to reinvestigate any entry you don't agree with. Well, Mr. Alvarez, it seems you didn't pay your charge at foremost on time. You let your bill go for six months. But I couldn't help it. I was laid off. I told him that. And the minute I got back to work, I paid double, and he agreed to it. Isn't that there too? No, but if you'd like, a statement can be put in your file, giving the facts. The credit bureau must put your statement into the record, and if you request it, a corrected report must be sent to anyone who received a credit check in the preceding six months. These are some of the ways the new consumer credit laws and regulations can help you and protect you. But don't forget, only you yourself can create a good credit record. You do it by buying and borrowing within your means. You do it by paying your debts on time. Your credit rating can affect your whole life so protect it. Know your credit rights. Shop for the best credit terms. Ask if you don't understand something. If there's a problem, most lenders are more than willing to try to work things out. But if you can't, and you think a lender is violating the law, contact the agency responsible for carrying out the law. There are 12 government agencies that share this responsibility. If you're not sure which one you should contact, write or call your Federal Reserve Bank.


Today we have hot pit refueling, refueling the jet with an engine running. It helps us get off the ground faster so as soon as we land, we do our checks, hook up to the truck and we feel allowed to taxi out, decreasing ground pattern. This training is important because it brings agile combat employment to our KC-135s. Readiness is important because all the things that are happening around the world, we have to be ready to go, ready to fight at all times. KC-135s are strategically located in Hawaii as you know, Hawaii is surrounded by the largest body of water in the world and being able to set up a tanker and refuel fighters and other aircraft so they don't have to make additional stops and being able to take the fight to the adversary is just a huge advantage and a huge win for the Air Force. And the hot refueling we did today allows us to keep the tanker on the ground for a shorter period of time and keep it airborne so the fighters can do their thing and other aircraft can complete their mission.


Last week, we introduced some basic commands to get around in the Linux operating system. So we'll continue today and look at some different things, look at running processes, connecting to other computers, and a little bit about permissions, who can do what on a computer. The first thing we'll look at is processes. When we run a command, LS, for example, LS is actually a program on this computer. We know that if we use which, LS, LS is actually an executable installed on the computer in the bin directory. So when I type LS, that the program is executed, it does something, that is at least the files or the directories, and then it stops executing. So that's common with most commands. It starts the application, it does something, and it stops. We talk about that it starts a software process, a process runs, does something, and then ends. So we want to look at, in a terminal, normally we just run one process at a time. I type LS, I press enter, LS executes, the process runs, stops, then I do another command. So just sequential. We can do more complex than that. We can run some processes, leave them running, and then run some other processes. So we'll introduce how to do that. The concept is that we can have one process that we can run and interact with by typing things in, and then other processes we say are running in the background. They're running, but we don't interact with them. So let's see how we do that and give some examples of why it's useful. First, let's see one of our commands we did last week, LS. If we want to list all of our files on our hard disk, LS minus L shows us in the long format, and there's a minus R option, recursive. And we want to list everything on the hard disk, so let's list all files in long format recursively starting from the root directory. Recursively means list the files in that directory and then all of its subdirectories and all of its subdirectories and so on. So essentially list everything on the hard disk. Run it. See what happens. So LS minus L minus uppercase R forward slash to mean list in the root directory. And when we run it, you see it prints all the files on the hard disk. There's some we can't see. I want to stop. So the process is running. I can't interact with the terminal. I can't run other processes while this one's running. It stopped. Okay. Now I can run other commands, the next command. So that process took a long time or some things we may want to do. Maybe I run it and I realize I'm not so patient. So I run it again. How do I stop it before it finishes? One way is control C. So you don't see the command I press, but note down here it showed I pressed control C character there, the two keys. So that stops it or that's what we say stops or cancels a process. Sometimes we say we kill the process. We talk about the process was running to stop it before it completes normally. Control C will do that, cancel the process. So that's useful when you have something that you see is going to run for a long time and you realize you don't want to wait for the end or if you've done something wrong or typed in the wrong command and it's sitting there waiting for input, you've got no idea what to do, then control C will cancel or kill that process and you can return to the terminal and interact. Just to show that because doing that, to demonstrate that we need a process that will run a long time. The LS minus LR does run for a long time. Let's find another process just for the demonstration. I'll just clear that. Try yes. What does yes do? Just prints wise forever. This process will run for a long time. It will run until the computer shuts down. So it's just for testing. So just prints wise forever. So how do we stop it? Well we can control C to cancel or kill the process. So we just use yes just as an easy demo of manipulating processes. So when the program runs, when I run yes, it's running, I can kill or cancel the process with control C and the operating system stops the process and deletes any information about it. But we can also pause the process or suspend the process, put it to sleep and to put a process to sleep, suspend control Z. Control C kills control Z, suspends or puts it to sleep. That is the operating system still has some information about this process in memory. It's just not executing at this stage. It's stopped that says on the command line. It's not running, but note with it suspended we can still interact with the terminal. We would like to maybe, if it's paused, to restart, to resume. So what we can do to see the set of processes that are stopped or paused from this bash shell that I refer to as jobs. What jobs are paused? If we type jobs, it says the jobs that are paused or suspended or stopped at this stage. Yes, it's stopped and it's job number one. So that's a paused process. We can bring it back and start it again and we say that there's always one process that can run with interactivity with the terminal and we say that process is in the foreground. So to bring that process back, we can say foreground followed by the job number is job number one, FG1. Or if you just type FG on its own, it will still work because it brings the most recent one paused back. But FG1 will bring our process, yes, back to the foreground, that is, it's running again. Control Z will stop it again and we see it's listed as the jobs.  FG followed by the number or if you want the most recent one just FG is now in the foreground. A process in the foreground, when I do something on the terminal, I'm interacting with that process in the foreground. There's nothing to interact with this program, it just prints on the screen. So I can't run other programs at the moment. We can Control C, kill the process. There's no jobs suspended now. So jobs list those that have been suspended or stopped. FG brings, can you be used to bring one that was suspended back to foreground and have it running again. So that's useful if you want to pause something and then go do something else in the meantime and then come back to that process. Let's try that in some different ways. Let's run yes and let's output that to a file. Remember redirection from last week, the greater than sign says instead of print the output of yes on the screen, printer inside a file. Try that. Then it doesn't take up the screen. It's running. The process is in the foreground. I can't do anything. I can't issue commands. You can try and type but I can't run anything. It's running. We can suspend it. Control Z, it's stopped. Just check the file. How big is it? That's one of the options for LS. If you want human friendly, H, human friendly gives the prefixes. It's 2.1 gigabytes mine. Note that what yes does is just prints wise to a file and does as fast as possible. So it filled up two gigabytes in those 10 or 20 seconds when I ran it. Note that it's not getting any bigger. That process is suspended. It's not running. There's some state information about it but it's not running.  Just check the jobs. There's only one. I can do FG1 to bring job number one back to the foreground. And it's running again. I'll suspend it again and look at the file size. Mine's now up to 2.6 gigabytes. So that just illustrates that something was added to the file there. It started again. It's suspended so it's not doing anything at this stage. We say it's stopped. What we can do is take that process instead of having it paused, have it run. But have it run in the background, we say. Have it run such that it's executing but we can still interact with the terminal. And to put a process into the background, we use BG. BG followed by the process number or simply BG because there's only one job to deal with. BG puts that process into the background. Let's check the jobs. So now that job, yes, redirect to the out.txt file is running. And let's check our file size. Mine's 4.7 gigabytes. If I check again, it's now 5.2 gigabytes. So just to illustrate that it is running now but I can still interact with the terminal because that process we say is in the background. And we can have as many processes as we like running in the background. How do I stop it? I'm going to fill up the hard disk soon. So how do I stop my yes process? We could bring it back to the foreground. It's in the background, running. To bring it back to the foreground, simply FG or FG followed by the number. There's only one, so FG is fine. It's running again and now it's in the foreground and I can interact with it by the terminal. The commands I issue affect that process so I can control C to kill the process. Look at the file size. There's no jobs running now and that process is stopped. The file's not getting any better. It's gone. So really three states of our process. The process is in the foreground. It's running and in the foreground means that when we interact with it by the terminal, when we issue commands, it's interacting with that process in the foreground. The process can be paused or suspended with Control Z. Means it's not running but there's still some, the operating system stores some information about the process so we can resume if we like. And the third state is the process is in the background. It is running but we cannot interact with it by the terminal. It's running in the background, we say. Let's delete that file so I don't fill up my hard disk and I suggest you do the same. Let's do similar again but we'll introduce different ways to do that. Yes, redirect to our file. It's running. Control Z just pause it, BG puts it into the background so it's running again. It's a gigabyte, it's 1.5 gigabytes, it's two gigabytes. So it's running there in the background. So that's common. If you start a process normally and then you realize let's put it in the background. Let's have a running but in the background then a quick way to do that. Control Z suspends and then BG puts it into the background. So it's still running. You want it back, foreground and it's back. Back to the background, Control Z, BG. So we usually combine those two, Control Z followed by BG puts it into the background. It's getting big, the file. We said to stop the process to kill it or cancel, we use Control C but there's another way. So we see the jobs that yes, program is running. We can also see the processes, PS, lists the processes. A little bit more detail. It's the processes that you're running in this terminal and there are three listed. So this program PS runs a process that tells us what processes are running. Which processes did it list? It listed itself, that is when it runs it records that it itself is a process running, PS. Yes is a process that our operating system is running, the program that we've got running. And bash, bash is the software that interprets your commands on the command line. That's the shell software, we call it. The born again shell, it handles the commands that we can issue. So you always see bash there at the output. You almost always see PS and you may see other processes that you've got running in the background like yes in this case. It tells us something about how long it's running and more importantly or useful for now is the process ID. The operating system assigns a process ID. We know yes as the process ID 5575. How big is my file? Only 19 gig, so we better stop it. Rather than bring it back to the foreground we can kill the process without Control C but using kill. Followed by the process ID. So that's why we use PS there to learn the process ID and now kill 5575. Make sure you choose the correct process ID, yours will be different than mine. PS shows that yes is not there. We also got a nice information saying that yes has been terminated. Sorry I did a mistake there. What do I do when I get a mistake? What's happened here, it's waiting for more input. I hit the wrong key, I hit the backslash key. Control C will get me out of that. What I want is this. So another way to kill the process is if you know the process ID issue the kill command. Control C is the keyboard shortcut. The kill command will do it based on process ID. Let me delete the file. So different ways to interact with processes. Try them, they're useful. Let's say I want to run my yes command and I know I want to run it in the background. I don't want to have it in the foreground. I don't want to have to suspend and type BG. If you want to run a process immediately in the background then add the ampersand character at the end. This means run the process and immediately put it into the background. So we don't have to control ZBG, just add the ampersand character. And it's running in the background already. Jobs, this it's running, PS shows it's running, process ID 5606. The file is 2GB, 2.5GB and so on. So it's getting larger. The process is running and we run it in the background using the ampersand character. And you can do this for any command. We're using yes as a simple demo. Since I know the process ID, I can kill that. Now when we run kill, it tries to what we say gracefully shut down the process. Tries to end it normally and it's terminated. Let's delete the file just to clean up. So kill tries to stop the process like if think of say in Windows you try to close a program and it will try and save the file before it exits.  But sometimes we can't do that. Maybe something's not responding. So maybe in Windows you try and close a program and it says it's not responding. Do you want to force a shut down or stopping? So we can do that with kill if we run our process again in the background. Process 5618. If something will not stop using kill, then you can try even harder using minus nine. That really means even if you can't save any information, just stop the process for sure. So this is just used if something's not responding.  And it usually works. So that's useful if something's hung. So that killed the process, slightly different than terminating, slightly worse than terminating a process. So we can interact. We saw PS list the processes and only by default shows the processes in my, this terminal running by me, bash and PS, so there's not much interesting there. If you want to see more, because our operating system is running processes for different users, if you want to see them all, PS minus E will show lots of processes and I'll pipe it into less. Remember the vertical bar means take the output of PS minus E and send that into the program less and less just shows me the output page by page. So it shows me all the processes running on my operating system. Starting with process ID one, the initialization process that starts everything. And many operating system processes for starting networking, all the different tasks. And we scroll down, we may see some we recognize there's a MySQL server running, Apache web servers running, there's processes for that. If we scroll down, we get to the, we may see Firefox running, secure shell server is running on my computer, because all of you have logged into my computer. So there's a process handling the login. And to view the demo, we're using software called T-Mark. So that's running on my computer, yours will be different. And if we get to the bottom, all right, PS and less are running. So PS minus E shows all processes, quit that, or if you want even more details, PS minus F uppercase A, there are other ways as well to show. PS has many options. This shows all the processes, but it also gives things like who is the user that's running that process? The user ID, the student user is running these processes. The root user is running, the instructor user on my computer is running some processes. Because I'm logged in as the instructor, the root user is running some processes, the core operating system. PS shows us process information. One last way to see process information, we can see a real time feedback is to use top to show the top processes. Try top. This gives us every one second an updated list of the processes. Plus the top, the first five lines show us some summary statistics about the processes on our operating system, those that are running, or the total number of processes. There's one running and there's many sleeping. Something about the CPU utilization, the amount of memory. We have 16 gigabytes. How much is used? The amount of swap space and so on. And then the list of processes. And usually it's, well by default, it's sorted by the amount of CPU they're using. Yours will be slightly different from mine because I'm running some software in the background. I'm recording the video in audio and the process, sorry it doesn't show here, but on yours you'll see on the right side the process name, mine's running some recording software. So there are many options with top. You can change which items you sort by, but we'll not go through them. If you want to see the processes interactively, use top. In Windows, this is like, what? In Windows, the task manager. You can bring up the task manager and see a similar output. Queue to quit. So I'm just showing you how to find this information. So that's the main commands we use to interact with processes. There are others, but that's the most common ones. We can do this also with processes which start graphical programs. So we're doing everything on the command line. But from the command line, we can start GUI-based programs. We know that we have Firefox installed, the PDF viewer. So we don't have Acrobat. It's called evince. I know that evince is a program that opens PDFs. So they have two programs that open up a separate graphical window. We can interact with them as processes as well. To demonstrate this, I need to switch to another window where I'm logged in as instructor on my computer. So let's do that. I'll just close my instance of Firefox and then we'll start it on the command line. And to start Firefox, we type the command Firefox and opens up the web browser. And note that that process is in the foreground. From our terminal's perspective, we can no longer issue commands. Firefox is the process running in the foreground. I can't do other things while Firefox is running. So that process is in the foreground. But I would like to do other things. I'd like to have both windows open. Well, we can close it. We can interact with it. Same with any other process. So control C kills Firefox. We can run it in the background by adding ampersand. And there was a bit of an error or a warning in my case. But it is running just to show I can do LS now. So I can now run commands on the terminal and at the same time use Firefox. So this is useful when we have graphical programs started from the terminal. We start them in the background so that we actually have both of them running. We can bring it back to the foreground. And Firefox is still running. But I can't interact with it in the shell, in the terminal. I can suspend it, control Z. I can now run commands. Can I use Firefox? The process is there, but it's suspended or paused. And the window manager has shown that it's grayed out because I can't do anything on Firefox now because it's not running. It's paused. So I can't do anything. I'd have to put it into the background if I want to use it at the same time. Now I can do something. So remember the foreground means that the process is running and it's got control of the terminal. Paused or suspended means it's not running, but there's some state information stored about it so we can resume later. Background means it's running, but we don't have control of it via the terminal. We can run other commands. Firefox is running. It's also started another process, maybe some plug-in for plug-ins on Firefox. If we kill the Firefox process ID, it kills Firefox. It produces some error, but let's ignore that. It kills its children as well. So when we killed Firefox process, the children process of Firefox were also killed, so we lost that plug-in container as well. So we can interact with processes using control C, control Z. There are some other ones as well, FG, BG, foreground and background, jobs, PS, and the ampersand character to start a process in the background.


Guy goes into a doctor's office. He says, doctor, I have a terrible problem. I have an absolutely terrible problem. I am confident. I am shrinking. You have to do something. I'm shrinking. And the doctor said, don't calm, calm down.  Oh my God. Hey, welcome back to our studio X of Corbin. I'm Rick. He follows on Instagram, Twitter for more. She's kind of the expert for all of us. We're gonna leave a button. Today we have a new video from Village Cooking Channel. Yay! And this is, bring it inside mutton, mud mutton recipe, clay covered, full goat and cooking. Oh my goodness. In a direct fire. Oh my goodness. Good frickin' grief. Sorry to you, veg people. Don't watch this one.  But it's gonna be nice. Here we go. Can't wait. I love that part. I love that part. I love that part. Oh, that must feel so good on the toes. This is, I was not expecting this to go in this direction. Once again, your veg. Full dead goat. Ginger. No, that's probably, um, turmeric. Yeah, hand ground turmeric paste. Yeah, gonna rub it on in, let it marinate. Reminds me of your mom. You're four.  Oh yeah, that's definitely your mom. I regret this video immediately. So they're making the mutton inside the goat. Oh, interesting. Does that hurt the goat? Yeah, I don't think the goat can feel that, Corbin. We should try this one. And are they gonna cook it in that clay, did they make a clay oven, I suppose? Do you think that tinfoil grew in their neighborhood? Yes, yeah, I do too. Fresh grown tinfoil, ladies and gentlemen. Okay, gonna wrap it in the clay. Right.  I'm so amazed at things like this and think to myself, who was the first person to try this and how many different ways did they try it? Well, covering stuff and cooking in the ground has been very long. Yeah, but someone had to do it for the first time. Cavemen. Looks like a rock. Wow, it's a big cooking utensil. Looks like a T-rex poop. Okay, intriguing. Love that sound and that smell. Well, how long do you think that bad boy's gotta cook? Four minutes at least. At least, I don't know why you just don't stick that in the microwave. Don't put tinfoil in the microwave, kids. So I guess you cook it till the wood's gone. This is so intriguing.  Yeah, I bet that is hot. It's so moist. It literally falls off the bottom. Yeah, but that's hot. We need forks. That's probably pretty good. Oh, no, forget it. Oh, my stars, glorious. Did they cook the rice, too? Oh, geez. That reminds me of the turkey legs at Disneyland at Magic Mountain. It's probably a little better than those. Just the size, they sell giant turkey legs that are quite delicious at Disneyland. That's probably way better. Yeah, by a long shot. What'd you call it? He was thinking about your mom. I love that they were in the movie Vikram. I'm wondering who the fan was. Is it the Lukash? Was it Kamal? Who was the fan that was like, let's put them in the movie? What a meal. Think any of them have seen their videos? Any of them have seen their videos? Who knows? There's really nothing more practical and beautiful you can do for a human being is just give them a good meal. That's pretty dang good. You think so? Yeah. I would eat it. Boy, oh boy, would I eat that. I'd love to be part of the process of making it. I'd probably have a hard time eating it off of the bone. Yeah, you get your wings boneless, don't you? Well, I don't like wings in general just because of the fly effect.  Yeah, I don't like it. If I'm getting wings, I want them on the bone. They're definitely more moist on the bone. And whenever we eat chicken, it's a whole chicken and we're tearing it apart and man, that looked so good. Yeah, as always. And that's something as well is that that's really common all over the world where when Andrani grew up, it was absolutely normal to get your meat in any way fresh. It's killed for you there. Yeah, I think we saw in Mumbai, it was funny because we were going past stalls and people butchering chicken. Fresh meat on the side of the road. Yeah, it was crazy. Cause obviously you cannot do that here. Health code. No, it's very, a health code, but it is, I've mentioned this before, the very strange disconnect in society as it was from, you know, how many, how many kids grow up eating animals but that they've never killed one themselves or even seen one killed. That's such an odd disconnect for me. I would prefer to not kill them.  Yeah, yeah, I know, but I wish I didn't. Really? Yeah, I don't think it's uncommon to have a moral dilemma about it. I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm not saying it's wrong. It's just, I don't think it's uncommon to be like, that's a living animal.   But I don't think it's uncommon to have that sentiment. No, I think it's very common. I think it's very common. I think it would be a lot easier to be vegetarian in India. It would be very easy. All the places on earth, that would be for, I think the easiest place to do that. Delicious food, that is just veg, all of the places.  Yep, I'm sure. Oh, Pakistan probably is a little more Muslim, so they probably don't have as much veg. Yeah, I mean, I'm not, don't know. But I'd imagine they probably have similar styles of food. Anyway, it's fantastic videos all this time. As always, love them. How many subscribers do they have now? Probably like 20 million. Yeah, look at that, I love it. 21.3 million, I love it. Yeah, they've grown exponentially since we started. Yeah, you're welcome. Yeah, you're welcome, anytime. It's probably all because of us. I'm sure it is, you have literally 20 times as many subscribers as us, but it's because of us. We'll take almost all the credit, it's fine. It's true. Anyways, fantastic video. Let us know what other videos we can react to. And when we're in India and Tamil, we would love to just cook with you. I'd love to just sit and watch them do a video. Yeah, that'd be awesome. That alone. Anyways, let us know down below. Josh!


I stand shoulder to shoulder with working hard, playing hard America, especially my blood brothers in the wilds of coal mining country, because we have got to responsibly and resourcefully and aggressively utilize the energy that we have, the energy reserves that we have in America. But people like Barack Obama lied. Hillary Clinton said her truth when she said she wants to destroy the coal industry. Those aren't my words.


So, the human development learning is very important and interesting topic and we will now come to know that what are the issues that human development may suffer through and issues can be hereditary issues or problems, issues can be environmental issues or problems. So, by, you know, just interacting with the hereditary factor and the environmental factor, always human development proceeds and those children who are healthy, mentally, physically, emotionally and socially, then they are able to encounter with environment in a healthy way and those children who are weak physically, mentally and socially or even emotionally, they feel always problem in interacting with environment and in adjusting with environment. Adjustment is also a skill or we can say a trait of intelligent person. So, the issues we are talking about in human development, then there comes a question of hereditary with environment. What are the traits of hereditary? How does human development affect and how does environment affect human development? So, the hereditary factors or biological factors are the traits and characteristics Now, those traits and characteristics are one child is intelligent, one child is less intelligent, one child is average, if there are three children at home, then they have to see that how do we expect from a very intelligent child? How do we expect from an average child and how do we expect from a less intelligent child? So, the hereditary factors are fine, there are traits in a child, the intelligence that Allah had to give to him, he came. Now, how do we provide environment? Where does the problem come from? When parents put a lot of expectations from their children, this is your elder brother, he has always taken A grade, why can't you take it?  So, these hereditary factors on their basis, criticizing children and comparing them with their siblings or friends, believe me, the development of their children is a very big issue for them. So, similarly, if the child is hereditary, a big brother is Gora and a small child is in low color, so, believe me, parents keep their children's names in their homes, they start calling them, Kala, Gora, the children get very hurt from this, and the issue of their development is that they stop eating and drinking. They start calling their parents very rude, so, all their personality gets disturbed, if we don't provide good environment on their hereditary traits, then these are common mistakes that we do in our homes, that we shouldn't do. The child's personality problem doesn't come from outside, it is always a problem in your parenting at home, or the environment of the child's home, because of which the child has become a victim of depression. So, this is a very important tip, that you should never compare the children to your home, because of some lack or some lack of good, and also, the expectations of the child's education, according to the intelligence of the child, when you say wonderful things, these comments are for the child, they will be so motivated that the child will do better next time, even if the child fails. So, you have to see the reasons, the child is not being scolded or bullied, nowadays, as the environment is in the hands of the children, the parents have given their mobile in their hands, you say we should do a void, then you can't stop the technology, you can't stop the child from using that technology, then how do you manage, you should go inside your home, decide the time, for this much time, you can use it, you can play your game, then you have to give your study so much time, along with feeding it well, keeping it in a good mood, giving it a physical exercise, provide it with a lot of opportunities, believe it, there is extra energy in the children, when you don't take them to the ground, because of sitting on their mobile all day, they have become aggressive, because of that, their energy is not utilized, the children used to go to the ground, the parents used to take them, because of which, when the children's energy was utilized, they used to relax, so the reason for the aggression of the children, is that the parents don't give them proper time, they don't provide proper environment in their home, now the nature of nurture is also a very big debate, that the nature of the person, we say that the nature of this person is very bad, its nature is not good, how will this life remain the same, this kind of debate happens in our society, so now we have to see, whether the nature of the person, has come into the human life, and whether we can not nurture it by giving it a good environment, and cannot change its nature, so on top of this, there are two schools of thought, which sometimes call hereditary factors, they say that it is very important, and we cannot change them, one school of thought says, that by providing a good environment, we can improve hereditary traits, so the nature of the nature of the nature, the debate is very old, both these factors, combine them and study a child, and with good environment, enhance hereditary traits, and with the lack of them, with the good environment, at least improve hereditary traits, and bring her over the average, then active and passive character of development, that development, active and passive will be in the same condition, if you have given a good environment, then hereditary traits are already present in it, now good physical growth and good mental growth will be in your hands, how actively you involve the child, in some activities, in which the creativity of the child is fulfilled, in which the physical activity of the child is provided, so this is active, the child who has been passive, will not have physical growth, will not have mental growth, will not have social growth, similarly continuous and discontinuous debate, that development stops at one place, whereas we have seen this definition, that development continues from conception to death, so continuity and discontinuity, this concept is not right, in fact, as long as a person is alive, there are changes, he keeps interacting with the environment, with the interaction of this environment, the changes will continue to the death, so development is a continuous process, which continues throughout life,


I'll get back to that shortly, the record 39.15, set in 2022 by Sondre Davis, the Ankhed Jamaica team. The Grenadians, they take centre stage now. Final of the Under 20 boys, 4x100 coming up. I just wanted to make the point that the Trinidad and Tobago team 4x100 symphony Patrick to the Frederick Twins with Alexi Henry on anchor for Jamaica. They had on the opening leg of Iber Harris, the Tianali Terrellong, with on the third leg Breanna Campbell, the sprint hurdler, and Chenoya Douglas bringing it home. Here's the line up for the Under 20 boys, 4x100 Guyana, Antigua and Bon Buda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Jamaica, Bahamas, Grenada, Trinidad and Tobago, and Bon Buda's listed but not seeing them out on the track at the moment. Number of withdrawals for the Basians today. Guyana also absent, but Marbetas was called by the mid-announcer. Grenada in the line up, the Bahamians, there as well. Antigua and Barbetas should have a fine team, they have a shot at a medal. And Johnny Deity should be in there. There's the Jamaicans, which have worn down to the 100 bronze medalist on lead off. They have a lot of firepower, the Jamaicans. Pinnock card to call on. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines haven't been ever present in the redays, but they think they have a very good team this year. Timothy Williams, Kiyo Davis, Jamar Sanders, Eji Del Pesh, Cichuner and Tobago there. Should again figure among the medals for the likes of Wicom, Bayer, Chinapu and Woodruff. We try to confirm the participants for each of the teams, the Bahamas. They'll have the likes of Carlos Brown, Eden Kelly. Antigua and Barbetas, they will go in lane number two. Donkli leads off for the Jamaicans. Final of the under 20 boys, four by 100. The Jamaicans looking for a clean sweep. They are favoured here. Set off for the Bahamas. Well, pretty on start for Donkli of Jamaica. The Jamaicans right upon the Bahamians, Trinidad and Tobago flying down the back straight away, but the Jamaicans going brilliantly. The Jamaicans a slow change there with Rahim Pinnock on the second leg. Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada in a medal position. Bahamas there as well. This is a fine race that's on. Ramon the Smythe is the baton for Jamaica. This is going to be a close one. Trinidad and Tobago on the outside. The Trinidadians try to defeat the Jamaicans. The upset created. The Jamaicans denied the sweep by Trinidad and Tobago. A terrific performance. Trinidad and Tobago don't often win relays at the Carifta Games, but when they do, they celebrate. As they should, as they should, that's brilliant. Dylan Woodruff on the anchor leg for the Trinbeconians. 40.45. The Jamaican shocked. 40.55. Johan Ramaldes Smythe on the anchor leg. They didn't have Gary Card on the team, the Jamaicans. Saving him for tomorrow. Probably thought they had enough, but they didn't. What a performance from Grenada. Told you they were in with a shot of the medal. Soto and Tiga and Barbuda, but the Grenadians on home soil. Delivering a big way to close this 4x100 series with a medal. The Bahamians out of it, I suspect. Carlos Brown wasn't on their team, and that was always going to be a big problem. We see Chinapu there for the Trinidad and Tobago team. I think he was on second. They had the Sean Cole on there as well. Woodruff, as he said, on the anchor. Fantastic performance from them. Good performance too from Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. I made them all to be fourth or fifth. When all was said and done. Disappointing for the Jamaicans. The changes were not very good. That much I can tell you. Here's another look at the final race. In lane number four, Bahamas in five, Trinidad and Tobago outside in lane number seven. The Trinbeconians changing beautifully all the way through this race. Rahim Pinocchio on the second leg for Jamaica. Change from first to second. Sloppy. The Trinbeconians smooth all the way around. Grenada with a terrific run. Antigua and Barbuda never really got into this race the way I thought they would. And even here they had a shot at a medal. But Grenada coming through to take Granz. The Jamaicans outpaced by Trinidad and Tobago. 40.45 at the time for the quartet of Che Wicombe, Mikhail Bayer, Akim Chinapu and Dylan Woodruff to take the gold here at the Kirani James Stadium. Jamaica, Dunkley Pinocchio. It says Cardi's here on the list but I don't see him. He definitely wasn't there. He was not in the actual lineup. The Jamaicans still waving their flags and we still have one event to come to close this show. The mixed four by four. Confirmation there. Trinidad and Tobago. Gold medalist. 40.45 seconds. Jamaica 40.55 for the silver and Grenada. Fine bronze medal at home. 40.70 just holding off Antigua and Barbuda.