Comparison and Analysis of the Stages of the Journey of the Righteous Soul to Heaven in the Manichean and Zoroastrian Religions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In various religions, there are beliefs about the fate of the righteous person’s soul in the afterlife. In this research, we examine and compare the stages of the ascension of the righteous soul until reaching Heaven in the Manichean and Zoroastrian religions. At each stage it is examined what happens and what heavenly gifts the righteous soul receives. The findings show that these two religions have similarities and differences in the beliefs related to the ascension of the righteous soul to Heaven. According to the findings of this research, it was determined that there was a ceremony in the Manichaean religion in which fortune telling was done to select the Teachers, the Elect and Church Leaders. In this ceremony, the ascension to Heaven of that person was determined with omen, and if their omens were recognized as good, they were elected as teachers or elected members or church leaders. Also, in this article, due to the fact that there are similarities between Kird-īr’s journey to heaven and the journey of the righteous soul to heaven in Manichaeism, the manner of his journey is also examined.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".