One of the language’s functions is the literary function. It is the spot of joint of the linguistics and literature. In the literary function, the focus is on the message; so the language of this message distinct of the standard language. The linguists explain this Foregrounding in two ways: escape the standard language that is named Deviation and adding the some rules to it that is named Extra regularity, in three levels: meaning, form and formal realization. The Deviation near the speech to the poetry and the Extra regularity verse it. In this short text, we pay to the most obvious Foregrounding, Deviation, in the Az in AVESTA book; because it shows the Akhavan’s art. In addition to so many Deviations forward to the Extra regularity in the Akavan’s poetry, meaning Deviation is rather than the other kinds of Deviation. This kind contains the Figurative language and meaning Rhetoric topics that increase the imagination. Especially the Simile and Metaphor, two forms of poetic images, have used greatly. Then the temporal Deviation, the use the archaic words, is seen plenty; so we see that the other kinds of Deviation is found rarely; because these reduce the word’s glory. Instance is found in the Akhavan’s poetry too, that is untitled or isn’t dependent on the mentioned kinds exactly.

The concept of God is the most important concepts in the sacred texts. In these texts the attributes and characteristics of God are told through the names, so that each name describes an aspect of God. In AVESTA, as a sacred book, God has several names included Ahura Mazda and 101 other names. Ahura Mazda, in Gahan, is God of wisdom who creates heaven and earth. So the universe, which is full of goodness, is considered as the act of God. Ahura Mazda is infinite and limitless but the cosmos is finite and limited. Ahura Mazda is self-existing God and Amesha Spantas, the divine sparks and manifestations depend on Him. Therefore, Ahura Mazda is inherently creative and benevolent and these attributes are manifested through Spanta Mainyu, His holy wisdom. This article tries to survey the names of God in AVESTA and its interpretation.

According to the role of Simorgh (Roc) archetype among authors and artists, we see effective presence of Simorgh in classical Persian texts having different functions like mythical, epic, philosophical, mystical and so on roles. Among these functions, it has shapes of birds, human, gods, and angels and so on in early periods; and it has different forms, features, and functions due to presence of myth; while in contemporary world, Simorgh is no longer a strange and mysterious being, and it is a multi-patterned bird in literature and other forms of art. This shows that Simorgh has got to objectivity from abstraction in the historical transition to contemporary art and literature; and it has declined from its original fine status in contemporary poetry instead of improving or at least stopping in being applied in previous sublime uses.

Gashtassb is one of the well-known kings of the Kiyani dynasty.Based on Zoroastrian sources, he promotes improving religion and a favored kingdom. In AVESTA and Pahlavi scripts, his wife is named Hotos; an Iranian girl from the Nozar race. Yet there are obvious differences among the personality of Gashtassb and his wife in AVESTA and the Pahlavi scripts with the descriptions of these characters in Shah-Nameh by Ferdowsi. In Shah-Nameh, Gashtassb has a negative and undesirable characteristic. Also, unlike these mentioned texts, in Shah-Nameh his wife is called Katayoon; and their union takes place during Gashtassb's trip to Rome. The present paper makes an attempt to introduce Gashtassb and his wife; while it discusses the dual differences within different texts; such as AVESTA and Shah-Nameh.

The attainment of knowledge is the most important goal of the philosophical, artistic and mystical efforts of the world of today and yesterday. The power of revelation is sometimes exercised with imagination and imagination; But many similarities and commonalities can be found between them. In this study, the aim is to examine mystical ideas in two works that seem to contradict mysticism, but research on them has shown that, despite the apparent contradictions, there are many similarities and commonalities in achieving knowledge. Shahnameh is not a mystical work. However, the origin of mysticism is the God-seeking nature of man and no heart can be found in which there is no sign of mystical tendencies and thoughts. Some of the mythological and epic characters of Shahnameh are the gods of Rig Veda religious songs; After the advent of Ashuzardasht and the spread of monotheism, they appeared in the form of gods and kings in the first epic work, AVESTA, and after Islam, they became the great kings and heroes of Shahnameh; in the history of these men and in some other The stories of Shahnameh come to discussions in which Ferdowsi's poetry becomes more like a mystical allegorical system. In this research, while introducing these characters to the mythical background and their evolution from the Vedas to AVESTA and Shahnameh and analysis Mystical mention of each.

Mythological criticism is one of the main methods of contemporary literary criticism that has been based on findings of contemporary psychology and particularly theories of Carl Gustav Jung, the famous Swiss psychiatrist, and his personality theory. Analytic psychology and its formation is in continuity theory that has been created on Sigmund Freud's psychoanalysis theory (Austrian psychiatrist).The paper depicts the formation of priest-king pattern in personality of Jamshid, his assimilation with Manna (Fares), his psychic inflation, and gloriousness, instituting of golden age and utopia (Var-e-Jamkard), and reasons of his sin and his extremity destroying, in AVESTA and Shahnameh.Then, it presents the reader with archetypical criticism and change cycles of the myth.

Comparative study of Indo-European poetry has been popular among Indo-Europeanists since the nineteenth century. This field, the main subject of which is the reconstruction of ancient literary texts, poetic texts, and the “ Indo-European poetic language, ” has been under the influence of modern literary theory, especially formalism. According to the formalistic definition, the main characteristic of a poetic text is the “ poetic diction” rather than its composition in metrical form. Moreover, the antithesis of a poetic speech is an ordinary text or idiomatic speech rather than prose. Indo-Europeanists argue that there is not a clear difference between poetry and prose in illiterate societies. However, for the early AVESTAn scholars, like Karl Friedrich Geldner, AVESTAn poetic texts are identical with AVESTAn metrical texts. In this paper, it is demonstrated that neither the meter nor the deviance in the ordinary speech is an appropriate criterion to distinguish poetic texts from non-poetic ones in the Younger AVESTA, but the best criterion is comparing the poetic devices and the common poetic-text features in the Indo-European cognate languages.

AVESTAn scholars have long believed that the duality which is the corner-stone of Zoroastrianism in the Avestā, finds its counterpart in the AVESTAn language; there are a certain number of words in AVESTAn which are used only for Ahurian creatures, and likewise there are a number of other words which are reserved for Ahrimanian beings. The author sets out in this paper to verity this assumption, and also to find out the origin of such a linguistic dichotomy.After reviewing and rejecting the opinions of some European scholars on the subject, for instance the claim that the words associated with Ahriman were originally those that were used for beasts or for one's enemies, the author lists some of these words which have "Ahurian" and "Ahrimanian" varieties; he gives a list for nouns (which includes some very common words such as house, woman, death and parts of the human anatomy) and another one for verbs (such as to create, to come, to eat, to go etc).The author then subjects these words to a linguistic and etymological analysis and comes up with some interesting findings:1. Some words are used metaphorically, either for Ahurian or for Ahrimanian beings. In some cases, we find the words which are associated with Ahura Mazda are euphemisms for some more common words.2. In some cases, the words which are used for Ahrimanian beings are diminutive and pejorative.3. Likewise, some words used for Ahrimanian beings have been picked from a local dialect, which was considered inferior to the main AVESTAn dialect.The author concludes that this duality is not in fact linguistic; it is rather stylistic, and it is a deliberate effort by those high priests who were responsible for composing AVESTAn texts to show on the one hand their veneration for Ahura Mazda and his creations, and their disdain, on the other, for Ahriman and his cohorts.

In Iranian mythology, Mitra as deity of covenant and judging, has a stable connection with Sun and receives its help to perform its functions. Two deities, Souroush and Rashan accompany him in judging. All of these deities, in addition to judging, have another functions like giving blessing, accompanying the soul of the dead, supporting honesty and fighting with demons. In the present article, we try to show the features of deities of judging by using content analysis method. Then we consider the connection of these features with the deity of judging in Shanameh. In addition to studying the poems which refer to the judging of Mitra and the sun, furthermore, instances that the term of judging indicate the presence of deities of judging are considered.

This article aims to study the caste-class system in Indian Rig- Veda and AVESTA, which were the social structure of the ancient Iran as well as India.Since the hymns of the Rig-Veda and AVESTA remark three distinct classes, it is hard to imagine the early Aryans with no social classes when they migrated to Iran and India. The Rig-Veda calls these classes “Brahman” (priest), “Rajanya” (nobility), and “Vaisya” (Commoner or Farmer -Craftsman). AVESTA labels them “Athravan (priest)”, “Rathaestar (Army)”, and “Vastrya (Commoner or Farmer-Craftsman). The Classification of Aryans reveals that the classes from Rig-Veda are very close to the AVESTAn’s social classes. This reveals that these two systems have a common origin. Hence it makes evident that the Aryans gradually migrated to India from Iran.