Purity, Taboos and Dietary Rules in Êzîdîism

Êzîdîism has a dense, everyday-permeating system of purity rules (paqijî) and taboos (tabû / qedexe) that reaches far beyond religious rites and shapes daily life, food, clothing and even language. Unlike the Abrahamic religions, there is no comprehensive written law book; the rules are part of the oral tradition and of lived practice, which is why they vary noticeably from region to region and from family to family. Their common core is the concern for the preservation of purity: of the four elements, of the body, of the community and of the word (Kreyenbroek 1995; Allison 2001; Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis”).

Until now these rules were scattered across several articles of the wiki. This contribution gathers them together systematically and refers to the respective specialist articles for the ritual details.

Important note first: Among the best-known taboos is the avoidance of the Arabic word Şeytan (“Satan”). This linguistic taboo was misinterpreted by outsiders for centuries in order to impute “devil worship” to the Êzîdî. Tawûsî Melek, the Peacock Angel, is in Êzîdî theology never the devil: but rather the faithful vicegerent of the one God Xwedê. The word taboo is explained factually below, without repeating this refuted equation (see in detail Tawûsî Melek).

1. Purity as a fundamental principle

In Êzîdî thought, purity is not a merely hygienic but a cosmic-religious concept. The world itself emerged from the pure light of Xwedê, and it is humankind’s task not to defile this original purity. Purity manifests itself on several levels:

• Purity of the elements: earth, water, fire and air must not be polluted (see section 2).
• Purity of the community: the strict endogamy (marriage only within one’s own caste and only among Êzîdî) preserves the “purity” of the three estates Şêx, Pîr and Mirîd (in detail: Social order).
• Purity of the body: ablutions, taboos concerning saliva and certain foods.
• Purity of the word: the avoidance of tabooed terms (section 6).

The Encyclopaedia Iranica summarises it thus: the Êzîdî concern for religious purity and their reluctance to mix things felt to be incompatible shows itself not only in the caste system, but also in numerous taboos of everyday life (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”). It is notable here that some of these taboos, such as the lettuce prohibition or the blue prohibition, are observed strictly above all in the presence of clergy, but are often handled loosely in their absence (ibid.). This makes it clear: it is less a matter of a “register of sins” than of respect for holiness and of group identity.

2. The purity of the four elements

The core of the entire purity system is formed by the holiness of the four elements: earth (ax), water (av), fire (agir) and air (ba). They are regarded as divine powers of creation and stand in close connection with the holy beings, fire and sun with Şêx Şems, water with Khidir. They must not be soiled, insulted or “wrongly mixed” (Kreyenbroek 1995; Açıkyıldız 2010).

The Encyclopaedia Iranica records that the purity of the four elements, earth, air, fire and water, is protected by a series of taboos, for example by the prohibition of spitting on earth, water or fire (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”). Concretely, numerous everyday rules derive from this:

2.1 Earth (ax)

• Do not spit on the ground.
• Bread (nan), which is likewise regarded as holy, must not be thrown on the earth, stepped on or turned over; crumbs are picked up (see Cuisine).
• The earth of Lalîş is especially holy; from it the Berat are formed, consecrated little clay balls used at important transitions.

2.2 Water (av)

• Do not spit into the water or throw refuse into it.
• The water of the holy spring Kaniya Spî (“White Spring”) in Lalîş is kept pure and not mixed with other water, it serves as a healing drink and for baptism.
• Water is the element of Khidir (Xidir Nebî) and is connected with healing and protection.

2.3 Fire (agir)

• Fire is not extinguished with water or saliva and not desecrated by rubbish.
• The lighting of lamps and wicks (especially at Sersal and in Lalîş) is a central ritual act, since the fire symbolises the divine light whose luminous expression is Tawûsî Melek.

2.4 Air (ba)

• The air, as the element of breath and of life, is likewise thought of as pure; in some traditions blowing on water or open fire at night is undesirable.

This element-purity is the common denominator from which many of the following dietary and everyday taboos can be explained.

3. Dietary taboos

The Êzîdî dietary rules are not a closed code, but a layering of prohibitions valid community-wide (lettuce, pork) and regional or caste- and family-specific taboos (fish, rooster, gazelle, certain beans). The detailed culinary embedding is in the article Cuisine; here it is about the origin and justification of the taboos.

3.1 Lettuce (xas / head lettuce): the best-known taboo

The most famous and most widespread Êzîdî dietary taboo concerns head lettuce, Kurmancî xas (also xes, marûl). Several mutually non-exclusive explanations for its origin circulate in scholarship and oral tradition, the sources explicitly scatter here, which is why they are juxtaposed transparently:

1. Phonetic explanation (linguistic taboo). The Encyclopaedia Iranica names as the most probable root a phonic similarity: the name of the lettuce, xas (ḵās), recalls Kurdish pronunciations of ḵāṣṣ, a word connected with the saints or with the holy/special. Out of reverence one therefore avoids the like-sounding food (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”). This explanation places the lettuce taboo within the same logic as the word taboos (section 6).

2. Saints’ legend. An oral tradition links the prohibition with the founding saints: when Şêx Adî (or a persecuted saint) wished to hide from his persecutors, a lettuce/cabbage field is said to have betrayed him, which is why the plant is avoided. Other versions tell that the corpse of a saint was pelted with lettuce heads.

3. Massacre explanation. Another tradition traces the taboo back to historical persecutions: Êzîdî are said to have been slaughtered in northern Iraqi lettuce fields, which is why the lettuce is held to be “blood-stained”.

4. Form/symbol explanation. In the literature there is also the indication that the layered lettuce leaves recall holy images, which justifies the protection against desecration (cf. Açıkyıldız 2010).

In practice the lettuce taboo is very stable and is often kept even in the diaspora; the Encyclopaedia Iranica notes, however, that, like the blue prohibition, it is frequently ignored in the absence of clergy (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”).

3.2 Pork

The pig (beraz) is avoided as in the Islamic and Jewish environment and is regarded as impure. This taboo is widespread community-wide and is also consistently preserved in the diaspora.

3.3 Fish (masî): regional

The fish is not taboo everywhere. In the region Sheikhan/Lalîş it is avoided (Kreyenbroek 1995:147; cf. Cuisine), whereas in Sinjar (Şingal) it is eaten. The justification lies partly in the connection of water (and its living creatures) with the holy, partly in local traditions. The taboo is thus a good example of the regional scattering of the dietary rules.

3.4 Gazelle (xezal)

The gazelle is in many places regarded as avoided: in some traditions it is understood as a “related” animal or one associated with the saints and is therefore not hunted or eaten (cf. Cuisine). Here too it is a taboo handled with varying strictness from region to region.

3.5 Rooster / cockerel (dîk): among certain lineages

The rooster plays a special role in Êzîdîism, because the peacock is the emblem of Tawûsî Melek and the rooster stands close to it as a bird. In certain Pîr families (handed down for example for the lineage of the Pîrê Sînê) the rooster is therefore regarded as protected and may not be slaughtered (cf. Cuisine). It is thus not a community-wide but a caste-/family-bound taboo. To be emphasised: the peacock itself is also holy, to hunt, eat or mistreat it is expressly forbidden (Açıkyıldız 2010; see Tawûsî Melek).

3.6 Further regional dietary taboos

In individual Şêx or Pîr lineages, certain beans (e.g. black beans, on account of the mourning connotation of the colour) or other foods are additionally avoided. These taboos are locally limited and not binding for all Êzîdî.

3.7 Wine and alcohol: not a taboo

Unlike in Islam, wine (mey) is religiously not forbidden. On the contrary: wine is poured out ritually at the assembly festival in Lalîş (Allison 2001; Açıkyıldız 2010). This is an important difference from the Islamic environment and shows that the Êzîdî dietary rules follow their own logic and are not derived from Islam.

4. The colour blue

A taboo visible in everyday life is the avoidance of the colour blue: traditionally especially in clothing. For this prohibition too the explanations scatter, and scholarship places them side by side:

1. Phonetic/word taboo. Several sources connect the blue prohibition with the avoidance of words that sound like Şeytan, in the same logic as the lettuce taboo (cf. section 6). The word for blue (Kurmancî among others şîn) thereby comes into the vicinity of the avoided terms.

2. Purity/holiness. Other interpretations assign blue to the holy, “heavenly” spheres, whose colour humans should not claim for themselves, blue being too holy to be worn as profane everyday clothing.

3. Symbolism of the creation colours. In Êzîdî symbolism it is above all the primal colours of the creation narrative (red, yellow, white) that are significant; blue stands outside this series (Açıkyıldız 2010; see Creation and Tawûsî Melek).

As with the lettuce: the blue prohibition is handled with varying strictness from region to region and is often ignored in the absence of clergy (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”). The many-coloured plumage of the peacock itself, also shimmering blue, remains untouched by this and stands for the fullness of creation.

Note: Concrete colour taboos vary regionally and are presented differently in the literature. The above explanations are to be read as interpretations standing side by side, not as a single assured reason.

5. Purity rules in everyday life

From the element-purity (section 2) derive numerous concrete everyday rules that are observed in traditional Êzîdî households:

5.1 Saliva

Saliva is regarded as impure and as endangering the elements: one does not spit on the earth, into water or into fire (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”). Fire is not extinguished with saliva.

5.2 The threshold (derî / nigê derî)

The doorstep: especially the thresholds of holy sites in Lalîş, is regarded as holy. One does not step on the threshold but steps over it; at sanctuaries the threshold is kissed. The entering of holy precincts takes place barefoot. This threshold reverence is part of the general respect for holy places and boundaries between the pure and the profane.

5.3 Fire and light

The lighting and tending of lamps is an act of purity and veneration; the fire is not desecrated (see section 2.3).

5.4 Purity of dishes and food

In orthodox Şêx and Pîr families, and especially among the Feqîr/Faqra (ascetically living devout), the dishes of non-Êzîdî are in part regarded as impure. Holy water and holy foods (Sîmel bread, Berat) are kept separate and handled carefully (see Cuisine).

6. Taboo words

A separate area of purity concerns language. Certain words are completely avoided because even their utterance is regarded as impure or as a violation of reverence.

The best-known example is the Arabic word Şeytan (“Satan”, “devil”). Êzîdî traditionally avoid it completely, not because it concerned their angel, but because the loud utterance of the name of the “evil principle” is felt to be a defilement (Kreyenbroek 1995). From the same taboo derives, according to a widespread interpretation, the avoidance of words that phonically recall Şeytan or could be associated with it, among which some explanations count the words for lettuce/cabbage and blue (cf. sections 3.1 and 4).

Clarification (central): That Êzîdî avoid the word Şeytan does not mean that Tawûsî Melek were identical with the devil. On the contrary: in Êzîdî belief there is no independent, God-hostile evil and no “fallen angel”. Tawûsî Melek is the highest, faithful angel and vicegerent of Xwedê. The linguistic taboo is a purity taboo, not a confession, it was merely misinterpreted as such by colonial and missionary literature. The detailed refutation of this slander is in the article Tawûsî Melek (see also Kreyenbroek 1995; Asatrian & Arakelova 2014).

Besides Şeytan, further words may, depending on region and family, be avoided or replaced by paraphrases; this too belongs to the “purity of the word”.

7. Rites of passage and purification (overview)

Purity is not only avoidance, but also active purification. At the turning points of life and in the festival calendar stand rites that produce or renew purity. They are only briefly touched on here and deepened in the specialist articles:

• Mor kirin (baptism). The child is blessed with the holy water of the Kaniya Spî, a central rite of purification and incorporation (in detail: Life cycle and Traditions).
• Bisk / first lock of hair and further initiations bind the child to its Pîr and its caste.
• Ablutions accompany prayer, festivals and especially the pilgrimage to Lalîş.
• Mourning and death. The handling of the corpse and the mourning rites too follow purity conceptions; the soul enters the cycle of rebirth (in detail: Death, soul and rebirth).

The religious purity of the community is moreover secured structurally through endogamy and the estate order (see Social order).

8. Terms and conventions

Sources

• Philip G. Kreyenbroek: Yezidism, Its Background, Observances and Textual Tradition. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 1995.
• Philip G. Kreyenbroek & Khalil Jindy Rashow: God and Sheikh Adi are Perfect, Sacred Poems and Religious Narratives from the Yezidi Tradition. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2005.
• Christine Allison: The Yezidi Oral Tradition in Iraqi Kurdistan. Richmond: Curzon, 2001.
• Eszter Spät: The Yezidis. London: Saqi Books, 2005.
• Birgül Açıkyıldız: The Yezidis, The History of a Community, Culture and Religion. London: I. B. Tauris, 2010.
• Khanna Omarkhali: The Yezidi Religious Textual Tradition, Transmission, Categorisation and Canonisation of the Yezidi Oral Religious Texts. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2017.
• Garnik S. Asatrian & Victoria Arakelova: The Religion of the Peacock Angel, The Yezidis and Their Spirit World. Durham: Acumen/Routledge, 2014.
• Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”, https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/yazidis-i-general-1/
• Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis ii. Initiation in Yazidism”, https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/yazidis-ii-initiation-in-yazidism/

Statements marked as “regional”, “discussed” or “side by side” (especially on lettuce, fish, blue and the word taboos) reflect open research questions and regional differences and are not to be read as a single assured reason.

This article is part of the Êzdîxan wiki. Related articles: Religion + Theology, Traditions + life rituals, Tawûsî Melek, Cuisine + foods, Life cycle, Social order, Death, soul and rebirth.

8. Endogamy and the Marriage Ban Between the Three Castes

Probably the most consequential application of the purity principle to the community is strict endogamy. It operates on two levels: outwardly as a ban on marriage with non-Yazidis, and inwardly as a ban on marriage between the three hereditary castes Şêx (Sheikh), Pîr and Mirîd (Murid/laity). The social structure of these castes is treated in detail in the article Social Order; here the focus is on the religious rationale, the consequences of transgression, and the reform debate in the diaspora.

8.1 Religious Rationale

Caste membership is determined exclusively by birth and is regarded as unchangeable for life (Kreyenbroek 1995; Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”). Unlike a Hindu-style ranking of worth, according to Kreyenbroek the Yazidi caste system is primarily a division of religious functions: each caste carries its own duties for the spiritual life of the community as a whole, Şêx and Pîr as the spiritual castes, Mirîd as the great majority of the laity (Kreyenbroek 1995).

The religious rationale for endogamy lies in the purity of this God-ordained order: the spiritual lineages trace their authority back to divine descent, traditionally to six of the seven holy angels (Tawûsî Melek, as the foremost of the seven angels, remains excluded from this). A marriage across caste boundaries is therefore regarded as a violation of a “spiritual kinship” and is understood in the tradition as a kind of religious incest that would defile the order established by the angels (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”; Asatrian & Arakelova 2014). Within the spiritual castes, moreover, even narrower subdivisions apply: certain Şêx and Pîr lineages may only marry among themselves, so that the ban is multi-tiered.

In this way endogamy fits seamlessly into the rest of the purity system (Section 1): just as the four elements must not be “wrongly mixed,” so too the caste order is meant to remain unmixed. The Encyclopaedia Iranica explicitly names the caste system as the first expression of precisely that concern for purity from which the everyday taboos also arise (Encyclopaedia Iranica, “Yazidis i. General”).

8.2 Consequences of Transgression

Transgressing the marriage rules traditionally entailed the most severe sanction of Yazidi society: exclusion from the community (excommunication). Anyone who married a non-Yazidi or entered into a sexual union with a non-Yazidi was, according to traditional understanding, no longer considered a Yazidi; conversion or readmission from outside was impossible, since one can only be born into the religion as the child of two Yazidi parents (Kreyenbroek 1995). Historically, even the harshest punishments, up to killing, are recorded for violations of caste and religious boundaries; the regular and enforceable consequence, however, was expulsion together with one’s descendants.

This strictness also explains the community’s demographic vulnerability: since conversion to Yazidism is not possible and every “mixed marriage” permanently lost members, the number of Yazidis remained small, a circumstance that additionally aggravated the consequences of persecution and genocide (the 74 Fermans, most recently the genocide by IS in 2014).

8.3 Reform Debate in the Diaspora and After 2014

In the Western European diaspora (with the largest community in Germany), it is precisely the elements regarded as the most rigid, caste purity and the ban on inter-caste marriage, that come under pressure for change most quickly and at the same time generate the greatest tensions (Maisel/diaspora research; cf. the religious-studies literature on the transformation of Yazidism in exile). Several factors work together: growing up in a majority society with free choice of partner, higher education, the absence of geographically closed caste structures, and the social pressure of having to justify traditional rules. Young Yazidis increasingly question the inter-caste marriage ban; whether Yazidism can transform here is regarded by many as a key question for its survival.

The religious leadership in Iraq also responded, above all under the impact of the IS genocide. In coordination with the Spiritual Council, the Baba Şêx declared that women enslaved and raped by ISIS would be readmitted into the community as Yazidis, a clear break with the older rule, according to which a sexual union with a non-Yazidi meant exclusion (UNHCR; Al Jazeera). In spring 2019, the Supreme Spiritual Council initially went further with a declaration concerning “all survivors,” but clarified it shortly afterward: readmission did not apply to children born of rape with IS fathers, but only to children of two Yazidi parents (Al Jazeera, 29.04.2019). Thus the fundamental principle, only someone descended from two Yazidi parents is a Yazidi, remained essentially in place; many mothers found themselves faced with the painful choice between their child and a return to the community (Al Jazeera 2021).

It should be noted: these debates concern different levels, the readmission of victims of violence, the status of children, and, to be distinguished from these, the intra-community inter-caste marriage ban between Şêx, Pîr and Mirîd. The latter is officially still in force; the loosening so far takes place more in the lived practice of the diaspora than through formal religious decisions, and it remains contested within the community.

Note: The reform debate is in flux. Official religious declarations (Baba Şêx, Spiritual Council) and actual practice in Iraq and the diaspora can diverge; the 2019 decisions mentioned here concern above all the readmission of genocide survivors and not a general abolition of caste endogamy.