Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1This arose partly, but partly only, from the imperfections * Colebrooke’s Migcellaneous Essays, 1873, vol. ii, p. 102, [3] b XVili PREFACE TO THE of the translation. Much, however, of what Sir W. Jones represented as ridiculous, and therefore unworthy of Zoroaster, and therefore unworthy of being translated, forms an integral part of the sacred code of the Zoroastrians. Sir W. Jones smiles at those who ‘think obscurity sublime and venerable, like that of ancient cloisters and temples, shedding,’ as Milton expresses it, ‘a dim religious light’ ‘On possédait déja, he writes in his letter addressed to Anquetil Duperron, 'and composed in very good and sparkling French, ‘plusieurs traités attribués 4 Zardusht ou Zeratusht, traduits en Persan moderne ; de prétendues conférences de ce législateur avec Ormuzd, des priéres, des dogmes, des lois religieuses. Quelques savans, qui ont lu ces traductions, nous ont assuré que les originaux étaient de la plus haute antiquité, parce qu’ils renfermaient beaucoup de platitudes, de bévues, et de contradictions: mais nous avons conclu par les mémes raisons, qu’ils étaient trés-modernes, ou bien qu’ils n’étaient pas d’un homme d’esprit, et d’un philosophe, tel que Zoroastre est peint par nos historiens. Votre nouvelle traduction, Monsieur, nous confirme dans ce jugement: tout le collége des Guébres aurait beau nous l’assurer; nous ne croirons jamais que le charlatan le moins habile ait pu écrire les fadaises dont vos deux derniers volumes sont rempplis?.’ He at last sums up his argument in the following words: ‘Ou Zoroastre n/avait pas le sens commun, ou il n’écrivit pas le livre que vous lui attribuez: sil n'avait pas le sens commun, il fallait le laisser dans la foule, et dans lobscurité; s'il n’écrivit pas 1 Sir W. Jones’s Works, vol. iv, p. 113. * Tb., vol. x, p. 408. SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST. xix
2Jones’s Works, vol. iv, p. 113. * Tb., vol. x, p. 408. SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST. xix ce livre, il était impudent de le publier sous son nom. Ainsi, ou vous avez insulté le godt du public en lui présentant des sottises, ou vous l’avez trompé en lui donnant des faussetés: et de chaque cété vous méritez son mépris!.’ ' This alternative holds good no longer. The sacred code of Zoroaster or of any other of the founders of religions may appear to us to be full of absurdities, or may in fact really be so, and it may yet be the duty of the scholar to publish, to translate, and carefully to examine those codes as memorials of the past, as the only trustworthy documents in which to study the growth and decay of religion. It does not answer to say that if Zoroaster was what we believe him to have been, a wise man, in our sense of the word, he could not have written the rubbish which we find in the Avesta. If we are once satisfied that the text of the Avesta, or the Veda, or the Tripi¢aka is old and genuine, and that this text formed the foundation -on which, during many centuries, the religious belief of millions of human beings was based, it becomes our duty, both as historians and philosophers, to study these books, to try to understand how they could have arisen, and how they could have exercised for ages an influence over human beings who in all other respects were not inferior to ourselves, nay, whom we are accustomed to look up to on many points as patterns of wisdom, of virtue, and of taste. The facts, such as they are, must be faced, if the study of the ancient religions of the world is ever to assume a really historical character; and having 1 Works, vol. x, p. 437. b2 XX PREFACE TO THE
3The facts, such as they are, must be faced, if the study of the ancient religions of the world is ever to assume a really historical character; and having 1 Works, vol. x, p. 437. b2 XX PREFACE TO THE myself grudged no praise to what to my mind is really beautiful or sublime in the early revelations of religious truth, I feel the less hesitation in fulfilling the duty of the true scholar, and placing before historians and philosophers accurate, complete, and unembellished versions of some of the sacred books of the East. Such versions alone will enable them to form a true and just estimate of the real development of early religious thought, so far as we can still gain a sight of it in literary records to which the highest human or even divine authority has been ascribed by the followers of the great religions of antiquity. It often requires an effort to spoil a beautiful sentence by a few words which might so easily be suppressed, but which are there in the original, and must be taken into account quite as much as the pointed ears in the beautiful Faun of the Capitol. We want to know the ancient religions such as they really were, not such as we wish they should have been. We want to know, not their wisdom only, but their folly also; and while we must learn to look up to their highest points where they seem to rise nearer to heaven than anything we were acquainted with before, we must not shrink from looking down into their stony tracts, their dark abysses, their muddy moraines, in order to comprehend both the heighth and the depth of the human mind in its searchings after the Infinite. I can answer for myself and for those who have worked with me, that our translations are truthful, that we have suppressed nothing, that we have varnished nothing, however hard it seemed sometimes even to write it down. There is only one exception. There are in ancient SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST. Xxt books, and particularly in religious books, frequent allusions to the sexual aspects of nature, which, though perfectly harmless and innocent in themselves, cannot be rendered in modern language without the appearance of coarseness. We may regret that it should be so, but tradition is too strong on this point, and I have therefore felt obliged to leave certain passages untranslated, and to give the original, when necessary, in a note. But this has been done in extreme cases only, and many things which we should feel inclined to suppress have been left in all their outspoken simplicity, because those who want to study ancient man, must learn to study him as he really was, an animal, with all the strength and weaknesses of an animal, though an animal that was to rise above himself, and in the end discover his true self, after many struggles and many defeats.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1This arose partly, but partly only, from the imperfections * Colebrooke’s Migcellaneous Essays, 1873, vol. ii, p. 102, [3] b XVili PREFACE TO THE of the translation. Much, however, of what Sir W. Jones represented as ridiculous, and therefore unworthy of Zoroaster, and therefore unworthy of being translated, forms an integral part of the sacred code of the Zoroastrians. Sir W. Jones smiles at those who ‘think obscurity sublime and venerable, like that of ancient cloisters and temples, shedding,’ as Milton expresses it, ‘a dim religious light’ ‘On possédait déja, he writes in his letter addressed to Anquetil Duperron, 'and composed in very good and sparkling French, ‘plusieurs traités attribués 4 Zardusht ou Zeratusht, traduits en Persan moderne ; de prétendues conférences de ce législateur avec Ormuzd, des priéres, des dogmes, des lois religieuses. Quelques savans, qui ont lu ces traductions, nous ont assuré que les originaux étaient de la plus haute antiquité, parce qu’ils renfermaient beaucoup de platitudes, de bévues, et de contradictions: mais nous avons conclu par les mémes raisons, qu’ils étaient trés-modernes, ou bien qu’ils n’étaient pas d’un homme d’esprit, et d’un philosophe, tel que Zoroastre est peint par nos historiens. Votre nouvelle traduction, Monsieur, nous confirme dans ce jugement: tout le collége des Guébres aurait beau nous l’assurer; nous ne croirons jamais que le charlatan le moins habile ait pu écrire les fadaises dont vos deux derniers volumes sont rempplis?.’ He at last sums up his argument in the following words: ‘Ou Zoroastre n/avait pas le sens commun, ou il n’écrivit pas le livre que vous lui attribuez: sil n'avait pas le sens commun, il fallait le laisser dans la foule, et dans lobscurité; s'il n’écrivit pas 1 Sir W. Jones’s Works, vol. iv, p. 113. * Tb., vol. x, p. 408. SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST. xix
2Jones’s Works, vol. iv, p. 113. * Tb., vol. x, p. 408. SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST. xix ce livre, il était impudent de le publier sous son nom. Ainsi, ou vous avez insulté le godt du public en lui présentant des sottises, ou vous l’avez trompé en lui donnant des faussetés: et de chaque cété vous méritez son mépris!.’ ' This alternative holds good no longer. The sacred code of Zoroaster or of any other of the founders of religions may appear to us to be full of absurdities, or may in fact really be so, and it may yet be the duty of the scholar to publish, to translate, and carefully to examine those codes as memorials of the past, as the only trustworthy documents in which to study the growth and decay of religion. It does not answer to say that if Zoroaster was what we believe him to have been, a wise man, in our sense of the word, he could not have written the rubbish which we find in the Avesta. If we are once satisfied that the text of the Avesta, or the Veda, or the Tripi¢aka is old and genuine, and that this text formed the foundation -on which, during many centuries, the religious belief of millions of human beings was based, it becomes our duty, both as historians and philosophers, to study these books, to try to understand how they could have arisen, and how they could have exercised for ages an influence over human beings who in all other respects were not inferior to ourselves, nay, whom we are accustomed to look up to on many points as patterns of wisdom, of virtue, and of taste. The facts, such as they are, must be faced, if the study of the ancient religions of the world is ever to assume a really historical character; and having 1 Works, vol. x, p. 437. b2 XX PREFACE TO THE
3The facts, such as they are, must be faced, if the study of the ancient religions of the world is ever to assume a really historical character; and having 1 Works, vol. x, p. 437. b2 XX PREFACE TO THE myself grudged no praise to what to my mind is really beautiful or sublime in the early revelations of religious truth, I feel the less hesitation in fulfilling the duty of the true scholar, and placing before historians and philosophers accurate, complete, and unembellished versions of some of the sacred books of the East. Such versions alone will enable them to form a true and just estimate of the real development of early religious thought, so far as we can still gain a sight of it in literary records to which the highest human or even divine authority has been ascribed by the followers of the great religions of antiquity. It often requires an effort to spoil a beautiful sentence by a few words which might so easily be suppressed, but which are there in the original, and must be taken into account quite as much as the pointed ears in the beautiful Faun of the Capitol. We want to know the ancient religions such as they really were, not such as we wish they should have been. We want to know, not their wisdom only, but their folly also; and while we must learn to look up to their highest points where they seem to rise nearer to heaven than anything we were acquainted with before, we must not shrink from looking down into their stony tracts, their dark abysses, their muddy moraines, in order to comprehend both the heighth and the depth of the human mind in its searchings after the Infinite. I can answer for myself and for those who have worked with me, that our translations are truthful, that we have suppressed nothing, that we have varnished nothing, however hard it seemed sometimes even to write it down. There is only one exception. There are in ancient SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST. Xxt books, and particularly in religious books, frequent allusions to the sexual aspects of nature, which, though perfectly harmless and innocent in themselves, cannot be rendered in modern language without the appearance of coarseness. We may regret that it should be so, but tradition is too strong on this point, and I have therefore felt obliged to leave certain passages untranslated, and to give the original, when necessary, in a note. But this has been done in extreme cases only, and many things which we should feel inclined to suppress have been left in all their outspoken simplicity, because those who want to study ancient man, must learn to study him as he really was, an animal, with all the strength and weaknesses of an animal, though an animal that was to rise above himself, and in the end discover his true self, after many struggles and many defeats.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.