Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1So that, if shat same de owing to the sacred being, it would be easier for him not to produce it, than, after z¢s production, ¢o have brought z¢ to notice and commanded zs to abstain from it. 263. So far, indeed, I do not understand any advantage and motive 7” the production and creation of evil. 264. Again, in their scriptures, he speaks inconsistently about good works and crime (265) thus : ‘Good works and crime are both owing to me. 266. Neither demons, nor wizards, are unrestricted in causing the ruin of any one. 267. Noone has accepted the religion and done good works, and no one Aas walked in infidelity azd committed crime, except through my will.’ 1 Zaratist. [24] oO 194 SIKAND-GOMANIK VIGAR. 268. In the same scripture he adduces many ¢hzngs which one has to connect, and inflicts curses on the creatures, (269) thus: ‘Why do mankind desire and commit that crime which I design for them?’ 270. It occurs concerning the will and work of his own hand, and yet he frightens them with punishment in body and soul. 271. J” another place he speaks thus: ‘I myself am the deluder of mankind, for if it should be my will they woudd then be shown the true path by me, but z¢ zs my will that they go to hell!’ 272. And zz another place he speaks thus: ‘Man himself is the causer of crime.” 273. In these three modes the sacred being gives evidence of different kinds about his own creatures. 274. One is this, that Ze himself is Aharman?; (275) one is this, that he is himself the deluder of the creatures®; (276) and, in the other, he makes his own creatures confederates involved with Aharman in deluding‘; so that Le zmphes: ‘There are instances when I occasion 24, and there are instances when Aharman does.’ 277. Through that whzck he states, that mankind themselves occasion crime, they are made by him confederates with Aharman; Ae himself decng at a distance from the crime. 278. For if mankind commit crime owing to their own nature and their own delusion, that zmplies that the sacred being, with 1 Texts to this effect are numerous in the Qur’4n, such as ‘whom he pleases does God lead astray, and whom he pleases he places on the right way . . . God leads the wrong-doers astray ; for God does what he will... in hell they shall broil’ (Qur'an VI, 39, XIV, 32, 34; SBE, vol. vi). 2 As deduced from the passage quoted in § 269. ® As stated in the passage quoted in § 271. * As implied in the passage quoted in § 272. CHAPTER XI, 268-293. 195 Aharman, is far from the criminality, (279) because Zt ts as zt were not owing to the sacred being, nor yet owing to Aharman.
2vi). 2 As deduced from the passage quoted in § 269. ® As stated in the passage quoted in § 271. * As implied in the passage quoted in § 272. CHAPTER XI, 268-293. 195 Aharman, is far from the criminality, (279) because Zt ts as zt were not owing to the sacred being, nor yet owing to Aharman. 280. Again, you should ask of those whom they call Mftazalik! (281) thus: ‘Is z# the will of the sacred being for all mankind to. abstain from crime through cher own free will?, to escape from hell, and to make ¢hem proceed to heaven, or not?’ 282. If one says that z¢ zs not, (283) that zmphes that an® opinion is formed by him as to the little goodness of the sacred being and the evil of his will; (284) and, for the same reason, z¢ is not fitting to glorify hem as the divine existence. 285, If ove says that z¢ zs his will, (286) that zmples that an opinion is formed by him as to the good will-of the sacred being ; (287) and, for the same reason, z¢ is fitting to glorify Zem as the divine existence. 288. Ask this, too, that is: ‘If z¢ de his will, is he capable of performing z¢, or not?’ 289. If ove says that Ae zs not, (290) that zmpies that an opinion is formed by him as to the incapability of the sacred being as regards that will of his; (291) and, for the same reason, z¢ is not fitting to glorify zm as the divine existence which is almighty. 292. If ome says that Ae is capable of performing 42s will, (293) that implies that an opinion is formed by him as to zs 1 Which is doubtless the original Pahlavi form of Paz. muthzari. It is an adjective, meaning ‘seceding, schismatic,’ derived from Ar. muwhtazil, and applied specially to Muhammadan schismatics. ; 2 Assuming that P4z. A4wad-k4mf stands for Pahl. 4z4dkAmith, which would be identical with the former word in Pahlavi writing. 5 JE has ‘no’ in Paz. but not in Sans., which negative is evidently a modern blunder. O 2 196 SIKAND-GOMANIK VIGAR. capability for that will of his; (294) and, for the same reason, ?7¢ is fitting to glorify 42m as the divine existence which is almighty. 295. Again, ask this, that is: ‘When Ze is capable of performing his will, does he perform z¢, or not?’ 296. If ome says that he performs 7z¢, (297) that implies that the abstaining from sin, escaping from hell, and bringing to heaven! would be manifested unto all mankind ; (298) dz¢ this is that which is not manifest by his existence, and is falsifying even his own revelation (dind). 299. If one says that he is capable of performing his will, but does not perform zt, (300) that zmples that an opinion is formed by him as to the unmercifulness of the sacred being, zs enmity to mankind, and the inconstancy of his will. 301. For if he performs 2z¢, 2# is no harm to him himself and is an advantage ¢o mankind; his own will is also continuous thereby. 302. But if he does not perform 2¢, z¢ is no advantage to him himself and is harm ¢o mankind; his own will is also discontinuous thereby.
3301. For if he performs 2z¢, 2# is no harm to him himself and is an advantage ¢o mankind; his own will is also continuous thereby. 302. But if he does not perform 2¢, z¢ is no advantage to him himself and is harm ¢o mankind; his own will is also discontinuous thereby. 303. Again, as& this, that is : ‘ Does he not perform z¢ through will, or without will?’ 304. If ome says that he does not perform z¢ through will, (305) that temples that an opinion is formed by him that the sacred being is good-willed, du¢ has no will to do good ; (306) azd this is even to consider 42m faulty through inconsistency. 307. If ome says that he is without will, ad therefore does not perform 2¢, (308) that zmples that an opinion is formed by him as to the weakness of the sacred being in his own self, or the existence of an injurer of his will. 309. The conclusion is this, that, wh a manager 1 JJ has ‘saving from hell and escaping to heaven.’ CHAPTER XI, 294-319. 197 of this worldly exzstence who may be without an opponent, without competition, and perfect in sagacity, goodness, and capability, ¢heve should not be all these unworthy actions, trouble and misery, pain and vexation, especially of mankind and the other creatures. 310. Because, when a manager, without an opponent, is perfect in sagacity, he knows means for evil not to occur and also remedies for carrying off evil. 311. When Ze is perfect in goodness and merciful, Ze Aas no wish for the occurrence of evil at first, dv¢ a wish for z¢s extinction. 312. When he is perfect in capability, Ze is capable of not really becoming equally the origin of evil. 313. Now, as in the worldly exzstence, whose manager is the sacred being, the existence of evil is unquestionably visible, then thus much is not separable from this, either where the manager is provided with an opponent, or is without an opponent :—314. If he does not know means for evil not to occur, and remedies for carrying off evil, the imperfect sagacity of the sacred being is thereby! manifested. 315. Or the evil exists with his good will, azd the imperfect goodness of his will is manifested. 316. Or 4e is not capable of not a//owzng the occurrence of evil, and of carrying z¢ off, and the imperfect capability of the sacred being is manifested. 317. And when “e is imperfect even 2% one—in sagacity, or goodness, or capability—z¢ is not fitting to glorify and worship him as the divine existence who is almighty, all-good, and all-wise. 318. This, too, you should know, that since any existing thing, which is acting, is prouzded with a will, but z¢s nature Aas not become unrestricted, (319) that 1 Reading agas instead of the similarly-written afas, ‘and by it.’ 198 SIKAND-GOMANIK vIGAR.
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.
1So that, if shat same de owing to the sacred being, it would be easier for him not to produce it, than, after z¢s production, ¢o have brought z¢ to notice and commanded zs to abstain from it. 263. So far, indeed, I do not understand any advantage and motive 7” the production and creation of evil. 264. Again, in their scriptures, he speaks inconsistently about good works and crime (265) thus : ‘Good works and crime are both owing to me. 266. Neither demons, nor wizards, are unrestricted in causing the ruin of any one. 267. Noone has accepted the religion and done good works, and no one Aas walked in infidelity azd committed crime, except through my will.’ 1 Zaratist. [24] oO 194 SIKAND-GOMANIK VIGAR. 268. In the same scripture he adduces many ¢hzngs which one has to connect, and inflicts curses on the creatures, (269) thus: ‘Why do mankind desire and commit that crime which I design for them?’ 270. It occurs concerning the will and work of his own hand, and yet he frightens them with punishment in body and soul. 271. J” another place he speaks thus: ‘I myself am the deluder of mankind, for if it should be my will they woudd then be shown the true path by me, but z¢ zs my will that they go to hell!’ 272. And zz another place he speaks thus: ‘Man himself is the causer of crime.” 273. In these three modes the sacred being gives evidence of different kinds about his own creatures. 274. One is this, that Ze himself is Aharman?; (275) one is this, that he is himself the deluder of the creatures®; (276) and, in the other, he makes his own creatures confederates involved with Aharman in deluding‘; so that Le zmphes: ‘There are instances when I occasion 24, and there are instances when Aharman does.’ 277. Through that whzck he states, that mankind themselves occasion crime, they are made by him confederates with Aharman; Ae himself decng at a distance from the crime. 278. For if mankind commit crime owing to their own nature and their own delusion, that zmplies that the sacred being, with 1 Texts to this effect are numerous in the Qur’4n, such as ‘whom he pleases does God lead astray, and whom he pleases he places on the right way . . . God leads the wrong-doers astray ; for God does what he will... in hell they shall broil’ (Qur'an VI, 39, XIV, 32, 34; SBE, vol. vi). 2 As deduced from the passage quoted in § 269. ® As stated in the passage quoted in § 271. * As implied in the passage quoted in § 272. CHAPTER XI, 268-293. 195 Aharman, is far from the criminality, (279) because Zt ts as zt were not owing to the sacred being, nor yet owing to Aharman.
2vi). 2 As deduced from the passage quoted in § 269. ® As stated in the passage quoted in § 271. * As implied in the passage quoted in § 272. CHAPTER XI, 268-293. 195 Aharman, is far from the criminality, (279) because Zt ts as zt were not owing to the sacred being, nor yet owing to Aharman. 280. Again, you should ask of those whom they call Mftazalik! (281) thus: ‘Is z# the will of the sacred being for all mankind to. abstain from crime through cher own free will?, to escape from hell, and to make ¢hem proceed to heaven, or not?’ 282. If one says that z¢ zs not, (283) that zmphes that an® opinion is formed by him as to the little goodness of the sacred being and the evil of his will; (284) and, for the same reason, z¢ is not fitting to glorify hem as the divine existence. 285, If ove says that z¢ zs his will, (286) that zmples that an opinion is formed by him as to the good will-of the sacred being ; (287) and, for the same reason, z¢ is fitting to glorify Zem as the divine existence. 288. Ask this, too, that is: ‘If z¢ de his will, is he capable of performing z¢, or not?’ 289. If ove says that Ae zs not, (290) that zmpies that an opinion is formed by him as to the incapability of the sacred being as regards that will of his; (291) and, for the same reason, z¢ is not fitting to glorify zm as the divine existence which is almighty. 292. If ome says that Ae is capable of performing 42s will, (293) that implies that an opinion is formed by him as to zs 1 Which is doubtless the original Pahlavi form of Paz. muthzari. It is an adjective, meaning ‘seceding, schismatic,’ derived from Ar. muwhtazil, and applied specially to Muhammadan schismatics. ; 2 Assuming that P4z. A4wad-k4mf stands for Pahl. 4z4dkAmith, which would be identical with the former word in Pahlavi writing. 5 JE has ‘no’ in Paz. but not in Sans., which negative is evidently a modern blunder. O 2 196 SIKAND-GOMANIK VIGAR. capability for that will of his; (294) and, for the same reason, ?7¢ is fitting to glorify 42m as the divine existence which is almighty. 295. Again, ask this, that is: ‘When Ze is capable of performing his will, does he perform z¢, or not?’ 296. If ome says that he performs 7z¢, (297) that implies that the abstaining from sin, escaping from hell, and bringing to heaven! would be manifested unto all mankind ; (298) dz¢ this is that which is not manifest by his existence, and is falsifying even his own revelation (dind). 299. If one says that he is capable of performing his will, but does not perform zt, (300) that zmples that an opinion is formed by him as to the unmercifulness of the sacred being, zs enmity to mankind, and the inconstancy of his will. 301. For if he performs 2z¢, 2# is no harm to him himself and is an advantage ¢o mankind; his own will is also continuous thereby. 302. But if he does not perform 2¢, z¢ is no advantage to him himself and is harm ¢o mankind; his own will is also discontinuous thereby.
3301. For if he performs 2z¢, 2# is no harm to him himself and is an advantage ¢o mankind; his own will is also continuous thereby. 302. But if he does not perform 2¢, z¢ is no advantage to him himself and is harm ¢o mankind; his own will is also discontinuous thereby. 303. Again, as& this, that is : ‘ Does he not perform z¢ through will, or without will?’ 304. If ome says that he does not perform z¢ through will, (305) that temples that an opinion is formed by him that the sacred being is good-willed, du¢ has no will to do good ; (306) azd this is even to consider 42m faulty through inconsistency. 307. If ome says that he is without will, ad therefore does not perform 2¢, (308) that zmples that an opinion is formed by him as to the weakness of the sacred being in his own self, or the existence of an injurer of his will. 309. The conclusion is this, that, wh a manager 1 JJ has ‘saving from hell and escaping to heaven.’ CHAPTER XI, 294-319. 197 of this worldly exzstence who may be without an opponent, without competition, and perfect in sagacity, goodness, and capability, ¢heve should not be all these unworthy actions, trouble and misery, pain and vexation, especially of mankind and the other creatures. 310. Because, when a manager, without an opponent, is perfect in sagacity, he knows means for evil not to occur and also remedies for carrying off evil. 311. When Ze is perfect in goodness and merciful, Ze Aas no wish for the occurrence of evil at first, dv¢ a wish for z¢s extinction. 312. When he is perfect in capability, Ze is capable of not really becoming equally the origin of evil. 313. Now, as in the worldly exzstence, whose manager is the sacred being, the existence of evil is unquestionably visible, then thus much is not separable from this, either where the manager is provided with an opponent, or is without an opponent :—314. If he does not know means for evil not to occur, and remedies for carrying off evil, the imperfect sagacity of the sacred being is thereby! manifested. 315. Or the evil exists with his good will, azd the imperfect goodness of his will is manifested. 316. Or 4e is not capable of not a//owzng the occurrence of evil, and of carrying z¢ off, and the imperfect capability of the sacred being is manifested. 317. And when “e is imperfect even 2% one—in sagacity, or goodness, or capability—z¢ is not fitting to glorify and worship him as the divine existence who is almighty, all-good, and all-wise. 318. This, too, you should know, that since any existing thing, which is acting, is prouzded with a will, but z¢s nature Aas not become unrestricted, (319) that 1 Reading agas instead of the similarly-written afas, ‘and by it.’ 198 SIKAND-GOMANIK vIGAR.
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.