Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
12 The words in brackets have no equivalent in the Pazand text, but are indicated by 4svadyav&a in Sans. 202 SIKAND-GOMAN!IK VIGAR. in his mind, (372) and Aharman merely invites and instigates him to the committal of crime; that shows that the criminal thought ¢vaced ¢o the sacred being and also his desire for it are more violent and worse than the invitation of Aharman. 373. When, too, his listening to what proceeds from Aharman, as ¢o the committal of crime, is likewise due to the criminal thought which the sacred being produced, and so also zs his desire for it, z¢ is already obvious that the sacred being is much worse and more sinful than Aharman. 374. As regards these statements, which are enumerated by us, (375) one of these two ofznzons must arise, (376) either that all are true or that all are false, (377) or there are some which are true and there are some which are false. 378. If all de true, every statement that is not adapted to these statements is false, 0x something of the two, truth and falsehood. 379. If all de false, every statement that is not adapted to these statements is true, ov something of the two together. 380. If.there be some that are true and there be some that are false, (381) then of those which are true—derzved from the nature and nucleus (n4f) of truth—(382) and of those which are false—derived from the nature and nucleus and original evolution of falsehood—(383) the origins are two, one from which a@rzses truth, and one from which avzses falsehood. CuHarTer XII. 1. Again, about the inconsistency of their assertions ¢here are several statements from the Dinkard? 1 Sans. has ‘something mingled twofold’ 2 See Chap. IV,107. As the inconsistent statements which CHAPTER XI, 372—XiI, 21. 203
2CuHarTer XII. 1. Again, about the inconsistency of their assertions ¢here are several statements from the Dinkard? 1 Sans. has ‘something mingled twofold’ 2 See Chap. IV,107. As the inconsistent statements which CHAPTER XI, 372—XiI, 21. 203 manuscript, (2) as fo that which they say, that the sacred being is around everything, du¢ nothing is within him; (3) and within everything, dv¢ nothing is around him. 4. That he ts above everything, éu¢ nothing is below him; (5) and below everything, éut nothing is above him. 6. Zhat he sits upon a throne, du is possessing no vesteng-place ; (7) and is inside heaven, du¢ is possessing no whereabouts. 8. That he does not exist in any place, and yet he does exist there. 9. That he exists everywhere, and yet his place does not exist. 10. Also ¢hat everything of his becomes /¢ for his own by his own will, (11) Ais original evolution dezng both malice and good; (12) and e zs eternally unforgiving and compassionate, (13) preparing distress and not distressing. 14. Likewise ¢hat he has commanded him who is incapable of performing oy neglecting the divine command, (15) and he das created him who is innocent for hell, not the-distresser. 16. Zhat he ts aware of the hellish existence of mankind, owing to wickedness, and his will is for it; (17) and he zs good-willed, or it as become not his will. 18. Zhat he has produced a remedy, and is not himself distressing ; (19) or no remedy, but want of remedy, is produced by him, and yet he is not possessing an opponent. 20. Zhat he 7s wanting experience, and yet omniscient; (21) neglecting commands, and yet follow in the text are not to be found in the portion of the Dinkard known to be extant, they were probably contained in the first two books of that work, which have not yet been discovered. Chap. 132 of the third book (130 in Dastfr Peshotan’s translation, pp. 176-178) is the nearest approach to our text in style, but not in matter. It is ‘about him who is in all and over all, over and not lower than anything zor through anything, that is, even owing to management /e és over all, and all is manageable by him.’ 204 SIKAND-GOMANIK VIGAR. they are themselves his will; (22) and he who neglects, azd provides a restricted evolution’, is yet a good sovereign. 23. Also ¢hat his commands are all continuous, (24) and ye¢ the setting aside of his commands is obtainable. 25. And ¢ha¢ there is some of his will which is not continuous, (26) and neglect of his will is not an injurer of the will. 27. Likewise that he has commanded that which is not his will, (28) and the command wzch zs not inconsistent with his will azd also the command wzch ts inconsistent with his will are both proper. 29. Also ¢hat his good will is not a discontinuous will, (30) and as ¢o his evil will, which makes evil things, that is judicious. 31. And many other inconsistencies which are in the assertions of varzous sects.
329. Also ¢hat his good will is not a discontinuous will, (30) and as ¢o his evil will, which makes evil things, that is judicious. 31. And many other inconsistencies which are in the assertions of varzous sects. 32. If it be not possible for an orderly (padm4ntk) religion to exist, without rescue from these inconsistent assertions of many kinds, (33) they then? say this of it, that zo the supposers of two original evolutions * the work of the sacred being is weak and unresisting ; (34) aud they say 7z¢ is not as 2¢ were adapted to the grandeur of the sacred being. 35. Upon this subject, too, there are some matters, which I skad/ clearly: state, that should be dictated and known. 36. That is, does he* make divine things weaker and more unresisting, (37) where 2¢ zs hewho says that ¢he sacred being’s own achievements, 1 Reading bandak-gastth instead of Paz. bandayasti; compare Chap. IV, 73 n. ® Reading adinas, ‘ then of it,’ for Paz. aina, as in Chap. IV, 81. 5 That is, those who hold the orthodox Mazda-worshipper’s opinion, that the producer of evil is independént of the producer of good, so long as the former continues to exist. * The believer in a single original evolution without any independent producer of evil. Connect §§ 36, 37 with §§ 52, 53. CHAPTER XII, 22-51. 205 which were created by him, have all lapsed into Jeng intolerant of command and deaf to admonition, (38) till even the most tender-bodied creatures struggle against his will? 39. And so ¢hey have slain or impaled those many prophets (vakhshvar4n) and apostles (pétkhambar4n) of his, who are appointed by him; (40) and there are some who have acted scornfully, contemptibly, and irreverently. 41. This, too, is where he has not only not protected his own dominion from the vile creatures which were created by him himself, but Ze 4as himself afflicted his own dominion also ; (42) and he himself destroys his own productions without a reason, (43) and himself renders his own creations useless. 44. Through his own culpability he himself destroys his own innocent servants. 45. He himself makes his own peculiar friends weak, needy, sinful, and deluded. 46. And hes wrath, 2z/lcted upon a single innocent servant, which is like Aharman’s!, makes his own innumerable creatures unobservant azd deluded. 47. For a sin that is limited, which is owing to his own actions, he puts the innocent to unlimited punishment® 48. The door of forgiveness is finally shut up, (49) and he is not satiated with the pain, distress, and misery of his own creatures, (50) éa¢ maintains them perpetually in action and excitement. 51. And yet he is not able to insist upon the commands which he 1 Aharman being supposed to be the producer of the demon of wrath, who is one of his most powerful auxiliaries.
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.
12 The words in brackets have no equivalent in the Pazand text, but are indicated by 4svadyav&a in Sans. 202 SIKAND-GOMAN!IK VIGAR. in his mind, (372) and Aharman merely invites and instigates him to the committal of crime; that shows that the criminal thought ¢vaced ¢o the sacred being and also his desire for it are more violent and worse than the invitation of Aharman. 373. When, too, his listening to what proceeds from Aharman, as ¢o the committal of crime, is likewise due to the criminal thought which the sacred being produced, and so also zs his desire for it, z¢ is already obvious that the sacred being is much worse and more sinful than Aharman. 374. As regards these statements, which are enumerated by us, (375) one of these two ofznzons must arise, (376) either that all are true or that all are false, (377) or there are some which are true and there are some which are false. 378. If all de true, every statement that is not adapted to these statements is false, 0x something of the two, truth and falsehood. 379. If all de false, every statement that is not adapted to these statements is true, ov something of the two together. 380. If.there be some that are true and there be some that are false, (381) then of those which are true—derzved from the nature and nucleus (n4f) of truth—(382) and of those which are false—derived from the nature and nucleus and original evolution of falsehood—(383) the origins are two, one from which a@rzses truth, and one from which avzses falsehood. CuHarTer XII. 1. Again, about the inconsistency of their assertions ¢here are several statements from the Dinkard? 1 Sans. has ‘something mingled twofold’ 2 See Chap. IV,107. As the inconsistent statements which CHAPTER XI, 372—XiI, 21. 203
2CuHarTer XII. 1. Again, about the inconsistency of their assertions ¢here are several statements from the Dinkard? 1 Sans. has ‘something mingled twofold’ 2 See Chap. IV,107. As the inconsistent statements which CHAPTER XI, 372—XiI, 21. 203 manuscript, (2) as fo that which they say, that the sacred being is around everything, du¢ nothing is within him; (3) and within everything, dv¢ nothing is around him. 4. That he ts above everything, éu¢ nothing is below him; (5) and below everything, éut nothing is above him. 6. Zhat he sits upon a throne, du is possessing no vesteng-place ; (7) and is inside heaven, du¢ is possessing no whereabouts. 8. That he does not exist in any place, and yet he does exist there. 9. That he exists everywhere, and yet his place does not exist. 10. Also ¢hat everything of his becomes /¢ for his own by his own will, (11) Ais original evolution dezng both malice and good; (12) and e zs eternally unforgiving and compassionate, (13) preparing distress and not distressing. 14. Likewise ¢hat he has commanded him who is incapable of performing oy neglecting the divine command, (15) and he das created him who is innocent for hell, not the-distresser. 16. Zhat he ts aware of the hellish existence of mankind, owing to wickedness, and his will is for it; (17) and he zs good-willed, or it as become not his will. 18. Zhat he has produced a remedy, and is not himself distressing ; (19) or no remedy, but want of remedy, is produced by him, and yet he is not possessing an opponent. 20. Zhat he 7s wanting experience, and yet omniscient; (21) neglecting commands, and yet follow in the text are not to be found in the portion of the Dinkard known to be extant, they were probably contained in the first two books of that work, which have not yet been discovered. Chap. 132 of the third book (130 in Dastfr Peshotan’s translation, pp. 176-178) is the nearest approach to our text in style, but not in matter. It is ‘about him who is in all and over all, over and not lower than anything zor through anything, that is, even owing to management /e és over all, and all is manageable by him.’ 204 SIKAND-GOMANIK VIGAR. they are themselves his will; (22) and he who neglects, azd provides a restricted evolution’, is yet a good sovereign. 23. Also ¢hat his commands are all continuous, (24) and ye¢ the setting aside of his commands is obtainable. 25. And ¢ha¢ there is some of his will which is not continuous, (26) and neglect of his will is not an injurer of the will. 27. Likewise that he has commanded that which is not his will, (28) and the command wzch zs not inconsistent with his will azd also the command wzch ts inconsistent with his will are both proper. 29. Also ¢hat his good will is not a discontinuous will, (30) and as ¢o his evil will, which makes evil things, that is judicious. 31. And many other inconsistencies which are in the assertions of varzous sects.
329. Also ¢hat his good will is not a discontinuous will, (30) and as ¢o his evil will, which makes evil things, that is judicious. 31. And many other inconsistencies which are in the assertions of varzous sects. 32. If it be not possible for an orderly (padm4ntk) religion to exist, without rescue from these inconsistent assertions of many kinds, (33) they then? say this of it, that zo the supposers of two original evolutions * the work of the sacred being is weak and unresisting ; (34) aud they say 7z¢ is not as 2¢ were adapted to the grandeur of the sacred being. 35. Upon this subject, too, there are some matters, which I skad/ clearly: state, that should be dictated and known. 36. That is, does he* make divine things weaker and more unresisting, (37) where 2¢ zs hewho says that ¢he sacred being’s own achievements, 1 Reading bandak-gastth instead of Paz. bandayasti; compare Chap. IV, 73 n. ® Reading adinas, ‘ then of it,’ for Paz. aina, as in Chap. IV, 81. 5 That is, those who hold the orthodox Mazda-worshipper’s opinion, that the producer of evil is independént of the producer of good, so long as the former continues to exist. * The believer in a single original evolution without any independent producer of evil. Connect §§ 36, 37 with §§ 52, 53. CHAPTER XII, 22-51. 205 which were created by him, have all lapsed into Jeng intolerant of command and deaf to admonition, (38) till even the most tender-bodied creatures struggle against his will? 39. And so ¢hey have slain or impaled those many prophets (vakhshvar4n) and apostles (pétkhambar4n) of his, who are appointed by him; (40) and there are some who have acted scornfully, contemptibly, and irreverently. 41. This, too, is where he has not only not protected his own dominion from the vile creatures which were created by him himself, but Ze 4as himself afflicted his own dominion also ; (42) and he himself destroys his own productions without a reason, (43) and himself renders his own creations useless. 44. Through his own culpability he himself destroys his own innocent servants. 45. He himself makes his own peculiar friends weak, needy, sinful, and deluded. 46. And hes wrath, 2z/lcted upon a single innocent servant, which is like Aharman’s!, makes his own innumerable creatures unobservant azd deluded. 47. For a sin that is limited, which is owing to his own actions, he puts the innocent to unlimited punishment® 48. The door of forgiveness is finally shut up, (49) and he is not satiated with the pain, distress, and misery of his own creatures, (50) éa¢ maintains them perpetually in action and excitement. 51. And yet he is not able to insist upon the commands which he 1 Aharman being supposed to be the producer of the demon of wrath, who is one of his most powerful auxiliaries.
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.