Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1species of animals from the primeval ox. Another copy of this abridgement appears to be contained in fols. 80-84 of No. 15 of Anquetil’s Collection in the National Library at Paris. 2. Tue SikaND-GOMANIK VicAR. The term Sikand-gdmA4nik Vig4r, ‘ doubt-dispelling expla- . nation, is the Pahlavi name applied to a controversial work by its author. The chief object of the work is to prove the correctness of the fundamental doctrine of the Mazda-worshipping religion, that good and evil do not proceed-from the same source, and to show that other religions, while professing to believe in the unity of creation, can only account for the origin of evil, either by degrading the character of the sacred being, or by attributing evil to a corrupting influence which is really a second being. In other words, the author’s object is to show that all people, who believe in an all-good and omnipotent creator, must logically admit the existence of an independent origin of evil, whatever they may say to the contrary. In the course of his arguments, he naturally finds it easier to attack the inconsistencies of other beliefs than to defend his own, and much of his attention is, therefore, given to pointing out apparent inconsistencies and seemingly delusive statements in the scriptures of the Muhammadans, Jews, Christians, and Manichaeans. The author’s name was MardAn-farukh, son of Atharmazd-dad (Chap. I, 35), and his account of his enquiries (§§ 36, 37) bears much resemblance to what is said of the wise man’s proceedings in Mkh. I, 34-36. He determines to 1 Bd. X, 3, XIV, 13 mention 282 (or 272 in some copies). XXVI PAHLAVI TEXTS. write a treatise for removing religious doubt, and -calls it the Sikand-gim4nik Vigar (Chap. I, 38). He is also careful in stating that he has selected many of his facts and arguments from older writings, such as those of Atdr-pAdiyavand?, which he had found in the Dinkard* compiled by Attr-frébag, son of Farukh-z4d. In this statement he must be referring to the first two books of the Dinkard, which have not yet been discovered, as the other seven books, which are extant, do not contain the matters to which he alludes. He also mentions the Réshan manuscript compiled by Réshan3, son of Atdr-frébag, a writer who is often quoted inthe Pahlavi commentaries on the Avesta*. And he begins his religious discussion by replying to some difficulties that had been suggested to him, in a friendly manner, for solution by Mitré-alyyar, son of Mahmad, of Ispahan ®.
2And he begins his religious discussion by replying to some difficulties that had been suggested to him, in a friendly manner, for solution by Mitré-alyyar, son of Mahmad, of Ispahan ®. His allusions to Muhammadanism are of a very guarded character, though sufficiently clear to leave no doubt as to the religion he means. Like all Pahlavi writers, he never mentions that religion by name, but when, in the position of a Zoroastrian in Persia, he states that he did not admire the religion that was then in supremacy®, there can be little doubt that he refers to Muhammadanism. And any such doubt would be dispelled, not only by such vague references to passages in the Qur’an as occur in Chap. XI, 4, 5, 269-271, but also by the distinct quotation ofa striking legend, from the same source, regarding the fallen angel in §$ 52-60, 248 of the same chapter, and by the use of the term Matazalik (Ar. mu’htazil) with reference to a certain sect in § 280. With regard, therefore, to the age of the Sikand-gim4nik Vigar, we may be quite certain that it was written long after the Arab conquest of Persia; and from the names mentioned by the author, as stated above, it is evident that he lived after the time of Réshan, son of Attr-frébag, son of 1 See Chaps. I, 38, IV, 106, IX, 2, X, 52. 2 See Chaps. IV, 107, IX, 1, 4, X, 57. * See Chap. X, 53, 54. * See Sls. I, 4n. ® See Chap. II, 1, 2. ® See Chap. X, 45. INTRODUCTION. XXVii Farukh-z4d. Now, according toa Pahlavi tale', the accursed Abdlis?, the Zandik, had a religious disputation with Atarfrébag, son of Farukh-z4d, in the presence of the Khalifah Al-Mamin who reigned A.D. 813-833; it is, therefore, hardly possible that Réshan, son of Atdr-frébag, could have written his commentary before the middle of the ninth century. We also know, from the last chapter of the third book of the Dinkard, that At0r-frébag was not the last editor of that work, but was succeeded by his son Zaratist, and, later still, by Atdrp4d, son of Hémid, who appears to have given the book its final revision. Of AtdrpAa’s work the author of the Sikandgdm4nik Vigar does not speak, and it is, therefore, reasonable to suppose that it had not been completed in his time. But, according to Bd. XXXIII, 10, 11, this Atdvp4d was a contemporary of Z4d-sparam who was living in A.D. 8813, and his revision of the Dinkard was, therefore, probably in progress by the end of the ninth century. From these facts we may conclude that the Sikand-gdmanik . Vigar was written after the middle, but before the end, of the ninth century ; unless we were to suppose that, although its author consulted only the first two books of the Dinkard (as mentioned above), the remaining seven books may have existed as a separate work unknown to him. Considering, however, that Atdrpad, son of Hémid, was so important a personage as ‘the leader of those of the good religion ’ of his time, this supposition would not be very probable.
3Considering, however, that Atdrpad, son of Hémid, was so important a personage as ‘the leader of those of the good religion ’ of his time, this supposition would not be very probable. There is probably nothing new to defenders of Christianity in Mardan-farukh’s attacks upon the apparent inconsistencies of their scriptures, with regard to the origin of evil and the existence of unity in trinity, subjects that are more usually admitted without investigation than seriously discussed. This is not, however, the mode in which such subjects are likely to be treated by outsiders, and missionaries will no doubt find among Mardan-farukh’s arguments many that they must become accustomed to hear from educated 1 A copy of which is contained in the very old codex No. 20 in the University Library at Kopenhagen, fols. 148-152. 2 The reading of this name is uncertain, but this is the Pazand form. 3 See Ep. III, 2, 17, 21. XXVIII PAHLAVI TEXTS. men of other faiths. And, if they engage in controversy, as they ought to do, they must expect to hear them stated in less considerate language than this author uses. An interesting question, for any one who possesses special information on the subject, would be to ascertain from what version of the Old and New Testaments Mardan-farukh drew his quotations. There seems every probability that his translation of the passages, though it may not be altogether literal, is yet sufficiently so to admit of the particular version being identified, if its peculiarities of wording were carefully considered. The peculiar Pahlavi spelling of the name Isaac in Chap. XIV, 42, as deduced from its corruption in Pazand, points to a Syriac version of one of the legendary works consulted by the author. In his discussion of the tenets of the Manichaeans Mardinfarukh is dealing with a subject that is far less known than the other faiths he attacks, and the information he gives may be valuable. Unfortunately the latter part of this discussion is missing, although the loss of text is probably not very extensive.
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.
1species of animals from the primeval ox. Another copy of this abridgement appears to be contained in fols. 80-84 of No. 15 of Anquetil’s Collection in the National Library at Paris. 2. Tue SikaND-GOMANIK VicAR. The term Sikand-gdmA4nik Vig4r, ‘ doubt-dispelling expla- . nation, is the Pahlavi name applied to a controversial work by its author. The chief object of the work is to prove the correctness of the fundamental doctrine of the Mazda-worshipping religion, that good and evil do not proceed-from the same source, and to show that other religions, while professing to believe in the unity of creation, can only account for the origin of evil, either by degrading the character of the sacred being, or by attributing evil to a corrupting influence which is really a second being. In other words, the author’s object is to show that all people, who believe in an all-good and omnipotent creator, must logically admit the existence of an independent origin of evil, whatever they may say to the contrary. In the course of his arguments, he naturally finds it easier to attack the inconsistencies of other beliefs than to defend his own, and much of his attention is, therefore, given to pointing out apparent inconsistencies and seemingly delusive statements in the scriptures of the Muhammadans, Jews, Christians, and Manichaeans. The author’s name was MardAn-farukh, son of Atharmazd-dad (Chap. I, 35), and his account of his enquiries (§§ 36, 37) bears much resemblance to what is said of the wise man’s proceedings in Mkh. I, 34-36. He determines to 1 Bd. X, 3, XIV, 13 mention 282 (or 272 in some copies). XXVI PAHLAVI TEXTS. write a treatise for removing religious doubt, and -calls it the Sikand-gim4nik Vigar (Chap. I, 38). He is also careful in stating that he has selected many of his facts and arguments from older writings, such as those of Atdr-pAdiyavand?, which he had found in the Dinkard* compiled by Attr-frébag, son of Farukh-z4d. In this statement he must be referring to the first two books of the Dinkard, which have not yet been discovered, as the other seven books, which are extant, do not contain the matters to which he alludes. He also mentions the Réshan manuscript compiled by Réshan3, son of Atdr-frébag, a writer who is often quoted inthe Pahlavi commentaries on the Avesta*. And he begins his religious discussion by replying to some difficulties that had been suggested to him, in a friendly manner, for solution by Mitré-alyyar, son of Mahmad, of Ispahan ®.
2And he begins his religious discussion by replying to some difficulties that had been suggested to him, in a friendly manner, for solution by Mitré-alyyar, son of Mahmad, of Ispahan ®. His allusions to Muhammadanism are of a very guarded character, though sufficiently clear to leave no doubt as to the religion he means. Like all Pahlavi writers, he never mentions that religion by name, but when, in the position of a Zoroastrian in Persia, he states that he did not admire the religion that was then in supremacy®, there can be little doubt that he refers to Muhammadanism. And any such doubt would be dispelled, not only by such vague references to passages in the Qur’an as occur in Chap. XI, 4, 5, 269-271, but also by the distinct quotation ofa striking legend, from the same source, regarding the fallen angel in §$ 52-60, 248 of the same chapter, and by the use of the term Matazalik (Ar. mu’htazil) with reference to a certain sect in § 280. With regard, therefore, to the age of the Sikand-gim4nik Vigar, we may be quite certain that it was written long after the Arab conquest of Persia; and from the names mentioned by the author, as stated above, it is evident that he lived after the time of Réshan, son of Attr-frébag, son of 1 See Chaps. I, 38, IV, 106, IX, 2, X, 52. 2 See Chaps. IV, 107, IX, 1, 4, X, 57. * See Chap. X, 53, 54. * See Sls. I, 4n. ® See Chap. II, 1, 2. ® See Chap. X, 45. INTRODUCTION. XXVii Farukh-z4d. Now, according toa Pahlavi tale', the accursed Abdlis?, the Zandik, had a religious disputation with Atarfrébag, son of Farukh-z4d, in the presence of the Khalifah Al-Mamin who reigned A.D. 813-833; it is, therefore, hardly possible that Réshan, son of Atdr-frébag, could have written his commentary before the middle of the ninth century. We also know, from the last chapter of the third book of the Dinkard, that At0r-frébag was not the last editor of that work, but was succeeded by his son Zaratist, and, later still, by Atdrp4d, son of Hémid, who appears to have given the book its final revision. Of AtdrpAa’s work the author of the Sikandgdm4nik Vigar does not speak, and it is, therefore, reasonable to suppose that it had not been completed in his time. But, according to Bd. XXXIII, 10, 11, this Atdvp4d was a contemporary of Z4d-sparam who was living in A.D. 8813, and his revision of the Dinkard was, therefore, probably in progress by the end of the ninth century. From these facts we may conclude that the Sikand-gdmanik . Vigar was written after the middle, but before the end, of the ninth century ; unless we were to suppose that, although its author consulted only the first two books of the Dinkard (as mentioned above), the remaining seven books may have existed as a separate work unknown to him. Considering, however, that Atdrpad, son of Hémid, was so important a personage as ‘the leader of those of the good religion ’ of his time, this supposition would not be very probable.
3Considering, however, that Atdrpad, son of Hémid, was so important a personage as ‘the leader of those of the good religion ’ of his time, this supposition would not be very probable. There is probably nothing new to defenders of Christianity in Mardan-farukh’s attacks upon the apparent inconsistencies of their scriptures, with regard to the origin of evil and the existence of unity in trinity, subjects that are more usually admitted without investigation than seriously discussed. This is not, however, the mode in which such subjects are likely to be treated by outsiders, and missionaries will no doubt find among Mardan-farukh’s arguments many that they must become accustomed to hear from educated 1 A copy of which is contained in the very old codex No. 20 in the University Library at Kopenhagen, fols. 148-152. 2 The reading of this name is uncertain, but this is the Pazand form. 3 See Ep. III, 2, 17, 21. XXVIII PAHLAVI TEXTS. men of other faiths. And, if they engage in controversy, as they ought to do, they must expect to hear them stated in less considerate language than this author uses. An interesting question, for any one who possesses special information on the subject, would be to ascertain from what version of the Old and New Testaments Mardan-farukh drew his quotations. There seems every probability that his translation of the passages, though it may not be altogether literal, is yet sufficiently so to admit of the particular version being identified, if its peculiarities of wording were carefully considered. The peculiar Pahlavi spelling of the name Isaac in Chap. XIV, 42, as deduced from its corruption in Pazand, points to a Syriac version of one of the legendary works consulted by the author. In his discussion of the tenets of the Manichaeans Mardinfarukh is dealing with a subject that is far less known than the other faiths he attacks, and the information he gives may be valuable. Unfortunately the latter part of this discussion is missing, although the loss of text is probably not very extensive.
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.