Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1. (of ché), it would seem better to call it a root aor. But the two chi’s were originally one. Except for the long ¢, we have no difficulty in recognizing the word as a of + chi + até (= °ata), a 874 pl. mid. pret., or improper conj. But then the long 4 is significant, so the MSS., (see also vy. 6). Is this ¢ a miswriting?, or does the long @ represent an in the termination, as, for instance, long ¢ in the root Ja, jan, etc.? If so, it is possible that we may have here an unstrengthened conjunctive 374 pl. o@ + chi + até = vt + chi + antd = * vichyanta; cp. bhuvdni. Surely, if we accept dtd as equalling a 3°¢ pl. ending, it is better to give it some explanation in har- mony with known laws, even if, at the same time, we must accept an ex- ceptionally unstrengthened root, 439 The Pahl. trlr. seems to have understood a 3r4 ge. mid., but his word may also be rendered 24 pl. imper. ‘do ye choose’. It would offer a fine thought if we dared follow his possible hint, and read véS(k)yatd as an imperative of the a@ aor.; cp. ahyat from hi (ep. a(d)vaé(é)natd in the prece- ding verse); yet see vis(k)ydtd in verse 6. The meaning ‘selves’ was first seen by the Pahl. trir. With glosses dropped the effect is better. As ordinary Pahl. read line 4 (with glosses): ‘Both thought thoughts, spoke words, and did deeds, the one who is good, and the one who is evil []’. Possibly a: ‘Thus the two spirits, the first, were themselves heard, (or known) - - -’. 4. There is not much difference of opinion here. Some would however take ajyditim in the sense of ‘the continuance beyond this life’: ‘And, as these two spirits of old counselled together, to establish the earthly life, and also the continuance beyond, and that, at the end, the worst condition should be the portion of the wicked, but for the righteous the highest rejoicing of the soul’, There is some question as to whether we may take paourvim as quali- fying jasaé(é)tem, or dazdé(é). Looking at its position I should say dazdé(é); but this would be a little too minute, paourvim and apémem in- antithesis. Paourvim qualifies the whole verse, and also v. 5. The Pahl. trlr. renders dazdé as an infin. (* dadh + ¢é(é)). Otherwise one is strongly tempted to regard the word as a 3r4 dual with Justi, Hiibsch- mann, and Geldner, and as a perf. with the last two, daddte (cp. dadhite), shortened by later corruption to fit the metre. As it stands, it is a regular 3rd so. pres.; ‘each establishes for himself’. The accusatives forbid a passive sense, and an infin. leaves the sense uncompleted. ‘Some finite verb ex- pressed, or understood, is needed. The next verse may however possibly supply one. One writer would narrow the sense of the ‘best mind’ to the ‘ood conscience’. It was not only ‘conscience’, but correct mental insight as to all particulars, as subjective beatification in the future state , apema anhu; see vispdi yave(é) Vanheus Mananhd, Y. 28, 8. Reading va after Aharmano (with Sp.), ¢ in the Pahl.
2rrow the sense of the ‘best mind’ to the ‘ood conscience’. It was not only ‘conscience’, but correct mental insight as to all particulars, as subjective beatification in the future state , apema anhu; see vispdi yave(é) Vanheus Mananhd, Y. 28, 8. Reading va after Aharmano (with Sp.), ¢ in the Pahl. might be ren- dered: ‘The worst characteristic of the wicked, [and the devastation owing to Aharman and the wicked are fully seen], and so, on the other hand, the best thought of the pure accompanies [A. everlastingly|’; so I rendered formerly more naturally as Pahl.; but see the Gatha and Ner. The last line needs the force of some form of khaditéintand understood. 5. Varatéd, Haug as imperative (?); the Pahl., followed by Spiegel and others, gives the proper indication. Some would regard verezyé as an infin., or would even change the text to verezaydi. Others, abandoning an 440 infin., hold to an acc. pl. of an adj. veree?, yet not reading vereeayd with two MSS. I have very little doubt that verezyé is an adjective in the sense of ‘effecting’. Its position at the end of the sentence highly favours a nominative form, as does the symmetry of the construction, varatd - +» - verezyd ++ - spenistd . - - vasté(é). Another form of verezyO occurs in mathra verezya _ in a good sense, here the sense is evil. For vasté(¢) the Pahl. trlr. renders néhifts, which gives the idea of ‘covering’, ‘clothing on’; cp. Yt. 18, 3. Haithydi§ must have a meaning approximating ‘good’, or it may mean ‘real’ merely, and find its associate in fraor(e)d(f). This latter was considered the weak form of the present participle of var + fra taken adverbially, by Haug, Justi, and others, and the metre favours three (?) syllables. But it is better taken as = fravrit, adv. neut. adj. from vi (var). This suggestion had long circulated, and was later published with, however, the meaning potius, lieber. I take the mean- ing to be that indicated in frd té(e) verené(e) etc., and so ‘piously’, ‘beliey- ingly’; see the Pahl. rendering in Y. 53, 2, Srandmishno, Some scholars were formerly inclined to render: ‘Of those two spirits, the evil one chose to do (?) the worst action, but the holiest spirit, the right - - -, and those who gladly (?) rejoice M. with their upright actions’. The Pahl., strictly in the light of the Gatha, might even be read: ‘Of these two spirits by him was loved (or chosen) by him, who was wicked, whose was the worse action’, or, not impossibly, ‘the worse acting one’. Varzishnd might be taken, as West with Haug took debriinishno in Y. 28,6, that is, as = the pres. part. = ‘performing’, verezyd being regarded as nom. sg. masc. Totally aside from its original, we might have: "+ + loved, or loves, (déshé¢) him (?) who is the worse in his action [Ahar- mana, him (?) whose desire - - -’], (quite erroneous). Then & (without gloss) might be; ‘when also by him the hard stone was covered’; (dsmdnich being, strictly, gloss).
3masc. Totally aside from its original, we might have: "+ + loved, or loves, (déshé¢) him (?) who is the worse in his action [Ahar- mana, him (?) whose desire - - -’], (quite erroneous). Then & (without gloss) might be; ‘when also by him the hard stone was covered’; (dsmdnich being, strictly, gloss). Otherwise; ‘the hard stone-covered [sky] was made by him’. Fraored(t) does not seem translated by the Pahl. here; Ner.’s apdpath however renders its idea, showing the probability that he had a different text. Apdpaih is hardly gloss, or alternative translation, in addition to his prakataiccha; see his rendering in Y. 53, 2, where he seems to render the idea of fraored(t) as drddhandm. Dropping the glosses, the whole strophe in the Pahl. comes out much closer to its original. If however the lines are not brought together, ¢ would be naturally rendered; ‘He who propitiates Atharmazd, [his desire also is that of A.) ete? 6. It is safest to regard v#S(k)ydtd as ‘the same word which meets us inv. 3. It cannot be an imperative here, and would be difficult as such anywhere, a A eas , Te aa 441 Debaomad* I now regard, with Spiegel, De Harlez, and Bartholomae, as the noun in man, and I would no longer (as in S. B. E. XXXI) offer an alternative in the sense of the verbal form, with Haug, Justi, Hiibschmann, and Bartholomae (as formerly). I however strongly adhere to the view that the word is in the nom. rather than in the acc., and, as the subject of jasad(f), also in apposition with achistem mand. (A to 7s, or read ddeb°.) Verendtd. I can only explain the long 4, if the word is a pl., by the supposition that it stands for @m in a conj. term. dntd (nd conjugation). But the word may be a 34 sg. conj. mid. for passive, also with secondary term. AchiStem mané are, like (4) debaomd, nom. sg., and stand in apposition : ‘Deceit came upon those consulting ones, even the Worst Mind, that he might be chosen’. If verendtd be a pl., I would still hold achistem mané to be a nom. rather than acc.; ‘Deception came upon those consulting, even the Worst Mind, that they might choose him’. (With another verenata is 3ra pl. pret.) Some able writers almost uniformly avoid the recognition of the pos- sibility of a nom. in the Gathds at the end, or after part, of the line, or sentence, accepting for the Gatha the dull sentence-formation of the Behistun Inscriptions. I hold exactly the reverse. Not only are nominatives possible at the end of sentences, but that is the natural place for them (see remarks elsewhere). Haug rendered banayen praedicabant, to bhan = ‘to speak’. The Pahl. gave the true indication, well followed by Spiegel, Geldner, and others. Others prefer a shade of meaning more directly expressed by the Sansk. van. Haug’s text, ahd, with its translation vitas-duas, is not desir- able. The Pahl. gave the proper indication, followed by most. Ner.’s gloss is however influential in the rendering, ‘die Menschen wm’s Leben im jenseits eu bringen’.
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.
1. (of ché), it would seem better to call it a root aor. But the two chi’s were originally one. Except for the long ¢, we have no difficulty in recognizing the word as a of + chi + até (= °ata), a 874 pl. mid. pret., or improper conj. But then the long 4 is significant, so the MSS., (see also vy. 6). Is this ¢ a miswriting?, or does the long @ represent an in the termination, as, for instance, long ¢ in the root Ja, jan, etc.? If so, it is possible that we may have here an unstrengthened conjunctive 374 pl. o@ + chi + até = vt + chi + antd = * vichyanta; cp. bhuvdni. Surely, if we accept dtd as equalling a 3°¢ pl. ending, it is better to give it some explanation in har- mony with known laws, even if, at the same time, we must accept an ex- ceptionally unstrengthened root, 439 The Pahl. trlr. seems to have understood a 3r4 ge. mid., but his word may also be rendered 24 pl. imper. ‘do ye choose’. It would offer a fine thought if we dared follow his possible hint, and read véS(k)yatd as an imperative of the a@ aor.; cp. ahyat from hi (ep. a(d)vaé(é)natd in the prece- ding verse); yet see vis(k)ydtd in verse 6. The meaning ‘selves’ was first seen by the Pahl. trir. With glosses dropped the effect is better. As ordinary Pahl. read line 4 (with glosses): ‘Both thought thoughts, spoke words, and did deeds, the one who is good, and the one who is evil []’. Possibly a: ‘Thus the two spirits, the first, were themselves heard, (or known) - - -’. 4. There is not much difference of opinion here. Some would however take ajyditim in the sense of ‘the continuance beyond this life’: ‘And, as these two spirits of old counselled together, to establish the earthly life, and also the continuance beyond, and that, at the end, the worst condition should be the portion of the wicked, but for the righteous the highest rejoicing of the soul’, There is some question as to whether we may take paourvim as quali- fying jasaé(é)tem, or dazdé(é). Looking at its position I should say dazdé(é); but this would be a little too minute, paourvim and apémem in- antithesis. Paourvim qualifies the whole verse, and also v. 5. The Pahl. trlr. renders dazdé as an infin. (* dadh + ¢é(é)). Otherwise one is strongly tempted to regard the word as a 3r4 dual with Justi, Hiibsch- mann, and Geldner, and as a perf. with the last two, daddte (cp. dadhite), shortened by later corruption to fit the metre. As it stands, it is a regular 3rd so. pres.; ‘each establishes for himself’. The accusatives forbid a passive sense, and an infin. leaves the sense uncompleted. ‘Some finite verb ex- pressed, or understood, is needed. The next verse may however possibly supply one. One writer would narrow the sense of the ‘best mind’ to the ‘ood conscience’. It was not only ‘conscience’, but correct mental insight as to all particulars, as subjective beatification in the future state , apema anhu; see vispdi yave(é) Vanheus Mananhd, Y. 28, 8. Reading va after Aharmano (with Sp.), ¢ in the Pahl.
2rrow the sense of the ‘best mind’ to the ‘ood conscience’. It was not only ‘conscience’, but correct mental insight as to all particulars, as subjective beatification in the future state , apema anhu; see vispdi yave(é) Vanheus Mananhd, Y. 28, 8. Reading va after Aharmano (with Sp.), ¢ in the Pahl. might be ren- dered: ‘The worst characteristic of the wicked, [and the devastation owing to Aharman and the wicked are fully seen], and so, on the other hand, the best thought of the pure accompanies [A. everlastingly|’; so I rendered formerly more naturally as Pahl.; but see the Gatha and Ner. The last line needs the force of some form of khaditéintand understood. 5. Varatéd, Haug as imperative (?); the Pahl., followed by Spiegel and others, gives the proper indication. Some would regard verezyé as an infin., or would even change the text to verezaydi. Others, abandoning an 440 infin., hold to an acc. pl. of an adj. veree?, yet not reading vereeayd with two MSS. I have very little doubt that verezyé is an adjective in the sense of ‘effecting’. Its position at the end of the sentence highly favours a nominative form, as does the symmetry of the construction, varatd - +» - verezyd ++ - spenistd . - - vasté(é). Another form of verezyO occurs in mathra verezya _ in a good sense, here the sense is evil. For vasté(¢) the Pahl. trlr. renders néhifts, which gives the idea of ‘covering’, ‘clothing on’; cp. Yt. 18, 3. Haithydi§ must have a meaning approximating ‘good’, or it may mean ‘real’ merely, and find its associate in fraor(e)d(f). This latter was considered the weak form of the present participle of var + fra taken adverbially, by Haug, Justi, and others, and the metre favours three (?) syllables. But it is better taken as = fravrit, adv. neut. adj. from vi (var). This suggestion had long circulated, and was later published with, however, the meaning potius, lieber. I take the mean- ing to be that indicated in frd té(e) verené(e) etc., and so ‘piously’, ‘beliey- ingly’; see the Pahl. rendering in Y. 53, 2, Srandmishno, Some scholars were formerly inclined to render: ‘Of those two spirits, the evil one chose to do (?) the worst action, but the holiest spirit, the right - - -, and those who gladly (?) rejoice M. with their upright actions’. The Pahl., strictly in the light of the Gatha, might even be read: ‘Of these two spirits by him was loved (or chosen) by him, who was wicked, whose was the worse action’, or, not impossibly, ‘the worse acting one’. Varzishnd might be taken, as West with Haug took debriinishno in Y. 28,6, that is, as = the pres. part. = ‘performing’, verezyd being regarded as nom. sg. masc. Totally aside from its original, we might have: "+ + loved, or loves, (déshé¢) him (?) who is the worse in his action [Ahar- mana, him (?) whose desire - - -’], (quite erroneous). Then & (without gloss) might be; ‘when also by him the hard stone was covered’; (dsmdnich being, strictly, gloss).
3masc. Totally aside from its original, we might have: "+ + loved, or loves, (déshé¢) him (?) who is the worse in his action [Ahar- mana, him (?) whose desire - - -’], (quite erroneous). Then & (without gloss) might be; ‘when also by him the hard stone was covered’; (dsmdnich being, strictly, gloss). Otherwise; ‘the hard stone-covered [sky] was made by him’. Fraored(t) does not seem translated by the Pahl. here; Ner.’s apdpath however renders its idea, showing the probability that he had a different text. Apdpaih is hardly gloss, or alternative translation, in addition to his prakataiccha; see his rendering in Y. 53, 2, where he seems to render the idea of fraored(t) as drddhandm. Dropping the glosses, the whole strophe in the Pahl. comes out much closer to its original. If however the lines are not brought together, ¢ would be naturally rendered; ‘He who propitiates Atharmazd, [his desire also is that of A.) ete? 6. It is safest to regard v#S(k)ydtd as ‘the same word which meets us inv. 3. It cannot be an imperative here, and would be difficult as such anywhere, a A eas , Te aa 441 Debaomad* I now regard, with Spiegel, De Harlez, and Bartholomae, as the noun in man, and I would no longer (as in S. B. E. XXXI) offer an alternative in the sense of the verbal form, with Haug, Justi, Hiibschmann, and Bartholomae (as formerly). I however strongly adhere to the view that the word is in the nom. rather than in the acc., and, as the subject of jasad(f), also in apposition with achistem mand. (A to 7s, or read ddeb°.) Verendtd. I can only explain the long 4, if the word is a pl., by the supposition that it stands for @m in a conj. term. dntd (nd conjugation). But the word may be a 34 sg. conj. mid. for passive, also with secondary term. AchiStem mané are, like (4) debaomd, nom. sg., and stand in apposition : ‘Deceit came upon those consulting ones, even the Worst Mind, that he might be chosen’. If verendtd be a pl., I would still hold achistem mané to be a nom. rather than acc.; ‘Deception came upon those consulting, even the Worst Mind, that they might choose him’. (With another verenata is 3ra pl. pret.) Some able writers almost uniformly avoid the recognition of the pos- sibility of a nom. in the Gathds at the end, or after part, of the line, or sentence, accepting for the Gatha the dull sentence-formation of the Behistun Inscriptions. I hold exactly the reverse. Not only are nominatives possible at the end of sentences, but that is the natural place for them (see remarks elsewhere). Haug rendered banayen praedicabant, to bhan = ‘to speak’. The Pahl. gave the true indication, well followed by Spiegel, Geldner, and others. Others prefer a shade of meaning more directly expressed by the Sansk. van. Haug’s text, ahd, with its translation vitas-duas, is not desir- able. The Pahl. gave the proper indication, followed by most. Ner.’s gloss is however influential in the rendering, ‘die Menschen wm’s Leben im jenseits eu bringen’.
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.