Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1ter than vdrid = vareden. Aréskoch is better, elsewhere araské or °kun. The trlr. may have under- stood 6; ‘by their own tongues among the increasers of the decreasing one’. Read /shivintdané (D.). Dan is paraphrazed freely and intelligently. — D. and M.1, tye) ey for ty ey. Read khéshmo, or aéshmé. Ner.’s varshantah is figurative, but = vdréd; sammdrjanam hardly = aréskéch (?) but some mistaken form of @ priv. + résh, or poss. rich = ‘the not injurious’; sam- marjanam = virdyishnd = rdzaré, Y. 34, 12, = virdstand, 45, 3 gl.; sam- © marjayati, Y.29, 1 = sdzéd = sastd. No fshivinénd was (D.) supposed to equal vindganam etc. Let it be remembered that é) may = v, and vishdved = | vishoped, fshiiv and vishév might have the same characters. Ner. deciphered as a form of vishiiftand = ‘to destroy’, or pas, hénatan = ‘to scatter? might have been surmised in an ‘evil’ sense. Parsis of old had trouble with the shifting letters. Qubhoditd, as with hit-varsht, seems to show a reading hi-rost. Firib, or farib would be more Pers.; read ikhtiydr. 5. Read as altern. for huzeituS bonus civis, see above on Y. 43, 3, 4 and cum his omnibus, for the instr. as altern. As to line d, I now prefer my rendering of ¢di$ vtspadis in the sociative sense; see 8. B. E. XXXI, p. 164; ‘with all those in Thy kingdom, O A’. D. om. 7 after valman in a, ins. 7 after zak in b, read vddiindnd (so in c), has diff. sign for s» in kaddrchdi. Vddényén in the glosses may be imper.; see Ner. Glosses and Ner. aside, the trl. comes out nearer the Gatha. J.3 read kurute in } gloss, which seems to fit the text, but see the Pahl. and c. Kuru — vddinyén as imper. may have an alternative trl. in kurute (J.3, J 4, c) which is at least in the 374 pers. Satkdér°, generally renders forms of shndyinidand, and makes it pos- - sible, if not probable, that such a root was seen in what now stands as shindsakth. Shirtnt, so for shér°, . 6. As to caesura, see 6; read Sraés(k)yd. Read in me as altern. for mihi, and Vestri-devoti; in the free; That Insight of Your faithful one, O Lord. Can fraé(é)s(k)y4 = ‘now I declare forth’? The view that mraté(é) is an infin. had circulated privately for years; and also, so far as I know, © the objection that it stands at the end of the line was first suggested by a private remark of my own to a friend in 1882. Before that I had never heard, or read, the smallest allusion among Zendists to the form of the Gathic sentence. The voc, Mazdé standing where it does, and the place — of Ashemché militates against an infin. mriuté(é). Fré vdo ashemché va- ochanhé(é) Mazda Sraé(é)s(k)y@ would look more like an infin. sentence. Srdvayaé(é)ma tim daé(é)nam casts light on Y. 28, 7. Perhaps khshmédvaté had better be rendered ‘your servant’ here in view of sraoté in the next y.
2place — of Ashemché militates against an infin. mriuté(é). Fré vdo ashemché va- ochanhé(é) Mazda Sraé(é)s(k)y@ would look more like an infin. sentence. Srdvayaé(é)ma tim daé(é)nam casts light on Y. 28, 7. Perhaps khshmédvaté had better be rendered ‘your servant’ here in view of sraoté in the next y. 581 Some might render: ‘I call on You, O Mazda and Asha, to declare what as emanation (@mananhd)(?) of your will is rightly to be comprehended, that I may declare that doctrine, that of your servant, O A’. Pahl. Mrivé(é) was read for mriité(é). Notice vichidydi intelligently rendered as 1* sg, fut. (1 now prefer vijinam). The 15 sg. for 1% pl. is hardly a variation to be noted in such a document, and é@m may be sg. or pl. D. has curiously vddinamam (so elsewhere). Parisphutam = Ashavahishtich (so v. 7, and Y. 51, 4, otherwise = d@shkdrak) arises from the association of A. with the Fire, hence ‘brightness’, ‘manifestation’, or A. may have been misread for ashnd (so). Vazinam, so for vaj°, also in other forms. 7. As to caesura, see vohi apart from mananhd. As sraotd is without expressed subject, some would read sraotd. But khshmdvant in the very possible sense ‘your servant’ may be understood from v. 6, or better the verse belongs after v. 9, see sraoti-- fshénghyo. Notice the three, airyamdn, baé(étu, and verezéna once more. I now prefer Jegibus, ‘laws and institutions’ to donis. Many recoil from a religious sense for frasastim, preferring famam, but the word is associated with yasna and vahma. Some might render: ‘Hear (sraotd) that graciously, O M., hear Thou (sraos tu) (?), OA.; listen Thou, O Ahura, what association for protection, what kith, is it which through its attitude gives good reputation to the circuit?’. Pahl. Read khvéshth. D. om. am in a, but spelt, with DJ. and M.1, nydkshédo; D. has nyokshash (sic vid.) in 6, vddindid in c, min tdno for min at avo, and kardé 7 lak (M1 7 kardé lak) in d. Read khvéshih. Let V. listen, and: = ‘since V.. = amat + pres. Am proves freedom. ‘A listening with V. M. ~ and Ashavahisht’ = ‘VY. M. listens and Ashav°® listens’, instr. sociative. As bae(é)\teus airymanaschd, and verezend = khvéshand, ayarmdndn, variinikich in Y. 46, 1, etc. I have rendered aryamdnth, khvéshih, and varzishno too rigidly here; the abstracts are here free for concrete; read: ‘Who, as client, kins- man-propietor, is a bestower on me, who to the working-class (varzishno concrete (?)) [for thee (°at is gloss)|’, etc. I can only explain sampadayitd as a free rendering. Why the Parsi-pers. renders mashhir is hard to explain. I read shunavad as older than shin®; érmdn?, so in the MS. for yéar°. 8. Fraé(é)stdonhé to fr? (pr?) = ‘most influential (in a friendly sense)’. Others /requentissimi; see fraé(é)stem even applied to ‘evils’ in Vd. 1, 4, but to beneficial influences in Vd. 3, 12 (= ‘most’). Some might render: ‘Grant to F. a steadfast abiding place (?) (in heaven) on account of his piety, and also to me.
3o fr? (pr?) = ‘most influential (in a friendly sense)’. Others /requentissimi; see fraé(é)stem even applied to ‘evils’ in Vd. 1, 4, but to beneficial influences in Vd. 3, 12 (= ‘most’). Some might render: ‘Grant to F. a steadfast abiding place (?) (in heaven) on account of his piety, and also to me. In Thy Holy kingdom may we be ever the most numerous (?)’. Pahl. The trlr. already thought of the Fire wrvaz, hence his garmak (so); with am understood an orig. bavthtinid (so deciphering) would = 1st pers., so Ner. read, but see the gloss. Knowing well mazbyd, the trlr, 582 freely renders, as elsewhere (see Y. 28, 7), by mantkané also with free gloss. Sg. 1st for pl. 18 is very frequent, as in hémandnt, see the gl. The text of the MSS. ato) )9pu is accidental; Y. 48, 3, ¢ we have oj) 24s, SO, cor- rectly. D. has vddindid for vadin (a), dar for badd, (6), afzayinend (c) homandnd, 7 in gl. (d). M.t has méanikdnoch. Ner.’s vanaspater agneh veters to garmiik, and urvdzistam; the Fire wrvdzista was ‘in plants’, Ydchaydmi = ydsd may indicate a decipherment (am) bavihiinid. J.4, J.* have dvdreshu which explains the senseless °dvdreshe of P.; J.3 has mém before yo inc. I had rendered ddegakdrinah naturally, but in view of Sarmanpato it should rather == ‘enforcing commands’, ddegikatayd (so) however in Y. 33, 3 = pavan ayarmanih, and ddegikinam in Y. 33, 4 = ménich ayarmanan. Deh (so preferred by Chodzko (?); others dik) seems more origina] as Parsi. 9. Read final yy. Dadas, with some = ‘taking’; so8. B. E., XXX], p. 167, but, for the meaning ‘establishing the chieftainship with, that is, together with the wicked and associated with him, and for his benefit’ (the instr. in a sociative and quasi dat. sense as elsewhere) cp. the direct analogon, Y. 31,15 ‘who prepares the throne for the wicked’. Following the valuable hint of another, I have construed yukhtd as a dual with Dé- Jdmaspa, yaht being irregularly left in the sg. or as being a dual from a stem yah? (msc.), or again as having suffered mutilation from ydhind. It isa pity to abandon the dual; cp. wtayiit? tevisht. But I would now suggest a loc. of yah (cp. ydonhd and manahi from manah). ‘In truth the two Jamaspa’s (Frashaostra and J.) are united in the arduous cause’. Or again; ‘since the souls will become united with the best reward (or since the precepts, see sdsniio (= daé(é)ndo (?)) in being obeyed, gain the best reward), and through their sanctity the Yahin (that is, Vistaspa (Y. 46, 14)) and Dejamaspa (read Déjdmdspo) are in very truth united with it’. Pahl. The pres. with amat may be meant (see v. 7) to express a feeble imper., ‘let him listen, and: -’, = ‘since he listens’. D. corroborates the Pers. tashidar. Read fsheg = Ssheng for pah. Fsheg sid tdshiddr = ‘the one prosperous through thrift is the creator of prosperity’; cp. Ssheg = visphdrayitre in Y.31, 10. D. om. the 7’s (a), has va rdi for la (2), om. pavan, ins. 2 before pdhlim (c), om 2 (a). Rasto-gobishné may well be nom.
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.
1ter than vdrid = vareden. Aréskoch is better, elsewhere araské or °kun. The trlr. may have under- stood 6; ‘by their own tongues among the increasers of the decreasing one’. Read /shivintdané (D.). Dan is paraphrazed freely and intelligently. — D. and M.1, tye) ey for ty ey. Read khéshmo, or aéshmé. Ner.’s varshantah is figurative, but = vdréd; sammdrjanam hardly = aréskéch (?) but some mistaken form of @ priv. + résh, or poss. rich = ‘the not injurious’; sam- marjanam = virdyishnd = rdzaré, Y. 34, 12, = virdstand, 45, 3 gl.; sam- © marjayati, Y.29, 1 = sdzéd = sastd. No fshivinénd was (D.) supposed to equal vindganam etc. Let it be remembered that é) may = v, and vishdved = | vishoped, fshiiv and vishév might have the same characters. Ner. deciphered as a form of vishiiftand = ‘to destroy’, or pas, hénatan = ‘to scatter? might have been surmised in an ‘evil’ sense. Parsis of old had trouble with the shifting letters. Qubhoditd, as with hit-varsht, seems to show a reading hi-rost. Firib, or farib would be more Pers.; read ikhtiydr. 5. Read as altern. for huzeituS bonus civis, see above on Y. 43, 3, 4 and cum his omnibus, for the instr. as altern. As to line d, I now prefer my rendering of ¢di$ vtspadis in the sociative sense; see 8. B. E. XXXI, p. 164; ‘with all those in Thy kingdom, O A’. D. om. 7 after valman in a, ins. 7 after zak in b, read vddiindnd (so in c), has diff. sign for s» in kaddrchdi. Vddényén in the glosses may be imper.; see Ner. Glosses and Ner. aside, the trl. comes out nearer the Gatha. J.3 read kurute in } gloss, which seems to fit the text, but see the Pahl. and c. Kuru — vddinyén as imper. may have an alternative trl. in kurute (J.3, J 4, c) which is at least in the 374 pers. Satkdér°, generally renders forms of shndyinidand, and makes it pos- - sible, if not probable, that such a root was seen in what now stands as shindsakth. Shirtnt, so for shér°, . 6. As to caesura, see 6; read Sraés(k)yd. Read in me as altern. for mihi, and Vestri-devoti; in the free; That Insight of Your faithful one, O Lord. Can fraé(é)s(k)y4 = ‘now I declare forth’? The view that mraté(é) is an infin. had circulated privately for years; and also, so far as I know, © the objection that it stands at the end of the line was first suggested by a private remark of my own to a friend in 1882. Before that I had never heard, or read, the smallest allusion among Zendists to the form of the Gathic sentence. The voc, Mazdé standing where it does, and the place — of Ashemché militates against an infin. mriuté(é). Fré vdo ashemché va- ochanhé(é) Mazda Sraé(é)s(k)y@ would look more like an infin. sentence. Srdvayaé(é)ma tim daé(é)nam casts light on Y. 28, 7. Perhaps khshmédvaté had better be rendered ‘your servant’ here in view of sraoté in the next y.
2place — of Ashemché militates against an infin. mriuté(é). Fré vdo ashemché va- ochanhé(é) Mazda Sraé(é)s(k)y@ would look more like an infin. sentence. Srdvayaé(é)ma tim daé(é)nam casts light on Y. 28, 7. Perhaps khshmédvaté had better be rendered ‘your servant’ here in view of sraoté in the next y. 581 Some might render: ‘I call on You, O Mazda and Asha, to declare what as emanation (@mananhd)(?) of your will is rightly to be comprehended, that I may declare that doctrine, that of your servant, O A’. Pahl. Mrivé(é) was read for mriité(é). Notice vichidydi intelligently rendered as 1* sg, fut. (1 now prefer vijinam). The 15 sg. for 1% pl. is hardly a variation to be noted in such a document, and é@m may be sg. or pl. D. has curiously vddinamam (so elsewhere). Parisphutam = Ashavahishtich (so v. 7, and Y. 51, 4, otherwise = d@shkdrak) arises from the association of A. with the Fire, hence ‘brightness’, ‘manifestation’, or A. may have been misread for ashnd (so). Vazinam, so for vaj°, also in other forms. 7. As to caesura, see vohi apart from mananhd. As sraotd is without expressed subject, some would read sraotd. But khshmdvant in the very possible sense ‘your servant’ may be understood from v. 6, or better the verse belongs after v. 9, see sraoti-- fshénghyo. Notice the three, airyamdn, baé(étu, and verezéna once more. I now prefer Jegibus, ‘laws and institutions’ to donis. Many recoil from a religious sense for frasastim, preferring famam, but the word is associated with yasna and vahma. Some might render: ‘Hear (sraotd) that graciously, O M., hear Thou (sraos tu) (?), OA.; listen Thou, O Ahura, what association for protection, what kith, is it which through its attitude gives good reputation to the circuit?’. Pahl. Read khvéshth. D. om. am in a, but spelt, with DJ. and M.1, nydkshédo; D. has nyokshash (sic vid.) in 6, vddindid in c, min tdno for min at avo, and kardé 7 lak (M1 7 kardé lak) in d. Read khvéshih. Let V. listen, and: = ‘since V.. = amat + pres. Am proves freedom. ‘A listening with V. M. ~ and Ashavahisht’ = ‘VY. M. listens and Ashav°® listens’, instr. sociative. As bae(é)\teus airymanaschd, and verezend = khvéshand, ayarmdndn, variinikich in Y. 46, 1, etc. I have rendered aryamdnth, khvéshih, and varzishno too rigidly here; the abstracts are here free for concrete; read: ‘Who, as client, kins- man-propietor, is a bestower on me, who to the working-class (varzishno concrete (?)) [for thee (°at is gloss)|’, etc. I can only explain sampadayitd as a free rendering. Why the Parsi-pers. renders mashhir is hard to explain. I read shunavad as older than shin®; érmdn?, so in the MS. for yéar°. 8. Fraé(é)stdonhé to fr? (pr?) = ‘most influential (in a friendly sense)’. Others /requentissimi; see fraé(é)stem even applied to ‘evils’ in Vd. 1, 4, but to beneficial influences in Vd. 3, 12 (= ‘most’). Some might render: ‘Grant to F. a steadfast abiding place (?) (in heaven) on account of his piety, and also to me.
3o fr? (pr?) = ‘most influential (in a friendly sense)’. Others /requentissimi; see fraé(é)stem even applied to ‘evils’ in Vd. 1, 4, but to beneficial influences in Vd. 3, 12 (= ‘most’). Some might render: ‘Grant to F. a steadfast abiding place (?) (in heaven) on account of his piety, and also to me. In Thy Holy kingdom may we be ever the most numerous (?)’. Pahl. The trlr. already thought of the Fire wrvaz, hence his garmak (so); with am understood an orig. bavthtinid (so deciphering) would = 1st pers., so Ner. read, but see the gloss. Knowing well mazbyd, the trlr, 582 freely renders, as elsewhere (see Y. 28, 7), by mantkané also with free gloss. Sg. 1st for pl. 18 is very frequent, as in hémandnt, see the gl. The text of the MSS. ato) )9pu is accidental; Y. 48, 3, ¢ we have oj) 24s, SO, cor- rectly. D. has vddindid for vadin (a), dar for badd, (6), afzayinend (c) homandnd, 7 in gl. (d). M.t has méanikdnoch. Ner.’s vanaspater agneh veters to garmiik, and urvdzistam; the Fire wrvdzista was ‘in plants’, Ydchaydmi = ydsd may indicate a decipherment (am) bavihiinid. J.4, J.* have dvdreshu which explains the senseless °dvdreshe of P.; J.3 has mém before yo inc. I had rendered ddegakdrinah naturally, but in view of Sarmanpato it should rather == ‘enforcing commands’, ddegikatayd (so) however in Y. 33, 3 = pavan ayarmanih, and ddegikinam in Y. 33, 4 = ménich ayarmanan. Deh (so preferred by Chodzko (?); others dik) seems more origina] as Parsi. 9. Read final yy. Dadas, with some = ‘taking’; so8. B. E., XXX], p. 167, but, for the meaning ‘establishing the chieftainship with, that is, together with the wicked and associated with him, and for his benefit’ (the instr. in a sociative and quasi dat. sense as elsewhere) cp. the direct analogon, Y. 31,15 ‘who prepares the throne for the wicked’. Following the valuable hint of another, I have construed yukhtd as a dual with Dé- Jdmaspa, yaht being irregularly left in the sg. or as being a dual from a stem yah? (msc.), or again as having suffered mutilation from ydhind. It isa pity to abandon the dual; cp. wtayiit? tevisht. But I would now suggest a loc. of yah (cp. ydonhd and manahi from manah). ‘In truth the two Jamaspa’s (Frashaostra and J.) are united in the arduous cause’. Or again; ‘since the souls will become united with the best reward (or since the precepts, see sdsniio (= daé(é)ndo (?)) in being obeyed, gain the best reward), and through their sanctity the Yahin (that is, Vistaspa (Y. 46, 14)) and Dejamaspa (read Déjdmdspo) are in very truth united with it’. Pahl. The pres. with amat may be meant (see v. 7) to express a feeble imper., ‘let him listen, and: -’, = ‘since he listens’. D. corroborates the Pers. tashidar. Read fsheg = Ssheng for pah. Fsheg sid tdshiddr = ‘the one prosperous through thrift is the creator of prosperity’; cp. Ssheg = visphdrayitre in Y.31, 10. D. om. the 7’s (a), has va rdi for la (2), om. pavan, ins. 2 before pdhlim (c), om 2 (a). Rasto-gobishné may well be nom.
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.