Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1not be considered in his turn ignorant of all Pahl. grammar from his freedom in d. Read péshtnagan for the misprinted de- cipherment of the confused writing; read khriéis perhaps, but ‘cock’ was certainly not meant; cp. khraozh®, also old Pahl.-paz. gl. khrdéshd (so), khrishéd might better be khré°. I meant hishhan (?) + ya'ni, etc. 41. As to caesura see b. Aojdi might = ‘I will name myself’, better mid.-pass., as so often. Perhaps we should read isdchd (act), so J.?, J.%, so also J.*, but it is corrected to °sd7. VarStam is either gen. pl. shortened on account of the metre (cp. deviim for devindm, etc.), or it is a 37¢ sg. mid. imper. (so, long privately taught) with neut. pl. subject, or with ddta understood as subject. ‘Let these truly righteous acts of praise be accom- plished’, or, ‘let the Creator of the world accomplish for Himself what may be most prospering for the cause through grace’. Pahl, M. gives us ao |) Seg 594 the needed aétind = ad(#), D. yakhsenunam, M.1 darém (a), D. yehabinéd in d, see DJ. The trir. had aojé before him, or read aojdi as a verbal form from the root of aojé, and this is a solution well worth considering; see tavdchd isdichad. ‘As your praiser I will have power in the future, and I have been your praiser so far as I can and may’. The trlr. was not ignorant of a root aoj = ‘to say’; see Y. 43, 8 where aoji = hémanam-- gift. He may well also have recognized the form as well as the root of staotd; ‘Your praising is strength to me’ may be free for ‘I as Your praiser will have strength’. See also the roundabout perf. in the gloss, showing unquestioned freedom in att}. Isai (or zsé), as ever, to ish = ichchh probably erroneously, but always possibly correctly; here the trlr. may have recoiled from tautology; see tavd. Dédtd he took as imper. 224 p],; aredad(t) was probably divided are.dad(#) in his MSS., and probably (not certainly) regarded as a puzzling neut. But, on the contrary, these seeming errors may be each and all mere freedom, or inherited views which he feared to change. Varstam was seen as gen. pl, and rendered in the concrete. He notices the superl. frashdtemem. Ner. has his eye on adj6 ait, and blundering, or correcting us; J.4 has dste: JA, J* have bhavami for karomi. J8 om. yat inb; J.8 antah sampirna (2) uttamasya manasah. In d, gl. 1 followed OC. as nearer the Pahl., but still yehabiinéd may be imper. J.3 has svdémin prasddam prasidapiritam (so) dehi pravdhena, J.° bhavdmi; P. has svdmina (?) and as J.3. J is reported as svdmin yat krimah(?) yah prasddah piritain (SO) prasd- dam dadydt yat pravahena J.(?) bhavémi bhavet ayam prabhdvahe (80) gighram bhavami. J.* corresponds with J.4 from svdmin on save as to puritam (sic), dadyat (sic), also pravdéhe for prabdvahe (so). C. follows J.4 till bhavet, then yam pravdhe gighram bhavémi.
2mah(?) yah prasddah piritain (SO) prasd- dam dadydt yat pravahena J.(?) bhavémi bhavet ayam prabhdvahe (80) gighram bhavami. J.* corresponds with J.4 from svdmin on save as to puritam (sic), dadyat (sic), also pravdéhe for prabdvahe (so). C. follows J.4 till bhavet, then yam pravdhe gighram bhavémi. Tat (d) is a mistaken word, I think, I misreading Sp.’s handwriting; omit it, Parsi-pers.; deham and dehad as more orig.; otherwise read dih®, deh® also in other MSS.; so badlah in other MSS. The Gatha(a) vohukhshathra(a). Yasna LI. For introduction, altern. trl., etc., see 8. B. E., pp. 176—187. 1, Read final J.* has vidush°, &(k)yaothn®. With some khshathrem = ‘field’, (2), better kshétra = shdithra. As to the reading védishemndiS — (see the MSS.), poss. to an aor. of dig, with monstrous transition; ‘actions that are being well discriminated’ (it agrees with §(k)yaoth(a)ndi§ without doubt); or it is a formation from the aor. of dhd ‘actions that produce it’, or ‘arrange it’, Reading °dush®, consider divas as pointing to a root 59b _ du in the positive sense, ‘actions which inspire it with zeal’, etc. Then con- sider v¢dus as the stem, see vidushé(é) in v.8. If to dush = ‘afflict’, then antare-charaiti is in analogy with antare mruyé(é) (also with the instr.) = ‘interdict’, ‘goes between, as holding off on each side’, so, ‘opposes’. Some prefer the dat. °emndi, but see s(k)yaoth(a)nds. Probability almost inclines to dush in the ‘good’ sense, but then aitare ch. = ‘enters’, or ‘ pervades’ (?). Some might take varshdné(é) as dat. infin., with ahm? or mahé understood = ‘I will do’, ‘let us do’, better as aor. conj. mid. Some would emend a: ‘He afforded (abcbar) as the best lot wished-for by us (¢8tem) - -’. D. ins. 7, khiddt in a, om. avo, and va in a gl., om. va in b, om. 7’s, has yeheviind inc. Mas K.> (Sp.); the usual liturgical notes follow. Read avdyad. The Pahl. is intentionally free with avim. Vidushemndis seems referred to a du, = ‘to favour’, extended by ‘sh’. The root ideas are indicated, bahar = bdgem, afzind = tzha, kevanich = nichid(t); even vddinyén points” to char in one of its meanings. The glosses break up the otherwise easily established connection. Haug’s kdmine, although against the other MSS., should be read at least as an alternative. I had proposed an altern. masc. in uttamasvamikdmin® as feeling the influence of upari; see the gloss. (I do not of course see a masc. in wibhitim in agreement with °kdminam, but upart may possible govern it.) Notice varsh (vrish) in the rare sense of ‘bestowing’. Kuru = varzishn as infin. for imper. Baharah as more original; otherwise bahrah; burishn as older; otherwise barishn; see altern. crude form dur in Gl. to Arda Viraf. Read géyad for the misprint. 2. Td seems sometimes dual nt. in the Gathas = ¢é, referring to _ khshathrem and bdgem; but with bdgem, masc. td = téu would be natural. Otherwise td = téna = eo. Yé(e)cha is either 1% sg. indic. or conj., cp.
3barishn; see altern. crude form dur in Gl. to Arda Viraf. Read géyad for the misprint. 2. Td seems sometimes dual nt. in the Gathas = ¢é, referring to _ khshathrem and bdgem; but with bdgem, masc. td = téu would be natural. Otherwise td = téna = eo. Yé(e)cha is either 1% sg. indic. or conj., cp. yacha(m) (2); or read yaé(é)ché with many MSS., acc. dual neut. We might think of Ashayaé(é)ch@ = ‘and to Ashi’ for Ashd yéchd (yaéchd). Déis is 2nd so. opt. from aor. stem of dé transferred to the a conjug.; otherwise doishé as 274 se, gunated sa aor. imper. of dis = ‘show me’. Some might suggest: ‘To You primarily, O M. A., and for Ashi, may we arrange (dézs- dméi (?)) the district (khshathrem (?)) in our possession (¢stéis); may we through grace partake of (vahmdiddid? as corruption from vanghdmaidi (?), or some similar form, to aor. of van, vans) your support’. D. ins. @ with DJ. (@) has vddimamam curiously again (4), also ésht 7, om. va before first std (c); M.1 as Sp. (K.°). No yée)chéd = ydché in the Pahl.; see also Y. 30, 1. Was déis rendered in the 34 pers. as if an aor. of dis? Ddidi, which might be regarded as = déc§, as a 224 se. = yehabiindi in Y. 28, 7, here freely z= Pd. Isht stands in Zend characters in all MSS. Ner.’s prithivydm should hardly be within the brackets; the more correct samprnamanasé y 596 was his seco,d thought. Varchhitam (?) is for zsht transcribed only by the Pahl. lr. vam (so also J.*) points to Lekim. 3. Read final » Géushéd is adverbially used ‘to You let them assemble with the ear (that is, to hear) who are guided by Your (cere- monially prescribed (sic) moral) actions’. Some prefer the Vedic sense of ghosha, ‘with loud call’ (cp. Yt. 10, 85), but ep. also geushais, Y. 30, 2. I now prefer hémyanti = ‘let them come’. Whether ve can be the object — which the pious ‘lean upon’, ‘hold to’ is a question; but read as a possible — altern.; ‘who incline to You (séreté(é)) in their actions’, or ‘are governed — by You (gen. for abl. (?)) as to their actions’. Ukhdhdi§ as ‘chanted words of the ritual’, ‘hymns and recitations’. D. and M.t have védéndad in ¢, gl. Notwithstanding avd, ham-sdtinishnd might be infin. for imper. conj., and so _ render °yantd; but a conj. imper. only would literally render Syanti, — ‘Would’st provide’ for vddéndi (also equalling ‘may’st thou’, or ‘provide thou’) points to hémanih. Ner.’s labhah seems to render khirsandih (so read); nydkshiddr was prob. translit. naddkth® = gubhena; but sarve renders (?) hem = ham (sic). Karomi shows that he read héman for homand. Parisphutam for Ashavahisht6 again prob. points to association with the Fire. Prithak kar®— renders dakhshakin®; elsewhere chihna is used. Karoti can hardly stand in ¢; read ‘Thou makest distinctly separated’. J.4 has karmandah (so). Shun- ida(a@)r as more orig., otherwise shan®. Read gundh. 4. Read /yén.
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.
1not be considered in his turn ignorant of all Pahl. grammar from his freedom in d. Read péshtnagan for the misprinted de- cipherment of the confused writing; read khriéis perhaps, but ‘cock’ was certainly not meant; cp. khraozh®, also old Pahl.-paz. gl. khrdéshd (so), khrishéd might better be khré°. I meant hishhan (?) + ya'ni, etc. 41. As to caesura see b. Aojdi might = ‘I will name myself’, better mid.-pass., as so often. Perhaps we should read isdchd (act), so J.?, J.%, so also J.*, but it is corrected to °sd7. VarStam is either gen. pl. shortened on account of the metre (cp. deviim for devindm, etc.), or it is a 37¢ sg. mid. imper. (so, long privately taught) with neut. pl. subject, or with ddta understood as subject. ‘Let these truly righteous acts of praise be accom- plished’, or, ‘let the Creator of the world accomplish for Himself what may be most prospering for the cause through grace’. Pahl, M. gives us ao |) Seg 594 the needed aétind = ad(#), D. yakhsenunam, M.1 darém (a), D. yehabinéd in d, see DJ. The trir. had aojé before him, or read aojdi as a verbal form from the root of aojé, and this is a solution well worth considering; see tavdchd isdichad. ‘As your praiser I will have power in the future, and I have been your praiser so far as I can and may’. The trlr. was not ignorant of a root aoj = ‘to say’; see Y. 43, 8 where aoji = hémanam-- gift. He may well also have recognized the form as well as the root of staotd; ‘Your praising is strength to me’ may be free for ‘I as Your praiser will have strength’. See also the roundabout perf. in the gloss, showing unquestioned freedom in att}. Isai (or zsé), as ever, to ish = ichchh probably erroneously, but always possibly correctly; here the trlr. may have recoiled from tautology; see tavd. Dédtd he took as imper. 224 p],; aredad(t) was probably divided are.dad(#) in his MSS., and probably (not certainly) regarded as a puzzling neut. But, on the contrary, these seeming errors may be each and all mere freedom, or inherited views which he feared to change. Varstam was seen as gen. pl, and rendered in the concrete. He notices the superl. frashdtemem. Ner. has his eye on adj6 ait, and blundering, or correcting us; J.4 has dste: JA, J* have bhavami for karomi. J8 om. yat inb; J.8 antah sampirna (2) uttamasya manasah. In d, gl. 1 followed OC. as nearer the Pahl., but still yehabiinéd may be imper. J.3 has svdémin prasddam prasidapiritam (so) dehi pravdhena, J.° bhavdmi; P. has svdmina (?) and as J.3. J is reported as svdmin yat krimah(?) yah prasddah piritain (SO) prasd- dam dadydt yat pravahena J.(?) bhavémi bhavet ayam prabhdvahe (80) gighram bhavami. J.* corresponds with J.4 from svdmin on save as to puritam (sic), dadyat (sic), also pravdéhe for prabdvahe (so). C. follows J.4 till bhavet, then yam pravdhe gighram bhavémi.
2mah(?) yah prasddah piritain (SO) prasd- dam dadydt yat pravahena J.(?) bhavémi bhavet ayam prabhdvahe (80) gighram bhavami. J.* corresponds with J.4 from svdmin on save as to puritam (sic), dadyat (sic), also pravdéhe for prabdvahe (so). C. follows J.4 till bhavet, then yam pravdhe gighram bhavémi. Tat (d) is a mistaken word, I think, I misreading Sp.’s handwriting; omit it, Parsi-pers.; deham and dehad as more orig.; otherwise read dih®, deh® also in other MSS.; so badlah in other MSS. The Gatha(a) vohukhshathra(a). Yasna LI. For introduction, altern. trl., etc., see 8. B. E., pp. 176—187. 1, Read final J.* has vidush°, &(k)yaothn®. With some khshathrem = ‘field’, (2), better kshétra = shdithra. As to the reading védishemndiS — (see the MSS.), poss. to an aor. of dig, with monstrous transition; ‘actions that are being well discriminated’ (it agrees with §(k)yaoth(a)ndi§ without doubt); or it is a formation from the aor. of dhd ‘actions that produce it’, or ‘arrange it’, Reading °dush®, consider divas as pointing to a root 59b _ du in the positive sense, ‘actions which inspire it with zeal’, etc. Then con- sider v¢dus as the stem, see vidushé(é) in v.8. If to dush = ‘afflict’, then antare-charaiti is in analogy with antare mruyé(é) (also with the instr.) = ‘interdict’, ‘goes between, as holding off on each side’, so, ‘opposes’. Some prefer the dat. °emndi, but see s(k)yaoth(a)nds. Probability almost inclines to dush in the ‘good’ sense, but then aitare ch. = ‘enters’, or ‘ pervades’ (?). Some might take varshdné(é) as dat. infin., with ahm? or mahé understood = ‘I will do’, ‘let us do’, better as aor. conj. mid. Some would emend a: ‘He afforded (abcbar) as the best lot wished-for by us (¢8tem) - -’. D. ins. 7, khiddt in a, om. avo, and va in a gl., om. va in b, om. 7’s, has yeheviind inc. Mas K.> (Sp.); the usual liturgical notes follow. Read avdyad. The Pahl. is intentionally free with avim. Vidushemndis seems referred to a du, = ‘to favour’, extended by ‘sh’. The root ideas are indicated, bahar = bdgem, afzind = tzha, kevanich = nichid(t); even vddinyén points” to char in one of its meanings. The glosses break up the otherwise easily established connection. Haug’s kdmine, although against the other MSS., should be read at least as an alternative. I had proposed an altern. masc. in uttamasvamikdmin® as feeling the influence of upari; see the gloss. (I do not of course see a masc. in wibhitim in agreement with °kdminam, but upart may possible govern it.) Notice varsh (vrish) in the rare sense of ‘bestowing’. Kuru = varzishn as infin. for imper. Baharah as more original; otherwise bahrah; burishn as older; otherwise barishn; see altern. crude form dur in Gl. to Arda Viraf. Read géyad for the misprint. 2. Td seems sometimes dual nt. in the Gathas = ¢é, referring to _ khshathrem and bdgem; but with bdgem, masc. td = téu would be natural. Otherwise td = téna = eo. Yé(e)cha is either 1% sg. indic. or conj., cp.
3barishn; see altern. crude form dur in Gl. to Arda Viraf. Read géyad for the misprint. 2. Td seems sometimes dual nt. in the Gathas = ¢é, referring to _ khshathrem and bdgem; but with bdgem, masc. td = téu would be natural. Otherwise td = téna = eo. Yé(e)cha is either 1% sg. indic. or conj., cp. yacha(m) (2); or read yaé(é)ché with many MSS., acc. dual neut. We might think of Ashayaé(é)ch@ = ‘and to Ashi’ for Ashd yéchd (yaéchd). Déis is 2nd so. opt. from aor. stem of dé transferred to the a conjug.; otherwise doishé as 274 se, gunated sa aor. imper. of dis = ‘show me’. Some might suggest: ‘To You primarily, O M. A., and for Ashi, may we arrange (dézs- dméi (?)) the district (khshathrem (?)) in our possession (¢stéis); may we through grace partake of (vahmdiddid? as corruption from vanghdmaidi (?), or some similar form, to aor. of van, vans) your support’. D. ins. @ with DJ. (@) has vddimamam curiously again (4), also ésht 7, om. va before first std (c); M.1 as Sp. (K.°). No yée)chéd = ydché in the Pahl.; see also Y. 30, 1. Was déis rendered in the 34 pers. as if an aor. of dis? Ddidi, which might be regarded as = déc§, as a 224 se. = yehabiindi in Y. 28, 7, here freely z= Pd. Isht stands in Zend characters in all MSS. Ner.’s prithivydm should hardly be within the brackets; the more correct samprnamanasé y 596 was his seco,d thought. Varchhitam (?) is for zsht transcribed only by the Pahl. lr. vam (so also J.*) points to Lekim. 3. Read final » Géushéd is adverbially used ‘to You let them assemble with the ear (that is, to hear) who are guided by Your (cere- monially prescribed (sic) moral) actions’. Some prefer the Vedic sense of ghosha, ‘with loud call’ (cp. Yt. 10, 85), but ep. also geushais, Y. 30, 2. I now prefer hémyanti = ‘let them come’. Whether ve can be the object — which the pious ‘lean upon’, ‘hold to’ is a question; but read as a possible — altern.; ‘who incline to You (séreté(é)) in their actions’, or ‘are governed — by You (gen. for abl. (?)) as to their actions’. Ukhdhdi§ as ‘chanted words of the ritual’, ‘hymns and recitations’. D. and M.t have védéndad in ¢, gl. Notwithstanding avd, ham-sdtinishnd might be infin. for imper. conj., and so _ render °yantd; but a conj. imper. only would literally render Syanti, — ‘Would’st provide’ for vddéndi (also equalling ‘may’st thou’, or ‘provide thou’) points to hémanih. Ner.’s labhah seems to render khirsandih (so read); nydkshiddr was prob. translit. naddkth® = gubhena; but sarve renders (?) hem = ham (sic). Karomi shows that he read héman for homand. Parisphutam for Ashavahisht6 again prob. points to association with the Fire. Prithak kar®— renders dakhshakin®; elsewhere chihna is used. Karoti can hardly stand in ¢; read ‘Thou makest distinctly separated’. J.4 has karmandah (so). Shun- ida(a@)r as more orig., otherwise shan®. Read gundh. 4. Read /yén.
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.