left (a + gish)’. But, as has been more than once remarked, when the Avesta text stood partly, or wholly in its original Pahl. character, initial » represented long, or short, a, The rendering ‘instruction’, likewise requires emended dsiitim. But 1 think the idea of ‘instruction’ singularly out of place here. The strophe is one of the few in the GAthis which breathes the spirit of the Rik, The fire is ‘quick’ with its darting flames, and ‘shining’, and, in the form of lightning casts bolts as ‘if from the hand’. Rap = rabh = (in the GAthis) ‘to receive joyfully’: rapantee) , or rapent&(?), = ‘to the joyfully receiving (people)’, Some able scholars would see the acc, with the infin, in dtarém std = ste(?); ‘we wish that thy ire should be’, (Std/ from std in the sense of ah = ‘to be’), One might seriously suspect an infin, in Y, 81, 8. dd(t) thwd merghi paourvin » y(eeim sti mananhd; but nothing makes the expressions more heavy than a clumsy and useless infin, As an infin,, the word would be either a dat, = sl0(?) = sthé = ‘to stand’ in the sense of ‘to be’, or some might con- Jecture a weakened aséé(?), infin, of ah = ‘to be’. Wo have before us a nominal form from radical s/@ in the dat, The meaning of the Sansk, sthd
‘the stationary’ is too restricted, but is not foreign to ‘world’, ‘people’; or the word might be a loc. from st@ (by transfer in Zend to a), The sense is that of the Vedic sf, as Roth long ago showed of stéé in Y, 34, [(It is also not impossible that the letter ¢ in s¢ contains an inherent a, and that the dé of stdi = A(@) in st(?), is in reality (w)y?, so that we should have
stay?, There is strong reason to suspect at every turn that yo may have the force of the Pahl. letter ay (see elsewhere), This letter in Pahl,
doos not in fact ever represent yé(¢), but its use once begun as a letter in Zond with Pahl, varying value, it retains somewhat of this force, even where it does not retain all of it, Wor instance in 6y94 the letter yo = ya or ye, whereas in o}r449 = hainyd, it has its fall value ya. If stay? is before us, we may call it a dat. of s¢é,)] Op, Y, Ab, 10 Ahmadi stoi dan tevishi utaynditd? = ‘for this land » + « the enduring mighty two’; ep. Y. 46,16 Athrd td ar(e)drdid iat Hodgod tais yerg usvahi usta stoi; shall we render ‘go with those whom we gladly wish to be (?) in blessedness’? The words obviously mean ‘whom we pray for as wild (cp. usta ahmaé yahmai witd kahmdichid(t)) as ‘salvation’ (adverbial) for the land’. Op, Y. 49, 2 ndid(f) spentiim’ dorest ahmai stoi Ar(a)maitim = ‘for this land’, not ‘to be for us’; 60 Y. 50, 2 ye Aim ahmai vdstravaitin stdi usyadd(t). = not ‘to be for us’, but ‘for this land’, See especially Y, 50, 6 data khratéus hievd.raithim stoi = ‘not giver of understanding ‘to be’ ’, but ‘giver of Wise
is
yoice-guidance for the land (or people)’. -(In sté/$ we have the gen. of the fem. word sti.) Chitrd-avanhem is in poetical parallelism and ryhme with derestd-aé(é)nanhem. One might hesitate to decide whether a ‘steady deter- mined vengeance’, or ‘a visible vengeance’ is the better rendering for deresta (from dar(e)z or dar(e)s). We should naturally advocate the latter on account of the fire and chithra; a chithra help, and a chithra (derestd = seen) ‘curse’, This seems decidedly better; and I would therefore put ‘steadfast’, ‘steady’, in the second place, as the alternative. Haug’s gud commisit- peccatum for derestd-aénanhem is not desirable.
Khirsandth freely and not improperly, although obscurely, expresses the sense of usemah? (see the gloss for the 1% pers. The trlr. was not ignorant of the term. mahé (see for instance Y. 31, 1 senghamahi = amazem). Stéc was taken as an infin. of st@ ‘for the abiding’ as = ‘which abides’. Aside from its original read in d+ ~- ‘who stands by a friend, to him it makes joy manifest’. The gloss ‘who has tormented the fire’ is useless and harmful. Pavan tdbdnd for zastd is not ignorant error (see yadman = °zastd, Y. 28, 1). It is a frequent free rendering, see remarks on Y. 43, 4. 1§tdi§ erroneously to ish = ‘to wish’. There is no 1% pers. in the gloss of Ner. Zastd.istais = hastechchhayd shows that Ner.’s eye was on both Gatha and Pahl.
5. I very much prefer the reading ahm?, which stood before the Pahl. trir., to either ham?, hakhmi, or hahmi. Haug’s vaokhmi is not justified. Vado is here possessive, as so often; whether it is grammatically the equivalent of 22, is doubtful. That 75#/§ means ‘wealth’ here, as the Pahl. trir. saw, is obvious from the cénnection. ‘Power’ and ‘wealth’ were needed for the protection and sustenance of the poor. Haug’s ad - triplicem -faciendam trinitatem vestram as = thrdjoidydi drigtm ydshmdkem was rather pecu- liar. We must also modify his rendering of line c.: ‘Schon lange redeten wir euretwillen gegen die bésen Geister, die Fleischfresser, und die (bésen) Menschen’. The meaning of pare vaokhema was seen by the Pahl. translator before all, as so often. Paré is here nearly equivalent to aitare in antare
- mrayé(°vé), see Y. 49, 3. Here it equals (?) para. Some scholars seem inclined to take v2 in the sense of the Vedic vdé; and S(k)yaothandis as simply meaning ‘in fact’. Some would drop vaokh(e)md on account of the metre instead of the second paré; but I may be here mistaken.
I should say that vdddandnt should be read for vddéndnd (characters closely similar, not identical), and aharayindné for °dnd (char. identical). The approximately correct Pahl. trl. with its interesting gloss needs only the remark that a far less literal rendering would still give the invaluable indications, The idiomatic paré is here first critically rendered (see above).
Yet some writers have missed the hint entirely, rendering paré merely as indicating priority of announcement.
6. Some would render: ‘If ye are well-inclined, O Mazda, and Asha’. Dakhstem might mean the ‘means’, as well as the ‘sign’, I prefer the latter. Maé(é)thd is most obviously adverbial instrumental, meaning ‘during my dwelling’, ‘abode’. There is no indication whatsoever of the idea of ‘perversion’, ‘wrong’ here. Some would prefer an acc. pl. ‘that I may go to the abodes of this people’. Comparing ameshdo as having at least the place of an accus. pl., I formerly rendered urvdidydo here according to the context as an accus., taking the hint of the Pahl. trlr. which is closely in accord with the connection. Now however, as in S. B. E, XXXT, p. 86, I prefer a nom. sg. masc. of the comparative from a root adj., equalling ‘to magnify’ in the sense of mimaghehd, Y.45, 10. Urvdidydo may equal vrdidydo, aS urvazd equals vrazd, and orddh, in a transitive sense, might be compared. Some prefer urvaddydéo, and changing that reading to urvady a, see an infin. of a root of urvd = ‘to believe’; see the Pahl. of Y. 31, 2, where urvdné(e) is similarly taken. Some may exclaim at the error of s¢é for std; but the error was not ignorant; see hémanéd in Y. 32, 3 made certain as a 2°4 by atdné, and °tdnd in the gloss. Had he not a different reading here?; or did he not change (sic) his text? Possibly, as Sp. suggests, he regarded std as a loc. of st. In Ner. etadiyenacha seems for etadtyechd.
7. Some are inclined to regard lines a and 6 as expressions of repu- diation: ‘Hast thou as helpers those who deliver the possessions of the pious community, the doctrines, the property, the cattle (?) asvén (?) in an evil manner, to robbery? how hast not’. I think however that this rend- ering possesses equal difficulty with one constructed on simpler principles. The strophe expresses a momentary discouragement (comp. the preceding verse). The sage rhetorically complains of the absence of the aredra@ who turn every aspen(chid(t))(?) and even sddré into admonitions which result in prosperity (treasures) by their proselyting zeal. So I rendered formerly, allowing perhaps to much meaning. Evil is described as being turned into good elsewhere, as where the Fryéna, the converted Turks, are mentioned in Y.46. But we might perhaps better take aspeichtd(t) (?) sddrdchid(t) ad- verbially ‘in our misery and our woe’, or, very much better, read dspenchid(t) with the Pahl. trir. not forgetting that the text once stood in the Pahl. characters, and that initial » = a, or ad, ‘in prosperity, or in woe’ that was what the composer meant. SeighaS might well equal ¢ansus (see Haug) 3°¢ pl. perf.; ‘. - who ag the instructed of the Good Mind have proclaimed blessings to us, producing the treasures of the Good Mind (recall the shtz)
in weal or woe’. Chakhrayé to chdkri (not 2"4 sg. with H.). I can see no valid reason at all for distorting the plain words wshi-uri. Ushi (sic) and uri might well both be instr., or, taken together, they might well be a descriptive compositum with the adjective last, a form seldom or never found in Sanskrit. And ‘with wide apprehension’ should be no more considered an improbable meaning than wrugdnsa = ‘commanding afar’. I hardly like Haug’s possessa = vaédemna.
Pahl. The concrete aredrdé is rendered by the abstract rddih. The trlr. was not ignorant that yé¢ = man. If hi-varishné were indeed figura- tively applied to raé(é)khndo, it would be a fine rendering, but it is difficult to believe that it was so intended. No a priv. is seen in aspénchid(t). It was read dspénchid(¢), probably affording an important emendation. Chakh- rayo was referred to its proper root (cp. chdkri). I had read ahardyindnd on account of vddindid, and Ner.’s gloss., but ahardyindn? is better in case we venture on the easy emendation vddindni. Without gloss read: ‘when I shall fulfil righteousness, do ye then bestow deliverance upon us’.
8. I formerly read dayanté(é) = bhdyante, rendering: ‘They are terrified by these our actions’; but see the connection, the apprehension expressed in v. 7, and the rest of v. 8. It is our duty in exegesis to render from the context, or else to deny that the context is original. ‘By these
actions they terrify us’, reading dayaint? as having transitive sense, disturbs the analogy with dhdyante, but this cannot be helped. See Yt. 17, 12 Aé(é)shiim aspdonhd bayainti dsavé ravé-frathmané etc.; here bayainti cannot mean ‘take fright’; (or read bavainti (?)). Aé(é)sham ustrdonhd bayainte(?) v.15. In the Vedic the transitive sense has disappeared except in the cau- Sative. Y0¢ néid(t) ashem mainyantd is a varying expression for the dreg- vanits who were opposed to the ‘Holy Order’ of the cause. The absence of Asha from these has its parallelism in the next verse. Indian students should be on their guard against Haug’s affligas cognatum (inimicum) tut Sapiens! angore edicto, for asaojydo ndidydonhem thwahya Mazda asta
_urvaitahyd, more freely; den nahverwandten Feind mégest du durch deinen Ausspruch, Weiser! dngstigen:,, die, etc. His suggestion that we have a citation is however well worth considering. His text voht asmand = a- lucente coelo is again misleading.
The Pahl. trlr. is free, or erroneous in the difficult 6 with the word which I could only decipher in view of its original, as ‘néhddad’ (?) (Sp. n, h, 4, 7, tf). D.’s MS. might be read nihddino (sic). I formerly corrected to nihddo in accordance with Ner. and the Pers.: Sp. suggests nihan. But I think it more than probable that we have here a partial so-called transliteration rather than a translation. The letters of D. might possibly be read n, @, h, d, y, 6, n, (?)