7. Formal caesura after the 4", yet see the awkwardness in c, Syl- thesis may help out keuz(e)mem chéréd(t), but see e. Read beatam in -my former verbatim. I formerly printed profluentiae as a concession to the Pahl.’s kabed; it was superfluous. Berekhdhim = ‘blessed’, ‘peloved’, to bhraj (2). Uzemem, ‘beloved’, or ‘revering’, So ‘dear’, to Ind. ah dhate. Vydnayd; see on Y. 29,6 where the Pahl. trlr. gives the meaning vijarishno followed by all. Here he seems to start with the idea of vd. Whether he means ‘causes the son to be discriminating’, recall vijdrishnd, or ‘causes to the son to acquire’, vid, vind, or simply, ‘who made the friendly love when the father gets the son’, is hard to determine. The gloss is indifferent, see Ner. Frakhshné(é) to khshnd, dat. infin., see on Pp. 430, whether possibly to priksh(?) is a question. We should at once decide on priksh, rendering ‘for satisfaction’ from frakhshan, but frakhshnené(?) makes khshnad certain that form. Have we priksh in frakhshné(é), and khshnd °khshnené(é)?
The Pahl. levatman = mad occurs after khaddyth in accordance with the Gatha, but fearing to favour the literalness of the rendering, I had translated without reference to this fact, Jevatman being generally a prepo- sition. I would now regard it as (unusually) a postposition. Vindinéd corresponds to vydnayd, reproducing its general idea; see also. ¥. 2295-6 where vydnayd equals vijdrishnd. The mere outward shape of words not unnaturally determined the choice of the early scholar, even when freely rendering; and here we have a free rendering which is sufficiently intel- ligent. ‘To cause one to understand’, or even ‘to be an abundant acquirer’, certainly implies vydnayd. So in avdmi, the first two syllables, doubtless separated from m? in the MS. before the early scribe, suggested a form of av — ‘to come to help’, hence aiyydrth, and he was only able to suggest minam as giving point to the isolated °mi. It is quite impossible to suppose than any of the Pahl. trlrs. could regard such a rendering to be literal; see min lakd; which is certainly free for thod. As proof that he knew that av was a verb, see avan, or avdin (in Y. 57, 10, 2) = sdtind,
yo ey
' ce
A
3 f a
;
This curious translation of the separated syllables of a familiar word had probably descended from generation to generation, having originated from
mechanical causes. Kabed may well be regarded now as a mere general ©
rendering of the force of frdkhshné(é) (so, elsewhere). Haug’s text of Nerv, pratyakarot is not to be desired in view of déstéh. Nery. renders grihnati reading vindinéd, or vindéd.
8. Mérdaidydi seems literally = ‘animadvertere’ hardly as men + d, but men + dd; cp. grat-dhd. AdiSti§ = ‘doctrinal direction’, as to the
substance of the Faith and the course of religious political action; cp, _
dishti, smdd-dishti; RV. III, 45,5 Indra. . - smdddishtith » - - bhdva nah sucrdvastamah. Frasht. 1 now prefer a 1% se, of the s aor. of pares, a Suggestion which had circulated privately for many years. My former ren- dering interrogatum est is well possible, but not so desirable; ‘what reve- lations were sought for with questioning’. Frashé refers characteristically to the questions of this chapter and the Avesta generally; cp. Y. 13, 5; ‘in all the questions, and conferences in which they two conversed together Mazda and Z’. Arém is the familiar ara as in Ar(a)maiti (ardmati), and is a characteristic Gathic expression. Vae(é)dydi is the dat. of the infin. noun = ‘to know’, or ‘to attain to’; kd = héna = per quam. Urvikhshad(t), so better than urvishad(t), does not necessarily, or even so probably, mean ‘may go’ because of dgemad(t); it is 3r4 Sg. s@ aor., oF conj. s aor. of vraz, if = ‘may go’, then the meaning is in the sense, ‘prosperous progress’, and not mere motion. One writer takes urvakhshat as pres. part. neut. with vohtt = ‘the prospering’. In accordance with a suggestion privately circu- lated years ago some prefer to emend to dgematd. Tad may well = téna (kéna - + téna). Another cast to this line would be: ‘How shall my soul proceed (wrvdkhshat) toward this good, and reach it (dgematd)’.
The Pahl. curiously read pendatdydi, p for m, the two letters might be confounded in a careless Sasanian MS., but see Ner.’s me détim. Frashé is freely rendered as an aor. pass. Shdyad(t) is rendered gakyate by Ner. West has remarked that shdyad(f) has not been positively limited in its meaning as yet. Prabhdvena is free for rds. Ner. may have chosen the word from the idea which inheres in prabhutva, ‘reaching over to’. Haug’s text might help in offering bhuvaneshu = ‘in the (pure) worlds’. Read Mahdjianin in a, yan me in e, misprinted in my former text.
9. Formal caesura was probably intended after the 4*, yet. see 4, ¢, and ¢. Former divisions after the Seventh were wholly mechanical, to mark the supposed stress on the 7, We should not too contemptuously repudiate the Pahl. trlr, here, who saw a possible fem, of the superl., see ds# in v.4 and
the Pahl. t#z. I would not however follow. Read sacratione in my former verbat. and sahkydd, vohuchd, emending my former printing. The second yaos is, as in most, if not all similar cases probably a later interpolation, but see the metre which without it requiies daé(¢)nam with three syllables, and yaos with two. Yaos = yds is indeclinable. It casts light on the Vedic word. We desire naturally to read daé(¢)nam here as meaning ‘soul’, ‘How shall I hallow the soul’, but the syntax is too pointed; yam sahydd(t) seems to compel the more common meaning of daé(¢)nim. Ddné(é) 1 sg. mid. conj., a form lost in the Veda, ‘The hallowing’ of the Faith was the conducting it to triumph over the opposing creed of the dregvaiit. The ideas of sanctity and prosperity were closely associated in early Zoroastrian ideas, cp. the shade of meaning in spenta; see the next v. Hreshvd khshathra might be voc.; but this seems awkward in view of huddndus paitis - - khshathrahyd. Patti. - Thwévas is merely an oblique ‘Thou, a ruler’; ‘O true ruler’ would hardly be added. As#S##S = dstS#S, hardly the fem. of a superl. of dsw with the Pahl. Cp. the forms from the Indian ¢ds ¢zshta, °vishté pragis. Some would prefer the meaning ‘rejoicing’ for skyas, but see - hademéi which is decisive. Some might colour as follows: ‘How shall I regulate my doctrine of faith which the Lord of a well-ordered land empha- sizes with powerful might, an energetic ruler like Thee, O M., in commonwith the pious, rejoicing therein in truth’? Aséstis (K.4, etc.) might = ‘a commander’.
The Pahl. trlr., etymologizing vigorously here, seems to see the root of dsu, in a(d)s@stis, a fem. of the superl. which is not impossible. Read havand in former d. Notice the general correctness of the Pahl. The MS. text of Ner. is difficult as to sahasakhdyatayd (°sakhya + ta). Haug suggested °(?)sakhy- aya, having sahasakhayayd before him. Read Dinir iyam ine in my former printing.
10. Read a formal caesura after the 4%» syllable; former divisions at the 7 marked a supposed accent. My former optatio, desiderans should have ay ego desiderans. The Daé(é)na is here still the Holy Insight, the Faith. Fradéid(t) throws light on the yaoS - - - déné@) of v. 9. The hallowing was the deeper consecration of the Holy Faith in his own (md) mind, and in that of the people. Some prefer to render hachemné ‘being followed’, i. e. ‘obeyed’ rather than ‘following’. 18/§ wsén. In the Latin transl. I formerly transcribed what I thought, and think still may be the form of usén; that is, a present participle (So Haug); but I carefully sepa- rated it from the fem. @st/$ by a comma. [&ti§ is only probable as a masc. with wsen when regarded as an exceptional form, and I obviously did not suppose 7s¢/§ and usen to be in agreement. Usen = ugdn as a part. would
be at the Vedic stage, its oldest form would be wsants; cp. khshayais =
khshayants. The 6 of bard, etc. is the relic of an as degenerated from as = ants, and is more primitive than the Vedic nom. °an (which has lost both ¢ and s). I now greatly prefer the reading @s¢§ as an irregular nom. pl. fem. by transition to the 7 declension, cp. Ved. bhimis. Usén would then equal wean, ‘My enlightened supplications will seek for Thee, O M.’; ep. déishé mot ya ve abifré; Ashd kad(t) thwd daresdnt. One scholar regards usén as aneut. pl. from usan; see on Y. 45, 9 (a very old suggestion). As some writers justly hold to a shifting caesura, there should be no objection to an enclitic thwd. Some would refer daidyad(t) to dhyd, or dha (?): ‘He should with hig action rightly consider the words - - he who is striving after (@st¢$ nom. Sg. masc.) thy (thwd acc. pl. neut.) commands (usén ace. pl. neut.)’. Others (long previously) have given the following colour: ‘That doctrine, the best of existing ones, when it is correctly followed, blesses my people; through the commands of obedience it correctly brings actions to pass; from thee I desire (#st/§ nom. sg. masc. (?)) the guidance (usen n. pl. nt.) of my mind’,
No one should object to the easy freedom of the Pahl. trlr. in inter- changing the forms of Sradoid(t) hachémna. Rendering one bya noun and the other by a verb, he shows that he could not have been ignorant of — the forms, and was free with both. Possibly vddiinyén may have been meant as the 24 sg. imper.; so possibly in the next gloss. The trlr. had great difficulty with 7s¢é(7)s usen, aS do all, and with no contemptible decision he separated the words, beginning a new phrase with use. In this he may well have shown us the correct solution. Ner.’s datte ig undoubtedly meant as an equivalent of yehabimed, and in the sense ‘produces’, not in the sense ‘receives’. Of course, if tubhyam refers to the Deity, it must be
rendered ‘for Thee’. The reward could not be given to the Deity. Read my former text, Dinir iyam.
11. A type had broken in my former su) 99. Read caesura at the —
4h, and paouruyé, correcting a misprint in my old transliteration. Read — enuntiabitur for my former careless enuntiatur. Paouruyd = paourvyd recalls paowrvatétem Y. 38, 14 and paourutemais Y. 34, 1. The leadership, and the leaders, were an element of the last importance in the holy struggle. No vanity or egoism attached to the ‘priority in the cause’. The leaders |
were the true representatives of the people; and without them Gathic life was nothing. Some render paouruyé(é) ‘at first’. Thwdi — thwé = ( we) ous = thwayd; %y = 45 = y4, uF has inherent a, n. Sg. fem. = ‘Thy’. I prefer my former alternative prior-cognitus-sum to my former translation, but the mid. often occurs in active sense. Dvaé(é)shanhda is, as one would naturally
Suppose, an instr. sg. It is however taken by one writer as an acc. pl. neut.: ‘I regard all others as opposers’(?). Another suggested: ‘Do Thou behold all the others with the hate of Thy spirit’.
Mian, too rigidly rendered in c, should equal yaé(é)ibyé in the sense of ‘to whom’ they announce, and with the change of d to d, yemalelind would be passive. Whether the trlr. really intended to represent what he had before him in the place of fravdividé(é) as an imper. is a question. He was able to render the perf. form, as is shown in v. 20, a. At the same time his freedom here, while reproducing the roots present, entirely turns the point of the sense. Many another might propose an alteration of text from mainyéus to the acc. pl., as the trlr. does here. In Y. 28, 1 he recognizes the word as a sg., in Y! 82, 9 probably as a gen. sg. freely rendered by a gen. pl., so in Y. 47, 4. Ignorance as to sg., or pl. is here absolutely impossible. And any who would seriously crititize the trlr. as to this particular would show his own want of knowledge. And after all the men may very possibly apply to mainyeus, affording an exactly literal rendering. Certain it is that the Pahl. trir. did not mistake the véspang anyéng for abl. gen. As to 7 déshiddr, it would not be in place to satirize the trir., since dvaé(é)shanhé has been rendered even by a modern occidental as an acc. pl. neut. As alternative read: ‘ Of (against) the spirit of all others, as
‘their hater, I keep my guard’. I have been formerly unnecessarily hostile
a eS