3. Séwhdonhd (cp. sénhdscha) Y. 31, 11, may certainly be masc. as = ‘doctrines’, and gu#zrd likewise masc. I had translated yaé(é)chid(t) quae- cunque simply as agreeing with the Latin doctrinae. Read quicunque [quae?}. Gizrd-senhdonhéd may also be a compositwum in the nom. masc. pl.; see S. B. E. XXXI, p. 154. Recoiling from the ellipsis necessary for this sense, I formerly regarded the words as separated, ‘secret (that is till now secret, agushté) doctrines’; cp. Y. 31, 11 hyad(t) skyaothandchd séiighasché yathra varenéng vasdo ddyé(é)ité(é). I incline now to this original opinion, as above expressed. In S. B. E. XXXI, p. 154, I have referred thwdvis to the fshuyant, or Saos(k)yant, as in Y. 43, 2, and I would still do so, but it is far from certain here, as there, that the line may not refer to Ahuréd. At all events it is positive that the nom. Ahuré and the voc. Mazdé occur in the same strophe, and the fact is to be noted. From excessive cautiousness I read valman with DJ. (so also D.). K.5 (Sp.) and M.1 read avd dkds- dahishné. 1 render: ‘Thus to the one endowed with intelligence, to him 7s the best doctrine’. Aérpaté, 7 Adhar°® freely in the gen., shows interesting priestcraft. Dropping it, we have possibly; ‘which to him the beneficently wise one, who is A., teaches, (c) bountiful intelligent, as to what that is also which is the secret words [ |, etc’. D. read Aharmékth, see Pers. and Ner. M. has adté for asnd; was it in the sense of ‘continuousness’?; see else- where. I had followed Spiegel in reading first ¢7kshet (see the other (P.,C.)) but we should expect gishydt; otherwise, for meaning see dmizéd, and read cishydt. I had read sa after P., but it appears in no other MS. Read my former misprint, vriddhih. Haug’s adhogdminah = ‘ going under (to Hell’ (?)) might be an improvement, if it could be rendered ‘secretly approaching’ ; J.« has adhyo®. I would not at present follow Sp. in correcting swvydpard to sad° against the MSS. since acquired. Hérbud (°), and Hirbid (2), are sometimes written; @gadah(?) might be miswritten for dgandéh = ‘full’, @gah
occurs for dgé@h, so poss. here, yet it would be superfluous as adj. to khirad.
4. Read as(k)yascha; also s(k)\yaothnéché with J.*, ete. is better; see the metre; read final 49. Regarding my trl. above as alternative, I now
prefer; ‘his decision wst§ will follow his religious professions, and in Thine understanding opinion he will in many ways nand (in mind, faith, deeds, words, religious professions) be set apart at last (from the wicked’; see v. 1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 11, cp. ahmt Thwahmi.- - vichithot, Y. 32, 8). Yet we must guard against changing the sense of khratéo too abruptly from that of khrathwé in v.3. It is the ‘understanding of the Deity’, not only discerning the character, but also imparting its own enlightened wisdom, as in khrathwé. ‘Abiding in the understanding of God’, ‘dwelling in God, and He in him’. But then, the Pahl. may well be right as to ‘everyone’ for nand, cp. narem narem, Y. 30, 2. Its free expression is ‘man and woman’, so in Y. 30, 2; see the generalizing tone in yaé(é)chéd(#) (v. 3), if personal. I cannot follow the Pahl. trv. in referring as(k)yasché to aka (s(&) simply = § bef. y); ‘who makes his mind better and worse (avd saritarth)’, will hardly do. A&(k)yé = °yas may also be a comp. of asha in an adj. Sense, notwithstanding the deriv. stem; for yas cp. ndvyas beside naviyas. The passage is much forced in being referred to the hamistakdén, reading 6, ‘who also makes his Faith better and worse--~-. In §. BE. XXXI, p. 155, I rendered ‘who bends his mind to the better thing’; ep. mendaidydi yd tdi - - adistis, Y. 44, 8, and mencha 7(?) dazditm, Y.53,5, where méenddidydt and méndazdiim govern the ace. directly. I rendered thus, recoiling from the very fine sentiment which lies in the rendering ‘who makes our mind, or his mind, better and holier, he also helps the holy Religion to a better course’. I feared to accept more meaning than actually lies in the words. But the sense above is so forcible that I now allow it to stand as an emphatic alternative. My free translation for ¢ was painfully literal, but see S. B. E. XXXI, p. 155, and read: ‘His intention ,G. e. his will, wsti$) follows (i. e. it should follow) his religiously professed love (for holy things); i. e. he should act up to his creed’. Pahl. The sense in a is important; ‘turning the attention’ is an . idea (whether correct, or not) emphatically followed by some. D. has vq minich for va amatich, ‘and who also turns his attention to the more evil thing’. In c Min... ash = ‘whose’; ‘whose decisive desire accompanies (is with) that which is affection toward goodness, (hardly ‘toward a benefit’)’; see also Ner. Read the free gabra néshman without brackets. Having ac- quired J. in Oxford in April 1890, I can now bring Ner. more into har- mony with his chief original; read nikyishtataram ; but J.4, P., C. and J.* all © seem to have utkrisht®. J.3 has also yat tat dehi; dehi freely = yehabanéd erroneously read as 2°24 pl. We might suspect sundaratvam to mean
‘benefit’, as eubham often = nadikth, but perhaps it means ‘goodness’, as nearer its usual Sansk. meaning ‘beauty, etc.’. Perhaps Ner.’s abhildshayet may be denominatively rather than causatively taken, ‘let one desire’, or Haug’s abhildshdya might be considered, but his text otherwise is very imperfect, and all read °ayet. Read my former text kdryena. Read kih ham, 6 (?) khwahishn, and perhaps dkhar, but usage differs.
5. Read s(k)yaoth®, and mas(k)y°. As line a is overloaded with 12 syllables, I preferred to emend khshayantim to khshayentim, not liking khshentim (see the frequent khshaya®). I dropped the last khshentd as understood. But on the whole I return to Westergaard’s and Geldner’s reading khshentam ma né- - - khshéntd, as 12 syllables occur sometimes in both Gathic and Vedic Trishtup. Read in my former printing: Boni-rectores
imperanto, ne nobis mali-rectores imperent, perhaps labora(?), and final tx. (M9
with Westerg. was customary formerly; I felt committed to yy by earlier printing). With Armaiti, read alternatively ‘through Ar(a)maiti’; yaozhddo then to subject of fshuyd. Apt zathem I had taken as substantially meaning ‘during life’; see 2athdc in the next verse. In S. B. E. XXXI, p. 155, I prefer ‘for offspring’, which is however more in the spirit of the Vedas than in that of the Gathds. The words might be a compositum ‘sanctifying to men their posterity (?), O thou best one’, or ‘through the best one’. It is rather too aerial to render, ‘the later birth, beginning the future life’. If Ar(a)maité(é) isread, yaozhddo may be 2™4 sg. aor. conj.; ‘may’st thou hallow to men their happiness (véhzstd) during life’, see fshuyd; but both might be n. pl. qualifying the subj’ts. in khshéntam; and verezydtam (not pl.) may be 3*4 pass, = ‘let toil be used’; or fshuyd might well be nom. sg. part. pres. = /shuyas® ‘Let the holy agriculturalist labour (mid.) for the Cow, foddering her for us for food’, Pahl. AZ well = md; bindak-minishnith (later quite a proper name) has here not as yet lost its literal meaning, see béndak-minishnihd. ‘After birth’, or ‘next to birth’ (?). Vereeydtim as freely = gen. of duty, (not as pl. of part.). Fshwyé by infin. for imper. Read avindsth. Ner. saw no Janman = né. or freely rendered without. Mdéno curiously = griham, as = ‘abode’ (to a man(?)). J.* seems to read nikrishtandm (2?) for dushta- rajyam. I had read nirvé@nam, see the Pahl., but J.’, J.4, and P. report °ne = ‘in the end, or final state’; avabodham seems explained by the reading dkdsh (dkdsth(?)) in D. (avd (or and) akdsh(?) for avindsth). J. seems to have a gloss to sphitayati, ki(e)layati = ‘he makes white’, thinking of Zend spiti?. J.4 read vardhayitum. Read pddishdh in my former printing. I should have cited the Pers. Pahl. text dkds (or dgds), so it is meant, hence dgah written dkah,
6. See the difficulties as to caesura in a, c, d; omitting the 224 nz as interpolated, we have eleven syllables. Read final qq. Hushiithema,
acc. sg. neut. freely =améenitates, or, cp. kshéma, pl.(?). Berekhdhé(é) Lrendered ‘in the longing desire, or prayer’ in S. B. E. XXXI, p. 156; see the Pahl.; consider my former in gaudio as altern., poss. ‘in the blessing’. Others
regard the word as nom., but that could only be the ease if = yd (see
on p. 436), and yé@ would be here a specially awkward term.; a loc. is well in place. It is syntactically most natural to refer ahydi (so read) to Ar(a)maiti, especially in view of the emphatic poetic iteration, ha, had, which could not so well apply to the Cow. We should then have ‘the fruits of the earth’ matured as a reward for Pious obedience. Piety and the fertile meadows are elsewhere associated (cp. Y. 47, 3); and these poetic ideas determined the later identification of ‘Piety’ with ‘the earth’. If the Cow can be meant in ¢ with hd, ha = A. in a (?), all would be simpler.
Notice vakhshad(t) again in a trans. sense. Min gospendan (gloss) most intelligently repeats gavéi from v. 5. What DJ. and Mts kérdik means I do not venture to say, possibly a formation from Kir — membrum virile, and so = ‘manly’, ‘manly vigour’; hardly from kért = memoria. I have cor- rected tékhishn everywhere, but there may be such a form; the meaning is clear. For my former tarsdahih read tarsakasth with D. (later acquired) which alone helps us fully out here. I rendered formerly ‘toward him’ on account of the gloss; otherwise probably ‘her’. D. has dakhshak alter- natively. J.3 read vichitratd, or °tam, so P. This might refer to the cubhapramodam in the sense ‘entertaining quality’, ‘being amusing’. Eka controls the syntax erroneously. Déddrasya = Aiharmazd must mean ‘creator’ here. I had followed Sp.’s jananir as against the MSS. but ; Jananijatah (J.3) = ‘engendered in birth’ is perfectly proper, and presents one word for edk. Kit = ‘vigour’, as well as ‘food’. Gau, or gdv (so better (?)). West has a Parsi éwadéd = aévoddta (M. i K.); aytkdad (traditional trans- lit.) reproduces the same characters as khadik® ; ummid was misprinted.
7. Notice the difficulty as to caesura in a, 6, and perhaps d. Read repurcutite, pditi, final in my former printing. The second né and the Second patti are interpolated, see the metre. Hithdus has traditional authority, but hithaoS = sétos. Ictum for remem is poss., and still to be ~ retained as an emphatic altern. I superseded it however in S. B. E. XXXL p. 156, by the suggestion of the Pahl. I prefer this still, ‘the blow of envy’ personified, for a possibly related word, cp. ramédan = ‘to be in conster- nation’; see above, p. 412, Didraghzhoduyé(é) = °dvé(é), v9 miswritten, as
often, for »», 224 pl. desid. of dragh, cp., for form, drdgh®. Vyam. Viam looks especially doubtful as a meaning on account of its close similarity to the Gathic word. We have however vf = ‘go’ also in the Veda, and v may well have inherent a, as being originally a Pahl. letter; read vayam (suffix a). The meaning ‘course’, ‘procedure’ is well possible and appro- priate, cp. adw(v)anem. Looking for an altern., cp. vyd, vt = ‘to cover’, ‘to protect’, ‘refuge’ (so Roth). But the Pahl. trir. with his navéd (or navidih) may give us the true solution in a restoration to oidyam (neut., not vidyam, cp. for form Ved. pati-vidya); ‘ye who would hold fast that true imparted knowledge as tidings in the presence of, or by the side of, the good mind’. Yée)hyad to Ashd, or V. M., poss. to a neut. or masc. vayam,
vyam; hoi, best to nd. Démaim = °man (cp. dhiiman), loc. = ‘in the abode’, or = mdn, acc. pl.(?), transition toa = ‘creatures’ (?), or = dhdméani (ep. mizhdavan = °vani) = ‘regulations’, ‘laws’ of the association, hithaos’.
Dam. 15 sg. improp. conj.; cp. (a)dham. Aréshké (so D.) = remem seems to differ from Y. 29, 1, but see notes there. Déidraghzhéduyé(é) = °dve was first recognized as a 2"4 pl. by the Pahl. trl.; see méntdné, aightdné, with the infin., (dahishné by this time should be recognized as a mere noting of a syllable, here the redup. dz). Translate merely; ‘you whose is the holding (c) of the navidith = vyam’ (2). The later discovery of the 2™4 pl. °duyé(é) = °dvé was a rediscoyery. Navidth, or navid, = cpoolo freely; or the