ior, or improved, thereby. (d) They are falling, (for thei reward] may be with deceit. He who [may render *?] that greater and superior thing midnight darkness and death, [that is, another and different thing, O Lord!| is swifter in reaching his punishment, [it may be an ‘apagaiahi’ to these; i. e. to such as he 7s; it may effect their decease].
**1 Possibly ‘may be produced’. **? or ‘may give out, or report, the darkness as superior’.
Parsi-persian Ms. trit. Az [an == dn] 4madan hend; [ki, bih [] [an = zak] in Din nah amad [Pahl. -tnd]]; [wa = va] dish-varzidér hémand (sic); kit, chiz 7 bad {bih = bana (sic)| [] [kunad = vdgind (?)] firébandah hast] * (b) Zadan hend pah tamam zaman [] khroshidar ast + hend awar * (c) [] [Ormuzd! = Anhéma!] [ | {ma = ar (?)] t jih [] rah-zan [pah = pavan] gurz [= gavartini] [] zakhm [ ]! Bi-dast + bi-pai + wa + ya‘ni + lang [wa = va] na-kir [deh = dabin] [wa = va] pah admadan dahishn, kih an [] [mandan wanth = mdnishn vinds| mad] * (d) Uftad (2) [= hifténd] dshan; az [], firéb bid; dshan (sic) 4n @ [] [‘ajaibtar (sic?) = shikuftum|] {rah = rds], [margi = margth(?)] i giran, meh [az baki] dishwari + néz + ma (?)] wa + tiz hast; [ktishan bi (?)-jan bashad] +
Free tr. Through unbelievers the foeman Thine upholders perverteth Through the truth-slaying wish of the body estranged *. Where’s then the lord righteous, who smites these out of living, from license too hurls*them ?
Mazda, Thine is that kingdom whence to poor and right, living Thou givest, Lord! better!
ejus]. (c) Ubi est sanctus dominus qui eos [i. e. tales ex-] vitae [-ta] ictu- ejiciat [et ex] ad-libitum-itionis [-ne] (que) [i. e. ex licentia eorum]. (d) Sic, O Magni-donator! Tui [est] Regnum quo recte-viventi des [dabis] pauperi [rem] melius [-iorem].
*%1 Vel fortasse ‘corpus (supra) Pontem Judicis non feliciter transiens ha- bentis’ (vide Pahl. tandptihar).
Pahl. text translit. ‘Ddshih hémnuninidar homand béshishn? arastar ; [aigh, dardé béshishn? ribik vadindnd], min valman? Lak Dastobar va rijisinénd (? vel ri(i)zisinénd, sic videtur P.; fortasse réjinénd) [afash rayinénd (vel réshinénd®)] (b); afshin bavihinasto*® yekavimtinéd6” zado Dastobarih bindakih; faighshan Dastobarih bindakih zadé yekaviméinéd], va tandpiharkand hdmand. (c) Kaddér aharibd khidai, min yalmanshan makhitiinéd, afshin haméstdrinéd; [aighshané min vinds lakhvar yakhse-s nunéd] afshin pavan kimak6 kininédé. (d) Valman* Atiharmazd hana i Lak’ khiddyih; [aighash shalitath® min Lak. Aité mtn ‘avé Lak khfdayih’®
|
an
ao A
392 LIIL. 9, 10.
yemaleltinéd] mfin'® avd1! rastd zivishnd daregtsh va asand yehabinéd;
[aighash nadtikih padash vadtinyén].
See Pers. 1 DJ. has space. ? so P. % DJ. va ano or ayo. “4 P. va rizisinend (?) or varzasinénd (?) or razpasinénd (?), indecipherable. ° so P. © DJ. a superfluous stroke. 7 DJ. ins. va. ° DJ. ins. 7. ° DJ. spells dite, 7° so DJ; 9Sp. and P. mins 4 so DJ.; Sp. and P. valman.
Pahl. transl. The teachers of evil they are, and preparers * of the
tormenting; [that 7s, they will cause progress in the torment of anguish] ~
they who are causing Thy Dastur to flee (?), or treating him as ‘rijis’ signi- fies, [that is, they are driving him on, or away, or wounding him (réshinénd)] (b); also the smiting * of the Dasturship’s completeness is desired by them, [that is, the Dasturship’s perfection is smitten by them], and they are un- pardonably sinful. (c) Which is the righteous sovereign who is smiting these, and who is effectively opposing them, [that is, who keeps them back from sin], and also takes vengeance on them at will? (d) To that one, O Atharmazd! belongs this Thy sovereignty; [that is, his sovereignty is from Thee. Some say that the teat should be rendered ‘the sovereignty is for Thee’], and for righteous living it renders the poor man comfortable; [that is, they shall afford him happiness thereby]. ; Ner.’s sansk. text. Duhkritena svechchhaya santi Tava labdhena samarachanat; kila, pidaih labdhith pravartamanath kurute [leg. kurvate] ]. (b) Teshaih samihitara evarh? Aste yat nihantarah gurtnath sampirnanam. Tesham ‘tanavaragunaha’ dste. (c) Ke muktdtmandm, Svamin! yat nihant-
ee
a ? re
Liii, 9, 393
arah, te pratipaksha bhavanti? [Teshdth papati pacchad aste], yat teshar vatichha dveshasyo* “pari. (d) Yat, Mahajianin, Tvar Svamit, yah satyataya . [saralataya*] jivet durbalasya samadhanam dadyat, ye cubhar {tatra kurute]
See Rem besdwe,or d.*, Je syaminab= (no yah), so also in c.
Ner. transl. By their headstrong crime they are the evil-meaning purifiers (or ‘adjusters’) by means of, (or ‘by occasion of’) Thine acquisition, [that is, they make the acquisition of the advancers a torment through their evil teaching (?)|. (b) Their desired object is this, that they may* be* murderers of the perfect spiritual masters, and theirs is the ‘tandvara- gunaha’. (c) Who, because they wre the smiters of the free-souled ones, O Lord, are thus Thine adversaries? [Theirs is the evil later on], because their desire is concerning (or ‘for’) hatred. (d) Because Thou, O Great Wise One, art Lord let him who lives (or ‘may live’) in truth [and in right] grant wel- fare to the feeble, for thereby {he (lit. who) does him] good [beyond].
Parsi-persian Ms. trit, Badi ikhtiyar-kunandah (so = adminiddr*)[ ] {hast = homiind* (?),
[] [azar = béshishn} [] [arastar* = ardstér (sic)], [kii, dard [ ] [azar = béshishn] rawa-
kunad], kih i Ti Dastir ya‘ni + hukm [] [ikhtiyar-kunad (?) = va rezisinénd ? (sic
vid.)}, [az-ash (sic) [] kharab-kunad =résh(?)énénd], (b) az-shan (= ajshdn (so)) khwahishn
éstéd [] dasttri* [wa = va] bundagi; [kishin — [wa = va] bundagi zad éstéd], [] Margarzan hast % (c) Kudam ashé khuda, kih éshan zanad, az-shan (sic) skikast-
kunad, [ktish (pro kfishan) az wandh (sic) baz darad], az-shan (sic) pah kamah (kin-)
kunad % (d) U ¢ Ormuad (n. tr. for ana) [] ¢ [in (?)] = zak] khudai, [kt [] [shan =
shan] padishahi az Ti % Hast kih ‘an Tf khudai’ gtiyad] az fi 7 rast zindagi dar-
wish u Asani dehad, [kfish néki padash* (sic) kunand] * *! Often ‘Hormuzd’ throughout.
A study of the Five Zarathushtrian (Zoroastrian)
Gathas.
with texts and translations,
also with the
Pahlavi translation for the first time edited with collation of manuscripts, and now prepared from all the known codices, also deciphered, and for the first time translated in its entirety into a Huropean language, with Neryosangh’s Sanskrit text edited with the collation of five MSS., and with a first translation, - also with the Persian text contained in Codex 12> of the Munich Collection edited in transliteration, together with a commentary,
being the literary apparatus and argument to the translation of the Gathas in the XXXIst volume of the Sacred Books of the East
by
L. H. Mills, D.D., Hon. M.A. Oxon.
Part IV. Commentary.
This work is published with the assistance of the Secretary of State for India in
Council (of Her Britannic Majesty’s Government), and also with that of the Trustees of the Parsi Panchayet Translation Fund of Bombay.
To be had of F, A. Brockhaus in Leipsie
Oxford 1892,
Druck der Universitits - Buchdruckerei yon E. Th. Jacob in Erlangen.
Commentary.
As the Gathic texts have been somewhat extensively treated above, and as further discussion of the Gathds, will, it is hoped, be presented, ordinary knowledge as to the Gathic language is here presupposed. The Pahlavi translations however have necessarily claimed a fuller comment, owing to the circumstances mentioned in the Preface. In the texts and translations above we have the preliminary translations of the Pahlavi made in the light of the glosses, and more in accordance with the rules of ordi- nary Pahlavi syntax, here however I endeavour to give the final and more accurate treatment with glosses for the most part dropped, and with the flexible Pahlavi words brought as nearly as possible into harmony with their Gathic originals. But the reader will understand that space for this can only be spared while treating the first few chapters. And even here more space than is occupied would be desirable
Y. XXVIU, 0. This introductory verse is, as of course, of later origin than the Gathdas. Its dialect also shows the later termination in ahé(e) (= ahya probably), and also fr@ for the Gathic fré = frd + wu; but except in the possible instance of ahé(e), the long finals are preserved, and also the more ancient vé for v6. Géurvdin = géurwaya(e)n, as the 4, originally and permanently a Pahlavi letter, like many other Zend letters, is a consonant here equalling y, as often in Pahl., and, as also in Pahl., containing inherent a.
The Pahlavi adds glosses which are not objectionable; but géurvdin (if read) was not rendered with future subjunctive force. Neryosangh adds copiously to the glosses of the Pahlavi with interesting matter however obscurely expressed.
1. Texts. A voc. Mazdd in a has been read with many MSS. to avoid the accumulation of genitives; see also the voc. Mazdd in verses 2, 6, 7,9, 10, 11, also the vocatives in 3, 5 and 8. Holding to the gen. with some MSS., we would have ‘of Mazda, the bounteous spirit’.
Haug first suggested the rendering vispeng as an acc. pl. neut., otherwise it would be an acc. pl. masc. used adverbially, as often occurs with similar forms. S(k)yaothna accords with the metre.
Acting on the remark made above, I will treat the Pahlavi of this verse with the strictest reference to its original, and indeed will bring its
very flexible forms more than elsewhere into harmony with the Gatha.
I have therefore regarded the word bavihtinam = ydséd as having appli-
cation throughout the verse, and that, notwithstanding the intervening glosses. Later I have recoiled, I fear, too much from this procedure in my anxiety to avoid favouring the Pahlavi as to its approximately literal character. The first gloss here is however by no means objectionable, anticipating the till now prevailing, and not impossible, reading ‘Mazddo’ as a gen. in line 0. The second is directly in point; the offerer was in the act of effecting the ‘mediation of the Yazads’. The third gloss, ‘the mind also’, is especially intelligent. That ‘for his own joy’ is better than ‘by it, the mind’s own joy’ (the word ‘mind’s’ is only in the gloss) is proved by 7 Adharmazd nafshman. Pavan Gdsdnikth only expressed the universal conviction of Parsis, although of course the original composer of the ‘GAthic doctrine’ did not mean to refer to that doctrine directly, and the gloss is in so far erroneous. Afzdyinishnih should be rendered as a genitive by position in accordance with its original, spevitahyd, as the Pahlavi translator has elsewhere shown that he could not mistake a genitive of the kind when fairly before him in his MS. That the line is free, and not intended to be verbatim throughout, as So many would thoughtlessly suppose, is proved by the fact that vanheus mananhé is either not rendered at all, or else rendered by dsn6 khiradé; and if it is thus rendered freely, it is most intelligently correct. We have then pavan rdmishn as free for 7 rdmishn, pavan minavadikth for 4 minavad, Ahardyih ¢ for pavan Ahardyih, and shndyishnd for pavan min shndyem. As to pavan khiradé as = khratim, the reader must not forget that pavan often means merely ‘as’.
Otherwise the renderings should not be questioned. Zak, the gloss aside, may be genitive by position = ahyd (see Ner.’s asya); bavihtinam equals yasd, pavan niydyishn equals nemanhd; adstand yadman equals usténazasté ; Atharmazd may be either voc. or gen. by position, equalling Mazdd, or Mazdéo; Sratim = paourvim; pavan harvispd kinishns = vispeng S(k)yaothné (if an adverbially used plural masc.); 7 géshdérvan = géeu§ urvdnem. Without glosses, which were probably not present in the rendering from which our surviving translation was written, we should have: ‘With praise of this Ipray, stretching out the hand in, or for, joy, (0) praying for the first gift of Atharmazd according to His spiritual nature, according to the prospering holiness which is in every action; and according to His understanding I pray for the contentment of Géshddrvan’. The translation is doubtless imperfect, but it cannot be reasonably neglected as the oldest extant. The connection of ahyd with rafedhrahyd was not credited, but the pavan of pavan |Gdsdnikth] might more properly be referred to Ahardyih = Ashé,
in which case the rendering, which especially disclaims literalness (see
the absence of Vohimand) would be hampered with but little error. Line 6 might then read in view of the Gathic: ‘I pray for Atharmazd’s first gift which 7s bestowed according to His bountifulness, viz. I pray for the action which is with righteousness toward all’. There is the gravest doubt whether it is not imperatively necessary to render this, and all analogous passages, in this manner; for the izdfat is often understood, and the flexible Pahlavi may represent different grammatical forms in harmony with the context.