mitrad, referred by some scholars to mid. In so far the suggestion of the Sansk. mid has a decided advantage. At the same time all readers of the Rig-Veda will hesitate before they reject a good etymological explanation reporting a Zend word as related to another Zend word, on account of a difference in the meanings of derivatives. How many Vedic words have two diametrically opposed definitions, both accepted by leading authorities. A difference in the meanings of derivatives is to be expected.
Barand@ is regarded as a 2° pl. (?) imperative by some scholars; and the traces of the termination here recognized are supposed to be visible in the endings thana, tana.
The word is a nom. pl. mase. of the pres. mid. part. of dar, conjugated as bharti, or, as a root aorist.
It was Spiegel’s keen-sighted view that hathrd-mando is a nom. sg. of a compositum, following Ner., and followed himself by others. But I think this opinion, on the whole, not so probable, as that mando is a nom. pl. neut., hathré and yathrd being obviously related, ‘there +--+ where’. Maé(é)thé (= maé(e)thana), is an adverbial instr. Some render it ‘perverted’: ‘For there will be the steadfast-minded one where knowledge was perver- ted(?), a keen suggestion emanating from a high source, but see notes on Bead, Loe) Wu Ody 2D.
- Some scholars would render as follows: ‘And we would be such as arrange this world according to that order (asha comprehended within Jrashim or frashém). May Mazda, and the Ahuras, afford us support and instructions, that the mind may be accordant, where (now) the faith is astray’.
The Pahl. trlr. preferred #67 = ‘thine’; see taibyé in v. 8. He was in doubt as to (d)méyastrd, and translated the word as it stood divided before him in some text older than those now copied beside him; dm° was read as ham®, a fragment (the letters @ and / in Pahl. being
both expressed by #), and then reading méyastré (sic), he translated han-
jamanikih as recognizing the root mit, or mid (?), a shattered rendering, but showing an original recognition of the root. Yedrianishnd = barand. Hathra was rendered by him, as we should at first sight say, erroneously.
Asdr = ‘endless (?)’ would seem to show that he saw the a priv. in
the #, which, as so often, expressed the gy of the Zend word hathra in the Pahl. character, in which the Zend word may have stood in earlier MSS. But the letters ¢h are expressed in Pahl by » = s (?) directly, or indirectly;
cp. mansar = mathra, Hence his asér, Verso , seems almost hasdr, for
hasrd. (Words in the Pahl. almost universally end in consonants; the fre- quent final short 6 is not organic). Hasér, = hasrd = hathra, would therefore seem a transliteration rather than a translation.
Ner. saw no asdr in the Pahl. text; nor could the Parsi- persian trlr, accept any such expression. I have therefore very little doubt that asér = ‘endless’, as a full explanation, is a total mistake. The word is an abortive transliteration. In Y.28, 4 no asdér appears in the Pahl. for hathrd. We should render at least alternatively; ‘since (mim = amat = hyad(t)) here is his thought (or he is present-minded; i. e. well-regulated), - - his know- ledge is beyond’. But it is also not impossible, however improbable, that the meaning of the word hathrd, entirely aside from its appearance,
may account for the word Vasa09 not only as a transliteration, but also
additionally as a translation (whether by accident, or not, it is hard to say). Vedic satr@ has a sense well expressing ‘entirety’. ‘Endless’ in the sense of ‘ever’ may possibly be useful. Had Ner. min, beside denman, before him in a?; see min Lak. Hesees no asdr = ‘endless’ in the Pahl., but renders asdr(2)-minishnéd as = hathra-mando in the sense of Spiegel.
10. Avé = ‘down’ (Haug, illa = sie (?) to chistis). Avé is an inter- polated repetition of avd (Haug, auzxilium (?)). Sketdé = ‘injury’. Spaya- thrahyd is admirably referred by the indirect suggestion of the Pahl. trlr. to spi = pi (cp. spas = pag) = ‘to swell’, or to spi = su = gvi = ‘to swell out’ (so perhaps better; ep. spenta = ¢vdntd). Spaya + tra = ‘the host’, ‘the throng’; so the Pahl. sipdh. Here, as may be observed, I reverse my former view as to probabilities. The double suffix, spa + ya + tra = ‘destruction’, ‘fall’ is more awkward. The meaning however ‘injury causing destruction’ is not amiss, and may be entitled to alternative adoption. Asistd (Mf.) n. pl. masc. = ‘most swift’. The apparent short a of most MSS. is here, as in many other places, to be explained as Pahl. initial »
= a, or d. Haug rendered perfecta = vollkommenes, a + ¢ish ‘nicht zu- rtickgelassen’. One scholar renders ‘in hope’, Sansk. @ + ¢ds. Others also
render as a loc. of a(d)siSti, = ‘in instruction’; cp. a(d)ststiS Y. 44,9. —
AsiSté as rendered by its Pahl. equivalent, together with yaozanti(°té) (J.°)
and its Pahl. translation , gives the more concrete sense; ‘thereon most — | swift the righteous will hasten (yuz) to the good abode of the Good Mind,
that is, to Heaven’.
Yaozantée(é), or yaojanté(é), (; yuz or yuj) gunated present of the a stem; cp. yojate as pres. with Delbruck and Grassmann, or as aor. pres., or —
Toot aor. conj. with future sense. Two MSS. reproduce yaoz°., and the
mistake of the other surviving MSS., if it be a mistake, as seems probable from the inferior sense which their readings afford, may well have arisen from the fact that the texts once stood partly in the Pahl. character, and the same letter @, in that character, may represent either 7 or z.
Some scholars have rendered lines a and 6 as follows: ‘Then took place the fall of the wicked into Hell, yet the righteous remain undisturbed together in the happy land of the pious congregation - - :
Zazenté(é); Pahl. vakhdind, possibly vddind (the signs are the same). This latter points to 2an: ‘they are produced in glorious fame’. Vakhdind elsewhere renders zaze.buyée) Y. 62, 6, and may mean ‘hold on’ in the gense of ‘hold on in the way’, i.e. ‘proceed’ (compare hd, jihite) so, better.
Other scholars prefer to abandon the excellent concrete of the Pahl. trl. ‘in good fame’ followed by Haug, Spiegel, and Hitbschmann. They render; ‘qué versent dans la sainte doctrine’; and more originally, ‘ welche sich aufmachen nach der heilbringenden Offenbarung des Mazda und Asha’. Ner.’s kricatarapatdkintkah should render the Pahl. I was formerly
tempted to emend swnivdsatayd to an accus.; but see the Pahl.
11. Vétichd eneit? remain a difficulty. Hyad(t)cha separates them from _what follows. The long since circulated view that hw-7t? an-7t? mean ‘for good and for ill’ (lit. for good progress, and for non- progress (hindrance), seems rather mechanical*and improbable, the more so, as hyad(f)cha com- mences a new expression of ideas.
The Pahl. has yw (2 )@))6) in Pahl. letters, adding nahinih in letters appa-
rently Zend (so Sp.); but DJ.’s MS., reads joyw (a6) in Pahlavi, with
ahinh clearly written as decipherment (?) over it in Zend. There should however be no hesitation in reading some of the Zend letters as having Pahl. value, if we were led on to such a view by sufficiently positive indications; and as} should be y, we must read Jopy (7) as = joy , and might suppose it possibly intended to express khvaén (see Y. 32, 7, (Pahl.) where the Parsi-persian probably saw _jopv ), and consider ahinh as gloss, regarding the final / as an accidental anticipation of the following Pahlavi letter which, although properly equal- ling a, may express #. So deciphering, we should have khvaén [ahin| = ‘olittering [dart]’, ahin to hi = si(?) = ‘to hurl’ (asé). But this sheds no light on ditichd éneitt; nor does it gain any light from those words, owing to hyad(t)ché which interposes between rashé and the first line which has no reference to the wicked, or to punishment. It is to be noticed that two purely Pahlavi letters correspond with the first two of the Gatha, 57(n), ahinh,
as
or nahinih (Sp.) being in Avesta characters). But the mdénich must also not be forgotten, as it repeats the °chd. Does the trir. freely render s7é7 by man, referring it to the reflexive pronoun ?, So that the 2 in 67° could be partially compared with the 7 pronouns, Ai = si, im, éd (cp. yim(?) for yem, or yém). Have we here éi#i = ba + ti = sva + suffix? This also sheds light on éaé(é)tt. Where does the baé° come from, as opposed to ba, dato? Vaél(é)td contains a gunated 07°. Here in sétiché it is not gun- ated. The meaning ‘of himself’ is admirably in place, as has long since been shown by Haug and Spiegel. For a quasi suffix to 5a = sva com- pare the clumsy édpaithydd(t), a compositum; cp. the Sk. suffix #2 when without numeral value. (But an exact correspondence between Zend and Sansk. suffixes is not to be expected).
As to éneiti, we at once think, with Justi, of ainit? = Ginitichd (an + in +7 -+ t?) = ‘with absence of severity’. Here however we have less possible trace of the a priv. If inis present at all, it is in the sense of ‘ furtherance’; ‘from himself, and to bless us’. It might be called an infin. Or (if we emend to énait?) we might see a finite verbal form, and consider an = ‘to breathe’ (Haug): ‘from himself he inspires (‘breathes’) them’; or, more probably, he ‘propagates them’ (enait? to an = in, as akhsh to ksh; cp. ‘anmd, anmainé(é) = pavan astibth, or stubd /é). Retaining the more mechanical explanation that é¢ticha (= hu + itt + chd), we should have in the Gatha; ‘for blessing (dat.) to his people he furthers, or inspires, them’. It is also
very possible indeed that sttichéd is twice translated by miinich, and by 9pw which may represent khw(vjad = ‘self’,as 9 can express d in Pahl., while
in Zend 2 = hv, The Avesta letters nahinth (2), or nahinh, would then
represent gloss, or be perhaps resolvable into na. + ahinth, for na ait *ahini = ‘there is no violence’ (recall nd-mard, na-durust, nd-umid, also vnane, etc.), a rendering for éneiti in the sense of ainitichd, Y. 58, 4. Amikhtishno would render énaiti (sic) in the sense of either ‘inspire (?)’, or ‘propagate’, or indeed éneét? as an infin. noun. But no reasonable certainty can be arrived at as to the matter, and both Gath and Pablavi are obscure. No sincere and judicious commentator will affect to be confident, much less to dogmatize in such a case.
Aipi is taken merely in the sense of ‘also’ by some writers; ‘also by these things’. The meaning of api should be’ ‘after’, but perhaps in the sense of ‘in addition to (these things)’; ep. aipi.chithid(t).
Some are inclined to colour: ‘If ye, O men, lay to heart the pray- ers which Mazda gave for welfare and security, namely misfortune for
the evil, and prosperity for the righteous, then one day salvation shall be your portion by that means’.
Y. XXXL.
See for introductory summary S. B. E. XXXI., pp. 36—53. Changes in opinion decided upon since its composition are not always noted here.
1. With Roth (followed by De Harlez and Jackson) marenté means pre- dominantly ‘remembering’. Haug’s dicentes is, I think, here to be preferred, so Spiegel’s hersagend; cp. Pahl. hédshmirém, radically the same word (see hismarenté). Recitation was the only mode of memorizing, and transmitting ancient doctrines and their documents. The composer was in no danger of ‘forgetting’. The Vedic occurrences of smar (smri) do not refer to human beings about to announce doctrines, but to Indra and Soma VII, 104, 7, and to the Acvins X. 106, 9; but see the later Sansk. meanings ‘teach’, ‘assert’, also the smriti in the sense of ‘explained as’, or ‘named’. See Y. 55, 6, where framaremna must mean ‘being recited’, also A. 3, 5 (or 4, 5) framarditi rapithw(v)inem. There is reason to suppose that the Aryan mar (smar) meant to ‘count’, hence to ‘recollect’.
Vimerenchaité(é), a 3*4 pl. athematically conjugated (beside merenichanté(é)). Spiegel, Justi, and others formerly placed it in the sg.