* J has ‘because if even for that about superior matters, ac- quaintance with religion, and learned knowledge ¢here be, &c.
* That is, when he knows all the scriptures and commentaries by heart.
* J omits ‘Afharmazd and.’
* That is, he has full authority to interpret the scriptures.
* Reading saran sar daran, but in K35 the two words overlap, so that sar-sardar4n, ‘head guardians,’ might be intended.
* Probably referring to the quotation from the Vendidad in § 3.
Epistle 3; \Chapter Iv, to—17. 297
15. Anda semblance of it is apparent even from
that which the glorified Nishahpthar, the supreme |
officiating priest', and also other officiating priests
of Athavmazd have said, that one zs not to change
any teaching of theirs thereon after z¢ zs provided,
and not to render useless the statements of other
authority thereon. 16. But that which they should
accept from them asa certainty is to maintain the
statements of other high-priests as pre-eminent ; axd
not to change the operation of statements of another
description fas appeared lawful. 17. Even so it
was as that same Nishahpdhar, in the council of the
glorified (andédshaké rfib4né) Khisréd’, king of
+ This mdbad of mébads is mentioned in Pahl. Vend. III, 151, V,112, VI, 71, VIII, 64, XVI, 10, 17, AV. I, 35, and twenty-four times in the Nirangistan (see Sls. I, 4n). His name is spelt in various ways.
298 EPISTLES OF MANOSKIHAR.
kings and son of Kavad,—by preserving old things
(lig4n3)—showed that way on whose thoughts they
are established, and wrote them unaltered, so that
such thoughts thereon became as z¢ were decided ;
and their thoughts théreon, after such decree of his,
have so become unanimous. 18. Through the im-
portance of Acs assured rank, and the rest which
was said by him in the work of sustaining the
faithful, he maintains as much as the other state-
ments, one éy one, from the deliberative teaching
of those high-priests.
1. That writing which comes amid the writing of
your epistle is a correct fragment} as regards the
nothing in which oze is to change the operation pro-
perly maintainable, and it is becoming; because, if it
be even for him, by whom it is written from the
stated that Viraf was called by the name of Nikhshapfir by some. From the statements made in our text it seems probable that the council was employed in revising the Pahlavi Vendidad, in which they were careful not to erase the opinions of older commentators, and thus confirmed their statements by their own authority. It is possible that this council was that mentioned in Byt. I, 7, where the name Nishapfir also occurs, but whether it refers to a man or a city is not quite certain. This council, which seems to have been summoned for condemning the heresy of Mazdak, was held pro- bably two or three years before Khiisr6 came to the throne (see Noéldeke: Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden, p- 465).
* Reading bangisnth, but it may be bfgisnih, ‘deliverance Srom contamination” ‘The reference is to the decree of Zad-sparam
mentioned in Chap. IV, 7, the ‘writing’ alluded to in Ep. II, ii, 1; ill, T,
Epistle I, Chapter Iv, 18—V, 4. 299
4. And even the recompense of community‘ of
property is that when one gladly observes pure
thoughts; and the swift action of voluble (pir)
speakers and kind regard of religious characters for
deliverance® avd for the noticeable undeceitfulness
of the same spirit®—which is itself the desire of
settled observation that is in it for the sake of the
' The names of three of the commentators whose opinions are most frequently quoted in the Pahlavi Vendidad (see Sls. I, 3). Each of them appears to have written a complete ‘teaching’ or dissertation upon the ceremonial laws, from which the quotations are taken (see § 6).
2 That is, in collecting the opinions of the ancients, he has twisted them so as to suit his own views.
* The last of the future apostles (see Dd. II, ro), not the com- mentator of the same name mentioned in § 1.
* Literally ‘fraternity.’
* From pollution or sin. * See § 2.
300 EPISTLES OF MANUSKIHAR.
same kind of full religious diffusion—are the swift
action of the patron spirit, which, for the sake of
preparing him for a deliverance that is not falsifying
revelation azd zs without disputants, is a kind regard
for the deliverance itself of 42m whose spiritual life
(haikS) it is.
5. As to that which is thought by him?’ of those
deliverances sent down, completed, azd announced,
I consider more particularly about the meaning of
one thing, which is their solemnized observance.
6. The solemnized observance of Médyék-mah is in
the teaching? of Médydék-mah, and those of Afarg
and Sdéshans are each one meditated aud indicated
in a teaching; and the pointedly superior position
of each one of them is mentioned by him in Aes
statement of any teaching and of the decision set
up. 7. Also with a kind regard for his own choice
he “as thought it (the former teaching) imperfect,
and, on account of what was not attained by it—
which was a re-explainer of the same good ideas
provided—z¢s dissimilarity to it is not unnoticed °.
8. Gut when one hears the re-explainers of a true
reply he is well protected (hfi-zinharid6d) by com-
plete mindfulness *, azd is himself confident that the
teaching of Médyék-mah is not the whole statement
of Médyék-mah, for there are many opinions of
1 Zad-sparam the writer of the decree mentioned in § 1.
* The word £astak6 means usually a written course of teaching or exposition, a commentary, dissertation, or manual of instruction.
* Implying that Zad-sparam had been more inclined to enforce his own opinions than to examine those of the commentators.
* The Pahl. translation of Av. 4rmaiti, ‘devotion,’ which is usually personified as a female archangel protecting the earth.
Epistle I, Chapter V, 5—Vi, I. 301
Médyék-mah! whzch have decided zz another man-
ner; not ¢Zat whatever Médyék-mah said is not
good, du¢ in the teaching of Médyék-mah 2? is certain
that even what is not proper is mentioned many
times as a possibility *.
CHAPTER VI.
1. As ¢o that which is written in that epistle, that
in the teaching of Sdshans he thus states, that ‘of _
both the purifiers necessary he is suitable by whom
the ritual is performed 3, they have been similarly
very unanimous that when one is incapable (at )¢ it
is the other ¢/atz is suitable, who is written of in con-
nection with him; and that, moreover, because the
statement of Afarg is in a teaching of his‘®, and, on
1 J inserts ‘rules which are mentioned in the special teaching of Médyék-mah.’ It appears probable that the author had access to much more complete commentaries than the fragments now extant in the Pahlavi version of the Vendidad.
2 Meaning, probably, that Médyék-mah was disposed to relax the rigid enforcement of the law in cases of doubt or difficulty, as the Avesta itself does in several cases.
* Quoted from Pahl. Vend. IX, 132, 4, where it may be read either as an opinion of Afarg (as mentioned in our text), or as a statement of the Pahlavi translator, who would, therefore, appear to have been Sdéshans. A complete translation of the Pahlavi version of Vend. IX, 1-145 and the commentaries relating to the Bare- shnfim ceremony, which are frequently alluded to in these epistles, will be found in App. IV.
* Perhaps ‘impotent,’ as the Rivdyats (Mro, fol. 103 a) provide that a purifier shall be neither aged nor youthful, not less than thirty years of age.
® See note 3, above; from this it appears that Afarg was the earlier commentator.
302 EPISTLES OF MANOsKIHAR.
that account, that declaration of his seemed Zo de
from him, which is as though zt were decided by
him. 2. Then, when ove reaches the eulogistic
(afrasinakd) reply of his re-explainer, owing to his
just will it is itself well perceived that Afarg comes
into account as one of the high-priests; and that
which is the special teaching of Sdéshans Zas men-
tioned that they have been very unanimous that
when there is one he would be suitable’.
3. That evidence, too, which many high-priests,
and especially one teaching, are alike ditfusing, is
stated also in the teaching of Médyék-mah, that
when he who is washing? understands the profes-
sion, then one purifier is plenty for him. 4. When
it is abundantly declared, in particular by two teach-
ings, ‘hat when there is one he is suitable, z¢ is then
not to be rendered quite inoperative through the
solitary statement of Afarg; for Afarg only said, as
it appeared so to him himself, ¢Zat ‘two purifiers
are requisite®. 5. The customs of another high-
priest are not declared to exist with like evidence ;
and this is set aside (spégid@5) even by him himself,
that another custom is not suitable to exist, because
his own view is mentioned as it appeared to him.
6. Those of the primitive faith have been fully 4
of the custom that other oze selected, as to this,
where z¢ is the performance of the Vikaya (‘exor-
cism’)>; because its explanation is this, that an
? See Pahl. Vend. IX, 132, 4, but the earlier part of the section refers to statements no longer extant.
* That is, the person undergoing the purification.
® See’ Pahl. Vendo ik, 139.0) ope eh
* J inserts ‘ of the same opinion.’
* ‘That is, they have considered one purifier sufficient for reciting
Epistle I, Chapter Vi, 2-9. 303
opinion upon which the priests (magavdéga4n6) are
without dispute is that which he says is the custom
of a priest, azd the business of the two priests, of
whose other custom he speaks as much, is a per-
formance by those two witnesses indicating the
same as the priest.
7. This, too, is evident, that, by confession of
Afarg, when there is owly one purifier he is to be
considered as being suitable’; avd an attainment /o
more evidence is that which is written by you, that
Médyék-mah fas said that every customary fart
(pisak6) is to be washed three times ?, and now the —
purifiers do z# once. 8. That teaching remains zz
the same manner as written by him, but the three-
fold washing of Médyék-mah is not a washing to be
striven for, but oze to be well considered, of which
he spoke ; and this, too, is not said by him, that when
one shall not wash three times it is not proper’.
9. Afarg said that when ome shall* wash once it is
proper, and about this once the opinion of Médyék-
mah is the after statement, and the opinion of Afarg
is the prior statement; azd since in the life of man
the first ¢izmg to be considered is about purity, not
the indispensability of washing, and, further, the
the passages from the Avesta (see Vend. VIII, 49-62, IX, 118) which are supposed to drive away the fiend (comp. Ep. II, ii, 7).
1 See Pahl. Vend. IX, 132, 4.
2 See Pahl. Vend. IX, 132,7, where, however, the statement as to three times washing is attributed to Afarg, who is the prior authority quoted (as mentioned in § 9), and that as to once washing is attri- buted to Médy6k-mah, who is the after authority.
* Reading 14 khalelfinédé-ae 14 shdyedo instead of 1a khalelfiinédé a-la shayedo.
* Reading aé instead of va a. This statement is attributed to Médy6k-mah in Pahl. Vend. (see note 2, above).
304 EPISTLES OF MANUOSKIHAR.
pollution diminishes, about which it speaks in the
religious cleansing, during so many times washing
as is declared, then the consideration of it is a con-.
sideration about the one time which is the first com-
putation!, 10. That which mentions more than once
washing is a contradiction of the prior deponent, not
a declaration; avd the consideration of that opera-
tion, so long as z¢ zs declared, is about the statement
of him who das mentioned once washing with the
opinion of a prior deponent?, owing to the same
reasons. 11. But if it be even that much washing |
which is the merit of the operation, then the state-
ment of Afarg about these times® is manifestly very
preservative, azd that of Médyék-mdh is a necessity
for declaration.
CuaptTer VII.
1. And as to that which is written‘, that ‘in the
teaching of Afarg z¢ is thus declared, that “for every
single person, at the least®, one cup of water aud
* In Vend. IX, 48-117 the washings of the several parts of the body are mentioned only once, which is ‘the first computation’ here mentioned. :
