The Sih-Rozag in Zoroastrianism : A Textual and Historico-Religious Analysis 9781317913610, 9780415812320

Citation preview

The Sh-rzag in Zoroastrianism A Textual and Historico-Religious Analysis

Focusing on the Avestan and Pahlavi versions of the Sh-rzag, a text worshipping Zoroastrian divine entities, this book explores the spiritual principles and physical realities associated with them. Introducing the book is an overview of the structural, linguistic and historicoreligious elements of the Avestan Sh-rzag. This overview, as well as reconstructing its approximate chronology, helps in understanding the original ritual function of the text and its relationship to the other Avestan texts. The book then studies the translation of the text in the Middle Persian language, Pahlavi, which was produced several centuries after its initial composition, when Avestan was no longer understood by the majority of the Zoroastrian community. Addressing the lacuna in literature examining an erstwhile neglected Zoroastrian text, The Sh-rzag in Zoroastrianism includes a detailed commentary and an English translation of both the Avestan and Pahlavi version of the Sh-rzag and will be of interest to researchers and scholars of Iranian Studies, Religion, and History. Enrico G. Raffaelli is Professor of the History of Zoroastrianism at the University of Toronto. His research concentrates on the pre-Islamic phase of the Zoroastrian religion, with a particular focus on the study of the Avestan and Middle Persian literature.

Iranian Studies Edited by Homa Katouzian, University of Oxford and Mohamad Tavakoli, University of Toronto.

Since 1967 the International Society for Iranian Studies (ISIS) has been a leading learned society for the advancement of new approaches in the study of Iranian society, history, culture, and literature. The new ISIS Iranian Studies series published by Routledge will provide a venue for the publication of original and innovative scholarly works in all areas of Iranian and Persianate Studies. 1. Journalism in Iran From mission to profession Hossein Shahidi 2. Sadeq Hedayat His work and his wondrous world Edited by Homa Katouzian 3. Iran in the 21st Century Politics, economics and conflict Edited by Homa Katouzian and Hossein Shahidi 4. Media, Culture and Society in Iran Living with globalization and the Islamic State Edited by Mehdi Semati 5. Modern Persian Literature in Afghanistan Anomalous visions of history and form Wali Ahmadi 6. The Politics of Iranian Cinema Film and society in the Islamic Republic Saeed Zeydabadi-Nejad 7. Continuity in Iranian Identity Resilience of a cultural heritage Fereshteh Davaran

8. New Perspectives on Safavid Iran Empire and society Edited by Colin P. Mitchell 9. Islamic Tolerance Amr Khusraw and pluralism Alyssa Gabbay 10. City of Knowledge in Twentieth Century Iran Shiraz, history and poetry Setrag Manoukian 11. Domestic Violence in Iran Women, marriage and Islam Zahra Tizro 12. Gnostic Apocalypse and Islam Qur’an, exegesis, messianism, and the literary origins of the Babi religion Todd Lawson 13. Social Movements in Iran Environmentalism and civil society Simin Fadaee 14. Iranian-Russian Encounters Empires and revolutions since 1800 Edited by Stephanie Cronin 15. Iran Politics, history and literature Homa Katouzian 16. Domesticity and Consumer Culture in Iran Interior Revolutions of the Modern Era Pamela Karimi 17. The Development of the Babi/ Baha’i Communities Exploring Baron Rosen’s Archives Youli Ioannesyan 18. Culture and Cultural Politics Under Reza Shah The Pahlavi State, New Bourgeoisie and the Creation of a Modern Society in Iran Bianca Devos and Christoph Werner

19. Recasting Iranian Modernity International Relations and Social Change Kamran Matin 20. The Sh-rzag in Zoroastrianism A Textual and Historico-Religious Analysis Enrico G. Raffaelli

The Sh-rzag in Zoroastrianism A Textual and Historico-Religious Analysis

Enrico G. Raffaelli

Routledge Taylor & Francis Group LONDON AND NEW YORK

To my father, in memoriam

First published 2014 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2014 Enrico G. Raffaelli The right of Enrico G. Raffaelli to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him/her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978–0–415–81232–0 (hbk) ISBN: 978–1–315–85074–0 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Swales & Willis Ltd, Exeter, Devon

Contents

List of tables Foreword Note to the reader Symbols and abbreviations

ix x xii xiv

PART I

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

1

1

General notes on the Sh-rzag

2

For a chronology of the text

15

3

The Middle Persian version of the text: characteristics and chronology

37

3

PART II

The Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

41

1

The Sh-rzag in the manuscripts

43

2

The manuscripts used for the edition of the Avestan and Pahlavi text

44

Notes for a classification of the manuscript tradition of the Sh-rzag

66

Note on the preceding editions and translations of the Sh-rzag in Western languages

71

3 4

viii Contents PART III

Edition and Translation

75

1

Editorial criteria

77

2

Little Sh-rzag

80

3

Great Sh-rzag

120

PART IV

Commentary

147

Appendix

293

List of lexical items

314

Bibliography Index

321 340

Tables

I.1 I.2 I.3 I.4 I.5

Avestan and Pahlavi names of the five subdivisions of the day Anomalous case endings Anomalous number endings Anomalous gender endings The day-names of the Zoroastrian Calendar

7 17–18 19 19 30

Foreword

This book focuses on the Avestan and Pahlavi versions of the Sh-rzag, a text worshipping Zoroastrian divine entities and spiritual principles, and physical realities associated with them. Due to its apparent poverty of content and its clearly late composition, the Shrzag is one of the Avestan texts that have received less attention in the studies on Zoroastrian pre-Islamic literature. Analysis of the text, though, provides valuable information about multiple aspects of the history of Zoroastrianism, first and foremost about the characteristics of the entities that are praised in it. The study of the Pahlavi version of the Sh-rzag also provides important historico-religious information. For example, it helps to demonstrate that by early Islamic times the Zoroastrian pantheon had been considerably simplified when compared to that of the Avesta. In fact, many minor deities praised in the Avestan Sh-rzag were unknown to its Pahlavi translators. Both the Avestan Sh-rzag and its Pahlavi version are therefore not “minor” texts deserving little attention, but rather, texts that bear a remarkable interest from the historico-religious point of view. It is my hope that this research can inspire other scholars to conduct similar analyses on likewise neglected Zoroastrian texts. Recent scholarship has underlined, on multiple occasions, the need to study the Pahlavi versions of Avestan texts, insofar as they can assist in the interpretation of the Avestan texts themselves and give precious information on the history of the Zoroastrian exegetical tradition. This is also true for the Pahlavi Sh-rzag. For example, the analysis of its manuscript tradition demonstrates the existence of two distinct Pahlavi translations of the Sh-rzag, which indicates that this was the object of exegesis in two different periods. The book includes a critical edition, translation and analysis of both the Avestan version of the Sh-rzag and its Middle Persian translation. This edition is based on the analysis of all the manuscripts that it has been possible to consult. The edition of the Avestan Sh-rzag also includes the variants of the now inaccessible manuscripts, of high philological interest, that were consulted by Karl F. Geldner for his edition of the text (which is included in vol. 2 of Avesta: The Sacred Book of the Parsis, 1886–96). An overview of the structural, linguistic and historico-religious elements of the Avestan Sh-rzag introduces the book. This helps in understanding the original

Foreword xi ritual function of the text and its relationship to the other Avestan texts, as well as in reconstructing its approximate chronology. The principal characteristics of the Pahlavi version of the text are also provided, and a chronology proposed. The edition and translation of the Avestan and Pahlavi Sh-rzag are accompanied by a detailed historico-religious and philological commentary. An Appendix lists the correspondences between the Avestan Sh-rzag and other Avestan texts. Until the late phase of the period of preparation of the book (which grew out of my PhD dissertation defended in 2004), I have made an effort to take into account the most recent relevant publications. However, several important publications on Zoroastrianism and on pre-Islamic Iranian literature have appeared when the book was in an advanced state of preparation, and therefore could not be considered. One of the most important of these is The Transmission of the Avesta, edited by Alberto Cantera, which appeared in late 2012. During my work on the book, I have availed myself of the suggestions and advice of numerous people. Among these I wish to thank in particular Frantz Grenet and Adriano V. Rossi (who have followed my research on the Sh-rozag since the period of my doctoral studies), and (in alphabetical order), Nasrin Askari, Alberto Cantera, Carlo G. Cereti, Elan Dresher, Christoph Emmrich, Elaine Gold, Almut Hintze, Judith Josephson, Monica A. Irimia, Mauro Maggi, Antonio Panaino, Firuzeh Qandehari, Ajay Rao, Martin Revermann, P. Oktor Skjærvø, Maria Subtelny and Shafique Virani. Special thanks go to Janet Angelini for her translation of the preliminary version of the book from Italian into English, to Anjeza Rexha for her work on the indexes, and to Jennette Boehmer, Anthony Cristiano, and Brendan Sutherland for their editorial assistance. And to Melissa Kelly, for everything.

Note to the reader

Throughout the book (especially in the Appendix), numerous passages parallel to the Avestan Sh-rzag are quoted. The analysis of the correspondences is based on Geldner’s edition of the Avesta (it should be recalled that this edition does not include several Avestan passages which are merely repetitions of other passages, which are usually also not included in the manuscripts). The texts containing the correspondences are listed following the order: Yasna – Visperad – Vdvdd – Yašts – texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. Among the latter, only the correspondences with the texts which include some original material, i.e., the frnagns, the Ghs and the Niyyišns, have been taken into consideration; furthermore, in the Appendix, the few correspondences existing between the Sh-rzag and the Avestan fragments have not been mentioned, insofar as their interest for the history of the text appears to be very limited. Although the philological commentary to the text is concentrated in Part IV, observations on some forms (those presenting anomalous endings) are included in one chapter of Part I, Chapter 2, section 2.2. This has been considered the most appropriate placement for these observations, since they give indications on the chronology of the Sh-rozag, which is discussed in Part I (note, though, that Chapter 2, section 2.2 contains no observations on the etymology or meaning of the stems discussed in it: these are all found in Part IV). The identification codes given to the manuscripts by Geldner have been conserved. Those of Supplément persan 39, Supplément persan 40 and Supplément persan 51 have been modified respectively into P39, P40 and P51, in order to harmonize them with the type of mark assigned by Geldner to Supplément persan 49 (P14) and the other manuscripts of the Supplément Persan collection of the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, to which these manuscripts belong. Part IV has been divided into 34 sections (dedicated to the 33 paragraphs of the Sh-rzag and the concluding formula respectively). Each section includes an introduction that primarily contains information on the principal characteristics of the entities highlighted in the paragraph. The introduction is followed by a commentary to the text of the paragraph, divided into subsections, as listed in the Appendix (a subdivision which has also been followed in the commentary included in Chapter 2, section 2.2 of Part I). This commentary is mostly dedicated to the philological analysis, and includes a comparison of the text (especially its Pahlavi version) with portions of other Zoroastrian texts.

Note to the reader xiii In the analysis of the Pahlavi version of the paragraphs, those correspondences or differences from the translations of their parallels in other texts that have been considered worthy of note have been pointed out. Similarly, particularly relevant correspondences or differences in the translation of single words have been noted. To conclude, as a general rule, in Part IV, the Avestan and Pahlavi words which appear more than once are translated only in their first occurrence.

Symbols and abbreviations

Symbols and abbreviations used in the edition and translation of passages x +

{abc} gg sec. m. /abc/ //abc// \abc/ \\abc// [[abc]] ***

[abc]

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

emendation spelling attested in the Avestan manuscripts, but not used by Geldner in his edition of the Sh-rzag restoration expunction portion of text that cannot be emended secunda manu interlinear spelling marginal spelling interlinear spelling added sec. m. marginal spelling added sec. m. portion of text cancelled in the manuscript illegible portion of text gloss to the Pahlavi text

Abbreviations of titles of Avestan and Pahlavi texts A. Any. Aog. AZ. Bd. Dd. Dk. G. H. MX. N. Ny. Pahl. Riv. Dd.

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

frnagn Nrang  taxš Aogmadac frn  Zardušt Bundahišn Ddestn  dng Dnkard Gh Hdxt Nask Ddestn  mng  xrad Nrangestn Niyyišn Pahlavi Rivyat accompanying the Ddestn  dng

Symbols and abbreviations xv P. RV. S. 1 S. 2 Šnš. V. Vr. Vyt. Y. Yt. Zd.

= = = = = = = = = = =

Pursišnh Rgveda Little Sh-rzag Great Sh-rzag Šyast n šyast Vdvdd Visperad Vštsp Yašt Yasna Yašt Wizdagh  Zdspram

Journal titles abbreviations AAH ACF AnCF AION AOH ASGM AuOr BOr BSOAS BSOS DL

= = = = = = = = = = =

DSp EW IF IIJ JA JAOS JCOI JRAS JSAI KZ

= = = = = = = = = =

MSS NIB

= =

OrSu RSO StII StIr TPS

= = = = =

Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae Annali di Ca’ Foscari Annuaire du Collège de France Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli Acta Orientalia Academia Scientiarum Hungaricae Atti del Sodalizio Glottologico Milanese Aula Orientalis Bibliotheca Orientalis Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies Deutsche Literaturzeitung für Kritik der internationalen Wissenschaft Die Sprache East and West Indogermanische Forschungen Indo-Iranian Journal Journal Asiatique Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of the Cama Oriental Institute Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der Indogermanischen Sprachen Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft Nme-ye Irn-e Bastn: The International Journal of Ancient Iranian Studies Orientalia Suecana Rivista degli Studi Orientali Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik Studia Iranica Transactions of the Philological Society

xvi

Symbols and abbreviations

ZDMG ZII

= =

Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländische Gesellschaft Zeitschrift für Indologie und Iranistik

Other abbreviations acc. Av. Cf Chor. gen. Grk. instr. interl. Khot. MMP ms(s). nom. OAv. OI om. Pahl. PIE PIIr PIr pl. sg. Skt. Ved.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

accusative Avestan Concluding formula Chorasmian genitive Greek instrumental interlinearly Khotanese Manichaean Middle Persian manuscript(s) nominative Old Avestan Old Indic omits Pahlavi Proto-Indo-European Proto-Indo-Iranian Proto-Iranian plural singular Sanskrit Vedic

Part I

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

Thispageintentionallyleftblank

1

General notes on the Sh-rzag

1.1 Position in the Avesta and attestations of the title The Sh-rzag1 has come down to us as a part of the Xwurdag Abestg, a group of Avestan texts which can be recited also by laypersons.2 It has reached us in two versions which are almost identical in content, but differ in morphology and length. On the basis of their respective lengths, these versions are called in the research “Little Sh-rzag” and “Great Sh-rzag.”3

1 In this work, the title of the text, differently from common research practice, is given with the spelling Sh-rzag rather than the spelling Sh rzag, in consideration of its compound nature. The compound sh-rzag in effect has an adjectival value of the kind “(specific to) the day thirty.” It refers to the thirtieth day from the death of a person and to the specific rituals carried out on such an occasion. The gloss to the translation of V. 8.22, witnesses the change of the meaning of sh-rzag into “thirtieth day (from the death).” With regard to the rituals for the soul of the deceased at certain intervals of time from their death, this gloss says: ka-š xsh-rzag n dnd -š xsh-rzag pad Frawardn rz (“if his [= the deceased’s] thirtieth day is not known, the day Frawardn [is considered] his thirtieth day”; for this passage, Anklesaria–Kapadia 1949: 200 has been broadly followed; note that the two occurrences of sh-rzag are emended into rôza in Anklesaria and Kapadia’s edition; see also Jamasp 1907, 1: 320). The recitation within the rituals thirty days from the death of a person was perhaps the very purpose of the composition of the Sh-rzag (see I.1.2). 2 According to a modern Parsi tradition, the collection of texts forming the Xwurdag Abestg was arranged in the 4th century CE (see Wilson 1843: 13; see also Kellens in 1998: 479). It is not possible to determine whether the Sh-rzag was included in the Sasanian Avesta (i.e. the Avestan canon, that was larger than the one that has come down to us, of which the definitive version is attributed to the Sasanian period). On the basis of the dedication of almost all the paragraphs of the Sh-rzag to the entities controlling the days of the Zoroastrian month, it can be assumed that, if this text was included in the Sasanian Avesta, it formed part of the Nask (i.e. the section) called Pzen (for this name, see Gignoux–Tafazzoli 1993: 166; Cantera 2004: 14, n. 52; see also Tavadia 1930: 119, n. 1). Going by the description of the contents of this Nask given in Dk. 8.7, one of the subjects it dealt with was the various subdivisions of the day, the month and the year, and the divine entities controlling the days of the month (for the text of this passage, see Dnkart 1966: 301 [530], ll. 10–22; [64sup.], l. 1–[67sup.], l. 13; for its edition and translation, see Molé 1963: 100–3). 3 S. 1 (the little Sh-rzag) consists of 416 words, and S. 2 (the great Sh-rzag) of 615, or 471 excluding the occurrences of the verbal form yazamaide (the calculation does not take into account the concluding formulae of S. 1 and S. 2, which can be considered as separate from the rest of the text). The main reason for the difference in length between the two versions is the presence in S. 2 of a greater number of epithets.

4

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

The Sh-rzag is mentioned for the first time in some passages of Pahlavi texts, which refer to its ritual recitation. A number of references in this respect can be found in the Pahlavi version of the Avestan text Nrangestn.4 The first of these is N. 24.10, where there is a discussion of which šn man (sacred formula)5 is to be recited during the Yasna ritual (specifically, the first Yasna of the day) during the Ghnbr festivals.6 The passage mentions first the šn man of the Ng-nwar,7 and then says: 30-rzag šyd; sh-rzag wš-abestgh weh-iz ast. Ast k dn gwd ay az bunh 30-rzag kunišn  šyd8 (“it is permissible [to recite the šn man of the] Sh-rzag [i.e. rather than that of the Ng-nwar]; the Sh-rzag is even better [because] it has more Avestan text. Some say: ‘that is, it is permissible if the Sh-rzag is recited from the beginning’”).9 N. 29.12 then alludes to two types of ritual: one is in honour of the divinity to whom the day is dedicated and the other is the “major” (meh) ritual. The passage then continues by quoting two different opinions as to which is the “major” ritual; first, it says ast k n  wš-abestgtar gwd (“some say that [this rite is] the one with more Avestan text”) and then ast k ay pad 30-rzag pš10 (a sentence difficult to interpret, which can tentatively be translated as “some [say] ‘that is, [the one with

4 For the chronology of this version, see Kotwal–Kreyenbroek 1992–2009, 3: 17–18, as well as Cantera 2004: 194–201 (and see also pp. 207–20 of the same text). 5 The word šn man is a Pahlavi adaptation of Av. xšn maine (concerning which, see I.1.2). 6 For some references on these festivals, see Boyce 2001c. 7 This šn man contains invocations to a series of entities. It is nowadays called Mno Nwar by the Parsis: for some references on it, see Kotwal–Boyd 1991: 85, n. 68. 8 The reading of this passage is in accordance with Kotwal–Kreyenbroek 1992–2009, 3: 44. 9 The sentence sh-rzag wš-abestgh weh-iz ast appears to say that the recitation of the whole Sh-rzag (classified as a šn man) has greater merit than reciting only the šn man of the Ngnwar, which is shorter than the Sh-rzag. Kotwal and Kreyenbroek, in 1992–2009, 3: 45, translate 30-rzag šyd; sh-rzag wš-abestgh weh-iz ast as: “The Sroza is also permissible; it is even better to recite the additional Avesta of the Sroza” (not a very clear rendering, of which the meaning is clarified by the two authors under n. 66 on the same page, as: “it is a good thing to recite the dedications to all Yazads, since this implies reciting more Avestan”). Furthermore, in the last sentence of the passage can be recognized a reference to the recitation of the Sh-rzag in its entirety, starting from the first paragraph of S. 1 (the interpretation of Kotwal and Kreyenbroek in 1992–2009, 3: 45 is different: “There is one who says thus: ‘One should recite the Sroza first, then it is permissible’”; under n. 68 the two scholars explain this sentence as: “Meaning, presumably, that one may only recite the additional texts if one has recited the rest of the Sroza first”; this explanation is unconvincing, inasmuch as it is not clear to which additional texts the passage can be referring). It should also be noted that the passage is followed by the sentence pas ka ardfraward kunnd  šyd, for which the translation by Kotwal and Kreyenbroek in 1992–2009, 3: 45 seems acceptable: “If they recite [the šn man of] Ard-fraward at the end it is permissible.” The explanation of this sentence, given by the two scholars under n. 69 on the same page, seems correct: “The dedication to Ard-fraward [= S. 1.19 and 2.19, author’s note] is normally not recited as the nineteenth dedication of the Sroza, since the frawashis are invoked at the end of the text.” 10 These two sentences have been presented following Kotwal–Kreyenbroek 1992–2009, 3: 116 (omitting, however, the integration of the verbal form gwd after the second ast k, which does not appear to be necessary, and deleting the ezafe between 30-rzag and pš: see the following note).

General notes on the Sh-rzag

5

11

the šn mans that are] foremost in the Sh-rzag’” ). Shortly after this passage, in N. 29.16, with regard to the formulae to be recited in the rites, is said: šn man, ka 7 Amahraspand n gyg n  7 Amahraspand, pas gh pas rz pas mhgn pas n  pad 30-rzag pš. Ka 7 Amahraspand n n gyg gh ud rz mhgn pas n  pad 30-rzag pš.12 A possible translation of the passage is “(With regard to the) šn man: if the seven Amahraspands are venerated (lit. “are in that place”), (the šn man) of the seven Amahraspands (has to be recited), then (those of the) gh, of the day and the month, then those (necessary), (which are) first of all in the Sh-rzag. If the seven Amahraspands are not venerated (lit. “are not in that place”), (the šn man) of the gh, of the day and the month (are to be recited), and then those (necessary), (which are) first of all in the Sh-rzag.”13 The compound sh-rzag occurs finally in N. 29.26, where, speaking of the formulae to be used when consecrating the drn14 in the Frawardgn festival,15 is said: šn man harw-iz  30-rzag pdixšy kardan, abg rz pdixšy kardan j ud-iz  tis pdixšy kardan be vspašmca  n  be pad 30-rzag t n šyd; 2 brzat 2 dauš be pad 30rzag t n pdixšy kardan.16 This passage can be translated as “Any šn man of the Sh-rzag can be recited; one can recite (the šn man) corresponding to the day, or any other, except vspašmca, because this can be recited only in the Sh-rzag; brzat and da uš (also) cannot be recited twice, except in the Sh-rzag.”17 11 Accepting this interpretation, the sentence can be understood as referring to the greater ritual merit of reciting a text which includes the šn mans taken from the Sh-rzag, compared to that of reciting other texts, which include longer formulae. A different interpretation is given by Kotwal and Kreyenbroek, who in 1992–2009, 3: 117, translate the sentence as “There is one (who says it should be performed) with the first Srza” (the “first Srza,” as explained under n. 439 on the same page, is S. 1). Pš, whose primary meaning is “before, earlier,” would thus have here the adjectival value of “first.” A fact militating against this interpretation, though, is that the naming of S. 1 as Sh-rzag  pš does not seem to be attested elsewhere. Moreover, as will be noted here below, the expression pad 30-rzag pš is present also just after this phrase, in § 16 of N. 29, which seems to refer to the fact that the Sh-rzag is the principal source of the ritual formulae to be recited in the Zoroastrian rituals (see the discussion of the passage here below). It must finally be noted that the sentence immediately following the one being discussed also seems to refer to the recitation of the Sh-rzag, which says: sraw pad tan- n pdixšy yaštan (“it is not permissible to recite a formula singly,” i.e. a single formula of the Sh-rzag without the remainder of the text, when a “greater” ritual is performed: a similar interpretation can be found in Kotwal–Kreyenbroek 1992–2009, 3: 117, n. 440). 12 The edition of the passage is in accordance with Kotwal–Kreyenbroek 1992–2009, 3: 118. 13 Kotwal and Kreyenbroek, in 1992–2009, 3: 119, translate the passage in a way that is almost identical to what is given here, with the exception of the phrase pad 30-rzag pš, which they render as “which occur in the Srza” (but under n. 452 on the same page, Kotwal and Kreyenbroek note that this is a free rendering, which does not take into account the usual meaning of pš). 14 On the drn, a type of consecrated bread, see Choksy 1996, with further references. 15 Regarding the Frawardgn, a festivity in honour of the dead, see Boyce 1999; Malandra 2000, with further references. 16 The edition of the passage broadly follows Kotwal–Kreyenbroek 1992–2009, 3: 128 (see also the following note). 17 The Avestan form vspašmca quoted in the passage, introduces the concluding formula of S. 1. Probably  n  be pad 30-rzag t n šyd means that this formula cannot be recited during the Frawardgn, except in association with the Sh-rzag. The two Avestan forms mentioned in

6

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

A reference to the ritual recitation of the Sh-rzag can also be found in another Pahlavi text, the Pahlavi Rivyat accompanying the Ddestn  dng,18 which in 58.39, in describing the ways in which the chief priest (Zt) has to suggest to an assistant priest (Rspg) the formula that has to be pronounced during the ritual of consecration of the drn, says ka 30-rzag wz j uttar nst (“if [it is] the wz Sh-rzag,19 [the ways to suggest the formula are] no different”).20 Finally, a mention of the ritual recitation of the work is found in a short Middle Persian text contained in K7b, the first part of manuscript K7, in the Royal Library in Copenhagen.21 This text describes the rituals that candidates aspiring to become Zoroastrian priests have to perform during the ritual of initiation to the Zoroastrian priesthood called Nwar, one of which is the consecration of the drn with the šn man  30-rzag (“šn man of the Sh-rzag”).22

1.2 Structure and contents of the text In both versions, the Sh-rzag is divided into 33 paragraphs, each dedicated to a divine or spiritual entity of the Zoroastrian pantheon and in which the entity is praised.23 The first 30 paragraphs are dedicated to the entities giving their names to

18 19

20 21

22 23

the following sentence, brzat and da uš, refer, in turn, to the invocations these introduce, i.e. respectively those of S. 1 gh 4 / S. 1.33, and of S. 1.8/15/23. Kotwal and Kreyenbroek suggest a different interpretation. They omit pad from the clause starting with ; pad is attested, though, in a manuscript (see Kotwal–Kreyenbroek 1992–2009, 3: 128, n. 572), and, moreover, by its omission its parallelism with the following sentence is interrupted. On p. 129 of 1992–2009, 3, Kotwal and Kreyenbroek translate  n  be pad 30-rzag t n šyd as “for one may not (recite that) except for the 30 divinities of the days (Srza)”; there do not seem to be any reasons, though, not to interpret here 30-rzag as the title of the homonymous text, as in its other occurrences in the Nrangestn. Again on p. 129, Kotwal and Kreyenbroek also suggest for the sentence starting with 2 brzat the translation “(Also) it is not permissible to recite brzat, or da uš, twice in the Srza.” This translation, however, does not seem to correspond to the meaning of the text, even accepting the expunction of be proposed by the two scholars in the edition (on p. 128). The last editor of this text, Alan Williams, suggests dating it between the end of the 9th and the first quarter of the 10th century: see Williams 1990, 1: 8–9. It should be recalled that wz has a number of meanings in addition to the base meaning of “word.” In this passage it has the meaning of “sacred text” and is thus an appellative of the Sh-rzag (for this meaning, see Boyce–Kotwal 1971: 57, 311; in the same article, Boyce and Kotwal analyze the meanings of wz and its equivalent in the modern Zoroastrian lexicon, bj). The passage has been quoted in accordance with Williams 1990, 1: 208–9. For it and its translation, see also Boyce–Kotwal 1971: 72; JamaspAsa 1985: 342, 350; Williams 1990, 2: 99. For this text, see Kotwal 1988, with an edition and translation on pp. 303–7. It must be noted that it is difficult to determine its dating: on the basis of its linguistic form, it can be considered approximately contemporary with the majority of the Pahlavi texts, i.e. between the 9th and 10th centuries. Manuscript K7 dates possibly to the 13th century (its date, though, is the subject of debate: see in this respect Barr in K7 1944: xiii–xiv, with further references, to which Geldner 1904: 15 should be added). See K7 1944: 104r, ll. 11–12. Regarding the ritual practice documented by this passage, see also I.1.2. A reflection of the division of the Sh-rzag in 33 paragraphs dedicated to 33 different entities is encountered also in modern ritual practice. Some passages of Rivyats state that in some funerary rituals during which the Sh-rzag is recited there are offered 33 luwgs (a word designating a type

General notes on the Sh-rzag

7

24

the corresponding days of the month of the Zoroastrian calendar; the remaining three are dedicated respectively to Apm Napt, Haoma and Dahm friti, entities excluded from the list of day-names.25 of consecrated bread: see also Boyce–Kotwal 1971: 65–66, n. 53) and 33 eggs (see Unvala 1922, 1: 155, ll. 6–7; 1: 156, l. 3–5; 1: 169, ll. 7–8, 18; Dhabhar 1932: 168–69, 177–78). Furthermore, in the Ferešte ceremony, carried out also in contemporary times to honour happy circumstances, such as weddings or birthdays, 33 frnagns and 33 Bjs are performed, each in honour of one of the entities to whom the paragraphs of the Sh-rzag are dedicated (on this ceremony, see Modi 1937: 11, 450–51; see also Boyce 1992b: 110; Karanja 2010: 78). 24 It is important to remember here that the Zoroastrian calendar is divided into twelve months of 30 days. The name of each day is identical in each month. To the last month five epagomenal days are attached, each taking its name from one of the G s. Regarding the Zoroastrian calendar see also Panaino 1990a, with further references. 25 The criterion on the basis of which §§ 31 and 32 were dedicated to Apm Napt and Haoma is not clear. The dedication of § 33 to Dahm friti may, however, reflect the connection of this divine entity with the end of the recitation of a prayer to a group of divine entities. This connection is expressed by an Avestan quotation included in P. 31, where Dahm friti is said to manifest in the form of an intoxicated camel to those offering a complete prayer to the divine entities (for this passage, see JamaspAsa–Humbach 1971, 1: 48–49; note that the complete prayer to which the passage refers is not necessarily to be identified with the Sh-rzag, as proposed in JamaspAsa–Humbach 1971, 1: 48, n. a). It must be added here that the two versions of the Sh-rzag end with two different concluding formulae, invoking various divine and spiritual entities and also include, attached to S. 1.7 and 2.7, the invocations to be recited in each of the five ghs, the temporal periods which divide the daytime and regulate ritual time. These invocations are formed of praises to the divine and spiritual entities controlling them. It should be recalled that the five subdivisions of the day and the entities controlling them, are praised in various Young Avestan passages (Y. 1.3–7, 2.3–7, 3.5–9, 4.8–12, 6.2–6, 7.5–9; see the analysis of the first of these passages in Kellens 1996a: 62–75; see also the translation of these passages in Kellens 2006: 13–16, 31–34, 49–51, 61–64, 72–74, 82–85). In the table below are given the Avestan and Pahlavi names of the five subdivisions of the day, with an indication of their respective duration and the entities in charge of them: Table I.1 The ghs Av. Name

Pahl. Name

Duration

Entities

Huuani Rapi ßina Uzaiieirina Aißisr rima aibigaiia Ušahina

Hwan Rapihwin Uzrin

bsr srim

6am–12pm 12–3pm 3–6pm 6pm–12am

Ušahin

12–6am

Mira / Rman Aš.a / tar Apm Napt / Ap Aš.unm frauuaš.i / n / Hušiti / Ama / Vrrana / Uparatt Sraoša / Rašnu / Arštt

The gh Rapi ina forms part of the Zoroastrian day only in the summer months, while during the winter months the hours 12–15 are called “second Hwan.” The Avestan names listed above are adjectives: huuani- means “of the haoma,” and refers to the fact that the Yasna ritual in which the haoma (a plant for ritual use, regarding which see also IV § 32) holds an essential role, can be performed only in the morning. Also connected to the chronological placement of the respective ghs are the names rapi ina- (“of midday”), uzaiieirina- (“of the afternoon”), ušahina- (“of the dawn”), as well as, perhaps, aiisr rima- aibigaiia- (as explained by Hintze in 2003, this compound means “the time of chanting characterized by attentive listening,” and refers possibly to the recitation of the prayers performed in the evening). As regards the connections of the divine entities to the periods of the day, the gh of the morning hours was placed under the protection of Mira because of the close association of this divine entity with the sun (see IV § 11); Rman, in turn, was put in charge of this

8

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

This structure reflects the importance of the number 33 in the Zoroastrian tradition. In this respect, it should be noted first of all that a division into thirty-three parts, according to a New Persian Rivyat, was characteristic of the Nask of the Sasanian Avesta entitled Std Yasn.26 Also to be remembered is a formula attested in several passages of the Yasna invoking “all the ratus” (vspa- ratu-), which it defines as being thirty-three and qualifies as nazdišta- pairiš.huuani- (“of the most internal circle around the period huuani”).27 Here, ratu-, a word with multiple meanings, probably has the meaning of “patron entity”:28 this interpretation is supported by a Pahlavi passage, Dk. 8.7.17, which mentions, among the topics of the Nask Pazn, the 33 xrad29  nazdist ud prmon Hwan (the translation of ratu- nazdišta- pairiš.huuani-), and explains that this Nask specified which of these rads were material and which spiritual, and what their hierarchy was (k

and mng and gtg, ud kadr dudgar ud kadr sidgar az mngn

26

27

28 29

gh because of his connection with Mira (see IV § 16). Protection of the second gh was entrusted to Aš.a, who personifies a principle of fundamental importance, the cosmic order, first of all because of the high symbolic value held in Zoroastrianism by noon, with which this gh starts. Noon, furthermore, is the moment when the sun, a fiery celestial body, reaches its zenith. This recalls the close connection of Aš.a with fire (see IV § 3), personified by the second divine entity in charge of the gh Rapi ina, tar (on this gh, see also Boyce 1968). The entities in control of the third gh, Apm Napt and the waters (designated with the plural of the noun ap-), are closely related (see IV § 31). These entities are characterized by a watery nature. It is probable that the protection of this section of the day was allocated to them in order to create a counterpart to that of the second gh. Among the various entities charged with the fourth gh, some, like the frauuas. is “of the righteous” (aš.unm), Vrrana and his associates Ama and Uparatt, share a warlike nature (see IV § 19 and IV § 20; it is possible, moreover, as Kellens notes in 1996a: 71, that the association among the frauuas. is of the righteous, Vrrana, Ama and Uparatt, is based on their praise in Yt. 13.42). Due to their warlike nature these entities were considered suited to protecting the early hours of the night, during which the forces of evil launch their attack, seeking to damage the world. On the other hand, it is unclear why this time of the day is connected with the ns, a group of female divine entities, and with Hušiti, another female divine entity. The link of the second nocturnal gh, during which the world continues to be exposed to attack by the forces of evil, with Sraoša, is due to the role of this entity of protector of the material world (see IV § 17). The other divine entities protecting this gh, Rašnu and Arštt, are closely related to one another, and Rašnu is also closely related to Sraoša (see IV § 18; see also Kreyenbroek 1985: 117–18, where the Pahlavi passages are found, which allude to the connection of Sraoša with the fifth gh, one of which is a passage of the Dnkard giving information that does not seem to occur elsewhere, i.e. that the first part of this gh is placed under the protection of Sraoša and the second part under the protection of Rašnu and Arštt). Regarding the ghs, see also Boyce 2001b, and Hintze 2002 (which deals with the Ghs, a group of texts dedicated to the five sections of the day, forming part of the Xwurdag Abestg). For the relevant passage, see Unvala 1922, 1: 4, ll. 5–7; see also Dhabhar 1932: 4. It should be recalled that the name Std Yasn is the transposition into the Pahlavi spelling of Av. staota- yesniia-, a sequence denoting a portion of the Yasna (on the possible identity of this portion of text, see Hintze 2009: 32–35, with some references to other hypotheses). Regarding the name of the Std Yasn Nask, see also Cantera 2004: 14. This formula occurs in Y. 1.10, 2.10, 3.12, 4.15, 6.9, 7.12, 17.9 and 22.12. See the edition and translation of Y. 1.10 in Kellens 1996a: 83–84 and 2006: 17 (see, though, n. 31 regarding the interpretation given there of ratu-). For the various meanings of ratu-, see IV § 6, commentary to S. 1.6 a / 2.6 a. Ms.: radh.

General notes on the Sh-rzag

9

gtgn “how many are spiritual and how many material, and which is the second and which the third among the spiritual and the material ones”).30 This passage clearly refers to a text dealing with divine entities. The identity of the ratus associated with the first gh of the day, is, however, unknown to us.31 The importance of the number 33 is also reflected in a number of passages of Pahlavi and New Persian Zoroastrian texts.32 30 For the text of Dk. 8.7.17, see Dnkart 1966: 113 [66sup.], ll. 3–6. 31 Despite the above-mentioned passage referring to the contents of the Nask Pzen, which possibly contained the Sh-rzag, no clues seem to support the identification of these 33 ratus with the 33 entities to whom the paragraphs of the Sh-rzag are dedicated. Kotwal and Boyd (in 1991: 93, n. 88) refer to the interpretation in modern Zoroastrianism of the 33 ratus in question as ritual instruments; see also the passages of Rivyats published in Unvala 1922, 1: 484, ll. 17–20; 1: 485, ll. 7–10 and translated in Dhabhar 1932: 328–29 (with further references in n. 1 on p. 329). Another interpretation of the nature of the 33 ratus of the formula has been proposed by Kellens in some recent studies (see especially 1996a: 80–102 and 1998: 495–504). According to the Belgian scholar, these represent 33 portions of a text put together into a first phase of the canonization of the Avestan texts. A structure in 33 parts would have been characteristic also of texts canonized in two following phases of the history of the Avesta, the last of which texts would correspond to the above-mentioned Std Yasn Nask. Despite its being interesting and articulate, this hypothesis (whose main points are accepted also in Cantera 2009), seems to lack sufficient documentary support for it to be accepted. Here it should be recalled also that various Vedic passages mention 33 gods; in particular, in R.V. 9.92.4 this number is given as that of “all the gods” (vive devh.): for further information, see Dumézil 1948: 155–61; 1949: 213–19. 32 This number occurs, for example, in various Pahlavi passages on the life of Zoroaster: Dk. 7.4.67 mentions the 33 lies uttered by the enemies of Zoroaster, which caused his imprisonment on the orders of King Wištsp, and which are defined as 33 “links” (band; for this passage, see Molé 1967: 54–55). The 33 links binding Zoroaster before the conversion of Wištsp are mentioned also in Pahl. Riv. Dd. 47.6 (for this passage, see Williams 1990, 1: 168–69; 2: 77). Zd. 24.5 too refers to the 33 lies proffered to Wištsp (to be understood as on the account of Zoroaster), and defines them as the indication of the 33 “evil religions” (dn  wattar) which were opposed to the Zoroastrian religion; subsequently, the passage refers to the 33 links (band) which are the nšn  bastan  sh ud s dd  wattar pad sh ud s kirbag  pšom (“the sign of the prevention of the 33 evil laws by means of the 33 excellent actions”; the edition and translation of this passage are in accordance with Gignoux–Tafazzoli 1993: 84–85). The 33 “excellent actions” mentioned here can be identified with the 33 principal good actions allowing paradise to be reached, listed in MX. 37 (and the preceding chapter of the same work lists the worst sins, though not in the number of 33, but 30: for the text and the translation of these two chapters, see Chunakova 1997: 58–60, 104–6). Another passage of the Wizdagh  Zdspram, 4.6, describes an appearance of the divine entity Spandarmad dressed in a golden kustg (the Zoroastrian sacred belt) representing the Zoroastrian religion: with respect to the latter, the passage says band ast k-š awiš paywastag sh ud s band  abar sh ud s winh k-š hamg winh az-iš baxtag “it is a link into which are joined the 33 links against the 33 sins, into which all the sins are divided” (the edition and translation of the passage are in general accordance with Gignoux–Tafazzoli 1993: 56–57). Pahl. Riv. Dd. 10h.1 must then be mentioned, which refers to the 33 ways (rh) which join the bridge inwad (the bridge crossed by souls in the afterlife in order to reach their other-worldly dwelling) to the Gardmn (a section of paradise: see IV § 30; for this passage, see Williams 1990, 1: 68–69; 2: 21). A similar reference occurs also in the New Persian text S.ad dar-i Bundahish (100.17; for the text of this passage, see Dhabhar 1909: 172; for its translation, see Dhabhar 1932: 575). Finally Dk. 7.5.4 must be recalled: this passage mentions the 33 ordeals described in the Dn (i.e. in the Zoroastrian sacred texts: see IV § 24; for this passage, see Molé 1967: 62–63), and the short version of the New Persian Zoroastrian text Saugand-nme, which refers to 33 types of oath (see Unvala 1922, 1: 45, l. 9; Dhabhar 1932: 39).

10

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

Both versions of the Sh-rzag are composed of invocative formulae. The large majority of the paragraphs praise not only the entity to whom they are dedicated, but also one or more divine and spiritual entities, supernatural or abstract properties, prayers and sacred texts, mythical figures or aspects of the physical or ultramundane world. Below is a list of the names mentioned in the various paragraphs:33 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

10. 11. 12.

13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

Ahura Mazd/ Ams. a Spn.ta (in the plur.) Vohu Manah / xšti / sna Xratu / Gaoš.srta Xratu As. a / Airiiaman išiia / Saok Xšara / Aiixšusta / Marždika rmaiti / Rt Hauruuatt / Hušiti / Sara (in the plur.) Amrtt / Fšaoni (in the dual) / V  (in the dual) / Yauuan (in S. 1; in the dual) – Yuun (in S. 2; in the plur.) / Gaokrna Ahura Mazd / Ams. a Spn.ta (in the plur.) tar / Xvarnah / Sauuah / Airiianm Xvarnah (in S. 1) – Airiiana Xvarnah (in S. 2) / Kuuaiia Xvarnah / Kuuaii Haosrauuah / Vairi Haosrauuah / Asnuuan.t Gairi / Cacasta Vairi / Rauuan.t Gairi / Nairii.saha Ap (in the plur.) / Arduu Anhit (in S. 1) – Arduu Sr Anhit (in S. 2) / Ap (in the plur.) / Uruuar (in the plur.) Huuarxšata Mh / Gauu Auu.dt (in S. 1) – Gaom Auu.dtahe Uruuan (in the plur.) Frauuas. i (in S. 2) / Gauu Pouru.sar (in S. 1) – Gaom Pouru.sarahe Uruuan (in the plur.) Frauuas. i (in S. 2) Tištriia / Satauuasa / Star Afšcira (in the plur.) / Star Zmascira (in the plur.) / Star Uruuar.cira (in the plur.) / Vanan.t / Haptirin.ga Guš Tašan (only in S. 1) / Guš Uruuan / Druusp Ahura Mazd / Ams. a Spn.ta (in the plur.) Mira / Rman Sraoša Rašnu / Arštt / ržuxa Vacah (in S. 1) – ržuxa Vac (in S. 2) As. un m Frauuas. i (in the plur.) Ama / Vrra na / Uparatt Rman / Vaiiu /  s. a / Zruuan Vta / Hm.variti Ahura Mazd / Ams. a Spn.ta (in the plur.) Cist / Dan

33 The names of the entities to whom the paragraphs are dedicated are given in bold. For the entities praised in the invocations of the ghs, refer to the table given under n. 25. A list of the names mentioned in the Sh-rzag can be found also in Pirart 2006a: 28–31 (which, however, gives some interpretations that are different from those given here; unfortunately, Pirart does not give notes or bibliographical references for his interpretations).

General notes on the Sh-rzag

11

25. As. i / Cisti (only in S. 1) / rt (only in S. 1) / Rasstt (only in S. 1) / X arnah / Sauuah / Prn.di / Airiianm Xvarnah (in S. 1) – Airiiana Xvarnah (in S. 2) / Kuuaiia Xvarnah / Axvarta Xvarnah / Zarauštrahe Xvarnah 26. Arštt / Gairi Uši.darna 27. Asman / Vahišta Ahu As. aonm 28. Zam / Asah (in the plur.) / Šira (in the plur.) / Gairi Uši.darna / Gairi (in the plur.) / Kuuaiia Xvarnah / Axvarta Xvarnah 29. M ra Spn.ta / Dta Vdauua / Dta Zarauštri / Dar Upaiian / Dan / Zrazditi Mrahe Spn.tahe / Uši.darra Danaii / Vaiia Mrahe Spn.tahe / sna Xratu / Gaoš.srta Xratu 30. Ana ra Raocah (in the plur.) / Gar.nmna / Misuun Gtu / Cinuuat . ˜ prtu 31. Naptar Ap m (in S. 1) – Ap m Napt (in S. 2) / Ap (in the plur.) 32. Haoma 33. Dahm friti / Dmiš Upamana v

The thirty-three paragraphs invoke all the main entities and many of the secondary entities venerated in the Avesta. The concluding formulae of S. 1 and S. 2, moreover, invoke all the spiritual and material yazatas34 and various categories of frauuas. is, spiritual entities connected to the cult of the dead.35 It can be assumed that the Sh-rzag was composed with the purpose of providing protection to the soul of the deceased. In fact, invoking all these entities provides the maximum possible protection to the soul of the deceased. The repetition of the invocation to Ahura Mazd and to the group of the Ams. a Spn.tas reflects the pre-eminence of these entities in the Zoroastrian pantheon. The repeated mention of some other entities in more than one passage of the text, on the other hand, should not be interpreted as a reflection of their particular religious importance. Furthermore, neither the exclusion of some entities in S. 2, nor the secondary placement, in some paragraphs, of the invocation to the dedicatory entity, are due to religious reasons. These features are due, rather, to the fact that the formulae containing these invocations appear to have been transposed to the Sh-rzag from other texts.36 It bears noting here that almost all the entities mentioned in the paragraphs have elements connecting them to the dedicatory entity. Furthermore, in the length of

34 It should be recalled that yazata- is properly the masculine/neuter gerundive of yaz (“to worship; sacrifice”: for further details on this verbal root, see below). It is used moreover as an appellative of some divine entities (for references, see Kellens 1976: 122) or with the generic nominal meaning of “divine entity.” The latter is the value it has in the concluding formulae of the Sh-rzag (and it is also the meaning of its Pahlavi translation, yazd). 35 For some references on this aspect of the frauuas. is, see Boyce 2001a; see also IV § 19. It should be noted as well that the concluding formula of S. 2 includes Y. 26.1–10, of which the recitation is central to the St m, a ritual performed in honour of the dead (regarding which, see Kotwal–Choksy 2004, with further bibliographic references, to which add Stausberg 2002–4, 3: 373–75). 36 See I.2.1.1 for further details.

12

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

paragraph 9 (the longest in both the Little and the Great Sh-rzag) there is a resonance of the ritual importance of fire in Zoroastrianism. Morphologically, the two versions of the text differ inasmuch as S. 1 is mainly constituted of nominal and adjectival forms in the genitive, while in S. 2 the majority of the nominal, adjectival and pronominal forms are in the accusative, governed by yazamaide.37 S. 1 is governed by nominal forms or formulae that are external to the text: the Sh-rzag was in fact originally complementary to other ritual texts (even if, from a certain time onwards, it was used also as a prayer to be recited independently, as is demonstrated by its inclusion in the Xwurdag Abestg38). Among the texts that have come down to us, the Sh-rzag is intended to be recited in the variable passages of the frnagn, as well as in those of the Yasna and the Drn Yašt, mainly in funeral rituals.39 In the variable passages of these texts, S. 1 is governed by three types of nominal forms or formulae. In a passage of the frnagn, in one of the Yasna and in one of the Drn Yašt, it is governed by the formula yasnmca vahmmca aojasca zauuarca frnmi (“I bless the sacrifice, the praise, the power, and the strength [of]”), which precedes it.40 In two passages of the Yasna and in one of the frnagn, S. 1 is governed by xšnao ra (the instrumental singular of xšnao ra- “satisfaction”), which follows it and is part of the formula xšnao ra yasnica vahmica xšnao rica frasastaiiaca (“through the satisfaction [of] . . . for sacrifice, praise, satisfaction and glory”).41 At one 37 It should be remembered that the alternation between invocative formulae in the genitive (or dative) and in the accusative governed by yazamaide or other verbal forms, occurs in other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, in specific, the Ghs (see Hintze 2007, especially p. 43) and the Niyyišns 1–4, as well as in parts of the Yasna and the Visperad (see Kellens 1996a: 68–102, which makes a detailed analysis of the invocations in Chapters 1 and 2 of the Yasna and the Visperad, for which, see also Kellens 2006: 9–46). 38 Note that the Sh-rzag is still used today as an independent prayer. 39 It should be noted that a reference to the recitation of the Sh-rzag in the Drn Yašt carried out in honour of the dead (specifically in the days of the Frawardgn) may possibly be recognized in the passage of N. 29.26 quoted in I.1.1. Regarding the recitation of the Sh-rzag within the Yasna, the Drn Yašt and the frnagn in the funeral rituals in modern times, see the passages of Rivyats published in Unvala 1922, 1: 152, l. 15–1; 155, l. 16; 1: 159, ll. 8–13 and their translation in Dhabhar 1932: 167–69, 172, as well as Anquetil-Duperron 1771, 2: 31; Modi 1937: 362; Karanja 2010: 54. Among the uses of the Sh-rzag, apart from in funeral rituals, its recitation must be recalled here in the Drn Yašt made during the ceremony of the Nwar, a ritual practice already documented in the Pahlavi text quoted in I.1.1 (and in contemporary times, the Sh-rzag is recited in the same ceremony within the Yasna, the Drn Yašt and the frnagn: see Modi 1937: 195, 348; Karanja 2010: 54, 81). Furthermore, in numerous ritual circumstances, some invocations corresponding to paragraphs, or portions of paragraph, of the Sh-rzag are recited in the variable passages of the above-mentioned texts. 40 See the last paragraph of the frnagns, Y. 72.8 and Dr. Yt. 4.3.8 (here the numbering introduced by Karanja in 2010 is followed for the passages of the Drn Yašt; Karanja’s work includes, on pp. 126–247, an edition and translation of the text and its different variable formulae, as well as notes on the procedures for its recitation, on its manuscript tradition and on earlier studies dedicated to it). 41 See Y. 0.8–12 and Y. 24.28–32, and the introduction of the frnagns. It should be noted that the instruction to recite this formula at the end of S. 1 occurs in some manuscripts of the Sh-rzag (see the description of D2, R22 and R115 in II.2.1.1.1).

General notes on the Sh-rzag

13

point in the Drn Yašt, it is governed only by the formula yasnica vahmica xšnao rica frasastaiiaca (“for the sacrifice, the praise, the satisfaction, and the glory [of]”).42 Finally, in two passages of the Yasna and in two of the Drn Yašt, S. 1 is preceded and governed by xšn maine (dative of xšn man- “satisfaction; favour”43), which means “for the satisfaction (of).”44 The fact that S. 1 is governed in various passages by nominal forms meaning “for – through the satisfaction (of)” suggests that the main function of this text is to give satisfaction to the entities praised therein. The phrase aoxt.nman yazatahe (“of the yazata whose name is pronounced”), which concludes the text of S. 1 in the occurrences in which it is governed by xšn maine, indicates the way in which this purpose is implemented: the entities mentioned in the text receive satisfaction from the very pronouncing of their names.45 S. 2 instead, is an independent text. It is recited once during the Yasna and once during the Drn Yašt.46 Yazamaide, which governs the S. 2 formulae, is the first person plural middle indicative of yaz, which has the meaning of “to worship” or “to sacrifice.”47 When it has this latter meaning, it can designate an animal sacrifice for immolation, its metaphorical transposition being represented by the sacrificial offering of animal products, or its transfiguration on a metaphysical plane.48 In S. 2, yazamaide must be interpreted as “we sacrifice (to)”: this meaning expresses a ritual dimension that is different from and complementary to that of S. 1 (a dimension that, on the contrary, would not be expressed by interpreting this verbal form as “we worship”). Being in the first person plural, yazamaide expresses not only the will of the speaker, but more generally that of the group of persons taking part or ordering the ritual to be carried out.49 Furthermore, the middle voice of 42 See Dr. Yt. 2.16. 43 Regarding this word, see Kellens, in 1996a: 50–51, with bibliographical references (the Belgian scholar, however, translates xšn maine as “pour obtenir la faveur”: see, for example, the translation of Y. 3.1 in Kellens 1996a: 52–53). 44 Xšn maine governs the text of S. 1 in Y. 22.23–27 and 66.17–19, and in Dr. Yt. 1.1.10 and 4.1.10. It should be noted that xšn maine was perceived as related in a particularly close way to S. 1, at least in the period in which the text was translated into Pahlavi: this is highlighted by the presence of pad šnyndrh , the translation of xšn maine, at the introduction of the Pahlavi version of S. 1 (see also IV § 1, commentary to S. 1.1 a–b / 2.1 a–b). 45 It should be remembered in this respect that the pronunciation of the name of a divine entity has a sacred significance in Zoroastrianism: see Panaino 2002c, especially pp. 20–21, with bibliographical references. 46 It is recited between Y. 25.4 and 26.10, and in Dr. Yt. 3.2.10. 47 Regarding yaz, see Narten 1985b; on this verb root and on yazamaide in particular, see Hintze 2007: 156–62, with bibliographical references (note though that according to Hintze yaz should always be translated as “to venerate”). 48 This transposition is noticeable above all in the passages in which yaz indicates the sacrifice made by the individual in honour of his spiritual parts called uruuan and frauuas.i: see also Panaino 2004a and 2004c, which deal with sacrifice in Zoroastrianism and give parallels between Avestan and Old Indian texts, with bibliographical references. 49 See also Hintze 2007: 159–60, which recalls that yazamaide may be coordinated with a form of first person singular and notes that this coordination “suggests that although an individual may speak, the form yazamaide is an inclusive plural.”

14

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

this verbal form has an indirect reflexive function, whose meaning is defined in this way by Kellens (1984: 63): “Le sujet applique à sa propre personne le procès que définissent le verbe et son objet direct, entend faire de ce dernier sa propriété ou [. . .] s’attend à retirer de son action un avantage personnel.” As suggested by Narten (1986: 168), finally, the indicative mood of yazamaide expresses “die aktuelle Gegenwart des liturgischen Geschehens, des Vortrags der Verehrungsgebete unter der Anteilnahme der Versammelten.” The two versions of the Sh-rzag therefore express two distinct ritual dimensions of Zoroastrianism: the abstract praise of the name of the divine and spiritual entities and the sacrifice carried out (actually or figuratively) in their honour.

2

For a chronology of the text

2.1 Introductory note The Sh-rzag poses the dating difficulties common to all Avestan texts. Below, some of its elements are analyzed, so that some hypotheses can be made as to when it was crystallized. 2.1.1 Correspondences between Sh-r zag and other Avestan texts The vast majority of the invocations constituting the Sh-rzag occur also in other Young Avestan texts.1 The text with which the Sh-rzag has the largest number of correspondences is the Yasna. Corresponding to parts of this text are paragraphs 1, 8/15/23, 11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 24, 29, 31, 33, the invocations of the five ghs and the concluding formulae of both S. 1 and S. 2, paragraphs 10, 12 and 21 of S. 1, paragraph 32 of S. 2 and numerous paragraph portions.2 In all likelihood, the parts of the Sh-rzag with correspondences to the Yasna were drawn from it (or from a proto-version of it; see also I.2.2). 1 For references, turn to the Appendix. 2 The correspondence should be noted in particular between some portions of S. 2 found also in the Yasna, and the introductory formulae of the Kardes of some Yašts. In particular, the invocation to Mira of S. 2 gh 1 recurs in Yt. 10; the one to the frauuas. is of S. 2 gh 4 and S. 2.19 recurs in Yt. 13; the invocation to Sraoša of S. 2 gh 5 and S. 2.17 recurs in Yt. 11; the one to the Kayanid xvarnah of S. 2.9, 2.25 and 2.28 and that to the axvarta xvarnah of S. 2.25 and 2.28 recur in Yt. 19; the invocation to Tištriia of S. 2.13 recurs in Yt. 8; the one to Vrrana of S. 2.20 recurs in Yt. 14, and the one to Cist of S. 2.24 recurs in Yt. 16. Furthermore, the invocation to Druusp in S. 2.14, which has no correspondence in the Yasna, recurs in Yt. 9. It must be added here that according to Kellens, the text of some of the paragraphs of the Sh-rzag having correspondence in the Yasna would have originated in the Yašts. Specifically, the formulae which constitute the text of § 16 of S. 1 and S. 2 would be a combination of elements given in three passages of Yt. 10, which is dedicated to Mira (see Kellens 1996a: 69). Furthermore, the formula corresponding to S. 1.19 would have been inspired by a passage of Yt. 13, which is dedicated to the frauuas. is (see Kellens 1996a: 93) and the one found in S. 2.31 would form part of the basic formula of a Yašt to Apm Napt, which has not come down to us (see Kellens 1996a: 70; 1998: 511). To conclude, S. 2.32 would include the formula of a Yašt to Haoma, which has not come down to us (to be distinguished from the part of the Yasna that is traditionally called Hm Yašt, i.e. Y. 9–11: see Kellens 1998: 511). See also below as regards the correspondence between the Sh-rzag and the introductory and concluding formulae of the Yašts.

16

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

Texts which have not come down to us may have included additional correspondences. On the other hand, in all likelihood, various parts of the Sh-rzag were not drawn from any other text. Furthermore, the Sh-rzag is possibly the source of passages of other Avestan texts, such as, for example, texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. Some correspondences seem to have a particular significance. Worthy of note, first of all, is the case of the correspondence between the long paragraph 9 of S. 1 and two passages of the fifth Niyyišn (dedicated to tar),3 i.e. Ny. 5.5–6 and Ny. 5.17. The text of Ny. 5.5–6 is governed by the formula xšnao ra yasnica vahmica xšnao rica frasastaiiaca, which is placed after it, while the text of Ny. 5.17 is governed by the formula yasnmca vahmmca aojasca zauuarca frnmi, which is placed before it. The text of S. 1.9 / Ny. 5.5–6, 5.17 does not occur elsewhere in its entirety, but it is possible that it was drawn from an Avestan text that has not come down to us. If, on the other hand, it is the original of one of the two texts, it is much more probable that it was transposed from the Sh-rzag into Ny. 5 rather than the reverse. Differently from Ny. 5 in fact, the Sh-rzag contains, in S. 2.9, the exact version in the accusative of S. 1.9.4 Also worthy of note is the case of the introductory and concluding formulae of the 21 Yašts, which include invocations corresponding to portions of S. 1. Some of these invocations do not occur in other texts.5 In each Yašt, these invocations are governed in the introductory formula by xšnao ra yasnica vahmica xšnao rica frasastaiiaca, and in the concluding formula by yasnmca vahmmca aojasca zauuarca frnmi. The presence of these invocations reflects the relationship between the series of the Yašts and the Sh-rzag.6 It is very likely that they were 3 It should be recalled that, like the other Niyyišns, this text appears to be for the most part a compilation of passages from other Avestan texts. For details on its correspondences with other Avestan passages, see the notes to the edition by Geldner (1886–96, 2: 50–51) and Panaino 2012. For other references on this text, see Boyce–Kotwal 1989a. 4 Note that the same hypothesis on the relationship between the Sh-rzag and Ny. 5 passages in question has been made also by Panaino in 2012. 5 Of particular note, above all, is the case of Yt. 2, whose long introductory formula includes the text of §§ 1–7 and the invocations of the ghs of both S. 1 and S. 2 (regarding this Yašt, see Pirart 2002, which, however, deals almost exclusively with the actual text of the hymn, i.e. stanzas 11–14). It should also be observed that in several manuscripts, the introductory formulae of Yašts 3 and 4 are followed respectively by §§ 3 and 6 of S. 2 (see Geldner 1886–96, 2: 73, n. 1 to § 1, 78, n. 5 to § 0). The correspondences between S. 1 and the introductory and concluding formulae of the Yašts have been listed in the Appendix, with the exception of the correspondences between S. 1 and the concluding formulae of Yašts 2, 3, 5, 12, and 19, inasmuch as these are found in abbreviated form in Geldner 1886–96 (see pp. 72, 77, 102, 167, 258 of vol. 2). The introductory and concluding formulae of Yt. 13 have also not been mentioned in the Appendix, since their invocation to the frauuašis is introduced by ašaonm instead of by ašunm (see Geldner 1886–96, 2: 205). Note that the concluding formula of Yt. 1 is not found at the actual end of the hymn (stanza 33), but in stanzas 22–23 (see Geldner 1886–96, 2: 65, 68). For further information on the introductory and concluding formulae of the Yašts, see Lommel 1927: 8–12, and now also Panaino 2012, with additional references. 6 It should be recalled that the series of Zoroastrian day-names and that of the 21 Yašts have a partial correspondence. The question of the relationship between these two series has been discussed by a number of scholars: see especially Darmesteter 1892–93, 2: xxv–xxviii; Lommel 1927: 4–6; Wikander 1946: 229–33; Hartman 1955 and 1956; Duchesne-Guillemin 1962: 123–25; Belardi 1977: 153–61; Panaino 1992a: 174–76, and finally Kellens 1998: 504–11.

For a chronology

17

transposed into the Avestan hymns from the Sh-rzag. The opening and closing formulae of the Yašts, in fact, are portions of text that to some extent are secondary (as is also indicated by the variability with which they are written in the manuscripts).

2.2 Forms with anomalous endings in the Sh-rzag The Sh-rzag contains various forms with endings that are different from the expected. Of particular interest are some nominal phrases where the dative functions as a genitive. These nominal phrases also occur in the Yasna and the Visperad, but in these texts the dative ending is the one required. It can be inferred that these phrases were transposed into the Sh-rzag from the Yasna and the Visperad, or from a proto-version of these texts, and document a linguistic stage later than their crystallization. Several forms with an anomalous ending, however, do not occur elsewhere (or occur only in the opening and closing formulae of the Yašts) and may thus have originated in the Sh-rzag. To define correctly the documentary value of the forms with an ending that deviates from the norm, it must be pointed out, however, that some of them at least were certainly produced after the crystallization of the Sh-rzag (some, for example, could have been produced during the transmission of the text because of its frequent ritual use7). Below, the forms with anomalous endings are listed according to their type. These forms are marked in bold. They will be analyzed following the order of the paragraphs in which they occur.

Table I.2 Anomalous case endings a. Nominative instead of genitive S. 1.9 d / S. 1.25 h S. 1.13 g S. 1.27 b

airiianm xvarn mazdatanm auue str yi haptirin.ga mazdata xvarnahun.ta bašaziia vahištahe ahuš aš.aonm raocah vsp.xvr

b. Nominative / accusative instead of genitive S. 1.21 c

atat t vaii yat t asti spn.t.maiiaom ˜ ˜

c. Nominative instead of vocative S. 1.9 p

tarš spn.ta ra aštra

S. 2.9 p

tarš spn.ta ra aštra yazamaide

7 See also the observation by Hoffmann in 1970: 193: “Die Srza-Litaneien sind als Gebrauchstexte ziemlich schlecht überliefert.” See also the analysis of the forms of Yašts 1 and 15 with an ending different from the expected in Panaino 2002c, especially pp. 89–103.

18

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

Table I.2 Continued d. Dative instead of genitive S. 1.2 a S. 1.4 c S. 1.6 c S. 1.7 b–c S. 1.14 a–b S. 1.33 b

vahauue mana he marždiki rii.dri auue saraibii aš.ahe ratubii fšaonibiia v  biia aspanibiia yaonibiia guš tašne guš urune u ri dmiš upamani

e. Accusative instead of genitive S. 2.12 b–c S. 1.28 b S. 1.29 g–h S. 2.29 f–h S. 1.30 d

gaom auu.dtahe urun frauuaš.m yazamaide gaom pouru.sareahe urun frauuaš.m yazamaide im as im šir uši.darrm danaii mzdaiiasniš vam m rahe spn.tahe zrazditm m rm spn.tm yazamaide uši.dar rm dan m mzdaiiesnm yazamaide vam m rm spn.tm yazamaide cinuuat.prtm mazdat m ˜

f. Accusative instead of nominative S. 2.1 b/8 b/15 b/23 b S. 2.6 c S. 2.7 c S. 2.9 t S. 2 gh 4 a / S. 2 19 a S. 2.13 c–e S. 2.28 d S. 2.Cf c

amš. spn.t huxšar huh yazamaide sara aš.auuana aš.ahe ratauu yazamaide aspanca yuun yazamaide vspe tar yazamaide aš.unm vavhš s r spn.t frauuaš.aii yazamaide vspe str afšcira yazamaide vspe str zmascira yazamaide vspe str uruuar.cira yazamaide vsp garaii aš.a.xv r pouru.xv r mazdata aš.auuana aš.ahe ratauu yazamaide aš.unm vavhš s r spn.t frauuaš.aii staomi . . .

g. Instrumental instead of accusative S. 1.2 b S. 2.2 b S. 1.21 b S. 2.21 c

xštiš hm.vain.tii tarat an iiiš dmn xštm hm.vain.tm yazamaide taratm an iiiš dmn vaiiaoš upar.kairiiehe tarat an iiiš dmn vam upar.kairm yazamaide taratm an iiiš dmn

h. Vocative instead of genitive S. 1.9 a/f/l/o/s

 r ahurahe mazd pura

For a chronology

19

Table I.3 Anomalous number endings a. Singular instead of plural S. 1.Cf e

aoxt.nman yazatahe

b. Dual instead of plural / singular S. 1.7 c

aspanibiia yaonibiia

c. Plural instead of singular S. 1.9 d / S. 1 25 h airiianm xvarn mazdatan m S. 2.12 b–c gaom auu.dtahe urun frauuaš.m yazamaide gaom pouru.sareahe urun frauuaš.m yazamaide Table I.4 Anomalous gender endings a. Masculine / neuter instead of feminine S. 2.12 b–c S. 1.26 a S. 2.26 a

gaom auu.dtahe urun frauuaš.m yazamaide gaom pouru.sareahe urun frauuaš.m yazamaide arštt fradt.gaahe ˜ .gam yazamaide aršttm fradt ˜

b. Feminine instead of masculine S. 2.28 d

vsp garaii aš.a.xvr pouru.xvr mazdata aš.auuana aš.ahe ratauu yazamaide

S. 2.1 b/8 b/15 b/23 b. The phrase ams.  spn.t huxša r contains the nominative plural of ams. a-, spn.ta- and huxša ra- (“of good power”). It functions as an accusative, inasmuch as it is the object of yazamaide. It should be noted that the use of the nominative instead of the accusative can be seen for all the masculine a- stems in the plural in S. 2 (they are all the object of yazamaide). It should be remembered that the nominative functions as an accusative, especially in the plural, in many Young Avestan passages.8 As noted by Skjærvø in 2009: 107, the substitution of accusative endings by those in the nominative must surely have been produced during the oral transmission of the texts. Ams.  spn.t huxša r has an accusative plural function, in addition to these sections of paragraphs and their parallels, also in its other occurrence, in Y. 2.2 (where it is the object of iiese yešti “I introduce sacrificially”). Finally, it should be noted that the accusatives plural of ams. a- (ams. ), spn.ta- (spn.t) and huxša ra- (huxša r) occurs in sequence in Y. 70.1 (where they are followed, like in the phrase analyzed here, by huh). S. 1.2 a. Vahauue mana´he, a phrase containing the dative singular of vohuand manah-, is part of the group of nominal forms of S. 1 which, while governed by xšn maine, xšnao ra or by the formulae yasnmca . . . frnmi and yasnica . . ., are not in the genitive. Among these, the group of forms in the dative is the most 8 For some references, see Hoffmann 1970: 190, 195. See also Bartholomae in Geiger–Kuhn 1895– 1901, 1: 213, 233.

20

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

numerous. In addition to the introductory formula and the concluding formula of Yt. 2, vahauue mana´he occurs, as can be seen in the Appendix, in Y. 1.2 and the passage identical to it, Vr. 11.16. In these two passages, it is included in a series of invocations in the dative, which is the case required by the context.9 The genitives of vohu- and manah-, vahuš and manah, are attested in sequence in numerous Gic10 and Young Avestan passages.11 Furthermore, S. 1 contains various stems in u- in the genitive singular (for example, ahuš from ahu- “life, existence,” found in S. 1.27, and rašnaoš from rašnu-, found in S. 1 gh 5, and in S. 1.18), as well as the genitive singular of various stems in h- (for example, xvarnah from xvarnah- “glory,” found in S. 1.9, 1.25, and 1.28). Probably, when the text of S. 1.2 was put together, the difference between vahauue mana´he and a phrase in the genitive singular was not any longer perceived.12 S. 1.2 b; 1.21 b; 2.2 b; 2.21 c. In tarat / taratm aiiiš dmn, the instrumental plural ending of aiia- (“other”) is anomalous. Aiiiš, in fact, is governed by tarat and taratm, respectively the genitive and accusative singular of tarat- (“who defeats”), which requires the accusative (and dman- “creature,” a neuter noun, is here indeed in the accusative plural). Of these two phrases, only taratm aiiiš dmn occurs outside these sections of paragraphs and their parallels. This phrase is found in Yt. 12.1 and 12.2 and in the introductory formulae of the Kardes of Yt.19 (stanzas 9, 14, 25, 27, 30, 45, 55, 65, 70, 73, 78, 83, 88, and 91). The Sh-rzag, in S. 2.30 contains the accusative plural of a neuter a- stem, anara (from anara- “endless”). It should be added that the accusative plural neuter of aiia-, i.e. aiia, is seldom attested.13 It is important to remember that the use of the instrumental plural where the nominative or accusative plural is required, is found in other Young Avestan texts. Possibly, as explained by Oettinger (1986), this feature is an analogic extension of the Old Avestan usage, where sentences with no verb contain, by attraction, the instrumental plural form of the relative pronoun yiš, instead of the nominative / accusative neuter plural y. It must then be observed that aiiiš dmn (which is also found in Ny. 1.1) also presents an anomalous coordination of adjectival and nominal form. Another abnormal occurrence of coordination between dmn and an epithet in the instrumental plural must be mentioned, the phrase dmn sraštiš, found in Yt. 10.143.14 9 These invocations are governed by the verb phrase niuuaaiiemi han.kraiiemi (see Kellens 2006: 11; see also Kellens 1996a: 38–40), for which the translation of Kellens in 1996a: 45–46 and 2006: 12–13, “j’annonce et j’organise (le sacrifice d’Ahura Mazd) à l’intention de” seems appropriate. 10 See Y. 28.8, 30.1, 30.10, 32.9, 33.5, 34.10, 34.13, 46.16, 48.6, 48.7, 50.8, 51.3, 51.11, and 53.5. 11 See Y. 10.12, 64.4, 68.3, and 70.2; Yt. 2.13; Any. 2; P. 19. 12 The dative functions as a genitive in other Young Avestan passages (but see Kellens 1996a: 63–65, where it is proposed that the dative forms occurring in Y. 1–7 and parallel passages, which are generally interpreted as having a genitive function, should be interpreted as the forms required by the context; see also the translations of these chapters of the Yasna in Kellens 1996a and 2006). It should be noted that the use of dative forms where the genitive is expected recalls the merger between genitive and dative, which is seen in Old Persian, and in some Middle Iranian languages. 13 This occurs twice in V. 3.21 and twice in V. 5.26, and in N. 91.3. 14 For other examples of uses of the instrumental deviating from the norm and their coordination with forms in the accusative, see the references in Oettinger 1986 and Hintze 1994a: 102.

For a chronology

21

S. 1.4 c. In marždiki rii.driauue, marždika- (“mercy”) and rii.driu(“which protects the poor”) are in the dative singular. This phrase is governed by the nominal forms or the formulae requiring the genitive in S. 1. Marždika- and rii.driu- are never attested in the genitive singular (but the genitive singular of driu- “poor,” i.e. driaoš, is documented15). It should then be noted that marždiki occurs in various passages,16 and a Gic passage attests drigauu.17 It can be assumed that marždiki rii.driauue was put in the text because its forms were relatively easy to trace in the Avesta and were considered equivalents to genitive forms. S. 1.6 c. In saraibii as. ahe ratubii, sara- (which denotes the divinization of the years) and ratu-, while governed by the nominal forms or the formulae governing S. 1, are in the dative plural; ratubii is coordinated with as. ahe, the genitive singular of as. a- (“Order”). In the passages of the Yasna in which it occurs (Y. 1.9, 3.11, 4.14, 7.11, and 22.11), saraibii as. ahe ratubii concludes a series of invocations in the dative, while in Vr. 1.4 it introduces a series of invocations in the genitive (here too, though, its morphological ending may possibly be justified).18 In the Sh-rzag are found various stems in a- in the genitive plural (for example, ams. anm, from ams. a-, found for the first time in S. 1.1), as well as the genitive plural of a u- stem (y m, from ytu- “sorcerer,” found in S. 2.13). Here should be mentioned another formula in which the genitive plural of sara-, saranm, introduces a relative clause which contains as. a- and ratu-, saranmca yi hn.ti as. ahe ratauu (“of the Saras, who are ratus of Order”).19 Perhaps the formula analyzed here was preferred to the latter because it was shorter, and probably, its semantic difference from it was not noticed. S. 2.6 c. Sara and as. auuana, objects of yazamaide, are respectively the nominative plural of sara- and the a- thematization of as. auuan- (“holy”). Sara as. auuana has the function of accusative plural, in addition to the passages parallel to this section of paragraph, also in Y. 2.9 and Vr. 2.6, where it is the object of iiese yešti (and, as here, it is followed by as. ahe ratauu “ratus of Order”). S. 2 contains the accusative plural of a stem in *u 7an-, urun (from uruuan- “soul,” repeated twice in § 12; on this, however, see below, commentary to S. 2.12 b–c).

See Y. 10.13 (where it occurs twice), Y. 57.10, and P. 44. See Yt. 10.5; Ny.2.14; Aog. 49. See Y. 53.9. In these passages of the Yasna and the Visperad, the dative is governed by various verbal forms. For Y. 1.9, see Kellens 1996a: 75, 79–80; 2006: 16–17; for Y. 3.11 (which is identical to Y. 22.11) see Kellens 2006: 52; for Y. 4.14, see Kellens 2006: 64–65; for Y.7. 11, see Kellens 2006: 85–86; for Vr. 1.4, see Kellens 1996a: 96–97; 2006: 26. It should be noted, though, that Kellens interprets sara- as “of the living species” and translates saraibii aš.ahe ratubii as “pour les prototypes des espèces vivantes.” In 1996a: 78, furthermore, the Belgian scholar interprets the invocation of S.  1.6 being analyzed here as governed by the preceding yiriiaii hušitiš (“of the annual Hušiti”). In this way, the anomaly of the dative ending of saraibii and ratubii would be eliminated. This interpretation seems to be one to reject, inasmuch as sara- does not seem to have the meaning suggested by Kellens (see IV § 6, commentary to S. 1.6 c / 2.6 c). 19 This formula is found Y. 1.17, 3.19, 4.22, 7.19, and 22.19. 15 16 17 18

22

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

S. 2.6 c; 2.28 d. Ratauu, governed in these formulae by yazamaide, is the nominative plural of ratu-. Ratauu has an accusative function in several Avestan formulae. Relevant for the present discussion are the sequences as. auuana as. ahe ratauu iiese yešti / yazamaide, recurring in Y. 2.3, 2.8, 6.2, 6.7, 17.2, 17.7, 17.8, 59.2, 59.29, and Vr. 2.2, and as. ahe ratauu iiese yešti / yazamaide, found in Y. 2.9, 2.10, 2.18, 6.8, 6.9, 6.20, 14.3, 17.9, 17.19, 59.29, and 71.4, in Vr. 2.1, 2.2, and 2.8, and twice in G. 4.5. The Sh-rzag does not contain the accusative plural of any u- stem. Finally, it should be noted that the accusative plural of ratu-, i.e. rat š, occurs both in Old Avestan and Young Avestan passages.20 S. 1.7 b–c. The anomaly of the phrases fšaonibiia v biia and aspanibiia yaonibiia lies in their dative endings. They are governed, in fact, by the nominal forms or formulae requiring the genitive in S. 1. In fšaonibiia v biia and aspanibiia yaonibiia the sequences fšaoni- v - (dvandva meaning “small cattle and large cattle”) and aspan- yauuan- (“fruitful field of wheat”) are in the dative dual. The genitive (singular, dual or plural) is not attested for any of these four stems. It should also be noted that in the Sh-rzag no stem is in the genitive dual. For aspanibiia yaonibiia, respectively an adjectival and a nominal form, the dual ending is also not required by the context. Perhaps fšaonibiia v biia was transposed from an Avestan passage that has not come down to us, and the following phrase, aspanibiia yaonibiia, was modelled on it. These two sequences were probably considered morphologically suitable for the context of the invocation. S. 2.7 c. Aspan(ca), object of yazamaide, is the nominative plural of the -a thematization of aspan-. Aspan(ca), which occurs only in this passage and in its parallels in Y. 42.2 and Yt. 2.8, is the only documented form of this stem apart from aspanibiia. S. 2 gh 4 a / 2.19 a / 2.Cf c. Frauuas. aii, the nominative plural of frauuas. i-, is in the invocation of gh 4 and S. 2.19 the object of yazamaide, and in S. 2.Cf, of staomi and the following verbal forms. It should be noted that frauuas. aii also functions as an accusative in numerous other Avestan passages. Among these, of particular interest for the present analysis are some points of the concluding formula of S. 2 which have not been included in the edition of the text: frauuas. aii occurs once in the passage of the concluding formula which corresponds to Y. 26.7, four times in the one which corresponds to Y. 26.8, three times in the one which corresponds to Y. 26.9, and three times in the one which corresponds to Y. 26.10 (in all these passages, it is the object of yazamaide). The accusative plural of frauuas. i-, frauuas. š(ca), occurs in one Old Avestan passage, Y. 37.5, and in three Young Avestan passages, Y. 5.3, 63.3, and Yt. 13.75, in each of which it is the object of yazamaide. To conclude, it should be noted that in the Sh-rzag no i- stem is in the accusative plural. S. 1.9 a/f/l/o/s. Pu ra, the vocative of pu ra- (“son”) is an apposition to  r (genitive singular of tar- “fire”), which is governed by xšn maine, xšnao ra or the formulae which require the genitive in S. 1. In turn, pu ra governs the phrase

20 For references, see Doctor 2004: 276, s.v. rat š (to the references found there add P. 31).

For a chronology

23



in the genitive singular following  r, i.e. ahurahe mazd. As can be seen from the references found in the Appendix, the invocation in S. 1.9  r ahurahe mazd pu ra has parallels in various passages of the Yasna.21 The genitive singular of pu ra-, pu rahe, occurs in various Avestan passages,22 in two of which it is pre ceded by  r ahurahe mazd.23 A possible explanation of the presence of pu ra in this invocation is given by Kellens in 1996a: 47. In dealing with the formula of Y. 22.26  r ahurahe mazd pu ra tauua tarš pu ra ahurahe mazd mat vspaibii trbii (“of fire, son of Ahura Mazd, you, O fire, son of Ahura˜ Mazd, along with all fires”), the Belgian scholar hypothesizes that the first occurrence of pu ra is an anticipation of the second, which is required by the context. According to Kellens, furthermore, the sequence  r ahurahe mazd pu ra was transposed from this formula to Y. 1.12. Following this hypothesis, it can be supposed that this sequence was thereafter transposed to other passages, including S. 1.9.24 S. 1.9 d / 1.25 h. The phrase airiianm xvarn mazdatanm has two anomalous elements. The first is xvarn, nominative / accusative singular of xvarnah-. In its place, one would expect the gen. sg. xvarnah, inasmuch as it is governed by the formulae or the nominal forms governing S. 1. Furthermore, in the phrase, airiianm (genitive plural of airiia- “Aryan”) is apparently qualified by mazdatanm (also a genitive plural, of mazdata- “created by Mazd”). The literal meaning of airiianm xvarn mazdatanm is thus “(of) the glory of the Aryans created by Mazd.” It must be noted, though, that mazdata- does not qualify airiia- in any Avestan passage, whereas it qualifies xvarnah- in several Avestan passages, including some invocations of S. 1.9, 1.25, 1.28, 2.9, 2.25, and 2.28. Of particular relevance is the occurrence of the invocation airiianm xvarn mazdatm (“the Aryan glory, created by Mazd”) in S. 2.9 and 2.25. Therefore, mazdatanm must be considered an epithet of xvarnah-.25 In order to try to explain the presence of anomalous elements in this phrase it must be noted that the phrase that would be expected, airiianm xvarnah mazdatahe, is



Also to be quoted, are A. 4.2 and 4.10, which contain  rasca ahurahe mazd pu ra. For references, see Doctor 2004: 162, s.v. pu rahe. See Y. 0.2 and 0.11. In turn, the invocation of A. 4.2 and 4.10 cited under n. 21 may have been formulated on the model  of  r ahurahe mazd pu ra. 25 The same interpretation of the function of mazdatanm in the phrase under analysis is given by Darmesteter in 1892–93, 2: 299, 302: “la Gloire des Aryas, créée par Mazda” (and see also the translation of Yt. 18.0 and 18.9 on pp. 612 and 614), and by Lommel in 1927: 11 (“dem vom Weisen geschaffenen Glücksglanze der Aryer”). Pirart, in 2006b: 253, nn. 4–6, and 261, n. 85, also interprets mazdatanm as qualifying xvarnah-, but (on p. 253, n. 6) furthermore defines airiianm as “mis ou fautif pour xairiianm, lui-même mis pour le genitive nt. sg.” (on p. 249, Pirart translates airiianm xvarn mazdatanm as “à Aryna Hvarnah que Mazd mit en place”; on p. 252, this phrase is translated as “d’Aryna Hvarnah”). Wolff (in 1910: 299 and 301) instead translates the phrase literally as “der Herrlichkeit der mazdhgeschaffenen Arier” (see, in addition, Wolff’s translation of the introductory and concluding formulae of Yt. 18 on pp. 284–85); the same type of translation is given also by Hartman in 1956: 42 and 52: “le Xvarenah des Aryas, créés par Mazdh.”

21 22 23 24

24

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

not attested (even though xvarnah and the genitive singular of mazdata-, i.e. mazdatahe, recur in numerous Avestan passages, including S. 1.9 and S. 1.25). The sequence airiianm xvarn may have been formulated on the model of phrases occurring in other Avestan passages, such as xvarn airiianm dax´iiunm (“the glory of the Aryan lands”),26 and xvarn yat asti airiianm ˜ dax´iiunm (“the glory that is of the Aryan lands”).27 Furthermore, mazdatacould have been given here a genitive plural ending on the model of airiianm. S. 1.9 p; 2.9 p. tarš, the nominative singular of tar-, is part of two invocations in the vocative. tarš has a vocative function in numerous passages. The vocative singular of tar-, tar, on the contrary, is attested relatively infrequently.28 The Sh-rzag does not contain the vocative singular of any stem in r-. S. 2.9 t. The sequence vspe tar, governed by yazamaide, consists of the nominative plural respectively of vspa- (“all”) and tar-. In S. 2.13 is found the accusative plural of a stem in -ar, i.e. struš (from star- “star”), while the masculine accusative plural of vspa- is not contained in the Sh-rzag. The accusative plural of tar- is not attested.29 As suggested in Hoffmann–Forssman 2004: 172, vspe functioning as an accusative could be a spelling for vsp. S. 2.12 b–c. Gaom is the accusative singular of gauu- (meaning, in this passage, “bovine”). Both its occurrences in this passage are possessive genitives governed by urun frauuas. m, and should therefore be in the genitive. The two adjectival forms qualifying gauu-, auu.dtahe (from auu.dta- “sole-created”) and pouru.sarahe (from pouru.sara- “of many species”) are indeed in the genitive.30 The use of the accusative instead of the genitive of gauu- (guš) is not attested elsewhere. Guš is attested several times in the Sh-rzag (in the very text of S. 1.12, as well as in S. 1.14 and 2.14). Probably, gauu- was attracted into the accusative on the model of the large majority of the other nominal, adjectival, and pronominal forms in S. 2. In this passage, furthermore, auu.dta- and pouru.sara- have a masculine (or neuter) ending, whereas in S. 1.12 they are in their genitive singular feminine forms, auu.dtaii and pouru.saraii. It should be noted that auu. dtahe and pouru.sarahe are attested only in S. 2.12, and that auu.dtaii and pouru.saraii are documented only in S. 1.12 and parallel passages. The bovine praised in S. 1.12 and 2.12, which is the first animal existing on the earth, has both

26 This sequence is found in V. 19.39. 27 This phrase occurs in several passages of the Karde 8 of Yt. 19: see Yt. 19.57, 19.58, 19.60, 19.62, 19.63, and 19.64. 28 This form occurs only in the Old Avestan passages Y. 36.2 and 36.3 and in the Young Avestan passages Y. 58.7 and 65.12, and Yt. 2.13 (in the latter passage it occurs twice; for this passage, see Pirart 2002: 27–28). 29 tar functions as an accusative also in its other attestation, Y. 71.10: here too it is governed by yazamaide (and is also qualified by a form of vspa-, which the manuscripts record in the spellings vspaca, vspaca: see Geldner 1886–96, 1: 234, with n. 10 to § 10). See also Hoffmann–Forssman 2004: 152. 30 A different interpretation of the function of auu.dtahe and pouru.sarahe in this passage is proposed by Hintze in 2005b: 61–62: see below, n. 32.

For a chronology

25

31

male and female attributes, but it seems improbable that these two paragraphs were intended either to emphasize this characteristic or to provide a stylistic variation. In all likelihood, in one of the two paragraphs, these epithets have gender endings that are different from those required. In my opinion, auu.dtahe and pouru.sarahe in S. 2.12 are the anomalous forms. First of all, gauu- is, in the majority of its occurrences, a feminine noun; only in a minority of its occurrences is it a masculine. Furthermore, as shown above and also here below, S. 2.12 is particularly defective, as it contains various forms with endings different from those expected. Finally, urun is the accusative plural of uruuan-; like frauuas. m, it is the object of yazamaide.32 One would expect in its place the accusative singular of uruuan-, uruunm. It is interesting to observe that this form occurs in connection with the gen. sg. guš, and is governed by yazamaide, in another passage of S. 2 (in § 14). It should also be noted that in some Avestan passages is found a sentence giving in sequence uruunm and frauuas. m, i.e. uruunmca frauuas. mca yazamaide.33 The use of urun instead of uruunm is not encountered elsewhere. Perhaps urun was transposed from other passages in which urun yazamaide occurs.34 S. 1.13 g. Auue and str are the nominative plural respectively of auua- (“that”) and star-. In their place, one would expect genitive forms, since they are governed by the nominal forms and the formulae that require the genitive in S. 1. Auue str does not function as a genitive outside this passage and the introductory and concluding formulae of Yt. 8. Auue str and the phrase that follows it in this passage, yi haptirin.ga (“who [are] Haptirin.ga”), occur also in Yt. 12.28, where syntax would require, instead of auue str, forms in the accusative (the same is true of the four occurrences of auue str in stanzas 29–32 of the same hymn). The sequence auue str only, furthermore, is found also in V. 9.41 (where, however, it is required by the context). The genitive plural of star-, strm, is found in the text of S. 1.13 itself. Perhaps auue str was transposed from its other occurrences.

31 See IV § 12. The observations by Hintze in 2005b: 61, who attributes to the first bovine a feminine gender, are therefore inexact. 32 It should be noted, though, that some scholars interpret this occurrence of urun as the identical form of genitive singular of uruuan-: see Darmesteter 1892–93, 2: 327 (“Nous sacrifions à la Fravashi de l’Âme . . .”); Wolff 1910: 303 (“die Fravašay der Seele . . . verheren wir”); Hartman 1956: 45 (“nous sacrifions à la Fravaši de l’âme . . .”). Hintze does the same in 2005b: 61–62, where, however, she translates the line gaom auu.dtahe urun frauuas.m yazamaide gaom pouru.sareahe urun frauuas. m yazamaide as “we worship the animal (and) the choice of the sole-created soul; we worship the animal (and) the choice of the soul of many species,” a translation which complicates its interpretation (but on p. 61 of the same article, Hintze notes “the entire line may be corrupted for ‘we worship the soul and choice of the sole-created animal/of the animal of many species’”). 33 This sentence is found in Y. 26.4 and 26.6 (which correspond to part of the concluding formula of S. 2), and 55.1; Yt. 13.149 (where it occurs twice), and 13.155. Guš uruunm (. . .) yazamaide is found, apart from in S. 2.14 and corresponding passages, also in G. 4.6; in addition, in Y. 59.28, 71.18 and Ny. 1.9 is found uruunm yazamaide. 34 See Y. 39.2 (where yazamaide is recorded in its Old Avestan spelling yazamaid); Yt. 13.74 and 13.154.

26

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

S. 2.13 c–e. Vspe str afšci ra, vspe str zmasci ra and vspe str uruuar. ci ra, objects of yazamaide, contain the nominative plural of vspa-, star-, and the epithets afšci ra- (“of the seed of the water”), zmasci ra- (“of the seed of the earth”) and uruuar.ci ra- (“of the seed of the plants”). The sequences vspa- starafšci ra- / zmasci ra- / uruuar.ci ra- are not attested in the accusative plural. S. 1.14 a–b. The phrase guš tašne guš urune contains the dative singular of tašan- and uruuan-, which govern guš. In Y. 1.2, guš tašne guš urune forms part of a series of invocations in the dative, and therefore its morphological ending is justified (see above the discussion on S. 1.2 a). In the other passage where this sequence occurs, Y. 70.2, it follows the names of the Ams. a spn.tas, which are in the genitive, but the value of possessive dative may be attributed to it. The Sh-rzag, in 1.27, contains the genitive singular of a stem in an-, i.e. ašn (from asan- “sky”). It should also be noted that in Vr. 9.5 is found gušca tašn gušca urun, where tašan- and uruuan- are in the genitive singular. Probably, the phrase guš tašne guš urune was considered equivalent to gušca tašn gušca urun, and for this reason it was put in S. 1.14. S. 1.21 c. Atat is the nominative/accusative singular neuter of ata- (“this”). It ˜ introduces an invocation directed to Vaiiu. Atat is governed by the nominal forms ˜ would expect atahe (which freand formulae governing S. 1, so in its place one 35 quently occurs in the Avesta ). This form would also be required in the passages parallel to this invocation (i.e. the introductory and concluding formulae of Yt. 15 and three variable passages of the Yasna). No other occurrences are encountered in which atat is used instead of the genitive singular. It should be added that the ˜ not contain the genitive singular of any pronominal form. The Sh-rzag does presence in this invocation of atat is probably due to a mechanical transposition from the corresponding invocation˜ in the accusative, found in S. 2.21 and parallel passages, in which this form is the object of yazamaide. This transposition may have been made easier by the fact that the formula introduced by atat was per˜ ceived as separate from what preceded and followed it in the text. S. 1.26 a; 2.26 a. Frdat.ga ahe and frdat.ga m, respectively the mascu˜ line/neuter genitive and accusative singular of˜ frdat.ga a- (“who furthers the ˜ is not qualified by masworld”), qualify the female theonym arštt-. This stem culine or neuter epithets elsewhere. Furthermore, the use of masculine or neuter forms, instead of feminine ones, for frdat.ga a- is not documented elsewhere. ˜ could be modified abbreviations of The formulae recorded in S. 1.26 and 2.26 those found in S. 1 gh 5, 1.18, 2 gh 5, and 2.18 and parallel passages (aršttasca frdat.gaa aii vardat.ga aii / aršttmca frdat.ga m vardat.ga m) ˜ ˜ frdat.ga aii˜ vardat. or of those recorded in˜ Yt. 11.16 and 11.21 (arštt   ˜ ˜ ga aii sauu.ga aii) and in Vr. 7.2 (aršttm yazamaide vavhm frdat. ˜ ga m vardat.ga m sauu.ga m). ˜ v S. 1.27 b. Vsp.x  r is the nominative singular of vsp.xv ra- (“of all wellbeing”). It is governed by xšn maine, xšnao ra or the formulae requiring the genitive in S. 1. The genitive singular of vsp.xv ra- is not attested, but in S. 1.26 35 For references, see Doctor 2004: 9–10, s.v. atahe.

For a chronology

27

and S. 1.28 (and thus also in the introductory and concluding formulae of Yt.19) is documented the genitive singular of as. a.xv ra- (“of the well-being of Order”), i.e. as. a.xv rahe. Perhaps the ending - was attributed to vsp.xv ra- on the model of the ending of the nominal form preceding it, raocah.36     S. 1.28 b. The phrase im as im ši r contains the accusative plural neuter of the demonstrative pronoun ima- (“this”) and of the neuter nouns asah- (“place”) and ši ra- (“place of habitation”). It is governed by the nominal forms or formulae that govern the text of S. 1. These forms do not occur in this order outside the formula of S. 2.30, where they are the object of yazamaide. It is important to recall the phrase hm asahmca ši ranmca (“of these places and places of habitation”), which forms part, in some passages of the Yasna, of a series of invocations in the genitive, governed by various verbal forms.37 The sequence analyzed here was clearly transposed from S. 2.28. S. 2.28 d. Garaii, object of yazamaide, is the nominative plural of gairi(“mountain”). This form functions as an accusative, in addition to the passages parallel to this invocation, also in other passages, i.e. in Y. 2.14 and Vr. 2.8 (where the invocation vsp garaii as. a.xv r pouru.xv r mazdata as. auuana as. ahe ratauu iiese yešti “I introduce sacrificially all mountains, [of] the well-being of Order, [of] much well-being, created by Mazd, holy, ratus of Order” is found), in Y. 71.20 (where vspsca garaii as. a.xv r yazamaide occurs), and in Y. 10.3 (where is found staomi garaii “I praise the mountains”). The epithets of garaii, mazdata (from mazdata-) and as. auuana, nominative plurals, function as accusatives. It must be recalled here that as. auuana has the function of an accusative also in S. 2.6 (see above). It should be noted that the accusative plural masculine of mazdata- is not attested. The other epithets of garaii in this invocation, vsp, as. a.xv r and pouru. v x  r, are indeed accusative plurals, but feminine (they are from vsp-, as. a. xv r- and pouru.xv r- respectively). The other occurrences in which garaii is qualified by these epithets or only by vspsca as. a.xv r are cited above. It should be noted that the accusative plural masculine of as. a.xv ra- and of pouru. xv ra- is not documented. Possibly, as hypothesized in Hoffmann–Forssmann 2004: 172, vsp and vspsca are erroneous spellings for vsp and vspsca, the accusative plural masculine form of vspa-. The ending in - could have been assigned here to as. a.xv ra- and pouru.xv ra- after the model of vsp. S. 1.29 g–h: uši.dar rm and vam are respectively the accusative singular of uši.dar ra- (“understanding”) and vaiia- (“knowledge”). Both are governed by the nominal forms or formulae requiring the genitive in S. 1. They are anomalous also in the two passages of the Yasna parallel to S. 1.29 (Y. 0.10 and 22.25, which are part of the variable passages of the Yasna). It should be noted also that 36 This is also the interpretation of Bartholomae in 1904: 1470, s.v. vsp.xv ra-. 37 See Y. 1.16, 3.18, 4.21, 7.18, and 22.18. Also to be remembered is the formula asahmca ši ranmca vahištm fr rsm (“I fashioned forth as the best among the places and places of habitation”), which recurs repeatedly in the first chapter of the Vdvdd (§§ 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19).

28

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

neither the genitive singular of uši.dar ra- nor that of vaiia- is attested. Probably, uši.dar rm and vam were transposed from the invocation in the accusative found in S. 2.29. S. 2.29 f–h: In these portions of the paragraph, m ra-and spn.ta-, as well as dan- (“religion”) and mzdaiiasni- (“mazdean”) are in the accusative singular, although the syntax would require them to be in the genitive. The first occurrence of m rm spn.tm is governed by zrazditi- (“faith”), and the second by vam, while danm mzdaiiesnm is governed by the above-cited uši.dar ra-. M rm spn.tm and danm mzdaiiesnm do not function as a genitive outside this passage and its parallel in Y. 25.6. S. 1.29 itself contains the genitive singular of m ra-, spn.ta-, dan- and mzdaiiasni- (respectively m rahe, spn.tahe, danaii and mzdaiiasniš). Perhaps m ra-, spn.ta-, dan- and mzdaiiasniwere attracted into the accusative case on the model of the other nominal and adjectival forms of S. 2.29. S. 1.30 d: The phrase cinuuat.prt m mazdatm contains the accusative singular of the compound cinuuat˜.prtu- (denoting the bridge that souls cross after ˜ death in order to reach their other-worldly home) and of mazdat-. This phrase is governed by xšn maine, xšnao ra or the formulae governing S. 1. The genitive singular of mazdat-, mazdataii, occurs several times in the Sh-rzag itself (starting from S. 1.3). In the two passages in which cinuuat.prt m mazdatm ˜ occurs, V. 19.29 and 19.36, the accusative ending is required by the context. In the second of these passages, though, this phrase is preceded by a sequence in the genitive, misuunahe gtuuahe xvatahe (also found in S. 1.30), instead of which one would expect a sequence in the accusative, inasmuch as it is the object of nizbaiiemi (“I call down”). Probably, the invocation misuunahe gtuuahe xvatahe cinuuat.prt m mazdatm was transposed into S. 1.30 from the Vdvdd (or ˜ from another text that has not come down to us), at a time when it was no longer known how to give the rare compound cinuuat.prt - a genitive ending.38 ˜ S. 1.33 b: In uri dmiš upamani, ura- (“strong”) and upamana- are in the dative singular, but are governed by the nominal forms and formulae requiring the genitive in S. 1. The genitive of ura- (urahe) and upamana- (upamanahe) would be expected also in the other passages where uri dmiš upamani occurs: in A. 1.1 and 1.13 this phrase is governed respectively by xšnao ra yasnica . . . and by yasnm vahmmca . . ., which require the genitive, while in Y. 8.1 it determines 38 Klingenschmitt (in 1972: 80–82) hypothesizes, on the contrary, that this phrase was transposed from S. 1.30 to V. 19.36. This hypothesis seems doubtful, since the sequence in the acc. misuunm gt m xvatm, which would be required in the Vdvdd passage, is found in the text of S. 2.30 itself. It should also be noted that nizbaiiemi governs words that are anomalously in the genitive in several other passages of V. 19 (see §§ 16, 38 and 39). As regards V. 19.36, the translation of misuunahe gtuuahe xvatahe cinuuat.prt m mazdatm given by Wolff in 1910: 431 should ˜ be recalled, “Ich rufe herab die mazdhgeschaffene invat .Brücke des unvergänglichen Orts der ˜ Gemischten.” Wolff understands misuunahe gtuuahe xvatahe as governed by cinuuat.prt m ˜ mazdatm. This interpretation, however, has to be rejected, inasmuch as the spatial entities mentioned in the invocation, the Misuun Gtu and the Cinuuat .prtu, are not found in the texts to ˜ have a particularly close relationship.

For a chronology

29

39

frasasti (instrumental singular of frasasti- “praise”). Urahe and upamanahe are attested in the formula uraheca taxmahe dmiš upamanahe yazatahe. This occurs in several passages, where it is preceded by dahmaii vahuii fritiš dahmaheca narš as. aon (“of the good Dahm friti, and of the expert righteous man”).40 The phrase in the dative found in this passage was probably transposed into the text, thinking it was equivalent to that in the genitive (and was preferred to the latter, perhaps, since it is shorter and makes no mention of a human entity). S. 1.Cf e: Instead of aoxt.nman (from aoxt.nman- “whose name is pronounced”) and of yazatahe (genitive singular of yazata-), one would expect plural forms, since these two words refer to the group of entities invoked in S. 1. Apart from this passage and its parallel in Y. 22.27, aoxt.nman yazatahe qualifies only singular nominal forms: mi rahe in S. 1.16 and corresponding passages, sraošahe in Y. 3.20 and 7.20, zara uštrahe in Y. 3.21 and 7.21, and  r in Y. 3.21 and 7.21. Aoxt.nman- and yazata- never occur in sequence in the genitive plural, but the genitive plural of yazata-, yazatanm, is attested in the concluding formula of S. 1 itself. It is evident that the phrase aoxt.nman yazatahe was transposed mechanically from other passages in which it occurred.

2.3 Historico-religious and historico-cultural elements 2.3.1 The Sh-r zag in relation to the history of Zoroastrianism Of some interest for the reconstruction of the chronology of the Sh-rzag is the praise, in its ninth paragraph, of the three greatest fires of Zoroastrianism, whose temples were probably founded in the Achaemenid age. It is more important to observe that the text mentions all the principal Avestan divine entities, as well as many other entities, and that almost all paragraphs contain invocations to entities which have some elements in common. When the version of the Sh-rzag we have received was crystallized, then, a large number of Avestan divine beings were still worshipped, and their characteristics were well known. It is impossible to determine until when all the entities praised in the Sh-rzag survived in the cult. Some minor divine entities mentioned in it ( xšti, Rt, the Saras, Guš Tašan, Ama, Uparatt, Hm.variti, Cist, Cisti, rt, Rasstt, and Dmiš Upamana) seem not to have been known to the authors of the Pahlavi translation of the Sh-rzag and of the other Avestan texts. They are furthermore not mentioned in the other Pahlavi texts, nor does there seem to be any trace of their cult in other post-Avestan Zoroastrian sources.41 They probably disappeared from the cult before the Sasanian period, the period in which Middle Persian exegetic and theological literature has its roots. 39 On Y. 8.1, see Kellens 2007: 9–11 (regarding uri and upamani, see especially p. 11, n. 3), but on the interpretation suggested there of dmiš upamana- as part of a text title, see IV § 33. 40 See Y. 1.15, 3.17, 4.20, 7.17, 22.17, and Vr. 1.7. 41 For further details, see the observations on these entities, and the commentaries to their invocations in IV § 2, IV §5, IV § 6, IV § 14, IV § 20, IV § 22, IV § 24, IV § 25, IV § 33.

30

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

2.3.2 The Sh-r zag and the Zoroastrian month The correspondence between the headings of the thirty days of the Zoroastrian month and those of §§ 1–30 of the Sh-rzag encourages us to place the composition of the text in a period following the elaboration of the series of day-names (which is clearly connected to the introduction of the Zoroastrian calendar). A table is given below, providing the Avestan names of the entities to whom the days are dedicated and the Middle Persian day-names:42 Table I.5 The day-names of the Zoroastrian calendar Day

Avestan

Middle Persian

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Ahura Mazd Vohu Manah Aš.a Vahišta Xšara Vairiia Spn.ta rmaiti Hauruuatt Amrtt Dauuh Ahura Mazd tar Ap Huuar Mh Tištriia

Ohrmazd Wahman Ardwahišt Šahrewar Spandarmad Hordd Amurdd Day pad dur43 dur bn Xwar Mh Tr44

42 It should be recalled that the names of the entities designating the days of the month are listed in series in the Avesta, in addition to in the Sh-rzag, also in Y. 16.3–6 (where they are mentioned in similar or identical formulae to those found in S. 2). For some references to Pahlavi texts which give the Middle Persian day-names, see Belardi 1977: 62–63. It should be noted that according to Gershevitch (in Hartner 1985: 774–75), the Middle Iranian names of days derive from Avestan genitive forms governed by the noun aiiar- (“day”). Confirmation of this would be found in some Sogdian day-names deriving from Old Iranian genitive forms. This interpretation may be valid for the Middle Persian day-names gš, frawardn and anagrn, possibly deriving from the genitive forms guš, frauuas.inm and anaranm, but the majority of the other Pahlavi day-names do not seem to support it. 43 The headings of days 8, 15 and 23, constituted of the name Day (the Pahlavi rendering of the appellative of Ahura Mazd dauuh- / daduš-: see IV § 8, commentary to S. 1.8 a–b / 2.8 a–b), followed by pad (“at, on”) and by the name of the following day, have the function of distinguishing these three days from each other. This type of heading is documented for the first time in the Pahlavi texts, but may date back to an earlier period. 44 The Pahlavi name of Tištriia is Tištar, and not Tr. Tr is the Middle Persian form of the name of the divine entity Triya, who is associated with the planet Mercury (see Panaino 1995b: 61–64, 72–73). This entity is never mentioned in the Avesta, but there is considerable proof of his veneration in Western Iran (possibly beginning earlier than the Achaemenid age; see Boyce 1982: 31–33, 204–6). The dedication to him of the thirteenth day of the month and the corresponding paragraph of the Sh-rzag (as well as of the fourth month of the Zoroastrian year), is due to the fact that at a certain point (probably already in the Achaemenid age), Triya / Tr was identified with Tištriia (regarding the relationship between these two divine entities, see Gnoli 1963b; Panaino 1995b: 47–85). Nevertheless, some Pahlavi texts present Tr as an evil entity, an enemy of Tištar, demonstrating that this identification was not accepted by the whole Zoroastrian community, at least up to the 9th–10th centuries (for further references, see Panaino 1995b: 65–66).

For a chronology 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Guš uruuan Dauuh Ahura Mazd Mira Sraoša Rašnu Frauuaši Vrrana Rman Vta Dauuh Ahura Mazd Dan Aš.i Arštt Asman Zam Mra spn.ta Anara Raocah

31

Gš45 Day pad Mihr Mihr Srš Rašn Frawardn Wahrm Rm Wd Day pad Dn Dn Ard Aštd Asmn Zmyd46 Mraspand Anagrn

The series of day-names is structured in four parts, comprising respectively days 1–7, 8–14, 15–22, 23–30, each of which starts with a day dedicated to the supreme god, Ahura Mazd. This subdivision of the days of the month is suggested by Bd. 3.1, which says:47 Ohmazd nm  sh Amahraspand pad n  sh rz dn nihd k nazdist Ohrmazd, pas šaš Amahraspand, bawd haft, ud haštom Day ast Ddr, ud pas šaš Amahraspand, bawd haft, ud haštom Day ast Ddr, ud pas haft Amahraspand, bawd hašt, ud nohom Day ast Ddr, ud pas haft Amahraspand, bawd hašt. Ohrmazd fixed in this way the names of the thirty Amahraspands48 over the thirty days: first Ohrmazd, then six Amahraspands, which makes seven, and 45 Bartholomae (1904: 646, s.v. taš-), basing himself on the fact that the invocation to Guš Uruuan introduces S. 1.14, interprets the day-name gš as deriving from the name of the entity Guš Tašan. According to the German scholar, in the invocation of S. 2.14 and its parallel passage, Y. 16.4, the name of Guš Tašan would have been substituted by that of Guš Uruuan. The fact that the latter entity is mentioned, differently from Guš Tašan, in both the Little and the Great Sh-rzag, encourages us, however, to rule this interpretation out. Gš must therefore be considered a reduced form of Gšurwan (the Pahlavi name of Guš Uruuan). See also Bd. 26.26, where is said: Gš  Gšurwan (“Gš, who is Gšurwan”; see Pakzad 2005: 297). 46 Several interpretations have been offered for the etymology of this form. The most plausible seems to be that expressed by MacKenzie in 1971a: 98, s.v. zmyd, according to which, zmyd could derive from an erroneous reading of the spelling of the sequence zm-yazd, the transposition into Pahlavi spelling of Av. zam- yazata-. For this hypothesis, see also Panaino in 2002b: 92–93, with further references. 47 The passage is edited in accordance with Cereti 2007: 22. See also Narten 1982: 8, n. 31, which contains references to various studies dealing with it (to which Belardi 1977: 91–92 should be added). 48 Note that here amahraspand generically denotes a divine entity in control of a day of the month.

32

Introduction to the Sh-rzag as eighth Day, who is “the Creator”, and then six Amahraspands, which makes seven, and as eighth Day, who is “the Creator”, and then seven Amahraspands, which makes eight, and as ninth Day, who is “the Creator”, and then seven Amahraspands, which makes eight.49

The dedication of the first days of the sections of the month to Ahura Mazd reflects the greater significance of the high god compared to the other divine figures. In the first section, after the day dedicated to Ahura Mazd, there follow six days dedicated to the Ams. a Spn.tas, the most important group of divine entities in the Mazdean pantheon.50 Among the dedications in the second section of the month can be recognized first of all two sub-groups: days 9 and 10 are dedicated to the two principal cult elements of Zoroastrianism, fire (embodied by the entity tar) and water (designated with the plural of ap-); days 11, 12 and 13 are dedicated to three astral entities respecitvely: Huuar (the sun), Mh (the moon) and the stars (represented by Tištriia, the principal stellar body venerated in Zoroastrianism). According to several Avestan passages, these astral bodies are in charge of three levels of the sky, which, however, are listed only in V. 9.4 in the order sun–moon-stars (usually they are listed as: level of the stars, level of the moon, level of the sun).51 Probably the dedications of the names of days 11–13 were not allocated in order to mirror the celestial position of the sun, the moon and the stars, but rather their importance. There do not seem to be elements in common among the entities to whom the days of the two sub-groups of the second section of the month are dedicated, except that they are all inanimate. As suggested by Narten (1986: 251), this could explain the dedication of the last day of the section to Guš Uruuan, who personifies the soul of the cow and is thus a representative of the animate world. Another possible interpretation of the dedications of these days of the month is provided by Pirart in 2006a: 31: all the day-name entities of this section could be classified as ga iia (“material”), that is, as representing visible realities of the world. As concerns the third section, it is plausible to see in the attribution to Mira of day 16 (which in addition to being the second day of the section is also the first of the second half of the month), a reflection of the cult significance of this divine entity in the Zoroastrian pantheon. The dedications of the two following days and day 21 to Sraoša, Rašnu and Rman, who are closely associated to Mira, 49 According to Nyberg (1929–31: 128–34) and Zaehner (1955: 128–34), this passage says that the days dedicated to Day are the last of the first three sections of the month and that the last section of the month is concluded by the day Anagrn. According to both scholars, furthermore, the distribution of the dedications of the days of the month reflects the concept, specific to the Zurvanite sect, that the supreme divine entity manifests himself in four aspects (Nyberg and Zaehner also even question the identification with Ahura Mazd of the entity to whom days 8, 15, and 23 are dedicated). These interpretations, though, seem forced: see the reasoned criticism by Belardi in 1977: 89–112. 50 Regarding the sequence of the names of the Amš.a Spn.tas, see Narten 1982: 11–27. 51 Regarding the levels of the sky in Zoroastrian uranography, see Panaino 1995c.

For a chronology

33

52

seem obvious. The entities to whom the other days of this section are dedicated also have some elements of connection with Mira, as evidenced by being mentioned in the tenth Yašt, that is dedicated to him.53 Mira, Sraoša, the frauuas. is, Vrrana and Vta are also united by their warlike nature.54 Common elements also exist between the entities to whom the days of the last section of the month are dedicated. The three days following that of the Creator Ahura Mazd are dedicated to feminine entities, Den, As. i, and Arštt. Moreover, Den and As. i are presented in an Avestan passage as sisters.55 In addition, Dan and Mra Spn.ta have a similar nature, as they embody respectively religion and the holy word. A close affinity, constituted by the personification of physical spaces, is observed also for the divine figures in charge of days 27 (Asman), 28 (Zam) and 30 (Anara Raocah), who, respectively, represent the sky, the earth, and a level of the sky. Concluding these observations, the absence of days dedicated to two divine entities of great cult significance, Haoma and Anhit, is striking,56 especially given that a day exists that is dedicated to a secondary entity in the Avestan pantheon, Rman.57 Therefore, even if the criterion by which the day-names were distributed can in part be identified, it seems impossible to reconstruct it exactly. In my opinion, the attribution of the names of the days of the month should not, in any case, be correlated to particular doctrinarian views or to specific phases in the history of Zoroastrianism.58 52 Mira, Sraoša, and Rašnu have a particularly close relationship, which has to be attributed to their connection with earthly and ultramundane justice (in particular, in several Pahlavi texts, they are presented as the triad that judges souls in the afterlife; see also IV § 16, IV § 17, and IV § 18). See also the references to the Avestan and Pahlavi passages which mention these three divine entities together in Kreyenbroek 1985: 134–38 and 176–77 (where, however, a somewhat forced interpretation is expressed, according to which the Avestan passages mentioning Mira, Sraoša, and Rašnu together are interpolations secondary to the introduction of the Zoroastrian calendar). 53 In particular, there are numerous mentions of Vrrana in the Yašt. The frauuas. is are named in Yt. 10.6 and 10.100, and Vta is mentioned in Yt. 10.9. 54 In this case, it does not seem possible to share the interpretation of Pirart (in 2006a: 31) according to which the days of this section of the month are dedicated to maiiauua (“spiritual”) divine entities: Vta, in fact, personifies the wind, a material element. 55 See IV § 25. 56 The absence of a day dedicated to Anhit can be explained by the fact that there already existed a day, no. 10, dedicated to water, an element with which this entity is closely connected (see IV § 10). 57 Perhaps this dedication is due to the identification of Rman with Vaiiu, who has considerably greater cult significance than he. Of this identification, though, there is no trace in the Avesta. These two entities are only named together in some passages of the Avesta (i.e. in S. 1–2.21 and corresponding passages, as well as in Y. 72.10). Their identification is evidenced in the Pahlavi version of Ny. 1.1 and in Bd. 26.28, which say that Rm is also called Wy  weh (“good Wy,” the Pahlavi name of Vaiiu, regarding which see IV § 21). 58 Several scholars, on the other hand, have recognized some precise criteria in the headings of the days. First of all, according to Nyberg (1938: 379) the first section of the month is dedicated to Mazdean divinities, the second to the divinized elements, the third to divinities in the Mithraic pantheon and the fourth to entities belonging to several divine groups. Other scholars have paid particular

34

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

It is more pertinent to observe that, as mentioned above, the elaboration of the series of day-names is undoubtedly linked to the introduction of the Zoroastrian calendar. The creation of this calendar has to be ascribed to the Achaemenid period. As suggested by several scholars, a clue to this can be found above all in the geographical dissemination of the day-names and the month-names of the Zoroastrian calendar.59 Several of these, in fact, are attested in sources, which, while mainly later than the Achaemenid period by several centuries, derive from Cappadocia,60 Armenia,61 Georgia,62 Parthia,63 Sogdiana,64 Chorasmia,65 Bactria66 and Sistn.67

59 60 61 62 63 64

65 66 67

attention to the position of the day of the month dedicated to Mira. According to Lewy (1941: 64, n. 2) the first fifteen days are dedicated to entities connected to Ahura Mazd and the second to entities connected to Mira. The series of the day-names of the Zoroastrian month, which would have been established in the Sasanian period, would be the result of a compromise between a religious current that had Ahura Mazd as supreme god and another for which the supreme god was Mira. Hartman, in 1955 and 1956, attempts to demonstrate that the series of the days of the month, of the months of the year and of the Avestan Yašts are structured in such a way as to guarantee a central position to the day, month, and Yašt dedicated to Mira. Belardi, in 1977: 113–39, hypothesizes that the position of the day of Mira in the Zoroastrian month is due to the change from a sidereal month, formed of 27 days, to a month made up of 30 days. The additional days would have been dedicated to Ahura Mazd; in the assumed original series, the day of Mira would have been found in the fourteenth position, that is, exactly in the middle of the series. None of these analyses seem correctly to interpret the data available. The same can also be said of the analyses of the series of day-names by Boyce (in 1982: 243–48) and Kellens (in 1998: 506–7). In particular, the hypothesis by Boyce, i.e. that the headings of the days of the Zoroastrian month reflect a compromise between Zoroastrian “orthodoxy” and Zurvanite orientation, is unacceptable, since it is not drawn from any documentary basis. The dedication of four days to Ahura Mazd would reflect notions specific to this orientation, and would have resulted in the exclusion of Apm Napt, Haoma and Dahm friti from a hypothetical original calendar. These entities would then have continued to have considerable cult significance after the exclusion from the calendar of the days dedicated to them, thanks also to the presence of their invocations in the Sh-rzag. Kellens’ analysis, then, is based on a questionable assumption, inasmuch as it is not supported by sufficient documentary proof, i.e. that the dedications of the days had a correlation with the canonization of an earlier version of the Yasna (called by the Belgian scholar “Proto-Yasna A”). See also the remarks on the Zoroastrian day-names made by Pirart in 2006a: 28–32; some significant points in these remarks are mentioned above. It should be remembered that the month-names of the Zoroastrian calendar also correspond to names of divine entities: for a list, see Panaino 1990a. The names of the Cappadocian months derive from those of the Avestan calendar (see Panaino 1990a). Some of the names of the Armenian months are of Iranian derivation (see Panaino 1990a). Some Georgian month-names are of Iranian derivation (see Gippert 1988). Some Parthian names of months and days are attested, which correspond to the respective Avestan names (see Panaino 1990a, with bibliography, to which should be added Korn 2006). Almost the entirety of the Sogdian day-names derives from the Avestan: a list of these names and bibliographical references relating to the Sogdian calendar can be found in Panaino 1990a (see also Marshak 1991). Almost all the day-names and month-names of the Chorasmian calendar are the continuation of those in the Avestan calendar (see Panaino 1990a). The names of the Bactrian days and months of Avestan derivation are analyzed in Sims-Williams– de Blois 1996, where there can be found also an updated treatment on the Bactrian calendar. Some Sistanic month-names, attested in the Chronology by al-Brn, have a correspondence with the equivalent Avestan month-names (see Panaino 1990a).

For a chronology

35

In all likelihood, the Zoroastrian calendar could have been introduced into regions covering such a vast area only by a central power, to be identified with the Achaemenid Empire (the only one in history which succeeded in controlling them all). An element allowing us to date the introduction of the Zoroastrian calendar more precisely is its structural affinity with the Egyptian calendar, on which it appears to be modelled.68 It is probable that the Zoroastrian calendar was introduced in the period during which Egypt was dominated by the Achaemenids. It can be hypothesized that it was introduced in the 5th century BCE (possibly even before 459 BCE, to which dates the last document proving use by the Achaemenids of a different calendar system, the so-called Old Persian calendar).69 It is important to note, however, that the days of the Zoroastrian month could have received their names even after the introduction of the Zoroastrian calendar itself.70

2.4 Concluding remarks The posteriority of the Sh-rzag with respect to the elaboration of the day-names of the Zoroastrian calendar suggests that the terminus post quem for its composition is the 5th century BCE.71 Even though the Sh-rzag is mostly composed of formulaic material taken from other texts, in all likelihood at least some parts of it are original. It is important to note that in all probability the Sh-rzag, like most other Avestan texts, underwent several redactions before being crystallized.72 68 It should be remembered that like the Zoroastrian calendar, the Egyptian calendar is divided into 12 months of 30 days, which are followed by five epagomenal days. Also to be remembered is that in both the Egyptian lunar calendar and the Zoroastrian calendar, each of the 30 days of the month receives a different designation (for further details, see Hartner 1985: 774, n. 1). Regarding the relationship between the Egyptian calendar system and the Zoroastrian, see also Hartner 1985: 764–72. 69 The introduction of the Zoroastrian calendar is dated from the 5th century BCE also in the important study published by de Blois in 1996 (see especially pp. 46–50), as well as in Panaino 1999a and 2002a (to be referred to also for some critical remarks on the article by de Blois). See Panaino 1999a: 108–11 also for references to the numerous other opinions expressed in the research on the dating of the Zoroastrian calendar (to these reference should be added Cristoforetti 2000, and, again, Panaino 2002a). 70 See, in this respect, also Panaino 2002a: 228–30. As terminus ante quem for the introduction of the day-names can be taken an Aramaic document coming from Bactriana that can be dated between 358 and 329 BCE, in which the day-name dyn is given. The document fragment containing this day-name has been edited and translated in Shaked 2004: 43 (see also pp. 42–48). Before the discovery of this document, the oldest attestation of a name connected to the Zoroastrian calendar was considered to be an Aramaic inscription, of which the terminus ante quem is 261 BCE, where the month-name Spandarmad seems to be recognizable (see Kellens 1998: 512; see also Panaino 2002a: 226). 71 It is important to note that S. 1 and S. 2 were most likely composed at the same time. The presence of atat in S. 1.21, and of uši.dar rm and vam in S. 1.29 (forms having a genitive function, ˜ also in the corresponding paragraphs of S. 2), does not imply that the Little Sh-rzag is and found later than the Great Sh-rzag. As has been noted in I.2.2, in fact, atat, uši.dar rm and vam  ˜ of im   have a genitive function also in other passages. Furthermore, the presence as im ši r in S. 1.28, certainly transposed from the corresponding paragraph of S. 2, is not sufficient evidence that the whole text of S. 1 is later than that of S. 2. 72 See also the observations on the history of the Avestan texts presented by Skjærvø in 2005–6, as well as in 1994 (especially pp. 240–41) and in 2007: 108–9, with the notes on p. 135.

36

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

Although several morphosyntactic anomalies in the text may have been produced in the course of its transmission, some of them certainly date to the time of its crystallization at the latest. It can be assumed, therefore, that the Sh-rzag was crystallized when the Avestan morphosyntax was no longer mastered, i.e. after the 5th century BCE.73 Research into the history of the Avestan texts suggests, on the other hand, that the crystallization of the Sh-rzag is not subsequent to the 4th century.74 A dating of this kind agrees with the historical-religious framework provided by the Sh-rzag, which suggests that it dates to a period in which almost the whole Avestan pantheon was still venerated, including many entities that had probably disappeared from the cult before the Sasanian period.

73 This type of dating is suggested by comparing Avestan with Old Persian (see also Skjærvø 1999: 5–7). 74 See the following recent studies that deal with the chronology of the Avesta: Hoffmann–Forssman 2004: 31–38; Skjærvø 1994 (see especially the summary table on pp. 201–2) and 2003–4 (especially pp. 36–37, 39); Kellens 1998: 495–513; de Vaan 2003: 11–15; Panaino 2007.

3

The Middle Persian version of the text Characteristics and chronology

The Pahlavi version of the Sh-rzag is characterized, like the other Middle Persian translations from the Avestan, by the care given to reproducing the meaning and word order of the original text as faithfully as possible.1 The translations of the majority of the words of the Sh-rzag correspond to those found in the versions of other Avestan texts,2 and the majority of the formulae are translated as their parallels in other Avestan texts.3 This is in line with the tendential uniformity of the rendering of the words and formulae in the Pahlavi

1 Regarding the characteristics of the Pahlavi translations of the Avestan texts, see Josephson 1997 (a text which has provided a considerable boost to the study of the versions of the Avestan texts in Pahlavi; see also its review in Cereti 1996) and Cantera 2004 (a work of fundamental importance, dealing in depth with the principal aspects of research into the Pahlavi version of the Avesta and containing a detailed bibliography, to which should be added Cantera 2006a, Cereti 2008, and Cantera–Andrés Toledo 2008; see also the reviews of Cantera 2004 in Josephson 2005; Mayrhofer 2005; de Vaan 2007; Skjærvø 2008, Zeini 2008; Shayegan 2011). 2 Regarding the types of translations of the Avestan lexemes in Pahlavi, see Cantera 2004: 302– 28. Regarding the Middle Persian translations of the Avestan words, usually accurate references are found in the notes to the dictionary entries by Bartholomae (1904); a very useful dictionary accompanies the critical edition of the Pahlavi Yasna and Visperad in Dhabhar 1949 (and see also the glossary of the Pahlavi version of only the Old Avestan texts in Malandra–Ichaporia 2010: 97–184). See also Jamasp 1907, 2 (glossary to the Pahlavi Vdvdd), and Kapadia 1953 (which, differently from what the title would suggest, is not only a dictionary of the Pahlavi Vdvdd, but is a sort of general Pahlavi dictionary). Specific glossaries to the translations of some texts follow the respective editions. 3 Referring for specific items to section IV, here are given some references to editions and translations of the versions of texts having parallels with the Sh-rzag. In addition to the above-mentioned Dhabhar 1949, see Dhabhar 1927 (which includes a critical edition of the Pahlavi versions of the texts of the Xwurdag Abestg and of the Yašts; see also Dhabhar 1963, the English translation of these versions), Dhalla 1908 and Taraf 1981 (which include a critical edition and a translation of the Pahlavi Niyyišns), Jamasp 1907, 1 (which includes a critical edition of the Pahlavi Vdvdd), Anklesaria–Kapadia 1949 (another edition, with an English translation of the Pahlavi version of the Vdvdd). See furthermore Kreyenbroek 1985: 35–75, which includes the edition and translation of Y.57, Yt.11 and Y.56 (texts dedicated to Sraoša). Unfortunately, the Pahlavi translation of the second Yašt, which would be particularly interesting in view of the correspondence of its introductory and concluding formulae to S. 1–2.7, does not occur in any of the manuscripts consulted for this current work, nor is its existence in other manuscripts recorded elsewhere.

38

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

translation of the Avesta. Some words, however, are rendered in a different way in S. 1 and S. 2, perhaps in order to provide some stylistic variations.4 As is common in the Pahlavi version of the Avesta, glosses accompany the translations of many invocations (several of which glosses are also found in the translations of other texts containing these invocations).5 Among the glosses, particularly interesting are some, included in S. 1, which describe the characteristics of the entities praised in the text. Several of them are elaborated and of a certain length.6 The fact that these glosses are found in S. 1 rather than S. 2 is the consequence of their explanatory nature: it was necessary to place them after the first mention of the entities. Regarding the chronology of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag, it must first be noted that, as with the other texts of the Zand,7 the version which has come down to us was certainly preceded by other versions.8 The approximate chronology of the version of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag that we have received can be reconstructed by comparing it with Chapter 26 of the Bundahišn, which deals with the characteristics of the entities controlling the days of the month.9 Several parts of this chapter have a close affinity with some of the

4 Regarding the different renderings of the same Avestan words, which are encountered at times also within the same text, see also Cantera 2004: 303–14. 5 Regarding the general characteristics of the glosses to the Pahlavi version of the Avesta, see Cantera 2004: 244–68. Here, the Spanish scholar proposes, among other things, a subdivision of the glosses into three types: “Glossen” (those made up of one or two words), “Kommentare” (those of between two and 99 words) and “Excurse” (those of 100 words and over). While the Sh-rzag contains exegeses of all these three types, in this present work I have preferred to use only the word “gloss” in order to avoid confusion. 6 The majority of the longer glosses are included in the first ten paragraphs of S. 1 (which include, in particular, the five longest ones; see also the diagram in Cantera 2004: 259), while those of §§ 26–32 are conspicuous for their brevity. 7 I use this word to indicate the body of the Pahlavi versions commenting on the Avestan texts, originating in the Sasanian period (see also the observations on the word zand and its use in Pahlavi literature in Cantera 2004: 1–13). 8 The discussion of the chronology of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag presented here does not consider what seems to be a re-elaborated summary of the text, which excludes the glosses specific to S. 1, and has some variations in the translations of some words (on which see also II.3.2). The existence of this summarized version testifies to the fact that the work of interpretation of the Sh-rzag continued after the first insertion of its Pahlavi version into the manuscripts. Cantera and Andrés Toledo (2008) have demonstrated the rise of a movement of exegesis of the Avestan texts in Middle Persian among the Parsis as late as the 18th century. This discovery opens a new view of the chronology of the Pahlavi version of the Avesta. The chronology of the translations of the Avestan texts in Middle Persian is dealt with by Cantera also in 2004: see specifically pp. 164–239 and 343–47; see also pp. 35–105 of the same text, which provide references to previous hypotheses on this chronology. 9 Chapter 26 of the Bundahišn, titled Abar wuzurg kardrh  mngn yazdn (“On the higher action of the spiritual yazds”), is found only in the Iranian Bundahišn. It is published in Pakzad 2005: 293–313 (and see also its edition and translation in Anklesaria 1956: 210–33). The chapter can be divided into seven sections, the first dedicated to Ohrmazd and the others starting each with a part dedicated to an Amahraspand, then continuing with treatments on the calendar entities con-

The Middle Persian version of the text 39 glosses on the entities specific to S. 1. Bd. 26 also cites some passages from the Pahlavi Sh-rzag (some of them in a distorted form). It must, though, be ruled out that the version of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag that has come down to us is a direct source of Bd. 26, inasmuch as some treatments on divine entities are formulated in a more detailed way in this chapter than in the translation of S. 1.10 On the other hand, a comparative analysis does not seem to suggest that, conversely, the portions of the Pahlavi glosses of S. 1 that are similar to passages of Bd. 26 depend on the latter. Rather, it is probable that the Pahlavi glosses of S. 1 and Bd. 26 have a common source, which can be identified with a damaged version of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag preceding the one that has reached us. It is probable, in fact, that if, when Bd. 26 was composed, the Pahlavi version of the Sh-rzag which has come down to us had already existed, this would have been used as the source of the chapter.11 Bd. 26 dates, like the majority of the Bundahišn, to around the end of

sidered to be their hamkrs (“collaborators”; on the groups of the Amahraspands and their hamkrs according to tradition, see Modi 1937: 453–55 and Boyce 1996: 267). It should be noted that the affinity between the glosses of S. 1 and Bd. 26 underlies the secondary addition of some passages of this chapter in manuscripts T12 and E, which contain the Pahlavi Sh-rzag (see II.3.2). For more information on Bd. 26 and its relationship with the Pahlavi Sh-rzag, see Raffaelli 2010. 10 See in particular the parts on Sg and Hordd in Bd. 26.34 and 26.106–8, which are more detailed than the parts on the same entities in S. 1.3 and 1.6 (see IV § 3, commentary to S. 1.3 c / 2.3 c, and IV § 6, commentary to S. 1.6 a / 2.6 a). 11 A trace of the origin of the glosses to S. 1 and Bd. 26 from an incomplete text can be recognized in the paucity of content in some of their passages, which were perhaps added by their final redactors, since they were missing from the source they used (see in particular: S. 1.28, whose gloss does not even name Zmyd, to whom the paragraph is dedicated, and the very short passage on this divine entity Bd. 26.123; the passages on Aštd in S. 1.26 and Bd. 26.122; the passages on Asmn in S. 1.27 and Bd. 26.79; the brief gloss on Mraspand in S. 1.29 and the passage on this entity Bd. 26.103; S. 1.30, whose gloss does not deal with the A-sar Ršnh, to which the paragraph is dedicated, and the brief treatment on Anagrn in Bd. 26.80, and finally the passages on Hm in S. 1.32 and Bd. 26.95). It must be noted that when using their source, the authors of the glosses to S. 1 and Bd. 26 certainly attempted to save the majority of the text received, but they did also take a certain liberty in selecting or expanding some of its parts, by using other portions of the Zand (and perhaps also other religious sources). It must be added that some parts of the glosses to S. 1 also resemble other passages of the Bundahišn and other Pahlavi theological texts (these too originating in the Zand or in other religious texts). Furthermore, in the translations of parallel passages of S. 1 and other Avestan texts are found similar or identical glosses, which probably derive from glosses found in the Zand of the Sasanian period. Very noticeable, for example, is the similarity between the Pahlavi gloss to S. 1.12 and that to Ny. 3.1, as well as between the gloss to S. 1.16 and those to various parallel passages (for further details, see IV § 12, commentary to S. 1.12 a / 2.12 a; IV § 16, commentary to S. 1.16 a / 2.16 a); the similarity in the contents of the gloss to S. 1.33 and the gloss to the Sanskrit translation of Y. 1.15 is also worthy of notice (see IV § 33, commentary to S. 1.33 a / 2.33 a). Above all, what stands out is the almost total identity between the Pahlavi glosses to S. 1.9 and glosses to the corresponding passage of Ny. 5.5–6. In this latter passage, furthermore, some manuscripts contain some variants of these glosses, these too probably deriving from glosses to the Zand of the Sasanian period (their linguistic form is similar to that of the Pahlavi Zoroastrian texts and it can thus be ruled out that they are modern revisions; for these glosses, see IV § 9, commentary to S. 1.9 a–e / 2.9 a–e, S. 1.9 f–k / 2.9 f–k, S. 1.9 l–n / 2.9 l–n). Cantera, who in 2004: 262–68 analyzes the Pahlavi glosses to S. 1.9 and Ny. 5.5–6 in parallel, similarly hypothesizes that the gloss portions specific to this latter text are variants of the

40

Introduction to the Sh-rzag

the 9th century CE, which, therefore, may be taken as the terminus post quem for the dating of the Pahlavi version of the Sh-rzag. On the other hand, the linguistic form of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag is comparable, both from the lexical and the morphosyntactic points of view, to that of the Pahlavi Zoroastrian texts. This suggests dating it, at the latest, shortly after the end of the period of composition of the majority of these texts, i.e. the 10th century.12

same commentary to a lost Avestan text (or that they derive from a different version of the Shrzag from the one that has come down to us, an hypothesis that has to be rejected, inasmuch as it lacks any documentary basis). Additionally, according to Cantera the portions of Pahlavi glosses to Ny. 5.5–6 common to S. 1.9 are drawn from this text. The Spanish scholar bases this hypothesis first of all on the better textual quality of the gloss to section 3 of S. 1.9 compared with the gloss to the corresponding passage of Ny. 5.6. This latter gloss, though, is only a variant of the one to S. 1.9, and is probably the reduction of a fuller text, produced during the manuscript transmission (see IV § 9, commentary to S. 1.9 l–n / 2.9 l–n). Cantera supports his hypothesis, furthermore, with the presence of a presumed error in the gloss to section 3 of S. 1.9, which would have been transposed in the corresponding passage of Ny.5.6: he bases himself, however, on an incorrect interpretation of the passage (see the observations in IV § 9, commentary to S. 1.9 l–n / 2.9 l–n, regarding the form pahikrd). 12 As regards the chronology of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag, some observations made by Cantera in 2004 should also be recalled. First of all, at the end of a brief analysis of the text contained in pp. 184–86, the Spanish scholar notes the difficulty of establishing this chronology, due, on the one hand, to the absence of Arabic words (which would be clear tardy elements) and on the other, to the presence of exegeses that he classifies as erroneous. He uses as examples the exegesis of fraznag (“wise”) by frazm (“end”) in the gloss to S. 1.24, and that of rymand (“rich”) by rdh (“generosity”) in the gloss to S. 1.1. These exegeses would be signs of a late composition. The two examples quoted by Cantera, though, are unfit to support his hypothesis: see IV § 1, commentary to S. 1.1 a–b / 2.1 a–b, and IV § 24, commentary to S. 1.24 b / 2.24 b. Furthermore, the presence of “erroneous” exegeses of Pahlavi words is not necessarily an indication of lateness (see the observations given in Skjærvø 2008, especially on p. 12). On p. 194, furthermore, Cantera defines the group of translations of the frnagns, the Sh-rzag, the Niyyišns and the Ohrmazd Yašt as “nicht allzu jung.” These translations are distinguished, apart from a tendency to gloss all the words, by the absence of Arabic words and by not being translated from the Persian or the Pzand. On the basis of the fact that the translation of the Niyyišns is cited in the Frahang  m k, a text which Cantera dates to around the 9th–10th centuries (see p. 17), the Spanish scholar concludes that the whole of this group of translations dates back to the 9th–10th centuries or earlier. However, it appears inappropriate to attribute the same date to all these translations solely on the basis of their linguistic and structural affinity.

Part II

The manuscript tradition of the Sh-rzag

Thispageintentionallyleftblank

1

The Sh-rzag in the manuscripts

The texts of the two versions of the Sh-rzag in the manuscripts are generally presented one after the other; in some cases, they are separated by other ritual texts or invocations. In the manuscripts containing the Pahlavi Sh-rzag, portions of Avestan text alternate with their corresponding Pahlavi translation. As evidenced by the following description and the notes to the critical edition (Part III), some portions of the Sh-rzag are recorded with a certain variability in the manuscripts (which has to be imputed, in some cases, to the existence of different methods of reciting the text, and in others, simply to the need for occupying less space1). It will be seen, further, that a small minority of the manuscripts record the paragraphs of the Sh-rzag in the form in which they are recited during the Drn Yašt ritual when addressed to specific entities.

1 It should also be noted that in the manuscripts consulted, the occurrences of yazamaide in S. 2 are . . almost always written as y / y or as yaz / yaz(a), clearly in order to save space.

2

The manuscripts used for the edition of the Avestan and Pahlavi text

The following is a description of the manuscripts of the Avestan and Pahlavi Sh-rzag used for this work, classified by their libraries of origin.

2.1 Manuscripts from Indian libraries 2.1.1 Library of the Cama Oriental Institute1 2.1.1.1 Manuscripts containing the Sh-rzag D2,2 a manuscript containing a Pzand text and the Avestan Sih-rzag. As indicated by the colophons, the two texts were both copied in 1205 A. Y. (the transcription of the Sh-rzag was completed on the day Wahman in the month Spandarmad of that year). The two texts fill 13 folios each and are separated by three blank folios; the manuscript measures 198 × 147 mm. The Sh-rzag is written on 12/13 lines per page; S. 1 is found on ff. 1r–6v of the second part of the manuscript, S. 2 on ff. 6v–13r. S. 1 is introduced by a title concluded by Srzahe xvurd avista (written in Avestan characters), while S. 2 is introduced by a title in Persian. In both S. 1 and S. 2, of the five invocations of the ghs, only the first one is given,3 and §§ 17 and 19 are omitted.4 In the concluding formula of S. 1, the sequence aoxt.nman 1 I consulted the manuscripts described below during my research visit to Mumbai in 2000. 2 This and the other manuscripts described below marked “D” + cardinal number belong to the collection of the Mulla Firoze Library. 3 The presence in the two versions of the Sh-rzag of only the first invocation of the ghs, or of only the invocations of ghs 1–3, is encountered in the majority of the manuscripts. This is due primarily to the fact that in the ritual recitation of the Sh-rzag, only the invocation of the current gh is recited. Generally, in fact, the text was (and is) recited before sunset, both as an independent prayer and also as part of other rituals. The absence in the manuscripts of some of the invocations of the ghs may also be attributed to the intention of saving space (these were in fact well known to the ritualists from their various occurrences in the texts). 4 The omission of § 17 is encountered in numerous manuscripts, generally in both S. 1 and S. 2. This absence is due to the belief, expressed in several Pahlavi texts, that it is inappropriate to praise in the same text Srš and Ohrmazd, who are both sovereign entities (Srš, in fact, is presented as the lieutenant to Ohrmazd and the leader of the material world: see Kreyenbroek 1985: 108–9, 113–14, and also IV § 17). See especially: Dd. 28.1–2 (for which, see Jaafari-Dehaghi 1998: 90–91), which

Manuscripts used for the edition 45 yazatahe is not recorded: after frauuaš.inm is found xšnao ra t5 viuu mraot 6 (“‘through the satisfaction [of]’ until ‘let the knowing one say’”), while S. 2 ends with frauuaš.aii.7 The spelling of the text is very careless. For more information on this manuscript, see Brelvi–Dhabhar 1917: 3. D6, a manuscript containing mainly texts to be pronounced during the Drn Yašt ritual, composed of 132 folios written on 17 lines per page, measuring 287 × 178 mm. It is not possible to date it with precision. The only indication provided by the colophon is that its last text is copied from a manuscript of 1868 Samvat. It gives the Avestan text of the Sh-rzag twice: the first time in abbreviated form (ff. 108v–109v), and the second in full (ff. 111r–119v: S. 1 is found in ff. 111r–114r, S. 2 in ff. 114v–119v). In its abbreviated version, starting from S. 1.3 only the first and last words of the individual paragraphs are found, separated by t. In the full version, in both S. 1 and S. 2, only gh 1 is given, and §§ 17 and 19 are missing. The concluding formula of S. 2 ends with frauuaš.aii. Both S. 1 and S. 2 are introduced by titles written in Avestan characters: S. 1 is introduced by the heading Srza rihia rxvic, and S. 2 by Sirza vad rcg. Furthermore, in S. 1, §§ 1 and 2 are preceded respectively by the titles in Avestan characters Ddar Hrmzda and Barman. The text is written elegantly, but contains numerous errors. says that the šn man of Srš may not be recited in the rituals together with the šn man of other divine entities, because of the special status conferred upon Srš by Ohrmazd; Pahl. Riv. Dd. 56.3 (for which, see Williams 1990, 1: 196–97; 2: 92), which states that Srš has to be venerated separately from Ohrmazd, inasmuch as he is the lord of the material world. Indications of this nature occur also in various Rivyats (see the passages published in Unvala 1922, 1: 151, l. 15–1: 152, l. 4; 1: 152, ll. 6–7, 9–10, and translated in Dhabhar 1932: 166–67). The absence, too, of § 19 (dedicated to the frauuaš.is) is encountered in many manuscripts, generally in both S. 1 and S. 2. This absence is due to the fact that S. 1.19 and S. 2.19 correspond to part of the concluding formula, respectively, of the Little and of the Great Sh-rzag. To some copyists and theologians it seemed appropriate for the praise of the frauuaš.is to be recited only once, at the end of the text, where it seals the praises to all the entities (see also I.1.2 in regards to the final invocation to the frauuaš.is in S. 1 and S. 2). It should be remembered that N. 24.10 seems to allude to the practice of not reciting the invocation to the frauuaš.is in the middle of the Sh-rzag (see I.1.1). 5 The use of the Pahlavi preposition t (“up to, until”), is frequently equivalent in the Avestan manuscripts to that of three dots. 6 Aoxt.nman yazatahe is the standard final phrase of the Little Sh-rzag. The sequence that is found in this manuscript is an abbreviated form of either one of two almost identical formulae starting with xšnao ra and ending with vuu mraot . The longer such formula is found in Y. 0.12–13 (a passage where xšnao ra governs the Sh-rzag when recited as part of the Yasna: see also I.1.2), 8.9, and 57.1. The shorter one recurs in numerous passages (in Y. 0.2–3; Yt. 1.0, 2.5, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0, 12.0, 13.0, 14.0, 15.0, 16.0, 17.0, 18.0, 19.0, 20.0, and 21.0; A. 1.1, 2.2, 3.2, 4.2; G.1.2, 2.2, 3.2, 4.2, 5.2; Ny. 1.10, 2.10, 3.2, 4.1, 5.6). 7 It should be noted that the long concluding formula of S. 2 is not recorded in full in any of the manuscripts used for the edition of the text (very probably it was never written in its entirety in any manuscript, inasmuch as it was well known to the copyists because of its frequent ritual uses, and writing it in full would have filled space fruitlessly). Some manuscripts contain an instruction to recite the concluding formula of S. 2 until the end, while in the majority, only the first part is recorded (perhaps many copyists considered that it was not necessary to include the continuation of the formula, or perhaps the religious groups to which they belonged only recited a small part of it).

46

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag For further information on this manuscript, see Brelvi–Dhabhar 1917: 5–7.

D23 (= Mf3 in Geldner 1886–96), a manuscript of the Iranian tradition, composed of 228 folios, to which four folios are added at the end (and folios 2 and 4–16 are also a later addition). It contains 11/12 lines per page, and measures 135 × 91 mm. It contains two colophons, one on f. 182v and another on f. 227v, which indicate as dates of copying A. Y. 1069. In addition to the Sh-rzag and other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, it contains some short ritual texts. These include invocations to the entities controlling the days of the month, to be recited in the variable passages of the ritual texts. They are found both in the form in which they occur in S. 1 (followed by the graphemes  y = iiese yešti8) and in the one belonging to S. 2. The manuscript, furthermore, contains the Pahlavi work Styišn  sh-rzag. Some protective and propitiatory formulae in Avestan are also found, on the last folios of the manuscript. The Sh-rzag occupies ff. 55v–84r (S. 1 is found on ff. 55v–74 v, S. 2 on ff. 74v–84r). S. 1 is introduced by a title in Pahlavi to be read as Šn man  yazdn  rz 30; šny az rz Ohrmazd t Anagrn; pad Yazdn km bawd (“Šn man of the yazds of the thirty days; propitiate from the day Ohrmazd to the [day] Anagrn; may it be in accordance with the will of God”); S. 2 is preceded by the title Pad Yazdn ud Amahraspandn kmag bawd; šn man 30-rzag pad yaza (“May it be in accordance with the will of God and the Amahraspands; the Sh-rzag šn man9 according to [the formulation in] yaza[maide]”). Each of the paragraphs from 1 to 30 is preceded, in both versions of the text, by the word rz (“day”) followed by the Pahlavi name of the entity to whom it is dedicated. Each paragraph is given in the form to be recited in the Drn Yašt when directed to specific entities. Generally, the paragraphs of S. 1 are preceded by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 (written in abbreviated form), and are followed by the concluding phrase of S. 1, aoxt.nman yazatahe, while those of S. 2 are preceded by the text of S. 2.1 (also written in abbreviated form). Different from this structure is S. 1.1, which is not recorded in full, but only until xvarnavhat. Furthermore, S. 1.8 is followed by the concluding formula of S. 1, written in an abbreviated form (aš.unm is followed by t nabnazdištanm frauuaš.inm aoxt.nman yazatahe), and S. 2.8 is followed by the concluding formula of S. 2, this too written in an abbreviated form (it is given until spn.t frauuaš.aii staomi, which is followed by a sequence to be read as t pš guft “up to where it was previously said,” which clearly refers to an instruction, given earlier, regarding where the formula ends). In both versions, moreover, §§ 15, 19 and 23 are not given (but instead of § 15 is found the Pahlavi sentence Day pad Mihr iyn nibišt “[the paragraph] Day pad Mihr is the same as [the one] written [above],” which refers to the text of § 8). Paragraph 17 is missing in S. 1, but occurs in S. 2.10 It should also be noted that in S. 1 the invocations of ghs 1–4 8 For example, the invocation for day 2 is recorded as vahauue manahe  y (which is written in a corrupted spelling). 9 “The Sh-rzag šn man” (šn man 30-rzag) is here the appellative of the text. 10 The information provided by Geldner in 1886–96, 2: 265, n. 1 to § 17, according to which the paragraph is missing also in S. 2, is therefore erroneous.

Manuscripts used for the edition 47 are given, of which the first follows § 7, and those of ghs 2–4 are placed at the beginning of § 8. The invocations of ghs 2–4 are preceded by short introductory headings in Pahlavi, which may be read as: Ka gh + the name of the gh + bawd (“When it is the gh . . .”); in these headings, however, each gh is erroneously given the name of the preceding gh. The invocation of gh 4 is followed by a phrase whose correct reading is ka gh guft bawd (“when the gh [invocation] is recited”), after which, in turn, is found, after some separation points, the word pas (“then”), and finally, § 8. In S. 2 are found only the invocations of ghs 1and 2 (of which the first follows § 7; the second is placed at the beginning of § 8, and is preceded by the heading in Pahlavi Ka gh Hwan, “When it is the gh Hwan,” an error, inasmuch as the gh Hwan is not the second, but the first).11 Both S. 1 and S. 2 are followed by their respective concluding formulae; that of S. 2 ends with zbaiiemi, followed by the Pahlavi phrase t sar (“up to the end”), which is an instruction to recite the formula until the end.12 The entire Sh-rzag is recorded in an elegant and accurate Iranian writing style. For further information on this manuscript, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: xi and Brevi–Dhabhar 1917: 19–20. D24, a copy of Mf3, composed of 200 folios, written on 12 lines per page, measuring 203 × 160 mm. It was transcribed, as indicated in the colophon, in 1253 A. Y. The Sh-rzag occupies ff. 91v–124r (S. 1 occupies ff. 91v–108r, S. 2 ff. 108r–124r). D29 (= Mf2 in Dhabhar 1927), a manuscript written over 487 pages, on 11 lines per page and measures 211 × 145 mm. In addition to the Sh-rzag, the majority of the other texts it contains also form part of the Xwurdag Abestg. In Brelvi– Dhabhar 1917: 23, the opinion is expressed that the handwriting of the manuscript is that of the Ervad Khusro Edal, active at the beginning of the 19th century. Both the Avestan version and the Pahlavi translation of the Sh-rzag are recorded, incorporated in the Drn Yašt. S. 1 is found on pp. 322–83, and S. 2 on pp. 422–54. S. 2 is introduced by a title in Pahlavi to be read as Drn  30-rzag pad rh yazamaide (“Drn of the Sh-rzag according to the formulation in yazamaide”). Each paragraph is preceded by the heading in Pahlavi Drn (rz) (“Drn [of the day]”)13 + the Middle Persian name of the entity to whom the paragraph is dedicated (a heading referring to the recitation of the individual paragraphs of the text during

11 The invocations of the ghs, as well as the concluding formulae of S. 1 and S. 2 are normally recited together with the invocation to Day when the Drn Yašt is addressed to this divine entity. This peculiar type of recitation highlights the prominence of the days dedicated to this entity, inasmuch as they are the first of the last three subsections of the month. The presence in this manuscript of the invocation of gh 1, both in S. 1 and S. 2, after § 7, is therefore erroneous. 12 The information given by Geldner (1886–96, 1: 267, n. 4 to § 30) that in this manuscript the text stops before aš.unm, therefore, is erroneous. 13 Obviously, rz occurs only in the headings of §§ 1–30, which are dedicated to the entities after whom the days of the Zoroastrian month are named (but is omitted from the heading of S. 2.8).

48

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

the Drn Yašt ritual14); furthermore, before the concluding formula of S. 1 there is a heading to be read as Harwisp yazd (“All the yazds”; this heading refers to the content of the formula, which invokes all the divine entities). S. 1 records only the invocation of gh 1 (at the beginning of § 8, as if it formed part of it15), while S. 2 records none of the invocations of the ghs, but contains instead a notation in Persian written in Pahlavi characters, which seems to give the instruction to recite the invocation of the current gh, but not those of ghs 4 and 5.16 In both S. 1 and S. 2, § 15 is substituted by a sentence in Pahlavi to be read as Day pad (be in S. 2) Mihr iyn k pš nibišt (“[The paragraph] Day pad / be Mihr is the same as the one written above”);17 similarly, in place of § 23 is found in S. 1 Drn rz Day pad Dn iyn k pš nibišt (“The Drn of the day Day pad Dn is the same as the one written above”) and in S. 2 Drn rz Day be Dn iyn nibišt (“The Drn of the day Day be Dn is the same as [the one] written [above]”): the text of S. 1.15 and 1.23, and that of S. 2.15 and 2.23 are in fact identical to those of S. 1.8 and 2.8. Both in S. 1 and S. 2, furthermore, §§ 17 and 19 are not given in their normal position, but after the concluding formula. In S. 2, the concluding formula ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. The Avestan text of the Sh-rzag is recorded with rather imprecise spelling. From the philological point of view, the Pahlavi version is of greater interest than the Avestan one, inasmuch as it contains the glosses on the entities specific to S. 1, which are attested only in a small minority of manuscripts. For further information on the manuscript, see Brelvi–Dhabhar 1917: 23. D83, an Iranian manuscript composed of 283 folios and measuring 229 × 155 mm. Its first part (until folio 183) corresponds to the manuscript called Mf1 in Geldner 1886–96 (of which, see p. xi of vol. 1). This part of the manuscript contains the Yasna and various ritual texts in Persian and Avestan, including, on ff. 178r–179v, invocations to the entities to whom the days are dedicated, given first in accordance with the formulation of S. 1, then with that of S. 2.18 The date on which the copying of this part of the manuscript was completed is given as A. 20 Y. 1090. The Sh-rzag is included in the second part of the manuscript; it is preceded by the Visperad and is followed by short texts with ritual instructions. This part of the manuscript is later than the other (two colophons placed at its beginning give the dates A. Y. 1185 and 1195). The Sh-rzag occupies ff. 46v–53v (S. 1 is found on ff. 46v–39r and S. 2 on ff. 40r–53v; between the two versions of the text are found some ritual instructions in Pzand). S. 1 is preceded by the title Sh-rzag Yašt bun (“Beginning of the Sh-rzag Yašt”) and S. 2 by a title in Pahlavi that can be read as Pad nm  Yazd dudgar Srzag pad yaz (“In the name of God, the second 14 Here observe the use of the word drn to define the Drn Yašt ritual. On this denomination of the Drn Yašt, current in modern Zoroastrianism, see Boyce–Kotwal 1971: 63–64. 15 The placement of this invocation is influenced, perhaps, by the way the Drn Yašt is recited when addressed to Day. 16 See the transcription of this notation in Dhabhar 1927: 389, n. 7 to § 7 (where is recorded also the almost identical notation found in the manuscript called by Dhabhar U1). 17 This sentence occurs also in manuscript U1: see Dhabhar 1927: 385, n. 1 to § 15, and 390, n. 1 to § 15. 18 In these invocations yazamaide is represented by the grapheme y.

Manuscripts used for the edition 49 Sh-rzag, according to [the formulation in] yaz[amaide]”). In both S. 1 and S. 2 are recorded the invocations of ghs 1–3. In S. 1, §§ 17 and 19 are missing, while in S. 2 the text from the sequence yazatm yazamaide of § 16 until § 20 inclusive, as well as that of the concluding formula, are omitted. From the palaeographic point of view, the Sh-rzag does not have the same quality as the texts in the first part of the manuscript. Regarding this manuscript, see also Brelvi–Dhabhar 1917: 50–51. R14,19 an incomplete manuscript, composed originally of 36 folios, written on 17 lines per page, measuring 267 × 235 mm. From its appearance, it should date to no earlier than the 19th century. In it, the Sh-rzag is given, along with the Pahlavi translation, within the Drn Yašt: S. 1 occupies eight folios starting from f. 4v, and S. 2 occupies four and a half folios starting from f. 20r. S. 2 is preceded by a title to be read as Drn  30-rzag pad rh y. Every paragraph is preceded by a heading consisting of the sequence Drn (rz) (“The Drn [of the day]”)20 + the Pahlavi name of the entity to whom it is dedicated. The concluding formula of S. 1 is preceded by the heading Harwisp yazd. In S. 1 a gap is found, which extends from part of the Pahlavi text of § 2 to the first section of § 9 (and respective Pahlavi translation). In S. 2, the invocations of the ghs are missing and in their place is recorded (with minimum variants) the notation found also in D29. Furthermore, §§ 15 and 23 are also substituted in S. 1 and S. 2 by the same sentences found in their place in D29. The Avestan text of S. 2.17, and a part of its Pahlavi translation are found after the concluding formula of S. 2 (they occupy until the end of f. 25v, after which the text is broken off). S. 1.17, 1.19 and 2.19 are not found. The concluding formula of S. 2 breaks off with ga m yazatm yazamaide. The Avestan text is recorded with numerous spelling mistakes. Its Pahlavi translation is of considerably greater interest, because it includes the glosses specific to S. 1. It should be added, moreover, that in S. 2 some brief glosses are recorded, in part interlinearly, in part marginally, which are written by a hand different from that of the copyist. Some of these are in Avestan, others in Pahlavi, yet others in Persian or Gujarati. Perhaps this part of the manuscript was used for a type of didactic exercise by apprentice copyists. A short description of this manuscript can be found in Dhabhar 1923b: 140. R22, a manuscript of 481 folios, measuring 203 × 160 mm, containing, apart from the Sh-rzag, mainly texts of the Xwurdag Abestg and other short ritual texts. It is a very recent manuscript (it is on European paper, and the watermark has the date 1867). The Sh-rzag occupies ff. 392v–427v (S. 1 is found on ff. 392v–408v, S. 2 on ff. 408v–427v). Each of its paragraphs is accompanied by the Persian 19 This, and the other manuscripts described below, which are marked “R” + cardinal number, belong to the historical collection of the library. 20 The word rz is recorded only in the titles of the paragraphs dedicated to the entities of the daynames (but in S. 1 it is recorded erroneously also in the heading of § 31; note too that in S. 2 it is missing from the heading of § 8).

50

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

translation. In both S. 1 and S. 2, there occur only the invocations of ghs 1–3, and § 19 is not given. In the concluding formula of S. 1, nabnazdištanm is followed by the phrase xšnao ra yasnica vahmica xšnao rica frastaiiaca. In S. 2 the concluding formula is interrupted by frauuaš.aii. The text is recorded in an elegant and clear hand, but contains many spelling inaccuracies. Regarding this manuscript, see also Dhabhar 1923b: 140. R53, a manuscript made up of three parts of 155, 25 and 30 folios each, measuring 244 × 152 mm. The first part of the manuscript gives the Pzand text of the Ddestn  mng  xrad, the second the Sh-rzag, and the third the Aogmadac. Dhabhar (in 1923b: 146) identifies the handwriting of the manuscript as that of the Dastur E. S. Meherjirana (if this is correct the manuscript dates, therefore, to the end of the 19th–beginning of the 20th century). The Sh-rzag is written on 12 lines per page (S. 1 occupies ff. 1v–12v of the second part of the manuscript, S. 2 ff. 13r–24v). Both the Avestan version and the Middle Persian translation of it are given. S. 1 is preceded by the heading in Pzand Pa nm i yazdn (= Pahl. Pad nm  Yazdn “In the name of God”). In both S. 1 and S. 2 are found the invocations of ghs 1–3 (in S. 1, gh 3 is preceded by the heading Pad gh Uzrin “In the gh Uzrin”). In S. 1, § 19 is not given. In S. 2 the concluding formula ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. The handwriting of the manuscript is very clear. The text of the Sh-rzag is of a certain interest from the philological point of view, because it was copied from the important manuscript T12 of the First Dastur Meherjirana Library of Naosari (on which see II.2.1.2; the Pahlavi version is of much greater interest than the Avestan, which contains many spelling errors). For more information on this manuscript, see Dhabhar 1923b: 146. R111, a manuscript of 150 folios written on 12 lines per page, measuring 193 × 157 mm. It contains principally invocation formulae to the Zoroastrian divine entities. It is a recent manuscript (it is written on European paper). On ff. 31r–46v are found the Avestan invocations to the 30 entities to whom the days of the month are dedicated. These are the same as those found in S. 1 and S. 2, but are recorded in a somewhat confused form and in an unusual sequence. The Sh-rzag occurs on ff. 115r–129v (S. 1 occupies ff. 115r–121v, S. 2 ff. 122r–129v). S. 1 is preceded by a title, one part of which is in Avestan characters, where in xšn maine Srz (“this [is] the šn man of the Sh-rzag”) can be recognized. In both S. 1 and S. 2, § 9 is abbreviated (undoubtedly with the aim of saving space) and the invocations of the ghs and §§ 17 and 19 are omitted. In S. 1, the concluding formula, which is given in abbreviated form, is followed by another formula, which starts with xvar m miiazdm iie (= iiese yešti) (“I introduce sacrificially, as food, the solid offering”).21 Also in S. 2, the concluding formula is abbreviated: yazatm yaz is followed by aš.unm t frauuaš.aii staomi zbaiiemi (recorded in very incorrect 21 This formula does not occur in any other manuscript used for the edition of the text. It should be noted that xvar m miiazdm iiese yešti introduces one of the variable passages of the Drn Yašt, i.e. 1.1.10.

Manuscripts used for the edition 51 spelling), which concludes the text. The text includes a large number of spelling errors, but the handwriting is very clear. A very brief description of the manuscript can be found in Dhabhar 1923b: 159. R115, a manuscript of 506 folios, written on 19 lines per page, measuring 300 × 206 mm. It contains principally texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. As indicated in the colophon, its copying was completed on the 27th day of the fourth month of the year 1896 Samvat. The Sh-rzag is given on ff. 255r–266r (S. 1 is found on ff. 255r–262v, S. 2 on ff. 261v–266r). S. 1 is preceded by a long introductory heading in Avestan characters, where the phrase in xšn maine Srza can be recognized. In S. 1 the invocations of all five of the ghs are given, while in S. 2 none are recorded. Neither S. 1 nor S. 2 contains §§ 17 and 19. In S. 1 the concluding formula is given as vspašm t frauuaš.inm xšnao ra t frauuaš.inm xšnao ra t mraot ,22 and in S. 2 as vspmca t frauuaš.aii y t ahmiia nmne23 (some words external to the text follow, probably ritual instructions, among which the words n xšn maine Src are recognized). The text is written with execrable spelling. For further information, see Dhabhar 1923b: 160–61. R319, a manuscript of 360 pages, with text written on 13 lines per page. Primarily, texts of the Xwurdag Abestg are found there. From its appearance, it should not date to earlier than the 18th century. Both the Avestan and Pahlavi versions of the Sh-rzag are recorded: S. 1 occupies pp. 189–224, S. 2 pp. 246–62. In both S. 1 and S. 2, §§ 17 and 19 are placed, one after the other, after the concluding formulae. Between the Little and the Great Sh-rzag other invocations to the frauuaš.is in Avestan, and their Pahlavi translation are recorded. S. 2 is preceded by the title Drn 30-rzag pad rh azaimadi [= yazamaide]. The various paragraphs are preceded by the heading Drn (rz) + the Pahlavi name of the day.24 In S. 1 only the invocation of gh 1 is found, which is placed after the title of § 8. In S. 2, instead of the invocations of the ghs is recorded (with minimum variants) the notation relating to their recitation which is also found in D29 and R14. Furthermore, S. 1.15, 1.23, 2.15 and 2.23 are substituted by the sentences found instead of these paragraphs in D29 and R14 (with the only difference that the sentence in S. 1.15 does not record iyn). The concluding formula of S. 2 is given until the sequence ga m yazatm yazamaide. The text is recorded in very elegant handwriting, but contains numerous spelling errors, both in the Avestan and in the Pahlavi versions. Its main philological interest consists of the presence of the Pahlavi glosses specific to S. 1.

22 This concluding formula of S. 1 is very likely the same as that found in manuscript D2, since xšnao ra t frauuaš.inm, is probably an addition made in error. 23 The phrase ahmiia nmne is found in Y. 26.7 and forms part, therefore, of the concluding formula of S. 2. 24 An exception is S. 1.8, which is not preceded by any heading. Furthermore, rz is missing from the headings of §§ 31, 32 and 33 in S. 1. It is also missing from the heading of S. 2.8, while the headings of S. 2.31 and 32 include it.

52

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

R379, a manuscript of 130 folios, written on 12 lines per page. It contains mainly texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. From its appearance, it should not date to later than the beginning of the 19th century. The Sh-rzag is recorded in the Avestan and Pahlavi versions; it occupies ff. 97v–116v (S. 1 is found between ff. 97v–106r, S. 2 between ff. 106r–116v). S. 1 is preceded by a title in Pahlavi, interpretable as Pad nm  Ddr Ohrmazd n 30-rzag  xwurdag bun (“In the name of the Creator Ohrmazd, this is the beginning of the Little Sh-rzag”), and is followed by the sentence Yazdn Amahraspandn pad kmag bawd (“May it be in accordance with the will of God [and] of the Amahraspands”). S. 2 is preceded by a title in Pahlavi that can be read as Pad nm  Ddr Ohrmazd; n Sh-rzag wuzurg abg zand (“In the name of the Creator Ohrmazd; this is the Great Sh-rzag with the translation”). Finally, the margin at the end of the text contains a Pahlavi notation to be read as n 30-rzag  wuzurg (“this is the Great Sh-rzag”). In both S. 1 and S. 2 are recorded only the invocations of ghs 1–3 (which in S. 1 are preceded by headings having the structure Ka gh + the name of the gh, to which in gh 3 is added bawd; furthermore, in S. 2 a heading of this type precedes the invocation of gh 1). In S. 1, § 19 is not recorded. The concluding formula of S. 1 ends with frauuaš.inm,25 and that of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. The manuscript is written in a very elegant hand, but the Sh-rzag contains many errors, especially in the Avestan version. 2.1.1.2 Other manuscripts R109, a manuscript of 172 folios, written on 15 lines per page, to which four folios are added at the end; it measures 234 × 145 mm. It contains almost exclusively texts relating to the Drn Yašt ceremony. Its copying was finished on the day Wd of the month Day of 1119 A. Y. On ff. 137r–141r there occur the invocations to the entities to whom the days of the month are dedicated. These invocations are preceded by the names of the days, written in Avestan characters with spellings that reflect a Gujarati pronunciation. Each of these is recorded first in accordance with the formulation of S. 1 (followed by iie) accompanied by the Gujarati translation, and then in accordance with the formulation of S. 2 (where yazamaide is represented by yaz).26 The invocations to the entities who are in charge of the months follow (recorded between f. 141r and f. 143r). All the invocations are recorded in a very corrupt form, influenced by a Gujarati pronunciation. For further information on this manuscript, see Dhabhar 1923b: 158, and especially Modi 1922. R110, a manuscript of 177 folios written on 15 lines per page, measuring 231 × 140 mm, whose copying was completed on the day Ohrmazd of the month Mihr 25 The interruption of the concluding formula of S. 1 before aoxt.nman yazatahe, observed in various manuscripts, reflects a recitation of the text that is different from the standard one. 26 It should be noted that the invocation of § 1 is recorded only in the form belonging to S. 1 (and, furthermore, it is not followed by iie).

Manuscripts used for the edition 53 of 1126 A. Y. It contains almost exclusively texts relating to the Drn Yašt ceremony. On ff. 150r–154r it records the invocations to the 30 entities of the days of the month, to be recited in certain ritual texts. The invocations occur first in the form specific to S. 1 followed by iie (with the exception of the invocation to Ahura Mazd in § 1, where the whole sequence iiese yešti is found), and then in the form specific to S. 2, where yazamaide is represented by yaz. Each paragraph is preceded by the name of the day dedicated to the entity praised therein, written in reverse in Devangar, with spellings that reflect a Gujarati pronunciation. This manuscript is reproduced in anastatic form as vol. 30 of the series The Pahlavi Codices and Iranian Researches published in Shiraz in 1976. For more information on it, see Dhabhar 1923b: 158–59. 2.1.2 First Dastur Meherjirana Library F4 (= E1 in Geldner 1886–96),27 a manuscript divided into two volumes, comprising 530 folios in all, to which another 12 folios are added. The folios have 15 lines per page, and measure 241 × 146 mm. Apart from the Sh-rzag, it contains various texts of the Xwurdag Abestg (including the whole series of the 21 Yašts). The transcription of the part containing the Sh-rzag (and the majority of the other texts) was completed on the day Rm of the month Hordd of 970 A. Y.28 The Sh-rzag is recorded in the second volume between ff. 411r and 422r (S. 1 is found on ff. 411r–416v and S. 2 on ff. 416v–422r). S. 1 is preceded by a phrase containing the Pahlavi heading Sh-rzag Yašt bun (written in a distorted . spelling), and S. 2 by the title Sh-rzag pad y (“The Sh-rzag according to [the formulation in] y[azamaide]”). In S. 1 each paragraph is preceded by its number in Arabic script, repeated in S. 2 only for §§ 1–4. Both versions of the text only give the invocation of gh 1. Paragraphs 17 and 19 are missing from both S. 1 and S. 2. The concluding formula of S. 2 ends with spn.t frauuaš.aii.29 The text of the Sh-rzag and that of the other texts of the manuscript, are remarkable for their orthographical precision. For information on this manuscript, see E1 2008: 1–50, and also Geldner 1886–96, 1: ii, Dhabhar 1923a: 2–3, and Hintze 1989 (which contains paleographic observations). T12 (= AK in Dhabhar 1927),30 a manuscript consisting of 192 folios (of which the last is added), written on 13 lines per page, measuring 183 × 122 mm. Apart from the Sh-rzag, it contains principally other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, as well as the Visperad, accompanied by the respective Pahlavi version. Its colophon, found on the last two folia of the manuscript, states that its transcription was 27 This manuscript has been consulted only in microfilm and in the anastatic reproduction published in E1 2008 (the Sh-rzag is found on pp. 473–85 of the volume). 28 See the edition and translation of the colophon in E1 2008: 40–42. 29 So the notation by Geldner in 1886–96, 1: 267, n. 5 to § 30, according to which it ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide, is erroneous. 30 This manuscript has been consulted only in microfilm. Some additional information about it was provided to me by Miguel Ángel Andrés Toledo, whom I thank for his help.

54

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

completed on the day Dn of the month Wahman of 921 A. Y.31 This, however, does not seem to be its original colophon, inasmuch as some letters are missing from it. Therefore, this is probably a colophon copied from another manuscript by a copyist who is not personally identified. Even though the manuscript may not be as old as the date mentioned in the colophon, it is nevertheless an old manuscript. To judge from the quality of the paper, it should be earlier than the 18th century. It is probably, therefore, one of the oldest manuscripts that has come down to us containing the Sh-rzag, and the first manuscript recording its Pahlavi version (as well as, more generally, the first to contain the Pahlavi version of texts of the Xwurdag Abestg). S. 1 is found between f. 84v, l. 10 and the verso of the folio marked as 98 (which, however, follows f. 96). S. 2 follows it after a blank space, starting from line 8 of the same page, and it occupies until f. 113v, l. 6. In both S. 1 and S. 2 are recorded the invocations of ghs 1–3, which in S. 1 are preceded by the heading in Pahlavi Ka gh + the name of the gh. In S. 1, § 19 is missing. The concluding formula of S. 1 ends with nabnazdištanm frauuaš.inm, while that of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. The Avestan Sh-rzag is recorded in a form that is pretty much correct. For more information on this manuscript, see Dhabhar 1923a: 112.

2.2 Manuscripts in European libraries 2.2.1 Bibliothèque Nationale de France32 2.2.1.1 Manuscripts containing the Sh-rzag Suppl. pers. 39,33 a manuscript of 323 folios (ff. 313–15 are blank), written on a variable number of lines per page and measuring 285 × 265 mm. It forms part of the most ancient group of Zoroastrian manuscripts in the library, those donated by 31 According to the colophon, the copyist is Kk sdn son of Kk, who has been identified by several scholars (see for example JamaspAsa in F1 1991: xiii–xv) with the copyist of the important Niyyišn and Yašt manuscript F1. 32 I consulted the manuscripts described below during my doctoral studies between 2000 and 2003. 33 It should be recalled that the majority of the manuscripts in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris which contain Zoroastrian texts belong to the Supplément persan collection (indicated here as Suppl. pers.). A description of the manuscripts in this collection which record Zoroastrian texts is found in Blochet 1900 (which is the reprint, in the form of a book, of an article published between 1898 and 1899 in Le bibliographe moderne) and, in a more succinct form, on pp. 131–78 of the first volume of Blochet 1905–34 (a catalogue in four volumes of the Persian manuscripts in the Bibliothèque Nationale). Another very detailed catalogue of the Supplément persan manuscripts having the collocation 1 to 1000 has been prepared by Francis Richard (the catalogue is unpublished, but the author has kindly permitted me to consult it). Regarding the setting up of the collection of Zoroastrian manuscripts at the above-mentioned library, the foundational role of Abraham Hyacinthe Anquetil-Duperron must be remembered. During his stay in India, between 1755 and 1761, he endeavoured to decipher the sacred Zoroastrian texts, which until then had been inaccessible to European scholars. In 1762, he placed manuscripts in various languages, including a number of Zoroastrian manuscripts, in the library. Numerous other manuscripts were subsequently purchased by the library. Regarding Anquetil-Duperron, see also Duchesne-Guillemin 1987, with bibliographical references, to which should be added Anquetil-Duperron 1997.

Manuscripts used for the edition 55 Anquetil-Duperron in 1762 to what was known then as the Bibliothèque Royale. The manuscript contains the Vdvdd and the Visperad with their Pahlavi translation, a sacred formula (bj), the Srš Yašt with the Sanskrit translation and finally, the Sh-rzag with the Persian translation. The part of the manuscript containing the Vdvdd was copied in 1127 A. Y.,34 while the part containing the other texts was copied two years later. The Sh-rzag, written on a number of lines varying from 20 to 25, is found between ff. 316v–323r (S. 1 is recorded between ff. 316v– 319v, S. 2 between ff. 319v–323r). In it, the New Persian translation is interspersed within subsections of the paragraphs. Both S. 1 and S. 2 contain only the invocations of ghs 1–3. In S. 1, §§ 1–2 are missing. The concluding formula of S. 1 is given until nabnazdištanm frauuaš.inm, while in that of S. 2 the first occurrence of frauuaš.aii is followed by yazamaide, after which the text ends.35 The Sh-rzag is recorded in execrable handwriting and with numerous spelling errors, deletions, and corrections. At various points, the Avestan text is followed by blank spaces or, more often, is written in a contracted mode and with interlinear line breaks, which indicate that the Avestan and Persian versions were transcribed at different times (they are recorded, furthermore, in two different types of ink: that of the Avestan text is thicker). It is probable that the Persian version was transcribed first, leaving a blank space for the Avestan version. For more information on this manuscript, see Anquetil-Duperron 1771, 2: vii–viii; Blochet 1900: 8, and 1905–34, 1: 134. Suppl. pers. 40, a manuscript of 148 folios, written on 23 lines per page, measuring 400 × 240 mm. It was donated to the library by Anquetil-Duperron in 1762. It contains: the Sh-rzag and several other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg accompanied by their respective Pahlavi translation, the Hm Yašt accompanied by the Persian translation, and a Rivyat in Gujarati translated from Persian. The first group of texts is followed (on f. 57v) by a colophon with the date day Ohrmazd of the month dur of 1091 A. Y.; the colophon accompanying the Hm Yašt has the date 1130 A. Y.;36 the Rivyat has no colophon. 34 See the colophon of this manuscript recorded and translated in Unvala 1940: 13–14. The text of the Vdvdd given in this manuscript is of notable importance, inasmuch as it was the first that Anquetil-Duperron used to interpret the Avestan language. Anquetil-Duperron, in 1771, 1: cccxiii–cccviii (= 1997: 346–51), recounts in fact that his informants, the two Zoroastrian priests Dastur Darb and Dastur Kaus, had at first given him, in order to decipher the Avestan, a copy of the Vdvdd (which is the one included in this manuscript). Subsequently, Anquetil-Duperron obtained another copy of the Vdvdd from Dastur Manusherji (Anquetil-Duperron’s other informant, a rival of the other two Dasturs). On the basis of a comparison with this copy of the text, Anquetil-Duperron considered the first to be mutilated and incorrect and Dastur Darb, therefore, arranged to provide him with another that was similar to the second (that Dastur Darb had any evil intentions when he gave the first copy to Anquetil-Duperron must be ruled out: see in this respect Cantera–Andrés Toledo 2008: 117–21; see also Menant 1907: 35–36; Schwab 1934: 56–59, and the contribution by Modi on pp. 195–236 of the same text). 35 Note that in reality, in the concluding formula of S. 2, yazamaide does not follow frauuaš.aii but the sequence staomi zbaiiemi ufiiemi. Its presence is either an error, or possibly, reflects a different method of concluding the recitation of S. 2. 36 See Unvala 1940: 14–16, which records and translates the colophons of this manuscript.

56

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

The Sh-rzag is found on ff. 2r–13r (S. 1 is found on ff. 2r–7r, S. 2 on ff. 7r–13r). S. 1 is preceded by a title in Pahlavi to be read as Pad nm  Ddr Ohrmazd  xwbar  kirbakkar k-š nm Ohrmazd, 30-rzag abg zand nibišt; x b frazm bawd (“In the name of the beneficent Creator Ohrmazd, benefactor, whose name is Ohrmazd, the Sh-rzag is written; may the end be good”), and S. 2 by the phrase in Avestan characters Srza karn b mni. In both S. 1 and S. 2 only the invocations of ghs 1–3 are found. In S. 1, § 19 is missing. The concluding formula of S. 1 is given until nabnazdištanm frauuaš.inm, that of S. 2 until ga m yazatm yazamaide. Both the Avestan and the Middle Persian versions are written correctly and in an elegant hand. For further information on this manuscript, see Anquetil-Duperron 1771, 2: vi–vii; Blochet 1900: 34–36, and 1905–34, 1: 138–39. Suppl. pers. 49 (= P14 in Geldner 1886–9637), a manuscript composed of 228 folios, written on a variable number of lines per page (though f. 179 is left blank), measuring 285 × 170 mm. It is one of the manuscripts brought to Europe by Anquetil-Duperron, who, however, did not donate it to the library, but kept it in his own private collection. After his death in 1805, the administrator of part of his library, Silvestre de Sacy, sold it to what was then the Bibliothèque impériale. The manuscript is divided into several sections. The first three parts contain respectively: texts of the Xwurdag Abestg (copied in 1091 A. Y.), the Visperad with Pahlavi translation and the Srš Yašt Hdxt with Persian and Sanskrit translation (copied in 1130 of the Vikramditya era), and the Hm Yašt (copied in 1106 A. Y.). The fourth part contains the Sh-rzag twice (the first time giving its Avestan text followed by the Persian translation, and the second time including its Avestan text in abbreviated form accompanied by the full Pahlavi translation). The colophons accompanying these two versions of the text (the first found on f. 191v, the second on f. 207) indicate that both were copied by the same copyist, the Mobed Špr bin Mnak (the first, written in Persian, informs us that the manuscript was transcribed for Anquetil-Duperron; the second, written in Pahlavi, indicates as the date on which the transcription was completed the day Šahrewar of the month Tištar/Tr of 1170, maybe of the Hijra).38 The continuation of the manuscript contains the Xwaršd Niyyišn (copied in 1048 A. Y.), and a series of short texts, including the Xwaršd and the Mihr Niyyišn, and formulaic texts in Avestan, written in Persian characters. The first version of the Sh-rzag, written on 17 lines per page, occupies ff. 173v–191v (S. 1 is found on ff. 173v–183r, S. 2 on ff. 183r–191v), while the second, written on 13 lines per page, is found, after a blank page, on ff. 192v–206v (S. 1 is on ff. 192v–199r, S. 2 on ff. 199v–206v). In the first version, the text starts, after some lines left blank, from S. 1.3. The Avestan text alternates with the New 37 Note that Geldner used only a copy of this manuscript, transcribed by Olshausen (see Geldner 1886–96, 1: xii). 38 For these colophons, see Unvala 1940: 28–29 (and see also pp. 27–30 for the other colophons in the manuscript).

Manuscripts used for the edition 57 Persian translation. Each paragraph is preceded by a title in Avestan spelling which reflects a Gujarati pronunciation. In both S. 1 and S. 2 only the invocations of ghs 1–3 are recorded. The text of S. 2 concludes with spn.t frauuaš.aii, followed by yaz. The text is written in an elegant hand and fairly accurately. In the second version, S. 1 is preceded by a title in Pahlavi to be read as Pad nm  Ddr  xwbar  kirbakkar k-š nm Ohrmazd, 30-rzag abg zand nibišt; x b frazm bawd (“In the name of the beneficent Creator Ohrmazd, benefactor, whose name is Ohrmazd, the Sh-rzag is written with the translation; may the end be good”). This version was probably inserted into the manuscript with the sole aim of adding the Pahlavi translation, which the preceding version did not contain. The Avestan text of § 1 of S. 1 is given there in full, while in the other paragraphs only the first letter (or the first two or three letters) of part of the Avestan words are recorded. In both S. 1 and S. 2 there occur only the invocations of ghs 1–3 (which in S. 1 are preceded by headings in Pahlavi having the structure Ka / Andar gh [“When (it is) / In the gh”] + the name of the gh). Furthermore, in S. 1, § 19 is missing. The concluding formula of S. 1 ends with n (corresponding to nabnazdištanm39), and that of S. 2 with v (corresponding to the second of the two vspmca that the formula contains). This version of the text is also recorded in an elegant and precise hand. For other information on this manuscript, see Blochet 1900: 23–28, and 1905– 34, 1: 149–52. Suppl. pers. 51, a manuscript of 277 differently-sized pages, written on a variable number of lines. This manuscript was brought to Europe by Anquetil-Duperron. It does not form part of the group of manuscripts gifted to the Bibliothèque Royale in 1762, but instead was sold to the library by Silvestre de Sacy. It is mentioned in several passages of Anquetil-Duperron 1771, where it is called “Petit ravaët.” The manuscript is made up of more than one part, the first of which comprises the Sh-rzag and, according to the colophon found on p. 55, was copied for the priests of India (this part of the manuscript, therefore, is of Iranian origin).40 The copyist of this section is the same as that of the one of a group of texts, copied in 1095 A. Y., found in the following part of the manuscript.41 The latter include, among other things, Avestan invocations to divine entities and ritual texts in Persian. In the middle of this group of texts are two series of invocations written by a different hand, one of which is an abbreviated version of the Sh-rzag. In the remainder of the manuscript (which records the dates 1782 of the Samvat era, 1052 A. Y., and 1055 A. Y.42) are found a Rivyat and short texts that are formulaic and concerning ritual matters. The Sh-rzag which is found in the first part of the manuscript is written on 16 lines per page, and occupies pp. 2–39 (S. 1 is between p. 2 and p. 22, and S. 2

39 In other words, the first letter of the last occurrence of frauuaš.inm is omitted. The Pahlavi version, however, has its translation frawahr. 40 This colophon is published in Blochet 1900: 58. 41 See the edition and translation of the colophon of this section of the manuscript in Unvala 1940: 30–31. 42 For the colophons found in this section of the manuscript, see Unvala 1940: 31–33.

58

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

between p. 22 and p. 39). S. 1 is preceded by an introductory heading in Pahlavi, to be read as pad nm  Ddr Ohrmazd (“in the name of the Creator Ohrmazd”), and by the title in Persian Xšn man-e Dar n be yaštan-e har r ze, az rmazd t Anrn (“Šn man for the celebration of the Drn of every day, from [the day] Ohrmazd to [the day] Anrn”). In both the Little and the Great Sh-rzag, the paragraphs are preceded by a title in Persian formed by R z (“Day”) + the name of the day. The paragraphs are recorded in the form to be recited as part of the Drn Yašt when addressed to specific entities. They have the same structure as in Mf3, but some differences should be noted from the text that is found in this manuscript. First of all, both S. 1 and S. 2 include §§ 15, 19 and 23, and they do not include § 17. Furthermore, in S. 1 the invocations of ghs 1–3 are placed at the beginning of § 8, and they are also placed at the beginning of §§ 15 and 23. In S. 2, on the other hand, the invocation of gh 1 is placed at the beginning of § 8, and before §§ 15 and 23 are placed the invocations of ghs 2 and 3 respectively. In addition, the whole concluding formula of S. 1 follows S. 1.8, 1.15, and 1.23. Furthermore, S. 2.8, 2.15, and 2.23 are accompanied by part of the concluding formula of S. 2 (in §§ 8 and 23 it is recorded only until staomi, while in § 15 it is recorded until ufiiemi yaz). S. 2.32 is followed by an invocation to the frauuaš.is and to all yazatas, followed by what seems to be an abbreviated form of part of the Hm Yašt. It should also be noted that in S. 2.19 frauuaš.aii is followed by staomi zbaiiemi ufiiemi yaz. A further peculiarity is that aoxt.nman yazatahe is not written at the end of S. 1.33, probably because it was considered superfluous, given the occurrence of the whole concluding formula of S. 1 after this paragraph. The concluding formula of S. 2 ends with zbaiiemi.43 The text is recorded fairly accurately. The ritual texts written after the Sh-rzag include the invocations to the entities to whom the days of the month are dedicated, recorded first in accordance with the form they have in S. 1, followed by iiese yešti, then in accordance with the form they have in S. 2. Subsequent to these are found the invocations to the entities controlling the months. The abbreviated version of the Sh-rzag is given on pp. 126–33 (S. 1 is found on pp. 126–29, S. 2 on pp. 129–33), and is written on 22 lines. Both S. 1 and S. 2 record only §§ 1–9, 12, 14, and 21. It should furthermore be noted that a ritual annotation in Pzand is written between S. 1 and S. 2. This version of the text contains a very large number of spelling errors. For further details on this manuscript, see Blochet 1900: 58–63, and 1905–34, 1: 170.

43 The differences in structure of the paragraphs of the Sh-rzag between this manuscript and Mf3 probably reflect different methods of ritual enunciation of the invocations to the entities in the Drn Yašt, existing in different liturgical schools. It should be noted that an analysis of the Rivyats provides evidence of the existence of further types of recitation of the paragraphs of the Sh-rzag in the Drn Yašt: see the table found in Hartman 1956: 66–68. Moreover, see also Karanja 2010: 183–212, which records how the individual paragraphs of the Sh-rzag are pronounced in the Drn Yašt ritual in contemporary Parsi practice.

Manuscripts used for the edition 59 2.2.1.2 Other manuscripts Nouvelles acquisitions françaises 8867, an undated notebook of 117 pages, handwritten by Anquetil-Duperron, which, like the other notes of the French Orientalist kept at the library (by which they were acquired in 1805), was compiled by him during his stay in India. This notebook contains the transcription and translation of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag, the Styišn  sh-rzag and other texts. The Sh-rzag is on pp. 1–20 (S. 1 occupies pp. 1–11, S. 2 pp. 12–20). The pages are divided into two columns: in the right-hand column is the transcription of the Pahlavi text in Latin characters, with some interlinear writing in Persian, and in the left-hand column the French translation (only a small part of S. 2 is translated, perhaps because of the close similarity of this text to S. 1). The spelling of the text is very difficult to decipher. Some information on this manuscript can be found in Blochet 1900: 114. Papiers de Burnouf 6, a volume of 190 folios, measuring 435 × 264 mm. It is one of the volumes handwritten by Eugène Burnouf (part of which were acquired by the library in 1869, and part of which were donated by the daughter of the French scholar in 1886). It contains a transcription in Latin characters of the Sh-rzag and parts of other Avestan texts. The Sh-rzag occupies ff. 1r–2v, and is the transcription of the text given in P40; ff. 3r–7r then contain the textual variants of the other three manuscripts of the library which record the Sh-rzag, i.e. P14, P39, and P51. The text is written in a very elegant and clear hand. Regarding this manuscript, see Blochet 1900: 11–12, where, however, it is erroneously called Papiers de Burnouf 17, and Feer 1899: 7–8. Suppl. pers. 46, a manuscript of 444 folios, measuring 320 × 250 mm, which dates to the 18th century. This manuscript was donated to the library in 1762 by Anquetil-Duperron, who mentions it frequently in his Zend-Avesta, calling it “Grand ravaët.” It contains texts of varied kinds, among which, on ff. 93r–94r and 250v–251v, the Sh-rzag occurs in abbreviated form (the large parts of text not recorded are replaced by t / t sar). For information on this manuscript, see also Anquetil-Duperron 1771, 2: xxv– xxxii; Blochet 1900: 88–98, and 1905–34, 1: 163–67. Suppl. pers. 983, a manuscript of 250 pages, measuring 205 × 140 mm. It dates to the 17th century and forms part of the group of manuscripts donated to the library in 1762. On pp. 2–38 it contains invocations to the day-name entities according to the formulation of the Sh-rzag (given on pp. 2–17 in the form they have in S. 1 and on pp. 18–38 in the form they have in S. 2), in an order, however, that does not correspond to that of the series of day-names. The remainder of the manuscript is occupied by the Drn Yašt. The spelling is mediocre and contains numerous errors. Regarding this manuscript, see also Anquetil-Duperron 1771, 2: xxiv–xxv; Blochet 1900: 11, and 1905–34, 1: 134. Suppl. pers. 1191, a manuscript of 185 folios, measuring 218 × 170 mm; it belonged originally to J. Darmesteter, whose wife donated it to the Bibliothèque Nationale in 1895.

60

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

The date of this manuscript is indicated in a dedication on the flyleaf, which says “To Professor J. Darmesteter by Jamshedji Mervadji Antia 11/2/87.” It contains several ritual texts in Avestan and passages of different kinds in Persian. On ff. 1v–25v is found the Drn Yašt. On ff. 28v–31v are the invocations to the entities of the days of the month: each invocation is given first in the formulation . as found in S. 1, followed by  y , then in the formulation specific to S. 2, where . yazamaide is represented by y . Following these invocations are those to the entities controlling the months (recorded between f. 31v and f. 33r). For a detailed description of the manuscript, see Blochet 1905–34, 1: 171–73, and especially 1900: 52–56. 2.2.2 Kongelige Bibliotek of Copenhagen: K38,44 a manuscript made up of 108 folios, measuring 191 × 108 mm. Here are found the Drn Yašt, part of S. 1, and various other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. It is an Iranian manuscript, whose transcription was completed on the 30th day of the month Wahman of 1127 A. Y., corresponding to the day Srš of the month Amurdd of 1183 of the Qadimi calendar.45 On ff. 106r–108r are written, in an elegant and precise hand, some portions of S. 1, i.e. §§ 1–7, the invocation of gh 1, §§ 20, 30–33 and the concluding formula, which introduce another ritual text. In the manuscript are also found, on ff. 96v–99v, the invocations to the entities to whom the days are dedicated (each one recorded first in the form specific to S. 1, . followed by  y , and then in the form specific to S. 2, where yazamaide is repre. 46 sented by y ). These invocations are followed by those to the entities after whom the months are named (recorded between f. 99v and f. 101r). Regarding this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: viii; Asmussen 1992.

2.3 The other manuscripts A brief description follows of the structure and contents of manuscripts which could not be consulted directly, but were used by Geldner for his edition of the Avestan Sh-rzag (Geldner 1886–96, 2: 260–67). Virtually all the variants of these manuscripts given by Geldner have been reproduced in this current work. Various manuscripts used by the German scholar were part, in his time, of private Indian libraries:47 44 I have been able to consult only a part of this manuscript, in microfilm. 45 See the colophon of the manuscript edited and translated in Unvala 1940: 150–51. 46 In 1886–96, 2: 260, Geldner defines this series of invocations as “Sîr. 1 and 2 in abbreviated form worked into one piece” (the phrase “worked into one piece” refers to the alternation of the invocations of the two versions of the Sh-rzag). It should be further noted that the German scholar does not point out the presence of part of S. 1 in K38; from the brief description of the manuscript in Geldner 1886–96, 1: viii, it could be inferred, mistakenly, that this contains the whole Sh-rzag. 47 The current location of these manuscripts is impossible to establish.

Manuscripts used for the edition 61 F2, a manuscript in the library of Framji Fardunji Madan, of 97 folios, measuring 197 × 140 mm. It is an Iranian manuscript. It contains S. 1 and several other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg and a text in Persian. S. 1 and the majority of the other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg are accompanied by the Pahlavi translation. The colophon gives as the date of copying the day Zmyd of the month Dn A. 20 Y. 1075.48 Paragraphs 17 and 19 are missing from S. 1. It is in an elegant and precise hand and is considered to be the best Iranian manuscript of the Xwurdag Abestg. On this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: iii. H1, a manuscript in the library of the Dastur Hoshangji Jamaspji in Poona, containing 329 folios, measuring 210 × 152 mm. It is divided into three parts: the first contains the Yasna Sde, the second the Sh-rzag (which occupies 11 folios), and the third the Visperad Sde. It is an old manuscript (not dated), and is written in a very correct way. The concluding formula of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. Regarding this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: iii. Jm4, a manuscript belonging to the library of the Mobed Jamshedji Manekji Unvala. It measures 330 × 251 mm. Of the ancient part of the manuscript, which probably dates to 721 A. Y., there remain only ff. 7–42 and 64–71, separated by a large gap. The first six folios are more recent. It records the Sh-rzag both as a whole and in abbreviated form;49 moreover, it contains primarily other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. It is generally written accurately, but is somewhat untidy. For further information on this manuscript, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: v. At the time of Geldener’s edition of the Avesta, a group of manuscripts he used belonged to the library of the Dastur Jamaspji Minocheherji Jamasp Asana in Mumbai. The manuscripts in question are the following: J8, a manuscript constituted of 98 unbound folios, measuring 232 × 191 mm. It contains the Visperad Sde and the Sh-rzag, which occupies ff. 92–99 (the last folios are badly damaged). The manuscript is written rather incorrectly. S. 2 is recorded here in a defective manner. The concluding formula of this version of the text ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. For more information on this manuscript, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: iv. J10, a manuscript of 540 folios, measuring 200 × 140 mm. It contains mainly texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, written in an ornamental hand. Despite being modern and containing many errors, it is structurally more complete than any other manu-

48 As regards the date of this manuscript, see the notes found in Geldner 1886–96, 1: iii, n. 1. 49 It should be noted that Geldner, in 1886–96, 1: v, mentions the position in the manuscript of the abbreviated version of the Sh-rzag (f. 42), while he does not specify the location of the full version.

62

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

script used for the present work: it contains, in both S. 1 and S. 2, all 5 invocations of the ghs, and clearly indicates where the concluding formula of S. 2 ends. One formula precedes S. 1, and another one follows S. 2.50 It should also be noted that §§ 17 and 19 are missing from both S. 1 and S. 2. For a description of this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: v. J15, a manuscript formed of 188 folios, measuring 222 × 200 mm. It contains the Sh-rzag and other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, and the Visperad, which are accompanied by the Pahlavi translation. Paragraphs 17 and 19 are missing from S. 1. The concluding formula of S. 1 excludes aoxt.nman yazatahe and that of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. Regarding this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: v. J16, a manuscript of 188 folios, which measures 292 × 181 mm, containing the Sh-rzag and various other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. In S. 1, §§ 17 and 19 are not recorded. On this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: v. Finally, in Geldner’s time, the following manuscripts also belonged to Indian libraries: Kh2, a manuscript of the library of the Dastur Khorshedji Bejanji, made up of two parts of 45 and 36 folios respectively; it measures 251 × 171 mm. The Sh-rzag is found in the first part, which contains the Drn Yašt; the second part contains the Vštsp Yašt and several texts in Pzand. It belongs to the Iranian tradition. Paragraphs 17 and 19 are missing in both S. 1 and S. 2, and the concluding formula of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. For information on this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: viii. Ml2, a manuscript originally belonging to the library of Manekji Limji Hataria.51 It is an elegant manuscript, containing several Avestan texts and fragments written in Persian characters. The Sh-rzag and most of the other texts that are found in it were copied from Iranian manuscripts. Paragraphs 17 and 19 are not recorded either in S. 1 or in S. 2.52 See also Geldner 1886–96, 1: xi. 50 Geldner (1886–96, 2: 260 and 267, n. 6 to § 30) states that these are the introductory and the concluding formulae of the Yašts. This notation does not allow us to establish exactly which formulae are recorded in J10. It is important to notice that the presence of these formulae indicates a way of reciting the Sh-rzag which is different from the usual one. It should be added that Geldner, in 1886–96, 2: 260, notes that the Sh-rzag is preceded in the manuscript by the title“Sîroza Yasht.” 51 Geldner (in 1886–96, 1: xi, n. 1) informs that the Hataria library manuscripts he used were entrusted to a “committee” in Mumbai after Hataria’s death. 52 Geldner, in 1886–96, 2: 260, points out that the Sh-rzag is preceded in this manuscript by the heading “Sîroza Yasht.”

Manuscripts used for the edition 63 Some of the other manuscripts used by Geldner are currently kept in European libraries. One group belongs to the Kongelige Bibliotek in Copenhagen:53 K11, a manuscript of 317 folios, measuring 251 × 210 mm. It contains the Yasna Sde, the Sh-rzag, and the Visperad Sde. The colophon at its end records as the transcription date of the latter text 1703 Samvat/1016 A. Y.54 Some notes on this manuscript are found in Westergaard 1846: 112; Geldner 1886–96, 1: vii; Asmussen 1992. K12, a manuscript of 378 folios, containing the Sh-rzag and other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. It was copied in 1170 A. Y.55 The concluding formula of S. 1 ends before aoxt.nman yazatahe. For further information on the manuscript, see Westergaard 1846: 112; Geldner 1886–96, 1: vii; Asmussen 1992. K17, a manuscript of 208 folios, measuring 235 × 120 mm, which contains the Shrzag both in full and abbreviated form, together with several texts composed of ritual formulae (including the invocations to the day-name entities, each recorded first in the formulation of S. 1 and then in that of S. 2). Its colophons record the dates 1738 Samvat and 1050 A. Y.56 In the non-abbreviated Sh-rzag, § 17 is missing from both S. 1 and S. 2, and § 19 is missing from S. 1. The concluding formula of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. Some notes on this manuscript can be found in Westergaard 1846: 113; Geldner 1886–96, 1: vii–viii; Asmussen 1992. K18, a manuscript of 277 pages, divided into three parts bound together, composed of texts of the Xwurdag Abestg accompanied by the Persian or Pahlavi translation. The Sh-rzag is found in the first part, of which the transcription was completed on the twelfth day of the month Mh of 1160 A. Y.57 The concluding formula of S. 1 ends before aoxt.nman yazatahe. As regards this manuscript, see also Westergaard 1846: 113–14; Geldner 1886– 96, 1: viii; Asmussen 1992. K36, an Iranian manuscript of 167 folios (of which ff. 1 and 101–15 are missing), measuring 165 × 111 mm; it records the Sh-rzag both in full and also in abbreviated form. Moreover, it contains mainly other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. Its 53 Note that in 1886–96, 2: 260, among the manuscripts he used for the edition, Geldner also lists manuscript K25 of the Copenhagen Kongelige Bibliotek, which, however, he does not mention in any note (regarding this manuscript, see Westergaard 1846: 114 and pp. xv–xvii of the 12th volume of the series Codices Avestici et Pahlavici Bibliothecae Universitatis Hafniensis, published in 1944; notes on this manuscript can also be found in Asmussen 1992). 54 See the edition and translation of the colophon in Unvala 1940: 135. 55 See the edition and translation of the colophon of the manuscript in Unvala 1940: 136–37. 56 See the edition and translation of the colophons in Unvala 1940: 143–44. 57 See the edition and translation of the colophons of the manuscript in Unvala 1940: 144–45.

64

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

transcription dates to 1073 A. Y. For other notes, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: viii; Asmussen 1992. Two manuscripts are now kept at the British Library:58 BL MS Avestan 12 (= L12 in Geldner 1886–96), a manuscript of 119 folios, measuring 187 × 136 mm. It contains several texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, all accompanied by the Pahlavi translation. The manuscript was copied in 1124 A. Y. In S. 1, § 19 is missing; the concluding formula of S. 1 excludes aoxt.nman yazatahe, and that of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. The manuscript is written correctly. For further information on this manuscript, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: ix and Dhalla 1912: 391. BL MS Avestan 21 (= L11 in Geldner 1886–96), a manuscript formed of 277 folios, measuring 217 × 122 mm. It contains primarily texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. S. 1 starts on f. 260, S. 2 on f. 269; the part of the manuscript containing the Sh-rzag was copied in 1093 A. Y. (the part of the manuscript up to f. 88 was copied later).59 Paragraphs 17 and 19 are not recorded in either S. 1 and S. 2, and the concluding formula of S. 2 ends with ga m yazatm yazamaide. For further information on this manuscript, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: ix and Dhalla 1912: 395. A manuscript is currently kept at the Staatsbibliotek in Munich: M49 (= M4 in Geldner 1886–96), a manuscript of 246 folios, measuring 200 × 115 mm. It is divided into three parts copied at different times. It contains the Visperad as well as, mainly, texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, accompanied by the Persian or Pahlavi translation. The Sh-rzag is found in the second part, which was copied in A. 20 Y. 1107;60 it occupies ff. 87r–109v (S. 1 is found between ff. 87r–97v, S. 2 between ff. 97v–109v), and is accompanied by the Pahlavi translation. The text ends with the Avestan version of S. 2.32. In S. 1, § 19 is not recorded, and the concluding formula ends before aoxt.nman yazatahe. With respect to this manuscript, see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: x, and especially Bartholomae 1915: 15–31. 58 When Geldner’s edition was published, these were part of the India Office Library (as regards the manuscripts of this library used by Geldner for the edition of the Avesta, see Sims-Williams 2005). Here it should also be noted that Geldner, in 1886–96, 1: x, informs us that the Sh-rzag is found also in manuscript Lb5 of the British Museum library (now Add. 8997 of the British Library), which, however, is never cited in the notes to the edition of the text. In reality, as can be inferred from Sachau 1869: 270, this manuscript does not contain the Sh-rzag but rather the invocations to the entities controlling the days of the month, to be recited in the ritual texts. On this manuscript see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: x, and especially, Sachau 1869: 269–75. 59 See the edition and translation of the colophons of the manuscript in Unvala 1940: 96. 60 The colophon included in this part of the manuscript is edited and translated in Unvala 1940: 54–55 (and on pp. 54–56, the other colophons of the manuscript are also edited).

Manuscripts used for the edition 65 Finally, two manuscripts are now kept at the John Rylands University Library in Manchester. They originally belonged to the Reverend John Wilson,61 and then passed into the possession of Lord Crawford (i.e. James Lindsay, the 26th Earl of Crawford and 9th Earl of Balcarres). Subsequently, they were acquired in 1901 by Mrs. Enriquetta Rylands (the widow of John Rylands).62 The variants in these manuscripts found in the Geldner edition reproduce those in the previous edition of the Sh-rzag by Westergaard (1852–54: 335–42). These manuscripts are: Parsi 15 (old no. 8)63 (= W6 in Geldner 1886–96), a modern manuscript containing texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. The Sh-rzag here occupies pp. 1–25 (S. 1 is found on pp. 1–12 and S. on pp. 13–25). In S. 1 the concluding formula ends before aoxt.nman yazatahe. For more information, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: xiii. Parsi 17 (old no. 5) (= W3 in Geldner 1886–96), a manuscript of 293 folios, measuring 149 × 98 mm, which contains texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. The transcription date is unknown. It was probably copied from an Iranian manuscript. The Shrzag here occupies pp. 1–23 (S. 1 is found on pp. 1–12 and S. 2 on pp. 12–23). For more information, see Geldner 1886–96, 1: xiii.

61 These, in turn, were copies made for Wilson of manuscripts that, at the time of Westergaard’s edition of the Avesta (1852–54), were kept in Mumbai. 62 I owe this latter information to Leon Goldman, with my thanks. 63 Again, it is Leon Goldman who gave me the information on the current library identification code of this and the manuscript described below, and on the positioning of the Sh-rzag therein.

3

Notes for a classification of the manuscript tradition of the Sh-rzag

3.1 On the manuscript tradition of the Avestan Sh-rzag As can be seen from the preceding description, the majority of the manuscripts containing the Sh-rzag also include other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg. Overall, the text of the Sh-rzag is transmitted uniformly and it may be assumed, therefore, that its manuscripts derive from same archetype, which can be identified with the first manuscript containing the collection of the short liturgies (i.e. the texts of the Xwurdag Abestg and the Yašts).1 This manuscript is very probably later than the transcription of the Sasanian Avesta (which is most probably not later than the 6th century, the latest date to which the invention of the Avestan alphabet can be attributed).2 The Xwurdag Abestg and the other liturgical texts were known to

1 For this group of texts, I am using the appellative “collection of the short liturgies” in accordance with the definition suggested by Kellens for the first time in 1998. Here the Belgian scholar discusses the hypothesis that all Avestan ritual texts that have come down to us are two liturgical anthologies, i.e. the collection of the short liturgies (“recueil des liturgies brèves”) and the recitative of the long liturgy (“récitatif de la liturgie longue,” i.e. the group Yasna – Visperad – Vdvdd). According to Kellens, these anthologies already existed, in parallel with the text of the Sasanian Avesta, at the latest in the first Sasanian era, at least in oral form. This hypothesis, which, by all means, can be shared, has found a broad consensus among specialists (see, for example, de Vaan 2003: 11–15; Cantera 2004, for the first time on pp. 21–24). It should be remembered that this differs radically from another view of the history of the Avesta, which previously was widely accredited, according to which the Avestan texts that have come down to us would derive from hyparchetypes copied in the 9th–10th centuries, which would originate directly from the Sasanian Avesta (the most complete formulation of this view is to be found in Hoffmann–Narten 1989; for other references, see Hoffmann–Narten 1989: 23–33; Kellens 1998: 466–68). See also the observations on the manuscript transmission of the Avesta in Kellens 1998: 452–88, and in Cantera 2004: 25–34. 2 That the corpus Xwurdag Abestg + Yašts texts derives from a single manuscript is suggested also, with some words of caution, by Kellens in 1998: 472. Here it should be recalled that for the first time in this article (especially on pp. 482–88), the Belgian scholar expresses doubts about the existence of a written version of the Sasanian Avesta. Kellens’ doubts are based on arguments of palaeographic and textual order (the Pahlavi cursive, on which the Avestan alphabet is based, would not be documented before the 7th century CE, and furthermore, the passages of Pahlavi texts which refer to the existence of a written text of the Avesta in the Sasanian era would deserve little credit). Important critical comments against Kellens’ view are raised by Cereti in 2008: on the basis of an analysis of the Pahlavi cursive, the Italian scholar concludes that this script was developed

Classification of the manuscript tradition 67 all priests because of their frequent use, and corresponded to parts of the Sasanian Avesta. We may therefore assume that their transcription was only considered necessary when the Zoroastrian community saw that its literary and religious tradition was risking extinction, during the period following the fall of the Sasanian empire. It is impossible to establish the stemma codicum of the Sh-rzag manuscripts, principally because of the strong influence of the oral transmission on their transcription, which often led the copyists to modify the text they found in their models.3 Due to such an influence, many different spellings are found in manuscripts that are related to each other (or, conversely, remarkable spelling concordances can be encountered in manuscripts that are not related to each other). Furthermore, some related manuscripts have structural differences, such as the presence or absence of S. 1.17, 1.19, 2.17, and 2.19, and a different structure of the concluding formulae. Structural variations may be due to the space available to the copyists or to their personal assessments as to whether, or how, to insert some portions of text. A relationship can nevertheless be recognized between some manuscripts of the Sh-rzag which share particular structural affinities, or numerous and remarkable variants.4 We can in particular see that the manuscripts of the Iranian tradition are divided in two sub-groups, one which includes D24, Mf3, and P51,5 and the other which includes F2, K36, K38, Kh2, and Ml2.6 Furthermore, it is interesting to observe that a Sh-rzag manuscript belonging to the Iranian tradition appears to have been used as a model by the copyist of E1.7 Additionally, among the Pahlavi Sh-rzag manuscripts we can then identify two sub-groups: the first one includes, J15, K18, L12, M4, R53, P40, and T12,8 and the second one includes D29, R14, and R319.9

3

4

5 6

7 8

9

at the latest by the middle of the 6th century. Additionally, he attributes veridicity to the textual references made to the existence of a written copy of the Avesta, at least in the 6th century. Against the interpretation by Kellens, see also Cantera 2004: 135–63. It should be recalled that a strong influence of the oral transmission is also common to the manuscript tradition of all other texts of the Xwurdag Abestg, as well as to that of some Yašts; see also Geldner 1886–96, 1: xl, and Hoffmann 1967a (especially p. 11). A table of the variants of the manuscripts of the Sh-rzag, based on the critical edition included in the present work, is available on the Internet website of the Avestan Digital Archive (see the page http://ada.usal.es/analizador/). It should be noted here that in de Vaan 2003: 27 is found a little schema of the manuscript transmission of the group of texts frnagns, Ghs, and Sh-rzag. This schema does not find support in the analysis of the manuscripts of the Sh-rzag. It does not take into account, in fact, that (as already noted by Geldner in 1886–96, 1: xlv), in copying the Xwurdag Abestg texts, the copyists appear to have generally used different manuscript sources. D24 is, as already noted in II.1.1.1, a copy of Mf3; P51 does not belong in the same transmission line as these two manuscripts. Within this sub-group, K36, K38, and Kh2 have a close relationship; K36 and Kh2 are also related to F2. The variants of W3 recorded in Geldner’s edition do not permit to reconstruct the relationship of this manuscript to the other Iranian manuscripts of the Sh-rzag. E1 has in fact several remarkable variants in common with the Iranian manuscripts, especially with K36 and Kh2. The text of the Sh-rzag in R53 is copied from T12 (see II.1.1.1). Within this sub-group, a very close relationship between T12 and K18 can also be recognized. Furthermore, K18 and J15 are related to one another, and so are P40 and P14. See also II.3.2. See also II.3.2.

68

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

Among the other manuscripts, the relationship between H1 and K17 stands out. To conclude, it must be noted that J10 presents some structural peculiarities, which differentiate it from the other manuscripts: it is the only manuscript which includes all 5 invocations of the ghs in both S. 1 and S. 2, and it is the only one which clearly indicates where the concluding formula of S. 2 ends. This suggests that the copyist of J10 used a more complete, and possibly also more ancient, source than all other Sh-rzag manuscripts.10

3.2 On the manuscript tradition of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag The Pahlavi Sh-rzag manuscripts consulted are divided into two groups, which henceforth will be called respectively Group A and Group B, each representing a branch of the manuscript transmission.11 These are differentiated by the differing translations of some words, by the presence or absence of some glosses (most remarkably, the glosses on some entities in S. 1; see also I.1.3), and a different alternation of the Avestan and Pahlavi portions of text.12 Additionally, the two groups are differentiated by the presence or absence of some paragraphs and gh invocations. The manuscripts of Group A are those in which S. 1 is accompanied by the glosses on the entities. Of the manuscripts analyzed, only D29, R14 and R319 belong to this group.13 10 It bears remembering here that, as first demonstrated by Geldner in 1886–96, 1: xliv, the text of the Yašts included in this manuscript originates from a source that is older and more complete even than the excellent manuscript F1. 11 It should be noted here that in addition to the manuscripts described in the preceding paragraphs of this chapter, the Pahlavi version of the Sh-rzag is also found in the Indian manuscripts named U1 and E in Dhabhar 1927. According to Dhabhar 1927: 32 [introduction], U1 was copied in 1162 A. Y. Dhabhar presents it as one of the manuscripts of the library of the Ervad Maneckji Rustamji Unvala (1856–1919). Its current location is unknown: many of the manuscripts originally belonging to the library of Unvala, Dan Sheffield points out, went to the First Dastur Meherjirana Library, and others to the library of the Cama Oriental institute; the manuscript, however, does not appear either in Kotwal–Sheffield–Gandhi 2008 (a catalogue of the manuscripts donated to the First Dastur Meherjirana Library since 1923), or in the unpublished catalogue of the not previously catalogued manuscripts of the Cama Oriental Institute, prepared by Dan Sheffield, who has kindly provided it to me. Manuscript E, which Dhabhar presents as belonging to the library of Dastur Kaikhosro Jamaspji JamaspAsa, is composed of three parts copied respectively in 1108, 1182, and 1189 A. Y. In the descriptive note in Dhabhar 1927: 34 [introduction] it is not specified in which of these three parts the Pahlavi Sh-rzag is contained. The Middle Persian translation of the Sh-rzag is also found in the Indian manuscripts J1, MU27, MU35, and TD23 published as Photostats in the series The Pahlavi Codices and Iranian Researches (these constitute, respectively, volumes 6, 24, 38, and 4). Note that these four manuscripts have been consulted, but have not appeared to contain sufficiently significant elements for them to be used for the edition of the Avestan or the Pahlavi Sh-rzag (some interesting variants of their Pahlavi version of the text have been pointed out in Part IV). 12 Minimal differences are observed in the distribution of the Avestan and Pahlavi portions of text within the two manuscript branches. Such differences were surely produced during the manuscript transmission. 13 U1 also belongs to this group. It must be noted that the four manuscripts belonging to this group are closely related. R14 and R319 appear to belong to the same transmission line as D29. U1 appears, on the other hand, to belong to a transmission line that is different from that of the other three manuscripts in the group.

Classification of the manuscript tradition 69 All the other manuscripts of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag that have been consulted belong to Group B.14 As regards the relationship between the two groups of manuscripts, it is important to observe that most of the translation of the Avestan text recorded in them is the same. They are further united by the presence of some brief glosses and, more significantly, by some common errors.15 In my opinion, the Group A manuscripts derive directly from the archetype of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag, i.e. the first manuscript in which the Pahlavi version was added to the Avestan text. It is impossible to establish the date at which this manuscript was compiled.16 However, it precedes the hyparchetype of the Group B manuscripts, into which a re-elaboration of the text of a Group A manuscript was inserted. This re-elaboration consisted of excluding a large part of the glosses of S. 1 (considered, perhaps, to be superfluous or too long), modifying the translations of some words, and adding new brief glosses. It is not possible to determine when this was carried out; terminus ante quem is the transcription of T12 (or of its model), i.e. halfway through the 16th 14 Manuscript E also belongs to Group B. It must be noted here that the Group B manuscript tradition appears to be divided into several transmission lines. It is interesting to observe that in T12 small portions of Pahlavi text and glosses are found between the lines or in the margins. Most, if not all of them, were not written by the original copyist. Several of these were certainly copied from a Group A manuscript. Moreover, some portions of Bd. 26 were also added subsequently in the margins (i.e. part of § 87, of § 106, and of § 116, which are in the margin, respectively, of S. 1.5, 1.6, and 1.7). In R53, the Pahlavi Sh-rzag includes the portions of text which are written in T12 interlinearly or in the margins, as well as some words taken from a Group A manuscript. Also included there are some words that are missing from all the other manuscripts analyzed (perhaps added by the copyist of R53 himself). The passages from Bd. 26.106 and 26.116, and several of the words and portions of text written interlinearly and in the margins in T12 are also found in the margins or interlinearly (in a couple of cases with some variants) in manuscript E. Perhaps the interlinear and marginal portions of text common to T12 and E are to be attributed to the same hand (and certainly they are very recent: §§ 87, 106, and 116 of Bd. 26, in fact, are found only in manuscripts TD1 and TD2, which were not available to the Parsis before 1870 and 1880 respectively: see MacKenzie 1990). It is important to note that the analysis of the variants demonstrates that E does not derive, either directly or indirectly, from T12. To conclude, it must be noted that no manuscript in Group B appears to be the copy of another. Regarding T12, R53, P40, and P14, see also II.3.1. 15 See in the manuscripts of both groups, the erroneous radh for rad in S. 1.7, kmag  axw for kmag-axw in S. 1.29, xwady-nf for xwadyh-nf in S. 2.9, and ahlyh  xwrh for ahlyhxwrh in S. 2.26, the superfluous presence of -iz (the translation of -ca) in S. 1.6, 1.22, and 1.33, and the misspellings ’snwd in S. 1.9, hwt’yt in S. 1.21, d’l’y in S. 2.9, and ’sym’n' in S. 2.27. 16 It should be remembered that it is also impossible to establish the chronology of the manuscripts of the other texts of the Pahlavi Xwurdag Abestg. In 2004: 31, Cantera suggests dating the insertion of the Pahlavi translations of the Xwurdag Abestg into the manuscripts to the period between the 12th and the 15th century (to the latter century date H2 and J9, Indian manuscripts of the Xwurdag Abestg with the Sanskrit translation, which implies the existence of a Pahlavi version). The dating suggested by Cantera is plausible, but the H2 and J9 manuscripts do not include the Sh-rzag. The Sanskrit version of the Sh-rzag, edited by Bharucha in 1906–33, 1: 48–50, is of no help in establishing the chronology of the manuscript tradition of the Pahlavi version. The Parsi scholar did not use a text recorded in manuscripts, but a copy supplied to him, as he states, “in the form of a tract” (see Bharucha 1906–33, 1, notes: 15, n. 278). The chronology of this Sanskrit version is extremely hard to establish. It seems to be a re-elaboration of the Pahlavi version of S. 1 (carried out, perhaps, by using manuscripts of both Group A and Group B), but it has numerous grammatical, orthographical, and sandhi anomalies, which make it arduous to decipher.

70

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

century. An analysis of the variants in this manuscript, in fact, shows that it (or its model), was not the hyparchetype of Group B. One could suppose, on the contrary, that the text of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag given in the Group A manuscripts is a modified and expanded version of the one found in the Group B manuscripts (in which case, the latter would derive directly from the archetype of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag). Militating against this view, however, is the fact that, if we accept it, the composition of the text which is included in the Group A manuscripts would very probably be later than the 10th century (perhaps by several centuries). This conflicts with the linguistic form of this text, which lacks any trace of late composition, such as New Persian grammatical and lexical elements. It also conflicts with the fact that several of its glosses probably originate from Pahlavi exegetical texts of the Sasanian or early Islamic period, which are very unlikely to have existed after the 10th century (see also I.1.3).

4

Note on the preceding editions and translations of the Sh-rzag in Western languages

The first translation of the Avestan Sh-rzag into a Western language is found in the work Zend-Avesta by Anquetil-Duperron (1771, 2: 316–36).1 It is preceded by an introduction (Anquetil-Duperron 1771, 2: 315), in which the text is presented as “composé de petits et de grands Khoschnouméns [= šn mans] des Esprits célestes qui président aux trente jours du mois.” In this introduction are found some observations on the title of the text (recorded by Anquetil-Duperron as Si-rouzé and interpreted as having the meaning of “thirty days”) and on its ritual uses. The translation has a large number of misunderstandings of the meaning of the original text. The Sh-rzag is correctly divided into 33 paragraphs; moreover, in S. 1 each paragraph is introduced by “Je fais khoschnoumen à” (the translation of xšn maine).2 The work of Anquetil-Duperron is translated into German in Kleuker 1776–86; here, on pp. 283–94, is found the translation of S. 1 only. The first critical edition of the Avestan Sh-rzag is found on pp. 335–42 of the edition of the Avesta by Westergaard (1852–54). It is based on ten manuscripts and on a 19th-century printed edition of the Xwurdag Abestg (which are briefly described on pp. 14–15 of the volume). The critical apparatus of this edition is quite limited. Both S. 1 and S. 2 are divided into 30 paragraphs, where §§ 31–33 and the concluding formulae are amalgamated with § 30, undoubtedly on the basis of the mistaken conviction that the Sh-rzag is intended solely to praise the entities in charge of the days of the Zoroastrian month. It should be noted that this erroneous division is encountered in all subsequent editions, as well as translations, of the Avestan Sh-rzag.

1 In the first volume of the work, Anquetil-Duperron provides some references on when he carried out the translation of the Sh-rzag. He writes, in fact, that starting from the end of November 1759, after completing the translation of the Vdvdd, he moved on to translating the Yasna, the Visperad, the Niyyišns, the Yašts and other texts contained in an (unidentified) manuscript. He then translated the Bundahišn and other Pahlavi texts contained in another manuscript (this, too, unidentified), and after this, translated the Sh-rzag (see Anquetil-Duperron 1771, 1: 337 = 1997: 358). 2 Anquetil-Duperron, in 1771, 2: 316, informs that he used the manuscript P51 (the “Petit Ravaët”) as the source for his translation. As noted in II.2.2.1.1, in this manuscript, xšn maine precedes all the paragraphs of S. 1.

72

Manuscript Tradition of the Sh-rzag

A German translation of the text is found in Spiegel 1852–63, 3: 198–207. For this translation, Spiegel makes full use of the interpretative assistance of the Pahlavi and Persian versions of the Sh-rzag. The formulae of S. 1 are translated as if they were in the nominative (surely after the model of the text of a Pahlavi Sh-rzag manuscript of Group B3). Furthermore, in 1864–68, 2: 696–700, Spiegel offers comments on the Sh-rzag, based on the Persian version of the text contained in the Paris manuscript Supplément du fonds d’Anquetil 5 (i.e. P39), of which he reproduces some parts. Another translation of the Sh-rzag is included in the French version of the Avesta by de Harlez (1881: 596–605). On pp. vii–viii of the book, de Harlez explains that he used an intertextual and linguistic-comparative analysis as interpretative assistance. As in the translation by Spiegel, S. 1 is translated as if its invocations were in the nominative. Furthermore, in both S. 1 and S. 2 the arrangement of the invocations of the ghs is interpreted wrongly: the invocation to Amrtt and auxiliary entities (§ 7) is understood as forming part of gh 1 and the invocations of the first four ghs are interpreted as belonging to ghs 2–5; the one to Sraoša and the other entities in charge of gh 5, finally, is presented as an invocation on its own (see de Harlez 1881: 597, 601–2). The first English translation of the Sh-rzag is owed to Darmesteter (1880–87, 2: 3–20). To Darmesteter is owed also a subsequent French translation of the text (1892–93, 2: 296–304, 323–30; this is preceded by a brief introductory note on pp. 294–954). Darmesteter makes wide use of the Pahlavi version of the text for his interpretation. As in the two translations cited above, the invocations of S. 1 are rendered as if they were in the nominative. From shortly after Darmesteter’s English translation dates Geldner’s critical edition of the Sh-rzag (1886–96, 2: 260–67), which is included in the full edition of the Avesta. In the introductory note to the edition (p. 260), Geldner lists the 24 manuscripts he used.5 The critical apparatus is basic, but comprehensive. In the German translation of the Avesta by Wolff (1910), the translation of the Sh-rzag is found on pp. 299–306. Wolff’s translation is based on the Avestan dictionary by Bartholomae (1904). It should be pointed out that in the translation of S. 1, the invocations are mistakenly understood as being governed implicitly by a nominal form meaning “The day (of).” Hartman 1956, a study dedicated mainly to the Sh-rzag, should then be cited. On pp. 36–60, it contains a side-by-side transcription, in two columns, of the Little and the Great Sh-rzag (based on Geldner’s edition). Each paragraph is accompanied by the translation in French and a list of the Avestan passages that 3 In the Pahlavi text of these manuscripts, the invocations of the Little Sh-rzag are translated as if they were in the nominative (for further information, see IV § 1, commentary to S. 1.1 a–b / 2.1 a–b). 4 It should also be noted that between the translation of S. 1 and that of S. 2, on pp. 305–22, there is interjected a translation of Chapter 26 of the Bundahišn: Darmesteter inserted it because he considered it, in his own words (p. 295), “le meilleur commentaire de ces litanies.” The insertion of this translation demonstrates recognition of the thematic affinity of Bd. 26 with the Pahlavi version of S. 1. 5 The number, however, should be reduced to 23, given the absence of notes drawn from manuscript K25 (see also II.2.3).

Editions and translations in Western languages 73 coincide with or are similar to its subsections. The formulae of S. 1 are rendered as if they were in the nominative. Although Hartman divides the Sh-rzag into 30 paragraphs, on p. 72, he observes that in reality it contains 33 paragraphs. On pp. 60–73 of the article is also found a treatment on the ritual uses of the text, based on the notes contained in the Rivyats. The Avestan Sh-rzag and its translation are now found also on the Internet: the website www.avesta.org gives the text transcribed in Latin characters, as well as in Avestan characters in accordance with the Geldner edition, and the English translation by Darmesteter.6 A critical edition of the Pahlavi version of the Sh-rzag is included in Dhabhar 1927. Here, it occupies pp. 159–81 (and the relevant notes are on pp. 380–92; on p. 29 of the introduction Dhabhar also gives a brief descriptive note on the Pahlavi translation of the text). The edition is based on the previously mentioned manuscripts E, Mf2, T12, and U1. Here, the text is divided into 33 paragraphs. To Dhabhar is owed also the English translation of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag (the sole one in a Western language that has appeared before the present work), which is found on pp. 307–41 of Dhabhar 1963, and is also divided into 33 paragraphs. In the footnotes to the translation, Dhabhar gives several annotations: he suggests emendations to the 1927 edition, refers to passages of Pahlavi texts that are comparable to the glosses in S. 1, and cites passages from the Persian version of the text. It should be observed that these annotations contain very few references to Avestan texts, including the Sh-rzag.7 Another edition of the Middle Persian Sh-rzag, accompanied by a Frsi translation, is found in Dihdasht 1984: 1–123. Its critical apparatus is based on that of the Dhabhar edition. In addition, it records the variants found in the manuscripts J1, MU27, MU35, and TD23 published in the series The Pahlavi Codices and Iranian Researches. The text, written in Pahlavi characters, is followed by the critical notes, a transcription in Latin characters and finally, by the Frsi translation. It is divided into 33 paragraphs. Each paragraph is given and translated first according to the formulation of S. 1, directly followed by that of S. 2, thus not reflecting the arrangement of the text in the manuscripts (on p. 4 Dihdasht justifies her editorial choice as aimed at highlighting the difference between the little and the Great Sh-rzag). The previously cited edition of the Sanskrit Sh-rzag by Bharucha (1906–33, 1: 48–50) should also be mentioned (see also p. 15 of the notes). In conclusion, it should be noted that the Avestan Sh-rzag and its Pahlavi translation have been the object of the doctoral thesis Raffaelli 2004. 6 The transcription in Latin characters of S. 1 and S. 2 is found in two different formats: see www. avesta.org/ka/s1.htm; www.avesta.org/ka/s2.htm; www.avesta.org/ka/s_mithra.htm#s1; www. avesta.org/ka/s_mithra.htm#s2. The webpages www.avesta.org/ka/s_jamaspa.htm#s1 and www. avesta.org/ka/s_jamaspa.htm#s2 have the text of S. 1 and S. 2 in Avestan characters, and the pages www.avesta.org/ka/s1sbe.htm and www.avesta.org/ka/s2sbe.htm have their translation. 7 The only reference to the Avestan Sh-rzag is found on p. 335, n. 1 to § 1, where Dhabhar notes that “I adore” (his translation of the verbal form yazom, governing the S. 2 invocations) is the rendering of yazamaid (sic).

Thispageintentionallyleftblank

Part III

Edition and Translation

Thispageintentionallyleftblank

1

Editorial criteria

1.1 The Avestan text The transcription of the Avestan text of the Sh-rzag follows the system established by Hoffmann, for which, see most recently Hoffmann–Forssman 2004: 39–46. The variants provided include those found in the edition of the text published by Geldner in 1886–96, 2: 260–67 (whose spellings have been corrected in those cases where consultation of the manuscripts has revealed errors).1 To these have been added some particularly interesting variants found in the manuscripts consulted.2 Spelling differences from Geldner’s edition which have no philological interest have not been mentioned in the footnotes. Firstly, these include the emended spellings xvarnavhat in S. 1.8, 1.13, 1.15, and 1.23, vavhm in S. 2.3, 2.5, 2.24, 2.25, 2.29, and 2.33 and vavhš in S. 2 gh 4, 2.10, 2.19, and 2.Cf. These reflect the phonetic evolution in Young Avestan of the PIr group *-hu 7- in intervocalic position3 (Geldner gives, instead of these spellings, xvarnauhat, vauhm and vauhš respectively,4 without giving any variant). Secondly, the spelling manahe has been given in S. 1.2. Manahe is the evolution of PIr * manahai7-5 (Geldner gives this form as manahe, without providing any variant6). Finally, the spellings 1 Note that the variants mentioned between parentheses are, as in the Geldner edition, those occurring in K17, K36, and K38 in what Geldner calls the “abbreviated” Sh-rzag. 2 Among the manuscripts not used by Geldner, only P39, P40, P14, P51, and T12 seem to contain elements of interest for the critical apparatus. Note the omission in the apparatus of a variant mentioned by Geldner in n. 2 to S. 1.13 (p. 261), that is, the spelling of haptirin.ga in the introductory formula of Yt. 8 in L18. This spelling is of no philological interest for this present study. Also omitted are some of Geldner’s annotations, whose meaning is not clear: the annotation given in the introductory note to the edition (p. 260) and that (given in n. 6 to § 30, p. 267) regarding the formulae that are attached to S. 1 and S. 2 in J10; the annotation regarding the spelling of trm in S. 2.9 in H1, J10, J15, and K18 (given on p. 264, n. 1 to § 9); the annotation given on p. 262, n. 3 to § 25; the annotation “Ml2 connects this clause also with the preceding Par.” (given on p. 266, n. 1 to § 20). 3 See Hoffmann–Narten 1989: 50–52; Hoffmann–Forssman 2004: 106. 4 These spellings are found in the manuscripts more frequently than the correct ones: for the spelling of the group -vh- in the Avestan manuscripts see Hoffmann–Narten 1989: 51–52; Hoffmann–Forssman 2004: 45. 5 See Hoffmann–Forssmann 2004: 106–7, and see also Hoffmann–Narten 1989: 55–59. 6 The group -h- is indeed almost always written in the Avestan manuscripts as -h-: see Hoffmann– Narten 1989: 56–58, and Hoffmann–Forssmann 2004: 45.

78

Edition and Translation

aiiiš in S. 1.2, 1.21, 2.2, and 2.21, (°)maiiaom in S. 1.21, 2.21 and 2.Cf and maiiauuanm in S. 1.Cf have been given. The  in these forms is the development of PIr *ni77 (Geldner’s edition gives these forms with spellings of the type an° and [°]main°8). Furthermore, several divergences from the Geldner edition have not been pointed out in the critical apparatus regarding the reading of the graphemes (š), (š.) and (š). Geldner often records these graphemes in a way that does not correspond to their phonetic value.9 To conclude, generally the differences in the spelling and structure of the formulae introducing and concluding the paragraphs in Mf3 and P51 have not been noted (these formulae are in fact secondary in nature, and therefore have a very marginal philological interest).

1.2 The Pahlavi text For the transliteration and transcription of the Pahlavi text, the system introduced by MacKenzie has been chosen (for which, see MacKenzie 1967 and 1971a: x–xv, as well as the observations of Rossi in 1973). The edition is based on the text of the Group A manuscripts, on the basis of the hypothesis that these derive directly from the archetype of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag (see II.3.2). The variants in the translations of some words and the short glosses specific to the Group B manuscripts have therefore been omitted in accordance with the assumption that these are emendations and additions to the original text. The Group B manuscripts have been used, though, to incorporate those portions of text that were certainly found in the archetype of the Pahlavi Sh-rzag, but are missing from the Group A manuscripts that have come down to us. In the critical apparatus, of the Group A manuscripts, only the variants of D29 have been recorded, this being judged sufficient to represent the manuscript tradition of the whole group. Among the manuscripts consulted, in fact, this one appears to contain the most complete and correct text. Of the Group B manuscripts, the variants of T12 and of P40 have been recorded, as these manuscripts provide a more complete text than R379 and P14, and adequately represent the manuscript tradition of the group.

7 See Hoffmann–Narten 1989: 59–62; Hoffmann–Forssmann 2004: 88–89. 8 These are the most frequent spellings, in the manuscripts, of all forms of aiia- and maiiauua-. This type of spelling originates from an early phase of the manuscript transmission: in addition to the texts quoted in the previous note, see Hintze 1989: 34–36, which lists the occurrences of the grapheme  in the important manuscript F1. 9 It should be noted that some confusion around the phonetic value of these signs already existed in the first phases of the manuscript transmission of the Avestan texts (see Hintze 1989: 32–35, which deals with their occurrence in F1). See also Hoffmann–Forssmann 2004: 104–5 regarding the phonetic value of š, Hoffmann 1986 and Hoffmann–Forssmann 2004: 92 regarding the phonetic value of š., and Hoffmann–Narten 1989: 62–67 and Hoffmann–Forssmann 2004: 101 regarding the phonetic value of š .

Editorial criteria 79 In the critical apparatus, no note has been made of some of the occurrences or absences from the manuscripts of the ezafe (), the conjunction ud and the end-of-word stroke ('), which are recorded with a great deal of variation in the manuscripts.

2

Little Sh-rzag

1.1 ahurahe mazd rauuat xxvarnavhat2 amš.anm3 spn.tanm 1. of Ahura Mazd, rich, glorious; of the Amš.a Spn.tas; 1. PWN4 šn’dynyt’lyh Y ’whrmzd Y l’d’wmnd5 Y GDE’wmnd ’mhrspnd’n6 xHWEt7 {W} ’whrmzd x’mwlcyt’l8 AP-š ’mwlcyt’lyh HNA AYK KRA AYŠ MNW PWN wn’s ZY-š krt' YKOYMWNyt' BYN ’whrmzd PWN xpytyt9 YHWWNyt' PWN tn' Y psyn xlyst10 LAWHL wyl’dynd W xy’wyt’n'11 x’nwšk12 YHWWNd AP-š xl’d’wmndyh13 l’tyh AP-š x GDE’wmndyh14 xHNA15 AYK BNPŠE GDE’wmnd W KRA AYŠ GDE Y nywk {Y} MN OLE AP-š gytydy xdhšk16 GBRA Y ’hlwb' xAP-š17 ’pst’k gwk’dyyh HNA xhn.ti18 nar aš.auuan hngwšytk Y ’whrmzd PWN gytydy GBRA Y ’hlwb' {Y} cygwn' GBRA Y ’hlwb' {Y} PWN gytyk xLBA19 swt ’ytwn-c ’whrmzd PWN mynwk W gytydy hmyšk swt 1. [Pad šnyndrh ] Ohrmazd  rymand  xwarrahmand; Amahraspandn [hd Ohrmazd murzdr; u-š murzdrh d k har kas k pad winh -š kard std andar 1. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine 2 Geldner: xvarnauhat H1, Jm4 – xvarnahat F2, K36, K38, L11, E1, J8, Mf3, P51 – Mf3, P51 . add axt.nman yazatahe 3 Mf3 and P51 om. amš.anm and the following word 4 T12, P40 om. PWN and the following two words 5 l’dywmnd D29 – lyd’wmnd P40 6 ’mhrspnd’n T12 7 HWEd D29 – T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph 8 ’mwlcyt’lyh D29 9 ptyt D29 10 l’st D29 11 y’wyt’n'k D29 12 hwd’k D29 13 l’dywmnd D29 14 GDE’wmnd D29 15 zkn’ D29 16 dhyk D29 17 AP-š D29 18 hn.te D29 19 lwb’ D29

Little Sh-rzag

81

Ohrmazd pad pett bawd, pad Tan  pasn rist abz wirynd ud j wdn anšag bawnd; u-š rymandh rdh; u-š xwarrahmandh d k xwad xwarrahmand, ud har kas xwarrah  nk az y; u-š gtg daxšag mard  ahlaw; u-š abestg gugyh d hn.ti nar aš.auuan. Hangšdag  Ohrmazd pad gtg mard  ahlaw; iyn mard  ahlaw pad gtg wuzurg s d, dn-iz Ohrmazd pad mng ud gtg hamšag s d]; 1. [For the propitiation of] Ohrmazd, rich, glorious; (of) the Amahraspands [that is, Ohrmazd is merciful; and his mercy is this: all those who confess, in (the presence of) Ohrmazd, the sins they have committed, at the Future body, will be raised again (from) dead and become immortal for ever; and his richness is (his) generosity; and his gloriousness is that he himself is glorious; and everyone has good glory from him; and his material sign is the righteous man; and his Avestan testimony is “there are righteous men.” The likeness of Ohrmazd in the material world is the righteous man; as the righteous man is of great benefit in the material world, so is Ohrmazd of perpetual benefit in the spiritual and material worlds]; 2.1 vahauue manahe xštiš hm.vain.tii +tarat2 aiiiš dmn snahe xra  mazdatahe gaoš.sr tahe xra  mazdatahe3 2. of Vohu Manah; of xšti, victorious, who defeats the other creatures; of innate intelligence, created by Mazd; of acquired intelligence, created by Mazd; 2. wyh mynšnyh4 ’štyh5 ’m’wndyh6 xAYT7 MNW xhwmtryh8 YMLLWNyt' AYT' x ’m’wndyh9 YMLLWNyt' Y tlwynyt’ltwm10 MN11 ZK’y12 d’m’n' PWN ’n’štyh13 ’k’l krtn' ’sn' hlt' Y ’whrmzdYHBWNt!14 ZK15 Y MN MNDOM Y NPŠE gwšwslwt16 hlt' Y ’whrmzdYHBWNt'17 ZK18 Y MN dyn' xHWEt19 whwmn xwyhyh20 HNA AYK xlwb’n' 2. In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 Mf3, Kh2, K18, L12, E1, P51, T12 – Geldner: tart F2, L11 – tardt K17, H1, J10 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe T12 has whmn' \\wyh myn ***// instead of wyh mynšnyh – P40 has whmn instead of wyh mynšnyh ’štyyh P40 – D29 om. ’štyh ’mywndyh T12 – ’mydwndyh P40 ’t D29 – T12 om. from AYT to ’m’wndyh YMLLWNyt' – P40 om. from AYT to d’m’n' PWN hwmtr'yh D29 ’m’rwndyh D29 tlwynyt’ltwymn D29 D29 om. MN ZKy’n D29 – ZK’n T12 ’n’š’ytyh D29 ’whrmzdd’t T12, P40 T12 om. from ZK to Y NPŠE but adds \\ZK Y MN M ***// – P40 om. from ZK to Y NPŠE gwš’wslwt T12, P40 ’whrmzdd’t T12, P40 T12 om. from ZK to the end of the paragraph but adds \ZK MN dyn' ’hlwb’n' ’w' ZK Y p’hlwm ’hwn' whwmn YBLWNyt/ – P40 om. from ZK to the end of the paragraph 19 HWEd D29 20 g’s D29

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Edition and Translation

82 x 21

Y ’hlwb’n' BRA OL ZK Y p’hlwm ’hw’n whwmn YBLWNyt' W xhndym’nyh22 Y ’whrmzd whwmn OBYDWNyt' MN ZK {Y} gyw’k pyt’k xushištat23 xvohu24 man haca xgtuu25 zaranii.krt MNW yšt' krt YKOYMWNyt' AP-š ˜y’mk PWN zwt’n' x d’t'26 YKOYMWNyt' zlyn' pysyt' hwm’n’k BRA OBYDWNyt' AP-š LAWHL YHBWNyt x MNW-š27 yšt' {l’d} krt' YKOYMWNyt' BRA-š y’mk PWN x’hlwb'-d’t'28 xYHBWNt'29 YKOYMWNyt' ’-š zlyn' pysyt x’symyn'30 xpysyt'31 BRA xOBYDWNyt32 AP-š LAWHL x YHBWNyt'33 xMNW-š34 yšt' LA krt' YKOYMWNyt' y’mk-c PWN x’hlwb-YHBWNt'35 LA d’t' YKOYMWNyt' tn' Y psyn' xlwb’n'36 bl’hnk AP-š PWN tn' Y psyn' ’whrmzd xyšt'37 BRA OBYDWNyt' AP-š xmynwk xY38 g’s’n k’l Y wstlgyh OBYDWNyt' AMT xy’mk39 LA MN yzd’n' ’-š xy’mk40 {Y} MN yzd’n' gwspnd xHWEd41 Y mynwk AP-š gytydy wstlg Y gwspnd’n' AP-š ’m’wndyh HNA AYK AMT x’n’yl’n'42 MTA’n' ’ywk xLWTE43 TWB BRA ’pshynd PWN l’s Y OLE AP-š x’m’wndyh44 HNA AYK AMT gwnd Y ’yl’n' {gwnd Y ’yl’n'} MTA’n' ’ywk xLWTE45 TWB ’štyh YHSNNd PWN l’s Y OLE TLYN' HWEd MNW BYN mynšn' Y ANŠWTA’n' g’s YHSNNd whwmn W ’kwmn AMT xwhwmn46 g’s OHDWNyt ’kwmn MN xTME47 xdwb’lyt'48 AMT ’kwmn g’s xOHDWNyt'49 whwmn xTME50 xg’s-151 LOYT' AP-š tlwynyt’lyh HNA AYK hm’k ZK Y xgn’k52 mynwk d’m BRA xtlwynyt53 ’sn hlt' W gwš’wslwt' hlt' 2 mynwk Y wyh HWEd {W} 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

D29 has lwb’nyh instead of lwb’n Y hnd’m’n' D29 usi.hištt D29 ˜ vh D29 g h D29 d’št' D29 AMT-š D29 ’hlwb' Y d’t D29 YHBWNyt' D29 ’sm’n' D29 pst' D29 OBYDWNd D29 YHBWNt' D29 AMT-š D29 ’hlwb' Y YHBWNt' D29 lw’n' D29 d’t' D29 D29 has mynwk-1 instead of mynwk Y y’m D29 y’m D29 wynmnd D29 ’yl’n' D29 LAWHL D29 ’m’rwndyh D29 LAWHL D29 whwm D29 tm’mw D29 dwb’lyst' D29 OHDWNt D29 tm’mw D29 g’š D29 gwn’ D29 tlwnyt’l D29

Little Sh-rzag x

83

54

MNW BYN tn' Y ANŠWTA’n' BRA YHBWNt' YKOYMWNd AP-š’n' BYTA ywdt ’sn' hlt' ’stšnyh PWN gwšwslwt hlt' {PWN} gwšwslwt hlt' PWN ’sn hlt' OL NPŠE š’yt' krtn' MNW ’sn' hlt' LOYT' gwšwslwt hlt' QDM {W} LA YHWWNyt MNW gwš’wslwt hlt' LA ALPWNt' YKOYMWNyt' ’sn hlt' BRA OL k’l LA YDOYTWNyt' YBLWNtn' ’sn' hlt W gwš’wslwt hlt m’hm’nyh PWN whwmn W m’nslspnd ’ywk BYN TWB {HD} hngwšytk Y whwmn PWN gytydy gwspnd YHBWNt' YKOYMWNyt' cygwn' {PWN} gytydy {cygwn' gytydy} gwspnd wclg xswt'55 lwb’n' ddw' PWN dyn' plwš AP-š AHRN-c KBD xŠM9 {Y} AYT' 8. Ddr Ohrmazd  rymand  xwarrahmand; Amahraspandn [hd d ry 3 gwd  Ohrmazd nmagnh  tan Day pad dur, be Day pad Mihr ruwn, Day pad Dn frawaš; u-š an-z was nm ast]; 8. (of) the Creator Ohrmazd, rich, glorious; (of) the Amahraspands [that is, He says (they are) three for this reason, because Day pad dur is the commemoration of the body of Ohrmazd, whereas Day pad Mihr (is the commemoration) of (his) 8. 1 In Mf3 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 + the text of S. 1 ghs 2–4 – In P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 + the text of S. 1 ghs 1–3 2 Mf3, P51 add the text of S. 1.Cf 3 l’dywmnd D29 – lyd’wmnd P40 4 GDE’wmnd Y D29 5 ’mhrspnd’n T12 6 T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph 7 hnw ’y D29 8 ymrrwyt' D29 9 ’m D29

Little Sh-rzag

93

soul, and Day pad Dn (is the commemoration) of (his) frawaš; and there exist also many other names of him]; 9.1  r ahurahe mazd pu ra2 xvarnah sauuah mazdatahe airiianm xvarn mazdatanm kuuaiieheca xvarnah mazdatahe  r ahurahe mazd pu ra kauuiš haosrauuahahe variš haosrauuahahe asnuuan.tahe3 gariš mazdatahe cacastahe4 variš mazdatahe kuuaiieheca xvarnah mazdatahe  r ahurahe mazd pu ra rauuan.tahe gariš mazdatahe kuuaiieheca xvarnah mazdatahe  r ahurahe mazd pu ra tarš5 spn.ta ra aštra6 yazata pouru.xvarnaha yazata pouru.bašaza  r ahurahe mazd pu ra mat vspaibii trbii xša r.nafr nairii.sahahe yazatahe7 ˜ 9. of fire, son of Ahura Mazd; of glory; of prosperity, created by Mazd; of the glory of the Aryans, created by Mazd, and of the Kayanid glory, created by Mazd; of fire, son of Ahura Mazd; of the Kayanid Haosrauuah; of Lake Haosrauuah; of Mount Asnuuan.t, created by Mazd; of Lake Cacasta, created by Mazd, and of the Kayanid glory, created by Mazd; of fire, son of Ahura Mazd; of Mount Rauuan.t, created by Mazd, and of the Kayanid glory, created by Mazd; of fire, son of Ahura Mazd; O fire, bounteous warrior, yazata of much glory, yazata of many healing capacities; of fire, son of Ahura Mazd, along with all fires; of the yazata Nairii.saha, scion of power; 9. ’thš Y ’whrmzd BRE ’twr'8 plnbg GDE swt Y ’whrmzdd’t' ’yl’n'9 GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t' W kd’n'10 GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t' AP-š11 xk’l xY12 ’slwnyh xHNA13 AYK PWN ZK kwstk' ’slwn d’n’ktl W xkrt’ltl14 xYHWWNd15 PWN l’s Y OLE ZK MNW LWTE dh’k ptk’l krt OLE xYHWWNt'16 ’thš17 Y ’whrmzd BRE ’twr'18 gwšnsp 9. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 pu ra tauua tarš pu ra ahurahe mazd  r ahurahe mazd pu ra J8 3 K36, Kh2, L11, J10, P40, P51 – asnuuatahe E1 – asnuun.tahe F2 – asn .an.tahe H1 – asnauuan.tahe K18, J8, T12 – asanuuan.tahe Mf3 4 Mf3, L12, P51, T12 – ccastahe F2, Kh2, K36, E1 – cicastahe J10 – caecaestahe P14, P40 – cae. caestahe L11 – caeacaeštahe H1, J8 5 J8, H1 om. from tarš to mazd 6 F2, Mf3, K36, E1– ara aštra P51, T12 – ara aeštra K18, L12 7 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe 8 T12 om. ’twr' and the following word but adds \’twr Y plnbg/ – P40 om. ’twr' and the following word 9 ’glpt \’yl’n'/ T12 –’glpt P40 10 ksn T12 – kd’ P40 11 T12, P40 om. from AP-š to krt OLE YHWWNt' 12 D29 has k’lyh instead of k’l Y 13 ’nd D29 14 krlt’ltl D29 15 lyhwwnd D29 16 YHWWNyt D29 17 ’thš ’t T12, P40 18 T12 om. ’twr' and the following word but adds \’twr Y gwšnsp/ – P40 om. ’twr' and the following word

94

Edition and Translation

kd-hwslwb'19 wl20 Y hwslwb'21 PWN22 ’twr-p’tk’n' x’snwnd23 gl Y ’whrmzdd’t' cycst24 wl Y ’whrmzdd’t' ’y25 MN cycst' OL ZK wl 4 plsng kd’n'26 GDE Y27 ’whrmzdd’t'28 AP-š29 k’l Y ’ltyšt’lyh ZNE AYK PWN kwstk' Y ’twr'-p’tk’n' ’ltyšt’l tyctl W xtkyktl30 YHWWNd PWN l’s Y OLE {YHWWNyt} ’twr' bwlcyn' ’thš Y ’whrmzd BRE lywnd31 gl Y ’whrmzdd’t' W kd’n'32 GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t' AP-š33 k’l Y {w’stlywšyh W} w’stlywšyh ZNE AYK w’stlywš PWN ’pl-štr' xtwhš’ktl34 x wlcšnyktl35 W xšwst-y’mktl36 HWEd PWN l’s Y OLE ZK MNW xLWTE37 wšt’sp ptk’lt OLE YHWWNt' pyt’k AYK PWN xZNE38 KRA 3 pyšk BYN KRA 3 {KRA 3} AYT' ME MN TME BOYHWNd W LAWHL OHDWNd wnnd stl32 Y ’whrmzdd’t33 OLEš’n' stl Y hptwlng Y ’whrmzdd’t' Y GDE’wmnd34 Y byšcynyt’l35 KRA36 hlpstl MN zyd’n W wznd Y ’whrmzd d’m’n' 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

stwl D29 l’dywmndyh D29 – lyd’wmnd P40 GDE’wmnds D29 – GDE’wmd Y P40 T12 om. from HWEt to ’pzwtn' but adds \AMT-š PWN ZK Y nylng ydbhwnt/ \\*** YKOYMWNyt ’-š zywndykyh Y ANŠWTA’n' 100 W šk YWM *** t ***’ pzwtn'// – P40 om. from HWEt to ’ pzwtn' l’dywmndyh D29 gwptn' D29 dlk D29 šk D29 stwyš T12, P40 pr’c'-MYA T12, P40 ’pz’l \[[***]] swt’wmnd/ T12 – ’p  z’l P40 ’whrmzd\d’t/ T12 – ’whrmzd P40 T12, P40 om. from AP-š to OZLWNyt' b’l’y-’ pyhs D29 t’ D29 stkwys D29 p’l’yt' D29 stl T12, P40 MYA-twhmk \cyhl’n!/ T12 – MYA-twhmk P40 zmyk-twhmk \cyhl’n!/ T12 – zmyk-twhmk P40 ’wlwl-c Y cyhl’n' D29 –’wlwl-twhmk' \cyhl’n'/ T12 – ’wlwl-twhmk P40 T12, P40 om. from ’n' to OHDWNd zmyk’n' D29 stwl D29 p’hyk D29 sl D29 ’whrmzd d’t W LWTE D29 GDE’wmndyh D29 – GDE’wmnd Y ’whrmzdd’t T12, P40 byš’cynyt’l T12, P40 T12, P40 om. from KRA to the end of the paragraph

Little Sh-rzag

101

LAWHL d’štn' hwyš-k’lyh Y wnnd stl hptwlng PWN ’p’htl’n' nymk ’ybgt Y pytyd’lk MN dwšhw' BRA LA xŠBKWNtn37 l’d AP-š’n' {MN} KRA xkyšwl-138 BRA hwyš bst' YKOYMWNd AMT ZNE zmyk hcdl W hcpl BRA LA YHWWNyt' PWN l’s Y OLE ZK xl’d39 xstl40 hm’k GDE’wmnd W xbyš’cynyt’l41 13. Tištar star  rymand  xwarrahmand [hd tištarh pad n  tztar, u-š starh d dag; u-š rymandh rdh; u-š xwarrahmandh xwš-krh; n sl ka Tištar kmgr, dw  Apš agr; ka-š pad n nrang yaznd -š xwad guft std, š zndagh  mardmn 150 rz be tuwn abz dan]; Sadws  ply-b  s dmand  ohrmazddd [u-š ply-bh d k har b  andar haft kišwar  zamg be rzhd,  Sadws rasd, Sadws be plyd, pk be kund, ud pad pkh frz  zrh  Frxkard šawd]; starn  b- ihrn  zamg- ihrn  urwar- ihrn  ohrmazddd [n wnag  bn, n-iz  zamg, n-iz  urwarn pad star pyag std, pad Tan  pasn az nh xwhnd ud abz grnd]; Wanand star  ohrmazddd; awšn star  Haftring  ohrmazddd  xwarrahmand  bšazndr [har xrafstar az zyn ud wizend  Ohrmazd dmn abz dštan xwš-krh  Wanand star; Haftring pad abxtarn nmag, bgat  Petyrag az dušox be n hištan ry, u-šn har kišwar- be  xwš bast stnd; ka n zamg azr ud azabar be n bawd, pad rh  y; n ry star hamg xwarrahmand ud bšazndr]; 13. (of) the star Tištar, rich, glorious [that is, (his) being Tištar consists of this, that no (star) is faster (than he), and his being star (= “star”) is (his) family (= that he is of the family of the stars); and his richness is generosity; and giving glory is his proper function; in the year in which Tištar is more powerful, the demon Apš is impotent; if they worship him with the nrang that is said (to be) his own, then he can lengthen the life of humans by 150 days]; (of) Sadws, who purifies water, beneficial, created by Ohrmazd [and his quality of purifying water is this, that any course of water that flows in the seven continents of the earth reaches Sadws and Sadws purifies it and makes it clean, and it goes forth in a cleansed state towards the sea Frxkard]; (of) the stars of the seeds of the water, of the seeds of the earth, of the seeds of the plants, created by Ohrmazd [the form of water, that of earth and that of plants is in the station of the stars, and at the Future body they will seek (these forms) and bring (them) back from there]; (of) the star Wanand, created by Ohrmazd; (of) those stars Haftring, created by Ohrmazd, glorious, healers [the proper function of the star Wanand is to keep away every evil creature from damaging and injuring the creatures of Ohrmazd; Haftring is on the northern side, in order not to allow an attack of the Adversary from hell, and (these stars) have bound to themselves every single continent; if this earth is not turned upside down, it is thanks to them; for this reason, (these) stars are all glorious and healers]; 37 38 39 40 41

ŠBKWNd D29 kyšwl-’ D29 LA D29 stwl D29 byš’cynyt’l’wmndyh D29

102

Edition and Translation

14. guš tašne guš urune druuspaii s raii mazdataii aš.aonii2 1

14. of Guš Tašan; of Guš Uruuan; of Druuusp, strong, created by Mazd, holy; 14. gwspnd’n'3 tn'4 gwspnd’n'5 lwb’n' dlw’sp'6 Y ’pz’l7 Y ’whrmzdd’t' Y ’hlwb'8 gwš’wlwn9 xgwspnd’n'-tnyh10 W gwspnd’n'-lwb’nyh HNA AYK PWN tn' Y x psyn'11mck W x ’šnyk12 MN tn' Y gwspnd’n' LAWHL OL gwš’wlwn gwmyhtyt dlw’sp dlw’spyh HNA AYK-š drwyst'-stwlyh drwyst'-gwspndyh drwyst-dwstyh x drwyst'-’pwln’dyh13 hw’stk {hw’stk} W xKBD14 xnywkyh15 twb’n' YHBWNtn' AP-š x ’pz’lyh16 swt’wmndyh 14. gspandn tan; gspandn ruwn; Druwsp  abzr  ohrmazddd  ahlaw [Gšurwan gspandn-tanh ud gspandn-ruwnh d k pad Tan  pasn, mizag ud šng az tan  gspandn abz  Gšurwan gumxtd; Druwsp druwsph d k -š drust-strh, drust-gspandh, drust-dsth, drust-aburnyh, xwstag ud was nkh tuwn ddan; u-š abzrh s dmandh]; 14. (of) the body of cattle; (of) the soul of cattle; (of) Druwsp, powerful, created by Ohrmazd, holy [(the connection of) Gšurwan with the body and the soul of cattle is this, that at the Future body, the taste and flavour of the bodies of cattle will be mixed again with Gšurwan; the being Druwsp of Druwsp is this, that she can bestow health on large cattle, health on small cattle, health on friends, health on children, wealth and much wellbeing; and her being powerful is (her) being beneficial]; 15.1 da uš ahurahe mazd rauuat xvarnavhat amš.anm spn.tanm2 14. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe ZK Y gwspnd’n T12 – ZK Y gwspnd’n P40 twn' T12 – TWRA P40 ZK Y gwspnd’n T12 – ZK Y gwspnd’n P40 dlw’sp' P40 pz’l [[’hlwb']] T12 ’hlwb’n' D29 T12, P40 om. from gwš’wlwn to the end of the paragraph gwspnd’n'-tnnyh D29 psn' D29 c’šnyh D29 drwyst' W ’p  wln’dyh D29 NKB D29 nywgyh D29 ’p  z’l D29

15. 1 This paragraph is omitted in Mf3 – In P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 + the text of S. 1 ghs 1–3 2 P51 adds the text of S. 1.Cf

Little Sh-rzag

103

15. of the Creator Ahura Mazd, rich, glorious; of the Amš.a Spn.tas; 15.3 d’t’l ’whrmzd Y l’d’wmnd4 Y GDE’wmnd ’mhrspnd’n' 15. Ddr Ohrmazd  rymand  xwarrahmand; Amahraspandn; 15. (of) the Creator Ohrmazd, rich, glorious; (of) the Amahraspands; 16.1 mi rahe vouru.gaoiiaoitiš hazar.gaošahe2 bauuar.cašman aoxt. nman yazatahe rman xvstrahe3 16. of Mira, of the vast protected pastures, of a thousand ears, of ten thousand eyes, yazata whose name is pronounced; of Rman xvstra; 16. mtr Y pl’hw-gwywt'4 Y hc’l-gwš5 Y xbywl-AYNE6 Y gwpt'-ŠM7 yzdt' AYK-š ŠM8 PWN ZNE dyn' gwpt'9 YKOYMWNyt' l’mšn'-hw’lwm10 AP-š11 xpl’hw-gwywtyh12 HNA AYK AMT PWN dšt' pl’hwyh’ BRA š’yt' lptn' PWN l’s Y OLE AP-š hc’lgwšyh HNA AYK-š 5 100 {hc’l} xmynwk13 LWTE gwm’lt' xYKOYMWNd14 MNW k’l Y gwšyh OBYDWNd MNW OL mtr xLOYN15 xYMRRWNd16 AYK ZK xOŠMEN17 ZKc xOŠMEN18 AP-š xbywl-cšmyh19 HNA AYK-š AHRN-yc 5 1000 {bydwl} mynwk LWTE gwm’lt' xYKOYMWNd20 MNW k’l Y xcšmyh21 OBYDWNd MNW OL mtr 3 This paragraph is omitted in D29 4 lyd’wmnd P40

16. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 F2, Mf3, Kh2, T12 – hazara.gaoš.ahe L12, L11, J10 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe T12 om. pl’hw-gwywt' but adds \pl’hw-ywt/ – P40 om. pl’hw-gwywt' 1000-gwš T12, P40 bswl-’dynmn D29 – bywl-cšm T12, P40 gwpt'-ŠM Y D29 – gwpt \ŠM/ T12 – gwpt P40 ŠM Y D29 gwptn' D29 l’mšn'-hw’lwm ZK Y mynwk Y AMT ANŠWTA hwlšn' Y myck' YDOYTWNnd PWN l’š Y OLE T12 – l’mšn'-hw’lwm ZK Y mynwk Y AMT ANŠWTA hwlšn' Y myck' YDOYTWNd PWN l’š Y wmn P40 T12, P40 om. from AP-š to the end of the paragraph pl’hw-gwywt'yh D29 mynwgw D29 YKOYMWNtnd D29 lwn' D29 ymrrwd D29 wšmmn D29 wšmmn D29 bydwl-cšmyh D29 YKOYMWNtnd D29 gwšyh D29

104

Edition and Translation

x

LOYN22 xYMRRWNd23 AYK ZK HZYTWN ZK-c HZYTWN OD-š BNPŠE cšm 2 cygwn dyn' YMRRWNyt' x drt .ska24 xdirbiia25 ˜ 16. Mihr  frx-gyd  hazr-gš  bwar- ašm  guft-nm yazd [k -š nm pad n Dn guft std]; Rmišn-xwrom [u-š frx-gydh d k ka pad dašt frxh be šyd raftan, pad rh  y; u-š hazr-gšh d k -š 500 mng abg gumrd stnd, k kr  gšh kunnd, k  Mihr pš gwnd k n ašnaw n-iz ašnaw; u-š bwar- ašmh d k -š an-z 5000 mng abg gumrd stnd, k kr  ašmh kunnd, k  Mihr pš gwnd k n wn n-iz wn; t-š xwad ašm 2 iyn Dn gwd drt .ska dirbiia]; ˜ 16. (of) Mihr of the vast protected pastures, of a thousand ears, of ten thousand eyes, yazd whose name is pronounced [that is, his name is pronounced in this sacred text]; (of) Rmišn-xwrom [and his (= Mihr’s) being of the vast protected pastures is this, that if it is possible to go far and wide on the plain, it is thanks to him; and his being of a thousand ears is this, that with him there are appointed five hundred spirits who listen, who say in the presence of Mihr: “Listen to that and listen to that other”; and his being of ten thousand eyes is this, that with him there are also appointed five thousand more spirits who observe, who say in the presence of Mihr: “See that and see that other”; therefore, he himself has (only) two eyes, as the Religion says: “with a far-shining (look, he looks) with (his) two eyes”]; 17.1 sraošahe aš.iiehe taxmahe tanu.m rahe darši.draoš h iriiehe 17. of Sraoša, who accompanies the reward, brave, who embodies the sacred word, of bold club, who belongs to Ahura (Mazd); 17.2 xslwš’hl’y3 Y tkyk Y tn'-plm’n' AYK4 tn' PWN plm’n' Y yzd’n' YHSNNyt' Y škypt'-zyn' Y hwt’y PWN ’lc’h W sw’h5 slwš6 x’hl’dyh7 xHNA8 AYK BNPŠE ’hlwb' {Y} xlwb’n'9 Y ANŠWTA’n' PWN ’hl’dyh PWN xp’n’kyh10 ZK wt’lyt' AP-š tkykyh 22 23 24 25

lwn' D29 ymrrwd D29 d r.s ka D29 d isrbii D29

17. 1 This paragraph is omitted in E1, F2, J10, J15, J16, K17, K36, Kh2, L11, Mf3, Ml2, P51; it is found in T12, H1, J8, Jm4, (K17), K18, (K36), (K38), L12, P14, P39, P40 2 In D29 this paragraph follows S. 1.Cf 3 PWN šn’dynyt’lyh Y slwš’l’y D29 – slwš’lyd T12 – slwš ’hlwb P40 4 T12, P40 om. from AYK to YHSNNyt' 5 sy’w’h D29 6 T12, P40 om. from slwš to the end of the paragraph 7 ’lyh D29 8 ’y D29 9 wln’n' D29 10 pn’h D29

Little Sh-rzag

105

tycyh W ggsckyh AP-š {W} xtn'-plm’nyh11 {W} tn' PWN plm’n' Y yzd’n' xd’štn'12 AP-š xškypt-zynyh13 HNA AYK-š zyn'-’pc’l QDM gn’k mynwk d’m’n tyc W bwl’k 17. Sršahly  tagg  tan-framn [k tan pad framn  yazdn drd]  škeftzn  xwady [pad Arzah ud Sawah; Srš ahlyh d k xwad ahlaw, ruwn  mardmn pad ahlyh pad pngh n widrd; u-š taggh tzh ud sckyh; u-š tan-framnh tan pad framn  yazdn dštan; u-š škeft-znh d k -š zn-abzr abar Ganng Mng dmn tz ud burg]; 17. (of) Srš, holy, strong, whose body is command [that is, he keeps the body under the command of the yazds], of the hard weapon, lord [over Arzah and Sawah; the holiness of Srš is this, that he himself is holy, and he guides the souls of (the deceased) humans in righteousness, protecting (them); and his strength is the sharpness and the sckyh; and the fact that his body is command (is that) he keeps the body under the command of the yazds; and his having a hard weapon is this, that his weapon is sharp and cutting on the creatures of the Evil Spirit]; 18.1 rašnaoš razištahe aršttasca frdat.g aii vardat.ga aii ržuxahe2 ˜ ˜ vacah yat frdat.ga ahe3 ˜ ˜ 18. of Rašnu, very just, and of Arštt, who furthers the world, who increases the world; of the word spoken correctly, who furthers the world; 18. lšn' Y l’stk' ’št’t-c4 Y xpl’y-d’t’l5 Y gyh’n' AYK6 BRA x’pz’dyt7 Y w’lšn'-d’t’l8 Y gyh’n' AYK9 plpyhtl BRA OBYDWNyt' {ZK-c10 Y} x’lšwht11 gwbšn' Y12

11 tn' PWN plm’nyh D29 12 d’yštn' D29 13 škptyh-zyn'yh D29 18. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 Mf3, Kh2, K18, K17, H1, J8, L11, W3, P51 – rzuxahe K11 – iržuxahe F2, K36 – aržuxahe E1 – L12, J15, M4 om. from ržuxahe to the end of the paragraph 3 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe 4 ’št’yt Y yzdt' D29 –’št’t-c \yzdt'/ T12 5 pl’y  -d’d’l D29 – pl’-d’t’l T12, P40 6 T12 om. AYK and the following two words but adds \AYK BRA ’p  z’dyn’yt/ – P40 om. AYK and the following two words 7 ’pz’hyt' D29 8 w’lšn'yh-d’t’l D29 – w’lšn Y d’t’l P40 9 T12 om. AYK and the following three words but adds \\AYK plpyhtl BRA OBYDWNyt// – P40 om. AYK and the following three words 10 D29 om. from ZK-c to gyh’n' 11 ’lšwwht \l’st/ T12 –’lšwwht P40 12 Y \MNW/ T12

106

Edition and Translation

x

pl’y-d’t’l13 Y gyh’n' {W}14 lšn l’stkyh {W} PWN 3 LYLYA xlwb’n'15 Y ANŠWTA’n PWN l’styh lšn' ’m’lynyt AP-š xl’styh16 W gghmkw’h ZNE-c AYK AMT l’st' xbhtn'17 W ttn' W xwptn'18 š’yt PWN l’s Y OLE W PWN cyh-wtlg tl’cwk-d’l PWN tn' Y psyn' ps’ht lšn' OBYDWNyt' 18. Rašn  rstag, Aštd-iz  fry-ddr  ghn [k be abzyd]  wlišn-ddr  ghn [k frabhtar be kund]; aršuxt gwišn  fry-ddr  ghn [Rašn rstagh n k pad 3 šab ruwn  mardmn pad rsth Rašn mrnd; u-š rsth ud hmkw’h n-iz k ka rst baxtan ud tadan ud waftan šyd, pad rh  y; ud pad "h-widarg tarz g-dr; pad Tan  pasn passxt Rašn kund]; 18. (of) the just Rašn, and (of) Aštd, increaser of the world [that is, she expands it], who gives growth to the world [that is, she makes it more plentiful]; (of) the word spoken correctly, increaser of the world [the justice of Rašn is this, that for three nights Rašn adjudicates (lit. “reckons”) with fairness the souls of humans; and his justice and hmkw’h are also this, that if it is possible to distribute, spin and weave fairly, (it is) thanks to him; and he is the holder of the scales at the Passage of lamentation; and at the Future body Rašn will perform the ordeal]; 19.1 aš.unm2 frauuaš.inm uranm aii ranm3 19. of the strong, unswerving frauuaš.is of the righteous; 19.4 {PWN šn’dynyt’lyh Y} ’hlwb’n' plw’hl Y cyl’n' Y ’plwyc’n' {pwlywtkyšyn’n' plwhl b’nzdšt’n' plwhl} 19. ahlawn frawahr  rn  abarwzn; 19. (of) the valiant, triumphant frawahrs of the righteous; 13 14 15 16 17 18

pl’-d’t’l T12, P40 T12, P40 om. from W to the end of the paragraph l’wn D29 l’syyh D29 bwhtn' D29 w’p'tn' D29

19. 1 This paragraph is omitted in E1, F2, J10, J15, J16, K17, K36, Kh2, L11, L12, M4, Mf3, Ml2, P40, T12; it is found in H1, J8, Jm4, K18, (K36), (K38), P14, P39, P51 – In P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 H1, J8, (K38), (K17) – \\aš.unm// K18 – aš.anm (K36), Jm4, P51 3 aii ranm paoirii.tkašanm frauuaš.inm nabnazdištanm frauuaš.inm J8, P39 – aii ranm paoirii.t˜kašnm frauuaš.nm nab.nazdištanm frauuaš.inm P14 – P51 adds ˜ aoxt.nman yazatahe 4 This paragraph is omitted in T12, P40; in D29 it follows S. 1.17

Little Sh-rzag

107

20. amahe hutštahe huraoahe vr ranahe ahuratahe vanain.tiisca uparatt3 1

2

20. of Ama, well built, of beautiful appearance; of Vrrana, created by Ahura, and of victorious Uparatt; 20. ’m’wndyh4 Y hwt’šyt'5 Y hwlwst' {Y} pylwcglyh Y ’whrmzdd’t'6 w’nyt’lc7 PWN ’pl-lwbšnyh wlhl’n'8 yzdt' AP-š ’m’wndyh xškwh9 AP-š xhwt’šytyh10 W xhwlwstyh11 xtn'-b’l’d12 AP-š pylwcglyh xw’nytkyh13 AP-š xw’nyt’lyh14 HNA AYK KRA d’m Y SLYtl KN xw’nyt'15 20. amwandh  hu-tšd  hu-rust; przgarh  ohrmazddd, wndr-iz pad abar-rawišnh [Wahrm yazd; u-š amwandh škh; u-š hu-tšdh ud hu-rusth tan-bly; u-š przgarh wndagh; u-š wndrh d k har dm  wattar h wnd]; 20. (of) strength, well built, well-grown; (of) victory, created by Ohrmazd, and (of) he who conquers with predominance [the yazd Wahrm; and his power is majesty; and his good build and good growth is (shown by) the stature of (his) body; and his being victorious is (his) conquering; and his action of conquest is this, that he overcomes every evil creature]; 21.1 rman xvstrahe vaiiaoš upar.kairiiehe +tarat2 aiiiš dmn atat t vaii yat t asti spn.t.maiiaom š.ahe xvatahe zruunahe akaranahe˜ zruunahe ˜dar.xvatahe3 20. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 vr ranaheca H1, J8 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe ’m’wndk T12, P40 hwt’šyt' W D29 ’whrmzdd’t' wlhl’n' yzdt' T12, P40 w’nyt’l-c Y D29 – w’nyt’lyh-c T12, P40 T12, P40 om. from wlhl’n' to the end of the paragraph škw’h D29 hwt’šyt' D29 hwlstyh D29 tn' W b’l’ D29 ’nytgyh D29 ’nyt’lyh D29 w’n'yt' D29

21. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 F2, Mf3, Kh2, P51, T12 – tardt P14, P40 – tart E1 – Geldner: tart 3 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe

108

Edition and Translation

21. of Rman xvstra; of Vaiiu, energetic, who defeats the other creatures; of the part of you, O Vaiiu, which belongs to Spn.ta Maiiu; of  š.a, autonomous; of the infinite Zruuan; of Zruuan, long autonomous; 21. xl’mšn'-hw’lwm4 w’y Y ’pl-k’l Y tlwynyt’ltwm MN xZK’y5 d’m’n'6 ’ytwn' LK w’y {Y} MNW LK xHWEydy7 spyn’k8 mynwk AYK9 OLE NPŠE10 HWEydy11 sp’š12 Y xhwt’t13 zwlw’n'14 Y ’kn’lk' xzwlw’n'15 Y xdglnd-hwt’t16 AP-š17 xl’mšn'-hw’lwmyh18 HNA AYK hm’k ’whrmzd d’m’n' BRA l’mynyt' AP-š’n' MN nyd’c W s’htyh bwcyt' AMT-š PWN ZK nylng YDBHWNd ZY-š gwpt' YKOYMWNyt' ’-š zywndkyh Y ANŠWTA’n' {W} 40 xYWM19 BRA twb’n' ’pzwtn' sp’š xhwt’tyh20 HNA AYK-š MN bylwn' MNDOM BYN LA ’p’yt' AYT' MNW ’ytwn YMRRWNyt' HWEt xhwt’tyh21 HNA AYK KRA AYŠ BNPŠE OL NPŠE OBYDWNd 21. Rmišn-xwrom; Wy  abar-kr  tarwndrtom az any dmn, dn t Wy k t h Speng Mng [k y xwš h]; Spš  xwadd; Zurwn  a-kanrag; Zurwn  dagrand-xwadd [u-š rmišn-xwromh d k hamg Ohrmazd dmn be rmnd, u-šn az niyz ud saxth bzd; ka-š pad n nrang yaznd -š guft std, -š zndagh  mardmn 40 rz be tuwn abz dan. Spš xwaddh d k š az brn tis andar n abyd; ast k dn gwd hd xwaddh d k har kas xwad  xwš kunnd]; 21. (of) Rmišn-xwrom; (of) Wy, energetic, the most overcoming among the other creatures, thus you, O Wy, who are the Good Spirit [that is, you are his own]; (of) Spš, autonomous; (of) the infinite Zurwn; (of) Zurwn, long autonomous [and his being Rmišn-xwrom is this, that he gives pleasure to all creatures of Ohrmazd and he saves them from need and from adverse conditions; if they worship him with the nrang that is said (to be) his, then he can lengthen the life of humans by 40 days. The autonomy of Spš is this, that he does not need anything from the outside; some say thus: “that is, (his) autonomy is this, that each one in person will make him his own”]; 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

l’mšn' Y hw’lwnm D29 – l’mšn'-hw’lyh T12, P40 ZK Y D29 – ZK’n T12, P40 hnd’m’n' D29 hwt’y Y D29 – AYT' T12, P40 spn’yk D29 T12, P40 om. AYK and the following word hwyš T12 – hwwš P40 HWEydy Y D29 – HWEyd T12, P40 sp’š \’p’š/ T12 hwt’yt D29, T12, P40 zm’n T12, P40 zwl’n' D29 – zm’n T12, P40 dglnd-hwt’y D29 – dglnd-hwt’yt T12, P40 T12, P40 om. from AP-š to the end of the paragraph l’mšn'- hw’lwm D29 ZNE D29 hwt’tyh’ D29 hwt’tyh’ D29

Little Sh-rzag

109

22. vtahe huh aarahe uparahe fratarahe pasci iiehe nairiiaii hm. vartiš5 1

+

2

3

4

22. of the generous wind, southern, northern, eastern, western; of manly Hm.variti; 22. w’t6 Y hwd’k Y ’dl Y ’pl7 Y pr’ctl8 Y psyn'9 ZK-{c} Y GBRA’n'10 hmmlt'’pwkyh11 ptwkyh12 PWN k’l W d’tst’n'13 HWEt14 w’t Y x’dl15 ZK Y hcdl Y zmyk x ’pl16 ZK Y hcpl Y zmyk pr’ctl w’t Y xlpytpyntl17 MN AHL ZK Y ’p’ryk gyw’k W ZK Y GBRA’n' hm-mlt'’pwkyh wyn' YHYTYWNšn W YBLWNšn' 22. wd  hudg  r  abar  frztar  pasn; n  mardn ham-mardbagh [patt gh pad kr ud ddestn; hd wd  r n  azr  zamg; abar n  azabar  zamg; frztar wd  rapihwintar; az pas n  abrg gyg; ud n  mardn hammardbagh wn warišn ud barišn]; 22. (of) the beneficent wind, below, above, in front, behind; (of) the universal valour of men [perseverance in (performing) righteous deeds; that is, the lower wind is the one beneath the earth; the upper one is the one above the earth; (the one) in front is the wind of the south; (the one) from behind is the one of the other place; and that of joint masculine valour is breathing in and breathing out]; 23.1 da uš ahurahe mazd rauuat xvarnavhat amš.anm spn.tanm2 23. of the Creator Ahura Mazd, rich, glorious; of the Amš.a Spn.tas; 22. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 (K36), (K38), Jm4, Ml2 – Geldner: huhahe F2, Mf3, Kh2, E1, K36 – huhe K18, K17, K11, L12, L11, J15, J8, H1, M4, J10, P40, P51, T12 3 aparahe K17 4 F2, Mf3, K36, K18 – pasc.i iiehe E1 – upasci iiehe M4, L12 – upascii iiehe T12 – upaštm. hai iiahe K17 – apastm.ai iiahe P51 – apascm.hai iiehe L11 5 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe 6 YHWWN’t D29 7 ’p  l-c' D29 8 pyš \[[***]]/ and \\pr’ctl// T12 – pyš P40 9 AHL \psyn/ T12 – AHL P40 10 mltwm’n T12, P40 11 hm-mlt’pwkyh W D29 – hm-mlt’pwkyh pšw w’t T12, P40 12 ptwkyh Y D29 – ptykyh P40 13 \\d’tstn ***// DYNA T12 – DYNA P40 14 T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph 15 hcdl D29 16 hcpl D29 17 lpytpyntl D29 23. 1 This paragraph is omitted in Mf3 – In P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 + the text of S. 1 ghs 1–3 2 P51 adds the text of S. 1.Cf

110

Edition and Translation

3

23. d’t’l ’whrmzd Y l’d’wmnd4 Y GDE’wmnd ’mhrspnd’n' 23. Ddr Ohrmazd  rymand  xwarrahmand; Amahraspandn; 23. (of) the Creator Ohrmazd, rich, glorious; (of) the Amahraspands; 24.1 razištaii cistaii mazdataii aš%aonii danaii vahuii mzdaiiasniš2 24. of the very straight Cist, created by Mazd, holy; of the good Mazdean Religion; 24. l’stk'3 plc’nk ’whrmzdd’t' ’hlwb'4 dyn' Y ŠPYL5 Y mzdysn’n'6 HWEt7 xl’stkyh8 HNA AYK KRA l’stk W pl’lwn' BYN dyn' pyt’k AP-š plc’nkyh HNA AYK xplc’m9 Y KRA k’l W d’tst’n' PWN dyn š’yt' YDOYTWNstn' W x’psyhšn'10 Y xgn’k11 mynwk W ŠDYA’n' bwhtn W ’ylhtn Y KRA 2 mynwk PWN tn' Y psyn' PWN dyn' pyt’k 24. rstag fraznag ohrmazddd ahlaw Dn  weh  mazdsnn [hd rstagh d k har rstag ud frrn andar Dn paydg; u-š fraznagh d k frazm  har kr ud ddestn pad Dn šyd dnistan, ud abeshišn  Ganng Mng ud dwn, bxtan ud raxtan  har 2 mng pad Tan  pasn, pad Dn paydg]; 24. (of) the good Mazdean Religion, true, wise, created by Ohrmazd, holy [that is, (her) being true is this, that in the Religion is revealed all that is true and righteous; and her wisdom is this, that thanks to the Religion the end of all righteous deeds can be understood, and in the Religion is revealed the destruction of the Evil Spirit and demons, and the salvation and damnation of the two spirits at the Future body]; 25.1 aš.iš vahuii cistiš vahuii r 2 vahuii rasstt vahuii xvarnah sauuah mazdatahe prn.dii3 raora aii airiianm xvarn mazdatanm 3 This paragraph is omitted in D29 4 lyd’wmnd P40 24. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe ldstk T12 – ldstk Y W P40 ’hlwb' Y D29 wyh T12, P40 m’zdsn’n' T12 – m’zdsn’n' P40 T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph l’stkyh’ D29 plc’wm D29 ’p  ys’hšn' D29 gwn’k D29

25. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 F2, Mf3, E1, P14 – r  Kh2, K36, K17, H1, L11, P40, P51 – iri  K18, J15, L12, T12 – ar a J10 3 L12 – parn.dii P39 – prn.daii F2, Mf3, Kh2, K18, K36, K11, H1, L11, M4, E1, P14, P40, T12

Little Sh-rzag v

v

111

v

kuuaiieheca x arnah mazdatahe ax artaheca x arnah mazdatahe zara uštraheca xvarnah mazdatahe4 25. of the good Aš.i; of the good Cisti; of the good rt; of the good Rasstt; of glory; of prosperity, created by Mazd; of Prn.di, of the fast chariot; of the glory of the Aryans, created by Mazd, of the Kayanid glory, created by Mazd, of the unseizable glory, created by Mazd, and of the glory of Zarauštra, created by Mazd; 25. ’hlyšwng5 Y ŠPYL Y plc’nk' Y ŠPYL xY6 ls Y ŠPYL7 ls-’stšnyh8 Y ŠPYL GDE swt'9 Y ’whrmzdd’t'10 p’lnd11 Y xlwb’k-ls12 ’yl’n'13 GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t' W kd’n' GDE Y ’whrmzdYHBWNt14 W15 ’glpt16 GDE Y ’whrmzdYHBWNt17 ZK-c Y zltwhšt' GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t HWEt18 ’hlyšwng ŠPYLyh HNA AYK xhw’stk19 Y KRA ŠPYL’n' x hdyb’lyh20 W p’nkyh OBYDWNyt' KRA MNW hw’stk PWN hwyšyh Y xyzd’n21 W x swt'22 Y ŠPYL’n' YHSNNyt' ’-š SLYtl’n' hcš LAWHL YHSNNyt' ZK Y ’glpt GDE Y x’whrmzdd’t'23 xmzdyysn'24 GDE PWN x’yl’n'25 xmyhn'26 PWN hwyš-k’lyh W x twhš’kyh27 OL {Y} NPŠE š’yt' krtn' 25. Ahrišwang  weh  fraznag  weh  rah  weh  rah-stišnh  weh; xwarrah; s d  ohrmazddd; Prand  rawg-rah; rn xwarrah  ohrmazddd, ud Kayn xwarrah  ohrmazddd, ud a-grift xwarrah  ohrmazddd, n-iz  Zarduxšt xwarrah  ohrmazddd [hd Ahrišwang wehh d k xwstag  har wehn ayrh ud pnagh kund; har k xwstag pad xwšh  yazdn ud s d  wehn drd, -š

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe ’lšwng T12, P40 W D29, T12, P40 ŠPYLyh D29 ’stšnyh D29 yzdt' P40 ’whrmzd Y d’t T12 –’whrmzd P40 P40 om. p’lnd and the following two words lwbk-l’s D29 – lwb’k-lhy¯ T12 ’y lhy¯ AYŠ’n lwb’k OBYDWNtyd W ’yl’n T12 – yš’n lwb’k OBYDWNyt W ’yl’n P40 ’whrmzdYHBWNt Y D29 – ’whrmzdd’t T12, P40 Y T12 P40 om.’glpt and the following three words ’whrmzdYHBWNt Y W D29 –’whrmzdd’t' T12 T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph hw’st D29 hd’b’lyh D29 yd’n' D29 swntn' D29 ’whrmzd D29 mzdšt' D29 ’swl’n' D29 m’hwmn D29 twhš’ykyh D29

112

Edition and Translation

wattarn aziš abz drd. n  a-grift xwarrah  ohrmazddd mazdsn xwarrah pad rn mhan, pad xwš-krh ud tuxšgh  xwš šyd kardan]; 25. (of) the good Ahrišwang, wise, good, of the good chariot, who stands well on the chariot; (of) glory; of benefit, created by Ohrmazd; (of) Prand, of the running chariot; (of) the glory of the Iranians, created by Ormazd, (of) the glory of the Kayanids, created by Ohrmazd, (of) the unseizable glory, created by Ohrmazd, and (of) the glory of Zarduxšt, created by Ohrmazd [that is, the goodness of Ahrišwang is this, that she helps and protects the assets of all (who are) good; she keeps the evil ones far from every person who keeps some assets to offer to (lit. “for the possession of”) the yazds and for the benefit of the good. The unseizable glory, created by Ohrmazd, is the Mazdean glory; it is possible to make it one’s own in the houses of the Iranians through diligence and (doing) one’s duty]; 26.1 arštt frdat.ga ahe gariš xuši.darnahe2 mazdatahe aš.a.xv rahe3 ˜ 26. of Arštt, who furthers the world; of Mount Uši.darna, created by Mazd, of the well-being of Order; 26. ’št’t4 Y xpl’y-d’t’l5 Y gyh’n' AYK6 BRA ’pz’dynyt7 gl8Y x’wšd’št’l9 Y ’whrmzdd’t' Y ’hl’dyh-hw’lyh10 HWEt11 ’št’t k’l ’p-b’ht’lyh {Y} OL kyšwl’n' AP-š xpyšk12 x ’slwnyh13 26. Aštd  fry-ddr  ghn [k be abzynd]; gar  #šdštr  ohrmazddd  ahlyh-xwrh [hd Aštd kr b-baxtrh  kišwarn; u-š pšag srnh]; 26. (of) Aštd, increaser of the world [that is, she causes it to expand]; (of) Mount šdštr, created by Ohrmazd, of the happiness of righteousness [that is, the action of Aštd is the distribution of the waters to the continents; and her social class is that of the priests]; 26. 1 Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 Geldner: uš.i.darnahe F2, L12, L11 – uši.darnahe Kh2, K18, J15, T12 – uši.daranahe E1, P51 – uš.i.daranahe K17 – uši.daranahe Mf3 3 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe 4 ’št’yt D29 5 pl’y¯-d’t’l D29 – pl’-d’t’l T12, P40 6 T12 om. AYK and the following two words but adds \\AYK BRA ’pz’dynyt W w’lšn'-d’t’l gyh’n' AYK plpyhtl BRA OBYDWNyt// – P40 om. AYK and the following two words 7 ’p  z’dynyt w’lšn' d’t’l Y BRA OBYDWNd D29 8 D29 om. from gl to ’hl’dyh-hw’lyh 9 ’wšd’tšt’ T12 –’wšd’tšt P40 10 ’hl’dyh-hw’ls T12, P40 11 T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph 12 ’p  yšk D29 13 ’slwyhyh D29

Little Sh-rzag 1

2

3

113

v

27. ašn brzat s rahe vahištahe ahuš aš.aonm raocah vsp.x  r4 .

27. of the sky, high, strong; of the Best Existence of the Righteous, light, of all well-being; 27. ’sm’n'5 Y bwlnd-swt6 ZK7 Y8 p’hlwm9 ’hw’n' Y ’hlwb’n' Y lwšn' Y hm’k-hw’lyh10 x HWEt11 bwlnd-swtyh HNA AYK xdglnd12 zm’n' swt' hcš AP-š hm’k-hw’lyh HNA AYK hm’k nywkyh OL xplyd’t13 Y mlt' ZK gyw’k YHMTWNyt 27. asmn  buland-s d; n  Pahlom Axwn  Ahlawn  ršn  hamg-xwrh [hd buland-s dh d k dagrand zamn s d aziš; u-š hamg-xwrh d k hamg nkh  frayd  mard az n gyg rasd]; 27. (of) the sky, of high benefit; (of) the Best Existence of the Righteous, luminous, of all happiness [that is, the high beneficence (of the sky) is this, that from it comes great benefit for a long time; and its all happiness is this, that all good things for the help of man come from that place]; 28.1 zm huh yazatahe im as im ši r gariš uši.darnahe2 mazdatahe aš.a.xv rahe vspašmca gairinm aš.a.xv ranm pouru.xv ranm mazdatanm kuuaiieheca xvarnah mazdatahe axvartaheca xvarnah mazdatahe3 28. of the earth, generous yazata; of these places; of these places of habitation; of Mount Uši.darna, created by Mazd, of the well-being of Order, and of all moun27. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 F2, Mf3, Kh2, K18, K36, (K38), J15, J8, Ml2, E1 – aš.man M4, J10 – asman K17, K11, H1, J16, P14, P40 – aš.aon L11 3 F2, Mf3, Kh2, L12, E1, J8, W3, P40, T12 – raocahm H1, L11, K17, K11, J10, Ml2 4 F2, Kh2, Mf3, K36, K11, M4, J8, E1, P40, T12 – vsp.xv rm H1, L12, L11, J10, Ml2 – Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe 5 ’sym’n T12, P40 6 bwlnd ’p  z’l T12, P40 7 ZK-c T12, P40 8 Y hm’y-hw’lyh P40 9 pšwm T12, P40 10 hm’y-hw’lyh T12, P40 11 HWEd D29 – T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph 12 dgln’d D29 13 pl’t' D29 28. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 uši.daranahe F2, Mf3 3 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe

114

Edition and Translation

tains, of the well-being of Order, of much well-being, created by Mazd; of the Kayanid glory, created by Mazd and of the unseizable glory, created by Mazd; 28. zmyk Y hwd’k yzdt'4 OLEš’n'5 gyw’k6 OLEš’n'7 lwst’k8 gl Y ’wšd’št’l9 Y ’whrmzdd’t' Y ’hl’dyh-hw’lyh hlwsp-c10 gl Y ’hl’dyh-hw’lyh11 Y pwl-hw’lyh12 Y ’whrmzdd’t' xW13 kd’n'14 GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t' W15 ’glpt GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t' x HWEt16 ’wšd’št’lyh HNA {HNA} AYK ’wš Y ANŠWTA’n' nk’s PWN g’s xYHSNNyt'17 wn’sk’l’n W ’wšmnd’n ZK MN g’s BRA YBLWNyt' 28. zamg  hudg yazd; awšn gyg; awšn rstg; gar  #šdštr  ohrmazddd  ahlyh-xwrh, harwisp-iz gar  ahlyh-xwrh  purr-xwrh  ohrmazddd; ud Kayn xwarrah  ohrmazddd, ud a-grift xwarrah  ohrmazddd [hd šdštrh d k š  mardmn nigh pad gh drd, winhgrn ud šmandn az n gh be bard]; 28. (of) the earth, beneficent yazd; (of) those places; (of) those provinces; (of) Mount šdštr, created by Ohrmazd, of the happiness of righteousness, and (of) all mountains, of the happiness of Righteousness, full of happiness, created by Ohrmazd; (of) the glory of the Kayanids, created by Ohrmazd, and (of) the unseizable glory, created by Ohrmazd [that is, (its) being šdštr is this, that it keeps the intelligence of humans stable (lit. “in place”), (and that) it takes away from that place (= from where it is located) sinners and assassins]; 29.1 m rahe spn.tahe aš.aon xvarziiavhahe2 dtahe vdauuahe dtahe zara uštriš daraii upaiianaii danaii vahuii mzdaiiasniš +zrazdtiš3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

D29 om. from yzdt' to lwtst’k OLEš’n \ZNE/ T12 gywyk T12 OLEš’n \ZNE/ T12 lwtst’k T12, P40 hwšd’tšt’l P40 W hlwst' T12, P40 ’hl’dyh W hw’lyh D29 pwl-GDE T12, P40 Y D29, T12, P40 kddd’n' D29 ZK-c Y T12, P40 HWEd D29 – T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph yhs ytn' D29

29. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 varziiahahe F2, Kh2 – vrziiahahe Mf3 – vrziiehahe T12 – vrziiahe K17, H1, J8, L11, P14, P40 – Geldner: vrziiahahe 3 Mf3 – Geldner: zarazdtiš F2, Kh2, K18, L12, P40, T12 – zarzdtiš E1

Little Sh-rzag

115

m rahe spn.tahe uši.dar rm danaii mzdaiiasniš vam m rahe spn.tahe snahe xra  mazdatahe gaoš.sr tahe xra  mazdatahe4 29. Of Mra Spn.ta, holy, of energetic vital force; of the “Law Discarding the Demons”; of the “Zoroastrian Law”; of the “Long Approach”; of the good Mazdean Religion; of the faith in Mra Spn.ta; of the understanding of the Mazdean Religion; of knowledge of Mra Spn.ta; of innate intelligence, created by Mazd; of acquired intelligence, created by Mazd; 29. m’rspnd5 Y ’hlwb' Y6 wlc7 {Y} k’mk {Y} ’hw AYK-š8 k’mk Y ’hw' xLWTE9 mynšn' l’st AYT' MNW ’ytwn YMRRWyt' xHWEt10 {W} ZK-c Y AYŠ’n' l’st' BRA OBYDWNyt' d’t' Y ywdt-ŠDYA AYK-š11 ŠDYA xLWTE12 LOYT' d’t Y zltwhšt'13 ’pyck' 14 d’tyh15 dgl16 ’pl-lwbšnyh17 dyn' Y ŠPYL Y mzdyysn’n'18 lwb’k-dhšnyh19 Y m’nslspnd ZK mynwk MNW dyn' Y mzdyysn’n' xlwb’kyh20 hcš W nk’s-d’lšnyh Y m’nslspnd {Y} ’wš-d’lšnyh Y dyn' {Y ŠPYL} Y mzdyysn’n' ’k’syh21 Y xm’rspnd22 ’sn' hlt' Y ’whrmzdd’t' gwš’wslwt23 hlt Y ’whrmzdd’t {Y} 29. Mraspand  ahlaw  warz [kmag] axw [k -š kmag  axw abg menišn rst; ast k dn gwd hd n-iz  kasn rst be kund]; dd  j ud-dw [k š dw abg nst]; dd  Zarduxšt [abzag ddh]; dagr abar-rawišnh; Dn  weh  mazdsnn; rawg-dahišnh  Mnsarspand [n mng k Dn  mazdsnn

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22 23

Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe m’nslspnd T12 – m’nslspnd P40 D29 has ’hl’dyh instead of ’hlwb' Y T12 om. wlc and the following word but adds \’hl’dyh wlc/ – P40 om. wlc and the following word T12, P40 om. from AYK-š to OBYDWNyt' LAWHL D29 HWEd D29 T12 om. AYK-š and the following three words but adds \AYK-š ŠDYA LAWHL LOYT/ (AYK-š ŠDYA LAWHL LOYT is written upside down) – P40 om. AYK-š and the following three words LAWHL D29 zltwšt T12 – zltwšt m’nsl P40 T12 om. pyck and the following word in the text but adds these words interl. sec. m. – P40 om. pyck and the following word d’t’yh D29 dlg D29 ’pl-lwbšnyh mynwk spnd T12 – ’pl-plwbšnyh mynwk spnd P40 m’zdsn’n' T12 – m’zdsn’n' P40 lwb’gn-dhšnyh D29 – T12 om. from lwb’k-dhšnyh to ŠPYL Y mzdyysn’n' but adds \\lwb’k-dhšnyh Y m’nslspnd ZK mynt MNW dyn' mzdyysn’n' lwb’s hcš ’wšd’št’l Y dyn' Y mzdyysn’n'// – P40 om. from lwb’k-dhšnyh to ŠPYL Y mzdyysn’n' lwb’gyh D29 ’k’s D29 m’rspnnd D29 – m’nslspnd Y T12, P40 D29 om. from gwš’wslwt to the end of the paragraph

116

Edition and Translation

rawgh aziš, ud nigh-drišnh  Mnsarspand]; š-drišnh  Dn  mazdsnn; ghh  Mraspand; sn xrad  ohrmazddd; gšsr d xrad  ohrmazddd; 29. (of) Mraspand, holy, (who has) action [will] as the vital force [that is, the will of his vital force is equal to the will of (his) mind; some say thus: “that is, he also makes (the will of the vital force and the will of the mind) of people equal”]; (of) the law separating the demons [that is, the demon is not with it]; (of) the law of Zarduxšt [pure law]; (of) the long upper movement; (of) the good Mazdean Religion; (of) the continuous creation of Mnsarspand [that spirit from which comes the dissemination of the Mazdean Religion, and the preservation of Mnsarspand]; (of) the understanding of the Mazdean Religion; (of) the knowledge of Mraspand; (of) innate wisdom, created by Ohrmazd; (of) acquired wisdom, created by Ohrmazd; 30.1 anaranm raocahm xvatanm raoxšnahe gar.nmnahe misuunahe2 gtuuahe3 xvatahe cinuuat.prt m4 mazdatm5 ˜ 30. of the Endless Lights, autonomous; of the radiant Gar.nmna; of the Misuun Gtu, autonomous; of the Cinuuat .prtu, created by Mazd; ˜ 30. ’sl6 lwšnyh7 Y hwt’t8 lwšn'9 glwtm’n' hmyšk-swt'10 g’s11 Y hwt’t'12 xHWEt'13 hmyšk-swt' Y xg’s14 Y xhwt’t'15 HNA AYK ’yw-b’l YHWWNt' ’-š xhm’y16 swt' hcš YHWWNt' xcynwt-pwhl17 Y ’whrmzdd’t' 30. A-sar Ršnh  xwadd; ršn Gardmn; Hamšag-s d Gh  xwadd [hd hamšag-s d  Gh  xwadd d k w-br b d, -š ham s d aziš b d]; "inwadpuhl  ohrmazddd; 30. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 M4 om. misuunahe and the following two words 3 F2, Kh2, K36, H1, L11, P14 – gt ahe K11, P40 – gtauuahe E1, T12 – gtuuahe Mf3, K38 – gtuu L12, J10, P39 4 cinuuat.prt m J10 5 Mf3, F2, K18, L12, J10, Ml2, T12 – mazdatanm K36, K38, E1, L11, H1, P40, P51 – Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe 6 ZK ’nkl \’sl/ Y T12 – ZK ’nkl Y P40 7 lwšn'yh T12, P40 8 hwt’yt' D29 – hwt’t T12, P40 9 lwšn' Y D29 – ZK Y lwšn' T12, P40 10 hmyšk-swt' W D29 – myšk-swt' T12 – myšk ’whrmzdd’t' swt' P40 11 g’š P40 12 hwt’yt' D29 13 HWEd D29 – T12, P40 om. from HWEt' to hcš YHWWNt' 14 g’š D29 15 hwt’yt' D29 16 hm’k D29 17 twcynwl pwr D29 – cyh-wtlg T12, P40

Little Sh-rzag

117

30. (of) the Endless Light, autonomous; (of) the luminous Gardmn; (of) the autonomous Place of Eternal benefit [that is, the eternal benefit of the autonomous Place is this, that once upon a time it came into existence, (and) then benefit has continuously derived from it]; (of) the inwad bridge, created by Ohrmazd; 31.1 brzat ahurahe nafr apm apasca mazdataii2 31. of the high lord Apm napt, and of water, created by Mazd; 31. bwlc Y hwt’y Y NKB’n' yzdt'3 Y ’pyk AYK-š bwn-h’n' lwšn tn' Y OLE Y ’p’n'n’p4 AYK-š5 twhmk MN ZK gyw’k AYK MYA ’lwnd-’sp' AYK-š SWSYA Y nywk MYA-c6 Y ’whrmzdd’t' 31. Burz  xwady [ mdagn; yazd  bg k -š bun-xn; ršn, tan  y]  bn-nf [k -š thmag az n gyg k b; arwand-asp k -š asp  nk], b-iz  ohrmazddd; 31. (of) Burz, lord [of women; watery yazd, that is, his origin (lit. “source”) (is in the waters); luminous, (that is), his body (is luminous)], of the family of the waters [that is, his seed derives from the place where water is; of fast horses, that is, he has good horses], and (of) water, created by Ohrmazd; 32.1 haomahe aš.auuazah2 32. of Haoma, vehicle of Order; 32. hwm Y ’hlwb'-zhk3 HWEt4 x’hlwb'-zhkyh5 HNA AYK xzhkyh6 Y ANŠWTA’n' ’hlwb' BRA OBYDWNyt AYT' MNW ’ytwn xYMRRWNyt'7 AYK xglwtm’nyh8 PWN x hwm-hw’lšnyh9 š’yt' xYHWWNtn10 31. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 2 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe 3 T12 om. from yzdt' to OLE Y but adds \\bwlc Y hwt’y NKB’n' yzdt' W ’p  yk AYK-š bwn h’n' lwšn' tn' W ’p’n'-n’p  ’whrmzdd’t// – P40 om. from yzdt' to OLE Y 4 ’p  ’n'-MYA D29 – ’p  ’n-\n/’p T12 –’p  ’nyk P40 5 T12, P40 om. from AYK-š to nywk 6 D29 om. MYA-c 32. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 Mf3, P51 add aoxt.nman yazatahe ’hlwb' Y z’lwb' Y z’hk' Y D29 T12, P40 om. from HWEt to the end of the paragraph ’hlwb' Y zhkyhyh D29 zhk'yh D29 ymrrwyt' D29 glwtm’n'yh D29 hwm-hwlšnyh D29 YHWWNt D29

118

Edition and Translation

32. Hm  ahlaw-zahag [hd ahlaw-zahagh d k zahagh  mardmn ahlaw be kund; ast k dn gwd k gardmnh pad hm-xwarišnh šyd b dan]; 32. (of) Hm, of righteous offspring [that is, his being of righteous offspring is this, that he makes the offspring of humans righteous; some say thus: “one can go to Gardmn by drinking hm”]; 33.1 dahmaii vahuii fritiš uri dmiš upamani2 33. of the good Dahm friti; of the strong Dmiš Upamana; 33. d’hm’n'3 wyh’n'4 ’plyn'5 ZK{-c} Y cyl Y tkyk d’hm6 Y QDM PWN mynšn'7 HWEt'8 {OL} xpyt’kynynd9 AYK ’ plyn' 2 ’dwynk' ’ywk ZK Y PWN mynšn' ’ywk' ZK Y PWN gwbšn' ’plyn' PWN gwbšn' {W} cyltl xMN10 x’ plyn'11 PWN mynšn' d’hm’n' ’plyn' KRA LYLYA 4 b’l OL hm’k ’hw Y ’st’wmnd PWN p’nkyh QDM YATWNyt' hw’stk' pl’lwnyh xhndwcynd12 {’-š} xp’nk13 d’hm’n' ’ plyn' 33. Dahmn Wehn frn; n  r [ tagg] dahm  abar pad menišn [hd paydgnnd k frn 2 wnag, k n  pad menišn, k n  pad gwišn; frn pad gwišn rtar az frn pad menišn; Dahmn frn har šab 4 br  hamg axw  astmand pad pnagh abar yd; xwstag  pad frrnh handznd pnag Dahmn frn]; 33. (of) Dahmn Wehn frn; (of) the valiant, [strong], pious (blessing), superior in thought [that is, they reveal that the blessing is of two types: one is that (made) with thought, the other is that (made) with word; the blessing (made) with the word is more powerful than the blessing (made) with the thought; Dahmn frn comes four times every night over the whole material world in order to protect it; Dahmn frn is the protector of wealth gained with honesty]; Cf. vspašm yazatanm aš.aonm maiiauuanm ga iianm aš.unm frauuaš.inm uranm aii ranm paoirii.tkašanm frauuaš.inm ˜ nabnazdištanm frauuaš.inm aoxt.nman1 yazatahe 33. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by xšn maine + the text of S. 1.1 Mf3 adds aoxt.nman yazatahe d’ym’n T12, P40 ŠPYL’n' T12, P40 ’p  ryn' T12, P40 d’m T12, P40 mynšn' Y D29 T12, P40 om. from HWEt' to the end of the paragraph pyt’knynd D29 W D29 nplyn' D29 dwcynd D29 p’nkyh D29

Cf. 1 J10, J15, K12, K18, L12, M4, P39, P40, T12, W6 om. aoxt.nman and the following word

Little Sh-rzag

119

Cf. of all the holy spiritual and material yazatas; of the strong, unswerving frauuaš.is of the righteous; of the frauuaš.is of the first believers; of the frauuaš.is of the next of kin; of the yazata whose name is pronounced. Cf. hlwsp2 yzdt'3 Y ’hlwb'4 Y xmynwk5 Y6 gytydy7 ’hlwb’n'8 xplw’hl9 Y cyl’n' Y ’plwyc’n' {Y} pwlywtkyš’n' plw’hl10 nb’nzdšt’n' plw’hl gwpt'-ŠM11 yzdt' AYK-š ŠM {Y} PWN ZNE dyn' gwpt' YKOYMWNyt' Cf. harwisp yazd  ahlaw  mng  gtg; ahlawn frawahr  rn  abarwzn; prytkšn frawahr; nabnazdištn frawahr; guft-nm yazd [k -š nm pad n Dn guft std]. Cf. (of) all the holy material and spiritual yazds; (of) the valiant, triumphant frawahrs of the righteous; (of) the frawahrs of the first believers; (of) the frawahrs of the next of kin; (of) the yazd whose name is pronounced [that is, his name is pronounced in this sacred text].

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

hlwsp  ' T12 yzd’n' T12, P40 ’hlwb'’n T12, P40 mynwkw D29 – mynwk’n' hlwsp  ' yzd’n' Y ’hlwb’n T12 – mynwk’n' hlwst yzd’n' Y ’hlwb’n P40 W D29 gytyk’n' T12, P40 D29 om. from ’hlwb’n' to nb’nzdšt’n' plw’hl plw’l T12, P40 plw’l P40 gwpt'-ŠM Y D29 – T12 om. from gwpt'-ŠM to the end of the paragraph but adds (sec. m.) gwyt-ŠM yzdt – P40 om. from gwpt'-ŠM to the end of the paragraph

3

Great Sh-rzag

1. ahurm mazdm rauuan.tm +xvarnahun.tm1 yazamaide amš.2 spn.t huxša r huh yazamaide 1. We sacrifice to Ahura Mazd, rich, glorious; we sacrifice to the Amš.a Spn.tas, of good power, generous. 1. ’whrmzd Y l’d’wmnd3 Y GDE’wmnd YDBHWNm4 ’mhrspnd’n'5 Y hwhwt’y’n'6 Y hwd’k’n' xycwm7 1. Ohrmazd  rymand  xwarrahmand yazom; Amahraspandn  hu-xwadyn  hudgn yazom. 1. We worship Ohrmazd, rich, glorious; we worship the Amahraspands, good lords, beneficent. 2.1 vohu man amš.m spn.tm yazamaide xštm hm.vain.tm yazamaide + taratm2 aiiiš dmn snm xrat m mazdatm yazamaide gaoš.sr tm xrat m mazdatm yazamaide 2. We sacrifice to the Amš.a Spn.ta Vohu Manah; we sacrifice to xšti, victorious, who defeats the other creatures; we sacrifice to innate intelligence, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to acquired intelligence, created by Mazd. 1. 1 Mf3, (K36) – xvarnahan.tm L12, (K38), E1, P14, P40, P51 – xvarnahn.tm K18, K11, H1, L11, M4, T12 – Geldner: xvarnauhan.tm 2 amš Mf3 3 l’dywmnd D29 – lyd’wmnd P40 4 D29 om. YDBHWNm 5 ’mhrspnd’n' T12, P40 6 \hw/hwt’y’n' W T12 – hwt’y’n' P40 7 ’ycm D29 – YDBHWNm T12, P40 2. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.1 2 L12, P14, T12 – Geldner: tartm M4 – tardtm L11 – taratm Mf3, Kh2, E1

Great Sh-rzag

121

2. whwmn3 Y4 ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk ’mhrspnd5 ycwm6 ’štyh {Y}7 ’m’wndyh8 xycwm9 Y10 tlwynyt’ltwm MN xZK’y11 d’m’n'12 PWN13 ’n’štyh ’k’l krtn' ’sn'14 hlt Y ’whrmzdYHBWNt'15 YDBHWNm16 gwš’wslwt hlt Y ’whrmzdd’t ycwm17 2. Wahman  a-marg  abzng [Amahraspand] yazom; šth, amwandh yazom  tarwndrtom az any dmn [pad an-šth agr kardan]; sn xrad  ohrmazddd yazom; gšsr d xrad  ohrmazddd yazom. 2. We worship Wahman, immortal, bountiful [Amahraspand]; we worship peace (and) strength, the most overcoming among the other creatures [in making discord impotent]; we worship innate wisdom, created by Ohrmazd; we worship acquired wisdom, created by Ohrmazd. 3.1 aš.m vahištm sraštm amš.m spn.tm yazamaide airiiamanm išm yazamaide s rm mazdatm yazamaide saokm vavhm vouru.di rm mazdatm aš.aonm yazamaide 3. We sacrifice to the Amš.a Spn.ta Aš.a Vahišta, very beautiful; we sacrifice to the Airiiaman išiia; we sacrifice (to the Airiiaman išiia), strong, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to Saok, good, of broad vision, created by Mazd, holy. 3. x’šwhšt2 Y3 nywk Y ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk4 ycwm5 ’ylm’n'-hw’dšnyh ycwm6 Y ’pz’l

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

whmn' P40 T12, P40 om. Y and the following three words ’mhrspnd T12, P40 ’ycm D29 Y W D29 ’m’wn[[d]] T12 – ’m’wnd P40 ’ycm D29 – YDBHWNm T12, P40 Y W D29 ZK Y ’n' D29 – ZK’n T12, P40 d’m D29 T12, P40 om. PWN and the following three words ’sn' Y D29 ’whrmzdd’t T12 –’whrmzdd’t Y P40 ycwm T12, P40 ’ycm D29

3. 1 2 3 4 5 6

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.1 ’šwnhšt D29 –’hl’dyh Y p’hlwm T12, P40 D29 om. Y and the following two words T12 has ’mhrspnd instead of ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk – P40 has ’mhrspnd instead of ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk ’ycm D29 ’ycm D29

122

Edition and Translation

Y ’whrmzdYHBWNt7 ycwm8 swk Y ŠPYL Y k’mk-dwysl9 Y ’whrmzdd’t Y ’hlwb'10 ycwm11 3. Ašwahišt  nk  a-marg  abzng yazom; rmn-xwhišnh yazom  abzr  ohrmazddd yazom; Sg  weh  kmag-dysar  ohrmazddd  ahlaw yazom. 3. We worship Ašwahišt, beautiful, immortal, bountiful; we worship the desire of rmn, we worship (it), powerful, created by Ohrmazd; we worship Sg, good, of desirous gaze, created by Ohrmazd, holy. 4.1 xša rm vairm amš.m spn.tm yazamaide aiixšustm2 yazamaide marždikm rii.dri m3 yazamaide 4. We sacrifice to the Amš.a Spn.ta Xšara Vairiia; we sacrifice to molten metal; we sacrifice to mercy, which protects the poor. 4. štrywr4 Y ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk5 YDBHWNm6 x’syn-wt’ht7 ycwm8 x’mwlcšn9 sl’dšn'10 Y dlgwš’n' xycwm11 4. Šahrewar  a-marg  abzng yazom; sn-widxt yazom; murzišn, sryišn  driyšn yazom. 4. We worship Šahrewar, immortal, bountiful; we worship molten iron; we worship mercy (and) protection of the poor. 5.1 spn.tm vavhm rmaitm yazamaide rtm vavhm vouru.di rm mazdatm aš.aonm yazamaide 7 8 9 10 11

’whrmzdd’t T12, P40 ’ycm D29 k’mk’l-dwys D29 ’hlwb' Y D29 ’ycm D29

4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.1 Mf3, Kh2, E1 – aiiaoxš8ustm K18, L12, L11, P51, T12 Mf3, Kh2, E1 – rii.darm K18, L12, T12 hwt’y-k’mk W štrywr T12, P40 T12, P40 have ’mhrspnd instead of ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk ycwm T12, P40 ’syn Y wt’št D29 – ’ywkšwst' T12, P40 ’ycm D29 ’mlcšn D29 –’mwlcyt’lyh T12, P40 sl’dynyt’lyh T12, P40 ’ycm D29 – YDBHWNm T12, P40

5. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.1

Great Sh-rzag

123

5. We sacrifice to the good Spn.t rmaiti; we sacrifice to Rt, good, of broad vision, created by Mazd, holy. 5. xspndrmt2 Y ŠPYL Y bwndk-mynšnyh3 xycwm4 l’tyh Y ŠPYL Y k’mk-dwysl5 Y ’whrmzdYHBWNt6 Y7 ’hlwb' ycwm8 5. Spandarmad  weh  bowandag-menišnh yazom; rdh  weh  kmag-dysar  ohrmazddd  ahlaw yazom. 5. We worship the good Spandarmad, who is perfect thought; we worship generosity, good, of desirous gaze, created by Ohrmazd, holy.

6.1 hauruuattm amš.m spn.tm yazamaide yiriim hušitm yazamaide sara aš.auuana aš.ahe ratauu yazamaide 6. We sacrifice to the Amš.a Spn.ta Hauruuatt; we sacrifice to the annual Hušiti; we sacrifice to the Saras, ratus of Order, holy. 6. hwrdt Y ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk2 ycwm3 s’l’n'4 xhwm’nšnyh5 xycwm6 ŠNT’n7 Y ’hlwb'8 Y ’hl’dyh lt' 9 ycwm 6. Hordd  a-marg  abzng yazom; sln hu-mnišnh yazom; sln  ahlaw  ahlyh rad yazom. 6. We worship Hordd, immortal, bountiful; we worship the annual good dwelling; we worship the holy years, rads of righteousness.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

sp  wndymt' D29 – ’pzwnyk T12, P40 bwndk'-mynšn' spndrmt' T12 – bwndk Y mynšn' sp  ndrmt' P40 ’ycm D29 – YDBHWNm T12, P40 k’mk-dwsl D29 ’whrmzdd’t T12, P40 T12, P40 om. Y and the following word ’ycm D29

6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.1 T12, P40 have ’mhrspnd instead of ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk ’ycm D29 ZK-c Y ŠNT’n Y T12, P40 hwmnšn D29 – hwmnšnyh T12, P40 ’ycm D29 – YDBHWNm T12, P40 ŠNT T12, P40 ’hlwyh D29 ’lt' P40

124

Edition and Translation

1

7. amrtattm2 amš.m spn.tm yazamaide fšaonm v m yazamaide + aspanca3 yuun4 yazamaide gaokrnm s rm mazdatm yazamaide Gh 1.5 mi rm vouru.gaoiiaoitm yazamaide rma xvstrm yazamaide Gh 2.6 aš.m vahištm trmca7 ahurahe mazd pu rm yazamaide Gh 3. brzan.tm ahurm xša rm xšatm apm naptm auruuat.aspm yaza˜ maide apmca mazdatm aš.aonm yazamaide Gh 4. aš.unm vavhš s r spn.t frauuaš.aii yazamaide nsca vr. v  yazamaide yiriimca hušitm yazamaide ammca hutaštm huraom yazamaide vr ranmca ahuratm yazamaide vanain.tmca uparattm yazamaide Gh 5. sraošm aš.m huraom vr rjanm frdat.ga m aš.auuanm aš.ahe ˜ rat m yazamaide rašn m razištm yazamaide aršttmca frdat.ga m vardat. ˜ ˜ ga m yazamaide 7. We sacrifice to the Amš.a Spn.ta Amrtt; we sacrifice to small cattle and large cattle, and we sacrifice to fruitful fields of wheat; we sacrifice to Gaokrna, strong, created by Mazd. Gh 1. We sacrifice to Mira, of the vast protected pastures; we sacrifice to Rman xvstra. Gh 2. We sacrifice to Aš.a Vahišta and to fire, son of Ahura Mazd. Gh 3. We sacrifice to the high lord Apm napt, powerful, shining, of fast horses, and we sacrifice to water, created by Mazd, holy. Gh 4. We sacrifice to the good, strong, bounteous frauuaš.is of the righteous; we sacrifice to the ns, with a legion of men, we sacrifice to the annual Hušiti, we sacrifice to Ama, well built, of beautiful appearance, we sacrifice to Vrrana, created by Ahura, and we sacrifice to victorious Uparatt. Gh 5. We sacrifice to Sraoša, who accompanies the reward, of beautiful appearance, victorious, who furthers the world, holy, ratu of Order; we sacrifice to 7. 1 In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.1 2 Mf3, Kh2, E1, Jm4, (K36), Ml2 – amrttm K18, K11, L12, L11, H1, P14, P40, P51, T12 3 K18, L12, M4, J10, T12 – aspnca Kh2, K36, E1 – Geldner: aspinca Mf3, K17, H1, L11, P40 – spinca K11 . 4 Mf3 – yauun K18, P51, T12 – yauuan L12, J10, P14 – yauuana M4 – yauun H1 – yiuun Kh2, K36, E1 – y in L11, K11 5 In P51 the gh invocations are omitted 6 In many manuscripts the invocations of ghs 2, 3, 4 and 5 are omitted; the invocations of ghs 4 and 5 are found only in J10 7 K18, M4, J10, T12 – tarmca L12, Kh2

Great Sh-rzag

125

Rašnu, very just, and we sacrifice to Arštt, who furthers the world, who increases the world. 7. ’mwrdt Y ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk8 ycwm9 pšwnšn' Y10 lmk {Y} ycwm ’pzwnyk11 ywlt’y’n'12 ycwm gwkln'13 Y ’pz’l Y ’whrmzdd’t14 ycwm Gh 1.15 mtr' Y xpl’hw-gwywt16 ycwm xl’mšn'-hw’lwm17 ycwm Gh 2. ’hl’dyh Y p’hlwm ’thš-c Y ’whrmzd BRE YDBHWNm Gh 3. bwlc Y18 hwt’y Y NKB’n' Y lwšn' Y ’p’n'-n’p Y x’lwnd-’sp19 YDBHWNm ’p'c Y ’wrmzdd’t Y x’hlwb' 20 YDBHWNm 7. Amurdad  a-marg  abzng yazom; fšnišn  ramag yazom, ud abzng j rdyn yazom; Gkarn  abzr  ohrmazddd yazom. Gh 1. Mihr  frx-gyd yazom; Rmišn-xwrom yazom. Gh 2. ahlyh  pahlom taxš-iz  Ohrmazd pus yazom. Gh 3. Burz  xwady  mdagn  ršn  bn-nf  arwand-asp yazom, b-iz  ohrmazddd  ahlaw yazom. 7. We worship Amurdd, immortal, bountiful; we worship the fattening of herds, and we worship bountiful pastures; we worship Gkarn, powerful, created by Ohrmazd. Gh 1. We worship Mihr, of the vast protected pastures; we worship Rmišn-xwrom. Gh 2. We worship best righteousness and fire, son of Ohrmazd. Gh 3. We worship Burz, lord of women, luminous, of the family of the waters, of fast horses, and we worship water, created by Ohrmazd, holy. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

T12, P40 have ’mhrspnd insted of ’mlg Y ’pzwnyk ’ycm D29 W D29 ’p  zwnyk Y P40 ywld’y’n D29 gwkl D29 ’whrmzdd’t hwm Y spyt T12, P40 D29 om. all gh invocations pl’-gwywt T12, P40 l’mšn'-hw’hlwm T12, P40 Y W T12 ’lwd-’sp' T12, P40 ’hlwn' T12 – ’hlwbn' P40

126

Edition and Translation

8. dauuhm ahurm mazdm rauuan.tm amš. spn.t huxša r huh yazamaide3 1

+ v

x arnahun.tm2 yazamaide

8. We sacrifice to the Creator Ahura Mazd, rich, glorious; we sacrifice to the Amš.a Spn.tas, of good power, generous. 8. d’t’l ’whrmzd4 Y l’d’wmnd5 Y GDE’wmnd xycwm6 ’mhrspnd’n7 Y xhwhwt’y’n'8 Y hwd’k’n' YDBHWNm9 8. Ddr Ohrmazd  rymand  xwarrahmand yazom; Amahraspandn  huxwadyn  hudgn yazom. 8. We worship the Creator Ohrmazd, rich, glorious; we worship the Amahraspands, good lords, beneficent. 9.1 trm2 ahurahe mazd pu rm yazamaide xvarn mazdatm yazamaide sauu mazdatm yazamaide airiianm3 xvarn mazdatm yazamaide urm kauuam xvarn mazdatm yazamaide trm4 ahurahe mazd pu rm yazamaide kauuam haosrauuahm yazamaide vairm haosrauuahm yazamaide asnuuan.tm5 gairm mazdatm yazamaide cacastm6 vairm mazdatm yazamaide urm kauuam xvarn mazdatm yazamaide trm7 ahurahe mazd pu rm yazamaide rauuan.tm gairm mazdatm yazamaide urm kauuam xvarn mazdatm yazamaide trm8 ahurahe mazd pu rm yazamaide tarš spn.ta ra aštra9 yazamaide yazata pouru.xvarnaha yazamaide yazata pouru. 8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.7 gh 1 Mf3 – xvarnahan.tm E1 – xvarnahntm L12, L11, T12 – Geldner: xvarnauhan.tm Mf3, P51 add the text of S. 2.Cf (until staomi) D29 om. ’whrmzd l’dywmnd D29 – lyd’wmnd P40 ’ycm D29 – YDBHWNm T12, P40 ’mhrspnd’n' T12, P40 hwhwth’n! D29 – \***/ hwt’y’n! T12 – hwt’y’n! P40 ycwm T12, P40

9. In Mf3, P51 this paragraph is introduced by the text of S. 2.1 L12, E1, M4, Jm4 – trm Mf3, Kh2, K36 – atrm P51 – tarm K17, L11, P14, P40 airiianm J10, Ml2 L12, E1, M4, Jm4, T12 – trm Mf3, Kh2, K36 – atrm P51 – tarm K17, L11, P14, P40 K18, K17, Kh2, L12, H1 – asnauuan.tm E1, M4 – asanuuan.tm K36 – asanauuan.tm Mf3 Mf3, K18, L12, L11, M4, T12 – caecaestm K17, P40 – caecistm J15 – ccastm Kh2, E1, K36 – cicastm H1 7 L12, M4, Jm4, P40 – trm Mf3, Kh2, K36 – atrm P51 – tarm K17, L11, T12 8 L12, M4, Jm4, T12 – trm Mf3, Kh2, K36 – tarm K17, L11, E1, P14, P40 – M4 om. from trm to the following yazamaide 9 Mf3, Kh2, E1, K17 – ara aštra P51, T12 – ara aeštra K18, L12, L11 1 2 3 4 5 6

Great Sh-rzag

127

bašaza yazamaide trm ahurahe mazd pu rm yazamaide vspe tar12 yazamaide xša rm nafrm nairii.sahm yazatm yazamaide 10

11

9. We sacrifice to fire, son of Ahura Mazd; we sacrifice to glory, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to prosperity, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to the Aryan glory, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to the strong Kayanid glory, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to fire, son of Ahura Mazd; we sacrifice to the Kayanid Haosrauuah; we sacrifice to Lake Haosrauuah; we sacrifice to Mount Asnuuan.t, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to Lake Cacasta, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to the strong Kayanid glory, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to fire, son of Ahura Mazd; we sacrifice to Mount Rauuan.t, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to the strong Kayanid glory, created by Mazd; we sacrifice to fire, son of Ahura Mazd; we sacrifice to (you), O fire, bounteous warrior; we sacrifice to (you), O yazata of much glory; we sacrifice to (you) O yazata of many healing capacities; we sacrifice to fire, son of Ahura Mazd; we sacrifice to all fires; we sacrifice to the yazata Nairii.saha, scion of the kingdom. 9. ’thš Y ’whrmzd BRE ycwm13 GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t ycwm swt Y ’whrmzdd’t YDBHWNm14 ’yl’n'15 GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t ycwm cyl16 kd’n' GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t xycwm17 ’twr'18 plnbg ’thš Y ’whrmzd BRE19 ycwm20 xkd-hwslwb'21 ycwm wl Y hwslwb' ycwm x ’snwnd22 xgl23 Y ’whrmzdd’t24 YDBHWNm cycst' wl Y ’whrmzdd’t' ycwm cyl {Y} kd’n' GDE Y ’whrmzdd’t' YDBHWNm