SŪDGAR NASK and WARŠTMĀNSR NASK, the first and second of three commentaries on the Old Avesta (the five ٳ [&ٳٲ;s] and Yasna haptaŋ徱پ), extant in a Pahlavi resume in book nine of the ŧ첹, the third being the Bag nask. They are three of the 21 nasks (parts of the Avesta), which, according to ŧ첹 book eight, constituted the Avesta in the ninth century CE. All three contain 22 fragards, corresponding to the traditional division of the ٳs into 17 sections (徱پs), the Yasna haptaŋ徱پ (as per the Avestan manuscripts, its seven 徱پs are treated as a single unit and called Yasn; cf. ŧԲ 18.3, ed. Kotwal and Kreyenbroek, p. 101, n. 343), and four fragards on the four sacred prayers (Ahuna vairiia, Aṣəm vohū, ۱ŋˊŧ ą, and Ā airiiə̄mā išiiō). In addition, the ū岵has a brief introduction (ŧ첹 9.1.1-2), the ²&Dz;ٳԲhas an introductory fragard on the birth and life of Zoroaster (ŧ첹 9.24), and the Baghas a final fragard with quotations from the Pahlavi ٳs on the future existence (ŧ첹 9.69).
The fragards are called by the Pahlavi forms of the names of the Avestan 徱پs (e.g., ݷɲ峾ŧ for Xᵛaŧtumaitī 徱پ = Yasna 32; Բŧ for Kamnamaŧzā 徱پ = Yasna 46), but Yasna 28 (Ahiiāsā 徱پ) is named after its introductory text (Yasna 28.0), the (archaizing) Young Avestan Yānīm manō (thus also in Wizīdagīhā ī Zādspram 28.3, ed. Gignoux and Tafazzoli, pp. 92-93). The Young Avestan Yasna 42 (between the Yasna haptaŋ徱پ and the second ٳ) and Yasna 52 (between the third and fourth ٳs) are not included (Molé, pp. 142-43, arguedthat this shows a traditional awareness of the structure of the Old Avestan corpus).
Whether there were complete Avestan nasks is uncertain; the only text with an extant Avestan original is the last fragardof the ²&Dz;ٳԲ nask, the Ērmān fragard (commenting on the Ā airiiə'mā išiiō= Yasna 54.1), which is the translation of the so-called Fragment Westergaard 4.1-3. This suggests that at least some of the fragards were based on Avestan originals.
The style is terse and best described as a “table of contents”; most sections are introduced by the preposition abar(“about, regarding”) and are often followed by ud ŧn-iz kū(“and [it says] this also”), introducing additional explanations (cf. West, 1892, p. xlvi). The ū岵 is more expansive in its interpretation of the Old Avesta than the ²&Dz;ٳԲ and Bag nasks, which, at least at times, follow the Pahlavi ٳs closely, whereas the ū岵 often draws on material from the īŧ and the Yašts.
ū岵 may mean “the benefit-maker,” but swtyklyhy> = sŭ(ī?)ī in the Pahlavi Psalter renders Syriac “supplication” (see Andreas and Barr, p. 54). In the Zand ī Wahman yasn(1.1) and the Persian ⲹs (Dhabhar, 1932, pp. 2-3) it is called ū岵 or ū岵, “the praise-maker,” by popular etymology (Cereti, p. 171). In ŧ첹 8.1.12, the ū岵 is listed as thefirst of the īԲs (Gathic nasks), and its contents and style are briefly described in ŧ첹 8.2.2-4. The nasks are listed in the same order in the Persian ⲹ of Bahman Punjya (Dhabhar, 1932, p. 1), but in the Pahlavi Wizīrgird ī dŧnīgand thePersian ⲹs of Kama Bohra, Narimān Hoshang, and Dastur Barzoji, it is listed second, with the Stōt yašt (Av. Staota yesniia)listed first (Dhabhar, 1932, pp. 1-2).
The name ²&Dz;ٳԲ refers to the working/composing (varz-) of a ą&ٳٲ; (cf. Yasna 45.3 mąθrəm varəšəṇtī “[those who] shall work a ą&ٳٲ;”; Yasna 3.4 gāθanąmca sraoθrəm huuarštå mąθrå “and the recitation of the ٳs, the well-wrought ą&ٳٲ;s”). In the Persian ⲹs it is called ²&Dz;ٲ-Բ “the best ą&ٳٲ;” by popular etymology (ibid., 1932, p. 3). In ŧ첹 8.1.12, the ²&Dz;ٳԲ is listed as the second of the ī nasks, and its contents and style are briefly described in ŧ첹 8.3.1-5, where it says (8.3.4), “whatever is said in the &ٳٲ;s, then in the ²&Dz;ٳԲ something is said about it.”
Manuscripts. ŧ첹 9 is found in six published manuscripts. The only complete manuscript is J5 (copied in 1865 from B, now in Bombay; Jamasp Asa and Nawabi, 1976b), but it is modern and less reliable than the others (e.g., AMT = ka “when” is typically used for MNW= ŧ “who, which”). The three oldest, but incomplete manuscripts are DH (copied in 1577, now in Bombay; ed. P. K. Anklesaria), K43b (copied in 1594, from DH, nowin Copenhagen; ed. Christensen), and B (copied in 1659,now in Bombay; ed. Dresden; see Ē). The remaining two modern manuscripts are D10a (copied from Bin 1868, now in Bombay; ed. Jamasp Asa and Nawabi, 1976a) and MR24II (= Meherji Rana; copied in 1893 to fillthe lacunae of B, now in Navsari; ed. Dresden).
DH (and K43b) and B represent two separate manuscript traditions (evidenced by variant readings and divergent text in certain parts), but both go back to the Baghdad manuscript copied by Māhwindād in 369A.Y./1020 CE, whose colophon (the oldest in Pahlavi literature) is preserved in B (Sanjana, 1928, XIX, pp. 95-100; see the translation in West 1892, pp. xxxiii-xxxiv).
The ū岵 naskis missing in B and D10a, except the end of the 10th and all of the 11th fragard (cf. West 1892, pp. xxxvi-xxxvii). The ²&Dz;ٳԲ naskis missing in B and D10a, and K43b has only the first eight fragards (West relied upon K43b, and his translation is therefore incomplete). Only the first half of the first fragard (Ahunwar) is preserved in MR24II.
Editions and translations. The only complete editions of the two nasks are those of D. M. Madan (1911, pp. 787-818 [ū岵], and pp. 818-72 [²&Dz;ٳԲ]) and D. P. Sanjana (1922, XVII, pp. 1-65 [ū岵], pp. 66-98 [²&Dz;ٳԲ], and 1926, XVIII, pp. 1-57 [²&Dz;ٳԲ]). The only complete translation is that of Sanjana (1926, XVII, pp. 1-50 [ū岵], pp. 51-75 and XVIII, pp. 1-42 [²&Dz;ٳԲ]). E. W. West’s translation of the ū岵 (1892, whose paragraph numbering is used here) is complete (pp. 172-226), but that of the ²&Dz;ٳԲ(pp. 226-303) is lacking a portion of the 10th-11th and 14th fragards (ŧ첹 9.33-34, 37). Dresden provides concordances for manuscripts B, MR24II and K43b, and the editions of Sanjana and Madan.For concordances of all the published manuscripts and editions of the Dŧnkard, book 9, see Vevaina; also see Vevaina; also see TABLE 1.
Contents. The ū岵 contains numerous references to characters and events from the mythological narratives found primarily in the Young Avestan yašts (Menasce, p. 1175; cf. Darmesteter, pp. CIII-CIV). Many passages have parallels in other Pahlavi texts and the Persian ⲹs; for instance, in the section on the Ahunwar, the number of times the prayer is to be recited in particular circumstances is listed as “nine when one wishes to throw seeds into the earth, ten when one wishes to release the male animals [into the females], eleven when one goes to seek a wife” (ŧ첹 9.2.11-13); similar texts about how many times to recite the Ahunwar are found in the Pahlavi Supplementary Texts to the Šāyest-nŧ-šāyest (e.g., 19.9: “corn will ripen in nine months,” cf. West, 1880, p. 392; ed. Kotwal, pp. 76-81) and the Persian ⲹ of Bahman Punjya (tr. Dhabhar, 1932, pp. 9-10).
The remuneration of priests is frequently hinted at, e.g., “he who goes according to the law of the demons, is going over to the demons, or has committed deceit is like a wealthy person who gives nothing to a worthy supplicant” (ŧ첹 9.4.2 on the Yeŋ'hŧ ą), and “he who gives something to Zoroaster’s disciples, his fee/salary [mizd] and reward [&Dz;] are just as if you gave something to Zoroaster (himself)” (ŧ첹 9.13.9 on Yasna 43). Another frequent theme in both the ū岵 and the ²&Dz;ٳԲ is the rise of heresy (dzō&;ī), e.g., “regarding the complaint of the spirit of the &ٳٲ;s that, when a herbed or dastur dies away from home and the body of that man does not return to his own land, for that reason, in the land of his birth, there will oppression by heretics” (ŧ첹 9.6.2 on Yasna 29).
Anachronistic interpretations are found in both the ū岵 and the ²&Dz;ٳԲ. In the exegesis of Yasna 31 (Tā və' uruuātā 徱پ) in the ū岵 (ŧ첹 9.8.1-7), the four ages of mankind are described as the golden age, in which Ohrmazd (Ahura Mazdā) revealed the dŧn (“religion”) to Zoroaster; the silver age, in which Wištāsp received it from Zoroaster; the age of steel, in which Ādurbād ī Mahraspandān (lived 4th century CE) was born; and the age mixed with iron, when heresy is confused with religion, sovereignty, goodness, and virtue weaken, and character and wisdom deteriorate and disappear from Iran. The same description is explicitly cited from the “ū岵” in chapter one of the Zand ī Wahman yasn (Cereti, pp. 139, 149). In the exegesis of Yasna 46.7 in the ²&Dz;ٳԲ(ŧ첹 9.39.13), it is suggested that the Avestan text is about the characteristics of the fiend, the cripple Mani (3rd century CE) and the evil people who are his Hearers (Ծō&Dz;岵) and the beating, which came upon him from the lord of the land (dahibed).
A famous passagein the ²&Dz;ٳԲ is the exegesis of Yasna 30.3 on the twin “spirits” (mainiius), where the demon Arš says that Ohrmazd and Ahriman were two brothers in one womb (ŧ첹 9.30.4-5). Here, this view (often ascribed to “Zurvanism” by Western scholars) is repudiated in favor of the separate origin of light and darkness. A similar statement is found in a Manichean polemical hymn (see Skjærvø, pp. 245; cf. Henning, pp. 50-51),and the doctrine is critiqued in greater detail in the Armenian Christian theologian Eznik of Kołb’s “Refutation of Sects” (4th-5th centuries CE; cf. Zaehner, for other polemics against Zurvanism).
A unique ritual interpretation is found in the exegesis of Yasna 50.1-11 in the ²&Dz;ٳԲ (ŧ첹 9.43.7). Here, the three steps taken by the priest(ō) when libating the waters (see Ā-Ō) at the beginning of the Ābān niyāyišn are interpreted as the three steps through good thoughts, words, and deeds from the earth, via the star, moon, and sun stations (ⲹ) up to paradise (ō峾; this is also the path of the soul after death, cf. Mŧnōy ī xrad 7.8-12, tr. West, 1885, pp. 29-30, ed. T. D. Anklesaria, pp. 39-40 [6.8-12]; Ardā Wirāz-nāmag 7-10, ed. Gignoux, pp. 53-56, 161-63). In the modern Yasnaritual, these three steps are taken during the recitation of Yasna 64.3-4 = Yasna 50.7-8(the Ātaš niyāyišn) before the beginning of Yasna65 (the Ābān niyāyišn);Yasna 50.8 contains the statement “with the steps (pada-) that are renowned as those of the milk libation (īž-),” which evidently prompted the exegesis (cf. West, 1892, pp. 292-93, see p. 293, n. 1-2; Darmesteter, I, pp. 400-1, for further details on the ritual actions of the officiating priest; and Windfuhr, pp. 30-31, on related matters).
Bibliography:
Friedrich Carl Andreas and Kaj Barr, Bruchstücke einer Pehlevi-Übersetzung der Psalmen, SPAW, phil.-hist. Kl. 1, 1933, no. 1, pp. 1-64.
Tehmuras Dinshaw Anklesaria, Dânâk-u Mainyô-i Khard. Pahlavi, Pazand, and Sanskrit Texts, Bombay, 1913.
Peshotan K. Anklesaria, The Codex DH, Being a Facsimile Edition of Bondahesh, Zand-e Vohuman Yasht, and Parts of Denkard, Tehran, 1971.
Carlo G. Cereti, The Zand ī Wahman Yasn. A Zoroastrian Apocalypse, Serie Orientale Roma 75, Rome, 1995.
Arthur Christensen, The Pahlavi Codex K 43, Second Part, Copenhagen, 1936, repr. in Pahlavi Codices and Iranian Researches 42, ed. Kaikhusroo M. Jamasp Asa and Mahyar Nawabi, Shiraz, 1976.
James Darmesteter, Le Zend-AvestaI-III, Paris, 1892-93, repr. Paris, 1960.
Bamanji Nasarvanji Dhabhar, The Persian Rivayats of Hormazyar Framarz and Others. Their Version with Introduction and Notes, Bombay, 1932.
Mark J. Dresden, Dŧnkart. A Pahlavi Text. Facsimile Edition of the Manuscript B of the K. R. Cama Oriental Institute Bombay, Wiesbaden, 1966.
Philippe Gignoux, Le livre d’Ardā Vīrāz, translittération, transcription, et traduction du texte Pehlevi, Paris, 1984.
Idemand Ahmad Tafazzoli, Anthologie de Zādspram. Studia Iranica, Cahier 13, Paris, 1993.
Walter Bruno Henning, Zoroaster. Politician or Witch-Doctor, London, 1951.
Helmut Humbach and Pallan Ichaporia, The Heritage of Zarathushtra: A New Translation of his ٳ, Heidelberg, 1994.
Kaikhusroo M. Jamasp Asa and Mahyar Nawabi, Manuscript D 10a. Dinkart. Books 4-9, 2 vols., Pahlavi Codices and Iranian Researches 9-10, Shiraz, 1976a.
Idem, MS. J 5. Dinkart. Books 5-9, Pahlavi Codices and Iranian Researches 22, Shiraz, 1976b.
Firoze M. P. Kotwal, The Supplementary Texts to the Šāyest ne-Šāyest, Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser 44, 2, Copenhagen, 1969.
Idem and Philip G. Kreyenbroek with contributions by James R. Russell, The Hŧrbedestān and ŧԲ, vol. II: ŧԲ, Fragard1, Paris, 1995.
Dhanjishah Meherjibhai Madan, The Complete Text of the Pahlavi Dinkard,Bombay, 1911.
Jean de Menasce, “Zoroastrian Pahlavī Writings,” in CHI III/2, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, Cambridge, 1983,pp. 1166-95.
Marijan Molé, Culte, mythe et cosmologie dans l’iran ancien. Le problème zoroastrien et la tradition mazdéenne,Annales du Musée Guimet, Bibliothèque d’Études 69, Paris, 1963.
Behramjee Sanjana and Peshotan Sanjana, The Dînkard. The Original Pahlavi Text, 19 vols., Bombay, 1874-1928.
Prods Oktor Skjærvø, “The Manichean Polemical Hymns in M 28 I,” Bulletin of the Asia Institute9, 1995 [pub. 1997], pp. 239-55.
Yuhan Sohrab-Dinshaw Vevaina,“Studies in Zoroastrian Exegesis and Hermeneutics with a Critical Edition of the ū岵 Nask of ŧ첹Book 9,”Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard University (Cambridge, 2007).
Edward William West, Pahlavi TextsI: The Bundahis, Bahman Yast, and Shâyast lâ-shâyast,SBE 5, Oxford, 1880 (repr. New Delhi, 1993).
Idem, Pahlavi Texts III: Dînâ-î Maînôg-î Khirad, Sikand-Gûmânîk Vigâr, Sad Dar, SBE 24, Oxford, 1885 (repr. New Delhi, 1994).
Idem, Pahlavi TextsIV: Contents of the Nasks, SBE 37, Oxford, 1892 (repr. New Delhi, 1994).
Gernot Windfuhr, “The Ties that Bind. Sacred Geometry in the Zoroastrian Yasna Ritual (ŧԲ 60-61),” Nāma-ye Irān-e Bāstān4/1, 2004, pp. 3-40.
R. C. Zaehner, Zurvan. A Zoroastrian Dilemma, Oxford, 1955 [1971].
(Yuhan Sohrab-Dinshaw Vevaina)
Originally Published: January 7, 2010
Last Updated: January 7, 2010
