1. That writing which comes amid the writing of your epistle is a correct fragment [1] as regards the nothing in which one is to change the operation properly maintainable, and it is becoming; because, if it be even for him, by whom it is written from the [ p. 299 ] statements of Mêdyôk-mâh, Afarg, and Sôshâns [2], the several statements and teachings of the same high-priests, yet then the elaboration and publication thereof are not such as that which is sent down by his further elaboration [3]. 2. And thereby it has seemed manifest that it is sent so that a wish for the spirit may proceed from the truth of its minister (padŏ), or from his thought for the desired decision; or his understanding may be of that kind which is warped (vukôstŏ), as though he believed it as other than the exposition of the religion and the teaching of the high-priests. 3. But until the unparalleled arrival of Sôshâns [4] any one not sharing in complete knowledge is not appointed unto a patron spirit (ahvŏ), and the fiend specially contends more experimentally with the thoughts of the high-priests of the religion for a religious decision.
4. And even the recompense of community [5] of property is that when one gladly observes pure thoughts; and the swift action of voluble (pûr) speakers and kind regard of religious characters for deliverance [6] and for the noticeable undeceitfulness of the same spirit [7]\—which is itself the desire of settled observation that is in it for the sake of the [ p. 300 ] same kind of full religious diffusion—are the swift action of the patron spirit, which, for the sake of preparing him for a deliverance that is not falsifying revelation and is without disputants, is a kind regard for the deliverance itself of him whose spiritual life (hûkŏ) it is.
5. As to that which is thought by him [8] of those deliverances sent down, completed, and announced, I consider more particularly about the meaning of one thing, which is their solemnized observance. 6. The solemnized observance of Mêdyôk-mâh is in the teaching [9] of Mêdyôk-mâh, and those of Afarg and Sôshâns are each one meditated and indicated in a teaching; and the pointedly superior position of each one of them is mentioned by him in his statement of any teaching and of the decision set up. 7. Also with a kind regard for his own choice he has thought it (the former teaching) imperfect, and, on account of what was not attained by it—which was a re-explainer of the same good ideas provided—its dissimilarity to it is not unnoticed [10]. 8. But when one hears the re-explainers of a true reply he is well protected (hû-zinharîdŏ) by complete mindfulness [11], and is himself confident that the teaching of Mêdyôk-mâh is not the whole statement of Mêdyôk-mâh, for there are many opinions of [ p. 301 ] Mêdyôk-mâh [12] which have decided in another manner; not that whatever Mêdyôk-mâh said is not good, but in the teaching of Mêdyôk-mâh it is certain that even what is not proper is mentioned many times as a possibility [13].
(298:1) Reading bangisnîh, but it may be bûgisnîh, ‘deliverance from contamination.’ The reference is to the decree of Zâd-sparam mentioned in Chap. IV, 7, the ‘writing’ alluded to in Ep. II, ii, 1; iii, 1. ↩︎
(299:1) The names of three of the commentators whose opinions are most frequently quoted in the Pahlavi Vendidâd (see Sls. I, 3). Each of them appears to have written a complete ‘teaching’ or dissertation upon the ceremonial laws, from which the quotations are taken (see § 6). ↩︎
(299:2) That is, in collecting the opinions of the ancients, he has twisted them so as to suit his own views. ↩︎
(299:3) The last of the future apostles (see Dd. II, 10), not the commentator of the same name mentioned in § 1. ↩︎
(299:4) Literally ‘fraternity.’ ↩︎
(299:5) From pollution or sin. ↩︎
(299:6) See § 2. ↩︎
(300:1) Zâd-sparam the writer of the decree mentioned in § 1. ↩︎
(300:2) The word kâstakŏ means usually a written course of teaching or exposition, a commentary, dissertation, or manual of instruction. ↩︎
(300:3) Implying that Zâd-sparam had been more inclined to enforce his own opinions than to examine those of the commentators. ↩︎
(300:4) The Pahl. translation of Av. ârmaiti, ‘devotion,’ which is usually personified as a female archangel protecting the earth. ↩︎
(301:1) J inserts ‘rules which are mentioned in the special teaching of Mêdyôk-mâh.’ It appears probable that the author had access to much more complete commentaries than the fragments now extant in the Pahlavi version of the Vendidâd. ↩︎
(301:2) Meaning, probably, that Mêdyôk-mâh was disposed to relax the rigid enforcement of the law in cases of doubt or difficulty, as the Avesta itself does in several cases. ↩︎