šak-ud-gumānīh-vizār | The Doubt-removing book (ŠGV) (Chapter 1-5)

ped-bun

I

(1-2) nam Ohrmazd xvadāy ī mahist ud dānāg, [vispxvadāy, vispāgāh ud visptuvān, kē andar-z mēnōgān mēnōg.

(3) u-š, az xvadīh  –ped ēkīh ōstīgān– āfrīd.

(4) u-š dād, ped xvēš anhambidīg zōr, abardar šaš amehrspend,] ud vispān yazdān ī mēnōgān gētīgān;

(5) ud haft gētīg daxšagān ī hend: mardōm, gōspend, ātaš, ayōxšust, zamīg, āb ud urvar.

(6) u-š dād mardōm ped sālārīh ī dāmān, ō kāmravāgīh.

(7) u-š frēstīd, āvām āvām, dēndānāgīh ī abēzagīh ud gumēzagīh, cihrīgīh ud kāmīgīh.

(8-9) ēdōn-z vīr, uš, xrad ud dānišn, bōy, fravahr, ī hend ruvān abzārān; ī hend āgāhīh-xvāstār ī ēn abzārān ī mēnōg panz, ī hend vēnišn, ašnavišn, hambōyišn, caxšišn, permāhišn, ped panz abzārān ī gētīg, ī hend cašm, gōš, vēnīg, dahan, dast, hamāg tan mārdārān.

(10) u-š, ped ēn abzārān abāgīh, mardōm dād ō rāyēnīdārīh ī dāmān.

(11-12) u-š dād dēn ī harvispāgāhīh ī mazdesn draxt humānāg, kē-š ēk stūnag, do baxšišn, si azg, cahār sāg, panz rēšag.

(13) u-š ēk stūnag peymān;

(14) do baxšišn kunišn ud pahrēzišn;

(15) si azg humat, hūxt ud huvaršt, ī ast humenišnīh, hugōbišnīh ud hukunišnīh;

(16-17) cahār sāg, cahār pēšagān ī dēn kē-š gēhān pediš virāyīhed, ī ast āsrōnīh, arsēštārīh, vāstryōšīh ud hudoxšīh;

(18) panz rēšag, panz pedān ī-šān dēnīg nām: mānbed, vīsped, zandbed, dahebed, zarduštrōdum.

(19) ud ēk sarān sar, ī ast šāhān šāh dahebed ī gēhān.

(25) ēdōn-z cahārān hunarān ī andar mardōm, ī ast xēm, hunar, xrad, toxšāgīh:

(26) abar xēm āsrōnīh, cōn mahist xvēškārīh ī āsrōnān xēm, ī šarm ud bīm rāy, vināh nē kunend.

(27) abar hunar arsēštārīh, ī ast vāspuhragāndar peyrāyišn ī arsēštārān hunar, ī vizārīhed «narīh ī az xvadīh».

(28) abar vāstryōšān xrad, ī ast xradīkkārīh varzīdan ī gēhān ud peyvastan ī ō frašegird.

(29) abar hudoxšān toxšāgīh, ī ast mahist ravāgēnīdārīh ī-šān pēšag.

(30) ēn harv ēvēnag vinārišn abar ēk stūnag, rāstīh ud peymān, pedīrag druz, u-š abzārān ī hambidīg hend.

(31-32) ēn ī-m ušmurd vasēvēnagīhā, vassardagīhā, cōn vasdēnīh, vasvurravišnīh ī andar āvām kē hamāg ēk abāg did hambasān, hambidīg, škastār ud kastār hend, abāg hambasānīh ud škastārīh ud zadārīh ī-šān ēk ō did, pas-iz ēvkirdagīhā, ped ēvzōrīh, pedīrag ēk rāstīh stēzend.

(33) rāstīh xvadīh ēk zōr, ī ōstīgān ped ēkīh, ī rāstīh.

(34) drōv vasēvēnag, ō vas brahm hambasān šāyist būdan hamāgīh az ēk bun ī drōzanīh ast.

(35) hān man ī Mardānfarrox ī Ohrmazddādān ham, ēn pesāzišn kird. cōn man dīd andar āvām vassardagīh vasdēnīh, vasuskārišnīh ī kēšān.

(36) ā-m andar ham aburnāy-dādīh hamvār taftīgmenišnīhā xvāstār, vizustār ī rāstīh būd ham.

(37) im cim rāy ō-z vas kišvar ud zrehvimand franaft ham.

(38) u-m ēn hangirdīg gōbišnān ī aziš ast pursišn ī rāstīhkāmagān, u-š az nibēg ud āyādgār ī pēšēnīg dānāgān rāstān dastvarān, ud nāmcišt hān ī hufravard Ādarpādyāvandān, cīd ud vizīd, ud ō ēn āyādgār «šak-ud-gumānīh-vizār» nām nihād.

(39) cōn ped gumānvizārīh ī nōghamōzagān abēr abāyišnīg ast abar bē dānistan ī rāstīh, ud vābarīgānīh ud rāstīh ī veh dēn, ud andarg škōh judpehikārān.

(40-41) u-m nē dānāgān ud abzārumandān, bē frahangīgān ud nōgabzārān rāy kird ud ārāst; kū dā vasān abar abdīh ud vābarīgānīh ī veh dēn ī pōryōdkēšīg gōbišn abēgumāndar bēnd.

(42-43) az-iz vizīdag dānāgān xvāhišnīg ham kū, kē nigerīdan xvāhed, mā ō nihangmāyagīh ī guftār ud pesāxtār, bē ō vazurgīh ud rāstīh ud vābarīgānīh ud vimandgōbišnīh ī pēšēnīg dānāgān ē nigered.

(44) cē an kē pesāxtār ham, nē pāyag ī hamōzgārīh, bē hān ī hamōzišnīgīh dāram.

(45) u-m rādmenišnīhā gōbišn az hān ī dēndānišnīh ō-z nōghamōzagān baxtan cimīg sahist.

(46) cē kē az andak dānišn ī-š ast ō arzānīgān baxšed, pedīrišnīgdar kū, kē vas dāned, (bē) arzānīgān aziš asūdīh ud anayyārīh.

(47) cōn avēšān vizīrēnīd pēšēnīg dānāgān

(48) kū rādīh si ēvēnag: menišnīg, gōbišnīg ud kunišnīg.

(49) menišnīg rādīh hān kē kadār-z-ē hamgōhrān rāy nēkīh abāyistan ōn cōn xvēš rāy.

(50) rādīh ī ped gōbišn hān kē az harv frārōn dānišn ud āgāhīh ī-š mad ēsted ō arzānīgān hamōzed.

(51-52) cōn hān ī dānāg-ē guft kū: «kāmam kū, dānam vispāgāhīh ī sūdbar, ud hamōzam ō frayādān, ud ayābam bar ī abāyišnīg.»

(53) rādīh ī ped kunišn hān kē az nēkīh ī-š mad ēsted kadār-z-ē ō arzānīgān nēkīh.

(54-55) didīgar, āyādēnīdārīh ī vehān ped bōxtruvānīh. im cim rāy, man ārāst kū-m dā dānāgān ped xvēš xvābarīh ud hucašmnigerišnīh, ped anōšervānīh āyādēned.

(56) cē guft ēsted kū: kē visp dām ī veh, hucašmīhā, nigered, cašm ī ōy cašm ī xvaršēd ast.

(57) cē xvaršēd ō visp dām, hucašmīhā, nigerīdār ud brāzēnīdār.

Prelude

I

(1-2) Homage to Ahura Mazdā, the lord, the most great and wise, universal sovereign, omniscient and omnipotent, Who is the <holy> spirit among the spirits.

(3) From His selfhood (or, essence) that is One, steadfast in [His] unity, He spiritually created.

(4) And, through His unrivalled power, He created the six supreme Amǝṣa spǝṇta (holy Immortals), and all the Yazata of the world of thought and of the world of life,

(5) and the seven material signs (or, creations), namely the (primordial) Man, Holy Cow, Fire, Metal, Earth, Water and Plant.

(6) He created man as master of the creatures in fulfilment of His will.

(7) He likewise sent, age after age [through his beneficence and mercifulness], to His creatures the Scientia divina of purity and mixture, naturalness and willingness;

(8-9) and likewise the wit, intelligence, wisdom and knowledge, consciousness and fravahr-soul which are the organs of the soul that are seeking information of these five immaterial organs –i.e., sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch– by the five material organs –i.e., eye, ear, nose, mouth and hand–, the whole bodily senses.

(10) And [simultaneously] together with these organs, He created man for the guidance of the creatures.

(11-12) He created the Mazdayasnian religion of omniscience like a tree, with one trunk, two boughs, three branches, four stems and five roots.

(13) The one trunk is measure;

(14) the two boughs are action and protection;

(15) the three branches are humata, hūxta, huvaršta, that is, good thought, good word, and good deed;

(16-17) the four stems are the four classes of the Religion by which the world is well-ordered, that is, priesthood, warriorship, husbandry and artisanship;

(18) the five roots are the five lords whose scriptural names are house-lord, village-lord, district-lord, country-lord and pontiff.

(19) And [there is] one master of masters, that is, the king of kings, the lord of this world.

(25) So too the four virtues (/qualities) that are in man i.e. temper (or, character), skill, wisdom and diligence:

(26) Priesthood corresponds to temper, for temper is the most proper function of the priests, that they do not commit sin on account of shame and fear.

(27) Warriorship corresponds to skill, for the most proper embellishment of the warriors is skill which is explained “manliness by itself”.

(28) Husbandry corresponds to wisdom, for the wise action is the cultivation of the world and the linking with the eschatological renovation [of the existence].

(29) Artisanship corresponds to diligence, for diligence is the greatest propagation of their class.

(30) All these diverse establishments are upon one trunk, truth-and-measure, opposed to its rival, lie and its organs.

(31-32) I noticed this, multifariously and of many kinds, that many religions and beliefs in the world that all are discordant, rival, breaker and enemy one as regards the other, in spite of their discord, breaking and hostility to one another, they combat however, in alliance and with united force, against the sole truth.

(33) The essence of truth is one force, steadfast in unity, which is Truth.

(34) The lie is manifold, which may be in numerous adverse forms, but all these are from one base, that is Lie.

(35) I, who am Mardānfarrox son of Ohrmazddād, provided this composition. For, I observed in the world (in this period), numerous kinds and many religious views and many discussions of the sects.

(36) From childhood on I have always been fervent-heartedly a suitor and researcher of truth.

(37)That is why I have travelled in many lands and seashores.

(38) And I have collected and selected these summarised discourses, some of which are questions of those who seek after the truth and some are from the writings and memoranda of the ancient sages, true priests, especially those of the blessed “Ādarpādyāvandān”, And I have appointed to this memorandum the title Šak-ud-gumānīh-vizār, “Doubt -and-doubtfulness-removing”;

(39) Because it is verily requisite for removing the doubts of neophytes about the knowledge of the truth and the trustworthiness and truthfulness

of the good religion, in contrast with the miserable opponents.

(40-41) I have composed and arranged it not for the wise and expert, but for the students and novices, so that many of them may acquire more certainty regarding the wonder and the trustworthiness of the good religion and the discourses of the old teaching.

(42-43) As regards distinguished sages, I ask of those wishing to consider it, not to consider the little knowledge of the narrator and composer, but the greatness, the truthfulness, and the trustworthiness of the logical discourses of ancient sages.

(44) For I, who am the composer, belong not to the rank of the teachers, but to the rank of the students.

(45) And it seemed to me justified to bestow, liberal-heartedly, a theological treatise on neophytes.

(46) Because he who bestows the little knowledge that he has on those who are worthy is more acceptable than he who knows much, but from whom those who are worthy do not receive benefit or help.

(47) The previous sages stated that:

(48) Liberality is of three kinds, of thought, of word and of deed.

(49) Liberality of thought: to desire good for whoever is alike, just like for him.

(50) Liberality of word: to teach to those who are worthy all the righteous knowledge and information acquainted by him.

(51-52) As a certain sage said that: “I want to acquaint all advantageous knowledge and teach it to those who help (the other), and a quire a desirable profit”.

(53) Liberality of deed: [to bestow] the good that he has acquired something on those who are worthy.

(54-55) Furthermore, [I have composed it, so that] those who are good may remember me, saying “may his soul be saved”. For this reason, I have arranged it, so that the sages, through their beneficence and kind observation may remember me, saying “may his soul be immortal (and happy)”.

(56) Since it is said that: “He who observes all the good creature with good eyes, his eye is [like] the eye of the sun”.

(57) For the sun, indeed, observes and illuminates all creatures with a benevolent eye.

darag ī fradum

II

(1) darag ī fradum:

(2) abar pursišn ēcand ī hamēpērōzgar, Mihrayyār ī Muḥammadān, az Spāhān, vehmenišnīhā, nē halagxvāhišnīhā pursīd, pāsox:

(3) hān ī pursīd kū: «Ahrmen cē rāy ō rōšnīh vizāyed, ud cōn šāyist būd ka-š nē hamgōhr, ka amā hamē vēnem kū harv cē nē hamgōhr, az judgōhr ōn pahrēzed cōn āb az ātaš?»

(4) pāsox ēn kū: Ahrmen vizāyišn ī-š ō rōšnīh xvad vahān judgōhrīh;

(5) ud zadārkāmagīh ī-š hamēšagīhā ped gōhr būdan rāy ō judgōhr-š zadār.

(6) vizūdagīh, vizāyišn harv cōn baved bē az judgōhrīh ud judgōhrān enyā nē baved.

(7) cē hamgōhrān, ēk ō did, hamkāmagīh ud hamsāzagīh baved, nē vizāyišn ud vizūdagīh.

(8) ud judgōhrān, hamēstārgōhrīh rāy, harv cōn ō ham rasend, ēk ō did zadār ud vizūdār bend.

(9) hamgōhrān, hamsāzagīh ud hamgōhrīh rāy, ka ō ham rasend zīvīhend, kārīgīhend ud hamayyār hend.

(10) višōbišn ud judīh ud anhamīh ī judgōhrān,

(11) ōn cōn garmīh sardīh, kē hamēstārgōhrīh rāy, hamēšaggōhrīhā, ēk ō did, zadār ud vizūdār, kuxšāg ud višōbāg hend.

(12) cē harv višōbišn az sardīh ud huškīh ud garmīh ud xvēdīh ristagān;

(13) ud ēk ō did zadārīh ud vizūdārīh ud hamēstārīh.

(14) cē višōbišn ī tanān az hamēšakkuxšišnīh ī garmīh ud sardīh, huškīh ud xvēdīh.

(15) az kuxšišn ī avēšān, ēk ō did, tanān višōbīhend ud agārīhend.

(16) āb ud ātaš, xvadgōhrīhā, ēc vizūdārīh nē pēdāg;

(17) bē sardīh ī brādrodīg ō xvēdīh ī āb gumixt ēsted, hamēstār ī garmīh ī ātaš;

(18) ud huškīh ī brādrodīg ō garmīh ī ātaš gumixt ēsted, hamēstārīhā ō xvēdīh ī āb vizūdār.

III

(1-3) ud hān ī pursīd kū: «cim dādār Ohrmazd, Ahrmen az vad kirdan ud vad xvāstan abāz nē dāred, ka tuvān-kirdār ast? ka gōbem kū nē tuvānkirdār, pas nē bavandag, abādyāvand-iz ast.»

(4-5) pāsox ēn kū: Ahrmen vadkunišnīh az vadgōhrīh ud vadkāmagīh ī-š hamēšag ped druz.

(6) dādār Ohrmazd visptuvānīh, hān ī abar visp šāyed būdan sāmānumand.

(7) hān ī-š nē šāyed būdan, tuvān atuvān abar nē gōbīhed.

(8) kē gōbed, nē andar vimand ī soxanšnāsīh.

(9-10) cē, ka guft kū «nē šāyed būdan», did gōbed kū «yazd pediš tuvānīg», ā-š az vimand ī nē-šāyed-būdan burd; cē pas nē nē-šāyed, bē šāyed būdan.

(11-15) cōn-š tuvān sāmānumand, ōn-z aziš kām. cē frazānag; ud kām ī frazānag harv ō hān ī šāyed būdan; u-š kām ō hān ī nē-šāyed nē videred; cē harv hān kāmed ī šāyed ud sazed būdan.

(16-17) agar gōbem kū «dādār Ohrmazd Ahrmen az vattarīh ī-š hamēšag gōhrīg abāz dāštan tuvān», ā gōhr ī dēvīg ō yazdīg, ud hān ī yazdīg ō dēvīg vardēnīdan šāyed;

(18-21) ud tār rōšn, ud rōšn tār kirdan šāyed. gōhr, ped xvadīh, vaštan, gōhr-nē-šnāsān gōbend, kē vizīhišn ī gōhr andar kunišn ud jadišn anešnās; ud gurg xrafstar ped nēkīh hangārend.

(22-23) cōn anāgīh ud vad ī az mardōm ud gōspend, nē xvēšgōhrīhā, bē az vināhišn, frēbišn, vībišn ud viyābānīh ī druz, az ham vattarīh ī abārīg druz, cōn kēn (/xēn) ud xēšm ud varan, ī gumixtag ō mardōm.

(24) cōn xvardan ī dārūg ī taxl ī zahr-gumixtag, nē nēkīh-pardazišnīh, bē spuxtan ī dard ud vēmārīh ī az bē-gōhr rāy.

(25-28) cōn soxan ī rāst ud drō, ī ka, ast ī ka ped soxan-ē ī drō, ahlō mard az vas anāgīh bōxted, ud ped hān ī rāst ēraxted. frāyist, hān nēkīh nē az drōgōbišnīh, bē az spuxtan ī zadārīh ud vattarīh ī gumixtag ō vattarān, hān-z anāgīh nē az rāstgōbišnīh, bē az vattarīh ī gumixtag ō vattarān.

(29-31) az-iz hān ī ka hamēstārān ēk ēk xvēš hambidīg spuxtan cihrēnīd ēstend, harv ēk hān ī xvēš hamēstār abāz dāštan ādōg hend. cōn rōšnīh tārīkīh, hubōyīh dušgennīh, kirbag bazag, hudānāgīh dušdānāgīh.

hān nē ped nēkīh ī az tārīkīh, nē-z ped anāgīh ī az rōšnīh dāštan sazed. cē rōšnīh ped spuxtan ī tārīkīh dād ēsted, nē ped abāz dāštan ī šagr, gurg ud xrafstarān, abārīg vas ī ped ēn šōn.

(38-39) dagrandīh rāy ō hangirdīg handāxt. ašmā pērōzgarān nēkīh šnāxtārīh ōn kū az dēn vas ayābed.

IV

(1-3) ud hān ī pursīd kū: «ka hamē vēnem kū hamāg tis az spihr ud stāragān hamē baved, ud ēn spihr kē dād pas ham hān ast ī urravišnīgān gōbend kū nēk ud vad ōy dād.

(4-5) agar Ahrmen dād, ēn abd tis kār ōy cōn tuvān būd dādan? cē rāy ka ast stārag kē-šān nēkīh abāgīh aziš hamē baxšīhed.

(6) agar Ohrmazd ud Ahrmen ped hampursagīh dād, pas ōn pēdāg kū Ohrmazd ped vināh ud vad ī az spihr hamē baved, abāg Ahrmen hamvināh hambāy».

(7-8) pāsox ēn kū: spihr gyāg ī bayān ī nēkīh-baxtārān kē-šān harv nēkīh-baxtārīh aziš hamē baxšend rāstīhā.

(9-10) ud haftān starkirbān perigān ī azēr avēšān dvārend, appurdārān ī judbaxtārān, kē-šān dēnīg nām gayōgān.

(11) dādār Ohrmazd, nizūmānagīhā, frazānagīhā, ārāstārīh ī ēn dām dahišn, peyvastārīh ī ō frašegird rāy.

(12) cōn Gennāg-Mēnōg andarōn asmān pēcīd, ōy druz, dušdānāgīhā, zūrmihōxtīhā, abāg vas sardag bazagān, druzān ī tamtōmagān ō rōšnīh parvast ud gumixt kū «ēn dām dahišn ī Ohrmazd anast kunam, ayāb ō xvēš šāyam kirdan».

(13) avēšān rōšnān abardum ī vehīgān, harvispāgāhīh rāy, ō hān ī druz halakkārīh ud zūrmihōxtīh āgāh būd;

(14-15) ēn-z kū-š ēn nērōg kē-š ēn halakkārīh ud vizendgārīh aziš uzīhed cē sāmānag, ōn kū-š az nūn ēc nērōg ī ped abāz-ārāstārīh ī az bavandag-mārdārīh ī bann ud dard ud pēcīdagīh ī andarōn asmān nē baved.

(16-17) ā-š frazānagīhā, cōn-š ōy druz ō rōšnān parvast ud pēcīd, ēgiš hamāg zōrān abzārān ī-šān bazagān druzān ī vas sardag jud jud ped xvēš kāmišngarīh nē hištan rāy, ast ī ō stī ī rōšnān gumixtag, cōn druzīg zahr ī xrafstarīg kē cahār zahagān ī ohrmazdīg peymuxt dārend.

(18) cē agar ēn druzīg zahr ī xrafstarīg ō cahār zahagān ī tanēgirdīg ī ohrmazdīg, ī ast āb ud ātaš ud gil ud vād, pēcīd nē ēstēnd, hamcōn ō asmān mēnōgīg mad hēnd.

(19-20) agar ped mēnōgīh ud atanīh būd hēnd, ā dām ī Ohrmazd pahrixtan, rastan az hān ī avēšān zahr ī dēvīg nē šāyist hē; ud andar gravīgīh ud nihaxt ōn gumixt hād ī mardōm, abārīg dām, vinārišn, barišn, abzāyišn, vaxšišn nē šāyist hād.

(21) ōn-z avēšān abāxtarān rōšnīh peymuxt dārend cōn druzīg zahr ī xrafstarān andar stī ī rōšnān.

(22-23) hān-z rāy az mār-sardag ī zahr-vidāz, az abārīg dadān xrafstarān, vasān sūdīg tis astīh pēdāg, ōn-z az abāxtarān hamgumēzišnīh ī azērbrāhīh ī rōšnān rāy, nēkīh azišān pēdāgīhed.

(24-27) hangōšīdag ī ēn abāxtarān nēkīh ī avēšān hamē baxšend, ōn cōn gayōgān, rāhdārān ī andar kārevān ī vāzāragānān rāh brīnend, vasān tis ī māyagīg apparend, nē ō xvēškārān ud arzānīgān, bē ō vināhgārān, axvēškārān, jahigān, rūspīgān, anarzānīgān baxšend ud dahend.

(28-30) ēn-z kū: ēn kirbakkarīh, ī starhangārān az avēšān abāxtarān hangārend ud gōbend, hān cim rāy ka-šān cōnīh ī bayān, ī nēkīhbaxtārīh, ud hān-z ī panz stārag ī ohrmazdīg, ī ast mēx ī bālistīg ī handāzišnīg, Haftōiring mazdadād, Vanand, Sadvēs, Tištar stārag, andar gayōgān, anāgīh-baxtārān nē vizīd ēstend, ud hān panz abāxtar, ī ped starkirbīh, azēr avēšān dvārend, ud rōšnīh peymuxt dārend, ī ast Kēvān ud Ohrmazd ud Vahrām ud Anāhid ud Tīr.

(31-32) cōn stārag ī bālistīg mēx pedīrag Kēvān;

(33) Haftōiring mazddād pedīrag Ohrmazd;

(34) Vanand ī xrafstar zadār pedīrag Vahrām;

(35) star ī Sadvēs pedīrag Anāhid;

(36) Tištar stārag pedīrag Tīr ī abāxtarīg.

(37-38) nēkīh ī az avēšān gayōgān gōbend az hān panz stārag ī ohrmazdīg, cōn vēš-nērōgīh, kamvizūdārīh, pērōzīh ayābend.

(39-40) ud ēn panz abāxtar, dādār Ohrmazd, xvēš-kamagīhā nē hištan rāy, harv ēk ped do zīg ō mihr ud māh bast ēstend; u-šān frāzravišnīh ud abāz-ravišnīh az ham cim.

(41-42) ast kē-š drahnāy ī zīg drāzdar cōn Kēvān ud Ohrmazd; ud ast ī kehdar cōn Tīr ud Anāhid.

(43-44) harv ka ō abdum ī zīg šavend, ped pas abāz āhanzend. u-šān xvēš-kāmagīhā raftan nē hilend, kū dām nē vināhānd.

(46) ud hān do druz ī meh-ōz, ī hend Mihr ud Māh ī abāxtarīg, hamēstārīhā, azēr brāh ī do rōšnān ravend.

(47-49) anī hān-z ī xvānīhed mūšperīg, ī ast stārag gayōg, azēr brāh ī mihr bast ast; ud ka az bann dūr baved, ped hān axtar ī-š andar jahed, ped kust ī hān kē hān axtar xvēškārīh, vizend ud anāgīh kuned, dā did abāz bannag ud gravīg ī mihr baved.

(50-51) soxan ī pediš barend ēn ast: ardīg ī abarīgān andar star pāyag.

(52-54) azēr ī avēšān ardīg ī Tištar ud Spenzaγr dēv, ud ātaš ī Vāzišt ud Abōš dēv, abārīg veh mēnōgān ī abāg tamīgān, ped vārānkirdārīh ud sūdbaxtārīh ī ō dāmān.

(55) azēr ī avēšān mardōm ud gōspend ud xrafstar ud mar ud abārīg dām ī veh ud vattar.

(56–59) cē jadišn abāg mardōm gumixt ēsted, ī ast āz ud varan ud kēn ud xēšm ud būšyāsp, ud xrad ud xēm ud hunar ud dānišn ud uš ud vīr, cōn juxt ī veh ud juxt ī vattar gōbīhed ī vahān hend ī kirbag ud vināh.

(60-62) ēn hamāg nēkīh ī dām frāyist az dādār ī dām kē ast xvad bizešk ud drustbed, pānāg, dāštār ud parvarāg ud pahristār ud būzāg ī xvēšān dāmān; u-š ō xvēšān dāmān cār ī az anāgīh bōxtan, ud abzār ī az bazagīh pahrixtan, bavandagīhā dād ud hamuxt ēsted.

(63-66) u-š hangōšīdag ōn cōn bāv xvadāy, ud bōyestānbān ī dānāg kē-š dad ud murv ī vināhgār ud zadār ped tabāhēnīdan ī bar ī draxtān ō bāv kāmend vizūdan, ud ōy bāvbān ī dānāg, pedisāy kamranzīh ī xvēš abāz dāštan ī hān dad ī vināhgār az xvēš bāv rāy, abzār ī ped griftan šāyed ī hān dad ārāyed, cōn talag ud dām ud cīnag ī parrendag kū ka dad cīnag vēned, u-š ruzdagīhā kāmed raftan, ped anāgāhīh ī talag ud dām andar-iš gravīhed.

(67) ēn āšnāg kū dad ka ō dām ōfted, nē abarvēzīh ī dām, bē hān ī dām ārāstār.

(68-69) ped hān dad andar dām gravīhed ī mērag, bāv xvadāy ī dām ārāstār, ped dānāgīh, āgāh kū hān dad nērōg dā cē sāmānag ud cand zamān.

(70) hān dad, nērōg ud zōr ī-š andar tan ped kuxšīdārīh agārīhed, ud rebīhed, cand-iš tuvān ped dām kandan ud talag škastan ud tabāhēnīdan, kuxšīdan.

(71-72) ud ka-š abavandag-nērōgīh rāy, nērōg ī kuxšāg uzīhed, agārīhed, pas hān bāvbān ī dānāg, ped xvēš kāmaghanzāmīh, bar xvēš, dānāgīhā hān dad az dām bērōn abganed, xastgōhrīhā, agār-nērōgīhā. xvēš dām ud talag abāz-ārāstārīhā, avizendīhā, abāz ō ganz abespāred.

(73) ōy-iz mānāg ast dādār Ohrmazd ī dahišnān bōxtār, ud dām ārāstār, ud vad bunēštag agārēnīdār, ud bāv ī xvēš az vizūdār pādār.

(74) dad ī vināhgār, ī bāv tabāhēnīdār, ōy guzastag Ahrmen ī dām avištāftār, pedyāragēnīdār ī dām ī veh. asmān kē-š veh dahišnān andar mehmān hend, kē-š Gennāg Mēnōg ud vihūdagān hāmis andar gravīg hend, ōy talag ud dām ī dad ī vināhgār az xvēš kāmišngarīh agārēnīdār.

(78-80) zamān ī ped kuxšīdārīh ī Ahrmen, u-š zōrān, abzārān, dagrand ī ped kuxšīdārīh ī dad andar talag ud dām agārīhed ī-š nērōg. abāz dādār, ī dāmān bōxtan ī-š az pedyārag, jāyēdānag nēkravišnīh vinārdan, abāz-ārāstan ī ōy bāv xvadāy ī dānāg xvēš dām ud talag.

(83-85) ēg-iz, abāg druz-nērōgīh ud zadārkāmagīh ud hamēšakkuxšišnīh, ī az tuvān-sāmān ēc rāy, ud kuxšišn ī dēvān, ast ēn zamīg ud asmān ud ēn dām, ī az andak ō vas āzāyišnīg, cōn pēdāg, amaragān-z pediš xustōgīh.

(86) cē agar, andar ēn kuxšišn, ēc abarvēzīh frāyist būd hē, az andak ō vas madan ašāyist hē.

(87) agar-z zāyišn ī gētīg frāyist pediš margīh-rasišnīh pēdāg, ēg-iz vēnīhed kū hān margīh nē astīh bavandag-agārīh, bē vihēz ī az gyāg ō gyāg, az kār ō kār.

(88) cē cōn hāmōyēn dahišnān bavišn az cahār zahagān, ī-šān gētīg tan, abāz ō cahār zahagān gumēzīhistan ōy vēnābdāg pēdāg.

(89) mēnōgān, ī tan rāyēnāg, gyān hāmis abzārān, ō ruvān gumēzīhend; ēvcihrīh rāy nē višōbīhend.

(91-92) ud ruvān az hān ī xvēš kunišn āmārīhend. u-š ganzvar kē-š kirbag ud bazag aviš abespārd, ānōh frāz rasend ped kuxšīdārīh.

(93-94) ud ka ganzvar ī kirbag meh-ōz, ā-š ped abarvēzīh, az hamemāl dast būzed, ō meh-gāhīh ud rōšnān ī hāmxvašīh ahrāmed; ud jāyēdān nēkravišnīhā frayādīhed.

(95-96) ud ka-š ganzvar ī bazag meh-ōz, ā-š ped abarvēzīh, az ayyār dast, kašīhed, ō gyāg ī pāzišn ud šōyišn, ud vēmārestān ī sardgar, abespārīhed;

(97-98) u-š ānōh-iz hān xvazārag kirbag ī-š gētīgīhā varzīd nē agārīhed, cē-š, im cim rāy, hān šōyišn ud pāzišn ud pādifrāh, vināh-sāmānīhā, nē adādīhā.

(99-100) cē-š pādifrāhēnīdan pādār, ud abdum, xvābar dādār ī dām abaxšāyīdār, ēc dām ī veh andar dastgravīgīh ī dušmen nē hiled;

(101) ud hān-z ī vināhgār jumā hān ī ahlavān, ped vizārdārīh ī vināh, az yōšdāhrgarān dast, būzed, ō nēkravišnīh ī jāyēdānag zāmēned.

(102) hangird ēn kū: dādār, bizešk ud drustbed, ud dāštār, parvardār ud pānāg, būzāg ī dāmān, nē vēmārgar ud dardēnīdār ud pādifrāhgar ī xvēš dām.

(103) ud ast ī gōvizārdar azēr nibišt abāg do bunēštag vinārdārīh, andarg nēst-yazd-gōbān ud ēkīh-uskārān.

(104-105) cōn-itān framūd ud xvāst, peyrāst ēsted. hucašmīhā framāyed nigerīdan! cē cōn-imān azabar nibišt, nē pāyag ī hamōzgārīh, bē hān ī hamōzišnīgīh dāram.

(106-107) ēn-z dēnīhā hamōz, ī-m ped nihang xrad, az nibēg ī Ādarpādyāvandān ayāft, ēdar nišānēnīd. u-š hamōzagān andar dēnkird nibēg ī agrī frazānag Ādurfarrōbay ī Farroxzādān, ī hudēnān pēšobāy būd, az dēn dānāgīh vizārd, ī ast hazār-darag.

(108) hān-z ī-tān abar akanāragīh ud kanāragumandīh pursīd, azēr nibišt-am. ped yazdān kām.

First Chapter

II

(1) Chapter one:

(2) On some questions that the ever-successful Mihrayyār son of Muḥammad from Spāhān, put forward not out of absurd curiosity, but with good intentions, and the answer thereto.

(3) As for that which he asked: “Why did Aṇgra Mainyu (harmful spirit) harm the Light and how was that possible? Since it is so that he is not of the same substance, and we always observe that a thing avoids that which is not of the same substance as itself, as the water does the fire?”

(4) The answer is this: The Angra Mainyu's harm to the Light is precisely because of their difference of substances.

(5) It is by reason of his desire of hostility which is a constant aspect of his substance that he is hostile to all that is of a different substance.

(6) Harmedness and harm, of whatever kind may they be do not take place except from difference of substance and those of different substances.

(7) For between those of the same substance there is consensus and concord, and not mutual harm and harmedness.

(8) Those of different substances, because of their substantial contrariness, every time they meet one another, become hostile and harmful to each other.

(9) While those of the same substance, because of their concord, and their community of substance, when they meet one another, become lively and efficient and assist each other.

(10) The disturbance and discord and disunion of those of different substances are

(11) just as heat and cold which, on account of their substantial opposition, are mutually hostile, harmful, striving and disturbing, through their perpetual substance.

(12) Because every disturbance comes from the natural properties of coldness and dryness, heat and moisture,

(13) there are hostility, harmfulness and opposition of one another.

(14) For the disturbance of bodies comes from the perpetual combat of heat and cold, dryness and moisture.

(15) Bodies become disturbed and disabled, owing to their combat, one with the other.

(16) Of water and fire, as regards their substance, no harm whatever does appear.

(17) But the cold that is closely related to the moisture, is mingled with the moisture of water, and is an opponent of the heat in fire;

(18) and the dryness that is related to the heat, is mingled with the heat of fire is opponently harmful to the moisture in water.

III

(1-3) As for that which he asked: “Why did Ahura Mazdā the creator not prevent Aṇgra Mainyu from doing and wanting evil, when He is able to do so? For if we say He is not able, that would mean that He is not perfect, and even He is feeble”.

(4-5) The answer is this: The evil actions of Angra Mainyu come from the evil substance and evil will, which are always his, as the Lie.

(6) The omnipotence of Ahura Mazdā the creator is limited to all that which is possible.

(7) The question of knowing whether or not one is able or unable to do that which is not possible does not make sense.

(8) Whoever says so, is not within the limits of rational discourse.

(9-10) For he who says first “it is impossible”, and next “God is able to do it”, then by that removes its impossibility, because now it is not impossible but possible.

(11-15) As His ability is limited, so is His will. For He is wise; and the will of the wise is [confined] to that which is possible, and his will does not encroach on what is impossible; because he only wills all that which is possible and contingent.

(16-17) If we say that “Ahura Mazdā the creator is able to prevent Angra Mainyu from the evil which is his constant substance”, then we might as well say that it is possible to change the demonic substance into the divine, and the divine to the demonic;

(18-21) and that it is possible to make darkness light and light darkness. Those who speak of the changing of a substance from its essence [into another] are not physicists i.e. those who cannot discern substance in action and accidents, and count wolf (and) monster as beneficent.

(22-23) Since the calamity and evil which arise from man and cattle are not substantially their own, but are owing to the corruption, deception, delusion of the Lie, and owing to the evil of other demons such as Revenge (or, Crime), Wrath and Lust which are mingled with man.

(24) Just as taking a bitter medicine, which is mingled with poison, is not for the maintaining of well-being, but for the removal of the pain and sickness which are owing to an extraneous substance.

(25-28) [Another] example: a true statement and a false statement. Sometimes, a righteous man is saved from much calamity by a false statement and is condemned by a true statement. That benefit does not come, mostly, from the lying, but from the removal of the hostility and evil which are mingled with the evil ones, and that calamity is not from the veracity, but from the evil which is mingled with the evil ones.

(29-31) Considering that the opponents have been constituted in order to repel each one its own contrary, each one is [only] capable to keep away that which is its own opponent, such as light darkness, fragrance stench, good-deed evil-doing, erudition ignorance.

It is not proper to consider that as a benefit owing to darkness, nor yet as a calamity owing to light. Because light is created to repel darkness, not to keep away the lion, wolf and monsters and many others alike.

(38-39) On account of tediousness, I contented myself to explain succinctly. You, the successful, may your appreciation of benefit be such that you may obtain much from Religion.

IV

(1-3) And as for that which he asked: “We always observe that everything is generated from the celestial sphere and stars, then He who created this sphere is the same that, the Believer claim that ‘He created Good and Evil’.

(4-5) If Angra Mainyu created, how was he able to create these wonderful things? For there are stars by which, and with accordance with them, benefit is bestowed.

(6) If Ahura Mazdā and Angra Mainyu created in consultation with each other, then so it is obvious that, Ahura Mazdā is an accomplice and partner, with Angra Mainyu, in the sin and evil which arise from the celestial sphere”.

(7-8) The answer is this: The celestial sphere is the place of gods (= luminaries) who bestow benefits, and every bestowal of benefits by them is done always justly.

(9-10) The seven planets are star-form witches who roam about beneath them (luminaries), rob and distribute amiss, whose scriptural name is Robber.

(11) Ahura Mazdā the creator prepared, skilfully and sagaciously, these creatures, with the idea of conveying them to the eschatological Renovation.

(12) When the Harmful Spirit winded in the sky, that demon, ignorantly and hypocritically, together with the various sinful demons, who are those of a gloomy seed, encircled the Light and mingled with it, expecting that: “I either will annihilate the creatures of Ahura Mazdā, or may take possession of them”.

(13) The luminarie, the supreme among the good, were aware, thanks to their omniscience, of the absurd action and hypocrisy of that Demon;

(14-15) and of this too that, to what extent is this power of his, from which the absurd action and harmfulness come out, so that, henceforth, no power remains for his restoration from the complete perception of bondage and pain, and winding inside the sky.

(16-17) When this Demon encircled and winded round the Light , then [Ahura Mazdā], sagaciously, for the purpose of not allowing the forces and organs [of the Demon], that is, the whole sinful demons, to fulfil their proper will, some of these demons are mingled with the realm of the luminaries, such as the demonic poison pertaining to monsters which is clad with the four divine elements.

(18) For if this demonic poison pertaining to monsters had not been winded in the four divine corporeal elements, that is water and fire and clay (/earth) and wind, then they would have come to the immaterial sky.

(19-20) If they had attained to immateriality and incorporeality, then it would have not been possible for the creatures of Ahura Mazdā protect and escape from the demonic poison of theirs, and it would be so mingled [with the creature] in the pledge and detention that the establishing and bearing, increase and growth of mankind would not be possible.

(21) Likewise also the planets are clad with light, as the demonic poison of the monsters in the realm of the luminaries.

(22-23) On account of that, too, the existence of a certain advantage is manifest from the serpent species that are poison-melting, and from the other wild animals and monsters, so also some benefit is manifested from the planets, on account of their commingling below the radius of the luminaries.

(24-27) By analogy, these planets that bestow benefit, are like the brigands and highwaymen who cut off the way of the caravan of merchants, steal many important things, and bestow and give them, not to the dutiful and worthy, but to the sinner, undutiful, harlot, prostitute and unworthy.

(28-30) The benevolence which astrologers attribute and state (that they come) from the planets, is for this reason that, they have not discriminated the quality of the gods (/luminaries) who bestow benefit, and that of the five divine (/Ahuric) fixed stars –which are the Highest Peg which is a measuring-mark (= Polaris), the star Haptō.iriṇga established by Mazdā (= Ursa Maior), Vanant, Satavaēsa and Tištrya – from the quality of the robbers (= the wandering celestial bodies) who distribute calamity, and that of the five planets which roam about beneath them, in the form of stars, and are clad with light, that is Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus and Mercury.

(31-32) For, opposed to the Highest Peg is Saturn;

(33) opposed to Haptō.iringa established by Mazdā is Jupiter;

(34) Opposed toVanant the-smiter-of-monsters is Mars;

(35) opposed to the star Satavaēsa is Venus;

(36) and opposed to the star Tištrya is the planetary Mercury.

(37-38) The benefit which [the astrologers] claim comes from those robbers (planetary bodies), comes in fact from those five divine stars, as they obtain much strength, little damage and victory.

(39-40) The creator Ahura Mazdā in order not to abandon these five planets to their own will, bound each of them to the sun and moon with two ropes, hence their progression and retrogression.

(41-42) The length of the rope of some is longer, such as Saturn and Jupiter, and that of some others is shorter, such as Mercury and Venus.

(43-44) Whenever they go to the end of the rope then they are pulled back, they are not permitted to go according to their own will, so that they may not damage the creatures.

(46) Those two demons who are greater in strength, that is the planetary sun and moon, move in opposition below the radius of the two luminaries (Sun and Moon).

(47-49) Another star<-form> robber that is called Mūšperīg, is likewise bound below the radius of the sun. When she gets far from bond, and enters into a zodiacal constellation, she commits damage and calamity to the quarter which is the proper function of that constellation, until it becomes again subject and pledged of the sun.

(50-51) The reason given [by the sages] is this: The battle of the superior beings occurs in the star station.

(52-54) Beneath them, there is the battle of Tištrya against the demon Speṇjaγri, of the fire Vāzišta (the cloud-fire) against the demon Apaoša, and of other good Spirits against gloomy ones, for the making of rain and allotment of profit to the creatures.

(55) Below them, that of man and cattle [against] monsters and felons, and of other good creatures against bad ones.

(56-59) Because, accidents are mingled with man, that is: Greed, Lust, Revenge, Wrath and Sleepness, Wisdom, Character, Virtue, Science, Recollection and Wit, as the yoking together with good and the yoking together with evil are called, which are the causes of good deed and sin.

(60-62) All the benefits of the creatures come, mostly, from the creator of the creatures, who is Himself the healer and physician, the guardian and keeper and nourisher and protector and saviour of His own creatures. He has given to His creatures and taught them all the means of being delivered from calamity, and the instruments of abstaining from crime.

(63-66) He is like a wise garden-owner and gardener that pernicious destructive beasts and birds are intent on damaging the garden by spoiling the fruit of the trees, and the wise gardener, for the sake of diminishing his trouble and keeping those pernicious beasts out of his garden, prepares instruments whereby to be able to capture those beasts, like traps, net and bird-grains, so that when the beast sees the bait, and wishes, greedily, to catch it, is captured therein, not knowing of the trap or net.

(67) It is obvious that, if the beast falls into the net, this event is not the triumph of the net, but that of the arranger of the net.

(68-69) The beast is captured in the net because the master, garden-owner and arranger of the net knows, sagaciously, that to what extent the beast is strong and for how long.

(70) The bodily strength and force of that beast are exhausted by striving [in the net], and it becomes infirm in endeavouring, as much as it is able, to destroy the net and rend and demolish the trap.

(71-72) Since its strength is not sufficient, when its power of striving is gone out and it becomes powerless, then the wise gardener, taking successfully possession of his fruits, throws wisely the wounded and powerless beast out of the net, and consigns his net and trap, rearranged and undamaged, back to his storehouse.

(73) Similar to Ahura Mazdā the creator, the saviour of creations and (re-)arranger of creatures, who makes the principle of Evil disabled, is the gardener who protects his garden from the injurer.

(74) The pernicious beast which ruins the garden is similar to Angra Mainyu the accursed who oppresses the creatures and is adverse to the good creation. The trap and net which make disabled the pernicious beast to fulfill its wish are similar to the sky in which good creations dwell, and in which the Harmful Spirit and his abortions are captured.

(78-80) The time of Angra Mainyu and his forces and instruments, for the combat, is similar to the duration of the beast, for the striving in the trap and net, so that its power is exhausted. The salvation of the creatures from adversity, and the establishment of the eternal beatitude, are similar to the rearrangement of the net and trap by that owner of the garden.

(83-85) Then, in spite of his fiendish strength, desire of hostility, and perpetual combat, as far as possible and in spite of the strife of the devils, there exist the earth and sky and the creatures that are increasing from few to many, as is manifest, and all acknowledge it.

(86) For, if in this combat there had not been any triumph, it would have been impossible to come from few to many.

(87) If it is manifest that the death occurs after the worldly birth, however that death may not be the complete cease of existence, but rather is the movement from place to place, or from act to act.

(88) For, it is obvious and manifest that, since the generation of all these creations is from the four elements which [constitute] their material body, they are to be mixed again with the four elements.

(89) The Spirits which are all the instruments of the breathing soul and agents within the body, are mingled with the soul, and on account of being of one nature, they do not be disturbed.

(91-92) The soul will be reckoned for its own deeds. The treasurers unto whom are deposited its good and evil deeds arrive for a test.

(93-94) If the treasurer of the good deeds is greater in strength, then it is, triumphantly, saved from the hands of the adversity, and it ascends to the great seat and all-blissful luminaries, and it is delighted eternally in beatitude.

(95-96) And if the treasurer of the evil deeds is greater in strength, then it is, triumphantly, dragged from the hands of the helper, and it is entrusted to the cleaning-and-washing place, that is, the purifying hospital.

(97-98) There, even those feeble good deeds practised in the material world, are not ineffectual to it. For this reason, the washing and cleaning and punishment are proportionate to the sin, and not arbitrarily.

(99-100) For, [these good deeds practised in the world] protect it from the [arbitrary] infliction of its punishment. Finally, the beneficent creator, who is the forgiver of the creatures, does not leave any good creature in captivity in the hands of the enemy.

(101) He saves both, the righteous and even the sinful, through atonement for sin, from the hands of the purifiers, and leads them to the eternal beatitude.

(102) In brief: The creator is the healer and physician, the keeper and nourisher and guardian and saviour of the creature, and not the one who inflicts disease and pain, and punishes his own creatures.

(103) This has been more extensively written below [in the chapters] on the proof of Two Principles and against the atheists and monists.

(104-105) I prepared  [this chapter] as you (Mihrayyār) commanded and requested. May you consider it with kind regards. Because, as I have written above, I belong not to the rank of the teachers, but to the rank of the students.

(106-107) I have presented here, these religious teachings which I found, despite my little wisdom, from the books of “Ādarpādyāvandān”, and his teachings are extant in he book Dēnkird of the excellent wise Ādurfarrōbay son of Farroxzād, who was the Leader-of-Mazdayasnians, and explained out of the knowledge of the religion, [and this book Dēnkird] contains a thousand chapters.

(108) As for the unlimitedness and limitedness that you asked, I will write, God willing, below.

darag ī didīgar

V

1. anī darag andarg ī nēstyazdgōbān, ud abar astīh ī yazd u-š hambidīg.

(2) astīh ī yazd u-š hambidīg xradpedīrišnīg dānišn ud gōbāgīh vimandsoxanīhā.

(3) hangird ēn ē framāyed dānistan kū: abardum, fradum ud avizīrišnīgdum dānišn yazd šnāxtan ast.

(4) kē-š ēn dānišn nē pēšobāy ī dānišnān, ā-š abārīg dānišn afrayād.

(5) yazd šnāxtan ped uš ī avinast, ud vīr ī tēz (ud ayābāg) ud xrad ī vizināg šāyed.

(6) cē yazd šnāxtan nē ēn and vas kū dāned kū, yazd ast.

(7-8) cē kē vahmān tis ped astīh āgāh, u-š az cōnīh anāgāh, ēn kū hān tis veh ayāb vattar, hudānāg ayāb dušdānāg, anōš ayāb zahr, sard ud afsurd ayāb garm ud vidāzāg, hušk ud hōšēnāg ayāb xvēd ud namēnāg, ud ka-š az cōnīh anāgāh, ēgiš ast ēvāz dānistan asūd;

(9) cē stāyišn ud nikōhišn ī kas ud tis nē ped astīh, bē ped cōnīh šāyed kirdan.

(13-14) cē andar vimand ī acārīgīh-iz nē šāyed guftan kū: būd, baved zamān-ē ayāb gyāg-ē kū do bār do panz ayāb si gōbīhed.

(15-17) hangōšīdagdānišnīh hān kē az pēdāgīg tis, hān ī nē pēdāg pēdāgīhed. ud az vēnābdāg tis avēnābdāg tis, ped hangōšīdag ī dastabarnihād āvared ō handēmānīh ī vēnišn ī xrad, ped spurrīgmānāgīh, humānāgīh, ud humānāgbahrīh.

(18) spurrīgmānāg ōn cōn mardōm ī Pārs ō mardōm ī anī šahr.

(19) ud humānāg ōn cōn panīr ō spēdag ī xāyag.

(20-26) ud humānāgbahr ōn cōn panīr ō gac. cē ēn az vimand ī humānāgbahr. cōn panīr ō gac ēvāz ped spēdīh mānāg; spēdag ī xāyag ped spēdīh ud xvarišn-iz. ud ast-iz kē humānāg humānāgdar, ud humānāgbahr humānāgbahrdar gōbīhed. hān ī spurrīghumānāgdar abar nē gōbīhed. cē spurrīg spurrīgdar nē baved.

az ēn ēvēnag gugān vas, dagrandīh rāy, frāz hišt.

(27-30) az vēnābdāg tis avēnābdāg nimūdan ōn cōn az kirdag ud dāštag tis kē kirdār ud dāštār nē handēmān, ud az nibištag tis kē-š nibištār nē pēdāg, pēdāgīhed kirdār ī hān kirdag, ud dāštār ī hān dāštag, ud nibištār ī hān nibištag acārīg, cōn-š nimūd tis ī pēdāg ud vēnābdāg hān ī abēdāg ud avēnābdāg.

(31) hān ī andar šāyed ud sazed būdan āgāhīh vurravišnīg.

(32-33) cōn kē gōbed kū: «-m dīd mard-ē kē-š šagr-ē, ayāb šagr-ē kē-š mard-ē bē ōzad», ud ēn hān ī andar šāyed ud sazed būdan vimand šāyed drōv.

(34) bē ka hān āgāhīh mard gōbed kē ped rāstīh husrav, ud ped vizurdīh uzmūdag, ā andar rāstīh ud astīh vimand.

(35) agar mard gōbed kē ped drōzanīh dusrav, ud ped avizurdīh uzmūdag, ā andar vimand ī drōvīh ud anastīh.

(36) anī ēvēnag ī az ēn bērōn vimand ī acārīg nē būd ud nē šāyed.

(37-45) cōn kē gōbed kū: «gēhān ped nihānīgīh andar andarōn xāyag-ē burdan šāyed»; ayāb: «pīl-ē andar sūrāg-ē ī sōzan vidurdan šayed, ōn ka ēk-iz nē meh baved ud nē keh»; ayāb: «gōhr tis ī nē-bun»; ud «kuxšišn ī nē kanāragumandīhā»; ud «astag tis ī nē zamānumand ud gyāgumand», ayāb «gyāgumand nē kanāragumand»; ud «jumbišn vihēzag ī tuhīg»; ud abārīg ī az ēn šōn guftan ud handēšīdan zīfān ud drōv ud nē šāyed.

(46-50) ēnyā astīh ī āfurāg yazd, jud az hān ī cihrmārišnīh ud anī gugāyīh, ped acārīg ud hangōšīdagīg dānišn, pēš vēnišn ī xrad ōn vēnābdāg cōn az bahrumandīh ud kirdagīh ud pesāxtagīh ī az vas ēvēnag judsān tis, kirdagīh ī gēhān ud mardōm kē-šān bahrān abzārān ī aziš, cōn tan, gyān, zahagān kē aziš pesāxt ud kird ēstend; ī ast: ātaš ud āb ud vād ud zamīg, ī jud jud ped xvēš kār rāyēnišn ōn cihrēnīd ud vāspuhragānēnīd ēstend kū, ātaš ped xvēšcihrīh ud vāspuhragānīh kār ōn kū-š kār ī āb, vād, zamīg nē ādōg rāyēnīdan.

(51) ēdōn-z āb ped xvēšcihrīh ud vāspuhragānīh kār ōn cōn kū-š kār ī vād, ātaš, zamīg nē [ādōg].

(52) ēdōn-z vād kār ī ātaš, āb, zamīg nē.

(53) ēdōn-z zamīg kār ī avēšān rāyēnīdan nē ādōg.

(54-56) bē jud jud ped hān ī xvēš kār cōn vāspuhragānēnīd ud cihrēnīd ēstend, az ōy ī cihrēnīdār ud pesāxtār ud vāspuhragēnīdār frazānagīhā ud nizūmānagīhā, cōn ō hān kār abāyišnīg, pesazag pesāxt, virāst, cihrēnīd ud vāspuhragānēnīd.

(57-59) ōn-z mardōm ud abārīg dām kē zahagumand ī ēn zahagān, kē-šān pesāxtagīh ī ast ud pit ud pay ud rag ud pōst jud jud, ēk ō did abyuxtagīh āgenīn vēnābdāg.

(60-62) ēdōn-z vāspuhragānīh ud cihrēnīdagīh ī hannāmān ī andarōnīg, cōn jagar, spul, šuš, gurdag, ud zahr pōšišn, abārīg abzārān kē harv ēk azišān xvēškārīh-ē pēdāg, avišān pādemār cihrēnīd ud vāspuhragānēnīd ēstend ped hān ī-šān xvēš kār.

(63-64) ēdōn-z cašm, gōš, vēnīg, uzvān, dahan, dandān, dast, pāy, abārīg abzārān ī bērōnīg kē-šān jud jud xvēškārīh cihrēnīdagīh vēnābdāg pediš pēdāg; ōn ka ēk az avēšān hannāmān agār, hān ī did ped kār ī ōy ī did kē-š aviš nē cihrēnīd ēsted nē šāyed.

(68-73) ōn kū spēdag pay ast; syāhag āb, ī ped rag ī pay ōn ēstādag kū-š vardišn ī cašm az kust ō kust pediš baved; tēdag xvad vēnāgīh ast cōn vēnāgīh ī andar āb; syāhag ped rag ī spēdag ēsted cōn ēstišn ī āb ped rag ī pay; ud tēdag andar syāhag cōn vēnāgīh ī tis andar rōšn āb, ud dīdan ī kālbod andar āyēnag ī rōšn.

(74-76) ud spēdag ī gabrīhā vināristan ped hān cim kū xāk gard ī az andarvāy ka ō cašm rased pediš nē ōftād, ō dumb ī cašm vardād, ud vēnišn ī cašm mā tabāhēnād.

(77-79) ēdōn cōn varg ī gōš xvahr pesāxt ped hān cim kū, xāk gard, parrvarān xrafstar, rāstīhā, pediš andar nē šavād, ud xvad nam ud guzd ī gōš, ud zahr ī xrafstarān.

(80-81) ēdōn pēdāg ka ō abzārān ī gyān ud ruvān nigerīhed, cōn hambōyišn ud ašnavišn ud vēnišn ud caxšišn ud permāhišn ī āgāhegar ī gyānumandān;

(82) ēdōn-z xrad, ī «harv rad» vizārīhed, vizingar;

(83) ud dānišn ī ayābāg;

(84) ud vīr ī xvāstār abespārdār;

(85) ud uš ī ganzvar nigāhdār;

(86) ud bōy ī xvād vēnāgīh ī ruvān;

(87) fravaš ī xvad cihr ī dāštār ī tan;

(88) ud ox ī abēzag;

(89-91) ud abārīg mēnōgān ī tan dāštār kē-šān jud jud kār ud xvēškārīh ped hān ēvēnag cihrēnīd ēstend, ped xvēškārīh cōn vāspuhragānēnīd cihrēnīd ēstend ped xvēš kār bavandag hend, ped hān ī nē cihrēnīd ēstend nē šāyend.

(92) ud gugān ī jud jud andar dēngird nibēg ī cōn agrī frazānag az dēnāgāhīh vizārd, ēdar dagrandīh rāy frāz hišt.

(93-95) kē-š kāmag kū abdīh ī dēn mazdesn ud pōryōdkēšīg gōbišn bē dānistan, ped hān an-angōšīdag nibēg pediš nigered, abdīh ud rāstīh ī dēn abardar ē dāned.

VI

(1-4) ud anī viyābānīgīh ī avēšān nēstyazdgōbān, kē-šān dahrīg xvānend, kē az arg ī dēnīg ud ranz ī ped kirbag varzīdan vaxt ēstend, ud drāyišn ī abēvimand vasīhā drāyend.

(5-6) ēn ē nigered kū: ēn gēhān abāg vasēvēnag vardišn ud ārāyišn ī-š hannāmān abzārān, ud pedyāragīh ī ēk ō did, ud gumēzišn ī-š ēk ped did, akanārag zamān bunēštag hangārend.

(7) ud ēn-z kū nē kirbag mizd, ud nē vināh pādifrāh, ud nē vahišt ud dušox, ud nē rāyēnīdār ī kirbag ud bazag ast.

(8) ēn-z kū: tis ēvāz gētīg ast, ud mēnōgīg nēst.

(9-10) cōn man azabar nibišt ud nišānēnīd kū:

kirdag bē az kirdār, ud vizīdag bē az vizīdār būdan ōn nē šāyed cōn nibištag bē az nibištār virāstan, mān bē az rāz dēsāg.

(11) hāmōyēn kirdag tis bē az kunāg būdan nē šāyed.

(12-14) ud ēn gētīg az gumēzišn ī zōrān hambidīgān, ōn vasān xīrān judcihrān, judgōnān, judbōyān, juddaxšagān, judsardagān ōn pesāxt ud vizīd ud kird ēsted cōn man azabar abar tan guft kū:

az vas tis ī cōn ast ud pay ud pit ud rag ud pōst ud xūn ud vād ud viš ud rīm ud dast ud pāy ud sar ud škam(b) ud abārīg hannāmān andarōnīg ud bērōnīg pesāxt ud kird ēsted.

(15-16) andar davistan ī vas ēvēnag tis ī judgōhr ī judzōr rāy hamēšag-nē-kirdag, ayāb bē-az-kirdār būdan, nē šāyistan ēvar.

(17-18) ud ham ēvēnag, abārīg dām, urvar, draxt, ud āb ud ātaš ud zamīg ud vād, u-šān rāyēnišn ī nē xvad ō xvēš kām, ud nē rāyēnīdār hend, bē-šān rāyēnīdār ud dēsāg ud kunāg ast;

(19) ud acār kē-šān az rāyēnišn ō rāyēnišn, ud az sān ō sān, ud az hangām ō hangām vardēnāg, rāyēnāg, nē cōn kām ud abāyist ī kirdagān, bē cōn hān ī rāyēnāg ud kunāg.

(20) ēdōn-z, vardišn ī sālān, māhān, rōzān, zamānān, ī daxšagumandīg, vardišn ī spihr ud stārag ī pesāxtag, ud xvaršēd ud māh ī vinārdag ī anhaspīnravišn ī cihrīgvardišn.

(21) ēn-z nimūdārīh kū harv cihrīg cannišnān az cihrēnīdār-ē kē-š ōy cihrīg cannišn cihrēnīd.

(22-23) az abārīg juttarīh ud judrāyēnišnīh ī andar gētīg, az gētīg ped zamān zamān, hangām hangām, šāyed dānistan kū, ēn gētīg nē abērāyēnīdār.

(24) ayāb-iš rāyēnīdār nē yazd ī cimīkkunišn ī akanāragzōr ud asāmānvarz? ōy-iz ī ka gēhān frāyumandīh ud zarmānīh ud marg ēdōn vēnābdāg kū ham mardōm ud gōspend, ud ham cihrān ud draxtān az juvānīh ō pērīh, az pērīh ō margīh madan cihrīg.

(25) az pērīh abāz ō juvānīh, az margīh abāz ō zīndagīh madan kas-iz nē vēnīhed, ud guftan nē tuvān.

(26-28) nē-z ēn menīdan, guftan, vurravistan sazed kū: pādāšn ī kirbag, ud pādifrāh ī bazag nēst; nē-z cihr ī hamāg dāmān ayābišnīh ī dādār, ud murnzēnīdār mārdārīh.

(29) ēn-z kū-šān grāmīgīh ī nivāzišn dōsttar kū xvārīh ī dušnām, vattarīh.

(30-31) cē-šān nēkīh ī pediš kunend spāsdār, ud ka must vēnend garzīdār bend.

(32) az-iz ēn baxt ud jahišn bē az mēnōgān mēnōgīg būdan nē šāyed.

(33-34) ēdōn-z ped cihr ī harv šuyišnumandān, ped harv avištāb ud vidang āyaftxvāhišnīh, umēddārišnīh, ō abardarnigerišnīh, abar mardōmān, bē abar dadān ud murvān ud cahārbāyān pēdāgīg.

(35-37) ēn-z ī sofistāgīh gōbend kū: tisān ēk-iz ōstīgānīh nēst, cē hamāg taxl hend.

(38-39) cē kē gōbed kū «angubēn taxl» ud «angubēn šīrēn», harv do rāst, cē taxl ō viš-abzūdān, šīrēn ō abārīgān.

(40-41) ud «nān xvaš» ud «nān axvaš» harv do rāst, cē xvaš ō gursagān, axvaš ō sagrān.

(42) abārīg vas ped ēn šōn.

(43-45) ā ēn gōbīhed ped pāsox ī avēšān drāyišn hangirdīg:

cōn-šān guft dānāgān kū: ēn-z soxan ī ašmā sofistāgān abar taxlenīh ī harv tis ham taxl ast, u-š rāstīh nēst.

(46-48) abārīg vas andarg ī avēšān guft ast. u-mān ēn kū nišānēnīd, pedisāy šnāxtārīh ī ašmā pērōzgarān kū az dēn vas ayābed.

Second Chapter

V

1. Another chapter: Against the atheists, and about the existence of the God and His rival.

(2) The existence of the God and His rival is a judicious statement according to the science and logic acceptable by wisdom.

(3) In brief, you should know this that: the supreme, a priori and most inevitable science is Scientia divina (theology).

(4) He, of whom this science is not the leader of science, is helpless by other sciences.

(5) Knowing the god is possible through undefiled intelligence, “swift” memory and analytic reason.

(6) Because, for knowing the god it is not sufficient to know that the god exists.

(7-8) Whoever is aware of the existence of such a thing, and is unaware of its qualities – such as that thing is good or bad, erudite or ignorant, antidote or poison, cold and frozen or hot and melting, dry and parching or moist and damp–, his only knowledge of its existence is vain.

(9) For, it is possible to praise or blame someone or some thing, not through its existence, but through its qualities.

(13-14) For, within the limits of necessity, it is not possible to say that: there was, or there will be a time or a place where twice two are said to be five or three.

(15-17) Knowledge by syllogism is that by which is manifested from anything manifest something non-manifest, and convinced by analogy the vision of wisdom, out of anything obvious something obscure, that is through complete comparison, or resemblance, or partial comparison.

(18) Complete comparison is such as that of a man of Persis to a man of another province.

(19) Resemblance is such as that of cheese to the white of an egg.

(20-26) Partial comparison is such as that of cheese to plaster. For this comes from the definition of partial similitude. Because cheese is similar to plaster only in whiteness, but it is similar to the white of an egg in whiteness and also as food. Sometimes a resembling is said more resembling, and a partially similar more partially similar. But that which is more-complete-similar is never spoken about, because complete does not become more complete.

About this kind, details are enough; and on account of tediousness, [more details] are left aside.

(27-30) To show a thing obscure from a thing obvious is such as: from a thing made and kept whose maker and keeper is not present, and from a thing written whose writer is not manifest, are necessarily manifested a maker of that which is made, a keeper of that which is kept, and a writer of that which is written, so that those which are manifest and obvious show those of non-manifest and obscure.

(31) Information of that which is within the possible and contingent is something believable.

(32-33) For, one who says that “I saw a man who slew a lion, or lion who slew a man”, this may be false within the limits of possibility and contingency.

(34) If a man who is renowned for truth and tested in verity announces that information, then it is within the limits of truth and reality.

(35) But if a man announces it, who is notorious for falsehood and tested in non-verity, then it is within the limits of falsehood and unreality.

(36) Another mode, outside these [three modes of knowing], is within the limits of necessarily-non-existent and or impossible.

(37-45) For example, to state: “it is possible to beat the world hidden into an egg”, or “it is possible that an elephant passes into an eye of a needle, so that none of them become greater nor smaller”, or “substance is something without origin” and “[the time of] combat is not limited”, and “there is some existing thing which is not temporal nor localised”, or “it is localised but not limited (by time)”, and “movement is the displacement of the void” [these statements] and others alike, are false and untrue and not worthy to think and say.

(46-50) Moreover, the existence of the God who is (spiritual) creator, apart from perception and other evidences, and through the necessary and analogical sciences, is as much obvious before the vision of wisdom as: from the partition, constitution and composition of the things which are of many different kinds [is manifested] the constitution of the world and man from those things which are the parts and organs [of the world and man], such as body and [breathing] soul, and the elements from which [body] is composed and constituted; that is, fire, water, wind and earth, each of them is so appointed nature and made proper for its own management that, the operation of fire by its own nature and property, is so that [the fire] is not capable of managing the operations of water and wind and earth.

(51) So also the operation of water, through its own nature and property, is so that it is not [capable of managing] the operation of wind and fire and earth.

(52) So also wind is not [capable of managing] the operations of fire and water and earth.

(53) So also earth is not capable to manage the operations of these [others].

(54-56) But each of them is made, for its own operation proper and natural, by Him who, sagaciously and skilfully, appoints nature, composes and makes proper, according as He composed, arranged, appointed nature and made proper to that operation which is requisite and suitable.

(57-59) So, as to man and the other creatures who are embodied of these elements, and composed of bone, flesh, sinew, veins and skin, their junction to each other is obvious.

(60-62) So also the property and natural disposition of the internal organs, such as the liver, spleen, lungs, kidneys, gall-bladder, and other organs for every one of which a function is manifest. They are made natural and proper for their functions, according to the [natural] edict.

(63-64) So also is the function of the eye, ear, nose, tongue, mouth, hand, foot and other external organs, whose natural appointments are obvious and manifest, inasmuch as if one of these organs is disabled, the other does not deserve for the operation of that [organ], for which it is not appointed.

(68-73) As the white is sinew, the black is water, and in the veins of sinew is disposed in such a way that it permits the turning of the eye, from one side to the other, the pupil is itself the vision, like a vision (or, reflection) in the water, the black stands in the veins of the white just as the standing of water in the veins of sinew, and the pupil inside the black is like the reflection of a thing in the limpid water, and the seeing of a shape in a clear mirror.

(74-76) The white in the hollow is so disposed for the reason that when a particle of dust from the air arrives at the eye, shall not fall in it, but shall deflect towards the outer corner of the eye, and shall not spoil the sight of the eye.

(77-79) Likewise, the auricles are crooked for the reason that the dust and winged noxious insects shall not directly enter therein, not even the moisture and discharge of the ear, nor the venom of insects.

(80-81) It is manifest that, when the organs of breath [of life] and soul are observed, such as the smell, hearing, sight, taste and touch which are informers of living beings;

(82) as also the wisdom, interpreted as ‘every judge’, which is discriminator;

(83) the knowledge which is acquiring;

(84) the wit (faculty of intellectual awareness and perception) which is seeker and deliverer;

(85) the intelligence which is treasurer and keeper;

(86) the consciousness which is itself the faculty of vision of the soul;

(87) the Fravahr-nature which is itself a maintainer of the body;

(88) the Ahu which is pure;

(89-91) and the other immaterial agents that are maintaining the body, which are constituted, in that manner, for their special operation and function; they are perfect in their own operation, as to function such as they are specialised and constituted for, as to that [operation] for which they are not constituted, they do not deserve.

(92) The details of each of these [subjects] are [extant] in the book Dēnkird, a he excellent wise [Ādarfarrōbay] explained them out of the knowledge of the religion, and on account of tediousness are here left aside.

(93-95) Whoever wishes to know the wonder of the Mazdayasnian religion and the words of the old teaching, may refer to that unparalleled book, and shall know the wonder and truth of the superior religion.

VI

(1-4) Again: the delusion of the atheists called “Dahrīs ”, who are disengaged from religious work and effort in doing good, and they abundantly utter their illogical talks.

(5-6) You should observe that: they consider this world with its manifold revolutions and dispositions of its members and organs, and the opposition of one to another, and the mixture of one with another, as a Principle of infinite time.

(7) And further that: there is no reward of virtue, no punishment of sin, no Heaven and Hell, and no one who conducts [the judgement of] virtue and sin.

(8) And further that: There is only the world of life, and not the world of thought.

(9-10) As I have written and shown above that:

A thing to be without a maker, or a thing to be chosen without a chooser is just impossible as a written work to be prepared without an author, or a house [to be built] without a builder or architect.

(11) It is impossible for anything to be made without a maker.

(12-14) The material world is composed, selected, and made of a mixture of contrary forces as well as numerous things of different nature, colour, smell, characteristic and species, just as I have said above concerning the body that:

it is composed and made of many things such as: bone, sinew, flesh, vein, and skin, blood, wind, bile and phlegm, hands, feet, head, stomach, and other external and internal organs.

(15-16) The impossibility of uttering that “these various things of different substances and forces are never made” or “they are without a maker” is certain.

(17-18) Likewise, other creatures like plants, trees, water, fire, earth, and wind: their conduct is not according to their own will, and they are not themselves conductors, but they have a conductor, builder, and maker.

(19) It is necessary that He who is changing and conducting the (beings) from management to management, from manner to manner, and from time to time, does thus not according to the will and wish of made things, but rather of Himself who is conducting and making.

(20) Thus too is the revolution of the years, months, days, and hours which is with conventional signals, and the revolution of the celestial Sphere and the fixed stars and the established and sleeplessly-progressing Sun and Moon which is natural.

(21) This demonstrates that all natural movements come from one who constitutes them, from Him by whom the natural movement is constituted.

(22-23) From the other differences and different managements in the world, and from the world itself in its different times and ages, it is possible to know that this world is not without a manager (/conductor).

(24) Is not its manager the God, rational in action, of infinite force, and of unlimited miraculous power? Also since the increase, old age, and death of the living world are so obvious that man and cattle, together with seeds and trees naturally proceed from youth to old age, and from old age to death.

(25) But no one has been seen to come back from old age to youth or from death to life, nor can anyone say so.

(26-28) Nor yet is it right to think, say or believe that: there is no retribution of virtue, and punishment of sin, nor the nature of all creatures is the comprehension of the Creator and the perception of the destroyer.

(29) Further that: The honour of compliment is more preferable to them than the dishonour of abuse and evil.

(30-31) For, when good is done to them, they are thankful, but when they experience violence, they complain.

(32) From there, it is manifest that fate and fortune are impossible to come into existence except from the spiritual beings that are immaterial.

(33-34) Likewise, through the nature of all those who feel hungry, in every oppression and trouble, the desire of boon, hopefulness and consideration of the higher are typical of mankind, to the exclusion of wild beasts, birds and quadrupeds.

(35-37) As to this that the Sophists say: there is no confidence in nothing [in the world]. For, all are bitter.

(38-39) Because, one who says that ‘honey is bitter’, and [the one who says that] ‘honey is sweet’, both are right , since it is bitter to the bilious, and sweet to others.

(40-41) Also ‘bread is savoury’ and ‘bread is unsavoury’ are both true, since it is savoury to the hungry, and unsavoury to the full.

(42) And many other [sayings] like this.

(43-45) In reply to their illogical talks, it should be said, in a word:

As the wise have said: “this word of you, sophists, about the bitterness of everything is itself bitter, and there is no truth in it”.

(46-48) Many other things are said against them. This that we indicated here is for your information, O victors, so that you may obtain much from Religion.

darag ī sidīgar

VII

(1) anī abar astīh ī hambidīg ī judgōhr.

(2) cōn azabar nimūd kū: az ōn frazānagīhā-pesāxtagīh, cihrēnīdagīh, vāspuhragānīh ī tisān, az-iz bahrān ī hamēnīdag, rōšn, acārīg, dastabarnihād, pēdāg kū-š kirdār, pesāxtār, hamēnīdār, cihrēnīdār frazānag.

(3) u-š frazānagīhā-pesāxtagīh az jud jud, ped xvēš jud jud kār cihrēnīdan vāspuhragānēnīdan, pēdāg.

(4) u-š frazānagīhākunišnīh nimūdār kū-š kunišn cimīg vahānīg.

(5) cē az frazānagān kunišn harv cimīg vahānīg sazed būdan.

(6) pēš, cim ud vahān ī kunišn baved; pas, kunišn.

(7) az vasēvēnagīh ī-š kunišn pēdāg kū-š kunišn kāmagīg ud abāyistīg.

(8-10) cē kunišn az kunāg do ēvēnag baved:

ayāb, kāmagīg, vasēvēnag ī-š kām; ayāb, cihrīg, ēk-ēvēnag ī cōn cihrēnīd ēsted.

(11-13) az vasēvēnag kunišn ī dādār pēdāg kū-š kunišn kāmagīg ud abāyistīg, u-š kām az abāyist judvimand. cē-š kām, ped nērōg, ī bunēštag abāyistag.

(14-15) cim ud vahān ī kunišn pēš az abāyist. cē dā cim ī abāyist ī kunišn nē rased, abāyist nē baved.

(16) cim ī kunišn az vahān baved kēš hān kunišn abāyist aviš nixvāred.

(17-18) abāyistan, kāmistan ī tis ī vahānīg baved, ud vahān ī abāyistan ī tis az xvadīh nē hangēzīhed;

(19-20) cē az bē-rasišnīh vahān baved. kē rāy nimūdār cimīkkunišnīh ī frazānag.

(21) cim az vahān, ud vahān az avištāb, ud avištāb az bē, ud bē az vizūdār, ud vizūdār az hamēstār, abēsoxan.

(22) u-m ped ēn dar nimūd acārdānišnīhā ud hangōšīdagīhā kirdagīh ud cihrēnīdagīh ī gēhān, u-š bahrān abzārān.

(23-24) az kirdagīh ud cihrēnīdagīh ī gēhān pēdāgīhed kirdār ud cihrēnīdār, ud cimīkkunišnīhā kirdagīh ī frazānag dādār.

(25) az cimīkkunišnīhā kirdagīh pēdāgīhed astīh ī vizūdār ī az be.

VIII

(1) did abar astīh ī hambidīg judbunēšt.

(2-3) ēn kū: az nēkīh ud vattarīh ī andar gēhān pēdāg, ud nāmcišt ī nēkkirdār ī xvēš vimand.

(4-14) ēdōn cōn tārīkīh ud rōšnīh, hudānāgīh ud dušdānāgīh, bōy (hubōyīh) ud genn (dušgennīh), zīndagīh ud margīh, vēmārīh ud drustīh, dād ud adād, must ud āzādīh, abārīg hambidīg kirdārān ī-šān ēvarīg astīh dīdārīh ped harv šahr, būm, ud harv zamānag; ōn kū nē ayābīhed ēc šahr ud būm, ud nē-z būd, bād ēc zamānag ka ēn nām, ud nāmcišt ī nēk ud vad, nē būd ud nē ast, ud nē ped ēc gyāg ud zamānag šāyed guftan kū nēk ud vad az xvēš cōnīh ped xvadīh vardišnīg baved.

(15-17) ēdōn-z abārīg hambidīgān kē-šān judīh nē judgōhrīhā bē judgārīhā ud judsardagīhā ud judcihrīhā, cōn judīh ī hamgōhrān ēk andar did ōn cōn narīh māyagīh, bōyān, mizagān, gōnān, ud xvaršēd, māh, stāragān, kē-šān judīh nē judgōhrīhā, bē judgārīhā ud judcihragēnīdīhā ud judpesāxtīhā, ī cōn ō kār kār abāyišnīg.

(18-19) nēk ud vad, ud rōšn ud tār, abārīg judgōhrān ēg-išān judāgīh nē judgārīhā, bē judgōhrīhā, asāzišnīgcihrīh ud vizūdārīh ī-šān ēk ō did pēdāg.

(20-21) ōn ka nēkīh ānōh, vattarīh nēstīh abēgumān; ka rōšnīh mad, tārīgīh spōzīhed;

(22) ēdōn-z abārīg hambidīgān kē-šān asāzišnīgīh ud vizūdārīh ō āgenīn az judgōhrīh vahān.

(23) cōn andar gētīg hambidīggōhrīh ud vizūdārīh ī tisān ēk ō did pēdāg.

(24) gētīg bar ī mēnōg; u-š mēnōg bun.

(25-26) cē bar ayābīhed ped bun, ham ēvēnag būd gugāyīhdādār, andar šnāsagān rōšn.

(27-28) gētīg bar, mēnōg bun būdan, pēdāgīh ēn ka: harv vēnišnīg, gīrišnīg tis az abēdāgīh ō pēdāgīh madan, gōvizār pēdāg.

(29-30) cōn mardōm ud abārīg dām ī vēnišnīg, gīrišnīg, az mēnōg ī avēnišnīg agīrišnīg būdan, āšnāg; ōn cōn kālbod, andar āyēnag, drahnāy, pahnāy, zahā ī xvad;

(31) ud tan ī mardōm ud abārīg dām pēdāgīh andar tōm ī az pidarān abēdāg avēnišnīg būd.

(32) xvad-iz tōm andar hān ī pidarān pušt ō pēdāgīh ud vēnišn ud gīrišn mad.

(33) nūn acārīg, šāyed dānistan kū: ēn gētīg ī vēnišnīg, gīrišnīg, az mēnōg ī avēnišnīg agīrišnīg dād būd ēsted.

(34) ham ēvēnag az vēnišn, gīrišn, ō avēnišnīgīh agīrišnīgīh ī xvad mēnōg būdan abēgumān.

(35-37) ka-mān dīd ped gētīg hambidīggōhrīh ud asāxtārīh ud vizūdārīh ī ēk ō did, pez mēnōg xīr kē bun ast ī gētīg, u-š gētīg xīrān bar, ham ēvēnag būdan nē gumānīg.

(38) ēn hān ī az hambidīggōhrīh pēdāg.

(39-40) enyā-m azabar nimūd cim ud vahān ī frazānagīhā-kunišnīh ī dādār kē dād dām ī nimūdār ast astīh ī hamēstār.

(41) cē āšnāg kū: kunišn az kunišngar do ēvēnag:

kāmagīg ayāb cihrīg.

(42-47) hān ī kāmagīg si ēvēnag:

do, az dānāgān frazānagān, ayāb ped xvāstan, ō xvēš kirdan ī sūd ud nēkīh, ayāb spuxtan, ayāb dāštan ī zyān ud anāgīh ī az be;

ud ēk, az dušāgāhān adānān, halagīhā, abēcimīhā.

(48) az dānāgān frazānagān kunišn abēcim avahān nē sazed būdan.

(49) cōn dādār ī frazānag ī vispāgāh ī bavandag tuvānīg, ped xvadīh bavandag spurrīg, hān ī-š nē niyāz ō sūd-ē ud abzōn-ē ī az bē xvāstan.

(50-51) pas šāyed dānistan kū cim, vahān ī-š kunišnān hān ēk ēvēnag:

zyān ī-š az hamēstār ud vizūdār ī az bē, šāyed būdan, spuxtan, abāz dāštan, ī xvad cim ud vahān ī dāmdahišnīh.

(52) ēn-z kū: ōy dādār ī frazānag vehegām;

(53) u-š kām hamāg vehīh;

(54) u-š dād dām pedisāy xvēš kām;

(55) ud bavandag ravākkāmīh ī ōy ī vehkām frazānag ped ānāftan, anast kirdan ī vattarīh.

(56) cē dā vattarīh nē ānābīhed, ōy ī vehkām nē spurrīkkām.

(57) ēn kū: ōy ī dādār ī frazānag vehīh az dādārīh ud parvardārīh ud pānāgīh, rāh ī anāgīh bē kirdan, ud pahrēz ī az bazag kirdan, cārag framūdan hamuxtan, pēdāg.

(58-60) az-iz cahārān zōrān ī tan ī ped dard ud vēmārīh ī az bērōn, ud ped vahān ī tan hamēstār ī ō tan rased bē spuxtan, abāz dāštan, dāštārīh ud pezāmēnīdārīh ud vaxšēnīdārīh ī gyānvarān ud rōymānān ped zōr ī dārāg parvarāg ī cihr hamkār, ī dēnīg fravahr xvānīhed;

(61-63) ud ped hān cahār zōr ī frabihišngar, ī ast zōr ī āhanzāg, gīrāg, gugārāg, spōzāg, kē az hāmōyēn dādār frazānagīh, hamkārīhā, ped peymānīg zōr, ped abāzdāštārīh ī dard ud vēmārīh ī sardag sardag ī az hamēstār ī halakkunišn ī anākkām, ud anī hamzōr, hamayyār hend, pēdāg vehkāmagīh ī dādār.

(64) ēn-z kū: ēn dard ud margīh, ī tan višuftār, nē az dādār ī vehkām ī tan dāštār ud parvardār.

(65-67) pēdāgīh az-iz ēn ka dādār ī frazānag nē abaxšdār ud pašīmānīh-kunišn, ud nē višuftār ud agārgar ī xvēš āfurišnān; cē frazānag ud vispāgāh.

(68) ēn ōn abaxšīh, pašīmānīh ī az xvēš kunišn abar ōy kamdānišn, abavandagxrad ud afrazāmešnās sazed guftan.

(69) cōn az dānāgān ud frazānagān kunišn abēcim avahān nē baved.

(70) hamgōnag az adānān, dušāgāhān, afrazāmešnāsān kunišn hamāg halag, abēcim, avahān.

(71) ud ōy ī frazānag ped abāzdāštārīh ī hān halakkunišn ud afrazāmešnās az xvēštan dāmān frazānagīhā nizūmānagīhā kunišnīg ud hangixtār.

(72) ōy ī halakkunišn parzīnumand pēcīdag andar dāmvandag kird.

(73-74) cē ēn āšnāg kū: ōy ī jumbāg zīndag gōhr andar akanārag tuhīgīh ōn nē šāyed abāz dāštan, abesinnīdan, az vizūdārīh abēbīm būdan, bē ka pēcīdag ud parzīdag ud gravīg nē baved.

(75) andar pēcīdagīh ud gravīgīh dardmār ud grān pādifrāh cārag.

(76) bē dā bavandagmārdārīh ī-š dard ud bavandagāgāhīh ī az xvēš dušāgāhgārīh nē baved, ped hān ī-š peyvasted zūrmihōxtīhā mened;

(77) ud bavandagtuvānīh ī visptuvān dādār dardmārdārīh;

(78) az bavandagmārdārīh ī dard andar visptuvānīh ī frazānag dādār agārīhā abāz abganed dā ō hān ī akanārag tuhīgīh.

(79) hān ī veh dām aziš abīm, anōšag, abēš baved;

(80) bavandag nizūmānīhā frazānagīh ud cāragvēnīh ī ōy harvispāgāh dādār ī vehīgān.

(81) ud az cašmdārišnīh ī xīrān pēdāg judāgīh ī tisān.

(84) judgārīh az hamayyārīh ud hamzōrīh;

(85-86) ud judgōhrīh az asāxtārīh ud hamēstārīh, ud ped ēvgyāg nē ēstišn ī xīrān pēdāg.

(87) agar tis ēk hād, ēk nēstnām hād.

(88) šnāxtārīh ī tisān ēk az did nāmdārišnīh rāy.

(89) vad ped judāgīh ī az nēk astīh bunēštagīhā ōn ī ēk-iz nē vahānag ast ī ōy ī did.

(90-91) cē harv ēk ped xvēš xvadīh astagumand. az hamēšag-vizūdārīh pedyāragīh ī-šān ēk ō did pēdāg.

(92-94) agar kas gōbād kū: «cōn hambidīgān hambidīg vas – cōn nēk vad, ud tār rōšn, ud bōy genn, ud zīndagīh margīh, ud vēmārīh drustīh, ud rāmišn bēš, abārīg vas – ōn bunēštān vasmarag, vassardag sazend būdan», ēgiš pāsox dahend kū:

(95-102) ka-z ōy hambidīgān vasnām ud vassardag hend, ēg-iz hamāg andar parvastag ī do nām. u-šān ēn do nām tōmag ī parvannāg, ī ast nēk ud vad. avēšān judnāmān ud judsardagān daxšag hend ī ēn do tōmag. nē ēc tis ī nē parvast ī ēn do nām. nē būd ud nē baved tis ī nē nēk ayāb vad ayāb gumixtag az harv do. kē rāy pēdāg gōvizār kū bunēšt do, nē vēš. ēn-z kū, nēk az vad ud vad az nēk būdan nē šāyed.

(103-104) az-iz ēn šāyed dānistan kū:

hān tis ī ped nēkīh bavandag spurrīg, vadīh aziš būdan nē šāyed.

(105) agar šāyed, pas nē bavandag.

(106) cē ēk tis ka bavandag guft, anī tis gyāg nē baved.

(107) ud ka gyāg ī anī tis nē baved, anī tis aziš nē uzīhed.

(108) agar yazd ped vehīh ud dānāgīh spurrīg, ā-š adānīh ud vattarīh aziš nē būdan, āšnāg.

(109) agar-š aziš būdan šāyed, pas nē bavandag.

(110) agar nē bavandag, ped yazdih ī spurrīg vehīh stāyīdan nē šāyed.

(111) agar yazd veh ud vad aziš uzīhed, ped vehīh abavandag.

(112) agar ped vehīh abavandag, ped hudānāgīh abavandag.

(113) agar ped hudānāgīh abavandag, ah-iz ped xrad, uš, dānišn, vīr, abārīg-iz dānāgīh abzār abavandag.

(114) agar ped xrad, uš, vīr, dānišn abavandag, ped drustīh abavandag.

(115) agar ped drustīh abavandag, vēmār sazed būdan.

(116) agar vēmār sazed būdan, ped zīndagīh abavandag.

(117-118) agar kas gōbād kū: «hamē vēnam kū, az ēk gōhr, ī cōn mardōm ham nēkīh ud ham vattarīh ped kunišn az-išān hamē uzīhed», ā ē rāy cē mardōm ped ēk-iz nē bavandag.

(119-121) ud nēbavandagīh ī ped nēkīh rāy vadīh azišān uzīhed. ud nēbavandagīh-iz ī ped drustīh-iz rāy vēmārīhend. im cim rāy mīrend.

(122) cē vahān ī margīh kuxšišn ī do hambidig jadišnān, andar ēk gōhr.

(123) ānōh kū do hambidīg jadišnān andar ēk gōhr bavend, vēmārīh ud margīh būdan, āšnāg.

(124-125) agar kas gōbād kū: «nēk ud vad kunišn hend ī dā kunīhed nēst», ēgiš pāsox dahend kū:

(126) kunišn bē az kunāg būdan ōn nē šāyed būdan cōn ēc jadišn bē az gōhr, ud ped gōhr.

(127) enyā-š ped xvēš xvadīh ēstišn ud vinārišn nē būdan, āšnāg.

(128) cē ka mard xēšm kuned, vahman az ānōh dūr;

(129) ud ka vahman gāh dāred, xēšm ānōh nē.

(130) ud ka mard drō gōbed, rāstīh az ānōh dūr [ud hān mard drō xvānīhed];

(131) ud ka rāst gōbed, drōzanīh ānōh gāh nē dāred, ud hān mard rāst xvānīhed.

(132) ēdōn-z ka vēmārīh mad, drustīh ānōh nē;

(133) ud ka drustīh mad, vēmārīh šud.

(134-135) cōn gōhr ī nē jumbāg būdan šāyed; bē jumbišn bē ped gōhr būdan nē šāyed.

(136-137) abar ēn dar-z ō hangirdīg handāxt. dārmagīhā ud vizīdārīhā pediš nigerīdan framāyed.

Third Chapter

VII

(1) Another [chapter]: Concerning the existence of the contrary of different substance

(2) As I have demonstrated above: From the composing, constituting and appropriating of things so sagaciously, as well, from their parts which are connected, it is clear, necessary, convincing, and manifest that their agent, composer, connector and constitutor is sagacious.

(3) The sagacity of His composition of each of them is manifest through the constituting and appropriating of their own separate functions.

(4) And the sagacity of His action demonstrates that His action is reasonable (/with a motive) and causal.

(5) Because, every action of the sagacious should be reasonable and causal.

(6)The reason and cause of an action arise first, and then the action itself arises.

(7) From the manifoldness of His action, it is manifest that His action is voluntary and desired.

(8-10) For, there are two modes of action by an agent:

either, voluntary, it is manifold corresponding to his will; or, natural, it is monotype as it is naturally constituted.

(11-13) From the manifold actions of the creator, it is manifest that His actions are voluntary and desired. His will is different in definition from His desire. Because, His will is a desire, in potential, of the Principle.

(14-15) The reason and cause of an action are before its desire. Because until the reason of the desire of an action does not occur, the desire does not exist.

(16) The reason of an action proceeds from the cause which incites the desire of that action.

(17-18) “To desire” is to be willing of a casual thing. The cause of desiring something does not arise from it-self.

(19-20) Because the cause arises from without, therefore, the reasonable action of the sagacious is demonstrated.

(21) The reason comes from a cause; the cause from a pressure; the pressure from without; the outside from an injurer; and the injurer from an opponent; sine controversia.

(22) I have shown, in this chapter, through necessary knowledge and through syllogism, that the world and its parts and organs are made and naturally constituted.

(23-24) From the making and constitution of the world are manifested an agent who naturally constituted it, and the making through the reasonable action of the sagacious Creator.

(25) From the making through the reasonable action is manifested the existence of an Injurer from without.

VIII

(1) Further: concerning the existence of the contrary of different principle.

(2-3) This is manifest through good and evil in the world, and especially through the good agent having His own definition.

(4-14) Such as darkness and light, erudition and ignorance, fragrance and stench, life and death, sickness and health, justice and injustice, offence and freedom, and other contrary factors which exist and are visible in every country and land at all times, so that no country or land whatever exists, nor yet any time has been or shall be wherein these names, and especially those of good and evil have not existed or do not exist. And nowhere and never is it possible to say that good and evil change their own quality essentially.

(15-17) There are also other contraries whose difference is not of substance, but of operation, kind and or nature, such as the difference of those of the same substance, one as regards the other, such as the male and female nature, the [different] scents, tastes and colours, the sun, moon and stars whose difference is not difference of substance, but of operation, nature and composition, each being required to its own operation.

(18-19) The difference of good and evil, light and darkness, and other substantially different things, is a difference not of operation, but of substance; their incompatibility of nature and mutually injuriousness are manifest.

(20-21) So that where goodness is, evil undoubtedly is not; when light has entered, darkness is expelled.

(22) Similarly there are other contraries, incompatible and mutually injurer, owing to the cause of difference of substance.

(23) Thus in the material world is manifest the contrariety of substance and mutually injuriousness of things.

(24) The world of life (material world) is the result of the world of thought (immaterial world), and the world of thought is its base.

(25-26) For result is obtained through a base. Likewise, it is clear to any knowing that [the result] gives testimony [of the base].

(27-28) The world of life is the result and the world of thought the base is manifest by the fact that: every visible and tangible thing comes from an unmanifest state to a manifest state. This is explicitly manifest.

(29-30) Because, man and other creatures, who are visible and tangible, are known to be generated from the world of thought which is invisible and intangible. Such as the (external) body form that in the mirror has the same length, breadth and depth as itself.

(31) The body of man and other creatures is unmanifest and invisible in the seed of their fathers.

(32) The seed itself became manifest and visible and tangible in the back of the fathers.

(33) It is now necessary and possible to know that: This world which is visible and tangible has been created from the world of thought which is invisible and intangible.

(34) Similarly, [to return] from visibility and tangibility into invisibility and intangibility which are proper to an immaterial state, is unquestionable.

(35-38) Since we have seen in the material world contrariety of substance and constitution, and mutual injuriousness, there can be no doubt that it is the same in the things of the world of thought, which is the base of the world of life, and the material things are its results.

(38) This is that which is manifest as regards the contrariety of substance.

(39-45) Moreover, I have shown above that: The reason and cause for the sagacious action of the Creator, who created the creatures, indicate the existence of the Antagonist.

(41) For it is well-known that, action proceeds from an agent in two modes:

voluntary or, natural.

(42-47) The voluntary action is of three modes:

Two are due to the wise and sagacious: Either, for seeking and appropriating the advantage and benefit; or, for repelling and withholding the loss and harm which are from without.

And one is due to the ignorant and foolish, done absurdly and without reason.

(48) From the wise and sagacious, it is not right to arise actions without any reason and cause.

(49) Since the wise creator, omniscient and of perfect power, is complete and perfect in Himself, then He has no need to seek any advantage or increase from without.

(50-51) Therefore, it is possible and worthy to know that the reason and cause for His actions is all of one mode:

to repel and ward off whatever harm which there might be from the external Antagonist and Injurer, which is itself the reason and cause for creation.

(52) This too: The sagacious Creator’s will is good.

(53) His will is all good.

(54) He created creatures in accordance with His will.

(55) The complete success of that sagacious whose will is good is the abolition and annihilation of evil.

(56) For so long as evil is not abolished, He whose will is good has not perfectly realised His will.

(57) This too: The goodness of the sagacious Creator is manifest: through creativeness, nourishing, and protection, and teaching the way of cutting off the path of evil and the means of defending oneself against crime;

(58-60) and also through the four powers of the body to repel and withhold the pain and sickness from without, and the malady that is the opponent of the body[-health], whenever they come to the body; and through maintenance, maturation and growth of animals and plants by the preserving and nutritive power – this power cooperates with Nature, and its scriptural (Avesta) name is Fravaṣi;

(61-63) and through the four growth-promoting powers, that is, the attractive, the retentive, the digestive, and the propulsive, which, owing to the Creator’s all-sagacity, withhold, jointly and with moderate power, the pain and sickness of various kinds inflected by the Antagonist who acts at random and whose will is evil; and [through] other [powers] which are united in strength and cooperate with each other, the good will of the Creator is manifest.

(64) Further that: Pain and death that are the disturber and destroyer of the body, do not come from the Creator whose will is good, and who preserves and nourishes the body.

(65-67) This is manifest from this too, that the sagacious Creator neither repents or regrets His acts, nor does He disturb His own creatures or make them disabled, for He is sagacious and omniscient.

(68) It is proper to attribute repentance and regret to one of deficient knowledge, imperfect wisdom, and ignorance of the final outcome.

(69) For from the wise and sagacious does not arise an action without reason or cause.

(70) Similarly, the actions of the unwise, unenlightened who is ignorant of the final outcome are all absurd, without reason or cause. (71) The Sagacious acts and arouses, with sagacity and skill, to withhold from His creatures the one whose actions are absurd and who is ignorant of the final outcome;

(72) and He has made the one of absurd actions hedged in and entangled into the net [of the material world].

(73-74) For it is well-known that: it is not possible to withhold or annihilate a moving and living substance within a limitless void, nor is it possible to become fearless from injuriousness unless he is entangled, hedged in, and made captive.

(75) In entanglement and captivity, the “remedy” (against the one of absurd action) is suffering pain and grievous punishment.

(76) But until he becomes full conscious of his suffering pain and fully aware of his own ignorant activity, he thinks falsely as to what has befallen him;

(77) and the complete power of the omnipotent Creator [becomes manifest through this] perception of suffering and pain.

(78) After the complete perception of suffering and pain, under the omnipotence of the sagacious Creator, [the Creator] casts him idle into the limitless Void.

(79) Then the good creation will have no fear of him; it will be immortal and free from hostility.

(80) That is the complete and skilful sagacity and foreknowledge of the remedy of the omniscient Creator of the good.

(81) Through observation of things the difference of things is manifest.

(84) Difference of operation involves cooperation and union of forces.

(85-86) Difference of substance involves discordance and opposition. It is manifest that [different] things cannot be in one place.

(87) If the things were one, then One would be nameless.

(88) For it is through the possession of a name that one thing can be recognised from another.

(89) The existence of evil as different in principle from good means that neither is the cause of the other.

(90-91) For, each one is existent through its own essence, as is manifest from the perpetual injury and opposition between the two.

(92-94) If someone were to object that: “Since there is a multiplicity of contraries, such as good and evil, darkness and light, fragrance and stench, life and death, sickness and health, pleasure and sorrow, and many others, so there should be a great number and variety of principles”, then the reply is that:

(95-102) Even if the contraries may have many names and be of many kinds, yet all are comprised under two names, and these names are the seeds comprising them, that is: good and evil. The [contraries] of different names and kinds are tokens of these two names. There has not been, nor will be anything which is neither good nor bad, or a mixture of the two. Hence it is explicitly manifest that there are two principles, not more; and also that good cannot proceed from evil, nor evil from good.

(103-104) From this too it is possible to know that:

what is complete and perfect in goodness, no evil can proceed from it.

(105) If it could, then it would not be perfect.

(106) For if a thing is said to be perfect, there is no place for anything else.

(107) If there is no place for anything else, nothing else can proceed from it.

(108) If God is perfect in goodness (- wisdom) and knowledge, then it is known that ignorance and evil cannot come from him.

(109) If they could come from Him, then He would not be perfect.

(110) If He were not perfect, He should not be praised as God and completely good.

(111) If both good and evil could proceed from God, then He would be incomplete as far as goodness is concerned.

(112) If He is incomplete in respect of goodness, then He is incomplete in respect of knowledge.

(113) If He is incomplete in respect of knowledge, then He is incomplete in respect of intellect, intelligence, science, wit and other organs of wisdom.

(114) If He is incomplete in respect of intellect, intelligence, wit and science, then He is incomplete in respect of wholesomeness.

(115) If He is incomplete in respect of wholesomeness, He is apt to become sick.

(116) If He is apt to become sick, He is incomplete in respect of life.

(117-118) If someone should object that: “I see that both good and evil, indeed, proceed from a single substance, such as man”, then [ the reply is thus:], This is because man is not at all perfect.

(119-121) And because of his incompleteness in respect of goodness, evil proceeds from him. And because of incompleteness in respect of wholesomeness, he falls sick; and for the same reason he dies.

(122) For the cause of death is the conflict of two contrary accidents in one substance.

(123) Where there are two contrary accidents in one substance, the occurrence of sickness and death is acknowledged.

(124-125) If someone should object that: “Good and evil are actions , which do not exist until they are performed”, then the reply is that:

(126) An action can no more exist without an agent than an accident without a substance, in which it belongs.

(127) Moreover, it is acknowledged that its own existence and establishment cannot be of itself.

(128) For when a man is angry, Good-Thought is far from there.

(129) When Good-Thought takes room, anger is not there.

(130) When a man tells a lie, truth is far from there; [and that man is called liar].

(131) When he speaks the truth, falsehood has no place there; and that man is called truthful.

(132) Similarly, when sickness comes, health is not there.

(133) When health has come, sickness departs.

(134-135) For a substance which does move is possible, but no movement is possible except when it belongs to a substance.

(136-137) Concerning this chapter, too, I contented myself to explain succinctly. May you observe subtly and distinctly thereon.

darag ī cahārum

IX

(1) anī abar astīh ī hambidīg, hamgugāyīhā, az dēngird nibēg, āgāhīh ī ašmā rāy ēdar nišānēnīdan xūb.

(2) cē ēn-z ī abar nibišt, ud hān ī nibēsīhed hamāg az tōm rust ī hufravard Ādarpādyāvandān kišt.

(3) ud bun spās ī ōy agrī frazānag Ādurfarrōbay ī Farroxzādān xvēš!

(5-6) hād. astīh ī dām hamēstār az andardum ī mardōm tan dā bēdum ī aziš vēnišn, mārišn, dānišn, ayābišnīg, ud azabar hān ī andar humānāgīh vimand ī ēvarīg.

(7-13) andardum ī mardōm, ī andardum ī gyān baved, vēnīhed ped bavandag-nigerišnīh andar ham vimand.

ē cōn dušāgāhīh ō hudānāgīh, ud frēftārīh ō huxēmīh, ud drōzanīh ō rāstīh, abārīg āhōgān ī ō hunarān ī hudānāgīh, huxēmīh, rāstīh tōhmag hamēstār, ud ruvān durvandīh vahān.

(14) did ēn: andar tan parvann, abēristagān, ī ristagān ī tanvinārišn hamēstār, ud tan višōbišn vahān.

(15) did ēn: andar zahagān, sardīh ī garmīh, huškīh ī xvēdīh, abārīg vināhišngarān ī ō bavišngārān hamēstār.

(16) andar āvām, tārīkīh ī rōšnīh, ud genn ī bōy, dušcihrīh ī huzihrīh, dušmizagīh ī humizagīh, ud zahr ī anōš, xrafstar gurg ī hudāg gōspend, vattar mar ī veh mardōm hamēstār.

(17) azabar āvām, gayōgān ī bayān baxšēnīdārān kār hamēstār.

(18) azabar hamāg ēn gund vēnišn-mārišnīg, dānišn-ayābišnīg, hān ī andar humānāgīh vimand, amaragān āgāhīh ēvarīg: dēvān ī yazdān hamēstār.

(19) hamēstār astīh pēš az dāmdahišnīh, u-š rasišn ī ō dām pas az dām-dahišnīh;

(20) hav-iz dādār, dānišnīgīhā, ped cim ī abāyišnīg-dahišnīh, cārakkunišnīhā dād dahišn ī ō kār.

(27) astīh ī ē panz sāmān ped xvad dahišnān āfurišnān pēdāg.

(28) «dānišnīg» dēsag, dānāgīhā vīrāstagīh ī dāmān abargugāy.

(29) ped cim dād ī az ham dānāgīh pēdāgīh;

(30) ud cim abāyišnīgīh ī dahišn būd,

(31) abāg ōn nizūmānagīhā vīrāstagīh ī dahišn az abāyišnīgīh ī dahišn būdan sazed;

(32) ud abāyišnīgīh cimīgīh ī xvad dahišn ped cihr dāred gugāyīh.

(33) cārīg dād dānišnīg-dahišnīh nimūdār;

(34) cē dānišn kāmagīg, ud kāmagīg cihrīg baved.

(35) ō kār dād, ped xvēškārīh ī dahišn, jud ju-z cihrīg-iz kāmagīg pēdāg.

(36-37) astīh ī hamēstār pēš az dāmdahišnīh pēdāgīh vas, u-š ēk abāyišnīgīh ī dāmdahišnīh.

(38-39) cōn vimand ī abāyišn nē hangēzīhed ō tis bē az niyāz, ā az abāyišn niyāz, az niyāz avištāb, az avištāb hamēstār astīh ī pēš az abāyišnīg kār ī ast dahišn.

(40-41) rasišn ī ebgad ō dām pas az dāmdahišnīh pēdāgīh abzār sāxtan ī dādār ō pedīrag ī hamēstār pēš az hamēstār rasišn, ī vispāgāhīhā, pēšdahišnīh ī dādār pesazag.

(42) ud ham abzār ī dām nimūdār ast ī vīrāst ī ō hamēstār pedīrag kōšāgīh ped cihr vīrāyišn.

(43) kār-ē ī dāmān cihr hāvand bēšānābīh;

(44) u-šān vinārišn razm – ī pedīrag hamēstār dušmen – sāzišnīh mānāg;

(45) u-šān kār, cihrīg ud kāmagīg, hamāg avištāb-spōzišnīh ast.

Fourth Chapter

IX

(1) Another [chapter]: It is just as well to quote, for your information, some chapter of the book Dēnkird that testifies to the existence of the Contrary.

(2) For that which is written above, and that which will be written are all grown from the seed that the blessed “Ādarpādyāvandān” sewed.

(3) And thanks unto his relative, the excellent wise Ādurfarrōbay, son of Farroxzād!

(5-6) The existence of the contrary of the creatures is perceptible by sight and understandable by knowledge from the innermost of the body of man even to the outermost of the body, and beyond is certain within the limits of resemblance (one of the means of correct knowledge).

(7-13) The innermost of man, which is the innermost of the breathing soul, is seen, through complete contemplation, within the same limits.

For example, ignorance is the opponent of knowledge, deceit of good morals, mendacity of veracity, and other vices which are the cause of the wickedness of the soul are opponents of the virtues which are the seed of knowledge, good morals and veracity.

(14) Further: The morbid humours, comprised in the body, are opponents of the humours which establish the body; these morbid humours are the cause of the disturbance of the body.

(15) Furthermore: Among the elements, cold is the opponent of heat, dryness is of moisture, and the other agents of corruption are opponents of the agents of generation.

(16) In the temporal world, darkness is the opponent of light, stench of fragrance, ugliness of handsomeness, unsavouriness of savouriness, poison of antidote, the noxious wolf of the munificent cattle, and the bad villain of the good man.

(17) Beyond the world, the work of the Robbers (Planets, etc.) is the opponent of the work of the divine Bestowers (fixed stars, constellations).

(18) Beyond all this legion, perceptible by sight and understandable by knowledge, this general information is certain within the limits of resemblance: Daēva are the opponents of the Yazata.

(19) The existence of the opponent is prior to the creation, and his arrival to the creatures is posterior to the creation.

(20) The Creator created, intelligibly, with the motive of the desirable creation, and through provision of a remedy, the creation, and put into operation.

(27) The existence of these five terms is manifest through creations, both spiritual and material.

(28) The “intelligible” sign [of His creation] is testified by the sagaciously arrangement of the creatures.

(29) “Creation with motive” is manifest owing to the same sagacity.

(30) “The motive was the necessity of creation”:

(31) For, the arrangement of the creation so skilfully ought to arise from the requirement of creation.

(32) The necessity testifies that the creation itself is according to natural order with motive.

(33) “He created [the creation] as a remedy” is demonstrated through the intelligible creation.

(34) Because knowledge implies voluntary, and voluntary natural.

(35) “He put into operation”, is manifest through the functions of the creatures, one by one, both naturally and voluntarily.

(36-37) The evidences of the existence of the opponent (antagonist) prior to the creation are many. One of them is the necessity of the creation of the creatures.

(38-39) Because the definition of “necessity” is not applied to anything except “need”, consequently, from necessity is need, from need hurry (oppression), from hurry the existence of the opponent who is prior to the necessary operation, that is, creation.

(40-41) The arrival of the Onslaught on the creatures, posterior to the (material) creation, shows the constitution of (the creatures as) the means of the Creator, for encountering the Opponent, before the onset of the Opponent, which is in accordance with the omnisciently pre-creation by the Creator.

(42) The instrument itself demonstrates that the creatures are arranged to combat against the Opponent similar to the natural arrangement.

(43) The operation of the creatures is similar to the natural removal of sorrow.

(44) Their establishment is similar to the preparation of a battle against the enemy and adversary.

(45) And their operation, both natural and voluntary, is [similar to] repelling all pressure.

darag ī panzum

X

(1) anī dar abar uskār ī ēkīhuskārān kē-š vinārišn-z ī doīh aziš pēdāgīhed.

(2-10) ē dānīhed kū: kē dādār-ē kāmed šnāxtan, bē ka ranz ō xvēš gyān dahed, dārmagīhā ē handēšed, naxvist tan ud ruvān ī xvēš bē šnāsed kū: kē, az cē, ud ped cē kār dād? u-š hamemāl ud pedyārag kē? u-š dōst ud ayyār kē? u-š ō bazag kirdan kē nixvāred? ud az kadām gōhr? u-š rastan cōn šāyed?

(11) enyā-š nē tuvān dādār ped cōnīh šnāxtan, u-š ō xvēš madan.

(12-13) cē ka «dādār» nām burd, ēgiš ēn si nām abāg burd: dahišn ud dēn ud ruvān.

(14) cē dādār nām az dahišn būdan āšnāg.

(15-16) ēn kū dādār ī dahišn dahišnān ō xvēškārīh dād, bē az xvēškārīh nē hiled.

(17-18) ud xvēškārīh ī dāmān, kām ī dādār šnāxtan ud kirdan, az agām pahrixtan;

(19) az kām ī dādār varzīdan u-š az agām pahrixtan ruvān bōxtan.

(20) kām ī dādār bē az dēn ī dādār nē šnāsīhed.

(21) dēn ped dādār brihēnīd, abēgumān.

(22) nūn sazed dānistan kū: yazd brihēnīd dēn ō šnāxtārīh ī-š kām;

(23) ud az šnāxtan ī-š kām ō bōxtārīh ī ruvān, pēdāgīhed xvābarīh ud abxšāyišngarīh ī yazd

(24) ud az bōxtārīh ī dēn ō ruvān, pēdāgīhed vazurgīh ud arzumandīh ī dēn.

(25) az bōxtan abāyistan ī ruvān pēdāgīhed vīftagīh ud viyābānīgīh ī ruvān.

(26-27) az vīftagīh ud viyābānīgīh ī ruvān pēdāgīhed vīftār ud viyābānēnīdār ī menišnān, gōbišnān, ud kunišnān ī mardōm, ō ham pēdāgīhed tabāhēnīdār ī ruvānān.

(28) u-mān nūn sazed uzvārdan ud dānistan kū: hān vīftār ī ruvānān tabāhēnīdār az kadām gōhr?

(29-30) cē agar az ham gōhr ī dahišn ud āfurišn ī yazd gōbīhed, ēg cōn yazd dēn ō bōxtārīh ī ruvān brihēnīd, ā-š nē sazed vīftār ud viyābānēnīdār ī ruvānān ped xvēš dānišn ud kām āfrīdan.

(31-32) cē agar ōy xvad ast dādār, ud xvad ast vīftār ud tabāhēnīdār ī ruvānān, jud az kām ī ōy tis nē baved, ēg ka-mān az yazd bōxtārīh abāyed, pušt ud panāh ō kē kunem?

(33-35) nūn harv ušyār mardōm ēn and abāyed šnāxtan ud dānistan kū: -mān az kē virīxtan ud pahrixtan abāyed, u-mān panāh ō kē, umēd ō kē dārišn?

(36) cārag ī ēn xīr anī tis nēst bē yazd ped cōnīh šnāxtan.

(37) cē, cōn man azabar nibišt kū, nē ēvāz astīh dānistan, bē cōnīh u-š kām abāyed šnāxtan.

(38) u-m nigerīd andar gēhān harvisp kēšdārān kēš ud vurravišn ī dārend.

(39) ēk, hān kē gōbed kū: hamāg nēkīh ud anāgīh ī ped gēhān az yazd.

(40-42) ēk, hān kē gōbed kū: hamāg nēkīh ī ped gēhān, umēd-iz ī ped ruvān bōxtan az yazd, ud hamāg anāgīh ī tan, bīm-iz ī ruvān, az Ahrmen vahān, hamāg az baxšišn ī ēn do bun ō kardag kardag, brīnag brīnag franaft hend.

(43) nūn an harv gāh ped yazd šnāxtan, cōn azabar nibišt, taftīgmenišn ped vizustārīh ī-š dēn ud kām pursīdār būd ham.

(44) hamcōn, vizustārīh rāy, ō bē kišvar ud hindūgān būm ud vasān judsardagān franaft ham.

(45-46) cē man dēn nē hān ī ped abarmānd dōšīd, bē hān xvāst ī ped xrad gugāyīh ōstīgāndar ud pedīrišnīgdar.

(47-49) ō-z abāgīh ī vasān judsardagān šud ham, dā ē-bār ka an az hān ī yazdān xvābarīh, ud dēn ī veh ōz ud xvarrah ud zōr, az vas zufāy ī tamag ud gumānīgīh ī dušvizār rast ham;

(50-60) az ham zōr ī dēn dānāgīh, ud nibēg uskār ī dānāgān, ud abēhangōšīdag nibēgān ī frazānag Ādarpādyāvandān, ud az hān nibēg-ē ī-š kird hufravard Rōšn ī Ādurfarrōbayān ī-š «Rōšn nibēg» nām nihād, hān-z ī ōy agrī frazānag ahlō Ādurfarrōbay ī Farroxzādān ī hudēnān pēšobāy az dēn vizārd ud dēnkird nibēg nām nihād, bōxt ham az vas gumānīgīh ud ērang ud frēb ud dušīh ī kēšān, ud nāmcišt az hān ī frēftārān mehdar, mazandar, dušhamōzdar, vard-masturg mānī, kē-š kēš jādōgīh ud dēn frēftārīh ud hamōz dušīh ud brahm nihān-ravišnīh.

(61-63) āstuvānīhist ham, dānišnīhā, ped hān ī xrad zōr ud dēn dānāgīh ōz; nē saxtvurravišnīhā, bē ped abēzag juddēv dēn ī Ohrmazd dādestān, kē-š dādār Ohrmazd ō ahlō Zardušt cāšt.

(64-66) Zardušt ped rāst-frēstagīh, ēvdāg ō dar ī burzāvand kay Vištāsp mad, u-š ped ōzumand ezvān, xrad-gugāyīhā, dastabarnihādīhā, ud vimandsoxanīhā, ud vas gumānvizārīhā, ud amehrspendān venābdāg gugāyīhdādārīhā dēn ō kay Vištāsp ud frazānagān cāšt abāg vas abdīh, ud mehīh, ī andar tuvān ī gētīgān nē vaxt ī-šān ōy yaštfravahr dīd.

(67-68) ud kay Spendōyād ud Zerir ud abārīg kišvarīgān, vas ardīgjumbišnīh ud xūnrēzišnīh zādag dēn ō grīv pedīrift, dā-z ō Hrōm ud Hindūgān bē kišvar ped dēn ravāgēnīdārīh franaft hend.

(69-71) az hān frāz ped peyvann ō bayān xvadāyān ī kaytōhmagān ī burzāvandān mad dā-z pesāxt ī ped vidāxt rōy ī abar-var-rēzišnīh ī ōy hufravard Ādurbād ī Mahrspendān andar xvadāyīh ī ōy bay Šābuhr, ī šahān šāh, ī Ohrmazdān, ped pehikār ī abāg vas sardag judsardagān ahlemōgān, az avēšān mazandum ahlemōgān ī-šān pōz-ebyāstagān xvand hend bōxt.

(72-73) ud hrōmāyīgān kē ped āvām āvām «anast» nām būd hend vas frašn ī dušvizār az ēn dēn pursīd, nē būd ēc frašn gumānīg ī az ēn dēn vizārīhist.

(74) ud frazānagān ī Ērānšahr hamē andar avēšān pērōzīh-burdār būd hend.

(75) nē cōn abārīg kēšān kē-šān dēn nihānravišnīhā ud frēftārīhā ud frēftagān-viyābānēnīdārīhā axvēškārīhā andar ristag ud ram ī kamdānišnān ud anešnāsān ud dēvcihrān kē-šān az dānāgīh ud xrad ud šnāsagīh tis-iz āgāhīh nē būd;

(76) ēg cand-išān ram ī vas nihānīhā frēft ud viyābānēnīd, tan ō āškārāgīh nē dād.

(77) pas az vasān grōh ī kamdānišn ī anāgāhdādestān ī-šān viyābānēnīd, āškārāgīhist hend abāg vas hambasān-gōbišnīh ud drōzanīh, ud škastagīh ī-šān kēš.

(78) cōn az vas hambasānīh ud škastagīh ud dādestān-āgāhīh ī nōghamōzagān rāy ēdar nišānēnam.

(79) az hān cim ī ka nibēg ī frazānag pēšēnagān frāyist bārīg ud dārmag soxanīhist ō hangirdīg handāxtan.

(80) hucašmīhā framāyed nigerīdan.

Fifth Chapter

X

(1) Another chapter: Concerning the colloquies of the monists, from which even the proof of the duality is manifested.

(2-10) It should be known that: whoever wishes to know the Creator, he should give trouble to his own life, should meditate in a subtle way, and first he should know about his own body and soul, that is: “Who created them, out of what, and for what operation? Who is his opponent and adversary? And who is his friend and assistant? Who hastens him to commit crime? Of what substance is he? and how can he be saved?”

(11) If not he is unable to know the Creator, according to His qualities of being, and come to himself.

(12-13) For, when he bore the name of “Creator”, then, at the same time he bore these three names: creation, religion and soul.

(14) Because the derivation of the name of  “Creator” from that of  “creation” is well known.

(15-16) The Creator of the creation created the creations with the view to the (special) functions, and does not let them without function.

(17-18) The function of the creature is: to know and perform the will of the Creator, and to abstain from what is not His will.

(19) From performing the will of the Creator and avoiding doing what is not His will results the salvation of the soul.

(20) The will of the creator cannot be known, except through the daēnā (religion) of the Creator.

(21) The Religion is doubtless made (or, destined) by the Creator.

(22) Now, it is worthy to know that: God made the religion so as to make known His will.

(23) From the knowledge of His will in order to save the soul are manifested the beneficence and mercifulness of God.

(24) And from the religion as saviour for the soul are manifested the grandeur and value of the religion.

(25) From the necessity of the salvation of the soul are manifested the deception and delusion of the soul.

(26-27) From the deception and delusion of the soul are manifested a deceiver and deluder of the thoughts, words and deeds of man, and, at the same time a spoiler of souls is manifested.

(28) Now it would be expedient for us to understand and know that: Of what substance is that deluder who spoils the souls?

(29-30) Because if he is said to be of the same substance that the material and spiritual creations of God, given that God made the religion for the salvation of the soul, then it is not right for Him to create the deceiver and deluder of souls knowingly and voluntarily.

(31-32) For if He be Himself the creator, and be Himself the deceiver and deluder of souls, and nothing occur except by His will, then, when we desire salvation from [this] God, whom shall we make as a support?

(33-35) Now every intelligent man should know and recognize that: From whom should we flee and avoid, and to whom should we seek shelter, and in whom should we hope?

(36) The remedy of this matter is nothing else but to know God through His qualities.

(37) Because, as I wrote above, it is necessary not only to know His existence, but also His qualities (or, attributes) and His will.

(38) I have examined, in the world, all the doctrines and beliefs that belong to the doctrinaires.

(39) One [doctrine] asserts that: All the good and evil in the world are due to God.

(40-42) And one asserts that: All the good of the world, besides the hope of saving the soul, is due to God, and the cause of all evil of the body, beside the fear of the soul, is Aŋra Mainyu. All [the doctrines] are derived from the division of these two original [doctrines] into schisms and sects.

(43) I was ever fervent-hearted to know God, as I wrote above, and inquiring in the research of His Religion and will.

(44) Likewise, for the sake of research, I travelled in foreign countries, in the land of Indians, [meeting] many different sects.

(45-45) Because, I did not like [to follow] a religion by inheritance, but I sought that which is more reliable and acceptable before the testimony of wisdom;

(47-49) I went also along with many different sects, until a time when, owing to the beneficence of the divinities, and the strength, fortune and power of the Good Religion, I escaped from the depths of the gloom and ill-solvable doubtfulness.

(50-60) By the same power of the divine science, and the books and colloquies of the wise, and the matchless books of the wise “Ādarpādyāvandān”, and the book written by the blessed Rōšn, son of Ādurfarrōbay, named the “Rōšn-nibēg”, and also the book of the excellent wise and righteous Ādurfarrōbay, son of Farroxzād who was the Leader of those of the good religion, explained parts of the Religion (or, the Avesta) and called it the “Book of the Dēnkird”, I was saved from much doubtfulness, error, deceit and wickedness of (false) doctrines, and, especially, from that one who was greater, more monstrous and more evil-teaching than [all] the deceivers, that is the hard-headed Mani, whose doctrine was sorcery, religion deceitfulness, teaching malice, and habit secretiveness.

(61-63) I knowingly professed, by the power of philosophy and the strength of the divine science, not fanatically, but through the holy religion, the Ahuric laws of breaking off with the demons, that the creator Ahura Mazdā taught to the righteous Zaraθuštra.

(64-66) Zaraθuštra came alone, as a true apostle, to the court of Kai Vīštāspa, with sublime insight. He taught the religion to Kavi Vīštāspa and the wise, with a powerful tongue, through testimony of wisdom, convincingly, eloquently, through resolving many doubts, and through giving visible testimony of the Aməṣa Spəṇta, together with many [other] wonders, and much greatness which were beyond the power of worldly beings, and he whose Fravaṣi is worshipped saw them.

(67-68) Kay Spəntōδāta and Zairi.vari and other governors , and numerous sons of the warlike and sanguinary adopted the Religion. They even wandered to abroad, Rome (Greece, or Byzantium) and India, in propagating the Religion.

(69-71) Since then It passed on, by succession, to the lords and kings of the Kavi race, the exalted ones, until the ordeal with melted metal (lit. zinc) pouring upon the breast of the blessed Ādurbād, son of Mahrspend, in the reign of his (late) Majesty Šābuhr son of Ohrmazd, the king of kings, in a controversy with heretics of different species of many kinds, and especially with the greatest heretics among them who were also known as the Peccībāstag; [in that ordeal and those controversy, Ādurbād] acquitted himself well.

(72-73) The Roman (or, Greek) [philosopher] who have been, as ever, named “Anāst”, asked many knotty questions about this religion. There was no question making doubtful this religion that has been shelved.

(74) The sages of the Land of the Aryans (Ērānšahr, Persia) won them over.

(75) Not like other faiths that propagate their religious vision, secretively, deceivingly, delusively for the deceived, and undutifully among the nations and peoples with little knowledge, vulgar and demonic who have heard nothing from wisdom and philosophy and science.

(76) They won’t yield to appearance until they have sufficiently deceived and deluded.

(77) Immediately they have deluded a sufficient group of little knowledge, they will appear with much inconsistent discourse, falsehood and deficiency [inherent in] their religion.

(78) I here present a few of their much inconsistency and deficiency for informing the neophytes of the dispute.

(79) Seeing that the books of the sagacious ancients have much wisely discoursed of these things, guided by the desire of precision and acuteness, I contented myself to explain succinctly.

(80) May you observe it with kind regards.