THE A V E S T A F RAGMENT Fr D.

3
by
KARL HOFFMANN
Erlangen
To Kaikhusroo M. Dastoor Jamasp Asa
I n Pahl avi texts and col ophons we encount er a number of Avest a frag-
ment s, t he i nt erpret at i on of which, in general, present s consi derabl e
difficulties due t o t he l ack of cont ext . The event ual Pahl avi t r ansl at i on
consists most l y in a mer e par aphr ase which allows no cert ai n concl u-
sions f or t he Avest an wordi ng t o be drawn. The f r agment s seem t o be
quot ed f r om memor y, and, t her ef or e, t hei r t ext ual condi t i on is r at her
corrupt . The f r agment desi gnat ed by Fr D. 3 in Bar t hol omae' s A i r Wb . ,
p. IX, has been publ i shed by Dar mest et er , Z e n d - A v e s t a , I I I , p. 150 on
t he basis of t hree manuscr i pt s: Jp 1, J p 129, and B 29. Thr ee f ur t her
references are t o be f ound in M 55 ( Bar t hol omae, Ze n d h a n d s c h r i f t e n ,
p. 119), in K 4 (Unval a, Col l e c t i on o f Col ophons , p. 124) and in R =
Dd r d b H o r m a z y d r ' s R i v d y a t (ed. Er vad Manockj i Rust amj i Unv~lgt,
Vol. II, 1922, p. 371). 1 By r e- t r ansposi ng t he readi ngs of Dar mes t et er ' s
mss. t he col l at i on runs as fol l ows:
(1.) Jp 1 : n6i_t c a h mi z a z u u a ~ y 6 n6i_t ur une z a z u u a
K 4: nSi_t ahrni z az u~a y 6 n6i_t ur une z az u~a
Jp 129: n6i_t a h mi z az u~a y 6 n6i.t ur une z a z u u a
B 29: n6i I j a h m i z a u u a y 6 n6i_t ur une z a z u u a
R: n6i_t j a h m i z a u u a y 6 ngi ! ur qn z a z u u a
M 55: n6i_t z a h i z a u u a y 6 n6i t urclni z a z u u a
(2.) Jp 1 : n6i.t c a h mi z az u~a (deest)
K 4: n6i_t e a h mi z az u~i 3 ,,
Jp 129: n6i t e a h mi z az u~a ,,
1 This reference was kindly supplied by K. M. Dastur Jamasp Asa.
z For the system of transcription which is in accordance with the original spelling
see my forthcoming study ' Der Sasanidische Archetypus'.
s In the printed text of Unvala it is not quite certain, whether there is the ligature
gi or a defective ga.
B 29:
R:
M 55:
(3.) Jp 1:
K4 :
Jp 129:
B 29. R. M 55
THE Avesta FRAGMENT FRD. 3 283
n6i.t zahmi zazu~ y6 n6i_t uruuqni2 j azug
n6it zahmi zazu~ y6 n6it uruuqni j azug
n6i_t zahmi zazug y6 nOit uruuqni zazu~
nagci5 a~a zaraOugtra sfig yaOd ddara magiiaka 2
na~cig i6a zaraOu~tra si~ yaOa hi m 6dara ma~iiaka
na~cig aria zaraOugtra s~g yaOd h~m adara magiidka
(deest)
Dar mest et er (op. cit.) t ransl at es: 'I1 n' a rien gagn6 celui qui n' a poi nt
gagn6 l'gtme: il ne gagnera rien celui ne gagne pas l'~me./I1 n' y a aucun
profi t pour les hommes, 6 Zar at husht r a, ~t recevoi r de l ui . . . '
Bar t hol omae (Ai rWb. , 1795) renders t he first line: ' nichts hat gewon-
hen, wer (es) ni cht f ar seine Seele gewonnen hat ' and t he t hi rd (Air Wb.,
1581): ' es ist da kein Nut zen vorhanden, weil es die Menschen weg-
nehmen kSnnen' . The second line was consi dered by hi m t o be a mere
vari at i on of t he precedi ng one (Ai rWb. , 1795 n. 7).
In M~n67 ~ xra~ I 28 ( K 43, fol. 131v, 5f.), where t he Avestan text is
wanting, and in t he col ophon of K 4 t he first line has been rendered in
Pahl avi with n~-g tis grift k~-g n~ ruvdn grift ' he has not acqui red any-
thing, who has not acqui red (the possession of his) soN' .
The t ransl at i on of zazuua by Phi. grift and t he evident meani ng of
some ot her forms cont ai ni ng zaz- yield a verbal meani ng ' t o seize, t ake
possession of, win' , as was recogni zed by Bart hol omae, Ai rWb. , 1795.
Fr om a mor phol ogi cal st andpoi nt t here is no pr obl em in deriving all
t he f or ms in quest i on f r om t he r oot zd, correspondi ng t o Vedic hd ' t o
discharge, leave, leave behi nd, abandon' . The l at t er r oot was accept ed
by Bar t hol omae, Ai rWb. , 1688 f or zazdmi V.5,17 (Ved. j dhdmi ) ; zazdhi
V.5,15 (Ved. j~hdsi); auua-zazat Y.34,9 (3d plur. inj. pres., cf. imperf.
Ved. a-jahur wi t h t he nor mal substitute -ur f or Indo-Iran. *- at ) :
On account of t he special meani ng ' t o win' , which seemingly is not
t o be reconci l ed wi t h zd ' t o leave' , t he ot her forms cont ai ni ng zaz- have
been summed up under t he l emma haz ' t o t ake possession of ' (Ai rWb. ,
1795). Bar t hol omae t hought these f or ms were redupl i cat ed t oo, but
were provi ded wi t h an analogical redupl i cat i on because, accordi ng t o
4 Yt. 19,81 auuaza.t quot ed here by Bart hol omae stands for auua-azaI ' he drove
down', cf. V.18,12 auuaz6it (L 4 auua. az6it), AirWb., 224 (root az 'to drive'). On the
other hand frazahf.t Y.60,7 (Bartholomae's lemma zah AirWb., 1687) belongs to z~
'to leave': rnd yauue imat nmdnam ... xvaran6 frazahit 'never shall the xvamnah-
abandon this house', frazaM.t, spelled for an expected *frazdM_t, is an optative of the
s-aorist, as recognized by Kuiper, Aeta Or., 12, p. 206. In my opinion -t~t (instead of
-iid!, Ved. -ydt) is not a misspelling, but is due to a linguistic change, which took place
if-iat was originally unaccented, cf. saMt, dai~i.t.
284 KARL HOFFMANN
the sound laws, the reduplicated Indo-Irani an weak stem *sa-z3h- <
* sa-s~h- (: *saSh, Ved. sah) woul d result in Avestan haz ( < *ha33),
which were identical with an unreduplicated stem ha2 ( < *ha~). At
any rate Bart hol omae' s first entry is not to be justified: Yr.5,130 iri~on, tam
xgaOrdrn za2diti, which neither he nor Wol ff tried to translate. I do not
see any difficulty here: ' t he ownership abandons the dying man' , perhaps
a ki nd of aphorism.
The other references quot ed here undoubt edl y possess the meani ng
' t o win, gain' and t hey have one characteristic feature ill common: the
object is not expressed in the accusative, but in the locative. This con-
struction is at variance wi t h t hat of Vedic sah ' t o win' , which is always
construed with the accusative. As the Avestan deviation cannot be
accounted for, an objection arises against Bart hol omae' s assumption.
Since all the zaz-forms which mean ' t o wi n' fit in the paradi gm of
zd (Ved. hd) ' t o leave' , we have t o l ook out for a situation where "leav-
i ng" may have acquired the sense of "wi nni ng". This is t o be found
in the noble sport of horse-racing, often alluded to by the Vedic poets
and well known in the Avesta too. In horse-racing (as well as in foot-
racing) ' t o leave behind (the rival)' means ' t o come in first, to win (the
race)' . The normal Vedic expression for ' runni ng a race' is dfim yd.
It is construed with a locative, which denotes the prize at stake, e.g.
TS. V 3,2,3 (pa~gt.sv afire ayu.h ' they ran a race for cattle' ); MS . I 11,5:
166,8; IV 3, 2:41, 1; the same dfim aj ~B. I I 4,3,4; V 1,1,3 and sp.rdh
' to cont end for' , cf. Delbriick, Altind. Syntax, p. 119. The plausible
semantic change of ' leaving behi nd (a rival)' t o ' winning (a race)' to-
gether with the Vedic locative used for the prize at stake seems t o be
sufficient to make the Avestan construction of zd with the loc. ' t o leave
behind (the rival in a race) for something' understandable. But the
ggveda offers a still closer parallel. The present stem of the " r oot "
hds ' t o run for a prize' (with the attested ind. pres. hdsate, part. hdsa-
mdna-, calls, hdsayanti) is probabl y based on the subjunctive of t he
s-aorist of hd: hd-s-a- (with reciprocal medium) ' t o want t o leave each
ot her behind, to run for a prize' (v. Narten, Sigmat. Aoriste, p. 285f.).
In RV. I 169,2 this hds appears with a locative: hdsamdnd svdrmi[hasya
pradhdnasya sdtau ' runni ng (a race) for the winning (loc. sdtau) of the
prize (pradhdna-), the reward (m~l.hd-) of which is the sun' .
Fr om this passage, as compared wi t h the Avestan material, we may
infer t hat the connection of hd ' t o leave' with a loc. originates f r om a
common Indo-Iran. racing-term. 5
5 CT. my communication to Humbaeh, MSS., 10, p. 40.
THE A v e s t a FRAGMENT FRD. 3 285
The Aves t an occur r ences sui t t hi s c onc e pt i on wel l : Y.30,10 aS asi gt d
yaojan, t~ . . . y 6 i zazan, f f 6 va~hdu srauuah~ ' t hen t he qui ckest (horses)
will be har nessed, whi ch will wi n ( r aci ng for) g o o d gl or y' . The expr essi on
obvi ous l y bel ongs t o t he l anguage o f nobl e me n, f or ' g o o d gl or y' is a
desi r ed ai m o f war r i or s, n o t o f pri est s. The s ame wor di ng appear s i n-
c o r p o r a t e d i n Y.62,6 ( A. I , 11) z az a. bui i e 7 v a~hduc a mi ~d e va~hduca
s r auuahi ur una~ca dara?e hauua~Vhe s ' i n or der t o wi n ( r aci ng for) g o o d
r e wa r d 9 a nd g o o d gl or y a n d ever l ast i ng good- l i vi ng f or t he soul ' . 1~
A cl ear r ef er ence t o t he class o f rul ers a n d war r i or s is met wi t h i n Yt . 13, 18
h6 aoh6i t i z a z u g t a m6 x~ai i 6 ' t hi s ( l or d o f t he count r y) will be t he mos t
vi ct or i ous r ul er ' a nd i n Yt. 5, 132 y a g a t ~ vgspe auruuan, t a z a z u u a ~ h a
p a i t i . j a s ~ n y aOa k a u u 6 i g vi gt dspahe ' i n or der t ha t all t hese cour ser s t~
ma y r et ur n vi ct or i ous as t hos e o f Ka vi Vi~t~spa' .
I n t he l ast me nt i one d t wo passages z a z u u d ~h a is an act i ve per f ect
par t i ci pl e ( z az uuah- ' ha vi ng won' ) , a nd z a z u g - t a ma - is a super l at i ve
bas ed o n its we a k st em ( zazug- ) . A f ur t her r ef er ence o f t hi s f o r m is
P. 27 z az u~u vfspaY~u va~hugu z az u~u v ~s pa~u ag. 6. ci 3r a~u ' a mo n g all
t he vi ct or i ous g o o d ones, a mo n g all t he vi ct or i ous ones wh o have A.~a
as t hei r or i gi n' . Thus z a z u u a , t oo, i n t he f r a gme nt we ar e di scussi ng
bel ongs here. Of cour s e we s houl d expect *z az uuA as t he cor r ect f o r m
o f t he nomi na t i ve si ngul ar, but t her e is al so a ( ps eudo- gat hi c) y6i Of l d
Y. 27, 6; Vr.12,1 ( i nst ead o f y6i Of l a: y a t ' t o t ake one' s s t and' ) , so t ha t
such f or ms ma y have existed, per haps by a na l ogy wi t h t he n- s t e ms ? 2
6 zaza.nti, corresponding to subj. aor. yaoja.nt~, is a "short-vowel" subjunctive from
the present stem (Ved. 3d sing. jahat AB. VIII 23,11), cf. dai.nti Y.32, 15 (primary
ending e.g. also in subj. aor. radaoti Y. 33,2 and varaga.nti Y.45,3).
7 V. below.
8 Labial Ov attested in the ms. Pd (cf. Salemann, Ober eine Parsenhandschrift, p. 52
= 542).
Cf. mi[hd- in RV. I 169,2 quoted above.
,0 An adoption of the racing-term in the language of religion is carried out already
in Yasna Haptaijhaiti (41,4) hanagmaea za~maea mazda ahura Oflahmf rafanahi dar-
gait~u ' may we gain and may we win, O Ahura Mazdh, (in the race for) thy life-
long support' , where zagma must be an aorist optative of za, cf. Humbach, MSS. , 10,
p. 3912.
~ The usual rendering by 'heroes' does not seem to me to be correct, auruua.nta
zazuuaoha as to grammatical form is not a plural but a dual, justified by the fact that
to every chariot a pair of coursers is harnessed. But the pairs of coursers together
form a plurality which accounts for the construction with the plural forms tg vispe
and paiti.jasctn. The same construction is found e.g. Yt.10,136 auruga auruua.nta...
t~a.njaiia.nte ' the pairs of tawny coursers...will draw', and Yt. 10,42 ime n6 uyra ba-
zauua karata miz~ra sein. daiiei.nti 'these two strong arms of ours are destroying (the
enemies) with the sword, O Mithra'. Cf. Yt.5,120 eaO~arO (P1.) ar~ana (Du.) ' four
staUions (two by two)' (V.18,31 : ' four men').
*~ The perfect part. zazuuah- must also underlie zaza.buiie ' in order to become one
286 KARL HOFFMANN
Wh a t is mo r e i nt er est i ng is t ha t z a z u u a is cons t r ued wi t h a l ocat i ve. 13
Thi s pr oves t ha t t he f r a gme nt is not a l at e bot c hi ng but a pi ece o f g o o d
ol d l anguage. Ther ef or e, i n expl ai ni ng it, we ar e obl i ged t o appl y t he
t he st ri ct me t hods o f phi l ol ogy.
The first l i ne has t o be r ead and t r ans l at ed a c c or di ng t o Ba r t h o l o ma e :
n6i.t c a h mi z az uua y o noi_t urune z az uua ' he has n o t wo n a nyt hi ng wh o
has n o t wo n ( anyt hi ng) f or hi s soul ' . Da r me s t e t e r ' s r ender i ng o f t he
rel at i ve cl ause ' wh o has not wo n t he s oul ' is i n a c c or da nc e wi t h t he
Pahl avi t r ans l at i on, but t he n we s houl d have t o conj ect ur e a l ocat i ve
*uruni , f or whi ch ur qni (urqn, uruuqni ) is a we a k t es t i mony, i nst ead o f
t he wel l at t est ed dat i ve urune. Mor e ove r , urune is s uppor t e d by t he
above quot e d Y.62,6 z az a. bui i e . . . ur unagc a daroTe hauua~Vhe ' i n or der
t o wi n ... ever l ast i ng good- l i vi ng (loc. ) f or t he s oul ( dat . ) ' , i.e. we have
t o s uppl y t he l oc. c a h mi f r o m t he pr ecedi ng cl ause: ( ' s omet hi ng) f or
t he soul ' . The ques t i on whet her t he soul can be " wo n " at all, is a t heo-
l ogi cal one ; I see no concl usi ve phi l ol ogi cal evi dence whi ch answer s it.
Mo r e difficulties are pr es ent ed by t he s econd l i ne whi ch seems t o
be a par al l el t o t he first. I n t hr ee out o f t he six manus cr i pt s t he rel at i ve
cl ause is want i ng, but never t hel ess it is t r ans l at ed i n Pahl avi . I ns t ead
o f z a z u u a all mss. have a f o r m i n g: zazu5, zazu~a, a nd per haps z az ugi
i n K 4. Whe r e a s i n t he Pahl avi t r ans l at i on z a z u u a is r ender ed b y t he
pr et er i t e gr i f t , zazu~( a) appear s as pr esent gf r~6: n~-~ t i s gr i f t k~- d n~
ruv~n g r i f t dd n~n u~ n~ t i s g~r~6 k ~ n~ r uvdn g~r4~ az- i ~ nfin f r d z ' he has
n o t wo n a nyt hi ng wh o has n o t wo n t he soul hi t her t o, a nd he does not
wi n a nyt hi ng wh o does n o t wi n t he soul he nc e f or t h' ( Mx. , si mi l arl y
K 4). Da r me s t e t e r t r ansl at es zazu~( a) wi t h a f ut ur e ( ' gagner a' ) a nd
t hi nks it is an aor i st z a - z u - L On t he ot her h a n d t he z az ug- s e nt e nc e seems
t o Ba r t hol oma e ( A i r Wb . , 1795 not e 7) t o be a mer e var i ant o f t he pre-
who has won' Y.62,6, A.I,I1, for the parallel vauuana.buiie (.4.1,11) shows the same
perfect stem as vauuanuua (A.I,10). The so-called cvi-construction of saoci.buiie
(ma.t-saoci., raocahi., vax~az~Lbuiie) Y.62,3 and of daitiiO.a~smi buii~ (daitiir.baoOi,
daitiir.piOfli, daitii6.upasaiieni, paranaiiuLhara#ri, dahmaiiuLhara~ri buiia) Y.62,2
suggests that i could have taken the place of -gah-; but the spellings vauuani and zazi,
poorly attested, cannot be relied on. If we assume that the "infinitives" in buiie were
compounds we may reconstruct an original *gauanuabu~, *zaz~tabug~ i.e. ua instead
of ~tah like in raocSbig from raocah-. Perhaps a dissimilation took place which re-
suited in *~agan#bu~, *zazSbuu.~, developing later to the attested f o r ms . - In the
sequence vauuana.buiie, nijana.buiie, zaza.buiie (A. I, l l ) also nijana must originally
have been a perfect participle *nijaTna (cf. ja?nuu(O, the present part. would be 7anant-
(cf. 7anq<rn) sadaiieiti Yt.10,71).
18 For the initial of cahmi cf. also the other forms of the indefinite pronoun gen.
GAy. cahiia Y.48,9; 50,1 and dat. YAv. cahmai Yt.13,3).
THE Avesta FRAGMENT FRD. 3 287
cedi ng one. Mor phol ogi cal j ust i fi cat i on is nei t her possi bl e f or t he
Pahl avi t r ansl at i on nor f or t he assumpt i on of Dar mest et er . Bar t hol omae
obvi ousl y t hi nks 2azud is an anal ogi cal nomi nat i ve of t he perfect part i -
ciple l i ke vMu~ ' knowi ng' , i.e. Bar t hol omae' s assumpt i on is mor pho-
logically possi bl e. Yet it does not make sense. A var i at i on by a mer e
changi ng of equi val ent gr ammat i cal f or ms woul d be a poor piece of
poet i cal handi craft . We shoul d t her ef or e t ry t o find anot her expl anat i on.
The synt ax of t he sent ence compel s us t o l ook out f or a nomi nat i ve,
but f or a nomi nat i ve whi ch differs in sense f r om zazuua. Thi s woul d be
t he femi ni ne perfect part i ci pl e zazu~i, whi ch easily ma y have been
mi sspel l ed ei t her as zazu~a or zazud, especially if -di was wri t t en as a
l i gat ure, cf. e.g. t he var i ant s Yt.16,15 viOu~i, v~Ou~a, viOud; V.19,6 zduuidi
(l i gat ure ~i L 4. Mf 2), zduu~da, zdluu~d. I t is well known t hat in Avest an
texts rel i gi ous i nj unct i ons are addressed equal l y t o men and women. The
r epet i t i on of a f or mul a in t he femi ni ne t her ef or e makes sense. Never t he-
less t here is still an obst acl e: t he presence of t he mascul i ne pr onoun y5
i nst ead of t he expect ed yd in t he t hree manuscr i pt s t hat do at t est t he
rel at i ve clause. Yet t he quot at i on was no l onger correct l y under s t ood
by t he aut hor of M~n67 ~ xra3, and t here are bet t er at t est ed t ext s where
t he rel at i ve pr onouns have become mi xed up, e.g. in V.18,62 all ross.
have yd i nst ead of yd.
I n t he t hi r d line, f or whi ch in K 4 and Dar mes t et er ' s ross. onl y a vague
Pahl avi par aphr as e exists, Bar t hol omae conj ect ured ida, now at t est ed
in K 4, i nst ead of ( Dar mest et er ' s) a6a. Thi s I believe is correct , but t he
meani ng of i6a is mor e emphat i c, viz. ' her e on ear t h' , whi ch is qui t e
c ommon f or Ved. ihd. I n t he second par t of t he line, ddaro was mi s-
i nt er pr et ed by Dar mes t et er and Bar t hol omae (AirWb. , 718). Li ke
ddar9 Y.43,15 it cannot bel ong t o d-dd, because t here is no r-endi ng in
t he Avest an aori st 14 (in cont r ast t o Ved. a-dhur). I t has t o be equat ed,
as Wacker nagel obser ved in Festgabe Jacobi, p. 14, wi t h t he Vedic perfect
dhur ' t hey say' :15 ' as or di nar y peopl e (rna$iidka) call it ( = t hi nk it is)' .
14 a~kar~ V.1,3 PiiZ is not an aorist of sak (AirWb., 1553 'they have passed'), but
a misspelling of Phi. ddkar 'it is manifest', as was recognized by Darmesteter ZA,
III, p. 34.
z~ The phonetic form of YAv. ddara, if it is not a mere misspelling of *d~ara, may
be due to a Gathic reminiscence, or to the (dissimilatory) preservation of d imme-
diately before or behind r (Proto-Av. *ddt'); the same possibilities exist for YAv.
vadaro 'weapon' (1. GAy. vadara, 2. Proto-Av. *u, adf ) . - To the root ad ' to say'
also belongs ddd Y.35,8 (corresponding to Ved. dha): a.Yahiid da.t sairfa.~ahiia vorazan~
kahmdicit hdtqm ]ijigqm vahi~tqrn ddd ubOibiid ahubiid ' I say to everyone of the riving
beings that the desire to live in the protection of A~a, in the community of A~a, is the
best for both the lives'. Bartholomae's explanation of add as imperative of d-dd
288 KARL HOFFMANN
The whol e fragment in t he supposed original form, t hen, shoul d
r un as follows:
n6Lt cahmi zazuua y6 n6it urune zazuua
n6it cahmi zazugi yd n6i.t urune zazugi
na~ci~ i6a zaraOu~tra sft~ yaOa h~m ~dara ma.giidka
' He has not won anyt hi ng who has not won (anything) f or his soul. She
has not won anyt hi ng who has not won (anything) f or her soul. Her e
on ear t h t here is not any prosperi t y, Zarat hust ra, as or di nar y peopl e
call it. '
(AirWb., 718) is quite improbable. The reading ada, preferred by Lommel, ZII,1,
p. 23 and H.-P. Schmidt, BCD, 20 (1960), p. 331f., is obviously secondary: add.
b~ibiia i n H 1 etc. instead of ada.ub6ibiia attested i n the best ross., i.e. au (-&u-) has
been replaced by a, as is often the case.