Postscript To Zurvān

R. C. Zaehner

doi:10.1017/S0041977X00111711

Postscript To Zurvān

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009

R. C. Zaehner

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

In the preface to my recently published book, Zurvän, A Zoroastrian Dilemma,1 I said: ‘I have not found it necessary to alter much in the proof stage only what seemed to me to be positive mistakes’. During the two and a half years that the book was in the Press, however, I had come across evidence which I had not noticed before and which seems to be worth considering. There is further evidence of the theory put forward in the book that the original Zandiks persecuted by Kartir were identical with the Dahris. On the other hand, the references to Mithraism in the book are largely out of date, and I gladly avail myself of this opportunity to correct them.

Type: Articles
Information: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , June 1955 , pp. 232 - 249

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X00111711 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1955

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 232 note 1} Abbreviated as ZZZ.

^{page 232 note 2} So de Menasce, JA, 1943, p. 339

^{page 233 note 1} GrBd. 21.4 = ZZZ, pp. 284, 319.

^{page 234 note 1} Munqidh, ed. Jābir, Cairo, undated, p. 18. Translation in Montgomery Watt, The Faith and Practice of Al-Ghazāli, p. 30

^{page 234 note 2} cf. B. Lewis, The Origins of Isma'ilism, p. 90, on Zindiq materialists.

^{page 234 note 3} India, p. 132: translation i, p. 264.

^{page 234 note 4} Al-farq bayn al-furuq, ed. Cairo, 1367/1948, p. 177.

^{page 234 note 5} ibid., p. 214.

^{page 234 note 6} Corbin, Oetivres philosophiqv.es et mystiques de Shihabaddin Sohrawardi, I, 1952, p. 265

^{page 235 note 1} R. A. Nicholson, Studies in Islamic Mysticism, p. 133. This view which Jili attributes to the Dahris is exactly paralleled in DkM, 207.3–4 = ZZZ, pp. 383–4: ‘Time itself is eternal, and its essence is duration. Through it matter has the potentiality of being actualized. Qua potency it is eternal’.

^{page 235 note 2} Chapter vi.

^{page 235 note 3} Baghdādi, op. cit., pp. 214–15. The maskhiya are presumably the Mazdeans in the strict I sense of that term. I can offer no explanation of why the term maskhiya should be used. Possibly a corruption of *mazdiya or *mazdayasniya

^{page 235 note 4} ZZZ, p. 81, n. 2.

^{page 235 note 5} SGV, 10.69–71.

^{page 236 note 1} SGV, chapter vi.

^{page 236 note 2} ZZZ, texts Z 31 (a) and (b).

^{page 236 note 3} ibid., text F 5.

^{page 236 note 4} See his article ‘Zandlk-Zindlq’, in Iranische Beilräge,I

^{page 236 note 5} Kashf al-Mahjūb, p. 404, in Nicholson's translation which I quote

^{page 237 note 1} The word is spelt in GrBd. 147.15: 148.4, 5, 8, 9, 10. In Vd. 14.5 we have translating Av. Icdhrpuna- which is described as an azi- spaka- (Phi. ai i'sag) or ‘dogserpent ’. The Phi. gloss (Vd. loc. cit.) saysmārbānake, *sagih et ku apāc ō kun nisinet ‘It is the marbanak (protector of snakes ?), and its resemblance to the dog consists in the fact that it sits on its posterior’. It is, in fact, the cat, and is so identified in GrBd. 147.15, where it is explained as gurbak (‘cat’). DkM. 811.20 has in a passage that seems to be derived from Vd. 14.5. The word then seems to be a transliteration of Av. kahrpuna-, and its meaning appears to be ‘cat’.

^{page 238 note 1} On the strength of GrBd. 147.14 Bailey translated tōrak as ‘jackal’. That passage reads– tōrak kēān and ‘The torak also called the jackal’. ān, however, phonetically written, is very rare in GrBd. Perhaps usyāl in the same sense could be read. Equally possible, however, is hu-skar ‘the good hunter‘ which would then be a descriptive epithet of tōrak. As a possible cognate one might mention NP. (colloquial) meaning a ‘puppy’.

^{page 239 note 1} Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 128.

^{page 239 note 2} ed. Flügel, p. 329: id., Mani, pp. 53, 86.

^{page 239 note 3} Kephalaia, 30.34:Sein Kopf [hat ein LÜwen-Gesieht, seine] Hände, seine Füsse haben ein Damonen-Gesicht … [seine] Schultern haben ein Adler-Gesicht, [sein] Bauch (?) [hat ein Draehen-Gesicht].

^{page 239 note 4} See E. S. Drawer, The Mandeeans of Iraq and Iran, pp. 37–8.

^{page 240 note 1} Drower, loc. cit.

^{page 240 note 2} Lidzbarski, Ginzā, p. 157: cf. ZZZ, p. 261.

^{page 240 note 3} ‘Etudes sur les mysteres de Mithras’ in Yearbook of the New Society of Letters at Lund, 1950, pp. 5–16.

^{page 240 note 4} Cumont, Textes et Monuments, n, p. 105, and i, p. 235, n. 6.

^{page 240 note 5} Cumont's connexion with NP. nabard (op. cit., I, p. 208, n. 6) is impossible. L. H. Gray (Muséon, 1915, p. 191) derived from *nauauarz ‘making new’.

^{page 240 note 6} See ZZZ, 14 ff.

^{page 240 note 7} De Iside et Osiride, 45–7: ZZZ, p. 448

^{page 241 note 1} See Ivanow, The Truth-worshippers of Kurdistan, 1953, pp. 34 ff., where the Mithraic parallel to the Ahl i Haqq texts is adduced.

^{page 241 note 2} Ivanow, op. cit.

^{page 241 note 3} ibid., p.

^{page 241 note 4} ibid., p., cf. GrBd. 38.12–14 = ZZZ, pp. 324, 336: ‘At the Rapiflwin time Ohrmazd and the Ajnahraspands fashioned the “idea” of sacrifice. By the performance of sacrifice all creation was created’.

^{page 241 note 5} Ivanow, op. cit., p.

^{page 242 note 1} Text has : for ?

^{page 242 note 2} op. cit., p. Strikingly similar is the famous Gāθic passage Y. 32.8: ‘Yima, son of Vivahvant, is said by tradition to be one of these sinners, for to gladden men he gave our people portions of the bull to eat’.

^{page 242 note 3} ibid., p.

^{page 242 note 4} ibid., p.

^{page 242 note 5} Cureton, p. 183: ZZZ, p. 433.

^{page 243 note 1} ZZZ, pp. 97–8.

^{page 243 note 2} Eznik, ed. Venice, p. 139: Langlois, Historiens de l'rménie, n, pp. 377–8.

^{page 243 note 3} Dd. 35.2: Gayo(k)mart 'ut Jimset 'ut Zartust Spitaman asokan rat 'ut 'vasān 'vazurg spasisn aβizar i fraskart frazamenitan raδ brehenit. The rendering of spasisn is uncertain, spasan could be read and compared either to MParthT. 'spsg ‘servant, deacon’, or to Av. spas-‘spy. Spasisn seems to give the better sense.

^{page 244 note 1} ZZZ, p. 369.

^{page 244 note 2} Hartman, Gayomart, pp. 65–78.

^{page 244 note 3} pita te yo ahuro mazda / yo mazisto yazatanam / yo vahisto yazatanam / mata armaitis spanta / brata te yo vanhus sraoso asyo / rasnusca berezo amava / miθrasca vouru-gaoyaoitis / yo baevarespasano hazanra-gaoso / xvanha daena mazdayesnis. cf. Hartman, ibid., p. 67.

^{page 244 note 4} Phl. Texts, p. 42, 2: ‘ut-am patvand 'ut tohm 'hoc Gayomart; 'ut-am 'mat Spandarmat, 'ut-am 'pit Ohrmazd.

^{page 244 note 5} See ZZZ, pp. 362–3, 367.

^{page 244 note 6} This phrase seems to have been introduced by a copyist who anticipated the Mahrya and Mahryane episode which occurs a few lines lower down ('pas Mahrya 'ut Mahryane 'hoc zamik <'paf> refSas harp 'be rust 'hend). There is no reason to suppose that Gayomart grew out of the earth in the form of a rhubarb plant as Masye and Masyane did. The contrast, on the other hand, seems to be between Gayomart on the one hand, who was ‘fashioned’ and ‘born’ of Spandarmat, and Masye and Masyane on the other who grew out of the earth as plants.

^{page 245 note 1} As , Mithras is the son of the Earth (cf. Cumont, op. cit., 11, p. 533, petre genetrici, etc.), and as the child of the anthropomorphized Armaiti he is said to be born of woman: so Elise, n, 36, ed. Portugal, Venice, 1903, p. 232, Mihr astuac i knoje cnani, ‘The god Mithra was born of a woman’: Langlois, op. cit., n, p. 193: Cumont, op. cit., n, p. 5.

^{page 245 note 2} Cumont, op. cit., 11, p. 11.

^{page 245 note 3} Or. 4, 132 D, : cf. 135 C, (ie. etc.

^{page 245 note 4} Cumont, op. cit., n, p. 91, in an inscription at Tyana. This is, so far as I know, the only authenticated epigraphical example of the Mithras of the mysteries being described as , and on Wikander's theory the fact that it appears in Cappadocia is significant. In general I would agree with W. that Mithras is a saviour god rather than a judge (op. cit., p. 38). I would not attach as much importance as W. to the fact that the form employed here is Miθpn rather than Miθpn However, if there is anything in W.'s theory (ibid., pp. 39–40), then this inscription would refer to the god of the mysteries rather than to the ‘genuinely’ Iranian deity.

^{page 246 note 1} ZXA, p. 79, § 3: cf. ibid., p. 57, 1. 1, and p. 70, 1. 5.

^{page 246 note 2} PhlRiv. 48.66

^{page 246 note 3} For the reading of this word see ZZZ, pp. 104, 357

^{page 247 note 1} For 'NDL'D read 'wgr'y = āgrāy ‘dipping down’ > NP. girā'idan ‘incline’. Nyberg read avērāδ, Glossar,s.v.

^{page 247 note 2} Mx. 2.76–8.

^{page 247 note 3} JRAS, 1939, pp. 115–16. He connects with kaēnā- ‘exaction’.

^{page 247 note 4} The clue to this passage seems to be Yt. 17.6, yeyhe nmane ašiš vanuhi/surapa03B4;a nidaBaite/ agnmaitis . In both passages we read of a ‘house’ (, nmane) to which someone or something comes ‘for long association’. In Yt. 17.6 it is Asi herself who comes to the house to join in long association with man. In view of the general similarity of the two passages it would seem that Mithra-Rasnu is similarly introducing a consort into the house he has just built; and in this case it would surely be Asi again, for she is his sister. manavaintim looks like an ace. fern., but can scarcely be from a form in vant which would give -vaitim. Possibly we should read *mano-vaintim (from van-) and translate ‘she whose victory is in the mind’, or betterfor Asi is the goddess of fertility and therefore of love— ‘she whose victory is over the mind’. Whatever the interpretation of the word, the similarity between the two passages makes it probable that Asi is the person referred to. One may not translate rasnus as if it were raSnaoS, as former translators have done, for there is no MS. authority for thi

^{page 248 note 1} I hope to develop this theme at a later date.

^{page 248 note 2} All this is based on Vd. 2.3.

^{page 248 note 3} Reading Icalan for karan

^{page 248 note 4} Beading bi-mandand Ixiyran for na-mandand bayran.

^{page 248 note 5} Spiegel, Traditionelle Literatur der Parsen, p. 328.

^{page 248 note 6} ibid., p. 332.

^{page 249 note 1} Cumont, op. cit., n, p. 50, cf. I, p. 319. The text, as reproduced by Cumont, is as follows: Ervbescite commilitones eius (i.e. Christi) iam non ab ipso ivdicandi sed ab aliquo Mithrae milite, qui cum initialur in spelaeo, in castris vere tenebrarum, coronam interposito gladio sibi oblatam, quasi mimum martyrii, dehinc capiti suo accomodatam, monetur obvia manu a capite pellere et in humerum si forte transferre, dicens Mithran esse coronam suam

Article contents

Postscript To Zurvān

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests