Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T20:16:37.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The admonitions of Ādurbād and their relationship to the Aḥīqar legend

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

François De Blois
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Ādurbād, son of Māraspand, is a well known figure in the history of Zoroastrianism. The historical Ādurbād appears to have played an important rôle in the religious controversies during the reign of Šābūr II (309–379) and in the suppression of Manichaeism. The third book of the Dēnkard contains the ten precepts with which Ādurbād contradicted the teachings of Mānī and which are likely enough to be authentic. Besides these, we possess a good number of wise sayings attributed to him in various Middle Persian books and, more sparsely, in Arabic adab collections, and whose historicity seems more open to doubt. In particular we have two fairly extensive Middle Persian works attributed to him, the Handarz ī Ādurbād ī Māraspandān (HA) or “Admonitions of Ādurbād”, and the work entitled Wāzag ī ēwcand ī Ādurbād ī Māraspandān (WE) or “Some sayings of Ādurbād”, as well as an Arabic text, Mawā'iẓ Ādhurbādh, included in Miskawayh's anthology of wisdom literature of the Arabs, Persians, Greeks, and other nations.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 116 , Issue 1 , January 1984 , pp. 41 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1984

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

1 The Dinkard, edited by P. B., and Sanjana, D. P., Bombay, 1874–1928, Bk. 3, chap. 199Google Scholar. Translated in de Menasce, J., Le troisième livre de Dēnkart, Paris, 1973, 208–9Google Scholar. For this and other texts attributed to Ādurbād see also Shaked, S., The wisdom of the Sasanian sages (Dēnkard VI) (Persian Heritage Series 36), Boulder, Colorado, 1979, 283.Google Scholar

2 Middle Persian text in Jamasp-Asana, Dastur Jamaspji Minocheherji, The Pahlavi texts contained in the Coldex MK … vol. II, Bombay, 1913, 58–71Google Scholar. English translations in Tarapore, J. C., Pahlavi Andarz nāmak, Bombay, 1933, 21–33Google Scholar, and Zaehner, R. C.The teachings of the Magi, London, 1956, 101–10Google Scholar. Persian translation by Nawwābī, M. in Našriva-vi daniškāda-yi adabīyāt-i Tabrīz, XI, 1338/1959–1960, 502–28. Various studies published before Jamasp-Asana's edition are based on faulty manuscripts, and now only of antiquarian interest.Google Scholar

3 Jamasp-Asana, , op. cit., 144–57Google Scholar. Translated by Zaehner, , op. cit., 110–16Google Scholar, and by Nawwābī, in Nasšriya, XIII, 1340/1961–1962, 11–30. In the case of both of these works the traditional MP titles appear to have been invented by Jamasp-Asana.Google Scholar

4 Edited by Badawī, 'Abd al-Raḥmān under the title al-Ḥikmah al-khālidah, Cairo, 1952, 27–9.Google Scholar

5 See Shaked, , op. cit., xvi, n. 4.Google Scholar

6 On the general relationship between the Persian texts in Miskawayh's anthology and the MP documents see Henning, W. B., “Eine arabische Version mittelpersischer Weisheitsschriften”, Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Geselhchaft, CVI, 1956, 73–7.Google Scholar

7 Here, and throughout the article, the transcription is made from Jamasp-Asana's text with liberal use of the variants indicated in his apparatus criticus. * denotes conjectures; ‹ › conjectural additions to the text. The transcription follows the system used in MacKenzie, D. N., A concise Pahlavi dictionary, London, 1971.Google Scholar

8 Reading * 'ḥnṣ'nd; the MSS have 'ḥnṣnd or 'ḥnṣynd. In kū…kē clauses Zor. MP manuscripts use the indicative and subjunctive quite indiscriminately, sometimes changing modes in the middle of a clause (see e.g. MX ii 14–15; also n. 11 below).Google Scholar

9 All Biblical passages are quoted from the Revised Standard Version.

10 MNW kē, not 'MT ka, is apparently the lectio in MK and JJ (Jamasp-Asana's footnote “97” seems to be a misprint for 17).

11 Reading *myl'y for mylyt. Cf. §114, which runs closely parallel to this one, where MK has YMYTWN'y mīrāy, the others the corresponding indicative form YMYTWNyḥ mīrē. The parallelism with the preceding paragraph and Miskawayh's version, show also that in §114 āšnāg is either an error for šnāz, “swimming”, or has at least this meaning (cf. āšnāh, “swimming” in the Šāhnāma).

12 It has been claimed, I think too hastily, that the historical reality of Aḥīqar is proven by a cuneiform tablet published by van Dijk, J. in Lenzen, H. J., XVIII. vorläufiger Bericht über die … Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, Berlin, 1962, 44–52Google Scholar, which lists a number of “sages” (apkallū and ummanü) and tells under which king each one flourished. Most of the names mentioned belong to persons who lived “before the flood”, that is to say they are entirely fictitious. The latest entry, however, tells us that “in the days of king iddina (Esarhaddon) the ummanū was Aba-enlil-dari, whom the call ”. The person known by the Sumerian name Aba-enlil-dari, or the corresponding Akkadian name Mannu-kīma-enlil- is mentioned in other sources – one literary text seems in fact to have been written by him – but only here is he identified with Aḥḫqar. It should be noted that van Dijk's tablet dates from the Seleucid period and is thus much later than the old Aramaic Aḥīqar text. Now, the tablet says precisely that it is the (i.e. the Aramaeans) who call the sage although this is clearly not an Aramaic, but an Akkadian name. It seems most likely that the author of our tablet was aware of the Aramaean legend, and, seeing that its hero was supposed to have lived under Esarhaddon, identified him, quite arbitrarily, with Aba-enlil-dari. The tablet thus proves only that the Aḥīqar story was well known in Seleucid Babylonia, not that it has any historical foundation in events half a millenium earlier. That the persons called , Nādin, etc., in Assyrian texts have nothing to do with the figures in our story was pointed out by von Soden, W. in Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, XLIII, 1936, 12, n. 1.Google Scholar

13 First published in Sachau, E., Aramäische Papyrus und Ostraka aus einer jüdischen Militärkolonie zu Elephantiné, Leipzig, 1911, 147–82Google Scholar. The texts are now most easily accessible, together with a translation and copious notes, in Cowley, A., Aramaic papyri of the fifth century B.C., Oxford, 1923, 204–48Google Scholar. For a new translation see Grelot, P., Documents araméens d'Égypte, Paris, 1972, 427–52. Grelot's interpretation of the texts is not always an advance on Cowley's.Google Scholar

14 See Perry, B. E., Aesopica, I, Urbana, 1952, 35–107 (Greek texts). The relationship between these texts and the Aḥīqar story is discussed in the Latin preface, pp. 4–10, where the reader will find references to earlier studies.Google Scholar

15 Edited and translated by Harris, J. Rendel in Conybeare, F. C., Harris, J. Rendel and Lewis, Agnes Smith, The story of Aḥīkar, Second edition, Cambridge, 1913, 99–127Google Scholar and lz to cb. See also Nau, F., Histoire et sagesse d'Aḥikar l'Assyrien, Paris, 1909Google Scholar, and Nöldeke, Th., Untersuchungen zur Achiqar-Roman (Abhandlungen d. k. Geselhchaft d. Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Phil.-hist. Klasse. Neue Folge. Band XIV. No. 4) Berlin, 1913, which also contains valuable comments on the other versions.Google Scholar

16 Conybeare, , op. cit., 24–85Google Scholar (translations of two versions and variants from others) and 198–234 (Armenian text). Five different Armenian versions are edited in Martirosyan, A. A., Paṭmutiun yev xraṭk xikara imasṭno, 2 Vols., Erevan, 1969–1973. I have read only the French resumé in Vol. I, 62–70.Google Scholar

17 One version was published by Lewis, A. Smith in Conybeare, et al. , op. cit., pp. to and translated (poorly) pp. 130–161Google Scholar; another in Ṣāliḥānī, Anṭūn (Salhani, A. S. J.), Contes arabes, Beyrouth, 1890Google Scholar, pp. to These and other recensions are discussed in Nöldeke, , op. cit.Google Scholar

18 Translated by Jagić, V. in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, I, 1892, 107–26Google Scholar. There is an English translation (from Jagić's German) by Lewis, Smith in Conybeare, et al. , op. cit., 1–23.Google Scholar

19 Edited and translated by Conybeare, , op. cit., 86–98, 185–97Google Scholar. Republished on the basis of the same MS by Deny, J. and Tryjarski, E. in Rocznik Orientalistyczny, XXVII, 2, 1964, 7–61Google Scholar, with a French translation. These scholars fail to mention Conybeare's edition and claim to be publishing the text for the first time. Also in Martirosyan, , op. cit.Google Scholar

20 cf. Martirosyan, , op. cit., I, 69Google Scholar: “Le texte turc en caractères arméniens Alim Higaren söyledigi nasihat – dont le manuscrit est conservé au monastère de Bzommar sous le numéro 413, ff. 43r–66r”.

21 Translated by Gaster, M. in JRAS, 1900, 301–19.Google Scholar

22 Cornill, C. H., Das Buch der weisen Philosophen, Leipzig, 1875, 40–4; translation pp. 19–21Google Scholar. English by Harris, Rendel, op. cit., 128–9Google Scholar. On the (unpublished) Arabic source see Merkle, K., Die Sittensprüche der Philosophen, Leipzig, 1921, 20.Google Scholar

22a Published and translated by Schneider, R., “L'histoire d'Ahiqar en éthiopien”, Annales d'Éthiopie, XI, 1978, pp. 141–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also the English translation by Sumner, C. in Abba Salama, III, 1972, pp. 257–269.Google Scholar

23 Harris, Rendel, op. cit., xxviii–xxxv; xlviii–liv.Google Scholar

24 ibid., lv–lxxiii. A detailed discussion of the parallels between the Aḥīqar story and Biblical and Jewish literature can be found in Küchler, M., Frühjüdische Weisheitstraditionen, Freiburg Schweiz, 1979, 319–413.Google Scholar

25 Harris, Rendel, op. cit., xli–xlviiiGoogle Scholar, Nöldeke, , op. cit., 21–23. Both authors also discuss the Ahiqar sayings which al-Shahrastani attributes to Democritus; Noldeke is rightly sceptical about the whole matter.Google Scholar

26 Harris, Rendel, op. cit., xli–xlviii.Google Scholar

27 Published in Land, J. P. N., Anecdota Syriaca, I, Leiden, 1862, 64–73 of the Syriac sectionGoogle Scholar. The most recent translation and study is by Audet, J. -P., “La sagesse de Ménandre l'égyptien”, Revue Biblique, LIX, 1952, 55–81Google Scholar. See also Küchler, , op. cit., 303–18. The work has nothing to do either with the celebrated Greek playwright Menander (4th century B.C.) or with the set of Greek didactic verses attributed in Greek manuscripts, wrongly, to Menander; or in Arabic sources, even more unjustifiably, to Homer.Google Scholar

28 Nöldeke, , op. cit., 25.Google Scholar

29 The story was included by Galland in the appendix to his French translation of the Thousand and One Nights (1704–1717). This fact has given rise to the often repeated, but false statement that the Aḥīqar story is part of the Arabic text of that book.

30 Harris, Rendel, op. cit., lxxiv–lxxxiii.Google Scholar

31 see Heller's, B. article “Luḳmān” in the old edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam.Google Scholar

32 Thus in t h e Armenian versions, where we find even the (apparently Mesopotamian) names of the gods in question. In Rendel Harris's Syriac version, and in Slavonic, he prays to God. In Smith Lewis's Arabic version he prays first to the “idols” and only afterwards to God. Thereupon a voice informs him that as punishment for the fact that he first placed his trust in t h e idols his prayer had been rejected. All of these versions – except for the Armenian ones – represent clumsy attempts to Christianize the story.

33 op. cit., 205–6.Google Scholar

34 cf. von Soden, W., Akkadisches Handwörterbuch, s.v. šumû, with quotationsGoogle Scholar. For the whole question of Aramaic šmh and Old Persian nāma see Kutscher's, E. Y. rather inconclusive remarks in Proceedings of the International Conference on Semitic Studies,Jerusalem, 1969, 133 and 151, with references to earlier studies.Google Scholar

35 op. cit., p. 27, n. 1. See also my remarks in Burzōy's voyage to India and the origin of the book of Kalīlah wa Dimnah (in the press), chap. 3.Google Scholar

36 Kalīla und Dimna syrisch und deutsch von F. Schulthess, II, Berlin, 1911, xvii–xxv. See also below, example viii.Google Scholar

37 The text given here is transcribed from the standard Middle Persian (“Pahlavi”) recension in Dānāk-u Mainyō-i Khard, Pahlavi, Pazand and Sanskrit texts, edited by Anklesaria, Tehmuras Dinshaw, Bombay, 1913, 83–4Google Scholar; and corrected, where necessary, on the basis of the Pāzand version published there, and in West, E. W., The Book of Mainyo-i-khard: the Pazand and Sanskrit texts, Stuttgart and London, 1871. I follow West's numbering of the sections.Google Scholar

38 The curious form hgšš is perhaps a formation – like the Akkadian ŠD stem – otherwise not attested in Aramaic, used with the same meaning as the ordinary pa“el (Syriac gaššeš “spied out”).

39 Thus also Nöldeke, , op. cit., 5Google Scholar, and Kraeling, E. G., The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri, New Haven, 1953, 98, n. 55.Google Scholar

40 Text pp. ld to lw; translation pp. 99–101.

41 For lā yaḥduthu, read lam yaḥduth with Badawī's MSS and and with Bodleian 662 Marsh, fol. 9b.

42 The translation follows Ṣāliḥānī, , op. cit.,Google Scholar p. apu., yā bunayya ḍbuṭ ibnaka min al-shurūri wa addibhu qabla an yakbura wa yatamarrada ‘alayka wa yuhīnaka bayna aṣḥābika wa yuḥniya (read *tuḥniya) ra'saka fī 'l-shawāri'i wa'l-maḥāfili wa tun'āba fī (read *tu'āba 'alā, or the like) a'mālihi 'l-radī'ah. The text published by Smith Lewis is corrupt.

43 cf. Man. MP wsyxwr, NP bisyār xwār “glutton”, or read: was *xwarendag, with Man. Parth, wxryndg “devouring”, NP xwaranda “eating”. The MSS have was-xwāstag “rich” (was is missing in MK and its copy JJ), but this does not agree with the Arabic version, nor does it fit the parallelism with the next maxim. The idea that one should not consort with the rich is, moreover, quite foreign to the character of the present text.

44 The MSS do not distinguish between xwarišn in §20 and xwārišn in §21.

45 One could also read azēr, and translate: “for you are under (the authority of) him who is older.” Zaehner's translation “Do not mock at your elders, for you are subject to them”, would require reading *mehtarān.

46 I translate: “Mock not old age, for (in so doing) you will be doing age an injustice and rebelling against it” (… meṭṭol da- 'lēh-ū -or read att w-qā'em). Audet's translation: “Ne tourne pas la vieillesse en dérision, car tu y viendras toi aussi et tu yprolongeras tes jours”, though it agrees remarkedly with the MP version, does not seem possible to me. dra 'al means transgressus est, not “arrived at”.

47 see Shaked, , op. cit., xxvii and 294.Google Scholar

48 p'td'yšn is either an error, or an unusual spelling for p'td'šn.

49 Thanks are due to Professor Mary Boyce, London, who read through a draft of the present article in 1982, for her valuable criticism and advice. The revised article was submitted to the Journal at the beginning of 1983. The intervening months have seen the publication of two important studies by Lindenberger, J. M.: The Aramaic proverbs of Ahiqar, Baltimore/London, 1983Google Scholar, a copiously commentated edition of the maxims from the Old Aramaic version, and “The gods of Ahiqar”, Ugarit Forschungen, XIV (dated 1982, actually published 1983), 105–117. Lindenberger's views on some matters differ from my own, e.g. on the questions discussed above in notes 12, 38, and 39. I hope to return to these matters later.Google Scholar