Litanies and rituals. The structure and position of the Long Liturgy within the Zoroastrian ritual system
p. 195-282
Résumés
Les rituels en langue avestique ont été considérés durant une longue période comme des productions secondaires tardives. Seulement dans les dernières années, il a commencé à devenir clair que les rituels avestiques n’étaient pas des compositions hasardeuses des matériaux survivants du Grand Avesta, mais des compositions primaires. Les conséquences les plus évidentes pour notre compréhension des textes avestiques sont : 1. que nous devons essayer une lecture cohérente de tous les textes récités dans chaque rituel avestique ; 2. notre compréhension de chaque partie d’un rituel n’est possible qu’à la lumière de sa position dans le rituel. Dans cette contribution, il est, de plus, proposé que tous les rituels en langue avestique font partie d’un système rituel complexe partageant un ensemble commun de blocs textuels et rituels, ainsi qu’une série de règles combinatoires. Cela s’oppose à la traditionnelle vue Yasna-centrique selon laquelle les rituels brefs sont extraits du Yasna et les plus longs en sont simplement des extensions aléatoires.
Les éléments fondamentaux dans le complexe système rituel sont des litanies en prose. Ces sections en prose, qui imitent le Yasna Haptaŋhāiti du point de vue formel, contiennent les informations contextuelles performatives (moment et date de la célébration et dieu à qui on la dédie) et sont combinées avec des blocs textuels de forme poétique qui ne peuvent pas être aisément modifiés et ne contiennent aucune information variable comme la date de la célébration. Habituellement, les litanies sont combinées en des « litanies multiples », dans lesquelles la même litanie est répétée avec plusieurs verbes performatifs.
Selon l’usage des litanies, nous pouvons distinguer trois types de cérémonies : 1. pour un seul yazata qui ne contient pas de « litanies multiples » ; 2. les cérémonies vīspa yazata contenant seulement une « litanie multiple » et 3. les cérémonies vīspa ratu vīspa yazata qui combinent dans une seule cérémonie plusieurs « litanies multiples ». À ce dernier groupe appartiennent toutes les variantes de la Liturgie Longue. Ainsi, elles peuvent être considérées comme des groupes standards de rituels combinant plusieurs « litanies multiples » avec des textes poétiques variés. Les cérémonies « pour un seul yazata » doivent être introduites par une cérémonie vīspa yazata qui délimite leur contexte rituel. Néanmoins, une seule « litanie multiple » peut précéder plusieurs cérémonies mineures sans litanie multiple, tant que les conditions rituelles ne changent pas.
The rituals in Avestan language have been considered for a long time as late secondary products. Only in the last years, it has started to become clear that the Avestan rituals are not random compositions out of surviving materials from the Great Avesta, but primary compositions. The most obvious consequences for our understanding of the Avestan texts are: 1. that we are compelled to try a coherent reading of all texts recited in each single Avestan ritual; 2. our understanding of each single part of a ritual is only possible in the light of the position it takes in the ritual. In this paper, it is proposed that, furthermore, all rituals in Avestan language are part of a complex ritual system sharing a common pack of textual and ritual blocks and a series of combinatory rules. It opposes the traditional Yasna-centric view according to which shorter rituals are extracted from the Yasna and longer are just random extensions from it.
Fundamental elements in the complex ritual system are the prose litanies. These prose sections that imitate in the formal the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti contain the contextual performative information (time and date of the performance and god for whom it is performed) and are combined with textual blocks in poetic form that cannot be easily modified and never contain variable information like the date of performance. Usually the litanies are combined in “multiple litanies”, in which the same litany is repeated with several performative verbs.
According to the use of the litanies we can distinguish three types of ceremonies: 1. for single yazata that do not contain “multiple litanies”; 2. the vīspa yazata ceremonies containing only a “multiple litany” and 3. the vīspa ratu vīspa yazata ceremonies that combine in a single ceremony several “multiple litanies”. To the last group belong all variants of the Long Liturgy. Thus, they can be considered as a standardized cluster of rituals combining several “multiple litanies” with various poetic texts. The ceremonies “for single yazata” have to be introduced by a vīspa yazata ceremony that delimits their ritual context. Nonetheless, a single “multiple litanies” can precede several minor ceremonies without multiple litany, as long as the ritual conditions do not change.
Texte intégral
1Zoroastrian ritual tradition is one of the oldest in the world that is still alive. Its ancient rituals are still performed, albeit in different degrees and variations, by communities of Zoroastrians living in India, Iran, and the diaspora. The most solemn rituals, the different variants of the Long Liturgy (LL), are nevertheless performed regularly only among the Parsees in India. Whereas the ritual usage of the Avestan texts has traditionally been considered as secondary, recent research has emphasised the original ritual function of the Avestan texts, as opposed to the long-standing view that has treated them as a collection of texts gathered secondarily for ritual purposes more than a thousand years after their composition. J. Kellens has conducted a seminal analysis of the LL as an original and unitary composition in his Études avestiques et mazdéennes (Kellens 2006, Kellens 2007a, Kellens 2010, Kellens 2011, Redard & Kellens 2013).1 Nonetheless, A. Ahmadi has cast doubts on the supposed “coherence” of the LL in several articles (and most especially in a paper dedicated to this issue, Ahmadi 2018), and questions the attempts to understand the “logic” of the arrangement of the LL. For him, “the ascription of a ‘ritual course’ to Yasna would remain the tautological observation that the sections found in Yasna occur in sequence in Yasna, unless one can show the logic of this sequence” (Ahmadi 2018, 76).
2Indeed, the “ritual course” is not just the succession of the texts in the order in which they appear, but also of the actions that are performed simultaneously. Moreover, the succession of the texts in the rituals is not evident from the previous editions. Their focus was not to place the representation of the texts in their ritual contexts, but rather to provide material mainly for the linguistic and theological analysis, hence the lack of a clear concept of “text” and a presentation of the texts that does not fit their ritual arrangement well, but rather seeks to avoid redundancy. The Yasna has been edited more or less in the same arrangement as it is performed, but this is not true for the Visperad (and related ceremonies). It would be a vain attempt to try to reconstruct the exact textual arrangement of this ceremony on the basis of the standard editions. They are based on the exegetical manuscripts that are clearly secondary to the liturgical ones, which present the texts in their ritual arrangement (Cantera 2012a, 452 ff.). Thus, a description of the textual arrangement of the Visperad had not been possible2 until our publication of the Visperad ceremony in the Corpus Avesticum Berolinense (https: //ada.geschkult.fu-berlin.de/exist/apps/cab/ceremony_generator.html).3
3Moreover, the reconstruction of the liturgical performance that accompanied the Avestan texts when they obtained their present form is not an easy task, and has hardly been attempted. The materials at our disposal are limited, and both chronologically and geographically dispersed: the ritual Avestan texts themselves,4 the meta-ritual literature in Avestan and Middle Persian,5 the ritual instructions contained in the manuscripts (attested from the 13th century CE),6 and modern practice. Their analysis shows that, despite a clear continuity, changes have inevitably taken place, some of them important.7 A careful analysis of the witnesses is therefore required to reconstruct the ritual course of the performances taking into account the historical transformations.
4Furthermore, and contrary to Ahmadi, we may affirm that there is a clear rationale or “logic” behind the arrangement of the texts (using Ahmadi’s terminology). Disagreements in the interpretation among scholars or even changes of opinion are not proof of the lack of any such rationale, as Ahmadi seems to assume. The general structure of the LL is clear. It consists of three parts (see § 5.3):
- the constitution of the priestly personality, of the priestly frauuaṣ̌is, and the identification of the frauuaṣ̌is of the other members of the community with the one of the priests (Y3–21),
- the sacrifice itself and the offering of meat to the fire accompanied by the recitation of the Staōta Yesńiia, the Old Avestan texts in the special arrangement in which they appear in the LL (Y22–55),
- the request for a reward for the sacrifice in the form of offerings to the fire and the waters (Y59–70).
5In addition, the arrangement of the different texts within each block seems to follow a rationale. A very simple example from the beginning of the LL should be enough. The Srōš Drōn includes the parahaōma among its offerings. It is dedicated to Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i, a dedicatory shared with the Hōmāst of the Paragna. This dedication preludes the Hōm Stūt and the drinking of the parahaōma by the presiding priest during the recitation of the Aṣ̌әm Vohū of Y11.11. At Y11.10 (pairi.tē haōma aṣ̌āum aṣ̌auuāzō daδąmi imąm tanūm “I offer you, Haōma, promoter of the Aṣ̌a, this body”), the zaōtar drinks the parahaōma. Immediately after this, an auxiliary priest (the ātrauuaxša) exhorts him to assume the office of the zaōtar, which he accepts, and together they both recite mazdaiiasnō aɱi “I am one who makes a yasna for (Ahura) Mazdā” in which they announce the following Fraōrәti and Āstaōϑβana Hāitis (see § 5.3.1.) (VrS11.27):
mazdaiiasnō aɱī
mazdaiiasnō zaraϑuštriš frauuarānē
āstūtascā frauuarәtascā
āstuiiē humatәm manō
āstuiiē hūxtәm vacō
āstuiiē huuarštәm š́iiaōϑanәm
I am one who makes a yasna for (Ahura) Mazdā.
I make the choice of doing a yasna for (Ahura) Mazdā as Zaraϑuštra did,
having performed the Āstaōϑβana and the Fraōrәti.
I praise the thought well-thought,
I praise the word well-said,
I praise the action well-performed.
6The drinking of the parahaōma, an offering dedicated to Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i, is the requirement for assuming the zaōtar’s office and for being able to pronounce the Frauuarāne that connects him with Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i.
7 Thus, the analysis of the compositional and ritual patterns of the LL goes far beyond a merely “tautological observation”.8 It consists of two main steps:
- a description of the ritual course and its historical evolution for each performance;
- an investigation into the rationale of the current arrangement of the liturgy, including both text and action.
8Both tasks require an analysis of each ritual as a unit, and at the same time as part of a modular system in which the same modules are used in similar contexts, albeit with relevant variants depending on the ritual context. Nonetheless, since Anquetil-Duperron, the LL has been submitted to a progressive dismemberment. As a consequence, complete translations of the Avestan LL are rare (except in the “complete” translations of all Avestan texts) and analysis of the single rituals even more rare.9 The main reason for this conscious disregard of the importance of the ritual course for the analysis of the Avestan texts is, besides the general disinterest in rituals that has dominated the field of Avestan studies, the hypothesis that the ritual use of the texts is only secondary, and the texts should therefore be scrutinised according to their “real” or “original” use. However, whereas the ritual use of the texts is beyond any doubt, a different “previous” or “original” use has still to be proven. Although I cannot pursue this matter here, it seems that the supposed original arrangement of the Avestan texts — the one described for the Great Avesta in Middle Persian literature — is indeed simply a secondary arrangement of part of the texts used in the rituals, but with other goals and according to different principles. The description of the Great Avesta as consisting of three groups (gāhānīg, hadamānsrīg, and dādīg) of seven books seems to reflect the collection of three different types of texts intercalated in intercalation ceremonies.10 Two of the three designations do indeed take their names from the two ceremonial ratu of the intercalation ceremonies: hadamānsrīg from the Vištāsp Yašt (haδa.mąϑrәm zaini.parštәm upairi.gātubiiō gәrәptәm mąϑrәm spәṇtәm aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm), and dādīg from the Vidēvdād (dātәm haδa.dātәm vīdōiium zaraϑuštrәm aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm).
9 By contrast, the antiquity of the arrangement of the texts in the same order as they appear in the ritual performances is assured (Cantera 2014a, 187 ff.). On this point, Ahmadi’s criticism in no way accounts for the strongest argument for the antiquity of the ritual use and attested arrangement of the constitutive elements of the LL: the Avestan Nērangēstān not only knows parts of the LL in exactly the same form as they are attested in the LL, but also the general arrangement of the LL as it appears in the manuscripts (Cantera 2014a, 210 ff.). Furthermore, it is obvious that the Avestan text of the LL does indeed know the actual textual arrangement of the liturgy or at least some of its features. Thus, some texts are repeated in the performance of the LL, and there is an Avestan designation for the repeated text. We may therefore conclude that these repetitions already existed at a time when Avestan was still a productive language. The clearest examples are the repetitions of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti (YH) and the Spәṇtā.maińiiū Hāiti (Y47). The former is recited a second time between the Vohuxšaϑrā and the Vahištōištī Gāϑā in the Visperad (and related performances). The repetition is designated as apara- yasna-haptaŋhāiti- “the second/later Yasna Haptaŋhāiti” (VrS65.10, 68, 81). The Spәṇtā. maińiiū Hāiti is recited twice out of the Staōta Yesńiia: in Y18, at the end of the section for the installation of the priests, and in Y68.35–42, at the end of the Āb-zōhr. The second recitation is designated as spәṇtā.maińiiūm hāitīm paitiiāpąm, making a clear reference to the fact it is recited at the end of the Āb-zōhr. In the Dō-Hōmāst, ms. 2000 indicates that the recitation of the first hāiti of the Uštauuaitī Gāϑā is possible (Cantera 2014a, 238). In this case, too, the hāiti is designated as uštauuaitīm hāitīm paitiiāpąm (ms. 2000, fol. 100v). By contrast, no proof has been provided of a profound rearrangement of the text of the LL after Avestan fell into disuse as a living language.11 Thus, the simplest hypothesis is that the LL was arranged as it is (or in a very similar form) at a time when Young Avestan was still a productive language. This is confirmed by a simple analysis of the variability and adaptation of the litanies to their different ritual contexts.
10It therefore befalls us as researchers to try to describe and analyse the texts in the arrangement in which they are transmitted, as well as discover the nature of their interrelations (the “logic of its sequence”, in Ahmadi’s words). The structure of the LL and its relationship to the other rituals in Avestan should indeed be one of the priorities of the research on Avestan texts, and even of the study of Zoroastrianism in Antiquity. The alternative is to dismiss the LL (in all its variants) and the other rituals in Avestan as “randomly organised” and unworthy of research, and focus, as research has done for almost two centuries, exclusively on some of the texts recited in them, basically the Gāϑās, the Hōm Stūt, and Srōš Yašt (Y5712), basically treating them as disiecta membra.
11 This article is informed by the conviction that our understanding of the Avestan texts (and especially of the performative texts) must consider, firstly, their position within the ritual to which they belong, and secondly, their position within the complete ritual system in Avestan. The second point implies that the use of each textual block or module must be compared to the use of the same module in other rituals. This task will only be possible, however, when an edition of the Avestan rituals preserved in the manuscripts becomes available. This is the main aim of the Corpus Avesticum Berolinense. In this project carried out at the Institute for Iranian Studies (https://cab.geschkult.fu-berlin.de/), we aim to present an edition of the rituals in Avestan in two different ways: 1) a presentation of the ritual system still operating in Iran in the 16th century using mainly the evidence of the manuscripts, but also other coetaneous materials, such as the Rivāyats; 2) a diplomatic edition of each single ritual in one or more manuscripts. The numbering system and the designation of the ceremonies used in this article are the ones defined for this project, and are explained on our website.
1. The unitary nature of the LL
12As a consequence of the assumption of the secondary use of the texts of the LL for ritual purposes, its unitary nature has often been questioned: the LL would rather be a collage of texts from different times and origins gathered in later times for ritual purposes. Thus, the LL is conceived not as an “original homogeneous unit”, but rather as a “compilation” in which different compositional patterns are recognisable: “Das Yasna ist dabei allerdings selbst, wie unten noch näher erläutert, nicht ohne weiteres als originäre homogene Einheit zu betrachten denn sowohl Textsubstanz als auch das zeremonielle Arrangement des Yasna lassen gezielte kompilative Kompositionsmuster erkennen, die im Laufe der Zeit vermutlich sogar mehrfach grundlegend umgestaltet wurden.” (Stausberg 2002, 3.306.)
13There are apparently two concurrent evidences: 1) the text of the LL as it is gathers texts created at different times (there are at least three perceptible layers: Old Avestan, Middle Avestan,13 and Young Avestan); 2) the texts are not arranged randomly, but intentionally, and the result is a ritual (and a text) compiled as a unity through clear formal marks. This implies a long and complex compositional process, but it does not per se refute that the LL is a coherent “unit”. I use “unit” in the sense of “a text that is marked as a complete text through formal indicators”. There are, of course, units of different levels: each stanza of the Gāϑās is a unit, but also the hāiti and the gāϑā and even the Staōta Yesńiia, etc. “Coherent” does not necessarily imply an individual composition clearly delimited in time and with a single “intention”, but rather the existence of a rationale for the general arrangement and the fact that modifications over the course of time do not occur randomly, but respond to certain impulses.
14There is no doubt that the Avestan text of the LL presents the complete ceremony as a formally differentiated unit. The formal boundaries of the LL are the double opening and closing of the ceremony (Cantera 2015). However, the use of ritual frame has remained productive for a long time as it clearly appears from the composition of some “modern” magical nērangs, so that it could be considered as a late development. Nonetheless its specific dedoublement in two Frauuarānes and two final āfrīnāmi rather speaks for its antiquity. Moreover, there are further elements that frame the whole liturgy as a complete unit, and can hardly be later additions at a time when Avestan was no longer a living language. Thus, the initial framework (Y0) is followed by a litany introduced by the verbs ńiuuaēδaiiemi and haṇkāraiiemi that is exclusive to the LL,14 and appears only at its beginning. It does not belong to the initial Srōš Drōn, but opens the whole LL. This can be clearly deduced from several facts: 1) the lack of the typical dedicatory of the Srōš Drōn; 2) the inclusion of the Visperad-extension in Y1 and 2, but not in the Srōš Drōn; 3) the omission at the beginning of the litany of the typical lists of objects that are going to be used in the ritual. This litany together with the litany aɱiia zaōϑre barәsmanaēca… āiiese yešti plays a similar role for the LL as the litany āiiese yešti in the “multiple litanies”.15 At the other end, the Wīsp Yašt (Y71), a holistic yazamaide litany in which the whole universe is object of yazamaide, is obviously a closing of the complete liturgy. These elements bookend the constitutive elements of the LL as parts of a whole.
15Furthermore, although many parts of the LL also exist as independent ceremonies, cross-references between ceremonies performed at different moments of the liturgy create a strongly overlapping network of references that confirms the conception of the LL as a unity. These are abundant between almost every part of the LL, but they are especially frequent between the Hōmāst and the final Āb-zōhr. In the former, the libations are prepared that are going to be offered to the waters at the end of the liturgy. Both are the only sections that mention the libations containing haōma and milk (haōmauuaitī- gaōmauuaitī- zaōϑrā-). Yet the relationship is much closer than just a few lexical agreements. In fact, the performance of the Hōmāst is divided into two sections, and what we usually call the Hōmāst (Y22– 27) is simply the first part of a ceremony that culminates solely in the Āb-zōhr. The main difference between the Hōmāst and a Drōn Yašt (performed within the LL or outside it) is the absence of an aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany after the yazamaide. During the performance of the Āb-zōhr we find the lone aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany that is isolated and not part of a “multiple litany” (see § 2.3), that is, this is the only occasion in the LL where an aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany does not appear together with all the other litanies that are typical of the series (āiiese yešti, āuuaēδaiiamahī, and yazamaide, see § 2.3). Therefore, the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany in the first section of the Āb-zōhr could be conceived as the conclusion of the multiple litany of the Hōmāst. The reason for this displacement is that the offering of the haōma does not take place during the Hōmāst, but at the end of the liturgy, during the Āb-zōhr,16 when it is offered as part of the libation to the waters.
16This interpretation of Y66 as a displaced end of the Hōmāst is confirmed by a peculiarity of the litanies of the Hōmāst when performed in the Visperad that is shared only by the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi of the Āb-zōhr (VrS90.29–31). In the āiiese yešti and āuuaēδaiiamahī litanies of the Hōmāst, a text is recited between the dedicatory and the standard stanza about the frauuaṣ̌is that is unknown elsewhere (GVr10.1–2). This extension that is exclusive to the Hōmāst in the greater performances introduces, first, the seven countries of the earth, and then the tools for the pressing of Haōma. It appears in two versions: a short one in the āiiese yešti litany (VrS25.33–4 [= GVr10.1–2]), and a longer one in the āuuaēδaiiamahī litany (VrS27.44–48 [= GVr11.17–21]). The short version reappears only once in the major performance: exactly at the end of the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany of the Āb-zōhr, as we can see in this comparative table:

17We may thus conclude that this litany is the last one of the Hōmāst. Consequently, when the Āb-zōhr is celebrated as an independent ceremony outside the performance of the LL (see § 4.4), then the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany (Y66) is not performed.
18The recitation of the Hōmāst between Y22–27 presupposes the recitation of the Āb-zōhr at the end of the liturgy. Both elements belong together, and they cannot be properly understood except in reference to each other. Research has overlooked the analysis of the litanies and has had an unfortunate tendency to dismember the LL into its different parts instead of conducting a global analysis, which means we have been prevented from noticing the numerous interconnections between the different parts of the liturgy, thereby leading to the assumption that its arrangement does not follow any obvious pattern. There can, however, be little doubt that the LL has been constituted in its present (or similar form) at a time when it was still possible to compose complex texts in Avestan.
2. The Avestan ritual system
19I believe the LL constitutes not only a functional, ritual and textual unity, but also that it is a complete unit within a complex ritual system. Its component parts cannot be understood out of context, or without considering their use in other rituals. Instead of the model that conceives most of the rituals as “extracted” from the Yasna, and therefore as secondary products of a text/ritual already considered as “secondary” (see § 2.2), I propose a model according to which the different rituals attested are the surviving remains of a complex ritual system that was created in Antiquity (doubtless at a time when Avestan was still a productive language), and has remained in use (in part and with major changes) until the present day. In this model a series of modules (of different extensions) can be used and combined in different rituals.
2.1. Greater and lesser performance
20The traditional description of the Pārsis divides the rituals in Avestan into “inner” (pāw-mahel) and “outer” (hušmordi) ceremonies (Modi 1922, 246 ff.; Karanjia 2010, 22 ff.). This division is based on different criteria, with the main one being the place of celebration, but which also address the necessary degree of purity of the officiating priests and their number. Inner ceremonies are held in the fire temple, whereas the outer ones can be held anywhere. For the former, the priest needs a higher level of purity obtained through the marātab initiation; and only the nōg nāwar for the latter. Furthermore, inner ceremonies must be officiated by at least two priests, whereas the outer ones can be performed by a single one. The main inner ceremonies are the Yasna, Visperad, and Vidēvdād; the outer ones are the Āfrīnagān, Farroxši, and Stōm.
21A similar dual division is often found in the Western classification of the rituals in Avestan. Thus, Kellens (1998) distinguishes two collections among surviving Avestan texts: the LL and a collection of short liturgies. The latter is defined basically by the negative: it includes all the texts edited by Geldner except the LL and the texts intercalated in it, such as the Vidēvdād and the Vištāsp Yašt. Despite the apparent similarity to the traditional division established by the Pārsis, the collection of the short liturgies only partially recovers the groups of liturgies traditionally ascribed to the “inner” ceremonies. In fact, apart from the Āfrīnagān, the main outer liturgies were not included in editions of the Avestan texts.
22One of the main problems with this binary classifications is the fact they leave the Drōn Yašt in terra incognita, even though it plays a central role in the Avestan ritual system. It has only recently been edited in an extremely useful edition by Karanjia (2010). Accordingly, modern Western classifications do not include the Drōn Yašt in either group. The traditional classification of the Pārsis usually ascribes it to the “inner” liturgies. However, it can be performed by priests with only the nōg nāwar initiation, and even by the laity (Modi 1922, 358). Karanjia therefore emphasises its intermediary position, as it does not fulfil all the criteria for being considered an “inner” ceremony (Karanjia 2010, 22 ff.).
23This dual division cannot be traced back in either the Avestan texts or in Middle Persian meta-ritual literature. The Middle Persian meta-ritual literature knows also a dual classification of the rituals: the classification in meh “greater” and keh “lesser” rituals. It does not in any way imply a similar division as “inner” or “outer” ceremonies. In fact, each ceremony (or many of them) can be celebrated as a keh and meh. This distinction implies textual changes and differences concerning the number of priests, but the exact nature of the distinction is not completely clear to us. Clear is only that it does not define a ritual as “lesser” or “greater”, but each instance of its performance. The Nērangestān itself provides us with several examples of how we should understand the distinction between the meh and keh performances of certain rituals. The most explicit one is the description of Drōn ī Ābān (see § 4.4.1). Chapter 53 describes a ceremony for the waters that includes the performance of a Drōn Yašt before certain specific texts dedicated to the waters. At one point, it provides different versions of the ritual, one “lesser” (keh) and one “greater” (meh). The main differences between the two performances are as follows:
- the greater and lesser versions have some textual differences, with the greater version including a number of additional texts (for a detailed comparison between both textual arrangements, see § 4.4.);
- the greater version requires the presence of more priests. The lesser seems to be performed by two priests (and not by one, as in modern practice for the Drōn Yašt): the zaōtar and the hāuuanān. The latter invites to partake of the drōn, exactly as in the Srōš Drōn of the LL. Nonetheless, here we encounter the taking of the wāž that is used only when one priest officiates, and is typical for the Drōn Yašt (yaϑā ahū vairiiō zaōtā frā.mē mrūte… see Cantera 2016a). By contrast, at least three priests take part in the greater performance. The final section of the Drōn Yašt involves an exchange between the zaōtar and the sraōšāuuarәza, and when the specific section of the Āb-zōhr begins, the auxiliary priest is the frabәrәtar.
24The Nērangestān provides a further clear example of the differences between greater and lesser performances in the description of the LL at dawn (ušahina). In the description of the drinking of the parahaōma during the Hōm Stūt, after mentioning a textual variant of Y11.8 (nәmō haōmāi mazdaδātāi vaŋhuš haōmō huδātō17), we find the following text (Kotwal & Kreyenbroek 2003, 98 f.):
zōt ka hāuanānәm āstāiia nē gōwēd [ka nē pad kardag mad estēd] u-šān pad yašt ī keh be rāyēnīd; pad wīsparad ud bayān yasn šāyēd būdan.
If the zōt does not recite hāuuanānәm āstāiia, [if it is not a liturgy with kardag], then they have arranged it as a lesser service (yašt ī keh). This may happen in the case of the Vīspered or the Bayān Yasn.
25There is a moment in the Visperad when the zōt has to invite the single auxiliary priest (VrS11.9 ff.); if he does not do so, then the ceremony is a yašt ī keh. If we omit VrS11.9–13, the resultant ceremony is, of course, a Yasna. There, as in the description of the Nērangestān, Y11.8 (āat̰ aōxta zaraϑuštrō nәmō haōmāi mazdaδātāi vaŋhuš haōmō mazdaδātō nәmō haōmāi) is followed by Y11.9 (yō nō aēuuō at̰ tē uiiē ϑrāiiōidiiāi tūrahe maṇdāidiiāi xšuuīdәm haptāždiiāi nauua dasme yōi vǝ̄ yaēϑma), which the auxiliary priest recites at the place of the frabardāran (see N28.42). We therefore learn that for the Nērangestān the version of the LL that we call Yasna is simply a yašt ī keh, a lesser variant of the yašt, whereas the Visperad and the Bayān Yasn would be a yašt ī meh.18 All of them are lesser or greater performances of the LL, the yašt. The designations keh and meh are not categorical, but simply determine that each ceremony can be performed as a lesser or a greater one.
26The Middle Persian literature does not divide the rituals into two clear categories. The classification of the rituals in the Nērangestān according to the number and quantity of some of the elements required for each ceremony nonetheless provides a hierarchy of the ceremonies, but no clear features for a classification, as we can see in the following table based on N28.21 and N72.8:

27A formal analysis of the Avestan text of the rituals, the elements that integrated them, and their distribution leads us instead to a threefold division of the rituals (see § 2.3).
2.2. Yasna-centric model vs ritual system: the ritual blocks
28It is a widely held view that all the other rituals have been secondarily extracted from the LL (more exactly, from the Yasna). There is a well-known statement by Geldner in the Grundriss (Geldner 1896, 9):
Viele Liturgien sind lediglich oder fast ausschliesslich Zusammenstellungen aus den bekannte Texten und geläufigen Formeln, z. B. der Darūn Bāǰ, Darūn Yasht, Mayā Yasht (auch Mayā Zōhr genannt), der Tshīdak avistāk ī gāsān (Zusammenstellung von Gathastrophen), die vielen Āfrīngān’s und Khshnūman’s, ein dem Sīrōze nachgebildeter Monatskalender in persischen Mss. u.a.m.
29Regarding the Drōn Yašt, he even affirms: “Der Darūn Yasht setzt sich zusammen aus einer Eingangsformel und Yasnastücken mit teilweise veränderten liturgischen Formeln… ”25 Similar statements abound in recent literature. Thus, Stausberg (2002, 3.352) writes: “obwohl der im Ritual (des Drōns) rezitierte Text größtenteils aus dem Yasna und für die Widmungen bzw. Anrufungen aus dem Sīrōza stammt.”26
30My view of the relationship between the LL and all the other rituals is completely different, as they are part of a complex ritual system and share, at least partially, the same elements. These elements are textual (and ritual) functional modules that are available for all the rituals. This is true for both elements mentioned by Stausberg as the constituent elements of the Drōn: the texts “taken from the Yasna” are the litanies shared by many different rituals, and the dedicatories are not taken from the Sīrōzag, but the latter is one instance (the longest) of the set of dedicatories available for all the rituals.
31An analysis of the modules is crucial for understanding the ritual system to which the LL and all the other rituals in Avestan belong, although this point has been systematically ignored in the research on Avestan texts. We must distinguish between static and dynamic modules in the LL and in other Avestan rituals. The first ones do not adapt to the ritual context, or do so in a minimal way,27 and do not include elements such as dedicatories, or mention the date or the part of the day in which the ceremony is performed. The second ones, by contrast, adapt to the ritual context introducing changing elements, such as temporal or local indications, dedicatories to different gods, and lists of different ritual objects, among others. Basically belonging to the latter category are the Frauuarāne (Cantera 2015), the litanies (see below § 2.3), and a series of performative formulas, such as the wāž gīrišnīh (Cantera 2016b) and the srōš barišnīh (Cantera forthcoming-b).
32Each ritual consists of a combination of both static and dynamic modules. Their distributive proportions can be quite different. Whereas in the Drōn Yašt the dynamic modules dominate completely, the opposite is true in the Yašts and Niyāyišn. In the LL, however, we find an even distribution of dynamic and static modules (see § 4 and § 5.3). Nonetheless, the ceremonies predominantly consisting of static modules were probably combined in joint performances together with others in which dynamic modules prevail, whereby the final distribution of the modules was balanced (see § 2.3.3).
33In the performative formulas (wāž gīrišnīh and sraōšō astū), the changes mainly concern the type of priests involved in the performance. The Frauuarāne reflects the time of the performance and the god for whom the ceremony is performed (and also, but rarely, where the performance takes place). The type of variation possible in the litanies is highly diverse (Cantera 2018). Beside the performative information also provided in the Frauuarāne, it includes the date and, most importantly, references to offerings at the corresponding moment in the performance when each litany is recited. Thus, although the litanies recited in the first and second Srōš Drōn (see below) and in the Hōmāst are quite similar, they always adapt to the ritual context. The following table compares the objects mentioned in the first litany in each Drōn and the Hōmāst:

34The comparison could be extended to the performance of similar litanies in the Drōn Yašt or in the Drōn ī Ābān, for example. However, this basic comparison should be enough to show how the dynamic modules can adapt to different ritual contexts. The solid offering for Sraōša appears only in the Srōš Drōn, but, as expected, it is omitted in the other two instances. Furthermore, the mention of the haōma-twigs and of the para.haōma prepared during the Paragna is substituted in the Hōmāst by the elements that are going to be mixed for the preparation of the haōma at the end of the Hōmāst (Y27) and used in the libations to the waters at the end of the liturgy. Accordingly, the mortar is also mentioned together with the waters in Y22.3, but not in the Srōš Drōn. Hence, we may clearly deduce that the latter received its current form at a time when the recitation of the Hōm Stūt did not accompany the pressing of haōma, but just the drinking of the para.haōma prepared during the Paragna. A previous stage could perhaps be reconstructed, but our texts reflect the one when the para.haōma was prepared during the Paragna and only drunk during the Hōm Stūt. Conversely, the second Drōn Yašt is part of the fire ritual at the end of the ceremony (see § 4.3), and consequently mentions only the wood and the incense.
35The view that some parts of the LL were extracted from there and used for other rituals (see § 2) needs to be abandoned. The variable textual-ritual modules are the cornerstones of the Avestan ritual system. They adapt to their specific use in each position. They can therefore have been included at their respective positions only at a time when the composition of new texts in Avestan was still possible.
2.3. “Standardised” and “multiple” litanies
36All Avestan rituals share a similar structure. They are opened and closed by a series of framing modules (Cantera 2015). The text of the proper ceremony is often characterised by the presence of at least one performative verb that defines the type of ceremony (yazamaide in a yasna;28 āfrīnāmi in an āfrīti,29 āuuaēδaiiamahī in an āuuisti, and so on). These performative verbs are often repeated several times, producing litanies. Their repetitive nature has doubtlessly contributed to the lack of interest in these building blocks of Avestan rituals. There are only a few exceptions to this disinterest. The work by Kellens on the first chapters of the Yasna (1996) has provided the first systematic analysis of the litanies that appear at the beginning of the LL.30 Recently, a new paper by Sadovski (2018) has appeared in which the author is basically interested in the Indo-Iranian parallels, as well as formally in the contents. However, neither of the above authors considered the variation in the litanies depending on the ritual context, as a fundamental clue for their understanding, or the use of the litanies in rituals other than the LL. The analysis of the litanies from this new perspective reveals the fundamental role they play in the Avestan ritual system, even allowing for a classification of the different rituals depending on the use of the litanies involved.
37I divide the litanies in two types: simple litanies with only one performative verb and multiple litanies with several. When litanies with two or more performative verbs are combined in a “multiple litany”, then each litany follows a well-defined pattern of objects that have to appear in a specific order (see § 2.3.1, 2). This is what I call a “standardised litany”. This concept allows us to distinguish the litanies found in the Drōn Yašt or the LL from the long series of litanies repeating the verb yazamaide that we find, for example, in the Gāhs. The main differences regarding the “standardised litanies” are that they do not follow the same pattern of items that function as object of the performative verb than the “standardised” ones and that they never include the ratus (except when it is part of the dedicatory, as it happens in the dedicatory of the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇtas). They include, however, mostly the dedicatory of the ceremony as object of the verb yazamaide. This does not happen, however, when the “simple litany” appears in the LL (e.g., Y16, Y71). The “standardised litanies” are combined in a succession of litanies, in a “multiple litany”.
2.3.1. The performative verbs of the “multiple litanies”
38Simple litanies are never “standardised litanies” (with the exception of some litanies in LL: Y17, 59 and 66), and lack the basic elements that define the latter ones. A non-standardised yazamaide section is the basic pattern found in the Gāhs, Niyāyišns, and Yašts. The litany yazamaide can, however, be extended with an āuuaēδaiiamahī-section. The litanies āuuaēδaiiamahī are always introduced by a first section in which the performative verbs are pairica dadәmahī and āca vaēδaiiamahī (DrYt2.1, Y4.1, Y24.3, Y55.1, VrS79.1), which is repeated twice. This is then followed by a section with just the verb āuuaēδaiiamahī. This second section is mostly a “standardised litany”. The only exception is Y55, where the following yazamaide litany is not a “standardised” one either.
39This minimal pattern appears in the Hōmāst performed during the Paragna. It is a very similar ceremony to the Hōmāst of the LL (Y22–27), but without the āiiese yešti-litany (see § 5.3). The very core of this combination of litanies lies in the āuuaēδaiiamahī litany, not in the yazamaide. Hence the designation of the whole ceremony as āuuisti (at least for its use in the LL, see VrS24.6, 27.46).31 This is the reason the yazamaide litany in the Hōmāst does not fulfil all the criteria for a standardised litany, but consists only of a yazamaide for the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta (amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide32) and the dedicatory that includes the objects of the Hōmāst.33
40This minimal pair can be extended through two additional performative verbs: one at the beginning (āiiese yešti) and one at the end (aṣ̌aiia daδąmi). They are, interestingly, not in the 1st p.pl., like the two central ones, but in the 1st p.sg. The reasons for the change of number are unclear. The 1stp.pl. of the central ones is due to the influence of the YH, but the change to the singular in the other two is unclear.34 The addition of the introduction (āiiese yešti) and the concluding offertory (aṣ̌aiia daδąmi) is the typical structure of the “multiple litanies”. We find it, for example, in all the variations of the Drōn Yašt and in the Hōmāst of the LL.35
41The different possible combinations and their use in specific rituals are summarised in the following table.

note36
42As we have seen, the main difference between an āuuisti and a yasna is that the yazamaide litany in the former is not a complete “standardised litany”, being shorn of some of its fundamental elements and basically reduced to a dedicatory.
43Further litanies were possible in Antiquity. It is thus quite likely that the Hōmāst included another one with the verb aiβi.vaēδaiiamahi after the āuuaēδaiiamahī litany. The aiβi.visti litany is mentioned at the opening of the Hōmāst in the greater performance of the LL (VrS24.4–6):37
haōmanąm uzdātanąm zaōϑranąm uzdātanąm… āuuistaiiaēca aiβi. vistaiiaēca aiβiš.hutaiiaēca upāštaiiaēca upaŋharštaiiaēca hufrāiiaštaiiaēca huframәrәtaiiaēca yōi hәṇti haōma sūra spәṇta aṣ̌auuana aṣ̌aiia uzdāta aṣ̌aiia uzdāhiiamna aṣ̌aiia aiβi.vaēδaiiamna aṣ̌aiia aiβi.vaēδaiiaṇta aṣ̌aiia hunuuana aṣ̌aiia haōš́iiaṇta
(Let Sraōša be here) for the consecration (āuuisti) and oblation (aiβi. visti), pressing (aiβiš.huiti), the sending (upāšti), filtering, the good sacrifice (hufrāiiašti) and the good silent recitation (huframәrәti) of the presented haōma and of the presented offerings (zaōϑrā) that are the powerful, beneficial, orderly haōma that are being or have been presented according to the Order, that are being or have been offered according to the Order, that are going to be or are being pressed according to the Order.
44The model of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti seems to have played an important role in the constitution of the “standardised litanies”.38 The minimal pattern consisting of only two performative verbs used in plural (āuuaēδaiiamahī and yazamaide) follows the model of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti (Y36.6–37.1):
sraēštąm at̰ tōi kәhrpǝ̄m kәhrpąm āuuaēdaiiamahī mazdā ahurā imā raōcā̊ barәzištәm barәzimanąm auuat̰ yāt̰ huuarǝ̄ auuācī
yeŋ́hē hātąm… tā̊scā yazamaide
idā āt̰ yazamaidē ahurәm mazdąm yǝ̄ gąmcā aṣ̌әmcā dāt̰ apascā dāt̰ uruuarā̊scā vaŋvhīš raōcā̊scā dāt̰ būmīmcā vīspācā vohū
45The connection to the YH is readily apparent in a feature that is exclusive to some “standardised litanies” (specifically the two Drōn Yašt) performed within the LL: the intercalation of a section of the YH between the āuuaēδaiiamahī39 and the yazamaide litanies. In the Srōš Drōn, it is Y37 (= Y5), the beginning of the proper yasna of the YH, whereby the combination of Y4 and Y5 resembles the succession of Y36.6 and Y37. In the second Drōn Yašt, Y36 is recited instead of Y37 in the same position. Furthermore, a quotation of the YH does always close the most complex “multiple litanies”. Thus, a quotation of Y41.5–6 (the end of the YH) closes the “standardised litanies” of the Drōn Yašt, as well in its isolated performance and within the LL. At the end of the ašạiia daδąmi litany of Y67.6–8, the displaced litany closing the “multiple litany” of the Hōmāst, we find instead the section to the waters of the YH (Y38.3–5).
2.3.2. The items included in the “standardised litanies”
46When the litanies of several performative verbs are arranged together, each litany then follows a very specific pattern concerning the items included in it. Their number and type depend on the type of ceremony. In the individual litanies, the litany consists sometimes of a single item that might be repeated several times. It is identical to the god or gods mentioned in the šnūman of the Frauuarāne.40 These litanies are frequently complemented by further texts of different nature concerning the specific god addressed, and very often also with a request. This is the typical structure of the Yašts and Niyāyišn. In other litanies, for example, in the Gāhs, we find lists similar to the ones of the standardised litanies, but with the elements in different order and always lacking the mention of the date and the typical final stanza of the “standardised litanies” (see below).
47By contrast, the objects follow a very specific pattern in the “standardised litanies”. They consist mainly of two lists: the list of the yazata and of the ratu. The latter is intercalated in the middle of the list of yazata. Besides the ratu and the yazata, all the litanies except the one with yazamaide open with a mention of the ritual objects and offerings that are going to be used in the ceremony (see § 2.2). The following are the basic elements of a “standardised litany”:41
481. List of the ritual elements used and the god to whom they are dedicated. The appearance or not of the ritual objects at the beginning (beg.) of the ceremony and within the dedicatory (ded.) is represented in the following table:

492. List of the yazata, mostly divided in two parts among which the list of the ratu is inserted. The first part do not appear in the āiiese yešti and aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litanies. It consists mostly of Ahura Mazdā and the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta (sometimes followed by other yazatas like the frauuaṣ̌is and the fire). Here you see the most frequent variants:

50The second part of the list (e.g., Y4.19–22) follows the end of the list of the ratu. It is identical in all ceremonies and litanies with only a significant difference at the end of the list between the litanies with the items in gen./dat. or in acc.42 It is opened with the mention the fire, water and plants and continues always in the same way:

51The list is always closed in the same way: with the dedicatory of the current ceremony43 followed by the mention of the frauuaṣ̌is. In the LL, the dedicatory is preceded by the mention of the Great Ratu or its equivalent in the accusative, “all ratus”. In the yazamaide and aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litanies, the dedicatory also includes a mention of the ritual objects. The structure of the end of the list is the following:

523. The time-ratu. The minimal expression includes the part of the day and the date of the performance, but can be extended to the complete list of all the ratu. This is a feature distinguishing the LL from all the other liturgies. In the greater performances, the seasonal and yearly time-ratu lead to an extension of the list of ratu through the mention of the texts recited in an intercalation ceremony with intercalated Yašts (Kreyenbroek 2008, Cantera 2009, Cantera 2013b), which was probably celebrated during the last five days of the year. The extensions do not appear, however, in all the litanies of the LL, but only in the ńiuuaēδaiiamahī litany (Y1), in the aɱiia zaōϑre barәsmanaēca… āiiese yešti of the barsom yašt (Y2), in the litanies of the Hōmāst (except yazamaide), in the yazamaide litanies in Y17 (VrS17.10–12) and Y59 (VrS77.10–12), and in the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany of the Āb-zōhr (VrS90 ~ Y66).44 Furthermore, the intercalation ceremonies include the ceremonial ratu.45 In parallel to the mention of the Great Ratu before the variable yazata of the dedicatory, the lists of the LL mention as well some yazatas before the mention of the patron of the day and month. The list of these gods include the dvanda Ahura Mazdā Miϑra, the stars, moon, sun and again Miϑra. The schema of the different elements mentioned in the list of ratu depending of the liturgy is the following:

53The final stanza of each standardised litany is a summary of the complete litany. All the elements are summarised under two categories: vīspa ratu for the list of all the time-ratu, and vīspa yazata referring mainly to the list of gods that appears between the date and the dedicatory. In the litanies where we simply find the corresponding asńiia ratu and the date instead of the complete list of the ratu, the mention of the vīspa ratu is omitted in the last stanza:

54If there is no mention of the ratu or of the yazata, the last stanza is fully omitted. This is the case of the special litany yazamaide of the Hōmāst (see above). It does not include either the ratu or the fixed list between the date and the dedicatory, and consequently omits the last stanza. It ends with the mention of the frauuaṣ̌is. There are no known instances of a list including the ratu, but not the yazata, and therefore mentioning only the latter in the last stanza. A “standardised” litany is always “for all the gods” (except the yazamaide litany of the Hōmāst), and sometimes (in the LL) for all the ratu.
55We can distinguish five different types of “standardised litanies” according to the number of items included. The variation basically concerns the way in which they display the list of the ratu:
- Only one “standardised litany” fully omits the mention of the ratu: the yazamaide litany of the Hōmāst.
- The list of the ratu- includes only the part of the day (asńiia ratu) at which the ceremony is performed and the date: this is the typical litany of all the rituals except the LL.
- The list of the ratu mentions all the ratu as they appear in the LL.
- The extended list of the ratu expands the yāiriia ratu with the mention of a series of texts. It appears exclusively in the greater performance of the LL.
- The intercalation ceremonies have two particularities:
- They include the ceremonial ratu before the time-ratu.
- Martínez-Porro has recently reported for the intercalation ceremonies that when the litany is not the extended one of the greater performances (type d), then the list of ratu is reduced to the ceremonial ratu plus the categorical names of the ratu of time: asńiia, māhiia, yāiriia, and sarәδa (e.g., VVrS3.6).
- They include the ceremonial ratu before the time-ratu.
56The distribution of the objects of the performative verbs in the “standardised litanies” is summarised in the following table:

note46
57As we can see in the table, a series of features allows us to distinguish between the variants of the LL and all the others. The most obvious one is concomitant with the inclusion of the raϑβąm-section in the Frauuarāne: the list of all the liturgical times between the mention of the part of the day and the date. This is again concomitant with other elements of each litany that are exclusive to this type of ceremony (Cantera 2018, 20; Cantera 2019a, 40):
- The invocation to “all ratu of Order” in the final stanza of the litany (vīspaēibiiō ašạhe ratubiiō- in Y3.25, 4.26, 6.21, 7.23 and corresponding passages).
- The mention of the “all greatest ratu-” in the yazamaide section before hauruuatāt and amәrәtatāt (ratauuō vīspe mazišta: Y6.17, 21 and corresponding passages of the litanies; see also Y71.21).47
- The mention of the Great Ratu (ratu- bәrәzaṇt) appears before the šnūman, together with a mention of all the types of time ratu- (aiiara-, asńiia-, māhiia-, yāiriia-, sarәδa-), determined by the relative clause yōi hәṇti aṣ̌ahe ratauuō.
- They all include a list before the date that begins with the dvanda ahuraēibiia miϑraēibiia and is closed again by Miϑra, as lord of the countries. The middle section evokes the stars, Tištriia, and the sun, emphasising the connection between the time ratu, Miϑra, and the astronomical calendar.
2.3.3. The performative section at the end of the “multiple litanies”
58The “multiple litany” is always followed by a closing section in which the main ritual action announced before takes place. It precedes the addition of the “recitative”, the non-performative section (see § 3). In the case of the Drōn Yašt (and Srōš Drōn), it is the offering of the drōn (DrYt6.1, Y8.2), and its partaking in the case of the LL (Y8.3). The whole is closed by an Āfrīti, the Vasasca (DrYt6.7–10, Y8.8–11). In the case of the Hōmāst, the section involves the pressing of haōma (Y27).
59The structure of the final section of the multiple litany follows a well-established pattern:

60The case of the Drōn ī Ātaxš is more complex, but the general structure is identical to other ceremonies (see § 4.3). More problematic is the case of the Hōmāst, where the performative section is the libation to the waters after Y66. It fits well into the general framework, but it also has some significant differences (see § 4.4).
2.3.4. A classification of the Avestan rituals according to their use of the litanies
61A specific feature of the LL is the possibility (found only there) of gathering several “multiple litanies” in one ceremony. This is, indeed, the basic structure of the LL.52 It consists of a twofold or threefold repetition of the multiple litany extended by further celebrations:
Verb | Srōš Drōn | Hōmāst | Drōn ī Ātaxš |
āiiese yešti | Y3–3.23 | Y22–23.4 | VrS78 |
frauuarāne | Y3.24–25 | Y23.5 | VrS79.0 |
āuuaēδaiiamahī | Y4 | Y24 (VrS27) | VrS79.1–27 |
Y5=Y37 | VrS80 = Y36 | ||
yazamaide | Y6 | Y25 | VrS81 |
aṣ̌aiia daδąmi | Y7 | VrS82 |
62We can distinguish three types of rituals, depending on the performative verbs and how they are distributed:
- Type 1: ceremony with only a performative verb (e.g., Yašts, Niyāyišn, Gāh) and no “standardised litanies”.
- Type 2: Two or more performative verbs combined in a “multiple litany” in which several parallel litanies are joined together in a long litany (e.g., the Hōmāst and the Drōn Yašt).
- Type 3: two or more “multiple litanies” are combined in one ceremony (e.g., the different variants of the LL).
63Furthermore, the items included in the standardised litanies enable us to classify the rituals with “multiple litanies” into two different groups:
- Ceremonies vīspa yazata “for all the gods”. They are characterised by the mention only of the part of the day and the date of performance. Moreover, each litany ends with the mention of vīspa yazata. It covers the same rituals as type 2 in the above classification.
- Ceremonies vīspa ratu vīspa yazata “for all the ratu and for all the gods”. Beside mentioning all the ratu in each litany, they mention the “great ratu” (see § 2.3.2) at several places in the litany, closing it with the mention of “all ratu and all gods”. It covers the same rituals as the previous type 3. At the beginning of the ceremony, the Frauuarāne announces that the ritual pertains to this type by reciting the section raϑβąm aiiaranąmca asńiianąmca māhiianąmca yāiriianąmca sarәδanąmca yōi hәṇti aṣ̌ahe ratauuō yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca between the asńiia ratu and the dedicatory.
64The result of the combination of both criteria is a threefold classification:
- Vīspa ratu vīspa yazata ceremonies covering almost all the different performances of the LL.
- Vīspa yazata ceremonies that include all the rituals in which only one “multiple litany” appears. Its best-known example is the Drōn Yašt.
- Ceremonies for single gods that do not include any “standardised litanies”.
65There are rituals in each classification that adopt intermediary positions between the categories. The Yasna with the dedicatory for Rapihwin is thus very similar to the other variants of the LL and share most of their features with them, but not the features that would make it a vīspa ratu ceremony: e.g., the ratu are not listed and the vīspa ratu are neither announced in the Frauuarāne nor mentioned at the end of each litany.
66The kind of performative contextual information that can be provided is determined by the type of liturgy it is. The Frauuarāne already informs about the actual ratu in which the ceremony is performed and about the dedicatory. The text of the proper ceremony includes always the dedicatory, but the information about the ratu and the date in which the ceremony is performed appears only in the vīspa yazata and in the vīspa ratu vīspa yazata ceremonies:
litanies | yazata | vīspa yazata | vīspa ratu |
šnūman | + | + | + |
actual asńiia ratu | – | + | + |
date | – | + | + |
vīspa ratu | – | – | + |
67The information about the actual ratu is concomitant with the information provided in the initial Frauuarāne, but this is not the case for the date.
68It is very likely that the ceremonies of the second and third level were combined with the ones of the first level and provided thus the performative context for ceremony. The ceremonies type yazata were probably always preceded, at least once a day, by a ceremony of the second level, in which it was informed about the date of the performance. In fact, we have to think about the Avestan rituals, especially about the yazata ones, as items integrated in ritual clusters. The different variants of the LL could be understood as an example of a ritual cluster that was fixed in its form. However, other cluster were as well possible. The modern performances of rituals are, indeed, mostly clusters in which different rituals are integrated as part of one single performance.
3. Litanies in prose and metric texts in the Avestan rituals intergrated in a ritual cluster
69The Staōta Yesńiia consists of a combination of a prose section (a yasna) and five metrical texts (gāϑās). The yasna section is the YH recited after the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā and before the other four Gāϑās, two of them consisting of three hāitis and two being mono-hāitic. The main ritual action, the offering to the fire of a piece of meat/fat from the sacrificial victim, takes places during the yasna, whereas the only action performed during the recitation of the Gāϑās is the continuation53 of the pressing of haōma mixed with milk that started at the end of the Hōmāst (see § 4.2 and 5.3). Further differences between the yasna and the gāϑās involve their treatment in the greater performance of the LL:
- the yasna might be recited twice in the greater performances;
- the yasna is placed under the protection of Sraōša, being introduced by the srōš barišnīh that summons the god to the yasna.
70There is a special link between Sraōša and the yasna. The beginning of Y57 describes the ritual that Sraōša has performed as the first one. It consists of three different actions:
- Sraōša performs a yasna for Ahura Mazdā, the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta (Y57.4);
- he spreads the barәsman (Y57.8);
- he recites the five Gāϑās (Y57.11).
71According to Kellens (2011, 74 f.; 2012), we are dealing with a ritual course similar to the one of the Yasna, characterised by the spreading of the barәsman and the recitation of the Gāϑās. We should note, however, that the description of the three actions does not seem chronologically linear, as the yasna of Y57.4 should follow the spreading of the barәsman mentioned in Y57.8. Furthermore, the spreading of the barәsman does not refer to the spreading in a specific ritual course, as different possible numbers of twigs are recorded. It is a prototypical spreading of the barәsman for any ritual.
72More important is the observation that Y57.4 seems to describe the performance of the YH:
yō paōiriiō mazdā̊ dāmąn frastәrәtāt̰ paiti barәsmәn yazata ahurәm mazdąm yazata amәṣ̌ǝ̄ spәṇtǝ̄ yazata pāiiū ϑβōrәštāra yā vīspa ϑβәrәsatō dāmąn
(Sraōša) the first, who after spreading the barәsman, performed a yasna for Ahura Mazdā, performed a yasna for the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, both the protectors and fashioners who made all creatures.
73As Kellens has recognised (2011, 81), the yasna performed by Sraōša included the recitation of Y42 (cf. pāiiū ϑβōrәštāra and Y42.2 pāiiūšcā ϑβōrәštārā yazamaidē). Accordingly, the yasna for Ahura Mazdā and the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta might allude to Y37, as the beginning of the yazamaide “standardised litany” always does (e.g., Y6.1 daδuuā̊ŋhәm ahurәm mazdąm yazamaide amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide). This situation, combined with the fact that the YH is placed under the especial protection of Sraōša, renders it quite likely that the three actions whose first performance is attributed to Sraōša represent an “Old Avestan liturgy”, consisting of the spreading of the barәsman and a combination of the YH and the five Gāϑās. Thus, the combination of a prose yasna and a metrical text is a basic feature of the liturgy already in the paradigmatic performance attributed to Sraōša. The number of prose sections required seems to have varied. In greater performances, several YH could accompany the recitation of the five Gāϑās, as shown by the Visperad variants of the LL in which the YH is performed a second time before the Vahištōištī Gāϑā.54
74König has noted that the use of the terms yasna and gāϑā are in “reciprocal dependency” (König 2017, 87 ff.). I would rather refer to it as “reciprocal complementarity”. The term gāϑā is frequently the object of srāuuaiia- “to recite”, whereas yasna- appears with stu- “to praise”, and in the YH and Young Avestan mainly with yaz- (also frā-iiaz-), cf. N4.4 gāϑā̊ srāuuaiiō yasnәm yazәṇtәm “reciting the gāϑās and performing the yasna”. The distinction might cover the division between the performance of the prose sections during which the main ritual actions are performed and the metrical compositions that are merely recited. A general designation for the texts that are mainly “recited” (srāuuaiia-) and not “performed” (yaz- or frā-iiaz-) seems to be srauuah-. The Vidēvdād occupies a priority position among them (V5.22).
75This allows us to postulate a new understanding of the designation staōta yesńiia. It would refer to all the “songs of praise” (staōta) that are worthy of being included in/recited after a yasna, understood as a prose text containing certain litanies whose centre is a yazamaide litany. They are frequently the object of the verb yazamaide. It likely means that they are presented, consecrated, performed, and offered in the litanies as the texts that are going to be recited (srāuuaiia-) at the end of the succession of litanies (the yasna-). The designation staōta yesńiia does not group the texts belonging to a linguistic layer or tradition, but is rather a general concept that gathers all the texts that can be recited after a yasna. The Old Avestan texts in their arrangement in the LL are the main staōta yesńiia, as they are at the very heart of the main ritual, the yasna par excellence, the YH.
76This structure of a yasna or prose section consisting of the repetition of performative verbs with a metrical text, with the focus being on the poetic text rather than on the ritual action, finds a clear reflection in the Young Avestan rituals. The functional equivalents of the YH in Young Avestan tradition are “multiple litanies” leading to the yazamaide litany. Instead of the gāϑās, a genre exclusive to the Old Avestan, other texts could be introduced after the performative sections in prose: a stūiti (as happens in the Hōm Drōn with the Hōm Stūt), an Āfrīti (as is the case in the Drōn ī Ātaxš of the LL, see § 4.3), and so on. The most particular case is when a “non-standardised” yazamaide litany follows the “multiple litany”. In this case, it seems that a yasna (understood as text dominated by the verb yazamaide or similar) follows a yasna (understood as a “multiple litany” including a litany yazamaide).
77Kreyenbroek (2008) has shown that Nērangestān (29.13–15) describes the performance of a Drōn Yašt combined with Yt15 dedicated to Vaiiu (Rām Yašt).55 The reason for the preservation of this combination is its use in the ceremonies following someone’s death, as the commentary on the Pahlavi Vidēvdād (V8.22) clearly affirms:
(O) u-š pad ōš ī sidīgar drōn se bē yazišn ēk rašn aštād ud ēk way ī weh ud ēk ahlaw ardā frawahr
(O) On the third dawn, they should perform for him three Drōn Yazišn, one for Rašnu and Aštād, one for the good Way, and one for Ardā Frawahr.56 (Cf. Moazami 2014.)
78The Drōn for Way is the text preserved by the Nērangestān, with the one for Rašnu and Arštād is easily reconstructed. It consisted of a Drōn with the dedicatory of Rašnu and Arštād plus Yt12. The Drōn for the frauuaṣ̌is is the well-known Farroxši (see below). The link between the Yašt and the Drōn Yašt would follow the same pattern that we know from the Drōn for Way (thanks to the Nērangestān) and from the combination of Hōm Stūt and the preceding Srōš Drōn. At the end of the Drōn Yašt, the dedicatory to the corresponding god substitutes the initial Frauuarāne of the Yašt in an isolated performance:

79According to Kreyenbroek’s interpretation of N29.12 (2008, 88 f.), a ceremony for a specific god on the day dedicated to him, simply requires the performance of a Drōn Yašt together with his Yašt; on other days, a yašt ī meh is necessary (i.e., probably a performance of the LL with the dedicatory to this god). Accordingly, all Yašts would have been celebrated on the corresponding day of the month, not isolated, but after the performance of Drōn Yašt. However, this use was abandoned at some unknown moment in time, and only a few combinations of Drōn Yašt + Yašt used in ceremonies for the dead survive: the Drōn for Rašnu is lost; the one for Vāiiu is mentionned in the Nērangestān and the Drōn of Ardā Fraward still survives, known today as the Farroxši (Modi 1922, 385). Modi describes two variants for the celebration of the Farroxši; the shorter one consists of the recitation of the Stōm (Y26)57 with the Frawardīn Yašt (Yt13), while the recitation of Yt13 in the longer variant is preceded by a Drōn Yašt.58 The text has been edited by Edalji Navroji (1865, 5 ff.). It consists of a standard Drōn Yašt extended through the recitation of Yt13. The juncture between both sections is identical to the one between the Drōn Yašt and the Hōm Stūt in the LL, or to the Vaiiu Yašt, but including here the dedicatory to the frauuaṣ̌is:
rauuasca xvāϑrәmca āfrīnāmi vīspaiiā̊ aṣ̌aōnō stōiš ązasca dužāϑrәmca āfrīnāmi vīspaiiā̊ druuatō stōiš (cf. Y8.8)
aṣ̌әm vohū 3 (cf. Y8.9)
aṣ̌āunąm frauuaṣ̌inąm uγranąm aiβiϑūranąm paōiriiō.t̰kaēšanąm frauuaṣ̌inąm nabānazdištanąm frauuaṣ̌inąm xšnaōϑra yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca
yaϑā ahū vairiiō zaōtā frā mē mrūtē aϑā ratuš…
Yt13
80It is indeed likely that all Yašts (and not only the ones performed in funerary ceremonies) were not recited in isolation, but instead as part of more complex ceremonies. Thus, the refrain indicating the end of a kardag in most Yašts59 states clearly that the performance of the Yašts requires the use of haōma mixed with milk. The latter can only be prepared during a Hōmāst, whereby a “multiple litany” should have accompanied, in one way or the other, the recitation of a Yašt. In fact, the Mihr Yašt (Yt10.120) makes a clear reference to the performance of an Āuuisti for Haōma (see § 2.3.1).
81Although the Nērangestān and modern practice provide evidence solely of the combination of a Drōn Yašt and a Yašt, this possibility could have involved the extension through texts other than the Yašts. Boyce (1966, 111) reported that the ceremony of the libation to the waters was still being practised by Iranian Zoroastrians in the villages of Yazd in the 1960s. The priest recites the drīn-ī ōwzūr (or drōn ī ābzōhr).60 The title seems to indicate that the ceremony included a Drōn Yašt. Nonetheless, the performance of this ceremony as we now know it today and from the printed Khordeh Avestas does not include the performance of a Drōn Yašt, but simply consists of the recitation of the so-called Mayā Yašt, that is, Y65 (see § 4.4). Fortunately, the Nērangestān provides us with very interesting information about its performance in earlier times. N53.22 ff. describes a major and a minor performance of a ceremony called Drōn ī Ābān (cf. the modern drīn-ī ōwzūr). The link between the Drōn Yašt and the section for the waters takes place in exactly the same way as in the Drōn Yašt for Vaiiu and the Farroxši:

82Accordingly, it seems that the ceremony for the waters (the Drōn ī Ābān) could have been celebrated in many ways, and at least some of them included the prior performance of a Drōn Yašt. The situation is thus partially comparable with the double performance of the Farroxši, with and without an initial Drōn Yašt.
83In the Young Avestan tradition, isolated performances of single poly-hāitic Gāϑās introduced by a previous “multiple litany” were apparently possible. The Yašt ī Gāhān is a short liturgy that basically involves the recitation of the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā (König 2017, 75 ff.). Although in the manuscripts this liturgy does not include an introduction with a “multiple litany”, it is likely that at some point the Ahunauuaitī was introduced through a previous “multiple litany”. The resultant ceremony would be similar to the current combination of the Hōmāst and the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā in the LL. König (2017, 78 ff.) also describes the existence of a ceremony for the dead consisting of the Uštauuaitī Gāϑā. It may also have followed the same pattern, being introduced by a “multiple litany”. This ceremony would be quite similar to the performance of the Uštauuaitī Gāϑā in the Dō-Hōmāst. According to the description in ms. 2000, and like the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā, this Gāϑā is also introduced by a Hōmāst that is very similar to the first Hōmāst. According to N84.12 (but not in ms. 2000), the Spәṇtā.maińiiū Gāϑā in the Dō-Hōmāst liturgy is recited before the Uštauuaitī, and therefore after the second Hōmāst. It seems that each poly-hāitic Gāϑā could be introduced by a “multiple litany”, probably either within the LL or even as an isolated ritual.
84Almost all the ceremonies can or should be preceded by a Drōn Yašt (or a similar ritual containing a “multiple litany”). This is still the modern practice, as Karanjia affirms (2010, 11):
The performance of Bāj-dharna is an essential pre-requisite for performing other inner rituals, as it bestows ritual powers on the performer. Hence, it enjoys a central position among Zoroastrian rituals.
85We may even conclude that all or most of the short liturgies were probably introduced by a vīspa yazata ceremony,61 that is, a ritual including a “multiple litany” for all the gods. In such clusters, the introduction announces the most important performative information: the god to whom the ceremony is dedicated, the moment and, especially, date of the performance. Accordingly, this information may be missing (and is indeed) in the ceremonies for individual gods or groups of gods smaller than the collective designation “all the gods”. The most likely scenario is that one “multiple litany” could serve as an introduction for many ceremonies performed on the same day. In this case, only the first one would be directly attached to the litany, whereas the following ones would begin with a Frauuarāne that updates the information as required: the part of the day of the ceremony and the individual god for whom it is performed, but not the date, as it should be the same as the one of the “multiple litany”. The fact that one vīspa yazata ceremony could introduce several individual ceremonies would explain the twin options for performing the short liturgies: with or without a prior Drōn Yašt. We could imagine, for example, that on one day the Yašt for a divinity was introduced by a Drōn Yašt in its first performance (e.g., hāuuani), but then performed in isolation throughout the rest of the asńiia ratu. The second variant, the shorter one, is the one that appears mostly in the manuscripts, and the one chosen for the collection of Yašts as they appear in F1.
86The necessity of introducing a yazata ceremony through a vīspa yazata depends, as it seems, from different factors. The most evident is that each day at least a vīspa yazata or a vīspa ratu ceremony has to be performed and a series of yazata ceremonies can be attached to it. However, other changes in the performative context might imply the necessity of a new “multiple litany”. It seems that a change of šnūman could imply (or not) the recitation of a new multiple litany. But the evidence we do have for it is indirect. We get it from the LL, as we will see in § 4. In any case, the basic structure of the rituals in Avestan language seems to be the combination of a prose litany containing a performative verb (like yazamaide) and, in Young Avestan, variable performative information with another section, mostly metrical that is static, that is, does not include variable performative information.
4. The combination of a “multiple litany” and an additional text in the LL
87Several features are exclusive to the LL, such as the recitation of the Staōta Yesńiia, the presence of a double beginning and end to the ceremony (Cantera 2015, 83 ff.), its characterisation as vīspa ratu (see § 2.3), etc. This list also caters for the possibility of integrating several “multiple litanies” (see § 2.3.4). As we have just seen, two “multiple litanies” are always recited in the lesser performance of the LL, with three in the greater:
- at the very beginning, the so-called Srōš Drōn (Y3–8), extended with two further litanies that are exclusive to the LL (Y1 and Y2);
- immediately before the recitation of the Old Avestan texts, the so-called Hōmāst (Y22–27);
- in the greater performances, a Drōn-like ceremony introduces the following fire ceremony (see § 4.3).
88The LL is exceptional in that the “multiple litanies” are a constitutive part of the performance and cannot be omitted when the LL is performed in combination with other ceremonies. The number of “multiple litanies” might vary depending on the solemnity of the performance. Thus, whereas the fire ceremony is introduced by a “multiple litany” in the greater performances, it is not in the lesser ones. Furthermore, the Dō-Hōmāst is an even more solemn performance than the Visperad in which a further Hōmāst is performed before the Uštauuaitī Gāϑā (Cantera 2014a, 242 ff.). The designations known from Middle Persian literature as Dah-Hōmāst or Dawāzdah-Hōmāst could indicate the existence of liturgies with even more Hōmāst.62 It seems that at least one63 or two “multiple litanies” are necessary for the performance of a LL, but more could be added.
89The reason for the necessity of the Hōmāst, but not of the second Hōmāst or the Drōn ī Ātaxš is that there is a change of dedicatory between the first part of the Yasna, ending with Y21, and the second that begins with Y22. The first section, the capacitation of the priests, is dedicated always to Sraōša, Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i and the fire independently of the occasion for which the ceremonony is performed (see § 4.1). The rest of the ceremony can change its dedicatory depending on the goal of the performance. The change of dedicatory requires a new “multiple litany”, but as long as there is no change, its presence is optative. This variability in the use of the “multiple litanies” is directly comparable with the variability of the number of YH among the Gāϑās in the lesser and greater performances (see § 3). In the case of the short liturgies, one “multiple litany” was probably a requirement for the performance of most of them, but just one “multiple litany” could serve as a preamble for several short liturgies.
90The “multiple litanies” contained in the LL can also be performed outside the LL in the same or in a similar way as they are inside it. Thus, the Srōš Drōn is no more than a variation of the Drōn Yašt (see § 4.1). The Hōmāst can also be performed outside the LL (see § 4.3). Furthermore, at least one combination of a “multiple litany” with a subsequent static block of the LL is found with a similar form elsewhere. The Nērangestān and other Pahlavi works attest to a Hōm Drōn that could have been similar to the combination of the Srōš Drōn and the Hōm Stūt (see § 4.1). Consequently, the LL could be understood as a succession of three individual ritual units, each one initiated with a multiple litany (a vīspa yazata ceremony) extended through one or several static blocks, just as the individual performances of the Drōn Yašt can be extended through other static blocks.
91The Ātaxš Niyāyišn that might appear in the LL, preceded or not by a “multiple litany” depending on whether the performance is a greater or a lesser one, is never performed in modern practice with a preceding “multiple litany”. However, the presence of this combination in the LL might point to this possibility.64 The contrary is true in the case of the Āb-zōhr. In this case, the independent performance may or may not have a prior “multiple litany” (see § 4.4). However, a preceding multiple litany never appears in the LL. The reason is that the fire and water ceremonies in the greater performance of the LL both seem to be introduced by the “multiple litany” performed after Y59. In the lesser performance, they are both attached with the Staōta Yesńiia to the “multiple litany” of the Hōmāst.
4.1. The Srōš Drōn and Hōm Stūt
92The initial chapters of the LL (Y3–8), the so-called srōš drōn,65 are almost identical to the Drōn Yašt celebrated separately from it, with only a few minor differences. Both ceremonies have recently been compared, first by Karanjia (2010), and later by Redard (2015). The main differences concern the catalogue of items mentioned in the litanies, revealing the standard differences between the vīspa yazata and vīspa yazata vīspa ratu ceremonies (see § 2.3.2). Yet the most significant difference is the dedicatory. In the independent performance, almost any dedicatory is possible. The Drōn manuscripts are basically collections of all the possible dedicatories for the performance of the Drōn Yašt. At the expected position, at the end of each litany and immediately before the mention of the frauuaṣ̌is, there is a reference to the god to whom each performance is dedicated.
93The Srōš Drōn is an introductory ceremony that has a different dedicatory to the rest of the liturgy. Despite its name, it is dedicated not only to Sraōša (under whose protection the whole performance is placed), but also to Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i (especially connected with the Haōma that the priest will drink immediately afterwards) and the fire. In fact, the litany in Y4.24 āuuaēδaiiamahī (the only one that does not include the offerings in the dedicatory) dedicates the ceremony only to these three gods (omitting the waters, the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, and the material and immaterial yazata that are mentioned as the recipients of some offerings in the other litanies).
94Beside the differences between the vīspa yazata and vīspa ratu ceremonies, the main variations between the Srōš Drōn and the independent Drōn Yašt concern the dedicatory and the god to which the offerings are presented. The offerings are mentioned at the beginning of the litanies (except yazamaide) and in the dedicatories (except aṣ̌aiia daδąmi). In the Drōn Yašt, the offerings are presented at the beginning of the litany always to the same gods, namely, Ahura Mazdā, Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, Sraōša, Ātar, and Ratu Bәrәzaṇt (xšnūmaine ahurahe mazdā̊ amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm sraōšahe aṣ̌iiehe āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ raϑβō bәrәzatō yō aṣ̌ahe DrYt1.2, Y22.5, VrS78.14), independently of the dedicatory of the ceremony, see e.g. DrYt1.2:66
…
xᵛarәϑәm miiazdәm āiiese yešti hauruuata amәrәtāta gāuš hudā̊ apǝ̄ uruuara aēsma baōiδi
xšnūmaine ahurahe mazdā̊ amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm
xšnūmaine sraōšahe aṣ̌iiehe āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊
raϑβō bәrәzatō yō aṣ̌ahe
I introduce for the sacrifice the edible offering, both health and immortality, the generous cow, the waters, the plants and wood and incense
for the satisfaction of Ahura Mazdā, of the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta,
for the satisfaction of Sraōša who bestows reward, of the fire of Ahura Mazdā and of the Great Ratu of Aṣ̌a.
95In the dedicatory, the same offerings are presented to the corresponding god or gods of the variable dedicatory. By contrast, in the Srōš Drōn, the offerings are presented as well at the beginning of the litanies as in the dedicatories to the gods of the dedicatory that are always the same:
xvarәϑәm miiazdәm… hauruuata amәrәtāta gāuš hudā̊ (solid offering) | Ahura Mazdā, Amәṣ̌a Spәnṭa, Sraōša (Y3.1) |
haōmәmca para.haōmәmca (haōma and parahaōma)67 | Zaraϑuštra’s Frauuaṣ̌i (Y3.2) |
aēsmą… baōiδi (wood and incense) | Fire (Y3.2) |
haōmą…68 | to the god waters of the good waters created by Mazdā (Y3.3 aiβiiō vaŋᵛhībiiō apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm mazdaδātanąm69) |
āpәm haōmiiąm… gąm jīuuiiąm… uruuarąm haδānaēpatąm… (haōma-twigs water for the haōma, milk and pomegranate-twig)70 | to the waters created by Mazdā (Y3.3 apąm mazdaδātanąm)71 |
imat̰ barәsma haδa.zaōϑrәm haδa. aiβiiā̊ŋhanәm… (the barәsman with the libations and the girdle…) | Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta (Y3.4) |
vāca humata hūxta huuaršta… gāϑanąmca sraōϑrәm… huuarštā̊ mąϑrā̊ imąm aŋhuiiąmca aṣ̌aiiąmca raϑβąmca ratufritīmca | the material and immaterial yazatas and the individual soul (Y3.4) |
96The dedicatory of the litany āuuaēδaiiamahī (Y4.24) shows that the dedicatory includes properly only Sraōša, Zaraθuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i and the Fire.
97The combination of the Srōš Drōn and Hōm Stūt can be held as an independent celebration. The Nērangestān and other Pahlavi texts attest, indeed, the existence of a Hōm Drōn ceremony. N40.8–1072 contains a number of considerations about the offerings that can be made during this ceremony. Besides these specific regulations, the Hōm Drōn is mentioned only in lists of different rituals (e.g., N13.13). It probably refers to a ceremony similar to the Srōš Drōn and the Hōm Stūt. If this hypothesis is true, not only could the Srōš Drōn be celebrated with slight variations outside the LL, the first part of the LL between Y3 and Y11 could also have existed as an independent ceremony that follows the basic pattern of the combination of a “multiple litany” with a static block (the Hōm Stūt in this case).
4.2. The Hōmāst
98The Hōmāst has the same structure as the Drōn Yašt: a “multiple litany” that precedes the ceremony itself, in this case the pounding of haōma during Y27. The “multiple litany” is almost identical to the Srōš Drōn, with the following being the most significant differences:
- The aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany is missing after the yazamaide litany, but appears out of position in the Āb-zōhr (Y66) (see § 1).
- The section of the YH (Y37.1–5) inserted between the āuuaēδaiiamahī litany and the one in yazamaide is missing in the Hōmāst.
- The yazamaide litany is very short in the Hōmāst, and does not contain the standard elements of the litanies regarding the time-ratu. It consists exclusively of a yazamaide for Ahura Mazdā and the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, and the dedicatory that also includes, as in the Srōš Drōn, the list of the offerings. The list of the ratu and the standard list of the yazata are missing. Accordingly, the closing mention of vīspa ratu and vīspa yazata is also missing (see § 2.3.2).
- Y8, the section for the consumption of drōn, is substituted by Y27 for the pounding of haōma.
99Further differences include the offerings mentioned (see § 2.2)73 and the dedicatory (see § 5.1).
100The Hōmāst is not only performed as part of the LL, but also as part of the Paragna. Our oldest source for this ritual is N28.27, but the Avestan text is highly abridged there. We know of it, nonetheless, thanks to the Rivāyat of Ǧāsā (1516) and through several Indian liturgical manuscripts of the Yasna (mss. 100, 110, 230, 231, and 234).74 Although the manuscripts are also heavily abbreviated, they provide enough information for a credible reconstruction of the text.75
101The differences between each litany of the Hōmāst within and outside the LL are the same as between the Drōn Yašt within and outside the LL (see § 2.3.2). Exactly as in the case of the Drōn Yašt, there are also differences concerning the offerings mentioned at the beginning of each litany. Thus, there is no mention of the gauu- jīuuiia- “living milk” in either litany in the Hōmāst of the Paragna, cf. Hōmāst 2.1 and Y24.1,
Hōmāst 2.1 | Y24.1 |
ahurāi mazdāi haōmą miiazdąsca āuuaēδaiiamahī imą haōmąsca zaōϑrā̊sca barәsmaca aṣ̌aiia frastarәtәm gąmca huδā̊ŋhәm imąmcā uruuarąm haδānaēpatąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm | ahurāi mazdāi haōmā̊ āuuaēδaiiamahī imā̊ haōmąsca miiazdąsca zaōϑrā̊sca barәsmaca aṣ̌aiia frastarәtәm gąmca huδā̊ŋhәm imąmcā gąm jīuuiiąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm imąmcā uruuarąm haδānaēpatąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm |
102and Hōmāst 3.1 and Y25.2:
Hōmāst 3.1 | Y25.1 |
amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide imәm haōmәm aṣ̌aiia uzdātәm yazamaide imąmcā uruuarąm haδānaēpatąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm yazamaide | amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide. imәm haōmәm aṣ̌aiia uzdātәm yazamaide. imąmcā gąm jīuuiiąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm yazamaide. imąmcā uruuarąm haδānaēpatąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm yazamaide. |
103A further difference concerns the dedicatory. Whereas the dedicatory in the LL is the same as for the rest of the ceremony (except Srōš Drōn), the dedicatory in the Hōmāst of the Paragna is always for the frauuaṣ̌i of Zaraϑuštra, exactly like the dedicatory for the parahaōma in the Srōš Drōn. The fundamental difference, however, concerns the number of litanies. Whereas the Drōn Yašt has the same litanies in the external and internal performance, the Hōmāst of the Paragna does not include either the āiiese yešti litany or the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi.
104The combination of the Hōmāst and the Staōta Yesńiia cannot be celebrated as an independent ceremony because the Staōta Yesńiia in their known arrangement are an exclusive product of the LL. However, single Gāϑā can be combined with a “multiple litany” in an independent ritual (see § 3). The combination of a “multiple litany” plus Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā was a possible performance of the Yašt Gāhān. In fact, the Hōmāst and Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā are closely linked in the performance of the LL, and both texts are recited as part of the same single ritual action, the pressing of the haōma mixed with milk (see § 5.3.2).
4.3. The Drōn ī Ātaxš and the Ātaxš Niyāyišn
105The part of the LL that is more frequently performed independently is the so-called Ātaxš Niyāyišn, along with its variant, the Nērang ī Ātaxš.76 The former is used in modern practice for feeding the fire five times a day, both preceded and followed by the standard opening and closing, and accompanied by the recitation of some Gathic citations. The ceremony is designated as bōy dādan “the ceremony of giving aromatic wood (to the fire)”, and the text (as recited in the Yasna77 and also in the bōy dādan-ceremony) is called Ātaxš Niyāyišn in the manuscripts. In temples of lesser importance, the Ātaxš Niyāyišn is recited once during each one of the five feedings of the fire. By contrast, in the Wahrām-fires, the Ātaxš Niyāyišn is recited a variable number of times depending on the part of the day during which the ceremony is performed (hāuuani: 11; rapiϑβina: 9; uzaiieirina and aiβisrūϑrima: 7; ušahina: 6). Furthermore, there, the first Ātaxš Niyāyišn is substituted by an extended variation of the same text known as the Nērang ī Ātaxš (Any) (Westergaard 1852–1854, 317). Both texts are basically identical, with their central part being Y62:
Nērang ī Ātaxš | Ātaxš Niyāyišn |
Y33.12–14 | |
xšnaōϑra ahurahe mazdā̊ | |
nәmasә.tē ātarš mazdā̊ ahurahe huδā̊ mazišta yazata | nәmasә.tē ātarš mazdā̊ ahurahe huδā̊ mazišta yazata |
AV 3 | AV 3 |
Frauuarāne with dedicatory āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑra tauua ātarš puϑra ahurahe mazdā̊ WG | Frauuarāne with dedicatory āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑra tauua ātarš puϑra ahurahe mazdā̊ + S1.9 WG |
AV | |
ā ϑβā ātarәm gāraiiemi vaŋhǝ̄uš manaŋhō zaōϑrābiiō ā ϑβā ātarәm gāraiiemi vaŋhǝ̄uš uxδahe zaōϑrābiiō ā ϑβā ātarәm gāraiiemi vaŋhǝ̄uš š́iiaōϑnahe zaōϑrābiiō sūkāi manaŋhahe sūkāi vacaŋhahe sūkāi xš́iiaōϑnāi. | |
nәmasә.tǝ̄ nәmasә.tē ātarš mazdā̊ ahurahe huδā̊ mazišta yazata Y33.11 | |
xšnaōϑra ahurahe mazdā̊ Y35.2 + Y33.12 | |
Y62.1–10 | Y62.1–10 |
AV 3 | |
YAV 2 | YAV 2 |
yasnәmca vaɱәmca aōjasca zauuarә āfrīnāmi āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑra tauua ātarš puϑra ahurahe mazdā̊ | yasnәmca vaɱәmca aōjasca zauuarә āfrīnāmi āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑra tauua ātarš puϑra ahurahe mazdā̊ + S1.9 |
nәmasә.tē ātarš mazdā̊ ahurahe huδā̊ mazišta yazata. | AV3 |
at̰ ā ϑβaɱāi āϑrē rātąm nәmaŋhō (= Y43.9b) | Y34.4 |
AV | |
aɱāi raēšca xvarәnasca… . | aɱāi raēšca xvarәnasca… . |
xšnaōϑra ahurahe mazdā̊ nәmasә.tē ātarš mazdā̊ ahurahe huδā̊ mazišta yazata (2 ×) | |
AV |
106Although we do not know its exact textual composition, there was also an independent drōn ī ātaxšān parallel to the drōn ī ābān. It is mentioned in the Nērangestān chapter on the drōn ī ābān, where we find a list of the offerings made in the different types of Drōn Yašt (N53.15):
pad drōn ī ābān ān gōšūdāg ān 6 pārag ān ī ardā fraward carb ī rōdīg ān ī rahwōberezad sar pad ān ī ātaxšān dil weh nest kū abārīg
For the Drōn ī Ābān, the gōšūdāg consists of six pieces. For the Drōn for Ārda-fraward, the fat of the entrails. For the Drōn for Rahwōberezad,78 the head. For the Drōn for the Fires, the heart is no better than any other part.
107The whole ceremony most likely consisted of a Drōn Yašt combined with at least the Ātaxš Niyāyišn, probably in a similar way as it appears in the greater performances of the LL. Like other Drōn Yašts, a meat offering was part of the performance, linking this ceremony to the modern Ātaxš-zōhr (on this ceremony, see Boyce 1966).
108When performed in the LL, the section of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn has major differences between the lesser and greater performances. These differences can only be perceived in the manuscripts, as the standard editions do not include the variants of the Visperad after Y54.79 The Dāhma Āfrīti follows on directly after Y59 in the Yasna, leading to a complete Ātaxš Niyāyišn (Y62). In the greater performances of the LL, the first section of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn (Y62.1–6) is recited at the beginning of the series of litanies of the second Drōn Yašt and then closed after them and the Dahmā Āfrīti:80

109The ceremony of the fire in the third block of the solemn ceremonies could be understood as an offering to the fire in the form of a Drōn Yašt plus an Āfrīti reclaiming from the fire the reward for the sponsor of the sacrifice.
110Together with Y17, Y59 is the only yazamaide litany in the whole LL (and indeed in all Avestan rituals known to us) that is not part of a “multiple litany”, but, despite, follows the standard pattern of such litanies (mention of the time-ratu, dedicatory, closing with vīspa ratu and vīspa yazata, etc.). They are the only known examples of an isolated “standardised litany”. Yet they do share further features that set them apart from the other yazamaide sections of multiple litanies:
1111. The mention of the fire after the date is extended in a way that appears only in Y17.12 and 59.12:81
ϑβąm ātrәm ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑrәm yazamaide ātrәm bәrәzisauuaŋhәm yazamaide ātrәm vohu.friiānәm yazamaide ātrәm uruuāzištәm yazamaide ātrәm vāzištәm yazamaide ātrәm spǝ̄ništәm yazamaide xšaϑrәm nafәδrәm nairiiō.saŋhәm yazatәm yazamaide ātrәm vīspanąm nmānanąm nmānō.paitīm mazdaδātәm ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑrәm aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm yazamaide mat̰ vīspaēibiiō ātәrәbiiō.
We make a yasna for you, the fire, son of Ahura Mazdā; we make a yasna for the fire who grants great success; we make a yasna for the fire that is a friend of the good; we make a yasna for the fire that is the best conveyor;82 we make a yasna for the fire that is the most bounteous; we make a yasna for the god Nairiiō. saŋha, the grandson of the power; we make a yasna for the fire, the lord of the house of all houses, created by Mazdā, son of Ahura Mazdā and an orderly ratu of the Order together with all the fires.
1122. The short mention of the Frauuaṣ̌is that always precedes the final stanza of the litanies (aṣ̌āunąm vaŋᵛhīš sūrā̊ spәṇtā̊ frauuaṣ̌aiiō yazamaide, e.g., Y6.20, VrS81.31) is substituted in Y17.19 by aṣ̌āunąm vaŋᵛhīš sūrā̊ spәṇtā̊ frauuaṣ̌aiiō staōmi zbaiiemi ufiiemi yazamaide nmāńiiā̊ vīsiiā̊ zaṇtumā̊ dāx́iiumā̊ zaraϑuštrōtәmā̊ and in Y59 by a longer text on the frauuaṣ̌is (see § 5.3.3).
113Through this variation, Y17 and Y59 link the frauuaṣ̌is and the fire. The standard formula for the fire that opens the fixed list of yazata after the date is ϑβąm ātrәm ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑrәm aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm mat̰ vīspaēibiiō ātәrәbiiō. The alternative text of Y17.12 and 59.12 has provided the names of the fires in the doctrine of the five fires that we find in Pahlavi literature (GrBd18.1–7; WZ3.77–82). Both litanies (Y17 and Y59) are closed by a request. There is a Gathic quotation in Y17, Y51.8, which also serves as a request for the libation to the barәsman (Y65.11). In Y59, there is an exchange between the auxiliary priest and the zaōtar, with the focus on obtaining “what is better than good” (Y59.32–33). The auxiliary priest at the place of the frabardār requests “what is better than good” for the zaōtar, and then the zaōtar transfers it to the sacrificial community (Y59.32–33):
vaŋhu.tū.tē vaŋhaōt̰ vaŋ́hō buiiāt̰ yat̰ zaōϑre hanaēša tū tūm tat̰ mīždәm yat̰ zaōta hanaiiamnō ā̊ŋha frāiiō.humatō frāiiō.hūxtō frāiiō.huuarštō
Let what is good and what is better than good83 be there for you who are the zaōtar. You should earn the reward that the zaōtar who thinks more good thoughts, speaks more good words and does more good actions has earned in the past.
jamiiāt̰ vō vaŋhaōt̰ vaŋ́hō mā.vō jamiiāt̰ akāt̰ aš́ō mā.mē jamiiāt̰ akāt̰ aš́ō
Let what is better than good come to you. What is worse than bad should not come to you. What is worse than bad should not come to me.
114The Dahmā Āfrīti follows immediately in the minor performances of the LL. The initial quotation of Y43.3 is clearly linked to the end of Y59 (at̰ huuō vaŋhǝ̄uš vahiiō nā aibī.jamiiāt̰…).
115In the greater performances of the LL the end of Y59 is followed, instead of by the Dahmā Āfrīti, by the first part of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn (Y62.1–6), also an Āfrīti but addressed to the fire. As already noted by Redard & Kellens (2013, 10), both the Dahmā Āfrīti and the Ātaxš Niyāyišn belong to the genre of the Āfrīti. In fact, the parallelisms between the initial Ātaxš Niyāyišn and the final Dahmā Āfrīti are quite remarkable. In both of them, the optative mood is almost exclusive. Moreover, both texts include a reference to the house of the sponsor of the sacrifice. The expected reward should reach “this house”, the house of the sponsor of the sacrifice. The reference appears twice (Y60.4, 7) in the Dahmā Āfrīti, and four times (!) in Y62.3 at the beginning of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn, although this expression is quite rare in the LL.84 Furthermore, the text hubәrәtīm uštabәrәtīmca vaṇtabәrәtīmca referring to the offering to the fire also appears in the Ātaxš Niyāyišn and in the Dahmā Āfrīti. Elsewhere, it is found only in the libation to the waters (Y68.15), albeit referring to the offerings to the fire in the previous section. In the greater performances, it appears immediately at the beginning of the second Drōn Yašt (VrS78.6), and then at its middle (VrS84.6) and end (VrS86.1).
116In the greater performances, it follows a Drōn ī Ātaxš, a Drōn Yašt for the offering of wood and incense to the fire. The reduction of the number of offerings that is restricted now to wood for the fire best explains the more significant differences between the Srōš Drōn and the second Drōn Yašt, which are as follows:
1171. In the Drōn Yašt and the Srōš Drōn of the LL, the āuuaēδaiiamahī section (Y4) is followed by a recitation of Y37 (= Y5). This section does not appear in the Hōmāst. In the Drōn ī Ātaxš, Y36 is recited instead of Y37, which is the text recited during the meat offering to the fire (Narten 1986, 155 f.).
1182. Between the quotations of Y41.5–6 (2 ×) and the two Ahuna Vairiia that usually follow the end of the “multiple litany”, on the one hand, and the yazamaide mentioning the Ahuna Vairiia and the Dahmā Āfrīti (see § 3), on the other, the Drōn ī Ātaxš introduces a long section consisting mostly of quotations:
- wāž gīrišnīh (yaϑā ahū vairiiō [yō] sraōšauuarәzō…);
- Y52.2–5;
- vahištąm aṣ̌īm aōgәmadaēca usmahica vīsāmadaēca amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca;85
- the section in the genitive of the Great Ratu that usually precedes the dedicatory;
- the dedicatory, the only one appearing outside a standardised litany or the Frauuarāne;
- Y52.5b–d: fradaϑāi ahe nmānahe fradaϑāi vīspaiiā̊ aṣ̌aōnō stōiš hamistǝ̄e vīspaiiā̊ druuatō stoiš stauuas aṣ̌ā yǝ̄ hudā̊ yōi hәṇtī;86
- Aṣ̌әm Vohū (3 ×);
- Y35.2 (2 ×), Y35.5 (2 ×);
i. huxšaϑrōtәmahe xšaϑrәm yazamaide daϑušō yat̰ ahurahe mazdā̊87
119It is clearly an extended variant of Y52 and has the same focus: an Āfrīti, a request for aṣ̌i- “reward”. In fact, as we shall see, the final section of the LL is dominated by the requests made to the fire and the waters (see § 5.3.3).
1203. The performative section typical of the end of the multiple litanies (see § 3) is simply a variant of Y8.2 (VrS83.2) with the usual adaptation of the offerings, during which the last offering of wood to the fire in the LL takes place.
1214. The offerings presented in the second Drōn are only “wood and incense” for the fire. See the comparison between the offerings in the Drōn Yašt, Srōš Drōn, and Drōn ī ātaxš in § 1.
1225. One of the more significant differences is that the closing of the performative section does not include, as it is the norm, two Ahuna Vairiia and the Vasasca, but instead the complete Dahmā Āfrīti.
123This last difference deserves further commentary. In the manuscripts of the Yasna, the Dahmā Āfrīti (Y60) is presented as a unit consisting of Y60.2–9 (the same section that is repeated in the Āfrīnagān ī Dahmān) plus the Vasasca (Y60.10–1488) that follows directly after Y59. However, a comparison between the arrangement of the multiple litanies in the greater performances and the other Drōn-like ceremonies indicates that the Vasasca functions as the closing of the performative section that follows the two Ahuna Vairiia (see § 2.3.4). The proper Dahmā Āfrīti is only Y60.2–9, and plays the same function in the Drōn ī Ātaxš as the Vasasca in other variants of the Drōn Yašt.89 Accordingly, the static block that follows this “multiple litany” would be the frašna between the Ahura Mazdā and Spitama Zaraϑuštra about the ceremonies for the fire (Y62.7–10).
124The link between the fire ceremony and the recitation of the Dahmā Āfrīti seems to have already been established in the first and the second Drōn Yašt, despite some interpretative difficulties. The recitation of the Dahmā Āfrīti (frasasti daɱaiiā̊ vaŋhuiiā̊ āfritōiš) is mentioned together with the offerings to the fire at the end of first and second Drōns in the LL (Y7.30): aēsmąsca baōiδīmca yazamaide frasasti daɱaiiā̊ vaŋhuiiā̊ āfritōiš “we make a yasna of wood and incense with the recitation of the Dahmā Āfrīti”. A similar passage appears in Y8.2, mentioning the recitation not only of the Dahmā Āfrīti, but also of the Ahuna Vairiia (Y8.2):
aṣ̌aiia daδąmi xᵛarәϑәm miiazdәm hauruuata amәrәtāta gāuš hudā̊ haōmәmca para.haōmәmca aēsmąsca baōiδīmca frasasti ahurahe mazdā̊ ahunahe vairiiehe aršuxδahe vāxš daɱaiiā̊ vaŋhuiiā̊ āfritōiš uγrāi dāmōiš upamanāi haōmaheca mąϑraheca aṣ̌aōnaēca zaraϑuštrahe aṣ̌aiia.nō paiti jamiiāt̰.
125Kellens (2007a, 8 f.) seeks to provide an interpretation of Y8.2 that is respectful of the grammar, and therefore produces a translation in which vāxš is interpreted as the nominative singular. Accordingly, he interprets the text following frasasti ahurahe mazdā̊ as reflecting the triadic structure of the LL (Hōm Stūt-Staōta Yesńiia-Dahmā Āfrīti): “(Voici) le texte (qui va) de l’Ahuna Vairiia récité de manière rectiligne (à) la « Bonne propitiation experte du fort Damōis Upamana » et (préalablement) la « Formule de (la conversation entre) Haoma et Zaraϑuštra qui soutient l’Agencement ».” Consequently, the complement of frasasti would simply be ahurahe mazdā̊ However, despite the ungrammaticality90 of assuming that vāxš functions here as a genitive singular, the parallelism between Y8.2 and Y7.30 (frasasti daɱaiiā̊ vaŋhuiiā̊ āfritōiš) suggests that we should understand Y8.2 as “with the recitation of the Ahuna Vairiia, the text recited correctly, (with the recitation) of the good Dahmā Āfrīti… and of the Mąϑra of Haōma and Zaraϑuštra.”
126These two passages (Y7.30 and Y8.2) have a parallel in the Drōn ī Ātaxš. The versions of the latter differ from the ones of the Srōš Drōn precisely through the explicit mention of the fire followed by the expression imąm aŋhuiiąmca aṣ̌aiiąmca raϑβąmca ratufritīmca:
127VrS82.34 (parallel to Y7.30)
ahunәm vairīm yazamaide aršuxδәm vācim yazamaide daɱąm vaŋᵛhīm āfritīm yazamaide uγrәm taxmәm dāmōiš upamanәm yazatәm yazamaide
aēsmąsca baōiδīmca yazamaide tauua āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑra
imąm aŋhuiiąmca aṣ̌aiiąmca raϑβąmca ratufrītimca frasasti daɱaiiā̊ vaŋhuiiā̊ āfritōiš
128and VrS83.2 (parallel to Y8.2):
… aṣ̌aiia daδąmi aēsmi baōiδi tauua āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑra imąm aŋhuiiąmca aṣ̌aiiąmca raϑβąmca ratufritīmca frasasti ahurahe mazdā̊ ahunahe vairiiehe aršuxδahe vāxš daɱaiiā̊ vaŋhuiiā̊ āfritōiš uγrāi dāmōiš upamanāi haōmaheca mąϑraheca aṣ̌aōnaēca zaraϑuštrahe aṣ̌aiia.nō paiti jamiiāt̰
129The added text imąm aŋhuiiąmca aṣ̌aiiąmca raϑβąmca ratufritīmca is directly comparable to Ā4.4–5:
pәrәsat̰ zaraϑuštrō ahurәm mazdąm ahura mazda… cuuat̰ hō nā aŋhuiiāite cuuat̰ hō nā aṣ̌aiieiti cuuat̰ aɱāi naire miždәm aŋhat̰
yō rapiϑβinahe ratufrita rapiϑβinәm ratūm framarāite rapiϑβinәm ratūm frāiiazāite…
Zaraϑuštra asked Ahura Mazdā: “Ahura Mazdā, … how much this man strives towards ahu, how much this man strives toward aṣ̌a, how much the reward for this man is going to be
who within the satisfaction of Rapiϑβina recites the ratu Rapiϑβina and makes a yasna for the ratu Rapiϑβina…
130The “quest for ahu and aṣ̌a” is the goal of the ratufriti of the ratu.91 The ahu and aṣ̌a are part of the expected reward (mižda). Accordingly, Av aŋhuiiā- and aṣ̌aiiā- “the quest for ahu and aṣ̌a” seem to refer to the Dahmā Āfrīti. It could even make direct reference to its first two stanzas. The focus of the first stanza of the Dahmā Āfrīti (= Y43.3) is on the “straight paths of success of the material and immaterial existence” (sauuaŋhō paϑō ahiiā aŋhǝ̄uš astuuatō manaŋhascā) (cf. aŋhuiiā-) and the second claims for the presence of aṣ̌a (cf. aṣ̌aiiā-), xšaϑra, sauuah, xvarәnah and xvāϑra in the house.
131Within this context, it is no surprise that the combination of the Drōn ī Ātaxš and the Dahmā Āfrīti could also have been celebrated together as an independent ceremony for the dead. Zaehner (1972, 84) already assumed that the text we know as Aōgәmadaēca92 (also known as Āfrīn ī Dahmān93) was a “Mazdean liturgy” recited after the Āfrīnagān for a departed soul. A more detailed analysis of this text is a pressing desideratum. It seems likely that the Avestan texts recited are not a coherent text, but instead quotations from a lost ceremony for a departed soul. Interestingly, the first quotation consists of the three verbs aōgәmadaēcā usmahicā vīsāmadaēcā of Y41.5 that always appear directly at the end of the “multiple litany” in the Drōn ceremonies. As we have seen, a new text based on these three verbs appears in the Drōn ī Ātaxš after the quotation of Y52.2–5 (vahištąm aṣ̌īm aōgәmadaēca usmahica vīsāmadaēca amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca). This text is quite remarkable because it is strikingly followed by a dedicatory (see above) that has no equivalent in any other ritual. It follows the Dahmā Āfrīti after the yazamaide for the Ahuna Vairiia and the Dahmā Āfrīti and the performative stanza with which the fire is nourished for the last time. The second quotation of the Aōgәmadaēca is precisely the beginning of Y60.13, the last stanza of the Vasasca that closes the Dahmā Āfrīti. We may thus assume that the beginning of the Aōgәmadaēca is an abbreviated version of the Drōn ī Ātaxš, as we find it in the greater performances of the LL. This would allow us to reconstruct a ceremony for a departed soul performed on the fourth day after someone’s death. It consists of a “multiple litany” (probably in its special version for the fire) complemented by the Dahmā Āfrīti (in the same or a similar way to the ceremony for the fire in the greater performance of the LL), and then extended by a further lost text similar to the Hādōxt 2, of which some fragments are preserved in the Āfrīn ī Dahmān or Aōgәmadaēca.
132We may thus conclude that both variants of the fire ceremony (the one of the lesser performance consisting of just the Ātaxš Niyāyišn, and the one of the greater performances integrating a Drōn Yašt, the Ātaxš Niyāyišn and the Dahmā Āfrīti) also existed as independent ceremonies. Whereas the complex combination of the greater performance could have been used on special occasions such as the Gāhāmbār or the hamāg-dēn ceremony (Boyce 1966, 100), the simple variant of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn was performed in the daily ceremonies for the care of the fire. Likely, the combination of the solemn LL that consists of the Drōn ī Ātaxš with the Ātaxš Niyāyišn and the Dahmā Āfrīti could also be performed independently from the LL as part of the ceremonies for the dead.
4.4. The Āb-zōhr and the libations to the barәsman
4.4.1. The Drōn ī Ābān
133Together with the Ātaxš Niyāyišn, the Āb-zōhr is one of the most important rituals in Zoroastrianism. In modern practice, the Āb-zōhr has been abandoned in India,94 but Boyce still witnessed the vitality of this ritual in Iran in the second half of the last century. She describes the actual rituals as follows (Boyce 1966, 111):
In Iran the ritual of the “libation to the water” is still practised, under the name ōwzūr, in the Zoroastrian villages of Yazd, although its manner differs somewhat from Strabo’s description, according to which the libation was made near, not into the water. In Iran, its manner is now as follows: a cow is milked by someone in a state of ritual purity, the milk being caught in a silver or copper bowl. To this milk are added two things from the vegetable kingdom, usually rose-petals, fresh or dried, with leaves of ōwižan (wild marjoram), or some fruits of the senjed (oleander). The bowl is then taken to the priest, who carries it to the bank of a stream, where he seats himself. In his left hand he holds the bowl, in his right a silver spoon. He first pours three spoonfuls from the bowl, one after the other, into the water, to symbolize good thoughts, words, and deeds. Then he begins the recital of the drin-i ōwzūr (or drōn-i ābzōr), pouring as he recites single spoonfuls of the milk into the water. The recital of the Avesta takes about half an hour. At the end, the last of the libation is poured out in three pourings from the bowl itself, and then bowl and spoon are each in turn immersed in the running water, so that every drop of milk is carried away. The bowl and spoon are finally scoured with sand or fine earth from the stream-bank and rinsed again in the running water until they gleam.
134Unfortunately, Boyce does not indicate which texts were recited in the drōn-i ābzōr. Besides, the Āb-zōhr is not usually included in the manuscripts of the Khordeh Avesta, although a so-called Mayā Yašt or Mayā-Zōhr is often mentioned.95 Geldner notes its presence in Mf3 and W1. Another instance is found in the manuscript Pd96 (where it precisely follows the Ātaxš Niyāyišn) and manuscript 9 of the Pouladi collection, discovered recently by Saloumeh Gholami. The text of the Mayā Yašt is as follows (Salemann 1879, 543–545):97
Introduction | nәmasә.tē sūma sәuuišta arәduuī sūra anāhita xšnaōϑra ahura mazdā̊ |
AV 3 | |
Frauuarāne | frauuarāne mazdaiiasnō zaraϑuštriš vīdaēuuō ahura.t̰kaēšō gāh harke bāšad aibisrutrim u ušahin našāyad98 [šnūman] ahurahe mazdā̊ raēuuatō xᵛarәnaŋᵛhatō amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm mazdaδātanąm arәduiiā̊ āpō anāhitaiiā̊ aṣ̌aōńiiā̊ vīspanąmca apąm mazdaδātanąm vīspanąm uruuaranąm mazdaδatanąm vīspaēšąm yazatanąm aṣ̌aōnąm maińiiauuanąm gaēϑiianąm aṣ̌āunąm frauuaṣ̌inąm uγranąm aiβiϑūranąm paōiriiō.t̰kaēšanąm frauuaṣ̌inąm nabānazdištanąm frauuaṣ̌inąm xšnaōϑra yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca [wāž gīrišnīh] yaϑā ahū vairiiō zaōtā frā.mē mrūte aϑā ratuš aṣ̌āt̰cit̰ hacā aṣ̌auuā viδuuā̊ mraōtū |
Y65.1–15 | |
Close | yasnәmca vaɱәmca aōjasca zauuarәca āfrīnāmi [šnūman] ahurahe mazdā̊ raēuuatō xᵛarәnaŋᵛhatō amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm mazdaδātanąm arәduiiā̊ āpō anāhitaiiā̊ aṣ̌aōńiiā̊ vīspanąmca apąm mazdaδātanąm vīspanąm uruuaranąm mazdaδatanąm vīspaēšąm yazatanąm aṣ̌aōnąm maińiiauuanąm gaēϑiianąm aṣ̌āunąm frauuaṣ̌inąm uγranąm aiβiϑūranąm paōiriiō.t̰kaēšanąm frauuaṣ̌inąm nabānazdištanąm frauuaṣ̌inąm xšnaōϑra yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca |
aɱāi raēšca xᵛarәnasca aɱāi tanuuō druuatātәm… |
135The dedicatory is the standard one to the waters (~ S1.10) preceded (as usual) by Ahura Mazdā and the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, and closed by the dedicatory to all yazata and the frauuaṣ̌is. The actual text of the ceremony (besides the opening and closing) consists solely of Y65. It is celebrated as an independent Āb-zōhr outside the LL, exactly like the Ātaxš Niyāyišn.
136As we have seen in § 3, chapter 53 of the Nērangestān describes in detail two variants of the Āb-zōhr, a greater (meh) and a lesser one (keh). Accordingly, the Āb-zōhr could be preceded by an isolated Drōn Yašt, and (to judge from the Nērangestān) was even performed more frequently, as it appears in the manuscripts containing the Mayā Yašt. We can reconstruct both versions of the performance. The differences described concern the final section of the Drōn Yašt, the combining of the Drōn and the Āb-zōhr itself, and the text of the actual Āb-zōhr (see § 2.1):

note99
137Besides the number of officiating priests (the lesser performance seems to involve two priests, and the greater one at least three, see § 2.1), there are some significant textual differences between the two performances. First, the greater one includes a section of the Āfrīnagān ī Rapihwin (Ā4.2–8) after DrYt6.3 (amәṣ̌a spәṇta…), in which Ahura Mazdā announces the reward for the performance of the ceremony of Rapiϑβina. The text that follows is a variant of the yazamaide section intercalated between the Hōm Stūt and the Fraōrәti in the greater performances of the LL. The only difference is that the yazamaide section is inserted in an irregular way in the Visperad within a srōš barišnīh (Cantera forthcoming-b), and it includes a final stanza announcing the following Frauuarāne.100 This text was chosen because its final part (VrS11.34) paraphrases the beginning of the section for the waters of the YH, Y38.2, and mentions the libations to the waters (vaŋᵛhīmca ādąm vaŋᵛhīmca aṣ̌īm vaŋᵛhīmca cistīm vaŋᵛhīmca druuatātәm, cf. Y68.22 vaŋᵛhīm iδāt̰ ādąm vaŋᵛhīm aṣ̌īm).
138A further difference is that the greater performance does not mention the recitation of Y65. This might just be an idiosyncrasy of the description that does not mention the key section of the Āb-zōhr, whose recitation is common to any performance, but we cannot affirm this with any certainty. The final stanza, however, is common to both performances. It is the same text during which the libation to the waters take place in the LL, Y68.22–27. It consists of:
- an introduction: vaŋᵛhīm iδāt̰ ādąm āca nica mrūmaide, cf. VrS11.33 āca manō mata āca yazamaide vaŋᵛhīmca ādąm vaŋᵛhīmca aṣ̌īm;
- a quotation of the yazamaide for the waters of the YH (Y38.2–5).
139The description of the libation in the Nērangestān for the Drōn ī Ābān and in the manuscripts for the Āb-zōhr of the LL is very similar. See, for example, the comparison with ms. 400:
N53.31 | ms. 400 |
vaŋᵛhīm iδāt̰ āδąm vaŋᵛhīm aṣ̌īm āca abar āb nica andar *wardēnišn mrūmaide purr be kunišn īžā̊ abāz gardēnišn ẏāōštaiiō 4 angušt az āb ul dārišn āpō abar āb at̰ andar rāh-ē ẏazamaide pad war ī zōhrag abāz *ōh rēzišn uiti ẏā.vǝ̄ *vaŋhǝ̄uš pad bun ī barsom apasca pad war ī zōhrag vā̊ ‘(*āb abāz ō āb kunišn)’ | vaŋᵛhīm iδāt̰ ādąm vaŋᵛhīm aṣ̌īm ǰām ēdōn kū xwaršēd *gardēd abar sar ī ān ǰām kē-š āb andar gardēnīdan āca nica mrūmaide āca abar āb nica andar wardēnišn mrūmaide purr bē kunišn īžā̊ yaōštaiiō fәraštaiiō ārmataiiō īžā̊ abāz gardēnišn cīyōn xwaršēd gardēd yaōštaiiō 4 angust az āb ul stānišn vaŋᵛhīm ābīš aṣ̌īm vaŋᵛhīm īšәm vaŋᵛhīm āzūitīm vaŋᵛhīm frasastīm vaŋᵛhīm parǝ̄ṇdīm yazamaidē āpō at̰ yazamaidē maēkaiṇtīšcā hǝbuuaiṇtīšcā frauuazaŋhō āpō abar āb nihišn at andar rāh yazamaide pad war ī zōhr ahurānīš ahurahiiā hauuapaŋhā̊ hupәrәϑβā̊scā vā̊ huuōγžaϑā̊scā hūšnāϑrā̊scā ubōibiiā ahubiiā cagәmā ūitī yā vǝ̄ vaŋᵛhīš ahurō mazdā̊ nāmą dadāt̰ ūitī yā vǝ̄ vaŋᵛhīš pad bun ī barsom 4 gyāg pad hōy ud dašn ud azabar ud azēr vaŋhudā̊ hiiat̰ vā̊ dadāt̰ tāiš vā̊ yazamaidē tāiš friiąmahī tāiš nәmax́iiāmahī tāiš išūidiiāmahī apascā vā̊ azīšcā vā̊ mātәrąšcā vā̊ agәńiiā̊ drigudāiiaŋhō apascā pad war ī zōhr vā̊ āb abāz ō āb kunišn |
iδāt̰ āδąm vaŋᵛhīm aṣ̌īm. At āca, (he places the zōhr cup) over (another filled with) water; at nica, he should turn (the cup) around; at mrūmaide, he should fill it; at īžā̊, he should tilt it; at ẏāōštaiiō, he should raise it four fingers above the water; at āpō, (he should hold it) over the water; at at̰, (he should be) on the way; at ẏazamaide, he should pour it out again beside the zōhr cup; at uiti ẏā.vǝ̄ *vaŋhǝ̄uš, (he should pour it) on the base of the barsom; at apasca, beside the zōhr cup; at vā̊, he should pour the water back into the water. | vaŋᵛhīm iδāt̰ ādąm vaŋᵛhīm aṣ̌īm. He should stir the consecrated milk in the bowl that contains the water in the direction in which the sun moves. āca nica mrūmaide āca. At āca, (he should add consecrated milk) to the water. At nicā, he should stir it. At mrūmaide, he has to fill (the bowl). īžā̊ yaōštaiiō fәraštaiiō ārmataiiō. At īžā̊, he has to stir it again in the direction in which the sun moves across the sky. At yaōštaiiō, he has to raise it four fingers above the water. vaŋᵛhīm ābīš aṣ̌īm vaŋᵛhīm īšәm vaŋᵛhīm āzūitīm vaŋᵛhīm frasastīm vaŋᵛhīm parǝ̄ṇdīm yazamaidē āpō at̰ yazamaidē maēkaiṇtīšcā hǝ̄buuaiṇtīšcā frauuazaŋhō. At āpō, he has to place it over the water. At at, on the way. At yazamaide, looking to the zōhr. ahurānīš ahurahiiā hauuapaŋhā̊ hupәrәϑβā̊scā vā̊ huuōγžaϑā̊scā hūšnāϑrā̊scā ubōibiiā ahubiiā cagәmā ūitī yā vǝ̄ vaŋᵛhīš ahurō mazdā̊ nāmą dadāt̰. At ūitī yā vǝ̄ vaŋᵛhīš, at the beginning of the barsom, at four places: on the left, the right, above and below, vaŋhudā̊ hiiat̰ vā̊ dadāt̰ tāiš vā̊ yazamaidē tāiš friiąmahī tāiš nәmax́iiāmahī tāiš išūidiiāmahī apascā vā̊ azīšcā vā̊ mātәrąšcā vā̊ agәńiiā̊ drigudāiiaŋhō. At apascā, looking to the zōhr. At vā̊, he has to return the water to the water. |
4.4.2. Āb-zōhr and libations to the barәsman in the LL
140Although the final stanza is identical in both performances and the Āb-zōhr of the LL, and Y65 is also common at least to the lesser performance of the Drōn ī Āb and the Āb-zōhr, the ceremony for the waters in the LL has major differences regarding the Drōn ī Ābān. The main one is that the Āb-zōhr consists of two parts, clearly separated by the use of the srōš barišnīh (Y63.4–5; Y65.16–18):
- a first part consisting of a series of libations on the barәsman101 (Y63–4) and the intention to perform a yasna for the waters (yazāi āpәm… Y65.1–5), followed by a yāna- “request” (Y65.10–15);
- Y66-Y8 is the section during which the actual libations are performed.
141This division has an exact correspondence in chapter N52–3 of the Nērangestān. From chapters 48 to 53, the Nērangestān deals generally with the libations to the waters. N48 describes the types of offerings, and N49 covers the times for its performance. Extremely illuminating is chapter 51, in which the Avestan texts connect the libations to the waters and to the barsom, exactly as happens in the LL. The Avestan text (N51.1–8) states the following (Kotwal & Kreyenbroek 2003, 232 f.):
yō paiti ape baraiti nōit̰ barәsmaine, әezi barәsma aṇtarāt̰ naēmāt̰ aēšō. drājahiiehe *әauuō.fraϑahiiehe paiti barәsmacit̰ aiti barōit̰ әezi nōit̰ *ϑrī vā paiti āzāiti aiiarә.drajō vā vāstriiāt̰
When one offers (libations) to the water, but not to the barәsman, if the barәsman is placed at a distance within the length of a chariot-pole, (or) the breadth of a barleycorn, he should also offer (libations) to the barәsman.
If he does not, he shall be punished with three (lashes) or a day’s work in the field.
yō paiti barәsmaine nōit̰ ape paiti apaēcit̰ barōit̰ әezi nōit̰ paiti.baraiti *ϑrī vā āzāiti aiiarә.drajō vā vāstriiāt̰
When one offers (libations) to the barәsman, but not to the waters, he should also offer libations to the water.
If he does not, he shall be punished with three (lashes) or a day’s work in the field.
142Thus, libations to the barәsman are always accompanied by libations to the waters and the libations to the waters by libations to the barsom only when the latter is next to the water, as is indeed the case in the performance of the LL. The Nērangestān goes on to describe the libations to the barsom (N52) and then to the waters (N53).
143The description in the Nērangestān of the libations to the barsom corresponds exactly to the first section of the Āb-zōhr as it appears in the manuscripts of the LL. The Avestan text specifically describes the ceremony as it appears in the lesser performance of the LL, and then the Pahlavi text adds the description corresponding to the performance of the greater variant. Hence, we may conclude that the libations to the barәsman seem to have played an important role in the ritual system, as the number of rituals described in the Avestan Nērangestān is quite limited.
4.4.2.1. The libations to the barәsman
144The description in Avestan of the Nērangestān begins with the libations during the recitation of Y63.3. At each yazamaide, a libation is offered to the barәsman, but at different places: when invoking Ahura Mazdā, in the middle; Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, at the front; the Waters, on the left; and the Frauuaṣ̌is and the souls, on the right. At the same place, the manuscripts of the Yasna contain a similar ritual to the one described by the Nērangestān, albeit with some significant differences (see below). Furthermore, the greater performances of the LL have an alternative version in which the mention of the uruuan and frauuaṣ̌is is substituted by a quotation of Yt13 (Yt13.154–5, with Yt13.154 being itself a quotation of Y39.2). This version is also described in the Middle Persian version of the Nērangestān. The Avestan one is as follows:

145The Middle Persian version describes the Avestan of Y63.3 as it is recited in the greater performances (N52.9):
kudō.zātanąmcit̰ kār-ē nē dānēm narąmca abar hāwan nairīnąmca ay abarhāwan yaēšąm vahehiš andar rāh daēnā̊ abar zamīg vanaiṇti vā abar *ϑraxti abar ātaxš vaŋhәn abar tašt ī waras vaōnarә (*abar) dast ī zōt u-š pas (*ō)*war ī zōhrag barišn, u-š tā ō xšaϑrәmcā ī sidīgar pad war ī zōhrag dārišn u-š tā ō xšaϑrәmcā ī sidīgar <ō> abāz ō barsom āwarišn u-š pas ō dast ī zōt dahišn tā ō әāiš azāϑā mahmāi x́iiātā auuaŋvhē mat̰ vā̊ padāiš *әā *frasrūtā īzaiiā̊ pairi.jasāi 6 gōwišn u-š gām <az kust ī hōy pad sar ī barsom> be āyišn.
During the recitation of kudō.zātanąmcit̰ (VrS87.8b) I do not know of any ritual act; at narąmca, (one should hold the zōhr cup) over the mortar; at nairīnąmca, over the pestle; at ẏaēšąm vahehiš (VrS87.8c), on the way; at daēnā̊, over the earth; at vanaiṇti vā, over a corner over the fire; at vaŋhәn vā, over the waras holder; at vaōnarә vā, over the hand of the zōt; and then one should carry it to the side of the zōhr cup, and keep it by the side of the zōhr cup until the third xšaϑrәmca (in the third Ahuna Vairiia, VrS88.1); and at the third xšaϑrәmca, he should bring it back to the barsom and then place it in the hand of the zōt. He should recite up to әāiš azāϑā mahmāi x́iiātā auuaŋ́hē (Y50.7d = Y64.4d, VrS88.4d) mat̰ vā̊ padāiš *әā *frasrūtā īzaiiā̊ pairi.jasāi (Y50.8 = Y64.5, VrS88.5) the six (stanzas),102 and come (stand) three paces to the left of the top of the barsom.
146This description corresponds to the Avestan text and ritual actions of the greater performances (VrS87.8–88.8), but in abridged form. It omits a middle section that appears in the greater performances (VrS87.9–13), probably because it is abbreviated. It consists of a quotation of Yt13.155, then a slight variation of Y25.1 that is not known elsewhere,103 and finally, a section that frequently appears in the Visperad closed by a Yeŋ́hē Hātā (identical to the text edited by Geldner as Vr7.5).
147According to the description of the Nērangestān, it seems that the ceremony for the libations to the barәsman might end at this point, but if the barәsman is next to the water, then Y65 (yazāi āpәm…) has to be recited, as stated in N52.10 (Kotwal & Kreyenbroek 2003, 238 f.):
*daxšmēst ān barsom ka pad hān ī āb frāz šawē [hamē ka andar *daxšmēst harw ēn 2 әazāi āpәm *ōh gōwēd ay daxšmēst harw ēn 2 әazāi āpәm andar *daxšmēst guftan
If that barsom should go towards the water (to the extent of) a daxšmēst [alternative: whenever it (is performed) within a daxšmēst from the water], one should recite әazāi āpәm according to both interpretations. That is: within a daxšmēst (from the water), according to both instructions, one should recite әazāi āpәm.
148This might just be an indication that, as already mentioned in N51, the libations to the barәsman have to be accompanied by the libations to the waters. According to the Avestan text of N51, nonetheless, the libations to the waters must always accompany the libations to the barәsman, and the Middle Persian text seems to indicate that this happens only when the barәsman is brought into the proximity of water.
149The following paragraphs of the Nērangestān (N52.11–17) provide instructions for the performance of a Drōn Yašt, and describe the differences that should be considered depending on the place of performance. Hence, we might deduce, firstly, that the libations to the barәsman could also be celebrated as an independent ceremony outside the LL, and secondly, that this ceremony came after a Drōn Yašt. It seems that there were also greater and lesser performances, comparable to the ones in the Yasna and in the Visperad, respectively.
150The main differences between the isolated and integrated performances are, firstly, that the performance within the LL includes Y65 as part of the libations to the barәsman, whereas according the Nērangestān this is optional in the isolated performances; and secondly, that Y50.6–11 is recited before Y65, and it includes the performance of a ritual that seems to be exclusive to the performance of the libations in the LL. This text mentions a circumvallation during which the libation takes place104 (Y64.5 = Y50.8):
mat̰ vā̊ padāiš yā frasrūtā īžaiiā̊
pairijasāi mazdā ustānazastō
at̰ vā̊ aṣ̌ā arәdrax́iiācā nәmaŋhā
at̰ vā̊ vaŋhǝ̄uš manaŋhō hunarәtātā
With footsteps that are said to be to the invigoration I will go around you, oh Mazdā, with stretched hands; around you with Order and with the homage brought (to you) by the successful (in the performance of the ritual); around you, with the skilfulness of Good Thought
151The manuscripts describe how zōt has to move between the place for the zōt (the zōtgāh) and the fire during its recitation; see the description, for example, in ms. 400:105
ēn gyāg barsom az barsomdān ul stānišn bē *ō gāh ī frabardārān šawišn mat̰ vā̊ padāiš kunišn pad ruwān ō bun ī ātaxš gāh tā haiϑiiāuuarәštąm gōwišn mat̰ vā̊ gām-ē frāz nihišn namāz ō zōhr barišn padāiš gām-ē namāz ō zōhr barišn yā frasrūtā īžaiiā̊ gām-ē frāz nihišn bē ō gāh ābardārān
Here, he has to take the barsom from the barsomdān and go to the place of the frabardārān and recite the section going from mat̰ vā̊ padāiš (Y64.5) until haiϑiiāuuarәštąm (Y64.8) with the mind focusing on the basement of the fire place. At mat̰ vā̊, he has to place (the barsom) one step further and pay homage to the libation. At padāiš, one further step, and he should pay homage to the libation. At yā frasrūtā īžaiiā̊, he has to place it one step further towards the place of the ābardārān.
152Furthermore, we note that the libations to the barәsman described in the Nērangestān as accompanying the recitation at Y63.6 are quite different to the instructions we find in the manuscripts. The differences are probably due to the substitution of the large-sized barsom by the small metal barsom of the modern performance. The actions described in the Iranian manuscripts have been completely abandoned in modern practice, at least according to the description by Kotwal & Boyd (1991, 120). They simply record that at Y63.6 the zōt “fully inserts the metal wire into the barsom bundle”. The ritual instructions contained in the manuscripts have major differences between different versions of the LL, and even single manuscripts. The main difference concerns the greater performance. The quotation of Yt13.154–5 (VrS87.8–9), recited instead of aṣ̌āunąm urunascā frauuaṣ̌īšcā yazamaide found in the lesser performance, also implies a different performance. In the Yasna, the manuscripts describe the action as follows (e.g., ms. 40):
sukūrag kē-š zōhr padiš abar ǰām gāh ud barsom nihādan
ahurәm mazdąm aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm yazamaide.
pad mayānag <ī> barsom abar sar ī barsom nihādan abar war zōhrag az sar ī barsom pad 4 angust
amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide.
pad hōy <ī> barsom nihādan frāztom sar ī barsom
apō at̰ yazamaide.
abar āb nihišn abar hōytar barsom pad war zōhrag az sar ī barsom pad 4 angust
He should place the saucer that contains the zōhr next to the place of the consecrated milk and to the barsom. At ahurәm mazdąm aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm yazamaide, he should place it in the middle of the barsom above the end of the barsom, next to the zōhrag at a distance of four fingers from the end of the barsom. At amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide, he has to put it on the left of the barsom at the front end of the barsom. At apō at̰ yazamaide, he has to put it on the water, further to the left of the barsom, next to the zōhrag, at a distance of four fingers from the end of the barsom.
aṣ̌āunąm urunascā frauuaṣ̌īšcā yazamaide.
abar ē barēd ō dašntar ī barsom pad war ī zōhrag az sar barsom pad 4 angust
At aṣ̌āunąm urunascā frauuaṣ̌īšcā yazamaide, he should move it further to the right of the barsom, next to the zōhrag, at a distance of four fingers from the end of the barsom.
153Unlike the description of the Avestan Nērangestān, no libation takes place here. The zōt simply places the saucer containing the libation at different positions around the barsom. A different procedure is described, for example, in ms. 400, where, the frāgām is inserted into the consecrated milk and then drops of milk are poured from the frāgām onto the barsom:
frāgām pad ǰīw kunišn pad vaṇtā az dast dašn pad datuš barišn pas zōhr abar griftan zōt ahurәm mazdąm pad mayānag barsom abar 3 angust aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm yazamaide abar ō zōhrag az sar barsom pad 4 angust amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide frāztom sar barsom apō at̰ yazamaide abar hōytar barsom pad war ī zōhrag az sar barsom pad 4 angust
He has to take the frāgām to the consecrated milk. At vaṇtā, he has to bring (the frāgām) from the right hand to the datuš. The zōhr then removes the barsom. ahurәm mazdąm. In the middle of the barsom, at a distance of three fingers, aṣ̌auuanәm aṣ̌ahe ratūm yazamaide. On the zōhrag from the end of the barsom, at four fingers distance. amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide. At the front end of the barsom. apō at̰ yazamaide. At the left end of the barsom, looking at the zōhrag from the end of the barsom, at a distance of four fingers.
aṣ̌āunąm urunascā
abar dašntar ī sar barsom pad war ī zōhrag ham ēdōn pad 4 angust
frauuaṣ̌īšcā yazamaide.
pad mayānag barsom sar ī war ī zōhrag
aṣ̌āunąm urunascā. At the right end of the barsom, looking at the zōhrag, also at a distance of four fingers, frauuaṣ̌īšcā yazamaide. In the middle of the barsom, looking at the zōhrag.
154Both actions seem to replace the old libations within the context of the replacement of the old barsom by the minimal metallic one.
155In the greater performance, the beginning of the ritual is similar, but during the recitation of Yt13.154–5, the performance is quite different. Here, a libation is made on the mortar, and it is then returned to the saucer for the zōhr. We find a similar description in the Visperad and Vištāsp Yašt manuscripts, whereas the ones of the Vidēvdād omit the ritual instructions for the first part of the ritual (before Yt13.154–155) and are slightly different to the performance of the second one. Ms. 2109 describes the second part in following terms:106
daitikanąmcā aidiiūnąm hiiat̰ urunō yazamaidē aṣ̌āunąm āat̰ urunō yazamaidē kudō.zātanąmcīt̰ narąmcā nāirinąmcā
pad kudō.zātanąmcīt̰ zōhr andak-ē andar hāwan rēzišn narąmcā hāwan abar dastag pahikābišn nāirinąmcā dastag abar hāwan pahikābišn
yaēšąm vahehīš daēnā̊ abar zamīg pahikābišn vanaiṇtī vā abar sar ī ādušt pahikābišn və̄ṇghәn vā abar hōm *pālā ud warsdān ud urwis pahikābišn vaōnarə̄ vā abāz ō ī zōhr rēzišn
daitikanąmcā aidiiūnąm hiiat̰ urunō yazamaidē aṣ̌āunąm āat̰ urunō yazamaidē kudō.zātanąmcīt̰ narąmcā nāirinąmcā
At kudō.zātanąmcīt̰, he has to pour one drop of zōhr into the mortar. At narąmcā, he has to hit the pestle with the mortar. At nāirinąmcā, he has to hit the mortar with the pestle. At yaēšąm vahehīš daēnā̊, he has to hit the ground. At vanaiṇtī vā, the fire-stand. At vǝ̄ṇghәn vā, the hōm-filter, warsdān and urwis. At vaōnarǝ̄ vā, he pours it back to the zōhr.
156A slightly different version is found in the Vidēvdād manuscripts (e.g., ms. 4025):
pad aṣ̌āunąm āat̰ urunō yazamaidē rāspīg ō ī dast <ī> hōy <ī> zōt šawišn ud hāwan abar nihišn pad kudō.zātanąmcīt̰ zōt pārag ī zōhr andar hāwan kunišn pad narąmcā nāirinąmcā abarhāwan abar hāwan zanišn yaēšąm vahehīš daēnā̊ vanaiṇtī vā rāspīg hāwan abar urwis nihišn və̄ṇghәn vā abar warsdān nihišn vaōnarə̄ andarag ātišt ud urwis abar zamīg nihišn vā abar ātišt nihišn ud zōhr abāg gyāg kunišn
At aṣ̌āunąm āat̰ urunō yazamaidē, the rāspīg has to go to the left-hand side of the zōt and put down the hāwan. At kudō.zātanąmcīt̰, the zōt should pour a bit of zōhr into the hāwan. At narąmcā nāirinąmcā, he has to hit the hāwan with the ābarhāwan. At yaēšąm vahehīš daēnā̊ vanaiṇtī vā, the rāspīg puts the hāwan on the urwis. At vaōnarǝ̄, he puts it in the earth, in the middle between the firestand and the urwis. At vā, he has to put it on the fire-stand and return the zōhr to its place.
157The differences should be attributed to the various stages represented by each kind of manuscript107 rather than to real differences between the Vidēvdād, on the one hand, and all the other greater performances, on the other.
4.4.2.2. The libations to the waters
158The second part of the Āb-zōhr in the LL (Y66–8) has no correspondence in modern practice, except the recitation of stanzas Y68.22–27 in both variants of the Drōn ī Ābān described in the Nērangestān. We have already seen that Y68.22–27 consists of an introduction (vaŋᵛhīm iδāt̰ ādąm āca nica mrūmaide) plus the section for the waters of the YH (Y38.2–5). This is the moment for the libation in both the isolated and the integrated performances.108 The connection between both YH and Āb-zōhr and Drōn ī Ābān is further emphasised through the introduction of the Āb-zōhr. It uses the verb aiβi.gәrәδmahi (aiβi.gәrәδmahi apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm frāitīmca paititīmca aibijarәtīmca āiiese yešti) that appears elsewhere in the greater performance of the LL solely in the closing of the first and second YH (VrS52.2–4 aiβi.gәrәδmahi yasnahe haptaŋhātōiš humataca hūxtaca huuarštaca aiβi.gәrәδmahi; VrS65.77–80 auui apąmca vaŋᵛhīnąm uruuaranąmca xᵛaβrīranąm aṣ̌aōnąmca frauuaṣ̌inąm yasnәm gәrәδmahi vaɱәmca) (Hintze 2004, 305 ff.).
159Whereas the section of the YH is the only text recited in the independent performance, the performance of the LL reveals a more complex textual arrangement. First, we encounter the recitation of the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany (Y66–67.4) that closes the multiple litanies of the Hōmāst (see § 1). As already mentioned, it is concluded by the section to the waters of the YH (Y67.6–9 = Y38.3–5). Y68 is the equivalent in the Āb-zōhr of the complex arrangement of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn (Y62) + Dahmā Āfrīti (Y60) and the apotropaic precaution (Y61) in the ceremony for the fire. Both of them basically consist of the request made first to the fire and then to the waters. The Dahmā Āfrīti, the Ātaxš Niyāyišn, and Y68 are characterised as an āfrīti through the presence of the verb āfrīnāmi. This verb is quite rare in the LL. It appears in the closing formula (yasnәmca vaɱәmca aōjasca zauuarәca āfrīnāmi Y57.52,109 72.11, 72.12) and at the end of the Vasasca (rauuasca xᵛāϑrәmca āfrīnāmi…) that closes (among others) the Dahmā Āfrīti. All the other attestations appear in Y52.2, Y62.1 (the first stanza of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn) and several times in Y68 (Y68.15 [4 ×] and Y68.16 [3 ×]). In Y68.15, both āfrīnāmi, the one for the fire and the one for the waters, are mentioned together, linking both ceremonies to each other:
hušiti rāmō.šiti darәγō.šiti ite vīse āfrīnāmi yaɱat̰ haca imā̊ zaōϑrā̊ hušiti rāmō.šiti darәγō.šiti vīspaiiāi vīse māzdaiiasne āfrīnāmi hubәrәti ušta.bәrәti vaṇta.bәrәti ātarš āfrīnāmi huiiešti tauua ahurāne āfrīnāmi.
With an Āfrīti, I wish a good settlement, a peaceful settlement, a durable settlement for this clan from which these libations are made. With an Āfrīti, I wish a good settlement, a peaceful settlement, a durable settlement for each clan of the people making a yasna for Ahura Mazdā. I do an Āfrīti for the fire with a good offering with ušta and vaṇta. I do an Āfrīti with a good sacrifice (yešti) for you, o wife of Ahura.110
160The optative mood prevails in Dahmā Āfrīti, Ātaxš Niyāyišn and Y68. In all three sections, the optative forms of the verb gam- “to come” are very numerous: Y60.3 aibī.jamiiāt̰, Y60.4 jamiiārәš, us… jamiiāt̰, Y60.6 jamiiąn, Y60.14, 16,18 jamiiama; Y68.1 paiti.jamiiāt̰, Y68.2 paiti.jamiiā̊, Y68.9 āca (nō) jamiiā̊ (auuaŋ́he),111 Y68.20 jamiiāt̰. Furthermore, the Ātaxš Niyāyišn and Y68 share identical formulations: Y62.4–7 is introduced by dāiiā̊mē ātarš exactly like Y68.5 is introduced by dāiiā̊ mē ahurāne ahurahe. Both instances of the formula share the OAv. verbal form dāiiā̊ instead of YAv. daiiā̊ (Y11.10, Y57.37, Yt10.114).
161From a structural point of view, the main difference between the Dahmā Āfrīti and Ātaxš Niyāyišn, on the one hand, and Y68, on the other, is the presence of a yazamaide section in the latter that is absent in the ceremony for the fire, as found in the LL. Yet this difference might only be apparent if we consider the special position of the yazamaide to the fire in Y59 (Y59.12), the text that precedes the Āfrītis to the fire, and the whole yazamaide litany of the Drōn ī Ātaxš in the greater performance.
162The final part of Y68 consists of the same section that is recited in the Drōn ī Ābān according to the Nērangestān (Y68.22–27). The whole is closed by a conclusion of the request (Y68.28) and a nәmah- to Ahura Mazdā, the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, Miϑra, the Sun, the eyes of Ahura Mazdā, the Cow, the Life (gaiia-), Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i, and the whole of existence (Y68.29).112
163The relationship between the Āb-zōhr of the LL and the Drōn ī Ābān is clear. The second part of the Āb-zōhr, corresponding to the actual libations to the waters, is extended in the LL through the offering section of the Hōmāst and through an Āfrīti to the waters that complements the Āfrīti to the fire. The request of the Āfrīti is not for the reward for the fire and water ceremonies, but for the whole liturgy. This becomes clear through the fact that a section of the request to the waters (Y68.11) is the final request that closes not only the LL in all its variants, but also all the rituals in Avestan.113 The original passage is, however, the Āb-zōhr of the LL, as the verb (dāiiata) appears only in the next stanza (Y68.13), but this famous stanza is omitted in other repetitions (that include only Y68.12):
Y68.12
aɱāi raēšca xᵛarәnasca
aɱāi tanuuō druuatātәm
aɱāi tanuuō vazduuarә
aɱāi tanuuō vәrәϑrәm
aɱāi īštīm pouruš.xᵛāϑrąm
aɱāi āsnąmcit̰ frazaṇtīm
aɱāi darәγąm darәγō.jītīm
aɱāi vahištәm ahūm aṣ̌aōnąm raōcaŋhәm vīspō.xᵛāϑrәm
To him (you should give) the wealth and the glory,
to him the health of the body,
to him the beauty of the body,
to him the resistance of the body
to him the power that provides abundant well-being,
to him a successful progeny,
to him a long-life,
to him the best existence due to the aṣ̌auuans that provide life and well-being
Y68.13114
dāiiatavaŋᵛhīš āpō māuuaiiaca zaōϑre yazәmnāi aɱākәmca mazdaiiasnanąm frāiiazәmnanąm haš́ąmca hāuuištanąmca aēϑrapaitinąmca aēϑriianąmca narąmca nāirinąmca apәrәnāiiūkanąmca kainikanąmca vāstriiāuuarәzanąmca.
You should give them to me and to the zaōtar who makes this yasna and to us that are co-participants of the yasna for Mazdā, friends, disciples, teachers, students, men, women, children, girls, and farmers.
164Thus, the Āb-zōhr of the LL is an extended version of the Drōn ī Ābān as an isolated ritual, but omitting the initial Drōn Yašt. In the LL, the performance is directly linked to the previous Hōmāst through Y66 and, furthermore, it includes a yasna with a request for a reward for the performance of the complete liturgy, as in the case of the fire ceremony. Interestingly, whereas the emphasis of the isolated performance of the fire is on the request made to the fire, with the yasna being alluded to only at its beginning (yasnәmca vaɱәmca hubәrәtīmca ušta.bәrәtīmca vaṇta.bәrәtīmca), the isolated ceremony for the waters is basically a yasna.
5. The structure of the LL
5.1. The concentric, symmetrical, or linear arrangement of the LL
165There is a wider view that presents the Yasna as a concentric structure:115 the very centre is occupied by the YH (Y35–41), which is surrounded by the Gāϑās (Y28– 34, on the one hand, and Y43–53 on the other); they are in turn flanked by the so-called sacred prayers (i.e., Ahuna Vairiia, Aṣ̌әm Vohū, and Yeŋ́he Hātā at the beginning, and the Airiiaman Išiia at the end). The Young Avestan texts Y1–27 and 56–72 are the outer circles. The LL is thus conceived as a matryoshka in which the Young Avestan section consists almost solely of a textual box containing the precious Gāϑās, the jewel of ritual Avestan output, with the YH. This view has been expressed recently by, for example, A. Hintze (2004, 293).
166Nevertheless, at least some points of this view need to be revised. First, the YH can hardly be understood as the centre of Old Avestan texts. It is involved in their structure as a further component of the Staōta Yesńiia, paired with the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā as a single text consisting of seven hāiti (Cantera 2012b). Furthermore, this view of the YH as the centre of Old Avestan texts would fit only for the basic, daily variant of the LL, but not for its solemn celebrations. In the latter ceremonies, the YH is repeated a second time (it is known as apara yasna haptaŋhāiti) before the recitation of Y53, which means the supposedly concentric structure is completely distorted. The idea of the YH as the centre of Old Avestan texts could be defended, albeit with difficulties, only for one concrete version of the LL, the Yasna, but not for its greater performances. In fact, as we have seen, the YH is just the prose section with a litany during which the ritual action takes places, introduced and followed by a series of metric texts, the Gāϑās, just as the other metric texts are introduced by the “multiple litanies”.
167Second, the concentric circle of the prayers surrounding the Gāϑās and the YH (the Ahuna Vairiia, Aṣ̌әm Vohū, and Yeŋ́hē Hātā at the beginning, and Airiiaman Išiia at the end) is even more problematic. In fact, the initial prayers are not recited at all in the celebration of the liturgy (Cantera 2013a, 27 f.). Only a dialogued recitation of the Ahuna Vairiia appears, and this does not strictly belong to the Gāϑās, but is part of the Frauuarāne that opens their recitation (Cantera 2015, 75 ff.).
168In fact, Old Avestan texts in their Young Avestan arrangement appear at the very centre of the LL (and only there).116 After the Old Avestan texts, the rest of the ceremony is a kind of departure from the sacrifice (Kellens 2013). Recently, Kellens (2011, 137) and Sadovski (2018, 310 ff.) have emphasised the symmetrical disposition of the liturgy around the sacrifice. This symmetry depends basically on the fact that the elements that are sacralised during the preparation of the sacrifice have to return to their natural state in the departure from the sacrifice, and at the end the offerings have to be converted into rewards.
169Despite the obvious symmetries between the introduction and the departure from the sacrifice, it is clear that they are not the main compositional impulse of the LL. Kellens’s symmetrical structure does not involve the whole liturgy, but only the section between the installation of the priest and the Fšūšō Mąϑra, and neither does he consider the initial Srōš Drōn or the fire and water ceremonies at the end of the liturgy. In addition, the links Sadovski (2018) has established for these sections are somewhat tenuous. He simply links the whole introduction until Y7.23 (which he surprisingly separates from the performative section of the Srōš Drōn) to the final yazamaide litanies of Y71–72, but not with the almost identical litanies in the Hōmāst and the second Drōn Yašt. In fact, the clearest parallelisms are between the Hōmāst and the libations to the waters. As I have already mentioned, the Hōmāst is concluded only with the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany of Y66, where the haōma produced during the Hōmāst is offered to the waters (see § 1). Accordingly, we identify a clearly linear structure in the LL. The Srōš Drōn with its offerings to the Sraōša, Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i, and the Fire (see § 4.1) places the whole ceremony under the protection of Sraōša, prepares the installation of the priest, and stresses the role of the fire during the whole ceremony, as the first Frauuarāne opening the liturgy already does. The installation of the priest ends at the beginning of Y14. Then, once the barәsman (Y14–15) has finally been prepared, the sacrifice itself can begin. The Staōta Yesńiia are the very centre of the ceremony, and especially so the meat offering to the fire during the YH. The focus then turns to gaining the reward for the sacrifice. Therefore, a series of requests are addressed to the fire, the barәsman, and the waters that receive their own offerings. With the return to the world of the fire and the waters reinforced through the sacrificial offerings, the reward for the sacrifice leaves the sacrificial area and goes to the house of the sponsor of the sacrifice and to the world of the community.
170Each one of the three main moments of the liturgy (capacitation of the priest, sacrifice, and request) is introduced, at least in the greater performances, by the combination of a dynamic multiple litany in prose with one or several static blocks (see § 5.2). As we have seen, this is a basic structure of the rituals in Avestan, and we may rethink the structure of the LL from this perspective. One of the main features of the LL is, indeed, that it is the only type of ritual in Avestan that permits the combination of several multiple litanies within a performance (see § 2.3).
5.2. The threefold structure of the LL
171The standard greater performance of the LL is characterised by, among other things, its presentation as three blocks, each one introduced by a “multiple litany”. Although the addition of further “multiple litanies” was possible, the establishment of this standard greater performance reveals a division of the LL into three major blocks. Seen from a bird’s eye view, they are follows: 1. the installation of the priest (consisting basically in linking his frauuaṣ̌i with the one of Zaraϑuštra); 2. the sacrifice (including the recitation of the Staōta Yesńiia), and 3. the request of the reward for the sacrifice in the form of fire and water ceremonies. A multiple litany introduces the main text in each section:
- The Srōš Drōn (Y3–8) introduces the first section (Y9–21): the introduction to the sacrifice consisting mainly of the installation of the zaōtar (and of all the other priests in the greater performances).
- The Hōmāst (Y22–27) introduces the second and central section (Y28–55: the recitation of the staōta yesńiia, Gāϑās, and YH) and, further, the final Āb-zōhr.
- The Drōn ī Ātaxš (VrS78–82) introduces the fire and opens the third section: VrS83–92 (corresponding roughly to Y60–68) is the exit from the sacrifice consisting mainly of the request for the sacrifice offered, structured as a double ceremony for the fire and the waters.
172The three blocks share further similarities than simply the general structure of a “multiple litany” plus an additional text. Thus, in the initial and final sections, a hāiti of one Gāϑā and a hāiti of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti are recited, thus reproducing a similar pattern to the one we find in the Staōta Yesńiia of the middle section: YH + Gāϑā. They insert a complete section of the YH between the āuuaēδaiiemahī and yazamaide litanies: Y37 in the first Drōn (=Y5) and Y36 in the second one (= VrS80). Likewise, each section is closed by a recitation of the first hāiti of the Spәṇtā.maińiiū Gāϑā: Y18.3–12 in the introduction, and Y68.33–42 at the end of the Āb-zōhr.
173Another structural parallelism shared by the three blocks of the LL is that each one is closed by a yazamaide section, a yasna: Y16 and 17 conclude the first one, Y59 could close the second one (but for the problems, see § 5.4.1), and Y70 ends the third. The parallelism is, moreover, limited because of the different nature of the litanies: whereas Y17 and 59 are “standardised litanies” in yazamaide, Y70 is not. These closing isolated yazamaide litanies are comparable to the short yazamaide sections ending each part of the Staōta Yesńiia that are in turn closed by a Yeŋ́hē Hātā.117 A final yazamaide (also closed by a Yeŋ́hē Hātā) appears, too, at the end of other sections:
- We have already seen that each performative section following a “multiple litany” includes a final stanza in yazamaide (see § 2.3.3).
- Y13.7 and 11 close the Fraōrәiti and Āstaōϑβana.
- Each chapter of the Bagān ends with a yazamaide including the title of the chapter (Y19.21, 20.5, 21.5).
- Y55.5–8 closes the collection of the Staōta Yesńiia.
- Y59.36 provides an end to the Fšūšō Mąϑra, and again to the whole Staōta Yesńiia.
- Y60.23 closes the Dahmā Āfrīti.
174The “multiple litany” that introduces each part of the LL is basically the same, except for some differences such as the special yazamaide litany, the missing hāiti of the YH, and the displaced position of the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi in the Hōmāst. However, the performative section closing each “multiple litany” has major differences. The Srōš Drōn and the Drōn ī Ātaxš share a similar stanza aṣ̌aiia daδąmi as performative section that does not belong to the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany (Y8.2, VrS83.2),118 but the first one includes a section for the partaking of the drōn (Y8.3–6) missing in the second. In the case of the Hōmāst (see § 4.2), we instead encounter the section for pounding the haōma (Y27.1–13), recited after the yazamaide litany, and a further performative section in Y68 after the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany of the Āb-zōhr.
175Furthermore, the typical connection between the Drōn Yašt and the following text is not the same in all instances of the LL as in the combination of a Drōn Yašt with an additional text. There, the dedicatory of the god to whom the next ceremony is dedicated is inserted after the three Aṣ̌әm Vohū following the closing Vasasca and before the initial wāž gīrišnīh opening the following text (see § 3). This is the model we find in the concatenation of the Hōm Stūt after the Srōš Drōn (see § 4.2). However, the links between the other “multiple litanies” and the sections they introduce are quite different. The Staōta Yesńiia are introduced after the Hōmāst as if a new ritual is beginning: through the three standard Aṣ̌әm Vohū and the Frauuarāne plus an introduction for the first hāiti and a nәmah for all the Gāϑās (Y28.2). Similarly, the second Drōn Yašt does not have a dedicatory to the fire between the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany and the Dahmā Āfrīti. We find only two Ahuna Vairiia.119 However, the link is facilitated because VrS83.2 explicitly mentions the Dahmā Āfrīti that will follow (in a similar, but not identical, way to Y8.2) (see § 4.3):
aṣ̌aiia daδąmi aēsmi baōiδi tauua āϑrō ahurahe mazdā̊ puϑra
imąm aŋhuiiąmca aṣ̌aiiąmca raϑβąmca ratufritīmca frasasti ahurahe mazdā̊ ahunahe vairiiehe aršuxδahe vāxš daɱaiiā̊ vaŋhuiiā̊ āfritōiš uγrāi dāmōiš upamanāi
haōmaheca mąϑraheca aṣ̌aōnaēca zaraϑuštrahe aṣ̌aiia.nō paiti jamiiāt̰.
176It seems that there were more possibilities for linking the introductory “multiple litany” to the following text than the standard juncture we find in the isolated combination of a Drōn Yašt with a Yašt (see § 3).
5.3. The three sections of the LL
5.3.1. The installation of the priest (s)
177The first ritual block is preliminary to the central sacrifice. Its main function is the constitution of the presiding priest’s frauuaṣ̌i, a condition sine qua non for the success of the sacrifice. The general structure is as follows:
1781. Srōš Drōn (Y3–8): it is a special variation of the Drōn Yašt in which the different offerings, tools and even texts that are going to be used in the performance are dedicated to single divinities (see § 4.1.), mainly Sraōša (under whose protection the whole liturgy is placed), Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i (governing the priest’s installation and the receiving of the reward), and the fire. It is identical in the major and lesser performances.
1792. Hōm Stūt (Y9–11) during which the priest drinks the haōma. Towards the end, the greater performance includes the installation of the assistant priests after Y11.8 (VrS11.9–13), and then, at its very end, the definitive installation of the presiding priest, the zaōtar (VrS11.25–28).
1803. Fraōrәti and Āstaōϑβana (Y12–13 and Y14.1–2) renders the ritual choice of the priest explicit, and concludes with the assumption of the duties of the zaōtar (to be zaōtar, zbātar, yaštar, framәrәtar and aibijarәtar), and offering the vitality of his own body. The only difference between the major and lesser performances involves the following slight variation:120
Y14.1 | VrS14.1 |
vīsāi vǝ̄ amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā staōtā zaōtā zbātā yaštā framarәtā aibijarәtā yūšmākәm yasnāica vaɱāica yat̰ amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm | vīse vō amәṣ̌a spәṇta staōta zaōta zbāta yašta framarәta aibijarәta yūšmākәm yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca yat̰ amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm |
aɱākәm hauuaŋᵛhāica aṣ̌auuastāica yat̰ saōš́iiaṇtąm aṣ̌aōnąm | aɱākәm hauuaŋᵛhāica ratufritaiiaēca aṣ̌auuastāica vәrәϑraγńiiāica huruńiiāica yat̰ saōš́iiaṇtąm aṣ̌aōnąm |
1814. Y14–15 is a section for the barәsman that emphasises the connection between barәsman and the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta already established in the Srōš Drōn (e.g., Y3.4). Y15 is the ceremony for the selection of the datuš and the final binding of the barәsman. It is introduced by a section parallel to the initial barsom yašt. The different way in which the latter is alluded to, abbreviated, or repeated is different in almost each variant of the LL:

182Only the last stanza of Y2 is quoted in the Yasna. All that is recited in the Visperad is a section of the first stanza (the one referring to the libation and the girdle binding the barsom), together with the second stanza and the final stanza of Y2. By contrast, in the Vidēvdād ceremony (but strikingly not in the Vištāsp Yašt), the whole barsom yašt is repeated at this point, with the only difference being the substitution of the long list of the ratu of time by the short one that is typical of the ceremonies of intercalation in the Drōn Yašt.
1835. Y16–17 is a double litany with yazamaide that closes the whole section: the first is not standardised and includes, among others, the ordered lists of the patrons of the days of the month; the second is, by contrast, a “standardised litany” that is directly comparable to Y59, thereby linking the first and the third block of the LL (see § 4.3).
184Especially pertinent for the first part is the dedicatory of the haōma to Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i.121 It connects the Hōmāst not only to the Srōš Drōn, but also to the following Fraōrәiti. The priest drinks the haōma dedicated to Zaraϑuštra’s frauuaṣ̌i, making the same choice as Zaraϑuštra (see Y12.12), and thus links his frauuaṣ̌i to Zaraϑuštra’s. At the end of the first part, with Y17 and its special section on the frauuaṣ̌is (Y17.19, see § 5.3.3), the choice of both the priest and Zaraϑuštra is extended to all the members of the five social circles, thus making them participants of the success of the performance and announcing the final section of the liturgy from Y59 on.
185Problematic in the first section are the function and position of the Bagān (Y19–21), the commentary of the Ahuna Vairiia, Aṣ̌әm Vohū, and Yeŋ́hē Hātā.
5.3.2. The Hōmāst plus the Staōta Yesńiia
186The second section is the very heart of the liturgy, and consists of two main actions:
- the preparation of haōma with milk;
- the offering of a piece of meat from the animal sacrifice to the fire.
187The first action is performed during the Hōmāst (Y22–27) for the first time, and for the second time during the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā. I describe the procedure according to the nērangs of the manuscripts. During Y24.1, the zaōtar takes the hāwan and puts it on the urwis. At Y25.1, hōm and urwarām are put in the hāwan at the beginning of the yazamaide litany. At its end, the haōma is pounded and pressed during the recitation of specific Old Avestan texts. It basically consists of two moments: firstly, the pounding of haōma and the striking of the mortar, and secondly, its squeezing after adding the milk. The pounding is accompanied by a syncopated recitation of the complete Staōta Yesńiia summarised in the three key stanzas that are repeated four times: the opening one (Ahuna Vairiia), the middle one (Y34.15), and the final one (Y54.1) of the five Gāϑās. Intercalated within the pounding, three drops of consecrated milk are added to the hāwan: first, three drops at the word vohū of the three Aṣ̌әm Vohū of Y27.6;122 second, an additional drop at Y27.8 aϑā.zī.nǝ̄ humāiiōtarā aŋhәn; and the third and last time, at the š́iiaōϑnanąm of the first of the four Ahuna Vairiia of Y27.9. The haōma is squeezed at the xšaϑrәmca of the first Ahuna Vairiia and at the š́iiaōϑnanąm of the other three. This action is continued through the recitation of Y33.11 (3 ×) and 33.12– 14. The action described by Kotwal and Boyd seems to present some differences (Kotwal & Boyd 1991, 108):
While both priests recite st. 8 three times, the zōt, resting the pestle across the palm of his right hand, picks up the mortar around its stem (holding it between the second and third fingers) and swishes the contents to mix the residue with the liquid. He empties the mortar into the nine-holed sieve placed over the cup, now designated the hōm cup. Placing the mortar, with the pestle in it, back on the table, he picks up the sieve by grasping it from above with his whole hand, using the middle finger to clear the residue of twigs off the holes to allow the liquid to flow through to the cup below. […] On the third recitation the zōt and raspī repeat the last phrase “give lordship in every place” (adāi kahyāichīt paitī) as the zōt places the residue back in the mortar.
188The action described in the nērang does not seem to involve pouring the contents of the hāwan into the filter, but the squeezing seems to take place in the hāwan, even though there is a clear boundary between pounding and squeezing. In the pressing of the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā, however, the first squeezing in Y31.4 is followed by further poundings in Y33.4, so we must assume that the squeezing takes place in the hāwan. According to the manuscripts, it seems that there is no filtering of the haōma during the Hōmāst, and it remains in the hāwan.
189The process is repeated during the recitation of the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā, albeit with some differences.123 At Y30.8, hōm and urwarām are placed in the hāwan, which still contains the previously pressed haōma with milk, if we believe the indications of the manuscripts. During Y31.4, they are pounded a first time, and then water is added to the hāwan,124 and the whole mixture is squeezed. During Y33.4, they are pounded again, and at Y33.11 they are finally squeezed and perhaps filtered, as mention is made of the pālā “filter” for the first time. Given that water and filtering are mentioned only during the second pressing, it is possible that, according to the manuscripts, both pressings during the Hōmāst and the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā were part of the same complex pressing ceremony. The pressing with milk seems to require the more complex pressing that ends only with the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā.
190In both processes, the squeezing takes place during the recitation of Y33.11– 14. This passage has been identified by Kellens as the moment of the libation of haōma125 at a time when, he contends, the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā was performed as an independent ritual before being integrated as part of the Staōta Yesńiia of the LL (Kellens 2013, 61 ff.). In this independent performance, the libation would have preceded the meat offering to the fire, whose moment Kellens identifies with Y34.1–5 (Kellens 2013, 59 f.). Despite the similarities, the LL follows a different ritual course than the Gāϑā, mainly concerning the libation of haōma. In the LL, the haōma prepared during the Hōmāst and again in the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā is not libated before the meat offering to the fire, but at the very end of the liturgy, when it is libated to the barәsman and the waters (see § 4.2 and 4.4). The libation to the waters takes place at Y68.22, which begins vaŋᵛhīm iδāt̰ ādąm, confirming that the arranger of the LL read ādā in Y33.11–12 as the libation of haōma (as Kellens does, too).
191Within the LL, the preparation of the haōma with milk is the final step in the constitution of the priestly personality before the animal sacrifice and the meat offering to the fire, and before the YH. The key expression appears in the final stanza: tanuuascīt̰ xᵛax́iiā̊ uštanәm in Y33.14a–b at̰ rātąm zaraϑuštrō tanuuascīt̰ xᵛax́iiā̊ uštanәm dadāitī “Zaraϑuštra gives the gift of the vitality of his own body”. The expression appears several times in the first block of the LL, always as the object of a verb pronounced by the zaōtar in the 1st p.sg. (fәrā rāhī at the end of the frastuiie in Y0.7 and 12.3; pairī daδąmī in Y13.4 and Y14.2, the very end of the installation of the priest). The zaōtar has offered his body to haōma during the drinking of the haōma at the end of the Hōm Stūt (Y11.10 pairi.tē haōma aṣ̌āum aṣ̌auuāzō daδąmi imąm tanūm yā mē vaēnaite huraōδa). Then, with the preparation of haōma during the Hōmāst, he offers the “vitality of his own body”, following the model of Zaraϑuštra (Y33.14). As Kellens has recognised (Kellens 2018), this is the moment in the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā of the priest’s transfiguration into a Zaraϑuštra.
192After the priest’s transformation into a saōšiiaṇt, he is ready for the performance of the central act of worship, namely, the meat offering to the fire that takes place at the beginning of the YH, as described by N47.39 (Cantera 2014a, 256). In the greater performances, the YH is recited a second time, now by the rāspīg. According to the manuscripts, no ritual action takes places during the second YH, and its recitation through the rāspīg might point in the same direction. The Visperad section that follows both recitations of YH clearly identifies the first as a ceremony for the fire and the second as one for the waters, thus preluding the same duality we will find in the third section (see § 5.3.3.).
5.3.3. The fire and water ceremonies
193The third block consists of a fire and a water ceremony in sequence. The Vidēvdād already refers to both rituals together when describing the actions a sinner has to perform (beside receiving punishment) in order to be rehabilitated after killing an otter (V14.1–4) or after having intercourse with a menstruating woman (V18.69– 72). Strabo (Geography, 15.3.14) also presents the ritual for the fire and the waters in parallel:126
They bring sacrifices to fire and water in a different way. For fire, they place upon it dry pieces of wood without the bark and place soft fat upon it; then, they pour oil upon it and light it below, not blowing but fanning; they even kill those who do blow or put a corpse or filth upon the fire. But for water, they go to a lake or a river or a spring, dig a trench and sacrifice (the victim) over it, taking care that nothing of the water nearby is soiled with blood, because thus they will defile it. Then they arrange the pieces of meat on myrtle or laurel, the Magi touch it with slender wands and sing invocations, while pouring out a libation of oil with milk and honey, not into fire or water, but upon the ground. And they sing invocations for a long time, holding the bundle of slender tamarisk wands in their hand. (de Jong 1997, 125 f.)
194For the composers of the Visperad, the duplication of the YH in the greater performances transforms the performance of the second block into a succession involving a ceremony for the fire and one for the waters, exactly in the same order as in the third block. This is clearly shown by comparing the sections of the Visperad closing the first and the second YH. Both texts are identical, except for the substitution of yasna- haptaŋhāiti- by apara- yasna- haptaŋhāiti- “posterior YH” in the closing of the second one and by a passage that indicates the difference:127

note128
195I translate here only the passages differentiating both versions:
YH | Apara YH |
We do make here a yasna to the Fire, the son of Ahura Mazdā. We make a yasna to the Fire whose visible sign is the Fire. We make a yasna to the “right ones” whose visible sign is the Fire. We make a yasna to the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly ones. We make a yasna to Sraōša that breaks the obstacle. We make a yasna to the orderly man. We make a yasna to the whole existence of the orderly one. | We greet the yasna and the vaɱa for the good waters, for the edible plants and for the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly ones. We greet the yasna and the vaɱa for these ones, the good waters, the good plants, and the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly ones. |
We make a yasna to the aṣ̌i and frauuaṣ̌i of the orderly Spitāma Zaraϑuštra. We make a yasna to the aṣ̌i and frauuaṣ̌i of each orderly one. We make a yasna to all the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly ones. We make a yasna to the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly ones who have remained in the country. We make a yasna to the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly ones who are gone from the country. We make a yasna to the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly men. We make a yasna to the frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly women. Zaraϑuštra is the ahu and ratu of these among us in whose sacrife the orderly Ahura Mazdā knows the better (than good). We make a yasna to the settlement, the waters, the earths and the plants. | We greet the yasna and the vaɱa for the cow, for life, for the orderly Mąϑra Spәṇta that makes existence possible. We greet the yasna and the vaɱa for you, Ahura Mazdā. We greet the yasna and the vaɱa for you, Zaraϑuštra. We greet the yasna and the vaɱa for you, Great Ratu. We greet the yasna and the vaɱa for the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta. |
196The first YH recited by the zaōtar that includes an animal offering to the fire is designated as yasna, while the prevailing performative verb is yazamaide. By contrast, the second, recited by the rāspīg and probably without an animal offering to the fire, is designated as yasna and vaɱa, and the performative verb is auui… gәrәδmahi, the same verb that will later introduce the Āb-zōhr (Y63.2). Thus, the first is defined primarily as a yasna for the fire, and the second as a yasna and vaɱa for the waters and the plants.
197The link between the water and fire ceremonies is also recognisable in the similarities already identified between Y68 and the Dahmā Āfrīti and the Ātaxš Niyāyišn (see § 4.3). Besides, a textual parallelism connects the Āb-zōhr as performed in the LL with the Nērang ī Ātaxš, a greater performance of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn specific to the awakening of the fire within an Ātaxš Wahrām.129 This specific section for the awakening of the fire is to be compared with Y68.3–4:
Any2.1 | Y68.3 |
ā ϑβā āϑrәm gāraiiemi vaŋhǝ̄uš manaŋhō zaōϑrābiiō ā ϑβā āϑrәm gāraiiemi vaŋhǝ̄uš uxδahe zaōϑrābiiō ā ϑβā āϑrәm gāraiiemi vaŋhǝ̄uš š́iiaōϑanahe zaōϑrābiiō sūkāi manaŋhahe sūkāi vacaŋhahe sūkāi š́iiaōϑnәm | yazamaide ϑβā ahurāne ahurahe vaŋhǝ̄uš manaŋhō zaōϑrābiiō yazamaide ϑβā ahurāne ahurahe vaŋhǝ̄uš uxδahe zaōϑrābiiō yazamaide ϑβā ahurāne ahurahe vaŋhǝ̄uš š́iiaōϑnahe zaōϑrābiiō sūkāi manaŋhe sūkāi vacaŋhe sūkāi š́iiaōϑnahe hauuaŋhāi urune fradaϑāi gaēϑanąm hauuaŋhāi aṣ̌auuastanąm |
I awaken you, o fire, through the offerings of good thought. I awaken you, o fire, through the offerings of the good word. I awaken you, o fire, through the offerings of the good deed, for the light for the thought, for the light for the word, and for the light for the deed. | We sacrifice to you, o Ahurani of Ahura, with the offerings of the good thought; we sacrifice to you, o Ahurani of Ahura, with the offerings of the good word; we sacrifice to you, o Ahurani of Ahura, with the offerings of the good deed, for the light for the thought, for the light for the word, and for the light for the deed, for the good life for the soul and for the promotion of living beings and for the good life of the best supporters of Order. |
198In the third block, we encounter the transfer of the individual frauuaṣ̌i of the priest and of Zaraϑuštra to the frauuaṣ̌is of the sponsor and of all the aṣ̌auuans that have been already announced at the end of Y17. With the link created between the frauuaṣ̌i of the priest and the one of the sponsor and of all the members of the community, the conditions are created for transferring the reward from the priest to them. The focus on the frauuaṣ̌is in both the fire and water ceremonies is already stressed by the composer of the Visperad regarding the recitations of the two YH, the fire and the water ceremonies, in the greater performances of the LL (VrS51.3– 4 and 65.77; see above). Furthermore, the srōš barišnīh that opens the libations to the barәsman (Y63.5) presents it as a yasna for the waters with the frauuaṣ̌is. In fact, both ceremonies include a direct invitation to the frauuaṣ̌is of the aṣ̌auuans to come. They will bring the reward for the sacrifice. The first one appears in the Dahmā Āfrīti, and the second in the libations to the barәsman:
Y60.6
jamiiąn iϑra aṣ̌āunąm vaŋᵛhīš sūrā̊ spәṇtā̊ frauuaṣ̌aiiō aṣ̌ōiš baēšaza hacimnā̊ zәm.fraϑaŋha dānu.drājaŋha huuarә.barәzaŋha ištǝ̄e vaŋhaŋhąm paitištātǝ̄e ātaranąm fraša.vaxšiiāi raiiąmca xᵛarәnaŋhąmca
There might come the good, successful, beneficial frauuaṣ̌is that are accompanied by the remedy of the reward (aṣ̌i-) that is broad like the earth, long as a river, high as the sun for obtaining the good thing and rejecting the other ones and for the excellent growth of wealth and glory (xᵛarәnah).
Y65.6
ā hātąmca aŋhušąmca zātanąmca azātanąmca aṣ̌aōnąm iδa jasәṇtu frauuaṣ̌aiiō yōi hīš baβrarә paitiiāpәm nazdištaiiāt̰ apat̰ haca
Let come here the frauuaṣ̌is of the present and of the past ones, of the already born and of those yet to be born who have brought for them the water taken against the current from the next stream.
199Although Y59 takes an intermediary position between the second and third blocks (see § 5.4.1), the special role of the fire in this litany clearly links it to the next fire ceremony (see § 4.3). Both parallel independent “standardised” yazamaide litanies, Y17 and Y19, differ from the other ones through their special treatment of the fire and of the frauuaṣ̌is. Concerning the latter, both behave differently. The mention of the frauuaṣ̌is at the end of the yazamaide litany has different variants. The standard one is just aṣ̌āunąm vaŋᵛhīš sūrā̊ spәṇtā̊ frauuaṣ̌aiiō yazamaide. It appears in DrYt4, Y6, and VrS81 (second Drōn). However, the yazamaide litany of the Hōmāst (Y25) takes a very special position (see § 2.3.1): the frauuaṣ̌is are mentioned only when the dedicatory includes them, and in this case Y26 is recited. A further variant is found in Y17 and Y59. Initially, the whole litany goes like Y6 (with the aforementioned exception of the extended mention of the fire). However, at the end, instead of the šnūman we find Y26.1 in Y17, and the complete text of Y26.1–10 in Y59.130 Y17 and 59 are, indeed, dedicated to the frauuaṣ̌is.
200Thus, the ceremony’s first block ends with a yazamaide litany dedicated to the frauuaṣ̌is of the members of the five social circles, and the third also begins with a similar yazamaide that is also dedicated to them. Although the sections about the frauuaṣ̌is in the yazamaide litany of the Hōmāst and in Y59 are identical, their respective final stanzas are different:
Y26.11
vīspā̊ frauuaṣ̌aiiō aṣ̌āunąm yazamaide
iristanąm uruuanō yazamaide yā̊ aṣ̌aōnąm frauuaṣ̌aiiō
Y59.29
vәrәϑraγnәm ahuraδātәm yazamaide saōš́iiaṇtәm vәrәϑrājanәm yazamaide
imat̰ barәsma haδa.zaōϑrәm haδa.aiβiiā̊ŋhanәm aṣ̌aiia frastarәtәm yazamaide
haōm uruuānәm yazamaide hauuąm frauuaṣ̌īm yazamaide
201Y26.11 adds very little information to Y26.10, where all the frauuaṣ̌is from Gaiia Marәtan to the SaōѺiiaṇt are mentioned, except for the identification of the souls (uruuan) of the dead orderly ones with their frauuaṣ̌i. Y59.29 has three major differences with respect to Y26.11:
- the worship of Vәrәϑraγna and the SaōѺiiaṇt;
- the worship of the barәsman that is going to receive the libations (haδa.zaōϑra-), thus announcing the libations to the barәsman of Y63;
- the change of the collective of the souls and frauuaṣ̌is of the orderly ones into each individual soul, and the frauuaṣ̌i of the people performing the liturgy.
202The operation seems to be clear: through the Frauuarāne of the first block, the priest constitutes his frauuaṣ̌i as one of the frauuaṣ̌is of the succession of “historical” sacrificers (from the beginning until the end of time); this frauuaṣ̌i is then transferred to all the members of the five social circles (Y17): all the members of the community participate in this frauuaṣ̌i, so their frauuaṣ̌is are also one of the aṣ̌aōnąm frauuaṣ̌aiiō; eventually, the soul and frauuaṣ̌i of the sponsor of the sacrifice (haōm uruuānәm, hauuąm frauuaṣ̌īm) are identified as part of the long chain of frauuaṣ̌is of the aṣ̌auuans. This is the guarantee of eschatological success and the condition sine qua non for fulfilling the purpose of the sacrifice repeated at the end of the Vasasca in the requests of the fire and water ceremonies that will follow, namely, that the leaders of the social circles will think, speak and act according to the daēnā.
203The goal of the third part of the LL is the acquisition of the reward for the sacrifice that comes to the house of the sponsor and to the whole sacrificial community accompanying the frauuaṣ̌is, and together with the fire and waters. The fire and water ceremonies are the scenario in which the requests are addressed. Both ceremonies include two perfectly symmetrical requests:

204The movement in both ceremonies shifts from the individual to the collective request. Thus, in the fire ceremony, the beginning of the Ataxš Niyāyišn and the first section of the Dahmā Āfrīti are requests for “this house”, the house of the sponsor of the performance. But with the Vasasca, the reward acquires a social and historical dimension. In the ceremony for the waters, the movement is similar. First, we encounter the request that Zaraϑuštra has made to the waters and all the other gods with the usual demands (force, descendance), and in the last stanza something “bigger, better, more beautiful and more worthy”. The second request (Y68.11–12) is the same that closes all Avestan rituals (see § 4.4.2.2), except in the Āb-zōhr, where the performer requires the transfer of the reward to the whole community of people sacrificing to Mazdā (Y68.12). A series of requests (comparable to the beginning of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn), and exactly as in the ceremony to the fire, is followed by the Vasasca, where the extension of the reward to the social circles is completed.
205The Vasasca is repeated several times in the LL, where it appears three times at the end: in the ceremony for the fire (Y60.10–12), in the one for the waters (Y68.17–20), and at the very end of the Yasna (Y71.28–30). The Vasasca in the first part of the LL serves as a leitmotiv that precedes the most important moments of the constitution of the priestly personality:
- the drinking of haōma: Y8.8–11 introduces the Hōm Stūt;
- the installation of the presiding priest, the zaōtar (only in the Visperad), and the ritual choice of the priest, the Frauuarāne (Y11.14–17);
- the union with the daēnā during the recitation of the Vahištōištī Gāϑā (Y52.6–9).
206The performance’s intention is thus announced before each step leading to the constitution of the priestly personality, and then repeated three times at the end of the ceremony:
vasasca.tū ahura mazda uštāca xšaēša hauuanąm dāmanąm vasō āpō vasō uruuarā̊ vasō vīspa vohu aṣ̌aciϑra xšaiiamnәm aṣ̌auuanәm dāiiata axšaiiamnәm druuaṇtәm | O Ahura Mazdā, you might dispose at will and pleasure of your own creatures. You, the waters, the plants, all gods that have the visible signs of Order enable the orderly one to dispose of you at will and ensure the liar cannot. |
vasō.xšaϑrō hiiāt̰ aṣ̌auua auuasō.xšaϑrō hiiāt̰ druuā̊ gatō hamistō nižbәrәtō haca spәṇtahe maińiiǝ̄uš dāmabiiō varatō auuasō.xšaϑrō | The orderly one might have the power at will, but not the liar. He should be taken away, separated from the creatures of Spәṇta Maińiiu, and paralysed he should not have the power at will. |
haxšaiia azәmcit̰ yō zaraϑuštrō fratәmā̊ nmānanąmca vīsąmca zaṇtunąmca dax́iiunąmca aŋ́hā̊ daēnaiiā̊ anumataiiaēca anuxtaiiaēca anuuarštaiiaēca yā āhūiriš zaraϑuštriš | And me, Zaraϑuštra, that I might convince the leader of the houses, the clans, the tribes and the countries, to think according to the daēnā, to speak according to the daēnā, to act according to the daēnā that belongs to Ahura and Zaraϑuštra. |
207The core motif of the first two stanzas is the capacity for disposing of xšaϑra, the eschatological and historical power.131 It should be at the disposal of Ahura Mazdā and all the creatures of Order, and especially for the aṣ̌auuan, but not for the druuạnt. The final wish, attributed to Zaraϑuštra, exactly like the previous demand to the waters, directly links each performance of the LL, at least in terms of goals, to the sacrifices performed for Ahura Mazdā and Zaraϑuštra, and described in the Yašts (Yt5.17, 105 and 9.25).
5.4. Sections not involved in the threefold structure: the enjambments
208Although the LL seems to be a combination of three blocks sharing a similar structure, some texts at the beginning remain outside this arrangement, and appear to open and close the whole ceremony. At the beginning, they are as follows:
- The two initial Frauuarānes with the frastuiie (Y0). It consists of two parts. The first (Y0.2–5) includes the first Frauuarāne that begins a ceremony for the fire. It is the moment in which, at the end of the Paragna, the zaōtar enters, first, the sacrificial area and cleans the firestand before going to the zōtgāh. The second (Y0.6–14) is the proper beginning of the LL that follows the pattern of the beginning of other ceremonies like the yašts, but whith a different Frauuarāne.
- The ńiuuaēδaiiemi hād is a litany exclusive to the LL that introduces the whole liturgy (see § 1).
- The barsom yašt establishes a connection between the barәsman and the libations that are going to be offered to it at the end of the liturgy as the first part of the Āb-zōhr. The barsom yašt is repeated in abridged forms in different ways depending on the type of LL at the end of the fraōrәiti hāiti.
- At the end, the Wisp Yašt is a yazamaide section presented as a frašna between Frašaōštra and Zaraϑuštra. Its function is comparable to the yazamaide sections closing each one of the three parts of the LL: Y17, 59 (?) and 69. It closes the whole ceremony.
209Furthermore, the boundaries between the three parts of the LL are not always completely clear. The clearest case is the one between the second and the third block (see § 5.4.1). On the one hand, the Srōš Yašt ī keh (Y56) opens and anticipates the ceremonies constituting the third block, and Y59 seems to already belong to the ceremony to the fire. On the other hand, Y59 corresponds structurally to the yazamaide litany that closes the first and third sections, and Y58 is closely linked to the Staōta Yesńiia. We encounter a similar problem at the end of the third block, where it is not easy to decide which parts end the third section and which ones do the same for the complete performance.
5.4.1. Srōš Yašts, Fšūšō Mąϑra and Y59
210The third section is opened by two “Yašts” dedicated to Sraōša (Y56 and Y57). In fact, only the second one is properly a Yašt, and is the only one included in the collection of the Yašts of the manuscript F1.132 Y56 is not a Yašt, but rather a collection of srōš barišnīh133 that anticipate all the formulas that are going to appear in the third block (Cantera 2016b, 161):
Y56.1 sәraōšō iδā astū ahurahe mazdā̊ yasnāi sәuuīštahe aṣ̌aōnō yǝ̄ nā̊ ištō | VrS75.3 (before Y58) sәraōšō iδā astū ahurahe mazdā̊ yasnāi sәuuīštahe aṣ̌aōnō yǝ̄ nā̊ ištō |
Y56.2 sәraōšō iδā astū apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yasnāi aṣ̌āunąmca frauuaṣ̌ibiiō yā̊nō ištā̊ uruuōibiiō hiiat̰ paōuruuīm tat̰ ustәmәmcīt̰ | Y63.5134 sәraōšō iδā astū apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yasnāi aṣ̌āunąmca frauuaṣ̌ibiiō yā̊nō ištā̊ uruuōibiiō hiiat̰ paōuruuīm tat̰ ustәmәmcīt̰ |
Y56.3 sәraōšō iδā astū apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yasnāi vaŋhuš vaŋᵛhīnąm amәṣ̌anąmcā spәṇtanąm huxšaϑranąm huδā̊ŋhąm vohunąmcā vaŋhuiiā̊scā aṣ̌ōiš yasnāi yā.nǝ̄ āraēcā әrәnauuataēcā aṣ̌aŋhāxš sәraōšascā iδā astū apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yasnāi vaŋhuš aṣ̌iuuā̊ hiiat̰ paōuruuīm tat̰ ustәmәmcīt̰ | VrS89.17 (between Y65 and Y66) sәraōšō iδā astū apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yasnāi vaŋhuš vaŋᵛhīnąm amәṣ̌anąmcā spәṇtanąm huxšaϑranąm huδā̊ŋhąm vohunąmcā vaŋhuiiā̊scā aṣ̌ōiš yasnāi yā.nǝ̄ āraēcā әrәnauuataēcā aṣ̌aŋhāxš sәraōšascā iδā astū apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yasnāi vaŋhuš aṣ̌iuuā̊ ratǝ̄ušca aṣ̌aōnō bәrәzatō yasnāica vaɱāica |
211It opens, places under the protection of Sraōša, and anticipates the complete third block that Y56 divides into three parts (see § 6.3). The fact that Y56 in the Yasna also anticipates the three srōš barišnīh, as they appear only in the greater performances, clearly shows that the latter are not secondary to the Yasna. According to this interpretation of Y56, Y57 can be understood as an extension of the sraōšәm aṣ̌īm yazamaide that closes the srōš barišnīh in many instances in the greater performance (VrS11.36, 42.11, 65.11, 74.6, 75.11, 89.22). Thus, the combination of Y56 + Y57 appears as the counterpart of the Srōš Drōn at the beginning of the ceremony.135
212The fire ceremony could begin with Y58. This text represents the moment of the de-sacralisation of the fire and the turning point in the sacrifice in which the offerings to the gods make their way to the house of the sponsor of the sacrifice and the community of people making a yasna for Mazdā (Tremblay 2006; Kellens 2011, 108 ff.). In fact, the end of Y58 (Y58.7) is a nәmah for the fire that has served as a model for the introduction of all the ceremonies for the fire (including the Yasna): nәmasә.tē ātarš ahurahe mazdā̊ hudā̊ mazišta yazata (Cantera 2019, 25 f.). A quotation of the āuuaēdaiiamahī for the fire of the YH, Y36.6, follows, and is subsequently closed by a yazamaide for the Staōta Yesńiia that is identical to Y45.3 and the end of Y59.36. It introduces Y59, which appears so as the yazamaide of the final āuuaēdaiiamahī of the Fšūšō Mąϑra.
213Y59 is (together with Y17) the only isolated “standardised” yazamaide litany (see § 4.3 and 5.3.3). The fire and the frauuaṣ̌is seem to be the focus of this litany, exactly as in the fire ceremony that will come later. Furthermore, the final request that closes Y59 (Y59.32–33) links it directly to the requests that follow on in the different performances: the Dahmā Āfrīti in the lesser one (cf. Y59.33 jamiiāt̰ vō vaŋhaōt̰ vaŋ́hō and Y43.3, repeated in Y60.3, at̰ huuō vaŋhǝ̄uš vahiiō nā aibī.jamiiāt̰) and the first part of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn in the greater ones. Accordingly, Y58– 59 could be understood as a general introduction to both the fire and the water ceremonies,136 placing particular emphasis on the fire and the frauuaṣ̌is.137 We may therefore conclude that the third block begins with the hymns to Sraōša (and is placed under his protection), and Y58 and Y59 are the beginning of the following fire ceremony. Nevertheless, on the one hand, the presence of the Fšūšō Mąϑra and the yazamaide litany preceding the “multiple litany” of the second Drōn does not fit well into the pattern established for the other sections. On the other hand, the closing stanzas of Y58 clearly integrate this hāiti into the collection of the Staōta Yesńiia (Y58.8–9), although they also stress its link to the ritual fire that receives the animal offering during the YH with a quotation of Y36.6:
hauruuąm haṇdāitīm staōtanąm yesńiianąm yazamaide apanōtәmaiiā paitī vacastaštā sraēštąm at̰ tōi kәhrpǝ̄m kәhrpąm āuuaēdaiiamahī mazdā ahurā imā raōcā̊ barәzištәm barәzimanąm auuat̰ yāt̰ huuarǝ̄ auuācī | We make a yasna for the complete collection of the Staōta Yesńiia at the moment of the stanza that is the first to reach the goal: at̰ tōi kәhrpǝ̄m kәhrpąm āuuaēdaiiamahī mazdā ahurā imā raōcā̊ barәzištәm barәzimanąm auuat̰ yāt̰ huuarǝ̄ auuācī (Y36.6) |
staōta yesńiia yazamaide yā dātā aŋhǝ̄uš paōuruiiehiiā | We make a yasna for the Staōta Yesńiia “that are the prescriptions of the first existence”. (Y33.1a) |
214Furthermore, the end of Y59 seems to conclude the whole Staōta Yesńiia, and this is signalled through its special form. The Yeŋ́hē Hātā closing the yazamaide litany VrS77.41 (GY59.30) is followed by request for “what is better than good” (vaŋhaōt̰ vaŋ́hō). Then, after ten Ahuna Vairiia and ten Ašәm Vohū and a yazamaide that serves as the conclusion of the Fšūšō Mąϑra and the Staōta Yesńiia (VrS77.46 [GY59.33]), the zōt and rāspīg recite an anomalous closing: one Yeŋ́hē Hātā and the only passage of the LL in which a single Ahuna Vairiia is recited. Then, in the greater performances, the rāspīg moves to the three main positions of the auxiliary priests (besides the one of the ātrawaxš):138 at the place of the hāwanān, the rāspīg recites Y51.23, then a Yeŋ́hē Hātā at the place of the srōšāwarz, and an Aṣ̌әm Vohū at the place of the frabardār. The rāspīg closes the Staōta Yesńiia at the four places where he can perform: together with the zōt at the place of the ātrawaxš, and then alone at the places of hāwanān, srōšāwarz, and frabardār.
215The Fšūšō Mąϑra is the link between the ritual fire that receives the animal offering during the YH and the fire that will abandon the ritual area after the fire ceremony and will be returned the house of the sponsor of the sacrifice, bringing with it the expected reward (Cantera 2019a). Accordingly, Y58 and 59 have a foot in each section of the liturgy. They are the closing section to the second part, but then at the same time they open the third one. Hence the reason the Srōš Yašts recited before them links them to the third section of the liturgy, although from a more structural point of view they are the end of the second one. The three sections of the LL are not hermetic, but instead strongly interwoven.
5.4.2. Y69–70
216The final part of the last section is a fine example of an enjambment. Three facts connect it clearly to the Āb-zōhr:
- The srōš barišnīh of Y65.16–18 that mentions the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta together with the waters (sәraōšō iδā astū apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yasnāi vaŋhuš vaŋᵛhīnąm amәṣ̌anąmcā spәṇtanąm huxšaϑranąm huδaŋhąm vohunąmcā Y65.17) points out to an understanding of the yazamaide of Y69.70, clearly focused on the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta, as part of the Āb-zōhr.
- The special mention of the ceremony to the waters as the object of yazamaide in Y70.6 (apąm vaŋᵛhīnąm yazamaide frāitīmca paititīmca aibijarәtīmca bәrәzaṇtәm ahurәm xšaϑrīm xšaētәm apąm napātәm auruuat̰.aspәm yazamaide) points in the same direction.
- According to the ritual instructions in the manuscripts, libations are poured onto the barәsman either during the last stanza of Y69 or during the first of Y70, and between the last stanza of Y70 and the first of Y71.
217However, other facts139 clearly link Y69–70 to the following Wisp Yašt. Y69–70 is a curious variation of the srōš barišnīh. The standard opening of the formula is the combination of the last stanza of Y51 and the first verse of its first stanza. In Y69, it is transformed through a repetition of the Y51.23 six times, closed once by vohu manō vahištәm (Y69.1), twice by the first verse of the Aṣ̌әm Vohū (aṣ̌әm vohū vahištәm astī) (Y69.2), and three times by the first of Y51.2 (Y69.3), as in the standard formula. Each repetition of the stanza is thus closed by the invocation in the accusative (probably conceived as the object of yazāi and pairi.jasāi) of the three neuter Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta.140
218Instead of the standard exchange, sәraōšō iδā astū… yasnāi… .auuaϑāt̰ iδā sәraōšō… yasnāi we find a whole yazamaide-section (Y70.1–6). However, its end is again identical with a frequent closing of the srōš barišnīh. The end of Y71.6 sraōšō astu + Y71.7 (= Y57.4) is identical to variant 1 at the end of the srōš barišnīh that appears when the formula introduces a subsequent yasna: VrS11.36, VrS42.11, VrS65.11, VrS75.11 (Cantera forthcoming-b). Accordingly, the final sentence of Y70.6 could be understood as an introduction to the following Wisp Yašt.
6. Final remarks
219Single rituals like the LL have only recently been studied as a coherent entity deserving analysis and there are still voices arguing against such an enterprise. Even less attention has got the possibility of analysing all rituals in Avestan language as elements of a complex ritual system. The research has been for many years taken as starting point the Yasna, on the one side, and the Yašt, on the other. Accordingly, all other rituals are basically seen as extracted from or derived from these two collections of texts. The conviction behind this paper is that the bulk of the rituals still attested in the manuscripts are the survivors of a complex ritual system created in the Antiquity. The system was modular. Functional and textual modules appear in several ceremonies and at different parts of the same ceremony with textual variations. The analysis of the use of the modules and their variations in the different ritual contexts provide us with exceptional information about how the ritual system works. This information was, however, usually disregarded and the variations of the modules were just tagged as repetitions or even quotations from other texts.
220The analysis of the use and combination of these modules reveals, first, that a fundamental structure is the combination of a prose litany in which performative verb that announces the action performed by the priest (like yazamaide “we make a yasna”, daδąmi “I make an offering”, etc.) with metrical texts. It is found already in the Young Avestan arrangement of the Old Avestan texts and is the leading principle of the arrangement of the Young Avestan rituals. When in the manuscripts, prose litanies or metrical texts appear as independent units, this is likely because these rituals were combined in clusters in which the prose litanies and the metrical texts were performed together.
221In this paper, I have tried to make a reading of the LL from this point of view, as an iteration of the basic structure of prose litanies combined with metrical texts. In fact, the analysis shows that this structure is repeated three times in the major performances of the LL. Each one of the three parts of the LL could, indeed, be performed as such or in similar ways also outside of the LL. Furthermore, I have tried to analyse the “logical” structure of the liturgy taking into account the formal criterion of the units consisting of a combination of prose litanies with metrical texts. It appears thus a clearly threefold division that corresponds to the three main moments of the liturgy: the constitution of the priestly personality, the pressing of haōma and the animal sacrifice and, finally, the offerings to the fire and the waters and the demand for reward.
222This paper is pioneering in its methodological approach. For sure, many details of the analysis will be challenged by future revisions of the material. However, the methodological approach that analyses each textual module not only in its actual position, but in all its variations at other passages and in other rituals will hopefully remain. The main difficulty for such an analysis is our deficient knowledge of the rituals in Avestan language because of the nature of the present editions. The manuscripts published in the Avestan Digital Archive have done such a research possible for the first time after many years of Avestan studies and the new edition of the ritual in Avestan language intended in the Corpus Avesticum Berolinense will make it even easier.
Notes de bas de page
1 For an analysis of this undertaking, see Cantera 2016.
2 The only exception is Brockhaus 1850.
3 Former attempts at describing the Visperad ceremonies simply indicate how the 24 kardag included in the exegetical manuscripts are intercalated among the Yasna sections. Thus, Darmesteter (1892) indicates the position of the intercalation in his translation, but again only from the 24 sections of the exegetical manuscripts. The intercalations and variations of the Visperad are, however, much more numerous (Cantera 2012a, 452 ff.). Even when the intercalations are edited, the indications do not suffice for understanding the arrangement of the texts.
4 The most thorough analyses of the Avestan from this point of view have been conducted in recent years by Jean Kellens (2006, 2007a, 2010, 2011, 2012, Redard & Kellens 2013). He has placed the focus on the information about the ritual performances of the Gāϑās before their integration in the LL (Kellens 2013).
5 This task has been greatly facilitated by the ground-breaking edition and translation of the Hērbadestān and Nērangestān by Kotwal & Kreyenbroek (1995, 2003, 2009) that has opened a new universe of possibilities.
6 I have posted a preliminary edition and translation of the nērang for each variant of the LL based solely on a single manuscript for each variant in the online edition of the Corpus Avesticum Berolinense (Cantera 2019b, Cantera 2019c). Furthermore, the Avestan Digital Archive I lead has so far provided a sufficient number of liturgical manuscripts so that the nērangs are available for research for the first time.
7 Thus, although the Nērangestān basically describes the rituals in the same way as we find them in the manuscripts, there are multifarious differences, ranging from minimal variations to fundamental alterations. The most obvious differences of significance are the substitution of the previous sacerdotal college of seven priests by one of two priests for the major performances of the LL, and the end of the animal sacrifice and the offering of meat to the fire during the recitation of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti.
8 In fact, the analysis of the ritual patterns in any religious tradition is an important field of study. As Gregory Dix states in the introduction to his seminal The Shape of the Liturgy in 1945 on the importance of studying ritual patterns for the science of Comparative Religions: “It is only within recent years that the science of Comparative Religions has fully awakened to the value of the study of ‘ritual patterns’ for the appreciation of any given system of religious ideas and its necessary consequence in human living — a ‘culture’. The analysis of such pattern and the tracing of its evolution opens for the historian and the sociologist the most direct way to the sympathetic understanding ‘from within’ of the minds of those who practise that religion, and so to a right appreciation of the genius of their belief and the value of their ideas and ideals of human life.” (Dix 1945, xxix).
9 The most significant exceptions are Skjærvø 2006, Skjærvø 2007a and Kellens 2006, Kellens 2007a, Kellens 2010, Kellens 2011, Redard & Kellens 2013.
10 On these ceremonies, see Kreyenbroek 2008, Cantera 2009, Cantera 2013b.
11 This does not exclude the possibility of adaptations, such as the elimination of the texts corresponding to animal sacrifice when this practice was abandoned, etc.
12 Y56, contrariwise, has remained forgotten (except for the value of the supposed Old Avestan quotations contained in it).
13 See Tremblay 2006.
14 We are not certain, however, whether this was also the case at the time of composition of the Šāyest-nē-Šāyest. It seems that the litany ńiuuaēδaiiemi opens not only the LL but also the Drōn Yašt (ŠnŠ9.11): pad hamāg yazišn pad bun ī yazišn ud bun ī drōn yazdān ud ahlawān frawahr be ō yazišn niwēyēnišn “In each ceremony (yazišn), at the beginning of the yazišn and at the beginning of the drōn, (the priest) has to invite to the ceremony the gods and the frawahr of the ahlaw” (cf. Tavadia 1930, 120; Shaked 2004). It is not completely clear, nonetheless, whether the verb niwēyēnidan (the etymological equivalent, its standard translation, and even its designation [in the nērang]) refers exclusively to the litany ńiuuaēδaiiemi or to any “invitation” of the gods to the ceremony. The next stanza (ŠnŠ9.12) says that if the gods and frauuaṣ̌is are not invited at the beginning, they might be invited at staōmi (Y26.19) or frašō.carәϑram saōš́iiaṇtąm (Y26.7) or vīspā̊ frauuaṣ̌aiiō aṣ̌āunąm yazamaide (Y26.11). All quotations point to Y26, the section about the frauuaṣ̌is that is included when the dedicatory ends with their mention. It is very unlikely that a litany ńiuuaēδaiiemi could be included at this position, so we cannot be certain that niwēyēnišn in Šāyest-nē-Šāyest refers here precisely to the ńiuuaēδaiiemi litany. Surprisingly, neither Tavadia nor Shaked noticed the direct reference to the ńiuuaēδaiiemi litany (Y1). Tavadia affirms that “as far the yazišn is concerned there is no such ritual instruction at the beginning of or elsewhere in this part (Y3–8)”. However, the nērangs in the manuscripts clearly refer to this “invitation of the gods to the ceremony”. A good number of liturgical manuscripts include a similar nērang at the beginning of Y1: mss. 40, 400, 2030, 2101, 4010, 4025, 4050: “pad niuuaēδaiiemi bōy ō ātaxš dahišn xšnūman pad menišn frāz kunišn yazdān ō yazišn xwānišn.” For the use of xwāndan instead of niwēyēnidan, cf. ŠnŠ9.12. Nonetheless, Shaked (2004, 341) affirms: “Although such an invocation is not actually attested in the ceremony, it makes good sense, and it is probably present there, at least implicitly.”
15 See § 2.3.
16 Nonetheless, the offerings mentioned at the beginning of the Hōmāst (Y22.1–3: imәm haōmәm, imąm gąm jīuuiiąm, imąm uruuarąm haδānaēpatąm, imā̊ zaōϑrā̊ haōmauuaitīš gaōmauuaitīš haδānaēpatauuaitīš, imąm uruuarąm barәsmanīm) are all substituted by the mention solely of the libations (Y66.1: imąm zaōϑrąm haōmauuaitīm gaōmauuaitīm haδānaēpatauuaitīm).
17 Kotwal & Kreyenbroek (2003, 97) wrongly identify the text as Y9.16, but it clearly refers to the text recited in the Visperad directly before the installation of the auxiliary priests (VrS11.9 ff.). This quotation is one of the few textual variants regarding the text attested in all manuscripts: āat̰ aōxta zaraϑuštrō nәmō haōmāi mazdaδātāi vaŋhuš haōmō mazdaδātō nәmō haōmāi. It seems that huδātō was transformed into mazdaδātō because of the influence of the previous mazdaδātāi. These variants seem to have been introduced as the regular form in the performance between the composition of the Nērangestān and the time of the extant manuscripts. No known manuscripts have the older reading huδātō.
18 Yašt ī keh can also sometimes designate a specific ritual, as it does in N28.21 and 72.8. In these passages, it refers to a ritual of less importance than the Yašt ī hāwan (probably our Yasna), but more important than the Yasn ī Rapihwin. Unfortunately, it is unclear to us what the differences were between the yašt ī keh and the yašt ī hāwan.
19 That is, the Drōn Yašt celebrated for the patron of the day.
20 It probably refers to the Drōn Yašt for the Rapihwin celebrated in one series of the Drōn Yašts for this god/ratu.
21 It probably refers to a Drōn Yašt that included an animal sacrifice.
22 There is doubt about in which sense yašt ī keh was used as an intermediary ceremony between the Yasn ī Rapihwin and the standard Yasna. It could refer to the combination of a Drōn Yašt and a Yašt, but this remains speculative.
23 It does not appear in N28.21, as it seems that yašt ī keh is used in N28.21 as a synonym of yašt ī hāwan (or even each lesser performance of the LL). In any case, yašt ī keh seems to be used here for designating a ceremony including the recitation of the Gāϑās.
24 The Dō-Hōmāst liturgy is described in the manuscript ms. 2000 (K7) and in some chapters of the Nērangestān. For more details about this performance, see Cantera 2014a, 238 ff.
25 The non italics are mine.
26 There could be some philological arguments for such a view, but they have never been discussed. A good example could be provided by the mention in the Drōn Yašt of certain texts that are not part of the ceremony itself. Thus, the Drōn Yašt twice mentions the performance of the Dahmā Āfrīti (DrYt5.16, 6.2). Its mention could more easily be justified in the LL, as this text is recited in its third part (Y60). In fact, the text of the Drōn Yašt mentions the Dahmā Āfrīti (as it does the LL) within the context of the ceremony to the fire; a combination that appears in the major performance of the LL, but not in the Drōn Yašt. This suggests the Drōn Yašt has borrowed the text from the LL. Nevertheless, in other parts of the Drōn Yašt, the text is not simply taken from the LL, as both texts seem to be variants of a basic module that can operate under different forms in different rituals. In fact, the mention of the Dahmā Āfrīti could also be explained in another way. It might refer to the Vasasca that is the second part of the Dahmā Āfrīti in the LL, and is always recited at the end of the Drōn Yašt. It is also possible that the performance of the Drōn Yašt in Antiquity always or sometimes ended with the Dahmā Āfrīti, and that the recitation of the Vasasca has survived as the minimal expression of an Āfrīti.
27 A well-known example of a minimal variation is the change in the performative verb in the same module included as part of the Ardwīsūr Yašt (Yt5.1–5), as well as in the Āb-zōhr celebrated either on its own or within the LL (Y65.1–5). Whereas the former is introduced as an order given by Ahura Mazdā to Zaraϑuštra (mraōt̰ ahurō mazdā̊ spitamāi zaraϑuštrāi) with the verb yazaēša “You should make a yasna”, the latter opens simply with the verb yazāi “I will make a yasna”.
28 Note that the Avestan texts always designate the Yašts (e.g., in the refrain of the Yašts) as yasna, and that the Nērangestān uses the term yasn for the Drōn Yašt (see N29.13, where the ceremony mentioned is clearly a Drōn Yašt, as it describes the number of barsom-twigs to be used).
29 Later called āfrīnagān.
30 A few years later, I proposed a slightly different and specific interpretation of the section of the litanies in the major performances, but within the same interpretative framework (Cantera 2009).
31 It also appears in the Middle Persian title of Y22–27: hōmāst < haōma-*āṷisti- (Kellens 2010, 75), cf. Yt10.120 haōmō āuuistō.
32 It corresponds to Y6.1: daδuuā̊ŋhәm ahurәm mazdąm yazamaide amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide. This section is extended in the major performance through VrS28.1–4, which is identical to the first part of the yazamaide section introduced in the major performance after the yazamaide litany of Y17 (VrS18.1–4). The two final stanzas in VrS18 (5–6) seem to be missing in the major performance; they do appear, however, at the end of the litany, immediately after the dedicatory (VrS30.12–13). Accordingly, as it appears in the major performances, the yazamaide litany of the Hōmāst is an extended variant of the one that closes the first section of the LL and the major performances; that is, VrS18 (Vr7 in Geldner’s edition).
33 As we can see from the comparison between Y25.1–3 and Y22.22–24, in the latter, the whole is identified as the dedicatory through its insertion between the mention of vīspa ratu and the frauuaṣ̌is, and through its full repetition. In Y6.18–19, the dedicatory of the yazamaide litany of the Srōš Drōn also includes the objects as part of the dedicatory.
34 We could posit that the central litanies were recited by all the officiating priests together, whereas the initial and final ones only by the presiding priest. Nevertheless, neither the Nērangestān nor the instructions of the manuscripts confirm this type of performance. According to the ritual instructions of the manuscripts, the distribution of roles during the recitation of the litanies in the LL is clear: (1) the zōt and rāspīg recite together the beginning of the litany until the ratu that follows the actual ratu in which the ceremony is performed; (2) the zōt recites alone the rest of the ratu and the list of the fixed list of the yazata; (3) both recite together from the mention of the Great Ratu that precedes the šnūman until the end of the litany.
35 We do not have any examples of “multiple litanies” including an āiiese yešti litany, but lacking an ašạiia daδąmi. The only instance would be the Hōmāst of the LL, but as we have seen, the aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litany is simply displaced to the end of the LL (see § 1).
36 They are non-formalised litanies.
37 This passage is to be compared with Yt10.120, which seems to allude to the performance of Hōmāst as part of the ritual course of Mihr Yašt: miϑrō vīspǝ̄ mazdaiiasnanąm yąm | aṣ̌aōnąm әrәδβāca kәrәϑβāca haōmō | āuuistō aiβi.vistō yā̊ zaōta aiβica | vaēδaiiā̊ṇte fraca yazā̊ṇte nā | aṣ̌auua yaōždātąm zaōϑrąm fraŋᵛharāt̰ | yō kәrәnauuāt̰ yim yazaite | miϑrәm yim vouru. gaōiiaōitīm xšnūtō | at̰bištō hiiāt̰ (Miϑra is the furtherer [?] and guardian [?] of everything belonging to the orderly people that perform sacrifices to [Ahura] Mazdā. The hāoma is consecrated and presented; [consecrated and presented are the zaōϑrā (offering, libation)] that the zaōtar is going to consecrate and sacrifice. The “orderly man” [the sponsor of the sacrifice] will drink the purified zaōϑrā, the one who, when he makes a sacrifice for Miϑra, of wide pasturelands, is propitiated and without antagonist).
38 In fact, at the end of the āuuaēδaiiamahī litany the Visperad explicitly states that the āuuisti is performed as an imitation of the āuuisti previously performed by Zaraϑuštra and by Ahura Mazdā (VrS27.46): yat̰ uzdātәm yat̰ āuuistәm | yaϑa dīš āuuaēδaiiat̰ ahurō mazdā̊ aṣ̌auua yaϑa dīš āuuaēδaiiat̰ yō aṣ̌auua zaraϑuštrō yaϑa dīš azәm yō zaōta āuuaēδaiiemi | vīδuuā̊ aēšąm yasnәmca vaɱәmca vīδuuā̊ dāitiiąm āuuistīm vīδuuā̊ raϑβiiąm āuuistīm “[We consecrate the haōma-twigs] that have been presented and consecrated in the way as Ahura Mazdā consecrated them; in the way as the orderly Zaraϑuštra consecrated them and as I, the zaōtar, consecrate them, knowing their yasna and vaɱa and knowing the āuuisti that is consistent with the prescriptions and the āuuisti performed in its actual ratu”. This model informed not only the “multiple litanies”, but also Y55 that begins with a pairica dadәmahi āca vaēδaiiamahi.
39 In fact, a yazamaide for the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta is included at the end of the litany āuuaēδaiiamahī before the YH: amәṣ̌ā spәṇtā huxšaϑrā huδā̊ŋhō yazamaide (Y4.25, VrS79.26).
40 The list is sometimes only minimally extended, e.g., G1.
41 They are occasionally extended through others in the greater performances. I present here the list of elements common to the Drōn Yašt and the Yasna.
42 There is a significant difference between the list in genitive/dative and in accusative. Instead of the mention of the sky levels and “all the creatures of Spәṇta Maińiiu” at the end of the list, we find in the accusative version only šoiϑrahe paiti- “the lord of the settlement”. It seems that there were two separate lists for two ceremonies and that one was canonized for the genitive/ dative variant and the other for the accusative one.
43 The dedicatory is introduced in different ways depending on the performative verb: in the āiiese yešti and aṣ̌aiia daδąmi litanies, the dedicatory follows xšnūmaine, and is in the genitive; in the āuuaēδaiiamahī, it precedes xšnaōϑra, and is also in the genitive; and with yazamaide, it appears directly in the accusative as the object of the performative verb.
44 It seems that the Visperad-karde is inserted only in the litanies that announce the recitation of the Staōta Yesńiia: the two litanies that open the whole ceremony (Y1 and 2) and the Hōmāst that introduces ther recitation of the Staōta Yesńiia (including its dislocated aṣ̌aiia daδąmi in Y66). However, the karde does not appear in the litanies opening the first and the third section of the liturgy (Srōš Drōn and Drōn ī Ātaxš). The presence of the karde in Y17 and 59 is difficult to be explained, but it seems that these two closely related litanies frame the recitation of the Staōta Yesńiia. This distribution seems to confirm that the texts mentioned in the karde are the ones recited at the very center of the liturgy.
45 See Cantera 2013b, 88.
46 The misunderstanding of this structure has led to some mistakes. Kellens (2010, 76) writes: “La seconde partie originale (Y22.23–26, Y24.28–31, Y25.4–7) décrit un panthéon qui semble procéder, tantôt par variation, tantôt par sélection, de celui de Y3.13–16 et qui s’achève, dans Y22.27 et Y24.32, par une évocation des Frauuašis identique à Y3.22 L’originalité essentielle de cette énumération est la présence de Vāiiu, qui n’avait pas encore été mentionné dans le Yasna.” However, the supposed “original part” is simply the dedicatory that is always introduced after the mention of the ratu bәrәzaṇt and before the frauuašis. The typical nōg nāwar dedicatory, identical to the one we find in Y0.8, is the one quoted in Geldner’s edition, but any other dedicatory might appear here. It is, indeed, the first time that the dedicatory appears in the LL after Y0, where it appears twice. The particularities Kellens describes here do not concern the “Yasna”, but the dedicatory of nōg nāwar that can also be used in other ceremonies such as the Drōn Yašt. Furthermore, some parts of the dedicatory, specifically the section on Miϑra and Rašnu, are not stable, but depend on the asńiia ratu.
47 The mention of all the ratu is also missing in the yazamaide section of the Hōmāst, see previous footnote.
48 The interpretation of this text that opens the request and with the final āfrīnāmi frames the performative section that follows each litany is disputed. Kellens (2007a, 7 f.) considers it a quotation from an unknown text. Furthermore, he contends that the subject is the unexpressed haōma. This assumption could perhaps be valid for the attestation in the Srōš Drōn, but not elsewhere. Furthermore, he rightly connects aṣ̌aiia with the preceding and following aṣ̌aiia daδąmi, interpreting it accordingly as the instrumental singular of aṣ̌a “conformément à l’Agencement”. Nevertheless, aṣ̌aiia could also be understood as the haplologic instrumental singular of aṣ̌aiiā- (instead of *aṣ̌aiiaiia): “I make an offering because of the search for Order”, which would have to be interpreted in the same way as in the expression aŋhuiiā- aṣ̌aiiā- “search for life on earth and after death” (see § 4.3). Accordingly, aṣ̌aiia.nō paiti.jamiiāt̰ could be translated as “May the search for Order (aṣ̌a) come to us”. This expression would anticipate the final Āfriti of the Vasasca (see again § 4.3).
49 This stanza appears in different variations in each attestation.
50 In this case, a long section is intercalated before the stanza in yazamaide (see § 4.3).
51 It includes not only the Vasasca, but also the first part of the Dahmā Āfrīti (see § 4.3)
52 They are the only ceremonies in which the collection of the Old Avestan texts (the five Gāϑās and the Yasna and the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti) are recited in full. From the point of view of the ritual action, they are characterised firstly by the performance of several pressings of haōma (a plant yet to be identified, perhaps ephedra) whose sap is then either drunk by the presiding priest or offered to the waters at the end of the ceremony, and secondly by an animal sacrifice and its offering to the fire.
53 As far as I can see from the nērang in the manuscripts, it is not a second pressing of additional twigs of haōma, but a further squeezing of the same twigs of haōma used during the Hōmāst. In fact, the only filtering attested in the manuscripts is made at Y33.11, after the second pressing during the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā.
54 We state a similar phenomenon for the “multiple litanies” (see § 4).
55 See also Cantera 2014a, 257 ff.; Cantera 2015, 87 ff.
56 Moazami edits wrongly: u-š ēk Srōš ahlaw Ardā Frawahr, but see ms. 4610.
57 In modern times, the Stōm can also be performed in isolation, see Kotwal & Choksy 2004. The Stōm is considered a minor performance of the Farroxši (Kotwal 2018, 464). The recitation of the Stōm in the version without Drōn Yašt, but not after the Drōn Yašt in the greater performance is better understandable if we take into account that the Stōm is recited as part of the yazamaide litany during the preceding Drōn Yašt. This fact could point out to a secondary character of the lesser performance without Drōn Yašt.
58 Andrés-Toledo (2015) has found manuscripts with both a Drōn Yašt and the Frawardīn Yašt. He has found the ceremony described in the following manuscripts: YL17–02233 (Yegānegi Library, Tehran), K13 (Royal Library, Denmark), X892.5 Av3U (Columbia University), SP1191 (Bibliothèque Nationale de France), and F3 (Meherjirana Library, Navsari). G. König has found numerous additional instances of this text in his examination of the manuscripts of the short liturgies within the context of the Project Corpus Avesticum Berolinense.
59 We find it in Yt3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19. It also appears in all the Niyāyišn.
60 As this ceremony is no longer performed in India, Karanjia (2010) does not include it in his edition of the different variants of the Drōn Yašt.
61 The manuscripts K37 and Pd contain further texts that could have been combined with a Drōn Yašt or another ceremony containing a “multiple litany”. For a description of these manuscripts and the possibility of liturgical performances of the text contained there, see König 2017.
62 In modern usage, these designations are used in a different way (Modi 1922, 405 ff.; Dhabhar 1932, 219 ff.; Stausberg 2002, 3.341 f.). However, the case of the Dō-Hōmāst clearly indicates that this does not necessarily correspond to the old use.
63 If we assume that the omission of the Srōš Drōn could have been possible if the same priests were officiating in the second performance.
64 A similar case is the Yašt ī Gāhān, an isolated recitation of the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā that is not attested with previous “multiple litanies” (see § 3).
65 The name already appears in the Nērangestān (e.g., N18.3) and is the standard one in the manuscripts.
66 The same dedicatory appears at the beginning of the other “multiple litanies” of the LL, except for the Srōš Drōn (e.g., Y22.5, VrS78.14).
67 It refers to the parahaōma that the priest is going to drink immediately before the Frauuarāne.
68 The plural probably refers to the haōma-twigs that are to be pressed during the Hōmāst.
69 Cf. the invocation to the waters always used after the date: aiβiiō vaŋvhībiiō vīspanąmca apąm mazdaδātanąm.
70 They are the components of the libation that is going to be prepared during the Hōmāst and offered to the waters at the end of the liturgy (Kellens 2007a, 7).
71 The distinction between the two waters, the ones to which the haōma-twigs are dedicated and the ones to which all the other components of haōma are dedicated, is not clear to me.
72 A version of the same text also appears in PRDd 58.83–85.
73 The objects are mentioned in Y3.1–3 ~ Y22.2–4, Y3.21–2 ~ Y22.22–4, Y4.1–3 ~ Y24.1–8, Y25.1–3.
74 The text is, furthermore, edited by T.D. Anklesaria in his Yasna ba Nirang (Anklesaria 1888, 11 ff.).
75 My version of the Hōmāst of the Paragna is edited in CAB under the heading “Drōn ceremonies”.
76 On these texts, see Cantera, forthcoming-a.
77 This is the case in the combined Yasna manuscripts, such as mss. 400 (Pt4) and 410 (Mf4).
78 That is, the one with the dedicatory for the Gāhāmbār.
79 The only exception is Brockhaus (1850, 198 ff.), who included this text in his edition of the Vidēvdād Sāde as part of Y59.
80 Concerning the division of the Ātaxš Niyāyišn in the greater performances, we contend, on the one hand, that the lesser performance combines two texts that do not seem to belong together (Boyce 1975b, 455; König 2015, 252ff.; Cantera 2019, 33). Redard & Kellens (2013, 10) draw our attention to the fact that the parallelism between āfrīnāmi in Y62.1 and āfriuuanәm in Y62.10 identifies the whole text as a unity. However, this unit might not just be Y62 as it appears in the Yasna, but the whole fire ceremony as it appears in the Visperad (Cantera 2019, 33).
81 The importance of this parallelism has already been noted by Sadovski (2018, 311) in the comparison he draws between this stanza and Y58 and 59.
82 Hintze prefers the translation “the most invigorating”, see her discussion of former proposals in Hintze 2007a, 133.
83 Cf. Y52.1 vaŋhuca vaŋ́hā̊sca.
84 “This house” appears twice in Hōm Stōm (Y9.28, 11.6) and once in the Hōmāst. Outside the LL, this expression is frequent only in the Frawardin Yašt (Yt 13.52, 147, 156, 157), but see as well Yt14.41 imat̰ nmānәm; Yt15.1 aɱāica nmānāi.
85 It is a variation of Y45.1 based on its three main verbs. The final part is identical to Y52.5a.
86 Notice that this text appears in Y52.5 after amәṣ̌anąm spәṇtanąm yasnāica vaɱāica xšnaōϑrāica frasastaiiaēca. It also appears in the Drōn ī Ātaxš, immediately before the section of the Great Ratu and the dedicatory. It seems that the text of the Drōn Yašt is equivalent to Y52.5, but extended with a dedicatory.
87 This text does not appear in other Avestan texts. Bartholomae (1904, 1820) refers to this passage as Vs 533, citing it from the Brockhaus edition of the Vidēvdād (Brockhaus 1850).
88 It is identical (but for the last stanza) to Y52.6–8. The same last stanza appears in Y71.32.
89 There are two possibilities that I cannot discuss here. (1) The Vasasca is part of the Dahmā Āfrīti, and its recitation at the end of each Drōn Yašt could be alluded to in the Drōn Yašt by the expression frasasti daɱaiiā̊ āfritōiš (DrYt5.16 and 6.2). Nevertheless, we have to be cautious, as DrYt6.2 also mentions the haōma or haōma’s mąϑra that do not play any role in the Drōn Yašt. (2) The Vasasca is a standard closing Āfrīti that might end any ceremony started by a “multiple litany” and, accordingly, also several sections of the LL.
90 Although I fully appreciate Kellens’ wish to respect the grammar whenever possible, even if it prompts interpretations deviating from traditional ones, I understand that the grammar of the dynamic blocks calls for a systematic analysis. We encounter usages that stray from the ones found in the static blocks. They might reflect a different “état de langue”. Thus, the change between dative and genitive (underlined) we note (e.g., in Y68.29) does not seem to imply any functional difference: nәmō ahurāi mazdāi | nәmō amәṣ̌aēibiiō spәṇtaēibiiō | nәmō miϑrāi vouru. gaōiiaōitǝ̄e | nәmō huuarәxšaētāi auruuat̰.aspāi | nәmō ābiiō dōiϑrābiiō yā̊ ahurahe mazdā̊ | nәmō gǝ̄uš nәmō gaiiehe nәmō zaraϑuštrahe spitāmahe aṣ̌aōnō frauuaṣ̌ǝ̄e | nәmō vīspaiiā̊ aṣ̌aōnō stōiš haiϑiiāica bauuąiϑiiāica būš́iiąiϑiiāica.
91 The ratu appears in the plural in the LL because the LL is for the gratification of all the ratu, whereas the Āfrīnagān ī Rapihwin is simply the rapiϑβinahe ratufriti “the gratification of the ratu of Rapiϑβina”.
92 See the edition by JamaspAsa 1970.
93 See Geldner 1896, 9.
94 A ceremony for the waters (Ābān Yazad Jašan) is still performed on the Ābān day of the Ābān month, and it is one of the most popular festivals. It includes the recitation of an Āfrīnagān and the Niyāyišn for the waters (Kreyenbroek & Munshi 2001, 23; Rose 2015, 388 f.; Cama 2019, 70 ff.).
95 For the scant information available on this ritual, see Geldner 1896, 9; Gippert 2002, 181.
96 See Salemann 1879.
97 The same text appears in the modern printing of the Khordeh Avesta by Shahmardan & Firouzgary 2003.
98 “Each gāh that happens to be, but aibisrutrim and ušahin are not allowed”, due to the prohibition of libations to the waters when the sun is not visible.
99 N53.28 adds tā haxәδranąm paēma. It is probably a transmission error for Y65.5 hā xšaϑrinąm paēma. The order, however, does not correspond exactly to that of the Avestan text of Y65 as we know it.
100 It is not clear whether the abbreviation in the Nērangestān should include VrS11.35 or not. Nonetheless, as the latter text includes a direct reference to the Frauuarāne that follows on immediately in the Visperad, I consider it more likely that the abbreviation does not include this text.
101 The libations on the barhiṣ- with milk, soma or butter are well-known in Vedic tradition (Oberlies 1998, 254, 446). About this ritual in the Avestan texts, see Darmesteter 1892, 1.395 ff.; Cantera 2014a, 213 f.; Rezania 2014.
102 It likely refers to Y50.6–11 that are recited as Y64.3–8.
103 The difference concerns the substitution of the elements for the pressing of haōma through the pressed haōma. Y25.1: imәm haōmәm aṣ̌aiia uzdātәm yazamaide | imąmcā gąm jīuuiiąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm yazamaide | imąmcā uruuarąm haδānaēpatąm aṣ̌aiia uzdātąm yazamaide; VrS87.8: haōmәm aṣ̌aiia hutәm yazamaide | asmanaca hāuuana yazamaide. The reference to the Hōmāst is due to the fact that the libations that are going to be poured onto the barsom have been prepared during the Hōmāst. The close link between the libations and the barәsman has been overlooked, but it is recurrently emphasised in the Avestan texts. Thus, the epithet haδa.zaōϑra- “with libations” (probably meaning “on which the libations are poured”) is exclusive to the barәsman to which it is applied no less than 23 times in the Visperad. Equally, the epithet haδa.barәsman- “with barәsman” (“to be poured onto the barәsman”) is exclusive to the libations.
104 A circumvallation is also mentioned at the beginning of the Ahunauuaitī Gāϑā (Y28.1 nәmaŋhā ustānazastō “stretching the hands in homage” and 28.2 pairī.jasāi), and at the end of the Vohuxšaϑrā Gāϑā (Y51.23). The centrality of this action is further emphasised through the frequent repetition of the latter stanza whenever an important action is going to take place, immediately before invocating the god Sraōša. The Yašt to Miϑra alludes to the circumvallation in its extended version of the refrain (Yt10.4–6 = Ny2.13–15). The allusion precedes the standard version of the refrain, and links the circumvallation to the libations (Yt10.6): tәm amauuaṇtәm yazatәm | sūrәm dāmōhu sәuuištәm | miϑrәm yazāi zaōϑrābiiō | tәm pairi.jasāi vaṇtaca nәmaŋhaca | tәm yazāi surunuuata yasna… (I will make a sacrifice to the powerful yazata, the strong, the strongest among the creatures, Miϑra, with libations I will go around with adoration and homage I will make a sacrifice for him with an audible yasna…). The text is comparable to the sacrifice to the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta at the end of the LL (Y70.1): tā̊ yazāi tәm pairi.jasāi vaṇtā yā̊ amәṣ̌ǝ̄ spәṇtǝ̄ huxšaϑrǝ̄ huδā̊ŋhō (I will make a sacrifice for them. I will go around the Amәṣ̌a Spәṇta who had a good power and good gifts). The latter is again a reformulation of Y51.22 that is immediately repeated no less than three times in Y69.
105 The action was still being performed at least until the 19th century (Darmesteter 1892, 1.401).
106 All the other manuscripts of the Visperad and ms. 5020 of the Vištāsp Yašt have a similar description.
107 Note that all Iranian liturgical manuscripts of the Vidēvdād probably hark back to a single manuscript.
108 The same section (Y38.3–5 without Y38.2) is also recited at the end of Y67.
109 This stanza is the closing of Srōš Yašt ī meh. Geldner does not include it in his edition because this stanza is missing in the Mihrābān Kayxōsrō manuscripts. The combined Yasna manuscripts such as 400 (Pt4) and 410 (Mf4) include it exactly like the liturgical ones. It is quite interesting, as it is the only instance known to me of the use of āfrīnāmi to close a section that is not opened by a Frauuarāne. The manuscripts of the Vidēvdād and Vištāsp Yašt furthermore indicate that when the dedicatory of the whole ceremony is to Sraōša, then his dedicatory is not recited here, but it is recited when the whole LL is dedicated to another divinity. See, for example, ms. 400: yasnәmca vaɱәmca aōjasca zauuarәca āfrīnāmi anōh ēn ǰuddēwdād pad xšnūman kē srōš nibišt ēstēd čīyōn xšnūman srōš bēd ka āfrīnāmi bē guft hēnd sraōšahe nē abāyēd guftan čīyōn xšnūman dudīgar bēd sraōšahe aṣ̌iiehe taxmahe tanumąϑrahe darši.draōš āhūiriiehe bē abāyēd guftan “yasnәmca vaɱәmca aōjasca zauuarәca āfrīnāmi Here is written the [dedicatory] of the Vidēvdād with the dedicatory to Srōš. If the dedicatory [of the ceremony] is Srōš, when they have said āfrīnāmi, they do not say sraōšahe. If it is a different dedicatory, then they must say sraōšahe aṣ̌iiehe taxmahe tanumąϑrahe darši.draōš āhūiriiehe”.
110 Cf. Y68.9.
111 The expression is frequent in the Yašts: Yt10.5, 77, 11.8, Y57.5, 12, 15, 18, 21, 26, 29, 32, 37, 41, 48.
112 Although the combined manuscripts (e.g., ms. 400 [Mf4]) do not include any further division until the beginning of the Wisp Yašt, the Frauuarāne of Y68.32 clearly opens a new section.
113 It also appears in Yt10.108.
114 This stanza again has parallels with the verb dāiiata in the first part of the Āb-zōhr (Y65.11 [āpō yānәm vō yāsāmi mazā̊ṇtәm tәm mē dāiiata], 13, 14) and in the Vasasca.
115 For other divisions of the Yasna rituals, see the overview by Stausberg (2002, 3.310 ff.).
116 As a matter of fact, Old Avestan texts do not exist outside the LL, and we do not have any evidence that they ever did. Individual Old Avestan texts do have any other ritual functions (König 2017), but the five Gāϑās and the YH in their current arrangement are a product of the LL.
117 Martínez-Porro has noted that the Yeŋ́hē Hātā always appears after a yasna, a yazamaide/yazāi section. The words yesnē paiti refer precisely to this section. In my view, these Yeŋ́hē Hātā that follow a short yazamaide section are designated in Avestan as yasnō.kәrәti- “the performance of a yasna” (e.g., N52.8).
118 The litany has previously ended with a mention of all the yazata and all the ratu (Y7.26, VrS82.23).
119 They are perhaps comparable to the ones that precede the closing formula of the Drōn Yašt (DrYt7.2) and all the other ceremonies.
120 In the major performance, the basic Middle Avestan text seems to have been modernised. Kellens (2007a, 113 f.) also understands vīse to be a modernisation of vīsāi. However, there might just be a change of mode. The use of the indicative instead of the subjunctive in the minor performance might be connected to the fact that the zaōtar had already expressed his intention to assume his office in VrS11.25 in the major performance (but not in the minor one): azәm aēta zaōta vīsāi staōtanąm yesńiianąm frasraōϑrәmca framarәϑrәmca fragāϑrәmca frāiiaštīmca “I will remain available as a zaōtar for the recitation aloud and quietly, for the singing and for the performance of the Staōta Yesńiia”.
121 Both are mentioned together again in Y10.21 (repeated in Yt20.2): haōmәm zāirīm bәrәzaṇtәm yazamaide | haōmәm frāšmīm frādat̰.gaēϑәm yazamaide | haōmәm dūraōšәm yazamaide | vīspe haōma yazamaide | zaraϑuštrahe spitāmahe iδa aṣ̌aōnō aṣ̌īmca frauuaṣ̌īmca yazamaide “We make a yasna for the green, tall haōma. We make a yasna for the brilliant haōma. We make a yasna for the haōma that holds death far. We make a yasna for all the haōma We make a yasna for Zaraϑuštra’s reward and frauuaṣ̌i.”
122 In modern practice, water, and not milk, is added (Kotwal & Boyd 1991, 107). Kotwal and Boyce note that: “The filtered hōm mixture prepared in Y.27 has goat’s milk (jīwam) as one of its ingredients” (Kotwal & Boyd 1991, 108 fn. 115). However, and as far as I can see, they do not indicate when it is added to the mixture.
123 For the procedure in modern times, see again (Kotwal & Boyd 1991, 110 ff.).
124 Note that during the first pressing there is no nērang indicating that water should be added.
125 Interestingly, Kellens does not mention how the libation of haōma took place, and whether or not it was poured onto the fire.
126 Despite the distortions of the description made from a Greek perspective (de Jong 1997, 353 ff.), the description might bear traces of the modern practice among Persians, representing quite well the ceremony of the Drōn ī Ātaxšān described above (also known as ātaxš-zōhr). De Jong refers to the difficulty due to the fact that an animal sacrifice for the waters is unknown. Nonetheless, it may be contemplated within the context of a Drōn ī Ābān. Strabo’s reference to the libation not into fire or water, but upon the ground, might reflect the libation upon the barәsman that precedes the libations to the waters in the LL, and perhaps also in the isolated performance.
127 Note that the section that is different in both passages is recited twice, emphasising its importance.
128 Only in the second YH, of course.
129 On this ceremony, see Cantera forthcoming-a.
130 In fact, Y26.1–10 is only recited during the Hōmāst, when the dedicatory includes the frauuaṣ̌i, but it is a regular feature in Y59.
131 For the interpretation of the two first stanzas, see Redard & Kellens 2013, 127 ff.
132 Manuscript F1 contains two different Yašt for Sraōša; the same one that is integrated within the performance of the LL bears the title srōš yast, whereas the previous one is identified as going back to the Hādōxt Nask (mәhe yasta srōš әz naska hāδaoxta).
133 On this formula, see Cantera forthcoming-b.
134 Cf. VrS87.5–6: sәraōšō iδā astū apąm vaŋvhīnąm yasnāi amәṣ̌anąmca spәṇtanąm aṣ̌āunąmca frauuaṣ̌ibiiō yā̊nō ištā̊ zaōiiō uruuōibiiō aṣ̌āunąmca yasnāi sraōšō astū hiiat̰ paōuruuīm tat̰ ustәmәmcit̰.
135 The parallelism between them is stressed by the fact that both sections dedicated to Srōš are free of variation in the Yasna and the major LL. During the Srōš Drōn, the list of the ratu is not the list of the Visperad, but of the Yasna. In Y56, the wāž of the Srōš Yasn follows the pattern of the Yasna rather than the one of the Visperad.
136 Interestingly it is at the recitation of Y58.10 that the priest pours the water into the vessel for the subsequent libations. Later on, with the mention of the frauuaṣ̌is in Y59.19, the water is placed next to the barәsman, and will remain there until the libations at the end of the liturgy.
137 It is no coincidence that a small ceremony for the Frauuaṣ̌is is also introduced before the Frauuarāne opening the ceremony for the waters in the ceremonies performed during the last ten days of the year (Cantera 2018).
138 As for the four main positions of the rāspīg in the greater performances according to the nērangs of the liturgical manuscripts, see Cantera forthcoming-b.
139 Although the liturgical manuscripts indicate the recitation of one Aṣ̌әm Vohū, the combined manuscripts indicate only the recitation of the first verse. This is the lectio difficilior, and the most likely solution compared to the other two ends of Y51.23 in Y69.
140 This emphasis on the Beneficial Immortals fits well with the beginning of the yazamaide of Y70 (Y70.1 tą yazāi tәm pairi.jasāi vaṇtā yą amәṣ̌ǝ spәṇtǝ̄ huxšaϑrǝ̄ huδā̊ŋhō) and their listing in Y70.2.
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Comparer en histoire des religions antiques
Controverses et propositions
Claude Calame et Bruce Lincoln (dir.)
2012
Sacrifices humains
Perspectives croisées et représentations
Pierre Bonnechere et Renaud Gagné (dir.)
2013
Le porc en Égypte ancienne
Mythes et histoire à l’origine des interdits alimentaires
Youri Volokhine
2014
Fabriquer du divin
Constructions et ajustements de la représentation des dieux dans l’Antiquité
Nicole Belayche et Vinciane Pirenne-Delforge (dir.)
2015
Henri Hubert et la sociologie des religions
Sacré, Temps, Héros, Magie
Jean-François Bert (dir.)
2015
Dévotion et légitimation
Patronages sacrés dans l’Europe des Habsbourg
Marie-Élizabeth Ducreux (dir.)
2016
Démons iraniens
Actes du colloque international organisé à l’Université de Liège les 5 et 6 février 2009 à l’occasion des 65 ans de Jean Kellens
Philippe Swennen (dir.)
2015
Aux sources des liturgies indo-iraniennes
Céline Redard, Juanjo Ferrer-Losilla, Hamid Moein et al. (dir.)
2020