1 Stroumsa 2011.

2 Lévi-Strauss 1962, 188. Cf. also the passages p. 44–47 and 127 on the relationship of game (“jeu”) and rite (“rite”).

3 The Avestan rituals of the Long Liturgy integrate two or three distinct elements/purposes: (1) the (re-) stabilization of the world; (2) the connection of the (two) worlds (see Nyberg 1938, 157); (3) the obtention of divine knowledge. Although these elements harmonize (the world-connecting ritual is the condition for the obtaining of the divine knowledge, the divine knowledge — as ritualistic knowledge [see AWN] — makes the ritual process possible). It is questionable whether the combining of the cosmological and the epistemological purpose is an old legacy, an Iranian innovation or a fusion that is also known in other cultures (cf. Eliade 1975, 193f.). (Unfortunately, Nyberg’s idea that the older Zoroastrianism participated in the shamanism of Siberia, was banished out of the Iranian Studies without any good reason.) In the historical process, these distinct elements can dissolve from each other or even criticize each other.

4 Cantera 2013b; cf. also: Cantera 2013a, 2012, 2010, 2009.

5 According to Cantera (2013b, 120), the system of intercalation is “described” in the Young Avesta itself. V 19 “reproduces the structure of a ceremony of intercalation”.

6 The “proof” is de facto only a negative proof. Cantera tries to show that the Vyt is not (or not only [see Cantera 2013b, 102]?) a “medley” (see Cantera 2013b, 95). The “proof” implicates that Vyt cannot be a (late) substitution of V. From the (concluded) contemporaneousness of Vyt and V follows that their (identical) intercalation structure has a general status and could be used for all intercalated texts.

7 The argumentation is implicitly a critique of all structural and historical views on the Avesta that marginalize the Gāϑās and consider the non-Gāϑic texts — and with them, the liturgical structure — as accidental, late and arbitrary. To talk about the Gāϑās means then: to talk about texts within a ritualistically structured sequence of texts and performances.

8 “Since we have no evidence of the use of the Widēwdād as a ritual text except in the Widēwdād ceremony, it seems very likely that it was composed exactly for the only purpose we know of, viz. to be intercalated between the Old Avestan texts.” (Cantera 2013b, 107.) The argument is only e silentio.

9 See Cantera 2013b, 132–134.

10 Cantera 2013b, 122.

11 On frašna, see AiW 1009f.

12 Already the OAv. texts give hints to the frašna situation, not only in detail (see e.g. Y43/44), but in their overall structure, see Cantera 2013b, 119: “The Staota Yesniia appear as the textual equivalents of the journey of the sacrificer’s soul.”

13 According to ŠnŠ 13.1 (Cim ī gāhān) the Stōtān Yasn begins with Y14.1 vīsāi. vǝ̄. amәṣ̌ā. spәṇtā.

14 See Cantera 2013b, 107.

15 See Cantera 2013b, 108.

16 See the discussion in Cantera 2013b, 97, fn. 27.

17 See the discussion in Cantera 2013b, 97, fn. 27.

18 It is visible on the textual surface of the Staota Yesniia, that this OAv text block, is divided in a hymnal text area in which a collective speaks in present tense (YH) and in a text area in which the singular (I/he) dominates. This second text area comprises notes on events in the past, presence and future. These notes form a kind of prismatic narrative, a cluster of narrative (and also of non-narrative [see especially Y30, Y45]) strands. The point zero of the narrative is the (current) sacrifice. Parts of the narrative then allude to the prehistory of this sacrifice; parts of it make (sometimes biographical) references to situations in the past and in the future (a “vision-time”). The narrative connects two different religious areas: a) a sacrificial cursus; b) a Shamanistic séance (journey of the soul; encounter with a deity; elements of healing). A particularity of the Gāϑic narrative is its construction as a Moebius loop: the narrative is itself part of the ritual, which is again one of the narrative subjects.

19 On daēnā and uruuan, see Kellens 1995c, 38.

20 “But the passive relationship of the daēnā has another important aspect: it is seen by the sacrificer’s soul of the sacrifice (sic!) and this vision includes in itself the contents of the consultation with god that it makes possible.” (Cantera 2013b, 130.)

21 Cantera 2013b, 130: “to ‘utter and to bring’ the Vision is to put it in words in the form of a frašna and to recite it intercalated between the Staota Yesniia during a long liturgy.”

22 In Y49.6 daēnā seems to possess a linguistic aspect: frō. vā̊. [fra]ēšiiā. mazdā. aṣ̌әmcā. mrūitē. / yā. vǝ̄. xratǝ̄uš. xšmākahiiā. ā.manaŋhā. / әrәš. vīcidiiāi. yaϑā. ī. srāuuaiiaēma. / tąm. daēnąm. yā. xšmāuuatō. ahurā. “I urge You, O Wise One, and Truth, to tell (us) / which (are) the passions of Your intellect, of Yours, / so that (we) may discern plainly how we might make heard / that religion which is (that) of One such as You, O Ahura.” (Humbach 1991 I, 181.) In the YAv daēnā can be shown and taught: cf. Y57.23 daēnō.dis- “who shows the daēnā”, cf. V18.9 aγa. daēna. disiiāt̰.; but Y19.17, Yt13.155 daēnō.sac- “who teaches the daēnā”.

23 On stanza Y33.6, see Cantera 2013b, 113. Cantera postulates a more or less direct relation of Y33.6 with the so-called daēnā-section of Y53.

24 A daršti-seeing can be found two times in the Younger Avesta: a) at the beginning of Y9 — the seeing of the Haoma; b) in HN2 — the seeing of the Daēnā. Both passages attest a relation of the act of seeing and the recitation of the Gāϑās.

25 Humbach 1991 I, 191.

26 In Y51.5 (vīspā. tā. pәrәsas. yaϑā. ašāt̰. hacā. gąm. vīdat̰. / vāstriiō. šiiaoϑanāiš. әrәšuuō. hąs. huxratuš. nәmaŋhā. / yǝ̄. dāϑaēibiiō. әrәš. ratūm. xšaiiąs. ašiuuā̊ cistā. “[I am] asking about all those [ways] in which in accordance with truth [the herdsman] does find a cow, / the herdsman, who through [his] actions ranks high [and is] of good intellect in reverence [to Him] / who, wielding power [and] in possession of rewards, finds a fair judgment on the just.” [tr. Humbach 1991 I, 187]) there is only an indirect connection of “asking” and xratu; for a connection of cow, herdsman and xratu, see Y31.7ff.

27 The Gāϑās record the following propositions of the xratu: aṣ̌ā. xšmākәm. vārәm. xšnaošәmnō. Y46.18; raocǝ̄bīš. rōiϑβәn. x^vāϑrā. Y31.7.

28 Y48.3 at̰. vaēdәmnāi. vahištā. sāsnanąm. / yąm. hudā̊ sāstī. aṣ̌ā. ahurō. / spәṇtō. vīduuā̊ yaēcīt̰. gūzrā. sǝ̄ṇghā̊ŋhō. / ϑβāuuąs. mazdā. vaŋhǝ̄uš. xraϑβā. manaŋhō. “The best of teaching (will belong) to him who accepts (it) / (to be the teaching) which the munificent Ahura teaches, with truth, / the Prosperous One who knows even the secret proclamations, / One such as Thou, O Wise One, with the intellect of good thought.” (Humbach 1991 I, 176.)

29 Statements that have consequences in practice. Y34.14 talks about nourishing the community (frādō. vәrәzǝ̄nā.) by means of Ahura Mazdā’s xratu.

30 Humbach 1991 I, 191.

31 The relation of xratu- and fras- can be found also in the obscure passage of Yt13.16 ā̊ŋhąm. raiia. x^varәnaŋhaca. us. nā. zaiieiti. viiāxanō. viiāxmōhu. gūšaiiat̰.uxδō. yō. bauuaiti. xratu. kātō. yō. nāidiiā̊ŋhō. gaotәmahe. parō.yā̊ parštōit̰. auuāiti. “Durch ihren (der Frauuaṣ̌is) Glanz und x^varәnah wird ein Mann erzeugt, beredt <ist er> in den Versammlungen, <dort seine> Worte zu Gehör bringend, der ist xratu.kātō.*, der scheint aus der Befragung** des kraftlosen Gaotәma hervorgehend (?).” [* AiW 536f. “(um Weisheit angegangen) den man um Belehrung, Rat angeht”; Kuiper 1960, 247ff. “who is esteemed for his quick wit”. ** According to Kellens 1974, 227, parō.yāh- “qui a une requête supérieure”.]

32 Humbach’s translation is different (1991 I, 192). In the passage Y34.12–15 — the end of the Ahunauuaitī-Gāϑā — Ahura Mazdā is identified with his xratu or at least closely connected with this capacity (cf. also Y43.6). As xratu he leads the (human) life-soul (uštāna-) (that was given as a gift in Y33.12) to the “good insight” (hu-cisti), by means of which the right discrimination/choice (vī-ci-) is possible and the “true existence/being” (haiϑiiǝ̄m. ahūm.) will be “wonderful” (fәrašǝ̄m.). The four stanzas Y34.12–15 form a climax of requests. The passage has some parallels with the so-called daēnā-section Y53.1–3. A (first) person (sg./pl.) ask for paths that are probably the paths into the heavenly spheres. This recalls Y53.2 and the identification of the әrәzūš paϑō with daēnā (cf. also Y53.2 daēnąm. ahurō. saōšiiaṇtō. with Y34.13 daēnā̊ saošiiaṇtąm.). These requests lead in Y34.14 to the call for xratu or the hu-cisti of the xratu (and the production of divine statements, Y34.15), that means, as in Y53.1–3 also in Y34.12ff. xratu (it is here the divine xratu) is the vanishing point of a text passage.

33 According to Hoffmann & Forssman 1996, 232, fәrašuuā. <*fraś-š-šṷa (cf. ved. sā́kṣva from sah “overcome”) is 2^nd sg. mid.aor.imp. (see already TVA). Av. ham-fras- has an equivalent in OI sám-pṛc-, that can have the meaning “etw. mit etw. (instrumental) vereinigen”, see Grassmann 1873, 851. While in Y53.3 a translation “Thus you (have to) unite your xratu with the spǝ̄ništā (ac.pl.n.)” is not impossible (but not in harmony with the caesura in the verse line), in Y47.3 hǝ̄m. vohū.… hǝ̄mә.fraštā. manaŋhā. an accusative object is missing.

34 According to Strunk 1975, the Old Indic collocation krátu- and dakṣa- (dakṣa- “geschickt, tüchtig”; dakṣas n. “rechtes Handeln”), on which Joanna Jurewicz has pointed out in the discussion after my lecture, has a parallel in Darius’ xratu and aruvasta; krátu- and dakṣa- are two sub-terms of manas “thinking” (krátu- is the thinking which is focused on practicability, dakṣa- is the felicitous performance). Strunk points to ŚB 4,1,4,1: sá yád evá mána kāmáyata idáṃ me syād idáṃ kurvīyéti sá evá krátur átha yád asmái tát samṛdhyáte sá dákṣo “Wenn er mit seinem manas wünscht: ‘dies möge mir zuteil werden, dies möge ich tun’: das ist kratu. Wenn ihm das aber glückt: das ist dakṣa.” (Tr. Oldenberg, see Strunk 1975, 281.) Cf. perhaps Y43.15. In Y46.18 (see Strunk 1975, 281) xratu- and manah- have a paratactic relation: mazdā. ǎṣ̌ā. xšmākәm. vārәm. xšnaošәmnō. / tat̰. mōi. xratǝ̄uš. manaŋhascā. vīciϑәm. “O Wise One, (thereby) satisfying your will by truth. Such is the discrimination (made) by my intellect and thought.” (Humbach 1991 I, 173.) Cf. Y48.3 xraϑβā. manaŋhō. “with the xratu of manah”, cf. Y28.1, 50.6. The close connection of manah and xratu can also be seen in the collocations xratu- + (ham-) fras- / manah- + (ham-) fras- (see above).

35 Y43.6 aēibiiō. ratūš. sǝ̄ṇghaitī. ārmaitiš. / ϑβahiiā. xratǝ̄uš. yǝ̄m. naēciš. dābaiieitī. “Right-mindedness pronounces for those (present) the judgments of Thy intellect which nobody (can) deceive.” Y45.4 nōit̰. diβžaidiiāi. vīspā.hišas. ahurō. “the all-seeing Ahura cannot be deceived”. Cf. Yt1.14 +aδauuīš nąma ahmi +viδauuīš nąma ahmi “with name I am ‘without deceit’, with name I am ‘beyond deceit’”; Yt12.1 aδaoiiō. ahi. aδaoiiō.xratuš. aδaoiiō. vīspō.vīdβā̊, P26 aδaoiimnәm. aδaoiiamnāt̰. xrataot̰.

36 Strunk 1975 with literature.

37 In the Gāϑās xratu can be a part of the human beings (Y31.11, Y46.18, Y51.5; referring to saošiiaṇt- in Y46.3), of the deceitful ones (see Y32.14, 32.4, 48.10), of the bad spirit (Y45.2), but it is in particular a capacity of Ahura Mazdā (Y31.7, Y32.4, Y34.14, Y43.6, Y45.2, Y45.6, Y48.3, Y49.6, Y50.6 [as dātā. xratǝ̄uš.]). In the YAv Ahura Mazdā is identified with the “all-knowing xratu” (see Vr19.1 vispō.vīδuuąŋhәm. → xrad ī harwisp āgāh). Xratu is also part of Vohu Manah (Y28.1, Y48.3), who is again part of Ahura Mazdā. A connection with aṣ̌a is not rare (Y31.7e, 32.4, 34.14).

38 The conception is different in Y45.7 tācā. xšaϑrā. mazdā̊ dąmiš. ahurō. “by means of xšaϑra is Mazdā Ahura the creator”.

39 Cf. Y34.14 xratǝ̄uš. aṣ̌ā. frādō.

40 Cf. Y48.3 vaŋhǝ̄uš. xraϑβā. manaŋhō.

41 Humbach 1991 I, 117.

42 See Humbach 1991 II, 19: Y28.1 vaŋhǝ̄uš. xratūm. manaŋhō. “refers to the prayers of men or, by metonymy, to the praying men themselves. Y48.3: 3 differs in sāstī ahurō… vaṇhǝ̄uš. xraϑβā. mananhō. ‘the Ahura teaches with the intellect of good thought’ where the intellect of good thought is depicted as a divine quality.”

43 Humbach 1991 I, 184.

44 For aiβi-ah- see Bartholomae 1904, 277–278. According to AiW 277 a form aiβiiąŋhāt̰ is perfect optative.

45 Cf. V4.45. On this difficult passage, see Cantera 1998, 369, 333f.

46 Gershevitch 1959, 209 gives “a Tripos student in Divinity”.

47 Bartholomae 1904 (AiW), 150 upayat̰.

48 Cf. V18.9 (AiW 99, 811); N52 yōi. dāitiiō.yaona. carәṇta. gauuāstriiaca. varәšnā̊ vәrәziiaṇtō. xratūmca. aṣ̌auuanәm. aiβišaṇtō. (farming and xratu-studies); N66.6–7 (= N84) (AiW 277f.) yā. *naire. aṣ̌aōne. *daste. aiβica. *hāite. cišānāica. paitica. *pәrәsmanāi. xratūm. aṣ̌auuanәm. “(the zaoϑras) which one gives to the nar aṣ̌auuan who studies and teaches and asks the xratu aṣ̌auuan”.

49 Cereti 2001.

50 B 232.4–6 hād kāmag ī dādār ohrmazd pad šnāxtan ī mardōm ō ōy-iz az-iz ān ī +kē-š har mardōm pad dādār šnāsīh-nērōg bahrēnēd u-š andar dēn dādār šnāxtan fradom ud pahlom handarz paydāg “It is the will of the creator Ohrmazd that he is known by the people, by means of that capacity through which the people participate in the intellectual capacity of the creator. In the dēn, it is the knowledge of the creator that is manifested as the first and best handarz”.

51 On Pahl. ī ō, see Josephson 2012, 550–552.

52 Hintze 1994, 381. Cf. Y46.3, Yt17.2. In Yt19 the clause is parallel to hō. vīspәm. ahūm. astuuaṇtәm. ižaiiā̊ vaēnāt̰. dōiϑrābiia. This speaks for a close relationship of xratu and (the ritualistic term) ižā- (= ai. íḍā-).

53 J1, J2, H, DF wsp; TD sp/syp; K35 sp; Jaafari-Dehaghi (1998, 122) +dīd.

54 See Hultgård 1990, 188.

55 Cf. also Dd 39.2 dēnīg xrad <ī> parwandīhēd…; however, in Dd 38.23 parwand is connected with dēn.

56 Cf. GrBd 6J1, 28.15 with reference to xwarrah ī wehdēn.

57 On pauruuanīm, see Haug 1878, 182, Anm. 3; Geldner 1877, 140; Bartholomae 1904, 873; Wolff 1910, 34, fn. 1; Hübschmann 1895, 40; Klingenschmitt 2000, 225. PTr plwny could be a transcription or an interpretation plwnd/parwand “enclosure, comprehension” (MacKenzie 1971, 65; Bailey 1943, 145, fn. 1).

58 Av. xratu can be used as a term for a non-mystical reasoning, e.g. Yt1.28 where xratu is used together with (divine) uši. and hizuuā (“ear, sense of hearing” and “tongue”). In V13.29, 31, 35, 39 xratu refers to the dog.