We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
In the first part of this study ‘framing’ bāj have been considered in connexion with religious rituals celebrated in the fire-temples, and with acts for achieving or maintaining ritual purity, mostly by pāw-mahal priests. Here it is proposed to consider such bāj as are needed and used in daily life.
2 Dhabhar, B. N. (ed.), Saddar Naṣr and Saddar Bundahesh, Bombay, 1909, lix.2 (p. 131)Google Scholar.
3 See part i, p. 65.
4 See Šnš., ed. Tavadia, , p. 83, n., p. 92, nGoogle Scholar.
5 ef. Y, VIII.4.
6 See Pahl.Vd., xvi.7 (drōn… ul gōwišn) and cf. Šnš., iii.35.
7 See, e.g., Rivāyats, MU, I, 222.10–16, Dhabhar, 223–4. On present practice see below, p. 309.
8 See Šnš., iii.32, and x.35.
9 Šnš., x.35. It was only a woman of ill-fame who could not herself consecrate the drōn, but who had to employ others to do so(Šnš., x.36).
10 See part i, p. 67.
11 Rivāyats, MU, II, 29.4–10, Dhabhar, 415.
12 Firdausī, , Šāhnāma, Tehran, ed., 1934–1936, VIII, p. 2571Google Scholar, 1. 96 (transl. Warner, VIII, 82–3).
13 See Wizīdagīhā ī Zādspram, xii. 1–5 (ed. Anklesaria, B. T., Bombay, 1964, 68–9)Google Scholar; Dīnkard, VII. 3. 34–6 (ed. Sanjana, D. P., London, 1912, XIII, 57–8Google Scholar; Molé, M., La léende de Zoroastre selon les textes pehlevis, Paris, 1967, 35–7)Google Scholar.
14 ŠāhnŠāma, IX, p. 2762, I. 1513 (Warner, VIII, 277). The texts have be-gīrad, which yields little sense. On the use ofbāj by the dihqān class cf. Šāhnāma, VII, p. 1820, 1. 214 (…dīn-i dihqān-i ātaš-parast, ke bī bāž barsam na-gīrad be dast).
15 Šāhnāma, VIII, p. 2648, 1. 1445 (Warner, VIII, 157).
16 See Hoffmann, G., Auszüge aus syrischen Akten persischer Märiyrer, Leipzig, 1880, 96Google Scholar. The word wask has been interpreted as a drink, see Henning, W. B., ‘The Middle-Persian word for “beer”‘, BSOAS, XVII, 3, 1955, 603–4Google Scholar; in this particular passage one would expect it to signify some part of the čŝšnī (on which, in current usage, see part I, p. 68), and to be associated therefore with the drōn. Cf. the Mandaean passage cited by Henning, loc. cit.
17 Sanjana, D. P. (ed.), The Kārnāme ī Artakhshīr ī Pāpakān, Bombay, 1896, vii. 6, 7Google Scholar. The brethren presumably addressed their guest ‘inarticulately’(see part I, p. 71), and the longish speech added in the text after their courteous request must be taken as romancer's licence.
18 ibid., viii.8 (where yazišn is evidently used as a general term, and not with reference to the yasna).
19 ibid., viii.19.
20 Šāhnāma, IX, p. 2793, 1. 2092 (Warner, VIII, 308).
21 ibid., IX, p. 2794, 11. 2102–3 (Warner, VIII, 309).
22 See part I, pp. 72–3.
23 Šāhnāma, IX, p. 2794, 1. 2105.
24 ibid., IX, p. 2795, 11. 2119–20 (Warner, VIII, 310).
25 ibid., IX, p. 2716, 11. 706–7 (Warner, VIII, 234).
26 ibid., IX, p. 2734, n. (Paris ed. only); Warner, VIII, 250.
27 ibid., IX, p. 2995, 1. 497 (Warner, IX, 100).
28 ibid., IX, p. 2995, 1. 502 (barsam čerāāhiy āy rūzbeh?).
29 ibid., IX, p. 2788, 1. 2003 (Warner, VIII, 304).
30 Kārnāmag, ed. Sanjana, , ix. 10Google Scholar.
31 e.g., Xenophon, , Anabasis, v. 2.17Google Scholar.
32 Saddar Nasr, xxi.7.
33 See part I, pp. 63–4.
34 See Saddar Bd., lix. 5; Šnš., v. 2, 5.
35 Saddar Bd., xxvii. 4, and cf. Saddar Nasr, xxi. 7.
36 Tavadia, , Šnš., p. 92, n.Google Scholar, takes yašt throughout as referring to the yašt ī nō nāvar; but this yields poor sense.
37 Šnš., v. 2.
38 Cited in part I, p. 65.
39 For references see Tavadia, , Šnš., 152, on v.l, n. 3–4Google Scholar; and further Saddar Bd., lxxiv. 13.
40 AVN, xxiii. 6; cf. MX, ii. 33.
41 AVN, xxiii.7–9.
42 Rivāyats, MU, I, 412.7–8, Dhabhar, 320.
43 Rivāyats, MU, I, 350.12, Dhabhar, 312.
44 Modi, J. J. (ed.), The Persian Farzīāt-nūrmh and Kholāseh-i dīn of Dastūr Dārāb Pāhlan, Bombay, 1924, 25.8Google Scholar. Modi, (Ceremonies and customs, 349)Google Scholar distinguishes between the ‘great bāj with barsom’ (the drōn yašt) and the ‘great bāj without barsom’ (the Amešaspand bāj).
45 Modi, (ed.), The Persīan Farziāt-nāmeh, 25.36Google Scholar.
46 See al-Bİrūnī, , The chronology of ancient nations, ed. Sachau, E., 223Google Scholar; Mas'ūdī, , Lea prairies d'or, ed. Pellat, Ch., i, 198Google Scholar, § 533 (= Barbier de Meynard, II, 108).
47 Anklesaria, T. D., appendix to the Gujarati transl. of Dd., p. 53Google Scholar.
48 See Modi, , Ceremonies, 43Google Scholar.
49 Modi, , Ceremonies, 359–60Google Scholar.
50 MU, I, 263.3 (x'āndan-ī yād), Dhabhar, 263.
51 See, e.g., Modi, , Ceremonies, 93, 123Google Scholar.
52 MU, I, 51.19–52.1, Dhabhar, 48.
53 MU, I, 51.13–15, Dhabhar, 47.
54 MU, I, 52.17–18, Dhabhar, 49.
55 For the ceremony with consecration of pure water see Pavry, H. M. E., Bājdharnānē lagtī pāwmahalnī kriyao, III, Bombay, [1938], 156–7Google Scholar.
56 See part I, p. 64.
57 It is presumably as lord of prayer that Srōš is held to preside over the religious life of the individual; see Farziyāt-nāma, text, 2, transl., 3.
58 Modi seeks on occasion to distinguish these as the ‘Srōš bāj’ i.e. the yašt, and the ‘smaller Srōš bāj’, i.e. the bāj proper, see, e.g., Ceremonies, 409, 410; but he does not separate the two in the index to this work.
59 MU, I, 586.1.
60 MU, I, 607.13.
61 See Darmesteter, , ZA, II, 686–8Google Scholar.
62 Five y. a. v. belong to Srōš the protector; cf. Vd., xi.3.
63 See Modi, , Ceremonies, 180Google Scholar.
64 Šāhnāma, IX, p. 2935, 1. 452–3 (Warner, IX, 34).
65 See Rivāyats, MU, I, 162.2, Dhabhar, 175. The Srōš bāj is used on other occasions also against Nasūš ‘who, of all dēvs, is the most bold, continuously polluting and fraudulent’ (Farziyāt-nāma, ed. Modi, text, 10, transl., 19).
66 Modi, , Ceremonies, 231Google Scholar; cf. the Rivāyat of Shapur, Kamdin, MU, I, 99. 11–12Google Scholar, Dhabhar, 102, where however only the first four of these drōn yašts are enjoined.
67 For the details see Modi, , Ceremonies, 231–4Google Scholar.
68 ibid., 234; cf. MU, I, 99–100, Dhabhar, 102, 103.
69 Modi, , Ceremonies, 238Google Scholar. It is th e three Vendīdāds which are enjoined in the Rivāyat of Shapur, Kamdin, MU, I, 99Google Scholar, Dhabhar, 103.
70 Modi, , Ceremonies, 238Google Scholar.
71 See Modi, , Ceremonies, 53Google Scholar, and cf. Rivāyats, MU, I, 235.2, Dhabhar, 236.
72 Modi, , Ceremonies, 62Google Scholar.
73 See Rivāyats, MU, I, 144.1–6, Dhabhar, 162.
74 See Rivāyats, MU, I, 107–8, Dhabhar, 109.
75 See Rivāyats, MU, I, 108.8–17, Dhabhar, 110. (In MU. 108.12 the phrase for ‘having the bāj’ is elaborated to vāj dar dahān dārand ‘they have the bāj in the mouth’, the sacred words of the initial bāj remaining as it were still on the tongue.)
76 See Modi, , Ceremonies, 65–6Google Scholar; and for accounts of similar funeral procedures in Iran the Rivāyats, MU, I, 143, 144 (Dhabhar, 161–2), 163 ff. (Dhabhar, 176).
77 Rivāyats, see Dhabhar, 90, 94.
78 Rivāyats, MU, I, 131.15–17, Dhabhar, 146–7.
79 Vd., xvii.1–10 with Pahl. commentary; Rivāyats, MU, I, 244.7–14, 246.13–247.19; Dhabhar, 249–51.
80 See Saddar Naṣr, xiv; West, SBE, xxiv, 275; Modi, , ‘Two Iranian incantations for burying hair and nails’, J. of the Anthropological Society of Bombay, VIII, 8, 1909, 557–72Google Scholar.
81 Authorities differ as to whether the parings should be actually buried (the usual custom in India) or not. On the need for care in disposing of the nail-parings see also Šnš., xii. 6 (ed. Kotwal, , p. 28)Google Scholar.
82 It is of course possible that such exacting rules of conduct laid down in theŠnš. and else-where applied, and were meant to apply, mainly to priestly families.
83 See MU, I, 205–7, Dhabhar, 211–16; and cf. MU, I, 238.2, Dhabhar, 240 with n. 7.
84 MU, I, 208–9, Dhabhar, 215.
85 See Rivāyats, MU, I, 599, Dhabhar, 376.
86 See, e.g., Rivāyats, MU, I, 559–60, Dhabhar, 378–80; Modi, , Ceremonies, 124 fGoogle Scholar. The bāj is similarly taken for the lesser purification of sī-šōoy, or sī-šūr, still administered in Iran.
87 See part I, p. 57.
88 See Rivāyats, MU, i, 603–4, Dhabhar, 384–5.
89 Šnš., iv.13.
90 See Modi, , Ceremonies, p. 61, n. 1Google Scholar.
91 See Modi, , Ceremonies, 174–5Google Scholar.
92 See Antia, E. K., Pāzend texts, Bombay, 1909, 177Google Scholar.
93 Šnš., x.5; and see further Dhabhar, , Persian Rivāyats, p. 101, n. 1Google Scholar.
94 Šnš., iii.9.
95 See Vd., xviii (without Y, XIII.8), cf. Rivāyats, MU, I, 603, Dhabhar, 384, FarZiyZt-nāma, text, 26, transl., 38–9.
96 See Šnš., x.38.
97 See Farziyāt-nāma, text, 4, transl., 7–8.
98 ibid., text, 3, transl., 4–5.
99 Rivāyats, MU, I, 315.8–9, Dhabhar, 299. The expression also occurs generally as a synonym for the Srōšbāj, see, e.g., MU, I, 144.2, Dhabhar, 162.
100 See Rivāyats, MU, I, 191, Dhabhar, 206.
101 Vd., xviii.51–2. For a first consorting, an initial bāj of 11 y. a. v.'s was enjoined, MTJ, I, 192, Dhabhar, 206. In India it is still the custom for priests to undergo barašnom after the marriage-night.
102 Vd., xviii.51–2.
103 Rivāyats, MU, I, 193, II, 464, Dhabhar, 207. On the bāj see Vd., xviii.49–50.
104 See Rivāyats, MU, I, 261–2, Dhabhar, 262.
105 See part I, p. 59.
106 See part I, p. 59.
107 See Dadabhai, Kavasji, Tamām Khordeh Avastā (in Gujarati), Bombay, 1902, 473–5Google Scholar.
108 Keeping the bāj may well have helped develop the Persians’ guard of their tongues, which caused Ammianus Marcellinus ruefully to observe (‘History’, xxi.13.4) that some among them worshipped the god of silence.
