ABSTRACT
Parsis: for some references on it, see Kotwal-Boyd 1991: 85, n. 68. 8 The reading of this passage is in accordance with Kotwal-Kreyenbroek 1992-2009, 3: 44. 9 The sentence sh-rzag wš-abestgh weh-iz ast appears to say that the recitation of the whole
Sh-rzag (classified as a šn man) has greater merit than reciting only the šn man of the Ngnwar, which is shorter than the Sh-rzag. Kotwal and Kreyenbroek, in 1992-2009, 3: 45, translate 30-rzag šyd; sh-rzag wš-abestgh weh-iz ast as: “The Sroza is also permissible; it is even better to recite the additional Avesta of the Sroza” (not a very clear rendering, of which the meaning is clarified by the two authors under n. 66 on the same page, as: “it is a good thing to recite the dedications to all Yazads, since this implies reciting more Avestan”). Furthermore, in the last sentence of the passage can be recognized a reference to the recitation of the Sh-rzag in its entirety, starting from the first paragraph of S. 1 (the interpretation of Kotwal and Kreyenbroek in 1992-2009, 3: 45 is different: “There is one who says thus: ‘One should recite the Sroza first, then it is permissible’”; under n. 68 the two scholars explain this sentence as: “Meaning, presumably, that one may only recite the additional texts if one has recited the rest of the Sroza first”; this explanation is unconvincing, inasmuch as it is not clear to which additional texts the passage can be referring). It should also be noted that the passage is followed by the sentence pas ka ard- fraward kunnd šyd, for which the translation by Kotwal and Kreyenbroek in 1992-2009, 3: 45 seems acceptable: “If they recite [the šn man of] Ard-fraward at the end it is permissible.” The explanation of this sentence, given by the two scholars under n. 69 on the same page, seems correct: “The dedication to Ard-fraward [= S. 1.19 and 2.19, author’s note] is normally not recited as the nineteenth dedication of the Sroza, since the frawashis are invoked at the end of the text.”
