Talk:Vendidad

Vendidad vs Vendidad Sade

As I understood (again, from Modi), it is the whole Vendidad Sadeh ceremony that must be performed at night, it is not a question of part of the Yasna one morning, Vendidad that night and then the rest of the Yasna the following morning. As I remember from the Brockhaus Vendidad Sadeh print, the chapters of the Vendidad are interspersed with those of the Yasna and Vispered, rather than recited all in one block. Am I mistaken about this? --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 12:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, the Vendidad and Vendidad Sade rituals are not the same thing. The Vendidad Sade - the one that intersperses chapters of the Vendidad with select ones of the Yasna and Visparad - is performed at a home, typically for the benefit of the dying or the very sick.

-- Fullstop 15:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

ps: Sade means "clean" (i.e. without commentary) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fullstop (talk • contribs) 17:22, August 22, 2007 (UTC). I knew that! [Sir M na G]

If so, the "Vendidad" ritual must mean just reading out the whole Vendidad as a religious exercise. The "Vendidad Sadeh" is an expanded Yasna, with the chapters of the Visparad and Vendidad inserted in appropriate places; and it can refer both to a book in that form (as you say, without Zand) and to the ceremony. It would seem impractical to perform this in a home, given the need for ritual cleanliness, hom and all the other Izeshne accoutrements: are you sure that the home ceremony for the sick and dying isn't just the straight reading of the Vendidad? (Again I don't know, I am asking for information.) In neither case is there any question of spreading it over two mornings and the night between, unless I have completely misunderstood the sources. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 09:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know when the whole Vendidad is read. I've asked, but don't have a reply yet.

I'm certain that the Vendidad Sade is read at a home. I've asked whether it is accompanied by any ritual activity.

As for the ritual cleanliness: this is the distinction between "inner" and "outer rituals". While the ritual precinct can be anywhere, the Ab-Zohr demands ritual cleanliness and hence cannot be performed as part of an "outer ritual". The rest of the Yasna can.

-- Fullstop 19:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

more info as I get it.

update: After some initial bouncing around, my list of questions landed in Poona, which responded with "poor knowledge on the subject, as Vandidad is not performed in Pune" (this from the city with the 2nd largest concentration of Zoroastrians in the world ;). They have forwarded it to the Vendidad authority in Bombay. *sigh* Of course, the answers will be now be OR, but at least we'll personally be the wiser for it. -- Fullstop 23:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Here are the answers (the questions I asked should be evident as well). Unfortunately, his answer to my (a1) question "When/on what occasion are each recited?" didn't come back with a very satisfactory answer. It also seems that there are three variants when the Vendidad are recited: b), b1) & b4), but they don't tell us which is which. Well, b4 seems to suggest that variant is recited when someone is dying. If his "knitted together" means "interleaved", b/b1 seem to suggest that the Vendidad is not recited in one block. B4 appears to suggest the opposite.

>

> a) Yes the “Vendiad” and the “Vendidad Sade”

> are different. Vendidad is performed in an Agairy or a dar-e-meher,

> whereas a “Vendidad sade is performed at a house or any place

> other than a place of worship.

>

> a1) Both are recited at night i.e. in Ushen gah.

>

> b) In the vendidad ceremony, the yasna, visparad and other prayers are

> knitted together.(i.e.72 chapters of yasna, 23kardas of visparad and

> 22 pargarad{chapters} of vendidad)

>

> b1) For the vendidad first the 27 chapters of yasna and 12 kardas of

> visparad are prayed (they are all knitted together).Than the pargarad

> of Vendidad starts and in between the remaning Kardas of the visparad

> and the chapters of yasna are prayed.

>

> b3) two priest are involved for the vendidad and one for Vendidad

> sade.

>

> b4) No the full vendidad is not recited at home. Only the 22

> pargarad(chapters) of the vendidad are prayed with the kshuman of

> Sarosh yazad. The ch. of yasna and kardas of visparad are not prayed.

>

> c) In your last question you have asked regarding Ab Zohr/ Parahoma

> rituals, they are performed if the vendidad is done in the Agairy but

> not in vendidad sade.

Can we fill in the blanks from your source, or should I follow up to clarify? (I'd rather not).

-- Fullstop 23:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, so what's the Vendidad Sadé ceremony? --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 09:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I've tried to make sense of the reply. To recap as I understand it...

1. the Sade is only performed as an outer ritual. (answered in 'a', supported by 'c')
2. the Vendidad as performed in an outer ritual doesn't include anything from the yasna or visparad (answered in b4)
3. the Vendidad as performed in an inner ritual interleaves all of the yasna + all of the vendidad + all of the visparad (b/b1 minus b4)

Analysis (*not* of the most satisfactory kind):

• the Vendidad Sade *ceremony* is the reading of the Vendidad Sade in an outer ritual but in which the yasna and visparad sections of the Sade text are skipped over. Whats left is then only the 22 chapters of the Vendidad proper (which might support another meaning of "Vendidad Sade" = "clean Vendidad").
• your Brockhaus is referring to *text*. Partially recited at ceremony #2 and completely recited at ceremony #3.

What did you get?

-- Fullstop 17:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

In other words, I understood the distinction correctly but simply had the names the wrong way round. Thanks for everything. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 09:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

you're easy to please. :) Seriously though, did that analysis make sense? Is it supportably by what you got from the Brockhaus? Incidentally, I checked Stausberg and he only refers to the Sade in passing, and does not specify what it entails. -- Fullstop 14:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

another note: c) says the Ab-Zohr is done if the Vendidad is recited at a fire temple, a1) says the Vendidad is performed at night. Boyce (EIr I, p. 28) says the Ab-Zohr may never ever be performed at night. Do you see a way to explain this anomaly? -- Fullstop 21:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Brockhaus. The book is called "Vendidad Sade", and sets out in full (transliterated) the Yasna, Visparad and Vendidad, in the order in which they are recited in what we must now call the "Vendidad" ceremony. It also explains that the term "Vendidad Sade" is applied to all Avesta manuscripts set out in this order without Zand. I suppose the point is that "Sade" means "plain, without additions" (in Persian it is used to distinguish plain rice from pilau!). Thus in the book, it means, "plain, without Zand", while in the ceremony it means "(Vendidad) on its own, without Yasna". Hence the confusion.

I have absolutely no knowledge about Ab-Zohr. If it is a water purification ceremony, as the name suggests, perhaps the answer is that it is done in advance in order for the Vendidad ceremony to be performed, and therefore on the previous day. But this is purely a guess and I have no evidence for it. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 09:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, my interpretation jives with the Brockhaus then.

Ab-Zohr is the purpose of an "inner" Yasna (i.e. when a Yasna is recited in a fire-temple). cf. Ab-Zohr -- Fullstop 15:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

-- Fullstop 15:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't reconcile the two statements either. Perhaps Boyce was thinking of the present-day community in Iran which she documented so extensively, and perhaps the full Vendidad ceremony was no longer performed there (like what your informant says about Pune). --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 14:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I've put it on my "to-do" list of things to figure out. The article doesn't say anything one way or another, so there is no urgency (I suppose). Thanks again for all your help btw. -- Fullstop 04:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Whee! I've figured it out.

The Sade text (interleaved Yasna+Visperad+Vendidad) has no commentary. We're clear on that, right?

But... the "clean" isn't because the text has no annotations. Instead, the text has no commentary because thats part of what makes it 'clean', i.e. in a state of ritual cleanliness/purity. Unlike the non-Vendidad verses, the Vendidad is not recited from memory, so the pages themselves become part of the ritual precinct, and the pages themselves are treated as if they were a ritual implement.

Then it gets really complicated. As we had already inferred, we don't just have one meaning of 'sade'.

• Sade text: interleaved Yasna+Visperad+Vendidad), ritually pure (and thus no commentary).
• Sade procedure: "plain" Vendidad (solo) reading. Plain == Sade.

In other words, the meanings of "sade" are criss-crossed. Translating "sade" to mean either 'plain' or 'pure', we get:

• At a plain recital, the text is impure.
• At a non-plain ritual, the text is pure.

An impure text doesn't necessarily mean that it has commentary. An impure text may be:

• #1 A simple Vendidad solo (with or without commentary).
  It takes this meaning when the procedure is a plain reading. Its irrelevant whether the text has commentary or not, as the reading itself is done in a ritually impure environment.
• #2 interleaved Yasna+Visperad+Vendidad with commentary.
  It takes this meaning when the collection is (typically) being used to train a priest. The priest-to-be and precinct are not ritually pure anyway. Incidentally, the annotations/instructions appear written upside down and in different colour ink, allowing the two to face & track each other while sharing the same text.

The corollary: The Vendidad solo text is given against the demons, i.e. it is part of what establishes ritual purity to begin with. Once¹ ritual purity has been established, only the "clean" text may be recited because only the clean text is ... clean. [¹"once" in the sense of once-upon-a-time when the ritual precinct was consecrated]

Addressing the matter of when the Ab-Zohr is done:

• Only in the non-plain ritual is there any ritual activity. The Ab-Zohr requires ritual purity.
• The plain recital (Vendidad solo), is done in an impure state, and has no accompanying ritual activity at all.

Both the plain and non-plain Vendidad are performed at night. Boyce (EIr I, p. 28) is wrong about the Ab-Zohr only being done during the morning, though the non-plain Vendidad is performed so rarely that she may be excused for only thinking of only the Yasna & Visperad. :)

*phew* :) Does this resolve the Sade/non-Sade confusion? -- Fullstop (talk) 02:42, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Sixteen Lands Created by Ahura Mazda

Mr.Fullstop, I advice you to stop "undo"ing my edits. Are you aware of the "sixteen lands created by Ahura Mazda" which are mentioned in Fargard I in the Avesta. If you are not aware of the contents of the Avesta then kindly dont interfere with this article.Thanks -

Rustam

01:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your personal interpretation of the "sixteen lands," but these are neither relevant to the subject of the article, nor does your custom interpretation reflect any academic view. Should you have any anything substantial to say on the matter, then please rephrase whatever it is you wish to express in a courteous manner. Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 01:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

"Not relevant to this article" means this article is about a liturgy/ritual and not about the sixteen lands. The sixteen lands are not even mentioned in the article, not least because they are not relevant to the subject under discussion.

If you wish to write an article on Avestan geography, you are most welcome to do so, but in which case I suggest you first familiarize yourself with the extensive academic discourse on the subject. Should you need pointers, leave a request on my talk page and I will respond accordingly. Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 02:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry. But your reasoning in the "Edit history" page didnt seem good. Well, this map is based on James Darmesteter's identification of the sixteen lands.-

Rustam

02:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

James Darmester's identification is defective, and like the rest of his 130-year old translation, is now regarded as obsolete.

-- Fullstop (talk) 02:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Still, I observe that both the external links (not just the one added by me) are of James Darmesteter's translation and they are the only ones mentioned. As for the subject of the article, the name of the article is 'Vendidad'. Either the name is too general for an article on 'Avestan rituals' or includes all details related to the Vendidad. Also I am sorry to say that I did not find anything on the talk page in relation to this. Well, I am changing the caption of the image to include' according to James Darmesteter'. Cheers :-) -

Rustam

02:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Also I dont find any point in the article or external links which says that Darmesteter's translation is obsolete -

Rustam

02:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

1. First, quit arguing with me. Wikipedia is not a WP:FORUM.
2. Secondly, the invalidity of Darmesteter is not mentioned because it is irrelevant. And besides, there is a note over at Avesta on the issue.
   In any case, your interpretation goes well beyond what Darmesteter himself said, which is "Of these sixteen lands there are certainly nine which have really existed" (page 2). And of those "nine," at least one has been long been shown to be false, perhaps already so already in Darmester's time.
3. The picture is and remains irrelevant to the subject under discussion. Even the suggestion that it is related or even marginally accurate is going too far. Reliability is key. -- Fullstop (talk) 02:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Well firstly I am not ARGUING with you. Well, this is not a political discussion or anything of that sort. All I ask you to is to weigh your points carefully before making your argument. Well, first of all, this page isnt "specifically" about Avestan rituals as its name seems to indicate. By the by, I haven't added something completely irrelevant as a map of Papua New Guinea. Sorry if I had been discourteous. But people should understand the amount of effort put forth in creating articles or images before removing them or deleting them. And as I said earlier the image isnt completely unrelated to the subject of the article. On the contrary modifications and altercations could be suggested. This is all that I wanted to say. I am concluding this discussion and am not taking it any further --

Rustam

03:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

You most certainly are being argumentative, attempting (as you do) to convince me that your point of view is "right." I don't care if you are is "right" or not. What I do care about is accuracy and relevance and adherence to Wikipedia policy (WP:OR, WP:RS). Your map is neither accurate, nor relevant, nor does it adhere to reliability requirements. And, this talk page is for the article on the Vendidad. It it not for discussion of whether Darmester is correct or not.

Secondly, the article is about the Vendidad, which is a text and a ritual. Nothing more. End of story. I have already suggested a more suitable topic which you might to start and include your drawing under. The image does not belong here and it completely unrelated to the subject. Being made-up, it also does not belong under Airyanem Vaejah. For a academic review of where Airyanem Vaejah might be, you might wish to check Zoroaster#Place.

Apology accepted. :) To be able to edit effectively on Wikipedia then you will need to learn to thoroughly support your assertions (do not use the web as your source) and reevaluate your preconceptions (here for instance, the idea that the Avesta makes note of any place in Western Iran). It will also help to grow a thicker skin. :)

-- Fullstop (talk) 04:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

You most certainly are being argumentative, attempting (as you do) to convince me that your point of view is "right." I don't care if you are is "right" or not.

>> You need to respect the opinion of people around you. Just as you feel that I am trying to impose my point of view I too feel that ypu aoe trying to do the same. In the end regardless of who is right or wrong, we need to accept the truth.

Secondly, the article is about the Vendidad, which is a text and a ritual. Nothing more. End of story

>> Well the First Fargard speaks of the 'Sixteen Lands Created by Ahura Mazda and the Plagues Introduced by Angra Mainyu' in plain terms. If at all the page is about the rituals in the Vendidad, the name of the article should be 'Rituals in the Vendidad'.

What I do care about is accuracy and relevance and adherence to Wikipedia policy (WP:OR, WP:RS).

>> If at all you feel that the map is inaccurate just because the image is self-created, then I've seen numerous self-created maps in Wikipedia. This map, as I said earlier, is based on the lands mentioned in an SBE edition and does not constitute OR. The location of Bakhdhi or Bactria (modern day Balkh), Mouru (modern day Mary),Verkhana (Gorgan) and other places are pretty accurate.

For a academic review of where Airyanem Vaejah might be, you might wish to check Zoroaster#Place.

>> The location of Airyanem Vaejah till date remains a matter of speculation and you cannot conclude "you are right" or "you are wrong". The theory given by Darmesteter is considered significant and is widely respected

To be able to edit effectively on Wikipedia then you will need to learn to thoroughly support your assertions (do not use the web as your source) and reevaluate your preconceptions (here for instance, the idea that the Avesta makes note of any place in Western Iran). It will also help to grow a thicker skin--

Rustam

08:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

>> The Vendidad does not mention any land located in Western Iran. This is as per Darmesteter's version which you regard as an authority and have provided as an external link.

Horsepucky. I quoted directly from Darmesteter himself that tells you only 9 are "known", and of which one is already outdated. But even though its in your supposed text in black-on-white you insist on speculating/forwarding the speculation anyway. Misrepresentation is OR. Pure and simple.

If "the location of Airyanem Vaejah till date remains a matter of speculation" then its obviously wrong to suggest that you know where it is. Which you exactly what you claim.

And I don't give a damn whether you consider Darmesteter to be useful or not. Your picture is not relevant to this article, its your own OR *AND* out-of-context OR *AND* (putatively) based on an outdated source. Thats it. End of story.

And no, I do not regard Darmester as an authority. You will not see me cite Darmester's footnotes unless I have another source to back him up. Darmester is *not* cited as a reference. Darmester is listed in the article as "Further reading". And even this is only because there is no other copyright-free English language translation out there.

>>"we need to accept the truth."

There is no such thing as "truth" on Wikipedia (see also WP:TRUTH). There is only verifiability and reliability. Your picture is neither.

Notwithstanding the fact that there are reliable sources on Avestan geography available even on the web, whether you actually bother to correct your picture to reflect current academic consensus is entirely your business. ::Whether you choose to cling to a 130-year old source because it suits your world-view, or because you do/don't care about your own reliability or your reputation, is altogether your affair.

Arguing with me about Darmesteter's "significance" is a waste of time. The WP:V#Burden of evidence is on you, not on me to disprove you.

Wikipedia is WP:NOT a blog or a soapbox. I don't care (or need to care) about your opinion. On WP, I *will* insist on verifiability, reliability, and adherence to encyclopedic standards. Either take the heat or get out of the kitchen.

-- Fullstop (talk) 09:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Basically, you can never be sure of geographical identifications in ANY ancient text. People carry their stories around with them and apply the geographical names to places in their new homes: for example in the Arthurian legend "Lyonesse" originally means Lothian (southern Scotland) but has been applied to a lost land off Cornwall and to the Léonnais in Brittany.

As I mentioned in the Avesta talk page, the Avesta mentions "turan" and "sairima", presumably meaning different Iranian peoples in central Asia, but later tradition interprets them as meaning Turkic peoples as a whole and Europeans as a whole. Similarly "hara berezaiti" is an unlocatable and mythical mountain (rather like the Hindu Mount Meru), but two different ranges (in Iran and in Armenia) have been called "Elburz" after it.

If you really want a consistent Avestan geography, before identifying the sixteen lands you need to identify the seven keshvars (vouru-jaresti, vouru-baresti and the rest: apparently we live in vanirathem bamim). For the purposes of this article, I really wouldn't bother. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 09:52, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Zoroastrian Cleaning

Probably need a newer source than this for such an important topic, but apparently among Zoroastrians cow's urine went from being a preventative/cure against leprosy to being a common daily ablution to avoid disease and evil spirits until the early 20th century. This was apparently most prominently expounded in the Vendidad and would merit inclusion here if true. — LlywelynII 09:27, 11 April 2022 (UTC)