This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
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)
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)
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'.
In other words, the meanings of "sade" are criss-crossed. Translating "sade" to mean either 'plain' or 'pure', we get:
An impure text doesn't necessarily mean that it has commentary. An impure text may be:
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:
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)
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 -
01:49, 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--
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.
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)
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)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
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)
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)
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'.
In other words, the meanings of "sade" are criss-crossed. Translating "sade" to mean either 'plain' or 'pure', we get:
An impure text doesn't necessarily mean that it has commentary. An impure text may be:
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:
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)
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 -
01:49, 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--
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.
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)
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)