Talk:Ahuna Vairya

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by WikiProject Zoroastrianism, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Zoroastrianism-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
	The subject of this article is considered to be of Top importance to Zoroastrianism.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] translation

I agree with everything that's been stated on this page, but I beg to differ on the translation of "Yatha Ahu Vairyo". In "The Masnavi According to Jalal-ud-Din Rumi" (the sufi Rumi), Dr. Jatindra Mohan Chatterjee" states the simple meaning of Yatha Ahu Variyo to be" as follows: "Yatha" means "If" - (it is Avestan from which "Yadi" is derived in modern Persian). "Ahu" of course stands for Ahura Mazda". "Vairyo" stands for "Believe". "Atha" stands for "Then". Now "Ratush" does not mean "Judgement" as is shown on this page. "Ratu" stands for "Precious/Bright shining object. In this case that "object" is Zarathustra. And "Ratush" stands for "His object". It is a possessive noun in modern Persian grammar and has derived its roots from Sanskrit/Avestan. Note that the highest award, offered by the Indian Government is the "Bharat Ratna", which is "India's highest civilian award given to an Indian citizen for exceptional service. So, if we are to translate Yatha Ahu Vairyo, it would go something like: "If you believe in Ahura Mazda, then believe in his most precious object [too]". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ardalon (talk • contribs) 14:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

1. if you agree with everything that's been stated in the article, then you must also be aware (and agree with) the numerous statements in the article that indicate that the Ahuna Vairya is way too cryptic to assume that any word 'A' stands for 'B'. Typical for such manthric poetry, there are numerous meanings at various levels, so to say the Ahuna Vairya has a "simple meaning" is plain hubris. Two examples:

• 'ratush' has as its root Indo-European ar-, "to allot," "to dispense," hence ratu "judge", ratush, "judgement."
• There are two homonymous Avestan terms that are spelled ahu: The first means "life," "existence" and is cognate with Vedic Sanskrit asu, "existence" (especially, existence in the other world). The second word means "lord, overlord" and *always* occurs linked with ratu-, "judge." In the usual interpretation, ahu- is a holder of secular power, holder of the jurisdiction of the king [who opens the legal process and executes judgement]. While ahu-ratu is an epithet of several yazatas, for Ahura Mazda it only occurs thrice (in contrast, for Zoroaster it occurs seven times).

Further, to apply rules of grammar to Gathic verses that have little (if any) grammar is a rather pointless exercise.

2. the article stresses that there is no single accepted translation. Rumi's translation is just as valid (or invalid) as anyone else's.

-- Fullstop 14:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)