TEACHINGS OF THE ZEND-AVESTA, CONCLUDED.
THE VENDĪDAD—FARGARD II—THE VARA OF YIMA—THE LAWS OF PURIFICATION—
DISPOSITION OF THE DEAD—PUNISHMENTS—THE PLACE OF REWARD—THE
VISPARAD—TEACHING OF THE MODERN PĀRSĪS.
This portion of the Zend-Avesta is also a collection of fragments,
although the Pārsī tradition claims that it has been preserved entire.
The Vendīdad has often been called the book of the laws of the Pārsīs,
but the greater portion of the rules here given pertain to the laws of
purification. The first two chapters deal largely with mythical matter,
and are remnants of an old epic and cosmogonic literature—the first
dealing with the creation of Ahūra and the marring of his work by the
evil principle, and the second treating of Yima as the founder of
civilization. Three chapters of a mythical nature about the origin of
medicine are placed at the end of the book, and the nineteenth Fargard
or section treats of the revelation of the law by Ahūra to Zarathuśtra.
The other seventeen chapters deal largely with observances and
ceremonies, although mythical fragments are occasionally met with, which
have more or less connection with the text, many of them, perhaps, being
interpolations of a later date. About eight chapters[186] are devoted to
the impurity of the dead and the method of dispelling it; this subject
is also treated in other Fargards, while two long sections are devoted
to the care of the dog, the food which is due him and the penalties for
offenses against him.[187] The apparent lack of order is, perhaps,
largely due to the form of expression which was adopted by the first
composers of the Vendīdād. The law is revealed by Ahūra in a series of
answers, which are given in reply to the questions of Zarathuśtra, and
as these queries are not of a general character, but refer to details,
the matter is presented in fragments, each of which (consisting of a
question with its answer) appears as an independent passage.
FARGARD II.
This is the most poetical chapter in the work, and is devoted to Yima.
Ahūra here proposes that Yima, the son of Vīvanghat, shall receive the
law from him and carry it to men. Yima, however, refuses to do so,
whereupon Ahūra gives him a commission, bidding him to keep his
creatures and make them prosper. Yima, therefore, makes the creatures of
Ahūra to thrive and increase, keeps death and disease away from them,
and three times enlarges the earth, which had become too small for its
inhabitants. On the approach of a dreadful winter, which was to destroy
every living thing, Yima, being advised by Ahūra, built a Vara to
preserve the seed of all animal and vegetable life, and there the
blessed still live happily under his rule. The world, after lasting a
long year of twelve millenniums, was to end in a dire winter, to be
followed by an everlasting spring, when men, being sent back to earth
from the heavens, should enjoy upon the earth the same happiness which
they had found after death in the realms of Yima. But when a more
definite form was taken by the Mazdean cosmology the world was made to
end by fire, and therefore the Vara of Yima, instead of remaining the
paradise from which the inhabitants of earth return, came to be a
comparatively modern representative of Noah’s Ark. In the Vedas, Yama is
the first man, the first priest and “the first of all who died”; he
brought worship here below, as well as life, and “first he stretched out
the thread of sacrifice.”
Yima had at first the same right as his Hindū prototype to the title of
a founder of religion, but he lost it, as in the course of the
development of Mazdeism, Zarathuśtra became the law-giver. Zarathuśtra
asked of Ahūra Mazda:
“Who was the first mortal before myself, Zarathuśtra,
With whom thou, Ahūra Mazda, did’st converse?
To whom did’st thou teach the law of Ahūra?”
Ahūra answered:
“The fair Yima, the great shepherd,
O holy Zarathuśtra!
He was the first mortal before thee
With whom I, Ahūra Mazda, did converse—
Whom I taught the law of Ahūra—
The law of Zarathuśtra.
“Unto him, O Zarathuśtra,
I, Ahūra Mazda, spake, saying:
‘Fair Yima, son of Vīvanghat,
Be thou the bearer of my law,’
But the fair Yima replied,
‘I was not born, I was not taught
To be the preacher and the bearer of thy law.’
Then I, Ahūra Mazda, said thus unto him:
‘Since thou wantest not to be my preacher
And the bearer of my law,
Then make thou my worlds to thrive—
Make my worlds increase;
Undertake thou to nourish, to rule
And to watch over my world.’
And the fair Yima replied unto me:
‘Yes, I will make thy worlds thrive—
I will make thy worlds increase—
Yes, I will nourish and rule
And watch over thy world.’
Then I, Ahūra Mazda,
Brought the implements unto him,
A golden ring and a poniard
Inlaid with gold,[188]
Behold here Yima bears the royal sway.”
Thus, under the sway of Yima, three hundred winters passed away,
And the earth was replenished with flocks and herds,
With men, and dogs and birds, and with red blazing fires,
‘Till there was no more room for flocks and herds and men.
Then Yima stepped forward toward the luminous space
To meet the sun, and he pressed the earth with the golden ring
And bored it with the poniard, saying, thus:
“O Spenta Ārmaiti,[189] kindly open asunder, and stretch thyself afar
To bear flocks and herds and men.”
And Yima made the earth grow larger by one-third than it was before, and
there came flocks and herds and men, at his will, as many as he wished.
THE VARA OF YIMA.
Ahūra Mazda then called a council of the gods, and here he spake to Yima
saying, “Upon the material earth the fatal winters are going to fall
that shall make the snow-flakes thick and deep on the peaks of the
highest mountains, and all the beasts shall perish that live in the
wilderness, and those that live on the mountains, and those that live in
the bosom of the vale. Therefore make thee a Vara, long as a riding-
ground on every side of the square, to be an abode for men and a fold
for flocks. There thou shalt make the waters flow, there thou shalt
settle birds by the evergreen banks that bear the never-failing food.
There shalt thou establish dwelling places and bring the greatest, the
best and the finest of the earth, both men and women; thou shalt bring
the animals, and the seeds of the trees, two of every kind to be kept
there, so long as men shall stay in the Vara.”
And Yima made a Vara, and brought into it all the varieties of cattle
and of plants, and the men in the Vara which Yima made, live the
happiest life,[190] and he who brought the law of Ahūra into the Vara
was the bird Karśipta. And Yima sealed up the Vara with the golden ring,
and he made a door and a window which was self-shining within. And Ahūra
Mazda said “There the stars, the moon and the sun, only once a year seem
to rise and set, and the year seems only a day.”
THE LAWS OF PURIFICATION.
The larger portion of the Vendīdad is devoted to a description, with
numberless repetitions, of the Mazdean laws of purification and the long
ceremonies pertaining to them. Impurity or uncleanness may be described
as the condition of a person or thing that is possessed of a demon, and
the process of purification is for the purpose of expelling the evil
presence. Death is the triumph of the demon, and therefore it is the
principal cause of uncleanness; when a man dies, as soon as the soul has
left the body, the Drūj Nasu, or Corpse-Drūj, comes from the regions of
hell, and falls upon the body, and whoever thereafter touches the corpse
is not only unclean himself, but every one whom he touches is also
unclean.
The Drūj is expelled from the dead by the Sag-dīd, or “the look of the
dog;” “a four-eyed dog,” or “a white one with yellow ears,” must be
brought near the body, and made to look upon the dead, and as soon as he
has done so the Drūj hastens back to hell.[191] The Drūj is expelled
from the living by a process which is too revolting for description. The
ceremonies are accompanied by the constant repetition of spells like the
following: “Perish, O fiendish Drūj! Perish, O brood of the fiend! Rush
away, O Drūj! Perish away to the regions of the north, never more to
give unto death the living world.”
The feeling out of which these ceremonies grew was not original with
Mazdeism; the Hindū also considered himself in danger while burning the
corpse, and he cried aloud, “Away, go away, O Death! injure not our sons
and our men.”[192]
The Pārsīs, not being able to find a four-eyed dog, interpreted the law
to mean a dog with two spots above the eyes, while in practice they are
still less particular, and the Sag-dīd may be performed by a house-dog,
or by a dog four months old. As birds of prey are fiend-smiters as well
as the dog, the devotee may claim their services when there is no dog at
hand. The four-eyed dog, which the ceremony originally called for, is
doubtless a reproduction of “the four-eyed dogs of the tawny breed of
Saramā,” belonging to Yama,[193] which guard the realms of death in
Hindū mythology. The identity of the four-eyed dog of the Pārsīs with
the dogs of Yama is confirmed by the tradition that the yellow-eared dog
watches at the head of the Chinvat bridge, and, as the souls of the
faithful pass over, he barks to drive away the fiend who would drag them
down to hell. Wherever a corpse is carried, death walks beside it all
the way, from the house to the last resting-place, and the fatal
presence constantly threatens the living who are near the path-way.
DISPOSITION OF THE DEAD.
As the centre of contagion is in the corpse, it must be disposed of in
such a way that death may not be spread abroad. The old Indo-European
customs have in this respect been completely changed by Mazdeism. The
corpse was formerly either burned or buried; both of these customs,
however, are held to be sacreligious in the Avesta. The elements, fire,
earth, and water, are holy, and even during the Indo-Īrānian period they
were already so considered, being represented in the Vedas as objects of
worship. But this did not prevent the Hindūs from burning their dead,
and the dead man was really considered as a traveler to the other world,
while the kindly fire was supposed to carry him on flashing pinions to
his heavenly abode. The funeral fire, like that of the sacrifice, was
the god that goes from earth to heaven, the mediator most friendly to
man.
In Persia, however, it remained more distant from him and represented
the purest offspring of the good spirit; therefore no uncleanness could
be allowed to enter it. Its only function appears to be the repelling of
the fiends by its blaze. In every place where the Pārsīs are settled, an
everlasting fire is still kept, which is always fed by perfumes and
costly woods, and wherever its flames are carried by the wind, it kills
thousand of fiends. No degradation must be inflicted upon this sacred
element, even blowing it with the human breath is a crime, because the
outgoing breath is unclean; burning the dead is therefore the most
criminal act; in the time of Strabo[194] it was a capital crime, and the
Avesta places it in the list of sins for which there is no atonement.
Water was looked upon in the same light, and throwing dead matter into
it was as unpardonable as to pollute the sacred flame with its presence.
The Magi are said to have overthrown a king for having built bath-
houses, and the Jews were forbidden to practice their ablutions; in some
cases the sick were even forbidden to drink it, unless it was decided
that death would be caused by longer abstinence. The earth was equally
holy, for in her bosom there dwelt Spenta Ārmaiti, the goddess of the
earth, and to defile her sacred dwelling by burying the dead was also a
deed for which there was no atonement.
In earlier times the Persians practiced burial even after burning had
been forbidden. Cambyses aroused the national indignation by cremating
the body of Amasis, and years later the Persians were still burying
their dead. Afterward, however, when the Mazdean law became dominant,
the worship of the earth was included, although it was sometime before
it was considered as sacred as fire and water. In later times the
Persians builded Dakhmas, or “Towers of Silence” for the bodies of their
dead; these towers were about twenty feet high, and they enclosed an
annular stone pavement on which the bodies were placed. These towers
were usually built on the summit of a mountain far from the haunts of
men. A barren cliff was chosen, free from trees or water, and the tower
was even separated from the earth herself, for it was isolated by a
layer of stones and bricks, while it was claimed that a golden thread
ran between the tower and the earth. Here, afar from the world of men,
the dead were left to lie “beholding the sun.” The Avesta and commentary
are especially emphatic upon this point, for “it is as if the dead man’s
life were thus prolonged, since he can still behold the sun.”
PUNISHMENTS.
The penalties for the violation of the Persian law were very severe, and
human life was considered of very little value, capital punishment being
inflicted even for the killing of a dog. Their laws were far more
barbarous than those of England in Sir William Blackstone’s time, when
one hundred and sixty offenses[195] were declared by act of Parliament
to be worthy of instant death;[196] and death was the most humane of the
Persian punishments, when it was promptly inflicted, for their methods
were too terrible for description. Two hundred stripes were awarded if
one tilled land in which a corpse had been buried within a year, or if
the mother of a very young child drank water. Four hundred stripes were
the penalty if one covered with a cloth a dead man’s feet, and eight
hundred if he covered the whole body. The penalty for killing a puppy
was five hundred stripes, six hundred for killing a stray dog, eight
hundred for a shepherd’s dog, and ten thousand stripes for killing a
water-dog.[197]
In the old Āryan legislation there were many crimes which were
considered more criminal than murder, and Persians who defiled the earth
were not more severely punished than were the Greeks who defiled the
ground of Delos, nor would the Athenians, who put Atarbes to death, have
wondered at the awful punishment inflicted for the killing of the
Persian water-dog. There are but few laws in the Vendīdad, however
absurd, that may not find a counterpart in the legislation of the Greeks
or Latins.
Every crime, according to the Persian law, makes the guilty man[198]
liable to two penalties, one here on earth and another in the next
world, but in ancient Persia, as in modern legislation, there was a
money value attached to many crimes, and the rich criminal escaped by
paying his fine, so far as this present world was concerned. In the
next, however, his money is of no value to him; when he comes to the
head of Chinvat bridge, his conscience becomes a maiden, either of
divine beauty, or of fiendish deformity, according to his merits. The
bridge itself, which reaches over the awful chasm of hell to the
heavenly shore on the other side, widens, if he be a good man, to the
width of nine javelins; but for the souls of the wicked it narrows to a
thread and they fall down into hell.
THE PLACE OF REWARD.
“O, Maker of the material world! where are the rewards given? where does
the rewarding take place?”
Ahūra Mazda answered: “When the man is dead, when his time is over, then
the hellish evil-doing Daevas assail him; and when the third night is
gone—when the dawn appears and brightens up, and makes Mithra, the god
with the beautiful weapons, reach the all-happy mountains, and the sun
is rising. Then the fiend carries off in bonds[199] the souls of the
wicked, who live in sin. The soul enters the way made by Time, and open
both to the wicked and the righteous. At the head of the Chinvat bridge,
the holy bridge made by Mazda, they ask for the reward for the goods
which they have given away here below. Then comes the well-shapen,
strong and noble maiden, with the dogs (that keep the Chinvat bridge) at
her side—she is graceful and of high understanding.
“She makes the soul of the righteous one to go up above the Hara-
berezaita; above the Chinvat bridge she places it in the presence of the
heavenly gods themselves; Vohu-manō from his golden seat exclaims, ‘How
hast thou come to us, thou holy one, from that decaying world into this
undecaying one? Gladly pass the souls of the righteous to the golden
seat of Ahūra Mazda—to the abode of all the other holy beings.”[200]
THE VISPARAD.
The word Visparad means “all the chiefs,” referring to “the lords of the
ritual,” therefore the various chapters are merely used in the course of
the sacrifice. The following extracts will give the reader a definite
idea concerning the literary merit of this portion of the Zend-Avesta:
In this Zaothra, with this Baresman,
I desire to approach the lords of the ritual
Which are spiritual with my praise;
And I desire to approach the earthly lords as well.
And I desire to approach the lords of the water with my praise
And the lords of the land;
And I desire to approach with my praise,
Those chiefs which strike the wing,
And those that wander wild at large,
And those of the cloven hoof, who are chiefs of the ritual.
And in this Zaothra with this Baresman,
I desire to approach thee, Zarathuśtra Spitama,...
I desire to approach the man who recites the ritual rites
Who is maintaining thus the thought, well thought,
And the word well spoken, and the deed well done.
I desire to approach the seasons with my praise
The holy lords of the ritual order,....
And I desire to approach those mountains with my praise,
* * * * * * * * * *
Which shine with holiness, abundantly glorious,
And Mithra of the wide pastures,
And I desire to approach the question,
Asked of Ahūra, and the lore of the lord—
And the farm-house of the man possessed of pastures,
And the pasture produced for the kine of blessed gift,
And the holy cattle-breeding man.
And we worship the fire here, Ahūra Mazda’s son,
And the Izads, having the seed of fire in them;
And we worship the Fravishas of the saints
And we worship Sraosha who smites to victory
And the holy man, and the entire creation of the clean.
* * * * * * * * * *
And we sacrifice to the fields and the waters...
We take up our homage to the good waters,
And to the fertile fruit-trees,
And the Fravishas of the saints, and to the kine.
And we sacrifice to that listening, that hears our prayers,
And to that mercy, and to the hearing of our homage,
And to that mercy shown in response to our praise,
And we sacrifice to that good praise which is without hypocrisy.
And which has no malice as its end.
* * * * * * * * * *
With this chant fully chanted,
And which is for the Bountiful Immortals
And by means of these ceremonial actions,
We desire to utter our supplications for the kine.
It is that chant which the saint has recognized
As good and fruitful of blessed gifts,
And which the sinner does not know.
May we never reach that misfortune
That the sinner may outstrip us in our chanting.
Nor in the matter of the plan thought out,
Or in words delivered, or ceremonies done,
Nor yet in any offering whatever, when he approaches us for harm.[201]
TEACHING OF THE MODERN PĀRSĪS.
This résumé of the ancient books will be closed by a brief explanation
of their faith in Dualism, as given by some learned Indian Pārsīs of
Bombay to Sir M. Monier-Williams during his stay in India. In speaking
of the Dualism of Zoroaster, as understood in modern times, Prof.
Williams says:
“The explanation given to me was that Zoroaster, although a believer in
one Supreme Being, and a teacher of Monotheism, set himself to account
for the existence of evil, which could not have its source in an all-
wise Creator.
He therefore taught that two opposite—but not opposing, forces, which he
calls ‘twins,’ were inherent in the nature of the Supreme Being, called
by him Ahūra Mazda (or in Persian Ormazd), and emanated from that Being,
just as in Hindūism, Vishṇu and Śiva emanate from the Supreme Brahmā.
These two forces were set in motion by Ahūra Mazda, as his appointed
mode of maintaining the continuity of the Universe.
The one was constructive, the other destructive.
One created and composed. The other disintegrated and decomposed, but
only to co-operate with the creative principle by providing fresh
material for the work of re-composition.
Hence there could be no new life without death, no existence without
non-existence.
Hence, also, according to Zoroaster, there was originally no really
antagonistic force of evil opposed to good.
The creative energy was called Ahūra Mazda’s beneficent spirit (Spento-
Mainyus), and the destructive force was called his maleficent spirit
(Angro-Mainyus, afterwards corrupted into Ahriman), but only because the
idea of evil is connected with dissolution.
The two spirits were merely antagonistic in name.
They were in reality co-operative and mutually helpful.
They were essential to the alternating processes of construction and
dissolution, through which the cosmical being was perpetuated.
The only real antagonism was that alternately brought about by the free
agent, man, who could hasten the work of destruction, or retard the work
of construction by his own acts.
It is therefore held, that the so-called dualistic doctrines of
Zoroaster were compatible with the absolute unity of the one God
(symbolized especially by fire).
Ultimately, however, Zoroastrianism crystallized into a hard and
uncompromising dualism. That is to say, in process of time, Spento-
Mainyus became merely another name for Ahūra Mazda, as the eternal
principle of good, while Angro-Mainyus or Ahriman became altogether
dissociated from Ahūra Mazda, and converted into an eternal principle of
evil.
These two principles are believed to be the sources of two opposite
creations which were incessantly at war.
On the one side is a celestial hierarchy, at the head of which is
Ormazd; on the other side, a demoniacal, at the head of which is
Ahriman. They are opposed to each other as light to darkness—as
falsehood to truth.
The whole energy of a religious Indian Pārsī is concentrated on the
endeavor to make himself—so to speak—demon-proof, and this can only be
accomplished by absolute purity (in thought, word and deed), symbolized
by whiteness. He is ever on his guard against bodily defilement, and
never goes out to his daily occupation, without first putting on a
sacred white shirt and a sacred white girdle. Even the most highly
educated and Anglicized Pārsīs are most rigorous observers of this
custom, though it is probable that their real creed has little in common
with the old and superstitious belief in demons and evil spirits, but
rather consists in a kind of cold and monotheistic pantheism.
How far Zoroastrian dualism had affected the religion of the Babylonians
at the time of the Jewish captivity is doubtful, but that the Hebrew
prophets of those days had to contend with dualistic ideas seems
probable from these words: ‘I am the Lord, and there is none else. I
form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil. I the
Lord do all these things.’[202] The New Testament, on the other hand,
might be thought by a superficial reader to lend some support to
dualistic doctrines.... I need scarcely point out, however, that the
Bible account of the origin, nature, and destiny of Satan and his angels
differs, _toto cælo_ from the Zoroastrian description of Ahriman and his
host. Nor need I add that the various monistic, pantheistic, and
dualistic theories, briefly alluded to in this paper, are utterly at
variance with the Christian doctrine of a Personal, Eternal and Infinite
Being, existing and working outside man, and outside the material
universe, which He has Himself created, and controlling both, and in the
case of human beings, working not only outside man, but in and through
him.”[203]
-----
Footnote 176:
Sa. Bks. of the East, Vol. IV, Int., pp. 56, 83.
Footnote 177:
Sa. Bks. of the East, Vol. XXXI, pp. 6-194.
Footnote 178:
Having an especial Yast.
Footnote 179:
The first month is called Fravisha, and indicates the particular time
of this celebration. Fravisha also means the departed souls of
ancestors, and these angels or protectors are numberless. Every being
of the good creation, whether living, dead or still unborn, has its
own Fravisha or guardian angel, who has existed from the beginning.
Footnote 180:
Haug was the first to call attention to this striking coincidence with
Hindu mythology; in the Aitareya, and Satapatha Brahmanas, in the
Atharva-veda, and in the Ramayana, the gods are numbered at thirty-
three.
Footnote 181:
Yasna, xvi.
Footnote 182:
See Yasna, xix.
Footnote 183:
This expression probably points to an immigration of Zarathustranism.
Footnote 184:
Yasna, xlii.
Footnote 185:
Yasna, lvii.
Footnote 186:
From the fifth to the twelfth.
Footnote 187:
When a dog dies his spirit passes to Ardvi Sura, the goddess of the
living waters that pour into the celestial sea. The penalty for
frightening a pregnant dog was from ten to two hundred stripes.
Footnote 188:
As the symbol and instrument of sovereignty. He reigned supreme by the
strength of the ring and of the poniard.
Footnote 189:
Spenta Armaiti is a general name for heavenly counsellors, and they
represent also the genii of the earth and waters. Under Ahura were six
Amesha Spentas, which were at first mere personifications of virtues
and moral powers, but as their lord and father ruled over the whole
world, in later times they took each a part of the world under
especial care. The dominion of the trees and waters was vested in
Haurvatad and Ameretad, or Health and Immortality; here we find the
influence of the old Indo-Iranian formulæ, in which waters and trees
were invoked as the springs of health and life. Perfect Sovereignty
had molten brass for his emblem, as the god in the storm established
his empire by means of that “molten brass,” the fire of lightning, and
he thus became the king of metals in general. Asha Vahista, the holy
order of the world, as maintained chiefly by the sacrificial fire,
became the genius of fire. Armaiti seems to have become a goddess of
the earth as early as the Indo-Iranian period, and Vohu-mano, or Good
Thought, had the living creation left to his superintendence. These
Amesha Spentas projected, as it were, out of themselves as many demons
who were hardly more than inverted images of the gods they were to
oppose; for instance. Health and Immortality were opposed by Sickness
and Decay, but these very demons were changed into the rulers of
hunger and thirst when they came in contact with the genii of the
waters and the trees. Vohu-mano, or Good Thought, was reflected in
Evil Thought, and after these came the symmetrical armies of
numberless gods and fiends.—_Darmesteter in Sa. Bks. E._
Footnote 190:
According to the hymns of the Rig-veda, “Yama the king, the gatherer
of the people, has descried a path for many which leads from the
depths to the heights; he first found out a resting place from which
nobody can turn out the occupants; on the way the forefathers have
gone, the sons will follow them.”—Rig-veda, X, 14, 1, 2.
Footnote 191:
The Druj went back to hell in the shape of a fly. The fly that came to
smell of a dead body was thought to be a corpse-spirit that came to
take possession of the dead in the name of Ahriman.
Footnote 192:
Rig-veda, X, 18, 1.
Footnote 193:
Hindu Literature, p. 35.
Footnote 194:
Strabo XV, 14; Herod. I, 138.
Footnote 195:
The Mosaic law mentions only seventeen crimes as being worthy of
capital punishment.
Footnote 196:
Blackstone’s Commentaries, IV, 4. 15, 18.
Footnote 197:
Says Prof. Darmesteter: “It may be doubted whether the murder of a
water-dog could actually have been punished with ten thousand stripes
unless we suppose that human endurance was different in ancient Persia
from what it is elsewhere; in the time of Chardin the number of
stripes inflicted on the guilty never exceeded three hundred; in the
old German law, two hundred; in the Mosaic law, forty.”—_Sa. Bks. E.,
Vol. IV, p. 99, Int._
Footnote 198:
The penalties for uncleanness in men were far more severe upon woman;
after giving birth to a child she was forbidden to taste of water, as
her touch would defile the element, and at times her food was handed
to her upon a long-handled spoon. Woman was made a creature of
contract, and disposed of by a bill of sale; like land or cattle, she
was classed under “the fifth contract,” being considered more valuable
than cattle, but far cheaper than real estate. They were sometimes
sold in the cradle and often when only two or three years of age.—_See
Dosabhoy Framjee’s work on The Parsis, p. 77._
Footnote 199:
Every one has a noose cast around his neck; when a man dies, if he is
righteous, the noose falls from his neck; but if wicked, they drag him
with that noose down to hell.—(_Farg., V, 8._)
Footnote 200:
Fargard, xix, 27-32.
Footnote 201:
Visparad, II, V, XVI, XXII.
Footnote 202:
Isaiah xlv, 6.
Footnote 203:
Sir M. Monier-Williams, Trans. Vic. Ins., Vol. XXV, p. 10.
DIVISION III.
THE TIME OF THE MOHAMMEDAN CONQUEST
AND THE KORĀN.