Introduction
It has been already stated (see pp, xiii, xiv) that Zād-sparam, a
younger brother
of Manuskihar, after having been at Sarakhs, in the
extreme north-east of Khurāsān, where he seems to have associated with
the heretical Tughazghuz, was appointed high-priest of Sīrkān, south
or south-west of Kirmān 1. Shortly after his arrival there he issued a
decree, regarding the ceremonies of purification and other matters,
which was so unpalatable to the Mazda-worshippers of that place that
they wrote an epistle to Manuskihar, complaining of the conduct of his
brother (Ep. I, i, 2, ii, 1).
In reply to this complaint, which was sent by a special courier (Ep.
I, i, 2), and after going to Shīrāz and holding a general assembly of
the priests and elders (Ep. II, i, ii), Manuskihar wrote his first
epistle, completed on the 15th March 881 (Ep. I, xi, 12), in which he
condemned the practices decreed by Zād-sparam, to whom he sent a
confidential agent, named Yazdān-pānak (Ep. I, xi, i, 2, 6, 10, II,
vii, 2), with a copy of this epistle and a further one to himself, which
has not been preserved, for the purpose of inducing his brother to
withdraw his decree and conform to the usual customs.
It would appear that Yazdān-pānak was not very successful in his
mission, as we find Manuskihar writing a general epistle (Ep. III) to
all the Mazda-worshippers in Irān, in the following June or July (Ep.
III, 21), denouncing as heretical the mode of purification decreed by Zād-sparam,
and ordering an immediate return to former customs. At the same time (Ep.
II, vii, 2, viii, 1) he wrote a second epistle (Ep. II) to his brother,
as he had already promised in Ep. I, xi, 2, and, after referring to an
epistle (now lost) which he had received from Zād-sparam in the
previous November or December, he proceeded to enforce his views by a
judicious intermingling of argument, entreaty, and threats. He also
contemplated making preparations (Ep. I, xi, 4, II, vii, 3) for
travelling himself to Sīrkān, notwithstanding his age (Ep. II, ix, 1),
to arrange the matters in dispute upon a satisfactory basis. Whether he
actually undertook this journey is unknown, but that his brother must
have finally submitted to his authority appears from Zād-sparam
retaining his position in the south, as has been already noticed (p.
xiv).
The matter in dispute between Zād-sparam and the orthodox
Mazda-worshippers may seem a trivial one to people of other religions,
but, inasmuch as the ceremonial uncleanness of a person insufficiently
purified after contact with the dead would contaminate every one he
associated with, the sufficiency of the mode of purification was quite
as important to the community, both priests and laity, as avoidance of
breach of caste-rules is to the Hindū, or refraining from sacrifices to
heathen gods was to the Jew, the early Christian, or the Muhammadan. And
much more important than any disputes about sacraments, infallibility,
apostolic succession, ritual, or observance of the Sabbath can possibly
be to any modern Romanist or Protestant.
In his mode of dealing with this matter Manuskihar displays at once
the moderation and tact of a statesman accustomed to responsibility, the
learning and zeal of a well-informed priest, and the kindly affection of
a brother. That he was not without rivals and enemies appears from his
casual allusions to Zaratūst, the club-footed, and Ātūro-pād in Ep.
II, i, 13, v, 14, ix, 11; but in all such allusions, as well as in his
denunciation of heretical opinions, he refrains from coarse invective,
and avoids the use of exaggerated language, such as too often disfigures
and weakens the arguments in polemical discussions.
Indirectly these epistles throw some light upon the condition of the
Mazda-worshippers after more than two centuries of ceaseless struggle
with the ever-advancing flood of Muhammadanism which was destined to
submerge them. Shīrāz, Sīrkān, Kirmān, Rāī, and Sarakhs are still
mentioned as head-quarters of the old faith; and we are told of
assemblies at Shīrāz and among the Tughazghuz, the former of which
appears to have had the chief control of religious matters in Pārs,
Kirmān, and the south, acting as a council to the high-priest of Pārs
and Kirmān, who was recognised as the leader of the religion (Dd. XLV,
5). We also learn, from Ep. I, iii, I x, II, v, 14, that the leaders of
the Mazda-worshippers, if not their high-priests, were still in the
habit of maintaining troops and, from Ep. II, i, 9, that when a
high-priest became very old his worldly duties were performed by four of
the most learned priests, forming a committee, which had full authority
to deliberate and act for him in all worldly matters. Manuskihar even
speaks of emigrating by sea to China, or by land to Asia Minor (Ep. II,
viii, 5), in order to escape from the annoyances of his position.
But the statements which are most important to the Pahlavi scholar,
in these epistles, are the date attached to the third epistle,
corresponding to A.D. 881, and the mention of Nīshahpūhar in Ep. I,
iv, 15, 17 as the supreme officiating priest and councillor of king Khūsrō
Nōshirvān (A.D. 531-579), engaged apparently in writing commentaries
on the Avesta. The date of these epistles not only limits that of the Dādistān-ī
Dīnīk to the latter half of the ninth century, but also fixes those of
the larger recension of the Bundahis and of the latest revision of the Dīnkard
within the same period, because it is stated in Bd. XXXIII, 10, 11 that
the writer of that chapter was a contemporary of Zād-sparam, son of Yūdān-Yim,
and Ātūr-pād, son of Hźmīd, the former of whom was evidently the
brother of Manuskihar, and the latter is mentioned in Dīnkard III,
ccccxiii as the latest editor of that work. The actual compiler of a
great part of the Dīnkard (especially of the fourth and fifth books)
was, however, the somewhat earlier writer Atūr-frōbag, son of Farukhūzād
(Dd. LXXXVIII, 8, Ep. I, iii, 9). The name of Nīshahpūhar is also
mentioned as that of a commentator in the Pahlavi Vendidād and Nīrangistān,
which works must, therefore, have been revised since the middle of the
sixth century. And as we are informed in the book of Ardā-Vīrāf (I,
35) that 'there are some who call him by the name of Nikhshahpūr,' we
ought probably to refer that book to the same age. These epistles,
therefore, enable us, for the first time, to fix the probable dates of
the latest extensive revisions of six of the most important Pahlavi
works that are still extant; and from the relationship of these to
others we can readily arrive at safer conclusions, regarding the age of
Pahlavi literature in general, than have been hitherto possible.
Footnotes
xxv:1 The city of Kirmān was itself called Sīrgān, or Sīrgān, in
the middle ages, and is evidently mentioned by that name in Ouseley's
Oriental Geography, pp. 139, 143, though the Sīrgān of pp. 138, 141 of
the same work was clearly further south. Which of these two towns was
the Sīrkān of these epistles, may therefore, be doubtful.
Suggested Reading
| Source:
PAHLAVI TEXTS Translated by E. W. WEST Part II The Dādistān-ī Dīnīk
and the Epistles of Mānūskīhar Clarendon: Oxford University
Press [1882]
|
|
