________________
CHAPTER VIII, 10-14.
305
13. Nêryôsang' said thus: Thou deemest it most surprising that, of the renunciation of sin with energy, whatever may be its efficacy, they have been so much of the same 2 opinion, so that whenever they perform renunciation, however they perform it, and before whomever they perform it, whenever a sin is not even mentally originating with one s a renunciation should be performed by him; and when very many mortal sins (margargân) are committed by him, and he engages mentally in renunciation of every one separately, he is not on the way to hell, owing to his renunciation; and if there be one of which he is not in renunciation the way to hell 6 is not closed to him, for he does not rely upon the beneficence (sad) of Adharmazd, and it is allowable to appoint a priestly retribution (rad tôgisn) to fully atone for it, and when thou appointest a priestly retribution for it, and dost not fully atone, it is allowable to inflict it justly and strongly (drabô).'
14. When his sin is committed against (dên)
1 This cannot be the learned Parsi translator of several Pahlavi texts into Sanskrit, who bore the same name, and is supposed to have lived in the fifteenth century. Being quoted in the Pahlavi Vendidad (see Chap. I, 4, note) he must have been one of the old commentators.
* K20 has hômanam, 'I am,' instead of ham, the same;' a mistake arising from reading am, I am,' for ham.
This applies to all cases of merely imputed sin, such as those committed by children, which are imputed to the father, and for which he is spiritually, as well as temporally, responsible.
• Reading pavan, 'on,' instead of bara, 'out of' (see p. 176, note 5).
o Most of this clause is omitted in K20 by mistake.
[5]
х
Digitized by Google
