A Substantial Change in the Approach to the Zoroastrian Long Liturgy
A Substantial Change in the Approach to the Zoroastrian Long Liturgy
复制标题
琐罗亚斯德教漫长礼拜仪式方式的重大变化
DOI：
10.1163/15728536-05902002
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
0.2
通讯作者：
Alberto
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cantera;Alberto
2006 年至 2013 年间，J. Kellens 出版了五卷（最后一本与 C. Redard 合着），由 K.F. 编辑的文本修正版本。 格尔德纳主持了最长、最重要的琐罗亚斯德教仪式，通常以其变体之一的名称为亚斯纳（Yasna）。文本附有实验性翻译，并附有评论。 J.凯伦斯在翻译和研究礼拜仪式的标准日常变体，以及其更庄严的版本方面处于领先地位。此外，他的作品是第一次尝试将整个礼拜仪式文本解读为古老而有意义的礼拜仪式的连贯文本（尽管产生于不同时期），尽管传统上它被理解为晚期作品。正如它在手稿中出现的那样，并且至今在印度仍然受到庆祝，礼拜仪式是对旧版本的一系列有意识的解释、重新解释和重新排列的结果。尽管如此，这是一个连贯的文本和仪式，其中礼拜仪式的每个部分都发挥着具体的作用，J.凯伦斯首次试图揭示这一点。在本评论中，我试图强调凯伦斯对琐罗亚斯德教长礼拜仪式的新方法的非凡重要性，并揭示他的主要成就。同时，我揭露了这部巨著的主要弱点：1.它依赖于格尔德纳编辑的文本，隐藏了部分长礼拜仪式的仪式多样性； 2. 有意识地忽视琐罗亚斯德教传统所提供的有关礼仪表演的元仪式信息； 3. J.凯伦斯的亚斯纳中心主义使他无法认识到长礼拜仪式和其他小型仪式之间的密切联系，以及在长礼拜仪式中参与许多可以独立庆祝的短仪式。
Between 2006 and 2013 J. Kellens published in five volumes (the last one together with C. Redard) a corrected version of the text edited by K.F. Geldner of the longest and most important Zoroastrian ritual usually known by the name of one of its variants as theYasna. The text accompanies an experimental translation and both are followed by a commentary. J. Kellens is pioneering in translating and studying, not only the standard daily variant of the liturgy, but also its more solemn version. Furthermore, his work is the first attempt to read the complete text of the liturgy as the coherent text (although produced at different times) of an old and meaningful liturgy, although it has been traditionally understood as a late composition. As it appears in the manuscripts and is celebrated still today in India, the liturgy is the result of a series of conscious interpretations, reinterpretations and rearrangements of older versions. Despite of this, it is a coherent text and ritual in which each section of the liturgy plays a concrete role that J. Kellens has tried to bring to light for the first time. In the present review, I try to highlight the extraordinary importance of Kellens’ new approach to the Zoroastrian Long Liturgy and to expose his main achievements. At the same time, I expose the main weaknesses of this monumental work: 1. its dependence on the text edited by Geldner, which hides part of the ritual variety of the Long Liturgy; 2. the conscious disregard of the meta-ritual information provided by the Zoroastrian tradition about the performance of the liturgy; 3. J. Kellens’s Yasna-centrism that prevents him to recognize the close connections between the Long Liturgy and other minor rituals and the participation within the Long Liturgy of many short rituals that can be celebrated independently.