差分

But western scholars oppose this identification. In the Avesta, it is the hero warrior-priest ''[[Fereydun]]'' who battles the serpent ''[[Zahhak|Aži Dahāka]]'' (which, for the virtue of 'Azi' being cognate with Sanskrit 'Ahi', snake, is – by proponents of the theory - associated with Vedic [[Vritra]]ポール・ティームはこの主要な特徴に同意したが、バフラム・ヤシュトの豊富な古語的要素は明らかにゾロアスター教以前の時代を示しているが、固有名詞の解釈は「極めて推測的」であり、「インド・アーリア的あるいは古いインド的性格に対する決定的な論拠は得られない」と明言している<!--, although it remains unclear why those two and not any other Azi, or for that matter, Vedic ''ahi budhnya'', should be related --ref>). One Western scholar claims that, in the Vedas, the epithet 'hero' (''sura'') is itself almost exclusively reserved for ''Indra'', while in the Avesta it is applied to ''Thraetaona'' and other non-divine figures. The term "victorious" is not restricted to ''Verethragna'', but is also a property of a number of other figures, both divine and mortal, including ''Thraetaona''. Then, while in the Vedas it is ''Indra'' who discovers [[Soma (drink)|Soma]], in the Avesta, it is humans who first press [[Haoma]] and ''Thraetaona'' is attributed with being the "inventor of medicine". In the Vedas, ''Indra'' strikes with ''[[vajra]]'', but in the Avesta ''vazra'' is [[Mithra]]'s weapon. Attempts to resolve these objections led to the development of another theory, in which, in addition to the pre-historical divinity of victory, there was also a dragon-slaying hero ''Indra''. Then, while the Iranians retained the figures independently of one another, the Indians conflated the two (leaving an echo in the character of ''Trita Aptya''). This theory too had its problems, in particular the fact that ''Indra'' was already evidently a divine figure, and not a man, in [[Indo-Aryan superstrate in Mitanni|the Mittani treaties]], where he appears in the company of [[Mitra (Vedic)|Mitra]] and [[Varuna]]. That again raises more questions since the treaties echo the [[Rig Veda]]'s invocation of all three as protectors of contract, again, not a property associated with ''Verethragna''. However, as Benveniste and Renou demonstrated, many of the objections to the first theory could be negated if the evidence were reviewed in light of the fact that the principal feature of ''Verethragna'' was not to slay noxious creatures but to overcome obstacles (''verethra''), in particular to unblock the flow of [[Aban|''apas'']], the waters, the holiest of the elements.{{sfn|Benveniste|Renou|1934|p=182}} Paul Thieme agreed with this principal feature, but clarified that while the wealth of archaic elements in the ''Bahram Yasht'' clearly point to the pre-Zoroastrian era1960, the interpretation of proper names is "highly conjectural", and "in no case do we get a decisive argument against their Indo-Aryan or old Indic character"{{sfn|Thieme|1960|p=302}} p302</ref> <!-- Since "Vedic Indra must be distinguished from a presumable Proto-Aryan ''*Indra'' [of the Mittani treaties]" (302), "we may go so far as to say that the Avestan ''Vərəθraγna'' in his role as the fighting companion of ''Miθra'' is the equivalent of the Vedic Indra in his role as the helper of the ''Adityas''. This does not necessarily mean that ''Vərəθraγna'' has taken the place of Proto-Aryan ''*Indra''; it may just as well mean that Vedic Indra has replaced a Proto-Aryan ''Vərəθraγna''." (312) --> Adopting "the exact linguistic and exegetic analysis" of Benveniste and Renou, Thieme concludes "Proto-Aryan ''*Indra'' has assumed the functions of a Proto-Aryan god ''*Vrtraghna''." Noting that ''Vrtrahan'' is the name of Indra only in the later Sanskrit texts (but not in the Rig Veda), Thieme adds "there is no valid justification for supposing that the Proto-Aryan adjective ''。ベンヴェニステとルヌーの「正確な言語学的・聖書学的分析」を採用したティームは、「原アーリア人の*vrtraghan'' was specifically connected with ''インドラは、原アーリア人の神*Indra'' or any other particular god."{{sfn|Thieme| 1960|p=312-313}} ==See also==ウルスラグナの機能を引き受けている」と結論付けている。Vrtrahanがインドラの名前であるのは、後のサンスクリット語のテキストだけで、リグ・ヴェーダにはないことを指摘した上で、ティームは「原アーリア語の形容詞*[[Indra]]vrtraghanが特に*[[Vritra]]インドラや他の特定の神と関連していたと考える正当な理由はない」と付け加えている<!--Drawing attention to the fact that ''Indra'' is specifically named as a demon in both the Avesta (''Vendidad'' 10.9) and also in later middle Persian texts (e.g. ''Bundahishn'' 21.6), Boyce adds that it is preferable to see individual developments rather than elements inherited from a different past.--ref><!-- Indra=Demon is noted at 1975:62-64Thieme, but ref for "preferable etc" (Boyce, 1975:283) is wrong. --> == Bibliography =={{refbegin}}* {{citation|title=Vrtra et Vrθragna|last1=Benveniste |first1=Émile |last2=Renou |first2=Louis |name-list-style=amp |year=1934|location=Paris|publisher=Imprimerie Nationale}} <!-- as cited in Boyce et al. -->* {{citation|last=Boyce|first=Mary|title=History of Zoroastrianism, Vol. I1960, The early period|year=1975|publisher=Brill|location=Leiden|isbn=90p312-04-10474-7}} * {{citation|last=Boyce|first=Mary|author-link=Mary Boyce|title=History of Zoroastrianism, Vol. II, Under the Achamenians| year=1982|publisher=Brill|location=Leiden|isbn=90-04-06506-7}}* {{citation|title=Religion of ancient Iran|author=[[Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin]]|year=1973|location=Bombay|publisher=Tata Press}} <!--Originally published as ''La religion de l'Iran ancien'' (1962). -->* {{citation|title=The destiny of the warrior|last=Dumezil|first=Georges|year=1970|location=Chicago|publisher=University of Chicago Press|isbn=0-226-16970-7|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/destinyofwarrior00dume}}* {{citation|chapter=Bahram in old and middle Iranian texts|last=Gnoli|first=Gherardo|title=Encyclopaedia Iranica|volume=3|year=1989|location=New York|publisher=Routledge & Kegan Paul|pages=510–513}}* {{cite encyclopedia | article = Bahrām (Vərəθraγna) | last1 = Gnoli |first1 = G. |last2 = Jamzadeh |first2 = P. | author-link = | url = http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bahram-1 | editor-last = | editor-first = | editor-link = | encyclopedia = Encyclopaedia Iranica, Vol. III, Fasc. 5 | pages = 510–514 | location = | publisher = | year = 1988 | isbn = }}313<!-- * {{cite book|last=Puhvel|first=Jaan|title=Comparative Mythology|year=1989|location=Baltimore|isbn=0-8018-3938-6|publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press}} -->* {{citation|last=Lommel|first=Herman|title=Der arische Kriegsgott|year=1939|location=Frankfurt/Main|publisher=Klostermann}}* {{citation|title=The 'Aryan' Gods of the Mitanni Treaties|last=Thieme|first=Paul|journal=Journal of the American Oriental Society|volume=80|issue=4|year=<!--Oct-Dec--ref>1960|pages=301–317|doi=10.2307/595878|jstor=595878}}* {{cite book|last=West|first=Edward William|author-link=Edward William West|chapter=Marvels of Zoroastrianism: The Bahman Yasht|year=1880|editor-last=Müller|editor-first=Friedrich Max|editor-link=Max Müller|title=[[Sacred Books of the East|SBE]] |volume=5|publisher=OUP|location=Oxford}}* {{citation|last=Zaehner|first=Richard Charles|title=Zurvan, a Zoroastrian dilemma|year=1955|publisher=Clarendon|location=Oxford|isbn=0-8196-0280-9}}{{refend}}。

== 10の化身 ==『ウルスラグナ祭儀書』によれば、ウルスラグナはアワタールという変身に長け、10種の姿をとってゾロアスターの前に現れたとされる。 それによりウルスラグナは変身して戦うといわれ、特に力強いちなみに、インドラは「イン（天あるいは熊）」＋「ドラ（Tù）」という造語で「天兎」あるいは「熊兎」という造語、ヴリトラは「兎（Tù）」の最初の子音「T」が略されたものではないかと思う。ヴリトラはおそらく中国神話の[[イノシシ共工]]の姿をとって戦場で[[ミスラ]]を先導する姿は、宗教画などに好んで描かれた。 また、鳳（おおとり）の時は霊力に優れ、この羽根を持てば災難除けの呪いになった。この羽根を身体に擦り付けると、悪い呪いを術者に跳ね返す事が出来るといわれる。 # 強い風# 黄金の角を持つ雄[[牛]]# 黄金の飾りをつけた[[白馬]]# 鋭い爪と長い毛を持つ俊足の[[駱駝]]# 鋭い牙をした野[[猪]]# 十五歳の輝かしい若者# 鳳（おおとり）# 美しい野生の雄[[羊]]# 鋭い角を持つ[[山羊]]# 黄金の刃のある剣を持つ人間 これは[[ヴィシュヌ]]の10の[[アヴァターラ]]に対応するという説がある<ref>『世界神話大事典』<sup>''（要ページ番号、2015-11-03）''</ref>。両者の変化する動物には猪を除いて共通するものが無いが、ゾロアスター教では善悪二元論によって善い動物・悪い動物が規定されていることと、ウルスラグナの成立にオリエント文化の影響があったことなどが背景として考えられる<ref name="Okada"/>。 == 私的考察 ==ウスラグナは北欧神話のヴァルハラと関連するのではないか。また子音構成からいってオーディンと同起源の神かと思う。に相当するのではないだろうか。「兎子（Tùzǐ）」の神の穏やかな相・良い相（和魂）をインドラとするならば、荒れ狂う相（荒魂）がヴリトラであると考える。ウルスラグナは英雄であるので、和魂に属する神といえると考える。