“Facts about the Dēnkard” along with “The Review of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti from the Waršt-Mānsar Nask and Baγ Nask from the 9th Book of Dēnkard”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The“Dēnkard” is one of the most important religious books related to Zoroastrian religion, which is written in Pahlavi script and language. This book is written based on the Avesta and its interpretations and the sayings of the predecessors. In this research, firstly, materials about the Dēnkard and its final authors are examined, which contain important points and new results. After that, the chapters Yasna Haptaŋhāiti from the Waršt-Mānsar Nask and Baγ Nask from the ninth book of the Dēnkard are examined and analyzed in order to determine to what extent their contents have been taken from the Avestan text of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti and its Zand. In the findings of the research, it was found that because the final author of the Dēnkard did not have any source of the Avesta and Zand at the time of writing the book, he has interpreted the Avesta using his intelligence and memory. Also, according to the findings of the research, it was found that in addition to the content that has been taken from the Avestan text of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, some content from other parts of the Avesta have been also written in these two chapters of the Waršt-Mānsar Nask and Baγ Nask. Because, sometimes due to the confusion of the final author of the Dēnkard, who has confused one verse with another verse, and sometimes for further explanation and interpretation, the interpretations of other parts of the Avesta have been written in these two chapters. In fact, the author of the Dēnkard wrote these contents from other parts of the Avesta in these chapters as a guest. This article contains research materials and methods that have been discovered for the first time in the world by its author.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".