In this paper, we show that the Yašts wehave are not authentic in so far as that theyare the fruit of the arbitrary mixture of thethree kinds of the original Yašts: theliturgical one, the legal one and theetiological one. In a lot of our Yašts, moreweight is given to the liturgical version (with
yazamaide), but, in the ĀbānYašt, the legal one (with
yazaēša)plays the main role. By considering alltogether the etiological fragments theĀbān Yašt contains, it is possible toenlarge upon what we knew already of what mayhave constituted the etiological myth of thesacrifice offered to a deity.
Incidentally, all the different names thegreat Iranian goddess receives, ap-, areduuī-,sūrā- and anāhitā-, are explained: `water, soft,opulent, unaffected'.