But there remains a third possible explanation, that the two texts are by different authors, one of whom knows and imitates the style of the other,
INTRODUCTION. XXXili
a character as not to be easily ascribable to mistakes and carelessness such as even a careful author may be guilty of in the course of a large work!. It seems to me then that until the discovery of further circumstances throwing light on the question of the identity of the authors of the Srautas and of the Grthyas, it would be premature if we were to venture on a decision of this question in one direction or the other.
Prof. Bihler’s investigations have made perfectly clear the relation in which the Gvthya-sitras and the Dharmasitras stand to each other in those cases, where we have texts of both kinds by the same school. In the case of the Grhya-sdtra and the Dharma-sitra of the Apastambiyas he has proved* that both texts were the work of the same author according to a common plan, so that the Grihya-sitra is as short and terse as possible, because Apastamba had reserved for the Dharma-sitra a portion of the subject-matter generally treated of in the Grihyasitras. Besides there are references in each of the two texts to the other which strengthen the proof of their being written by the same author. In the Siftra collection of Hiramyakesin the state of things is different. Here, as Prof. Biihler has also shown °, we find numerous discrepancies between the Gvthya and the Dharma-sitra, which are owing to the fact, that while this teacher took as Dharma-sftra that of Apastamba with some unessential changes, he composed a Grthya-sitra of his own. Of the two Sftras of Baudhdyana, the same _ distinguished scholar, to whom we owe the remarks we have just mentioned, has treated in the Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxi. ,
I believe that every reader who compares the two kinds of texts will notice that the frame within which the exposi-
: ° tion of the Dharma-siitras is inclosed, is an essentially
1 Cf. my remarks in the introduction to the Sankh&yana-Grshya, vol. xxix,
PP: 5, 6. 3 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xiii seq. 5 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxiii seq.
[30] c
_ XXXIV GRIHYA-SOTRAS.
my remarks in the introduction to the Sankh&yana-Grshya, vol. xxix,
PP: 5, 6. 3 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xiii seq. 5 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxiii seq.
[30] c
_ XXXIV GRIHYA-SOTRAS.
broader one than in the case of the Gvzhya-sftras. We have here, I think, the same phenomenon that may also be observed, for instance, in the domain of the Buddhist Vinaya literature, where the exposition of the life of the community was at first given only in connection with the explanation of the list of sins (Patimokkha) which was promulgated every half month at the meetings of the spiritual brethren. It was not till later that a more comprehensive exposition, touching all the sides of the life of the community was attempted?, an exposition which, on the one hand, no longer limited itself to the points discussed in the Patimokkha, and which, on the other hand, necessarily had much in common with what was laid down in the Patimokkha. The relation of the Gvzhya-sftras and Dharma-sitras seems to me to be of a similar nature. The Grihya-sitras begin to treat of the events of the daily life of the household, but they do not yet undertake to exhaust the great mass of this subjectmatter ; on the contrary they confine themselves principally to the ritual or sacrificial side of household life, as is natural owing to their connection with the older ritualistic literature. Then the Dharma-sitras take an important step further ; their purpose is to describe the whole of the rights and customs which prevail in private, civic, and public life. They naturally among other things touch upon the ceremonies treated in the Gvthya-sitras, but they generally merely mention them and discuss the questions of law and custom which are connected with them, without undertaking to go into the technical ordinances as to the way in which these ceremonies are to be performed 2.
Only in a few cases do portions treated of in the domain of the Dharma-sitras happen to coincide with portions treated of in the Grzhya-s(tras. Thus especially, apart from a few objects of less importance, the detailed rules for the behaviour of the Snataka and the rules for the interruptions
1 In the work which has Khandhaké as its general title and which has been transmitted to us in two parts, Mahavagga and Xullavagga.
2 Compare, for instance, the explanations concerning the Upanayana in the Dharma-sfitras (Apastamba I, 1; Gautama I) with the corresponding sections of the Grthya-sitras.
INTRODUCTION, XXXV
of the Veda study (anadhy4ya) are generally treated in an exactly similar way in the texts of the one and those of the other category.
INTRODUCTION, XXXV
of the Veda study (anadhy4ya) are generally treated in an exactly similar way in the texts of the one and those of the other category.
We have spoken above of the metrical peculiarities of the Mantras quoted in the Grzhya-sitras, the metre of which clearly proves what is indubitable from other reasons, that most, if not all, of these verses were composed at a perceptibly older period than the descriptions of the sacred acts in the midst of which they are inserted!. A second kind of verses which are quoted in the Grzhya-s(tras must be carefully distinguished from these. It is doubtful whether there are any to be found among them which the authors of the Sfitras have themselves composed; but they were composed at a period decidedly more recent than those Mantras ?, and they therefore exhibit metrical peculiarities which are essentially different. The verses I mean are Slokas of ritual contents, which are quoted to confirm or to complete what is stated in the prose, and which are introduced by such expressions as tad apy 4hu& ‘here they say also,’ or tad api slokak ‘here there are also Slokas,’ and other similar phrases °,
‘We called attention above (p. xix) to the fact that a verse of this kind occurs in one of the Grvzhya chapters of the Satapatha Brahmama, in a metre corresponding to the peculiarities of the older literary style. On the other hand, the verses appearing in the Grihya-sitras differ only in a few cases from the standard of the later Sloka prosody, as we have it, e.g. in the Mahabharata and in the laws of Manu. In the Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlind. Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvii, p. 67, I have given tables for the verses in question out of the Sankhayana-Grzhya, and these tables show that the characteristic ending of the first
1 We do not mean to deny that among these verses too a few of especially modern appearance are to be found; e.g. this is true of the verses which Dr. Von Bradke has quoted from the Mfnava-Grzhya II, 14, 34 (Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlind. Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvi, p. 429).
5 Let me here refer to the fact that one of these verses (Asvalfyana-Grshya IV, 7, 16) concludes with the words, ‘thus said Saunaka.’
* Asvalayana-Grthya I, 3, 10 designates such a verse as yagfagitha.
c2
XXXvi GRIHYA-SOTRAS.
Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvi, p. 429).
5 Let me here refer to the fact that one of these verses (Asvalfyana-Grshya IV, 7, 16) concludes with the words, ‘thus said Saunaka.’
* Asvalayana-Grthya I, 3, 10 designates such a verse as yagfagitha.
c2
XXXvi GRIHYA-SOTRAS.
Sloka Pada for the later period v —- —™, which, for instance, in the Nalopakhyana of the Mahabharata covers precisely five-sixths of all the cases, occurs in Sankh4yana in thirty cases out of thirty-nine, that is in about three quarters of the cases1; S4nkhayana has still twice the ending v-u™ which is the rule in the Rig-veda, but which is forbidden by the later prosody: prahuta’ pitrzkarman4, uktva mantram sprised apak*, It may be observed that a similar treatment of the Sloka metre appears also in the Rig-veda Pratisikhya of Saunaka. Here too the modern form of the ending of the first pada dominates, although sometimes the old iambic form is preserved, e. g. II, 5 antakpadamvivrittayaf, III, 6 anudattodaye puna.
It seems evident that we have in this Sloka form of the Sftra period, the last preparatory stage which the development of this metre had to traverse, before it arrived at the shape which it assumes in epic poetry ; and it is to be hoped that more exhaustive observations on this point (account being especially taken of the numerous verses quoted in the Dharma-sitras) will throw an important light on the chronology of the literature of this period lying between the Vedas and the post-Vedic age.
We add to these remarks on the Slokas quoted in the Grihya-sitras, that we come upon a number of passages in the midst of the prose of the Sdtras, which without being in any way externally designated as verses, have an unmistakable metrical character, being evidently verses which the authors of the Sfatras found ready made, and which they used for their own aphorisms, either without changing them at all, or with such slight changes that the original form remained clearly recognisable. Thus we read in Asvalayana (Grthya I, 6, 8), as a definition of the Rakshasa marriage: hatva bhittva 4a sirshdzi rudatim rudadbhyo
* The few verses which are found in Gobhila preserve the same metrical standard as those quoted in SaikhAyana ; it follows that in Gobhila IV, 7, 23, asvatthad agnibhayam brilyat, we cannot change brflyat in 4a, as Prof. Knauer proposes. The supernumerary syllable of the first foot is unobjectionable, but the form v — - — of the second foot should not be touched.
* Both passages are to be found in Saikh&yana-Grhya I, 10.
INTRODUCTION. XXXVil
Knauer proposes. The supernumerary syllable of the first foot is unobjectionable, but the form v — - — of the second foot should not be touched.
* Both passages are to be found in Saikh&yana-Grhya I, 10.
INTRODUCTION. XXXVil
haret: the approximation of these words to the Sloka metre cannot escape attention, and it is only necessary to make rudadbhya and rudatim change places in order to obtain a regular Sloka hemistich. In Gobhila the Sdtras I, 2, 21-27 represent three hemistichs, which with one exception (na 4a sopanatkak kvaéit) exactly conform to the laws of the Sloka metre. II, 4, 2 gives also a hemistich by slightly changing the order : Mahavrzkshan smasdnam ka nadis ka vishamami ha!.
Somewhat more remote from the original verses is the wording of the Sftras I, 6, 8. 9 na pravasann upavased ity ahuf, patny4 vratam bhavatiti; we have the metrical order in one of the Slokas quoted by Sankh4yana (Grzhya II, 17): nopavasak pravdse syat patni dhdrayate vratam.
The verses which are thus either expressly quoted, or at any rate made use of by the authors of the Grzhya-sitras, do not seem to be taken from connected metrical works any more than the yag#agath4s quoted in the Brahmazas; on the contrary in a later period of literature, when texts similar to Manu’s Code were composed, they evidently furnished these texts with some of their materials *.
Leaving out of consideration the Khadira-Grihya, which is evidently a recast of the Gobhiliya-Grzhya, and the Sitra of Hirazyakesin, which is, at least in part, based on that of Apastamba °, we are not in regard to the other Grthya texts in a condition to prove that one of them borrowed from the other. It often happens that single Sfitras or whole rows of Sitras agree so exactly in different texts that this agreement cannot be ascribed to chance; but this does not—so far at least—enable us to tell which text is to be looked upon as the source of the
1 The text has: nadts £a visham4wi 4a mah4vrikshan smasinam a,
* Cf. Indische Studien, XV, 11. We do not mean to imply anything as to the metrical portions of other Sfitra texts than the Grzhya-sitras. As regards some verses quoted in the Baudh&yana-Dharma-s(itra, Prof. Biihler (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xli) has shown that they are actually borrowed from a metrical treatise on the Sacred Law.
* Cf. Prof. Biihler’s remarks, Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxiii.
XXXViii GRIHYA-SOTRAS.
other, or whether they have a common source which has been lost.
I will content myself with mentioning two such cases of agreement, in the one of which we can at least prove that a certain Sdtra cannot originally spring from one of the texts in which we find it, while in the other case we are able by means of a possibly not too uncertain conjecture to reconstruct the opening Sftras of a lost Grzhya-sftra.
The description of the vrishotsarga (i.e. of the setting a bull at liberty) agrees almost word for word in the Sdtras of Sankh4yana (III, 11), Paraskara (III, 9), and in the K4azhaka-Grthya. In SA4nkhayana we read:
(‘When the bull is in the midst of the cows, he recites over it the texts “ mayobhd&, &c.,” down to the end of the Anuvaka.’)
The quotation mayo bhd& is clear, if we refer it to the Rig-veda. Hymn X, 169, which stands about in the middle of an Anuvaka, begins with this word!. On the other hand in the Vagasaneyi Samhita there is no Mantra | beginning with MayobhoZ; we find this word in the middle of the Mantra XVIII, 45, and there follow verses whose use at the vvishotsarga would seem in part extremely strange. There can thus be no doubt that Paraskara here borrowed from a Sftra text belonging to the Rig-veda, a Pratika, which, when referred to the Vagasaneyi Samhitd, results in nonsense.
The other passage which I wish to discuss here is Para-
* In the Taittirfya Samhita (VII, 4, 17) mayobh@A is the beginning of an Anuvaka ; the expression anuvakaseshe#a would have no meaning if referred to this text.
INTRODUCTION. XXXIX
The other passage which I wish to discuss here is Para-
* In the Taittirfya Samhita (VII, 4, 17) mayobh@A is the beginning of an Anuvaka ; the expression anuvakaseshe#a would have no meaning if referred to this text.
INTRODUCTION. XXXIX
skaraI,4,1-5. PAraskara, being just on the point of describing the marriage ritual, prefixes a few sentences, the position of which here it is not very easy to understand. A general division of all Pakayag#ias—general remarks on the nature of the place for sacrificing : this looks very strange between a discussion of the Arghya and marriage ceremonies. Now these same sentences are found almost word for word and with the same passing on to the marriage ritual in SAnkhayana also (Grzhya I, 5,1-5). Here, as in other cases, we have the borrowing word for word of such portions of text from an older text, and, closely related to this phenomenon, the fact that the sentences in question are awkwardly woven into the context of the Grzhya where we read them, and are poorly connected with the surrounding parts. Unless we are much deceived, we have here a fragment from an older source inserted without connection and without change. It would seem that this fragment was the beginning of the original work ; for the style and contents of these SAtras are peculiarly appropriate for the beginning. Thus, if this conjecture is right, that old lost Gréhya began with the main division of all the Pakayag#as into four classes, and then proceeded at once to the marriage ritual. Later, when the texts which we have, came into existence, the feeling evidently arose, that in this way an important part of the matter had been overlooked. The supplementary matter was then inserted before the old beginning, which then naturally, as is to be seen in our texts, joins on rather strangely and abruptly to these newly-added portions,
GRIJHYA-SUOTRA OF GOBHILA.
ty [30] : B
INTRODUCTION
TO THE
GRIHYA-SOTRA OF GOBHILA.
THE Grthya-sitra of Gobhila differs from those of Sankhayana, Asvalayana, Paraskara, Hirawyakesin in one essential point: while these texts presuppose only the same Vedic Samhit&s on which also the corresponding Srautasitras are based, viz. the Rig-veda-Samhitd, the Vagasaneyi- Samhita, and the Taittiriya-Samhita ; the Sdtra of Gobhila, on the other hand, presupposes, beside the Sammhit4 of the Sama-veda}, another collection of Mantras which evidently was composed expressly with the purpose of being used at Grihya ceremonies: this collection is preserved to us under the title of the Mantra-Brahmaza,and it has been edited at Calcutta (1873), with a commentary and Bengali translation by Satyavrata SAmasramin 2.
Prof. Knauer of Kiew, to whom all students of the Grthya literature are highly indebted for his very accurate edition and translation of Gobhila, has been the first to
Prof. Knauer of Kiew, to whom all students of the Grthya literature are highly indebted for his very accurate edition and translation of Gobhila, has been the first to
' The term ‘Samhita of the Sama-veda’ onght to be understood here in its narrower sense as denoting the so-called first book of the Samhita, the Xhanda-arkika or collection of Yoni verses (see on the relation between this collection and the second book my remarks in the Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, vol. xxxviii, pp. 464 seq.). Prof. Knauer in his list of the verses quoted by Gobhila (p. 29 of his translation of the Gobhilfya- Grthya) states that Sama-veda II, 1138 (=I, 276) and 1139 is quoted in Gobhila TII, 9, 6, but an accurate analysis of the words of Gobhila shows that the verse II, 1139 is not referred to, so that only the verse II, 1138 remains, which occurs also in the first book of the Samhita. The ‘dvika’ of which Gobhila speaks in that Stra is not a dvrika, but, as the commentators rightly understand it (see Knauer's edition of the text, p. xii), it is a dyad of Sdmans or melodies, the two Kavasha Samans which are based on the text I, 276, and are given in the great S4ma-veda edition of Satyavrata SAmasramin, vol. i, pp. 566, 567.
2 In the same way the Grshya-siitra of Apastamba stands in connection with a similar collection of Grhya verses and formulas, the Apastambtya-Mantrapasha.
B2
4 GRIHYA-SUTRA OF GOBHILA.
examine into the relation in which the two texts, the Mantra-Brahmaza and the Gobhiliya-sdtra, stand to each other. He has very kindly enabled me to make use, before they were published, of the results of his investigations, which he has laid down in the introduction to his translation of Gobhila. While I wish, therefore, to acknowledge the obligation under which Prof. Knauer has thus laid me, I must try, on the other side, to state my own opinion as to the problem in question, which in some points differs from, or is even opposed to, the theory by which Prof. Knauer has tried to solve it.
While I wish, therefore, to acknowledge the obligation under which Prof. Knauer has thus laid me, I must try, on the other side, to state my own opinion as to the problem in question, which in some points differs from, or is even opposed to, the theory by which Prof. Knauer has tried to solve it.
To begin with that side of the question regarding which there can scarcely be any doubt: it is certain, I believe, that Gobhila supposes the Mantra-Brahmaza to be known to the students of his Sdtra. The reasons which show this are obvious enough. By far the greater part of the Mantras of which Gobhila quotes the first words, are not found in the Sama-veda nor, for the most part, in any other Vedic Samhité, except in the Mantra-Brahmaaza, in which they stand in exactly the same order in which they are referred to by Gobhila. The descriptions of the Grihya sacrifices by Gobhila would have been meaningless and useless, and the sacrificer who had to perform his domestic ceremonies according to the ritual of Gobhila, would have been unable to do so, unless he had known those Mantras as contained in the Mantra-Braéhmaza. And not only the Mantras, but also the order in which the Mantras stood, for Sftras such as, for instance, Gobh. II, 1, 10 (‘With the two following verses he should wash,’ &c.), would have no meaning except for one who had studied the Mantra-Brahmaza which alone could show which ‘the two following verses’ were.
There are, consequently, two possibilities: either the Mantra-Brahmana existed before the Gobhiliya-sdtra, or the two works have been composed together and on one common plan. It is the first of these alternatives which Prof. Knauer maintains; I wish, on the other hand, to call
1 Cf, Knauer’s Introduction, pp. 24, 31 seq.
p. 5
the attention of Vedic scholars to some facts which seem to me to render the second more probable.
It is the first of these alternatives which Prof. Knauer maintains; I wish, on the other hand, to call
1 Cf, Knauer’s Introduction, pp. 24, 31 seq.
p. 5
the attention of Vedic scholars to some facts which seem to me to render the second more probable.
A great part of the Mantras which have to be recited, according to Gobhila, at the performance of the Grzhya ceremonies, are not given in the Mantra-Brahmaza, but they are either found in the SAma-veda-Samhita and then their Pratikas are quoted by Gobhila, or they are cited by Gobhila in extenso. Thus for the ceremonies described in the first Prap4a¢saka of Gobhila, such as the morning and evening offerings and the sacrifices of the full and new moon, the Mantra-Brahmaaa gives, with one single exception, no Mantras at all; but those Mantras, most of which consist only of a few words, are given by Gobhila only. It is scarcely to be believed that in a Samhita which had to contain the Mantras required for the performance of the Grihya sacrifices, the Mantras belonging to the two daily and the two fortnightly sacrifices, which occupy one of the first places among all Grzhya ceremonies and are treated of accordingly in all Grzhya-sitras, should have been omitted, unless that SamhitA was intended to stand in relation to another text by which that deficiency was supplied: and the Gobhiliya-sitra exactly supplies it. Prof. Knauer thinks that those Mantras were omitted because they had already found their place in the Srauta ritual ; but we must not forget that in the Srauta ritual of the SAma-vedins neither the Agnihotra nor the Darsapirzamasa sacrifices, which are performed without the assistance of priests of the Udgatr? class, are treated of. Moreover the one Mantra-to which we have already alluded’, the single one which corresponds in the Mantra-Brahmaza to the first book of Gobhila, seems to me quite sufficient to show that it was not the intention of the compiler of that text to disregard that group of sacrifices; he gave that Mantra only, because the other Mantras, consisting of but a few words, were given in extenso in the Gobhila text. The Mantra of which we speak, belongs to the description
1 Cf, Knauer’s translation, Introduction, p. 25. 3 Mantra-Brihmasa I, 1, 1.
p. 6
The Mantra of which we speak, belongs to the description
1 Cf, Knauer’s translation, Introduction, p. 25. 3 Mantra-Brihmasa I, 1, 1.
p. 6
of the paryukshaza of the sacrificial fire. The sacrificer pours out water to the south, the west, and the north of the fire, with the Mantras, ‘ Aditesnumanyasva, ‘Anumate snumanyasva, ‘Sarasvaty anumanyasva’; then he sprinkles water round the fire once or three times with a longer Mantra, ‘ Deva Savita# prasuva yag#am prasuva yag#apatim bhagdya. Divyo gandharvas ketapik ketam nah punatu. Vakaspatir vakam nak svadatu.’ This last one is the Mantra given in its entirety in the Mantra-Brahmaza, while Gobhila! has only the first words of it. To assume here that the author of the Mantra-Brahmaza knew only of that one Mantra, and that at the time of Gobhila the custom of the S4ma-vedins had undergone a change, so that they used four Mantras instead of the one, would be, in my opinion, an artificial and not very probable way of explaining the facts; a much more natural supposition would be, I believe, that the Sdtra and the Mantra-Brahmama describe one and the same form of the ceremony, so that the Brahmaza, by omitting the short Mantras, which were given in the Sdtra in their entirety, implicitly refers to the Sdtra, and the Sftra, on the other hand, by quoting only the first words of the longer Mantra, refers to the Brahmawa in which the full text of that Mantra was given.
Among the numerous ceremonies described by Gobhila, which could furnish the occasion for similar remarks, we select only two: the rites performed in the evening of the wedding-day *, and the sacrifice on the full-moon day of Asvayuga*. The bridegroom, having carried away his bride from her home, takes her to the house of a Brahmana, and when the stars have appeared, he makes six oblations with the six verses lekhasandhishu pakshmasu (Mantra-Br. I, 3, 1-6): these are given in the Mantra-Brahmama, and Gobhila has only the Pratika. ‘Then follow two short Mantras: the bride, to whom the polar-star has been shown, addresses that star with the words: dhruvam asi dhruvaham patikule bhoiyd4sam amushydasav iti;
1 Gobh. I, 3, 4. 2 Gobh. II, 3, 17 seq. 3 Gobh. III, 8.
p. 7
‘Then follow two short Mantras: the bride, to whom the polar-star has been shown, addresses that star with the words: dhruvam asi dhruvaham patikule bhoiyd4sam amushydasav iti;
1 Gobh. I, 3, 4. 2 Gobh. II, 3, 17 seq. 3 Gobh. III, 8.
p. 7
and when she sees the star Arundhati, she says, ruddhaham asmi. As the full wording of these Mantras is given by Gobhila, they are omitted in the Brahmaza. Finally the bridegroom recites over the bride the Rik dhruvaé dyaur dhruva prithivi, &c.; this we find in the M.-B. (I, 3,7), the Pratika only being quoted by Gobhila. If one were to suppose here that in the two texts two different stages in the development of this ceremony are represented, so that only the Mantras lekhasandhishu and dhruva dyau& would belong to the more ancient form of it, while the Mantras dhruvam asi and ruddhaham asmi would have been introduced at a later time, it may perhaps not be possible to disprove, in the strictest sense of the word, such an opinion. But I think the data we have given point to another solution of the problem which, if not the only admissible, is yet the most probable and natural one. Gobhila gave the full wording of the shorter Mantras with which the description of the ceremony could be interwoven without becoming obscure or disproportionate ; the longer Mantras would have interrupted, rather tediously and inconveniently, the coherency of his ritual statements; so he separated them from the rest of his work and made a separate Samhita of them. It is true that there are some exceptions to the rule that all long Mantras are given in the Mantra-Brahmaza and all short Mantras only in the Sdtra: on the one hand, there are some Mantras of considerable extent that are given by Gobhila and omitted in the Brahmaza, thus, for instance, the Mantra yady asi saumi used at a preparatory ceremony that belongs to the Pumsavana!. On the other hand, a number of short Mantras which Gobhila gives in extenso, are found nevertheless also in the Mantra-Brahmavza: such is the case, for instance, with many of the Mantras belonging to the worship of the Fathers, Gobhila IV, 2. 3, Mantra-Br. IT, 3.
1 Gobh. II, 6, 7. It is possible, though we have no positive evidence for this conjecture, that such statements regarding preparatory or auxiliary ceremonies may here and there have been added to the Siitra collection in a later time. The Khadira-Grzhya (II, 2, 20) has instead of that long Mantra only a few words which in the Gobhiliya-sitra stand at the end of it.
p. 8
It appears then, that allowance must be made for a certain inconsistency or carelessness in the distribution of the material between the two texts: and such an assumption will easily be allowed by any one who does not entertain very exaggerated ideas as to the care and reflection which presided over the composition of the Sdtra texts.
I will add only a few words concerning a second Grihya ceremony, which calls for the same sort of comment as the rites which have just been discussed. For the offering on the day of the full moon, Gobhila prescribes (III, 8, 2) first the verse 4 no mitrAvaruzA, second the verse ma nastoke. The Mantra-Brahmama (II, 1, 8) has the second of these verses only, not the first: conversely, the first verse alone, and not the second, is to be found in the Samhita of the SAma-veda (I, 220). We could hardly assume, as I think, that the Mantra-Brahmaza presupposed another form of the rite differing from Gobhila’s; we should be much more inclined to consider the leaving out of that matter, which was contained in other texts of the Sama-veda, as a proof that the compiler of the Mantra-Brahmaza assumed that those texts were known}.
And this brings me to one of Prof. Knauer’s conjectures concerning the Mantra-Brahmaza which I have not yet touched. According to tradition we consider the Mantra- Brahmaza as belonging to the SAma-veda ; in the Calcutta edition it is designated as the ‘SA4ma-vedasya Mantra- Brahmazam, Prof. Knauer thinks that it is doubtful whether the Mantra-Brahmaza belonged to the SAma-veda originally. He conjectures? ‘that it existed already in the
1 Any one who holds the view that the ritualistic formulas, which are not contained in the Mantra-Brahmasa, represent later extensions of the ceremonies in question, will do well to notice how in any one of the offerings of the Srauta ritual which we possess, both in the old description of the Samzhita and Brahmana texts, and in the more recent description of the Sfitra texts, Mantras have been added in more recent times to the former ones. I think that it would be difficult to draw from such observations any argument of analogy calculated to support Dr. Knauer's opinion as to the relation of the Mantras in Gobhila and in the Mantra-Brahmana,
? Introduction to his translation, p. 23.
p. 9
I think that it would be difficult to draw from such observations any argument of analogy calculated to support Dr. Knauer's opinion as to the relation of the Mantras in Gobhila and in the Mantra-Brahmana,
? Introduction to his translation, p. 23.
p. 9
period during which the separate schools were as yet in the process of sifting, when there were as yet no SAma-vedists in the later and stricter sense of the term?.’ For out of 249 Mantras of the Mantra-Brahmava there are only four which are found in the SAma-veda?, as Prof. Knauer has shown, while a much greater number of these Mantras occur in the other Vedic Samhitas. I should be inclined to conclude the other way : just because the author of the Mantra-Brahmaza presupposed a knowledge of the Samhita of the SAma-veda, but not of the other Vedas—or in other words because he destined his work for SAma-vedins, he did not need to repeat what was in the SAma-veda, but was compelled to incorporate in his compilation the Mantras out of the Rig-veda or of the Yagur-veda*. Moreover, I would draw the same conclusions from the Mantras cited by Gobhila which are absent in the Mantra-Brahmaza, as I did from the Mantras which occur in the Mantra-Brahmaaa, but are not to be found in the Sama-veda. Those Mantras are all to be found in the Sama-veda with the exception of those which Gobhila has in extenso, and which therefore could be omitted in the Mantra-Brahmaza. If we examine the thirteen Mantras collected by Prof. Knauer (p. 29), we find that in the case of nine of them the passage of the Samaveda (always of the first Arkika of the Sama-veda) where they are to be found is quoted by Prof. Knauer.
1 Besides the reasons given below in opposition to this conjecture, I may be permitted to point out that this hypothesis is contrary to the whole chronology of the Grzhya literature which we endeavoured to arrive at in the general introduction. It is a priori extremely improbable that there was a Grihya Samhita at a time when there was as yet no Sima-veda.
® Viz. (according to Prof. Knauer's alphabetical list of the Mantras of the Mantra-Brahmama) imam stomam arhate, M.-B. II, 4, 2=Sv. I, 66; II, 414; tat savitur varezyam, M.-B. I, 6, 29 =Sv. II, 812; bharfmedhmam, M.-B, II, 4, 3=Sv. II, 415; sakema tv, M.-B. II, 4, 4=Sv. II, 416.
* Notice that of the four exceptional cases which we put together in the previous note, three cases are Mantras which are found only in the second Arkika of the Sama-veda, not in the first (cf. above, p. 3, note 1). The fourth verse (M.-B. II, 4, 2) is to be found in the first Ardika, it is true, but it stands closely related to two verses which are not to be found in that Aréika (M.-B. II, 4, 3. 4). This explains why it was put into the Mantra-Brahmaaa, as well as those two verses.
p. 10
The four other cases are :
rikam sama yagamahe, Gobh. III, 2, 48.
tak kakshur devahitam, III, 8, 5.
sam anya yanti, III, 9, 7.
II, 4, 3. 4). This explains why it was put into the Mantra-Brahmaaa, as well as those two verses.
p. 10
The four other cases are :
rikam sama yagamahe, Gobh. III, 2, 48.
tak kakshur devahitam, III, 8, 5.
sam anya yanti, III, 9, 7.
pragapataye, IV, 7, 36. Of these Mantras the first is contained in the SAma-veda (1, 369) just as the nine first-mentioned ones; the second is quoted by Gobhila in extenso; the third is to be found in the Aranyaka division of the Sama-veda I (vol. ii, p. 292, ed. Bibl. Ind.) ; in the fourth finally the text is corrupt ; it is intended for the verse out of the Mantra-Brahmaza Pragapate na tvad etany anya&. Thus the four apparent exceptions all vanish, and we have in the Mantras which are absent in the Mantra-Bréhmaza a new proof that this text belongs to the literature of the SAma-veda!.
Thus, according to my view, we may describe the origin of the Mantra-Brahmaaa as follows. The SAma-veda contained in its Samhitd a much smaller number of Mantras applicable to the Grzhya rites than either the Rig-veda or the Yagur-veda ; the peculiar character of the SAman texts, intended for musical recitations at the most important sacrificial offerings, was quite remote from the character of formulas suitable for the celebration of a wedding, for the birth of a child, for the consecration of fields and flocks. Hence it is that, to a much greater extent than Asvalayana or Paraskara, Gobhila mentions Mantras for which a reference to the SahitA was not sufficient ; and this led to the compiling of a separate Samhita of such Grzhya-mantras, which presupposes the Grzhya-sitra, just as the latter presupposes this Samhita. The almost perfect agreement of the Mantra-Brahmaza with Gobhila furnishes a valuable
1 One will not object that the Mantras in question which are absent in the Mantra-Brahmama are all to be found in the Rig-veda as well as in the Samaveda. Since almost all the verses of the Sdma-veda are taken from the Rig-veda there is nothing astonishing about this. Before one could conclude from this that the Mantra-Brahmana belongs to the Rig-veda he would have to answer the question, How is it that the verses in question are always verses of the Rig-veda which are repeated in the SAma-veda? Why are there not among them verses which are not to be found in the Sdma-veda ?
INTRODUCTION, II
warrant for the good preservation of the two texts; of small discrepancies I have noted only two: Mantra-Brahmaza I, 6, 15, the formula 4gantr4 samaganmahi is given for the ceremony of the Upanayana, while Gobhila does not prescribe this Mantra for this ceremony, although other Grthya texts do; and secondly, the Mantra-Brahmavza II, 5, 1-7 does not consist of six verses as Gobh. IV, 6, 5-6 allows us to assume, but of seven verses.
IV, 6, 5-6 allows us to assume, but of seven verses.
In concluding this introduction notice is to be drawn to the fact that the text of Gobhila has preserved for us the traces of a division differing from the one into four Prap4thakas which is handed down by tradition: in a number of places certain Sftras or the last words of certain Sdtras are set down twice, a well-known way of indicating the close of achapter. This repetition, besides occurring at the end of the first, third, and fourth Prapa¢/aka (not at the end of the second), is to be found in the following places which become more frequent towards the close of the work: I, 4, 31; III, 6,15; IV, 1, 22; 4, 343 5, 34; 6, 16.
GR/JHYA-SOTRA OF GO
PrapAruaKa I, KAwoiKA 1.
1. Now henceforth we shall explain the domestic sacrifices.
2. He should perform (the ceremonies) wearing the sacrificial cord on his left shoulder and having sipped water,
3. During the northern course of the sun, at the time of the increasing moon, on an auspicious day, before noon: this he should know as the (proper) time (for performing the ceremonies).
4. And as the prescription (is stated with regard to the time of the single ceremonies).
5. All (ceremonies) are accompanied by the
« Anvaharya (Sraddha).
1, 1-4. Comp. Kh4dira-Grthya I, 1, 1. 2. 5. 7.
5. I cannot give this translation of the words ‘ sarvany evanvaharyavanti’ without expressing my doubts as to whether the commentator, whom I have followed, is right. He says: ‘anu paskad &hriyate yasmat prakritam karma iti, anu paskid 4hriyate yat prastutét (prakritét?) karmama iti Adnvaharyam nAndimukhasraddham dakshin4 kofyate.’ It is evident that the first explanation of anv4h4rya as a ceremony after which the chief sacrifice follows, is inadmissible. Below, IV, 4, 3. 4, Gobhila himself defines the Anvaharya Sraddha as a monthly ceremony (comp. Manu III, 123; Max Miller, India, p. 240); it is, consequently, different from a Sraéddha accompanying each Grzhya sacrifice. The Sloka which the commentary quotes from a ‘grzhy4ntara’ seems to me not to remove the doubt ; I think rather that it contains a speculation based on this very passage of Gobhila, taken in the sense in
I4 GRIHYA-SOTRA OF GOBHILA.
6. At the end (of each ceremony) he should feed worthy (Brahmazas) according to his ability.
7. A student, after he has studied the Veda, when going to put the last piece of wood (on the fire),—
8. Or to seize a wife’s hand (i.e. to marry her),— g. Should fetch water from a hidden place, should sweep a place which is inclined towards north-east, or which is level, and should besmear it (with cowdung). Beginning from the centre of it he should draw a line from west to east, (another line) from south to north which touches that line at its western end, and three lines from west to east (touching the northwards-turned line at three different points) in its midst (i.e. at neither of its ends). He then should besprinkle (those lines with water).
at neither of its ends). He then should besprinkle (those lines with water).
10. In this way the Lakshama (i.e. the preparation of the place for the sacred fire) is performed everywhere.
11. With the words ‘ Bhar, bhuva/, sva%,’ they carry the fire forward (to that place) so that they have it in front of them.
12. Or after the householder has died, the chief which the commentator takes it, and on the Sftras IV, 4, 3.4. Thus I rather believe that we ought to understand anvahfrya as a mess of food like that offered after the darsapfirnam4sau sacrifices to the officiating priests (Hillebrandt, Neu- und Vollmondsopfer, 133), and I propose to translate: All (sacrifices) are followed by (the offering of) the Anvah4rya food (to the priest).
6. Kh&dira-Grzhya I, 1, 3.
4. The text goes on to treat of the setting up of the domestic fire. Khadira-Grehya I, 3, 1.
g. Khadira-Grzhya I, 3, 1 seqq.; Gréhya-samgraha I, 47 seqq. ; Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl. Gesellschaft, XXXV, 557.
12. I have followed in the translation of paramesh/sikarazam the
p. 15
(of the family) should do it (i.e. he should set up the sacred fire).
13. In this way, on the coincidence of an (auspicious) Tithi and an (auspicious) Nakshatra, (or of such a Nakshatra) and a Parvan—
14. On the full-moon day or on the new-moon day: then he should celebrate the setting up of his (sacred domestic) fire.
15. He should get fire from a Vaisya’s house or from a frying-pan, and should set it up (as his sacred fire) ;
16. Or (he should fetch it) from the house of one who offers many sacrifices, be it a Brahmaza, or a Raganya, or a Vaisya.
17. Or he may kindle another fire by attrition and may set it up.
18, That is pure, but it does not bring prosperity.
19. He may do what he likes (of the things stated as admissible in the last Sdatras).
20. When he puts (at the end of his studentship) the last piece of wood (on the fire), or when he sacrifices when going to seize the hand of a wife, that fire he should keep.
21. That becomes his (sacred) domestic fire.
22. Thereby his morning oblation has been offered.
way indicated by the Grzhya-samgraha I, 77, and by Sankhayana (I, 1, 5): prete va grthapatau svayam gyayin. I think the paramesh/At is the same person as the gy4ya4n. The commentary gives a different explanation: paramesh/Af agnir ity 4takshate, tasya paramesh/hino:gneh karanam yathoktena vidhina svikarazam.
15-18. KhAdira-Grzhya I, 5, 3 seqq.
20, 21. KhAdira-Grthya I, 5, 1. 2. Comp. also above, Sfitras 7 and 8.
22. I.e. in the first of the two cases mentioned in Sfitra 20, the
p. 16
23. Beginning from that time the sacrificing (of regular morning and evening oblations) in the domestic fire is prescribed, so that he begins with an evening oblation.
also above, Sfitras 7 and 8.
22. I.e. in the first of the two cases mentioned in Sfitra 20, the
p. 16
23. Beginning from that time the sacrificing (of regular morning and evening oblations) in the domestic fire is prescribed, so that he begins with an evening oblation.
24. Before the time has come for setting the fire in a blaze, he should fetch in the evening and in the morning from a hidden place the water with which the different acts (such as sipping water) are performed.
25. Or (he should fetch water only) in the evening.
26. Or he should draw it out of a water-pot or of a barrel.
27. Before sunset he should set the fire in a blaze, and sacrifice the evening oblation after sunset.
28. In the morning he should set the fire in a blaze before sunrise, and should sacrifice the morning oblation before sunrise or after it.
KAwoikA 2,
1. He takes as his yag#opavita (i.e. sacrificial cord) a string, or a garment, or simply a rope of Kusa grass.
putting of fuel on the fire, and in the second case, the oblations of fried grain, &c., prescribed for the wedding, are considered as the sacrificer’s morning oblation in his newly-established Grehya fire, so that the regular oblations have to begin with the sfyamahuti.
23. Khadira-Grzhya I, 5,6. Comp. Prof. Bloomfield’s note 2, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl. Gesellschaft, XXXV, 561.
27, 28. Khadira-Grzhya I, 5, 7-9. As to the two cases regarding the time of the morning oblation, comp. Indische Studien, X, 329.
2, 1-4, Rules regarding the Upavita. Khadira-Grthya I, 1, 4-6. Compare the detailed description of the nine threads of which the Upavita-string should consist, in the Grzhya-samgraha II, 48 seqq. A string was evidently considered as the regular and preferable form of the Upavita; with regard to the second kind of Upavita mentioned in Stra 1, the commentary says, ‘A garment (is used),
p. 17
2. Raising his right arm, putting the head into (the upavita), he suspends (the cord) over his left shoulder, so that it hangs down on his right side: thus he becomes yag#opavitin.
3. Raising his left arm, putting the head into (the upavita), he suspends it over his right shoulder, so that it hangs down on his left side : thus he becomes pradinaévitin.
4. Pra&tn4vitin, however, he is only at sacrifices offered to the Manes.
5. Having gone in a northern direction from the fire, having washed his hands and feet, and having seated himself, he should sip water three times and wipe off (the water) twice.
6. Having besprinkled his feet (with water) let him besprinkle his head.
7. Let him touch the organs of his senses with water :
8. The two eyes, the nose, the two ears.
g. Whatever (limb of his body) requires his consideration (whether it is pure or not), that he should touch with water (i.e. with a wet hand).
10. Here they say:
11. Let him not touch (himself with water, or sip water) while walking,
12. Nor standing,
13. Nor laughing,
g. Whatever (limb of his body) requires his consideration (whether it is pure or not), that he should touch with water (i.e. with a wet hand).
10. Here they say:
11. Let him not touch (himself with water, or sip water) while walking,
12. Nor standing,
13. Nor laughing,
14. Nor looking about,
15. Nor without bending down, if the Upavita has been lost, for instance, in a forest, and if it is impossible to get a string.’ A similar remark is given with reference to the third kind of Upavita, the rope of Kusa grass.
5-32. Rules regarding the 44amana and upasparsana. Kh&dira-Grrhya I, 1, 7-10; Manu II, 60 seqq.
21, Nor wearing a part of his under garment as if it were an upper garment,
22. Nor with warm water,
23. Nor with foamy water,
24. And in no case wearing sandals,
25. (Not) with a turban on his head (?),
26, (Not with his garment) tied round his neck,
27. And not stretching out his feet,
28. When he has finally touched (water) again, he becomes pure.
29. Let him, however, sip only water that reaches his heart.
30. For if he does otherwise, he remains impure.
31. Now the cases in which he has to touch (water) a second time,
17. As to the Tirthas (or parts of the hand) sacred to the different deities or beings, comp. Vasish¢ha TII, 64 seqq., &c. See also Manu II, 58.
20. According to the commentary he has to hold his hands between his knees. Comp. Sankh.-Grzhya I, 10, 8. Thus the shoulders are brought forward.
21-27. These Sftras form three regular Sloka hemistichs. Only at the end of the second hemistich there is a metrical irregularity (sopanatka’ kvafit standing at the end of the verse).
25. Kasaktikak, which the commentary explains as a compound of ka, ‘ the head,’ and 4saktikA = 4veshAka.
28. Khadira-Grshya I, 1, 10.
2g. In other texts (for instance, Manu II, 62; Vasishrha III, 31 seqq.) it is stated that a Brahmama should sip water that reaches his heart, a Kshatriya water reaching his throat, a Vaisya water that wets his palate; a Sfidra should only touch water with his lips.
p. 19
32. Having slept, or eaten, or sneezed, or taken a bath, or drunk something, or changed (his garments), or walked on the high road, or gone to a cemetery, he should sip water and then sip water again.
KAwpikA 8.
1. Having put wood on the (sacred) fire, having swept (the ground) round it, he should, bending his right knee, pour out to the south of the fire his joined hands full of water with (the words), ‘ Aditi ! Give thy consent!’
2. To the west with (the words), ‘Anumati! Give thy consent !’
3. To the north with (the words), ‘ Sarasvatt ! Give thy consent!’
Give thy consent!’
2. To the west with (the words), ‘Anumati! Give thy consent !’
3. To the north with (the words), ‘ Sarasvatt ! Give thy consent!’
4. With (the words), ‘God Savitrz! Give thy impulse!’ (Mantra-Brahmama I, 1, 1) he should sprinkle (water) round the fire once or thrice so as to keep his right side turned towards it—
5. Interchanging the points at which he begins and ends the (sprinkling of water), and sprinkling so as to encompass what he is going to offer (with the streams of water),
6. Let him then make oblations of the sacrificial food, be it prepared or raw, over the fire.
32. This Sftra again forms a Sloka, though a slightly irregular Sloka.
3. Rules regarding the daily morning and evening sacrifice.
1-5. Khadira-Grehya I, 2, 17-21.
6, The sacrificial food is either krita (prepared) or akrita (unprepared), A mess of boiled rice, for instance, is krz'ta, rice grains are akrita.
C2
p. 20
-
7. If it is raw, he should sacrifice after having washed it and having let the water drop off.
8. If it consists in curds or milk or rice gruel, (he should sacrifice it) with a brazen bowl, or with the pot in which the oblations of boiled rice are prepared, or also with the (sacrificial spoon called) Sruva;
9. In the evening the first (oblation) with (the formula), ‘To Agni Svaha!’ the second silently, in the middle and in the north-eastern part (of the fire) ;
10. In the morning the first (oblation) with (the formula), ‘To Sdrya Svaha!’ the second again silently, again in the middle and in the north-eastern part (of the fire).
11. Having put a piece of wood (on the fire), and having again sprinkled (water) round it, he should pour out again his joined hands full of water in the same way (as prescribed in the Satras 1-3); in the Mantras he says, ‘Thou hast given thy consent’ (instead of ‘Give thy consent’).
12. Having circumambulated the fire so as to turn his right side towards it, having poured out the remains of water, and filled the vessel again, and put it (in its proper place), (he may do) whatever his business is.
q-12. Khadira-Grehya I, 5, 10-12, Prodaka in Sftra 7 is explained by pragatodaka.
g-10. Khadira-Grehya, 1.1. 13-15.
9. The first oblation is made in the middle, the second, sacred to Pragapati (Sankhayana I, 3, 15, &c.), in the north-eastern part of the sacred fire. The tenth Sfitra of course is to be understood in the same way.
12, The water is that mentioned chap. 1, 24. With regard to
p. 21
13. In that way, from that time (in which he has begun to offer the two daily sacrifices) he should sacrifice, or should have sacrificed, over the (sacred) domestic fire, till the end of his life.
14. Here now they say:
15. ‘If they like, his wife may offer the morning and evening oblations over the domestic fire. For his wife is (as it were) his house, and that fire is the domestic fire,’
14. Here now they say:
15. ‘If they like, his wife may offer the morning and evening oblations over the domestic fire. For his wife is (as it were) his house, and that fire is the domestic fire,’
16. When the morning meal or the evening meal is ready, he should make (his wife) say, ‘It is ready !’—
17. In an unbroken voice (?), having made himself pure,
18. He replies in a loud voice,‘Om!’ Then in yath4rtham the commentary says, ‘ yathartham karm4pavargavihitam V4madevyaginfdikam pr&tarihutipaséadvihitam brahmayagfam va kuryad iti vikyasesha#.’ Similarly in the note on II, 4, 11 it is said, ‘yathirtham iti karmazad parisam4ptir ufyate ;’ II, 8, 17: ‘yathartham tantrasamfpanam kuryat,’ &c. In my translation I have adopted the opinion of Professor Weber (Indische Studien, V, 375), according to whom yath4rtham simply means, ‘(he should behave) as required by circumstances;’ ‘(he should do) what happens to be his business.’
13. The last words are 4 givitdvabhréth&t, which literally means ‘till the Avabhritha bath of his life.’ The Avabhritha bath is the bath taken at the end of certain sacrifices, so that the Avabhritha of life signifies death.
15. Khadira-Grihya I, 5, 17.
16-18. Khadira-Grshya, 1.1. 18, 19. In my translation of SAtra 17 I have adopted, though not quite without doubt, the conjecture of Professor Roth given in Professor Knauer’s note, p. 137. Professor Roth writes ritebhangaya vaéd or ritebhagay4 vasa: he says simply ‘om,’ and not ‘6-0-6-0-6-om.’ According to the commentary Sfitra 17 would refer to the wife, not to the husband.
18. The MSS. give makhy4 and m&ksh4. We ought to read, tan ma ksh4yfty upamsu. Comp. Apastamba II, 2, 3, 11p. 22 a low voice: ‘To that (food) I bring adoration. May it not fail!’
KAwopikA 4.
1, He then should silently offer the Balis.
2. Let him speak only what refers to the due preparation of the food. With guests he may converse, if he likes.
3. He then should take some portion of food which is fit for sacrifice, should pour over it some liquid fit for sacrifice (such as ghee, milk, or curds), and should sacrifice it silently in the fire with his hand.
4. The first oblation is sacred to Pragdpati, the second to (Agni) Svish/ak77t.
5. He then should offer the Balis, inside or outside (the Agnyag4ra), having well cleansed the ground.
6. Let him pour out water once, and put down Balis in four places, and finally sprinkle once (water on the four Balis).
7. Or let him for each Bali which he puts down, sprinkle (water) before and afterwards,
* 8. What he puts down first, that is the Bali belonging to the Earth. What in the second place, to Vayu. What in the third place, to the Visve devas. What in the fourth place, to Pragdpati.
9. Then he should offer other Balis (near) the water-pot, the middle (post, and) the door: the first Bali is sacred to the Waters, the second to the Herbs and Trees, the third to the Ether.
What in the third place, to the Visve devas. What in the fourth place, to Pragdpati.
9. Then he should offer other Balis (near) the water-pot, the middle (post, and) the door: the first Bali is sacred to the Waters, the second to the Herbs and Trees, the third to the Ether.
4, 1 seqq. The daily Bali offering. Khadira-Grzhya I, 5, 20 seqq. g. According to the commentary the first of these three Balis has
p. 23
10. Then he should offer another Bali in the bed or in the privy. That Bali belongs either to Kama or to Manyu.
11. Then (another Bali) on the heap of sweepings; that (belongs) to the hosts of Rakshas.
12. The remnants of the Balis he should besprinkle with water, and should pour them out towards the south from right to left; they belong to the Fathers.
13. Let him sacrifice in the fire sitting.
14. Let him make the oblation to the Fathers sitting ; the other (Balis he may offer) as it happens.
15. He should, however, offer those Balis himself as long as he stays at home.
_ 16, Or another person who must be a Brahmaza (should offer them for him).
17. Both the husband and his wife (should offer them) :
18. This is the rule for householders.
19. The wife in the evening, the man in the morning: thus (it is stated).
20. He should offer such Balis of all food whatever, be it prepared for the Fathers, or for auspicious to be offered near the water-pot, the second near the middle door of the house, the third (comp. Gautama V, 16) in the air. With the genitives the word samfpe is supplied. It is difficult to understand why the author, if his intention had been to state three places in which the Balis had to be offered, should have mentioned only two. Thus I believe that the right explanation is that of Professor Knauer, who takes madhyama in the sense of the middle post of the house (comp. III, 3, 31).
11, The commentary explains avasalavi here, as is frequently the case, by pitrztfrthena. Lagree with the opinion pronounced in the Petersburg Dictionary, in rejecting this explanation.
1g. Comp. Manu III, r2t.
p. 24
purposes (for instance, for being offered to Brahmanzas), or for (ordinary) purposes.
21. Only in the case ofa sacrifice (this rule) ceases.
22. If rice and barley are prepared for one and the same meal, he should, having offered (Balis) of the one or the other (kind of food), consider his duty as fulfilled.
23. Ifthe food is cooked at different times for one meal, he should perform this Bali ceremony only once.
24. If food is prepared at different places for one family, he should perform this Bali ceremony only from (the food which is prepared in) the kitchen belonging to the householder.
25. However (of the persons belonging to -the family) he whose food becomes ready before (that of the householder), (that person) should offer the prescribed portion in the fire, and give to a Brahmaza his share (of the food), and then should eat ‘ himself.
25. However (of the persons belonging to -the family) he whose food becomes ready before (that of the householder), (that person) should offer the prescribed portion in the fire, and give to a Brahmaza his share (of the food), and then should eat ‘ himself.
26. He whose (food becomes ready) after (that of the householder), should only eat.
27. Here they say also:
28. ‘At the end of that offering of Balis let him pronounce a wish. Then it will be fulfilled to him.’
29. He himself, however, should offer the Asasya Bali, from the barley(-harvest) till the rice(-harvest), and from the rice(-harvest) till the barley(-harvest), This is called the Asasya Bali.
22. K4la I take, as the commentator does, for bhoganak4la.
23. Here again kAla occurs in the same sense. Comp. Khadira-Grihya I, 5, 34.
29. Kh&dira-Grthya I, 5, 37. The barley-harvest is in the hot season, the rice-harvest in autumn (see Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, 243). The sacrificer offers barley from the barley-harvest till the rice-harvest ; and rice from the rice-harvest till the barley-harvest.
I PRAPATHAKA, 5 KANDIKA, 6. 25°
30. Thus he obtains long life.
31. When a donation has been made, he should offer a Bali of chaff, of the scum of boiled rice, and of water. This is sacred to Rudra. This is sacred to Rudra.
KAwnpikA 5.
1. Now at the times of the new moon and of the full moon (the following ceremonies are performed).
2. Let him fast on that full-moon day (when the full moon rises) at the meeting (of day and night).
3. The following day, according to some (teachers).
4. And on that day on which the moon is not seen, (he should fast, considering it) as the newmoon day.
5. The ends of the half-months are the time for fasting, the beginnings for sacrifice.
6. With the sacrificial food of the new-moon
This Bali is called 4-sasya, because it is offered until (4) the next crop (sasya) is ripe. As to the regulation that the sacrificer has to offer it himself, compare above, Sftras 15-19.
31. Khadira-Grhya I, 5, 30. The repetition of the last words makes it probable that this Sftra was at one time considered the end of the first book. Comp. Introduction, p. 11.
5. Description of the sacrifices of the full and new moon. Paradigm of the regular Sthalipaka offering. The first twelve Sfitras of this chapter have been translated by Professor Weber, Ueber den Vedakalender namens Jyotisham, PP. 50 seq.
a. See the note below at Sfttra ro.
3. With these two Sfitras, ‘sandhy4m paurnzamfsim upavaset ; uttarim ity eke,’ a passage should be compared which is identically found in the Aitareya (VII, 11), and in the Kaushftaka Brahmana (III, 1): pfirvam paurzam4sim upavased iti Paingyam, uttaram iti Kaushitakam.
6. The month is reckoned here, as is usually done, as beginning with the fortnight of the increasing moon.
p. 26
sacrifice he celebrates the first half (of the month), with that of the full-moon sacrifice the second.