Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Winternitz in his essay, Das altindische Hochzeitsrituell, p. 5 (Denkschr. Wiener Akademie, Bd. 40). INTRODUCTION. XV to the sacrificer. In the first passage the verb, upeyat, is added, which the sense requires; in the second it has the abbreviated form, which the best MSS. of the Dharmasdtra offer. The occurrence of the irregular word, ritve for ritvye, in all the three passages, proves clearly that we have to deal with a self-quotation of the same author. If the Dharma-sitra were the production of a different person and a later addition, the Pseudo-Apastamba would most probably not have hit on this peculiar irregular form. Finally, the Gvrzhya-sitra, too, contains several crossreferences to the Srauta-sitra, and the close agreement of the Sfitras on the Vedic sacrifices, on the domestic rites, and on the sacred, both in language and style, conclusively prove that they are the compositions of one author ?. Who this author really was, is a problem which cannot be solved for the present, and which probably will always remain unsolved, because we know his family name only. For the form of the word itself shows that the name Apastamba, just like those of most founders of Vedic schools, e.g. Bhdradvaga, Asvalayana, Gautama, is a patronymic. This circumstance is, of course, fatal to all attempts at an identification of the individual who holds so prominent a place among the teachers of the Black Yagur-veda. But we are placed in a somewhat better position with respect to the history of the school which has been named after Apastamba and of the works ascribed to him. Regarding both, some information has been preserved by tradition, and a little more can be obtained from inscriptions and later works, while some interesting details regarding the time when, and the place where the Sitras were composed, may be elicited from the latter themselves. The data, obtainable from these sources, it is true, do not enable us to determine with certainty the year when the Apastambiya school was founded, and when its Satras were composed. But they make it possible to ascertain the position of the school and of its Sdtras in Vedic litera- 1 See Dr. Winternitz, loc. cit. Xvi APASTAMBA. ture, their relative priority or posteriority as compared with other Vedic schools and works, to show with some amount of probability in which part of India they had their origin, and to venture, at least, a not altogether unsupported conjecture as to their probable antiquity.
2Xvi APASTAMBA. ture, their relative priority or posteriority as compared with other Vedic schools and works, to show with some amount of probability in which part of India they had their origin, and to venture, at least, a not altogether unsupported conjecture as to their probable antiquity. As regards the first point, the Karazavydha, a supplement of the White Yagur-veda which gives the lists of the Vedic schools, informs us that the Apastambiya school formed one of the five branches of the Khazdikiya school, which in its turn was a subdivision of the Taittiriyas, one of the ancient sections of Brahmazas who study the Black Yagur-veda. Owing to the very unsatisfactory condition of the text of the Karavzavydha it is unfortunately not possible to ascertain what place that work really assigns to the Apastambiyas among the five branches of the Khazdikiyas. Some MSS. name them first, and others last. They give either the following list, 1. K4leyas (KAletas), 2. Satydyanins, 3. Hirazyakesins, 4. Bharadvagins, and 5. Apastambins, or, 1. Apastambins, 2. Baudhéyanins or Bodhayanins, 3. SatyAshadhins, 4. Hirazyakesins, 5. Aukheyas'. But this defect is remedied to a certain extent by the now generally current, and probably ancient tradition that the Apastambiyas are younger than the school of Baudhayana, and older than that of Saty4shadha Hiranyakesin. Baudhayana, it is alleged, composed the first set of Satras connected with the Black Yagurveda, which bore the special title ‘pravagana,’ and he was succeeded by Bhdradvaga, Apastamba, and Satyéshadha Hirazyakesin, who all founded schools which bear their names ?. 1 Max Miller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 371. A MS. of the Xaramavyfha with an anonymous commentary, in my possession, has the following passage : aiizearat ca der aie | MTRet Biwraat aan? (ew agt arent fr. ? Max Miiller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 194. These statements occur in the introduction of Mahadeva’s commentary on the Srauta-siitra of Hirasyakesin (Weber, Hist. Sansk. Lit., p. 110, and ed.) and in an interpolated passage of Bharadvaga’s Grihya-sitra (Winternitz, op. cit., p. 8, note 1), as well as, with the omission of Bharadv4ga’s name, in interpolated passages of INTRODUCTION. xvii This tradition has preserved two important pieces of information. First, the Apastamba school is what Professor Max Miiller appropriately calls a Sdtrakaraaa, i.e. a school whose founder did not pretend to have received a revelation of Vedic Mantras or of a Brahmaza text, but merely gave a new systematic arrangement of the precepts regarding sacrifices and the sacred law. Secondly, the Satras of Apastamba occupy an intermediate position between the works of Baudh4yana and Hiramyakesin. Both these statements are perfectly true, and capable of being supported by proofs, drawn from Apastamba’s own and from other works.
3Secondly, the Satras of Apastamba occupy an intermediate position between the works of Baudh4yana and Hiramyakesin. Both these statements are perfectly true, and capable of being supported by proofs, drawn from Apastamba’s own and from other works. As regards the first point, Professor Max Miiller has already pointed" out that, though we sometimes find a Brahmana of the Apastambiyas mentioned, the title Apastamba-brahmava is nothing but another name of the Taittiriya-bradhmaza, and that this Brahmaza, in reality, is always attributed to Tittiri or to the pupils of Vaisampayana, who are said to have picked up the Black Yagurveda in the shape of partridges (tittiri). The same remark applies to the collection of the Mantras of the Black Yagurveda, which, likewise, is sometimes named Apastambasamhita. The Karanavytha states explicitly that the five branches of the Khazdikiya school, to which the Apastambiyas belong, possess one and the same recension of the revealed texts, consisting of 7 Kaxdas, 44 Prasnas, 651 Anuvakas, 2198 Pannasis, 19290 Padas?, and 253,868 syllables, and indicates thereby that all these five schools were Sitrakaramas. If we now turn to Apastamba’s own works, we find still BandhAyana’s Dharma-sitra (II, 5, 9, 14) and of the same author's Grthyasftra (Sicred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxvi, note 1). Adherents of a Prava‘ana-s(tra, no doubt identical with that of Baudhayana, the Prava- Ranakarta (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxvi), are mentioned in a land grant, originally issued by the Pallava king Nandivarman in the beginning of the eighth century a.p., see Hultzsch, South Indian Inscriptions, vol. ii, p- 361 seqq.; see also Weber, Hist. Sansk. Lit., p. 110, and ed. 1 Max Miiller, op. cit., p. 195. 3 See also Weber, Ind. Lit., p. 98, and ed. [2] XViil APASTAMBA.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Winternitz in his essay, Das altindische Hochzeitsrituell, p. 5 (Denkschr. Wiener Akademie, Bd. 40). INTRODUCTION. XV to the sacrificer. In the first passage the verb, upeyat, is added, which the sense requires; in the second it has the abbreviated form, which the best MSS. of the Dharmasdtra offer. The occurrence of the irregular word, ritve for ritvye, in all the three passages, proves clearly that we have to deal with a self-quotation of the same author. If the Dharma-sitra were the production of a different person and a later addition, the Pseudo-Apastamba would most probably not have hit on this peculiar irregular form. Finally, the Gvrzhya-sitra, too, contains several crossreferences to the Srauta-sitra, and the close agreement of the Sfitras on the Vedic sacrifices, on the domestic rites, and on the sacred, both in language and style, conclusively prove that they are the compositions of one author ?. Who this author really was, is a problem which cannot be solved for the present, and which probably will always remain unsolved, because we know his family name only. For the form of the word itself shows that the name Apastamba, just like those of most founders of Vedic schools, e.g. Bhdradvaga, Asvalayana, Gautama, is a patronymic. This circumstance is, of course, fatal to all attempts at an identification of the individual who holds so prominent a place among the teachers of the Black Yagur-veda. But we are placed in a somewhat better position with respect to the history of the school which has been named after Apastamba and of the works ascribed to him. Regarding both, some information has been preserved by tradition, and a little more can be obtained from inscriptions and later works, while some interesting details regarding the time when, and the place where the Sitras were composed, may be elicited from the latter themselves. The data, obtainable from these sources, it is true, do not enable us to determine with certainty the year when the Apastambiya school was founded, and when its Satras were composed. But they make it possible to ascertain the position of the school and of its Sdtras in Vedic litera- 1 See Dr. Winternitz, loc. cit. Xvi APASTAMBA. ture, their relative priority or posteriority as compared with other Vedic schools and works, to show with some amount of probability in which part of India they had their origin, and to venture, at least, a not altogether unsupported conjecture as to their probable antiquity.
2Xvi APASTAMBA. ture, their relative priority or posteriority as compared with other Vedic schools and works, to show with some amount of probability in which part of India they had their origin, and to venture, at least, a not altogether unsupported conjecture as to their probable antiquity. As regards the first point, the Karazavydha, a supplement of the White Yagur-veda which gives the lists of the Vedic schools, informs us that the Apastambiya school formed one of the five branches of the Khazdikiya school, which in its turn was a subdivision of the Taittiriyas, one of the ancient sections of Brahmazas who study the Black Yagur-veda. Owing to the very unsatisfactory condition of the text of the Karavzavydha it is unfortunately not possible to ascertain what place that work really assigns to the Apastambiyas among the five branches of the Khazdikiyas. Some MSS. name them first, and others last. They give either the following list, 1. K4leyas (KAletas), 2. Satydyanins, 3. Hirazyakesins, 4. Bharadvagins, and 5. Apastambins, or, 1. Apastambins, 2. Baudhéyanins or Bodhayanins, 3. SatyAshadhins, 4. Hirazyakesins, 5. Aukheyas'. But this defect is remedied to a certain extent by the now generally current, and probably ancient tradition that the Apastambiyas are younger than the school of Baudhayana, and older than that of Saty4shadha Hiranyakesin. Baudhayana, it is alleged, composed the first set of Satras connected with the Black Yagurveda, which bore the special title ‘pravagana,’ and he was succeeded by Bhdradvaga, Apastamba, and Satyéshadha Hirazyakesin, who all founded schools which bear their names ?. 1 Max Miller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 371. A MS. of the Xaramavyfha with an anonymous commentary, in my possession, has the following passage : aiizearat ca der aie | MTRet Biwraat aan? (ew agt arent fr. ? Max Miiller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 194. These statements occur in the introduction of Mahadeva’s commentary on the Srauta-siitra of Hirasyakesin (Weber, Hist. Sansk. Lit., p. 110, and ed.) and in an interpolated passage of Bharadvaga’s Grihya-sitra (Winternitz, op. cit., p. 8, note 1), as well as, with the omission of Bharadv4ga’s name, in interpolated passages of INTRODUCTION. xvii This tradition has preserved two important pieces of information. First, the Apastamba school is what Professor Max Miiller appropriately calls a Sdtrakaraaa, i.e. a school whose founder did not pretend to have received a revelation of Vedic Mantras or of a Brahmaza text, but merely gave a new systematic arrangement of the precepts regarding sacrifices and the sacred law. Secondly, the Satras of Apastamba occupy an intermediate position between the works of Baudh4yana and Hiramyakesin. Both these statements are perfectly true, and capable of being supported by proofs, drawn from Apastamba’s own and from other works.
3Secondly, the Satras of Apastamba occupy an intermediate position between the works of Baudh4yana and Hiramyakesin. Both these statements are perfectly true, and capable of being supported by proofs, drawn from Apastamba’s own and from other works. As regards the first point, Professor Max Miiller has already pointed" out that, though we sometimes find a Brahmana of the Apastambiyas mentioned, the title Apastamba-brahmava is nothing but another name of the Taittiriya-bradhmaza, and that this Brahmaza, in reality, is always attributed to Tittiri or to the pupils of Vaisampayana, who are said to have picked up the Black Yagurveda in the shape of partridges (tittiri). The same remark applies to the collection of the Mantras of the Black Yagurveda, which, likewise, is sometimes named Apastambasamhita. The Karanavytha states explicitly that the five branches of the Khazdikiya school, to which the Apastambiyas belong, possess one and the same recension of the revealed texts, consisting of 7 Kaxdas, 44 Prasnas, 651 Anuvakas, 2198 Pannasis, 19290 Padas?, and 253,868 syllables, and indicates thereby that all these five schools were Sitrakaramas. If we now turn to Apastamba’s own works, we find still BandhAyana’s Dharma-sitra (II, 5, 9, 14) and of the same author's Grthyasftra (Sicred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxvi, note 1). Adherents of a Prava‘ana-s(tra, no doubt identical with that of Baudhayana, the Prava- Ranakarta (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxvi), are mentioned in a land grant, originally issued by the Pallava king Nandivarman in the beginning of the eighth century a.p., see Hultzsch, South Indian Inscriptions, vol. ii, p- 361 seqq.; see also Weber, Hist. Sansk. Lit., p. 110, and ed. 1 Max Miiller, op. cit., p. 195. 3 See also Weber, Ind. Lit., p. 98, and ed. [2] XViil APASTAMBA.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.