Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1195, note 1. * Or upwards, on the upper side, uparish/allakshanam. See the offering-formulas above, p. 195, note 2. * Vashazs, or rather vausha#[‘may he (Agni) carry it (to the gods)!’], is pronounced after each y 4gy 4 or offering-formula, which contains the name of the deity towards the end, or at least not at the very beginning. 198 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. of the) deity constitutes the vigour of the Azé (verse): hence after thus enclosing it! on both sides with vigour, he offers the sacrificial food to that deity for which it is intended. 21. He pronounces (the syllable) vauk?; for, assuredly, the vashaécall is speech; and speech means seed: hence he thereby casts seed. ‘Sha?’ (he pronounces), because there are six seasons: he thereby casts that seed into the seasons, and the seasons cause that seed so cast to spring up here as creatures. This is the reason why he pronounces the vashadé. 22. Now the gods and the Asuras, both of them sprung from Prag4pati, entered upon their father Pragdpati’s inheritance*, to wit, these two halfmoons. The gods entered upon the one which waxes, and the Asuras on the one which wanes. 23. The gods were desirous as to how they might appropriate also the one that had fallen to the Asuras. They went on worshipping and toiling. They saw this haviryagz#a, to wit, the new and full-moon sacrifices, and performed them; and by performing them they likewise appropriated the one— 24. Which belonged to the Asuras. Now when these two revolve, then the month is produced ; and month (revolving) after month, the year (is produced). But the year, doubtless, means all; hence the gods thereby appropriated all that belonged to 1 Viz. the invitatory and offering-formulas, * The sacrificial call vausha/ (for vasha/, irregular aorist of vah, ‘to bear,’ cf. p. 88, note 2) is here fancifully explained as composed of vauk, for vak, ‘speech,’ + sha/, ‘six.’ 3 Pragdpati, or Lord of Creatures, is here, as often (cf. I, 2, 5, 13), taken as representing the year, or Time. I KANDA, 7 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMAMA, I. 199 the Asuras, they deprived their enemies, the Asuras, of all. And in the same way he (the sacrificer) who knows this appropriates all that belongs to his enemies, deprives his enemies of all. 25. That (half-moon) which belonged to the gods is (called) yavan, for the gods possessed themselves (yu, ‘to join’) of it; and that which belonged to the Asuras is ayavan, because the Asuras did not possess themselves of it. 26. But they also say contrariwise :— That which belonged to the gods is (called) ayavan, because the Asuras did not get possession of it; and that which belonged to the Asuras is yavan, because the gods did get possession of it. The day is (called) sabda, the night sagar4, the months yavya, the year sumeka': sveka (‘eminently one’), doubtless, is the same as sumeka. And since the Hotvz is concerned with these—to wit, the yavan and the ayavan, which (according to some) is yavan—they call (his office) yavihotram%
2The day is (called) sabda, the night sagar4, the months yavya, the year sumeka': sveka (‘eminently one’), doubtless, is the same as sumeka. And since the Hotvz is concerned with these—to wit, the yavan and the ayavan, which (according to some) is yavan—they call (his office) yavihotram% Tuirp BRAHMANA, OstatTion To AGNI SvisH7AkR/T, [AND THE BRAHMAN’S PORTIONS. | 1. Now by means of the sacrifice the gods ascended to heaven. But the god who rules over 1 Sumeka is taken by the St. Petersburg Dictionary to mean ‘firmly established ;’ by Grassmann, ‘bountiful,’ literally ‘wellshowering.’ Our author identifies it with su-eka. The words sabdam (sabdam, K4nva rec., ? =the sounding one) and sagarda are obscure; yavya here apparently means, ‘ consisting of the yavas or half-months.’ 2 The term yAvihotram is obscure, and does not seem to occur anywhere else. The Kava MS. reads yAmihotram (? = gamihotram). Sdyana’s comment is corrupt in several places and affords little help. 200 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, the cattle was left behind here: hence they call him VAstavya, for he was then left behind on the (sacrificial) site? (vastu). 2. The gods went on worshipping and toiling with the same (sacrifice) by which they had ascended to heaven. Now the god who rules over the cattle, and who was left behind here,— 3. He saw (what occurred, and said), ‘I have been left behind: they are excluding me from the sacrifice!’ He went up after them, and with his raised (weapon)? rose up on the north—the time (when this happened) was that of the (performance of the) Svishéakrit. 4. The gods said, ‘Do not hurl!’ He said, ‘Do not ye exclude me from the sacrifice! Set apart an oblation for me!’ They replied, ‘So be it!’ He withdrew (his weapon), and did not hurl it; nor did he injure any one. 5. The gods said (to one another), ‘ Whatever portions of sacrificial food have been taken out by us, they have all been offered up. Try to discover 1 Or perhaps, ‘he was left behind with, or in, the remains (of the sacrifice) ;’ vastu being evidently also taken in this sense by our author, in par. 7. ? The text has dyatay4 merely, which, to become intelligible, clearly requires some noun, which may have been lost here. Sdyana is silent on this point. In Dr. Muir’s version of the legend, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, p. 202, the word is left untranslated. I am inclined to supply some such noun as heti, ‘ weapon ;’ cf. XII, 7, 3, 20, where this very word is used in connexion with Rudra: in later times it is also specially applied to Agni’s weapon or flame (gihv4, ‘tongue’). It is not impossible, however, that we have to supply tanva (‘with his raised body, or self’). To m4 vi srakshih (for which the Kava recension reads ma ’sthaA), ‘do not hurl,’ and to samvivarha (‘he drew back’), Sayama supplies yagftiam, ‘sacrifice:’ hence he apparently takes it thus,—‘do not scatter (the sacrifice),’— “he kept (the sacrifice) together and did not injure it in any way.’ ,
3To m4 vi srakshih (for which the Kava recension reads ma ’sthaA), ‘do not hurl,’ and to samvivarha (‘he drew back’), Sayama supplies yagftiam, ‘sacrifice:’ hence he apparently takes it thus,—‘do not scatter (the sacrifice),’— “he kept (the sacrifice) together and did not injure it in any way.’ , I KANDA, 7 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, 8. 201 some means by which we may set apart an oblation for him!’ 6. They said to the Adhvaryu priest, ‘Sprinkle the sacrificial dishes (with butter) in proper succession ; and replenish them for the sake of one (additional) portion, and again render them fit for use ; and then cut off one portion for each!’ 7. The Adhvaryu accordingly sprinkled the sacrificial dishes in proper succession, and replenished them for the sake of one (additional) portion, and again rendered them fit for use, and cut off one portion for each. This then is the reason why he (Rudra) is called V4stavya!, for a remainder (vastu) is that part of the sacrifice which (is left) after the oblations have been made: hence, if sacrificial food is offered to any deity, the Svish¢akvzt (Agni, ‘the maker of good offering’) is afterwards invariably offered a share of it; because the gods invariably gave him a share after themselves. 8. That (offering) then is certainly made to ‘Agni,’ for, indeed, Agni is that god;—his are these names: Sarva, as the eastern people call him; Bhava, as the Bahtkas (call him); Pastinam pati (‘lord of beasts,’ Pasupati), Rudra, Agni?*. The name Agni, doubtless, is the most auspicious 1? On the identification of Agni with Rudra, see also VI, 1, 3, 7; and Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, p. 339 seq. 2 Passages such as this and VI, 1, 3, 7 seq. are of considerable interest, as showing, on the one hand, the tendency towards identifying and blending originally distinct and apparently local Vedic gods, especially Rudra, with the person of Agni, the representative of the divine power on earth in the later Vedic triad ; and, on the other hand, the origin of the conception of Siva, in the pantheistic system of the post-Vedic period. On our passage, see also Weber, Ind. Stud. II, p. 37; I, p. 189; Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, p. 328. 202 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. (sAnta), and the other names of his are inauspicious: hence it is offered to (him under the name of) ‘Agni,’ and to (him as) the Svish¢akrzt. g. They (the gods) said, ‘What we have offered unto thee who art in yonder place’, do thou render that well-offered (svish¢a) for us!’ He made it well-offered for them; and this is the reason why (it is offered) to (Agni as) the Svishéakvzt.
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.
1195, note 1. * Or upwards, on the upper side, uparish/allakshanam. See the offering-formulas above, p. 195, note 2. * Vashazs, or rather vausha#[‘may he (Agni) carry it (to the gods)!’], is pronounced after each y 4gy 4 or offering-formula, which contains the name of the deity towards the end, or at least not at the very beginning. 198 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. of the) deity constitutes the vigour of the Azé (verse): hence after thus enclosing it! on both sides with vigour, he offers the sacrificial food to that deity for which it is intended. 21. He pronounces (the syllable) vauk?; for, assuredly, the vashaécall is speech; and speech means seed: hence he thereby casts seed. ‘Sha?’ (he pronounces), because there are six seasons: he thereby casts that seed into the seasons, and the seasons cause that seed so cast to spring up here as creatures. This is the reason why he pronounces the vashadé. 22. Now the gods and the Asuras, both of them sprung from Prag4pati, entered upon their father Pragdpati’s inheritance*, to wit, these two halfmoons. The gods entered upon the one which waxes, and the Asuras on the one which wanes. 23. The gods were desirous as to how they might appropriate also the one that had fallen to the Asuras. They went on worshipping and toiling. They saw this haviryagz#a, to wit, the new and full-moon sacrifices, and performed them; and by performing them they likewise appropriated the one— 24. Which belonged to the Asuras. Now when these two revolve, then the month is produced ; and month (revolving) after month, the year (is produced). But the year, doubtless, means all; hence the gods thereby appropriated all that belonged to 1 Viz. the invitatory and offering-formulas, * The sacrificial call vausha/ (for vasha/, irregular aorist of vah, ‘to bear,’ cf. p. 88, note 2) is here fancifully explained as composed of vauk, for vak, ‘speech,’ + sha/, ‘six.’ 3 Pragdpati, or Lord of Creatures, is here, as often (cf. I, 2, 5, 13), taken as representing the year, or Time. I KANDA, 7 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMAMA, I. 199 the Asuras, they deprived their enemies, the Asuras, of all. And in the same way he (the sacrificer) who knows this appropriates all that belongs to his enemies, deprives his enemies of all. 25. That (half-moon) which belonged to the gods is (called) yavan, for the gods possessed themselves (yu, ‘to join’) of it; and that which belonged to the Asuras is ayavan, because the Asuras did not possess themselves of it. 26. But they also say contrariwise :— That which belonged to the gods is (called) ayavan, because the Asuras did not get possession of it; and that which belonged to the Asuras is yavan, because the gods did get possession of it. The day is (called) sabda, the night sagar4, the months yavya, the year sumeka': sveka (‘eminently one’), doubtless, is the same as sumeka. And since the Hotvz is concerned with these—to wit, the yavan and the ayavan, which (according to some) is yavan—they call (his office) yavihotram%
2The day is (called) sabda, the night sagar4, the months yavya, the year sumeka': sveka (‘eminently one’), doubtless, is the same as sumeka. And since the Hotvz is concerned with these—to wit, the yavan and the ayavan, which (according to some) is yavan—they call (his office) yavihotram% Tuirp BRAHMANA, OstatTion To AGNI SvisH7AkR/T, [AND THE BRAHMAN’S PORTIONS. | 1. Now by means of the sacrifice the gods ascended to heaven. But the god who rules over 1 Sumeka is taken by the St. Petersburg Dictionary to mean ‘firmly established ;’ by Grassmann, ‘bountiful,’ literally ‘wellshowering.’ Our author identifies it with su-eka. The words sabdam (sabdam, K4nva rec., ? =the sounding one) and sagarda are obscure; yavya here apparently means, ‘ consisting of the yavas or half-months.’ 2 The term yAvihotram is obscure, and does not seem to occur anywhere else. The Kava MS. reads yAmihotram (? = gamihotram). Sdyana’s comment is corrupt in several places and affords little help. 200 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, the cattle was left behind here: hence they call him VAstavya, for he was then left behind on the (sacrificial) site? (vastu). 2. The gods went on worshipping and toiling with the same (sacrifice) by which they had ascended to heaven. Now the god who rules over the cattle, and who was left behind here,— 3. He saw (what occurred, and said), ‘I have been left behind: they are excluding me from the sacrifice!’ He went up after them, and with his raised (weapon)? rose up on the north—the time (when this happened) was that of the (performance of the) Svishéakrit. 4. The gods said, ‘Do not hurl!’ He said, ‘Do not ye exclude me from the sacrifice! Set apart an oblation for me!’ They replied, ‘So be it!’ He withdrew (his weapon), and did not hurl it; nor did he injure any one. 5. The gods said (to one another), ‘ Whatever portions of sacrificial food have been taken out by us, they have all been offered up. Try to discover 1 Or perhaps, ‘he was left behind with, or in, the remains (of the sacrifice) ;’ vastu being evidently also taken in this sense by our author, in par. 7. ? The text has dyatay4 merely, which, to become intelligible, clearly requires some noun, which may have been lost here. Sdyana is silent on this point. In Dr. Muir’s version of the legend, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, p. 202, the word is left untranslated. I am inclined to supply some such noun as heti, ‘ weapon ;’ cf. XII, 7, 3, 20, where this very word is used in connexion with Rudra: in later times it is also specially applied to Agni’s weapon or flame (gihv4, ‘tongue’). It is not impossible, however, that we have to supply tanva (‘with his raised body, or self’). To m4 vi srakshih (for which the Kava recension reads ma ’sthaA), ‘do not hurl,’ and to samvivarha (‘he drew back’), Sayama supplies yagftiam, ‘sacrifice:’ hence he apparently takes it thus,—‘do not scatter (the sacrifice),’— “he kept (the sacrifice) together and did not injure it in any way.’ ,
3To m4 vi srakshih (for which the Kava recension reads ma ’sthaA), ‘do not hurl,’ and to samvivarha (‘he drew back’), Sayama supplies yagftiam, ‘sacrifice:’ hence he apparently takes it thus,—‘do not scatter (the sacrifice),’— “he kept (the sacrifice) together and did not injure it in any way.’ , I KANDA, 7 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, 8. 201 some means by which we may set apart an oblation for him!’ 6. They said to the Adhvaryu priest, ‘Sprinkle the sacrificial dishes (with butter) in proper succession ; and replenish them for the sake of one (additional) portion, and again render them fit for use ; and then cut off one portion for each!’ 7. The Adhvaryu accordingly sprinkled the sacrificial dishes in proper succession, and replenished them for the sake of one (additional) portion, and again rendered them fit for use, and cut off one portion for each. This then is the reason why he (Rudra) is called V4stavya!, for a remainder (vastu) is that part of the sacrifice which (is left) after the oblations have been made: hence, if sacrificial food is offered to any deity, the Svish¢akvzt (Agni, ‘the maker of good offering’) is afterwards invariably offered a share of it; because the gods invariably gave him a share after themselves. 8. That (offering) then is certainly made to ‘Agni,’ for, indeed, Agni is that god;—his are these names: Sarva, as the eastern people call him; Bhava, as the Bahtkas (call him); Pastinam pati (‘lord of beasts,’ Pasupati), Rudra, Agni?*. The name Agni, doubtless, is the most auspicious 1? On the identification of Agni with Rudra, see also VI, 1, 3, 7; and Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, p. 339 seq. 2 Passages such as this and VI, 1, 3, 7 seq. are of considerable interest, as showing, on the one hand, the tendency towards identifying and blending originally distinct and apparently local Vedic gods, especially Rudra, with the person of Agni, the representative of the divine power on earth in the later Vedic triad ; and, on the other hand, the origin of the conception of Siva, in the pantheistic system of the post-Vedic period. On our passage, see also Weber, Ind. Stud. II, p. 37; I, p. 189; Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, p. 328. 202 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. (sAnta), and the other names of his are inauspicious: hence it is offered to (him under the name of) ‘Agni,’ and to (him as) the Svish¢akrzt. g. They (the gods) said, ‘What we have offered unto thee who art in yonder place’, do thou render that well-offered (svish¢a) for us!’ He made it well-offered for them; and this is the reason why (it is offered) to (Agni as) the Svishéakvzt.
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.