Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1It is, however, unlikely that the scribe should have committed any mistake regarding the number of adhyayas., * Literally ‘ together with the rahasya (saiahasyam),’ &c. > History of Indian Literature, p. 107 seq. INTRODUCTION. Xxxi especially in some of the later books where his professional connection with Ganaka, king of Videha, and his skill in theological disputations are favourite topics. As regards the earlier portion of the work, however, it is a remarkable fact that, while in the first five books YAagiiavalkya’s opinion is frequently recorded as authoritative !, he is not once mentioned in the four succeeding k4zdas (6-9). The teacher whose opinion is most frequently referred to in these books, is SAndilya. This disagreement in respect of doctrinal authorities, coupled with unmistakable differences?, stylistic as well as geographical and mythological, can scarcely be accounted for otherwise than by the assumption of a difference of authorship or original redaction. Now the subject with which these four kavdas are chiefly concerned, is the agnizayana, or construction of the sacred fire-altar. For reasons urged by Professor Weber, it would appear not improbable that this part of the ceremonial was specially cultivated in the north-western districts; and since the geographical allusions in these four ka#das chiefly point to that part of India, while those of the other books refer almost exclusively to the regions along the Ganges and Jumna, we may infer from this that the fire-ritual, adopted by the Vagasaneyins at the time of the first redaction of their texts—that is, of the first nine kAmdas, as far as the Brahmava is concerned—had been settled in the north-west of India. Here, however, we meet with another difficulty. The tenth book, or Agnirahasya, deals with the same subject as the preceding four kazdas; and here also SAndilya figures as the chief authority, while no mention is made of YAgiiavalkya. Moreover, at the end of that k4sda, a list of teachers is given in which the transmission of the sacrificial science (either in its entirety, or only as regards the fire-ritual) is traced from a teacher Tura Kavasheya —who is said to have received it from the god Pragdpati— downwards, through two intermediate teachers, to Sandi- 1 See, however, Sat. Br. I], §, 1, 2-3, where Yagfavalkya’s opinion is referred to as being contrary to the Rig-veda. 3 See Weber, Ind. Stud. XIII, p. 266 seq, XXXii SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA.
2Br. I], §, 1, 2-3, where Yagfavalkya’s opinion is referred to as being contrary to the Rig-veda. 3 See Weber, Ind. Stud. XIII, p. 266 seq, XXXii SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. lya; and from thence, through six intermediate teachers, to Samgivi-putra. Tura KAvasheya is referred to in another passage of the tenth kazda (X, 6, 5,9) as having built a fire-altar! to the gods at K4rott; and in the Aitareya-brahmaza he is mentioned as the high-priest who officiated at the inauguration-ceremony of king Ganamegaya Parikshita, renowned in epic legend. From these indications we may, it seems to me, take it for certain that Tura K4vasheya and Sandilya (the latter of whom is also held in high repute by the Kandogas or SAman-priests) were regarded by the Vagasaneyins as the chief arrangers, if not the originators, of the fire-ritual such as it was finally adopted by that school. On the other hand, we saw that the first nine books of the Satapatha, if their identification with Patafgali’s ‘shash¢ipatha’ be correct, must have been regarded as, in some particular sense, a complete work. Now this combination of the fire-ritual in kazdas 6-9 with the complete exposition of the Haviryagiia and Soma-sacrifice, contained in the first five books, would seem to presuppose some kind of compromise between the two schools recognising Yagfavalkya and S4zdilya respectively as their chief authority. What, then, are we to understand to be the exact relations between the later kAndas, especially the tenth, and the earlier portion of the work? We do not, and could not, meet with such a term as ‘ katvarimsat-patha, or work of forty paths, as applying to the last five kazdas of the Satapatha; their nature was too well understood for that, as we see from the passage of the Mahabharata, above referred to. The list of teachers at the end of the tenth kaxda shows no sign of any amalgamation of the two schools up to the time of Samgiviputra, the last teacher mentioned in it: with one exception, it belongs exclusively to the Sazdilya school. It contains, however, an additional remark to the effect that from Samgivi-putra downward the list is ‘identical,’—viz. with some other list. Now this remark can only refer to the vamsa given at the end of the last kazda. In this list the ' The author of this passage would seem to imply, though he does not exactly express it, that this was the first fire-altar built in the proper way. INTRODUCTION. XXXIli
3with some other list. Now this remark can only refer to the vamsa given at the end of the last kazda. In this list the ' The author of this passage would seem to imply, though he does not exactly express it, that this was the first fire-altar built in the proper way. INTRODUCTION. XXXIli transmission of the science of the Adhvaryus is traced—as far as human agency is concerned—from Kasyapa Naidhruvi, through nine teachers, to Yagfavalkya, and thence, through four other teachers, to SAmgivi-putra!, The only name which this list has in common with the former one, previous to Samgivi-putra, is that of Kusri. According to the former list, he was the teacher of Sazdilya, who, in his turn, taught Vatsya?. But since in the same book (X, 5, 5, 1) he is referred to as Vagasravasa, and in the list at the end of the Satapatha he is set down as the pupil of Vaga- Sravas, the same teacher is evidently referred to in both lists; and if we can at all rely on the authenticity of these vamsas, we should have to infer from this coincidence, that there was already some connection between the two schools prior to both Yagfavalkya and SAndilya. The two lines of teachers meet once more in the name of Samgivi-putra. In the later list the succession of teachers 1 I here give, side by side, the lists, in inverted order, from Samgtvi-putra upwards. For the complete lists, see Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 438 seq. End of Book XIV. End of Book X. 58. Aditya. (52) Brahman Svayambbu. 57. Ambiat. 56. Vak. (51) Pragdpati. 55. Kasyapa Naidhruvi. ep 54. Silpa Kasyapa. (50) Tura KAavasheya. 53. Harita Kasyapa. 52. Asita Varshagana. 51. Gihvavat Badhyoga. (49) Yagiavakas Ragastambayana. 50. Vagasravas, 49. Kusri. . (48) Kusri. 48. Upavesi. (47) Sandilya. 47. Aruna. (46) VAtsya. 46. Uddalaka (Aruneya). Vamak: 45. Yagtavalkya (Vagasaneya). (45) Vamakakshfayana. (44) Mahitthi. 44. Asuri. 43. Asurayana. (43) Kautsa, 42. Prasnt-putra (Asurivasin). (42) Mandavya. 41. Karsakeyt-putra. (41) Mandfkayani. 40. SAmgtvi-putra. (40) Samgtvi-putra. Follow 39 names formed by the addition (Same as elsewhere.) of ‘putra’ to the mother’s name, 2 In the Brihad-franyaka (Kanva) VI, 5, 4 the order is Kusri, Vatsya, Sandilya. (13] c . XXXIV SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA,
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.
1It is, however, unlikely that the scribe should have committed any mistake regarding the number of adhyayas., * Literally ‘ together with the rahasya (saiahasyam),’ &c. > History of Indian Literature, p. 107 seq. INTRODUCTION. Xxxi especially in some of the later books where his professional connection with Ganaka, king of Videha, and his skill in theological disputations are favourite topics. As regards the earlier portion of the work, however, it is a remarkable fact that, while in the first five books YAagiiavalkya’s opinion is frequently recorded as authoritative !, he is not once mentioned in the four succeeding k4zdas (6-9). The teacher whose opinion is most frequently referred to in these books, is SAndilya. This disagreement in respect of doctrinal authorities, coupled with unmistakable differences?, stylistic as well as geographical and mythological, can scarcely be accounted for otherwise than by the assumption of a difference of authorship or original redaction. Now the subject with which these four kavdas are chiefly concerned, is the agnizayana, or construction of the sacred fire-altar. For reasons urged by Professor Weber, it would appear not improbable that this part of the ceremonial was specially cultivated in the north-western districts; and since the geographical allusions in these four ka#das chiefly point to that part of India, while those of the other books refer almost exclusively to the regions along the Ganges and Jumna, we may infer from this that the fire-ritual, adopted by the Vagasaneyins at the time of the first redaction of their texts—that is, of the first nine kAmdas, as far as the Brahmava is concerned—had been settled in the north-west of India. Here, however, we meet with another difficulty. The tenth book, or Agnirahasya, deals with the same subject as the preceding four kazdas; and here also SAndilya figures as the chief authority, while no mention is made of YAgiiavalkya. Moreover, at the end of that k4sda, a list of teachers is given in which the transmission of the sacrificial science (either in its entirety, or only as regards the fire-ritual) is traced from a teacher Tura Kavasheya —who is said to have received it from the god Pragdpati— downwards, through two intermediate teachers, to Sandi- 1 See, however, Sat. Br. I], §, 1, 2-3, where Yagfavalkya’s opinion is referred to as being contrary to the Rig-veda. 3 See Weber, Ind. Stud. XIII, p. 266 seq, XXXii SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA.
2Br. I], §, 1, 2-3, where Yagfavalkya’s opinion is referred to as being contrary to the Rig-veda. 3 See Weber, Ind. Stud. XIII, p. 266 seq, XXXii SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. lya; and from thence, through six intermediate teachers, to Samgivi-putra. Tura KAvasheya is referred to in another passage of the tenth kazda (X, 6, 5,9) as having built a fire-altar! to the gods at K4rott; and in the Aitareya-brahmaza he is mentioned as the high-priest who officiated at the inauguration-ceremony of king Ganamegaya Parikshita, renowned in epic legend. From these indications we may, it seems to me, take it for certain that Tura K4vasheya and Sandilya (the latter of whom is also held in high repute by the Kandogas or SAman-priests) were regarded by the Vagasaneyins as the chief arrangers, if not the originators, of the fire-ritual such as it was finally adopted by that school. On the other hand, we saw that the first nine books of the Satapatha, if their identification with Patafgali’s ‘shash¢ipatha’ be correct, must have been regarded as, in some particular sense, a complete work. Now this combination of the fire-ritual in kazdas 6-9 with the complete exposition of the Haviryagiia and Soma-sacrifice, contained in the first five books, would seem to presuppose some kind of compromise between the two schools recognising Yagfavalkya and S4zdilya respectively as their chief authority. What, then, are we to understand to be the exact relations between the later kAndas, especially the tenth, and the earlier portion of the work? We do not, and could not, meet with such a term as ‘ katvarimsat-patha, or work of forty paths, as applying to the last five kazdas of the Satapatha; their nature was too well understood for that, as we see from the passage of the Mahabharata, above referred to. The list of teachers at the end of the tenth kaxda shows no sign of any amalgamation of the two schools up to the time of Samgiviputra, the last teacher mentioned in it: with one exception, it belongs exclusively to the Sazdilya school. It contains, however, an additional remark to the effect that from Samgivi-putra downward the list is ‘identical,’—viz. with some other list. Now this remark can only refer to the vamsa given at the end of the last kazda. In this list the ' The author of this passage would seem to imply, though he does not exactly express it, that this was the first fire-altar built in the proper way. INTRODUCTION. XXXIli
3with some other list. Now this remark can only refer to the vamsa given at the end of the last kazda. In this list the ' The author of this passage would seem to imply, though he does not exactly express it, that this was the first fire-altar built in the proper way. INTRODUCTION. XXXIli transmission of the science of the Adhvaryus is traced—as far as human agency is concerned—from Kasyapa Naidhruvi, through nine teachers, to Yagfavalkya, and thence, through four other teachers, to SAmgivi-putra!, The only name which this list has in common with the former one, previous to Samgivi-putra, is that of Kusri. According to the former list, he was the teacher of Sazdilya, who, in his turn, taught Vatsya?. But since in the same book (X, 5, 5, 1) he is referred to as Vagasravasa, and in the list at the end of the Satapatha he is set down as the pupil of Vaga- Sravas, the same teacher is evidently referred to in both lists; and if we can at all rely on the authenticity of these vamsas, we should have to infer from this coincidence, that there was already some connection between the two schools prior to both Yagfavalkya and SAndilya. The two lines of teachers meet once more in the name of Samgivi-putra. In the later list the succession of teachers 1 I here give, side by side, the lists, in inverted order, from Samgtvi-putra upwards. For the complete lists, see Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 438 seq. End of Book XIV. End of Book X. 58. Aditya. (52) Brahman Svayambbu. 57. Ambiat. 56. Vak. (51) Pragdpati. 55. Kasyapa Naidhruvi. ep 54. Silpa Kasyapa. (50) Tura KAavasheya. 53. Harita Kasyapa. 52. Asita Varshagana. 51. Gihvavat Badhyoga. (49) Yagiavakas Ragastambayana. 50. Vagasravas, 49. Kusri. . (48) Kusri. 48. Upavesi. (47) Sandilya. 47. Aruna. (46) VAtsya. 46. Uddalaka (Aruneya). Vamak: 45. Yagtavalkya (Vagasaneya). (45) Vamakakshfayana. (44) Mahitthi. 44. Asuri. 43. Asurayana. (43) Kautsa, 42. Prasnt-putra (Asurivasin). (42) Mandavya. 41. Karsakeyt-putra. (41) Mandfkayani. 40. SAmgtvi-putra. (40) Samgtvi-putra. Follow 39 names formed by the addition (Same as elsewhere.) of ‘putra’ to the mother’s name, 2 In the Brihad-franyaka (Kanva) VI, 5, 4 the order is Kusri, Vatsya, Sandilya. (13] c . XXXIV SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA,
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.