Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
13. Thereupon he cuts up the victim: ‘Move thrice’, and make the heart the uppermost of the thrice-moved!’ thus (he says to the slaughterer), for threefold is the sacrifice. 4. He then instructs the slaughterer: ‘If one ask thee, “Is the sacrificial food cooked, O Samitar ?” say thou only “Cooked!” not “Cooked, reverend sir!” nor “Cooked, forsooth!”’ 1 The order of proceeding is not quite clear from the context, and seems to have puzzled the later ritualists. From Katy. VI, 7-8 it would seem that the author of the Sfitras means the performance of the cake-offering to go on simultaneously with the cutting up of the victim (and the cooking of the portions and roasting of the beast). The comm. on Katy. VI, 7, 29, however, protests against this arrangement as contrary to the order laid down in the Brahmavza; and insists especially on the ‘atha (now)’ at the beginning of this paragraph. This particle is, however, often used in a vague sense; as very frequently when, after sketching the chief course of performance, the author turns back to fill in the details. There seems also a difference of opinion as to the exact meaning of the above direction given by the Adhvaryu to the Samitar after (as would seem) the portions have been cooked. The commentator on K4ty. VI, 8, 1 apparently takes ‘triA prakydvaya’ in the sense of ‘shake thrice’ or ‘turn thrice.’ Sayama, on the other hand, explains it as meaning that the Samitr? is to divide the portions into three parts, according to whether they are destined for the chief offerings, or the Svish/akrit, or the by-offerings(?). As the direction cannot refer to the taking out of the portions from the cooking-vessel (ukh4) it would seem that the Samitar is either to move (shake) the vessel itself, or to stir the contents, perhaps hereby separating the respective portions. The Kava text reads, Trif prakyavayéd ity uttame prakyava uttamardhe hr:dayam kurutad iti. The heart, when done, is to be removed from the spit and laid on the portions; whereupon the Adhvaryu pours ghee on the portions (paragraph 8). III KANDA, 8 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, IO. = 201 5. Having then taken clotted ghee with the guhd, the Adhvaryu, stepping up (from the altar) to (the SAmitra), asks, ‘Is the sacrificial food cooked, O Samitar?’ ‘Cooked, he says. ‘That is of the gods,’ says the Adhvaryu in a low voice. 6. The reason why he asks is this. Cooked, forsooth, not uncooked (must be) the gods’ food ; and the Samitvz indeed knows whether it is cooked or uncooked. 7. And again, why he asks. ‘I will perform with cooked (food),’ so he thinks; and if that sacrificial food be uncooked, it is yet cooked food for the gods, and is cooked as regards the Sacrificer; and the Adhvaryu is guiltless; on the slaughterer that guilt lies. Thrice he asks, for threefold is the sacrifice. And as to his saying, ‘That is of the gods,’ that which is cooked, indeed, belongs to the gods; therefore he says, ‘That is of the gods.’
2Thrice he asks, for threefold is the sacrifice. And as to his saying, ‘That is of the gods,’ that which is cooked, indeed, belongs to the gods; therefore he says, ‘That is of the gods.’ 8. The heart he bastes (with clotted ghee) first of all; for the heart is the self (soul), the mind; and the clotted ghee is the breath; he thus puts the breath into its (the victim's) self, into its mind; and thus it verily becomes the living food of the gods, and immortal for the immortals. 9. He bastes it with (Vag. S. VI, 18), ‘May thy mind unite with the mind; thy breath with the breath!’ He utters no Sv4ha (‘hail’), for this is not an oblation. They remove the victim (from the cooking-fire)'. 10. They take it along the back of the pit, and 1 The Adhvaryu removes the dish northwards from the fire, takes the portions out of it, puts them into some kind of basket, and performs ‘ prizad4na’ (p. 196, note 3) on them. 202 SATAPATHA-BRAHMAWA. between the sacrificial stake and the (Ahavantya) fire. The reason why, though it is cooked, they do not take it across the middle (of the altar), as they take other sacrificial dishes, is ‘lest they should bring the sacrifice in the middle in connection with that which is cut up by limbs and mangled.’ And why they do not take it outside (the altar) in front of the stake, is that they would thereby put it outside the sacrifice: therefore they take (the flesh) along between the stake and the fire. When they have put it down south (of the fire), the Pratiprasthatz? cuts off (the portions). There are Plaksha branches!(Ficus Infectoria) by way of an upper barhis (covering of altar); thereon he cuts. The reason why there are Plaksha branches by way of an upper barhis is this, 11. For when the gods, at first, seized an animal (to sacrifice), Tvash¢vz first spat upon its head, thinking, ‘Surely, thus they will not touch it!’ for animals belong to Tvashévz, That (spittle became) the brain in the head and the marrow in the neckbone*: hence that (substance) is like spittle, for Tvash¢vz spat it. Let him therefore not eat that, since it was spitten by Tvashérz. 12. Its sacrificial essence flowed down and there a tree sprang up. The gods beheld it; wherefore it (was called) ‘prakhya’ (visible), for ‘plaksha,’ 1 Or, the Plaksha branches with which the altar was covered on the preceding night. See p. 120, note 3. The K4mva text (as Taitt. S. VI, 3, 10, 2) speaks of one Plaksha branch put on the barhis. ? Anfika, of which anfkya is the adjective, means ‘the forepart of the spinal column.’ The K4ava text reads,—yan mastishko yad anike maggd. ll KANDA, 8 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, 14. 203 doubtless, is the same as ‘prakhya.’ With that same sacrificial essence he now completes it (the victim), and makes it whole: hence there are Plaksha branches as an upper covering.
3ll KANDA, 8 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, 14. 203 doubtless, is the same as ‘prakhya.’ With that same sacrificial essence he now completes it (the victim), and makes it whole: hence there are Plaksha branches as an upper covering. 13. He then makes an ‘underlayer’ of ghee both in the guhd and the upabhvzt, and in the vasAhomahavant', and the samavattadh4ni?; and puts a piece of gold? both in the guhd and the upabhr7t. 14. Thereupon he addresses (the Hotrz) for the recitation on the havis to the manota deity‘. The reason why he addresses him for the recitation on the havis to the manota deity is this. All the deities draw nigh to the victim while it is immolated, thinking, ‘My name he will choose, my name he will choose!’ for the animal victim is sacrificial food for all deities. The minds (manas), then, of all those deities are fixed upon (ota) that victim; those (minds of theirs) he thereby satisfies, and thus the minds of the gods have not drawn nigh in vain. For this reason he addresses him for the recitation on the havis to the manota deity. 1 That is, the ladle used (as a substitute for the guhd) for offering the fat-liquor or gravy. See paragraph 20. § That is, the vessel used for holding the cuttings (samavatta) of the ida ; also called id&p4tri, see part i, p. 219, note 3. ® See p. 198, note r. ‘ Thereupon he says, ‘Recite to the manota (deity) the invitatory prayer for (of) the havis which is being cut in portions (havisho *vadiyamanasya). K4nva text; cf. Ait. Br. II, 10.—While the sacrificial portions are being cut into the respective spoons, the Hotr? recites the Hymn to Agni, Rig-veda VI, 1, 1-13, beginning, ‘Thou, O wondrous Agni, the first thinker (manotrz) of this hymn, wert verily the priest... .’ From the occurrence of this word manoté, the latter has come to be the technical name both of the hymn itself and of the deity (Agni) to whom it is recited. 204 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, 15. He first makes a portion of the heart. The reason why he first makes a portion of the heart which is in the middle, is that the heart is the breath, since it is from there that this breath moves upward?; and the animal is breath, for only so long does the animal (live) as it breathes with the breath; but when the breath departs from it, it lies there useless, even (as) a block of wood. 16. The heart,:‘then, is the animal; thus he first . makes a portion of its very self (or soul). And, accordingly, if any portion were omitted, he need not heed this, since it is of his entire animal victim that the first portion is made which is made of the heart. He therefore first makes a portion of the heart, that being in the middle. Thereupon according to the proper order. 17. Then of the tongue, for that stands out from its fore-part. Then of the breast, for that also (stands out) therefrom*. Then of the simultaneously moving (left) fore-foot*. Then of the flanks. Then of the liver. Then of the kidneys.
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.
13. Thereupon he cuts up the victim: ‘Move thrice’, and make the heart the uppermost of the thrice-moved!’ thus (he says to the slaughterer), for threefold is the sacrifice. 4. He then instructs the slaughterer: ‘If one ask thee, “Is the sacrificial food cooked, O Samitar ?” say thou only “Cooked!” not “Cooked, reverend sir!” nor “Cooked, forsooth!”’ 1 The order of proceeding is not quite clear from the context, and seems to have puzzled the later ritualists. From Katy. VI, 7-8 it would seem that the author of the Sfitras means the performance of the cake-offering to go on simultaneously with the cutting up of the victim (and the cooking of the portions and roasting of the beast). The comm. on Katy. VI, 7, 29, however, protests against this arrangement as contrary to the order laid down in the Brahmavza; and insists especially on the ‘atha (now)’ at the beginning of this paragraph. This particle is, however, often used in a vague sense; as very frequently when, after sketching the chief course of performance, the author turns back to fill in the details. There seems also a difference of opinion as to the exact meaning of the above direction given by the Adhvaryu to the Samitar after (as would seem) the portions have been cooked. The commentator on K4ty. VI, 8, 1 apparently takes ‘triA prakydvaya’ in the sense of ‘shake thrice’ or ‘turn thrice.’ Sayama, on the other hand, explains it as meaning that the Samitr? is to divide the portions into three parts, according to whether they are destined for the chief offerings, or the Svish/akrit, or the by-offerings(?). As the direction cannot refer to the taking out of the portions from the cooking-vessel (ukh4) it would seem that the Samitar is either to move (shake) the vessel itself, or to stir the contents, perhaps hereby separating the respective portions. The Kava text reads, Trif prakyavayéd ity uttame prakyava uttamardhe hr:dayam kurutad iti. The heart, when done, is to be removed from the spit and laid on the portions; whereupon the Adhvaryu pours ghee on the portions (paragraph 8). III KANDA, 8 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, IO. = 201 5. Having then taken clotted ghee with the guhd, the Adhvaryu, stepping up (from the altar) to (the SAmitra), asks, ‘Is the sacrificial food cooked, O Samitar?’ ‘Cooked, he says. ‘That is of the gods,’ says the Adhvaryu in a low voice. 6. The reason why he asks is this. Cooked, forsooth, not uncooked (must be) the gods’ food ; and the Samitvz indeed knows whether it is cooked or uncooked. 7. And again, why he asks. ‘I will perform with cooked (food),’ so he thinks; and if that sacrificial food be uncooked, it is yet cooked food for the gods, and is cooked as regards the Sacrificer; and the Adhvaryu is guiltless; on the slaughterer that guilt lies. Thrice he asks, for threefold is the sacrifice. And as to his saying, ‘That is of the gods,’ that which is cooked, indeed, belongs to the gods; therefore he says, ‘That is of the gods.’
2Thrice he asks, for threefold is the sacrifice. And as to his saying, ‘That is of the gods,’ that which is cooked, indeed, belongs to the gods; therefore he says, ‘That is of the gods.’ 8. The heart he bastes (with clotted ghee) first of all; for the heart is the self (soul), the mind; and the clotted ghee is the breath; he thus puts the breath into its (the victim's) self, into its mind; and thus it verily becomes the living food of the gods, and immortal for the immortals. 9. He bastes it with (Vag. S. VI, 18), ‘May thy mind unite with the mind; thy breath with the breath!’ He utters no Sv4ha (‘hail’), for this is not an oblation. They remove the victim (from the cooking-fire)'. 10. They take it along the back of the pit, and 1 The Adhvaryu removes the dish northwards from the fire, takes the portions out of it, puts them into some kind of basket, and performs ‘ prizad4na’ (p. 196, note 3) on them. 202 SATAPATHA-BRAHMAWA. between the sacrificial stake and the (Ahavantya) fire. The reason why, though it is cooked, they do not take it across the middle (of the altar), as they take other sacrificial dishes, is ‘lest they should bring the sacrifice in the middle in connection with that which is cut up by limbs and mangled.’ And why they do not take it outside (the altar) in front of the stake, is that they would thereby put it outside the sacrifice: therefore they take (the flesh) along between the stake and the fire. When they have put it down south (of the fire), the Pratiprasthatz? cuts off (the portions). There are Plaksha branches!(Ficus Infectoria) by way of an upper barhis (covering of altar); thereon he cuts. The reason why there are Plaksha branches by way of an upper barhis is this, 11. For when the gods, at first, seized an animal (to sacrifice), Tvash¢vz first spat upon its head, thinking, ‘Surely, thus they will not touch it!’ for animals belong to Tvashévz, That (spittle became) the brain in the head and the marrow in the neckbone*: hence that (substance) is like spittle, for Tvash¢vz spat it. Let him therefore not eat that, since it was spitten by Tvashérz. 12. Its sacrificial essence flowed down and there a tree sprang up. The gods beheld it; wherefore it (was called) ‘prakhya’ (visible), for ‘plaksha,’ 1 Or, the Plaksha branches with which the altar was covered on the preceding night. See p. 120, note 3. The K4mva text (as Taitt. S. VI, 3, 10, 2) speaks of one Plaksha branch put on the barhis. ? Anfika, of which anfkya is the adjective, means ‘the forepart of the spinal column.’ The K4ava text reads,—yan mastishko yad anike maggd. ll KANDA, 8 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, 14. 203 doubtless, is the same as ‘prakhya.’ With that same sacrificial essence he now completes it (the victim), and makes it whole: hence there are Plaksha branches as an upper covering.
3ll KANDA, 8 ADHYAYA, 3 BRAHMANA, 14. 203 doubtless, is the same as ‘prakhya.’ With that same sacrificial essence he now completes it (the victim), and makes it whole: hence there are Plaksha branches as an upper covering. 13. He then makes an ‘underlayer’ of ghee both in the guhd and the upabhvzt, and in the vasAhomahavant', and the samavattadh4ni?; and puts a piece of gold? both in the guhd and the upabhr7t. 14. Thereupon he addresses (the Hotrz) for the recitation on the havis to the manota deity‘. The reason why he addresses him for the recitation on the havis to the manota deity is this. All the deities draw nigh to the victim while it is immolated, thinking, ‘My name he will choose, my name he will choose!’ for the animal victim is sacrificial food for all deities. The minds (manas), then, of all those deities are fixed upon (ota) that victim; those (minds of theirs) he thereby satisfies, and thus the minds of the gods have not drawn nigh in vain. For this reason he addresses him for the recitation on the havis to the manota deity. 1 That is, the ladle used (as a substitute for the guhd) for offering the fat-liquor or gravy. See paragraph 20. § That is, the vessel used for holding the cuttings (samavatta) of the ida ; also called id&p4tri, see part i, p. 219, note 3. ® See p. 198, note r. ‘ Thereupon he says, ‘Recite to the manota (deity) the invitatory prayer for (of) the havis which is being cut in portions (havisho *vadiyamanasya). K4nva text; cf. Ait. Br. II, 10.—While the sacrificial portions are being cut into the respective spoons, the Hotr? recites the Hymn to Agni, Rig-veda VI, 1, 1-13, beginning, ‘Thou, O wondrous Agni, the first thinker (manotrz) of this hymn, wert verily the priest... .’ From the occurrence of this word manoté, the latter has come to be the technical name both of the hymn itself and of the deity (Agni) to whom it is recited. 204 SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, 15. He first makes a portion of the heart. The reason why he first makes a portion of the heart which is in the middle, is that the heart is the breath, since it is from there that this breath moves upward?; and the animal is breath, for only so long does the animal (live) as it breathes with the breath; but when the breath departs from it, it lies there useless, even (as) a block of wood. 16. The heart,:‘then, is the animal; thus he first . makes a portion of its very self (or soul). And, accordingly, if any portion were omitted, he need not heed this, since it is of his entire animal victim that the first portion is made which is made of the heart. He therefore first makes a portion of the heart, that being in the middle. Thereupon according to the proper order. 17. Then of the tongue, for that stands out from its fore-part. Then of the breast, for that also (stands out) therefrom*. Then of the simultaneously moving (left) fore-foot*. Then of the flanks. Then of the liver. Then of the kidneys.
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.