Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1IX, 48, 2, ,, samvrikta ” samyukta », IX, 49,1, , no*pim ” no y&m >. IX, 54, 3, » saryad » stryam >, IX, 59, 3,» sida ni » Sidati®, > As printed by Pandit Taranatha. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xlv Pratisdkhya followed in their critical researches in the fifth or sixth century before our era. I believe that starting from that date our text of the Veda is better authenticated, and supported by a more perfect apparatus criticus, than the text of any Greek or Latin author, and I do not think that diplomatic criticism can ever go beyond what has been achieved in the constitution of the text of the Vedic hymns, Far be it from me to say that the editio princeps of the text thus constituted was printed without mistakes. ; But most of these mistakes are mistakes Aufrecht’s . : : Romanised Re- which no attentive reader could fail to detect. Rinivedan Cases like II, 35,1, where gégishat instead of géshishat was printed three times, so as to perplex even Professor Roth, or II, 12, 14, where sasamAndm occurs three times instead of sasamanam, are, I believe, of rare occurrence. Nor do I think that, unless some quite unexpected discoveries are made, there ever will be a new critical edition, or, as we call it in Germany, a new recension of the hymns of the Rig-veda. If by collating new MSS., or by a careful study of the Pratisakhya, or by conjectural emendations, a more correct text could have been produced, we may be certain that a critical scholar like Professor Aufrecht would have given us such a text. But after carefully collating several MSS. of Professor Wilson’s collection, and after enjoying the advantage of Professor Weber’s assistance in collating the MSS. of the Royal Library at Berlin, and after a minute study of the Pratisakhya, he frankly states that in the text of the Rig-veda, transcribed in Roman letters, which he printed at Berlin, he followed my edition, and that he had to correct but a small number of misprints. For the two Mazdalas which I had not yet published, I lent him the very MSS. on which my edition is founded ; and there will be accordingly but few passages in these two concluding Mazdalas, which I have still to publish, where the text will materially differ from that of his Romanised transcript. No one, I should think, who is at all acquainted with the tules of diplomatic criticism, would easily bring himself to xlvi VEDIC HYMNS,
2No one, I should think, who is at all acquainted with the tules of diplomatic criticism, would easily bring himself to xlvi VEDIC HYMNS, touch a text resting on such authorities as the text of the Rig-veda. What would a Greek scholar give, if he could say of Homer that his text was in every word, in every syllable, in every vowel, in every accent, the same as the text used by Peisistratos in the sixth century B.c.! A text thus preserved in its integrity for so many centuries, must remain for ever the authoritative text of the Veda. To remove, for instance, the eleven hymns 49-59 in the eighth Mazdala from their proper place, or count them by Valakhilya themselves as Valakhilya* hymns, seems to Hymns. me, though no doubt perfectly harmless, little short of a critical sacrilege. Why Sdyaza does not explain these hymns, I confess I do not know; but whatever the reason was, it was not because they did not exist at his time, or because he thought them spurious. They are regularly counted in Katy4yana’s Sarvanukrama, though here the same accident has happened. One commentator, Shadgurusishya, the one most commonly used, does not explain them ; but another commentator, Gagannatha, does explain them, exactly as they occur in the Sarvanukrama, only leaving out hymn 58. That these hymns had something peculiar in the eyes of native scholars, is clear enough. They may for a time have formed a separate collection, they * The earliest interpretation of the name Valakhilya is found in the Taittirfyafranyaka, I, 23. We are told that Pragapati created the world, and in the process of creation the following interlude occurs : sa tapoxtapyata. sa tapas taptvd sariram adhinuta. tasya yan mamsam Astt tatoxru#4’ ketavo vatarasana rishaya udatish¢han. ye nakhih, te vaikhanasik. ye bala, te balakhilya’. He burmed with emotion. Having burnt with emotion, he shook his body. From what was his flesh, the Aishis, called Aruzas, Ketus, and Vatarasanas, sprang forth. His nails became the Vaikhfnasas, his hairs the Balakhilyas. The author of this allegory therefore took bala or vala in valakhilya, not in the sense of child, but identified it with bala, hair. The commentator remarks with regard to tapas: nAtra tapa upavasddirdpam, kimtu srashfavyam vastu kidvisam iti paryalofanaripam. > A similar omission was pointed out by Professor Roth. Verses 21-24 of the 53rd hymn of the third Masdala, which contain imprecations against Vasish¢ha, are left out by the writer of a Pada MS., and by a copyist of S4yana’s commentary, probably because they both belonged to the family of Vasishtha. See my first edition of the Rig-veda, vol. ii, p. lvi, Notes. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xl vii
3See my first edition of the Rig-veda, vol. ii, p. lvi, Notes. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xl vii may have been considered of more modern origin *®. I shall go even further than those who remove these hymns from the place which they have occupied for more than two thousand years. I admit they disturb the regularity both of the Mazdala and the Ashfaka divisions, and I have pointed out myself that they are not counted in the ancient Anukramanis ascribed to Saunaka; (History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 220.) But, on the other hand, verses taken from these hymns occur in all the other Vedas>; they are mentioned by name in the Brahmaaas (Ait. Br. V, 15; VI, 24), the Aranyakas (Ait. Ar. V, 10, p. 445), and the Sdtras (Asv. Srauta Sdtras, VITI, 2, 3), while they are never included in the manuscripts of Parisishtas or Khilas or apocryphal hymns, nor mentioned by Katydyana as mere Khilas in his Sarvanukrama. Eight® of them are mentioned in the Brzhaddevata, without any allusion to their apocryphal character : Parézy ashéau tu sdktany rvishizam tigmategasam, Aindrazy atra tu shadvimsahk pragatho bahudaivatak. Rig anty4gner akety agni# sdryam antyapado gagau. Praskanvas ka prishadhras ka pradad yad vastu kimzana Bharid iti tu sdktabhyam akhilam parikirtitam. Aindrazy ubhayam ity atra sha/ Agneyat paraai tu. ‘The next eight hymns belong to Rishis of keen intellect 4; they are addressed to Indra, but the 26th Pragatha ® Sayama (RV. X, 88, 18) quotes these hymns as Valakhilya-samhita. In the Mahabharata XII, 59 ; 110 seq. the VAlakhilyas are called the ministers of King Vainya, whose astrologer was Garga, and his domestic priest Sukra ; see Kern, Brthat-samhitd, transl. p. 11. > This is a criterion of some importance, and it might have been mentioned, for instance, by Professor Bollensen in his interesting article on the Dvipad& Virag hymns ascribed to Pardsara (I, 65-70) that not a single verse of them occors in any of the other Vedas. ¢ Sayaza in his commentary (RV. X, 27, 15) speaks of eight, while in the Ait. Ar. V, 10, the first six are quoted (containing fifty-six verses, comm.), as being used together for certain sacrificial purposes. 4 Lest Saunaka be suspected of having applied this epithet, tigmategas, to the Valakhilyas in order to fill the verse (padap(iraz4rtham), I may point out that the same epithet is applied to the Valakhilyas in the Maitry-upanishad 3, 3. The nom. plur. which occurs there is tigmategas’4, and the commentator remarks: tigmategasas tivrategasosty(rgitaprabhavas ; tegasa ityevamvidha etabéhakhasahketapashas Ahandasah sarvatra. See also Maitr. Up. VI, a9. xl viii VEDIC HYMNS.
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.
1IX, 48, 2, ,, samvrikta ” samyukta », IX, 49,1, , no*pim ” no y&m >. IX, 54, 3, » saryad » stryam >, IX, 59, 3,» sida ni » Sidati®, > As printed by Pandit Taranatha. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xlv Pratisdkhya followed in their critical researches in the fifth or sixth century before our era. I believe that starting from that date our text of the Veda is better authenticated, and supported by a more perfect apparatus criticus, than the text of any Greek or Latin author, and I do not think that diplomatic criticism can ever go beyond what has been achieved in the constitution of the text of the Vedic hymns, Far be it from me to say that the editio princeps of the text thus constituted was printed without mistakes. ; But most of these mistakes are mistakes Aufrecht’s . : : Romanised Re- which no attentive reader could fail to detect. Rinivedan Cases like II, 35,1, where gégishat instead of géshishat was printed three times, so as to perplex even Professor Roth, or II, 12, 14, where sasamAndm occurs three times instead of sasamanam, are, I believe, of rare occurrence. Nor do I think that, unless some quite unexpected discoveries are made, there ever will be a new critical edition, or, as we call it in Germany, a new recension of the hymns of the Rig-veda. If by collating new MSS., or by a careful study of the Pratisakhya, or by conjectural emendations, a more correct text could have been produced, we may be certain that a critical scholar like Professor Aufrecht would have given us such a text. But after carefully collating several MSS. of Professor Wilson’s collection, and after enjoying the advantage of Professor Weber’s assistance in collating the MSS. of the Royal Library at Berlin, and after a minute study of the Pratisakhya, he frankly states that in the text of the Rig-veda, transcribed in Roman letters, which he printed at Berlin, he followed my edition, and that he had to correct but a small number of misprints. For the two Mazdalas which I had not yet published, I lent him the very MSS. on which my edition is founded ; and there will be accordingly but few passages in these two concluding Mazdalas, which I have still to publish, where the text will materially differ from that of his Romanised transcript. No one, I should think, who is at all acquainted with the tules of diplomatic criticism, would easily bring himself to xlvi VEDIC HYMNS,
2No one, I should think, who is at all acquainted with the tules of diplomatic criticism, would easily bring himself to xlvi VEDIC HYMNS, touch a text resting on such authorities as the text of the Rig-veda. What would a Greek scholar give, if he could say of Homer that his text was in every word, in every syllable, in every vowel, in every accent, the same as the text used by Peisistratos in the sixth century B.c.! A text thus preserved in its integrity for so many centuries, must remain for ever the authoritative text of the Veda. To remove, for instance, the eleven hymns 49-59 in the eighth Mazdala from their proper place, or count them by Valakhilya themselves as Valakhilya* hymns, seems to Hymns. me, though no doubt perfectly harmless, little short of a critical sacrilege. Why Sdyaza does not explain these hymns, I confess I do not know; but whatever the reason was, it was not because they did not exist at his time, or because he thought them spurious. They are regularly counted in Katy4yana’s Sarvanukrama, though here the same accident has happened. One commentator, Shadgurusishya, the one most commonly used, does not explain them ; but another commentator, Gagannatha, does explain them, exactly as they occur in the Sarvanukrama, only leaving out hymn 58. That these hymns had something peculiar in the eyes of native scholars, is clear enough. They may for a time have formed a separate collection, they * The earliest interpretation of the name Valakhilya is found in the Taittirfyafranyaka, I, 23. We are told that Pragapati created the world, and in the process of creation the following interlude occurs : sa tapoxtapyata. sa tapas taptvd sariram adhinuta. tasya yan mamsam Astt tatoxru#4’ ketavo vatarasana rishaya udatish¢han. ye nakhih, te vaikhanasik. ye bala, te balakhilya’. He burmed with emotion. Having burnt with emotion, he shook his body. From what was his flesh, the Aishis, called Aruzas, Ketus, and Vatarasanas, sprang forth. His nails became the Vaikhfnasas, his hairs the Balakhilyas. The author of this allegory therefore took bala or vala in valakhilya, not in the sense of child, but identified it with bala, hair. The commentator remarks with regard to tapas: nAtra tapa upavasddirdpam, kimtu srashfavyam vastu kidvisam iti paryalofanaripam. > A similar omission was pointed out by Professor Roth. Verses 21-24 of the 53rd hymn of the third Masdala, which contain imprecations against Vasish¢ha, are left out by the writer of a Pada MS., and by a copyist of S4yana’s commentary, probably because they both belonged to the family of Vasishtha. See my first edition of the Rig-veda, vol. ii, p. lvi, Notes. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xl vii
3See my first edition of the Rig-veda, vol. ii, p. lvi, Notes. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xl vii may have been considered of more modern origin *®. I shall go even further than those who remove these hymns from the place which they have occupied for more than two thousand years. I admit they disturb the regularity both of the Mazdala and the Ashfaka divisions, and I have pointed out myself that they are not counted in the ancient Anukramanis ascribed to Saunaka; (History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 220.) But, on the other hand, verses taken from these hymns occur in all the other Vedas>; they are mentioned by name in the Brahmaaas (Ait. Br. V, 15; VI, 24), the Aranyakas (Ait. Ar. V, 10, p. 445), and the Sdtras (Asv. Srauta Sdtras, VITI, 2, 3), while they are never included in the manuscripts of Parisishtas or Khilas or apocryphal hymns, nor mentioned by Katydyana as mere Khilas in his Sarvanukrama. Eight® of them are mentioned in the Brzhaddevata, without any allusion to their apocryphal character : Parézy ashéau tu sdktany rvishizam tigmategasam, Aindrazy atra tu shadvimsahk pragatho bahudaivatak. Rig anty4gner akety agni# sdryam antyapado gagau. Praskanvas ka prishadhras ka pradad yad vastu kimzana Bharid iti tu sdktabhyam akhilam parikirtitam. Aindrazy ubhayam ity atra sha/ Agneyat paraai tu. ‘The next eight hymns belong to Rishis of keen intellect 4; they are addressed to Indra, but the 26th Pragatha ® Sayama (RV. X, 88, 18) quotes these hymns as Valakhilya-samhita. In the Mahabharata XII, 59 ; 110 seq. the VAlakhilyas are called the ministers of King Vainya, whose astrologer was Garga, and his domestic priest Sukra ; see Kern, Brthat-samhitd, transl. p. 11. > This is a criterion of some importance, and it might have been mentioned, for instance, by Professor Bollensen in his interesting article on the Dvipad& Virag hymns ascribed to Pardsara (I, 65-70) that not a single verse of them occors in any of the other Vedas. ¢ Sayaza in his commentary (RV. X, 27, 15) speaks of eight, while in the Ait. Ar. V, 10, the first six are quoted (containing fifty-six verses, comm.), as being used together for certain sacrificial purposes. 4 Lest Saunaka be suspected of having applied this epithet, tigmategas, to the Valakhilyas in order to fill the verse (padap(iraz4rtham), I may point out that the same epithet is applied to the Valakhilyas in the Maitry-upanishad 3, 3. The nom. plur. which occurs there is tigmategas’4, and the commentator remarks: tigmategasas tivrategasosty(rgitaprabhavas ; tegasa ityevamvidha etabéhakhasahketapashas Ahandasah sarvatra. See also Maitr. Up. VI, a9. xl viii VEDIC HYMNS.
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.