Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Grassmann also translates, ‘ ein wohlgezielter Pfeil.’ Verse 7. Note 1. Aldtriniisak, a word which occurs but once more, and which had evidently become unintelligible even at the NOTES. I, 166, 7. 227 time of Yaska. He (Nir. VI, 2) explains it by alamatardano megha4, the cloud which opens easily. This, at least, is the translation given by Professor Roth, though not without hesitation. Alamatardanaf, as a compound, is explained by the commentator as 4tardanaparydpta4, alam Atardayitum udakam, i.e. capable of letting off the water. But Devardgayagvan explains it differently. He says: alam paryaptam Atardanam hims4 yasya, bahidakatvasksabalo megho viseshyate, i.e. whose injuring is great; the dark cloud is so called because it contains much water. SAdyana, too, attempts several explanations. In III, 30,10, he seems to derive it from tyzh, to kill, not, like Y4ska, from tréd, and he explains its meaning as the cloud which is exceedingly hurt by reason of its holding so much water. In our passage he explains it either as anatrzna, free from injury, or good hurters of enemies, or good givers of rewards. From all this I am afraid we gain nothing. Let us now see what modern commentators have proposed in order to discover an appropriate meaning in this word. Professor Roth suggests that the word may be derived from r4, to give, and the suffix trivza, and the negative particle, thus meaning, one who does not give or yield anything. But, if so, how is this adjective applicable to the Maruts, who in this very verse are praised for their generosity? Langlois in our passage translates, ‘heureux de nos louanges;’ in ITI, 30, 10, ‘qui laissait fiétrir les plantes.’ Wilson in our passage translates, ‘devoid of malevolence ;’ but in III, 30, 10, ‘heavy.’ I do not pretend to solve all these difficulties, but I may say this in defence of my own explanation that it fulfils the condition of being applicable both to the Maruts and to the demon Bala. The suffix triva is certainly irregular, and I should much prefer to write aldtriga, for in that case we might derive latrin from lAtra, and to this latra, i.e. ratra, I should ascribe the sense of barking. The root rai or ra means to bark, and has been connected by Professor Aufrecht with Latin rire, inrire, and possibly inritare’, ® Kuhn, Zeitschrift, vol. ix, p. 233. Q2 228 VEDIC HYMNS.
2ratra, I should ascribe the sense of barking. The root rai or ra means to bark, and has been connected by Professor Aufrecht with Latin rire, inrire, and possibly inritare’, ® Kuhn, Zeitschrift, vol. ix, p. 233. Q2 228 VEDIC HYMNS. thus showing a transition of meaning from barking, to provoking or attacking. The same root ra explains also the Latin lAtrare, to bark, allatrare, to assail ; and, whatever ancient etymologists may say to the contrary, the Latin latro, an assailer. The old derivation ‘latrones eos antiqui dicebant, qui conducti militabant, a7é rijs Aarpeias,’ seems to me one of those etymologies in which the scholars of Rome, who had learnt a little Greek, delighted as much as scholars who know a little Sanskrit delight in finding some plausible derivation for any Greek or Latin word in Sanskrit. I know that Curtius (Grundziige, p. 326) and Corssen (Kritische Nachtrage, p. 239) take a different view; but a foreign word, derived from Adrpov, pay, hire, would never have proved so fertile as latro has been in Latin. If then we could write alAtrizdsak, we should have an appropriate epithet of the Maruts, in the sense of not assailing or not reviling, in fact, free from malevolence, as Wilson translated the word, or rather Sdyaza’s explanation of it, Atardanarahita. What gives me some confidence in this explanation is this, that it is equally applicable to the other passage where alatriza occurs, III, 30, 10: alatrindh valah indra vragdh géh pur& hanto# bha4yamanak vi ara. Without barking did Vala, the keeper of the cow, full of fear, open, before thou struckest him. If it should be objected that vragd means always stable, and is not used again in the sense of keeper, one might reply that vragd#, in the nom. sing., occurs in this one single passage only, and that bhadyamanaé, fearing, clearly implies a personification. Otherwise, one might translate: ‘Vala was quiet, O Indra, and the stable of the cow came open, full of fear, before thou struckest.’ The meaning of alatrivd would remain the same, the not-barking being here used asa sign that Indra’s enemy was cowed, and no longer inclined to revile or defy the power of Indra. Hom. hymn. in Merc. 145, o¥8@ xives AeAdKovro. Note 2. See I, 38, 15, note 1, page 95. NOTES. I, 166, 9. 229 Verse 8. Note 1. Abhi-hruti seems to have the meaning of assault, injury, insult. It occurs but once, but abhi-hrut, a feminine substantive with the same meaning, occurs several times. The verb hru, which is not mentioned in the Dhatup4¢ha, but has been identified with hvar, occurs in our hymn, verse 12: I, 128, 5. sdk nak trdsate duA-it&t abhi-hritaz sdmsat aghat abhi-hriuta/. He protects us from evil, from assault, from evil speaking, from assault. X, 63,11. tréyadhvam nak duh-évayas abhi-hruta. Protect us from mischievous injury ! I, 189, 6. abhi-hritém dsi hi deva vishpdz. For thou, god, art the deliverer from all assaults. Vishpd¢, deliverer, from vi and spas, to bind.
3X, 63,11. tréyadhvam nak duh-évayas abhi-hruta. Protect us from mischievous injury ! I, 189, 6. abhi-hritém dsi hi deva vishpdz. For thou, god, art the deliverer from all assaults. Vishpd¢, deliverer, from vi and spas, to bind. Vi-hruta, which occurs twice, means evidently what has been injured or spoiled : VIII, 1,12. ishkart4 vi-hrutam punar (iti). He who sets right what has been injured. Cf. VIII, 20, 26. Avi-hruta again clearly means uninjured, intact, entire: V, 66, 2. t&é hf kshatrdm avi-hrutam —4sAte. For they both have obtained uninjured power. X, 170, 1. &yuk dddhat yagiid-patau dvi-hrutam. Giving uninjured life to the lord of the sacrifice. Verse 9. Note 1. Tavishd certainly means strength, and that it is used in the plural in the sense of acts of strength, we can see from the first verse of our hymn and other passages. But when we read that tavish&a#i are placed on the chariots of the Maruts, just as before bhadra, good things, food, &c., are mentioned, it is clear that so abstract a meaning as strength or powers would not be applicable here. We might take it in the modern sense of forces, i.e. your armies, your companions are on your chariots, striving with each other; but as the word is a neuter, weapons, as the means 230 VEDIC HYMNS. of strength, seemed a preferable rendering. As to mithaspridhya, see I, 119, 3, p. 164. Note 2. The rendering of this passage must depend on the question whether the khadis, whatever they are, can be carried on the shoulders or not. We saw before (p. 120) that khadis were used both as ornaments and as weapons, and that, when used as weapons, they were most likely rings or quoits with sharp edges. There is at least one other passage where these khad{s are said to be worn on the shoulders : VII, 56, 13. dseshu & marutak khaddyas vak vdksha/-su rukma& upa-sisriyandh. On your shoulders are the quoits, on your chests the golden chains are fastened. _ In other places the kh4dis are said to be in the hands, hasteshu, but this would only show that they are there when actually used for fighting. Thus we read: I, 168, 3. &esh4m dmseshu rambhini-iva rarabhe, hasteshu khadiz ka kritih ka s4m dadhe. To their shoulders there clings as if a clinging wife, in their hands the quoit is held and the dagger.
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.
1Grassmann also translates, ‘ ein wohlgezielter Pfeil.’ Verse 7. Note 1. Aldtriniisak, a word which occurs but once more, and which had evidently become unintelligible even at the NOTES. I, 166, 7. 227 time of Yaska. He (Nir. VI, 2) explains it by alamatardano megha4, the cloud which opens easily. This, at least, is the translation given by Professor Roth, though not without hesitation. Alamatardanaf, as a compound, is explained by the commentator as 4tardanaparydpta4, alam Atardayitum udakam, i.e. capable of letting off the water. But Devardgayagvan explains it differently. He says: alam paryaptam Atardanam hims4 yasya, bahidakatvasksabalo megho viseshyate, i.e. whose injuring is great; the dark cloud is so called because it contains much water. SAdyana, too, attempts several explanations. In III, 30,10, he seems to derive it from tyzh, to kill, not, like Y4ska, from tréd, and he explains its meaning as the cloud which is exceedingly hurt by reason of its holding so much water. In our passage he explains it either as anatrzna, free from injury, or good hurters of enemies, or good givers of rewards. From all this I am afraid we gain nothing. Let us now see what modern commentators have proposed in order to discover an appropriate meaning in this word. Professor Roth suggests that the word may be derived from r4, to give, and the suffix trivza, and the negative particle, thus meaning, one who does not give or yield anything. But, if so, how is this adjective applicable to the Maruts, who in this very verse are praised for their generosity? Langlois in our passage translates, ‘heureux de nos louanges;’ in ITI, 30, 10, ‘qui laissait fiétrir les plantes.’ Wilson in our passage translates, ‘devoid of malevolence ;’ but in III, 30, 10, ‘heavy.’ I do not pretend to solve all these difficulties, but I may say this in defence of my own explanation that it fulfils the condition of being applicable both to the Maruts and to the demon Bala. The suffix triva is certainly irregular, and I should much prefer to write aldtriga, for in that case we might derive latrin from lAtra, and to this latra, i.e. ratra, I should ascribe the sense of barking. The root rai or ra means to bark, and has been connected by Professor Aufrecht with Latin rire, inrire, and possibly inritare’, ® Kuhn, Zeitschrift, vol. ix, p. 233. Q2 228 VEDIC HYMNS.
2ratra, I should ascribe the sense of barking. The root rai or ra means to bark, and has been connected by Professor Aufrecht with Latin rire, inrire, and possibly inritare’, ® Kuhn, Zeitschrift, vol. ix, p. 233. Q2 228 VEDIC HYMNS. thus showing a transition of meaning from barking, to provoking or attacking. The same root ra explains also the Latin lAtrare, to bark, allatrare, to assail ; and, whatever ancient etymologists may say to the contrary, the Latin latro, an assailer. The old derivation ‘latrones eos antiqui dicebant, qui conducti militabant, a7é rijs Aarpeias,’ seems to me one of those etymologies in which the scholars of Rome, who had learnt a little Greek, delighted as much as scholars who know a little Sanskrit delight in finding some plausible derivation for any Greek or Latin word in Sanskrit. I know that Curtius (Grundziige, p. 326) and Corssen (Kritische Nachtrage, p. 239) take a different view; but a foreign word, derived from Adrpov, pay, hire, would never have proved so fertile as latro has been in Latin. If then we could write alAtrizdsak, we should have an appropriate epithet of the Maruts, in the sense of not assailing or not reviling, in fact, free from malevolence, as Wilson translated the word, or rather Sdyaza’s explanation of it, Atardanarahita. What gives me some confidence in this explanation is this, that it is equally applicable to the other passage where alatriza occurs, III, 30, 10: alatrindh valah indra vragdh géh pur& hanto# bha4yamanak vi ara. Without barking did Vala, the keeper of the cow, full of fear, open, before thou struckest him. If it should be objected that vragd means always stable, and is not used again in the sense of keeper, one might reply that vragd#, in the nom. sing., occurs in this one single passage only, and that bhadyamanaé, fearing, clearly implies a personification. Otherwise, one might translate: ‘Vala was quiet, O Indra, and the stable of the cow came open, full of fear, before thou struckest.’ The meaning of alatrivd would remain the same, the not-barking being here used asa sign that Indra’s enemy was cowed, and no longer inclined to revile or defy the power of Indra. Hom. hymn. in Merc. 145, o¥8@ xives AeAdKovro. Note 2. See I, 38, 15, note 1, page 95. NOTES. I, 166, 9. 229 Verse 8. Note 1. Abhi-hruti seems to have the meaning of assault, injury, insult. It occurs but once, but abhi-hrut, a feminine substantive with the same meaning, occurs several times. The verb hru, which is not mentioned in the Dhatup4¢ha, but has been identified with hvar, occurs in our hymn, verse 12: I, 128, 5. sdk nak trdsate duA-it&t abhi-hritaz sdmsat aghat abhi-hriuta/. He protects us from evil, from assault, from evil speaking, from assault. X, 63,11. tréyadhvam nak duh-évayas abhi-hruta. Protect us from mischievous injury ! I, 189, 6. abhi-hritém dsi hi deva vishpdz. For thou, god, art the deliverer from all assaults. Vishpd¢, deliverer, from vi and spas, to bind.
3X, 63,11. tréyadhvam nak duh-évayas abhi-hruta. Protect us from mischievous injury ! I, 189, 6. abhi-hritém dsi hi deva vishpdz. For thou, god, art the deliverer from all assaults. Vishpd¢, deliverer, from vi and spas, to bind. Vi-hruta, which occurs twice, means evidently what has been injured or spoiled : VIII, 1,12. ishkart4 vi-hrutam punar (iti). He who sets right what has been injured. Cf. VIII, 20, 26. Avi-hruta again clearly means uninjured, intact, entire: V, 66, 2. t&é hf kshatrdm avi-hrutam —4sAte. For they both have obtained uninjured power. X, 170, 1. &yuk dddhat yagiid-patau dvi-hrutam. Giving uninjured life to the lord of the sacrifice. Verse 9. Note 1. Tavishd certainly means strength, and that it is used in the plural in the sense of acts of strength, we can see from the first verse of our hymn and other passages. But when we read that tavish&a#i are placed on the chariots of the Maruts, just as before bhadra, good things, food, &c., are mentioned, it is clear that so abstract a meaning as strength or powers would not be applicable here. We might take it in the modern sense of forces, i.e. your armies, your companions are on your chariots, striving with each other; but as the word is a neuter, weapons, as the means 230 VEDIC HYMNS. of strength, seemed a preferable rendering. As to mithaspridhya, see I, 119, 3, p. 164. Note 2. The rendering of this passage must depend on the question whether the khadis, whatever they are, can be carried on the shoulders or not. We saw before (p. 120) that khadis were used both as ornaments and as weapons, and that, when used as weapons, they were most likely rings or quoits with sharp edges. There is at least one other passage where these khad{s are said to be worn on the shoulders : VII, 56, 13. dseshu & marutak khaddyas vak vdksha/-su rukma& upa-sisriyandh. On your shoulders are the quoits, on your chests the golden chains are fastened. _ In other places the kh4dis are said to be in the hands, hasteshu, but this would only show that they are there when actually used for fighting. Thus we read: I, 168, 3. &esh4m dmseshu rambhini-iva rarabhe, hasteshu khadiz ka kritih ka s4m dadhe. To their shoulders there clings as if a clinging wife, in their hands the quoit is held and the dagger.
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.