Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1rue weapons with which the Brahma/za may slay his enemies, Manu XI, 33 ; the king must choose for his chaplain (purohita) one who is skilled in the Atharvan and Angiras (atharvangirase),, Ya^av. I, 312 2; and the same recommendation is implied at Gaut. XI, 15. 17, where the king is enjoined to take heed of that which astrologers and interpreters of omens tell him, and to cause the puro- hita to perform in his house-fire among other expiatory rites (i-anti), rites for prosperity (mangala), and witchcraft practices (abhi^ara) against enemies 2. Such a purohita is eo ipso an Atharvan priest. In the Atri-sa;^hita (Civct- nanda's collection, vol. i, p. 45) ^yotirvido . . . atharva/za/z, ( Atharvan priests skilled in astrology* are recommended for the performance of jraddhas and sacrifices (cf. Vishnu III, 75 ; Ya^Tzav. I, 332). The sn&taka must not live in a country without physicians, Vish/zu LXXI, 66, and the king should consult his physicians in the morning, Y£gna.v. I, 332. At Vish/zu III, 87, the king himself is urged to be conversant with incantations dispelling the effects of poison and sickness, and at Manu VII, 217, the food of the king is rendered salubrious by sacred texts that destroy poison : these passages evidently refer to Atharvanic bhai- sha^yarii (cf. p. 25 ff.), and Atharvan priests skilled in their use. At Baudh. II, 8, 15,4; Vish/zu LXXIII, 11 ; LXXXI, 4, the demons called yatudhana are driven out by means of sesame, in perfect accord with AV. I, 7, 1. Thus far then the dharma-literature expresses regard for the Atharvan, and distinct dependence upon its literature and its practices. But the ever dubious quality of the fourth Veda sounds from notes pitched in a different key. In the 1 The king himself is urged (ib. I, 310) to devote himself to the trayi. 2 This is the stereotyped summary of the functions of the AV., jantapush/i- kabhi/karika ; see p. xxix. INTRODUCTION. xlix first place we may remark that the conspicuous omission of this Veda which characterises the ^rauta-literature, with- out pronounced disapproval of the Atharvan, is continued in the dharma-texts. Thus notably in the prohibition of the recital of the other Vedas while the sound of the Samans is heard, these texts mention only the rzk and the ya^u/z ; see Gaut. XVI, 21'; Vas. XIII, 30; Vishmi XXX, 26; Manu IV, 123. 124. At Baudh. IV, 5, 29; Manu XI, 263-66, the recitation of the traividya is recommended as a most efficient means of purification and release from sin.
2mention only the rzk and the ya^u/z ; see Gaut. XVI, 21'; Vas. XIII, 30; Vishmi XXX, 26; Manu IV, 123. 124. At Baudh. IV, 5, 29; Manu XI, 263-66, the recitation of the traividya is recommended as a most efficient means of purification and release from sin. In the cosmogonic account, Manu I, 23, only rzk, yagu/i, and saman are derived from the primeval creation. In Baudh. II, 8, 14, 4. 5; Manu III, 145, the traividya and its adherents only appear at the funeral-offerings (iraddha), though the Atri-sa^hita singles out Atharvans skilled in astronomy on that very occasion (see above, p. xlviii). At Manu XII, 112 (cf. Ya^/zav. I, 9) adherents of the three Vedas are recommended as an assembly (parishad) to decide points of law; at Ya^/zav. II, 21 1 punishment is declared for him that abuses one skilled in the three Vedas ; at Ya^av. I, 310 the king is urged to devote himself to the study of the trayi (vidya) ; his chaplain, on the other hand, must be skilled in the manipulation of the atharvangirasam (ib. I, 312). The inferiority of the Atharvan is stated outright at Apast. II, 11, 29, 10. 11, where it is said that the know- ledge of women and 5udras is a supplement of the Atharva- veda (cf. Biihler, Sacred Books, vol. ii, p. xxix) ; and yet more brusquely Vish/zu V, 191 counts him that recites a deadly incantation from the Atharva-veda as one of the seven kinds of assassins. Still more frequently, performances which imply the knowledge and use of the Atharvan are decried and punished, though the writings of the Atharvan are not expressly mentioned. Thusjiiagir rites with intent to harm enemies, and sorceries^ajid cnmeg in general cause impurity, and are visited with_seyere penances at Apast. I, 9, 26, 7 ; 10, 29, 15; Baudh. II, 1, 2, 16 ; Gaut. XXV, 7; Vish/zu XXXVII, 26; LIV, 25; Manu IX, 290; XI, J 98; Ya^Tzav. Ill, 289. Yet the other side of the coin is turned [42] d 1 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. up at Manu XI, $$> where the Atharvan is recommended as the natural weapon of the Brahma^a against his enemies (see above). Narada, V, 108, also betrays his hostile attitude towards sorcery when he remarks that the sage Vasish/^a took an oath, being accused of witchcraft1. With especial frequency and emphasis the impurity of physicians is insisted upon, Apast. I, 6, 18, 20; 19, 15; Vishnu LI, 10; LXXXII, 9; Gaut. XVII, 17; Vas. XIV, 2. 19; Manu III, 152. 180; IV, 212. 220; Ya^Tzav. I, 162 ; III, 240 : we gathered above (p.
3. With especial frequency and emphasis the impurity of physicians is insisted upon, Apast. I, 6, 18, 20; 19, 15; Vishnu LI, 10; LXXXII, 9; Gaut. XVII, 17; Vas. XIV, 2. 19; Manu III, 152. 180; IV, 212. 220; Ya^Tzav. I, 162 ; III, 240 : we gathered above (p. xxxix) that the practice of medicine is regarded in the same light in the Brahma^as ; the charge, of course, reflects upon the Atharvan. Astro- logy also, and fortune-telling, are impure occupations, Baudh. II, 1, 2, 16 ; Manu IX, 258; the practice of astro- logy is forbidden to ascetics, Vas. X, 21 ; Manu VI, 50; and the astrologer is excluded from the ^raddha, Vish/m LXXXII, 7; Manu III, 162. That these practices were Atharvanic in character we may gather from AV. VI, 128 ; Kaui". 50, 15 2. An especially pointed reflection against the AV. is implied in the prohibition of the mulakriya or mulakarma, 'practices with roots3:' at Vish/m XXV, 7 wives are especially forbidden to engage in such practice ; at Manu IX, 290 magic rites with roots, practised by per- sons not related to him against whom they are directed, are regarded as sinful4; at Manu XI, 64 practices with roots in general are forbidden. Such practices abound in the AV. and its ritual; see I, 34; III, 18 ( = RV. X, 145); V, 31, 12 ; VI, 138. 139 ; VII, 38, &c, and the performances connected with them (cf. p. 99 ff. and the commentary on these hymns). Though they are not wanting elsewhere, especially in the Grzhya-sutras, the brunt of the charge is without doubt directed against the Atharvan. Finally, at Gaut. XV, 16 ; Vishnu LXXXII, 12 ; Manu III, 151 ; IV, 1 He has in mind the asseveration of the poet, RV. VII, 104, 15, adya1 muriyayadi yatudhano asmi, &c, 'may I die to-day if I am a sorcerer.' 3 Cf. ' Seven Hymns of the Atharva-veda,' Amer. Journ. Phil. VII, 484 ff. (19 ff. of the reprint) ; the present volume, pp. 160, 532 ff. 8 Cf. the same prohibition in the Mahabharata, below, p. liv. 4 The commentator Narada states that they are permissible, if practised against a husband or relative. INTRODUCTION. H 205, he who practises for a multitude (gramaya^aka) is pronounced impure: we may presume that this kind of activity was largely, if not entirely in the hands of Athar- van-priests ; cf. the note on p. xl. The position of the Atharvan in the Mahabharata may be characterised in the single statement that its importance Th AV in as a Veda, an<^ *ts canonicity, are finally and the Maha- completely established ; that its practices are familiarly known and, in general, not sub- jected to any particular criticism.
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.
1rue weapons with which the Brahma/za may slay his enemies, Manu XI, 33 ; the king must choose for his chaplain (purohita) one who is skilled in the Atharvan and Angiras (atharvangirase),, Ya^av. I, 312 2; and the same recommendation is implied at Gaut. XI, 15. 17, where the king is enjoined to take heed of that which astrologers and interpreters of omens tell him, and to cause the puro- hita to perform in his house-fire among other expiatory rites (i-anti), rites for prosperity (mangala), and witchcraft practices (abhi^ara) against enemies 2. Such a purohita is eo ipso an Atharvan priest. In the Atri-sa;^hita (Civct- nanda's collection, vol. i, p. 45) ^yotirvido . . . atharva/za/z, ( Atharvan priests skilled in astrology* are recommended for the performance of jraddhas and sacrifices (cf. Vishnu III, 75 ; Ya^Tzav. I, 332). The sn&taka must not live in a country without physicians, Vish/zu LXXI, 66, and the king should consult his physicians in the morning, Y£gna.v. I, 332. At Vish/zu III, 87, the king himself is urged to be conversant with incantations dispelling the effects of poison and sickness, and at Manu VII, 217, the food of the king is rendered salubrious by sacred texts that destroy poison : these passages evidently refer to Atharvanic bhai- sha^yarii (cf. p. 25 ff.), and Atharvan priests skilled in their use. At Baudh. II, 8, 15,4; Vish/zu LXXIII, 11 ; LXXXI, 4, the demons called yatudhana are driven out by means of sesame, in perfect accord with AV. I, 7, 1. Thus far then the dharma-literature expresses regard for the Atharvan, and distinct dependence upon its literature and its practices. But the ever dubious quality of the fourth Veda sounds from notes pitched in a different key. In the 1 The king himself is urged (ib. I, 310) to devote himself to the trayi. 2 This is the stereotyped summary of the functions of the AV., jantapush/i- kabhi/karika ; see p. xxix. INTRODUCTION. xlix first place we may remark that the conspicuous omission of this Veda which characterises the ^rauta-literature, with- out pronounced disapproval of the Atharvan, is continued in the dharma-texts. Thus notably in the prohibition of the recital of the other Vedas while the sound of the Samans is heard, these texts mention only the rzk and the ya^u/z ; see Gaut. XVI, 21'; Vas. XIII, 30; Vishmi XXX, 26; Manu IV, 123. 124. At Baudh. IV, 5, 29; Manu XI, 263-66, the recitation of the traividya is recommended as a most efficient means of purification and release from sin.
2mention only the rzk and the ya^u/z ; see Gaut. XVI, 21'; Vas. XIII, 30; Vishmi XXX, 26; Manu IV, 123. 124. At Baudh. IV, 5, 29; Manu XI, 263-66, the recitation of the traividya is recommended as a most efficient means of purification and release from sin. In the cosmogonic account, Manu I, 23, only rzk, yagu/i, and saman are derived from the primeval creation. In Baudh. II, 8, 14, 4. 5; Manu III, 145, the traividya and its adherents only appear at the funeral-offerings (iraddha), though the Atri-sa^hita singles out Atharvans skilled in astronomy on that very occasion (see above, p. xlviii). At Manu XII, 112 (cf. Ya^/zav. I, 9) adherents of the three Vedas are recommended as an assembly (parishad) to decide points of law; at Ya^/zav. II, 21 1 punishment is declared for him that abuses one skilled in the three Vedas ; at Ya^av. I, 310 the king is urged to devote himself to the study of the trayi (vidya) ; his chaplain, on the other hand, must be skilled in the manipulation of the atharvangirasam (ib. I, 312). The inferiority of the Atharvan is stated outright at Apast. II, 11, 29, 10. 11, where it is said that the know- ledge of women and 5udras is a supplement of the Atharva- veda (cf. Biihler, Sacred Books, vol. ii, p. xxix) ; and yet more brusquely Vish/zu V, 191 counts him that recites a deadly incantation from the Atharva-veda as one of the seven kinds of assassins. Still more frequently, performances which imply the knowledge and use of the Atharvan are decried and punished, though the writings of the Atharvan are not expressly mentioned. Thusjiiagir rites with intent to harm enemies, and sorceries^ajid cnmeg in general cause impurity, and are visited with_seyere penances at Apast. I, 9, 26, 7 ; 10, 29, 15; Baudh. II, 1, 2, 16 ; Gaut. XXV, 7; Vish/zu XXXVII, 26; LIV, 25; Manu IX, 290; XI, J 98; Ya^Tzav. Ill, 289. Yet the other side of the coin is turned [42] d 1 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. up at Manu XI, $$> where the Atharvan is recommended as the natural weapon of the Brahma^a against his enemies (see above). Narada, V, 108, also betrays his hostile attitude towards sorcery when he remarks that the sage Vasish/^a took an oath, being accused of witchcraft1. With especial frequency and emphasis the impurity of physicians is insisted upon, Apast. I, 6, 18, 20; 19, 15; Vishnu LI, 10; LXXXII, 9; Gaut. XVII, 17; Vas. XIV, 2. 19; Manu III, 152. 180; IV, 212. 220; Ya^Tzav. I, 162 ; III, 240 : we gathered above (p.
3. With especial frequency and emphasis the impurity of physicians is insisted upon, Apast. I, 6, 18, 20; 19, 15; Vishnu LI, 10; LXXXII, 9; Gaut. XVII, 17; Vas. XIV, 2. 19; Manu III, 152. 180; IV, 212. 220; Ya^Tzav. I, 162 ; III, 240 : we gathered above (p. xxxix) that the practice of medicine is regarded in the same light in the Brahma^as ; the charge, of course, reflects upon the Atharvan. Astro- logy also, and fortune-telling, are impure occupations, Baudh. II, 1, 2, 16 ; Manu IX, 258; the practice of astro- logy is forbidden to ascetics, Vas. X, 21 ; Manu VI, 50; and the astrologer is excluded from the ^raddha, Vish/m LXXXII, 7; Manu III, 162. That these practices were Atharvanic in character we may gather from AV. VI, 128 ; Kaui". 50, 15 2. An especially pointed reflection against the AV. is implied in the prohibition of the mulakriya or mulakarma, 'practices with roots3:' at Vish/m XXV, 7 wives are especially forbidden to engage in such practice ; at Manu IX, 290 magic rites with roots, practised by per- sons not related to him against whom they are directed, are regarded as sinful4; at Manu XI, 64 practices with roots in general are forbidden. Such practices abound in the AV. and its ritual; see I, 34; III, 18 ( = RV. X, 145); V, 31, 12 ; VI, 138. 139 ; VII, 38, &c, and the performances connected with them (cf. p. 99 ff. and the commentary on these hymns). Though they are not wanting elsewhere, especially in the Grzhya-sutras, the brunt of the charge is without doubt directed against the Atharvan. Finally, at Gaut. XV, 16 ; Vishnu LXXXII, 12 ; Manu III, 151 ; IV, 1 He has in mind the asseveration of the poet, RV. VII, 104, 15, adya1 muriyayadi yatudhano asmi, &c, 'may I die to-day if I am a sorcerer.' 3 Cf. ' Seven Hymns of the Atharva-veda,' Amer. Journ. Phil. VII, 484 ff. (19 ff. of the reprint) ; the present volume, pp. 160, 532 ff. 8 Cf. the same prohibition in the Mahabharata, below, p. liv. 4 The commentator Narada states that they are permissible, if practised against a husband or relative. INTRODUCTION. H 205, he who practises for a multitude (gramaya^aka) is pronounced impure: we may presume that this kind of activity was largely, if not entirely in the hands of Athar- van-priests ; cf. the note on p. xl. The position of the Atharvan in the Mahabharata may be characterised in the single statement that its importance Th AV in as a Veda, an<^ *ts canonicity, are finally and the Maha- completely established ; that its practices are familiarly known and, in general, not sub- jected to any particular criticism.
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.