Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1superficial: the word has in the AV. the meaning of charm only in so far and inasmuch as the hymns of that Veda happen to be charms ; the RV. employs the term freely to designate its own suktini (e.g. V, 85, 1 ; VII, 28, 1 ; 36, 1 ; X, 13, 1 ; 61, 1). One misses, too, the plural brahmam as the true Vedic type of designation for a special class of composition, on a level with rika/i, samani, ya^uwshi, atharvangirasa^, or athar- vanak (bhesha^-ani) and angirasa^ (abhi^arikam). We may also remember that the Atharvan of all Sa/^hitas contains the largest collection of theosophic hymns which deal explicitly (X, 2), or implicitly (X, 7), with Brahman and the brahma x. This may, of course, have helped to suggest that the Atharvavedin was the truly superior theo- logian. In the Upanishads the knowledge of just such theosophic relations is styled the brahmavidya. Saya^a in the Introduction to the AV., p. 4, argues that the AV. is known as Brahma-veda because it was revealed to Brahman who is called Atharvan 2. His authority, however, is Gop. Br. I, 4 ff., a text that elsewhere identifies the AV. with that bhuyish//£am brahma which was produced by the tapas (cf. AV. VIII, 10, 25), pressing to an unwarranted degree the relationship of the Atharvan texts with the sphere of the Upanishads 3 ; cf. above, p. lix. It may be safe to assume that all these and other notions 1 Cf. also the superabundant Upanishads, composed in Atharvanic schools. 2 atharvakhyena brahma/za drzsh/atvat tannamna aya;;z vedo vyapadisyate. 3 Similarly the Vishnu- pura^a VI, 5 (Wilson's translation, vol. v, p. 210) : ' The AV. also states that there are two kinds of knowledge. By the one which is the supreme, God (akshara) is obtained ; the other is that which consists of Rik and other Vedas.' INTRODUCTION. lxvii flitted through the minds of the systematic theologians R , . f of the Atharvan schools as they continued the purohita to insist upon the name Brahma-veda for to t e ' their scriptures, and upon the office of Brah- man for their priests. A measure of substantiality may, however, come to their claim from another quarter at a comparatively early time, in this instance with the passive support of all Vedic schools. The matter concerns the office of the purohita, the spiritual and temporal aid of the king, his chaplain, and chancellor. One would again look in vain in the non-Atharvanic Sa^hitas, Brahma/^as, or Sutras for the direct declaration that the purohita either was, or should be, an adherent of the Atharvan.
2hita, the spiritual and temporal aid of the king, his chaplain, and chancellor. One would again look in vain in the non-Atharvanic Sa^hitas, Brahma/^as, or Sutras for the direct declaration that the purohita either was, or should be, an adherent of the Atharvan. These texts do not mention the Atharvan in this connection any more than in connection with the office of the Brahman at the sacrifice. Yet it seems extremely unlikely that the knowledge of Atharvan practices should not have been considered a very valuable adjunct, if not a conditio sine qua non, of the purohiti. Purohitas, whether they are formal adherents of the AV. or not, are always engaging in Atharvanic practices, even against one another (cf. Max Muller, Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 486). The interests of the king and his sovereignty (kshatriya and kshatram) are too obviously dependent upon magic rites to admit the likelihood that the pretensions to this office on the part of him that knew them should have been ignored. At all periods the safety of the king, the prosperity of his people, his ascendency over hostile neighbours, must have depended upon the skill of his purohita in magic. The description, Ait. Br. VIII, 24-28, of the purohita, his func- tions, and his relation to the king, transfer the reader to the sphere and spirit of the Atharvan. The purohita secures for the king royalty, strength, emf^re, and people (VIII, 24, 7). The purohita is a fire with five flaming missiles, dangerous when not properly propitiated ; but, duly honoured, he embraces the king, protecting him with his flames as the ocean the earth (VIII, 25, 1). His people do not die young, his own life's breath does not leave him before he has reached the full limits of his life, he lives to e 2 lxviii HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. a good old age, if a Brahma/za, imbued with this know- ledge, is his purohita, the shepherd of his kingdom. The subjects of such a king are loyal and obedient (VIII, 25, %. 3). The prescriptions regarding the purohita are fol- lowed (VIII, 25) by a magic rite, called bvahvaanak pari- mara, designed to kill hostile kings, which might have found a place in the ritual of the Atharvan1. In later texts, as a matter of fact, the rule is laid down formally that the purohita should be an Atharvavedin. Thus in Gaut. XI, 15. 17 ; Yagnav. I, 312 (cf. also Manu XI, 3$) ; see p. xlviii, above. Saya/za in the Introduction to the AV., pp.
3Atharvan1. In later texts, as a matter of fact, the rule is laid down formally that the purohita should be an Atharvavedin. Thus in Gaut. XI, 15. 17 ; Yagnav. I, 312 (cf. also Manu XI, 3$) ; see p. xlviii, above. Saya/za in the Introduction to the AV., pp. 5, 6, claims outright that the office of purohita belongs to the Atharvanists (paurohitya;^ ka atharvavidai*va ka- ryam), and he is able to cite in support of his claim not only the rather hysterical dicta of the Atharvan writings, but also j-lokas from a number of Pur£/zas, the Niti^astra, &c. ; cf. above, p. lvi 2. In the Da^akumara-^arita magic rites, as well as the marriage ceremony, are in fact per- formed at the court of a king with Atharvan rites athar- va;zena (atharva/zikena) vidhina, and the statement is the more valuable as it is incidental ; see above, p. lv. I do not desire to enter here upon a discussion of the question of the original relation between the purohita and the brahman, whose identity is baldly assumed in many passages of the earlier Hindu literature 3. I believe that they were not originally the same, but that they were bound together by certain specific ties. They are similar, 1 Cf. the battle-charm, AV. Ill, 19 : the purohita figures in it as well as in the accompanying performances, Kaiu. 14, 22-23 (Darila). And RV. IV, 50, 7-9, perhaps earlier, shows the br/haspati (purohita) in essentially the same important relation to the king. 2 Cf. Deva at Katy. St. XV, 7, 11, purohito yo*tharvavedavihitanaw janti- kapaush/ikabhi^arakarma^aw karta. 3 Cf. Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 485 ff. ; Weber, Ind. Stud. X, 31 ff. ; Ra^asuya, p. 23, note; Haug, Brahma und die Brahmanen, p. 9 ff. ; Geldner, Vedische Studien, II, 144 ff. ; Oldenberg, Die Religion des Veda, pp. 374, 395 ff Sayarca at RV. VII, 33, 14 equates purohita and brahman, and Ait. Br. VII, 16, 1 exhibits VasishMa, the typical purohita, in the office of brahman at a jrauta-rite. At RV. IV, 50, 7 ff. the activity of a purohita is sketched : the purohita, however, is called brz'haspati ( = brahman). INTRODUCTION. Ixix above all, in this, that they have in charge, each in his own way, the general interests of their noble employers, whereas other priests are likely ordinarily to have had only subordinate charges, because of the technical charac- ter of their knowledge and occupation. RV.
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.
1superficial: the word has in the AV. the meaning of charm only in so far and inasmuch as the hymns of that Veda happen to be charms ; the RV. employs the term freely to designate its own suktini (e.g. V, 85, 1 ; VII, 28, 1 ; 36, 1 ; X, 13, 1 ; 61, 1). One misses, too, the plural brahmam as the true Vedic type of designation for a special class of composition, on a level with rika/i, samani, ya^uwshi, atharvangirasa^, or athar- vanak (bhesha^-ani) and angirasa^ (abhi^arikam). We may also remember that the Atharvan of all Sa/^hitas contains the largest collection of theosophic hymns which deal explicitly (X, 2), or implicitly (X, 7), with Brahman and the brahma x. This may, of course, have helped to suggest that the Atharvavedin was the truly superior theo- logian. In the Upanishads the knowledge of just such theosophic relations is styled the brahmavidya. Saya^a in the Introduction to the AV., p. 4, argues that the AV. is known as Brahma-veda because it was revealed to Brahman who is called Atharvan 2. His authority, however, is Gop. Br. I, 4 ff., a text that elsewhere identifies the AV. with that bhuyish//£am brahma which was produced by the tapas (cf. AV. VIII, 10, 25), pressing to an unwarranted degree the relationship of the Atharvan texts with the sphere of the Upanishads 3 ; cf. above, p. lix. It may be safe to assume that all these and other notions 1 Cf. also the superabundant Upanishads, composed in Atharvanic schools. 2 atharvakhyena brahma/za drzsh/atvat tannamna aya;;z vedo vyapadisyate. 3 Similarly the Vishnu- pura^a VI, 5 (Wilson's translation, vol. v, p. 210) : ' The AV. also states that there are two kinds of knowledge. By the one which is the supreme, God (akshara) is obtained ; the other is that which consists of Rik and other Vedas.' INTRODUCTION. lxvii flitted through the minds of the systematic theologians R , . f of the Atharvan schools as they continued the purohita to insist upon the name Brahma-veda for to t e ' their scriptures, and upon the office of Brah- man for their priests. A measure of substantiality may, however, come to their claim from another quarter at a comparatively early time, in this instance with the passive support of all Vedic schools. The matter concerns the office of the purohita, the spiritual and temporal aid of the king, his chaplain, and chancellor. One would again look in vain in the non-Atharvanic Sa^hitas, Brahma/^as, or Sutras for the direct declaration that the purohita either was, or should be, an adherent of the Atharvan.
2hita, the spiritual and temporal aid of the king, his chaplain, and chancellor. One would again look in vain in the non-Atharvanic Sa^hitas, Brahma/^as, or Sutras for the direct declaration that the purohita either was, or should be, an adherent of the Atharvan. These texts do not mention the Atharvan in this connection any more than in connection with the office of the Brahman at the sacrifice. Yet it seems extremely unlikely that the knowledge of Atharvan practices should not have been considered a very valuable adjunct, if not a conditio sine qua non, of the purohiti. Purohitas, whether they are formal adherents of the AV. or not, are always engaging in Atharvanic practices, even against one another (cf. Max Muller, Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 486). The interests of the king and his sovereignty (kshatriya and kshatram) are too obviously dependent upon magic rites to admit the likelihood that the pretensions to this office on the part of him that knew them should have been ignored. At all periods the safety of the king, the prosperity of his people, his ascendency over hostile neighbours, must have depended upon the skill of his purohita in magic. The description, Ait. Br. VIII, 24-28, of the purohita, his func- tions, and his relation to the king, transfer the reader to the sphere and spirit of the Atharvan. The purohita secures for the king royalty, strength, emf^re, and people (VIII, 24, 7). The purohita is a fire with five flaming missiles, dangerous when not properly propitiated ; but, duly honoured, he embraces the king, protecting him with his flames as the ocean the earth (VIII, 25, 1). His people do not die young, his own life's breath does not leave him before he has reached the full limits of his life, he lives to e 2 lxviii HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. a good old age, if a Brahma/za, imbued with this know- ledge, is his purohita, the shepherd of his kingdom. The subjects of such a king are loyal and obedient (VIII, 25, %. 3). The prescriptions regarding the purohita are fol- lowed (VIII, 25) by a magic rite, called bvahvaanak pari- mara, designed to kill hostile kings, which might have found a place in the ritual of the Atharvan1. In later texts, as a matter of fact, the rule is laid down formally that the purohita should be an Atharvavedin. Thus in Gaut. XI, 15. 17 ; Yagnav. I, 312 (cf. also Manu XI, 3$) ; see p. xlviii, above. Saya/za in the Introduction to the AV., pp.
3Atharvan1. In later texts, as a matter of fact, the rule is laid down formally that the purohita should be an Atharvavedin. Thus in Gaut. XI, 15. 17 ; Yagnav. I, 312 (cf. also Manu XI, 3$) ; see p. xlviii, above. Saya/za in the Introduction to the AV., pp. 5, 6, claims outright that the office of purohita belongs to the Atharvanists (paurohitya;^ ka atharvavidai*va ka- ryam), and he is able to cite in support of his claim not only the rather hysterical dicta of the Atharvan writings, but also j-lokas from a number of Pur£/zas, the Niti^astra, &c. ; cf. above, p. lvi 2. In the Da^akumara-^arita magic rites, as well as the marriage ceremony, are in fact per- formed at the court of a king with Atharvan rites athar- va;zena (atharva/zikena) vidhina, and the statement is the more valuable as it is incidental ; see above, p. lv. I do not desire to enter here upon a discussion of the question of the original relation between the purohita and the brahman, whose identity is baldly assumed in many passages of the earlier Hindu literature 3. I believe that they were not originally the same, but that they were bound together by certain specific ties. They are similar, 1 Cf. the battle-charm, AV. Ill, 19 : the purohita figures in it as well as in the accompanying performances, Kaiu. 14, 22-23 (Darila). And RV. IV, 50, 7-9, perhaps earlier, shows the br/haspati (purohita) in essentially the same important relation to the king. 2 Cf. Deva at Katy. St. XV, 7, 11, purohito yo*tharvavedavihitanaw janti- kapaush/ikabhi^arakarma^aw karta. 3 Cf. Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 485 ff. ; Weber, Ind. Stud. X, 31 ff. ; Ra^asuya, p. 23, note; Haug, Brahma und die Brahmanen, p. 9 ff. ; Geldner, Vedische Studien, II, 144 ff. ; Oldenberg, Die Religion des Veda, pp. 374, 395 ff Sayarca at RV. VII, 33, 14 equates purohita and brahman, and Ait. Br. VII, 16, 1 exhibits VasishMa, the typical purohita, in the office of brahman at a jrauta-rite. At RV. IV, 50, 7 ff. the activity of a purohita is sketched : the purohita, however, is called brz'haspati ( = brahman). INTRODUCTION. Ixix above all, in this, that they have in charge, each in his own way, the general interests of their noble employers, whereas other priests are likely ordinarily to have had only subordinate charges, because of the technical charac- ter of their knowledge and occupation. RV.
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.