Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1vangirasa^. Thus in the first superscription of the AV. Prati- jakhya, the 6aunakiya Aaturadhyayika, and in Pacini V, 2, 37. Cf. also Gop. Br. I, 1, 8. 2 For the distinction between janta and abhUarika see Kslus. 3, 19, and note 5 on p. 1 1 of our edition. INTRODUCTION. XIX catalogued at Kauy. 8, 16, and there distinctly described as sant&k, ' holy ;' the second list is stated at Vait. Su. 5, 10 itself to be angirasa, in the obscure terms, kapurviparva- rodakavWkkdvatina^/anirdahantibhir angirasibhi/£. These names are in general unknown, the text is not quite certain, but the designation of the last, nirdahanti, shows that the list is designed for unholy sorcery practices (abhiMrika) *. The adjective angirasa is in general in the ritualist texts of the AV. equivalent to abhiHrika. Thus sa/^bhara angi- rasa^, Kauj. 47, 2, means ' utensils for sorcery 2 ; ' da;/^/a angirasa^, Kauj. 47, 13, means ' staff for sorcery;' agnir angirasa/z, Kaui*. 14, 30, means 'sorcery-fire3.' The fifth kalpa of the AV., usually known as Angirasa-kalpa, bears also the names AbhiHra-kalpa, and Vidhana-kalpa, ' text- book of sorcery ; ' see ibid. XI, 376 fif. It is worth while to follow out this specific use of the term angirasa in non-Atharvan texts, lest it be ang^ra-Tin suspected of being an Atharvanic refinement. non-Atharvan The Rig-vidhana IV, 6, 4, has the following i-loka : ' He against whom those that are skilled in the Angirasakalpas practice sorcery repels them all with the Pratyangirasakalpa 4.' The term pratyangirasa is the exact equivalent of pratyabhiMra/za, ' counter- witch- craft5' (AV. II, 11, 2), and the krztyapratihara/zani, Ath. Pari.?. 32, 2 (cf. Kau^. 39, 7, note). The texts of the sort called atharva/zapratyangirakalpam (! see Ind. Stud. I, 469) deal with the same theme, as does the Ya^iir-vidhana (Agni-pura^a, 259, 10) in the expression pratyangireshu (sc. karmasu). Cf. also the titles of works, pratyangiratatva, pratyangirapa?X£anga, and pratyangirasukta, mentioned in Bohtlingk's Lexicon, as probably dealing with the same theme. We may connect with this pejorative use of the 1 Cf. AV. Ill, 2, 5 ; VII, 108, 2 ; IX, 2, 4; 5, 31 ; XIV, 2, 48. 2 Darila, ghoradravya/zi. 3 Kcfava, angirasoxgni^ H«</alagni,#. * yam angirasakalpais tu tadvido * bhi^aranti sa pratyangirasakalpena sarvaws tan pratibadhate. Cf. also the following jlokas, and IV, 8, 3 ; Ath. Parij. 3, I ; and see Rudolf Meyer's preface to his edition of the Rig-vidhana, p. xxxi. 5 Sayawa, nivaryate parakr/tabhiMra^anita krz'tya anena iti pratyabhi£a- rawa^. b2 XX HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.
2. Cf. also the following jlokas, and IV, 8, 3 ; Ath. Parij. 3, I ; and see Rudolf Meyer's preface to his edition of the Rig-vidhana, p. xxxi. 5 Sayawa, nivaryate parakr/tabhiMra^anita krz'tya anena iti pratyabhi£a- rawa^. b2 XX HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. word angirasa the fact that the Vishnu- pura^a (Wilson's translation, V, 383) and the Bhavishya-purawa count the Angirasa as one of the four Vedas of the Parsis (Maga), the other three, Vada, Vi^vavada, and Vidut, also conveying thinly veiled disparagement of the religious books of an exotic religion ; cf. Wilson in Reinaud's Memoire sur l'lnde, p. 394; Ind. Stud. I, 292, note; Weber, Ind. Lit.2, p. 164, note. We may then regard it as certain that the words angiras and angirasa are reflected by the ceremonial literature in the sense of abhL£ara and abhi^arika. Far more important is the evidence of certain texts of greater antiquity, and higher dignity, wrhich have occasion to mention the Atharvan inci- dentally, and enunciate clearly this twofold character of the Veda. They make the very same distinction between atharvan and angiras that appeared above in the ritualistic passage, Vait. Su. 5, 10 (Gop. Br. I, 2, 18). At 5ankh. 5r. XVI, 2, 1 fif., on the occasion of the horse-sacrifice, recita- tions are made from the ordinary Vedic classes of literature, the rik&k, ya^uwshi, samani, and also the remoter literary categories which the Brahma^as and Sutras report, with great unanimity and considerable variety, as having been in existence in their time : the itihasa (akhyana), pura/za, sarpavidya, &C.1 The Atharvan figures immediately after the Rik and Saman, and that too twice, in its double character as Atharvan and Angiras, and, what is more im- portant, bhesha^am, i.e. remedial charms, are recited from the Atharvan; ghoram, i.e. sorcery, abhi/£arikam, from the Angiras 2. The commentator regards bhesha^am and ghoram as distinct works, bhesha^agranthasya*tharva//i- kanam . . . ghoram atharva/zo grantha^. The same subject is treated in almost identical terms in Asv. Sr. X, 7, 1 ff. : again atharva/zo veda/i and angiraso veda^ are treated indi- vidually, and again the former is correlated with bhesha^am, the latter with ghoram 3. Once more this theme is handled 1 Cf. Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 40 ff. 2 atharvavedo veda/z so*yam iti bhesha^aw nigadet . . . angiraso vedo veda>4 so * yam iti ghoram nigadet. 3 Scholiast, ghoram iti abhi/£aradipratipadakam ity artha//. Cf. RV. X, 34, 14, ma* no ghorewa £arata*bhi dhrtshnu. INTRODUCTION. XXI by the 5at. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 3 ff.
3so*yam iti bhesha^aw nigadet . . . angiraso vedo veda>4 so * yam iti ghoram nigadet. 3 Scholiast, ghoram iti abhi/£aradipratipadakam ity artha//. Cf. RV. X, 34, 14, ma* no ghorewa £arata*bhi dhrtshnu. INTRODUCTION. XXI by the 5at. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 3 ff. : here also atharvan and angiras are recognised individually ; the correlation with bhesha^-am and ghoram is wanting, but the individuality of the two categories is clearly implied in the behest to recite on the third and fourth days respectively one section each of the Atharvans and the Ahgiras, each of which are distinctly said to be a Veda \ Indirect, yet significant testimony that this double character of the AV. was clearly established in Brahman- ical times may be derived from the formation of the names of two apocryphal teachers. One is Bhisha^ Atharva^a, Ka//z. S. XVI, 3 (Ind. Stud. Ill, 459); the other is Ghora Angirasa, Kaush. Br. XXX, 6 ; Asv. Sr. XII, 13, 1 ; KMnd. Up. Ill, 17, 6 (cf. Ind. Stud. I, 190, 293). The formation Bhisha^* Atharva;/a is illustrated further by Fa.nk. Br. XII, 9, 10, bhesha^a;// ya atharva^ani ; and XVI, 10, 10, bhesha- gam vai devanam atharva^o bhesha^yayai*va*rish/yai2; cf. also the expressions samyu atharva^a, personified as a sage, Gop. Br. I, 2, 18, and atharvabhi/£ ^anta/^, Kaiu\ 1 25, 33. These names never, as far as is known, occur in inverted order : there is no Bhisha^ Angirasa, and no Ghora Atharva//a ; they reflect perfectly the individual character and the individual function of the two members of the compound atharvangirasa^. It seems now, further, that the texts of the Atharva- sa/^hita mark this same distinction with no angirasin uncertain touch. At AV. XI, 6, 14, four the Atharva- Vedic mantra-categories are indicated by the expressions, ri'kak, samani, bhesha^*a(ni), and yagumshl. The choice of the word bhesha^a is certainly eclectic and one-sided. The passage appeals to the auspi- 1 atharva^o veda^ . . . atharvawam ekam parva vya^aksha^a^ ; ahgiraso veda/& . . . angirasam ekam parva vya&iksha^a^. Elsewhere, aside from the Atharvan texts, the component parts of the dvandva atharvangiras are drawn asunder, But without accessory statements; thus Tait. Br. Ill, 12, 9, 1; NWsiwhapurvatapani Up. 5, 9. 2 A converse statement like bhesha^aw va angirasani, is, if we judge the matter aright, a counter-sense, and unheard of anywhere in Hindu literature. 3 So also 6anti, as the wife of Atharvan ; see Wilson's translation of the Vishwu-purawa, I, 110, 200; Bhagavata-pura^a III, 24, 24. XXU HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.
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.
1vangirasa^. Thus in the first superscription of the AV. Prati- jakhya, the 6aunakiya Aaturadhyayika, and in Pacini V, 2, 37. Cf. also Gop. Br. I, 1, 8. 2 For the distinction between janta and abhUarika see Kslus. 3, 19, and note 5 on p. 1 1 of our edition. INTRODUCTION. XIX catalogued at Kauy. 8, 16, and there distinctly described as sant&k, ' holy ;' the second list is stated at Vait. Su. 5, 10 itself to be angirasa, in the obscure terms, kapurviparva- rodakavWkkdvatina^/anirdahantibhir angirasibhi/£. These names are in general unknown, the text is not quite certain, but the designation of the last, nirdahanti, shows that the list is designed for unholy sorcery practices (abhiMrika) *. The adjective angirasa is in general in the ritualist texts of the AV. equivalent to abhiHrika. Thus sa/^bhara angi- rasa^, Kauj. 47, 2, means ' utensils for sorcery 2 ; ' da;/^/a angirasa^, Kauj. 47, 13, means ' staff for sorcery;' agnir angirasa/z, Kaui*. 14, 30, means 'sorcery-fire3.' The fifth kalpa of the AV., usually known as Angirasa-kalpa, bears also the names AbhiHra-kalpa, and Vidhana-kalpa, ' text- book of sorcery ; ' see ibid. XI, 376 fif. It is worth while to follow out this specific use of the term angirasa in non-Atharvan texts, lest it be ang^ra-Tin suspected of being an Atharvanic refinement. non-Atharvan The Rig-vidhana IV, 6, 4, has the following i-loka : ' He against whom those that are skilled in the Angirasakalpas practice sorcery repels them all with the Pratyangirasakalpa 4.' The term pratyangirasa is the exact equivalent of pratyabhiMra/za, ' counter- witch- craft5' (AV. II, 11, 2), and the krztyapratihara/zani, Ath. Pari.?. 32, 2 (cf. Kau^. 39, 7, note). The texts of the sort called atharva/zapratyangirakalpam (! see Ind. Stud. I, 469) deal with the same theme, as does the Ya^iir-vidhana (Agni-pura^a, 259, 10) in the expression pratyangireshu (sc. karmasu). Cf. also the titles of works, pratyangiratatva, pratyangirapa?X£anga, and pratyangirasukta, mentioned in Bohtlingk's Lexicon, as probably dealing with the same theme. We may connect with this pejorative use of the 1 Cf. AV. Ill, 2, 5 ; VII, 108, 2 ; IX, 2, 4; 5, 31 ; XIV, 2, 48. 2 Darila, ghoradravya/zi. 3 Kcfava, angirasoxgni^ H«</alagni,#. * yam angirasakalpais tu tadvido * bhi^aranti sa pratyangirasakalpena sarvaws tan pratibadhate. Cf. also the following jlokas, and IV, 8, 3 ; Ath. Parij. 3, I ; and see Rudolf Meyer's preface to his edition of the Rig-vidhana, p. xxxi. 5 Sayawa, nivaryate parakr/tabhiMra^anita krz'tya anena iti pratyabhi£a- rawa^. b2 XX HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.
2. Cf. also the following jlokas, and IV, 8, 3 ; Ath. Parij. 3, I ; and see Rudolf Meyer's preface to his edition of the Rig-vidhana, p. xxxi. 5 Sayawa, nivaryate parakr/tabhiMra^anita krz'tya anena iti pratyabhi£a- rawa^. b2 XX HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. word angirasa the fact that the Vishnu- pura^a (Wilson's translation, V, 383) and the Bhavishya-purawa count the Angirasa as one of the four Vedas of the Parsis (Maga), the other three, Vada, Vi^vavada, and Vidut, also conveying thinly veiled disparagement of the religious books of an exotic religion ; cf. Wilson in Reinaud's Memoire sur l'lnde, p. 394; Ind. Stud. I, 292, note; Weber, Ind. Lit.2, p. 164, note. We may then regard it as certain that the words angiras and angirasa are reflected by the ceremonial literature in the sense of abhL£ara and abhi^arika. Far more important is the evidence of certain texts of greater antiquity, and higher dignity, wrhich have occasion to mention the Atharvan inci- dentally, and enunciate clearly this twofold character of the Veda. They make the very same distinction between atharvan and angiras that appeared above in the ritualistic passage, Vait. Su. 5, 10 (Gop. Br. I, 2, 18). At 5ankh. 5r. XVI, 2, 1 fif., on the occasion of the horse-sacrifice, recita- tions are made from the ordinary Vedic classes of literature, the rik&k, ya^uwshi, samani, and also the remoter literary categories which the Brahma^as and Sutras report, with great unanimity and considerable variety, as having been in existence in their time : the itihasa (akhyana), pura/za, sarpavidya, &C.1 The Atharvan figures immediately after the Rik and Saman, and that too twice, in its double character as Atharvan and Angiras, and, what is more im- portant, bhesha^am, i.e. remedial charms, are recited from the Atharvan; ghoram, i.e. sorcery, abhi/£arikam, from the Angiras 2. The commentator regards bhesha^am and ghoram as distinct works, bhesha^agranthasya*tharva//i- kanam . . . ghoram atharva/zo grantha^. The same subject is treated in almost identical terms in Asv. Sr. X, 7, 1 ff. : again atharva/zo veda/i and angiraso veda^ are treated indi- vidually, and again the former is correlated with bhesha^am, the latter with ghoram 3. Once more this theme is handled 1 Cf. Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 40 ff. 2 atharvavedo veda/z so*yam iti bhesha^aw nigadet . . . angiraso vedo veda>4 so * yam iti ghoram nigadet. 3 Scholiast, ghoram iti abhi/£aradipratipadakam ity artha//. Cf. RV. X, 34, 14, ma* no ghorewa £arata*bhi dhrtshnu. INTRODUCTION. XXI by the 5at. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 3 ff.
3so*yam iti bhesha^aw nigadet . . . angiraso vedo veda>4 so * yam iti ghoram nigadet. 3 Scholiast, ghoram iti abhi/£aradipratipadakam ity artha//. Cf. RV. X, 34, 14, ma* no ghorewa £arata*bhi dhrtshnu. INTRODUCTION. XXI by the 5at. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 3 ff. : here also atharvan and angiras are recognised individually ; the correlation with bhesha^-am and ghoram is wanting, but the individuality of the two categories is clearly implied in the behest to recite on the third and fourth days respectively one section each of the Atharvans and the Ahgiras, each of which are distinctly said to be a Veda \ Indirect, yet significant testimony that this double character of the AV. was clearly established in Brahman- ical times may be derived from the formation of the names of two apocryphal teachers. One is Bhisha^ Atharva^a, Ka//z. S. XVI, 3 (Ind. Stud. Ill, 459); the other is Ghora Angirasa, Kaush. Br. XXX, 6 ; Asv. Sr. XII, 13, 1 ; KMnd. Up. Ill, 17, 6 (cf. Ind. Stud. I, 190, 293). The formation Bhisha^* Atharva;/a is illustrated further by Fa.nk. Br. XII, 9, 10, bhesha^a;// ya atharva^ani ; and XVI, 10, 10, bhesha- gam vai devanam atharva^o bhesha^yayai*va*rish/yai2; cf. also the expressions samyu atharva^a, personified as a sage, Gop. Br. I, 2, 18, and atharvabhi/£ ^anta/^, Kaiu\ 1 25, 33. These names never, as far as is known, occur in inverted order : there is no Bhisha^ Angirasa, and no Ghora Atharva//a ; they reflect perfectly the individual character and the individual function of the two members of the compound atharvangirasa^. It seems now, further, that the texts of the Atharva- sa/^hita mark this same distinction with no angirasin uncertain touch. At AV. XI, 6, 14, four the Atharva- Vedic mantra-categories are indicated by the expressions, ri'kak, samani, bhesha^*a(ni), and yagumshl. The choice of the word bhesha^a is certainly eclectic and one-sided. The passage appeals to the auspi- 1 atharva^o veda^ . . . atharvawam ekam parva vya^aksha^a^ ; ahgiraso veda/& . . . angirasam ekam parva vya&iksha^a^. Elsewhere, aside from the Atharvan texts, the component parts of the dvandva atharvangiras are drawn asunder, But without accessory statements; thus Tait. Br. Ill, 12, 9, 1; NWsiwhapurvatapani Up. 5, 9. 2 A converse statement like bhesha^aw va angirasani, is, if we judge the matter aright, a counter-sense, and unheard of anywhere in Hindu literature. 3 So also 6anti, as the wife of Atharvan ; see Wilson's translation of the Vishwu-purawa, I, 110, 200; Bhagavata-pura^a III, 24, 24. XXU HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.
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.