Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1tice. Ke^ava says that it produces victory in disputa- tion (vivade ^ayakarma;/a^ vldhi/i) ; Darila, more mildly, says that it is an expiatory performance to wipe out the guilt incurred in defeating an opponent (in debate), praty- artha^ayadosha^amana;^ 1 pr^ya^ittam. Either of these manipulations of the hymn is reasonable if we regard kami'ni in stanza 5 as referring to the parishad or sabha 2, and there is therefore no absolute guarantee that the hymn had originally anything to do with sexual love. Cf. how- ever II, 30, 1. In Kaui*. 76, 8. 9 the bridegroom, while reciting this hymn, ties to his little finger an amulet of licorice-wood (madugha), fastening it with thread coloured red with lac, 1 The MSS. have pratyartha^apa-, but this does not yield good sense. The correction was suggested by Professor Cowell in a kind note. Correct accordingly our treatment of the passage in Seven Hymns of the Atharva-veda, Amer. Journ. Phil. VII, 481 (p. 16 of the reprint). 2 There is, too, a bare possibility that the fifth stanza is of later origin, especially if we attach any weight to the tradition that the first book of the AV. consisted of hymns of four stanzas each ; see the introduction to I, 12 (p. 247). The meaning of that tradition seems, however, rather to be that each hymn consisted of at least four stanzas, or more, since many of them, in fact, consist of more. T 2 276 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. and placing it so that the amulet is on the outside of the finger, the knot within (the hand). In Sutra 10 he leads the bride forth, and the amulet is, therefore, obviously intended to make him attractive to the bride. This in- volves the construction of the hymn which we have pre- sented in our translation, i.e. the bridegroom, by means of the amulet, secures the love of the bride l. Once more, in Kaui-. 79, 10, at the consummation of the marriage, a ceremony, involving this hymn, is enacted by the married couple. The bridegroom takes hold of the amulet of licorice (which he has put on previously, Kau^s*. 76, 8. 9), puts it into bull's grease, and while reciting the pre- sent hymn and AV. XIV, 2, 71. 72, they embrace one another. Kcrava, more explicitly, states that the amulet is first ground up, madughama/d/^ pish/va aukshe 2 prakshipya abhimantrya parasparam varavadhvau samalabhete. The purpose of the performance is not quite clear ; it seems to be designed to render the affection mutual 3. Cf. AV. II, $6, 7, and our discussion there. The hymn has been translated by Weber, Ind. Stud. IV, 429 (cf. V, 218); Grill2, pp. 52, 78.
2amalabhete. The purpose of the performance is not quite clear ; it seems to be designed to render the affection mutual 3. Cf. AV. II, $6, 7, and our discussion there. The hymn has been translated by Weber, Ind. Stud. IV, 429 (cf. V, 218); Grill2, pp. 52, 78. The Anukramam designates it as madughama/zisuktam, ' the hymn of the amulet of licorice/ 1 Dr. Haas in the Indische Studien, V, 386, makes the bride- groom fasten the amulet upon the bride's finger. There is nothing to indicate this proceeding, which is contrary to the context of the hymn. Dr. Haas, to be sure, erroneously refers the pratika iya#z virudh to AV. VII, 56, 2; hence he did not see that the bridegroom desires to make himself lovable in the sight of the woman (see I, 34, 5). 2 For aukshe, see our note on II, 36, 7. 3 Professor Weber in his translation of this passage, Ind. Stud. V, 401, takes madughamam to mean 'hymen/ for reasons not apparent to me. I fancy that Ke^ava's pish/va removes the possi- bility of such a construction, and the madughama^ipraya^itta quoted by the same scholar on p. 404, refers simply to the loss of the amulet here in question ; this is restored by making another amulet from the putudaru (devadaru)-tree. II, 3« COMMENTARY. 277 Stanza 1. Honey is the symbol of personal agreeableness from earliest times. Cf. e.g. RV. X, 40, 6, c From you, O A^vins, the bee took honey in its mouth, as a woman goes (with honey in her mouth) to an assignation V The digging of the plant with honey is not to be taken too literally, as Saya^a does, madhurupe^a khanitradina, or madhure^a prakare/^a, but rather, * with the influence of the sweetness of honey, prompting or supporting him who digs after the licorice-root.' Cf. AV. VII, 56, %. Stanza 2. The second half is a formula, being repeated almost literally at III, 25, 5 and VI, 9, 2 ; Pada d, at VI, 42, 3 ; 43> 3- Stanza 4. c, d. The passage contains an elliptic comparison, as indi- cated by the brackets in our translation. Without the ellipsis supplied there is no good sense: Weber, 'rnich allein drum du lieben magst wie einen honigsiissen zweig ; ' Grill, ' so sei denn ich das liebste dir, gleich einem honig- siissen zweig.' But what human being regards a branch sweet as honey as the most precious possession ? Stanza 5. a. The clinging sugar-cane is used here metaphorically for sweetness and attractiveness; no practice of this cha- racter is indicated anywhere. c, d. The passage is a formula; see II, 30, 1 ; VI, 8, 1-3. II, 3. Commentary to page 9. The hymn is joined with I, 2 at Kau^.
3sugar-cane is used here metaphorically for sweetness and attractiveness; no practice of this cha- racter is indicated anywhere. c, d. The passage is a formula; see II, 30, 1 ; VI, 8, 1-3. II, 3. Commentary to page 9. The hymn is joined with I, 2 at Kau^. 25, 6-9, in a charm against excessive discharges from the body ; see the treatment at I, %. The particular part of Kau^ika's prac- tices, which is based on our hymn, is contained in Sutra 1 A different interpretation is suggested by Bergaigne, La syntaxe des comparaisons v^diques (Melanges Renier, p. 89). 278 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. 25, 7. It is founded upon the conception that ants are endowed with the faculty of producing water, and that, too, healing-water, wherever they appear, and consequently whenever they are applied as a remedy. Hence they are here given to the patient to be drunk in water. For fuller statements of this belief, see the introduction to VI, 100, and Seven Hymns of the Atharva-veda, Amer. Journ. Phil. VII, pp. 482-4. The hymn has been translated by Weber, Ind. Stud. XIII, 138 ff. ; Ludwig, Der Rigveda, III, 507 ; Grill2, pp. 17, 79 ff. The Anukrama/zi designates it as bhaisha^yayurdha- nvantaridaivatam. Stanza 1. b. The difficult word here is avatka. In the Paippalada XIX, 8, 2 (see Bohtlingk's lexicon s. v.) occur the two hypermetric Padas, avataka//z mama bhesha^am avataka;^ pariva^anam. Here the metre suggests emendation to avatka, but at the same time shows pretty clearly that the word is a derivative of avata, ' spring.' Saya/za is very mis- leading. Having in mind the performances of the Sutra, he identifies avatka with mungasira/t in Kau^. 25, 6, and the mountain mentioned in the stanza with the Mu^avat, to wit : atra parvata^abdena mu^avan nama parvato viva- kshita^ x . . . tasmat ada^ viprakrzsh/a/^ yat prasiddham avatkaw vyadhiparihare^a rakshaka;^ mungasiraA ava- dhavati avaruhya bhumau dhavati. This involves an im- possible rendering of avadhavati, and leaves out of sight the possibility that this hymn may have nothing to do with the mu^*a-reed, being concerned rather with the healing water, procured by the ants ; see the introduction. c, d. The passage as it stands in the text, and our trans- lation, can be sustained only on the supposition that the water is added to some other substance, not indicated in the stanza. Ludwig, feeling this difficulty, emends subhe- sha^-am to subhesha^o, ' so that you (the patient) may have a powerful remedy.' A simpler emendation is to change 1 Cf. the note on V, 22, 5. II, 3- COMMENTARY.
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.
1tice. Ke^ava says that it produces victory in disputa- tion (vivade ^ayakarma;/a^ vldhi/i) ; Darila, more mildly, says that it is an expiatory performance to wipe out the guilt incurred in defeating an opponent (in debate), praty- artha^ayadosha^amana;^ 1 pr^ya^ittam. Either of these manipulations of the hymn is reasonable if we regard kami'ni in stanza 5 as referring to the parishad or sabha 2, and there is therefore no absolute guarantee that the hymn had originally anything to do with sexual love. Cf. how- ever II, 30, 1. In Kaui*. 76, 8. 9 the bridegroom, while reciting this hymn, ties to his little finger an amulet of licorice-wood (madugha), fastening it with thread coloured red with lac, 1 The MSS. have pratyartha^apa-, but this does not yield good sense. The correction was suggested by Professor Cowell in a kind note. Correct accordingly our treatment of the passage in Seven Hymns of the Atharva-veda, Amer. Journ. Phil. VII, 481 (p. 16 of the reprint). 2 There is, too, a bare possibility that the fifth stanza is of later origin, especially if we attach any weight to the tradition that the first book of the AV. consisted of hymns of four stanzas each ; see the introduction to I, 12 (p. 247). The meaning of that tradition seems, however, rather to be that each hymn consisted of at least four stanzas, or more, since many of them, in fact, consist of more. T 2 276 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. and placing it so that the amulet is on the outside of the finger, the knot within (the hand). In Sutra 10 he leads the bride forth, and the amulet is, therefore, obviously intended to make him attractive to the bride. This in- volves the construction of the hymn which we have pre- sented in our translation, i.e. the bridegroom, by means of the amulet, secures the love of the bride l. Once more, in Kaui-. 79, 10, at the consummation of the marriage, a ceremony, involving this hymn, is enacted by the married couple. The bridegroom takes hold of the amulet of licorice (which he has put on previously, Kau^s*. 76, 8. 9), puts it into bull's grease, and while reciting the pre- sent hymn and AV. XIV, 2, 71. 72, they embrace one another. Kcrava, more explicitly, states that the amulet is first ground up, madughama/d/^ pish/va aukshe 2 prakshipya abhimantrya parasparam varavadhvau samalabhete. The purpose of the performance is not quite clear ; it seems to be designed to render the affection mutual 3. Cf. AV. II, $6, 7, and our discussion there. The hymn has been translated by Weber, Ind. Stud. IV, 429 (cf. V, 218); Grill2, pp. 52, 78.
2amalabhete. The purpose of the performance is not quite clear ; it seems to be designed to render the affection mutual 3. Cf. AV. II, $6, 7, and our discussion there. The hymn has been translated by Weber, Ind. Stud. IV, 429 (cf. V, 218); Grill2, pp. 52, 78. The Anukramam designates it as madughama/zisuktam, ' the hymn of the amulet of licorice/ 1 Dr. Haas in the Indische Studien, V, 386, makes the bride- groom fasten the amulet upon the bride's finger. There is nothing to indicate this proceeding, which is contrary to the context of the hymn. Dr. Haas, to be sure, erroneously refers the pratika iya#z virudh to AV. VII, 56, 2; hence he did not see that the bridegroom desires to make himself lovable in the sight of the woman (see I, 34, 5). 2 For aukshe, see our note on II, 36, 7. 3 Professor Weber in his translation of this passage, Ind. Stud. V, 401, takes madughamam to mean 'hymen/ for reasons not apparent to me. I fancy that Ke^ava's pish/va removes the possi- bility of such a construction, and the madughama^ipraya^itta quoted by the same scholar on p. 404, refers simply to the loss of the amulet here in question ; this is restored by making another amulet from the putudaru (devadaru)-tree. II, 3« COMMENTARY. 277 Stanza 1. Honey is the symbol of personal agreeableness from earliest times. Cf. e.g. RV. X, 40, 6, c From you, O A^vins, the bee took honey in its mouth, as a woman goes (with honey in her mouth) to an assignation V The digging of the plant with honey is not to be taken too literally, as Saya^a does, madhurupe^a khanitradina, or madhure^a prakare/^a, but rather, * with the influence of the sweetness of honey, prompting or supporting him who digs after the licorice-root.' Cf. AV. VII, 56, %. Stanza 2. The second half is a formula, being repeated almost literally at III, 25, 5 and VI, 9, 2 ; Pada d, at VI, 42, 3 ; 43> 3- Stanza 4. c, d. The passage contains an elliptic comparison, as indi- cated by the brackets in our translation. Without the ellipsis supplied there is no good sense: Weber, 'rnich allein drum du lieben magst wie einen honigsiissen zweig ; ' Grill, ' so sei denn ich das liebste dir, gleich einem honig- siissen zweig.' But what human being regards a branch sweet as honey as the most precious possession ? Stanza 5. a. The clinging sugar-cane is used here metaphorically for sweetness and attractiveness; no practice of this cha- racter is indicated anywhere. c, d. The passage is a formula; see II, 30, 1 ; VI, 8, 1-3. II, 3. Commentary to page 9. The hymn is joined with I, 2 at Kau^.
3sugar-cane is used here metaphorically for sweetness and attractiveness; no practice of this cha- racter is indicated anywhere. c, d. The passage is a formula; see II, 30, 1 ; VI, 8, 1-3. II, 3. Commentary to page 9. The hymn is joined with I, 2 at Kau^. 25, 6-9, in a charm against excessive discharges from the body ; see the treatment at I, %. The particular part of Kau^ika's prac- tices, which is based on our hymn, is contained in Sutra 1 A different interpretation is suggested by Bergaigne, La syntaxe des comparaisons v^diques (Melanges Renier, p. 89). 278 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA. 25, 7. It is founded upon the conception that ants are endowed with the faculty of producing water, and that, too, healing-water, wherever they appear, and consequently whenever they are applied as a remedy. Hence they are here given to the patient to be drunk in water. For fuller statements of this belief, see the introduction to VI, 100, and Seven Hymns of the Atharva-veda, Amer. Journ. Phil. VII, pp. 482-4. The hymn has been translated by Weber, Ind. Stud. XIII, 138 ff. ; Ludwig, Der Rigveda, III, 507 ; Grill2, pp. 17, 79 ff. The Anukrama/zi designates it as bhaisha^yayurdha- nvantaridaivatam. Stanza 1. b. The difficult word here is avatka. In the Paippalada XIX, 8, 2 (see Bohtlingk's lexicon s. v.) occur the two hypermetric Padas, avataka//z mama bhesha^am avataka;^ pariva^anam. Here the metre suggests emendation to avatka, but at the same time shows pretty clearly that the word is a derivative of avata, ' spring.' Saya/za is very mis- leading. Having in mind the performances of the Sutra, he identifies avatka with mungasira/t in Kau^. 25, 6, and the mountain mentioned in the stanza with the Mu^avat, to wit : atra parvata^abdena mu^avan nama parvato viva- kshita^ x . . . tasmat ada^ viprakrzsh/a/^ yat prasiddham avatkaw vyadhiparihare^a rakshaka;^ mungasiraA ava- dhavati avaruhya bhumau dhavati. This involves an im- possible rendering of avadhavati, and leaves out of sight the possibility that this hymn may have nothing to do with the mu^*a-reed, being concerned rather with the healing water, procured by the ants ; see the introduction. c, d. The passage as it stands in the text, and our trans- lation, can be sustained only on the supposition that the water is added to some other substance, not indicated in the stanza. Ludwig, feeling this difficulty, emends subhe- sha^-am to subhesha^o, ' so that you (the patient) may have a powerful remedy.' A simpler emendation is to change 1 Cf. the note on V, 22, 5. II, 3- COMMENTARY.
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.