Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1intelligible why such portions should have been considered as of equal age to the body of the work ; in fact they would probably go back to about the same time as some of the earlier portions ; only that, owing to a longer state of uncertain transmission, they may have been more liable to changes and additions. If these tracts are not mentioned by Pa;/ini, it may be an accidental omission on his part, or he may not have been aware of their existence, for geographical or other reasons : we can hardly expect Paz/ini to have been so intimately acquainted with the Ya^us texts as Katyayana. As regards the dates of Katyayana and Pata/?^ali, I accept with Professor Biihler and others, as by far the most probable, the fourth and the middle of the second century B.C. respectively. Under the title of Va^asaneyaka, the ^atapatha-brah- ma;/a is quoted once in La/yayana's vSrauta-sutra IV, 12, 12 ; but I have not been able to find the passage either in the Madhyandina text or in that part of the Ka«va text which I have hitherto had at my disposal, viz. kandas I, II, IV-VII (Ka«va). Far more frequently the work is quoted, either as Va^asaneyaka or as Va^asaneyi-brahma;^a, by Apastamba, both in his ^rauta and his Dharma-sutras, On comparing one of these quotations in the Dharma- sutras (1,4,12,3) with the corresponding passage in the Madhyandina recension, Professor Biihler found that ' its wording possessed just sufficient resemblance to allow us to identify the passage which Apastamba meant, but dif- fered from the vSatapatha-brahma/^a in many details ^' From this he naturally inferred that Apastamba probably took his quotations from the Ka;/va recension. Now, although I have not been able to compare this particular passage with the Kawva text-, I have done so regarding a number of other passages quoted from Apastamba in Karka's commentary on the Katiya-5rauta-sutra. The result was that in no single case did Apastamba's quota- tions agree with the corresponding passages in the Ka//va, fifth Ka«va\ on the other hand, the Ka^vas have 8, instead of 6 adhyayas ; and in the fifth ki/ida. (,or sixth and seventh Ka«vas) they have together 7, instead of 5 adhyayas. 1 Biihler, kic. cit. p. xxv. ^ The oassage occurs in Madhyandina XI, 5, 6, 3. xl 5ATAPATHA-BRAHMAJVA. any more than they did with those of the Madhyandina text^. In some cases they came nearer to the one text, in others to the other. To several quotations, again, I could find nothing corresponding in either text.
2hyandina XI, 5, 6, 3. xl 5ATAPATHA-BRAHMAJVA. any more than they did with those of the Madhyandina text^. In some cases they came nearer to the one text, in others to the other. To several quotations, again, I could find nothing corresponding in either text. Now, supposing the quotations, as given by Karka, to be on the whole correct, there seem to be only two ways of accounting for these discrepancies, viz. either Apastamba did not mean to quote the passages literally, but only to give the substance of them ; or he had a third recension of the vSatapatha before him. While some passages would seem to be in favour of the former alternative, others would scarcely admit of this expla- nation. This question,however, requires further investigation, before it can be definitely settled. In connection with this question the fact will also have to be taken into account, that Katyayana, in composing his Va^asaneyi-pratij-akhya, seems to have had before him a different recension of the Samhiti, from those of the Ka;/va and Madhyandina schools^. Professor Buhler appears to be inclined to place Apa- stamba somewhere about the fifth century B. C. ; and though probably he himself does not consider the reasons he adduces as conclusive, they seem at any rate to show that that writer cannot have lived later than the third century B.C. From ' I select a few passages : — 1. Ap. (Katy.VII, i, 36). pragvamsasya madhyamam sthu/zara^am alabhya ^apaliti va^'-asaneyakam. Madhy. Ill, i, i, 11. sa purvardhyaw sthuwarae-am abhipadyaitad yas'ur aha. Ka«va IV, 1,1, 7. sa yasaii varshish/Aa piirvardhe salasthuwa bhavati tam abhipadya ^apati. 2. Ap. (Katy. V, 3, 6). atrapi meshaw ^ameshiwz ^a karotiti va^asaneyakam. Madhy. II, 5, 2, 15. tatrapi meshaw ^-a meshiw ka. kurvanti. Kanva I, 5, i, 13. mesham ia. va api meshi/n ka. kurvanti. 3. Ap. (Katy.VII, 2, 34). (vntrasya kaninikasiti traikakudena/T^anenankte) yadi traikadukaw nadhigaWAed yenaiva kenawo'anenaM^iti va^'asaneyakam. Madhy. Ill, i, 3, 12. (traikadukam bhavati; yatra va indro vr/tram ahaws tasya yad akshy asit taw girim trikakudam akarot . . . .) yadi traikakudaw na vinded apy atraikakudam eva syat samani hy eva/lo'anasya bandhuta. Ka«va IV, 1, 3, 10. (tat traikakuda/K syat; yatra va indro vr?tram ahams tasya ha ya kaninakasa yat ^akshus tam etaw girim ^ak.ira trikakuda/w ; sa yat traikakudam bhavati iakshushy evaita* Xakshur dadhati) ; yadi traikakudam na vinded api yad eva kinka syat. 4. Ap. (Katy.VII, 3, 28). ush«ishe«a pradakshi«aw siro vesh/ayata iti vao'asa- neyakam. Madhy. Ill, 2, i, 16-17. sa pror«ute. Ka«va IV, 2, i, 11-12.
3a yat traikakudam bhavati iakshushy evaita* Xakshur dadhati) ; yadi traikakudam na vinded api yad eva kinka syat. 4. Ap. (Katy.VII, 3, 28). ush«ishe«a pradakshi«aw siro vesh/ayata iti vao'asa- neyakam. Madhy. Ill, 2, i, 16-17. sa pror«ute. Ka«va IV, 2, i, 11-12. athainaw pror«oti, — sa pronjoti. * See Weber, Ind. Stud. IV, p. 69. INTRODUCTION. xli the fact that 5vetaketu, the son of Uddalaka Aru;/i, the reputed teacher (and rivaP) of Ya^wavalkya, is counted by Apastamba among the Avaras or moderns, Dr. Biihler infers that the promulgator of the White Ya^us cannot have preceded Apastamba 'by a longer interval than, at the utmost, two or three hundred years.' That the two authors may not have been separated from each other by a longer interval seems likely enough ; but, on the other hand, Apastamba, by his remark, pays no very great com- pliment to the inspired texts of his own school, since Aruwa Aupave.yi, the grandfather of vSvetaketu Aru;/cya, is twice referred to in the Taittiriya-sa;;zhita^ The geographical and ethnical allusions contained in the 5atapatha-brahma;/a have been carefully collected by Professor Weber ^. With the exception of those in ka;/^as 6-1 o, as I have already remarked, they point almost exclusively to the regions along the Ganges and Jumna. In the legend about Videgha Mathava^ and his Purohita Gotama Rahugawa, tradition seems to have preserved a reminiscence of the eastward spread of Brahmanical civilisation. Among the peoples that occupied those regions, a prominent position is assigned in the 5atapatha to the closely-allied Kuru-Pa»Mlas. The Kurus occupied the districts between the Jumna and Ganges— the so- called Madhyadeja or middle country— and the Pa?7- mas bordered on them towards the south-east. According to Sat. Br. XIII, 5, 4, 7, the Pa^Ualas were in olden times called Krivi ; and a tribe of this name is evidently referred to in Rig-veda VIII, 20, 24 ; (22, 12)5, in connection with the rivers Sindhu and Asikni. The Kurus, on the other hand, arc not directly referred to in the Rik ; but a king Kuru^rava;/a, ♦glory of the Kurus,' and a patron with the epithet Kaurayawa are mentioned in the hymns. In Aitar. Br. VIII, 14, the Uttara (northern) Kurus, together with the Uttara-Madras, are said to dwell beyond the Himalaya. » See Brih Ar. 3, <;, where he is defeated by Ya^Jlavalkya in disputation. ^ Taitt. S.VI, i,9;2 ; 4, B, i- ' 1"^. Stud. I 187 seq. ♦ See the present volume, p. .04, with note.
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.
1intelligible why such portions should have been considered as of equal age to the body of the work ; in fact they would probably go back to about the same time as some of the earlier portions ; only that, owing to a longer state of uncertain transmission, they may have been more liable to changes and additions. If these tracts are not mentioned by Pa;/ini, it may be an accidental omission on his part, or he may not have been aware of their existence, for geographical or other reasons : we can hardly expect Paz/ini to have been so intimately acquainted with the Ya^us texts as Katyayana. As regards the dates of Katyayana and Pata/?^ali, I accept with Professor Biihler and others, as by far the most probable, the fourth and the middle of the second century B.C. respectively. Under the title of Va^asaneyaka, the ^atapatha-brah- ma;/a is quoted once in La/yayana's vSrauta-sutra IV, 12, 12 ; but I have not been able to find the passage either in the Madhyandina text or in that part of the Ka«va text which I have hitherto had at my disposal, viz. kandas I, II, IV-VII (Ka«va). Far more frequently the work is quoted, either as Va^asaneyaka or as Va^asaneyi-brahma;^a, by Apastamba, both in his ^rauta and his Dharma-sutras, On comparing one of these quotations in the Dharma- sutras (1,4,12,3) with the corresponding passage in the Madhyandina recension, Professor Biihler found that ' its wording possessed just sufficient resemblance to allow us to identify the passage which Apastamba meant, but dif- fered from the vSatapatha-brahma/^a in many details ^' From this he naturally inferred that Apastamba probably took his quotations from the Ka;/va recension. Now, although I have not been able to compare this particular passage with the Kawva text-, I have done so regarding a number of other passages quoted from Apastamba in Karka's commentary on the Katiya-5rauta-sutra. The result was that in no single case did Apastamba's quota- tions agree with the corresponding passages in the Ka//va, fifth Ka«va\ on the other hand, the Ka^vas have 8, instead of 6 adhyayas ; and in the fifth ki/ida. (,or sixth and seventh Ka«vas) they have together 7, instead of 5 adhyayas. 1 Biihler, kic. cit. p. xxv. ^ The oassage occurs in Madhyandina XI, 5, 6, 3. xl 5ATAPATHA-BRAHMAJVA. any more than they did with those of the Madhyandina text^. In some cases they came nearer to the one text, in others to the other. To several quotations, again, I could find nothing corresponding in either text.
2hyandina XI, 5, 6, 3. xl 5ATAPATHA-BRAHMAJVA. any more than they did with those of the Madhyandina text^. In some cases they came nearer to the one text, in others to the other. To several quotations, again, I could find nothing corresponding in either text. Now, supposing the quotations, as given by Karka, to be on the whole correct, there seem to be only two ways of accounting for these discrepancies, viz. either Apastamba did not mean to quote the passages literally, but only to give the substance of them ; or he had a third recension of the vSatapatha before him. While some passages would seem to be in favour of the former alternative, others would scarcely admit of this expla- nation. This question,however, requires further investigation, before it can be definitely settled. In connection with this question the fact will also have to be taken into account, that Katyayana, in composing his Va^asaneyi-pratij-akhya, seems to have had before him a different recension of the Samhiti, from those of the Ka;/va and Madhyandina schools^. Professor Buhler appears to be inclined to place Apa- stamba somewhere about the fifth century B. C. ; and though probably he himself does not consider the reasons he adduces as conclusive, they seem at any rate to show that that writer cannot have lived later than the third century B.C. From ' I select a few passages : — 1. Ap. (Katy.VII, i, 36). pragvamsasya madhyamam sthu/zara^am alabhya ^apaliti va^'-asaneyakam. Madhy. Ill, i, i, 11. sa purvardhyaw sthuwarae-am abhipadyaitad yas'ur aha. Ka«va IV, 1,1, 7. sa yasaii varshish/Aa piirvardhe salasthuwa bhavati tam abhipadya ^apati. 2. Ap. (Katy. V, 3, 6). atrapi meshaw ^ameshiwz ^a karotiti va^asaneyakam. Madhy. II, 5, 2, 15. tatrapi meshaw ^-a meshiw ka. kurvanti. Kanva I, 5, i, 13. mesham ia. va api meshi/n ka. kurvanti. 3. Ap. (Katy.VII, 2, 34). (vntrasya kaninikasiti traikakudena/T^anenankte) yadi traikadukaw nadhigaWAed yenaiva kenawo'anenaM^iti va^'asaneyakam. Madhy. Ill, i, 3, 12. (traikadukam bhavati; yatra va indro vr/tram ahaws tasya yad akshy asit taw girim trikakudam akarot . . . .) yadi traikakudaw na vinded apy atraikakudam eva syat samani hy eva/lo'anasya bandhuta. Ka«va IV, 1, 3, 10. (tat traikakuda/K syat; yatra va indro vr?tram ahams tasya ha ya kaninakasa yat ^akshus tam etaw girim ^ak.ira trikakuda/w ; sa yat traikakudam bhavati iakshushy evaita* Xakshur dadhati) ; yadi traikakudam na vinded api yad eva kinka syat. 4. Ap. (Katy.VII, 3, 28). ush«ishe«a pradakshi«aw siro vesh/ayata iti vao'asa- neyakam. Madhy. Ill, 2, i, 16-17. sa pror«ute. Ka«va IV, 2, i, 11-12.
3a yat traikakudam bhavati iakshushy evaita* Xakshur dadhati) ; yadi traikakudam na vinded api yad eva kinka syat. 4. Ap. (Katy.VII, 3, 28). ush«ishe«a pradakshi«aw siro vesh/ayata iti vao'asa- neyakam. Madhy. Ill, 2, i, 16-17. sa pror«ute. Ka«va IV, 2, i, 11-12. athainaw pror«oti, — sa pronjoti. * See Weber, Ind. Stud. IV, p. 69. INTRODUCTION. xli the fact that 5vetaketu, the son of Uddalaka Aru;/i, the reputed teacher (and rivaP) of Ya^wavalkya, is counted by Apastamba among the Avaras or moderns, Dr. Biihler infers that the promulgator of the White Ya^us cannot have preceded Apastamba 'by a longer interval than, at the utmost, two or three hundred years.' That the two authors may not have been separated from each other by a longer interval seems likely enough ; but, on the other hand, Apastamba, by his remark, pays no very great com- pliment to the inspired texts of his own school, since Aruwa Aupave.yi, the grandfather of vSvetaketu Aru;/cya, is twice referred to in the Taittiriya-sa;;zhita^ The geographical and ethnical allusions contained in the 5atapatha-brahma;/a have been carefully collected by Professor Weber ^. With the exception of those in ka;/^as 6-1 o, as I have already remarked, they point almost exclusively to the regions along the Ganges and Jumna. In the legend about Videgha Mathava^ and his Purohita Gotama Rahugawa, tradition seems to have preserved a reminiscence of the eastward spread of Brahmanical civilisation. Among the peoples that occupied those regions, a prominent position is assigned in the 5atapatha to the closely-allied Kuru-Pa»Mlas. The Kurus occupied the districts between the Jumna and Ganges— the so- called Madhyadeja or middle country— and the Pa?7- mas bordered on them towards the south-east. According to Sat. Br. XIII, 5, 4, 7, the Pa^Ualas were in olden times called Krivi ; and a tribe of this name is evidently referred to in Rig-veda VIII, 20, 24 ; (22, 12)5, in connection with the rivers Sindhu and Asikni. The Kurus, on the other hand, arc not directly referred to in the Rik ; but a king Kuru^rava;/a, ♦glory of the Kurus,' and a patron with the epithet Kaurayawa are mentioned in the hymns. In Aitar. Br. VIII, 14, the Uttara (northern) Kurus, together with the Uttara-Madras, are said to dwell beyond the Himalaya. » See Brih Ar. 3, <;, where he is defeated by Ya^Jlavalkya in disputation. ^ Taitt. S.VI, i,9;2 ; 4, B, i- ' 1"^. Stud. I 187 seq. ♦ See the present volume, p. .04, with note.
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.