Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Now, even a slight consideration of the ritual of the Purushamedha, as sketched out in these two works, must, I think, convince us that this form of human. sacrifice cannot possibly be recognised—any more than the one propounded in the Satapatha and Taittiriya Brahmanas— as having formed part of the traditional sacrificial ceremonial; and that, in fact, it is nothing more than what Sankhayana appears to claim for it, viz. an adaptation, and that a comparatively modern adaptation, of the existing Asvamedha ritual. Indeed, it seems to me by no means unlikely that the two different schemes of the Purushamedha originated at about the same time, and that they were intended to fill up a gap in the sacrificial system which seemed to require for Man, as the chief sacrificial animal, a more definite and, so to speak, a more dignified . place in the ceremonial than was up to that time accorded to him. The circumstance that the account of this sacrifice, as given in the Saakhdyana-sitra, presents some of the ordinary features of Brahmava diction, and that it is indeed actually assigned by the commentary to the Maha-Kaushitaka, should not be allowed to weigh with us, since thig is most likely done for the very purpose of securing for this scheme some sort of authoritative sanction of respectable 1 Dr, Garbe, in his translation, makes this and the subsequent rules refer (erroneously I think) to the animal victims of rule a1. INTRODUCTION. xlv
2INTRODUCTION. xlv antiquity’. For seeing that the older ritualistic works know nothing of it, it seems sufficiently evident that this human sacrifice could not possibly have been rite performed in Sankhayana’s time, since no proper priest—no genuine Adhvaryu and Udgatré, at all events—could have been found to perform it. And, indeed, it can scarcely be without significance that the Atharva-sitra is the only other work which recognises the ceremony; and that nearly all the hymns and verses used in connection with the immolation of the human victim are taken from the Atharvan and the tenth mamzdala of the Rik. Nay, the very fact that, in both Satra works, this sacrifice is represented as being undertaken, not for the great object of winning immortal life, but for the healing of the Sacrificer’s bodily infirmities, might seem sufficient to stamp the ceremony as one partaking more of the nature of the superstitious rites of the Atharvan priests than of that of the great sacrifices of the traditional Srauta ritual. If thus we find it impossible to recognise the Purushamedha as a genuine member of the sacrificial system, this is still more the case as regards the Sarvamedha, or all-sacrifice, a ten days’ performance which includes amongst its component parts, not only the Purushamedha, but also the Asvamedha, the Vagapeya, and the Visvagit with all the Stomas and Przshé#as,—it thus being the very ceremonial performance that might seem calculated to fitly crown the edifice of the sacrificial theory. As regards the ritualistic treatment of this sacrifice, the number of authorities dealing with it shows a further diminution from that of the Purushamedha. For whilst the Satapatha-brahmaza agrees with the S4nkhdyana and Vaita4na Sitras on the general features of its ritual—with the exception, of course, of the radical difference as to the character of the human sacrifice—the Taittiriya-brahmava, which gave at least the list of the symbolic victims of the Purushamedha, is altogether silent on the Sarvamedha; this ceremony being, ? On this and other passages referred to the Maha-Kaushftaka, cp. Professor Aufrecht’s judicious remarks, Ait. Br., p. v. xlvi SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, however, dealt with in some of the Stra works connected with the Black Yagus.
3On this and other passages referred to the Maha-Kaushftaka, cp. Professor Aufrecht’s judicious remarks, Ait. Br., p. v. xlvi SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, however, dealt with in some of the Stra works connected with the Black Yagus. The concluding chapter of the thirteenth ka#da contains a valuable and interesting account of the preparation of the burial-place or sepulchral mound, and the interment of the charred bones previously preserved, in an urn or jar, for some indefinite period since the burning of the dead body. Of especial interest, in this account, is the statement that the bones, when committed to the grave, are to be arranged in accordance with their natural position, the spaces between them being then filled up with bricks in such a way as to present, as in the case of the fire-altar, a fancied resemblance to the shape of a bird. It is difficult to see what explanation could be offered for this feature of the obsequies, except a vague belief in some form of future resurrection. The fourteenth kaxda, up to the beginning of the Brzhadaranyaka, is entirely taken up with the exposition of the Pravargya, an important, though optional and subsidiary, ceremony performed on the Upasad-days of Soma-sacrifices, Whilst the central feature of this sacrificial performance consists of a ceremony of an apparently simple and unpretending character, viz. the preparation of a hot draught of milk and ghee, the Gharma, which the Sacrificer has to take, after oblations have been made thereof to various deities, the whole rite is treated with a considerable amount of mystic solemnity calculated to impart to it an air of unusual significance. A special importance is, however, attached to the rough clay pot, used for boiling the draught, and manufactured and baked in the course of the performance itself; it is called Mahavira, i.e. the great man or hero, and Samr4g, or sovereign lord, and is made the object of fervid adoration as though it were a veritable deity of well-nigh paramount power. Although the history of this ceremony is somewhat obscure, the place assigned to it in the Soma-ritual would lead one to suppose that its introduction must have taken place at a time when the main procedure of the Somasacrifice had already been definitely settled. This con- INTRODUCTION. xlvii
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.
1Now, even a slight consideration of the ritual of the Purushamedha, as sketched out in these two works, must, I think, convince us that this form of human. sacrifice cannot possibly be recognised—any more than the one propounded in the Satapatha and Taittiriya Brahmanas— as having formed part of the traditional sacrificial ceremonial; and that, in fact, it is nothing more than what Sankhayana appears to claim for it, viz. an adaptation, and that a comparatively modern adaptation, of the existing Asvamedha ritual. Indeed, it seems to me by no means unlikely that the two different schemes of the Purushamedha originated at about the same time, and that they were intended to fill up a gap in the sacrificial system which seemed to require for Man, as the chief sacrificial animal, a more definite and, so to speak, a more dignified . place in the ceremonial than was up to that time accorded to him. The circumstance that the account of this sacrifice, as given in the Saakhdyana-sitra, presents some of the ordinary features of Brahmava diction, and that it is indeed actually assigned by the commentary to the Maha-Kaushitaka, should not be allowed to weigh with us, since thig is most likely done for the very purpose of securing for this scheme some sort of authoritative sanction of respectable 1 Dr, Garbe, in his translation, makes this and the subsequent rules refer (erroneously I think) to the animal victims of rule a1. INTRODUCTION. xlv
2INTRODUCTION. xlv antiquity’. For seeing that the older ritualistic works know nothing of it, it seems sufficiently evident that this human sacrifice could not possibly have been rite performed in Sankhayana’s time, since no proper priest—no genuine Adhvaryu and Udgatré, at all events—could have been found to perform it. And, indeed, it can scarcely be without significance that the Atharva-sitra is the only other work which recognises the ceremony; and that nearly all the hymns and verses used in connection with the immolation of the human victim are taken from the Atharvan and the tenth mamzdala of the Rik. Nay, the very fact that, in both Satra works, this sacrifice is represented as being undertaken, not for the great object of winning immortal life, but for the healing of the Sacrificer’s bodily infirmities, might seem sufficient to stamp the ceremony as one partaking more of the nature of the superstitious rites of the Atharvan priests than of that of the great sacrifices of the traditional Srauta ritual. If thus we find it impossible to recognise the Purushamedha as a genuine member of the sacrificial system, this is still more the case as regards the Sarvamedha, or all-sacrifice, a ten days’ performance which includes amongst its component parts, not only the Purushamedha, but also the Asvamedha, the Vagapeya, and the Visvagit with all the Stomas and Przshé#as,—it thus being the very ceremonial performance that might seem calculated to fitly crown the edifice of the sacrificial theory. As regards the ritualistic treatment of this sacrifice, the number of authorities dealing with it shows a further diminution from that of the Purushamedha. For whilst the Satapatha-brahmaza agrees with the S4nkhdyana and Vaita4na Sitras on the general features of its ritual—with the exception, of course, of the radical difference as to the character of the human sacrifice—the Taittiriya-brahmava, which gave at least the list of the symbolic victims of the Purushamedha, is altogether silent on the Sarvamedha; this ceremony being, ? On this and other passages referred to the Maha-Kaushftaka, cp. Professor Aufrecht’s judicious remarks, Ait. Br., p. v. xlvi SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, however, dealt with in some of the Stra works connected with the Black Yagus.
3On this and other passages referred to the Maha-Kaushftaka, cp. Professor Aufrecht’s judicious remarks, Ait. Br., p. v. xlvi SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA, however, dealt with in some of the Stra works connected with the Black Yagus. The concluding chapter of the thirteenth ka#da contains a valuable and interesting account of the preparation of the burial-place or sepulchral mound, and the interment of the charred bones previously preserved, in an urn or jar, for some indefinite period since the burning of the dead body. Of especial interest, in this account, is the statement that the bones, when committed to the grave, are to be arranged in accordance with their natural position, the spaces between them being then filled up with bricks in such a way as to present, as in the case of the fire-altar, a fancied resemblance to the shape of a bird. It is difficult to see what explanation could be offered for this feature of the obsequies, except a vague belief in some form of future resurrection. The fourteenth kaxda, up to the beginning of the Brzhadaranyaka, is entirely taken up with the exposition of the Pravargya, an important, though optional and subsidiary, ceremony performed on the Upasad-days of Soma-sacrifices, Whilst the central feature of this sacrificial performance consists of a ceremony of an apparently simple and unpretending character, viz. the preparation of a hot draught of milk and ghee, the Gharma, which the Sacrificer has to take, after oblations have been made thereof to various deities, the whole rite is treated with a considerable amount of mystic solemnity calculated to impart to it an air of unusual significance. A special importance is, however, attached to the rough clay pot, used for boiling the draught, and manufactured and baked in the course of the performance itself; it is called Mahavira, i.e. the great man or hero, and Samr4g, or sovereign lord, and is made the object of fervid adoration as though it were a veritable deity of well-nigh paramount power. Although the history of this ceremony is somewhat obscure, the place assigned to it in the Soma-ritual would lead one to suppose that its introduction must have taken place at a time when the main procedure of the Somasacrifice had already been definitely settled. This con- INTRODUCTION. xlvii
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.