Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Br. IV, 1, 4, 2; V, 3, 2, 43 IX, 4, 2, 16; Maitr. S. IV, 5,8; Taitt. Br. III, 1, 2, 7 (kshatrasya raga Varuxo sdhirfigat). INTRODUCTION. Xxiii as their king or ruler (Sat. Br. II, 5, 2, 34), just as they are with Indra (II, 5, 2, 27). One might thus expect that Indra would claim the same special connection} with the sacrificial horse as that which is conceded to Varuaa. The reason why this is not the case probably is that, in the Brahmaza period, the notion of the horse having, like the sun, originated from the cosmic waters had become as firmly established as was the traditional connection— nay, even identity *—of Varusa with the element of water generally. As regards Varuma’s and PragApati’s joint connection with the sacrificial horse, the Taitt. S. (II, 3, 12, 1) records the following legend which may perhaps have some bearing on this point :—Pragdpatir Varuz4yasvam anayat, sa svaom devat4m 4rAat, sa pary adiryata, sa etam varuzam katushkap4lam apasyat, tam nir avapat, tato vai sa varunapasad amufyata, Varuvo v4 etam grihnati yorsvam pratigrzhnati, yAvatossv4n pratigrzhviyat tavato varuz4# katushkapalan nir vaped, Varuzam eva svena bhagadheyenopa dhavati, sa evainam varuzapas4n mufkati :—‘ Pragdpati led up the horse to Varuxa: he (thereby) impaired his own godhead, and became racked all over with dropsy. He beheld that four-kap4la (cake) sacred to Varuna, and offered it, and thereupon was freed from Varuma’s noose; for Varuna seizes him who takes (receives) a horse,—as many horses as one takes so many four-kapdla (cakes) one ought to offer to Varuna: one (thereby) hastens up to Varuza with his (V.’s) own share, and he (V.) frees him from Varuza’s noose.’ The interpretation of this legend presents, however, some difficulties. Dr. Hillebrandt, ‘Varuza und Mitra’ (p. 64), translates the first sentence by—‘ Pragapati fiihrte dem 1 Since all the gods are concerned in the Asvamedha—whence the horse is called ‘vaisvadeva’—Indra would of course have a general interest in it. Indra is also associated with the horse in so far as he is said to have first mounted it, Rig-veda I, 163, 2,9. Indra’s two bays (hart) of course belong to a different conception. * Apo vai Varunas, Maitr. S, IV, 8, 5. XXiV SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA.
2Indra is also associated with the horse in so far as he is said to have first mounted it, Rig-veda I, 163, 2,9. Indra’s two bays (hart) of course belong to a different conception. * Apo vai Varunas, Maitr. S, IV, 8, 5. XXiV SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. Varuza das Ross fort !’—‘ PragApati led the horse away from Varuza’: this would undoubtedly make better sense, but, unfortunately, the construction of ‘ni’ with the dative in this sense would involve a decided solecism. SAyama, on the other hand, takes it in the same sense as we have done, and he explains that it is just by giving away the horse whose deity he himself is that Pragdpati forfeits his godhead?. He feels, however, afterwards constrained to assign to ‘ pratigréhvati’ the causal force of ‘he causes it to be taken, he gives it away,’ which is clearly impossible. But whatever the correct interpretation of the opening clause may be, it seems at all events clear that the sacrificial horse is represented in the legend as undergoing a change of ownership from the one deity to the other. When one compares the ceremonial of the Asvamedha, as expounded in the Brahmaaa, with the ritual indications contained in the two hymns already referred to, one is struck by the very marked contrast between the two. For whilst, on the central day of the Asvamedha alone, the ritual requires the immolation of not less than 349 victims bound to twenty-one stakes (p. 311, n. 1)—not counting two sets of eleven Savaniya victims (p. 383, n. 3) subsequently added thereto—the hymns (I, 162, 2-4; 163, 12) seem only to mention two victims, viz. the horse itself, and a he-goat. This latter animal which is to precede the horse when led to the sacrificial ground (and stake), and to ' This, no doubt, might possibly be taken to mean ‘ Pragfpati led away the horse for Varusa,’ but Dr. Hillebrandt could hardly have meant it in this sense, since his argument apparently is that the horse (like Varuza himself) represents the aqueous element, and that thus, by taking to himself the horse, Pragapati incurs dropsy. The exact point which interests us here, viz. the ‘relation between Pragdpati and Varuma as regards the sacrificial horse, lies outside Dr. Hillebrandt’s inquiry. ? In Dr. Hillebrandt’s interpretation, it is also not quite easy to see in what way Pragipati, by carrying off Varuza’s horse, impaired— griff an,’ attacked, assailed—his own godhead. One might possibly refer ‘ sv4m’ to the horse, but this would make the construction rather harsh. The verb ‘nt’ here would seem to refer to the leading up of the sacrificial horse to the offering-ground, either for being set free for a year’s roaming, or for sacrifice, for both of which acts the verb ‘ud-4-ni’—i.e. to lead up the horse from the water where it was washed—is used (Sat. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 1; 5,1, 16). INTRODUCTION. XXV
3to lead up the horse from the water where it was washed—is used (Sat. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 1; 5,1, 16). INTRODUCTION. XXV be slaughtered first in order to carry the welcome news of the sacrifice to the gods, is in one place referred to as Pdshan’s share, and in another as going forward to the dear seat of Indra and Pdshan?. Sankhdyana (Srautas. XVI, 3, 27-30), however, takes these statements of the Rishi to refer to two different he-goats, both of which he includes amongst the victims tied to the horse’s limbs, viz. one, sacred to Pishan, tied to the forehead, and another, sacred to Indra and Pdshan, fastened to the navel, of the horse*, The corresponding ‘paryangya’ victims recognised by the Maitrayawi Samhita (III, 13) and the White Yagus (Vag. S. XXIV, 1), on the other hand, are a black-necked he-goat for Agni, tied to the forehead, and a black or grey (syama) one, bound to the navel, and consecrated by the one authority to Pishan, and by the other to Soma and Pashan. But, curiously enough, the Taittiriya school (Taitt. Br. III, 8, 23; Ap. Sr. XX, 13, 12) recognises not only Sankhdyana’s two victims, but also the one for Agni; whilst in regard to the other victims also it differs considerably from the other schools of the Yagur-veda. Seeing, then, that there is so little agreement on these points even amongst different branches of the same Veda, one can hardly escape the inference that, in this respect at least, there was no continuity of ritual practice since the time of those two hymns. As regards the other points therein alluded to, the he-goat and horse are referred to ' Rig-veda S. I, 162, 2. ‘When, held by the mouth (by the bridle), they lead round the offering of the (horse) covered with rich. trappings, the allcoloured he-goat goes bleating in front right eastwards to the dear seat of Indra and Pishan. 3. This he-goat, fit for all the gods, is led in front of the swift horse as Pfishan’s share; like (?) the welcome cake, Tvash/r? promotes it, along with the steed, to great glory. 4. When thrice the men duly lead around the horse meet for offering along the way to the gods, then the he-goat walks first, announcing the sacrifice to the gods... . 16. The cloth which they spread (for the horse to lie upon) and the upper cloth and the gold, the halter, the steed, the shackle—these they bring up as acceptable to the gods.’—I, 163, 12. ‘ Forth came the swift steed to the slaughter, musing with reverent mind ; his mate, the he-goat, is led in front ; and behind go the wise singers.’ 2 According to the Taittirfyas, this second he-goat is tied to the cord surrounding the horse’s limbs somewhere above the neck of the horse. xxvi SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA.
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.
1Br. IV, 1, 4, 2; V, 3, 2, 43 IX, 4, 2, 16; Maitr. S. IV, 5,8; Taitt. Br. III, 1, 2, 7 (kshatrasya raga Varuxo sdhirfigat). INTRODUCTION. Xxiii as their king or ruler (Sat. Br. II, 5, 2, 34), just as they are with Indra (II, 5, 2, 27). One might thus expect that Indra would claim the same special connection} with the sacrificial horse as that which is conceded to Varuaa. The reason why this is not the case probably is that, in the Brahmaza period, the notion of the horse having, like the sun, originated from the cosmic waters had become as firmly established as was the traditional connection— nay, even identity *—of Varusa with the element of water generally. As regards Varuma’s and PragApati’s joint connection with the sacrificial horse, the Taitt. S. (II, 3, 12, 1) records the following legend which may perhaps have some bearing on this point :—Pragdpatir Varuz4yasvam anayat, sa svaom devat4m 4rAat, sa pary adiryata, sa etam varuzam katushkap4lam apasyat, tam nir avapat, tato vai sa varunapasad amufyata, Varuvo v4 etam grihnati yorsvam pratigrzhnati, yAvatossv4n pratigrzhviyat tavato varuz4# katushkapalan nir vaped, Varuzam eva svena bhagadheyenopa dhavati, sa evainam varuzapas4n mufkati :—‘ Pragdpati led up the horse to Varuxa: he (thereby) impaired his own godhead, and became racked all over with dropsy. He beheld that four-kap4la (cake) sacred to Varuna, and offered it, and thereupon was freed from Varuma’s noose; for Varuna seizes him who takes (receives) a horse,—as many horses as one takes so many four-kapdla (cakes) one ought to offer to Varuna: one (thereby) hastens up to Varuza with his (V.’s) own share, and he (V.) frees him from Varuza’s noose.’ The interpretation of this legend presents, however, some difficulties. Dr. Hillebrandt, ‘Varuza und Mitra’ (p. 64), translates the first sentence by—‘ Pragapati fiihrte dem 1 Since all the gods are concerned in the Asvamedha—whence the horse is called ‘vaisvadeva’—Indra would of course have a general interest in it. Indra is also associated with the horse in so far as he is said to have first mounted it, Rig-veda I, 163, 2,9. Indra’s two bays (hart) of course belong to a different conception. * Apo vai Varunas, Maitr. S, IV, 8, 5. XXiV SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA.
2Indra is also associated with the horse in so far as he is said to have first mounted it, Rig-veda I, 163, 2,9. Indra’s two bays (hart) of course belong to a different conception. * Apo vai Varunas, Maitr. S, IV, 8, 5. XXiV SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA. Varuza das Ross fort !’—‘ PragApati led the horse away from Varuza’: this would undoubtedly make better sense, but, unfortunately, the construction of ‘ni’ with the dative in this sense would involve a decided solecism. SAyama, on the other hand, takes it in the same sense as we have done, and he explains that it is just by giving away the horse whose deity he himself is that Pragdpati forfeits his godhead?. He feels, however, afterwards constrained to assign to ‘ pratigréhvati’ the causal force of ‘he causes it to be taken, he gives it away,’ which is clearly impossible. But whatever the correct interpretation of the opening clause may be, it seems at all events clear that the sacrificial horse is represented in the legend as undergoing a change of ownership from the one deity to the other. When one compares the ceremonial of the Asvamedha, as expounded in the Brahmaaa, with the ritual indications contained in the two hymns already referred to, one is struck by the very marked contrast between the two. For whilst, on the central day of the Asvamedha alone, the ritual requires the immolation of not less than 349 victims bound to twenty-one stakes (p. 311, n. 1)—not counting two sets of eleven Savaniya victims (p. 383, n. 3) subsequently added thereto—the hymns (I, 162, 2-4; 163, 12) seem only to mention two victims, viz. the horse itself, and a he-goat. This latter animal which is to precede the horse when led to the sacrificial ground (and stake), and to ' This, no doubt, might possibly be taken to mean ‘ Pragfpati led away the horse for Varusa,’ but Dr. Hillebrandt could hardly have meant it in this sense, since his argument apparently is that the horse (like Varuza himself) represents the aqueous element, and that thus, by taking to himself the horse, Pragapati incurs dropsy. The exact point which interests us here, viz. the ‘relation between Pragdpati and Varuma as regards the sacrificial horse, lies outside Dr. Hillebrandt’s inquiry. ? In Dr. Hillebrandt’s interpretation, it is also not quite easy to see in what way Pragipati, by carrying off Varuza’s horse, impaired— griff an,’ attacked, assailed—his own godhead. One might possibly refer ‘ sv4m’ to the horse, but this would make the construction rather harsh. The verb ‘nt’ here would seem to refer to the leading up of the sacrificial horse to the offering-ground, either for being set free for a year’s roaming, or for sacrifice, for both of which acts the verb ‘ud-4-ni’—i.e. to lead up the horse from the water where it was washed—is used (Sat. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 1; 5,1, 16). INTRODUCTION. XXV
3to lead up the horse from the water where it was washed—is used (Sat. Br. XIII, 4, 3, 1; 5,1, 16). INTRODUCTION. XXV be slaughtered first in order to carry the welcome news of the sacrifice to the gods, is in one place referred to as Pdshan’s share, and in another as going forward to the dear seat of Indra and Pdshan?. Sankhdyana (Srautas. XVI, 3, 27-30), however, takes these statements of the Rishi to refer to two different he-goats, both of which he includes amongst the victims tied to the horse’s limbs, viz. one, sacred to Pishan, tied to the forehead, and another, sacred to Indra and Pdshan, fastened to the navel, of the horse*, The corresponding ‘paryangya’ victims recognised by the Maitrayawi Samhita (III, 13) and the White Yagus (Vag. S. XXIV, 1), on the other hand, are a black-necked he-goat for Agni, tied to the forehead, and a black or grey (syama) one, bound to the navel, and consecrated by the one authority to Pishan, and by the other to Soma and Pashan. But, curiously enough, the Taittiriya school (Taitt. Br. III, 8, 23; Ap. Sr. XX, 13, 12) recognises not only Sankhdyana’s two victims, but also the one for Agni; whilst in regard to the other victims also it differs considerably from the other schools of the Yagur-veda. Seeing, then, that there is so little agreement on these points even amongst different branches of the same Veda, one can hardly escape the inference that, in this respect at least, there was no continuity of ritual practice since the time of those two hymns. As regards the other points therein alluded to, the he-goat and horse are referred to ' Rig-veda S. I, 162, 2. ‘When, held by the mouth (by the bridle), they lead round the offering of the (horse) covered with rich. trappings, the allcoloured he-goat goes bleating in front right eastwards to the dear seat of Indra and Pishan. 3. This he-goat, fit for all the gods, is led in front of the swift horse as Pfishan’s share; like (?) the welcome cake, Tvash/r? promotes it, along with the steed, to great glory. 4. When thrice the men duly lead around the horse meet for offering along the way to the gods, then the he-goat walks first, announcing the sacrifice to the gods... . 16. The cloth which they spread (for the horse to lie upon) and the upper cloth and the gold, the halter, the steed, the shackle—these they bring up as acceptable to the gods.’—I, 163, 12. ‘ Forth came the swift steed to the slaughter, musing with reverent mind ; his mate, the he-goat, is led in front ; and behind go the wise singers.’ 2 According to the Taittirfyas, this second he-goat is tied to the cord surrounding the horse’s limbs somewhere above the neck of the horse. xxvi SATAPATHA-BRAHMANA.
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.