a, b. The text of our translation of the first two Padas is that of the vulgate. This differs from the MS. reading so much as to amount to an independent composition on the part of the editors. They read, angira (cf. st. 6) asi gangida rakshitassi gangida ; the MSS. unanimously pre- sent, gangidossi gangidé rakshitassi gangidak. I am far from feeling that the editors have restored the ancient text. The difficulty with the MS. reading is the absence of any adjective or noun gangida with appellative meaning, and the cumulation of nominatives. The latter difficulty is paralleled closely by AV. IV, 12, 1, and it would seem almost as though in both passages the nominative had assumed the function of vocative. Neither difficulty exists for Sayazva, who translates the second gangidd as vocative and paraphrases the first as an agent noun, as follows: he gangida maze gangidossi yato gatandm krityandm krityakritam ka nigaravakarta:si (one MS. nigirava-) ato gangida ity ukyate... gam girati iti gangirak ... yad va gangamyate satrin badhitum iti gangidaz. I must say that I do not think it impossible that the original text had in mind some pun on the root gar, ‘swallow, in connection with the first gangida, or perhaps some other root, say, gigri, ‘wake.’ The latter suggestion would yield good
* My copy of the Santikalpa reads vatavatyadyam.
* Shankar Pandit, erroneously, here and in the following quota-
tion, substitutes Nakshatrakalpa for Santikalpa.
Xix, 34. Commentary. 671
sense, the first gangido, ‘wakeful,’ being parallel with rda- kshita in the second Pada.
a. The MSS. at the basis of Roth and Whitney’s edition read gagritsyas tripa#kasiz, and the editors, inspired doubt- less by RV. X, 34, 8, have emended akshakrityds tripaw##a- si, ‘the sorceries with dice, fifty-three in number.’ But the parallelism of the Rig-veda passage is every way doubtful (Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, p. 284; Weber, Uber die Kénigsweihe, Transactions of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences, 1893, p. 72 of the reprint) ; the bold emendation is at any rate not warranted by any too desperate condition of the text. The majority of the MSS. - used in Shankar Pandit’s edition (both Saszhita and Pada- pazha) have gagritsyas, which the editor, with Sayama, has changed to ya(Z) grétsyas; this might mean ‘the thieving female demons’ (Sayava, ya gritsyak gardhanasila yds... krityah); cf. grétsak at Vag. S. XVI, 25, and Mahidhara's scholium. Notwithstanding that g7vztsyas is the unanimous lectio difficillima of the MSS., perchance yet destined to be sustained, I have restored simply ya kritya!'; cf. for the juxtaposition of krztya and krityakrit (Pada b), AV. weet ao, 54. 4.4. 5. 0. AK 1d, PRs Xk, 1,.0.30 jo KIX, 45, 1. The Padapatha divides tripa#ka-asiz, ‘devouring fifteenfold, which would comport well with the reading gritsyas. The meaning ‘consisting of fifty-three’ assumed for pa#kasa, 2. in the Pet. Lex., in our translation, and by Sayama (tryadhikapa#hasatsamkhyakaz), thus rests upon a fragile basis; perhaps the Padapda//a is right; or, per- haps, the word means simply ‘fifteenfold, an adjectivised tripaviza-sas, with the well-known adverbial suffix. -sas, ‘ fold *’
1 Sayama describes the krztyd concretely as a figure, or the like, made of mud, wood, &c., mriddarvadina nirmitaputtalyadi.
* Cf. the Avestan fractional numeral adjectives thrishva- ‘a third,’ kathrushva- ‘a fourth,’ &c., which, in our opinion, are adjectivised locatives plural, thrishu, &c., ‘that which is in three,’
672 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.
e. The MSS. of the vulgate read sarvan vinaktatégaso, for which the edition substitutes vinashza-. This is Sayava’s reading (vinashéategasaZ hatavirydn), and with a slight alteration (vinishéa-) that of one of the MSS. used by Shankar Pandit. The latter recites all the readings of his manuscripts ; they are (besides vinakta-), bhanakti, bhinakti, minaktu, vinakti, and vinaktu. He has chosen the last, making the Pada, sarvan vinaktu tégasa/, ‘may (the gan- gida) expel all strength’ (note, however, the ordinarily neuter gender of tégas). We prefer the text of the editio princeps and Sayaza.
a. Sayazva, abhikarata utpaditasz nada dhvanizz, ‘the noise got up by the person practising witchcraft (against any one);’ cf. Kesava’s purushahava in the introduction to II, 4 (p. 281). The MSS., Samhita and Padapazha, read krvztrim anna-adam !
b. Our translation of sapta visrasa/ by ‘seven debilitating (charms)’ is a purely etymological conjecture; cf. expres- sions like visrastanga, ‘lax of limb,’ visrastafetana, ‘lax in mind, and the like. Sdayawa, visraszsanaz ... mdardhani- sh¢ieshu nasarandhradvaya-kakshurgolakadvaya-srotrak“i- dradvaya-mukhakuhara-rtipeshu saptasu #/idreshu abhi- karata utpadita sapta nishyandaZ, i.e. ‘discharges from the
seven openings of the head, induced by one practising witchcraft.’
The same stanza with variants occurs at AV. II, 4, 6.
e. The text of the vulgate has sasahé, a reading which is now supported by one of the MSS. at the base of Shankar Pandit's edition. The MSS. in general have sdsaha, Pada- paca sasaha, each with a considerable variety of accentua- tions. Sayava comments upon the following text for Padas c, d, vishkandham ogasa saha samskandham oga ogasa. For his explanation of vishkandha, see the note on II, 4, 1 c (p. 282); his comment upon sdzzskandha is as
XIX, 34. COMMENTARY. 673 follows: yena rogevza skandhaf sasznatah samlagno bhavati sa rogai samskandha#. This etymological rendering coin- cides with that in the minds of the occidental interpreters : the Pet. Lex., ‘name of a demon or disease ;’ Bohtlingk, ‘name of a disease ;’ and Zimmer, l.c., p. 391, ‘ contracting the shoulders, a disease.’ See, however, our note on II. Act ©10.:257).
a. The MSS. of both Samhita and Padapazha read
trishtva ; we with both editions trish ¢va. Sayama, trishu
lokeshu avasthanaya. |
ce. The name angiras for the plant seems to be trumped up to pun with gangidas.
a. Roth and Whitney's edition reads, dtho yad& sama-
bhavo, the basis of our translation: the MSS. have atho
pada na bhagavo (Padapa/fa, atho iti pada na bhagava/).
Shankar Pandit, upon the basis of Sayaza’s comment,
restores athospadana bhagava/. The explanation is, he
upadana upadiyate svikriyate krztyanirharavadivyapareshv
iti upadanaz. The meaning seems to be something like
‘thou who ait pressed into service for the purpose of
driving out sorceries. I do not believe in either the
restoration, or the explanation.
ce. I have again translated the text as restored by Roth and Whitney (cf. XIX, 35.1). The MSS. of the Saszhita read pura ta ugra grasata (upa), and those of the Pada- pata are divided in reading ugra# and ugra. With the latter we might have the following sense, ‘formerly a fierce (female demon?) ate of thee.’ Sdyava, te tvam (!) ugraz pramina/# pura grasate bhakshayanti (! plural). I feel by no means certain that the vulgate has restored the original text.
a. Asarika and visarika are translated upon the basis of
their etymology simply. Sdyava, dsarikasz sarvato him-
sakam etannamanam rogam tathd visarikasz visesheva
[42] X X
674 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.
hiszsakam etanndmanam ka balasam. To visarikam, cf. our note on II, 4, 2 (p. 284). :
b. For haldsam, see the note on V, 22, I1.
e. For visvasAradam, see the note on V, 22, 13.
XIX, 35. COMMENTARY TO PAGE 39.
For the employment of this hymn in the ritual texts,
see the introduction to XIX, 34. Sayaza defines it as
gangidamazibandhane. It has been translated by Groh-
mann, Indische Studien, IX, p. 418 ff.; and Zimmer, Altin-
disches Leben, p. 65.
a The MSS., both Saszhita and Padapaz¢ha, read dur-
hardak samghoram kakshud, and Sayavza explains the
otherwise unknown compound samghoram by atyanta-
kriram. I have refused the text as emended by Roth
and Whitney (durhardas tva7 ghordm) ; cf. IV, 9, 6.
e. For sahasrafaksho, see the note on IV, 20, 5.
e. The extra Pada, making a pankti out of the anush¢ubh,
is rather suspicious. The MSS. read gangidak; we, with
the vulgate, gangida ; cf. the note on XIX, 34, 1.
ce. The majority of the MSS., both of the Sazzhité and
the Padapaza, read bhavydd. Both editions follow the
minority of the MSS. in adopting the regular bhavyad.
a. The edition of Roth and Whitney has yé kz¢tvano,
an emendation of yak krizshzavo of the MSS., both Sam-
hita and Padapa¢da. Sayaza comments upon ya rishzavo
(devair nishpaditaz . . . gantaro himsakaé purusha/), and
Xix, 38. Commentary. 675
this reading has been adopted by Shankar Pandit. I know
not how to improve upon the suggestion of the occidental
editors.
b. The western editors have restored yd utd martye- bhyad, the basis of our translation. The MSS. have ya uté vabhrztenyaz (vabhrztenya), and vabhrzthenyak. Sayaza’s text has ya utd vavrztésnya%, upon which he comments as follows, ye anye manushyddiprerita badhaka vavrite va- vritire (!why does he comment, in the teeth of the grammar, upen the plural, instead of the singular, which would make equally good sense?). Shankar Pandit has adopted Sayaza’s text.
XIX, 38. COMMENTARY TO PAGE 40.
The matter of this little hymn, the guggult or bdellium, has been made the subject of an exhaustive investigation by Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, I?, 339; cf. also Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, p. 28. Sdayaza here defines it as, surabhiz ghrazasamtarpako gandhaz; cf. also his comment at II, 36,7. The ritual of the Kausika makes no mention of the hymn, but it is rubricated in an unim- portant way in Ath. Parisish¢as 4, 3. 41; 17,2. A previous translation is that of Grill’, pp. 39, 193. The Anukramazi, mantroktagugguludevatakam.
In most of the MSS. the bracketed hemistich forms the first half of st. 17; next, the last hemistich of our first stanza, together with the first of st. 2, makes up the second ; and, finally, the second hemistich of our st. 2 figures inde- pendently as a third stanza. Some MSS., however, make one stanza of the three last hemistichs (a tryavasdné, sc. rik). The bracketed passage is obviously secondary, though it stood in its present place at the time of the composition
? Cf. the introduction to XIX, 39, note. 2 Thus also both editions.
Xx 2
676 HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.
of the Parisishzas. It seems to have been attracted to its present place by the word yakshmaz in st. 2a of the text.
a. For arundhate, see IV, 12; V, 5; VI, 59, in these translations. Sdyawa overcomes the embarrassing presence of the word by turning it into a verb, rodham na kurvanti na pidayanti (!), and Whitney in the Index, in the same vein, emends the word to arundhata, though it is followed by the present asnute. The MSS. with accent, arundhate.
f. The MSS. have, mrzgd Asva ives rate, which we have
translated. Roth and Whitney emend mrzgad 7/sya ivesrate,
‘as antelopes flee from the wild beast.’
XIX, 39. COMMENTARY TO PAGE 5.
Neither the Kausika, nor Darila and Kesava, make any mention of this hymn, though it might. but for the com- mentaries, be understood to be included in the kush- thalingah (sc. rikah) in Kaus. 28,13. It is not, moreover, included in the takmandsanagava of the Gavamala, Ath. Paris. 32, 7: see Kaus. 26, 1, note. Its failure to appear in the latter is fortuitous, since the Gavzamala, like other Atharvan Parisishfas, draws freely upon the nineteenth book; Kausika’s silence, on the other hand, is in accord with the general attitude of this Sutra towards the nine- teenth (and twentieth) books of the Samhita ; see Kausika, Introduction, p. xl. Sayava in his introduction to the hymn says that the hymn is employed in the Ratrikalpa}, on the occasion when incense of kush¢/a is offered (to whom ?) in connection with AV. XIX, 34, etu deva/ iti shash¢/az siiktam (sc. pazkamesnuvake) asya ratrikalpe kush//apra- dane viniyozaz pirvasiktasamaya (XIX, 38) uktaz.
The hymn has been translated by Ludwig, Der Rigveda,
III, 198 ff.; cf. also Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, Index,
p. 457b. For the nature of the kush¢a, see the introduc-
tion to V, 4.
* ‘The quotation occurs neither in the Pish/aratryah Kalpa (Ath, Paris. 6), nor in the Aratrika (Ath. Paris. 7), but in the Purohita- karma (Ath. Paris. 4, 4), where it is quoted together with XIX, 38.