Hymns of the Atharva-Veda — SBE Vol. 42 (Clarendon Press, 1897) page scans

* The word brahma which is catalogued with the trayf at XI, 8, 23; XV. 6,3 (cf. also XV, 3, 7) does not refer to the Atharvan, but is the broader and higher term for religious activity in general. Cf. RV. X, 71, 11, and see below, p. Ixvi.

* E. g. in the very same hymn (X, 7, 14) in which the Atharvafgirasa/ are

XXXIl HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.

In addition to the explicit designation of the Atharvan compositions as atharvangirasa/, bheshagani, atharvavzani, &c., there is to be noted in the Saunakiya-text of the hymns a decided advance in the association of the names Atharvan, Angiras, and Bhvzgu with the practices and conditions which these hymns are aimed at. The older, broader, and vaguer mythic personality of all three which appears, eg. in RV. VILL 495-193" X14, OAV T, 58); X, 92, 10, is still continued in the Atharvan (VI, 1,1; XI, 6,13; XVI, 8, 11-14): Atharvan, Angiras, and Bhvzgu are at times simply semi-divine, or wholly divine

mentioned as the fourth Veda the poet lapses into the more familiar traividya, in a stanza which, like st. 20, aims to state that the Vedas are derived from Skambha (Brahma), a monctheistic personification ; cf. Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, V,378.

1 A similar passage in a Siitra of the RV. (Asy Gvzh. IIT, 3, 1-3), on the same occasion, namely, the study of the Veda, does not hesitate to include the Atharvan along with many other Vedic texts. This does not argue conscious preference, any more than the Atharvan passage indicates-conscious exclusion ; cf. below, p. xliv.

INTRODUCTION. XXXIil

beings, whose office is entirely non-Atharvanic. But on the other hand the Atharvans appear at IV, 37,1 as slayers of the Rakshas (similarly IV, 3, 7); the Atharvans and Angiras fasten amulets, and consequently slay the Dasyus, at X, 6,20; and the name Bhyvgu appears at V, 19, 1 (cf. . TS. I, 8, 18,1; TB. I, 8, 2, 5) as the typical designation of a Brahmama, i.e. here, of an Atharvan priest. Such specialisations of these names are unknown in the RV. Especially noteworthy is the evident beginning of the asso- ciation of the name angirasa with aggressive witchcraft or spells, and the somewhat less clear corresponding correla- tion of the stem Atharvava with auspicious charms (see above, p. xviii ff.). Altogether the impression arises that the names Atharvan, Angiras, and Bhzzgu, connected with the redaction of the AV., have in the text of that Veda assumed, or commenced to assume, the office which the diaskeuast and the ritualistic texts of the Atharvan have definitely and permanently bestowed upon them. In the domain of the sruti, exclusive of the Rig-veda, i.e. in the Yagus-sawhitas, and the Brahmamzas, the position Se of the Atharvan is on the whole defined with the AV.in Sufficient clearness. It depends altogether on prchpech the practical character of these texts as ex- ponents of the great Vedic sacrifices, the srauta-performances : these, by their very nature, exclude any very direct interest in the systematic charms of the bheshagani and abhifarikazi. Such sorcery as is inter- woven with the srauta-performances has acquired inde- pendent expression in the metrical and prose formulas the Yagus-sashitas; it figures in the form and by the name of sacrificial formulas (yagtmshi) as part of the threefold Veda (trayi vidya). Thus the subject-matter of formulas like the following: ‘I dig (pits) that slay the Rakshas, destroy the spells that belong to Vishzu; that spell here which my equal or unequal has dug into (the ground) do I cast out ; I make subject here my equal or my unequal that plans hostile schemes against me’ (Tait. S. ee Ve, oii, 1.2; Maitr. 5. I, 2, 10. 11; Vag. S. V, 23 ff.; Sat. Br. Ill, 5, 4, 8 ff.), is by its very terms [42] c

XXXIV HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.

Atharvanic, and the practices by which its recitation is supplemented might be described in the Kausika-sitra. The formula yd asm4n dvéshti yas ka vaydm dvishmah, ‘he that hates us and whom we hate’ (shall perish, or the like), occurs countless times in the Yagus-texts, as well as in the Atharvan charms. The aims and the acts of the Atharvan are present at the Vedic sacrifice, as well as at the practices of private life ; the difference lies in the degree of applicability, and the degree of prominence: in the sruti-literature the sphere of the Atharvan is restricted to matters that are incidental and subsidiary, intended merely to pave the way for the main issue, the successful dispatching of the sacrifice to the gods, and the undis- turbed gratification of the priests (the ishfam and the pur- tam). Under these circumstances and at such a time pronounced hostility against the Atharvan would be a paradox, too silly even for the Yagus-texts and the Brah- mazas; no such hostility or repugnance is in evidence: that is reserved for a later and more reflective age.

In the first place then, the mythic personages Atharvan, Angiras, and Bhrzgu, whose proper names in the course of time are growingly restricted to the sphere of the Atharvan, continue in their pristine position of demi-gods. At Maitr. S. I, 6, 1 the Angiras are still gods, angirasds tva devanasz vratena»dadhe; similarly Tait. Br. I, 1, 4, 8, bhrzgtivam tvasngirasaa vratapate vratendsdadhami ; cf. also: Tait. Br, IU, 2;,7,°6 ; Maitr> Sc, 128 sjpNapeeemes 18 (SateBu J, 2,13 194, Katya Sn i538 Apast. Tei s 11,7, For Atharvan, see: LaiteS, Va 194957600, sen Br. I, 1, 10,4; Vag. S. VITI, 56; XI, 32. -And so innu- merable other instances. Needless to say, the descendants of the three divinities, conceived eponymically as the founders of families of A/shis, the Atharvaza, Angirasa, and Bhargava, enjoy the same rights, and hold the same position of honour as the other families of Réshis, it being reserved for the later Atharvan writings to extol them beyond measure, and to establish them as the typical teachers'. Thus Atharvan Daiva is the name of an ancient

* Cf. Weber, Omina und Portenta, Pp. 347.

Introduction, Xxxv

Seacher, -Sat.) Bro, XIV, -5,° 5;).22:5 695933528 ;. Dadhyare Atharvama, Tait. S. Va kh a. 6, os Sa pSet. ins IV, 1, 5, 18; VI, 4, 2, 3; the countless Angirasa, of which the RV. Piniletetnae counts no less than 45', e.g. Sat. Br. IV, 1. Boteernousin Gr XXX, 6; Ait. Bro .VIH,27, 135 Apast. Sr. V, 11,73; and the equally frequent Bhargava, Tait. S. waeie, 28. fissate rib, yp Ait. Bro Vil, 1. 5:5 Kaus?.Br. XXII, 4. Occasionally, doubtless, even the sruti feels the connection that has been established between these names and the sphere of Atharvanic literary activity, as when' the Kazh. S. XVI, 13 mentions a Rishi Bhishag Atharvana? (see Weber, Ind. Stud. III, 459); the Kaush. Br. XXX, 6, a Rishi Ghora Angirasa ; or when the Pazz. Br. XII, 8, 6 states that Dadhyaw#& Angirasa was the chaplain (puro- dhaniya) of the gods.

The manner in which the hymns of the Atharvan are alluded to in the srauta-texts is as follows. Ordinarily the texts are preoccupied with the sacrificial literature in the narrower sense, and hence devote themselves to the men- tion and laudation of the tray? vidya, either without recount- ing its specific literary varieties, or by fuller citation of the terms 7zk, siman, yagud. For these are substituted not infrequently other terms like stoma, uktha, sastra, udgitha. &c., special liturgical varieties, also derived directly from the sphere of the srauta-performances, and, in fact, strictly dependent upon these performances for their existence. On the other hand, whenever the srauta-texts mention, or make draughts upon other literary forms like itihasa, puraza, gatha, sditra, upanishad, and many others, the Atharvan literature is almost unfailingly included, and that too almost invariably in the following order: the traividya is mentioned first, the Atharvan holds the fourth place, and next follow in somewhat variable arrangement the types itihasa, &c.

1 Cf..Weber, Episches im vedischen Ritual, Sitzungsberichte der Koniglich- Prenssischen Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1891, p. 812 (46 of the reprint).

# The same apocryphal Rishi is reported by the Anukramamis as the author of the oshadhistuti, ‘the hymn to the plants,’ RV. X, 97; Vag. S. XII, 75-89.

Cc 2

XXXVI HYMNS OF THE ATHARVA-VEDA.

Thus the Taittirtya-samhité mentions 7zk, sdman, and
yaguk alone at IT, 4,°12) 73°5- 7, 13 V1, see Vee
1,43 12,1; the same categories are alluded to

The AV. in ; , A

fhe at II, 4, 11,6,in the expressions samnaz, yagu- pee sham, and ukthamadanam ; at III, 2, 9, 5. 6 ' in the expressions udgatrzv4m (with udgitha), ukthasamsinadm (with rikak), and adhvarytizam ; cf. also ish¢ayagushaZ, stutastomasya, sastokthasya at I, 4, 28, I. The only mention of Atharvan literature is at VII, 5, 11, 2, under the designation angirasak (without atharvazaz '), and here the text is as follows: rigbhyad svaha, yagurbhyah svaha, sdmabhya’ svaha, angirobhyak svaha, vedebhyak svaha, gathabhyad svaha, narasamsibhya# svaha, raibhi- bhyad svaha.

This also, in the main, is the nature of the references to
the AV. in the Satapatha-brahmava. Either the term
trayi vidya is used, or rzk, siman, and yagu

the are mentioned explicitly: I, 1; 4, 2. Cress arte tncoeal 6,)°45°929 2 IV 6) ROIS OPEN, BER SOS

t,t, 8379, 1, YO. 1120 °F" 11,4, eo ee 2, 45 FAS 2, 123 XS 4, 295 8o eo, 2 OE ee ee 8, 3-7; XIE, 9, 9323 49. XIV, aes s Oa, Gi” te these cases there is no mention of the Atharvan; but neither is there any mention of any other literary type that has a distinctive standing outside of the trayi vidya. On the other hand, the Atharvan is mentioned in a number of cases, every one of which presents also a lengthy list of addi- tional literary forms. Thus XI, 5, 6, 4-8, rikah, yagtimshi, — samani, atharvangirasaz, anusdsanani, vidya, vakovakyam, itihdsapurdvzam, gatha ndrasamsyah; XIII, 4, 3, 3 ff., rzko vedah, yagtimshi vedak, atharvazo vedad, angiraso veda, sarpavidya vedak, devaganavidyA vedahk, maya vedah, itihdso veda, purdvam vedak, simani vedak ; XIV, 8. a, 10; 6,10, G3" 9, Ste -[eiares Ar. It. 4 107 PUise 5, 11), rigvedo yagurvedak sdmavedostharvangirasa iti- hasad purdvam vidya upanishadah slokak sdtrazy anuvya- khyanani vyakhyanani; X, 5, 2, 20, adhvaryavas (yaguf),

1 Ct, above, p. xviii.

Introduction. Xxxvii

khandogah (siman), bahvrikahk (uktham), yatuvidad (yatu). sarpavidak . . . devaganavida#. Only a single Upanishad passage, XIV, 8, 14, 1-4 (=Brzh. Ar. Up. V, 13, 1-4). seems to mention, or rather hint at, the Atharvan in con- nection with representatives of the trayi vidya, without mentioning other texts’. The series is uktham, yagué. sAdma, kshatram; the passage possibly views the fourth Veda as the Veda of the Kshatriyas, or, more precisely, substitutes the act of kshatra, i.e. the performances of the kshatriya as Atharvanic by distinction. See, for this, p. xxv, above. | The Taittiriya-brahmavza mentions the Atharvan twice. once in accordance with the method described above, at _ III, 12, 8, 2, rzko yagtimshi sAmani atharva- Teeavem ia * this ngirasaz ... itihdsapurdazam. In the other Me abebey passage, TH, 12, 9, 1, the Atharvan is men-. tioned without the customary adjuncts, and that too before the Sadma-veda, to wit, rzkam praki mahati dig ufyate, dakshivam ahur yagusham apdrdm. atharvavam angirasa7z pratif#i, samnam udif#i mahati dig usyate. But it is of interest to note that in the sequel, where sundry symbolic and mystic correlations of the Vedas with the sun, &c., are established, the Atharvan is wanting, and the operations take place with vedais tribhiz. Thus, vzgbhiz pirvahne divi deva iyate, yagurvede tishZ/ati madhye ahna#, samavedenasstamaye mahiyate, vedair asinyas tribhir eti sirya#z. We shall not err in judging that the fourth Veda is mentioned in a purely formulaic manner, only because it is needed to fill out the scheme of the four principal directions of space; the real theme at the heart of the author is the traividya, as, e. g. in III, 10, 11, 5.6. Onthe other hand, it would be altogether erro- neous to assume either hostility, or conscious discrimina- tion against the Atharvan The Taittiriya-adrazyaka again falls into line in two passages, II, 9 and 10, presenting the texts in their most expansive form, rikah, yagtimshi.

? Conversely the trayi is catalogued with other texts (vakovakyam itiha- sapurazam), but without the Atharvan, at XJ, 5, 7, 6 ff.; cf. the same list Sankh. Grih. 1, 24, 8.