MS. has in a the equivalent yájamānam; its b reads vihā́ya prajā́m anutápyamānāḥ; while TS. has prajā́(ḥ) nírbhaktā(ḥ) anutapyámānāḥ, and Ppp. nirbhāgatā bhāgād anutapyamānā. TS. and MS. make the lost drops only two: madhavyāù stokāú...tā́bhyām, with tāú instead of yā́n, and hence rarādha. The translation implies correction to madhavy-, as read by both the parallel texts and the comm.; SPP's text agrees with ours in reading the mathavy- of all the mss. (except three of SPP's, which follow the comm.). All the saṁhitā-mss. make the absurd combination naṣ ṭébhiḥ in d, seeming to have in mind the participle naṣṭá; SPP. retains naṣṭébhis in his text, while ours emends to nas tébhis, as given in the comment to Prāt. ii. 31. Ppp. has our second half-verse as its 3 c, d; it reads madhavyāṅ stokān upa yā rarādha saṁ mā tarāis sṛjad viçvakarmā. The comm. takes anu and tapy- in b as two independent words; he explains apa rarādha in c by antaritān kṛtavān, which is doubtless its virtual meaning. ⌊W's prior draft reads: "what honeyed drops he failed of"—that is, 'missed.'⌋
3. Thinking the soma-drinkers to be unworthy of gifts (? adānyá), [though] knowing of the sacrifice, [he is] not wise (dhī́ra) in the conjuncture (samayá); in that this man is bound having committed a sin, do thou, O Viçvakarman, release him for his well-being.
The offense here had in view is far from clear. Instead of adānyá (which occurs only here), TS. has the apparently unintelligent ananyā́n; MS. reads ayajñiyā́ṅ yajñíyān mány- 'thinking the unfit for offering to be fit for offering' (or vice versa); both have in b prāṇásya for yajñásya, and samaré for -yé. Ppp. gives the second half-verse as 2 c, d, and ends it with pra mumugdhy enaṁ. TS. MS. have no yát at beginning of c; TS. gives énaç cakṛvā́n máhi, and MS. éno mahác cakṛvā́n b-, and TS. eṣām for eṣá. The comm. explains adānyān as ajñatvāropeṇa dānānarhān, takes na in b as particle of comparison, and makes samaya equal saṁgrāma: "as if one by confidence in the strength of his own arm should think the opposing soldiers despicable"! The verse (11 + 11: 10 + 12 = 44) has marked irregularities which the Anukr. ignores.
4. Terrible [are] the seers; homage be to them! what sight [is] theirs, and the actuality (satyá) of their mind. For Brihaspati, O bull (mahiṣá), [be] bright (dyumánt) homage; O Viçvakarman, homage to thee! protect thou us.
The translation follows our text, though this is plainly corrupted. TS. makes b less unintelligible by reading cákṣuṣas for cákṣur yát, and saṁdhāú for satyám; Ppp. has in the half-verse only minor variants: bhīma for ghorās, ‘stu for astu, saṁdṛk for satyam. In c, TS. has mahí ṣát for the senseless mahiṣa, and the comm. presents the same; Ppp. reads bṛhaspate mahiṣāya dive: namo viçv-. TS. gives for d námo viçákarmaṇe sá u pātv asmā́n. In d all the pada-mss. have the strange blunder pāhi, for pāhí as required by the sense and by the saṁhitā-text.; and SPP. adopts the blunder, thus giving a pada-reading that is inconvertible into his own saṁhitā. The comm. takes ṛṣayas in a as "the breaths, sight etc.," and satyam in b as yathārthadarçi; and he founds on this interpretation the use in Kāuç. 38. 22, "against faults of vision."
5. The sacrifice's eye, commencement, and face: with voice, hearing, mind I make oblation. To this sacrifice, extended by Viçvakarman, let the gods come, well-willing.
