2. Sapless is the poison of the east, sapless what is of the north; also this that is of the south is exchangeable with gruel (karambhá).
That is, is no stronger or more harmful than gruel. Except our Bp., which has adharā́cyàm, all the mss. accent -rā́cyam, and SPP. follows them; our edition emends to -rācyàm, to accord with the two adjectives of like formation in a, b. Ppp. puts arasam after viṣam in a.
3. Having made gruel of sesame (?), teeming with fat, steaming (?), thou dost not rack, O ill-bodied one, him that has eaten thee merely from hunger.
The verse is full of difficulties and doubtful points. The translation implies in d emendation of jakṣivā́nt sá to jakṣivā́ṅsam, as suggested by BR., s.v. rup (Grill rejects it, but unwisely); Ppp. reads jakṣivīpyasya. The construction of the augmentless aorist-form rūrupas with ná instead of mā́ is against all rule and usage; the easiest emendation would be to nā́ ’rūrupas; Ppp. gives nu rūrūpaḥ. SPP. unaccountably reads rūrupaḥ in pada-text, both here and in 5 d and 6 d, against all but one of his pada-mss. in this verse, and also against Prāt. iv. 86, which distinctly requires rurupaḥ; and (in all the three cases alike) the pada-mss. add after the word the sign which they are accustomed to use when a pada-reading is to be changed to something else in saṁhitā. In c, the pada-reading is dustano íti duḥ॰tano; the case is noted under Prāt. ii. 85. Tiryàm in a is rendered as if tilyàm, from tila (so the Pet. Lex.); the comm. derives it from tiras, and renders it tirobhavam 'vanishing,' which is as senseless as it is etymologically absurd; Ppp. reads instead turīyam. According to Rājan. xvi. 23, a sort of rice (as ripening in three months) is called tiriya (tirima?), but the word appears to be only a modern one, and is hardly to be looked for here. ⌊I cannot find it in the Poona ed.*⌋ Grill makes the very unsatisfactory conjecture atiriyam "running over." In b, all our mss. (as also the comment on Prāt. ii. 62) read pībasphākám (p. pībaḥ॰phākám, which the comment just quoted ratifies), as our edition reads; SPP., on the other hand, prints pībaspākám (comm. pīvaspākam, explained as "fat-cooking") and declares this to be the unanimous reading of his authorities: this discordance of testimony is quite unexplainable. The translation implies emendation of the pada-reading to pība॰sphākám. Ppp. reads udāhṛtam for the problematic udārathím; but the latter is supported by RV. i. 187. 10 (of whose first two pādas, indeed, our a, b seem to be a reminiscence): karambhá oṣadhe bhava pī́vo vṛkká udārathíḥ. The comm. explains the word as udriktārtijanakam (Sāyaṇa to RV. entirely differently). ⌊in a supplementary note, Roth reports: Ppp. has pivassākam; R. has, p.m., pibaspā-, corrected to pībasphā-; T. has pīvaspā-.⌋ ⌊Correct the verse-number: for 6 read 3.⌋ *⌊Or is nirapa, at p. 22014, a variant of tiriya? The two are easily confused in nāgarī.⌋
4. Away we make thine intoxication fly, like an arrow (çará), O intoxicating one (f.); we make thee with our spell (vácas) to stand forth, like a boiling pot.
