1. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in a raw vessel, what they have made in one of mixed grains; in raw flesh what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
That is, doubtless, 'back to its maker': cf. iv. 18. 4; and, for the whole verse, iv. 17. 4. The Anukr. makes no account of the redundant syllable in c.
2. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in a cock, or what in a kurī́ra-wearing goat; in a ewe what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
Geldner discusses kurī́ra 'horn,' Ved. Stud. i. 130.
3. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in the one-hoofed, in the one with teeth in both jaws, among cattle; in a donkey what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
4. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in a rootless [plant], or [what] secret spell (? valagá) in a narācī́; in thy field what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
The pada-text does not divide valagám.
5. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in the householder's fire, also, malevolent (duçcít), in the eastern fire; in the dwelling what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
6. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in the assembly (sabhá), what they have made at the gambling-board; in the dice what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
7. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in the army (sénā), what they have made in arrow-and-weapon; in the drum what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
To make the meter complete in the two preceding verses, we need to make the unusual resolution -ya-am at end of a.
8. What witchcraft they have put down for thee in the well, or have dug in at the cemetery; in the seat (sádman) what witchcraft they have made—I take that back again.
The indefinite 'seat' may be used for 'dwelling,' or for 'place of sacrifice.' The Anukr. takes no notice of the metrical irregularities in a, b.
9. What [witchcraft] they have made for thee in the human-bone, and what in the destroying (? sáṁkasuka) fire, [what] dimming, out-burning, flesh-eating one—I take that back again.
'Human-bone' (if not a corrupt reading) is perhaps an epithet of the funeral fire = 'the fire which leaves of the human body nothing but fragments of bone.'
