*⌊If we may trust Keçava (p. 33327-32), the verses are indeed four in number, and are vii. 74. 1 and 2, vii. 76. 1, and then vii. 76. 2. With each of the first three the performer pricks the boil with a colored arrow; and with the fourth verse (caturthyā: namely vii. 76. 2) he pricks it with a fourth arrow.—But why should Kāuç. in 32. 9 say caturthyā? are we to assume a gap in the text of Kāuç.?—Cf. Bloomfield's hypothesis, SBE. xlii. 558, n. 2, that vii. 74. 1-2 and 76. 1-2 together formed a single hymn for Keçava. They are so associated by the comm. at p. 4571, as Whitney observes in the preceding paragraph.⌋
Translated: Bloomfield, JAOS. xiii. p. ccxviii = PAOS. Oct. 1887, and AJP. xi. 324 (vss. 1 and 2); Henry, 29, 95; Griffith, i. 363; Bloomfield, SBE. xlii. 18, 557.
1. Of the red apacít's black is the mother, so have we heard; by the root of the divine anchoret I pierce them all.
The comm. makes at great length several discordant attempts to explain who the divine anchoret (múni) is. His explanation of apacit, fuller than elsewhere given, may be reported: doṣavaçād apāk cīyamānā galād ārabhya adhastāt kakṣādisaṁdhisthāneṣu prasṛtā gaṇḍamātāḥ: yadvā ’pacinvanti puruṣasya vīryam ity apacitaḥ. ⌊At vi. 83. 3, the apacít is "daughter of the black one."⌋
2. I pierce the first of them; I pierce also the midmost; now the hinder one of them I cut into like a tuft (stúkā).
The comm. says, at the end, yatho ”rṇāstukā ’nāyāsena chidyate tathā.
It is strange that the two following verses, which concern different matters, are combined with the above and with one another. But the hymn is not divided by any one of the authorities.
3. With the spell (vácas) of Tvashṭar have I confounded thy jealousy; also the fury that is thine, O master (páti), that do we appease for thee.
Some of the mss. (including our W.) combine manyús te in c.
4. Do thou, O lord of vows, adorned by the vow, shine here always, well-willing; thee being so kindled, O Jātavedas, may we all, rich in progeny, wait upon (upa-sad).
Nearly all the mss. (our Bp.E.p.m. are exceptions, with four of SPP's authorities) read tvā́m in a, and so do the mss. of the Kāuçika ⌊save Ch.Bū.⌋ and Vāitāna Sūtras in the pratīka; both printed texts give tvám ⌊with the comm.⌋. His full exposition of his uncertainty as to the meaning of jātavedas may be quoted: jātānām bhūtānāṁ veditar jātāir vidyamāna jñāyamāna vā jātaprajña jātadhana vā. The definition of the verse as triṣṭubh is lacking in the Anukr.
75 (79). Praise and prayer to the kine.
[Uparibabhrava.—dvyṛcam. āghnyam. trāiṣṭubham: 2. 3-av. bhurik pathyāpan̄kti.]
Like the preceding hymn, not found in Pāipp. Not used in Kāuç. (if iv. 21. 7 is intended in 19. 14). But the comm. says here that the ritual application in the rite for prosperity of kine has already been stated, referring, probably, to his exposition under iv. 21. 7, where he spoke of two verses, although the hymn had none after 7; possibly the two verses of this hymn are what he had in mind.
Translated: Ludwig, p. 469; Henry, 30, 96; Griffith, i. 364.
