puruṣaḥ); some of our later mss. (O.Op.R.D.) also give it, and it is to be regarded as the preferable reading, if there is such a thing in this case. In b, SPP. strangely reads in his saṁhitā-text āitad vr- and in his pada-text etat, his pada-'mss. having etat or āit—both, doubtless, by accidental misreadings*; the comm., however, gives etat, and makes it qualify vratena, being itself = etena! For nābhāu in d the comm. has yonāu.
*⌊If āitat is a "blundering extension of āit" one does not see why W. calls the pada-reading āit "an accidental misreading."—Meantime, in Oertel's edition of JUB., published in JAOS. xvi., we find (i. 48, p. 125-6) sa hāi ’vaṁ ṣoḍaçadhā ”tmānaṁ vikṛtya, sārdhaṁ samāit. tad yat sārdhaṁ samāitat, tat sāmnas sāmatvam; and (iii. 38, p. 197) tā ṛcaç çarīreṇa mṛtyur anvāitat. tad yat etc. On p. 234, Oertel suggests that we might regard samāitat and anvāitat as due to dittography of the following tat, "were it not for AV. xviii. 3. 40, anvāitat, which is protected by the meter." Cf. also Henry, Revue Critique, 1894, no's 39-40, p. 146.—See also SPP's full critical notes upon the verse, p. 160. It may be added that W's O. gives -padīmáṁnvāítád, and his Op. ánu: āitát.⌋
41. For the gods he chose death; for his progeny did he not choose immortality (amṛ́ta)? Brihaspati [as] seer extended the sacrifice; Yama left (ā-ric) his dear self (?).
Or, 'the dear body (tanū́).' Here too the variations from the RV. version (x. 13. 4) seem to be corruptions only. RV. has kám in b, correlative to that in a; for c it gives bṛ́haspátiṁ yajñám akṛṇvata ṛ́ṣim, and at the end prā́ ’rirecīt. The comm. explains ā rireca by samantād riktaṁ niḥsāram mṛtaṁ kṛtavān. ⌊See Ludwig's discussion of the verse, Ueber die kritik des RV.-textes, Abh. der k. böhmischen Gesellschaft der Wiss., 1889, no. 5, p. 46.⌋
42. Thou, O Agni, Jātavedas, being praised, hast carried the offerings, having made them fragrant; thou hast given to the Fathers; they have eaten after their wont (? svadháyā); eat thou, O god, the presented oblations.
The verse corresponds to RV. x. 15. 12, found also in VS. (xix. 66) and TS. (in ii. 6. 125). ⌊Disregarding īlitó,⌋ RV. differs only by reading kṛtvī́ at end of b; and VS. agrees with it in this, but has kavyavāhana for jātavedas in a; ⌊TS. agrees with AV. throughout⌋. Āp. (in i. 10. 14) and MB. (ii. 3. 17) have a verse that agrees with this in b and c, save that MB. has prā ’dāt for prā ’dās in c: but their a is abhūn no dūto haviṣo jātavedāḥ; and for d, Āp. has prajānann agne punar apy ehi devān, while MB. reads p, a. p. ehi yonim. The second half-verse occurs again below as 4. 65 c, d. Kāuç. (89. 13) makes the verse, with 4. 88, and with two verses not found elsewhere, accompany the feeding of the fire at the end of the piṇḍapitṛyajña. ⌊The forms ávāṭ and akṣan are treated, Gram. §890 a and §833 a. As for the sandhi ḍhḍh of the mss., see note to Prāt. i. 94.⌋
43. Sitting in the lap of the ruddy ones (f.), assign ye wealth to your mortal worshiper (dāçvā́ṅs); of that good, O Fathers, present ye to your sons; do ye bestow (dhā) refreshment here.
The verse is found, without variant, as RV. x. 15. 7 and VS. xix. 63. The comm. glosses aruṇīnām in a as aruṇavarṇānām mātṝṇām, without further explanation. Kāuç. does not quote the verse.
