Sanskrit Grammar/Chapter XI
THE AORIST SYSTEMS.
824. Under the name of aorist are included (as was pointed out above, 532) three quite distinct formations, each of which has its sub-varieties: namely —
I. A simple aorist (equivalent to the Greek "second aorist"), analogous in all respects as to form and inflection with the imperfect. It has two varieties: 1. the root-aorist, with a tense-stem identical with the root (corresponding to an imperfect of the root-class); 2. the a-aorist, with a tense-stem ending in अ á, or with union-vowel अ a before the endings (corresponding to an imperfect of the á-class).
II. 3. A reduplicating aorist, perhaps in origin identical with an imperfect of the reduplicating class, but having come to be separated from it by marked peculiarities of form. It usually has a union-vowel अ a before the endings, or is inflected like an imperfect of one of the a-classes; but a few forms occur in the Veda without such vowel.III. A sigmatic or sibilant aorist (corresponding to the Greek "first aorist"), having for its tense-sign a स् s added to the root, either directly or with a preceding auxiliary इ i; its endings are usually added immediately to the tense-sign, but in a small number of roots with a union-vowel अ a; a very few roots also are increased by स् s for its formation; and according to these differences it falls into four varieties: namely, A. without union-vowel अ a before endings; 4. s-aorist, with स् s alone added to the root; 5. iṣ-aorist, the same with interposed इ i; 6. siṣ-aorist, the same as the preceding with स् s added at the end of the root; B. with union-vowel अ a, 7. sa-aorist.
825. All these varieties are bound together and made into a single complex system by certain correspondences of form and meaning. Thus, in regard to form, they are all alike, in the indicative, augment-preterits to which there does not exist any corresponding present; in regard to meaning, although in the later or classical language they are simply preterits, exchangeable with imperfects and perfects, they all alike have in the older language the general value of a completed past or "perfect", translatable by have done and the like.
826. The aorist-system is a formation of infrequent occurrence in much of the classical Sanskrit (its forms are found, for example, only twenty-one times in the Nala, eight in the Hitopadeça, seven in Manu, six each in the Bhagavad-Gītā and Çakuntalā, and sixty-six times, from fourteen roots, in the first book, of about 2600 lines, of the Rāmāyaṇa: compare 927 b), and it possesses no participle, nor any modes (excepting in the prohibitive use of its augmentless forms: see 579; and the so-called precative: see 921 ff.); in the older language, on the other hand, it is quite common, and has the whole variety of modes belonging to the present, and sometimes participles. Its description, accordingly, must be given mainly as that of a part of the older language, with due notice of its restriction in later use.
827. a. In the RV., nearly half the roots occurring show aorist forms, of one or another class; in the AV., rather less than one third; and in the other texts of the older language comparatively few aorists occur which are not found in these two.
b. More than fifty roots, in RV. and AV. together, make aorist forms of more than one class (not taking into account the reduplicated or "causative" aorist); but no law appears to underlie this variety; of any relation such as is taught by the grammarians, between active of one class and middle of another as correlative, there is no trace discoverable.
c. Examples are: of classes 1 and 4, adhām and dhāsus from √dhā, ayuji and ayukṣata from √yuj; — of 1 and 5, agrabham and agrabhīṣma from √grabh, mṛṣṭhās and marṣiṣṭhās from √mṛṣ; — of 1 and 2, ārta and arāt from √ṛ; — of 2 and 4, avidam and avitsi from √vid find, anijam and anāikṣīt from √nij; — of 2 and 5, sanéma and asāniṣam from √san; of 2 and 7, aruham and arukṣat from √ruh; — of 4 and 5, amatsus and amādiṣus from √mad; — of 4 and 6, hāsmahi and hāsiṣus from √hā; — of 1 and 2 and 4, atnata and atanat and atān from √tan; — of 1 and 4 and 5, abudhran and ábhutsi and bódhiṣat from √budh, ástar and stṛṣīya and astarīs from √stṛ. Often the second, or second and third, class is represented by only an isolated form or two.
828. This is, of the three principal divisions of aorist, the one least removed from the analogy of forms already explained; it is like an imperfect, of the root-class or of the á-class, without a corresponding present indicative, but with (more or less fragmentarily) all the other parts which go to make up a complete present-system.
829. a. This formation is in the later language limited to a few roots in आ ā and the root भू bhū, and is allowed to be made in the active only, the middle using instead the s-aorist (4), or the iṣ-aorist (5).
b. The roots in आ ā take उस् us as 3d pl. ending, and, as usual, lose their आ ā before it; भू bhū (as in the perfect: 793 a) retains its vowel unchanged throughout, inserting व् v after it before the endings अम् am and अन् an of 1st sing. and 3d pl. Thus:
For the classical Sanskrit, this is the whole story.
830. In the Veda, these same roots are decidedly the most frequent and conspicuous representatives of the formation: especially the roots gā, dā, dhā, pā drink, sthā, bhū; while sporadic forms are made from jñā, prā, sā, hā. As to their middle forms, see below, 834 a.
a. Instead of abhūvam, RV. has twice abhuvam. BhP. has agan, 3d pl., instead of agus.
831. But aorists of the same class are also made from a number of roots in ṛ, and a few in i- and u-vowels (short or long) — with, as required by the analogy of the tense with an imperfect of the root-class, guṇa-strengthening in the three persons of the singular.
a. Thus (in the active), from √çru, áçravam and áçrot; from √çri, áçres and áçret; from √kṛ make, ákaram and ákar (for akars and akart); from vṛ enclose, ā́var (585 a); and so ástar, aspar. Dual and plural forms are much less frequent than singular; but for the most part they also show an irregular strengthening of the root-vowel: thus (including augmentless forms), ákarma and karma and ákarta, vartam, spartam, áhema and áhetana, bhema, açravan; regular are only avran, ákran, ahyan, and áçriyan.
832. Further, from a few roots with medial (or initial) vowel capable of guṇa-strengthening and having in general that strengthening only in the singular.
a. Thus, ábhedam and abhet from √bhid; ámok from √muc; yojam from √yuj; rok (VS.) from √ruj; arodham and arudhma from √rudh; avart from √vṛt; várk from √vṛj (AV. has once avṛk); adarçam from √dṛç, ā́rdhma from √ṛdh; and adṛçan, avṛjan, açvitan. But chedma, with guṇa, from √chid, and adarçma (TS.) from √dṛç.
833. Again, from a larger number of roots with a as radical vowel:
a. Of these, gam (with n for m when final or followed by m: 143 a, 212 a) is of decidedly most frequent occurrence, and shows the greatest variety of forms: thus, ágamam, ágan (2d and 3d sing.), áganma, aganta (strong form), ágman. The other cases are akran from √kram; átan from √tan; abhrāṭ from √bhrāj; askan from √skand; asrat from √sraṅs (? VS.); dhak and daghma from √dagh; ā́naṭ (585 a) and anaṣṭām from √naç; ághas or aghat, ághastām, aghasta, and ákṣan (for aghsan, like agman) from √ghas; and the 3d pll. in us, ákramus, ayamus, dabhús, nṛtus (pf.?), mandús.
834. So far only active forms have been considered. In the middle, a considerable part of the forms are such as are held by the grammarians (881) to belong to the s-aorist, with omission of the s: they doubtless belong, however, mostly or altogether, here. Thus:
a. From roots ending in vowels, we have adhithās, adhita (also ahita), and adhīmahi; adithās, adita, and adimahi (and adīmahi from √dā cut); áçīta (?); sīmáhi; ásthithās and ásthita and ásthiran, forms of ā-roots; — of ṛ-roots, akri, ákṛthās, ákṛta, akrātām, ákrata (and the anomalous kránta); avri, avṛthās, avṛta; ārta, ārata; mṛthās, amṛta; dhṛthās; adṛthās; astṛta; ahṛthās; gūrta; — of i and u roots, the only examples are ahvi (? AV., once), áhūmahi, and ácidhvam. The absence of any analogies whatever for the omission of a s in such forms, and the occurrence of avri and akri and ákrata, show that their reference to the s-aorist is probably without sufficient reason.
b. As regards roots ending in consonants, the case is more questionable, since loss of s after a final consonant before thās and ta (and, of course, dhvam) would be in many cases required by euphonic rule (233 c ff.). We find, however, such unmistakable middle inflection of the root-aorist as ayuji, áyukthās, áyukta, ayujmahi, áyugdhvam, áyujran; ā́ṣṭa and ā́çata; náṅçi; apadi (1st sing.) and apadmahi and apadran; ámanmahi; gánvahi and áganmahi and ágmata; atnata; ájani (1st sing.) and ajñata (3d pl.); from √gam are made agathās and agata, from √tan, atathās and átata, and from √man, amata, with treatment of the final like that of han in present inflection (637). The ending ran is especially frequent in 3d pl., being taken by a number of verbs which have no other middle person of this aorist: thus, agṛbhran, ásṛgran, adṛçran, abudhran, ávṛtran, ajuṣran, akṛpran, aspṛdhran, avasran, áviçran; and ram is found beside ran in ádṛçram, ábudhram, ásṛgram.
c. From roots of which the final would combine with s to kṣ, it seems more probable that aorist-forms showing k (instead of ṣ) before the ending belong to the root-aorist: such are amukthās (and ámugdhvam), apṛkthās and apṛkta, ábhakta, avṛkta, asakthās and asakta, rikthās, vikthās and vikta, arukta; apraṣṭa, ayaṣṭa, áspaṣṭa, asṛṣṭhās and ásṛṣṭa, and mṛṣṭhās would be the same in either case.
d. There remain, as cases of more doubtful belonging, and probably to be ranked in part with the one formation and in part with the other, according to their period and to the occurrence of other persons: chitthās, nutthā́s and ánutta and ánuddhvam, patthās, bhitthās, amatta, atapthās, alipta, asṛpta; and finally, árabdha, alabdha, aruddha, abuddha, ayuddha, and drogdhās (MBh.: read drugdhās): see 883.
835. Subjunctive. In subjunctive use, forms identical with the augmentless indicative of this aorist are much more frequent than the more proper subjunctives. Those to which no corresponding form with augment occurs have been given above; the others it is unnecessary to report in detail.
836. a. Of true subjunctives the forms with primary endings are quite few. In the active, kárāṇi, gāni, gamāni (for bhuvāni, see below, c); kárasi; sthāti, dā́ti and dhā́ti (which are almost indicative in value), karati, joṣati, padāti, bhédati, rādhati, varjati; sthāthas, karathas and karatas, darçathas, çravathas and çrávatas; and (apparently) karanti, gámanti. In the middle, joṣase; idhaté (?), kárate, bhójate, yojate, várjate; dhéthe and dhāithe; karāmahe, dhāmahe, gámāmahāi.
b. Forms with secondary endings are, in the active, dárçam, bhojam, yojam; káras, tárdas, párcas, yámas, rādhās, váras; karat, gámat, garat, jóṣat, daghat, padāt, yamat, yodhat, rādhat, várat, vártat, çrávat, sághat, spárat; kárāma, gamāma, rādhāma; gáman, garan, dárçan, yaman. No middle forms are classifiable with confidence here.
c. The series bhuvam, bhúvas, bhúvat, bhúvan, and bhuvāni (compare abhuvam: 830 a), and the isolated çrúvat, are of doubtful belongings; with a different accent, they would seem to be of the next class; here, a guṇa-strengthening would be more regular (but note the absence of guṇa in the aorist indicative and the perfect of √bhū).
837. Optative. The optative active of this aorist constitutes, with a s interposed between mode-sign and personal endings (567), the precative active of the Hindu grammarians, and is allowed by them to be made from every verb, they recognizing no connection between it and the aorist. But in the 2d sing. the interposed s is not distinguishable from the personal ending; and, after the earliest period (see 838), the ending crowds out the sibilant in the 3d sing., which thus comes to end in yāt instead of yās (compare 555 a).
a. In the older language, however, pure optative forms, without the s, are made from this tense. From roots in ā occur (with change of ā to e before the y: 250 d) deyām, dheyām and dheyus, and stheyāma; in u-vowels, bhūyā́ma; in ṛ, kriyāma; in consonants, açyā́m and açyā́ma and açyus, vṛjyām, çakyām, yujyāva and yujyā́tām, sāhyāma, and tṛdyus.
b. The optative middle of the root-aorist is not recognized by the Hindu grammarians as making a part of the precative formation. The RV. has, however, two precative forms of it, namely padīṣṭá and mucīṣṭa. Much more common in the older language are pure optative forms: namely, açīya and açīmáhi (this optative is especially common), indhīya, gmīya, murīya, rucīya; arīta, uhīta, vurīta; idhīmahi, naçīmahi, nasīmahi, pṛcīmahi, mudīmahi, yamīmahi; and probably, from ā-roots, sīmáhi and dhīmahi (which might also be augmentless indicative, since adhīmahi and adhītām also occur). All these forms except the three in 3d sing. might be precative according to the general understanding of that mode, as being of persons which even by the native authorities are not claimed ever to exhibit the inserted sibilant.
838. Precative active forms of this aorist are made from the earliest period of the language. In RV., they do not occur from any root which has not also other aorist forms of the same class to show. The RV. forms are: 1st sing., bhūyāsam; 2d sing., avyās, jñeyās, bhūyā́s, mṛdhyās, sahyās; 3d sing. (in -yās, for -yāst; RV. has no 3d sing, in yāt, which is later the universal ending), avyās, açyās, ṛdhyās, gamyā́s, daghyās, peyās, bhūyā́s, yamyās, yūyās, vṛjyās, çrūyās, sahyās; 1st pl., kriyāsma (beside kriyāma: 837 a). AV. has six 1st persons sing, in -yā́sam, one 2d in -yā́s, one 3d in -yāt (and one in -yās, in a RV. passage), three 1st pl. in -yā́sma (beside one in yāma, in a RV. passage), and the 2d bhūyāstha (doubtless a false reading: TB. has -sta in the corresponding passage). From this time on, the pure optative forms nearly disappear (the exceptions are given in 837 a). But the precative forms are nowhere common, excepting as made from √bhū; and from no other root is anything like a complete series of persons quotable (only bhūyāsva and bhūyāstām being wanting; and these two persons have no representative from any root). All together, active optative or precative forms are made in the older language from over fifty roots; and the epic and classical texts add them from hardly a dozen more: see further 925.
839. Imperative. Imperative forms of the root-aorist are not rare in the early language. In the middle, indeed, almost only the 2d sing. occurs: it is accented either regularly, on the ending, as kṛṣvá, dhiṣvá, yukṣvá, or on the root, as mátsva, yákṣva, váṅsva, rā́sva, sákṣva; dīṣva and māsva are not found with accent; the 2d pl. is represented by kṛdhvam, voḍhvam. In the active, all the persons (2d and 3d) are found in use; examples are: 2d sing., kṛdhí, vṛdhi, çagdhí, çrudhí, gadhi, yaṁdhí, gahi, māhi, sāhi, mogdhi; 3d sing., gaṁtu, dātu, aṣṭu, çrótu, sótu; 2d du., dātam, jitam, çaktam, çrutám, bhūtám, spṛtám, gatám, riktám, voḍham, sitam, sutám; 3d du., only gaṁtām, dātām, voḍhā́m; 2d pl., gātá, bhūtá, çruta, kṛta, gata, dāta, dhātana; 3d pl., only dhāntu, çruvantu. These are the most regular forms; but irregularities as to both accent and strengthening are not infrequent. Thus, strong forms in 2d du. and pl. are yaṁtám, varktam, vartam; kárta, gáṁta (once gáṁtá), yaṁta, vartta, heta, çróta, sóta; and, with tana, kártana, gáṁtana, yaṁtana, sotana, and the irregular dhetana (√dhā); in 3d du., gāṁtām. Much more irregular are yódhi (instead of yuddhí) from √yudh, and bodhí from both √budh and √bhū (instead of buddhí and bhūdhí). A single form (3d sing.) in tāt is found, namely çastāt. We find kṛdhi also later (MBh. BhP.).
a. As to 2d persons singular in si from the simple root used in an imperative sense, see above, 624.
840. In the oldest language, of the RV., are found a number of participles which must be reckoned as belonging to this formation.
a. In the active, they are extremely few: namely, kránt, citánt (?), gmánt, sthā́nt, bhidánt, vṛdhánt, dyutant- (only in composition), and probably ṛdhánt. And BhP. has mṛṣant (but probably by error, for mṛṣyant).
b. In the middle, they are in RV. much more numerous. The accent is usually on the final of the stem: thus, arāṇá, idhāṇá, krāṇá, juṣāṇá, tṛṣāṇá, nidāná, piçāná, pṛcāná, prathāná, budhāná, bhiyāná, manāná, mandāná, yujāná, rucāná, vipāná, vrāṇá, urāṇá, çubhāná, sacāná, suvāná or svāná, sṛjāná, spṛdhāná, hiyāná; — but sometimes on the root-syllable: thus, cítāna, cyávāna, rúhāṇa, úhāna (pres.?), vásāna, çúmbhāna; — while a few show both accentuations (compare 619 d): thus, dṛçāná and dṛ́çāna, dyutāná and dyútāna, yatāná and yátāna; and cetāna and hrayāṇa occur only in composition. A very few of these are found once or twice in other texts, namely citāna, dyutāna, ruhāṇa, vasāna, suvāna; and -kupāna occurs once in Āpast. (xiv. 28. 4).
841. All together, the roots exhibiting in the older language forms which are with fair probability to be reckoned to the root-aorist-system are about a hundred and thirty; over eighty of them make such forms in the RV.
842. A middle third person singular, of peculiar formation and prevailingly passive meaning, is made from many verbs in the older language, and has become a regular part of the passive conjugation, being, according to the grammarians, to be substituted always for the proper third person of any aorist middle that is used in a passive sense.
843. This person is formed by adding इ i to the root, which takes also the augment, and is usually strengthened.
a. The ending i belongs elsewhere only to the first person; and this third person apparently stands in the same relation to a first in i as do, in the middle voice, the regular 3d sing. perfect, and also the frequent Vedic 3d sing. present of the root-class (613), which are identical in form with their respective first persons. That a fuller ending has been lost off is extremely improbable; and hence, as an aorist formation from the simple root, this is most properly treated here, in connection with the ordinary root-aorist.
844. Before the ending इ i, a final vowel, and usually also a medial अ a before a single consonant, have the vṛddhi-strengthening; other medial vowels have the guṇa-strengthening if capable of it (240); after final आ ā is added य् y.
a. Examples (all of them quotable from the older language) are: from roots ending in ā, ájñāyi, ádhāyi, ápāyi; in other vowels, áçrāyi, ástāvi, áhāvi, ákāri, ástāri; — from roots with medial i, u, ṛ, aceti, ácchedi, açeṣi, ábodhi, ámoci, áyoji, ádarçi, asarji, varhi; from roots with medial a strengthened, agāmi, ápādi, ayāmi, avāci, vāpi, ásādi (these are all the earlier cases); with a unchanged, only ájani (and RV. has once jā́ni), and, in heavy syllables, ámyakṣi, vandi, çaṅsi, syandi; with medial ā, ábhrāji, árādhi; — from roots with initial vowel, ārdhi (only case).
b. According to the grammarians, certain roots in am, and √vadh, retain the a unchanged: quotable are ajani (or ajāni), agami (or agāmi), asvani, avadhi, also araci; and there are noted besides, from roots sometimes showing a nasal, adaṅçi, arambhi, arandhi, ajambhi, abhañji or abhāji, alambhi (always, with prepositions) or alābhi, astambhi; ÇB. has asañji.
c. Augmentless forms, as in all other like cases, are met with, with either indicative or subjunctive value: examples (besides the two or three already given) are: dhā́yi, çrā́vi, bhāri, reci, védi, roci, jáni, pā́di, sā́di, ardhi. The accent, when present, is always on the root-syllable (SV. dhāyí is doubtless a false reading).
845. These forms are made in RV. from forty roots, and all the other earlier texts combined add only about twenty to the number; from the later language are quotable thirty or forty more; in the epics they are nearly unknown. When they come from roots of neuter meaning, as gam, pad, sad, bhrāj, rādh, ruc, sañj, they have (like the so-called passive participle in ta: 952) a value equivalent to that of other middle forms; in a case or two (RV. vii. 73. 3 [?]; VS. xxviii. 15; TB. ii. 6. 102) they appear even to be used transitively.
846. a. This aorist is in the later language allowed to be made from a large number of roots (near a hundred). It is made in both voices, but is rare in the middle, most of the roots forming their middle according to the s-class (878 ff.) or the iṣ-class (898 ff.).
b. Its closest analogy is with the imperfect of the á-class (751 ff.); its inflection is the same with that in all particulars; and it takes in general a weak form of root — save the roots in ऋ ṛ (three or four only), which have the guṇa-strengthening.
c. As example of inflection may be taken the root सिच् sic pour. Thus:
847. The a-aorist makes in the RV. a small figure beside the root-aorist, being represented by less than half the latter's number of roots. It becomes, however, more common later (it is the only form of aorist which is made from more verbs in AV. than in RV.); and in Veda and Brāhmaṇa together about eighty roots exhibit the formation more or less fully. Of these a large number (fully half) are of the type of the roots which make their present-system according to the á-class, having a vowel capable of guṇa-strengthening before a final consonant (754): thus, with i, chid, bhid, nij, ric, riṣ, lip, vid, 1 çiṣ (çās), 2 çiṣ, çriṣ, çliṣ, sic, sridh; — with u, krudh, kṣudh, guh, duṣ, dyut, druh, puṣ, budh, bhuj, muc, mruc, yuj, ruc, rud, rudh, muh, ruh, çuc; — with ṛ, ṛdh, kṛt, gṛdh, gṛh, tṛp, tṛṣ, tṛh, dṛp, dṛç, dhṛṣ, nṛt, mṛdh, mṛṣ, vṛt, vṛdh, vṛṣ, sṛp, hṛṣ. A small number end in vowels: thus, ṛ, kṛ, sṛ (which have the guṇa-strengthening throughout), hi (? ahyat once in AV.), and several in ā, apparent transfers from the root-class by the weakening of their ā to a: thus, khyā, hvā, vyā, çvā, and dā and dhā; and āsthat, regarded by the grammarians as aorist to √as throw, is doubtless a like formation from √sthā. A few have a penultimate nasal in the present and elsewhere, which in this aorist is lost: thus, bhraṅç, taṅs, dhvaṅs, sraṅs, krand, randh. Of less classifiable character are aç, kram, gam, ghas, tam, çam, çram, tan, san, sad, āp, das, yas, çak, dagh. The roots pat, naç, vac form the tense-stems papta, neça, voca, of which the first is palpably and the other two are probably the result of reduplication; but the language has lost the sense of their being such, and makes other reduplicated aorists from the same roots (see below, 854).
a. Many of these aorists are simply transfers of the root-aorist to an a-inflection. Conspicuous examples are akarat etc. and agamat etc. (in the earliest period only akar and agan).
848. The inflection of this aorist is in general so regular that it will be sufficient to give only examples of its Vedic forms. We may take as model avidam, from √vid find, of which the various persons and modes are more frequent and in fuller variety than those of any other verb. Only the forms actually quotable are instanced; those of which the examples found are from other verbs than vid are bracketed. Thus:
b. Augmentless forms, with indicative or subjunctive value, are not infrequent. Examples, showing accent on the tense-sign, according to the general analogies of the formation, are: ruhám, sṛpas, bhuját, vidát, aratām, vocata, çakan; vidata and vyáta (3d sing.), arāmahi, çiṣāmahi, vidánta, budhánta, mṛṣanta (for exceptions as regards accent, see below, 853).
840. The subjunctive forms of this aorist are few; those which occur are instanced below, in the method which was followed for the indicative:
a. The ending thana is found once, in riṣāthana. Of middle forms occur only çíṣātāi (AV.: but doubtless misreading for çíṣyātāi) and çiṣāmahe (AV., for RV. çiṣāmahi). The form sádathas seems an indicative, made from a secondary present-stem.
850. The optatives are few in the oldest language, but become more frequent, and in the Brāhmaṇas are not rare. Examples are: in active, bhideyam, vidéyam, sanéyam (TB. once sanem); vidés, games; gamet, vocet; gametam; gaméma, çakéma, sanéma; vareta; in middle, (only) videya; gamemahi, vanemahi: ruhethās etc. in the epics must be viewed rather as present forms of the á-class.
a. A single middle precative form occurs, namely videṣṭa (AV., once); it is so isolated that how much may be inferred from it is very questionable.
851. A complete series of active imperative forms are made from √sad (including sadatana, 2d pl.), and the middle sadantām. Other imperatives are very rare: namely, sána, sára, ruha, vidá; ruhátam, vidátam; khyáta. TS. has once vṛdhātu (compare 740).
852. a. The active participles tṛpánt, ríṣant or rī́ṣant, vṛdhánt, çiṣánt, çucánt, sádant, and (in participial compounds, 1309) kṛtant-, guhant-, vidant- (all RV.), are to be assigned with plausibility to this aorist.
b. Likewise the middle participles guhámāna, dhṛṣámāṇa, dásamāna (?), nṛtámāna, çucámāna, and perhaps vṛdhāná, sridhāná.
853. A few irregularities and peculiarities may be noticed here. The roots in ṛ, which (847) show a strengthening like that of the present of the unaccented a-class, have likewise the accent upon the radical syllable, like that class: thus, from √ṛ, áranta (augmentless 3d pl.), sárat and sára. The root sad follows the same rule: thus, sádatam; and from √san are found sánas and sánat and sánema and sána, beside sanéyam and sanéma. It is questionable whether these are not true analogues of the bhū-class (unaccented a-class) present-system. On the other hand, rúhat (beside ruhám, ruhā́va, ruhátam), çíṣat and çíṣātāi (?), and ríṣant or rī́sant are more isolated cases. In view of such as these, the forms from the stem bhúva and çrúva (836 c) are perhaps to be referred hither. From √vac, the optative is accented vocéyam, vocés, vocéma, vocéyus; elsewhere the accent is on the root-syllable: thus, vóce, vócat, vócati, vócanta.
854. a. The stem voc has in Vedic use well-nigh assumed the value of a root; its forms are very various and of frequent use, in RV. especially far outnumbering in occurrences all other forms from √vac. Besides those already given, we find vocā (1st sing, impv.) and vocāti, vocāvahāi; voces, voceya, vocemahi; vocatāt (2d sing.), vocatu, vocatam, vocata.
b. Of the stem neça from √naç only neçat occurs.
c. The root çās (as in some of its present forms: 639) is weakened to çiṣ, and makes açiṣam.
855. Isolated forms which have more or less completely the aspect of indicative presents are made in the oldest language from some roots beside the aorist-systems of the first two classes. It must be left for maturer research to determine how far they may be relics of original presents, and how far recent productions, made in the way of conversion of the aorist-stem to a root in value.
a. Such forms are the following: from √kṛ make, kárṣi, kṛthas, kṛtha, kṛṣe; from √gam, gathá; from √ci gather, ceti; from √dā give, dā́ti, dāta; from √dhā put, dhāti; from √pā drink, pāthás, pānti; from √bhṛ, bharti; from √muc, mucánti; from √rudh, rudhmas (?); from √vṛt, vartti.
856. The reduplicated aorist is different from the other forms of aorist in that it has come to be attached in almost all cases to the derivative (causative etc.) conjugation in अय áya, as the aorist of that conjugation, and is therefore liable to be made from all roots which have such a conjugation, beside the aorist or aorists which belong to their primary conjugation. Since, however, the connection of the two is not a formal one (the aorist being made directly from the root, and not from the causative stem), but rather a matter of established association, owing to kinship of meaning, the formation and inflection of this kind of aorist is best treated here, along with the others.
857. Its characteristic is a reduplication of the radical syllable, by which it is assimilated, on the one hand, to the imperfect of the reduplicating class (656 ff.), and, on the other hand, to the so-called pluperfect (817 ff.). But the aorist reduplication has taken on a quite peculiar character, with few traces left even in the Veda of a different condition which may have preceded this.
858. a. As regards, indeed, the consonant of the reduplication, it follows the general rules already given (590). And the quality of the reduplicated vowel is in general as in the formations already treated: it needs only to be noted that an a-vowel and ṛ (or ar) are usually (for exceptions, see below, 860) repeated by an i-vowel — as they are, to a considerable extent, in the reduplicated present also (660).
b. But in regard to quantity, this aorist aims always at establishing a diversity between the reduplicating and radical syllables, making the one heavy and the other light. And the preference is very markedly for a heavy reduplication and a light root-syllable — which relation is brought about wherever the conditions allow. Thus:
859. If the root is a light syllable (having a short vowel followed by a single consonant), the reduplication is made heavy.
a. And this, usually by lengthening the reduplicating vowel, with ī for radical a or ṛ or ḷ. (in the single root containing that vowel): thus, arīriṣam, adūduṣam, ajījanam, avīvṛdham, acīkḷpam. The great majority of reduplicated aorists are of this form.
b. If, however, the root begins with two consonants, so that the reduplicating syllable will be heavy whatever the quantity of its vowel, the vowel remains short: thus, acikṣipam, acukrudham, atitrasam, apispṛçam.
860. If the root is a heavy syllable (having a long vowel, or a short before two consonants), the vowel of the reduplication is short: and in this case अ a or आ ā, and ऋ ṛ (if it occurs), are reduplicated by अ a.
a. Thus, adidīkṣam, abubhūṣam (not quotable), adadakṣam, adadhāvam, atataṅsam. And, in the cases in which a root should both begin and end with two consonants, both syllables would be necessarily heavy, notwithstanding the short vowel in the former: thus, apapraccham, acaskandam (but no such forms are found in use).
b. A medial ṛ is allowed by the grammarians to retain the strengthening of the causative stem, together with, of course, reduplication by a: thus, acakarṣat, avavartat (beside acīkṛṣat, avīvṛtat); but no such forms have been met with in use.
c. These aorists are not distinguishable in form from the so-called pluperfects (817 ff.).
861. a. In order, however, to bring about the favored relation of heavy reduplication and light radical syllable, a heavy root is sometimes made light: either by shortening its vowel, as in arīradham from √rādh, avīvaçam from √vāç, asīṣadham from √sādh, ajījivam from √jīv, adīdipam (K. and later: BV. has didīpas) from √dīp, abībhiṣam from √bhīṣ, asūsucam from √sūc; or by dropping a penultimate nasal, as in acikradam from √krand, asiṣyadam from √syand.
b. In those cases in which (1047) an aorist is formed directly from a causal stem in āp, the ā is abbreviated to i: thus, atiṣṭhipam etc., ajijñipat (but KSS. ajijñapat), jīhipas, ajījipata (but VS. ajījapata); but from çrap comes açiçrapāma (ÇB.).
862. Examples of this aorist from roots with initial vowel are very rare; the older language has only āmamat (or amamat) from √am, āpipan (ÇB.: BAU. āpipipat) from √āp, and arpipam (augmentless) from the causative stem arp of √ṛ — in which latter the root is excessively abbreviated. The grammarians give other similar formations, as ārcicam from √arc, āubjijam from √ubj, ārjiham from √arh, āicikṣam from √īkṣ, ārdidham from √ṛdh. Compare the similar reduplication in desiderative stems: 1029 b.
863. Of special irregularities may be mentioned:
a. From √dyut is made (V.B.) the stem didyuta, taking its reduplicating vowel from the radical semivowel. From √gup, instead of jūgupa (B.S.), JB. has jugūpa, and some texts (B.S.) have jugupa; and jīhvara (B.) is met with beside the regular jihvara (V.B.). In cacchada (Nir.), and the more or less doubtful paprátha and çaçvacá and sasvaja (RV.) we have a instead of i in the reduplication.
b. In support of their false view of this aorist as made from the causative stem instead of directly from the root, the native grammarians teach that roots ending in an u-vowel may reduplicate with i, as representing the ā of the strengthened stem: thus, bībhava from bhāv-aya, as well as būbhuva from bhū. No example of such a formation, however, is met with except ápiplavam (ÇB., once); against it we find dudruva, būbhuva, rūruva, çuçruva, and others.
c. As to apaptam, avocam, and aneçam, see above, 847.
864. The inflection of the reduplicated aorist is like that of an imperfect of the second general conjugation: that is to say, it has अ a as final stem-vowel, with all the peculiarities which the presence of that vowel conditions (738 a). Thus, from √jan give birth (stem jījana):
865. The middle forms are rare in the older language (the 3d pl. is decidedly the most common of them, being made from eleven roots; the 3d s. from seven); but all, both active and middle, are quotable except 1st and 2d du. middle and 1st du. active.
a. Atītape appears to be once used (RV.) as 3d sing., with passive sense.
866. A final ṛ has the guṇa-strengthening before the endings: thus, acīkarat, apīparam, atītaras, dīdaras, adīdharat, amīmarat, avīvaran, jihvaras. Of similar strengthened forms from ī and u-roots are found apiprayan (TS.), abībhayanta (RV.), apiplavam (ÇB.), acucyavat (K.), açuçravat (MS.), atuṣṭavam (RV.). Not many roots ending in other vowels than ṛ make this aorist: see below, 868.
867. Forms of the inflection without union-vowel are occasionally met with: namely, from roots ending in consonants, síṣvap (2d sing., augmentless) from √svap, and açiçnat from √çnath; from roots in ṛ or ar, dīdhar (2d sing.), and ajīgar (2d and 3d sing.); for roots in i- and u-vowels, see 868. Of 3d pl. in us are found almost only a form or two from i- and u-roots, with guṇa before the ending: thus, açiçrayus, ácucyavus, açuçravus, asuṣavus; but also abībhajus (ÇB.), and nīnaçus (MBh.).
868. In the later language, a few roots are said by the grammarians to make this aorist as a part of their primary conjugation: they are çri and çvi, dru and aru, kam, and dhā suck (çvi and dhā optionally).
a. In the older language are found from √çri açiçret and açiçrayus (noticed in the preceding paragraph) and açiçriyat (ÇB.); from √dru, adudrot and adudruvat (TB.: not used as aorist); from √sru, asusrot and (augmentless) susros and susrot; from √kam, acīkametām and -manta (B.S.). Of forms analogous with these occur a number from roots in u or ū: thus, anūnot and nūnot from √nu; yūyot from √yu separate; dūdhot from √dhū; apupot from √pū; tūtos and tūtot from √tu; asuṣot from √sū; — and one or two from roots in i or ī: thus, siṣet from √si (or sā) bind; amīmet from √mā bellow; apipres (with apiprayan, noticed above) from √prī (and the "imperfects" from dīdhī etc., 676, are of corresponding form). And from √cyu are made, with union-vowel ī, acucyavīt and acucyavītana. Few of these forms possess a necessarily causative or a decidedly aoristic value, and it is very doubtful whether they should not be assigned to the perfect-system.
b. From the later language are quotable only açiçriyat etc. (3d pl., -yan or -yus) and adudruvat.
869. a. As in other preterit formations, the augmentless indicative persons of this aorist are used subjunctively, and they are very much more frequent than true subjunctives.
b. Of the latter are found only rīradhā (1st sing.); tītapāsi; cīkḷpāti and sīṣadhāti, and pispṛçati (as if corresponding to an indicative apispṛk, like açiçnat); and perhaps the 1st sing. mid. çaçvacāí.
c. The augmentless indicative forms are accented in general on the reduplication: thus, dī́dharas, nī́naças; jī́janat, pī́parat; jī́janan; also síṣvap; but, on the other hand, we have also pīpárat, çiçráthas and çiçnáthat, and dudrávat and tuṣṭávat (which may perhaps belong to the perfect: compare 810). According to the native grammarians, the accent rests either on the radical syllable or on the one that follows it.
870. Optative forms are even rarer. The least questionable case is the middle "precative" rīriṣīṣṭa (ririṣīṣṭa has been ranked above with sāsahīṣṭa, as a perfect: 812 b). Cucyuvīmahi and cucyavīrata belong either here or to the perfect-system.
871. Of imperatives, we have the indubitable forms pūpurantu and çiçrathantu. And jigṛtám and jigṛtá, and didhṛtam and didhṛtá, and jajastám (all RV. only), and perhaps suṣūdáta (AV.), are to be referred hither, as corresponding to the indicatives (without union-vowel) ajīgar and adīdhar: their short reduplicating vowel and their accent assimilate them closely to the reduplicated imperfects (656 ff.) with which we are probably to regard this aorist as ultimately related.
872. No participle is found belonging to the reduplicated aorist.
873. The number of roots from which this aorist is met with in the earlier language is about a hundred and twenty. In the later Sanskrit it is unusual; in the series of later texts mentioned above (826) it occurs only twice; and it has been found quotable from hardly fifty roots in the whole epic and classical literature.
874. a. The common tense-sign of all the varieties of this aorist is a स् s (convertible to ष् ṣ: 180) which is added to the root in forming the tense-stem.
b. This sibilant has no analogues among the class-signs of the present-system; but it is to be compared with that which appears (and likewise with or without the same union-vowel i) in the stems of the future tense-system (932 ff.) and of the desiderative conjugation (1027 ff.).
c. To the root thus increased the augment is prefixed and the secondary endings are added.
875. In the case of a few roots, the sibilant tense-stem (always ending in क्ष kṣ) is further increased by an अ a, and the inflection is nearly like that of an imperfect of the second or a- conjugation.
876. a. In the vast majority of cases, the sibilant is the final of the tense-stem, and the inflection is like that of an imperfect of the first or non-a-conjugation.
b. And these, again, fall into two nearly equal and strongly marked classes, according as the sibilant is added immediately to the final of the root, or with an auxiliary vowel इ i, making the tense-sign इष् iṣ. Finally, before this इष् iṣ the root is in a very small number of cases increased by a स् s, making the whole addition सिष् siṣ. 877. We have, then, the following classification for the varieties of sibilant-aorist:
A. With endings added directly to the sibilant:
4. with स् s simply after the root: s-aorist;
5. with इ i before the स् s: iṣ-aorist;
6. the same, with स् s at end of root: siṣ-aorist.
B. With अ a added to the sibilant before the endings:
7. with sibilant and अ a: sa-aorist.
a. As regards the distinction between the fourth and fifth forms, it may be said in a general way that those roots incline to take the auxiliary i in the aorist which take it also in other formations; but it is impossible to lay down any strict rules as to this accordance. Compare 903.
878. The tense-stem of this aorist is made by adding स् s to the augmented root, of which also the vowel is usually strengthened.
879. The general rules as to the strengthening of the root-vowel are these:
a. A final vowel (including ऋ ṛ) has the vṛddhi-change in the active, and (excepting ऋ ṛ) guṇa in the middle: thus, from √नी lead, active stem अनैष् anāiṣ, middle stem अनेष् aneṣ; from √श्रु çru hear, अश्रौष् açrāuṣ and अश्रोष् açroṣ; from √कृ kṛ make, अकार्ष akārṣ and अकृष् akṛṣ.
b. A medial vowel has the vṛddhi-change in the active, and remains unaltered in the middle: thus, from √छन्द chand seem, active stem अच्छान्त्स acchānts, middle stem अच्छन्त्स acchants; from √रिच् ric leave, अरैक्ष् arāikṣ and अरिक्ष् arikṣ; from √रुध् rudh obstruct, अरौत्स arāuts and अरुत्स aruts; from √सृज् sṛj pour out, अस्राक्ष् asrākṣ and असृक्ष् asṛkṣ.880. a. The endings are the usual secondary ones, with उस् us (not अन् an) in 3d pl. act., and अत ata (not अन्त anta) in 3d pl. mid.
b. But before स् s and त् t of 2d and 3d sing. act. is in the later language always inserted an ई ī, making the endings ईस् īs and ईत् īt.
c. This insertion is unknown in the earliest language (of the BV.): see below, 888.
881. a. Before endings beginning with t or th, the tense-sign s is (233 c–e) omitted after the final consonant of a root — unless this be r, or n or m (converted to anusvāra).
b. The same omission is of course made before dhvam after a consonant; and after a vowel the sibilant is either omitted or assimilated (the equivalence of dhv and ddhv in the theories of the grammarians and the practice of the manuscripts makes it impossible to say which: 232); and then the ending becomes ḍhvam, provided the sibilant, if retained, would have been ṣ (226 c): thus, astoḍhvam and avṛḍhvam (beside astoṣata and avṛṣata); dṛḍhvam (√dṛ regard: ÇB., once), which is to dṛthās (2d sing.) as avṛḍhvain and avṛṣata to avri and avṛthās; and kṛḍhvam (M.).
c. According to the grammarians, the omission of s before t and th takes place also after a short vowel (the case can occur only in the 2d and 3d sing, mid.); but we have seen above (834 a) that this is to be viewed rather as a substitution in those persons of the forms of the root-aorist. Neither in the earlier nor in the later language, however, does any example occur of an aorist-form with s retained after a short vowel before these endings.
d. After the final sonant aspirate of a root, the sibilant before the same endings is said by the Hindu grammarians to disappear altogether, the combination of the aspirate with the th or t of the ending being then made according to the ordinary rule for such cases (160): thus, from the stem arāuts, for arāudh-s, is made arāuddha, as if from arāudh+ta directly. No example of such a form is quotable from the literature; but the combination is established by the occurrence of other similar cases (233 f). In the middle, in like manner, aruts+ta becomes aruddha, as if from arudh+ta; but all such forms admit also of being understood as of the root-aorist. Those that have been found to occur were given above (834 d); probably they belong at least in part to this aorist.
e. From the three nasal roots gam, tan, man are made the 2d and 3d sing. mid. persons agathās and agata, atathās and atata, and amata (amathās not quotable), reckoned by the native grammarians as s-aorist forms, made, after loss of their final root-nasal, with loss also of the sibilant after a short vowel. They are doubtless better referred to the root-aorist. But JB. has a corresponding 1st sing. atasi from √tan.
882. As examples of the inflection of this variety of sibilant aorist we may take the roots नी nī lead, and छिद् chid cut off. Thus:
883. The omission of s in the active persons (ácchāittam, ácchāittām, ácchāitta) is a case of very rare occurrence; all the quotable examples were given above (233 e). As to the like omission in middle persons, see 881. The ChU. has twice ávāstam for avāts-tam (√vas dwell): this may be viewed as another case of total disappearance of the sibilant, and consequent restoration of the final radical to its original form.
a. From √rudh obstruct, the 2d and 3d du. and 2d pl. act. and the 2d and 3d sing. mid. would be árāuddham, árāuddhām, árāuddha, áruddhās, áruddha; from √sṛj pour out, ásrāṣṭam, ásrāṣṭām, asrāṣṭa, asṛṣṭhās, asṛṣṭa; from √dṛç see, ádrāṣṭam etc. (as from sṛj). But from √kṛ do the same persons in the active are ákārṣṭam, ákārṣṭām, ákārṣṭa; from √tan stretch they are átāṅstam, átāṅstām, átāṅsta.
884. Certain roots in ā weaken the ā in middle inflection to i (as also in the root-aorist: above, 834 a): these are said to be sthā, dā, and dhā; in the older language have been noted ádiṣi and adiṣata from √dā give (and adiṣi perhaps once from √dā bind), adhiṣi and adhiṣata (with the optative dhiṣīya) from √dhā put, and asthiṣata; also agīṣṭhās and agīṣata from √gā go (with adhi).
a. The middle inflection of the aorist of √dā would be, then, according to the grammarians: ádiṣi, ádithās, ádita; ádiṣvahi, ádiṣāthām, ádiṣātām; ádiṣmahi, ádiḍhvam, ádiṣata.
885. Roots ending in changeable ṛ (so-called roots in ṝ: 242) are said by the grammarians to convert this vowel to īr in middle forms: thus, astīrṣi, astīrṣṭhās etc. (from √stṛ); of such forms, however, has been found in the older language only akīrṣata, PB.
886. The s-aorist is made in the older language from about a hundred and forty roots (in RV., from about seventy; in AV., from about fifty, of which fifteen are additional to those in RV.); and the epic and classical literature adds but a very small number. It has in the Veda certain peculiarities of stem-formation and inflection, and also the full series of modes — of which the optative middle is retained also later as a part of the "precative" (but see 925 b).
887. Irregularities of stem-formation are as follows:
a. The strengthening of the root-syllable is now and then irregularly made or omitted: thus, ayokṣīt (AB.), chetsīs (B.S.; also occurs in MBh., which has further yotsīs), rotsīs (KU.); amatsus (RV.); ayāṁsi and arāutsi (AB.), asākṣi etc. (V.B.: √sah), māṅsta (AY.) and māṅstām (TA.); lopsīya (U.); and MBh. has drogdhās. From √saj is made sān̄kṣīt (U. etc.), and from √majj, amān̄kṣīt (not quotable). The form ayun̄kṣmahi (BhP.) is doubtless a false reading.
b. A radical final nasal is lost in agasmahi (RV.) and gasāthām (TA.) from √gam, and in the optatives masīya and vasīmahi (RV.) from √√man and van.
c. The roots hū, dhū, and nū have ū instead of o in the middle: thus, ahūṣata, adhūṣata, anūṣi and anūṣātām and anūṣata; √dhur (or dhūrv) makes adhūrṣata.
d. ÇB. has once atrāsatām for atrāstām (√trā).888. The principal peculiarity of the older language in regard to inflection is the frequent absence of ī in the endings of 2d and 3d sing. act., and the consequent loss of the consonant-ending, and sometimes of root-finals (150). The forms without ī are the only ones found in RV. and K., and they outnumber the others in AV. and TS.; in the Brāhmaṇas they grow rarer (only one, adrāk, occurs in GB.; one, ayāṭ, in KB.; and two, adrāk and ayāṭ, in ÇB.; PB. has none).
889. If the root ends in a vowel, only the consonant of the ending is necessarily lost: thus, aprās (for both aprās-s and aprās-t) from √prā; and in like manner ahās from √hā; — ajāis (for ajāiṣ-t) from √ji; and in like manner acāis from √ci, and nāis (augmentless) from √nī; — and yāus (for ayāuṣ-t) from √yu.
a. But (as in other like cases: 555 a) the ending is sometimes preserved at the expense of the tense-sign; and we have in 3d sing. ajāit (beside ajāis and ajāiṣīt) from √ji; and in like manner acāit, açrāit, ahāit, nāit (no examples have been noted except from roots in i and ī): compare ayās and srās, 2d sing., 890 a.
890. a. If the root (in either its simple or strengthened form) ends in a consonant, the tense-sign is lost with the ending. Thus, abhār (for abhārṣ-t: beside abhārṣam, abhārṣṭām) from √bhṛ; other like cases are ahār. and (from roots in ar) akṣār, atsār, asvār, hvār. Further, ārāik (583 a: for arāikṣ-t) from √ric; like cases are açvāit from √çvit and (from roots with medial u) adyāut from √dyut, arāut from √rudh, and māuk from √muc. Further, from roots ending in the palatals and h, aprāk from √pṛc, asrāk from √sṛj, abhāk from √bhaj, adrāk from √dṛç, adhāk from √dah; but, with a different change of the final, ayāṭ from √yaj, aprāṭ from √pṛch, avāṭ from √vah, and asrāṭ from √sṛj; and (above, 146 a) srās appears to stand twice in AV. for srāṣ-s from √sṛj; RV. has also twice ayās from √yaj. Further, from roots ending in a nasal, atān from √tan, khān from √khan, ayān and anān from √√yam and nam (143 a).
b. If, again, the roots end in a double consonant, the latter of the two is lost along with tense-sign and ending: thus, acchān (for acchānts-t; beside acchāntta and acchāntsus) from √chand; and other like cases are akrān, askān, and asyān.
891. A relic of this peculiarity of the older inflection has been preserved to the later language in the 2d sing. bhāis, from √bhī.
892. The indicative forms without augment are used in a subjunctive sense, especially after mā́ prohibitive, and are not uncommon. Examples with accent, however, are extremely rare; there has been noted only váṅsi, middle; judging from this, the tone would be found on the radical syllable. According to the Hindu grammarians, it may be laid on either root or ending.893. Proper subjunctive forms are not rare in BV., but are markedly less common in the later Vedic texts, and very seldom met with in the Brāhmaṇas. They are regularly made with guṇa-strengthening of the radical vowel, in both active and middle, and with accent on the root.
a. The forms with primary endings are: in active, stoṣāṇi; darṣasi; neṣati, parṣati, pāsati, matsati, yoṣati, vakṣati, sakṣati; dā́sathas, dhāsathas, párṣathas, vakṣathas, varṣathas; pāsatas, yaṁsatas, yakṣatas, vakṣatas; dhāsatha, neṣatha, párṣatha, mátsatha; — in middle, naṁsāi, máṅsāi; máṅsase; kraṁsate, trāsate, darṣate, máṅsate, yakṣate, rāsate, vaṅsate, sākṣate, hāsate; trā́sāthe (not trāsāithe, as we should rather expect); náṁsante, máṅsante: and, with the fuller ending in 3d sing., mā́sātāi.
b. The forms with secondary endings are (active only): jéṣas, vákṣas; dárṣat, néṣat, pákṣat, párṣat, préṣat, yákṣat, yóṣat, váṅsat, vákṣat, véṣat, sátsat, chantsat, etc. (some twenty others); yakṣatām; váṅsāma, sā́kṣāma, stoṣāma; parṣan, yaṁsan, yoṣan, rā́san, vakṣan, çéṣan, çróṣan. Of these, yakṣat and vakṣat are found not rarely in the Brāhmaṇas; any others, hardly more than sporadically.
894. Of irregularities are to be noted the following:
a. The forms dṛ́kṣase and pṛkṣase (2d sing. mid.) lack the guṇa-strengthening.
b. Jeṣam, stoṣam, and yoṣam (AV. yūṣam, with ū for o as in anūṣata etc.) appear to be first persons formed under government of the analogy of the second and third — unless they are relics of a state of things anterior to the vṛddhi-strengthening: in which case jeṣma is to be compared with them (we should expect jāiṣma or jeṣāma).
c. From roots in ā are made a few forms of problematic character: namely, yeṣam (only case in RV.), khyeṣam, jñeṣam, geṣam and geṣma, deṣma, seṣam and set, stheṣam and stheṣus. Their value is optative. The analogy of jeṣam and jeṣma suggests the possibility of their derivation from i-forms of the ā-roots; or the sibilant might be of a precative character (thus, yā-ī-s-am). That they really belong to the iṣ-aorist appears highly improbable.
d. The RV. has a few difficult first persons middle in se, which are perhaps best noted here. They are: 1. from the simple root, kṛṣe, hiṣe (and ohiṣe?), stuṣé; 2. from present-stems, arcase, ṛñjase, yajase, gāyiṣe, gṛṇīṣé and punīṣé. They have the value of indicative present. Compare below, 897 b.
895. Optative forms of this aorist are made in the middle only, and they have in 2d and 3d sing. always the precative s before the endings. Those found to occur in the older language are: diṣīya, dhiṣīya, bhakṣīyá, masīya (for maṅsīya), mukṣīya, rāṣīya, lopsīya, sākṣīya, stṛṣīya; maṅsīṣṭhās; darṣīṣṭa, bhakṣīṣṭa, maṅsīṣṭha, mṛkṣīṣṭa; bhakṣīmahi, dhukṣīmáhi, maṅsīmáhi, vaṅsīmáhi, vasīmahi, sakṣīmáhi; maṅsīrata. PB. has bhukṣiṣīya, which should belong to a siṣ-aorist. The RV. form trā́sīthām (for trāsīyāthām or trāsāthām) is an isolated anomaly.a. This optative makes a part of the accepted "precative" of the later language: see below, 923, 925 b.
896. Imperative persons from this aorist are extremely rare: we find the 2d sing. act. neṣa and parṣa and the 2d pl. yaṁsata (from a-stems, and showing rather, therefore, a treatment of the aorist-stem as a root), and the 3d sing. mid. rāsatām and pl. rāsantām (of which the same may be said).
897. a. Active participles are dákṣat or dhákṣat, and sákṣat (both RV.).
b. If ṛñjase (above, 894 d) is to be reckoned as an s-aorist form, ṛñjasāná is an s-aorist participle; and of a kindred character, apparently, are arçasāná, óhasāna, jrayasāná, dhiyasāná, mandasāná, yamasāná, rabhasāná, vṛdhasāná, sahasāná, çavasāná, all in RV.; with namasāná, bhiyásāna, in AV. In RV. occurs also once dhī́ṣamāṇa, apparently an a-form of an s-aorist of √dhī.
898. The tense-stem of this aorist adds the general tense-sign स् s by help of a prefixed auxiliary vowel इ i, making इष् iṣ, to the root, which is usually strengthened, and which has the augment.
899. The rules as to the strengthening of the root are as follows:
a. A final vowel has vṛddhi in the active, and guṇa in the middle: thus, अपाविष् apāviṣ and अपविष् apaviṣ from √पू pū cleanse; अतारिष् atāriṣ, act., from √तृ tṛ pass; अशयिष् açayiṣ, mid., from √शी çī lie.
b. A medial vowel has guṇa, if capable of it, in both voices: thus, अलेशिष् aleçiṣ, act. and mid., from √लिश् liç tear; अरोचिष् arociṣ, from √रुच् ruc shine; अवर्षिष् avarṣiṣ from √वृष् vṛṣ rain; but अजीविष् ajīviṣ from √जीव् jīv live.
c. Medial अ a is sometimes lengthened in the active; but it more usually remains unchanged in both voices.d. The roots in the older language which show the lengthening are kan, tan, ran, stan, svan, nan, vraj, sad, mad, car, tsar, svar, jval, das, tras. From ran, san, kram, vad, rakṣ, and sah occur forms of both kinds. From √math or manth are made the two stems mathiṣ and manthiṣ.
900. a. Of exceptions may be noted: √mṛj has (as elsewhere: 627) vṛddhi instead of guṇa: thus, amārjiṣam; √stṛ has astarīs, and √çṛ has açarīt (also açarāit in AV.), with guṇa in active.
b. The root grabh or grah has (as in future etc., below, 936 e, 956) long ī instead of i before the sibilant: thus, agrabhīṣma, agrahīṣṭa, agrabhīṣata. The roots in changeable ṛ (so-called roots in ṝ: 242), and √vṛ are said by the grammarians to do the same optionally; but no forms with long ī from such roots have been found quotable. A Sūtra (PGS.) has once anayīṣṭa from √nī (doubtless a false reading).
901. The endings are as in the preceding formation (उस् us and अत ata in 3d pl.). But in 2d and 3d sing., the combinations iṣ-s and iṣ-t are from the earliest period of the language contracted into ईस् īs and ईत् īt.
a. The 2d pl. mid. should end always in iḍhvam (or iḍḍhvam, from iṣ-dhvam: 226); and this is in fact the form in the only examples quotable, namely ajaniḍhvam, artiḍhvam, āindhiḍhvam, vepiḍhvam; as to the rules of the native grammarians respecting the matter, see 226 c.
902. As examples of the inflection of the iṣ-aorist may be taken the roots पू pū cleanse, and बुध् budh wake. Thus:
903. The number of roots from which forms of this aorist have been noted in the older language is nearly a hundred and fifty (in RV., about eighty; in AV., more than thirty, of which a dozen are additional to those in RV.) ; the later texts add less than twenty. Among these are no roots in ā; but otherwise they are of every variety of form (rarest in final i and ī). Active and middle persons are freely made, but sparingly from the same root; only about fifteen roots have both active and middle forms in the older language, and of these a part only exceptionally in the one voice or the other.
a. No rale appears to govern the choice of usage between the iṣ- and the s-aorist; and in no small number of cases the same root shows forms of both classes.
904. Irregularities are to be noticed as follows:
a. The contracted forms akramīm, agrabhīm, and avadhīm (with augmentless vádhīm) are found in 1st sing. act.
b. For áçarīt occurs in AV. áçarāit; also (in a part of the manuscripts) çarāis for çarīs; agrahāiṣam is found in AB. (also the monstrous form ajagrabhāiṣam: see 801 i). Ajayit, with short i in the ending, occurs in TS.
c. AV. has once nudiṣṭhās, without guṇa.
d. The forms atārima (RV.), avādiran (AV.), and bādhithās (TA.), though they lack the sibilant, are perhaps to be referred to this aorist: compare avitá, 908. A few similar cases occur in the epics, and are of like doubtful character: thus, jānithās, mādithās, vartithās, çan̄kithās, and (the causative: 1048) aghātayithās. Agṛhītām and gṛhīthās and gṛhīta, if not false readings for gṛhṇī-, are probably irregular present-formations.
905. As usual, augmentless indicative forms of this aorist are more common than proper subjunctives. Examples, of all the persons found to occur (and including all the accented words), are, in the active: çáṅsiṣam, vádhīm; máthīs, vádhīs, yā́vīs, sā́vīs; ávīt, jū́rvīt, máthīt, vádhīt, veçīt; mardhiṣṭam, doṣiṣṭam, hiṅsiṣṭam; aviṣṭām, jániṣṭām, bādhiṣṭām; çramiṣma, vādiṣma; vadhiṣṭa and vadhiṣṭana, mathiṣṭana, hiṅsiṣṭa; hvāriṣus, grahīṣus; — in the middle: rādhiṣi; jániṣṭhās, marṣiṣṭhās, vyathiṣṭhās; krámiṣṭa, jániṣṭa, paviṣṭa, práthiṣṭa, mándiṣṭa; vyathiṣmahi. The accent is on the root-syllable (tāriṣús, AV. once, is doubtless an error).
906. a. Of subjunctive forms with primary endings occur only the 1st sing. act. daviṣāṇi, and the 1st pl. mid. (with unstrengthened e) yāciṣāmahe and saniṣāmahe.
b. Forms with secondary endings are almost limited to 2d and 3d sing. act. There are found: aviṣas, kā́niṣas, tāriṣas, rakṣiṣas, vádhiṣas; vā́diṣas, véṣiṣas, çaṅsiṣas; kā́riṣat, jambhiṣat, jóṣiṣat, takṣiṣat, tāriṣat, níndiṣat, pā́riṣat, bódhiṣat, márdhiṣat, yāciṣat, yodhiṣat, rakṣiṣat, vaniṣat, vyathiṣat, çaṅsiṣat, saniṣat, sāviṣat. They are made, it will be noticed, with entire regularity, by adding a to the tense-stem in iṣ before the endings. The only other persons found to occur are the 3d pl. act. saniṣan and mid. sániṣanta (and TS. has vaniṣanta, for the problematic vanuṣanta of RV.), which are also regular. Bhaviṣāt (AB. once) is a solitary example of a form with double mode-sign; cániṣṭhat (RV.; SV. instead jániṣṭhat) seems hopelessly corrupt. The radical syllable always has the accent, and its vowel usually accords with that of the indicative: but we have san- in the subjunctive against asāniṣam (as to cay- and ran-, see below, 908).
907. The middle optative of this aorist also forms a part of the accepted "precative" of the later language (923, 925 b). It is very rare at all periods, being made in RV. from only five roots, and in AV. from two of the same and from three additional ones (six of the eight have other iṣ-forms); and the remaining texts add, so far as noticed, only four other roots. All the forms found to occur are as follows: janiṣīya, indhiṣīya, edhiṣīyá, ruciṣīya and rociṣīya, gmiṣīya; modiṣīṣṭhās; janiṣīṣṭa; vaniṣīṣṭa; sahiṣīvahi; idhiṣīmahi, edhiṣīmáhi, janiṣīmahi, tāriṣīmahi, mandiṣīmahi, vandiṣīmáhi, vardhiṣīmáhi, sahiṣīmahi and sāhiṣīmáhi. The accent is on the ending, and this would lead us to expect a weak form of root throughout; but the usage in this respect appears to be various, and the cases are too few to allow of setting up any rule. The forms janiṣeyam and -ya, from a secondary a-stem, occur in K.
908. Of imperative forms, we have from √av a series: namely, aviḍḍhí, aviṣṭu, aviṣṭám, avitá (if this, as seems probable, stands anomalously for aviṣṭá) and aviṣṭána; two of these are of unmistakably imperative form. Other forms occur only in 2d du. and 2d pl., and are accordingly such as might also be subjunctives used imperatively (which is further made probable for two of them by their accentuation on the root-syllable): they are kramiṣṭam, gamiṣṭam, caniṣṭám, cayiṣṭam (against acāyiṣam), tā́riṣṭam, yodhiṣṭam, vadhiṣṭam, çnathiṣṭam; ráṇiṣṭana (against arāṇiṣus), çnathiṣṭana.
909. No words having a participial ending after iṣ are found anywhere to occur.
910. This is the only aorist of which forms are made in the secondary and denominative conjugations: see below, 1035, 1048, 1068.
911. According to the grammarians, this aorist is made from roots in आ ā (including मि mi fix, मि mi (or mī) damage and ली Iī cling, which substitute forms in ā), and from नम् nam bow, यम् yam reach, and रम् ram be content, and is used only in the active ; the corresponding middle being of the s-form (878 ff.). Its inflection is precisely like that of the iṣ-aorist; it is unnecessary, then, to give more than its first persons, which we may form from the roots या yā go and नम् nam low. Thus:
912. The siṣ-aorist is properly only a sub-form of the iṣ-aorist, having the tense-sign and endings of the latter added to a form of root increased by an added s. It is of extreme rarity in the older language, being made in RV. only from the roots gā sing and yā go, and in AV. only from hā leave, and doubtless also from pyā fill up and van win (see below, 914 b); the remaining older texts add jñā know (B.), jyā overpower, dhyā think (ÇB. once: the edition reads -dhā-), and ram be content (SV.: a bad variant for RY. rāsīya); other Brāhmaṇa forms which might be also of the s-aorist are adrāsīt, avāsīt, and ahvāsīt; and bhukciṣīya (PB. S.) must be regarded as an anomalous formation from √bhuj, unless we prefer to admit a secondary root bhukṣ, like bhakṣ from bhaj. In the later language have been found quotable from other roots only glāsīs, adhmāsīt, anaṁsīt, apāsīt, mlāsīs, and amnāsiṣus.
a. The participle hā́samāna and causative hāsayanti (RV.) show that hās had assumed, even at a very early period, the value of a secondary root beside hā for other forms than the aorist.
913. The whole series of older indicative forms (omitting, as doubtful, the 2d and 3d sing.) is as follows: agāsiṣam, ajñāsiṣam, ayāsiṣam, adhyāsiṣam; ajyāsiṣṭām, ayāsiṣṭām; ajñāsiṣma; ajñāsiṣṭa, áyāsiṣṭa; agāsiṣus, ayāsiṣus (ākṣiṣus is from √akṣ attain).
a. Forms without augment are these: jñāsiṣam, raṁsiṣam, hāsiṣam; hāsiṣṭam; hāsiṣṭām; hāsiṣṭa; hāsiṣus, gāsiṣus, jñāsiṣus. The accent would doubtless be upon the root-syllable.
914. a. Of proper subjunctives are found two, gāsiṣat and yāsiṣat (both RV.).
b. Optatives are not less rare: namely, yāsisīṣṭhas and pyāsiṣīmahi (for which the AV. manuscripts read pyāçiṣīmahi, altered in the edition to pyāyiṣ-); and doubtless vaṅçiṣīya (AV., twice) is to be corrected to vaṅsiṣīya, and belongs here. As to bhukṣiṣīya, see above, 912.
c. The accent of yāsiṣṭám (like aviṣṭám, 908) shows it to be a true imperative form; and yāsīṣṭa (RV., once) is doubtless the same, with anomalous ī for i.915. Middle forms of this aorist, it will be noticed, occur from the optative only; but, considering the great rarity of the whole formation, we are hardly justified in concluding that in the ancient language the middle persons in -siṣi, -siṣṭhās, etc., were not allowable, like those in -iṣi, -iṣṭhās, and the others of the iṣ-aorist.
916. In the later language, the roots allowed to form this aorist end in श् ç, ष् ṣ, or ह् h — all of them sounds which in combination with the tense-sign make क्ष् kṣ; and they have इ i, उ u, or ऋ ṛ as radical vowel.
a. They are as follows: diç, riç, liç, viç, kliç, kruç, ruç, mṛç, spṛç; tviṣ, dviṣ, çliṣ, viṣ, kṛṣ; dih, mih, lih, guh, duh, ruh, tṛh, vṛh, stṛh; from about half of them sa-forms, earlier or later, are quotable. Some of them may, or with certain meanings must, take aorists of other forms. And a few are allowed to drop both tense-sign and union-vowel a in certain persons of the middle: that is, they may make instead forms of the root-aorist.
917. As the tense-stem ends in अ a, the inflection is in the main like that of an imperfect of the second general conjugation. But (according to the grammarians: the forms unfortunately have not been found quotable) the 1st sing. mid. ends in इ i instead of ए e, and the 2d and 3d du. mid. in आथाम् āthām and आताम् ātām, as in imperfects of the other conjugation. Both active and middle inflection is admitted. The root is throughout unstrengthened.
918. As example of inflection we may take the root दिश् diç point. Thus:
919. In the earlier language, the forms of the sa-aorist are hardly more than sporadic. They are made in RV. from seven roots; in AV., from two of these and from two others; and the remaining texts add ten more, making nineteen in all (the later language makes no additions to this number). As later, all have i or u or ṛ as root-vowel, and a final consonant which combines with s to kṣ; but there are in the list also two ending in j, namely mṛj and vṛj. All the examples noted are given below.
a. So far as the middle forms are concerned, this aorist would be fully explained as a transfer of certain s-aorists to an a-inflection. The marked difference in the strength of radical vowel in the active, however, stands in the way of the successful application of such an explanation to the active forms.
920. a. In the indicative, we find, in the active: avṛkṣam; adrukṣas, adhukṣas, arukṣas, akrukṣas, aspṛkṣas (and MBh. adds amṛkṣas); adikṣat, amikṣat, alikṣat, avikṣat, ákrukṣat, aghukṣat, adukṣat and ádhukṣat, árukṣat, avṛkṣat, akṛkṣat, ámṛkṣat, áspṛkṣat; aghukṣatām; arukṣāma, amṛkṣāma, avṛkṣāma; ádhukṣan, apikṣan (√piṣ), arukṣan, aspṛkṣan; — in the middle, only akṛkṣathās (√kṛṣ), ádhukṣata, and amṛkṣanta (and MBh. adds amṛkṣata?).
b. Forms without augment (no true subjunctives occur) are, in the active: dṛkṣam, mṛkṣam; dukṣas, rukṣas, mṛkṣas; dvikṣat; mṛkṣata; dhukṣán and dukṣán; — in the middle, dvikṣata, dukṣata and dhúkṣata, dhukṣánta.
c. There are no optative forms.
d. Imperative are: in the active, mṛkṣatam; in the middle, dhukṣásva.
e. The few accented forms without augment which occur have the tone on the tense-sign sá, in analogy with the a-aorist (2) and the imperfect of the á-class: a single exception is dhúkṣata, which probably needs emendation to dhukṣáta.
f. The aspiration of initial d and g, after loss of the aspirated quality of the root-final (155), is seen in forms from the roots duh and guh, but not from druh (only a single case, AB.); RV., however, has also adukṣat and dukṣas, dukṣán, dukṣata.
921. As the so-called precative is allowed by the grammarians to be made in the later language from every root, and in an independent way, without reference to the mode of formation of the aorist from the same root, it is desirable to put together here a brief statement of the rules given for it.
922. The precative active is made by adding the active precative endings (above, 568) directly to the root. But:a. Of final root-vowels (as before the passive-sign yá: 770), i and u are lengthened; ṛ is usually changed to ri, but to īr and ūr in those roots which elsewhere show ir- and ur- forms (so-called ṝ-roots: 242), and to ar in ṛ and smṛ; ā is changed to e in the roots dā, dhā, sthā, pā drink, gā sing, and a few others, in part optionally.
b. The root in general assumes its weakest form: a penultimate nasal is lost, as in badhyāsam from √bandh; the roots which are abbreviated in the weak persons of the perfect (794) have the same abbreviation here, as in ucyāsam, ijyāsam, vidhyāsam, supyāsam, gṛhyāsam; √çās forms çiṣyāsam (compare 639, 854 c): and so on.
c. It has been pointed out above (837) that the active precative is an optative of the root-aorist, with a problematic insertion of a sibilant between mode-sign and ending.
923. a. The precative middle is made by adding the middle precative endings (above, 568) to the root increased by स् s or इष् iṣ — that is, to the tense-stem of an s-aorist or of an iṣ-aorist (but without augment).
b. The root is strengthened according to the rules that apply in forming the middle-stem of the s and of the iṣ-aorists respectively: in general, namely, a final vowel is gunated in both formations; but a medial vowel, only before इष् iṣ.
c. As was pointed out above (567) the middle precative is really the optative of certain aorists, with the insertion of a sibilant between mode-sign and ending only (so far as authenticated by use) in the 2d and 3d singular. In the older language, such forms are oftenest made from the s-aorist (895) and the iṣ-aorist (907); but also from the root-aorist (837 b), the a-aorist (850 a), the reduplicated aorist (870), and the siṣ-aorist (914 b); and even from the perfect (812 b).
924. As example of inflection, we may take the root भू bhū be, which is said (no middle aorist or precative from it is quotable) to form its middle on the iṣ-stem. Thus:
a. The forms given by the grammarians as 2d and 3d dual are of very questionable value, as regards the place assigned to the sibilant. Those persons, and the 2d pl., have never been met with in use. For the question respecting the ending of the 2d pl., as dhvam or ḍhvam, see 226 c.
925. a. The precative active is a form of very rare occurrence in the classical language. In each of the texts already more than once referred to (Manu, Nala, Bhagavad-Gītā, Çakuntalā, Hitopadeça) it occurs once and no more, and not half-a-dozen forms have been found quotable from the epics. As to its value, see 573 c.
b. The precative middle is virtually unknown in the whole later literature, not a single occurrence of it having been brought to light. The BhP. has once rīriṣīṣṭa, which is also a RV. form, belonging probably to the reduplicated aorist: see 870.
926. The uses of the aorist mode-forms (as has been already pointed out: 582) appear to accord with those of the mode-forms of the present-system. The predilection of the earlier language, continued sparingly in the later, for the augmentless forms in prohibitive expression after mā́ was sufficiently stated and illustrated above (579).
a. The tense-value of the aorist indicative has also been more than once referred to, and calls only for somewhat more of detail and for illustration here.
927. The aorist of the later language is simply a preterit, equivalent to the imperfect and perfect, and frequently coördinated with them.
a. Thus, tataḥ sa gardabhaṁ laguḍena tāḍayāmāsa; tenā ’sāu pañcatvam agamat (H.) thereupon he beat the donkey with a stick; and hereof the latter died; tataḥ sā vidarbhān agamat punaḥ; tāṁ tu bandhujanaḥ samapūjayat (MBh.) thereupon she went back to Vidarbha; and her kindred paid her reverence; prītimān abhūt, uvāca cāi ’nam (MBh.) he was filled with affection, and said to him; tam adahat kāṣṭhāiḥ so ‘bhūd divyavapus tadā (R.) he burned him with wood, and he became then a heavenly form.
928. The aorist of the older language has the value of a proper "perfect": that is, it signifies something past which is viewed as completed with reference to the present; and it requires accordingly to be rendered by our tense made with the auxiliary have. In general, it indicates what has just taken place; and oftenest something which the speaker has experienced.
a. Examples from the Veda are: párī ’mé gā́m aneṣata páry agním ahṛṣata, devéṣv akrata çrávaḥ ká imā́n ā́ dadharṣati (RV.) these here have led about a cow, they have carried around the fire, they have done honor to the gods — who shall venture anything against them? yám āíchāma mánasā sò ‘yám ā́ ’gāt (RV.) he whom we (formerly, impf.) sought with our mind has (now, aor.) come; yéné ’ndro havíṣā kṛtvy ábhavad dyumny ùttamáḥ, idáṁ tád akri devā asapatnáḥ kílā ’bhuvam (RV.) that libation by which Indra, making it, became (impf.) of highest glory, I have now made, ye gods; I have become free from enemies.
b. Examples from the Brāhmaṇa language are: sā́ hā ’smiñ jyóg uvāsa... táto ha gandharvā́ḥ sám ūdire: jyóg vā́ iyám urváçī manuṣyèṣv avātsīt (ÇB.) she lived with him a long time. Then the Gandharvas said to one another, "this Urvaçī, forsooth, hath dwelt a long time among mortals"; tasya ha dantāḥ pedire: taṁ ho ’vāca: apatsata vā asya dantāḥ (AB.) his teeth fell out. He said to him: "his teeth truly have fallen out"; índrasya vṛtráṁ jaghnúṣa indriyáṁ vīryàm pṛthivī́m ánu vy ā̀rchat tád óṣadhayo vīrúdho ‘bhavan sá prajapā́tim úpā ’dhāvad vṛtrám me jaghnúṣa indriyáṁ vīryàm pṛthivī́m ánu vy ā̀rat tád óṣadhayo vīrúdho ‘bhūvann íti (TS.) of Indra, when he had slain Vritra, the force and might went away into the earth, and became the herbs and plants; he ran to Prajāpati, saying: "my force and might, after slaying Vritra, have gone away into the earth, and have become the herbs and plants"; svayám enam abhyudétya brūyād vrā́tya kvā̀ ’vātsīḥ (AV., in prose passage) going up to him in person, let him say: "Vrātya, where hast thou abode"? yád idā́nīṁ dvāú vivádamānāv eyā́tām ahám adarçam ahám açrāuṣam íti yá evá brūyā́d ahám adarçam íti tásmā evá çráddadhyāma (ÇB.) if now two should come disputing with one another, [the one] saying "I have seen", [the other] "I have heard", we should believe the one who said "I have seen".
929. a. This distinction of the aorist from the imperfect and perfect as tenses of narration is very common in the Brāhmaṇalanguage (including the older Upanishads and the Sūtras), and is closely observed; violation of it is very rare, and is to be regarded as either due to corruption of text or indicative of a late origin.
b. In the Vedic hymns, the same distinction is prevalent, but is both less clear and less strictly maintained; many passages would admit an interpretation implying either sense; and evident aorist-forms are sometimes used narratively, while imperfect-forms are also occasionally employed in the aorist sense.
930. The boundary between what has just been and what is is an evanescent one, and is sometimes overstepped, so that an aorist appears where a present might stand, or was even rather to be expected. Thus: svāsasthe bhavatam indave na iti somo vāi rāje ’nduḥ somāyāi ’vāi ’ne etad rājña āsade ‘cīkḷpat (AB. i. 29. 7) "be ye comfortable seats for our Indu", he says; Indu is king Soma; by this means he has made them (instead of makes them) suitable for king Soma to sit upon; vāruṇī́r ā́po yád adbhír abhiṣiñcáti váruṇam evāí ’nam akar (MS. iv. 3. 10) the waters are Varuna's; in that he bepours him with waters, he has made him Varuna; pañcábhir vyā́ghārayati pā́n̄kto yajñó yā́vān evá yajñás tám ā́labdhā́ ’tho yā́vān evá yajñás tásmād rákṣāṅsy ápahanti (MS. iii. 2. 6) he smears with five; fivefold is the offering; as great as is the offering, of it he has [thereby] taken hold; then, as great as is the offering, from it he smites away the demons. This idiom is met with in all the Brāhmaṇas; but it is especially frequent in the MS.