Page:Atharva-Veda samhita volume 2.djvu/377

end pitṛ́bhyas ⌊as in our 5 b⌋ for pitṝ́ṅr úpa. In d, SPP. reads, with RV., áthe ”m enam, alleging for his reading three out of eight authorities, as against two or three that have imám. The comm. appears to read īm. Of our mss., all save O.Op.R. give áthe ’mám enam (and O. is corrected once to this, but the correction struck out again), as our edition reads; this is so bad a corruption that the authority for the other should be regarded as sufficient. TA. (in vi. 1. 4) agrees with RV. except in having karávas in its c ⌊our 5 a⌋. The text of the comm. agrees with RV. and TA. in having pitṛbhyas for pitṝṅr upa, while the comm. quotes pitṛbhyas and then adds and explains upa ⌊constructively a blend-reading⌋. Our Bp. appears to give in a çuçucaḥ, as it ⌊apparently⌋ ought to do according to Prāt. iv. 86, though the example is not quoted in the comment on that rule; but the other pada-mss. ⌊and SPP.⌋ have çūçucaḥ. The Anukr. is questionable in its reading as to the verse, whether tristubh or jagatt: the RV. version is pure tristubh; the AV. one is mixed (12 + 11: 11 + 12). Kāuç. (81. 33) prescribes this verse to be used, with 2. 36; 3. 71, and ii. 34. 5, when the youngest son lights the funeral pile, some of the schol. declaring vss. 4-7 to be intended instead ⌊cf. the comm., page 86²⁰⌋; then, in 81. 44, vss. 4-9 and 11-18 are called anuṣṭhānīs, and are to be repeated by the anuṣṭhātṛ during the cremation. ⌊Root kṣip properly means 'warp' in its obsolete sense 'cast or throw.' If, as I think, W. is right in rendering the causative here by 'warp' = 'twist out of shape, contort,' the cases present an interesting semantic parallel. BR. render by 'platzen machen.' Different is the sense of ava-kṣip at 4. 12: see my note.⌋

5. When thou shalt make him done, O Jātavedas, then commit him to the Fathers; when he shall go to that other life (ásunīti), then shall he become a controller (? vaçanī́) of the gods.

The verse is RV. x. 16. 2, but RV. makes our 5 a and 4 c change places: see note to vs. 4. RV. has yadā́ ⌊for our yadó = yadā́ u⌋ at beginning of c, and áthā at beginning of d. TA. (in vi. 1. 4) agrees throughout with RV. save in accenting karási in a. Both, of course, read áthe ”m enam in b; but this time the AV. mss. are as good as unanimous in the corruption of īm to imám, and both the published texts are compelled to read it; the Anukr., too, seems to ratify it, by calling the verse bhurij; the comm. has instead idam, and one or two of SPP's authorities follow it. The comm. explains asunīti by asūn prāṇān nayati lokāntaram, and hence prāṇāpahartrī devatā; and devānām by svakīyānām indriyāṇām; while vaçanīs is (cakṣurādīndriyāṇāṁ) sūryādidevatāprāpakaḥ! ⌊Weber deems the idea of getting the gods under your control to be an indication of lateness or possibly of Buddhistic influence: Sb. 1895, p. 845, and 1897, p. 597.⌋

6. With the trikadrukas it purifies itself; six wide ones, verily one great one; triṣṭúbh, gāyatrī́, the meters: all those [are] set in Yama.

RV. x. 14. 16, the corresponding verse, has in a patati, and at the end ā́hitā; TA, (in vi. 5. 3) agrees with it, but transposes triṣṭúbh and gāyatrī́ in c. The sense of the verse is wholly obscure. According to our comm., the trikadrukas are the jyotiṣṭoma, goṣṭoma, and āyuṣṭoma; the "six wide ones" (f.) are heaven and earth and day and night and waters and herbs; "the great one" (n.) is taken ⌊alternatively⌋ as applying to Yama (m.): mahāntāṁ yamam uddiçyāi ’va pravartante! The commentator's ignorance is as great as our own; only he has no mind to acknowledge it. ⌊Hillebrandt cites passages akin with this, Ved. Mythol. i. 500.⌋