ऋग्वेदे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

On the Mantras, Brāhmanas, and Sūtras, and their mutual relationship.

Probable origin and age of the Mantras, and Brāhmanas.

The Veda, or Scripture of the Brāhmans, consists, according to the opinion of the most eminent divines of Hindustan, of two principal parts, viz., Mantra and Brahmanam. All that is regarded as revelation must be brought under these two heads. What of the revealed word is no Mantra, that is a Brāhmaṇam ; and what is no Brahmanam, must be a Mantra. This is the line of argument followed by the Brāhmanic theologians. But this does neither make clear what a Mantra is, nor what we have to understand by a Brāhmaṇam. Both terms are technical, and their full bearing, and characteristic difference from one another, is to be comprehended only from a careful study of those works which bear either of these titles. The Brāhmanical divines have, of course, not failed to give definitions of both, and shown what topics fall under the head of either. But, as Sayaṇa (in his preface to his Comment ary on the Aitareya Brahmaṇam) justly remarks, all definitions of either term which were attempted, are unsatisfactory. [2] We have here nothing to do with the theological definitions of these two terms; we are only concerned with their meaning, from a literary point of view. And this we can state without reference to Brāhmanic authorities.

Each of the four Vedas (Rik, Yajus, Saman, and Atharvan) has a Mantra, as well as a Brahmaṇa portion. The difference between both may be briefly stated as follows: That part which contains the sacred prayers, the invocations of the different deities, the sacred verses for chanting at the sacrifices, the sacrificial formulas, blessings and curses, pro nounced by priests is called mantra, 1 i.e., the produce of thinking. This word is of a very early date; for we find it in the Zend-Avesta in the form of manthra also. Its meaning there is that of a sacred prayer, or formula, to which a magical effect was ascribed, ‘just as to the Vedic mantras. Zoroaster is called a manthran, i.e., a speaker of mantras, and one of the earliest names of the Scriptures of the Parsis, is manthra śpenta, i.e., the holy prayer (now corrupted to mansar spent).

See more about it in Goldstucker, " Pāṇini, his Place in Sanscrit Literature," page 68.

This fact clearly shows, that the term mantra in its proper meaning was already known at that early period of Aryan history when the ancestors of the Brāhmans and those of the Parsis (the ancient Iranians) lived as brother tribes peacefully together. This time was anterior to the combats of [3] the Devas and Asuras, which are so frequently mentioned in the Brāhmaṇas, the former representing the Hindus, the latter the Iranians.

At this time the whole sacred knowledge was, no doubt, comprised by the term mantra. The Brāhmaṇam was unknown; and there is actually nowhere in the whole Zend-Avesta a word to be found which conveys the same or a similar meaning which has been attached to the word " Brahmanam " in the Indian Literature.

The Brāhmagam always presupposes the Mantra ; for without the latter it would have no meaning, nay, its very existence would be impossible. By " Brāhmaṇam" we have always to understand that part of the Veda (Brāhmaṇical revelation) which contains speculations on the meaning of the mantras, gives precepts for their application, relates stories of their origin in connection with that of sacrificial rites, and explains the secret meaning of the latter. It is, to say it in short, a kind of primitive theology and philosophy of the Brahmang. The objects for these theological, philosophical, grammatical, etymological, and metrical speculations were the Mantras, and the sacrifices, principally the great ones, for the performance of which the Brabmans were actually trained, a custom which has obtained almost up to the present day in some parts of India (such as Mahārāstra). [4] Etymologically the word is derived from brahmdns which properly

2 See my Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings, and Roligion of tho Parsis, pp. 225.29.

$ Brahmán is derived from Brahma. This is an abstract noun, in tho noutor gendor, of a root brih (original from barh), to which the two meanings “ to raiso," and " to grow" are given by the Indian grammarians. The latter thought both meanings so irroc011 cilable that they substituted two roots brin. But there is cortainly no necessity for that. What grows, becomes bigger, and higher and thus “ rising in hoight, is a necessary consequence of growth. It is, however, very doubtful whother the root brin without a proposition (such as ud) can convey the meaning “to raiso." The meaning " to grow" is at any rate the original one. Thus derived Oralma mcang originally “ growth." That this was the original sense of the word, can be provod from other reasons also. Brahma is the same word in every respect, as tho baresma of tho Zend-Avesta, the “h’ of Sanscrit, being changed according to tho phonetical laws oL the Zend grammar, into a sibilant. This means a bunch of twigs tiod together by a reed which is used up to the present day by the Parsi priests when porfurming the Homa ceremony. The Brahmans use at all their sacrifices a bunch of lusa grass which is also tied together. They call it Veda (see Asv, sr. S. 1, 11 vedam patnyai prudaya

signifies the Brahma priest who must (5) know all Vedas, and understand the whole course and meannig of the sacrifice. He is supposed to be a perfect master of divinity, and has in this capacity to direct and superintend the sacrificial ceremonies. The most eminent of this class of priests laid down rules for the proper performance of sacrificial rites, explained them, and defended their own opinions, on such topics against those of their antagonists; moreover, they delighted in specula tions on matters of a more universal character, on this life, and that life, on the best means of securing wealth, progeny, fame, heaven, &c., on mind, soul, salvation, the Supreme Being; the dictum of such a Brahma

priest who passed as a great authority, was called a Brāhmanam.

vāchayet, i.e., after having handed over to the wife of the sacrificer that bunch of kuta grass which is called Veda, he should make her repeat this mantra, &c). Veda is a synony mous word for brahma; for the latter term is often explained by veda (so does Kaiyata in his notes on Patañjali’s explanation of Papini’s Sūtra 6, 3, 86, in the Mahābhāṣya), and thus identified with the designation of the whole body of sacred knowledge of the Brahmans. In the Nighantavas, the ancient collection of Vedic words, brahma occurs twice, once as a name for " food” (2, 7), and another time as that for " wealth." Both these meanings, principally the former, can easily be connected with that of “growta" They appear to be founded on passages of the Brahmanas, where it is said that the Brahma is food. In the Samhítā, however, these meanings are never to be met with ; but from this circumstance it certainly does not follow that they never existed. The meaning attached to the word in the Sanhits appears to be that of " sacred hymon chant." Sayana explains it often by stotra, i.e. the performance of the Sāma chanters (see his commentary on Rigveda, 7, 22, 9) or by stotráni haviṇṣicha (7, 23, 1), i.e. chants and offerings. This meaning is, however, not the original one, and does even in the Samhitā hardly express, its proper sense. It cannot be an equivalent either for mantra or sámun or stotram, or havis, and if it appear to be used in one of these senses, it means their courmon gource; for the hymn, repeated by the Hotar, as well as the chant of the Sama singers and the obla. tions given to the fire by the Adhvaryu, are all equally made sacred by means of their participation in the bralima. Such expressions as, “ to make the brahma," “to stir up the brahma,” (brahma jinvatt) throw some light on its nature. They show (as one may clearly see from such passages as Taittirīya Brahmanam 1, 1), that it was regarded as a laten power, like electricity, whicb was to be stirred up at the time of the performance of a ceromony. The apparatus were the sacred vessels, or the hymns, or chants. So, at a certain ceremony at the morning libation of tho Soma feast, the Adhvaryi and Prati pasthātār put the two Grabas (Soma cups), called Sukra and Manthi (see Ait. Br. 3, 1’) together, and address them in the following way,“ Put, yo two (Grabas) ! together the Brahwa; may ye stir it up for me," &c., (Taittir. Br. 1, 1). This evidently means, that these two Grahas are put together for the purpose of eliciting the Brahma-power, and all the other powers, dependent upon it, such as the Kṣattram, &c. The presence of the brukma at every sacrifice is necessary; for it is the invisible 11uk connecting the cere mony performed with the fruits wished for, such as sovereignty, leadership, cattle, food, &c.

It is, as we have seen, symbolically represented by a bunch of kusa grass, which is always wandering from one person to another, as long as the sacrifice lasts. It expresses

ped

[6] Strictly speaking, only the rule regarding the performance of a parti cular rite, * or the authoritative opinion on a certain point of speculative theology went by this name, and we have accordingly in the works called Brahmaṇas, nothing more or less than collections of the dicta of those Brahma priests on the topics mentioned. Afterwards the term Brahmanam, which originally signified only a single dictum, was applied to the whole collection.

In a still more comprehensive sense we have to understand by " Brahmaṇa," a whole kind of literature, including the so-called Aranyakas and Upaniṣads,

· Each Veda has a Brahmaṇam, or collectiou of the dicta of Brahma priests, of its own. But they also show in style, expression, line of argų ment, and object and tendency of their speculations, such a close affinity, and even identity, that the common origin of all Brahmanas is indisputable. They owe mainly their origin to those Brahmans who constituted them selves into regular sacrificial congregations, in order to perform the so-called Sattras or sacrificial sessions, some of which could last for many years. The legendary history of India knows of such sessions which are said to have lasted for one hundred, and even one thousand years. Though these reports [7] are extravagant, they undoubtedly show that there was a time in Ilin. dustan when large bodies of Brahmans spent almost their whole lives in sacrificing. This time is to be sought for at a very early period of Inilian history ; for the Brāhmaṇas with their frequent allusions and references to the Sattras of the Kiṣis on the banks of the Sarasvati, and those hold by the half-mythical Angiras, and by the Adityas (a class of gods), or even by the cows, trees, snakes, &c., presuppose their existence from times immemorial. Likewise we find in the Mahabharata frequent mention made of these sacrificial sessions which constitute one of the characteristic foa tures of the earliest Brahmanic settlements in the northwest of Ilindustan. It is chiefly at these Sattras that we have to look for the development and refinement of the sacrificial art, and the establishment of certain rules regarding the performance of sacrificial ceremonies.

the productive power in nature, which manifests itself in tho growth of plants, and all other creatures. The sacrificer wishes by means of the mystical process of tho sacrifice to get hold of it; for only then he is sure of obtaining anything he might wish for.

4 So are, for instance, the rules given for the repetition of tho Dirotlaram (4, 10) quoted as a “ Brahmaṇam" (in 6, 25). See also 8, 2.

5 Seo Mahābhārata 3, 105,13, where a Sattra, Iṣtakrita by name, is mentioned as lasting for one thousand years.

xiii

When the Brāhmaṇas were brought into that form, in which we possess them now, not only the whole kalpa (i.e. the way of performing the sacrificial ceremonies) was settled, save some minor points, but even the symbolical and mystical meaning of the majority of rites. It took, no doubt, many centuries before the almost endless number of rites and cerem monies, and their bewildering complications could form themselves into such a regular system of sacrificial rules, as we find already exhibited in the Brāhmaṇas. For the Sūtras which belong to each class of Brāhmanas generally contain nothing novel, (8) no innovation in the sacrificial art; they supply only the external form to a system which is already complete in the Brāhmaṇas, and serve as text-books to the sacrificial priests. And even in their arrangement they follow often their Brāhmaṇas to which they be long. So for instance the fourth, fifth, and sixth Adhyayas of the Asvala yana Sūtras, which treat of the Agniṣtoma, Soma sacrifice, and its modi fications, Ukthya, ṣolaši, and Atirātra, closely correspond to the three first books, and the two first chapters of the fourth, of the Aitareya Brāhmaṇam ; and the seventh and eighth Adhyāya of those Sūtras treat exactly of the same subjects, as the three last chapters of the fourth book, and the fifth and sixth books of our Brāhmaṇam, viz., on the various parts of the Sattras, or sacrificial sessions, and the numerous recitations required for their performance. In many passages, the Aitareya Brāb ,maṇam and the Asvalāyana Sutras even literally agree. The latter could,

from their very nature as a “ string of rules" for the guidance of the sacrificial priests, dispense with almost all the numerous speculations of the meaning and effect of certain verses and rites, and all points of contro versy in which some of the Brāhmaṇas abound; but as regards the actual performance of rites, what mantras were required at certain occasions, and in what way they were to be repeated, the Satras must give much more detail and be far more complete than the Brāhmaṇas. From this nature of both classes of works, and the relation in which they stand to one [9] another, it would not be difficult to show, that both might have ori ginated at the same time. Pāṇini distinguishes between old and new Brāhmaṇas as well as between old and new Kalpa works (8ūtras). The strict distinction between a Brāhmaṇa and Sūtra period is, on a closer inquiry, hardly tenable. The Brāhmaṇas were only more complete col lections of the same traditional stock which was in existence on the sacrificial art and its meaning than the Sūtras, which were compiled for practical purposes only.

We may safely conclude from the complicated nature and the multitude of the Brahminical sacrifices which were already developed

xiv

and almost complete at the time of the composition of the Vedic frymas, not only at that of the Brahmaṇas, that the compilation of sacrificial manuals containing all the rules for the actual performance of the duties of a certain class of priests (such as the Hotris or repeaters of the Rik verses, the Udgātris, the chanters of the Rik verses, and the Adhvaryus, the manual labourers and sacred cooks), was quite necessary at a very early time, certainly not posterior to the collection of the Mantras and the dicta of the Brahma priests into separate works.

The Sūtras contain many special rules which will be in vain sought for in the Brāhmaṇas, but which are there simply presupposed. So we do not find, for instance, the description of the Daráapurnama isthi (the New and Full Moon sacrifice), or that of the Chfiturmāsya-isti, in the Aitareya Brāhmanam, though their names are occasionally mentioned, but [10] we find them in the Asvalagana Sūtras. The recital of the Samidhent verses (required when kindling the fire at the coinmencement of any sac rificial rite) is briefly mentioned in the Brahmanas, but minutely described in the Sūtras (1, 2). That they were left out in tho Brahmanam cannot be accounted for by assuming that their exposition was alien to the purpose of its author, or that they were unknown to him, but only by believing, that they were regarded as too trivial matters, too commonly known to deserve any special notice on his part. Certain modifications in repeating mantras (required at the great Soma sacri fices), such as the Dürohanam, the Nyrtilha, the peculiar construction and repetition of the Solasi and Vūllahılya Sastras, «c., are in the Brahmanam almost as minutely and accurately describol, as we find them in the Sūtras (compare, for instance, Ait. Br. 4, 19. with Asv. Sr. S. 8,2). This clearly shows that the authors of the Brālumanas know as well all the details of the sacrificial art as the compilers of the Sūtras. The circumstance that many such things, as the recital of the Sāmidheni verses, &c., were left out in the Brahmanam, though they are neither very simple to comprehend, nor were they unknown, entities us to assume that they were taught in separate treatises, whiel could be nothing else than works like the present Sātras.

The Sætras wbich we possess at present are, no doubt, postorior to the Brāhmanas to which they belong; but there is every reason to believe that there were Sūtras more ancient, and simple in their [11] style, which served the authors of the present ones as sources of information, and these works may have been co-eval with the majority of our Brahmaṇas.

Although we cannot discover any inaterial difference betwoen the Brühmaṇas and the Satras so as to regard the latter as duroloping and

systematizing the ideas contained in the former, as is the case with the Vedanta philosophy in reference to the Upaniṣads, yet there exists one between the Brāhmaṇas, and the Mantras and hymns. This difference is, however, not very great, and can be accounted for partially from other causes than that of age. Alieady the lymns presuppose a settled ritual, and contain many speculative ideas similar to those of the Brāhmaṇas.

Some scholars hold that the occurrence of sacrificial terms, or of philosophical and mystical ideas, are suggestive of the late date of the hymn in which they are found. But these circumstances do by Do means afford any sure test as to the relative age of the Vedic hymns. One has even drawn a strict line of distinction between a Mantra and Chbandas period, assigning to the former all the sacrificial hymns, to the latter those expressive of religious and devotional feelings in general, without any reference to sacrificial rites. But I have grave doubts whether this distinction will prove tenable on further inquiries, chiefly if this question as to the age of a certain hymn is made entirely to depend upon what period (the Mantra or Chhandas period) it might belong to. There are sacrificial hymns which, to judge from their style and their general ideas, must (12) be as ancient as any which have been assigned to the Chhandas period.

I may instance here the hymn required at the horse-sacrifice (Rigveda, 1, 162) and the Nabhanediṣtha Sūkta (10, 61 ; on its origin see Ait. Br. 5, 14). The former is assigned by Max Müller to the Mantra period (between 1000-800) on no other ground but because of its containing technical terms of the sacrificial art. But this reason is certainly not sufficient to make it late. On the contrary, its rather unpolished style, its poor imagery, its beginning with the invocation of the most ancient triad of Indian gods, Mitra, Varuna, and Aryaman, the very names of which deities are even to be met with in kindred nations, such as the Iranians and Greeks, the mentioning of several sacrificial priests by obsolete and uncommon names,–all these circum stances combined tend to show, that it is rather one of the earliest than one of the latest productions of Vedic poetry. We find in it the sacrificial art, if compared with its description in the Brāmaṇas, in its infancy, yet containing all the germs of the latter system. Because of almost all incidents attendant upon a sacrifice being mentioned in this hyman, it: affords us the best means for investigating into the extent

• History of Ancient Sanscrit Literature, page 553,xvi

and development of the sacrificial art at the time of its composition. Let us point out some of the most remarkable facts which may be elicited from it. [13] In the fifth verse the names of the performing priests are mentioned. They are only six in number, viz. Hotar, Adhvaryu, Avayāj, Agnimindha, Gravagrabha, and Samstar. Four of these names are quite uncommon or obsolete. Avayāj is the Pratiprasthātar, Agnimindha (the fire-kindler), the Agnídhra, Grāvagrābha the Grāvastut, and Samstar the Maitrāvaruna of the Brāhmanas. The small number of priests at the horse-sacrifice (aśvamedha), which was at later times, as we may learn from descriptions given of it in the epic poems, the greatest, most complicated and costly which the Brahmans used to perform, must surprise, principally if we consider, that the Agniṣtoma, which was the most simple Soma sacrifice, required for its performance already at the time of the Brāhmanas, and even anterior to it, sixteen officiating priests.

There can be no doubt that in the most ancient times a comparatively small number of priests was sufficient for the performance of a simplo animal or Soma sacrifice. The two most ancient offices were those of the Hotar and Adhvaryu; they were known already when the ancient Iranians separated from the ancestors of the Hindus; for we easily recognise them by the names Zota and Rathwi (now corrupted to Raspi) in the Zend Avesta.

The Pratiprasthātar appears to have been an assistant of the Add varyu from a very remote time; for we find the two Aśvins called the two Adhvaryus (Ait. Br. 1, 18), by which expression we can only under stand the Adhvaryu and [14] his constant assistant the Pratiprasthitar, That there was a plurality of Adhvaryus already at the time of tho Riṣis, we may learn from several passages of the Samhitī of the Rigveda (2, 37, 2; 8, 2, 4).

The fourth priest here mentioned is the Agnidhra ; for by the term Agnimindha we can only understand him. His office appears to be very old and he is once mentioned by his very name Agnidhra in a Vedic song (2, 36, 4). Besides, we meet with the well-known formula which he has, as the protector of the sacrifice, to repeat as often as the Adllvaryu commences a set of oblations accompanied by the Anuvákyā and Yūjya mantras of the Hotar. This is astu þrauṣat (1, 139, 1), which he has to repeat when the Adhvaryu calls upon him to do so, by the formula ô śrāvaya." Before he repeats it, he takes a wooden sword, called

. This formula is repeated just before the commencomcnt of the so-called Prnyijas, Asval. śr, S1, 4, gives the following rules; Adhvaryur ásravayati pratyášrcivayad

ENVIA E

rway.

sphya’ into his hand, and ties round it twelve stalks of kusa grass, called idhmasannahanani (what is tied round the wood), making three knots (trisandhana). He must hold it up as long as the principal offerings last, from (15) the time of the beginning of the Prayajas till the Sviṣtakrit is over. The purpose of this act as explained by the Srotriyas (sacrificial priests) of the present day is to keep the Rakṣasas and evil spirits away from the sacrifice. Now the whole ceremony, along with the formulas used, resembles so closely what is recorded in the Zend-Avesta of the angel Sraosha (now called Seroṣh), that we can fairly conclude that the office, or at any rate, the duties, of the Agnidhra priests were already known to the Aryas before the Iranians separated from the Indians. Serosh, as may be seen from the Serosh Yasht (Yasna 57), holds in his hand a sword (śnaithis) in order to fight against the Devas, and to keep them away from the creation of Ormazd. He first spread the sacred grass or twigs; he first repeated (fraśravayat) the sacred prayers. His very name of Sravsha reminds of the call śrauṣat. One of the duties of the Agnīdhra, or Agrīt, was to kindle the fire. Such an office is known also to the Parsi ritual. It is that of the Atarevakso, i. e. who feeds the fire, a name often applied to the Rathwi, in which we have recognised the Adhvaryu.

The fifth priest is the Grāragrābha, a name no further mentioned in other Vedic books. Sāyaṇa identifies him with the Grāvastute of the ceremonial of the Brāhmaṇas. The office of the latter is to repeat the Pavamānya verses when the Soma juice is being prepared. But the name Grāvagrabha (18) implies more, for it means, one who holds, or seizes the Grāvaṇas?" (Soma squeezing stones). This is done by the Adhvarya himself. In ancient times the Soma juice was very likely extracted by that priest who had to repeat the mantras for the purification of the Soma juice, that is, by the Grāvastut. Such a priest who was engaged in the preparation of the Soma (Homa) juice is also known in the Zend-Avesta.

āgnidhrah, i. e. the Adhvaryu calls, ö śrāvaya, to which the Agnidhra responds by astu śrausat. Both formulas are mentioned or alluded to in two Satras of Panini (8, 2, 91-92), who teaches that the first vowel in śráuṣat, and the first and second in ö śravaya are to le pronounced in the pluta way, i.e. with three moras. Regarding śrāuṣaç Ašval. gives the same’ rale (astu śrāuṣaţ iti aukarum plávayan); but the pronunciation of ö śrāvaya he does not particularly mention.

Other interpretations have been given of this word by European scholars. But being: myself in possession of a sphya, and baving seen its use at the sacrifce, I can prove beyond any doubt, that it is a wooden sword.
On his office, see 6, 1-2, pp. 379-80. 10 See the note on the preparation of the Soma 7, 32 pp. 488-90.

Iviii

His name there is havanan, 11 4.6. one who makes or prepares the havana=savana" libatior."

The sixth priest mentioned in the Asvamedha hymn is the Samstar, 2.e. the repeater of Sastras. This is no doubt the Maitrāvaruna of the later ritual, who is several times mentioned by the name of Prašāstar in other passages of the Samhita (1, 94,6) and in the Brahmanas. Sayaṇa takes the same viev.

Besides the names of the officiating priests, we have to examine some of the technical terms of the sacrificial art. In the 15th verso we find (17] the expressions, iṣtam, vitam, abhigurtam, vaṣatkritam, which all refer to the repetition of the Yājya mantra by the Hotar when the Adhvaryu is ready to throw the offering into the fire. Istam is the technical term for

pronouncing the Yājyā mantra itself; athigārtam, which is the same as

· āgūrtam, signifies the formula ye yajámahe (generally called āgur) which

always precedes the Yājyā verse; vaṣatkritam is the pronunciation of the formula vāuṣat at the end of the Yājyā verse; vitam refers to the formula Agne yihi, which follows the pagatkara, and is itself followed by another vaṣatkāra (the so-called Anuvaṣıkára)

Let us now sum up the evidence furnished by this sacrificial hymn as bearing upon the history of the sacrificial art in its relationship to the mass of other Vedic songs on the one, and to the Brāhmaṇas on the other, side.

In examining the names of the officiating priests, we can here dis cover only two classes instead of the four, known to other Vedic hymns, and principally to the Brāhmaṇas. We have only Adhvaryus and Hotris, but no Brahma priests, and no Udgātris (chanters). Without the two latter classes no solemn sacrifice at which Soma was used could be per formed oven at a time far anterior to the Brahmaṇas. There is no doubt, the introduction of each of these two classes marks a new, epoch in the history of the sacrificial art, just as the separation of the offices of Adh

11 See Višparad 3,1, The term havana occars in tho Gathās for Homa (Yasnih, 10). That it means the same as the Vedic savana with which it is identical follows aquistal ably from the context. A fratarem havanem and an aparem. lavanem, that is a first and second libation, are even distinguished. (Yasna 10, 2, ed. Westergaard). The matarem havanem is the pratah savanam, że morning libation of the ritual books; the uparem in latter, following, corresponds to the mādhyandino savanam. Tho Parsi priests prepare up to the present day actually the Homa juice twice when performing tho Homa ceremony. The first preparation takes place before the Zota (tho Hotar of the Brahmans) appears; the second commences at the beginning of the proper ceromony, and is finished along with it. The Zota drinks the Howa which was prepared first by the Raspi (Adlvaryu); that one prepared during the ceremony is thrown into a well as a kind of otlaring

varyu and Hotar in the ante-Vedio times, indicates the first step in the development of the art of sacrificing. At that early time when the (18] Iranians left their Indian brethren’ on account of a bitter religious contest, which is known in the Brāhmaṇas as the struggle between the Devas and Asuras; already the offices of an Adhvaryu and Hotar were distinct, as we may learn from the Zend-Avesta, which exhibits the religion of the Asuras (Ahura religion, its professors calling themselves ühurotkéskô=asura-dikṣā, i.e. initiated into the Asura rites).

But the offices of Udgātris and that of the Brahma priests were not known to the Aryas at that time; they were introduced subsequently, after the separation. In many Vedic hymns we find, however, the duties principally of the former class (the chanters) mentioned. They are often juxtaposed with those of the Hotars. The term for the perform ance of the Hotri-priests is saris, to praise, recite; that for that of the Udgātris stų or gái to sing (see, for instance, Rigveda Samh (8, 1, 1; 6, 62, 5; 6, 69, 2-3); besides the technical names uktha=Sastra and Stoma, sama, are frequently to be met with (see 8, 1, 15; 3, 3,6; 6,3; 16,9; 14, 11 ; 6, 24, 7, &c.). Now the absence of all such terms, indica tory of the functions of the Udgātris (chanters) in the Afvamedha hymn is certainly remarkable. Their not occuring might, perhaps, be accounted for by the supposition that the chanters were not required at the horse sacrifice. It is true, several smaller sacrifices, such as the Darsapūrna. māsa, the Ohāturmāsya Iṣtis and the animal sacrifice (if performed apart without forming part of a Soma sacrifice) are performed without any chanting; [19] but for Soma sacrifices of whatever description, the chanters are as indispensable as the Hotars. That the Ašvamedha was connected with a Soma sacrifice?* already at the time of the composition of the hymn in question, undoubtedly follows from the office of Grāvagrábha being mentioned in it; for this priest is only required for the extracting of the Soma juice, and has nothing whatever to do with any other sacrificial rite. The mentioning of the Sanstar (Maitrāvruṇa) is another indication that the Afvamedha already at that early time was accompanied by a Soma sacrifice. For one of the principal duties of the Maitrāvaruṇa, who may be called the first assistant of the Hotar, is to repeat Sastras, which are only required at Soma sacrifices as the necessary accompaniments of all chants.

Besides the Udgā fris, we miss the class of the Brahma priests, viz. Brahmā, Brāhmanāchansi, and Subrahmanya, whose services are required

13 According to Asval, át. 8otras (10, 8) there are three Soma days (sutyanis required for the horse sacrifice.

at all great sacrifices. The Brahmā cannot, even at small sacrifices, such as the Darsapūrṇamāsa Iṣti, be dispensed with. The Brahmana chansi aud Subrahmanya are at Soma sacrifices as indispensable as the Maitrāvaruna; the first has to repeat also Sastras for the chants, the latter to invite every day Indra to the Soma feast (see the note to 6, 3, pp. 382-84).

The introduction of the Brahmā priest marks• no doubt a new era in the history of the sacrificial art; [20] for to judge from the nature of his duties as superintendent of the sacrifical ceremonies, he was only necessary at a time when the sacrifice had become already very complicated, and was liable to many mistakes. The origin of the office dates earlier than the Brāhmaṇas. Unmistakeable traces of it are to be found already in the Samhita of the Rigveda. In one passage 1, 10, 1, the Bralımi priests (brahmanas) are juxtaposed with the Hotris (arkina?) and Urigatris (guyat rinah). They are there said to “raise Indra just as (one raises) a reed.” Similarly we find together gayata, chant, samsata, praise, and brahma krinuta make the Brahma (8, 32, 17). In 10, 91, 10 the Brahmi is mon tioned along with other priests also, such as the Potar, Neṣtar, &c. Tho little work done by the Brahmā priests, or rather their idleness, is men tioned, 8, 92, 30," do not be as lazy as a Brahma priest" (mo șrı trah meva tandrayur bhuvah). That the Brahmā priests were thus reproached may clearly be seen from Ait. Brāhm. 5, 34. The Brahmā priest is the speaker or éxpounder of religious matters (10, 71, 11; 117, 8), -in which capacity they became the authors of the Brahmanas. That the Brahmā was expected to know all secret things, may bo inferred from several passages (10, 85, 3; 16; 35; 36). Brihaspati, the teacher of the gods, is also called brahmd (10, 143, 3), and Agni is honoured with tho same name (7,7,5), as well as his pious worshippers of old, the so-called Angirasah (7, 42, 1). Sometimes the name signifies the Brahman as distinguished from the Kṣattriyas brahmani rajani va (1, 108, 7). [21] It is certainly remarkable, that none of the Brahmii priests is to be found among the priests enumerated in the Agvamedha liyinn, and we may safely conclude, that their offices were not known at that time. The word brahma (neuter) itself occurs in it (in the seventeenth verno), “If any one, in order to make thee sit, did thee harm by kicking theo with his heels, or striking thee with a whip violently so that thou didst snort, I cause all to go off from thee by means of the Brałıma, just as I make flow (the drops of melted butter) by means of a Sruch (sacrificial spoon) over the piece which is among the ready-made oficrings (adlı vareşu). Brahma has here very likely its original meaning, “ the sacrificial grass

Ixi

or a certain bunch of it (see the note on pages 4, 5 of this Introduction), For the meaning " prayer,” which is here given to it by Sāyana, does not suit the simile. In order to understand it fully, one has to bear in mind that the Adhvaryu after having cooked and made ready any offering (Purodása or flesh, or Charu, &c.) generally pours from a Sruch some drops of melted butter over it. Now the brahma by means of which the priest is to soothe all injury which the sacrificial horse may have received from kicking or striking, is compared with this Sruch; the drops of melted butter are then the several stalks of the bunch of the sacrificial grass, required at all sacrifices and their taking out, and throwing away (as is done at all sacrifices, see note 8 to page 79), is compared to the flowing of the drops from the sacrificial spoon.

Not only is the number of priests less, but the [22] ceremonies are also more simple. It appears from verse 15th, that there was no Puronuvākyêu or introductory mantra required, but the Yajyā alone was sufficient. The latter consisted already of the same parts as in the Brāhmaṇas, viz. the Agur, the Yajyā mantra, the Vaşatkāra and Anuvaşatkāra (see note 32 to page 95, page 126, and note 11 to page 133-34). The Agur or the introductory formula, ye yajāmahe, i e., “what (gods are), those we worship by sacrificing," is very ancient, and seems to go back even beyond the properly so-called Vedic times ; for we meet it even with the same name already in the Zend-Avesta (see note 11 to page 134); even a large number of the Parsi prayer formulas commence with it up to this day, viz. yuzámaide. The Vaşaçkāra or the call văuşat, and the Anuvaşatkāra, or the second call vāuşať preceded by Agni rihi, i.e., “Agni eat (the food),” must be also very old, though we do not find any trace of them in the Parsi ritual, which circumstance can be, however, easily accounted for. The first call váuşat being required in the very moment of the offering being thrown into the fire, and the second at once after it, there was no occasion for them at the Zoroastrian sacrifices; for the priests are not allowed to throw flesh, or Homa, or even cakes into the fire; they have only to show their offerings to the sacred element. In the Samhita itself, the Vaşatkāra is frequently mentioned, and in hymns which show by no means a modern origin (see 1, 14, 8; 120, 4; 21,5; 7, 14, 3; 15, 6;99, 7, &c); some of them appar ently allude to the [23] Anuvaşatkāra, (so, for instance, 7, 156, semám vetu vaşatkritim, ‘may he eat this piece’ offered by the call vauşat! vi (in vihi) being one of the characteristic terms of the Anuvaşatára).

From all we have seen as yet it clearly follows that the Ašvamedha hymn is by no means a late, but a very early, production of Vedic poetry,

xti

and that consequently a strict distinction between a Chbandas and Mantra period, making the former by about two hundred years older than the latter, is hardly admissible.

The same result is to be gained from a more cloge examination of other pre-eminetly sacrificial hymns, which all would fall under the Mantra period. There being here no occasion to investigate into all hymns of that character, I will only here make some remarks on the Nābhānediştha hymns (10, 61-62). Their history is given in the Ait. Brāhm. itself (5, 14). They are traced to Manu, the progenitor of the human race, who gave them to his son, Nabhanedişgha. He should communicate them to the Angiras, for enabling them to perform success fully the ceremonies of the sixth day (in the Şalaha, (see note 9 to page 279), and receive all their property as a sacrificial reward.

This whole story appears to have no other foundation, 1but the two hymns themselves, principally the [241 latter. The first is very difficult to understand, the second is on the the whole simple. Both are by tradition ascribed to Nābhānediştha, the son of Manu, whose existence is very doubtful. They differ so much in style, that they cannont have the same author. Several traits of the legend, however, are to be found in them. The refrain of the first four verses of 10, 62 which is addressed to the Angiras, “receive the son of Manu,” re-occurs in the legend ; also the gift of a thousand. In a verse of the former (10, 61, 18) the word nábhanediştha occurs, but it does not mean there a human, but somo divine, being. I give the 18th and 19th verses in translation.

(18) “His relative, the wealthy Nabhānediştha who, directing his thoughts towards thee, speaks on looking forward (as follows) ’this our navel is the highest; as often as required I was behind bin (the Nābhānedistha on earth). "

(19) “This is my pavel, bere is what resides with me, thene gods are mine; I am everything. Those who are first born, and those who are born for a second time (by reproduetion),–the cow milked that (seed) from the truth, (and) they are born.” **

15 It is to be found also with little difference in the Taittiriya Samhita 8, 1, 0, 4-6. Instead of the two Saktas (hymus) Mana there is said to have given his son « Brihmanan on a certain rite concerning the share of Radra in the Boma libation, to help the Angiras to heaven. The " sixth day" is not mentioned in it. The man in a “blackish dress” of the Aitareya Br, is here called Rudra.

1* The explanation given by Sayaṇa of these difficult verses is vory artificial. He tries to get out of the kyun everywhere the story told of Nabhanedin tha in the Aite Br. 5, 14.

From these two verses as well as from several others in it (princi pally 2 and 5-8 describing Prajapati’s illicit intercourse with his [25] daughter, see Ait. Br. 3, 33), we may clearly perceive that Nābhāne diştha and the hymn in question refer to generation. This view is fully eorroborated by the application of it at the sacrifice, as expounded by the Brāhmaṇam, and as even pre-supposed in the hymn itself.

We know from various passages of the Brāhmaṇas, that one of the principal acts of the sacrificial priests was to make a new body to the sacrificer, and produce him anew by mantras, and various rites, by making him mystically undergo the same process to which he owed his natural life. So, for instance, the whole Pravargya ceremony (see note 1 to pages 41-43), the Ajya and Pra-uga Sastras (see Ait. Br. 2, 35-38; 3, 2) of the morning libation, and the so-called Silpa Sastras (6, 27-31) of the Hotri-priests are intended for this purpose. Of the latter the two Nābhānediştha hymns form the two first parts, representing the seed effused, and its transformation to an embryo in its rudest state (see 6, 27). Nābhānediştha is the sperm when effused ; after having undergone some change in the womb, it is called Narasamsa.16 That the hyma originally had such a mystical sense, is evident from the two first verses: [26] (1) “May this awful Brabma, which he (Prajapati) thus skilfully pronounced in words at the congregation, at the assembly, fill the seven Hotars on the day of cooking (the sacrificial food), when his (the sarificer’s) parents (and other) liberal men (the priests) are making (his body).”.

(2) “He established (as place) for the reception of his gift the altar (vedi), destroying, and ejecting the enemy with his weapons. After having thus made the place safe) he then hastily under a very loud cry poured forth hiş sperm in one continuous (stream).”

The meaning of these two verses can only be the following: the poet who was no doubt a; sacrificial priest himself wishes, that the hymn which be regards as, a revelation from Prajā pati, who repeated it at the great sacrificial session which he is so frequently said to have held, may fill the seven Hotri-priests when they, with the same liberality as Prajapati

14-This idea must be very old; for we find an unmistakeable trace of it in the Zoroastrian tradition. So we read in the Bundehesh (page 80 in Westergaard’s edition of the Pehlevi text) that the angel Nerioseng (nerioseng yazd=narasamhsa yajata in Sanscrit) intercepted the three particles of sperm which Zoroaster is said to have once lost, and out of which the three great prophets, Oshadar (bāmi), Oshadar máh, and Sosiosh are expected to spring at the end of the world. Norioseng clothed the said sperms with lustre and strength (rosnus Zor), and handed them over to Andhit (the Persian Venus) to look at them. They are guarded against the attacks. of the Devas (the Indian gods) by 999,999 Probarg (a kind of angels).

and

xxiv

(when he poured forth his sperm) are like parents making by their hymns the new celestial body to the sacrificer. The place for reception uf the seed poured out mystically in prayer by the IIotars, is the altar; for standing near it (and even touching it with their feet) they repeat the mantras. The reason that they have to regard the Vedi as the safe receptacle of the seed, is to be sought for in the antecedent of I’rajinati, who prepared it for the purpose, defending [27] it against the attacks of enemies. After having made it safe, he poured out his soed vlenco then all creatures sprang (see Ait. Br. 3, 34).

Nabhānediştha is, according to the verses above quoted, the heavenly guardian of all germs of generation ; all gods, men, boasts, &c., come from him. His assistance is required when the sacrificial priests are producing the new celestial body of the sacrificer. He looks down from heaven at his relative, that is, the seeds containing tho germ of new life poured out mystically by the lotars in their prayers. Ilis navel is the centre of all births in the universe ; as being nearest (* nearest to the pavel’ is the literal meaning of náthān tiştha), he is the guardian of all seeds. Every seed on earth has only effect as far as ko participates in it. We have here the Zoroastrian idea of the Fravashis (Frohars) who aro the prototypes of all things existing. The word nābhānediştha munt lo very old; for we find it several times in the form nabānaedlisti in the Zend Avesta. It is an epithet of the Fravashis (Yasna, 1, 18. Yashtu 13, 156), and signifies the lineal descendants in future generations’t (Vend. 4, 5-10 Westergaard).

[28] Although the Nábbānediştha hymn (10, 61) is purely wrisirial, and composed at a time when the Rişis already indulged in speculations on the mystical meaning of sacrificial rites, no trace can be found, to whole that it is a modern composition. The circumstance, that it is already in the Aitareya Brahmanam traced to Manu, the progenitor of the human race, shows, that its origin is entirely lost in the depths of antiquity. The mentioning of Kaleşivan in verso 16, and the occurrence of tho “seven Hotars” (in the 1st verse) are no proofs of a late origin, For

14 See my Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings and Roligion of the Parkih, page 180.

17 This is the sopse of naram nabānizdistancim, in the fourth lirargard of the Vondilld. In the passage in question, tho punishment consequent on the breach of a promine iu smidi to extend to so and so many narcim nabing distanin, literally, men who arit 7)**Arnst the narel of the offender, that is, his lineal descendants. The Pehlavi translatze#11 Witow in its notes about the same meaning to it. So it has for instance to 1,5 the role : 0) Nat. bỉm daresn “for three hundred years there will be dangor (for the nubinazuistus).” THIA is also the opinion of many Dastars,

Xv11

sphyas into his hand, and ties round it twelve stalks of kusa grass, called idhmasannahandni (what is tied round the wood), making three knots (trisandhana). He must hold it up as long as the principal offerings last, from (15) the time of the beginning of the Prayájas till the Sviştakrit is over. The purpose of this act as explained by the Srotriyas (sacrificial priests) of the present day is to keep the Rakşasas and evil spirits away from the sacrifice. Now the whole ceremony, along with the formulas used, resembles so closely what is recorded in the Zend-Avesta of the angel Sraosha (now called Seroşh), that we can fairly conclude that the office, or at any rate, the duties, of the Agnidhra priests were already known to the Aryas before the Iranians separated from the Indians. Serosh, as may be seen from the Serosh Yasht (Yasna 57), holds in his hand a sword (śnaithis) in order to fight against the Devas, and to keep then away from the creation of Ormazd. He first spread the sacred grass or twigs; he first repeated fraśrāvayat) the sacred prayers. His very name of Sraosha reminds of the call śrausat. One of the duties of the Agnidhra, or Agrīt, was to kindle the fire. Such an office is known also to the Parsi ritual. It is that of the Atarevakso, 2. e. fyho feeds the fire, a name often applied to the Rathwi, in which we have recognised the Adhvaryu.

The fifth priest is the Grdragrābha, a name no further mentioned in other Vedic books. Sāyaṇa identifies him with the Grāvastut® of the ceremonial of the Brāhmaṇas. The office of the latter is to repeat the Pavamānya verses when the Soma juice is being prepared. But the Dame Grāvagrabha (16) implies more, for it means, one who holds, or seizes the Grāvaṇası(Soma squeezing stones). This is done by the Adhvaryu himself. In ancient times the Soma juice was very likely extracted by that priest who had to repeat the mantras for the purification of the Soma juice, that is, by the Grāvastut. Such a priest who was engaged in the preparation of the Soma (Homa) juice is also known in the Zend-Avesta.

RAINL

dgnidhral, t. e, the Adhvaryu calls, ö śrāvaya, to which the Agnidhra responds by astu Árausat. Both formulas are mentioned or alluded to in two Satras of Panini (8, 2, 91-92), who teaches that the first vowel in śráusat, and the first and second in o śravaya are to be pronounced in the pluta way, i.e. with three moras. Regarding sráuşat Asya), gives the same rule (astu śrāuşat iti aukaram plāvayan); but the pronunciation of o śrāvaya he does not particularly mention.

S Other interpretations have been given of this word by European scholars. But being myselt in possession of a sphya, and having seen its use at the sacrifice, I can

prove beyond any doubt, that it is a wooden sword. … On his office, see 6, 1-2, pp. 379-80. . 10 See the note on the preparation of the Soma 7, 32 pp. 488-90.xviii

His name there is havanan,“1 i.e. one who makes or prepares the havana=savana “ libatior.”

The sixth priest mentioned in the Advamedha hymn is the Sanstar, i.e, the repeater of Sastras. This is no doubt the Maitrāvaruṇa of the later ritual, who is several times mentioned by the name of Prašāstar in other passages of the Samhita (1,94, 6) and in the Brāhmaṇas. Sayana takes the same viepy.

Besides the names of the officiating priests; we have to examine some of the technical terms of the sacrificial art. In the 15th verse we find [17] the expressions, iştan vitam, abhigūrtam, vaşatkritam, which all refer to the repetition of the Yajya mantra by the Hotar when the Adhvaryu is ready to throw the offering into the fire. Iştam is the technical term for pronouncing the Yājyā mantra itself; abhigārtamin which is the same as āgūrtam, signifies the formula ye yajamahe (generally called āgur) which always precedes the Yājyā verse; vaşatkritan is the pronunciation of the formula vāuşat at the end of the Yājyā verse; vitam refers to the formula Agne vihi, which follows the vaşatkāra, and is itself followed by another vaşatkāra (the so-called Anuvaştkāra).

Let us now sum up the evidence furnished by this sacrificial hymn aş bearing upon the history of the sacrificial art in its relationship to the mass of other Vedic songs on the one, and to the Brabmanas on tho other: side.

In examining the names of the officiating prieste, we can here dis cover only two classes instead of the four, known to other Vedic hymns, and principally to the Brahmaṇas. We have only Adhvaryus and Llotris, but no Brahma priests, and no Udgātris (chapters). Without tho two latter classes no solemn sacrifice at which Soma was used could be per formed even at a time far anterior to the Brahmaṇas. There is no doubt, the introduction of each of these two classes marks a new epoch in the history of the sacrificial art, just as the separation of the offices of Adh

Why

11 See Visparad 3,1. The term havana occurs in the Gathes for Homa (Yašna, 10). That it means the same as the Vedic aavana with which it is identical follows anmistak ably from the context. A fratarem haganem and an uparen havanem, that is, a first and second libation, are even distinguished (Yasna 10, 2 ed. Westerganrd). Tbo tratarem havanem is the prātaḥ savanam, i.e. morning libation of the ritual books; tho uparim, latter, following,. corresponds to the mādhyandino savanam. The Parsi priesto preparo up to the present day actually the Iloma juice twice when perforining the Homa coromony. The first preparation takes place before the Zota (the Hotar of the Brahmans) appears; the second commences at the beginning of the proper ceremony, and is finished along with it. The Zota drinks the Howa which was prepared first by the Raspi (Adhvaryu); that one prepared during the ceremony is thrown into a well as kind of offering.

xir

varyu and Hotąr in the ante-Vedic times, indicates the first step in the development of the art of sacrificing. At that early time when the (18) Iranians left their Indian brethren on account of a bitter religious contest, which is known in the Brāhmaṇas as the struggle between the Devas and Asuras, already the offices of an Adhvaryu and Hotar were distinct, as we may learn from the Zend-Avesta, which exhibits the religion of the Asuras (Ahura religion, its professors calling themselves ahurotkéshô=asura-dikşā, i.e. initiated into the Asura rites).

But the offices of Udgātris and that of the Brahma priests were not known to the Aryas at that time; they were introduced subsequently, after the separation. In many Vedic hymns we find, however, the duties principally of the former class (the chanters) mentioned. They are often juxtaposed with those of the Hotars. The term for the perform ance of the Hotri-priests is sants, to praise, recite; that for that of the Udgātris stu or gái to sing (see, for instance, Rigveda Samh (8,1,1; 6, 62, 5; 6, 69, 2-3); besides the technical names uktha=Sastra and Stoma, sāma, are frequently to be met with (see 8, 1, 15; 3, 3, 6; 6,3; 16,9; 14, 11; 6, 24, 7, &c.). Now the absence of all such terms, indica tory of the functions of the Udgātsis (chanters) in the Afvamedha hymn is certainly remarkable. Their not occuring might, perhaps, be accounted for by the supposition that the chanters were not required at the horse sacrifice. It is true, several smaller sacrifices, such as the Darsaparna māsa, the Chāturmāsya Iştis and the animal sacrifice (if performed apart without forming part of a Soma sacrifice) are performed without any chanting ; (19) but for Soma sacrifices of whatever description, the chanters are as indispensable as the Hotars. That the Aśramedha was connected with a soma sacrifice is already at the time of the composition of the hymn in question, undoubtedly follows from the office of Gravagrabha being mentioned in it; for this priest is only required for the extracting of the Soma juice, and has nothing whatever to do with any other sacrificial rite. The mentioning of the Samstar (Maitrāýrūṇa) is another indication that the Advamedha already at that early time was accompanied by a Soma sacrifice. For one of the principal duties of the Maitrāvaruṇa, who may be called the first assistant of the Hotar, is to repeat Sastras, which are only required at Soma sacrifices as the necessary accompaniments of all chants.

Besides the Udgātris, we miss the class of the Brahma priests, viz. Brahmā, Brāhmaṇāchamsi, and Subrahmanya, whose services are required

13 According to Asyal. Dr. Sætras (10,8) there are three Soma days (satyini; required for the horse sacrifice.

at all great sacrifices. The Brahmà cannot even at small sacrifices, such as the Darsapūrṇamāsa Işti, be dispensed with. The Brahman chařsi aud Subrahmanyā are at Soma sacrifices as indispensable as the Maitrāvaruna; the first has to repeat also Sastras for the chants, the latter to invite every day Indra to the Soma feast (see the note to 1, 3, pp. 382-84).

The introduction of the Brahmā priest marks no doubt a new era in the history of the sacrificial art; [20] for to judge from the nature of his duties as superintendent of the sacrifical ceremonies, he was only necessary at a time when the sacrifice had become already very complicated, and was liable to many mistakes. The origin of the office dates earlier than the Brāhmaṇas. Unmistakeable traces of it are to be found already in the Samhita of the Rigveda. In one passage 1, 10, 1, the Bralmī priests (brahmānas) are juxtaposed with the Hotřís (arkinaḥ) and Udgātçis (gůyat rinah). They are there said to “raise Indra just as one raises) a reed.” Similarly we find together gayata, chant, samsata, praise, and brahma krinuta make the Brahma (8, 32, 17). In 10, 91, 10 the Brahmi is men tioned along with other priests also, such as the Potar, Nestar, &c. Tho little work done by the Brahmā priests, or rather their idlences, is men tioned, 8, 92, 30, “do not be as lazy as a Brahmā priest” (mo $11. trazm meva tandrayur bhuvah). That the Brahmā priests were thus reproached may clearly be seen from Ait Brābm. 5, 34. The Brahma pricet is the speaker or expounder of religious matters (10, 71, 11; 117, 8), in which capacity they became the authors of the Brūlamanas. That the Brahmā was expected to know all secret things, may bo inferred from several passages (10, 85, 3; 16; 35; 36). Bribaspati, the teacher of tho gods, is also called brahmd (10, 143, 3), and Agni is honoured with tho same name (7, 7,5), as well as his pious worshippers of old, tho so-called Angirasaḥ (7, 42, 1). Sometimes the name sigoilies tho Brahman as distinguished from the Kşattriyas brahmani rajani vd (1, 108, 7). [21] It is certainly remarkable, that none of the Brahmi priests is to be found among the priests enumerated in the Advamedla hymn, and we may safely conclude, that their offices were not known at that time. The word brahma (neuter) itself occurs in it in the seventeenth verso), “If any one, in order to make thee sit, did thee harm by kicking theo with his heels, or striking thee with a whip violently so that thou didist snort, I cause all to go off from thee by means of the Brahma, junt as I make flow (the drops of melted butter) by means of a Sruch (sacrificial spoon) over the piece which is among the ready-made offerings (wherkuile). Brahma has here very likely its original meaning, “the sacrificial grass”

or a certain bunch of it (see the note on pages 4, 5 of this Introduction). For the meaning " prayer,” which is here given to it by Sāyana, does not suit the simile. In order to understand it fully, one has to bear in mind that the Adhvaryu’ after having cooked and made ready any offering (Purodása or flesh, or Charu, &c.) generally pours from a Sruch some drops of melted butter over it. Now the brahma by means of which the priest is to soothe all injury which the sacrificial horse may have received from kicking or striking, is compared with this Sruch; the drops of melted butter are then the several stalks of the bunch of the sacrificial grass, required *at all sacrifices and their taking out, and throwing away (as is done at all sacrifices, see note 8 to page 79), is compared to the flowing of the drops from the sacrificial spoon.

Not only is the number of priests less, but the [22] ceremonies are also more simple. It appears from verse 15th, that there was no Puronuvakya or introductory mantra required, but the Yājyā alone was sufficiente The latter consisted already of the same parts as in the Brāhmaṇas, viz. the Agur, the Yājyā mantra, the Vaşatkāra and Anuvaşatkāra (see note 32 to page 95, page 126, and note - 11 to page 133-34). The Agur or the introductory formula, ye yajāmahe, i.e., “what (gods are), those we worship by sacrificing," is very ancient, and seems to go back even beyond the properly so-called Vedic times ; for we meet it even with the same name already in the Zend-Avesta (see note 11 to page 134); even a large number of the Parsi prayer formulas commence with it up to this day, viz. yuzāmaide. The Vaşatkāra or the call vduşat, and the Anuvaşatkāra, or the second call vāuşat preceded by Agri rihi, i. e, “Agni eat (the food),” must be also very old, though we do not find any trace of them in the Parsi ritual, which circumstance can be, however, easily accounted for. The first call váuşat being required in the very moment of the offering being thrown into the fire, and the second at once after it, there was no occasion for them at the Zoroastrian sacrifices ; for the priests are not allowed to throw flesh, or Homa, or even cakes into the fire; they have only to show their offerings to the sacred element. In the Sambitā itself, the Vaşatkāra is frequently mentioned, and in hymns which show by no means a modern origin (see . 1, 14, 8; 120, 4; 21, 5; 7, 14, 3; 15, 6;-99, 7, &c); some of them appar ently allude to the [28] Anuvaßatkāra, (so, for instance, 7, 156, semán vetu vaşatleritim, ‘may he eat this piece ’ offered by the call vauşat! vi (in vihi) being one of the characteristic terms of the Anuvaşatára).

From all we have seen as yet it clearly follows that the Aévamedha hymn is by no means a late, but a very early, production of Vedic poetry,

and that consequently a strict distinction between & Chhanding and Mantra period, making the former by about two hundred years older than the latter, is hardly admissible.

The same result is to be gained from moro cloxo examination of other pre-eminetly sacrificial lymns, which all would fall under the Mantra period. There being here no occasion to investigate into all hymns of that character, I will only hero make some remarks on the Nābhānediştha hymns (10, 61-62). Their history is given in thio Ait. Brāhm itself (5, 14). They are tracell to Mann, the m itor of the human race, who gave them to his son, 1:1,reha. Ito should communicate them to the Angiras, for enabling them ta perforın succea fully the ceremonies of the sixth day in tlio Salaha, No noto i to pago 279), and receive all their property as a sacrificial reward.

This whole story appears to have no other foundation, ** but the two hymns themselves, principally the (24) latter. The first is very dillicult to understand, the second is on the the whole sinplex, Buch are buy tradition ascribed to Nabhānedischa, the son of Manı, xoa niatan is very doubtful. They differ so much in utyle, that they cannout buvo the same author. Several traits of the legendi, however, are to be found in them. Tho refrain of the first four verkin of 101, ohsyhich in audremo to the Angiras, “receive the son of Vanu,” TO-ear in the legend : 11140) the gift of a thousand. In a verso of the former (!), 01, 1K) the word nábhanedistha occurs, but it does not mean there i human, but wmo divine, being. I give the 18th and 10th vermu in translation.

(18) “Flis rolative, the wealthy Will , What ?:670s Tishin thoughts towards thee, speaks on luoking forwari * follwa) ’thi* our navel is the highest; as often as in.1 I Wam bulirul bin the Nābbinedistha on earth).* *

(19) “This is my pavel, here is what roticle with mo ; done would are mine ; I am everything. Those who are first buru, 1x1 tletio who are born for a second time (by reproduction)-the cow milkul that would) from the truth, (and) they are born.” **

It is to be found also with little dillerines In the aittiriynh #, |, 7. 4 0. Instead of the two Saktas (hyoos, Madu there I xsid tuby** **va hlm #04 * HethRNAN on a certain rito concorning the share of Kadra lu tha karak buluni, bip Aagiras to beavon. The sixth day ** In not mentioned in it. The mad in 4 * blaukist drogs” of the Altareya Br, is hore called Kudra.

** Tho explanation given by Kiyana of these dincult vo i s pary artideial, Ha tries to get out of the hymn overywhere the story told that Nabbluedo to w tle Ail. Br. 514.

xxui

From these two verses as well as from several others in it (princi. pally 2 and 5-8 describing Prajāpati’s illicit intercourse with his [25] daughter, see Ait. Br. 3,33), we may clearly perceive that Nābhāne distha and the hymn in question refer to generation. This view is fully corroborated by the application of it at the sacrifice, as expounded by the Brāhmaṇam, and as eren pre-supposed in the hymn itself.

We know from various passages of the Brāhmaṇas, that one of the principal acts of the sacrificial priests was to make a new body to the sacrificer, and produce him anew by mantras, and various rites, by making him mystically undergo the same process to which he owed his natural life. So, for instance, the whole Pravargya ceremony (see note 1 to pages 41-43), the Ajya and Pra-uga Sastras (see Ait. Br. 2, 35-38; 3, 2) of the morning libation, and the so-called Silpa Sastras (6, 27-31) of the Hotsi-priests are intended for this purpose. Of the latter the two Nābhānediştha hymns form the two first parts, representing the seed effused, and its transformation to an embryo in its rudest state (see 6, 27). Nābhānedistha is the sperm when effused ; after having undergone some change in the womb, it is called Narāsamsa.” That the hymn originally had such a mystical sense, is evident from the two first verses :

· [26] (1) “May this awful Brahma, which he (Prajāpati) thus skilfully pronounced in words at the congregation, at the assembly, fill the seven Hotars on the day of cooking (the sacrificial food), when his (the sarificer’s) parents and other) liberal men (the priests) are making (his body).” •

(2) “He established (as place) for the reception of his gift the altar (vedi), destroying and ejecting the enemy with his weapons. (After having thus made the place safe) he then hastily under a very loud cry poured forth his sperm in one continuous (stream).”

The meaning of these two verses can only be the following: the poet who was no doubt a sacrificial priest himself wishes, that the hymn which be regards as a revelation from Prajāpati, who repeated it at the great sacrificial session which he is so frequently said to have held, may fill the seven Hotri-priests when they, with the same liberality as Prajapati

*This idea must be very old ; for we find an unmistakeable trace of it in the Zoroastrian tradition. So we read in the Bundehesh (page 80 in Westergaard’s edition of the Pehlevi text) that the angel Nerioseng (nerioseng yazd=narásamsa yajata in Sanscrit) intercepted the three particles of sperm which Zoroaster is said to have once lost, and out of which the three great prophets, Oshadar (bami), Oshadar náh, and Sosiosh are expected to spring at the end of the world. Nerioseng clothed the said sperms with lustre and strength (rosnu: Zor), and handed them over to Anahit (the Persian Venus) to look at them They are guarded against the attacks of the Devas (the Indian gods) by 999,999 Frohans (& kind of angels).

xxiv

(when he poured forth his sperm) are like parents making by their hymns the new celestial body to the sacrificer. The place for reception of the seed poured out mystically in prayer by the Hotars, is the altar; for standing near it (and even touching it with their feet) they repeat the mantras. The reason that they have to regard the Vedi as the safe receptacle of the seed, is to be sought for in the antecedent of Prajapati, who prepared it for the purpose, defending [27] it against the attacks of enemies. After having made it safe, he poured out his seed whence then all creatures sprang (see Ait. Br. 3, 34).

Nábhānediştha is, according to the verses above quotod, the heavenly guardian of all germs of generation ; all gods, men, beasts, &c., come from him. His assistance is required when the sacrificial pricsta are producing the new celestial body of the sacrificer. Ile looks down from heaven at his relative, that is, the seeds containing the germ of new life poured out mystically by the Hotars in their prayers. Ilis navel is the centre of all births in the universe ; as being nearest ( nearest to the navel’ is the literal meaning of nālhānerliştha), he is the guardian of all seeds. Every seed on earth has only effect as far as he participatos in it. We have here the Zoroastrian idea of the Fravashis (Frohars) who aro the prototypes of all things existing 18 The word nàlihānedıştha muht he very old; for we find it several times in the form nabdnazdista in the Zend Avesta. It is an epithet of the Fravashis (Yasna, 1, 18. Yashts 13, 156), and signifies the lineal descendants in future generationgit (Vend. 4, 5-10 Westergaard).

[28] Although the Nābhānediştha hymn (10, 61) is purely sacrificia), and composed at a timo when the Rißis already indulged in speculatialis on the mystical meaning of sacrificial rites, no trace can be found, to show that it is a modern composition. The circumstance, that it is already in the Aitareya Brahmanam traced to Manu, the progenitor of the human race, shows, that its origin is entirely lost in the depths of antiquity, The mentioning of Kaksiran in verso 10, and the occurrence of the “seven Hotars" (in the 1st verse) are no proofs of a lato origin, lor

** Soo my Essays on tho Sacred Language, Writings and Religion of the Parnis, pago 186.

It This is the sonse of uriim nabūnizdistancim, in the fourch Krargarl of the Vanidad. In the passage in question, the punishment consequent on the broach of promise is a to extond to so and so many nariin gabringcelistanum, literally, men who are Wirint the parol of the offénder, that is, his lineal descendants. The Pehlevi translat.2011 1744 in its notes about tho kame meaning to it. So it has for instance to 4, thn note : 300 mit vim düresiz “for three hundred years there will be danger (for the pubůrazistas),” TUI is also the opinion of many Dastars,

XXV

Kakşivan appears as a celebrated Rişi, who was distinguished as a great chanter and Soma drinker in many other passages, principally in the first book (see Rigveda Samh. 1, 18, 1-2 ; 51, 13; 116, 7; 117, 6; 4, 26, 1), who enjoyed the special favour of the Aśvins. He is to the majority of the Vedic şişis whose hymns are kept, a personage of as remote an antiquity as Kaoya, Usanās, the Angiras, &c. The “seven Hotars"28 occur several times besides (3, 29, 14; 8, 49, 16), most of them with their very names, viz., Potar, Nestar, Agnid, Praśāstar, &c., (1, 15, 2-5; 9; 1, 94, 6; 10, 91, 10).

The second Nābhānediştha hymn is certainly later than the first, and contains the germs of the later legend on Nābhānediştha. The reason that it was also referred to him, is certainly to be sought [29] for in the 4th verse, where is said, “This one (i.e. I) speaks through the navel,’* (nabha), hails you in your residence; hear, O sons of the gods, ye Rişis (to my speech).” The song is addressed to the Aggiras, who are requested to receive the poet. The gift of thousand is also mentioned.

Let us, after this discussion regarding the antiquity of the Asya medha and Nābhānediştha hymns, return to the general question on the relationship between the pre-eminently sacrificial mantras and the other production of Vedic poetry.

If we look at the history of poetry with other nations, we nowhere find profane songs precede religious poetry. The latter owes its origin entirely to the practical worship of beings of a higher order, and must, as every art does, go through many phases before it can arrive at any state of perfection and refinement. Now, in the collection of the hymns of the Rigveda, we find the religious poetry already so highly developed, the language so polished, the metres already so artificially composed, as to justify the assumption, that the songs which have reached our time, are not the earliest productions of the poetical genius, and the devout mind of the ancient Indians. Generations of poets and many family (30] schools in which sacred poetry was regularly taught, just as the art of the bards and scalds with the Celtic and Scandinavian nations, must have preceded that period to which we owe the present

18 They are, according to the Brahmaṇas (see Ait. Br. 6, 10-12), Hotar, Maitrāvarana, Brahmaṇāchhausi, Achhāvāka, Potar, Nestar, and Agnīdhra.

19 This expression appears to be strange. It implies a very ancient idea, which muso have been carrent with the Iranians and Indians alike. The navel was regarded as the seat of an internal light, by means of which the seers received what they called revelation. It is up to the present day a belief of the Parsi priests, that the Dasturs or High-priests have a firo in their navel, by means of which they can seo things which are hidden This reminds us of some phenomena in modern somnambulism.

ΣΧΥ1

collection. If an old song was replaced by a nor ano, which appeared more beautiful and finished, the former Tras, in most cases, irni cmerably lost. Old and new poets are frequently mentioned in the lymns of the Rigveda; but the more morlorn Pişis of tlie Telio puriul appear not to have regarded the productions of their 116(6Vign with any particular reverence which might have induced them to keep their early relics.

Now the question arises, are the finished and polislei lymns of the Rigveda with their artificial mcircs the most incient relies of the whole religious literature of the Brilmaus, or are still moro ancient pieces in the other Vedlic writings’ to bo found? It is harlly credible, that the Brahmanical priests einplivcii at their sacrifices in the earliest times hymns similar to those which were usel when the ritual became sottled. The first sacrifices were no doubt simple offerings performed without much coremonial. A for appropriato solemn wurls, indienting the giver, the nature of the offering, the dicty to which as well as the purpose for which it was offered, ani acaresses to the objects that were offered, were suflicient. All this could be ombodied in the sacri. ficial formulas known in later times principally by the name of arts, whilst the older one appears to have been Yaga (preserved in pre-reja, anu-yāju, &c). The invocation of the deity by different names, (31) and its invitation to enjoy the meal prepared, may be equally okl. It was justly regarded only as a kind of Yajus, and calleil Dipearliest or Nipas The latter term was principally applied to the cameration of the titles, qualities, &c., of a particular deity, accompanied with in invitation. At the most anciont times it appears that all sacrificial fornits woro spoken by the Ilotar alone; the Adlivaryi vill only his o intari, who arranged the sacrificial conipound, provided the implements, and per formed all manual labour. It was only at the time wire regular metrical verses and hymns woro introduced into the ritual, that a part of the duties of tho Ilotar devolved on the blou Thero arc, in the present ritual, traces to bo found, that the llotar tually met have performed part of the dution of the lihvarsi.

According to the ritual which appears to have been in furce for the last three thousand years without

’ any erahlo chango, it is one of the principal duties vf the Adharyu ts give orders

2013 Seo Madhushrana’s Prasthanallela in Wendient’s Instinc dies Stud.2"ho is Jamil, ani tho Bhagavata l’urina 12, 0,52 (in the Dembias felirious #s ilver 1, Ajdsrepith, 1, f. the sories of Yajus mantras is called inimittit, Maskinstatia rompir is 114 1192met, no it appears, principally the Prairass or orders by the Acthvaryu to the user pirical to do their respoctivo duties.

*xvii

(praisa) to most of the officiating priests, to perform their respective duties. Now at several occasions, especilly at the more solemn sacrifices, the order is to be given either by the Hotar himself, or his principal assistant, the Maitrāvaruṇa. So, for instance, the order to the slaugh terers of the sacrificial animal, (32) which is known by the name of Adhrigu-Praişa-mantra (see Ait. Br. 2, 6-7) is given by the Hotar himself, though the formulas of which it is composed have all characteristics of what was termed in the ritual Yajus, and consequently assigned to the Adhvaryu. At the Soma sacrifice all orders to the Hotar to repeat the Yājya mantra, before the libations are thrown into the fire, are to be given by the Maitrāvaruna, and not by the Adhvaryu. The formulas by which the gods are called to appear, the address to the fire when it is kindled are repeated by the Hotar, not by the Adhvaryu, though they cannot be termed rik, the repetition of which alone was in later times regarded as incumbent upon the Hotar, The later rule, “The Hotar performs his duties with the Rigveda” (in the introductory chapter to the Hiranyakesi and Âpastamba Srauta Sutras) is therefore not quite correct. The Hotar himself even sacrifices on certain occasions what is, according to the later ritual, to be done by the Adhvaryu alone, or, when the offering is given as penance, by the Brahmā. So, for instance, he sacrifices melted butter before repeating the Advina Sastra (see the note to 4, 7, page 268), which is, as far as its principal parts are concerned, certainly very ancient.

Now, if we compare the sacrificial formulas as contained in the Yajurveda, and principally the so-called Nigadas, and Nivids, preserved in the Brahmanas and Sūtras with the bulk of the Rigveda hymns, we come to the conclusion, that the former are more ancient, and served the Rişis as a kind of [33] sacred text, just as passages of the Bible suggest ideas to religious poets among Christians. That Vedic poets were per fectly acquainted with several of such formulas and addresses which are still extant, can be proved beyond any doubt.

Reserving a more detailed treatment of this important question to a future occasion, I here instance only some of the most striking proofs.

One reference to the Nivid inserted in the Vaišvadeva hymn at the Vaišvadeva Sastra, and my remarks on it (see pages 212-13), the reader will find, that the great Rişi Viévāmitra who with some of his sons are the poets of many hymns which we now possess (as, for instance, of the whole third Mandala), knew this ancient sacrificial formula very well; for one of its sentences setting forth the number of deities is alluded to by him.1

Certain stereotyped formulus which occur in every Nirid, to what ever deity it might be addressed, occur in lymns and oron commence then. I instance the hymn predam bralama (S, 37), which is certainly an allusion to the senteuce which occurs in all Nivids, poreclam brahma predam kşattram (see note 25 on pago 189.) That tho coincidenco is no mere chance follows from some other characteristic Nirid terms made use of in the hymn in question ; comparo üritha pra &urlutuh with pre dam sunvantam yajamūnan aratu in all Nivids, and kraterija tram

avasi with predam satiram (aratu).

The Subrahmanyā formulas, which is generally called a Nigada (800 on it the note to 0, 3 on pages 383-84) (84) is unmistakably alluded to in the hymn, 1, 51, principally in the first and thirteenth versos. In both, Indra is called mesa, a ram, and urişanas tasya merut.

The call of the Agnidhra, astu śrāuşat as well as tho Agur addross od to the Hotar, hota yakşat, were known to the Rişis, as we learn from 1, 139, 1. 10.

The so-called Rituyījas which are extant in a particular collection of sacrificial formulas, called praişa sukta or proişādhyaya, occur oven with their very words in several hymns, such as 1, 15; 2, 37. (On the lituyājas, see note 35 on pages 135-36).

The so-called Apri bymns are nothing but a poetical lovelopmont of the more ancient Prayājas, and Anuyūjas (compare the notes 12 on page 18; 14 on pages 81-82; and 25 on pago 110.)

Many hymns wero directly composed not only for sacrilicial pur poses in general, but even for particular rites. This is girincipally the case with several hymns of Visvimitra. So, for instanco, tho wholo os hymn 3, 8 añjanti ivan adlıvarc (sco about it, Ait. Br. 2, 2) rofuis only to the anointing, orecting, and decorating, of tho sacrificial post; 3, 21 is evidently made for addirossing tlic drops of molted butter which drip from tho omontum, over which they jrore purud (soo Ait. Br. 12); 37 celebrates the offering of the Puroclivit consisting of friul gruinn, par, &c., which belongs to each Sona libativii (sco alit. Br. 2, 1)

The first ten hymns of tho lirst book of the Rinis la Sanalitii c ain, as it appears, tho Soma ritual (35) of Varlı:imkanlah Mu Of Visvai mitra. It providos, however, only for two lilations, riz., the morning and midday. The first liyin has exactly the nature of an aljva hyun, which forms the privcipal part of the lirnt. Sitra, the realle diya. The second and third lyinns contain tho Pra-ugn Sastra, klich is the second at the morning libation, in all its particulars. The following suvon

ETY

xxix

hymns (4-10) all celebrate Indra and it appears from some remarks in the Ait. Br. (3, 20, page 192), that in ancient times the midday libation belonged exclusively to Indra. The ritual for the evening libation is of so peculiar a nature, and so complicated, that we must ascribe to it quite a different origin than to the two other libations.

The hymns 12-23 appear to contain a more comprehensive ritual of the Kanva family, which is ancient. The 12th hymn (the frst in this collection) is addressed to the Agni of the ancestors, the pravard, who must be invoked at the commencement of every sacrifice; it contains three parts of the later ritual-(a) the pravara, (b) the invocation of Agni by the Nigada, and (c) the request to Agni to bring the gods (the so-called devdvahanam). The 13th is an apri Sūkta containing the Prayājas, which accompany the very first offerings at every sacrifice.

These three hymns were, it appears, appropriate to a simple Işți, as it precedes every greater sacrifice. The following hymns refer to the Soma sacrifice. The 15th is a Rituyāja hymn; the Rituyājas always precede the Ajya Sastra. The hymns from [36] 16-19 contain a ritual for the midday libation, and in 20-22 we find the principal deities of the Sastras of the evening libation.

The hymns from 44-50 in the first book by Praskaṇva, the son of Kaṇva, contain, if the Indra hymn (51) is also reckoned, all the principal deities, and metres of the Aśvina Sastra, the former even in their proper order, viz., Agni, Uşās, the Aśvins, Sūrya, Indra (see Ait. Br. 4, 7-11).

These instances, which could be easily greatly enlarged, will, I think, suffice to show that the ritual of the Brāhmaṇas in its main features was almost complete at the time when the principal Rishis, such as the Kanvas, Visvamitra, Vasiştha, &c., lived.

I must lay particular stress on the Nivids which I believe to be more ancient than almost all the hymns contained in the Rigveda. The principal ones (nine in number) are all to be found in the notes to my translation of the 3rd Pañchika (book). That no attention has been paid as yet to these important documents by the few Vedic scholars in Europe, is principally owing to the circumstance of their not having been known to them. It being now generally believed, that the earliest relics of Vedic literature are to be found only in the Rigveda Samhitā, it is of course incumbent on me to state briefly the reasons why I refer the so called Nivid to a still more remote antiquity.

The word nivid frequently occurs in the hymns, and even with the epithet pūrva or pūrvya, old [37] (see 1, 89, 3; 96, 2; 2, 36, 6.) The Marutvatiya Nivida is, as it appears, eren referral io ly limitea

of (4, 18, 7, compared vith note 2), on page IMI); the rtrition the Nivids is juxtaposed with the performance of the lunara, ia!!! the recital of the Sastras (0, 07, 10). The Brillman remarks the Nivids, particularly that one addressed to uni, as these write if Prajāpati, by means of which he created all lvings (seet Ait. Br. de 33-34). That such an idea, which entirely crimiles with th: 2111111n of Ahuramazda (Ormazd) haring created the work this.ari thar yilnin ali- vairy prayer (see the 19th chapter of the Vasan), must le pop** ancient than the Brahmanas, wo learn from a hymn of the old Pii Kutsa, who is already in many Vedic songs looked upon (9 4 Hagga ul tim remote past. He says (1, 96, 2) that Agni created hy means of the “ first Nivid” the creatures of the Danus (sco pago 1:13). In 1, 4!), 2.1, an old Nivid appears to bo quoted. For tho worci, which follore than sentence, “we call them with tho old Nivid,” bear quite tho stamp of such a piece.

Many Nivids, even the majority of them, aro certainly lost. But the few pieces of this kind of religious literaturo which an still oxlami, are sufficient to show that they must bo very ancient, and aro not to be regarded as fabricatious of tlo sacrilicial priests at the timon when the Brahmaṇas were composed. [38] Their stylo is, in the main, just the same in which the hymns are composed, and far moro ancient than that of the Brahmanas. They contain, in short sentence, the principal 1121114*.ty epithets, and feats of tho dcity invoked. They have 114 pomoliek Iniunt, but a kind of rhythmus; or even a parallelismus u numlilin that’s ancient llobrew poetry.

The circumstance that in the ritual such it ..! 11. 1.,’ is attached to such halt poctical, hall primer premier in the Minist ilm** **** particularly Ait. Br. 2, 33; 9, 10-11), charly try to Jiri***, tout tleniya must have been regardel is tory efficacit. “I’llis fahi lü* barily accounted for at a timo when beautiful and finished on w I’n fouth coining in abundance to serve the same

luul thieYTHAT 1*** s* y ancient, and their cinployinent bevii sanctissit by the

oftly most ancient Risis.

We havo alreally noon, that yviral ( Dom Sivil fenomla, vlirli we have now were known to sonne Vedic p ts. I will give burn it fr 1x more instancos, Tho liyanın to the Danutilise liy insomnitrat, 15 16 ovidently based on the Marutzativu Viile vor tlw«14 (!!1 Liiksi 1.1 ; thai

appears tiftens in the plurah, tan thus sera thio Nivid consists, are to be updorstood.

verse to Savitar (3, 54, 11) alludes to Savitri Nivids (see them on page 208); the hymn to Dyāvāprithivi (1, 160) is a poetical imitation of the Dyāvāpřithivi Nivids (page 209); the Ribhu hymn (4, 33) resembles very much the Ribhu Nivids (page 210), &c.

Another proof of the high antiquity of the Nivids is furnished by the Zend-Avesta. The many prayer (89) formulas in the Yasna which commence with nivaê-ahayêmi, i.e., I invite, are exactly of the same nature as the Nivids.

The Nivids along with many so-called Yajus formulas which are preserved in the Yajurveda, the Nigadas, such as the Subrahmanyā and the so-called Japa formulas (such as Ait. Br. 2, 38), which are muttered with a low voice only, are doubtless the most ancient pieces of Vedic poetry. The Kişis tried their poetical talent first in the composition of Yajyās or verses recited at the occasion of an offering being thrown into the fire. Thence we meet so many verses requesting the deity to accept the offering, and taste it. These Yājyās were extended into little songs, whicb, on account of their finished form, were called sūktam, że. well, beautifully spoken. The principal ideas for the Yājyás were furnished by the sacrificial formulas in which the Yajurveda abounds, and those of the hymns were suggested by the Nigadas and Nivids. There can be hardly any doubt, that the oldest hymns which we possess, are purely sacrificial, and made only for sacrificial purposes. Those which express more general ideas, or philosophical thoughts, or confessions of sins, such as many of those addressed to Varupa, are comparatively late.

In order to illustrate that the development of the sacrificial and religious poetry of the ancient Brahmans took such a course as here described, I may adduce the similar one which we find with the Hebrewg. The sacrificial ritual of Moses, as laid [40] down in the Leviticus, knows no rythmical sentences nor hymns which accompanied the oblations offered to Jehovah. It describes only such manual labour, as found with the Brahmans its place in the Yajurveda, and mentions but very few and simple formulas which the officiating priest appears to have spoken when throwing the offering into the fire of the altar. They differed, according to the occasion, but very little. The principal formula was 1717 7ping 777793 77 TIN " a fire offering of pleasant smell for Jehovah,” which exactly cor responds with the Vedic agnaye, indráya, &c. svāhā ! 22 i.e. a good offering to Agni, Indra, &c. If it was the solemn holocaustum, then the word og hany, i.e.

23 Tho term svaha is to be traced to the root dhı, to put, with a, to put in, into, and stands for svadha (sutadha). It means the gift which is thrown into the fire.

XXXII

holocaustum, was used in addition (Leviticus 1, 9-13); if it was the so called zebakh shlāmim or sacrifice for continued welfare, the word on food, bread, was added (Levit. 3, 11); if it was a penance, the words NIT ‘UN (Levit. 7, 5), “this is a penance,” were required. When the priost absolved a sacrificer who brought an offering as a penance, he appears to bave used a formula also, which is preserved in the so-fcquently occuring sentence: 021 um nume anything to 3 (Lev. iv, 25. 31: v. 6, 10.) “and he (the priest) shall annul the sin which he has committed, so that he will be pardoned.” 23 (41] If we compare these formulas with the psalms, which were composed and used for the worship of Jehovah, then we find exactly the same difference between both, as we discover between the Yajus formulas, Nivids, &c., and the finished hymns of the Rigveda Sarnlita. In the same way as there is a considerable interval of time between the establishment of the Mosaic ritual and the composition of tho psalms, we are completely justified in supposing that a similar space of time intervened between the Brahmanical ritual with its sacrifical formulas, and the composition of the majority of the Vedic hymns. Between Moses and David there is an interval of five hundred years, and if we assume a similar one between the simple Yajus formulas, and such finished hymns as those addressed to Varuṇa which M. Müller ascribes to his Chhandas period, we shall not be in the wrong.

Another proof that the purely sacrificial poetry is more ancient than either profane songs or hymns of a more general religious cliaracter, is furnished by the Shi-king or Book of Odes of the Chinese. Of its four divisions, viz, kūo-fung, i.e. popular songs of the different territories of ancient China, ta-ya and siao ya, i.e. imperial songs, to be used with music at the imperial festivals, and sung, 1.c. hymns in honour of deceased emperors, and vassal kings, the latter, which are of a puroly sacrificial character, are the most ancient pieces. The threo last odes in this fourth division go back as far as the commencement of the Shang dynasty, which ascended the dragon seat in [42] the year 1700 B 0., whilst almost all other pieces in the collection are composed from tho earlier part of the reign of the Chou dynasty down almost to Confucius’ timo (from 1120 B.C till about 600 B.C.)

If we consider that the difference of time between the purely sacrifi cial and non-sacrificial hymns of the Chinese thus amounts to about

*The priest appears to have addressed these words to thro sinnor who was to bo absolved in this manner, “I annul the sin which thou hast committed, and thou shalt be pardoned.”

xxxii

1,000 years, we would not be very wrong in presuming similar inter vals to exist between the different hymns of the Rigveda. Kişis like Kāvya, Ufanās, Kakşivat, Hiranyastūpa, to whom several hymns are traced, were for the Kansas, Viśvāmitra, Vasiştha, &c., as ancient per sonages, as the emperors Tang (1765 B.0.) and Wuwang (1120 B.O.) to Confacious (born 551 B. o.)

On account of the utter want of Indian chronology for the Vedic and post-Vedic times, it will be of course for ever impossible to fix exactly the age of the several hymns of the Rigveda, as can be done with most of the psalms and many of the odes of the Shi-king. But happily we possess at least one astronomical date which furnishes at any rate the ex ternal proof of the high antiquity of Vedic literature, which considerably tends to strengthen the internal evidence of the same fact. I here mean the well known passage in the Jyotişam, or Vedic calendar, about the position of the solstitial points. The position there given carries us back to the year 1181 according to Archdeacon Pratt’s, and to 1186 (48) B.0, according to the Rev. R. Main’s calculations. The questions on the age of this little treatise and the origin of the Nakşatra 35 system, about which [44] there has been of late so much wrangling among the few Sapscrit scholars of Europe and America, are of

** See the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal of the year 1862 pages 49-50. Max Muller’s Preface to the 4th Volume of his edition of the Rigveda Samhita, page LXXXV.

25 There can be hardly any doubt, that the Naksatra system of the Indians, Chinese, Persians and Árabs is of a common origin, but it is very difficult to determine with what nation it originated. The original number was twenty-eight. I do not intend fully to discuss here the important question, but I wish only to direot attention to the circumstance overlooked as yet by all the writers on the subject, that the terms which the Indians, Arabs, and Chinese use for expressing the idea “constellation” have in all the three languages, Sanscrit, Chinese, and Arabic, precisely the same meaning, viz, a place where to pass the night, a station. This is certainly no mero chance, bat can only be accounted for by the supposition, that the framers of the Nakşatra system regarded the several Naksatras as heavenly stations, or night quarters, where the travelling mood was believed to put on his journey through the heavens. Let us examine these terms.

The Chinese expression for Nakşatra is Sinu (spelt by Morrison suh and sew, by Medhurst sew with the third or departing tone). The character representing it which is to be found under the 40th radical, strokes 8 (see Morrison’s Chinese Dictionary, Vol. 1 page 847) is composed of three signs, viz. that for a roof, that for man, and that for a hundred. Its original meaning therefore is “a place where a hundred men find shelter, a station or night quarters for a company of soldiers " The word is, as is the case with most of the Chinese words, used as a substantive, adjective, and verb.

As a substantive it denotes " a resting place to pass the night at” with a road-hoase (lu shil), i.e, an inn, or a halting place in general ; such places were situated at the distance of every thirty Li. Thence it is metaphorically employed to express the

XXXIV

(45) minor importance compared with the fact and the age of the obser vation itself. That an astronomical observation was taken by the station on the heavens where the travelling moon is supposed to put up. In this sense the Chinese speak of ölh shił pa siu * the twenty-eight halting places" (on the

heavens). 1. As an objective it means past, former, i. e, the night-quarters which frere just left.

In the sense of a verb, but never in that of a substantive, we find it frequently used in two of the so-called See-shu or four Classical books of the Chinese, viz. tho Lun-yu (the Confucian Analects) and in Meng-tse,

In order to show the use of this important word in the Classical writings, I hero quote some instances :

(a) intrans, to pass the night, to stop over night, Lun-yu 14, 41; tse 11. siu Yu Shiiv-man,

.e. Tse-Iu (one of the most ardent and zealous disciples of Confucius) passed the night at Shih-man ; 18. 7. 8 ibidem ; chih Tse-lu siu, i.e. be detained Tse-u to pass the night (with him). Meng tse 2, 2, 11, 1; Meng-tse K’iu Tsi sia 47 Chaw, i. e. Meng-tse after having left Tši, passed the night at Chow; 2, 2, 12, 4, ibidem: yu san siz oth hën chun Chow, yu yu sin i wei suh, i. €. When I, after having stopped for

three nights left Chow, I thought in my mind my departure to be speedy still. (b) traps. to make pass the right, to keep over night. Lux-yu 10, 8, 8: tsc yu kung

pü siz já, when he (Confucius) Sacrificed at the Duke’s (assisted th0 Duke in sacrificing) he did not keep the (sacrificial) flesh over night. In this sense it is several times metaphorically used ; so Lun-yu 12, 2, 2; 18e-114 2111 giu no, i.e. Tse-lu never kept a promise over night (he carried it out at one, before he

went to rest). (c) to have taken up his quarters, to be at rest, Lun-yu 7, 26 : yih pā she siu, ho

(Confucius) shot, but not with an arrow and string at (animals) which were

at rest (asleep). The Arabic word for the Nakshatras is jie manzil phur. J, live menázil," a place where to put up, qurters," from the root is, to make a journey, to put up at a place as a guest.

This name for the constellations must be very ancient with tho Somitio nations, for we find it already in the Old Testament (Book of tho Kings ii. 23, 5) in tho form on het muzzaloth; it has no proper etymology in Hobrow (for the root by nazul, to which alone it could be traced, means to flow), and is apparently introduced as a foreign word from some other Semitic nation, probably the Babylonians. The Jewish comment tors had no clear conception of the proper meaning of tho word; they take it to mean star in general, and then the twelve signs of the Zodiac, But from the context of the passage in the Book of the Kings, just quotert, where it stands together will the moon and the whole host of the treavens (* for tho moon and tbo mazzaloth and tho whole host of the heaven") it undoubtedly follows, that its meaning eannot bo"starin general, which idea is expressed by the “ whole host of the heavens," but something particular in the heavens connected with the moon. Tho use of tho samo word in Arabic for expressing the idea of constellation, heavenly mansions of tho moou, proves beyond any doubt, that the mazzaloth mean the same.

Now the Sanscrit word naksatra has originally no other mcaning than sithor siu or manzil have. The arrangement of the meaning of this word which is made in Boehtlingk and Roth’s Sanscrit Dictionary is ipsujicient and troated with tho samo superficiality as the majority of the more difficult Vedic werds in that much lauded work. They make it to mean star in general (sidus), the stars, and then constellation, station of the moon. But the very formation of the word by moans of the suflix atra

Brahmans as early as the 12th century before Christ is proved bem yond any doubt by the date to be elicited from the observation itself. If astronomical calculations of past events are of any worth, we must accept as settled the date of the position of the solstitial (46) points as recorded in the Jyotişam. To believe that such an observation was imported from some foreign country, Babylon or China, could be absurd, for there is nothing in it to show, that it cannot have been made in the north-western part of India, or a closely adjacent country. A regulation of the calendar by such observations was an absolute necessity for the Brahmans ; for the proper time of commencing and ending their sacrifices, principally the so-called Sattras or sacrificial sessions, could not be known without an accurate knowledge of the time of the sun’s northern and southern progress. The knowledge of the calendar forms such an essential part of the ritual, that many import ant conditions of the latter cannot be carried out without the former. The sacrifices are allowed to commence only at certain lucky constel lations, and in certain months. So, for instance, as a rule, no great sacrifice can commence during the sun’s southern progress (daksinayana); for this is regarded up to the present day as an unlucky period by the indicates, that something particular must be attached to its meaning; compare patatra a wing, literally a means for flying, vadhatra a weapon, literally a means for striking, yajate ran the keeping of a sacrificial fire, literally the means or place for sacrificing ; umatra, a drinking vessel, literally a place to which a thing goes which holds it. According to all analogy we can derive the word only from naks, which is a purely Vedic root, and means to “arrive at.” Thus naksatra etymologically means, either the means by which one arrives, or the place where oue arrives, a station. This expresses most adequately the idea attached by the Indians to the Naksatras as mansions for the travelling moon. But even if we waive this derivation, and make it a compound of nak (instead of naktà, see Rigveda 7, 71, 1) and satra-sattra, a session for the nights night quarters, we arrive at the same meaning. The latter derivation is, I think, even preferable to the former. The meanings of the word are to be classed as follows: (1) station, qurters where to pass the night. In this sense it is out of use ;(2) especially the stations on the heavens where the travelling moon is supposed to put up, the twenty-eight constellations ; (3) metonymiclly stars in general, the starry sphere (Rig veda 7, 86, 1: raksatram paprathachcha blūma, he spread the starry sphere, and the earth). The latter use is pre-eminently poetical, as poets always can use pars pro toto The naksatras as stations of the moon were perfectly known to the Rişis, as every one can convince himself from the many passages in the Taitirīya Brahmanan, and the Atharvaveda. That these books are throughout much later than the songs of the Rigveda is just what I have strong reasons to doubt. The arrangement of the meanings of naksatra as given here entirely coincides with all we know of the history of either the word siu ia Chinese, or maneil, mazzaloth in the semitic languages. The Chinese, especially poets, used the word sitt in the sense of star or stars in general, and so did the Rabbis in the Mishnah and the Talmud, according to the testimony of Juda ben Karish (see Gesenii Thesaurus Lingua Hebræa, et Chaldææ ii. page 869).

XXXVI

Brahmans, in which even to die is belived to be a misfortune. The great sacrifices take place generally in spring, in the months Chaitra and Vaisakha (April and May). The sattras which lasted for one year were, as one may learn from a careful perusal of the 4th book of the Aitareya Brāhmaṇam, nothing but an imitation of the sun’s yearly course. They were divided into two distinct parts, each consisting of six months of thirty days each ; in the midst of both was the Vişuvan, i.e. equator or central day, cutting the [47] whole Sattra into two halves. The ceremonies were in both the halves exactly the same ; but they were in the latter half performed in an inverted order. This represents the increase of the days in the northern, and their decrease in the southern progress ; for both increase and decrease take place exactly in the same proportions.

In consideration that these Sattras were already at the time of the compilation of the Brāhmaṇas an old institution, we certainly can find nothing surprising in the circumstance, that the Indian astronomers made the observation above-mentioned so early as the 12th century B.C. For the Sattras are certainly as early as, if not earlier than, this time. Sattrag lasting for sixty years appear even to have been known already to the authors of the Brahmaṇas (see page 287).

Now that observation proves two things beyond doubt : (1) That the Indians had made already such a considerable progress in astronouivál science, early in the 12th century, as to enable then to take such obser vations; (2) That by that time the whole ritual in its main features as laid down in the Brāhmañas was complete.

We do not hesitate therefore to assign the composition of the bulk of the Brāhmaṇas to the years 1400-1200 B.O.; for the Samhita we require a period of at least 500-600 years, with an interval of about two hundred years between the end of the proper Brūlimana period. Thus we obtain for the bulk of the Samhitā the space from 1400-2000; the oldest hymns and [48] sacrificial formulas may be a few hundred years more ancient still, so that we would fix the very coinmencement of Vedic Literature between 2400-2000 B. O. If we consider the completely authenticated antiquity of several of the sacred books of the Chinese, such as the original documents, of which the Shu-king, or Book of History, is composed, and the antiquity of the sacrificial songs of the Shi-king, which all carry us back to 1700-2200 B.O., it will certainly not be surprising that we assign a similar antiquity to the most an cient parts of the Vedas. For there is nowhere any reason to show,

XXXvii

that the Vedas must be less ancient than the earliest parts of the sacred books of the Chinese, but there is on the contrary much ground to believe, that they can fully lay claim to the same antiquity. Already at the time of the composition of the Brāhmaṇas, which as we have seen, cannot be later than about 1200 B. C., the three principal Vedas, i.e. their respective Sanhitās, were believed to have proceeded directly from the mouth of Prajapati, the lord of the creatures, who occupies in the early Vedic mythology the same place which is, in the later writings, held by Brahmadeva. This could not bave been the case, had they not been very ancient. In a similar way, the Chinese ascribe the ground text of their most ancient and most sacred book, the Y-king, i.e. Book of Changes, to a kind of revelation too, which was made to Fuhi, the Adam of the Chinese, by a Dragon horse, called Lung-ma.

Speculations on the nature of the sacrificial rites, [49) and cognate topics of a mystical character which form the proper sphere of the Brāh maṇas, commenced already during the Samhita period, as one may learn from such hymns as Rigveda 1, 95, and the so-called Vamana Sūkta 1, 164. Even at the time of the composition of the present Brāhmaṇas, there existed already some time-hallowed sayings, which resemble in every respect those dicta of the Brahmā priests, of which the bulk of the Brābmaṇas consists. I instance here the Brah modyam (Ait. Br. 5, 25), which was used already at that time at the conclusion of the tenth day’s performance of the Dvadasāha sacrifice. It is, therefore, very difficult to draw a strict line of separation between the period during which the hymns were composed, and that one which brought forward the speculations known by the pame of Brahmaṇas. On a more close comparison of the mystical parts of the Samhita with the Brāhmaṇas, one must come to the conclusion, that the latter were com menced already during the period of the former.

Let us say a few words on the division made of the contents of the Brahmaṇas by the Indian divines and philosophers. According to the introductory chapters to the Hiranyākesi (and Apastamba Sūtras) the Brahmanas contain the following topics:

(1) Karmavidhanam, or vidhi, i.e. rules on the performance of particular rites. To this class all those sentences in the Brābmaṇas are referred which contain an order expressed in the potential mood, such as yajeta, he ought to sacrifice ; samset, he ought [50] to repeat (such and such a verse) ; kuryát, he ought to proceed (in such or such a way), &c. This is the prin cipal part of the Brāhmaṇas, and has for the BrahmansXXXV111

about the same significance as in the Talmudic Literature the halaltar has for the Jews; it is simply authoritative.

(2) Arthavdda, This term comprises the numerous cxplanatory remarks on the meaning of mantras and particular rites, the reasons why a certain rite must be performed in a certain way. This is the speculative part, and is on account of its containing the germs of all Hindu philosophy, and even of grammar, of the greatest importanco. There is nowhere anything like an approach to & regular system per ceptible, but only occasional remarks bearing on philosophical and grammatical topics. For the history of gramınar, the fifth Panchikil of the Aitareya Brāhmanam is of a particular interest. Wo learn from it, that at that time not only numerous attempts were madlo to explain the meaning of words by etymology, but that the Brahmans eren had already commenced to analyse the forins of speech by inaking distinc tions between singular and plural, present, past, and future tensos, lo. The idea of mukti or final absorption in the Supremo Boing, is taught in the later Vedānta philosophy, is even with inost of its particulars spoken out in several of those explanatory remarks, I alludo horo to the frequently occurring terms, sayujyalà junction, sarripinta identity of form, salokatd identity of place, which mark in the lator times (lifferent stages of the final beatitude. [51] The principal tendency of this part it, to show the close connection of the visible and invisible worlds, botween things on earth, and their counterparts or protoiypes in heaven. I’an theistic ideas pervade all the Brahmanas, and are already traceablo in bymns of the Samhitā.

(3) Ninda, censure. This refers principally to the controversial remarks contained in all Brühmaṇas. Thcro was amongst these ancient divines and metaphysicians often difference of opinion as to tho perform ance of a certain rite, or the choice of a particular inantra, or their meaning. One criticised the practice of the other, and cuticlumneri its application often in the strongest torms. The consure is generally introduced by the expression, “but this opinion is not to be attenim 100,"

The sacrificers are often cautioned from allapting such a malpractice, by the assertion that if a priest would proceed in such or such a way, the sacrificer would lose his life, be burned by the sacrificial fire, xfe.

(4) Samsů, i. c. praise, recommeudation. This part crollo porines porinei pally those phrases which express that the performance of such or suvli a rite with the proper knowledge, produces tho cliect desired. They alinost invariably contain the expression, ya evam voulu, 1.4, who has such a

11111

XXXIS

knowledge. The extreme frequency of this phrase in the Brahmanas, and Upanişads, is probably the reason, that the whole sacred know ledge was comprised afterwards only by the general term veda. Origi nally [52] it appears to have applied to Brāhmaṇa like sentences and explanations only.

(5) Purakalpa, i. e. performance of sacrificial sites in former times. Under this head come the numerous stories of the fights of the Devas and Asuras, to which the origin of many rites is attributed, as also all Legends on the sacrifices performed by the gods. This very interesting part forms the historical (or rather legendary) background of the whole sacrificial art. All rites were traced to the gods as their originators, or even to Prajā pati, the Supreme Being, the Lord of creatures. We can derive one important historical fact from the legends on the fight between the Devas and Asuras, viz., that the religious contest between the ancient Indians (represented by the Devas) and the Iranians (repre sented by the Asuras, contained in the name Ahuramazda=Ormazd) took place long before the time of the composition of the Brāhmaṇas, that is, before the 12th century B.O. This is another proof corroborative of the high antiquity ascribed by Grecian writers to Zarathustra (Zoroaster), the prophet of the Asura nation (Iranians), who did manfully battle against idolatry and the worship of the Devas, branded by him as “devils.” That contest which must have been lasting for many years appeared to the writers of the Brahmanas as old as the feats of King Arthur appear to English writers of the nineteenth century.

(6) Parakriti, i.e. the achievement or feat of another. This head comprises the stories of certain performances of renowned Srotrigas, of sacrificial (53) priests, of gifts presented by kings to Brahmans, the successes they achieved. The last book of the Aitareya particularly is full of this class of topics.

These six heads are often, however, brought only under two principal ones, viz., vidhi and arthavada. The latter then comprises all that is not injunction, that is, all topics from 2 to 6. This philosophical division exactly corresponds to the division of the contents of the Talmud by the Jewish Rabbis into two principal parts, viz: halakah, i.e. rule of con duct, which is as authoritative as the thorah (law of Moses), and haggadah, i.e. story, parable, and in fact everything illustrative of the former.

II. The Aitareya Brahmanam in particular. The Aitareya Brahmanam is one of the collections of tho sayinga ol ancient Brahmā priests (divines and philosophers), illustrative and ex planatory of the duties of the so-called Hotri-priests. The latter perform ing the principal part of their duties by means of the mantias, tormed rik, and contained in the so-called Rigveda Samhita, tlo Aitareya in therefore one of the Brahmanas belonging to the Rigveda. There must bave been, as we may learn from Pānini and Patañjali’s 11.11.ibita, a much larger number of Brahmanas belonging to cach Veda; and even Sāyaṇa, who lived only about four hundred years ago, was it.fmuintes with more than we have now. To the Rigvedla wo know at present besides [54] the Aitareya, only the Kāuşitaki Brilmasam, which is alho) called Sāökhayana. Both appear to have been known to the mammarian Pānini, as one may gather from the rule (v. 1, 02, which he gives ro garding the formation of names of Brahmanas consisting of thitiya anul forty Adhyāyas; for the Kauşitaki actually consists of thirty iiml tho Aitareya of forty Adhyāyas, which were afterwards dividert into ciglio Pañchikās, each of which comprises five Adlyáyas.

The name " Aitareya” is by Indian tradition tracod to Ibri. Siyana tells regarding the origin of the name and of the Bralizan itxall, in his introduction to the Aitareya Brāhmanam, the following story, on the authority of the sampradaya-vidaħ, i.e. men rernel in traditional maritt An ancient Rişi bad among his inany wives one we will calle | Itiri. She had a son Mahidāsa by name, who is mentioned in the litarya Aranyaka as Mahidasa Aitareya. Tho Risi perferral the 2014 of his other wives to Mahidása, and went oven so far as to inwalt him once by placing all his other children in his lap to his exclusion. His mother, grieved at this ill-treatment of her son, prayerl ti botojo Prasily lity (kuladevata), the Earth (bhiimi), who appeared in bır (**ostinl firm in the midst of the assembly, placed hiin on a tlırsala llista 2.ami gave him as a token of honour for his alll[ita-1, all other than in learning a boon (55] (vara) which had the ?} : libebas of 1: ?!n’t ‘1. After having received this gift, a Brālınanan ( ing: Only Allian yas, which commenced with the words, rir tai deranim fat33868 (the brut sentence of the Aitareya), and ended with strinutc frivinding the two last words of the Aitareya), came forth through the mind «D ina.

of Sanscrit scholars to this circumstance.

2..

that

ctanti

18 W08 Trst

LA SELE

Afterwards the Brahmanam, commencir.g with atha mañávratam (the beginning words of the first Aitareya Aranyaka) and ending with acharya acharya (the two last words of the third Aranyaka)" was also revealed in the shape of the vow of an hermit* (aranyakavratarū pam).

The Aitareya Brāhmaṇam, as well as the Kāuşitaki, do not treat of all the sacrifices and sacrificial rites which are mentioned and desa cribed in the books of Yajurveda, which may be (principally the Sūtras) regarded as the proper sacrificial encyclopedia. They were, however, perfectly well known to the authors of these Brāhmanas, as we may learn from the fact, that the pames of several sacrifices, such as Vajapeya, Aptor yama (see 3, 41) are mentioned without the description of the rituals belonging to them. Several things concerning [56] the Hotạis whose duties principally are treated at every Soma sacrifice are left out. So the ceremony of choosing the sacrificial priests (ritvig-varanam) by the sacria ficer, iacluding the Hotars, is left out, as Sāyana has already observed. But every Hautra-prayoga, i.e. practical hand-book for the Hotfi-priests (for each sacrifice there are separate prayogas for each set of priests required), commences with it; the topic is generally treated in the Satras belonging to the Yajurveda ; the principal mantras required at that occasion are to be found in the first chapter of the Tāndya Brāhmanam of the Sāmaveda. The dialogue used at this occasion is interesting, and throws some light on the nature and character of some sacrifices; there fore I give here some account of it.

The person who wishes to perform the Agnistoma sacrifice, for instance, sends a delegate called Somapraváka to all Srotriyas (sacrificial priests) whose services he wishes to engage for his forthcoming Soma sacrifice, to ask whether they would be willing to officiate at this occasion. The dialogue between the Somapravaka and the Hotar is as follows: S. * There will be a Soma sacrifice of such and such one; you are respect Fully requested to act as Hotar at it." H. “What sacrifice is it?" S. * The Jyotiştoma-Agnistoma-Soma sacrifice." H. " What priests (ritvijah) will officiate ?’, S. “Vişṇu, Mitra,* " &c. H. “What is the reward for

This remark throws some light on the relationship in which the five treatises, of which the present Aitareya Arapyaka consists, and each of which bears the name ára nyaka, stand to one another. Only the three first Aranyakas were according to this potice regarded as a divine revelation to the Aitareya Rini; the two others are then tater additions, and did not form originally part of the Aitareya Arapyaka.

3 According to Brahminical ideas, a vow, a curse, a blessing, &c., can assume a visible form and so bocome manifest to the mental eyes of men. * « The priests represent the gods.

the priests ? S. “One hundred and twelve cows.” [57] If the prieste have accepted the invitation, then the sacrificer has actually to appoint them to their respective offices. This is the varanam or selection (of the priests).

The sacrificer first mentions the gods who are to act as his priests, * Agni (the fire) is my Hotar, Aditya (the sun) my Adhvaryu, the Moon my Brahmā, Parjanya (the god of rain) my Udgātar, the Sky (akasa) is my Sadasya (superintendent), the waters are my Hotrāsansis (all the minor Hotri-priests); the rays my Chamasa Adhvaryus (cup-bearers). These divine priests I choose (for my sacrifice)." After having thus ap pointed the gods, who are to act as his divine priests, he now proceeds to appoint the “human” (mánuşa) priests. This is at the Agnistoma done with the following formula, “I (the name) of such and such a Gotra, will bring the Jyotiştoma sacrifice by means of its Agnistuma part, with the Rathantara-Pțiştha, four Stomas (the nine, fifteen, seventeen and twenty-one-fold), for which ten things, cows and so on are required, and for which as fee one hundred and twelve cows must be given. At this sacrifice be thou my Hotar.”. The Hotar then accepts the appointment by the following formula: “May the great thing thou spokest of (unto me). the splendour thou spokest of, the glory thou spokest of, the Stoma thon spokest of, the way of performance thou spokest of, the enjoyment thou spokest of, the satisfaction thou spokest of; may all that thou spokesto come to me; may it enter me; may I have enjoyment through it. Agai is thy Hotar. He is [58] thy (divine) Hotar. I am thy (human) Hotar." All priests are appointed in the same way, and by the same formulas.

After this disgression let us discuss the contents of the Aitareya Brāhmaṇam. It treats in its eight books, or forty chapters, each of which is subdivided into a certain number of kandikás, i.e. small sections, para graphs, as we have seen, almost exclusively of the duties of the seven Hotri-priests at the great Soma sacrifices, and the different royal inaugur ation ceremonies. All minor sacrifices and Istis, although they require the services of a Hotar, are excluded. The Hotri-priests are to be divided into thres distinct classes : (1) The Hotar, the chief of all IIotsi-priests. (2) The Botrakas, i.e., the little Hotras; these are, Maitriivaruna (Irasllstar) Brāhmanāchbaṁsi, and Achhavaka. (3) The Hotrašansinala, 2.c, the repeaters of the Hotri verses; they are, Potar, Neştar, and Agnidbra.

The first thirteen chapters (the two first books, and the three first chapters (of the third) treat of the duties of the chief Ilotar at the Agniştoma Soma sacrifices only; for this is the modol (prakriti) of

xliii

all Soma sacrifices which last for one day only (the so-called aikāhikas); all other Soma sacrifices of the same duration are mere modifications (vikriti) of it. It is regarded as an integral part of the Jyotiştoma, and said to consist of the following seven sacrifices: (1) Agnistoma, (2) Atyag niştoma, (3) Okthya, (4) Solasi, (5) Atirātra, (6) Vājapeya, (7) Aptoryāma Asv. Sr. S. 6, 11). In many places, however, the [59] term Jyotiştoma is equivalent to Agnistoma. The Aitareya does not know these seven parts, as belonging together, but simply remarks, that they follow the Agniştoma as their prakriti (3, 41). The Atyagnistoma is not even mentioned in it at all.

All the duties of the Hotar at the Agnihtoma are mentioned almost in the exact order in which they are required. It lasts generally for five days. The ceremonies are then divided as follows:

First day.–Preliminary ceremonies, such as the election of the priests giving them presents (madhuparka), the Dikşaniya Isti, and the Dikşā itself.

Second day.~The Prāyaniya or opening Isti; the buying of the Soma; the Atithya Işți, Pravargya, and Upasad twice (once in the forenoon, and once in the afternoon).

Third day.Pravargya and Upasad twice again.

Fourth day.-Agnipraṇayanam, Agni-Soma-pranayanam, Havírdhana pranayanam. The animal sacrifice.

Fifth day. The squeezing, offering and drinking of the Soma juice at the three great Libations, viz. the morning, midday, and evening Liba tions. The concluding Işti (udayaniya). Ablution (avabhrita).

The ceremonies of the four first days are only introductory, but abso lutely necessary; for without then no one is allowed to sacrifice and drink the Soma juice. The Soma ceremony is the holiest rite in the whole Brahmanical service, just as the Homa ceremony of the Parsi priests is regarded by them as [60] the most sacred performance. No Parsi priest is allowed to perform it, if he does not very frequently undergo the great purification ceremony, called the Barashnom of nine nights. In the same way every Brahman has, as often as he brings a Soma sacrifi’co - to undergo the Díkşā (see 1, 3; 4, 26.) One such ceremony is even not considered sufficient. For the sacrifice has besides the Dikşå to undergo the Pravargya, which is a similar preparation for the great Soma day. Even the animal sacrifice must precede the solemn Soma fiestival; for it is of minor importance. The animal is instead of the sacrificer himself.

Iliy

The animal when sacrificed in the fire, goes to the gods, and so does the sacrificer in the shape of the animal (see page 80 of the translation). The animal sacrifice is vicarious. Being thus received among the gods, the sacrificer is deemed worthy to enjoy the divine beverage, the Soma, and participate in the heavenly king, who is Soma. The drinking of the Soma juice makes him a new man; though a new celestial body had been prepared for him at the Pravargya ceremony, the enjoyment of the Soma beverage transforms him again; for the nectar of the gods flows for the first time in his veins, purifying and sanctifying him. This last birth to the complete enjoyment of all divine rights is symbolically indicated in rites of the morning libation (see 32, 35; 38; 3, 2).

the Boa 1, 14)

. . The principal features of this Agniştoma sacrifice must be very: ancient. For we discover them almost complete with the Parsis. They also do not prepare (61] the corresponding Homa (Soma) juice alone, but it must always be accompanied with other offerings. The Purodaśa of the Brahmans, which always belongs to a Soma libation, is represented by the Dêrūn (holy bread), the animal offer ing indicated by the ring of hair (varasa) taken from an ox, to be placed on the same table with the Home The IIoma shoots are treated in the same way, when brought to the spot, as the Brahmans treat them. The Parsi priest sprinkles them with water, which is exactly the apyāyana ceremony of the Brahmans. Ho must go round the fire with the Homa just as the Brahmans carry the Soma round the sacrificial compound (see 1, 14). The ceremonies of preparing and drinking both the Homa and Soma juice are quite similar. The water required for it must be consecrated, which exactly corresponds to the Vasativaris and Ekadhanās of the Brahmanical Soma service (2, 20). The Zota of the Parsis drinks his cup filled with Loma in three turns, so does the Hotar also from the Graha. After the libation has been poured from the Grahas into the fire, and drunk by the Hotar, the Stotrax are chanted, and then the Sastras belonging to them recited. In a similar way the Zota priest repeats, shortly after having enjoyerl the Iloma, the lithils of Zarathustra Spitama (Zoroaster), which [62] are metrical compositions, and represent the Sastras of the Brahmanical Soma service. Ile must repeat five such Gå thāns, just as there are five Sastras, at the inorning

are qu

The mantra repeated at that occasion is Yasna 10, 1, “May the water-drops (sprinkled over the Boma) fall to the destruction of the Devas, and Devis.”

“Compare notes 8 on page 118, 5 on page 131, 14 on page 137, and my Essays on the Sacred Language, &c., of the Parsis, pages 132-33, 107.

aly

and midday libations, and at the Ukthya Soma sacrifice at the evening libations also. * These are only a few of the points of comparison which I could easily enlarge ; but they will be sufficient to show, that the Agnistoma Soma sacrifice was originally the same ceremony as the Homa rite of the Parsi priests. The opinions of both the Brahmans and Parsis on the effect of the drinking of the Soma (Homa) juice are besides exactly the same. The Brahmaps believe that it leads to heaven; so do the Parsi Priests. They say, that Homa is a plant, and a great angel. Any one who has drunk the Homa juice becomes united with this angel, and after his death an inhabitant of paradise. For the juice which is in the body of the priest who has drunk him, goes to heaven, and connects him mystically with the angel.

With particular care are the the so-called Sastras or recitations of the Hotři priests treated in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇam. The fifth chapter of the second, and the three first chapters of the third book are entirely taken up with the exposition of the Shastras of the Hotar at the morning, midday, and evening libations. As the reader may learn from a perusal principally of the third book, the Sastras always belong to Stotras or performances by the Sāma singers, viz: the Udgātar or chief singer, the Prastotar who chants the prelude, and the Pratihartar (63) who.chants the response. Their recitations must be very ancient, as we have seen ; for they are by the name ukthå (exactly corresponding to ukhdhem in the Zend language) frequently mentioned in the Sanhitā. A closer examination of them will throw much light on the history of the composition of the Vedic hymns. As ancient as the Sastras are the Stomas, the exposition of which forms one of the topics of the Sāmaveda Brāhmanas (see note 18 on page 237-38). The word stoma is in the form stoma also known in the Zend Avesta. The Parsi priests understand by it a particular sacrificial ceremony of minor importance, which consists in consecrating a meal (meat is at this occasion indispensable) in the honour of an angel or a deceased person, to be enjoyed afterwards by the whole party assembled. That the idea of " sacrificial rite” was attached also by the Brahmans to the word, clearly follows from the terms, Agniştoma and Jyotiştoma. The musical performance which was originally alone called a Stoma, formed a necessary part of certain sacrifices, and was then, as pars pro toto, applied to the whole rite.

The universal character of the Agniętoma and its meaning is treated especially in the fourth chapter of the third book. In its last chapter, and

xlvi

Mange

in the two first of the fourth, the principal modifications of the Agniatama are mentioned, and briefly described, viz., tho Ukthya, Solasi, and Atiratra, along with the Aśvina Sastra.

The Atirātra sacrifice introduces, horvever, the [64] Satiras or sacrificial sessions, the principal rules for the Hotri performances of which are laici down in the third chapter of the fourth book. They are applicable for Sattras which last for a whole year. The two last chapters of the fourth. and the first four chapters of the fifth book describe very minutely the duties of the Hotar during the ten principal days of the Dvadasila whick may be performed as a Sattra, or as a Alina (a Soma sacrifico lasting for more than one, and less than thirteen days).

The last chapter of the fifth book is taken up with miscellaneous matter, such as the penances required of an Agnihotri when he becomes guilty of some fault, or if some misfortune shouki befal him regarding hia duties towards his sacred fires, and the question, whether the Agnihotrain (daily burnt offering) is to be offered before or after sunrise ; it further treats of the duties of the Brahmi priest, how ho has to jurform the penances for mistakes committed by any one of the lirfurmning priests.

The whole sixth book treats, after somo remarks on the oflices of the Grāvastut and Subrahmanyan, almost exclusively of the duties of the six minor Hotsi-priests, principally at the great Soma sacrilicos, which

last for one week at least, or for a series of weeks (Saba) Wo find in it descriptions of the so-called Silpa Sastrae, or “skilful (rathor very artificial) recitations” of the minor llotars. Thes0 Sastras, prin cipally the Valakhilyas, the Vrişākapi, Ernyitnirent, and the no-called Kuntapa hymns, are no doubt the latest auditions, looking liko (65) decorations, to the ritual of the Ilotsi-priests. The wholo book has tho appearance of a suppliment to tho fourth and ofth.

The seventh and eighth books trcat suivi alls of the sacrifices of the Ksattriyas and the relationship in which the princes stand to the Brahmans. They are, from an historical point of view, the most important part of the whole Brahmanam.

• The seventh book describes first the division of the sacrificial animal into thirty-six single pieces, and their distribution among the officiating priests, the sacrificer, his wife, and other persons connected with the performance of the sacrifice."

Then follows a chapter of penances for neglects on the part of an Agnihotri, or mishaps which might befal Lim. This is a continuation of the fifth chapter in the fifth book.

xlvii

In the third chapter we are introduced to the rites of the princely inauguration ceremonies connected with a sacrifice, by the story of Sunashepa. On account of its containing Rik verses, as well as Gathās (stanzas) it was to be told to the king on the day of its inauguration by the Hotar. The story is highly interesting; for it proves beyond doubt the existence of human sacrifices among the ancient Brahmans, and shows that they were in a half savage state ; for we find here a Brahman selling hiş son to a prince to be immolated.

Now three kinds of such inauguratory sacrifices for the king, called Rajasůyas, are described, viz. [66] Abhişeka, Punarabhişeka, and Mahabhi şeka. The principal part of all these ceremonies consists in the sprinkling of holy water over the head of the kings, which is called abhişeka. It corresponds to the ceremony of anointing the kings with the Jews. It is of particular interest to observe that the Brahmans at this occasion did not allow the king to drink the proper Soma juice, but that he had to drink instead of it, a beverage prepared from the roots and leaves of several trees. The enjoyment of the Soma juice was a privilege reserved by the Brahmans to themselves alone. The king was, properly speaking, even not entitled to bring a sacrifice at all. It was only for the sake of the most extravagant gifts which the shrewd Brahmans extorted from kings for their offices, that they allowed him to bring a sacrifice. But before he could do so, he was to be made first a Brahman himself ; at the conclusion of the ceremony he had, however, to resign his Brahmanship, and return to his former caste.

The last chapter of the Brāhmanam is taken up with the appointment by the king of a duly qualified Brahman to the office of a house-priest, who is called purohita, i.e., president, superintendent. The word, as well as the office, must be very ancient; for we find it not only in the Samhita of the Rigveda, but even in the Zend-Avesta. It is, as to etymology, the same word as paradhāta,? which is generally [67] the epithet of one of the most ancient Tranian heroes, of Haoshyanha (see Yashts 5, 20; 9, 3; 15, 7; 17, 24 ed. Westergaard) the Hosheng of the Shāhnāmah. The later Iranian legends, as preserved in the Shahnāmah, made of the para. dhātas a whole dynasty of kings, which they call Peshdadians (the modern Persian corruption of the primitive paradhāta) who then precede the Kayanians (the Kavis of the Vedas). This shows that the institution of

The word purohita is composed of puras before, and hita placed (from the root dhở); so paradhāta also; para is the Zend form of purā before, which is equivalent to puras, and dháta is the Zend participle of the root dhd.xlviit a Purohita, who was not only a mere house-priest, but a political func tionary, goes back to that early period of history when the Iranians and Indians lived peacefully together as one pation. The Paradhatas of the Iranian kings appear however not to have been as successful in munking the Shahs of Iran their slaves, as the Indian Iurohitas wore in onslay ing the Indian Rājas in the bonds of a spiritual threl.lom. Ilow far the Brahmans must have succeeded in carrying out their design of a spiritual supremacy over the royal caste, every reader nay learn from this last chapter, and convince himself at the same time that hierarchical rulo was known in the world more than a thousand years before the foundation of the Sea of St. Peter.

The ceremonial part of the last book is much onlivened by abort stories of kings who were said to have performes the " great inauguration ceremony," and of course attained to suprue rule over the whole earth (that is to say, of three or four Indian principalitie! It is an imitation of the ceremony by which the gods are said to have installed Indra to the sovereignty over them. The whole concludes (68) with the deseription of a magical performance (they are callen kritya) by means of which a king can destroy secretly all his enemies.

After this summary statement of the contents of the Aitareya Brah maṇam, the question arises whether the work in its present form is the composition of one author or of several. Although there is, as we have seen, a certain plan perceptible, in the arrangement of the subject matter, we may easily distinguish some repetitions, ditang-bigliammis anal interpola tions, which are hardly explicable is the book Itach ouly one author. So we find the Ajya hymn at the morning libation twico explained in 2, 40 and 41, but with slight differences; the origin of tho formula, agnir deveddhah is mentioned twice 2, 33 ans) 39, but in the former passage it is called Nivid, whilst in the latter the name “Puroruk” is given to it. The four last kandikis in the second book 38-41 appear to be a kind of appendix taken from some other sourco. The pieco 1,27 is identical with 7, 3; 6, 5 and 17 treat in the main of the samo topic, the relation between Stotriya and Anurūpa at the Ahina Macrifices. There are several repititions in the 8th book ; 80 the 13th hindiliis išlentical with the 18th and the 14th with the 19th. The 10th and 11th kanlikas in the seventh book are evidently interpolations, interrupting the context, and exhibiting a different style. The latter is very remarkable on account of its men tioning two other Vedic Sākbås by their names, viz. Pusingy and *Kduşitaki; it appears to have appertained to an old troatise on astronomy.

tih

xlix

[69] The style of the Brābmaṇam is on the whole uniform. There are certain phrases which constantly re-occur in the work, as for instance, “what is at the sacrifice appropriate, that is successful, when the verse (which is repeated) alludes to the ceremony which is being performed;” “(he who should observe a Hotar do so contrary to the precept) should tell him that the sacrificer would die; thus it always happens ;” “This is done for production (prajātyāu),” &ç. The language is, of course, like that of all Brāhmaṇas, more recent than that of the Sanhita ; but it is, however, not the classical Sanscrit. Purely Vedic forms occur, such as the infinitive forms in tos, e. g. karttos, arttos, roddhos, mathitos (tee 1, 10; 2, 20) generally dependent on išvara, i.e. able, who has the power, (iśvarah kartton he has the power to do; išvaro roddhoh, he has the power to obstruct, &c.), satartavái (from stri); stomebhir instead of stomớir (4, 15), &c.

The bulk of the work appears to have proceeded from one author; some additions were made afterwards. As regards the materials which our author, whom we may (with Sāyana in various places of his con mentary) call the Aitareya Rişi, that is, the Rişi of the Aitareya Sakhā of the Rigveda, used for the compilation of his work, we can principally distinguish four kinds, viz. (1) Sacred texts and formulas, such as the Adhrigu Praişa mantra (2, 6, 7), the Nivid (2, 34), &c., (70) which are, as we have seen, more ancient than the majority of the hymnş; 2 Gāthag i. e. stanzas, principally impromptus on sacrificial things, and topics.of a more wordly nature, and Itihasas, je stories ; (3) Rules on the performance of the duties of the Hotripriests; (4) Theological expositions of the meaning of mantras, sacred rites, &c., according to the teaching of the most ,eminent Brahma priests who preceded our author.

These materials were worked together by him, but not without many additions of his own, and with the view to present to the followers of his Sakhā a kind of encyclopedia of theological learning, and a supplement to their Veda. The theology of his Sakhá being founded ,on the hymns of the Rişis, and the latter being repeated by the Hotri priests only at the sacrifices, he confined himself for the most part to the speculations of the Hotris and their duties. The aim of our author was like that of all other Brāhmaṇa compilers, a double one, viz. to

The phrase is always elliptical; it is only ya enam bruyat, if any one should tell -him; but the meaning of the whole phrase is only that one which is here (and in the translation) given.

serve practical as well as theoretical ends. From a practical point of view it was to be a guide to the repeaters of the mantras of the Rigveda in some of their most important performances; but as regards the theoretical one, the author intenned to instruct them on the real ends of their profession, viz, to make the sacrificer, by means of the mystical power ascribed to the mantras, either attain to anything he might wish for, or if the Hotar should from some reason or other choose to do so, to deprive him through the same power of his property, children, and [71]life. The Hotris could learn from such a book how great their power was as the preservers of the sacred Rik verses. Every one who wished to perform a sacrifice as the only means for obtaining the favour of the gods, was entirely given up to the hands of the Hotsi-priests, who could do with him what they pleased.

The mantras referred to are, for the most part, to be found in the Rigveda Samhitā which we have at present. There are, however, several quoted, which are not to be met with in it, whence we must conclude, that the Samhita of the Aitareyins belonged to a Sakha different from that one (the Sakala Sākhā) which is at present only known to us. Asvaldyana, in his Srauta Sūtras, which are, as we have seen, founded on the Aitareya Brāhmanam, generally supplies the text of those mantras which are wanting in the Sam hitā. Several of them are in the Atharvaveda Samhitā, but they generally show different readings. In comparing both, those in the Ašvaldyana Sūtras, and those in the Atharvaveda Samhita, we find that, if there is any difference, the text of the Atharva is then always incorrect. It is remarkable that we do not only discover some relationship between the supposed Sakha of the Aitareyins and the Atharvaveda Samhita, but also between the Aitareya and Gopatha Brāhmaṇam. Whole kandikās of the Aitareya, such as those on the Vaşatkāra (3, 7-8) on Atirātra (4, 5) are almost literally to be found in the Gopatha Brāhmaṇam of the Atharvaveda.

The author’s own additions consisted principally [72] in critical remarks, recommending certain practices, and rejecting others, statement of reasons, why a particular rite must be performed in a particular way, and explanations of apparent anomalies in the ritual. The author does never, however, speak in the first person ; for the whole he has the appearance of a tradition having descended from him. He is referred to only in the third person by the words, taddha smāha, “this he told.” The theologians whose opinions are either accepted or rejected, are generally mentioned in the third person plural by the words “they say.” Now

and then they are called mahavadah, i.e. the speakers of great things. But their real name appears to have been Brahmavớdins, i. e. the speakers on Brahma (theologians, divines), which term we frequently meet in the Taittiriya Veda (Black Yajurveda.)

The work was, like the other Brāhmaṇas, no doubt, like the Samhitāi, orally handed down. Some external mark is still visible. At the end of each Adhyāya the last word, or phrase, is put twice. The same fact we observe in all other Brāhmaṇas as well as in the Sūtras. This was evidently a mark for the repeater as well as the hearer by which to recognise the end of a chapter, each of which formed a little treatise for itself.

Regarding the repetition of the Brāhmanam we have to remark, that it is done in a very slow tone, but quite monotonously, whilst the Brāhmaṇas of the Yajurveda are recited with the proper accents. like the Samhitās. Of very frequent occurrence in it is the pluti ie. the lengthening of a vowel to [78] three moras marked by a This Pluti is used in three cases, (1) to ask a question, (2) to deliberate or consider whether a thing should be done or not, and (3) to give some emphasis to a certain word. In the two first cases it expresses exactly the idea of our sign of interrogation, in the latter that of our underlining or ‘italicising of certain important words.

Let us make before we conclude some remarks on the principal sacrificial and theological ideas as far as they have not been touched already) which pervade the Aitareya Brāhmañana.

The sacrifice is regarded as the means for obtaining power over this and the other world, over visible as well as invisible beings, animate as well as inanimate creatures. Who knows its proper application, and has it duly performed, is in fact looked upon as the real master of the world; for any desire he may entertain, if it be even the most ambitious, can be gratified, any object he has in view can be obtained by means of it. The Yajña (sacrifice) taken as a whole is conceived to be a kind of machinery, in which every piece must tally with the other, or a sort of large chain in which no link is allowed to be wanting, or a staircase, by which one may ascend to heaven, or as a personage, endowed with all the characteristics of a human body. It exists from eternity, and proced ed from the Supreme Being (Prajapati (Brahma) along with the Trai vidyd, 1. e. the three-fold sacred science (the Rik verses, the Såmans or chants, and the Yajus or sacrificial formulas). The creation of the world [74] itself was even regarded as the fruit of sacrifice performed by the

Supreme Being. The Yajña exists as an invisible thing at all times, it is like the latent power of electricity in an electrifying machine, requiring only the operation of a suitable apparatus in order to be elicited. It is supposed to extend, when unrolled, from the Ahavaniya or sacrificial fire into which all oblations are thrown, to heaven, forming thus a bridge or ladder, by means of which the sacrificer can communicate with the world of gods and spirits, and even ascend when alive to their abodes. The term for beginning the sacrificial operations is “to spread the sacri fice ;” this means that the invisible thing, representing the ideal sacri fice which was lying dormant, as it were, is set into motion, in conse quence of which its several parts or limbs are unfolding themselves, and thus the whole becomes extended. This ideal sacrifice stands in the closest relationship with all the sacrificial in plements, the sacrificial place, and all the sacred verses and words spoken during its actual perfor mance. The sacrifice being often represented as a kind of being with a body like that of men, certain ceremonies form his head, others his neck, otbers his eye, &c. The most important thing at a sacrifice is that all its several parts should tally together, and that consequently there should neither anything be in excess, nor deficient in it. This agreeing of the several parts of the sacrifice constitutes its rūpa i. e. form. The proper form is obtained, when the mantras which are repeated are in [75] strictest accordance with the ceremony for which they are repeated, or (if the sacrifice lasts for several or many days) when they have the cha racteristics of the respective days. If the form is vitiated, the whole sacrifice is lost. Mistakes being, on account of the so extremely com plicated ritual, unavoidable, the sacrificial being was to be attended by a physician in the person of the Brahina priest (5, 34). Each mistake must be made good by a prayaschitta, .e. penance, or propitiatory offering.

The power and significance of the Hotri-priests at a sacrifice consists in their being the masters of the sacred word, which is fre quently personified by Vāch i.e. Speech, who is indentical třith Saras vati, the goddess of learning in the latter Hindu Pantheon. Speech has, according to the opinion of the earliest Hindu divines, the power of vivifying and killing. The sacred words pronounced hy the Hotar effect, by dint of the innate power of Vāch, the spiritual birth of the sacrificer, form his body, raise him up to heaven, connect him with the prototypes of those things which he wishes to obtain (such as children, cattle, &c.) and make him attain to his full life term, which is a hundred years; but they are at the same time a weapon by means of which the sacrificer’s enemies, or he himself (if the Hotar have any evil

1111

designs against him) can be killed, and all evil consequences of sin (this is termed påpman) be destroyed. The power and effect of Speech as regards the obtaining of any particular thing wished for, mainly lies in the form in which it is uttered. Thence [76] the great importance of the metres, and the choice of words and terms. Each metre is the invisible master of something obtainable in this world; it is, as it were, its ex ponent, and ideal. This great significance of the metrical speech is derived from the number of syllables of which it consists ; for each thing has, (just as in the Pythogorean system) a certain pumerical pro portion. The Gāyatri metre, which cansists of three times eight syllables, is the most sacred, and is the proper metre for Agai, the god of fire, and chaplain of the gods. It expresses the idea of Brahma ; therefore the sacrificer must use it when he wishes for anything closely connected with the Brahma, such as acquirement of sacred knowledge, and the thorough understanding of all problems of theology. The Triştubb, which consists of four times eleven syllables, expresses the idea of strength, and royal power; thence it is the proper metre by which Indra, the king of the gods, is to be invoked. Any one wishing to obtain strength and royal power, principally a Kşattriya," must use it. A variety of it the Uşṇih metre of twenty-eight syllables, is to be employed by a sacrificer who aspires for longevity, for twenty-eight is the symbol of life. The Jagati, a metre of forty-eight syllable, expresses the idea of cattle. Any one who wishes for wealth in cattle, must use it. The same idea (or that of the sacrifice) is expressed by the Pankti metre (five times eight syllables). The Bțihatī, which consists of thirty-six syllables, is to be used when a sacrificer is aspiring to fame and renown for this metre is the exponent [77] of those ideas. The Anuştubh metre, of thirty-two, syllables, is the symbol of the celestial world ; thence a candidate for a place in heaven has to use it. The Virāj of thirty syllables, is food and satisfaction; thence one who wishes for plenty of food, must employ it.

The words contained in these different metrical forms must always be appropriate to the occasion. If the oblation is given to Agni, the perse repeated must contain his name, or an allusion to it; were it to contain the name of Indra, or one of his characteristics, the offering would be thrown away. Every act, even the most trifling one, is at the sacrificial performance accompanied with mantras, and always such a verse is to be chosen as contains (or is made to contain by interpretation) an allusion to it. This will all be clear to the reader on reference, for instance, to 2, 2, where the mantras connected with every particular act of the ceremony of anointing and erecting the sacrificial post is given.

liv

Of almost equal is portance with the metres are the so-called Stomas, based also on numerical proportions. Fach Stoma contains a certain number of verses, chanted according to one and the same tune. The number is very often obtained only by frequent repetition of the same triplet of verses (see about the particulars of the Stomas note 18 on pages 237-38 of the translation). Each has, just as the metres, its peculiar symbolical meaning. The Trivrit (nine-fold) stoma, is, for instance, the symbol of Brahma, and the theological wisdom, and has Agni, the house priest of the gods, for its deity: the Panchadasa (fifteen-fold) is the (78) symbol of royal power and thence appropriate to Indra, and the Kşat triyas: the Saptadasa (seventeen-fold) is the exponent of wealth in cattle ; thence a Vaisya should use it, or any other sacrificer who wishes to obtain wealth: the Ekaviméa-(twenty-one-fold) is the symbol of generation : thence it is principally to be used at the third libation, many rites of which refer to the propagation of progeny. The other Stomas, such as the Trinava (twenty-seven fold), Trayastrira’a (thirty-three-fold), &c, have a similarly symbolical meaning.

Besides the Stomas, the so-called Pristhas the name of certain Sāmans and their combinations) are a necessary requisite at all the Soma sacrifices. They form the centre of all the ceremonies, and the principal one of them is always regarded as the womb (yoni) of the sacrificial being. They are generally only used at the midday libation. The two principal Prişthas are the Rathantara and Brihat Samans (abhitvà sūra nonums, and trāmiddhi havāmahe). They can be used singly, or along with one of their kindred (see notes 29 on page 193, 14 on page 282, and 4, 28). The name Priştha means “back," for they are regarded on the whole as the back of the sacrifice.

All these things, metres (chhandas), Stomas and Pristhas, are believed to be as eternal and divine, as the words themselves they contain. The earliest Hindu divines did not only believe in a pri mitive revelation of the words of the sacred texts, but even in that of the various forms, which might be used for their repetition or chanting. These forms along with their contents, [79] the everlasting Veda words, are symbols expressive of things of the invisible world, and in several respects comparable to the Platonic ideas. They are in the hands of the sacrificial priests the instruments for accomplish ing anything they might wish for in behalf of the sacrificer. But a great deal depends upon the way of using those spiritual instruments. It is a matter of importance whether a mantra is repeated without stopping,

or påda by pada.(quarter by quarter), or half verse by half verse. The four feet (pādas), of which many metres are composed, represent the four feet of animals. The repetition of such a verse, half verse by half verse, that is, with two stops only, represents the sacrificer who as a human being, has two legs. By thus combining the ideas of four and two-footed beings, the sacrificer is mystically placed amidst cattle, and obtains them, in future, in the largest quantity. Another important point is, whether the mantra is repeated upamću, i.e, with an almost inaudible voice, or tūsnim, .e. silently, or with a low and slow voice (mandrasvara), or with a middle tone (madhyama), or very loud (utiama). (See 3, 44).

Among the large number of the sacred words, there are always some which have a destructive quality, and must, therefore, be used with great caution. In order to protect the sacrificer, as well as himself, from the dangerous effects of such words, the repeater must, by means of certain other words, or formulas, deprive them of their destructive power, and thus propitiate them. This is generally called sūnti [80] (propitiation, appeasing). Such dangerous words are for instance, våuşat (see 3, 8) and rudra, the name of Siva, the god of destruction (3, 34).

The sacrificer, who is the object of all these mystical operations on the part of the priests) by means of their mantras, chants, and manual labour, is not allowed to remain inactive, but he himself has to repeat certain mantras, expressive of his desires. When, for instance, the Hotar is performing the mystical operation of placing him among cattle, he must say, “May I become rich in cattle!” When the same priest makes a firm standing place (a pratişthá) for him, he must say, “May I go to my place ! " Thus he obtains the fulfilment of any desire which might be obtainable by means of a particular verse or mode of repeating, or chant, or performance of a particular rite, when he repeats the appro priate formula at the right time and occasion. For what he himself speaks, connects him with the ideals of his wishes, which are brought within his grasp by the priest.

The objects sacrificed for are manifold, viz. Offspring, cattle, wealth, fame, theological learning, skill for performance of sacrifices, and heaven. For gaining heaven a Soma sacrifice is indispensable. For the sacred Soma juice has, according to the opinions of the ancient Hindu theo logians, pre-eminently the power of uniting the sacrificer on this earth with the celestial king Soma, and make him thus one of his subjects, and consequently an associate of the gods, and an inhabitant of the celestial world.

THE

AITAREYA BRAHMANAM OF THE RIGVEDA.