०४

Substitution does not apply to the master, the altar-fire, the deity, the word, the act, and a prohibition.

Commentary

The master is meant for the sacrificer himself and his wife. Their place cannot, of course, be taken by anybody else. The altar-fire is supposed to have a supernatural power, and cannot be replaced by any other fire. Nothing can take the place of the invoked deities, nor of the words used in the mantras addressed to them, nor can the sacrifice itself be replaced by any other act. Lastly, when it is said that māṣas, varakas, kodravas are not fit for sacrifice, or that a man ought not to sacrifice with what should not be eaten by Āryas, nothing else can be substituted for what is thus prohibited.

1. The substitute is stopped (i.e. not allowed) for the owner (i,e. the sacrificer), the fire, the word (i.e. the formula), the action, and for the prohibited.¹

The Prakṛti stops from three causes, from a corollary, from a prohibition, and from loss of purpose.

Commentary

A corollary (pratyāmnāna) occurs, when it is said, ‘instead of Kuśa grass, let him make a barhis of reeds.’ A prohibition (pratishedha) occurs, when it is said, ‘he does not choose an Ārsheya.’ Loss of purpose (arthalopa) occurs, when peṣaṇa, pounding, would refer to caru, a pulse, that cannot be pounded, while grains can be.

2. The basic paradigm stops (i.e. not followed) on account of three reasons: when there is a counter-sacred-text,¹ when it is prohibited,² or when the purpose will not be served.³

The Agniṣṭoma is the Prakṛti of the Ekāha sacrifices.

Commentary

The Ekāha are sacrifices accomplished in one day.

3. Agnistoma is the basic paradigm of the one day sacrifices.

The Dvādaśāha is the Prakṛti of the Ahargaṇas.

Commentary

The Dvādaśāha lasts twelve days and is a Soma sacrifice. It is either an Ahīna or a Sattra. An Ahargaṇa is a series of daily and nightly sacrifices. Those which last from two nights to eleven nights are called Ahīna. Those which last from thirteen to one hundred nights or more are called Sattras.

4. Dvādaśāha (is the basic paradigm) of the groups of days i.e. of the Ahīna and Sattra sacrifices.

The Gavāmayana is the Prakṛti of the Sāṃvatsarikas.

Commentary

The Gavāmayana lasts three years, and it is the type of all Sāṃvatsarika sacrifices, whether they last one, two, three or more years. They all belong to the class of Sattras.

5. Gavāmayana (Course of Cows) (is the basic paradigm) of the year-long-sacrificial-sessions.

Of the Nikāyi sacrifices the first serves as Prakṛti.

Commentary

Among the Nikāyi sacrifices, lit. those which consist of a number, all having the same name, but different rewards, the first is the prakṛti of the subsequent ones. The commentator calls them sādyaskra &c., and mentions as the first the Agniṣṭoma. See Sūtra CXLVI, and Weber, Ind. Stud. XIII, p. 218.

6. For sacrifices which form groups the first (one is the paradigm for the remaining ones).¹

At the Agniṣṭoma there is the Uttara-vedi.

Commentary

The commentator explains this by saying that at the Soma sacrifices, i.e. at the Agniṣṭoma, Ukthya, Ṣoḍaśin, and Atirātra, the fire is carried from the Āhavanīya to the Uttara-vedi, which is also called the Soma altar.

7. In the Agniṣṭoma-sacrifice (there is) an Uttaravedi.

The fire is valid for the successive sacrifices.

Commentary

This fire refers to the fire on the Uttara-vedi, mentioned in the preceding Sūtra, and the object of the Sūtra seems to be to include the act of lighting the fire on the Uttara-vedi in the Prakṛti, though properly speaking it does not form part of the Agniṣṭoma. But I cannot quite understand the argument of the commentator.

8. In the next (sacrifices there is) the fire-altar-building (made with bricks).

This does not apply to the Sādyaskras, the Vājapeya, the Ṣoḍaśin, and the Sārasvata Sattra.

Commentary

With regard to the Ṣoḍaśin and its vikāra, the Vājapeya, the laying of the fire is not mentioned. In the case of the Sādyaskras, it becomes impossible, because they have to be quickly finished. In the case of the Sārasvata Sattra, there is the same difficulty on account of not remaining in the same place (anavasthāpān nāgniś cīyate).

9. Except in the (following sacrifices): Sādyaskas¹, Vājapeya², Ṣoḍaśin³, and Sārasvata-sacrificial-session⁴.

A sacrificer wishes the object of his sacrifice at the beginning of the sacrifice.

Commentary

Some MSS. read kāmayeta, ‘he should wish,’ but the commentator explains that such a command (vidhi) is unnecessary, because it is natural to form a wish (svataḥ siddhatvāt).

10. The sacrificer should desire (express his desire) in the beginning of a sacrifice;

At the beginning of a special part of the sacrifice, one should wish the object of that part of the sacrifice.

Commentary

The commentary, though objecting, and objecting rightly, to kāmayeta, ‘he should wish,’ in the preceding Sūtra, accepts kāmayeta as determining the present Sūtra, saying kāmayetety anuvartate. One should read yajñāṅgakāmam, not yajñakāmam, for the commentary explains it by yajñāṅgaphalasaṅkalpaḥ. Whether it was really intended that there should be a special wish for each part or subsidiary act of a sacrifice (yajñāṅga), is another question, but the commentator evidently thought so.

Kātyāyana, who treats the same subject (1, 2, 10 seq.), states that there should be this desire for a reward for certain sacrifices which are offered for a certain purpose, as, for instance, the Dvādaśāha, but that there are no such motives for other sacrifices, and parts of sacrifices. He mentions, first of all, a niyama, a precept for the sacrifice, such as ‘Speak the truth.’ Then a nimitta, a special cause, as when some accident has taken place that must be remedied, for instance, when the house has been burnt down, &c. Thirdly, the Agnihotra, the morning and evening Homa; fourthly, the Darśa-pūrṇamāsau; fifthly, the Dākṣāyaṇa, a vikṛti of the Darśa-pūrṇamāsau, the Āgrayaṇa; sixthly, the Nirūḍha-paśu, the animal sacrifice. All these have to be performed as a sacred duty, and without any view to special rewards. Thus we read in Vāsiṣṭha:

Avaśyam brāhmaṇo’gnīn ādadhīta, darśapūrṇamāsāgrayaṇeṣṭicāturmāsyapaśusomaiś ca yajeta, ‘A Brāhmaṇa should without fail place his fires, and offer the Darśapūrṇamāsa, the Āgrayaṇeṣṭi, the Kāturmāsyas, the P a ś u, and the Soma sacrifices.’

Hārīta says: Pākayajñān yajen nityaṃ haviryajñāṃś ca nityaśaḥ, Somāṃś ca vidhipūrveṇa ya icched dharmam avyayam, ‘Let a man offer the Pākayajñas always, always also the Haviryajñas, and the Soma sacrifices, according to rule, if he wishes for eternal merit.’ The object of these sacrifices is aparimitaniḥśreyasarūpamokṣa, eternal happiness, and hence they have to be performed during life at certain seasons, without any special occasion (nimitta), and without any special object (kāma). According to most authorities, however, they have to be performed during thirty years only. After that the Agnihotra only has to be kept up. The proper seasons for these sacrifices are given by Manu, IV, 25-27:

A Brāhmaṇa shall always offer the Agnihotra at the beginning or at the end of the day and of the night, and the Darśa and Paurṇamāsa (iṣṭis) at the end of each half-month;

‘When the old grain has been consumed the (Āgrayaṇa) Iṣṭi with new grain; at the end of the (three) seasons the (Cāturmāsya) sacrifices; at the solstices an animal (sacrifice); at the end of the year Soma offerings;

‘A Brāhmaṇa, who keeps sacred fires, shall, if he desires to live long, not eat new grain or meat, without having offered the (Āgrayaṇa) Iṣṭi with new grain and an animal (sacrifice)¹.’

These Pākayajñas, Haviryajñas or iṣṭis, and Soma sacrifices are enumerated by Gautama², as follows:

[TABLE]

In a commentary on Dhūrtasvāmin’s Āpastambasūtrabhāṣya (MS. E.I.H. 137) another list is given:

| | | | |———————-|———————|—————-| | Pākayajñas: | Haviryajñas: | Somayajñas: | | (1) Aupāsanahomaḥ, | Agnihotram, | Agniṣṭomaḥ, | | (2) Vaiśvadevam, | Darśapūrṇamāsau, | Atyagniṣṭomaḥ, | | (3) Pārvaṇam, | Āgrayaṇam, | Ukthyaḥ, | | (4) Aṣṭakā, | Cāturmāsyāni, | Ṣoḍaśī, | | (5) Māsiśrāddham, | Nirūḍhapaśubandhaḥ, | Vājapeyaḥ, | | (6) Sarpabaliḥ, | Sautrāmaṇī, | Atirātraḥ, | | (7) Īśānabaliḥ. | Piṇḍapitṛyajñaḥ. | Aptoryāmaḥ. |

This list is nearly the same as one given by Satyavrata Sāmāśrami in the Uṣā. He gives, however, another list, which is:

[TABLE]

According to the substances offered, sacrifices are sometimes divided into vegetable and animal sacrifices. The vegetable substances are, taṇḍulāḥ, piṣṭāni, phalīkaraṇāḥ, puroḍāśaḥ, odanaḥ, yavāgūḥ, pṛthukāḥ, lājāḥ, dhānāḥ, and aktavaḥ. The animal substances are, payaḥ, dadhi, ājyam, āmikṣā, vājinam, vapā, tvacaḥ, māṃsam, lohitam, and paśurasaḥ.

11. (and) the desire of a subsidiary rite of a sacrifice in the beginning of that subsidiary rite of the sacrifice.

If there are fewer Mantras and more (sacrificial) acts, then after dividing them into equal parts, let him perform the former with the former, the latter with the latter.

Commentary

It happens, for instance, in certain iṣṭis that a pair of Yājyā and Anuvākyā mantras is given, but six acts. In that case one half of the mantras is used for one half of the acts, and the other half of the mantras for the other half of the acts.

12. When there are less formulae and more acts one should divide the formulae equally and use the first formula for the first act, the next formula for the next act.¹

If there are fewer acts and more Mantras, let him perform and act with one mantra, those which remain are optional, as the materials for the sacrificial post.

13. When there are less acts and more formulae, then one should use the formulae in their order each one for each act; the remaining formulae are optional as for example the substances of the sacrificial post.

From the end there takes place omission or addition.

Commentary

This refers again to the same subject, namely what has to be done if there are either more or less mantras than there are acts which they are to accompany. In that case it is here allowed to use as many mantras as there are acts, and to drop the rest of the mantras. Or, if there are less mantras than there are acts, then, after the mantras have been equally divided, the last verse is to be multiplied. For instance, in the Dvikapāla sacrifice for the two Aśvins, the placing of the two kapālas is accompanied by two mantras. The rest of the mantras enjoined in the prakṛti is left out. But if there are, for instance, twelve or more iṣṭakās, bricks, to be placed, while there are only ten mantras, then the mantras are equally divided, and the fifth and tenth to be repeated, as many times as is necessary to equal the number of the iṣṭakās.

14. At the end there should be exclusion¹ or addition.²

As the Prakṛti has been told before, anything that has not been told before, should be at the end.

Commentary

This seems to mean that anything new, peculiar to a Vikṛti, and not mentioned in the Prakṛti, should come in at the end, that is, after those portions of the sacrifice which are enjoined in the Prakṛti.

15. Because the basic paradigm is mentioned first, the new (different detail) should be at the end.¹

The rule should stand on account of the fitness of the Kumbhi, a large pot, the Śūla, the spit for boiling the heart, and the two Vapāśrapaṇīs, the spits for roasting the vapā.

Commentary

Kumbhī is explained by sroṇyādipākasamarthā

bṛhatī sthālī; Śūla by hṛdayapākārthā yaṣṭiḥ, and Vapāśrapaṇī by vapāśrapaṇārthe yaṣṭī dve. The exact object of the Sūtra is not quite clear. Prabhutva is explained by samarthatva, that is, fitness. This would mean, that on account of their fitness, or because they can be used for the object for which they are intended, or, so long as they can be used, the rule applying to them should remain. The commentary explains tantram by tantratā or ekatā. It may mean that the same pots and spits should be used, so long as they fulfil their purpose. The next Sūtra would then form a natural limitation.

16. The cooking pot, (heart-roasting) spit, and the Vapāśrapaṇī (y-shaped sticks) for roasting the Omentum¹ should be common (to all the victims) because they are capable for being used for more than one victim.²

But if there is a different kind of animal, there is difference (in pots and spits), owing to the diversity of cooking.

Commentary

If different animals are to be cooked, then there must be different pots for each (pratipaśum), because each requires a different kind of cooking. The commentary adds that, as the reason for using different pots is given, that reason applies also to young and old animals of the same kind (jāti), i, e. the young and small animal would require a different pot and a different kind of cooking.

17. But when there is a difference (of the genus of the victims)³ then these things should be different, because of the difference in cooking.

At the Vanaspati sacrifice, which is a modification (vikāra) of the Sviṣṭakṛt, the addresses (nigama) of the deities should take place in the Yājyā, because they are included in the Prakṛti.

Commentary

These nigamas of the deities are not mentioned in the rules of the Vanaspati sacrifice, but they are mentioned in the rules for the Sviṣṭakṛt sacrifice of the Darśapūrṇamāsa, which is the Prakṛti, and should therefore be taken over. Here again, because a reason is given, it is understood that the same reason would apply to other portions of Sviṣṭakṛt also, such as the Dvir abhighāraṇa, which is to be retained in the Vanaspati sacrifice.

18. In the offering to Vanaspati¹ which is a modification of Sviṣṭakr̥t² the addresses to the deity should be in the offering verse because they are connected with the (basic paradigm)³.

The Anvārambhaṇīyā or initiatory ceremony does not take place in a Vikṛti, because the Vikṛtis would fall within the time of the Prakṛti, and the Anvārambhaṇīyā has but one object, namely (the initiation of) the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa sacrifice.

Commentary

The Anvārambhaṇīyā ceremony has to be performed by those who begin the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa sacrifice. It has thus one object only, and is never enjoined for any other cause. It is not therefore transferred to any Vikṛti, such as the Saurya ceremony, &c. The Darśa-pūrṇamāsa sacrifice having to be performed during the whole of life, or during thirty years, the Vikṛtis would necessarily fall within the same space of time. The initiatory ceremony has reference to the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa sacrifice only, and thus serves as an introduction to all the Vikṛtis, without having to be repeated for each.

19. The Anvāraṁbhaṇīyā (offering)¹ should not be performed in a modificatory-rite because it is in the middle of the time of the basic paradigm (that the modificatory rites occur);² (and the Anvāraṁbhaṇīyā offering) is indeed (done for it basic paradigm).³

² i.e. the New and Full-moon-offerings and the Cāturmāsyas are performed throughout the life.

Or (according to others) the Anvārambhaṇīyā should take place (in the Vikṛtis also), because the time (of the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa) does not form an essential part.

Commentary

This Sūtra is not quite clear. It shows clearly enough that, according to some authorities, the Anvārambhaṇīyā or initiatory ceremony of the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa sacrifice should take place in the Vikṛtis also; but why? Because the time has not the character of a śeṣa, which is said to be a synonym of aṅga, an essential part of a sacrifice.

When it is said that the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa should be performed during life, this is not meant as determining the time of the sacrifice. It only means that so long as there is life a man should perform these sacrifices, and that their non-performance would constitute a sin. The former argument, therefore, that the time of the Vikṛti sacrifices would fall within the time of the Prakṛti sacrifice is not tenable.

20. Or (the Anvārambhaniyā-offering) may be (performed in the modificatory rites) because the time (of the New and Full-moon-sacrifices) does not form an integral part (of the ritual).

And again, because there is difference in the undertaking.

Commentary

Ārambha, the beginning, is explained as the determination to perform a certain sacrifice (darśapūrṇamāsābhyāyṃ yakṣya iti niścayapuraḥsaraḥ saṅkalpaḥ). The object of the undertaking in the case of the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa sacrifice, as the Prakṛti, is simply svarga, in the Vikṛtis it may be any kind of desire. Therefore the Anvārambhaṇīyā ceremony of the Darśa-pūrṇamāsas should be transferred to its Vikṛtis. This seems to have been the opinion of the same authorities who are referred to in Sūtra CLVII. The final outcome of the whole controversy, however, is clearly that our Ācārya is in favour of omitting the Anvārambhaṇīyā in the Vikṛtis. Anayoḥ pakṣayor anvārambhaṇīyābhāvapakṣasyaiva balavattvam ācāryābhilaṣitam iti manyāmahe. The Anvārambhaṇīyā is not to be considered as an ordinary Aṅga, but as a special act to fit the sacrificer to perform the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa and to perform it through the whole of his life.

21. And because the beginning (of it) is separated (from the beginning of the paradigmatic rites viz. New and full-moon sacrifices as far as the time of it is concerned).

For every object (new sacrifice) let him bring forward the fire (let him perform the Agnipraṇayana, the fetching of the Āhavanīya from the Gārhapatya fire). When the sacrifice is finished the fire becomes again ordinary fire, as when the (divine) fire has returned (to the firesticks).

22. For every purpose (i.e. for every performance of a rite) (the Adhvaryu) carries fire forwards.¹ When the rite is over, the fire becomes profane as in the case (of fire which has been) taken up.²