23. Homage to parts of the Atharva-Veda.
⌊Verses 1-29, prose.⌋ ⌊Not found in Pāipp.⌋ The application of the hymn, as defined by the comm., was given with the one preceding.
As in the case of the preceding hymn, the comm. to all the verses is given together at the end. Its main parts are given below under the separate verses. It further declares that by the words ekarca to daçarca are designated the ṛṣis named Atharvan, and by those from ekādaçarca to viṅçati are designated the ārṣeyas named Ātharvaṇa; and it quotes as authority the beginning of i. l. 5 of the Gopatha Brāhmaṇa.
⌊With regard to this hymn in general, and leaving books xix. and xx. out of account in the statements that follow: in the first place it is clear that the books of the third grand division of the AV., books xiii.-xviii. (see p. 708), are intended by verses 23-28 respectively (see under the verses below and see the introductions to the several books).⌋
⌊In the second place it is clear that the hymns of the books (but not the books themselves severally) of the first grand division of the AV., books i.-vii. (see p. 388), are intended to be covered by verses 1-15 and 19 and 20 (between 19 and 20 we miss the dvyṛcebhyaḥ which the commentator's text has). In this connection it is significant that vs. 1 begins with homage "to them of four verses," which is the norm of our first book, and not with homage "to them of one verse"—see the first table on p. 388. Moreover, as appears from the table on p. cxliv, the first grand division contains a hymn or hymns of every number of verses from 4 verses to 18 verses (mostly in books i.-v.) and from 1 verse to 3 verses (exclusively in books vi. and vii.). Again, while there is in the first grand division (and only there) one hymn or more of every number of verses from 1 verse to 18 verses, it is interesting to note that there is, in the whole AV. (books i.-xviii. or even i.-xix.), not one hymn of 19 verses, nor yet one of 20 verses (cf. p. 471 top): and of this fact account seems to be taken in so far as the form of our verses 16 and 17 differs from that of the 15 preceding.⌋
⌊Thirdly, the books of the second grand division of the AV. (books viii.-xii.) consist of hymns of over 20 verses (p. 471, top). There is, therefore, in all our present hymn, no special reference to this division, unless it be in verse 18, which may accordingly mean 'To the division (kāṇḍa) of great (mahant) [hymns], hail,' and refer to books viii.-xii. It is not impossible that a Hindu might use kāṇḍa to signify a 'division' comprising several books and tantamount to one of our so-called "grand divisions" (see my note to vs. 18). Against my view, I might well object that dīrgha would be a more appropriate adjective than mahant for the 'long' individual hymns of which the division consists; but, per contra, if the difference between mahadguṇa and mahāguṇa be a valid parallel, the text ought, if it means 'great book,' to read mahākāṇḍāya. A graver objection to my view, perhaps, is the position of vs. 18, which, if I were or am right, ought to come between verse 20 and verse 23.⌋
⌊Fourthly, verses 29 and 30 doubtless refer to this Veda as a whole, to the Brahmaveda, or to the incantations (bráhman) which form its subject-matter. After writing this, I note that Bloomfield in the Grundriss, p. 40, note 7, expresses an opinion similar, but much less specific. If I am right, bráhman is to be preferred to brahmán in these two verses, as also in vss. 20-21 of the preceding hymn: cf. the TB. vs. cited under 21. 21. On the other hand, I ought not to pass in silence the fact that the Anukr., at the beginning of its treatment of book xix., seems to call book xix. the brahmakāṇḍa.⌋
⌊Finally, therefore, aside from verse 18, just discussed, and assuming that verses 16 and 17 were added (in genuine Hindu fashion) merely for schematic completeness, we have only to note that all the verses of the hymn are reasonably accounted for, save only verses 21 and 22.⌋ ⌊☞ See pages cl, clvii, clix.⌋
Translated: Griffith, ii. 280.1. To them of four verses of the Ātharvaṇas, hail!
2. To them of five verses, hail!
3. To them of six verses, hail!
All the saṁhitā-mss. read ṣaḍarc-, and two of SW's pada-mss. ṣaḍá॰ṛc-; both editions ṣaḍṛc-, with the comm. and three pada-mss. The Gop.Br. has ṣaḍarc- in i. 1. 5.
4. To them of seven verses, hail!
5. To them of eight verses, hail!
6. To them of nine verses, hail!
7. To them of ten verses, hail!
8. To them of eleven verses, hail!
9. To them of twelve verses, hail!
10. To them of thirteen verses, hail!
11. To them of fourteen verses, hail!
12. To them of fifteen verses, hail!
13. To them of sixteen verses, hail!
14. To them of seventeen verses, hail!
15. To them of eighteen verses, hail!
16. Nineteen: hail!
17. Twenty: hail!
In these two verses, some of the mss. read -çatí sv-; the text of the comm. has -çatyāí, which would be an improvement; and two of SPP's reciters give the same. ⌊But cf. p. 931, ¶6, end.⌋
18. To the great book (mahat-kāṇḍá), hail!
⌊All of W's and of SPP's mss., and the reciters as well, give mahat-, not mahā-; but the comm. appears to read mahā-, and to say that it means the 'entire Veda of twenty books': mahākāṇḍāye ’ti çabdena viṅçatikāṇḍātmakakṛtsnavedavācinā; and this seems to support my suggestion that a Hindu might use kāṇḍa of a group of kāṇḍas: cf. ¶5 of introduction, above. Weber suggested at Ind. Stud. iv. 433 that mahatkāṇḍa might mean book xx.; but in a later volume (xviii. 154), that book v. might be intended.⌋ ⌊See pages clvii-viii.⌋
19. To them of three verses, hail!
Between this verse and the next, the commentator's text inserts dvyṛcebhyaḥ svāhā.
20. To them of one verse, hail!
21. To the petty ones, hail! ⌊See page clviii top.⌋
This is a repetition of 22. 6 above, and after it the commentator's text adds 22. 7.
22. To them of a half-verse, hail!
All the mss., and the comm., have here ekānṛcébhyas (p. eka॰anṛc-), and SPP. follows them. Our ekadvyṛcébhyas (misprinted ekadvṛc-) was meant as an emendation, but is hardly successful. What ekānṛc- should mean does not appear; the translation simply follows the comm., for lack of anything better.
23. To the ruddy ones (rohita), hail!
The mss. ⌊except W's O.D., which have róh-⌋, and hence also SPP., accent here rohitébhyas. The comm. remarks that in this and the following verses the books intended are clear. This, of course, means book xiii. ⌊which is designated by rohitāis at Kāuç. 99. 4⌋.
24. To the two Sūryās, hail!
That is, to the two parts (anuvākas) of the book beginning with the Sūryā-hymn (xiv.).
25. To the two Vrātyas, hail!
Again the two anuvākas of the Vrātya-book (xv.). ⌊Both ed's read vrātyā́bhyām, with all the authorities, save W's D.L., which have vrā́tyā-. The minor Pet. Lex., vi. 189, notes vrātyá as an adj. to vrā́tya: hence, rather, 'To the two [anuvākas ] about the vrā́tya, hail!' See my note, p. 770, ¶3.⌋
26. To the two of Prajāpati, hail!
The two anuvākas of book xvi. are evidently intended, though why they are called prajāpatya is difficult to say. ⌊The Major Anukr. calls the whole book prājāpatya, as noted p. 792, ¶4.⌋ The Old Anukr. quoted in the endings says at the end of xvi. 4 prājāpatyo ha catuṣkaḥ, ⌊····⌋ saptakaḥ paraḥ: i.e. 'the [first] Prajāpati-anuvāka has four hymns ⌊or paryāyas⌋; the [paryāya] next after [2 and 3: i.e. paryāya 4] is one of seven verses.' ⌊For the probable relative position and the significance of these extracts, see p. 792 (¶5)-793.⌋
27. To the viṣāsahí, hail!
The seventeenth book begins with the word viṣāsahím; and this time the comm. takes the trouble to specify that "the seventeenth kāṇḍa" is intended. ⌊Cf. p. 805, ¶1.⌋
28. To them of good omen (man̄galiká), hail!
29. To the bráhman, hail!
See above, 22. 20, with which this is identical. This time, two of our mss. ⌊and three of SPP's⌋ have bráhmaṇe; the others, and SPP's text, read brahmáṇe. ⌊As to the meaning, see introduction, p. 932, ¶2.⌋
30. Heroisms were gathered with the bráhman as chief; the bráhman as chief in the beginning stretched the sky; the Brahmán was born as first of creatures; therefore who is fit to contend with the Brahmán?
This is a repetition of 22. 21 above; the commentator's text apparently gives it in full, as SPP. notes that (doubtless only by an accident) it reads this time in c prathamo ‘tha.