35. To expiate errors in the sacrifice: to Viçvakarman.
[An̄giras.-—vāiçvakarmaṇam. trāiṣṭubham: 1. bṛhatīgarbhā; 4, 5. bhurij.]
Found (except vs. 5, and in the verse-order 2, 3, 1, 4) in Pāipp. i. The same four verses are found in TS. (iii. 2. 81-3: in the order 2, 4, 3, 1), and the first three in MS. (ii. 3. 8; in the order 1, 3, 2). The hymn is used by Kāuç. (38. 22) in a rite intended, according to the comm., to prevent faults of vision (dṛṣṭidoṣanivāraṇāya; Keçava says "to prevent rain," vṛṣṭinivāraṇāya; perhaps his text is corrupt), accompanying the eating of something in an assembly. Its employment (59. 21) with the hymn next preceding was noticed under the latter. The comm. (differing in his reading and division of the rules from the edited text of Kāuç.) declares it to be used in all the sava sacrifices, to accompany the purastād homas (59. 23-4: uttareṇa savapurastāddhomān); and vs. 5 is used (3. 16) with a purastād homa in the parvan sacrifices. In Vāit. the hymn appears (9. 7) in the cāturmāsya sacrifice, with two oblations to Mahendra and Viçvakarman respectively; and again (29. 22) in the agnicayana. In all these applications there is nothing that suits the real character of the hymn.
Translated: Weber, xiii. 211; Ludwig, p. 302 (vss. 1-4); Griffith, i. 76.
1. They who, partaking [of soma] (bhakṣ), did not prosper (ṛdh) in good things, whom the fires of the sacrificial hearth were distressed about (anu-tapya-)—what was the expiation (avayá) of their ill-sacrifice, may Viçvakarman ('the all-worker') make that for us a good sacrifice.
The translation implies emendation of dúriṣṭis in c to -ṭes, and of tā́n in d to tā́m; tā́m is read by the comm., as well as by TS. and MS., and SPP. even admits it into his text, though nearly all his mss., as well as ours, read tā́n. Our P. and M. read āvṛdhús at end of a; TS. has ānṛhús, MS. ānaçús. TS. elides the a of anu in b; it begins c with iyám for yā́, and ends it with dúriṣṭyāi, thus supporting our emendation. Both TS. and MS. give kṛṇotu in d, and MS. puts it after viçvákarmā. The pada-mss. read in c ava॰yā́, but SPP. alters his pada-text to ava-yā́ḥ, on the authority of the comm.; it is a matter of indifference, as the concluding element, in spite of the native grammarians, is doubtless the root yā. Ppp. gives duriṣṭā sviṣṭam in c, d. The various readings, here and in the following verses, are in good part of the kind which show that the text-makers were fumbling over matter which they did not understand. The comm. is no better off. Here, in a, he is uncertain whether to take ná as 'as if' or 'not,' and to make vásūni object of bhakṣáyantas or of ānṛdhús (= vardhitavantas, which is not bad). ⌊The fires, pāda b, are personified in like fashion at AGS. iv. 1. 2, 3.⌋ The verse (12 + 12: 9 + 11 = 44) is much more irregular than the definition of the Anukr. admits.
2. The seers declare the master (-páti) of the sacrifice by reason of sin disportioned, distressed about [his] offspring. What honeyed drops he offended in (? apa-rādh), with them let Viçvakarman unite (sam-sṛj) us.
MS. has in a the equivalent yájamānam; its b reads vihā́ya prajā́m anutápyamānāḥ; while TS. has prajā́(ḥ) nírbhaktā(ḥ) anutapyámānāḥ, and Ppp. nirbhāgatā bhāgād anutapyamānā. TS. and MS. make the lost drops only two: madhavyāù stokāú...tā́bhyām, with tāú instead of yā́n, and hence rarādha. The translation implies correction to madhavy-, as read by both the parallel texts and the comm.; SPP's text agrees with ours in reading the mathavy- of all the mss. (except three of SPP's, which follow the comm.). All the saṁhitā-mss. make the absurd combination naṣ ṭébhiḥ in d, seeming to have in mind the participle naṣṭá; SPP. retains naṣṭébhis in his text, while ours emends to nas tébhis, as given in the comment to Prāt. ii. 31. Ppp. has our second half-verse as its 3 c, d; it reads madhavyāṅ stokān upa yā rarādha saṁ mā tarāis sṛjad viçvakarmā. The comm. takes anu and tapy- in b as two independent words; he explains apa rarādha in c by antaritān kṛtavān, which is doubtless its virtual meaning. ⌊W's prior draft reads: "what honeyed drops he failed of"—that is, 'missed.'⌋
3. Thinking the soma-drinkers to be unworthy of gifts (? adānyá), [though] knowing of the sacrifice, [he is] not wise (dhī́ra) in the conjuncture (samayá); in that this man is bound having committed a sin, do thou, O Viçvakarman, release him for his well-being.
The offense here had in view is far from clear. Instead of adānyá (which occurs only here), TS. has the apparently unintelligent ananyā́n; MS. reads ayajñiyā́ṅ yajñíyān mány- 'thinking the unfit for offering to be fit for offering' (or vice versa); both have in b prāṇásya for yajñásya, and samaré for -yé. Ppp. gives the second half-verse as 2 c, d, and ends it with pra mumugdhy enaṁ. TS. MS. have no yát at beginning of c; TS. gives énaç cakṛvā́n máhi, and MS. éno mahác cakṛvā́n b-, and TS. eṣām for eṣá. The comm. explains adānyān as ajñatvāropeṇa dānānarhān, takes na in b as particle of comparison, and makes samaya equal saṁgrāma: "as if one by confidence in the strength of his own arm should think the opposing soldiers despicable"! The verse (11 + 11: 10 + 12 = 44) has marked irregularities which the Anukr. ignores.
4. Terrible [are] the seers; homage be to them! what sight [is] theirs, and the actuality (satyá) of their mind. For Brihaspati, O bull (mahiṣá), [be] bright (dyumánt) homage; O Viçvakarman, homage to thee! protect thou us.
The translation follows our text, though this is plainly corrupted. TS. makes b less unintelligible by reading cákṣuṣas for cákṣur yát, and saṁdhāú for satyám; Ppp. has in the half-verse only minor variants: bhīma for ghorās, ‘stu for astu, saṁdṛk for satyam. In c, TS. has mahí ṣát for the senseless mahiṣa, and the comm. presents the same; Ppp. reads bṛhaspate mahiṣāya dive: namo viçv-. TS. gives for d námo viçákarmaṇe sá u pātv asmā́n. In d all the pada-mss. have the strange blunder pāhi, for pāhí as required by the sense and by the saṁhitā-text.; and SPP. adopts the blunder, thus giving a pada-reading that is inconvertible into his own saṁhitā. The comm. takes ṛṣayas in a as "the breaths, sight etc.," and satyam in b as yathārthadarçi; and he founds on this interpretation the use in Kāuç. 38. 22, "against faults of vision."
5. The sacrifice's eye, commencement, and face: with voice, hearing, mind I make oblation. To this sacrifice, extended by Viçvakarman, let the gods come, well-willing.
The verse is found in no other text, and is perhaps not a proper part of the hymn; it is repeated below as xix. 58. 5. A few of the saṁhitā-mss. (including our O.) ignore the ā́ at beginning of d. The comm. is not certain whether the three nominatives in a designate Agni or sacrificial butter; but he has no scruple about making them objects to juhomi.