Book XIV.
⌊Nuptial Hymns.⌋
⌊Nuptial ceremonies.—This fourteenth book is the second of the six books (xiii.-xviii.) that form the third grand division of the Atharvan collection, and shows very clearly that unity of subject which is the distinguishing characteristic of the books of that division. The book has been translated by Weber, Indische Studien, vol. v. (1862), pages 178-217; and the parts peculiar to our text by Ludwig in his Der Rigveda, vol. iii. (Die Mantralitteratur), pages 470-476. The bhāṣya is again lacking.⌋
⌊The subject of the book has been often treated: thus, by that great scholar, Colebrooke, in 1801, in vol. vii. of the Asiatic Researches (the paper is reprinted in Cowell's edition of H. T. Colebrooke's Essays, vol. i., pages 217-238); by E. Haas, in the volume of Weber's Studien, just cited, pages 267-412, Die Heirathsgebräuche der alien Inder, nach den Gṛihyasūtra; and latterly by Dr. M. Winternitz, in the Denkschriften of the Vienna Academy for 1892, vol. xl., Das altindische Hochzeitsrituell nach dem Āpastambīya-gṛihyasūtra etc., with a detailed comparison of the nuptial ceremonies prevailing among the other Indo-European peoples. Then, some five years later (in 1897), in the Anecdota Oxoniensia, Dr. Winternitz published The Mantra-pāṭha or the Prayer Book of the Āpastambins, which contains very many of the mantras cited in the editor's Hochzeitsrituell; and for this reason the citations of those mantras are given below in duplicate, in order that they may be easily found in either work.—Here may be mentioned also the elaborate comments given in my Sanskrit Reader, pages 398-401, upon chapters 5, 7, and 8 of Āçvalāyana's Gṛhyasūtra, book i., which treat of the wedding customs and the wedding-service.⌋
⌊Division into anuvākas.—This book is divided into two anuvākas, the first with 64 verses, and the second with 75. This division is confirmed by the Old Anukr. or Pañcapaṭalikā (as quoted at the end of each anuvāka), which says ādyaḥ sāuryaç catuḥṣaṣṭiḥ and pañcasaptatir uttaraḥ. Here ādyaḥ and uttaraḥ doubtless refer to anuvākaḥ understood. It is also confirmed by AV. xix. 23. 24.⌋
⌊The decad-division is shown in the mss. as usual: thus hymn 1 is divided into 6 "decad"-sūktas (5 tens and 1 "decad" of 14 vss.), and hymn 2 is divided into 8 "decad"-sūktas (7 tens and 1 "decad" of 5 vss.). The sum is 14 "decad"-sūktas.⌋
⌊Division into hymns.—This seems to be a matter more or less questionable. By the Berlin edition, and also by that of SPP., the book is in fact divided into two hymns, each of which coincides with an anuvāka, as is the case with books xii. and xiii. The Old Anukr. seems to offer no evidence either for or against the division into hymns.⌋
⌊The mss. seem to support the division of the book into two hymns: thus, at the end of anuvāka 1, several mss. say anuvāke arthasūkta 1; ṛcā (!) 64; [supply presumably daçatayaḥ] 6. And, at the end of the second, they say anuvāke arthasūkta 1; ṛcā 75. Moreover, as noted on page 768, some mss. sum up the book as of two hymns.⌋
⌊The Major Anukr., on the other hand, seems rather to indicate that the book should not be divided into two hymns: 1. by its mingling the verses of the whole book together (see the next paragraph, which is by Mr. Whitney) in its metrical and other definitions; and 2. by its expression çatatamyā [ṛcā] 'hundredth verse,' which implies a continuous counting from the beginning of the book beyond the limits of the first anuvāka (or hymn?), which contains only 64 verses. Per contra, this method of designating a verse by any ordinal higher than the first few ordinals is very unusual, and (so far as I have noted) unexampled, save by the expression trayoviṅçatikayā in the next clause and by the ordinals of Kāuç. 49. 24, 25 (see note to x. 5. 6).⌋
The descriptions of meter etc. are ⌊by the Major Anukr.⌋ given together for the whole book; they are here separated for the two recognized divisions (anuvākas, treated as hymns) in accordance with the method elsewhere followed. The order of verses is so much disregarded in the metrical etc. descriptions as to make one wonder whether the arrangement contemplated by the Anukr. was the same with that which we have ⌊cf. p. 740, top⌋; yet minor deviations from the order are not very rare elsewhere. Other special points are mentioned in the notes to the verses.
⌊The Major Anukr. begins its treatment of the book as follows: satyene ’ti (xiv. 1. 1) sāikonacatvāriṅçachataṁ dvayānuvākakāṇḍam. Sāvitrī Sūryā. ātmadāivatam. ānuṣṭubham. prathamābhiḥ pañcabhiḥ (xiv. 1. 1-5) somam astāut; parābhiḥ (xiv. 1. 6-?) svavivāham; çatatamyā [?] (xiv. 2. 36) devān; trayoviṅçatikayā (xiv. 1. 23) somārkāu; parayā (xiv. 1. 24) candramasam.⌋
⌊That is to say: 'The double-anuvāka-hook (the expression dvaya is a little strange: the phrase would fit also books xv. and xvi.) that begins with satyena has [verses] a-hundred-and-forty-save-one (64 + 75 = 139). [The seer is] Sūryā,1 daughter of Savitar (cf. AV. vi. 82. 2; xiv. 2. 30; Bergaigne, Rel. Véd. ii. 486 f.). The deity is the same. The meter, anuṣṭubh. With the first five verses she praised (or mentioned, laudavit: see note to i. 7. 1) Soma; with the next verses (does this mean the verses from 6 to the end of the book? or to the end of the Sūryā-hymn proper, vss. 6-16?), her own wedding; with the hundredth verse (100 = 64 [vss. of h. 1] + 36 [vss. of h. 2]: hence xiv. 2. 36), the gods2; with the twenty-third verse (xiv. 1. 23), moon and sun; with the next (xiv. 1. 24), the moon.'⌋
1 ⌊The RV. Anukr. also ascribes the corresponding RV. hymn (x. 85) to Sūryā Sāvitrī.⌋
2 ⌊This statement does not fit xiv. 2. 36. On the other hand. Dr. Ryder points out that it does fit xiv. 2. 46 and that the RV. Anukr. makes devāḥ the deity of RV. x. 85. 17 (which = AV. xiv. 2. 46): and he accordingly offers the suggestion that çatatamyā may be a text-error for daça-çatatamyā.⌋
⌊The Major Anukr. continues: parā [?] (xiv. 1. 25-?) nṛṇāṁ vivāhamantrāçiṣaḥ. parā dehy (xiv. 1. 25) açlīlā tanūr (xiv. 1. 27) iti dve vadhūvāsaḥsaṁsparçamocanyāu. ye vadhva (xiv. 2. 10) iti yakṣmanāçanī. parā (xiv. 2. 11) dampatyoḥ paripanthināçanī.⌋
⌊The statements of the RV. Anukr. as to "deity" correspond quite closely with those just given, but with some differences: thus it says -nindā for -mocanyāu; etc. In particular, the description nṛṇāṁ vivāhamantrā āçiṣaç ca is applied by the RV. Anukr. to RV. x. 85. 20-28. All these 9 RV. verses have more or less close correspondents in AV. xiv.: they are, respectively, AV. xiv. 1. 61; 2. 33 (cf. RV. vss. 21 and 22); 1. 34; 1. 19, 18, 20, 21, 26. All this, it seems, fails to square with the parāḥ of the text of our Anukr., and reinforces Mr. Whitney's suspicion (above, p. 739) that the arrangement of the verses contemplated by that text may have been different from that which appears in the Berlin edition.—In connection with this suspicion should be considered also the fact that the Anukr. adds at the end the pratīkas iii. 30. 1, ii. 36. 1, and xx. 126. 1: see below, p. 768.⌋
⌊In the Major Anukr., moreover, a curious addition is inserted after the definition of xiv. 1. 60, as follows: (the text of its beginning is uncertain: ity? or parāviny?) edhiṣīmahīti vyāghrādiṣv avagantavyaḥ. Cf. the introduction to xi. 1 and especially the note to xv. 5. 7.⌋