Page images
PDF
EPUB

experience were freely placed at our service, we were warned against researches which he knew to be useless, we were encouraged in undertakings which he knew to be full of promise. His minute analysis of long passages of Sâyana, his independent interpretations of the text of the hymns, his comparisons between the words and grammatical forms, the thoughts and legends of the Veda and Avesta, his brilliant divination checked by an inexorable sense of truth, and his dry logical method enlivened by sallies of humour and sparks of imaginative genius, though not easily forgotten. and always remembered with gratitude, are now beyond the reach of praise or blame. Were I to criticise what he or other scholars have said and written many years ago, they might justly complain of such criticism. It is no longer necessary to prove that Nâbhânedishtha cannot mean 'new relatives,' or that there never was a race of Etendhras, or that the angels of the Bible are in no way connected with the Angiras of the Vedic hymns; and it would, on the other hand, be a mere waste of time, were I to attempt to find out who first discovered that in the Veda deva does not always mean divine, but sometimes means brilliant. In fact, it could not be done. In a new subject like that of the interpretation of the Veda, there are certain things which everybody discovers who has eyes to see. Their discovery requires so little research that it seems almost an insult to say that they were dis

covered by this or that scholar. Take, for instance, the peculiar pronunciation of certain words, rendered necessary by the requirements of Vedic metres. I believe that my learned friend Professor Kuhn was one of the first to call general attention to the fact that semivowels must frequently be changed into their corresponding vowels, and that long vowels must sometimes be pronounced as two syllables. It is clear, however, from Rosen's notes to the first Ashtaka (i. 1, 8), that he, too, was perfectly aware of this fact, and that he recognized the prevalence of this rule, not only with regard to semivowels (see his note to Rv. i. 2, 9) and long vowels which are the result of Sandhi, but likewise with regard to others that occur in the body of a word. 'Animadverte,' he writes, 'tres syllabas postremas vocis adhvarânâm dipodiæ iambicæ munus sustinentes, penultima syllaba præter iambi prioris arsin, thesin quoque sequentis pedis ferente. Satis frequentia sunt, in hac præsertim dipodiæ iambicæ sede, exempla syllabæ natura longæ in tres moras productæ. De qua re nihil quidem memoratum invenio apud Pingalam aliosque qui de arte metrica scripserunt: sed numeros ita, ut modo dictum est, computandos esse, taciti agnoscere videntur, quum versus una syllaba mancus eos offendat.'

non

Now this is exactly the case. The ancient grammarians, as we shall see, teach distinctly that where two vowels have coalesced into one according to

the rules of Sandhi, they may be pronounced as two syllables; and though they do not teach the same with regard to semivowels and long vowels occurring in the body of the word, yet they tacitly recognize that rule, by frequently taking its effects for granted. Thus in Sûtra 950 of the Prâtisâkhya, verse ix. 111, 1, is called an Atyashti, and the first pâda is said to consist of twelve syllables. In order to get this number, the author must have read,

aya ruka harinya punanah.

Immediately after, verse iv. 1, 3, is called a Dhriti, and the first pâda must again have twelve syllables. Here therefore the author takes it for granted that we should read,

sakhe sakhayam abhy a vavritsva*.

No one, in fact, with any ear for rhythm, whether Saunaka and Pingala, or Rosen and Kuhn, could have helped observing these rules when reading the Veda. But it is quite a different case when we come to the question as to which words admit of such protracted pronunciation, and which do not. Here one scholar may differ from another according to the view he takes of the character of Vedic

* See also Sûtra 937 seq. I cannot find any authority for the statement of Professor Kuhn (Beiträge, vol. iii. p. 114) that according to the Rik-prâtisâkhya it is the first semivowel that must be dissolved, unless he referred to the remarks of the commentator to Sûtra 973

metres, and here one has to take careful account of the minute and ingenious observations contained in numerous articles by Professors Kuhn, Bollensen, Grassmann, and others. With regard to the interpretation of certain words and sentences, too, it may happen that explanations which have taxed the ingenuity of some scholars to the utmost, seem to others so self-evident that they would hardly think of quoting anybody's name in support of them, to say nothing of the endless and useless work it would entail, were we obliged always to find out who was the first to propose this or that interpretation. It is impossible here to lay down general rules :-each scholar must be guided by his own sense of justice to others and by self-respect. Let us take one instance. From the first time that I read the fourth hymn. of the Rig-veda, I translated the fifth and sixth

verses:

utá bruvantu nah nídah níh anyátah kit ârata,

dádhânâh índre ít dúvak,

utá nah su-bhágân aríh vokéyuh dasma krishtayah, syama ít índrasya sármani.

I.

1. Whether our enemies say, 'Move away elsewhere, you who offer worship to Indra only,'

2. Or whether, O mighty one, all people call us blessed may we always remain in the keeping of Indra.

About the general sense of this passage I imagined there could be no doubt, although one word in it, viz. aríh, required an explanation. Yet the variety

of interpretations proposed by different scholars is extraordinary. First, if we look to Sâyana, he translates:

1. May our priests praise Indra! O enemies, go away from this place, and also from another place! Our priests (may praise Indra), they who are always performing worship for Indra.

2. O destroyer of enemies! may the enemy call us possessed of wealth; how much more, friendly people! May we be in the happiness of Indra!

Professor Wilson did not follow Sâyana closely, but translated:

I.

1. Let our ministers, earnestly performing his worship, exclaim: Depart, ye revilers, from hence and every other place (where he is adored).

2. Destroyer of foes, let our enemies say we are prosperous: let men (congratulate us). May we ever abide in the felicity (derived from the favour) of Indra.

Langlois translated :

1. Que (ces amis), en fêtant Indra, puissent dire: Vous, qui êtes nos adversaires, retirez-vous loin d'ici.

2. Que nos ennemis nous appellent des hommes fortunés, placés que nous sommes sous la protection d'Indra.

Stevenson translated:

I. Let all men again join in praising Indra. Avaunt ye profane scoffers, remove from hence, and from every other place, while we perform the rites of Indra.

« PreviousContinue »