Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

India as Known to Panini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi c11: Chapter VI. Religion

India as Known to Pāṇini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashṭādhyāyī c11

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VI. Religion

Section 1. Deities

c11.s1.1

The religious conditions in Pāṇini mainly relate to *yajña* or sacrifice, and worship of various Vedic deities with oblations and performance of appropriate rituals by different classes of priests. Names of officiating priests and *dakshiṇā* or payments for their service are also mentioned (V.1.69; V.1.95). At the same time there are definite indications of popular phases of religious beliefs and practices as elaborated in devotion to gods and asterisms, worship of images and the growth of religious ascetic orders.

c11.s1.2

*DEITIES.* Pāṇini mentions the following Vedic deities, both singly and in pairs: (1) Agni (IV.1.37), (2) Indra, (3) Varuṇa, (4) Bhava, (5) Śarva, (6) Rudra, (7) Mṛiḍa (IV.1.49), (8) Vṛishākapi, (IV.1.37), (9) Pūshā, (10) Aryamā (VI.4.12), (11) Tvashṭā (VI.4.11), (12) Sūrya (III.1.114), and (13) Nāsatya (VI.3.75). The last name is derived by Pāṇini as *na asatyāḥ*, 'who are the opposite of non-truth'. The Mahābhārata mentions Nāsatya and Dasra as the twin Aśvins born of the nose (*nāsā*) of Saṁjñā, wife of Sūrya (Anuśāsana-parva, 150.17). The derivation from *nāsā* is in fact mentioned by Yāska as a probable explanation of the word (*nāsikāprabhavau babhūvatur iti vā*, VI.13). But Pāṇini accepted the etymology of this word given by Aurṇavābha whose opinion is quoted by Yāska (*satyau eva nāsatyāvity-Aurṇavābhaḥ*, *Nirukta*, VI.13).

c11.s1.3

Indra is also referred to as Marutvān (IV.2.32). Pāṇini refers to Prajāpati under the symbolical name of *Ka*. Patañjali says that *Ka* is not a pronoun, but the proper name of a deity (*saṁjñā chaishā tatrabhavataḥ*, II.275), so that the dative case of *Ka* would be *Kāya*, not *kasmai*. Reference is also made to the deity called Vāstoshpati who presided over a house or homestead and was as old as the *Ṛigveda*. Pāṇini's mention of Gṛihamedha (IV.2.32) under the context 'This is its deity' (IV.2.24) shows that Gṛihamedha was also looked upon as a deity. In the same context mention is also made of Soma, Vāyu, Mahendra and Apāmnaptṛi (IV.2.27), which last was a name of Agni as sprung from water to whom special oblations were offered.

c11.s1.4

Of the pairs of deities (*devatā-dvandva*, VI.2.141) a long list is found in the *Ashṭādhyāyī*, e.g. Agni and Varuṇa (VI.3.27), Agni and Soma (IV.2.32; VI.3.27), Dyau and Pṛithivī (IV.2.32; VI.3.29-30) Ushā and Sūryā (VI.3.31), the twin agricultural deities Śunāsīra, and other combinations with Rudra and Pūshā (VI.2.142). Even Manthin, a Soma-vessel (*Somagraha*) is mentioned in the context of 'twin deities' (VI.2.142).

c11.s1.5

Of the female deities the older goddesses mentioned are Indrāṇī, Varuṇānī, (IV.1.49), Agnāyī, Vṛishākapāyī (IV. 1.37), Pṛithivī always referred to as a pair with Dyaus, and Ushas for whom oblations were prepared as for an independent deity (IV.2.31).

c11.s1.6

*POST-VEDIC DEITIES.* The most important of these is goddess Pārvatī four of whose names are mentioned, *viz.* (1) Bhavānī, (2) Śarvāṇī, (3) Rudrāṇī and (4) Mṛiḍānī (IV. 1. 49). This worship was a feature of the Sūtra period. The Vedas refer to their male counterparts such as Bhava, Śarva, Rudra and Mṛiḍa. The *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* mentions Rudra, Śarva, and Bhava as forms of Agni (VI.1.3.18), and makes the important statement that the name Śarva was popular in the Prāchya country, and Bhava in the Vāhīka region (*Śarva iti yathā Prāchyā āchakshate, Bhava iti yathā Vāhīkāḥ*, ŚB., I.7.3.8). It may, therefore, be inferred that the names Śarvāṇī and Bhavānī were local designations of the one and the same Mother Goddess. Similarly Rudrāṇī and Mṛiḍānī may have been other local epithets of the same deity.

c11.s1.7

Āditya referred to in *sūtra* IV.1.85 is to be taken as the name of the classical sun-god rather than of the Vedic Ādityas. In fact a new feature of the Pāṇinian pantheon is the emergence of time-denoting words raised to the status of deities (IV. 2.34). For instance, oblation was prepared to worship the deity named *Māsa*, 'Month', and called *Māsika*; and similarly for the deity *Saṁvatsara*, 'Year', and called *Sāṁvatsarika*. There was also worship of the 'Seasons' as deities, *e.g.* Vasanta or Spring, the oblation being called *Vāsantaṁ haviḥ*. Pāṇini himself refers to *Ṛitu*, 'Season' as a deity (IV.2.31), in whose honour some worship was prescribed. This process of deification extended even to stars. This is indicated by the mention of Proshṭhapada, a name of Bhādrapada, as a *devatā* or deity (IV.2.35). But the whole system of adopting personal names after the names of asterisms, for which detailed rules are given (IV.3.34, 36, 37), was due to the fact that the stars became objects of adoration and worship. Names like Rohiṇisheṇa, Bharaṇisheṇa and Śatabhishaksena implied in the *sūtra* *Nakshatrād-vā* (VIII.3.100) point to a belief in the beneficent influence of deities presiding over these asterisms.

c11.s1.8

*BHAKTI*. The new phase of religious belief found its expression in the cult of *Bhakti* or theistic devotion to particular gods and goddesses. Such names as Varuṇadatta and Aryamadatta, which were shortened as per *sūtra* V.3.84, point to the belief that gods like Varuṇa and Aryamā, if propitiated by the parents, would grant the boon of a son to be named after them. Pāṇini admits that the name-ending *datta* denoted a benediction from a god or a higher power of which the personal name became a symbolic expression (*Kārakād-datta-śrutayorevāśisbi*, VI.2.148). This religious approach is further exemplified in Pāṇini's reference to *bhakti* to Vāsudeva and Arjuna (IV.3.98). Patañjali clearly remarks that Vāsudeva was here not a mere Kshatriya name but the personal name of Kṛishṇa whose *bhakta* or worshipper was called *Vāsudevaka*. We should, however, admit that *bhakti* in this context (IV.3.95-100) has also a secular significance in some *sūtras*, e.g. *āpūpika*, one who loves eating cakes (example to IV.3.96). The reference to the *bhakti* of Mahārāja or Kubera proves on the other hand that Pāṇini surely had religious *bhakti* also in mind (*Mahārājat-ṭhañ*, IV.3.97).

c11.s1.9

*MAHĀRĀJA.* Besides referring to the *bhakti* shown to Mahārāja as stated above, Pāṇini also mentions that Mahārāja was a *devatā* (IV.2.35), to whom oblations were offered. According to Patañjali *bali* offered to Mahārāja was called *mahārāja-bali* (I.388, cf. also *Kāśikā*, II.1.36). This deity may be identified with those mentioned as a group of Four Great Kings, *Chattāro Mahārājāno*, who dwell in the *Chātummahārājika* or the lowest *deva* world as guardians of the four quarters. In *Jātaka* VI.265, Vessavaṇa is called a Mahārāja and in the *Mahāsutasoma Jātaka* Śakra and the other three Lokapālas are called *Mahārājāno* (VI.259). They also stand at the head of the list of gods and other superhuman beings in the *Āṭānāṭiya Sutta* (*Dict. Pāli Proper Names*, I.242; 861). From *bhakti* to Mahārāja deity, it is clear that Vāsudeva as an object of *bhakti* is also to be taken as a deity as stated by Patañjali.

c11.s1.10

*VĀSUDEVA-CULT.* Pāṇini's reference to Vāsudeva as the object of *bhakti* throws light on the antiquity of the *bhakti* cult. Kaiyaṭa describes Vāsudeva as *paramātma-devatā-viśesha*. Keith accepts the accuracy of this identification and considers the remark of Patañjali, *viz. samjñā chaishā tatrabhavataḥ*, to be 'the most satisfactory proof of the identity of Vāsudeva with Vishṇu, for except through such identification no one could dream of putting Vāsudeva on the same plane as Ka' (*J.R.A.S.*, 1908, p. 848). Patañjali's reference to the staging of *Bali-bandhana*, Vishṇu's famous exploit, and the slaying of Kaṁsa, Kṛishṇa's great deed, were regarded by Weber himself as hinting at the early belief in the existence of Kṛishṇa-Vāsudeva and his identification with Vishṇu (*ib.* p.

c11.s1.11

847). If in the second century B.C. these exploits formed part of the Vishṇu legend they must have been considerably older (cf. the example, *Jaghāna Kaṁsaṁ kila Vāsudevaḥ*, *Bhāshya* quoting it as a past event, II.119). Patañjali also refers to the *Vyūha* of Kṛishṇa with his three acolytes: *Janārdanas-tvātmachaturtha eva*, (*Bhāshya*, III.43, on *sūtra* VI. 3.5). He also mentions Kṛishṇa and Saṁkarshaṇa as joint leaders of an army (*Saṁkarshaṇa-dvitīyasya balaṁ Kṛishṇasya vardhatām*, I.426), and refers to the existence of temples dedicated to Keśava and Rāma besides those of Kubera (*Prāsāde Dhanapati-Rāma-Keśavānām*, I.436). In *sūtra* VIII.1. 15 Pāṇini states that the word *dvandva* signifies a pair of persons jointly famous (*abhivyakti*), on which the *Kāśikā* cites as an example *Saṁkarshaṇa-Vāsudevau* (*dvāvapyabhivyaktau sāhacharyeṇa*). Devotional worship to Saṅkarshaṇa and Vāsudeva in connection with a religious shrine is proved by epigraphic evidence of second century B.C. (Nagari Ins., *E.I.*, XXII, p. 198 ff.). The *Arthaśāstra* not only refers to the legend of Kṛishṇa and Kaṁsa (XIV.3) but also prescribes the building of temples sacred to god Apratihata, *i.e.* Vishṇu (II. 4). These examples, although of the Maurya-Śuṅga epoch, show that Kṛishṇa's divinity was already established as a result of centuries of religious development. Patañjali's reference to the Śiva-Bhāgavata religion (II. 387) is also proof of the early antiquity of the Bhāgavata cult, for the Śaivas following the Bhakti cult must have been so named after the Bhāgavatas. Although the evidence from the *Gaṇa-pāṭha* is not unassailable, it must be mentioned that the *Gavāśva* group (II.4.13) reads *Bhāgavatī-Bhāgavatam*, as a compound word in singular number mentioning a female and a male follower of the Bhāgavata religion. Grierson also maintained the antiquity of the Bhāgavata religion in Pāṇini's time on the basis of his knowledge of Vāsudeva as a deity (*J.R.A.S.*, 1909, p. 1122). Sir R. G. Bhandarkar agrees with this view. (*J.R.A.S.*, 1910, p. 170, Vāsudeva of Pāṇini, IV.3.98).

c11.s1.12

*IMAGES.*—Figurines, including divine images are included under the general term *pratikṛiti* (V.3.96). Pāṇini, however, knew of a more specific word, *archā* (V.2.101), which accords with Patañjali's usage (*Mauryaiḥ hiraṇyārthibhiḥ archāḥ prakalpitāḥ*, V.3.99, *Bhāshya*, II.429).¹ Its derivative *archāvān* (V.2.101) should have signified the owner of an image.

c11.s1.13

¹ *Archā* means 'image of a god'; cf. *dīrgha-nāsikī archā*, *tuṅga-nāsikī archā* (IV.1.54; II.222); also Lūder's discussion of its use in the Mora Well Inscription, *Ep. Ind.*, XXIV. p. 198.

c11.s1.14

An important sūtra, *Jīvikārthe chāpaṇye* (V.3.99) intended to regulate the formation of names of divine images, proves beyond doubt Pāṇini's knowledge of images of deities in his time. Regarding the naming of images there are the following possibilities covered by Pāṇini's rule and Patañjali's rather involved argument on it:

c11.s1.15

(1) There may be images installed in temples or open shrines, which are not of individual ownership, and hence not for any ones' livelihood (*jīvikā*), or for sale (*paṇya*), but are for worship (*pūjārtha*). These images remain outside the purview of Pāṇini's rule. How they were named, whether *Śiva* or *Śivaka* we are left to guess, but there is all the probability that they were named without the *kaṇ* suffix, as *Śiva*, *Skanda*, etc.

c11.s1.16

(2) In the second place there may be images in the possession of *devalakas* or owners and custodians of shrines. They may be either fixed in one place or carried from place to place. The former would cover for all practical purposes the images of class 1 above, which would then be objects of Pāṇini's rule and the deity would be named *Śiva* (without *kaṇ* suffix). Both *chala* and *achala* images with the *devalakas* would serve for worship (*pūjārtha*), be a source of livelihood (*jīvikārtha*) to their care-takers, but be not for sale (*apaṇya*). All these are the object of Pāṇini's rule, and they would be named as *Śiva*, *Skanda* (without *ka*).

c11.s1.17

(3) The third class of images would be those displayed for sale (*paṇya*); these were not for worship (*pūjārtha*), although they were a means of livelihood to their owners (*jīvīkārtha*). These would be counter-examples of Pāṇini's *sūtra*, and named as *Śivaka*, *Skandaka*, etc.

c11.s1.18

(4) Here Patañjali joins issue with Pāṇini. On the basis of some reliable historical information which he had he contends as to how the *sūtra* will fare in the case of images which the Mauryan kings, 'greedy of gold' (*hiraṇyārthibhiḥ*), had ordered to be set up (*prakalpitāḥ*) and most probably also to be sold, and which thus served simultaneously the triple purpose of *jīvikā*, *paṇya* and *pūjā*.¹ Kauṭilya supplies the much needed commentary on this extraodinary Mauryan measure to replenish their exchequer.² The Devatādhyaksha is directed to raise money (*ājīvet*, *hiraṇyopahāreṇa*, *kośaṁ kuryāt*, *Arth.* V.2) by manipulating the worship of divine images and exploiting the credulousness of the people, such as organising fairs and festivals in the holy shrines of deities (*daivata-chaitya*), improvising shows of miraculous *nāga* images with changing number of hoods, and spreading the news of other miracles, etc. (*Arth.* V.2). According to Patañjali these particular images would not be covered by Pāṇini's rule (*bhavet tāsu na syāt*), and although they might have found a place in the shrines for worship, they would not get the name *Śiva*, *Skanda*, etc.

c11.s1.19

¹ अपण्य इत्युच्यते तत्रेदं न सिध्यति । शिव : स्कन्द : विशाख इति । किं कारणं । मौर्यैर्हिरण्यार्थिभिरर्चा : प्रकल्पिता : । भवेत्तासु न स्यात् । यास्त्वेता : संप्रति पूजार्था-स्तासु भविष्यति । (*Bhāshya*, V.3.99; II.429).

c11.s1.20

² *Hiraṇyārthī*, according to Patañjali on *vār.* *arthāchchaśāsannihite* on *sūtra* V.2.135, denoted one who was bereft of wealth or gold, and consequently longed for it.

c11.s1.21

(5) As a way out of the conundrum, Patañjali dismisses the case of the Mauryan images which were both for sale and for worship, and he points to contemporary images under actual worship (*yās-tvetāḥ saṁprati pūjārthāḥ tāsu bhavish-* *yati*) which were suitable examples of Pāṇini's rule and be designated as *Śiva*, *Skanda*, etc. (without *kan* suffix).¹

c11.s1.22

Images of Śiva and Vaiśravaṇa were also known to Kauṭilya (II.4) as being installed in temples. Some of these deities were worshipped in pairs, e.g. *Śiva-Vaiśravaṇau*, *Skanda-Viśākhau*, *Brahma-Prajāpatī* (*Gaṇa-pāṭha* to II.4.14, and also a *vārttika* on VI.3.26). As pointed out by Patañjali these joint names were post-Vedic (*na chaite Vede sahanirvāpa-nirdishṭāḥ*, VI.3.26; III.149). Śiva and Vaiśravaṇa were the two main deities associated in the development of the popular cult of the Yakshas, Nāgas and other godlings. We have seen that Pāṇini refers to the worship of Mahārāja, which was but another name of Vessavaṇa-Kubera, who headed the group of the Four Great Kings or Regents of the Four Quarters and was the king of the *Yakkhas* in the North. Pāṇini also mentions the descendants of Dhṛitarājan (VI.4.135) who may be identified as the Lokapāla Dhataraṭṭha ruling in the East at the head of the Gandhabbas.

c11.s1.23

*DEMONS*—The counterpart of the gods were the demons who are dreaded as much as the former were loved. In mentioning them Pāṇini is obviously drawing on older literature rather than recording contemporary beliefs. Diti (IV.¹.85)

c11.s1.24

¹ | Images | *Jīvikā* | *Paṇya* or not | For *pūjā* or not | name |

c11.s1.25

| 1. Images installed in shrines | no जीविका | अपण्य | पूजार्थ | outside Pāṇini's rule; or see above (2) |
| 2. Devalaka images | जीविकार्थं | अपण्य | पूजार्थ | शिव : स्कन्द: |
| 3. Images for sale | जीविकार्थं | पण्य | notपूजार्थ | शिवक : स्कन्दक : |
| 4. Images under the Mauryas | हिरण्यार्थं | पण्य | पूजार्थ | could not be named as शिव : स्कन्द : (भवेत्तासु न स्यात्) |
| 5. Images in Patañjali's time | जीविकार्थं | अपण्य | पूजार्थ | शिव : स्कन्द: (यास्त्वेता : संप्रति पूजार्थस्तासु भविष्यति ।) |

c11.s1.26

mother of the Daityas, Kadrū (IV.1.72), Asuras (IV.4.123), Rākshasas and the Yātus (IV.4.121) are referred to, but in connection with older linguistic forms. The term *āsurī māyā* (IV.4.123) similarly appears to be an old word signifying thaumaturgy or the *asura-vidyā* (cf. *Āśv. Śr.*, X.7, and *ŚB.*, XIII.4.3.11). The female demon Kusitāyī, wife of Kusita (IV.1.37) occurs in the *Maitrāyaṇī Saṁhitā* (III.2.6). The planet Rāhu is referred to as an enemy of the moon (*Vidhuṁ-tuda*, III.2.35).

c11.s1.27

*YAKSHAS*—In *sūtra* V.3.84 Pāṇini refers to Śevala, Supari, Viśāla, Varuṇa and Aryamā. These were names of tutelary deities. It has been shown above (*ante*, p. 188) that Viśāla was the name of a *Yaksha* according to the Sabhāparva, 10.16. Supari and Śevala also appear to be minor godlings, probably *Yakshas*. According to the Āṭanāṭiya Sutta (*Dīghanikāya*) Varuṇa was a *Yaksha* also. Aryamā, too, was most probably a minor deity of popular religion associated with child-birth.

Section 2. Yajnas

c11.s2.1

*THE YĀJNIKAS*—Yāska quotes the opinions of the Yājñikas along with those of the Nairuktas. Pāṇini also refers to the *āmnāya* or tradition of the Yājñikas whose school was called *Yājñikya* (IV.3.129). The Yājñika literature was of remote antiquity. Patañjali refers to difficult Yājñika texts, *e.g. sthūla-pṛshatīm anaḍvāhīm*, which could not be rightly explained without the aid of grammar (I.¹). He also mentions their treatises (*Yājñika-śāstra*, I.9). It appears from the *Ashṭādhyāyī* that the *Yajña* doctrine both in its theory and practice held full sway in his time. He records minute details regarding the peculiarities of pronunciation of such formulas as the Subrahmaṇyā (I.2.37), Nyūṅkha (I.2.34) and Yājyā verses (VIII.2.90). His references relate not merely to academic discussions, but to actual practices of the *Yajña* ritual (*yajña-karmaṇi*, I.2.34; VIII.2.88).

c11.s2.2

*YĀJNIKA LITERATURE*—Besides the *Brāhmaṇas* and the *Anubrāhmaṇas* (IV.2.62), a vast body of specialised *yājñika* literature in the form of explanatory texts (*vyākhyāna*) of the *kratus* or Soma sacrifices and other *yajñas* had come into existence (IV.3.68); for example, the treatise giving an exposition of Agnishṭoma was called *Āgnishṭomika*; similarly there were texts called *Vājapeyika* and *Rājasūyika*. Particularly interesting is Pāṇini's reference to two-fold texts, one called *Puroḍāśika*, 'a book on *puroḍāśa*', containing detailed instructions about the manner of preparing the sacrificial rice-cake, and another called *Pauroḍāśika* (IV.3.70) which was a commentary of the *mantras* recited at preparing the *puroḍāśa* cake.¹ These *mantras* occur in the *Yajurveda*, Adh. I, and their commentary is found in the *Śatapatha*, Book I, which is thus a Pauroḍāśika text. These special handbooks arose to meet the practical needs of priests at the *Yajñas*.

c11.s2.3

¹ The Puroḍāśa verses in the *Yajurveda*, Adhy. I, deal with the following stages, *vrīhīn nirvapati* (verse 9), *prokshati* (12), *avahanti* (14), *parāpunāti* (16), *taṇḍulān pinashṭi* (20), *praṇītābhiḥ saṁyauti* (21), and *kapāleshu śrapayati* (22).

c11.s2.4

YAJAMĀNA (SACRIFICER)—The sacrificer was called *Yajamāna* (III.2.128) for the period of the sacrifice, after which he was on that basis called *Yajvā* (III.2.103). There were also other terms derived from the performance of special sacrifices, as *Agnishṭoma-yājī* (III.2.85). A person devoted (*tach-chhīla*) to the constant performance of *yajñas* was called *yāyajūka* (III.2.166; *ijyā-śīlo yāyajūkaḥ*, *Amara*). For the period of the sacrifice, the *yajamāna* observed the vow of restraining himself from wordy speech, hence called *vāchaṁ-yama* (*Vāchi yamo vrate*, III.2.40), and of sleeping on a raised platform on the *vedi*, hence called *sthāṇḍila* (IV.2.15) or *sthaṇḍila-śāyī* (III.2.80). The son or the student of the *yaja-māna* when he came to be of age as competent to perform the sacrificial act was called *alaṁkarmīṇa*, sitting by his side and assisting him (*Yadyasya putro vāntevasī vālaṁ-karmīṇaḥ syāt-sa dakshiṇata āsīno juhuyād iti*, *Baud Śr.*, XXII.20). *Karma* in this *sūtra* meant *Yajña* (cf. *Yajur.*, I.1; *Śatapatha*, I.1.21, *yajño vai karma*).

c11.s2.5

ĀSPADA—Social status (*pratishṭhā*) amongst the Brāhmaṇas was termed *āspada* (*Āspadaṁ pratishṭhāyām*, VI.1.146), a term still current. The *āspadas* were derived from the various sacrificial performances, such as Vājapeyī, Agnihotrī, etc. An Āhitāgni (II.2.37) was one who had consecrated the Three Śrauta Fires. One who had ceremoniously lived in the place set apart for the Āvasatha Fire, was called *Āvasathika* (IV.4.74), a word still seen in modern Avasthī. Inside the *yajña-bhūmi*, the special place built for the *yajamāna* is called *āvasatha* (also *agni-śaraṇa*, because of the *āvasathya agni* consecrated there), and it was obligatory for him to stay in the *āvasatha* room for the duration of the sacrifice.

c11.s2.6

NAMES OF YAJÑAS—(*Yajñākhyā*, V.1.95). *Yajña* is derived from *yaj*, 'to worship' (III.3.90). *Ijyā* is another term used by Pāṇini (III.3.98). Amongst the four Vedas the *Yajurveda* deals with sacrifices which are of three kinds, Ishṭi, Paśubandha and Soma.¹ Pāṇini makes a general reference to all the *Kratus* or *Soma* sacrifices mentioned in the *Adhvaryuveda* which was but another name of *Yajurveda* (*Adhvaryukratur-anapuṁsakam*, II.4.4). A distinction is made between *Kratus* and *Yajñas*, as both are mentioned separately in *sūtra* IV.3.68. *Yajña* was a general term which included the *Ishṭis* like Darśa and Paurṇamāsā, *Yajñas* as Pākayajña, Navayajña, and such variations as Pañchaudana, Saptaudana, etc., as well as such well known *Kratus* as Agnishṭoma, Rājasūya, and Vājapeya. But *Kratu* was used specially for the Soma sacrifices (II.4.4, Kāśikā, *kratuśabdaḥ soma-yajñeshu rūḍhaḥ*). The Soma juice forms the oblation in the *Kratus*. The *Kratus* are further subdivided into those called *Ahīna*² which are Soma *yāgas* lasting from one to eleven days, and *Sattra* which continued from twelve days to a hundred or a thousand years, the Dvādaśāha being regarded as both an *ahīna* and a *sattra*. There are *Kratus* governed by fixed time durations as *ekāha*, *daśāha*, etc. (subject to *kālādhi-kāra*, V.1.95). Agnishṭoma, Vājapeya, Rājasūya were *kratus*, but not *sattras*.³ Names of the sessions of Soma sacrifices continuing for prescribed periods, were compounded with the names of Yajamānas, e.g. *Garga-trirātra*, i.e. a Soma session of the Garga family lasting for three days; similarly *Charaka-* *trirātra*, *Kusurabindu-saptarātra*, etc. (*Dvigau kratau*, VI.2.97).

c11.s2.7

¹ In the Ishṭi as Darśa and Paurṇamāsa, the oblation is thrown with *Svāhā*, in the other two with *Vaushaṭ* (उपविष्ट होमाः स्वाहाकारप्रदानाः जुहोतय ; तिष्ठद्धोमा वषट्कारप्रदानाः याज्यानुवाक्यावन्तो यजतयः ।)

c11.s2.8

² *Sūtra* V.4.145, and *vārt.* on IV.2.42 *ahnaḥ khaḥ kratau, ahnāṁ samūhaḥ kratuḥ ahīnaḥ*.

c11.s2.9

³ Agnishṭoma and Vājapeya, each lasts for one day only with a preliminary course (*pūrvāṅga*) of four days, and the Rājasūya for about four days.

c11.s2.10

Of special sacrifices, Pāṇini mentions Agnishṭoma (VIII.3.82), Jyotishṭoma and Āyushṭoma (VIII.3.83), the latter performed to obtain longevity, and making with the former a part of the Abhiplava ceremony. The Agnishṭoma with its three pressings (*savanas*) and twelve *stotras* forms the norm (*prakṛiti*) and the Vājapeya and the Jyotishṭoma are its modifications (*vikṛiti*). Rājasūya (III.1.114), a *vikṛiti* of the Agnishṭoma, and Turāyaṇa (V.1.72) are also mentioned. Turāyaṇa was a modification of the Paurṇamāsa, and the *Yajamāna* performing it was called *Taurāyaṇika* (V.1.722). The *Śāṅkhāyana Br.* speaks of Turāyaṇa as a *yajña* performed for the attainment of heaven (*sa esha svargakāmasya yajñaḥ*, IV.11, cf. Āraṇyakaparva, 13.21). According to the *Kāt. Śr.* (XXIV.7.1-8) this *sattra* commenced on the fifth day of Vaiśākha Śukla or Chaitra Śukla and lasted for one year (*saṁvatsaraṁ yajate*). It was regarded as a *vikṛiti* of Dvādashāha *sattra*. *Kuṇḍapāyya* and *Sañchāyya* were the names of special Soma *kratus* (III.1.130), the former being a *vikṛiti* of Dvādashāha and a *sattra* lasting for one year, which was originally performed by the Kuṇḍapāyin Ṛishis (cf. Rig., VIII.17.13, where a person is so named).

c11.s2.11

Reference is also made to *Dīrghasattra* or sacrifices extending over long periods of time, as a hundred or a thousand years (VII.3.1). No doubt the *Brāhmaṇa* texts describe such *yajñas*, *e.g.* Viśvasṛij, a *yajña* lasting for one thousand years (*sahasra-sama sattra*) described in the *Pañchaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa*, but we have the testimony of Patañjali saying that such long sacrifices were not actually performed (*loke aprayuktāḥ*), and that only the Yājñikas described them in their works as part of inherited tradition (*kevalam ṛishi-sampradāyo dharma iti kṛitvā Yājñikāḥ śāstreṇānuvidadhate*, *Bhāshya*, I.9, and *vār.* *Aprayukte dīrgha-sattravat*).

c11.s2.12

SOMA—Pressing of Soma was known as *sutyā* (III.3.99), and one who pressed it as *Somasut* (III.2.90). After the ceremony the *yajamāna* who pressed the Soma was called *sutvā* (III.2.103), corresponding to the other title *yajvā*, 'one performing a sacrifice'.

c11.s2.13

The drinking of Soma depended on the fulfilment of certain spiritual and material conditions. According to Pāṇini he who had the requisite qualification to drink Soma was called *somya* (*Somam arhati yaḥ*, IV.4.137). In the opinion of the *Yājñika* school as quoted by Patañjali, that person was entitled to drink Soma in whose family there was no social stigma in the ten preceding generations (*Evaṁ hi Yājñikāḥ paṭhanti, Daśapurushanūkaṁ yasya gṛihe śūdrā na vidyeran sa Somaṁ pibediti*, *Bhāshya*, IV.1.93; II.248). Manu looks at the problem from an economic point of view: 'He who owns food to last for three years or more so as to maintain his dependants, is entitled to drink Soma (*sa somaṁ pātum arhati*, *Manu*, XI.7; also *Kāśikā*, VII.3.16). 'He should lay by the minimum prescribed store lest his labour be wasted' (XI.8). In the Soma ceremony the priests (*yājakas*) might press the Soma plant, but the credit of performing the Soma *yajña* belonged to the actual *yajamāna* who was in reality the beneficiary (*pradhāna kartā*) of that sacrifice. A special expression was current to designate him as *sunvan* (*Suño yajña-saṁyoge*, III.2.132). On the other hand in a *sattra*, i.e. a Soma *yāga* lasting for more than twelve days, the number of priests ranges from 17 to 25 (*saptadaśāvarāḥ pañchaviṁśatiparamāḥ*), all of them enjoy the status of *yajamānas* (*sarve yajamānāḥ, sarve ṛitvijaḥ*), all are *āhitāgnis*, all sharing the fruits of the *yajña* equally, and since it is a corporate endeavour no one pays or expects any fee, and all of them perform the act of pressing the Soma juice. This arrangement is reflected in the phrase *sarve sunvantaḥ sarve yajamānāḥ sattriṇaḥ uchyante* (*Kāśikā* on III.2.132, *Suño yajña-saṁyoge*).

c11.s2.14

NAMES OF FIRES (*AGNYĀKHYĀ*, III.2.92)—*Agni* as an agent carrying the offering of the sacrificer to the gods is spoken of as *havyavāhana* (III.2.66), and to the manes as *kavyavāhana* (III.2.65). In these two capacities it receives the offerings with the formula *Svāhā* and *Svadhā*, respectively (II.3.16). The former was called *Chitya agni* (III.1.132) used for performing the Śrauta sacrifices. Of the Three Śrauta Fires (*śrautāgnayaḥ*), mention is made of Gārhapatya (IV.4.90), and of the Dakshiṇāgni under the special name of *Ānāyya* which was brought from the Household Fire and not retained (*Ānāyyo' nitye*, III.1.127; with *Bhāshya* II.89).

c11.s2.15

The word *ānāyya* is of uncommon interest. The Śrautāgni is kindled with *araṇī* and perpetually maintained by an *āhitāgni* as Gārhpatya *agni* in the *vedi* of that name. The other two altars are Āhavanīya and Dakshiṇāgni. The intending sacrificer takes the *agni* from his Gārhpatya altar to the other two. In that case both are called *ānāyya* temporarily, since after the oblations are over the fires in the Āhavanīya and Dakshināgni lose their sacred character. But besides the Gārhapatya Fire there were other recognised sources for feeding the Dakshiṇāgni; for example, as a temporary measure the Dakshiṇāgni could be borrowed from a frying-place (*bhrāshṭra*), a Vaiśya-kula, or from a new home where the proper *śrautāgni* had not yet been installed. In such a contingency the word *ānāyya* denoted only the Dakshiṇāgni. (*ānāyyo Dakshiṇāgniḥ; rūḍhireshā, Kāśikā*).

c11.s2.16

The three stages in the kindling of the Fire are appropriately referred to as *parichāyya*, its showy assemblage and adornment in the beginning (*alaṅkaraṇa*; cf. *parichāyyaṁ chinvīta grāmakāmaḥ, Śat. Br.* V.4.11.3); *upachāyya*, its augmenting or blazing forth (*saṁvardhana*) in the middle; and *samūhya* (III.1.132), its final form consisting of ashes and rubbish swept or heaped together, for which the graphic phrase *samuhyapurīsha* was current (*Ś. Br.* VI.7.2.8; *Kāt. Śr.* XVI.5.9.10).

c11.s2.17

Special kinds of *vedis* which were made twice or thrice the usual size, were known as *dvistāvā*, *tristāvā* (V.4.84). The normal size of the platform in the Darśa-Paurṇamāsa was 27 ft.×13½ft. (36 *vitastis* long and 18 broad). On this platform different fire-altars were built, each being called a *sthaṇḍila* (IV.2.15; same as *kuṇḍa* in *smārta yajñas*). These altars were made of different shapes referred to in the *sūtra Karmaṇy-agnyākhyāyām* (III.2.92), *e.g.* *śyena-chit*, *kaṅka-chit* (*Kāśikā*), *droṇa-chit* (square), *ratha-chakra-chit* (round), *praüga-chit* (triangular), *ubhayataḥ praüga-chit* (double triangle; *Kāt. Śrauta*, XVI.5.9). These were special *agnis*, the arranging of which was called *agni-chityā* (III1.132). The altars were piled up (*chityā*, III.132) with bricks, which were given special names after the particular *mantras* used for building them (*Tadvānāsāṁ upadhāno mantra itiśhṭakāsu luk cha matoḥ*, IV.4.125). Important words occurring in the *mantras* used for laying the bricks were selected as their names, *e.g.* *Varchasyā*, *Tejasyā*, *Payasyā* and *Retasyā*, ancient words for particular bricks. Pāṇini mentions in particular the bricks called *Āśvinī* (IV.4.126). One who consecrated these sacrificial Fires was known as *agni-chit* (III.2.91).

c11.s2.18

OTHER ACCESSORIES—*Yajña* required a number of accessory articles of which some are mentioned in the *Ashṭādhyāyī*. That place in the *yajña* was called *saṁstāva* (III.3.31) where the Chhandoga singers sang the hymns in the Soma *Kratus*, a sort of *stuti-bhūmi* (*Amara*). Another portion was the *avaskara* for throwing refuse (IV.3.28), also called *utkara*. The *kuśa* grass, necessary for sacrificial ceremonies, is referred to as *pavitra* which had become a *saṁjñā* word (*Puvaḥ saṁjñāyām*, III.2.185; cf. *Yaju.* I. 2, 3, 12). The Soma plant was required for Soma sacrifices. Patañjali mentions *pūtika* grass as a substitute for Soma, but observes that Soma had not become obsolete (*na cha tatra somo bhūtapūrvo bhavati*, I.1.56, I.137).

c11.s2.19

The sacrificial utensils (*yajña-pātra*, I.3.64), specially the cups for drinking Soma, were arranged in pairs which is given as one of the meanings of the word *dvandva* (*yajña-pātra-prayoga*, VIII.1.15). Two Soma-cups (*grahas*) are named, *kshullaka-vaiśvadeva* (cf. *Kāt. Śr.* IX.4.1) and *mahā-vaiśvadeva* (*Kshullakaścha Vaiśvadeve*, VI.2.39, cf. *Kat. Śr.* X.6.2. for *mahāvaiśvadeva*). Oblation is mentioned as *havi*, a special form of which was known as *sāṁnāyya* (III.1.129), which is said to consist of 'curd from the cow's milking of the previous evening (*sāyaṁdoha*) taken with fresh milk of the following morning (*prātardoha*) and offered together to Indra in the New Moon sacrifice (*saṁ*+*nī*, to mix).¹

c11.s2.20

PRIESTS.—The generic term *ṛitivij* (III.2.59) was applied to all classes of priests employed at a sacrifice. The priests must have been Brāhmaṇas as in the Vedic period (*Vedic Index*, I.112). This is suggested by the epithet *ārtvijīna* (V.¹.71) denoting a person qualified in priestly duties (*ṛitvik-karmārhati*, *Kātyāyana*) which according to Patañjali was applied to a member of a Brāhmaṇa family. The *Shaḍviṁśa Br.* explains *artvijīna* as one who is able to expound those Vedic texts which are used in *yajñas* (*esha ārtvijīno ya etaṁ vedam anubrūte*, I.3.16). According to Patañjali an *ārtvijīna* should be able to utter the Vedic speech according to its proper *pada*, *svara* and *akshara* (*Bhāshya*, I.3). A priest with reference to his duties on behalf of the *yajamāna* was called *yājaka*; *sūtra* II.2.9. implies that the word *yājaka* was compounded with another denoting the sacrificer, *e.g.* *Brāhmaṇa-yājaka*, *Kshatriya-yājaka*.

c11.s2.21

¹ There are three oblations in the Darśa sacrifice, the first is the sacrificial cake for Agni (*āgneya purodāśa*), the second curds for Indra (*aindraṁ dadhi*), and the third milk for Indra (*aindraṁ payaḥ*). The last two make up the *sāṁnāyya yāga* in which the deity is single but the oblations to him being different are added and offered together. Firstly curd is taken in the *juhū* and then milk is poured on it.

c11.s2.22

Selection of priests must have depended on their special knowledge of the ritual for which they were invited. Pāṇini refers to the emergence of experts who made a special study of the complicated ritual of Soma-kratus like Agnishṭoma and Vājapeya, and were named *Āgnishṭomika*, *Vājapeyika* after those rituals (*Kratūkthādisūtrāntāṭ-ṭhak*, IV.2.60). For such important sacrifices the invitations would naturally be issued to them. Along with their pupils these masters cultivated advanced studies of those specialized *Kratu* texts (*kratu visheśa-vāchibhyaṣh-ṭhak pratyayo bhavati tadadhīte tad-vedetyasmin vishaye, Kāśikā*).

c11.s2.23

In the ritual as given in the *Brāhmaṇas*, the number of priests is sixteen, classed in four groups (*Vedic Index*, I.113).¹ Of those connected with the *Ṛigveda*, Pāṇini mentions Hotā, Praśāstā (VI.4.11), and Grāvastut (III.2.177), the Praśāstā known as Maitrāvaruṇa also. The Grāvastut praised the *grāvā* or stones for pressing Soma. The Hotā recited the *yājyā* and *anuvākyā* verses.

c11.s2.24

Of the *Sāmveda* priests, Pāṇini refers to Udgatā in *sūtra* V.¹.129, and to his assistant Pratihartā in its *gaṇa*.

c11.s2.25

The duties of the various priests were indicated by the addition of suffixes to their names, those of the Udgātā being called *audgātra* (V.¹.129) and of the Adhvaryu, *ādhvaryava* (IV.3.123). Adhvaryu's assistant Neshṭā (VI.4.11) belonged to the Soma ritual whose duty it was to lead forward the wife of the sacrificer. The importance of the Adhvaryu increased with the growth of the complicated ritual in which differences of opinion also arose in course of time. It appears that the followers of each special recension of the *Yajurveda* adopted the ritualistic peculiarities of their own School. The insistence on the two-fold variations of ritual according to locality and *śākhā* (*āmnāya*) resulted in the growth of special Adhvaryus who were designated by particular names. This is reflected in *sūtra* VI.2.10, *Adhyaryu-kashāyayor-jātau*, e.g. Prāchyādhvaryu, priests belonging to east India who were affiliated to the *Śukla Yajurveda*. The followers of the special schools of the *Kṛishṇa Yajurveda* were distinguished by the names of their *śākhās*, as Kaṭhādhvaryu, Kalāpādhvaryu, etc.

c11.s2.26

¹ होता, मैत्रावरुण, अच्छावाक्, ग्रावस्तुत् ।
2. उद्गाता, प्रस्तोता, प्रतिहर्ता, सुब्रह्मण्य ।
3. अध्वर्यु, प्रतिष्ठाता, नेष्टा, उंन्नता ।
4. ब्रह्मा, ब्राह्मणाच्छंसी, आग्नीध्र, पोता ।

c11.s2.27

Of *Atharvaveda* priests, Pāṇini mentions Brahmā (V.1. 136), Agnīdh (VIII.2.92) and Potā (VI.4.11). Brahmā must have emerged as the general supervisor of the ritual, as is indicated by his duties (*karma*) designated by the special term *Brahmatva* (V.2.136). The epithet Mahā-Brahmā 'Chief of the Brāhmaṇas (V.4.105, in which Brahman=Brāhmaṇa) seems to have been derived from the priviledged position of the Brahman priest, who as early as the *Ṛigveda* (I. 162.5) was called *suvipra*, a sage or priest of profound knowledge acting as superintendent of the whole ceremony.

c11.s2.28

The sons of *ṛitvijs* have been specially noticed as *Ṛitvik-putra* and *Hotuḥ-putra* (VI.2.133). These names were derived from sons who followed the calling of their fathers.

c11.s2.29

*RECITATION OF MANTRAS*—*Yajña* implies the invoking of deities with recitation of *mantras* (*mantrakaraṇa* I.3.25). Recitation in concert (*sahochchāraṇa*) marked by clear tone and accent was called *samuchchāraṇa* (I.3.48). Invocation of deities was *nihava* and *abhihava* (III.3.72).

c11.s2.30

*YĀJYĀ VERSES*—Pāṇini refers to the technical details of repeating the *Yājyā mantras* in a sacrifice (*Yajña-karmaṇi*, VIII. 2.88-92). The *Yājyās* were all selected hymns from the *Ṛigveda* and enumerated in the Hautra-kāṇḍa of the *Āśvalayāna* and other *Śrautasūtras*. The Hotā priest recites the *Yājyā* and *Puronuvākyā* verses as often as the Adhvaryu commences a set of oblations. The latter priest does not recite any *mantra*; he only gives directions (*praisha*) to the Hotā whose privilege it is to recite the appropriate *mantra* ending with the formula *Vaushat*, on hearing which the Adhvaryu throws the oblation into the fire.

c11.s2.31

This complicated ceremony is arranged as follows:

c11.s2.32

(1) *Puronuvākyā* and *Anubrūhi*. It is the first *praisha* or direction that the Adhvaryu gives to the Hotā to recite the preliminary laudatory verses called *Puronuvākyā* in praise of the deity who is to be invoked. According to *sūtra* VIII.2. 91 the formula must be uttered with a pluta accent, as अग्नयेऽनुब्रू३हि ।

c11.s2.33

(2) In response to this *praisha* the Hotā recites the *Puronu-vākyā* verse, the last letter of which is followed by a *praṇava* pronounced with *pluta* accent (VIII.2.89), *e.g.* अपारेतांसि जिन्वतो ३म् । According to the *Śatapatha*, *Puronuvākyā* is used for invoking the deity and the *Yājyā* for giving the oblation (*hvayati vā anuvākyayā, prayachchhati yājyayā*, I.7.2.17). After the Hotā has repeated the *puronuvakyā* verse, the actual *yājyā* is recited (*atha yadanuvākyām anūchya yājyayā yajati, Śatapatha*, XI.4.1.12). Both form one pair. In some cases, as pointed out by the *Śatapatha*, the *puronuvākyā* was dropped (*atha yad-apunarvākyakā bhavanti*, XI.4.1.12), and therefore its *praisha* (*anubrūhi*) was not counted in the set of five directive formulas comprising 17 letters.¹

c11.s2.34

¹ The following verse interpolated in the Bhishmastavarāja of the Śāntiparva refers to the *Yājyā* verses:

c11.s2.35

(3) *Āśravaṇa*. The Adhvaryu, Agnīdh and Hotā priests having taken their seats round the Vedi, the Adhvaryu calls upon the Agnīdh (cf. Agnimindha of Ṛigveda I.162.5), an assistant of Brahmā, whose duty it was to guard the sacrifice against the Asuras. He sat near the *utkara* and held a wooden sword (*sphya*) in hand. The order to him (*agnīt-preshana*, also called *āśravaṇa*) consisted of the formula ओ३ श्रा३वय with its variant in some *śākhās* as ओ ३ श्रा ३ वय (*Agnīt-preshane parasya cha*, VIII.2.92). This *praisha* signified 'Please notify the sacrifice to the gods, as all is well'.

c11.s2.36

(4) *Pratyāśravaṇa*. To this the Agnīdh responded by a *pratyāśravaṇa* formula, अस्तु श्रौ३षट् pronounced with pluta accent (*sūtra* VIII.2.91), the meaning being 'Let the gods be notified; everything is O.K.' (cf. *Āśv. Śr.* I.4, *astu śraushaḍ ity-aukāraṁ plāvayan*).

c11.s2.37

चतुर्भिंश्च चतुर्भिंश्च द्वाभ्यांपंचभिरेवच ।
हूयते च पुनर्द्वाभ्यां तस्मै होमात्मने नमः ॥

c11.s2.38

(Verse added after 47.27 in the Critical edition)

c11.s2.39

(5) *Yājyā-praisha*. Thus getting a line-clear from the Agnīdh, the Adhvaryu turns to the Hotā with the directive '*Yaja*', on hearing which the Hotā begins to recite the *Yājyā*. There is no *pluta* in the *Yaja* formula, which is uttered in mono-tone (*ekaśruti*).

c11.s2.40

(6) *Āgūrta* formula (also called *abhigūrta*, cf. Ṛig. I.162. 6; Haug, *Aitareya Br.*, Intr., XVIII) consists of the words ये ३ यजामहे 'We who are assembled here all give our approv-ing help to promote the *yajña*' (*Ye yajñakarmaṇi*, VIII.2.88) which always precedes the *Yājyā* verse.

c11.s2.41

(7) *Ishṭa* or *Yājyā*. As said above select verses from the *Ṛigveda* for invoking particular deities are called *Yājyā*, which constitute the actual *mantras* for throwing the oblation. Their last syllable is *pluta* (*Yājyāntaḥ*, VIII.2.90). The *Yājyā* is preceded by *Ye yajāmahe* and followed by the formula *Vaushaṭ*, e.g. ॐ ये यजामहे समिधः समिधोऽग्न आज्यस्य व्यन्तु३ वौ३षट् ।

c11.s2.42

(8) *Vashatkāra*—As seen above, it was added after each *Yājyā* verse and pronounced by the Hotā as *pluta* and in a very loud voice (*Uchchaistarāṁ vā vashaṭkāraḥ*, I.2.35; cf. *Ait. Br.* III.1.7, *śanaistarām asya ṛicham uktvochchaistarāṁ vashaṭ kuryāt*; *i.e.* the *yājyā* verse to be repeated with a very low and the *vashaṭkāra* with a very loud voice). As soon as *Vaushaṭ* is uttered the Adhvaryu throws the oblation into the fire. *Vashaṭ* (I.2.35; II.3.16) and *Vaushaṭ* (VIII.2.91) were variants of one and the same word, just as आश्रावय and ओ३श्रावय were variants in the different *Sākhās*.

c11.s2.43

(9) *Vītam* and (10) *Anuvashaṭkāra* (I.2.35; VIII.2.91). In the Soma *yāga* after the *yājyā* verse and *vashaṭkāra*, another formula is repeated, e.g. सोमस्याग्ने वीही ३ वौ ३ षट् 'O Agni, taste the Soma!'. According to the Aitareya (III. 1.5) in this way the deities are satisfied by a repeated request

c11.s2.44

आश्रावयेति चतुरक्षरम्, अस्तु श्रौषडिति चतुरक्षरम्, यजेति द्वयक्षरम्, ये यजामह इति पंचाक्षरम्, द्वयक्षरो वषट्कारः । एष वै सप्तदश प्रजापतिः यज्ञमन्वायत्तः
(*Tait. Br., Kāṇḍa* II).

c11.s2.45

to them to drink the remaining Soma juice. The *Vīhi* formula is called *vītam* and the *vashat* added to it *anuvashaṭkāra* (Haug, *Ait. Br.*, p. XVIII).

c11.s2.46

*ĀVĀHANA*—In the Darśa-Paurṇamāsa Ishṭis, there are five oblations (*Pañcha-prayājas*)¹ which constitute the first part (*pūrvāṅga*) of the sacrifice (Prayājānuyājau Yajñāṅge, VII.³.62) and three secondary oblations called *anuyājas*.² In a *Paśu-yāga* their number is raised to eleven. Of the five *prayājas*,¹ the last one is *svāhākāra* oblation, when the deity is invoked by the formula *āvaha*, for which Pāṇini prescribes *pluta* accent, *e.g.* अग्निमा३ वह (VIII.2.91).

c11.s2.47

¹ Five *prayājas*, *viz.* समिधो यजति, तनूनपातं यजति, बर्हिर्यजति, इडो यजति स्वाहाकारं यजति (*Śatapatha*, I.5.3.1-13, comparing them with 5 seasons). On account of the five oblations or *ājyāhutis*, accompanied by their appropriate invocations the *Yajña* is referred to in the Śāntiparva as *daśārdhabhavirākṛitim*, 'whose form is made whole by five *havis* (47.27).

c11.s2.48

² *Trayo'nuyājāś-chatvāro patnī-saṁyājāḥ*, *Śat. Br.* XI.4.1.11. The *Kāśikā* seems to be mistaken in stating that there were 5 *anuyājas* and 8 *patnī-saṁyājas*. In the Paśubandha sacrifices the number of *prayājas* and *anuyājās* is eleven each. The 4 *patnī-saṁyājas* were offered by the Yajamāna's wife after the *anuyājas* in the Darśa-Paurṇamāsa Ishṭi. The 8 *patnī-saṁyājas* are, however, prescribed, as an option, by the *Baudh. ŚSr.*, 24.29.

c11.s2.49

*MONOTONE (EKAŚRUTI)*—The strict rule of reciting Vedic *mantras* with correct three-fold accent (*traisvarya*) was gradually being relaxed. Pāṇini, like the *Kātyāyana Śrautasūtra* (I.8.16-19), was making a note of the tendencies current in his time when he says that the *mantras* were recited with monotone (*ekaśruti*; *ekatāra* in *Kāt. Śr.*, I.8.18) in the *yajñas*, excepting the few cases of *Japa*,³ Sāman songs and the special *Nyūṅkha* accents⁴ (*Yajñakarmanyajapa-nyūṅkha-*

c11.s2.50

³ The *Japa mantra* is *Yajurveda*, II.10, *Mayidamindra indriyam*, etc., uttered by the *Yajamāna* with three-fold accents (*Kāt. Śr.* III.4.18).

c11.s2.51

⁴ *Nyūṅkha* is a recitation by the Hotā at the morning libation of a Soma *yāga*, comprised of 16 *okāras*, *e.g.*

c11.s2.52

आपो ३ ओ ओ ओ ओ ओ ओ ३ ओ ओ ओ ओ ओ
ओ ३ ओ ओ ओ रेवती : क्षयथा हि वस्वः क्रतुं च भद्रं विभृथामृतं च ।
रायो ३ ओ ओ ओ ओ ओ ओ ३ ओ ओ ओ ओ ओ ओ ३

c11.s2.53

*sāmasu*, I.2.34). Jaimini made a vigorous attempt to restore the old practice of reciting Vedic *mantras* with their threefold accent whether for study or for ritual purposes (*Mīmāṁsā*, XII.3.20-24; D. V. Garge, Jaimini, Śabara and the Science of Grammar, A.B.O.R.I., XXX, 254-5). But it seems to have been a losing battle against heavy odds. The *Tait. Pr.* also records the practice of monotone (*sarvam ekamayam, T. Pr.* XV.9).

c11.s2.54

SUBRAHMAṆYĀ—The *Subrahmaṇyā* formula also had its definite rules of accentuation (I.2.37-38). It was a loud invocation addressed to Indra in the Jyotishṭoma and other Soma sacrifices (cf. *Kullūka* on *Manu*, IX.126; *Kāt. Śr.* IX.1.12; Haug, *Ait. Br.*, p. 260)¹.

c11.s2.55

¹ The *Shaḍviṁśa Brāhmaṇa* I.1.8-28 explains in detail the several parts of the Subrahmaṇyā formula (*nigada*) as follows:

c11.s2.56

*Upayaj* was the special name (III.2.73) of the eleven short formulas (*samudram gachchha svāhā*, etc.) given in the *Yajurveda* VI.21. Reference is made to the *sāmidhenīs*, the eleven verses of the *Ṛigveda*, III.27.1-11, used for enkindling the fire. The first and the last are each repeated thrice and thus we make fifteen *sāmidhenīs* for the Darśa-Paurnamāsa Ishṭis. Of these *Ṛig.* III.27.4 is called *sāmidhyamānavatī* and III.27.11 *samiddhvatī* by the words *samidhyamānaḥ* and

c11.s2.57

ओ ओ ओ स्वः स्वपत्यस्य पत्नी । सरस्वती तद्गृणते वयो धो ३मा३ पो ३ । ऋ० १० ३० । दै२

c11.s2.58

The first word in each half-*ṛich* is written with 16 *nyūṅkha okāras* added after its second vowel, comprising three *plutas* and thirteen *ardhokāras*.

c11.s2.59

सुब्रह्मण्यो३म् (repeated thrice), इन्द्रागच्छ, अहल्यायैजार, कौशिकब्रुवाण, गौतमब्रुवाण इत्यहे सुत्यामागच्छ मघवन् ।

c11.s2.60

Then the remaining formula (*nigada-śesha*) is repeated

c11.s2.61

देवा ब्रह्माण आगच्छतागच्छतागच्छतेति
(cf. Pāṇini, I.2.38).

c11.s2.62

Here *brahmāṇaḥ* is explained as *manushyadevāḥ* referring to *Brāhmaṇas* who are full of reverence and learning (*śuśruvāṁso'nūchānāḥ, Ṣaḍ. Br.* I.¹.28).

c11.s2.63

*samindhate* used in them. Sometimes extra verses are brought in *from outside, e.g. ekaviṁśatim anubrūyāt pratishṭhākāmasya*, i.e. the person desirous of stability should use 21 *sāmidhenīs*. In such cases the extra verses should be accommodated between *samidyamānavatī* and *samiddhavatī*, and all the verses between them are therefore called *dhāyyās* (*sūtra*, III.1.129).

c11.s2.64

The mention of these minute details shows that Pāṇini was in touch with a living tradition of the sacrificial ritual or *yajñas*. The title *pūtakratu* seems to have assumed a new significance, denoting the man whose mind was purified by the potions of Soma drunk at the *Kratus*. His wife, Patnī, who was his partner in the sacrifices (*yajña-saṁyoga*, IV.1.33) shared in this distinction and was thence called *pūtakratāyī* (IV.1.36).

c11.s2.65

The institution of *yajñas* had a vital economic interest for the officiating priests in that they received the *dakshiṇā* or sacrificial fee about the distribution of which instructions are contained in the law-books. We are told that the particular sacrificial guerdon was called after the name of the sacrifice for which it was paid (*Tasya cha dakshiṇā yajñākhyebhyaḥ*, V.1.95). Examples are cited of the particular fees paid at the Rājasūya, Vājapeya and Agnishtoma sacrifices, called *āgnishṭomikī*, etc., of which minimum units must have come to be fixed. The word *dakshiṇya* was applied to one whose merits entitled him to receive the proper *dakshiṇā* (V.1.69).

c11.s2.66

The social relationships arising out of sacrifices as between priests and *yajamāna* constituted one of the happiest features of domestic life. Patañjali refers to these as *srauva sambandha* (I.119) distinguished from those of blood (*yauna*), economic life (*ārtha*), and academic relationships (*maukha*). He also refers to certain priests marked by red turbans on their heads (*lohitoshṇīshā ṛitvijaḥ*, I.1.27 I.826) officiating for the Vrātyas (*Kāt. Śr.*, XXII.3.15).

Section 3. Ascetics

c11.s3.1

Pāṇini refers to religious mendicants as *bhikshus* (III.2. 168) from their obligatory duty of begging; whence they were also known as *bhikshāchara* (III.2.17). The ordinary beggar was known as *bhikshāka* (III.2.155). Pāṇini mentions both Brāhmaṇical ascetics and heretical sects. As to the former he mentions those following the *Bhikshu-sūtras* promulgated by Pārāśarya (IV.3.110), and Karmanda (IV.3. 111); of the latter reference is made to Maskarī mendicants (*maskarī parivrājaka*, VI.1.154) who were most probably the followers of Makkhali Gosāla. The term *tāpasa* (V.2.103) or *tapasvin* (V.2.102) was applied to an ascetic practising penance. This was denoted by the special root *tapasyati* (III.1.15). The several epithets like *śamī*, *damī*, *yogī*, *vivekī* and *tyāgī* (III.2.142) were indicative of the stages of spiritual culture. There are also two other terms *dānta* and *śānta* (VII.2.27), signifying control of the senses and the mind. The use of the term *yogī* points to Yoga as a system of spiritual discipline then known.

c11.s3.2

A mendicant subsisted on what he obtained by begging. The word *sarvānnīna* was applied to a person who accepted all kinds of food in his begging rounds (V.2.9). The *Kāśikā* states that a monk indiscriminately accepting alms from persons was so called. Some ascetics lived by gleaning corn (*Uñchhati*, IV.4.32). The *uñchhavṛitti* ascetics held stock of corn to last for some time. In *sūtra* VI.2.9. Pāṇini explains the word *śārada* as 'new'. Literally *śārada* should denote that which belongs to the Śarad season. The transition of meaning can be understood from Manu stating that a *muni* should gather his stock of corn twice a year, which was called *vāsanta* and *śārada* respectively after the names of the two crops harvested annually (*Manu*, VI.11). It is further laid down that he should renew his clothing and corn in the month of Āśvayuja, *i.e.* the beginning of autumn (*Manu*, VI.15). These fresh stocks obtained in Śarad were responsible for the secondary meaning of *śārada* as 'new'. The word *naikaṭika* (*nikaṭe vasati*, IV.4.73) is taken by the commentators to refer to a monk who had become a Vānaprastha, and in obedience to the rules of his order took his abode near the village outside it. Similarly *kaukkuṭika* is taken by the *Kāśikā* as a mendicant who walks with his gaze fixed to the ground to avoid harming life (IV.4.46).

c11.s3.3

There were also sham ascetics, called *dāṇḍājinika* (V.2.76) *i.e.* one who passes for an ascetic by the outward signs of staff and deer-skin only.

c11.s3.4

AYAHŚŪLA—Pāṇini refers to a class of false ascetics known as *āyaḥśūlika*, 'who flourished by the method of *ayaḥśūla* or iron spikes' (V.2.76). Patañjali's comment is of some historical interest. 'If *ayaḥśūla* literally means an iron spike, the word so formed will apply to a Śiva-Bhāgavata which is not the intention of Pāṇini's *sūtra*. Therefore the term *ayaḥśūla* indicates the practice of violent methods (*rabhasa*) to recruit followers as distinguished from the softer method of persuasion and instruction' (*mṛidu upāya*, *Bhāshya*, V.2.76). Patañjali here gives the information that there was a sect of the Śiva-Bhāgavatas who worshipped Śiva as Bhagavān and whose outward sign was an iron trident (*Ind. Ant.*, 1912, p. 272). As opposed to them the *āyaḥśūlika* Śaivas pierced their tongue or arms or other parts of the body with iron prongs and extracted forced sympathy.

First 97 of 147 passages. Read on

Linked texts (36)