Critical Studies in the Mahabharata (V. S. Sukthankar Memorial Edition, Vol. I) c7.s3.14

c7.s3.14

with the scansion ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡ | ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡ , which differs from our line as regards the quantity of the first two syllables only; ours has an iambic opening, the Muṇḍaka line trochaic. Here, also, we can with impunity omit the bracketed syllable (*tat*), and get a line which is metrically a “better” line, but obviously not the original one. I am, therefore, fully persuaded that in all such cases we have original hypermeters. These old stanzas were not built at all on the pattern of the later, more regular, classical metres, but followed some other finer rhythmic principle, which escapes our methods of rough analysis by syllable-counting.—Now as regards the sense. The exact explanation of the phrase *girā vā śaṃsāmi* is, I admit, difficult. Nīlakaṇṭha offers the facile explanation: *vāśabdaś cārthe* (i.e. *vā* = *ca*), which can hardly be considered satisfactory. Devabodha analyses the phrase into *girāv* + *ā* = *śaṃsāmi* (with *girau*, loc. of *giri*), but that hangs together with his interpretation of the Aśvins as the Sun and the Moon, which is not very convincing. It is possible to interpret the words as ‘*girā vā* *śaṃsāmi* (i.e. *vai* + *āśaṃsāmi*), as is done by some editors. On the other hand, it is also possible to emend *vā* to *vām* (“ye two,” acc. dual), which would give a satisfactory sense. This reading, which is mentioned as a pāṭha by Arjunamiśra, is found in only one of our inferior MSS. (D₂). It seemed to me such an obvious emendation that I did not like to adopt it on such slender MS. evidence, and I have hesitatingly (as shown by the wavy line) set in the text the old Northern reading *vā*, which is unquestionably a *lectio difficilior*. The whole hymn is, however, obscure and full of interpretative and other difficulties. It will have to be studied and dealt with more minutely before we can be sure of its text and meaning. But I am fully persuaded that *vā* (or some such word) did form part of the original line, and it would be a mistake to omit it.