Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The History of Indian Literature c8.120

The History of Indian Literature c8.120

Language
English

c8.120

*adhyáyas*. The former connects itself with the Aitareya-Bráhmaṇa, the latter with the Śáṅkháyana-Bráhmaṇa, and from these two works frequent literal quotations are respectively borrowed. From this circumstance alone, as well as from the general handling of the subject, we might infer that these Sútras are of comparatively recent origin; and direct testimony is not wanting to establish the fact. Thus the name Áśvaláyana is probably to be traced back to Aśvala, whom we find mentioned in the Áraṇyaka of the White Yajus as the Hotar of Janaka, king of Videha (see *I. St.*, i. 441). Again, the formation of the word by the affix *áyana*,[^asterisk] probably leads us to the time of established schools (*ayana*)? However this may be, names formed in this way occur but seldom in the Bráhmaṇas themselves, and only in their latest portions; in general, therefore, they always betoken a late period. We find corroboration of this in the data supplied by the contents of the Áśvaláyana-Sútra. Among the teachers there quoted is an Áśmarathya, whose *kalpa* (doctrine) is considered by the scholiast on Páṇini, iv. 3. 105, probably following the Mahábháshya,⁴¹ as belonging to the *new kalpas* implied in this rule, in contradistinction to the *old kalpas*. If, then, the authorities quoted by Áśvaláyana were regarded as recent, Áśvaláyana himself must of course have been still more modern; and therefore we conclude, assuming this statement to originate from the Mahábháshya,⁴¹ that Áśvaláyana was nearly contemporaneous with Páṇini. Another teacher quoted by Áśvaláyana, Taulvali, is expressly mentioned by Páṇini (ii. 4. 61) as belonging to the *práñchas*, or "dwellers in the east."—At the end there is a specially interesting enumeration of the various Bráhmaṇa-families, and their distribution among the family stems of Bhṛigu, Aṅgiras, Atri, Viśvámitra, Kaśyapa, Vasishṭha, and Agastya.—The sacrifices on the Sarasvatí, of which I shall treat in the sequel, are here only briefly touched upon, and this with some differences in the

Cites (1)