The History of Indian Literature c8.232

c8.232

Of the many schools which are allotted to the Black Yajus, all probably did not extend to Saṃhitá and Bráhmaṇa; some probably embraced the Sútras only.dagger Thus far, at least, only three different recensions of the Saṃhitá are directly known to us, two of them in the text itself, the third merely from an Anukramaṇí of the text. The two first are the *Taittiríya-Saṃhitá*, κατ’ ἐξοχὴν so called, which is ascribed to the school of Ápastamba, a subdivision of the Kháṇḍikíyas; and the *Káṭhaka*, which belongs to the school of the Charakas, and that particular subdivision of it which bears the name of Cháráyaṇíyas.[^double-dagger] The Saṃhitá, &c., of the Átreya school, a subdivision of the Aukhíyas, is only known to us by its Anukramaṇí; it agrees in essentials with that of Ápastamba. This is not the case with the Káṭhaka, which stands on a more independent footing, and occupies a kind of intermediate position between the Black and the White Yajus, agreeing frequently with the latter as to the readings, and with the former in the arrangement of the matter. The Káṭhaka, together with the *Háridravika*—a lost work, which, however, likewise certainly belonged to the Black Yajus, viz., to the school of the Háridravíyas, a subdivision of the Maitráyaṇíyas—is the only work of the Bráhmaṇa order mentioned by name in Yáska’s Nirukta. Páṇini, too, makes direct reference to it in a rule, and it is further alluded to in the Anupada-Sútra and Bṛihaddevatá. The name of the Kaṭhas does not appear in other Vedic writings, nor does that of Ápastamba.[^section]