The History of Indian Literature c8.473.3

c8.473.3

must be separated by a very wide interval from the date of Bhavabhúti,—a conclusion which follows besides from the circumstance that it is on several occasions turned to account in the Vedánta-Sútra, and that it has been commented by Śaṃkara.—The *Praśnopanishad*, in prose, seems to be borrowed from an Atharva-Bráhmaṇa, viz., that of the Pippaláda-school.∗ It contains the instruction by Pippaláda of six different teachers, amongst whom the following names are especially significant in regard to the date of the Upanishad: Kauśalya Áśvaláyana, Vaidarbhi Bhárgava, and Kabandhin Kátyáyana. In the course of the work Hiraṇyanábha, a prince of the Kośalas, is also mentioned,—the same doubtless who is specially extolled in the Puráṇas. As in the Muṇḍakopan., so here also some interpolated words are found which betray themselves as such by the fact that they are passed over by Śaṃkara in his commentary. They refer to Atharvan himself, and to the half *mátrá* (mora), to which the word *om*, here appearing in its full glory, is entitled in addition to its three moræ (*a*, *u*, *m*), and are evidently a later addition by some one who did not like to miss the mention of these two subjects in an Atharvopanishad, as in these they otherwise invariably occur. Both Muṇḍaka and Praśna have been several times edited and translated, see *I. St.*, i. 280, ff., 439, ff., again recently by Dr. Roer in vol. viii.