{"collection":"Hinduism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/hin/sbe30/sbe30002.htm","path":"hin/sbe30/sbe30002.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe30/sbe30002.htm","text":"The Grihya Sutras, Part 2 (SBE30), by Hermann Oldenberg, [1892]\nWe begin our introductory remarks on the literature of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras with the attempt to collect the more important data which throw light on the development of the Grihya ritual during the oldest period of Hindu antiquity.\nThere are, as it seems, no direct traces of the Grihya ceremonies in the most ancient portion of Vedic literature. It is certain indeed that a number of the most important of those ceremonies are contemporaneous with or even earlier than the most ancient hymns of the Rig-veda, as far as their fundamental elements and character are concerned, whatever their precise arrangement may have been. However, in the literature of the oldest period they play no part. It was another portion of the ritual that attracted the attention of the poets to whom we owe the hymns to Agni, Indra, and the other deities of the Vedic Olympus, viz. the offerings of the Srauta-Ritual with their far superior pomp, or, to state the matter more precisely, among the offerings of the Srauta-Ritual the Soma offering. In the Soma offering centred the thought, the poetry, and we may almost say the life of the Vasishthas, of the Visv\u00e2mitras, &c., in whose families the poetry of the Rig-veda had its home. We may assume that the acts of the Grihya worship, being more limited in extent and simpler in their ritual construction than the great Soma offerings, were not yet at that time, so far as they existed at all, decked out with the reciting of the poetic texts, which we find later on connected with them, and which in the case of the Soma offering came early to be used. Probably they were celebrated in simple unadorned fashion;\nwhat the person making the offering had to say was doubtless limited to short, possibly prose formulas, so that these ceremonies remained free from the poetry of the above-mentioned families of priests 1. We think that the character of the verses given in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, which had to be repeated at the performance of the different ceremonies, justifies us in making these conjectures. Some of these verses indeed are old Vedic verses, but we have no proof that they were composed for the purposes of the Grihya ceremonies, and the connection in which we find them in the Rig-veda proves rather the contrary. Another portion of these verses and songs proves to have been composed indeed for the very Grihya ceremonies for which they are prescribed in the texts of the ritual: but these verses are more recent than the old parts of the Rig-veda. Part of them are found in the Rig-veda in a position which speaks for their more recent origin, others are not contained in the Rig-veda at all. Many of these verses are found in the more recent Vedic Samhit\u00e2s, especially in the Atharva-veda Samhit\u00e2 which may be regarded in the main as a treasure of Grihya verses; others finally have not as yet been traced to any Vedic Samhit\u00e2, and we know them from the Grihya-s\u00fbtras only. We may infer that, during the latter part of the Rig-veda period, ceremonies such as marriage and burial began to be decked out with poetry as had long been the case with the Soma offering. The principal collection of marriage sentences 2 and the sentences for the\nburial of the dead 1 are found in the tenth Mandala of the Rig-veda, which, for the most part, is known to be of later origin than the preceding portions of the collections 2. If we look into the character of the verses, which these long Grihya songs are composed of, we shall find additional grounds for assuming their early origin. A few remarks about their metrical character will make this clear 3. There is no other metre in which the contrast between the early and later periods of Vedic literature manifests itself so clearly as in the Anushtubh-metre 4. The Anushtubh hemistich consists of sixteen syllables, which are divided by the caesura into two halves of eight syllables each. The second of these halves has as a rule the iambic ending ( ), though this rule was not so strictly carried out in the early as in the later period 5. The iambic ending is also the rule in the older parts of the Veda for the close of the first half, i.e. for the four syllables before the caesura 6. We know that the later prosody, as we see it in certain late parts of Vedic literature, in the P\u00e2li Pitakas of the Buddhists, and later in the great epic poems, not only departs from the usage of the older period, but adopts a directly contrary course, i.e. the iambic ending of the first p\u00e2da, which was formerly the rule, is not allowed at all later, and instead of it the prevailing ending is the antispast ( ) It goes without saying that such a change in metrical usage, as the one just described, cannot have\ntaken place at one jump. And accordingly a consideration of the Vedic texts reveals a transition period or rather a series of several transition periods between the old and the new standpoints. The first change is that every other ending of the first p\u00e2da is allowed by the side of the iambic ending. The two forms of the ending, the one prevailing in the earliest, and the one prevailing in the later period of the prosody, the iambic ( ) and the antispastic ( ), are those that occur most frequently in the intermediate period, but besides them all other possible forms are allowed 1.\nThis is precisely the stage of metrical development which the great Grihya songs of the tenth Mandala of the Rig-veda have reached. Let us consider, for instance, the marriage songs and the marriage sayings, X, 85, and see what kind of ending there is at the end of the first p\u00e2da. Of the first seventeen verses of this S\u00fbkta sixteen are in Anushtubh metre (verse 14 is Trishtubh); we have therefore thirty-two cases in which the metrical form of these syllables must be investigated. The quantity of the syllable immediately preceding the caesura being a matter of indifference, we have not sixteen but only eight a priori possible combinations for the form of the last four syllables of the p\u00e2da; I give each of these forms below, adding each time in how many of the thirty-two cases it is used:\nWe see that all the possible combinations are actually represented in these thirty-two cases, and accordingly the metrical build of this S\u00fbkta shows that it belongs to a period to which only the latest songs of the Rig-veda collection can be referred, but the peculiarities of which may be often noticed in the Atharva-veda and in the verses scattered throughout the Br\u00e2hmana literature 1.\nA hasty glance suffices to show that those verses of the Grihya ritual which do not appear in the Samhit\u00e2s, but which are quoted at full length in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, are also in the same stage. For instance, the seven Anushtubh verses which are quoted S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana-Grihya I, 19, 5. 6, give us the following relations, if we investigate them as we did those in Rig-veda X, 85:\nThus even the small number of fourteen hemistichs is enough to give us seven of the eight existing combinations, and no single one occurs at all often enough to allow us to call it predominant.\nOr we may take the saying that accompanies the performance of the medh\u00e2ganana on the new-born child. In the version of \u00c2sval\u00e2yana 2 we have:\nIn the version adopted in the school of Gobhila 3 the\ncontext of the first line is different, but the metre is the same:\nOr the saying with which the pupil (brahmak\u00e2rin) has to lay a log of wood on the fire of the teacher 1:\nThere would be no object in multiplying the number of examples; those here given are sufficient to prove our proposition, that the development of the Grihya rites in the form in which they are described to us in the S\u00fbtras, that especially their being accompanied with verses, which were to be recited by their performance, is later than the time of the oldest Vedic poetry, and coincides rather with the transition period in the development of the Anushtubh metre, a period which lies between the old Vedic and the later Buddhistic and epic form.\nBesides the formulae intended to be recited during the performance of the various sacred acts, the Grihya-s\u00fbtras contain a second kind of verses, which differ essentially from the first kind in regard to metre; viz. verses of ritualistic character, which are inserted here and there between the prose S\u00fbtras, and of which the subject-matter is similar to that of the surrounding prose. We shall have to consider these yag\u00f1ag\u00e2th\u00e2s, as they are occasionally called, later; at present let us go on looking for traces of the Grihya ritual and for the origin of Grihya literature in the literature which precedes the S\u00fbtras.\nThe Br\u00e2hmana texts, which, as a whole, have for their subject-matter the Vait\u00e2nika ceremonies celebrated with the three holy fires, furnish evidence that the Grihya fire, together with the holy acts accomplished in connection with it, were also already known. The Aitareya-Br\u00e2hmana 2 gives this\nfire the most usual name, the same name which is used for it in the S\u00fbtras, grihya agni, and describes a ceremony to be performed over this fire with expressions which agree exactly with the style of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras 1. We often find in the Br\u00e2hmana texts also mention of the terminus technicus, which the Grihya-s\u00fbtras use many times as a comprehensive term for the offerings connected with Grihya ritual, the word p\u00e2kayag\u00f1a 2. For instance, the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana 3, in order to designate the whole body of offerings, uses the expression: all offerings, those that are P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as and the others. It is especially common to find the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as mentioned in the Br\u00e2hmana texts in connection with the myth of Manu. The Taittir\u00eeya Samhit\u00e2 4 opposes the whole body of sacrifices to the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as. The former belonged to the gods, who through it attained to the heavenly world; the latter concerned Manu: thus the goddess Id\u00e2 turned to him. Similar remarks, bringing Manu or the goddess Id\u00e2 into relation with the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as, are to be found Taittir\u00eeya Samhit\u00e2 VI, 2, 5, 4; Aitareya-Br\u00e2hmana III, 40, 2. However, in this case as in many others, the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana contains the most detailed data, from which we see how the idea of Manu as the performer of P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as is connected with the history of the great deluge, out of which Manu alone was left. We read in the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana 5:\n'Now the flood had carried away all these creatures, and thus Manu was left there alone. Then Manu went about singing praises and toiling, wishing for offspring. And he sacrificed there also with a P\u00e2ka-sacrifice. He poured clarified butter, thickened milk, whey, and curds in the water as a libation.' It is then told how the goddess Id\u00e2 arose out of this offering. I presume that the story of the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1a as the first offering made by Manu after the great flood, stands in a certain correlation to the idea of the introduction of the three sacrificial fires through Pur\u00fbravas 1. Pur\u00fbravas is the son of Id\u00e2; the original man Manu, who brings forth Id\u00e2 through his offering, cannot have made use of a form of offering which presupposes the existence of Id\u00e2, and which moreover is based on the triad of the sacred fires introduced by Pur\u00fbravas; hence Manu's offering must have been a P\u00e2kayag\u00f1a; we read in one of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras 2: 'All P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as are performed without Id\u00e2.'\nThere are still other passages in the Br\u00e2hmana texts showing that the Grihya offerings were already known; I will mention a saying of Y\u00e2g\u00f1avalkya's reported in the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana 3: he would not allow that the daily morning and evening offering was a common offering, but said that, in a certain measure, it was a P\u00e2kayag\u00f1a. Finally I would call attention to the offering prescribed in the last book of the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana 4 for the man 'who wishes that a learned son should be born to him;' it is there stated that the preparation of the \u00c2gya (clarified butter) should be performed 'according to the rule of the Sth\u00e2l\u00eep\u00e2ka (pot-boiling),' and the way in which the offering is to\nbe performed is described by means of an expression, upagh\u00e2tam 1, which often occurs in the Grihya literature in a technical sense.\nWe thus see that the Br\u00e2hmana books are acquainted with the Grihya fire, and know about the Grihya offerings and their permanent technical peculiarities; and it is not merely the later portions of the Br\u00e2hmana works such as the fourteenth book of the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana, in which we meet with evidence of this kind; we find it also in portions against the antiquity of which no objections can be raised.\nWhile therefore on the one hand the Br\u00e2hmana texts prove the existence of the Grihya ceremonial, we see on the other hand, and first of all by means of the Br\u00e2hmana texts themselves, that a literary treatment of this ritualistic subject-matter, as we find it in the Br\u00e2hmanas themselves with regard to the Srauta offerings, cannot then have existed. If there had existed texts, similar to the Br\u00e2hmana texts preserved to us, which treated of the Grihya ritual, then, even supposing the texts themselves had disappeared, we should still necessarily find traces of them in the Br\u00e2hmanas and S\u00fbtras. He who will take the trouble to collect in the Br\u00e2hmana texts the scattered references to the then existing literature, will be astonished at the great mass of notices of this kind that are preserved: but nowhere do we find traces of Grihya Br\u00e2hmanas. And besides, if such works had ever existed, we should be at a loss to understand the difference which the Hindus make between the Srauta-s\u00fbtras based on Sruti (revelation), and the Grihya-s\u00fbtras resting on Smriti (tradition) alone 2. The sacred Grihya acts are regarded as 'sm\u00e2rta,' and when the question is raised with what right they can be considered as a duty resting on the sacrificer alongside of the Srauta acts, the answer is given that they too are based on a S\u00e2kh\u00e2 of the Veda, but that this S\u00e2kh\u00e2 is\nhidden, so that its existence can only be demonstrated by reasoning 1.\nBut the Br\u00e2hmana texts furnish us still in another way the most decisive arguments to prove that there have been no expositions of the Grihya ritual in Br\u00e2hmana form: they contain exceptionally and scattered through their mass sections, in which they treat of subjects which according to later custom would have been treated in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras. Precisely this sporadic appearance of Grihya chapters in the midst of expositions of a totally different contents leads us to draw the conclusion that literary compositions did not then exist, in which these chapters would have occupied their proper place as integral parts of a whole. Discussions of questions of Grihya ritual are found in the Br\u00e2hmana literature, naturally enough in those appendices of various kinds which generally follow the exposition of the principal subject of the Srauta ritual. Accordingly we find in the eleventh book of the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana 2, among the manifold additions to subjects previously treated, which make up the principal contents of this book 3, an exposition of the Upanayana, i.e. the solemn reception of the pupil by the teacher, who is to teach him the Veda. The way in which the chapter on the Upanayana is joined to the preceding one, is eminently characteristic; it shows that it is the merest accident which has brought about in that place the discussion of a subject connected with the Grihya ritual, and that a ceremony such as the Upanayana is properly not in its proper place in the midst of the literature of Br\u00e2hmana texts. A dialogue (brahmodya) between Udd\u00e2laka and Saukeya precedes; the two talk of the Agnihotra and of various expiations (pr\u00e2yaskitta) connected with that sacrifice. At the end Saukeya, filled with astonishment at the wisdom of Udd\u00e2laka, declares that he wishes to come to him as a pupil (up\u00e2y\u00e2ni bhagavantam), and Udd\u00e2laka\naccepts him as his pupil. It is the telling of this story and the decisive words up\u00e2y\u00e2ni and upaninye which furnish the occasion for introducing the following section on the Upanayana 1. The subject is there treated in the peculiar style of the Br\u00e2hmana texts, a style which we need not characterize here. I shall only mention one point, viz. that into the description and explanation of the Upanayana ceremony has been inserted one of those Slokas, such as we often find in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras also, as a sort of ornamental amplification of the prose exposition 2. 'Here a Sloka is also sung,' says the Br\u00e2hmana 3:\n[paragraph continues] From this passage we see, on the one hand, that the composition of such isolated 5 Slokas explaining certain points of the Grihya ritual goes back to quite an early period; on the other hand, we are compelled to assume that the Slokas of this kind which are quoted in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras differ nevertheless from the analogous Slokas of the early period, or at any rate that the old Slokas must have undergone a change which modernized their structure, so as to be received into the Grihya-s\u00fbtras; for the metre of the Sloka just quoted, which has the antispast before the caesura in neither of its two halves, and which has even a double iambus before the caesura in one half, is decidedly of an older type than the one peculiar to the Slokas quoted in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras 6.\nAnother Grihya section in the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana seems to have found its place there through a similar accidental kind of joining on to a preceding chapter as the above-mentioned passage. In XI, 5, 5 a story of the battle of the gods and Asuras is told: the gods beat the Asuras back by means of constantly larger Sattra celebrations and conquer for themselves the world of heaven. It seems to me that the description of the great Sattras celebrated by the gods is the occasion of the joining on of a section beginning with the words 1: 'There are five great sacrifices (mah\u00e2yag\u00f1as); they are great Sattras: the offering to Beings, the offering to men, the offering to the Fathers (i.e. the Manes), the offering to the Gods, the offering to the Brahman.' After this introduction follows an account of one of the five great offerings, namely of the Brahmayag\u00f1a, i.e. of the daily Veda recitation (sv\u00e2dhy\u00e2ya). The third Adhy\u00e2ya of \u00c2sval\u00e2yana's Grihya-s\u00fbtra begins in exactly the same way with the sentence: 'Now (follow) the five sacrifices: the sacrifice to the Gods, the sacrifice to the Beings, the sacrifice to the Fathers, the sacrifice to the Brahman, the sacrifice to men,' and then follows here also a discussion of the Brahmayag\u00f1a, which is entirely analogous to that given in the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana. \u00c2sval\u00e2yana here does not content himself with describing the actual course of ceremonies as is the rule in the S\u00fbtra texts; he undertakes, quite in the way of the Br\u00e2hmana texts, to explain their meaning: 'In that he recites the Rikas, he thereby satiates the gods with oblations of milk, in that (he recites) the Yagus, with oblations of ghee,' &c. It is plain that the mode of exposition adopted by \u00c2sval\u00e2yana in this passage, which is different from the usual S\u00fbtra style, finds its explanation in the supposition that exceptionally in this case the author of the Grihya-s\u00fbtra had before him a Br\u00e2hmana text, which he could take as his model, whether that text was the Satapatha itself or another similar text.\nAmong the extremely various prescriptions which we find\nin the last sections of the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana, there is a rather long section, which also really belongs to the Grihya domain. To quote from this section 1: 'If a man wishes that a learned son should be born to him, famous, a public man, a popular speaker, that he should know all the Vedas, and that he should live to his full age, then, after having prepared boiled rice with meat and butter, they should both eat, being fit to have offspring,' &c. Then follows a description of an \u00c2gya offering, after which the marital cohabitation is to be performed with certain formulas. This, however, is not the last of the acts through which the father assures himself of the possession of such a distinguished son; certain rites follow, which are to be performed at birth and after birth, the \u00c2yushya ceremony and the Medh\u00e2ganana. These rites are here prescribed for the special case where the father has the above-mentioned wishes for the prosperity of his child; but the description agrees essentially with the description of the corresponding acts in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras 2, which are inculcated for all cases, without reference to a determined wish of the father. It is a justifiable conjecture that, although this certainly does not apply to the whole of ceremonies described in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, many portions of these ceremonies and verses that were used in connection with them, &c., were first developed, not as a universal rite or duty, but as the special possession of individuals, who hoped to attain special goods and advantages by performing the ceremony in this way.\nIt was only later, as I think, that such prescriptions\nassumed the character of universality, with which we find them propounded in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras.\nIt is scarcely necessary to go through the sections of the texts of other Vedic schools referring to the Grihya ritual in the same way in which we have done it in the case of the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana. The data which we have produced from the great Br\u00e2hmana of the white Yagur-veda, will be sufficient for our purpose, which is to give an idea of the stage in which the literary treatment of the Grihya ritual stood during the Br\u00e2hmana period. As we see, there were then properly no Grihya texts; but many of the elements which we find later in the Grihya texts were either already formed or were in the process of formation. Most of the verses which are used for the Grihya acts\u2014in so far as they are not verses composed in the oldest period for the Soma offering and transferred to the Grihya ceremonies\u2014bear the formal imprint of the Br\u00e2hmana period; the domestic sacrificial fire and the ritual peculiarities of the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as which were to be performed at it, were known; descriptions of some such P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as were given in prose; there were also already Slokas which gave in metrical form explanations about certain points of the Grihya ritual, just as we find in the Br\u00e2hmana texts analogous Slokas referring to subjects connected with the Srauta ritual.\nThus was the next step which the literary development took in the S\u00fbtra period prepared and rendered easy. The more systematic character which the exposition of the ritualistic discipline assumed in this period, necessarily led to the taking of this step: the domain of the Grihya sacrifices was recognised and expounded as a second great principal part of the ritual of sacrifices alongside of the Srauta domain which was alone attended to in the earlier period. The Grihya-s\u00fbtras arose which treat, according to the expression of \u00c2sval\u00e2yana in his first sentence, of the grihy\u00e2ni 1 as distinguished from the vait\u00e2nik\u00e2ni, or, as S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana says, of the p\u00e2kayag\u00f1\u00e2s, or, as P\u00e2raskara says, of the grihyasth\u00e2l\u00eep\u00e2k\u00e2n\u00e2m karma. The\n[paragraph continues] Grihya-s\u00fbtras treat their subject of course in exactly the same style in which the sacrifices of the Srauta ritual had been treated by the Srauta-s\u00fbtras, which they constantly assume to be known and which are the works of teachers of the same Vedic schools, and oftentimes even perhaps the works of the same authors. Only certain differences in the character of the two groups of texts are naturally conditioned on the one hand by the greater complexity of the Srauta sacrifices and the comparative simplicity of the Grihya sacrifices, on the other hand by the fact that the Srauta-s\u00fbtras are entirely based on Br\u00e2hmana texts, in which the same subjects were treated, while the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, as we have seen, possessed such a foundation only for a very small portion of their contents.\nIt goes without saying that the above-mentioned statement that the subjects treated of in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras are P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as 1 or Grihyasth\u00e2l\u00eep\u00e2kas should not be pressed with the utmost strictness, as though nothing were treated in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras which does not come under these heads. First of all the term Sth\u00e2l\u00eep\u00e2ka is too narrow, since it does not include the offerings of sacrificial butter which constituted a great number of ceremonies. But besides many ceremonies and observances are taught in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, which cannot in any way be characterised as sacrifices at all, only possessing some inner resemblance to the group of sacrifices there treated of, or standing in more or less close connection with them 2.\nThe S\u00fbtra texts divide the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as in various ways; either four or seven principal forms are taken up. The\ncommonest division is that into the four classes of the hutas, ahutas, prahutas, pr\u00e2sitas 1. The division into seven classes is doubtless occasioned by the division of the Haviryag\u00f1as and of the Somayag\u00f1as, which also each include seven classes 2; for the nature of the sacrifices in question would hardly of itself have led to such a division. The seven classes taken up are either those given by Gautama VIII, 15 3: 'The seven kinds of P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as, viz. the Ashtak\u00e2, the P\u00e2rvana (Sth\u00e2l\u00eep\u00e2ka, offered on the new and full moon days), the funeral oblations, the Sr\u00e2van\u00ee, the \u00c2grah\u00e2yan\u00ee, the Kaitr\u00ee, and the \u00c2svayug\u00ee.' Or else the seven classes are established as follows, the fourfold division being utilised to some extent 4: 'Huta, Prahuta, \u00c2huta (sic, not Ahuta), the spit-ox sacrifice, the Bali offering, the re-descent (on the \u00c2grah\u00e2yana day), the Ashtak\u00e2 sacrifice.' According to the account of Prof. B\u00fchler 5, the exposition of Baudh\u00e2yana, who gives this division, keeps closely to the course which it prescribes. For the rest, however, the Grihya texts with which I am acquainted do not follow any of these divisions, and this is easily accounted for, if we consider the artificial character of these classifications, which are undertaken merely for the sake of having a complete scheme of the sacrifices. On the contrary, as a whole the texts give an arrangement which is based on the nature of the ceremonies they describe. In many instances we find considerable variations between the texts of the different schools; often enough, in a given text, the place\nwhich is assigned to a given chapter is not to be explained without assuming a certain arbitrariness on tlfe part of the author. But, as a whole, we cannot fail to recognise in the arrangement of the different texts a certain agreement, which we will here merely try to explain in its main traits; the points of detail, which would complete what we here say, will occur of themselves to any one who looks at the texts themselves.\nThe domestic life of the Hindus represents, so to speak, a circle, in which it is in a certain measure indifferent what point is selected as the starting-point. Two especially important epochs in this life are: on the one hand, the period of studentship of the young Brahmak\u00e2rin devoted to the study of the Veda; at the beginning of this period comes the ceremony of the Upanayana, at the end that of the Sam\u00e2vartana; on the other hand, marriage (viv\u00e2ha), which besides has a special importance for the Grihya ritual, from the circumstance, that as a rule the cultus of the domestic sacrificial fire begins with marriage. One can just as well imagine an exposition of the Grihya ritual, which proceeds from the description of the studentship to that of the marriage, as one which proceeds from the description of the marriage to that of the studentship. The Sam\u00e2vartana, which designates the end of the period of studentship, gives the Hindu the right and the duty to found a household 1. On the other hand, if the exposition begins with the marriage, there follows naturally the series of ceremonies which are to be performed up to the birth of a child, and then the ceremonies for the young child, which finally lead up to the Upanayana and a description of the period of studentship. The Hiranyakesi-s\u00fbtra alone, of the S\u00fbtras treated of in these translations, follows the first of the two orders mentioned 2; the other texts follow the other order,\nwhich has been already described by Prof. Max M\u00fcller almost thirty years ago, and we cannot do better than to give his description 1: 'Then (i.e. after the marriage) follow the Samsk\u00e2ras, the rites to be performed at the conception of a child, at various periods before his birth, at the time of his birth, the ceremony of naming the child, of carrying him out to see the sun, of feeding him, of cutting his hair, and lastly of investing him as a student, and handing him to a Guru, under whose care he is to study the sacred writings, that is to say, to learn them by heart, and 'to perform all the offices of a Brahmak\u00e2rin, or religious student.'\nIn this way we find, as a rule, in the foreground in the first part of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras this great group of acts which accompany the domestic life from marriage to the studentship and the Sam\u00e2vartana of the child sprung from wedlock. We find, however, inserted into the description of these ceremonies, in various ways in the different S\u00fbtras, the exposition of a few ritualistic matters which we have not yet mentioned. In the first place a description of the setting up of the sacred domestic fire, i.e. of the ceremony which in the domain of the Grihya ritual corresponds to the agny\u00e2dheya of the Srauta ritual. The setting up of the fire forms the necessary preliminary to all sacred acts; the regular time for it is the wedding 2, so that the fire used for the wedding acts accompanies the young couple to their home, and there forms the centre of their household worship. Accordingly in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras the description of the setting up of the fire stands, as a rule, at the beginning of the whole, not far from the description of the wedding.\nNext the introductory sections of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras have to describe the type of the Grihya sacrifice, which is universally available and recurs at all household ceremonies. This can be done in such a way that this type is described for itself, without direct reference to a particular sacrifice. This is the case in P\u00e2raskara, who in the first chapter of his\n[paragraph continues] S\u00fbtra describes the rites recurring at each sacrifice, and then remarks: 'This ritual holds good, whenever a sacrifice is offered 1.' Similarly \u00c2sval\u00e2yana, in one of the first chapters of his work, enumerates the rites which are to be performed 'whenever he intends to sacrifice 2.' Other texts give a general description of the Grihya sacrifice by exemplifying it by one special sacrifice. S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana 3 chooses for this the sacrifice which the bridegroom has to offer, when a favourable answer has been granted to his wooing; Gobhila 4 gives at least the greater part of the rules in question \u00e0 propos of the full moon and of the new moon sacrifice; Hiranyakesin 5, who opens his account at the period of the studentship of the young Br\u00e2hmana, describes the sacrificial type \u00e0 propos of the Upanayana rite.\nThe sacrifices which are to be offered daily at morning and at evening, those which are celebrated monthly on the days of the new moon and of the full moon\u2014the Grihya copies of the Agnihotra and of the Darsap\u00fbrnam\u00e2sa sacrifices\u2014and, thirdly, the daily distribution of the Bali offerings: these ceremonies are commonly described along with what we have called the first great group of the Grihya acts, immediately preceding or following the Viv\u00e2ha.\nWe find, as a second group of sacred acts, a series of celebrations, which, if the man has founded his household, are to be performed regularly at certain times of the year at the household fire. So the Srav\u00e2na sacrifice, which is offered to the snakes at the time when, on account of the danger from snakes, a raised couch is necessary at night. At the end of this period the festival of the re-descent is celebrated: the exchanging of the high couch for the low couch on the ground. Between these two festivals comes the Prish\u00e2taka offering on the full-moon day of the month \u00c2svayuga; it receives in the Grihya texts the place corresponding to that which actually belongs to\nit in the series of the festivals. As a rule 1 the acts we have just mentioned are followed, in accordance with the natural series, by the Ashtak\u00e2 festivals, which are celebrated during the last months of the year.\nAlongside of these acts which are connected with fixed points of the year we find in the various Grihya texts an account of a series of other ceremonies, which, in accordance with their nature, have no such fixed position in the system of the ritual. Thus, for instance, the rites which refer to the choice of a piece of ground to build a house or to the building itself; further, the rites connected with agriculture and cattle raising. In many texts we find together with this group of acts also an account of the ceremonies, related to fixed points in the year, which stand in connection with the annual course of Vedic study: the description of the opening festival and of the closing festival of the school term, as well as a point which generally follows these descriptions, the rules as to the anadhy\u00e2ya, i.e. as to the occasions which necessitate an intermission in the study of the Veda for a longer or for a shorter period. As a rule, the Grihya-s\u00fbtras bring the account of these things into the group of acts which refer to the household life of the Grihastha; for the Adhy\u00e2pana, i.e. the teaching of the Veda, held the first place among the rights and duties of the Br\u00e2hmana who had completed his time at school. On the other hand these ceremonies can naturally also be considered as connected with the school life of the young Hindu, and accordingly they are placed in that division by Gobhila 2, between the description of the Upanayana and that of the Sam\u00e2vartana.\nThe sacred acts connected with the burial and the worship of the dead (the various kinds of Sr\u00e2ddha rites) may be designated as a third group of the ceremonies which are described to us in the Grihya.-s\u00fbtras. Finally, a fourth group comprises the acts which are connected with the attainment of particular desires (k\u00e2my\u00e2ni). Among the\ntexts here translated we find a somewhat detailed account of these ceremonies in the Gobhila-s\u00fbtra and in the Kh\u00e2dira-Grihya only 1.\nThese remarks cannot claim to give a complete outline of the contents and arrangement of the Grihya texts; they only aim at giving an idea of the fundamental traits, which in each particular text are modified by manifold variations, but which nevertheless are to these variations as the rule is to the exceptions.\nWe must now speak of the relations of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras to the two other kinds of S\u00fbtra texts, with which they have so many points of contact in the Srauta-s\u00fbtras and the Dharma-s\u00fbtras.\nProf. B\u00fchler, in several places of the excellent introductions which he has prefixed to his translations of the Dharma-s\u00fbtras, has called attention to the fact that the relation in which the S\u00fbtra texts of the same school stand to each other is very different in different schools. Many schools possess a great corpus of S\u00fbtras, the parts of which are the Srauta-s\u00fbtra, the Grihya-s\u00fbtra, &c. This is, for instance, the case with the \u00c2pastamb\u00eeya school 2; its S\u00fbtra is divided into thirty Prasnas, the contents of which are divided as follows:\nXXV: Paribh\u00e2sh\u00e2s, &c.\nXXVI: Mantras for the Grihya-s\u00fbtra.\nXXVII: Grihya-s\u00fbtra.\nXXVIII-XXIX: Dharma-s\u00fbtra.\nXXX: Sulva-s\u00fbtra.\nIn other cases the single S\u00fbtra texts stand more independently side by side; they are not considered as parts of one and the same great work, but as different works. Of course it is the Dharma-s\u00fbtras above all which could be freed from the connection with the other S\u00fbtra texts to such an extent, that even their belonging to a distinct Vedic school may be doubtful. The contents\nof this class of S\u00fbtras indeed have hardly any connection with the subdivisions and differences of the Vedic texts handed down in the various schools; there was no reason why Brahmans, who studied various S\u00e2kh\u00e2s of the Veda, should not learn the ordinances concerning law and morals given in these S\u00fbtras as they were formulated in the same texts. The Grihya-s\u00fbtras are not so independent of the differences of the Vedic schools. The close analogy between the sacrificial ritual of the Grihya acts and that of the Srauta acts, and the consequent necessity of taking into account the Srauta ritual in the exposition of the Grihya ritual, necessarily brought the Grihya-s\u00fbtras into closer connection with and into greater dependence on the Srauta-s\u00fbtras than in the case of the Dharma-s\u00fbtras 1. But above all, the Grihya ceremonies demanded the knowledge of numerous Mantras, and accordingly as these Mantras were borrowed from the one or the ether Mantra S\u00e2kh\u00e2 2, there followed in the case of the Grihya text in question an intimate connection with the corresponding Mantra school 3. We find accordingly as a general rule, that each Grihya-s\u00fbtra presupposes a Vedic Samhit\u00e2, whose Mantras it quotes only in their Prat\u00eekas 4, and that besides each Grihya-s\u00fbtra presupposes a previous\nknowledge of the ritual which is acquired through the study of the proper Srauta-s\u00fbtra 1. It is not necessary to quote the numerous places where the Grihya-s\u00fbtras either expressly refer to the Srauta-s\u00fbtras, or point to them by repeating the same phrases or often even whole S\u00fbtras. It will be sufficient to quote one out of many places, the opening words of the \u00c2sval\u00e2yana-Grihya, which in a way characterise this work as a second part of the Srauta-s\u00fbtra: 'The rites based on the spreading (of the three sacred fires) have been declared; we shall declare the Grihya rites 2.'\nThus it is not difficult to perceive the dependence of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras on the Srauta-s\u00fbtras; but there remains the much more difficult question whether in each particular case both texts are to be regarded as by the same author, or whether the Grihya-s\u00fbtra is an appendix to the Srauta-s\u00fbtra composed by another author. Tradition accepts the one alternative for some S\u00fbtras; for other S\u00fbtras it accepts the other; thus in the domain of the Rig-Veda literature \u00c2sval\u00e2yana and S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana are credited with the authorship of a Srauta-s\u00fbtra as well as of a Grihya-s\u00fbtra; the same is true of \u00c2pastamba, Hiranyakesin, and other authors. On the other hand, the authorship of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras which follow the Srauta-s\u00fbtras of K\u00e2ty\u00e2yana, L\u00e2ty\u00e2yana, Dr\u00e2hy\u00e2yana, is not ascribed to K\u00e2ty\u00e2yana, L\u00e2ty\u00e2yana, Dr\u00e2hy\u00e2yana, but to P\u00e2raskara, Gobhila, and Kh\u00e2dir\u00e2k\u00e2rya.\nIt seems to me that we should consider the testimony of tradition as entirely trustworthy in the second class of cases. Tradition is very much inclined to ascribe to celebrated masters and heads of schools the origin of works which are acknowledged authorities in their schools, even though they are not the authors. But it is not likely that tradition should have made a mistake in the opposite\ndirection, that e.g. it should designate P\u00e2raskara as author when K\u00e2ty\u00e2yana himself was the author.\nWe shall not be able to trust so implicitly to tradition where it puts down the same author for the Grihya-s\u00fbtra as for the corresponding Srauta-s\u00fbtra; the possibility that such data are false is so large that we have to treat them as doubtful so long as we have not discovered certain proofs of their correctness. At present, so far as I can see, we are just as little justified in considering that such a proof has been made as we are able to prove the opposite state of things. It is easy to find the many agreements in contents and expression which exist, for instance, between the Srauta-s\u00fbtra and Grihya-s\u00fbtra of S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana, or between the Srauta-s\u00fbtra and the Grihya-s\u00fbtra of \u00c2sval\u00e2yana 1. But these agreements cannot be considered as sufficient proof that in each case the Grihya-s\u00fbtra and the Srauta-s\u00fbtra are by the same author. Even if the author of the Grihya-s\u00fbtra was not \u00c2sval\u00e2yana or S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana in person, still he must have been at all events perfectly familiar with the works of those teachers, and must have intended to fit his work to theirs as closely as possible, so that agreements of this kind can in no way astonish us 2. On the other hand, if the Srauta-s\u00fbtras and Grihya-s\u00fbtras are read together, it is easy to discover small irregularities in the exposition, repetitions and such like, which might seem to indicate different authors. But the irregularities of this kind which have been detected up to the present are scarcely of such\na character as not to be easily ascribable to mistakes and carelessness such as even a careful author may be guilty of in the course of a large work 1. It seems to me then that until the discovery of further circumstances throwing light on the question of the identity of the authors of the Srautas and of the Grihyas, it would be premature if we were to venture on a decision of this question in one direction or the other.\nProf. B\u00fchler's investigations have made perfectly clear the relation in which the Grihya-s\u00fbtras and the Dharma-s\u00fbtras stand to each other in those cases, where we have texts of both kinds by the same school. In the case of the Grihya-s\u00fbtra and the Dharma-s\u00fbtra of the \u00c2pastamb\u00eeyas he has proved 2 that both texts were the work of the same author according to a common plan, so that the Grihya-s\u00fbtra is as short and terse as possible, because \u00c2pastamba had reserved for the Dharma-s\u00fbtra a portion of the subject-matter generally treated of in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras. Besides there are references in each of the two texts to the other which strengthen the proof of their being written by the same author. In the S\u00fbtra collection of Hiranyakesin the state of things is different. Here, as Prof. B\u00fchler has also shown 3, we find numerous discrepancies between the Grihya and the Dharma-s\u00fbtra, which are owing to the fact, that while this teacher took as Dharma-s\u00fbtra that of \u00c2pastamba with some unessential changes, he composed a Grihya-s\u00fbtra of his own. Of the two S\u00fbtras of Baudh\u00e2yana, the same distinguished scholar, to whom we owe the remarks we have just mentioned, has treated in the Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxi.\nI believe that every reader who compares the two kinds of texts will notice that the frame within which the exposition of the Dharma-s\u00fbtras is inclosed, is an essentially\nbroader one than in the case of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras. We have here, I think, the same phenomenon that may also be observed, for instance, in the domain of the Buddhist Vinaya literature, where the exposition of the life of the community was at first given only in connection with the explanation of the list of sins (P\u00e2timokkha) which was promulgated every half month at the meetings of the spiritual brethren. It was not till later that a more comprehensive exposition, touching all the sides of the life of the community was attempted 1, an exposition which, on the one hand, no longer limited itself to the points discussed in the P\u00e2timokkha, and which, on the other hand, necessarily had much in common with what was laid down in the P\u00e2timokkha. The relation of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras and Dharma-s\u00fbtras seems to me to be of a similar nature. The Grihya-s\u00fbtras begin to treat of the events of the daily life of the household, but they do not yet undertake to exhaust the great mass of this subject-matter; on the contrary they confine themselves principally to the ritual or sacrificial side of household life, as is natural owing to their connection with the older ritualistic literature. Then the Dharma-s\u00fbtras take an important step further; their purpose is to describe the whole of the rights and customs which prevail in private, civic, and public life. They naturally among other things touch upon the ceremonies treated in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, but they generally merely mention them and discuss the questions of law and custom which are connected with them, without undertaking to go into the technical ordinances as to the way in which these ceremonies are to be performed 2.\nOnly in a few cases do portions treated of in the domain of the Dharma-s\u00fbtras happen to coincide with portions treated of in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras. Thus especially, apart from a few objects of less importance, the detailed rules for the behaviour of the Sn\u00e2taka and the rules for the interruptions\nof the Veda study (anadhy\u00e2ya) are generally treated in an exactly similar way in the texts of the one and those of the other category.\n___________________\nWe have spoken above of the metrical peculiarities of the Mantras quoted in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, the metre of which clearly proves what is indubitable from other reasons, that most, if not all, of these verses were composed at a perceptibly older period than the descriptions of the sacred acts in the midst of which they are inserted 1. A second kind of verses which are quoted in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras must be carefully distinguished from these. It is doubtful whether there are any to be found among them which the authors of the S\u00fbtras have themselves composed; but they were composed at a period decidedly more recent than those Mantras 2, and they therefore exhibit metrical peculiarities which are essentially different. The verses I mean are Slokas of ritual contents, which are quoted to confirm or to complete what is stated in the prose, and which are introduced by such expressions as tad apy \u00e2huh 'here they say also,' or tad api slok\u00e2h 'here there are also Slokas,' and other similar phrases 3.\nWe called attention above (p. xix) to the fact that a verse of this kind occurs in one of the Grihya chapters of the Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana, in a metre corresponding to the peculiarities of the older literary style. On the other hand, the verses appearing in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras differ only in a few cases from the standard of the later Sloka prosody, as we have it, e. g. in the Mah\u00e2bh\u00e2rata and in the laws of Manu. In the Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u00e4nd. Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvii, p. 67, I have given tables for the verses in question out of the S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana-Grihya, and these tables show that the characteristic ending of the first\n[paragraph continues] Sloka P\u00e2da for the later period , which, for instance, in the Nalop\u00e2khy\u00e2na of the Mah\u00e2bh\u00e2rata covers precisely five-sixths of all the cases, occurs in S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana in thirty cases out of thirty-nine, that is in about three quarters of the cases 1; S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana has still twice the ending which is the rule in the Rig-veda, but which is forbidden by the later prosody: prahutah pitrikarman\u00e2, uktv\u00e2 mantram sprised apah 2. It may be observed that a similar treatment of the Sloka metre appears also in the Rig-veda Pr\u00e2tis\u00e2khya of Saunaka. Here too the modern form of the ending of the first p\u00e2da dominates, although sometimes the old iambic form is preserved, e. g. II, 5 antahpadamvivrittayah, III, 6 anud\u00e2ttodaye punah.\nIt seems evident that we have in this Sloka form of the S\u00fbtra period, the last preparatory stage which the development of this metre had to traverse, before it arrived at the shape which it assumes in epic poetry; and it is to be hoped that more exhaustive observations on this point (account being especially taken of the numerous verses quoted in the Dharma-s\u00fbtras) will throw an important light on the chronology of the literature of this period lying between the Vedas and the post-Vedic age.\nWe add to these remarks on the Slokas quoted in the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, that we come upon a number of passages in the midst of the prose of the S\u00fbtras, which without being in any way externally designated as verses, have an unmistakable metrical character, being evidently verses which the authors of the S\u00fbtras found ready made, and which they used for their own aphorisms, either without changing them at all, or with such slight changes that the original form remained clearly recognisable. Thus we read in \u00c2sval\u00e2yana (Grihya I, 6, 8), as a definition of the R\u00e2kshasa marriage: hatv\u00e2 bhittv\u00e2 ka s\u00eersh\u00e2ni rudat\u00eem rudadbhyo\nharet: the approximation of these words to the Sloka metre cannot escape attention, and it is only necessary to make rudadbhyah and rudat\u00eem change places in order to obtain a regular Sloka hemistich. In Gobhila the S\u00fbtras I, 2, 21-27 represent three hemistichs, which with one exception (na ka sop\u00e2natkah kvakit) exactly conform to the laws of the Sloka metre. II, 4, 2 gives also a hemistich by slightly changing the order:\nSomewhat more remote from the original verses is the wording of the S\u00fbtras I, 6, 8. 9 na pravasann upavased ity \u00e2huh, patny\u00e2 vratam bhavat\u00eeti; we have the metrical order in one of the Slokas quoted by S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana (Grihya II, 17): nopav\u00e2sah prav\u00e2se sy\u00e2t patn\u00ee dh\u00e2rayate vratam.\nThe verses which are thus either expressly quoted, or at any rate made use of by the authors of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras, do not seem to be taken from connected metrical works any more than the yag\u00f1ag\u00e2th\u00e2s quoted in the Br\u00e2hmanas; on the contrary in a later period of literature, when texts similar to Manu's Code were composed, they evidently furnished these texts with some of their materials 2.\n_______________________________\nLeaving out of consideration the Kh\u00e2dira-Grihya, which is evidently a recast of the Gobhil\u00eeya-Grihya, and the S\u00fbtra of Hiranyakesin, which is, at least in part, based on that of \u00c2pastamba 3, we are not in regard to the other Grihya texts in a condition to prove that one of them borrowed from the other. It often happens that single S\u00fbtras or whole rows of S\u00fbtras agree so exactly in different texts that this agreement cannot be ascribed to chance; but this does not\u2014so far at least\u2014enable us to tell which text is to be looked upon as the source of the\nother, or whether they have a common source which has been lost.\nI will content myself with mentioning two such cases of agreement, in the one of which we can at least prove that a certain S\u00fbtra cannot originally spring from one of the texts in which we find it, while in the other case we are able by means of a possibly not too uncertain conjecture to reconstruct the opening S\u00fbtras of a lost Grihya-s\u00fbtra.\nThe description of the vrishotsarga (i.e. of the setting a bull at liberty) agrees almost word for word in the S\u00fbtras of S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana (III, 11), P\u00e2raskara (III, 9), and in the K\u00e2thaka-Grihya. In S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana we read:\n\u00a7 15: nabhyasthe\u093dnumantrayate mayobh\u00fbr ity anuv\u00e2kaseshena.\n('When the bull is in the midst of the cows, he recites over them the texts \"mayobh\u00fbh, &c.,\" down to the end of the Anuv\u00e2ka.')\nOn the other hand in P\u00e2raskara we have:\n\u00a7 7: nabhyastham abhimantrayate mayobh\u00fbr ity anuv\u00e2kaseshena.\n('When the bull is in the midst of the cows, he recites over it the texts \"mayobh\u00fbh, &c.,\" down to the end of the Anuv\u00e2ka.')\nThe quotation mayobh\u00fbh is clear, if we refer it to the Rig-veda. Hymn X, 169, which stands about in the middle of an Anuv\u00e2ka, begins with this word 1. On the other hand in the V\u00e2gasaneyi Samhit\u00e2 there is no Mantra beginning with Mayobh\u00fbh; we find this word in the middle of the Mantra XVIII, 45, and there follow verses whose use at the vrishotsarga would seem in part extremely strange. There can thus be no doubt that P\u00e2raskara here borrowed from a S\u00fbtra text belonging to the Rig-veda, a Prat\u00eeka, which, when referred to the V\u00e2gasaneyi Samhit\u00e2, results in nonsense.\nThe other passage which I wish to discuss here is P\u00e2raskara\n[paragraph continues] I, 4,1-5. P\u00e2raskara, being just on the point of describing the marriage ritual, prefixes a few sentences, the position of which here it is not very easy to understand. A general division of all P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as\u2014general remarks on the nature of the place for sacrificing: this looks very strange between a discussion of the Arghya and marriage ceremonies. Now these same sentences are found almost word for word and with the same passing on to the marriage ritual in S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana also (Grihya I, 5, 1-5). Here, as in other cases, we have the borrowing word for word of such portions of text from an older text, and, closely related to this phenomenon, the fact that the sentences in question are awkwardly woven into the context of the Grihya where we read them, and are poorly connected with the surrounding parts. Unless we are much deceived, we have here a fragment from an older source inserted without connection and without change. It would seem that this fragment was the beginning of the original work; for the style and contents of these S\u00fbtras are peculiarly appropriate for the beginning. Thus, if this conjecture is right, that old lost Grihya began with the main division of all the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as into four classes, and then proceeded at once to the marriage ritual. Later, when the texts which we have, came into existence, the feeling evidently arose, that in this way an important part of the matter had been overlooked. The supplementary matter was then inserted before the old beginning, which then naturally, as is to be seen in our texts, joins on rather strangely and abruptly to these newly-added portions.\nx:1 It is doubtful whether at the time of the Rig-veda the custom was established for the sacrificer to keep burning constantly a sacred Grihya fire besides the three Srauta fires. There is, as far as I know, no express mention of the Grihya fire in the Rig-veda; but that is no proof that it had then not yet come into use. Of the Srauta fires the g\u00e2rhapatya is the only one that is mentioned, though all three were known beyond a doubt. (Ludwig, Rig-veda, vol. iii, p. 355; in some of the passages cited the word g\u00e2rhapatya does not refer to the g\u00e2 hapatya fire.)\nx:2 Rig-veda X, 85. It is clear that what we have here is not a hymn intended to be recited all at once, but that, as in a number of other cases in the Rig-veda, the single verses or groups of verses were to be used at different points in the performance of a rite (or, in other cases, in the telling of a story). Compare my paper, '\u00c2khy\u00e2na-Hymnen im Rig-veda,' Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u00e4ndischen Gesellschaft, vol. xxxix, p. 83.\u2014Many verses of Rig-veda X, 85 occur again in the fourteenth book of the Atharva-veda.\nxi:1 Rig-veda X, 14-16, and several other hymns of the tenth book. Compare the note at \u00c2sval\u00e2yana-Grihya IV, 4. 6.\nxi:2 Compare my Hymnen des Rig-veda, vol. i (Prolegomena), pp. 265 seq.\nxi:3 Compare the account of the historical development of some of the Vedic metres which I have given in my paper, 'Das altindische \u00c2khy\u00e2na,' Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u00e4ndischen Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvii, and my Hymnen des Rig-veda, vol. i, pp. 26 seqq.\nxi:4 The Trishtubh and Gagat\u00ee offer a much less promising material for investigation, because, so far as can now be made out, the departures from the old type begin at a later period than in the case of the Anushtubh.\nxi:5 Compare Max M\u00fcller's introduction to his English translation of the Rig-veda, vol. i, pp. cxiv seq.\nxi:6 To demonstrate this, I have given in my last-quoted paper, p. 62, statistics with regard to the two hymns, Rig-veda I, 10 and VIII, 8; in the former the iambic ending of the first p\u00e2da obtains in twenty out of twenty-four cases, in the latter in forty-two out of forty-six cases.\nxii:1 Compare the statistics as to the frequency of the different metrical forms at the ending of the first p\u00e2da, p. 63 of my above-quoted paper, and Hymnen des Rig-veda, vol. i, p. 28. I have endeavoured in the same paper, p. 65 seq., to make it seem probable that this was the stage of prosody prevailing during the government of the two Kuru kings Parikshit and Ganamegaya.\nxiii:1 For instance, in the verses which occur in the well-known story of Sunahsepa (Aitareya-Br\u00e2hmana VII, 13 seq.).\nxiii:2 \u00c2sval\u00e2yana-Grihya I, 15, 2.\nxiii:3 Mantra-Br\u00e2hmana I, 5, 9; cf. Gobhila-Grihya II, 7, 21.\nxiv:1 \u00c2sval\u00e2yana-Grihya I, 21, 1. In P\u00e2raskara and in the Mantra-Br\u00e2hmana only the first hemistich has the Anushtubh form.\nxiv:2 Aitareya-Br\u00e2hmana VIII, 10, 9: etya grih\u00e2n pask\u00e2d grihyasy\u00e2gner upavisht\u00e2y\u00e2nv\u00e2rabdh\u00e2ya p. xv ritvig antatah kamsena katurgrih\u00eet\u00e2s tisra \u00e2gy\u00e2hut\u00eer aindr\u00eeh prapadam guhoti, &c.\nxv:1 Some of the places in which the St. Petersburg dictionary sees names of the Grihya fire in Br\u00e2hmana texts are erroneous or doubtful. Taittir\u00eeya Samhit\u00e2 V, 5, 9, 2, not grihya but gahya is to be read. Aup\u00e2sana, Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana XII, 3, 5, 5, seems not to refer to a sacrificial fire. Following the identity of aup\u00e2sana and sabhya maintained in the dictionary under the heading aup\u00e2sana, one might be tempted in a place like Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana II, 3, 2, 3 to refer the words ya esha sabh\u00e2y\u00e2m agnih to the domestic fire. A different fire is however really meant (K\u00e2ty\u00e2yana-Srauta-s\u00fbtra IV, 9, 20).\nxv:2 S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana I, 1, 1: p\u00e2kayag\u00f1\u00e2n vy\u00e2khy\u00e2sy\u00e2mah; I, 5, 1 =P\u00e2raskara I, 4, 1: katv\u00e2rah p\u00e2kayag\u00f1\u00e2 huto\u093dhutah prahutah pr\u00e2sita iti.\nxv:3 I, 4, 2, 10: sarv\u00e2n yag\u00f1\u00e2n . . . ye ka p\u00e2kayag\u00f1\u00e2 ye ketare.\nxv:4 I, 7, 1, 3: sarvena vai yag\u00f1ena dev\u00e2h suvargam lokam \u00e2yan, p\u00e2kayag\u00f1ena Manur asr\u00e2myat, &c.\nxv:5 I, 8, 1, 6 seq. The translation is that of Prof. Max M\u00fcller (India, what can it teach us? p. 135 seq.).\nxvi:1 It is true that, as far as I know, passages expressly stating this with regard to Pur\u00fbravas have not yet been pointed out in the Br\u00e2hmana texts; but the words in Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana XI, 5, 1, 14-17, and even in Rig-veda X, 95, 18 stand in close connection to this prominent characteristic of Pur\u00fbravas in the later texts.\nxvi:2 S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana I, 10, 5.\nxvi:3 II, 3, 1, 21.\nxvi:4 XIV, 9, 4, 18 = Brihad\u00e2ranyaka VI, 4, 19 (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xv, p. 220). Cf. Grihya-samgraha I, 114 for the expression sth\u00e2l\u00eep\u00e2k\u00e2vrit\u00e2 which is here used, and which has a technical force in the Grihya literature.\nxvii:1 See Grihya-samgraha I, 111. 112.\nxvii:2 The Grihya-s\u00fbtra of Baudh\u00e2yana is called Sm\u00e2rta-s\u00fbtra in the best known MS. of this work (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxx).\nxviii:1 Max M\u00fcller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, pp. 94-96.\nxviii:2 Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana XI, 5, 4.\nxviii:3 Max M\u00fcller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 359.\nxix:1 This is also the way in which S\u00e2yana understands the matter; he makes the following remark: tam hopaninya ity upanayanasya prastutatv\u00e2t taddharm\u00e2 asmin br\u00e2hmane nir\u00fbpyante.\nxix:2 Cf. above, p. xiv; below, p. xxxv.\nxix:3 Sect. 12 of the chapter quoted.\nxix:4 'The teacher becomes pregnant by laying his right hand (on the pupil for the Upanayana); on the third day he (i.e. the pupil) is born as a Br\u00e2hmana along with the S\u00e2vitr\u00ee (which is repeated to him on that day).'\nxix:5 It is not likely that verses of this kind are taken from more comprehensive and connected metrical texts.\nxix:6 Cf. on this point below, p. xxxv.\nxx:1 Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana XI, 5, 6, 1.\nxxi:1 Satapatha Br\u00e2hmana XIV, 9, 4, 17 = Brihad \u00c2ranyaka VI, 4, 18 (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xv, p. 219 seq.).\nxxi:2 Cf. Prof. Max M\u00fcller's notes to the passage quoted from the Brihad \u00c2ranyaka. I must mention in this connection a point touched upon by Prof. M\u00fcller, loc. cit. p. 222, note 1, viz. that \u00c2sval\u00e2yana, Grihya I, 13, 1, expressly calls 'the Upanishad' the text in which the Pumsavana and similar ceremonies are treated. It is probable that the Upanishad which \u00c2sval\u00e2yana had in mind treated these rites not as a duty to which all were bound, but as a secret that assured the realisation of certain wishes. This follows from the character of the Upanishads, which did not form a part of the Vedic course which all had to study, but rather contained a secret doctrine intended for the few.\nxxii:1 Similarly Gobhila: grihy\u00e2karm\u00e2ni.\nxxiii:1 I believe with Stenzler (see his translation of \u00c2sval\u00e2yana, pp. 2 seq.) that p\u00e2kayag\u00f1a means 'boiled offering.' It seems to me that the expression p\u00e2ka in this connection cannot be otherwise taken than in the word sth\u00e2l\u00eep\u00e2ka ('pot-boiling'). Prof. Max M\u00fcller (History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 203), following Hindu authorities, explains P\u00e2kayag\u00f1a as 'a small sacrifice,' or, more probably, 'a good sacrifice.' The definition of L\u00e2ty\u00e2yana may be also here quoted (IV, 9, 2): p\u00e2kayag\u00f1\u00e2 ity \u00e2kakshata ek\u00e2gnau yag\u00f1\u00e2n.\nxxiii:2 Compare, for instance, the account of the ceremonies which are to be performed for the journey of the newly-married pair to their new home, S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana-Grihya I, 15, or the observances to which the Sn\u00e2taka is bound, Gobhila III, 5, &c. According to the rule S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana I, 12, 13 we are, however, to suppose a sacrifice in many ceremonies where there does not seem to be any.\nxxiv:1 S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana I, 5, 1; 10, 7; P\u00e2raskara I, 4, 1. Doubtless Prof. B\u00fchler is right in finding the same division mentioned also Vasishtha XXVI, 10 (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. 128). \u00c2sval\u00e2yana (I, 1, s) mentions only three of the four classes.\nxxiv:2 In L\u00e2ty\u00e2yana (V, 4, 22-24) all the sacrifices are divided into seven Haviryag\u00f1a-samsth\u00e2s and into seven Soma-samsth\u00e2s, so that the P\u00e2kayag\u00f1as do not form a class of their own; they are strangely brought in as the last of the Haviryag\u00f1as. Cf. Indische Studien, X, 325.\nxxiv:3 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. 254.\nxxiv:4 Baudh\u00e2yana Grihya-s\u00fbtra, quoted by B\u00fchler, Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxi; cf. S\u00e2yana's Commentary on Aitareya-Br\u00e2hmana III, 40, 2 (p. 296 of Aufrecht's edition).\nxxiv:5 Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxii.\nxxv:1 Hiranyakesin says: sam\u00e2vritta \u00e2k\u00e2ryakul\u00e2n m\u00e2t\u00e2pitarau bibhriy\u00e2t, t\u00e2bhy\u00e2m anug\u00f1\u00e2to bh\u00e2ry\u00e2m upayakkhet.\nxxv:2 The same may be said with regard to two other Grihya texts which also belong to the black Yagur-veda, the M\u00e2nava and the K\u00e2thaka. See Jolly, Das Dharmas\u00fbtra des Vishnu and das K\u00e2thakagrihyas\u00fbtra, p. 75; Von Bradke, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u00e4nd. Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvi, p. 445.\nxxvi:1 History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 204.\nxxvi:2 See, for instance, P\u00e2raskara I, 2, 1: \u00e2vasathy\u00e2dh\u00e2nam d\u00e2rak\u00e2le.\nxxvii:1 I, 1, 5: esha eva vidhir yatra kvakid dhomah.\nxxvii:2 I, 3, 1: atha khalu yatra kva ka hoshyant sy\u00e2t, &c.\nxxvii:3 I, 7-10.\nxxvii:4 I, 6 seq.\nxxvii:5 I, 1.\nxxviii:1 Not in S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana, who describes the Ashtak\u00e2s before these sacrifices.\nxxviii:2 III, 3.\nxxix:1 Gobhila IV, 5 seq.; Kh\u00e2d. IV, 1 seq.\nxxix:2 B\u00fchler, Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, pp. xi seq.\nxxx:1 Professor Jolly in his article on the Dharma-s\u00fbtra of Vishnu, p. 71, note 1, points out that in the eyes of Hindu commentators also the Dharma-s\u00fbtras differ from the Grihya-s\u00fbtras in that the former contain rather the universal rules, while the latter contain the rules peculiar to individual schools. Cf. Weber, Indische Literaturgeschichte, 2. Aufl., S. 296.\nxxx:2 It seems as though the choice of the Mantras which were to be prescribed for the Grihya ceremonies had often been intentionally made so as to comprise as many Mantras as possible occurring in the Mantra-S\u00e2kh\u00e2, which served as foundation to the Grihya texts in question.\nxxx:3 When Govindasv\u00e2min (quoted by B\u00fchler, Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xiii) designates the Grihyas\u00e2str\u00e2ni as sarv\u00e2dhik\u00e2r\u00e2ni, this should not be understood literally. In general it is true the Grihya acts are the same for the disciples of all the Vedic schools, but the Mantras to be used in connection with them differ.\nxxx:4 In the introduction to Gobhila I have treated of the special case where a Grihya-s\u00fbtra, besides being connected with one of the great Samhit\u00e2s, is connected also with a Grihya-samhit\u00e2 of its own, so to speak, with a collection of the Mantras to be used at the Grihya acts.\nxxxi:1 In the domain of the Atharva-veda literature alone we find this relation reversed; here the Srauta-s\u00fbtra (the Vait\u00e2na-s\u00fbtra) presupposes the Grihya-s\u00fbtra (the Kausika-s\u00fbtra). Cf. Prof. Garbe's preface to his edition of the Vait\u00e2na-s\u00fbtra, p. vii. This relation is not extraordinary, considering the secondary character of the Vait\u00e2na-s\u00fbtra.\nxxxi:2 Ukt\u00e2ni vait\u00e2nik\u00e2ni, grihy\u00e2ni vakshy\u00e2mah.\nxxxii:1 The parallel passages from the Srauta-s\u00fbtra and the Grihya-s\u00fbtra of the M\u00e2navas are brought together in Dr. Von Bradke's interesting paper, 'Ueber das M\u00e2nava-Grihya-s\u00fbtra,' Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u00e4nd. Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvi, p. 451.\nxxxii:2 For this reason I cannot accept the reasoning through which Prof. B\u00fchler (Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xiv) attempts to prove the identity of the author of the Srauta-s\u00fbtra and of the Dharma-s\u00fbtra of the \u00c2pastamb\u00eeya school. B\u00fchler seems to assume that the repetition of the same S\u00fbtra, and of the same irregular grammatical form in the Srauta-s\u00fbtra and in the Dharma-s\u00fbtra, must either be purely accidental, or, if this is impossible, that it proves the identity of the authors. But there remains a third possible explanation, that the two texts are by different authors, one of whom knows and imitates the style of the other.\nxxxiii:1 Cf. my remarks in the introduction to the S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana-Grihya, vol. xxix, pp. 5, 6.\nxxxiii:2 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xiii seq.\nxxxiii:3 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxiii seq.\nxxxiv:1 In the work which has Khandhak\u00e2 as its general title and which has been transmitted to us in two parts, Mah\u00e2vagga and Kullavagga.\nxxxiv:2 Compare, for instance, the explanations concerning the Upanayana in the Dharma-s\u00fbtras (\u00c2pastamba I, 1; Gautama I) with the corresponding sections of the Grihya-s\u00fbtras.\nxxxv:1 We do not mean to deny that among these verses too a few of especially modern appearance are to be found; e.g. this is true of the verses which Dr. Von Bradke has quoted from the M\u00e2nava-Grihya II, 24, 34 (Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl\u00e4nd. Gesellschaft, vol. xxxvi, p. 429).\nxxxv:2 Let me here refer to the fact that one of these verses (\u00c2sval\u00e2yana-Grihya IV, 7, 16) concludes with the words, 'thus said Saunaka.'\nxxxv:3 \u00c2sval\u00e2yana-Grihya I, 3, so designates such a verse as yag\u00f1ag\u00e2th\u00e2.\nxxxvi:1 The few verses which are found in Gobhila preserve the same metrical standard as those quoted in S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana; it follows that in Gobhila IV, 7, 23, asvatth\u00e2d agnibhayam br\u00fby\u00e2t, we cannot change br\u00fby\u00e2t in ka, as Prof. Knauer proposes. The supernumerary syllable of the first foot is unobjectionable, but the form of the second foot should not be touched.\nxxxvi:2 Both passages are to be found in S\u00e2\u1e45kh\u00e2yana-Grihya I, 10.\nxxxvii:1 The text has: = nad\u00ees ka visham\u00e2ni ka mah\u00e2vriksh\u00e2n smas\u00e2nam ka.\nxxxvii:2 Cf. Indische Studien, XV, 11. We do not mean to imply anything as to the metrical portions of other S\u00fbtra texts than the Grihya-s\u00fbtras. As regards some verses quoted in the Baudh\u00e2yana-Dharma-s\u00fbtra, Prof. B\u00fchler (Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xli) has shown that they are actually borrowed from a metrical treatise on the Sacred Law.\nxxxvii:3 Cf. Prof. B\u00fchler's remarks, Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxiii.\nxxxviii:1 In the Taittir\u00eeya Samhit\u00e2 (VII, 4, 17) mayobh\u00fbh is the beginning of an Anuv\u00e2ka; the expression anuv\u00e2kaseshena would have no meaning if referred to this text.","title":"Grihya Sutras, Part 2 (SBE30): Introduction to the Gri...","type":"page"}