Sambodhi 1976 Vol 05

SR No.: 520755
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1976
Total Pages: 416
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 12 MB

Page 27

Madhava's Rgvedavyakhya and the system of galitas
You (are) the Hotṛ appointed by Manus, the bearer of offerings through your mouth, the better knower (of Hotp's office), O Agni do you perform sacrifice to the divine clans
25
4,5 On 1.16.3,25 he says
(1) indram id devatataye ity atrad hvarasabdak sarvasvamin yajne vartate tasmat sa (pado na) visrştah |
(11) Indram somasya pitaye stamaik ity asyam prathamaḥ pādo na vistilah | sa hy aparyavasanarthah | kuvid a gamat iti śravanad api cendram ity apurnom |
(i) prdakusanur yajataḥ ity atra indram somasya pitaye iti na śrjyate | sapekso hi sa padah | yadi va indra(m) ity aśvaviseṣanam |
(IV) tam v abhi prarcata ity atra indram somasya pitaye iti na sṛştah | tam evety atra tatparyad aparyavasıtarthatvac ca /20
(i) In (the rc) indram id (835),27 the word adhuara 19 used in (the sense of) the whole of a sacrifice. Therefore, that (foot is not) omitted (in the Pp).
(i) In (the Pp of the rc) indram somasya (3.42.4), the first foot is not omitted. For, indeed, that (foot) has not conveyed a complete sense. Also on account of the hearing (1. e mention) of kuvid agamat-an added sentence-(the word) indram is not complete (by itself).
(ii) In (the Pp of the r) prdakusanur. (8.17.15),29 (the foot) indram somasya...is not omitted. For that foot is expectant (of some additional matter to complete its sense). Or perhaps indram (could be) an adjective of alvam (in the rc).
(iv) In (the Pp of the re) tam v abhi...(8,92.5), not omitted on account of its bearing upon tam eva plete sense.'
(the foot) indram...is and also its incom
This comment is interesting in ways more than one. Thus, the remark (1) pertains to the 2nd foot of 1.16 3, while the remarks (i), (ii) and (iv) pertain to the 3rd foot of the same verse. Again, neither of the passages under (ii) and (iv) can be considered as a repetition of the passage under (li), nor can the passage under (iv) be taken as a repetition of that under (iii). All this recomes clear in the light of the translation of all the relevant passages, of course, under the lead of Sakalya-as Madhava would have it thus:
1.16.5
We invite Indra in the morning (1.e. at the morning libation), (we invite) Indra in the sacrifice that is going on (i. e. at the mid-day and evening libations), We invite Indra for the drink of Soma, Sambodhi 5.1