________________
308
VAIDIC AUTHORITY FOR THE
rect from the text of the Taittiriya Sanhitá itself; they are a quotation of a quotation, and, as in the case of the passage of the Rigveda, which has given rise to this discussion, we know that quotations cannot always be trusted. The Pandits should have made a reference to the Taittiriya Sanlitá itself, and have given us chapter and verse for the passages; we should then be able to test their accuracy by collation with the printed text when complete. In the next place, the quotation occurs in an Upanishad, the Yajniki, or Náráyaniya: the Upanishad period is of doubtful determination, because the Upanishads, which are numerous, one list enumerating above a hundred, are evidently of widely different dates, and not unfrequently of equivocal character. The Náráyaniya Upanishad is not altogether wexceptionable, for it constitutes the tenth Prapathaka, or section, of what is usually considered a Brahmana, the Taittiriya Arańyaka; Sáyana calls it even khilarúpá, or of the nature of an additional or supplementary section, so that it is scarcely acknowledged to be a part of the original Aranyaka*
Upon referring to the manuscripts of the library of the India House, another difficulty arises; neither text nor comment consists of more than 64 anuvákas, whilst the verses quoted by Rádhákánt are said to be taken from the 84th anuváka; consequently no such verses could be expected to be found in our copy,
* [See A. Weber, Ind. Stud., 1, 75 ff.]
