Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 201

On Vedic Duroņā
47
(ii) The Asvină also visit the place of sacrifice of a sacrificer: yena gácchathah sukrto duronám.(the chariot on which, you Asvinā) go to the place of sacrifice of the pious' (1.117.2, also 1.183.1; 4.13.1); tám påtam å gatan duroné' (oh Asvinā, drink that (soma), come to this place of sacrifice' (3.58.9); the sacrificer directs the Aśvină to his sacrificial enclosure as distinct from his house: imé gyhá aśvinedám duronam'these are our houses, oh Aśvinā, this the place of sacrifice' (5.76.4); if not soma, it is milk that is ritually made hot which awaits the Aśvina (átäpi gharmó mánuşo duroné'gharma drink has been heated in the sacrificial place of the man 8.87.2; also Cf. 10.40.13.
6. Since duronáa guest house' has also come to mean 'a sacrificial place', a special house of Agni, the átithi, the word, in a few places, seems to mean 'ones own special place'. Thus in 3.14.3 the dawn and the night are said to step into their respective special houses (uşáså ..... ä ..... lasthatur durone).5
Similarly in 7.60.5 we are told that the three Adityas, Varuņa, Mitra and Aryaman, grow in the special house of truth which is in the highest heaven (imá stásva vāvīdhur duroņé 7.60.5).
7. Comments on P. Thiemes paper 'Duroņá-n.' published in "Amrtadhārā” (Dr. R.N. Dandekar Felicitation Volume) 1984, pp. 435-444.
Thieme proposes to see in oná of duroņá, analysed as dur-oná, a stem onā which he considers to be a cognate of Greek eune bedstead'. In that case duronáprimarily would mean '(a house/home] offering a bad bedstead'.
Thieme is conscious of the fact that this etymological explanation conflicts with the notion of comfort that is otherwise associated with duroņá, e.g. in 7.42.4 where a guest is said to rest in a good lap of the duroná belonging is a rich person (reváto duroné syonasir átithih). Thieme's attempt to get over this difficulty by assuming that this way a host is only modestly describing his house to his guest as a place of discomfort' is not likely to succeed.
My comments on his paper follow:
1. p. 435: Thieme cites Yaska's explanation of duroņá (Nir. 4.5): durņa iti grhanāma duravā bhavanti dustarpāņand translates it as: "durone'is a name of the house (grhas). It (the house) is difficult to be helped, that is:) difficult to be satisfied". It is not clear why Thieme renders duravah 'as difficult to be helped'. Yaska's dustarpāḥ is only a paraphrase of duravāḥ and hence both the expressions have to be translated alike. This means Yāska's av - = trp-6
Thieme's translation of Durga's remark given in f.n. I on p. 435 is also not accurate. The translation should have started as: "And it is said ......" In the commentary of Durga available to me the words grham upakramya, given by Thieme, do not occur.
2. p. 435: While rejecting the old etymology of ona in duroņá from the root av 'to satisfy' Thieme says that difficult to be satisfied (by food and drink) does not recommend itself as a designation of a house. That is correct. But it would certainly be an apt designation of a guest house, where guests, notoriously difficult to be satisfied, are accomodated.
3. p. 436: In support of his derivation of duroni given above Thieme cites the paraphrase of this word given in the Satapatha Brāhmana6.7.3.11: duronasád visamasád ity etát and translates it as: "duronasát, that is 'taking his seat in an inconvenient / uncomfortable place/house". This does not seem to be correct. Visamaśát here means 'taking his seat in different places'. This is shown by the fact that according to the
Madhu Vidyā/176