________________
from this that the Paippalāda Samhitä existed in its present form, at any rate, in the second century B.C.
4.5 The Aitareya Brāhmana transgresses Pāņini's rules in containing itarad, nominative avām (3.1), and several neuter Tatpuruşa compounds in -an (3.2). It is also interesting that AB 7.17 has the periphrastic perfect amantrayam äsa, as opposed to P.3.1.40, which allows only ky in such formations (Keith 1936, 747). We also find optatives in (aylita instead of (ay)eta (Renou 1940, 11), and the ending -ai for both genitive and ablative -as (Caland 1927, 50), not prescribed by Pāņini.
By way of exception some older arguments adduced by Keith (1920, 42.) to determine the date of the Aitareya Brāhmana will be reviewed here (see also Bronkhorst 1982, 276). The language of this Brāhmana is said to be "decidedly older than the Bhäşā of Pāņini," on the basis of Liebich's Pānini (1891). The circularity of Liebich's arguments has been shown elsewhere (Bronkhorst 1982, 275f.). The fact that Yāska knew the Aitareya Brähmana is irrelevant, since it is very likely that he is later than Panini (Bronkhorst 1984, 8f.). The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa contains indications that it knew the Rgveda before the completion of the orthoepic diaskeuasis but this implies nothing in view of the fact that the orthoepic diaskeuasis of the Rgveda was not completed until long after Pāṇini (Bronkhorst 1981). The absence of reference to metempsychosis must be viewed against the background of the unwillingness of orthodox Brahmanism to let these ideas find entrance into their sacred texts even at a time when they had become generally known and widely accepted (Bronkhorst 1989, 125).
4.6 The other Brahmanas that are considered early are the Kausitaki Brāhmana, Pancavimsa Brähmana, Jaiminiya Brähmana, and Sata patha Brāhmana (Renou 1957, 14). We can be brief about them..
The Kausitaki Brähmana has a number of forbidden words: saprabhyti, sodarka, and itarad, besides many neuter Tatpuruşa compounds in -an and at least one in -as. Like the Aitareya Brāhmana, it has optatives in (ay)ita and -ai for -ās.
The Pañcavimsa Brahmana, too, has saprabhyti and sodarka, as well as nominative yuvām, and many neuter Tatpuruşa compounds in -an.
The Jaiminiya Brähmana goes against Panini's grammar in having itarad, many neuter Tatpuruşa compounds in -an and -as, ubhayatodanta and anyatodanta, and masculine sisira.
The Satapatha Brāhmana deviates from Panini's grammar in the words itarad, nominative avām, akārsih, sabhya, an accusative rather than a genitive for the object of preşya, many neuter Tatpuruşa compounds in -an, ubhayatodanta, genitive plural -grāmanyam, and masculine sisira.
The Kānva version of the Sata patha Brāhmana, finally, deviates in fewer respects, containing a few neuter Tatpuruşa compounds in -an and -as, ubhayatodanta and anyatodanta, an accusative rather than a genitive for the object of preşya, and masculine sifira.
5. The above considerations must be treated with caution. For one thing, it is not known in any detail what changes were made in the texts during the process we refer to as their worthoepic diaskeuasis." This implies that we cannot be altogether sure what features of those texts can
102
103
