________________
A. WEZLER
SANSKRIT PRĀNABHRT
44.
25.
46. 47.
50.
1954, p. 17 and 25. As for the syntax, I take prdnablstah to be used predicatively here and would hence translate it literally "in as much as they are supporters of breath'. The Veda of the Black Yajur School entitled Taittiriya Sanhita..., Pt. I (HOS 18), Cambridge, Mass. 1914, p. 255. Cf. R.P. Das, Das Wissen von der Lebensspanne der Bäume. Surapalas Vikşdiyurveda ... Stuttgart 1988, pp. 284[f., 289, 324, 444, 446 and 450. C. W. Caland, 'Eine dritte Mitteilung über das Vädhülasutra" in 40 IV (1926), p. 162 = Kleine Schriften hrsg. von M. Witzel, Stuttgart 1990, p. 345. The fact that the indicative is used, and not another mood, does not, of course, diminish the probability that what is ultimately intended is a plea (the essential difference being that the indicative expresses the idea that the plea has already being fulfilled: hope dressed as certitude, a significant element of religious speech). Cr. Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altindische Grammatik III - Göttingen 1931, p. 65. As for parallel passages, cf. Brahmanoddhara-kosah (Brahmanic Citations) ....Hoshiapur 1966, p. 96. Cf.eg. the book just mentioned in fn. 31. p.93ff. Cf. also SB 8.1.2.11. Eg. SB 8.2.3.1ff. Cf. Kāhs 20.9 and Kap 31.11. This is Keith's translation, o... (fn. 26), p. 415. On which see also ŚB 5.3.2.2(.). Note that according to Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altindische Grammatik II.2. p. 412f. this name is however derived from apas, 'work'. Cr. also MS 3.2.8 and Kaths 20.9. This is a basically correct zoological observation as the normal sequence of steps of terrestrial vertebrates) is right foreleg, left hind leg, left foreleg. right hind leg of. D. Müller-Schwarze, "Fortbewegung bei Tieren" in: Praktikum der Verhaltensforschung. hrsg. von Stokes u. Immelmann, Frankfurt-New York 1978, p. 8-14. That is to say, I don't think that prānabhrt was coined as an insider word for a colcrie of the Icarned. Scce.g. the passages discussed above in section 2.1. The Aitareya Aranyaka..., Oxford 1909, p. 216. Who explains: - osadhivanaspatinam annatam pranabhrtām manusegavisvadinami bhoktfam , ca loke prasiddham iti dyolayitur hifabdahl.
The spacing is mine. - Note that eg. TS 2.2.6.3 shows that the expression ubhayadat as such may refer to man, too, but that its (narrower) meaning is made clear here by the subsequent punisasyānuvidhd vihitas. Cr. also, though rather with regard to later developments of the dichotomy "food" and 'eater', R. Geib's article "Food and Eater in Natural Philosophy of Early India', JORI, Baroda, XXV, 3-4 (1976), 221-235. Quoted from A.B. Keith, o.c. (n. 41), p. 216f. C. e.g. R.N. Dandekar's contribution ("Der Mensch im Denken des Hinduismus") to the book Sein als Offenbaring in Christentum und Hinduismus, hrsg. v. A. Bstch, Mödling 1984, p. 139-179. Although man is conspicuous by his absence on the next, i.e. third, level (for which see the continuation of the passage quoted by me). Should one perhaps read amtam instead? On which cf. K.R. Norman, "Eleven Pali Etymologies', JPTS XV (1987), p. 396. and L. Schmithausen's monograph "Plants as Sentient Beings in Earliest Buddhism published 1991 in Tokyo by The International Institute for Buddhist Studies; see also below fn. 65. Quite in contradistinction to the corresponding word in Pali. Cf. c.g. also Mahabharata (Poona) 12.326.34:
na vind dhdusarghátam sariram bhavati kvacit/
na ca jivan vina brahman dhatavaf cestayanty utall. of the passages referred to in the Larger Petrograd Dictionary it is the following ones which have to be mentioned in this connection: Susrutasamhita I 175.3 (ie. Sūtrasthāna 45.48), Sprüche): 2599 and 3709, Varāh. BS 7.5 and Prabodhacandrodaya 35.18 (= 232). Man alone is, however, meant in Sprüche) 1299 and Varāh. BS 67.97 (68.96). ar. also Yuktidipikā (ed. Pandeya), p. 8 1. 261:... yeyam asati višese sarvaprānabhrtdm durereva bhagavato duhkhatrayābhighätabuddhir bhavati ... where the meaning "man'. even if it is not the only one intended, is yet what the author primarily has in view; cf. also YD p. 38 L. 17. Varah, BS 8.14 could be referred to here; yet Manu 5.28 has to be mentioned, too, in that it reads:
pranasyānnam idam sarvam prajapatir akalpayat
sthåvaran jarigaram caiva sarvani pranasya bhojanam II. (It has only been briefly mentioned by L. Alsdorf, Beiträge zur Geschichte von Vegetarismus und Rindervereining in Indien, Wiesbaden 1962, p. (20) = 576, but would in my view deserve closer a study.)
32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38.
52
53.
54.
39.
55.
40.
41.
