English
It is a characteristic peculiarity of the Siitras, that they were intended by their authors for more than one Charana, or adapted to more than one l§&kh&. This is remarked upon by EumlLrila, when he says: ^^ All authors of Ealpa-s^tras join with the rules of their own j§fi.kh&, tlxe optional command- ments of other S&kh&s, a proceeding approved of by Jaimini."^ Or again, "Not one of the SAtrak&ras was satisfied with comprehending his own j§&kh& only." ^ The same is maintained still more strongly by the author of the Hiranyake&i-bhfi,shya. "No single i§&khd," he says, " contains a complete account of the ceremonial, and a reference to other S&khSs is absolutely necessary." ® That this means a reference to other iSakh&s of the same Veda, and not a reference to other Vedas, may be seen from a passage of EauSika K&ma^, where he establishes the general principle, Kum&rila, i. 3. i^ ! 1 4j( 1 pf^^ 1^ | (ij ail^^lfK^Ml- f^rft^l ^<K1 f^^ref^ ^ Tpr t^*f^dl^tl Kum&rila, ii. 4. 2. il ^ 4jL^*KIHil4<fM ^ff^ KALPA. 179 that in a SMra a quotation from a different S&Midr makes a rule optional, whereas a quotation from a different Veda confirms it as generally binding- It was not usual that a common Brahman knew more than one i§&kh&. He might, if he liked, study each of the three Yedas, but, as Eumftrila says : ^^ It is not necessary that one man should read different S&kh&s, because one j§&khd. only is comprehended in that study of the sacred texts which every Brahman is bound to pass through. Therefore, if a very clever man should read different i§akh&s of one Yeda, he may do so, but he might as well, if very rich, sacrifice at the same time with rice and barley."^ But, even if a Brahman had studied the Sanhitfts and Brd^hmanas of the three Yedas, according to their various S&kh&s, he would still have found it extremely difficult to learn from them the correct performance of every sacrifice. It was, therefore, in order to 1 Kumarila, T. V. ii. ; Jaimini Sdtra, ii. 4. 2. a(|4$|ift<im€|4| "Trerr t% ^ 'infill ?i?r^ ^ •n^ifri^^v^if^fetf^^i- ^qt^pi f^%^4^l?Tlt This does not exclude, however, the obli- gation of reading different Yedas. 9f <ef^ q^^Mi^^l^^^ ^ ^t^ <reT ^^HV^nai ^T^ ^f^ W^W See also Mitak- shara, p. 17. a. b. Tt^rHP§rRR^^ ^?[1jn7T: H n 2 180 KALPA. obviate this difficulty, that the Sutras were called into existence, as a kind of grammar of the Vedic cere- monial, useful for members of all Gharanas. The Ealpa-sMras for the Hotri priests, which were composed by Aival&yana, were intended both for the l§akala- and B&shkala-fi&kh&s \ and they contain occasional references to other Charanas also. S&- yana, in his introduction to the Rig-veda (i. p. 34.) says distinctly, that ASvalllyana teaches the employ- ment of hymns, which do not occur in the S&kala- feftkhfi,. " These," he says, " have been taken from an- other l^kh&, and their employment, therefore, rests on the authority of a different Br&hmana, although the sacrifice itself (karma) must be considered as one and the same for all i§4kh&s, in spite of some differences in its performance (prayoga)."^ There is a second, and more ancient, collection of S&tras for the Hotri priests, written by S&nkhAyana. They were intended for members of the Eaushitaki- ^kh&, a ^&khk of which we still possess the Br&hmana and the Aranyaka. The Br&hmana is sometimes quoted under the name of the l§d.nkh&yana-br&hmana, in the same manner as the Aitareya is sometimes ^jf^rrer irr^rero *tiH^^ ^nm^i^ei^^^mfju^wi- H'Rf fTi? WtTHr^l N&iAjana Gargya's Commentary on Alvalajana. Hiranyakefii-bh­a; ^T^in^TTHW^r^ flJ^ ^flT- KALPA, 181 quoted as ASvalftyana-br^hmana. This S&nkh&yana text of the Eaushitaki-br&hmana may be more mo- dem than the Aitareya-br^hmana, but the Siitras of S&nkh&yana are more ancient than the Siitras of Ai* val&yana. The Siitras for the Adhvaryu priests were composed by E&ty&yana, and adopted by the K^va and M&- dhyandina-lS&kh&s.^ The ceremonial of the UdgAtri priests who followed the Sltma-veda, was likewise composed by authors who were free from the exclusive influence of one par- ticular S&kh&. The L&tyd.yana-siitras were not origi- nally the S&tras of a L&ty&yana-64kh&, but they were written by Ll^ty&yana, and afterwards adopted by the numerous branches of the Kauthuma-6dkh&. Another collection of Siitras, almost identical with the former, was composed by Dr&hy&yana, and was adopted by the different Charanas of the Mnftyantyas.^ Both Siitras follow the same authority, the TdBdya-br&hmana, its old as well as its more modem portion, and they quote not only the traditional literature of various Charanas, such as the id&tyftyanins, j§&lankd.yanins, but the works of individuals also, such as S^dilya, S&n- dily&yana, Dhdnanjaya, Kautsa, Kshairakalambhin, two Gautamas, Bh&ndit&yana,' R&n&yaniputra, L&ma- k&yana, Sauchivrikshi, &c.^ ' <)l4<ir>^<r>; ^il¥l^iX**i^ll Mahadeva'sCommeDtarjonthe Hiranjake^i-siitra. > In a MS. of the Dr&hy&jana-siitrasy £. L H. 363. thej are caUed <|H!l*|piaH4Sn*i l^lVl4V!4ll^li ' See Weber, YorlesuDgen, p. 74. The Kauthumafl seem to be a later Charana than the E&n&janijas. Lafyajana quotes a Banayaniputra ; Elauthumas are quoted in the Pushpa-siitra. K 3 tlie Sutras were adopted by di£- existing previous to the composition 1 although the author of a new code limself become the founder of a new , the text of these short rules seems anged. The text of the A6val&yana- ad the same for a follower of the old . or Aitareyi-SakhAs. We meet with dricB lectiones as we do in the Br&h- i as the time of SA-yana the various Br&hmanas were known, and he refers itly in his Commentary on the Aita- Nothing of the kind ever occurs taries on the SAtras ; still less were le to those more important changes manas underwent, as they became the met Charanas or sects, xgument, therefore, by which he en- establish a distinction between the i SMras^, is fully confirmed by those •an still be discovered by philological have only to translate what he calls ion, by "ancient literature handed down )n," and the distinction between Br&h- i, and SMras, as smriti, holds perfectly is no doubt a distinction to be made manner in which the hymns and the ^th included under the name of 6ruti, ^^fi^l%iHHA\M^\\ "The mistake of sup- ^a be Brahmanas, wliich arose from their iden- J ^KJcasiomil literal coincidences^ has thxLB been KALFA. 183 were preserved, Biit, in sjute of Wolfs maxim, that prose literature marks everywhere the introduction of writing, we must claim for the Br&hmanas, as well as for the hymns, a certain period during which they were preserved by means of oral tradition only. With- out the admission of an oral tradition, carried on for several generations and in several places by different families and Brahmanic colonies, it would seem im- possible to account for the numerous recensions of the same Br&hmana, and for the various readings of each recension. How the changes, the additions, the rearrangements of the original collections of the Brd.hmanas were effected, we have no means of ascer- taining ; but we can see, that the E&nva and M&dhy- andina recensions of the iSathapata-brd^hmana pre- suppose some point from whence they both started in common. The same applies to the Bahvricha- br&hmana in the ^dely di^ering recensions of the Aitareyins, the l§&nkh&yanins or the Kaushitakins. There is a common stock in the Brfthmanas of each Veda. The same ceremonial is described, the same doubts are raised, similar solutions are proposed, and many chapters are repeated in the same words. Before each recension took its present shape — and few only of these numerous recensions have been pre- served to us — they must have rolled from hand to hand, sometimes losing old, sometimes gathering new matter ; now broken to pieces, now rearranged, till at last the name of their author became merged in the name of the Charana that preserved his work. !No traces of this kind can be discovered in the Siitras. We probably read them in our MSS. exactly as they were written down at first by K&ty&yana, A6val&yana and others. They are evidently the works of indivi- 4 184 EALPA. dual writers, the result of careful and S3^stematic re- search. They presuppose the Sanhit&s and the iS&khds of the SanhitdiS ; they presuppose the Br&hmanas and the S&kh&s of the Brfthmanas.