English
It is hardly necessary to remark that at the time when the Aranyakas were written, the hymns of the Sanhitfts were not only known, but known in the same form in which we now possess them.^ The Rig-veda is quoted as a whole, and as consisting of ten Mandalas. Though the name of Mandala is not used, the names assigned to each of the ten books are the same as those used in the Anukramanis, and they follow each other in the same succession. Nay, these names had evidently been current for some time before, for the author of the Aranyaka assigns the most extraordinary etjonologies to them, and uses them in support of the wildest speculations. He first mentions the Satarchins or the poets of the first Mandala. He then comprehends the poets of Mandala U. to IX. under the common name of the M& dhyamas, assigning to the poets of the tenth and last Mandala the name of Eshudras^tas and Mah&siiktas. The middle books are enumerated more in detail under their usual names, Gritsamada, (ii.), Yi^v&mitra (iii.)) V&madeva (iv.), the Atris (v.), Bharadv&ja (vi.), Vafiishtha (vii.), the Prag&thas (viii.), the P&vam&nis (ix.) The names also of Rig^veda, Yajur-veda, and S&ma-veda occur as literary titles in this Aranyaka.^ 1 Ait.-ar. iii. h; ibid, i. 11, Upanishas&da. Ait-ar. ii. 9. * Ait-ar. i. 10. : Bhi^r bhuvah svar itjei& v&va vj&hritaya iine trajo ved^^ bhiir itjeva Rig-veda, bhuva id Yi^jur-yedah, BTar iti Sama-vedah. Abantaeas. 841 The etymologies assigned to these names are not perhaps more absurd than those which we find in the Br&hmanas. But there are other etymological explanations in the Aranyakas such as we scarcely find in any genuine Br^mana. Part of the first Aranyaka (i. 4.) reads almost like a commentary on the first hymns of the Rig-veda, and the short glosses scattered about in these books of the forest might well be considered as the first elements of a Nirukta. The grammatical study of the hymns of the Veda was evidently far advanced, and scholastic pedantry had long taken the place of sound erudition, when the early portions of the Aranyaka were composed. Not only the ten books of the Rig-veda are mentioned, but likewise their subdivisions, the hymns (sAkta), verses (rich), half-verses (arddharcha), feet (pada), and syl- lables (akshara). Sometimes the syllables of certain hymns and classes of hymns are counted, and their number is supposed to possess a mysterious signifi^ cance. In one passage (ii. 12.) speculations are propounded on the division of letters into consonants (vyanjana), vowels (ghosha), and sibilants (iishman). Admitting, therefore, that the Aranyakas repre- sent the latest productions of the Br&hmana period, and that in some cases their authors belong to the age of Saunaka, in others even to a more modern age, we have now to consider the character of the genuine Br&hmanas, in order to point out the differences which distino^uish the Br&hmanas from the Sdtras by which they are followed, and from the Mantras by which they are preceded. z 3 THB BB&HMAKAS. ifficulty of giving an exhaustive definition of k Brdlimana is, has been felt by the Brahmans slves. The name given to this class of litera- aes not teach us more than that these works ed to the Brahmans. They were brahmanic, leological tracts, comprising the knowledge valued by the Brahmans, bearing partly on sacred hymns, partly on the traditions and >8 of the people. They profess to teach the nance of the sacrifice ; but for the greater ley are occupied with additional matter; with lations and illustrations of things more or less tly connected with th^^ original fei*^ ^^ incient ceremoniaL ana, in his introduction to the Rig-^edaS has such extracts from the ^Arv.„,Afii^^ P^^^^ as may fumiah a pretty co W ^^^ ^^ ^^^ .anas, and he has treati^d "^ -an^e ^^^J^* m his Inti-oduction to the A;l ri-^T&.hmttna. Br&hmana," he says, ^^tt^^^jt containing commandments (vidhi^ o^^ , ft\exp\ana. ythavflda). This is J^nll^^^^'^^'tJ^^ : 'The Br^hmanas a^^^^ ^Jjients for .orifices; all the rest cnr.^"^*^*^ additional atlons.' The commandment"! ^^ ^re of two either causing somethirT ' *^ ^nne vhicb >t done before, or mfc*^ ^ S^no^ was not known befoiT ?,^^^e<>? "oer kind those commandment^ oc^^^^^^ ^^'^ P- K'8--^-bl^,,y^ mg P- 11. brIhmanas. 343 tical part, such as, ^ At the Dikshaniy& ceremony he presents a purodd.6a oblation to Agni and Yishnu.' Of the latter kind are all philosophical passages, such as, ^ Self was all this alone in the beginning.' ^^ But how can it be said," S&yana goes on, ^^ that the Veda consists of Mantras and Br&hmanas, as th^ essential qualities neither of the one nor of the other part can be satisfactorily defined ? For if it be said that a Mantra alludes to those things which are com- manded, this definition would not comprehend all Mantras, because there are some which are them- selves commandments, as, for instance, ^He takes Eapinjalas for the Spring.' Again, if it be said that a Mantra is what makes one think (manj to think), this definition would comprehend the Br^hmanas also. Other definitions have been given, that a Mantra ends with the word * thou art,' or that it ends with the first person plural ; but none of these definitions can be considered as exhaustive* The only means, then, by which Mantras can be distinguished from Br&hmanas lies in their general sacrificial appellation, which comprehends the most different things under the one common name of Mantras. There are some recording the performance of sacrifices ; some contain praises, some end with the word thee (tvfi), some are invocations, some are directions, some contain deliber- ations, some contain complaints, some are questions, some are answers. See. All these attributes are so heterogeneous, that none of them can be used for a definition. Knowing, however, that the Veda consists only of two parts, we may say that whatever does not come under the name of Mantra is Br&hmana, whether it contain reasons, explanations, censures, recommen- dations, doubts, commandments, relations, old stories, z 4 particular determinations. Not one of these sub- l;s belongs to the Br&hmanas exclusively, but they mv more or less frequently in the Mantras also, and aid therefore not be used as definitions of the Br&h- anas. The same objection applies to all other defi- tions which have been attempted. Some have said lat the frequent occurrence of the particle iii (thus) onstitutes a Br&hmana; others, that a Br&hmana loses with the words itydha (thus he said) ; others hat a Brfthmana contains stories, &c. ; but all this ivould apply with equal force to some of the Man- tras. The only division therefore of the Veda that holds good consists in comprehending one part under the old traditional appellation of Mantra, and con- sidering all the rest as Br&hmanas. "But it might be objected," Sdyana continues, "that for instance in the chapter on the Brahmayajna, other parts of the Yeda are mentioned besides the Br&hma- nas and Mantras, under the title of Itih&sas, (epic stories) Purftnas (cosmogonic stories), Kalpas (cere- monial rules), G&thfts (songs), Nd,rk6ansts, (heroic poems). This however would be the same mistake, as if we should place a Brahman coordinate with a Brahman who is a mendicant. For all these titles, like Itih&sa, &c., apply only to subdi\asions of the BrUhmanas* Thus, passages from the Brd^hmanas, like * The gods and the Asuras were fighting,' &c., would be called Itih&sas ; other passages like ^ In the beginning there was nothing,' would be called PurfU nas; therefore we may safely say, that the Veda consists of two parts only, of Mantras and Brdh- manas.^^ ^ ^ According to Madhusiidana*8 view, the Brahmanas consist of three parts ; of commandmentSi additional explanations, and Ye- BKiHlfANAS. 345 If after these not very Batisfactory definitions of what a Br&hmana is, and how it differs from a Mantra, we turn to the Br&hmanas themselves, such as we possess them in MS., we find that their number is much smaller than we should have expected. If every S^tkhft consisted of a Sanhitd. and a Br&h* mana, the number of the old Br&hmanas must have been very considerable. It must not be supposed, how- ever, that the Br&hmanas which belonged to different l§&khfts, were works composed independently by dif- ferent authors.