Page:Atharva-Veda samhita volume 2.djvu/316

Rh avasānarcas of 17, the words tásya vrā́tyasya with an avasāna-mark, but nevertheless makes his numbering as does the Berlin ed.⌋

⌊The differences accordingly are confined to the remaining seven paryāyas (those which have subdivided divisions), that is, to the gaṇa-paryāyas 2, 4, 5, 6, 11, 13, 14.—In paryāya 14, each of the 12 numbered divisions of the Berlin ed. is really a gaṇa and is subdivided (alike in both editions, by a mark just after kṛtvā́) into 2 vacanas: but the vacanas are numbered as 24 only by SPP.—A similar statement applies to paryāya 4, save that here the subdivision is each time into 3: thus the 6 divisions of the Berlin ed. become 18 with SPP.—We should expect the case of paryāya 6 to be just like that of 4: namely that the 9 gaṇas of the Berlin ed. would become (9 × 3 =) 27 gaṇa-avasānarcas in the Bombay ed.; but in fact the mss. divide one gaṇa (the eighth: see note thereon) into only 2 subdivisions; so that the sum is only 26. Note here especially that the anomalous division is supported by the Old Anukr. and that the two editions do not differ in the marking of the subdivisions, but only in the numbering.⌋

⌊With paryāyas 5 and 2, the case is as explained on pages 628-629: in a sequence of refrains or anuṣan̄gas, the refrain is given in full and counted as a separate avasāna only for its first and last occurrence in that sequence.—In paryāya 5 (see note), there are 7 gaṇas, each with 3 subdivisions (the first ending with akurvan and the second with ī́çānaḥ): therefore we have 2 gaṇas (the first and last), each with 3 subdivisions, making 6; and the remaining 5, each with 2 (a and b-c), making 10; and so, in all, 16.—In paryāya 2 (for minor differences, see notes), we have the first and last, each with 8 subdivisions, making 16; and the remaining 2, each with 6 (a, b, c, d, e, and f-h), making 12; and so, in all, 28.⌋

⌊Finally, in the case of paryāyas 13 and 11, we have divisions which are not coördinate. In 13, each of the first 5 divisions as numbered in the Berlin ed. is really a gaṇa with 2 subdivisions (the prior one ending with vásati); and each of the remaining 4 is undivided: SPP. therefore numbers them as (5 × 2 =) 10 gaṇa-avasānarcas and 4 paryāya-avasānarcas, thus making "14 avasānarcas of both kinds," as required by the Old Anukr.—In the case of paryāya 11, the Old Anukr. requires the division into 11 avasānarcas, and this is the division of both editions. The requirement of the non-coördinate subdivisions, namely into 5 + (3 × 2 =) 6 = 11, is made only by the summations of the mss., and only by some of them, not all. This division, if made at all, is doubtless to be made by taking the first 5 as paryāya-avasānarcas and the last 6 as gaṇa-avasānarcas (3 gaṇas of 2 each).⌋

⌊Of this book we find in Pāipp. (in xviii.) only the first paryāya and a phrase from the second.* Moreover, neither Kāuç. nor Vāit. make any citations from the book; but it may be noted that xv. 5. 1 is reckoned to the rāudra gaṇa by the schol. to Kāuç. 50. 13. In respect of contents and style, the book is quite like the Brāhmaṇas, and it is all in prose. Occasional sequences of words are rhythmical (so the first phrase of 17. 8 and the relative clauses of 15 and 16 and 17); but these are doubtless mere casual lapses into meter (cf. p. 869).⌋

⌊Whitney's ms. appears to indicate that he intended to give to each paryāya-sūkta a heading (in Clarendon type, as before); and I have thought it well, for the sake of convenience and typographical clearness, to carry out his apparent intent—Moreover,