Page:Atharva-Veda samhita volume 2.djvu/512

xix. 44- is easier and more natural. Ppp., too, has -cātanaṁ, which gives the emendation sufficient support.* Ppp. has for a vīraṁ madhyam avāsṛjat. The pada-mss. commit the egregious inconsistency of reading cātáyan: nāçáyat in c, d; SPP. emends in pada-text to cātáyat.* Ppp. has in d nāçayatam ivāhitā. ⌊In c of the Berlin ed., correct sárvaç to sárvāç.

* ⌊Both editions print rakṣohā́mīvacā́tanaḥ, and the pada-reading is rakṣaḥ॰hā́: amīva॰cā́tanaḥ. Whitney, doubtless by oversight, neglects to say how he would emend rakṣohā́ to make a corresponding neuter of it, and the question is a very troublesome one (for details, see Noun-Inflection, p. 478 end, p. 479). The neuter form would properly be -hắ; but none such is quotable, so far as I know, unless here. May it be that we have here that very form, -hắ (neuter), concealed in the combination -hā́mīva-, and that the misunderstanding of it as -hā́ (masculine.) amīva- led to a corruption of an original -cā́tanam into -cā́tanaḥ and also of an original pada-reading cātáyat into cātáyan? If so, all would be in harmony.⌋

8. Much untruth, O king Varuṇa, doth man (pū́ruṣa) say here; from that sin (áṅhas) do thou free us, O thou of thousand-fold heroism.

9. In that we have said O waters, O inviolable [kine], O Varuṇa, from that sin do thou free us, O thou of thousand-fold heroism.

10. Both Mitra and Varuṇa went forth after thee, O ointment; they, having gone far after thee, brought thee back for enjoyment (bhogá).