THE Grihya-sûtra ascribed to Sâṅkhâyana, which has been edited and translated into German by myself in the XVth volume of the Indische Studien, is based on the first of the four Vedas, the Rig-veda in the Bâshkala recension 1, and among the Brâhmana texts, on the Kaushîtaka. Its reputed author, whom we ordinarily find called by his family name, Sâṅkhâyana, had the proper name Suyagña. This we may infer from the lists of Vedic teachers given in different Grihya texts where they describe the Tarpana ceremony. Though in these lists the order of names varies very much, yet the two names Suyagña and Sâṅkhâyana are constantly placed side by side, so that this fact alone would render it probable that they belonged to the same person. Thus we read in the Sâṅkhâyana-Grihya IV, 10 = VI, 1: Kaholam Kaushîtakim, Mahâkaushîtakim, Suyagñam Sâṅkhâyanam, Âsvalâyanam, Aitareyam, Mahaitareyam. Here we have grouped together the two Brâhmana authors (with the fictitious doubles, the great Kaushîtaki, the great Aitareya) and the two corresponding Sûtra authors belonging to the two chief branches of the Rig-veda literature; first comes one Brâhmana author (for Kahola Kaushîtaki is one person) with the Sûtra author connected with him, then the second Sûtra author and the corresponding Brâhmana teacher. In the Sâmbavya-Grihya (Indische Studien, XV, 154) the corresponding passage runs thus: Gârgya- Gautama- Sâkalya- Bâbhravya- Mândattavya
Atrâranipradânam yad adhvaryuh kurute kvakit 2 It would perhaps be hazardous to claim for the author of this Kârikâ the authority of an independent witness, for very likely he may have derived his knowledge from the lists of teachers which we have quoted before. But at all events the concordance of the three Grihya texts furnishes a proof which, I think, cannot be set aside by another testimony which we must mention now. At the end of the Kaushîtaki-Âranyaka (Adhyâya 15) we find a Vamsa or list of the teachers by whom the knowledge contained in that Âranyaka is supposed to have been handed down. The opening words of this list run thus: 'Om! Now follows the Vamsa. Adoration to the Brahman! Adoration to the teachers! We have learnt (this text) from Gunâkhya Sâṅkhâyana, Gunâkhya Sâṅkhâyana from Kahola Kaushîtaki, Kahola Kaushîtaki from Uddâlaka Âruni, &c: It is a very natural supposition that the author of this list intended to begin with the name of the Doctor eponymus, if we may say so, of the Sûtras of his school, and then to proceed to name the Doctor eponymus of the Brâhmanas, and after him the more ancient teachers and
Here the question arises whether the Grihya-sûtra was composed by the same author to whom the authorship of the Srauta-sûtra belongs, so that the two texts form together, and would, in the conception of their author, be intended to form, one great body of Sûtras, or, on the other hand, whether the Grihya-sûtra is a later addition to the Srauta-sûtra. On this question I have ventured, in the preface to my German edition of Sâṅkhâyana 2, to offer a few remarks which, however, I feel bound to say do not seem to myself quite decisive. I there pointed out that the Grihya-sûtra contains a few aphorisms which we should rather expect would have found their place in the Srauta-sûtra, if the two texts were composed by the same author and on a common plan 3. But, apart from the possibility that in a work of such considerable extent as that collection of Sûtras would be, such trifling incongruences or irregularities might very easily escape the attention even of a very careful author, there is still another objection that may be urged against the inference drawn by me from such passages. It can be shown 4 that the Grihya texts which we possess are based to some extent on one common original, from which they have taken verbatim, or nearly verbatim, a certain number of aphorisms. Thus if we were to suppose that Sâṅkhâyana,
Natvâ Kaushîtakâkâryam Sâmbavyam sûtrakrittamam ('Having bowed to the most excellent author of Sûtras, to Sâmbavya, the Âkârya belonging to the Kaushîtaka school, I shall compose a short commentary on his Grihya, which has been forgotten by many.') The name of this Sâmbavya does not occur among the
('According to the Parisishta, if one of the half-monthly sacrifices has been omitted, a mess of rice should be offered on the sacred domestic fire to Agni Vaisvânara and to Agni Tantumat.') The passages of the Parisishta here referred to are the two first aphorisms of V, 4: 'Now if a half-monthly sacrifice has not been performed, one or the other of them, then a mess of rice (is to be offered)— 'With (the words), "To Agni Vaisvânara svâhâ! To Agni Tantumat svâhâ!'" There are, besides, several passages in which Nârâyana himself mentions the fifth book under the designation of Pariseshâdhyâya 2. And even if we had not the authority of the Kârikâ and of Nârâyana, the contents alone of the fifth book would raise our suspicion against its genuineness. The matter ordinarily treated of in the Grihya texts is brought to an end in Adhyâyas I-IV; in the fifth book we find diverse supplementary additions on points discussed before; rules, which no doubt would have been given at their proper place, had the fifth book been composed at the same time, and by the same author, as the preceding books 3. Besides, we find different prâyaskitta oblations treated of, and a description of two ceremonies which are mentioned, as far as I know, in no other Grihya-sûtra, but belong to the rites frequently described in such works as Purânas, Parisishtas, and later Dharma texts: the consecration of ponds or wells (chap. 2), and the consecration of gardens (chap. 3). There can thus be little doubt as to the secondary character of the fifth book. And this alone suffices to
3:1 See IV, 5, 9. 4:1 Manuscr. Chambers 712 (Berlin Royal Library), fol. 12 b. 4:2 Comp. Pâraskara-Grihya I, 2, 5: aranipradânam eke. 5:1 See, for instance, Grihya I, 16, 1 (Srauta IV, 16, 2). 5:2 Indische Studien, vol. xv, pp. 11, 12. 5:3 The Sûtras with reference to which I made that observation are I, 8, 14; 14, 13-15; II, 15, 10. Comp. Srauta-sûtra II, 7, 12; IV, 21. 5:4 I intend to give some proofs of this in the General Introduction to the Grihya-sûtras which will be given in the second volume of these translations. 6:1 Comp. the statements given with regard to that text in my German edition of Sâṅkhâyana, Indische Studien, XV, 4 seq. 9:1 Comp. the remarks in my German edition of Sâṅkhâyana, Ind. Studien. XV, 7. 10:1 vâgnaye the MS. 10:2 Nârâyana on I, 9, 3; 10, 2. 10:3 The Paddhati inserts the paraphrase of several of these rules into the explanation of the first Adhyâya.TO THE
SÂṄKHÂYANA-GRIHYA-SÛTRA.
matam tan na Suyagñasya, mathitam so ’tra nekkhati.
grihyam tadîyam samkshipya vyâkhyâsye bahuvismritam.
