Donate
 
    
Select your preferred input and type any Sanskrit or English word. Enclose the word in “” for an EXACT match e.g. “yoga”.
Root Search
  
"tud" has 7 results.
    
        Root Word (Pāṇini Dhātupāṭha:)Full Root MarkerSenseClassSutra
√tuḍtuḍaatoḍane691
√tuḍtuḍiichedane10107
√tuḍtuḍiitoḍane1179
√tuḍtuḍiibhāṣārthaḥ10196
√tuḍtuḍtoḍane1240
√tudtudaavyathane61
√tūḍtūḍtoḍane1240
  
"tud" has 4 results.
        Root WordIAST MeaningMonier Williams PageClass
√तुड्tuḍsplitting, reading or breaking / toḍana455/3Cl.6
√तुड्tuḍsplitting, pushing or injuring / toḍana455/3Cl.1
√तुद्tudtormenting / vyathana1031/1Cl.6
√तूड्tūḍsplitting, pushing, injuring / toḍana455/3Cl.1
     Amarakosha Search  
5 results
     
     Monier-Williams
          Search  
62 results for tud
     
Devanagari
BrahmiEXPERIMENTAL
tud cl.6 P. d/ati- (parasmE-pada f. datī-or dantī- ; perfect tense tut/oda-; future 2nd totsyati-or tottā-, ; Aorist atautsīt-) to push, strike, goad, bruise, sting, vex etc. ; Passive voice to pain (said of a wound) : Causal See todita- ; ([ confer, compare t/ottra-etc.; etc.; Latin tundo.]) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudmfn. in fine compositi or 'at the end of a compound' "pricking" See vraṇa--. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudamfn. in fine compositi or 'at the end of a compound' "striking" See aruṃ--, tilaṃ--, vidhuṃ-- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudam. Name of a man gaRa śubhrādi- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudam. see ut--. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudādithe roots of cl.6. (beginning with tud-) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
anunitud(imperfect tense 3. plural -atudan-) to wound with a stab, goad, View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
aruṃtuda(mf(ā-)n.) ()"beating or hurting a wound" , causing torments, painful View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
aruṃtudaSee aru-. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
ātud(p. -tud/at-; perf. -tut/oda-; ind.p. -tudya-) to strike, push, spur on, stir up View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
dhātudīpikāf. Name of gram. work View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
dhātudrāvakan. "dissolving metals"borax View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
hetudṛṣṭif. examination of reasons, scepticism View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
hetuduṣṭamfn. inconvincible by reasons, unreasonable (said of persons) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
jatudhāmann. idem or 'n. equals gṛha- q.v ' View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudhānafor yāt- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
jñānaketudhvajam. Name of a devaputra-, View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
ketudharmanm. Name of a man (varia lectio -varman-) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
kratudakṣiṇāf. sacrificial reward View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
kratudevam. Name of the man View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
kratudhvajam. Name of a rudra- (varia lectio ṛtu-dh-). View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
kratudhvaṃsinm. "destroyer of dakṣa-'s sacrifice", Name of śiva- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
kratudruh(Nominal verb -dhruk-) m. an enemy of sacrifices, asura- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
kratudviṣ(Nominal verb -dviṭ-) m. idem or '(Nominal verb -dhruk-) m. an enemy of sacrifices, asura- ' View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
nāruṃtudamfn. not hurting (a wound or a weak point), harmless View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
nistudP. -tudati- (Passive voice -tudyate-), to pierce, prick, sting View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
nitudP. A1. -tud/ati-, te- (-tundate- ;[ n/i- wrong reading for n/u-?]) , to pierce, penetrate View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
paitudāravamfn. relating to or derived from the tree pītu-dāru- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
paitudravamfn. equals daivadārava- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
paritudP. -tudati-, to trample down, pound, crush View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
pautudruvamfn. relating to the tree pūtu-dru- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudāru(p/ītu--) m. a kind of tree (equals deva-dāru-,or equals khadira-) (see pīta-dāru-). View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
pratudP. -tudati-, to strike at, cut through, pierce : Causal -todayati-, to push on, urge, instigate View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
pratudm. "pecker", Name of a class of birds (including the falcon, hawk, owl, parrot, crow, raven, peacock etc.) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
pratudam. idem or 'm. "pecker", Name of a class of birds (including the falcon, hawk, owl, parrot, crow, raven, peacock etc.) ' , Gaut View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
pratudam. an instrument for piercing View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
prātudamfn. derived from the pratuda-s or peckers (a kind of bird) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
prātuda prātṛda- etc. See under 3. prā-, . View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudārum. equals pūta-dru-, the tree Butea Frondosa View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudru pūt/u-dru- () m. () the tree Acacia Catechu or Pinus Deodora View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudrun. its fruit. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudevatamfn. having the seasons for a deity, View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudhāmanm. (probably for ṛta-dh-), Name of viṣṇu- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
saktudhānīf. a vessel of barley-meal View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
saṃtudP. -tudati-, to strike at, goad, sting ; (with prarohān-) to put forth new sprouts id est recur again and again (as a disease) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
sudhātudakṣiṇamfn. (-dh/ā-) (prob.) one on whom the sacrificial fee is well conferred, worthy of the sacrificial fee (according to to Scholiast or Commentator"one who receives precious metal as a sacrificial fee")
śutudf. (according to to also śutudri-and dru-) the śata-dru- or Sutlej river (See śata-dru-). View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tilaṃtudam. a sesamum-grinder vArttika View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
uttud(ud-- tud-) P. -tudati-, to push up, tear up ; to push open ; to stir up, urge on. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
uttudamfn. one who stirs up View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vāstudevam. () the deity presiding over a house. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vāstudevatāf. () the deity presiding over a house. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vastudharmam. sg. and plural the true nature of things ( vastudharmatva -tva- n.) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vastudharmatvan. vastudharma
vastudharminmfn. dependent on the nature of a thing, objective View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vidhuṃtudam. "moon-troubler", Name of rāhu- or the personified ascending node (causing the moon's eclipses) View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vipāṭchutudf. dual number the river vipāśā- and śutudrī- View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vitudP. A1. -tudati-, te-, to pierce, tear, strike, scourge, sting, prick etc. ; to strike id est play (a musical instrument) : Causal -tudāy/ati-, to prick, sting View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
vitudam. Name of a particular spectral being View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudhānam. equals yātu-, a kind of evil spirit or demon (f(ī-).) etc. View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudhānakṣayaṇamfn. destroying yātu-s View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
tudhānapreṣitamfn. (dh/āna--) hurled by yātu-s View this entry on the original dictionary page scan.
     Apte Search  
12 results
     
tud तुद् 6 U. (तुदति-ते, तुन्न) 1 To strike, wound, hit; तुतोद गदया चारिम् Bk.14.81;15.37; Śi.2.77. -2 To prick, goad. -3 To bruise, hurt. -4 To pain, vex, torment, afflict; सुतीक्ष्णधारापतनोग्रसायकैस्तुदन्ति चेतः प्रसभं प्रवासिनाम् Ṛs.2.4;6.28.
tuda तुद a. Striking, tormenting &c.
aruṃtuda अरुंतुद a. [अरूंषि मर्माणि तुदति; अरुस्-तुद्, खश् मुमागमश्च विध्वरुषोस्तुदः P.III.2.35; अरुद्विषदजन्तस्यमुम् VI.3.67] 1 Cutting or wounding the vital parts, inflicting wounds, corrosive, painful, sharp (fig. also); caustic; अरुंतुदमिवालानमनिर्वाणस्य दन्तिनः R.1.71; Ki.14.55; Si. 2.19. -2 Acrimonious, sour (disposition); नारुंतुदः स्यादार्तो$पि Ms.2.161.
ātud आतुद् 6 U. To strike, push, spur on, stir up. प्रतोदे- नातुदन्भृशम् Ms.4.68.
tudhānaḥ जातुधानः A demon, imp.
tilaṃtudaḥ तिलंतुदः An oilman.
nistud निस्तुद् 1 P. To pierce, prick, sting. निस्तोदः निस्तोदनम् nistōdḥ nistōdanam निस्तोदः निस्तोदनम् Piercing, pricking, stinging; Suśr.
pratud प्रतुद् 6 P. To strike, hurt, wound -Caus. 1 To urge on, drive forward; (fig.) to press, urge repeatedly (to do a thing); प्रविश गृहमिति प्रतोद्यमाना न चलति भाग्यकृतां दशामवेक्ष्य Mk.1.56. -2 To pierce, cut.
pratudaḥ प्रतुदः 1 An epithet of a class of birds (such as hawks, parrots, crows &c.); Ms.5.13; हारितो धवलः पाण्डुश्चित्रपक्षो बृहच्छुकः । पारावतः खञ्जरीटः पिकाद्याः प्रतुदाः स्मृताः ॥ प्रतुद्य भक्षयन्त्येते तुण्डेन प्रतुदास्ततः -2 An instrument for pricking.
vidhuṃtudaḥ विधुंतुदः N. of Rāhu; विधुमिव विकटविधुंतुददन्तदलनगलिता- मृतधारम् Gīt.4; आभिमुख्यं शशाङ्कस्य यथाद्यापि विधुंतुदः Pt.1. 326; N.4.71; Śi.2.61; ग्रस्तं विधुंतुदेनेव निखिलं विधुमण्डलम् Śiva B.25.62.
śutudriḥ शुतुद्रिः द्रूः f. The river Sutlej; cf. शतद्रु.
saṃtud संतुद् 6 U. 1 To goad, sting. -2 To recur (as a disease).
     Macdonell Search  
8 results
     
tuda a. striking, chafing, galling (--°ree;).
tudāya den. vi, pierce.
atitud a. striking --, lashing violently.
aruṃtuda a. making a wound; touching a sore; excruciating.
kratudeva m. N.; -mat, a. reso lute; intelligent, wise; -râg, m. chief sacri fice (Asvamedha and Râgasûya); -vikrayin, a. selling the rewards for a sacrifice; -víd, a. powerful, inspiring.
tudāru m. kind of tree; n. its resin.
paitudārava a. coming from the Pîtudâru tree.
pratuda m. pecker (a class of birds); goad; -tushti, f. satisfaction: -da, a. giving pleasure to (--°ree;); -trid, a. cleaving; -todá, m. goad; -tolî, f. broad road, main street.
     Vedic Index of
     Names and Subjects  
32 results
     
āśrama (‘resting-place’) does not occur in any Upanisad which can be regarded as pre-Buddhistic. Its earliest use as denoting the stages of a Hindu’s life is found in the śvetāśvatara Upanisad. In one passage of the Chāndogya Upanisad reference is made only to the Brahmacārin and householder, to whom, as a reward for study, the procreation of children, the practice of Yoga, abstention from injury to living creatures, and sacrifices, freedom from transmigration are promised. In another place three states are contemplated, but not as con­secutive. The Brahmacārin may either become a householder or become an anchorite, or remain in his teacher’s house all his life. Similarly, reference is made to the death of the anchorite in the forest, or the sacrifice in the village. In contrast with all three is the man who stands fast in Brahman (Brahma- samstha). In the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad the knowerof the Atman is contrasted with those who (1) study, or (2) sacrifice and give alms, or (3) are anchorites, and in another place with those who sacrifice and make benefactions, and those who practice asceticism. This position of superiority to, and distinction from, the Aśramas became later a fourth Aśrama, the Grhastha, or householder, who was in the second stage, being required to pass not only into the stage of Vānaprastha, but also that of the Sannyāsin (Bhiksu, Parivrājaka). The first stage, that of the Brahmacārin, was still obligatory, but was no longer allowed to remain a permanent one, as was originally possible.
udīcyas The Brāhmanas of the northern parts are referred to in the śatapatha Brāhmana as engaging, with Svaidāyana Saunaka as their spokesman, in a dispute with the Kurupañcāla Brāhmana Uddālaka Aruni, and as vanquishing him. Their relation to the Kurupañcālas appears also from the fact that in the same Brāhmana reference is made to the speech of the north being similar to that of the Kurupañcālas. The speech of the Northerners was also celebrated for purity; hence Brāhmanas used to go to the north for purposes of study, according to the Kausītaki Brāhmana, while in the Buddhist texts the school of Taksaśilā (in Gandhāra) is famous as a resort of students. Possibly, too, Sanskrit was specially developed in Kaśmīr, as suggested by Franke. See also Kuru.
ekāyana Denotes some object of study in the Chāndogya Upanisad. The St. Petersburg Dictionary renders it ‘ doctrine (ayana) of unity ’(eka), ‘ monotheism,’ while Max Muller prefers ‘ethics,’ and Monier-Williams in his Dictionary ‘worldly wisdom.
kitava ‘ the gambler/ is frequently referred to in the Rig­veda and later. A father is represented as chastising his son for gambling. The gambler seems at times to have fallen, along with his family, into servitude, presumably by selling himself to pay his debts.Technical names for different sorts of gamblers given in the Yajurveda Samhitās are Adinava-darśa, Kalpin, Adhi-kalpin, and Sabhā-sthānu. None of these can be safely explained, though the last has usually been taken as a satirical name derived from the gambler’s devotion to the dicing place (Sabhā), pillar of the dicing hall.’ The first literally means seeing ill-luck,’ and may refer to the quickness of the dicer to note an error on the part of his antagonist, or to his eagerness to see the defeat of his rival.
go ‘ox’ or ‘cow.’ These were among the chief sources of wealth to the Vedic Indian, and are repeatedly referred to from the Rigveda onwards. The milk (Ksīra) was either drunk fresh or made into butter (Ghrta) or curds (Dadhi), or was mixed with Soma or used for cooking with grain (Ksīraudana).The cows were milked thrice a day, early (prātar-doha), in the forenoon (Samgava), and in the evening (.sāyam-doha). Thrice a day they were driven out to graze, according to the Taittirīya Brāhmana (prātah, saφgave, say am). The first milking was productive, the last two scanty. According to the Aitareya Brāhmana, among the Bharatas the herds in the evening are in the Gostha, at midday in the Samgavinī. This passage Sāyana expands by saying that the herds go home to the Sālā, or house for animals, at night so far as they consist of animals giving milk, while the others stayed out in the Gostha, or open pasturage ; but both were together in the cattle-shed during the heat of the day. The time before the Samgava, when the cows were grazing freely on the pastureland, was called Svasara. When the cows were out feeding they were separated from the calves, which were, how¬ever, allowed to join them at the Samgava, and sometimes in the evening. While grazing the cattle were under the care of a herdsman (Gopā, Gopāla) armed with a goad, but they were liable to all sorts of dangers, such as being lost, falling into pits, breaking limbs, and being stolen. The marking of the ears of cattle was repeatedly adopted, no doubt, to indicate ownership. Large herds of cattle were well-known, as is shown by the Dānastutis, or ‘ praises of gifts,’ in the Rigveda, even when allowances are made for the exaggeration of priestly gratitude. The importance attached to the possession of cattle is shown by the numerous passages in which the gods are asked to prosper them, and by the repeated prayers for wealth in kine. Hence, too, forays for cattle (Gavisti) were well known; the Bharata host is called the ‘ horde desiring cows ’ (gavyan grāmak) in the Rigveda j and a verbal root gup, ‘ to protect,’ was evolved as early as the Rigveda from the denominative go-pāya, ‘ to guard cows.’ The Vedic poets do not hesitate to compare their songs with the lowing of cows, or to liken the choir of the singing Apsarases to cows. The cattle of the Vedic period were of many colours: red (:rohita), light (śakra), dappled (prśni), even black (krsna). Zimmer sees a reference to cows with blazes on the face in one passage of the Rigveda, but this is uncertain. Oxen were regularly used for ploughing or for drawing wágons (anadvāh), in which case they were, it seems, usually castrated. Cows were not properly used for drawing carts, though they at times did so. The flesh of both cows and bulls was sometimes eaten (Māmsa). Cattle were certainly the objects of individual ownership, and they formed one of the standards of exchange and valuation (see Kraya). The term Go is often applied to express the products of the cow. It frequently means the milk, but rarely the flesh of the animal. In many passages it designates leather used as the material of various objects, as a bowstring, or a sling, or thongs to fasten part of the chariot, or reins,or the lash of a whip. See also Carman, with which Go is sometimes synonymous.
caraka primarily denotes a ‘ wandering student,’ a sense actually found in the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad. More especially it denotes the members of a school of the Black Yajurveda, the practices of which are several times referred to with disapproval in the Satapatha Brāhmana. In the Vāja­saneyi Samhitā the Caraka teacher (Carakācārya) is enumerated among the sacrificial victims at the Purusamedha, or human sacrifice. His dedication there to ill-doing is a clear hint of a ritual feud.
tṛtsu Occurs in the Rigveda, once in the singular and several times in the plural, as a proper name. The Trtsus were clearly helpers of Sudās in the great battle against the ten kings, Simyu, the Turvaśa, the Druhyu, Kavasa, the Pūru, the Anu, Bheda, Sambara, the two Vaikarnas, and perhaps the Yadu, who led with them as allies the Matsyas, Pakthas, Bhalānas, Alinas, Visānins, Sivas, Ajas, Sigrus, and perhaps Yaksus. The defeat of the ten kings is celebrated in one hymn of the Rigveda, and is evidently alluded to in two others. The great battle took place on the Parusnī, but there was also a fight on the Yamunā with Bheda, the Ajas, Sigrus, and Yaksus. As the Yamunā and the Parusnī represent opposite ends of the territory of the Trtsus (for we cannot with Hopkins safely identify the streams), it is difficult to see exactly how the ten kings could be confederated, but it should be noted that the references to the ten kings occur in the two later hymns, and not in the hymn describing the battle itself; besides, absolute numerical accuracy cannot be insisted upon.It is difficult exactly to determine the character of the Trtsus, especially in their relation to the Bharatas, who under Visvamitra’s guidance are represented as prospering and as advancing to the Vipāś and Sutudrī. Roth ingeniously brought this into connexion with the defeat of his enemies by Sudās, which is celebrated in the seventh book of the Rigveda—a book attributed to the Vasistha family—and thought that there was a reference in one verse to the defeat of the Bharatas by Sudās. But it seems certain that the verse is mistranslated, and that the Bharatas are really represented as victors with Sudās. Ludwig accordingly identifies the Trtsus and the Bharatas. Oldenberg, after accepting this view at first, later expressed the opinion that the Trtsus were the priests of the Bharata people, and therefore identical with the Vasisthas. This view is supported by the fact that in one passage the Trtsus are clearly described as wearing their hair in the peculiar manner affected by the Vasisthas, and would in that passage thus seem to represent the Vasisthas. But Geldner has suggested with great probability that Trtsu, who is once mentioned in the singular, means the Trtsu king—that is, Sudās. This explanation alone justifies the description of the Bharatas as Trtsūnām viśah, ‘ subjects of the Trtsus,’ meaning the Trtsu Gotra or family, for the people could not be said to be subjects of a body of priests. The Vasisthas might be called Trtsus because of their close con¬nexion with the royal house of that people. The reverse process is also quite possible, but is rendered improbable by the fact that the Pratrdah are referred to as receiving Vasistha. This name of the Trtsu dynasty is probably older than its connexion with Vasistha in the time of Sudās, a conclusion supported by the name of Pratardana, who is mentioned later as a descendant of Divodāsa, an ancestor of Sudās. The Trtsu dynasty could therefore hardly have been referred to as Vasisthas. For the further history of the dynasty and its relation with Vasistha and Viśvāmitra, see Sudās. If the Trtsus and their subjects, the Bharatas, were in the Rigvedic period at war with the tribes on either side of the territory between the Parusnī and the Yamunā, it is clear that later on they coalesced with the Pūrus and probably others of those tribes to form the Kuru people. Already in the Rigveda the Trtsus are allied with the Srñjayas, and in the śatapatha Brāhmana one Purohita serves both Kurus and Srñjayas. Hillebrandt considers that the Trtsus cannot be identified with the Bharatas, but that Sudās and the Bharatas represent an invading body, which, however, became allied with the Trtsus and the Vasistha priests. He also thinks that the Rigveda reveals a time when Divodāsa, the grandfather or ancestor of Sudās, was living in Arachosia, on the Sarasvatī, and warring against the Panis, whom he identifies with the Parnians. But this conjecture cannot be regarded as probable. In the Sarasvatī it is not necessary to see any other river than the later Sarasvatī, in the middle country, which flowed within the boundaries of the Trtsus: it is also significant that there are references to contests between Turvaśa Yadu and Atithigva or Divodāsa. Thus there is no reason to doubt that Divodāsa and the Bharatas were in the middle country, and not in Iran.
triśaṅku Is in Vedic literature the name of a sage men­tioned as a teacher in the Taittirīya Upanisad. There is no trace of the later legend by which he becomes the victim of Vasistha’s curse and the object of Viśvāmitra’s solicitude, being eventually fixed in the sky as a constellation. The confusion of the chronology in the tales of Triśañku is a good example of the worthlessness of the supposed epic tradition.
dhanvan Desert,’ is repeatedly mentioned in the Rigveda and later. Death from thirst in the desert was not rare, and the value of a spring in the desert was fully appreciated. The great desert east of the Sindhu (Indus) and the Sutudrī (Sutlej) is possibly referred to in one hymn of the Rigveda.
nakṣatra Is a word of obscure origin and derivation. The Indian interpreters already show a great divergence of opinion as to its primary meaning. The śatapatha Brāhmana re­solves it into na-ksatra (‘ no power ’), explaining it by a legend. The Nirukta refers it to the root naks, ‘obtain/ following the Taittirīya Brāhmana. Aufrecht and Weber derived it from nakta-tra, ‘ guardian of night/ and more recently the derivation from nak-ksatra, ‘ having rule over night/ seems to be gaining acceptance. The generic meaning of the word therefore seems to be ‘star/ The Naksatras as Stars in the Rigveda and Later.—The sense of star ’ appears to be adequate for all or nearly all the passages in which Naksatra occurs in the Rigveda. The same sense occurs in the later Samhitās also : the sun and the Naksatras are mentioned together, or the sun, the moon, and the Naksatras, or the moon and the Naksatras, or the Naksatras alone; but there is no necessity to attribute to the word the sense of lunar mansion ’ in these passages. On the other hand, the names of at least three of the Naksatras in the later sense occur in the Rigveda. Tisya, however, does not seem to be mentioned as a lunar mansion. With Aghās (plur.) and Arjunī (dual) the case is different: it seems probable that they are the later lunar mansions called Maghās (plur.) and Phālgunī (dual). The names appear to have been deliberately changed in the Rigveda, and it must be remembered that the hymn in which they occur, the wedding hymn of Sūryā, has no claim to great age. Ludwig and Zimmer have seen other references to the Naksatras as 27 in the Rigveda, but these seem most improbable. Nor do the adjectives revatī (£ rich ’) and punarvasīi (‘ bringing wealth again’) in another hymn appear to refer to the Naksatras. The Naksatras as Lunar Mansions.—In several passages of the later Samhitās the connexion of the moon and the Naksatras is conceived of as a marriage union. Thus in the Kāthaka and Taittirīya Samhitās it is expressly stated that Soma was wedded to the mansions, but dwelt only with Rohinī; the others being angry, he had ultimately to undertake to live with them all equally. Weber hence deduced that the Naksatras were regarded as of equal extent, but this is to press the texts unduly, except in the sense of approximate equality. The number of the mansions is not stated as 27 in the story told in the two Samhitās: the Taittīriya has, and the Kāthaka no number; but 27 appears as their number in the list which is found in the Taittirīya Samhitā and elsewhere. The number 28 is much less well attested: in one passage of the Taittirīya Brāhmana Abhijit is practically marked as a new comer, though in a later book, in the Maitrāyanī Samhitā, and in the Atharvaveda list,27 it has found acceptance. It is perfectly possible that 28 is the earlier number, and that Abhijit dropped out because it was faint, or too far north, or because 27 was a more mystic (3x3x3) number: it is significant that the Chinese Sieou and the Arabic Manāzil are 28 in number.28 Weber, however, believes that 27 is the older number in India. The meaning of the number is easily explained when it is remembered that a periodic month occupies something between 27 and 28 days, more nearly the former number. Such a month is in fact recognized in the Lātyāyana and Nidāna Sūtras as consisting of 27 days, 12 months making a year of 324 days, a Naksatra year, or with an intercalary month, a year of 351 days. The Nidāna Sūtra makes an attempt to introduce the Naksatra reckoning into the civil or solar (sāvana) year of 360 days, for it holds that the sun spends 13J• days in each Naksatra (13^x27 = 360). But the month of 27 or 28 days plays no part in the chronological calculations of the Veda. The Names of the Naksatras.—In addition to the two mentioned in the Rigveda, the earlier Atharvaveda gives the names of Jyesthaghnī (the later Jyesthā) and Vicrtau, which are mentioned as in close connexion, and of Revatīs (plural) and Kyttikās. With reference to possible times for the ceremony of the Agnyādhāna, or Maying of the sacred fires/ the Kāthaka Samhitā, the Maitrāyanī Samhitā, and the Taittirīya Brāhmana mention the Naksatras called Krttikās, Rohinī, Phalgunyas, Hasta; the latter Brāhmana adds Punar- vasū, and in an additional remark excludes Pūrve Phālgunī in favour of Uttare Phālgunī. The śatapatha Brāhmana adds Mrgaśīrsa and Citrā as possibilities. On the other hand, Punarvasū is recommended by all authorities as suitable for the Punarādheya, 'relaying of the sacred fires,’ which takes place if the first fire has failed to effect the aim of its existence, the prosperity of the sacrificer. The Kāthaka Samhitā, however, allows Anurādhās also. In the ceremony of the Agnicayana, or 'piling of the fire- altar,’ the bricks are assumed to be equal in number to the Naksatras. The bricks number 756, and they are equated to 27 Naksatras multiplied by 27 secondary Naksatras, reckoned as 720 (instead of 729), with the addition of 36 days, the length of an intercalary month. Nothing can be usefully derived from this piece of priestly nonsense. But in connexion with this ceremony the Yajurveda Samhitās enumerate the 27, The Taittirīya Brāhmana has a list of the Naksatras which agrees generally with the list of the Samhitās. It runs as follows: Kyttikās, Rohinī, Invakās, Bāhū (dual), Tisya, Aśleṣās, Maghās, Pūrve Phālgunī, Uttare Phālgunī, Hasta, Citrā, Nistyā, Viśākhe, Anūrādhās, Rohinī, Mūlabarhanī, Pūrvā Asādhās', Uttarā Asādhās, Sronā, Sravisthās, Satabhisaj, Pūrve Prosthapadās, Uttare Prosthapadās, Revatī, Aśvayujau, Apabharanīs. In a later book, however, the list grows to 28, and the full moon is inserted after number 14, and the new moon after number, as an attempt to bring the Naksatra (lunar) month into accordance with the Sāvana (solar) month of 30 days. The names in this second list are as in the Samhitās with the following exceptions. The seven stars of the Krttikās are named as Ambā, Dulā, Nitatnī, Abhrayantī, Meghayantī, Varsayantī, Cupunīkā, names found also in the Taittirīya and Kāthaka Samhitās. Beside Mrgaśīrsa, Invakās are also mentioned. Then come Ardrā, Punarvasū, Tisya, Aśresās, Maghās (beside which Anaghās, Agadās, and Arun- dhatīs are also mentioned), Phalgunyas (but elsewhere in the dual, Phalgunyau), Phalgunyas, Hasta, Citrā, Nistyā, Viśākhe, Anūrādhās, Jyesthā, Mūla, Asādhās, Asā(jhās, Abhijit, śronā, Sravisthās, Satabhisaj, Prosthapadās, Prosthapadās, Revatī, Aśvayujau, Bharanyas, but also Apabharanīs. Abhijit, which occurs also in an earlier part of the Brāhmana, is perhaps interpolated. But Weber’s argument that Abhijit is out of place in this list because Brāhmana is here mentioned as the 28th Naksatra, loses some force from the fact (of course unknown to him) that the list in the Maitrāyanī Samhitā contains 28 Naksatras, including Abhijit, and adds Brāhmana at the end as another. In another passage the Taittirīya Brāhmana divides the Naksatras into two sets, the Deva Naksatras and the Yama Naksatras, being 1-14 and 15-27 (with the omission of Abhijit) respectively. This division corresponds with one in the third book of the Brāhmana60 where the days of the light half of the month and those of the dark half are equated with the Naksatras. The Brāhmana treats the former series as south, the latter as north; but this has no relation to facts, and can only be regarded as a ritual absurdity. The late nineteenth book of the Atharvaveda contains a list of the Naksatras, including Abhijit. The names here (masc.), Viśākhe, Anurādhā, Jyesthā, Mūla, Pūrvā Asādhās, Uttarā Asādhās, Abhijit, śravana, śravisthās, śatabhisaj, Dvayā Prosthapadā, Revatī, Aśvayujau, Bharanyas. The Position of the Naksatras.—There is nothing definite in Vedic literature regarding the position of most of the Naksatras, but the later astronomy precisely locates all of them, and its statements agree on the whole satisfactorily with what is said in the earlier texts, though Weber was inclined to doubt this. The determinations adopted below are due to Whitney in his notes on the Sūrya Siddhānta. 1.Krttikās are unquestionably η Tauri, etc., the Pleiades. The names of the seven stars forming this constellation, and given above from Yajurveda texts, include three --------abhrayantī, forming clouds meghayantī, ‘making cloudy’; varsayantī, ‘causing rain’—which clearly refer to the rainy Pleiades. The word krttikā possibly means ‘web/ from the root krt, spin.’ 2. Rohinī, ‘ ruddy,’ is the name of the conspicuously reddish star, a Tauri or Aldebaran, and denotes the group of the Hyades, <* θ y 8 e Tauri. Its identification seems absolutely assured by the legend of Prajāpati in the Aitareya Brāhmana. He is there represented as pursuing his daughter with incestuous intention, and as having been shot with an arrow (Isu Trikāndā, ‘ the belt of Orion ’) by the huntsman ’ (Mrgavyādha, Sirius ’). Prajāpati is clearly Orion (Mrgaśiras being the name of the little group of stars in Orion’s head). 3.Mrgaśīrsa or Mrgaśiras, also called Invakā or Invagā, seems to be the faint stars λ, φ,1 φ2 Orionis. They are called Andhakā, * blind,’ in the śāntikalpa of the Atharvaveda, probably because of their dimness. 4.Ardrā, ‘ moist,’ is the name of the brilliant star, α Orionis. But the names by which it is styled, in the plural as Árdrās in the śāñkhāyana Grhya Sūtra and the Naksatrakalpa, and in the dual as Bāhú, in the Taittirīya Brāhmana, point to a constellation of two or more stars, and it may be noted that the corresponding Chinese Sieou includes the seven brilliant stars composing the shoulders, the belt, and the knees of Orion. 5. Punarvasu, the two that give wealth again,’ denotes the two stars, a and β Geminorum, on the heads of Castor and Pollux. The name is no doubt connected with the beneficent character of the Aśvins, who correspond to the Dioscuri. 6.Tisya or Pusya includes the somewhat faint group in the body of the Crab, 7, δ, and θ Cancri. The singular is rather curious, as primarily one star would seem to have been meant, and none of the group is at all prominent. 7. Aśresās or Aślesās, which in some texts is certainly to be read Aśresās or Aślesas, denotes δ, e, η, p, σ, and perhaps also ζ, Hydrse. The word means ‘embracer,’ a name which admirably fits the constellation. 8. Maghās, the ‘bounties,’ are the Sickle, or α, γ, ζ, μ, e Leonis. The variants Anaghā, the ‘ sinless one,’ etc.,clearly refer to the auspicious influence of the constellation. 9. 10. Phālgunī, Phalgunyau, Phalgū, Phalg-unīs, Phal- gunyas, is really a double constellation, divided into Pūrve, ‘ former,’ and Uttare, ‘latter.’ The former is δ and θ Leonis, the latter β and Leonis. According to Weber, the word denotes, like Arjunī, the variant of the Rigveda, a ‘ bright- coloured ’ constellation. 11. Hasta, ‘hand,’ is made up of the five conspicuous stars (δ> Ί, e, a, β) in Corvus, a number which the word itself suggests. According to Geldner, the ‘ five bulls ’ of the Rigveda are this constellation. 12. Citrā, ‘bright,’ is the beautiful star, a Virginis. It is mentioned in a legend of Indra in the Taittirīya Brāhmana, and in that of the ‘ two divine dogs ’ (divyau śvānau) in the śatapatha Brāhmana. 13. Svāti or Nistyā is later clearly the brilliant star Arcturus or a Bootis, its place in the north being assured by the notice in the śāntikalpa, where it is said to be ‘ ever traversing the northern way ’ (nityam uttara-mārgagam). The Taittirīya Brāhmana, however, constructs an asterismal Prajāpati, giving him Citrā (α Virginis) for head, Hasta (Corvus) for hand, the Viśākhe (α and β Librae) for thighs, and the Anurādhās (β, δ, and 7r Scorpionis) for standing place, with Nistyā for heart. But Arcturus, being 30° out, spoils this figure, while, on the other hand, the Arabic and Chinese systems have respectively, instead of Arcturus, Virginis and κ Virginis, which would well fit into the Prajāpati figure. But in spite of the force of this argument of Weber’s, Whitney is not certain that Nistyā here must mean a star in Virgo, pointing out that the name Nistyā, ‘outcast,’ suggests the separation of this Naksatra from the others in question. 14.Viśākhe is the couple of stars a and β Librae. This mansion is later called Rādhā according to the Amarakośa, and it is curious that in the Atharvaveda the expression rādho Viśākhe, the Viśākhe are prosperity,’ should occur. But probably Rādhā is merely an invention due to the name of the next Naksatra, Anurādhā, wrongly conceived as meaning that which is after or follows Rādhā.’ 15. Anūrādhās or Anurādhā, propitious,’ is β, δ, and tγ (perhaps also p) Scorpionis. 16. Rohinī, ‘ ruddy ’; Jyesthaghnī, * slaying the eldest ’; or Jyesthā, ‘eldest,’ is the name of the constellation σ, α, and τ Scorpionis, of which the central star, a, is the brilliant reddish Antares (or Cor Scorpionis). 17.Vicrtau, ‘ the two releasers ’; Mūla, ‘ root or Mūla- barhanī, ‘ uprooting,’ denote primarily λ and v at the extremity of the tail of the Scorpion, but including also the nine or eleven stars from e to v. 18.19. Asādhās (‘ unconquered ’), distinguished as Pūrvās, ‘ former,’ and Uttarās, ‘ latter,’ are really two constellations, of which the former is composed of γ, δ, e, and η Sagittarii, or of 8 and e only, and the latter of θ, σ, t, and ξ Sagittarii, or of two, σ and ζ, only. It is probable that originally only four stars forming a square were meant as included in the whole constellation —viz., σ and f, with 8 and e. 20. Abhijit is the brilliant star a Lyrse with its two companions e and ζ. Its location in 6o° north latitude is completely discordant with the position of the corresponding Arabian and Chinese asterisms. This fact is considered by Oldenberg to support the view that it was a later addition to the system; its occurrence, however, as early as the Maitrāyanī Samhitā, which he does not note, somewhat invalidates that view. In the Taittirīya Brāhmana Abhijit is said to be ‘over Asādhās, under śronā,’ which Weber held to refer to its position in space, inferring thence that its Vedic position corresponded to that of the Arab Manāzil and the Chinese Sieou—viz., a, β Capricorni. But Whitney argues effectively that the words ‘ over ’ and ‘ under ’ really refer to the place of Abhijit in the list, ‘ after ’ Asādhās and ‘ before ’ Sronā. 21. Sronā, ‘lame,’ or Sravana, ‘ ear,’ denotes the bright star a Aquilai with β below and 7 above it. Weber very need- lessly thinks that the name Sravana suggested two ears and the head between. It is quite out of correspondence with the Manāzil and the Sieou, and is clearly an Indian invention. 22. śravisthās, ‘ most famous,’ or later Dhanisthās, ‘most wealthy,’ is the diamond-shaped group, α, β, δ, and 7, in the Dolphin, perhaps also ζ in the same constellation. Like the preceding Naksatra, it is out of harmony with the Manāzil and Sieou. 23. Satabhisaj or śatabhisa, ‘having a hundred physicians,’ seems to be λ Aquarii with the others around it vaguely conceived as numbering a hundred. 24. 25. Prostha-padās (fem. plur.), ‘ feet of a stool,’ or later Bhadra-padās,100 ‘auspicious feet,’ a double asterism forming a square, the former (pūrva) consisting of a and β Pegasi, the latter (uttara) of γ Pegasi and a Andromedse. 26. Revatī, ‘ wealthy,’ denotes a large number of stars (later 32), of which ζ Piscium, close upon the ecliptic where it was crossed by the equator of about 570 a.d., is given as the southernmost. 27. Aśva-yujau, ‘the two horse-harnessers,’ denotes the stars β and ζ Arietis. Aśvinyau101 and Aśvinī102 are later names. 28. Apabharanīs, Bharanīs, or Bharanyas, ‘ the bearers,’ is the name of the small triangle in the northern part of the Ram known as Musca or 35, 39, and 41 Arietis. The Naksatras and the Months.—In the Brāhmanas the Naksatra names are regularly used to denote dates. This is done in two ways. The name, if not already a feminine, may be turned into a feminine and compounded with pūrna-māsa, ‘the full moon,’ as in Tisyā-pūrnamāsa, ‘the full moon in the Naksatra Tisya.’103 Much more often, however, it is turned into a derivative adjective, used with paurnamāsī, ‘the full moon (night)/ or with amāvāsyā, ‘the new moon (night)/ as in Phālgunī paurnamāsl, ‘the full-moon night in the Naksatra Phālgunī’;104 or, as is usual in the Sūtras, the Naksatra adjective alone is used to denote the full-moon night. The month itself is called by a name derived105 from that of a Naksatra, but only Phālguna,106 Caitra,107 Vaiśākha,108 Taisya,109 Māgha110 occur in the Brāhmanas, the complete list later being Phālguna, Caitra, Vaiśākha, Jyaistha, Asādha, Srāvana, Prausthapada, Aśvayuja, Kārttika, Mārgaśīrsa, Taisya, Māgha. Strictly speaking, these should be lunar months, but the use of a lunar year was clearly very restricted: we have seen that as early as the Taittirīya Brāhmana there was a tendency to equate lunar months with the twelve months of thirty days which made up the solar year (see Māsa). The Naksatras and Chronology.—(i) An endeavour has been made to ascertain from the names of the months the period at which the systematic employment of those names was intro¬duced. Sir William Jones111 refers to this possibility, and Bentley, by the gratuitous assumption that śrāvana always marked the summer solstice, concluded that the names of the months did not date before b.c. Ii8I. Weber112 considered that there was a possibility of fixing a date by this means, but Whitney113 has convincingly shown that it is an impossible feat, and Thibaut114 concurs in this view. Twelve became fixed as the number of the months because of the desire, evident in the Brāhmanas, somehow or other to harmonize lunar with solar time; but the selection of twelve Naksatras out of twenty-seven as connected with the night of full moon can have no chronological significance, because full moon at no period occurred in those twelve only, but has at all periods occurred in every one of the twenty-seven at regularly recurrent intervals. (2) All the lists of the Naksatras begin with Krttikās. It is only fair to suppose that there was some special reason for this fact. Now the later list of the Naksatras begins with Aśvinī, and it was unquestionably rearranged because at the time of its adoption the vernal equinox coincided with the star ζ Piscium on the border of Revatī and Aśvinī, say in the course of the sixth century A.D. Weber has therefore accepted the view that the Krttikās were chosen for a similar reason, and the date at which that Naksatra coincided with the vernal equinox has been estimated at some period in the third millennium B.C. A very grave objection to this view is its assumption that the sun, and not the moon, was then regarded as connected with the Naksatras; and both Thibaut and Oldenberg have pronounced decidedly against the idea of connecting the equinox with the Krttikās. Jacobi has contended that in the Rigveda the commencement of the rains and the summer solstice mark the beginning of the new year and the end of the old, and that further the new year began with the summer solstice in Phālgunī.121 He has also referred to the distinction of the two sets of Deva and Yama Naksatras in the Taittirīya Brāhmana as supporting his view of the connexion of the sun and the Naksatras. But this view is far from satisfactory: the Rigveda passages cannot yield the sense required except by translating the word dvādaśa123 as 4 the twelfth (month) * instead of consisting of twelve parts,’ that is, ‘year/ the accepted interpretation; and the division of the Naksatras is not at all satisfactorily explained by a supposed connexion with the sun. It may further be mentioned that even if the Naksatra of Krttikās be deemed to have been chosen because of its coincidence with the vernal equinox, both Whitney and Thibaut are pre¬pared to regard it as no more than a careless variant of the date given by the Jyotisa, which puts the winter solstice in Māgha. (3) The winter solstice in Māgha is assured by a Brāhmana text, for the Kausītaki Brāhmana12® expressly places it in the new moon of Māgha (māghasyāmāυāsyāyām). It is not very important whether we take this with the commentators as the new moon in the middle of a month commencing with the day after full moon in Taisa, or, which is much more likely, as the new moon beginning the month and preceding full moon in Māgha. The datum gives a certain possibility of fixing an epoch in the following way. If the end of Revatī marked the vernal equinox at one period, then the precession of the equinoxes would enable us to calculate at what point of time the vernal equinox was in a position corresponding to the winter solstice in Māgha, when the solstitial colure cut the ecliptic at the beginning of Sravisthās. This would be, on the strict theory, in the third quarter of Bharanī, 6f asterisms removed from Sravisthās, and the difference between that and the beginning of Aśvinī = if asterisms = 23 (27 asterisms being = 360°). Taking, the starting-point at 499 a.d., the assured period of Varāha Mihira, Jones arrived at the date B.C. 1181 for the vernal equinox corresponding to the winter solstice in Māgha—that is, on the basis of ι° = 72 years as the precession. Pratt arrived at precisely the same date, taking the same rate of precession and adopting as his basis the ascertained position in the Siddhantas of the junction star of Maghā, a Leonis or Regulus. Davis and Colebrooke arrived at a different date, B.C. 1391, by taking as the basis of their calculation the junction star of Citrā, which happens to be of uncertain position, varying as much as 30 in the different textbooks. But though the twelfth century has received a certain currency as the epoch of the observation in the Jyotisa, it is of very doubtful value. As Whitney points out, it is impossible to say that the earlier asterisms coincided in position with the later asterisms of 13J0 extent each. They were not chosen as equal divisions, but as groups of stars which stood in conjunction with the moon; and the result of subsequently making them strictly equal divisions was to throw the principal stars of the later groups altogether out of their asterisms. Nor can we say that the star ζ Piscium early formed the eastern boundary of Revatī; it may possibly not even have been in that asterism at all, for it is far remote from the Chinese and Arabic asterisms corresponding to Revatī. Added to all this, and to the uncertainty of the starting-point— 582 a.d., 560 a.d., or 491 a.d. being variants —is the fact that the place of the equinox is not a matter accurately determin¬able by mere observation, and that the Hindu astronomers of the Vedic period cannot be deemed to have been very accurate observers, since they made no precise determination of the number of days of the year, which even in the Jyotisa they do not determine more precisely than as 366 days, and even the Sūrya Siddhānta136 does not know the precession of the equinoxes. It is therefore only fair to allow a thousand years for possible errors,137 and the only probable conclusion to be drawn from the datum of the Kausītaki Brāhmana is that it was recording an observation which must have been made some centuries B.C., in itself a result quite in harmony with the probable date of the Brāhmana literature,138 say B.C. 800-600. (4) Another chronological argument has been derived from the fact that there is a considerable amount of evidence for Phālguna having been regarded as the beginning of the year, since the full moon in Phālgunī is often described as the ‘ mouth (mukham) of the year.’139 Jacobi140 considers that this was due to the fact that the year was reckoned from the winter solstice, which would coincide with the month of Phālguna about B.C. 4000. Oldenberg and Thibaut, on the other hand, maintain that the choice of Phālguna as the ‘ mouth ’ of the year was due to its being the first month of spring. This view is favoured by the fact that there is distinct evidence of the correspondence of Phālguna and the beginning of spring : as we have seen above in the Kausītaki Brāhmana, the new moon in Māgha is placed at the winter solstice, which puts the full moon of Phālgunī at a month and a half after the winter solstice, or in the first week of February, a date not in itself improbable for about B.C. 800, and corresponding with the February 7 of the veris initium in the Roman Calendar. This fact accords with the only natural division of the year into three periods of four months, as the rainy season lasts from June 7-10 to October 7-10, and it is certain that the second set of four months dates from the beginning of the rains (see Cāturmāsya). Tilak, on the other hand, holds that the winter solstice coincided with Māghī full moon at the time of the Taittirīya Samhitā (b.c. 2350), and had coincided with Phālgunī and Caitrī in early periods—viz., B.C. 4000-2500, and B.C. 6000¬4000. (5) The passages of the Taittirīya Samhitā and the Pañca¬vimśa Brāhmana, which treat the full moon in Phālguna as the beginning of the year, give as an alternative the full moon in Caitra. Probably the latter month was chosen so as to secure that the initial day should fall well within the season of spring, and was not, as Jacobi believes, a relic of a period when the winter solstice corresponded with Caitra. Another alternative is the Ekāstakā, interpreted by the commentators as the eighth day after the full moon in Maghās, a time which might, as being the last quarter of the waning half of the old year, well be considered as representing the end of the year. A fourth alternative is the fourth day before full moon; the full moon meant must be that of Caitra, as Álekhana quoted by Ápastamba held, not of Māgha, as Asmarathya, Laugāksi and the Mīmāmsists believed, and as Tilak believes. (6) Others, again, according to the Grhya ritual, began the year with the month Mārgaśīrsa, as is shown by its other name Agrahāyana (‘ belonging to the commencement of the year ’). Jacobi and Tilak think that this one denoted the autumn equinox in Mrgaśiras, corresponding to the winter solstice in Phālgunī. But, as Thibaut shows clearly, it was selected as the beginning of a year that was taken to commence with autumn, just as some took the spring to commence with Caitra instead of Phālguna. (7) Jacobi has also argued, with the support of Buhler, from the terms given for the beginning of Vedic study in the Grhya Sūtras, on the principle that study commenced with the rains (as in the Buddhist vassā) which mark the summer solstice. He concludes that if Bhādrapada appears as the date of commencing study in some texts, it was fixed thus because at one time Prosthapadās (the early name of Bhadra- padās) coincided with the summer solstice, this having been the case when the winter solstice was in Phālguna. But Whitney155 has pointed out that this argument is utterly illegitimate; we cannot say that there was any necessary connexion between the rains and learning—a month like Srāvana might be preferred because of its connexion with the word Sravana, 4 ear ’—and in view of the precession of the equinoxes, we must assume that Bhādrapada was kept because of its traditional coincidence with the beginning of the rains after it had ceased actually so to coincide. the other astronomical phenomena; the discovery of a series of 27 lunar mansions by them would therefore be rather surprising. On the other hand, the nature of such an operation is not very complicated ; it consists merely in selecting a star or a star group with which the moon is in conjunction. It is thus impossible a priori to deny that the Vedic Indians could have invented for themselves a lunar Zodiac. But the question is complicated by the fact that there exist two similar sets of 28 stars or star groups in Arabia and in China, the Manāzil and the Sieou. The use of the Manāzil in Arabia is consistent and effective ; the calendar is regulated by them, and the position of the asterisms corresponds best with the positions required for a lunar Zodiac. The Indians might therefore have borrowed the system from Arabia, but that is a mere possibility, because the evidence for the existence of the Manāzil is long posterior to that for the existence of the Naksatras, while again the Mazzaroth or Mazzaloth of the Old Testament may really be the lunar mansions. That the Arabian system is borrowed from India, as Burgess held, is, on the other hand, not at all probable. Biot, the eminent Chinese scholar, in a series of papers published by him between. 1839 and 1861, attempted to prove the derivation of the Naksatra from the Chinese Sieou. The latter he did not regard as being in origin lunar mansions at all. He thought that they were equatorial stars used, as in modern astronomy, as a standard to which planets or other stars observed in the neighbourhood can be referred; they were, as regards twenty-four of them, selected about B.C. 2357 on account of their proximity to the equator, and of their having the same right ascension as certain circumpolar stars which had attracted the attention of Chinese observers. Four more were added in B.C. IIOO in order to mark the equinoxes and solstices of the period. He held that the list of stars commenced with Mao (= Krttikās), which was at the vernal equinox in B.C. 2357. Weber, in an elaborate essay of i860, disputed this theory, and endeavoured to show that the Chinese literary evidence for the Sieou was late, dating not even from before the third century B.C. The last point does not appear to be correct, but his objections against the basis of Biot’s theory were rein¬forced by Whitney, who insisted that Biot’s supposition of the Sieou’s not having been ultimately derived from a system of lunar mansions, was untenable. This is admitted by the latest defender of the hypothesis of borrowing from China, Lśopold de Saussure, , but his arguments in favour of a Chinese origin for the Indian lunar mansions have been refuted by Oldenberg, who has also pointed out that the series does not begin with Mao ( = Krttikās). There remains only the possibility that a common source for all the three sets—Naksatra, Manāzil, and Sieou—may be found in Babylonia. Hommel has endeavoured to show that recent research has established in Babylonia the existence of a lunar zodiac of twenty-four members headed by the Pleiades ( = Krttikās); but Thibaut’s researches are not favourable to this claim. On the other hand, Weber, Whitney, Zimmer, and Oldenberg all incline to the view that in Babylonia is to be found the origin of the system, and this must for the present be regarded as the most probable view, for there are other traces of Babylonian influence in Vedic literature, such as the legend of the flood, perhaps the Adityas, and possibly the word Manā.
pati Under these words denoting primarily, as the evidence collected in the St. Petersburg Dictionary shows, ‘ lord ’ and ‘ lady,’ and so * husband ’ and * wife,’ it is convenient to consider the marital relations of the Vedic community. Child Marriage.—Marriage in the early Vedic texts appears essentially as a union of two persons of full development. This is shown by the numerous references to unmarried girls who grow old in the house of their fathers (amā-jur), and who adorn themselves in desire of marriage, as well as to the paraphernalia of spells and potions used in the Atharvavedic tradition to compel the love of man or woman respectively, while even the Rigveda itself seems to present us with a spell by which a lover seeks to send all the household to sleep when he visits his beloved. Child wives first occur regularly in the Sūtra period, though it is still uncertain to what extent the rule of marriage before puberty there obtained. The marriage ritual also quite clearly presumes that the marriage is a real and not a nominal one: an essential feature is the taking of the bride to her husband’s home, and the ensuing cohabitation. Limitations on Marriage.—It is difficult to say with certainty within what limits marriage was allowed. The dialogue of Yama and Yam! in the Rigveda seems clearly to point to a prohibition of the marriage of brother and sister. It can hardly be said, as Weber thinks, to point to a practice that was once in use and later became antiquated. In the Gobhila Grhya Sūtra and the Dharma Sūtras are found prohibitions against marriage in the Gotra (‘ family ’) or within six degrees on the mother’s or father’s side, but in the śatapatha Brāh-mana marriage is allowed in the third or fourth generation, the former being allowed, according to Harisvamin, by the Kanvas, and the second by the Saurāstras, while the Dāksi- nātyas allowed marriage with the daughter of the mother’s brother or the son of the father’s sister, but presumably not with the daughter of the mother’s sister or the son of the father’s brother. The prohibition of marriage within the Gotra cannot then have existed, though naturally marriages outside the Gotra were frequent. Similarity of caste was also not an essential to marriage, as hypergamy was permitted even by the Dharma Sūtras, so that a Brāhmana could marry wives of any lower caste, a Ksatriya wives of the two lowest castes as well as of his own caste, a Vaiśya a Sūdrā as well as a Vaiśyā, although the Sūdrā marriages were later disapproved in toto. Instances of such intermarriage are common in the Epic, and are viewed as normal in the Brhaddevatā. It was considered proper that the younger brothers and sisters should not anticipate their elders by marrying before them. The later Samhitās and Brāhmanas present a series of names expressive of such anticipation, censuring as sinful those who bear them. These terms are the pari-vividāna, or perhaps agre-dadhus, the man who, though a younger brother, marries before his elder brother, the latter being then called the parivitta; the agre-didhisu, the man who weds a younger daughter while her elder sister is still unmarried; and the Didhisū-pati, who is the husband of the latter. The passages do not explicitly say that the exact order of birth must always be followed, but the mention of the terms shows that the order was often broken. Widow Remarriage. The remarriage of a widow was apparently permitted. This seems originally to have taken the form of the marriage of the widow to the brother or other nearest kinsman of the dead man in order to produce children. At any rate, the ceremony is apparently alluded to in a funeral hymn of the Rigveda ; for the alternative explanation, which sees in the verse a reference to the ritual of the Purusamedha (‘human sacrifice’), although accepted by Hillebrandt and Delbruck, is not at all probable, while the ordinary view is supported by the Sūtra evidence. Moreover, another passage of the Rigveda clearly refers to the marriage of the widow and the husband’s brother {devr), which constitutes what the Indians later knew as Niyoga. This custom was probably not followed except in cases where no son was already born. This custom was hardly remarriage in the strict sense, since the brother might—so far as appears—be already married himself. In the Atharvaveda, a verse refers to a charm which would secure the reunion, in the next world, of a wife and her second husband. Though, as Delbruck thinks, this very possibly refers to a case in which the first husband was still alive, but was impotent or had lost caste (patita), still it is certain that the later Dharma Sūtras began to recognize ordinary remarriage in case of the death of the first husband Pischel finds some evidence in the Rigveda to the effect that a woman could remarry if her husband disappeared and could not be found or heard of. Polygamy. A Vedic Indian could have more than one wife. This is proved clearly by many passages in the Rigveda; Manu, according to the Maitrāyanī Samhitā, had ten wives ; and the Satapatha Brāhmana explains polygamy by a characteristic legend. Moreover, the king regularly has four wives attributed to him, the Mahisī, the Parivrktī, the Vāvātā, and the Pālāgalī. The Mahisī appears to be the chief wife, being the first, one married according to the śata¬patha Brāhmana. The Parivrktī, ‘ the neglected,’ is explained by Weber and Pischel as one that has had no son. The Vāvātā is ‘the favourite,’ while the Pālāgalī is, according to Weber, the daughter of the last of the court officials. The names are curious, and not very intelligible, but the evidence points to the wife first wedded alone being a wife in the fullest sense. This view is supported by the fact emphasized by Delbruck, that in the sacrifice the Patnī is usually mentioned in the singular, apparent exceptions being due to some mythological reason. Zimmer is of opinion that polygamy is dying out in the Rigvedic period, monogamy being developed from pologamy; Weber, however, thinks that polygamy is secondary, a view that is supported by more recent anthropology. Polyandry.—On the other hand, polyandry is not Vedic. There is no passage containing any clear reference to such a custom. The most that can be said is that in the Rigveda and the Atharvaveda verses are occasionally found in which husbands are mentioned in relation to a single wife. It is difficult to be certain of the correct explanation of each separate instance of this mode of expression; but even if Weber’s view, that the plural is here used majestatis causa, is not accepted, Delbruck’s explanation by mythology is probably right. In other passages the plural is simply generic. Marital Relations.—Despite polygamy, however, there is ample evidence that the marriage tie was not, as Weber has suggested, lightly regarded as far as the fidelity of the wife was concerned. There is, however, little trace of the husband’s being expected to be faithful as a matter of morality. Several passages, indeed, forbid, with reference to ritual abstinence, intercourse with the strī of another. This may imply that adultery on the husband’s part was otherwise regarded as venial. But as the word strī includes all the ‘womenfolk,’ daughters and slaves, as well as wife, the conclusion can hardly be drawn that intercourse with another man’s ‘wife’ was normally regarded with indifference. The curious ritual of the Varunapraghāsās, in which the wife of the sacrificer is questioned as to her lovers, is shown by Delbruck to be a part of a rite meant to expiate unchastity on the part of a wife, not as a normal question for a sacrificer to put to his own wife. Again, Yājñavalkya’s doctrine in the Satapatha Brāhmana, which seems to assert that no one cares if a wife is unchaste (parah-pumsā) or not, really means that no one cares if the wife is away from the men who are sacrificing, as the wives of the gods are apart from them during the particular rite in question. Monogamy is also evidently approved, so that some higher idea of morality was in course of formation. On the other hand, no Vedic text gives us the rule well known to other Indo-Germanic peoples that the adulterer taken in the act can be killed with impunity, though the later legal literature has traces of this rule. There is also abundant evidence that the standard of ordinary sexual morality was not high. Hetairai. In the Rigveda there are many references to illegitimate love and to the abandonment of the offspring of such unions,ββ especially in the case of a protege of Indra, often mentioned as the parāvrkta or parāvrj. The ‘son of a maiden ’ (kumārī-putra) is already spoken of in the Vājasaneyi Samhitā. Such a person appears with a metronymic in the Upanisad period: this custom may be the origin of metro- nymics such as those which make up a great part of the lists of teachers (Vamśas) of the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad. The Vājasaneyi Samhitā refers to illicit unions of śūdra and Arya, both male and female, besides giving in its list of victims at the Purusamedha, or ‘human sacrifice,’ several whose designations apparently mean ‘ courtesan (atītvarī) and ‘ procuress of abortion ’ (
bali Occurs several times in the Rigveda and often later in the sense of tribute to a king or offering to a god. Zimmer thinks that the offerings were in both cases voluntary. He compares the notices of the Germans in Tacitus, where the kings of the tribes are said to receive gifts in kind as presents, but not a regular tribute. There seems to be no ground what­ever for this view. No doubt in origin the prerogatives of monarchy were due to voluntary action on the part of the tribesmen, but that the Vedic peoples, who were essentially a body of conquering invaders, were in this state is most improbable, and the attitude of the Vedic Indian to his gods was at least as compatible with tribute as with voluntary gifts. Zimmer admits that in the case of hostile tribes tribute must be meant even in the Rigveda. See also Rājan.
brahmacarya Denotes the condition of life of the Brahma-cārin or religious student. The technical sense is first found in the last Maṇdala of the Rigveda. The practice of-studentship doubtless developed, and was more strictly regulated by custom as time went on, but it is regularly assumed and discussed in the later Vedic literature, being obviously a necessary part of Vedic society. The Atharvaveda has in honour of the Brahmacārin a hymn which already gives all the characteristic features of religious studentship. The youth is initiated (iipa-nī) by the teacher into a new life; he wears an antelope skin, and lets his hair grow long ;δ he collects fuel, and begs, learns, and practises penance. All these characteristics appear in the later literature. The student lives in the house of his teacher (ācārya-kala-vāsin ; ante-vāsin); he begs, looks after the sacrificial fires, and tends the house. His term of studentship might be long extended: it was normally fixed at twelve years, but much longer periods, such as thirty-two years, are mentioned. The age at which studentship began varied: śvetaketu commenced at twelve and studied for twelve years. It is assumed in the Grhya Sūtras that the three Aryan castes were all required to pass through a period of studentship. But that this is much more than priestly schematism is uncertain. No doubt individuals of the Kçatriya or Vaiśya caste might go through part of the period of studentship, just as Burmese boys of all classes now pass some time in a monastery as students. This is borne out by the reference in the Atharvaveda to the king guarding his country by Brahmacarya—though that is susceptible of a different interpretation—and more clearly by the reference in the Kāthaka Samhitā to a rite intended to benefit one who, although not a Brahmin, had studied (vidyūm anūcya), but had not gained renown, and by references in the Upaniṣads to kings who like Janaka studied the Vedas and the Upaniṣads. Normally, however, the Kṣatriya studied the art of war. One of the duties of the Brahmacārin was chastity. But reference is in several places made to the possibility of misconduct between a student and the wife of his preceptor, nor is any very severe penance imposed in early times later it is different for such a sin. In certain cases the ritual required a breach of chastity, no doubt as a magic spell to secure fertility. Even an old man might on occasion become a pupil, as the story of Árurii shows.
brāmaṇa Descendant of a Brahman' (i.e., of a priest), is found only a few times in the Rigveda, and mostly in its latest parts. In the Atharvaveda and later it is a very common word denoting ‘priest,’ and it appears in the quadruple division of the castes in the Purusa-sūkta (‘hymn of man’) of the Rigveda. It seems certain that in the Rigveda this Brāhmaṇa, or Brahmin, is already a separate caste, differing from the warrior and agricultural castes. The texts regularly claim for them a superiority to the Kṣatriya caste, and the Brahmin is able by his spells or manipulation of the rite to embroil the people and the warriors or the different sections of the warriors. If it is necessary to. recognize, as is sometimes done, that the Brahmin does pay homage to the king at the Rājasūya, nevertheless the unusual fact is carefully explained away so as to leave the priority of the Brahmin unaffected. But it is expressly recognized that the union of the Ksatriya and the Brāhmaṇa is essential for complete prosperity. It is admitted that the king or the nobles might at times oppress the Brahmins, but it is indicated that ruin is then certain swiftly to follow. The Brahmins are gods on earth, like the gods in heaven, but this claim is hardly found in the Rigveda. In the Aitareya Brāhmana the Brahmin is said to be the ‘ recipient of gifts * (ādāyt) and the * drinker of the offering ’ (āpāyT). The other two epithets applied, āvasāyī and yathā- kāma-prayāpya, are more obscure; the former denotes either ‘ dwelling everywhere ’ or ‘ seeking food ’; the latter is usually taken as * moving at pleasure,’ but it must rather allude to the power of the king to assign a place of residence to the Brahmin. In the śatapatha Brāhmana the prerogatives of the Brah¬min are summed up as Arcā, ‘honour’; Dāna, ‘gifts’; Aj'yeyatā,‘ freedom from oppression ’; and Avadhyatā, ‘ freedom from being killed.’ On the other hand, his duties are summed up as Brāhmanya, ‘ purity of descent’; Pratirūpa-caryā, ‘devotion of the duties of his caste’; and Loka-pakti, ‘the perfecting of people ’ (by teaching). ī. Respect paid to Brahmins. The texts are full of references to the civilities to be paid to the Brahmin. He is styled bhagavant, and is provided with good food and entertain¬ment wherever he goes. Indeed, his sanctity exempts him from any close inquiry into his real claim to Brahminhood according to the Pañcavimśa Brāhmana. Gifts to Brahmins. The Dānastuti (‘Praise of gifts’) is a recognized feature of the Rigveda, and the greed of the poets for Dakṣiṇās, or sacrificial fees, is notorious. Vedic texts themselves recognize that the literature thence resulting (Nārā- śamsī) was often false to please the donors. It was, however, a rule that Brahmins should not accept what had been refused by others; this indicates a keen sense of the danger of cheapening their wares. So exclusively theirs was the right to receive gifts that the Pañcavimśa Brāhmaṇa has to explain how Taranta and Purumīlha became able to accept gifts by composing a Rigvedic hymn. The exaggerations in the celebration of the gifts bestowed on the priests has the curious result of giving us a series of numerals of some interest (Daśan). In some passages certain gifts those of a horse or sheep are forbidden, but this rule was not, it is clear, generally observed. Immunities of Brahmins. The Brahmin claimed to be exempt from the ordinary exercise of the royal power. When a king gives all his land and what is on it to the priests, the gift does not cover the property of the Brahmin according to the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa. The king censures all, but not the Brahmin, nor can he safely oppress any Brahmin other than an ignorant priest. An arbitrator (or a witness) must decide (or speak) for a Brahmin against a non-Brahmin in a legal dispute. The Brahmin’s proper food is the Soma, not Surā or Parisrut, and he is forbidden to eat certain forms of flesh. On the other hand, he alone is allowed to eat the remains of the sacrifice, for no one else is sufficiently holy to consume food which the gods have eaten. Moreover, though he cannot be a physician, he helps the physician by being beside him while he exercises his art. His wife and his cow are both sacred. 4.Legal Position of. Brahmins.—The Taittirīya Samhitā lays down a penalty of a hundred (the unit meant is unknown) for an insult to a Brahmin, and of a thousand for a blow ; but if his blood is drawn, the penalty is a spiritual one. The only real murder is the slaying of a Brahmin according to the śatapatha Brāhmana. The crime of slaying a Brahmin ranks above the sin of killing any other man, but below that of killing an embryo (bhrūna) in the Yajurveda ; the crime of slaying an embryo whose sex is uncertain is on a level with that of slaying a Brahmin. The murder of a Brahmin can be expiated only by the horse sacrifice, or by a lesser rite in the late Taittirīya Araṇyaka.The ritual slaying of a Brahmin is allowed in the later ceremonial, and hinted at in the curious legend of śunahśepa ; and a Purohita might be punished with death for treachery to his master. 5.Purity of Birth. The importance of pure descent is seeη in the stress laid on being a descendant of a Rṣi (ārseya). But, on the other hand, there are clear traces of another doctrine, which requires learning, and not physical descent, as the true criterion of Rsihood. In agreement with this is the fact that Satyakāma Jābāla was received as a pupil, though his parentage was unknown, his mother being a slave girl who had been connected with several men, and that in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa the ceremony on acceptance as a pupil required merely the name of the pupil. So Kavasa is taunted in the Rigveda Brāhmaṇas as being the son of a female slave (Dāsī), and Vatsa cleared himself of a similar imputation by a fire ordeal. Moreover, a very simple rite was adequate to remove doubts as to origin. In these circumstances it is doubtful whether much value attaches to the Pravara lists in which the ancestors of the priest were invoked at the beginning of the sacrifice by the Hotṛ and the Adhvaryu priests.66 Still, in many parts of the ritual the knowledge of two or more genera¬tions was needed, and in one ceremony ten ancestors who have drunk the Soma are required, but a literal performance of the rite is excused. Moreover, there are clear traces of ritual variations in schools, like those of the Vasisthas and the Viśvāmitras. 6. The Conduct of the Brahmin. The Brahmin was required to maintain a fair standard of excellence. He was to be kind to all and gentle, offering sacrifice and receiving gifts. Especial stress was laid on purity of speech ; thus Viśvan- tara’s excuse for excluding the Syaparnas from his retinue was their impure (apūtā) speech. Theirs was the craving for knowledge and the life of begging. False Brahmins are those who do not fulfil their duties (cf, Brahmabandhu). But the penances for breach of duty are, in the Sūtras, of a very light and unimportant character. 7. Brahminical Studies. The aim of the priest is to obtain pre-eminence in sacred knowledge (brahma-varcasam), as is stated in numerous passages of Vedic literature. Such distinction is not indeed confined to the Brahmin: the king has it also, but it is not really in a special manner appropriate to the Kṣatriya. Many ritual acts are specified as leading to Brahmavarcasa, but more stress is laid on the study of the sacred texts : the importance of such study is repeatedly insisted upon. The technical name for study is Svādhyāya : the śatapatha Brāhmana is eloquent upon its advantages, and it is asserted that the joy of the learned śrotriya, or ‘student,’ is equal to the highest joy possible. Nāka Maudgfalya held that study and the teaching of others were the true penance (tapas).7δ The object was the ‘ threefold knowledge’ (trayī vidyā), that of the Rc, Yajus, and Sāman, a student of all three Vedas being called tri-śukriya or tn-sukra, ‘thrice pure.’ Other objects of study are enumerated in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, in the Taittirīya Aranyaka, the Chāndogya Upanisad, etc. (See Itihāsa, Purāna; Gāthā, Nārāśamsī; Brahmodya; Anuśās- ana, Anuvyākhyāna, Anvākhyāna, Kalpa, Brāhmaria; Vidyā, Ksatravidyā, Devajanavidyā, Nakçatravidyā, Bhūta- vidyā, Sarpavidyā; Atharvāñgirasah, Daiva, Nidhi, Pitrya, Rāśi; Sūtra, etc.) Directions as to the exact place and time of study are given in the Taittirīya Araṇyaka and in the Sūtras. If study is carried on in the village, it is to be done silently (manasā); if outside, aloud (vācā). Learning is expected even from persons not normally competent as teachers, such as the Carakas, who are recognized in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa as possible sources of information. Here, too, may be mentioned the cases of Brahmins learning from princes, though their absolute value is doubtful, for the priests would naturally represent their patrons as interested in their sacred science: it is thus not necessary to see in these notices any real and independent study on the part of the Kṣatriyas. Yājñavalkya learnt from Janaka, Uddālaka Aruni and two other Brahmins from Pravāhaṇa Jaivali, Drptabālāki Gārgya from Ajātaśatru, and five Brahmins under the lead of Aruṇa from Aśvapati Kaikeya. A few notices show the real educators of thought: wandering scholars went through the country and engaged in disputes and discussions in which a prize was staked by the disputants. Moreover, kings like Janaka offered rewards to the most learned of the Brahmins; Ajātaśatru was jealous of his renown, and imitated his generosity. Again, learned women are several times mentioned in the Brāhmaṇas. A special form of disputation was the Brahmodya, for which there was a regular place at the Aśvamedha (‘ horse sacrifice ’) and at the Daśarātra (‘ ten-day festival,). The reward of learning was the gaining of the title of Kavi or Vipra, ‘ sage.’ 8. The Functions of the Brahmin. The Brahmin was required not merely to practise individual culture, but also to give others the advantage of his skill, either as a teacher or as a sacrificial priest, or as a Purohita. As a teacher the Brahmin has, of course, the special duty of instructing his own son in both study and sacrificial ritual. The texts give examples of this, such as Áruṇi and Svetaketu, or mythically Varuṇa and Bhṛgu. This fact also appears from some of the names in the Vamśa Brāhmana" of the Sāmaveda and the Vamśa (list of teachers) of the śāñkhāyana Áraṇyaka. On the other hand, these Vamśas and the Vamśas of the Satapatha Brāhmaṇa show that a father often preferred to let his son study under a famous teacher. The relation of pupil and teacher is described under Brahmacarya. A teacher might take several pupils, and he was bound to teach them with all his heart and soul. He was bound to reveal everything to his pupil, at any rate to one who was staying with him for a year (saηivatsara-vāsin), an expression which shows, as was natural, that a pupil might easily change teachers. But, nevertheless, certain cases of learning kept secret and only revealed to special persons are enumerated. The exact times and modes of teaching are elaborately laid down in the Sūtras, but not in the earlier texts. As priest the Brahmin operated in all the greater sacrifices; the simple domestic {grhya) rites could normally be performed without his help, but not the more important rites {śrauta). The number varied : the ritual literature requires sixteen priests to be employed at the greatest sacrifices (see Rtvij), but other rites could be accomplished with four, five, six, seven, or ten priests. Again, the Kauçītakins had a seventeenth priest beside the usual sixteen, the Sadasya, so called because he watched the performance from the Sadas, seat.’ In one rite, the Sattra (‘sacrificial session') of the serpents, the Pañcavimśa Brāhmaṇa, adds three more to the sixteen, a second Unnetṛ, an Abhigara, and an Apagara. The later ritual places the Brahman at the head of all the priests, but this is probably not the early view (see Brahman). The sacrifice ensured, if properly performed, primarily the advantages of the sacrificer (yajamāna), but the priest shared in the profit, besides securing the Daksiṇās. Disputes between sacrificers and the priests were not rare, as in the case of Viśvantara and the śyāparṇas, or Janamejaya and the Asitamrgras and the Aiçāvīras are referred to as undesirable priests. Moreover, Viśvāmitra once held the post of Purohita to Sudās, but gave place to Vasiṣtha. The position of Purohita differed considerably from that of the ordinary priest, for the Purohita not merely might officiate at the sacrifice, but was the officiator in all the private sacrifices of his king. Hence he could, and undoubtedly sometimes did, obtain great influence over his master in matters of secular importance; and the power of the priesthood in political as opposed to domestic and religious matters, no doubt rested on the Purohita. There is no recognition in Vedic literature of the rule later prevailing by which, after spending part of his life as a Brahma- cārin, and part as a householder, the Brahmin became an ascetic (later divided into the two stages of Vānaprastha, ‘forest-dweller,’ and Samnyāsin, ‘mystic ’). Yājñavalkya's case shows that study of the Absolute might empty life of all its content for the sage, and drive him to abandon wife and family. In Buddhist times the same phenomenon is seen applying to other than Brahmins. The Buddhist texts are here confirmed in some degree by the Greek authorities. The practice bears a certain resemblance to the habit of kings, in the Epic tradition,of retiring to the forest when active life is over. From the Greek authorities it also appears what is certainly the case in the Buddhist literature that Brahmins practised the most diverse occupations. It is difficult to say how far this was true for the Vedic period. The analogy of the Druids in some respects very close suggests that the Brahmins may have been mainly confined to their professional tasks, including all the learned professions such as astronomy and so forth. This is not contradicted by any Vedic evidence ; for instance, the poet of a hymn of the Rigveda says he is a poet, his father a physician (Bhiṣaj), and his mother a grinder of corn (Upala-prakṣiṇī). This would seem to show that a Brahmin could be a doctor, while his wife would perform the ordinary household duties. So a Purohita could perhaps take the field to assist the king by prayer, as Viśvāmitra, and later on Vasiṣtha do, but this does not show that priests normally fought. Nor do they seem normally to have been agriculturists or merchants. On the other hand, they kept cattle: a Brahmacarin’s duty was to watch his master’s cattle.129 It is therefore needless to suppose that they could not, and did not, on occasion turn to agricultural or mercan¬tile pursuits, as they certainly did later. But it must be remembered that in all probability there was more purity of blood, and less pressure of life, among the Brahmins of the Vedic age than later in Buddhist times, when the Vedic sacrificial apparatus was falling into grave disrepute. It is clear that the Brahmins, whatever their defects, represented the intellectual side of Vedic life, and that the Kṣatriyas, if they played a part in that life, did so only in a secondary degree, and to a minor extent. It is natural to suppose that the Brahmins also composed ballads, the precursors of the epic; for though none such have survived, a few stanzas of this character, celebrating the generosity of patrons, have been preserved by being embedded in priestly compositions. A legend in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa shows clearly that the Brahmins regarded civilization as being spread by them only: Kosala and Videha, no doubt settled by Aryan tribes, are only rendered civilized and habitable by the influence of pious Brahmins. We need not doubt that the non-Brahminical tribes (see Vrātya) had attained intellectual as well as material civilization, but it is reasonable to assume that their civilization was inferior to that of the Brahmins, for the history of Hinduism is the conquest by the Brahmins not by arms, but by mind of the tribes Aryan and non-Aryan originally beyond the pale.
muni Occurs in one hymn of the Rigveda where it seems to denote an ascetic of magic powers with divine afflatus (devesita), the precursor of the strange ascetics of later India* This agrees with the fact that Aitaśa, the Muni, is in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa regarded by his son as deranged, a view not unjustified if the nonsense which passes as the Aitaśapralāpa, ‘ Chatter of Aitaśa,’ was really his. The Rigveda calls Indra the ‘ friend of Munis,’ and the Atharvaveda refers to a ‘ divine Muni ’ (deva muni), by whom a similar ascetic may be meant. In the Upaniṣads6 the Muni is of a more restrained type: he is one who learns the nature of the Brahman, the Absolute, by study, or sacrifice, or penance, or fasting, or faith (:śraddha). It must not of course be thought that there is any absolute distinction between the older Muni and the later: in both cases the man is in a peculiar ecstatic condition, but the ideal of the Upaniṣads is less material than the earlier picture of the Muni, who is more of a ‘ medicine man ’ than a sage. Nor would it be wise to conclude from the comparative rareness of the mention of the Muni in the Vedic texts that he was an infrequent figure in Vedic times: he was probably not approved by the priests who followed the ritual, and whose views were essentially different from the ideals of a Muni, which were superior to earthly considerations, such as the desire for children and Dakṣiṇās.
tudhāna In the Rigveda and later denotes a ‘sorcerer,’ ‘wizard,'or ‘magician.’ The sense of the Rigveda is clearly unfavourable to sorcery. The feminine, Yātudhānl, is also found in the Rigveda and later.
lauhitya ‘Descendant of Lohita,’ is the patronymic of a large number of teachers in the Jaiminlya Upaniṣad Brāhmaṇa, which clearly must have been the special object of study of the Lauhitya family. See Kpçṇadatta, Kpçṇarāta, Jayaka, Tri- veda Kyçṇarāta, Dakṣa Jayanta, Palligupta, Mitrabhūti, Yaśasvin Jayanta, Vipaácit Dpdhajayanta, Vaipaścita Dārdhajayanti, Vaipaścita Dārdhajayanti Dpdhajayanta, śyā- majayanta, śyāmasujayanta, Satyaáravas. A Lauhitya or Lauhikya is also mentioned as a teacher in the śāñkhāyana Araṇyaka. The form of name (Jayanta) affected by the family, and the silence of the older texts, proves that they were modern.
varṇa (lit. ‘colour’) In the Rigveda is applied to denote classes of men, the Dāsa and the Aryan Varṇa being contrasted, as other passages show, on account of colour. But this use is confined to distinguishing two colours: in this respect the Rigveda differs fundamentally from the later Samhitās and Brāhmaṇas, where the four castes (varnūh) are already fully recognized. (a) Caste in the Rigveda.—The use of the term Varṇa is not, of course, conclusive for the question whether caste existed in the Rigveda. In one sense it must be admitted to have existed: the Puruṣa-sūkta, ‘hymn of man,’ in the tenth Maṇdala clearly contemplates the division of mankind into four classes—the Brāhmaṇa, Rājanya, Vaiśya, and śūdra. But the hymn being admittedly late,6 its evidence is not cogent for the bulk of the Rigveda.' Zimmer has with great force com- batted the view that the Rigveda was produced in a society that knew the caste system. He points out that the Brāhmaṇas show us the Vedic Indians on the Indus as unbrah- minized, and not under the caste system; he argues that the Rigveda was the product of tribes living in the Indus region and the Panjab; later on a part of this people, who had wandered farther east, developed the peculiar civilization of the caste system. He adopts the arguments of Muir, derived from the study of the data of the Rigveda, viz.: that (a) the four castes appear only in the late Purusasūkta; (6) the term Varṇa, as shown above, covers the three highest castes of later times, and is only contrasted with Dāsa; (c) that Brāhmaṇa is rare in the Rigveda, Kṣatriya occurs seldom, Rājanya only in the Purusasūkta, where too, alone, Vaiśya and śūdra are found; (d) that Brahman denotes at first ‘poet,’ ‘sage,’ and then ‘ officiating priest,’ or still later a special class of priest; (e) that in some only of the passages where it occurs does Brahman denote a ‘priest by profession,’ while in others it denotes something peculiar to the individual, designating a person distinguished for genius or virtue, or specially chosen to receive divine inspiration. Brāhmaṇa, on the other hand, as Muir admits, already denotes a hereditary professional priesthood. Zimmer connects the change from the casteless system of the Rigveda to the elaborate system of the Yajurveda with the advance of the Vedic Indians to the east, comparing the Ger¬manic invasions that transformed the German tribes into monarchies closely allied with the church. The needs of a conquering people evoke the monarch; the lesser princes sink to the position of nobles ; for repelling the attacks of aborigines or of other Aryan tribes, and for quelling the revolts of the subdued population, the state requires a standing army in the shape of the armed retainers of the king, and beside the nobility of the lesser princes arises that of the king’s chief retainers, as the Thegns supplemented the Gesiths of the Anglo-Saxon monarchies. At the same time the people ceased to take part in military matters, and under climatic influences left the conduct of war to the nobility and their retainers, devoting themselves to agriculture, pastoral pursuits, and trade. But the advantage won by the nobles over the people was shared by them with the priesthood, the origin of whose power lies in the Purohitaship, as Roth first saw. Originally the prince could sacrifice for himself and the people, but the Rigveda itself shows cases, like those of Viśvāmitra and Vasiçtha illustrating forcibly the power of the Purohita, though at the same time the right of the noble to act as Purohita is seen in the case of Devāpi Arṣtisena.le The Brahmins saw their opportunity, through the Purohitaship, of gaining practical power during the confusion and difficulties of the wars of invasion, and secured it, though only after many struggles, the traces of which are seen in the Epic tradition. The Atharvaveda also preserves relics of these conflicts in its narration of the ruin of the Spñjayas because of oppressing Brahmins, and besides other hymns of the Atharvaveda, the śatarudriya litany of the Yajurveda reflects the period of storm and stress when the aboriginal population was still seething with discontent, and Rudra was worshipped as the patron god of all sorts of evil doers. This version of the development of caste has received a good deal of acceptance in it's main outlines, and it may almost be regarded as the recognized version. It has, however, always been opposed by some scholars, such as Haug, Kern, Ludwig, and more recently by Oldenberg25 and by Geldner.25 The matter may be to some extent simplified by recognizing at once that the caste system is one that has progressively developed, and that it is not legitimate to see in the Rigveda the full caste system even of the Yajurveda; but at the same time it is difficult to doubt that the system was already well on its way to general acceptance. The argument from the non- brahminical character of the Vrātyas of the Indus and Panjab loses its force when it is remembered that there is much evidence in favour of placing the composition of the bulk of the Rigveda, especially the books in which Sudās appears with Vasiṣṭha and Viśvāmitra, in the east, the later Madhyadeśa, a view supported by Pischel, Geldner, Hopkins,30 and Mac¬donell.81 Nor is it possible to maintain that Brahman in the Rigveda merely means a ‘poet or sage.’ It is admitted by Muir that in some passages it must mean a hereditary profession ; in fact, there is not a single passage in which it occurs where the sense of priest is not allowable, since the priest was of course the singer. Moreover, there are traces in the Rigveda of the threefold or fourfold division of the people into brahma, ksafram, and vitofi, or into the three classes and the servile population. Nor even in respect to the later period, any more than to the Rigveda, is the view correct that regards the Vaiśyas as not taking part in war. The Rigveda evidently knows of no restriction of war to a nobility and its retainers, but the late Atharvaveda equally classes the folk with the bala, power,’ representing the Viś as associated with the Sabhā, Samiti, and Senā, the assemblies of the people and the armed host. Zimmer explains these references as due to tradition only; but this is hardly a legitimate argument, resting, as it does, on the false assumption that only a Kṣatriya can fight. But it is (see Kçatriya) very doubtful whether Kṣatriya means anything more than a member of the nobility, though later, in the Epic, it included the retainers of the nobility, who increased in numbers with the growth of military monarchies, and though later the ordinary people did not necessarily take part in wars, an abstention that is, however, much exaggerated if it is treated as an absolute one. The Kṣatriyas were no doubt a hereditary body; monarchy was already hereditary (see Rājan), and it is admitted that the śūdras were a separate body: thus all the elements of the caste system were already in existence. The Purohita, indeed, was a person of great importance, but it is clear, as Oldenberg37 urges, that he was not the creator of the power of the priesthood, but owed his position, and the influence he could in consequence exert, to the fact that the sacrifice required for its proper performance the aid of a hereditary priest in whose possession was the traditional sacred knowledge. Nor can any argument for the non-existence of the caste system be derived from cases like that of Devāpi. For, in the first place, the Upaniṣads show kings in the exercise of the priestly functions of learning and teaching, and the Upaniṣads are certainly contemporaneous with an elaborated caste system. In the second place the Rigvedic evidence is very weak, for Devāpi, who certainly acts as Purohita, is not stated in the Rigveda to be a prince at all, though Yāska calls him a Kauravya; the hymns attributed to kings and others cannot be vindicated for them by certain evidence, though here, again, the Brāhmaṇas do not scruple to recognize Rājanyarṣis, or royal sages’; and the famous Viśvāmitra shows in the Rigveda no sign of the royal character which the Brāhmaṇas insist on fastening on him in the shape of royal descent in the line of Jahnu. (6) Caste in the later Samhitās and Brāhmanas. The relation between the later and the earlier periods of the Vedic history of caste must probably be regarded in the main as the hardening of a system already formed by the time of the Rigveda. etc. Three castes Brāhmaṇa, Rājan, śūdraare mentioned in the Atharvaveda, and two castes are repeatedly mentioned together, either Brahman and Kṣatra, or Kṣatra and Viś. 2.The Relation of the Castes. The ritual literature is full of minute differences respecting the castes. Thus, for example, the śatapatha prescribes different sizes of funeral mounds for the four castes. Different modes of address are laid down for the four castes, as ehi, approach ’; āgaccha, ‘come’; ādrava, run up ’; ādhāva, hasten up,’ which differ in degrees of politeness. The representatives of the four castes are dedicated at the Puruṣamedha (‘human sacrifice’) to different deities. The Sūtras have many similar rules. But the three upper castes in some respects differ markedly from the fourth, the śūdras. The latter are in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa declared not fit to be addressed by a Dīkṣita, consecrated person,’ and no śūdra is to milk the cow whose milk is to be used for the Agnihotra ('fire-oblation’). On the other hand, in certain passages, the śūdra is given a place in the Soma sacrifice, and in the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa there are given formulas for the placing of the sacrificial fire not only for the three upper castes, but also for the Rathakāra, chariot-maker.’ Again, in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, the Brāhmaṇa is opposed as eater of the oblation to the members of the other three castes. The characteristics of the several castes are given under Brāhmaṇa, Kçatriya and Rājan, Vaiśya, śūdra: they may be briefly summed up as follows : The Viś forms the basis of the state on which the Brahman and Kṣatra rest;®3 the Brahman and Kṣatra are superior to the Viś j®4 while all three classes are superior to the śūdras. The real power of the state rested with the king and his nobles, with their retainers, who may be deemed the Kṣatriya element. Engaged in the business of the protection of the country, its administration, the decision of legal cases, and in war, the nobles subsisted, no doubt, on the revenues in kind levied from the people, the king granting to them villages (see Grāma) for their maintenance, while some of them, no doubt, had lands of their own cultivated for them by slaves or by tenants. The states were seemingly small there are no clear signs of any really large kingdoms, despite the mention of Mahārājas. The people, engaged in agriculture, pastoral pursuits, and trade (Vaṇij), paid tribute to the king and nobles for the protection afforded them. That, as Baden- Powell suggests, they were not themselves agriculturists is probably erroneous; some might be landowners on a large scale, and draw their revenues from śūdra tenants, or even Aryan tenants, but that the people as a whole were in this position is extremely unlikely. In war the people shared the conflicts of the nobles, for there was not yet any absolute separation of the functions of the several classes. The priests may be divided into two classes the Purohitas of the kings, who guided their employers by their counsel, and were in a position to acquire great influence in the state, as it is evident they actually did, and the ordinary priests who led quiet lives, except when they were engaged on some great festival of a king or a wealthy noble. The relations and functions of the castes are well summed up in a passage of the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, which treats of them as opposed to the Kṣatriya. The Brāhmaṇa is a receiver of gifts (ā-dāyī), a drinker of Soma (ā-pāyī), a seeker of food (āvasāyī), and liable to removal at will (yathākāma-prayāpyaīi).n The Vaiśya is tributary to another (anyasya balikrt), to be lived on by another (anyasyādyal}), and to be oppressed at will (yathā- kāma-jyeyal}). The śūdra is the servant of another (anyasya j>resyah), to be expelled at will (kāmotthāpyah), and to be slain at pleasure {yathākāma-vadhyah). The descriptions seem calculated to show the relation of each of the castes to the Rājanya. Even the Brāhmaṇa he can control, whilst the Vaiśya is his inferior and tributary, whom he can remove without cause from his land, but who is still free, and whom he cannot maim or slay without due process. The śūdra has no rights of property or life against the noble, especially the king. The passage is a late one, and the high place of the Kṣatriya is to some extent accounted for by this fact. It is clear that in the course of time the Vaiśya fell more and more in position with the hardening of the divisions of caste. Weber shows reason for believing that the Vājapeya sacrifice, a festival of which a chariot race forms an integral part, was, as the śāñkhāyana śrauta Sūtra says, once a sacrifice for a Vaiśya, as well as for a priest or king. But the king, too, had to suffer diminution of his influence at the hands of the priest: the Taittirīya texts show that the Vājapeya was originally a lesser sacrifice which, in the case of a king, was followed by the Rājasūya, or consecration of him as an overlord of lesser kings, and in that of the Brahmin by the Bṛhaspatisava, a festival celebrated on his appointment as a royal Purohita. But the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa exalts the Vājapeya, in which a priest could be the sacrificer, over the Rājasūya, from which he was excluded, and identifies it with the Bṛhaspatisava, a clear piece of juggling in the interests of the priestly pretentions. But we must not overestimate the value of such passages, or the exaltation of the Purohita in the later books of the śatapatha and Aitareya Brāhmanas as evidence of a real growth in the priestly power: these books represent the views of the priests of what their own powers should be, and to some extent were in the Madhyadeśa. Another side of the picture is presented in the Pāli literature, which, belonging to a later period than the Vedic, undoubtedly underestimates the position of the priests ; while the Epic, more nearly contemporaneous with the later Vedic period, displays, despite all priestly redaction, the temporal superiority of the nobility in clear light. Although clear distinctions were made between the different castes, there is little trace in Vedic literature of one of the leading characteristics of the later system, the impurity communicated by the touch or contact of the inferior castes, which is seen both directly in the purification rendered necessary in case of contact with a śūdra, and indirectly in the prohibition of eating in company with men of lower caste. It is true that prohibition of eating in company with others does appear, but hot in connexion with caste: its purpose is to preserve the peculiar sanctity of those who perform a certain rite or believe in a certain doctrine; for persons who eat of the same food together, according to primitive thought, acquire the same characteristics and enter into a sacramental communion. But Vedic literature does not yet show that to take food from an inferior caste was forbidden as destroying purity. Nor, of course, has the caste system developed the constitution with a head, a council, and common festivals which the modern caste has; for such an organization is not found even in the Epic or in the Pāli literature. The Vedic characteristics of caste are heredity, pursuit of a common occupation, and restriction on intermarriage. 3. Restrictions on Intermarriage. Arrian, in his Indica, probably on the authority of Megasthenes, makes the prohibi¬tion of marriage between <γevη, no doubt castes,’ a characteristic of Indian life. The evidence of Pāli literature is in favour of this view, though it shows that a king could marry whom he wished, and could make his son by that wife the heir apparent. But it equally shows that there were others who held that not the father’s but the mother’s rank determined the social standing of the son. Though Manu recognizes the possibility of marriage with the next lower caste as producing legitimate children, still he condemns the marriage of an Aryan with a woman of lower caste. The Pāraskara Gṛhya Sūtra allows the marriage of a Kṣatriya with a wife of his own caste or of the lower caste, of a Brahmin with a wife of his own caste or of the two lower classes, and of a Vaiśya with a Vaiśya wife only. But it quotes the opinion of others that all of them can marry a śūdra wife, while other authorities condemn the marriage with a śūdra wife in certain circumstances, which implies that in other cases it might be justified. The earlier literature bears out this impression: much stress is laid on descent from a Rṣi, and on purity of descent ; but there is other evidence for the view that even a Brāhmaṇa need not be of pure lineage. Kavaṣa Ailūṣa is taunted with being the son of a Dāsī, ‘slave woman,’ and Vatsa was accused of being a śūdrā’s son, but established his purity by walking unhurt through the flames of a fire ordeal. He who is learned (śiiśruvān) is said to be a Brāhmaṇa, descended from a Rṣi (1ārseya), in the Taittirīya Samhitā; and Satyakāma, son of Jabālā, was accepted as a pupil by Hāridrumata Gautama, though he could not name his father. The Kāthaka Samhitā says that knowledge is all-important, not descent. But all this merely goes to show that there was a measure of laxity in the hereditary character of caste, not that it was not based on heredity. The Yajurveda Samhitās recognize the illicit union of Árya and śūdrā, and vice versa: it is not unlikely that if illicit unions took place, legal marriage was quite possible. The Pañcavimśa Brāhmaṇa, indeed, recognizes such a case in that of Dīrghatamas, son of the slave girl Uśij, if we may adopt the description of Uśij given in the Brhaddevatā. In a hymn of the Atharvaveda extreme claims are put forward for the Brāhmaṇa, who alone is a true husband and the real husband, even if the woman has had others, a Rājanya or a Vaiśya: a śūdra Husband is not mentioned, probably on purpose. The marriage of Brāhmaṇas with Rājanya women is illustrated by the cases of Sukanyā, daughter of king śaryāta, who married Cyavana, and of Rathaviti’s daughter, who married śyāvāśva. 4.Occupation and Caste.—The Greek authorities and the evidence of the Jātakas concur in showing it to have been the general rule that each caste was confined to its own occupations, but that the Brāhmaṇas did engage in many professions beside that of simple priest, while all castes gave members to the śramaṇas, or homeless ascetics. The Jātakas recognize the Brahmins as engaged in all sorts of occupations, as merchants, traders, agriculturists, and so forth. Matters are somewhat simpler in Vedic literature, where the Brāhmaṇas and Kṣatriyas appear as practically confined to their own professions of sacrifice and military or administrative functions. Ludwig sees in Dīrgliaśravas in the Rigveda a Brahmin reduced by indigence to acting as a merchant, as allowed even later by the Sūtra literature; but this is not certain, though it is perfectly possible. More interesting is the question how far the Ksatriyas practised the duties of priests; the evidence here is conflicting. The best known case is, of course, that of Viśvāmitra. In the Rigveda he appears merely as a priest who is attached to the court of Sudās, king of the Tftsus ; but in the Pañcavimśa Brāhmaṇa he is called a king, a descendant of Jahnu, and the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa refers to śunahśepa’s succeeding, through his adoption by Viśvāmitra, to the divine lore (daiva veda) of the Gāthins and the lordship of the Jahnus. That in fact this tradition is correct seems most improbable, but it serves at least to illustrate the existence of seers of royal origin. Such figures appear more than once in the Pañcavimśa Brāhmana, which knows the technical terms Rājanyarçi and Devarājan corresponding to the later Rājarṣi, royal sage.’ The Jaiminiya Brāhmaṇa says of one who knows a certain doctrine, ‘being a king he becomes a seer’ (rājā sann rsir bhavati), and the Jaiminiya Upanisad Brāhmana applies the term Rāj'anya to a Brāhmaṇa. Again, it is argued that Devāpi Árstiseṇa, who acted as Purohita, according to the Rigveda, for śantanu, was a prince, as Yāska says or implies he was. But this assumption seems to be only an error of Yāska’s. Since nothing in the Rigveda alludes to any relationship, it is impossible to accept Sieg’s view that the Rigveda recognizes the two as brothers, but presents the fact of a prince acting the part of Purohita as unusual and requiring explanation. The principle, however, thus accepted by Sieg as to princes in the Rigveda seems sound enough. Again, Muir has argued that Hindu tradition, as shown in Sāyaṇa, regards many hymns of the Rigveda as composed by royal personages, but he admits that in many cases the ascription is wrong; it may be added that in the case of Prthī Vainya, where the hymn ascribed to him seems to be his, it is not shown in the hymn itself that he is other than a seer; the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa calls him a king, but that is probably of no more value than the later tradition as to Viśvāmitra. The case of Viśvantara and the śyāparṇas mentioned in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa has been cited as that of a king sacrificing without priestly aid, but the interpretation iś quite uncertain, while the parallel of the Kaśyapas, Asitamrgas, and Bhūtavīras mentioned in the course of the narrative renders it highly probable that the king had other priests to carry out the sacrifice. Somewhat different are a series of other cases found in the Upaniṣads, where the Brahma doctrine is ascribed to royal persons. Thus Janaka is said in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa to have become a Brahman; Ajātaśatru taught Gārgya Bālāki Pravāhaṇa Jaivali instructed śvetaketu Áruṇeya, as well as śilaka śālāvatya and Caikitāyana Dālbhya; and Aśvapati Kaikeya taught Brahmins. It has been deduced from such passages that the Brahma doctrine was a product of the Kṣatriyas. This conclusion is, however, entirely doubtful, for kings were naturally willing to be flattered by the ascription to them of philosophic activity, and elsewhere the opinion of a Rājanya is treated with contempt. It is probably a fair deduction that the royal caste did not much concern itself with the sacred lore of the priests, though it is not unlikely that individual exceptions occurred. But that warriors became priests, that an actual change of caste took place, is quite unproved by a single genuine example. That it was impossible we cannot say, but it seems not to have taken place. To be distinguished from a caste change, as Fick points out, is the fact that a member of any caste could, in the later period at least, become a śramaṇa, as is recorded in effect of many kings in the Epic. Whether the practice is Vedic is not clear: Yāska records it of Devāpi, but this is not evidence for times much anterior to the rise of Buddhism. On the other hand, the Brahmins, or at least the Purohitas, accompanied the princes in battle, and probably, like the mediaeval clergy, were not unprepared to fight, as Vasistha and Viśvāmitra seem to have done, and as priests do even in the Epic from time to time. But a priest cannot be said to change caste by acting in this way. More generally the possibility of the occurrence of change of caste may be seen in the Satapatha Brāhmaṇa,138 where śyāparṇa Sāyakāyana is represented as speaking of his off¬spring as if they could have become the nobles, priests, and commons of the śalvas; and in the Aitareya Brāhmana,139 where Viśvantara is told that if the wrong offering were made his children would be of the three other castes. A drunken Rṣi of the Rigveda140 talks as if he could be converted into a king. On the other hand, certain kings, such as Para Átṇāra, are spoken of as performers of Sattras, ‘sacrificial sessions.’ As evidence for caste exchange all this amounts to little; later a Brahmin might become a king, while the Rṣi in the Rigveda is represented as speaking in a state of intoxication; the great kings could be called sacrificers if, for the nonce, they were consecrated (dīksita), and so temporarily became Brahmins.The hypothetical passages, too, do not help much. It would be unwise to deny the possibility of caste exchange, but it is not clearly indicated by any record. Even cases like that of Satyakāma Jābāla do not go far; for ex hypothesi that teacher did not know who his father was, and the latter could quite well have been a Brahmin. It may therefore be held that the priests and the nobles practised hereditary occupations, and that either class was a closed body into which a man must be born. These two Varṇas may thus be fairly regarded as castes. The Vaiśyas offer more difficulty, for they practised a great variety of occupations (see Vaiśya). Fick concludes that there is no exact sense in which they can be called a caste, since, in the Buddhist literature, they were divided into various groups, which themselves practised endogamy such as the gahapatis, or smaller landowners, the setthis, or large merchants and members of the various guilds, while there are clear traces in the legal textbooks of a view that Brāhmana and Kṣatriya stand opposed to all the other members of the community. But we need hardly accept this view for Vedic times, when the Vaiśya, the ordinary freeman of the tribe, formed a class or caste in all probability, which was severed by its free status from the śūdras, and which was severed by its lack of priestly or noble blood from the two higher classes in the state. It is probably legitimate to hold that any Vaiśya could marry any member of the caste, and that the later divisions within the category of Vaiśyas are growths of divisions parallel with the original process by which priest and noble had grown into separate entities. The process can be seen to-day when new tribes fall under the caste system: each class tries to elevate itself in the social scale by refusing to intermarry with inferior classes on equal terms—hypergamy is often allowed—and so those Vaiśyas who acquired wealth in trade (śreṣthin) or agriculture (the Pāli Gahapatis) would become distinct, as sub-castes, from the ordinary Vaiśyas. But it is not legitimate to regard Vaiśya as a theoretic caste; rather it is an old caste which is in process of dividing into innumerable sub-castes under influences of occupation, religion, or geographical situation. Fick denies also that the śūdras ever formed a single caste: he regards the term as covering the numerous inferior races and tribes defeated by the Aryan invaders, but originally as denoting only one special tribe. It is reasonable to suppose that śūdra was the name given by the Vedic Indians to the nations opposing them, and that these ranked as slaves beside the three castes—nobles, priests, and people—just as in the Anglo-Saxon and early German constitution beside the priests, the nobiles or eorls, and the ingenui, ordinary freemen or ceorls, there was a distinct class of slaves proper; the use of a generic expression to cover them seems natural, whatever its origin (see śūdra). In the Aryan view a marriage of śūdras could hardly be regulated by rules; any śūdra could wed another, if such a marriage could be called a marriage at all, for a slave cannot in early law be deemed to be capable of marriage proper. But what applied in the early Vedic period became no doubt less and less applicable later when many aboriginal tribes and princes must have come into the Aryan community by peaceful means, or by conquest, without loss of personal liberty, and when the term śūdra would cover many sorts of people who were not really slaves, but were freemen of a humble character occupied in such functions as supplying the numerous needs of the village, like the Caṇdālas, or tribes living under Aryan control, or independent, such as the Niṣādas. But it is also probable that the śūdras came to include men of Aryan race, and that the Vedic period saw the degradation of Aryans to a lower social status. This seems, at any rate, to have been the case with the Rathakāras. In the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa the Rathakāra is placed as a special class along with the Brāhmaṇas, Rājanyas, and Vaiśyas: this can hardly be interpreted except to mean that the Rathakāras were not included in the Aryan classes, though it is just possible that only a subdivision of the Vaiśyas is meant. There is other evidence that the Rathakāras were regarded as śūdras. But in the Atharvaveda the Rathakāras and the Karmāras appear in a position of importance in connexion with the selection of the king; these two classes are also referred to in an honourable way in the Vājasaneyi Sarphitā; in the śata¬patha Brāhmaṇa, too, the Rathakāra is mentioned as a a person of high standing. It is impossible to accept the view suggested by Fick that these classes were originally non- Aryan ; we must recognize that the Rathakāras, in early Vedic times esteemed for their skill, later became degraded because of the growth of the feeling that manual labour was not dignified. The development of this idea was a departure from the Aryan conception; it is not unnatural, however undesirable, and has a faint parallel in the class distinctions of modern Europe. Similarly, the Karmāra, the Takṣan the Carmamna, or ‘tanner,’ the weaver and others, quite dignified occupations in the Rigveda, are reckoned as śūdras in the Pāli texts. The later theory, which appears fully developed in the Dharma Sūtras, deduces the several castes other than the original four from the intermarriage of the several castes. This theory has no justification in the early Vedic literature. In some cases it is obviously wrong; for example, the Sūta is said to be a caste of this kind, whereas it is perfectly clear that if the Sūtas did form a caste, it was one ultimately due to occupation. But there is no evidence at all that the Sūtas, Grāmaηīs, and other members of occupations were real castes in the sense that they were endogamic in the early Vedic period. All that we can say is that there was a steady progress by which caste after caste was formed, occupation being an important determining feature, just as in modern times there are castes bearing names like Gopāla (cowherd ’) Kaivarta or Dhīvara ('fisherman'), and Vaṇij (‘merchant’). Fick finds in the Jātakas mention of a number of occupations whose members did not form part of any caste at all, such as the attendants on the court, the actors and dancers who went from village to village, and the wild tribes that lived in the mountains, fishermen, hunters, and so on. In Vedic times these people presumably fell under the conception of śūdra, and may have included the Parṇaka, Paulkasa, Bainda, who are mentioned with many others in the Vājasaneyi Samhitā and the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa in the list of victims at the Puruṣamedha (‘human sacrifice’). The slaves also, whom Fick includes in the same category, were certainly included in the term śūdra. 5. Origin of the Castes.—The question of the origin of the castes presents some difficulty. The ultimate cause of the extreme rigidity of the caste system, as compared with the features of any other Aryan society, must probably be sought in the sharp distinction drawn from the beginning between the Aryan and the śūdra. The contrast which the Vedic Indians felt as existing between themselves and the conquered population, and which probably rested originally on the difference of colour between the upper and the lower classes, tended to accentuate the natural distinctions of birth, occupation, and locality which normally existed among the Aryan Indians, but which among other Aryan peoples never developed into a caste system like that of India. The doctrine of hypergamy which marks the practical working of the caste system, seems clearly to point to the feeling that the Aryan could marry the śūdrā, but not the śūdra the Aryā. This distinction probably lies at the back of all other divisions: its force may be illustrated by the peculiar state of feeling as to mixed marriages, for example, in the Southern States of America and in South Africa, or even in India itself, between the new invaders from Europe and the mingled population which now peoples the country. Marriages between persons of the white and the dark race are disapproved in principle, but varying degrees of condemnation attach to (1) the marriage of a man of the white race with a woman of the dark race; (2) an informal connexion between these two; (3) a marriage between a woman of the white race and a man of the dark race; and (4) an informal connexion between these two. Each category, on the whole, is subject to more severe reprobation than the preceding one. This race element, it would seem, is what has converted social divisions into castes. There appears, then, to be a large element of truth in the theory, best represented by Risley, which explains caste in the main as a matter of blood, and which holds that the higher the caste is, the greater is the proportion of Aryan blood. The chief rival theory is undoubtedly that of Senart, which places the greatest stress on the Aryan constitution of the family. According to Senart the Aryan people practised in affairs of marriage both a rule of exogamy, and one of endogamy. A man must marry a woman of equal birth, but not one of the same gens, according to Roman law as interpreted by Senart and Kovalevsky ; and an Athenian must marry an Athenian woman, but not one of the same γez/oç. In India these rules are reproduced in the form that one must not marry within the Gotra, but not without the caste. The theory, though attractively developed, is not convincing; the Latin and Greek parallels are not even probably accurate ; and in India the rule forbidding marriage within the Gotra is one which grows in strictness as the evidence grows later in date. On the other hand, it is not necessary to deny that the development of caste may have been helped by the family traditions of some gentes, or Gotras. The Patricians of Rome for a long time declined intermarriage with the plebeians; the Athenian Eupatridai seem to have kept their yevη pure from contamination by union with lower blood; and there may well have been noble families among the Vedic Indians who intermarried only among themselves. The Germans known to Tacitus163 were divided into nobiles and ingenui, and the Anglo-Saxons into eorls and ceorls, noble and non-noble freemen.1®4 The origin of nobility need not be sought in the Vedic period proper, for it may already have existed. It may have been due to the fact that the king, whom we must regard as originally elected by the people, was as king often in close relation with, or regarded as an incarnation of, the deity;165 and that hereditary kingship would tend to increase the tradition of especially sacred blood: thus the royal family and its offshoots would be anxious to maintain the purity of their blood. In India, beside the sanctity of the king, there was the sanctity of the priest. Here we have in the family exclusiveness of king and nobles, and the similar exclusiveness of a priesthood which was not celibate, influences that make for caste, especially when accompanying the deep opposition between the general folk and the servile aborigines. Caste, once created, naturally developed in different directions. Nesfield166 was inclined to see in occupation the one ground of caste. It is hardly necessary seriously to criticize this view considered as an ultimate explanation of caste, but it is perfectly certain that gilds of workers tend to become castes. The carpenters (Tak§an), the chariot-makers (Rathakāra), the fisher¬men (Dhaivara) and others are clearly of the type of caste, and the number extends itself as time goes on. But this is not to say that caste is founded on occupation pure and simple in its first origin, or that mere difference of occupation would have produced the system of caste without the interposition of the fundamental difference between Aryan and Dāsa or śūdra blood and colour. This difference rendered increasingly important what the history of the Aryan peoples shows us to be declining, the distinction between the noble and the non-noble freemen, a distinction not of course ultimate, but one which seems to have been developed in the Aryan people before the separation of its various.branches. It is well known that the Iranian polity presents a division of classes comparable in some respects with the Indian polity. The priests (Athravas) and warriors (Rathaesthas) are unmistakably parallel, and the two lower classes seem to correspond closely to the Pāli Gahapatis, and perhaps to the śūdras. But they are certainly not castes in the Indian sense of the word. There is no probability in the view of Senart or of Risley that the names of the old classes were later superimposed artificially on a system of castes that were different from them in origin. We cannot say that the castes existed before the classes, and that the classes were borrowed by India from Iran, as Risley maintains, ignoring the early Brāhmaṇa evidence for the four Varnas, and treating the transfer as late. Nor can we say with Senart that the castes and classes are of independent origin. If there had been no Varṇa, caste might never have arisen; both colour and class occupation are needed for a plausible account of the rise of caste.
vāc ‘Speech,’ plays a great part in Vedic speculation, but only a few points are of other than mythological significance. Speech is in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa divided into four kinds —that of men, of animals, of birds (vayāψsi), and of small creeping things (ksudram sañsrpam). The discrimination or making articulate of speech is ascribed to Indra by the Saiphitās. The speech ’ of the following musical instruments — Tūṇava, Vīṇā, Dundubhi — is mentioned, and in one Samhitā also that of the axle of a chariot. The speech of the Kuru-Pañcālas was especially renowned, as well as that of the northern country, according to the Kausītaki Brāhmaṇa, so that men went there to study the language. On the other hand, barbarisms in speech were known, and were to be avoided. One division of speech referred to* is that of the divine (daivī) and the human (mānusī), of which some specimens are given, such as om, the divine counterpart of tathā, and so forth. The Brahmin is said to know both ; it seems best to regard the distinction not as between Sanskrit and Apabhramśa, as Sāyaṇa suggests, but as between the Sanskrit of the ritual and the hymns and that of ordinary life. Reference is also made to Aryan11 and to Brahmin12 speech, by which Sanskrit, as opposed to non-Aryan tongues, seems to be meant. The Vrātyas are described as speaking the language of the initiated (dlksita-vāc), though not themselves initiated (a-dīksita), but as calling that which is easy to utter (a-durukta), difficult to utter. This may mean that the non-Brahminical Indians were advancing more rapidly than the Brahminical tribes to Prākrit speech, especially if it is legitimate to connect the Vrātyas with the barbarians in speech alluded to in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa.
vācaknavī ‘Descendant of Vacaknu,’ is the patronymic of a woman with the further patronymic of Gārgl, who appears as a student of Brahman in the Brhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.
vidyā In the Atharvaveda and later denotes ‘knowledge,’ especially that of the three Vedas, which are called the trayī vidyā, ‘the threefold knowledge,’ as early as the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa. In a more special sense Vidyā occurs in lists of objects of study in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa. What exactly the expression here means is uncertain : Sāyaṇa suggests the philosophic systems; Geldner the first Brāhmaṇas; and Eggeling, more probably, special sciences like the Sarpavidyā or the Visavidyā.
viśvāmitra (‘Friend of all ’) is the name of a Rṣi who is mentioned in the Rigveda, and to whom the third Maṇdala is attributed by tradition. In one hymn which appears to be his own composition, he praises the rivers Vipāś (Beas) and śutudrī (Sutlej'). There he calls himself the son of Kuśika, and seems unquestionably to be the helper of the Bharatas, whom he mentions. The tribe, engaged in a raid, apparently came to the rivers from the east. Anxious to cross them, they The Viśvāmitras are mentioned in several other passages of the Rigveda, and are also designated as a family by the term Kuśikas. In the Epic Viśvāmitra is represented as a king, who becomes a Brahmin. There is no trace of his kingship in the Rigveda, but the Nirukta calls his father, Kuśika, a king; the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa10 refers to śunahśepa as succeeding to the lordship of the Jahnus, as well as the ‘divine lore’ (daiva vedd) of the Gāthinsj^and the Pañcavirçiśa Brāhmana17 mentions Viśvāmitra as a king. But there is no real trace of this kingship of Viśvāmitra: it may probably be dismissed as a mere legend, with no more foundation at most than that Viśvā¬mitra was of a family which once had been royal. But even this is doubtful.
visras Denotes the ‘decay’ of old age, ‘decrepitude,’ ‘senility.’
vedāṅga As the name of a text subsidiary to the study of the Rigveda, is first found in the Nirukta and the Rigveda Prātiśākhya.
śūdra Is the designation of the fourth caste in the Vedic state (see Varṇa). It is quite unknown in the Rigveda except in the Purusasūkta (‘hymn of man’) in the tenth Maṇdala, where in the earliest version of the origin of the castes the śūdra for the first time appears. The Rigveda, on the other hand, knows Dasyu and Dāsa, both as aborigines independent of Aryan control and as subjugated slaves: it is reasonable to reckon the śūdra of the later texts as belonging to the aborigines who had been reduced to subjection by the Aryans. Strictly speaking, the defeated aborigines must have been regarded as slaves, but it is obvious that, except on occasions when most of the men were slain, which may have occurred quite often, there must have remained too many of them to be used as slaves of individual owners. The villages of the aborigines must have continued to subsist, but under Aryan lordship and control: there may be this amount of truth in Baden Powell’s theory, which practically traced all the early cultivating villages in India to Dravidian origin. On the other hand, the term śūdra would also cover the wild hill tribes which lived by hunting and fishing, and many of which would acknowledge the superiority of their Aryan neighbours: it could, in fact, be applied to all beyond the pale of the Aryan state. This view of the śūdra suits adequately the Vedic references to his condition, which would not apply adequately to domestic slaves only. The śūdra is continually opposed to the Aryan, and the colour of the śūdra is compared with that of the Aryan, just as his ways are so contrasted. The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, in its account of the castes, declares that the śūdra is anyasya presya, ‘the servant of another’; kāmotthāpya, ‘to be expelled at will’; andyathākāmaυadhya, ‘to be slain at will.’ All these terms well enough describe the position of the serf as the result of a conquest: the epithets might have been applied to the English serf after the Norman Conquest with but slight inaccuracy, especially if his master had received a grant of jurisdiction from the Crown. The Pañcavimśa Brāh- mapa explains that even if prosperous (bahu-paśu, having many cows’) a śūdra could not be other than a servant: his business was pādāvanejya, ‘ the washing of the feet ’ of his superiors. The Mahābhārata says out and out that a śūdra has no property (a hi svam asti śūdrasya, ‘ the śūdra has nothing he can call his own’). On the other hand, just as in England the royal justice would protect the serf in life and limb,8 so it appears that the slaying of a śūdra involved a wergeld of ten cows according to both Baudhāyana and Ápastamba. It may, indeed, be held that this wergeld was only due in case of murder by another than the master, but such limitation is nowhere stated. In sacred matters the distinction between Aryan and śūdra was, of course, specially marked. The texts do not hesitate to declare that the upper castes were ‘all,’ ignoring the śūdras; the śūdra is prohibited from milking the cow for the milk required at the Agnihotra (‘oblation to Agni ’); and the śatapatha Brāhmana forbids a man who has been consecrated (1dlksita) for a sacrifice to speak to a śūdra at all for the time, though the śāṭyāyanaka seems to have relaxed this rule by confining it to cases in which the śūdra was guilty of some sin. At the sacrifice itself the śūdra could not be present in the śālā, ‘hall’; he is definitely classed in the śatapatha Brāh¬mana and the Pañcavimśa Brāhmana10 as unfit for ‘ sacrifice ’ (ayajñtya); and declared in the Kāçhaka Samhitā not to be admitted to drink Soma. At the Pravargya (introductory Soma) rite the performer is not allowed to come in contact with a śūdra, who here, as in the Kāthaka Samhitā,17 is reckoned as excluded from a share in the Soma-draught. On the other hand, the śūdra is one of the victims at the Puruṣa- medha (‘ human sacrifice ’) in the Yaj’urveda, and a fight between an Aryan and a śūdra, in which, of course, the former wins, forms a part of the Mahāvrata rite, being perhaps a precursor of the Indian drama. Other indications, however, exist, showing that it would be undesirable to ignore the real importance of the śūdra, which again reminds us of the condition of the serf, who, though legally restrained, still gradually won his way to the rank of a free man. Rich śūdras are mentioned in the early texts, just as śūdra gahapatis, ‘householders,’ occur in the Buddhist texts, and śūdra kings in the legal literature. Sin against śūdra and Aryan is mentioned; prayers for glory on behalf of śūdras, as well as of the other castes occur; and the desire to be dear to śūdra as well as to Aryan is expressed. The Sūtras also, while they emphasize as general rules points earlier not insisted on, such as their inferiority in sitting, etc., their exclusion from the study of the Vedas, the danger of contact with them or their food, still recognize that śūdras can be merchants, or even exercise any trade.Moreover, the Sūtras permit the marriage of a śūdrā woman with members of all castes. Though it was a reproach to Vatsa and to Kavaṣa that they were the sons of a śūdrā and a Dāsī respectively, still the possibility of such a reproach shows that marriages of this kind did take place. Moreover, illicit unions of Arya and śūdrā, or śūdra and Aryā, are referred to in the Samhitās of the Yajurveda. The origin of the term śūdra is quite obscure, but Zimmer points out that Ptolemy mentions tvBpoi as a people, and he thinks that the Brāhui may be meant. Without laying any stress on this identification, it is reasonable to accept the view that the term was originally the name of a large tribe opposed to the Aryan invasion. See also Niṣāda.
śvetaketu áruṇeya (‘Descendant of Aruṇa’) or Auddālaki (‘son of Uddālaka’) is mentioned repeatedly in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa and the Chāndogya Upaniṣad. In the Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad he appears as śvetaketu, son of Áruṇi, and as a Gautama. In the Kauṣītaki Brāhmaṇa he is quoted as an authority on the vexed question of the duty of the Sadasya, or the seventeenth priest, at the ritual of the Kauṣītakins, to notify errors in the sacrifice; Áruṇi, his father, is also cited. He was a person of some originality, for he insisted on eating honey despite the general prohibition of the use of that delicacy by Brahmacārins or religious students. He was a contemporary of, and was instructed by the Pañcāla king Pravāhaṇa Jaivala. He was also a contemporary of Janaka, of Videha, and figured among the Brahmin disputants at his court. A story is told of him in the śāñkhāyana śrauta Sūtra:[6] Jala Jātūkarṇyā was lucky enough to become the Purohita of three peoples or kings, of Kāśi, Kosala, and Videha. Seeing this, śvetaketu felt annoyed and reproached his father with his excessive devotion to sacrifice, which merely enriched and glorified others, not himself. His father replied, forbidding him to speak thus: he had learned the true method of sacrificing, and his ambition in life had been to discuss it with every Brahmin. All the references to śvetaketu belong to the latest period of Vedic literature. It is, therefore, not surprising that the Ápa- stamba Dharma Sūtra should refer to him as an Avara, or person of later days, who still became a Rṣi by special merit. His date, however, must not be fixed too low, because the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa in which he plays so marked a part is certainly earlier than Pāṇini, and was apparently even in that grammarian’s time believed to be an ancient work; hence 500 B.c. is probably rather too late than too early a period for śvetaketu as a rough approximation to a date.
satyakāma (‘Lover of truth’) Jābāla ('descendant of Jabālā') is the name of a teacher, the son of a slave girl by an unknown father. He wás initiated as a Brahmacārin, or religious student, by Gautama Hāridrumata according to the Chāndogya Upaniṣad. He is often cited as an authority in that Upaniṣad and in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, where he learns a certain doctrine from Jānaki Áyasthūṇa. He is also mentioned in the Aitareya and the Satapatha Brāhmaṇas.
sarayu Is mentioned thrice in the Rigveda as the name of a river. Citraratha and Arṇa are said to have been defeated apparently by the Turvaśas and Yadus who crossed the vol. Sarayu.1 Sarayu appears in one passage with Sarasvatī and Sindhu,2 and in another with Rasā, Anitabhā, and Kubhā.3 Later, in the post-Vediç period, Sarayū, rarely Sarayu, is the name of a river in Oudh, the modern Sarjū.4 Zimmer5 regards this as the river meant in all the Vedic passages, seeing in the last,3 which may be used as an argument for locating the Sarayu in the Panjab, a reference to the north-east monsoon as well as to the usual monsoon from the west. Hopkins0 thinks that the Sarayu is to be found in the west, and Ludwig7 identifies it with the Kurum (Krumu). Vivien de St. Martin considered it to be probably identical with the united course of the śutudrī (Sutlej) and Vipāś (Beas).
sarpavidyā The ‘science of snakes,’ is enumerated in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa among branches of learning. It must have been reduced to fixed rules, since a section (parvan) of it is referred to as studied. The Gopatha Brāhmaṇa has the form Sarpa-veda.
sudās Is the name of the Tṛtsu king who won a famous victory over the ten kings, as described in a hymn of the Rigveda. At one time Viśvāmitra was his Purohita, and accompanied him in his victorious raids over the Vipāś (Beās) and śutudrī (Sutlej). The Aśvins gave him a queen, Sudevī, and also helped him on another occasion. He appears with Trasadasyu in a late hymn without hint of rivalry, but elsewhere he seems to be referred to as defeated by Pupukutsa, Trasadasyu’s father. In the Aitareya Brāhmana he is recognized as a great king, with Vasiṣha as his Puro­hita, and similarly in the śāñkhāyana śrauta Sūtra, where his generosity to his priest is related. His exact ancestry is a little uncertain, because he is called Paijavana, ‘son of Pijavana,’ as Yāska explains the patro¬nymic. If this explanation is correct, Divodāsa must have been his grandfather. If he was the son of Divodāsa, Pijavana must be understood as a more remote ancestor. The former alternative seems the more probable. Cf. Turvaśa, Dāśarājña. Paijavana, Bharata, Saudāsa.
snātaka The designation of the student ‘ who has taken the bath,’ marking the termination of his studentship under a religious teacher, occurs in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa Sūtras. Cf. Brahmacārin.
svādhyāya (‘Reciting to oneself’) in the Brāhmaṇas denotes the study or repetition of the Vedic texts. The Sūtras give rules for it in great detail. Cf Brāhmaṇa.
       Bloomfield Vedic
         Concordance  
20 results
     
tudad ahiṃ hariśipro ya āyasaḥ RV.10.96.4c; AVś.20.30.4c.
uttudas tvot tudatu # AVś.3.25.1a. P: uttudas tvā Kauś.35.22. Cf. stokas tvottuda.
nitudantīm arāte # AVś.5.7.7d; AVP.7.9.7d.
tudrur nāma bheṣajam # AVś.8.2.28d.
tudhānakṣayaṇaṃ ghṛtena # AVś.6.32.1b.
tudhānakṣayaṇam asi # AVP.2.46.2.
tudhānaṃ kimīdinam # AVś.1.7.1b; 4.20.8b; AVP.4.4.1b. Cf. yātudhānā kim-, yātudhānāt kimīdinaḥ, and yātudhānān kim-.
tudhānajambhanam asi svāhā # AVP.2.46.2.
tudhānam atho vṛkam # AVś.4.3.4d; AVP.2.8.5d.
tudhānasya rakṣasaḥ # RV.10.87.25c; SV.1.95c.
tudhānasya somapa # AVś.1.8.3a; AVP.4.4.9a.
tudhānā kimīdinā # RV.10.87.24b. Cf. under yātudhānaṃ kim-.
tudhānāt kimīdinaḥ # AVP.4.18.3c; 8.6.8b.
tudhānā nirṛtir ād u rakṣaḥ # AVś.7.70.2a; TB.2.4.2.2a.
tudhānān ihā naya # AVP.4.4.6d.
tudhānān kimīdinaḥ # AVś.1.28.1d. Cf. under yātudhānaṃ kim-.
tudhānān vi lāpaya # AVś.1.7.2d,6d; AVP.4.4.2d.
tudhānā hetiḥ # VS.15.16; TS.4.4.3.1; MS.2.8.10: 114.14; KS.17.9; śB.8.6.1.17.
tudhānebhyaḥ kaṇṭakīkārīm (TB. kaṇṭakakāram) # VS.30.8; TB.3.4.1.5.
tudhāno ya idaṃ kṛṇoti # AVś.8.3.8b. See yo yātudhāno.
     Dictionary of Sanskrit
     Grammar
     KV Abhyankar
"tud" has 77 results.
     
tudādia class of roots headed by the root तुद् which take the conjugational sign अ ( श ) and which are popularly called roots of the sixth conjugation, confer, compare P. III.1.77.
ghātudīpikā(1)name of a commentary on the Kavikalpadruma of Bopadeva by Ramalamkara; (2) name of a commentary on the Kavikalpadruma by Durgadasa who wrote a commentary on the Mugdhabodha also.
mantudevaknown also as मन्नुदेव, a famous grammarian of the eighteenth century who has written a commentary named दर्पणा on the Vaiyākaraṇabhūṣaṇasāra of Koṇḍabhaṭṭa and a commentary named दोषोद्धरण on Nāgeśa's Paribhāṣenduśekhara.
akālaka(1)not limited by any time-factors for its study such as certain periods of the day or the year. (2) not characterized by any technical terms expressive of time such as adyatanī, parokṣā occurring in the ancient Prātiśākhya and grammar works. The term akalika is used by the writers of the Kāśikāvṛtti in connection with the grammar of Pāṇini. confer, compare “पाणिन्युपज्ञमकालकं व्याकरणम्” Kās. on P. II.4.21 explained by the writer of the Padamañjarī, a commentary on the Kāśikāvṛtti by Haradatta. as पूर्वाणि व्याकरणानि अद्यतनादिकालपरिभाषायुक्तानि तद्रहितम् ।
anubhūtisvarūpācāryaa writer of the twelfth century who wrote a work on grammar called सरस्वती-प्रक्रिया or सारस्वतप्रक्रिया, He has also written धातुपाठ and आख्यातप्रक्रिया. The grammar is a short one and is studied in some parts of India.
abhyaṃkara(BHASKARASHASTRI Abhyankar 1785-1870 A. D. )an eminent scholar of Sanskrit Grammar who prepared a number of Sanskrit scholars in Grammar at Sātārā. He has also written a gloss on the Paribhāṣenduśekhara and another one on the Laghu-Śabdenduśekhara. (VASUDEVA SHASTRI Abhyakar 863-1942 A. D.) a stalwart Sanskrit Pandit, who, besides writing several learned commentaries on books in several Sanskrit Shastras, has written a commentary named 'Tattvādarśa' on the Paribhāṣenduśekhara and another named 'Guḍhārthaprakāśa' on the Laghuśabdenduśekhara. (KASHINATH VASUDEVA Abhyankar, 1890-) a student of Sanskrit Grammar who has written महाभाष्यप्रस्तावना-खण्ड, and जैनेन्द्रपरिभाषावृत्ति and compiled the परिभाषासंग्रह and the present Dictionary of Sanskrit Grammar.
aṣṭakaanother name for the famous work of Pāṇini popularly called the Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī.; confer, compare अष्टावध्यायाः परिमाणमस्य सूत्रस्य अष्टकं पाणिनीयम् । दशकं वैयाघ्रपदीयम् । त्रिंकं काशकृत्स्नम् । Kāś on P.IV. 1.58; (2) students of Pāṇini's grammar, e. g. अष्टकाः पाणिनीयाः; confer, compare सूत्राच्च कोपधात् । Kāś. on P.IV. 2. 65.
āpiśala(1)a work of अापिशलि, possibly his grammar; confer, compare आपिशलमधीते Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). on IV.1.14; (2) a student of Āpiśali's grammar: आपिशलमधीते आपिशला ब्राह्मणी Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). on IV.1.14: अापिशलपाणिनीयव्याडीयगौतमीयाः Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). on VI. 2.36.; confer, compare तथा चापिशलाः पाणिनीयाः पठन्ति-आगमोनुपघातेन विकारश्चोपमर्दनात् । आदेशस्तु प्रसङ्गेन लोपः सर्वापकर्षनात्.
ini(1)kṛt affix इन् applied to the roots क्री with धि, जु with प्र, and the roots जि, दृ, क्षि and others, e. g. सोमविक्रयी, प्रजवी, जयी et cetera, and others confer, compare P.III 2.93 and III.2.156-157: (2) taddhita affix. affix इन् affixed to the word पाण्डुकम्बल in the sense of 'covered with' ( confer, compare P, IV.2.11), in the sense of collection to the word खल exempli gratia, for example खलिनी confer, compare P.IV.2.51, to the word अनुब्राह्मण in sense 'student of' exempli gratia, for example अनुब्राह्मणी confer, compare P.IV.2.62, to the words कर्मन्द and कृशाश्च confer, compare P.IV.3.lll, to the word चूर्ण confer, compare P.IV.4.23 and to the word श्राद्ध confer, compare P.V.2.85 and साक्षात् confer, compare P. V. 2. 91 in specified senses and in the general sense of possession to words ending in अ, cf P. V.2.115-117 and to certain other words confer, compare P.V.2.128-37.
ukthādia class of words headed by the word उक्थ to which the taddhita affix इक (ठक् ) is applied in the sense of 'one who studies and understands'; confer, compare उक्थमधीते वेद वा औक्थिकः, similarly लौकायतिकः Kāś. on P.IV.2.60.
uṇādisūtradaśapādīthe text of the Uṇādi Sūtras divided into ten chapters believed to have been written by शाकटायन. It is printed at the end of the Prakriyā Kaumud and separately also, and is also available in manuscripts with a few differences. Patañjali in his Bhāṣya on P.III.3.1, seems to have mentioned Sakaṭāyana as the author of the Uṇādi Sūtras although it cannot be stated definitely whether there was at that time, a version of the Sūtras in five chapters or in ten chapters or one, completely different from these, as scholars believe that there are many interpolations and changes in the versions of Uṇādi Sūtras available at present. A critical study of the various versions is extremely desirable.
kaṇṭakoddhāraname of a commentary on Nāgeśa's Paribhāṣenduśekhara by Mannudeva, known also as Mantudeva or Manyudeva, who was a pupil of Pāyaguṇḍe in the latter half of the 18th century.
kavikalpadrumaa treatise on roots written by Bopadeva, the son of Keśava and the pupil of Dhaneśa who lived in the time of Hemādri, the Yādava King of Devagiri in the thirteenth century. He has written a short grammar work named Mugdhabodha which has been very popular in Bengal being studied in many Tols or Pāṭhaśālās.
kātantraname of an important small treatise on grammar which appears like a systematic abridgment of the Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī. of Pāṇini. It ignores many unimportant rules of Pāṇini, adjusts many, and altogether omits the Vedic portion and the accent chapter of Pāṇini. It lays down the Sūtras in an order different from that of Pāṇini dividing the work into four adhyāyas dealing with technical terms, saṁdhi rules,declension, syntax compounds noun-affixes ( taddhita affixes ) conjugation, voice and verbal derivatives in an order. The total number of rules is 1412 supplemented by many subordinate rules or Vārttikas. The treatise is believed to have been written by Śarvavarman, called Sarvavarman or Śarva or Sarva, who is said to have lived in the reign of the Sātavāhana kings. The belief that Pāṇini refers to a work of Kalāpin in his rules IV. 3.108 and IV.3.48 and that Patañjali's words कालापम् and माहवार्तिकम् support it, has not much strength. The work was very popular especially among those who wanted to study spoken Sanskrit with ease and attained for several year a very prominent place among text-books on grammar especially in Bihar, Bengal and Gujarat. It has got a large number of glosses and commentary works, many of which are in a manuscript form at present. Its last chapter (Caturtha-Adhyāya) is ascribed to Vararuci. As the arrangement of topics is entirely different from Pāṇini's order, inspite of considerable resemblance of Sūtras and their wording, it is probable that the work was based on Pāṇini but composed on the models of ancient grammarians viz. Indra, Śākaṭāyana and others whose works,although not available now, were available to the author. The grammar Kātantra is also called Kālāpa-vyākaraṇasūtra.. A comparison of the Kātantra Sūtras and the Kālāpa-vyākaraṇasūtra. Sūtras shows that the one is a different version of the other. The Kātantra Grammar is also called Kaumāra as it is said that the original 1nstructions for the grammar were received by the author from Kumāra or Kārttikeya. For details see Vol. VII Patañjala Mahābhāṣya published by the D.E. Society, Poona, page 375.
kātantrapariśiṣṭaascribed to Śrīpatidatta, whose date is not known; from a number of glosses written on this work, it appears that the work was once very popular among students of the Kātantra School.
kāśikā(1)name given to the reputed gloss (वृत्ति) on the Sūtras of Pāṇini written by the joint authors.Jayāditya and Vāmana in the 7th century A.D. Nothing definitely can be said as to which portion was written by Jayāditya and which by Vamana, or the whole work was jointly written. Some scholars believe that the work was called Kāśikā as it was written in the city of Kāśī and that the gloss on the first five Adhyāyas was written by Jayāditya and that on the last three by Vāmana. Although it is written in a scholarly way, the work forms an excellent help to beginners to understand the sense of the pithy Sūtra of Pāṇini. The work has not only deserved but obtained and maintained a very prominent position among students and scholars of Pāṇini's grammar in spite of other works like the Bhāṣāvṛtti, the Prakriyā Kaumudi, the Siddhānta Kaumudi and others written by equally learned scholars. Its wording is based almost on the Mahābhāṣya which it has followed, avoiding, of course, the scholarly disquisitions occurring here and there in the Mahābhāṣya. It appears that many commentary works were written on it, the wellknown among them being the Kāśikāvivaraṇapañjikā or Kāśikāvivaraṇapañjikā, a commentary on the Kāśikāvṛtti by Jinendrabuddhi, called Nyāsa. written by Jinendrabuddhi and the Padamañjari by Haradatta. For details see Vyākaraṇamahābhāṣya Vol.VII pp 286-87 published by the D. E. Society, Poona. ( 2 ) The name Kāśikā is sometimes found given to their commentaries on standard works of Sanskrit Grammar by scholars, as possibly they were written at Kāśī; as for instance, (a) Kāśikā on Vaiyākaraṇabhūṣaṇasāra by Hari Dīkṣita, and ( b ) Kāśikā on Paribhāṣenduśekhara by Vaidyanātha Pāyaguṇḍe.
kramādia class of words headed by the word क्रम to which the taddhita affix अक (वुञ् ) is added in the sense of 'one who studies and understands'; e. g. क्रमकः, पदकः, मीमांसकः, शिक्षकः et cetera, and others confer, compare Kāś. on IV. 2.61.
golḍsṭyūkaraa well known German scholar who made a sound study of Paini's Sanskrit Vyakarana and wrote a very informative treatise entitled 'Panini, his place in Sanskrit Literature.' He lived in the latter half of the 19th century.
ṭhaka very common taddhita affix. affix इक, or क in case it is added to words ending in इस् , उस् , उ, ऋ, ल् and त् according to P. VII. 3. 51, causing the substitution of vrddhi for the first vowel of the word to which it is addedition ठक् is added to (1) रेवती and other words in the sense of descendant ( अपत्य ) e. g. रैवतिकः:, दाण्डग्राहिकः, गार्गिकः, भागवित्तिकः यामुन्दायनिकः, confer, compare P. IV. 1.146-149; (2) to the words लाक्षा,रोचना et cetera, and others in the sense of 'dyed in', e. g. लाक्षिकम्, रौचनिकम् ; confer, compare P. IV. 2.2; (3) to the words दधि and उदश्वित् in the sense of संस्कृत 'made better ', e. g. दाधिकम् , औदश्वित्कम् ( क instead of इक substituted for टक् ), confer, compare P. IV.2. 18, 19; (4) to the words अाग्रहायुणी, अश्वत्थ et cetera, and others; confer, compare P. IV. 2. 22, 23; (5) to words expressive of inanimate objects, to the words हस्ति and धेनु, as also to the words केश and अश्व in the sense of 'multitude '; confer, compare P. IV. 2. 47, 48; (6) to the words क्रतु, उक्थ and words ending in सूत्र, वसन्त et cetera, and others, in the sense of 'students of' ( तदधीते तद्वेद ), confer, compare P. IV. 2.59, 60, 63; (7) to the words कुमुद and others as also to शर्करा as a चातुरर्थिक affix; confer, compare P. IV. 2.80, 84; (8) to the words कन्था, भवत् and वर्षा in the Saisika senses; confer, compare P. IV. 2.102, 115, IV. 3.18; (9) to the words उपजानु and others in the sense 'generally present '; confer, compare P. IV. 3. 40; (10) to the words consisting of two syllables, and the words ऋक्, ब्राह्मण et cetera, and othersin the sense of 'explanatory literary work'; confer, compare P. IV.3.72: ( 11) to words meaning 'sources of income ' in the sense of 'accruing from’; confer, compare P. IV. 3.75; (12) to words denoting inanimate things excepting words showing time or place in the sense of ' भक्ति ', cf P. IV. 8.96; and (13) to the words हल् and सीर in the sense of 'belonging to', confer, compare P. IV. 3.124. The taddhita affix. affix ठक् is added as a general termination, excepting in such cases where other affixes are prescribed, in specified senses like 'तेन दीव्यति, ' 'तेन खनति,' 'तेन संस्कृतम्' et cetera, and others; cf P. IV. 4.1-75, as also to words हल, सीर, कथा, विकथा, वितण्डा et cetera, and others in specified senses, confer, compare P. IV.4. 81, 102 ठक् is also added as a general taddhita affix. affix or अधिकारविहितप्रत्यय, in various specified senses, as prescribed by P. V.1.19-63,and to the words उदर, अयःशूल,दण्ड, अजिन, अङ्गुली, मण्डल, et cetera, and others and to the word एकशाला, in the prescribed senses; confer, compare P. V. 2.67,76, V. 3.108,109; while, without making any change in sense it is added to अनुगादिन् , विनय, समय, उपाय ( औपयिक being the word formed), अकस्मात्, कथंचित्; (confer, compareआकस्मिक काथंचित्क), समूह,विशेष, अत्यय and others, and to the word वाक् in the sense of 'expressed'; confer, compare P. V. 4.13, 34, 35. The feminine. affix ङीप् ( ई ) is added to words ending in the affix टक् to form feminine. bases.
ḍhinuktaddhita affix. affix एयिन् applied to the word छगलिन् in the sense of 'students following the text of ' e. g. छागलेयिनः in the sense छगलिना प्रोक्तमधीयते ते; confer, compare Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P. IV.3.109.
ṇinikrt affix इन् signifying vrddhi (1) applied to the roots headed by ग्रह् ( i. e. the roots ग्रह्, उद्वस्, स्था et cetera, and others ) in the sense of an agent;e. g. ग्राही, उद्वासी, स्थायी. confer, compare P. III.1.134; (2) applied to the root हन् preceded by the word कुमार or शीर्ष as उपपद: e. g. कुमारघाती, शीर्षघाती, confer, compare P. III.2.51: (3) applied to any root preceded by a substantive as upapada in the sense of habit, or when compari son or vow or frequency of action is conveyed, or to the root मन्, with a substantive as उपपद e. gउष्णभोजी, शीतभोजी, उष्ट्रकोशी, ध्वाङ्क्षरावीः स्थण्डिलशायी, अश्राद्धभोजीः क्षीरपायिण उशीनराः; सौवीरपायिणो वाह्रीकाः: दर्शनीयमानी, शोभनीयमानी, confer, compare P. III.2.78-82; (4) applied to the root यज् preceded by a word referring to the करण of यागफल as also to the root हन् preceded by a word forming the object ( कर्मन् ) of the root हन् , the words so formed referring to the past tense: e. g. अग्निष्टो याजी, पितृव्याघाती, confer, compare P. III 2.85, 86; (5) applied to a root when the word so formed refers to a kind of necessary activity or to a debtor; confer, compare अवश्यंकारी, शतंदायी, सहस्रदायी confer, compare P. III.4. 169-170: (6) tad-affix इन् , causing vrddhi for the first vowel, applied to the words काश्यप and कौशिक referring to ancient sages named so, as also to words which are the names of the pupils of कलापि or of वैशम्पायन, as also to the words शुनक, वाजसनेय et cetera, and others in the sense of 'students learning what has been traditionally spoken by those sages' e. g. काश्यपिनः, ताण्डिनः, हरिद्रविणः शौनकिनः, वाजसनेयिनः et cetera, and others; cf P. IV.3, 103 104, 106; (7) applied to words forming the names of ancient sages who are the speakers of ancient Brahmana works in the sense of 'pupils studying those works' as also to words forming the names of sages who composed old Kalpa works in the sense of those कल्प works; e. g. भाल्लविनः, एतरेयिणः । पैङ्गी कल्पः अरुणपराजी कल्पः; cf Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P. IV. 3.105: (8) applied to the words पाराशर्य and शिलालिन् in the sense of 'students reading the Bhiksusutras (of पाराशार्य) and the Nata sutras ( of शिलालिन् ) respectively; e. g. पाराशरिणो भिक्षव:, शैलालिनो नटाः: cf Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P. IV.3.110.
dayānandasarasvatia brilliant Vedic scholar of the nineteenth century belonging to North India who established on a sound footing the study of the Vedas and Vyakarana and encouraged the study of Kasikavrtti. He has written many books on vedic studies.
darpaṇāname of a commentary on the Sabdakaustubha, written by Mannudeva or Mantudeva of the nineteenth century.
daśakaa name given to the treatise on grammar written by व्याघ्रपाद which consisted of 10 chapters; confer, compare दशकं वैयाघ्रपदीयम् Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P V. 1.58. The word also means students reading the work दशक; confer, compare दशका वैयाघ्रपदीया: Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P. IV.2.65.
dānīmtaddhita affix. affix called विभक्ति, applied word also means students reading the work दशक; confer, compare दशका वैयाघ्रपदीया: Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P. IV.2.65.
nāgeśathe most reputed modern scholar of Panini's grammar, who was well-versed in other Sastras also, who lived in Benares in the latter half of the seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth century. He wrote many masterly commentaries known by the words शेखर and उद्द्योत on the authoritative old works in the different Sastras, the total list of his small and big works together well nigh exceeding a hundredition He was a bright pupil of Hari Diksita, the grandson of Bhattoji Diksita. He was a renowned teacher also, and many of the famous scholars of grammar in Benares and outside at present are his spiritual descendants. He was a Maharastriya Brahmana of Tasgaon in Satara District, who received his education in Benares. For some years he stayed under the patronage of Rama, the king of Sringibera at his time. He was very clever in leading debates in the various Sastras and won the title of Sabhapati. Out of his numerous works, the Mahābhāṣya-Pradīpoddyota by Nāgeśa.on Kaiyata's Mahabhasyapradipa, the Laghusabdendusekhara on the Siddhanta Kaumudi and the Paribhasendusekhara are quite wellknown and studied by every one who wishes to get proficiency in Panini's grammar. For details see pp. 21-24 and 401-403, Vol. VII of the Patanjala Mahabhasya edition D. E. Society, Poona.
niruktaname of a class of works which were composed to explain the collections of Vedic words by means of proposing derivations of those words from roots as would suit the sense. The Nirukta works are looked upon as supplementary to grammar works and there must have been a good many works of this kind in ancient times as shown by references to the writers of these viz. Upamanyu, Sakatayana,Sakapuni,Sakapurti and others, but, out of them only one work composed by Yaska has survived; the word, hence has been applied by scholars to the Nirukta of Yaska which is believed to have been written in the seventh or the eighth century B. C. i. e. a century or two before Panini. The Nirukta works were looked upon as subsidiary to the study of the Vedas along with works on phonetics ( शिक्षा ), rituals ( कल्प ), grammar (व्याकरण) prosody (छन्दस्) and astronomy(ज्योतिष)and a mention of them is found made in the Chandogyopanisad. As many of the derivations in the Nirukta appear to be forced and fanciful, it is doubtful whether the Nirukta works could be called scientific treatises. The work of Yaska, however, has got its own importance and place among works subsidiary to the Veda, being a very old work of that kind and quoted by later commentators. There were some glosses and commentary works written upon Yaska's Nirukta out of which the one by Durgacarya is a scholarly one.It is doubtful whether Durgacarya is the same as Durgasimha, who wrote a Vrtti or gloss on the Katantra Vyakarana. The word निरुक्त is found in the Pratisakhya works in the sense of 'explained' and not in the sense of derived; confer, compare Ṛgvedaprātiśākhya by Śaunaka ( Sanskrit Sāhityapariṣad Edition, Calcutta.) XV 6; V.Pr. IV. 19, 195.
patañjalithe reputed author of the Mahābhāșya, known as the Pātañjala Mahābhāșya after him. His date is determined definitely as the second century B.C. on the strength of the internal evidence supplied by the text of the Mahābhāșya itselfeminine. The words Gonardiya and Gonikāputra which are found in the Mahābhāșya are believed to be referring to the author himself and, on their strength he is said to have been the son of Goņikā and a resident of the country called Gonarda in his days. On the strength of the internal evidence supplied by the Mahābhāșya, it can be said that Patañjali received his education at Takșaśila and that he was,just like Pāņini, very familiar with villages and towns in and near Vāhika and Gāndhāra countries. Nothing can definitely be said about his birthplace, and although it might be believed that his native place was Gonarda,its exact situation has not been defined so far. About his parentage too,no definite information is available. Tradition says that he was the foster-son of a childless woman named Gonikā to whom he was handed over by a sage of Gonarda, in whose hands he fell down from the sky in the evening at the time of the offering of water-handfuls to the Sun in the west; confer, compareपतत् + अञ्जलि, the derivation of the word given by the commentators. Apart from anecdotes and legendary information, it can be said with certainty that Patañjali was a thorough scholar of Sanskrit Grammar who had studied the available texts of the Vedic Literature and Grammar and availed himself of information gathered personally by visiting the various schools of Sanskrit Grammar and observing the methods of explanations given by teachers there. His Mahābhāșya supplies an invaluable fund of information on the ways in which the Grammar rules of Pāņini were explained in those days in the various grammar schools. This information is supplied by him in the Vārttikas which he has exhaustively given and explainedition He had a remarkable mastery over Sanskrit Language which was a spoken one at his time and it can be safely said that in respect of style, the Mahābhāșya excels all the other Bhāșyas in the different branches of learning out of which two, those of Śabaraswāmin and Śańkarācārya,are selected for comparison. It is believed by scholars that he was equally conversant with other śāstras, especially Yoga and Vaidyaka, on which he has written learned treatises. He is said to be the author of the Yogasūtras which,hence are called Pātañjala Yogasūtras, and the redactor of the Carakasamhitā. There are scholars who believe that he wrote the Mahābhāșya only, and not the other two. They base their argument mainly on the supposition that it is impossible for a scholar to have an equally unmatching mastery over three different śāstras at a time. The argument has no strength, especially in India where there are many instances of scholars possessing sound scholarship in different branches of learning. Apart from legends and statements of Cakradhara, Nāgesa and others, about his being the author of three works on three different śāstras, there is a direct reference to Patañjali's proficiency in Grammar, Yoga and Medicine in the work of King Bhoja of the eleventh century and an indirect one in the Vākyapadīya of Bhartŗhari of the seventh century A. D. There is a work on the life of Patañjali, written by a scholar of grammar of the South,named Ramabhadra which gives many stories and incidents of his life out of which it is difficult to find out the grains of true incidents from the legendary husk with which they are coveredition For details,see Patañjala Mahābhāșya D.E.Society's edition Vol. VII pages 349 to 374. See also the word महाभाष्य.
paribhāṣenduśekharathe reputed authoritative work on the Paribhasas in the system of Paanini's grammar written by Nagesabhatta in the beginning of the 18th century A.D. at Benares. The work is studied very widely and has got more than 25 commentaries written by pupils in the spiritual line of Nagesa. Well-known among these commentaries are those written by Vaidyanatha Payagunde ( called गदा ), by BhairavamiSra ( called मिश्री), by Raghavendraacaarya Gajendragadakara ( called त्रिपथगा ), by Govindacarya Astaputre of Poona in the beginning of the nineteenth century (called भावार्थदीपिका), by BhaskaraSastri Abhyankar of Satara (called भास्करी ), and by M. M. Vaasudevasaastri Abhyankar of Poona (called तत्त्वादर्श ). Besides these, there are commentaries written by Taatya Sastri Patawardhana,Ganapati Sastri Mokaate, Jayadeva Misra, VisnuSastri Bhat, Vishwanatha Dandibhatta, Harinaatha Dwiwedi Gopaalacarya Karhaadkar, Harishastri Bhagawata, Govinda Shastri Bharadwaja, Naarayana Shastri Galagali, Venumaadhava Shukla, Brahmaananda Saraswati, ManisiSeSaSarma,Manyudeva, Samkarabhatta, Indirapati, Bhimacarya Galagali, Madhavacarya Waikaar, Cidrupasraya, Bhimabhatta, LakSminrsimha and a few others. Some of these works are named by their authors as Tikaas, others as Vyaakhyaas and still others as Tippanis or Vivrtis.
pāṇinithe illustrious ancient grammarian of India who is wellknown by his magnum opus, the Astaka or Astaadhyaayi which has maintained its position as a unique work on Sanskrit grammar unparalleled upto the present day by any other work on grammar, not only of the Sanskrit language, but ofany other language, classical as well as spoken. His mighty intelligence grasped, studied and digested not only the niceties of accentuation and formation of Vedic words, scattered in the vast Vedic Literature of his time, but those of classical words in the classical literature and the spoken Sanskrit language of his time in all its different aspects and shades, noticeable in the various provinces and districts of the vast country. The result of his careful study of the Vedic Literature and close observation ofeminine.the classical Sanskrit, which was a spoken language in his days, was the production of the wonderful and monumental work, the Astaadhyaayi,which gives an authoritative description of the Sanskrit language, to have a complete exposition of which,several life times have to be spent,in spite of several commentaries upon it, written from time to time by several distinguished scholars. The work is a linguist's and not a language teacher's. Some Western scholars have described it as a wonderful specimen of human intelligence,or as a notable manifestation of human intelligence. Very little is known unfortunately about his native place,parentage or personal history. The account given about these in the Kathaasaritsaagara and other books is only legendary and hence, it has very little historical value. The internal evidence, supplied by his work shows that he lived in the sixth or the seventh century B. C., if not earlier, in the north western province of India of those days. Jinendrabuddhi, the author of the Kaasikavivaranapanjikaa or Nyasa, has stated that the word शलातुर् mentioned by him in his sUtra ( IV. 3.94 ) refers to his native place and the word शालातुरीय derived by him from the word शलातुर by that sUtra was, in fact his own name, based upon the name of the town which formed his native placcusative case. Paanini has shown in his work his close knowledge of, and familiarity with, the names of towns, villages, districts, rivers and mountains in and near Vaahika, the north-western Punjab of the present day, and it is very likely that he was educated at the ancient University of Taksasilaa. Apart from the authors of the Pratisaakhya works, which in a way could be styled as grammar works, there were scholars of grammar as such, who preceded him and out of whom he has mentioned ten viz., Apisali, Saakataayana, Gaargya, Saakalya, Kaasyapa, Bharadwaja, Gaalava, Caakravarmana Senaka and Sphotaayana. The grammarian Indra has not been mentioned by Paanini, although tradition says that he was the first grammarian of the Sanskrit language. It is very likely that Paanini had no grammar work of Indra before him, but at the same time it can be said that the works of some grammarians , mentioned by Panini such as Saakaatyana, Apisali, Gaargya and others had been based on the work of Indra. The mention of several ganas as also the exhaustive enumeration of all the two thousand and two hundred roots in the Dhaatupaatha can very well testify to the existence of systematic grammatical works before Paarnini of which he has made a thorough study and a careful use in the composition of his Ganapaatha and Dhaatupatha. His exhaustive grammar of a rich language like Sanskrit has not only remained superb in spite of several other grammars of the language written subsequently, but its careful study is felt as a supreme necessity by scholars of philology and linguistics of the present day for doing any real work in the vast field of linguistic research. For details see pp.151154 Vol. VII of Paatanjala Mahaabhsya, D. E. Society's Edition.
puruṣottamavidyāvāgīśaa famous grammarian of Bengal, who wrote the grammar work Prayogaratnamala in the fifteenth century. The work betrays a deep study and scholarship of the writer in the Mantrasāstra.
prayogaratnamālāname of a recognised treatise on grammar written by पुरुषोत्तमविद्यावागीश of Bengal in the fourteenth century. The treatise explains many words which, although current in language and literature, cannot be easily formed by rules of grammar. The author has tried to form them by applying rules of grammar given in the grammatical systems of Panini and Katantra. The alphabet given in this treatise is according to the system of the Tantra Sastra which shows a scholarship of the author in that branch The grammar was studied much in Bengal and Assam.
prayojanaobject, motive or purpose in undertaking a particular thing; the word is used although rarely, in the sense of a cause also; confer, compare इमान्यस्य प्रयोजनानि अध्येयं व्याकरणम् Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). Ahnika 1. For the advantages of the study of Vyakarana, see Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). Ahnika 1. See also Vyakarana Mahabhasya Vol. VII pp.226,227, D.E. Society's edition.
prauḍhamanoramāpopularly called मनोरमा also; the famous commentary on the Siddhantakaumudi of Bhattoji Diksita written by the author himself to explain fully in a scholarly manner the popular grammar written by him; , the word प्रौढमनेारमा is used in contrast with बालमनोरमा another commentary on the Siddhantakaumudi by Vasudevadiksita. On account of the difficult nature of it, it is usual to read the प्रौढमनेारमा upto the end of the Karaka-prakarana only in the Sanskrit PathaSalas before the study of the Sabdendusekhara and the Paribhsendusekhara is undertaken.
prauḍhamanoramāṭīkāa commentary on Bhattoji DikSita's Praudhamanorama written by Bhattoji's grandson Hari Diksita. The commentary is called लघुशब्दरत्न or simple शब्दरत्न which is an abridgment of the author's work बृहच्छब्दरत्न. The Laghusabdaratna is widely studied along with the Praudhamanorama in the Pathasalas.
phaḍegan[ FADDEGON, BAREND ]a scholar of Sanskrit Grammar, who has written a book 'Studies in Panini's Grammar'.
bṛhacchabdaratnaa learned commentary on the commentary मनोरमा of भट्टोजीदीक्षित; the commentary was written by हरिदीक्षित the grandson of Bhattoji. The work is called बृहच्छब्दरत्न in contrast with the लघुशब्दरत्न of the same author (हरिदीक्षित) which is generally studied at the Pathasalas all over the country. The work बृहच्छब्दरत्न is only in a Manuscript form at present. Some scholars believe that it was written by Nagesabhatta, who ascribed it to his preceptor Hari Diksita, but the belief is not correct as proved by a reference in the Laghusabdaratna, where the author himself remarks that he himself has written the बृहच्छब्दरत्न, and internal evidences show that लबुशब्दरत्न is sometimes a word-forword summary of the बृहच्छब्दरत्न. confer, compareविस्तरस्तु अस्मत्कृते बृहच्छब्दरत्ने मदन्तेवासिवृतलधुशब्देन्दुशेखरे च द्रष्टव्यः Laghusabdaratna. For details see Bhandarkar Ins. Journal Vol. 32 pp.258-60.
bṛhadṛrpaṇāname of a commentary on Kondabhatta's Vaiyakaranabhusanasara by Mannudeva, who was called also Mantudeva, who lived in the latter half of the eighteenth century.
bhāṇḍārakara[ Sir Ramakrishna Gopal Bhandarkar 1837-1925 A. D. ]a well-known scholar of Sanskrit Grammar who has written learned articles on many grammatical topics. He was a distinguished Professor of Sanskrit in the latter half of the nineteenth century. He was one of the pioneers of Sanskrit studies in India.
bhāskaraśāstrīsurnamed Abhyankar (1785-1870) a great grammarian in the line of the pupils of Nāgeśa who was educated at Poona and lived at Sātārā. He taught many pupils, a large number of whom helped the spread of Vyākaraṇa studies even in distant places of the country, such as Vārāṇasi and others. For details see Vyākaraṇa The Volume of the introduction in Marathi to the Pātañjala Mahābhāṣya, written by K. V. Abhyankar and published by the O. E. Society, Poona. pp. 27-29, D. E. Society's Edition.
mañjūṣāa popular name given to the work परमलघुमञ्जूषा of Nāgeśa on अर्थप्रक्रिया (science or method of interpretation) in Vyākaraṇa, which is generally read by advanced students. Nāgeśa has also written a bigger work on the same subject लघुमञ्जूषा which sometimes is also referred to by the word मञ्जूषा.
madhyakaumudīcalled also मध्यमकौमुदी a work on grammar which is an abridgment, to a certain extent, of Bhaṭṭojī's Siddhāntakaumudī. The treatise was written by Varadarāja, a pupil of Bhaṭṭojī for facilitating the study of the Siddhānta-kaumudi.
mahābhāṣyaliterally the great commentary. The word is uniformly used by commentators and classical Sanskrit writers for the reputed commentary on Pāṇini's Sūtras and the Vārttikas thereon by Patañjali in the 2nd century B. C. The commentary is very scholarly yet very simple in style, and exhaustive although omitting a number of Pāṇini's rules. It is the first and oldest existing commentary on the Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī. of Pāṇini, and, in spite of some other commentaries and glosses and other compendia, written later on to explain the Sutras of Panini, it has remained supremely authoritative and furnishes the last and final word in all places of doubt: confer, compare the remarks इति भाष्ये स्थितम्, इत्युक्तं भाष्ये, इत्युक्तमाकरे et cetera, and others scattered here and there in several Vyaakarana treatises forming in fact, the patent words used by commentators when they finish any chain of arguments. Besides commenting on the Sutras of Paanini, Patanjali, the author, has raised many other grammatical issues and after discussing them fully and thoroughly, given his conclusions which have become the final dicta in those matters. The work, in short, has become an encyclopedic one and hence aptly called खनि or अकर. The work is spread over such a wide field of grammatical studies that not a single grammatical issue appears to have been left out. The author appears to have made a close study of the method and explanations of the SUtras of Paanini given at various academies all over the country and incorporated the gist of those studies given in the form of Varttikas at the various places, in his great work He has thoroughly scrutinized and commented upon the Vaarttikas many of which he has approved, some of which he has rejected, and a few of which he has supplementedition Besides the Vaarttikas which are referred to a reference to some preceding word, not necessarily on the same page., he has quoted stanzas which verily sum up the arguments in explanation of the difficult sUtras, composed by his predecessors. There is a good reason to believe that there were small glosses or commentaries on the SUtras of Paanini, written by learned teachers at the various academies, and the Vaarttikas formed in a way, a short pithy summary of those glosses or Vrttis. . The explanation of the word वृत्तौ साधु वार्तिकम् given by Kaiyata may be quoted in support of this point. Kaiyata has at one place even stated that the argument of the Bhaasyakaara is in consonance with that of Kuni, his predecessor. The work is divided into eighty five sections which are given the name of lesson or आह्लिक by the author, probably because they form the subject matter of one day's study each, if the student has already made a thorough study of the subject and is very sharp in intelligence. confer, compare अह्ला निर्वृत्तम् आह्लिकम्, (the explanation given by the commentatiors).Many commentary works were written on this magnum opus of Patanjali during the long period of twenty centuries upto this time under the names टीका, टिप्पणी, दीपिका, प्रकाशिका, व्याख्या, रत्नावली, स्पूर्ति, वृत्ति, प्रदीप, व्याख्यानं and the like, but only one of them the 'Pradipa' of कैयटीपाध्याय, is found complete. The learned commentary by Bhartrhari, written a few centuries before the Pradipa, is available only in a fragment and that too, in a manuscript form copied down from the original one from time to time by the scribes very carelessly. Two other commentaries which are comparatively modern, written by Naarayanasesa and Nilakantha are available but they are also incomplete and in a manuscript form. Possibly Kaiyatabhatta's Pradipa threw into the background the commentaries of his predecessors and no grammarian after Kaiyata dared write a commentary superior to Kaiyata's Pradipa or, if he began, he had to abandon his work in the middle. The commentary of Kaiyata is such a scholarly one and so written to the point that later commentators have almost identified the original Bhasya with the commentary Pradipa and many a time expressed the two words Bhasya and Kaiyata in the same breath as भाष्यकैयटयोः ( एतदुक्तम् or स्पष्टमेतत् ).
mahābhāṣyapradīpaa very scholarly commentary on Patanjali's MahabhaSya written by Kaiyatabhatta in the eleventh century, The commentary has so nicely explained every difficult and obscure point in the Mahabhasya, and has so thoroughly explained each sentence that the remark of later grammarians that the torch of the Mahabhasya has been kept burning by the Pradipa appears quite apt and justifiedition Kaiyata's commentary has thrown much additional light on the original arguments and statements in the Mahabhasya. There is a learned commentary on the Pradipa written by Nagesabhatta which is named vivarana by the author but which is well known by the name 'Uddyota' among students and teachers of Vyakarana. For details see pp. 389, 390 Vol VII, Patanjala Mahabhasya, D. E. Society's Edition.
rāmanātha( विद्यावाचस्पति )a Sanskrit scholar of the 17th century who studied Vyakarana,. Dharma, Alamkara and other Sastras and wrote a grammar work कातन्त्ररहस्य, besides many books on other Sastras.
rāmālaṃkārapossibly the same as रामराम (see a reference to some preceding word, not necessarily on the same page.) who wrote Dhatudipika, a commentary on the Kavikalpadruma of Bopadeva.
rauḍhīyaa term jocularly used with the word घृत preceding it,for students of a famous scholar named धृतरौढि; confer, compare ओदनपाणिनीया: घृतरौर्ढायाः Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). on P. 1.1.73.
laghuśabdaratnaname of a commentary on Bhațțoji's Manoramā by his grandson Hari Dīkşita, which is generally read together with the Manoramā, by students upto the end of the Kāraka Chapter after they have completely read and mastered the Siddhāntakaumudī. The commentary is called लघुशब्दरत्न which dlfferentiates it from the बृहच्छब्दरत्न written by the same author viz. Hari Dīkşita.
laghuśabdenduśekharaname of a commentary on Bhațțojī's Siddhāntakaumudī written by Nāgeśa Bhațța, the stalwart Grammarian of the eighteenth century. The work is named लघुशब्देन्दुशेखर which differentiates it from the author's another work बृहच्छब्देन्दुशेखर of which the former is an abridgment. As the study of the Laghuśabdenduśekhara is very common and as the Bŗhatśabdenduśekhara is seldom studied, it is always the Laghuśabdenduśekhara that is understood by the simple and popular name Śekhara.
lībiś[ LIEBICH, BRUNO ]a European grammarian belonging to Breslau who lived in the last quarter of the nineteenth and the first quarter of the twentieth century. He made a critical study of Sanskrit grammar and edited | the Cāndra Vyākaraņa and the Kșīratarańgiņī.
vasantādia class of words headed by the word वसन्त, which are mostly names of seasons, to which the affix इक (ठक्) is added in the sense of 'that which one studies or knows'; confer, compareवसन्तसहचरितोयं ग्रन्थो वसन्तस्तमधीते वासन्तिकः 1 वार्षिक: Kas on P. IV. 2.63.
viśrāntavidyādharaname of a grammar work of a general type which once occupied a prominent position and was studied as a text book of grammar, representing an independent system. The work is referred to by Hemacandra and Haribhadra. It is attributed to Vāmana who may be the same as one of the joint writers of the Kāśikāvṛtti. In that case the date of the work is the 7th century A. D.;confer, compare the popular verse परेत्र पाणिनीयज्ञाः केचित्कालपकोविदा: । एकेकं विश्रान्तविद्याः स्युरन्ये संक्षिप्तसारकाः quoted in Vol.VII p. 388 Vyākaraṇa Mahābhāṣya D.E. Society's edition.
vuñ(ID taddhita affix. affix अक causing vṛddhi to the vowel of the first syllable of that word to which it is added, as prescribed, (a) to the words denoting an offspring as also to the words उक्ष, उष्ट्र et cetera, and othersin the sense of 'a group'; e. g. अोपगवकम् , औष्ट्रकम् , कैदारकम् et cetera, and others: confer, compare P.IV.2.39, 40; (b) to the words राजन्य and others in the sense of 'inhabited country' ; e. g. राजन्यकः देवनायकः et cetera, and others, confer, compare P. IV.2.53, (c) to the words headed by अरीहण such as द्वुघण, खदिर्, मैत्रायण, काशकृत्स्न et cetera, and others in the quadruple senses; exempli gratia, for example अारीहणकम् , द्रौबणकम् , confer, compare P.IV.2.80, (d) to the word धन्व meaning a desert, to words with य् or र for their penultimate, to words ending in प्रस्थ, पुर and वह as also to words headed by धूम, नगर, अरण्य कुरु, युगन्धर et cetera, and others, under certain conditions in the miscellaneous senses; e. g. सांकाश्यकः,पाटलिपुत्रकः, माकन्दकः, आङ्गकः, वाङ्गकः, धौमकः, नागरकः, अारण्यकः et cetera, and others; confer, compare P.IV.2.121-130,134,135, 136; (e) to the words शरद् , आश्वयुजी, ग्रीष्म, वसन्त, संवत्सर,अाग्रहायणी and others in the specific senses given: confer, compare P. IV. 3.27, 45, 46, 49, 50; (f) to words denoting descendence or spiritual relation, words meaning families and warrior clans, words कुलाल and others, words meaning clans, and students learning a specific Vedic branch in specific senses prescribed : e. g. आचार्यक, मातामहक, ग्लौचुकायनक, कालालक, काठक, कालापक et cetera, and others; confer, compare P. IV. 3.77, 99, 118, 126; (g) to the words शाकल, उष्ट्र, उमा and ऊर्णा in the specially given senses; exempli gratia, for example शाकलः, संघः, औप्ट्रकः, औमम् और्णम्, confer, compareP.IV.3.188,157,158; (h) to words with य् as the penultimate, and a long vowel preceding the last one, to words in the dvandva compound, and to the words मनोज्ञ, कल्याण and others in the sense of 'nature' or 'profession';e.g रामणीयकम् गौपालपशुपालिका, गार्गिका, काठिका etc; confer, compare P. V.1.132,133,134: (2) kṛt affix अक added to the roots निन्द् हिंस् and others, and to the roots देव् and कृश् with a prefix before,in the sense of a habituated,professional or skilled agent; exempli gratia, for example. निन्दकः, परिक्षेपकः, असूयकः, परिदेवकः, आक्रोशकः et cetera, and others confer, compare P.III.2. 146, 147.
vun(1)kṛt affix अक added to the roots प्रु, सृ, and लू in the sense of 'a skilled agent' and to any root in the sense of 'an agent who is blessed'; exempli gratia, for example प्रवकः, सरकः, लवकः, जीवकः ( meaning जीवतात् ) नन्दकः, ( meaning नन्दतात् ); confer, compare P. III. 1. 149, 150; (2) taddhita affix. affix अक added to(a) the words क्रम and others in the sense of 'a student of'; e.g, क्रमक:, पदकः शिक्षकः मीमांसकः; confer, compare P.IV.2.61; (b) the words पूर्वाह्न, अपराह्ण et cetera, and others as also the words पथिन् and अमावास्या in the sense of 'produced in': exempli gratia, for example पूर्वाह्नक,पन्थक, अमावास्यकः confer, compare P. IV.3. 28, 29, 30; (c) the words कलापि, अश्वत्य, यव and बुस in the sense of 'debt paid at the time of', the words वासुदेव and अर्जुन in the sense of 'devoted to',and the dvandva compounds when the words so formed mean either 'enmity' or 'nuptial ties';exempli gratia, for example कलापकम् (ऋणम्),यवकम् (ऋणम्) वासुदेवकः, अर्जुनकः, काकोलूकिका, कुत्सकुशिकिका; confer, compareP.IV.3.48, 98,125: (d) the words गोषद, इषेत्व et cetera, and others in the sense of 'containing' or 'possessing', and the word पथिन् in the sense of 'expert' exempli gratia, for example इषेत्वकः, पथक:; confer, compareP.V.2.62, 63; and (e) the words पाद and शत preceded by a numeral, in the sense of वीप्सा, as also in the senses of दण्ड (fine) and व्यवसर्ग when those words are preceded by a numeral; exempli gratia, for example द्विपदिकां ( ददाति ), द्विशतिकां ( ददाति ), द्विपदिकां दाडितः confer, compare Kāś. on P. V.4.l and 2.
vebarWEBER, ALBRECHT of Berlin, 1825-190l ]a sound scholar of Vedic Literature who has written many articles on Sanskrit Grammar in "Indische Studien."
vaiyākaraṇaliterally a student of grammar; व्याकरणमधीते वैयाकरण: cf Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P. IV, 2.59. The word is used in the sense of 'a scholar of Grammar;'or, 'a person who has obtained proficiency in Grammar.' The word is used several times in this sense in the Mahabhasya. cf Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). on P. I. 1.3; I.4.2, II. 1.53, II.2.29, II.3.18, II.4.56, III.2.115 et cetera, and others The word is also used in the sense of 'pertaining to grammar' or 'found in grammar.'
vaiyākaraṇabhūṣaṇaa well-known work on the grammatical interpretation of words written by Kondabhatta as an explanatory work (व्याख्यान) on the small work in verse consisting of only 72 Karikas written by his uncle Bhattoji Diksita. The treatise is also named Brihadvaiyakaranabhusana. A smaller work consisting of the same subjectmatter but omitting discussions, is written by the author for facilitating the understanding of students to which he has given the name Vaiyakarahabhusanasara. This latter work has got three commentary works written on it named Kasika, Kanti and Matonmajja and one more scholarly one Sankari, recently written by Shankar Shastri Marulkar.
veyākaraṇabhūṣaṇasāraa slightly abridged form of the Vaiyakaranabhusana by the author Kondabhatta himself for students and beginners. It consists of the same number of fourteen chapters as the main treatise, which are given the name Nirnaya. See vaiyākaranabhusana.
vaiyākaraṇasiddhāntakaimudīan extremely popular work on the subject of Sanskrit grammar written for the use of students, which, although difficult at a few places, enables the students by its careful study to get a command over the subject. and enable him to read other higher works on grammar. The work is based on the Astadhyayi of Panini without omitting a single Sutra. The arrangement of the Sutras is, entirely different, as the author, for the sake of facility in understanding, has divided the work into different topics and explained the Sutras required for the topic by bringing them together in the topic. The main topics or Prakaranas are twelve in number, viz. (1) संज्ञापरिभाषा, (2) पञ्चसंधि, (3) सुबन्त or षड्लिङ्ग, (4) स्त्रीप्रत्यय, (5) कारक, (6) समास, (7) तद्धित, (8) तिङन्त, (9) प्रक्रिया, (10) कृदन्त, (11) वैदिकी and (12) स्वर which are sometimes styled as व्याकरणद्वादशी. The work is generally known by the term सिद्धान्तकौमुदी, or even कौमुदी, and it has got a large number of scholarly and ordinary commentaries as also commentaries on commentaries, all numbering a reference to some preceding word, not necessarily on the same page. twelve, and two abridgments the Madhyakaumudi and the Laghukaumudi. The work was written by the reputed scholar Bhattoji Diksita of Varanasi in the seventeenth century. See Bhattoji Diksita.
vyākaraṇādhyayanaprayojanathe purpose of the study of Grammar which is beautifully summed up and discussed in the first Ahnika by Patanjali in his Mahabhasya.
vyāḍīyaname given to the pupils and students belonging to the school of Vyadi; confer, compare M.Bh, on P.VI.2.36.
vhiṭne[ WHITNEY, WILLIAM DWIGHT, 1827-1894]a sound scholar of Vedic grammar who has, besides some books on Linguistic studies, written a work on Vedic Grammar and edited the Atharvaveda Pratisakhya.
śabdaratnaname of a scholarly gloss written by Haridiksita on the Manorama, a commentary by Bhattoji Diksita on his own Siddhantakaumudi. The proper name of the commentary is लघुशब्दरत्न of which शब्दरत्न is an abridged form.The commentary लघुशब्दरत्न is generally studied along with the Manorama by students.There is a bigger work named बृहच्छब्दरत्न written by Hari Diksita, of which the लधुशद्वरत्न is an abridgment.
śabdarūpāvalia very brief treatise on declension giving the forms of the seven cases of a few choice-words. The work is studied as the first elementary work and is very common without the name of any specific author.There are different works named शब्दरूपावलि giving declensions of different words which are all anonymous, although from the dates of manuscripts mentioned, they appear to be more than five or six hundred years old.
śarvavarmāa reputed grammarian who is believed to have been a contemporary of the poet Gunadhya in the court of Satavahana. He wrote the Grammar rules which are named the Katantra Sutras which are mostly based on the Sutras of Panini. In the grammar treatise named 'the Katantra Sutra' written by Sarvavarman the Vedic section and all the intricacies and difficult elements are carefully and scrupulously omitted by him, with a view to making his grammar useful for beginners and students of average intelligence.
śikṣāgeneral name given to a work on Phonetics. Although there are many such works which are all called शिक्षा, the work, which is often referred to, by the word, is the Siksa named पाणिनीयशिक्षा, about the authorship of which, however, there is a doubt whether it was the work of Panini or of somebody belonging to his school. The Siksa works are helpful, no doubt, for the study of grammar, but no topic belonging to Siksa is given by Panini which apparently means that these works do not come under the subject or province of Grammar. The reason why the Siksa topics are not given by Panini, is worth consideration. These Siksa works are not specifically related to a particular Veda and it cannot be said whether they preceded or succeeded the Pratisakhya works.
śiṣṭa(1)cultured and learned people who want to speak correctly and who therefore have studied gra mmar; confer, compare के पुनः शिष्टा: | वैयाकरणाः | कुत एतत् | शास्त्रपूर्विका हि शिष्टिवैयाकरणाश्च शास्त्रज्ञा: | Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). on P. VI. 1.109; (2) enjoined, prescribed; confer, compare विपर्ययो ध्रुवशिष्टेSपरेषाम् | R.Pr.VI.120.
śeṣa(l)any other senses than what are given a reference to some preceding word, not necessarily on the same page.; confer, compare शेषे P.IV.2.92: (2) surname of a reputed family of grammarians belonging to Southern India which produced many grammarians, from the fifteenth century to the eighteenth century. Ramacandra Sesa was the first grammarian in the family who wrote the Prakriyakaumudi in the fifteenth century. His descendants developed the system of studying grammar by the study of topics as given in the Prakriya Kaumudi and wrote several works of the nature of glosses and comments.
śrutakevalina term of a very great honour given to such Jain monks as have almost attained perfection; the term is used in connection with Palyakirti Sakatayana, the Jain grammarian शाकटायन, whose works शाकटायनशब्दानुशासन and its presentation in a topical form named शाकटायनप्रक्रिया are studied at the present day in some parts of India. See शाकटायन a reference to some preceding word, not necessarily on the same page..
ṣikantaddhita affix. affix इक added to the word पथिन् in the sense of ' a student of' or ' a scholar of ' when the word पथिन् is preceded by the word शत or षष्टि. e. g. शतपथिकः, शतपथिकी । confer, compare शतषष्टेः षिकन् पथ: Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. on P. [I. 2.60.
saṃkṣiptasāraname of a complete grammar-work written by क्रमदीश्वर for facility of study. This grammar appears to have been written before the time of कैयटं or हेमचन्द्र, as can be seen from the popular stanza परेत्र पाणिनयिज्ञा: केचित् कालापकोविदा; ।| एके विश्रान्तविद्याः स्युरन्ये संक्षिप्तसारका; ll
samāsaplacing together of two or more words so as to express a composite sense ; compound composition confer, compare पृथगर्थानामेकार्थीभावः समासः। Although the word समास in its derivative sense is applicable to any wording which has a composite sense (वृत्ति), still it is by convention applied to the समासवृत्ति only by virtue of the Adhikarasutra प्राक् कडारात् समास: which enumerates in its province the compound words only. The Mahabhasyakara has mentioned only four principal kinds of these compounds and defined them; confer, compare पूर्वपदार्थ प्रधानोव्ययीभावः। उत्तरपदार्थप्रधानस्तत्पुरुषः। अन्यपदार्थप्रधानो बहुव्रीहिः । उभयपदार्थप्रधानो द्वन्द्वः । M.Bh. on P.II.1.6; confer, compare also M.Bh. on P.II.1.20, II.1.49,II.2.6, II.4.26, V.1.9. Later grammarians have given many subdivisions of these compounds as for example द्विगु, कर्मधारय and तत्पुरुष (with द्वितीयातत्पुरुष, तृतीयातत्पुरुष et cetera, and othersas also अवयवतत्पुरुष, उपपदतत्पुरुष and so on) समानाधिकरणबहुव्रीहि, व्यधिकरणबहुव्रीहि, संख्याबहुवीहि, समाहारद्वन्द्व, इतरेतरद्वन्द्व and so on. समासचक्र a short anonymous treatise on compounds which is very popular and useful for beginners. The work is attributed to वररुचि and called also as समासपटल. The work is studied and committed to memory by beginners of Sanskrit ] studies in the PathaSalas of the old type.
sarasvatīkaṇṭhābharaṇacalled also सरस्वतीसूत्र, name of a voluminous grammar work ascribed to king Bhoja in the eleventh century. The grammar is based very closely on Panini's Astadhyayi, consisting of eight chapters or books. Although the affixes, the augments and the substitutes are much the same, the order of the Sutras is considerably changedition By the anxiety of the author to bring together, the necessary portions of the Ganapatha, the Unadiptha and the Paribhasas, which the author' has included in his eight chapters, the book instead of being easy to understand, has lost the element of brevity and become tedious for reading. Hence it is that it is not studied widely. For details see pp. 392, 393 Vyakarana Mahabhasya Vol. VII. D. E. Society's edition.
sāṃgrahasūtrikaa student of संग्रहसूत्र; the word occurs in the Mahabhasya along with वार्तिकसूत्रिक, and it may therefore mean a student of the stupendous work named the Samgraha of व्याडि which is believed to have consisted of small numerous sutralike assertions, with an exhaustive gloss thereon. See संग्रह.
siddhāntakaumudīa critical and scholarly commentary on the Sutras of Panini, in which the several Sutras are arranged topicwise and fully explained with examples and counter examples. The work is exhaustive, yet not voluminous, difficult yet popular, and critical yet lucid. The work is next in importance to the Mahabhasya in the system of Panini, and its study prepares the way for understanding the Mahabhasya. It is prescribed for study in the courses of Vyakarana at every academy and Pathasala and is expected to be committed to memory by students who want to be thorough scholars of Vyakarana.By virtue of its methodical treatment it has thrown into the back-ground all kindred works and glosses or Vrttis on the Sutras of Panini. It is arranged into two halves, the first half dealing with seven topics ( 1 ) संज्ञापरिभाषा, ( 2 ) पञ्त्वसंधि, ( 3 ) षड्लिङ्ग, ( 4 ) स्त्रीप्रत्यय, ( 5 ) कारक, ( 6 ) समास, ( 7 ) तद्धित, and the latter half dealing with five topics, ( 1 ) दशगणी, ( 2 ) द्वादशप्राक्रिया ( 3 ) कृदन्त ( 4 ) वैदिकी and ( 5 ) स्वर. The author भट्टोजीदीक्षित has himself written a scholarly gloss on it called प्रौढमनेरमा on which, his grandson, Hari Diksita has written a learned commentary named लघुशब्दरत्न or simple शब्दरत्न. The Siddhāntakaumudi has got a large number of commentaries on it out of which, the commentaries प्रौढमनेरमा, बालमनोरमा, (by वासुदेवदीक्षित) तत्त्वबोधिनी and लघुशब्देन्दुशेखर are read by almost every true scholar of Vyakarana. Besides these four, there are a dozen or more commentaries some of which can be given below with their names and authors ( I ) सुबेाधिनी by जयकृष्णमौनि, ( 2 ) सुबोधिनी by रामकृष्णभट्ट ( 3 ) वृहृच्छब्देन्दुशेखर by नागेश, ( 4 ) बालमनेारमा by अनन्तपण्डित, ( 5 ) वैयाकरणसिद्धान्तरहृस्य by नीलकण्ठ, ( 6 ) रत्नार्णव, by कृष्णमिश्र ( 7 ) वैयाकरणसिद्धान्तरत्नाकर by रामकृष्ण, ( 8 ) सरला by तारानाथ,(9) सुमनोरमा by तिरुमल्ल,(10)सिद्वान्तकौमुदीव्याख्या by लक्ष्मीनृसिंह, (11 )सिद्धान्तकौमुदीव्याख्या by विश्वेश्वरतीर्थ, (12) रत्नाकर by शिवरामेन्द्रसरस्वती and (13) प्रकाश by तोलापदीक्षित. Although the real name of the work is वैयाकरणसिद्धान्ततकौमुदी, as given by the author, still popularly the work is well known by the name सिद्धान्तकौमुदी. The work has got two abridged forms, the Madhyakaumudi and the Laghukaumudi both written by Varadaraja, the pupil of Bhattoji Diksita.
hṛradattaname of a reputed grammarian of Southern India who wrote a very learned and scholarly commentary, named पदमञ्जरी, on the Kasikavrtti which is held by grammarians as the standard vrtti or gloss on the Sutras of Panini,and studied especially in the schools of the southern grammarians. Haradatta was a Dravida Brahmana, residing in a village on the Bank of Kaveri. His scholarship in Grammar was very sound and he is believed to have commented on many grammarworks.The only fault of the scholar was a very keen sense of egotism which is found in his work, although it can certainly be said that the egotism was not ill-placed and could be justified: confer, compare एवं प्रकटितोस्माभिर्भाष्ये परिचय: पर:। तस्य निःशेषतो मन्ये प्रतिपत्तापि दुर्लभः॥ also प्रक्रियातर्कगहने प्रविष्टो हृष्टमानसः हरदत्तहरिः स्वैरं विहरन् ! केन वार्यते | Padamajari, on P. I-13, 4. The credit of popularising Panini's system of grammar in Southern India goes to Haradatta to a considerable extent.
hareidīkṣitaa reputed grammarian of the Siddhantakaumudi school of Panini who lived in the end of the seventeenth century. He was the grandson of Bhattoji Diksita and the preceptor of Nagesabhtta. His commentary named लधुशब्दरत्न, but popularly called शब्दरत्न on Bhattoji Diksita's Praudhamanorama, is widely studied by pupils along with the Praudhamanorama in the Vyakaranapathasalas. There is a work existing in a manuscript form but recentlv taken for printing, mamed 'Brhatsabdaratna ' which has been written by Haridiksita, although some scholars beiieve that it was written by Nagesa who ascribed it to his preceptor. For details see लधुशब्दरत्न.
     Vedabase Search  
33 results
     
tudan harassingSB 10.78.7
tudanti prickSB 11.23.3
tudanti they biteSB 3.31.27
tudyamānaḥ being painedSB 3.18.6
tudhānī api although she was a witch (whose only business was to kill small children and who had tried to kill Kṛṣṇa also)SB 10.6.34
arum-tudam capable of tormenting the heartSB 11.23.48
aruntudaḥ causing tormentSB 3.19.30
aruntudāḥ by piercing wordsSB 4.6.47
ḍākinyaḥ yātudhānyaḥ ca kuṣmāṇḍāḥ witches and devils, enemies of childrenSB 10.6.24
ḍākinyaḥ yātudhānyaḥ ca kuṣmāṇḍāḥ witches and devils, enemies of childrenSB 10.6.24
ḍākinyaḥ yātudhānyaḥ ca kuṣmāṇḍāḥ witches and devils, enemies of childrenSB 10.6.24
pratudantam piercingSB 3.18.9
tudhāna-pṛtanām the soldiers of the RākṣasasSB 9.10.19
santudati gives distressSB 11.28.28
arum-tudam capable of tormenting the heartSB 11.23.48
vitudan by playing onSB 4.8.38
vitudan playing onSB 4.12.40
vitudanti gives painSB 4.6.47
tudhāna RākṣasasSB 6.8.25
tudhāna-pṛtanām the soldiers of the RākṣasasSB 9.10.19
tudhānāḥ RākṣasasSB 5.21.18
tudhānāḥ the cannibals (Rākṣasas)SB 6.6.28
tudhānāḥ the RākṣasasSB 8.1.17
tudhānāḥ demonsSB 11.12.3-6
tudhānān a particular type of evil spiritSB 2.10.37-40
tudhānān man-eating demons, also known as RākṣasasSB 10.63.10-11
tudhāneṣu the ghostly YakṣasSB 4.10.15
tudhānī api although she was a witch (whose only business was to kill small children and who had tried to kill Kṛṣṇa also)SB 10.6.34
tudhānyaḥ demonessesSB 3.19.20
tudhānyaḥ carnivorous female demonsSB 8.10.48
tudhānyaḥ the wives of the RākṣasasSB 9.10.24
tudhānyaḥ disturbing elements, bad elementsSB 10.6.3
ḍākinyaḥ yātudhānyaḥ ca kuṣmāṇḍāḥ witches and devils, enemies of childrenSB 10.6.24
     DCS with thanks   
20 results
     
tud noun (masculine) [gramm.] root tud
Frequency rank 53665/72933
tud verb (class 1 parasmaipada) to bruise (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to pain (said of a wound) (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to push (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to strike (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to vex (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 5261/72933
tudana noun (neuter) toda
Frequency rank 53666/72933
abhitud verb (class 6 ātmanepada) to afflict to hit to push
Frequency rank 32295/72933
aruntuda adjective aggressive hurting
Frequency rank 20749/72933
ātud verb (class 6 parasmaipada) to push (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to spur on (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to stir up (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to strike (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 46319/72933
kratudhvaṃsin noun (masculine) name of Śiva (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 34337/72933
jatudruma noun (masculine) a kind of plant
Frequency rank 52640/72933
dhātudrāvaka noun (neuter) borax (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 55391/72933
nāruṃtuda adjective harmless (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
not hurting (a wound or a weak point) (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 28616/72933
nistud verb (class 6 parasmaipada) to pierce (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to prick (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to sting (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 14993/72933
paritud verb (class 6 parasmaipada) to crush (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to pound (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to trample down (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 36660/72933
pratud verb (class 6 parasmaipada) to cut through (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to pierce (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to strike at (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 19676/72933
pratuda noun (masculine) eine bestimmte Klasse von Vögeln
Frequency rank 9886/72933
prātuda adjective derived from the Pratudas or peckers (a kind of bird) (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 59647/72933
tudhānī noun (feminine) a female yātudhāna
Frequency rank 29807/72933
tudhāna noun (masculine) yātu (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
a kind of evil spirit or demon (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
a Rākṣasa
Frequency rank 6012/72933
vitud verb (class 6 ātmanepada) to pierce (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to prick (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to scourge (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to sting (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to strike (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to strike i.e. play (a musical instrument) (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))
to tear (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 12214/72933
vidhuṃtuda noun (masculine) name of Rāhu or the personified ascending node (causing the moon's eclipses) (Monier-Williams, Sir M. (1988))

Frequency rank 39356/72933
śatakratudruma noun (masculine) name of a plant
Frequency rank 67153/72933
Ayurvedic Medical
Dictionary
     Dr. Potturu with thanks
     
     Purchase Kindle edition

ālasya

debility, lassitude, indolence.

ārjava

sincere; honest; frankness; rectitude.

aupadhenava

student of Dhanvantari and colleague of Suśruta.

aurabhra

student of Dhanvantari, colleague of Śuśruta.

bharadvāja

a celestial āyurveda physician and student of Indra; skylark; planet Mars; bone.

bhela

student of Ātreya, native of northwest (Gāndhāra) India and author of Bhela samhita, manuscript found in the Tanjore library.

hārīta

physician and author contemporary to Agnivesa and student of Atreya.

ojovisramsa

decripitude of immunity; senility, weakness.

parimāṇa

amount, quantity, magnitude, measurement in weight or volume.

pratuda

peckers, birds that use beak to peck.

sandhāraṇa

posture, position; attitude; holding together, supporting.

tūda

mulberry tree and fruit; cotton tree; Thespesia populneoides; Spondium mangifera.

vāritara,vāritaratva

float on water; a test for improperly processed metal. This is one of the physical analytical parameters for bhasma, and is applied to study the lightness and fineness of prepared bhasma.

viparītalajjālu

Plant better stud, Biophytum sensitivum.

visramśa

decrepitude, dropping down.

     Wordnet Search "tud" has 27 results.
     

tud

taḍ, tuḍ, tud, āhan, abhihan, abhyāhan, abhinihan, ātud, udāhan, uṭh   

kasmin api kena api vastunā āhananapūrvakaḥ vyāpāraḥ।

ārakṣakaḥ cauraṃ laguḍena tāḍayati।

tud

tud   

kasya api kṛtyā vacanena vā manasi duḥkhotpādanātmakaḥ vyāpāraḥ।

satyavacanaṃ sarvathā manaḥ tudati। / tudasi me marmāṇi vākśaraiḥ।

tud

śivaḥ, śambhuḥ, īśaḥ, paśupatiḥ, pinākapāṇiḥ, śūlī, maheśvaraḥ, īśvaraḥ, sarvaḥ, īśānaḥ, śaṅkaraḥ, candraśekharaḥ, phaṇadharadharaḥ, kailāsaniketanaḥ, himādritanayāpatiḥ, bhūteśaḥ, khaṇḍaparaśuḥ, girīśaḥ, giriśaḥ, mṛḍaḥ, mṛtyañjayaḥ, kṛttivāsāḥ, pinākī, prathamādhipaḥ, ugraḥ, kapardī, śrīkaṇṭhaḥ, śitikaṇṭhaḥ, kapālabhṛt, vāmadevaḥ, mahādevaḥ, virūpākṣaḥ, trilocanaḥ, kṛśānuretāḥ, sarvajñaḥ, dhūrjaṭiḥ, nīlalohitaḥ, haraḥ, smaraharaḥ, bhargaḥ, tryambakaḥ, tripurāntakaḥ, gaṅgādharaḥ, andhakaripuḥ, kratudhvaṃsī, vṛṣadhvajaḥ, vyomakeśaḥ, bhavaḥ, bhaumaḥ, sthāṇuḥ, rudraḥ, umāpatiḥ, vṛṣaparvā, rerihāṇaḥ, bhagālī, pāśucandanaḥ, digambaraḥ, aṭṭahāsaḥ, kālañjaraḥ, purahiṭ, vṛṣākapiḥ, mahākālaḥ, varākaḥ, nandivardhanaḥ, hīraḥ, vīraḥ, kharuḥ, bhūriḥ, kaṭaprūḥ, bhairavaḥ, dhruvaḥ, śivipiṣṭaḥ, guḍākeśaḥ, devadevaḥ, mahānaṭaḥ, tīvraḥ, khaṇḍaparśuḥ, pañcānanaḥ, kaṇṭhekālaḥ, bharuḥ, bhīruḥ, bhīṣaṇaḥ, kaṅkālamālī, jaṭādharaḥ, vyomadevaḥ, siddhadevaḥ, dharaṇīśvaraḥ, viśveśaḥ, jayantaḥ, hararūpaḥ, sandhyānāṭī, suprasādaḥ, candrāpīḍaḥ, śūladharaḥ, vṛṣāṅgaḥ, vṛṣabhadhvajaḥ, bhūtanāthaḥ, śipiviṣṭaḥ, vareśvaraḥ, viśveśvaraḥ, viśvanāthaḥ, kāśīnāthaḥ, kuleśvaraḥ, asthimālī, viśālākṣaḥ, hiṇḍī, priyatamaḥ, viṣamākṣaḥ, bhadraḥ, ūrddharetā, yamāntakaḥ, nandīśvaraḥ, aṣṭamūrtiḥ, arghīśaḥ, khecaraḥ, bhṛṅgīśaḥ, ardhanārīśaḥ, rasanāyakaḥ, uḥ, hariḥ, abhīruḥ, amṛtaḥ, aśaniḥ, ānandabhairavaḥ, kaliḥ, pṛṣadaśvaḥ, kālaḥ, kālañjaraḥ, kuśalaḥ, kolaḥ, kauśikaḥ, kṣāntaḥ, gaṇeśaḥ, gopālaḥ, ghoṣaḥ, caṇḍaḥ, jagadīśaḥ, jaṭādharaḥ, jaṭilaḥ, jayantaḥ, raktaḥ, vāraḥ, vilohitaḥ, sudarśanaḥ, vṛṣāṇakaḥ, śarvaḥ, satīrthaḥ, subrahmaṇyaḥ   

devatāviśeṣaḥ- hindūdharmānusāraṃ sṛṣṭeḥ vināśikā devatā।

śivasya arcanā liṅgarūpeṇa pracalitā asti।

tud

tūtaḥ, tūdaḥ, yūpaḥ, kramukaḥ, brahmabhāgaḥ, brāhmaṇeṣṭaḥ, brahmaniṣṭhaḥ, brahmasthānaḥ, surūpaḥ, yūṣaḥ, nūdaḥ, pūṣaḥ   

vṛkṣaviśeṣaḥ yasya phalāni miṣṭāni santi।

tūtasya adanārthe vayaṃ tūte ārohāmaḥ।

tud

tūdaḥ, kramukaḥ, yūpaḥ   

madhyamākāravataḥ tūtavṛkṣasya phalam।

bālakāḥ tūdān adanti।

tud

asuraḥ, daityaḥ, daiteyaḥ, danujaḥ, indrāriḥ, dānavaḥ, śukraśiṣyaḥ, ditisutaḥ, pūrvadevaḥ, suradviṭ, devaripuḥ, devāriḥ, kauṇapaḥ, kravyāt, kravyādaḥ, asrapaḥ, āśaraḥ, rātriñcaraḥ, rātricaraḥ, kavvūraḥ, nikaṣātmajaḥ, yātudhānaḥ, puṇyajanaḥ, nairṛtaḥ, yātuḥ, rakṣaḥ, sandhyābalaḥ, kṣapāṭaḥ, rajanīcaraḥ, kīlāpāḥ, nṛcakṣāḥ, naktañcaraḥ, palāśī, palāśaḥ, bhūtaḥ, nīlāmbaraḥ, kalmāṣaḥ, kaṭaprūḥ, agiraḥ, kīlālapaḥ, naradhiṣmaṇaḥ, khacaraḥ   

dharmagranthaiḥ varṇitāḥ te jīvāḥ ye dharmavirodhinaḥ kāryān akarot tathā ca devānāṃ ṛṣīṇāṃ ca śatravaḥ āsan।

purākāle asūrāṇāṃ bhayena dharmakārye kāṭhīnyam abhavat।

tud

rāhuḥ, tamaḥ, svarbhānuḥ, saiṃhikeyaḥ, vidhuntudaḥ, asrapiśācaḥ, grahakallolaḥ, saiṃhikaḥ, upaplavaḥ, śīrṣakaḥ, uparāgaḥ, siṃhikāsūnuḥ, kṛṣṇavarṇaḥ, kabandhaḥ, aguḥ, asuraḥ   

śāstreṣu varṇitaḥ navagraheṣu ekaḥ grahaḥ।

bhavataḥ putrasya janmapatrikāyāṃ saptame sthāne rāhuḥ asti।

tud

nistud, udākṛ, vitud, upārṣ, cimicimāya   

kṣuradhārasya vastunaḥ kasyāpi mṛdupṛṣṭhe praveśānukūlavyāpāraḥ।

alasmāt kaṇṭakaḥ niratudat mama pāde।

tud

tud   

anyeṣāṃ durvacanaiḥ vyathanānukūlaḥ vyāpāraḥ।

tasya vacanāni mama manaḥ atudat।

tud

karkaṭī, kaṭudalī, jīnasā, mūtraphalā, trapuṣā, hastiparṇī, lomaśakāṇḍā, mūtralā, bahukandā, karkaṭākṣaḥ, śāntanuḥ, cirbhaṭī, vālukī, ervāruḥ, trapuṣī   

phalaviśeṣaḥ- devadālīlatāyāḥ dīrghaṃ tathā ca atundaṃ phalam।

janāḥ grīṣmakāle karkaṭīm adanti।

tud

tāḍaya, tud, han   

ekaṃ vastu anyena vastunā āhananānukūlaḥ vyāpāraḥ।

basayānasya cālakena yānaṃ vṛkṣeṇa saha atāḍyata।

tud

devadāru, śakrapādapaḥ, paribhadrakaḥ, bhadradāru, drukilimam, pītudāru, dāru, dārukam, snigdhadāru, amaradāru, śivadāru, śāmbhavam, bhūtahāri, bhavadāru, bhadravat, indradāru, mastadāru, surabhūruhaḥ, surāvham, devakāṣṭham   

vṛkṣaviśeṣaḥ- yasmāt tailaṃ prāpyate।

devadāruṇaḥ kāṣṭham dṛḍham asti।

tud

vyadh, chid, āvyadh, anuvyadh, nirbhid, avabhid, prabhid, nirbhad, pratibhid, vibhid, vinirbhid, nirvyadh, nivyadh, parivyadh, pratud, nistud, pariṇud, tṛd, ātṛd, atitṛd, ativyadh, nikṣ, anunikṣ, udṛṣ, upatṛd, upārṣ, nitud, nitṛd, paritṛd, pracchid, vitud, vitṛd, vinikṣ, vivyadh, vyṛṣ, śvabhr, saṃkṛt, saṃchid, sañchid, sambhid   

tigmena astreṇa kasyacana vastunaḥ chidranirmāṇānukūlaḥ vyāpāraḥ।

takṣakaḥ utpīṭhikāṃ nirmātuṃ kānicana kāṣṭhāni avidhyat।

tud

śutudrī, śitadruḥ, satalajanadī   

pañjābaprānte vartamānā ekā nadī।

pañjābaprānte vartamāneṣu pañcasu nadīṣu ekā śutudrī asti।

tud

tuḍī   

sampūrṇajāteḥ ekā rāgiṇī।

gāyakaḥ tuḍīṃ gāyati।

tud

vānuāṭudeśaḥ, vānuāṭūdeśaḥ   

praśāntamahāsāgarasya naiṛtye sthitaḥ deśaviśeṣaḥ।

vānuāṭudeśe prāyaḥ 80 dvīpasamūhāḥ santi।

tud

ketudharmā , ketuvarmā   

ekaḥ puruṣaḥ ।

ketudharmā mahābhārate ullikhitaḥ asti

tud

baṭudāsaḥ   

ekaḥ puruṣaḥ ।

kośakāraiḥ baṭudāsaḥ ullikhitaḥ asti

tud

ketudharmā , ketuvarmā   

ekaḥ puruṣaḥ ।

ketudharmā mahābhārate ullikhitaḥ asti

tud

kratudevaḥ   

ekaḥ puruṣaḥ ।

kratudevasya varṇanaṃ kathāsaritsāgare vartate

tud

kratudevaḥ   

ekaḥ puruṣaḥ ।

kratudevasya varṇanaṃ kathāsaritsāgare vartate

tud

tuḍgiḥ   

ekaḥ rājaputraḥ ।

tuḍgeḥ ullekhaḥ chandaḥsūtre vartate

tud

tudaḥ   

ekaḥ puruṣaḥ ।

tudaḥ śubhrādigaṇe parigaṇitaḥ

tud

tūdī   

ekaḥ janapadaḥ ।

tūdī pāṇinīnā parigaṇitā

tud

tuḍgiḥ   

ekaḥ rājaputraḥ ।

tuḍgeḥ ullekhaḥ chandaḥsūtre vartate

tud

tudaḥ   

ekaḥ puruṣaḥ ।

tudaḥ śubhrādigaṇe parigaṇitaḥ

tud

tūdī   

ekaḥ janapadaḥ ।

tūdī pāṇinīnā parigaṇitā

Parse Time: 1.084s Search Word: tud Input Encoding: IAST IAST: tud