Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book XIX/Hymn 49

49. Praise and prayer to night.

[As 47.*—daçakam. ānuṣṭubham: 1-5, 8. triṣṭubh; 6. āstārapan̄kti; 7. pathyāpan̄kti; 10. 3-av. 6-p. jagatī.] *⌊The Anukr. adds bharadvājaç ca (or bhārad-), apparently meaning that Gopatha and Bharadvāja were jointly the seers in the case of this hymn.⌋

This hymn and the following occur together also in Pāipp. xiv. Their viniyoga is the same with that of the two preceding hymns (see under hymn 47). They are translated together (but in reversed order) by Ludwig.

Translated: Ludwig, p. 466; Griffith, ii. 306.

1. The lively woman, household maiden, night, of god Savitar, of Bhaga, all-expanded, of easy invocation, of assembled fortune (? -çrī́), hath filled heaven-and-earth with greatness.

In a, the pada-mss. read dámūnā; SPP. emends to -náḥ. In c, all the mss., with the comm. and SPP., read açvakṣabhā́ (p. açva॰kṣabhā́), which, as being unintelligible, our edition emends at a venture to viçvávyacās, and the translation follows the latter, for lack of anything better. The comm. gives two explanations: açu (= āçu) + akṣa + bhā (= abhibhavati or tiraskaroti), meaning çīghrapravṛtticakṣurādinirodhikā; or, alternatively, by analogy with vs. 4 c, açvakṣā (= açvān kṣāyati or kṣapayati) bhā (= dīptiḥ) yasyāḥ sā: both as absurd as possible. Ppp. reads açvakṣarā. Many of the mss. read sámbhṛtaḥçrīr, and the pada-mss. divide falsely sám॰bhṛtaçrīḥ instead of sámbhṛta॰çrīḥ; SPP. follows them. Ppp. reads saṁbhṛtaḥçīr ā.

2. The profound one hath surmounted all things; the most mighty one hath ascended to the loftiest sky; the eager night spreads toward me like a friend with excellent svadhā́s.

The translation follows our text of the verse, which, however, is full of emendations, and by no means satisfactory. Nearly every ms. reads at the beginning ávi (one áviṁ, and one authority ⌊SPP's reciter V., with impossible accent⌋ ábhi), while Ppp. has abhi, which is also, except for the accent, an easier emendation for ávi. The comm. has ati. Nearly all authorities, again, have for verb in a áruhat (the accent is perfectly defensible as an antithetical one, and might well have been left in our text); but the reciter V. gives (ábhi) árhat, thus agreeing in part with the (ati) arhat of the text of the comm.; ⌊and one of W's mss. has ásahat⌋. The explanation of the comm. reads atyarhati, which he glosses by atikramya vyāpya vartate, which is wholly without authority, since even the Dhātūpaṭha gives only pūjāyām as the sense of arh. Ppp. has aruhat. SPP. goes half way with the comm., adopting áti...aruhat (unnecessarily abandoning the "ancient accent" of the verb). All authorities have víçvāni (but Ppp. only viçvā ar-); and all ⌊save Ppp. again⌋ have gambhīró, p. -ráḥ, ⌊but one of W's pada-mss. gives -rā, p.m.⌋, although the comm., again.st his own text (according to SPP.), explains gambhīrā. Here perhaps Ppp. brings help, reading gabhīro ’d varṣ-; this is better than our -rā́ = rā́: ā́. ⌊The gabhīrā́ of the Berlin ed. seems to be a misprint for gambhīrā́, if we judge by the Collation Book and the Index Verborum: but it may be intended as an emendation, as it certainly is a metrical improvement.⌋ SPP. reads gambhīró vá-, although gambhīrás is simply unusable, and the change to -rā́ as easy as possible. Nearly all, including Ppp., read várṣiṣṭham, ⌊save three of SPP's authorities and one of W's, which have -ṣiṣṭam⌋. Then follows in nearly all aruhántas, p. aruhántaḥ; but -háta is found in one, -hánta in two, and arháti is given by a reciter, with the comm.; the comm. has arhati, and explains it precisely as he did his ati...arhati above; SPP. emends to aruhanta; our ⌊ā́...⌋ dyā́m aruhat is very bold, but the case was a desperate one. Ppp. reads aruhad açraviṣṭhā, and this, with emendation to áçramiṣṭhā (cf. RV. iv. 4. 12), makes acceptable sense. One of SPP's mss. has çramiṣṭhā́, but doubtless only by accident; all the other authorities, including the comm., have ⌊apart from some unimportant details⌋ çraviṣṭhā́, which SPP. emends to çráviṣṭhāḥ. There was probably no sufficient reason for our changing çrav- to çav- in our text. The fairly acceptable and least altered version of the line would be this: abhí víçvāny áruhad gambhīró ’d várṣiṣṭham aruhad áçramiṣṭhā. The third pāda is in equally bad condition. All the authorities ⌊with unimportant variants⌋, including Ppp., have at the beginning uçatī́ rā́try (a-), but the pada-mss. give rā́tri instead of rā́trī, as they should give, and as SPP's pada-text reads by emendation. What follows it the pada-mss. offer as ánu॰sāma: drā́him (or drāhím); in the saṁhitā-mss. the first word appears as ánusāma (once ánusama) or (accentless, and so making one word with -drā́him or -drā́hi) anusāma- or aṁnusāma-; and the second appears as -drā́him, -drā́hi, drā́him, drā́hím, drāhí, drā́vi, prā́him. The rest of the half-verse, tiṣṭhate mitrá iva svadhā́bhiḥ, is the same in all, including the comm. and Ppp. SPP. emends to ánu sā́ bhadrā́ ’bhí ti-, which appears to be modeled on our ánu mā bhadrā́bhir ví ti-, but is defective both in sense and in meter. The comm. gives anukṣaṇaṁ vi ti-, cutting loose entirely from the ms.-reading; his own text, according to SPP., has anusāmadrā vi ti-. Ppp., finally, has avasāna bhadrād vi ti-, which suggests the emendation uçatī́ rā́try ávasā no bhadrā́ ví tiṣṭhate etc. Our ví tiṣṭhate, at any rate, is by the support of Ppp. and the comm. put nearly beyond question. ⌊I have made some modifications in the above paragraph which I could not well indicate by the ell-brackets.—For those who do not have the Bombay ed., it may be well to give SPP's reconstructions of the verse: first, the text of the comm.: ati viçvāny arhad gambhīro varṣiṣṭham arhati çraviṣṭhā: uçatī rātry anusāmadrā vi tiṣṭhate mitra iva svadhābhih; second, the text which the comm. actually explains: ati viçvāny arhati gambhīrā varṣiṣṭham arhati çraviṣṭhā: uçatī rātry anukṣaṇaṁ vi tiṣṭhate mitra iva svadhābhiḥ; third, SPP's reading: áti viçvāny aruhad gambhīró várṣiṣṭham aruhanta çráviṣṭhāḥ: uçatī́ rā́try (p. rā́trī) ánu sā́ bhadrā́ ’bhi tiṣṭhate mitrá iva svadhā́bhiḥ.⌋

3. O desirable, welcome, well-portioned, well-born one! thou didst come, O night; mayest thou be well-willing here; save thou for us the things that are produced (jātá) for men, likewise what [are] for cattle, by prosperity ⌊puṣṭyā́⌋.

⌊Or, '[and] prosperous,' if we read puṣṭā́.⌋ The mss. all read in a várye, which we need not have altered to vā́rye, as várya is found elsewhere as early as TB.; Ppp. has niryāi. Three of SPP's authorities and one of ours have vándye, ⌊one has véde⌋, the rest with Ppp., vánde; the comm. vade (= sarvāir abhiṣṭūyamāne). Ppp. has svajātā. In b, most of the mss. begin with ā́jā́gan (one ájā́gan; p. ā́: jā́: agan), and the true reading is in all probability ā́ ’jāgan, impf. intensive of gam; or, if left as "pluperfect," as in our edition, it should at any rate be ā́ ’jagan, as SPP., with the comm., reads. Rātri is our (evidently called-for) emendation for rā́tri of the mss., which SPP. follows. Syās, at the end of b, is also for syām of the mss., the comm., and SPP.; it is an obvious improvement, though not quite necessary ⌊and receiving no support from Ppp.: see below⌋. Ppp. has a peculiar (and corrupt) version: ā (if svajātā, as quoted above, is for svajāta ā) cāgni rātri sumanā hy asyām. In c, the translation implies emendation of asmā́ṅs to asmé, against all the authorities, including Ppp. and the comm. The pada-mss. read jātā́ḥ, their natural inference from the rare and anomalous combination jātā́ átho; SPP. emends to jātā́. In d, Ppp. reads çriyā instead of atho, and at the end puṣṭyā, with all the mss. (they vary only as to its accent), and with SPP.; our conjectural emendation puṣṭā́ is supported only by the comm. ⌊text and explanation⌋.

4. The eager night has taken to herself the splendor of the lion, of the stag, of the tiger, of the leopard, the horse's bottom, man's (púruṣa) roar (? māyú); many forms thou makest for thyself, shining out.

The saṁhitā-mss. accent rātry uçatī́ (p. rātri: uçatī́); SPP. emends, with us, to rā́try uçatī́; the comm. also understands rā́trī. The mss. all ⌊with trifling variations⌋ read pīṣásya or pīṅsásya (or ṣīṣásya); SPP. accepts pīṅsásya; the comm. gives piṣasya, which is doubtless only a bad spelling of our piçásya; ⌊lion and stag are mentioned by these names together at RV. i. 64. 8;⌋ Ppp. has nipasya; and, at end of b, varcādhe. In c, all the authorities, including Ppp. ⌊but not the comm.⌋, offer bradhnám; the translation implies correction to budhnám,* which is the reading of the commentator (he explains it as = mūlam) ⌊and adds, açvavīryasya vego hi mūlam; in vi. 38. 4 we had the horse's vā́ja and man's māyú combined; and TB. (ii. 7. 7¹) in the corresponding passage reads krándye for vā́je. The comm. explains māyúm as çabdam āhvānādilakṣaṇam. Ppp. has kṛṇuṣī for -ṣe. ⌊The majority of the authorities read vibhātī́ḥ at the end.⌋ *⌊Cf. áçvabudhna, RV. x. 8. 3; and Aufrecht on áçvabudhya, ZDMG. xxiv. 206.⌋

5. Propitious to me [be] night and [the time] after sunrise; be the mother of cold (himá) easy of invocation for us; notice, O well-portioned one, this song of praise, with which I greet thee in all the quarters.

The translation implies in a a new conjectural reading: çivā́ me rā́try anūsūryáṁ ca; an accusative is opposed by the connection, and the meter needs another syllable. Anūtsūryá is venturesome, but we had otsūryám, p. ā॰utsūryám, above, at iv. 5. 7. At any rate, neither our text nor that of SPP. (çivā́ṁ rā́trim anusū́ryaṁ ca) seems to give any sense. Ppp. supports the mss.: çivāṁ rātrim ahni sūryaṁ ca; the majority of the saṁhita-mss. have çivā́ṁ rā́trim ahi sū́-, others anu for ahi (p. çivā́m: rā́trim: anu॰sū́ryam: ca); the comm. has rātrimahi, and understands it as rātri (voc.) mahi (= mahāntam, and qualifying sūryam!). ⌊SPP. suggests çivā́ rā́trī mahī́ sū́ryaç ca.⌋ In b, Ppp. has yamasya. In c, nearly all the mss. read açvá (or áçva) for asyá; and the pada-mss. treat it as an independent word; SPP. has asyá, with us. In d, a few mss. have vándye or vádye. Ppp. reads at the end vikṣu.

6. Our song of praise, O shining (vibhā́van) night, like a king thou enjoyest; may we be having all heroes, may we become having all possessions, through (ánu) the out-shining dawns.

The mss. read at the end anūṣásaḥ (p. anu॰uṣásaḥ); SPP. emends as we had done. Ppp., in b, c, d, has, joṣasī yathā nas sarvavīrā bh-. The verse is very ill described by the Anukr.; it is a good pan̄kti with one syllable wanting in c.

7. Pleasant names thou assumest:—whoso desire to damage my riches, them, O night, do thou burn continually, so that no thief be found, so that he be not found again.

The translation follows our text, which is considerably altered from that of the mss. All of them, with the comm. and SPP., have at the beginning çámyā, for which our rāmyā́ is, so far as the written form is concerned, a very easy emendation. The comm. explains: "thou wearest the name çamyā = çatruçamanasamarthā": one of his usual absurdities. Ppp. reads for a, b çramyā ha nāma taruṣe vimṛcchantī yo janāṅ. There seems to be no good reason why dadhiṣé should be accented. Nearly all the mss. give dhánāḥ at end of b; the comm. understands dhanā, and SPP. reads it. For c the pada-text is rā́trī: hitā́ ⌊or hi: tā́⌋: naḥ: suta॰pā́! The comm. understands instead rā́trī ’hí tā́n asutapā́, and SPP. follows him, making a new pada-text to correspond (rā́tri: ihí: tā́n: asu॰tapā́). The comm. explains asutapā as either "burning their life-breaths" (asu-tapa) or "badly burning" (a-su-tapa). Ppp. gives no help, reading ⌊for our c, d, e: it is not clear just how much of the reading is to be assigned to c⌋ rātri hīrcāna sadamātasteno anvavidyate. Our emendation is fairly acceptable; but the hí ⌊which, with the imperative, hardly needs a separate word in translation⌋ requires that we accent anutápa. For our yáthā, in d and e, the mss. and SPP. give the first time yás and the second time yát; the comm. both times yas; the meter and sense alike call for our emendation. Ppp. has for both pādas only ta steno anv avidyate, ⌊which might (see above) be understood as atas steno etc.⌋.

8. Excellent art thou, O night, like a decorated bowl; thou bearest [as] maiden the whole form of kine; full of eyes, eager, [thou showest] me wondrous forms; thou hast put on (prati-muc) the stars of heaven (divyá).

Of this verse also the translation is a make-shift, following in part the mss. and in part our conjectural emendations. In a the only point of question is the last word, which the mss. read as ṣiṣṭás (so the majority) or çiṣṭas or viṣṭás ⌊etc.⌋: the comm. has viṣṭas (= bhojanārtham pariviṣṭas). Ppp. gives the whole pāda as bhadrā ’si rātris tapaso nu viṣṭo. In b, nearly all the mss. give víçvaṁ górūpaṁ yuvatir ⌊several have -tím⌋ bibharṣi (one has bíbh-), and this the translation follows, alterations not seeming to supply a better sense. SPP., however, follows the comm. in offering víṣvan̄ for víçvam (in saṁhitā he prints it incorrectly víṣvaṁ gó-, as if there were an assimilated final in the case); ⌊but in his Corrections at the end of vol. iv. he duly notes the error;⌋ he would hardly accept the comm's interpretation, = viṣūcī (one gender for another); but how he would render it, it is hard to see. Ppp. reads viçvaṁ gorūpaṁ yuvatid vibharṣi, but another hand has written above -tir bibha-. In c, nearly all the mss. (including the comm's text, as stated by SPP.) leave me unchanged before uçatī́ and SPP. accepts it in his text, though against all rule and practice; two of our mss. have ma. ⌊All the authorities give cákṣuṣmatī, and this is followed by the comm. and SPP., and also by W. in the translation, therein departing from the emendation ('to me having eyes') of the Berlin ed.⌋ Ppp. has for the pāda cakṣuṣmatī ve yuvatī ’va rūpaḥ. The translation supplies a verb, as seems necessary unless the text be still further altered. For d the general ms.-reading is práti tyā́ṁ divyā́ tákmā amukthāḥ (also tvám and tvā́ for tyā́m, and takmā́; p. takmā̀ḥ or -mā́ḥ); but the comm. offers práti tváṁ divyā́ ná kṣā́m amukthāḥ, and this SPP. accepts ⌊accenting thus⌋ and prints. Ppp. has pratyāṁ dityāṁ divyām arukṣam amugdhaḥ. The comm's version of the text is senseless, and his attempt to put meaning into it very absurd; it might suggest práti tváṁ divyā́ nákṣatrāṇy amukthāḥ. Our text ought to accent tā́rakā am-, if the reading is admitted.

9. What thief shall come today, [what] malicious mortal villain, may night, going to meet him, smite away the neck, ⌊away⌋ the head of him;—

The two following pādas ⌊10 a, b⌋ evidently belong to this verse rather than to verse 10; but our division is that of the mss. and the Anukr., and so is adopted also by SPP. The comm. inserts another line after our 9 a, b: yo mama rātri surūpa āyati sa sampiṣṭo apāyati; and then he divides the four lines that follow into two verses of four pādas each, giving eleven verses to the whole hymn. The majority of mss. accent martyás in b. The comm. reads harat for hanat at the end. Ppp. has yu dya stenā yutv aghāyu mṛtyo ripuḥ; and, in d, pra gīyasva pra. Pāda a is the a of iv. 3. 5, ⌊of which the b recurs here as the second pāda of the comm's inserted line and also as the fourth pāda of our vs. 10⌋.

10. ⌊Away⌋ his feet, that he may not go; ⌊away⌋ his hands, that he may not harm.

What marauder shall approach, may he go away all crushed; may he go away, may he go well away; may he go away in a dry place (?).

At the end of b, the majority of mss. read yáthā́çiṣaḥ, which all the pada-mss. resolve into yáthā: áçiṣaḥ; ⌊most of⌋ the rest, and SPP., give yáthā́ ’çiṣat; the comm. yathā ”çliṣat (= saṁçleṣayet). Ppp. offers pra pādāu na yat āhataṣ pra hastāu na yanāçiṣat. In e, the pada-mss. compound su॰ápāyati, doubtless wrongly; ⌊read as pada-text sú: ápa: ayati⌋. All the mss., the comm., and SPP., give in f sthāṇāú, and the comm. explains it as = çākhopaçākhārahitavṛkṣamūla āçraye. After it, the mss. have apā́yataḥ (p. apa॰áyataḥ), but the comm. agrees with us in ápā ’yati, and SPP. accordingly also adopts it. The translation follows throughout the emendations of our text; perhaps, in f, sthā́ne would be better than sthalé, as more closely resembling the ms.-reading. We are deprived of the help of Ppp. upon the point, as it skips from apāyati in e to tṛṣṭadhūnam in 50. 1 a; for c, d, it had yo mulalaṁ sulapāyati sa saṁpiṣṭyo upāyati. We had d above as iv. 3. 5 b; ⌊cf. the end of the note to vs. 9⌋.