365bet娱乐

The Laksanagranthas of the Atharvaveda, Saunakiya recension , as mentioned in the Caranavyuha (Atharvaveda-Parisistas 49.4.8), are five in number. They are 1) Caturadhyayika 2) Pratisakhya 3) Pancapatalika 4) Dantyosthavidhi and 5) Brhatsarvanukramani. These texts have been written from a practical point of view. It is their purpose to teach and not to edify; to explain, not to discuss. The Caturadhyayika and the Atharva-Pratisakhya are linguistic-grammatical by nature while as the Pancapatalika, the Dantyosthavidhi and the Brhatsarvanukramani may be characterised as text-historical. It is well-known that special efforts were made to preserve the Vedic texts against being in any way corrupted. The pada the krama and similar other vikrtis show how the Vedic Aryans sought scrupulously to preserve the pristine character of every single syllable and its accent in the Vedas. A verse by Patanjali² states: "A word which is deficient in accent or syllable, or which is employed wrongly, does not give the correct meaning. It becomes (1) Cf. Max Muller, A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 116. (2) Mahabhasya 1: sabda hinah svarata varnata va mithya prayukta na tamarthamaha | sa vagva yajamanam hinasti yathendrah svarata paradhat||

209 a word-missile (vag-vaira) and kills the sacrificer as in the case of (the word) indrasatru³ which was wrongly accented." This shows the great importance attached to every syllable and accent. In the case of the Atharvaveda, Saunakiya recension , which was less current among the people than any of the other Vedas, there was a greater possibility of variations and corruptions. In fact, we do find that there is a great number of variant readings in the text of the Saunakiya and the Paippalada recensions. Hence it was with a view to standardising the text and also to fixing its division into Kandas, anuvaakas, suktas, pryayas and rks or avasanas that these Laksanagranthas were composed. FOAE (3) It is said that Tvastr performed a sacrifice to obtain a son who would kill Indra. But the word indrasatru was wrongly pronounced with the udatta accent on the first member so that it became a bahuvrihi compound meaning thereby 'one whose destroyer is Indra'. The son Visvarupa was, in fact, born but he did not become the destroyer of Indra'. On the contrary, he was killed by Indra. Cf. Gopatha Brahmana II.5.6.