VEDIC HINDUISM by S. W. Jamison and M. Witzel - people.fas ...

Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 10
by Caland 1923-1928. Neither the Maitråya�ī Sa�hitå nor the Kå�haka Sa�hitå
has a surviving separate text called a Bråhma�a, though a collection of fragments
of the original Ka�ha Bråhma�a, called Śatådhyåya Bråhma�a, is found in
Kashmiri ritual handbooks and has been partially edited by von Schroeder
(1898) and Surya Kanta (1943); cf. also Lokesh Chandra 1982, 1984.
The �g Veda has two Bråhma�as, the Aitareya Bråhma�a (AB) and the
Kau�ītaki (or Śå�khåyana) Bråhma�a (KB), of which the Aitareya is the older
and the more extensive. The AB was edited by Aufrecht (1879); the KB by
Lindner (1887) and in its Kerala version by E.R.S. Sarma (1968). Both have been
translated into English by Keith (1920).
The major Bråhma�as of the Såmaveda are the Jaiminīya Bråhma�a (JB)
and the Pañcavi�śa Bråhma�a (PB, or Tå��ya Mahåbråhma�a). The JB is an
immense, unfortunately corrupt, and very rich text, that has not yet been
sufficiently worked on (see Ehlers 1988). Caland (1919) edited and translated
significant portions of it (into German), and added many passages in an English
rendering in his translation of the PB (1931b), as did, to a lesser extent, Oertel in
a series of articles (1897-1909). Only in 1954 did a complete edition appear (that
of Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra), unfortunately still riddled with misprints
and corruptions.15 A carefully, and if possible critically edited version of the JB
is greatly desirable.16 There are several recent partial translations, e.g. H. W.
Bodewitz (1973, 1990) of the Agnihotra and Soma sections, accompanied by
detailed philological though not particularly pioneering commentary. W.
Doniger O'Flaherty (1985) has translated some of the narrative portions,
however, mostly a recapitulation of those translated by Oertel and Caland, with
a Freudian commentary.17 Tsuchida (1979) and Schrapel (1970) have translated
parts of book 2. A complete, philologically grounded translation of the JB,
would contribute mightily to our understanding of middle Vedic religion, but
it may be premature to desire one without an accurate text.
The Pañcavi�śa Bråhma�a, which is available only in unsatisfactory
uncritical editions, presents fewer difficulties, but also fewer rewards than the JB.
15 A guide to the MSS has been given by W. Rau, 1988, and a useful compilation of
emendations that have been proposed, by Ehlers 1989.
16 E. R. Sreekrishna Sarma (Adyar, Madras) has begun a new edition in the early Eighties,
based on new MSS from Kerala.
17 And some basic misunderstandings of Indian sociology, (e.g. fear of the father in case of a
måtula?!); the date assigned to JB (of 900 B.C.) is pure guesswork and definitely too early for
the text as it stands now, especially for book 1,1-65. For further criticism see Bodewitz
1990:19-24.