Vol. V, No. 4.] The Hero-Gods of the Rigveda. 111 
[N.8.] 
taken q@ifq first person singular for qw@re third person singu- 
lar. ee Macdonell has taken faa: nominative singular 
‘aa accusative singular. Sdyana has removed | faa: 
altogether fr om the first line and made it an adjective of ‘ton 
in the second line. It cannot be said that these attempts have 
been quite successful. The most natural way to proceed would 
be to see if the sentence would make any sense without alter- 
ing any of the words. I think it would do so if we would 
take we the ae indicated by the form of the verb and faa: 
both as the subject of the econ We would then get for 
the subject @¥ ni a form not uncommon in the Rigveda. 
An instance of it we will get at it See 32 (X. 48. 2). Now 
if this be the construction of the sentence what does it 
mean? It means that the composer of the hymn has here 
made faa: as the speaker. We have seen him represented as a 
Beier: It is, therefore, not unnatural that he would be 
made to say he had adored Agni with beautiful hymns. Here 
we have two riks, in one of which (V, 41- 9) faa: is adored as 
god and in the other an explanation is given as to how he at- 
tained to divinity. 
n translating gu: ware av I have followed Sayana, 
differing from Professor Macdonell and Griffith. These autho- 
tities have rendered eau: “wae” into ‘‘ of the terrestrial hero, 
“e., of Agni.’”? No objection can be urged against this mean- 
ing. But when we come to gam yaa aw this rendering is re- 
duced to an absurdity. The aw’ here = sat agra = afi | Now if 
Zar ym is wfy: what does seu: aye ad or Wa: wfy mean ? 
Say these authorities that aw: here means ‘‘ germ’’ and gsq? 
ai: is the germ of the terrestrial hero ie A Soe 
sousileretion will Se that this is simply concealing fro 
ourselves an absurdity by the use of the English onirtvalant of 
a Sanskrit term instead of using the Sanskrit term itself. TheS 
eh a¥: has been used in the Rigveda in two different senses, 
amely, ‘‘ the womb containing the foetus,’’ and ‘ the foetus 
alutamed in the womb.’? When the word is used i in the latter 
sense it can be rendered in English into ‘‘ germ.” For the 
foetus is the undeveloped state of the being that will grow out 
of it. But in the use of the two terms “a¥:” and ‘* germ ”’ 
ae is this difference. We can speak of the aw: of the being 
t bears it and not of the being that will come out of it. 
use the word foetus or child instead of the term germ. In eq: 
WTA wi: both es yw: and a: cannot refer to the same thing, 
namely, wfy: | at agrq and ea: yaq ay: mean very much 
