1847.] On the History and Literature of the Veda. 827 



shows however, by its contents that it belongs to an already far advanced 

 period of grammar and interpretation. That however it is older than 

 Panini, we may conclude from the less developed state, particularly of 

 the technical part of grammatical science in the Nirukta. For along 

 with a certain richness of grammatical expressions, it still wants the 

 greater part of those peculiar technical terms, of which it is not credible 

 that they were wholly Panini' s own creation. Yaska is entirely ignorant 

 of algebraical symbols such as Panini has. That the latter makes no 

 mention of Yaska, though he had in many places an opportunity of doing 

 so, can no longer strike us now that we know so large a number of 

 decidedly older grammarians of whom he makes no mention ; and 

 would at most show that in Panini's time this book did not yet enjoy 

 that general circulation and esteem, to which it latterly attained. The 

 introduction to the Nirukta, very remarkable in many respects, which 

 contains the sketch of a grammatical and exegetical system, makes us 

 acquainted with the views of Yaska and his predecessors, and it is in 

 this way possible for us to institute a complete comparison between 

 these older grammarians and Panini. For this I believe I mav be 

 permitted to refer to the edition and explanation of the Nirukta, which 

 I think of sending to the press without delay. Let me only be allowed 

 to examine somewhat more closely one section of that introduction, 

 which is calculated to throw light on the age of the Veda, and of its 

 interpretation. 



Yaska mentions the opinion of the Grammarian Kautsa that the 

 songs of the Veda are inaccessible to grammatical and logical interpre- 

 tations ; for their sense, says Kautsa, is fixed by the Brahmanas and by 

 the use of the hymns in the ritual, and thus forbid a free explanation. 

 The hymns, says he further, even contain what is absurd and impossible ; 

 they contradict themselves, when e. g. they say " There is but one 

 Rudra and no second ;" and again " numberless are the thousands of 

 Rudras on the earth ;" finally they contain, Kautsa thinks, passages 

 completely unintelligible. To the last reproach Yaska replies, it is not 

 the fault of the beam, if the blind man does not see it, but of the man ; 

 and tries to refute or explain the rest in detail. That the sense of the 

 hymns is determined by their ritual signification, as the latter is taught 

 m the Brahmanas is (he thinks) by no means a fault, since these books 

 give the correct meaning. Yaska (as is further clear from a number 



o p 



