ASTAMI-PAKSA IN PILLAR EDICT V OF ASOKA
By D.C. Sircar, Calcutta
The fohowing passage, which is regarded as one sentence or two sentences by
different scholars, occurs in PE V of the Maurya king Atoka (c. 272-236 B.C.): -
athamT-pakhäye cavudasäye parhmdasäye tisäye punävasune tTsu cätum-
mäsTsu sudivasäye gone no nflakhitaviye ajake edake sükale e vä pi arnne m-
lakhiyati no nflakhitaviye^ . [Sanskrit: astami-pakse caturdasyäm pancadai- yäm tisyäyäm punairasau tisrsu cäturmäsTsu sudivase gauh no nirlaksayitavyah
- ajakah edakah iükarah ye va api anye nirlaksyante no nirlaksayitavyah. ]
It has been translated into English as fohows: — "On the eighth [tithi] of [every]
fortnight, on the fourteenth, on the fifteenth, on Tisyä, on Punarvasu, on the three Caturmäsfs, [and] on the festivals, buhs must not be castrated, [and] he-goats, rams, boars, and whatever other animals are castrated [otherwise], must not be castrated [then]"' .
On the first expression in the passage quoted above, G. Biihler made the follow¬
ing observation: "M. Senart's explanation of athamT-pakhäye by paksasyästamyäm, 'on the eighth of [each] fortnight', is no doubt correct. In the Jain Acäränga, ii.
15.17, p. 125 (Jacobi), we have an exactly analogous compound dasami-pakkhena,
'on the tenth of the fortnight'. The position of the parts of the compound is in¬
verted in accordance with a license or slovenliness, frequently observable in ah
Prakrits; compare, e.g., the DesT valaya-bähu, 'armlet' (Hemacandra, Desikosa,
VII. 52) for bähu-valaya. Some formations of this kind like vära-bäria, 'a protection against arrows', i.e. 'a coat-of-mail', have even crept into Sanskrit in addition to those words where the grammar or classical usage sanctions the irregular position of the parts of the compound"' .
The argument is so very convincing that the interpretation of astami-paksa as
'the 8th of each fortnight (dark or bright)' has been generally accepted and has
not been challenged so far as 1 know. However, when 1 began to study the edicts
of Asoka long ago, I was not quite happy with this interpretation because the for¬
mation of the expression cäturmäsT-paksa occurring in the immediately following
sentence of the same PE V is analogous though it is interpreted in a remarkably different way. This sentence reads as foUows:
1 Delhi-Topra text in E. Hultzsch, Corp. Ins. Ind., I, 1925, 126.
llbid., 128.
3 Cf Ep. Ind., II, 266; also Franke in Kuhn 's Zeitschrift ßr vergleichende Sprachforschung, 34. 434 referred to by Hultzsch.
Astam T-Paksa in Pillar Edict V of Asoka 269
tisäye punävasune cätuthmäsiye cäturhmäsi-palchäye asvasä gonasä lalchane no
kataviye (Sanskrit: tisyäyäm punarvasau cäturmäsyäm cäturmäsi-pakse asvasya goh
laksariam no kartavyam).
English translation: "On Tisyä, on Punarvasu, on the CäturmäsTs, [and] during the fortnight of [every] Cäturmäsf, horses [and] bullocks must not be branded"".
The expression cäturmäsT-paksa has been correctly understood in the sense of
'the fortnight to which one of the three CäturmäsTs (i.e. the full moon of Phälguna, Äsädha and Kärttika) belongs', i.e. the bright fortnight of the said three months. On
this analogy, the expression astamT-paksa would mean 'the fortnight to which the
most important AstamT-tithi of the year belongs (or the few important Astaml-
tithis belong)'. Because the two expressions astami-paksa and cäturmäsT-paksa occur in the same record in the same context in two consecutive passages, it is at least
expected that they were formed in the same way to convey simhar ideas. Unfor¬
tunately, I was formerly uncertain about the special importance to be attached to
any ÄstamT-tithi of the year in the socio-religious life of Magadha or India in the
third century B.C. In the context of Bengal and its neighbourhood during the late
medieval and modern periods, astami-paksa would no doubt mean the fortnight to
which the MahastamT or Ä^vina-sudi 8 belongs, i.e., the bright fortnight of Äsvina.
However, no special importance appears to have been attached to this tithi during
the much earlier epochs.
As it later appeared to me, there is some evidence to show that the 8th of the
dark fortnight of Mägha was regarded as specially important in ancient India, and
we have to see if, by astami-paksa, Atoka means the said fortnight.
The Ästakä rites, which gradually came to be associated especiahy with the
Sräddha ceremony, were so called because they were performed on the KrstiästamT- tithi or the 8th of the dark half of any month or of a particular month' . Sahara's
commentary on Jaimini's Pürvamimämsäsütra^ quotes a verse [from the Athar¬
vaveda]'' saying, "May that night (i.e. the Ästakä night) be very auspicious for us,
which people welcome like a cow coming towards one and which is the wife of the
year." Elsewhere in the Atharvaveda^ it is said that the KrsnastamT-tithi called Ekästakä (i.e. the principal Ästakä) was the wife of the year and was suitable for diksä for the performance of the Sarhvatsara-sattra. The Ekästakä, which is identi¬
fied by Jaimini' with the KrsnästamT of Mägha, is also called the wife of the year
in the Grhyasütra^° of Hiranyakesin. According to Äpastamba as quoted by Hara¬
datta on Gautama" , the Ekästakä (i.e. MäghT KrsriästamT), called the wife of the
year, was the second day of the AstamI when the tithi spread over two days, the
4 Hultzsch, op. cit., 126 and 128.
5 Cf Gautama. VIII. I9;iat. Br, VI. 4. 2. 10; see Kane,Hist. Dharm., IV, 353 (353ff ).
6 I. 3. 2.
7 III. 10. 2. See W. D. Whitney's English translation of the Atharvaveda, Indian reprint, I, 100.
8 III. 10. 8. See Whitney, op. cit., 101.
9 VI. 5. 32-37.
10 II. 15. 9.
11 See 8. 19.
270 D. C. Sircar
Naksatra of that day being Jyesthä. The Bhäradväja Grhyasütra^^ also says that
the MäghT KrsnästamT, on which the moon is in the Jyesthänaksatra, was called
Ekästakä. The Baudhäyana Grhyasütra^^ prescribes the performance of the Ästakä
rites on the 8th of the dark fortnight of Mägha or on the 7th, 8th and 9th of the
said fortnight.
The performance of the Ästakä rites on days other than the MäghT KrsnästamT is
prescibed by some other authorities also. Thus the Vaikhänasä Smärtasütra^'^ speaks
of the Krsnastami of Mägha and Bhadrapada, whhe MargasTrsa, Pausa and Mägha
are mentioned in this connection in the Mänava^^ , SäAkhäyana^^ , Khädira^^ ,
Käthaka^^ , KausTtaki^^ und Päraskara^" Grhyasütras. The Äsvaläyana Grhyasütra^^
not only mentions the Krsnästami of MargaSTrsa, Pausa, Mägha and Phälguna but
also refers to an apparently older view that the Ästakä rites were to be performed only on the KrsnästamT of Mägha (often cahed Ekästakä) and not on the KrsnästamT of the four months.
From what has been said above, it wUl appear that the Ekästakä or the Ästakä
par excellence was probably indicated in the expression astamT-paksa in PE V of
Atoka. Here AstamTmay have been either the 8th of the dark fortnight of the month of Mägha or the second day when the tithi covered two days and the Jyesthä-naksatra fell on that day. The second alternative seems to be preferable. Thus the expression
in the Atokan edict seems to have been used to indicate the dark fortnight of
Mägha or preferably the same fortnight in particular years.
12 II. 16.
13 II. 11. 1-4 14 IV. 8.
15 II. 4. 1.
16 III. 12. 1.
17 III. 3. 27.
18 61. 1.
19 III. 15. 1.
20 III. 3.
21 II. 4. 1-2.
VORLÄUFIGE BEMERKUNGEN ZU DEN IN DER STAATSBIBLIOTHEK
PREUSSISCHER KULTURBESITZ IN BERUN NEU GEFUNDENEN
TOCHARISCHEN HANDSCHRIFTENFRAGMENTEN
Von Klaus T. Schmidt, Saarbrücken
In den Jahren 1971 und 1975 hatte ich dank der freundhchen Erlaubnis der
Herren Bibhotheksdirektoren Dr. W. Voigt und Dr. D. George Gelegenheit, die
Handschriftenbestände der OrientabteUung in der Staatsbibhothek Preußischer
Kuhurbesitz in Berhn nach bis dahin unbeachtet gebhebenen tocharischen Texten
durchzusehen . Im Verlaufe meiner Nachforschungen gelang es mir, insgesamt mehr
als 50 tocharische Fragmente, meist kleineren Umfangs, festzustellen. Einige der
Bruchstücke waren bereits von sachkundiger Hand (vermuthch von W. Sieghng' ) zu
größeren Blattfragmenten zusammengesetzt worden, waren jedoch z. T. wieder —
wohl durch Kriegseinwirkung - auseinandergerissen worden. Nur drei größere
Fragmente waren bereits unter Glas gebracht worden, der Rest - darunter drei
weitere größere Stücke — befand sich ungeordnet und z. T. miteinander verklebt
in einem Briefumschlag, der die Signatur Mainz 655 trug.
Diese Fragmente, die, wie sich anhand der vorhandenen Fundsiglen erkennen
läßt, aus den Funden der Preußischen Turfanexpeditionen stammen, waren von
E. Sieg und W. Sieghng, den Herausgebern der tocharischen Texte der Berliner
Sammlung, aus bisher unbekannten Gründen nicht weiter bearbeitet worden und of¬
fensichthch in Vergessenheit geraten.
Im einzelnen handelt es sich um die folgenden Fragmente :
Mainz 613: 1 Fragment mit Resten von 7 Zeilen (TI. D).
Mainz 617: 1 Fragment , vierzeilig (T I . D).
Mainz 651: 1 Skt.-Fragment, 6-zeihg, mit osttocharischen Interhnear-Glossen,
mehrfach zusammengesetzt (Fundort unbekannt).
655,1: 1 Fragment, 8-zeUig, mehrfach zusammengesetzt; die ursprünghche
Größe läßt sich auf 36 x 10 cm berechnen (T III. MQR).
655,2: 6 kleine Fragmente (Fundort nicht angegeben), die wohl mit 655, 1
zu einer Handschrift gehören.
655,3: 3 nicht zusammenhängende Bruchstücke, z. T. selbst wieder mehr¬
fach zusammengesetzt, aus der Mitte eines Blattes; die ursprünghche
Größe der Handschrift läßt sich auf 34 x 8,1 cm berechnen (Fun¬
dort nicht angegeben, dürfte aber MQ sein).
655,4: 2 kleinere Fragmente (Fundort unbekannt), die mit 655,3 zu einer
Handschrift gehören könnten. Dazu 5 kleine Fragmente, verschie¬
denen Handschriften angehörend (Fundort unbekannt).
1 Irgendwelche Angaben über frühere Bearl)eiter dieser Fragmente liegen nicht vor.
