Note [1:127:8:1]1. Va'has and its compounds, such as stomavahas, ukthavahas, girvahas, have been treated of by Dr. Neisser in his ingenious article on vahni, Bezzenberger's Beitrage, XVIII, 301 seq. (comp. on vahni, vol. xxxii, p. 37 seq.). Dr. Neisser tries to show that by the side of vahni, derived from vah = Latin vehere, and meaning 'draught-horse' (and besides--though Dr. Neisser does not admit this, see p. 316--'a person that drives in a chariot'), there existed a second substantive vahni connected with the Greek eyxesthai, and meaning both 'erhaben' and 'erhebend,' i. e. praising the gods (loc. cit., p. 314). With this second vahni he connects va'has and its compounds. One of the principal arguments of Dr. Neisser is the fact quite correctly stated by him (p. 301), that 'the word vahni very frequently associates itself to the term hotri, while it does not with the compounds havyavah and havyava'hana.' This fact, indeed, points to the conclusion that 'those compounds belong to another sphere of ideas than vahni' (p. 302). But Dr. Neisser seems to me to go too far in concluding that vahni, standing as an epithet of Agni, is not derived from vah = vehere. Agni's action consists not only in carrying the sacrificial food to the gods, but also in carrying the gods to the sacrifice of men, and in coming to that sacrifice himself with his chariot and his horses. Nor do the words stomavahas or ukthavahas, if derived from vah = vehere, necessarily presuppose the admissibility of expressions such as 'uktham (stomam) vahati viprah devan akkha' (p. 303), but those compounds may also rest on an idea conveyed by expressions such as 'uktham (stomah) vahati devan upa yagnam,' which idea is quite Vedic. Thus stomavahas in my opinion means, as an epithet of the god, 'carried by the stoma as by a vehicle' (comp. VII, 24, 5. esha stomah mahe ugra'ya va'he dhuri-iva atyah na vagayan adhayi). or, as an epithet of the human worshippers, fitting out the

stoma as a vehicle.' I believe that the words in question can thus be explained in conformity with the whole range of Vedic thought, and the artificial distinction of two different substantives vahni, &c., will be avoided. For special indications pointing in the same direction, which are furnished by the passages which contain the words here treated of, I refer to Bergaigne, Religion Vedique, II, 286 seq., and to the article of Dr. Neisser himself, p. 321 seq.

Verse 9.

Note [1:127:9:1]1. On the metrical irregularity, see above, verse 3, note 1.

Note [1:127:9:2]2. Te seems to stand for the accusative, comp. Pischel, Zeitschrift der D. Morgenl. Gesellschaft, XXXV, 714 seq.; Delbruck, Altindische Syntax, 205. Or may the meaning be: and thy (worshippers) walk around thee ... like obedient (servants)?'

Verse 10.