Here we have the opposition between amah and sa, while in the Ait. Brahmana VIII, 27, we have amo 'ham asmi sa tvam, giving amah in opposition to sa. It seems not unlikely that this was an old proverbial formula, and that it meant originally no more than 'I am he, and thou art she.' But this meaning was soon forgotten. In the Khand. Up. I, 6, 1, we find sa explained as earth, ama as fire (Sacred Books of the East, vol. i, p. 13). In the Ait. Brahmana sa is explained as Rik, ama as Saman. I have therefore in our passage also followed the interpretation of the commentary, instead of rendering it, 'I am he, and thou art she; thou art she, and I am he.'

^221:1 Anulomam, murdhanam arabhya padantam.

^221:2 Nirmathitavantau.

^221:3 Asvinau devau, Madhyandina text.

^221:4 Dadhamahe, Madhyandina text. Instead of sutave, A. has suyate, B. sutaye.

^221:5 Iti nama grihnati, Madhyandina text. Sankara says, asav iti tasyah. Anandagiri says, asav iti patyur va nirdesah; tasya nama grihnatiti purvena sambandhah. Dvivedaganga says, ante bhartasav aham iti svatmano nama grihnati, bharyaya va.

^221:6 See Paraskara Grihya-sutra I. 16 seq.

^221:7 Vatah, M.

^221:8 Argadaya nirodhena saha vartamanah sargadah, Dvivedaganga.

^221:9 Saparisrayah, parisrayena pariveshtanena garayuna sahitah, Dvivedaganga.

^221:10 Savaram is the reading given by Poley, Roer, A. and B. Anandagiri explains: garbhanihsarananantaram ya mamsapesi nirgakkhati savara, tam ka nirgamayety arthah. Dvivedaganga (ed. Weber) writes: nirgamyamanamamsapesi sa-avarasabdavakya, tam savaram ka nirgamaya.

^222:1 These as well as the preceding rules refer to matters generally treated in the Grihya-sutras; see Asvalayana, Grihya-sutras I, 13 seq.; Paraskara, Grihya-sutras I, 11 seq.; Sankakyana, Grihya-sutras I, 19 seq. It is curious, however, that Asvalayana I, 13, 1, refers distinctly to the Upanishad as the place where the pumsavana and similar matters were treated. This shows that the Upanishads were known before the composition of the Grihya-sutras, and explains perhaps, at least partially, why the Upanishads were considered as rahasya. Asvalayana says, 'Conception, begetting of a boy, and guarding the embryo are to be found in the Upanishad. But if a man does not read the Upanishad, let him know that he should feed his wife,' &c. Narayana explains that Asvalayana here refers to an Upanishad which does not exist in his own Sakha, but he objects to the conclusion that therefore the garbhadhana and other ceremonies need not be performed, and adds that some hold it should be performed, as prescribed by Saunaka and others.

^222:2 Asvalayana, Grihya-sutra I, 10, 23.

^222:3 Trayilakshana vak tvayi pravisatv iti gapato 'bhiprayah.

^223:1 Cf. Paraskara Grihya-sutras I, 16, 4, anamikaya suvarnantarhitaya; Sankhayana, Grihya-sutras I, 24, prasayeg gatarupena.