7629974015

64

origin of the Gandhava conception the Etig-Vedic testimony cannot be considered as conclusive. The evidences of the Atharva-Veda and the Grihya-Sutras are morę yaluable as representing a stock of ideas of popular origin and conseąuently less altered by clerical censorship. It is worth noticing that the part of Gandharva in the Vedic wedlock rites¹ stands in no contradiction to the Buddhist conception: before the betrothed is allowed to be United with ber husband, she be-longs, for three nights to the Gandharva Viśvavasu. During that time the newly wedded couple sleeps chastely on the ground seperated by a staff representing the Gandharya, annointed with scents and adorned with materials and cords². The role of Gandharya as a child spirit is not mentioned in Vedic texts, but there are sufficient reasons for this fact: the identification of lover and embryo was too much for adaptation possibilities, even in the lower spheres of the popular Brahmanism.

As a conclusion a few words will be dedicated to the etymolog^' of the Gandharya. There is beyond doubt a connection beween the Greek Kentauros, Iranian Gandarewa and Indian Gandharva. Nevertheless the attempts to explain this connection by the comparatiyo grammar of Indian-European languages are not conyincing³. The word is probably not of Indo-European origin, and both the Indian Gandharya as well as the Greek Kentauros are folk etymologies ⁴ based on the same loan word. Przyluski’s supposition ^{5 6}, that we are in presence of a word akin to the Drayidian names of horse (kudirei etc.) deserves to be taken into account. It does not exclude the identification of Gandharya with gardabha, garda being probably also an un-Aryan

1

Cf. Apastamblya Grihya Sufcra, VIII, 8—9; Winternitz, Das altindische Hochzeitsrituell, p. 48, 88.

2

*    We are here in presence of a typical instance of the un-Aryan pUja. Cf. Przyluski, Totemisme et Vegetalisme, RHR. 1927 and J. Charpentier, Cber den Begriff und die Etymologie von paja. Festgabe H. Jacobi, 1926.

3

*    Beside9 A. Kuhn, Zeitschrift fttr vgl. Sprachforschung, I, p. 513 there are two recent hypotheses to be noticed: H. G-iintert, 1. c., p. 69 and G. Du-mezi), Le probl^me des Centaures, 1929.

4

Buddhists (cf. Abhidliarmakośa III, 47) explain Gandhawa as »he who

5

eats smell«, and the Tibctan Lotsavas translate it in the same way a9 dri-za.

6

L’influence iranienne en Gr&ce et dans 1’lnde, p. 285.