The Vedic Passive Optative and Its Functional Equivalents: A Study in the Syntax of the Gerundive

The Vedic Passive Optative and Its Functional Equivalents: A Study in the Syntax of theGerundiveAuthor(s): Stephanie W. JamisonReviewed work(s):Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 104, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1984), pp. 609-620Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/601895 .

Accessed: 28/01/2013 04:33

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofthe American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Mon, 28 Jan 2013 04:33:55 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aos

http://www.jstor.org/stable/601895?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


THE VEDIC PASSIVE OPTATIVE AND ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENTS:

A STUDY IN THE SYNTAX OF THE GERUNDIVE*

STEPHANIE W. JAMISON

IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT THE OPTATIVE of the -yate passive does not occur in early Vedic, but Whitney's formulation of this fact (Grammar ? 77 ld)-"No forms of the passive optative chance to occur (my italics) in RV or AV"-implies that their absence is accidental. Accident does seem, superficially, to be a reasonable explanation, given that the -yate passive is not fully developed and distinguished from the - 'yate intransitive at this period.' Yet, one might wonder why other modal forms, passive imperatives (e.g., badhyantam IV.57.4, vrgcantdm X.87.18, yujydtdm AV XIV.1.64) and subjunctives (bhriyate V.31.12) do occur in these texts. Indeed, closer investigation suggests that the lack of passive optatives results from deliberate avoidance, and that the semantic/syntactic slot that they would occupy is instead filled by non-finite forms in predicative function.

How can we conclude that the passive optative is systematically avoided? By expanding our view of the passive system beyond the limits of the morphological passive, the -yate forms. It is hardly necessary to say that the category passive is expressed in early Vedic at least as often by other formations: most notably by medially inflected forms of any type of stem and by the past participle, with or without copula. Within this considerably larger body of material we still find that the optative is marginal at best. There is one

undeniable example of a passively used medial optative, staveta in V. 18.1, and another likely example in a popular verse:

V. 18.1 prdtar agnih purupriy6, viNd stavetitithih 'Early should Agni, the much loved guest of the clan,

be praised.'

V11.59.12 urvdrukdrm iva bandhandn mrty6r muksTya mamitat

'Like a cucumber from its stem may I be released from death, not from immortality.'

Neither of these examples is entirely free from taint, however. C. Watkins has suggested to me that staveta might be a sort of "optativized" form of the common t-less 3rd sg. passive stave 'is praised,' whose preferred position in the line is exactly as here, starting in the 3rd syllable (1.92.7, VI.12.4 VII.12.2, X.115.7). Cf. VI. 12.4b agni stave dalma a jataivedah. In the case of mukszya, note that many commentators are inclined to interpret the middle of muc, with animate subject, as intransitive/reflexive, reserving true passive usage for forms with an inanimate subject expressing the bonds. Geldner's translation '. . so mochte ich mich ... losmachen' illustrates this reflexive interpretation.

Grassmann identified a number of other medial optatives as passive (dhTmahi 111.30.19, VIII.7.18; stuvTtd IV.55.6; dadrran VII.64. 1), but these are not generally accepted as such. Since the non-passive value of these forms has been adequately discussed and affirmed by the standard commentators, I need not add to this literature here. There remain two uncertain cases containing the same idiom: dadhta + dative in V.41.5, V.66. 1-the former being the clearer:

V.41.5b raya ese 'vase dadhTta dhfh Geldner: 'im Streben nach Reichtum moge das Lied

zum Beistand dienen'

Although the original or literal value of the verb may well have been passive 'be placed/established,' in this

* Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the panel on Sanskrit syntax at the Fifth SALA Roundtable, Univ. of Illinois, May 1983, and at the Second East Coast Indo- European Conference, Harvard University, June 1983.

Here and elsewhere in this paper, medial optatives to -ia- presents without passive value (type jayeta 'should be born, arise'), even those with passive accent (type mriyeta 'should die'), are naturally not considered. However, certain appar- ently passive forms are found in some texts with root accent, while other texts show the expected passive suffixal accent. The TS commonly shows forms like bhidyeta 'should (be) split' where other texts have bhidyeta. These root-accented forms are considered here.

609



610 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104.4 (1984)

idiom it seems to have acquired the intransitive value 'serve for,' and therefore is not felt as a passive optative.

There are also two clear examples of periphrastic passive optatives:

VI.63. lOd hata riksamsi purudamrasa syuh 'O ye two capable ones, the demons should be (/let

them be) smashed.'

1.24.7d asm6 antir nWhitdh ketaivah syuh 'The beacons should be (let them be) established in

us.'

In the other possible cases, it is often difficult to decide how the past participle is to be construed. VIII. 19.26 presents a past participle compounded with duh-, parallel to a non-verbal adjective:

VIII. 19.26cd nd me stotamat-vd na dturhitah, syat ... 'My praiser should not be indigent nor ill-placed.'

Dzurhitah seems to have the same adjectival function as amatTvd.

In I. 104.3 Geldner and Renou translate hate sydtdm as a periphrastic passive 'getotet werden'/'soient tuees.' But it is also possible that hat is adjectival, and the predicate consists of the the verb 'to be'+ locative, a construction especially frequent with the optative of as.

1. 104.3d hat te svdtdm pravan6 siphayah. 'Those two (fem.) should be killed/smashed in the

stream of giphd.' (following Geldner/ Renou) or

'Smashed, those two should be (=lie) in the stream of giphd.'

Two examples of negated drista- in the same hymn (11.27.7, 16) display this latter syntax, optative of as + locative:

11.27. 16d aristd urav a 9irman sydma 'Unharmed, may we be in broad shelter.'

Another example of drista- (X. 128.3) is convincingly taken by Geldner as merely adjectival:

X. 128.3d dristah syama tanva suvirah Geldner: 'Wir wollen am Leib unversehrt die Meister

sein.'

Given the extraordinary frequency of both the past participle and the optative of the root as in the RV, it

is remarkable that the two so seldom come together. We have only the two certain examples and this small handful of others. Indeed, these two, plus the one or two medial optatives seen above, form the entire corpus of passive optatives in the RV and AV to my knowl- edge. There are no periphrases involving the past participle and the optative of bhM and none with present, aorist, or perfect medial participle + as or bha, in either text. Indeed, I was unable to find any passive optative expressions at all in the AV. We can also note in passing that none of the examples identified has an agent.

One need not conclude from all of this, however, that the functional slot into which the passive optative would fit went unfilled; on the contrary this value is quite frequently expressed, but by non-finite forms, as I suggested above: by the gerundive or so-called future passive participle in positive contexts and by a dative or datival infinitive in negative contexts.

I will begin with the gerundive. The morphology of the gerundive is well known and needs no lengthy treatment here. In the RV the major formation is that made with -ya-suffix, though forms in -enya-, -Jyya-, and -tva- are also relatively common. The -tavva- formation, which is widespread later, only begins appearing in the AV and there only twice; -anTya- forms also begin appearing marginally in the AV but never become as common as -tavya- and -ya-forms. There is no fundamental difference in the usages of various types of gerundives in early Vedic, though the -tva-forms appear in restricted contexts after the RV (Delbruck, A IS p. 400).

The major outlines of the syntax of the gerundive in early Vedic are likewise well known, and I will run through them here only briefly. In the RV/AV the gerundive is fundamentally parallel in usage to the past participle. Like the past participle, it can be used as a simple adjective, either in the nominative or in any oblique case:

nominative: 11.7.4ab siicih pavaka vdndi'6, 'gne brhad vi rocase

'0 pure one, Agni, bright (and) praiseworthy dost thou shine forth loftily.'

oblique: VIII.18.21 aneh6 mitraryaman, nrvid varuna srms am / trivirdtham maruto yanta nag chardih

'O Mitra, Aryaman, Varuna, Maruts, extend to us (your) faultless, manly, praiseworthy, threefold shelter.'

But again like the past participle, it can also appear in the nominative or oblique case with agents or other



JAMISON: The Vedic Passive Optative and Its Functional Equivalents 611

complements, forming a complex phrasal modifier; e.g., with nominative:

VlII.90.1ab a no v1svasu hdvya, indrah sumdtsu bhI- satu

'Let Indra, to be called upon by (?) us in every battle, be active.'

The agent is ordinarily in the instrumental (e.g., V.44. 10), in special circumstances the genitive; but the gerundive, unlike the past participle, also admits dative agents (e.g., X.39. 10).

oblique case/ instr. agent: V.44. 1Ocd . . . sprnavdma . . . vajam vidzusd cid

drdhyam 'We shall win the booty to be achieved only by a

knowing one.'

oblique case/dative agent: X.39. IOcd . . .dadathuh . . . bhdgam ni nWbhyo

hdvyam ... 'Ye two gave (a horse) to be called upon by men, like

Bhaga.'

Besides these adjectival uses, the gerundive in the nominative, with or without complements, can be predicated of the subject, i.e., can take the place of a finite verb. It can occasionally be difficult to decide whether a nominative gerundive is adjectival or predicative usually when the sentence consists of a string of nominal forms and no finite verb, so that there are too many choices for predicate. But in most cases it is clear which gerundives are predicative, despite the lack of surface criteria for judging. The following brief sample contains examples of the major morphological types of gerundives, in contexts with and without complements.

X.38.4a y6 dabhrebhir h/vvyo yas ca bhiribhih 'Who is to be called upon by the few and by the

many.'

VIII.I I.lc tvam yajnesv dyah 'Thou art to be called upon in the worship.'

VI,69.5a indravisnu tat panayayarm vam 'O Indra and Visnu, this (deed) of yours is to be

admired.'

1.23.18c sindhubhyah kdrtvam havih 'An oblation is to be made to the rivers.' AV V111.2.27 ya nastra atitdrvvh Whitney: 'the perditions that are to be overpassed.'

AV XII.4. 10 tdsmad brahmabhyo deyaisa 'Therefore she (= the cow) is to be given to the Brah-

mans.'

The examples just given are without copula. But, though examples lacking the copula outnumber those with it, the copula is possible, in fact not uncommon in the RV and AV, in both 2nd and 3rd person forms. By my count there are nearly 110 predicative gerundives in the RV, of which about 70 lack the copula. In the AV there are 16, of which 11 lack the copula.

The shape of the copula gives us important information about the nature of the predicative gerundive. The entire range of tense, modal, and aspectual pos- sibilities of the roots as and bhii is represented, except the optative. Following are representative examples from both texts of indicative present, imperfect, aorist, and perfect; injunctive present and aorist; subjunctive present and aorist; imperative present and aorist, from both roots. The aorist injunctive bhiut and present indicative asi/asti are especially common. Yet there are not even any possible examples involving an optative such as sydt or bhavet.

Indicative:

present: VIII.l 1.2ab tvam asi pra~dsvo, vidathesu ... 'Thou art to be called upon in the ceremo-

nies.'

1.33.2d yd stotibhyo hdvyo dsti yaman 'Who is to be called upon by the praisers on

(his) journey.'

AV VIII.10.22-26 upalTvanivo bhavati ya evam veda

'He becomes (one) to be lived upon, who knows thus.'

imperfect: 111.2.2b sa matr6r abhavat putra idvah 'The son became (one) to be called upon

by the two mothers.'

aorist: IV.54. 1 dbhid devah savita vdndyo nu nah 'God Savitar has become (one) to be praised

now by us.'

perfect: X.6.7b sady6 jajfina6 hdv'o babhiutha 'Immediately on being born, you became (one)

to be called upon.'

VI11.96.2 1 b sady6 jajnian6 hdv-vo babhava ' . . . he became . . .

Injunctive:

present: AV X.8.22 bhogyo bhavat Whitney: 'Enjoyable shall he become.'




aorist: I. 189.7cd abhipitv6 m~nave sasyo bhfur, mar-

mrjenya u~igbhih ... 'At mealtime you became/shall become (one)

to be directed by man, to be wiped by the zealous ones.'

VI.34.2d asmabhir indro anumadyo bhMt 'Indra became/ shall become (one) to be greeted

by us.'

Subjunctive:

present: X. 103.13cd ugra vah santu bahaivo, 'nddhr~sya ya'thdsatha

'Let your arms be strong, so that you will be undareable against.'

aorist: X.4. lb bhzivo ydtha vandyo no halvesu 'So that you will become (one) to be praised in

our calls.'

Imperative:

present: AV XVIII.2.31 yas tva jaghana badhyah so astu

'Who killed thee, let him be (one) to be killed.'

V.2.6d ninditAro nindydso bhavantu 'Let the scorners become (ones) to be scorned.'

AV VI.98. 1 carkiti'a W1i'o vdndnbas copasddvo namasp6 bhaveha

'Here become (one) to be celebrated, called upon, praised, waited upon, reverenced.'

aorist: 11.2.11 sa no bodhi sahasya prasamsyah 'Become (one) to be praised by us, o strong

one.'

Given the relatively large number of gerundives with copula (about 40), the absence of the optative again seems to result from systematic avoidance. The most obvious conclusion to draw is that the optative is avoided because it does not need to be marked, that the unmarked, underlying mood, as it were, of the predicative gerundive is optative, and a surface copula is required only to express other modal values. This contrasts strongly with other periphrases, such as that involving the past participle, where the presumed underlying mood is indicative. (I have not yet, however, looked carefully at the behavior of the copula with the past participle in the texts.) In other words, the syntactic distribution of the predicative gerundive clearly suggests that it functions as an optative. As was established earlier in the paper, we have an empty slot in the verbal system where the predicted passive optatives do not occur, and now we have a formation neatly defined to fit this slot, a form passive in value

and optative in function, as its behavior shows. So that, in fact, the function "passive optative," rather than being rare and marginal, is actually expressed quite frequently, in the person of the gerundive.

The gerundive in positive contexts. In negated contexts the gerundive is hardly found, especially in the earlier parts of the RV. On the one hand, gerundives with the privative prefix a(n)-, though easily formed and relatively common, are seldom used predicatively. One exception is anddhrsyi- 'undareable against' in the late X. 103.13 quoted above (under Subjunctive present). The same form is used predicatively twice elsewhere in the Xth Book (X.44.5, X. 154.2). Cf. X.154.2, without copula:

tapasa ye anddhrsyTh 'Who, through austerity, are undareable against.'

Interestingly enough, this same lexeme is expressed by nai + the infinitive ddhrse 6x in the RV (I.39.4, 1.136. 1, V.8.5, V.87.2, IX.53.3, X.49.4), the usual construction, to be discussed below. Cf., for example,

V.8.5d tvisih sa te titvisridsya nadhjse 'The glittering force of thee the glittering one is not to

be dared against.'

The gerundive of X.103.13, etc., seems to be a Xth Mandala replacement for this common locution.

There is only one possible case of a privative predicative gerundive in the earlier parts of the text,2 where the negative gerundive dnedya- occurs in a series of modifiers (one underlyingly a doubly negated gerundive [an-a-vadya]):

VI. 19.4 tam .. . indram ... huvema / yatha cit purve jaritara asuir, anedyd anavadya Aristah

2 Another possible example is the disputed form atas aya-, predicative (with bhMa) in both its occurrences (1.63.6, 11.19.4). This form is ordinarily ascribed to the root at 'wander' (so Geldner, ad 1.63.6), sometimes indirectly, as a denominal derivative of the RVic hapax atasi- 'beggar?, request?' (Wack.- Debr. 11.2.405). But Geldner also suggests (loc. cit.) another possible analysis, as a negated gerundive a-tasdyya-, built to the root tams 'shake,' a derivation I tentatively follow in Function and Form in the -dya-Formations of the Rig Veda and A tharva Veda, p. 93.

However, that this form is used predicatively on both occasions may be an argument against an analysis as a negated gerundive.




The precise disposition of the passage is not altogether clear to me. Though a gerundive interpretation might be possible ('We would call upon Indra, (so that we might be) not to be scorned, without flaw (lit., not not-to-be-spoken-about), unharmed, even as the old singers were.'), Geldner, at any rate, does not interpret the form as a gerundive: 'Diesen . . Indra . .. wollen wir ... rufen, . . . so wie die fruheren Sanger gewesen sind, ohne Tadel, ohne Makel, unverletzlich.'

The AV adds one possible example:

AV V.18.3 sa brahmandsaya rajanya trstaisa gaur anddya

Whitney: 'This cow of the Brahman, o noble, is harsh, not to be eaten.'

But the gerundive here need not be predicative, since the phrase gam . . . anddyarn appears two verses pre- viously as an accusative, where the gerundive cannot be predicative:

AV V.18.1 ma brdhmandsya rajanya gam jighatso anddyam

'O noble, do not desire to eat the not-to-be-eaten cow of the Brahman.'

The other possible type of negative context, with an independent negative na and predicative positive gerundive, is even rarer. There is one example in the RV, again in the Xth Book, and one in the AV, in the same hymn as the negated gerundive just quoted:

X.22.5cd yayor dev6 na mdrtyo, yanta nakir vidjyyah 'As leader of which two (horses) neither a god nor a

man is to be found.'

AV V.18.6 na brahman6 himsitavybh 'A Brahman is not to be injured.'

Again the avoidance of the construction seems deliberate; again a different construction can be identified that fills the slot thus left empty: this time na plus dative infinitive in -e or -tave/ tavai. Cf.

X.143.3cd atha hi varn div6 nara, puina st6mo na viIi~se

'For then, o men of heaven, your praise is not to be proclaimed again.'

VII.33.1 na me durad avitave vdsisthadh 'The Vasisthas are not to be aided by me from a

distance.'

as well as V.8.5 quoted above. As this construction has been extensively discussed in the literature, and

good collections of examples have been made, I will pass over it briefly. Especially good are the treatments of Delbruck in AIS (pp. 415 and 421) and Vgl. Syntax II (esp. 460), but the general outlines of its use are widely known: That when these infinitives are found with n1, they are 1) especially likely to be passive (otherwise they are neutral as to voice, or more often active) (In fact, Delbruck knows of no non-negative passive examples [ Vgl. Syntax 460]); 2) more likely to serve as predicates, rather than as complements to verbs or the like. Moreover, their similarity in usage to the gerundive is often noted, though, to my knowl- edge, their complementary distribution has not been discussed (Delbruck does hint at it in Vgl. Syntax [p. 489]), nor their relation to the optative.3

So, for early Vedic, by identifying gaps in the system, we have been able to construct a grid like the following:

active/ middle passive positive | tat gerundive negative

p I inf. in -e, -tave/tavai

' Some or all of the characteristics just mentioned are found, e.g., in the discussions of Renou (Gramm. vMd. 359f.), Mac- donell (Ved. gramm. for stud. 335), Bartholomae (KZ 41, 1907, 319ff., esp. 323), Wackernagel-Debrunner (AIG 11.2, 614f., 800), Benveniste (Les infinitdfs avestiques, 97f.).

I should also note that this topic has recently been treated in a series of publications by Dorothy Disterheft [Haas] (1976 'The voice of the infinitive in the RV' in Current Progress in Linguistics (William Christie, ed.); 1980 The syntactic develop- ment of the infinitive in Indo-European; 1981 'The Indo- Iranian predicative infinitive,' KZ 95). Her views differ sharply from my own, and those of previous scholars, but her curious interpretations and translations of the text make these views difficult to discuss. In particular, her major claim (or perhaps assumption, since no arguments are given for it) throughout is that the underlying tense/ mood of the predicative passive infinitive is present indicative. In other words, a sentence like X.143.3 just quoted in the text would mean 'your praise is not proclaimed again' rather than 'your praise is not to be proclaimed again.' Such renderings fly in the face of all tra- ditional interpretations and all accumulated wisdom about the meaning of the RV, but no justification is given for this radical departure. Until arguments in favor of this pervasive claim are given, I see no reason to discuss her views in detail.




This system is in great part retained in the Brihmanas; indeed the stylistic continuity of Brrhmanic prose fur- nishes us with numerous striking examples of the equivalence of gerundive and negated infinitive, of passive gerundive or infinitive and active optative-types of examples more difficult to extract from the less dog- gedly constructed poetry of the Sarnhitds. A sampling follows: 4

Complex sentences with optative and gerundive corresponding:

MS 1.8.3 (118: 5-6) yddi duhydmandvabhindvad, anydya sthdlya nirnijya dohva

'If (the cow), while being milked, should split (the cauldron), after cleaning up, she is to be milked with another cauldron.'

TS 111.4.6.1 yena karmanertset tdtra hotavyah 'By what(ever) rite he should wish to succeed, then

( at that rite) (the oblations) are to be offered.'

Passive gerundive = active optative in discourse:

TS V1.2.9.4 ydt tam nd visram'sadVet. .. tdsmat sd vi.srds vah

'If he should not unloose it, ... .). Therefore it is to be unloosed.'

Passive infinitive = active optative in discourse:

MS 1.5.13 (82: 8-9) nd hindm anvdhartavai . .. yad

dhlndm anvdhdreyuh '(What was) left out is not to be supplied. If they

should supply (what was) left out, ( . ).'

Positive gerundive = negative infinitive:

MS 1.6.10 (102: 1-2) nd pura suryasy6detor mdnthi- tavai. . . udyatsu raimisu mdthyah

'(The fire) is not to be churned before the rising of the sun.... It is to be churned when the (sun's) rays have arisen.'

MS 1.8.6 (123: 15-17) nd samid abhihotavai. . . tat

tathaiva hotavymii yatha ... 'The kindling is not to be poured upon.... (The obla-

tion) is to be poured in such a way that . . .'

In fact, even cursory reading of Brahmanic prose provides impressive evidence of complementary distribution between active optative and gerundive. The optative is ubiquitous in these texts, in that most direc- tions for ritual practise are given in the optative- except when the prescription is passive: then the gerundive appears.

However, two major types of change occur in the Brdhmanas, entailing readjustments in the system just outlined. On the one hand, the dative infinitive goes slowly out of use, in all its functions; on the other, passive optatives, both morphological and periphrastic, begin to appear more regularly than in early Vedic.

Although the dative infinitive has not completely disappeared even from the later Brdh. texts, it is far more common in the prose of the BYV Samhitds, particularly the MS, than later. Yet even there it has become marginal. In the parts of the MS that I have been through I have found only 13 negated predicative infinitives-more remarkable, only 2 in all of the TS. This decline is most emphatically not because that type of negative expression is no longer used; rather, as one might trivially predict, the gerundive has begun to appear in these contexts as well, in fact to monopo- lize them. Comparison of the following almost identical MS and TS passages is instructive in this regard:

MS 1.7.2 (110: 10-12) nd sambhdrah samrbhktd nd ydjuh kdrtavd ity ahuh ... sambhrti'd evd sambh5- rah kdryeith ydjur iti

"'The sacrificial equipment is not to be collected. The formula is not to be performed." So (some) say ... (Others) say "The sacrificial equipment is to be collected. The formula is to be performed."'

TS 1.5.2.4 nd sambhHt dh sambhara nd yajuh kartav- yam ity atho khalu sambhityad eva' sambharah kartav- yam yajur yajfiasya samrddhyai

"'The equipment is not to be collected. The formula is not to be be performed." (Some) say. But the equipment is to be collected; the formula is to be performed, for the success of the worship.'

The MS shows a skewed system: the second terms retain the old correct distribution: negative infinitive na kartavai, positive gerundive kdryam, but the first terms use the gerundive sambhrtya- in both positive and negative context. The TS has simply made the system consistent, using the gerundive in all four spots. (Note in passing the complete semantic equivalence of the -ya- and -tavya- gerundives.)

In all the Brah. texts nd + gerundive is the ordinary means of negative expression: examples are too abun-

4 The data on which the rest of the paper is based were drawn from systematic reading of the TS and about 2/3 of the MS, both belonging to the early Black YV; of the AB; and of Books I, VI, and XI of the 9B (Madh.), the first a Ydjfiavalkya Kanda, the second a 9andilya Kanda, and the last belonging to the latest layer of that text. I have also run across other examples unsystematically, and have, of course, access to examples collected in sources like AIS. As yet, I have not examined any of the grauta Siatras, though they may well be a fertile source.




dant to need quoting. In the same portion of the MS that contains 13 negated infinitives, there are 45 gerundives with na, and the proportion becomes higher in later texts. Much more rarely gerundives compounded with privative a(n)- are used in the same fashion. There are a few such examples in the MS and the AB. Cf.

MS 1.6.10 (102: 18) tdsmdd rdjanyAsyagnihotrdm ahotavyam

'Therefore an Agnihotra is not to be offered for a Rdjanya.'

(For negated gerundives with copula, see below.) It is not especially difficult to understand how the

nd + gerundive construction could have arisen-it could simply have spread haphazardly to negative contexts as the infinitive became less common. However, I suspect that there is a special channel for its introduc- tion, through a stylized method of debating theological questions. One of the most common uses of the gerundive in the Brahmanas is in questions of the form 'is x to be done or not done?'. A few examples of the many are given below.

TS VII.5.7.1 utstjyi3m n6tstjyi3m iti mima-msante brahmavadinah

"'Is (a day) to be omitted or not to be omitted?" thus the theologians debate.'

MS 1.8.7 (126: 8ff.) samrsthapyi3n na samrsthapyj3m iti mmimansante ... tan nd samrsthapyam

"'Is it to be made complete or not to be made complete?" thus they debate.... It is not to be made complete.'

MS 1.6.10 (102: 19-103: 1) hotavybmlr rijanyAsyagni- hotra3n na hotavyi3m iti m-mmmisante

"'Is an Agnihotra to be performed for a Rajanya or not to be performed?" thus they debate.'

In these circumstances the gerundive correct in the first, positive half of the question might induce a parallel gerundive in the second, negative half, where an infinitive might be more "correct." The answer to the question, whether positive or negative, would repeat the same form, thereby introducing the gerundive into an independent negative context, not preceded by a positive form. The second example above (MS 1.8.7) has such an answer: tan nd samsthapyam 'it is not to be completed.'

Although by the time of our documentation the process I have proposed has been completed, and the gerundive is freely used in all negative contexts, I find

this the easiest way to understand how the infinitive and gerundive can coexist in negative contexts in early prose. One piece of evidence in its favor is that I have found no examples of infinitives in these questions, but given the relative rarity of infinitives I do not weight this evidence too heavily.

However, a more general consideration favors this proposal; one cannot examine the gerundives in the Brahmanas for very long without feeling that they belong in great part to a special rhetorical layer of the language, to a particular formal style of staged argu- nrentation and declaration, not always integrated into the continuous prose of narration and ritual descrip- tion. Besides the questions just discussed, we find many gerundives used in summary statements of ritual practise, introduced by tdsmdt 'therefore,' tasmid dhur 'therefore they say,' tad &hur 'they say the following,' or followed by ity Jhur 'so they say'; sometimes more explicitly introduced by brahmavddino vadanti 'the theologians say' (TS 11.5.3.4, V.2.7.1, VI.1.4.5, VI. 1.5.3-4). An argument that bases itself on this peculiar feature of language use, on its pragmatic aspect, would seem to have a better chance of being right than one which Ireats the whole of Brahmana prose as a seam- less garment.

Besides its successful invasion of negative contexts, the gerundive in the Brdhmanas undergoes several other changes. For one thing it sheds much of its pure adjectival nature and becomes almost always predicative in function. Non-predicative forms do continue to show up, albeit rarely, in all Brah. texts. Cf. e.g.,

TS VI.2.4.2-3 vardh6 'yam ... saptanAm girinam pardstad vittdm v&Iyam Asurdnam bibharti

'This boar bears beyond the 7 mountains the wealth of the Asuras (which is) to be found/won.'

One of the more common ones is ddya- 'edible,' as in

MS 1.6.5 (93: 15-16) ye vdnaspitaya dranyA ddybm philarn bhulyistham pacydnte

'Which wild trees best ripen edible fruit.'

But most superficially non-predicative gerundives actually express predication in indirect discourse, as a sort of embedded clause in the accusative,' after a verb of knowing, seeing, or the like.6 Cf.

' Also possible is the genitive after vid 'know.' Cf. gB 1.2.3.2 tdsya hait6 'pi badhyasya vidafi cakruh 'They knew he (was) to be killed.'

6 Such constructions in indirect discourse appear already in the RV; cf., e.g.,




MS 1.9.5 (137: 3-4) y6 vai caturho(rn anusavanim

tarpayitavyan veda 'Who knows (that) the Four Hotars (are) to be satisfied

at every pressing ...'

TS VI.4.6.1 t& deva upa-mtsau j yahnam samsthalpyam apagyan

'The gods saw (that) the worship (was) to be completed in the Updmihu.'

The discomfort with which Brah. speakers viewed the merely adjectival gerundive is vividly demonstrated by the SB passage following:

gB 1.5.2.3 mantra: Tdamahai devam Tcknydn namas- yama namasydn yajama yajniyan iti

gloss: -Id.mahai tan devan y'd Wlnyd na- masyama tan ye namasyd yajama

yajinyadn iti

Here a mantra with a parallel series in the accusative consisting of two adjectival gerundives and a single pure adjective is recast in its gloss: the simple adjective is left as it was, but the adjectival gerundives become relative clauses, with predicative gerundives. SB 1.9.3.2 seems to show a similar distaste:

SB 1.9.3.2 prati tam osato yah pratyiusy6 'ty u tam' srjete y6 'tisrjyah

'(The two fires) burn him who is to be burned and let

through him who is to be let through.'

The relative clauses here simply create an opportunity for a predicative gerundive in the nominative-an accusative adjectival gerundive would have served as well. Compare also the relatively common AB tag

AB 11.1 (= 11.35, etc.) . . . yo 'sya strtyas tasmai star- tavai

'(He does such and such), to lay him low who is to be laid low by him.'

Another restriction in the use of the gerundive is that the copula ceases to be an option with the predicative gerundive in the Brahmanas. The RVic and AVic

forms with copula were discussed above: though considerably rarer than independent forms, these consti- tuted a respectable body of material. But the copula was abruptly abandoned in Brah. times. This has been known for a long time; Delbruck (AIS p. 397) states categorically that he has found no forms with the copula in prose,7 and the standard grammars follow him. In actual fact, some do exist, and without denying the fundamental truth that the copula has in essence disappeared in these circumstances, it seems worth- while to examine the few examples, simply because they have not found their way into the literature.

First we can eliminate apparent counterexamples. Numerous technical terms concerning the ritual are gerundives or gerundive-like in origin, beginning with the ubiquitous havydm 'oblation,' but also including the formulae called yjya1 and anuvdkya, the cere- monies of adhdyam and punarddheyam or 'laying' and 'relaying' of the fire, and so on. Since these are syn- chronically simply nouns, they occur freely with the copula, in any tense or mood. Examples are scarcely necessary, but compare

MS 111.7.2 (77: 3-4) yah prayanfye 'nuvakyas ta udayaniye ydjydh suiuh

'What (were) the Anuvakyd (verses) at the introductory (oblation) should be the Ydjyd (verses) at the con- cluding (oblation).'

More occasionally, gerundives are used in place of nouns, as referents to people or things. Again the pres- ence of the copula need not detain us. The AB fur- nishes such an example:

AB 111.31 yasyam asya digi dveyyah sydi 'In which(ever) quarter there should be (one) to be

hated by him (= an enemy of his).'

Note that syat does not serve as an auxiliary with dvesyah but is to be construed with the locative diKi.

But there are a number of actual examples of gerundive with copula. Gerundives negated with the prefix a(n)- seem routinely able to occur with the copula (generally bhavati). E.g.,

VI1I.33.17 indrag cid ghd tid abravit, striya asasydm mdnah

'Even Indra said this, (that) the mind of a woman is not to be instructed.'

X.108.4 nahdm tam veda dhbhhyam 'I do not know him as (one) to be deceived.'

Note that in VIII.33 the gerundive is negated.

7 This statement is actually found in his section on the gerundive in -ia- and so technically limited to it. However, since in his section devoted to -tavy'a- he says that the -lavva- gerundive is used just as the -va-gerundive is, and he makes no special mention of a difference in usage with regard to the copula, one may assume that the earlier statement is meant to apply to the -tavva-gerundive as well.




gB 1.4.3.1 anavadhrsy6 hi bhdvaty anavamrsydh 'For (the fire) is/becomes not to be dare against, not

to be disturbed.'

TS 11.2.8.5 anaparudhy6 bhavati 'He is/becomes not to be expelled.'

Recall that these negated forms only rarely appear predicatively without copula in Vedic prose. (An example from the MS was given above.) Their comparative frequency with the copula seems another fact of distri- butional interest.

On several occasions a predicative gerundive appears with a past tense indicative. The copula is necessary here because gerundives (like optatives) have only present value. In MS 111.9.5 the past tense sets the gerundive properly in the context of the narrative in which it occurs:

MS 111.9.5 (121: 1) sddhYa vai deva asann. dtha vai tdrhi nAnyAhutir dsTt

'The gods were to be propitiated. But at that time there was no other oblation.'8

SB 1.6.2.3 is of the same type:

gB 1.6.2.3 9rdmena ha sma vai tad deva jayanti yad esam. jdv'am asa

'By labor the gods conquered what was to be conquered by them.'

(Note that though the main clause has a present jayanti, this is an automatic result of sma, which only appears with the present. Sma + present has the force of the past [AIS 520f.].)

Similarly, the event in VI. 1.2.16 is set in the mythical past: the referent of asya is Prajapati:9

SB VI. 1.2.16 cetdv'o hy Asya#sT 'For (Agni/the fire) was to be piled up by him.'

In contrast to the three passages just quoted, in the following two TS passages this same locution, gerundive + past tense indicative, has the value of a past

contrary-to-fact: what ought to have been done but wasn't.

TS VI.3.4.8 dprajfiitam hi tad yid itipanna dhiir idim

kdryhm dsTd iti

Keith: (It is proclaimed), 'for what is not proclaimed is that of which when it is passed men say, "this should have been done."'

TS VI.6.2.3 yajii vava yajiinh pratisthdpya isid yija-

manasyaparabhavayeti (The worship was established on the lord of worship,

not on the worship; and so the worshippers were destroyed.) 'Truly the worship was to be made (= ought to have been made) to stand on the worship, for the non-destruction of the worshipper.'

In all the preceding examples the reason for the copula is relatively clear, but I have run across several examples where an explanation is harder to find. Per- haps the clearest example is 9B VI.1.2.16, where the copula seems to result from contextual pressure:

gB VI. 1.2.16 cetdvvo hy Asya bhdvati 'For (the fire) is to be piled up by him.'

This phrase follows almost immediately upon the sentence quoted above, referring to Prajapati, with dslt. Since the parallel sentence in past time has a copula by rule, the present time sentence seems merely to imitate it. Moreover this passage is further complicated by several appearances of the -(t)ya- gerundive to this same root ci, as a technical ritual term. Used as a noun, hence deprived of its gerundive value, citya- appears with the copula. Since cet6vya- is used as an etymological explanation of Agni Citya, the occurrence of the copula with the latter may have reinforced its use with both instances of cetdvya-. Cf. the whole passage:

SB VI. 1.2.16 s6 'syaisa citya dsTt / cetdvyo hy AsydsTt tasmac cityas citya u evayam yajamanasya bhavati cetivyo hy asya bhavati tasmad u evai cityah

'This was his '(Agni) Citya,' for it was to be piled up by him. Therefore (was it called his) 'Citya'.' etc.

I have found the present indicative only once elsewhere (so far) in Brah. prose with a non-negated gerundive, in AB VI.35, also with bhavati:

AB VI.35 tasmad ahur datavyaiva yajnie daksina bhavaty apy alpikapi

' Though sddhYh- can be a technical term designating a particular class of gods, in this context it seems to have real gerundive value. 'There were the Sadhya gods' makes no sense here.

9 Interestingly enough, Delbruck, on the page after he denies that the gerundive appears with the copula (AIS 398), quotes this example and translates it as I have. For further on this passage, see below.




'Therefore they say: a daksind is to be given at a worship, even if (it is) only a small one.'

I have no explanation for this, but it does occur in a book which is considered a later addition to the text (Keith, pp. 31ff.).

The optative copula in 9B 1.6.2.2 seems to result from a combination of factors.

gB 1.6.2.2 ... Ticuh kathim na idim manusyair ana- bhydrohyam sydd iti

'(The gods) said: "How may/ might this (territory) of

ours be made not to be ascended by men?"'

Perhaps most important is that the gerundive is negated with prefix an-, which, as we just saw, often triggers the copula (though usually present indicative). Moreover, the optative sydt seems not to be a pleonastic reinforcement of the optative force of the gerundive, but rather to add a different optative value, the deliberative or uncertain. Hence the possible translation 'how may it be made,' rather that 'how should it be made' or 'how is it to be made.' Finally the fact that the question is embedded in a narrative in past time may have made the copula seem appropriate, even though it is not itself past.

A non-negated gerundive occurs with the optative in MS 111. 1.8-the only clear example of this combination I have found in the texts so far.'0 This passage should be troublesome for my claims, since I argued above that the absence of optative copula in the RV was strong evidence for the "optative" nature of the

10 Another possible example (or rather two) of karyb- with

syAt also occurs in the Illrd Book of the MS, but despite this suggestive conjunction it has an entirely different explanation from 111.1.8. This passage is complex and ambiguous, but illuminated by its more explicit KS and TS parallels.

It is most important to note first that kdryb- here does not have its ordinary neutral sense 'to be made/done.' Rather it exhibits two different senses (both developed from the neutral one), and the punning between them is crucial to the purpose of the passage. On the one hand it is used as an adjective meaning 'artificial': the KS has the clear adjective krtrima- in

its place. In the other sense, kdryi- is used as a real gerundive, but as the gerundive corresponding to an idiomatic usage of kr. As is well known, bhi 'become' is frequently used in the Brahmanas in the pregnant sense 'prosper, thrive,' with no further complement; its (less frequent) transitive equivalent is kr 'make (s.o.-acc.) prosper,' again with no further complement. The corresponding gerundive kdryi- means 'to be made to prosper.'

After these preliminaries, examine the three passages: MS 111.8.4 (99: If.) yAt kdrybm iva syat- tad yajeta

yAh kdyii (sic -*kdry ) iva syhd dtmA vai devayAj- anam kar6ty evainam

KS XXV.3 (105: 15f.) krtrime yajeta bubhUsann dtmd vai devayajanam karoty evainam

'(Someone) desiring to prosper should worship on an artificial (place of worship). The place of worship is really the self. Thus (one) makes him prosper.'

TS VI.2.6.4 kirye devayijane yajayed bhuftikamam kdryb vai puruso bhivaty evi

'(One) should cause (someone) having desire for prosperity to worship on a to-be-made (=artificial) place of worship. (The) man is to-be-made (=to be made to prosper). Thus he prospers.' (The point of this passage seems to have been missed by Keith.)

In the MS passage the first karya- is used as the adjectival 'artificial' and refers to the (neut.) devayajanam 'place of worship,' as the locative parallels KS krtrime, TS kdrye devayajane show.

The second kdryi- refers to the worshipper, and here the

gerundive sense 'to be made (to prosper)' is the primary one. The clause, yah *karya iva syat, is the equivalent of KS bubhusan 'desiring to prosper,' TS bhutikarmam 'having desire for prosperity.' It is the intersection of the two senses of kdary-, the pun, which is the point of the passage and the action it is prescribing. By an ordinary type of Brahmanic word magic, the fact that the goal of the worshipper ('to be made [to prosper]') has the same verbal expression as the designation of the place of worship ('artificial') allows the worshipper to annex all the value of that place (and the worship there performed) to himself, and transform the first sense of the word into the second. In other words the use of

kdrya- in its first, 'artificial' sense ensures that the second, gerundive sense will be fulfilled. Note that the use of iva with both occurrences of karya- emphasizes that something special is going on verbally. One can translate 'Who(ever) would be kdrya-, so to speak, should worship on that (place) which is/should be karya-, so to speak. The place of worship is really the self. Thus one makes him (prosper),' or more fully 'Who(ever) would be (one) to be made (= to be made to prosper) should worship on that (place) which is/would be to-be-made (= artificial).

But why the two optative copulas? The first is easy to explain, once another fact is taken into account. As will be discussed later in this paper, Brahmanic prose is governed by a rule of modal attraction: the mood in a subordinate clause must ordinarily match that of the main clause. The main clause here has the prescriptive optative yajeta. In the clause yat karyam iva syat, since kdryam is merely an adjective, without the usual passive optative value of a real




gerundive. However, in this case again, the copula is not pleonastic, but has independent value. The phrase expresses a sort of potential contrary-to-fact value, rather like the TS past contrary-to-fact quoted above.

MS 111. 1.8 (11: 1-2) mitrayaivaindm pdridadaty dbhitt- yai ydd dhi mitrayaparitta bhidyeta punah kdrya syat

'He entrusts it (= the cauldron) to Mitra, for non- splitting (= so that it won't split). For, if it should be split (while still) unentrusted to Mitra, it would (have) to be made again.'

To summarize this long digression-some predicative gerundives do appear with copula in the Brah- manas, despite Delbruck's statement to the contrary. But 1) they are quite rare; 2) except for the privative gerundive, all that I have identified result from special semantic/syntactic requirements. I do not believe that I have found all of them, by any means, and moreover feel that those that do appear furnish some of the most interesting data the gerundive can give us: one senses that the speakers are stretching their language to the limits, to express complex modals for which there is no ordinary provision in the language.

I now wish to return my emphasis to the rarity of the gerundive with copula. Like the rising restriction of gerundive from mere adjectival value, the banish- ment of the copula seems evidence of the hardening of the role of the gerundive. In the RV and AV, the gerundive had a number of functions, one of which

was to stand in for the passive optative. In the Brah- manas this has become virtually its only function.

So it seems almost ironic that "real" passive optatives begin to make their appearance in this period. They remain rare-in every text I have collected pages of gerundives for each page of passive optatives-but they do exist. We must now examine the textual situations into which they are introduced.

As one might expect (or at any rate wish), the vast majority of passive optatives occur in situations where the gerundive does not occur, in fact situations from which the gerundive is barred, for one reason or another. These fall into two major groups. One large set of passive optative forms is found in subordinate clauses, with main clauses containing prescriptive optatives. These subordinate clauses state as fact the circumstances under which the action in the main clause should be performed. Cf. the following examples:

TS 11.1.3.4f. indrdya ... 1alamam ... a labheta, ydh papmdnd grhatdh syat

'Whoever is/should be seized by evil should offer (a beast) with a spot (on its forehead) to Indra.'

SB VI.6.4.8 yidy es6kha bhidyva.. . tisyam enarn parydvapet

'If the fire-pan is/should be split, he should pour it (= fire) into a (new) one.'

AB 11.14 yad dhiranyarn na vidyeta katham sydt 'If gold is/ should not be found, how should (the

offering) be (arranged)?'

(cf. also MS 11I. 1.8 quoted above)

Since they are stating facts, the underlying or "independent" mood of the subordinate clause is probably indicative. However, as Minard has established (SPV p. 18; cf. Trois Mnig. IIg 776a), harmony of moods in complex sentences is strictly enforced in Vedic prose: if the main clause is in the optative," the verb in the subordinate clause will pass to (Minard: "passe 'a") the optative as well. Hence the passive optative in these cases is imposed by a surface rule of modal

gerundive, a surface optative sydt is required to match yajeta in mood. The construction of this clause is similar to that of AB 111.31 quoted above: yasydm asya digi dvesyah sydt (nd tam dhydyet) 'In whatever quarter there should be an enemy of his,

The shape of the second kiryb- clause is slavishly dependent on the first, applying to the worshipper exactly the words used of the place of worship. It is this necessity for repetition in word magic that has created the anomalous combination of the real gerundive kdryb- with an optative copula. As will be seen below, clauses of this semantic type, specify- ing the condition of the worshipper, ordinarily do not contain gerundives at all, but optatives. But in this case the gerundive is the pivotal word in the passage and cannot rightly be replaced, while the optative appropriate to this type of clause appears as well. (It is perhaps ironic that the KS version, which lacks kiry&- and also presumably the verbal effective- ness which is the reason for the ritual action, is the passage that most clarifies the superior MS passage.)

" A main clause containing a gerundive will also trigger an optative in the subordinate clause, another piece of evidence for the optative nature of the gerundive. Cf., e.g., MS 1.8.3 (I 18: 5-6) quoted above. On one occasion that I know of the optative thus triggered is passive:

TS 111.4.8.2 (cf. 111.4.8.7) y6 rastrAd dpabhitah syit tAsmai hotavyah

'(These oblations) are to be offered for one who is/ should be expelled from his kingdom.'




attraction. English is far freer in this regard: these sentences can be rendered in English either with a modal or with an indicative, with no loss or change in meaning. In fact, note that Keith in his translations of the TS and AB pretty consistently uses the indicative.

The other group of passive optatives occurs in what Delbruck calls the "potential" use of the optative, expressing what might happen, rather than what should. (All the gerundives and most of the active optatives encountered so far have been in the latter, the prescriptive function-which is the most common use of the optative throughout the Brdhmanas, or so is my impression.) In practise, passive optatives in potential value almost always occur in "worst-case" sentences, what one might call "hopeful contrary-to- fact"-in a discourse shaped in the following way: 'he should do such and such in the ritual. If he would not do it, x would happen.' The main clause of the second sentence, expressing the dire consequences of possible wrong action, will contain a potential optative, even if the verb is passive. A gerundive cannot be substituted here. Examples follow.

MS 1.6.10 (103: 1-2) yAd dhutva nd juhuyad . . . jlyeta vd pr6 vd mTyeta

'If, having offered (once), he should not offer (again), ... he would be overcome or destroyed.'

TS V.1.9.2f. yid bhidyeta . . . hanyetisya yajMh 'If the pot splits/should split, his worship would be

destroyed.'

AB VI.6.1.3 sd ydd dgnrvaisnavim evA nirvdpet... adhvardsyaivd diksan'yam krtdth sydt

'If he offers/should offer (only) the oblation for Agni and Visnu, (only) the initiation offering of the cere- mony would be performed.'

A minor pattern, which I have so far found only in the gB, has a passive optative in a ydthd clause, meaning "as if," with indicative in the main clause. Both contrary-to-fact and non-contrary-to-fact examples are found:

Contrary to fact: 9B 1.6.1.21 yatha haivinte satd istdmu sydi evdff hai-

vaivam vidusa istam bhavati 'Even as (the worship) would be performed for one

being nearby, so is it performed for one knowing thus (who is distant).'

Non-contrary-to-fact: 9B XI.2.6.13 ydthahis tvac6 nirmucytaivdm asman

mdrtyac chdrTirt papmdno nirmucyate

'Even as a snake would be freed from its skin, so is he freed from this mortal body, from sin.'

The great majority of passive optatives in the Brah- manas conform to the types just described. There remains a residue of a very few forms, of undeniable examples where one might expect a gerundive, in pre- cisely the prescriptive contexts where gerundives (and active optatives) are so common. There are a few in the TS and two in the AB:

TS V.6.7.1 tisr6 rdtrir dfksitah sydt (= TS VII.2.10.3) 'For three nights he should be consecrated.'

TS VI.2.6.2-3 antara sadohavirdhan6 unnatdmh sydt 'It should be elevated between the oblation holder and

the seat.'

AB 1.14 anyataro 'nadvan yuktah sydd anyataro vimuktah

'One ox should be yoked, the other released.'

AB VII.33 tasmin dve darbhatarunake prdste syatdm 'In it two shoots of darbha grass should be thrown.'

It is perhaps no accident that all are periphrastic, so that the past participle could be interpreted as adjectival rather than as part of a complex verb.'2

It does not seem surprising that the passive optative should appear in contexts where active optatives are so enormously represented. What does seem little short of surprising is that this hole in the pattern has re- mained unpatched for so long, and that next to these three or so passive prescriptive optatives, there are hundreds of gerundives. The system I described for the RV has been remarkably persistent.

2 In fact, in the two TS passages and the first AB passage the verbal complex seems not to describe an action which should occur, but rather prescribes (sydt) a state which the subject should have entered, denoted by the past participle. For example, in TS V.6.7.1 the actual act of consecration of the subject probably does not endure for three nights; rather, having become consecrated, he remains so for that period.

In contrast, AB VII.33 must express an action, not a state. However, Keith's translation 'should have been cast' is worth noting; Keith seems to believe that the periphrasis is an attempt to express anteriority, though the context does not seem to require this:

AB V11.33 tad yatraitamr camasan unnayeyus tad etam yajamanacamasam unnayet tasmin dye darbhatarunake praste syatdm

Keith: 'When they fill up the goblets, then he should fill up the goblet of the sacrificer; in it should have been cast two Darbha shoots.'



Documents

The Vedic Passive Optative and Its Functional Equivalents: A Study in the Syntax of the Gerundive