# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 74 (78)

74 (78). Against apacíts: against jealousy: to Agni.
[Atharvān̄giras.—caturṛcam. mantroktadevatyam uta jātavedasam. ānuṣṭubham.]
This hymn and the one following are not found in Pāipp. There is apparently no real connection between the three parts of the hymn. Used by Kāuç. (32. 8: according to Keç. and the comm., vss. 1 and 2, which alone are applicable) in a healing ceremony, with the aid of various appliances, "used as directed in the text." It is added: "with the fourth verse one puts down upon and pierces [them]" (32. 9), but the fourth verse of this hymn suggests no such use, and Keç. declares 76. 2 to be intended.* Verse 3 appears (36. 25), with hymn 45 etc., in a rite against jealousy; and vs. 4 is made (1. 34) an alternate to v. 3 when entering on a vow; in Vāit. (1. 13) it follows v. 3 in a like use. The comm. here ⌊p. 457$^1$⌋ quotes apacitām ⌊vii. 74⌋ as read at Kāuç. 31. 16, and understands this hymn instead of vi. 83 ⌊apacitas⌋ to be there meant; but under vi. 83 he quotes apacitas, and understands accordingly!
*⌊If we may trust Keçava (p. 333$^{27-32}$), the verses are indeed four in number, and are vii. 74. 1 and 2, vii. 76. 1, and then vii. 76. 2. With each of the first three the performer pricks the boil with a colored arrow; and with the fourth verse (caturthyā: namely vii. 76. 2) he pricks it with a fourth arrow.—But why should Kāuç. in 32. 9 say caturthyā? are we to assume a gap in the text of Kāuç.?—Cf. Bloomfield's hypothesis, SBE. xlii. 558, n. 2, that vii. 74. 1-2 and 76. 1-2 together formed a single hymn for Keçava. They are so associated by the comm. at p. 457$^1$, as Whitney observes in the preceding paragraph.⌋
Translated: Bloomfield, JAOS. xiii. p. ccxviii = PAOS. Oct. 1887, and AJP. xi. 324 (vss. 1 and 2); Henry, 29, 95; Griffith, i. 363; Bloomfield, SBE. xlii. 18, 557.
1. Of the red apacít's black is the mother, so have we heard; by the root of the divine anchoret I pierce them all.
The comm. makes at great length several discordant attempts to explain who the divine anchoret (múni) is. His explanation of apacit, fuller than elsewhere given, may be reported: doṣavaçād apāk cīyamānā galād ārabhya adhastāt kakṣādisaṁdhisthāneṣu prasṛtā gaṇḍamātāḥ: yadvā ’pacinvanti puruṣasya vīryam ity apacitaḥ. ⌊At vi. 83. 3, the apacít is "daughter of the black one."⌋
2. I pierce the first of them; I pierce also the midmost; now the hinder one of them I cut into like a tuft (stúkā).
The comm. says, at the end, yatho ”rṇāstukā ’nāyāsena chidyate tathā.
It is strange that the two following verses, which concern different matters, are combined with the above and with one another. But the hymn is not divided by any one of the authorities.
3. With the spell (vácas) of Tvashṭar have I confounded thy jealousy; also the fury that is thine, O master (páti), that do we appease for thee.
Some of the mss. (including our W.) combine manyús te in c.
4. Do thou, O lord of vows, adorned by the vow, shine here always, well-willing; thee being so kindled, O Jātavedas, may we all, rich in progeny, wait upon (upa-sad).
Nearly all the mss. (our Bp.E.p.m. are exceptions, with four of SPP's authorities) read tvā́m in a, and so do the mss. of the Kāuçika ⌊save Ch.Bū.⌋ and Vāitāna Sūtras in the pratīka; both printed texts give tvám ⌊with the comm.⌋. His full exposition of his uncertainty as to the meaning of jātavedas may be quoted: jātānām bhūtānāṁ veditar jātāir vidyamāna jñāyamāna vā jātaprajña jātadhana vā. The definition of the verse as triṣṭubh is lacking in the Anukr.