# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book XIX/Hymn 20

20. For protection by various gods.
[Atharvan.—bahudevatyam. trāiṣṭubham: 2. jagatī; 3. purastādbṛhatī; 4. anuṣṭubh.]
⌊Not found in Pāipp.⌋ The comm. says, purely on his own authority, that with this hymn the purohita arms with a breastplate a king going to battle. ⌊For the reference to vs. 4 in Kāuç. 25. 36 note, see above, introd. to viii. 5.⌋
Translated: Griffith, ii. 279. ⌊In Anukr. we miss caturṛcam.⌋
1. Have set down apart the human deadly weapon Indra-and-Agni, Dhātar, Savitar, Bṛihaspati, king Soma, Varuṇa, the Açvins, Yama; let Pūshan protect us round about from death.
It is quite as likely that 'Soma' etc. in the second half-verse should be viewed as coördinate with Pūshan. The translation omits yám in a; it seems probable that a is deeply corrupt ⌊Caland, KZ. xxxiv. 456, citing Avestan usage, takes pāúruṣeyaṁ vadháṁ yám as accusative of the crystallized combination pāúruṣeyo vadhó yáḥ which we had at i. 30. 1: see note to xii. 2. 19. But W's suspicion is weighty.⌋ All the mss. accent nyádhus (the pada-mss. having, against all rule and practice, nyádhuḥ, instead of ni॰ádhuḥ or ní: adhuḥ), and SPP. follows them (in p. also); our nyàdhus is an emendation, apparently a necessary one—unless we can construe, with the comm., b-d as together constituting the apodosis: 'what means of death for men [our enemies] have fixed in secret—from [that] death let Indra-and-Agni etc. etc. protect us.' ⌊Griffith: 'May Soma etc. guard us from Mṛityu—death caused by men, which Indra etc. appointed.'⌋ The verse is far too irregular (11 + 12: 12 + 9 = 44) to be called simply a triṣṭubh.
2. What [defenses] he who is lord of creation, Prajāpati, Mātariçvan, made for his creatures (prajā́), what ones the directions and the quarters put on (vas)—let those defenses (várman) be abundant (bahulá) for me.
3. What [defense] those gods fastened on themselves, when fighting for overlordship, what defense Indra made for himself, let that protect us on all sides.
Pāda b is altogether corrupt; the translation implies the reading ā́dhirājyāya yodhínaḥ, which differs a little from the emendation in our text, but which the Pet. Lex. assumes under ādhirājya. The mss. give (devā́) ’dhirājayódhehinaḥ, which the pada-text analyzes into (deva:) ádhi॰rāja: yáḥ: dhehi: naḥ (SPP. reports his pada-mss. as giving at the beginning devā, apparently by an oversight, as devā is no form*). The comm. has (devāḥ) dyurājayo (implying p. dyu॰r-) dehinaḥ, and this SPP. accepts, despite its unsatisfactory character; the comm. explains dyurājayas as divi dyuloke rājamānās, which is absurd, and adds that, since the wearing of armor implies a body (deha), the gods were embodied (dehinas), which is silly. The pada-mss. (and one of SPP's saṁhitā-mss.) strangely read sarvátas at the end instead of viçvátas; the comm. and both editions accept the latter; ⌊and since W. notes nothing to the contrary, his D. presumably has viçvátaḥ. The text, with b as translated, and with ca-kṛ-e in c ⌊making 11 + 8: 8 + 8⌋, answers excellently to the definition of the Anukr. *⌊W. means, I take it, no form which is usable in this connection.⌋
4. Defense for me may heaven-and-earth, defense may day, defense may the sun, defense for me may all the gods make; let not the affrontress (? pratīcikā́) reach me.
Some of the mss. leave pratīcikā accentless, and nearly all accent krán; both editions have kran and -kā́. The comm. seems to read agnis instead of áhas in b, and mo for mā́ in d. The comm. paraphrases pratīcikā as çatrusenā ’jñātapratikūlāñcanā (ka being added to pratīcī "ajñātārthe"); the ⌊minor⌋ Pet. Lex. conjectures 'discomfort' (Ungemach); the translation above is of course only tentative. To be compared with the verse is viii. 5. 18 above; found also in AÇS. i. 2. 1, which has our a, b (but reading agnis with our comm.), and, for third pāda, varma me santu tirçcikāḥ; and in Āp. xiv. 26. 1, with agnis in b, and, for c, d, varma me brahmaṇaspatir mā mā prāpad ato bhayam.
⌊Here ends the second anuvāka, with 11 hymns and 72 verses. If we counted hymn 16 as of 3 verses, there would be 73. Some mss. sum up the verses as 72, and thus support the numeration of hymn 16 as given by both editions (see p. 923).⌋