________________
INTRODUCTION.
xxvii
verses) composing the Stotra or hymn of praise (the Mahåvrata-sâman), on the one hand, and the verses and metres of the recited litany, on the other, are so arranged and explained as to make up the different parts of a bird's body. It need scarcely be remarked that, whilst in the case of the altar the task of bringing out at least a rough resemblance to a flying bird offered no great difficulties, it is altogether beyond the capabilities of vocal performances such as the chant and the recitation of hymns and detached verses. But the very fact that this symbolism is only a matter of definition and make-believe, makes it all the more Characteristic of the great hold which the Pragâpati theory had gained upon the sacerdotal mind
The question as to whether these compositions themselves might seem to show any signs of comparatively recent introduction of this symbolism requires further investigation before it can be answered. Of the Mahâvrata-saman we have virtually a single version, with only indications of certain substitutions which may be made in the choice of texts and tunes; the parts of the bird's body represented by the single Sâmans being in the order-head, right wing, lest wing, tail, and trunk. Of the Mahad Uktham, on the other hand, we possess two different versions, those of the Aitareya and the Sânkhâyana schools of Rig-veda theologians. Both of them start with the hymns representing the trunk of the bird; but otherwise there is so marked a difference between them, both as to arrangement and the choice of verses and hymns, that it seems pretty clear that, whilst there must have existed already a certain traditional form of the litany when these two schools separated, it was not yet of a sufficiently settled character to prevent such serious discrepancies to arise as those exhibited by the two rituals. This point being, however, of too technical a nature to be entered upon in this place, its further investigation must be reserved for some other opportunity.
