stem (?) of munja grass

[Frits Staal]

Ashok Aklujkar's answer to Vassilkov question about mu;nja is most helpful
and surely on the right track. The statement that the plant could be 3
merers high could be an (unconscious?) translation from Monier Williams who
mentions 10 feet. But both MW and Apte/Gode/Karve are confusing. Perhaps
the confusion is old for ritualists are not botanists and Apastamba Srauta
Sutra  10.9.13 (further references in Caland's note) states that the
Yajamana is tied with mu;nja OR ;sara. In the Agnicayana, he is tied with a
;sikhyapaa;sa to the ukhaa pot (Baudh.SS 10.14 and 15). I mention this
because Vassilkobv asked for an illustration and that string, which seems
to be made of mu;nja or ;sara, is depicted in AGNI Vol.I, Plate 46 (page
327) and also in the film "Altar of Fire."


At 09:09 AM 3/30/02 -0800, you wrote:
>"Grass" in English explanations of mu;nja may owe itself to someone's
>'mechanical' translation of the traditional gloss t.r.na-vi;se.sa. However,
>in Skt usage t.r.na is not restricted to what we call grass in English; cf.
>t.r.naraaj 'vine palm,' t.r.na-raaja 'cocoa-nut tree,' 'bamboo,'
>'sugarcane,' 'palmyra tree,'  t.r.na-v.rk.sa 'fanpalm tree' and t.r.na;saala
>'areca-nut tree, ' 'bamboo' recorded on p. 782 of Apte's dictionary enlarged
>by Gode et al.  These identifications show some uncertainty or conflation,
>but they establish that t.r.na is not confined to what commonly makes lawns.
>
>
>
>On 30-03-2002 04:39, "Yaroslav Vassilkov" <yavass at YV1041.SPB.EDU> wrote:
>
>>should we really call it a grass: I have read somewhere
>> that
>> this plant could reach sometimes 3 meters in height.
>
Frits Staal

http://philosophy.berkeley.edu/staal