A note on the donkey and the mule in
early Vedic literature. Adyar Library Bulletin 44-45
(1980-1981): 179–189 [= Kl. Schr. II 987–997].
As its
title suggests, it deals only with donkeys and mules in Vedic literature.
However,
and this seems important and somehow enlightening to me, any crossbreeding product different
from the mule is not mentioned anywhere in this paper. Also conceptually, the
hinny is entirely missing. For Rau, “the mule [(aśvatara/°ī) ...] is the
offspring of a donkey and a mare” (p. 994 in his Kl. Schr.).
This
is certainly not wrong, and Rau rightly refers to Rudradatta’s commentary on Āpastambaśrautasūtra 13.5.3 (gardabhād vaḍavāyāṃ jāto ’śvaraḥ) to
substantiate his claim. Incidentally, it would also confirm Nīlakaṇṭha’s previously cited comment.
I just
chanced upon an interesting passage, which suggests that in India, too, at
least in early modern times, there seemed to be no agreement about what was
mule and what was hinny. Thus Jagannātha quotes the following two opposing
views in his Dīpikā on Madhva’s Brahmasūtrabhāṣya (1,3.9.5):
"gardabhād aśvāyāṃ jātā aśvataryaḥ" iti tattvapradīpe
[would be “mule”]
"gardabhīṣu aśvair jātā aśvataryaḥ" iti vyāsatīrthīye [would be “hinny”]
Unfortunately
and for obvious reasons, I cannot verify the quoted passage in any printed
edition, but the quote does offer quite a revealing view with regard to conceptual
uncertainties as they seem to have prevailed.
Another
essay on this topic, which is also not accessible to me, is:
Gildemeister,
Johannes: Açvatarî. Orient und Occident, insbesondere in ihren
gegenseitigen Beziehungen 2 (1864): 172–174.
Kind
regards,
WS