THE TEXT · ATHARVAVEDA
Hymns discussed in this article
Begin with the verses shown here. Open the other cited hymns to compare their images and aims.
ATHARVAVEDA · BOOK III IN FOCUS
For concord
Like-heartedness, like-mindedness, non-hostility do I make for you; do ye show affection (hary) the one toward the other, as the inviolable [cow] toward her calf when born.
Be the son submissive to the father, like-minded with the mother; let the wife to the husband speak words (vā́c) full of honey, wealful.
Let not brother hate brother, nor sister sister; becoming accordant (samyáñc), of like courses, speak ye words auspiciously (bhadráyā).
That incantation in virtue of which the gods do not go apart, nor hate one another mutually, we perform in your house, concord for [your] men (púruṣa).
Read the remaining 3 verses of III.30
Having superiors (jyā́yasvant), intentful, be ye not divided, accomplishing together, moving on with joint labor (sádhura); come hither speaking what is agreeable one to another; I make you united (sadhrīcī́na), like-minded.
Your drinking (prapā́) [be] the same, in common your share of food; in the same harness (yóktra) do I join ⌊yuj⌋ you together; worship ye Agni united, like spokes about a nave.
United, like-minded I make you, of one bunch, all of you, by [my] conciliation; [be] like the gods defending immortality (amṛ́ta); late and early be well-willing yours.
Whitney–Lanman translation as printed (1905) · Read III.30 at Wikisource ↗
ATHARVAVEDA · BOOK V IN FOCUS
Against niggardliness and its effects
Bring to us, stand not about, O niggard; do not prevent (? rakṣ) our sacrificial gift as led [away]; homage be to baffling (vīrtsā́), to ill-success; homage be to the niggard.
What wheedling (? parirāpín) man thou puttest forward, O niggard, to him of thine we pay homage: do not thou disturb my winning (vaní).
Let our god-made winning progress (pra-kḷp) by day and by night; we go forth after the niggard; homage be to the niggard.
Sarasvatī, Anumati, Bhaga, we going call on; pleasant (juṣṭá) honeyed speech have I spoken in the god-invocations of the gods.
Read the remaining 6 verses of V.7
Whomever I solicit (yāc) with speech, with Sarasvatī, mind-yoked, him may faith find today, given by the brown soma.
Do not thou baffle our winning nor speech. Let Indra and Agni both bring good things to us. De ye all, willing today to give to us, welcome the niggard.
Go thou far away, O ill-success; we conduct away thy missile; I know thee, O niggard, as one putting (? mīv) down, thrusting down.
Likewise, greatly making thyself naked, thou fastenest on (sac) a person in dreams, O niggard, baffling the plan and design of a man (púruṣa).
She that, being great, of great height (-unmāna), permeated all regions—to her, the golden-haired, to perdition have I paid homage.
Gold-colored, fortunate, gold-cushioned, great—to her, the golden-mantled, to the niggard have I paid homage.
Whitney–Lanman translation as printed (1905) · Read V.7 at Wikisource ↗
ATHARVAVEDA · BOOK III ALSO CITED
To command a woman's love
Read comparison hymn III.25 (6 verses)
Let the up-thruster thrust (tud) thee up; do not abide (dhṛ) in thine own lair; the arrow of love (kā́ma) that is terrible, therewith I pierce thee in the heart.
The arrow feathered with longing (ādhī́), tipped with love, necked with resolve (? saṁkalpá-)—having made that well-straightened, let love pierce thee in the heart.
The well-straightened arrow of love which dries the spleen, forward-winged, consuming (vyòṣa)—therewith I pierce thee in the heart.
Pierced with consuming pain (çúc), dry-mouthed, do thou come creeping to me, gentle, with fury allayed, entirely [mine], pleasant-spoken, submissive.
I goad thee hither with a goad (ā́janī), away from mother, likewise from father, that thou mayest be in my power (krátu), mayest come unto my intent.
Do ye, O Mitra-and-Varuṇa, cast out the intents from her heart; then, making her powerless, make her [to be] in my own control.
Whitney–Lanman translation as printed (1905) · Read III.25 at Wikisource ↗
III.30's common share belongs to a group
The concord hymn first seeks like-mindedness, then extends through parents, spouses, siblings, and a household that works and speaks together. Verse 6 gives them common food and drink and compares their union to spokes around a hub. Such sharing is not a ranking of one member's request above every other need. Indeed a household's common share implies multiple claims, even if its ancient social order is hierarchical. Reading the verse as “put me first” would reverse its scale. The poem is about coordination of a group, not a targeted demand that another person abandon their own priorities. Its language of accord has substance precisely because more than one person is involved.
V.7 articulates a request but not a debt
V.7 addresses niggardliness in a setting of winning gifts and overcoming refusal. Verse 4 invokes divine powers with honeyed speech; verse 5 speaks of soliciting someone through words and hoping confidence will arise. Whitney notes later uses connected with success in requests, but the hymn's subject is bound to generosity, ritual giving, and personified ill-success. It does not identify a romantic partner who must put one private request first. The step from persuasive speech to an obligation to comply is not in the verse. A hearer may be moved, may give something, or may remain unmoved; the ancient petition asks for favor rather than reporting its outcome.
A love command shows the stronger alternative
III.25 asks that a woman's desires and independent intentions be displaced so she comes under the speaker's control. Its arrow and goad dramatize the cost of turning a request into a command over another mind. The comparison with III.30 and V.7 is not that all three say the same thing. They pose different social relations: a household seeking workable concord, a petitioner seeking a generous reception, and a pursuer demanding submission. The modern word priority can slide between them if it is left undefined. Does the speaker want to be heard, helped, or obeyed regardless of the other person's circumstances? The historical contrasts make that question visible.
The Considered Request is new
“Make a target person put my request first” and The Considered Request are contemporary inventions. The plan's keyword about having a request considered is narrower than the benefit's demand for top priority; neither effect is promised by the cited hymns. A present-day reader can use III.30 to think about shared obligations and V.7 to think about what happens when someone asks. Those are interpretive analogies, not an ancient priority-setting procedure. Another person's decision may properly weigh needs the requester cannot see. No old poem supplies evidence that a modern request deserves precedence, or that the target will give it precedence.
WORKED READING
Three ways a request meets another will
Read III.30.6's shared provision, V.7.5's solicitation through speech, and III.25.6's demand that a woman's intentions be removed. The first pictures several people holding resources in common; the second presents a speaker seeking a favorable response; the third aims to eliminate resistance. A modern request could be discussed within a shared relationship, granted after persuasion, or pressed as if refusal were unacceptable. These verses do not rank modern obligations for us. Their contrast shows why “consider me” and “put me first” are distinct claims, even though the same keyword may lead a reader to both.