Speaking of fear as one of the motives of non-violence(ahimsa), L. Schmithausen quite aptly points out that 'fear presupposes at least an inkling of empathy. The German scholar further argues that in the Brahmana, empathy has the same source as fear and embarrassment, and it also provides the basis of concern or merciful sympathy(dayd) and caring for others(anukampd) in Buddhism. How is empathy treated in the Vedic Samhita? This is the topic which I explore in this paper by comparing the Black Yajur Veda texts with the Satapatha Brahmana. In his study on the origin of ahimsa, H.-P. Schmidt adduces some Vedic sources which deal with specific methods meant to eliminate the act of sacrificial killing or appease its victims. These are divided into two groups: A. Verbal formulae declaring that the victims will be reborn from the sacrificial fire, etc. B. Acts aimed at an immediate elimination of killing and harming, i.e., appeasing(santi), or symbolic identifications aimed at avoiding any injury. In the present paper, I adopt the same frame of analysis. Type A of ritual avoidance is found at Satapatha Brahmana 3.8.1.2. as well as at its parallel passages at Taittirlya Samhita 6.3.8.1.-2. According to Schmidt, the acts of appeasing linked to Type B apply not only to the pains of the sacrificial victims but also to all entities which might be injured during the ritual, such as the earth, trees, and grains. In order to understand the actual methods of alleviating the suffering of the victims, I first look at Maitrayanl Samhita 3.10.1. Then I turn my attention to several other passages dealing with ways of avoiding types of pain to be caused by other than killing. Here are the main conclusions yielded by my investigation. (1) The Taittirlya Samhita instruction 'they lead the victim into death' is denied and becomes rephrased in the Satapatha Brahmana as 'they lead the victim to the sacrifice'. (2) In the Samhita, the water is a means of appeasing. In the Satapatha Brahmana its function changes into a means of attaining immortality. (3) It is true that the Satapatha Brahmana stresses the ideas of immortality and rebirth, but one can also find the word 'to kill' (√) frequently mentioned. (4) In the Samhita, we find examples of empathy for the "pain" of the earth, trees, animals and so on, which may have been inflicted during the ritual act. This feeling is not accompanied by a sense of fear. In such cases, the method of eliminating pain is of a purely magical nature. The Satapatha Brahmana mentions pain less frequently than the Samhita, and attaches greater importance to the recitation of mantras as a way of removing the pain. (5) Satapatha Brahmana 7.5.2.28-37. juxtaposes the word 'pain' and 'evil'. It furthermore states that the five domestic animals (man, horse, bull, sheep, he-goat) actually represent a transformation of the pain, evil which was eliminated by Prajapati. They are, therefore, pithless and unfit for rituals as well as consumption. Prima facie, it would seem that the emphasis placed by the Satapatha Brahmana on immortality presupposes firm faith in the power and efficacy of the ritual, and that its authors felt the need to rid themselves of the sense of guilt or eschew the criticism of the ritualists from inner and outer circles. This, however, is not the whole truth. One can also detect an intention on the part of the Satapatha Brahmana authors to bring immortality to the fore of their doctrinal agenda and to re-build the authority of the declining authority of the ritual in new terms. In the Samhita the authority of the ritual reigns unchallenged. It is against this religious background that we witness the co-existence of the killing of animals and the occasional empathy for pain, empathy which is not necessarily caused by an actual act of killing. This feeling of empathy probably later became regarded as primitive and infantile, and even came to be despised. This is at least the impression one gets by looking at
