with the Commentary of Medhatithi 9 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 15 из 350Следующая ⇒

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Under this verse Hopkins translates a passage from Medhātithi, which, as will be clear from the text, has been entirely misunderstood and hence wrongly rendered.

Verses 55 and 56 have been variously interpreted. (1) According to Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Kullūka, it describes the process of transmigration. When an individual is dying, his individual Soul enters darkness, — i.e. becomes unconscious; and even though It continues to be connected with the dying body, the physical functions gradually cease; — then It leaves the body, — and enveloped in a subtle body — formed of the eight constituents (variously enumerated), It enters the embryo determined for It by its own past acts, and there becomes clothed with a new physical body which accompanies It through Its next life on Earth. (2) Nārāyaṇa holds that verse 55 provides the description of the soul during a swoon, and the second alone refers to the method of transmigration. (3) The explanation given by Nandana is entirely different. He; takes the verses as referring to what is done by the Supreme Being, the Creator; — verse 55 describing His action during Dissolution and 56 referring to a fresh creation following it. The Supreme Lord ‘enters darkness — i.e. the Pradhāna, — and having remained therein during the entire period of the Dissolution, becomes endowed with organs and a visible shape, — i. e., the shape of the Created Universe.’

VERSE 1.56 [Transmigration of the Individual Soul]

Section XXXI - Transmigration of the Individual Soul

यदाऽणुमात्रिको भूत्वा बीजं स्थाणु चरिष्णु च ।
समाविशति संसृष्टस्तदा मूर्तिं विमुञ्चति ॥५६॥

yadā'ṇumātriko bhūtvā bījaṃ sthāṇu cariṣṇu ca |
samāviśati saṃsṛṣṭastadā mūrtiṃ vimuñcati ||56||

When, invested with minute particles, the Individual enters the moveable or immoveable Seed; — then, becoming united with the aforesaid (Subtile body), it assumes the (new) body. — (56)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Invested with minute particles’ — that which is constituted by minute, subtile, particles, parts. This may refer either to the ‘Puryaṣṭaka,’ or the ‘Intermediate Body’; or to the Soul itself; — all Souls being by their very nature, subtile; as stated in such texts as ‘This Self within the heart, is extremely minute.’

‘Seed’ — The source of the physical body; — ‘Immoveable,’ that which is the cause of the birth of trees, &c.; — ‘Moveable,’ animate. — ‘Enters into,’ becomes enclosed in; — then ‘united with the aforesaid,’ — i.e., with Prāṇa and other constituents of the subtile body) — then ‘it assumes,’ attaches to itself, the body; i.e., takes up the new corporeal frame. — (56)

VERSE 1.57 [Creation of all things by Brahmā’s waking and sleeping]

Section XXXII - Creation of all things by Brahmā’s waking and sleeping

एवं स जाग्रत्स्वप्नाभ्यामिदं सर्वं चराचरम् ।
सञ्जीवयति चाजस्रं प्रमापयति चाव्ययः ॥५७॥

evaṃ sa jāgratsvapnābhyāmidaṃ sarvaṃ carācaram |
sañjīvayati cājasraṃ pramāpayati cāvyayaḥ ||57||

Thus by waking and sleeping, the Imperishable One incessantly brings to like and destroys all this that is moveable and immoveable. — (57)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse recapitulates what has been said before.

By means of his own ‘waking and sleeping,’ he produces and destroys the world consisting of moveable and immoveable beings, i.e., vegetables and animals. ‘Imperishable’ — Indestructible. — (57).

VERSE 1.58 [Origin of the Law]

Section XXXIII - Origin of the Law

इदं शास्त्रं तु कृत्वाऽसौ मामेव स्वयमादितः ।
विधिवद् ग्राहयामास मरीच्यादींस्त्वहं मुनीन् ॥५८॥

idaṃ śāstraṃ tu kṛtvā'sau māmeva svayamāditaḥ |
vidhivad grāhayāmāsa marīcyādīṃstvahaṃ munīn ||58||

Having prounded this Law, he himself, first of all, taught it to me with due care; I then taught it to Marīci and other Sages. — (58)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

In the present context the term ‘Law’ stands for the whole collection of Injunctions and Prohibitions contained in the Smṛtis, and not for any particular treatise; as this latter was composed by Manu; that is why the Treatise is called ‘Mānava’ (of Manu); otherwise [ i.e., if the Treatise were the ‘Law’ propounded by the Imperishable One], it would have been ‘Hairaṇyagarbha,’ ‘of Hiraṇyagarbha.’

Others however have held that the Treatise itself was composed by Hiraṇyagarbha [and is spoken of in the text as the ‘Law’ propounded by him], and since it came to be revealed to, and published among, many persons by Manu, it is only right that it should he called after the name of the latter. For instance, the Ganga has its real source somewhere else (in Heaven), and yet since it is seen for the first time in the Himavat (Himālaya), it is called ‘Haimavatī’ (proceeding from Himavat), after the name of the latter; — similarly though the Vedic text is eternal, yet since it was expounded by Kaṭha, it is called ‘Kāṭhaka,’ after his name; even though there are several other expounders and learners of that Veda, yet it is called after Kaṭha, on account of the superiority of his expounding. Nārada also has declared thus: — ‘This Treatise, consisting of 100,000 verses, was composed by Prajāpati, and, in due course, it came to be abridged by Manu and others.’ Thus, even though the Treatise may have been originally composed by some one else, there is nothing incongruous in its being called ‘Mānava,’ ‘of Manu.’ As for the term ‘Śāstra,’ ‘Law’ (of the text) standing for the Treatise, we often find it so used, in the sense that the subject expounded by it is instruction, ‘śāṣana.’

‘He taught it to me,’ I was taught by him. — ‘Himself,’ ‘first of all,’ ‘with care,’ — these words indicate the fact that there was no break in the continuity of tradition in regard to the Law. As a matter of fact, when the author of a book ‘himself’ teaches it first of all, not a single syllable of it is lost; while when the book composed by one person is taught by another person who has learnt it from the former, there is not the same ‘care’ taken in guarding the text from loss. In fact, in the case of the author himself, when he has taught it once and established its position, he feels confident that he has already taught it once, and hence when he comes to teach the work a second time, he is likely to be careless and lazy; so that lapses in the text become possible; hence the text has added the phrase ‘first of all’. — ‘With due care,’ — the term ‘vidhi,’ ‘care,’ stands here for the quality, in the teacher and the pupil, of having undiverted attention, a concentrated mind; and the affix ‘vati’ (in the term ‘vidhivat’) signifies capability, possession.

‘Then I taught it to Marīci and other sages.’ — In as much as Marīci and the other sages are persons of well-known reputation, when Manu speaks of such well-known persons having learnt the Law from him, he describes his connection with specially qualified pupils, and thereby indicates his well-established professional dignity; and by pointing out the importance of the Law, he produces in the minds of the great sages (who have asked him in verse 1 et seq. to propound the Law) faith and confidence, so that they may be unremitting in their study; the idea being — ‘So important is this Law that oven such great sages as Marīci and the rest have learnt it, — Manu also is such a high personage that he is the Teacher of those great sages, — so that it is highly proper that this Treatise should be learnt from him with this idea in their minds, the enquirers who have come to hear the Law propounded would not cease to give their attention to it. — Both these facts are mentioned with a view to eulogise the Law. — (58)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Vidhivat’ — ‘With due attention’ (Medhātithi and Govindarāja); — ‘according to rule, — with due ceremonies’ (Kullūka).

In connection with the authorship of the Smṛti see Bhāṣya (Printed edition, Gharpure, p. 7) and also Buhler’s Introduction p. xv. Burnell in his footnote on Verse 58, misrepresents Medhātithi, by imputing to him a view which he has put forward only as held by ‘some people’ ‘Kechit’.

Parāśara-mādhava (Ācāra — p. 106) quotes this verse in support of the view that the Smṛtis are the work of Brahmā; and it adds that — ‘as Brahmā, so Svāyambhuva Manu also, compiles the Duties that have been ordained in the Veda; — which establishes the beginningless and immutable character of Dharma.’

VERSE 1.59 [Advice to Learn from Bhṛgu]

Section XXXIV - Advice to Learn from Bhṛgu

एतद् वोऽयं भृगुः शास्त्रं श्रावयिष्यत्यशेषतः ।
एतद् हि मत्तोऽधिजगे सर्वमेषोऽखिलं मुनिः ॥५९॥

etad vo'yaṃ bhṛguḥ śāstraṃ śrāvayiṣyatyaśeṣataḥ |
etad hi matto'dhijage sarvameṣo'khilaṃ muniḥ ||59||

This Bhṛgu will fully describe to you this (Law); this sage has learnt the whole of this in its entirety, from me. — (59)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘This,’ Law; — ‘to you’; — ‘Bhṛgu will describe fully,’ will carry it to your cars, will teach and will explain: The pronoun ‘this’ (in the second line) refers to the Law; the whole of this Law this Sage has ‘learnt,’ read, ‘in its entirety,’ ‘from me’ at my hands. The teaching proceeds as it were, from the Teacher’s mouth, and the pupil takes hold of it, as it were; it is for this reason that we have the affix ‘tasi,’ in the word ‘mattaḥ,’ in the sense of the Ablative.

Bhṛgu is a person whose greatness is very well known to the sages; so that by directing him to explain the Law, Manu shows that the Law has come down through a tradition of teaching handed down by a long line of several persons possessing exceptional knowledge of all sciences. It is for this reason that some people are to undertake the study of the Law by the following considerations: — ‘This Law has come down from several high-souled persons, — why then should we not study it.’ This consideration serves to prompt men to study and thus attracts them to the Law. — (59)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This Verse is quoted by the Aparārka (p. 4) with a view to show that the writer of a work often quotes himself, — and wherever manurabravīt occurs, it is Manu’s own words that are quoted, not those of Bhṛgu, the compiler.

VERSE 1.60 [Bhṛgu Begins]

Section XXXV - Bhṛgu Begins

ततस्तथा स तेनोक्तो महर्षिमनुना भृगुः ।
तानब्रवीद् ऋषीन् सर्वान् प्रीतात्मा श्रूयतामिति ॥६०॥

tatastathā sa tenokto maharṣimanunā bhṛguḥ |
tānabravīd ṛṣīn sarvān prītātmā śrūyatāmiti ||60||

Thereupon, being thus directed by Manu, the great sage Bhṛgu, with a gladdened heart, said to the sages — ‘Listen.’ — (60)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

That great sage ‘Bhṛgu,’ ‘bring thus directed’ — prompted, by means of the words ‘Bhṛgu will describe it to you’; — ‘thereupon,’ — after that, — ‘said to the sages’ — ‘Listen.’

‘With a gladdened heart’; — his gladness being due to the idea of respectability implied by the fact that from among the several pupils (of Manu) he had been directed to teach; Bhṛgu’s idea of his own respectability was based upon this idea — ‘I, who am an obedient pupil of Manu, have been thus honoured by him, by reason of my special aptitude to expound the Law.’ — (60)

[Here ends the introductory Section — describing the true origin of the Law and the authorship of the present Treatise.]

[Now begins the actual Text of the Treatise, as expounded by

Bhṛgu, to the sages who had questioned Manu.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

With this verse ends the Introductory Section of the work, describing the Origin of the Law and the authorship of the ordinances.

VERSE 1.61 [Manvantara and the Seven Manus]

Section XXXVI - Manvantara and the Seven Manus

स्वायम्भुवस्यास्य मनोः षड्वंश्या मनवोऽपरे ।
सृष्टवन्तः प्रजाः स्वाः स्वा महात्मानो महौजसः ॥६१॥

svāyambhuvasyāsya manoḥ ṣaḍvaṃśyā manavo'pare |
sṛṣṭavantaḥ prajāḥ svāḥ svā mahātmāno mahaujasaḥ ||61||

There are Six other Manus, high-souled and mighty, who belong to the same race as this Svāyambhuva Manu, and have called into being, each his own offsprings. — (61)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When the Teacher (Manu) was asked (in the beginning of this work) to explain Duties, he proceeded to describe the origination of the world and other cognate matters; hence when the pupil (Bhṛgu) has been directed to expound the Law, he also begins with the remaining parts of the same process of world-creation.

‘Of this’ — the pronoun refers to the Manu before their eyes; — our teacher, who is known as ‘Svāyambhuva.’ There are six other Manus who belong to the same race as himself, — persons horn in the same family are said to ‘belong to the same race,’ and since all Manus are called into being directly by Brahmā himself, they are born in the same family, and are hence said to ‘belong to the same race.’ Or, persons engaged in the same work are also said ‘to belong to the same race’; as a matter of fact, living beings are often distributed among ‘races’ in accordance with the work done by them; e.g., we have such statements as — ‘related to grammar there are two sages who belong to the same race.’

The text proceeds to point out one such work common to the Manus: — “They have called into being each his own offsprings”; in each Manvantara, created beings destroyed during the previous Manvantara are again created and protected by that particular Manu who holds sway over that Manvantara; hence the offsprings that each of them creates are called ‘his own.’ — (61)

VERSE 1.62

Section XXXVI - Manvantara and the Seven Manus

स्वारोचिषश्चोत्तमश्च तामसो रैवतस्तथा ।
चाक्षुषश्च महातेजा विवस्वत्सुत एव च ॥६२॥

svārociṣaścottamaśca tāmaso raivatastathā |
cākṣuṣaśca mahātejā vivasvatsuta eva ca ||62||

[These six Manus are] — Svārociṣa, Uttama, Tāmasa, Raivata, Cākṣuṣa, and the glorious Vivasvat-suta (the Son of Vivasvat). — (62)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The aforesaid Manus are now mentioned by name.

‘Glorious' is a qualifying epithet. — The other words are names; some being merely conventional, and others based upon relationship; the last name ‘Vivasvat-suta,’ ‘Son of Vivasvat,’ is a different kind of word; it is a name bearing the form of a compound; just like the names ‘Black-serpent,’ ‘Narasiṃha’ (Man-Lion) and the like.

VERSE 1.63

Section XXXVI - Manvantara and the Seven Manus

स्वायम्भुवाद्याः सप्तैते मनवो भूरितेजसः ।
स्वे स्वेऽन्तरे सर्वमिदमुत्पाद्यापुश्चराचरम् ॥६३॥

svāyambhuvādyāḥ saptaite manavo bhūritejasaḥ |
sve sve'ntare sarvamidamutpādyāpuścarācaram ||63||

These seven almighty Manus, of whom Svāyambhuva is the first, having called into existence the whole of this world, consisting of movable and immovable beings, sustained it, each during his own regime. — (63)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Here seven Manus have been mentioned by me; elsewhere they are spoken of as fourteen.

‘Each during his own regime’ — during his time, i.e., during the time of his sovereignty. — ‘Having called into being’ the offerings, they ‘maintained,’ nourished, them. — ‘During his own regime’ — means during the time of his sovereignty; i.e., that Manu whose time or turn it was to create and maintain the continuity of the world.

Others explain the term ‘antara’ as denoting a particular time-period, just like the words ‘month’ &c.

But this is not right; it is only when the term ‘antara’ occurs along with the term ‘Manu’ (i.e., in the compound ‘Manvantara’) that it becomes expressive of a time-period, — i.e., the time-period known ns ‘Manvantara,’ — and not when it stands by itself (as it does in the text).

VERSE 1.64 [Measures of Time]

Section XXXVII - Measures of Time

निमेषा दश चाष्टौ च काष्ठा त्रिंशत् तु ताः कला ।
त्रिंशत् कला मुहूर्तः स्यादहोरात्रं तु तावतः ॥६४॥

nimeṣā daśa cāṣṭau ca kāṣṭhā triṃśat tu tāḥ kalā |
triṃśat kalā muhūrtaḥ syādahorātraṃ tu tāvataḥ ||64||

Ten and eight ‘nimeṣas’ (should be known as) one ‘Kāṣṭhā’; thirty such (Kāṣṭhās) one ‘Kalā’; thirty ‘Kalās’ one ‘muhūrta’; and as many ‘muhūrtas’ one ‘Ahorātra’ (Day and Night). — (64)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The author now begins to describe the measures of time, which are taught in the Science of Astronomy, for the purpose of determining the exact duration of time of the continuance of the world and its dissolution.

Eighteen ‘nimeṣas’ go to make that measure of time which is known as ‘Kāṣṭhā’; — thirty ‘Kāṣṭhās’ make one ‘Kalā’; — thirty ‘Kalās’ make one ‘Muhūrta,’ and ‘as many’ — i.e., thirty; — thirty ‘muhurtas’ make one ‘Ahorātra’ (Day and Night).

‘Should be known as’ — this verb has got to be supplied.

‘Tāvataḥ,’ ‘a s many,’ is the Accusative Plural form.

“What is it that is called Nimeṣa?”

‘Nimeṣa is the natural winking of the Eye-lashes, which accompanies every opening of the eye. Other people have declared that ‘Nimeṣa’ is that time which is taken in the distinct utterance of one letter-sound. — (64)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Nimeṣa’ — (1) The time taken by one wink of the eye, or (2) the time taken in the distinct pronouncing of one syllable.

‘Tāvaṭaḥ’ — in the Accusative necessitates the supplying of the Transitive verb ‘vidyāṭ,’ ‘one should know’. Nārāyaṇa and Nandana however favour the nominative form ‘ṭāvanṭaḥ’ which obviates the necessity of adding any words.

Cf. in this connection Wilson’s Viṣṇu-Purāṇa — Ed. Hall, Vol. I, pp. 47-50.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(Verse 64-73)

Mahābhārata, 12.231.12-31. —

15 Nimeṣas make one Kāṣṭhā,

30 Kāṣṭhās make one Kalā,

30 Kalās     make 1 Muhūrta,

30 Muhūrtas make 1 Day or Night,

30 Days and Nights make 1 Month,

12 Months make 1 Year

2 Ayanas solstices (Northern and Southern).       make 1 Year

‘In the world of human beings it is the Sun that divides the Day and Night, the night is for the sleep of creatures and the day for active operations; — the Month constitutes the Day-Night of the Pitṛs, the brighter half being the Day, for active operations and the darker half, the Night, for sleeping. The year constitutes the Day-Night of the gods, the northern solstice, the Night.... 4,000 years constitute the Kṛtayuga and each succeeding yuga [Tretāyuga, Dvāparayuga, Kaliyuga] is a quarter less, etc., etc.’

Arthaśāstra, p. 265. — ‘The divisions of these are the following — Tuṭa, Lava, Nimeṣa, Kāṣṭhā, Kalā, Nāḍīkā, Muhūrta, Divasa, Rātri, Pakṣa, Māsa, Ṛtu, Ayana, Saṃvatsara and Yuga.

2 Tuṭas       make one Lava

2 Lavas      make one Nimeṣa

5 Nimeṣas  make one Kāṣṭhā

30 Kāṣṭhās make one Kalā

40 Kalās     make one Nāḍīkā

2 Nāḍīkās  make one Muhūrta

15 Muhūrtas make one Divasa*

15 Muhūrtas make one Night*

*= During the months of Chaitra and Aśvina; during other months the extent of the day and night vary to the extent of three Muhūrtas.

15 Divasa-Rātris    make one Pakṣa

2 Pakṣas     make make one Māsas

2 Māsas      make one Ṛtu

3 Ṛtus make one Ayana

2 Ayanas    make one Saṃvatsara

5 Saṃvatsaras make one Yuga

VERSE 1.65

Section XXXVII - Measures of Time

अहोरात्रे विभजते सूर्यो मानुषदैविके ।
रात्रिः स्वप्नाय भूतानां चेष्टायै कर्मणामहः ॥६५॥

ahorātre vibhajate sūryo mānuṣadaivike |
rātriḥ svapnāya bhūtānāṃ ceṣṭāyai karmaṇāmahaḥ ||65||

The Sun divides the ‘Day’ and ‘Night’ of Men and Gods; [of others] what is conducive to the repose of beings is ‘Night,’ and what is conducive to activity is ‘Day.’ — (65)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Ahorātra’ — ‘day’ and ‘night’; of these the Sun makes the division; the Sun having risen, so long as his rays are visible, it is called ‘day’; and from the time that the Sun sets to the time that he rises again, it is called ‘night.’ Such is the case in the region of men and in the region of Gods.

“In a place where the Sun does not reach with his rays, — how is one to make this division of ‘day’ and ‘night’?”

The answer to this is given in the second line — ‘what is conducive &c.’ For such beings as are self-illumined, as the light is always there (and it never ceases) the division of ‘day’ and ‘night’ is made according to the undertaking of actions and going to sleep. Just as in the case of herbs, the time for sprouting is fixed by nature, exactly in the same manner, in the case of the beings in question, the times of ‘activity’ and ‘repose’ are fixed by the nature, of time itself [and are not variable]. — (65)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Rātriḥ svapnāya &c.’ — This line supplies the definition of ‘Day’ and ‘Night’ for those regions that are beyond the reach of the Sun; — ‘Day’ being the period of activity, and ‘Night’ the period of repose.

Comparative notes by various authors:

See the comparative notes for Verse 1.64 (Measures of Time).

VERSE 1.66 [‘Day and Night’ of the ‘Pitṛs’]

Section XXXVIII - ‘Day and Night’ of the ‘Pitṛs’

पित्र्ये रात्र्यहनी मासः प्रविभागस्तु पक्षयोः ।
कर्मचेष्टास्वहः कृष्णः शुक्लः स्वप्नाय शर्वरी ॥६६॥

Познавательные статьи:



Организация работы процедурного кабинета

Статус республик в составе РФ

Понятие финансов, их функции и особенности

Сущность демографической политии