with the Commentary of Medhatithi 10 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 16 из 350Следующая ⇒

pitrye rātryahanī māsaḥ pravibhāgastu pakṣayoḥ |
karmaceṣṭāsvahaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ śuklaḥ svapnāya śarvarī ||66||

One month (of men) forms the ‘day and night’ of the ‘Pitṛs’; and their division is by fortnights: the darker fortnight, conducive to activity, is ‘Day,’ and the lighter fortnight, conducive to repose, is ‘Night.’ — (66)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

That which is the ‘month’ of men is a ‘day and night’ of the ‘Pitṛs.’ As regards ‘division’ as to which part is ‘day’ and which ‘night,’ — this division, that ‘this is day and that is night,’ is determined ‘by fortnights,’ i.e., the fifteen days, which are known by the name of ‘half-month.’ That is, the said division is based upon fortnights: one fortnight is ‘day,’ and another fortnight is ‘night.’ In view of the fact that ‘day’ and ‘night’ differ in their character and occur in a fixed order of sequence, the author adds the following distinction: — The darker fortnight is ‘day,’ and the brighter fortnight, ‘night.’

The right reading (in view of the meaning intended) would be ‘Karmaceṣṭābhyaḥ’ (the Dative form), just as we have ‘svapnāya’; for the meaning meant to be conveyed is that the day is for the purpose of ‘activity.’ Hence the Locative ending in the text can be explained only as used on account of the exigencies of metre. — (66)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

The ‘day’ and ‘night’ of Pitṛs is regulated by the Moon, just as those of gods and men is by the Sun.

This verse has been quoted in the Kālaviveka (p. 112) in support of the view that the seasons and other calculations are not governed by the ‘Lunar Month,’ — which only serves the purpose of being the ‘Day-Night’ of Pitṛs; the darker fortnight being their ‘day,’ and the brighter fortnight ‘night’.

The same work quotes it again on p. 308, in support of the view that ‘from Pratipat to Amāvāsyā is the dark fortnight, and from Pratipat to Purṇamāsi is the Bright Fortnight.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

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

VERSE 1.67 [‘Day’ and ‘Night’ of the ‘Gods’]

Section XXXIX - ‘Day’ and ‘Night’ of the ‘Gods’

दैवे रात्र्यहनी वर्षं प्रविभागस्तयोः पुनः ।
अहस्तत्रोदगयनं रात्रिः स्याद् दक्षिणायनम् ॥६७॥

daive rātryahanī varṣaṃ pravibhāgastayoḥ punaḥ |
ahastatrodagayanaṃ rātriḥ syād dakṣiṇāyanam ||67||

One ‘year’ (of men) forms the ‘Day and Night’ of the Gods; and the division of these is that the ‘Northern course’ is the ‘Day,’ and the ‘Southern Course’ the ‘Night.’ — (67)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘One year,’ of men, — i.e., twelve months, — ‘forms the Day and Night of the Gode.’ — The division of these is by means of the ‘Northern Course’ and the ‘Southern Course’; the six months during which the Sun moves towards the North is the ‘Northern Course,’ ‘Udagayanam’; the term ‘ayana’ standing for moving or occupying; the meaning being that during the six months the Sun rises towards that particular quarter. Turning hack from that, there comes the ‘Southern course’; during these six months the Sun abandons the Northern quarters and rises towards the South. — (67)

VERSE 1.68 [The ‘day’ of Brahmā and the ‘Yugas’]

Section XL - The ‘day’ of Brahmā and the ‘Yugas’

ब्राह्मस्य तु क्षपाहस्य यत् प्रमाणं समासतः ।
एकैकशो युगानां तु क्रमशस्तन्निबोधत ॥६८॥

brāhmasya tu kṣapāhasya yat pramāṇaṃ samāsataḥ |
ekaikaśo yugānāṃ tu kramaśastannibodhata ||68||

Learn in brief, in due order, the measure of the Brahmic ‘day and night,’ as also that of the ‘Time-cycles’ (Yugas) one by one. — (68)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Brahmā,’ — The creator of living beings, has a region of his own; and what is going to be described is of Day and Night as obtaining in that region; — ‘as also of the Time-cycles.’ — ‘Learn’ all this, ‘in brief,’ summarily; i.e., hear it from me. — ‘one by one’ — that is, of each time-cycle separately.

The present verse serves as the summary of what is going to be described, intended to draw the attention of the audience; it is with this view that they are exhorted to ‘learn.’ — The ‘division of time’ having been already mentioned as the subject-matter of the context, the reiterated promise (implied in the exhortation to ‘learn’) is meant to indicate that a fresh subject is going to be introduced; the idea being that what is going to be described now is not merely what remains of the afore-mentioned ‘division of time,’ but it is also conducive to merit; as will be directly stated in verse 73, where it is stated that ‘Brahma’s day is known to be sacred’; which means that the knowledge of it brings merit. — (68)

VERSE 1.69

Section XL - The ‘day’ of Brahmā and the ‘Yugas’

चत्वार्याहुः सहस्राणि वर्षाणां तत् कृतं युगम् ।
तस्य तावत्शती सन्ध्या सन्ध्यांशश्च तथाविधः ॥६९॥

catvāryāhuḥ sahasrāṇi varṣāṇāṃ tat kṛtaṃ yugam |
tasya tāvatśatī sandhyā sandhyāṃśaśca tathāvidhaḥ ||69||

They say that four thousnd ‘years’ are what is the ‘Kṛta-cycle’; as many hundred ‘years’ form the ‘Juncture’ (Morning); and of equal measure is the ‘Juncture-end’ (Evening). — (69)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The ‘years’ here spoken of are taken as the years of the Gods; as it is this that has been mentioned last. Says the Author of the Purāṇas — ‘O Brāhmaṇas, all this has been described by the divine measure: the measure of the Time-Cycles has been described by the divine measure.’ — ‘Four thousand’ such ‘years’ of the Gods constitute the Time-Cycle known as ‘Kṛta’: — of the ‘Kṛta’ cycle, ‘as many’, i.e. four ‘hundred’ ‘years’ form the ‘Juncture’; and of the same ‘Kṛta’ Cycle, the ‘Juncture-end’ is consisting of a period of four hundred years. That period of time which partakes in equal degree of the character of the preceding as well as that of the succeeding Cycle, is called ‘Juncture’; and ‘Juncture-end’ is that period of time which also partakes of the character of both, but in a less degree, of the preceding and, to a greater degree, of the succeeding Cycle.

The text contains the word ‘tāvacchatī’; and it is necessary to And out the rule under which the final I has been lengthened. The only grammatical explanation of the word possible is that it should be expounded as ‘tāvat śatānām sa māhārah’, ‘the collection of as many hundreds’; the term ‘tāvat’, ending in the ‘vatu’ affix, becomes a numeral according to Pāṇini’s Sūtra 1.1.23, by which words ending in ‘vatu’ are regarded as ‘numerals’; so that the said compound having a numeral for its first number becomes a ‘Dvigu’, according to Pāṇini 2.1.25; and since the Feminine affix ṭāp is precluded from Dvigu compounds, we have the Feminine affix ṅīp; and the word ‘tāvat’ means ‘one whose measure is tat (that)’: it being derived from the pronoun ‘tat’ with the ‘vatup’ affix, added according to Pāṇini’s Sūtra 5.2.39; the vowel in ‘tat’ being lengthened by the sūtra 6.3.91. If the form ‘tāvātī’ were explained in any other way, — for instance, if it were taken as a Bahubrīhi compound, being expounded as ‘tāvanti śatāni yasyāḥ’, — then, since the word ‘śata’ ends in ‘a’, it would take the Feminine affix ‘ṭāp’ according to Pāṇini 4.1.1; so that the form would be ‘tāvaccatā.’ This is the meaning. — (69)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Sandhyā’ — it is not clear whether the succeeding or preceding twilight is meant. Kullūka, and possibly Medhātithi, accepts the former view.

Medhātithi (p. 34, l. 24) for ‘Svabhāvānuvṛttiḥ’; how would it do to read ‘Svabhāvānanuvṛttiḥ’ — the meaning being that the preceding Twilight has the character of neither Day nor Night?

VERSE 1.70

Section XL - The ‘day’ of Brahmā and the ‘Yugas’

इतरेषु ससन्ध्येषु ससन्ध्यांशेषु च त्रिषु ।
एकापायेन वर्तन्ते सहस्राणि शतानि च ॥७०॥

itareṣu sasandhyeṣu sasandhyāṃśeṣu ca triṣu |
ekāpāyena vartante sahasrāṇi śatāni ca ||70||

In each of the other time-cycles, along with their ‘junctures’ and ‘juncture-ends’, the ‘thousands’ and ‘hundreds’ are reduced by one. — (70)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Among the three Time-cycles other then the Kṛta, — i.e. in Tretā and the rest, — along with their ‘junctures’ and ‘juncture-ends’, — the ‘thousands’ are reduced (in each) by one; ‘reduction’ means dimunition. That is in Tretā, the number of ‘thousand,’ is one less than that in Kṛta; similarly the number in Dvāpara is one less than that in Tretā; and that in Kali is one less than that in Thus Tretā consists of three thousand years, Dvāpara of two thousand years, and Kali of one thousand years. Similarly the number of ‘hundred’ goes on diminishing in the ‘junctures’ and ‘juncture-ends’ of the Cycles.

‘Time-cycle’, ‘yuga’, is the name given to a particular aggregate of days; and ‘Kṛtā’ and the rest are particular names of the said ‘Time-cycle’. — (70)

VERSE 1.71 [The Yuga — Time-Cycle — of the Gods]

Section XLI - The Yuga — Time-Cycle — of the Gods

यदेतत् परिसङ्ख्यातमादावेव चतुर्युगम् ।
एतद् द्वादशसाहस्रं देवानां युगमुच्यते ॥७१॥

yadetat parisaṅkhyātamādāveva caturyugam |
etad dvādaśasāhasraṃ devānāṃ yugamucyate ||71||

This period of the four time-cycles that have been just computed, — twelve thousand such periods are called the ‘time-cycle of the gods.’ — (71)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Yadetat’ (in the sense of ‘this’) is an ordinary expression; and as a whole it means that which has been spoken of. — ‘This period of four Time-cycles that has been computed’ — i.e., the exact number of years in which have been definitely determined before this verse, — e.g. in verse 69, where the number of years in the Time-cycles is declared to be four thousand etc., etc., — ‘Twelve thousand’ of this period of four Time-cycles are called the ‘Time-cycle of the Gods’. That is to say the Divine Cycle consists of twelve thousand ‘Four-Cycles.’

The word ‘Sāhasram’ is derived from the word ‘sahasra’ with the reflexive affix ‘aṇ’; and the compound ‘dvādaśasāhasram’ is to be expounded as ‘dvādaśa-sahasrāṇi parimāṇe yasmin’, ‘that in which the measure is that of twelve-thousands’. — (71)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Burnell remarks — “According to the commentators the translation should run thus: ‘The four Yugas just reckoned (consisting of) twelve thousand years are called a Yuga of the gods.” This is the translation adopted by Buhler also. What is not quite accurate is the statement that such a translation is “according to the commentators”, — when we find that according to Medhātithi at least, the meaning of the verse is as it is represented by Burnell in his text. Medhātithi says explicitly — ‘dvādaśa-chaturyuga — sahasrāṇi devayugam nāma kāla ityarthaḥ’.

In face of the fact that the words of the text themselves convey this meaning — which involves the ‘lengthening’ of the ordinary into divine years, — it is difficult to understand Burnell’s remark that this ‘lengthening’ ‘is the work of commentators.’ On the contrary, on Burnell’s own showing, the ‘commentators’ would appear to have shortened the great length of the divine year clearly expressed by the words of the text.

VERSE 1.72 [‘Day and Night’ of Brahmā]

Section XLII - ‘Day and Night’ of Brahmā

दैविकानां युगानां तु सहस्रं परिसङ्ख्यया ।
ब्राह्ममेकमहर्ज्ञेयं तावतीं रात्रिमेव च ॥७२॥

daivikānāṃ yugānāṃ tu sahasraṃ parisaṅkhyayā |
brāhmamekamaharjñeyaṃ tāvatīṃ rātrimeva ca ||72||

The ‘Time-cycles’ of the Gods, one thousand in number, should be regarded as one ‘day’ of brahmā; and (his) ‘night’ also is of the same extent. — (72)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Thousand ‘Time-cycles’ of the Gods make one ‘day’ of Brahmā. — Brahmā’s night also ‘is of the same extent’ — i.e., as long as thousand ‘Time-cycles’ of the Gods. — ‘In number’ — i.e., which in computation, is one thousand; the adding of this term is only for the purpose of tilling up the verse; for a thing cannot be spoken of as a‘thousand’ except in number.

The instrumental ending (in ‘Sāṅkhyayā’) denotes causality.

VERSE 1.73

Section XLII - ‘Day and Night’ of Brahmā

तद् वै युगसहस्रान्तं ब्राह्मं पुण्यमहर्विदुः ।
रात्रिं च तावतीमेव तेऽहोरात्रविदो जनाः ॥७३॥

tad vai yugasahasrāntaṃ brāhmaṃ puṇyamaharviduḥ |
rātriṃ ca tāvatīmeva te'horātravido janāḥ ||73||

Those who know the ‘Day of Brahmā’ as ending with the (said) thousand ‘time-cycles,’ and the ‘night’ also as of the same extent, — are people who alone know what is ‘day and night’, and acquire merit. — (73)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Yugasahasrāntam,’ — ‘that of which the thousand cycles are the end;’ — those men who know this, ‘they are the people who alone know what is Day and Night.’

If it be asked — what happens to the people who know this? — it is added that ‘they acquire merit.’ Such is the connection (of the word ‘puṇyam’). The sense is that ‘knowledge of Brahmā’s Day and Night is conducive to merit, and hence this knowledge should be acquired;’ — this injunction (of acquiring the said knowledge) being implied by the valediction contained in the verse. — (73)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Puṇyam’ — Medhātithi takes this not merely as an epithet of ‘ahaḥ,’ but as constituting a distinct sentence by itself.

VERSE 1.74 [Brahmā creates the Mind and applies it to creation]

Section XLIII - Brahmā creates the Mind and applies it to creation

तस्य सोऽहर्निशस्यान्ते प्रसुप्तः प्रतिबुध्यते ।
प्रतिबुद्धश्च सृजति मनः सदसदात्मकम् ॥७४॥

tasya so'harniśasyānte prasuptaḥ pratibudhyate |
pratibuddhaśca sṛjati manaḥ sadasadātmakam ||74||

At the end of the said ‘Day and Night,’ Brahmā, who was asleep, wakes up, and ha vino woken up, he creates mind, which partakes op the nature op the existent and the non-existent. — (74)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Brahmā, having slept daring the long night or the said extent, ‘wakes up,’ and then proceeds to create the world again. — The ‘sleep’ of Brahmā is of the character already described (in verse 54); and he does not sleep in the manner of ordinary men, as he is ever awake (conscious).

The order of creation is next stated: — [He created] ‘the Mind, which partakes of the nature of the existent and the nonexistent.’

Question — “It has been stated above (in verse 8) that ‘at first he created water’.”

In answer to this some people offer the following explanation: — There are two kinds of ‘Dissolution’ — the ‘Great Dissolution’ and the ‘Intermediate Dissolution’; and what is stated in the present context is the order in which things are created after the ‘Intermediate Dissolution’; and the ‘Mind,’ in this case, is not one of the ‘Principles,’ — this ‘Principle’ Mind having come into existence already (after the Great Dissolution); what the text means is that ‘Brahmā’, having woken up, ‘creates’ — i.e., applies — the Mind — to creation.

If, however, the text be taken to refer to the creation following on the ‘Great Dissolution,’ — then ‘Mind’ should be taken as standing for the ‘Great Principle of Intelligence,’ — it being called ‘Mind’ because it is the cause of the Mind; and thus the order here mentioned would not in any way militate against that stated before (in verse 14-15). In the Purāṇa we read — ‘It is described as Mind, Mahān, Mati, Buddhi and Mahattattva; all these have been described as words synonymous with Mahat (the Great Principle of Intelligence)’; [and thus there is nothing wrong in taking ‘manas’ of this verse as standing for the Great Principle]. — (74)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Of the second half of the verse, two explanations have been mentioned by Medhātithi and Kullūka: (1) ‘on waking from sleep, Brahmā creates the Manas (i. e., the Mahat)’; and (2) ‘He employs his own Manas (Mind) in creating die world’. Govindarāja adopts the latter explanation only; Nārāyaṇa and Nandana accept the former only. Nandana takes ‘Manas’ as standing for Mahat, Ahaṅkāra and Manas, — and Sadasadāt makam as ‘prakṛtivikṛtyātmakam’.

VERSE 1.75 [Ākāśa produced out of ‘Mind’ [the Great Principle of Intelligence]]

Section XLIV - Ākāśa produced out of ‘Mind’ [the Great Principle of Intelligence]

मनः सृष्टिं विकुरुते चोद्यमानं सिसृक्षया ।
आकाशं जायते तस्मात् तस्य शब्दं गुणं विदुः ॥७५॥

manaḥ sṛṣṭiṃ vikurute codyamānaṃ sisṛkṣayā |
ākāśaṃ jāyate tasmāt tasya śabdaṃ guṇaṃ viduḥ ||75||

The ‘Mind’ impelled by (Brahmā’s) desire to create, evolves creation; — from out of that (Mind) is produced Ākāśa; of this they know sound to be the quality. — (75)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Though the creation of the ‘Principles’ has been already described, it is stated again for the purpose of pointing out the details not set forth before.

Vikurute, ‘evolves,’ — i.e., being impelled, by Brahmā, it brings about creation in a particular manner; — from out of the ‘Mind’ (i.e., the Great Principle of Intelligence), thus propelled (to modification) is produced Ākāśa; and this Ākāśa possesses the quality known as ‘Sound ‘Quality’ is that which subsists (in a substance); and the substratum of the quality of Sound is Ākāśa, in the sense that no Sound is possible apart from Ākāśa. — (75)

Comparative notes by various authors:

(Verse 75-78)

Mahābhārata, 12.232.4-7. — (Same as Manu.)

VERSE 1.76 [Wind (vāyu) after Ākāśa]

Section XLV - Wind (vāyu) after Ākāśa

आकाशात् तु विकुर्वाणात् सर्वगन्धवहः शुचिः ।
बलवाञ्जायते वायुः स वै स्पर्शगुणो मतः ॥७६॥

ākāśāt tu vikurvāṇāt sarvagandhavahaḥ śuciḥ |
balavāñjāyate vāyuḥ sa vai sparśaguṇo mataḥ ||76||

After Ākāśa, from out of the same evolvent [‘Mind’], there comes into existence the pure and potent Wind, the vehicle of all odours; and it is held to be endowed with the quality of Touch. — (76)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Though the creation of the ‘Principles’ has been already described, it is stated again for the purpose of pointing out the details not set forth before.

Vikurute, ‘evolves,’ — i.e., being impelled, by Brahmā, it brings about creation in a particular manner; — from out of the ‘Mind’ (i.e., the Great Principle of Intelligence), thus propelled (to modification) is produced Ākāśa; and this Ākāśa possesses the quality known as ‘Sound ‘Quality’ is that which subsists (in a substance); and the substratum of the quality of Sound is Ākāśa, in the sense that no Sound is possible apart from Ākāśa. — (75)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Medhātithi forces the Sāṅkhya doctrine on Manu, whose words clearly favour the Vaiśeṣika view.

The words clearly mean ‘From out of Ākāśa, undergoing modifications, proceeds Vāyu.’ But Medhātithi construes them to mean — ‘After Ākāśa — (from out of Mahat) which undergoes modifications — proceeds Vāyu &c.,’ — in order to make it agree with the Sāṅkhya doctrine that Vāyu, like every other elementary substance, proceeds from Mahat.

Comparative notes by various authors:

See Comparative notes for Verse 1.75 (Ākāśa produced out of ‘Mind’).

VERSE 1.77 [Light (jyoti) after Wind (vāyu)]

Section XLVI - Light (jyoti) after Wind (vāyu)

वायोरपि विकुर्वाणाद् विरोचिष्णु तमोनुदम् ।
ज्योतिरुत्पद्यते भास्वत् तद् रूपगुणमुच्यते ॥७७॥

vāyorapi vikurvāṇād virociṣṇu tamonudam |
jyotirutpadyate bhāsvat tad rūpaguṇamucyate ||77||

After wind, from out of the same Evolvent, emanates the bright and radiant light, the dispeller of darkness; it is said to be endowed with the quality of colour. — (77)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The two words ‘bright’ and ‘radiant,’ which are synonymous, have been used with a view to indicate that Light is itself bright, and it also illumines other things; that it is itself endowed with brilliance and it makes other things also brilliant. — (77)

Comparative notes by various authors:

See Comparative notes for Verse 1.75 (Ākāśa produced out of ‘Mind’).

VERSE 1.78 [Water (ap) after Light (jyoti): Earth (bhūmi) after Water]

Section XLVII - Water (ap) after Light (jyoti): Earth (bhūmi) after Water

ज्योतिषश्च विकुर्वाणादापो रसगुणाः स्मृताः ।
अद्भ्यो गन्धगुणा भूमिरित्येषा सृष्टिरादितः ॥७८॥

jyotiṣaśca vikurvāṇādāpo rasaguṇāḥ smṛtāḥ |
adbhyo gandhaguṇā bhūmirityeṣā sṛṣṭirāditaḥ ||78||

Познавательные статьи:



Как правильно слушать собеседника

Типичные ошибки при выполнении бросков в баскетболе

Принятие христианства на Руси и его значение

Средства массовой информации США