with the Commentary of Medhatithi 14 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 20 из 350Следующая ⇒

‘The coming into existence of the world,’ — i.e. the measure of time, the delineation of the characteristics of principles and things, the praise of the Brāhmaṇa, and so forth, — all these are included under the ‘coming into existence of the world’; this subject has been dealt with in the Treatise as a commendatory description, and not as something to be actually accepted as absolutely true.

‘The rates relating to sacramental rites,’ ‘the method of keeping observances.’ By ‘sacramental rites’ are meant those connected with ‘Impregnation’ and the rest; the ‘rules’ i.e., procedure — relating to these; — the keeping of ‘observances’ — i.e., by the Initiated Student, — of these the ‘method,’ the actual performance, the procedure; — this sums up what has been proclaimed in Discourse II. — ‘Final Ablution,’ — i.e. the particular ceremony performed by one who is returning from the house of his Preceptor (after finishing his course of study). — (111)

VERSE 1.112

Section LXII - Contents of the Treatise

दाराधिगमनं चैव विवाहानां च लक्षणम् ।
महायज्ञविधानं च श्राद्धकल्पं च शाश्वतम् ॥११२॥

dārādhigamanaṃ caiva vivāhānāṃ ca lakṣaṇam |
mahāyajñavidhānaṃ ca śrāddhakalpaṃ ca śāśvatam ||112||

The taking of wife, — the definition of the several forms of Marriage, — the method of the Great Sacrifices, — the eternal regulations relating to the offering to Pitṛs. — (112)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Taking of wife,’ — the accepting of a wife in marriage; — ‘the definition’ — i.e., the means of distinguishing the exact character — ‘of marriages,’ — such as the ‘Brahma’ and the rest, which form the means by which the wife is taken. — ‘The great sacrifices’ — the five offerings of the ‘Vaiśvadeva’ and the rest. — ‘The regulations,’ rules, method, relating to śrāddhas, ‘offering to the Pitṛs.’

The terms ‘para,’ ‘excellent’ (in verse 111), and ‘eternal’ (in 112) only serve to fill in the metre.

All this forms the subject-matter of discourse III. — (112)

VERSE 1.113-116

Section LXII - Contents of the Treatise

वृत्तीनां लक्षणं चैव स्नातकस्य व्रतानि च ।
भक्ष्याभक्ष्यं च शौचं च द्रव्याणां शुद्धिमेव च ॥११३॥

स्त्रीधर्मयोगं तापस्यं मोक्षं संन्यासमेव च ।
राज्ञश्च धर्ममखिलं कार्याणां च विनिर्णयम् ॥११४॥

साक्षिप्रश्नविधानं च धर्मं स्त्रीपुंसयोरपि ।
विभागधर्मं द्यूतं च कण्टकानां च शोधनम् ॥११५॥

वैश्यशूद्रोपचारं च सङ्कीर्णानां च सम्भवम् ।
आपद्धर्मं च वर्णानां प्रायश्चित्तविधिं तथा ॥११६॥

vṛttīnāṃ lakṣaṇaṃ caiva snātakasya vratāni ca |
bhakṣyābhakṣyaṃ ca śaucaṃ ca dravyāṇāṃ śuddhimeva ca ||113||

strīdharmayogaṃ tāpasyaṃ mokṣaṃ saṃnyāsameva ca |
rājñaśca dharmamakhilaṃ kāryāṇāṃ ca vinirṇayam ||114||

sākṣipraśnavidhānaṃ ca dharmaṃ strīpuṃsayorapi |
vibhāgadharmaṃ dyūtaṃ ca kaṇṭakānāṃ ca śodhanam ||115||

vaiśyaśūdropacāraṃ ca saṅkīrṇānāṃ ca sambhavam |
āpaddharmaṃ ca varṇānāṃ prāyaścittavidhiṃ tathā ||116||

The description of the means of livelihood, — the observances of the initiated Householder, — lawful and forbidden food, — Purification, — the cleansing of things. — (113)

The conditions of Women, — the Duties of the Recluse, — Final Release, — Renunciation, — the entire duty of the King, — and the decision of law-suits. — (114)

The Rules regarding the examination of witnesses, — the Duties of Husband and wife, — Law relating to the Division of Property, — Gambling, — the exterminating of bad characters. — (115)

The duty of the Vaiśya and the Śūdra, — the birth of the mixed castes — the duties of all castes during times of distress — the method of expiation. — (116)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The ‘description of the means of livelihood,’ — i.e., of the means of subsistence, in the form of acquiring wealth and the like. — ‘Of the Initiated Householder,’ — i.e., of one who has finished his Vedic study and has returned home from his teacher’s house; ‘the observances,’ such as ‘he should not look at the rising sun’ and so forth. All this forms the subject-matter of Discourse IV.

‘Lawful and forbidden food,’ — ‘five five-nailed animals are permitted food,’ and ‘forbidden food’ — such as onion, etc. — ‘Purification,’ — by lapse of time, as in the case of childbirth — ‘cleansing of things,’ with water. — ‘The condition of women’ — such as childhood, youth and so forth. All this is dealt with in Discourse V.

‘Duties of the Recluse’ — the Recluse is one whose chief work consists in the performing of austerity, — i.e., the ‘Vānaprastha,’ the Hermit; and the duty of these is called ‘Tapasyā.’ — ‘Final Release,’ — i.e., the duty of the Wandering Mendicant. — ‘Renunciation,’ is a particular form of the said ‘duty’ (of the Mendicant); how this is so will be explained in the chapter referred to. All this forms the subject matter of Discourse VI.

‘The entire duty,’ — those leading to visible (physical) as well as invisible (super-physical) results, — ‘of the king,’ — i.e., of the man whose business it is to protect the Earth, and who has obtained sovereignty. This forms the subject-matter of Discourse VII.

‘Of law-suits,’ — such as the non-payment of debts, etc.; — ‘decision,’ — i.e., dispelling all doubts, ascertaining the facts and deciding upon the course of action to be adopted. — ‘The method of examination of witnesses,’ — this has been mentioned separately (though already included in the foregoing), because of its great importance. This is the subject-matter of Discourse VIII.

‘Duties of husband and wife,’ — i.e., behaviour towards each other, when living together, and also when living apart. — ‘Laws relating to division’ — i.e., of Property. ‘Gambling’ — i.e., Laws relating to gambling are here spoken of as ‘gambling’ — ‘The extermination of,’ — means of banishing, — ‘bad characters’ — such as thieves, robbers and the like. Though in reality the ‘Division of Property,’ forming one of the eighteen ‘matters of dispute,’ is included under ‘law-suits’ and as such, standing on the same footing as the ‘nonpayment of debts,’ need not have been mentioned separately, yet it has been mentioned separately because it forms the subject-matter of a distinct Discourse. The duties of the Vaiśya and the Śūdra,’ — i.e., the performance of their respective duties. All this is dealt with in Discourse IX.

‘The birth’ coming into existence, ‘of the mixed Castes,’ — i.e., of the ‘Kṣattṛ,’ the ‘Vaideha,’ etc., etc. — ‘Duties during times of distress,’ — i.e„ when failing to carry on livelihood by the means prescribed for them, they are reduced to the point of death; and then there are certain duties that devolve upon the various castes. — This is dealt with in Discourse X.

‘The method of expiation,’ — is dealt with in Discourse XI. — (113-116)

VERSE 1.117

Section LXII - Contents of the Treatise

संसारगमनं चैव त्रिविधं कर्मसम्भवम् ।
निःश्रेयसं कर्मणां च गुणदोषपरीक्षणम् ॥११७॥

saṃsāragamanaṃ caiva trividhaṃ karmasambhavam |
niḥśreyasaṃ karmaṇāṃ ca guṇadoṣaparīkṣaṇam ||117||

The threefold transmigration of the Soul, arising from actions, — the highest good, — and the examination of the good and bad features of actions. — (117)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Saṃsāragamana,’ — the property, ‘saṃsāra,’ ‘series of births and deaths,’ stands here for the possessor of the property, i.e., the personality or Soul, undergoing births and deaths; — the ‘gamana’ of that is its migration from one body to another. — Or, ‘saṃsāra’ may be taken as standing for the objects of the world, i.e., the three Regions of the Earth, etc.; — the ‘gamana’ is being born in those regions, as described before. — ‘Threefold,’ high, low and middling. — ‘Arising from actions’ — brought about by good and bad deeds.

‘Highest good’ — the work describes not only the conditions brought about by deeds, but also that higher than which there is nothing, — i.e., spiritual knowledge, — the means of attaining that also has been described.

‘Of actions’ — i.e.. those that are enjoined and those that are prohibited, — ‘the examination of the good and bad features.’ — (117)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

See 12. 51 et seq.

VERSE 1.118

Section LXII - Contents of the Treatise

देशधर्मान्जातिधर्मान् कुलधर्मांश्च शाश्वतान् ।
पाषण्डगणधर्मांश्च शास्त्रेऽस्मिन्नुक्तवान् मनुः ॥११८॥

deśadharmānjātidharmān kuladharmāṃśca śāśvatān |
pāṣaṇḍagaṇadharmāṃśca śāstre'sminnuktavān manuḥ ||118||

The eternal laws op countries, duties op castes and laws of dynasties, — also the laws relating to heretics and to guilds, — all this manu has expounded in these Institutes. — (118)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The present verse further confirms the complete character of the Treatise. ‘Laws of countries’ — those that are observed in particular countries, and not over the whole earth; — ‘Duties of castes’ — those pertaining specifically to the Brāhmaṇa and other castes. — ‘Laws of dynasties’ — those promulgated by famous dynasties; — ‘Heresy’ consists in the keeping of such observances as are prohibited; and ‘laws of heretics’ are those laws that are based upon heterodox treatises; the ‘heretics’ being described (in 430) as ‘persons addicted to improper deeds.’ — ‘Guilds,’ companies; of traders, artisans, actors and so forth.

All these laws and duties the revered ‘Manu has expounded in these Institutes’ — (118)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Deśadharma’ — is local custom, e.g. the ‘Holāka’ or Holi festival, which is peculiar to ‘North India’; and there also it is observed in different ways in different parts of the country.

Burnell — ‘It is worth while to compare the twelfth lecture with the first, on which it throws considerable light.’

This has been improved upon by Hopkins who, with a transcendent insight peculiar to a certain well-known sect of orientalists, opines the ‘whole character’ of the first lecture ‘as that of a later prefix to the work.’ It is really a treat to see how far people are carried away by their eagerness to say something ‘new.’

One fails to see the logic of the argument that, because the first lecture contains much more mingling of philosophical views, therefore it must be a later prefix. It would indeed be more logical to expect the ‘later prefix’ to be more accurate and lucid than what has preceded it! In fact the whole trouble regarding the first Discourse has arisen from the efforts made by commentators — Sanskrit and English — to read in the verses a systematic account of one or the other of the two well-known systems of the ‘Sāṅkhya’ and the ‘Vedānta’. Hopkins himself finds it ‘difficult to bring such verses as 53 ff. into harmony with the Sāṅkhya doctrine.’ But has Manu himself anywhere told him that he was expounding things in accordance with the ‘Sāṅkhya doctrine’? It does not appear to be fair to impose a doctrine upon the writer and then to take him to task for not being in harmony with that doctrine.

VERSE 1.119

Section LXII - Contents of the Treatise

यथैदमुक्तवांशास्त्रं पुरा पृष्टो मनुर्मया ।
तथैदं यूयमप्यद्य मत्सकाशान्निबोधत ॥११९॥

yathaidamuktavāṃśāstraṃ purā pṛṣṭo manurmayā |
tathaidaṃ yūyamapyadya matsakāśānnibodhata ||119||

You also learn from me to-day, these teachings, — just as they were, in the past promulgated by Manu, on being questioned by me. — (119)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This address to the sages is for the purpose of attracting their attention. — (119)

Thus in the Institutes of Law promulgated by Manu, in the compilation expounded by Bhṛgu, the first Discourse.

Also

In the Bhāṣya by Bhatta Medhātithi.

***

Discourse II - Sources of Knowledge of Dharma

VERSE 2.1 [Dharma defined]

Section I - Dharma defined

विद्वद्भिः सेवितः सद्भिर्नित्यमद्वेषरागिभिः ।
हृदयेनाभ्यनुज्ञातो यो धर्मस्तं निबोधत ॥१॥

vidvadbhiḥ sevitaḥ sadbhirnityamadveṣarāgibhiḥ |
hṛdayenābhyanujñāto yo dharmastaṃ nibodhata ||1||

Learn that Dharma, which has been ever followed by, and sanctioned by the heart of, the learned and the good, who are free from love and hate. — (1)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The First Discourse was undertaken for the purpose of showing the real character of the subject-matter dealt with by the Treatise; the description of the creation of the World and such other subjects have also been explained as supplementary to the said delineation of the subject-matter of the Treatise. It is now that the Treatise actually begins. As the promised subject of the Discourse, interrupted by the description of world-creation and such other subjects, may have been lost sight of, — the Teacher again addresses his pupils with a view to recall the subject to their minds.

That ‘Dharma,’ which you desired to learn is now being expounded by me, — please now ‘learn,’ — i.e., be attentive and listen.

In Discourse I, five or six verses (85 — 91) were meant to point out the purpose of the Treatise; the rest of it is mere ‘declamatory description’ (Arthavāda). So that, if all that has not been carefully learnt, there is not much harm; in the present Discourse however ‘Dharma’ itself is being directly expounded; hence this subject should be carefully learnt. This is the meaning of the re-iteration (in this verse, of Dharma being the subject-matter of the Treatise).

The term ‘dharma,’ as already explained, denotes the performance of the Aṣṭakā and such other prescribed acts. External philosophers regard as ‘dharma’ also such acts as the wearing of ashes, the carrying of begging-bowls, and so forth; — and it is with a view to exclude these from the category of ‘Dharma’ that the author adds the qualifications — ‘followed by the learned,’and so forth.

The ‘learned’ are those whose minds have been cultured by the study of the sciences; those that are capable of discerning the real character of the means of knowledge and the objects of knowledge. The ‘learned’ (meant here) are those who know the real meaning of the Veda, and not others. In fact those persons that admit sources other than the Veda to be the ‘means of knowledge’ in regard to Dharma are ‘unlearned,’ ‘ignorant’; in as much as their notions of the means and objects of knowledge are wrong. That this is so, we learn thoroughly from Mīmāmsā (Sūtra, Adhyāya I).

The ‘Good,’ — i.e., righteous men; those who translate into action what is known from authoritative sources, and who always try to obtain what is wholesome and avoid what is not wholesome; — what is ‘wholesome’ and ‘not wholesome’ among visible things is well known; among the ‘Unseen,’ that which forms the subject of ‘Injunction’ is ‘wholesome,’ while that which forms the subject of ‘prohibition’ is ‘not wholesome.’ Those who are outside the said pale of acting in accordance with the said authoritative sources of knowledge are called ‘not good’ (unrighteous). It is for these reasons that both knowledge and acting have been mentioned here (by means of the two epithets, ‘learned’ and ‘good’).

It is not possible for the term ‘saṭ' (in ‘sadbhiḥ’) to be taken in the sense of existing at the present time; because in this sense the epithet would be entirely superfluous: when a certain thing is ‘followed’ by one, it is only when this latter exists at the time [so that existence would be already implied by the other epithet.]

By ‘following’ in the present context is meant capability of acting (in conformity with). The Past-participial affix (in ‘sevitaḥ,’ ‘followed’) indicates the fact of the Dharma having been in force from times without beginning. As a matter of fact, such Dharma as consists of the Aṣṭakā and other rites are not, like ordinary Dharmas or Duties, set up by any person during the present time. This same fact is also indicated by the term ‘ever.’ (The sense is that) this Dharma has continued ever since the world-process has been going on. All other extraneous Dharmas, being set up by ignorant and wicked persons, though they may obtain currency for some time, drop out in course of time; no mere delusion can continue for thousands of ages. True knowledge on the other hand, even though it may for a time be shrouded by ignorance, shines forth in all its brilliance, upon the destruction of that ignorance. Being by its very nature, pure and brilliant, it can never undergo entire destruction.

‘Who are free from love and hate’ — What is referred to here is another cause that leads men to take to heterodox dharmas. ‘Delusion’ having been already described (as leading to the same end), the present phrase serves to indicate greed and the rest; the direct mention of ‘love and hate’ being meant to be only illustrative; e.g., it is by reason of Greed that people have recourse to magical incantations and rites. Or ‘Greed’ may he regarded as included (not merely indicated) by ‘Love and Hate.’ People who are too much addicted to what brings pleasure to themselves, on finding themselves unable to carry on their living by other means, are found to have recourse to such means of livelihood as the assuming of hypocritical guises and so forth. This has been thus described — ‘The wearing of ashes and carrying of begging bowls, being naked, wearing of discoloured clothes — these form the means of living for people devoid of intelligence and energy.’

‘Hate,’ — leads to the performance of acts contrary to those prescribed. People filled with hate are not quite capable of comprehending the truth; and hence they come to regard the wrong act (adharma) as the right one (dharma).

Or, both ‘Love’ and ‘Hate’ may be regarded as obstacles to the discernment of truth. As a matter of fact, even when some slight knowledge of the scriptures has been acquired, and the man has acquired the name of being ‘learned,’ — there is every possibility of his acting otherwise (than in strict accordance with the scriptures), if he happens to be under the influence of love or hate. For instance, people, though fully conversant with the scriptures, do commit such wrong acts as the giving of false evidence, with a view either to do harm to some one whom he hates, or to do good to some one whom he loves, and certainly one cannot be sure that such acting of these people is based upon the Veda; for the simple reason that there are present other forces (controlling his action), in the shape of Love and Hate. It is for this reason that these are prohibited.

The following objection is hero put forward: — “In the word ‘sadbhiḥ,’ the term ‘saṭ’ has been explained as denoting righteousness; but what sort of righteousness could belong to the man for whom it is considered possible to do wrong under the influence of Love and Hate? Consequently, it is not necessary to add the epithet ‘free from love and hate’ (this being already implied by the word ‘good’).”

[Our answer to the above is as follows] — As a matter of fact, the epithet in question (‘free from love and hate’) is mentioned as the reason or ground (of the aforementioned ‘goodness’ or ‘righteousness’); the sense being that ‘it is because they are free from Love and Hate that they are good.’

What is really meant is the absence of undue predominance of Love and Hate (and not absolute absence); because no man, even though there be forces at work tending to make him free from Love and Hate, can get rid of these entirely, as declared by Śruti (Chāndogya Upaniṣad, 8-12-1) — ‘So long as one has a body, there can be no cessation of the agreeable and the disagreeable.’

‘Love’ here stands for hankering after the enjoyment of things; and ‘Hate’ is that which leads one to avoid or escape from a certain thing. ‘Greed’ is the jealous hankering after the sole possession of an object; the feeling being in the form ‘may all this prosperity, fame and the like not belong to any other person.’ All these are functions of the Mind. Or, ‘Love’ may be taken as standing for the affection one feels towards sentient beings, like one’s wife, son, relations and so forth; and ‘greed’ for the longing that one has for riches and such insentient things.

‘By the heart.’ — ‘Heart’ here stands for the Mind; — ‘sanction’ is satisfaction of mind. The real condition of things is this: Buḍḍhi and other principles are located inside the Heart; and even though deluded persons have recourse to such unrighteous acts as the killing of animals apart from sacrifices, the eating of prohibited food and so forth, — thinking them to be right ‘Dharma,’ — yet they have compunctions in their hearts; in the case of the performance of actions prescribed in the Veda, on the other hand, the Mind feels satisfied.

The sense of all this is as follows: — ‘The Dharma that I am going to expound is not one beset with the said defects; — it is one that is actually followed by high-souled persons and towards which the Mind itself urges us. For these reasons it is only right that great regard should be paid to the Dharmas that are going to be propounded.’

Or, ‘Heart’ may be taken as standing for the Veda; the Veda, duly studied and borne within the heart in the form of ideas and conceptions, is called ‘heart.’

The present statement refers to the following three cases: — (1) when a person, without much thought, undertakes an action, through sheer impulse, — it must be right; this is what is meant by ‘sanctioned by the heart’; — (2) the same expression also includes the case when one acts according to custom, depending upon the dictum ‘that is the right path by which great men have gone’; — (3) when ‘learned’ persons, without any ulterior motives, are found to act in a certain manner they are never blamed for it, and even when people do not find their action authorised (by the Veda), they accept the fact that it must be based upon the Veda. In every way the present verse makes men have recourse to activity.

Other people explain this verse as serving the purpose of providing a general definition of ‘Dharma’; the sense being — ‘that which is done by such persons should be regarded as Dharma’; this definition is applicable to all forms of Dharma, — that which is directly prescribed by the Veda, that which is laid down in the Smṛti and also that which is got at from Right Usage. In accordance with this explanation, however, the right reading would be — ‘yaḥ elaih sevyate tam dharmam nibodhata.’

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Hṛdayenābhyanujñātaḥ’ — The term ‘hṛdaya’ stands for the heart — conscience. The phrase stands for what is spoken of later on, in verse 6 below, as ‘ātmanastuṣṭih’ Medhātithi has suggested that ‘hṛdaya’ may stand for the Veda.

Medhātithi (p. 48. l. 15). ‘Mīmāṃsātaḥ’ — This refers to Mīmāṃsāta Sūtra I. i — 2 ‘Chodanālakṣaṇo'artho dharmaḥ.’

This verse has been quoted in the Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 80), in corroboration of the definition of Dharma provided by Viśvāmitra, that ‘Dharma is that which when done is praised by good men learned in the scriptures.’ From this it follows that according to this writer ‘hṛdayenāvhyanujñātaḥ’ means the samething as ‘Yam āryāḥ praśaṃsanti’ in Viśvāmitra’s definition. — It is quoted in Hemādri (Vrata, p. 10), which explains hṛdayenābhyanujñātaḥ as ‘which is definitely known in the mind, for certain,’ find ‘adveṣarāgibhiḥ’ as ‘persons free from improper love and hate — in the Vīramitrodaya (Paribhāṣā, p. 80), which adds the following notes — This verse supplies a definition of Dharma in general. ‘Vidvadbhiḥ’ those conversant with what is contained in the Veda; — ‘Sadbhiḥ,’ those who have the right knowledge of things; — these two qualifications are meant to indicate that ‘Dharma’ is rightly known by means of the Veda; — ‘adveṣarāgibhiḥ,’ free from such love and hate as are conducive to evil this is meant to indicate that Dharma is that which is not conducive to any undesirable effects; — ‘ hṛdayenabhyanujñātaḥ indicates that Dharma is conducive to all that is good; as it is only the good to which men’s minds are attracted: — thus then the complete definition of Dharma, as indicated by the text, is that it is that which, not being conducive to any evil effects, is known through the Veda as conducive to good. The three qualifications serve the purpose of excluding such acts as the performance of the Śyena sacrifice. — This definition of ‘Dharma,’ ‘Right,’ also implies that of ‘Adharma,’ ‘Wrong,’ as that which is known through the Veda as conducive to evil.’

Познавательные статьи:



Как правильно слушать собеседника

Типичные ошибки при выполнении бросков в баскетболе

Принятие христианства на Руси и его значение

Средства массовой информации США