with the Commentary of Medhatithi 25 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 31 из 350Следующая ⇒

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Dharmasya’ — Govindarāja alone takes this to mean ‘spiritual merit others agree in taking it as ‘duties

Medhātithi (p. 78,1.28) — ‘Iha pañcaprakāro dharmoḥ’ — This view is here attributed to the author of the Smṛtivivaraṇa. Kullūka quotes the Bhaviṣyapurāṇa to the same effect.

Modern writers and lecturers on what they call ‘Varṇā-śramadharma’ should note the exact connotation of this name, as here explained by Medhātithi.

VERSE 2.26 [Duties and Sacraments]

Section VIII - Duties and Sacraments

वैदिकैः कर्मभिः पुण्यैर्निषेकादिर्द्विजन्मनाम् ।
कार्यः शरीरसंस्कारः पावनः प्रेत्य चैह च ॥२६॥

vaidikaiḥ karmabhiḥ puṇyairniṣekādirdvijanmanām |
kāryaḥ śarīrasaṃskāraḥ pāvanaḥ pretya caiha ca ||26||

For the twice-born persons corporeal consecration, beginning with ‘Conception,’ should be performed with auspicious Vedic rites; it purifies in this world and also after death. — (26)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The ‘Vedic rites’ spoken of here are mantra-recitations. ‘Veda’ here stands for mantras; and what ‘arises out of them’ (which is what is expressed by the affix in ‘Vaidikaiḥ’) is the ‘reciting’; hence the nominal affix ‘ṭhañ’ comes under the provisions of the Vārtika on Pāṇini, 4. 3. 60.

Or, the word ‘vaidika’ (Vedic) may he taken as figuratively applied to the rites, on the ground of their source lying in the Veda. ‘Karma,’ ‘Rites,’ would, in this case, stand for the act constituting the procedure; and hence becomes possible the differentiation and the relation of cause and effect (between the Karma and the Saṁskāra which is expressed in the assertion — ‘the consecration, saṁskāra, should he performed by means of the Rites?

‘Conception’ — is the depositing of the semen in the womb, and ‘niṣekādiḥ’ stands for that body of sacraments to he described below, which liegins with the said ‘Conception’ and ends with ‘Initiation’ ( Upanayana). The singular number in ‘Śarīrasaṁskāraḥ,’ ‘corporeal consecration,’ is due to the whole body of sacraments being taken collectively. ‘Consecration’ means the preparation of a qualified body; and the Eeveral sacraments serve to produce in the body special qualifications.

This is what is meant by the term ‘pāvanaḥ,’ ‘it nurifies,’ removes impurities.

‘In this world and also after death’. — This means that the person duly consecrated becomes entitled to the performance of all those acts that, like the Kārīri and other sacrifices, lead to material results, -as also those that, like the Jyotiṣṭoma etc., bring spiritual rewards; and hence the consecrations are of use in both worlds.

‘Puṇyaiḥ’ — ‘auspicious,’ ie., propitious; i.e., they bring good luck and remove bad luck. Thus there is a clear difference between the word ‘puṇy a’ and ‘pāvana’ here.

‘For the twice-born persons,’ — this serves to exclude the Śūdras. This word serves to point out who are the persons to be consecrated; and it is only by indirect indication that the three higher castes arc understood to be meant; for before consecration, they are not yet ‘twice-born’ (the ‘second birth’ consisting of the consecration). — (26)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Vaidikaiḥ karmabhiḥ’. — The term ‘vaidika-karma’ here stands for Vedic mantras; — or for rites prescribed in the Veda. Both explanations are found in Medhātithi and Govindarāja; Kullūka notes only the latter explanation.

This verse has been quoted in the Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 132) as laying down the necessity of performing the Saṃskāras. Here also both the above explanations are noted. — It explains the term ‘śarīra’ in the compound ‘Śarīrasaṃskāraḥ’ to stand for the constituents of the body. — ‘In this world and also after death’ — has been explained as implying that the Saṃskāras help ‘after death’ by enabling the man to perform such sacrifices as lead him to heaven, and they help ‘in this world’ by enabling him to perform such sacrifices as the Kārīrī and the like, which bring desirable results in the world, in the shape of rain, children and so forth. — It is quoted in the Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 36), to the effect that sacramental rites are performed with Vedic Mantras in the ease of the Twice-bom persons only; it adds that these sacraments are called ‘pāvana’, ‘purificatory’ of the person, because, performed with Vedic Mantras, they serve to destroy sins.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama-Dharmasūtra, 7.7. — ‘Sanctified by means of the forty sacraments.’

Gautama-Dharmnsūtra, 7.14. — ‘Four are the Vedic observances.’

Yājñavalkya, 1.10. — ‘From Conception till Death, the rites of the Brāhmaṇa, the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya are performed with Mantras.’

Yama (Vīra-Saṃskāra, p. 132). — ‘The Śūdra also should be sanctified; hut without Mantras,’

Baijavapa (Ibid). — ‘For the Śūdra also, the following sacraments have been ordained — Niṣeka, Puṃsavana, Sīmantonnayana, Jātakarma, Nāmakaraṇa, Annaprāśana, and Chaula, — as to he done without Mantras.’

Jātūkarṇya (Ibid, p. 134) — ‘For the Śūdra, there is Marriage as also the Final (Death) Rites.’

VERSE 2.27

Section VIII - Duties and Sacraments

गार्भैर्होमैर्जातकर्मचौडमौञ्जीनिबन्धनैः ।
बैजिकं गार्भिकं चैनं द्विजानामपमृज्यते ॥२७॥

gārbhairhomairjātakarmacauḍamauñjīnibandhanaiḥ |
baijikaṃ gārbhikaṃ cainaṃ dvijānāmapamṛjyate ||27||

Of twice-born men the taint of seed and womb is removed by the ‘Libations in connection with Pregnancy’ and by ‘Jātakarman’ (Rites attendant upon birth), ‘Chauḍa’ (Tonsure) and ‘Mauñjībandhana’ (Tying of the grass-girdle). (27)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The statement that ‘corporeal consecration is purifying and auspicious’ has pointed out the use of the Sacraments Now, ‘purification’ consists in removing the impurities of the impure thing; and the question arises — “whence the impurity of the Body?”

It is in answer to this that the text speaks of ‘the taint of seed and womb,’; — ‘of the seed,’ is that which arises from, or is due to, the seed; — similarly ‘of the womb’ (is that which arises from, or is due to, the womb). ‘Taint’ is evil, an unseen source of pain. All that is meant by this is that the Body is impure, owing its birth to the seed and the womb. The ‘seed’ of man consists of semen and ovule; and these by their very nature, are impure. Similarly the womb, is impure by contamination. And the ‘taint’ of the man thus caused is ‘removed? wiped away, by the sacraments.

These sacrameuts are now mentioned ; some are actually named, while others are left to be indicated by the peculiar circumstances of what is sanctified.

‘Libations in connection with pregnancy,’ — thoso that are offered when the pregnancy of the woman has come about, — or those that are offered for the purpose of bringing about pregnancy; in either case the libations are said to be ‘in connection with pregnancy.’ What prompts the offering is the pregnancy, the woman being only a means to it; so that the libations, being prompted by pregnancy, are said to be in connection with it; and these are the rites of ‘Pumsavana,’ ‘Sīmantonnayana’ and ‘Garbhādhāna.’ The word ‘libation’ here stands for the whole rite; as the ‘Garbhādhāna’ (‘Conception’) is certainly not a ‘Libation.’ The exact details of the rites, regarding the substances to be offered, the duties and so forth — arc to be found out from the Gṛhyasūtras.

Just as by the ‘libations in connection with pregnancy’. so also by the sacrament known as ‘Jātakarman’ (Rites attendant upon birth). Similarly by ‘Tonsure’; — ‘Chauḍa,’ ‘Tonsure,’ is meant that which is performed for the purpose of the ‘cūḍā’ (the- lock of hair left to grow on the crown of the head). ‘Tying of the gross-girdle’ is Upanayana; as it is at this ceremony that the girdle of muñja-grass is tied, this indicates that rite. ‘Nibandhana’ is the same as ‘bandhana’; and the prefix ‘ni’ has been added for filling up the metre.

‘Jātakarman’ and the rest — which are the names of the sacraments — have been made into a copulative compound, and then have the instrumental ending added to show that they are instrumental in the removal of taint.

------------

Every ‘consecration’ brings about some peculiarity, either seen (material) or unseen (spiritual), in the thing consecrated, which is subservient to something else to be brought about, and has either already subserved, or is going to subserve, the purposes of this latter thing. For instance, in the case of the ‘threshing of the corn’ and ‘offering sacrifices with the corn,’ the ‘threshing’ (which is the ‘consecration’ or ‘purification’ in this case) produces in the corns, that are going to help in the accomplishment of the sacrifice, the visible peculiarity, in the shape of the removal of the chaff. [So that in this case the thing consecrated is going to subserve some useful purpose]. When again it is said that ‘removing the garland from the head one should keep it in a clean place,’ the garland is something that has been used (and served its purpose) and has become mangled in shape; so that the special method of its disposal (after use) only produces an invisible effect. Now all the sacraments mentioned in the text are prescribed for the purpose of the purification of the body; but they are not found to bring about in the body any such effects as the removal of bad odour, etc., which is done by washing with clay and water. Hence the ‘purification’ in this case should be understood to consist in some unseen effect; just as has been held to result from the particular time at which the birth of the individual takes place. And when the man has become purified by such purification, he becomes fit for the performance of acts prescribed in the Smṛtis and in the Vedas; just as the Butter sanctified by mantras is fit for use in libations. In connection with ordinary (non-religious) acts, all necessary purity is attained by the (external) purification of things; as in the case of the Butter required for eating. As for that ‘purity’ of the boy which consists in his touchabien?ss, this is brought about by the ‘washing with water’ mentioned as the means of purifying the body (in 5.109). Hence has it been declared that ‘there is no impurity arising from his touch.’

Objection. —

“How can these sacraments be regarded as subserving the purposes of actions? As regards the ‘sprinkling of butter,’ it is only natural that through the butter it should subserve the purposes of the sacrificial act, in Connection with which it has been prescribed. These sacraments however lie entirely, outside the pale of any action; — their injunction not occurring in the context of any sacrificial act. So it is difficult to say that they help in the sacrifice through the man (in the way in which the does through the butter). And unless it subserves the purposes of an act, consecration cannot be performed for its own sake; as in that case it should cease to be a ‘consecration’ (which is always subsidiary to something else), and become a primary act itself, and (when it ceases to be a consecration) this would mean the nullification of the statement ‘corporeal consecration should be performed’ (verse 26), and also of the Accusative ending in the statement ‘when, the boy is born, before he is touched by any other person, the father should etc.’ (which refers to the Birth-rites); and in that case, the sense of the injunction will have to be altered, as is done in the case of the injunction ‘Saktūñjuhoti’ [where the incompatibility of the Accusative ending leads us to alter it into the Instrumental ], — a particular result (as arising out of the consecration, as a primary act by itself) will have to be assumed; and so forth, a number of absurd assumptions will have to be made.”

Our answer to the above is as follows: — What we mean by the consecration subserving the purposes of sacrifices is-not that it is a subsidiary integral part of these, — which character is indicated by Direct Vedic Declaration and certain other means; all that we mean is that it is helpful to it; and this helpfulness is possible even without the one forming an integral part of the other. For instance, we have the injunction regarding the ‘laying of fire’ and that relating to ‘Vedic study’; but there is no Direct Injunction or any other indication (of these forming part of any sacrifice); all that we find is the Vedic text ‘offerings are made into the which lays down the ‘Āhavanīya’ (as the receptacle of the offerings); and as the precise nature of the ‘Āhavanīya’ is superphysical, the only way in which it can be brought into existence is by means of the prescribed ‘laying of fire,’ which is contained in the text ‘the Brāhmaṇa should lay the fires during spring’; so that the ‘laying of fire’ helps in the sacrificial performance through the bringing into existence of the Āhavanīya, and yet it does not form an integral part of the performance. ‘Vedic study’ also helps in the sacrificial performance, through the knowledge of the meaning of Vedic texts (acquired by the study).

Analogous to these two is the case of the sacraments:

• the act of Vedic study can be done only by one who has had these sacraments performed,

• it is only when one has carried out the injunction of Vedic study that he can marry,

• it is only when one has married that he can ‘lay the fire,’

• and it is only one who has ‘laid the fire’ that is entitled (to the performance of sacrifices).

It is in this way that even though the sacraments are laid down apart from the sacrificial injunctions, yet their due performance is helpful towards the sacrificial acts.

Since the text speaks of ‘Niṣeka’ (conception, depositing of the semen) as the first of the sacraments, it follows that all the sacraments for the child are to be performed by the father. Thus the mantra for the ‘Rites on Birth’ reads — ‘You are my very soul, bearing the name of son’ (Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, 14. 9. 4. 8.) [which clearly shows that it is recited by the father]. It is for the father again that the begetting and instructing of children has been prescribed as a duty in the verse — ‘Having paid off the three debts etc.,’ (6.35); and the passage. It is for this reason that the duly instructed son is called the real son,’ speaks of ‘instruction,’ which consists in teaching the boy his duties; and we shall show later on that this ‘instruction’ is accomplished only by teaching hi m the Veda up to the point where the boy comprehends its full meaning. It is thus that the sacraments are of use to both: they help the father in the begetting of the right sort of child, and they help the boy in the performance of those acts that can be done only by one who has been duly consecrated. Thus it is the father on whom devolves the task of having the sacraments properly performed; and on his death, for hi m who takes his place; for instance, it is said ‘he who h as not been consecrated should be consecrated by his brothers who have had their consecration already done.’ (Yājñavalkya, 2.124). — (27)

The author next indicates, by way of illustration, those acts in which the sacraments of the Boy are helpful: —

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Medhātithi (p. 80, 1. 8) — Gṛhyasmṛtibhyo — vasātavyam — see Āśvalāyana Gṛhya Sūtra 1-13-14.

Medhātithi (p. 80, 1. 10) ‘Mekhalā badhyate’ — see Gautama, 1-15.

This verse has been quoted by the Mitākṣarā on 3.253 (p. 1285), where it has been taken to mean that the sacrament of the Upanayaṇa wipes off all the sins committed by the boy prior to it.

It is also quoted in the Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 134) and has been taken to mean that the Sacramental Rites are meant only for the ‘Twice-bom — and in the Aparārka (p. 25), as indicating that the sacraments are meant for the Twice-born only, on the ground that they have been mentioned after the injunction of Upanayaṇa which pertains to the Twice-born only. It is quoted in the Smṛtikaumudī (p. 48), which notes that the term ‘Saṃskāra’ (Sacrament) connotes destruction of sin or impurity.

It is quoted in the Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 36), which adds the following notes: — ‘Bīja’ stands for semen-ovule, the impurity due to defects in that is called ‘baijika’ — that due to residence in the womb is called, ‘gārbhika’; — ‘homaiḥ’ includes the Garbhādhāna and other rites that are accompanied by libations into fire; — and in the Saṃskāra - ratnamālā (p. 5) to the effect that Homa is to be performed by the Twice-bom only; — ‘baijika’ is such impurity relating to the semen-ovule as is due to the intercourse having taken place at a forbidden time, — ‘Gārbhika’ is the impurity due to residence in a womb that is not quite clean; — it quotes Medhātithi to the effect that as.the ‘semen-ovule’ and the ‘womb’ cannot be the effects of any sins of the child, the ‘enaḥ’ mentioned in the text must be taken as standing not for actual sin, but for the impurity or uncleanliness due to the child’s physical connection with them.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(Verses 27 and 28)

Sumantu (Vīra-Saṃskāra, p. 131). — ‘The sacraments common to the Brāhmaṇa, the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya, are the following — Garbhādhāna, Sīmantonnayana, Jātakarma, Nāmakaraṇa, Annaprāśana, Cūḍā, Upanayana, Vratacaryā, Adhyayana, Samāvartana, Vivāha, Yajña and Dāna.’

Hārīta (Ibid, p. 135). — ‘There are two kinds of Sacraments — Brāhma and Daiva; the Garbhādhāna and the rest ending with Snāna, which are proscribed in the Smṛtis, are “brāhma”; the Pākayajñas, the Haviryajñas and the Somayajñas are “daiva”.’

Jātūkarṇya (Ibid, p. 135). — ‘The sixteen sacramental rites are the following —

(1) Ādhāna,

(2) Puṃsavana,

(3) Sīmanta,

(4) Jāta,

(5) Nāma,

(6) Anna,

(7) Chaula,

(8) Mauñjī,

(9-12) the four Vratas,

(13) Godāna,

(14) Samāvartana,

(15) Vivāha,

and (16) Antya.’

Āṅgiras (Ibid). — ‘

(1) Garbhādhāna,

(2) Puṃsavana,

(3) Sīmanta,

(4) Bali,

(5) Jātakṛtya,

(6) Nāmakaraṇa,

(7) Niṣkrama,

(8) Annaprāśana,

(9) Chaulakarma,

(10) Upanayana,

(11-14) the Four Veda-vratas,

(15) Snāna,

(16) Udvāha,

(17) Āgrayaṇa,

(18) Aṣṭakā,

(19) Śrāvaṇī,

(20) Āśvayujī,

(21) Mārgaśīrṣī,

(22) Pārvaṇa,

(23) Utsarga,

(24) Upākaraṇa,

(25) Mahāyajñas;

these are the obligatory sacraments, specially for the Brāhmaṇa. It is by means of the sacraments that Brāhmaṇahood comes to be gradually manifested.’

Āśvalāyana (Ibid, p. 136). — ‘The five mahāyajñas are to be performed daily; the sixteen cuding with Marriage are naimittīka, to be done on prescribed occasions; the Pārvaṇa is to be done every month, or if this be not possible, then every year; the seven sacrifices beginning with Āgrayaṇa are to be performed once in the year.’

Gautama (Ibid, p. 137). — ‘The following are the 10 Sacraments —

(1) Garbhādhāna,

(2) Puṃsavana,

(3) Sīmantonnayana,

(4) Jātakarma,

(5) Nāmakaraṇa,

(6) Annaprāśana,

(7) Chaula,

(8) Upanayana,

(9-12) the four Veda-vratas,

(13) Snāna,

(14) Sahadharmacāriṇīsaṃyoga,

(15-19) the five mahāyajñas,

(20-26) the seven Pākayajñas — Aṣṭakā, Pārvaṇa-Śrāddba, Śrāvanī, Āgrahāyaṇī, Caitrī and Āśvayujī,

(27-33) the seven Haviryajñas — Agnyādheya, Agnihotra, Darśapūrṇamāsa, Cāturmāsya, Āgrayaṇeṣṭi, Nirūdhapaśubandha, and Sautrāmaṇi,

(33-40) the seven Somayajñas — Agniṣṭoma, Atyagniṣṭoma, Ukthya, Ṣoḍasbī, Vājapeya, Atirātra and Āptoryamā’

...‘He who has not had these forty sacraments, nor is endowed with the eight qualities of the soul (sympathy for all beings, forgiveness, freedom from jealousy, purity, equanimity, good character, non-miserliness) is never united to Brahman, nor does he attain the regions of Brahman.’

Hārita (Ibid, p. 130). — ‘He who has been sanctified by the Brāhma Sacraments becomes equal to the sages and becomes united with them and attains their regions; and he who is sanctified by the Daiva sacraments becomes equal to the gods, is united with them and reaches their regions.’

Do. (Aparārka, p. 25). — ‘When the women of the twice-born castes are sanctified by the performance of a single sacrament, every child that they bear thereafter becomes sanctified thereby.’

Śaṅkha-Likhita (Ibid, p. 110). — ‘The Brāhmaṇa who is endowed with the two sets of sacraments and is equipped with the eight qualities (of the soul) attains the regions of Brahman.’

Devala (Aparārka, p. 25). — ‘Just as a picture becomes manifested through the gradual appearance of the several limbs, in the same manner Brāhmaṇahood becomes manifested through the lawful performance of the sacraments.’

VERSE 2.28

Section VIII - Duties and Sacraments

स्वाध्यायेन व्रतैर्होमैस्त्रैविद्येनेज्यया सुतैः ।
महायज्ञैश्च यज्ञैश्च ब्राह्मीयं क्रियते तनुः ॥२८॥

svādhyāyena vratairhomaistraividyenejyayā sutaiḥ |
mahāyajñaiśca yajñaiśca brāhmīyaṃ kriyate tanuḥ ||28||

This body is made godly, — by a thorough study of the three Vedas, by Observances, by libations, by offerings, by children, by the Great Sacrifices and by the Sacrifices. (28)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The term ‘svādhyāya’ here stands for the act of studying (in general; and not for Vedic study, which is what it ordinarily means); and the subject-matter of the study is therefore indicated by the term ‘of theThree Vedas,’ ‘traividyena.’ Even though the two terms (‘svādhyāyena’ and ‘traividyena’) do not stand in close proximity, yet they are construed together on account of their denotations being correlated, in accordance with the law that ‘when the denotation of one term is connected with that of another, they should be taken as correlated.’ Hence, even though both the terms are in the same (Instrumental) case, yet one (traividyena) may be taken as denoting the object of the other (svādhyāyena) by altering the signification of the case-ending; the phrase ‘traividyena svādhyāyena’ thus being construed as ‘trayāṇām Vedānām (traividyasya) adhyayanena (svādhyāyena),’ ‘by a thorough study of the three Vedas’

‘Traividya’ is the compounded form of ‘trayo’; the formation of the term being similar to that of such terms as ‘chaturvarṇya’ and the rest.

Or, ‘svādhyāyena' may be taken (as usual) in the sense of the study of the verbal text of the Vedas, and ‘traividyena' in that of the study of their meaning.

‘By Observances’ — by the ‘Sāvitra’ and other observances kept by the Religious Student.

‘By Libations’ — i.e., those that are poured at the time of the Initiation, — or the kindling of fire with fuels, which the Religious Student has to do every morning and evening, may be spoken as ‘libation,’ on account of Fire being the receptacle of the act of kindling (just as it is of the act of pouring libations).

“Is not the putting of fuel on the fire really a ‘libation’ — that you should call it so simply from the said analogy?”

People say that it is not really a ‘libation because ‘libations’ and ‘offerings’ consist only of eatable substances.

“How then does the author himself say (under 2.186) that ‘the Religious Student should, every morning and evening offer the libation (juhuyāt) of fuels into the Fire’?”

It is only in a figurative sense that the ‘laying of fuel’ is called ‘homa’, ‘libation’; the idea being that the fuel for the kindling of fire is thrown into it in the same manner as substances are poured as libations; and it is on the basis of this analogy that the kindling is called ‘libation’ In the original injunction (of fire-kindling) the words used are ‘sami dham-ādadhyat,’ ‘should lay the fuel’ [where the word ‘homa,’ ‘libation’ is not used]. As for the words (in Manu, 2.186) ‘agnim juhuyāt tābhih,’ (‘should offer the libation of fuels into fire’), we shall point out later on that they are purely explanatory (not mandatory), and mean something quite different; and in explanations, figurative expressions are not out of place.

[This is the view of some people]. The right view however is that the offering of any fit and proper substance constitutes the acts of ‘Yāga’ (Sacrifice) and ‘Homa’ (Libation). It is only in this sense that we can rightly comprehend several injunctions. For instance, we have the injunction ‘praitaram praharati,’ where ‘praharati,’ is taken to mean ‘offer in sacrifice’ and ‘prastaram’ (‘bed of Kuśa-grass’) is taken as the substance offered [and certainly the ‘Kuśa-bed’ is not an eatable substance],

“In this particular instance, we have to take the ‘sacrifice’ as consisting of the offering of the Grass-bed, simply because it is so directly enjoined. And further, Kuśa-grass also is eatable for some.”

Well, how is it then in the case of the ‘Śākala-homa’ (where pebbles are offered)?”

“In that case also it has to be done in that way, because of the direct injunction — ‘one should offer the pebbles’.”

What explanation can there be of the case of the ‘Grahayāga,’ where fuels of the arka and other plants are offered to each of the Grahas?

From all this it is clear that wherever we have the term ‘juhuyāt’ (‘should offer libation’) and the connection of a Deity also is mentioned, in the original Injunction, the act is to be regarded as ‘Homa,’ ‘Libation.’

Познавательные статьи:



Коммуникативные барьеры и пути их преодоления

Рынок недвижимости. Сущность недвижимости

Решение задач с использованием генеалогического метода

История происхождения и развития детской игры