with the Commentary of Medhatithi 75 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 81 из 350Следующая ⇒

Bṛhaspati (Parāśaramādhava, p. 499). — ‘Excess of woman’s seed makes the progeny female, excess of man’s seed makes the progeny male; therefore for increasing his seed, the man shall eat oily and delicious food.’

VERSE 3.46

Section V - Duties of Marital Life

ऋतुः स्वाभाविकः स्त्रीणां रात्रयः षोडश स्मृताः ।
चतुर्भिरितरैः सार्धमहोभिः सद्विगर्हितैः ॥४६॥

ṛtuḥ svābhāvikaḥ strīṇāṃ rātrayaḥ ṣoḍaśa smṛtāḥ |
caturbhiritaraiḥ sārdhamahobhiḥ sadvigarhitaiḥ ||46||

Sixteen days, including the four days that are censured by good men, have been declared to be the normal “season” for women. — (46)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The verse is meant to provide a definition of ‘season;’ and what is stated here is based upon medical science, not upon any scriptural injunctions. Similarly, the two verses beginning with the forty-eighth.

‘Sixteen days,’ in every month, constitute the ‘natural season’ for women. That ‘every month’ is meant, we gather from other sources, though it is not mentioned in this verse.

‘Normal’ — what comes by nature; i.e., what happens in the case of women in normal health; in cases of disease and such other causes, the flow is absent even when the time has arrived; and by means of such medicines as butter and sesamum, and so forth, or by excessive sexual intercourse, the flow is brought on even before time. Hence the sixteen days are called the ‘normal season.’

‘Including the four days’ — the four days that are censured by all good men, during which the touching of, and conversing with, the woman has been prohibited; these are the four days beginning with the first day on which the flow of blood becomes visible. ‘Day’ stands for ‘day and night.’

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 437) in support of the view that counting from the first day of the menses, sixteen days constitute the ‘season’, of which the first four days are condemned by good men.

Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika, p. 539) quotes this verse, and adds that the addition of the term ‘svābhāvikaḥ’, ‘normal,’ indicates that the period may vary, on account of the presence of certain diseases and other causes.

This verse is quoted also in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 166); — in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 680), which adds that the specification of ‘night’ implies the prohibition of intercourse during the day; — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 38).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 3.45-50)

See Comparative notes for Verse 3.45.

VERSE 3.47

Section V - Duties of Marital Life

तासामाद्याश्चतस्रस्तु निन्दितैकादशी च या ।
त्रयोदशी च शेषास्तु प्रशस्ता दशरात्रयः ॥४७॥

tāsāmādyāścatasrastu ninditaikādaśī ca yā |
trayodaśī ca śeṣāstu praśastā daśarātrayaḥ ||47||

Of these the first four days have been deprecated, as also the eleventh and the thirteenth, the remaining ten days have been recommended. — (47)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Of these’ — days — ‘the first four’ — beginning from the day on which the blood is first seen — ‘have been deprecated,’ — i.e., there should be no intercourse on those days. On the first three days, even touching is prohibited, the woman being impure on those days; on the fourth day, when she has bathed, — though, according to the words of Vaśiṣṭha, she is pure — there is to be no sexual intercourse; all the four days being equally deprecated (for that purpose).

‘The eleventh and the thirteenth’ days also ‘have been deprecated,’ — i.e., on those days also intercourse has been forbidden. The ‘eleventh’ and the ‘thirteenth’ days are those counted from the first day of the flow; they do not stand for the two dates of the month; because the genitive ending in ‘tāsām,’ ‘of these,’ signifies selection; and, as the pronoun stands for ‘days,’ it must be the same thing (day) that is selected; just as in the expression, ‘of cows, the black one gives most milk.’

This prohibition of intercourse on the said six days is with a view to a transcendental result.

‘The remaining ten days have been recommended,’ — (of the sixteen days) six days having been forbidden, the commendation of the remaining ten days follows naturally; and it is this same natural conclusion that is reiterated here. — (47)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 438); — in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika, p. 559), which adds that the ‘eleventh’ and other numbers refer to the days of the ‘season;’ the eleventh day of the ‘season’ and so forth; — and in Vidhānapārijāta (II, p. 368) which, for the first quarter, reads tāsāmāpañcataḥ sarvā, which means ‘all days till the fifth’, coming to the same thing — that the first four days are forbidden.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 104); which adds that the ‘eleventh’ and ‘thirteenth’ are meant to be the days of the ‘season’, not of the fortnight; — in Hemādri (Kāla, p. 727), which adds that the ‘eleventh’ and ‘thirteenth’ are the days, not of the fortnight, but of the ‘period’; — in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 682), which has the same note, adding that such is the view of Madanapārijāta; — in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 38), which says that of the sixteen nights, the first four arc to be avoided; — and in Ācāramayūkha (p. 118).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 3.45-50)

See Comparative notes for Verse 3.45.

VERSE 3.48

Section V - Duties of Marital Life

युग्मासु पुत्रा जायन्ते स्त्रियोऽयुग्मासु रात्रिषु ।
तस्माद् युग्मासु पुत्रार्थी संविशेदार्तवे स्त्रियम् ॥४८॥

yugmāsu putrā jāyante striyo'yugmāsu rātriṣu |
tasmād yugmāsu putrārthī saṃviśedārtave striyam ||48||

On the even days male children are conceived, and female ones on the uneven days; therefore one who desires a son should have recourse to ones wife on the even days of her “season.” — (48)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Among the said ten days, the ‘even days’ are the sixth, the eighth, the tenth, the twelfth, the fourteenth and the sixteenth; and when one has intercourse with one’s wife on these days, sons are born to him.

‘One who desires a son should have recourse to one’s wife on the even days of her season;’ — i.e., because ‘female ones’ — i.e., daughters are conceived — ‘on the uneven days,’ — ‘therefore’ for the bringing about of the birth of sons, ‘one should have recourse to’ — have sexual intercourse with — ‘one’s wife, on the even days of her season?’

This is a mere reiteration; and it is also a restrictive rule, the meaning being that ‘one, for whom no sons have been born, should not have intercourse with one’s wife on the uneven days.’ — (48)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 438), where ‘yugmāsu’ is explained as ‘even nights’, and ‘samvishet’ as ‘should approach’; — in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika, p. 559), which explains ‘ayugmāsu’ as ‘odd nights’, and ‘samvishet’ as ‘should approach; — also in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra p. 153) in support of the view that ‘one who desires a son should approach his wife on the even nights of the period, and he who desires a daughter, on the odd nights’; and adds that though the text speaks simply of ‘nights’, yet the act should be done after midnight; and also that the special mention of the ‘night’ clearly indicates that intercourse during the day is forbidden.

Smṛtitattva quotes this verse as describing the results accruing from approaching one’s wife on certain days.

This is quoted in Aparārka (p. 103); — in Hemādri (Kāla, p. 722); — in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 16); — in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 37); — in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 680); — and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 24 b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 3.45-50)

VERSE 3.49

Section V - Duties of Marital Life

पुमान् पुंसोऽधिके शुक्रे स्त्री भवत्यधिके स्त्रियाः ।
समेऽपुमान् पुं।स्त्रियौ वा क्षीणेऽल्पे च विपर्ययः ॥४९॥

pumān puṃso'dhike śukre strī bhavatyadhike striyāḥ |
same'pumān puṃ|striyau vā kṣīṇe'lpe ca viparyayaḥ ||49||

A male child is born when the man’s seed is in excess, and a female child when the woman’s (is in excess); when the two are equal, there is born either a non-male or a boy and a girl; when it is weak and small in quantity, there is failure. — (49)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Seed’ — the man’s semen, and the woman’s ovule. Says the revered Vaśiṣṭha — ‘man is the product of semen and ovule’ (15.1).

When the man’s ‘seed’ is in excess of the woman’s, then, even on the uneven days, a male child is conceived; similarly, on the even days also a female child becomes conceived, if the woman’s ‘seed’ happens to be in excess.

This statement is meant to lead the man seeking for a son to have intercourse with his wife on the uneven days also; the sense of the instruction being that — when the man finds that by the use of aphrodisiacs and strengthening food he has become vigorous in his virility, and that his wife has, for some reason or other, become weak, then he should have intercourse with her, when desirous of getting a son.

The ‘excess’ meant here is not that in quantity, but that in virility.

When the two are equal, there in burn either a non-male, or a boy and a girl, together. ‘Non-male’ stands for the hermaphrodite, according to some people.

Some people read ‘sāmye;’ and it means that ‘in case of equality of both, a non-male is born.’

‘Or a boy and a girl’ — When the wind in the womb stirs up the mixed semen and ovula and divides it into two equal parts — a small quantity in -one part, and an equal quantity in another part of the womb, — then twins are born; and in those two equal parts also, in that part where the woman’s seed happens to be in excess the girl is born, while in the other part, where the male’s seed is in excess, the boy is born.

When the seed is weak — in virility — then ‘there is failure;’ either non-conception, or the birth of a hermaphrodite. — (49)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 499), which remarks that in the second line the words are ‘same apumān’; — and in Smṛtitattva (p. 617).

Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 160) quotes this verse and adds the following notes: — ‘Śukra’ in the man’s case is semen; and in that of the woman, the red ovule; — Vaśiṣṭha has declared that the human body is made up of the semen and the ovule; — if the man’s seed happens to be in excess of the woman’s, then the child is male, even though the sexual intercourse might have taken place on an odd day of the period; but with this difference that the male child born under such circumstances would have an effeminate body; — in the event of the woman’s seed being in excess of the man’s the child is female, even though the intercourse might have taken place on an even day of the period; but in this case the female child would have a masculine body; — and the reason for this mixed character consists in the fact that the effect of the seed, which is the material cause of the child’s body, is more potent than that of the time of conception, which is only a ‘concomitant cause’; — when the two seeds are in equal quantity, the child is either ‘non-male’ i.e., a eunuch, or a boy and girl — i.e., twins, — this latter being caused by the bifurcation of the seed at the time of emission, leading to two portions of it falling on two different parts of the womb.

The verse is also quoted in the Āhnika section (p. 559) of Vīramitrodaya where we find the following notes: —

‘Same’ — when the man’s seed and the woman’s are equal — there is born either a non-male, a eunuch, or ‘a boy and girl’; — the seeds being bifurcated into two parts in.equal quantities, twins, consisting of one boy and one girl, are born; — ‘Kṣīṇe’ — when the seed is weak, — and ‘alpe’ — small in quantity, there is ‘viparyaya’ — failure of conception.

This is quoted in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 16), which adds that if the intercourse takes place on an ‘even’ day but the proportion of the woman’s ‘seed’ is larger, then the child will be a female one, but with masculine features; and if it takes place on an odd day and the proportion of the man’s ‘seed’ is larger, then the child will be a male one, but with feminine features; — in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 683), which explains ‘apumān’ as ‘sexless’ and there are two children, one male and another female, if the seed become divided; — in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p, 25a); — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 40) which explains ‘Same’ as ‘when there is equality of the two-seeds,’ and adds the same notes as those in the Mayūkha.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 3.45-50)

See Comparative notes for Verse 3.45.

VERSE 3.50

Section V - Duties of Marital Life

निन्द्यास्वष्टासु चान्यासु स्त्रियो रात्रिषु वर्जयन् ।
ब्रह्मचार्येव भवति यत्र तत्राश्रमे वसन् ॥५०॥

nindyāsvaṣṭāsu cānyāsu striyo rātriṣu varjayan |
brahmacāryeva bhavati yatra tatrāśrame vasan ||50||

‘By avoiding women on the forbidden days and also on the eight other days, one remains a “religious student” (observing the vow of continence), in whatever stage of life he may happen to be.” — (50)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Forbidden days’ — i.e., the six mentioned above.

‘Other eight days’ — which have not been forbidden.

He who avoids women on these days, and has recourse to her on the remaining two days — avoiding the sacred days — then ‘he remains a religious student etc.’ — i.e., he obtains the fruits of continence.

‘In whatever stage of life he may happen to be,’ — this is an exaggeration. Certainly, intercourse with women on two days could never be permitted for the Recluse; for the simple reason that it has been strictly enjoined that one should keep one’s sexual organs in complete check, in all stages of life, except that.of the Religious Student. As for the repetition (in the phrase, ‘yatra tatra’), this is explicable as occurring in an exaggerated statement.

The text does not menu that the fourteen days are to be avoided in the order in which they are mentioned; all that is meant is that one should not think that one may have intercourse whenever one chooses, only leaving off the sacred days; and it is in this sense that only two days have been permitted.

“What is the fruit of continence?”

Since we do not find any particular fruit mentioned (as resulting from continence), it must be taken to be Heaven. But in some places we find it asserted that ‘the student observing the vow of continence never incurs sin;’ which means that he is not tainted by sins accruing from minor transgressions.

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Yatra tatrāśrame vasan’ — ‘In whatever life-stage he may be’; i.e., ‘whether he be a householder or a hermit Vānaprastha’ (Kullūka and Nārāyaṇa). — According to Medhātithi, this is a mere arthavāda, and what is said does not apply to any one except the householder; — Govindarāja does not, like Kullūka, restrict the extension to the Hermit (Vānaprastha) only, he includes the Renunciate (Yati) also. Buhler remarks that ‘Kullūka justly ridicules the last opinion’; but Kullūka’s own opinion is only a shade less ridiculous than Govindarāja’s. (See the following note, for a good explanation).

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika, p. 559), where the foilwing notes are added: — ‘Nindyāsu rātriṣu’ — on the first four days, the, eleventh day and the thirteeenth day; — ‘anyāsu ratriṣu — on any other eight days from among those not forbidden; — if one avoids women, — i.e, approaching them only on two days, — the man remains ‘a continent religious Student’; — i.e., he derives the results obtainable by continence; — ‘Yatra tatrāśrame’ — i.e., even though he is a Householder, he gets all that is obtainable by the chaste Student.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 3.45-50)

See Comparative notes for Verse 3.45.

VERSE 3.51 [Rules Regarding Marriage]

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

न कन्यायाः पिता विद्वान् गृह्णीयात् शुल्कमण्वपि ।
गृह्णंशुल्कं हि लोभेन स्यान्नरोऽपत्यविक्रयी ?? ॥५१॥

na kanyāyāḥ pitā vidvān gṛhṇīyāt śulkamaṇvapi |
gṛhṇaṃśulkaṃ hi lobhena syānnaro'patyavikrayī ?? ||51||

The girl’s father, if wise, should not accept even a small consideration; by accepting a consideration, through greed, the man becomes a child-seller. — (51).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse prohibits the receiving ‘of consideration’ in connection with the ‘Āsura’ form of marriage; that this is so, is indicated by the fact that later on (in 54) the acceptance of a dowry for the bride is permitted.

‘Wise’ — i.e., knowing the impropriety of accepting the gift.

The girl’s father shall not accept even a small present; by accepting it, he becomes tainted with the sin of child-selling.

“What is it that is called ‘Śulka,’ ‘consideration?’”

It is what is received from the bridegroom on stipulation. When there is a bargaining, carried on in consideration of the good or bad qualities of the bride, — it is a case of pure ‘selling;’ what is referred to here is the acceptance of even a small present — though the bride is possessed of most excellent qualities, — that also without any stipulation.

This (acceptance of unequal price) is not a condition of ‘sale’ proper; the act is only deprecated by being described as being of the nature of ‘selling.’ — (51)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 851), which deduces from the word ‘lobhena,’ ‘through greed,’ the conclusion that if something is received without greed on the part of the father, it is not the ‘price,’ but only an honorific present to the bridegroom; and in support of this it quotes Manu 3.54; — in Vyāvahāra-Bālambhaṭṭī (p. 761); — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 232); — and by Jīmūtavāhana (Dāyabhāga, p. 151).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Baudhāyana (1.11.21). — ‘Those persons who, deluded by greed, give away their daughters for a consideration, are soul-sellers, sinful and grave sinners, and up to their seventh generation, they fall into hell.’

Āpastamba Dharmasūtra (2.13.11). — ‘In connection with marriage, a gift to the girl’s guardian has been prescribed with a view to securing a special end, and for a righteous purpose; therefore one should present to the girl’s guardian a chariot and a hundred cows; which present joins the couple in wedlock; the applying of the name selling to such giving of the girl is a mere declamation; because the acceptance of the present is for a righteous purpose.’

VERSE 3.52

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

स्त्रीधनानि तु ये मोहादुपजीवन्ति बान्धवाः ।
नारीयानानि वस्त्रं वा ते पापा यान्त्यधोगतिम् ॥५२॥

strīdhanāni tu ye mohādupajīvanti bāndhavāḥ |
nārīyānāni vastraṃ vā te pāpā yāntyadhogatim ||52||

Those relations who, through folly, live upon the bride’s properties — even the bride’s conveyances and clothes — are sinners and fall into the lowest state. — (52)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse is supplementary to the foregoing verse.

‘Bride’s properties’ — i.e., those properties that are received from the bridegroom for the sake of the bride; ‘the relations’ — fathers and others — ‘who, through folly, live upon’ them; — as described above (in verse 31)

‘The’ property here spoken, of is that in the form of gold and silver.

‘Bride’s conveyances’ — such as the horse and the rest.

‘Clothes;’ — even such paltry things as clothes and conveyances should not be lived upon, — what to say of more valuable properties?

The text proceeds to describe what befalls those who do live upon such properties, — they are ‘sinners — and by doing what is prohibited in the scriptures — ‘they fall into the lowest state’ — i.e., into hell.

Or, ‘bride’s properties’ may be taken in the sense, in which it is going to be described in Discourse 9 below. Those who, through folly, live upon those properties; — the ‘relations,’ in this case, would stand for the girl’s father and his kinsmen, as also the husband and his relations. Similarly, with ‘conveyances’ and ‘clothes the ‘clothes’ also those belonging to the bride; this connection being assumed on the basis of the proximity of the term ‘bride’ (in the compound term ‘bride’s conveyances’); just as in the case of the use of expression, ‘royal servant,’ if some one asks, ‘whose?,’ — this is taken to mean ‘of what king?’ — (52)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 851), which deduces from the word ‘lobhena,’ ‘through greed,’ the conclusion that if something is received without greed on the part of the father, it is not the ‘price,’ but only an honorific present to the bridegroom; and in support of this it quotes Manu 3.54; — in Vyāvahāra-Bālambhaṭṭī (p. 761); — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 232); — and by Jīmūtavāhana (Dāyabhāga, p. 151).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Āpastamba-Smṛti (9.27). — [Reproduces Manu’s words, only substituting ‘svarṇam yānāni’ for ‘nārīyānāni.’]

VERSE 3.53

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

आर्षे गोमिथुनं शुल्कं के चिदाहुर्मृषैव तत् ।
अल्पोऽप्येवं महान् वाऽपि विक्रयस्तावदेव सः ॥५३॥

ārṣe gomithunaṃ śulkaṃ ke cidāhurmṛṣaiva tat |
alpo'pyevaṃ mahān vā'pi vikrayastāvadeva saḥ ||53||

Some people declare that the bovine pair are the “consideration” (to be accepted) in the Ārṣa form of marriage. This is not true; for small or large, the act becomes a ‘selling’ all the same. — (53)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Bovine pair’ — i.e., a cow and a bull.

Some people declare that this ‘consideration’ should be accepted.

Manu’s opinion, however, is that ‘this is not true;’ i.e., it should not be accepted.

‘Small’ — i.e., accomplished by small means; similarly with ‘large.’ It is ‘selling’ all the same. — (53)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 489), which adds the following explanation: — The ‘gomithuna,’ ‘bovine pair,’ (given by the bridegroom in the Ārṣa marriage) has been called by some people the ‘price’ paid for the girl; — but ‘this is not true,’ — i.e., it cannot be regarded as the ‘price’, as it does not posses that character; the ‘price’ of a thing is always an indefinite factor; as is found in every sale-transaction, the price can never be definitely fixed; that which suffices for buying a thing is called its ‘price’; and this varies with time and place. In the present case, however, the amount is definitely fixed; it is the ‘Ārṣa’ marriage when only the ‘cow-pair’ is given, neither more nor less. Thus there being no real buying in this case, the Ārṣa marriage must be regarded as lawful.

Познавательные статьи:



Алгоритмические операторы Matlab

Конструирование и порядок расчёта дорожной одежды

Исследования учёных: почему помогают молитвы?

Почему терпят неудачу многие предприниматели?