with the Commentary of Medhatithi 76 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 82 из 350Следующая ⇒

Madanapārijāta (pp. 155-156) takes the verse somewhat differently: It says that if the ‘cow-pair’ given by the bridegroom is taken by the bride’s father himself, then it is a clear case of ‘selling’ the girl; but there would be nothing wrong if the present were accepted by him on behalf of the bride, as is clear from the next verse.

Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 849) quotes it in support of the view that the ‘cow pair’ given in the Ārṣa marriage is not the ‘price’; though it must come to be so regarded if it is taken through greed, as has been made clear by Verse 51 above.

This verse is also quoted in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 759) in support of the view that the Ārṣa marriage involves no ‘selling’ of the girl, — and it reproduces the arguments adduced by Parāśaramādhava (above).

It is quoted in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 479), which has the same note as Parāśaramādhava (above); but makes things clear by reading ‘Kriyate tāvataiva saḥ’, which lends itself to the desired interpretation much more easily than the reading ‘vikrayastāvadeva saḥ,’ which calls the transaction pure ‘selling’; — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra p. 231), which explains ‘mṛsā’ as ‘false,’ and declares that the marriage is unrighteous, in as much as it involves ‘selling’, the cow-pair being the price and not mere śulka or ‘fee.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (13.80.20-21). — [Reproduces Manu’s words and adds] — ‘though this has been done by some persons, yet it is not the Eternal Law; because such action is found, in many cases, to he due to greed.’

Vaśiṣṭha (1.36). — ‘Therefore, when the present of a chariot and a hundred cows is made, it is known as selling.’ Apastamba-Dharmasūtra (2.13.11). — [See under verse 51.]

Mahābhārata (13.45.20). — (Same as Manu.)

VERSE 3.54

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

यासां नाददते शुल्कं ज्ञातयो न स विक्रयः ।
अर्हणं तत् कुमारीणामानृशंस्यं च केवलम् ॥५४॥

yāsāṃ nādadate śulkaṃ jñātayo na sa vikrayaḥ |
arhaṇaṃ tat kumārīṇāmānṛśaṃsyaṃ ca kevalam ||54||

In the case of girls whose relations do not appropriate the bride’s gift, it is not “selling;” It is only a means of honouring the maidens and is entirely harmless. — (54)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The question being — “Does the mere act of receiving gifts from the bridegroom make the marriage a sale?” — our answer is that it is not so; it is when the ‘relations’ of the bride, — i.e., those in charge of her — accept gifts for themselves, then alone it is ‘selling.’

‘Means of honouring’: — The receiving of presents on behalf of brides becomes a means of honouring them; it raises the girls in their own estimation; they come to think that ‘we are so good that we are being married after receiving proper presents;’ they rise in the estimation of the people also, who look upon such brides as very ‘handsomely fortunate.’ Or, when out of the presents received ornaments are made for them, and they are decked in them, they look beautiful.

‘Harmless’ — it involves no sin; i.e., there is not the slightest taint of sin in this act.

What this exaggerated statement indicates is that the accepting of presents on behalf of the bride is permitted. — (54).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 850) in support of the view that if the ‘cow-pair’ given by the bridegroom in the Ārṣa marriage is accepted, not in greed, — then it is to be looked upon only as a means of honouring the bride, and not as a ‘price’ paid for her. It explains the word ‘ānṛśaṃsyam’ as ‘not sinful.’

Madanapārijāta (p. 156) also quotes it in support of the view that if the ‘cow-pair’ is accepted on behalf of the bride, there is nothing wrong in it, — the verse being explained as follows — That ‘consideration’ which is accepted on behalf of the bride, constitutes the ‘honouring’ of the girl, and as such is not sinful; — i.e., the ‘consideration’ thus received should be handed over to the girl.

It is quoted in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 100), which explains ‘ānṛśaṃsyam’ as ‘honest dealing’; — in Saṃskā raratnamālā (p. 479) winch explains ‘ānṛśaṃsyam’ as ‘not sinful — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 233), which explains the meaning as ‘what is received as fee for the girl, that is only a present to the bride,’ — and is ‘ānṛśaṃsyam’, ‘nothing sinful.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśā. 81.1-2; also 13.46.1-2). — ‘People learned in ancient lore quote the words of Prācetasa to the effect that in cases where the relations do not appropriate anything for themselves, it is not selling, it is only a method of honouring the girls, and as such, entirely harmless and righteous; the whole of the present received should he made over to the girl.’

VERSE 3.55

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

पितृभिर्भ्रातृभिश्चैताः पतिभिर्देवरैस्तथा ।
पूज्या भूषयितव्याश्च बहुकल्याणमीप्सुभिः ॥५५॥

pitṛbhirbhrātṛbhiścaitāḥ patibhirdevaraistathā |
pūjyā bhūṣayitavyāśca bahukalyāṇamīpsubhiḥ ||55||

These shall be honoured and adorned by their fathers and brothers, husbands and brothers-in-law, who are desirous of their own welfare. — (55)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The bride’s relations are not only to receive presents for her from the bridegroom; they themselves shall make presents to her.

‘Fathers’ — through association, the term ‘father’ here includes the grandfather, uncle, etc., also; hence the plural number; or, the plural number may be explained as referring to several individual brides.

Similarly, ‘husbands’ may stand for father-in-law, &c.; or, it may refer to several individual girls.

‘Brothers-in-law’ — the husband’s brothers.

‘Shall be honoured’ — during rejoicings in connection with the birth of sons, &c., they should be invited, welcomed and received with honour and feasting.

‘Shall be adorned’ — should be decked with clothes, ornaments, unguents, and so forth.

The effect of all this is next indicated — ‘welfare what is desirable, i.e., being endowed with children, wealth, &c., good health, freedom from troubles, and so forth: Those who are desirous of all this — i.e., of obtaining all this (should do what is said above).

The injunction contained in this verse has been set forth for the purpose of indicating this reward. — (55)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 506), in support of the view that the wife, whether young or old — should always be respected, ‘worshipped’; but it adds that this does not apply to the unchaste wife, for whom one should provide just enough to keep her body and soul together.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yājñavalkya (1.82). — ‘Women should be honoured with ornaments, clothes and food, by their husbands, brothers, fathers, parental relations, mothers-in-law, fathers-in-law, brothers-in-law and maternal relations.’

Mahābhārata (Anuśā.) (also 13.46.3). — ‘Women should he honoured and fondled by their fathers, brothers, fathers-in-law and brothers-in-law — if these are desirous of their own welfare.’

VERSE 3.56

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

यत्र नार्यस्तु पूज्यन्ते रमन्ते तत्र देवताः ।
यत्रैतास्तु न पूज्यन्ते सर्वास्तत्राफलाः क्रियाः ॥५६॥

yatra nāryastu pūjyante ramante tatra devatāḥ |
yatraitāstu na pūjyante sarvāstatrāphalāḥ kriyāḥ ||56||

Where women are honoured, there the gods rejoice; where, on the other hand, they are not honoured, there all rites are fruitless. — (56)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘The gods rejoice’ — are satisfied, pleased; and being pleased, they bestow upon the master of the house desirable rewards.

‘Where they are not honoured, all rites are fruitless’ — ; sacrifices, libations and charities, — gifts made with the motive of pleasing the gods, — all such acts, though done, become fruitless.

This is a commendatory exaggeration. — (56)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 506); — in Vivādaratnākara (p. 417) as explaining the reason why women should be honoured; — and in Aparārka (p. 17).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśā. 46.5-6). — ‘O king, women should be always honoured and fondled; where women are honoured, there the gods rejoice; where they are not honoured, there all rites are fruitless.’

VERSE 3.57

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

शोचन्ति जामयो यत्र विनश्यत्याशु तत् कुलम् ।
न शोचन्ति तु यत्रैता वर्धते तद् हि सर्वदा ॥५७॥

śocanti jāmayo yatra vinaśyatyāśu tat kulam |
na śocanti tu yatraitā vardhate tad hi sarvadā ||57||

Where the female relations live in grief, the family soon wholly perishes; but that family where they are not unhappy ever prospers. — (57)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

Vivādaratnākara (p. 417.) explains ‘jāmayaḥ’ as ‘ladies of the family; sisters, daughters-in-law, and so forth’.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśā. 46.6). — ‘Where the ladies are aggrieved, that family becomes doomed.’

VERSE 3.58

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

जामयो यानि गेहानि शपन्त्यप्रतिपूजिताः ।
तानि कृत्याहतानीव विनश्यन्ति समन्ततः ॥५८॥

jāmayo yāni gehāni śapantyapratipūjitāḥ |
tāni kṛtyāhatānīva vinaśyanti samantataḥ ||58||

The houses on which female relations, not being duly honoured, pronounce a curse, perish completely, as if destroyed by magic. — (58)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 506); in Vivādaratnākara (p. 417); — and in Aparārka (p. 107), which explains ‘Jāmayaḥ’ as, ‘bhaginyaḥ’ and adds that it includes the daughter, daughter-in-law and others.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśā. 46.7). — ‘Houses cursed by women are as if struck down by malignant spirits; such houses neither shine nor prosper; and they are devoid of all prosperity — O king.’

VERSE 3.59

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

तस्मादेताः सदा पूज्या भूषणाच्छादनाशनैः ।
भूतिकामैर्नरैर्नित्यं सत्कारेषूत्सवेषु च ॥५९॥

tasmādetāḥ sadā pūjyā bhūṣaṇācchādanāśanaiḥ |
bhūtikāmairnarairnityaṃ satkāreṣūtsaveṣu ca ||59||

Hence men who seek (their own) welfare, should always honour women on holidays and festivals with (gifts of) ornaments, clothes, and (dainty) food. — (59)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

‘Satkāreṣu’ — ‘On holidays’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka, and Rāghavānanda); — Reading ‘Satkāreṇa’, Nārāyaṇa explains it as ‘by kind speech’.

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 418); — and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 506).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśā. 46.15). — ‘The women are like the Goddess of Wealth: they should be respected by the man desiring his own welfare; when loved and fondled, woman becomes the veritable Goddess of Prosperity.’

VERSE 3.60

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

सन्तुष्टो भार्यया भर्ता भर्त्रा भार्या तथैव च ।
यस्मिन्नेव कुले नित्यं कल्याणं तत्र वै ध्रुवम् ॥६०॥

santuṣṭo bhāryayā bhartā bhartrā bhāryā tathaiva ca |
yasminneva kule nityaṃ kalyāṇaṃ tatra vai dhruvam ||60||

In that family, where the husband is pleased with his wife and the wife with her husband, happiness will assuredly be lasting. — (60)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 421); — and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p, 506).

VERSE 3.61

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

यदि हि स्त्री न रोचेत पुमांसं न प्रमोदयेत् ।
अप्रमोदात् पुनः पुंसः प्रजनं न प्रवर्तते ॥६१॥

yadi hi strī na roceta pumāṃsaṃ na pramodayet |
apramodāt punaḥ puṃsaḥ prajanaṃ na pravartate ||61||

For if the wife is not radiant with beauty, she will not attract her husband; but if she has no attractions for him, no children will be born. — (61)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

(verse 3.61-62). — These verses are quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 421).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśā. 46.4). — [Reproduces Manu.]

Mahābhārata (Anuśā. 46.4). — [See the whole of Adhyāya 46 of Anuśāsana Parva.]

VERSE 3.62

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

स्त्रियां तु रोचमानायां सर्वं तद् रोचते कुलम् ।
तस्यां त्वरोचमानायां सर्वमेव न रोचते ॥६२॥

striyāṃ tu rocamānāyāṃ sarvaṃ tad rocate kulam |
tasyāṃ tvarocamānāyāṃ sarvameva na rocate ||62||

If the wife is radiant with beauty, the whole house is bright; but if she is destitute of beauty, all will appear dismal. — (62)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

(verse 3.61-62). — These verses are quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 421).

VERSE 3.63

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

कुविवाहैः क्रियालोपैर्वेदानध्ययनेन च ।
कुलान्यकुलतां यान्ति ब्राह्मणातिक्रमेण च ॥६३॥

kuvivāhaiḥ kriyālopairvedānadhyayanena ca |
kulānyakulatāṃ yānti brāhmaṇātikrameṇa ca ||63||

By low marriages, by omitting (the performance of) sacred rites, by neglecting the study of the Veda, and by irreverence towards Brahmanas, (great) families sink low. — (63)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 589) as enumerating the causes leading to the degradation of families; — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 232).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Baudhāyana (1.5.82). — ‘By the omission of sacrifice and of marriage, and by the rejection of Veda, the family ceases to be a family; also by the ill-treating of the Brāhmaṇa.’

VERSE 3.64

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

शिल्पेन व्यवहारेण शूद्रापत्यैश्च केवलैः ।
गोभिरश्वैश्च यानैश्च कृष्या राजोपसेवया ॥६४॥

śilpena vyavahāreṇa śūdrāpatyaiśca kevalaiḥ |
gobhiraśvaiśca yānaiśca kṛṣyā rājopasevayā ||64||

By (practising) handicrafts, by pecuniary transactions, by (begetting) children on Sudra females only, by (trading in) cows, horses, and carriages, by (the pursuit of) agriculture and by taking service under a king. — (64)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 589) as setting forth further causes for the degradation of a Brāhmaṇa family; — also in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 676) to the same effect; — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 208), which explains that the selling of ‘cows’ and ‘horses’ is what is meant here.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 3.64-66)

Baudhāyana (1.5.84). — ‘Through cows, houses and conveyances, through agriculture and through serving the king, families cease to be families; as also those that are devoid of the Veda; those families on the other hand that are rich in the Veda, — even though possessed of little wealth, come to be numbered among families and acquire great fame.’

VERSE 3.65

Section VI - Rules Regarding Marriage

अयाज्ययाजनैश्चैव नास्तिक्येन च कर्मणाम् ।
कुलान्याशु विनश्यन्ति यानि हीनानि मन्त्रतः ॥६५॥

ayājyayājanaiścaiva nāstikyena ca karmaṇām |
kulānyāśu vinaśyanti yāni hīnāni mantrataḥ ||65||

By sacrificing for men unworthy to offer sacrifices and by denying (the future rewards for good) works, families, deficient in the (knowledge of the) Veda, quickly perish. — (65)

(Note: the above is an alternate translation by George Bühler)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Verses 57 to 66 have been omitted by Medhātithi.]

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verses 57 — 66 are omitted by Medhātithi. [Query — are they interpolations?] “These are very probably a later addition. The corresponding section in the Mahābhārata, 13.46 stops right here also.” — Hopkins. They are all quoted in Vivādaratnākara and in Parāśaramādhava.

This verse is quoted in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 676) as setting forth the causes of the degradation of families; and it explains ‘mantrataḥ’ as ‘vedaiḥ’, ‘in Veda’; — also to the same effect, in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 589); — and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra p. 208).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Познавательные статьи:



Организация работы процедурного кабинета

Статус республик в составе РФ

Понятие финансов, их функции и особенности

Сущность демографической политии