with the Commentary of Medhatithi 88 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 94 из 350Следующая ⇒

‘The meanest of twice-born men;’ — the ‘twice-born men’ have been mentioned only by way of illustration; in reality, the Śūdra also should not feed friends at śrādḍhas.

“The mere fact of the Śūdra being a non-Brāhmaṇa makes it impossible for him to feed a friend at śrāddhas (where only Brāhmaṇas are fed).”

But who has laid down the rule that Brāhmaṇas cannot be the friends of Śūdras?

“As a matter of fact, it is only persons of the same caste that are regarded as friends; so that there could be no friendship between persons, one of whom belongs to the higher and the other to the lower caste.”

This also is not true; since Śvetaketu, the son of Aruṇi, is declared to have said — ‘In the Pañcāla country, there is a Kṣatriya friend of mine.’

Then again, it has already been explained that the term ‘friend’ in the present context has been used as connoting relationship in general. And Brāhmaṇas also come to have pecuniary relations with Śūdras; and to the Pāraśavaśūdra (the Śūdra born of a Brāhmaṇa father and a Śūdra mother), Brāhmaṇas hear even blood-relationships. — (140)

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 3.139-140)

See Comparative notes for Verse 3.139.

VERSE 3.141

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

सम्भोजानि साऽभिहिता पैशाची दक्षिणा द्विजैः ।
इहैवास्ते तु सा लोके गौरन्धेवैकवेश्मनि ॥१४१॥

sambhojāni sā'bhihitā paiśācī dakṣiṇā dvijaiḥ |
ihaivāste tu sā loke gaurandhevaikaveśmani ||141||

This convivial dinner has been called by twice-born people the “gift of devils.” It remains in this world alone, like the blind cow tied in a single room. — (141)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The particle ‘sam’ (in ‘Sambhojanī) connotes convivility; and the term ‘sambhojanī’ means that at which men dine together; such convivial dinner is possible only among friends. Or, the word ‘sambhojamī’ may be taken as standing for a social dinner of several people.

The making of friendships by Śrāddhas is a custom with ‘devils,’ — the term ‘devil’ here standing for highway robbers.

This gift ‘remains in this world alone’ — i.e., it is not capable of bringing rewards in the other world; just as the blind cow, which remains tied in a single room, so this gift also remains in this world only, — i.e., the only result it brings about is the goodwill of friends, — and it does not bring any benefit to the ancestors.

The term ‘dakṣiṇā’ here stands for gift. — (141)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Paiśācī’ — ‘Gift of devils; — i.e., offered in the manner of devils’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Kullūka, and Rāghavānanda); — ‘offered to devils’ (Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

Hopkins traces the origin of verses 138 to 141 to certain verses of the Mahābhārata: Verse 140 corresponds to 13.90.42 of the Mahābhārata; verse 138 to 13.90.43; verse 142 to 13.90.44; verse 141 to 13.90.46 of the Mahābhārata.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśāsana, 90.46). — ‘A convivial dinner is the Devil’s Gift; it reaches neither the gods nor Pitṛs; devoid of virtue, it wanders about in this world.’

Āpastamba-Dharmasūtra (2.17.7). — [Reproduces the above with one slight verbal variation.]

VERSE 3.142

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

यथैरिणे बीजमुप्त्वा न वप्ता लभते फलम् ।
तथाऽनृचे हविर्दत्त्वा न दाता लभते फलम् ॥१४२॥

yathairiṇe bījamuptvā na vaptā labhate phalam |
tathā'nṛce havirdattvā na dātā labhate phalam ||142||

Just as having sown the seed in barren soil, the sower reaps no harvest, — even so, having given the offerings to one ignorant of the Veda, the giver obtains no reward. — (142)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Barren soil’ — Unproductive ground. that plot of land is called ‘barren’ on which if seed is sown, it does not sprout; there the ‘sower reaps no harvest.’

‘Even so,’ ‘to the person ignorant of die Veda’ — ‘having given the offerings made to gods and ancestors, — ‘the giver obtains no reward.’

The term ‘anṛce’ is with the Locative ending; and the term ‘ṛk’ stands for the Veda in general. — (142)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (Anuśāsana, 90.45). — ‘As seed sown in barren soil does not germinate and the sower does not reap even a part of the seed, so also the Śrāddha partaken of by undeserving persons confers no benefits either here or elsewhere.’

VERSE 3.143

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

दातॄन् प्रतिग्रहीतॄंश्च कुरुते फलभागिनः ।
विदुषे दक्षिणां दत्त्वा विधिवत् प्रेत्य चैह च ॥१४३॥

dātṝn pratigrahītṝṃśca kurute phalabhāginaḥ |
viduṣe dakṣiṇāṃ dattvā vidhivat pretya caiha ca ||143||

The presenting of the gift, according to rule, to the learned makes the givers and receivers partakers of reward, here as well as after death. — (143)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

That the gift that is presented to the learned person makes the givers partakers of reward is only right: but what is the reward obtained by the receivers? If it be held that they obtain some transcendental result, — that, cannot be right: because the act of receiving gifts has not been so enjoined, and also because the receiver is prompted to accept the gift only with a view to the perceptible reward. If, on the other hand, the reward to the receiver be held to be something perceptible, — then such a reward is found to be obtained by the ignorant person also.”

True; but what is stated here is mere praise; the sense lasing that — ‘the presenting of offerings to the learned man is so effective that the receiver also comes to partake of the imperceptible reward, in addition to the perceptible one, — what to say of the giver.’

‘Alter death’ — in heaven.

‘Here’ — the reward is in the form of fame; the man being praised by men as doing things in exact accordance with the scriptures,

‘According to rule;’ — this is a mere reiterative reference to the injunction that ‘gifts should be made to persons posessing such and such qualifications.’ — (143)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yājñavalkya (1.270). — ‘Men’s grandfathers, when pleased, bestow upon them, long life, offspring, wealth, learning, heaven, final deliverance and pleasures.’

VERSE 3.144

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

कामं श्राद्धेऽर्चयेन् मित्रं नाभिरूपमपि त्वरिम् ।
द्विषता हि हविर्भुक्तं भवति प्रेत्य निष्फलम् ॥१४४॥

kāmaṃ śrāddhe'rcayen mitraṃ nābhirūpamapi tvarim |
dviṣatā hi havirbhuktaṃ bhavati pretya niṣphalam ||144||

One may entertain a friend at Śrāddhas, but never a foe, even though qualified. The offering eaten by the enemy becomes futile after death. — (144)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

[Medhātithi takes no note of this verse].

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Medhātithi omits this verse. It is quoted in Aparārka (p. 448) as permitting the feeding of the friend and others when no other Brāhmaṇa is available; — and in Śrāddhakriyākaumudī (p. 41), which explains ‘abhirūpam’ as ‘learned and ‘pretya’ as ‘in the other world.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Āpastamba-Dharmasūtra (2.17.5-6). — ‘When other men with proper qualifications are not available, one may feed even his own uterine brother; or even his own pupils.’

Baudhāyana (2.8.4). — ‘One may feed even a Sapiṇḍa if he is equipped with the Ṛk, the Yajuṣ and the Sāman.’

VERSE 3.145

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

यत्नेन भोजयेत्श्राद्धे बह्वृचं वेदपारगम् ।
शाखान्तगमथाध्वर्युं छन्दोगं तु समाप्तिकम् ॥१४५॥

yatnena bhojayetśrāddhe bahvṛcaṃ vedapāragam |
śākhāntagamathādhvaryuṃ chandogaṃ tu samāptikam ||145||

With great care one should feed at a Śrāddha the adherent of the Ṛgveda who is thoroughly versed in his Veda, or the adherent of the Yajurveda who has finished the entire recensional text, or the adherent of the Sāmaveda who has reached the end of it. — (145).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The three terms — ‘thoroughly versed in the Veda,’ ‘who has finished the entire recesional text’ and ‘who has reached the end of it’ — are synonymous; everyone of them denotes persons who have learnt the whole recensional text, including the Mantra as well as the Brāhmaṇa; not those who have learnt either the Mantra-text alone or the Brāhmaṇa- text alone, or only a portion of these. The name ‘śrotriya,’ ‘learned in the Veda,’ is Applied, to even those who have learnt only a part of the Veda; hence the three terms in the present verse have been used for the purpose of excluding the mere ‘śrotriya.’ In regard to this latter, it has been said (in 128) that ‘the offering should be given to the śrotriya;’ the term ‘śrotriya’ means ‘one learned in the Veda;’ and the term ‘veda’ denotes the entire recensional text, including the Mantra and the Brāhmaṇa, as also a part of these. Consequently, for the purpose of referring to one who has learnt the entire ṛecensional text, the Text 1ms used the terms in question.

“It has been laid down above (134-135) that one shall feed only such persons as belong to one or the other stage; and until one has learnt the entire Vedic text, it is not possible for one to cuter upon the state of the Householder; as it has been asserted that ‘the entire Veda should be learnt’ (2.165).”

But even so, it would he open to one to feed the Student who has begun to learn the Veda, — even before he has finished it. Hence all the three synonymous terms — ‘thoroughly versed in the Veda,’ ‘who has finished the entire recensional text,’ and ‘who has reached the end of it’ — indicate that the whole Veda should have been learnt.

Though only one of these words would have sufficed for the purpose, yet the Author has made use of several forms of the same expression in view of metrical exigencies.

‘Vedapāragah,’ ‘Thoroughly versed in the Veda,’ — who has gone through the entire Veda.

‘Śākhāntagaḥ’ ‘who has finished the entire recensional text’ — the end of the recensional text.

‘Samāptikaḥ,’ — ‘who has reached the end of it.’

‘Adhvaryu,’ ‘adherent of the Yajurveda’ — one who has studied the Yajurveda; this term is not used here as the name of one of the principal sacrificial priests. ‘Ādhvargava’ is the name given to the act of reciting; hence the person connected with this act is called ‘Adhvaryu.’

‘Chāndoga,’ ‘adherent of the Sāmaveda,’ — one who studies the Sāmaveda.

In another Smṛti, it is the person who has learnt the ‘three thousands’ that has been called ‘samāptika;’ and the term ‘thousand’ here denotes the Sāmaveda, by reason of its being related to a thousand musical forms.; and one. whose learning consists of three of these ‘thousand’ is ‘one who has learnt the three thousands;’ the three forms being (I) the

‘Tāṇḍava’ (Texts relating to Dancing), (2) the ‘Aukthikya’ (Texts relating to the Ukthas) and (2) the ‘Sāmagāna’ (the singing of Sāmu verses); these are the three ‘sciences’ of the Sāmaveda, of which there are a thousand recensions.

The ‘Ṛgveda’ stands for the Saṃhitā text of ten Maṇḍalas divided into sixty-four adhyāyas and the Brāhmaṇa.

Others have explained this verse as excluding the adherents of the Atharva Veda from being fed. (They argue that) if the author had intended to include all the Vedas, he would have simply said — ‘one should feed that Brāhmaṇa who has learnt the entire recensional text of the Veda.’

“The same argument might be urged against the verse being taken as excluding the adherent of the Atharva Veda: if this exclusion had been intended, the Author could have simply said — ‘the adherent of the Atharva Veda shall not be fed.’ Such a statement would be very much simpler and a more direct way of laying down the exclusion.”

There is no force in this; as Munu’s way of teaching Dharma is diverse: sometimes he leaves the negation to be implied by means of an affirmation, and at others he puts the negation directly in its own words. — (145).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 284); — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 382).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Laghu-Śātātapa (99-100). — [After reproducing Manu 145, it adds the following.] — ‘At the Śrāddha one shall feed the Sāmavedin; at the Vaiśvadeva offering, the Ṛgvedin; at the Pacificatory rite, the Yajurvedin; and at the Harder rites, the Atharvavedin.’

Laghvāśvalāyana (24.15). — ‘At the Śrāddha, one should invite such Ṛgvedin Brāhmaṇas as are learned in the Veda; in the absence of them, those learned in the other Vedas.’

VERSE 3.146

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

एषामन्यतमो यस्य भुञ्जीत श्राद्धमर्चितः ।
पितॄणां तस्य तृप्तिः स्यात्शाश्वती साप्तपौरुषी ॥१४६॥

eṣāmanyatamo yasya bhuñjīta śrāddhamarcitaḥ |
pitṝṇāṃ tasya tṛptiḥ syātśāśvatī sāptapauruṣī ||146||

If any one of these should dine, duly honoured, at the Śrāddha performed by a certain person, there would be ever-lasting satisfaction for his ancestors, lasting till the seventh degree (of descendants). — (146)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Some people might argue as follows: — “It has been asserted that ‘at the rite performed in honour of ancestors one should feed three Brāhmaṇas;’ and in the preceding verse the learners of several recensional texts have been mentioned; so that there is no possibility of one’s own companions in study being fed.”

And it is with a view to set aside this notion that the author puts forward the present verse.

Of these three — the adherents of the three Vedas — anyone may be fed.

That is to say, one may feed either persons professing the same recensional text as oneself or those professing other several texts.

‘Duly honoured’ — worshipped, approached, with offerings of water, etc.

‘Satisfaction to the seventh degree’ — i.e., the satisfaction continues till the seventh degree of descendants. The prolonging of both vowels in the term ‘sāptapauruṣī’ is in accordance with Pāṇini 7.3.20. This epithet has been added for the purpose of indicating great length of time; the meaning being that ‘the satisfaction of the ancestors lasts for a long time.’ The meaning is that ‘by the feeding of the said Brāhmaṇa, the satisfaction secured to the ancestors is such as lasts till such time as his sons and grandsons to the seventh degree are born.’

‘Everlasting,’ — i.e., it does not cease, and then appears again; it remains there always. — (146)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 284); — in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 882); — and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Śrāddha, p. 8a).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Bṛhaspati (Parāśaramādhava, p. 337). — ‘If one feeds a single Sāmavedin at the Śrāddha, all the three Vedas, Ṛk, Sāman and Yajuṣ, are present in him. If, for the sake of his fathers, one secures one who has pondered over the texts of the Sāman, then he secures the entire earth along with hills and forests. The Ṛk satisfies the father, the Yajuṣ, the grandfather, and the Sāman, the great-grandfather; — and the Chandoga is superior even to that.’

Śātātapa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 337). — ‘If one feeds an Atharvavedin at the offerings to Gods and Pitṛs, he attains endless and imperishable results; — says the Śruti.’

VERSE 3.147

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

एष वै प्रथमः कल्पः प्रदाने हव्यकव्ययोः ।
अनुकल्पस्त्वयं ज्ञेयः सदा सद्भिरनुष्ठितः ॥१४७॥

eṣa vai prathamaḥ kalpaḥ pradāne havyakavyayoḥ |
anukalpastvayaṃ jñeyaḥ sadā sadbhiranuṣṭhitaḥ ||147||

This is the first course to be adopted in the presenting of the offerings made to Gods and Pitṛs. This (following) is to be regarded as the secondary course always adopted by the good.’ — (147)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Beginning with verse 122, twenty-five verses have gone before; and the upshot of them all is as follows: (a) Śrāddhas should be performed on the moon-less day; — (b) the person fed should be learned in the Veda, highly educated, of right behaviour, belonging to a known family, the sou of a person learned in the Veda and not bearing any relationship to the person offering the Śrāddha. The rest of it all is only commendatory.

‘This’ — what has been just described, — is ‘the the first’ — the primary — ‘course’ — procedure at Śrāddhas; viz., that, the food shall be presented to one who is not related to the performer.

‘This’ — what is going to be described — ‘should be regarded as ‘the secondary course’ — which is to be adopted only in the event of the primary course being not possible This course is called ‘anukalpa,’ ‘secondary course,’ by the ‘law of substitutes’ (propounded in Mīmāṃsā-sūtra 3.6.37 et. seq.).

‘Always adopted’ — this is purely commendatory. — (147)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 1.220, p. 146) in support of the view that the sister’s son and other similar relatives (mentioned in the next verse, and in Yājñavalkya, 1.220) are to be fed at the Śrāddha only if the above described ‘Brāhmaṇa learned in the Veda’ is not available; — in Madanapārijāta (p. 558), along with the next verse; — in Hemādri (Śrāddha; p. 447); — in Godādharapaddhati (Kāla, p. 514), which remarks that this secondary method is put forward in view of the fact that very few Brāhmaṇas are really fit for being fed at Śrāddha; — and in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 991).

Medhātithi (P. 250, l. 15) — ‘Pratinidhinyāyenā.’ — See Mīmāṃsā sūtra 3.6.37. The Yava having been laid down as a substitute at sacrifices for the Vrīhi, the question is raised as to the necessity or otherwise of performing all those acts in connection with the substitute which have been laid down in connection with the original; and the conclusion is that the substitute has to be treated exactly in the same manner as the original.

VERSE 3.148

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

मातामहं मातुलं च स्वस्रीयं श्वशुरं गुरुम् ।
दौहित्रं विट्पतिं बन्धुं ऋत्विग् याज्यौ च भोजयेत् ॥१४८॥

mātāmahaṃ mātulaṃ ca svasrīyaṃ śvaśuraṃ gurum |
dauhitraṃ viṭpatiṃ bandhuṃ ṛtvig yājyau ca bhojayet ||148||

One may feed the maternal grandfather, the maternal uncle, the sister’s son, father-in-law, the teacher, the daughter’s son, the son-in-law, a relative, the priest and him at whose sacrifices the performer officiates. — (148)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Svasrīyaḥ’ — the sister’s son.

‘Viṭpatiḥ’ — the son-in-law; the term ‘viṭ’ meaning child, According to others , ‘viṭpati’ is the guest, he being the ‘lord of all men;’ in ordinary parlance also, one who comes to one’s house is called ‘viṭ.’

‘Bandhuḥ’ — the wife’s brother, the cognate kinsman, and so forth. — (148)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Bandhuḥ’ — ‘The brother-in-law, one belonging to the same gotra, or some such remote relation’ (Medhātithi and Govindarāja); — ‘cognate kinsman’ (Kullūkā and Rāghavānanda).

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 558), which explains ‘vitpati’ as ‘the son-in-law and ‘bandhu’ as ‘blood relations, as well as those related by friendship’; — in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 447); — in Godādharapoddhati (Kāla, p. 574); — and in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 991).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (15.19.20). — ‘According to some people, one may feed even his own pupils and also sagotras beyond the third grade.’

Āpastamba-Dharmasūtra (2.17.6). — ‘This includes the pupils also.’

Yājñavalkya (1.220). — ‘Sister’s son, priest, son-in-law, sacrificer, father-in-law, maternal uncle, the Triṇāciketas, daughter’s son, disciple, marriage-relations, paternal and maternal relations (may be fed).’

Viṣṇu (83.17.19). — ‘The son-in-law, and the daughter’s son are fit recipients; specially the Yogins.’

Prajāpati (73). — ‘Preceptor, son-in-law, daughter’s son, sister’s son, — these deserve to be offered the seat at the Śrāddha to the Pitṛs; the qualified maternal uncles also deserve to be honoured.’

VERSE 3.149

Section VIII - Śrāddhas

न ब्राह्मणं परीक्षेत दैवे कर्मणि धर्मवित् ।
पित्र्ये कर्मणि तु प्राप्ते परीक्षेत प्रयत्नतः ॥१४९॥

na brāhmaṇaṃ parīkṣeta daive karmaṇi dharmavit |
pitrye karmaṇi tu prāpte parīkṣeta prayatnataḥ ||149||

At the rite in honour of the gods, the man knowing the law shall not examine the Brāhmaṇa. But when the rite in honour of the Pitṛs comes to be performed, he shall examine him carefullv. — (149)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse is not meant to be prohibitive o? the examination of Brāhmaṇas (to be invited) at the rite performed in honour of the gods; what is meant by it is the permitting, at certain times, of the feeding, at rites in honour of gods, of such persons as are one-eyed, suffering from elephantiasis, and so forth.

‘At the rite in honour of the Pitṛs’ — i,e., when the time for Śrāddha has arrived, one should do the examination with great care; not so at the rite performed in honour of the gods. At the latter, one may sometimes even feed those going to be mentioned. Who are those that are permitted to be fed, we shall show later on.

According to others, however, this verse has been introduced for the purpose of enjoining the strict exclusion of those going to be mentioned; and not for that of permitting the feeding of those at the rites in honour of gods. — (149)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 556), which explains ‘parīkṣeta’ as ‘make an investigation regarding their learning and conduct’; — in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 287); — in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Śrāddha, p. 6b); — in Hemādri, (Śrāddha, p. 510); — and in Śrāddhakriyākaumudī (p. 34) as meaning that the testing in the case of Pitṛkṛtya is to be more thorough than in that of Devakṛtya.

Познавательные статьи:



Техника нижней прямой подачи мяча

Комплекс физических упражнений для развития мышц плечевого пояса

Стандарт Порядок надевания противочумного костюма

Общеразвивающие упражнения без предметов