with the Commentary of Medhatithi 97 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 103 из 350Следующая ⇒

“The father’s death is not the precise time of succession; since it has been declared that the sons shall divide the property, after having performed the Sapiṇḍīkaraṇa Śrāddha (which is done one year after death).”

The time herein mentioned is that for division, nut succession. In fact, for division also there is no such absolute rule that it must be done after the Sapiṇḍīkaraṇa; as it has been declared that ‘separation among brothers is in view of religious rites;’ and the act of separation becomes ‘religious,’ when the members separating severally perform Śrāddhas and entertain guests, and so forth. Nor will it be right to argue that such assertions as ‘the sons shall offer the nine Śrāddhas conjointly’ — refers to persons who have finished their studies. Because it may be that a man, having acquired only a little learning, marries a wife with a view to guard himself against transgressing the rule of having intercourse with one’s own wife, to which he would be prone by excess of sexual desire; but having married, be might devote greater attention to the studies he had begun, and thus complete his studies within a year, And it is with reference to such cases that we have the rule regarding the sons dividing their property after having performed the Sapiṇḍīkaraṇa.

Then again, when a man has lost a wife and is going to marry another, till he has married again, there would be ‘absence of fire.’ Specially because, in view of the general law that ‘one should make sacrificial offerings in the company of his wife,’ which shows that there can be no setting up of fire for one who has not married.

Such being the case, when Fire is absent, one should place the oblations in the hands of the Brāhmaṇa — “Of which Brāhmaṇa?” — Of one of those that have been invited; either of one who has been invited in honour of the gods, or of some other invited Brāhmaṇa.

As a laudatory description, we have the words — ‘what the Fire is, &c.’

This is the opinion of those ‘seers of mantras’ who know their meanings. — (212).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Medhātithi (P. 274, l. 19) — ‘Dvau hi kālau etc.’ — See Gautama 5. 7 — ‘Bhāryādiragnirdāyādirvā.’

The first half of this verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 581) as laying down the offering of Homa into the hand of the Brāhmaṇa. In this connection it enters into a long discussion. The text speaks of the ‘absence of fire the ‘fire’ meant here must be the Śrauta and Gṛhya fires. Absence again is of three kinds: ‘previous absence,’ ‘destruction,’ and ‘absolute absence there is ‘previous absence’ of fire prior to one’s entering the ‘Household’; — after the man has entered the Household, if the fire goes out, either through carelessness, or through the break up of the Household, there is ‘destruction’ of fire, which can be resusciated by being set up again, or by the resumption of the Household; — there is ‘absolute absence’ of fire in the case of the Life-long Student, who never marries, and therefore never sets up either the Śrauta (Sacrificial) or the Gṛhya (Domestic) fire. It is only in the case of the first two kinds of ‘absence’ of the

Sacrificial and Domestic fires, that it being impossible to set up the Fire at the time of offering the Śrāddha, the Homa should be offered into the hands and such other receptacles as have been prescribed. — Some people have held that Homa can be offered into the ordinary fire also; but according to this view there could be no ‘absence of fire,’ as the ordinary fire can always be set up without difficulty; so that there would be no occasion for advantage being taken of the permission to offer the Homa into the hand or other receptacles; and this would render the present text, and others similar to it, entirely futile. All this points to the conclusion that the Homa at Śrāddha should never be offered into the ordinary fire.

Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 739) quotes this half of the verse, and remarks that it refers only to the case of the Homas offered by a Student

It is quoted also in Mitākṣarā (on 1.237) in support of the view that the offering of Homa into the hand is meant to apply only to the Case — (1) of the Śrāddhas prescribed for the purpose of attaining a definite end, such as the one laid down to be performed under such lunar asterisms as Kṛttikā and the rest, for the purpose of attaining heaven, — (2) of the Ābhyudayika Śrāddha laid down to be performed on the occasion of the son’s marriage and such other ceremonies, — (3) of the Aṣṭakā Śrāddha, laid down to be performed on the eighth day of the month, — and (4) of the Sapiṇḍīkaraṇa Śrāddha.

The first half of the verse is quoted in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 316).

The whole verse is quoted in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1337), which has the following ṅotes: — The second line is a Hetuvannigada Arthavāda, the Brāhanaṇa being eulogised as serving the same purposes as the fire into which libations are poured, — ‘mantradarśibhiḥ’, ‘by those learned in the Veda.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Āśvalāyana Gṛhyasūtra (4.8.5-6). — ‘If permitted, then, it may be offered into the hands; Agni being the mouth of the Gods and the hand being the mouth of the Pitṛs, — so says the Brāhmaṇa-text.’

Jātūkarṇa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 739). — ‘In the absence of the fire, it should be offered into the right hand of the Brāhmaṇa. That is regarded as the period of absence of fire while one has not taken to a wife,’

Gṛhyakāra (Parāśaramādhava, p. 739). — ‘The Anvaṣṭakā, the monthly Pārvaṇa, the Śrāddha for obtaining specific reward, the auspicious Iṣṭi, and the unitary Śrāddha; at the first four of these, the man with the fire shall offer oblations into the fire; and at the latter four, in the hands of the Brāhmaṇas invited for the sake of the Pitṛs.’

VERSE 3.213

Section XIV - Method of Feeding

अक्रोधनान् सुप्रसादान् वदन्त्येतान् पुरातनान् ।
लोकस्याप्यायने युक्तान् श्राद्धदेवान् द्विजोत्तमान् ॥२१३॥

akrodhanān suprasādān vadantyetān purātanān |
lokasyāpyāyane yuktān śrāddhadevān dvijottamān ||213||

The ancients describe these good Brāhmaṇas as the “Gods of Śrāddha,” free from anger, easily satisfied, intent upon sustaining the universe. — (213).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This is a purely laudatory declaration; and it makes the Brāhmaṇas attain the dignity of gods. [The sense being] — Agni (Fire) is a god, and when a libation is poured into the Fire, the gods eat it, through the Fire as their mouth; the Brāhmaṇas also have the same character; and whatever is placed in their hands, that also the gods eat.

“What is that character of the gods, by virtue of which the Brāhmaṇas are spoken of as having the same character?”

It is in answer to this that the text adds — ‘free from anger &c.’ As regards the question why they are so described, the explanation is that what is meant is that the libations of butter should be offered into the hands of such Brāhmaṇas as are endowed with the character here described.

Others have explained that in a foregoing verse (192),

‘freedom from anger’ and the rest have been laid down as the qualities to be sought for those invited in honour of the Pitṛs and who were meant to be eulogised, — while the present text lays down these as to be sought for in those, invited in honour of the gods. This is the difference between the two texts. It is in this sense that they have been described as ‘the gods of śrāddha.’

‘Ancients’ — i.e., the sages.

Or, we may read the term ‘purātana’ with the accusative ending; ‘ancient’ (in this case) qualifying ‘gods;’ — the ‘ancient gods’ standing for those deities born in this cycle who are called ‘sādhyas.’

‘Intent upon sustaining the universe,’ — i.e., it is with a view to gratifying people that they eat at śrāddhas; hence one should not think that ‘these men are eating through greediness, and for the purpose of obtaining the perceptible pleasure (of eating tasty food), and hence why should any honour be rendered to them?’ Because these men sustain the universe, — i.e., the Earth, the Sky and the Heaven; therefore, they should not be treated with disrespect. — (213)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Burnell is not right in saying that “Medhātithi omits verses 213-14.”

‘Purātanān’ — ‘Those deities born in this cycle who are called Sādhyas’ (Medhātithi, who adopts this reading only as an alternative, his own reading being ‘purātanāḥ’ explained as ‘the ancient sages’ and construed as nominative to the verb ‘vadanti’); — ‘Those whose succession has been uninterrupted since immemorial times’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda); — ‘Those who were produced before all other castes’ (Nārāyaṇa)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mahābhārata (13.237.31). — ‘At the Śrāddha, one should invite such persons as are free from anger, not fickle, tolerant, self-controlled, with senses suppressed, and benevolent towards all beings.’

VERSE 3.214

Section XIV - Method of Feeding

अपसव्यमग्नौ कृत्वा सर्वमावृत्य विक्रमम् ।
अपसव्येन हस्तेन निर्वपेदुदकं भुवि ॥२१४॥

apasavyamagnau kṛtvā sarvamāvṛtya vikramam |
apasavyena hastena nirvapedudakaṃ bhuvi ||214||

Having done the entire serial performance in Fire, in the “Apasavya” form, he should offer water on the ground with the hand in the “Apasavya” position. — (214)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

What is done in fire, in the form of pouring the libation, with the words, ‘agnaye svadhā namaḥ’ (‘this is an offering for Agni,’) should be done in the ‘apasavya’ form.

Some people explain the term ‘apasavya’ to mean that the act should be done with the right hand, not with the left, nor by both; in view of the prohibition contained in verse 225 below. This, according to these people, has been added, in view of it being thought possible to do the act with both hands.

This, however, is not right. Because the ‘apasavya form’ here enjoined is in reference to the ‘serial performance’ of those libations that are poured into Fire; hence, what is meant is that the libations should be poured in such a manner that they tend towards the South, not towards the North; — this latter being what is right in the case of offerings to the gods. That is to say, when the sacrificial material is being poured with the ladle, one should be facing the South, and not the North — this rule standing on the same footing as that which prescribes the pouring of water-libations to the Pitṛs in such a manner that it flows between the thumb and the index-finger.

The epithet ‘entire’ indicates that all such acts as the placing of the material in the dish, and so forth, should be done in the ‘apasavya’ form.

‘He should offer water with the hand in the apasavya position,’

‘Śanaiḥ’ (for ‘bhuvi’) is another reading.

The purpose of this rule is that it has been emphasised with a view to preclude the use of silver implements (according to 202).

‘Āvṛt’ stands for ‘Āvṛtti,’ ‘repetition.’ — (214)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Apasavyam’ — ‘In such a manner that they tend towards the South’ (Medhātithi); — ‘Passing the sacrificial thread over the right shoulder under the left arm’ (Nārāyaṇa); — ‘with the right hand’ (‘others’ in Medhātithi, which he rejects).

‘Āpasavyena hastena’ — ‘With the right hand’ (Kullūka). This explanation, which Buhler wrongly attributes to ‘others’ (in Medhātithi), is really put forth by Medhātithi in connection with the former term ‘Apasavyam’, and not the second expression ‘Āpasavyena hastena.’ Nor is it right to say that according to Medhātithi this second expression means ‘out of the Tīrtha of the right hand which is sacred to the Manes’; because, as a matter of fact, Medhātithi has given no explanation of this expression at all. Buhler seems to have got an imperfect copy of Medhātithi; or did he not pay careful attention to reading it?

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 601) without any comment; — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1321) as distinctly laying down the ‘Prācīnāvīta’.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Laghu-Āśvalāyana Smṛti (13.73-74). — ‘On the spot which is sloping towards the south-east, he shall draw a line with the mantra Apahata, etc.; he shall spread kuśa over it and then adopting the Apasavya form, he shall sprinkle water over it with the mantra Śundhantām, etc.; and then upon the kuśa he shall offer the balls.’

VERSE 3.215

Section XIV - Method of Feeding

त्रींस्तु तस्माद् हविःशेषात् पिण्डान् कृत्वा समाहितः ।
अउदकेनैव विधिना निर्वपेद् दक्षिणामुखः ॥२१५॥

trīṃstu tasmād haviḥśeṣāt piṇḍān kṛtvā samāhitaḥ |
audakenaiva vidhinā nirvaped dakṣiṇāmukhaḥ ||215||

Having made these balls out of the remnant of the said sacrificial material, he should, with collected mind and facing the South, offer them in the manner of the water-libations. — (215)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

From out of the material that had been held in the vessel, and out of which the fire-oblations have been offered, — ‘having made three bails,’ turning bis face towards the South, he should ‘offer them’ — i.e., throw them on the kuśa-grass, with reference to the Pitṛs.

The term ‘piṇḍa,’ ‘ball,’ stands for something solid; hence, one should not, in this connection, offer disintegrated articles of food.

‘In the manner of the water-libations’ — i.e., the manner of offering water-libations, which has been just pointed out (in the preceding verse).

In this connection, the following question arises: — “Should the purificatory rites necessary for the sacrificial material be performed over the substance taken out of the food that has been cooked for feeding the Brāhmaṇas? — or, should separate rice be cooked? — and also what should be the quantity of that sacrificial material? The rule laying down ‘four handfulls’ cannot apply to this case.”

This question has been already discussed; in the absence of any specific rules on the subject, one is free to do what one likes; and the quantity should be just what may be necessary for the purpose in view.

Inasmuch as ‘the manner of the water-libations’ is laid down as applicable to the offering of balls, it follows that this latter offering is to be done with ‘hands in the apasavya position,’ and not with silver implements.

‘With collected mind’ — this has been added for the purpose of filling up the metre. — (215)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 601), without any comment; — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1427), which adds the following notes: — ‘Tasmāt haviḥśeṣāt’, out of the remnant of the substance offered into the Fire, — ‘audakavidhi’ stands for the method by which an offering of water is made with hands in the Apasavya form, as laid down in the preceding verse.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (73.17-19). — ‘Near the food-remnant, upon kuśa-blades pointing southwards, he shall deposit one ball for his father, with the mantra Pṛthivī darvirakṣitā, etc.; — the second to the grand-father, with the mantra Antarikṣam darvirakṣitā, etc.; the third to the great-grand-father, with the mantra Dyaurdarviraksiṭā, etc.’

Yājñavalkya (1.241-242). — ‘Taking up all the food and mixing it up with sesamum, he shall offer the balls near the food-remnant, in the manner of the Pitṛyajña.’

Laghu-Āśvalāyana (13.74). — (See above.)

VERSE 3.216

Section XIV - Method of Feeding

न्युप्य पिण्डांस्ततस्तांस्तु प्रयतो विधिपूर्वकम् ।
तेषु दर्भेषु तं हस्तं निर्मृज्याल्लेपभागिनाम् ॥२१६॥

nyupya piṇḍāṃstatastāṃstu prayato vidhipūrvakam |
teṣu darbheṣu taṃ hastaṃ nirmṛjyāllepabhāginām ||216||

Self-controlled, he should, after having offered those balls on Kuśa-blades, according to rule, wipe that hand on those same (Kuśa-blades), for the sake of the “Partakers of Smearings.” — (216)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Nyupya’ — ‘having offered,’ — ‘on kuśa-blades’ — he should wipe that hand on those same kuśa-blades, — those same on which the balls have been offered.

In accordance with the opinion of other Smṛtis, the wiping is to be done on the root-end of the kuśa-blades.

Others have held that this rule does not mean simply that the food and water attaching to the hand should be so wiped; in fact, even though nothing may be attached to the hand, yet even the hand itself should be wiped on the blades. The reason for this is that the act here prescribed is not in the nature of the ‘disposal of remnants,’ in which case alone it could he held to be done only when the stated conditions would be present. Specially as what is prescribed is, not that ‘one should wipe what is attaching to the hand,’ but that ‘he should wipe the hand.’

Against this it might be argued that — “we find it stated that the act is ‘for the sake of the Partakers of Smearings,’ which shows that it cannot be done when there is no ‘smearing’ at all. Why, then, should it be said that, even when there is nothing sticking to the hand, the act should be done?”

The answer to this is as follows: — It is possible that solid food may not stick to the hand; but when the ball of food is being rolled up, the juices of the food are sure to stick to the hand, by reason of the contact with heat; and it is this that is called the ‘smearing.’

The genitive ending in ‘lepabhāginām’ connotes the connection of the act of wiping with the particular class of Pitṛs. Any such beings as ‘Partakers of Smearings’ are not visible to the eye; hence it is not possible to bring about their ‘possession’ in connection with the ‘smearing.’ Hence, all that is meant is that ‘one should think in his mind that the smearing is meant to be the share of the ‘Partakers of Smearings;’ or, he may even say this in so many words.

Others have held that ancestors above the great grandfather are spoken of as ‘Partakers of Smearings.’ According to this view, if the names of those ancestors are not pronounced, they may be referred to by means of such expressions as ‘this to the father of my great-grandfather,’ ‘this to the grandfather of my great-grandfather,’ and so forth.

The singular number in ‘hand’ shows that the ball is to be offered with a single hand in the ‘apasavya’ form.

‘Self-controlled’ — this is a mere reiteration: such control having been already prescribed above.

‘According to rule’ — refers to the rules of procedure laid down in other scriptures; e.g., Śaṅkha says — ‘One should offer the ball along with sandal-paint, garlands, incense, doth and dressings.’ The ‘rule’ that has been prescribed in the text by Manu himself has been stated in his own words; hence the phrase, ‘according to rule,’ would be meaningless (if it referred to that rule itself). It is for this reason that this phrase should be taken as summing up the details prescribed in other scriptures. — (216).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 601), without comment; — in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 754) as laying down what should be done after the offering of the Balls has been made; — in Smṛtitattva (p. 177), which explains that the ‘Lepabhāginaḥ,’ ‘Partakers of smearings’ are the ancestors, the great-great-grandfather, his father and his grandfather; — one’s own father, grandfather and great-grandfather being called ‘pīṇḍabhāginaḥ’; — the same explanation is repeated by the same work on p. 239.

It is evidently a misprint in Buhler’s note where he includes the ‘great-grandfather’ under the ‘lepabhāginaḥ’.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 507); — in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1449), which has the following notes: — ‘Nyupya’, having deposited on the kuśa-grass, — ‘prayataḥ’ with proper care, — such care as implies concentration of mind, freedom from forgetfulness and so forth; in fact it stands for the entire procedure, — ‘vidhipūrvakam’ refers to rules prescribed in ordinances other than those of Manu himself, — ‘teṣu darbheṣu’, those kuśa-blades upon which the Balls have been deposited, — ‘tam’, that hand by which the Ball has been offered — ‘lepabhāginaḥ’ i.e., intended for those Pitṛs who are entitled to the ‘smearings’ i. e., the four ancestors, above the great-grandfather; — and in Śrāddhakriyākaumudī (p. 190).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (73.22). — ‘The hand should be rubbed over the root-end of the kuśa-blades, with the mantra atra pitaro mādayadhvam

Vyāghra (Aparārka, p. 507). — ‘The smearing of the hand one should wipe at the root-end of the kuśa.’

VERSE 3.217

Section XIV - Method of Feeding

आचम्यौदक्परावृत्य त्रिरायम्य शनैरसून् ।
षड् ऋतूंश्च नमस्कुर्यात् पितॄनेव च मन्त्रवत् ॥२१७॥

ācamyaudakparāvṛtya trirāyamya śanairasūn |
ṣaḍ ṛtūṃśca namaskuryāt pitṝneva ca mantravat ||217||

Turning to the north, having sipped water and having gently suppressed his breath three times, he shall salute, with proper formulas, the six seasons and also the Pitṛs. — (217)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Having placed the balls on the kuśa-grass, he should turn towards the North, leftwards; since we read in another Smṛti — ‘turning to the left, towards the north.’

Seated with his face towards the North, he should sip water. ‘Having sipped water’ — he should perform ‘breath-suppression’ three times; e.g., simply supressing the breath three times — only this much; — the rule relating to the repeating of the Gāyatrī verse along with the ‘Śiras’ formula (Yājña. Ācāra 23) not applying to the present case.

‘Gently’ — so that there may not he much pain. This is what has been asserted (elsewhere) in the words — ‘having suppressed the breathing as much as one can.’

Still facing the North, he should salute, &c., &c. — saying, ‘Salutation to the spring!’ and so forth.

He should also salute the Pitṛs; ‘with proper formulas with the mantra, ‘Na mo vaḥ pitaraḥ, &c., &c.’ This saluting of the Pitṛs should be done with face turned towards the Balls; for another Smṛti says that this is to be done by ‘turning round.’ — (217).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Smṛtitattva (p. 241), which explains the word ‘mantravat’ (the reading adopted by it, along with Medhātithi, in place of ‘mantravit’), as referring to the Yajurveda-text — ‘namo vaḥ pitaro rasāya — namo vaḥ pitaraḥ śoṣāya — namo vaḥ pitaro jīvāya — namo vaḥ pitaraḥ svadhāyai — namo vaḥ pitaro ghorāya — namo vaḥ pitaro manyave,’ where, according to Halāyudha, the six names — ‘Rasa — Śoṣa — Jīva — Svadhā — Ghora — and Manyu’ — stand respectively for the six seasons — Spring, Summer, Rains, Autumn, Pre-winter and Mid-winter; and what is meant is that these should be thought of as ‘Pitṛs’ and then saluted. — It further adds that as no such ‘salutation to the Seasons’ is spoken of in Gobhila’s Gṛhyasūtra, what Manu says should be taken as applying to Brāhmaṇas other than those who belong to the Sāmaveda.

Madanapārijāta (p. 601) also quotes this verse, and adds that the salutation to the Seasons is to be made with the mantra — ‘namo vaḥ pitaraḥ &c., &c.’

Nirṇayasindhu (p. 328) quotes this verse, and adds that Medhātithi has explained the phrase ‘trirāyamya asūn’ as ‘triḥ prāṇāyāmam kṛtvā.’

It is quoted in Aparārka (p. 507); — in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1451) to the effect that the sipping of water should be done after the washing of the hand; — and in Śrāddhakriyākaumudī (p. 193), which adds that the mantra for bowing to the seasons begins with ‘vasantāya’ and that for saluting the Pitṛs, with ‘amīmadanta.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Laghu-Āśvalāyana (13.75). — ‘Having taken leave with the mantra, Atra, etc., he shall turn towards the north and restrain his breath.’

VERSE 3.218

Section XIV - Method of Feeding

Познавательные статьи:



Где возникла философия и почему?

Относительная высота сжатой зоны бетона

Сущность проекции Гаусса-Крюгера и использование ее в геодезии

Тарифы на перевозку пассажиров