with the Commentary of Medhatithi 111 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 117 из 350Следующая ⇒

He shall not honour, even with speech, impostors, those who follow improper occupations, those who are cat-like in their behaviour, hypocrites, logicians, and those who behave like herons. — (30)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

In view of the implied meaning of the terms ‘shall dwell,’ people have taken this verse to mean that one shall.....

NOTE: Pages 336 and 337 are missing from the book. Please email me if you have a copy of the text.

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Pāṣaṇḍinaḥ’ — ‘Ascetics who wander about with external marks, such as nakedness, red-dresses, and so forth’ (Medhātithi, who does not explain the term as ‘non-brahmanical ascetics,’ as asserted by Buhler, — and also Govindarāja); — ‘Śākyas, Bhikṣus, Kṣapaṇakas and other ascetics outside the Vedic pale’ (Kullūka and Nārāyaṇa); — ‘those who do not believe in the Vedas’ (Rāghavānanda). The ‘vāhyaliṅgin’ does not mean, as Hopkins says, ‘those who bear the token of outcastes’; what is really meant is the person who, without possessing any real asceticism of the heart, makes a show of it, by wearing external marks.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 170), which explains ‘vikarmasthān’ as ‘those addicted to such acts as are forbidden — in Mitākṣarā (on l. 130), which explains ‘haituka’ as ‘one who, by argumentation, raises doubts about everything’, — ‘pāṣaṇḍinaḥ’ as ‘those-who have recourse to such life-conditions as are opposed to the dictates of the Vedas — and in Smṛtisāroddhāra (p. 319).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yājñavalkya (1.130). — ‘One should always exclude the hypocrite, the logician, the impostor and those who behave like the heron.’

Viṣṇudharmottara (Aparārka, p. 171). — ‘The man who transgresses all laws laid down in the Śruti and the Smṛti, relating to the division of castes and life-stages, and acts as he likes, relying upon false reasonings, addicted to evil deeds, deluded with overweening opinion of his own reasoning powers, is the Pāṣaṇḍin, wicked, fit for hell, the lowest of men. With such men and with the Vaiḍālavratas one shall never have any intercourse.’

Viṣṇupurāṇa (Do.). — [Same as Manu.]

VERSE 4.31

Section VII - Attending upon Guests

वेदविद्याव्रतस्नातांश्रोत्रियान् गृहमेधिनः ।
पूजयेद् हव्यकव्येन विपरीतांश्च वर्जयेत् ॥३१॥

vedavidyāvratasnātāṃśrotriyān gṛhamedhinaḥ |
pūjayed havyakavyena viparītāṃśca varjayet ||31||

Those who have become Snatakas after studying the Veda, or after completing their vows, (and) householders, who are Srotriyas, one must worship by (gifts of food) sacred to gods and manes, but one must avoid those who are different. — (31)

Note: The above is an alternate translation by George Bühler.

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

NOTE: Pages 336 and 337 are missing from the book. Please email me if you have a copy of the text.

... Answer: — The term has been added for the purpose of laying stress upon the fact that those persons are meant who still keep up their study of the Veda.

‘Householders.’ — This does not mean that the mendicant, the ascetic and the student are not to be honoured; all that is meant is that, since all these live upon alms, they cannot be regarded as ‘guests;’ especially as the student cannot dwell anywhere else except at his teacher’s house, and the ascetic cannot dwell away from the forests. For the Renunciate also, dwelling in villages is not possible, since it has been distinctly declared that ‘he shall go to the village only when seeking for alms’ (Gautama, 3. 14). From all this it follows that, in view of the fact that persons in the other stages of life live in places other than ‘households,’ — even though it be somehow possible for them to have the character of ‘guests,’ — what is said here can apply to householders only, as a rule.

‘With offerings to Gods, and to Pitṛs.’ — That is, these persons are to be received and honoured at the performance of rites in honour of Gods and of Pitṛs.

‘Otherwise.’ — Those who are not ‘accomplished,’ should be avoided, even though they be free from the aforesaid defects (described in 30). — (31)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 182).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Laghuśātātapa (78, 83). — ‘If, in the matter of feeding and gifts, one ignores a Brāhmaṇa Student who may happen to be at hand, he destroys his family up to the seventh generation. If a Vedic Scholar, accomplished in the Veda, in learning and in observances, come to one’s house, all the vegetables become delighted at the prospect of reaching the highest state.’

Bṛhad-Yama (42, 43). — ‘The man who is free from jealousies, who is of good character, a Vedic Scholar cognisant of Brahman, young and endowed with learning and modesty is the proper recipient, the best of the twice-born. He who is conversant with the Vedanta, who is Jyeṣṭhasāman, free from avarice, devoted to the Veda, is the person who should be employed with special effort in the rites offered to gods and Pitṛs.’

VERSE 4.32

Section VII - Attending upon Guests

शक्तितोऽपचमानेभ्यो दातव्यं गृहमेधिना ।
संविभागश्च भूतेभ्यः कर्तव्योऽनुपरोधतः ॥३२॥

śaktito'pacamānebhyo dātavyaṃ gṛhamedhinā |
saṃvibhāgaśca bhūtebhyaḥ kartavyo'nuparodhataḥ ||32||

The Householder shall give as much as he can to those who do not cook their own food; and, for the sake of all living beings, he shall make apportionment, without detriment (to himself). — (32)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Those who do not cook their own food.’ — Students and Renunciates are meant, — say some.

But this is not right, as gifts to students and hermits has already been laid down as an obligatory duty. Hence, what is meant by the present text is that one shall give as much as one can to the poor and also to impostors (who are unable to cook for themselves). That is, his giving shall be in due consideration of what he can give and of the quantity of food cooked in his house. Since the recipients are described as doing no ‘cooking,’ it follows that cooked food is to be given to them.

‘Apportionment.’ — He shall distribute out of his other belongings also, — such as fuel, clothing, medicines and other useful things.

‘Among ail beings’ — The term ‘beings’ stands for all living things in the world; just as it is used in such declarations as ‘gāyatri is all this being.’ Since inanimate beings cannot be helped in the same manner as living beings, this term here stands for conscious, living, beings only. Thus, according to the view that plants are capable of growing and endowed with consciousness, it would follow that some apportionment of wealth should be made for providing for the watering of plants, &c., also.

The term ‘bhūta,’ ‘being,’ has many meanings: (1) In some cases, it means the principal thing, e.g., in such expressions as ‘this Brāhmaṇa woman is the being in this house;’ (2) sometimes it means ‘ghost;’ e.g., ‘this person is obsessed by a being;’ (3) sometimes it means the contrary thing; e.g., ‘he says, what is bhūta;’ (4) sometimes it is used in the sense of the past, — e g., ‘this verb denotes the bhūta;’ (5) sometimes it stands for particular deities, — e.g., ‘offering to the bhūtas;’ (6) sometimes it stands for all conscious beings, — e.g., ‘one should not kill bhūtas;’ (7) sometimes it denotes approach, — ‘our Moon is bhūta, become, large;’ (8) sometimes it denotes similitude, — e.g., ‘this is kāvya — bhūta, as if it were a poem;’ and (9) sometimes it means coming into existence, — e.g., ‘Devadatta’s son is bhūta, born.’ What the term means in the present context we have already explained.

The Dative ending in ‘bhūtebhyaḥ’ denotes ‘for the sake of.’

‘Without detriment;’ — so that no suffering be caused to his own family; that is, he shall keep back enough for his own family, and then, with the remainder, he shall ‘make the apportionment.’ This is what is taught also in 11-10. — (32)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Āpastamba (2.4.13). — ‘If any one should beg for food at the time, the master and mistress of the house shall not refuse him.’

Do. (2.10.10). — ‘Distribution of food has been laid down for such seekers for food as may be coming daily, — but without detriment (to the master).’

VERSE 4.33 [Duties of the Accomplished Student: Sources of Wealth]

Section VIII - Duties of the Accomplished Student: Sources of Wealth

राजतो धनमन्विच्छेत् संसीदन् स्नातकः क्षुधा ।
याज्यान्तेवासिनोर्वाऽपि न त्वन्यत इति स्थितिः ॥३३॥

rājato dhanamanvicchet saṃsīdan snātakaḥ kṣudhā |
yājyāntevāsinorvā'pi na tvanyata iti sthitiḥ ||33||

Suffering from hunger, the accomplished student should seek for wealth from the king, or from one at whose sacrificial rites he officiates, or from his pupil; and not from others; such is the rule. — (33)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The term ‘king’ here stands for all wealthy castes; as the author is going to declare later on (10-113) — ‘The king should be begged by persons suffering from want and seeking for wealth and metals.’ Thus the term ‘rājan,’ ‘king,’ in its primary denotation signifies the Kṣatriya caste; but on the strength of what we see in other treatises, we take it to mean here the ‘king of men,’ specially, as kings of men are wealthy. Thus, what the text means is that — ‘gifts’ should be received from such persons as are extremely rich in the possession of cows and bulls, goat and sheep, cash and grains. In doing this, the man shall he also observing the rule that ‘he should live without causing pain to any one;’ as such people do not feel any pain in making gifts; while if one were to beg from men with small wealth, it would be open to objection.

If the term ‘rājan’ were taken in its primary sense of the Kṣatriya caste, the receiving of gifts from Brāhmaṇas and others would become forbidden; and this would be against the teaching of all Smṛtis. In another Smṛti, we read — ‘One shall receive gifts from commended twice-born people, and uncooked food also from a Śūdra who is submissive,’ In prohibitions also, we find the term ‘rājan’ used in the sense of ‘king of men;’ e,g., in such passages as — ‘One shall not accept gifts from the Rājā,’ where the prohibition cannot apply to the Kṣatriya caste, since the text subsequently adds — ‘or from one not born of Kṣatriya parents’ (4-84). It is for this reason that this latter verse cannot be taken as forbidding the acceptance of gifts from the Kṣatriya, because, if that were meant, the text could not add ‘from one not born of Kṣatriya parents;’ for those ‘not born of Kṣatriya parents’ can never be ‘Kṣatriyas,’ For these reasons, the conclusion on this point is as follows: — ‘gifts shall be accepted from such Kṣatriya kings as behave according to the scriptures, and not from others,’

‘From one at whose sacrificial rites he officiates, or from his pupil.’ — The Genitive ending is used in reference to the ‘wealth.’ Or, we may read the phrase as ending with the ‘Tasi affix’ — yājyāntevāsitaḥ.’ Since both these names are based upon the doing of certain acts, the meaning is that — ‘he shall live by the occupations of Teaching and Officiating at Sacrifices.’

Others explain as follows: — The receiving of gifts from others would constitute a minor sin, and other means of acquiring wealth, such as theft and the like, are distinctly forbidden. The upshot is that he shall worship God and live upon gifts made through love, and also by pronouncing ‘svasti’ (at sacrificial performances); but in no case shall he do service; as that means of livelihood has been already forbidden. Thus he may accept gifts from such of his sacrificial clients as have received benefit at his hands, even though he may not be officiating at their sacrifices at the time; for even though the actual relationship (of priest and client) may have ceased, their duty towards each other remains.

‘Suffering.’ — This means that gifts shall not be sought, if the man has inherited some property; as it has been declared (in verse 15 above) that — ‘nor when wealth is already there.’

What is said here is not something to be done in abnormal times of distress; as mere ‘suffering’ does not constitute ‘distress;’ all that it means is ‘absence of earned wealth;’ and it would be a case of ‘distress,’ only if the adopting of any of the sanctioned means of living were impossible, or if all one’s property were destroyed. Even though he may be possessed of much cash and grains, his grain-supply may become exhausted in times of famine; and, in such cases, if entertainment as a guest would be impossible, and the man would be suffering from hunger, this would constitute ‘distress;’ while, if the man were not pining from hunger, this would be simple ‘suffering.’ Such is the difference between the two (distress and suffering).

‘Not from others.’ — That is, he shall receive no gifts from persons with little wealth, or from one who receives no benefit from the person (begging). — (33)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 33), which adds that where the text says ‘not from others’, what it means is that ‘in the event of those named here being available, one should not seek for it from others’; — and in Prāyaścittaviveka (p. 402), which explains ‘rājan’ as standing for ‘the just king of the Kṣatriya caste’.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (9.6 3, 64). — ‘For the sake of his own maintenance and welfare he shall approach none except those who may he dutiful towards gods and elders.’

Vaśiṣṭha (12.2), — ‘He shall beg from any one except the king and his own pupils.’

Yājñavalkya (1.130). — ‘Suffering from hunger, he may seek for wealth from the king, from his own pupils and from one at whose sacrifices he officiates; and he shall avoid the hypocrite, the sceptic, the impostor and the heron-like.’

Viṣṇu (63.1). — ‘For the sake of his maintenance and welfare he shall approach the king.’

VERSE 4.34

Section VIII - Duties of the Accomplished Student: Sources of Wealth

न सीदेत् स्नातको विप्रः क्षुधा शक्तः कथं चन ।
न जीर्णमलवद्वासा भवेच्च विभवे सति ॥३४॥

na sīdet snātako vipraḥ kṣudhā śaktaḥ kathaṃ cana |
na jīrṇamalavadvāsā bhavecca vibhave sati ||34||

The Accomplished Brāhmaṇa shall not, if he can, suffer from hunger; nor shall he wear torn or dirty clothes, so long as he has any property. — (34).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

If he happen to fail in some attempt at acquiring wealth, he shall not, at once, have recourse to methods permitted during abnormal times; on the contrary, he should try again and again; this is what has been said in 4.13. Consequently, if the man is a cultivator, and his crops have withered for want of grain, he should not, merely for this, at once have recourse to living upon others, or to begging.

So long as he can, and so long as he has property, torn and dirty clothes shall not be worn. — (34)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Śaktaḥ’ — ‘Who is able to procure food’ (Nārāyaṇa); — ‘he who is able to dine shall not stint himself through avarice’ (Nandana); — ‘a Snātaka, who is a fit recipient of gifts must not pine with hunger (so long as the king has anything to give); — Rāghavānanda reading ‘Yuktaḥ’ explains it to mean ‘A Snātaka suffering from hunger shall not (...?)

This verse is quoted in Nityācārapradīpa (p. 353); — and in Smṛtisāroddhāra (p. 224).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (9.3). — ‘So long as he has any property, he shall not wear torn or dirty clothes.’

Vaśiṣṭha (12.4). — ‘He shall not associate with a man in dirty clothes, nor with a woman in her courses.’

Viṣṇu (72.9). — [Same as Gautama.]

VERSE 4.35 [Personal Cleanliness]

Section IX - Personal Cleanliness

कॢप्तकेशनखश्मश्रुर्दान्तः शुक्लाम्बरः शुचिः ।
स्वाध्याये चैव युक्तः स्यान्नित्यमात्महितेषु च ॥३५॥

kḷptakeśanakhaśmaśrurdāntaḥ śuklāmbaraḥ śuciḥ |
svādhyāye caiva yuktaḥ syānnityamātmahiteṣu ca ||35||

Keeping his hair, nails and beard clipped, subdued, wearing white clothes, pure, — he shall always remain engaged in Vedic study, also in what may be conducive to his welfare. — (35)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Clipping.’ — This clipping, or ‘shaving of the lips’ — is necessary. By this the man becomes ‘pure,’ as the text says. If a man wear long hair, bathing becomes a difficult process, and the man is likely to be lazy on that account: and would thus remain ‘impure.’ If, however, even though wearing long hair, he is careful about his bath, then the wearing of hair would not be objectionable.

‘Subdued’ — free from haughtiness.

‘Pure’ — in all matters; and also purified by the right use of such means of cleanliness as clay, water, mouth-rinsing, and so forth.

He should be always engaged in the study of the Veda. Though this has been already said before, yet it is repeated again and again, in order to show its great importance.

‘What is conducive to his welfare.;’ — i.e., the avoiding of illness by remedies, and also by guarding against indigestion, untimely meals, heavy and hot food, and so forth. — (35).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Smṛtitattva (II, p. 249) as laying down ‘shaving of the head’ for those who have taken the Final Bath; — and in Smṛtisāroddhāra (p. 224).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (9.4-7). — ‘He shall not wear cloth that is loudly coloured, or that has been worn by another; nor garlands or shoes; in the event of incapacity, he may wear washed clothes; he should never grow his beard, without cause.’

Gautama (69). — ‘He shall teach those that are disciplined, — himself disciplined in cleanliness, and ever alert in regard to the Veda.’

Yājñavalkya (1.131). — ‘Wearing white clothes, with hair, beard and nails clipped, — he shall not eat in the presence of his wife, nor with only one cloth, nor standing.’

Āpastamba (1.30.10-12). — ‘In his clothing, he shall avoid all colouring; also what is naturally black. He shall wear only such cloth as may not be obtrusive.’

VERSE 4.36

Section IX - Personal Cleanliness

वैणवीं धारयेद् यष्टिं सोदकं च कमण्डलुम् ।
यज्ञोपवीतं वेदं च शुभं रौक्मे च कुण्डले ॥३६॥

vaiṇavīṃ dhārayed yaṣṭiṃ sodakaṃ ca kamaṇḍalum |
yajñopavītaṃ vedaṃ ca śubhaṃ raukme ca kuṇḍale ||36||

He shall hold a stick of bamboo, and also a water-pot full of water, the sacred thread, a handful of kuśa-grass and a pair of bright golden ear-rings. — (36).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The ‘holding’ of the sacred thread and of the ear-rings, would consist in their being worn on the body; and each of these should be worn on that part of the body for which it is fitted; for instance, the ear-rings shall be worn in the ears, and the sacred thread over the body; the term ‘kuṇḍala’ ‘ear-ring,’ being the name of the ornament for the ear; and the name ‘sacred thread’ being applied to the thread worn over the neck and passing under the right arm.

The stick and the rest are to be always kept on the body, in view of the visible purposes served by them. For instance, the stick serves as a support when the man is tired, and it also serves the purpose of driving away the bull and other aggressive animals.

Inasmuch as ‘cleaning’ has been laid down as to be done with water taken out of a reservoir, the present text restricts the vessel to the ‘water-pot’ definitely; and this precludes the jar and other vessels, which serve the same purpose (of holding water), and not such other things as the ear-ring, the bracelet, and so forth.

Thus it is that the water-pot has to be kept filled with water, for the purpose of removing such uncleanliness as may be caused by contamination during the act of paying the calls of nature, and which is capable of being removed by water. It has been said that — ‘in matters within one’s power, one should not remain unclean for a single moment.’ The meaning of the phrase, ‘in matters within one’s power,’ is as follows If the water held before has been used up, and then there happens to come about such further uncleanliness as is caused by spitting, and the like, then, if water be not available, there would be no harm in the man remaining unclean for sometime (till he can obtain the requisite water); but even so, in connection with the calls of nature, our author is going to prescribe bathing under 12. 22, where it is laid down that ‘the man should dip into water, with all his clothing.’

Precise rules regarding the means of cleaning have been laid down in another Smṛti text. Says the revered Vaśiṣṭha (12-15-17) — “For water, hand and wood, Fire has been declared to be the means of cleaning; hence, having washed the water-pot with the hands and with water, the offering that one makes, has been declared by manu Prajāpati to constitute Paryagnikaraṇa (Fire-purfication). The person knowning the laws of cleanliness should rinse his mouth after having done all necessary acts.’

Baudhayāna also has said — after having begun with the words, ‘Now the water-pot is to be held,’ — ‘Having become clean, and when one washes the water-pot, this washing of things constitutes Paryagnikaraṇa (Purification by fire); even in his previous condition, the man shall leave off the water-pot, on account of its being unclean; but the learned shall not decry it, nor censure it, nor regard it as objectionable.’

The name ‘kamaṇḍalu,’ ‘water-pot,’ is based upon the particular shape, and not upon any particular species or kind, of its material. So that, whether it be made of eathernware or of gold, or of silver, — the cleaning, in all cases, is to be done in the manner just described, and in the manner that has been prescribed in connection with the original substance of which it may be made. But, on its coining into contact with urine and such things, the purification is to done in the manner laid down in connection with the constituent material. In all cases, the hands are to be washed, because of their being in contact with. such sources of contamination as the man in an unclean state.

Says Gautama also — ‘Having placed the pot somewhere near him, for the purpose of purification,’ etc, etc., So, in the present verse, what is meant by ‘holding’ is keeping near oneself, and not the actual holding in the hand.

‘Veda’ is the name of ‘Kuśa-handful.’ The use for this consists in the ‘touching of the organs,’ which has been laid down as to be done with ‘Kuśa-blades.’

The upshot of all this is that things that serve transcendental purposes shall be held on the body at all times, while those that serve only visible purposes are to be kept only when need arises.

‘Bright. ’ — Beautiful, in shape, and also by the burnishing of the gold by heating and polishing. — (37)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 176), which explains ‘vedam’ as ‘handful of kuśa’, and ‘raukme’ as ‘golden’; — in Mitākṣarā (on 1.133); — and in Smṛtisāroddhāra (p. 320).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Baudhāyana (1.3.3-5). — ‘The Accomplished Student shall wear a lower and an upper garment. He shall hold a bamboo-stick: — also the water-pot filled with water; wearing two sacred threads, — a turban, a skin, shoes and umbrella.’

Do. (1.6.7). — ‘Vedic Study constitutes the Brahmayajña.’

Vaśiṣṭha (12.12, 34, 35). — ‘For the Accomplished Student, there shall be a lower and an upper garment; two sacred threads and the water-pot filled with water; he shall carry the bamboo-stick and wear golden ear-rings; he shall not wear garland outside, except the golden necklace.’

Āpastamaba Dharmasūtra (2.8.2). — ‘Wearing a garland, with face and hair washed, annointed, head turbaned, coated and wearing shoes and sandals.’

Viṣṇu (71.13-16). — ‘Bamboo-stick, — water-pot with water, cotton sacred thread, — golden ear-rings.’

Yājñavalkya (1.133). — ‘Wearing gold and the sacred thread, carrying the bamboo and the water-pot.’

Gobhila (3.4.25-27). — ‘Having bathed and adorned himself, wearing new clothes, he shall tie the garland with the mantra Śrīrasi mayi ramasva; then the shoes...and then the bamboo-stick.’

Познавательные статьи:



Техника прыжка в длину с разбега

Тактические действия в защите

История Олимпийских игр

История развития права интеллектуальной собственности