with the Commentary of Medhatithi 135 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 141 из 350Следующая ⇒

Viṣṇu (5.7.10). — ‘Fuel, water, roots, fruits, fearlessness, flesh, honey, couch, seat, house, flowers, curds, vegetables, — when these are presented to one, one shall not refuse them.’

Yājñavalkya (1.214). — ‘Kuśa grass, vegetables, milk, fish, perfumes, flowers, curds, land, flesh, couch, fried barley, and water — these should not be refused.’

Aṅgiras (Aparārka, p. 406). — ‘Grains in the harvesting ground, water in tanks and wells, milk in the cow-pen, — these may he accepted even from one whose food is not to be eaten.’

VERSE 4.248

Section XIX - Accepting of Gifts

आहृताभ्युद्यतां भिक्षां पुरस्तादप्रचोदिताम् ।
मेने प्रजापतिर्ग्राह्यामपि दुष्कृतकर्मणः ॥२४८॥

āhṛtābhyudyatāṃ bhikṣāṃ purastādapracoditām |
mene prajāpatirgrāhyāmapi duṣkṛtakarmaṇaḥ ||248||

Alms brougt forward and offered, and not previously begged, Prajāpati has declared to be acceptable, even from a sinful person. — (248).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse asserts the acceptability of even things other than fuel and the rest (mentioned in the preceding verse).

The term ‘bhikṣā,’ ‘alms,’ has been used in an appreciatory sense; and it is not striclty alms that is meant here; though, in reality, the term ‘alms’ denotes a small quantity of cooked food, — and it is on account of smallness of its quantity that its acceptance is not regarded as open to serious objection; Specially as, for the Student, it has been permitted as coming from all castes. And what is meant by the present text is that other things also may be treated on the same footing. The term ‘alms’ is often found to be used in this sense; e.g., in the Mahābhārata (1.206.1) — ‘The two high-souled sons of Pṛthā went to Pṛthā at the carpenter’s shop and joyously informed her of their having received Draupadi as alms.’

‘Brought forward’ — to that place where the recipient stands.

‘Offered’ — placed before the recipient, who is told, either by a gesture, or with actual words, to accept it. ‘Previously’ — at any previous time.

‘Not begged,’ — not asked for by the recipient; nor promised by the giver, either directly, or through some one else, to the effect that, — ‘such and such a thing there is in my house; please have the kindness to accept it;’ only what is offered without premeditation, actually thought of at the moment itself.

Such alms ‘Prajāpati’ — Hiraṇyagarbha — has declared, — what? — to be acceptable even from a sinful person, — the sinful person being one whose actions are sinful — (248)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 407), which adds that the term ‘bhikṣā’ here stands for ‘cooked food’ and in Hemādri (Dāna, p. 56).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Vaśiṣṭha (14.13). — (See above.) (Almost the same as Manu.)

Āpastamba (1.19.12). — (Same as Manu, the reading being slightly varied.)

Viṣṇu (3.7.11). — (Do.)

Yājñavalkya (1.215). — ‘What is presented without asking should be accepted, even though it come from a sinner, — except from a loose woman, a eunuch, an outcast and an enemy.’

Yama (Aparārka, p. 407). — ‘Of the physician, the hunter, the prostitute, the eunuch, the dancer — gifts of these should be refused, even when presented without asking.’

VERSE 4.249

Section XIX - Accepting of Gifts

नाश्नन्ति पितरस्तस्य दशवर्षाणि पञ्च च ।
न च हव्यं वहत्यग्निर्यस्तामभ्यवमन्यते ॥२४९॥

nāśnanti pitarastasya daśavarṣāṇi pañca ca |
na ca havyaṃ vahatyagniryastāmabhyavamanyate ||249||

Of the man that disdains it, the Pitṛs do no eat any food for ten and five years; nor does fire convey his offering to the gods. — (249)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This is an imaginary assertion, deprecating the non-acceptance of the said gifts.

That person who disdains, refuses to accept it, — his Śrāddha the ‘Pitṛs do not eat’ — do no accept; nor does Fire convey his offerings to the gods. That is, such a man does not derive any benefit from rites performed for the Pitṛs or for the gods.

In this connection, some one has asserted that — “Even though what is offered happens to be of no use, it should be accepted, as a favour to the giver.”

This, however, is not right; as all that the text means is that gift, offered unasked, may be accepted without harm; and what is said here is a counter-exception, and there can be ‘counter-exception’ only in favour of what has been forbidden; so that, what may he had recourse to by reason of ordinary want having been forbidden (by a previous text), the present text lays down a counter-exception. — (249)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 407); — and in Hemādri (Dāna, p. 56).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Vaśiṣṭha (14.15). — (Same as Manu.)

Āpastamba (1.19.13). — (Do.)

Viṣṇu (57.12). — (Do.)

VERSE 4.250

Section XIX - Accepting of Gifts

शय्यां गृहान् कुशान् गन्धानपः पुष्पं मणीन् दधि ।
धाना मत्स्यान् पयो मांसं शाकं चैव न निर्णुदेत् ॥२५०॥

śayyāṃ gṛhān kuśān gandhānapaḥ puṣpaṃ maṇīn dadhi |
dhānā matsyān payo māṃsaṃ śākaṃ caiva na nirṇudet ||250||

He shall not refuse a couch, a house, kuśa grass, perfumes, water, flowers, jewels, curd, grain, fish, milk, meat and vegetables. — (250)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The couch and other things one should not refuse to accept, even when they are not actually presented before him. That is if some one were to come and Ray, ‘I have these things in my house; do please come and accept them,’ — then these should not be rejected. — (250).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is. quoted in Aparārka (p. 406); in Mitākṣarā (on 1.214); — in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 190); — in Madanapārijāta (p. 220), which adds — ‘maṇi’ stands for those that serve as antidotes to poisons, — ‘dhānā’ is ‘fried grain,’ — these one should not refuse; — in ‘Prāyascittaviveka’ (p. 412), which explains ‘na nirnudet’ as ‘should not refuse when presented unasked’; — in Hemādri (Dāna, p. 56); — and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Āhnika, p. 37b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (17.3). — (See above, under 247.)

Āpastamba (1.18.1). — (Do.)

Vaśiṣṭha (14.7). — ‘Fuel, water, fodder, Kuśa grass, fried grains, what is presented without asking, conveyances, house, fish, Priyaṅgu corn, garlands, perfumes, honey, flesh, — these he shall accept.’

Viṣṇu (57.10). — (See above, under p. 47.)

Yājñavalkya (1.214). — (See under 247.)

VERSE 4.251

Section XIX - Accepting of Gifts

गुरून् भृत्यांश्चोज्जिहीर्षन्नर्चिष्यन् देवतातिथीन् ।
सर्वतः प्रतिगृह्णीयान्न तु तृप्येत् स्वयं ततः ॥२५१॥

gurūn bhṛtyāṃścojjihīrṣannarciṣyan devatātithīn |
sarvataḥ pratigṛhṇīyānna tu tṛpyet svayaṃ tataḥ ||251||

For the purpose of bringing relief to his teachers and dependents, and for the purpose of honoring the gods and guests, he may accept gifts from all persons; but he shall not derive from them satisfaction for himself. — (251)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Teachers;’ — the plural form is used, in view of some persons teaching directly, and others only indirectly, by implication.

‘Dependents,’ — those who have a right to be maintained by him; these are enumerated in another Smṛti text as follows: — ‘Aged parents, the well-conducted wife and the infant child.’

‘For the purpose of bringing relief to these’ — when they are suffering from hunger; — ‘and for the purpose of honouring the gods and guests; — that is, for the sake of due accomplishment of his daily duties.

‘He may accept gifts from all persons’ — good or bad.

‘But he shall not derive from them satisfaction for himself.’ — ‘Satisfaction’ here stands for relieving hunger and other forms of enjoyment; these he shall not do. That is, such gifts shall be accepted only for the sake of Teachers and others, and never for his own sake. — (251)

“How, then, is the man to maintain himself?” In answer to this, we have the following: —

Comparative notes by various authors:

Vaśiṣṭha (14.10). — (Same as Manu, with slight variants.)

Viṣṇu (57.13). — (Same as Manu, but reading ‘pitṛdevatāḥ’ in place of ‘devatātithīn.’)

Gautama (17.4). — ‘For the maintaining of the father, the Gods, the Teacher and the dependants, — it is ditferent.’

Āpastamba (1.7.21). — ‘Some people hold that for the sake of the teacher the acceptance of gifts even from Śūdras and Ugras is sanctioned by the scriptures.’

Yājñavalkya (1.216). — ‘For the worshipping of gods and guests, and for the sake of one’s teacher and dependants, and for one’s own livelihood, one may accept gifts from all.’

Aṅgiras (Aparārka, p. 408). — ‘For the teacher, for guests and for dependants one may accept food from the Śūdra; but he himself shall not partake of it.’

VERSE 4.252

Section XIX - Accepting of Gifts

गुरुषु त्वभ्यतीतेषु विना वा तैर्गृहे वसन् ।
आत्मनो वृत्तिमन्विच्छन् गृह्णीयात् साधुतः सदा ॥२५२॥

guruṣu tvabhyatīteṣu vinā vā tairgṛhe vasan |
ātmano vṛttimanvicchan gṛhṇīyāt sādhutaḥ sadā ||252||

When, however, the Teachers are dead, or when one lives in his house without them, — then, seeking for his own subsistence, he may always accept gifts from good persons. — (252)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Dead’ — and past; or when, even though the Teachers be living, the man lives apart from them.

The term, ‘Teachers, ‘here includes all dependants also.

‘Seeking his own subsistence,’ he shall accept gifts from ‘good’ — righteous — ‘persons.’ No caste being specified, acceptance is permitted from righteous Śūdras also; as is said under 223 — ‘A Brāhmaṇa shall not eat, etc., etc.’ — (252)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (57. 15). — (Same as Manu.)

VERSE 4.253

Section XIX - Accepting of Gifts

आर्धिकः कुलमित्रं च गोपालो दासनापितौ ।
एते शूद्रेषु भोज्यान्ना याश्चात्मानं निवेदयेत् ॥२५३॥

ārdhikaḥ kulamitraṃ ca gopālo dāsanāpitau |
ete śūdreṣu bhojyānnā yāścātmānaṃ nivedayet ||253||

His own ploughman, hereditary friend, cowherd, slave and barder, — among Śūdras; these are persons whose food may be eaten; as also one who offers himself. — (253)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Ardhika,’ ‘Ploughman,’ is the man who ploughs his family-holdings for him.

‘Cowherd and slave’ — arc terms denoting relationship. One may eat food of that person who keeps his cows for him.

‘He who offers himself;’ — saying, ‘you are my sole refuge; I live solely dependent upon you’ — one who offers oneself in this manner, is also one whose food may be eaten. — (253).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (57.16) — (Same as Manu.)

Gautama (17, 5-6). — ‘Livelihood should not be sought for from Śūdras. — Cattle-keeper, field-plougher, hereditary friend of the family, father’s servants, — the food of these Śūdras may be eaten.’

Āpastamba (1.17.14). — ‘Oneshould not eat food exposed in the market.’

Āpastamba (1.18.14). — ‘Even of the Śūdra (food may be eaten) if he is righteous.’

Hārīta (Vīramitrodaya-Āhnika, p. 494). — ‘What is roasted or cooked in oil, or in milk, or flour cooked in curds, these may be eaten even from a Śūdra — says Manu.’

Yājñavalkya (Vīramitrodaya-Āhnika, p. 492). — ‘Among Śūdras, the slave, cowherd, hereditary friend, partner in ploughs, barber, and he who surrenders himself — are persons whose food may be eaten.’

Devala (Do.). — ‘One’s own slave, barber, cowherd, potters, ploughman, — these five Śūdras are those whose food may be eaten even by Brāhmaṇas.’

Aṅgiras (p. 493). — ‘Milk, saktu, oil, cakes, ground sesamum and things made with milk may be eaten even from a Śūdra.’

VERSE 4.254

Section XIX - Accepting of Gifts

यादृशोऽस्य भवेदात्मा यादृशं च चिकीर्षितम् ।
यथा चौपचरेदेनं तथाऽत्मानं निवेदयेत् ॥२५४॥

yādṛśo'sya bhavedātmā yādṛśaṃ ca cikīrṣitam |
yathā caupacaredenaṃ tathā'tmānaṃ nivedayet ||254||

As the man’s character may be, as may be the nature of the work he wishes to do, and as may be the manner in which he may serve, — even so must he offer himself. — (254)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The text proceeds to show the manner of ‘offering himself.’

‘As may be the character of the man,’ — i.e., the family, the country and the profession to which the Śūdra concerned may belong.

‘The work he wishes to do;’ — saying, ‘This is the work that I shall do under you, either as my duty, or for s ome other purpose, such as saving myself from being pressed for service at the royal palace, and so forth.’

‘The manner in which he may serve;’ — ‘I shall serve you with this act of mine;’ — ‘I shall press your feet, and do other household work.’ When one offers to do all this, then is he said to have ‘offered himself.’

‘Others have taken the word,’ ‘Ātman’ ‘himself,’ in the expression, ‘Ātmanām nivedayet,’ ‘offers himself,’ to mean child — according to the text, ‘thou art my own self, named son;’ and have explained it to mean that ‘one may eat the food of the Śūdra, whose daughter (ātma) one may have married, under the influence of sexual passion.’ This, however, is not right. The term, ‘ātmā’ is never used directly in the sense of daughter; it is only the masculine form ‘putra,’ ‘son,’ that is often found to be so used; and there would be no useful purpose served by the Author using a term, in an indirect sense; it would have been enough to say — ‘he who gives his daughter to him.’

Others have explained that the mention of the ‘ploughman’ and others is meant to be indicative of the Śūdra in general; so that it follows that one may cat the food of one’s father-in-law of the ‘Pāraśava’ caste (son of a Brāhmaṇa from a Śūdra mother). — (254)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Cf. 5.253.

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika, p. 492), which explains ‘ātmanivedana’ as ‘declaring his family, his character, his motive in seeking service and the ways in which he is going to serve’; — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 785).

VERSE 4.255 [Control of Speech]

Section XX - Control of Speech

योऽन्यथा सन्तमात्मानमन्यथा सत्सु भाषते ।
स पापकृत्तमो लोके स्तेन आत्मापहारकः ॥२५५॥

yo'nyathā santamātmānamanyathā satsu bhāṣate |
sa pāpakṛttamo loke stena ātmāpahārakaḥ ||255||

He, who describes himself to good men otherwise than what he is, is the worst sinner in the world, a thief stealing himself. — (255)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Being of one kind,; — i.e., unrighteous — if he describes himself to ‘good men’ — to cultured people — ‘otherwise’ — describing himself as righteous; — or, when he goes to a man for one purpose, and represents it to be something else, — such a person is the worst of all sinners.

‘Thief’ — stealer; — ‘stealing himself.’ Other thieves steal things, while this person steals himself. This shows the despicable character of the man. — (255)

VERSE 4.256

Section XX - Control of Speech

वाच्यर्था नियताः सर्वे वाङ्मूला वाग्विनिःसृताः ।
तांस्तु यः स्तेनयेद् वाचं स सर्वस्तेयकृन्नरः ॥२५६॥

vācyarthā niyatāḥ sarve vāṅmūlā vāgviniḥsṛtāḥ |
tāṃstu yaḥ stenayed vācaṃ sa sarvasteyakṛnnaraḥ ||256||

All things are regulated by speech, have their root in speech, and emanate from speech. The man who steals such speech is the stealer of all things. — (256)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The relation between words and their denotations being eternal, things are described as ‘regulated by speech.’

‘Have their root in speech.’ — Things are said to have their root in speech, in view of the fact that the ideas of the speaker depend, for their manifestation, upon speech.

‘Emanate from speech,’ — are produced out of speech; things are so called, because the ideas of the hearer also are dependent upon speech.

It is not necessary to suspect, or attempt an explanation of, the repetition here involved; because what is stated here is merely a description of things as they are, and as such may be put forward in any manner possible.

He who ‘steals such speech’ — misrepresents, having said one thing, does something else; he says something in one sense, and represents it in another sense; — ‘is the stealer of all things;’ — there is no substance, gold or anything else, which such a man has not stolen.

This is an imaginary statement, deprecatory of telling a lie. — (256)

VERSE 4.257 [End of the Householding Stage]

Section XXI - End of the Householding Stage

महर्षिपितृदेवानां गत्वाऽनृण्यं यथाविधि ।
पुत्रे सर्वं समासज्य वसेन् माध्यस्थ्यमाश्रितः ॥२५७॥

maharṣipitṛdevānāṃ gatvā'nṛṇyaṃ yathāvidhi |
putre sarvaṃ samāsajya vasen mādhyasthyamāśritaḥ ||257||

Having paid off, according to law, the debts owing to the Great Sages, to the Pitṛs and to the Gods, he shall consign everything to his son and remain fixed in neutrality. — (257)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This is another method prescribed for the Householder.

Debts to the Great Sages are paid by Vedic Study; those to the Pitṛs are paid by the begetting of children; and those to the Gods are paid by sacrifices. This is what has been described in the passage — ‘The Brāhmaṇa is under three kinds of debts.’

‘Gatvā’ — having brought, about the three forms of freedom from debt.

‘He shall consign’ — make over — ‘everything’ — the entire business of the house and family — ‘to his son’ — who has attained the age of business.

He shall remain in the house ‘fixed in neutrality’ — i.e., having resigned all egoism. That is, ‘he shall continue to dwell in the house, having relinquished all such notions as this is my wealth, these my son and wife, these my male and female slaves.‘Neutrality’ consists in the feeling, ‘I do not belong to any one, no one belongs to me,’ in which all desire is abandoned.

What is meant is the‘renunciation’ of only ordinary voluntary acts done for some purpose, and not of all (even obligatory) acts; as we shall show later on. — (257)

VERSE 4.258

Section XXI - End of the Householding Stage

एकाकी चिन्तयेन्नित्यं विविक्ते हितमात्मनः ।
एकाकी चिन्तयानो हि परं श्रेयोऽधिगच्छति ॥२५८॥

ekākī cintayennityaṃ vivikte hitamātmanaḥ |
ekākī cintayāno hi paraṃ śreyo'dhigacchati ||258||

Alone, in solitude, he shall meditate upon what is good for himself. By meditating in solitude, he attains the highest good. — (258)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The renunciation of all acts having been accomplished, the following is his special duty: —

‘Alone,’ — without a companion, — having no one to talk to — ‘in solitude’ — in a place where there is no one, and which is free from all disturbance, — ‘he shall meditate upon what is good for himself’; i.e., should practise that ‘contemplation of the Brahman’ which has been enjoined in the Upaniṣads.

By means of this practice and meditation, he obtains the highest good — called ‘Liberation.’ — (258)

VERSE 4.259 [Summing Up]

Section XXII - Summing Up

एषौदिता गृहस्थस्य वृत्तिर्विप्रस्य शाश्वती ।
स्नातकव्रतकल्पश्च सत्त्ववृद्धिकरः शुभः ॥२५९॥

eṣauditā gṛhasthasya vṛttirviprasya śāśvatī |
snātakavratakalpaśca sattvavṛddhikaraḥ śubhaḥ ||259||

Thus has been described the eternal course of life of the Brāhmaṇa-Householder, as also the series of observances for the Accomplished Student, which is conducive to the increase of the quality of goodness, and is praiseworthy. — (259)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This sums up the contents of the whole Discourse: —

“Thus has been described the eternal course of life of the Householder,” — the ‘non-eternal’ one being that which shall be described in connection with abnormal times.

The addition of the term, ‘Brāhmaṇa,’ indicates that the observances laid down are for the Brāhmaṇa Accomplished Student.

‘Goodness’ — is a quality of the soul; and it is conducive to the increase of this quality.

‘Praiseworthy’ — excellent. All this is mere praise. — (259)

Познавательные статьи:



Техника прыжка в длину с разбега

Организация работы процедурного кабинета

Области применения синхронных машин

Оптимизация по Винеру и Калману