with the Commentary of Medhatithi 137 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 143 из 350Следующая ⇒

It is in view of all this that this same rule has been held to be applicable also to the case of the man eating uncooked food; in accordance with the assertion — ‘the Gods of a man have the same food as the man himselt’ (Vālmīkīya Rāmāyaṇa.)

Further, cooking is not to be done only by the hungry householder; in fact, the act of cooking every day forms an integral factor of Householder ship itself. So that even on the day on which the man himself does not eat, if he omits the act of cooking, he incurs sin.

The upshot of the whole is this: — The man may cook for himself, or for others; the words ‘shall not cook for himself’ can only mean that people should not undertake the act, if they do not intend to make the offering to the Viśvedevas. So that this only reiterates the obligatory character of the offering. Similarly also the text that — ‘For the removal of the sin of the Five Slaughters, the Viśvedeva-offering shall be made in the ordinary fire, in the Vedic sacrificial fire, in the fire in which oblations have been already poured and the deity dismissed, in water or on the ground, only reiterates the obligatory character of the offering to the Viśvedevas. Because the said offering cannot be made into the Vedic sacrificial fire; specially as there is no authority attaching to a Smṛti text (as against a Śruti text) [so that the text just quoted cannot be taken in its literal sense].

‘Milk-rice and flour-cakes’. — ‘Pāyasa’, ‘Milk-rice,’ stands for rice cooked in milk, and not for preparations of milk; — ‘Puroḍāśa (?)’ is flour-cake.

‘Food of the Gods’: — what these are can only be ascertained from usage.

‘Sacrificial viands — the materials laid down in the Śruti as to be offered into the Fire.

These are ‘unlit to be eaten only before the Grahahomas; as the text is going to lay down the necessity of eating the remnants of the offerings.

The meat of an animal that has not been ‘consecrated,’ — i.e. which has not been killed at a sacrifice.‘Consecration’ is a peculiar form of purification of the animal, prescribed in connection with the ‘Animal-Sacrifice.’ The mention of this indicates that one should eat the remnant of the meat that has been offered at a sacrifice.

Though the Text has already used the qualification ‘needlessly prepared’, yet the epithet ‘unconsecrated’ has been added with a view to forbid the merit of the cow, the sheep and the goa (goat?) that may have been left by the guest and other persons to whom they may have been offered. Or, the term unconsecrated may be taken as refering specially to the meat of the cow, the sheep and the goat; since it is the killing of these animals only that has been enjoined in connection with sacrifices; the other animals being described as already ‘prokṣita’, ‘washed clean’ (fit for cating).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Cf. The Mahābhārata 13.104.41.

This verse is quoted in Smṛtitattva (p. 448), which explains ‘vṛthā’ as ‘what is cooked for oneself, and not for being offered to gods or pitṛs’, — and quotes the Chandogapariśiṣṭa as defining ‘kṛsara’ to be ‘rice and sesamum cooked together,’ — ‘saṃyāva’ is a preparation of ‘butter, milk, molasses, and the flour of wheat and other grains,’ — ‘anupākṛtomāṃsa’ is ‘meat not consecrated by mantras,’ — ‘devānna’ is ‘food prepared for offering to gods,’ — ‘haviṣ’ is the ‘sacrificial cake’ and such things; — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 610.)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (17.31). — ‘Flesh of animals with teeth not fallen out, flesh of diseased animals, and flesh got without any religious purpose.’

Viṣṇu (51.37). — ‘Śālūka, needlessly cooked rice-sesamum and butter, sugar-wheat, rice-milk, cakes, breads fried in butter, food of the gods and sacrificial viands.’

Yājñavalkya (1.171, 173). — ‘Offerings meant for gods... unconsecrated meat, rice-sesamum or butter-sugar-wheat, or milk-rice or flour-cakes or wheaten bread fried in butter, — needlessly cooked.’

VERSE 5.8

Section II - Objectionable Food

अनिर्दशाया गोः क्षीरमौष्ट्रमैकशफं तथा ।
आविकं सन्धिनीक्षीरं विवत्सायाश्च गोः पयः ॥८॥

anirdaśāyā goḥ kṣīramauṣṭramaikaśaphaṃ tathā |
āvikaṃ sandhinīkṣīraṃ vivatsāyāśca goḥ payaḥ ||8||

The milk of the cow that has not passed its ten days, as also that of the camel and of one-hoofed animals and of sheep; the milk of the irregular cow, as also the milk of the cow without her calf. — (8)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

If we read the opening words as ‘anirdaśāham goḥ kṣīram,’ then the prohibition regarding the milk of the camel and other animals also would be understood as limited to the ten days from calving; so that the qualification ‘that has not passed its ten days’ being taken with every one of the animals, it would become necessary to depend entirely upon usage in support of the absolute prohibition of the milk of the camel and other animals. If however we rend ‘anirdaśāyāḥ’ in the feminine form, then there would be no possibility of the above misunderstanding. Because it would not be possible to interpret the nominal affixes (attached to filenames of the other animals) as, in any way, connecting these animals with the epithet ‘anirdaśāyāḥ’)

In as much as the word ‘milk’ is repeated in the second half of the verse, this implies that what are forbidden by the former half are the milk of the camel, of the one-hoofed animals, of the sheep, of the goat and of the cow within ten days of its calving, — along with all its preparations; while in the case of the ‘irregular’ cow and the cow ‘deprived of its calf’, it is the milk only that is forbidden. Such is the usage also.

That cow is called ‘anirdaśāha,’ ‘not passed its ten days’, in whose case ten days have not passed since her calving.

‘Irregular cow’; — the cow that is expected to give milk both morning and evening, but gives it only at one time; giving milk in the evening only if not milked in the morning; and on account of the supply of milk being scanty, she is milked once only.

Some people explain ‘Sandhini’ as standing for that cow which, on having lost her own calf, is made to yield milk by bringing to her the calf of another cow; and in this case the cow ‘without her calf’ would be one whose calf is alive, but is separated from it, and is milked, independently of the calf, through presenting before her such special articles of food as the husks of barley, rice etc., so that the cow would be called ‘without her calf’ by the calf being held aside; just as people say — ‘bring the cow without her calf’.

The ‘cow’ having been already mentioned in the first half, the term is repeated in the second half, with a view to show that similar milk of the goat and the buffalo is not forbidden. The same does not hold good regarding the epithet ‘anirdaśāyāh,’ ‘that has not passed its ten days;’ so that in this connection the ‘cow’ includes the front and the buffalo also. So says Gautama (17.22-23) — ‘The milk of the cow that has not passed its ten days, during the period of impurity; also of the goat and the buffalo.’

The term ‘payaḥ’ ‘milk,’ has been added because it is not easy to construe the term ‘of the cow,’ with the term ‘kṣīram,’ ‘milk’ as contained in the compound ‘sandhinīkṣīram.’ — (8)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Sandhinī’ — ‘a cow that gives milk only once a day’ (Medhātithi, and Govindarāja); — ‘a cow in heat’ (Kullūka, who quotes Hārita in support, Nārāyaṇa and Rāghavānanda); — ‘a cow big with calf’ (Nandana); — ‘a cow whose own calf being dead, is milked with the help of another’s calf’ (‘some one’ mentioned in Medhātithi.)

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.290), where it is said that the unintentional drinking of these milks, if done once only, makes one liable to the penance of a single day’s fast, while if done intentionally, or if repeated, it entails a three days’ fast.

It is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 712), where the ‘Sandhinī’ is described as ‘the cow that approaches the bull i.e., the cow in heat’, — and the ‘anirdaśā’ as ‘the one that has not passed more than ten days since delivery.’

It is quoted in Smṛtitattva (p. 448), which adds the following: — ‘anirdaśā’ is that which has not passed ten days since its delivery; — the ‘cow’ stands for the goat and the buffallo also; — ‘ekaśapha’ are the horse and other one-hoofed animals; — the ‘sandhinī’ is the cow that seeks for the bull; the avoiding of the second ‘goḥ’ in the second line indicates that it is the milk of the cow only that has lost its calf, and not that of the goat or the buffalo.

It is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika, p. 525), which adds the following: — ‘nirdaśā’ is the cow that has passed ten days since delivery; — ‘ekaśapha’ are the horse and other one-hoofed animals — ‘āvika’ is ‘the milk of the ewe’; — ‘sandhinī’ is the cow in heat; — ‘vivatsā’ is one devoid of her calf.

It is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 929), which contains the same remarks as Mitākṣarā; — in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Śrāddha p. 13a) — in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 567); — in Śuddhikaumudī (p. 328), which explains ‘ekaśapha’ as standing for the Horse and the like, and ‘Sandhinī’ as the cow ‘which has been covered by the bull’; — and in Prāyaścittaviveka (p. 335).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (17.22-26). — ‘The milk of the cow until ten days have elapsed since its calving, which is its period of impurity; — also of the she-goat and the she-buffalo; — the milk of sheep and of the camel is never to be drunk, as also that of one-hoofed animals; also the milk of the cow that is constantly dripping milk, or which gives birth to twins or of the irregular cow; also of the cow that has lost its calf.’

Baudhāyana (1.12.9-11). — ‘The milk of an animal until its calf is ten days old, and of one that gives milk while pregnant should not be drunk; — nor that of a cow which has no calf, or which is milked with a strange calf; the milk of sheep, camels or one-hoofed animals.’

Āpastamba (1.17.22-24). — ‘The milk of sheep, — also the milk of the camel, the deer, the milk of the irregular cow and of the cow that gives birth to twins, — also of the cow within ten days of its calving.’

Vaśiṣṭha (14.34-85). — ‘Let him not drink the milk of the cow in heat, nor of one whose calf has died; — nor that given by cows, buffalos and goats within ten days of calving.’

Viṣṇu (51.28-40). — ‘All milks, except that of the cow, the goat and the buffalo; — the milk of even these within ten days of calving; — also the milk of those which are irregular in milk, or which constantly drip milk, or which has lost its calf.’

Yājñavalkya (1.170). — ‘Milk of the cow in heat, of the cow within ten days of its calving, of the cow that has lost its calf, — one should avoid; also the milk of camels, of one-hoofed animals, of women, of wild animals and of sheep.’

Śaṅkha (Aparārka, p. 216). — ‘The milk of all animals with two teats should be avoided, except that of the goat.’

Āpastamba (Parāśaramādhava, p. 712). — ‘The well-behaved Kṣatriya, or Vaiśya or Śūdra should not drink the milk of the Kapilā cow.’

Hārīta (Vīramitrodaya-Āhnika, pp. 525, 526). — ‘One shall not drink the milk of the cow in heat; — nor of the cow whose calf is absent or dead, of the cow that has been milked dry, nor of one just calved, till seven days have elapsed, according to some, — ten days, according to others, — while according to some, milk becomes drinkable after a month; — they say that for two months, all the milk should he given to the calf; during the third month, one shall milk only two teats, during the fourth three teats.’

VERSE 5.9

Section II - Objectionable Food

आरण्यानां च सर्वेषां मृगाणां माहिषं विना ।
स्त्रीक्षीरं चैव वर्ज्यानि सर्वशुक्तानि चैव हि ॥९॥

āraṇyānāṃ ca sarveṣāṃ mṛgāṇāṃ māhiṣaṃ vinā |
strīkṣīraṃ caiva varjyāni sarvaśuktāni caiva hi ||9||

That of all wild animals, except the buffalo; the milk of females (women) and all soured substances should be avoided. — (9)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Wild animals’ — cows, elephants, monkeys and so forth.

There can be no milk of males; hence the masculine gender used in connection with the words ‘sarvī(?)ṣām mṛgāṇam’ is to be taken as standing for the genus, and the connection is with the female members of that genus: the term ‘mṛgakṣīram’ thus being similar to‘kukkuṭāṇḍam’. This has been made clear by the author of the Mahābhāṣyu in connection with the rules relating to the change of the feminine form into the masculine, (when occurring within a compound).

‘Māhiṣam vinā’; — the neuter form has been used, in view of the neuter form ‘payaḥ’‘milk’.

‘Females,’ — hum in females, women. Though in such passages as‘strī gauḥ somakrayiṇī’,‘the female cow is the price of the soma’, — the term ‘strī’, ‘female’, is found to be used in connection with the animal with the dew(?)lap also, — yet it is to be understood here in the sense of the‘woman’, in as much as in the present context the term cannot apply to any other species of animals, and as it is better known as standing for the‘human female’ only. In all such assertions as — ‘females desire sweets’, ‘females are the best jewels’ — the word is understood as standing for the woman.

The term‘eva’ in the text has been explained as indicating the prohibition of applying the woman’s milk to the eye and such other uses of it: the it caning being that the milk of the woman is to be avoided, not only in eating, but also in all similar uses. The word can be taken as indicative of all this only on the strength of usage and other Smṛti texts; and it cannot be regarded as directly expressive of it. — (9).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

“Cf. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 1.2.3.9, for an early list of animals whose flesh is forbidden” — Hopkins.

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.290); — and in Smṛtitattva (p. 448), which adds that the term ‘mṛga’ here stands for animals, and not for the deer only; since the ‘buffalo’ is cited as an exception; — ‘śukta’ is the name of those things that, by themselves sweet, become soured by keeping.

The first half is quoted in Aparārka (p. 246), which adds that the phrase ‘payovarjyam’ has to be supplied.

The verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika p. 525), which takes ‘āraṅyānām mṛgāṇām’ together, and explains it as standing for the Ruru, Mahiṣa, Pṛṣata and the rest; — in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Śrāddha p. 13a); — in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 567); — in Prāyaścittaviveka (p. 335); — and in Śuddhikaumudī (p. 323).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (17.14). — ‘All soured substances by themselves with the exception of curds.’

Baudhāyana (1.12-15). — ‘Nor soured substances nor molasses turned sour.’

Āpastamba (1.17.15). — ‘Also soured substances.’

Vaśiṣṭha (14.37-38). — ‘Let him avoid wheat-cakes, fried grain, porridge, barley-meal, pulse-cakes, oil, milk-rice and vegetables that have turned sour; like other kinds of sour food prepared with milk and barley-flour.’

Viṣṇu (51.1-42). — ‘Also soured substances by themselves, with the exception of curds.’

Yājñavalkya (1.167, 170), — ‘Things turned sour, food cooked overnight, leavings, &c.’

Bhaviṣyapurāṇa (Aparārka, p. 241). — ‘That should be regarded as spoilt by time, which has been cooked on the preceding day; among such soured substances, curds may be eaten, but not molasses.’

Śaṅkha-Likhita. — ‘Nor what has been cooked twice, nor what has been kept over-night, with the exception of rice cooked in sugar, curds, molasses, or preparations of wheat and barley-flour.’

VERSE 5.10

Section II - Objectionable Food

दधि भक्ष्यं च शुक्तेषु सर्वं च दधिसम्भवम् ।
यानि चैवाभिषूयन्ते पुष्पमूलफलैः शुभैः ॥१०॥

dadhi bhakṣyaṃ ca śukteṣu sarvaṃ ca dadhisambhavam |
yāni caivābhiṣūyante puṣpamūlaphalaiḥ śubhaiḥ ||10||

Among Soured Substances, the curd is fit to be eaten, and all that is prepared out of it; as also all that is distilled from pure flowers, roots and fruits; — (10)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

All ‘soured substances’ having been forbidden in the foregoing verse, the present: text makes an exception in favour of a few of them.

‘Śukta’, ‘soured substance’, is the name of those substances which, being juicy in their constitution and having a distinct taste of their own, become soured either by the flux of time, or by the contact of some other substance. For instance, the Āmrātaka, which is sweet and full of juice, becomes‘soured’ after the lapse of some time; cane-juice becomes ‘soured’ after sometime. Things that are sour by their very nature — e. g., the Pomegranate, the Āmalaka, the Lemon &c. — are not called‘soured substances’; nor those that are still unripe. Because the term‘śukta’,‘soured’, is not synonymous with‘sour’. What are directly forbidden here are only those soured substances that have become sour by fermentation; and those that turn sour by the contact of flowers and roots &c. are only indirectly indicated; according to what Gautama has said (17.14) — ‘All soured substances except Curd only’.

‘Distilled’. — Distillation consists in allowing the thing to remain soaked in water over-night.

“In that case the sourness would be due to the length of time (so that all these would be included among‘Soured Substances’).”

True; these also are ‘soured substances’; and the Instrumental ending may signify either instrumentality or association. The meaning thus is — ‘what are distilled — e.g. made out of — flowers etc. along with water’.

Some people offer the fallowing explanation: — “The roots of trees are directly productive of sourness. Such ‘sour substances’ as the Pomegranate, the Āmalaka and the rest are ‘fit to be eaten’, while those that are distilled from grapes and other sweet things are not eaten. ‘Distillation’ means producing acidity; hence ‘distilled from flowers’ means soured by flowers and such things. Grapes and such other things however are not themselves productive of acidity; in their case it is time alone that is the acidulating agent.”

This however i not right; simply because such is not the meaning of the term (‘distillation’). When one says ‘he is distilling Soma’ — this is not understood to mean that he is making it sour; what is understood is as we have explained above.

‘Prepared out of curd’; — e.g. Udaśvit, Maṣṭu (whey), Kilāṭa (Coagulated milk), Kūrcika (Inspissated milk) and so forth. — (10)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.290); — in Smṛtitattva (p. 448), which explains ‘dadhisambhavam’ as standing for the takra and other similar preparations; — and again on p. 182; — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 616).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (17.14). — (See above.)

Baudhāyana (1.12.14). — ‘Stale food should not be eaten, except pot-herbs, broths, meat, clarified butter, cooked grain, molasses, curds and barley-meal.’

Āpastamba (1.17.19). — ‘Excepting raw sugar, fried grain, curd-rice, fried barley, barley-meal, vegetables, meat, wheat-cake, preparations of milk, herbs, tree-roots and fruits (stale food shall not be eaten).’

Viṣṇu (51.42). — (See above.)

Yājñavalkya (1.169). — ‘Food cooked overnight may be eaten, if it is smeared with fatty oils, or if it has been kept for a long time; preparations of wheat, barley and milk may be eaten even when not mixed with fatty oils.’

Yama (Aparārka, 7.245). — ‘Soured foods one should Dover eat; but in times of distress they may be eaten after being washed; preparations of lentil and māṣa, even though cooked overnight, one may eat after washing them and mixing butter with them. Even though one may avoid soured substances, one may eat such things cooked overnight as wheat-cakes, rice-curd, fried grains, small cakes, barley-meal, vegetables, meat, broths, rice-gruel, barley-flour and things mixed with fatty oils. Curds and food mixed with molasses, when stale, should be avoided; so also drinks prepared with honey and butter.’

Devala (Do.). — ‘Even though soured, curd may be eaten, also preparations of curd; drinks made of fruits and roots and flowers may be eaten, if they are not intoxicating.’

VERSE 5.11

Section II - Objectionable Food

क्रव्यादान् शकुनान् सर्वान्तथा ग्रामनिवासिनः ।
अनिर्दिष्टांश्चेकशफान् टिट्टिभं च विवर्जयेत् ॥११॥

kravyādān śakunān sarvāntathā grāmanivāsinaḥ |
anirdiṣṭāṃścekaśaphān ṭiṭṭibhaṃ ca vivarjayet ||11||

He shall avoid all carnivorous birds, and also those living in villages, the one-hoofed animals not specified, and also the Ṭiṭṭibha. — (11)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Carnivorous’; — those that eat raw flesh; such as the Heron, the Vulture &c. What are meant are those that eat raw flesh only; and not those that eat both (raw and cooked flesh), such as the Peacock and the rest.

‘Living in villages’ — even though they be not carnivorous.

‘One-hoofed animals;’ — e.g., the Horse, the Mule, the Ass and so forth.

‘Not specified’; — i.e. those that have not been specified as fit to be eaten should not be eaten: those that have been so specified are lit to be eaten. For instance, it has been declared that ‘one who desires to obtain offspring shall eat the meat of the camel, the horse, the bear and the white ass’. [and here the one-hoofed animals, horse and white ass, are specified as fit to be eaten].

“The eatability of these animals is known only from this Śruti passage. And the presence of the term ‘specified’ in the verse would he understood to mean that the animals thus specified in the Vedic passage may be eaten even elsewhere (apart from Vedic sacrifices also); the meaning of the text being ‘one shall avoid those nut specified, but not those specified.’ As a matter of fact however, nowhere in the Smṛti have any one-hoofed animals been specified as fit to be eaten, with reference to which the term ‘not specified’ (of the text) could be explained. Hence it comes to this that ‘those not specified in the śruti are unfit to be eaten”.’

Our answer to the above is that such a sense of the Smṛti would be contrary to all usage. The term ‘not specified’ is a mere re-iterative reference.

‘Ṭiṭṭibha’ — is a bird which is always screaming ‘ṭiṭ’, ‘ṭiṭ’. In most cases the names of birds are in imitation of their sounds: as says the Nirukta — ‘The name Kāka is in imitation of the sound; such is the case with most bird-names.’ — (11).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika p. 540), which adds the following notes: — ‘Kravyādaḥ’ are the vulture and other birds that eat raw flesh only, and also the peacock and others that eat both raw and cooked flesh; — ‘grāmanivāsinaḥ’ stands for such village-birds as the pigeon and the like, which do not eat flesh; — the term Śakunīn is to be construed with both ‘kravyādaḥ’ and ‘grāmanivāsinaḥ’; — ekaśapha’ are the horse and other one-hoofed animals, — ‘anirdiṣṭaḥ’ means ‘those that are not mentioned in the Śruti as fit for eating’; those that are mentioned as such should certainly be eaten; this refers to such sacrificial animals as are mentioned in the Vedic texts like the following: — ‘One should sacrifice the horse to Tvaṣṭṛ’; which implies that the flesh of the horse so sacrificed must be eaten; — ‘Ṭiṭṭibha’ is the name of the bird that makes the ‘ṭī ṭī’ sound.

It is quoted in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 582); — and in Smṛtisāroddhārā (p. 298).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautamā (17.28-29) — ‘Animals with two rows of teeth, hair-covered animals, hairless animals, one-hoofed animals, house-sparrow, Cakravāka and Haṃsa; — also crows, herons, vultures, kites, such water-fowls as have red feet or beaks, village-hens and village hogs.’

Baudhāyana (1.12.1-2). — ‘Tame animals should not be eaten; nor carnivorous and tame birds.’

Āpastamba (1.17.29, 34). — ‘One-hoofed animals, camels, gavaya, village-hog, śarabha and cows; — also carnivorous animals (are not to be eaten).

Vaśiṣṭha (14.48). — ‘Among birds, those who seek food by scratching with feet, the web-footed ones, the Kalaviṅka, the water-hen, the flamingo... a vulture,... those feeding on flesh and those living about villages,’

Viṣṇu (51.28-30). — ‘On eating the flesh of carnivorous animals and birds one should perform the Tapta-Kṛcchra; on eating the Kalaviṅka... one should fast for three nights; — also on eating one-footed animals and those with two rows of teeth.’

Yājñavalkya (1.172). — ‘Carnivorous birds... one-hoofed animals, animals living about villages, etc., etc.’

Paiṭhīnasi (Aparārka, p. 248). — ‘Cow, sheep, goat, horse, mule, ass and man — these seven are the gramya-paśus (grāmya-paśus?), animals living about villages.’

Познавательные статьи:



Коммуникативные барьеры и пути их преодоления

Рынок недвижимости. Сущность недвижимости

Решение задач с использованием генеалогического метода

История происхождения и развития детской игры