with the Commentary of Medhatithi 144 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 150 из 350Следующая ⇒

Yājñavalkya (1.181). — (See above, under 47.)

VERSE 5.58

Section VII - Impurity due to Death

दन्तजातेऽनुजाते च कृतचूडे च संस्थिते ।
अशुद्धा बान्धवाः सर्वे सूतके च तथौच्यते ॥५८॥

dantajāte'nujāte ca kṛtacūḍe ca saṃsthite |
aśuddhā bāndhavāḥ sarve sūtake ca tathaucyate ||58||

When a child dies that has teethed, or one younger than it when its tonsure has been performed, all its relatives are ‘impure’. The same is declared to be the case with births also. — (58).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Anujāta’ — is taken to mean younger than the child that has teethed.

The present verse mentions the several stages only by way of illustration, and much emphasis is not meant to be laid on them; since the exact period of ‘impurity’ in regard to the various stages is going to be prescribed later on; e .g., in another Smṛti-text we read — (a) Till the appearance of teeth etc.’ — (b) ‘When a child dies in a foreign country, etc., etc.’ (5.77), — there is‘immediate impurity’; — where the term ‘child’ is to be understood as standing for one that has not teethed. Thus too it. is that what the text (5.67) says regarding the ‘one night’s impurity’ in connection with the death of ‘persons whose tonsure has not been performed etc.’ is taken to be applicable also to one who has teethed. It is in this way that the rules laid down by the two Smṛti-texts in connection with the ‘child’ become reconciled. In fact the ‘one night’s impurity’ pertains only to children till the performance of the Tonsure; since in connection with those whose Tonsure has been performed, the period of impurity is going to be prescribed as to last for three days; and this applies to the case of hoys before their Initiatory Ceremony; after which the period would be ten days and so forth, as laid down in the text — ‘The Brāhmaṇa is purified in ten days, etc.’ (5.83).

Some people interpret the several alternative rules laid dowu in verses 5.59 et seq — ‘Impurity due to death lasts for ten days’ etc., etc., — as pertaining to the different ages (of the dying person), and construe them differently from their natural order — on the strength of usage and of other Smṛti.texts; by which (a) the impurity in connection with the Initiated child lasts for ten days, (b) in connection with the uninitiated for four days, (c) in connection with one whose Tonsure has been performed, three days, (d) in connection with one who has teethed, one day, and (e) in connection with younger children, it is to be only ‘immediate’; and so forth. In this way there would be an option between ‘three’ and ‘four’ days, in connection with one whose Tonsure has been performed.

But in accordance with these views, there would be no notice taken of the rule that has been prescribed in another Smṛti- text, in connection with the death of the boy ‘who has completed his Vedic Study’. All this we shall explain later on.

A person is called ‘dead’ when all his functions have ceased, and the root ‘sthā’ with the prepositiou ‘sam,’ denotes cessation of functions, [Hence ‘saṃsthita’ means de?a ].

‘Relations’, — i.e., Sapiṇḍas (sharers in the ball-offering) and Samānodakas (‘Sharers in the water-offering’).

‘Jātaka’ is the birth of a son, etc.

‘The same is declared to be the case’; i.e., all relations are impure.

Question: “Whence is any notion of age obtained, by which the text is interpreted as applying to one whose Tonsure has been performed, and thus refering to a particular sacramental rite? In a later text, the connection of the Initiatory Rite has been directly mentioned. But we do not find it any where stated upto what age a child may be called tonsured.”

Our answer to the above is as follows: By reason of its having been mentioned along with ‘one who has teethed,’ the term ‘tonsure’ is understood as indicating a definite age; and this age is to be taken as extending upto the third or the fourth year.

It has been argued that — “Since there is the option of performing the Tonsure during the first year, if one adopts this option, the present rule (which extends the ‘impurity’ in the case of the‘tonsured’ child to one day) would be contrary to the rule that ‘upto the period of teething, the impurity is only immediate’.”

This is not right. As a matter of fact, what is the extent of the ‘tonsured’ age we learn from the juxtaposition of the epithets ‘tonsure’ and ‘initiated’, which indicates that the new name becomes applicable only upon the performance of the next sacramental rite [so that the boy could be regarded as ‘tonsured’ only till the performance of the Initiatory Rite]. In this way, the present text would become reconciled with such texts as ‘Till teething, impurity is to be immediate.’ Similarly in the Smṛti- text — ‘Till the ceremony of initiation it is to be for three days’ — the Initiatory ceremony is mentioned only as indicative of a particular age. It might be argued that — “there would, in this case be no age specified for the Śūdra, in the way in which it is for the Brāhmaṇa, the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya, in connection with whom, the Initiation has been more or less strictly prescribed, as being the eighth year and so forth.” — But in this case also, the age would be understood as when the period of ‘childhood’ is passed; in accordance with the law that ‘for all there is a full period of impurity.’ Thus then, after the eighth gear, in case of all the four castes, the period of impurity would be the full term’, and this age is applicable to the case of the Śūdra also. In accordance with the view by which the ‘Initiation’ in the present context is taken as indicating the eleventh (and twelfth) year in the case of the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya, — there would be no age mentioned in connection with the Śūdra. Though in his case also the period of impurity extends to the full time, in the case of one who has passed his childhood; before which the period extends to three days only: and the passing of childhood has been defined in another Smṛti-text, which says — ‘Upto the eighth year one is called a child’, while others declare that ‘one is a child till his sixteenth year.’ Those who hold that ‘childhood’ ceases after the sixteenth year, — according to those also purification takes place only after a month (the full term). It has also been declared that ‘after six years, the purification of the Śūdra comes after a month’; and in another text — ‘one month in the case of the eight-year-old child’.

Objection — “The rules regarding the several ages are obtained from the verses that follow; why then should the ‘teething’, etc., have been specified in the present verse?”

Answer — True; but it bus been answered here also for the purpose of making the rules more intelligible. — (58)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Anujāte’ — ‘Younger than one that has teethed’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Nārāyaṇa, Rāghavānanda; and Kullūka also, who is not rightly represented by Buhler).

‘Ca’ — This includes ‘one whose Upanayana has been performed’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka, Nārāyaṇa and Rāghavānanda).

This verse is quoted in Smṛtitattva (II, p. 239), which adds that according to this the impurity attaches, not only to the Sapiṇḍas, but also to Sagotras, Samānodakas, paternal relations, maternal relations and so forth; — ‘anujāta,’ literally meaning ‘bora after,’ means ‘one born after the dantajāta,’ this latter being the noun immediately preceding the word; — the presence of ‘ca,’ implies the ‘initiated’ also; ‘saṃsthīte’ means ‘dead.’

It is quoted in Hāralatā (p. 1), which adds the following notes: — ‘anujāta’ is the child born after the child that has cut its teeth, i.e., a ehilçl that has not cut its teeth, — ‘kṛtacūḍe ca,’ the ‘ca’ is meant to include one whose Upanayana has been performed, — ‘saṃsthite’ on his dying, — ‘sūtaka’ stands here for the impurity due to birth, that duo to death having been separately mentioned.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Parāśara (3.21). — (Same as Manu.)

Āpastamba (2.15.3.4). — ‘On account of the death of children who have not completed their first year, the parents alone shall bathe — and those who bury them.’

Viṣṇu (22.26-31). — In the case of the child dying immediately after birth, or one who is still-born, the impurity of the family ceases immediately; for such a child there is no cremation, nor water-oblations; in that of a child that has teethed hut whose tonsure has not been performed, the impurity lasts for a day and night; in that of one whose tonsure has been done, hut no other sacrament, three days.’

Yājñavalkya (3.18.23). — ‘Impurity due to death lasts for three or ten days; if the dead is a child less than two years old, the impurity attaches to the parents only; and that due to the birth attaches to the mother only. In the case of the death of children before teething, the impurity is only for the moment; in that of those after teething but before tonsure, it lasts for one night; in that of those after tonsure, hut before Upanayana, for three days; — after that, for ten days.’

VERSE 5.59

Section VII - Impurity due to Death

दशाहं शावमाशौचं सपिण्डेषु विधीयते ।
अर्वाक् सञ्चयनादस्थ्नां त्र्यहमेकाहमेव वा ॥५९॥

daśāhaṃ śāvamāśaucaṃ sapiṇḍeṣu vidhīyate |
arvāk sañcayanādasthnāṃ tryahamekāhameva vā ||59||

Among ‘Sapiṇḍas’. the period of impurity due to death is ordained to last for ten days; or till the collecting of the bones, or for three days, or for one day only — (59).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The qualifications of the‘Sapiṇḍa’ shall be described later on.

‘Till the collecting of the bones’; — this is meant to indicate the period of four days; — since there is the text — ‘The bone-collecting of one who has set up the fire shall be done on the fourth day’.

The alternatives here laid down are in consideration of the man’s character and Vedic learning, or of his character only; as says another Smṛti -text, — ‘The Brāhmaṇa who is equipped with the Veda only, in three days, and he who has no qualifications, in ten days.’ The period of ‘one day’ is meant for the man who knows three Vedas and has set up the Fire; that of ‘three days’ far one who knows one Veda only; and that of ten days for one who has no such qualifications.

Gautama (14.44) has spoken of ‘immediate purity.’ But this is for a special purpose; all that is meant it that Vedic Study shall not cease. During the period of Impurity, several acts are discontinued, — e.g. for ten days, the food of the two families is not eaten; the making of gifts, the receiving of them, the offering af (of?) oblations and Vedic Study are discontinued; so that ordinarily all these acts would cease during the period; but so far as the Student of several Vedas is concerned, if he were not to repeat them regularly, he would forget them; hence in his case Vedic Study shall not cease.

Similarly it is only right that an alternative should be provided, in consideration of the mourner’s livelihood. For instance, for the man who lives by the ‘six acts’ (of giving and receiving gifts, of sacrificing and officiating at sacrifices, and Reading and Teaching), the impurity lasts for ten days; for him who lives by the ‘three acts’ (of receiving gifts, officiating at Sacrifices and Teaching), it lasts for four days, and for him who lives by’two acts,’ it lasts for three days. If, for all these, the Impurity were to last for ten days, then, as the man would not be entitled to receive gifts and officiate at sacrifices, his living would become extremely difficult for him.

Some people hold that — “there are four age-stages, and four periods of Impurity; so that each of the latter is to be taken along with each of the former.”

But according to this view, there would be ten days impurity in the case of the child that has teethed; while in the case of the death of the initiated boy, it would be for a single day only; and this would be contrary to usage and other Smṛti-texts.

In order to avoid this incongruity, the connection may be made in the reverse order; i.e., the death of the initiated boy entailing ten days, and that of the tonsured child four days, the teething child three days, and a still younger child only one day.

Even so in view of the incompatibility (of this view) with the Smṛti-text, that — ‘in the case of the tonsured child, the impurity lasts for three days’, — it would be necessary to regard the two (three and four days) as optional alternatives; specially as the term ‘sva’ refers to ‘three days,’ and the period of‘four days’ would apply to the particular livelihood of the mourner, or to the particular day on which the bones are collected. In this manner all this becomes reconciled with the other Smṛti-texts, which, speaks of‘one day, &c,’ If, on the other hand, the option were explained as based upon the diversity of age, — then, with what would Menu’s declaration regarding‘conduct’ and‘study’ be taken as optional?

From all this it follows that on the strength of Gautama’s assertion, there is to be‘immediate purification,’ only so far as Vedic Study is concerned — for the man who, like the person possessing a ‘granary’, has other means of living than the receiving of gifts, and who is very much learned in the Vedas. In the case of the other alternatives, of ‘three days’ and the rest, the purification in meant simply to qualify the man for the receiving of gifts for purposes of a living. This is according to the view of Gautama. If this were not his meaning, then, he would have said simply — ‘for the Brāhmaṇa learning the Veda,’ — and not ‘for the purpose of avoiding discontinuance of study.’

Thus, though purification has been laid down in a general way, as to be accomplished in a single day, — yet it should be understood as pertaining to certain special acts only. So that the ordinary period for the Brāhmaṇa being‘ten days’ (according to 5.83), there is no need for saying anything else; from which it is clear that the option should be admitted in the manner described above. In the case however of ‘purity’ being immediate, in the case of new born infants, and the period of impurity lasting for ‘three days’ in the case of tonsured children, — sinece there is no option, the purity must pertain to all acts. — (59).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

“The commentators are of the opinion that the length of the period of the impurity depends on the status of the mourner; and that a man who knows the mantras only of one Śākhā shall be impure during four days, one who knows a whole Śākhā (or two Vedas) during three days, one who knows the Veda (or three Vedas) and keeps three or five sacred fires, during one day. Medhātithi however mentions another interpretation, according to which the four periods correspond to the four ages of the deceased, which have been mentioned in the preceding verse. According to this view, the Sapiṇḍas shall mourn for an initiated person for ten days, — for one who had received the tonsure, four days, and so forth.” — Buhler.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 893), which explains the first half to mean that the Sapiṇḍas are impure for ten days, and the second half as laying down three other alternatives; — ‘Arvāk (or as it reads ā vā) sañcayanāt asthnām’ it explains as indicating the period of four days, the fourth day being prescribed for the collecting of the bones of the dead. Thus the four alternative periods are — ten days, four days, three days and one day; and the rule regarding the restriction of one or the other is thus laid down by Parāśara — ‘The Brāhmaṇa equipped with both the Veda and the Fire becomes pure in one day, one equipped with the Veda only in three days, and one without qualifications in ten days.’

It is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.29), which remarks that the four periods here specified are meant respectively for the ‘Kusūladhānyaka,’ the ‘Kumbhīdhānyaka,’ the Tryahaihika’ and the ‘Aśvastanika’ (described in 4.7 above). It quotes Parāśara’s rule (just quoted), but rejects it as unacceptable.

It is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 391), and again on p. 426; — in Smṛtisāroddhāra (pp. 226 and 229); — in Nityācārapradīpa (p. 116); — in Hāralatā (p. 3) which reads ‘āsthi’ and explains it as meaning ‘four days’; — and in Śuddhimayūkha (p. 37).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (14.1). — ‘The Sapiṇḍas become impure by death during ten days, — except those who officiate as priests, who have performed the initiatory sacrifice and religious students.’

Baudhāyana (1.11.1). — ‘Referring to deaths and births, they declare that the impurity of Sapiṇḍas lasts for ten days, except for the officiating priest, or one who has performed the initiatory sacrifice, or the religious student.’

Vaśiṣṭha (4.16). — ‘It is ordained that impurity caused by a death shall last ten days in the case of Sapiṇḍa relations.’

Viṣṇu (22.1). — ‘Impurity due to death and birth shall last for ten days for the Brāhmaṇa, among Sapiṇḍas.’ Yājñavalkya (3.18). — (See above, under 58.)

Āśvalāyana Gṛhyasūtra (4.4.18). — ‘For ten days after the death of a Sapiṇḍa (study and gifts are to be avoided).’

Śāṅkhāyana Gṛhyasūtra (4.7.6). — ‘If a death or birth has occurred, for ten days (shall study be discontinued).’

Parāśara (Aparārka, p. 894). — ‘The Brāhmaṇa equipped with fire and Veda becomes purified in a single day; one endowed with the Veda only, in three days; one devoid of special qualifications, in ten days.’

Dakṣa (Do.). — ‘There are options in regard to impurity due to birth — for the moment, for one, three, four, six, ten, twelve or fifteen days, for a month, and till death. No such impurity attaches to the persons who know the text and the meaning of the Veda, along with the subsidiary sciences, rituals and esoteric doctrines, and are also devoted to the performance of religious rites.’

Bṛhaspati (Do.). — ‘There is no impurity when Vedic Study is carried on, when Homa is offered at both times and when the Vaiśvadeva-offerings are constantly made. The Brāhmaṇa equipped with Fire and Veda becomes purified in one day; those with lesser qualifications, in three and four days. One without the Fire, in three days; the common Brāhmaṇa, in ten days; one who lives upon pickings and gleanings is immediately purified; for one whose sole possession is the Gāyatrī and who duly offers the three twilight-prayers, and who does not live the life of the dog, the impurity lasts for six days.’

Parāśara (Do.). — (Same as above; but ‘Mahābhārata is read’ in place ‘Homa is offered at both times).’

Dakṣa (Do. p. 895). — ‘The twice-born man who takes his food without bathing or making oblations, is always impure; also one who is an invalid, a miser, one in debt, one devoid of religious acts, and illiterate, one who is controlled by his wife and so forth.’

Brahmapurāṇa (Aparārka, p. 895). — ‘The man who has a second wife is beset with permanent impurity.’

Śātātapa (Do.). — ‘One who is degraded in birth and death, who is devoid of twilight-prayers, and who only bears the name of the Brāhmaṇa, becomes pure in ten days.’

Parāśara (l.3.6.). — (Same as above.)

(Do.) (1.3.7, etc.). — ‘Those who arc of the same Piṇḍa are affected by impurity. Up to the fourth grade, the impurity lasts ten days; at the fifth grade, six days; at the sixth, four days; at the seventh, three days.’

Kūrmapurāṇa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 583). — ‘On the death of the Brāhmaṇa, the Śūdra, the Vaiśya and the Kṣatriya are purified in ten days.’

Devala (Do.). — ‘On the death of the Brāhmaṇa, all his Sapiṇḍa relations are impure for ten days.’

VERSE 5.60 [Sapiṇḍa: relationship as bearing on ‘Impurity’]

Section VIII - Sapiṇḍa: relationship as bearing on ‘Impurity’

सपिण्डता तु पुरुषे सप्तमे विनिवर्तते ।
समानोदकभावस्तु जन्मनाम्नोरवेदने ॥६०॥

sapiṇḍatā tu puruṣe saptame vinivartate |
samānodakabhāvastu janmanāmnoravedane ||60||

The ‘Sapiṇḍa-relationship’ ceases with the person in the seventh-degree and the ‘Samānodaka-relationship,’ when the origin and the name become unrecognisable — (60).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Inasmuch as the present context is meant to provide information regarding the exact signification of the term ‘anvaya’, ‘family’, — and as the term ‘bāndhava’, ‘relation’ (of the proceeding verses) is meant to be construed with the present text also, — the meaning of the present verse is that persons born of the same family are called ‘Sapiṇḍas’ upto the person in the seventh grade. In view of the assertion — ‘the son shall make offerings to those to whom his fathers make them’. — which lays down offerings to be made also by a person whose father is living; six persons become recognised as ‘Sapiṇḍas’ (the seventh being the offeror himself).

Further, according to the statement’ — ‘offerings are made to forefathers, counting one’s own self as the seventh’ — the grandfather, the great-grand-father and other ancestors are called ‘Sapiṇḍas’; and yet, while the six ancestors are called ‘Sapiṇḍas,’ the six descendants, beginning with the son, are also called ‘Sapiṇḍas,’ Because the ‘offering of the ball’ is a single act, upon which, and in connection with which, the title ‘Sapiṇḍa’ becomes applicable, — the ‘son’ and other descendants also become associated with this ‘act as performed by the grandson, and other descendants respectively; consequently the person to whom one makes the offering, and along with whom he becomes the recipient of the offering — all these come to be called ‘Sapiṇḍa;’ and the reason for this lies in the fact that the ‘ball-offering’ is the only indicative in the present case; just as in the case of the assertion ‘you should come at conch-time (gun-time)’ the ‘conch’ is the only indicative of the time that is meant. Thus it comes to this that all descendants upto the seventh grade of the greatgrandfather of one’s great-grandfather are his ‘Sapiṇḍas’; and similarly the descending line of one’s descendants, and the descendants of his father, grand-father and the rest. The degrees are to be counted from that person from whom the two lines bifurcate. For instance, among persons who have a common grandfather, the seven degrees should be counted from that grandfather, and persons falling within those seven degrees would be the ‘Sapiṇḍa’. Similarly in all cases.

In dealing with the question of ‘Sapiṇḍa’, all that the text speaks of is ‘person born of the same family,’ and no mention of the caste is made; consequently persons belonging to the Kṣatriya and other castes also become ‘Sapiṇḍa’ of the Brāhmaṇa. It is for this reason that on the birth of such persons also the Brāhmaṇa remains ‘impure’ for ten days; while in their own case the period lasts for twelve days (for the Kṣatriya), thirteen for the Vaiśya and so forth. Thus then, in the case of the birth or death of the person of a different caste, or in that of the Sapiṇḍa of a different caste, the purification is governed by the period prescribed for the caste of the person concerned.

In the case of the Kṣatriya and other castes, their ‘Sapiṇḍa’-relationship to the Brāhmaṇa extends to three degrees only; as says Śaṅkha — “If of one person there are born several persons, of different mothers and diverse castes, these are ‘Sapiṇḍas’, with varying periods of purification; but the ball-offering extends over three degrees only.” In this passage the term ‘of different mothers’ means ‘born of mothers of different castes’; the term ‘of diverse castes’ has also been added in view of the fact that persons born of mothers of the same caste also are ‘born of different mothers’. — These are ‘Ekapiṇḍa’, i.e., Sapiṇḍa; but ‘with varying periods of purification’; i.e., the purification of each person is in accordance with his own caste; for instance, for the Brāhmaṇa in the case of the birth, etc, of his Sapiṇḍa of the Kṣatriya and other castes, the purification takes ten days; while for the Kṣatriya, in the case of the birth, &c. of his Brāhmaṇa Sapiṇḍa, it takes twelve days; — there is the further peculiarity in this case that ‘the ball-offering extends over three degrees only’; i.e., it is offered to persons within three degrees only.

Within the pale of their own castes however, for the Kṣatriya and other castes also the ‘Sapiṇḍa-relationship’ extends over seven degrees, exactly as for Brāhmaṇas; specially as in the words of Śaṅkha justed quoted, we find the qualifying terms ‘born of one person from different mothers’ — it is only in relation to other castes that their ‘Sapiṇḍa-relstionship can be understood to extend over three degrees only. This same fact is still more clearly stated in the following Smṛti — text — ‘In the case of impurity due to the death of those relations of the Brāhmaṇa who are descendants from the Kṣatriya, the Vaiśya and the Śūdra, the purification of the Brāhmaṇa comes after ten days, upto six, three and one stage respectively.’

In the case of the wives of different castes, if the husband is alive, the purification is determined by the time laid down for the husband. To this end it is said — ‘In the case of birth and death among slaves, and among one’s wives of lower castes, the purification would be similar to that of the master or husband, but if the husband is not living, it shall be similar to that of their fathers.’

In place of the fist quarter of the text (instead of the words ‘sūte mṛte tu dāsānām — ‘in the case of birth and death among slaves’) some people read ‘asavarṇāsutānām’ (‘of sons born of other castes’). If such be the reading, then such Śūdra-sons as live in the house of the Brāhmaṇa-father would be controlled entirely by the ways of the father, and hence their time of purification would be ten days in consideration of their father’s caste.

The term ‘dāsa,’ ‘slave’, in the text just quoted are meant to be those that have been hired; because for born slaves we have another rule, — viz: — ‘Artisans, mechanics, female and male slaves, and king’s officers have been declared to be capable of immediate purification’. Bat this ‘purification’ should be understood to consist only in their touchability, and not as entitling them to the acts of offering gifts, feeding Brāhmaṇas and so forth; and the reason for this lies in the fact that all the names here mentioned are such as are based upon professions; which gives rise to the following questions — (a) Is the purification here laid down subversive of all the rules that have been laid down before? — Or (b) does it entitle the man to all acts? — Or (c) does it entitle him to a few of these only? And the conclusion that suggests itself is that the man is entitled to just those acts that may be necessary for the proper carrying out of the King’s business. Such also is the usage.

Познавательные статьи:



Коммуникативные барьеры и пути их преодоления

Рынок недвижимости. Сущность недвижимости

Решение задач с использованием генеалогического метода

История происхождения и развития детской игры