with the Commentary of Medhatithi 163 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 169 из 350Следующая ⇒

‘Offerings’ — apart for the Agnihotra-libations; those that are laid down as to be made.to ‘Indra’ ‘Indrapuruṣa’ and so forth.

In this view, there are no offerings poured into the fire, — they say.

But this is not right; as the term ‘bali’, ‘offering’, is a generic name for all kinds of oblations; and hence it stands equally for those offered into the fire, and those not offered Into the fire.

If the right view to hike were this that(one shall offer only what he eats; — and that also into the file only, — and that offerings into the fire must consist of cooked food then the hermit would cook just that much herb, &c. as would be needed for the offerings, and he himself would cat the ripe fruits of the season. Even for one who lives upon season-fruits, it is necessary to offer the Vaiśvadeva oblations into fire.

The compound in the second line is a copulative one, formed of ‘ap’, ‘water’, and the rest; the meaning being that ‘the traveller that happens to come to his hermitage he shall honour with water, roots, fruits and alms — consisting of Nīvāra and other grains’. — (7).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.45) in support of the view that it is the Hermit’s duty to feed guests.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (3.29-30). — ‘He shall worship gods, Pitṛs, men, elementals, and sages; he shall receive hospitably men of all castes except those intercourse with whom is forbidden.’

Baudhāyana (2.11-15). — (See under 3.)

Baudhāyana (3.3.5-7, 20). — ‘Fetching shrubs, etc., and cooking them, they offer the Agnihotra in the evening and in the morning, give food to ascetics, guests and students, and eat the remainder. A devotee shall first honour the guests who have come to his hermitage at dinner time, he shall be sedulous in worshipping gods and Brāhmaṇas, in offering Agnihotra and in practising austerities.’

Āpastamba (2.22.17). — ‘After that time he shall offer the burnt oblations, sustain his life, feed his guests, and prepare his clothes with materials produced in the forest.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.7). — ‘he shall honour guests coming to his hermitage, with alms of roots and fruits.’

VERSE 6.8

Section III - Details of the Hermit’s Life

स्वाध्याये नित्ययुक्तः स्याद् दान्तो मैत्रः समाहितः ।
दाता नित्यमनादाता सर्वभूतानुकम्पकः ॥८॥

svādhyāye nityayuktaḥ syād dānto maitraḥ samāhitaḥ |
dātā nityamanādātā sarvabhūtānukampakaḥ ||8||

He should be always engaged in Vedic study, meek, conciliatory, quiet, ever liberal, not accepting any gifts, and compassionate towards all living beings. — (8).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This being a distinct stage of life, people might think that such duties as Vedic Study and the like, which pertain to other life-stages, should have to be omitted now; hence with a view to show that they do not cease, the Text has added — ‘always engaged’; and not as in the Householder’s stage, during which, the man being busy with his household work, their performance leaves no time for Vedic study and such duties.

‘Meek’ — endowed with humility; free from haughtiness.

‘Conciliatory’ — abounding in the friendly spirit; always saying what is agreeable and wholesome; ever ready to conciliate his neighbour.

‘Quiet.’ — Even when urged by others, he should not speak much of what may be irrelevant.

‘Ever liberal’ — in making gifts of water, fruits and roots and alms.

‘Not accepting any gifts’ — He should not beg anything for his medication or diet and such needs, from a person belonging to another stage of life and coming to see him.

‘Compassionate towards all living beings’ — ‘Compassion’ is pity. But even though he be compassionate, he should not, for the sake of any person, beg anything from another person. — (8).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Dāntaḥ’ — ‘Self-controlled, free from pride’ (Medhātithi and Nārāyaṇa); — ‘patient with hardships’ (Kullūka).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Baudhāyana (3.3.19). — ‘Let him not injure even gadflies or gnats; let him bear cold and perform austerities; let him constantly reside in the forest, be contented, delight in bark and skins, and in carrying water.’

Āpastamba (2.21.21). — ‘He shall keep one fire only, have no house, enjoy no pleasures, have no protector, observe silence, uttering speech only on the occasion of the daily recitation of the Veda.’

Āpastamba (2.22.11). — ‘He shall not any longer take presents.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.8). — ‘He shall only give, not receive, presents.’

Viṣṇu (94-6). — ‘He must not relinquish the private recitation of the Veda.’

Yājñavalkya (3.48). — ‘Self-controlled, bathing at three times, desisting from accepting presents, studying the Veda, charitable, devoted to the welfare of all living beings.’

VERSE 6.9

Section III - Details of the Hermit’s Life

वैतानिकं च जुहुयादग्निहोत्रं यथाविधि ।
दर्शमस्कन्दयन् पर्व पौर्णमासं च योगतः ॥९॥

vaitānikaṃ ca juhuyādagnihotraṃ yathāvidhi |
darśamaskandayan parva paurṇamāsaṃ ca yogataḥ ||9||

He shall offer, according to rule, the sacrificial oblations, taking case not to omit the ‘Darśa’ and the ‘Paurnamāsa’ sacrifice. — (9)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Vitāna’, is vihāra, sacrifice; what pertains to it is ‘sacrificial’, ‘vaitānikam’; i.e., the rites pertaining to the Three Fires this he shall ‘offer’, perform.

The term ‘agnihotra’ primarily denotes the wild barley and other substances that are employed in sacrificial oblations; and it is not the name of a particular rite; it is in this sense that we have the term used as the object of the verb ‘shall offer’; and we get at the meaning that ‘he shall offer, by means of the Agnihotra and other rites, the oblations into the Āhavanīya Fire;’ — it is in this way that the use of the verb ‘juhuyāt’, ‘shall offer’ becomes justified. In this explanation the word ‘agnihotra’ becomes synonymous with the denotation of the root ‘hu’, ‘to offer into the fire.’

Objection — “The text has just prescribed the optional alternative of committing his wife to his sons; in this case how can the man, in the absence of his wife, be entitled to the performance of śrauta rites? It might be said that ‘the man would be entitled to them in the same way as the man away from home is entitled; just as the man who is away from home, though at a distance from the Fires, is regarded as the performer of the rituals by reason of his having made arrangements for the offerings to be made by a proper substitute, in the same manner, in the case in question, when the man is starting for the forest, his wife shall permit him to carry on the rituals; and in this manner the joint character of the title would not be disturbed.’ But this cannot be right. The procedure of employing a substitute is permissible only in cases where the man is forced by human or divine agencies to go away from home, and not when he goes out of his own accord. Because in such a procedure, many of the details would become omitted, even though the man would be perfectly capable to accomplish them (if he himself remained at home); e.g. in connection with the Darśa-Paurnamāsa sacrifices it is laid down that the sacrificer shall make his wife repeat the mantra ‘vedo-si vittirasi, &c.’; and this would be omitted (during the sacrificer’s absence).

“It might be said that the rule laid down in the present verse may be taken as pertaining to the case where the householder is retiring to the forest along with his wife (and not when he is going alone, leaving her in charge of his sons). But this also is not possible; because we do not find any such restrictive specification. Further in connection with the contigency of leaving the wife behind, the scriptures have prescribed another method of disposing of the Fires (in the shape of the direction that they should be committed to the charge of the wife.)

“Then again, even if the rule wore taken as pertaining to cases where the wife accompanies the husband, the following direction (contained in verse 11) would not be relevant — ‘With pure grains, fit for hermits, which grow in spring and in autumn, and which he has himself collected, he shall prepare the cakes and the boiled messes, according to law’; — the grains meant here are the wild ones, Nīvāra and the like, because he has been directed to relinquish all his village-belongings; and yet in the Veda cakes are laid down as to be made of Vrīhi and other grains, which are cultivated. Nor could the rite be completed by using any other pure grain, either in accordance with the maxim that ‘whatever is produced may be used’ (‘Utpannanyāya’), or in accordance with the law of options (Vrīhi-nyāya). Because any such grains it would be difficult for the wife to obtain. Lastly, the performance of the Agnihotra being a life-long duty, how can there be any relinquishing of that rite, or of the wife? From all this it is clear that the rule regarding the entering into the next stage of life is not compatible with the performance of the Sacrificial Acts.”

On this point a special effort has to be made (for reconciling the apparent discrepancy).

(A) Some people say that the term ‘sacrificial’ in the text has been used, by way of praise, for the smārta (not śrauta) rites; and in connection with the smārta rites there are no such scriptural restrictions as that cakes should be made of the Vrīhi and other cultivated grains only. In fact in connection with these rites it has been declared that — The deities of a man partake of the same food as the man himself’ (Vālmiki-Rāmāyaṇa Ajodhyā kāṇḍa). So that there would be nothing wrong if the Hermit performed these rites with ‘grains fit for the hermit.’ Even if this were incompatible with the injunctions regarding the use of Vrīhi and other cultivated grains, this incompatibility could be easily explained away.

“But even in this case there would be the law relating to the joint right of the husband and wife to the performance, which would be infringed by the man doing it when separated from his wife.”

Well, as regards the Vedic declaration — ‘One shall offer sacrifices, when accompanied by his wife.’ — this can pertain to śrauta rites only so that the said difficulty does not arise in connection with the smārta rites.]

(B) Another explanation is that the rule laid down in the present verse does not refer to the Householder’s Fire at all; it refers to what has been prescribed by Gautama (3.27) regarding ‘the kindling of fire in the month of Śrāvaṇa.’ In the present treatise also, the author is going to add the phrase ‘following the methods of the hermit’ (Verse 21). From all this it is clear that the rites referred to here are those that have been prescribed in the scriptures, as entirely apart from the rites relating to the Agnihotra, &c. And the terms ‘Darśa’ and ‘Paurṇamāsa’ too have been used only figuratively. Thus the said kindling of the Fire by the Hermit is to be done by him, without his wife. As regards the household Fires of the Agnihotra, the method of disposing of them is laid down (in verse 25 below) in the words — ‘Having reposited the sacrificial fires in himself, &c. &c.’

As regards the contention based upon the life-long character of tbs Agnihotra- rite, that the abandoning of the Fires cannot be right, — we shall deal with this when we are considering the question of the sequence among the four life stages.

(C) Others again explain as follows: — What has been forbidden for the Hermit is the act of offering oblations of cultivated grains, and not that of employing these for the sake of the Deities.

“But the sacrificer has got to eat of what is offered to the gods, according to the law that the four priests, with the sacrificer as the fifth, partake of the sacrificial cake.”

True; but that eating is one that is prescribed by the scriptures, and not the ordinary one; and what has been forbidden under verse is the ordinary eating. And for purposes of the scriptural act, even if the man were to go into the village, there would he nothing wrong in this; in fact it is going to be declared below (verse 28) that — ‘he may eat the food after having obtained it from the village.’

This however is not right; because of the express injunction that he is to make use of only such grains as are‘fit for hermits.’

Thus we find that the whole explanation regarding the text referring to the fire kindled during the month of Śrāvaṇa (explanation B above), and all that follows is not acceptable.

Further, verse 4 has spoken of the man‘taking with himself the sacred fire’, — and not leaving it behind. As for its being committed to another person, it is going to be laid down that it is to be done either by the man who is going to die, or who is going out for the first time. Then again, the Turayāṇa and other rites that are prescribed (in verse 10) for the Hermit (and which are all Śrauta rites to be performed in the Śrauta Fire of the Agnihotra) cannot be explained, if the present verse refers to the fresh Smārta fire kindled in Śrāvana. In fact, this latter Fire-kindling could be done only by one whose wife has died, — such being the implication of the actual words laying it down. Or, it may be done in a case where the man retires to the forest immediately after Studentship-

From all this it follows that when an Agnihotrin retires to the forest, he shall do so along with the Fire, and accompanied by his wife.

In the forest, the rites are to be performed ‘according to law’, with Vrīhi and other grains; and these grains (though belonging to the cultivated category) may somehow or other be brought under the category (if ‘grains fit for hermits.’ Specialty as Vrīhi and Yava (which are cultivated grains) are (quite sacred.

For the man who has not maintained the Fire, the duty of ‘committing the Fires to his wife’ may be accomplished somehow with reference to the Fire kindled according to smārta rules. This would be only right, as both are ‘smārta’ acts. In the case of a man who has two wives, and one of these has taken charge of the Fires, the ‘committing of the wife to the children’ would apply to the second wife.

‘Not omitting.’ — ‘Omission’ is disobeying the Injunction; the non-performance of an act in the form in which it has been prescribed. This has been added only for the purpose of filling up the metre; similarly also the term ‘yogaṭaḥ’, ‘taking care.’ The construction is ‘yogataḥ askandayan’, ‘taking care not to omit’, i.e., carefully keeping up. The‘care’ here refers to the injunction ittelf — (9).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.45) as indicating the purpose for which the Hermit is to carry with him his Śrauta Fire; — in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 528); — and in Aparārka (p. 941).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Baudhāyana (3.3.5-8, 20). — ‘They offer Agnihotra in the evening and in the morning, give food to ascetics, guests and students and eat the remainder. They shall be sedulous in worshipping gods and Brāhmaṇas, in offering Agnihotra, and in practising austerities.’

Āpastamba (2.22.12). — ‘He shall offer sacrifices.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.10). — ‘He shall offer the Agnihotra.’

VERSE 6.10

Section III - Details of the Hermit’s Life

ऋक्षेष्ट्य्।आग्रयणं चैव चातुर्मास्यानि चाहरेत् ।
तुरायणं च क्रमशो दक्षस्यायनमेव च ॥१०॥

ṛkṣeṣṭy |āgrayaṇaṃ caiva cāturmāsyāni cāharet |
turāyaṇaṃ ca kramaśo dakṣasyāyanameva ca ||10||

He shall perform the Darśeṣṭi and the Āgrayaṇa; as also the Cāturmāsya sacrifices, and the Turāyaṇa and Dākṣāyaṇa in due order. — (10).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Darśeṣṭyāgrayaṇam is a copulative compound consisting of the two terms ‘darśeṣṭi’ and ‘āgrayaṇā’. ‘Caturmāsya’, ‘Turāyaṇa’ and ‘Dākṣayaṇa’ are the names of particular śrauta rites.

According to some people the performance of the Turāyaṇa and the rest is obligatory — (10).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 941), which explains ‘ṛkṣeṣṭi’ as the Nakṣatreṣṭi, the sacrifice to the lunar mansions, — and the Uttarāyaṇa and Dakṣiṇāyana as the two six-monthly sacrifices pertaining to the two solstices; — and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 528).

VERSE 6.11

Section III - Details of the Hermit’s Life

वासन्तशारदैर्मेध्यैर्मुन्यन्नैः स्वयमाहृतैः ।
पुरोडाशांश्चरूंश्चैव विधिवत्निर्वपेत् पृथक् ॥११॥

vāsantaśāradairmedhyairmunyannaiḥ svayamāhṛtaiḥ |
puroḍāśāṃścarūṃścaiva vidhivatnirvapet pṛthak ||11||

With the pure grains fit for hermits, which grow in spring and in autumn, and which he has himself gathered, he shall severally prepare cakes and boiled messes, according to law — (11).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

If the phrase ‘grains fit for hermits’ is not connected with what has gone before, then there is no room for the objection — “how can the sacrificial offerings be made, which are laid down as to consist of Vrīhi and other cultivated grains?”

The ‘boiled mess’ and ‘cake’ meant here are those that have been prescribed by the rules laid down for Hermits.

‘Vāsanta’ — those that grow, or ripen, during spring; similarly ‘śārada’.

‘Sacred’ — this is a mere re-iteration.

‘Which he has himself gathered’. — This forbids such means of livelihood as receiving gifts and the like. For the due fullilment of the aforesaid s mārta rites, grains have to be gathered by wandering hither and thither.

‘According to law’, ‘severally’. — Both these terms are added for filling up the metre. — (11).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.46), which notes that even though the ‘munyanna’ is by nature pure, yet the text has added the epithet ‘medhya’ with a view to indicate that the grains should be fit for being offered at a sacrifice; — and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 528), which explains ‘munyanna’ as ‘uncultivated grains,’ and ‘medhya’ as ‘fit for being offered at sacrifices.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Āpastamba (2.22.17-18). — ‘He shall offer the burnt oblations, sustain his life... Rice must be used for those sacrifices for which cakes mixed with meat are offered by the Householder.’

Yājñavalkya (3.48). — ‘The rites prescribed in the Smṛti and in the Śruti, as also all acts, he shall perform with oils extracted from fruits.’

VERSE 6.12

Section III - Details of the Hermit’s Life

देवताभ्यस्तु तद् हुत्वा वन्यं मेध्यतरं हविः ।
शेषमात्मनि युञ्जीत लवणं च स्वयं कृतम् ॥१२॥

devatābhyastu tad hutvā vanyaṃ medhyataraṃ haviḥ |
śeṣamātmani yuñjīta lavaṇaṃ ca svayaṃ kṛtam ||12||

Having offered to the gods that most pure offering consisting of wild-growing things, he shall take to himself the remnant, as also the salt prepared by himself — (12).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

He should eat only what remains after the offerings to the gods have been made on the New and Full moon days, — and not any herbs, roots, fruits and the rest. — ‘He shall take to himself the remnant’ shall use it for his own purposes, i.e., for the sustaining of his body.

He should eat only such salt as is ‘prepared by himself’ and not rock-salt &c. — (12).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Lavaṇam svayam kṛtam’ — ‘Collected from saltmarshes’ (Kullūka); — ‘collected from salt or alkaline elements of trees and the like’ (Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.46), which explains that the salt is to be collected from salt-marshes.

VERSE 6.13

Section III - Details of the Hermit’s Life

स्थलजौदकशाकानि पुष्पमूलफलानि च ।
मेध्यवृक्षोद्भवान्यद्यात् स्नेहांश्च फलसम्भवान् ॥१३॥

sthalajaudakaśākāni puṣpamūlaphalāni ca |
medhyavṛkṣodbhavānyadyāt snehāṃśca phalasambhavān ||13||

He should eat the vegetables that grow on land and in water; also flowers, roots and fruits, the productions of pure trees; as well as oils produced from fruits. — (13).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

He should eat those growing on land and in water; as also flowers, roots and fruits. — (13).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 942); — and the second half in Mitākṣarā (on 3.49) to the effect that clarified butter and such ‘oils’ should not be used.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (3.26). — ‘The hermit shall live in the forest, subsisting on roots and fruits, practising austerities.’ Baudhāyana (2.11.15). — (See under 3.)

Āpastamba (2.22.2). — ‘Then he shall wander about, sustaining his life by roots, fruits, leaves and grass.’

Do. (2.23.2). — ‘Afterwards he shall wander about sustaining his life with roots, fruits, leaves and grass which he collects. Finally, he shall content himself with what has become detached spontaneously. Then he shall live on water, then on air, and then on Ākāśa. Each succeeding mode of subsistence procures greater rewards’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.4). — ‘He shall only gather wild-growing fruits and roots.’

Viṣṇu (95.7-12). — ‘He may eat flowers; he may eat fruits; he may eat vegetables; he may eat leaves; he may eat roots; or he may eat barley once a fortnight.’

Yājñavalkya (3.49). — ‘He shall eat what ripens in its own time; and all rites prescribed by Śruti and Smṛti, he shall perform with oils extracted from fruits.’

VERSE 6.14

Section III - Details of the Hermit’s Life

वर्जयेन् मधु मांसं च भौमानि कवकानि च ।
भूस्तृणं शिग्रुकं चैव श्लेश्मातकफलानि च ॥१४॥

varjayen madhu māṃsaṃ ca bhaumāni kavakāni ca |
bhūstṛṇaṃ śigrukaṃ caiva śleśmātakaphalāni ca ||14||

He shall avoid honey, meat, cabbages, mushrooms, the fragrant grass, the pot-herb and the ‘Śleṣmātaka (Śleśmātaka?)’ fruits. — (14).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Bhaumāni Kavakāni’. — The term ‘kavaka’ has already been explained (under 5.5) as a synonym of ‘chatraka’ (mushrooms). These mushrooms grow on the ground, as also in the hollow of trees and other places. Hence the specification ‘land-grown’.

This however would appear to be contrary to usage; specially as among the duties of the Householder, all kinds of mushroom have been forbidden, and for the Hermit, the discipline, if anything, should be stricter.

For this reason the term ‘bhaumāni’ should be taken separately by itself; and it should be understood us standing for the ‘gojihvikā’ (cabbage), which is well-known among foresters, — and not for anything grown on the land.

Mushrooms having been already forbidden before, their repented prohibition in the present text is for the purpose of indicating that the eating of the fragrant grass and other things involves the same Expiatory Rite as that of mushrooms.

‘Bhustṛṇa’ (fragrant grass) and ‘shigruka’ (pot-herb) are the names of particular kinds of herbs well known among cultivators — (14).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Bhaumāni kavakāni’ — Medhātithi prefers to take the two separately — ‘bhaumāni’ being ‘the vegetable known among foresters’ as ‘gojihvikā’ and ‘kavakāni’ as ‘mushrooms’; — Govindarāja, Kullūka and Nārāyaṇa take the two together ‘mushrooms growing on the ground.’

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 942); — and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 529), which explains ‘Kavakāni’ as ‘mushrooms.’

Познавательные статьи:



Как правильно слушать собеседника

Типичные ошибки при выполнении бросков в баскетболе

Принятие христианства на Руси и его значение

Средства массовой информации США