with the Commentary of Medhatithi 169 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 175 из 350Следующая ⇒

He should reflect upon the conditions of men, arising from the defects of their deeds, their falling into hell and their sufferings in the abode of the death-god. — (61)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

What is stated here is a mode of meditating upon the Supreme Truth, consisting in the noting of the fact that birth and rebirth abound in pain.

Finding that life in the world abounds in sufferings caused by the separation from friends, relations, sons and wife and the loss of wealth &c., how could the man voluntarily go on undergoing the physical troubles of wandering about, begging for alms and so forth?

The ‘conditions’ of men abound in pain and result from the defects of their actions, — from their doing what is forbidden; e.g., such acts as doing injury to living beings, stealing, adultery, cruelty, back-biting, improper intentions and so forth. Or ‘conditions’ may stand for what the man undergoes in the world of the living itself, — in the shape of sorrows resulting from poverty, disease, ill-treatment and so forth.

As regards the other world, there is ‘falling into hell’ — i.e., being born as worms and insects in places filled with urine, ordure and dirt &c.

‘Sufferings in the abode of the death-god’ — in the form of Kumbhīpāka and other hells.

Something more has to be reflected upon (and this is pointed out in the next verse). — (61)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968), which explains ‘Yamakṣaye’ as ‘in Yama’s abode’; — and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 34).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (96.36, 38). — ‘He shall reflect upon the anxieties arising in youth from not obtaining the objects of pleasure, and upon the abode in hells awarded as punishment for enjoying them after they have been obtained unlawfully; and on the fearful agonies of hell.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63, 64). — ‘He should reflect upon residence in the womb, as also the sufferings brought about by one’s own acts, mental agonies, physical ailments and other troubles, decrepitude, bodily deformities, birth and rebirth during thousands of lives, and vicissitudes of pleasure and pain.’

VERSE 6.62

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

विप्रयोगं प्रियैश्चैव संयोगं च तथाऽप्रियैः ।
जरया चाभिभवनं व्याधिभिश्चोपपीडनम् ॥६२॥

viprayogaṃ priyaiścaiva saṃyogaṃ ca tathā'priyaiḥ |
jarayā cābhibhavanaṃ vyādhibhiścopapīḍanam ||62||

On the separation of loved ones and the meeting of hated persons; on being beset with decrepitude and suffering from diseases. — (62)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The Accusative ending is due to the verse being construed along with the verb ‘should reflect’ (of the preceding verse.)

‘Loved ones’ — sons and other relations.

‘Separation’ — caused by their untimely death.

‘Hated persons’ — Enemies.

‘Meeting’ — in battle &c.

‘Decrepitude.’ — ‘Decrepitude’ is a peculiar state of the body during the fourth quarter of man’s age. — ‘Being beset having the shape of the body spoilt, feebleness, weakness of the senses, the advent of asthma and other diseases, being loved by none, being jeered at by all; — all this constitutes being ‘beset with decrepitude.’

‘Diseases’ — even before the advent of old age, some people are attacked by diseases. — (62)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968); — and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (96.27-29, 37). — ‘He shall reflect upon the destruction of beauty by old age, — and upon the pain arising from diseases — bodily, mental, or due to excesses, — and upon that arising from the five naturally inherent affections; on the union of those whom we hate, and the separation from those whom we love.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63.64). — (See under 61.)

VERSE 6.63

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

देहादुत्क्रमणं चास्मात् पुनर्गर्भे च सम्भवम् ।
योनिकोटिसहस्रेषु सृतीश्चास्यान्तरात्मनः ॥६३॥

dehādutkramaṇaṃ cāsmāt punargarbhe ca sambhavam |
yonikoṭisahasreṣu sṛtīścāsyāntarātmanaḥ ||63||

There is for his Inner Soul departure from the body, then again birth in the womb, and transmigrations among millions of life-forms. — (63)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

There is ‘departure’ — going out — of the life-breaths; and this constitutes unbearable pain.

‘Birth in the womb’ — where there are several kinds of pain: the organs are not yet developed, the child in the womb is in utter darkness, and it also suffers from diseases, described in the medical science, as proceeding from the extremely cold and hot foods eaten by the mother in varying quantities.

‘Transmigrations’ — passing through — ‘among millions of life-forms’; — the soul being born in the bodies of lower animals, worms, insects, dogs and so forth.

Objection — “The Inner Soul is held to be omnipresent and eternal; how can there be any ‘departure’ for it, when it is present everywhere? how again can there be any ‘transmigration’ among life-forms? how too can there be any ‘birth’ for it when it is eternal?”

Our answer is as follows: — The theory of some people is that there lies within the body the ‘personality’ of the size of the thumb, composed of rudimentary substances, mind and intellect; and it is this personality that goes on being born during the entire series of births and deaths; and when this becomes endowed with a certain merit, the faculty of consciousness becomes manifested in it; and it is through this faculty that the qualities of the said Personality come to be attributed to the Inner Soul.

Or, the explanation may be that the inner soul is related to certain entities in the shape of the life-breath and so forth; and when these depart, the soul is said to ‘depart.’ Similarly with ‘birth.’

All this we shall explain again under Discourse XII and we need not prolong the discussion here. — (63)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968); — and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (96.39). — ‘On the agonies to be suffered in the passage of the soul through the bodies of animals and plants.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63, 64). — (See under 61.)

VERSE 6.64

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

अधर्मप्रभवं चैव दुःखयोगं शरीरिणाम् ।
धर्मार्थप्रभवं चैव सुखसंयोगमक्षयम् ॥६४॥

adharmaprabhavaṃ caiva duḥkhayogaṃ śarīriṇām |
dharmārthaprabhavaṃ caiva sukhasaṃyogamakṣayam ||64||

On the infliction of pain upon living beings, caused by demerit; as also upon the imperishable union with happiness proceeding from the essence of merit. — (64)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The ‘infliction’ — experiencing — ‘of pain’ proceeds from Demerit.

‘Merit’ — as described above, is an ‘artha’, an ‘entity’ and from this — entity, essence — proceeds ‘union with imperishable happiness’.

This also has to be reflected upon.

The meaning is that Renunciation constitutes the principal merit. — (64)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968); — and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (96.40-42). — ‘He shall reflect thus that there is no pleasure to bo met within this never-ceasing passage of the soul through mundane existence; and that even what is called pleasure, on account of the absence of pain, is of a transient nature; and that he who is unable to enjoy such pleasures, from sickness and other causes, or who is unable to procure them, suffers severe pangs.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63.64). — (See under 61.)

VERSE 6.65

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

सूक्ष्मतां चान्ववेक्षेत योगेन परमात्मनः ।
देहेषु च समुत्पत्तिमुत्तमेष्वधमेषु च ॥६५॥

sūkṣmatāṃ cānvavekṣeta yogena paramātmanaḥ |
deheṣu ca samutpattimuttameṣvadhameṣu ca ||65||

By meditation he shall recognise the subtile character of the Higher Self, as also the possibility of its presence in all organisms, high and low. — (65)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Meditation’ — steadiness of the functioning of the mind, as described by Patañjali. By means of that, ‘he shall recognise the subtile character’ of the conscious entity in the body, the soul; and he shall not look upon either the body etc. or the life-breath etc, as the ‘Soul,’ which latter is to be understood, by the help of intuition born of meditation, as something different from all external and internal things; — this is what is meant by the text. Of the Soul, there are no grosser manifestations. And just as he can realise the ‘possibility of its presence’ — in the higher organisms in the form of the bodies of the Gods and other such beings — i.e., the fact of its ensouling these bodies and pasting through experiences born therein, even though in reality it is omnipresent, — exactly in the same manner can one realise it also in the lower organisms, of lower animals, spirits, demons and so forth.

According to the philosophy of Monism, the souls in the organisms are only so many manifestations of the Supreme Self; and it is for this reason that the text has spoken of the man recognising the ‘t ransmigrations of the Higher Self.’ — (65)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Vaśiṣṭha (10.14). — ‘He shall constantly seek in his heart the knowledge of the Supreme Soul.’

Yājñavalkya (3.64). — ‘By contemplative meditation he shall seek to perceive the subtle soul residing within himself.’

VERSE 6.66

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

दूषितोऽपि चरेद् धर्मं यत्र तत्राश्रमे रतः ।
समः सर्वेषु भूतेषु न लिङ्गं धर्मकारणम् ॥६६॥

dūṣito'pi cared dharmaṃ yatra tatrāśrame rataḥ |
samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu na liṅgaṃ dharmakāraṇam ||66||

Even though he be adorned, the man should fulfil his duty, to whichever order he may belong. He should be equal to all beings; mere external marks are not conducive to merit. — (66)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Adorned’ — with flowers, bracelets and other ornaments.

‘Duty’ — all that has been prescribed for the Renunciate, such as meditation on the Self and so forth, he shall perform with care. In fact one should perform the duties of that order to which he may belong.

One should not consider himself to have become a ‘Renunciate’ merely by wearing such external marks as the ‘three staffs’ and the like; in fact ‘he should be equal, to all beings’; — that is, he should, with care, eschew all love, hatred and greed.

By deprecating the external marks it is not meant that the man should wear ornaments. — (66)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Cf. 3.50 and 12.102.

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.65); — and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35), which reads bhūṣitaḥ’ for ‘dūṣitaḥ’, explains it as ‘adorned with the staff and other signs of the Remmciate’ and says that the particle ‘api’ implies that even when without these, he should meditate upon the identity of the individual and supreme selves.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 6.66-67)

Vaśiṣṭha (10.18). — ‘He shall not wear any visible mark of his order, nor adopt any visible rules of conduct.’

Yājñavalkya (3.65). — ‘The mere adoption of any particular order is not a means of acquiring spiritual merit.’

VERSE 6.67

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

फलं कतकवृक्षस्य यद्यप्यम्बुप्रसादकम् ।
न नामग्रहणादेव तस्य वारि प्रसीदति ॥६७॥

phalaṃ katakavṛkṣasya yadyapyambuprasādakam |
na nāmagrahaṇādeva tasya vāri prasīdati ||67||

Though the fruit of the Kataka tree clarifies water, yet water does not become clear by the mere mention of its name. — (67)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When the fruit of the kataka tree is put in dirty water, the water becomes clarified, takes the clear form. But it does not become clear by the mere mention of the name of that fruit; it needs action. Similarly, the wearing of external marks is like the pronouncing of the name of the fruit; and success is attained, not by that wearing alone, but by the due fulfilment of such duties as ‘resting in solitude’, ‘meditation’, ‘equal-mindedness towards all beings’ and so forth.

This verse is a laudatory supplement to what has gone before. — (67)

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 6.66-67)

See Comparative notes for Verse 6.66.

VERSE 6.68

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

संरक्षणार्थं जन्तूनां रात्रावहनि वा सदा ।
शरीरस्यात्यये चैव समीक्ष्य वसुधां चरेत् ॥६८॥

saṃrakṣaṇārthaṃ jantūnāṃ rātrāvahani vā sadā |
śarīrasyātyaye caiva samīkṣya vasudhāṃ caret ||68||

With a view to the safety of living beings, he shall always, during day and night, even during bodily illness, walk after having scanned the ground. — (68)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse shows the necessity for what has been said above (46) regarding the treading on the ground ‘sight-purified.’

‘Even during bodily illness’ — when the body is suffering from some disease; — ‘during day and night’ — when the grass-bed has been spread for sleeping, he shall not lay down his body upon it without having carefully looked over it. The transgression of this rule involves the necessity of performing an expiatory rite.

Or, the text may be taken as referring to those minute animalcules that become attached to the man’s body and perish by the mere moving of the limbs. — (68)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Cf. 6.46.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 570.)

VERSE 6.69

Section VI - Procedure of going forth as a Wandering Mendicant

अह्ना रात्र्या च याञ्जन्तून् हिनस्त्यज्ञानतो यतिः ।
तेषां स्नात्वा विशुद्ध्यर्थं प्राणायामान् षडाचरेत् ॥६९॥

ahnā rātryā ca yāñjantūn hinastyajñānato yatiḥ |
teṣāṃ snātvā viśuddhyarthaṃ prāṇāyāmān ṣaḍācaret ||69||

By day and by night, if the Renunciate unintentionally injures some living creatures, he shall, for the purpose of expiating it, bathe and then perform six ‘breath-suspensions.’ — (69)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Living creatures’ — here, should be understood as standing for minute animalcules; ‘for the expiation of the sin accruing from the injuring of these’; — such is the construction of the passage. — (69)

VERSE 6.70 [Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)]

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

प्राणायामा ब्राह्मणस्य त्रयोऽपि विधिवत् कृताः ।
व्याहृतिप्रणवैर्युक्ता विज्ञेयं परमं तपः ॥७०॥

prāṇāyāmā brāhmaṇasya trayo'pi vidhivat kṛtāḥ |
vyāhṛtipraṇavairyuktā vijñeyaṃ paramaṃ tapaḥ ||70||

Even three ‘breath-suspensions,’ accompanied by the three ‘vyāhṛti’-syllables and the syllable ‘om’, when duly performed, should be regarded as the highest austerity for the Brāhmaṇa. — (70)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

By using the term ‘brāhmaṇa’ the text implies that what is mentioned constitutes the duty of the whole caste, and is not restricted to the Renunciate only.

‘Even three’ — more than three lead to more excellent results; three are absolutely necessary.

‘Vyāhṛti syllables’ — those mentioned under 2.81.

‘Praṇava’ — the syllable ‘om’.

The breath-suspensions are to be ‘accompanied by these’. — This indicates the duration of the breath-suspension.

These breath-suspensions are of three kinds, named ‘Kumbhaka’ (total suspension), ‘Pūraka’ (inhaling) and ‘Recaka’ (exhaling). The total suppression of air passing out of the mouth and the nostrils constitutes the (inhalation and suspension); and when the man does not inhale breath but continuously keeps on exhaling, it is called ‘Recaka exhalation.’ The exact duration of each of these has been described under Discourse II. Or, in view of its being spoken of as ‘austerity,’ it may be continued till it becomes actually painful. — (70)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Cf. 2.74.

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 68).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Vaśiṣṭha (10.5). — ‘The one syllable om is the best Veda; the suppression of breath is the highest austerity; living on alms is better than fasting; compassion is preferable to liberality.’

VERSE 6.71

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

दह्यन्ते ध्मायमानानां धातूनां हि यथा मलाः ।
तथेन्द्रियाणां दह्यन्ते दोषाः प्राणस्य निग्रहात् ॥७१॥

dahyante dhmāyamānānāṃ dhātūnāṃ hi yathā malāḥ |
tathendriyāṇāṃ dahyante doṣāḥ prāṇasya nigrahāt ||71||

Just as the impurities of metallic ores are consumed when they are blasted, even so are the taints of the senses consumed through the suspension of breath. — (71)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When the ‘metallic ores,’ of gold for instance, are blasted in a furnace, what is left behind is pure gold; similarly when the senses apprehend their objects, the man feels joys and sorrows, and these are productive of sin; this sin is consumed through the suspension of breath.

For the man seeking Liberation, indulging in joys and griefs has been forbidden.

But even in a man who has given up all attachment, and has his organs under his control, these are bound to appear, in howsoever small a degree, through the sheer nature of things, whenever by chance various kinds of colour, sound &c. become presented before him. And it is for the removal of the taints due to these that breath-suspensions have to be practised. — (71)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.62); — and in Vidhānapārijāta (II. p. 176).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Vaśiṣṭha (25.6). — ‘Through the inhibition of breath air is generated; through air is produced fire; then through heat water is formed; hence one becomes internally purified by these three.’

Baudhāyana (4.1.24). — (Same as above from Vaśiṣṭha.)

VERSE 6.72

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

प्राणायामैर्दहेद् दोषान् धारणाभिश्च किल्बिषम् ।
प्रत्याहारेण संसर्गान् ध्यानेनानीश्वरान् गुणान् ॥७२॥

prāṇāyāmairdahed doṣān dhāraṇābhiśca kilbiṣam |
pratyāhāreṇa saṃsargān dhyānenānīśvarān guṇān ||72||

By means of ‘Breath-suspension’ he shall destroy the taints; and by means of ‘Concentration,’ all sin; all attachments by means of ‘Abstraction,’ and by means of ‘Contemplation,’ those attributes that are not independent. — (72)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

What is said here regarding Breath-suspension has already been indicated in the preceding verse.

But some people explain this verse to mean that ‘one shall destroy the taints’ — i.e., love, hatred &c.

But how can these latter be destroyed by means of Breath-suspension? What can be destroyed by it is sin (not love &c.), specially as it is sin only which has its origin as well as destruction both indicated in the scriptures, and hence imperceptible; while Love or Hatred and the rest are all directly perceptible; so that what destroys these, and what is destroyed by them, can also be learnt by perception, and not through the scriptures. If the scripture were to speak of the destroying of these, its meaning would be that ‘one should destroy these things, which are by their very nature, destructible’; — and what would be the authority attached to such a declaration? From all this it is clear that what is meant by the term ‘taint’ is the evil deed that proceeds from Love and the rest. And this is ‘destroyed’ by the destruction of its effects; because as for the act itself, it perishes by reason of its evanescent character. This is what is meant by ‘dāha’, ‘being consumed’, and not being actually burnt to ashes.

Thus the present verse is only a reiteration of what has gone before in the preceding verse.

‘By means of Concentration’ —

Objection — “‘Kilviṣa (Kilbiṣa)’ is sin, so is ‘doṣa’ also. Hence the words of the text should have been ‘by means of Breath-Suspension and Concentration he shall destroy all taints, doṣas’; and there would be no need of mentioning kilviṣa, sin, separately. Or, only ‘kilviṣa’, sin,’ need have been mentioned, and where was the need for mentioning ‘doṣa,’ ‘taint’, also?”

The explanation is as follows: — It is absolutely necessary to mention the ‘taint’, in order to show that what are destroyed by means of Breath-suspension are only particular kinds of sin, not all. The term ‘taint’ stands for Love and other like things; and hence the word can be rightly taken as figuratively indicating such sinful acts as are prompted by Love, Hatred &c., as has been already pointed out.

“If so, then, let the taint be mentioned, what is the use of mentioning the ‘kilviṣa,’ sin?”

Познавательные статьи:



Психологические особенности спортивного соревнования

Приготовление дезинфицирующих растворов различной концентрации

Занятость населения и рынок труда

Социальный статус семьи и её типология