with the Commentary of Medhatithi 171 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 177 из 350Следующая ⇒

By doing thus ‘he reaches the eternal Brahman’, directly, and has not got to pass through the intervening stages of the Luminous Path and so forth.

The presence of the epithet ‘eternal’ implies that the man does not return to the cycle of births and deaths. — (79)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Medhātithi has been misunderstood by Buhler (see Translation).

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 41).

VERSE 6.80

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

यदा भावेन भवति सर्वभावेषु निःस्पृहः ।
तदा सुखमवाप्नोति प्रेत्य चैह च शाश्वतम् ॥८०॥

yadā bhāvena bhavati sarvabhāveṣu niḥspṛhaḥ |
tadā sukhamavāpnoti pretya caiha ca śāśvatam ||80||

When, by disposition, he becomes free from longing for all things, then he obtains lasting happiness in this world, as also after death. — (80)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This teaches the cultivation of a mental disposition.

It is not by the abandoning of the acquisition of desired things that one becomes ‘free from longings’; he becomes so only when he renounces what forms the source of all longing.

‘Disposition’ is an attribute of the mind, or of the soul, in the form of desire..

‘Towards all things’ — ‘sarvabhāveṣu.’ — This second ‘bhūva’ denotes things. The presence of the epithet ‘all’ implies that attachment to even such necessary things as articles of food and drink which are required for the maintenance of the body, is to be deprecated and not the desire. Because the desire for such things, in the form of hunger and thirst, arises from the very nature of things and is bound to appear. But ‘desire’ is something different from ‘longing’: Longing arises from attachment and is demeaning; while desire for food & c. appears in the man naturally, after the digestion of what has been eaten and drunk. — (80)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 48).

VERSE 6.81

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

अनेन विधिना सर्वांस्त्यक्त्वा सङ्गान् शनैः शनैः ।
सर्वद्वन्द्वविनिर्मुक्तो ब्रह्मण्येवावतिष्ठते ॥८१॥

anena vidhinā sarvāṃstyaktvā saṅgān śanaiḥ śanaiḥ |
sarvadvandvavinirmukto brahmaṇyevāvatiṣṭhate ||81||

Having, in this manner, gradually renounced all attachments, he becomes freed from all pairs of opposites, and reposes in Brahman alone. — (81)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Having renounced all attachments.’ — ‘Attachment’ stands for the notion of ‘mine’ that people have with regard to such things as the cow, the horse, the elephant, gold, slaves, wife, agricultural lands, houses and so forth. When this has been renounced, and the man has begun to delight in solitude; — having taken to this as the principal method, and in the manner detailed above — i.e., by the due performance of the temporal and spiritual acts prescribed — he ‘reposes in Brahman,’ — which is of the nature of pure consciousness; and he is no longer fettered by actions. This is what is meant by the phrase ‘from ail pairs of opposites’ — i.e., pleasures and pains as resulting from good and bad acts. — ‘he becomes freed’ — (81)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 48).

VERSE 6.82

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

ध्यानिकं सर्वमेवैतद् यदेतदभिशब्दितम् ।
न ह्यनध्यात्मवित् कश्चित् क्रियाफलमुपाश्नुते ॥८२॥

dhyānikaṃ sarvamevaitad yadetadabhiśabditam |
na hyanadhyātmavit kaścit kriyāphalamupāśnute ||82||

All this that has been declared here is appurtenant to Meditation; he who does not realise and cultivate the said mental attitude does not obtain the reward of the acts. — (82)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Appurtenant to Meditation’, — i.e., what comes about only when there is Meditation; what is attained only when meditation is properly done.

“All this that has been declared here’ — directly described, not merely indirectly implied. That is, the cultivating of the feeling that good and bad deeds are the causes of agreeable and disagreeable experiences; — when man does something disagreeable, it is always the outcome of natural fortes of one’s own acts) and stands on the same footing as when fever causes suffering or fire burns; and just as the man, who has been burnt by fire, does not hate fire, so also he should not hate the man that causes him pain; nor shall he forbid him to do it (just as no one goes to forbid the fire).

All this becomes possible only when there is meditation, when the mind is duly concentrated. Consequently one should at all times, cultivate the following thought; — Pleasure and pain are the effect of past Actions; in reality the King is not the bestower of happiness, of landed property and other things; in fact it is by my own effort that the first approach to him was obtained; it is my own past meritorious act that is the real bestower of the gift, and not the King; similarly the fine imposed (Penalty inflicted) is not what causes me trouble; it is my own acts that are troubling me; neither the King nor any one else is able to do it.’

All this shall always be pondered over, reflected upon; and all that has been described above as conducive to disgust with the world — thinking of the body a hut having bones for pillars &c. (76) — this also has to be always pondered over.

(A) ‘Anadhyātmavit’; — ‘adhyātma’ here stands tor mental attitude; — he who does not realise, does not cultivate — the above-described mental attitude, — ‘does not obtain the reward of the acts’; of such acts of the Renunciate, for instance, as begging alms, living in the village for a single night and so forth, he does not obtain the ‘reward,’ in the shape of Liberation. That is to say, the mere cotemplation (contemplation?) of the body as a hut with bones for its pillars and so forth does not always bring about freedom from longing, so long as love and hatred have not been got rid of by the attributing of all that happens to one’s own acts. When this attitude of the mind becomes permanently fixed, then alone is the reward obtained, and not when it comes about only once in a way.

(B) [ Second explanation of ‘anadhyātmavit’] — Or, ‘what has been declared’ may refer to the ‘reposing in Brahman’ (81); and the meaning thus is that this ‘reposing in Brahman’ is ‘appurtenant to meditation,’ and is not attained merely by the performance of acts. And as regards the question as to what is it that has to be meditated upon, the text adds ‘nahyanadhyātmavit’ — and the term ‘adhyātma’ stands for those treatises on Vedānta that have been composed on the subject of the Soul; — he who does not know this. — Or ‘adhyātma’ may stand for that which pertains to the soul; i.e., such ideas as — ‘the Soul is something distinct from the body, the sense-organs, the mind, the intellect, the life-breath and so forth, and it does not perish when these perish; — it is neither the doer of acts nor the enjoyer of their fruits’; — all these notions belong to one who is swayed by the idea of diversity; — when it has destroyed all evil, it is not affected by the taints or their effects; — being one, it is all this, there is nothing apart from it; — diversity is only, apparent. One who does not know all this as described in the Harisavama, Sadaka and other (?) Upaniṣads, and does not strengthen these ideas by constant and one-pointed meditation, does not obtain the said ‘reward of acts.’ The sense of the verse in this case would be that — ‘Except at the time that one is either taking food or engaged in some necessary act, one should always keep meditating upon the soul as described in the Vedānta and other treatises’.

(C) (Third Explanation) Or, even though the text occurs in the section dealing with Renunciation, yet the ‘reward of acts’ may be taken as referring to the Householder also; specially as it is this latter for whom the performance of acts constitutes the most important duly. According to this view, the meaning of the verse comes to be this: — Though Householders may duly perform the Agnihotra and other rites, yet, if they happen to be ignorant of the esoteric sciences, — those sciences which form the very essence of the rites, in the shape of the Udgītha, which is described as permeating all acts, and with which all persona learned in rituals ore thoroughly conversant, — they do not obtain the full reward of those rites, which appear after a long time. This is what has been described in two Śruti texts of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka and the Chāndogya Upaniṣads: — (a) ‘O Gārgi, he who without knowing this syllable, performs sacrifices and practises austerities even for several thousand years, all this becomes only perishable; but what is done through full knowledge, with faith and in full accordance with the esoteric science, becomes extremely virile’; — that is, excellent results accrue only to him who performs acts only after having understood the philosophy of the soul. (b) This has also been declared in the Chāṇḍoyya — ‘Those who know this and meditate upon it as frith and austerity etc., etc.,’ (5.10.1). It is with reference to these persons equipped with full knowledge and performing the prescribed acts that the Śruti has declared that they reach the region of Brahman by the path of light etc.(82).

The object to be meditated upon, for the sake of obtaining the knowledge of the Soul, having been thus indicated, it would appear as if the repeating of Vedic mantras were not required at all; hence it is this that is enjoined by the next verse.

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Yadetadabhiśabditam’ — ‘What has been described in the immediately preceding verses’ (Medhātithi); — ‘what has been described in the preceding one verse’ (Kullūka); — ‘what has been described in all the preceding chapters’ (Govindarāja and Nandana); — ‘what can be expressed by words’ (Nārāyaṇa).

‘Kriyāphalam’ — ‘The reward of fulfilling the duties of the Renunciate’ (Medhātithi); — ‘reward of the act of meditation’ (Kullūka); — ‘reward of the performance of rites’ (Govindarāja, Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

Buhler has misunderstood Kullūka, who does not explain ‘adhiyajñam’ as ‘Brahma-veda’; he explains it as yajñam adhikṛtya pravṛttam brahma vedam’ — where ‘brahma’ of the text is explained as ‘veda’.

VERSE 6.83

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

अधियज्ञं ब्रह्म जपेदाधिदैविकमेव च ।
आध्यात्मिकं च सततं वेदान्ताभिहितं च यत् ॥८३॥

adhiyajñaṃ brahma japedādhidaivikameva ca |
ādhyātmikaṃ ca satataṃ vedāntābhihitaṃ ca yat ||83||

He shall constantly recite Vedic texts bearing upon sacrifices, those dealing with deities and those dealing with the Soul, which have been called ‘Vedānta.’ — (83)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

What this verse permits (for the Renunciate) is the mere reciting of the texts, and not the repeating and getting up of them, as is prescribed for the householder.

‘Bearing upon sacrifices’ — i.e., the Brāhmaṇa texts prescribing the sacrificial rites.

‘Dealing with deities’ — those indicating the deities of sacrifices.

A particular kind of texts of this last class is ‘those dealing with the Soul;’ — i. e., ‘aham manurabhavam &c,’ ‘aham rudrebhiḥ etc.’ and so forth.

Which have been called ‘Vedānta’ — and which deal with Action and Knowledge both. This shows that it is the combination of these two that makes one reach Brahman. — (83)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Baudhāyana (2.18.20-21). — ‘He shall recite the Agnihotra-mantras in the evening and in the morning; after performing his evening-devotions by reciting the mantras called Vāruṇī and his morning-devotions by reciting the Maitrī verses.’

Āpastamba (2.21.4) — ‘Not to abandon sacred learning is a duty common to all.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.4). — ‘He shall discontinue the performance of all religious ceremonies; hut he shall never discontinue the recitation of the Veda. By neglecting the Veda he becomes a Śūdra; therefore he shall not neglect it.’

VERSE 6.84

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

इदं शरणमज्ञानामिदमेव विजानताम् ।
इदमन्विच्छतां स्वर्गमिदमानन्त्यमिच्छताम् ॥८४॥

idaṃ śaraṇamajñānāmidameva vijānatām |
idamanvicchatāṃ svargamidamānantyamicchatām ||84||

This is the refuge for the ignorant, this for the learned; this for those seeking heaven, and this also for those desiring immortality. — (84)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘This’ refers to the Veda; which also is Brahman; as has been declared in the following words — ‘Two Brahmans have to be recognised — the Verbal Brahman and the Supreme Brahman; one who is thoroughly acquainted with the Verbal Brahman reaches the Supreme One’; — one is said to become ‘acquainted with the Veda’ when he studies it, understands it and acts according to its injunctions.

This verse is a commendatory supplement to the foregoing injunction.

‘For the ignorant’ — those who do not understand the meaning of Vedic texts, and are yet entitled to and desirous of their reciting. The revered Vyāsa has declared success for the mere reciter. Or, ‘ignorant’ may mean those not knowing the true nature of the Soul; i.e., those who have not realised, with the help of the scriptures, the real nature of the Soul, and though engaged in meditation upon it, have not yet acquired the requisite steadiness of the mind.

For these people the Veda is the ‘refuge’; as by reciting it, acting in accordance with it and acquiring some knowledge of it, they are saved from falling into the life of worms and insects, or into hell.

‘This for the learned.’ The text proceeds to show how. it is the ‘refuge’ for the learned — ‘this for those seeking heaven;’ — i.e., those who know only the Ritualistic Sections of the Veda, and have not acquired any firm conviction regarding the Soul; and when these people perform the rites laid down in the Veda, they obtain heaven and other rewards. Others however, who have renounced all attachment and destroyed all passions, and are intent upon the contemplation of the real nature of the Soul, obtain ‘immortality’, i.e., non-return to the cycle of births and deaths.

For all these the Veda is the only ‘refuge’, and there is no other path. Such is the sense of the verse — (84)

VERSE 6.85

Section VII - Means of Removing Sin (kilbiṣa)

अनेन क्रमयोगेन परिव्रजति यो द्विजः ।
स विधूयैह पाप्मानं परं ब्रह्माधिगच्छति ॥८५॥

anena kramayogena parivrajati yo dvijaḥ |
sa vidhūyaiha pāpmānaṃ paraṃ brahmādhigacchati ||85||

The twice-born person, who, by this successive process, goes forth (as a mendicant), shakes off evil and attains the Supreme Brahman. — (85)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Successive process’ — the adopting of the method that has been described as consisting of the combination of action and knowledge; — i.e., after having paid off his debts.

‘Shakes off evil’ — just as the horse shakes off its hairs, so the nun shakes off evil by means of self-knowledge. This has been thus described — ‘Just as the water does not become attached to the. lotus-leaf so evil does not become attached to the man who knows It.’

‘He attains the Supreme Brahman’ — becomes one with Brahman, having got rid of all notions of diversity.

This verse describee the reward following from true knowledge and from the proper fulfilment of the duties of the particular life-stage. — (85).

VERSE 6.86 [The Renouncer of the Veda (vedasaṃnyāsika)]

Section VIII - The Renouncer of the Veda (vedasaṃnyāsika)

एष धर्मोऽनुशिष्टो वो यतीनां नियतात्मनाम् ।
वेदसंन्यासिकानां तु कर्मयोगं निबोधत ॥८६॥

eṣa dharmo'nuśiṣṭo vo yatīnāṃ niyatātmanām |
vedasaṃnyāsikānāṃ tu karmayogaṃ nibodhata ||86||

Thus have the duties of the self-controlled Renunciates been expounded to you. Listen now to the duties of the ‘renouncers of the Veda.’ — (86).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Those who have taken to the renouncing of the Veda are called ‘Veda-sanyāsika,’ ‘renouncers of the Veda.’ The term ‘veda’ indicates the renouncing of all such acts as the pouring of libations and the like, and not that of reciting Vedic texts; then again, as for meditation on the soul, this has been enjoined for these men also; so that what are forbidden Cor them are such acts as going on pilgrimages, keeping of fasts and so forth, all which require (for their accomplishment) wealth as well as bodily labour; and the prohibition does not apply to such acts as the twilight-prayer, repeating of mantras and the like, for which the man needs nothing besides himself. All this we shall explain at the proper place.

The first half of the verse sums up the section on Renunciation, and the second half introduces the duties of the ‘renouncer of the Veda.’ — (86).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

“Govindarāja is of the opinion that the persons named above (4.22) are here intended. But from what follows (verses 94, 95) it appears that those Brāhmaṇas are meant who, though solely intent on the acquisition of Supreme Knowledge, and retired from all worldly affairs, continue to reside in their houses; see also 4.257. Govindarāja and Nārāyaṇa assume that they remain Householders, while Kullūka counts them among the ascetics.” — Buhler.

VERSE 6.87-88

Section VIII - The Renouncer of the Veda (vedasaṃnyāsika)

ब्रह्मचारी गृहस्थश्च वानप्रस्थो यतिस्तथा ।
एते गृहस्थप्रभवाश्चत्वारः पृथगाश्रमाः ॥८७॥

सर्वेऽपि क्रमशस्त्वेते यथाशास्त्रं निषेविताः ।
यथोक्तकारिणं विप्रं नयन्ति परमां गतिम् ॥८८॥

brahmacārī gṛhasthaśca vānaprastho yatistathā |
ete gṛhasthaprabhavāścatvāraḥ pṛthagāśramāḥ ||87||

sarve'pi kramaśastvete yathāśāstraṃ niṣevitāḥ |
yathoktakāriṇaṃ vipraṃ nayanti paramāṃ gatim ||88||

The student, the Householder, the Hermit and the Renunciate, — all these, several stages emanate from the Householder. — (87). But all these, when observed in due order, a ccording to the scriptures lead the Brāhmaṇa who has (thus) acted according to the law, to the highest state. — (88).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

(verses 6.87-88)

Objection: — “Inasmuch as the author has promised that he is going to expound the duties of the Renouncer of the Veda, the assertion of the sequence of the life-stages is entirely irrelevant.”

In answer to this some people have explained that the four life-stages have been mentioned in the present context with a view to show that ‘Renunciation (of the Veda)’ is not a distinct stage, being included among these same four; and the question arising as regards the particular stage in which it is included, the present verse points out that it is included in the state of the ‘Householder’; since the man has to dwell in the ‘house.’

Others however point out that the said ‘Renunciation of the Veda’ is to be included under the fourth stage of ‘going forth as a mendicant’, since it resembles this latter on this point that in both there is ‘renouncing of attachments’; nor is any need for including it under any one stage; because by virtue of the qualities of the man and of the Renunciate, the man would no longer have anything to do with sacrifices and other acts; specially as these have been enjoined by means of such specific words and expressions as restrict them to a definite lifestage.

“But if the man belongs to no life-stage, he would be liable to the penalty of the expiatory rite that has been prescribed for one who, for one year, remains outside the pale of all orders.”

Since such a state of things would have been brought about by the strict observance of the words of the text, how could there be any liability to an expiatory penance?

From all this it follows that the other orders have been mentioned in the present text for the purpose of eulogising Renunciation; and this serves the purpose of lending support to the view that the. combination of knowledge and action’ (as represented by the four orders) is necessary (for liberation).

In view of the fact that the house is the shelter, the dwelling-place, for all these orders, they have the Householder for their ‘source’, their support. Such is the explanation of the compound. — (88)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

(verses 6.87-93)

“According to the commentators, the following discussion (87-93) is introduced in order to show, (1) that there are four orders only, and that the Vedasannyāsika belongs to these, and does not form a fifth order, or stand outside the orders; (2) that as the order of the Householders is most distinguished, it is proper that a man may continue to live in his house under the protection of his son.” — Buhler.

(verse 6.87)

This verse is quoted in Puruṣārthacintāmaṇi (p. 445), which explains ‘gṛhasthaprabhavāḥ’ as ‘dependent upon the Householder’; — in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 64), which has the same note; — and also in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 173).

(verse 6.88)

This verse is quoted in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 173), which says that ‘kramaśaḥ’ indicates that any inversing of the order of the Life-stages is forbiddenand in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 64), which has the same note.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verse 6.87)

Gautama (3.2-3). — ‘The four orders are — Student, Householder, Hermit and Vaikhānasa. The Householder is the source of these, because the others do not produce offspring.’

Āpastamba (2.21.1). — ‘There are four orders: — Householder, Student, Hermit and Renunciate.’

Śukranīti (4.4.1-5). — ‘The Brahmacāri, the Gṛhastha, the Vānaprastha and the Yati are the four compulsory stages for every Brāhmaṇa. The Brahmacāri is the disciple who wants learning; the Gṛhastha is for maintaining all men; the Vānaprastha is for restraining the passions and activities, and the Sanyāsi attempts the attainment of salvation.’

Baudhāyana (2.11-12). — ‘The Student, the Householder, the Hermit and the Renunciate.’

(verse 6.88)

Gautama (3.1). — ‘Some people declare that he who has studied the Veda may make his choice as to which among the orders he shall enter.’

Āpastamba (2.21.2). — ‘If he lives in all these four orders according to the rules, without allowing himself to be disturbed, he will gain liberation.’

VERSE 6.89

Section VIII - The Renouncer of the Veda (vedasaṃnyāsika)

सर्वेषामपि चैतेषां वेदस्मृतिविधानतः ।
गृहस्थ उच्यते श्रेष्ठः स त्रीनेतान् बिभर्ति हि ॥८९॥

sarveṣāmapi caiteṣāṃ vedasmṛtividhānataḥ |
gṛhastha ucyate śreṣṭhaḥ sa trīnetān bibharti hi ||89||

Познавательные статьи:



Психологические особенности спортивного соревнования

Приготовление дезинфицирующих растворов различной концентрации

Занятость населения и рынок труда

Социальный статус семьи и её типология