with the Commentary of Medhatithi 173 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 179 из 350Следующая ⇒

evaṃ saṃnyasya karmāṇi svakāryaparamo'spṛhaḥ |
saṃnyāsenāpahatyainaḥ prāpnoti paramaṃ gatim ||96||

Having thus renounced all rites, intent upon his own duty, free from longings, he destroys sin by his renunciation and attains the highest state. — (96).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘His oven duty’ — meditation on the Soul; he for whom this is the highest duty.

‘Free from longings’ — not entertaining a desire for anything, even in his mind — (96).

VERSE 6.97

Section VIII - The Renouncer of the Veda (vedasaṃnyāsika)

एष वोऽभिहितो धर्मो ब्राह्मणस्य चतुर्विधः ।
पुण्योऽक्षयफलः प्रेत्य राज्ञां धर्मं निबोधत ॥९७॥

eṣa vo'bhihito dharmo brāhmaṇasya caturvidhaḥ |
puṇyo'kṣayaphalaḥ pretya rājñāṃ dharmaṃ nibodhata ||97||

Thus has the fourfold duty of the Brāhmaṇa been expounded to you, which is conducive to imperishable rewards after death. Now listen to the duty of Kings. — (97.)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Fourfold Duty’ — pertaining to the four life-stages; all this has been expounded for the Brāhmaṇa.

“At the outset the text has spoken of the twice-born person, in the opening verse — ‘Having thus lived the life of the. Householder, the accomplished twice-born person &c. &c.’, and it has been decided that the term stands for all the three castes, as there is no sort of incongruity involved in this. Under the circumstances, the term ‘brāhmaṇa’ of the present verse should also be taken as standing for all the three castes. There would be a justification for denying this only if the entire Discourse did not form one organic whole, beginning from the opening verse and ending with the present verse. As a matter of fact, the opening verse is perfectly amenable to being construed with this last verse (the whole discourse thus forming one organic whole); so that it is quite open to us to take this verse as referring to what has been mentioned in the opening verse.”

As a matter of fact, the sentence is regarded as having that meaning which is found to be expressed by it, after a thorough consideration of the sentence as a whole. And in this way, it is distinctly more reasonable to take the term ‘twice-born person’ (of the opening verse) us standing for the Brāhmaṇa (rather than the other wav). Because every ‘Brāhmaṇa’ also is ‘twice-born’, but every ‘twice-born person’ is not a ‘Brāhmaṇa’. So that the term ‘twice-born’ being capable of being directly applied to the Brāhmaṇa, it cannot be right to take the term ‘Brāhmaṇa’ as indirectly indicating the wider circle of twice-born persons.

“But in the Mahābhārata we find three life-stages laid down for the Śūdra also; — having started with the words ‘for the Śūdra who has accomplished all his work, there is attendance, it goes on to say ‘all the life-stages have been prescribed for him, except the Nirāmiṣa’ — that is Renunciation.”

This is not right. Such is not the meaning of the text quoted; what it means is as follows — ‘the Śūdra should not have recourse to the four stages, he obtains the reward of all the stages by means of service and the begetting of children’; — which means that — ‘during Householdership he obtains, by means of serving the twice-born men, the rewards of all stages, with the sole exception of Liberation, which is the reward of Renunciation.’

From this it follows that the Four Life-stages are meant for the Brāhmaṇa only. — (97)

Thus ends the Bhāṣya on Discourse VI.

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Buhler is not right in asserting that “according to Medhātithi the word ‘brāhmaṇā’ is not intended to exclude other Aryans (dvijas)”. — He has evidently been misled by the words in which Medhātithi has set forth an objection to the text using the word ‘Brāhmaṇa’. See Translation.

The first half of this verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.57) in support of the view that the Brāhmaṇa alone is entitled to enter the fourth stage of the Renunciate; — in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 564) to the same effect; — in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 176), — which says that ‘brāhmaṇa’ here stands for all the twice-born persons; — and in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 65) which quotes ‘my grand-father’ to the effect that ‘brāhmaṇa’ stands for all twice-born men, — while it itself favours the view that it stands for the Brāhmaṇa only.

***

Discourse VII - Duties of the King

VERSE 7.1 [Important Position of the King (rājan)]

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

राजधर्मान् प्रवक्ष्यामि यथावृत्तो भवेन्नृपः ।
सम्भवश्च यथा तस्य सिद्धिश्च परमा यथा ॥१॥

rājadharmān pravakṣyāmi yathāvṛtto bhavennṛpaḥ |
sambhavaśca yathā tasya siddhiśca paramā yathā ||1||

I am going to expound the duties of Kings; how the Lord of Men should conduct himself, how he came into existence and how excellent success accrues to him. — (1).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

It has already been pointed out that the term ‘Dharma’ denotes what ought to be done, duty, so what the author promises in the present verse is that he is now going to describe what ought to be done by the King.

This duty is of two kinds — (1) pertaining to visible things, such as the ‘six courses of action’ and the like, and (2) pertaining to invisible things, such as the Agnihotra and the like. In the present context it is the former that is chiefly dealt with; and in fact it is only those forms of activity that are generally known as ‘kingly duties.’

The term ‘rājan’, ‘king,’ in the present context, does not stand for the Kṣatriya caste; it stands for that person who fulfills the conditions of having been anointed, possessing the rights of sovereignty and so forth. It is for this reason that the Text adds — ‘How the Lord of Men should conduct himself.’ — The use of the term ‘lord of men’ indicates that what is stated here is applicable to the person who has sovereignty over the people.

The duties expounded in the present connection are based, not all upon the Veda, but on other sources of knowledge also. Among those based upon other sources of information, those alone are stated here which are not contrary to the Science of Duty (Ethics). Says Kātyāyana — ‘One shall renounce the Science of Politics and act according to the Science of Duty.’

‘Yathāvṛttaḥ,’ ‘how he should conduct himself’; — the compound is to be expounded as ‘yaḍyatprakārakam vā vṛttam yasya,’ a Bahuvrīhi compound; the third factor referred to by it being the King. If the compound were explained in the manner whereby the denotation of the words of the compound itself formed the principal denotation of the compound itself, — then it would have to be an Aryayībhāva (in the form ‘yathāvṛttam’). — ‘Conduct’ stands for the action of protecting the people and also of accomplishing some transcendental ends.

‘Coming into existense’, being created; as is going to be described under verse 3 — ‘the Lord created the King’ and so forth.

‘Excellent’, highest, — ‘success’, in the form of undisputed sovereignty.

This verse states the rewards of the due fulfilment of kingly duties (1).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 10), which adds the following notes: — We proceed to consider the exact meaning of the term ‘rājan’, — the question for determination being — (A) Is the name ‘rājā’ applied to any and every one doing the work of ‘protecting the people?’ (B) or only to one simply belonging to the Kṣatriya caste (C) or to that Kṣatriya alone who is duly anointed?

 — Now in support of (A) we have the following arguments: — In popular usage the name ‘rājā’ is applied to any one who owns and performs ‘rājya,’ the functions of the rājā, king; and these functions are actually performed by the Brāhmaṇa and other castes also. In the Nirukta the etymological meaning of ‘rājā’ is explained as ‘rājate,’ ‘one who shines,’ i.e.,with royal glory; and this glory results only from the proper ‘protection of the people.’ The Veda also speaks of Soma as ‘the rājā of Brāhmaṇas,’ and again as ‘the rājā among the Gandharvas’; — in all these passages the term stands for the ‘lord,’ the ‘protector of the people.’

 — In support of (B), the view that the term is applicable to the Kṣatriya caste, we have the following arguments: — Manu, having introduced the subject as ‘I am going to describe Rājadharma’ goes on to describe such duties as the protecting of the people and so forth, all of which pertains to the Kṣatriya, as is dear from the next verse which speaks of ‘protection’ as the principal ‘rājadharma’; from all which it is dear that it is the Kṣatriya alone that is entitled to ‘rājya,’ the ‘functions of the Rājā.’

It is in view of the ‘protection of the people’ being his duty that the Kṣatriya alone is entitled to carry arms and to make a living by arms. Yājñavalkya clearly declares ‘protecting of the people’ as the ‘principal duty of the Kṣatriya.’ Paṇini also lays down the affix ‘ṣyañ’ in the term ‘rājya’ in the sense of ‘function’ of the rājā, i.e., the Kṣatriya. Anointing also has been prescribed for the Kṣatriya only; the texts speak of the ‘anointing of the Rājā,’ which means that the ceremony is to be performed by one who is already a Rājā; and this can be true only of the Kṣatriya who alone is a ‘rājā’ (i.e., Kṣatriya) even before being anointed. Thus the primary denotation of the term resting in the Kṣatriya only, whenever it is applied to such Brāhmaṇas and other castes as do the work of the ‘rājā’ it should be understood to be used in a secondary or figurative sense.

 — (C) The third view has been held by Medhātithi and Kulllūka, both of whom hold that the term is applicable to ‘any man who is equipped with anointment and such other qualifications, and who does the work of protecting the people.’ So also Haradatta on Gautamasūtra, and Mitākṣarā, the latter applying it to such ‘Householder as is equipped with anointment and other qualifications.’ On the ground of commonsense also the duties laid down for the ‘Rājā’ must be taken as pertaining to every one who has to do the work of ‘protecting the people.’ If they did not, then what would be there for the guidance of those non-Kṣatriyas who happen to be kings of men? Aparārka also declares that the duties prescribed pertain to these non-Kṣatriyas also; though it holds that the name ‘rājā’ is applicable only to that Kṣatriya who has been anointed.

Having stated the arguments for the three views, the author declares his own conclusion as that the word ‘rājan’ in the present context must apply to one on whom devolves the duty of protecting the people; — which is the first of the three views stated above.

See in this connection the Aveṣṭyadhikaraṇa (Mīmāṃsā-sūtra, 2.3.3.), where the conclusion is that the word ‘rājan’ is rightly and directly denotative of the Kṣatriya, and as the ‘protecting of the people’ is prescribed in law-books as the duty of the Kṣatriya, this ‘protection’ has come to be called ‘Rājya’ (Kingship) the ‘function of the King’; and thus when other castes are found, by chance, to perform this function, they have the title ‘rājā’ applied to them only metaphorically. — As for ‘anointment’, the Tantravārtika (Trans. p. 822) remarks that this also is prescribed for the Kṣatriya only. (See in this connection Tantravārtika, Trans. pp. 815-831, where the whole subject is discussed in detail).

Though such is the conclusion of the Mīmāṃsakas, the commentators on Manu are agreed that in the present context the term ‘rājan’ stands for any one who performs such functions of the king as ‘protecting the people’ and so forth. Aparārka combines the two views that it applies to such Kṣatriyas as perform the function of protecting the people.

This verse is quoted in Rājanītiratnākara (p. 2 b).

VERSE 7.2

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

ब्राह्मं प्राप्तेन संस्कारं क्षत्रियेण यथाविधि ।
सर्वस्यास्य यथान्यायं कर्तव्यं परिरक्षणम् ॥२॥

brāhmaṃ prāptena saṃskāraṃ kṣatriyeṇa yathāvidhi |
sarvasyāsya yathānyāyaṃ kartavyaṃ parirakṣaṇam ||2||

The protection of all this shall be done according to law, by the Kṣatriya who has received the Vedic training in due form. — (2).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Brahma’ is Veda; the ‘training under gone according to the Veda is called ‘brāhma’ ‘Vedic’; that which consists in the learning of the meaning of the texts by studying the Veda, and which is accomplished in obedience to the injunction of Vedic study. The Initiatory Ceremony also is rightly called ‘Vedic’, in view of the fact that it is gone through for the purpose of getting up the Veda; as the author is going to say later on (verse 43) — ‘From persons learned in the three Sciences he shall learn the Three-Fold science etc’. If this (learning the meaning of the Vedic texts) were not meant by the present verse, then it would he asserting what is already known; as in that case the ‘sacrament’ could only stand for the forty-eight ‘sacramental rites’ laid down in the Smṛtis, beginning with ‘Conception’ and ending with the ‘Final Sacrifice’.

‘By the Kṣatriya.’ — This indicates that the Kṣatriya alone is entitled to Kingship. In the absence of the Kṣatriya however, a substitute also may be accepted; otherwise the people would become exterminated (for want of a protector). Such is the sense of the text.

‘Of all’ — who pay taxes, as well as those who are poor and helpless.

‘This’; — this refers to the people living in his kingdom, in villages as well in cities.

‘According to law’. — ‘Law’ stands for the scriptures, specially the scriptures dealing with ‘Dharma’ or Duty, and not those relating to ‘Artha’ or ‘Policy’ and composed by Auśanas and other writers. ‘According to this’ — i.e., not acting contrary to it.

‘Protection’ — Guarding; i.e., removing troubles, guarding the weak against the strong, and seeing that they do not act against the law. ‘Protection’ means saving from trouble; the transgressing of law brings impercepible trouble; s o that when people do not transgress it, they become saved from that trouble, by the King. It might be argued that the punishment inflicted by the King (for transgressions of the law) is also painful. But the pain caused by such punishment would be infinitesimal, as compared with the terrible sufferings undergone in hell.

‘Shall be done’; — this is the Injunction.

What prompts and entitles the King to do all this is explained in Discourse VIII — (2)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Saṃskāram’ — ‘Upanayana, Initiation’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Kullūka and Nārāyaṇa); — ‘Sacrament of Coronation’ (Nandana).

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 11), in support of the view that it is the Kṣatriya alone whose function it is to protect the people; and it adds the following notes: — ‘Brahma’ is Veda; and the ‘saṃskāra,’ ‘embellishment,’ ‘aptitude,’ brought about by the learning, proper study and due understanding of the Veda is called ‘brāhma’) — or the ‘saṃskāra’ ‘initiation,’ which is undergone for the purpose of learning the ‘Brahma’ or Veda, is called the ‘brāhma saṃskāra,’ i.e., the Upanayana; — ‘yathāvidhi’ means ‘in accordance with the scriptures;’ — this is an adverb modifying ‘prāptena’; ‘yathānyāyam’ means ‘in strict accordance with the law relating to the infliction of punishment, going to be set forth below’; — ‘parirakṣaṇam,’ ‘guarding the weak against oppression by the strong.’ This verse shows that the function of Kingship belongs primarily to the Kṣatriya.

It is quoted in Nītimayūkha (p. 1), which explains ‘brāhmam saṃskāram’ as ‘the anointing done by the Brāhmaṇas.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Mārkaṇḍeya-purāṇa (Vīramitrodaya-Rājanīti, p. 12). — ‘Making gifts, study, sacrifice, — these constitute the threefold duty of the Kṣatriya; protecting the people and fighting constitute his livelihood.’

Yājñavalkya (Do.). — ‘Protecting of the people is the principal duty of the Kṣatriya.’

Parāśara (1.61). — ‘The Kṣatriya wielding weapons and protecting people, having defeated the armies of the enemy, shall protect the earth according to law.’

Mahābhārata-Śānti (Parāśaramādhava-Āchâra, p. OíiO). — ‘The protecting of the people is the highest duty of kings. The king is the protector of all castes and orders; he should protect his people and direct them to devote themselves to their own respective duties.’

VERSE 7.3-4

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

अराजके हि लोकेऽस्मिन् सर्वतो विद्रुतो भयात् ।
रक्षार्थमस्य सर्वस्य राजानमसृजत् प्रभुः ॥३॥

इन्द्रानिलयमार्काणामग्नेश्च वरुणस्य च ।
चन्द्रवित्तेशयोश्चैव मात्रा निर्हृत्य शाश्वतीः ॥४॥

arājake hi loke'smin sarvato vidruto bhayāt |
rakṣārthamasya sarvasya rājānamasṛjat prabhuḥ ||3||

indrānilayamārkāṇāmagneśca varuṇasya ca |
candravitteśayoścaiva mātrā nirhṛtya śāśvatīḥ ||4||

At a time when the people were without a King, and were utterly perturbed through fear, the Lord created the King for the protection of all this; — (3) taking out the essential constituents of Indra, Vāyu, Yama, Sūrya, Varuṇa, Chandra and Kubera — (4)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

(verse 7.3)

‘Perturbed’ — troubled, or unsettled.

‘Lord’ — Prājapati.

This is a pure enlogium. — (3)

(verse 7.4)

‘Anita’ is Vāyu.

‘Vitteśa,’ — the Lord of Wealth, Vaiśravaṇa, Kubera.

‘Mātra’ — constituent parts.

‘Eternal’ — i. e., essential.

‘Niṣkṛtya’ — extracting, taking out — (4)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

(verse 7.3)

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 391), to the effect that the king is the representative of the strong hand of the Law; — in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 5), to the effect that the King comes down to the earth for the suppression of the thief and other evil-doers; — in Vīramitrodaya (Lakṣaṇa, p. 195), as to the effect that the king was created by Brahmā for the purpose of protecting the people; — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 15), which adds the following notes: — ‘Arājake’ means ‘without a king’; — in ‘sarvataḥ’ the affix ‘tasil’ has the sense of the Ablative, and the word means ‘from all strong individuals,’ — ‘abhidrute’ means ‘oppressed,’ — ‘asya’ means ‘of this world’; — ‘prabhu’ is Brahmā. In some places the reading is ‘vidrute’ (for ‘abhidrute’), which means ‘fallen off from duty’; and in this case the affix in ‘sarvataḥ’ will have the force of the Locative. — It then goes on to remark that the reading adopted by Medhātithi is ‘cakṣurdharmasya sarvasya’ (in the place of rakṣārthamasya sarvasya’) under which reading ‘bhayāt’ will mean ‘through fear of adharma,’ — ‘dharmasya cakṣuḥ’ will be the ‘seer,’ i.e., the propagator ‘of Dharma,’ i.e., the king who is known as the ‘source of Dharma.’

This is quoted in Rājanītiratnākara (p. 2a).

(verse 7.4)

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — in the same work (Vyavahāra, p. 5); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 6), which explains that ‘anila’ is Vāyu, ‘vitteśa’ is Kuvera, — ‘mātrā’ means portions — ‘nirhṛtya’ means ‘extracting,’ — ‘śāśvatīḥ’ means ‘most essential’ or ‘most lasting.’ — It adds that this verse may be construed with verse 3, the construction being ‘mātrā nirhṛtya (verse 4) rājānamasṛjat’ (verse 3).

This is quoted along with verses 5 and 6 in Rājanītiratnākara (p. 4a).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

Mahābhārata (Parāśaramādhava-Ācāra, p.393) — ‘All the deities are invisible; the king is the only visible deity, whose favour and disfavour bring about visible results. The king is the father, the mother and also the family of all those of noble families; the king is Truth and Deity; and the king is the great benefactor of the people. Let there be no doubt as to whether the king is the regulator of the time or time is the regulator of the king; for it is the king who regulates time. O King! in this world, the virtue of men is guarded by the king; it is only through fear of the king that people do not devour each other,’

Bṛhat-Parāśara (Vīramitrodaya-Rājanīti, p. 16). — ‘Brahmā created the king with portions of Indra, Fire, Wind, Yama, Sun, Moon, Varuṇa, Kuvera and Īśāna.’

Bṛhat-Parāśara (Vīramitrodaya-Rājanīti, p. 20). — ‘With or without cause, having his anger aroused, the king could burn the people; that is why people knowing the policy of kings call the king Fire.’

Nārada (Do.). — ‘When the king becomes angry, with or without cause, he burns the people; that is why they call him Fire. When the king desirous of conquest has recourse to valour and marches against enemies, then is he called Indra. The king is called the Moon when, on the disappearance of anger and splendour, he appears before the people in a happy mood. When the king seated on the seat of judgment, awards punishments impartially to all creatures, then he is Yama. When the king bestows gifts upon learned men and dependents seeking for help, then he is called Kuvera. As among human beings, the king is without beginning and without end, and as he is endowed with splendour and purity, and as he deviates not from the right path, and as an impure man becomes pure by his word, and the pure becomes impure, wherefore should not such a king not be a god?’

Bṛhaspati (Do.). — ‘Inasmuch as the king keeps the people pleased (rañjayati) by means of his four-limbed army, and shines with his splendid body, he is called the Raja.’

Aṅgiras (Do.). — ‘Inasmuch as the king, by means of punishments, removes evil he is called the Guru.’

Mahābhārata (Do.). — ‘In countries devoid of a king, Righteousness obtains no footing and people devour one another; fie, therefore, upon anarchy! Since the Veda declares the king to be Indra, he should be honoured by one who desires his own welfare, in the same manner as Indra. I feel that one should never live in a country where there is no king. In a country where there is no king, the Fire does not convey offerings to the gods. Such countries as have no kings are powerless whenever attacked by enemies.’

Vālmiki-Rāmāyaṇa (Vīramitrodaya-Rājanīti, p. 20). — ‘In a country where there is no king, there is no safety of life or property; nor is the enemy able to bear any attack by enemies.’

Garuḍa-purāṇa (Do.). — ‘Wealthy man, Vedic scholar, king, river, and physician, — in a place where these five are nor present, one should not take up residence.’

Śukranīti (l.141). — ‘The king is made out of the paramount elements of Indra, Vāyu, Yama, Surya (Sūrya), Agni, Varuṇa, Chandra, and Kuvera; he is the lord of both the moveable and immoveable worlds.’

VERSE 7.5

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

यस्मादेषां सुरेन्द्राणां मात्राभ्यो निर्मितो नृपः ।
तस्मादभिभवत्येष सर्वभूतानि तेजसा ॥५॥

yasmādeṣāṃ surendrāṇāṃ mātrābhyo nirmito nṛpaḥ |
tasmādabhibhavatyeṣa sarvabhūtāni tejasā ||5||

In as much as the King was created with the constituent elements of these principal Gods, he surpasses all living beings by his glory. — (5)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘These’ — Indra and the other chief Gods; — ‘with the constituent elements’ — with the particles of their Light constituting their bodies; — The ‘King was created’; — hence his face becomes terrible to look at; — ‘by his glory’ — on account of his glory.’

He was created after ‘taking out’ the essential constituents. The root ‘kṛṣi’ (in the term ‘niṣkṛṣya’ (in verse 4) denotes ‘creating’. The Ablative (in ‘mātrābhyaḥ’) may be explained either on the ground of the ‘elements’ being the permanent factor out of which the constituents of the King are taken out. Or we may read ‘mātrāya’ with the Instrumental ending (which would denote cause). — (5)

Познавательные статьи:



Алгоритмические операторы Matlab

Конструирование и порядок расчёта дорожной одежды

Исследования учёных: почему помогают молитвы?

Почему терпят неудачу многие предприниматели?