with the Commentary of Medhatithi 174 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 180 из 350Следующая ⇒

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — again in the same work (Vyavahāra, p. 5); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 16), which adds the following notes: — ‘Eṣām surendrāṇām’ — ‘these principal gods, Indra and the rest’; — ‘mātrābhyaḥ’ — ‘the king has been created after extracting the most essential portions out of the constituent portions of the said deities; for this reason in glory, he surpasses all beings, i.e., he is superior to all things.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.6

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

तपत्यादित्यवच्चैष चक्षूंषि च मनांसि च ।
न चैनं भुवि शक्नोति कश्चिदप्यभिवीक्षितुम् ॥६॥

tapatyādityavaccaiṣa cakṣūṃṣi ca manāṃsi ca |
na cainaṃ bhuvi śaknoti kaścidapyabhivīkṣitum ||6||

Like the sun, he burns the eyes and minds (of man); no one on the earth can even gaze at him. — (6)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Burns’, — as if it were; it is so expressed, in view of the fact that people cannot gaze at him; this is what is stated in the second half. — ‘No one on the Earth’ — not even persons belonging to the excellent Brāhmaṇa caste, or endowed with Brahmic glory — ‘can gaze at him’ — look at him straight in the face. It is in view of the that it has been declared that ‘people shall sit down below while the King is seated on high’ (Gautama, 11) — (6)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — in the same work (Vyavahāra, p. 5); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 16); which adds the the following explanation: — ‘By his lustre he burns, like the Sun, the eyes and minds of the people that look at him’; though the verb ‘tapati’ is in the simple form, it has the sense of the causal; what is said here is based on the idea that people cannot look the king in the face; this is the purport of the second half of the verse, which means that ‘no one on earth can look the king straight in the face.’ — It proceeds — “Medhātithi has remarked that even Brāhmaṇas, who are of superior caste, and who are endowed with Brahmic glory, cannot look him in the face”; and he bases this assertion on the words of Gautama (11.7) that ‘people should sit below the king who sits on high’. This however is not right, since Gautama has followed up his assertion with the saving clause ‘anye brāhmaṇebhyaḥ enam manyeran’, so that what the complete sūtra of Gautama means is — ‘while the king is sitting high upon the throne, people should sit below, on the ground, — all except the Brāhmaṇas, and these latter should honour him with benedictions.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.7

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

सोऽग्निर्भवति वायुश्च सोऽर्कः सोमः स धर्मराट् ।
स कुबेरः स वरुणः स महेन्द्रः प्रभावतः ॥७॥

so'gnirbhavati vāyuśca so'rkaḥ somaḥ sa dharmarāṭ |
sa kuberaḥ sa varuṇaḥ sa mahendraḥ prabhāvataḥ ||7||

On account of his puissance he is Agni, Vāyu and Sūrya; he is Soma and Yama; he is Kubera, he is Varuṇa and he is Indra. — (7)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This is said in view of the fact that, being constituted by the component particles of Agni and other Gods, he is equipped with their powers.

‘Puissance’ — supernatural power. — (7)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Cf. 9.303 et seq.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — in the same work (Vyavahāra, p. 5); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 17), which adds the following: — Inasmuch as the king has been created out of their essential portions, he is all these gods; — ‘dharmarāṭ’ is Yama; the meaning is that the king is similar to Agni and the other gods, being created out of their portions: — ‘prabhāva’ means ‘extraordinary power.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.8

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

बालोऽपि नावमान्तव्यो मनुष्य इति भूमिपः ।
महती देवता ह्येषा नररूपेण तिष्ठति ॥८॥

bālo'pi nāvamāntavyo manuṣya iti bhūmipaḥ |
mahatī devatā hyeṣā nararūpeṇa tiṣṭhati ||8||

Even though an infant, the King shall not be despised as if he were merely human; because he is a great divinity in human form. — (8)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Even on infant King shall not be regarded as merely a human being, and as such despised. In fact he is a great divinity, appearing in the shape of man. For this reason it is not right to show disrespect towards the King, even on account of defects that may be perceived in him. — (8)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse occurs also in the Mahābhārata.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — in the same work (Vyavahāra, p. 5); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 17), to the effect that by showing disrespect to the king one incurs the same sin that he does by showing disrespect towards the gods.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.9

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

एकमेव दहत्यग्निर्नरं दुरुपसर्पिणम् ।
कुलं दहति राजाऽग्निः सपशुद्रव्यसञ्चयम् ॥९॥

ekameva dahatyagnirnaraṃ durupasarpiṇam |
kulaṃ dahati rājā'gniḥ sapaśudravyasañcayam ||9||

Fire burns only one man who may happen to approach it carelessly; the fire of the King, on the other hand, consumes the entire family, along with its cattle and hoard of wealth. — (9)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The following verses are commendatory supplements to the foregoing Injunction. Though the context deals with the ‘Duties of Kings’, yet what is stated here applies to all men.

When a man touches fire with his hand, or goes too near the fire when it is burning fiercely, — he is said to be ‘approaching it carelessly’; and when he is thus careless, he becomes burnt. If, however, the King happens to be angry, he destroys the man along with his wife, children, relations and property. In fact; on account of the fault committed by the master of the house, he destroys all those relations and friends that may happen to be with the family at the time, along with all their goods and chattels. — (9)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — in the same work (Vyavahāra, p. 6); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 18), which adds the following notes: — When a man carelessly approaches too near the fire, he himself alone is burnt, not his sons or other relations; — others have explained ‘durupasarpiṇam’ as ‘one who approaches the fire for the purpose of throwing himself into it, with a view to escape from misery’; — better still than both these explanations is the following one: — ‘When a man, knowing himself to be guilty, proceeds, through bravado, to touch Fire in an ordeal, it is he alone that is burnt by the fire; but the king, becoming angry with him, destroys the man himself as well as his son, brother and other members of the family, along with his cattle and other possessions.’ It is thus alone that the two halves of the verse become correlated.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.10

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

कार्यं सोऽवेक्ष्य शक्तिं च देशकालौ च तत्त्वतः ।
कुरुते धर्मसिद्ध्यर्थं विश्वरूपं पुनः पुनः ॥१०॥

kāryaṃ so'vekṣya śaktiṃ ca deśakālau ca tattvataḥ |
kurute dharmasiddhyarthaṃ viśvarūpaṃ punaḥ punaḥ ||10||

For the proper fulfilment of his duty, he assumes many forms re peatedly, after having carefully considered the nature of his business, his power and the conditions of time and place. — (10)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

One should never think that the King is his relation or friend. ‘To whom is the King ever a friend, and who are friends to the King?’ (as the saying goes).

Under the exigencies of business, Kings treat a friend as their enemy, or an enemy as their friend. Similarly when they feel that they are not sufficiently strong, they condone faults; and as soon as they feel strong enough, they destroy the culprit. Similarly he acts according to the exigencies of time and place.

Thus ‘for the due fulfilment of hie duty’ — i.e., for the accomplishment of his business — ‘he assumes many forms’. In a moment he becomes a friend, and in a moment an enemy; the King never remains uniform.

For this reason one should never trust the King; that is, either by reason of friendship, or of kindness, or of good nature, or of sameness of age, one should not behave towards him as an equal. He should always be treated with caution. — (10)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); in the same work (Vyavahāra, p. 6); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 18), which adds the following notes: — ‘Kāryam’ means ‘fitness for being pardoned or punished’, — ‘śakti’ is ‘capacity’, — ‘deśa’ means ‘remoteness or proximity’, — ‘kālam’ refers to times of scarcity or opulence; — having considered all this, he assumes various forms; — i. e., in a moment he is pleased, and in a moment displeased; when he finds a man weak, he becomes forgiving and if the man is strong, he uproots him, i.e., he assumes a friendly, inimical or disinterested attitude in accordance with the considerations of state.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.11

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

यस्य प्रसादे पद्मा श्रीर्विजयश्च पराक्रमे ।
मृत्युश्च वसति क्रोधे सर्वतेजोमयो हि सः ॥११॥

yasya prasāde padmā śrīrvijayaśca parākrame |
mṛtyuśca vasati krodhe sarvatejomayo hi saḥ ||11||

He indeed contains in himself the splendour of all, in whose favour dwells the Goddess of Fortune, in whose valour rests victory and in whose anger abides death. — (11)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When he is pleased at service rendered to him, he grants wealth; when he is angry, he inflicts death. Hence he who desires wealth should serve him with care. When he is pleased with a man, he does not merely bestow wealth on him, but also subdues and destroys his enemies. For this reason also, if a man desires the destruction of his enemy, he should try to please the King.

‘Padma;’ — though this term is synonymous with ‘Śri’ (a name of the Goddess of Fortune, yet in the present text it has been used in the sense of greatness; t he sense being that the King bestows large wealth.

All these things are obtained from the King, because ‘he contains in himself the splendour of all’ — i.e., of the Sun, the Moon and Fire. — (11)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Padmā’ — ‘Carrying a lotus in her hand’ (Nārāyaṇa); — ‘dwelling in the lotus (Rāghavānanda); — ‘the great, the magnificent’ (Medhātithi, Govindārāja and Kullūka).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 18) which adds the following notes: — When a man seeks for fortune, or having an enemy seeks to destroy him, — or seeks for livelihood, — he has recourse to the king; — Medhātithi and others have remarked that the term ‘padmā’ being a synonym of ‘Śrī’, is added for the purpose of indicating greatness; that is to say, the term ‘padmā’ is superfluous; — in reality however it is ‘padmā’ that stands as a name for the goddess of fortune, Lakṣmī, and the term ‘śrīḥ’ stands for ‘bodily splendour or we may construe the words as follows: — ‘In whose favours rests Padmā, the goddess of fortune, and in whose valour rest resplendence (śriḥ) and victory (vijayaḥ).’

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.12

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

तं यस्तु द्वेष्टि संमोहात् स विनश्यत्यसंशयम् ।
तस्य ह्याशु विनाशाय राजा प्रकुरुते मनः ॥१२॥

taṃ yastu dveṣṭi saṃmohāt sa vinaśyatyasaṃśayam |
tasya hyāśu vināśāya rājā prakurute manaḥ ||12||

He, who, through folly, is hostile towards him, doubtlessly perishes; because the King makes up his mind for his quick destruction. — (12).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The King shall be kept pleased, not so such with a view to obtaining desirable things from him, as for saving oneself from trouble; this is what is reiterated by the text.

He who is hostile to the King, — i.e., acts against him — ‘he doubtlessly perishes’; ‘because, for his quick destruction.’ etc. — Other men may forgive a fault, on account of the difficulties involved in complaining of it to the King; which involves expenditure of money, where difficulties crop up again and again by reason of the freaks of witnesses and so forth; but in the case of the King himself, there is no such difficulty; and when once he makes up his mind to destroy a man, the man is surely ruined; the King being all-powerful; and further, if he were to appear like making special efforts for chastising such a man, this (show of weakness) would militate against his puissance (?). — (12).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 23), which adds the following notes: — ‘Tam’ stands for the king, — ‘dveṣṭi’ means ‘disobeys him’, — ‘Sa vinaśyati’, ‘he becomes subjected by the king to death’.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.13

Section I - Important Position of the King (rājan)

तस्माद् धर्मं यमिष्टेषु स व्यवस्येन्नराधिपः ।
अनिष्टं चाप्यनिष्टेषु तं धर्मं न विचालयेत् ॥१३॥

tasmād dharmaṃ yamiṣṭeṣu sa vyavasyennarādhipaḥ |
aniṣṭaṃ cāpyaniṣṭeṣu taṃ dharmaṃ na vicālayet ||13||

For this reason no one should transgress that favourable decree which the King should ordain in favour of his favourites, or that unfavourable decree that he should ordain against those in his disfavour. — (13).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Because the King ‘contains within himself the splendour of all,’ therefore, — ‘in favour of his favourites’ — towards those ministers, priests and others who are in favour, — whenever in course of business, a ‘decree’ — an ordinance, in consonance with Law and Custom — is ordained or issued by the King; — no one should transgress such a decree. Such a decree of the King’s should not be disobeyed; such a decree for instance us — ‘To-day, the city should observe a holiday — there is a marriage in the minister’s house, — all men should be present there, — no animals shall be slaughtered to-day by the soldiers, — no birds are to be caught, — for so many days dancing girls shall be entertained by all wealthy men.’

Similarly ‘against those in disfavour’, — such a decree as — ‘no one shall associate with this person, — no one should allow him to enter his house’.

When such decrees are issued by the King by the beat of drum etc. they shall not be transgressed. But the King has no power to control the ordinances pertaining to religions acts, such as. the Agnihotra and the like, of the orders and castes. Such control would be repugnant to other Smṛti texts; and the present text has its application, without offending against any Smṛti text, in cases indicated above. — (13).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 392); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 23), which adds the following notes: — Inasmuch as the king is the centre of all lustre and power, one should never transgress any lawful and fair commands that his majesty may issue in regard to his minister, priest or other favourites; — such commands for instance as — ‘To-day should be observed by all the people as a day of rejoicing, there is a marriage in the minister’s house, all should be present there, butchers shall kill no animals today, no birds are to be caught, no debtors are to be imprisoned by their creditors’ and so forth [these in regard to the king’s favourites.] — Similarly in regard to one whom he dislikes, he may issue such orders as — ‘none shall associate with him, he should not be permitted to enter any household,’ and so forth. — Such rules promulgated by the king should not be disobeyed. In regard to the performance of the Agnihotra and such religious acts, however, the king has no right to interfere at all.

This verse is quoted also in Rājanītiratnākara (p. 42b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.3-13)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.3.

VERSE 7.14 [Punishment (daṇḍa)]

Section II - Punishment (daṇḍa)

तस्यार्थे सर्वभूतानां गोप्तारं धर्ममात्मजम् ।
ब्रह्मतेजोमयं दण्डमसृजत् पूर्वमीश्वरः ॥१४॥

tasyārthe sarvabhūtānāṃ goptāraṃ dharmamātmajam |
brahmatejomayaṃ daṇḍamasṛjat pūrvamīśvaraḥ ||14||

For his sake, the Lord, at first, created Punishment, which is Law born of the Lord Himself, an incarnation of divine glory and the protector of all creatures. — (14).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The origin of the King has been described; the origin of Punishment is now described.

‘For his sake’ — for the due fulfilment of the purposes of the King, — ‘the Lord’ — Prajāpati — ‘created Punishment’.

“What purpose of the King is served by Punishment?”

The answer is as follows — It is ‘the protector of all creatures’; — it is Punishment that ‘protects’ — guards — all creatures; as without Punishment the King cannot carry on the work of protecting the people. Thus it was for the proper accomplishment of the kingly function that Punishment was created.

(a) ‘It is Law, (b) born of the Lord himself, (c) incarnation of divine glory’. — (a) ‘Law’ does not consist of sacrifices and gifts; it consists of Punishment, (b) Nor should it be regarded as an inferior form of Law, by reason of its depriving men of their life and property because it is that Law which is born out of the body of the Lord, Prajāpati, himself, (c) Nor is it composed of the five material substances; it is created out of the pure‘glory’ of Brahman himself.

‘At fir st,’ — before the creation of the King himself, — (14)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p 393); — in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 283), which adds the following notes: — ‘Tadartham’ means ‘for the accomplishment of the king’s purpose’; protecting of the people is the king’s duty, and as this protecting cannot be done without punishment, it is punishment itself that is called the ‘protection’ and it is eulogised by being styled ‘Dharma’ itself. — It is quoted again on p. 292.

The verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 646), which adds the following notes: — The merit arising from the protection of the people is the king’s ‘Artha’ or ‘purpose’ — for the sake of this the ‘Lord’, Creator of the people, created punishment, which is ‘brahmatejomayam (brahmatejomaya),’ the natural Power of Hiraṇyagarbha, and which is ‘Dharma’ itself, i.e., the consolidator of Dharma; — both these epithets being purely valedictory and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 261), which explains ‘tadartham dharmam’ as for the purpose of establishing Dharma; — and ‘brahmatejomayam’ as ‘constituted of the essence of Hiraṇyagarbha’; — it adds that this is mere eulogy.

It is quoted also in Rājanītiratnākara (p. 37b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yājñavalkya (1.353). — ‘Brahmā created Dharma in the form of Punishment.’

VERSE 7.15

Section II - Punishment (daṇḍa)

तस्य सर्वाणि भूतानि स्थावराणि चराणि च ।
भयाद् भोगाय कल्पन्ते स्वधर्मात्न चलन्ति च ॥१५॥

tasya sarvāṇi bhūtāni sthāvarāṇi carāṇi ca |
bhayād bhogāya kalpante svadharmātna calanti ca ||15||

It is through fear of him that all living beings, movable as well as immovable, go to subserve the experiences (of men) and do not swerve from their duties. — (15)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Through fear of him.’ — As mere relationship in general is meant to be expressed (and Punishment is not meant to be spoken of as the actual source of fear), we have the Genitive (and not the Ablative) ending in ‘tasya’. It is through fear of Punishment that immovable beings Subserve (lie experiences of men — become capable of helping in their enjoyment, by means of flowers, fruits, shade and so forth. The immovable being (tree) that does not bear fruit either dries up: or if it does not dry up, it spreads all over the place and is cut up and made into coal.

By citing the case of the ‘immovable things’ it is meant that such should be the treatment meted out to the person who is found to be deserving of punishment on account of his having done something wrong to the King; that he should he punished with cutting, uprooting (total destruction) and the like.

The mention of the ‘immovable beings’ is for the purpose of eulogising, by its example, the Punishment; the sense being ‘Punishment is such a thing that it is inflicted even upon immovable things, what to say of movable ones?’ — and it is not meant that Punishment is actually inflicted upon immovable things.

‘Do not swerve from their duty’ — i.e., they do not flower or fruit out of their proper season. — (15).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Bhogāya kalpante’ — ‘Become capable of providing enjoyment’ (Medhātithi); — ‘are enabled to enjoy’ (Kullūka).

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 646); — in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 284), which adds the following notes: — ‘Tasya’, ‘of the punishment;’ — Question: “Punishment, a source of fear, should have ended in the Ablative”. — The answer to this is that all that is meant to be expressed is relationship in general (and not the fact of being a source of fear); that is why we have the Genitive. — It is quoted again on p. 292; — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 261).

Познавательные статьи:



Техника прыжка в длину с разбега

Тактические действия в защите

История Олимпийских игр

История развития права интеллектуальной собственности