with the Commentary of Medhatithi 176 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 182 из 350Следующая ⇒

VERSE 7.26

Section II - Punishment (daṇḍa)

तस्याहुः सम्प्रणेतारं राजानं सत्यवादिनम् ।
समीक्ष्यकारिणं प्राज्ञं धर्मकामार्थकोविदम् ॥२६॥

tasyāhuḥ sampraṇetāraṃ rājānaṃ satyavādinam |
samīkṣyakāriṇaṃ prājñaṃ dharmakāmārthakovidam ||26||

They declare that King to be the just governor who is truth ful of speech, who acts after due consideration, who is wise and who knows the essence of virtue, pleasure and wealth. — (26)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The justness of the governor consists in the following qualities — (a) truthfulness, (b) the habit of doing things after due consideration, (c) wisdom and (d) a true discernment of the three aims of man.

‘Truthful of speech’ — he who, having inflicted the punishment in due accordance with Law, does not enhance it on becoming apprised of the fact of the culprit being a very wealthy person, — or does not reduce it through considerations of friendship towards him.

‘Wise’ — he who fully understands the mutual effects of time, place &c and their special relations; sometimes the effect of the time is nullified by that of place, and vice-versa; or both these are nullified by considerations of Learning and Power; and who also recognises the special relations among them, as regards their wider or more restricted application. Under certain circumstances what has been the nullifier before becomes the nullified. So that wisdom is necessary for the proper discernment of this; and also for recognising the relative importance or non-importance of virtue, pleasure and wealth. For instance, if it is found that the acquiring of a little virtue would lead to a great evil (discomfort or loss of wealth), that virtue may be abandoned; and this abandonment may be expiated by penances. — (26).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 647) which explains ‘samīkṣya kāriṇam’ as ‘one who acts after due consideration of the exigencies of time and place.’; — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 262), which adds the same explanation of ‘samīkṣya kāriṇam.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Kāmandaka (1.49). — ‘From a strict observance of scriptural injunctions and interdictions, wealth is acquired; from wealth proceeds desire; and the fruition of desires brings happiness. He who does not indulge in the reasonable enjoyment of these three objects destroys these, and also his own self.’

Do. (2.16). — ‘By the right administration of justice the king should protect himself and encourage the branches of knowledge. The science of government benefits mankind directly and the king is its preserver.’

Do. (2.25). — ‘Punishments dealt out proportionately to offences increase the Trivarga of the king; disproportionate punishment excites anger even in Renunciates.’

Gautama (11.2). — ‘The king shall be pure in acts and speech.’

Yājñavalkya. (1.308-309). — ‘The king shall be modest, endowed with virility, of noble family, truthful in words, pure, non-procrastinating, with keen memory, not. mean and not cruel; righteous, not addicted to evil habits, intelligent, brave, conversant with secrets.’

VERSE 7.27

Section II - Punishment (daṇḍa)

तं राजा प्रणयन् सम्यक् त्रिवर्गेणाभिवर्धते ।
कामात्मा विषमः क्षुद्रो दण्डेनैव निहन्यते ॥२७॥

taṃ rājā praṇayan samyak trivargeṇābhivardhate |
kāmātmā viṣamaḥ kṣudro daṇḍenaiva nihanyate ||27||

The King who metes out punishment in the proper manner prospers in respect of his three aims; he who is blinded by affection, unfair, or mean is destroyed by that same punishment. — (27).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Blinded by affection’ — he who is unduly influenced by love.

‘Unfair’ — inclined to be irascible. The King prospers if he metes out punishment on a friend or a foe in the same impartial spirit.

‘Mean’ — inclined to take undue advantage.

‘Is destroyed by that same punishment’ — either through evil passions aroused among the people, or through some imperceptible effects. — (27).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Viṣamaḥ’ — ‘Irascible’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda); — ‘partial’ (Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara, (p. 647), which explains ‘samyak’ as ‘with due deliberation,’ — ‘kāmātmā’ as ‘one who acts just as he pleases’ — and ‘Viṣamaḥ’ as ‘adopting the wrong course by reason of partiality;’ — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi’ (p. 262), which explains ‘Kāmātmā’ as ‘if the king acts as he pleases,’ and ‘Viṣamaḥ’ as ‘acting wrongly through partiality or prejudice.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Kāmandaka (2.41). — ‘A king, by the right inflicting of punishments, upholds this stayless world.’

Kāmandaka (1.11-13). — ‘A righteous king protecting his subjects to the best of his resources and having the power of capturing hostile cities, should be held in as high a regard as the god Prajāpati himself. A sovereign discharging his duties according to the rules of polity soon secures the three ends for himself and for his people; acting otherwise, he is sure to ruin himself and his people.’

Do. (2.36). — ‘Tho self-controlled king holds the key to the spiritual and material advancement of himself and bis people; therefore he should mete out punishments impartially.’

Yājñavalkya (1.354-356). — (See under 19.)

Arthaśāstra (p. 32). — ‘The Teachers have declared that for the king there is no other means save punishment for the subjugating of living beings. Such is not the view of kauṭilya; for if a king is very severe in his punishments, the people become discontented; if he is very lenient, he is disregarded; he is respected only when he inflicts punishment impartially in the right manner. If intelligently administered, punishment brings prosperity and happiness to the people; if improperly administered, through ignorance, or greed, or anger, it angers even Hermits and Renunciates; what to say of Householders? The people consisting of the four castes and orders is protected by the king through punishment.’

VERSE 7.28

Section II - Punishment (daṇḍa)

दण्डो हि सुमहत्तेजो दुर्धरश्चाकृतात्मभिः ।
धर्माद् विचलितं हन्ति नृपमेव सबान्धवम् ॥२८॥

daṇḍo hi sumahattejo durdharaścākṛtātmabhiḥ |
dharmād vicalitaṃ hanti nṛpameva sabāndhavam ||28||

Punishment, which is a tremendous force, hard to be controlled by persons with undisciplined minds, destroys the King who has swerved from duty, along with his relatives. — (28).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Punishment is a tremendous force; and it cannot be properly administered by persons who have not been disciplined by the study of the scriptures and the service of teachers, or by inborn humility.

One should not entertain the idea that ‘punishment can be meted out by mere word of command, and there is no difficulty in controlling it; because if a King is not careful with regard to it, and does not devote special attention to it, he commits mistakes, and is, on that account, destroyed by the Punishment, along with hi relatives. The King is struck down not only physically by himself, but along with his whole family of sons and grandsons. — (28).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 647) which adds that punishment is called ‘sumahattejaḥ’ in the sense that it is extremely sharp; — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 262), which says that ‘bāndhava’ here stands for the son, — and that ‘sumahat tejaḥ’ refers to its forcible character.

VERSE 7.29

Section II - Punishment (daṇḍa)

ततो दुर्गं च राष्ट्रं च लोकं च सचराचरम् ।
अन्तरिक्षगतांश्चैव मुनीन् देवांश्च पीडयेत् ॥२९॥

tato durgaṃ ca rāṣṭraṃ ca lokaṃ ca sacarācaram |
antarikṣagatāṃścaiva munīn devāṃśca pīḍayet ||29||

Then it will afflict his fortress and kingdom, the world along with movable and immovable things, as also the sages and the gods inhabiting the heavenly regions. — (29)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When Punishment is inflicted without due consideration of time, place &c., there is destruction of the whole kingdom along with the King and together with all animals and immovable things. Hence the King has to be warned of this by his ministers and his people; or these latter should leave the kingdom.

The sages and the gods are also afflicted: — the gods live upon offerings made by the inhabitants of the earth; hence when, on account of the disruption of the kingdom, there is no proper performance of sacrificial acts &c., the gods and the sages are as good as ‘destroyed.’ Says the author of the Purāṇas —

‘Whatever is done by persons of the various castes and stages, that has been declared to be the source of maintenance for persons of divine origin in heaven and the other regions’.

The upshot of all that has been said from the first verse to this is as follows: — ‘The kingdom has got to be ruled by a Kṣatriya of impartial mind; — this cannot be done without punishment; hence this should be meted out, in his own kingdom as also elsewhere, in strict accordance with the Law, after a full investigation of the exigencies of time and place &c., relating to each case; — if it is inflicted otherwise, there is destruction of both worlds.’

The rest of it all is purely a commendatory supplement. — (29)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 647), which explains ‘tataḥ’ as ‘after destroying the king along with his relations’; — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 262), which explains ‘tataḥ’ as ‘after destroying the king and his bāndhavas.’

VERSE 7.30 [The King’s Assistants (sahāya)]

Section III - The King’s Assistants (sahāya)

सोऽसहायेन मूढेन लुब्धेनाकृतबुद्धिना ।
न शक्यो न्यायतो नेतुं सक्तेन विषयेषु च ॥३०॥

so'sahāyena mūḍhena lubdhenākṛtabuddhinā |
na śakyo nyāyato netuṃ saktena viṣayeṣu ca ||30||

Punishment cannot be justly administered by one who has no assistant, or who is demented, or who is avaricious, or whose mind is not disciplined, or who is addicted to sensual objects. — (30)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The present section is taken up for the purpose of indicating the necessity of associating assistants with one’self (one’s self?).

A King who is not helped by assistants, in the shape of able councillors, army-commanders, administrators of justice, — all which are going to be described, — cannot justly administer punishment alone by himself; even though he be fully endowed with all necessary qualities of justice and expediency. ‘Justice’ consists in decision that is in due accordance with Law and is in keeping with the peculiarities of time, place &c.

For this reason it is necessary for the King to employ properly qualified assistants.

The meaning is that punishment cannot be justly administered by the King without assistants, — just as it cannot be administered by one who is foolish or demented, or whose mind is not properly trained, or who is addicted to sensual objects, or is avaricious — and hence confiscates people’s property in an unjust manner. It can be rightly administered only by persons possessed of qualities that are tṇe reverse of these. — (30).

This same idea is expressed obversely in the next verse.

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 647), which explains ‘mūḍhena’ as ‘devoid of right imagination’, — and ‘akṛtabuddhinā’ as ‘one who has not learnt the scriptures’; — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 262), which explains ‘mūḍhena’ as ‘Licking imagination,’ — and ‘akṛtabuddhinā,’ as ‘ignorant of the scriptures.’

VERSE 7.31

Section III - The King’s Assistants (sahāya)

शुचिना सत्यसन्धेन यथाशास्त्रानुसारिणा ।
प्रणेतुं शक्यते दण्डः सुसहायेन धीमता ॥३१॥

śucinā satyasandhena yathāśāstrānusāriṇā |
praṇetuṃ śakyate daṇḍaḥ susahāyena dhīmatā ||31||

Punishment can be administered by one who is pube, who is true to his word, who acts according to the Law, who has good assistants and is wise. — (31)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Pure’ — not covetous.

‘True to his word’ — who attaches great importance to truth; who, in all his acts, places truth in the fore-front; which means that he has his senses under control; for how can there be any truthfulness in one whose senses are not subdued?

‘Who acts according to the Law’, — ‘who has good assistants whose assistants are properly qualified; i.e., assisted by such assistants as are not illiterate, and who are devoted to him.

‘Wise’ — intelligent; — this is the reverse of the ‘demented’ person mentioned in the preceding verse.

Thus he who is equipped with these five qualities, and free from the corresponding five contrary qualities, is the person entitled to administer punishment, and to partake of the visible (physical) and invisible (moral) results proceeding therefrom. Such is the sense of these two verses. — (31).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Satyasandhaḥ’ — ‘Regarding Truth as predominant’ (Medhātithi); — ‘faithful to his promise’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda).

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 647); — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 262).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (11.4). — ‘The king shall be pure, of subdued senses, surrounded by companions possessing excellent qualities and by the means of upholding his rule.’

Yājñavalkya (1.310). — ‘He shall appoint ministers who are intelligent, hereditarily connected, firm and pure.’

Kāmandaka (2.37). — ‘inflicting extraordinarily heavy punishments, the king frightens his people; and inflicting light ones, he ceases to be feared. That king deserves praise who deals out punishment proportionate to the offence.’

VERSE 7.32 [Duties of the King]

Section IV - Duties of the King

स्वराष्ट्रे न्यायवृत्तः स्याद् भृशदण्डश्च शत्रुषु ।
सुहृत्स्वजिह्मः स्निग्धेषु ब्राह्मणेषु क्षमान्वितः ॥३२॥

svarāṣṭre nyāyavṛttaḥ syād bhṛśadaṇḍaśca śatruṣu |
suhṛtsvajihmaḥ snigdheṣu brāhmaṇeṣu kṣamānvitaḥ ||32||

In his own kingdom he shall be of just behaviour, and on his enemies he shall inflict rigorous chastisement; with loved friends he shall be straightforward and towards Brāhmaṇas tolerant. — (32)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The name ‘own kingdom’ is based upon the fact of the territory having been inherited from one’s forefathers; e.g., Kāśmīra would be ‘own kingdom’ for the King of Kāśmira, Pāñcāla would be ‘own Kingdom’ tor the King of Pāñcāla; and so forth Therein ‘he shall be of just behaviour’, i.e., act with justice; — he who behaves with justice is said to be ‘of just behaviour’; the compound being expounded as a Bahuvrīhi.

‘Nyāyavṛttiḥ’ is another reading.

The foregoing clause having reiterated what has been already enjoined before, the Author enjoins ‘rigorous chastisement’ towards enemies. The sense is that he shall attack the enemy’s territories outright, not waiting for any such favourable opportunity as the enemy being beset with difficulties or attacked by other kings. By acting thus, the king acquires a glamour of glory; and to one who has attained this glamour, the enemies bow down.

Towards all Brāhmaṇas, he shall be ‘tolerant’; i.e., even when they have committed an offence, punishment shall be meted out to them in a merciful, and not a revengeful, spirit.

When a king is attacking another kingdom, he does not destroy the inhabitants of that realm, if it is at all possible to save them.

Towards ‘loved friends’ he shall be ‘straightforward’ — free from duplicity. One who helps in the accomplishment of the king’s business, and who regards his business as his own and who looks upon his prosperity and adversity as his own, is his ‘loved friend’. — (32).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 121).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Kāmandaka (4.15-19). — ‘Eloquence, self-confidence, accuracy of memory, stateliness of stature, superior might, self-control, ingenuity in inventing means and instruments of torture, perfection in all arts, ability to reclaim men from evil ways, power of sustaining assaults from enemies, knowledge of remedies against danger, promptness in detecting the weak points of the enemy, familiarity with the nature of war and peace, strict observance of secrecy regarding all counsel and action, proficiency in utilising place and time, collection of money and its proper expenditure, deep insight into the nature of dependants, freedom from anger, avarice, fear, malice, obstinacy and fickleness — avoidance of tyranny, depravity, animosity, jealousy and falsehood, — compliance with the advice of elders, — learning, energy, amiable appearance, appreciation of people’s worth and smiling words; — these are the indispensable qualifications of a sovereign.’

Do. (6.8). — ‘Thus knowing what is just and what unjust, and abiding by the decrees of the pious, the king should cherish his subjects and should oxtirpate his adversaries.’

Do. (14.13). — ‘A king hard in inflicting punishment excites the people; thus harassed, they seek the protection of the enemy.’

Viṣṇu (3.96). — ‘In his own domain, the king shall inflict punishments according to justice, chastise foreign foes with rigour, behave without duplicity to his affectionate friends and with lenience towards Brāhmaṇas.’

Arthaśāstra (p. 31). — ‘Sticking to one’s own duty leads to Heaven and Immortality; neglecting thereof leads to confusion and ruin. Therefore the king shall never disturb the specific duties of living beings. By remaining firm in his own duty, he is happy here as also after death; the people are contented, never discontented, if the rules of gentility are duly observed, and if they are protected according to the three Vedas.’

Yājñavalkya (1.333). — ‘To his dependants and to his people, the king shall be as father; lenient towards Brāhmaṇas, straightforward to his affectionate friends, rigorous towards enemies.’

Śukranīti (1.52-54). — ‘From the very moment that a man attains the position of a king through skill, might or valour, — no matter whether he is anointed or not, — he should begin to rule his subjects according to law, being above hoard and ever holding his sceptre.’

Do. (1.59.62). — ‘The king who protects his people and is charitable......is called Sāttvika and attains salvation.’

VERSE 7.33

Section IV - Duties of the King

एवंवृत्तस्य नृपतेः शिलोञ्छेनापि जीवतः ।
विस्तीर्यते यशो लोके तैलबिन्दुरिवाम्भसि ॥३३॥

evaṃvṛttasya nṛpateḥ śiloñchenāpi jīvataḥ |
vistīryate yaśo loke tailabindurivāmbhasi ||33||

For the King who behaves thus, even though he may subsist up on gleanings, his fame spreads in the world, like the drops of oil on water. — (33)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This is a praise of the conduct described.

‘Even though he may subsist on gleanings’ — i.e., even though his treasure be empty.

‘His fame spreads’ — becomes well known. And as a result of this, other kingdoms submit to him, and people of his own kingdom, through love for him, reuse to deviate from the path of duty. — (33)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (3.97). — ‘Of a king thus disposed, oven though he subsist by gleaning, the fame is far spread in the world, like a drop of oil in water.’

VERSE 7.34

Section IV - Duties of the King

अतस्तु विपरीतस्य नृपतेरजितात्मनः ।
सङ्क्षिप्यते यशो लोके घृतबिन्दुरिवाम्भसि ॥३४॥

atastu viparītasya nṛpaterajitātmanaḥ |
saṅkṣipyate yaśo loke ghṛtabindurivāmbhasi ||34||

But for the King who deviates from it having no control over himself, his fame diminishes in the world, like the drop of clarified butter on water. — (31)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘He who deviates’ — swerves — from the aforesaid behaviour — and the reason for this is that he has ‘no control over himself’ — i.e., who has not disciplined his mind in the manner prescribed in the scriptures. — (34)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Śukranīti (1.64-68). — ‘The miserable king who is not compassionate and is mad through passions......attachment to sensuous objects......who is not uniform in thought, word and deed......is called Rājasa and is born as a low animal.’

VERSE 7.35

Section IV - Duties of the King

स्वे स्वे धर्मे निविष्टानां सर्वेषामनुपूर्वशः ।
वर्णानामाश्रमाणां च राजा सृष्टोऽभिरक्षिता ॥३५॥

sve sve dharme niviṣṭānāṃ sarveṣāmanupūrvaśaḥ |
varṇānāmāśramāṇāṃ ca rājā sṛṣṭo'bhirakṣitā ||35||

The King has been created the protector of all castes and orders, who, in due order, are intent upon their respective duties. — (35).

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The King has been created as the protector of people intent upon their duties; so that if the King fails to protect those who are engaged in their duties, he incurs sin: on the other hand, if those who have swerved from their duty happen to be attacked by some person, this would not entail any grievous offence on the part of the King. This is what is meant by the phrase ‘respective duties’

Or, the passage may he construed as containing a negative particle prefixed to the term ‘niviṣṭānām’, which is to be read as ‘a-niviṣṭanam’, ‘not conversant.’ The meaning in this case would be that ‘the king shall not adopt a hostile attitude towards those persons who are not conversant with their duties through the scriptures or through the advice of friends and others’.

The term ‘caste’ has been added for the purpose of securing protection for women and children also, — these not belonging to any ‘order.’

Познавательные статьи:



Организация работы процедурного кабинета

Статус республик в составе РФ

Понятие финансов, их функции и особенности

Сущность демографической политии