with the Commentary of Medhatithi 182 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 188 из 350Следующая ⇒

tadadhyāsyodvahed bhāryāṃ savarṇāṃ lakṣaṇānvitām |
kule mahati sambhūtāṃ hṛdyāṃ rūpaguṇānvitām ||77||

Having occupied it, he shall wed a wife of the same caste as himself, who is equipped with auspicious signs, born in a noble family, charming, and possessed of beauty and excellent qualities. (77)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Having taken up his residence in it’ — the said palace — he should, for the purpose of helping himself, marry a wife from some ‘noble family’; such an alliance being conducive to his welfare.

‘Of the same caste as himself &c. — what is meant by all this has been already explained before (3.4).

‘Charming’ — pleasing; endowed with brightness and loveliness of complexion.

‘Beauty ’ — of good bodily shape.

‘Excellent qualities’ — speech, conduct and so forth.

‘Possessed of’ — Endowed with. — (77)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 407).

VERSE 7.78

Section VII - Domestic Duties

पुरोहितं च कुर्वीत वृणुयादेव चर्त्विजः ।
तेऽस्य गृह्याणि कर्माणि कुर्युर्वैतानिकानि च ॥७८॥

purohitaṃ ca kurvīta vṛṇuyādeva cartvijaḥ |
te'sya gṛhyāṇi karmāṇi kuryurvaitānikāni ca ||78||

He shall appoint a household priest and select officiating priests; they shall perform his domestic rites, as also the fire-sacrifices. — (78)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Even though the Accusative case-ending has been used, yet the singular number (in ‘purohitam’, ‘priest’) should be regarded as significant; specially as the singleness of the household priest has been declared elsewhere also; the present construction being analogous to that in the case of such sentences as ‘he cuts a post’, ‘one should obtain a wife’, and so forth.

‘He shall select officiating priests’ — The exact number of these should be ascertained from Vedic texts. Their qualifications arc — ‘They should be neither too fat nor too lean, neither too tall nor too short, neither too old nor too young, having at least six ancestors on both sides famed for learning, austerity and actions, their Brāhmaṇa-hood should be above suspicion and they should themselves be learned’; and so forth.

‘Domestic rites’ — those that are performed for the allaying of evil portents and for the securing of welfare.

‘Fire sacrifices’ — sacrificial rites performed in connection with the Three Fires. — (78)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 407); — and in Rājanītiratnākara (p. 13b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (11.12-18). — ‘He shall select as his domestic priest, a Brāhmaṇa who is learned, of noble family, eloquent, handsome, of proper age, and of virtuous disposition, who lives righteously and is austere. With his assistance, he shall fulfil his religious duties; for it is declared in the Veda that “Kṣatriyas who are assisted by Brāhmaṇas prosper and do not fall into trouble.” He shall also take heed of that which astrologers and interpreters of omens tell him.... He shall perforin in the Fire of the Hall the rites ensuring prosperity, which are connected with Śānti (allaying of portents), festivals, a prosperous march, long life and auspiciousness; as well as those that are intended to cause enmity, to subdue enemies, to destroy them by incantations, and to cause their misfortune. Officiating priests shall perform for him the other sacrifices, according to the law.’

Baudhāyana (1.18.7, 8). — ‘The king shall choose a domestic priest, foremost in all transactions; — and shall act according to his instructions.’

Kāmandaka (4.32). — ‘A person well versed in the Vedic Triad and in the Science of Government should he appointed as the Royal Priest; he shall perform the Śānti, Pauṣṭika and other rites according to the Atharva Veda.’

Vaśiṣṭha (19. 3-6). — ‘He shall appoint a domestic priest to perform those rites that are obligatory for householders. It is declared in the Veda that a realm where a Brāhmaṇa is appointed domestic priest, prospers. Thus shall both his duties he fulfilled; — by himself alone the king would be unable to do both.’

Viṣṇu (3.70). — ‘He shall appoint as domestic priest a man conversant with the Vedas, the Epics, the Institutes of Sacred Law, and the science of what is useful in life, — of a good family, not deficient of limbs, and persistent in the performance of austerities.’

Yājñavalkya (1.312-313). — ‘He shall appoint the domestic priest, who is well versed in astrology, endowed with the aforesaid qualities, expert in criminal law, and also in the Atharvāṅgirasa rites. For the performance of Śrauta and Smārta rites, he shall appoint the sacrificial priests and shall perform, according to law, sacrifices at which large fees are paid.’

Arthaśāstra (p. 46). — ‘He shall appoint as his domestic priest a person whose family and character are well-known, who is well-instructed in the Veda with the six subsidiaries, in portents and the science of government, competent to allay all troubles from human and superhuman sources hy means laid down in the Atharva Veda; him the king shall follow as the pupil follows the teacher, the son the father, or the servant the master.’

VERSE 7.79

Section VII - Domestic Duties

यजेत राजा क्रतुभिर्विविधैराप्तदक्षिणैः ।
धर्मार्थं चैव विप्रेभ्यो दद्याद् भोगान् धनानि च ॥७९॥

yajeta rājā kratubhirvividhairāptadakṣiṇaiḥ |
dharmārthaṃ caiva viprebhyo dadyād bhogān dhanāni ca ||79||

The King shall offer various sacrifices at which large sacrificial fees are paid; and for the purpose of acquiring merit, he shall provide for Brāhmaṇas luxuries and riches. — (79)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘At which large sacrificial fees are paid’ — i.e., the Pauṇḍarīka and other elaborate sacrifices.

‘Luxuries and riches’. — Clothes, scents, unguents, and rich food constitute the ‘luxuries’; and ‘riches’ consist in silver and gold.

Some people hold that these gifts are obligatory, and not voluntary. This is what is meant by the assertion that this is ‘for the purpose of acquiring merit’. — (79).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 407).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yājñavalkya (1.313). — (See above, under 78.)

Āpastamba (2.26.1). — ‘A king who, without detriment to his dependents, gives land and money to Brāhmaṇas, according to their deserts, gains imperishable worlds.’

Viṣṇu (3.78-81, 84). — ‘He shall offer sacrifices; — he must not suffer any Brāhmaṇa in his realm to perish from want, nor any other loading a pious life. He shall bestow landed property upon Brāhmaṇas. He shall present the Brāhmaṇas with gifts of every kind.’

VERSE 7.80

Section VII - Domestic Duties

सांवत्सरिकमाप्तैश्च राष्ट्रादाहारयेद् बलिम् ।
स्याच्चाम्नायपरो लोके वर्तेत पितृवत्नृषु ॥८०॥

sāṃvatsarikamāptaiśca rāṣṭrādāhārayed balim |
syāccāmnāyaparo loke varteta pitṛvatnṛṣu ||80||

He should cause the yearly revenue to be collectbd by trusted men. In his business he shall stick to the scriptures; and towards the people he shall behave like a father. — (80)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Revenue’ — the tux, in the shape of the sixth part of the produce of grains.

By trusted men’ — by men who have been tested by means of tests.

‘He shall stick to the scriptures’ — as detailed above. That is, he shall have recourse to such sciences of reasoning &c. as depend mostly upon the scriptures. Or, it may mean that he shall receive only such part, of the produce as ‘tax’ as may be sanctioned by established usage, never more than that.

‘Towards the people he shall behave like a father’. — That is, he shall behave lovingly towards those who pay the taxes, as also towards others. — (80)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 407); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 187), which explains ‘sāṃvatsarikam balim’ as the ‘yearly tax’, — ‘loke’ as ‘among the people’, — and ‘āśrayaparaḥ’ as ‘inclined to provide livings for the poor and the helpless.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yājñavalkya (1.321). — ‘For the king there is no act more meritorious than this that what he obtains by war he gives away to Brāhmaṇas and the gift of fearlessness to the people.’

Kāmandaka (5.78, 79). — ‘Agriculture, communications to facilitate commercial traffic, entrenchment of strongholds for soldiers in the capital, construction of dams and bridges across rivers, erection of enclosures for elephants, working of mines and quarries, felling and selling of timber and the peopling of uninhabited tracts, — these eightfold sources of revenue, the king should ever enhance; his officers looking up to him for livelihood should also do so, for maintaining themselves.’

VERSE 7.81

Section VII - Domestic Duties

अध्यक्षान् विविधान् कुर्यात् तत्र तत्र विपश्चितः ।
तेऽस्य सर्वाण्यवेक्षेरन्नृणां कार्याणि कुर्वताम् ॥८१॥

adhyakṣān vividhān kuryāt tatra tatra vipaścitaḥ |
te'sya sarvāṇyavekṣerannṛṇāṃ kāryāṇi kurvatām ||81||

Here and there he shall appoint several proficient inspectors; they shall supervise all the acts of men working for him. — (81)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Inspectors’ — duly authorised supervisors — ‘he shall appoint.’

‘Several’ — of various kinds; i.e. kind-hearted, hard-hearted, righteous and experts in collecting wealth.

‘Here and there’, — in the treasury containing gold, in the collecting of customs and taxes in cash and kind, in looking after the navy, the elephants, the chariots, the horses and the foot-soldiers. To all this he shall appoing (appoint?) ‘proficient men. All these should be endowed with all the qualities of ministers; as has been declared in the Adhyakṣapracāra — ‘Those inspectors shall supervise all the works of men who transact the king’s business as his agents, — e.g., elephant-keepers in the keeping of elephants, masters of the horse in looking after horses, and keepers of cattle in looking after ploughing and such works’. — (81)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 581), which explains ‘kāryāṇī’ as ‘good and bad deeds.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yājñavalkya (1.320-321). — In several places he shall appoint officers, expert, clever and pure and ever careful regarding income, expenditure and the harem.’

Arthaśāstra (p. 130). — ‘The officer styled Samāhartṛ shall look after forts, kingdom (e.g., Revenue, Taxes, Customs and so forth), mines, bridges and dams, forests, cow-pens and trade-routes.’

Śukranīti (2.234-236). — ‘He should appoint many supervisors, or only one officer without supervisors, according to the importance of the charge. For other works he should appoint those who are fit.’

VERSE 7.82

Section VII - Domestic Duties

आवृत्तानां गुरुकुलाद् विप्राणां पूजको भवेत् ।
नृपाणामक्षयो ह्येष निधिर्ब्राह्मोऽभिधीयते ॥८२॥

āvṛttānāṃ gurukulād viprāṇāṃ pūjako bhavet |
nṛpāṇāmakṣayo hyeṣa nidhirbrāhmo'bhidhīyate ||82||

He shall do honour to those Brāhmaṇas who have returned from their teacher’s house; for kings, this is interminable; and has been called ‘Brahmic treasure’. — (82)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

He shall honour with gifts those Brāhmaṇas who have learnt the Veda and studied what is contained in it in their teacher’s house and are desirous of proceeding to Householdership.

This act of giving also is abligatory on the King. Hence it is said that — ‘for the king this is interminable — i.e., obligatory, hence interminable, life-long. If it were voluntary, its necessity would cease as soon as its fruits had been attained. This is exactly what is going to be described under 11.1.

Others however hold that what is enjoined under 11.1 is the giving of gifts to persons seeking for it, while the present context refers to persons not seeking for gifts; hence all that is meant is that they shall be duly honoured with such presents as those of a pair of cloth and the like, just in obedience to the injunction laying down such honouring, it is in view of this that the text has said ‘he shall do honour to the Brāhmaṇas.’

‘Brahmic’ — entrusted to the Brāhmaṇas. — (82).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.82-83)

Yājñavalkya (1.314). — ‘He shall present to Brāhmaṇas objects of enjoyment, and various kinds of riches; what is given to Brāhmaṇas constitutes an inexhaustible treasure for the king.’

Do. (1.321). — (See under 80.)

VERSE 7.83

Section VII - Domestic Duties

न तं स्तेना न चामित्रा हरन्ति न च नश्यति ।
तस्माद् राज्ञा निधातव्यो ब्राह्मणेष्वक्षयो निधिः ॥८३॥

na taṃ stenā na cāmitrā haranti na ca naśyati |
tasmād rājñā nidhātavyo brāhmaṇeṣvakṣayo nidhiḥ ||83||

Neither thieves, nor enemies take it away; nor does it perish; hence this inexhaustible treasure shall be deposited by the king with the Brāhmaṇas. — (83)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The wealth that is given away to Brāhmaṇas, that ‘no thieves’ — forest-robbers — can take away; enemies also cannot take it. Nor does it become lost — either in the form of treasure buried underground, of which the exact position cannot be recalled, or in the form of security. — (83)

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.82-83)

See Comparative notes for Verse 7.82.

VERSE 7.84

Section VII - Domestic Duties

न स्कन्दते न व्यथते न विनश्यति कर्हि चित् ।
वरिष्ठमग्निहोत्रेभ्यो ब्राह्मणस्य मुखे हुतम् ॥८४॥

na skandate na vyathate na vinaśyati karhi cit |
variṣṭhamagnihotrebhyo brāhmaṇasya mukhe hutam ||84||

What is offered into the mouth of the Brāhmaṇa, which is neither spilt nor spoilt, nor wasted, is far superior to the Fire-offerings. — (84)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

That the act just mentioned must be performed is asserted again in another form; What is offered into the Fire is sometimes ‘spilt’ — it flows out, when it is poured out; sometimes it becomes spoilt — as in the case of the cake — by becoming overburnt. Similarly it becomes ‘wasted’ — in the eyes of all cultured men — by reason of defects in the ritualistic detail. None of these defects is possible in the case of what is given to Brāhmaṇas.

It is in view of this that the text asserts that this is ‘superior to the Fire-offerings’ — i.e. to the offerings poured into fire. Or, the term ‘Agnihotra’ may be taken in its literal sense of the name of the Rite; and in that case we have to supply the term ‘et cetera.’

‘Offered into the mouth.’ — The hand of the Brāhmaṇa is his ‘mouth’; according to the declaration — ‘The Brāhmaṇa has been described as having his hands for his mouth.’

‘Superior’ — more excellent.

This is purely commendatory; and should not be taken as actually detracting from the value of the Fire-offerings. — (84)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Chyavate’ — ‘Becomes spoilt’ (Medhātithi); Kullūka reads ‘vyathate’ and explains it as ‘dries up’; and Rāghavānanda as ‘causes pain’.

This verse is quoted in Rājanītiratnākara (p. 14a).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Vaśiṣṭha (30.7). — ‘The offering made through the mouth of a Brāhmaṇa, which is neither spilt nor causes pain, nor assails him who makes it, is far more excellent than the Agnihotra.’

Yājñavalkya (1.315), — ‘What is offered into the Brāhmaṇa-fire is an oblation that involves no spilling and no pain, and is not tainted by expiations.’

VERSE 7.85

Section VII - Domestic Duties

सममब्राह्मणे दानं द्विगुणं ब्राह्मणब्रुवे ।
प्राधीते शतसाहस्रमनन्तं वेदपारगे ॥८५॥

samamabrāhmaṇe dānaṃ dviguṇaṃ brāhmaṇabruve |
prādhīte śatasāhasramanantaṃ vedapārage ||85||

The gift to a non-Brāhmaṇa is equable; that to a nominal Brāhmaṇa is twofold; that to the Teacher, a hundred-thousand-fold and that to a person thoroughly learned in the Veda, endless. — (85)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Objection: — “As a matter of fact, it has been laid down in the present context that gifts should be made to Brāhmaṇas (82); and before this also (under 3.96) it has been declared that gifts should be made ‘to a Brāhmaṇa who knows the real meaning of the Veda.’ Then again, it cannot be reasonable to accept the words of the text in the literal sense — that the various kinds of gifts actually bring about the rewards in the manner stated. For instance, of what sort is the equableness (between the gift and the reward accruing thence, to the giver)? Is it in (a) kind, or (b) quantity, or (c) utility? If it be held to be in kind, then, in a case where, on the occasion of drinking a medicinal drug, the patient makes a gift of those drags (?) to temple-worshippers, the gift would be conducive to pain. Because medicinal drugs as a rule are bitter, hot and pungent and tend to move the bowels. If, again the ‘equableness’ meant were in regard to quantity, — and there also the equality were only in quantity, irrespective of the character of the substance, — then a gift of gold might bring, as its reward, an equal quantity of copper, or some such things as a clod of earth or a piece of wood and the like. If again, the ‘equableness’ meant were both in regard to kind and quantity, then also there would be the same difficulties as those just pointed out. If lastly, the ‘equableness’ meant were in regard to utility, — then also, if the use also were of the same kind, in that case, the use of the medicinal drugs consisting in the curing a certain disease, — if the reward were to be of the same kind, then it would be as good as nonexistent, if the man did not happen to suffer from the same disease; so that the gift of those drugs would have to make the giver subject to that disease again, or some other disease of the same degree of seriousness. For these reasons, the declarations contained in the present verse should not be regarded as distinct sentences standing by themselves. Just as in the case of the Vedic declarations — ‘The Nivīta form is for human beings end the Upavīta for divine beings; so that when the man adopts the Upavīta form, he takes upon himself a mark of the gods’, — what is said in regard to the Nivīta and the rest is not taken as distinct from what is said regarding the adopting of the Upavīta form.”

The answer to the above is as follows: — In the present text we do not. find any verb in any of the sentences, every one of which, therefore, stands on the same footing. If it is a commendatory description, then this can apply only to the statement ‘that to the man learned in the Veda, endless.’ If again, it is an Injunction, then all the sentences should be regarded as equally injunctive; there is nothing to indicate that any one of them is subservient to any other. In the case of the passage regarding the ‘Nivīta’ &c; on the other hand, we find a verb in the term ‘upavyayate’ (‘adopts the upavīta form’); so that the sentence containing it fulfilling the conditions of an Injunctive sentence, it is only right that the others should be taken as subservient to it.

As for the argument that no gifts to a Non-Brāhmaṇa can be possible, — this must be due to the objector having forgotten that gifts to the poor and helpless of all castes have been enjoined. In fact it is only in regard to gifts to be made by Kings to Brāhmaṇas that we have the sentences in the present verse.

As regards the argument that “there is no possibility of rewards accruing in the manner stated in the text, on account of all the various methods indicated bring, open to objection,” — our answer is as follows; — The mode of expression adopted here is that of ordinary parlance. In ordinary parlance, what is not very good is called ‘equable’; e. g. in such expressions as ‘the Saktu contains an equable supply of salt.’ As for the reward being ‘two-fold?, the two-foldness meant is in regard to utility; the meaning bring that the reward is doubly as useful as the original gift. It is not meant either that the same kind of substance is obtained in return, or that the utility is of the same kind; all that is meant is that the degree of happiness produced is twice as much. Further, as a matter of fact, the verse is not meant to be an ‘injunction of rewards’; so that there is no room for the raising of any such questions as to whether it is the same substance, or another substance, that is obtained in reward. Specially as in cases where no rewards ore mentioned, the attainment of Heaven is always regarded as the reward. Then again, in connection with the giving of sesamum, the obtaining of children has been declared to be the reward; and certainly in such a case there can be no possibility of the reward being of the same kind as the gift. Thus all that is meant here, and also in the subsequent passages, is that the excellence of the recipient adds to the excellence of the gift. This is exactly what is emphasised in the next verse.

In the term ‘brāhmaṇa — bruva’ (‘nominal Brāhmaṇa’) — the particle ‘bruva’ has a derogatory sense; it staṇḍs for one who is Brāhmaṇa by caste only, and is wholly devoid of learning and other qualities.

‘Teacher’ — the Initiator.

‘A person thoroughly learned in the Veda,’ — one who has, by learning and study, got to the end of the Veda. — (85)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Samam’ — ‘Middling’ (Medhātithi); — ‘neither more nor less than what is described in the scriptures’ (Kullūka and Govindarāja); — ‘equal to the kindness shown’ (Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 286).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 7.85-86)

Gautama (5.20). — ‘The reward of a gift to a non-Brāhmaṇa is equal to the value of the gift; that of what is given to a Brāhmaṇa is twofold; that of what is given to a Vedic scholar, thousandfold; and that of what is given to one thoroughly versed in the Veda, endless.’

Viṣṇu (93.1-4). — ‘What is given to a non-Brāhmaṇa produces the same fruit in the world to come; — what is given to one who calls himself a Brāhmaṇa produces twice the same fruit; — what is given to one who has studied the main portions of the Veda produces a thousand times the same fruits; — what is given to one who has mastered the whole Veda, produces infinite fruit.’

Yājñavalkya (1.201). — ‘Cows, land, gold and other things are to be offered, with respect, to proper recipients; a man desiring his own welfare shall give nothing to an improper person.’

Познавательные статьи:



Алгоритмические операторы Matlab

Конструирование и порядок расчёта дорожной одежды

Исследования учёных: почему помогают молитвы?

Почему терпят неудачу многие предприниматели?