with the Commentary of Medhatithi 214 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 220 из 350Следующая ⇒

‘Severally’ — separately, one by one. — (114)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 694); — the second half in Smṛtitattva (II, p. 611); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, 71b and 88b), which says that the touching of the head is to be done with the right hand.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.114-116)

Yājñavalkya (2.96-113). — ‘The Balance for women, children, aged persons, the lame, the Brāhmaṇa and the invalid; Fire or Water or seven Yavas or seven Poisons for the Śūdra. Neither the Plough-share nor the Poison nor the Balance shall he used in suits whose value is less than a thousand paṇas; hut in connection with the business of the King, or when one is accused of heinous crimes, the pure men shall always use these. (Then follows the detailed procedure of the ordeals.)’

Viṣṇu (Chapters 10 to 14). — [Rules regarding ordeal by Balance in Chap. 10, regarding that by fire in Chap. 11: ‘That man whose hands are burnt ever so little should be deemed guilty; but if he remains wholly unburnt, he is freed from the charge regarding that by Water, in Chap. 12: ‘The defendant should enter water;...... if he is not seen above the water during the time that a man brings back a discharged arrow, he is proclaimed innocent; hut in the contrary case, he is declared guilty, even though only one limb of his may have become visible;’ — regarding that by Poison in Chap. 13: — and regarding that by Sacred Libation, in Chap. 14.]

Nārada (1.251-253). — ‘Holy Manu has ordained that five kinds of ordeals should be administered to those involved in a doubtful case, specially if the matter under dispute is of a recondite nature. The Balance, Fire, Water, Poison and fifthly, Consecrated Water are the ordeals ordained for the purgation of high-minded persons. Those ordeals have been ordained by Nārada, for the purpose of proving the innocence of criminals who are defendants in a law-suit, and in order that right may be discerned from wrong.’ [Then follow detailed instructions regarding the ordeals, up to verse 348.] — ‘If the members of the court should declare him unhurt, he shall he honourably released as innocent; if he is burnt, he shall receive due punishment’ (363). — ‘If the man returning with the discharged arrow does not see the defendant rising in water, the defendant should he acquitted; otherwise he is guilty; even though only one limb of his may have become visible’ (311-312).

Bṛhaspati (10.4-2). — ‘The Balance, Fire, Water, Poison, and fifthly, Sacred Libation, sixthly grains of rice, seventhly, a hot piece of gold, are declared to he ordeals; — the Plough-share is mentioned as the eighth; the ordeal by Dharmas the ninth. Truth, a vehicle, weapons, cows, grains, gold, venerable gods and Brāhmaṇas, the heads of sons and wives, — by these have oaths to be taken. When a dispute between two litigants has arisen regarding a debt or some other matter, that ordeal is to be administered which is in keeping with the amount of the sum in dispute and with the character and strength of the person to he examined. The ordeal by Poison should he administered where property worth a thousand has been stolen; that by Fire when it is a quarter less than that; when the charge concerns four hundred, the Hot Piece of Gold should be administered; when three hundred, Grains of Rice should be used; and the Sacred Libation, when it is half of that; when a hundred has been stolen, or falsely denied, purgation by Dharma should be administered; thieves of cows should be subjected, by preference, to ordeal by the Plough-share.’

Śukranīti (4.5.493 et seq.). — ‘When the plaintiff is not prepared to accept the result of the ordeal as final, the ordeal shall not be administered: an ordeal is to be administered to the Accused only; never shall the judge ask the accuser to go through the ordeal; but if he so wills it, he may be put through it. In the case of those who have been suspected by the King, ordeal may be prescribed. In cases of adultery and incestuous intercourse, and of heinous offences, ordeal shall be administered; there is no other proof. In the case of those against whom there is a presumptive charge of theft, the ordeal of lifting a small piece of metal out of boiling oil is ordained. In the case of indictment for murder, even though human evidence be available, if the accuser volunteers to have recourse to ordeal, the human evidence may be ignored. Where the witness that is produced is suspected of dishonesty, the King shall, before admitting his evidence, test him by means of an ordeal.’

Viṣṇu (8.40). — ‘Whenever a perjured witness has given false evidence in a suit, the King must reverse the judgment; and whatever has been done should be regarded as undone.’

Nārada (2.40). — ‘When a man has lost his cause through the dishonesty of witnesses or judges, the cause may be tried anew.’

VERSE 8.115

Section XVIII - Oaths and Ordeals

यमिद्धो न दहत्यग्निरापो नोन्मज्जयन्ति च ।
न चार्तिं ऋच्छति क्षिप्रं स ज्ञेयः शपथे शुचिः ॥११५॥

yamiddho na dahatyagnirāpo nonmajjayanti ca |
na cārtiṃ ṛcchati kṣipraṃ sa jñeyaḥ śapathe śuciḥ ||115||

He whom the blazing fire burns not, or whom the water does not throw up, or who does not speedily suffer some misfortune, should be regarded as pure on his oath. — (115)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Blazing’ — flaming.

A red-hot iron-ball, when held by an innocent person, does not burn him; the water does not make him float on the surface, if he has sworn truly; he also does not suffer ‘misfortune,’ — i.e. trouble, in regard to his hair and other parts of his body. ‘Illness’ has already been mentioned before.

Such a person is to ‘be regarded as pure’ — i.e., innocent.

‘Speedily’ — i.e., within a period of fourteen days, — as declared in another Smṛti. — (115)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

See Atharva Veda 2.12; Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.16.1.

‘Kṣipram’ — ‘Within fourteen days’ (Medhātithi); ‘within three fortnights’ (Rāghavānanda).

This verse is quoted in Kṛtyakalpataru (62b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.114-116)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.114.

VERSE 8.116

Section XVIII - Oaths and Ordeals

वत्सस्य ह्यभिशस्तस्य पुरा भ्रात्रा यवीयसा ।
नाग्निर्ददाह रोमापि सत्येन जगतः स्पशः ॥११६॥

vatsasya hyabhiśastasya purā bhrātrā yavīyasā |
nāgnirdadāha romāpi satyena jagataḥ spaśaḥ ||116||

Formerly when Vatsa was accused by his younger brother, fire, the world’s spy, did not burn even a hair of his, because of truth. — (116)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Question. — “How can it be that fire shall not burn or that water shall not throw up? Certainly elemental substances never renounce their natural functions, being as they are unconscious entities.”

It is in anticipation of this objection that the author corroborates his statement by means of a commendatory story. Though the matter in question is one that can he ascertained either by positive and negative induction, or by direct perception, — yet there may he people who would regard such phenomena in the same light as a magical performance, and so would be inclined to take all that is said regarding oaths and ordeals merely as intended to frighten the person into telling the truth; just in the same way as verbal threats and angry staring, etc., are used to make men tell the truth; — and it is in view of this contingency that the author has cited an instance from the Veda; as there are men who become convinced of the truth of a statement when it is corroborated by past occurrences.

Vatsa was a sage of the family of Kaṇva; he was ‘accused’ — blamed — by his younger step-brother, of being not a Brāhmaṇa, but a Śūdra, whereupon he said — ‘By truth, I enter fire, if I be not a Brāhmaṇa’; when having said this, he entered the fire, ‘the fire did not burn even his hair’; — and why? — ‘because of truth.’

The question arising as to how fire can know the truth? — the answer is — ‘fire is the world’s spy.’ The man who, keeping his real character concealed, comes to know what is done and what is not done by others, is called ‘spy,’ known also by such names as ‘cāra’, ‘praṇidhi’ and so forth. The God Agni moves within all living beings, and as such, is cognisant of all that is done or not done. We read in the Tāṇḍya Brāhmaṇa that “Agni is one who lies within the gods as well as the Asuras; — Gautama, approaching fire, said ‘May you Sir, operate within all beings’; and then he goes on to say — ‘May you Sir, move about here as a spy.’” A similar passage from the Pañcaviṃśa-Brāhmaṇa may he quoted; — “Vatsa and Medhātithi were two sons of Kaśyapa; Medhātithi insulted Vatsa by saying — ‘thou art not a Brāhmaṇa’; and the only remedy of this was Fire.”

Objection. — “As a matter of fact however, it is found that real thieves are not burnt by fire (when undergoing the ordeal) while innocent persons are actually burnt. How then can any reliance he placed upon oaths and ordeals?”

Our answer is as follows: — The principle here laid down cannot be rejected simply on the strength of a perceptible miscarriage; because such miscarriages are very rare. In fact, even in the case of perception and other forms of valid cognition, such miscarriages are met with; and yet these are not regarded as untrustworthy. Further, it has been declared that ‘what is found to be wrong does not deserve the name of Perception, etc.; what is found to ho wrong is not Perception; and what is Perception is never wrong’; and on the analogy of this statement, it may be asserted that ‘what miscarries is not an ordeal, and what is an ordeal never miscarries.’ For what is an ‘ordeal’? It is that wherein the full procedure is observed, all obstructions in the shape of spells neutralising the force of the fire and so forth duly examined and removed; what is contary (contrary) to this is not an ordeal.

And certainly an ordeal of the said kind never miscarries. Even though there be some such miscarriage, it must be regarded as the result of some past act of the man; in fact even a real criminal comes to be acquitted by virtue of some previous meritorious act; while an innocent man becomes convicted by virtue of an evil deed committed in his past life. The causes leading up to the fruition of past acts are truly strange. But with all this, it is only in one ease among a thousand that an ordeal is found to fail; as a rule it is infallible; and it is exactly the same with the Putreṣṭi, the Kārīrī and such other Vedic sacrifices.

From all this it follows that reliance should be placed upon oaths and ordeals also, just as on witnesses; for these latter also speak falsely sometimes.

Thus then, what has been said regarding ordeals is not meant simply to frighten the man. In fact, in the case of the said ordeals, it is the truth that prevails. — (116)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

“This story is told in Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa of the Sāma Veda” — Hopkins.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.114-116)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.114.

VERSE 8.117 [Effect of False Evidence upon the Suit]

Section XIX - Effect of False Evidence upon the Suit

यस्मिन् यस्मिन् विवादे तु कौटसाक्ष्यं कृतं भवेत् ।
तत् तत् कार्यं निवर्तेत कृतं चाप्यकृतं भवेत् ॥११७॥

yasmin yasmin vivāde tu kauṭasākṣyaṃ kṛtaṃ bhavet |
tat tat kāryaṃ nivarteta kṛtaṃ cāpyakṛtaṃ bhavet ||117||

In whatever suit false evidence should have been given, the effect of that shall cease, and what has been done shall be undone. — (117)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

In a suit where a decision should have been taken on the strength of lying witnesses, — that decision shall be reversed.

‘What is done shall be undone i.e., even though the creditor may have received the amount of debt claimed, he should be made to refund it; and the debtor shall be excused the fine that may have been imposed upon him. In a case where the victory was merely verbal, the verdict being simply ‘you are defeated,’ — the same shall be declared to be reversed.

The decision, carried into effect, even to the realisation of the fine, — is what is said to be ‘done’; and this ‘shall cease’, ‘become undone’; the repetition of the same idea serving the purpose of filling up the metre. — (117)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 2.77), to the effect that even though the case may have been decided, yet if, even subsequently it is found out that the witnesses had deposed falsely, — the decision should be upset; — in Smṛtisāroddhāra (p. 337); — in Kṛtyakalpataru (p. 65a); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, 39b).

VERSE 8.118

Section XIX - Effect of False Evidence upon the Suit

लोभान्मोहाद् भयात्मैत्रात् कामात् क्रोधात् तथैव च ।
अज्ञानाद् बालभावात्च साक्ष्यं वितथमुच्यते ॥११८॥

lobhānmohād bhayātmaitrāt kāmāt krodhāt tathaiva ca |
ajñānād bālabhāvātca sākṣyaṃ vitathamucyate ||118||

Evidence is called ‘false,’ when it is due to greed, or embarrassment, or fright, or friendship, or lust, or anger, or ignorance, ok childishness. — (118)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

False evidence is due to greed and the rest. These have been enumerated for the purpose of determining the exact penalty.

‘False’ — untrue.

The Ablative throughout denotes cause. — (118)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 680), which adds the following notes: — False evidence is given only through these causes; — ‘lobha’ is greed for wealth, — ‘moha’ is mistake, — ‘ajñāna’, imperfect knowledge, — ‘bālabhāva’ extreme youth; — in Kṛtyakalpataru (37a); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, 50b).

It is quoted also in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 80).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.118-123)

Śukranīti (4.5.337). — ‘The man who hears false evidence, and the man who suppresses evidence are to receive double punishment.’

Nārada (1.193-97). — ‘One who, weighed down by the consciousness of his guilt, looks as if he were ill, or shifts his position constantly, runs after everybody: — who walks involuntary and without reason, and draws deep sighs; who scratches the ground with his feet and who shakes his arms and clothes; — whose countenance changes colour, whose forehead sweats, whose lips become dry and who looks about and above himself; — who makes long and irrelevant speeches as if he were in a hurry, and without being asked; — such a person may be recognised as a false witness, and the King should punish that sinful man.’

Viṣṇu (8.18). — ‘A false witness may be known by his altered looks, by his countenance changing colour, and by his talk wandering from the subject.’

Do. (Aparārka, p. 680). — ‘Of false witnesses, the whole property should be confiscated.’

Yājñavalkya (2.81). — ‘Forgers and false witnesses should be separately punished with line which is double the value of the suit; but the Brāhmaṇa should be banished. The witness who having made a statement before others, conceals it from the court, through folly, — should be made to pay a fine eight times the value of the suit; but the Brāhmaṇa should he banished.’

VERSE 8.119 [Penalty for Perjury]

Section XX - Penalty for Perjury

एषामन्यतमे स्थाने यः साक्ष्यमनृतं वदेत् ।
तस्य दण्डविशेषांस्तु प्रवक्ष्याम्यनुपूर्वशः ॥११९॥

eṣāmanyatame sthāne yaḥ sākṣyamanṛtaṃ vadet |
tasya daṇḍaviśeṣāṃstu pravakṣyāmyanupūrvaśaḥ ||119||

I am going to explain, in due order, the particular punishments for him who should give false evidence from any one of these causes. — (119)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The construction to be adopted in the following verse should be — ‘He who tells a lie through greed should be fined one thousand’ and so forth. — (119)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava, (Vyavahāra, p. 82); — and in Kṛtyakalpataru (37a).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.118.

VERSE 8.120

Section XX - Penalty for Perjury

लोभात् सहस्रं दण्ड्यस्तु मोहात् पूर्वं तु साहसम् ।
भयाद् द्वौ मध्यमौ दण्डौ मैत्रात् पूर्वं चतुर्गुणम् ॥१२०॥

lobhāt sahasraṃ daṇḍyastu mohāt pūrvaṃ tu sāhasam |
bhayād dvau madhyamau daṇḍau maitrāt pūrvaṃ caturguṇam ||120||

If through greed, he should be fined a thousand; if through embarrassment, the lowest amercement; if through fear, two middlling ones; if through friendship, four times the first. — (120)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When the man deposes falsely after receiving a bribe from another person, his motive is greed.

‘Through embarrassment.’ — Though the man may be quite truthful, habituated to speak in strict accordance with what he has actually seen, yet on account of some distraction of the mind, at the time of his examination, he may be so confused as to be unable either to comprehend the question or to recall the exact facts of the case, and thereby he may make statements that are not true; in this case the reason is ‘embarrassment.’

‘Fright’ is fear, in the form of the suspicion — ‘if this man was to lose the case through my telling the truth, he would ruin me by injuring my relations, or by making me suffer financially.’

‘One thousand;’ — what is that to which this number appertains is to be learnt from other passages: they are ‘paṇas.’

‘Lowest amercement’ — i.e. 250 paṇas, as described under 138 below.

‘Two middling ones’ — i.e., amercements; the number being changed into the dual.

‘Four times the first,’ — i.e. 1,000 paṇas.

It is through metrical considerations that the same idea is expressed in various ways. — (120)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 82); — and in Mitākṣarā (on 2.811), which adds the following notes — ‘Lobha’ is greed for wealth, — ‘moha’, wrong information, — ‘bhaya’, fear, — ‘maitrī’, too much affection, — ‘kāma’, longing for intercourse with women, — ‘krodha’, anger. It adds that the 1,000 and other numbers refer to so many copper paṇas.

It is quoted in Aparārka (p. 680), which adds the following notes: — The numbers here mentioned refer to kārṣāpaṇas. Some people might think that there are two kinds of perjury — one through greed and the rest, for which the penalty shall he as prescribed by Manu, and another due to other causes, for which the penalty would be that prescribed by Yājñavalkya (2.81). But this would not he the right view, because as already shown by Manu (in 118), people commit perjury only through greed and other causes enumerated therein.

It is quoted in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 191), which says: — If the witness lie, through avarice, he should he fined 1,000 paṇas, — if through delusion, 250 paṇas, — if through fear 1,000 paṇas, — if through friendliness 1,000 paṇas; — and in Kṛtyakalpataru (37a), which says that ‘thousand’ paṇas are meant, — ‘mohāt’ means ‘through absent-mindedness’ — that ‘pūrva sāhasa’ stands for 250 paṇas, — ‘dvau madhyamau’ means ‘dvau madhyamau sāhasau’, which means 1,000 paṇas, — ‘pūrvam’ means ‘first amercement’, four times of which means 1,000 paṇas.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.118.

VERSE 8.121

Section XX - Penalty for Perjury

कामाद् दशगुणं पूर्वं क्रोधात् तु त्रिगुणं परम् ।
अज्ञानाद् द्वे शते पूर्णे बालिश्यात्शतमेव तु ॥१२१॥

kāmād daśaguṇaṃ pūrvaṃ krodhāt tu triguṇaṃ param |
ajñānād dve śate pūrṇe bāliśyātśatameva tu ||121||

If through lust, ten times the first; if through anger, three times the next; if through ignorance, full two hundred; and if through childishness, only a hundred. — (121)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Lust,’ — sexual love: when females happen to be parties to the suit, the person who loves one of them, deposes falsely; and such a person should be fined 2,500 Paṇas.

‘If through anger, three times the next;’ — the ‘lowest amercement’ having been mentioned before, its ‘next’ is the ‘middling amercement.’ Or, on the basis of ordinary usage, ‘para’ may stand for the ‘highest.’

‘Through ignorance’; — he who, through mistake, should say what is contrary to busts, on the spur of the moment, — and not during his regular examination, — his punishment shall consist of ‘two hundred.’ This is meant to be merely suggestive of some sort of punishment to be inflicted; and hence it is not contrary (to what has been declared regarding the lowest fine to consist of 250).

‘Childishness’ — is childish character. The man who has not acquired steadiness of mind is called ‘childish.’ The punishment here laid down is for one who has just passed his minority; one who is still a minor cannot be a witness at all. — (121)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 680); — in Mitākṣarā (on 2.81), which adds the following notes: — ‘Ajñāna’ is imperfect knowledge, — and ‘bāliśya’, want of experience and knowledge; — in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra p. 82); — in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 191), which says — ‘If the witness lies through sexual passion for some woman, he should be fined 2,500 paṇas, — if through anger, 2,000 paṇas, — if through ignorance, 200 paṇas’; — and in Kṛtyakalpataru (37b), which says ‘triguṇam param’ means ‘three times the middle amercement’, i.e., 1,500 paṇas, — ajñānāt’, from a wrong idea formed at the time of the transaction in question, — ‘bāliśya’ means ‘majority just attained’, a minor not being admissible as a witness.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.118.

VERSE 8.122

Section XX - Penalty for Perjury

एतानाहुः कौटसाक्ष्ये प्रोक्तान् दण्डान् मनीषिभिः ।
धर्मस्याव्यभिचारार्थमधर्मनियमाय च ॥१२२॥

etānāhuḥ kauṭasākṣye proktān daṇḍān manīṣibhiḥ |
dharmasyāvyabhicārārthamadharmaniyamāya ca ||122||

They declare these penalties for false evidence to have been prescribed by the wise, for the purpose that justice may not fail and injustice hay be prevented. — (122)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

With a view to indicating that it is necessary to inflict the punishments, the author shows that punishment serves two purposes.

Decision taken in strict accordance with Law and Usage is ‘Justice’; and its ‘non-failing’ consists in its not being thwarted; — and for this purpose the witnesses have to be punished. Though the real purpose of all this is the finding out of what has been done and what not done; and it is this that is reiterated here (in different words). — (122)

Познавательные статьи:



Психологические особенности спортивного соревнования

Приготовление дезинфицирующих растворов различной концентрации

Занятость населения и рынок труда

Социальный статус семьи и её типология