with the Commentary of Medhatithi 215 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 221 из 350Следующая ⇒

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 82); — in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 191); — in Smṛticandrikā (Vyavahāra, p. 51); — and in Kṛtyakalpataru (37b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.118.

VERSE 8.123

Section XX - Penalty for Perjury

कौटसाक्ष्यं तु कुर्वाणांस्त्रीन् वर्णान् धार्मिको नृपः ।
प्रवासयेद् दण्डयित्वा ब्राह्मणं तु विवासयेत् ॥१२३॥

kauṭasākṣyaṃ tu kurvāṇāṃstrīn varṇān dhārmiko nṛpaḥ |
pravāsayed daṇḍayitvā brāhmaṇaṃ tu vivāsayet ||123||

The king shall however fine and then banish the three castes giving false evidence; but the Brāhmaṇa he shall deprive of his clothes (and dwelling). — (123)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The penalties prescribed above are for the first offenders; for repeated offenders there is fining, followed by ‘banishment,’ — i.e., expulsion from the kingdom; — or death; rules regarding the inflicting of such penalty being met with in political science.

‘But the Brāhmaṇa he shall deprive of his clothes’; — ‘vivāsana’ meaning depriving of clothes, or of dwelling. The verb is formed from the noun ‘vivāsa,’ ‘homeless,’ ‘clothesless,’ with the causal affix ‘ṇic,’ which makes the nominal verb ‘makes vivāsa.’

‘The three Castes’ — the Kṣatriya and the rest; — since for the Brāhmaṇa a separate punishment is prescribed. — (123)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Pravāsayet’ — ‘Banish’ (all concur). But Medhātithi suggests ‘put to death’, as an alternative; this is accepted by Mitākṣarā (see below).

‘Vivāsayet’ — ‘Should deprive him of his clothes (Medhātithi and Govindarāja), — ‘or homestead’ (Medhātithi, alternative); — ‘banish (without fining, as in the case of the other three castes)’ (Kullūka).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 2.81), which adds the following notes: — This rule is meant for repeated offence, as is clear from the present participle affix in ‘kurvāṇān’ (which implies habit); on the three castes, Kṣatriya and the rest, the king should impose the aforesaid fine and then put them to death; — the root ‘pravāsa’ is used in the sense of killing in works dealing with political science; and this part of the law-book is a treatise on that science. This putting to death is of various kinds — cutting the lips, cutting the tongue and actual killing; which one of these is to be adopted in any particular case will depend upon the nature of the case in regard to which the man may have given false evidence. The Brāhmaṇa, on the other hand, is to be fined and banished, removed from the kingdom; or ‘vivāsayet’ may mean deprive him of his clothes, strip him naked; — or again ‘vāsa’ meaning the dwelling house, ‘vivāsayet’ may mean ‘should deprive him of his house’, his house should be demolished. In the case of the Brāhmaṇa also, if the offence is the first one of its kind, and the man is not found to have been actuated by any such sordid motive as ‘greed’ and the rest, — only simple fine is to be imposed; but if the offence is repeated, there is to be fine and also ‘vivāsana’, i.e., banishment, or stripping naked, or rendering homeless; which one of these three is to be adopted will depend upon the character of the parties, the nature of the subject-matter of dispute and so forth. If the Brāhmaṇa is not found to have been actuated by greed or any such motive, if the offence is the first of its kind, and if the subject-matter of the dispute is a petty one, — then he also is to be only slightly fined, like the Kṣatriya and other lower castes; but if the subject-matter of the dispute is an important one, then he is to be banished. In the case of the offence being repeated, the punishment for all the castes is to be as prescribed by Manu.

This verse is quoted also in Aparārka (p. 680), which explains the meaning as follows: — The three lower castes are to be fined and banished, while the Brāhmaṇa is to be only banished) not fined; — though if the offence is repeated, or if the issues involved in the case are important, the Brāhmaṇa also may be fined.

It is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 82); — in Vyavahāra-Bālambhaṭṭī (p. 119); — in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 191), which adds the note: — ‘If a Kṣatriya or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra is found to depose falsely repeatedly, he should, in addition to the aforesaid fines, be banished from the country, — and in the ease of a Brāhmaṇa, he should be banished with all his belongings’; — in Kṛtyakalpataru (37b), which explains ‘vivāsayet’ as ‘should he banished from the kingdom’; — and in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, 57a), which adds the explanation that — persons of the three castes other than the Brāhmaṇa are to he fined and then killed — the ‘killing’ consisting either in cutting off the lips or lopping off the tongue or down-right killing, in accordance with the gravity of the offence; — the Brāhmaṇa, is to be banished or rendered naked, — the verb ‘vivāsayet’ meaning ‘deprived of vāsa, habitation or clothes’. It adds that all this refers to cases of repeated perjury.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.118.

VERSE 8.124 [Corporal Punishment]

Section XXI - Corporal Punishment

दश स्थानानि दण्डस्य मनुः स्वयम्भुवोऽब्रवीत् ।
त्रिषु वर्णेषु यानि स्युरक्षतो ब्राह्मणो व्रजेत् ॥१२४॥

daśa sthānāni daṇḍasya manuḥ svayambhuvo'bravīt |
triṣu varṇeṣu yāni syurakṣato brāhmaṇo vrajet ||124||

Manu Svāyambhuva has named ten places for punishment, where it should be inflicted in the case of the three castes; but the Brāhmaṇa shall depart unscathed. — (124)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The term ‘sthāna’ ‘place,’ is synonymous with ‘subject’; the meaning being that the man should be made to suffer pain on these spots.

In as much as for the Brāhmaṇa also pecuniary punishment has been directly prescribed, it follows that what is said here in regard to his departing ‘unscathed’ is with reference to corporal punishment, which is forbidden in his case; even though ‘property’ also is included (in the next verse) among the ‘ten places.’

Our opinion however is that, in as much as one can be called ‘unscathed’ only when he has all his property also intact, pecuniary punishment also must be taken as forbidden in the case of the Brāhmaṇa; hence if a Brāhmaṇa, endowed with learning, character and noble birth, should, by chance, happen to commit a crime, there is no pecuniary punishment either. In fact, it is in reference to such a Brāhmaṇa that Gautama, having begun with the statement — ‘In this world there are two men firm in their vow,’ (8.1) — goes on to say, — ‘He should be excused from six.’ (8.13). — (124)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (2.26), as laying down the forms of ‘death,’ which means ‘corporal punishment;’ Bālambhaṭṭī adds that ‘vrajet’ means ‘should go away from home or from the city’; — in Vivādaratnākara (p. 630), which explains ‘akṣataḥ’ as ‘without corporal suffering’; — in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 293), as laying down the spots of the body where corporal punishment is to be inflicted upon all offenders, except the Brāhmaṇa; — and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 399 and Vyavahāra, p. 155), as laying down the ten forms of corporal punishment.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.124-125)

Gautama (12.46-47). — ‘Corporal punishment must not be inflicted on the Brāhmaṇa. — Desisting from the deed, publicly proclaiming his crime, banishment and branding are the punishments to which a Brāhmaṇa may be subjected.’

Viṣṇu (5.1-8). — ‘Great criminals should all be put to death. In the case of the Brāhmaṇa no corporal punishment should be inflicted. A. Brāhmaṇa should be banished from his own country, his body having been branded; — for murdering another Brāhmaṇa, let the figure of a headless body be branded on his forehead; for drinking spirits, the flag of a wine-seller; for stealing gold, a dog’s foot; for incest, a female part; — if he has committed any other capital offence, he shall be banished, taking with him all his property, and unhurt.’

Nārada (114.8-10). — ‘For a crime of violence of the highest degree, a fine amounting to no less than a thousand Paṇas has been ordained. Moreover, corporal punishment, confiscation of the entire property, banishment from the town, branding, as well as amputation of the limb, is declared to be the punishment for a violent crime of the highest degree. This gradation of punishments has been ordained for all castes indiscriminately, excepting only corporal punishment in the case of a Brāhmaṇa, who should never he subjected to corporal punishment. Shaving his head, banishing him from the town, branding him on the forehead with a mark of the crime of which he has been convicted, and parading him on an ass, shall he the Brāhmaṇa’s punishment.’

Do. (15-16.20). — ‘The Brāhmaṇa and the King are exempt from censure and corporal punishment.’

Do. (15-16.22-31). — ‘If a Śūdra insults a member of a higher caste with invectives, he shall have his tongue cut out; if he refers to their name or caste contemptuously, an iron-rod ten inches long shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth; — if ho is insolent enough to teach duty to a Brāhmaṇa, the King shall have hot oil poured into his mouth and ears. With whatever limb a low caste man offends against a Brāhmaṇa, that very limb of his shall be cut off; such shall be the atonement for his crime. If a low-born man tries to place himself on the same seat as his superior, he shall be branded on his hip and banished; or he may have his backside gashed. If, through arrogance, he spits on his superior, the King shall have both his lips cut off; if he urinates on him, then his penis; if he breaks wind against him, the buttocks. If he pulls his superior by the hair, he shall have his hands cut off; likewise if he seizes him by the feet, beard, neck or scrotum. If a man censures a King who is devoted to the discharge of his duties, he shall have his tongue cut out, or his entire property confiscated. When an evil-minded person assails even a wicked king, he shall be fastened on a stake and burnt in fire.’

Nārada (Punishments, 41-439). — ‘Let him not on any account kill a Brāhmaṇa, though convicted of all crimes; he may at pleasure cause him to be banished; let the King take his entire wealth from him, or leave a fourth part of it; for four offences of a Brāhmaṇa, branding has been ordained.’

Bṛhaspati (21.8). — ‘For killing, capital punishment.’

Do. (21.15). — ‘If persons begotten in the inverse order of castes, and members of the lowest caste, should insult a Brāhmaṇa, they shall be corporally punished, and shall never be amerced in fine.’

Do. (22.10). — ‘Judges passing an unjust sentence, those who take bribes, and those who betray confidence, — all such shall be banished.’

Do. (22.17). — ‘House-breakers shall be impaled on a stake, and highwaymen shall be bound and hanged by the neck from a tree.’

Do. (22.20). — ‘Stealers of grass deserve to have a hand cut off.’

Nārada (Punishments, 36-37). — ‘Svāyambhuva Manu has declared ten spots of punishment which should be selected in punishing the lower castes; a Brāhmaṇa should remain uninjured always; — those places are the privy parts, the belly, the tongue, the two hands, and fifthly, the two feet; as well as the eye, the nose, the two ears, the property and the body.’

Bṛhaspati (27.9-10). — ‘Both hands, both feet, the male organ, the eye, the tongue, the ears, the nose, the neck, the half of the foot, the thumb and the index finger, the forehead, the lips, the hind part and the hips; — these fourteen spots of punishment have been indicated. For a Brāhmaṇa, branding on the forehead is the only kind of punishment. A Brāhmaṇa, though a mortal sinner, shall not suffer capital punishment; the King shall banish him and cause him to be branded and shaved.’

VERSE 8.125

Section XXI - Corporal Punishment

उपस्थमुदरं जिह्वा हस्तौ पादौ च पञ्चमम् ।
चक्षुर्नासा च कर्णौ च धनं देहस्तथैव च ॥१२५॥

upasthamudaraṃ jihvā hastau pādau ca pañcamam |
cakṣurnāsā ca karṇau ca dhanaṃ dehastathaiva ca ||125||

(1) The genital organ, (2) the stomach, (3) the tongue, (4) the hands, (5) the feet, (6) the eye, (7) the nose, (8) the ears, (9) the property and (10) the body. — (125)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘The genital organ’ — male and female. Here the places are only named; the exact form in which the punishment is to be inflicted on each ‘place’ shall be described later on. If, with reference to any ‘place,’ no particular form of punishment has been prescribed, the law is that the culprit shall suffer by that limb whereby he may have committed the wrong. Hence in cases of incest, punishment is inflicted on the genital organ; — in theft it is inflicted upon the stomach, in the form of starvation, etc.; — in the case of defamation, on the tongue, and in that of assault, on the hands; — when he trespasses with his feet, it is to be inflicted on the feet; — if he openly and fearlessly stares at the king’s wife, his punishment is inflicted on the eyes, — by smelling the (forbidden) odour of sandal-paint, he is punished on the nose; — if he should be found listening behind the wall or the curtain, while the king is holding secret council, the punishment should fall on his ears; — punishment regarding ‘property’ is well known; — the killing of the ‘body’ is done only in the case of the gravest offenders. — (125)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 156); — in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 399); — in Vivādaratnākara (p. 630), which adds that this should not be taken to be an exhaustive list; — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti. p. 293), which adds that the punishment should be inflicted upon that part of the body by which the crime might have been committed.

It has been quoted in Mitākṣarā (2.26), which makes the remark that has been reproduced in Vīramitrodaya; — Bālambhaṭṭī adds the following notes: — ‘Dhana’ is mentioned among the ‘sthānas’ with a view to indicate that when the crime committed pertains to wealth, the punishment also should pertain to that only; or it may be that the punishment here meant is different from ‘fine’ (which is what has gone before), and may be taken to stand for that physical pain which is caused by the confiscation of some property; in the crime of adultery the punishment should fall on the sexual organ, — in that of eating improper food, on the stomach, such as starvation and so forth, — in defamation, on the tongue, such as cutting it off, — in theft, on the hands, — in misbehaviour with the feet, such as walking ahead of a superior person, on the feet, — in trying to look at the king’s harem, on the eyes, — in stealthily smelling his scents, on the nose, — in eaves-dropping on the king’s councils, on the ears, — in the case of heinous crimes, on the body, i.e., death.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.124-125)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.124.

VERSE 8.126 [Considerations regarding Punishments]

Section XXII - Considerations regarding Punishments

अनुबन्धं परिज्ञाय देशकालौ च तत्त्वतः ।
सारापराधो चालोक्य दण्डं दण्ड्येषु पातयेत् ॥१२६॥

anubandhaṃ parijñāya deśakālau ca tattvataḥ |
sārāparādho cālokya daṇḍaṃ daṇḍyeṣu pātayet ||126||

Having duly ascertained the motive and the time and place, and having taken into consideration the condition (of the accused) and the nature of the offence, — he shall inflict punishment upon those deserving punishment. — (126)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse forms the basis for all penalties and offences, described above; and it is in accordance with this that all punishment is to be determined.

‘Motive,’ ‘anubandha,’ literally means repealed action or that which leads to repeated action; the meaning thus is that the king shall ascertain what it was that led the man to commit the offence, i.e., he shall find out if he was urged to it by the starving condition of his family, or by association with criminals, or by reason of his being addicted to drink and gambling, — and if he did it intentionally or by mistake, — if he was urged to it by another person, or he did it voluntarily. These are the points to be considered in the ascertaining of the man’s ‘motive.’

‘Place,’ — a village, forest, granary or pasture-ground.

‘Time’ — whether it was night or day; whether it was a time of scarcity or of plenty; whether the criminal is a youth or a full-grown person.

‘Condition,’ — capability or otherwise to suffer the penalty, — whether he is rich or poor.

‘Offence’ — under which of the eighteen categories the act falls.

Having, in due order, considered all this, the king shall ‘inflict the punishment,’ — so that the condition of the society may not suffer. — (126)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Anubandham’ — ‘Motive or frequency’ (Medhātithi and Govindarāja) — ‘frequency’ (Kullūka and Nārāyaṇa).

‘Sārāprādhau’ — Nandana reading ‘Sārāsārau,’ explains it as ‘strength or weakness of the offender.’

Tins verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 627), which explains ‘Sāra’ as strength and ‘anubandha’ as ‘repetition of the improper act.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (12.51). — ‘The award of punishment must be regulated by a consideration of the status of the criminal, of his bodily strength, of the nature of the crime, and whether the offence has been repeated.’

Yājñavalkya (1.367). — ‘On those deserving punishment, the King shall inflict punishment after having considered the nature of the crime, the time, place and strength of the criminal, as also his age, conduct and wealth.’

Nārada (Punishments, 38). — ‘After carefully considering the nature of the offence, the place and time, and after examining the ability of the offender, and his motive, he shall inflict the punishments.’

Bṛhaspati (27.4-7). — ‘When he has discovered a man to be an offender, the King should inflict on him, reprimand, reproach or corporal chastisement, or one of the four grades of fines. He shall inflict gentle reprimand when the offence is very light; harsh reproach for a crime of the first degree; a fine for a crime of the middlemost degree, and arrest in the case of high treason. Banishment also may be resorted to by a king desirous of promoting his own welfare;...... and all the various forms of punishment should be combined in the case of one who has committed a mortal sin. The King should punish elders, domestic priests and persons commanding respect, with admonition only; other litigants he should punish with fine, when they are found guilty; and on the perpetrators of a heavy crime, he should inflict corporal punishment.’

VERSE 8.127

Section XXII - Considerations regarding Punishments

अधर्मदण्डनं लोके यशोघ्नं कीर्तिनाशनम् ।
अस्वर्ग्यं च परत्रापि तस्मात् तत् परिवर्जयेत् ॥१२७॥

adharmadaṇḍanaṃ loke yaśoghnaṃ kīrtināśanam |
asvargyaṃ ca paratrāpi tasmāt tat parivarjayet ||127||

Unjust punishment is destructive of reputation among men and subversive of fame; in the other world also it leads to loss of heaven; he shall therefore avoid it. — (127)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Unfair punishment’ is that punishment, that savours strongly of injustice; — i.e., one that takes no account of what has been just said, and which is determined cither entirely on the basis of the letter of the law, or by the king’s whim, or by love, hatred and such other feelings.

Such a punishment is ‘destructive of reputation,’ also ‘subversive of fame’; ‘reputation’ consists in the man’s good qualities being known in his own country, while ‘fame’ in their being known in foreign countries. Or ‘reputation’ may consist in one’s good name during life. — Or the passage being a purely commendatory one, some other distinction may be drawn.

‘Leads to loss of heaven’; — i.e., obstructs the passage to heaven, that might have been opened by other meritorious deeds.

‘In the other world’; — this has been added for filling up the metre; ‘heaven’ itself being the other world. — (127)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 649).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.127-128)

Vaśiṣṭha (19.42-45). — ‘If an innocent person is punished, the domestic priest shall perform a Kṛcchra penance; and the King shall fast during three days and nights.’

Yājñavalkya (1.356, 358). — ‘Punishment illegally inflicted by the King destroys heaven, fame and worldly prosperity; legally inflicted, it brings to the King heaven, fame and victory. If the King punishes those who deserve punishment, and if he kills those who deserve to be killed, he offers, thereby, sacrifices at which excellent sacrificial fees are given.’

Nārada (Punishments, 61). — ‘Let the King, faithful to the tenets of the sacred law, practise the duties of his office and follow the rule of inflicting punishment. Let him destroy, as governor, the evil-doers, after having traced them by cunning stratagems and arrested them.’

Kātyāyana (Vivādaratnākara, p. 649). — ‘By not chastising evil-doers, and by punishing those who are already submissive, kings and ministers incur sin.’

VERSE 8.128

Section XXII - Considerations regarding Punishments

अदण्ड्यान् दण्डयन् राजा दण्ड्यांश्चैवाप्यदण्डयन् ।
अयशो महदाप्नोति नरकं चैव गच्छति ॥१२८॥

adaṇḍyān daṇḍayan rājā daṇḍyāṃścaivāpyadaṇḍayan |
ayaśo mahadāpnoti narakaṃ caiva gacchati ||128||

The king, punishing those who do not deserve to be punished, and not punishing those who deserve to be punished, attains great ill-fame and goes to hell. — (128)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The preceding verse was supplementary to the injunction regarding the consideration of the ‘motive’ and other things; while the present verse prohibits the punishing of persons who are not guilty of any offence, and enjoins that of those who are guilty; — and this is emphasised because of the possibility of the king regarding punishment as futile and hence omitting to inflict it, which would lead to much evil. — (128)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 649); — in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 391), as prohibiting the punishment of the innocent; — in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 25); — in Mitākṣarā (2.1), to the effect that the non-investigation of cases as well as the wrong investigation of them, — both bring sin upon the king; — in Nītimayūkha (p. 59); — and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Vyavahāra, p. 5a).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.127-128)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.127.

VERSE 8.129

Section XXII - Considerations regarding Punishments

वाग्दण्डं प्रथमं कुर्याद् धिग्दण्डं तदनन्तरम् ।
तृतीयं धनदण्डं तु वधदण्डमतः परम् ॥१२९॥

vāgdaṇḍaṃ prathamaṃ kuryād dhigdaṇḍaṃ tadanantaram |
tṛtīyaṃ dhanadaṇḍaṃ tu vadhadaṇḍamataḥ param ||129||

First of all, he shall inflict punishment in the form of reprimand, then in the form of reproach, thirdly in the form of fine, and after that the death-penalty. — (129)

Познавательные статьи:



Алгоритмические операторы Matlab

Конструирование и порядок расчёта дорожной одежды

Исследования учёных: почему помогают молитвы?

Почему терпят неудачу многие предприниматели?