with the Commentary of Medhatithi 318 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 324 из 350Следующая ⇒

Persons learned in the Veda and knowing the law declare that for the twice-born person keeping up his vows, the intentional emission of semen means a ‘transgression of the vow.’ — (120)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse supplies the explanation of the meaning of the term ‘avakīṛṇīn’ ‘immoral religious student’; — from which it is clear that the term ‘vrata’ here stands for something other than the penances mentioned in the present context

‘Keeping up his vows.’ — On the strength of other Smṛti texts, this should be understood to mean ‘one who is in the state of the Religious Student’; as it is for such a one that emission of semen, even without sexual intercourse, has been specially forbidden.

The rule here laid down applies to the case, of intentional emission of semen. — (120)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 1140), which explains that this ‘emission of the seed’ is meant to be ‘in a woman’; — and in Madanapārijāta (p. 909.)

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.118.

VERSE 11.121

Section XII - Expiation for the Immoral Religious Student (avakīrṇa)

मारुतं पुरुहूतं च गुरुं पावकमेव च ।
चतुरो व्रतिनोऽभ्येति ब्राह्मं तेजोऽवकीर्णिनः ॥१२१॥

mārutaṃ puruhūtaṃ ca guruṃ pāvakameva ca |
caturo vratino'bhyeti brāhmaṃ tejo'vakīrṇinaḥ ||121||

The spiritual power of the Religious Student, who has become ‘immoral,’ ‘goes away into the maruts, indra, Bṛhaspati and agni. — (121)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This is a declamatory statement in support of the aforesaid injunction of the oblations to certain deities.

In the case of the Religious Student who has committed an immoral act, his ‘spiritual power,’ — the merit acquired by him by the various kinds of knowledge — ‘goes away into’ several deities; i.e., it disappears among them. What is meant is that it departs from the Religious Student — (121)

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.118.

VERSE 11.122

Section XII - Expiation for the Immoral Religious Student (avakīrṇa)

एतस्मिन्नेनसि प्राप्ते वसित्वा गर्दभाजिनम् ।
सप्तागारांश्चरेद् भैक्षं स्वकर्म परिकीर्तयन् ॥१२२॥

etasminnenasi prāpte vasitvā gardabhājinam |
saptāgārāṃścared bhaikṣaṃ svakarma parikīrtayan ||122||

On this sin having been incurred, the man, clothed in the skin of the ass, shall go begging alms at seven houses; proclaiming his own deed. — (122)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Dressed’ — covered.

‘His own deed’ — saying — ‘I am an immoral Religious Student.’ — (122)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

(verses 11.122-123)

These verses are quoted in Aparārka (p. 1141), as laying down an ‘yearly penance’ for the unchaste student; — in Mitākṣarā (3.280), as referring to the case where the woman with whom the student hits misconducted himself is either the wife of an unlearned Brāhmaṇa or that of a learned Vaiśya; the expiation in the, case of the wife of a learned Brāhmaṇa or learned Kṣatriya consisting of the three or two years penance.

They are quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Prāyaścitta, p. 436); — in Prāyaścittaviveka (p. 387); — and in Smṛtisāroddhāra (p. 363).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.118.

VERSE 11.123

Section XII - Expiation for the Immoral Religious Student (avakīrṇa)

तेभ्यो लब्धेन भैक्षेण वर्तयन्नेककालिकम् ।
उपस्पृशंस्त्रिषवणं त्वब्देन स विशुध्यति ॥१२३॥

tebhyo labdhena bhaikṣeṇa vartayannekakālikam |
upaspṛśaṃstriṣavaṇaṃ tvabdena sa viśudhyati ||123||

Subsisting on a single meal per day out of the alms obtained from those houses, and bathing at the three ‘extractions,’ he becomes pure after one year. — (123)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Bathing’ — ‘taking his bath’ — in the morning, at midday and in the evening, he becomes purified in one year. — (123)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

(verses 11.122-123)

See Explanatory notes for Verse 11.122.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.118-123)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.118.

VERSE 11.124 [Expiation for Offences causing Loss of Caste]

Section XIII - Expiation for Offences causing Loss of Caste

जातिभ्रंशकरं कर्म कृत्वाऽन्यतममिच्छया ।
चरेत् सान्तपनं कृच्छ्रं प्राजापत्यमनिच्छया ॥१२४॥

jātibhraṃśakaraṃ karma kṛtvā'nyatamamicchayā |
caret sāntapanaṃ kṛcchraṃ prājāpatyamanicchayā ||124||

On having intention ally done any one of those acts which cause loss of caste, one should perform a Sāntapana-Kṛcchra; and the Prājāpatya, when it is done unintentionally. — (124)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The treatment of Minor Offences has been finished.

‘Any one.’ — This is only by way of reference; as a combination of occasions is not possible; and further, if all the offences were meant to be taken together, the expiation here spoken of would not be meant for any one; what man is there who could ever commit all those deeds that lead to the loss of caste? On the other hand, if expiation were to be prescribed separately for each offence, there would be no end to the teaching at all Nor would combination be otherwise advisable; as the occasions and conditions of the expiation are set forth only as qualifying the human agent For these reasons the declaration should be taken as complete with each individual offence. Just as in connection with the assertion ‘he whose father or grandfather has not drunk Soma (shall perform a certain expiatory rite),’ — the conclusion is that the expiatory Animal-sacrifice becomes necessary when either one of the ancestors — the father or the grandfather — has failed to drink Soma; — and similarly in the declaration — ‘when both sacrificial materials become spoilt, etc.,’ — even though it contains the term ‘both,’ yet the expiatory ‘Pañcaśarāva’ sacrifice has to be performed even when only one material becomes spoilt. The same principle is to be observed in the case of all expiations.

‘Intentionally.’ — This is meant to be emphasised; as also the qualification ‘unintentionally.’

The exact form of the two penances, ‘Prājāpatya’ and ‘Sāntapana,’ shall be described later on. — (124)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

The ‘Jātibhraṃśakara’ offences have been enumerated above in verse 67.

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (3.254), — and again under 3.290); — in Smṛtitattva (p. 542); — in Parāśaramādhava (Prāyaścitta p. 441), as laying down the expiation common to all ‘Jātibhraṃśakara’ offences; — and in Prāyaścittaviveka (pp. 464 and 542), which says that when the offence is committed intentionally, the penance to be performed is the Sāntapana, and when it is committed unintentionally, it is Prājāpatya.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (38.7). — ‘He who has knowingly committed an act causing loss of caste shall perform the Sāntapana penance; he who has done so unawares shall perform the Prājāpatya penance.’

VERSE 11.125

Section XIII - Expiation for Offences causing Loss of Caste

सङ्करापात्रकृत्यासु मासं शोधनमैन्दवम् ।
मलिनीकरणीयेषु तप्तः स्याद् यावकैस्त्र्यहम् ॥१२५॥

saṅkarāpātrakṛtyāsu māsaṃ śodhanamaindavam |
malinīkaraṇīyeṣu taptaḥ syād yāvakaistryaham ||125||

In the case of acts conducive to the degradation of ‘caste-mixture,’ or of those that make one unworthy of receiving gifts, purification is secured by the monthly lunar penance; and in the case of those that lead to defilement, one should mortify his body on barley-products for three days. — (125)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The acts ‘conducive to the degradation of mixed caste’ and ‘those that make one unworthy of receiving gifts’ have been described above (68 and 69); and the plural number is due to the large number of acts included in these two sets.

The term ‘Kṛtyā,’ ‘acts’ is to be construed with each of the two terms ‘Saṅkara’ and ‘apātra’ ‘Kṛtyā means deed.

‘The monthly Lunar penance’ — is the ‘Cāndrāyaṇa.’ ‘Barley-products’ — articles of food prepared from barley, — fit for drinking or sipping and so forth.

Though the expiation mentioned here is without any distinction, yet, a distinction has always to be made in the lightness or heaviness of the penance, according as the act is done intentionally or unintentionally. — (125)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

The ‘Saṅkarīkaraṇa’, ‘apātrīkaraṇa’ and ‘malinīkaraṇa’ offences have been enumerated above, under verses 68, 69 and 70.

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣaṛā (3.290); — and in Prāyaścittaviveka (p. 403 and 431).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (39.2). — ‘He who has committed a crime degrading one to a mixed caste shall eat barley-gruel for a month, or perform the penance of Kṛcchrātikṛcchra.’

Do. (40.2). — ‘He who has committed a crime rendering one unworthy to receive alms, is purified by the penance Taptakṛcchra, or by the penance Śitakṛcchra, or by the penance Mahāsāntapana, if the act has been committed repeatedly.’

Do. (41.5). — ‘The penance ordained for crimes causing defilement is the Taptakṛcchra; or they shall he expiated by the Kṛcchrātikṛcchra penance.’

VERSE 11.126 [Expiation for the killing of a Kṣatriya, or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra]

Section XIV - Expiation for the killing of a Kṣatriya, or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra

तुरीयो ब्रह्महत्यायाः क्षत्रियस्य वधे स्मृतः ।
वैश्येऽष्टमांशो वृत्तस्थे शूद्रे ज्ञेयस्तु षोडशः ॥१२६॥

turīyo brahmahatyāyāḥ kṣatriyasya vadhe smṛtaḥ |
vaiśye'ṣṭamāṃśo vṛttasthe śūdre jñeyastu ṣoḍaśaḥ ||126||

One fourth of the expiation for the killing of a Brāhmaṇa has been prescribed for the killing of a Kṣatriya, one eighth for that of a Vaiśya, and one sixteenth for that of a Śūdra, — each of these being one who is devoted to his duty. — (126)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

It has been said above that for the killing of a Kṣatriya or a Vaiśya, engaged in a sacrificial performance, the expiation shall be equal to that for killing a Brāhmaṇa. The present verse applies to cases other than these.

The ‘fourth’ and ‘eighth’ parts (of the expiation for killing a Brāhmaṇa) have been prescribed in connection with such persons as are fulfilling all their duties, — the term ‘duty’ standing for all duties.

According to this rule, for the killing of a Kṣatriya, the expiation shall last for three years, for that of a Vaiśya, for a year and a half, and for that of a Śūdra, for nine months.

The expiation that has been laid down above (under 67) in connection with ‘the killing of a woman, a Vaiśya or a Kṣatriya,’ pertains to the case of those persons being such as have neglected their duties, and are addicted to unrighteous acts.

‘Duty’ implies character. When the Vaiśya is one who has the character of, and behaves like, a Vaiśya. The ‘duty’ of the Śūdra consists in service of twice-born men and the like, — and not the performance of the ‘great sacrifices.’

The full expiation prescribed is to be performed in the case of the death of persons firmly devoted to the performance of their duties. — (126)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (3.266-267), as referring to such Vaiśyas and Śūdras as are possessed of only a few good qualities; — it explains the term ‘vṛtta’ as qualities of the heart and so forth, such as ‘reverence for superiors, purity, cleanliness, truthfulness, control of organs and goodwill towards all’; — and in the Prāyaścittaviveka (p. 215).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.126-130)

Gautama (22.14-16). — ‘For intentionally killing a Kṣatriy a, the normal vow of continence must be kept for six years, and one should give away one thousand cows with a bull. For killing a Vaiśya, the same penance, for three years; and one should give away one hundred cows with a hull. For killing a Śūdra, the same penance, for one year; and one should give away ten cows with a bull.’

Baudhāyana (1.19.1-2). — ‘For slaying a Kṣatriya, the offender shall give to the King one thousand cows and also a bull in expiation of his sin; for slaying a Vaiśya, one hundred cows; for slaying a Śūdra, a fee; and a bull should be added in all cases.’

Baudhāyana (2.1-8-10). — ‘For killing a Kṣatriya he shall keep the normal vow of continence for nine years; — for killing a Vaiśya, for three years; — for killing a Śūdra, for one year.’

Vaśiṣṭha (20.31-33). — ‘Having slain a Kṣatriya, he shall perform a penance during eight years; for killing a Vaiśya, during six years: for killing a Śūdra, during three years.’

Viṣṇu (50.12-15). — ‘He who has unintentionally killed a Kṣatriya, shall perform the Mahāvrata for nine years; — he who has unintentionally killed a Vaiśya, for six years; — he who has unintentionally killed a Śūdra, for three years,’

Yājñavalkya (3.267-268). — ‘For killing a Kṣatriya one should give away a thousand cows with a bull; or he may perform, for three year, the penance prescribed for Brāhmaṇa-killing; one who kills a Vaiśya shall perform the same penance for one year, or give away one hundred cows; one who has killed a Śūdra shall perform the same penance for six months, or give away ten cows.’

Āpastamba (1.24.1-4). — ‘One who has killed a Kṣatriya shall give away a thousand cows for the expiation of his sin; he shall give a hundred for killing a Vaiśya; and ten for killing a Śūdra; and in every case a bull should be added for the sake of expiation.’

VERSE 11.127

Section XIV - Expiation for the killing of a Kṣatriya, or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra

अकामतस्तु राजन्यं विनिपात्य द्विजोत्तमः ।
वृषभैकसहस्रा गा दद्यात् सुचरितव्रतः ॥१२७॥

akāmatastu rājanyaṃ vinipātya dvijottamaḥ |
vṛṣabhaikasahasrā gā dadyāt sucaritavrataḥ ||127||

If the chief of twice-born men kills a Kṣatriya unintentionally, he should duly perform the penance and give away a thousand cows and a bull. — (127)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This is another expiation in the form of gifts. It is going to be laid down (under 139) below that so long as one has wealth, he need not perform a penance.

‘Unintentionally.’ — No stress is meant to be laid on this qualification; as is clear from the heaviness of the expiation. Or, it may be assumed that it refers to the unintentional killing of the Kṣatriya or the Vaiśya, engaged in a sacrificial performance.

‘Vṛṣabhaikasahasrāḥ gāḥ’ — literally means ‘thousand cows who have one bull among them.’ — (127)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (3.266); — in Parāśaramādhava (Prāyaścitta, p. 73); — and in Prāyaścittaviveka (pp. 215 and 534).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.126-130)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.126.

VERSE 11.128

Section XIV - Expiation for the killing of a Kṣatriya, or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra

त्र्यब्दं चरेद् वा नियतो जटी ब्रह्महनो व्रतम् ।
वसन् दूरतरे ग्रामाद् वृक्षमूलनिकेतनः ॥१२८॥

tryabdaṃ cared vā niyato jaṭī brahmahano vratam |
vasan dūratare grāmād vṛkṣamūlaniketanaḥ ||128||

Or, he may perform, for three years, the penance of the ‘Brāhmaṇa-killer,’ keeping himself under control and wearing matted locks, living far off from the village, having his abode at the root of a tree. — (128)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The first half of the verse explains what is meant by the ‘one-fourth’ mentioned in the preceding verse.

‘Wearing matted locks.’ — Some people hold that this is meant to exclude the wearing of rags, carrying of a part of the bedstead and so forth (which have been prescribed for the Brāhmaṇa-killer).

This, however, is not right. For what the present verse does is to apply to the case in question the ‘one fourth’ part of only those details that have been prescribed for the Brāhmaṇa-killer, and not of anything else, even though some such be possible; — walking against the current, of the Sarasvatī and such other (optional) details (laid down in 78 et. seq.,) being adopted only when there is some necessity for them.

‘Far off’ — All that this means is that he should not remain in the village.

‘Under the root of a tree’; — i.e.., having built a hut there. — (128)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

According to Medhātithi and Rāghavānanda this verse only reiterates what has been prescribed in verse 126, all the details of which are meant to be observed in the present connection; — but according to Govindarāja and Kullūka, the special details, of carrying the skull and so forth, which are not expressly mentioned here, are not meant here.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Prāyaścitta, p. 128); — and in Prāyaścittaviveka (pp. 216 and 534).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.126-130)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.126.

VERSE 11.129

Section XIV - Expiation for the killing of a Kṣatriya, or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra

एतदेव चरेदब्दं प्रायश्चित्तं द्विजोत्तमः ।
प्रमाप्य वैश्यं वृत्तस्थं दद्याच्चैकशतं गवाम् ॥१२९॥

etadeva caredabdaṃ prāyaścittaṃ dvijottamaḥ |
pramāpya vaiśyaṃ vṛttasthaṃ dadyāccaikaśataṃ gavām ||129||

If a Brāhmaṇa kills a righteous Vaiśya, he shall perform this same expiatory rite for one year; or he may give a hundred cows and one (bull). — (129)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

In a previous verse ‘one eighth’ was prescribed for the killing of a Vaiśya; what the present verse lays down is ‘one twelfth.’

As the expiation is a light one, it has to be done ‘for one year.’

It appears that the rule here laid down is meant for the case of a Vaiśya devoid of qualifications.

“The case of a Vaiśya devoted to his duty has been already dealt with before.”

True; but what the present verse contemplates is the case of a Vaiśya who was ‘righteous’ at the time of death, but was devoid of qualities before that; while the previous rules apply to one who was righteous all along. — (129)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

“According to Govindarāja and Kullūka, the two penances are to be performed optionally, in case a virtuous Vaiśya has been killed unintentionally. — Medhātithi says that the first penance is to be performed for the murder of a Vaiśya who was less distinguished than the one referred to in verse 126. — Nārāyaṇa thinks that the verse refers to a Vaiśya engaged in the performance of a sacrifice, and that the particle ‘vā’ takes the place of the?upola, and thus one penance only is prescribed.” — Buhler.

This verse is quoted in Prāyaścittaviveka (pp. 216 and 534), which explains ‘ekaśatam’ as ‘a hundred and one’.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.126-130)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.126.

VERSE 11.130

Section XIV - Expiation for the killing of a Kṣatriya, or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra

एतदेव व्रतं कृत्स्नं षण्मासांशूद्रहा चरेत् ) ।
वृषभेकादशा वाऽपि दद्याद् विप्राय गाः सिताः ॥१३०॥

etadeva vrataṃ kṛtsnaṃ ṣaṇmāsāṃśūdrahā caret ) |
vṛṣabhekādaśā vā'pi dadyād viprāya gāḥ sitāḥ ||130||

He who kills a Śūdra shall perform this same entire penance for six months; or he shall give to the Brāhmaṇa ten white cows and one bull. — (130)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Here also, whether the performance shall continue for six months or nine months should he determined by the consideration as to whether the man was ‘righteous’ or otherwise.

In all eases, the giving of the prescribed number of cows should be understood to be an optional alternative.

The mention of the ‘Brāhmaṇa’ (in 127) in this connection is meant to be only illustrative.

‘White’ — does not mean white in colour, but pure in all points, giving much milk, prone to give birth to females, and not in the habit of losing her offsprings. — (130)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Verse is quoted in Prāyaścittaviveka (pp. 216 and 534)

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 11.126-130)

See Comparative notes for Verse 11.126.

VERSE 11.131 [Expiation for the killing of Cats and other Animals]

Section XV - Expiation for the killing of Cats and other Animals

मार्जारनकुलौ हत्वा चाषं मण्डूकमेव च ।
श्वगोधौलूककाकांश्च शूद्रहत्याव्रतं चरेत् ॥१३१॥

Познавательные статьи:



Организация работы процедурного кабинета

Статус республик в составе РФ

Понятие финансов, их функции и особенности

Сущность демографической политии