The Sanskrit Epics

Home > Other > The Sanskrit Epics > Page 782
The Sanskrit Epics Page 782

by Delphi Classics


  154 The two negatives in the second line amount to an affirmative assertion.

  155 Vaivaswati is ‘appertaining to Vivaswat or prakasarapachidatma’, hence ‘Brahma-vishayini’. ‘Daughter of Surya’ means Sattwiki. Faith is vahirvangamanasi, i.e., is ‘the outward form of speech and mind,’ implying that it ‘transcends (the merit born of) speech (recitation) and mind (meditation).’

  156 ‘Defects of speech’ are the incorrect utterance of mantras. ‘Defects of mind’ are such as listlessness, haste, etc.

  157 Kadarya is explained by the commentator as ‘miserly.’ I think it may be taken also in a more extended sense. Then again vardhushi is a usurer and not necessarily a dealer in corn.

  158 The commentator is entirely silent upon this verse. The two Bengali versions have proceeded in two different ways. The four classes of persons indicated in the previous verses are (1) he that is destitute of faith but is (outwardly) pure, (2) he that has faith but is not (outwardly) pure, (3) a miserly person possessed of learning, and (4) a usurer endued with liberality. The answer of Brahman, without touching other points, refers particularly to faith. The liberal man’s food is sanctified by faith. The food of him that has no faith is lost. For this reason, the liberal man’s food, even if he happens to be a usurer, is worthy of acceptance, and not so the food of the miser even though he may be possessed of Vedic lore.

  159 The commentator takes the word divam as implying hardakasam. They sported (not in the ordinary felicity of heaven but) in the puissance of Yoga.

  160 Gograhe is explained by the commentator as ‘a sacrifice in which kine are slain.’ Yajnavatasya is an instance of the genitive for the accusative. It means Yajnavatsthan nirdayan Brahmanan. The expression may also mean ‘in the cow-pen within the sacrificial enclosure.’

  161 Avyaktaih is explained by the commentator as Yajnadi-dwaraiva khyatimichchhadbhih.

  162 Kamakara may also mean recklessness, Vahirvedyam is ‘on the outer Vedi or altar.’ The actual slaughter takes place on this vedi. The Burdwan translator misunderstands the word.

  163 Upasya, is explained by the commentator as ‘living near an inhabited place.’ Vedakritah Srutih are the fruits indicated in the Vedas of the acts laid down in them. Acharah has reference to the duties of the domestic mode of life. Acharah should be made anacharah, i.e., should not be followed. The Sannyasa mode of life is thus recommended.

  164 The meaning is this: ordinary men abstain from tainted meat, regarding all meat as tainted which is obtained from animals that are not killed in sacrifices and in course of religious acts. The speaker, however, holds that this practise is not worthy of applause, for all meat is tainted, including that of animals slain in sacrifices. K.P. Singha gives the sense correctly though his rendering is not literal. The Burdwan translator, misunderstanding text and commentary, jumbles them together and gives an incorrect rendering.

  165 Hence there is no need for sacrifices with slaughter of animals, and alcohol, etc.

  166 The sense is this: dangers are always seeking to destroy the body. The body is always seeking to destroy those destroyers. This perpetual war or struggle implies the desire to injure. How then, asks Yudhishthira, is it possible for any man to lead a perfectly harmless life, harm being implied in the very fact of continued existence?

  167 The sense, of course, is that one should acquire religious merit without wasting one’s body; one should not, that is, cause one’s body to be destroyed for the sake of earning merit.

  168 On the occasion of the Jata-karma the sire says ‘be thou as hard as adamant,’ ‘be thou an axe (unto all my foes).’ The upakarma or subsidiary rite is performed on the occasion of the samavartana or return from the preceptor’s abode. It is called subsidiary because it does not occur among the rites laid down in the Griha Sutras. The words uttered on that occasion are, ‘Thou art my own self, O Son.’

  169 Bhogya implies such articles as dress, — etc. Bhojya implies food, etc. Pravachana is instruction in the scriptures. Garbhadhana is the ceremonial in connection with the attainment of puberty by the wife. Simantonnayana is performed by the husband in the fourth, sixth or eighth month of gestation, the principal rite being the putting of the minimum mark on the head of the wife. The mark is put on the line of partition of her locks.

  170 In India in every house two sticks were kept for producing fire by rubbing. These were replaced by the flint-stone and a piece of steel. Of course, Bryant and May’s matches have now replaced those primitive arrangements almost everywhere, and in the hands of children have become a source of great danger to both life and property.

  171 Prana is the organ of generation. Samslesha is union. The desires cherished are indicated in the Griha Sutras. ‘Let our child be fair of complexion.’ ‘Let him be long-lived!’ Though both parents cherish such wishes, yet their fruition depends more on the mother than the father. This is a scientific truth.

  172 The sense seems to be this. The mother only has correct knowledge of who the father is. The commands of the father, therefore, may be set aside on the ground of the suspicion that attaches to his very status as father. Then, again, if the father be adulterous, he should not be regarded on account of his sinfulness. Chirakarin asks, ‘How shall I know that Gautama is my father? How again shall I know that he is not sinful?’

  173 The object of this verse is to indicate that when Gautama had ceased to protect his wife he had ceased to be her husband. His command, therefore, to slay her could not be obeyed.

  174 The commentator argue that ‘man being the tempted, takes the guilt upon himself; woman, being the tempted, escapes the guilt.’

  175 The sense is this: the sire is all the deities together, for by reverencing the sire, all the deities are pleased. The mother, however, is all mortal and immortal creatures together, for by gratifying her one is sure to obtain success both here and hereafter.

  176 Dharmasya is explained by the commentator as Yogadharma-sambandhi. Probably, Gautama blames his own carelessness in not having provided, by Yoga-puissance, against the commission of the offence. The commentator observes that the Rishi’s exculpation of Indra himself is due to his own purity of nature and the entire absence of a desire to wrong other people. In reality, however, there can be no doubt that it was Indra who was to blame.

  177 i.e., prince Satyavat said that the persons brought out for execution should not be executed. The power of kings did not extend over the lives of their subjects. In other words the prince argued against the propriety of inflicting capital punishment upon even grave offenders.

  178 Verse 10 is a triplet.

  179 The Burdwan translator gives a very incorrect version of this verse. He misunderstands both text and commentary completely. K.P. Singha is correct.

  180 The commentator explains that the object of this line is to show that the very Sannyasin, when he offends, deserves to be chastised. K.P. Singha misunderstands the line completely. The Burdwan version is correct.

  181 Both the vernacular versions of this verse are incorrect. The first half of the first line should be taken independently. The commentator explains that after gariyamsam the words api sasyu should be supplied. Aparadhe tu punah punah, etc., is said of offenders in general, and not eminent offenders only.

  182 i.e., punishments were not necessary in former times, or very light ones were sufficient. The Burdwan version of this verse is thoroughly ridiculous.

  183 Hence extermination is the punishment that has become desirable.

  184 Hence, by slaying them no injury is done to any one in this or the other world.

  185 Padma means, the ornaments of corpses. Grave-stealers that were in every country. Pisachat is Pisachopahatat. Evidently, idiots and mad men were the persons who were regarded to have been possessed by evil spirits. Daiyatam is an accusative which, like, Samayam is governed by the transitive verb Kurvita. Yah kaschit means yah kaschit mudyhah, na tu prajnah. The Burdwan version of this verse shows that the person entrusted with this portion of the Canti was altoge
ther incompetent for the task. K.P. Singha gives the meaning correctly.

  186 The commentator supposes that after sadhun the word kartum is understood. The line may also be taken as meaning,— ‘If thou dost not succeed in rescuing the honest without slaying (the wicked).’ Bhuta bhavya is sacrifice. The prince speaks of exterminating the rogues by slaying them as animals in a sacrifice because of the declaration in the Srutis that those killed in sacrifices ascend to heaven, purged of all their sins. Such acts, therefore, seem to be merciful to the prince, compared to death by hanging or on the block.

  187 The world thus improves in conduct and morality through the king only behaving in a proper way. Cruel punishments are scarcely needed to reform the world.

  188 The period of human life decreases proportionately in every succeeding age, as also the strength of human beings. In awarding punishments, the king should be guided by these considerations.

  189 The word satya is used here for Emancipation. Mahaddahrmaphalam is true knowledge, so called because of its superiority to heaven, etc. The way pointed out by Manu is, of course, the religion of harmlessness. In verse 35, there is an address to prince Satyavat. It seems, as I have pointed out, that verses 32 to 35 represent the words of the grandsire to whom the prince refers in verse 31.

  190 The redundant syllable is arsha.

  191 Both acts and knowledge have been pointed out in the Vedas. The Vedas, therefore, being authority for both, one or the other cannot be censured or applauded.

  192 Arsha means here Vedic injunctions declared through the mouths of inspired Rishis and compiled by Rishis. Viditatmanah is the Supreme Being himself. The object of the speaker is to show that no part of the Vedas can be censured, for every word in them is equally authoritative, all being God’s own.

  193 Deva-yanah is explained by the commentator as Devam atmanam janti ebhiriti, i.e., those by which the Soul is reached. The relative strength or weakness of the four modes of life hath been thus indicated. The Sannyasin attains to Moksha or Emancipation; the forest recluse to the region of Brahman; the house-holder attains to heaven (region of the deities presided over by Indra) and the Brahmacharin attains to the region of the Rishis.

  194 The commentator explains that having commenced with the assertion that men should sacrifice from desire of heaven, the speaker fears that the hearer may deny the very existence of heaven. Hence, he takes a surer ground for justifying slaughter, viz., the ground that is connected with the consideration of food. Living creatures must eat in order to live. The very support of life requires the slaughter of life. Slaughter, therefore, is justified by the highest necessity.

  195 i.e., there are the essential requisites of sacrifice.

  196 The seven domestic animals are cow, goat, man, horse, sheep, mule, and ass. The seven wild ones are lion, tiger, boar, buffalo, elephant, bear, and monkey.

  197 Vichinwita is Vivechayet with alamvartham understood; atmanah is equivalent to jivat.

  198 All the products of the cow that are named here are not required in all sacrifices. Some are required in some, others in others. Those then that are required, when coupled with Ritwijas and Dakshina, complete the respective sacrifices or uphold or sustain them.

  199 Samhritya means Ekikritya and not ‘destroying’ as the Burdwan translator wrongly takes it.

  200 The Burdwan translator, notwithstanding the clear language of both the text and commentary, wrongly connects the first line of verse 31 with the last line of 30, and makes nonsense of both verses.

  201 By taking the two lines of 32 with the last line of 30, the Burdwan translator makes nonsense of the passage.

  202 ‘Brahmanas’ here means that part of the Vedas which contains the ritual.

  203 Each constitutes the refuge of the other.

  204 There are many such expletives, such as hayi, havu, etc.

  205 For, as the commentator explains, one who has acquired an empire does not seek the dole of charity. In view of the high end that Renunciation is certain to bring, what need has a person of the domestic mode of life which leads to rewards that are insignificant compared to the other.

  206 Varhi is grass or straw. Oshadhi here implies paddy and other grain. Vahiranya adrija implies ‘other kinds of Oshadhi born on mountains,’ i.e., the Soma and other useful hill plants and shrubs. Teshamapi mulam garhastyam should be supplied after the first line. Domesticity is the root of these, because these are cultivated or collected by persons leading the domestic mode of life. The argument in the second line is this: Oschadhibhyah pranah, pranat vahihna kinchit drisyate, atah viswasyapi mulam garhastyam.

  207 Literally rendered, the words are,— ‘Without doubt, Vedic mantras enter into persons of the regenerate classes in respect of acts whose effects are seen and acts whose effects instead of being seen depend upon the evidence of the scriptures.’ Practically, what is said here is that all the acts of a Brahmana are performed with the aid of Vedic mantras.

  208 Mantras are necessary in cremating a Brahmana’s dead body. Mantras are needed for assisting the dead spirit to attain to a brilliant form (either in the next world or in this if there be rebirth). These mantras are, of course, uttered in Sraddhas. After the dead spirit has been provided, with the aid of mantras, with a body, food and drink are offered to him with the aid of mantras. Kine and animals are given away by the representatives of the dead for enabling the dead ancestor to cross the Vaitarani (the river that flows between the two worlds) and for enabling him to become happy in heaven. The funeral cake, again, according to the ordinance, is sunk in water for making it easily attainable by him to whom it is offered. By becoming a human being one inherits three debts. By study he pays off his debt to the Rishis, by the performance of sacrifices he pays off his debt to the gods, and by begetting children he frees himself from the debt he owes to the Pitris. The argument then is this: when the Vedas, which are the words of Supreme Godhead, have laid down these mantras for the attainment of such objects in the next world, how can Emancipation, which involves an incorporeal existence transcending the very Karana (form) be possible? The very declarations of the Vedas in favour of acts are inconsistent with incorporeal existence or with the negation of existence with dual consciousness of knower and known.

  209 The mention of ‘Devan’ as the commentator points out — Rishis and also Pitris. The amrita here that these covet is, of course, the Sacrificial libation. ‘Brahma-sanjnitah’ implies ‘conversant with Brahma,’ for the Srutis say that ‘Brahmavid Brahmaiva bhavati.’

  210 The terseness of the original has not been removed in the translation. Enam is the universal Soul dwelling within this physical frame. It refers to the person who constitutes himself to be the soul of all creatures or one who is conversant with Brahma or has become Brahma itself. That soul is said to have a fourfold nature, viz., it is virat (all-embracing), sutra (fine as the finest thread and pervading everything), antaryamin (possessed of omniscience), and suddha (stainless). Its four mouths, by which are meant the four sources of enjoyment or pleasure, are the body, the senses, the mind, and the understanding. What the speaker wishes to point out by this is the Bhotkritwa (power of enjoyment) of the Soul. The Kartritwa (power of action) is then pointed out by the mention of the doors which are the two arms, the organ of speech, the stomach and the organ of the pleasure (generation). These last operate as doors for shutting or confining the soul within its chamber. They are the screens or avaranas that conceal its real nature. The very gods feel their force, being unable to transcend them or their demands. He who would transcend them and shine in his own stainless nature should seek to control or restrain them. Practically, it is Yoga that is recommended for enabling one to attain to the position of the universal Soul.

  211 ‘One who has cast off his upper garment’ is one who clothes himself very scantily only for the sake of decency and not for splendour.

  212 Dwandwarama very likely means here the joys of wedded couples and not ‘the pleasures derived from pairs of opposites’. The sense seems
to be this that man is a Brahmana who, without marrying succeeds in enjoying singly all the felicity that attaches to married life.

  213 In reality all things are, of course, Brahma. Their external aspects are only transformations. The end of all creatures is death and rebirth till absorption takes place into Brahma by means of Yoga.

  214 The original is very terse. I have expanded it, following the commentator. Dana-yajna kriya phalam is chitta suddhi of purity or heart; antarena is equivalent to vina; anujananti governs Brahmanyam understood. Anyat phalam in the second line implies heaven and its joys (which satisfy ordinary men). The particle anu before jananti is taken to imply gurum anu, i.e., following the instructions of preceptors.

  215 These three verses run together and are extremely abstruse. There can be no doubt that the commentator is right. The construction is this: Yam sadacharam asritya samsritanam swakarmabhih (sahitam) tapah ghoratwam agatam, tam (sadacharam) puranam puranam saswatam dhruvam dharmeshu cha sutritamkitichit charitum asaknuvantah phalavanti vyushtimanti dhruvam cha karmani (mudah) vigunani, etc., pasyanti. The second line of 36 stands by itself as an explanatory sentence referring to some of the characteristics of the sadachara that is spoken of. Samsritanam, refers to men observing the different modes of life; ghoratwam agatam is samsarandhakaranasakam bhavati. What is meant by this is that the penances of such men, along with the duties they are called upon to observe by the particular mode of life they follow, become a terrible weapon, in consequence of their sadacharah, for destroying the evils of worldliness. The sadacharah spoken of here is nishkamadharmah. The latter is no new-fangled theory of men of learning but is puranam saswatam, and dhruvam. The phalavanti vyushtimanti, and dhruva karmani which fools regard to be vigyunani and anaikatitikani are, of course, those acts which are included within the word ‘Yoga.’ In brief, the speaker, in these three verses, wishes to inculcate that wise men, whatever their mode of life, observe its duties. But by virtue of the nishkama dharma they follow, they convert those duties and their penances into efficient means for dispelling the darkness of ignorance. Fools, on the other hand, unable to practise that nishkama dharma, look upon it and Yoga itself as fruitless and valueless although the rewards these confer are visible.

 

‹ Prev