with the Commentary of Medhatithi 94 страница

Viṣṇu (73.1). — ‘Going to perform the Śrāddha, he shall, on the previous day, invite the Brāhmaṇas.’

Yājñavalkya (1, 225). — ‘The man, himself pure and self-controlled, shall, on the previous day, invite the Brāhmaṇas.’

Hārīta (Parāśaramādhava, p. 696). — ‘Going to perform the Śrāddha the next day, he should invite the Brāhmaṇas on the previous day.’

Kūrmapurāṇa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 696). — ‘He shall approach the Brāhmaṇa saying — I shall perform Śrāddha to-morrow — on the previous day; if that be not possible, then on the same day.’

Devala (Do.). — ‘Having made up his mind that he shall perform Śrāddha on the coming day, he shall invite the Brāhmaṇas;... if that be not possible, then the next day.’

Varāhapurāṇa (Do., p. 697). — ‘Knowing that he would be performing Śrāddha on the next day, he shall clean the ground and invite the Brāhmaṇas.’

Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa (Do.). — ‘On the previous day, at night, he shall approach the Brāhmaṇas after they have taken their evening meal and invite them, on behalf of his father.’

 

 

VERSE 3.188

Section X - Method of Invitation

 

निमन्त्रितो द्विजः पित्र्ये नियतात्मा भवेत् सदा ।
न च छन्दांस्यधीयीत यस्य श्राद्धं च तद् भवेत् ॥१८८॥

nimantrito dvijaḥ pitrye niyatātmā bhavet sadā |
na ca chandāṃsyadhīyīta yasya śrāddhaṃ ca tad bhavet ||188||

 

The brāhmaṇa invited at a rite in honor of Pitṛs shall remain self-controlled and shall not recite the Veda; so also the man who performs the śrāddha. — (188)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

One invited ‘at a rite in honour of Pitṛs’ — i.e., a t a śrāddha — ‘shall remain self controlled;’ i.e., with his mind under control, he shall maintain continence and keep up also the other restraints and observances — such as the observances of the ‘Snātaka,’ and so forth. The avoidance of dancing, music, etc., which are the observances to be kept up by men, has been prescribed as part and parcel of religions rites; hence the performer of the śrāddha shall so arrange things that the invited Brāhamaṇa, from the moment he has been invited, shall keep control over his sense-organs; otherwise the śrāddha would become defective.

‘He shall not recite the Veda;’ — what is prohibited is the reciting of the texts of the Veda; the mere repeating of mantras during the evening and morning prayers is not prohibited.

‘Also the man who performs the Śrāddha’ — i.e., at the rite that one performs in honour of the Pitṛs, one should, like the invitee, remain self-controlled; the construction is — ‘So the man also...... shall remain self-controlled.’ The meaning is, that the rule regarding self-control and avoiding of Veda-reciting applies alike to the inviter and the invitee, from the moment of invitation onwards. — (188)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 456); — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1014), which adds the following notes: — The Brāhmaṇa invited at Śrāddha should keep himself self-controlled, i.e., should keep himself free from sexual intercourse and also keep the other restrictions; Medhātithi

says that the obeservances laid down for the Accomplished Student, the avoidance of dancing and music, &c. are all meant to be kept; the meaning is that the inviter should see to it that the invited keeps these restrictions: — ‘Chandāṃsi’ Vedas; — ‘adhīyīta’, ‘utter the words of the Veda’; the Japa of texts is not prohibited: — the performer of the Śrāddha himself also is to observe these restrictions; the role is meant for both the inviter and the invited.

 

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (15.23). — ‘Therefore on that day, he shall live like a religious student,’

Yājñavalkya (1.225). — ‘They shall remain under self-restraint, with mind, speech and acts duly controlled.’

Prajāpati (93). — ‘The Brāhmaṇa invited at the Śrāddha should avoid association with women on the previous day and on the next day; as also the second meal.’

Likhita (60). — ‘One who has eaten at the Śrāddha shall avoid eight things: the second meal, journeying, carrying loads, study, sexual intercourse, making and receiving gifts, and offering of oblations into fire.’

Devala (Aparārka, p. 457). — ‘Having been previously invited, if the Brāhmaṇa accept a gift, or if he eat at the Śrāddha after having taken his food, then all his merit becomes destroyed.’

 

 

VERSE 3.189

Section X - Method of Invitation

 

निमन्त्रितान् हि पितर उपतिष्ठन्ति तान् द्विजान् ।
वायुवत्चानुगच्छन्ति तथाऽसीनानुपासते ॥१८९॥

nimantritān hi pitara upatiṣṭhanti tān dvijān |
vāyuvatcānugacchanti tathā'sīnānupāsate ||189||

 

The Pitṛs attend upon those invited Brāhmaṇas; like the wind, they follow them and sit down when they are seated. — (189)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The present verse supplies a recommendation in support of the injunction that the invited person should remain self-controlled.

Because ‘the Pitṛs,’ — in their invisible forms — ‘attend upon’ — enter into the body of — ‘the invited Brāhmaṇas;’ just in the same manner in which people are obsessed by evil spirits.

‘Like the wind they follow him;’ — when a man moves along, the ‘wind’ — in the form of his breath — follows him; and it does not leave him while he is moving; and the Pitṛs also are in the form of air.

‘So when they ’ — the Brāhmaṇas — ‘are seated,’ “they sit down;’ i.e., they move when the Brāhmaṇas move and sit down when they are seated. The meaning is that the invited Brāhmaṇas take the form of the Pitṛs; hence those invited shall not be unrestrained in their behaviour. — (189)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1005), which adds that the Fathers ‘upatiṣṭhanti,’ enter the bodies of the invited Brāhmaṇas; i. e., the Brāhmaṇas represent the Fathers; for this reason they should keep pure.

 

 

VERSE 3.190

Section X - Method of Invitation

 

केतितस्तु यथान्यायं हव्ये कव्ये द्विजोत्तमः ।
कथं चिदप्यतिक्रामन् पापः सूकरतां व्रजेत् ॥१९०॥

ketitastu yathānyāyaṃ havye kavye dvijottamaḥ |
kathaṃ cidapyatikrāman pāpaḥ sūkaratāṃ vrajet ||190||

 

The rest of Brāhmaṇas, who, when duly invited at the rite in honour of Gods and Pitṛs, happens, somehow, to neglect it, incurs sin and becomes a hog.’ — (190)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Ketitaḥ’ means invited.

‘Havye kavye’ — at the rite in honour of Gods, and at the rite in honour of the Pitṛs. Having accepted the invitation and promised to eat, — if ‘somehow he neglects it,’ — i.e., does not present himself at the time of eating, or, if he does not maintain continence, — then such a Brāhmaṇa ‘becomes a hog.’

‘Somehow’ — i.e., either intentionally, or through lapse of memory.

‘Duly’ — this has been added for the purpose of filling up the verse.

Others have held that the ‘neglect’ here stands for non-acceptance of the invitation; according to what has been said in the Śrāddhakalpa — ‘one should not fail to accept the invitation of a man free from all blame.’

This, however, is not right; it is through desire to eat that men become prone to go to śrāddhas; and if a man happens to have no such desire, and hence refuses the invitation, what sin could there be in this? — (190.)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Atikrāman’ — ‘Does not present himself at the time of eating, and does not maintain continence’ (Medhātithi, who is slightly misrepresented by Buhler, who attributes to him only the latter part of the explanation); — ‘breaks the appointment’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka, Nārāyaṇa and Rāghavānanda); — ‘who does not accept the invitation’ (‘others’ in Medhātithi, who rejects this explanation).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 701) in support of the view that the man ‘who having accepted the invitation, subsequently refuses it, even though quite fit to respond to it, incurs a sin.’ It explains ‘ketitaḥ’ as ‘being invited.’

Madanapārijāta (p. 565) quotes the verse; — also Aparārka, (p. 457), which adds that this refers to the person who has accepted the invitation; — and Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1002), which adds the following notes; — ‘Ketitaḥ,’ invited; — the meaning is that if, on an invitation, the invited fails to keep the restrictions, he becomes a pig; — ‘Kathañcit,’ intentionally or through forgetfulness; others hold that ‘atikrāman’ means ‘not accepting the invitation,’ but this view has been criticised and rejected by Medhātithi.

 

Comparative notes by various authors:

Yama (Parāśaramādhava, p. 701). — ‘Having been invited, if the Brāhmaṇa goes elsewhere to take his food, he goes to a hundred hells and is born among Cāṇḍālas.’

Ādipurāṇa (Do.). — ‘Being invited, the Brāhmaṇa should not be late; one who is late... falls into hell.’

 

 

VERSE 3.191

Section X - Method of Invitation

 

आमन्त्रितस्तु यः श्राद्धे वृषल्या सह मोदते ।
दातुर्यद् दुष्कृतं किं चित् तत् सर्वं प्रतिपद्यते ॥१९१॥

āmantritastu yaḥ śrāddhe vṛṣalyā saha modate |
dāturyad duṣkṛtaṃ kiṃ cit tat sarvaṃ pratipadyate ||191||

 

If the man invited at the śrāddha dallies with a woman, he takes upon himself all the sin that there may be in the giver. — (191)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The term ‘vṛṣalī’ here stands for woman in general; this is indicated by the fact that the invitee has been advised to observe strict continence (and not only avoidance of improper intercourse). Hence, in the present context, the Brāhmaṇa woman also is a ‘vṛṣalī;’ the term (in this sense) being etymologically explained as ‘she who tempts her husband’ (bhartāram vṛṣasyati). Tims, what the passage means is as follows: — Having accepted invitation, if the man dallies with a woman, — i.e., with a view to having sexual intercourse with her, engages in such nets as conversation, embracing, and so forth, — then he incurs the following evil: whatever sin there might be in the ‘giver,’ i.e., the performer of the Śrāddha — passes on to him. What this indicates is the coming about of undesirable results; if this were not what is meant, then it would mean that there is nothing wrong in doing this, in a case where the giver is a sinless person.

‘Dallying’ stands for obtaining pleasure; hence it follows that one should not do even such acts as conversation, embracing, and the like. — (191)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Vṛṣalī’ — ‘Woman in general’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Nandana and Rāghavānanda); — ‘a Śūdra woman’ (Kullūka).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 702), where it apparently takes the term ‘vṛṣalī’ as standing for the Śūdra woman; — and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1006), which adds the following notes — ‘vṛṣalī’ stands here for woman in general, — the Brāhmaṇī also is a ‘vṛṣalī’ in the sense that she ‘hankers after the male’ (vṛṣasyati bhartāram); hence the meaning is that ‘if after having accepted the invitation, one enjoys the company of his wife he incurs sin,’ — ‘modate’ means enjoying, hence conversing and embracing also are to be avoided, — ‘dātuḥ,’ of the performer of the Śrāddha, — ‘duṣkṛtam’ sin, — becomes transferred to the said transgressor, i.e., some disagreeable results accrue to him. If the words were to be taken in the literal sense then there could be nothing wrong in eases where the inviter is a pure, sinless man.

 

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (15.22). — ‘He who has just taken part in a Śrāddha, — if he takes to his bed a Śūdra woman, he throws his forefathers into her ordure for three months.’

 

 

VERSE 3.192

Section X - Method of Invitation

 

अक्रोधनाः शौचपराः सततं ब्रह्मचारिणः ।
न्यस्तशस्त्रा महाभागाः पितरः पूर्वदेवताः ॥१९२॥

akrodhanāḥ śaucaparāḥ satataṃ brahmacāriṇaḥ |
nyastaśastrā mahābhāgāḥ pitaraḥ pūrvadevatāḥ ||192||

 

The Pitṛs are the foremost gods, free from anger, ever intent on purity, chaste, rid of all means of offence, and supremely blessed. — (192)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Free from anger’ — without wrath.

‘Intent on purity,’ — ‘purity’ standing either for external purity obtained by means of clay and water, or internal purity obtained by means of expiatory rites.

‘Ever’ — qualifies ‘purity.’ Hence the meaning is that, whenever one happens to spit or do any such unclean act, one should rinse one’s mouth immediately.

‘Chaste’ — avoiding all intercourse with women.

‘Rid of all means of offence — those by whom the means of offence have been laid aside. ‘Offence’ stands for roughness and strife of all kinds.

‘Supremely blessed;’ — ‘blessedness’ consists in the presence of such qualities as nobility, prosperity, and so forth.

Since it is in all this form that the Pitṛs enter into the body of the Brāhmaṇas, — therefore, the Brāhmaṇas also should assume these same forms; — this is what is enjoined by means of the commendatory description contained in the verse.

‘Foremost gods.’ — That in another time-cycle the ancestors were gods, is an eulogium bestowed on the ancestors. They are called ‘foremost’ because they are worshipped before the gods. — (192)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Hemādri (Śrāddha, pp. 61 and 1005), which adds the following notes ‘Akrodhanāḥ,’ free from anger, — ‘śaucaparāḥ’ is qualified by ‘satatam’, ‘always pure,’ — hence the invited should sip water immediatly on sneezing or spitting, — ‘brahmacāriṇaḥ,’ avoiding intercourse with women, — ‘nyastaśastrāḥ’, who have renounced cruelty, — ‘mahābhāgāḥ’, endowed with mercy, generosity and other such qualities; ‘since Fathers are such the invited who take their form, should also be so.’

 

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (9.14,17, 24). — ‘He should offer metallic vessels; — specially those of silver; — whatever is offered with a vessel — howsoever small — made of gold or silver or rhinoceros-horn or Udumbara wood, — becomes imperishable.’

Yājñavalkya (1. 237). — ‘The remnant of the oblations one should carefully offer into vessels, such as may be available; but specially in those of silver.’

 

 

VERSE 3.193 [Origin of the Pitṛs and the Mode of Worshipping them]

Section XI - Origin of the Pitṛs and the Mode of Worshipping them

 

यस्मादुत्पत्तिरेतेषां सर्वेषामप्यशेषतः ।
ये च यैरुपचर्याः स्युर्नियमैस्तान्निबोधत ॥१९३॥

yasmādutpattireteṣāṃ sarveṣāmapyaśeṣataḥ |
ye ca yairupacaryāḥ syurniyamaistānnibodhata ||193||

 

Now fully learn from whom all these have their origin and who are to be worshipped, by whom and by what roles. — (193)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

He from whom these — Pitṛs — ‘have their origin,’ and ‘who’ — which Pitṛs — ‘have to be worshipped by whom,’ i.e., the ‘Somapa’ Manes by Brāhmaṇas, the ‘Haviṣmat’ Pitṛs by Kṣatriyas, and so forth; — all this ‘learn fully,’ as described now.

‘Rules;’ — this is a mere reiterative reference; the rules having been already laid down in the words, ‘one should remain self-controlled, &c., &c.’ The plural number is due to there being a large number of rules. — (193)

 

 

VERSE 3.194

Section XI - Origin of the Pitṛs and the Mode of Worshipping them

 

मनोर्हैरण्यगर्भस्य ये मरीच्यादयः सुताः ।
तेषां ऋषीणां सर्वेषां पुत्राः पितृगणाः स्मृताः ॥१९४॥

manorhairaṇyagarbhasya ye marīcyādayaḥ sutāḥ |
teṣāṃ ṛṣīṇāṃ sarveṣāṃ putrāḥ pitṛgaṇāḥ smṛtāḥ ||194||

 

Of Manu, the son of Hiraṇyagarbha, Marīci and the rest were sons; and the sons of all these sages have been declared to constitute the “Body of Pitṛs.” — (194)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Hiraṇyagarbha’ is Prajāpati; his son is ‘Manu, the son of Hiraṇyagarbha;’ as has been declared under Discourse I — ‘Having created all this and myself, &c., &c.;’ — of this Manu, the sons were ‘Marīci and the rest’ — i.e., Atri, Aṅgiras, and so forth; and these constitute the ‘Body of Pitṛs,’ ‘Pitṛgaṇa.’

An objection is raised — “For every person, his own Father, &c., are his ‘Pitṛs.’ The injunctions also are in the words — ‘one should offer balls to his father, grandfather and great-grandfather;’ ‘after this, the sons should make offerings to three ancestors.’ What then is this that is being said now — that ‘the sons oft he sages are the Pitṛs,’ — or that ‘the Somapās are the Pitṛs of Brāhmaṇas?’ We cannot accept any such option as that — ‘one shall make an offering to the Somapā

Pitṛs,’ or ‘he shall make the offering to his father and grandfather;’ for the simple reason that in the original injunction we find the words ‘this should be done by the son;’ and ‘son’ is a relative term; and later on (verse 221) we read — ‘he whose father may be dead &c., &c.’ It has, therefore, got to be explained what is the real meaning of the present context,”

The answer to the above is as follows: — What the present verse contains is merely a commendatory description supplementary to the foregoing injunctions; and we never hear of the ‘Somapa’ and other Pitṛs spoken as the recipients of offerings.

“But there is the injunction (in 193) that these have to be worshipped.”

The root ‘chara’ (in ‘upacaryāḥ’) is denotative of mere action in general; and as such, it cannot form the subject of any injunction. In the Veda, we do not find any such action spoken of as ‘upacāra,’ in the same manner as the acts of sacrificing, giving and the like. In most cases, the root ‘chara’ is used, like the root ‘kṛ’ as pertaining to some other act mentioned in close proximity to it; and in the present case, the act mentioned in close proximity is that of offering the śrāddha. This latter act having been already enjoined as to be offered to a definite set of recipients, could not be again enjoined as to be offered to other recipients. If it were again the enjoined itself, then it would not be regarded as being in proximity to another enjoined act; and the presence of the root ‘chara’ distinctly precludes the possibility of any other act being understood, which is not in proximity to another enjoined act. As for such usages in ordinary parlance as ‘the Teacher should be worshipped,’ ‘guravaḥ upacaryāh’ (where we have the same term ‘upacaryāḥ’), there also the act that is understood to be expressed is service, in the form of washing the feet, and the like; and no such act as these is possible in connection with the Pitṛs, And so long as a passage is capable of being construed in a certain sense along with the context in which it occurs, there can be no justification for assuming another meaning for it. If the ‘Somapa’ and the rest had been really intended as the recepients of the Śrāddha offered by the several castes, then alone would there have been any use for the description of their birth, &c. (as found in the present verse). When, however, the verse is taken as a mere commendatory description, then any description might come in useful.

Hence, the conclusion is, that the present verse proceeds with a view to make those people undertake the performance of Śrāddha who may happen to have no regard for their ancestors, and hence having no inclination for doing any act on their behalf; — the purport being — ‘do not you think that the Pitṛs being dead men, what harm could they do if they were not satisfied at the Śrāddha, or what good they could do by being satisfied? — because they are, in reality, beings of tremendous power, being the grandsons of Manu; who is the son of Hiraṇyagarbha, the lord of the whole universe.’ It is for conveying this sense that the text has used the term, ‘of the sages;’ which means that they are not ordinary sons of Manu; it is those great sages, Marīci and the rest, who are known as possessed of great powers; and it is of such sages that the Pitṛs are the sons.

There are many people who would be led to the performance of Śrāddhas, just by means of such laudatory descriptions.

Some people explain the verse to mean that “one should look upon the Pitṛs as Somapa and the rest.

These, however, have to be disregarded; as there is no authority for any such notion. We have no such assertion to this effect, as we have in connection with the propriety of looking at the sun as Brahman.

Others, again, have offered the explanation that, what is meant is, that the rule being that ‘offerings to the Pitṛs should be made after pronouncing their gotra and name,’ and ‘Somapā,’ &c., are just the names that have to be pronounced in connection with the several castes.

This also is not right; since the expression used is “somapā nāma,” ‘by name Somapā,’ these must be names, not gotras.

“But the term ‘name’ would be applicable also when these were names of gotras only.”

If these were the names of gotras, then the two could not be in apposition; the proper form would be, ‘Somapā is the gotra of the Pitṛs,’ and not that ‘the Pitṛs are Somapa.’

“It is often found that the descendant is identified with his gotra, and the name of the latter is applied to the former; e.g, in such expressions as ‘Babhru is Mandu.’”

Our answer to this is as follows: — It has to be considered here what is it that is called ‘gotra,’ As a matter of fact, the ‘gotra’ of a family is its first progenitor who imparts his name to it, being the most renowned person by virtue of his possessing such qualities as learning, opulence, bravery, nobility and the like; and it is after him that the family becomes named. Thus it is that among Brāhmaṇas and others, there are sub-divisious of gotras. The personage whom his descendants remember with such feelings as ‘we are the descendants of such and such a person,’ would thus be the one after which that particular family should be named. As a matter of fact, however, no men are found to think of themselves as being ‘Somapā’ and thus regarding

‘Somapā’ as the name of their gotra; — in the manner in which people regard the names of ‘Bhṛgu’, ‘Garga’ and

‘Gālaya.’ It is by these latter names that the gotras of Brāhmaṇas should be known; as these are the principal gotras; the name ‘gotra’ applying to them by convention, and not by virtue of their fulfilling the condition mentioned in the above-mentioned definition that ‘the first progenitor, imparting his name to the family, is its gotra;’ in fact, ‘Bhṛgu,’ &c., have been known as ‘gotra’ from beginningless time, and their use in this sense is as much without beginning as the use of the caste-names, ‘Brāhmaṇa,’ and the rest. Prior to Parāśara’s birth, no Brāhmaṇas could have been named after him; hence, if the ‘gotra’ consisted in the first progenitor, &c., then the Veda (which makes mention of Parāśara as gotra) would have a beginning in time. Thus, then, since the use of the name ‘gotra’ is beginningless, it is this ‘gotra’ that is to be used in the pouring of water-libations. The persons imparting their names to families are not beginningless; they are modern; and at a Vedic rite, so long as one can make use of eternal names, there can be no justification for pronouncing names that have had a beginning in time. For these reasons, what the Brāhmaṇa should do when offering the libation of water, &c„ is to pronounce the appropriate ‘gotra- name’ — such as ‘may this offering go to the Gargya,’ or ‘to one belonging to the Garga-gotra’ — and then pronounce the name of the person.