Book 13 edition notes 201–300

By Sakti is implied kamadidamanasamarthyam and by dhriti purvapraptasya atyagah. The last half of the last line of verse 25 is rendered erroneously by both the vernacular translators. Adhering to the commentator's explanation, they add their own interpretation which is different. This sort of jumble is very peculiar.

Linga means signs or indications. A Lingin is one that bears signs and indications. Brahmanam (in both places) means one conversant with Brahman. The first, that is, Lingin implies either a Brahmacharin or a Sanyasin that always bears the marks of his order. An Alingin is one that is divested of such marks. Yudhishthira's question is, who, amongst these, should be considered worthy of gifts?

The sense is that with respect to acts having reference to only the Pitris the conduct and competence of Brahmanas should be examined.

The commentator explains that five persons are mentioned in the question of Yudhishthira, K. P. Singha omits one. The Burdwan translator repeats the words of the original without any explanation. I take sambandhi to mean relatives by marriage. To this day, in all India, people make gifts or presents unto sons-in-law, etc.

The sense is that no sin can touch a Brahmana who observes these three acts. These three acts are efficacious in washing away all sins. The commentator points out that by this the attributes of birth and knowledge are referred to.

By good conduct is implied modesty and candour.

Anekantam is explained by the commentator as Anekaphalakaram, i.e., of diverse kinds of fruits. The fruits attainable by a correct discharge of duties are of diverse kinds, because the objects of those duties, called Palms are of various kinds.

Verse 22 contains 4 substantives in the genitive plural. All those are connected with vishtham in the previous verse. The commentator points out this clearly. Those living in the outskirts of towns and villages are tanners and other low castes. They who publish the acts and omissions of others are regarded as very vile persons, equivalent to such low caste men mentioned above. It is difficult to differ from the commentator, but it seems that genitives in the verse as are used for datives, in which case the meaning would be that they who give unto such persons shall also sink into hell. The Burdwan translator gives a ridiculous version of verse 22.

The Bengal reading Brahmacharyya is better than the Bombay reading of that word in the accusative. Bhishma apparently gives two answers. These however involve three. By maryyada is meant boundaries or limits. The duties of men have known bounds. To transgress those bounds would be to transgress duty. The highest indication of Righteousness is samah or absence of desire for all worldly objects; hence Renunciation.

i.e., by making gifts unto even a single such Brahmana, one rescues all the ancestors and descendants of one's race.

One makes gifts unto the deities, the Pitris, and unto human beings. There is a time for each kind of gift. If made untimely, the gift, instead of producing any merit, becomes entirely futile, if not sinful. Untimely gifts are appropriated by Rakshasas. Even food that is taken untimely, does not strengthen the body but goes to nourish the Rakshasas and other evil beings.

i.e., any food, a portion of which has been eaten by any of these persons, is unworthy of being given away. If given, it is appropriated by Rakshasas. One incompetent to utter Om is, of course, a Sudra.

The speaker, by first mentioning who are unworthy, means to point out those that are worthy.

Apasmara is a peculiar kind of epilepsy in which the victim always thinks that he is pursued by some monster who is before his eyes. When epilepsy is accompanied by some delusion of the sensorium, it comes to be called by Hindu physicians as Apasmara.

An Agrani or Agradani is that Brahmana unto whom the food and other offerings to the Preta in the first Sraddha are given away. Such a person is regarded as fallen.

When corpses are taken to crematoria, certain rites have to be performed upon them before they can be consumed. Those Brahmanas that assist at the performance of those rites are regarded as fallen.

Sometimes the father of a daughter bestows her upon a bridegroom under the contract that the son born of that daughter by her husband should be the son of the daughter's father. Such a son, who is dissociated from the race of his own father, is called a Putrika-putra.

Anugraham is that merit in consequence of which faults become neutralised and the stained person may come to be regarded as deserving.

As Drona, Aswatthaman, Kripa, Rama and others.

Uditastamita means one who having earned wealth spends it all in gifts. Astamitodita is one who though poor at first succeed in earning wealth afterwards; i.e., one who having become rich, keeps that wealth for spending it on good purposes.

Upon the completion of a Sraddha, the Brahmana who is officiating at it should utter the words yukta which means well-applied. Certain other words such as Swadha, etc., have to be uttered. The meaning is that the Brahmana who assists the performer of the Sraddha by reciting the Mantras should, upon completion, say unto the performer that the Sraddha is well-performed. As the custom is, these words are still uttered by every Brahmana officiating at Sraddhas.

K. P. Singha wrongly renders the word somakshayah as equivalent to somarasah.

Upon the conclusion of a Sraddha or other rites, the Brahmana who officiates at it, addresses certain other Brahmanas that are invited on the occasion and says,--Do you say Punyaham--The Brahmana addressed say,--Om, let it be Punyaham!--By Punyaham is meant sacred day.

The fact is, the slaughter of animals in a sacrifice leads to no sin but if slaughtered for nothing (i.e., for purposes of food only), such slaughter leads to sin.

One is said to become impure when a birth or a death occurs among one's cognates of near degree. The period of impurity varies from one day to ten days in case of Brahmanas. Other periods have been prescribed for the other orders. During the period of impurity one cannot perform one's daily acts of worship, etc.

In this country, to this day, there are many persons that go about begging, stating that they desire to go to Banaras or other places of the kind. Sometimes alms are sought on the ground of enabling the seeker to invest his son with the sacred thread or perform his father's Sraddha, etc. The Rishi declares such practices to be sinful.

Literally that are afraid of thieves and others. The sense, of course, is that have suffered at the hands of thieves and others and are still trembling with fear.

The two exceptions have been much animadverted upon by unthinking persons. I have shown that according to the code of morality, that is in vogue among people whose Christianity and civilisation are unquestionable, a lie may sometimes be honourable. However casuists may argue, the world is agreed that a lie for saving life and even property under certain circumstances, and for screening the honour of a confiding woman, is not inexcusable. The goldsmith's son who died with a lie on his lips for saving the Prince Chevalier did a meritorious act. The owner also who hides his property from robbers, cannot be regarded as acting dishonourably.

By selling the Vedas is meant the charging of fees for teaching them. As regards the Vedas, the injunction in the scriptures is to commit them to memory and impart them from mouth to mouth. Hence to reduce them into writing was regarded as a transgression.

In this country to this day, the act of marrying a helpless person with a good girl by paying all the expenses of the marriage, is regarded as an act of righteousness. Of course, the man that is so married is also given sufficient property for enabling him to maintain himself and his wife.

Articles needed in marriages are, of course, girls and ornaments.

Vapra has various meanings. I think, it means here a field. Large waste lands often require to be enclosed with ditches and causeways. Unless so reclaimed, they cannot be fit for cultivation.

The river Chenab in the Punjab was known in former times by the name of Chandrabhaga. So the river Jhelum was known by the name of Vitasta.

The sense is that one proceeds to the region of the Apsaras and becomes an object of respect there.

i.e., one acquires sovereignty.

It is difficult to understand the connection of the second line of verse 31. It does not mean enters the eternal region called Andhaka that rests on nothing. Human sacrifices were performed sometimes in former days.

Nyastani has Gangayam understood after it.

The deities are supported by the offerings made in sacrifices. These offerings consist of the productions of the Earth and the butter produced by the cow. The deities, therefore, are said to be chiefly supported by the Earth and the Cow. The Asuras, by afflicting the Earth and killing kine, used to weaken the deities.

The river Ganga has three courses. On Earth it is called Bhagirathi or Ganga; in heaven it is called Mandakini; and in the nether regions it is known by the name of Bhogabati.

Devesh is lit. the lord of the deities; but here it means the King or Emperor.

Aranyaih is explained by the commentator as implying courses of conduct leading to Brahmaloka.

The story referred to is this: King Sagara of the solar (?) race had sixty thousand sons, all of whom were reduced to ashes by the curse of Kapila. Afterwards Bhagiratha, a prince of the same race, brought down Ganga from heaven for their redemption.

Identical with the universe because capable of conferring the fruition of every wish. Vrihati--literally, large or vast, is explained by the commentator as implying foremost or superior.

Madhumatim is explained as conferring the fruits of all good actions.

Viswam avanti iti. Here the absence of num is arsha.

Bhuvanasya is swargasya.

The construction of this verse is not difficult though the order of the words is a little involved. Both the vernacular translators have misunderstood it completely.

Kurute may mean also makes. The sense is that the Brahmana grants to others whatever objects are desired by them. In his own case also, he creates those objects that he himself desires. His puissance is great and it is through his kindness that others get what they wish or seek.

Ekaramah is one who sports with one's own self, i.e., who is not dependant on others for his joy or happiness; one who has understood the soul.

Dasatirdasa is ten times hundred or one thousand Dasati, like Saptati, Navati, etc., means ten times ten. Both the Vernacular translators have erred in rendering the word.

Teshu (Brahmaneshu) Vahumanaprah (san) kan namsvasi--this is the Grammar, as explained by the commentator.

Yajanti with reference to truth and righteousness means worship, and with reference to land kine means give away.

Pigeons pick up scattered grains and never store for the morrow. In the Sila and other vows, the picking up of scattered and cast off grains from the field after the crops have been taken away by the owners, is recommended as the means of filling the stomach.

The aggregate of three is Righteousness, Wealth, and Pleasure. Persons who, in all the acts they do, keep an eye upon these three, are said to have their aggregate of three existing in all their acts.

Some texts read vriddhan for Ishtan. If the former reading be adopted, the meaning would be that kings should worship all aged Brahmanas possessed of Vedic lore.

Though really conversant with all duties, and of righteous behaviour, the Brahmanas, nevertheless, for concealing their real natures or for protecting the world, are seen to be employed in diverse kinds of occupations.

The argument, therefore, is that anything given to the Brahmana to eat and that is eaten by him apparently, is really eaten by these deities.

Bhutatmanah is explained by the commentator as Bhuta praptahvasikritahatma yaih.

The second line of verse 18 is a crux. The commentator explains that prakshipya means dattwa; Kun is the Earth. Van is diptim ukrvan, ubhaya-loke iti seshah. Para- [This footnote appears to have been truncated, as the last line begins with a hyphenated word.--JBH.]

The dark spots on the Moon were due to the curse of Daksha. The waters of the Ocean became saltish owing to the curse of a Rishi.

The sense is that one becomes a Brahmana by birth alone, without the aid of those purificatory rites that have been laid down in the scriptures. When food is cooked, none else than a Brahmana is entitled in the first portion thereof.

The commentator thinks that saudram karma has especial reference to the service of others. Hence what is interdicted for the Brahmanas is the service of others.

In this country to this day, when food is prepared in view of guests invited to a house, no portion of such food can be offered to any one before it is dedicated to the deities and placed before those for whom it is intended. An exception, however, is made for children. What is stated here is that a good Brahmana can take the precedence of even children in the matter of such food.

What is stated here is that those Brahmanas that do not accept gifts are very superior. Their energy and might are great. Bhishma directs Yudhishthira to be always careful of how he would treat such superior Brahmanas. After rakshyam, the words swakulam are understood. The Burdwan translator misunderstands the second line of the verse.

The construction is Etat Brahmana-mukhat sastram, yat srutwaiha pravartate, prithivyam etc, etc. Both the vernacular translators have misunderstood the verse.

Etat karanam seems to refer to Brahmana-mukhat sastram. The sense seems to be that in the encounter between the deities and the Asuras the power of the Brahmanas was abundantly proved, for Sukra aided the Asuras with his Mantras and incantations, while Vrihaspati and others aided the deities by the same means.

In some of the Bengal texts for Bhumiretau the reading Bhumireto occurs. The fact is, the latter is a misprint or a mere clerical error. The etau has reference to the two mentioned in the second line. The Burdwan translator actually takes Bhumireto as a correct reading and makes nonsense of the verse.

I expand this verse. After kriya bhavati patratwam is understood. Kriya includes the diverse objects for which persons solicit alms or gifts. Upansuvratam is maunam parivrajyam.

It is said that food or other things, when given to an undeserving person, feels grief. What Yudhishthira asks is who the proper person is unto whom gifts may be made.

All these acts should be performed with purity of intention and according to the ordinances of the scriptures. For example, sacrifices should not be performed with vanity or pride. The Vedas should not be studied without faith. Children should not be procreated from lust, etc.

Such words are unseizable and unintelligible for their depth of meaning. Women are equally unseizable and unintelligible.

The sense is this: women agitate the hearts of those that treat them with respect as of those that treat them with disdain. The commentator explains that Pujitah dhikkritahva tulyavat vikaram janayati.

All living creatures are virtuous, for they are capable of progressing towards godship by their own acts.

Pura has little force here, implying 'first'. In the first place, know that I have come to thee,

Ladies spoke in Prakrita and not in Sanskrit. The latter is refined, the former is unrefined. Hence Indra's surprise at hearing Sanskrit words from the lady's lips.

The adana ceremony was a rite in course of which friends and kinsmen had to make presents unto the person performing the ceremony. The investiture with the sacred-thread, marriage, the rite performed in the sixth and the ninth month of pregnancy, are all ceremonies of this kind.

It would be curious to see how the commentator Nilakantha seeks to include within these five the eight forms of marriage mentioned by Manu. The fact is, such parts of the Mahabharata are unquestionably more ancient than Manu. The mention of Manu is either an instance of interpolation or there must have been an older Manu upon whose work the Manu we know has been based. The Asura and the Rakshasa forms are unequivocally condemned. Yet the commentator seeks to make out that the Rakshasa form is open to the Kshatriyas. The fact is, the Rakshasa was sometimes called the Paisacha. The distinction between those two forms was certainly of later origin.

Thus, there was no difference, in status, in ancient times, between children born of a Brahmana, a Kshatriya or a Vaisya mother. The difference of status was of later origin.

Nagnika is said to be one who wears a single piece of cloth. A girl in whom the signs of puberty have not appeared does not require more than a single piece of cloth to cover her. The mention of Nagnika, the commentator thinks, is due to an interdiction about wedding a girl of even ten years in whom signs of puberty have appeared.

When a father happens to have an only daughter, he frequently bestows her in marriage upon some eligible youth on the understanding that the son born of her shall be the son, for purposes of both Sraddha rites and inheritance, not of the husband begetting him but of the girl's father. Such a contract would be valid whether expressed or not at the time of marriage. The mere wish of the girl's father, unexpressed at the time of marriage, would convert the son into a son not of the father who begets him but of the father of the girl herself. A daughter reserved for such a purpose is said to be a putrikadharmini or 'invested with the character of a son.' To wed such a girl was not honourable. It was in effect an abandonment of the fruits of marriage. Even if dead at the time of marriage, still if the father had, while living, cherished such a wish, that would convert the girl into a putrikadharmini. The repugnance to wedding girls without father and brothers exists to this day.

For understanding the meanings of Sapinda and Sagotra see any work on Hindu law civil or canonical.

These verses are exceedingly terse. The commentator explains that what is intended is that under the third and fourth circumstances the giver of the girl incurs no sin; under the second, the bestower of the girl (upon a person other than he unto whom a promise had been made) incurs fault. The status of wife, however, cannot attach simply in consequence of the promise to bestow upon the promiser of the dower. The relationship of husband and wife arises from actual wedding. For all that, when the kinsmen meet and say, with due rites, 'This girl is this one's wife,' the marriage becomes complete. Only the giver incurs sin by not giving her to the promised person.

Hence, having promised to wed such a one, she is at liberty to give him over and wed another whom she likes.

In consequence of that boon no one incurs sin by retracting promises of bestowing daughters upon others in view of more eligible husbands.

Hence, no one should bestow his daughter upon a person that is not eligible, for the offspring of such marriage can never be good and such a marriage can never make the daughter's sire or kinsmen happy.

One of the most important rites of marriage is the ceremony of circumambulation. The girl is now borne around the bride-groom by her kinsmen. Formerly, she used to walk herself. All gifts, again, are made with water. The fact is, when a thing is given away, the giver, uttering the formula, sprinkles a drop of water upon it with a blade of Kusa grass.

Hence, what Savitri did at the bidding of her sire could not be against the course of duty or morality. The Burdwan translator has misunderstood the second line of this verse, while K.P. Singha has quietly dropped it.

Dharmasya refers to the true or correct or eternal Aryan usage, Pradanam is khandanam, from da, to cut. The sense is that the grant of liberty to women is an Asura practice.

Hence, no one should wed, led by desire alone. Nor should the maiden be permitted to choose for herself. She may be guided in her choice by improper considerations connected with only carnal pleasure.

The property is divided into five parts, two of which are taken by the daughter under such circumstances and three by the son.

I expand the verse for making it intelligible, by setting forth the reasons urged by Hindu lawyers and noticed by the commentator.

Valatah vasyam implies only those whose consent is obtained by force. Hence, such cases as those of Krishna abducting Rukmini and Arjuna abducting Subhadra, are excluded from this denunciation.

The maiden may herself accept ornaments. That would not convert the transaction into a sale.

Swalpa-kaupinah literally is covered with a small piece of cloth, hence, capable of being easily seduced.

i.e., he should not acquire for storing. He may acquire to spend in sacrifices and gifts or for maintaining himself and his family.

i.e., if the Brahmana, led by affection for any other wife, disregards the wife belonging to his own order and shows preference for those of the other orders, he then incurs the liability of being regarded as a Chandala that has come to be numbered among Brahmanas.

The sense of this verse seems to be this: If a Brahmana takes in succession three spouses all belonging to his own order, the son born of his first wife shall take the share that is allotted to the eldest; that born of the second wife shall take a share next in value; and that born of the youngest wife shall take the share allotted to the youngest. After such especial shares are taken, the residue of the property is to be distributed unto equal shares each of which shall be taken by each of the children. If this interpretation be correct, it would appear that the contention waged some years ago in Bengal, that the scriptures do not allow a person the liberty of taking more than one spouse from his own order, falls to the ground. Upon other grounds also, that contention was absurd, for Kshatriya kings often took more than one Kshatriya spouse.

i.e., each order was created for performing sacrifices. The Sudra is competent to perform sacrifice. Only his sacrifice should be by serving the three other orders.

For them there is no investiture with the sacred-thread.

Broken earthenpots are always cast off. They are some times utilised by persons of the lower orders.