Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1of the Vaigayanti on a very great number of minor points, entirely omit the greater part of Chapter LXXXI 1 Biihler, Introduction to Apastamba, p. xliii. 2 Biihler loc. cit. tv) c XXXIV VISHNU. (3-22), the genuineness of which is proved by analogous passages in the other Smvztis'. An excellent copy of the Vaigayanti in possession of Dr. Bihler has, together with three London MSS. of that work and one London MS. containing the text only, enabled me to establish quite positively nearly in every case the readings sanctioned by Nandapazdita. I had hoped to publish a new edition of the text prepared from those MSS., and long ready for the press, before publishing my English version. This expectation has not been fulfilled, but it is hoped that in the mean time this attempt at a translation will be welcome to the students of Indian antiquity, and will facilitate the understanding of the text printed in Givananda Vidy4sagara’s cheap edition, which is probably in the hands of most Sanskrit scholars. The precise nature of the relation in which the text of my forthcoming edition stands to the Calcutta editions may be gathered from the large specimens of the text as given in the best MSS., that have been edited by Dr. Biihler in the Bombay Digest, and by myself in two papers published in the Transactions of the Royal Bavarian Academy of Science. Nandapavdita has composed, besides the Vaigayanti, a treatise on the law of adoption, called Dattaka-mimamsa*, a commentary on the code of Pardsara, a work called Vidvanmanohar4-smritisindhu, one called Sraddhakalpa-lata, and commentaries on the Mitakshara and on Adityakarya’s Asaukanirmaya. All these works belong to the province of Hindu law, and both his fertility as a writer in that branch of Indian science, and the reputation enjoyed by some of his works even nowadays, must raise a strong presumption in favour of his knowledge of the subject. The ' The first edition of the ‘ Vaishnava Dharmasdstra’ was published in Bengali type by Bhavantkaraza; the second, in Devanagart type, is contained in Givananda Vidyasagara’s Dharmashastrasangraha (1876). ? This work has been published repeatedly at Calcutta and Madras, and translated into English by Sutherland (1821), which translation has been reprinted in Stokes’ Hindu Law Books. The rest of the above list is made up from an enumeration of Nandapandita’s Tikds at the end of Dr. Biihler’s copy of the Vaigayantt, from an occasional remark in the latter work itself (XV, 9), and from Professor Weber's Catalogue of the Berlin Sanskrit MSS. INTRODUCTION. XXXV
2The rest of the above list is made up from an enumeration of Nandapandita’s Tikds at the end of Dr. Biihler’s copy of the Vaigayantt, from an occasional remark in the latter work itself (XV, 9), and from Professor Weber's Catalogue of the Berlin Sanskrit MSS. INTRODUCTION. XXXV general trustworthiness of his Commentary on the Vishzusdtra is further confirmed by the frequent references which it contains to the opinions of earlier commentators of that work ; and the wide extent of his reading, though he often makes an unnecessary display of it, has been eminently serviceable to him in tracing the connection of certain chapters and Mantras with the K4zsaka literature’, On the other hand, his very learning, combined with a strict adherence to the well-known theory of Hindu commentators regarding the absolute identity between the teaching of all Smritis, has frequently misled him into a too extensive method of interpretation. Even in commenting the Slokas he assigns in many cases an important hidden meaning to such particles as 4a, va, tatha, and others, and to unpretending epithets and the like, which have clearly been added for metrical reasons only*. This practice, besides being contrary to common sense, is nowhere countenanced by the authority of Kullika, in his remarks on the numerous identical Slokas found in the code of Manu. With the Sdtras generally speaking the case is different: many of them would be nearly or quite unintelligible without the explanatory remarks added in brackets from Nandapandita’s Commentary °, and in a number of those cases even, where his method jars upon a European mind, the clauses supplied by him are probably correct*. The same may be said of his interpretations of the epithets of Vishzu, excepting those which are based on utterly fanciful etymologies, 1 See the notes on LXV, 2 seq.; LXXIII, 5-9; LXXXVI, 13. In his Commentary on LXVII also Nandapandita states expressly that the description of the Vaisvadeva is according to the rites of the Katha-sakha. 2 For instances, see the notes on XX, 45; LXIV, 4o. 8 See e.g. Chapter V passim. * Thus nearly all the ‘intentionally’s’ and ‘unintentionally’s,’ &c., as supplied in the section on penances might seem superfluous, or even wrong ; but as in several places involuntary crimes are expressly distinguished from those intentionally committed (seee.g. XXVIII, 48, 51; XX XVIII, 7), and as in other cases a clause of this kind must needs be supplied (see XX XIX, 2; LII, 3; LIII, 5, &c.), Nandapandita is probably right in supplying it from other Smritis in most remaining cases as well. This method has occasionally carried him too far, when his explanations have not been given in the text. 5 See I, 51, 55; XCVIII, 40, 41, 46, &c. Cc 2 XXXV1 VISHNU.
3This method has occasionally carried him too far, when his explanations have not been given in the text. 5 See I, 51, 55; XCVIII, 40, 41, 46, &c. Cc 2 XXXV1 VISHNU. as the style of the introductory and final chapters is as artificial, though in another way, as the Satra style. Though, however, in works composed in the latter style, every a, va, or iti, &c., which is not absolutely required by the sense, was probably intended by their authors to convey a special meaning}, it is a question of evidence in every single case, whether those meanings which Nandapamdita assigns to these and other such particles and expletive words are the correct ones. In several cases of this or of a similar kind he is palpably wrong 2, and in many others the interpretations proposed by him are at least improbable, because the authoritative passages he quotes in support of them are taken from modern works, which cannot have been known to the author of the Vishwu-sitra. Interpretations of this class have, therefore, been given in the notes only ; and they have been omitted altogether in a number of cases where they appeared quite frivolous, or became too numerous, or could not be deciphered completely, owing to clerical mistakes in the MSS. But though it is impossible to agree with some of his general principles of interpretation, or with his application of them, Nandapamdita’s interpretations of difficult terms and Sitras are invaluable, and I have never deviated from them in my translation without strong reasons to the contrary, which have in most cases been stated in the notes’. Besides the extracts given in the notes, a few other passages from the Commentary and several other additions will be given in p. 312; and I must apologize to my readers for having to note along with the Addenda a number of Corrigenda, which will be found in the same page. In compiling the Index of Sanskrit words occurring in this work, which it has been thought necessary to add to the General Index, I have not aimed at completeness except as regards 1 For instances of this in the Dharma-siitras of Apastamba and Gautama, see Biihler, Apast. I, 2, 7, 24; 8,5; Gaut. V, 5, 14,17; 1X, 44; XIV, 45; XIX, 13-15, 20; XXI, g, &c.; and see also Dr. Biihler’s remarks on Gnapaka-sitras, Apast. I, 3, 11, 7; Gaut. I, 31, notes. 2? See V, 117; VII, 7; XXVII, 10; LI, 26; LXXI, 88; LXXIII, 9g; LXXIV, 1, 2, 7, &e. 3 Seee.g. XVII, 22; XVIII, 44; XXIV, 40; XXVIII, 5,11; LV, 20; LIX, 27, 29; LXIII, 36; LXIV, 18; LXVI, 6-8; XCII, 4; XCVII, 7. INTRODUCTION. XXXVii the names of deities and of penances. My forthcoming edition of the Sanskrit text will be accompanied by a full Index of words.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1of the Vaigayanti on a very great number of minor points, entirely omit the greater part of Chapter LXXXI 1 Biihler, Introduction to Apastamba, p. xliii. 2 Biihler loc. cit. tv) c XXXIV VISHNU. (3-22), the genuineness of which is proved by analogous passages in the other Smvztis'. An excellent copy of the Vaigayanti in possession of Dr. Bihler has, together with three London MSS. of that work and one London MS. containing the text only, enabled me to establish quite positively nearly in every case the readings sanctioned by Nandapazdita. I had hoped to publish a new edition of the text prepared from those MSS., and long ready for the press, before publishing my English version. This expectation has not been fulfilled, but it is hoped that in the mean time this attempt at a translation will be welcome to the students of Indian antiquity, and will facilitate the understanding of the text printed in Givananda Vidy4sagara’s cheap edition, which is probably in the hands of most Sanskrit scholars. The precise nature of the relation in which the text of my forthcoming edition stands to the Calcutta editions may be gathered from the large specimens of the text as given in the best MSS., that have been edited by Dr. Biihler in the Bombay Digest, and by myself in two papers published in the Transactions of the Royal Bavarian Academy of Science. Nandapavdita has composed, besides the Vaigayanti, a treatise on the law of adoption, called Dattaka-mimamsa*, a commentary on the code of Pardsara, a work called Vidvanmanohar4-smritisindhu, one called Sraddhakalpa-lata, and commentaries on the Mitakshara and on Adityakarya’s Asaukanirmaya. All these works belong to the province of Hindu law, and both his fertility as a writer in that branch of Indian science, and the reputation enjoyed by some of his works even nowadays, must raise a strong presumption in favour of his knowledge of the subject. The ' The first edition of the ‘ Vaishnava Dharmasdstra’ was published in Bengali type by Bhavantkaraza; the second, in Devanagart type, is contained in Givananda Vidyasagara’s Dharmashastrasangraha (1876). ? This work has been published repeatedly at Calcutta and Madras, and translated into English by Sutherland (1821), which translation has been reprinted in Stokes’ Hindu Law Books. The rest of the above list is made up from an enumeration of Nandapandita’s Tikds at the end of Dr. Biihler’s copy of the Vaigayantt, from an occasional remark in the latter work itself (XV, 9), and from Professor Weber's Catalogue of the Berlin Sanskrit MSS. INTRODUCTION. XXXV
2The rest of the above list is made up from an enumeration of Nandapandita’s Tikds at the end of Dr. Biihler’s copy of the Vaigayantt, from an occasional remark in the latter work itself (XV, 9), and from Professor Weber's Catalogue of the Berlin Sanskrit MSS. INTRODUCTION. XXXV general trustworthiness of his Commentary on the Vishzusdtra is further confirmed by the frequent references which it contains to the opinions of earlier commentators of that work ; and the wide extent of his reading, though he often makes an unnecessary display of it, has been eminently serviceable to him in tracing the connection of certain chapters and Mantras with the K4zsaka literature’, On the other hand, his very learning, combined with a strict adherence to the well-known theory of Hindu commentators regarding the absolute identity between the teaching of all Smritis, has frequently misled him into a too extensive method of interpretation. Even in commenting the Slokas he assigns in many cases an important hidden meaning to such particles as 4a, va, tatha, and others, and to unpretending epithets and the like, which have clearly been added for metrical reasons only*. This practice, besides being contrary to common sense, is nowhere countenanced by the authority of Kullika, in his remarks on the numerous identical Slokas found in the code of Manu. With the Sdtras generally speaking the case is different: many of them would be nearly or quite unintelligible without the explanatory remarks added in brackets from Nandapandita’s Commentary °, and in a number of those cases even, where his method jars upon a European mind, the clauses supplied by him are probably correct*. The same may be said of his interpretations of the epithets of Vishzu, excepting those which are based on utterly fanciful etymologies, 1 See the notes on LXV, 2 seq.; LXXIII, 5-9; LXXXVI, 13. In his Commentary on LXVII also Nandapandita states expressly that the description of the Vaisvadeva is according to the rites of the Katha-sakha. 2 For instances, see the notes on XX, 45; LXIV, 4o. 8 See e.g. Chapter V passim. * Thus nearly all the ‘intentionally’s’ and ‘unintentionally’s,’ &c., as supplied in the section on penances might seem superfluous, or even wrong ; but as in several places involuntary crimes are expressly distinguished from those intentionally committed (seee.g. XXVIII, 48, 51; XX XVIII, 7), and as in other cases a clause of this kind must needs be supplied (see XX XIX, 2; LII, 3; LIII, 5, &c.), Nandapandita is probably right in supplying it from other Smritis in most remaining cases as well. This method has occasionally carried him too far, when his explanations have not been given in the text. 5 See I, 51, 55; XCVIII, 40, 41, 46, &c. Cc 2 XXXV1 VISHNU.
3This method has occasionally carried him too far, when his explanations have not been given in the text. 5 See I, 51, 55; XCVIII, 40, 41, 46, &c. Cc 2 XXXV1 VISHNU. as the style of the introductory and final chapters is as artificial, though in another way, as the Satra style. Though, however, in works composed in the latter style, every a, va, or iti, &c., which is not absolutely required by the sense, was probably intended by their authors to convey a special meaning}, it is a question of evidence in every single case, whether those meanings which Nandapamdita assigns to these and other such particles and expletive words are the correct ones. In several cases of this or of a similar kind he is palpably wrong 2, and in many others the interpretations proposed by him are at least improbable, because the authoritative passages he quotes in support of them are taken from modern works, which cannot have been known to the author of the Vishwu-sitra. Interpretations of this class have, therefore, been given in the notes only ; and they have been omitted altogether in a number of cases where they appeared quite frivolous, or became too numerous, or could not be deciphered completely, owing to clerical mistakes in the MSS. But though it is impossible to agree with some of his general principles of interpretation, or with his application of them, Nandapamdita’s interpretations of difficult terms and Sitras are invaluable, and I have never deviated from them in my translation without strong reasons to the contrary, which have in most cases been stated in the notes’. Besides the extracts given in the notes, a few other passages from the Commentary and several other additions will be given in p. 312; and I must apologize to my readers for having to note along with the Addenda a number of Corrigenda, which will be found in the same page. In compiling the Index of Sanskrit words occurring in this work, which it has been thought necessary to add to the General Index, I have not aimed at completeness except as regards 1 For instances of this in the Dharma-siitras of Apastamba and Gautama, see Biihler, Apast. I, 2, 7, 24; 8,5; Gaut. V, 5, 14,17; 1X, 44; XIV, 45; XIX, 13-15, 20; XXI, g, &c.; and see also Dr. Biihler’s remarks on Gnapaka-sitras, Apast. I, 3, 11, 7; Gaut. I, 31, notes. 2? See V, 117; VII, 7; XXVII, 10; LI, 26; LXXI, 88; LXXIII, 9g; LXXIV, 1, 2, 7, &e. 3 Seee.g. XVII, 22; XVIII, 44; XXIV, 40; XXVIII, 5,11; LV, 20; LIX, 27, 29; LXIII, 36; LXIV, 18; LXVI, 6-8; XCII, 4; XCVII, 7. INTRODUCTION. XXXVii the names of deities and of penances. My forthcoming edition of the Sanskrit text will be accompanied by a full Index of words.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.