Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Both Vishnu and Manu agree with the K4thaka in the use of the curious term abhinimrukta or abhinirmukta ; but - the same term is used by Apastamba, Vasish¢ha, and others. * Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 134. 5 Introduction to Bombay Digest, p. xxii. XXVill VISHNU. work, Ifthe latter remark were in need of further confirmation, it might be urged that the description of Vishzu as ‘ the boar of the sacrifice’ (yagfiavaraha) in the first chapter is bodily taken from the Harivamsa (2226-2237), while most of the epithets given to Vishvu in I, 49-61 and XCVIII, 7-100 may be found in another section of the Mahabhfrata, the so-called Vishzu-sahasrandma. Along with the introductory and final chapters, all those passages generally are distinctly traceable to the activity of the Vishzuitic editor, in which Vishvu (Purusha, Bhagavat, Vasudeva, &c.) is mentioned, or his dialogue with the goddess of the earth carried on, viz. 1; V, 193; XIX, 24; XX, 16-21; XXII, 93; XXIII, 46; XXIV, 35; XLVII, 10; XLIX; LXIV, 28, 29; LXV; LXVI; LXVII, 2; XC, 3-5, 17-23; XCVI, 97, 98; XCVII, 7-21; XCVIII-C. The short invocation addressed to Vishzu in LXVII, 12 is proved to be ancient by its recurrence in the corresponding chapter of the Ka¢#aka Grvzhyasitra,and Chapter LXV contains genuine K4¢aka Mantras transferred to a Vishzuitic ceremony. Chapter LXVI, on the other hand, though it does not refer to Vishzu by name, seems to be connected with the same Vishzuitic rite, and becomes further suspected by the recurrence of several of its rules in the genuine Chapter LX XIX. The contents of Chapter XCVII, in which it is attempted to reconcile some of the main tenets of the Sankhya system, as propounded in the Sankhya-karik4, Sankhya-pravazanabhashya, and other works, with the Vaishvava creed and with the Yoga; the fact that the two Slokas in XCVI (97, 98) and part of the Slokas in XCVII (15-21) have their parallel in similar Slokas of the Bhagavad-gita and of the Bhagavata-pur4za; the terms Mahatpati, Kapila, and Sankhy4é4rya, used as epithets of Vishvu (XCVIII, 26, 85, 86); and some other passages in the Vishzuitic chapters seem to favour the supposition that the editor may have been one of those members of the Vishzuitic sect of the Bhagavatas, who were conspicuous for their leaning towards the Sankhya and Yoga systems of philosophy. The arrangement of the Vishzu-sitra in a hundred chapters is no doubt due to the same person, as the Commentary points out that the num- INTRODUCTION. XXIX
2The arrangement of the Vishzu-sitra in a hundred chapters is no doubt due to the same person, as the Commentary points out that the num- INTRODUCTION. XXIX ber of the epithets given to Vishzu in XCVIII is precisely equal to the number of chapters into which the laws promulgated by him are divided (II-XCVII); though the number ninety-six is received only by including the introductory and final invocations (KCVIII, 6, 101) among the epithets of Vishvu. It seems quite possible, that some chapters were inserted mainly in order to bring up the whole figure to the round number of a hundred chapters, and it is for this reason chiefly that the majority of the following additions, which show no Vishzuitic tendencies, may also be attributed to the Vishzuitic editor. 1. Most or all of the Slokas added at the end of Chapters XX (22-53) and XLIII (32-45) cannot be genuine; the former on account of their great extent and partial recurrence in the Bhagavad-gita!, Mahabharata, and other works of general note, and because they refer to the self-immolation of widows and to K4la, whom the commentator is probably right in identifying with Vish#u ; the latter on account of their rather extravagant character and decidedly Purdnic style, though the Garuda-pur4ma, in its very long description of the hells, offers no strict parallel to the details given here. The verses in which the Brahmawas and cows are celebrated (XIX, 22, 23; XXIII, 57-61) are also rather extravagant ; however, some of them are Trish¢ubhs, and the verses in XIX are closely connected with the preceding Sdtras, The two final Slokas in LXXXVI (19, 20) may also be suspected as to their genuineness, because they are wanting in the corresponding chapter of the Kacdaka Grzhya-sitra ; and a number of other verses in divers places, because they have no parallel in the Smriti literature, or because they have been traced in comparatively modern works, such as the Bhagavad-gitd, the Pafizatantra, &c. 2. The week of the later Romans and Greeks, and of modern Europe (LXXVIII, 1-7), the self-immolation of widows (XXV, 14; cf. XX, 39), and the Buddhists and Pasupatas (LXIII, 36) are not mentioned in any ancient Sanskrit work. Besides, the passages in question may be easily removed, especially the Siitras referring to the seven days of the week, which 1 Besides the passages quoted in the notes, 50-53 nearly = Bhag.-gita II, 22-25. XXX VISHNU.
3Besides, the passages in question may be easily removed, especially the Siitras referring to the seven days of the week, which 1 Besides the passages quoted in the notes, 50-53 nearly = Bhag.-gita II, 22-25. XXX VISHNU. form clearly a subsequent addition to the enumeration of the Nakshatras and Tithis immediately following(LX XVIII, 8-50), and the rule concerning the burning of widows (X XV, 14), which is in direct opposition to the law concerning the widow’s right to inherit (XVII, 4) and to other precepts regarding widows. That the three terms kash4yin, pravragita, malina in LXIII, 36 refer to members of religious orders seems clear, but it may be doubted whether malina denotes the Pasupatas, and even whether kash4yin (cf. pravragita XXXVI, 7) denotes the Buddhists, as dresses dyed with Kash4ya are worn by Brahmanical sects also, and prescribed for students, and for ascetics likewise, by some of the Grihya- and Dharma-sitras. Still the antiquity of the Satra in question can hardly be defended, because the acquaintance of the Vishzuitic editor with the Buddhistic system of faith is proved by two other Sftras (XCVIII, 40, 41), and because the whole subject of good and evil omens is not treated in any other ancient Smviti. On the other hand, such terms as vedaninda and n4stikaté (XX XVII, 4, 31, &c.) recur in most Smrttis, and can hardly be referred to the Buddhists in particular. 3. The Tirthas enumerated in LXXXV, some of which are sacred to Vishzu and Siva, belong to all parts of India, and many of them are situated in the Dekhan, which was certainly not included within the limits of the ‘Ary4varta’ of the ancient Dharma-sitra (LXXXIV, 4). As no other Smrtti contains a list of this kind, the whole chapter may be viewed as a later addition. 4. The ceremonies described in XC are not mentioned in other Smrtis, while some of them are decidedly Vishzuitic, or traceable in modern works; and as all the Sftras in XC hang closely together, this entire chapter seems also to be spurious. 5. The repetitions in the list of articles forbidden to sell (LIV, 18-22); the addition of the two categories of atipatak4ni, ‘crimes in the highest degree,’ and prakirzakam, ‘miscellaneous crimes’ (XX XIII, 3,5; XXXIV; XLII), to Manu’s list of crimes; the frequent references to the Ganges river; and other such passages, which show a modern character, without being traceable in the Smrttis of Yagtiavalkya and Narada, may have been added by the Vish- INTRODUCTION. xxxi
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.
1Both Vishnu and Manu agree with the K4thaka in the use of the curious term abhinimrukta or abhinirmukta ; but - the same term is used by Apastamba, Vasish¢ha, and others. * Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 134. 5 Introduction to Bombay Digest, p. xxii. XXVill VISHNU. work, Ifthe latter remark were in need of further confirmation, it might be urged that the description of Vishzu as ‘ the boar of the sacrifice’ (yagfiavaraha) in the first chapter is bodily taken from the Harivamsa (2226-2237), while most of the epithets given to Vishvu in I, 49-61 and XCVIII, 7-100 may be found in another section of the Mahabhfrata, the so-called Vishzu-sahasrandma. Along with the introductory and final chapters, all those passages generally are distinctly traceable to the activity of the Vishzuitic editor, in which Vishvu (Purusha, Bhagavat, Vasudeva, &c.) is mentioned, or his dialogue with the goddess of the earth carried on, viz. 1; V, 193; XIX, 24; XX, 16-21; XXII, 93; XXIII, 46; XXIV, 35; XLVII, 10; XLIX; LXIV, 28, 29; LXV; LXVI; LXVII, 2; XC, 3-5, 17-23; XCVI, 97, 98; XCVII, 7-21; XCVIII-C. The short invocation addressed to Vishzu in LXVII, 12 is proved to be ancient by its recurrence in the corresponding chapter of the Ka¢#aka Grvzhyasitra,and Chapter LXV contains genuine K4¢aka Mantras transferred to a Vishzuitic ceremony. Chapter LXVI, on the other hand, though it does not refer to Vishzu by name, seems to be connected with the same Vishzuitic rite, and becomes further suspected by the recurrence of several of its rules in the genuine Chapter LX XIX. The contents of Chapter XCVII, in which it is attempted to reconcile some of the main tenets of the Sankhya system, as propounded in the Sankhya-karik4, Sankhya-pravazanabhashya, and other works, with the Vaishvava creed and with the Yoga; the fact that the two Slokas in XCVI (97, 98) and part of the Slokas in XCVII (15-21) have their parallel in similar Slokas of the Bhagavad-gita and of the Bhagavata-pur4za; the terms Mahatpati, Kapila, and Sankhy4é4rya, used as epithets of Vishvu (XCVIII, 26, 85, 86); and some other passages in the Vishzuitic chapters seem to favour the supposition that the editor may have been one of those members of the Vishzuitic sect of the Bhagavatas, who were conspicuous for their leaning towards the Sankhya and Yoga systems of philosophy. The arrangement of the Vishzu-sitra in a hundred chapters is no doubt due to the same person, as the Commentary points out that the num- INTRODUCTION. XXIX
2The arrangement of the Vishzu-sitra in a hundred chapters is no doubt due to the same person, as the Commentary points out that the num- INTRODUCTION. XXIX ber of the epithets given to Vishzu in XCVIII is precisely equal to the number of chapters into which the laws promulgated by him are divided (II-XCVII); though the number ninety-six is received only by including the introductory and final invocations (KCVIII, 6, 101) among the epithets of Vishvu. It seems quite possible, that some chapters were inserted mainly in order to bring up the whole figure to the round number of a hundred chapters, and it is for this reason chiefly that the majority of the following additions, which show no Vishzuitic tendencies, may also be attributed to the Vishzuitic editor. 1. Most or all of the Slokas added at the end of Chapters XX (22-53) and XLIII (32-45) cannot be genuine; the former on account of their great extent and partial recurrence in the Bhagavad-gita!, Mahabharata, and other works of general note, and because they refer to the self-immolation of widows and to K4la, whom the commentator is probably right in identifying with Vish#u ; the latter on account of their rather extravagant character and decidedly Purdnic style, though the Garuda-pur4ma, in its very long description of the hells, offers no strict parallel to the details given here. The verses in which the Brahmawas and cows are celebrated (XIX, 22, 23; XXIII, 57-61) are also rather extravagant ; however, some of them are Trish¢ubhs, and the verses in XIX are closely connected with the preceding Sdtras, The two final Slokas in LXXXVI (19, 20) may also be suspected as to their genuineness, because they are wanting in the corresponding chapter of the Kacdaka Grzhya-sitra ; and a number of other verses in divers places, because they have no parallel in the Smriti literature, or because they have been traced in comparatively modern works, such as the Bhagavad-gitd, the Pafizatantra, &c. 2. The week of the later Romans and Greeks, and of modern Europe (LXXVIII, 1-7), the self-immolation of widows (XXV, 14; cf. XX, 39), and the Buddhists and Pasupatas (LXIII, 36) are not mentioned in any ancient Sanskrit work. Besides, the passages in question may be easily removed, especially the Siitras referring to the seven days of the week, which 1 Besides the passages quoted in the notes, 50-53 nearly = Bhag.-gita II, 22-25. XXX VISHNU.
3Besides, the passages in question may be easily removed, especially the Siitras referring to the seven days of the week, which 1 Besides the passages quoted in the notes, 50-53 nearly = Bhag.-gita II, 22-25. XXX VISHNU. form clearly a subsequent addition to the enumeration of the Nakshatras and Tithis immediately following(LX XVIII, 8-50), and the rule concerning the burning of widows (X XV, 14), which is in direct opposition to the law concerning the widow’s right to inherit (XVII, 4) and to other precepts regarding widows. That the three terms kash4yin, pravragita, malina in LXIII, 36 refer to members of religious orders seems clear, but it may be doubted whether malina denotes the Pasupatas, and even whether kash4yin (cf. pravragita XXXVI, 7) denotes the Buddhists, as dresses dyed with Kash4ya are worn by Brahmanical sects also, and prescribed for students, and for ascetics likewise, by some of the Grihya- and Dharma-sitras. Still the antiquity of the Satra in question can hardly be defended, because the acquaintance of the Vishzuitic editor with the Buddhistic system of faith is proved by two other Sftras (XCVIII, 40, 41), and because the whole subject of good and evil omens is not treated in any other ancient Smviti. On the other hand, such terms as vedaninda and n4stikaté (XX XVII, 4, 31, &c.) recur in most Smrttis, and can hardly be referred to the Buddhists in particular. 3. The Tirthas enumerated in LXXXV, some of which are sacred to Vishzu and Siva, belong to all parts of India, and many of them are situated in the Dekhan, which was certainly not included within the limits of the ‘Ary4varta’ of the ancient Dharma-sitra (LXXXIV, 4). As no other Smrtti contains a list of this kind, the whole chapter may be viewed as a later addition. 4. The ceremonies described in XC are not mentioned in other Smrtis, while some of them are decidedly Vishzuitic, or traceable in modern works; and as all the Sftras in XC hang closely together, this entire chapter seems also to be spurious. 5. The repetitions in the list of articles forbidden to sell (LIV, 18-22); the addition of the two categories of atipatak4ni, ‘crimes in the highest degree,’ and prakirzakam, ‘miscellaneous crimes’ (XX XIII, 3,5; XXXIV; XLII), to Manu’s list of crimes; the frequent references to the Ganges river; and other such passages, which show a modern character, without being traceable in the Smrttis of Yagtiavalkya and Narada, may have been added by the Vish- INTRODUCTION. xxxi
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.