The Bhagavadgîtâ, with the Sanatsugâtîya and the Anugîtâ — SBE Vol. 8 (trans. K. T. Telang, 1882)

Open to allEdited by F. Max Müller; translated by Müller, Legge, Bühler, West, Darmesteter, Palmer, Telang, Thibaut, Jolly, Rhys Davids, Oldenberg, Jacobi, Bloomfield and others2259 segments · 127 pp
page 183

The translator’s English as printed (K. T. Telang). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.

The men who act thus have their places in hell. Frenzy has eighteen defects—as already described here—hatred of men, factiousness¹, censoriousness, untruthful speech, lust, wrath, want of self-control², speaking ill of others, backbiting, mismanagement in business*, quarrelsomeness, animosity, troubling living creatures, want of forgiveness, delusion, flippancy, loss of reason‘, censoriousness⁵ ; therefore a wise man should not be subject to frenzy, for it is always censured. Six characteristics should be understood as (belonging) to friendship—that one should rejoice at (anything) agreeable; and feel grieved at (anything) disagreeable; that with a pure heart one, when asked by a deserving (man), should give to him who asks what can⁶ certainly be given, (though it) may be beneficial to oneself, and even though it ought not to be asked, (namely) one’s favourites, sons, wealth, and one’s own wife; that one should not dwell there where one has bestowed (all one’s) wealth, through a desire (to get a return for one’s liberality) ; that one should enjoy

1 One copy of Sañkara’s commentary says this means * obstructing other people’s acts of piety,’ &c.

2 One copy of Sankara’s commentary says ‘this means ‘being given up to intoxicating drinks,’ &c.; another copy says, ‘doing another’s bidding without thought.’

8 One copy says this means ‘inattention to any work undertaken;’ another renders the original by ‘ destruction of property, i.e. squandering it on dancers,’ &c.

4 L.e. discrimination between right and wrong.

5 This seems to be some error, for ‘censoriousness ? has occurred before. But neither the texts nor the commentaries give any help to correct the error. Perhaps the latter is to be distinguished as referring to the habit, and the former only to sporadic acts, of censoriousness. These qualities, I presume, constitute frenzy ; they are not the ‘ defects.’

6 [i.e. where the power to give exists.

page 183

The men who act this way have their places in hell. Frenzy has eighteen defects—as already described here—hatred of men, factiousness¹, censoriousness, untruthful speech, lust, wrath, want of self-control², speaking ill of others, backbiting, mismanagement in business*, quarrelsomeness, animosity, troubling living creatures, want of forgiveness, delusion, flippancy, loss of reason', censoriousness⁵; therefore a wise man should not be subject to frenzy, for it is always censured. Six characteristics should be understood as belonging to friendship—that one should rejoice at anything agreeable and feel grieved at anything disagreeable; that with a pure heart one should, when asked by a deserving man, give to whoever asks what can⁶ certainly be given, even if it may be beneficial to oneself and even if it ought not to be asked for, namely one's favourites, sons, wealth, and one's own wife; that one should not continue to live among those on whom one has bestowed all one's wealth, out of desire for a return on that generosity; that one should enjoy

1 One copy of Sañkara's commentary says this means 'obstructing other people's acts of piety,' etc.

2 One copy of Sankara's commentary says 'this means 'being given up to intoxicating drinks,' &c.; another copy says, 'doing another's bidding without thought.'

8 One copy says this means 'inattention to any work undertaken;' another renders the original by 'destruction of property, i.e. squandering it on dancers,' &c.

4 I.e. discrimination between right and wrong.

5 This appears to be some error, since 'censoriousness' has already occurred. Neither the texts nor the commentaries offer any help in correcting it. Perhaps the two can be distinguished: the latter referring to the habitual disposition, the former only to isolated acts, of censoriousness. These qualities, I take it, constitute frenzy; they are not the 'defects.'

6 [i.e. where the power to give exists.

Commentary
page 183 ·

No commentary for this page.

There is commentary on pages 1, 2.