Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1the sacred law applicable to all Aryas. This fact is fully acknowledged by the Hindu tradition, even in cases where the Dharma-sitras no longer are the property of particular Vedic schools. The metrical Smvitis, on the other hand, are surrounded by clearly fictitious traditions, by mythological legends which either may have grown up spontaneously, because the real origin had been forgotten, or may have been fabricated intentionally in order to show that these works possess divine authority and, hence, have a claim to implicit obedience on the part of all Aryas. Nay, what is more, such legends or portions of them have been introduced into the text, and obscure the real character of the Smritis. These peculiarities are particularly marked in the M4nava Dharmasdstra, where the whole first chapter is devoted to the purpose of showing the mighty scope of the book, and of setting forth its divine origin as well as the manner in which it was revealed to mankind. Its opening verses narrate how the great sages approached Manu, the descendant of self-existent Brahman, and asked him to explain the sacred law. Manu agrees to their request, and gives to them an account of the creation as well as of his own origin from Brahman. After mentioning that he learnt ‘these Institutes of the Sacred Law’ from the creator who himself produced them, and that he taught them to the ten sages whom he created in the beginning, he transfers the work of expounding them to Bhvzgu, one of his ten mindborn sons. The latter begins his task by completing, as the commentators call it, Manu’s account of the creation. First he gives the theory of the seven Manvantaras, the Yugas, and other divisions of time, as well as an incidental description of the order of the creation. Next he briefly describes the duties of the four principal castes, passes then to an encomium of the Brahmaaas and of the Institutes of Manu, and winds up with an enumeration of the contents of all the twelve chapters of the work, which he promises to expound ‘exactly as it was revealed to him.’ In the following chapters we find frequent allusions to the situation which the first describes. In about forty passages a new INTRODUCTION. xiii topic is introduced by a prefatory verse which contains phrases like ‘such and such a matter has been explained to you, now listen to,’ &c., or ‘I will next declare,’ &c.
2In about forty passages a new INTRODUCTION. xiii topic is introduced by a prefatory verse which contains phrases like ‘such and such a matter has been explained to you, now listen to,’ &c., or ‘I will next declare,’ &c. Twice (V, 1-3 and XII, 1-2) the sages are represented as interrupting Bhyigu’s discourse and expressing their desire to be instructed on particular points, and on both occasions Bhyigu is again named as the narrator. Moreover in a number of verses! Manu is particularly mentioned as the author of certain rules, and II, 7 the authoritativeness of Manu’s teaching is emphatically asserted, ‘ because he was omniscient.’ In two other passages Manu appears, however, in different characters. VII, 42 he is enumerated among the kings who gained sovereignty by their humility, and XII, 123 he is identified with the supreme Brahman. This account of the origin of our Manu-smriti would have to be slightly modified by those who accept as genuine the verse? which stands at the beginning of the Smriti according to the commentators Govindar4ga, NarAyama, and RaghavAnanda, as well as according to the Kasmir copy and other MSS. As this verse contains an invocation of the selfexistent Brahman, and a promise to explain the laws which Manu taught, it indicates, as Govindaraga says', that ‘some pupil of Bhryigu recites the work which had descended to him through an unbroken line of teachers.’ According to this version we have, therefore, a triple exordium instead of a double one, and our Manu-smriti does not contain the original words of Bhvigu, but a recension of his recension such as it had been handed down among his pupils. The additional verse is apparently intended to make the story more plausible. The remarks which the commentators make on this narrative are scanty, and, though they are meant to support its credibility, they are, partly at least, calculated to discredit it. Medhatithi states in his remarks on Manu I,1, that the Pragapati Manu was ‘a particular individual, perfect 1 See the index s. v. Manu. ® See note on Manu I, 1. > ge epyfgre: afaefaferwatacranreparareeaterenne lt xiv LAWS OF MANU.
3Medhatithi states in his remarks on Manu I,1, that the Pragapati Manu was ‘a particular individual, perfect 1 See the index s. v. Manu. ® See note on Manu I, 1. > ge epyfgre: afaefaferwatacranreparareeaterenne lt xiv LAWS OF MANU. in the study of many branches of the Veda, in the knowledge (of its meaning) and in the performance (of its precepts), and known through the sacred tradition which has been handed down in regular succession!’ Govindaraga closely agrees, and says that Manu is ‘a great sage, who received his name on account of his acquaintance with the meaning of the whole Veda, who is known to all learned men through the tradition handed down in regular succession, and who is entrusted with causing the creation, preservation, and destruction (of the world)®.” Kullfka, on the other hand, though he agrees with respect to the etymology and explanation of Manu’s name, deriving it from man, ‘to know (the meaning of the Veda), and though he admits the human character of his SAstra, somewhat differs in the description of the person. Referring to XII, 123, he declares Manu to be a manifestation or incarnation of the supreme Soul. Further, Medhatithi and Kullika adduce in their remarks on the same verse various passages from the Sruti and the Smriti, tending to prove the authoritativeness of the Manu-smzzti. Both quote slightly varying versions of the famous Vedic passage which declares that ‘ All Manu said is medicine.’ Medhatithi adds only one more anonymous verse, to the effect that ‘the Vedas were proclaimed by the great sages, but the Smarta or traditional lore by Manu®.’ Kulldka gives two other passages, one from the Brihaspati-smriti which places Manu’s Sastra at the head of all works of the same class, and another from the Mahabharata which declares that ‘the Purdzas, Manu’s laws, the Vedas, and the medical works must not be opposed by (adverse) reasoning.’ Both commentators mention also that the pre-eminence of Manu’s teaching is admitted in other passages of the Vedas, the Purazas, the wiqcmnfag: 0 taqia weffamtertea menqds ermicmn waste. reaaiehy: wifeafarsrarcafuga: nu PAT ayfe ania wat wraturs 81 welding was one J aquaraty 0 INTRODUCTION. , XV
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.
1the sacred law applicable to all Aryas. This fact is fully acknowledged by the Hindu tradition, even in cases where the Dharma-sitras no longer are the property of particular Vedic schools. The metrical Smvitis, on the other hand, are surrounded by clearly fictitious traditions, by mythological legends which either may have grown up spontaneously, because the real origin had been forgotten, or may have been fabricated intentionally in order to show that these works possess divine authority and, hence, have a claim to implicit obedience on the part of all Aryas. Nay, what is more, such legends or portions of them have been introduced into the text, and obscure the real character of the Smritis. These peculiarities are particularly marked in the M4nava Dharmasdstra, where the whole first chapter is devoted to the purpose of showing the mighty scope of the book, and of setting forth its divine origin as well as the manner in which it was revealed to mankind. Its opening verses narrate how the great sages approached Manu, the descendant of self-existent Brahman, and asked him to explain the sacred law. Manu agrees to their request, and gives to them an account of the creation as well as of his own origin from Brahman. After mentioning that he learnt ‘these Institutes of the Sacred Law’ from the creator who himself produced them, and that he taught them to the ten sages whom he created in the beginning, he transfers the work of expounding them to Bhvzgu, one of his ten mindborn sons. The latter begins his task by completing, as the commentators call it, Manu’s account of the creation. First he gives the theory of the seven Manvantaras, the Yugas, and other divisions of time, as well as an incidental description of the order of the creation. Next he briefly describes the duties of the four principal castes, passes then to an encomium of the Brahmaaas and of the Institutes of Manu, and winds up with an enumeration of the contents of all the twelve chapters of the work, which he promises to expound ‘exactly as it was revealed to him.’ In the following chapters we find frequent allusions to the situation which the first describes. In about forty passages a new INTRODUCTION. xiii topic is introduced by a prefatory verse which contains phrases like ‘such and such a matter has been explained to you, now listen to,’ &c., or ‘I will next declare,’ &c.
2In about forty passages a new INTRODUCTION. xiii topic is introduced by a prefatory verse which contains phrases like ‘such and such a matter has been explained to you, now listen to,’ &c., or ‘I will next declare,’ &c. Twice (V, 1-3 and XII, 1-2) the sages are represented as interrupting Bhyigu’s discourse and expressing their desire to be instructed on particular points, and on both occasions Bhyigu is again named as the narrator. Moreover in a number of verses! Manu is particularly mentioned as the author of certain rules, and II, 7 the authoritativeness of Manu’s teaching is emphatically asserted, ‘ because he was omniscient.’ In two other passages Manu appears, however, in different characters. VII, 42 he is enumerated among the kings who gained sovereignty by their humility, and XII, 123 he is identified with the supreme Brahman. This account of the origin of our Manu-smriti would have to be slightly modified by those who accept as genuine the verse? which stands at the beginning of the Smriti according to the commentators Govindar4ga, NarAyama, and RaghavAnanda, as well as according to the Kasmir copy and other MSS. As this verse contains an invocation of the selfexistent Brahman, and a promise to explain the laws which Manu taught, it indicates, as Govindaraga says', that ‘some pupil of Bhryigu recites the work which had descended to him through an unbroken line of teachers.’ According to this version we have, therefore, a triple exordium instead of a double one, and our Manu-smriti does not contain the original words of Bhvigu, but a recension of his recension such as it had been handed down among his pupils. The additional verse is apparently intended to make the story more plausible. The remarks which the commentators make on this narrative are scanty, and, though they are meant to support its credibility, they are, partly at least, calculated to discredit it. Medhatithi states in his remarks on Manu I,1, that the Pragapati Manu was ‘a particular individual, perfect 1 See the index s. v. Manu. ® See note on Manu I, 1. > ge epyfgre: afaefaferwatacranreparareeaterenne lt xiv LAWS OF MANU.
3Medhatithi states in his remarks on Manu I,1, that the Pragapati Manu was ‘a particular individual, perfect 1 See the index s. v. Manu. ® See note on Manu I, 1. > ge epyfgre: afaefaferwatacranreparareeaterenne lt xiv LAWS OF MANU. in the study of many branches of the Veda, in the knowledge (of its meaning) and in the performance (of its precepts), and known through the sacred tradition which has been handed down in regular succession!’ Govindaraga closely agrees, and says that Manu is ‘a great sage, who received his name on account of his acquaintance with the meaning of the whole Veda, who is known to all learned men through the tradition handed down in regular succession, and who is entrusted with causing the creation, preservation, and destruction (of the world)®.” Kullfka, on the other hand, though he agrees with respect to the etymology and explanation of Manu’s name, deriving it from man, ‘to know (the meaning of the Veda), and though he admits the human character of his SAstra, somewhat differs in the description of the person. Referring to XII, 123, he declares Manu to be a manifestation or incarnation of the supreme Soul. Further, Medhatithi and Kullika adduce in their remarks on the same verse various passages from the Sruti and the Smriti, tending to prove the authoritativeness of the Manu-smzzti. Both quote slightly varying versions of the famous Vedic passage which declares that ‘ All Manu said is medicine.’ Medhatithi adds only one more anonymous verse, to the effect that ‘the Vedas were proclaimed by the great sages, but the Smarta or traditional lore by Manu®.’ Kulldka gives two other passages, one from the Brihaspati-smriti which places Manu’s Sastra at the head of all works of the same class, and another from the Mahabharata which declares that ‘the Purdzas, Manu’s laws, the Vedas, and the medical works must not be opposed by (adverse) reasoning.’ Both commentators mention also that the pre-eminence of Manu’s teaching is admitted in other passages of the Vedas, the Purazas, the wiqcmnfag: 0 taqia weffamtertea menqds ermicmn waste. reaaiehy: wifeafarsrarcafuga: nu PAT ayfe ania wat wraturs 81 welding was one J aquaraty 0 INTRODUCTION. , XV
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.