Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1H. Wilson, Vishsru-purasa, vol. i, pp. 104-5 (ed. Hall); Professor Hopkins, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. xi, pp. 247-256. (25) e Ixvi LAWS OF MANU. revision. Toa certain extent we may also avail ourselves of the Vishzu-smriti for the same purpose. But a greater degree of caution will be necessary, as this work, though in the main a representative of the Kassaka Dharma-sitra, contains also an admixture of modern elements. On the other hand, those rules and discussions which cannot be traced in one of the old Sftras, are at least suspicious, and require careful consideration. The ultimate decision, if such passages have indeed to be considered as additions, must depend on various collateral circumstances. The safest criterion will always be the character of the ideas which they express. If these are entirely foreign to the Sftras or to Vedic literature, they may be confidently rejected as interpolations. A good deal depends also on their position and on the manner in which they fit into the context. Numerous cases will, however, remain doubtful. If we examine Manu’s text according to these principles, the more important results will be as follows :—The whole first chapter must be considered as a later addition. No Dharma-sitra begins with a description of its own origin, much less with an account of the creation. The former, which would be absurd in a Dharma-sitra, has been added in order to give authority to a remodelled version. The latter has been dragged in, because the myths connected with Manu presented a good opportunity ‘to show the greatness of the scope of the work,’ as Medhatithi says. The table of contents, given at the end of chapter I, was, of course, also foreign to the original Sdtra. Chapters II-VI, on the other hand, seem to represent with tolerable faithfulness the contents of the corresponding sections of the Manava Dharma-sitra. Nearly all the rules are found in the other Dharma-sitras and in the Vishzu-sm7iti, and more than three-fourths of the verses find counterparts in the aphorisms and verses of the older law-books. Nevertheless, the hand of the remodeller is not rarely visible. There are, besides the verses which announce the transition from one subject to the other, a considerable number of smaller and some 1 These verses probably mark the subdivisions of the Adhyayas, the Kanaikas or Khasdas of the ancient Sftra. INTRODUCTION. Ixvii
2There are, besides the verses which announce the transition from one subject to the other, a considerable number of smaller and some 1 These verses probably mark the subdivisions of the Adhyayas, the Kanaikas or Khasdas of the ancient Sftra. INTRODUCTION. Ixvii larger interpolations. To the latter belong, in the second chapter, vv. I-11 and wv. 88-100. The first passage gives a philosophical account of the origin of actions (1-5), such as is not found in any older law-book ; further, a verse (v. 6) stating the sources of the sacred law, which is unnecessary on account of v. 12, and suspicious on account of the double description of the third source of the law, by the synonymous terms sila and 4#4ra’. The contents of the remaining verses, the praise of the Manu-smriti(v. 7), the advice how the different authorities are to be studied (v. 8), the declaration of the reward for obedience to the revealed texts (v. 9), the definition of the terms Sruti and Smr‘ti, and the declaration of their authoritativeness, are likewise superfluous, and clearly later enlargements. The second passage (vv. 88-100), which enumerates the organs of sensation and action and teaches the necessity of controlling them, interrupts the continuity of the text very needlessly, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the matter treated of. Among the smaller interpolations in this chapter, vv. 13, 16, 27, 28, 142, 143, 213-215, 221, and 239 must certainly be reckoned. It also seems probable that the passage on the importance of the syllable Om, of the Vy4hritis, and of the Savitri (vv. 76-87), as well as that on the humility and meekness required of a Brahmana (vv. 160-163), and that on the worship due to parents and a teacher (vv. 225-237), have been enlarged, though in each case something of the kind may have occurred in the Dharma-sfitra. Inthe third chapter, there is one longer passage (vv. 192-201) which, beyond all doubt, has been added by a later hand. For the classification of the Manes, which it contains, is in this form foreign to Vedic literature. More doubtful are the discussions on the duty of conjugal intercourse (vv. 46-50), on the honour due to women (vv. 55-60), on the excellence of the order of householders (vv. 79-80), and on the results of inviting sinners and men of bad conduct to Sraddhas (vv. 169-182). Possibly the ancient Sdtra contained hints on some of these subjects, but it is most improbable that it 1 See note to the translation, e€2 Ixviii LAWS OF MANU.
379-80), and on the results of inviting sinners and men of bad conduct to Sraddhas (vv. 169-182). Possibly the ancient Sdtra contained hints on some of these subjects, but it is most improbable that it 1 See note to the translation, e€2 Ixviii LAWS OF MANU. should have entered into all the details which our text gives. The passage on the householders has probably been placed wrongly. Most of its verses ought to stand in the discussion on the relative importance of the orders at the end of chapter VI. Inthe fourth chapter the first section on the means by which a Brahmawa may subsist (vv. 1-24) is exceedingly suspicious. The Dharma-sitras, e.g. Vasishtha XII, 2-4, no doubt sometimes prefix brief hints on the manner in which a Sna4taka may support himself, to the rules regarding his behaviour. But they do not mention the curious classification of the means of subsistence, Rita, Amrita, Mrita, Pramrita, and Svavritti (vv. 5, 6), which, though common in the Puradzas and other later works, is unknown in Vedic literature. As, moreover, Vasish¢ha’s rules, which enumerate the persons by whom a Snataka may be supported, occur further on (IV, 33-34), it is not improbable that the whole section consisting of the first twenty-four verses is a later addition. With still greater certainty the same may be said of vv. 85-91, which describe the heinousness of the offence committed by him who accepts gifts from a royal usurper and other wicked persons, and enumerate the twenty-one hells which will be the offender’s portion. For it is not doubtful that, even if the Sitrak4ras were acquainted with a classification of the regions of punishment, their enumeration ought not to stand here, but, as in the Vishzu-smriti, at the beginning of the section on crimes and penances. Other probable interpolations are vv. 172-174 on the results of sin, vv. 180-185 on the reasons why quarrels with near relatives should be avoided, vv. 238-243 on the reasons why spiritual merit should be accumulated. Finally, the section on gifts and the acceptance of gifts (vv. 186-197) seems to be strongly mixed with modern elements. The next following two chapters present fewer suspicious passages. Nevertheless, the preamble to the section on forbidden food, V, 1-4, the verses 19-21, which prescribe the penances for eating mushrooms, onions, leeks, and so forth, must be certainly rejected. For the former belong to the artificial framework which has been placed round the old Sftra,and the latter ought to stand in chapter XI. From the quotation in INTRODUCTION. Ixix
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.
1H. Wilson, Vishsru-purasa, vol. i, pp. 104-5 (ed. Hall); Professor Hopkins, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. xi, pp. 247-256. (25) e Ixvi LAWS OF MANU. revision. Toa certain extent we may also avail ourselves of the Vishzu-smriti for the same purpose. But a greater degree of caution will be necessary, as this work, though in the main a representative of the Kassaka Dharma-sitra, contains also an admixture of modern elements. On the other hand, those rules and discussions which cannot be traced in one of the old Sftras, are at least suspicious, and require careful consideration. The ultimate decision, if such passages have indeed to be considered as additions, must depend on various collateral circumstances. The safest criterion will always be the character of the ideas which they express. If these are entirely foreign to the Sftras or to Vedic literature, they may be confidently rejected as interpolations. A good deal depends also on their position and on the manner in which they fit into the context. Numerous cases will, however, remain doubtful. If we examine Manu’s text according to these principles, the more important results will be as follows :—The whole first chapter must be considered as a later addition. No Dharma-sitra begins with a description of its own origin, much less with an account of the creation. The former, which would be absurd in a Dharma-sitra, has been added in order to give authority to a remodelled version. The latter has been dragged in, because the myths connected with Manu presented a good opportunity ‘to show the greatness of the scope of the work,’ as Medhatithi says. The table of contents, given at the end of chapter I, was, of course, also foreign to the original Sdtra. Chapters II-VI, on the other hand, seem to represent with tolerable faithfulness the contents of the corresponding sections of the Manava Dharma-sitra. Nearly all the rules are found in the other Dharma-sitras and in the Vishzu-sm7iti, and more than three-fourths of the verses find counterparts in the aphorisms and verses of the older law-books. Nevertheless, the hand of the remodeller is not rarely visible. There are, besides the verses which announce the transition from one subject to the other, a considerable number of smaller and some 1 These verses probably mark the subdivisions of the Adhyayas, the Kanaikas or Khasdas of the ancient Sftra. INTRODUCTION. Ixvii
2There are, besides the verses which announce the transition from one subject to the other, a considerable number of smaller and some 1 These verses probably mark the subdivisions of the Adhyayas, the Kanaikas or Khasdas of the ancient Sftra. INTRODUCTION. Ixvii larger interpolations. To the latter belong, in the second chapter, vv. I-11 and wv. 88-100. The first passage gives a philosophical account of the origin of actions (1-5), such as is not found in any older law-book ; further, a verse (v. 6) stating the sources of the sacred law, which is unnecessary on account of v. 12, and suspicious on account of the double description of the third source of the law, by the synonymous terms sila and 4#4ra’. The contents of the remaining verses, the praise of the Manu-smriti(v. 7), the advice how the different authorities are to be studied (v. 8), the declaration of the reward for obedience to the revealed texts (v. 9), the definition of the terms Sruti and Smr‘ti, and the declaration of their authoritativeness, are likewise superfluous, and clearly later enlargements. The second passage (vv. 88-100), which enumerates the organs of sensation and action and teaches the necessity of controlling them, interrupts the continuity of the text very needlessly, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the matter treated of. Among the smaller interpolations in this chapter, vv. 13, 16, 27, 28, 142, 143, 213-215, 221, and 239 must certainly be reckoned. It also seems probable that the passage on the importance of the syllable Om, of the Vy4hritis, and of the Savitri (vv. 76-87), as well as that on the humility and meekness required of a Brahmana (vv. 160-163), and that on the worship due to parents and a teacher (vv. 225-237), have been enlarged, though in each case something of the kind may have occurred in the Dharma-sfitra. Inthe third chapter, there is one longer passage (vv. 192-201) which, beyond all doubt, has been added by a later hand. For the classification of the Manes, which it contains, is in this form foreign to Vedic literature. More doubtful are the discussions on the duty of conjugal intercourse (vv. 46-50), on the honour due to women (vv. 55-60), on the excellence of the order of householders (vv. 79-80), and on the results of inviting sinners and men of bad conduct to Sraddhas (vv. 169-182). Possibly the ancient Sdtra contained hints on some of these subjects, but it is most improbable that it 1 See note to the translation, e€2 Ixviii LAWS OF MANU.
379-80), and on the results of inviting sinners and men of bad conduct to Sraddhas (vv. 169-182). Possibly the ancient Sdtra contained hints on some of these subjects, but it is most improbable that it 1 See note to the translation, e€2 Ixviii LAWS OF MANU. should have entered into all the details which our text gives. The passage on the householders has probably been placed wrongly. Most of its verses ought to stand in the discussion on the relative importance of the orders at the end of chapter VI. Inthe fourth chapter the first section on the means by which a Brahmawa may subsist (vv. 1-24) is exceedingly suspicious. The Dharma-sitras, e.g. Vasishtha XII, 2-4, no doubt sometimes prefix brief hints on the manner in which a Sna4taka may support himself, to the rules regarding his behaviour. But they do not mention the curious classification of the means of subsistence, Rita, Amrita, Mrita, Pramrita, and Svavritti (vv. 5, 6), which, though common in the Puradzas and other later works, is unknown in Vedic literature. As, moreover, Vasish¢ha’s rules, which enumerate the persons by whom a Snataka may be supported, occur further on (IV, 33-34), it is not improbable that the whole section consisting of the first twenty-four verses is a later addition. With still greater certainty the same may be said of vv. 85-91, which describe the heinousness of the offence committed by him who accepts gifts from a royal usurper and other wicked persons, and enumerate the twenty-one hells which will be the offender’s portion. For it is not doubtful that, even if the Sitrak4ras were acquainted with a classification of the regions of punishment, their enumeration ought not to stand here, but, as in the Vishzu-smriti, at the beginning of the section on crimes and penances. Other probable interpolations are vv. 172-174 on the results of sin, vv. 180-185 on the reasons why quarrels with near relatives should be avoided, vv. 238-243 on the reasons why spiritual merit should be accumulated. Finally, the section on gifts and the acceptance of gifts (vv. 186-197) seems to be strongly mixed with modern elements. The next following two chapters present fewer suspicious passages. Nevertheless, the preamble to the section on forbidden food, V, 1-4, the verses 19-21, which prescribe the penances for eating mushrooms, onions, leeks, and so forth, must be certainly rejected. For the former belong to the artificial framework which has been placed round the old Sftra,and the latter ought to stand in chapter XI. From the quotation in INTRODUCTION. Ixix
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.