Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1shin's opinion that the fact of the word ' 6udra ' being enounced in the sa//zvarga-knowledge constitutes an inferential mark (of the Sudra's qualifica- tion for knowledge), we remark that that inferential mark has no force, on account of the absence of arguments. For the statement of an inferential mark possesses the power of intimation only in consequence of arguments being adduced ; but no such arguments are brought forward in the passage quoted 2. Besides, the word ' 6udra ' which occurs in the sa//zvarga-vidya would establish a claim on the part of the vSudras to that one vidycl only, not to all vidyas. In reality, however, it is powerless, because occurring in an arthavada, to establish the Sudras' claim to anything. — The word ' vSudra ' can moreover be made to agree with the con- text in which it occurs in the following manner. When Ganasruti Pautraya;za heard himself spoken of with dis- respect by the flamingo (' How can you speak of him, being what he is, as if he were like Raikva with the car ? ' IV, 1, 3), grief (suk) arose in his mind, and to that grief the rishi Raikva alludes with the word .Sudra, in order to show thereby his knowledge of what is remote. This explanation must be ac- cepted because a (real) born vSudra is not qualified (for the sa^varga-vidya). If it be asked how the grief (suk) which had arisen in Gana^ruti's mind can be referred to by means of the word .Sudra, we reply: On account of the rushing on (adrava^a) of the grief. For we may etymologise the word 5udra by dividing it into its parts, either as ' he rushed into grief (.Su^am abhidudrava) or as 'grief rushed on 1 The £udra not having acquired a knowledge of Vedic matters in the legitimate way, i. e. through the study of the Veda under the guidance of a guru, is unfit for sacrifices as well as for vidya\ 2 The lihga contained in the word 'Sudra' has no proving power as it occurs in an arthavada-passage which has no authority if not connected with a corresponding injunctive passage. In our case the linga in the arthavada-passage is even directly contradicted by those injunctions which militate against the £udras' qualification for Vedic matters. [34] Q 226 VED ANTA-S^TR AS. him,' or as c he in his grief rushed to Raikva ; ' while on the other hand it is impossible to accept the word in its ordinary conventional sense. The circumstance (of the king actually being grieved) is moreover expressly touched upon in the legend *. 35.
2. him,' or as c he in his grief rushed to Raikva ; ' while on the other hand it is impossible to accept the word in its ordinary conventional sense. The circumstance (of the king actually being grieved) is moreover expressly touched upon in the legend *. 35. And because the kshattriyahood (of G&namiti) is understood from the inferential mark (supplied by his being mentioned) later on with ATaitraratha (who was a kshattriya himself). Ganamiti cannot have been a Sudra by birth for that reason also that his being a kshattriya is understood from an inferential sign, viz. his being mentioned together (in one chapter) with the kshattriya jftTaitraratha Abhipratarin. For, later on, i. e. in the passage complementary to the sawvarga- vidyd, a kshattriya TTaitrarathi Abhipratarin is glorified, 'Once while Saunaka Kipeya and Abhipratarin Kikshaseni were being waited on at their meal a religious student begged of them ' (Kh. Up. IV, 3, 5). That this Abhipratdrin was a iTaitrarathi (i. e. a descendant of -ftTitraratha) we have to infer from his connexion with a Kapeya. For we know (from 5ruti) about the connexion of iTitraratha himself with the Kapeyas (' the K&peyas made iTitraratha perform that sacrifice;' T&ndya. Br. XX, 12, 5), and as a rule sacrificers of one and the same family employ officiating priests of one and the same family. Moreover, as we understand from Scripture (' from him a iif aitrarathi descended who was a prince2') that he (^Taitraratha) was a prince, we must 1 Ha#zsavaky£d dtmano^nadaraw mitva g&nasmtek sug ut- pannety etad eva katha/rc gamyate yenasau judra^abdena su£yate tatraha spmyate £eti. Ananda Giri. 2 I translate this passage as I find it in all MSS. of -Sankara consulted by me (noting, however, that some MSS. read /fcaitrarathi- namaika^). Ananda Giri expressly explains tasmad by /fcitraratMd ity artha^. — The text of the TaWya Br. runs : tasmad ^aitrarathrnam eka^ kshatrapatir gayate, and the commentary explains : tasm&t kdrawad adyapi ^itrava^otpannana^ madhye eka eva ra^d kshatra- I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 36. 227 understand him to have been a kshattriya. The fact now of Ganajruti being praised in the same vidyk with the kshattriya Abhipratirin intimates that the former also was a kshattriya. For as a rule equals are mentioned together with equals. That G&najruti was a kshattriya we more- over conclude from his sending his door-keeper and from other similar signs of power (mentioned in the text). — Hence the 5udras are not qualified (for the knowledge of Brahman). 36.
3uals are mentioned together with equals. That G&najruti was a kshattriya we more- over conclude from his sending his door-keeper and from other similar signs of power (mentioned in the text). — Hence the 5udras are not qualified (for the knowledge of Brahman). 36. On account of the reference to ceremonial purifications (in the case of the higher castes) and on account of their absence being declared (in the case of the .Sudras). That the .Sudras are not qualified, follows from that circumstance also that in different places of the vidy&s such ceremonies as the upanayana and the like are referred to. Compare, for instance, 5at. Br. XI, 5, 3, 13, 'He initiated him as a pupil;' Kk, Up. VII, 1, 1, 'Teach me, Sir! thus he approached him;' Pra. Up. I, 1, 'Devoted to Brahman, firm in Brahman, seeking for the highest Brahman they, carrying fuel in their hands, approached the venerable Pippal&da, thinking that he would teach them all that.' — Thus the following passage also, ' He without having made them undergo the upanayana (said) to them ' (Kh. Up. V, 11, 7), shows that the upanayana is a well-established cere- mony1.— With reference to the 6udras, on the other hand, the absence of ceremonies is frequently mentioned; so, for instance, Manu X, 4, where they are spoken of as 'once- born ' only ('the Sudra is the fourth caste, once-born '), and Manu X, 126, ' In the Sudra there is not any sin, and he is not fit for any ceremony/ patir baladhipatir bhavati. — Grammar does not authorise the form ^aitraratha used in the Sutra. 1 The king Awapati receives some Brdhma^as as his pupils without insisting on the upanayana. This express statement of the upanayana having been omitted in a certain case shows it to be the general rule. Q 2 2 28 VED ANTA-stjTRAS. 37. And on account of (Gautama) proceeding (to initiate Cabala) on the ascertainment of (his) not being that (i.e. a 6udra). The 5udras are not qualified for that reason also that Gautama, having ascertained Cabala not to be a 6udra from his speaking the truth, proceeded to initiate and instruct him. ' None who is not a Brahma^a would thus speak out. Go and fetch fuel, friend, I shall initiate you. You have not swerved from the truth ' [Kh. Up. IV, 4, 5) ; which scriptural passage furnishes an inferential sign (of the vSudras not being capable of initiation). 38. And on account of the prohibition, in Smrz'ti, of (the 6udras') hearing and studying (the Veda) and (knowing and performing) (Vedic) matters.
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.
1shin's opinion that the fact of the word ' 6udra ' being enounced in the sa//zvarga-knowledge constitutes an inferential mark (of the Sudra's qualifica- tion for knowledge), we remark that that inferential mark has no force, on account of the absence of arguments. For the statement of an inferential mark possesses the power of intimation only in consequence of arguments being adduced ; but no such arguments are brought forward in the passage quoted 2. Besides, the word ' 6udra ' which occurs in the sa//zvarga-vidya would establish a claim on the part of the vSudras to that one vidycl only, not to all vidyas. In reality, however, it is powerless, because occurring in an arthavada, to establish the Sudras' claim to anything. — The word ' vSudra ' can moreover be made to agree with the con- text in which it occurs in the following manner. When Ganasruti Pautraya;za heard himself spoken of with dis- respect by the flamingo (' How can you speak of him, being what he is, as if he were like Raikva with the car ? ' IV, 1, 3), grief (suk) arose in his mind, and to that grief the rishi Raikva alludes with the word .Sudra, in order to show thereby his knowledge of what is remote. This explanation must be ac- cepted because a (real) born vSudra is not qualified (for the sa^varga-vidya). If it be asked how the grief (suk) which had arisen in Gana^ruti's mind can be referred to by means of the word .Sudra, we reply: On account of the rushing on (adrava^a) of the grief. For we may etymologise the word 5udra by dividing it into its parts, either as ' he rushed into grief (.Su^am abhidudrava) or as 'grief rushed on 1 The £udra not having acquired a knowledge of Vedic matters in the legitimate way, i. e. through the study of the Veda under the guidance of a guru, is unfit for sacrifices as well as for vidya\ 2 The lihga contained in the word 'Sudra' has no proving power as it occurs in an arthavada-passage which has no authority if not connected with a corresponding injunctive passage. In our case the linga in the arthavada-passage is even directly contradicted by those injunctions which militate against the £udras' qualification for Vedic matters. [34] Q 226 VED ANTA-S^TR AS. him,' or as c he in his grief rushed to Raikva ; ' while on the other hand it is impossible to accept the word in its ordinary conventional sense. The circumstance (of the king actually being grieved) is moreover expressly touched upon in the legend *. 35.
2. him,' or as c he in his grief rushed to Raikva ; ' while on the other hand it is impossible to accept the word in its ordinary conventional sense. The circumstance (of the king actually being grieved) is moreover expressly touched upon in the legend *. 35. And because the kshattriyahood (of G&namiti) is understood from the inferential mark (supplied by his being mentioned) later on with ATaitraratha (who was a kshattriya himself). Ganamiti cannot have been a Sudra by birth for that reason also that his being a kshattriya is understood from an inferential sign, viz. his being mentioned together (in one chapter) with the kshattriya jftTaitraratha Abhipratarin. For, later on, i. e. in the passage complementary to the sawvarga- vidyd, a kshattriya TTaitrarathi Abhipratarin is glorified, 'Once while Saunaka Kipeya and Abhipratarin Kikshaseni were being waited on at their meal a religious student begged of them ' (Kh. Up. IV, 3, 5). That this Abhipratdrin was a iTaitrarathi (i. e. a descendant of -ftTitraratha) we have to infer from his connexion with a Kapeya. For we know (from 5ruti) about the connexion of iTitraratha himself with the Kapeyas (' the K&peyas made iTitraratha perform that sacrifice;' T&ndya. Br. XX, 12, 5), and as a rule sacrificers of one and the same family employ officiating priests of one and the same family. Moreover, as we understand from Scripture (' from him a iif aitrarathi descended who was a prince2') that he (^Taitraratha) was a prince, we must 1 Ha#zsavaky£d dtmano^nadaraw mitva g&nasmtek sug ut- pannety etad eva katha/rc gamyate yenasau judra^abdena su£yate tatraha spmyate £eti. Ananda Giri. 2 I translate this passage as I find it in all MSS. of -Sankara consulted by me (noting, however, that some MSS. read /fcaitrarathi- namaika^). Ananda Giri expressly explains tasmad by /fcitraratMd ity artha^. — The text of the TaWya Br. runs : tasmad ^aitrarathrnam eka^ kshatrapatir gayate, and the commentary explains : tasm&t kdrawad adyapi ^itrava^otpannana^ madhye eka eva ra^d kshatra- I ADHYAYA, 3 PADA, 36. 227 understand him to have been a kshattriya. The fact now of Ganajruti being praised in the same vidyk with the kshattriya Abhipratirin intimates that the former also was a kshattriya. For as a rule equals are mentioned together with equals. That G&najruti was a kshattriya we more- over conclude from his sending his door-keeper and from other similar signs of power (mentioned in the text). — Hence the 5udras are not qualified (for the knowledge of Brahman). 36.
3uals are mentioned together with equals. That G&najruti was a kshattriya we more- over conclude from his sending his door-keeper and from other similar signs of power (mentioned in the text). — Hence the 5udras are not qualified (for the knowledge of Brahman). 36. On account of the reference to ceremonial purifications (in the case of the higher castes) and on account of their absence being declared (in the case of the .Sudras). That the .Sudras are not qualified, follows from that circumstance also that in different places of the vidy&s such ceremonies as the upanayana and the like are referred to. Compare, for instance, 5at. Br. XI, 5, 3, 13, 'He initiated him as a pupil;' Kk, Up. VII, 1, 1, 'Teach me, Sir! thus he approached him;' Pra. Up. I, 1, 'Devoted to Brahman, firm in Brahman, seeking for the highest Brahman they, carrying fuel in their hands, approached the venerable Pippal&da, thinking that he would teach them all that.' — Thus the following passage also, ' He without having made them undergo the upanayana (said) to them ' (Kh. Up. V, 11, 7), shows that the upanayana is a well-established cere- mony1.— With reference to the 6udras, on the other hand, the absence of ceremonies is frequently mentioned; so, for instance, Manu X, 4, where they are spoken of as 'once- born ' only ('the Sudra is the fourth caste, once-born '), and Manu X, 126, ' In the Sudra there is not any sin, and he is not fit for any ceremony/ patir baladhipatir bhavati. — Grammar does not authorise the form ^aitraratha used in the Sutra. 1 The king Awapati receives some Brdhma^as as his pupils without insisting on the upanayana. This express statement of the upanayana having been omitted in a certain case shows it to be the general rule. Q 2 2 28 VED ANTA-stjTRAS. 37. And on account of (Gautama) proceeding (to initiate Cabala) on the ascertainment of (his) not being that (i.e. a 6udra). The 5udras are not qualified for that reason also that Gautama, having ascertained Cabala not to be a 6udra from his speaking the truth, proceeded to initiate and instruct him. ' None who is not a Brahma^a would thus speak out. Go and fetch fuel, friend, I shall initiate you. You have not swerved from the truth ' [Kh. Up. IV, 4, 5) ; which scriptural passage furnishes an inferential sign (of the vSudras not being capable of initiation). 38. And on account of the prohibition, in Smrz'ti, of (the 6udras') hearing and studying (the Veda) and (knowing and performing) (Vedic) matters.
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.