०५ शास्त्रपरम्परा

Having prounded this Law, he himself, first of all, taught it to me with due care; I then taught it to Marīci and other Sages.—(58)

इह शास्त्रशब्देन स्मार्तो विधिप्रतिषेधसमूह उच्यते, न तु ग्रन्थः, तस्य मनुना कृतत्वात् । तथा हि मानव इति व्यपदेशो ऽस्य । इतरथा हि हैरण्यगर्भ इति व्यपदिश्येत ।

• केचित् तु हिरण्यगर्भेनापि कृते ग्रन्थे मनुना बहूनां प्रकाशितत्वात् तेन व्यपदेशो युज्यत एव । यथा हिमवति प्रथमम् उपलभ्यमाना गङ्गा, अन्यतो ऽप्य् उत्पन्ना हैमवतीति व्यपदिश्यते, यथा च नित्यं दर्शनात् काठकं प्रवचनं कठेन व्यपदेशः । सत्स्व् अप्य् अन्येष्व् अध्येतृष्व् अध्यापयितृषु च प्रवचनप्रकर्षात् कठेन व्यपदेशः । नारदश् च स्मरति- “शतसाहस्रो ऽयं ग्रन्थः प्रजापतिना कृतस् ततः स मन्वादिभिः क्रमेण संक्षिप्तः” इति । अतो ऽन्यकृतत्वे ऽपि मानवव्यपदेशो न विरुद्धः । शास्त्रशब्देन ग्रन्थाभिधानम् अपि शासनरूपार्थप्रतिपादकत्वाद् दृष्टम् एव ।

• माम् एव ग्राहयामास, अहं तेनाध्यापित इत्य् अर्थः । स्वयम् आदितो विधिवद् इत्य् एभिः पदैर् आगमस्याविभ्रंश उच्यते । ग्रन्थकारेण हि स्वकृतो ग्रन्थो यः स्वयम् अध्याप्यते प्रथमं तत्र मात्रापि न परिहीयते । अन्यस्य हि तस्माद् अधिगतवतो ऽन्यम् अध्यापयतो न तद्ग्रन्थाविनाशे यत्नो भवति । कर्तुर् अप्य् अध्यापितपूर्वस्य “प्रतिष्ठापितो मया पूर्वम् अयं ग्रन्थः” इति द्वितीयवारं प्रमादालस्यादिना भ्रंशः संभाव्यते । अत आदित इत्य् उक्तम् । विधिवच् छिष्योपाध्याययोर् अनन्यमनस्कतादिगुणो ऽवहितचित्तता विधिः । अर्हे वतिः (च्ड़्। पाण् ५.१.११७) ।

• मरीच्यादींस् त्व् अहं मुनीन् । मरीच्यादयः प्रसिद्धप्रभावाः, तैर् अप्य् एतन् मत्सकाशाद् अधितम् इत्य् आत्मनो विशिष्टशिष्यसंबन्धेन सिद्धम् औपाध्यायिकं¹ दर्शयन् महर्षीणां शास्त्रमाहात्म्येन च श्रद्धातिशयं जनयत्य् अध्ययनाविरामाय । एवंविधम् एतन् महच् छास्त्रं यन् मरीच्यादिभिर् अप्य् अधीतम् । एष चेदृशो महात्मा मनुस् तेषाम् उपाध्याय इति युक्तम् एतस्य सकाशाद् एतद्ग्रन्थाध्ययनम् इत्य् आ शास्त्रपरिसमाप्तेर् नोपरमन्ते श्रोतार इत्य् उभयथापि शास्त्रप्रशंसा ॥ १.५८ ॥

In the present context the term ‘Law’ stands for the whole collection of Injunctions and Prohibitions contained in the Smṛtis, and not for any particular treatise; as this latter was composed by Manu; that is why the Treatise is called ‘Mānava’ (of Manu); otherwise [ i.e., if the Treatise were the ‘Law’ propounded by the Imperishable One], it would have been ‘Hairaṇyagarbha,’ ‘of Hiraṇyagarbha.’

Others however have held that the Treatise itself was composed by Hiraṇyagarbha [and is spoken of in the text as the ‘Law’ propounded by him], and since it came to be revealed to, and published among, many persons by Manu, it is only right that it should he called after the name of the latter. For instance, the Ganga has its real source somewhere else (in Heaven), and yet since it is seen for the first time in the Himavat (Himālaya), it is called ‘Haimavatī’ (proceeding from Himavat), after the name of the latter;—similarly though the Vedic text is eternal, yet since it was expounded by Kaṭha, it is called ‘Kāṭhaka,’ after his name; even though there are several other expounders and learners of that Veda, yet it is called after Kaṭha, on account of the superiority of his expounding. Nārada also has declared thus:—‘This Treatise, consisting of 100,000 verses, was composed by Prajāpati, and, in due course, it came to be abridged by Manu and others.’ Thus, even though the Treatise may have been originally composed by some one else, there is nothing incongruous in its being called ‘Mānava,’ ‘of Manu.’ As for the term ‘Śāstra,’ ‘Law’ (of the text) standing for the Treatise, we often find it so used, in the sense that the subject expounded by it is instruction, ‘śāṣana.’

‘He taught it to me,’ I was taught by him.—‘Himself,’ ‘first of all,’ ‘with care,’—these words indicate the fact that there was no break in the continuity of tradition in regard to the Law. As a matter of fact, when the author of a book ‘himself’ teaches it first of all, not a single syllable of it is lost; while when the book composed by one person is taught by another person who has learnt it from the former, there is not the same ‘care’ taken in guarding the text from loss. In fact, in the case of the author himself, when he has taught it once and established its position, he feels confident that he has already taught it once, and hence when he comes to teach the work a second time, he is likely to be careless and lazy; so that lapses in the text become possible; hence the text has added the phrase ‘first of all’.—‘With due care,’—the term ‘vidhi,’ ‘care,’ stands here for the quality, in the teacher and the pupil, of having undiverted attention, a concentrated mind; and the affix ‘vati’ (in the term ‘vidhivat’) signifies capability, possession.

‘Then I taught it to Marīci and other sages.’—In as much as Marīci and the other sages are persons of well-known reputation, when Manu speaks of such well-known persons having learnt the Law from him, he describes his connection with specially qualified pupils, and thereby indicates his well-established professional dignity; and by pointing out the importance of the Law, he produces in the minds of the great sages (who have asked him in verse 1 et seq. to propound the Law) faith and confidence, so that they may be unremitting in their study; the idea being—‘So important is this Law that oven such great sages as Marīci and the rest have learnt it,—Manu also is such a high personage that he is the Teacher of those great sages,—so that it is highly proper that this Treatise should be learnt from him with this idea in their minds, the enquirers who have come to hear the Law propounded would not cease to give their attention to it.—Both these facts are mentioned with a view to eulogise the Law.—(58)

‘Vidhivat’—‘With due attention’ (Medhātithi and Govindarāja);—‘according to rule,—with due ceremonies’ (Kullūka).

In connection with the authorship of the Smṛti see Bhāṣya (Printed edition, Gharpure, p. 7) and also Buhler’s Introduction p. xv. Burnell in his footnote on Verse 58, misrepresents Medhātithi, by imputing to him a view which he has put forward only as held by ‘some people’ ‘Kechit’.

Parāśara-mādhava (Ācāra—p. 106) quotes this verse in support of the view that the Smṛtis are the work of Brahmā; and it adds that—‘as Brahmā, so Svāyambhuva Manu also, compiles the Duties that have been ordained in the Veda;—which establishes the beginningless and immutable character of Dharma.’

058 But he having composed these Institutes (of the sacred law), himself taught them, according to the rule, to me alone in the beginning; next I (taught them) to Mariki and the other sages.

This Bhṛgu will fully describe to you this (Law); this sage has learnt the whole of this in its entirety, from me.—(59)

एतच् छास्त्रं वो युष्माकम् अयं भृगुर् अशेषतः सर्वं श्रावयिष्यति कर्णपथं नेष्यत्य् अध्यापयिष्यति व्याख्यास्यति च । एतच् छास्त्रस्यैतद् आ प्रत्यवमर्शः । एतच् छास्त्रम् एव मुनिर् अखिलम् अशेषं मत्तो मत्सकाशाद् अधिजगे ऽधिगतवान् ज्ञातवान् । गुरुमुखाद् विद्या निष्क्रामतीव शिष्यः प्रतिगृह्णातीवेत्य् अतः अपादाने तसिर् मत्त इति युक्तः । भृगुस् तु महर्षीणां प्रख्याततरप्रभावः । तस्य प्रवक्तृत्वनियोगेनानेकाशेषनिरतिशयविद्याविदाम् आगमनपरंपरयागतम् एतच् छास्त्रम् इति प्रदर्श्यते । अतश् च केषांचिद् अयम् अपि प्रवृत्तिप्रकारो दृश्यते । बहुभ्यो महात्मभ्यः शास्त्रम् इदम् अवतीर्णम् इति, किम् इति नाधीमह इत्य् अध्ययनादिप्रवृत्त्याभिमुख्यं शास्त्रे जन्यते ॥ १.५९ ॥

‘This,’ Law;—‘to you’;—‘Bhṛgu will describe fully,’ will carry it to your cars, will teach and will explain: The pronoun ‘this’ (in the second line) refers to the Law; the whole of this Law this Sage has ‘learnt,’ read, ‘in its entirety,’ ‘from me’ at my hands. The teaching proceeds as it were, from the Teacher’s mouth, and the pupil takes hold of it, as it were; it is for this reason that we have the affix ‘tasi,’ in the word ‘mattaḥ,’ in the sense of the Ablative.

Bhṛgu is a person whose greatness is very well known to the sages; so that by directing him to explain the Law, Manu shows that the Law has come down through a tradition of teaching handed down by a long line of several persons possessing exceptional knowledge of all sciences. It is for this reason that some people are to undertake the study of the Law by the following considerations:—‘This Law has come down from several high-souled persons,—why then should we not study it.’ This consideration serves to prompt men to study and thus attracts them to the Law.—(59)

This Verse is quoted by the Aparārka (p. 4) with a view to show that the writer of a work often quotes himself,—and wherever manurabravīt occurs, it is Manu’s own words that are quoted, not those of Bhṛgu, the compiler.

059 Bhrigu, here, will fully recite to you these Institutes; for that sage learned the whole in its entirety from me.

Thereupon, being thus directed by Manu, the great sage Bhṛgu, with a gladdened heart, said to the sages—‘Listen.’—(60)

स महर्षिर् भृगुस् तेन मनुना तथोक्तः “एष वः श्रावयिष्यति” इति नियुक्तस् ततो ऽनन्तरं तान् ऋषीन् अब्रवीच् छ्रूयताम् इति । प्रीतात्मानेकशिष्यसंनिधाव् अहम् अत्र नियुक्त इति बहुमानेन प्रीतात्मत्वं प्रवक्तृत्वयोग्यतयाज्ञाकरो ऽहम् अनेन संभावित इत्य् आत्मनि भृगोर् बहुमानः ॥ १.६० ॥

That great sage ‘Bhṛgu,’ ‘bring thus directed’—prompted, by means of the words ‘Bhṛgu will describe it to you’;—‘thereupon,’—after that,—‘said to the sages’—‘Listen.’

‘With a gladdened heart’;—his gladness being due to the idea of respectability implied by the fact that from among the several pupils (of Manu) he had been directed to teach; Bhṛgu’s idea of his own respectability was based upon this idea—‘I, who am an obedient pupil of Manu, have been thus honoured by him, by reason of my special aptitude to expound the Law.’—(60)

[Here ends the introductory Section—describing the true origin
of the Law and the authorship of the present Treatise.]

[Now begins the actual Text of the Treatise, as expounded by
Bhṛgu, to the sages who had questioned Manu.]

With this verse ends the Introductory Section of the work, describing the Origin of the Law and the authorship of the ordinances.

060 Then that great sage Bhrigu, being thus addressed by Manu, spoke, pleased in his heart, to all the sages, ‘Listen!’