१३ अवराद् अपि विद्या

One imbued with faith may acquire excellent learning even from a lowly person, special law even from the lowest, and the gem of a wife even from a base family.—(238)

श्रद्दधान आस्तिक्योपगृहीतान्तरात्माभियुक्तो यः शिष्यः स शुभां विद्यां न्यायशास्त्रादितर्कविद्याम् । अथ वा या शोभते केवलं सा विशद-काव्य-भरतादि-विद्या-विभूषिता, मन्त्र-विद्या वा न धर्मोपयोगिनी, ताम् अवराद् अपि हीनजातीयाद् अप्य् आददीत शिक्षते ।+++(5)+++

• न त्व् अत्र शुभा वेदविद्या वेदितव्या, आपदि विधिर् भविष्यति (म्ध् २.२४१), अनापदि तु नैवेष्यते । या त्व् अशुभा¹ शाम्भवी² मायाकुहकादि वा तां न क्वचित् ।+++(4)+++

• अन्त्यश् चाण्डालस् तस्माद् अपि यः परो धर्मः श्रुति-स्मृत्य्-अपेक्षया परो ऽन्यो लौकिकः । धर्म-शब्दो व्यवस्थायाम् अपि प्रयुज्यते । “एषो ऽत्र धर्मः” इति यदि चण्डालो ऽपि ब्रूते- “अत्र प्रदेशे मा चिरं स्था,” “मा वास्मिन्न् अम्भसि स्नासीः,” “एषो ऽत्र ग्रामीणानां धर्मो राज्ञा कृता वा मर्यादा” इति । न चैवं मन्तव्यम्- “उपाध्यायवचनं मया कर्तव्यं धिक् चाण्डालं जाल्मं³ यो मां नियुङ्क्ते” इति ।

• न पुनर् इयं बुद्धिः कर्तव्या- परो धर्मो ब्रह्मतत्त्वज्ञानम् । न हि चण्डालादेस् तत्परिज्ञानसंभवः, वेदार्थवित्त्वाभावात् । न चान्यतस् तत्संबवः । न हि वृश्चिक-मन्त्राक्षर-वद् ब्रह्मोपदेशो ऽस्ति ।

• स्त्रीरत्नम् इव । स्त्री चासौ रत्नं च तद् इति वा । “उपमितं व्याघ्रादिभिः” (पाण् २.१.५६) “विशेषणं विशेष्येन” (पाण् २.१.५७) इति वा । यदा यत्किंचिद् उत्कृष्टं वस्तु तद् रत्नम् उच्यते तदा विशेषणम् इति । अथ तु मरकत-पद्मरागादीन्य् एव रत्न-शब्द-वाच्यान्य् उत्कर्ष-सामान्याद् अन्यत्र प्रयोगः, तदोपमितम् इति । या स्त्री कान्ति-संस्थान-लावण्यातिशयवती⁴ अथ दान्य-बहु-धन-सुतादि-शुभ-लक्षणा सा दुष्कुलाद् +धीन-क्रियादेर् अप्य् आनेया । “अब्राह्मणात्” (म्ध् २.२४१) इत्य् अस्य विधेर् अयम् उपोद्घातः⁵ । अलाबेन तु प्रदर्शितः ॥ २.२३८ ॥

‘Imbued with faith’—the pupil who is devoted, having his innermost soul imbued with trust in the scriptures.

‘Excellent learning,’—i.e., the science of reasoning as propounded in the Nyāya-śāstra, etc.; or, it may mean ‘that which duly shines,’ i.e., good poetry and poetics as propounded by Bharata and other writers; or, it may mean the ‘science of incantations,’ which is of no use regarding Dharma.

Such learning one might ‘acquire’—learn—‘even from the lowly person,’—i.e., from a person born of a lower caste. ‘excellent learning’ here should not be taken as the ‘Vedic Science’; for even though in abnormal times of distress the learning of the Veda from lower castes may be permitted—as we shall find later on (Verse 241), yet it cannot be permitted in normal times. That learning which is ‘not excellent,’—such as the science of magic, etc.—one should not learn at all.

‘Lowest’ is the Cāṇḍāla; from him even, one may learn the ‘special law,’—i.e., law other than that expounded in Śrutis and Smṛtis; i.e., law relating to ordinary worldly matters. The term ‘dharma,’ ‘law,’ is also used in the sense of rule. The sense thus is that—if even a Cāṇḍāla should say—‘such is the rule here,’—‘do not stay here for long,’—‘do not bathe in this water,’—‘such is the custom among the people of the village,’—‘such is the restriction imposed by the king,’—then one should not think that he should obey only the words of his Preceptor and he need not pay any heed to those of a Cāṇḍāla who has dared to advise him.

We should not take the term ‘special law’ to mean ‘the knowledge of truth regarding Brahman’; because it is not possible to acquire this knowledge from the Cāṇḍāla and such people, for the simple reason that they are ignorant of the Veda; and from no other source such knowledge can be derived; specially as the teaching of Brahman is not like the teaching of incantations for the cure of scorpion-bite, etc.

‘Gem of a wife,’—the wife who is like a gem; the compound being based upon similitude, according to Pāṇini 2.1.56; or, it may be explained according to Pāṇini 2.1.57 (the meaning being the ‘gem-like wife’). If the term ‘gem’ be taken in the sense of any good thing, then the compound is according to 2.1.57; if, on the other hand, the term ‘gem’ be taken as standing only for the emerald, the ruby and other precious stones,—and it is applied to other things only on account of their excellence, in which they resemble precious stones,—then the compound would fall under 2.1.56. The meaning is that if a girl happens to be possessed of a well-formed figure and a charming complexion, and she happens to bear auspicious signs indicative of the possession of much wealth in cash and kind, and the possibility of bearing many children and so forth,—then she should be married, even though she belong to a ‘base family,’—a family wanting in the due performance of religious acts, etc.

This forms an introduction to what is going to be enjoined under 241 et seq. (in connection with abnormal times); and what is here permitted is only when other sources are not available.—(238)

‘Param dharmam’—‘Special law, i. e., law other than that expounded in the Śrutis and Smṛtis; i.e., that relating to ordinary worldly matters’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Rāghavānanda);—‘the means of obtaining final liberation’ (Kullūka), which view is noted and rejected by Medhātithi.

‘Duṣkulādapi’—‘Family wanting in the due perfohnance of religious acts’ (Medhātitlii);—‘Family lower than one’s own’ (Kullūka);—‘Family of a potter or such other low castes’ (Govindarāja).

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 514) in support of the view that learning may be acquired even from persons of lower grades;—in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 144);—and in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 52).

Āpastamba Dharmasūtra (2.29.11),—‘That knowledge whioh rests in women and Śūdras.’

Mahābhārata (12.165.31).—(Same as Manu.)

श्रद्धायुक्तः शुभां दृष्ट-शक्तिं गारुडादि-विद्याम् अवराच् छूद्रादपि गृह्णीयात् । अन्त्यश् चाण्डालस् तस्माद् अपि जाति-स्मरादेर् विहित-योग-प्रकर्षात् दुष्-कृत-शेषोपभोगार्थम् अवाप्त-चाण्डाल-जन्मनः परं धर्म मोक्षोपायम् आत्म-ज्ञानम् आददीत । तथा अज्ञानम् एवोपक्रम्य मोक्ष-धर्मे “प्राप्य ज्ञानं ब्राह्मणात् क्षत्रियाद् वैश्याच् छूद्राद् अपि नीचाद् अभीक्ष्णं श्रद्धातव्यं श्रद्दधानेन नित्यम् । " न श्रद्धिनं प्रति जन्म-मृत्यु-विशेषता ।

मेधातिथिस्तु " श्रुतिस्मृत्यपेक्षया परो धर्मों लौकिकः । धर्मशब्दो व्यवस्थायामपि युज्यते। यदि चाण्डालोऽपि ‘अत्र प्रदेशे माचिरं स्था, मा चास्मिन्नम्भसि स्नासीः’ इति वदति तमपि धर्ममनुतिष्ठेत् " ।

“प्रागल्भ्याल् लौकिकं वस्तु
परं धर्मम् इति ब्रुवन् ।
चित्रं तथापि सर्वत्र
श्लाघ्यो मेधातिथिः सताम् ॥’

स्त्रीरत्नं आत्मापेक्षया निकृष्ट-कुलाआपि परिणेतुं स्वीकुर्यात् ॥ २३८ ॥

238 He who possesses faith may receive pure learning even from a man of lower caste, the highest law even from the lowest, and an excellent wife even from a base family.

Nectar mat be taken even from poison, good advice even prom a child; good conduct (may be learnt) even from a foe; and gold (mat be taken) even from an impure source.—(239)

पूर्व इमौ चापद्य् अब्राह्मणाद् अप्य् अध्येतव्यम् (म्ध् २.१४१) इत्य् अस्य विधेः शेषः । अनेन लोकप्रवादो दृष्टान्तीक्रियते⁶ । एवं हि लौकिका आहुः- “असतस् सद् उपादेयम्” ।

• विषे ऽपि यद् अमृतं तद् ग्राह्यम् एव, यथा हंस उदकात् क्षीरं गृह्णाति । रसायनेषु केषुचित् विषं इत्य् एतद् अभिप्रेत्योक्तम् । बालो ऽपि यत् किंचिद् अकस्मात् सुभाषितं माङ्गलिकं प्रस्थानादौ वक्ति तद् ग्राह्यम् । अमित्रादेर् अपि सतां यद् वृत्तं शिष्टाचारः । न द्वेष्यस्⁷ तेनैतद् आचरितम् इति त्याज्यः⁸ । प्रसिद्धतरो⁹ ऽयं दृष्टान्तः- अमेध्याद् अपि काञ्चनं सुवर्णम् । असदाश्रयाद् अप्य् एते यथा¹⁰ गृह्यते तद्वद् अब्राह्मणाद् अध्ययनम् इति ॥ २.२३९ ॥

The preceding verse as well as these two verses (239 and 240) are supplementary to the injunction contained in verse 241.

The present verse cites an ordinary saying in support of the injunction. Ordinary people say that ‘good may be taken even out of evil.’ If there is nectar in poison, that should be taken in the same manner as the swan takes the milk out of water. This is said in reference to certain medicinal preparations which contain poisonous ingredients.

Even if a child should happen to say something good,—if be pronounces, for instance, some auspicious words at the time of one’s starting for a journey,—it should be accepted.

‘Even from a foe’—one should learn —‘good conduct,’—i.e., of cultured behaviour; and it would not be right to shun such behaviour simply because it happens to be followed by one’s enemy.

The next instance is still more well known—‘gold may be taken even from an impure source.’

The sense of all this is tbat just as the good things herein enumerated are accepted even from evil sources, so may learning be acquired even from a non-Brāhmaṇa.—(239)

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 514) along with the preceding verse;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 144).

Mahābhārata (12.165.30-31).—(Same as Manu.)

239 Even from poison nectar may be taken, even from a child good advice, even from a foe (a lesson in) good conduct, and even from an impure (substance) gold.

Wives, gems, learning, virtue, purity, wise saying and the various arts may be obtained from all sources.—(240)

रत्नानि मणयः शम्बरपुलिन्दादिभ्यो ऽप्य् उपात्ताः शुद्धास् तद्वद् विद्याद्य् अपीति । शिल्पानि च विचित्रपत्रच्छेद्यादीन्य् अदुष्टान्य् अगर्हितानि चैलनिर्णेजनपटरञ्जनबन्धादीनि¹¹ । सर्वतो जातिविशेषम् अनपेक्ष्य समादेयानि स्वीकर्तव्यानि निश्चितातिधैर्यभावैः । “विषाद् अप्य् अमृतम्” (म्ध् २.२३९) इत्य् एवमादिभिर् अनेकवाक्यत्वात्¹² समानप्रक्रमत्वेन सर्व एते ऽर्थवादाः ॥ २.२४० ॥

‘Gems’—precious stones, even though obtained from such low-born people as the Śabara, the Pulinda and so forth, are regarded as clean; similarly should learning be regarded.

‘Arts’—e.g., Painting, etc., and those that have been regarded as mean, such as clothes-washing, the colouring and tying of cloth and so forth.

‘From all sources’—i.e., irrespective of considerations of caste.

‘May be obtained,’—accepted; by persons whose patience is truly assured. Begininng with Verse 239, all that is said is syntactically connected, and forming part of the same context, the whole is to be regarded as a commendatory statement.—(240)

‘Striyo ratnāni’—‘Wives, gems’ (Medhātithi and Govindarāja);—‘gem-like wives’ (Rāghavānanda).

This verse occurs in Devalasmṛti also (quoted in Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 514).

240 Excellent wives, learning, (the knowledge of) the law, (the rules of) purity, good advice, and various arts may be acquired from anybody.

In abnormal times of difficulty learning from a non-Brāhmaṇa has been enjoined, as also the serving of such a teacher, in the shape of following him, during the course of study.—(241)

अयं त्व् अत्र¹³ विधिः । आपद्¹⁴ ब्राह्मणाध्यापकभावः । आपदः काल आपत्कालः । आपद् इत्येव सिद्धे कालग्रहणं वृत्तपूरणार्थम् । पाठान्तरम् आपत्कल्प इति । कल्पनं कल्प आपद्य् एषां कल्पना विधीयते उपदिश्यते । यद् आचार्यः प्रारब्धाध्यपनः प्रायश्चित्तेनान्येन वा निमित्तेन शिष्यं हित्वा देशान्तरं व्रजेत्, न च ब्राह्मणो ऽन्यो ऽध्यापकस् तस्मिन् देशे लभ्यते, बालत्वाद् दूरदेशगमनम् अशक्यम्, तदा ऽब्राह्मणात्¹⁵ क्षत्रियात् तदभावे वैश्याद् अध्ययनम् । प्रकृतत्वात्, “वेदः कृत्स्नः” (म्ध् २.१६५) इति, वेदग्रहणं विधीयते ।

• यद्य् अप्य् अत्राब्राह्मणशब्दो ब्राह्मणजातेर् अन्यत्र जातित्रये वर्तमानं पुरुषत्वम् आचष्टे, तथापि नेह शूद्रस्य ग्रहणम्, तस्याध्यापनाधिकाराभावात् । सत्य् अध्ययने ऽध्यापकत्वम् । अथ “शास्त्रातिक्रमेण शूद्रस्याप्य् अधितवेदत्वस्य संभवः, क्षत्रियवैशययोर् अध्यापकत्वस्येव” । तद् अपि न । यतो धारणे शरीरभेदस् तस्याम्नातः । ततो दण्डमहत्वान् महद् एतद् अकार्यम् अनुमीयते । निन्दितकर्माभ्यासे पतनं तत्संसर्गाच् च ब्रह्मचारिणो ऽत्यन्तदुष्टता स्यात्¹⁶ । “क्षत्रियवैशयोर् अध्यापकत्वनिषेधात् निषेधात् तुल्यदोषः” इति चेद् अस्त्य् अत्र विशेषः । यत्र दण्डप्रायश्चित्ते गुरुणी तत्र महादोषता, स्वपयोस् तु स्वल्पदोषता । न च क्षत्रियवैश्ययोर् अध्यापने महती दण्डप्रायश्चित्ते, शूद्रसेव । किं च द्वे निन्दिते कर्मण्य् अध्ययनम् अध्यापनं च, क्षत्रियवैश्ययोस् त्व् एकम् एव । निषिद्धाध्यापनसंसर्गस् त्व् अनेनैवानुज्ञातः, नासौ दोषकरः । निषिद्धाध्ययनेन तु शूद्रेण संसर्गे न किंचित् प्रंआणम् अस्ति ।

• अनुव्रज्या च शुश्रूषा । वन्दनपादप्रक्षालनादिशुश्रूषाप्रतिषेधार्थम्¹⁷ अनुव्रज्यैव शुश्रूषा, नान्येति । यावद् अध्ययनं यावद् ग्रहणम् ॥ २.२४१ ॥

This verse contains the injunction.

The ‘difficulty’ here meant is the absence of a teacher. The compound ‘āpatkālaḥ’ is to be expounded as ‘āpadaḥ kalaḥ,’ ‘time of difficulty.’ What is meant to be expressed being obtained from the term ‘difficulty’ alone, the additional term ‘time’ only serves to fill up the metre.

‘Āpatkalpe’ is another reading. The meaning in this case would be tbat the ‘kalpa,’ ‘kalpana,’ assumption, of these is permitted during difficulties.

If the preceptor, after having begun the course of teaching, should happen, either on account of an expiatory rite or of some other reason, to abandon the pupil and go to another place,—and no other Brāhmaṇa-teacher is available,—and the pupil himself being too young, is unable to go to another place,—then he may receive teaching even from a non-Brāhmaṇa; i.e., from the Kṣatriya, and in his absence, from the Vaiśya. In view of the context, which began with the mention of the ‘learning of the entire Veda’ (165), the ‘learning’ here enjoined is the getting up of the Veda.

Though the term ‘non-Brāhmaṇa’ denoting all the three castes, except the Brāhmaṇa, stands for all men, yet the Śūdra could not be meant here; for the Śūdra is not entitled to learn the Veda; and it is only when one has learnt something that he can teach it.

“But by transgressing the scriptural ordinance, the Śūdra also might learn the Veda, just as the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya do the work of teaching (which is not permitted).”

This also cannot be; because it has been laid down that if the Śūdra happens to learn the Veda, his body should be cut up. And since the penalty is so severe, it follows that the act is a grievous sin; and one who commits a grevious sin is regarded as ‘fallen’; so that if the Religious Student associated with a ‘fallen’ person, he would render himself extremely defiled.

“But the act of teaching has been prohibited for the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya also; so that the same guilt would be incurred in their case.”

There is a difference between the two cases. That act is to be regarded as extremely heinous in connection with which the scriptures prescribe heavy penalties and expiation; while that in connection with which the penalty and expiation prescribed are slight, should be regarded as slight. In connection with the work of teaching done by the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya, the penalty and expiation laid down are not heavy, as they are in the case of the Śūdra. Further, in the case of the Śūdra, there would he two prohibited acts—that of learning the Veda, and that of teaching it; while in the case of the Kṣatriya, there is only one,—that of teaching. Then, as regards the pupil associating with one who does the work of teaching in contravention of the law,—such associating h as been permitted by the present verse itself; hence it cannot be regarded as leading to defilement; for associating with the Śūdra, who learns the Veda in contravention to law, on the other hand, there is no authority at all.

‘Anuvrajyā ca śuśrūṣā,’ ‘service the shape of following’;—this is meant to prohibit such service as saluting, washing the feet, and so forth.

‘During the course of study’;—i.e., during the time required for the getting up of the text.—(241)

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 513) in support of the view that under abnormal circumstances learning may be acquired from the Kṣatriya and the rest also; where it is explained that the ‘following’ here laid down is to be done only during the time that the study is being carried on; and the implication of the mention of this alone is that the other forms of ‘service’ are excluded; (such as washing of the feet and the,like; this is in agreement with Medhātithi);—and that ‘learning’ here includes gems and other things also.

The verse is quoted also in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 519);—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 52), which explains that the ‘distress,’ ‘āpat’ meant here is the absence of a Brāhmaṇa teacher, and that in the case of the non -Brāhmaṇa teacher, there is to be mere ‘following,’ no feet-washing and the like;—in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 325), which adds the same notes and explains ‘abrāhmaṇa’ as ‘ Kṣatriya or Vaiśya’;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 143), which says ‘following’ is the only ‘service’ to be rendered, and that also only during the course of study.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 458) in support of the view that the rules laid down regarding life-long studentship pertain only to cases where the Teacher is a duly qualified Brāhmaṇa;—in Madanapārijāta (p. 109) to the effect that life-long studentship is permissible under a fully efficient Brāhmaṇa Teacher;—and in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 549), where also it is pointed out that the rules relating to life-long studentship laid down below (under verses 247 et. seq.) pertain to cases where the teacher is a fully qualified Brāhmaṇa.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 72) in support of the view that in the event of having a Kṣatriya or some other caste for his ‘teacher,’ the Brāhmaṇa shall not take up life-long residence under him,—nor with a Brāhmaṇa who is not fit to expound the Veda;—also in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 168).

**(verses 241-242)
**

Gautama (7.1.3).—‘In times of distress the Brāhmaṇa may acquire knowledge from the non-Brāhmaṇa;—there should be following and service of such Teacher;—but after completion of the study, the Brāhmaṇa is to be treated as superior.’

Baudhāyana (1.2.42-43).—‘One may read under a non-Brāhmaṇa also, during times of distress;—so long as he is reading under him, he should follow him, and attend upon him.’

Āpastamba Dharmasūtra (2.4.25-27).—‘In times of distress, the Brāhmaṇa may study under the Kṣatriya or the Vaiśya;—these teachers should be followed;—but after the study, the Brāhmaṇa should have precedence.’

Devala (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, pp. 513-514).—‘Wife, Knowledge, Dharma, Purity, Literary Sayings, and the various Arts,—these may be acquired from all.’

241 It is prescribed that in times of distress (a student) may learn (the Veda) from one who is not a Brahmana; and that he shall walk behind and serve (such a) teacher, as long as the instruction lasts.

A pupil, desiring an unsurpassable state, shall not be in life-long residence with a non-Brāhhaṇa teacher; or with a Brāhmaṇa-teacher who is not an expounder.—(242)

अब्राह्मणे गुरौ वासो ऽध्ययनाय पूर्वेणोक्तो नैष्ठिकस्यापि प्राप्तो विशेषेण¹⁸ निषिध्यते । आत्यन्तिकं वासं यावज्जीविकम् । न वसेन् न कुर्यात् । वासं वसेद् इति । सामान्यविशेषभावाद् वासं वसेद् इति संबन्धः कल्प्यः । गुरुविषयो वासस् तं वसेत् । समाप्ताध्ययनो ऽन्यत्र गच्छेत् ।

• ननु चाध्ययनमात्रम् अनुज्ञातम् आत्यन्तिकस्य वासस्य कुतः प्राप्तिः ।

• नैष दोषः । गुरौ तस्य वास उक्तः, अध्यापयिता च गुरुर् उक्तः । अतो भवत्य् आशङ्का ।

• ब्राह्मणे वाननूचाने । वाशब्दो ऽप्य् अर्थः । ब्राह्मणो ऽपि अद्य् अनूचानो वृत्ताभिजनसंपन्नो न भवति, न च व्याख्यानाध्ययनशील्ः । अनुवचनेनैते ऽपि गुणा लक्ष्यन्ते यतो ऽननुवक्तर्यर्हाभावाद्¹⁹ एवावासः सिद्धः । गतिर् अत्र सुखातिशयप्राप्तिर् विवक्षिता । अनुत्तमा, यस्या अन्योत्तमा नास्ति, तां काङ्क्षन् परमात्मानन्दरूपं मोक्षम् ॥ २.२४२ ॥

The foregoing verse might create the impression that the Life-long Student may live in residence with his non-Brāhmaṇa teacher, for the purposes of study; and it is this that is particularly interdicted here.

‘Ātyantikam vāsam’—means life-long residence.

‘Should not live’—should not do. The phrase ‘vāsam vaṣet,’ ‘live in residence,’ may be construed by regarding one (‘vāsa,’ ‘residence’) as the particular and the other (‘vaset,’ ‘live’) as the general (form of the same act of living). The meaning being ‘he should not live that particular kind of living which is done in the teacher’s house,’—‘he should go elsewhere after having finished his studies.’

“All that the preceding verse has permitted is learning from a non-Brāhmaṇa; how could there be any possibility of life-long residence?”

There is no force in this objection. It has been said above that one should reside with his preceptor; and the teacher has been called the ‘preceptor,’ hence the said possibility arises.

‘Or, with the Brāhmaṇa who is not an expounder.’—‘Or’ here stands for ‘also.’

The Brāhmaṇa also, if he happen to be a non-expounder,—i.e., if he is not equipped with good character and nobility, nor capable of studying and teaching,—all these qualifications should be taken as indicated by ‘expounding’; for if ‘expounding’ itself were meant, then the non-residence with a teacher who does no expounding would be only natural, [and would not need to be strictly emphasised, as it is here].

‘State’ here stands for the attainment of bliss;—‘Unsurpassable’—to which nothing else is superior;—‘denting’—such state,—i.e., Deliverance in the form of Highest Bliss—(242)

**(verses 241-242)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 2.241].

242 He who desires incomparable bliss (in heaven) shall not dwell during his whole life in (the house of) a non-Brahmanical teacher, nor with a Brahmana who does not know the whole Veda and the Angas.

If one likes to live in life-long residence in the teacher’s house, he should, intently serve him till he becomes freed from his body.—(243)

अत्यन्तं भवम् आत्यन्तिकं वासं गुरोः कुले नैष्ठिकं ब्रह्मचर्यं यदि रोचयेत् तदा युक्तस् तत्परः परिचरेद् एनं गुरुम्, आ श्रीरस्य विमोक्षणात् पाताद् यावच्छरीरं ध्रियत इत्य् अर्थः ॥ २.२४३ ॥

If he likes to live in absolute—i.e., life long, permanent,—residence in the Teacher’s house,—then, in that owe,—‘he should intently’—diligently—‘serve him,’—the Teacher; ‘till he becomes freed from his body,—i.e., as long as his body lasts.—(243)

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 458), as laying down the duties of the life-long Student under an efficient Brāhmaṇa-teacher;—to the same effect in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 504);—also in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 551), where the term ‘asmai’ is explained as standing for such a student as is not lame or dwarf, or blind, or otherwise incapacitated; and it is added that the provision of tins ‘life-long studentship’ need not be incompatible with the texts laying down a life-long performance of the Agnihotra for the Brāhmaṇa (which involves the necessity of taking a wife); because the latter is meant for only those students who intend to enter the ‘Household,’ and are on that account called ‘Upakurvāṇa,’ as distinguished from the ‘Naiṣṭhika’ who remains a ‘student’ all his life and never enters the household.

This is also quoted in Aparārka (p. 72) as indicating the optional character of life-long studentship;—in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 171) as discounting the view that “life-long studentship is meant only for the maimed and other incapable persons;”—and in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 62), to the same effect.

**(verses 243-244)
**

Gautama (3.5).—‘Dependence upon the Teacher, till the end.’

Gautama (3.9).—‘Behaving thus, he attains the Brahmic Region.’

Baudhāyana (2.6.).—‘The Religious Student should attend on the teacher till death.’

Āpastamba Dharmasūtra (2.21.6).—‘The Religious Student shall surrender his body to the Teacher’s House, observing the same restrictions as those during the course of his study.’

Vaśiṣṭha (7.3, 1).—‘The Religious Student shall serve the Teacher,—till the falling off of the body.’

Viṣṇu (28.43).—‘Or he may pass the whole of his life in the Teacher’s house.’

Yājñavalkya (1.49, 50).—‘The Life-long Student shall remain with the Teacher;—and after the Teacher, with the teacher’s son, or his wife or his fire.’

Bṛhaspati (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 549).—‘The observances of the Life-long Student are as follows:—the Twilight Prayers, Fire-tending, Vedic Study, Alms-begging, Sleeping on the ground, Self-control,—observing these till death, the Life-long Student attains the Brahmic region.’

Vaśiṣṭha (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 549, and Parāśaramādhava, p. 458).—‘He shall maintain his studentship till his body dies; on his teacher’s death, serving the fire. With speech controlled, eating of alms during the fourth, sixth and eighth parts of the day, dependent on the teacher, with hair-braided or with top-hair braided, walking behind the teacher when he works, standing when he is seated, reading when called upon to do so, offering to the teacher all that he obtains as alms,—he shall eat with his permission;—and avoiding sleeping on the cot, washing of the teeth, and annotating of the body, he shall remain standing or seated, and bathing three times during the day.’

Devala (Do., p. 550).—‘Wearing of the sacred thread, the string of beads, the staff, the loin-cloth, the water-pot and the girdle; eating once only; bathing more than once; performing Agnihotra both times, as also the twilight prayers;—with hair and nails uncut; he shall avoid garland, perfumes, unguents, ornaments, dresses, shoes, conveyances, jumping, bathing, running, teaching, medication, astrology, science of house-building, auspicious rites, fattening rites, allaying of portents, music, assemblies, entrance into contracts, caligraphy, carpentry, measurements of houses, fields, substances, and grains, use of weapons, gambling…’

Hārīta, (Do.).—‘Having fetched sacrificial fuel, he shall attend upon the Fire by sweeping, scratching, rekindling, collecting, putting on fuel, worshipping, hymning and saluting; he shall not touch it with his feet; nor shall he blow it with the mouth; shall not carry fire and water at the same time: shall not eat when there is indigestion, etc.. Those Brāhmaṇas who keep up this studentship become immortal.’

Yama (Do.).—‘Till the falling off of the body, those who serve the teacher, ever strict in celibacy, reach the region of Brahman and are not born again.’

Chāndogya Upaniṣad (Do., p. 551).—‘He who is firm in Brahman attains immortality.’

Dakṣa (Do., p. 552).—‘The second kind of Religious Student is the life-long one.’

Viṣṇu (Parāśaramādhava, p. 459).—‘The life-long studentship is for the dwarf, the humpbacked, one born blind, the sexless, the lame, the diseased and the invalid.’

243 But if (a student) desires to pass his whole life in the teacher’s house, he must diligently serve him, until he is freed from this body.

The Brāhmaṇa who, till the dissolution of his body, serves his teacher, goes forthwith to the eternal abode of brahman.—(244)

नैष्ठिकब्रह्मचर्यस्य फलविधिर् अयम् । शरीरस्य समाप्तिर् जीवितत्यागः । आ ततः कालाद् यो गुरुं शुश्रूषते परिचरति । स गच्छति विप्रो ब्रह्मणः सद्म सदनं स्थानं शाश्वतम्, न पुनः संसारं प्रतिपद्यत इति यावत् । अञ्जसा अक्लिष्टेन मार्गेण । न गत्यन्तरेण तिर्यक्त्वेन मनुष्यादिजन्मना व्यवधीयते । ब्रह्मशब्देन चेतिहासदर्शने²⁰ देवविशेषश्²¹ चतुर्वक्त्रः, तस्य सद्म स्थानविशेषः, दिवि विद्यते । वेदान्तवादिनां तु ब्रह्म परमात्मा, तस्य सद्म स्वरूपम् एव, तद्भावापत्तिः ॥ २.२४४ ॥

This verse lays down the reward of Life-long Studentship.

‘Dissolution of the body’—renouncing of life;—‘till’—up to that time;—‘who serves’—attends upon—‘his Teacher’;—such a Brāhmaṇa—‘goes’ to the ‘abode’—place, mansion—‘of Brahman’—‘eternal’;—i.e., he does not return again to the cycle of births.

‘Forthwith,’—i.e., by an easy path; not by the roundabout way of passing through the lives of animals and men.

The word ‘Brahman’ here stands, according to the view of the Purāṇas, for the particular God with four faces; and his ‘abode’ is a particular place in Heaven; while according to the Vedanta standpoint,’ ‘Brahman’ is the supreme Self, and his ‘abode’ is that Self itself, i.e., becoming absorbed hereinto.—(244)

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 459) as describing the reward that accrues to the life-long Student;—in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 504) to the same effect;—also in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 550);—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 170).

**(verses 243-244)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 2.243].

244 A Brahmana who serves his teacher till the dissolution of his body, reaches forthwith the eternal mansion of Brahman.

At first the pupil, knowing his duties, should not give anything to his teacher; but when going to take the final bath, he should, on being ordered by the teacher, present something for him, to the best of his capacity;—(245)

नैष्ठिकस्यायं गुरवे ऽर्थदानं²² प्रतिषिध्यते, स्नास्यतो गुर्वर्थविधानात् । न च नैष्ठिकस्य स्नानम् अस्ति । प्रकृतश् च नैष्ठिक एव । उपकुर्वाणस्य तु उपनयनात् प्रभृति यावत् स्नानम् अस्त्य् एव सति संभवे यथाशक्त्या दानम् ।

• पूर्वं स्नानाद् गुरवे किंचिद् उपकुर्वीत दद्यात्, ददात्यर्थे धातुः सोपसर्गो ऽतश् च स्वसाध्या चतुर्थी । अथ वा क्रियाग्रहणम् अपि कर्तव्यम् इति, ततः संप्रदानत्वम् । धर्मवित्पदम् अनुवादः । स्नास्यंस् तु स्नानकाले प्राप्ते गुरुणा आदीष्टम् “अमुम् अर्थम् आहर” इति । ततः शक्त्या यावन्तं शक्नोति तावन्तम् । गुर्वर्थम् । गुरोर् इदं गुर्वर्थम् । गुरोर् येन प्रयोजनं तम् आहरेद् उपनयेत् ।

• ननु अयं नैष्ठिकस्य गुर्वर्थकरणप्रतिषेधः ।

• न ह्य् एते द्वे वाक्ये, एकेन प्रतिषेधः, अपरेण गुर्वर्थविधिः । स्नाने गुर्वर्थो ऽवश्यं कर्तव्यम् इत्य् अयं विधिः । प्रतिषेधस् तच्छेषः । उपकारप्रतिषेधे²³ च सर्वशुश्रूषाविधिर् अनर्थकः स्यात् । न च दानम् एवोपकारः, येन धनोपकार एव निषिध्येत, नान्यः प्रियहितादिः । अर्थवादत्वे त्व् अयथार्थता न दोषः । गम्यते चात्रैकवाक्यता ॥ २.२४५ ॥

This verse should be taken as prohibiting the making of presents to the Teacher by the Life-long Student; since it lays down the gift to the Teacher as to be presented only by the pupil who is going to take the Final Bath, which the Life-long Student never takes; and it is the Life-long Student that forms the subject of the context. As for the (the other kind of student, who is only in temporary residence), he does go on making presents to the Teacher, on every possible occasion, since the very day of the Initiatory Rite.

‘At first’;—i.e., before the final Bath.

‘Should not give anything to his Teacher’;—the verb ‘upakurvīta’ stands here for giving, such being the force of the prefix; so that the Dative in gurave is due to this verb itself. Or, the Teacher may be regarded as the person aimed at by the act (denoted by upakurvīta); and in this case the Dative would be in accordance with the Vārtika on Pāṇini 2.3.13.

‘But when going to take the Final Bath’;—i.e., when the time for the Final Bath has arrived;—‘being ordered by the teacher,’—in such words as ‘bring me such and such a thing,’—he should ‘to the best of his capacity’—as much as he may be able to bring,—‘present somethin,’ useful, ‘to the teacher.’

“But this verse contains (as you have asserted at the outset) the prohibition of the Life-long Student presenting anything to the Teacher [and how do you reconcile this with the latter half, which prescribes such giving?].”

True; but the verse does not contain two independent sentences,—one (the first half of the verse) prohibiting the gift, and the other (the second half) permitting it. The fact is that there is a clear injunction that at the Final Bath a gift should be made to the Teacher; and it is to this injunction that the preceding prohibition is subservient; for, If the present prohibition related to all kinds of beneñt to the Teacher, the entire body of injunctions laying down the service of the Teacher would become nullified; further, ‘gift’ is not the only benefit that can be conferred; so that there is no justification for restricting the prohibition of ‘benefit’ to the gift of money only, and not to the ‘doing of what is agreeable and beneficial to him.’ There is nothing incongruous in taking the passage in a sense which is not the literal meaning,—when the passage is a purely commendatory one; and it is quite clear that the two halves of the verse form one syntactical whole [hence the former is taken as subservient and supplementary to the latter].—(245)

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 567) in support of the view that no ‘fee’ is to paid to the Teacher before the completion of study; and it adds that this ‘Concluding Bath’ is for the purpose of entering the married state,—and not for that of any other life-stage;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 179), which adds that this refers to the presenting of a living, there being no prohibition regarding other kinds of presents.

Gautama (2. 55, 56).—‘At the end of the study, he should approach the teacher with a present;—having done this, when permitted by him, he should take the Final Bath.’

Āpastamba Dharmasūtra (1. 7. 19).—‘Having finished his study, he shall present in the proper manner to the teacher as fee whatever may be in his power.’

Viṣṇu (28. 42).—‘After having acquired the Veda, he shall, when permitted by him, present to him something good and then take the Bath.’

Yājñavalkya (2. 1).—‘Having presented a good thing to the teacher, he shall take the Bath, with his permission; after having completed either the Veda or the observances, or both.’

Gobhila Gṛhyasūtra (3. 4. 1,2).—‘The Religious Student, after having studied the Veda, shall make a present to the Teacher.’

Āśvalāyana (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p 573).—‘Having studied the four, or three or two Vedas, or a single Veda, the wise man should satisfy the teacher with fees, having obtained from his parents and relations the wealth necessary for it.’

Āśvalāyana (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 575).—‘At the end of study, he should approach the teacher with a present and then perform the Bath.’

Śaunaka (Do.).—‘Having read the four Vedas and kept the observances, the pupil shall give to the teacher the fee that he can, and then, permitted by him, he shall perform the Samāvartana Rites.’

Laghu Hārīta (Do., p. 574).—‘That teacher who teaches a man a single syllable,—there is nothing on earth by giving which he would be free from the debt to him.’

245 He who knows the sacred law must not present any gift to his teacher before (the Samavartana); but when, with the permission of his teacher, he is about to take the (final) bath, let him procure (a present) for the venerable man according to his ability,

Joyfully bringing to the teacher, a field, or gold, or a cow, or a horse, or at least an umbrella and a fair of shoes, grain, vegetables or clothes.—(246)

उक्तम् उद्दिष्टं गुर्वर्थं कुर्यात् तत्र न सर्वं कर्तव्यम् इत्य् एवमर्थो ऽयं श्लोकः । यदि गुरुर् विरुद्धम् आदिशेत्, “अमुष्यस्त्रियम् आहर” इति, “सर्वस्वं वा देहि” इति, तन् न कर्तवम् । किं तर्हि **क्षेत्रम्, **धान्यानां भवनभूमिः क्षेत्रम् उच्यते । हिरण्यं सुवर्णम् । वाशब्दो विकल्पार्थः । न समुदितानि देयानि । अन्ततः अन्याभावे छत्रोपनहम् अपि । द्वन्द्वनिर्देशात् साहित्यदानम् । वासांसीति सर्वत्र संख्या न विवक्षिता । प्रीतिम् आहरन्न् इति एतद् आहरेद् इति पूर्वसंबन्धः²⁴ । “प्रीतम् आहरेद्” इति वा पाठे अत्रैव क्रियापरिसमाप्तिः । “प्रीतिम् आवहेद्” इति वा । प्रीतिम् उत्पादयितुं²⁵ धान्याद्य् आहरेत् । स्वतन्त्रैव वा प्रीतिर् आहार्यतयोच्यते । ततश् च द्रव्योपदेशस्य प्रदर्शनार्थता²⁶ सिद्धा भवति । अन्यद् अपि यद् एवंविधं प्रीतिजनकं मणिमुक्ताप्रवालहस्त्यश्वगन्त्रीरथादि²⁷ तद् अपि देयम् इति गम्यते । तथा च गौतमः- “विद्यान्ते गुरुर्²⁸ अर्थेन निमन्त्र्यः” (ग्ध् २.४८) । आहरेद् यदि स्याद् आत्मीयं शक्त्यागतं तदा, न चेद् याच्ञादिनार्जयेत्²⁹ ॥ २.२४६ ॥

It has been said that he should present something to the Teacher; and the present verse shows that any and everything should not be presented; the sense being that if the Teacher orders—‘bring me the wife of such and such a person,’ or ‘let me have all that you possess,’—then the pupil shall not do what he says; what he should givo are as fellows,—‘Field’—agricultural land;—‘Gold.’

‘Or’—signifies option; the sense being that all the things mentioned shall not be given.

‘Or at least,’—i.e., in the absence of the other things.

‘An umbrella and a pair of shoes’;—these two being mentioned in a copulative compound, it follows that both together have to be given.

‘Clothes;’—no significance is meant to be attached to the nouns in this passage.

‘Bringing joyfully’;—this has to be construed with ‘should present,’ (of the preceding verse). If, however, we read this as ‘prītimāharet,’ ‘should bring pleasure to his Teacher,’—then this sentence becomes self-contained. ‘Prītimāvahet’ is another reading; the sense being tbat ‘he should present the grain, etc., for bringing pleasure to the Teacher’: or the pleasure may by itself be regarded as the object to be brought to the Teacher: and in that case the mention of the things becomes purely suggestive; the sense being that other things likely to give him pleasure,—such as gems, pearls, corals, elephants, mules, chariots, etc.,—may also be given. To this effect we have the saying of Gautama (2.48)—‘On the completion of study the Teacher should be presented with something useful.’

Only such things have to be presented as the pupil happens to possess, he should not go about obtaining things by begging and other means, for presenting.—(246)

This verse is quoted in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 178), which adds that what is meant is that if possible, the best articles should be presented;—in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 368), which adds the following notes:—‘Kṣetram,’ field with corns standing,—the umbrella and shoes, should both go together, such being the sense of the compounding,—‘Vāsāṃsi’ three pieces of cloth,—‘gurave prītimāvahan,’ the ‘completion of the study should be done only when the Teacher permits it’;—also in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 48a).

Vyāsa (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 574).—‘Having completed his study, the pupil should with bis permission take the Bath, after having offered to him a cow as his fee.’

246 (Viz.) a field, gold, a cow, a horse, a parasol and shoes, a seat, grain, (even) vegetables, (and thus) give pleasure to his teacher.

The Preceptor having died, he should serve, in the same manner as the Preceptor, the qualified son of the Preceptor, or the Preceptor’s wife, or his Sapiṇḍa.—(247)

नैष्ठिकस्यायम् उपदेशः । असत्य् आचार्ये, तत्पुत्रे श्रोत्रियत्वादिगुणयुक्ते, गुरुपत्न्याम् आचार्याण्यां वा, सपिण्डे वा गुरोर् एव, वसेत् । तत्र च गुरुवद् वृत्तिम् आचरेद् भैक्षनिवेदनादि सर्वं कुर्यात् । दारशब्दो बहुवचनान्तो भार्यावचनो वैयाकरणैः स्मर्यते । स्मृतिकारास् त्व् एकवचनान्तम् अपि प्रयुञ्जते- “धर्मप्रजासंपन्ने³⁰ दारे नान्यां कुर्वीत” (आप्ध् २.११.१२) इति ॥ २.२४७ ॥

This injunction is meant for the Life-long Student.

In the absence of the Preceptor, he should continue to live in residence, either with the Preceptor’s son, who is endowed with Vedic learning and other qualities, or with the Preceptor’s widow, or with the Preceptor’s ‘Sapiṇḍa’; and towards each of these he should behave as towards his Preceptor; i.e., he should present to him the food he obtains as alms, and so forth.

The term ‘dārā,’ denoting, has been regarded by grammarians as always used with the plural ending; but writers on Smṛti use the singular form also; e.g., ‘Dharmaprajā- sampanne dāre nānyām kurvīta’ (Āpaṣṭamba, 2.11.13).—(247)

‘Sapiṇḍe’.—The ‘Sapiṇḍa’ is defined below in 5.60.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 458) as laying down the duties of the life-long Student;—in Madanapārijāta (p. 109) in support of the view that in the absence of the Teacher’s wife, the Student should take up ‘residence’ with the Teacher’s Sapiṇḍa, and in the absence of this latter also, he should betake himself to the ‘tending of Fire’;—in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 549) to the effect that ‘residence with Fire’ is to be taken up only in the absence of the Teacher’s Sapiṇḍa;—in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 504), along with the following verse;—in Hāralatā (p. 76) as referring to the ‘Life-long Student’;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 167), which says that this refers to cases where no Sapiṇḍa is available.

Gautama (3. 7).—‘In the absence of the teacher, service should be rendered to bis offspring.’

Viṣṇu (28. 44, 45).—‘On the death of the teacher, one should reside with his son, as with the teacher himself:—or with the teacher’s wife, or with others of the same caste.’

Yājñavalkya (1. 49).—‘In the absence of the teacher, he shall reside either with his son, or with his wife or with his fire.’

247 (A perpetual student) must, if his teacher dies, serve his son (provided he be) endowed with good qualities, or his widow, or his Sapinda, in the same manner as the teacher.

When all these are non-existent, he should perfect his body, while he carries on the tending of the Fire, with only such diversions as standing and sitting.—(248)

samudrasamyānam…… eṣāmanyatamat kṛtvā chaturtha kālāmitabhojinaḥ syuḥ ape? bhyapeyuḥ savanānukalpam sthānāsanābhyām viharanta ete tribhirvarṣaistadapahanti pāpam.

‘Sea-voyage (and a few other acts enumerated)…, having done any one of these acts, people should eat sparsely at the fourth part of the day, should enter water in the morning, at midday and in the evening; amusing themselves by sitting and standing, they destroy that sin after three years.’

अविद्यमानता सर्वेषाम् अभावः, यदि वा गुणहीनता । एतेष्व् असत्स्व् अग्निशुश्रूषां प्रयुञ्जीत, अग्निशरणोपलेपनम् अग्नीन्धनम् आचार्यवत् संनिधाननियमाद् भृत्यवद्³¹ अहोरात्रासनम् एषाग्नेः शुश्रूषा तां³² कुर्वन् देहं साधयेत् शरीरं क्षपयेत् । यथान्धश् चक्षुष्मान् उच्यते एवं साधयेद् इति । स्थानासन एव विहारः तद्वान्, न कदाचिद् आसीत एवं विहरेत् ।

• अन्ये तु मन्यन्ते- स्थानाय स्वस्तिकादिना यद् आसनं ध्यानकाले तत् स्थानासनम्, विहारो ऽन्यो भिक्षाचरणादिः ॥ २.२४८ ॥

‘Non-existence’ may mean either death, or absence of proper qualification.

‘When all these are non-existent,’ he should carry on the tending of the fire,—i.e., he should continue to wash and besmear with clay the fire-house, he should kindle the fire, he should constantly keep near the Fire, just as his Preceptor used to do;—all this constitutes the ‘tending of the fire.’ While doing all this, ‘he should perfect his body’—i.e., let it wear away; this is called ‘perfecting’ in the same manner (of contrary signification) as the blind man is described as ‘having excellent eyes.’

‘Sthānāsanavihāravān’—‘with only such diversion as standing and sitting’; i.e., he should amuse himself only by standing for sometime and sitting for sometime.

Others have explained this to mean that he ‘should sit in the proper posture for meditation’—such as the Svasti(k/h?) and the rest—‘and should go about begging alms.’—(248)

Deham sādhayet—‘Let the body wear away’ (Medhātithi and Govindarāja);—‘shall make the Soul in his body perfect, i.e. fit for union with Brahman’ (Kullūka, Nārāyaṇa and Rāghavānanda).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 458) as laying down the duties of the lifelong Student;—in Vidhānapārijāta (p. 504);—in Madanapārijāta (p. 106);—and in Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, (p. 504), where the note is added on the expression ‘sthānāsanavihāravan’ that what is meant is that ‘during his spare time left after he has fully accomplished all his duties, he may stand or sit or walk about’. Medhātithi explains it to mean ‘at times he shall stand, and at times sit down,—in this manner he shall divert himself.’ But he goes on to add another explanation offered by ‘others’, by which the meaning is that ‘he shall practise the postures prescribed in connection with Yogic practices, and live on alms’.—Nārāyaṇa explains the phrase to mean a particular form of austerity consisting in ‘standing, sitting and wandering’.—It is quoted in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 167), which explains the phrase to mean ‘standing, sitting and moving at stated times.’

This phrase ‘sthānāsanavihāra’ appears to have been an old idiom; it is met with for the first time in Baudhāyana’s Dharmasūtra (II. 1. 41), where we read —

samudrasamyānam…… eṣāmanyatamat kṛtvā chaturtha kālāmitabhojinaḥ syuḥ ape? bhyapeyuḥ savanānukalpam sthānāsanābhyām viharanta ete tribhirvarṣaistadapahanti pāpam.

Translated literally, this means—

‘Sea-voyage (and a few other acts enumerated)…, having done any one of these acts, people should eat sparsely at the fourth part of the day, should enter water in the morning, at midday and in the evening; amusing themselves by sitting and standing, they destroy that sin after three years.’

The exact meaning of the expiatory rite here prescribed has never been understood. Whenever the question of sea-voyage has come up for discussion, the antagonists of the voyage have held that by the last clause Baudhāyana clearly meant that the voyager should have to commit suicide; to spend three years ‘standing and standing’, i.e. without any sleep—would he nothing short of self-immolation. The protagonists of sea-voyage felt all along that the passage could not mean this; though they were unable to suggest any other plausible explanation. They thought that even if suicide were actually meant, there were more effective means available for doing that; and in fact the ordinance that ‘the man shall not sleep for three years’ looked absurd on the face of it.

We find the expression in several other works.

(1) In Padmapurāṇa (Ādi-khaṇḍa, 58. 26) we read in course of the description of the duties of Vānaprastha, the man in the third stage of life—sthānāsanābhyām viharet na kvachid dhairyamutsṛjet, ‘he shall divert himself with sitting and standing, and shall not renounce his steadiness on any point.’

The committing of suicide certainly could not form a duty of the ordinary Yānaprastha, the hermit retiring from active life to a life of meditation and worship.

(2) In Yājñavalkya (III 50) we read—sthānāsanavihārairvā yogābhyāsena vā tathā (dinam nayet), where Mitākṣarā adds the explanation—kañcit kālam sthānam kañcit chopaveśanam, ‘for some time he shall sit, and for some time he shall stand’—in this manner he shall spend the day. And Aparārka says—sthānena gatinivṛttyā, āsanena, upaveśanena vihāreṇa caṅkramaṇena (i. e. ‘resting, sitting, and walking) ca divasam nayet.

(3) Again in Manu (VI. 22) ‘sthānāsanābhyām viharet’ where Medhātithi says, ‘sthānāsanābhyām dine, rātrau tu kevalasthaṇḍilaśāyītām vakṣyati’, by which also the text means—‘he shall spend the day in standing and sitting.’

(4) Lastly in Manu (XL 224) we meet with the same expression; and here it forms part of the Kṛcchra—penance.

From all this it is clear that the phrase could never have been intended to lay down anything so physically impossible as passing three years ‘without sleep.’ In fact a careful study of all the above texts leads us to the conclusion that what is meant by the words ‘sthānāsanābhyām viharet’ is exactly what is expressed by the Hindi idiom ‘uṭha baiṭha kara samaya bitānā’; and the sense would appear to be that the man shall have recourse to no other diversion or amusement, save what may be obtained by ‘standing or sitting.’

Gautama (3. 8).—‘In the absence of them, he shall reside either with a senior fellow-student, or with the fire.’

Vaśiṣṭha (7.5, 6).—‘On the teacher’s death, he shall attend upon the Fire;—as the fire has been recognised as the teacher.’

Viṣṇu (28, 46).—‘In his absence, the Life-long Student shall attend upon the Fire.

Yājñavalkya (1. 49).—(See above.)

248 Should none of these be alive, he must serve the sacred fire, standing (by day) and sitting (during the night), and thus finish his life.

The Brāhmaṇa who thus keeps his studentship unflinchingly, goes to the highest place and is never born again into this world.—(249)

एवम् इति नैष्ठिकवृत्तिं प्रत्यवमृशति । एवं यो ब्रह्मचर्यं चरत्य् अविप्लुतः अस्खलः स प्राप्नोत्य् उत्तमस्थानं धाम परमात्मप्राप्तिलक्षणम् । न चेह पुनर् जायते न संसारम् आपद्यते । ब्रह्मरूपं संपद्यत इति ॥ २.२४९ ॥

इति मानवे धर्मशास्त्रे भृगुप्रोक्तायां संहितायां

द्वितीयो ऽध्यायः

इति श्रीभट्टमेधातिथिविरचिते मनुभाष्ये

द्वितीयो ऽध्यायः

‘Thus’ refers to the methods of the Lifelong Student.

‘He who thus keeps his Studentship unflinchingly’—without failing,—‘goes to’—obtains—‘the highest place’—above; i.e., he attains the Supreme Self.

‘Is not born again into this world—he does not fall into the cycle of births. That is, he becomes absorbed into Brahman.—(249)

‘Mānyā kāpi etc.’—This does not form part of the text of Medhātithi This has been added by a subsequent ‘Editor.’

Viṣṇu (28. 47).—[Reproduces Manu.]

Gautama (3. 9)—‘Behaving thus, the man with senses subdued, attains the Brahmic Region.’

End of Adhyāya II.

249 A Brahmana who thus passes his life as a student without breaking his vow, reaches (after death) the highest abode and will not be born again in this world.