०६

The twice-born accomplished student, having, in the afore- said manner, lived, according to law, the life of the householder, should dwell in the forest, in the proper manner, self-controlled and with his organs under subjection—(1).

गृहोपलक्षित आश्रमो गृहाश्रमः। गृहा दाराः । तत्र स्थित्वा तम् अनुष्ठाय, वने वसेद् इति विधिः । स्थित्वेति क्त्वाप्रत्ययेन पौर्वकाल्यं गार्हस्थ्यस्य वनवासाद् दर्शयति । क्रमेणाश्रमः कर्तव्यः । कृतगार्हस्थ्यो वनवासे ऽधिक्रियते । समुच्चयपक्षम् आश्रित्यैतद् उक्तम् । अन्यथाविप्लुतब्रह्मचर्याद् अपि वनवासो विद्यत इत्य् एतद् अपि वक्ष्यते । विजितेन्द्रियः पक्वकषायः क्षीणराग इत्य् अर्थः । एवं विधिवद् यथावद् इतिपदानि वृत्तपूरणानि । तानि प्राक् तत्र तत्र व्याख्यातानि । एतावद् विधीयते । गार्हस्थ्यं कृत्वा वनवास आश्रयितव्यः ॥ ६.१ ॥

The term ‘gṛhāśrama’ means that ‘āśrama’, life-stage which is characterised by the ‘gṛha’, house,—i.e., the presence of the wife.

Having ‘lived’ there,—i.e., having duly fulfilled the duties of that stage of life—he should dwell in, the forest. This is the injunction here set forth.

The affix in ‘sthitvā’, ‘having lived’, indicates the priority of the Householder’s life to that of the Hermit; and the meaning is that one should proceed from, stage to stage in the right order; it is only one who has lived the Householder’s life that is entitled to the forest-life of the Hermit.

What is said here is in accordance with the view that a man should pass through each and all the four stages. There is however the other view that from the life of the purely celebate student also one can proceed at once to the forest-life; as is going to be described later on.

‘With his organs under subjection ’—with his impurities washed off, his passions calmed down.

The phrases ‘according to law’ and ‘in the proper manner’ have been added only for the purpose of filling up the metre; as we have already explained in several places.

All that is meant to be enjoined here is that ‘having completed the Householder’s life, he shall betake himself to the life in the forest.’—(1).

‘Niyataḥ’—‘Taking a firm resolution’ (Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘devoted to the duties, austerities, reciting the Veda and so forth’ (Nārāyaṇa).

**(verses 6.1-2)
**

Gautama (3.1).—‘Some people declare that he who has studied the Veda may make his choice regarding the particular stage that he will enter.’

Baudhāyana (2.11.14).—‘A hermit is one who regulates his conduct according to the institutes proclaimed by Vikhānas.’

Āpastamba (2.21.1-2, 18-10).—‘There are four stages—that of the Householder, that of the Student, that of the Renunciate and that of the Hermit. If he lives in all these four according to the law, without allowing himself to he disturbed, he will obtain salvation. Only after completing studentship shall he go forth as a Hermit.’

Āpastamba. (2.22.78).—‘After having finished the study of the Veda, having taken a wife and kindled the sacred fires, he shall begin the rites ending with the Soma-sacrifices, performing as many as are prescribed in the Veda:—afterwards he shall build a dwelling outside the village and dwell there with his children and wife.’

Āpastamba (2.21.8).—‘After having fulfilled the duties of the Student, he shall go forth as a Renunciate.’

Āpastamba (2.24.14).—‘He may accomplish his objects as he pleases; there is no reason to place any one order before the other.’

Viṣṇu (94.1-2).—‘A householder, when he sees his skin wrinkled and his hair turned grey, must go to live in a forest; or when he sees the son of his son.’

Yājñavalkya (3.45).—‘Entrusting his wife to his sons, or accompanied by his wife, the Hermit, taking the vow of celibacy, shall repair to the forest, along with his tires and the Upāsanās.’

Yama (Aparārka, p. 940).—‘Having lawfully begotten children, having performed the sacrifices to the best of his ability, and having seen his son’s child, the Brāhmaṇa shall repair to the forest.’

Śaṅkha-Likhita (Do.).—‘Having begotten children, having performed their sacraments, taught them the Veda, provided them with the means of living, united them to their wives, entrusting his family to his son, and making preparations for departure, he should have recourse to special means of livelihood. In due course, after having passed through the Yāyāvara stage, he should repair to the forest.’

Yama (Do.).—‘faking with himself the sacrificial implements, the sacred fire, the cows and other accessories, and accompanied by his wife, the twice-born man shall repair to the forest.’

Jābāla (Parāśaramādhava, Ācāra, p. 525).—‘Having completed religious studentship, one shall become a Householder; after having become a House-holder, he shall go out.’

Chāgalega (Do., p. 526).—‘Being without his wife, he shall deposit his fire in himself, and the Brāhmaṇa shall go out of his house.’

Baudhāyana (2.17.2-5)—‘Some teachers say that he who has finished his studentship may become a renunciate immediately on the completion of that; hut according to others, renunciation is fit only for those Śālīnas and Yāyāvaras who are childless, or a widower; in general they prescribe renunciation after the completion of the seventieth year, after the children have been finally settled in their sacred duties.’

Vaśiṣṭha (7.1-3).—‘There are four orders: the Student, the Householder, the Hermit and the Renunciate; a man who has studied one, two or three Vedas without violating the rules of studentship may enter any of these, whichsoever he pleases.’

Kāmandaka (2.27-28).—‘The duties of the Hermit are to keep matted hair, to perform Agnihotra, to sleep on the bare ground, to wear black deer-skin, to live in solitary places, to sustain himself on water, succulent roots, Nīvāra corn and fruits, to refuse alms, to bathe thrice, to observe vows and to adore gods and guests.’

001 A twice-born Snataka, who has thus lived according to the law in the order of householders, may, taking a firm resolution and keeping his organs in subjection, dwell in the forest, duly (observing the rules given below).

When the householder notices his wrinkles and greyness, and sees his child’s child,—then he should r etire to the forest,—(2).

यद् उक्तं त्यक्तविषयोपभोगगर्धो ऽधिक्रियत इति तद् एव दर्शयति । वली त्वक्शैथिल्यम् । पलितं केशपाण्डुर्यम् । अपत्यस्यापत्यं पुत्रस्य पुत्र इत्य् आहुः । सत्य् अपि दुहितुर् अपत्ये दौहित्रे पुत्रस्यापि कन्यायां¹ जातायां नैवं विधिम् इच्छन्ति शिष्टाः ।

• अन्ये तु शिरःपालित्यं पौत्रोपत्तिं च वयोविशषलक्षणार्थम् आहुः । यस्य कथंचित् पालित्यं न² भवेत् सो ऽपि वार्धिक्ये वनाम् समाश्रयेत् । यथैव “जातपुत्रः कृष्णकेशस् तु” (च्ड़्। ब्ध् १.३.५) आधाने ऽधिक्रियते, एवं जातपौत्रः पलितशिराः । तदापि पुत्रजन्मकृष्णकेशता च वयोविशेषोपलक्षणार्थम् एव ।

• नातिशीघ्रं नातिचिरम् इत्य् अर्थस्योपलक्षणत्वे तु प्रमाणं वक्तव्यम् ॥ ६.२ ॥

It has been said before that the person who is entitled to the life of the Hermit is only one who has abandoned all longing for the objects of sense: and this is what the author is explaining now.

‘Wrinkles’—Looseness of skin.

‘Greyness’—the whiteness of the hair.

‘Child’s child.’—They explain this to mean ‘son’s son And cultured people have held that this rule does not apply if the man has only a son born to his daughter, or a daughter born to his son.

Others however have taken the ‘greyness of hair’ and ‘birth of the grandchild’ only as indicative of old age. So that even if an old man’s hairs may not, for some reason, become grey, he should, at the approach of old age, retire to the forest. Just as the person who has got a son and has his hairs still block is entitled to the ‘kindling of fire so is the man who has got a grandson and has his head turned grey entitled to the Hermit’s life. And in the former case also ‘the birth of the son’ end ‘blackness of hair’ are only indicative of a certain age.

Some people have taken the text to mean that ‘one should retire into the forest neither too early nor too late in life.’ But in is necessary to find out an authority for this.—(2).

“Medhātithi notes that the Śiṣṭas insist on the necessity that he who takes to forest-life must have sons and son’s sons, and that hence ‘apatya’, ‘offspring,’ is to be taken in this restricted sense (of grandson, not grand-daughter);—Nārāyaṇa holds that the verse gives three separate grounds for entering the third order, each of which is sufficient in itself; while Medhātithi thinks that the three conditions must exist together—[There is nothing in Medhātithi to indicate this]. ‘Others,’ mentioned by Medhātithi, took the verse to give a description of the approach of old age, which entitles the house-holder to turn hermit”—Buhler.

Medhātithi mentions,—but with disapproval—another explanation, by which the whole verse serves only to indicate that one should take to the hermit’s life neither ‘too early’ nor ‘too late.’

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā to the effect that one should retire to the forest either when he has become decrepit with old age, or has got a grandson in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 527);—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 131);—and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 68b).

**(verses 6.1-2)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.1].

002 When a householder sees his (skin) wrinkled, and (his hair) white, and. the sons of his sons, then he may resort to the forest.

Having given up cultivated food and all his belongings, he shall repair to the forest, either making over his wife to his sons, or along with her.—(3).

व्रीहियवमयम् अन्नं ततः प्रभृति नाश्नीयाद् इत्य् एतत् संत्यज्येत्य् उच्यते । तद् उक्तं “मूलाशी” इत्यादि । परिच्छदः गवाश्ववस्त्रास्नशय्यादिः । यदि भार्याया इच्छा तदा सहगमनम्, अन्यथा एकाकिनः ।

• अन्ये तु तरुणीं निक्षिप्य वृद्धया सहेति वर्णयन्ति ।

• सत्यां भार्यायाम् अयं विधिः, पुत्रेषु निक्षेपः वनगमनं वा । असत्याम् अपि मृतायां वनवास आपस्तम्बादिभिः स्मर्यते “पुनर् आधानः” इत्य् अत्र । यस्येन्द्रियचापल्यं नास्ति स वानप्रथः । इतरः पुनर् दारान् परिगृह्णीयाद् इति व्यवस्था ॥ ६.३ ॥

From this time onward he shall not eat any food consisting of barley, paddy and the like;—this is what is meant by ‘hav - ing given up’. This is what has been described as ‘living on roots.’

‘Belonging’—Consisting of cows, houses, clothing, seats and beds, etc.

If the wife wishes it, then they should go away together; Otherwise he shall go alone. Others explain the text to mean that if the wife is still young he shall commit her to his sons, and if she is old, he is to take her with himself.

It is only when the wife is there that there can be any rule regarding her either being made over to the sons or going to the forest with her husband. If the wife has died, then also the man should retire to the forest, as declared by Āpastamba and others, in connection with the ‘Re-kindling of Fire.’

Only that man can be a Hermit whose senses are not too mobile; otherwise, he should take another wife; such is the established rule.—(3).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.46);—in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 527), to the effect that the Hermit should live upon uncultivated food;—in Kālaviveka (p. 427) to the effect that sexual intercourse is possible for the Hermit also;—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 132);—and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 68b).

Gautama (3.26).—‘A hermit shall live in the forest subsisting on roots and fruits, practising austerities; he shall kindle the fire under the Śramaṇaka rules, he shall eat wildgrowing vegetables only.’

Baudhāyana (2.11.15).—‘A hermit shall live in the forest, subsisting on roots and fruits, practising austerities and bathing at morn, noon and eve, he shall kindle a fire according to the Śramaṇaka rule; he shall eat wild-growing vegetables and grains only; he shall worship gods, Pitṛs, elementals, men and sages; he shall receive hospitably men of all castes, except those intercourse with whom is forbidden; he may even use the flesh of animals killed by carnivorous beasts; he shall not step on ploughed land; and he shall not enter a village; he shall wear his hair in braids and dress in bark or skins; he shall not eat anything that has been hoarded more than a year.’

Āpastamba (2.21.18-21).—‘Now follow the rules regarding the hermit living in the woods;—only after completing studentship shall he go forth, remaining chaste. He shall keep one fire only, have no house, enjoy no pleasures, have no protector, observe silence, uttering speech on the occasion of the daily recitation of the Veda only.’

Viṣṇu (94.3).—‘Let him entrust the care of his wife to his sous, or let her accompany him.’

Yājñavalkya (3.45).—‘Wearing his beard and hair in braids, self-controlled, he shall maintain, with things obtained without ploughing, the fires, Pitṛs, gods, guests and dependants.’

Yama (Aparārka, p. 941).—‘Uncultivated grains, roots and fruits, Vrīhi corn,—having gathered these and other sacrificial food, he shall offer these at the great Five Great sacrifices.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.4).—‘He shall gather wild-growing roots and fruits only.’

Arthaśāstra (p. 30).—‘For the hermit—celibacy, sleeping on the ground, wearing matted locks and skins, performing Agnihotra and Baths, worshipping gods, Pitṛs and guests and living on wild-growing things.’

003 Abandoning all food raised by cultivation, and all his belongings, he may depart into the forest, either committing his wife to his sons, or accompanied by her.

Taking with him the Sacred Fire, as also all the ritualistic appurtenances of the Fire, the man shall go forth from the village to the forest and live there, with his senses under control.—(4).

अग्नय एव्आग्निहोत्रशब्देनोक्ताः । श्रौतान् अग्नीन्त् समादाय गृहीत्वा गृह्यं च अग्निहोत्रपरिच्छदं स्रुक्स्रुवादि । ग्राम्यस्य परिच्छदस्य त्यागविधानाद् अग्निसंबद्धस्य प्रतिप्रसवो ऽयम् ॥ ६.४ ॥

The term ‘agnihotra’ here stands for the fires themselves.

Taking with himself the Fires that had been kindled according to Śrauta rites, and also ‘the ritualistic appurtenances of the Fire’—in the shape of the sruk, the sruva and the rest. The abandoning of all belongings having been laid down, the present text makes an exception in favour of those pertaining to the Fires—(4)

Gautama (3.25-27).—‘The hermit shall live in the forest… kindling the fire according to the rule of the Śramaṇaka, he shall offer oblations in the morning and evening.’

Baudhāyana (2.11-15).—(See under 3.)

Vaśiṣṭha (9.2-10).—‘The hermit shall not enter a village; kindling a lire according to the rule of the Śramaṇaka, he shall offer the Agnihotra.’

Viṣṇu (94.4).—‘Let him keep the sacred fires in his new abode.’

Yājñavalkya (3.45).—(See under 3.)

004 Taking with him the sacred fire and the implements required for domestic (sacrifices), he may go forth from the village into the forest and reside there, duly controlling his senses.

These same ‘Great Sacrifices’ he should offer, according to rule, with various kinds of pure food fit for hermits, or with herbs, roots and fruits.—(5).

एतान् एव ये गृहस्थस्य विहिताः । निर्वपेद् अनुतिष्ठेत् । विधिपूर्वकम् इत्य् अनुवादः श्लोकपूरणार्थः ॥ ६.५ ॥

‘These same’—those that have been prescribed for the Householder;—‘he should offer’—perform.

‘According to rule’;—this is a reiteration, for the purpose of filling up the metre.—(5).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 528).

Gautama (3.29).—‘He shall worship gods, Pitṛs, men, elementals and sages.’

Baudhāyana (2.11-15).—(See under 3.)

Vaśiṣṭha (9.12).—‘He who gives their due to gods, Pitṛs and men will attain imperishable heaven’

Viṣṇu (94.5).—‘He must not omit to perform the five sacrifices, hut with fruits, herbs or roots growing wild.’

Yājñavalkya (3.16).—‘With beard and hair in braids, self-controlled, he shall maintain, with things obtained without ploughing, the fires, Pitṛs, gods and guests and dependants.’

Yama (Aparārka).—(See under 3.)

005 Let him offer those five great sacrifices according to the rule, with various kinds of pure food fit for ascetics, or with herbs, roots, and fruit.

He should wear either skin or a bit of cloth; he shall bathe in the evening, as also in the meaning; he shall always wear matted locks, as also beard, hair on his body and nails.—(6)

चर्म गोमृगादीनाम् । चीरं वस्त्रखण्डम् । सायं दिवसावसानसमयः । प्रगे चाह्नः प्रथमोदये । एवं सायं स्नानविधानाद् रात्रौ भोजनम् अस्याहुः, भुक्ते स्नानप्रतिषेधात् ।

• तद् अयुक्तम् इत्य् अन्ये । यतः स्नातकव्रतम् “अतः स्नानम् आचरेद् भुक्त्वा” इति । महाभारते तु पुरुषमात्रधर्मतया स्मर्यते । त्रैकालिकम् अप्य् अस्य स्नानं भविष्यति वैकल्पिकम् ।

• जटाश्मश्रुलोकनखानि न कर्तयेत् ॥ ६.६ ॥

Skin—of the bull, the deer and other such animals.

‘Cīra’—a bit of cloth.

^(‘)Evening’—end of the day.

‘Morning’—opening of the day.

This rule regarding bathing in the evening implies that the man is to eat at night only; because Bathing after meals is forbidden.

This view, some say, is not right; because among the observances of the Accomplished Student, it is said that ‘after taking his food he shall bathe’ (which shows that bathing after meals is not entirely forbidden), in fact this bathing after meals is declared in the Mahābhārata as to be done by each and every person.

It is open to the Hermit to bathe thrice during the day—this being a matter of option.

‘Matted locks, beard, hairs on the body and nails’;—all this he shall not have cut.—(6)

‘Cīram’—‘Vastrakhaṇḍa, tattered garment’ (Medhātithi, and Govindarāja);—‘dress of bark’ (Nārāyaṇa, Rāghavānanda and Kullūka, to whom last Buhler wrongly attributes the former explanation).

The second half of this verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.46).

Gautama (3.34).—‘He shall wear his hair in braids and dress in hark and skins.’

Bodhāyana (2.11-15).—(See under 3.)

Bodhāyana (3.3-19).—‘Let him not injure even gadflies or gnats; let him hear cold and perform austerities; let him constantly reside in the forest, be contented, and delight in dresses made of hark and skins and in carrying water.’

Āpastamba (2.22.1, 12, 13, 17).—‘A dress of materials procured in the woods (shins or hark) is ordained for him. He shall sacrifice only after having bathed in the following manner: He shall enter the water slowly, and bathe without heating it (with his hand), his face turned towards the sun. He shall offer the burnt oblations, sustain his life, feed his guests and prepare his clothes with materials provided in the forest.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.1).—‘The hermit, shall wear his hair in braids and dress in garments made of bark and skin.’

Viṣṇu (94.8-10).—‘He must wear a dress made of skins or bark; he must suffer the hairs of his head, of his heard and of his body and his nails to grow; he must bathe in the morning, noon and evening.’

Yājñavalkya (3.46).—(See under 5.)

006 Let him wear a skin or a tattered garment; let him bathe in the evening or in the morning; and let him always wear (his hair in) braids, the hair on his body, his beard, and his nails (being unclipped).

What he eats, cut of that he should make the offerings and give alms, according to his capacity; and those who come to his hermitage he should honour with water, roots and fruits and alms—(7).

“मुन्यन्नैर्” (म्ध् ६.५) इत्य् उक्तम् । तानि च नीवारादीनि वन्यानि धान्यानि तथा शाकादीनि वन्यान्य् एव । अन्नशब्दो बाहुल्येन धान्यविकारे भक्तसक्तुपिष्टादौ प्रयुज्यते । ततः शाकादीनां सत्य् अपि मुन्यन्नत्वे पृथग् उपादानम् । मुनयस् तापसास् तेषाम् अन्नानि मुन्यन्नानि । अग्नौ पाकधर्मान् महायज्ञान् निर्वपेत् । यदा कालपक्वफलाशी तदा न निर्वपेद् इत्य् आशङ्कायाम् आह- यद्भक्षः स्यात् । यद् एव भक्षयेत् तद् एव पिष्टादि यथासामर्थ्यं दद्यात् । बलिं अनग्निहोत्रं इन्द्रायेन्द्रपुरुषेत्यादि यद् विहितम् । अग्नौ त्व् अस्मिन् पक्षे होमो नास्ति ।

• तद् अयुक्तम् । बलिशब्दस्य चेज्यामात्रवचनत्वाद् अग्नाव् अनग्नौ च तुल्यम् एतत् । अथप्य् अयं पक्षः स्याद् यद् एव भक्षयेत् तद् एव, अग्नाव् एव, पक्वेनाग्नौ होमः कर्तव्यस् तथापि तावन्मात्रप्रयोजनं शाकादि वक्ष्यति, स्वयं कालपक्वं भोक्ष्यते । सर्वथा कालपक्वाशिनो ऽप्य् अस्ति वैशदेवो ऽगनाव् एव ।

• अब्आदिभिर् द्वन्द्वो ऽयम् । अद्भिर् मूलफलैः भिक्षया च नीवारादिन्आर्चयेद् आश्रमागतं पान्थम् ॥ ६.७ ॥

It has been said that ‘food fit for hermits’ should be used; this consists of wild grains, such as Nīvāra and the rest, and of wild-growing herbs, etc. The term ‘anna’, ‘food’, is generally used in the sense of some preparation of grains,— such as rice, fried flour, cake and so forth; and it is for this reason that, though herbs, &c., also are ‘food fit for hermits’, they have been mentioned separately. ‘Hermits’ are ascetics, and their food is called ‘food fit for hermits.’ And what is meant (by verse 5) is that the man should perform the Five Sacrifices, which are duties related to cooking on the household fire. This might give rise to the notion that when the man lives upon ripe season-fruits (and does not cook his food) he should not offer the said sacrifices: it is with a view to preclude such a notion that the Text adds—‘what he eats’; the meaning is that whatever, in the shape of flour, &.c., be eats, that he should offer to the best of his capacity.

‘Offerings’— apart for the Agnihotra-libations; those that are laid down as to be made.to ‘Indra’ ‘Indrapuruṣa’ and so forth.

In this view, there are no offerings poured into the fire,—they say.

But this is not right; as the term ‘bali’, ‘offering’, is a generic name for all kinds of oblations; and hence it stands equally for those offered into the fire, and those not offered Into the fire.

If the right view to hike were this that⁽one shall offer only what he eats;—and that also into the file only,—and that offerings into the fire must consist of cooked food then the hermit would cook just that much herb, &c. as would be needed for the offerings, and he himself would cat the ripe fruits of the season. Even for one who lives upon season-fruits, it is necessary to offer the Vaiśvadeva oblations into fire.

The compound in the second line is a copulative one, formed of ‘ap’, ‘water’, and the rest; the meaning being that ‘the traveller that happens to come to his hermitage he shall honour with water, roots, fruits and alms—consisting of Nīvāra and other grains’.—(7).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.45) in support of the view that it is the Hermit’s duty to feed guests.

Gautama (3.29-30).—‘He shall worship gods, Pitṛs, men, elementals, and sages; he shall receive hospitably men of all castes except those intercourse with whom is forbidden.’

Baudhāyana (2.11-15).—(See under 3.)

Baudhāyana (3.3.5-7, 20).—‘Fetching shrubs, etc., and cooking them, they offer the Agnihotra in the evening and in the morning, give food to ascetics, guests and students, and eat the remainder. A devotee shall first honour the guests who have come to his hermitage at dinner time, he shall be sedulous in worshipping gods and Brāhmaṇas, in offering Agnihotra and in practising austerities.’

Āpastamba (2.22.17).—‘After that time he shall offer the burnt oblations, sustain his life, feed his guests, and prepare his clothes with materials produced in the forest.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.7).—‘he shall honour guests coming to his hermitage, with alms of roots and fruits.’

007 Let him perform the Bali-offering with such food as he eats, and give alms according to his ability; let him honour those who come to his hermitage with alms consisting of water, roots, and fruit.

He should be always engaged in Vedic study, meek, conciliatory, quiet, ever liberal, not accepting any gifts, and compassionate towards all living beings.—(8).

आश्रमबुद्ध्या स्वाध्यायादीनां निवृत्तिम् आशङ्कमान आश्रमान्तरत्वाद् अस्यानिवृत्त्यर्थम् आह- नित्ययुक्तः । न यथा गार्हस्थ्ये । तत्र हि गृहचेष्टार्था अपि व्यापाराः सन्ति, तेष्व् अनुष्ठीयमानेषु नास्ति स्वाध्यायः । दान्तो दमयुक्तः मदवर्जितः । मैत्रः मित्रकर्मप्रधानः प्रियहितभाषी । संनिहितस्य चित्तानुकूलनपरः स समाहितः । नासंबद्धं नाप्राकरणिकं बहु पराधीनो ऽपि ब्रूयात् । दाता अपां मूलभिक्षाणां च । अनादाता पथ्यौषधाद्यर्थम् आश्रमान्तराद् आगतं न याचेत । सर्वभूतानुकम्पकः । अनुकम्पा कारुण्यम् । सत्य् अपि कारुणिकत्वे न परार्थम् अन्यं याचेत ॥ ६.८ ॥

This being a distinct stage of life, people might think that such duties as Vedic Study and the like, which pertain to other life-stages, should have to be omitted now; hence with a view to show that they do not cease, the Text has added—‘always engaged’; and not as in the Householder’s stage, during which, the man being busy with his household work, their performance leaves no time for Vedic study and such duties.

‘Meek’—endowed with humility; free from haughtiness.

‘Conciliatory’—abounding in the friendly spirit; always saying what is agreeable and wholesome; ever ready to conciliate his neighbour.

‘Quiet.’—Even when urged by others, he should not speak much of what may be irrelevant.

‘Ever liberal’—in making gifts of water, fruits and roots and alms.

‘Not accepting any gifts’—He should not beg anything for his medication or diet and such needs, from a person belonging to another stage of life and coming to see him.

‘Compassionate towards all living beings’—‘Compassion’ is pity. But even though he be compassionate, he should not, for the sake of any person, beg anything from another person.—(8).

‘Dāntaḥ’—‘Self-controlled, free from pride’ (Medhātithi and Nārāyaṇa);—‘patient with hardships’ (Kullūka).

Baudhāyana (3.3.19).—‘Let him not injure even gadflies or gnats; let him bear cold and perform austerities; let him constantly reside in the forest, be contented, delight in bark and skins, and in carrying water.’

Āpastamba (2.21.21).—‘He shall keep one fire only, have no house, enjoy no pleasures, have no protector, observe silence, uttering speech only on the occasion of the daily recitation of the Veda.’

Āpastamba (2.22.11).—‘He shall not any longer take presents.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.8).—‘He shall only give, not receive, presents.’

Viṣṇu (94-6).—‘He must not relinquish the private recitation of the Veda.’

Yājñavalkya (3.48).—‘Self-controlled, bathing at three times, desisting from accepting presents, studying the Veda, charitable, devoted to the welfare of all living beings.’

008 Let him be always industrious in privately reciting the Veda; let him be patient of hardships, friendly (towards all), of collected mind, ever liberal and never a receiver of gifts, and compassionate towards all living creatures.

He shall offer, according to rule, the sacrificial oblations, taking case not to omit the ‘Darśa’ and the ‘Paurnamāsa’ sacrifice.—(9)

वितानो विहारस् तत्र भवं वैतानिकम् । त्रेताग्निविषयं कर्म श्रौतं तज् जुहुयात् कुर्यात् । अग्निहोत्रशब्दो यवाग्वादौ होमसाधने द्रव्ये वर्तते, न कर्मनामधेयम् । ततश् च तज् जुहुयाद् आहवनीये ऽग्निहोत्रादिभिर् जुहोतीत्य् अर्थ उपपन्नः प्रथमपक्षे ऽग्निहोत्रशब्दो जुहोतिना ऽभिन्नार्थः ।

• ननु च “पुत्रेषु भार्यां निक्षिप्ये” (म्ध् ६.३) इति पक्षान्तरम् उक्तम् । तत्र कथं तया विना श्रौतेष्व् अधिकारः । प्रोषितस्य यथेति चेत्, यथा प्रोषितो वा यजमानः संविधानाद् दूरस्थो ऽप्य् अधिक्रियते संविधाने, एवं भवति कर्ता; तद्वत् पत्न्य् अपि वनं प्रतिष्ठमानम् अनुज्ञास्यति, न सहाधिकारो विरोत्स्यत इति । तद् अपि वार्तम् । दैवान् मानुषाद् वा प्रतिबलात् कथंचित् प्रवासोपपत्तेः युक्तम् ईदृशम् अनुष्ठानम्, न स्वेच्छया । सत्यां शक्तौ बहूनि चाङ्गानि परिलुप्येरन् । दर्शपौर्णमासयोः “वेदो ऽसि वित्तिर् असि” (त्स् १.६.४.४) इत्यादि पत्नीं वाचयेद् इत्य् उक्तम्, तद् धीयेत ।

• अथोच्येत- सहप्रस्थानपक्षे विधिर् अयं भविष्यतीति, एतद् अपि न, विशेषस्याश्रुतत्वात् । निक्षेपपक्षे चाग्नीनां प्रतिपत्त्यन्तरम् अनाम्नातम् । किं च सहत्वपक्षे ऽपीदं विरुध्यते ।

• वासन्तशारदैर् मेध्यैर् मुन्यन्नैः स्वयम् आहृतैः ।

• पुरोडाशांश् चरूंश् चैव विधिवन् निर्वपेत् पृथक् ॥ इति । (म्ध् ६.११)

आरण्यानि मुन्यन्नानि नीवारादिन्य् अभिप्रेतानि । ग्राम्यस्य परिच्छदस्य त्यागविधानात् । व्रीह्यादिभिश् च वेदे पुरोडाशा विहितास् ते च ग्राम्यः । न च स्मृतिश्रुतिषु उत्पन्नन्यायेन व्रीहिशास्त्रविधिन्यायेन वा केनचिन् मेध्येनारण्येनान्नेन प्रयोगः परिसमाप्येत निक्षेपे । ते च भार्यया दुरुपपादाः । कथं यावज्जीवश्रुतौ सत्याम् अग्नीनां त्यागो भार्याया वा । तस्माद् आश्रमान्तरविधानं वैतानिकानां च कर्मणाम् अनुष्ठानं न संवदेत् ।

• कर्तव्यो ऽत्र यत्नः ।

(१) केचिद् आहुः- वैतानिकशब्दः स्मार्तेष्व् एव कर्मसु स्तुत्या प्रयुक्तः । न च स्मार्तेषु व्रीह्यादि नियमशास्त्रम् अस्ति । तत्र ह्य् आम्नायते-

• यदन्नः पुरुषो राजंस् तदन्नास् तस्य देवताः । इति (राम् २.९५.३१) ।

अतश् च मुन्यन्नैर् अनुष्ठानम् अविरुद्धं भवेद् व्रीह्यादिशास्त्रविरोधः परिहृतः स्यात् । सहाधिकारस् तत्रापि विद्यते ।

• तस्य कः परिहारः । उभयोः स्मार्तत्वाद् अस्याम् अवस्थायां बाधिष्यते ।

• यत् तु श्रौतवचनं “पत्न्या सह यष्टव्यम्” इति तच् छ्रौतेष्व् एव ।

(२) अथ वा नैवायं विधिर् गृहस्थाग्नेः । किं तर्हि “श्रावणिकेनाग्निम् आधाय” (ग्ध् ३.२७) इत् गौतमेन पठितम् । इहापि वक्ष्यति “वैखानसमते स्थितः” (म्ध् ६.२१) इति । तस्माच् छ्रास्त्रविहितानि कर्मान्तराण्य् एवैतानि । दर्शपूर्णमासादयस् तु शब्दाः भक्त्या तत्र प्रयुक्ताः । अतस् तत्र तदाधानम् अभार्यस्यैव । गार्हस्थ्योपात्तानां प्रतिपत्तिर् उक्ता “अग्नीन् आत्मनि वैतानान्” (म्ध् ६.२५) इति । यत् तु यावज्जीवश्रुतौ सत्यां कथम् अग्नीनां त्याग इति, एतच् चातुराश्रम्यानुक्रमणप्रकरणे निरूप्यिष्यते ।

(३) अन्ये पुनर् आहुः । होमो ग्राम्यानाम् अन्नानां प्रतिषिद्धः, न तु देवताद्यर्थ उपयोगः । ननु च “यजमानपञ्चमा इडां भक्षयन्ति” इति तत्रापि विद्यते बक्षः । सत्यम् । स तु शास्त्रीयो न लौकिकः । लौकिकस्य च प्रतिषेधः “संत्यज्य” (म्ध् ६.३) इति । ग्रामप्रवेशश् च तस्य तदर्थो न विरुध्यते । तथा वक्ष्यति “ग्रामाद् आहृत्य वाश्नीयाद्” (म्ध् ६.२८) इति । तद् एतद् असत् । “मुन्यन्नैः” (म्ध् ६.५) इति विधानात् । तद् एवं “श्रावणिकेनाग्निम् आधाय” (ग्ध् ३.२७) इत्यादि सर्वम् उपपन्नम् ।

• तथा हि “अग्निहोत्रं समादाय” (म्ध् ६.४) इत्य् पठ्यते । न तु “संत्यज्य” (म्ध् ६.३) इति । समारोपणम् अपि मुमूर्षोस् तप्ततपसो वक्ष्यते प्रथमप्रवासे । न च तुरायणादिशब्दानां श्रवणिकाग्निविषयत्वे कथंचिद् उपपत्तिः । मृतभार्यस्य तदाधानं वाचनिकं भविष्यति । यदा वा ब्रह्मचर्याद् एव वनवासम् इच्छेत् तदा श्रावणिकाधानम् । तस्माद् आहिताग्नेः सहाग्निभिर् वनप्रस्थानं सभार्यस्य ।

• तत्र च यथाविधि व्रीह्यादिना श्रौतकर्मानुष्ठानम् । व्रीह्यादीनाम् अपि मुन्यन्नता कथाम्चिद् उपपाद्या । व्रीहियवाव् अपि पवित्रम् । भार्यानिक्षेपश् चानाहिताग्नेः कथंचित् स्मार्थे ऽग्नौ गतिः । उभयोः स्मार्तत्वात् । यस्य च द्वे भार्ये जाते एकया चाग्नयो नीतास् तस्य द्वितीयां भार्यां निक्षिप्येति वचनम् । अस्कन्दयन् । स्कन्दनं विध्यतिक्रमः, यथाविहितम् अनुष्ठानस्यासंपादनम् । एतच् च पादपूरणम् । योगत इत्य् एतद् अपि । योगत अस्कन्दयन् युक्त्याविनासयन् । युक्तिर् विधिर् एव ॥ ६.९ ॥

‘Vitāna’, is vihāra, sacrifice; what pertains to it is ‘sacrificial’, ‘vaitānikam’; i.e., the rites pertaining to the Three Fires this he shall ‘offer’, perform.

The term ‘agnihotra’ primarily denotes the wild barley and other substances that are employed in sacrificial oblations; and it is not the name of a particular rite; it is in this sense that we have the term used as the object of the verb ‘shall offer’; and we get at the meaning that ‘he shall offer, by means of the Agnihotra and other rites, the oblations into the Āhavanīya Fire;’—it is in this way that the use of the verb ‘juhuyāt’, ‘shall offer’ becomes justified. In this explanation the word ‘agnihotra’ becomes synonymous with the denotation of the root ‘hu’, ‘to offer into the fire.’

Objection—“The text has just prescribed the optional alternative of committing his wife to his sons; in this case how can the man, in the absence of his wife, be entitled to the performance of śrauta rites? It might be said that ‘the man would be entitled to them in the same way as the man away from home is entitled; just as the man who is away from home, though at a distance from the Fires, is regarded as the performer of the rituals by reason of his having made arrangements for the offerings to be made by a proper substitute, in the same manner, in the case in question, when the man is starting for the forest, his wife shall permit him to carry on the rituals; and in this manner the joint character of the title would not be disturbed.’ But this cannot be right. The procedure of employing a substitute is permissible only in cases where the man is forced by human or divine agencies to go away from home, and not when he goes out of his own accord. Because in such a procedure, many of the details would become omitted, even though the man would be perfectly capable to accomplish them (if he himself remained at home); e.g. in connection with the Darśa-Paurnamāsa sacrifices it is laid down that the sacrificer shall make his wife repeat the mantra ‘vedo-si vittirasi, &c.’; and this would be omitted (during the sacrificer’s absence).

“It might be said that the rule laid down in the present verse may be taken as pertaining to the case where the householder is retiring to the forest along with his wife (and not when he is going alone, leaving her in charge of his sons). But this also is not possible; because we do not find any such restrictive specification. Further in connection with the contigency of leaving the wife behind, the scriptures have prescribed another method of disposing of the Fires (in the shape of the direction that they should be committed to the charge of the wife.)

“Then again, even if the rule wore taken as pertaining to cases where the wife accompanies the husband, the following direction (contained in verse 11) would not be relevant—‘With pure grains, fit for hermits, which grow in spring and in autumn, and which he has himself collected, he shall prepare the cakes and the boiled messes, according to law’;—the grains meant here are the wild ones, Nīvāra and the like, because he has been directed to relinquish all his village-belongings; and yet in the Veda cakes are laid down as to be made of Vrīhi and other grains, which are cultivated. Nor could the rite be completed by using any other pure grain, either in accordance with the maxim that ‘whatever is produced may be used’ (‘Utpannanyāya’), or in accordance with the law of options (Vrīhi-nyāya). Because any such grains it would be difficult for the wife to obtain. Lastly, the performance of the Agnihotra being a life-long duty, how can there be any relinquishing of that rite, or of the wife? From all this it is clear that the rule regarding the entering into the next stage of life is not compatible with the performance of the Sacrificial Acts.”

On this point a special effort has to be made (for reconciling the apparent discrepancy).

(A) Some people say that the term ‘sacrificial’ in the text has been used, by way of praise, for the smārta (not śrauta) rites; and in connection with the smārta rites there are no such scriptural restrictions as that cakes should be made of the Vrīhi and other cultivated grains only. In fact in connection with these rites it has been declared that—The deities of a man partake of the same food as the man himself’ (Vālmiki-Rāmāyaṇa Ajodhyā kāṇḍa). So that there would be nothing wrong if the Hermit performed these rites with ‘grains fit for the hermit.’ Even if this were incompatible with the injunctions regarding the use of Vrīhi and other cultivated grains, this incompatibility could be easily explained away.

“But even in this case there would be the law relating to the joint right of the husband and wife to the performance, which would be infringed by the man doing it when separated from his wife.”

Well, as regards the Vedic declaration—‘One shall offer sacrifices, when accompanied by his wife.’—this can pertain to śrauta rites only so that the said difficulty does not arise in connection with the smārta rites.]

(B) Another explanation is that the rule laid down in the present verse does not refer to the Householder’s Fire at all; it refers to what has been prescribed by Gautama (3.27) regarding ‘the kindling of fire in the month of Śrāvaṇa.’ In the present treatise also, the author is going to add the phrase ‘following the methods of the hermit’ (Verse 21). From all this it is clear that the rites referred to here are those that have been prescribed in the scriptures, as entirely apart from the rites relating to the Agnihotra, &c. And the terms ‘Darśa’ and ‘Paurṇamāsa’ too have been used only figuratively. Thus the said kindling of the Fire by the Hermit is to be done by him, without his wife. As regards the household Fires of the Agnihotra, the method of disposing of them is laid down (in verse 25 below) in the words—^(‘)Having reposited the sacrificial fires in himself, &c. &c.’

As regards the contention based upon the life-long character of tbs Agnihotra- rite, that the abandoning of the Fires cannot be right,—we shall deal with this when we are considering the question of the sequence among the four life stages.

(C) Others again explain as follows:—What has been forbidden for the Hermit is the act of offering oblations of cultivated grains, and not that of employing these for the sake of the Deities.

“But the sacrificer has got to eat of what is offered to the gods, according to the law that the four priests, with the sacrificer as the fifth, partake of the sacrificial cake.”

True; but that eating is one that is prescribed by the scriptures, and not the ordinary one; and what has been forbidden under verse is the ordinary eating. And for purposes of the scriptural act, even if the man were to go into the village, there would he nothing wrong in this; in fact it is going to be declared below (verse 28) that—‘he may eat the food after having obtained it from the village.’

This however is not right; because of the express injunction that he is to make use of only such grains as are^(‘)fit for hermits.’

Thus we find that the whole explanation regarding the text referring to the fire kindled during the month of Śrāvaṇa (explanation B above), and all that follows is not acceptable.

Further, verse 4 has spoken of the man^(‘)taking with himself the sacred fire’,—and not leaving it behind. As for its being committed to another person, it is going to be laid down that it is to be done either by the man who is going to die, or who is going out for the first time. Then again, the Turayāṇa and other rites that are prescribed (in verse 10) for the Hermit (and which are all Śrauta rites to be performed in the Śrauta Fire of the Agnihotra) cannot be explained, if the present verse refers to the fresh Smārta fire kindled in Śrāvana. In fact, this latter Fire-kindling could be done only by one whose wife has died,—such being the implication of the actual words laying it down. Or, it may be done in a case where the man retires to the forest immediately after Studentship-

From all this it follows that when an Agnihotrin retires to the forest, he shall do so along with the Fire, and accompanied by his wife.

In the forest, the rites are to be performed ‘according to law’, with Vrīhi and other grains; and these grains (though belonging to the cultivated category) may somehow or other be brought under the category (if ‘grains fit for hermits.’ Specialty as Vrīhi and Yava (which are cultivated grains) are (quite sacred.

For the man who has not maintained the Fire, the duty of ‘committing the Fires to his wife’ may be accomplished somehow with reference to the Fire kindled according to smārta rules. This would be only right, as both are ‘smārta’ acts. In the case of a man who has two wives, and one of these has taken charge of the Fires, the ‘committing of the wife to the children’ would apply to the second wife.

‘Not omitting.’—‘Omission’ is disobeying the Injunction; the non-performance of an act in the form in which it has been prescribed. This has been added only for the purpose of filling up the metre; similarly also the term ‘yogaṭaḥ’, ‘taking care.’ The construction is ‘yogataḥ askandayan’, ‘taking care not to omit’, i.e., carefully keeping up. The^(‘)care’ here refers to the injunction ittelf—(9).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.45) as indicating the purpose for which the Hermit is to carry with him his Śrauta Fire;—in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 528);—and in Aparārka (p. 941).

Baudhāyana (3.3.5-8, 20).—‘They offer Agnihotra in the evening and in the morning, give food to ascetics, guests and students and eat the remainder. They shall be sedulous in worshipping gods and Brāhmaṇas, in offering Agnihotra, and in practising austerities.’

Āpastamba (2.22.12).—‘He shall offer sacrifices.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.10).—‘He shall offer the Agnihotra.’

होमसाधनप्रदर्शनार्थम् अग्निहोत्रग्रहणम् ॥ ६.९ ॥

009 Let him offer, according to the law, the Agnihotra with three sacred fires, never omitting the new-moon and full-moon sacrifices at the proper time.

He shall perform the Darśeṣṭi and the Āgrayaṇa; as also the Cāturmāsya sacrifices, and the Turāyaṇa and Dākṣāyaṇa in due order.—(10).

दर्शेषिश् च आग्रयणं चेति समाहारद्वन्द्वः । चातुर्मास्यतुरायणदाक्षायणाः श्रौतकर्मविशेषवचनाः । नित्या एव तुरायणादयः केषांचित् ॥ ६.१० ॥

‘Darśeṣṭyāgrayaṇam is a copulative compound consisting of the two terms ‘darśeṣṭi’ and ‘āgrayaṇā’. ‘Caturmāsya’, ‘Turāyaṇa’ and ‘Dākṣayaṇa’ are the names of particular śrauta rites.

According to some people the performance of the Turāyaṇa and the rest is obligatory—(10).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 941), which explains ‘ṛkṣeṣṭi’ as the Nakṣatreṣṭi, the sacrifice to the lunar mansions,—and the Uttarāyaṇa and Dakṣiṇāyana as the two six-monthly sacrifices pertaining to the two solstices;—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 528).

वैतानिकम् इति श्लोके स्मार्तानाम् एव प्रवृत्तिर् दर्शपौर्णमासादिशब्दे स्तुत्यर्थम् उच्यते । श्रौतानां तु नित्यानां चरुपुरोडाशादीनां व्रीह्यादिनियतत्वाद् असामर्थ्यस्मृतिर् व्रीह्यादिनिर्वर्तने ॥ ६.१० ॥

010 Let him also offer the Nakshatreshti, the Agrayana, and the Katurmasya (sacrifices), as well as the Turayana and likewise the Dakshayana, in due order.

With the pure grains fit for hermits, which grow in spring and in autumn, and which he has himself gathered, he shall severally prepare cakes and boiled messes, according to law—(11).

यदा मुन्यन्नैर् इति न पूर्वेण संबध्यते, तदा नास्ति चोद्यम् “वैतानिकानि कथं व्रीह्यादिचोदितानि क्रियेरन्” । अत्र चरुपुरोडाशा वैखानसशास्त्रोक्ता एव वेदितव्याः । वसन्ते जायन्ते पच्यन्ते वा वासन्तानि । एवं शारदैर् मेध्यैर् इत्य् अनुवादः । स्वयम् आहृतैः । प्रतिग्रहादीनि वृत्तिकर्माणि निषिध्यन्ते । स्मार्तानाम् उक्तानां कर्मणाम् अनुष्ठानार्थं पुनर्हृत्यादिनापहरणम् । विधिवत् पृथग् इति पूरणे ॥ ६.११ ॥

If the phrase ‘grains fit for hermits’ is not connected with what has gone before, then there is no room for the objection—“how can the sacrificial offerings be made, which are laid down as to consist of Vrīhi and other cultivated grains?”

The ‘boiled mess’ and ‘cake’ meant here are those that have been prescribed by the rules laid down for Hermits.

‘Vāsanta’—those that grow, or ripen, during spring; similarly ‘śārada’.

^(‘)Sacred’—this is a mere re-iteration.

^(‘)Which he has himself gathered’.—This forbids such means of livelihood as receiving gifts and the like. For the due fullilment of the aforesaid s mārta rites, grains have to be gathered by wandering hither and thither.

‘According to law’, ‘severally’.—Both these terms are added for filling up the metre.—(11).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.46), which notes that even though the ‘munyanna’ is by nature pure, yet the text has added the epithet ‘medhya’ with a view to indicate that the grains should be fit for being offered at a sacrifice;—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 528), which explains ‘munyanna’ as ‘uncultivated grains,’ and ‘medhya’ as ‘fit for being offered at sacrifices.’

Āpastamba (2.22.17-18).—‘He shall offer the burnt oblations, sustain his life… Rice must be used for those sacrifices for which cakes mixed with meat are offered by the Householder.’

Yājñavalkya (3.48).—‘The rites prescribed in the Smṛti and in the Śruti, as also all acts, he shall perform with oils extracted from fruits.’

वैखानसोक्ता एवैते चरुपुरोडाशाः स्मार्ता वेदितव्याः ॥ ६.११॥

011 With pure grains, fit for ascetics, which grow in spring and in autumn, and which he himself has collected, let him severally prepare the sacrificial cakes (purodasa) and the boiled messes (karu), as the law directs.

Having offered to the gods that most pure offering consisting of wild-growing things, he shall take to himself the remnant, as also the salt prepared by himself—(12).

पर्वसु यद् देवताभ्यो दत्तं तच्छिष्टम् एव भक्षयेन् न शाकमूलफलादि । शेषम् आत्मनि युञ्जीत आत्मनिमित्तम् उपयोजयेत्, आत्मार्थं शरीरस्थित्यर्थम् इत्य् अर्थः । स्वयं कृतं च लवणं न³ सैन्धवादि निषेवेत ॥ ६.१२ ॥

He should eat only what remains after the offerings to the gods have been made on the New and Full moon days,—and not any herbs, roots, fruits and the rest.—‘He shall take to himself the remnant’ shall use it for his own purposes, i.e., for the sustaining of his body.

He should eat only such salt as is ‘prepared by himself’ and not rock-salt &c.—(12).

‘Lavaṇam svayam kṛtam’—‘Collected from saltmarshes’ (Kullūka);—‘collected from salt or alkaline elements of trees and the like’ (Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.46), which explains that the salt is to be collected from salt-marshes.

तच्छेषवृत्तितास्य नियम्यते ॥ ६.१२ ॥

012 Having offered those most pure sacrificial viands, consisting of the produce of the forest, he may use the remainder for himself, (mixed with) salt prepared by himself.

He should eat the vegetables that grow on land and in water; also flowers, roots and fruits, the productions of pure trees; as well as oils produced from fruits.—(13).

स्थलजानि उदकजानि अद्यात् । तथा पुष्पमूलफलानि च ॥ ६.१३ ॥

He should eat those growing on land and in water; as also flowers, roots and fruits.—(13).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 942);—and the second half in Mitākṣarā (on 3.49) to the effect that clarified butter and such ‘oils’ should not be used.

Gautama (3.26).—‘The hermit shall live in the forest, subsisting on roots and fruits, practising austerities.’ Baudhāyana (2.11.15).—(See under 3.)

Āpastamba (2.22.2).—‘Then he shall wander about, sustaining his life by roots, fruits, leaves and grass.’

Do. (2.23.2).—‘Afterwards he shall wander about sustaining his life with roots, fruits, leaves and grass which he collects. Finally, he shall content himself with what has become detached spontaneously. Then he shall live on water, then on air, and then on Ākāśa. Each succeeding mode of subsistence procures greater rewards’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.4).—‘He shall only gather wild-growing fruits and roots.’

Viṣṇu (95.7-12).—‘He may eat flowers; he may eat fruits; he may eat vegetables; he may eat leaves; he may eat roots; or he may eat barley once a fortnight.’

Yājñavalkya (3.49).—‘He shall eat what ripens in its own time; and all rites prescribed by Śruti and Smṛti, he shall perform with oils extracted from fruits.’

आरण्यान्य् एवैतानि श्यामाकादीनि गृह्यन्ते ॥ ६.१३ ॥

013 Let him eat vegetables that grow on dry land or in water, flowers, roots, and fruits, the productions of pure trees, and oils extracted from forest-fruits.

He shall avoid honey, meat, cabbages, mushrooms, the fragrant grass, the pot-herb and the ‘Śleṣmātaka (Śleśmātaka?)’ fruits.—(14).

भौमानि कवकानि । कवकशब्दः प्राग्व्याख्यातः छत्राकशब्दपर्यायः (म्ध् ५.१९) । तानि च कवकानि भूमौ जायन्ते वृक्षकोटरादाव् अपि । अतो विशेषणार्थं भौमग्रहणम् । समाचारविरोधो गृहस्थधर्मेषु चाविशेषेण कवकानां प्रतिषेधः । वानप्रस्थस्य च नियमातिशयो युक्तः । तस्माद् भौमानीति स्वतन्त्रपदम् । तत्र गोजिह्विका नाम कश्चित् पदार्थो वनेचराणां प्रसिद्धस् तद्विषयं भोद्धव्यम् । न तु यत् किंचिद् भुविजातमात्रस्य । कवकानां प्रतिषिद्धत्वात् पुनःप्रतिषेधो भूस्तृणादीनां तत्समप्रायश्चित्तार्थः । भूस्तृणशिग्रुकशब्दौ शाकविशेषवचनौ वाहिकेषु प्रसिद्धौ ॥ ६.१४ ॥

‘Bhaumāni Kavakāni’.—The term ‘kavaka’ has already been explained (under 5.5) as a synonym of ‘chatraka’ (mushrooms). These mushrooms grow on the ground, as also in the hollow of trees and other places. Hence the specification ‘land-grown’.

This however would appear to be contrary to usage; specially as among the duties of the Householder, all kinds of mushroom have been forbidden, and for the Hermit, the discipline, if anything, should be stricter.

For this reason the term ‘bhaumāni’ should be taken separately by itself; and it should be understood us standing for the ‘gojihvikā’ (cabbage), which is well-known among foresters,—and not for anything grown on the land.

Mushrooms having been already forbidden before, their repented prohibition in the present text is for the purpose of indicating that the eating of the fragrant grass and other things involves the same Expiatory Rite as that of mushrooms.

‘Bhustṛṇa’ (fragrant grass) and ‘shigruka’ (pot-herb) are the names of particular kinds of herbs well known among cultivators—(14).

‘Bhaumāni kavakāni’—Medhātithi prefers to take the two separately—‘bhaumāni’ being ‘the vegetable known among foresters’ as ‘gojihvikā’ and ‘kavakāni’ as ‘mushrooms’;—Govindarāja, Kullūka and Nārāyaṇa take the two together ‘mushrooms growing on the ground.’

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 942);—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 529), which explains ‘Kavakāni’ as ‘mushrooms.’

अयं प्रतिषेधो ऽनर्थक इति, यतः कवकग्रहणम् अनर्थकम् इति केचित्।
अहं तु ब्रुवे, नानर्थक्यं शास्त्रे वेदितव्यं प्रसिद्धानाम् अवधानत्वाद् ऋषेः । यतो ऽनुवादो ऽयं प्रतिषिद्धानां भूस्तृषादीनां साहचर्यात् तत्समप्रत्यवायप्रज्ञापनार्थो, तत्भोजनं च प्रायश्चित्तसाम्यम् ।
अपरस् तु शुतापसप्रतिषेधार्थम् इदम् आह ।
तत् पुनर् विचार्यम् ।कवकानां पुनर्विधानेन तत्सहोपदिष्टानां लशुनादीनां विकत्थश् शक्यो वक्तुम्, समाचार । । । पुनर्ग्रहणवत् ।

भौमशब्दो गोजिह्विकाविषयो पृथगुक्तत्वात् । कवकशब्दस् तु प्रसिद्दार्थ एव । अपरे तु कवकविशेषणं भौमशब्दम् इच्छन्ति । तेषाम् अभोज्यत्वं प्राप्नोति । पूर्वस्मिन्न् अभक्ष्यप्रकरणे चाविशेषेण प्रतिषेधः सर्वच्छत्राकाण्म्। अथ तु तत्पदार्थविशिष्टप्रतिषेधात् एकजातिविषय एव । शिग्रुकशब्दश् च भूस्तृणसाहचर्यान् न सौभञ्जनकविषयः, किं तर्हि तत्स्वरूपतृणजातिविषयः ।

014 Let him avoid honey, flesh, and mushrooms growing on the ground (or elsewhere, the vegetables called) Bhustrina, and Sigruka, and the Sleshmantaka fruit.

In the month of Āśvina he shall throw away the formerly-gathered ‘hermit’s food’, as also the worn-out clothes and the herbs, roots and fruits.—(15).

षण्मासनिचयसमानिचयपक्षयोर् आश्वयुजे त्यागः ।

• ननु मुन्यन्नं तावद् एव संचयं यत्कर्मपर्याप्तम् । तत्र नैवाधिकम् अस्ति । कस्य त्यागः ।

• उच्यते । न शक्या तुला ग्रहीतुम् अर्जनकाले । अतो यत् किंचिद् अवशिष्टम् अस्ति तस्याश्वयुजे त्यागः ।

• जीर्णानि चैव वासांसि । अजीर्णानां नास्ति त्यागः ॥ ६.१५ ॥

This throwing away of the food during the month of Āśvina is applicable to cases where the man is either one who lays by provision for six months or for one who does it for a year.

“As a rule hermits’ food should be collected only in such quantities as may be actually needed for the rites to be performed; so that there can be no surplus; under the circumstances, what would be there to be thrown away?”

The answer to this is as follows At the time that the man is gathering food he cannot always keep a weighing balance in his hand; hence it is quite possible that some small quantities may be left over; and it is these that have to be thrown away during the month of Āśvina.

‘Worn out clothes’.—There is no throwing away of such clothes as are not worn out.—(15).

‘Ārtaḥ’—‘In distress, i.e., not having anything else to offer to the god’s’ (Medhātithi);—‘tormented by hunger’ (Kullūka and Govindarāja);—‘ill’ (Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka, (p. 942);—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 529).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 942), which quotes Laugākṣi enumerating the ‘grāmajātāni’—‘vrīhayo yava-godhūmāvubhau ca tilasarṣapau ikṣuḥ priyaṅgavaścaiva grāmyā oṣadhayaḥ smṛtaḥ.’

The verse is quoted also in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 529).

Āpastamba (2.22.24).—‘When he obtains fresh grain, he shall throw away the old one.’

Viṣṇu (94.12).—‘He who has collected provisions for a year must throw away his store on the full moon day of the month of Āśvina.’

Yājñavalkya (3.47).—‘He shall store provision sufficient either for a day, or for a month, or for six months, or for a year; and give it up in the month of Āśvina.’

“षण्मासनिचयः” (म्ध् ६.१८) इति वैकल्पिकानि वक्ष्यति ॥ ६.१५ ॥

015 Let him throw away in the month of Asvina the food of ascetics, which he formerly collected, likewise his worn-out clothes and his vegetables, roots, and fruit.

He shall not eat anything produced by ploughing, even though it mat have been thrown away by some one; nor such flowers and fruits as are grown in villages, even though he in be in distress.—(16)

आरण्यस्यापि फालकृष्टस्य प्रतिषेधः । ग्रामजातान्य् अफालकृष्टान्य् अपि “संत्यज्य ग्राम्यम् आहारम्” (म्ध् ६.३) इत्य् अनेन प्रतिषेधः । आर्तो ऽपि अन्यासंभवे ऽप्य् अवश्यकर्तव्यत्वाद् देवताद्यर्चनस्य प्रतिनिधिपक्षे ऽपि नोपादेयम् इत्य् अर्थः । अपिशब्दो भिन्नक्रमो द्रष्टव्यः- पुष्पाण्य् अपि नोपादेयानि किं पुनर् धान्यानि ॥ ६.१६ ॥

Of forest-grown things also, those ‘produced by ploughing’ are forbidden; while things grown in villages, even though not ‘produced by ploughing’, have been already forbidden by verse 3 above; the present fresh prohibition is meant for flowers and fruits, and this prohibition applies to the use of village-grown flowers and fruits in the worshipping of gods &c.

‘Even though he be in distress’.—That is, even though nothing else be available, and the worshipping of gods be absolutely necessary,—these things shall not be used even as substitutes.

The term ‘api’, ‘even’, should be construed away from where it occurs; the sense being—‘even f lowers shall not be used, what to say of grains?’—(16).

Vaśiṣṭha (9.4),—‘He shall gather wild-growing roots and fruits only.’

Yājñavalkya (3.46).—‘Wearing beard and braided hair, self-controlled, he shall support, with grain obtained without ploughing, the fires, the Pitṛs, gods, guests and dependants.’

Laugākṣi (Aparārka, p. 942).—‘Vrīhi, barley, wheat, sesamum, mustard, sugar-cane and Priyaṅgu,—these are the village-grown substances.’

अयं प्रतिषेधो फालकृष्टानां तथाफालकृष्टानाम् अपि ग्रामजातानाम् आरण्यानाम् ॥ ६.१६ ॥

016 Let him not eat anything (grown on) ploughed (land), though it may have been thrown away by somebody, nor roots and fruit grown in a village, though (he may be) tormented (by hunger).

He may be one living on food cooked by fire, or one eating only what Ripens in its own time; he may use the stone for grinding or he may use his teeth as the mortar.—(17).

अग्निना पक्वं शाकौदनादि, तदशनं यस्य सो ऽग्निपक्वाशनः । काले स्वयम् एव यत् पक्वं तद् एव भुञ्जीत वार्क्षं फलम् । अथ वा धान्यानाम् एव नीवारादीनां निष्पिष्येदं भक्षणम् । अश्मभिः पाषाणैः कुट्टयित्वा पिष्टरूपं कृत्वा भुञ्जीत । यद् वा यदृतूपपन्नं वृन्तकादिभिर् बहिस् तुषकपाटकं⁴ तद् अश्मभिर् अपनीय कवाटम् अन्तःफलं भक्षयेत् । दन्ता उलूखलम् अस्य दन्तोलूखलिकः । दन्तैस् तुषकवाटम् अपनीय भक्षयेत् । असत्य् अपि संस्कारे स न कर्तव्यः । यदि वा पूर्ववद् अशनविशेषोपलक्षणम्- तादृशम् अश्नीयाद् यद् अस्य दन्ता एव उलूखलकार्यम् अवघातं संपादयन्ति ॥ ६.१७ ॥

‘One living on food cooked by fire’.—One whose food consists of vegetables and rice &c. cooked by fire.

Or he may rat only such fruits of trees as ripen themselves in their season.

Or his food may consist of flour obtained by grinding nīvāra and other grains. That is, he should grind these grains, and having thus turned them into dough, eat. it.

Or this phrase may mean that those nuts that ripen in their own season, and which have a kernel beneath a hard crust,—the outer crust of these should be broken with stone and the inner kernel eaten.

‘Dantolūkhalikaḥ’.—One who has his teeth for the mortar. That is the outer crust of nuts may be removed with the teeth. This however ought not to be done even though the nut may have been cleaned.

Or the phrase may be taken as qualifying the eating; the sense being that—‘he shall eat in such a way that his teeth may serve the purposes of the mortar, in the thumping and removing of chaff’.—(17).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 942);—and the first half in Mitākṣarā (on 3.49).

Bodhāyana (3.3.1-3, 9-12),—‘Hermits belong to two classes—those who cook, and those who do not cook, food;—those who cook are of five kinds—those who eat everything that the forest contains, those who live on unhusked grain, those who eat bulbs and roots, those who eat fruits and those who eat pot-herbs. Those who do not cook are of five kinds—those who avoid the use of iron and other implements, those who ṭake food with the band, those who take it with the mouth, those who subsist on water only, and those who live on air only.’

Viṣṇu (95, 14, 15).—‘He shall break his food with stones; or he shall use his teeth as a pestle.’

Yājñavalkya (3, 49).—‘He shall use his teeth as the pestle; or he may eat only such fruits as ripen in their own time; or he may use stone for breaking what he eats.’

अग्निपक्वभुक् कालपक्वभुग् अश्मकुत्तभुग् इत्य् एते दन्तोलूखलिकाः ॥ ६.१७ ॥

017 He may eat either what has been cooked with fire, or what has been ripened by time; he either may use a stone for grinding, or his teeth may be his mortar.

He may be either one who washes off immediately, or one who lays by for a month, or one who lays by for six months, or one who lays by for a year.—(18).

यत् पूर्वम् अशनम् उक्तं तद् ऐकाहिकभोजनपर्याप्तम् एवार्जयेत् । मासोपयोगी वा संचयो मासपर्याप्तः संचयो माससंचयः । सो ऽस्यास्तीति ठन् कर्तव्यः । यदि वा माससंचयक इति बहुव्रीहिसमासो ऽत्र कर्तव्यः- मासपर्याप्तः संचयो ऽस्येति । एवम् उत्तरयोर् अपि ॥ ६.१८ ॥

The food that has been described above, he should obtain day after day, just enough to serve for the day.

The man who has a collection that lasts for one month. The form is obtained by the adding of the affix ‘ṭhan’. Or the reading may be ‘māsasañcayakaḥ’ and the word explained as a Bahuvrīhi compound: ‘he whose collection is sufficient for a month’.

Similarly with the last two expressions.—(18).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 942);—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 529).

Gautuma (3.35).—‘He shall not eat anything that has been hoarded for more than a year.’

Baudhāyana (2.11.15).—(See under 3.)

Baudhāyana (3.2.11-18)—‘As regards the mode of life called Samprakṣālanī, in order to see that there is no waste of the substances obtained, nor any hoarding, he overturns the dishes and washes them. In the mode called Samūhā, he sweeps up grain with a broom in permitted places where grain-bearing plants are found, either on a road or in fields, access to which is not obstructed, and lives on what is thus obtained. In the mode called Pālanī, which is also called Ahiṃsakā, he tries to obtain from virtuous men husked rice or seeds and maintains himself thereby. In the mode called Śiloñcha, he gleans single ears of corn in permitted places where grainbearing plants grow, or on roads, or in fields, access to which is not obstructed, and supports himself by these gleanings, collected from time to time. In the method called Kapota, he picks up with two fingers single grains in permitted places where grain-bearing plants grow, either on the road or in fields, access to which is not obstructed; this is acting like a pigeon, Kapota. In the mode called Siddhoñcha, tired with other modes of subsistence, and because he has become old or diseased, he asks virtuous men for cooked food. If he subsists on the produce of the forest, of trees, creepers and lianas and grasses, such as wild millet and wild sesamum, that is called forest-life.’

Āpastamba (2.23.1).—‘If he desires to perform great austerities, he shall collect food only day by day, in the morning, in his vessel.’

Viṣṇu (94.11).—‘He should collect provisions, after the manner of the pigeon, for a month; or he should collect them for a year.’

Yājñavalkya (3.47).—(See under 15.)

। । । समानिचयस्यापवादः ॥ ६.१८ ॥

018 He may either at once (after his daily meal) cleanse (his vessel for collecting food), or lay up a store sufficient for a month, or gather what suffices for six months or for a year.

Having collected food to the best of his ability, he should eat it at night, or during the day; or he may do it at every fourth time, or at every eighth time.—(19).

द्विर्भोजनस्य पुरुषार्थतया विहितत्वाद् अन्यतरस्मिन् काले निवृत्तिर्⁵ विधीयते । यथा यथा वयो ऽतिक्रामति तथा तथा भोजनकालं जह्यात् । चतुर्थम् अप्य् अष्टमावधिकतयाश्रयेत् । त्रीण्य् अहोरात्राण्य् अतीत्य चतुर्थे ऽहनि सायं भुञ्जानो ऽष्टमकालिको भवति । भोजनस्य प्रकृतत्वात् तद्विषयश् चतुर्थकालसंबन्धः प्रतीयते ॥ ६.१९ ॥

Two meals having been prescribed for the man’s ordinary purposes, the present text lays down the dropping of one of these meals for the Hermit. The sense is that as age goes on advancing, the man should go on dropping the mealtimes one by one. The ‘fourth’ meal-time is to be computed in the same manner us the ‘eighth’: Three days having elapsed, if one eats in the evening of the fourth day, he comes to be regarded as eating ‘every eighth time’. The act of eating being the subject-matter of the context, the ‘fourth’ (or ‘eighth’) time has to be taken as referring to that act.—(19).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka, (p. 943), which notes that the text provides several options, to be adopted according to the physical strength of the person concerned; and the particular option selected in the beginning should be kept up throughout the life-stage.

The verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā verse XXI, which has the same note as Aparārka.

Viṣṇu (95.5.6).—‘He should eat at night, he may eat after having fasted entirely for one day, or for two days, or for three days.’

Yājñavalkya (3.50).—‘He may maintain his life by the Candrāyaṇa or the Kṛcchra method; or he may eat food on the lapse of a fortnight, or of a month, or of one day.’

[लेखोऽव्यक्तः।]

019 Having collected food according to his ability, he may either eat at night (only), or in the day-time (only), or at every fourth meal-time, or at every eighth.

Or he may live during the bright and dark fortnights in th e manner of the ‘Cāndrāyaṇa’ penance; or he may eat once at the end of each of the two fortnights, boiled barley-gruel.—(20).

पक्षान्तौ पूर्णमास्यामास्ये । अत्र श्रितां यवागूम् अश्नीयात् । सकृद् इति सायं प्रातर् वा ॥ ६.२० ॥

Ends of the fortnights—i.e. the New Moon Day and the Full Moon Day;—op these two days he shall eat boiled barley-gruel;—‘once’ i.e., either in the morning or in the evening.—(20).

Viṣṇu (95.12.13).—‘He may eat boiled barley once, at the end of a fortnight; or he may eat according to the rules of the Cāndrāyaṇa.’

Yājñavalkya (3.50).—(See above, under 19.)

[लेखोऽव्यक्तः।]

020 Or he may live according to the rule of the lunar penance (Kandrayana, daily diminishing the quantity of his food) in the bright (half of the month) and (increasing it) in the dark (half); or he may eat on the last days of each fortnight, once (a day only), boiled barley-gruel.

Or, he may always subsist only on flowers, roots and fruits, which have ripened in their own season and fallen down spontaneously,—keeping firm in the ways of life prescribed in the ‘Vaikhānasa’ Institutes.—(21).

कालपक्वैः । पनसादीनाम् अग्निनापि पाकः क्रियते तन्निषेधार्थम् । तद् अग्निपक्वं गृहस्थस्यानिषिद्धम् । वैखानसं नाम शास्त्रम्, यत्र वानप्रस्थस्य धर्मा विहितास् तेषां मते स्थितः । अन्याम् अपि तच्छास्त्रोक्तां चर्यां शिक्षेत ॥ ६.२१ ॥

‘Ripened in their own season’.—The jack-fruit and some other fruits are ripened (artificially) by means of fire also; and it is with a view to exclude these that this epithet has been added. But fruits ripened by means of fire are not forbidden for the Householder.

‘Vaikhānasa’ is the name of a treatise where the duties of the Hermit are prescribed;—keeping firm on these rules;—i.e. he should seek to learn also the other details of life prescribed in that treatise.—(21).

‘Vaikhānasamate sthitaḥ’—This refers to the ‘Vaikhānasa-śāstra says Medhātithi. The Vaikhānasa-sūtra (Trivandrum Sanskrit Series) is the work most likely referred to.

Bodhāyana (3.2.11, etc., seq.).—(See under 18.)

Āpastamba (2.23.2).—‘Afterwards, he shall wander about, sustaining his life with roots, fruits, leaves and grass.

Finally he shall content himself with what has become detached spontaneously. Then he shall live on water, then on air, then on Ākāṣha.’

**The commentary and the mūla texts from 6.21–38 were illegible to Derrett. This is something that we may want to revisit by reading the original Malayalam manuscript. The readable commentary ends thus:

पुनर् ब्राह्मः एतस्माल् लिङ्गाद् अग्निपरित्यागात् । । । योत्सन्नशाखास्थम् अनुत्सन्नशाखास्थं वा चतुर्थम् आश्रमान्तरं प्रसादयितयं श्रुत्यविरोदेन्ह, यत् कारणं न ह्य् अकस्मात् सर्वकर्मसूत्रकर्तनो ऽस्ति ।

021 Or he may constantly subsist on flowers, roots, and fruit alone, which have been ripened by time and have fallen spontaneously, following the rule of the (Institutes) of Vikhanas.

He shall roll about on the ground, or stand on tip-toe during the day; he shall beguile his time by standing and sitting, going to water at the ‘Savanas’.—(22).

विपरिवर्तनं केवलायां भूमाव् एकेन पार्श्वेन निषद्य पुनः पार्श्वान्तरेणावस्थानम् । आहारविहारकालौ वर्जयित्वा एवं वर्तेत, नोपविशेन् न चक्रमेत्⁶ न शय्यायां नासने न भित्तौ निषीदेद् इत्य् अर्थः । प्रपदैः पादाग्रैर् वा तिष्ठेत् । स्थानासनाभ्यां च दिने । रात्रौ तु केवलस्थण्डिलशायितां वक्ष्यति । सवनेषु प्रातर्मधन्दिनापराह्णेषु उपयन्न् अप इति च । असंभवे नद्यादीनाम् उद्धृतोदकेनापि स्नानं दर्शयति ॥ ६.२२ ॥

‘Rolling about’— Lying down on the ground on one side for sometime and then turning over on the other side. He shall pass his time thus rolling about, except during meal-time and the time during which he has to move about, he shall neither sit down nor walk about, nor sit on a bed, or a seat, or a parapet.

‘On tip-toe’—‘prapadaiḥ’.—‘He shall stand’.

‘By standing and sitting’.—During the day; as for the night, it is going to be declared that the man should sleep on the bare ground.

‘At the savanas.’—i.e., in the morning, at midday and in the evening; —‘going to water’.—This indicates that where a river or some such reservoir of water is not available, one may perform his bath even with water pulled out (of a well).—(22).

‘Sthānāsanābhyām’—See note above on 2.248.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 943);—and in Mitākṣarā (on 3.51) which explains ‘prapadaiḥ’ as ‘pādāgraiḥ’ (like Medhātithi).

Gautama (3.26).—‘The hermit shall live in the forest, subsisting on roots and fruits and practising austerities.’ Baudhāyana (2.11.15).—(See under 3.)

Vaśiṣṭha (9.9).—‘He shall bathe at noon, morn and eve.’

Viṣṇu (94.10).—‘He must bathe in the morning, noon and evening.’

Yājñavalkya (3.48.51).—‘Self-controlled, bathing at the three Savanas……—Being pure, he shall sleep on the ground at night; the day he shall pass on tip-toe, or standing, sitting and walking, or by the practice of yoga.’

Padma-purāṇa (Ādikhaṇḍa, 58, 26).—‘He shall divert himself with standing and sitting, and shall never lose his steadiness.’

022 Let him either roll about on the ground, or stand during the day on tiptoe, (or) let him alternately stand and sit down; going at the Savanas (at sunrise, at midday, and at sunset) to water in the forest (in order to bathe).

022 Let him either roll about on the ground, or stand during the day on tiptoe, (or) let him alternately stand and sit down; going at the Savanas (at sunrise, at midday, and at sunset) to water in the forest (in order to bathe).

During summer he shall keep five fires; during the rains, he shall have the sky for his shelter; and during the winter he shall keep wet clothes: gradually increasing his austerities.—(23 ).

पञ्चभिर् आत्मानं तापयेत् । चतसृषु दिक्षु अग्नीन्त् संनिधाप्य मध्ये तिष्ठेद् उपरिष्टाद् आदित्यतापं सेवेत । प्रावृष्य् अभ्राण्य् एवावकाश आश्रयः⁷, यस्मिन् देशे देवो वर्षति तं प्रदेशम् आश्रयेद् वर्षनिवारणार्थं छत्रवस्त्रादि न गृह्णीयात् । हेमन्ते शीतोपलक्षणार्थम् । एतेन शिशिरे ऽप्य् एष एव विधिः आर्द्रवासस्त्वम् । क्रमशः क्रमेण ॥ ६.२३ ॥

He shall heat himself with five fires; he shall kindle, four fires close to himself on his four sides and shall expose himself to the sun at the head.

During the rainy season, he shall have the sky for his sole shelter; i.e., he shall live in a place where the rain falls, and he shall not hold the umbrella or any such thing to ward off the rain.

‘During the winter’,—i.e., whenever it is cold; i.e., during the two seasons of Hemanta and Śiśira (Winter and Midwinter)—he shall have his clothes wet.

‘Gradually’— In due course.—(23).

**(verses 6.23-24)
**

Viṣṇu (95.1-4).—‘The hermit should emaciate his frame by the practice of austerities. In summer he should expose himself to five fires. During the rains, he should sleep in the open air. In the winter, he should wear wet clothes.’

Yājñavalkya (3.52).—‘During the summer, he shall sit in the middle of five fires; during the rains, he shall he in an open space; during the winter he shall wear wet clothes; and he shall perform austerities to the best of his capacity.’

Do. (3.46).—(See under 5.)

Śaṅkha (Aparārka, p. 944).—‘In the course of time, he should emaciate his frame by the practice of restrictions, observances, mantras and fastings, to the best of his capacity; clothed in kuśa -grass, rags, hark and skins, wearing his hair in braids, having an upper garment of the skin of the black antelope and observing such rules as sleeping in water, among five fires, or in open space.’

023 In summer let him expose himself to the heat of five fires, during the rainy season live under the open sky, and in winter be dressed in wet clothes, (thus) gradually increasing (the rigour of) his austerities.

023 In summer let him expose himself to the heat of five fires, during the rainy season live under the open sky, and in winter be dressed in wet clothes, (thus) gradually increasing (the rigour of) his austerities.

Bathing at the three Savanas, he shall offer libations to the gods and Pitṛs; and practising harsher and harsher austerities, he shall emaciate his body.—(24).

उपस्पर्शनं स्नानम् । अन्यद् अपि ऊर्ध्वबाह्वादि मासोपवासद्वादशरात्रादि तपः । उग्रतरं प्रकृष्टतरं शरीरपीडाजननं कुर्वन् शोषयेच् छरीरम् ॥ ६.२४ ॥

‘Upasparśana’—means bathing.

‘Austerities’— such as holding up the arms permanently, fasting during the whole month, or for twelve days, and so forth.

‘Harsher’—what is calculated to cause greater suffering to the body.

He shall ‘emaciate’,—make to dry up,—his body (24).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 944);—and the second half in Mitākṣarā (on 3.52) to the effect that the Hermit should perform severe austerities for the purpose of emaciating his physical frame.

**(verses 6.23-24)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.23].

024 When he bathes at the three Savanas (sunrise, midday, and sunset), let him offer libations of water to the manes and the gods, and practising harsher and harsher austerities, let him dry up his bodily frame.

024 When he bathes at the three Savanas (sunrise, midday, and sunset), let him offer libations of water to the manes and the gods, and practising harsher and harsher austerities, let him dry up his bodily frame.

Haying reposited, according to rule, the Śrauta Fires within himself, he shall be a silent hermit, without fires and without a house, living upon roots and fruits.—(25).

विताने भवा वैतानाः श्रौताः । तान् समारोपयेद् भस्मपानादिविधानेन । आत्मनि समारोपणविधिश् च श्रवणकाद् अवगन्तव्यः । चिरकालं यदा तपश् चरितं भवति, सप्तत्यवस्थां वयः प्राप्तम्, तदा वानप्रस्थ एव सन्न् अनग्निर् अनिकेतः पर्णकुटीं निवासार्थां जह्यात् । क्व तर्ह्य् आसीत । उपरिष्टाद् वक्ष्यति “वृक्षमूलनिकेतनः” (म्ध् ६.२६) इति । मुनिः स्याद् इति संबध्यते । तेनायम् अर्थ उक्तो भवति । वाङ्नियमं कुर्याद् इति । मौनव्रतधारी नियतवाग् उच्यते लोके । मूलफलाशनः । अन्यान्ननिवृत्त्यर्थम् एतत् । नीवारादाइन्य् आरण्यान्य् अपि नाश्नीयात् ॥ ६.२५ ॥

‘Vaitāna’—Śrauta.

These fires he shall reposit within himself, by swallowing their ashes and perfoming such other rites as have been laid down in connection with it. The exact procedure of this repositting should be learnt from the Śravanaka (?).

When austerities have been performed for a long time, and the man has reached seventy years of age, then, still remaining a hermit, he shall be ‘without fires and without a house’; i.e., he shall give up his thatched dwelling-house.

“Where then should be live?”

He shall dwell ‘at the roots of trees’,—as is going to be said in the next verse.

‘He shall be a silent hermit’.—The construction is ‘muniḥ syāt’, ‘he shall be a muni’; which means that he shall keep his speech under control; the man who has his speech under control is called ‘a keeper of the vow of silence’.

‘Living upon roots and fruits’.— This serves to exclude all other kinds of food; he shall not eat even Nīvarā and the other wild grains.—(25).

‘Yathāvidhi’—‘By swallowing the ashes and so forth’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘by repeating the vedic text, Taittirīya Saṃhitā 2.5.8.8’ (Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 944), which explains ‘niketa’ as ‘home’,—‘muni’ as ‘observing silence,’—and adds that alms should be begged only in the event of his being unable to obtain wild fruits and roots,—as is clear from what follows in verse 27 below.

It is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.54), which explains ‘muniḥ’ as ‘observing the vow of silence’; and adds that in the event of his being unable to get roots and fruits, he may beg from the houses of other hermits, just enough to keep himself alive.

It is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 531).

Āpastamba (2.21.21).—‘He shall keep only one fire, have no house, enjoy no pleasures, have no protector, observe silence, uttering speech only on the occasion of the daily recitation of the Veda.’

Vaśiṣṭha (9.11.12).—‘After six months, he shall live at the root of a tree, keeping no fire and no house. He who makes offerings to gods, Pitṛs and men will attain endless heaven.’

Yājñavalkya (3.54.55).—‘Absorbing the fires within himself, living under a tree, eating measuredly, he shall beg alms only from the houses of hermits.’

025 Having reposited the three sacred fires in himself, according to the prescribed rule, let him live without a fire, without a house, wholly silent, subsisting on roots and fruit,

025 Having reposited the three sacred fires in himself, according to the prescribed rule, let him live without a fire, without a house, wholly silent, subsisting on roots and fruit,

Making no effort to obtain pleasure-giving objects, and maintaining celibacy, he shall sleep on the ground; and not caring for shelter, he shall have the roots of trees for his dwelling.—(26).

सुखप्रयोजनेषु वस्तुषु प्रयत्नं न कुर्यात् । आतपपीडितः छायां नोपसर्पेत् । शीतार्दितो नाग्निं समिन्धीत । यदि तु दैवोपपादितादित्यतापादिना शीतादिदुःखनिवृत्तिर् भवतीत्य् अत्रैव दुःखापनोदः क्रियते, न निषिध्यते । वर्षादिकालाद् अन्यत्रैतद् विधीयते, तत्र प्रतिपन्नस्य धर्मस्य विधानात् ।

• अथ वा व्याधितस् तस्यौषधप्रयत्नो निवार्यते । व्याधिनिवृत्तिर् अपि सुखम् उच्यते । अतस् तन्निवृत्त्यर्थं यत्नं न कुर्यात् ।

• धराशयः केवलैस् तृणैर् आच्छादिते स्थण्डिले शयीत । शरणेष्व् आश्रयेषु गृहवृक्षमूलादिषु ममकारम् आत्मीयाभिनिवेशं न कुर्यात् । वृक्षमूलानि निकेतं गृहस्थानीयं कुर्यात् । तद् असंभवे शिलातलगुहादयो ऽपि विहिताः ॥ ६.२६ ॥

He shall make no effort to obtain things that give pleasure; e.g., troubled by heat, he shall not move into the shade, and troubled by cold, he shall not kindle fire. If, however, his sufferings are removed by such natural causes as the falling of the sun’s rays and the like,—this is not forbidden. This rule refers to seasons other than the rains; because special rules have been prescribed with special reference to this latter Reason.

Or, the text may be taken as prohibiting the use of medicines by the hermit if he happen to fall ill,—being cured of disease also being a kind of ‘pleasure;’ hence he shall not make any effort to secure this pleasure.

‘Sleeping on the ground’;—i.e., he shall sleep on the ground, covered only with grass.

‘Shelter’— dwelling-places, such as houses, tree-roots and so forth;—for these he shall not care; he shall not have any hankering after the possession of these.

He shall make the roots of trees his dwelling. In the event of their being not available, stone-slabs, mountain-caves and such places have also been ordained for him.—(26).

The first half of this verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 531).

Vaśiṣṭha (9.5.11).—‘He shall remain celibate. He shall live at the roots of a tree.’

Viṣṇu (94.7).—‘He must preserve his celibacy.’

Yājñavalkya (3.45).—(See under 1.)

Yājñavalkya (3.51).—(See under 22.)

Do. (3.5.4).—(See under 25.)

026 Making no effort (to procure) things that give pleasure, chaste, sleeping on the bare ground, not caring for any shelter, dwelling at the roots of trees.

026 Making no effort (to procure) things that give pleasure, chaste, sleeping on the bare ground, not caring for any shelter, dwelling at the roots of trees.

He shall receive alms just enough for subsistence, only from brāhmaṇa-hermits, or from such twice-born householders as live in the forests.—(27).

पञ्चम्यर्थे सप्तमी । तापसेभ्यः फलमूलासंभवे भैक्षम् आहरेत् । गृहमेधिभ्यो गृहस्थेभ्यो वा वनवासिभ्यः । यात्रिकं यावता सौहित्यं भवति ॥ ६.२७ ॥

असंभवे तु ।

The Locative ending in ‘tāpaseṣu’ &c. has the sense of the Ablative; meaning ‘from hermits’—‘he shall receive alms’,—in the event of his being unable to obtain fruits and roots;—‘or from such householders as live in the forests’.

‘Enough for subsistence’;—what is just sufficient to satisfy his hunger.—(27).

In the absence of such alms.—

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 945) as laying down the means of subsistence for the Hermit, in the event of his being unable to obtain fruits and roots.

Yājñavalkya (3.54).—(See under 25.)

027 From Brahmanas (who live as) ascetics, let him receive alms, (barely sufficient) to support life, or from other householders of the twice-born (castes) who reside in the forest.

027 From Brahmanas (who live as) ascetics, let him receive alms, (barely sufficient) to support life, or from other householders of the twice-born (castes) who reside in the forest.

While dwelling in the forest, he may bring food from the village,—receiving it either in his hollowed hand or in a potsherd,—and eat eight morsels.—(28).

ग्रासग्रहणान् न मूलफलभिक्षैव, ग्राम्यान्नाशनम् अन्यासाम्भवे ऽनेनानुज्ञातम् । गृहीत्वा पुटेनैव पाणिना भाजनरहितेन, शकलेन शरावाद्येकदेशखण्डेन ॥ ६.२८ ॥

The use of the term ‘morsel’ implies that the alms are not to consist of fruits and roots only. In fact the present text permits the use of cultivated grains, in the absence of wild ones.

Receiving the alms either ‘in the hollowed hand’—without a dish—or in a piece of broken earthenware, dish, &c.—(28).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 531);—and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 68b).

Viṣṇu (94.13).—‘Or, the hermit may bring food from a village, placing it in a dish made of leaves, or on a single leaf, or in his hand, or in a potsherd, and eat eight mouthfuls of it.

Yājñavalkya (3.55).—‘Or, he shall get food from a village and with speech controlled, shall eat eight mouthfuls.’

028 Or (the hermit) who dwells in the forest may bring (food) from a village, receiving it either in a hollow dish (of leaves), in (his naked) hand, or in a broken earthen dish, and may eat eight mouthfuls.

028 Or (the hermit) who dwells in the forest may bring (food) from a village, receiving it either in a hollow dish (of leaves), in (his naked) hand, or in a broken earthen dish, and may eat eight mouthfuls.

The Brāhmaṇa dwelling in the forest shall attend to these and other restraints; and also to the several Vedic texts contained in the Upaniṣads, in order to attain the Self.—(29).

एता दीक्षा नियमान् अन्यांश् चान्तर्जलस्थानचक्षुर्निमीलनादिकं सेवेत । श्रुतीर् औपनिषदीः रहस्याधिकारपठितानि वेदवाक्यानि अधीयीत चिन्तयेद् भावयेच् च आत्मसंसिद्धये । ब्रह्मप्राप्त्यर्थं वा उपासणा उक्ताः । विविधा इत्य् अनुवादः ॥ ६.२९ ॥

These ‘restraints’—observances and ‘others’—such as standing in water, keeping the eyes closed and so forth.

^(‘)Vedic texts contained in the Upaniṣads.’—He shall study the texts contained in the esoteric sections of the Veda, and think of them and ponder over them;^(‘)in order to attain the Self’.

Or this may refer to the several forms of worship that have been laid down for attaining Brahman.

‘Several’—this is a mere re-iteration.—(29).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 943), which explains ‘dīkṣā’ as ‘determination to keep the penances’;—and ‘saṃsiddhi’ as ‘well-defined cognition’;—in Mitākṣarā (on 3.51), which explains ‘ātmasamsiddhi’ as ‘the attaining of Brahman’;—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 531).

029 These and other observances must a Brahmana who dwells in the forest diligently practise, and in order to attain complete (union with) the (supreme) Soul, (he must study) the various sacred texts contained in the Upanishads,

029 These and other observances must a Brahmana who dwells in the forest diligently practise, and in order to attain complete (union with) the (supreme) Soul, (he must study) the various sacred texts contained in the Upanishads,

Such of these as have been attended to by sages and Brāhmaṇa householders, for the advancement of knowledge and austerities, and also for the purification of the body—(30).

अविशेषेणोक्ता अन्याश् च सेवेत । शाक्यपाशुपतादिदीक्षादिसेवनम् अपि प्राप्तं तन् निषेधति । ऋषिभिर् महाभारते संतप्यमानाद्यैः⁸ सेविता वर्ण्यन्ते । ब्राह्मणैश् च गृहस्थैर् याः सेविताः । तद् उक्तम् “उत्तरेषां चैतद् अविरोधि” (ग्ध् ३.१०) इति । विद्या आत्मैकत्वविज्ञानम्, तच्छ्रुतिसेवनेन वृद्धिं नयेत् दृढीकुर्यात् । शरीरस्य च शुद्धये आहारनियमदीक्षाह् सेवेत ॥ ६.३० ॥

It has just been stated in general terms that ‘he shall attend to others’; this might be taken to imply the propriety of practising the restraints and observances laid down in the ‘Śākya’, the^(‘)Pāśupata’ and other heterodox scriptures. Hence the present verse is added for the purpose precluding these.

‘By sages.’—The Mahābhārata describes several restraints and observances practised by the ancient sages.

Those attended to by ‘Brāhmaṇa-householders’;—as has been declared under Gautama (3.9)—This refers to those coming later, also, because there is no incompatibility in this.’

‘Knowledge’—the realising of the unity of the Self; this one should ‘advance’—confirm, strengthen—by the study of the Veda.

‘For the purification of the body’—he should attend to the restraints relating to the regulation of food—(30).

‘Brāhmaṇaiḥ gṛhasthaiḥ’—Medhātithi takes the two together, in the sense of ‘Brāhmaṇa-householders’;—Kullūka and Govindarāja take them separately, in the sense of ‘(1) sages knowing the Brahman and (2) hermits.’

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 943).

030 (As well as those rites and texts) which have been practised and studied by the sages (Rishis), and by Brahmana householders, in order to increase their knowledge (of Brahman), and their austerity, and in order to sanctify their bodies;

030 (As well as those rites and texts) which have been practised and studied by the sages (Rishis), and by Brahmana householders, in order to increase their knowledge (of Brahman), and their austerity, and in order to sanctify their bodies;

Or, having fixed upon the North-Easterly direction, he shall go forward, moving straight on, intent and living upon water and air,—till the falling off of his body.—(31).

प्राच्या उदीच्याश् च दिशोर् अन्तरालम् अपराजिता दिक् लोकेष्व् ऐशानीत्य् उच्यते । दिशम् आस्थाय चेतसि निधायैषा मया गन्तव्येति ततस् ताम् एव व्रजेत् । अजिह्मगः अकुटिलगामी । श्वभ्रनदीस्रोतांसि न परिहरेत् । आ निपाताच् छरीरस्य युक्तो वार्यनिलाशनः । प्राच्या उदीच्याश् च गमनविधिर् अयम् । यावन् न पतति तावद् वायुभक्षो ऽम्बुभक्षश् च स्यात् । युक्तः योगशास्त्रैर् आत्मानं युक्त्वा । तद् एतन् महाप्रस्थानम् उच्यते ॥ ६.३१ ॥

The ‘Aparājitā’ is the name of the North-Easterly direction, known among the people as ‘Aiśānī’;—‘Having fixed upon’ this direction—as “this is the direction towards which I shall go’,—he should proceed towards it.

‘Moving straight on’—not swerving from his path, not seeking to avoid even rivers and streams. This is a rule laying down the going towards the North-East.

‘Intent, living upon water and air, till the falling off of the body.’—That is, until the body falls off, he shall live upon air and on water.

‘Intent’,—having concentrated himself by the rules of Yoga.

This refers to the ‘Grand Journey’ (towards certain death).—(31).

‘Yuktaḥ’—‘Intent on the practice of yoga’ (Govindarāja and Kullūka),—‘firmly resolved’ (Nārāyaṇa and Rāghavānaṇda).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 945), which adds the following notes:—‘yuktaḥ’ means ‘samāhitaḥ’, ‘intent, calm, collected’; this teaching regarding the ‘Great Journey’ is only by way of an illustration for all such means of self-immolation as burning, drowning and the like.

It is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.55);—and in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 1660), which explains ‘aparājitā’ as ‘the north-easterly direction,’—towards that he should go straight on, till his body falls, living upon water and air and with mind duly concentrated and calm.

**(verses 6.31-32)
**

Baudhāyana (3.3.10.11, 12).—‘The hermits called Unmajjakas avoid iron and stone implements; those called Pravṛttāśins take food with the hand; those called Mukhenādāyins take it with the mouth only.’

Āpastamba (2.23 also 2.22.24).—‘Then he shall live on water, then on air and finally on Ākaśa:—each succeeding method bringing a greater reward.’

Yājñavalkya (3.55).—‘Eating air, he shall proceed towards the North-East till his body perishes.’

Smṛtyantara (Aparārka, p. 945).—‘The hermit shall undertake either the Long Journey, or drown in water or enter the fire, or fall from a precipice.’

031 Or let him walk, fully determined and going straight on, in a north-easterly direction, subsisting on water and air, until his body sinks to rest.

031 Or let him walk, fully determined and going straight on, in a north-easterly direction, subsisting on water and air, until his body sinks to rest.

Having discarded his body by one of these methods adopted by the Great Sages, the Brāhmaṇa, with sorrow and fear departed, becomes exalted in the region of Brahman.—(32).

पूर्वोक्तानि तपांसि महाप्रस्थानं चानन्तरोक्तं महर्षिचर्या । आसाम् अन्यतमया नदीप्रवेशेन भृगुप्रपतनेनाग्निप्रवेशेनाहारनिवृत्त्या वा शरीरं त्यजेत् । अस्य फलं वीतशोकभयस्य ब्रह्मलोकप्राप्तिः । नरकादिदुःखानुभवः शोकः । भयं नरकं गमिष्यामीति । तद् अस्य व्येति । अव्यवधानेनैव, नार्चिरादिक्रमेण, ब्रह्मलोकं प्राप्नोति । इह स्थानविशेषो ब्रह्मलोकः, स्वर्गाद् अपि निरतिशयस् तत्र महीयते पूज्यमान आस्ते । न तु ब्रह्मणः स्वाराज्यं प्राप्नोति, लोकग्रहणात् । चतुर्थे ह्य् आश्रमे मोक्षं वक्ष्यति ।

• न केवलकर्मकृतो मोक्ष इत्य् आहुः ।

• ननु चास्याप्य् उक्तम् “विविधाश् चौपनिषदीर् आत्मसंसिद्धये स्रुतीः” (म्ध् ६.२९) इति । आत्मसंसिद्धिश् च आत्मोपासनतया तद्भावापत्तिः । न ह्य् अन्यः संसिद्धिशब्दस्यार्थ उपपद्यते । औपनिषदीषु श्रुतिषु तद्भाव्यं योगिनाम् आत्मानम् “ब्रह्मसंश्थो ऽमृतत्वम् एति” (छु २.२३.१) इति च । अथ सायुज्यं गच्छतीत्यादि (छु २.२०.२) ।

• अथोच्यते । अन्या अपि तपःसिद्धयः श्रूयन्ते । “स यदि पितृलोककामो⁹ भवति” (छु ८.२.१) इत्यादि संकल्पितार्थोपपादिता सार्ष्टिता सालोक्यं च पुरुषस्य भविष्यति । न पुनर् मोक्ष इति ।

• तद् अयुक्तं विशेषाभावात् । यथैव परिमितफलासूपासनास्व् अधिक्रियते एवम् अमृतत्वप्राप्ताव् अपि । न क्वचिच् छ्रूयते परिव्राजकेनैवोपासनान्य् अद्वैतविषयाणि कर्तव्यानि ।

• ननु च “त्रयो धर्मस्कन्धाः” इत्य् उपक्रम्य “यज्ञो ऽध्ययनं दानम्” (छु २.२३.१) इत्य् अनेन गृहस्थधर्मा उक्ताः । “तप एव” इत्य् अनेन वानप्रस्थः । “ब्रह्मचार्य् आचार्यकुलवासी” इत्य् अनेन नैष्ठिकः । “ब्रह्मसंस्थः” इत्य् अनेन परिव्राजकः । एतेषां त्रयाणां पुण्यलोका उक्ताः । पारिशेष्याद् एतद्व्यतिरिक्तस्यामृतत्वम् ।

• नैवम् । ब्रह्मणि संतिष्ठते प्रयतते तत्परस्य ब्रह्मसंस्थस्य यौगिकत्वाद् अस्य शब्दस्य ।

• ननु च यदि सर्वेषाम् अधिकारस् तदैतावद् एव वक्तव्यम् “ब्रह्मसंस्थो ऽमृतत्वम् एति” (छु २.२३.१) इति ।

• नैवम् । आश्रमाणां स्वविधिवाक्यावगतं फलं संपत्क्षयिणः “पुण्यलोका भवन्ति” ति ब्रह्मसंस्थस्य तदाश्रमावस्थितस्यैवामृतत्वम् अपुनरावृत्तिलक्षणं विधीयते ।

• ननु चाद्वैतरूपं ब्रह्मेत्य् आत्मविदः । स च निवृत्तकर्माख्यः । आश्रमाश् च प्रवृत्तमार्गाख्याः क्रियाकारकफलभेदानुष्ठानात्मकाः । तत्राद्वैतात्मविज्ञाने समानभेदाश्रयाणि च गृहस्थाद्यग्निहोत्रकर्मादीनीति परस्परविरोधः ।

• अत्रोच्यते । समानम् एतत् पारिव्राज्ये ऽपि यमनियमानाम् इष्टत्वात् ते च भेदाश्रयाः ।

• अथाप्य् उच्येत कर्मसंन्यासिनो निवृत्तिमार्गावस्थायिनो नैव केचिच् छास्त्रार्थविधयः सन्ति ।

• नायं शास्त्रार्थः । अहंकारममकारत्याग एव संन्यासो वक्ष्यते, नाशेषशास्त्रार्थत्यागः । तस्यापि क्षुधाद्युपहतस्य भिक्षादौ प्रवर्तमानस्यास्त्य् एव क्रियाकारकसंबन्धः । तत्र लौकिके दृष्टार्थभेदे प्रवर्तमानस्य अद्वैतात्मविज्ञानभावनम् अविरुद्धम्, शास्त्रीय त्व् अग्निहोत्रादौ विरोधाद् इति को युक्तकार्य् एवं वदेत् ।

• अथोच्यते । क्षुधाद्युपहतस्याप्य् अद्वैतत्यागो विरोधिना भोजनेन तावत्काल एव । यथान्धतमसि चलितस्य गच्छतः कण्टकप्रदेशे पादन्यासः सवितरि पुनर् उदिते लब्धप्रकाशस्य पुनर् न्याय्यम् एवाध्वन्यस्याकण्टके ऽवस्थानम् । तथा क्षुधाद्युपघाते विच्छिन्नात्मविज्ञानस्य क्षणम् आलोकस्थानीयायां क्षुन्निवृत्तौ पुनर् दृढसंस्कारवशाद् अद्वैत एवावस्थानम् इति ।

• तत् तापसे ऽप्य् अविरुद्धम् । गृहस्थस्यापि पुत्रदारादितयोपासनम् अविरुद्धम् । बहुव्यापारतस् तु भेदसात्म्यतां गतस्य कुतो ऽद्वैतसंस्कारोत्पत्तिः । उक्तं च गृहस्थधर्मेषु “एकाकी चिन्तयेत्” (म्ध् ४.२५८) इति । तथा “पुत्रे सर्वं समासज्य” (म्ध् ४.२५७) इति ।

• ननु च “तस्माद् उ ह न पुरायुषः स्वः कामी प्रेयात्” (श्ब् १०.२.६.७) इति श्रुतिः । तत्र कुतो वानप्रस्थस्य शरीरत्यागः । न हि सा श्रुतिर् वानप्रस्थाद् अन्यत्रानया स्मृत्या विषय उपस्थापयितुं शक्यते । बलीयसी हि श्रुतिः । सा च स्मृत्यनुरोधेन न संकोचम् अर्हति ।

• उच्यते । जरसा विशीर्णस्यानिष्टसंदर्शनादिना वा विदिते प्रत्यासन्ने मृत्यौ मुमूर्षतो न श्रुतिविरोधः । एवं हि तत्र श्रूयते “न पुरायुषः” इति । अवस्थाविशेषे ह्य् अनभिप्रेते मरणे एतावद् एवावक्ष्यत् “न स्वः कामी प्रेयात्” इति । अरिष्टोपदेशश् चोपनिषत्स्व् एवम् अर्थवान् भवति । यस्य त्व् एतन्निमित्तं मरणं नास्ति ॥ ६.३२ ॥

The austerities spoken of above and the ‘Grand Journey’ just spoken of constitute ‘the methods adopted by the Great Sages.’ By ‘one of these’—by drowning in a river, by falling from a precipice, by burning one self by fire, by starving one’self to death—one should discard his body.

The result of this is that ‘with sorrow and fear departed’ he reaches the regions of Brahman. ‘Sorrow’ consists in the experiencing of the sufferings of hell, etc.,—^(‘)Fear’—of going to hell. Both these disappear for the man; and directly—not having to pass through the several stages of Light, etc.—he goes to the region of Brahman.

The ‘region of Brahman’ is a particular place, superior than Heaven itself; and in that ‘he becomes exalted’—remains to honoured. This does not mean that he obtains the ‘Selfsovereignty’ of Brahman; since the text distinctly adds the term ‘region’; specially as Liberation is going to be spoken as being led to from the fourth Life-stage.

They say that Liberation is not attained by mere Action.

But this is not right; since in this very work it has been said—‘he should study the Vedic texts contained in the Upaniṣads in order to attain the Self’; and ‘attainment of the Self’ is nothing more than meditating,’ upon the Self and thereby becoming absorbed in it; there can be no other meaning of the term ‘attain’. And further what is to be meditated upon by yogins in connection with the Upaniṣad-texts is the Self:—‘One fixed in Brahman reaches immortality’, ‘he becomes absorbed therein’ and so forth.

It might be argued that—“there are other forms of success proceeding from austerities, spoken of in such texts as ‘if he is desirous of reaching the regions of the Pitṛs etc. etc.’; wherein we find it stated that man can attain that degree of greatness which belongs to Brahman, and which is acquired by his determined activity; but this cannot be Liberation.”

But this is not right. Because there is no distinction made. The man of action is just as much entitled to ‘Immortality’ (which is Liberation) as to the forms of worship leading to inferior results. It is nowhere declared that those forms of worship which relate to Non-duality shall be followed by the Renunciate only.

“But, having declared that ‘there are three departments of Dharma’, the Upaniṣad (Chāndogya) names ‘sacrifice, study and charity’, which represent the duties of the Householder; then it mentions ‘austerity’ which refers to the Hermit; then it speaks of the^(‘)Student dwelling in the Teacher’s house’, which refers to the Life-long Student; and lastly it mentions ‘one who is fixed in Brahman’, and this refers to the Renunciate. Further on, it declares that the former three lead to ‘sacred regions’; from which it follows that it is the remaining fourth, the Renunciate, who attains Immortality.”

Not so at all; the term ‘brahmasaṃstha’, ‘fixed in Brahman’, is used in its literal sense of ‘one who is given up to meditating upon Brahman’ [and this has no reference to any particular stage of life].

“If all men were equally entitled to it, then all that the Upaniṣad need have said is ‘one who is fixed in Brahman reaches Immortality’ [and nothing need have been said regarding the three life-stages]”.

Not so; what the passage means is that,—‘the several life-stages lead to sacred regions, which constitutes the result mentioned in connection with the Injunctions relating to the stages; but if, while still in the same stages, if a man fixes himself upon Brahman, he attains Immortality, which means non-return to birth.’

“Those who know the Self have declarered that Brahman is non-dual; and It is also called ‘one in whom all activity has ceased’; the Life-stages on the other hand, all constitute the path of activity, consisting of the performance of various acts leading up to various results; so that there is a clear incompatibility between the ‘knowing of the non-dual Self’ and the performance of the Agnihotra and other rites, which are inseparable from the stages of the Householder &c., and which are all based upon notions of diversity

Our answer to this is as follows:—This would be equally applicable to Renunciation also, which also consists of restraints and observances, which presuppose diversity.

It might be argued that—“For the man who has renounced all activity and entered the path of Inaction, there are no scriptural injunctions at all”.

Such certainly is not the meaning of the scriptures. Renunciation is going to be described as ‘the surrendering of the notions of I and mine’, and not the abandoning of all that is enjoined by the scriptures. Further, in connection with the Renunciate also, when he is hungry and goes about begging food, the notion of action and agent is always present. Under the circumstances, what reasonable man could assert that—“in the case of the Renunciate there is no incompatibility between his engaging in the said acts pertaining to the ordinary worldly life and his realising of the non-dual Brahman,—while there is a clear incompatibility between this latter and the performance of the Agnihotra and other acts prescribed by the scriptures”?

The following argument may here be put forward “When the Renunciate is hungry and engages himself in eating, there is certainly incompatibility between this act and his knowledge of Self; but this incompatibility or incongruity lasts during that time only; just when a man walks in the dark he may put hist foot upon thorny places; but when the sun rises and he obtains sufficient light, he places his foot only upon the right path, which is free from thorns; in the same manner, during the time that the man is suffering from hunger, he loses sight of his knowledge of Self; but as soon as the cessation of hunger comes about, like light in the other case, his firm conviction regarding the Self reasserts itself and the man regains his knowledge”.

The same may be said regarding the Hermit also.

For the Householder also, there would be nothing incongruous in his attending to his wife and children and also meditating upon Brahman.

“But how can the man of manifold activities, who has become identified with diversity, ever obtain conviction regarding Non-duality”?

In connection with the duties of the Householder also it has been laid down that—‘he shall meditate in solitude’ (4.248), and ‘having made over eveything to his son &c.’ (4.247)

“It has been declared in the Śruti that ‘the man desiring heaven should not die before the span of his lift; has run out how then can there beany ‘giving up of the body’ for the Hermit? It is not possible for the present text to restrict this Śruti- text to cases other than that of the Hermit. Because the Śruti is more authoritative, and as such, could not be restricted in its scope by the Smṛti.”

There would be no going against the said Śruti if the man were to seek death when his body is torn up by old age and by sorrows and he knows that death is near at hand. What the

Śruti says is ‘before the span of his life has run out’; where as if dying were not considered right under nay and every circumstances, then it would have simply said ‘one desirous of heaven should not die.’ Further, the Upaniṣads speak of several signs of approaching death; and these also have their use in connection with the Śruti in question; the sense being that ‘unless a man knows of impending death by means of such signs he shall not seek to die.”—(32)

‘Āsām anyatamayā’—‘The aforesaid austerities as also the Great Journey’ (Medhātithi); so also ‘others.’ There is no difference of opinion among the commentators, as Buhler makes out,

Hopkins is wrong in translating ‘bhṛguprapāta’ as ‘drowning;’—Buhler has understood it rightly to mean ‘precipitating himself from a mount.’

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.55), winch adds the following notes:—The ‘brahmoloka’ here meant is not ‘the eternal Brahman’, but a particular region; otherwise there would be no sense in the adding of the term ‘loka’; also because Liberation (which would be the ‘reaching of the eternal Brahman’) is not held to be attained without the fourth Life-stage of Renunciation; as is clear from the Śruti text (Chāndogya) which speaks of the first three life-stages as ‘puṇyalokāḥ’, ‘leading to sacred regions’, and of the ‘Brahmasaṃstha’ (Renunciate) alone as attaining immortality.’

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 5.31);—in Aparārka (p. 945), which adds that the ‘methods’ referred to are those described under verse 23 et. seq. it adds that all that has been prescribed under the ‘duties of the Religious Student’ has to be followed by the Householder, the Hermit and the Renunciate also, in so far as it does not militate against anything that has been prescribed specifically for any of these.

It is quoted in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 398).

**(verses 6.31-32)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.31].

032 A Brahmana, having got rid of his body by one of those modes practised by the great sages, is exalted in the world of Brahman, free from sorrow and fear.

032 A Brahmana, having got rid of his body by one of those modes practised by the great sages, is exalted in the world of Brahman, free from sorrow and fear.

Having thus passed the third part of his life in the forest, the man shall, during the fourth part, renounce all attachments and go forth (a wandering mendicant).—(33)

इतःप्रभृति चतुर्थाश्रममतिः । तृतीयं भागम् इति । कंचित् कालं स्थित्वेत्य् अर्थः । यावता कालेन तपः सुतप्तं भवति विषयाभिलाषश् च सर्वो निवृत्तः । न हि मुख्यतृतीय आयुषो भाग एवानेन शक्यो ज्ञातुम् । न हि वर्षशतापेक्षाश्रमाणाम्, यतो वलीपलितापत्योत्पत्ती¹⁰ तृतीयाश्रमप्रतिपत्तौ काल उक्तः । न च सर्वस्य पञ्चाशद् वर्षदेशीयस्य तद् उत्पद्यते । उक्तं चान्यत्र “तपसि ऋद्धे परिव्र्जेत्” इति ।

• ननु च यथान्येषाम् आश्रमाणां कालो विवृतो ग्रहणान्तं ब्रह्म्चर्यम्, वलीपलिताद्यवधि गार्हस्थ्यम्, नैवम् इह कश्चित् परिच्छेदहेतुर् अस्ति । यदि यथाश्रुतं तृतीयो भागः समाश्रियेत, यच् च “तपसि ऋद्धे” इति, तत्रापि कालापेक्षा युक्तैव । न ज्ञायते कियता तपसा ऋद्धिर् भवति । अतः कालपरिच्छेदो न वचनार्हः ।

• उक्तम् अत्र न शतवर्षापेक्षया तृतीयायुर् भागनिश्चयः संभवति । उक्तश् च कालः- कायपाके प्रव्रज्या प्रतिपत्तव्या । यावता तपसा यावति च वयसि पुनर् मदवृद्धिर् नाशङ्क्यते तदा परिव्रजेत् ।

• विहृत्यासित्वा यथोक्तं विधिम् अनुष्ठायेति यावत् । सङ्गत्यागश् च ममतापरिग्रहः एकारामता ॥ ६.३३ ॥

Henceforward we have the description of the fourth life-stage.

‘Third part.’—i.e, having remained, in the forest for some time; for such time as would suffice for the due performance of austerities and the proper allayment of longing for objects of enjoyment. The phrase cannot be taken as standing precisely for the exact ‘third part’ of the man’s life; because the period of the life-stage is not determined precisely with reference to one hundred years (the alleged span of man’s life); because the time for entering on the third life-stage has been indicated as that marked by the appearance of ‘wrinkles and grey hair’; and in every man these do not always appear at the completion of fifty years. Then again, elsewhere it has been declared that ‘one should go forth on the completion of his austerities’.

“In the case of the other life-stages the time has been precisely indicated—e.g. (a) Studentship shall continue till the Veda has been got up, (b) the life of the Householder shall continue till the appearance of wrinkles and grey hairs; in the present instance however no such time is indicated; whether we take it to be the ‘third part’ as asserted in the present text, or ‘on the completion of austerities,’—even so we stand in need of information regarding the exact time meant; for there is no knowing by what time one’s austerities might be completed. For these reasons it is necessary that the time should be indicated by the words of the text”

It has already been explained that the ‘third part of life’ cannot be determined with reference to ‘a hundred years’; and as regards the exact time, it has been clearly indicated by such words as—‘one should take to the life of the Wandering Mendicant after the body has fully ripened’; which means that ‘one should go forth after he has performed enough austerities, and till sufficiently advanced age, to be convinced that there is no more chance of any recrudescence of the passions.’

‘Having passed’— having lived through; i.e. having carried on the duties as detailed above.

‘Renouncing of attachment’ consists in not harbouring notions of I and mine, in resting within one’s self.—(33).

‘Saṅga’—‘Attachment to sense-objects’ (Kullūka);—‘possessions’ (Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 532);—in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 562);—and in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 64), which says that the division is to be made on the basis of the life-span of one hundred years.

**(verses 6.33-34)
**

Baudhāyana (2.17.1-6).—‘Now we shall explain the rule for entering the order of Renunciates. Some say that he who has finished his studentship may become a renunciate immediately after that. But according to others renunciation is fit only for such Śālīnas and Yāyāvaras as are childless, or widowers. In general, they prescribe renunciation after the completion of the seventieth year and after the children have been firmly settled in their sacred duties. Or a Hermit may become a Renunciate on the completion of the special rites prescribed for him.’

Baudhāyana (2.17.15-17).—‘It is declared in the Veda that “entering stage after stage man becomes one with Brahman.” They quote also the following verse—“Ho who has passed from stage to stage, has offered burnt oblations and kept his organs under subjection, becomes afterwards, tired with giving alms and making offerings, a Renunciate. Such a Renunciate becomes one with the Infinite.’

Viṣṇu (96.1).—‘After having passed through the first three stages, and having annihilated passion, he should offer an oblation to Prajāpati in which he gives away all his belongings as the sacrificial fee, and enter the stage of the Renunciate.’

Yājñavalkya (3.55-56).—‘Passing on from the stage of the Householder or from that of the Hermit, he shall perform the sacrifice to Prajāpati, at which he gives away all his belongings as the sacrificial fee, and on its completion, withdrawing the fires within himself, he shall turn his mind towards Liberation, after having studied the Veda, performed Japa, begotten sons, made gifts of food, maintained the fires, and performed sacrifices to the best of his capacity.’

Jābāla-smṛti (Aparārka, p. 946).—‘Having completed Studentship, he shall become a Householder; after having been a Householder, he shall become a Hermit; after having been a Hermit he shall go forth as a Renunciate; or he may go forth directly after Studentship or Householdership or Hermitship.’

Jābāla (Parāśaramādhava, p, 535).—‘One should go forth the very day on which he becomes freed from all attachments.’

Śaṅkha-Likhita (Aparārka, p. 947).—‘After he has lived in the forest as a Hermit, the man, calm and advanced in age, should make up his mind to go forth as a Renunciate. Having withdrawn the fires within himself, free from all such feelings as fear, avarice, delusion, anger, sorrow, envy, pride and jealousy, he should not wait for any time; as men’s determinations are evanescent; hence he shall not wait for to-morrow, to-morrow; that very day he shall renounce all activities and go forth as a Renunciate.’

Vāyupurāṇa (Do., p. 949).—‘Leading the life of the Hermit, having his sins burnt by austerities, the twice-born man shall take to renunciation and enter the fourth stage. ì laving made offerings to Brāhmaṇas, gods and his own Pitṛs and men, and having performed the Vaiśvānarī or the Prājāpatya sacrifice, he shall deposit the fires within himself and shall go forth, uttering the proper mantras: thenceforward he shall renounce all affection and longing for sons and others.’

Nṛsiṃhapurāṇa (Aparārka, p. 951).—‘The Brāhmaṇa, whose gestatory, generative and digestive organs and the head are well-controlled, may go forth as a Renunciate, even without having married, and live on alms. Renunciation consists in the giving up of the affections, attachment to objects of sense, son, wife, good and evil, as also the anxiety for worldly affairs.’

Dakṣa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 533).—‘If any one reverses the order of the stages, he is the most sinful among men. If one having been a Householder, becomes a Religious Student, he is neither a Renunciate nor a Hermit; he is beyond the pale of all the stages.’

Aṅgiras (Do., p. 534).—‘Having found the world to be devoid of essence, and longing for the essential substance, the man, being free from all attachment, goes forth, without marrying. One may go forth either directly after Studentship or after having led the life of the Householder, or after having lived as a Hermit in the forest.’

Yama (Do., p. 536).—‘On the death of his wife, if he does not take to another wife, he should go forth as a Renunciate; or this highest path may be taken up by one who, having lived as a Hermit, has shaken off all his sins.’

Nārada (Do, p. 537).—‘Even from the very first stage, if the Brāhmaṇa becomes freed from all attachment for this ocean of worldliness, and desires liberation, he should renounce relationships and go forth as a Renunciate.’

Yogi-Yājñavalkya (Parāśaramādhava, p. 537).—‘There are four stages prescribed by the Veda for the Brāhmaṇa, three for the Kṣatriya, two for the Vaiśya and one for the Śūdra.’

Vāmanapurāṇa (Do.).—‘Pour stages have been spoken of for the Brāhmaṇa; three only, i.e., those of the Householder, the Student, the Hermit, for the Kṣatriva; only two—Householdership and Hermitship—for the Vaiśya; only one, that of Householdership, is proper for the Śūdra.’

Yājñavalkya (3.60).—‘Controlling his senses, renouncing all love and hatred and fear of things, the twice-born man becomes immortal.’

Smṛtyantara (Aparārka, p. 966; Parāśaramādhava, p. 538).—‘Having paid off the three debts, being freed from all notions of I and mine, the Brāhmaṇa, the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya, may go forth from the house.’

Kūrmapurāṇa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 538).—‘Having deposited the fires within himself, the twice-born man should become a Renunciate.’

033 But having thus passed the third part of (a man’s natural term of) life in the forest, he may live as an ascetic during the fourth part of his existence, after abandoning all attachment to worldly objects.

033 But having thus passed the third part of (a man’s natural term of) life in the forest, he may live as an ascetic during the fourth part of his existence, after abandoning all attachment to worldly objects.

If one, after passing from stage to stage and after offering the sacrifices, with senses subdued, tired of alms and offerings,—goes forth as a wandering mendicant, and then dies, then he prospers.—(34)

समुच्चयपक्षं उपोद्बलयति । आश्रमाद् आश्रमम् इति । गृहस्थाश्रमाद् वानप्रस्थाश्रमं गत्वा हुतहोम उभयोर् अप्य् आश्रमयोर् यदा जितेन्दिर्यस् तदा परिव्रजेत् । प्रेत्य वर्धते मृत्वा विभूत्यतिशयं प्राप्नोति । भिक्षाबलिदानेन परिश्रान्तः चिरम् । आश्रमधर्मानुवादो ऽयम् ॥ ६.३४ ॥

This verse lends support to the view that one should pass through all the life-stages.—‘Passing from stage to stage; that is passing from the Householder’s stage to that of the Hermit.

‘After offering the sacrifices’—during both the stages.

‘With senses subdued’.—when he becomes so, then alone he should go forth.

‘If he dies, then he prospers’—‘i. e., obtains most excellent for splendour,

‘Tired of alms and offerings’—by having recourse to these along time.

This is reiterative reference to the duties of the Life-stages.—(35).

**(verses 6.33-34)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.33].

034 He who after passing from order to order, after offering sacrifices and subduing his senses, becomes, tired with (giving) alms and offerings of food, an ascetic, gains bliss after death.

034 He who after passing from order to order, after offering sacrifices and subduing his senses, becomes, tired with (giving) alms and offerings of food, an ascetic, gains bliss after death.

One shall turn his mind towards Liberation only after having paid off the three debts; without having paid them, if he seeks for Liberation, he sinks downwards.—(35)

अपाकरणम् ऋणसंशुद्धिः । मनो मोक्षे नेवेशयेत् । मोक्षशब्देन प्रव्रज्याश्रमो लक्ष्यते । तत्र प्राधान्येन मोक्षैकफलतोच्यते । न तथान्येष्व् आश्रमेषु । ततो मोक्षः परिव्राज्या ॥ ६.३५ ॥

कानि पुनस् तानि त्रीणि ऋणान्य् अत आह ।

‘Paying off’— Clearing off the debt.

‘One shall turn his mind towards Liberation’.—The term ‘liberation’ here indicates the stage of Renunciation; it is this stage that is spoken of as the principal path which leads to Liberation only; not so the other stages (which lead to other results also); hence ‘liberation’ means the Stage of Renunciation.—(35).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.57), to the effect that until one has begotten offsprings he is not entitled to the life of Renunciation;—in Vidhānapārijāta (II, p. 373);—in Hemādri (Kāla, p. 808), which says that ‘mokṣa’ here stands for jñāna, knowledge, as is clear from the use of the term ‘sevamānaḥ’—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 3) along with the next verse (see below).

Smṛtyantara (Aparārka, p. 966).—‘Having paid off the three debts, being freed from all motions of I and mine, the Brāhmaṇa, the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya may go forth from the house.’

035 When he has paid the three debts, let him apply his mind to (the attainment of) final liberation; he who seeks it without having paid (his debts) sinks downwards.

035 When he has paid the three debts, let him apply his mind to (the attainment of) final liberation; he who seeks it without having paid (his debts) sinks downwards.

After having studied the Vedas according to rule, having begotten sons in the rightful manner, and having offered sacrifices to the rest of his ability,—he shall turn his mind towards Liberation.—(36).

“त्रिभिर् ऋणैर् ऋणवा जायते यज्ञेन देवेभ्यः प्रजया पितृभ्यः स्वाध्यायेनर्षिभ्यः” (त्स् ६.३.१०.५) इति श्रुत्यनुवादिनी स्मृतिर् इयम् ।

• ननु च “गृही भूत्वा प्रव्रजेत् । अथ वेतरथा ब्रह्मचर्याद् एव प्रव्रजेत्” (जाबु ४) इति जाबालश्रुतिः ।

• उच्यते । उत्पत्तिमात्रम् आश्रित्योक्तम् उदाहरति । तत्रेदं विरुध्यते “अनुत्पाद्य तथा प्रजाम्” (म्ध् ६.३७) इति ।

• यद्य् एषा श्रुतिर् अस्ति किं तर्हि ।

• इदम् उच्यते । “प्रत्यक्षविधानाद् गार्हस्थ्यस्य” (ग्ध् ३.३६) इति । “प्रव्रजेत्” इति- तेन¹¹ तु प्रव्रजितेनेमानि कर्माणि कर्तव्यान्य् अनया वेतिकर्तव्यतयेत्य् एतन् नास्ति । गृहस्थस्य त्व् अग्निहोत्रादीनि साङ्गकलपान्य् आम्नातानीत्य् एतदभिप्रायम् एतत् । ये त्व् एतां श्रुतिम् अदृष्ट्वा स्मार्ता एव नैष्ठिकादयस् ते च गृहस्थाश्रमेण प्रत्यक्षश्रुतिविधानेन बाध्यन्ते ।

• ये च क्लीबाद्यनधिकृतविषयतया स्मृतिवाक्यानाम् अर्थवत्तां वर्णयन्ति, तेषाम् अभिप्रायं न विद्मः । यदि तावद् आज्यावेक्षणविष्णुक्रमाद्यङ्गाशक्तौ श्रौतेषु नाधिक्रियते, यतस् तथाविधाङ्गयुक्तं कर्म यः¹² संपादयितुं समर्थस् तं प्रत्य् अधिकारश्रुतीनां अर्थवत्त्वे जाते न तद् असमर्थम् अपि कुर्वीतेति । यद्य् एवं स्मार्थेष्व् अपि नैष्ठिकस्य गुर्वर्थम् उदकुम्भाद्याहरणं भैक्षपरिचरणम्, पारिव्राज्ये ऽपि “न द्वितीयाम् अपि रात्रिं ग्रामे वसेत्” (ग्ध् ३.२१) इति, कुतः पङ्ग्वधयोः स्मार्तकर्मक्रमाधिकारः । उपनयनं चैषाम् अस्ति लिङ्गम् । तत एषां विवाहार्थनं “यद्य् अर्थिता तु दारैः” (म्ध् ९.२०३) इति । यद्य् अप्य् उपनयनम् आदित्यदर्शनम् अग्निप्रदक्षिणं परीत्येति च विहितम्, यतो नानुपनीतस्य विवाहसंभवो व्रात्यत्वात्, अतो यावच् छक्यं गुरुशुश्रूषणं विगुणम् अपि ब्रह्मचर्यम् एवम् अस्ति । क्लीबस्य तु प्रकृतेर् अनुपनेयतैव । स च पिततश् च न क्वचिद् अधिकृतः ।

• तस्माद् अनधिकृतविषयं पारिव्राज्यं नैष्ठिकता चेति न मनः परितोषम् आदधाति । सत्यम् उदितहोमनिन्दावद् भविष्यति । समुच्चयपक्षम् आश्रित्य “अनपाकृत्य” (म्ध् ६.३५) इति निन्दावचनम्, न पुनः प्रतिषेध एव । अथ वा यदाकृतदारपरिग्रहस्य प्रव्रज्यायाम् अधिकार इत्य् एवम् एतन् नेयम् ॥ ६.३६ ॥

This Smṛti-text reiterates what has been said in the following Śruti—‘Man is born beset with three debts—the debt of sacrifice to the gods, the debt of offspring to the Pitṛs, and the debt of vedic study to the sages’ (Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa, 1.7.2.1).

“But the Jābāla-śruti has declared that—‘one should go forth as a mendicant after having been a house-holder, or he may go forth directly after studentship’."

Our explanation of this is as follows:—What the text just quoted does is to mention the mere coming into existence of the stage of Renunciation; and if it were taken in its literal sense it would be contrary to what is said in the following verse regarding the impropriety of ‘going forth, without having begotten offspring’.

“Well, when we have the Śruti just quoted, what if it be contrary to a Smṛti- text?”

We explain. The necessity of taking to the Householder’s life has been directly enjoined (with all its details); while all that the text does in regard to the Renunciate is to enjoin that ‘one shall go forth’; and nothing is said as to the rites to be performed by the Renunciate, or the procedure to be adopted in regard to those rites. As regards the Householder on the other hand, the Agnihotra and other rites have been prescribed along with nil their appurtenant details. This is what we meant (by urging that the Śruti text quoted, if taken in its literal sense, would be contrary to the Smṛti- text). Those persons then who, not knowing of the Śruti text describing the^(‘)three debts’, take their stand upon Smṛti -texts only, and become life-long ‘students’, find themselves running up against the ‘Householder’s Life’ which has been directly enjoined.

There are some people who explain the Smṛti-texts relating to the ‘Life-long Student’ as applying to the case of such men as are suffering from impotence or some such debility, and are, on that account, not entitled to entering upon the House holder’s Life.

But we do not understand what these people really mean. Their meaning may be as follows:—Such a person is not entitled to the rites laid down in the Śruti, on account of their being incapable of properly accomplishing such acts as the ex amining of the clarified butter (which cannot be done by the blind), or the walk in Viṣṇu’s steps (which cannot be done by the lame); and that even so the said Śruti-texts have their application in the case of such men as are capable of duly accomplishing the rites with all the said details; so that there is no need for taking them as forcing the disabled persona also to perform the acts^(”).

If this is what is meant, then as regards the Smṛti -texts also which speak of the ‘Life-long student’,—such a student also would have to ‘fetch water for the Teacher,’ to beg for food, and so forth; and in regard to the Renunciate also it has been declared that ‘he shall not dwell in any one place for a second night’. So that how could the blind and lame be entitled to these life-stages as prescribed by the Smṛti -texts? In fact the Initiatory Ceremony (upanayana) itself is clearly indicative of all (the four life-stages). Hence the desire of the person for marriage, which is referred to later on (9.203) in the text—‘if he has need for a wife etc. &c.’ Though in connection with the Initiatory Ceremony also, there are several details, such as looking at the sun, going round the fire, and so forth (which cannot be done by the blind or the lame), yet—in as much as the uninitiated person, by reason of his having become an outcast, would not be entitled to marry,—it is open to the man to keep up bis studentship, even though defective, by serving his Teacher to the best of his ability. As for the impotent man, he is, by his very nature, unfit for the Initiatory Ceremony; in fact, like the outcast, he is not entitled to anything at all.

From all this our mind is not satisfied with the view that the life of the Renunciate (directly after studentship), or that of the Life-long Student, is meant for disabled people. In fact the two methods may well be regarded as optional alternatives; as is done in the case of the two Vedic texts laying down oblations to be offend ‘before sunrise’ and ‘after sunrise’. And it is in accordance. with the alternative view that nil the four life-stages should be passed through that we have the passage—‘without paying off his debts &c.’,—which is deprecatory and not prohibitive (of Life-long Studentship, or Direct Renunciation). Or, it may be taken as referring to cases where the married man is going to take to Renunciation.—(36).

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 3) along with 35 which has the following notes:—These two verses mean that a man who has not already acquired dispassion towards worldly and celestial things should do all things according to the scriptures and then have recourse to Renunciation,—‘vrajatyadhaḥ’ i.e., lingers in the satya and other regions lower than Liberation,—the Jabāla śruti justifies Renunciation also for those who have not passed through all the preceding life-stages.

**(verses 6.36-37)
**

Bodhāyana (2.11.34).—‘Those dwell with us who fulfil the following duties—the study of the Vedas, the studentship, the procreation of offspring, faith, austerity, sacrificing and giving gifts; he who praises other duties becomes dust and perishes.’

Āpastamba (2.24.8).—(Same as Baudhāyana.)

Yājñavalkya (3.57).—‘One shall turn his mind towards liberation only after having studied the Vedas, performed japa, obtained sons, given away food, maintained the fires and performed sacrifices to the best of his ability;—never otherwise.’

(For other texts, see under 33-34.)

Kāmandaka (2.29-31).—‘The duties of the Renunciate are to renounce all activity, to live on begging, to dwell under trees, to refuse all gifts, to avoid injury to living beings, to maintain an attitude of equality towards all, to be neutral to friends and enemies, to be unmoved by joy and grief, to be pure in mind and body, to curb speech, observe vows, to withdraw the senses from their objects, to keep the mind collected, to be absorbed in meditation and to purify his intentions.’

036 Having studied the Vedas in accordance with the rule, having begat sons according to the sacred law, and having offered sacrifices according to his ability, he may direct his mind to (the attainment of) final liberation.

036 Having studied the Vedas in accordance with the rule, having begat sons according to the sacred law, and having offered sacrifices according to his ability, he may direct his mind to (the attainment of) final liberation.

The twice-born person, who seeks Liberation, without having studied the Vedas, without having begotten offspring, and without having offered sacrificis, sinks downwards.—(37).

यज्ञैर् आहिताग्निर् नित्यैः पशुसोमैः ॥ ६.३७

‘Sacrifices’—such as the Animal-Sacrifice, the Some-Sacrifice and the like, which an obligatory on persons who have set up the Fire.—(37).

**(verses 6.36-37)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.36].

037 A twice-born man who seeks final liberation, without having studied the Vedas, without having begotten sons, and without having offered sacrifices, sinks downwards.

037 A twice-born man who seeks final liberation, without having studied the Vedas, without having begotten sons, and without having offered sacrifices, sinks downwards.

Having performed the Prājāpatya Sacrifice, wherein all his belongings are given away as the sacrificial fee,—and having reposited the Fires within himself,—the Brāhmaṇa should go forth from his house.—(38).

प्राजापत्या अध्वर्युवेदे विहिता । तस्यां च सर्वस्वदानम् विहितम् । तां कृत्वात्मन्य् अग्नयः समारोप्यन्ते । समारोपणे ऽपि विधिस् तत एवावगन्तव्यः । सार्ववेदसं दक्षिणास्यास्तीत्य् अन्यपदार्थः । वेदो धनम्, तत् सर्वं देयम् । इदम् अर्थे विहितः स्वार्थिको व प्रज्ञादेर् आकृतिगणत्वात् ।

• अन्ये तु पुरुषमेधं प्राजापत्याम् इष्टिम् आहुः । तत्र “ब्रह्मणे ब्राह्मणम् आलभते” इति प्रथमः पशुः, ब्रह्मा च प्रजापतिः, मुख्येन व्यपदेशप्रवृत्तेः प्राजापत्यः पुरुषमेधः । सर्वस्वदानम् अग्निसमारोपणं प्रव्रज्या च तत्रैव् विहिता । एवं हि तत्र श्रुतिः “अथात्मन्य् अग्नीन्त् समारोप्य तत्रारोपणेनादित्योपस्थानाद् अपेक्षमाणैर् अरण्यम् अभिप्रेतात् तदैव देवमनुष्येभ्यः स्थिरो भवति” इति ।

• यत्¹³ त्व् आत्मन्य् अग्नीन्त् समारोप्य प्रव्रज्यया व्यपदिष्टा, अथाह एत एव आत्मनो यज्ञा, इत्य् अतस् तन्मरणात् तस्यै दत्ता आत्मन्य् एव समारोपिता भवन्ति । अतो भार्यामरणपक्षे प्रव्रज्या, नावश्यं¹⁴ “पुनर् दारक्रिया” (म्ध् ५.१६६) इति, तन् न¹⁵ । किं तु तस्याः पूर्वमरणे भार्यायै दत्वाग्नीन् अन्त्यकर्मणीति पठितम् इति वक्तव्यम् इति । पौरुषेयो ह्य् अयं ग्रन्थो न वेदः, येनोक्तम् उपालभेमहीति परिहारः स्यात् ॥ ६.३८ ॥

‘Prājāpatya Sacrifice’—as prescribed in the Yajurveda; at this the giving away of all one’s belongings is enjoined. After this has been performed, the Fires are reposited by the man within himself; the exact procedure of this repositing also has to be learnt from that same Veda.

The compound ‘Sarvavedasadakṣiṇam’is to be treated as a Bahuvrīhi compound; ‘that at which all one’s belongings are given away as the sacrificial fee’. ‘Vedas’ mean wealth; and the whole of this is to be given away. This is the sense attributed to the ‘an’ affix in the term ‘sarvāvedasa’. Or the ‘an’ affix may be taken in the reflexive sense; the ‘Prajñādi group’ (which are laid down as taking the said affix in this sense) being a purely tentative one.

Others have explained the ‘Prājāpatya sacrifice’ as human sacrifice. At this latter the Brāhmaṇa forms the first animal to be sacrificed in accordance with the injunction ‘the Brāhmaṇa should be sacrificed to Brahman’; and ‘Prājāpati’ is only another name f or Brahman; and since a sacrifice is named after its chief deity, ‘Prājāpatya’ is the name for the human sacrifice. Farther, it is only in connection with this sacrifice that the scriptures have enjoined the giving away of all belongings, the repositing of the Fires within oneself and the going forth as a mendicant. We have the following Śruti -text on this point:—‘Having reposited the

Fires within himself, and regarding this repositing as a worship rendered unto Āditya, the man should go forth; then alone does he become securer than gods and men

Some people have held that the ‘repositing of the Fires within himself’, which is mentioned in connection with Renunciation, becomes fulfilled if the Fires are made over to the wife at her death; and hence Renunciation is to be taken to only in the event of the wife’s death, when a second wife need not be taken.

But in that case the text bearing on the subject should have been in some such form as—‘in the event of the wife dying first, the Fires should be made over to her at her funeral rite’, and since the present treatise is the work of a human author, and not a Veda, the answer would not be available that no exception can be taken to its words. (?)—(38).

The second half of this verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.57) to the effect that the Brāhmaṇa only is entitled to the life of Renunciation.

The verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 538), in the sense that when going to enter the stage of Renunciation, the man should perform the Prājāpatya sacrifice in which he should give away all his belongings as the ‘sacrificial fee’;—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 13).

Bodhāyana (2.17.21).—‘A Brāhmaṇa who, knowing this, dies after fasting during the night of Brahman, and depositing within himself the sacred fires, conquers all guilts, even that of killing a Brāhmaṇa.’

Viṣṇu (96.1, 2).—‘After having passed through the first three stages, and annihilated passion, he must offer an oblation to Prajāpati, in which he bestows all his wealth as the sacrificial fee, and enter the stage of the Renunciate. Having reposited the fires in his own mind, he must enter the village in order to collect alms.’

Yājñavalkya (3.56).—‘Either after Studentship, or after Hermitship, having performed the Prājāpatya sacrifice, at which his entire wealth is given away as the sacrificial fee, and at its completion, repositing the fires within himself,—(he shall turn his mind towards liberation).’

Kūrmapurāṇa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 538).—‘Repositing the fires within himself, the twice-born should go forth as a Renunciate, devoted to the practice of Yoga. After having performed the Prājāpatya or the Āgneyī sacrifice, and having all his impurities evaporated within himself, he should have recourse to the stage dedicated to Brahman.’

Nṛsiṃhapurāṇa (Parāśaramādhava, p. 539).—‘Leading the life of the Hermit, having his sins burnt by austerity, the twice-born person should, in accordance with the law, take to renunciation and enter the fourth stage. Having made offerings to gods, Pitṛs, sages and men, and also to himself, and having performed the Prājāpatya or the Vaiśvānarī sacrifice, he shall reposit the fire within himself and, reciting mantras, go forth.’

Kātyāyana (Parāśaramādhava, p. 542).—‘Having reposited the fires within himself, seated in the centre of the altar, and meditating upon Hari, having obtained the permission of his guru, he should pronounce the Praiṣamantra.’

038 Having performed the Ishti, sacred to the Lord of creatures (Pragapati), where (he gives) all his property as the sacrificial fee, having reposited the sacred fires in himself, a Brahmana may depart from his house (as an ascetic).

038 Having performed the Ishti, sacred to the Lord of creatures (Pragapati), where (he gives) all his property as the sacrificial fee, having reposited the sacred fires in himself, a Brahmana may depart from his house (as an ascetic).

He who goes forth from home after having granted freedom from all fear to all beings,—to that expounder of the Veda belong regions of light.—(39).

गार्हस्थ्यनिन्दया चतुर्थाश्रमप्रशंसा । यज्ञे हि पशवो हन्यन्ते । “प्ररोहधर्मकाश् चेतनाः” इति दर्शने तृणौषधीनां छेद इत्य् एतद् भूतभयम् । तद् गृहात् प्रव्रजितस्य समारोपिताग्नेर् नास्तीत्य् उक्तम् । अभयं सर्वभूतेभ्यो दत्वेति । अनेनाशुष्काणां तृणपलाशानाम् अनुपादानम् आह । तेजोमया नित्यप्रकाशा । उदयास्तमयौ यत्रादित्यस्य न विभाव्येते । यथोक्तम् “अत ऊर्ध्वम् आदित्यो नैवोदेति न वास्तम् एति” इत्य् उपनिषत्स्व् इत्य् एवम् आहुर् वचांसि ॥ ६.३९ ॥

This verse eulogises the fourth life-stage at the expense of the Householding stage.

At sacrifices animals are killed; the cutting of herbs and grasses also constitutes ‘killing’, according to the theory that ‘all that grows is animate’. It is this that constitutes the ‘fear’ of living beings. So that when one has gone away from home, and has disposed of the Fires, there is no such fear from him. This is what is meant by the words—‘having granted freedom from fear to all beings.’ This also indicates that the Renunciate shall not pick up for his use any inch leaves or twigs as have not quite dried up.

‘Of light’—ever effulgent; where the rising and s etting of the sun are not perceived; this is what is described by the words of the Upaniṣads—^(‘)Beyond this the sun does not rise or set’—(39).

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 20), which explains ‘brahmavedinaḥ’ (which is its reading for ‘brahmavādinaḥ’) as ‘knowing the Brahman with properties’, which is clear from its being mentioned along with ‘effulgent regions’ which could have no connection with one who knows the absolute Brahman.

It is quoted also in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 460).

**(verses 6.39-40)
**

Mahābhārata (12.244.28; and 278.22).—(Reproduces Manu, the last foot being read as pretya cānantyamaśnute; under 279, 2, the same foot is read as ‘tathānantyāya kalpate.’)

Baudhāyana (2.17.29).—‘Finally he pours as much water as fills his joined hands, saying “I promise not to injure any living being.” They quote the following:—“A Renunciate who roams about after having given a promise of safety to all living beings, is not threatened with danger by any creature.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.1-3).—‘The Renunciate should depart from his house, giving a promise of safety from injury to all living beings. They quote the following:—“That Renunciate who wanders about at peace with all creatures, forsooth, has nothing to fear from any living being; hut he who becomes a Renunciate and does not promise safety from injury to all beings, destroys the born and the unborn; and so does a Renunciate who accepts presents.”’

यो गत्त्वा दर्वभूतेभ्यः प्रव्रजत्य् अभयं गृहात् ।
तस्य तेजोमया लोकाः

तेजस्विनो ब्रह्मलोकस्थानविशेषा अपुनरावर्तिनो ऽस्य नित्यप्रकाशलक्षणा वा परमात्मप्राप्तिलक्षणा वा

भवन्ति ब्रह्मवादिनः ॥ ६.३९ ॥

परमात्मज्ञस्य न केवलं प्रव्रजितस्येति ॥ ६.३९ ॥

039 Worlds, radiant in brilliancy, become (the portion) of him who recites (the texts regarding) Brahman and departs from his house (as an ascetic), after giving a promise of safety to all created beings.

The twice-born person, from whom not the slightest danger arises to living beings, suffers no danger from any source, when he has become freed from his body.—(40).

एष एवार्थः पुनर् उक्तः । देहाद् विमुक्तस्य वार्तमानिकं शरीरं यस्य पततीत्य् अर्थः ॥ ६.४० ॥

The same idea is repeated again.

‘When he has become freed from his body’—i.e., when his present body falls off. (40)

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 20), according to which this also refers to the knowledge of the Brahman with properties, as no fear is possible for one who knows the Absolute Brahman.

**(verses 6.39-40)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.39].

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

040 For that twice-born man, by whom not the smallest danger even is caused to created beings, there will be no danger from any (quarter), after he is freed from his body.

Having departed from his house, fully equipped with the sacred things, he shall go forth, silent and wholly indifferent towards pleasures that may be presented to him.—(41.)

पवित्रैर् मन्त्रजपैर् दर्भकमण्डलुकृष्णाजिनैर् उपचितो युक्तः । अथ वा पावनैः कृच्छ्रैः । मुनिर् अकिंचिद्वादी । समुपोढेषु उपहृतेषु¹⁶ केनचित् कामेषु स्पृहणीयेषु मृष्टभोजनादिषु यदृच्छातो गीतादिशब्देषु संनिहितेषु पुत्रादिषु वा समुपस्थितेषु निरपेक्षो भवेत् । नैतांश् चिरं स्निग्धेन चक्षुषा पश्येन् नाकर्णयेन् न तैः सहासीत ॥ ६.४१ ॥

यत आह ।

‘Sacred things’—the muttering of sacred texts, kuśa-grass, water-pot and deer-skin; —‘Equipped’— supplied—with these. Or ‘pavitra’ may be taken as standing for the purifying penances.

^(‘)Muni’,—^(‘)silenty,’— speaking little.

‘Presented’—offered by some person;—‘pleasures’— pleasure-giving objects, such as nice food and the like, which may come to him by chance,—or the sounds of music &c.,—or sons end other relations. When these happen to be presented before him, he should be^(‘)indifferent’ to them; i.e., he shall not look upon them for long with loving eyes, shall not listen to them, or shall not sit with them.—(41).

‘Pavitropacitaḥ’—‘Equipped with the purificatory recitation of sacred texts, and also with such purificatory things as kuśa, water-pot and staff; or equipped with purificatory penances’;—‘provided with such means of purification as the staff, the water-pot and so forth’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka and Nandana);—‘made eminent during life as a Householder by such purificatory acts as austerities, Vedic recitals and so forth’ (Nārāyaṇa);—‘possessed of a rich store of sanctifying knowledge taught in the Upaniṣads.’

‘Muniḥ’—‘Wholly silent’ (Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘intent on meditation’ (Nārāyaṇa).

‘Samupoḍheṣu’—‘Offered to him’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘collected in his house’ (Nandana);—‘fully enjoyed by him’ (Nārāyaṇa).

Gautama (3,16).—‘Abandoning all desire.’

Baudhāyana (2.11.16).—‘The Renunciate shall leave his relations, and, not attended by any one, nor possessing any property, depart from his house, according to rule.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.12, 28).—‘He should frequently change his residence. He should not enjoy any object of sensual gratification.’

Yājñavalkya (3.57).—‘Devoted to the welfare of all living beings, he shall go forth alone.’

Arthaśāstra (p. 30).—‘For the Renunciate—keeping senses under control, desisting from activities, having no possessions, abandoning of attachment, alms-begging in several places, living in the forest, internal and external purity.’

अनेन श्लोकत्रयेण सर्वभूताभयप्रदानं प्रव्रजितस्य विधीयते । एकारामता चानेन ॥ ६.४०–४१ ॥

041 Departing from his house fully provided with the means of purification (Pavitra), let him wander about absolutely silent, and caring nothing for enjoyments that may be offered (to him).

He shall always wander about alone, without a companion, in order to attain success; when one realises that success accrues to the solitary man, he neither forsakes nor becomes forsaken.—(42)

एकरामतानेन विधीयते । एक एवेत्य् अनेन पूर्वसंस्तुतपरित्याग उच्यते । असहायवान् इति भृत्यादेः पूर्वस्यापि परिग्रहो न कर्तव्यः । संविद्रागद्वेषविनिर्मुक्तस्य सर्वसमता एवं भवति । अन्यथा एष एव भृत्यादिर् अन्तिकस्थः, तत्रैवं बुद्धिः स्यात् “अयं मदीयो नायम्” इति । एष एव सङ्गो ऽवधिहेतुर् यथा त्व् एष संपत्स्यते यदा न जहाति, न क्वचित् पुत्रादिस् तेन त्यक्तो भवति । अतो न हीयते न वियुज्यते पुत्रादिभिस् तद्वियोगदुःखं नासादयति । इतरथा सङ्गात् पुनस् त्यागे महद् दुःखम् । न तस्य कश्चिन् म्रियते, स न कस्यचिद् इति ॥ ६.४२ ॥

This verse enjoins solitude.

‘Alone’—denotes the giving up of past acquaintances.

‘Without a companion’:—he shall not take with him even his former servant &c. It is only in this way that the man becomes free from friendship, hatred and love; and thus comes to look upon all things as equal. Otherwise, if a servant happen to be near him, he could have the notion that—‘this man is mine, not that’; and this is the attachment that becomes the cause of bondage.

When he realises this, then he does not ‘forsake’—no son or anybody else is ever forsaken, by him; and hence he himself also is not ‘forsaken’—not separated from this son and others; i.e., he is not beset with the pain of separation from them. Otherwise—if there had been attachment—the giving up would cause great pain. In fact, for auch a man no one dies, nor does he die for any one.—(42).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 953), which explains ‘siddhim na jahāti’ as ‘he is not abandoned by success’;—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 557), which adds the following explanation:—Coming to the conclusion that when a man moves about alone, without a companion, he is free from any such obstacles as attachment aversion and the like, and thus becomes enabled to attain ‘success’ in the shape of True Knowledge;—i.e., he acts without shackles towards its attainment; and of that success lie is not deprived, i.e., he attains it. If, on the other hand, he moves about with two or three companions, then he becomes liable to attachment and aversion, and by reason of these obstacles, he fails to attain that success.

Mahābhārata (12.245.4-5).—(Same as Manu.)

Yājñavalkya (3.5).—(See under 41.)

सिद्धे शास्त्राग्नित्यागे लौकिकाग्नित्यागार्थम् इदम् उच्यते ॥ ६.४२ ॥

042 Let him always wander alone, without any companion, in order to attain (final liberation), fully understanding that the solitary (man, who) neither forsakes nor is forsaken, gains his end.

He shall be without fires and without home; he may go to a village for food;—disinterested, steady, silent and calmly-disposed.—(43).

श्रौतानाम् अग्नीनां पूर्वम् अभाव उक्तो ऽनेन गार्हस्थ्यस्योच्यते । अथ वा पाकप्रतिषेधो ऽयम् अग्न्यर्थस्य चेन्धनस्य शीतादिनिवृत्तिप्रयोजनस्य । निकेतो गृहम् । ग्रामम् एकां रात्रिम् अन्नार्थम् आश्रयेत् । कृतप्रयोजनो ऽरण्ये शेषं कालम् । एषा चैकरात्रिर् ग्रामे गौतमेनोका (ग्ध् ३.२१) । तत्र यदि समया ग्रामं तदान्नार्थ एव प्रवेशः । अथ दूरतस् तदैकां रात्रिं वसेत् । द्वितीयाम् अरण्ये संभावयेत् । उपेक्षकः अचेतनेष्व् अपि भावेषु कमण्डल्वादिषु, न तन् निजायत्तं कुर्यात् । अथ वा शरीरस्य व्याधिप्रतीकारं न कुर्यात् । अन्ये त्व् “असंकसुकः” इति पठन्ति । अस्थिरः संकुसुकः, तन्निषेधेन चित्तवृत्तिधैर्यम् उपदिशति । मुनिः संयतवागिन्द्रियः । भावेन चित्तेन समाहितः मनसा विकल्पान् वर्जयेत् । भावेनैव समाहितो न वाङ्मात्रेण ॥ ६.४३ ॥

The abandoning of the Śrauta fires has been mentioned before; this verse speaks of the abandoning of the domestic fire. Or tins may be taken as forbidding the act of cooking, and of seeking for fuel for the fire required for the allaying of cold and such other purposes.

‘Niketa’ is home.

‘He may go’—for one night—‘to a village for food’; and having got what he needs, he should spend the rest of his time in the forest. This living in the village for a single night has been declared by Gautama. If the man happen to be near a village, then he shall enter it only for obtaining food; but if he happens to be far off from it, then he may dwell there for a single night, and pass on to the forest for the second.

‘Disinterested’;—he should not own his even such inanimate objects as the water-pot and the like. Or, it may mean that he shall not have recourse to any remedy for his bodily ailments.

Some people read ‘asaṅkusukaḥ’;—‘saṅkusuka’ means fickle, unsteady; and the opposite of this denotes firmness of mind.

‘Silent’—with the organ of speech under his full control

‘Calmly disposed’— Calm in disposition; i.e., he shall give up all mental imaginings; he shall be calm by disposition not in mere speech (43).

‘Muniḥ’—‘with the organ of speech controlled’ (Medhātithi);—‘meditating on Brahman’ (Kullūka).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 953).

Mahābhārata (12.245.5-6).—(Same as Manu, the third foot read as ‘aśvastana-vidhātā syāt.’)

Gautama (3.11, 14).—‘The Renunciate shall not possess any store. He shall enter a village only for begging alms.’ Baudhāyana (2.11.16).—(See under 41.)

Āpastamba (2.21.10).—‘He shall live without a tire, without a house, without pleasures, without protection. Remaining silent and uttering speech only on the occasion of the daily recitation of the Veda, begging only so much food in the village as will sustain his life, he shall wander about, caring neither for this world nor for the next.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.6).—‘The Renunciate sh all shave his head; he shall have no property, and no house.’

Viṣṇu (96.2).—‘Having reposited the fires in himself, he should enter the village only for collecting alms.’

Yājñavalkya (3.57).—(See under 41.)

अनग्निः स्यात् । सो ऽयम् अग्नीन्धनतत्संपरिग्रहप्रतिषेधः । अनिकेतश् च स्यात् । ग्रामैकरात्रिकन्यायेन ग्रामम् अन्नार्थम् आश्रयेत् । अर्थाच् छेषं कालम् अरण्ये तिष्ठेत् । उपेक्षकः स्वशरीरादिषु । असंचयिकः अप्रतिषिद्धास्व् अपि कमण्डल्वादिमात्रासु । मुनिर् भावसमाश्रितः । चित्तसंयमोपदेशपरम् इदं ध्यानात्मानुष्ठानम् ॥ ६.४३ ॥

043 He shall neither possess a fire, nor a dwelling, he may go to a village for his food, (he shall be) indifferent to everything, firm of purpose, meditating (and) concentrating his mind on Brahman.

The potsherd, the roots of trees, coarse cloth, solitude, e quality towards all,—are the mark of the liberated man.—(44).

भिक्षाभोजनपात्रं कपालं कर्परम् । निकेतो वृक्षमूलानि । कुचैलं स्थूलजीर्णवस्त्रखण्डम् । समता शत्रौ मित्रे उभयरूपरहिते स्वात्मनि च । मुक्तस्य लक्षणम् । अचिरप्राप्यता मोक्षस्योच्यते, न पुनर् इयतैव मुक्तो भवति ॥ ६.४४ ॥

The ‘potsherd’—the broken jar—shall be his dish and his begging-bow;—The ‘roots of trees’ shall be his home.

‘Coarse cloth’—Rough and torn pieces of doth.

‘Equality’—towards the friend and the enemy, to one who is neither a friend nor an enemy, as well as towards himself.

‘Mark of the liberated person’. What this means is that to such a man liberation is quickly attained; not that the man becomes liberated by these alone.—(44).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 953);—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 569).

Mahābhārata (12.245.7).—(Same as Manu, the second line being read as ‘Upekṣā sarvabhūtānāmetāvadbhikṣulakṣaṇam.’)

Gautama (3.18-19, 25).—‘He shall wear a cloth just to cover his nakedness; an old rag, duly washed, say some. He shall not undertake anything for his spiritual or temporal welfare.’

Baudhāyana (2.11, 19, 21).—‘He shall wear cloth just to cover his nakedness. He shall wear a dress dyed yellowish red.’

Do. (2.17.44).—‘He should no longer wear any white dress.’

Āpastamba (2. 21.11).—‘It is ordained that he shall wear clothes discarded by others.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.9, 10, 13, 27).—‘He should wear a single garment; or cover his body with a skin or with grass that has been nibbled at by the cow. He shall dwell at the extremity of the village, in a temple, or in an empty house, or at the root of a tree. He should not be crooked in bis ways; he should not observe the rules of impurity on account of deaths or births; he should not have a house; he should he of concentrated mind.’

Viṣṇu (96.10, 11).—‘He must live in an empty house; or at the root of a tree.’

समतादिगुणविधानार्थम् इदं भिक्षोः ॥ ६.४४ ॥

044 A potsherd (instead of an alms-bowl), the roots of trees (for a dwelling), coarse worn-out garments, life in solitude and indifference towards everything, are the marks of one who has attained liberation.

He shall not rejoice at death; nor shall he rejoice at life; he shall await his time, just as the servant awaits the fulfilment of his contract—(45).

अनेनाक्लेशिताभिहिता । न मरणं कामयेत । नापि ज्ञानातिशयलाभार्थी जीवितम् । कालम् एव प्रतीक्षेत । “यद् यदा भविष्यति तत् तदैवास्तु” इति चिन्तयेत् । यथा भृतको निर्वेशम् । भृतिं गृहीत्वा कालं परिपालयति, अहर् एतस्य मया कर्तव्यम् इति, नान्तरा विच्छेदे मूल्यलाभः, एवं संसारक्षयाच् छरीरपाते मोक्षो भवत्य् एतेन विधिना, न स्वेच्छावृत्तेन ॥ ६.४५ ॥

This denotes freedom from troubles.

He shall not seek death; nor shall he seek life, for the purpose of acquiring more knowledge.

‘He shall await his time’.—He shall cultivate the habit of thinking ‘let anything happen at any time it may’.

‘Just as the servant waits for the fulfilness of his contract’—‘This work I have got to do for him during the day,—if I stop in the middle, I shall not obtain full wages’.

Worldliness having thus ceased, when the man’s body falls off, he attains Liberation, by this process and not by doing whatever he likes.—(45)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 953), which explains ‘nirveśam’ as ‘time limit’—in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 569);—and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 70a).

Mahābhārata (12.245.15).—(Same as Manu, reading ‘nideśam’ for ‘nirveśam.’)

Viṣṇu (96.18)—‘He must neither wish for death nor for life.’

नाभिनन्देत मरणम्

अनेन क्लेशाभिघातोद्वेगेन कार्त्स्ने

नाभिनन्देत जीवितम् ।

विज्ञानाविगमसङ्गप्रीत्या,

कालम् एव प्रतीक्षेत निर्वेशं भृतको यथा ॥ ६.४५ ॥

045 Let him not desire to die, let him not desire to live; let him wait for (his appointed) time, as a servant (waits) for the payment of his wages.

He shall place his foot sight-purified, drink water cloth-clarified, utter speech truth-sanctified and act with pure mind—(46).

चक्षुषा मार्गं निरूप्य यस्मिन् प्रदेशे प्राणिनः पीडां न गच्छन्ति तत्र पादं निदध्यात् । सत्यां वाचं वदेद् इति सिद्धे पूतग्रहणं सत्यशब्दस्योपलक्षणताम् दर्शयति । तेनापविद्धं भवति । मनसा पूतो मनःपूतः सदा स्यात् । परद्रवाभिध्यानादि न कुर्यात् ॥ ६.४६ ॥

Having looked over the path with the eye, he should place his foot on a spot where there may be no animals to suffer from his tread.

It being already known that one should tell the truth, the term ‘pūta’, ‘sanctified’, is meant to show that the term ‘satya’, ‘truth’, is purely indicative; hence there is nothing incongruous in this.

One shall always remain pure in his mind; i.e. he shall not even think of possessing what belongs to another and so forth.—(46)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 953);—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 569).

Baudhāyana (2.11.25, 24).—‘He shall perform the necessary purifications with water which has been taken out and has been strained. He shall carry a cloth for straining water for the sake of purifications.’

Do. (2-17.43).—‘He shall not sip water which has not been drawn up, which has not been strained and which has not been thoroughly cleansed.’

Do. (2.18.2).—‘Abstention from injuring living beings, truthfulness, abstention from appropriating the property of others, continence and liberality.’

Viṣṇu (96.14-17).—‘He must set down his feet purified by looking down: he must drink water purified (by straining) with a cloth; he must utter speech purified by truth; ho must perform acts purified by his mind.’

प्रसिद्धार्थश्लोकः ॥ ६.४६ ॥

046 Let him put down his foot purified by his sight, let him drink water purified by (straining with) a cloth, let him utter speech purified by truth, let him keep his heart pure.

He shall patiently bear improper words, and shall not insult anyone; and he shall not make enmity with any one, for the sake of his present body—(47).

शास्त्रम् अतिक्रम्य यः कश्चिद् वदति सो ऽतिवादः अप्रियाक्रोशः । तितिक्षेत क्षमेत, न प्रत्याक्रोशेत् । न च मनसा क्रुध्येतेत्य् अतो वक्ष्यति “आक्रुष्टः कुशलं वदेत्” (म्ध् ६.४८) इति । अनेन मनसः क्षोभो विनिवार्यते, न कुशलशब्दाभिधानं विधीयते । तदा हि मिथ्यावादी स्याद् अन्यद् धृदये ऽन्यत् तु वाचा वदन् । नावमन्येतेति । अवज्ञानं न कस्यचित् कुर्यात् । गुर्वादिपूजनं नातिक्रामेत् । न चेमं देहम्, यदि कश्चित् प्रहरेच् छरीरे, तेन सह वैरं कुर्यात् । “किम् अनेन मे शरीरेण नष्टेनानष्टेन वा, तेजोमयं मे शरीरं भवतु” इति ध्यायेत् ॥ ६.४७ ॥

When one speaks in a manner contrary to the scriptures, his words are called ‘improper’—i.e. hard, disagreeable taunts;—these he shall ‘bear patiently’—i.e. tolerate, not answer back. In fact, he shall not bear ill-will even in his mind; what is implied by the direction is that ‘on being cursed he shall pronounce a blessing,” which forbids even mental perturbation; and it does not mean that he shall actually ask the man—‘is it well with you?’ Because if he spoke thus (and bore anger in his mind) he would be a liar, saying one thing and thinking of another.

‘He shall not insult’—shall not show disrespect towards—any one. That is, he shall not omit to show respect to his elders.

‘For the sake of his present body;’—i.e. if some one were to strike his body—‘he shall not make enmity with him.’ He is to think all the time in the following strain—? what would it matter whether this body perished or not, I may have an effulgent body.’—(47).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 953);—in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 569);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 107).

Mahābhārata (12.278.6)—(Reproduces the first half of Manu).—‘When angry, he should speak gently; when abused, he should speak in an agreeable manner.’

Gautama (3.24).—‘He shall be indifferent towards all creatures, and to an injury or to a kindness.’

Baudhāyana (2.11.23).—‘With the three means of punishment,—word, thought and action,—he shall not injure created beings.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.29).—‘He shall he utterly indifferent, avoiding injury and kindness towards living beings.’

Viṣṇu (96.19, 29, 23).—‘He must hear abuse patiently;—he must treat no one with contempt. Should one man chop his one arm with an axe, and another sprinkle his other arm with sandal, he must neither curse the one in his mind, nor bless the other.’

अतिवादांस् तितिक्षेत

क्षमोपदेशो ऽयम् ।

नावमन्येत कंचन ।

इति परावमानं वारयति ।

न चेमं देहम् आश्रित्य वैरं कूर्वीत केनचित् ॥ ६.४७ ॥

एवं च सति क्षमायोगा

047 Let him patiently bear hard words, let him not insult anybody, and let him not become anybody’s enemy for the sake of this (perishable) body.

Towards an angry man he shall not retort in anger; when he is cursed, he shall pronounce a blessing; and he shall not utter an untrue word, spreading over the seven openings.—(48).

सप्तद्वाराणि च धर्मार्थौ धर्मकामाव् अर्थकामौ कामार्थौ कामधर्मौ अर्थधर्मौ त्रिवर्ग इति । अत्र अवकीर्णां विक्षिप्ताम् एतद्विषयां न वाचं वदेद् अनृताम् । भेदाश्रयत्वाद् एतेषाम्, भेदस्य सर्वस्यासत्यत्वाद् अनृताम् इत्य् उक्तम् । किं तर्हि मोक्षाश्रयाम् एव वदेत् ।

• अथ वा सप्त शीर्षण्याः प्राणास् ते वाचो द्वाराणि ।

• अथ वा षड् इन्द्रियाणि बुद्धिः सप्तमी । एतैर् गृहीतेष्व् अर्थेषु वाक् प्रवर्तते ।

• सुब्विभक्तय इत्य् अन्ये ॥ ६.४८ ॥

‘Seven openings’—(1) Duty and wealth, (2) duty and pleasure, (3) wealth and pleasure, (4) pleasure and wealth, (5) pleasure and duty, (6) wealth and duty, and (7) wealth—pleasure—duty. He shall not utter an untrue word spreading over all these. All these are based upon notions of diversity; and all diversity is untrue; hence the word relating to these is called ‘untrue’.

The sense is that the man shall speak only such words as pertain to Liberation.

Or, the ‘seven openings’ may stand for the seven breaths in the head; and these are the ‘openings’ of speech. Or, it may stand for the six sense-organs and Intellect as the seventh. It is only when objects have been perceived by means of these that words speak of them. Others explain that the ‘seven openings’ stand for the seven declensional terminations.—(48).

‘Saptadvāra’—(a) (1) Dharma-Artha, (2) Dharma-Kāma, (3) Artha-Kama, (4) Kāma-Artha, (5) Kāma-Dharma, (6) Artha-Dharma, (7) Dharma-Artha-Kāma;—or (b) The seven life-breath in the head;—or (d) ‘the six sense-organs and Buddhi’ (Medhātithi);—Kullūka has only (c);—‘the five senses, mind and Ahaṅkāra’ (Nārāyaṇa);—Govindarāja has (a) only;—‘seven worlds’ (mentioned by Kullūka).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 954), which, reading na vācam samudīrayet (for na vācamanṛtam vadet) explains this much misunderstood second line as—he should not utter words vitiated by (1) desire, (2) anger, (3) greed, (4) delusion, (5) arrogance, (6) jealousy and (7) vanity.

This verse is quoted also in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 569).

Mahābhārata (12.278.6).—(See under 47.)

Baudhāyana (2.18, 3).—‘There are five minor vows—to abstain from anger, to obey the teacher, to avoid rashness, to observe cleanliness and to observe purity in eating.’

वाचस् सप्तद्वाराणि धर्मो ऽर्थः कामो धर्मार्थाव् अर्थकामौ धर्मकामौ धर्मार्थकामा इति । तत्र मोक्षाश्रिताम् एव वाचं वदेन्, न सप्तद्वाराश्रिताम् अनृतां त्रिवर्गाश्रयाम् ।

048 Against an angry man let him not in return show anger, let him bless when he is cursed, and let him not utter speech, devoid of truth, scattered at the seven gates.

Centered in spirituality, disinterested, free from longings, with himself as his sole companion, he shall wander forth in the world, seeking bliss.—(49).

आत्मतत्वप्रतिविधानापादानपरम् एकाग्रत्वम् अध्यात्मम् । तद्रतिस् तदर्थचिन्तापर आसीत । निरपेक्ष इत्य् उक्तानुवादो विषयान्य् एभ्यो धर्मेभ्यो ऽनुष्ठानार्थः । निरामिषो निःस्पृहः । मांसम् आमिषम्, तेन स्पृहां लक्षयित्वा प्रतिषेधस् तत्रातिशयवती प्राणिनां स्पृहा । अन्यत् प्राग् उक्तम् एव ॥ ६.४९ ॥

‘Spirituality’— disposition to concentrate one’s attention upon the quest for the true nature of the self;—‘centered’— always thinking of it, he shall remain.

‘Disintrested;’—this re-iterates what has been already said before regarding his not caring for the due fulfilment of Dharma and other things.

‘Nirāmiṣaḥ’—free from longings. Flesh is ‘āmiṣa’, which indicates (figuratively) longing, by reason of the fact that living beings have a great liking for flesh; and this longing is forbidden.

All the rest has already been explained before.—(49).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 954);—and in Parāśaramādhava (Āchāra, p. 569).

Mahābhārata (12.330.30).—(Same as Manu, the last foot being read as ‘yaścaret sa sukhī bhavet.’)

Āpastamba (2.21.13).—‘Abandoning truth and falsehood, pleasure and pain, the Vedas, this world and the next, he shall seek the Ātman.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.17, 20).—‘Freedom from future births is certain for him who constantly dwells in the forest, who has subdued his organs of sensation and action, who has renounced all sensual gratification, whose mind is fixed in meditation on the Supreme Spirit, and who is indifferent (to all things).’

049 Delighting in what refers to the Soul, sitting (in the postures prescribed by the Yoga), independent (of external help), entirely abstaining from sensual enjoyments, with himself for his only companion, he shall live in this world, desiring the bliss (of final liberation).

He shall never obtain alms either by means of prodigies and portents, or by means of the science of astrology and palmistry, or by means of counsel and discussion.—(50)

उत्पाता दिव्यान्तरिक्षभौमा उपरागग्रहोदयकेतूदयदिग्दाहावनिचलनादयः, तत्फलं न कथयेद् भिक्षालिप्सया । निमित्तं गृहदौस्थित्यादि¹⁷ । नक्षत्रविद्या अद्य कृत्तिकाकर्मण्यायात्रानक्षत्रम् इत्यादि । अङ्गविद्या हस्तलेख्यादिलक्षणम् । अनुशासनं राज्ञस् तत्प्रकृतीनाम्- एवं युक्तं वर्तितुम्, एतेन संधिर् अनेन विग्रहः, इदं त्वया किम् इति कृतम्, इदं किं न करोषीति । वादो ऽभिमानहेतुकः शास्त्रार्थविप्रतिपत्तौ साधनदूषणाद्युपन्यासः ॥ ६.५० ॥

‘Prodigies’—appearing in the heaven, in the atmosphere and on the earth, e.g., eclipess, the appearance of particular planets, the appearance of a comet, reddening of the atmosphere, earthquake and so forth. The man shall not go about describing the probable effects of these, for the purpose of obtaining alms.

‘Portents’—the evil effects of planetary aspects.

‘Science of astrology’— the science which enables one to say—‘To-day the moon is in the asterism of Kṛttikā, which is fit for starting on a journey and so forth.

‘Science of palmistry’— which describes the effect of marks in the palms and other parts of the body.

‘Counsel’— offering advice to the King and his subjects,—in such form as ‘It is right to act in this manner,—make peace with this King—declare war with that—why did you do this?—why don’t you do this?’

‘Discussion’— the urging of arguments in sheer arrogance, for and against certain doctrines in regard to which there is difference of opinion.—(50)

‘Nakṣatrāṅgavidyā’—‘Astrology and Palmistry’ (Medhātithi and Kullūka);—‘Astrology and the Science of Grammar and other Vedic Subsidiaries’ (Nārāyaṇa);—‘Astrology’ (Govindarāja).

‘Anuśāsana’—‘Offering advice’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Kullūka, and Rāghavānanda);—‘teaching of the Veda’ (Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

‘Vāda’—‘Disputation’ (Medhātithi and Nārāyaṇa);—Exposition of the Śāstras’ (Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘Science of Dialectics’ (Nandana and Rāghavānanda).

Buhler remarks—“This verse is historically important, as it shows that in ancient as in modern times, ascetics followed worldly pursuits and were the teachers and advisers of the people”.

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 86).

Vaśiṣṭha (10.21).—‘Neither by explaining prodigies and omens, nor by skill in astrology and palmistry, nor by casuistry and expositions, shall he ever seek to obtain alms.’

050 Neither by (explaining) prodigies and omens, nor by skill in astrology and palmistry, nor by giving advice and by the exposition (of the Sastras), let him ever seek to obtain alms.

He shall not go near a house that is filled by hermits, brāhmaṇas, birds, dogs or other mendicants—(51)

आकीर्णम् । यत्र बहवो ऽन्नलाभाय संघटितास् तं प्रदेशं भिक्षार्थं वर्जयेत् ॥ ६.५१ ॥

‘Filled’—where many people have collected for the purpose of obtaining food,—to such a place he shall not go for alms.—(51)

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā on (3.59).

Viṣṇu (96.5).—‘He must not beg of another Renunciate.’

Yājñavalkya (3.58).—‘Having gone forth as a Renunciate, he shall be devoted to the well-being of all creatures; calm, carrying three staves and the water-pot, lonely,—and have recourse to the village only for alms.’

051 Let him not (in order to beg) go near a house filled with hermits, Brahmanas, birds, dogs, or other mendicants.

His hair, nails and beard clipped, equipped with vessels, staffs and water-pot, he shall constantly wander about, self-controlled and not causing pain to any living brings.—(52)

पात्राणि वक्ष्यति । दण्डास् त्रयः । त्रिदण्डी हि सः । कुसुम्भः कमण्डलुः, न महारजनम् । उत्तरश्लोकार्धस्यार्थः प्राग् विहित एव ॥ ६.५२ ॥

‘Vessels’—to be described later on.

‘Staffs’—three; the Renunciate being required to carry three staffs.

‘Kusumbha’—is water-pot, not the colouring substance.

What is said in the second half of the verse has been already said before. (52)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 954);—in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 569).

Gautama (3.22).—‘He may either shave or wear a lock on the crown of the head.’

Baudhāyana (2.11.18).—‘He shall shave his hair excepting the top-lock.’

Do. (2.17.10, 11).—‘Alter having caused the hair of his head, his beard, the hair on his body, and his nails to be cut, he prepares—sticks, a rope, a cloth for straining water, a water-vessel and an alms-bowl.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.6).—‘He shall shave; and have no property or home.’

Yājñavalkya (3.58).—‘Having gone forth as a Renunciate, he shall be devoted to the well-being of all creatures, calm, shall carry three staves and a water-pot, living all alone by himself; and he shall approach the village only for alms.’

052 His hair, nails, and beard being clipped, carrying an alms-bowl, a staff, and a water-pot, let him continually wander about, controlling himself and not hurting any creature.

His vessels shall be non-metallic and free from holes; the cleansing of there has been ordained to be done by water, just like that of the vessels at a sacrifice.—(53)

अतैजसानि सुवर्णाद्यघटितानि पात्राणि भिक्षाया जलस्य च । निर्व्रणान्य् अच्छिद्राणि । अद्भिर् अम्मात्रेण चमसानाम् इव निर्लेपत्वे । लेपसंभवे तु तदपनयो ऽपि द्रव्यान्तरेण कार्य इति ग्राह्यम् ॥ ६.५३ ॥

‘Non-metallic—His vessels for carrying food or water shall not be made of gold or other metals.

‘Free from holes’— not having any holes etc.,

These are cleansed, like the sacrificial vessels, by means of water alone; but only when they are not stained; if there are stained, these should be removed by the use of other (cleaning) substances also. (53)

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava, (Ācāra, p. 567);—in Mitākṣarā (on 3.60), which remarks that the citing of the instance of ‘Cups at the sacrifice’ indicates that the vessels may be considered pure for practical purposes;—in Āparārka, (p. 964);—in Madanapārijāta, (p. 377);—in Nṛsiṃhaprasādā, (Saṃskāra, p. 70b);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha, (p. 78), which shows that the example of ‘chamasa’ indicates that the things are ‘clean’ only so far as to be used.

**(verses 6.53-54)
**

Viṣṇu (96.7, 8).—‘He should receive food in an earthen vessel, or in a wooden bowl, or in a vessel made of gourd; he should cleanse these vessels with water.’

Yājñavalkya (3.60).—‘The vessels for the Renunciate are those made of clay, bamboo, wood and gourd; the cleansing of these is by means of water and scrubbing with cow’s hair.’

Hārīta (Aparārka, p. 964).—‘He shall have for his vessels either his hand only, or those made of clay or wood or bamboo-chips or gourd or torn leaves; holding these he shall enter the village for alms.’

Śaṅkha-Likhita (Do., p. 965)—‘The begging-bowl shall he one only, made of either wood or gourd or bamboo-chips or clay. The cleansing of this is to he done each time by scrubbing it with a rope made of cow’s hair and water.’

Nṛsiṃhapurāṇa (Do.).—‘He shall eat in a leaf-bowl or in a leaf-vessel; but never in the leaves of Vaṭa or Aśvattha, or

Kumbhī or Tinduka… Renunciates eating out of a vessel made of bell-metal are declared to be unclean.’

Yama (Parāśaramādhava, p. 567).—‘Vessels made of gold or iron are not for Renun dates; the Renunciate should avoid these.’

Baudhāyana (Do.).—‘He shall eat in leaves picked and split by himself; never in the leaves of the Vaṭa or Aśvattha or Karañja or Kumbhī or Tinduka or Kobidāra or Arka; never, even in distress, in a vessel made of bell-metal, or gold or silver or copper or tin or zinc.’

053 His vessels shall not be made of metal, they shall be free from fractures; it is ordained that they shall be cleansed with water, like (the cups, called) Kamasa, at a sacrifice.

Manu, the son of Svayambhu, has declared that the vessels of the renunciate shall be a gourd, a vessel of wood or of earthenware, or of splits. (54)

वैदलं वंशादिविदलकृतम् । यतिपात्राणि भिक्षार्थं जलार्थं च ॥ ६.५४ ॥

‘Splits’—i.e., of cane, or bamboo or such other split things.

‘Vessels of the Renunciate’—for carrying food and water. (54)

Hopkins is not right in saying that “Medhātithi has no note on this verse.” (See Translation).

‘Vaidalam’—‘Made of bamboo and such other things’ (Medhātithi);—‘made of tree-bark’ (Govindarāja).

**(verses 6.53-54)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.53].

054 A gourd, a wooden bowl, an earthen (dish), or one made of split cane, Manu, the son of Svayambhu, has declared (to be) vessels (suitable) for an ascetic.

He shall go for alms only once, and shall not seek for a large quantity; because the renunciate who becomes addicted to collecting alms becomes attached to sensual objects also.—(55)

भैक्षकार्यस्य भोजनस्यैककालता विधीयते, न पुनर् भैक्षचरणस्यैव । द्विर्भोजनप्रतिषेधो ऽत्राभिसंहितः । तत्र सकृच् चरित्वा द्वितीयस्मिन् काले शेषयित्वा न भुञ्जीत, तदर्थो भोजनप्रतिषेधः । अत एवाह न प्रजज्जेत विस्तर इति । द्वितीयभोजनार्थितया हि विस्तरः प्राप्नोति । एकारामस्य न भृत्यार्थेन भैक्षविस्तर इति । हेतुं ब्रुवन् सकृद्भोजने ऽपि सौहित्यं निषेधति ॥ ६.५५ ॥

What is laid down here is that the man shall eat once, this being the purpose of the alms; it does not mean that he shall go to beg only once. What is intended here is the prohibition of eating twice; that is, the man, having gone for alms once, shall not save out of it for eating again. It is with a view to this that we have the prohibition of eating. It is for this reason that the text adds ‘he shall not seek for a large quantity;’ Seeking for a large quantity can only be for the purpose of eating again and again; specially because for one who delights in solitude, large quantities of food would not be wanted for the sake of servants and other dependents. By supplying a reason for what is laid down, the text implies that even at a single meal the man shall not eat too much.—(55)

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.59);—in Parāśaramādhava, (Ācāra, p. 562);—in Madanapārijāta, p. 375);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 85).

Baudhāyana (2.18.12, 13).—‘He shall eat food given without asking, regarding which nothing has been stipulated beforehand, and which has reached him accidentally; so much only as is sufficient to sustain life.’ They quote also—“Eight mouthfuls make the meal of a Renunciate, etc.”

Vaśiṣṭha (10.7).—‘He shall heg food at seven houses which he has not selected beforehand.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.24, 25).—‘In the morning and in the evening, he may eat as much as he obtains from the house of one Brāhmaṇa,—excepting honey and meat; and he shall never eat to satiation.’

Viṣṇu (96.3).—‘He should beg food at seven houses.’ Yājñavalkya (3.59).—‘In the evening he shall beg alms, unrecognised and with due respect, in a village where there are no mendicants,—only so much as may suffice for sustaining life, and he shall never hanker after it.’

Saṃvarta (Aparārka, p. 963).—‘Having obtained eight alms, or seven, or ñve,—he shall wash it all with water and then eat it.’

Yama (Do.)—‘Living on alms, celibate, he shall not confine his food-begging to any single house.’

सायं भोजनस्य प्रतिषेधः, गार्हस्थ्ये द्विभोजनस्य प्राप्तस्य ॥ ६.५५ ॥

055 Let him go to beg once (a day), let him not be eager to obtain a large quantity (of alms); for an ascetic who eagerly seeks alms, attaches himself also to sensual enjoyments.

The renunciate shall go for begging alms at a time when there is no smoke issuing, when the pestle has ceased to ply, when fire embers have been extinguished, when people have eaten, and when the removal of the dishes has been finished.—(56)

भुक्तवन्तो जना यस्मिन् काले स भुक्तवज्जनः ।एवं विधूमादयो ऽपि । शरावाणां संपात उच्छिष्टानां भूमौ त्यागः, स यदातीतो भवति । सर्वेणैतेन प्रथमे पाककाले भिक्षादानावसरो निवृत्तो यदा भवति, तदा भिक्षितव्यम् इत्य् आह । विधूम इत्यादिना द्वितीयपाकप्रवृत्तिम् आह । सन्ना मुसला अवघातान् निवृत्ताः स्थापिताः ॥ ६.५६ ॥

That time at which people have already eaten. Similarly with the other epithets, ‘Vidhūme’ and the rest.

‘Removal of the dishes,’—the throwing away of the dishes in which people have taken their food; when this has been finished.

From all this what follows is that he shall beg for food after the first occasion for the giving of alms, during the first instalment of the cooking, has passed away.

‘When there ie no smoke’ etc., indicate the impossibility of the cooking being done again.

When the pestles have ‘ceased to ply’—i.e., kept aside.—(56)

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.59);—in Madanapārijāta (p. 375);—in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 562);—and in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 135).

Gautama (3-15).—‘He shall beg late, without returning twice to the same house.’

Baudhāyana (2.11-22).—‘He shall go to beg when the pestle lies motionless, when the embers have been extinguished and when the cleaning of the vessels has been finished.’

Baudhāyana (2.18.4-6).—‘Now follows the rule for begging. He shall beg of Brāhmaṇas with houses (Śāliṇa) and those who lead a wandering life (), after they have finished their Vaiśvadeva-offerings. He shall beg it prefacing with the term Bhavat; he shall stand hogging no longer than the time required for milking a cow.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.7, 8).—‘Ho shall heg food at seven houses, which he has not selected beforehand,—at the time when the smoke of the kitchen fire has ceased and the pestle lies motionless.’

Viṣṇu (96.6).—‘He shall beg food from a house after the servants of the house have had their meal and when the dishes have been removed.’

Yājñavalkya (3.59).—(See under 55.)

Yama (Parāśaramādhava, p. 563).—‘Pure and with speech in check, he shall beg for pure food daily in the evening.’

056 When no smoke ascends from (the kitchen), when the pestle lies motionless, when the embers have been extinguished, when the people have finished their meal, when the remnants in the dishes have been removed, let the ascetic always go to beg.

056 When no smoke ascends from (the kitchen), when the pestle lies motionless, when the embers have been extinguished, when the people have finished their meal, when the remnants in the dishes have been removed, let the ascetic always go to beg.

He shall not be sorry at not obtaining alms; nor shall he rejoice at obtaining it; he shall have only what suffices to sustain his life, and be free from all attachment to his accessories.—(57)

ईदृशे काले यदि कुतश्चिन् न लभ्यते तदा विषादश् चित्तपरिखेदो न ग्रहीतव्यः । लाभालाभयोर् हर्षविषादौ न ग्राह्यौ । प्राणयात्रिकी प्राणधारणार्था मात्रा परिमाणं भैक्षस्य । अनेनैतद् दर्शयति । भैक्षासंभवे प्राणयात्रा फलमुलोदकादिभिर्¹⁸ अप्य् अपरिगृहीतैः कर्तव्या । मात्रा पात्रदण्डादि, तत्र सङ्गः प्रयत्नेनोपार्जनम्, ततो विनिर्गतो निवृत्तः । अकाम इति यावत् ॥ ६.५७ ॥

If at the stated time he should fail to obtain food, he shall not be ‘sorry,’ dejected in mind. He shall not allow grief or joy to overtake him at failing or succeeding to obtain food.

‘What suffices to sustain his life.’—This indicates the quantity of food to be begged. What this implies is that in the event of his failing to obtain alms, he shall sustain his life by such fruits, roots and water as do not belong to another person.

‘Accessories’— vessels, staff and so forth;—‘attachment to these’—i. e., making special efforts to obtain them;—from this he should he ‘free’; that is he shall harbour no longings.—(57)

‘Mātrā’—‘Implements, vessels, staff and so forth’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘portion, mouthful’ (Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka, (p. 963), which explains ‘mātrā’ as ‘upakaraṇadravyam, accessories’;—and in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 563), which explains ‘mātrā’ etymologically as ‘mīyante iti’, as meaning ‘objects’; since he is free from attachment to all objects, therefore he should be neither glad at getting them nor sorry at not getting them.

Mahābhārata (12.278.10).—‘He shall have only as much as would sustain his life, and should not care for the obtaining of vessels; he should not be aggrieved when ho fails to obtain things, nor should he exult at obtaining them.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10-22).—‘He should not be dejected when he obtains nothing, nor glad when he receives something. He should seek only as much as will sustain life, without caring for property.’

Viṣṇu (96.4).—‘If he does not get alms, he must not be sorry.’

अर्थप्राप्त । । । म् अस्मिन्न् अपि ॥ ६.५७ ॥

057 Let him not be sorry when he obtains nothing, nor rejoice when he obtains (something), let him (accept) so much only as will sustain life, let him not care about the (quality of his) utensils.

He shall disdain all honorific presents; by honorific presents the Renunciate, even though liberated, becomes fettered—(58).

अभ्यर्च्य यं ददाति सो ऽभिपूजितलाभः । तं जुगुप्सेतेति निन्देद् गर्हेत । अतश् च निन्दितं न समाचरेत् । सर्वशः सर्वकालम् । एकम् अप्य् अहस् तादृशं भैक्षं न गृह्णीयात् । उत्तरे ऽर्थवादः । न हि मुक्तस्य बन्धसंभवः ॥ ६.५८ ॥

‘Honorific presents’—what is given after due honouring;—this he shall^(‘)disdain’—deprecate, shun; and what is deprecated he shall not do.

‘All’—at all times; not even for a single day he shall accept such an aims.

The second half of the verse is a purely laudatory exaggeration; in reality one who has been liberated can never be^(‘)fettered’ again.—(58).

Mahābhārata (12.279.11).—‘He should not seek to acquire things that are sought for by all men; nor shall he enjoy what is given to him through humble salutations; he shall always disdain such acquisitions.’

Viṣṇu (96.9).—‘He must shun food obtained by humble salutation.’

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

058 Let him disdain all (food) obtained in consequence of humble salutations, (for) even an ascetic who has attained final liberation, is bound (with the fetters of the Samsara) by accepting (food given) in consequence of humble salutations.

By eating little food and by standing and sitting in solitude, he shall restrain his senses, when attracted by sensual objects.—(59).

रहो निर्जनो देशः, तत्र स्थानासने कर्तव्ये । एकारामतायाः फलम् इन्द्रियजयो ऽनेन प्रदर्श्यते ।

• अथ वा निष्कुतूहलतानेनोच्यते । यत्र बहवो जनसंघाताः स्त्रीपुंसात्मका विचित्राभरणा दृश्यन्ते न तत्र क्षणम् अपि तिष्ठेत् ॥ ६.५९ ॥

‘In solitude’—in a place devoid of people—he shall stand and sit.

This indicates that ‘subjugation of the senses’ is the result of living in solitude. Or, it may be taken to be indicative of freedom from curiosity.

He shall not stay even for a moment at a place where large number of people, men and women, with various kinds of dress and ornaments, congregate.—(59)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka, (p. 954);—in Parāśaramādhava, (Ācāra, p. 570);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 34).

Baudhāyana (2.18.10-13).—‘Giving, compassionately, portions of the food to living beings and sprinkling the remainder with water, he shall eat it as if it were a medicine… He shall eat food, given without asking, regarding which nothing has been stipulated beforehand and which has reached him accidentally; so much only as is sufficient to sustain life They quote the following:—“Eight mouthfuls make the meal of a Renunciate, etc., etc.”’

Vaśiṣṭha (10-25).—‘He shall never eat to satiation.’

इन्द्रियजयोपायद्वयोपदेशो ऽयम् । कस्य पुनर् हेतोरे यौ॥।

059 By eating little, and by standing and sitting in solitude, let him restrain his senses, if they are attracted by sensual objects.

By the restraining of the senses, by the destruction of love and hatred, and by not injuring living beings, he becomes fit for immortality.—(60)

निरोधः स्वविषयप्रवृत्तिप्रतिबन्धः । अमृतत्वाय कल्पते अमृतत्वाय समर्थो योग्यो भवतीत्य् अर्थः । यथा आत्मज्ञानम् एवम् एतद् अपीति दर्शयति ॥ ६.६० ॥

‘Restraining’—preventing from operating on their objects.

‘Becomes fit for immortality.’—He is enabled to become immortal. This shows that what is mentioned here is as useful as self-knowledge itself.—(60)

This is quoted in Aparārka (p. 954);—in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 370);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 34).

Baudhāyana (2.18.13).—‘The following arc the vows for the Renunciate:—Abstention from injuring living beings, truthfulness, abstention from appropriating the property of others, continence and liberality. There are five minor vows:—viz., abstention from anger, obedience to the Teacher, avoidance of rashness, cleanliness and purity in eating.’

Yājñavalkya (3.61).—‘Having controlled the host of senses, having renounced love and hate, and having abandoned fear, the Brāhmaṇa becomes immortalised.’

Śruti (Aparārka, p. 966).—‘When all the desires residing in his heart become abandoned, then the mortal becomes immortal and even in this world, attains Brahman.’

Smṛtyantara (Do.).—‘The Brāhmaṇa or the Kṣatriya or the Vaiśya shall go forth from his house as a Renunciate, after he has wiped off the three debts and has become free from all notions of I and mine.’

संसारस्वभावावलोकनेन च नित्यम् इन्द्रियजयम् आतिष्ठेत् । तच् च पुनर् इदम् ॥ ६.६० ॥

060 By the restraint of his senses, by the destruction of love and hatred, and by the abstention from injuring the creatures, he becomes fit for immortality.

He should reflect upon the conditions of men, arising from the defects of their deeds, their falling into hell and their sufferings in the abode of the death-god.—(61)

परमार्थभावनाप्रसंख्यानम् इदम् उच्यते दुःखात्मकसंसारस्वरूपनिरूपणम् । कथं नामायं प्रव्रजाभैक्षचर्यादिशरीरक्लेशं¹⁹ सुहृत्स्वजनपुत्रदारधनविभवत्यागदुःखहेतुं परिणमय्य विरोधतः स्वच्छन्दतश् चाविगुणम् अनुष्ठास्यति । मनुष्याणां गतयो दुःखबहुलाः, कर्मदोषेभ्यः प्रतिषिद्धसेवनेभ्यो हिंसास्तेयपारदार्यपारुष्यपैशुनानिष्टसंकल्पादिभ्यः समुद्भन्ति । इहैव जीवलोके दारिद्रव्याधिपरिभवाद् वा वैकल्यादयो गतयः फलोपभोगादयः । अमुत्र निरये नरके पतनं मूत्रपुरीषाद्यमेध्यस्थाने कृमिकीटादिजन्म । यमगृहे च यातनाः कुम्भीपाकादयः ॥ ६.६१ ॥

तथेदम् अपरम् अवेक्ष्यम् ।

What is stated here is a mode of meditating upon the Supreme Truth, consisting in the noting of the fact that birth and rebirth abound in pain.

Finding that life in the world abounds in sufferings caused by the separation from friends, relations, sons and wife and the loss of wealth &c., how could the man voluntarily go on undergoing the physical troubles of wandering about, begging for alms and so forth?

The ‘conditions’ of men abound in pain and result from the defects of their actions,—from their doing what is forbidden; e.g., such acts as doing injury to living beings, stealing, adultery, cruelty, back-biting, improper intentions and so forth. Or ‘conditions’ may stand for what the man undergoes in the world of the living itself,—in the shape of sorrows resulting from poverty, disease, ill-treatment and so forth.

As regards the other world, there is ‘falling into hell’—i.e., being born as worms and insects in places filled with urine, ordure and dirt &c.

‘Sufferings in the abode of the death-god’—in the form of Kumbhīpāka and other hells.

Something more has to be reflected upon (and this is pointed out in the next verse).—(61)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968), which explains ‘Yamakṣaye’ as ‘in Yama’s abode’;—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 34).

Viṣṇu (96.36, 38).—‘He shall reflect upon the anxieties arising in youth from not obtaining the objects of pleasure, and upon the abode in hells awarded as punishment for enjoying them after they have been obtained unlawfully; and on the fearful agonies of hell.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63, 64).—‘He should reflect upon residence in the womb, as also the sufferings brought about by one’s own acts, mental agonies, physical ailments and other troubles, decrepitude, bodily deformities, birth and rebirth during thousands of lives, and vicissitudes of pleasure and pain.’

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

061 Let him reflect on the transmigrations of men, caused by their sinful deeds, on their falling into hell, and on the torments in the world of Yama,

On the separation of loved ones and the meeting of hated persons; on being beset with decrepitude and suffering from diseases.—(62)

अवेक्षेतेति क्रियापदसंभवात् द्वितीया । प्रियाः पुत्रादयो बान्धवास् तैर् वियोगो ऽप्राप्तकाले मृतैः । अप्रियैः शत्रुभिः संयोगः संग्रामादिभिः²⁰ संयोगः । जरया । चतुर्थे वयस्य् अवस्थाविशेषो जरा, तय्आभिभवनं शरीराकारनाशः, अशक्तिः, इन्द्रियवैकल्यम्,²¹ कासश्वासादिव्याधिबाहुल्यम्, सर्वेषाम् अकाम्यता, उपहास्यतेत्यादिभिर्²² जराभिभवः । व्याधिभिः प्राग् अपि जरस उपपीडनं केषांचित् ॥ ६.६२ ॥

अथ महती तृष्णा एवंस्थितस्यापि भवति । एवं तर्हि इदम् अप्रतीकारम् अनिच्छतो ऽप्य् उत्पद्यते ।

The Accusative ending is due to the verse being construed along with the verb ‘should reflect’ (of the preceding verse.)

‘Loved ones’—sons and other relations.

‘Separation’—caused by their untimely death.

‘Hated persons’—Enemies.

‘Meeting’—in battle &c.

‘Decrepitude.’—‘Decrepitude’ is a peculiar state of the body during the fourth quarter of man’s age.—‘Being beset having the shape of the body spoilt, feebleness, weakness of the senses, the advent of asthma and other diseases, being loved by none, being jeered at by all;—all this constitutes being ‘beset with decrepitude.’

‘Diseases’— even before the advent of old age, some people are attacked by diseases.—(62)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Viṣṇu (96.27-29, 37).—‘He shall reflect upon the destruction of beauty by old age,—and upon the pain arising from diseases—bodily, mental, or due to excesses,—and upon that arising from the five naturally inherent affections; on the union of those whom we hate, and the separation from those whom we love.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63.64).—(See under 61.)

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

062 On the separation from their dear ones, on their union with hated men, on their being overpowered by age and being tormented with diseases,

There is for his Inner Soul departure from the body, then again birth in the womb, and transmigrations among millions of life-forms.—(63)

प्राणानाम् उत्क्रमणम् अन्तर्विच्छेदः । दुःसहा च सा पीडा । गर्भे च संभवः । तत्र नानाविधं दुखं इन्द्रियाणाम् अनुद्भेदात् तमोरूपता कुक्षिस्थस्य मातृसंबन्धिनाहारेण अतिशीतोष्णेन हीनातिमात्रेण वैद्योक्ता पीडा । योनिकोटिसहस्रेषु सृतीः सरणानि प्राप्तास् तिर्यक्प्रेतकृमिकीटपतङ्गश्वाद्याः क्षेत्रज्ञस्य ।

• ननु च विभुर् अन्तरात्मेष्यते नित्यश् च । तस्य सकलजगद्व्यापिनः कुत उत्क्रमणम्, क्व च योनिसरणम् । संभवोऽपरि गर्भे नित्यस्यानुपपन्नः ।

• उच्यते । अस्ति केषांचिद् दर्शनं यथायम् अन्तःशरीरम् अङ्गुष्ठमात्रः पुरुषस् तिष्ठति, तन्मात्रमनोबुद्ध्यहंकारात्मकः स यावत्संसारम् एति धर्मः, तस्य चोपचितस्य चैतन्यशक्तिर् आविर्भवति । अतस् तदीयधर्मा अन्तरात्मन उपचर्यन्ते । अथ वा तस्य भावार्था ये प्राणादयस् तेषूत्क्रामत्सु समुत्क्रामतीत्य् उच्यते । एवं संभवो ऽपि द्रष्टव्यः ।

• पुनश् चैतद् द्वादशे वक्ष्यामः । किं बहुना ॥ ६.६३ ॥

There is ‘departure’—going out—of the life-breaths; and this constitutes unbearable pain.

‘Birth in the womb’— where there are several kinds of pain: the organs are not yet developed, the child in the womb is in utter darkness, and it also suffers from diseases, described in the medical science, as proceeding from the extremely cold and hot foods eaten by the mother in varying quantities.

‘Transmigrations’— passing through—‘among millions of life-forms’;—the soul being born in the bodies of lower animals, worms, insects, dogs and so forth.

Objection—“The Inner Soul is held to be omnipresent and eternal; how can there be any ‘departure’ for it, when it is present everywhere? how again can there be any ‘transmigration’ among life-forms? how too can there be any ‘birth’ for it when it is eternal?”

Our answer is as follows:—The theory of some people is that there lies within the body the ‘personality’ of the size of the thumb, composed of rudimentary substances, mind and intellect; and it is this personality that goes on being born during the entire series of births and deaths; and when this becomes endowed with a certain merit, the faculty of consciousness becomes manifested in it; and it is through this faculty that the qualities of the said Personality come to be attributed to the Inner Soul.

Or, the explanation may be that the inner soul is related to certain entities in the shape of the life-breath and so forth; and when these depart, the soul is said to ‘depart.’ Similarly with ‘birth.’

All this we shall explain again under Discourse XII and we need not prolong the discussion here.—(63)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Viṣṇu (96.39).—‘On the agonies to be suffered in the passage of the soul through the bodies of animals and plants.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63, 64).—(See under 61.)

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

063 On the departure of the individual soul from this body and its new birth in (another) womb, and on its wanderings through ten thousand millions of existences,

On the infliction of pain upon living beings, caused by demerit; as also upon the imperishable union with happiness proceeding from the essence of merit.—(64)

अधर्मात् प्रभव उत्पत्तिः । दुःखेन यो योगः पीडानुभवः । धर्म उक्तलक्षणो यः पदार्थः, ततः सुखेनाक्षयेन संयोगः । एतद् अप्य् अवेक्ष्यम् । पारिव्राज्यं च मुख्यो धर्म इत्य् अभिप्रायः ॥ ६.६४ ॥

The ‘infliction’—experiencing—‘of pain’ proceeds from Demerit.

‘Merit’—as described above, is an ‘artha’, an ‘entity’ and from this—entity, essence—proceeds ‘union with imperishable happiness’.

This also has to be reflected upon.

The meaning is that Renunciation constitutes the principal merit.—(64)

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 968);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Viṣṇu (96.40-42).—‘He shall reflect thus that there is no pleasure to bo met within this never-ceasing passage of the soul through mundane existence; and that even what is called pleasure, on account of the absence of pain, is of a transient nature; and that he who is unable to enjoy such pleasures, from sickness and other causes, or who is unable to procure them, suffers severe pangs.’

Yājñavalkya (3.63.64).—(See under 61.)

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

064 On the infliction of pain on embodied (spirits), which is caused by demerit, and the gain of eternal bliss, which is caused by the attainment of their highest aim, (gained through) spiritual merit.

By meditation he shall recognise the subtile character of the Higher Self, as also the possibility of its presence in all organisms, high and low.—(65)

योगश् चित्तवृत्तिस्थैर्यं यथा पतञ्जलिना दर्शितम् (च्ड़्। य्सू १.२) । तेनात्मनः क्षेत्रज्ञस्य सूक्ष्मताम् अन्ववेक्षेत । शरीरादौ प्राणादौ वा नात्मबुद्धिः कर्तव्या, किं तर्हि योगजेन ज्ञानातिशयेन सर्वेभ्य एतेभ्यो ऽन्तर्बहिस्तत्त्वेभ्यो व्यतिरिक्तो बोद्धव्य इत्य् एवंपरम् एतत् । न तु स्थूलादिविकल्पा आत्मनः सन्ति । यथा चोत्तमेषु देवादिशरीरेष्व् अस्योपपत्तिः, शरीराधिष्ठातृतया फलोपभोगः सर्वगतस्यापि सतः, एवम् अधमेषु तिर्यक्प्रेतपिशाचादिषु । एकत्वपक्षे परमात्मविभूतय एव क्षेत्रज्ञा इति स्थितिः । अतः परमात्मनो गतीर् अन्ववेक्षेतेत्य् उक्तम् ॥ ६.६५ ॥

‘Meditation’—steadiness of the functioning of the mind, as described by Patañjali. By means of that, ‘he shall recognise the subtile character’ of the conscious entity in the body, the soul; and he shall not look upon either the body etc. or the life-breath etc, as the ‘Soul,’ which latter is to be understood, by the help of intuition born of meditation, as something different from all external and internal things;—this is what is meant by the text. Of the Soul, there are no grosser manifestations. And just as he can realise the ‘possibility of its presence’—in the higher organisms in the form of the bodies of the Gods and other such beings—i.e., the fact of its ensouling these bodies and pasting through experiences born therein, even though in reality it is omnipresent,—exactly in the same manner can one realise it also in the lower organisms, of lower animals, spirits, demons and so forth.

According to the philosophy of Monism, the souls in the organisms are only so many manifestations of the Supreme Self; and it is for this reason that the text has spoken of the man recognising the ‘t ransmigrations of the Higher Self.’—(65)

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35).

Vaśiṣṭha (10.14).—‘He shall constantly seek in his heart the knowledge of the Supreme Soul.’

Yājñavalkya (3.64).—‘By contemplative meditation he shall seek to perceive the subtle soul residing within himself.’

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

065 By deep meditation let him recognise the subtile nature of the supreme Soul, and its presence in all organisms, both the highest and the lowest.

Even though he be adorned, the man should fulfil his duty, to whichever order he may belong. He should be equal to all beings; mere external marks are not conducive to merit.—(66)

भूषितः कुसुमकटकाद्याभरणैः । धर्मः परिव्राजकस्य यद् विहितम् आत्मोपासनादि तद् यत्नतश् चरेत् । यस्मिन्न् आश्रमे यो विहितस् तं चरेत् । न त्रिदण्डादिलिङ्गधारणमात्राद् यतिम् आत्मानं मन्येत । अपि तु समः सर्वेषु भूतेषु स्यात् । रागद्वेषलोभान् यत्नतः परिहरेद् इति तात्पर्यम् । न लिङ्गत्यागेन भूषणाभ्यनुज्ञानम् ॥ ६.६६ ॥

‘Adorned’—with flowers, bracelets and other ornaments.

‘Duty’—all that has been prescribed for the Renunciate, such as meditation on the Self and so forth, he shall perform with care. In fact one should perform the duties of that order to which he may belong.

One should not consider himself to have become a ‘Renunciate’ merely by wearing such external marks as the ‘three staffs’ and the like; in fact ‘he should be equal, to all beings’;—that is, he should, with care, eschew all love, hatred and greed.

By deprecating the external marks it is not meant that the man should wear ornaments.—(66)

Cf. 3.50 and 12.102.

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.65);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 35), which reads bhūṣitaḥ’ for ‘dūṣitaḥ’, explains it as ‘adorned with the staff and other signs of the Remmciate’ and says that the particle ‘api’ implies that even when without these, he should meditate upon the identity of the individual and supreme selves.

**(verses 6.66-67)
**

Vaśiṣṭha (10.18).—‘He shall not wear any visible mark of his order, nor adopt any visible rules of conduct.’

Yājñavalkya (3.65).—‘The mere adoption of any particular order is not a means of acquiring spiritual merit.’

प्रसंख्यानद्यानात्मानुष्ठानस्तुतिर् इयं समत्वदर्शनस्य, न तु लिङ्गप्रतिषेधो, विहितत्वात् ।

066 To whatever order he may be attached, let him, though blemished (by a want of the external marks), fulfil his duty, equal-minded towards all creatures; (for) the external mark (of the order) is not the cause of (the acquisition of) merit.

Though the fruit of the Kataka tree clarifies water, yet water does not become clear by the mere mention of its name.—(67)

कलुषितम् उदकं कतकवृक्षफले निक्षिप्ते प्रसीदति स्वच्छशुद्धरूपताम् आप्द्यते । किं तु न तस्य फलस्य नामग्रहणेन तन् निर्मलीभवति । अपि त्व् अनुष्ठानम् अपेक्षते । एवं लिङ्गधारणं फलनामस्थानीयम् । न तावन्मात्रात् सिद्धिर् यावद् एकारामतोपासनसर्वसमतादिधर्मो नानुष्ठितः । पूर्वशेषार्थवादः ॥ ६.६७ ॥

When the fruit of the kataka tree is put in dirty water, the water becomes clarified, takes the clear form. But it does not become clear by the mere mention of the name of that fruit; it needs action. Similarly, the wearing of external marks is like the pronouncing of the name of the fruit; and success is attained, not by that wearing alone, but by the due fulfilment of such duties as ‘resting in solitude’, ‘meditation’, ‘equal-mindedness towards all beings’ and so forth.

This verse is a laudatory supplement to what has gone before.—(67)

**(verses 6.66-67)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.66].

क्रियातः फलम्, न विज्ञानमात्राद् इत्य् अनुष्ठानस्तुतिर् इयम् ॥ ६.६७ ॥

067 Though the fruit of the Kataka tree (the clearing-nut) makes water clear, yet the (latter) does not become limpid in consequence of the mention of the (fruit’s) name.

With a view to the safety of living beings, he shall always, during day and night, even during bodily illness, walk after having scanned the ground.—(68)

यद् उक्तम् “दृष्टिपूतं न्यसेत्” (म्ध् ६.४६) इति, तस्य प्रयोजनप्रदर्शनश्लोको ऽयम् । शरीरस्यात्यये ऽपि शरीरपीडायाम् अपि सत्यां रात्राव् अहनि वा तृणास्तरणे शयनार्थम् आस्तीर्णे ऽपि शरीरनिषङ्गो ऽनवेक्ष्यादृष्ट्वा न²³ कर्तव्यः । अस्मिन् व्यतिक्रमे प्रायश्चित्तम् । अथ वात्यन्तसूक्ष्माः केचन क्षुद्रजन्तवो ये सर्वे शरीरावयवसंवलनमात्रेणैव नश्यन्ति तदर्थम् इदम् ॥ ६.६८ ॥

This verse shows the necessity for what has been said above (46) regarding the treading on the ground ‘sight-purified.’

‘Even during bodily illness’—when the body is suffering from some disease;—‘during day and night’— when the grass-bed has been spread for sleeping, he shall not lay down his body upon it without having carefully looked over it. The transgression of this rule involves the necessity of performing an expiatory rite.

Or, the text may be taken as referring to those minute animalcules that become attached to the man’s body and perish by the mere moving of the limbs.—(68)

Cf. 6.46.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 570.)

अप्रत्ययाद् धर्मोत्पत्तिर् एव यत्नवतो ऽपि, यस्माद् समीक्ष्य वसुधां चरेद् इति । तस्य च प्रायश्चित्तम् अप्रकरणे ऽप्य् आदरार्थम् ॥ ६.६८ ॥

068 In order to preserve living creatures, let him always by day and by night, even with pain to his body, walk, carefully scanning the ground.

By day and by night, if the Renunciate unintentionally injures some living creatures, he shall, for the purpose of expiating it, bathe and then perform six ‘breath-suspensions.’—(69)

जन्तून् क्षुद्रजन्तून् इति द्रष्टव्यम् । तेषां हिंसायां यत् पापं तद्विशुद्ध्यर्थम् इति संबन्धः ॥ ६.६९ ॥

‘Living creatures’—here, should be understood as standing for minute animalcules; ‘for the expiation of the sin accruing from the injuring of these’;—such is the construction of the passage.—(69)

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

069 In order to expiate (the death) of those creatures which he unintentionally injures by day or by night, an ascetic shall bathe and perform six suppressions of the breath.

Even three ‘breath-suspensions,’ accompanied by the three ‘vyāhṛti’-syllables and the syllable ‘om’, when duly performed, should be regarded as the highest austerity for the Brāhmaṇa.—(70)

ब्राह्मणशब्देन जातिधर्मताम् आह । न परिव्राजकस्यैव विधिर् अयम् । त्रयो ऽपि । त्रिभ्य ऊर्ध्वं फलाधिक्यम्, त्रयस् त्व् अवशं कर्तव्याः । व्याहृतयः “ॐकारपूर्विकाः” (म्ध् २.८१) इत्य् अत्र या उक्ताः । प्रणव ॐकारः । तैर् युक्ताः । प्राणायामकाल एतद् ध्यातव्यम् । एते त्रिविधाः कुम्भकरेचकपूरकाख्याः । तत्र च मुख्यस्य नासिक्यस्य च वायोर् बहिर् निष्क्रमणनिरोधेन कुम्भकपूरकाख्याः अनुच्छ्वासतो बहिर् नैरन्तर्येण वायोर् उत्सर्गेण रेचको भवति । अवधिर् द्वितीयाध्याये निदर्शितः । यदि वा तपसा पुनर् यावता कालेन न पीडोपजायते ॥ ६.७० ॥

By using the term ‘brāhmaṇa’ the text implies that what is mentioned constitutes the duty of the whole caste, and is not restricted to the Renunciate only.

‘Even three’—more than three lead to more excellent results; three are absolutely necessary.

‘Vyāhṛti syllables’— those mentioned under 2.81.

‘Praṇava’—the syllable ‘om’.

The breath-suspensions are to be ‘accompanied by these’.—This indicates the duration of the breath-suspension.

These breath-suspensions are of three kinds, named ‘Kumbhaka’ (total suspension), ‘Pūraka’ (inhaling) and ‘Recaka’ (exhaling). The total suppression of air passing out of the mouth and the nostrils constitutes the (inhalation and suspension); and when the man does not inhale breath but continuously keeps on exhaling, it is called ‘Recaka exhalation.’ The exact duration of each of these has been described under Discourse II. Or, in view of its being spoken of as ‘austerity,’ it may be continued till it becomes actually painful.—(70)

Cf. 2.74.

This verse is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 68).

Vaśiṣṭha (10.5).—‘The one syllable om is the best Veda; the suppression of breath is the highest austerity; living on alms is better than fasting; compassion is preferable to liberality.’

अग्रे दृश्यताम्।

070 Three suppressions of the breath even, performed according to the rule, and accompanied with the (recitation of the) Vyahritis and of the syllable Om, one must know to be the highest (form of) austerity for every Brahmana.

Just as the impurities of metallic ores are consumed when they are blasted, even so are the taints of the senses consumed through the suspension of breath.—(71)

धातवः सुवर्णादयः, तेषां ध्मायमानानां सुवर्णम् एवावशिष्यते । तथ्एन्द्रियाणां विषयदर्शने यौ प्रीतिपरितपौ जायेते तयोर् यत् पापं तस्य दाहः प्राणनिरोधात् । प्रीतिपरितापोत्पत्तिर् मुमुक्षोर् निषिद्धा । सा तु शरीरिणः त्यक्तसङ्गस्यापि यादृच्छिकरूपशब्दाद्युपनतौ कयाचिन् मात्रया वस्तुसामर्थ्येन नियतेन्द्रियस्याप्य् उपजायते । अतस् तद्दोषनिवृत्त्यर्थाः प्राणायामाः ॥ ६.७१ ॥

When the ‘metallic ores,’ of gold for instance, are blasted in a furnace, what is left behind is pure gold; similarly when the senses apprehend their objects, the man feels joys and sorrows, and these are productive of sin; this sin is consumed through the suspension of breath.

For the man seeking Liberation, indulging in joys and griefs has been forbidden.

But even in a man who has given up all attachment, and has his organs under his control, these are bound to appear, in howsoever small a degree, through the sheer nature of things, whenever by chance various kinds of colour, sound &c. become presented before him. And it is for the removal of the taints due to these that breath-suspensions have to be practised.—(71)

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.62);—and in Vidhānapārijāta (II. p. 176).

Vaśiṣṭha (25.6).—‘Through the inhibition of breath air is generated; through air is produced fire; then through heat water is formed; hence one becomes internally purified by these three.’

Baudhāyana (4.1.24).—(Same as above from Vaśiṣṭha.)

एवं च सति ।

071 For as the impurities of metallic ores, melted in the blast (of a furnace), are consumed, even so the taints of the organs are destroyed through the suppression of the breath.

By means of ‘Breath-suspension’ he shall destroy the taints; and by means of ‘Concentration,’ all sin; all attachments by means of ‘Abstraction,’ and by means of ‘Contemplation,’ those attributes that are not independent.—(72)

प्राणायामैर् इत्य् एतत् पूर्वश्लोकेन दर्शितम् ।

• अपरे त्व् आहुः । दोषा रागादयस् तान् दहेत् ।

• कथम् प्राणायामैर् दग्धुम् एते शक्यन्ते । युक्तः पापस्य तैर् दाहः । अदृष्टा च तस्योत्पत्तिः शास्त्रलक्षणम्, तथा निवृत्तिर् अपि । रागादयस् तु प्रत्यक्षवेद्याः । तेषां च निवर्त्यनिवर्तकभावः प्रत्यक्षादिवेद्य एव युक्तो भवितुम्, न शास्त्रीयः । यदि शास्त्रम् एवं वदेद् विरमणशीलं निवर्तयेद् इति, किंप्रमाणं भवेत् । तस्माद् रागादिनिमित्तम् अशुभाचरणं दोषशब्देनोच्यते । तस्य कार्यदाहाद् दाहः । स्वरूपतो हि स्वरसत एव कर्मणां क्षणिकत्वान् नाशः । एष एव च दाहः, न त्व् अन्यस्येव भस्मीभावः । एवं च पूर्वश्लोकार्थानुवादः²⁴ ।

• धारणाभिश् च ।

• ननु च किल्बिषं पापं दोषश् च तद् एव। तत्रैतावद् वक्तव्यं प्राणायामैर् धारणाभिश् च दोषान् दहेत् । किं किल्बिषम् इत्य् अनेन । किल्बिषम् इति वास्तु, किं दोषग्रहणेन ।

• उच्यते । दोषग्रहणम् अवश्यं कर्तव्यम्, विशिष्टस्य पापस्य प्राणायामैर् दाहो यथा विज्ञायेत, न सर्वस्येति । दोषशब्देन हि रागादय उच्यन्ते । अतस् तन्निमित्त एव पापे उपचारो यथोक्तः ।

• एवं तर्हि तद् एव क्रियताम्, किं किल्बिषम् इत्य् अनेन ।

• पादपूरणार्थम् इत्य् अदोषः । तत्रोत्पन्नस्य पापस्य प्राणायामा दहना उच्यन्ते । धारणास् तु दोषानुत्पत्तिम् एव कुर्वन्ति ।

• काः पुनर् एता धारणाः ।

• शमयमादिभिर् नियमाद् विषयदर्शनाभिलाषेण प्रकृष्यमाणं मनो धार्यते, तत्रैव स्थाने नियम्यते । ताश् च विषयगतदोषभावना “अस्थिस्थूणाम्” (म्ध् ६.७६) इत्याद्याः । कान्तिलावण्यतारुण्यसंस्थानशौर्यादयः स्त्रीषु दृश्यमाना अभिलाषहेतवः । ते च सविकल्पं प्रत्यक्षग्राह्याः । विकल्पाश् च मनोधाराः । अतो विकल्पान्तरैर् “मूत्रपुरीषपूर्णं नम” इति तस्मिन् विषयगतदोषभावे, “कटककर्पटान्वितं स्त्रीद्रव्यं नाम,” “अधिकं प्राणिनो यत् प्रत्नतः परिहर्तव्यम् अभिलषन्ति,” “याप्य् एषा सुखलेशभ्रान्तिः सा क्षणभङ्गिनी, तदासेवनेन घोरा दीर्घकालाश् च यमयातनाः” — इत्यादिभिः शक्यन्ते निरोद्धुम् । एतद् एव तत्प्रसंख्यानम् उच्यते । एवं भोजनादिष्व् अपि भावयितव्यम् । “यद् एतच् छर्कराघृतपूरहैयङ्गवीनपायसादि, यच् च भैक्षं कदन्नादिभिः समम् एतच् छरीरधारणतया विशेषाभावात् कस्यचित् प्रकृतेर् जिह्वाग्रे क्षणलवमात्रवर्तमानस्य विशेषो यः सविशेषतया प्रतिभासेत, गन्धर्वनगरप्रख्यो ऽयं क्षणिकावभासः” इति । एवम् अन्यत्रापि स्पर्शदोषो भावयितव्य इत्य् एवम् उपदिशति ।

• अन्ये त्व् आहुः । कौष्ठ्यस्य वायोर् मुखनासिकासंचारिणः शरीरैकदेशान्तर्हृदयाकाशाद् अभ्यासवशतो धारणं धारणा ।

• ननु च प्राणायामेभ्य एतासां साधारणानां को भेदः ।

• बाहुललाटादाव् अपि यथेच्छं व्याहृत्यादिध्यानरहितं धारणा, प्राणायामा रेचनेनाधिक्रियन्त इति विशेषः ।

• अन्ये तु “मैत्री मुदिता करुणा उपेक्षा एता धारणा” (च्ड़्। य्सू १.३३) इति मन्यन्ते ।

• मैत्री कृपा मुदोपेक्षा सर्वप्राणिष्व् अवस्थिता ।

• ब्रह्मलोकं नयन्त्य् आशु ध्यातारं धारणास् त्व् इमाः ॥

तत्र मैत्री द्वेषाभावः, न तु सुहृत्स्नेहः, तस्य बन्धात्मकत्वात् । कृपा करुणा चित्तधर्मः, दुःखितजनदर्शनेन “कथम् अयम् अस्माद् दुःखाद् उद्ध्रियेत्”²⁵ इति समुद्धरणकामना । न त्व् अहिंसानुग्रहयोर् अनारम्भ इत्य् उक्तम् । अत एतद् एवम्²⁶ उच्यते, चित्तधर्मो ऽयम् अभ्यसितव्यः । मुदिता शोकव्यावृत्तिर् व्याध्यादिनिमित्ते दुःखे नरकादिभयजे वा, न तु हर्षः, तस्य रागहेतुत्वात् । उपेक्षा विषये, अनुग्राहकेषु उपघाते²⁷ च प्रसिद्धैव ।

• मनसो वान्तर्हृदयाकाशे ब्रह्मचिन्तापरतया निश्चलता धारणा ।

• प्रत्याहारेण संसर्गम् । इन्द्रियाणां विषयैः सह संबन्धस् तत्र प्रवृत्तिः संसर्गः, तन् दहेत् प्रत्याहारः । ततो ऽपसरणम् इन्द्रियाणां प्रतिबन्धकरणं वा । आश्चर्यरूपेण न कटकादौ रूपवत्स्त्रीसंदर्शने वा स्थगयितव्ये चक्षुषी, अन्यत्र वा दृष्टिर् उपनेया । एवं सर्वेन्द्रियेषु । एवं च समाधानं योगिनो ऽप्रतिबद्धं भवति ।

• ध्यानेनानीश्वरान् गुणान् । गुणान्त् सत्वरजस्तमांसि । ते चानीश्वराः परतन्त्राः चेतनाधीनमूर्तयः । पुरुषस्यानतस्य सुखादिरहितस्य यो ऽभिमानो “अहं सुख्य् अहं दुःखी” इति निर्गुणस्य गुणमन्यताभिमानस्य, गुणपुरुषविवेकध्यानेन दग्धव्यः । “चिद्रूपः पुरुषो निर्गुणो गुणमयी प्रकृतिः” इत्य् एवं गुणपुरुषविवेकः कर्तव्यः ॥ ६.७२ ॥

स कथं कर्तव्यः । ध्यानेन किं पुनर् ध्येयम्, अत आह ।

What is said here regarding Breath-suspension has already been indicated in the preceding verse.

But some people explain this verse to mean that ‘one shall destroy the taints’—i.e., love, hatred &c.

But how can these latter be destroyed by means of Breath-suspension? What can be destroyed by it is sin (not love &c.), specially as it is sin only which has its origin as well as destruction both indicated in the scriptures, and hence imperceptible; while Love or Hatred and the rest are all directly perceptible; so that what destroys these, and what is destroyed by them, can also be learnt by perception, and not through the scriptures. If the scripture were to speak of the destroying of these, its meaning would be that ‘one should destroy these things, which are by their very nature, destructible’;—and what would be the authority attached to such a declaration? From all this it is clear that what is meant by the term ‘taint’ is the evil deed that proceeds from Love and the rest. And this is ‘destroyed’ by the destruction of its effects; because as for the act itself, it perishes by reason of its evanescent character. This is what is meant by ‘dāha’, ‘being consumed’, and not being actually burnt to ashes.

Thus the present verse is only a reiteration of what has gone before in the preceding verse.

‘By means of Concentration’—

Objection—“‘Kilviṣa (Kilbiṣa)’ is sin, so is ‘doṣa’ also. Hence the words of the text should have been ‘by means of Breath-Suspension and Concentration he shall destroy all taints, doṣas’; and there would be no need of mentioning kilviṣa, sin, separately. Or, only ‘kilviṣa’, sin,’ need have been mentioned, and where was the need for mentioning ‘doṣa,’ ‘taint’, also?”

The explanation is as follows:—It is absolutely necessary to mention the ‘taint’, in order to show that what are destroyed by means of Breath-suspension are only particular kinds of sin, not all. The term ‘taint’ stands for Love and other like things; and hence the word can be rightly taken as figuratively indicating such sinful acts as are prompted by Love, Hatred &c., as has been already pointed out.

“If so, then, let the taint be mentioned, what is the use of mentioning the ‘kilviṣa,’ sin?”

No objection can be taken to it, as it is mentioned only for the purpose of filling up the metre. Further (the use of the second term gives the further meaning that) Breath-suspension is destructive of the sin accruing from the taints of Love &c., while Concentration stops the sin from arising at all.

“What is ‘Concentration’?”

By a longing for sensual objects and their enjoyment the mind is sometimes drawn away from the point where it may have been resting during the periods of quiescence, self-control and the like; and it is by means of ‘Concentration’ that it is concentrated, kept fixed on that same point. As a matter of fact, when one perceives brightness, charm, youth, shapeliness of the body and so forth in a woman, they give rise to his longing for her; all these details are apprehended by concrete perception; and all such perceptions are so many thoughts. Hence they can be counter-acted by counter-thoughts pertaining to the defects in the object perceived,—such as ‘her body is filled with urine and ordure,’ ‘the very object Woman consists of skin and bones;—fie upon the men that long for such a despicable object;—even the slight pleasure that she affords is momentary, and ultimately leads to terrible sufferings at the hands of the Death-god’. This is what is called ‘reflecting over’ the object. This reflection of the defects is what is spoken of below under verse 76.

The same method of reflection is to be employed regarding food and other objects of enjoyment. For instance—‘all this—sugar, cakes, fresh butter, milk-rice and so forth—stands on the same footing as coarse food obtained in alms; there being no difference in their nutritive power; the slight difference in their taste that may be felt on the tip of the tongue, is felt for the infinitesimal part of a second, so that even this momentary taste is like the imaginary city. Similarly one may reflect upon the defects in the objects of touch; and so forth. This is what is taught io the present text (by the term ‘Concentration’).

Others offer the following explanation of the term ‘dhāraṇā’ of the text:—When a man by constant practice succeeds in concentrating his breath, moving along his mouth and nose, in the cavity of his heart,—this is what constitutes ‘Concentration’.

“In what way would this differ from Breath-suspension?”

The difference is that we have ‘concentration’ also when the breath is held up in such places as the arms, the forehead and the like; whereas in Breath-suspension there is always exhalation at the end.

Others again hold ‘Dhāraṇā’ Concentration to consist in the qualities of ‘Friendliness, Joyfulness, Pathos and Indifference.’ ‘Friendliness, Kindness, Joyousness and Indifference, towards all living beings, carry the contemplation to the regions of Brahman; and these constitute Dhāraṇā’. (says an old text.)—Here ‘friendliness’ stands for absence of hatred, and not friendly affection; as this latter would be of the nature of a hindrance;—‘kindness’ is pity, a disposition of the mind; it consists in the longing to rescue a suffering person from suffering, and not the actual desisting from injuring, or conferring a benefit upon, others; it is in view of this that it has been described as a disposition of the mind, which should be practised—‘joyousness’ also stands for absence of grief at suffering caused by disease, or at the fear of the sufferings of hell, and not for actual pleasure, as this would be conducive to attachment;—‘indifference’ towards objects, favourable as well as unfavourable, is well known.

Or again, ‘concentration’ may be explained as consisting in fixing the mind on the inner cavity of the heart, in the process of meditating upon Brahman.

‘By Abstraction, all attachment:—‘attachment’ here stands (or the connection of the senses with their objects and their being drawn towards them. This is destroyed by Abstraction; whereupon the senses become drawn off from the objects, or their attraction is obstructed. For instance, when one happens to see a bracelet or some such ornament, or a handsome woman, he shall not fix his eyes upon them, he shall move his eyes to something else; similarly with all the senses. In this manner the composure of the Yogin becomes unperturbed.

‘By means of Contemplation, those attributes that are not independent.’ The ‘attributes’ meant here are those of Harmony, Energy and Inertia; and these are ‘not independent,’ being subservient to something else, in the shape of Consciousness. Though the soul or person is free from pleasure &c., yet there appears in him the false notion ‘I am happy—I am unhappy’; though he is free from attributes, he identifies himself with them;—all this has got to be destroyed by contemplating upon the distinction between the Soul and the Attributes; that the distinction between the two has to be drawn in some such form as—‘the Person, being of the nature of Consciousness is beyond Attributes, and it is Primordial matter that consists of the Attributes.’—(72)

‘Anīśvarān guṇān’—‘The three attributes of the Root Evolvent i.e., Sattva, Rajas and Tamas; these are anīśvara, i.e., dependent (upon the Conscious Being) (Medhātithi);—‘qualities of anger, greed etc., which are anīśvara, i.e., do not reside in God’ (Kullūka and Rāghavānanda) qualities opposed to virtue, knowledge, dispassion and power’ (Govindarāja).

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 41), which says that what this verse mentions are ‘Yama—niyama—āsana—prāṇāyāma—pratyāhāra—dhāraṇā and dhyāna’, all the accessories of Yoga except ‘Samādhi,’ which have been described in the ordinances as the means of acquiring Right Knowledge.

Viṣṇu (96.24).—‘He must constantly be intent upon suppressing his breath, upon retention of the image formed in his mind and upon meditation.’

प्राणायामैर् दहेद् दोषान् रागादीन् सविषयान् तत्कारणं वा ऽकुशलकर्मराशि । तथा च प्राणायामान् शुद्धिहेतून् वक्ष्यति प्रायश्चित्तप्रकरणे । तथा च प्राणायामान् शुद्धिहेतून् वक्ष्यति प्रायश्चित्तप्रकरणे । प्राणायामस्य दोषाणां च विनाश्यविनाशकसंबन्धः । शास्त्रलक्षणत्वाच् छ्रद्दधानीयः, विधिपक्षम् आश्रित्य । यतो नायं प्राणायामस्तुत्यर्थो ऽर्थवादः । स्तुत्यर्थत्वे ऽपि च सति न ह्य् अकस्मात् स्तुतिः प्राणायामानामुपपद्यते इति स्तुत्या विधिर् अनुमातव्यः । धारणाः पुनर् अवधारयत्य् आत्मानम् उपसृष्टो यतिर् योगसमाध्यवस्थायां कामक्रोधमोहलोभस्नेहादिभिः प्रवर्त्यमानम् अकुशलेषु, तभिश् च परमार्थदर्शनप्रसंख्यानभावनाख्याभिः कामादिप्रतिपक्षभूताभिर् धारणाभिः किल्बिषम् अनुत्पत्त्या दहेत् । एवं च प्राणायामैः संचितविरोधः धारणाभिर् स्नागतानुत्पत्तिर् अकुशलस्येत्य् उक्तं भवति । अपरे त्व् आहुर् विशिष्टानि शरीरात्मप्रदेशानि मनसः प्रज्ञाप्रयत्नकृतान्य् आत्मनो यथाबलं धारणाह् ।

अन्ये धारणा मैत्र्याद्याः संचक्षते ।
मैत्रीकृपामुदोपेक्षाः सर्वप्राणिष्व् अवस्थिताः ।
ब्रह्मलोकं नयन्त्य् आशु ध्यातारं धारणास् त्व् इह ॥

प्रत्याहारेण मनस इन्द्रियाणां च संसर्गान् विषयसंपर्काख्याञ् छब्दाद्युपलब्धिहेतून् । तेषु ह्य् एवम् उपहेतुषु अन्तःकरणप्रत्याहारेण मनसः समाधानयोगः प्रत्यनीकः । प्रतिलब्धसमाधानस्य प्रतिबन्धकरणत्वाच् छब्दाद्युपलब्धिकण्टकानि ध्यानादीन्य् आहुर् आचार्याः । परमात्मकर्मकेण च प्रणवध्यानेनानीश्वरान् गुणान् योगर्द्धिप्रत्यनीकभूतानैश्वर्यादीन् प्रतिलब्धसमाधानस्य दहमानस्य योगिनः सर्वोपसर्गस्थानम् अतिक्रान्तस्य परमार्थदर्शनप्रसंख्यानभावनाभिर् इति ॥ ६.७२ ॥

072 Let him destroy the taints through suppressions of the breath, (the production of) sin by fixed attention, all sensual attachments by restraining (his senses and organs), and all qualities that are not lordly by meditation.

By the practice of meditation he shall recognise the presence of this Inner Soul in all beings, high and low,—which is difficult to understand by unregenerate people.—(73)

अन्तरात्मा अन्तर्यामी पुरुषः, तस्य गतिः स्वरूपं यथावद् विज्ञेयम् । सुखदुःखाभिमानो न केवलं मनुष्यजन्मनि, किं तर्हि उच्चावचेषु नानाविधेषु भूतेषु तिर्यक्प्रेतपिशाचादिष्व् अहं ममेति प्रत्ययो ऽविद्याकृतो निवर्त्यः ।

• अथ वा “कथम् अयं विभुर् अन्तरिक्षाज् ज्यायान् दिवो ज्यायन् एभ्यो लोकेभ्यः सर्वकामः सर्वरसः सर्वगन्धः सर्वस्पर्शः इदम् अभ्यस्यतो विजिघत्सोर् विपिपासोर् एवंविधे ऽपि सुखे दुःखे शरीरस्य शरीरेष्व् असर्वभोगतया सो ऽहं नाम — अहो कर्मणां माहात्म्यम्, यद् अयं सर्वात्मकः स्वतन्त्रः परतन्त्रीक्रियते कर्मभिः, नैतानि करिष्ये दुष्टस्वामिस्थानीयानि — भृतक इव कर्माणि प्रतिपालयिष्ये” । यथा भृतकः कश्चित् स्वामिनं निबन्धेनाराधयितुं प्रविष्टः सन् यं मन्यते “यावद् दुराधर्ष इव नो दण्डशीलस् तर्जनापरः परुषभाषी, नैनं भूयः परिचरिष्यामि, यन् मयास्मात् किंचिद् भृत्यादि गृहीतं तद् एवास्य कर्मकरणेन शोधयामि” एवं ध्यायन्न् आसीत । “कृतानां कर्मणां फलोपभोगेनान्तं यास्यामि, अन्यानि च न करिष्यामि” इत्य् एवमादि ध्येयम् । तथा “किम् एते क्षेत्रज्ञाः परमात्मनो विभूतय उत स्वतन्त्राः — नैवंपरमात्मनो ऽन्यः²⁸ कश्चिद् अस्ति” इति वेदान्तनिषेवणादिना निचित्य ध्यातव्यम् ।

• अन्ये पुनर् आहुः । ध्यानं च योगश् च ध्यानयोगम् । तेन अन्तरात्मनः गतिं संपश्येन् निरूप्योप्यासीत गतिं ध्यानेन योगेन च ।

• अथ वा ध्यानार्थो योगः चित्तस्थैर् यं तत् कृत्वा, आत्मनो गतिं संपश्येद् उपासनाभिर् अनपायामृतादिगुणविशिष्टं²⁹ वेदान्ताभिहितरूपं निष्कल्मषम् अभिमुखीकुर्यात् ।

• अकृता असंस्कृताः शास्त्रेणात्मानो यैस् तैर् न शक्यं ज्ञातुम् ॥ ६.७३ ॥

Inner soul—the inner controlling personality ‘presence’—character—should be recognised.

Notions of pleasure and pain appear not only among human beings but among all kinds of ‘beings, high and low’—i.e., among animals, goblins, Piśācas &c.—there is the notion of ‘I’ and ‘mine’; and this has to be got rid of.

Or, the man may go on pondering over the following ideas—‘This soul is omnipresent, higher than the sky, higher than heaven, higher than all these regions, having all happiness, all tastes, all odours, all touches; and yet he is beset with hunger and thirst; and in the midst of such pleasures and pains, he passes through the experiences of his physical body, known as the I; how wonderful is the power of actions, that even this all-pervading, all-embracing soul is made subservient to the actions! I shall never have recourse to these acts, which are like a wicked master. Like a hired servant I shall wait upon the acts (already done by me); as when a man enters a man’s service being urged to it by his need, thinking him to be kind, but soon finding out that he is difficult to please, irascible, given to beating, and harsh of speech, the man decides that he would not serve him any longer, after he has cleared off by service all that may have been advanced to him.’ The thought to be practised should be in the form—‘I shall get to the end of my past acts by going through the experiences resulting from them, and shall perform no further acts’, and so forth. Similarly one should study the Vedānta, and having, with its help, discussed the question as to whether the embodied soul? are only manifestations of the Supreme Self or independent entities, and come to the conclusion that there is no soul apart from the Supreme Self,—he should ponder over this.

Others explain the text as follows:—‘Dhyāna’ is Contemplation, and ‘Yoga’ is Meditation; and by means of these ‘he should recognise the presence of the Inner Soul’; and having recognised it, he should meditate upon it.

Or ‘Dhyāna-yoga’ may be explained as ‘yoga’, calmness of mind, for the purposes of^(‘)dhyāna,’ contemplation;—having secured this calmness,^(‘)he should recognise the presence of the Inner Soul’; i.e., by means of devout worship he shall realise its presence as equipped with the qualities of Immortality and the like, free from defects, as described in the Vedānta-texts.

‘Akṛtātman’ ‘unregenerate person’ is one whose ‘ātman’, soul, mind, is^(‘)akṛta,’ untutored. By such persons the Inner Soul cannot be grasped.—(73)

Viṣṇu (96.25).—‘He must reflect upon the transitoriness of the passage through mundane existence.’

उच्चावचेषु गतिषूत्कृष्टापकृष्टेषु वा भूतानाम् उत्पत्तिस्थानेषु गतिसंभवम् अस्यान्तरात्मनः कर्माधिकारपुरुषस्य ज्ञानयोगेन, ज्ञानं शस्त्रं ज्ञायते ऽनेनेति कृत्वा, तदध्ययनविज्ञानसंबन्धेनाभ्यासयोगेन वा । तस्य दुर्ज्ञानाम् अकृतात्मभिर् अनधीताश्रुतशास्त्रैः । एवं हि प्रसंख्यानवान् नित्यम् अध्यात्मरतिर् उत्कृष्यते ॥ ६.७३ ॥

कस्य पुनर् हेतोर् एतद् एवम्, यस्माद् आह ।

073 Let him recognise by the practice of meditation the progress of the individual soul through beings of various kinds, (a progress) hard to understand for unregenerate men.

Equipped with true insight, he is no longer fettered by his acts; but destitute of insight, he falls into the cycle of births and deaths.—(74)

अनन्तरस्य विधेः फलम् आह । सम्यग्दर्शनम् अनन्तरोक्तम् आत्मनो यथार्थज्ञानम्, तेन संपन्नः कृतसाक्षात्कारः । कर्मभिर् न निबध्यते । संसारं नानुवर्तते । कृतानां कर्मणां भोगेन क्षयाद् अन्येषाम् अकरणात् । न पुनर् अनेन केवलात् ज्ञानान् मोक्ष उक्तो भवति । दर्शनेनाध्यात्मिकेन वेदान्तोपदिष्टेन यो विरहितः केवलकर्मकारी स³⁰ संसारम् एति ॥ ६.७४ ॥

This describes the result of what has been just enjoined.

‘True insight’—true knowledge of the Self, just described; ‘equipped’ with this,—i.e., having obtained direct apprehension of it.

‘Is not fettered by acts’— does not fall into the cycle of births and deaths; since the past acts have become exhausted on account of their effects having been already experienced, and no fresh acts are done.

This does not mean that Liberation is attained by mere knowledge.

He who is not endowed with the spiritual insight, taught in the Vedānta, and who is only given to the performance of acts, falls into the cycle of births and deaths.—(74)

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 42).

**(verses 6.74-75)
**

Āpastamba (2.21.14-16).—‘Some say that he obtains liberation if he knows the Ātman;—but that opinion is opposed to the scriptures; if liberation were obtained by the knowledge of the Ātman alone, then he ought not to feel any pain even in this world.’

Yājñavalkya (3.66).—‘Truthfulness, abstention from stealing and from anger, modesty, purity, discrimination, steadfastness, self-control, control over sense-organs and learning have been declared to be Universal Dharma.’

Kāmandaka (3.6).—‘Harmlessness is the highest of all virtues,—such is the unanimous opinion of all living beings. Therefore with feelings of kindness shall the king protect his people.’

सम्यग्दर्शनं नाम परमात्मदर्शनम् । संसार्यात्मनो ऽसंसार्यात्मनो वा देहेन्द्रियमनोबुद्ध्यादिव्यतिरिक्तस्य संसार्यात्मनो ऽधिकारीपुरुषस्य वा प्रधानपुरुषयोर् वा नानात्वकस्य कर्माङ्गदेवताया वा संसारस्वभावस्य च वा “अवेक्षेत गतीर् नॄणाम्” (म्ध् ६.६१) इत्य् एवमाद्य् उक्तं प्रसंख्यानविज्ञानं वा शरीरगतं शुक्लशोणिताद्युत्पन्नम् इति विषयगतं च संयग्दर्शनशब्देनोच्यते । तथा च वक्ष्यत्य् “अस्थिस्थूणम्” (म्ध् ६.७६) इत्य् एवमादि । सर्वं चैतद् यथाविषयं संयग्दर्शनशब्देनोच्यते । सामर्थ्याद् एवं ज्ञानकर्मसमुच्चयम् उपदेक्ष्यत्य् अनन्तरश्लोक एवम् । अतश् चैतद् एवम् अतः, दर्शनेन विहीनस् तु केवलकर्मकृत् संसारम् आवृत्तिम् प्रतिपद्यते पितृलोकद्वारेण । सैषा ज्ञानकर्मसमुच्च्यस्तुतिर् विज्ञानमात्रस्तुतिर् वा ॥ ६.७४ ॥

तथा च दर्शयति ।

074 He who possesses the true insight (into the nature of the world), is not fettered by his deeds; but he who is destitute of that insight, is drawn into the circle of births and deaths.

By abstention from injuring, by the non-attachment of the senses, by the acts prescribed in the Veda, by the rigorous practising of austerities, they attain the position of That Being.—(75)

इदं तु ज्ञानकर्मणोः समुच्चयान् मोक्ष इति श्लोकद्वयं ज्ञापकम् । पूर्वेण ज्ञानम् उक्तम् । अनेन कर्माण्य् उच्यन्ते ।

• कानि पुनर् वैदिकानि कर्माणि येषां फलं **तत् पदं **प्राप्नोतीत्य् उच्यते । यानि तावत् काम्यानि येषां स्वविधिवाक्ये श्रुतम् एव स्वर्गादि फलम् । तद्व्यतिरेकेण फलान्तरकल्पनायाम् अतिप्रसङ्गः । संकीर्णफलताश्रयणं वानर्थकं स्यात् । तावता च वाक्यार्थस्य समाप्तेर् विध्यनपेक्षिततत्पदप्राप्तिलक्षणफलेन कथं संबन्धः । श्रुतेनैवान्वयिना विध्यर्थसंपन्ने ऽन्यत्³¹ विधिर् नापेक्षते ।

• अत्रोच्यते । अस्त्य् एवात्र वाक्यान्तरम् “यज्ञेन तद् आप्नोति” इति रहस्याधिकारे । ततश् च संयोगपृथक्त्वात् फलद्वयं युक्तम् । अतश् च सर्वेषाम् एव काम्यानाम् अविच्छिन्नफलयोगिता परमपदप्राप्त्यर्थता च न विरोत्स्यते । तत्र च यागद्वयेन प्रयोगभेदेन स्वर्गापवर्गौ भवतः । न चात्र यज्ञविशेषः श्रुतो येन नित्यानाम् एतत् फलं स्यान् न काम्यानाम् ।

• अथोच्येत । नित्येष्व् अश्रुतत्वात् फलावच्छेदस्याविरोधात् तद्विषयता युक्ता, न काम्येषु । तावतैव यज्ञेनेत्य् अस्य सर्वविषयत्वलाभाद्³² इति चेत्,

• किम् अत्र फलश्रवणेन । कर्तव्यतानिष्ठानि च वैदिकानि वाक्यानि । सा च कर्तव्यतान्तरेण वैदिकं फलपदं यावज्जीवादिपदैर् अवगमितेति । तत्रापि फलसंबन्धो नापेक्षित एव । कल्प्यमानो ऽधिकत्वान् नैकार्थ्यं यायात् । अतो यज्ञेनेति वाक्यम् अप्रतिष्ठमानं विविक्ते विषये सर्वं यज्ञशब्दवाच्यं नित्यं काम्यं च गोचरयति ।

• न चैतत् फलं काम्यानाम्, अपवर्गकाम इत्य् अश्रुतत्वात् । एतद् अभिप्रायम् एवोक्तम् “कामात्मता न प्रशस्ता” (म्ध् २.२) इति । महाभारते ऽपि “मा कर्मफलहेतुर् भूर् मा ते सङ्गो ऽस्त्व् अकर्मणि” (भ्ग् २.४७) इति ।

• अतश् च भेदग्राहपरिवेष्टितान्तःकरणस्य तृष्णाविद्यावतो ऽनिर्मुक्ताहंकारममकारस्याभिसंहितपरिमितफलप्राप्तिः । इतरस्य त्व् अनभिसंधायफलविशेषचोदितत्वात् कर्तव्यम् इति बुद्ध्या वर्तमानस्यापरिमितनिरतिशयानन्दरूपब्रह्मावाप्तिः ।

• न चैतच् चोदनीयम्- “एकसप्तशतं क्रतवो यावन्तो वा तेषां सर्वेषाम् अनुष्ठानस्याशक्यत्वाद् अनारम्भोपदेशता स्यात्” इति । यतो दर्शनसंपत्त्यैवात्रानुष्ठानसंपत्तिः । अत एवोक्तम् “सम्यग्दर्शनसंपन्नः” (म्ध् ६.७४) इति । सर्वे च क्रतवो दर्शनसंपादनीयाः । तथा चोक्तम् “ज्ञानेनैवापरे विप्रा यजन्ते” (म्ध् ४.२४) इति ।

• अथ वा यांल् लोकान् एतीत्य् अवच्छेदनिर्देशः, स्वर्गकामः पुत्रकाम इति । अतीतानादिभेदग्रहवासितान्तरात्मानो दृष्टफललोभेनासत्येनैव प्रधाने पुरुषार्थे प्रवर्तन्ते । यथा बालः पुष्ट्यर्थे औषधे³³ “शिखा ते वर्धिष्यते” इत्य् असत्ययैव शिखावृद्ध्या प्रवर्त्त्यत इति केचित् ।

• अपरं मतम् । नित्यान्य् अत्र कर्माण्य् अभिप्रेतानि । तान्य् अक्रियमाणानि प्रत्यवायहेतुतया प्रतिबन्धकानि । अतस् तैर् अनुष्ठीयमानैर् असति प्रतिबन्धे उक्तं वैदिकैश् चैव कर्मभिर् इति । यद्य् अपि तानि न मोक्षार्थतया चोदितानि ।

• उग्रैर् अत्यन्तं शरीरतापहेतुभिः । तस्य ब्रह्मणः । पदं स्थानं ब्रह्मलोकम् । साधयन्ति स्वीकुर्वन्ति ।

• अथ वा तदीयपदं यादृशस् तस्याधिकारः, सर्वेश्वरत्वं स्वातन्त्र्यं तद्रूपप्राप्तिर् इति यावत् ॥ ६.७५ ॥

These two verses are indicative of the doctrine that Liberation is attained by Knowledge and Action combined. The preceding verse spoke of Knowledge and the present one speaks of Action.

Question:—“What are those acts ‘prescribed in the Veda,’ whose result is here spoken of as the ‘attaining of the position of That Being’? As for the voluntary acts, the results of these are already mentioned in those very texts that enjoin the acts themselves; and if they were to assume results other than those, there would be carrying the matter to an absurd length; and it would give rise to the great evil that the results of the acts would become mixed up and confused. Further, since the injunctive text would have all its syntactical needs supplied by the mention of the single result, how could any connection be established between that text and the additional words that would have to be thrown in if we were to connect the acts with the further result of ‘attaining the position of That Being’? As a matter of fact, the needs of the injunction having been supplied by what is directly mentioned in the text, it does not stand in need of anything else.”

Our answer to the above is as follows:—In fact in the Esoteric Section (of the Veda) we have a distinct text to the effect that ‘one attains That by means of sacrifice.’ So that by a proper adjustment there would be both kinds of results accomplished by means of Action; and there would be nothing incongruous in all the voluntary acts leading to the more limited results, as also to the attainment of ‘the position of That Being’; as two distinct sacrifices performed at two different times would lead to two distinct results The present text moreover has not specified any particular sacrifice, which could justify the conclusion that th.e result here spoken proceeds from the obligatory acts, and not from the voluntary ones.

The following argument might be raised against us:—“In as much as no results have been spoken of in the Vedic texts regarding any results following from the obligatory acts, it is only right that what is mentioned in the present text should be connected with those acts, and not with the voluntary ones; because there would be no difficulty in connecting it with them; and what the Esoteric text just quoted has declared regarding ‘sacrifice’ leading to That would also be amply justified by this construction.”

Why should any importance be attached to the mention of results in Vedic texts? Vedic Texts are purely injunctive in their character; their function lies in laying down what should be done; and that a certain act should be done is made known to us by such terms as ‘as long as one lives’ and the like, without the help of any words speaking of results; so that (even when the result is actually mentioned) the word expressive of the result is not needed at all by the sentence; so that in cases where it is assumed (and not directly mentioned) it would be entirely superfluous, and hence could not be construed along with the injunctive text. Thus then, the conclusion is that the esoteric text quoted above speaking of ‘sacrifices’ not being capable of being restricted to any particular kind of sacrifice, must be taken as including all kinds of sacrifices, obligatory as well as voluntary.

Further, the result spoken of in the present text cannot proceed from the voluntary acts; as none of then has been enjoined as to be done by ‘one desirous of Liberation’. In fact it was with reference to this that the text declared (under 2.2) that ‘being given up to desires is not commendable’; and also in the Mahābhārata—‘May thy acts not be done simply with a view to results. May thou not be addicted to inaction,” (Bhagavadgītā 2.47).

The conclusion thus is that so long as the actor has his mind beset with notions of diversity, is under the influence of Desire and Ignorance, and is not free from the notions of ‘I’ and ‘mine’,—the results obtained by him are just the narrow ones that he had bargained for (on the strength of the Vedic texts); while the other kind of actor, who undertakes an act without reference to any results, and simply because it has been enjoined by the Veda and as such should be done, attains Brahman Itself, which consists of the highest boundless bliss.

It will not be right to urge against this the following argument:—“There are one hundred and seventy-one sacrifices; in as much as it would be impossible for anyone to perform all these, the text would be enjoining an impossibility (if it meant all kinds of sacrifices)”.—Because in the present context the performance of the acts is meant to be accomplished by the attainment of true insight itself. The meaning is that all sacrifices are to be accomplished by the said insight. This is what is meant by such texts as—‘Other Brāhmaṇas offer sacrifices by means of Knowledge itself’.

Or, the particular position or region spoken of in the present text as attained (by non-injury &c.) may be taken to be just those whose special character would be determined by the man’s desires—according as he may be desirous of heaven or sons &c. &c. In fact persons who have their minds still beset with notions of such diversity as those of ‘past’, ‘present’ and so forth, are prompted by false longings, even when betaking themselves to acts leading up to the highest ends of man; just as when a child is tempted to drink a nutritious medicine by the false hope (set up before it) in the form that by drinking it it would have long hair.

Another theory on this subject is as follows:—The acts referred to in the present text are the obligatory ones. It is these whose omission is sinful, and acts as an obstacle to liberation. And it is the fact of these being properly performed, the obstacle being thereby removed, that is spoken of by the expression ‘by the acts prescribed in the Veda’:—even though these have not been enjoined as leading to liberation.

‘Rigorous’—powerfully conducive to the emaciation of the body.

‘Of that Being’—of Brahman.

‘Position’—place, region.

‘Attain’—Acquire.

Or, the ‘position of that’ may mean that character of Brahman which may be in accordance with his desire; i.e., being the Lord of all beings, or self-sufficiency, or the attaining of its very essence, and so forth.—(75).

‘Vaidikaiḥ karmabhiḥ’—‘the compulsory acts prescribed in the Veda’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Kullūka);—‘the compulsory and occasional acts prescribed in the Veda’ (Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

‘Tat padam’—‘The region of Brahman’ (Medhātithi);—‘Union with Brahman’ (Govindarāja, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda).

**(verses 6.74-75)
**

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.74].

अहिंसयेति सामान्यम् अपीदं प्रव्रजितस्य विशेषसाधनम् । तद् धर्मानाम् अपि विशेषाणां निदर्शनार्थम् । एवम् इन्द्रियसङ्गैः ब्रह्मचारिणः, वैदिकैश् चाग्निहोत्रादिकर्मभिः गृहस्थस्य, तपसश् चरणैर् इति तापसस्य । तदैवं सर्वाश्रमेष्व् अयं ज्ञानकर्मसमुच्चयो ब्रह्मत्वप्राप्तिहेतुर् विज्ञेयः, समुच्चयविकल्पपक्षयोर् आश्रमाणाम्, न तु बाधापक्षे । प्रकरणाद् वायं प्रव्रजितस्य विज्ञानकर्मस्मुच्चयः । एवं च सति वैदिकैश् चैव कर्मभिर् इत्य् अत्र वेदान्तचोदिता परमात्मोपासना गृह्यते, नाग्निहोत्रादीनि कर्माणि । तपसश् चरणैर् इत्य् अत्रापि तद् धर्मा एवानूद्यन्ते । तथा चोपनिषत्स्व् एवाह- “तस्माद् एवंविच् छान्तो दान्त उपरतस् तितिक्षुः समाहितो भूत्वात्मन्य् एवात्मानं पश्यति” इति । न वानप्रस्थधर्माः ॥ ६.७५ ॥

एवं च सत्य् अयम् अनेन सम्यग्विज्ञानसमानभावनाकरमेण प्रसन्नतत्त्वज्ञानो वैराग्यप्रकर्षात् प्रसंख्यायेमं कायम् एव,

075 By not injuring any creatures, by detaching the senses (from objects of enjoyment), by the rites prescribed in the Veda, and by rigorously practising austerities, (men) gain that state (even) in this (world).

वैराग्यजननम् एतत् । तिष्ठन्तु तावत् कृमिकीटपतङ्गादिशरीराणि जलौकोभूमिस्वेदजादीनाम्³⁴ । यद्³⁵ इदं मानुषशरीरं स्पृहणीयत्वेनाभिप्रेतम्, यत् पाताशङ्किनो नित्यभीता मनुष्यास् तन् मूत्रपुरीषकुटीगृहकम् इव । तद् इदानीं कुटीगृहकेन निरूपयति । अस्थीनि स्थूणा इव । तैर् अवष्टब्धम् । स्नायुना बद्धम् । मांसशोणिताभ्याम् उपरि दिग्धलेपनम् । उपरि देहचर्मणा अवनद्धम् । अथ वा तत उपरि³⁶ आच्छादितम् । पूर्णं मूत्रपुरीषयोः । ओदनस्य पूर्ण इतिवत् षष्ठी ॥ ६.७६ ॥

076 See 077

076 See 077

He shall discard this abode of material substances, where the bones are the pillars, which is held together by the tendons, plastered with flesh and blood; covered with the skin, foul-smelling, and full of urine and ordure;—(76) beset with wrinkles and sorrow, the seat of disease, harassed, sullied with passions and perishable.—(77)

जरा च चरमे वयसि शरीरापचयहेतुर् अवस्थाविशेषः । आतुरं नित्यगृहीतं रोगैः । रजस्वलं स्पृहयालु³⁷ सर्वपदार्थेषु, तदसम्पत्यां च महद्दुःखं सर्वस्मिन् सोढे अप्रतीकारम् अनिवर्त्यम् । अत एतद् अवेक्ष्य³⁸ त्यजेद् इदं शरीरम् । भूतानां भूविकाराणां मेदोमज्जाश्लेष्ममूत्रशुक्रशोणितानाम् अयं वासस् ते ह्य् अत्र वसन्ति नात्मनो ऽयं वासः सर्वगतत्वात् तस्य । अतस् तृष्णा³⁹ शरीरे न⁴⁰ कर्तव्या ॥ ६.७७ ॥

(verse 6.76)

This is meant to create disgust.

To say nothing of the bodies of worms insects and fleas, which are born in the earth and out of moisture etc.,—the human body itself, which has been considered highly desirable, the likelihood of losing which keeps man in constant fear,—is like a latrine, the abode of urine and ordure. It is this latrine-hut that is described.

The bones constitute the pillars; the hut is supported by the bones;—it is tied up with the tendons; it is plastered outside with flesh and blood;—and it is covered up with the skin; or roofed over with the skin;—‘filled with urine and ordure’;—the use of the Genitive here is analogous to that in the expression ‘odanasya pūrṇaḥ’, filled with rice.—(76).

(verse 6.77)

^(‘)Wrinkles’—indicates a peculiar state of the body in old age, due to its decrepitude.

‘Harassed’—ever beset with diseases.

‘Sullied with passions’—i.e., harbouring desires, the non-fulfilment of which brings irremediable unbearable pain.

Realising all this the man ‘shall discard’ this body, which is the abode of ‘material substances’—the products of the Earth, in the form of fat, marrow, phlegm, urine, semen and blood;—it cannot be the abode of the Soul; because this is all-pervading. For all these reasons one should not cherish any affection for the body.—(77.)

(verse 6.76)

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 91).

(verse 6.77)

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 91).

**(verses 6.76-77)
**

Mahāhhārata (12.330.42.43).—(Same as Manu.)

Maitryupaniṣad (3.4)—Do.

Viṣṇu (96.43-55).—‘He must recognise this human frame to consist of seven elements;—those elements are adeps, blood, flesh, flesh-serum, bone, marrow and semen. It is covered with skin; and it has a nasty smell; it is the receptacle of impure substances. Though surrounded by a hundred pleasures, it is subject to change; though carefully supported, it is subject to destruction. It is the stay of carnal desire, wrath, greed, folly, pride and selfishness. It consists of earth, water, fire, air and ākāśa. It is provided with bone, tubular vessels, arteries and sinews. It is endowed with the quality of Rajas. It is covered with six skin-layers; it is kept together by three hundred and sixty hones.’

Kāmandaka (3.10).—‘This clayey tenement rendered agreeable by artificial means is evanescent like a shadow and vanishes even as a bubble of water.’

तस्य च त्यागस्योपायभेदाद् द्वित्वं दृष्टान्तद्वयेन प्रदर्शयति ।

077 Let him quit this dwelling, composed of the five elements, where the bones are the beams, which is held together by tendons (instead of cords), where the flesh and the blood are the mortar, which is thatched with the skin, which is foul-smelling, filled with urine and ordure, infested by old age and sorrow, the seat of disease, harassed by pain, gloomy with passion, and perishable.

He, who leaves this body, either as the tree leaves the bank, or as the bird leaves the tree, becomes freed from the shark of misery.—(78.)

यस् तावद् अयं कुटीरूपको देहस् तस्य दृष्टान्ते नदीकूलं वृक्ष इति । न स्वेच्छयाग्निप्रेवेशादिना त्यक्तव्यः, किं तु तृष्णा तत्र न कर्तव्या । अनुद्दिष्टपूर्व आपातस् तदा भविष्यति कर्मक्षयात्, वृक्षस्येव कूलस्थस्य । यद् उक्तम्⁴¹ “नाभिनन्देत मरणम्” (म्ध् ६.४५) इति । यस् तु लब्धज्योतिर् वशीकृतप्राणसंचारो मोहविकारनिगृहीतमनास् तेन पूर्वम् उत्क्रमणं कर्तव्यम् । यथा शकुनिर् वृक्षं त्यजति । ग्राह इव ग्राहः, दुःखहेतुत्वसाम्यात् । तद् आह कृच्छ्रात् प्राप्तिपूर्वकस्यापि यावच्छरीरं वस्तुसामर्थ्याद् भवत्य् एव कृच्छ्रम्⁴² । पूर्वविप्रतिपत्ताव् एतद् उच्यते ॥ ६.७८ ॥

Continuing the figure of the body spoken of as the hut, we have the simile—‘as the bird leaves the tree’. What is meant is, not that the body should be voluntarily given up, by entering into the fire, or such methods of suicide, but one shall not cultivate attachment to it. And then the body shall fall off by itself, by the exhaustion of Karmic residuum; just as the tree on the banks falls off. This is what has been said above (40) in regard not rejoicing at death.

But when the man has acquired the inner light, has controlled the movements of his breath, and has withdrawn his mind from all manifestations of illusion;—he may even voluntarily leave off the body; in the same manner as the bird leaves the tree.

‘Shark’—which is like the shark, resembling it in being a source of trouble; hence the text has added the term ‘misery’; Even for the man who has attained discriminative wisdom, troubles continue to beset him so long as the body lasts; as such is the very nature of it.

This second alternative (of leaving the body voluntarily has been put forward in view of there being objections against the former one (of awaiting the chance of the falling off of the body I—(78)

यस् तावद् घटमानकस् तस्य कर्मक्षयात् अपराधिनो देहत्यागः, यथा वृक्षस्याबुद्धिपूर्वः पातः । यः पुनर् अभ्याससामर्थ्यात् प्राणमनोनिग्रहस् तस्य निस्तीर्णोपधस्य पश्यप्रकृतेर् धर्मविशेषोपष्कृतात्मनो महायोगयुक्तदीकस्य बुद्धिपूर्वो देहत्यागः शकुनिवद् जिज्ञेयः सांख्ययोगयोर् आशयो देहपातद्वयोपदेशो दृष्टान्तद्वयेन प्रदर्श्यते ॥ ६.७८ ॥

इदानीं क्षमासाधनस्तुत्यर्थं मध्यस्थ्यप्रदर्शनार्थं वा प्रसंख्यानम् इदम् अत्रोच्यते ।

078 He who leaves this body, (be it by necessity) as a tree (that is torn from) the river-bank, or (freely) like a bird (that) quits a tree, is freed from the misery (of this world, dreadful like) a shark.

Having, by the practice of meditation, attributed what is agreeable to him, to his good acts, and what is disagreeable, to his evil acts, he reaches the eternal Brahman.—(79)

प्रीतिपरितापकृतश् चित्तसंक्षोभो हर्षशोकादिलक्षणो ऽनेनोपायेन परिहर्तव्यः । यत् किंचित् प्रियं करोति तन् मम सुकृतस्य विशेष्यते तस्येदं फलम्, नैष कर्ता मम स्नेहबुद्ध्या प्रियम्, न चायं मे शात्रवं शक्नोति कर्तुं दुष्कृतं पीडाकरम्" इत्य् एवं विमृश्य ध्यानयोगेन चित्ते भावयेत् । अतो ऽस्य न प्रियकारिणि रागो नाप्रियकारिणि द्वेषो जायते । एवं कुर्वाणः सनातनं शाश्वतं ब्रह्माभ्येति अभिमुखं प्राप्नोति । अचिरादिपथेन न व्यवधीयते । शाश्वतग्रहणाद् अनावृत्तिः प्रतीयते ॥ ६.७९ ॥

Disturbance of the mind caused by pleasure and pain, and appearing in the forms of joy and sorrow, should be got rid of in the following manner. [He shall cultivate the following idea]—‘When such and such a person does anything pleasing to me, it is the result of some good act that I may have done in the past; and the doer of the act has not done it. through any feelings of affection towards me; in fact he could not do anything inimical to me; and when some one does what is disagreeable to me, there also what is the source of my pain is only my own evil act this is what he shall ponder over while practising meditation; so that he does not feel any attraction towards the man who does what is agreeable to him, nor any repulsion towards one who does what is disagreeable to him.

By doing thus ‘he reaches the eternal Brahman’, directly, and has not got to pass through the intervening stages of the Luminous Path and so forth.

The presence of the epithet ‘eternal’ implies that the man does not return to the cycle of births and deaths.—(79)

Medhātithi has been misunderstood by Buhler (see Translation).

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 41).

प्रियेषु स्वेषु धर्मविरुद्धेष्व् आत्मीयेषु स्वादुभैक्षलाभादिषु च निपतत्सु कारणत्वेनात्मीयम् एव सुकृतं विसृज्य, ध्यानयोगेन परमार्थदर्शनेन विनियुज्य, तम् कारणतया स्वधर्मं व्युदस्य च तत्संपादयितारं पुरुषम्, एवम् अप्रियेषु दुष्कृतं विसृज्य ध्यानयोगेन परं ब्रह्माभ्येति।

क्षमयानया विगतरागद्वेषतया च मध्यस्थो भूत्वा, एवं च अयम्,

079 Making over (the merit of his own) good actions to his friends and (the guilt of) his evil deeds to his enemies, he attains the eternal Brahman by the practice of meditation.

When, by disposition, he becomes free from longing for all things, then he obtains lasting happiness in this world, as also after death.—(80)

चित्तधर्मोपदेशो ऽयम् । न स्पृहा कार्याभिप्रेतवस् तूपादानपरिहारेण निस्पृहत्वम्, अपि तु तत्कारणत्यागेन । भावश् चित्तधर्मो वात्मनो वाभिलाषलक्षणः । सर्वभावेषु । पदार्थवचनो द्वितीयो भावशब्दः । सर्वग्रहणेनावश्यकर्तव्येष्व् अपि पानभोजनादिषु शरीरस्थितिहेतुष्व् अभिष्वङ्गो निषिध्यते, न पुनर् इच्छा । सा ह्य् अस्य भाविनी वस्तुसामर्थ्यजा बुभुक्षा पिपासा च । भिन्ना चेच्छा स्पृहातः । रागानुबन्धिनी दैन्यनिमित्ता स्पृहा । इच्छा तु भोजनादौ भुक्तपीताहारपरिणामसमनन्तरं स्वयं उपजायते ॥ ६.८० ॥

This teaches the cultivation of a mental disposition.

It is not by the abandoning of the acquisition of desired things that one becomes ‘free from longings’; he becomes so only when he renounces what forms the source of all longing.

‘Disposition’ is an attribute of the mind, or of the soul, in the form of desire..

‘Towards all things’—‘sarvabhāveṣu.’— This second ‘bhūva’ denotes things. The presence of the epithet ‘all’ implies that attachment to even such necessary things as articles of food and drink which are required for the maintenance of the body, is to be deprecated and not the desire. Because the desire for such things, in the form of hunger and thirst, arises from the very nature of things and is bound to appear. But ‘desire’ is something different from ‘longing’: Longing arises from attachment and is demeaning; while desire for food & c. appears in the man naturally, after the digestion of what has been eaten and drunk.—(80)

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 48).

इह शमसुखं प्रेत्य च ब्रह्मलोकप्राप्तिसुखम् । शाश्वतम् इतीयं स्तुतिः भूतार्थानुवादो वा ॥ ६.८० ॥

अधुना सर्वसङ्गत्यागोपयोपदेशस्य प्रयोजनम् इदम् आचष्टे ।

080 When by the disposition (of his heart) he becomes indifferent to all objects, he obtains eternal happiness both in this world and after death.

Having, in this manner, gradually renounced all attachments, he becomes freed from all pairs of opposites, and reposes in Brahman alone.—(81)

सङ्गांस् त्यक्त्वा सर्वान् । गवाश्वहस्तिहिरण्यदासभार्याक्षेत्रायतनादिषु ममेदम् इति बुद्धिः सङ्गः । तत्त्यागाद् एकारामतायाः परिग्रहणेन च । एनं प्रथमम् उपाश्रित्यैनं प्राधान्येन, ततो ऽनेन विधिना पूर्वोक्तेन क्रियाकलापेन बाह्याध्यात्मिकेनानुष्ठितेन ब्रह्मणि चिद्रूपे ऽवतिष्ठते । न कर्माणि बध्नन्ति । सर्वद्वन्द्वैः शुभासुभकर्मार्थैः सुखदुःखैर् विनिर्मुक्तो भवति ॥ ६.८१ ॥

‘Having renounced all attachments.’—‘Attachment’ stands for the notion of ‘mine’ that people have with regard to such things as the cow, the horse, the elephant, gold, slaves, wife, agricultural lands, houses and so forth. When this has been renounced, and the man has begun to delight in solitude;—having taken to this as the principal method, and in the manner detailed above—i.e., by the due performance of the temporal and spiritual acts prescribed—he ‘reposes in Brahman,’—which is of the nature of pure consciousness; and he is no longer fettered by actions. This is what is meant by the phrase ‘from ail pairs of opposites’—i.e., pleasures and pains as resulting from good and bad acts.—‘he becomes freed’—(81)

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 48).

उभाव् अपि चेमौ श्लोकौ “प्रियेषु स्वेषु सुकृतम्” (म्ध् ६.७९) इत्य् एतस्य श्लोकस्य शेषयोर् वचनीयौ ॥ ६.८१ ॥

तथा च सत्य् एतद् अत्र यत् परमार्थदर्शनं रागद्वेषप्रहाणायोक्तं “विसृज्य ध्यानयोगेन” इति तत्स्तुतिम् अधिकृत्य सर्वविज्ञानस्तुत्यर्थं वेदम् आरभ्यते ।

081 He who has in this manner gradually given up all attachments and is freed from all the pairs (of opposites), reposes in Brahman alone.

All this that has been declared here is appurtenant to Meditation; he who does not realise and cultivate the said mental attitude does not obtain the reward of the acts.—(82)

ध्याने सति भवति ध्यानिकम् । ध्याने क्रियमाणे लभ्यते । किं तत् । यद् एतद् अनन्तरम् अभिशब्दितम् उक्तम् आभिमुख्येन, न तात्पर्येण प्रतिपादितम् । सुकृतदुष्कृतयोस् तयोः प्रियाप्रियहेतुत्वन्यासः । पुरुषस्य यद् अप्रियकर्तृत्वं तज् ज्वरस्येव पीडाहेतुत्वम् अग्नेर् इव दुरुपसर्पणदग्धृत्वम् । यथा नाग्निदग्धो ऽग्निं द्वेष्टि एवं पुरुषम् अप्य् अप्रियकारिणं मन्येत, न प्रतिषेद्धा स्यात् ।एतच् च ध्याने सति एकाग्रे चित्ते भवति । सर्वकालम् एतद् धृदयेनाभ्यसितव्यम् । यथा सुखदुःखे इमे कर्मणः फलम् । न राजा सुखस्य ग्रामादेर् दता, अपि तु मदीयायासेन प्रथमोपसर्पणलाभः । पूर्वकृतं पुण्यं कर्म दातृ, न राजा । एवं दण्डो नोद्वेजयिता, कर्माणि माम् उद्वेजयन्ति, न राजा, नापि शक्तो ऽन्यः कश्चित् । एतत् सर्वदा ध्यातव्यं चिन्तयितव्यम् । यद् अपि संसारवैराग्यजननायोक्तम् “अस्थिस्थूणम्” (म्ध् ६.७६) इत्यादि तद् अपि नित्यं भावनीयम् ।

• न ह्य् अनध्यात्मवित् ।

(१) अध्यत्मं चित्तम् अत्रोच्यते । यद् एतद् अभिशब्दितं न वेत्ति न निश्चिनोति नाभ्यासेन भावयति । स न क्रियाफलम् उपाश्नुते⁴³ । परिव्राजकस्य या बैक्षचर्या क्रिया ग्रामैकरात्रवासादिश् च, न तत्फलं मोक्षाख्यं लभते । यावद् अस्थिस्थूणादिभावनया भावेनैव निरभिलाषता सर्वत्र नोत्पन्ना, यावच् च कर्मसु फलन्यासेन रागद्वेषप्रहाणं न कृतम् इत्य् अर्थः । तच् च नित्यं यदा एवं चित्तं पुज्यते तदा भवति, नाकस्माद् इति ।

(२) अथ वा “ब्रह्मन्य् एवावतिष्ठते” (म्ध् ६.८१) इति एतस्य यद् एतद् अभिशब्दितम् इति परामर्शः । ब्रह्मण्य् अवस्थानं ध्यानिकम्, न तु क्रियानुष्ठानमात्रलभ्यम् । किं तद् ध्येयम् इत्य् अत आह- न ह्य् अनध्यात्मविद् इति । आत्मानम् अधिकृत्य यो ग्रन्थो वेदान्तादिः सो ऽध्यात्मम्, न वेद । अथ वात्मन्य् अधि यो निर्वृत्तस् तद् अध्यात्मम्, यथायम् आत्मा देहेन्द्रियमनोबुद्धिप्राणादिव्यतिरिक्तः नेषां नाशे नश्यति, कर्ता कर्मणां भोक्ता तत्फलानाम्, भेदग्राहाकृष्टस्य सर्वम् एतद् भवति । यदा त्व् अयम् अपहतपाप्मा न दोषैर् न कार्यैः स्पृश्यते, एकत्वाद् एष एव सर्वम् इदम्, न ततो ऽन्यद् व्यतिरिक्तम् अस्ति । प्रभासमात्रं पृथक्त्वम् । हरिसवर्णसोदकादिका उपनिषदो यो न वेद, ध्यानेनैकाग्रया संततया मत्या न दार्ढ्यम् उत्पादयति, स न यथोक्तं क्रियाफलं लभते । अत आत्मा वेदान्ताभिहितस्वरूपो नित्यम् आहारविहारकालं वर्जयित्वा ध्येय इति श्लोकार्थः ।

(३) अथ वा यद्य् अपि प्रव्रज्याधिकारस् तथापि गृहस्थस्यापि क्रियाफलग्रहेण निर्देशः, यदि क्रियाप्रधानः । अत एतद् उक्तं भवति । यद्य् अप्य् अग्निहोत्रादीनि कर्माणि कुर्वते गृहस्थाः, रहस्यविद्याविदश् च न भवन्ति, या विद्याः कर्मसूपविष्टा उद्गीथा “अथ वा यावती उद्गीथम् अन्वयन्ते” इत्यादिना तेन निपुणाः कर्मकाण्डज्ञा अपि, न ततः परिपूर्णफलं चिरकालभावि लभन्ते । एषो ऽर्थो वजसनेयके छान्दोग्ये च श्रुतिद्वये निदर्शितः । “यो वा एतद् अक्षरं गार्ग्य् अविदित्वा यजते जुहोति तपस् तप्यते बहून्य् अपि वर्षसहस्रान्य् अन्तवद् एव तद् भवति” (बाउ ३.८.१०) इति, तथा “यद् एव विद्यया करोति श्रद्धया उपनिषदा तद् एव वीर्यवत्तरं भवति” (छु १.१.१०) छन्दोग्योक्तम्⁴⁴ । यस् तु यथोक्ताम् अध्यात्मोपदिष्टां विद्यां विदित्वा करोति तस्यैव फलातिशयः । उक्तं च “तद् य इत्थं विदुर् य इमे ऽरण्ये श्रद्धा तप इत्य् उपासते” (छु ५.१०.१) इति । यम् “अभिसंभवति” (छु ५.१०.१) इत्यादिविजानतां कर्मकारिणाम् अर्चिरादिमार्गेण ब्रह्मलोकप्राप्तिम् एषां श्रुतिर् आह ॥ ६.८२ ॥

एवम् आत्मज्ञानार्थं ध्येये विहिते वेदजपो न प्राप्तः तत्साधनतयातस् तं विधत्ते ।

‘Appurtenant to Meditation’,—i.e., what comes about only when there is Meditation; what is attained only when meditation is properly done.

“All this that has been declared here’—directly described, not merely indirectly implied. That is, the cultivating of the feeling that good and bad deeds are the causes of agreeable and disagreeable experiences;—when man does something disagreeable, it is always the outcome of natural fortes of one’s own acts) and stands on the same footing as when fever causes suffering or fire burns; and just as the man, who has been burnt by fire, does not hate fire, so also he should not hate the man that causes him pain; nor shall he forbid him to do it (just as no one goes to forbid the fire).

All this becomes possible only when there is meditation, when the mind is duly concentrated. Consequently one should at all times, cultivate the following thought;—Pleasure and pain are the effect of past Actions; in reality the King is not the bestower of happiness, of landed property and other things; in fact it is by my own effort that the first approach to him was obtained; it is my own past meritorious act that is the real bestower of the gift, and not the King; similarly the fine imposed (Penalty inflicted) is not what causes me trouble; it is my own acts that are troubling me; neither the King nor any one else is able to do it.’

All this shall always be pondered over, reflected upon; and all that has been described above as conducive to disgust with the world—thinking of the body a hut having bones for pillars &c. (76)—this also has to be always pondered over.

(A) ‘Anadhyātmavit’;—‘adhyātma’ here stands tor mental attitude;—he who does not realise, does not cultivate—the above-described mental attitude,—‘does not obtain the reward of the acts’; of such acts of the Renunciate, for instance, as begging alms, living in the village for a single night and so forth, he does not obtain the ‘reward,’ in the shape of Liberation. That is to say, the mere cotemplation (contemplation?) of the body as a hut with bones for its pillars and so forth does not always bring about freedom from longing, so long as love and hatred have not been got rid of by the attributing of all that happens to one’s own acts. When this attitude of the mind becomes permanently fixed, then alone is the reward obtained, and not when it comes about only once in a way.

(B) [ Second explanation of ‘anadhyātmavit’]—Or, ‘what has been declared’ may refer to the ‘reposing in Brahman’ (81); and the meaning thus is that this ‘reposing in Brahman’ is ‘appurtenant to meditation,’ and is not attained merely by the performance of acts. And as regards the question as to what is it that has to be meditated upon, the text adds ‘nahyanadhyātmavit’—and the term ‘adhyātma’ stands for those treatises on Vedānta that have been composed on the subject of the Soul;—he who does not know this.—Or ‘adhyātma’ may stand for that which pertains to the soul; i.e., such ideas as—‘the Soul is something distinct from the body, the sense-organs, the mind, the intellect, the life-breath and so forth, and it does not perish when these perish;—it is neither the doer of acts nor the enjoyer of their fruits’;—all these notions belong to one who is swayed by the idea of diversity;—when it has destroyed all evil, it is not affected by the taints or their effects;—being one, it is all this, there is nothing apart from it;—diversity is only, apparent. One who does not know all this as described in the Harisavama, Sadaka and other (?) Upaniṣads, and does not strengthen these ideas by constant and one-pointed meditation, does not obtain the said ‘reward of acts.’ The sense of the verse in this case would be that—‘Except at the time that one is either taking food or engaged in some necessary act, one should always keep meditating upon the soul as described in the Vedānta and other treatises’.

(C) (Third Explanation) Or, even though the text occurs in the section dealing with Renunciation, yet the ‘reward of acts’ may be taken as referring to the Householder also; specially as it is this latter for whom the performance of acts constitutes the most important duly. According to this view, the meaning of the verse comes to be this:—Though Householders may duly perform the Agnihotra and other rites, yet, if they happen to be ignorant of the esoteric sciences,—those sciences which form the very essence of the rites, in the shape of the Udgītha, which is described as permeating all acts, and with which all persona learned in rituals ore thoroughly conversant,—they do not obtain the full reward of those rites, which appear after a long time. This is what has been described in two Śruti texts of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka and the Chāndogya Upaniṣads:—(a) ‘O Gārgi, he who without knowing this syllable, performs sacrifices and practises austerities even for several thousand years, all this becomes only perishable; but what is done through full knowledge, with faith and in full accordance with the esoteric science, becomes extremely virile’;—that is, excellent results accrue only to him who performs acts only after having understood the philosophy of the soul. (b) This has also been declared in the Chāṇḍoyya—‘Those who know this and meditate upon it as frith and austerity etc., etc.,’ (5.10.1). It is with reference to these persons equipped with full knowledge and performing the prescribed acts that the Śruti has declared that they reach the region of Brahman by the path of light etc.(82).

The object to be meditated upon, for the sake of obtaining the knowledge of the Soul, having been thus indicated, it would appear as if the repeating of Vedic mantras were not required at all; hence it is this that is enjoined by the next verse.

‘Yadetadabhiśabditam’—‘What has been described in the immediately preceding verses’ (Medhātithi);—‘what has been described in the preceding one verse’ (Kullūka);—‘what has been described in all the preceding chapters’ (Govindarāja and Nandana);—‘what can be expressed by words’ (Nārāyaṇa).

‘Kriyāphalam’—‘The reward of fulfilling the duties of the Renunciate’ (Medhātithi);—‘reward of the act of meditation’ (Kullūka);—‘reward of the performance of rites’ (Govindarāja, Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

Buhler has misunderstood Kullūka, who does not explain ‘adhiyajñam’ as ‘Brahma-veda’; he explains it as yajñam adhikṛtya pravṛttam brahma vedam’—where ‘brahma’ of the text is explained as ‘veda’.

ध्यानिकं सर्वम् एवैतद् यद् एतद् अभिशब्दितम् ।

प्रकरणात् प्रव्रज्याख्यं कर्म सर्वाश्रमकर वा, कार्यसामान्यात् । द्यानशब्देन च यावत् किंचिद् अत्र प्रव्रज्याप्रकरणे शास्त्रे वा परमार्थदर्शनम् उक्तं तत् सर्वम् अभिधीयते । तस्मिन् ध्याने परमार्थदर्शने यत् कर्म तद् ध्यानिकम् । एवं च सति परमार्थदर्शनस्तितुर् इयम्, ज्ञानकर्मसमुच्चयस्तुतिर् वा । तथा चोक्तम्- “सम्यग्दर्शनसंपन्नः कर्मभिर् न निबध्यते” (म्ध् ६.७४) इति । अस्य वा हेतुर् अयं विज्ञेयः । कस्मात् पुनर् एतद् एवं भवति, यस्मात्,

न ह्य् अनध्यात्मवित् कश्चित् क्रियाफलम् उपाश्नुते ॥ ६.८२ ॥

आत्मनि तद् इत्य् अध्यात्मं बुद्ध्यादि तद् वेत्तीत्य् अध्यात्मविच् च । पुनर् यथाविषयं व्याकरणीयम् । अस्य निदर्शनार्थम् इदं रहस्यब्राह्मणं भवति “यो वा एतद् अक्षरं गार्ग्य् अविदित्वा ऽस्मिंल् लोके जुहोति यजते तपस् तप्यते बहूनि वर्षसहस्राण्य् अन्तवद् एवास्य तद् भवति” इति श्रुतेः । तथा च समुच्चये प्रशस्यते- “तद् य इत्तम् एतद् विदुर् ये चेमे ऽरण्ये श्रद्धा तप इत्य् उपासते, ते ऽर्चिषम् अभिसंभवन्ति” इत्य् एवमादिः । अधुना षडङ्गवेदाध्ययनोपदेशात् पूर्वत्र ब्रह्मचारिप्रकरणे नियमार्थं प्रव्रजितस्येदम् आरभ्यते, विशेषार्थं वा ॥ ६.८२ ॥

अध्यात्मनिष्ठत्वोपदेशे वा सति तन्निवृत्त्याशङ्कयानुवृत्त्यर्थम् इदम् उच्यते ।

082 All that has been declared (above) depends on meditation; for he who is not proficient in the knowledge of that which refers to the Soul reaps not the full reward of the performance of rites.

He shall constantly recite Vedic texts bearing upon sacrifices, those dealing with deities and those dealing with the Soul, which have been called ‘Vedānta.’—(83)

जपमात्रम् अस्याभ्यनुज्ञायते, न पुनर् गृहस्थादिवद् अभ्यासार्थम् अध्ययनम् । यज्ञेष्व् अधि अधियज्ञं विधायकं⁴⁵ ब्राह्मणम् । आधिदैविकम् अधिदैवं⁴⁶ भवं देवताप्रकाशकमन्त्राः । तेषाम् एव विशेष आध्यात्मिकम् इति । “अहं मनुर् अभवम्⁴⁷ अहं रुद्रेभिः” (र्व् ४.२६.१) इत्यादि । वेदान्त इति यद् अभिहितं तद् अपि कर्मज्ञानसमुच्चयं ब्रह्मत्वाय दर्शयति ॥ ६.८३ ॥

What this verse permits (for the Renunciate) is the mere reciting of the texts, and not the repeating and getting up of them, as is prescribed for the householder.

‘Bearing upon sacrifices’—i.e., the Brāhmaṇa texts prescribing the sacrificial rites.

‘Dealing with deities’—those indicating the deities of sacrifices.

A particular kind of texts of this last class is ‘those dealing with the Soul;’—i. e., ‘aham manurabhavam &c,’ ‘aham rudrebhiḥ etc.’ and so forth.

Which have been called ‘Vedānta’—and which deal with Action and Knowledge both. This shows that it is the combination of these two that makes one reach Brahman.—(83)

Baudhāyana (2.18.20-21).—‘He shall recite the Agnihotra-mantras in the evening and in the morning; after performing his evening-devotions by reciting the mantras called Vāruṇī and his morning-devotions by reciting the Maitrī verses.’

Āpastamba (2.21.4)—‘Not to abandon sacred learning is a duty common to all.’

Vaśiṣṭha (10.4).—‘He shall discontinue the performance of all religious ceremonies; hut he shall never discontinue the recitation of the Veda. By neglecting the Veda he becomes a Śūdra; therefore he shall not neglect it.’

यज्ञे तद् इत्य् अधियज्ञं कर्मोपदेशः । ब्रह्म विध्यर्थवादनामधेयाख्यम् । आधिदैविकं मन्त्राः । आध्यात्मिकं च ब्रह्ममन्त्रैकदेशः । प्रकरणात् पुरुषसूक्तादि सुक्रिया वा । वेदान्ताभिहितम् उपनिषदः । सामर्थ्यात् सोयं मन्त्रब्राह्मणाख्यो वेदः, श्लोकसमाप्त्यर्थम् एवं चतुर्धोक्तः । तथा च सति यथैव प्रव्रजितस्याध्यात्मानुष्ठानम् उत्कर्षाय, एवं वेदाभ्यासो ऽपीत्य् एतद् अपि सामर्थ्याद् अवगम्यते । तथा च स्मृतिः-

शब्दब्रह्मणि निष्णातः

तस्याध्ययनविज्ञानतदर्थानुष्ठानेन,

परं ब्रह्माधिगच्छति ॥

अपरस् त्व् आह- समर्थस्येदम् अध्यात्मानुष्ठाने श्रौतस्य वा तत्रारतेर् वा ।

083 Let him constantly recite (those texts of) the Veda which refer to the sacrifice, (those) referring to the deities, and (those) which treat of the Soul and are contained in the concluding portions of the Veda (Vedanta).

This is the refuge for the ignorant, this for the learned; this for those seeking heaven, and this also for those desiring immortality.—(84)

इदम् इति वेदाख्यं ब्रह्माचष्टे । सो ऽपि ब्रह्मैव । तथा चोक्तम् ।

• द्वे ब्रह्मणी वेदितव्ये शब्दब्रह्म परं च यत् ।

• शब्दब्रह्मणि निष्णातः परं ब्रह्माधिगच्छति ॥ इति । (मैतु ६.२२)

अध्ययनं विज्ञानम्, तदर्थानुष्ठानेन निष्णातता । पूर्वस्य विधेर् अयम् अर्थवादः । अज्ञानाम् अतदर्थविदां जपादिष्व् अधिकारेण । तथा च भगवता व्यासेन सिद्धिर् जापकानां दर्शिता । अथ वा अज्ञा अनात्मज्ञाः शास्त्रानवगतात्मतत्वा⁴⁸ अपि तदुपासनापरा अलब्धचित्तस्थैर्यास् तेषां वेदः शरणम् । जपेन कर्मानुष्ठानेन तावत्या च विद्यया । नरकेषु कीटपतङ्गादियोनिषु चानुपपत्तेः ।

• इदम् एव विजानताम् । कथं पुनर् विदुषां शरणम् अत आह । इदम् अन्विच्छतां स्वर्गम् । एतावद् एते कर्मकाण्डज्ञा आत्मन्य् अलब्धमनःप्रतिष्ट्ःआ वा, तेषां कर्मानुष्ठानात् स्वर्गादिफलं लभ्यते । इतरे त्यक्तसङ्गाः प्रक्षीणरागादिदोषा ज्ञानात्मतत्त्वोपासनापरास्⁴⁹ तेषाम् आनन्त्यम् अपुनरावृत्तिर् इति । सर्वेषां वेद एव शरणम्, नान्यः पन्था अस्तीत्य् अर्थः ॥ ६.८४ ॥

‘This’ refers to the Veda; which also is Brahman; as has been declared in the following words—‘Two Brahmans have to be recognised—the Verbal Brahman and the Supreme Brahman; one who is thoroughly acquainted with the Verbal Brahman reaches the Supreme One’;—one is said to become ‘acquainted with the Veda’ when he studies it, understands it and acts according to its injunctions.

This verse is a commendatory supplement to the foregoing injunction.

‘For the ignorant’—those who do not understand the meaning of Vedic texts, and are yet entitled to and desirous of their reciting. The revered Vyāsa has declared success for the mere reciter. Or, ‘ignorant’ may mean those not knowing the true nature of the Soul; i.e., those who have not realised, with the help of the scriptures, the real nature of the Soul, and though engaged in meditation upon it, have not yet acquired the requisite steadiness of the mind.

For these people the Veda is the ‘refuge’; as by reciting it, acting in accordance with it and acquiring some knowledge of it, they are saved from falling into the life of worms and insects, or into hell.

‘This for the learned.’ The text proceeds to show how. it is the ‘refuge’ for the learned—‘this for those seeking heaven;’—i.e., those who know only the Ritualistic Sections of the Veda, and have not acquired any firm conviction regarding the Soul; and when these people perform the rites laid down in the Veda, they obtain heaven and other rewards. Others however, who have renounced all attachment and destroyed all passions, and are intent upon the contemplation of the real nature of the Soul, obtain ‘immortality’, i.e., non-return to the cycle of births and deaths.

For all these the Veda is the only ‘refuge’, and there is no other path. Such is the sense of the verse—(84)

अस्येदानीं सर्वविधेर् वा यथायोगं स्तुत्यर्थम् इदम् आरभ्यते ।

आनन्तर्याद् ब्रह्मणो जपकर्मेदम् उच्यते यथा सांख्येन । अथ वा परिव्रज्याप्रशंसेयम्, तदुपसंहारदर्शनात् चातुराश्रमिधर्मक्रमेण शास्त्रस्यानुपसंहारात् तस्य । तथा च शास्त्रोपसंहारशास्त्रस्तुतिर् वक्ष्यते ॥ ६.८४ ॥

084 That is the refuge of the ignorant, and even that (the refuse) of those who know (the meaning of the Veda); that is (the protection) of those who seek (bliss in) heaven and of those who seek endless (beatitude).

The twice-born person, who, by this successive process, goes forth (as a mendicant), shakes off evil and attains the Supreme Brahman.—(85)

क्रमेण योगो ऽनुष्ठानम् । आत्मज्ञानकर्मणोः समुच्चये यः क्रम उक्तः, तेन ऋणापाकरणं कृत्वेत्य् अर्थः । विधूय पाप्मानम् अश्व इव रोमरजांसि, तथैवात्मविद्यया । यथोक्तम् “यथा पुष्करपलाश आपो न श्लिष्यन्त्य् एवम् एतद्विदि पापं कर्म न श्लिष्यति” (छु ४.१४.३) इति । परं ब्रह्माधिगच्छति । तद्रूपः संपद्यते निवृत्तभेदग्रह इति विद्याश्रमफलविधिः ॥ ६.८५ ॥

‘Successive process’—the adopting of the method that has been described as consisting of the combination of action and knowledge;—i.e., after having paid off his debts.

‘Shakes off evil’—just as the horse shakes off its hairs, so the nun shakes off evil by means of self-knowledge. This has been thus described—‘Just as the water does not become attached to the. lotus-leaf so evil does not become attached to the man who knows It.’

‘He attains the Supreme Brahman’—becomes one with Brahman, having got rid of all notions of diversity.

This verse describee the reward following from true knowledge and from the proper fulfilment of the duties of the particular life-stage.—(85).

अयं श्लोकः परव्रज्याधिकारस्तुत्यर्थः, आश्रमसमुच्चयस्तुत्यर्थो वा ॥ ६.८५ ॥

085 A twice-born man who becomes an ascetic, after the successive performance of the above-mentioned acts, shakes off sin here below and reaches the highest Brahman.

Thus have the duties of the self-controlled Renunciates been expounded to you. Listen now to the duties of the ‘renouncers of the Veda.’—(86).

वेदस्य संन्यासः त्यागः, स एषाम् अस्तीति वेदसंन्यासिकाः । वेदशब्देन यागहोमादेः कर्मणस् त्याग उच्यते, न पुनर् जपत्यागः । आत्मचिन्तनं तु विहितम् एव । केवलं धनसाध्याः शरीरक्लेशसाध्याश् च तीर्थयात्रादय उपवासादयश् च निषिध्यन्ते । यानि त्व् आत्मैकसाधनसाध्यानि संध्याजपादिकर्माणि⁵⁰ तेषाम् अनिषेधः । तद् एतत् स्वस्थान एव दर्शयिष्यामः । आद्येनार्धेन प्रव्रज्याश्रमोपसंहारः । उत्तरेण वेदसंन्यासिकस्य कर्मोपदेशप्रतिज्ञा ॥ ६.८६ ॥

Those who have taken to the renouncing of the Veda are called ‘Veda-sanyāsika,’ ‘renouncers of the Veda.’ The term ‘veda’ indicates the renouncing of all such acts as the pouring of libations and the like, and not that of reciting Vedic texts; then again, as for meditation on the soul, this has been enjoined for these men also; so that what are forbidden Cor them are such acts as going on pilgrimages, keeping of fasts and so forth, all which require (for their accomplishment) wealth as well as bodily labour; and the prohibition does not apply to such acts as the twilight-prayer, repeating of mantras and the like, for which the man needs nothing besides himself. All this we shall explain at the proper place.

The first half of the verse sums up the section on Renunciation, and the second half introduces the duties of the ‘renouncer of the Veda.’—(86).

“Govindarāja is of the opinion that the persons named above (4.22) are here intended. But from what follows (verses 94, 95) it appears that those Brāhmaṇas are meant who, though solely intent on the acquisition of Supreme Knowledge, and retired from all worldly affairs, continue to reside in their houses; see also 4.257. Govindarāja and Nārāyaṇa assume that they remain Householders, while Kullūka counts them among the ascetics.”—Buhler.

पूर्वोत्तरयोः प्रकरणयोर् उपसंहारार्थोपन्यासार्थः श्लोकः । वेदस्य संन्यासो वेदसंन्यासः । तत्र भवो वेदसंन्यासिकम् । न हि वेदस्य संन्यासो ऽस्ति शास्त्रविरोधात्, यतः सामर्थ्याद् अयम् अस्यार्थ उच्यते । वेदस्य हि ग्रन्थार्थाभ्यासनिमित्तः, तदर्थानुष्ठानाय च प्रतिग्रहादीनां वृत्तिकर्मणां संन्यासो यस्य स वेदसंन्यासिको गृहस्त एव कृतकरणीयो ऽभिधीयते सामर्थ्यात् । तथा च तं वक्ष्यत्य् अनन्तरम् एव । कृतसंपत्तिविधानो वा आसन्नमृत्यूपदर्शकेनारिष्टदर्शनेन । तथा च वाजसनेयकं रहस्यब्राह्मणम् इदमर्थं भवति । “अथातः संप्रत्तिः । यदा प्रैष्यन् मन्यते ऽथ पुत्रम् आह” इत्य् एवमादि । स हि कृतकरणीयः तथावसन्नशरीरो वा जरसा कृतसंपत्तिविधानो पुत्रोपहृतवृत्तिर् अस्याम् अवस्थायां निरुत्सुकः परमसंयमवान् परमात्मध्यानैकालम्बनः सुखम् आसीत । न तु नित्यानाम् अग्निहोत्रादीनां संन्यासो ऽस्ति, नित्यत्वाद् एव, शास्त्रविरोधाच् च, न च वेदस्येत्य् उक्तम् । यतो ऽयम् एव शास्त्रार्थ इति, विकल्पार्थश् चायम् अस्येहोपदेशः पारिव्राज्येनाक्रमे ऽपि कथम् । यस् तावत् समर्थो गृहात् प्रव्रज्यायां तस्य यथाशास्त्रं संभवति, असमर्थस्य पुनर् उत्सृष्टाग्नेः शास्त्राद् अर्थाद् वेयम् अवस्थोच्यते । प्रव्रज्या वैकल्पिकी । एवं च कृत्वा प्रव्रज्यानन्तरं (?) तदुपदेशो युज्यत इति ॥ ६.८६ ॥

उक्त आश्रमाणां समुच्चयस्, तेषां पुनर् अधुना बाधाविकल्पौ वक्तव्याव् इति । यतस् तत्प्रसिद्धय इदम् आरभ्यते ।

086 Thus the law (valid) for self-restrained ascetics has been explained to you; now listen to the (particular) duties of those who give up (the rites prescribed by) the Veda.

सर्वे ऽपि क्रमशस् त्व् एते यथाशास्त्रं निषेविताः ।

एवं च न पाषण्डोत्पन्नाः सन्तः स्वकर्मणा संबध्यन्ते । सर्वाश्रमाणां च गार्हस्थ्यस्य श्रैष्ठ्यम् । बाधापक्षम् आश्रित्य यद् वक्ष्यति तत्स्तुत्यर्थम् इदं वेदितव्यम् । विकल्पार्थं पुनर् इदम् एषाम् ॥ ६.८७ ॥

087 The student, the householder, the hermit, and the ascetic, these (constitute) four separate orders, which all spring from (the order of) householders.

The student, the Householder, the Hermit and the Renunciate,—all these, several stages emanate from the Householder.—(87). But all these, when observed in due order, a ccording to the scriptures lead the Brāhmaṇa who has (thus) acted according to the law, to the highest state.—(88).

• केचिद् आहुर् न संन्यास आश्रमान्तरम् अत्रैवान्तर्भावो ऽस्येति दर्शयितुम् । स च कस्मिन् । गृहस्थे ऽन्तर्भावितः । गृहे हि वासस् तस्य ।

• अन्यैस् तु प्रव्रज्यायाम्, सङ्गत्यागसामान्यात् । अतो⁵¹ नास्यान्तर्भावे प्रयोजनं पुरुषधर्मैर् यतिधर्मैश् च न यागादाव् अधिकरिष्यति, वैशेषिकैश् च स्वशब्दविधानात् । अनाश्रमित्वात्, “संवत्सरम् अनाश्रमी” इति प्रायश्चित्तप्रसङ्गाद् इति चेत्, वचनेनैवास्या व्यवस्थाया विदितत्वात् कुतः प्रायश्चित्तप्राप्तिः ।

तस्माद् गृहस्थादितुल्यतया संन्यासिकं प्रशंसितुम् आश्रमान्तरसंकीर्तनम् । तच् च समुच्चयं द्रढयितुम् । गृहस्थानाम् अवस्थितिर् एषाम् इत्य् अर्थः । गृहस्थः प्रभवः स्थितिहेतुर् एषाम् इति विग्रहः ॥ ६.८७–८८ ॥

**(verses 6.87-88)
**

Objection:—“Inasmuch as the author has promised that he is going to expound the duties of the Renouncer of the Veda, the assertion of the sequence of the life-stages is entirely irrelevant.”

In answer to this some people have explained that the four life-stages have been mentioned in the present context with a view to show that ‘Renunciation (of the Veda)’ is not a distinct stage, being included among these same four; and the question arising as regards the particular stage in which it is included, the present verse points out that it is included in the state of the ‘Householder’; since the man has to dwell in the ‘house.’

Others however point out that the said ‘Renunciation of the Veda’ is to be included under the fourth stage of ‘going forth as a mendicant’, since it resembles this latter on this point that in both there is ‘renouncing of attachments’; nor is any need for including it under any one stage; because by virtue of the qualities of the man and of the Renunciate, the man would no longer have anything to do with sacrifices and other acts; specially as these have been enjoined by means of such specific words and expressions as restrict them to a definite lifestage.

“But if the man belongs to no life-stage, he would be liable to the penalty of the expiatory rite that has been prescribed for one who, for one year, remains outside the pale of all orders.”

Since such a state of things would have been brought about by the strict observance of the words of the text, how could there be any liability to an expiatory penance?

From all this it follows that the other orders have been mentioned in the present text for the purpose of eulogising Renunciation; and this serves the purpose of lending support to the view that the. combination of knowledge and action’ (as represented by the four orders) is necessary (for liberation).

In view of the fact that the house is the shelter, the dwelling-place, for all these orders, they have the Householder for their ‘source’, their support. Such is the explanation of the compound.—(88)

(verses 6.87-93)

“According to the commentators, the following discussion (87-93) is introduced in order to show, (1) that there are four orders only, and that the Vedasannyāsika belongs to these, and does not form a fifth order, or stand outside the orders; (2) that as the order of the Householders is most distinguished, it is proper that a man may continue to live in his house under the protection of his son.”—Buhler.

(verse 6.87)

This verse is quoted in Puruṣārthacintāmaṇi (p. 445), which explains ‘gṛhasthaprabhavāḥ’ as ‘dependent upon the Householder’;—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 64), which has the same note;—and also in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 173).

(verse 6.88)

This verse is quoted in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 173), which says that ‘kramaśaḥ’ indicates that any inversing of the order of the Life-stages is forbiddenand in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 64), which has the same note.

(verse 6.87)

Gautama (3.2-3).—‘The four orders are—Student, Householder, Hermit and Vaikhānasa. The Householder is the source of these, because the others do not produce offspring.’

Āpastamba (2.21.1).—‘There are four orders:—Householder, Student, Hermit and Renunciate.’

Śukranīti (4.4.1-5).—‘The Brahmacāri, the Gṛhastha, the Vānaprastha and the Yati are the four compulsory stages for every Brāhmaṇa. The Brahmacāri is the disciple who wants learning; the Gṛhastha is for maintaining all men; the Vānaprastha is for restraining the passions and activities, and the Sanyāsi attempts the attainment of salvation.’

Baudhāyana (2.11-12).—‘The Student, the Householder, the Hermit and the Renunciate.’

(verse 6.88)

Gautama (3.1).—‘Some people declare that he who has studied the Veda may make his choice as to which among the orders he shall enter.’

Āpastamba (2.21.2).—‘If he lives in all these four orders according to the rules, without allowing himself to be disturbed, he will gain liberation.’

अपिशब्दात् सर्वे ऽपि त्रयो ऽपि द्वाव् अपि एको ऽपीत्य् अयम् एव विकल्पः प्रदर्शनीयः, समुच्चयवत् तेषाम् । तथा च स्मृत्यन्तरम्- “तस्याश्रमविकल्पम् एके” (ग्ध् ३.१) इति । सर्वसमुच्चयवच् च द्वित्रिसमुच्चयो ऽप्य् अपिशब्दसामर्थ्याद् उपदिष्टो मन्तव्यः ॥ ६.८८ ॥

बाधापक्षस् तु ।

088 But all (or) even (any of) these orders, assumed successively in accordance with the Institutes (of the sacred law), lead the Brahmana who acts by the preceding (rules) to the highest state.

Among all these however, in accordance with the injunction or the direct Vedic text, the Householder is declared to be the best; because he supports the other three.—(89)

• अत्रोच्यते । सत्यम् आधानात् प्रभृति गृहकर्माणि प्रत्यक्षश्रुतानि कृतदारपरिग्रहस्य । तत्र विवाहे प्रयुक्तिनिरूपनात् किं कर्म श्रुतिभिः प्रयुज्यते । अग्निहोत्रादिभिः स्वाहाधिकारः⁵² श्रुतेः, अथापत्योत्पत्तिविधिना, उत दृष्टेन पुरुषार्थेन ।

• ननु रागः स्त्रीमात्रं प्रयुङ्क्ते न विवाहम् । येन विना यन् न निष्पद्यते तत् तस्य प्रयोजकम् इति न्यायः । रागिणां च स्त्रीमात्रेण गृह्यकर्मनिर्वृत्तिः । किम् इति विवाहम् अपेक्षेरन् ।

• सत्यम् । यदि वचनान्तरे स्त्रीमात्रे⁵³ गमनं निषिद्धं स्यात् । समाने ऽपि सर्वत्र वेदाधिगमे शास्त्रतो गम्यागम्यविवेकः । अतश् च धीरप्रकृतीनां न विवाहम् अन्तरेण स्वार्थसंपत्तिर् इति युक्तैव वेदस्य प्रयोजकाशंका ।

• यद्य् एवं सर्वस्य न प्रयोजकानि सन्ति⁵⁴ । सर्वेषां तस्मिन् सत्य् अर्थनिवृत्तौ किं तेन निरूपितेन । यो ऽस्ति विवाहप्रयोजकः सो ऽस्तु । आश्रमान्तराणि प्रत्यक्षविधाने गार्हस्थस्य कथम् उपपद्यन्त इत्य् एतदधिकृता⁵⁵ विवाहप्रयुक्तिचिन्ता⁵⁶ तु केनांशेन संगच्छते ।

• उच्यते । यावद् उक्तं सर्वेषाम् अर्थसिद्धिर् इति ।

• सत्यम् । एकेन प्रयुक्ताव् अन्यस्य प्रसङ्गाद् उपकारसिद्धौ न पृथक्प्रयोक्तृत्वकल्पना । यथा व्रीहयः पुरुषार्थेन जीवनेन प्रयुक्ताः कर्मसु विनियुज्यन्ते । न कर्मणि धनार्जनं प्रयुज्यते । यथा वा विद्या सत्य् अप्य् वैदस्यानधिकारे⁵⁷ न प्रयुज्यते, स्वाध्यायविधिनैव तत्सिद्धेः । एवम् इह कामतः प्रवृत्तिसिद्धेर् न कर्मश्रुतयः प्रयोक्तव्याः । तेनाकृतविवाहम् अपि कृत्यकर्मविधय उपपत्स्यन्ते ।

• अतश् च यो ब्रह्मचर्य एव कथंचित् परिपक्वकषायः स न विवक्षते । ततः स द्वितीयत्वाभावान् नाधिकरिष्यते । अतश् च श्रौतेष्व् अनधिकारात् तादृशस्याश्रमान्तरतापत्स्येत ।

• अन्ये मन्यन्ते । नायं धनतुल्यो विवाहः । यथा धनेन विना जीवनम् अनुपपन्नम् इति, स वै जीवेद् धनतः, एवं न स्त्रियम् अन्तरेण जीवनाभाव इत्य् अत एव न दृष्टं नियमिनः प्रयोजनं संभवतीति धर्माधिकारार्थो ऽपि प्रयुक्तो विवाहः । अवश्यं चैतद् एवं विज्ञेयम् अधिकारोत्पत्त्यर्थे यत्नः कर्तव्य इति । इतरथा हि कृतोत्सर्गस्याशुचित्वाद् अधिकारापनये जननादि शुद्धकालावस्थे च संपादयतो न नित्यकर्मातिक्रमः स्यात् । ततश् च केनार्थेन मृतादिशुद्धौ क्लेशम् आदध्यात् । तद् अपि विहितम् एवेति चेत्, एवं तावन्मात्रस्यातिक्रमो न पुनर् विधिसहस्रस्य ।

• अथोच्येत कस्य पुनर् विधेर् अयं व्यापारो यदधिकृतत्वसंपत्त्यर्थम् अधिकृतः स्याम् इति पुरुषेण यत्नः कर्तव्य इत्य् उपदिशति । एतावद् अग्निहोत्रादिविधयस् ते यस्याम्नायस् तद्विषयां कर्त्व्यतां गमयन्ति, न त्व् अग्नीनाम् उत्पत्तिं प्रजुञ्जते । अग्नयो ऽपि काम्येषु लिप्सया प्रवर्तमानेन तदधिकारसिद्ध्यर्थम् अधीयते । तथा हि तेषु जातेष्व् आहिताग्नित्वे यावज्जीवश्रुतयः । भार्यावतश् चाधाने ऽधिकारः । यथैवाधिकारिणम् आत्मानं कर्तुम् अग्नीन् आधत्ते, एवं भार्याम् अप्य् उपयच्छते । अतो न कस्यचिद् विधेर् अर्थो विहितो यदि नाग्निहोत्रादिष्व् अधिकारो जनयितव्यः । न च विवाहविधिर् एव स्वार्थकर्तव्यताम् अवगमयति, नित्याग्निहोत्रादिश्रुतिवत् संस्कारकर्मत्वाद् अधिकारश्रवणभावाच् च ।

• अत्र पूर्वे वदन्ति । ऋणत्रयापाकरणश्रुतिर् अस्ति “जायमानो वै⁵⁸ ब्राह्मणस् त्रिभिर् ऋणवा जायते” (त्स् ६.३.१०.५) इत्यादि । एषा श्रुतिर् जातमात्रनिबन्धना । न चात्र जन्म द्वितीयम् उपनयनाख्यम् अभिप्रेतम्, प्राक् ततस् तिर्यक्समानधर्मत्वात् ।⁵⁹ जन्मनि सति यावता कालेनाधिकारावगमो भवति तद् एव ऋणश्रुत्या परिगृह्यते । ततश् च विदुषः सतः सत्य् अधिकारे यः कन्यां याचमानो न प्राप्नुयाद् यावत् सर्वतः पलितस् तस्य वानप्रस्थादाव् अधिकारः । स ह्य् एतन् निश्चिनोति — यौवन एव कन्या सर्वथा याचते, ⁶⁰ कथयन्त्य् अन्ये — कृष्णकेशस्यैवाधानं श्रुतम्, भार्यामरणं वर्जयित्वा न सर्वतः पलितेनाधातव्यम् इति श्रुत्यर्थं व्याचक्षते ।

• कर्मसंबन्धाद् गृहस्थः श्रेष्ठः । अत आश्रमस्यैव श्रैष्ठ्यम् उक्तं भवति । त्रीन् एतान् इति । इदम् अपरं श्रैष्ठ्यकारणं यद् अन्येषाम् आश्रमाणां भरणम् । तद् उक्तम् “ज्ञानेनान्नेन च” (म्ध् ३.६८) इति ॥ ६.८९ ॥

एष एवार्थो दृष्टान्तेन दृढीक्रियते ।

“What is asserted here does not appear to be right. For what it means is that the order of the Householder is directly enjoined by Vedic texts, which speak of the others only as supported by the former. In fact, in the event of the order of the Householder alone being directly enjoined by the Veda, there would be no room for the other orders; because the Vedic text (laying down Householding) would be more authoritative than the Smṛti -texts laying down austerities and other things (connected with the other orders.)’—It might be argued in this connection that—‘the words of the present verse are not to be construed as By reason of the injunction of the Vedic text (the Householder is superior), but that the superiority of the Householder spoken of in the Vedic text is due to the fact of his supporting the others; this is what is made clear by the sentence ‘he supports the other three’.—It has however got to be explained how this can be.—It may be urged that this would be so on account of the other orders also being enjoined in the Veda.—But if they are enjoined in the Veda, (and this is what is referred to in the present verse), then the present -text clearly runs counter to the Smṛti text that—‘the Householder’s order alone is directly enjoined by the Veda’ (Gautama, 3.36). Nor is there any other construction possible.—It might be urged that ‘In view of the Jābāla-śruti, where we read that, having become a Householder, one shall become a Hermit, and having become a Hermit he shall go forth as a Wandering Mendicant,—all the orders are equally enjoined by the Veda’.—But even So, the contradiction of the Smṛti- text remains unexplained. Then again, this Jābāla-śruti is not injunctive in connection with the other orders; it does not contain any such injunction as that ‘one shall wander about in the forest in such and such a manner,’—such and such acts shall be done by the man dwelling in the forest,—and such and such by the man who has gone forth as a Wandering Mendicant’,—in the way in which the duties of the Householder, beginning from the Laying of the Fire and ending with the Final Sacrifice, are found to be directly laid down; it merely mentions their name—‘having become a householder &c.’ From all this it is clear that to speak of the Householder’s order as well as the other orders as equally enjoined in the Veda involves a contradiction of what has gone before.”

Our answer to the above is as follows:—It is true that for the man who has taken a wife to himself, the Veda has directly enjoined the duties, commencing with fire-laying and ending with the final sacrifice. Now, in connection with the marriage-rite itself, we have to consider the question as to what it is by which that act of marriage is prompted,—whether It is prompted by the Vedic texts that speak of persons entitled to offer the Agni-hotra -libations?—or by the injunction that lays down the duty of begetting children?—or by the visible (worldly) purpose of the man?

“What sexual love prompts is only the taking of a woman, and not the marriage-rite; that alone can be regarded as prompting an act, without which this latter could not be accomplished; and for persons influenced by sexual love, all their domestic business would be accomplished by simply having a woman; why then should they need to perform the marriage-rites?”

This would be all right, if intercourse with a mere woman in general were not forbidden. Though what the Veda says regarding the fire-laying may apply to any woman in general, yet the scriptures always make a distinction between the woman with whom one may, or she with whom he may not, have inter course. It is for this reason that for men with a steady character, the desired purpose cannot be accomplished without marriage. So that it is only natural that there should be the idea that marriage is prompted by the Veda itself.

“If it be as the text says, then there would be nothing to prompt the other orders. And the purposes of all orders being accomplished by Householdership alone, what would be the need of examining what prompts the others. That which prompts the marriage may serve as the prompter (of Householdership); but if Householdership alone is actually enjoined, how could the other orders come about? Under the circumstances again, how far would any investigation into the prompter of marriage be justified?”

Our answer is as follows:—It has been asserted that the purposes of all the orders are fulfilled (by Householdership). This is quite true; when one order has been duly prompted, and the aid required by the others becomes indirectly accomplished by the same, there can be no heed for the assumption of what would prompt these latter. For instance, the Vrīhi corn, the acquiring of which is prompted by the motive of livelihood, is also used in the performance of rites; and there is no acquiring of property for the purpose of the rites;—or again, even though the unlearned man is not entitled to the performance of sacrifices, yet the acquiring of learning is not prompted by those performances, being, as it is, already accomplished in obedience to the injunction of Vedic study itself. Similarly in the case in question (of marriage), the necessary motive being already supplied by the man’s own desires, the act does, not need the prompting of Vedic texts. Thus the injunction of the acts to be done would be applicable to those also who have not married.

Thus it is that the man who has all his passions deadened during the period of Studentship itself, does not wish to marry at all; and such a person, on account of having no companion (wife), would not be entitled to the second order. Thus not being entitled to the rites prescribed in the Vedic texts, he would naturally take to the next (the third) order (having skipped over Householdership).

Others have offered the following explanation:—Marriage does not stand on the same footing as Property. Without some property living is impossible, as it is on property that man lives; but in the absence of the wife living is not impossible; so that the wife is not as essential as property; and the act of marrying a wife is prompted soley by considerations of religious acts (which cannot be done without a wife); and it is necessary to realise in this connection the necessity of making every effort to become entitled to the performance of religious acts. Otherwise, (if no such effort were necessary), having lost his title to such acts by reason of the impurity brought about by evacuations, if one were to omit the necessary purifying processes, he would not be open to the charge of having omitted an obligatory duty; under the circumstances, why should anyone take the trouble of getting rid of the impurity caused by death and other circumstances?—It might be argued that this latter is also itself enjoined.—Even so, the omission would involve the transgression of this one injunction only, and not of the thousands of injunctions (relating to the acts that the man would perform after due purification).

In answer to this, the following arguments may be put forward:—“Of what particular injunction would it be the meaning that ‘for the sake of acquiring the title to the performance of religious acts, the agent shall make an effort to accquire that title’? All the Injunctions that there are pertain to the performance of the Agnihotra and other rites, and all that they lay down is that the acts therein specified ought, to be performed, and they do not urge the bringing into existence of the Fires. These fires are kindled, in connection with the voluntary acts, by the man who undertakes them through desire for the rewards to be obtained from them; and it is only when these Fires have been thus kindled that the man becomes ‘one who has laid the Fires,’ and hence subject to the injunctions relating to the lifelong performance of the Agnihotra rites. Then again, it is only the man with a wife that is entitled to the ‘laying of fire’; so that the man would desire to marry a wife in the same manner as he lays the Fires for the purpose of acquiring the title to the performance of religious acts. So that the sense of no Injunction is offended if one omits to acquire the title to the performance of the Agnihotra and other rites [simply because there is no such Injunction as that one shall acquire this title ]. Nor does the Injunction of Marriage itself indicate that marriage shall be performed; because the act of Marriage is a sanctificatory or sacramental rite, just like the Vedic rites of the obligatory daily Agnihotra and other rites; specially as no rewards are mentioned in connection with it.”

In answer to this the ancients offer the following explanation: There is a direct Vedic text laying down the paying off of the ‘three debts’—‘When the Brāhmaṇa is born, he is born beset with three debts &c. &c.’; and this text becomes applicable to the man as soon as he is born; this ‘birth’ can not refer to the second ‘birth’ in the form of ‘Initiation’; as in that case, the man would be as good as an animal, prior to his ‘Initiation’. In fact the exact time referred to by the passage speaking of the ‘debts’ is that at which the man, having been born, comes to realise his responsibilities. Thus then, after the has accquired learning and thus become entitled to marry, if after having sought for a bride, he fails to obtain one and becomes grey, he would certainly be entitled to proceed to the stage of the Hermit. In fact, such a man comes to the following conclusion—‘all through my youth I have been seeking for a bride;—they say that Fire-laying has been enjoined for only such men as have their hair still black;—and by the man of grey hairs Fire is not to be laid except in the event of his wife having died,—such is the meaning that they attribute to the Vedic Injunction’.

The ‘Householder is the best of all’, because of his connection with religious acts; hence the superiority belongs to the stage itself (not to the man).

‘These three.’—That it supports the other three stages is another ground for its superiority. This is what has been referred to by the text—‘By means of knowledge and by good &c. &c.’—(89).

This same dea (idea?) is further supported by means of an example.—

(verses 6.87-93)

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.87].

(verses 6.89)

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 563), which explains the meaning to be as follows:—As a matter of fact we find that all the scriptures lay down in great detail the duties of the Householder; hence this is recognised as superior to the other life-stages;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 175).

Gautama (3.36).—‘The venerable teacher prescribes one order only; because the order of Householders is explicitly prescribed.’

Vaśiṣṭha (8.14).—‘A householder alone performs sacrifices; a householder alone performs austerities; and the order of Householders is the most distinguished among the four.’

Viṣṇu (59.27-29).—‘These three—the Student, the Hermit and the Renunciate—derive their subsistence from the order of Householders; therefore must a Householder not treat them with disdain, when they have arrived. The Householder offers sacrifices, the Householder practises austerities, the Householder distributes gifts; therefore is the order of Householders the best of all.’

वेदश्रुत्या गार्हस्थ्(य्)अस्याधानात् प्रभृत्य् आश्मशानकरणात् सर्वम् अभिधीयते, न स्मृत्या । अतः “प्रत्यक्षविधानाद् गार्हस्थ्यस्य” (ग्ध् ३.३६) तदनुष्ठानपुरुषो ऽपि श्रेष्ठ उच्यते यतश् च स त्रीन् एतान् बिभर्त्य् अन्नादिभिः । अतश् च गृहस्थाश्रमस्य वेदश्रुतिविधानतः श्रैष्ठ्यवचनात् तद्विरोधेनाश्रमान्तरप्रतिपत्तिर् अर्थाद् गम्यते । एवं च सत्य् आश्रमाणां न समो विकल्पः, किं तर्ःइ विषमः ॥ ६.८९ ॥

अस्मिन् बाधापक्षे स्मार्तत्वाद् आश्रमाणाम् अस्य स्तुतुः ।

089 And in accordance with the precepts of the Veda and of the Smriti, the housekeeper is declared to be superior to all of them; for he supports the other three.

Just as rivers and rivulets attain their resting-places in the Ocean, so do men of all other orders obtain support in the Householder.—(90).

नद्यो गङ्गादयः । भिद्यादयो नदाः । केनचिद् आदारसंनिवेशभेदेन रसभेदेन च नदीनदयोर् निर्देशभेदः । एकत्वविधानं तु रूढ्या । लिङ्गभेदो⁶¹ भार्यादारशब्दवत् । संस्थितिर् आश्रयः । समुद्रो यथा सर्वजलाश्रय एवं गृहस्थः सर्वधर्मान् अधिकृतवान् ॥ ६.९० ॥

‘Rivers’—the Gaṅgā and the rest;—‘rivulets’—the Bhidya and others. The distinction between ‘rivers’ and ‘rivulets’ is based upon the difference of position or of taste.

In actual usage both are treated as one and the same; and the diversity of gender (in that case) is explained as standing on the same footing as that in the ease of the synonymous words ‘bhāryā’ (feminine) and ‘dārā’ (Masculine).

‘Resting place’—support.

Just as the Ocean is the resting place for all kinds of water, so is the Householder entitled to the performance of all duties—(90)

(verses 6.87-93)

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.87].

(verses 6.90)

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 563);—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 175).

Vaśiṣṭha (8.15-17).—‘As all rivers, great and small, find a resting place in the ocean, even so men of all orders find protection with Householders. As all creatures exist through the protection afforded by their mothers, even so all mendicants subsist through the protection afforded by Householders.’

यथा च गौतमः- “ऐकाश्रम्यं त्व् आचार्याः” इत्य् एवमादि । त्रयो ऽपि चैते, आश्रमाणां विकल्पाद् अस्मिन् पक्षे वेदस्मृतिशास्त्राविरोधेन यथाधिकारं व्याख्येयाः । एकान्तग्रहणस् त्व् आचार्यः शास्त्रविरोधाद् विज्ञेयः ॥ ६.९० ॥

090 As all rivers, both great and small, find a resting-place in the ocean, even so men of all orders find protection with householders

By twice-born men belonging to all these four orders this ten-fold duty shall always be assiduously observed.—(91)

वक्ष्यमाणोपन्यासार्थः श्लोकः । दशलक्षणानि यस्य्एति बहुव्रीहिः । लक्षणं स्वरूपम् । सेवितव्यः सर्वकालम् अनुष्ठेयः । उक्तानाम् अप्य् एतेषां प्रधानत्वाय पुनर्वचनम् । ज्ञानकर्मसमुच्चयपक्षश् चानेन पुनर्वचनेन दृढीकृतः ॥ ६.९१ ॥

This verse introduces what is going to be described below. ‘Ten-fold’—That which has ten ‘folds’ or forms.

‘Be observed’—Always be performed.

Though all these have already been mentioned before, yet they are repeated here in order to indicate their great importance; and this repetition also lends support to the view that it is the combination of ‘Knowledge’ and ‘Action’ that accomplishes the hightest end of man—(91)

(verses 6.87-93)

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.87].

तत्र तत्र शास्त्रे विक्षेपेणोक्तानां वृत्त्यादीनां समाहृत्येहोपदेशः पुनर् असंमोहार्थः, अथ वा साधारणत्वप्रदर्शनार्थः, विशेषणार्थो वा ॥ ६.९१ ॥

091 By twice-born men belonging to (any of) these four orders, the tenfold law must be ever carefully obeyed.

(1) Steadiness (2) Forgiveness, (3) Self-control, (4) Abstention from unrighteous appropriation, (5) Purity, (6) Control of the Sense-organs, (7) Discrimination, (8) Knowledge, (9) Truthfulness, and (10) Absence of anger,—these are the ten-fold forms of duty.—(92)

धृत्यादय आत्मगुणाः । तत्र धृतिर् नाम धनादिसंक्षये सत्वाश्रयः । यदि क्षीणं ततः किं । शक्यम् अर्जयितुम् इति । एवम् इष्टवियोगादौ संसारगतिर् इयम् ईदृशीति प्रचलतश् चित्तस्य यथापूर्वम् अवस्थापनम् । क्षमा अपराधमर्षणम् । कस्मिंश्चिद् अपराद्धरि प्रत्युद्वेजनानारम्भः । दमः अनौद्धत्यं विद्यामदादित्यागः । अस्तेयं प्रसिद्धम् । शौचम् आहारादिशुद्धिः । इन्द्रियसंयम अप्रतिषिद्धेष्व् विषयेष्व् अप्रसङ्गः । धीः सम्यग्ज्ञानं प्रतिपक्षसंशयादिनिराकरणम् । विद्यात्मज्ञानम् । कर्माध्यात्मज्ञानभेदेन धीविद्ययोर् भेदः । एतत् पौनरुक्त्यतया⁶² धीविद्येति पठन्ति । तन् न सम्यक्, भेदस्य दर्शितत्वात् । अन्यत् प्रसिद्धम् । अक्रोधः उत्पत्स्यमानस्यानुत्पत्तिः । क्षमा कृते ऽप्य् अपकारे ऽपकारानारम्भः ॥ ६.९२ ॥

Steadiness and the rest are qualities of the Soul.

(1) ‘Steadiness’—the feeling of contentment even at the loss of property and such things; expressed by such feelings as ‘if it has been lost, what does it matter? It can be acquired again.’ Similarly at separation from a beloved person, the man regains former equanimity by thinking that ‘such is the way of the world.’

(2) ‘Forgiveness’— the excusing of wrongs committed; not seeking to do injury to a person in return for an injury that might have been done by him.

(3) ‘Self-control’—absence of haughtiness, renouncing of pride due to superior learning &c.

(4) ‘Absention from unrighteous appropriation’:—this is well known.

(5) ‘Purity’—cleanliness of food etc.

(6) ‘Control of the Sense-organs’—not allowing them to be drawn even towards unforbidden things.

(7) ‘Discrimination’—true knowledge, following upon the refutation of all doubtful and contrary views.

(8) ‘Knowledge’ of the Soul. The difference between ‘discrimination’ and ‘knowledge’ is that the former refers to Acts, and the latter to the Soul.

In view of this tautology, some people read ‘Dhīvidyā’ (wise discrimination). But this is not right; specially as we have explained the difference between the two.

The rest are well known.

‘Absence of anger’ is not permitting anger to arise when there is an occasion for it, and ‘forgiveness’ is not doing harm to others even when they may have done harm to one.—(92).

(verses 6.87-93)

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.87].

**(verse 6.92)
**

‘Dhṛtiḥ’—‘Fortitude, calmness even on the loss of wealth and such other calamities’;—‘firmness of purpose in the discharge of duties’ (Nārāyaṇa and Nandana).

‘Damaḥ’—‘Humility’ (Medhātithi);—‘patience under sufferings’ (Govindarāja and Nārāyaṇa);—‘subjugation of the mind’ (Kullūka and Rāghavānanda).

‘Dhīḥ’—‘True knowledge, free from doubts and errors (Medhātithi and Govindarāja);—‘knowledge of the true meaning of the śāstras’ (Kullūka and Rāghvānanda);—Nārāyaṇa and Nandana, reading ‘hrīḥ’, explain it as ‘modesty’.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 972), which explains ‘śaucam’ as ‘purity of mind and body’,—‘dhīḥ’ as ‘discrimination of right and wrong’,—‘dhṛtiḥ’ as ‘keeping the mind from going astray’,—‘damaḥ’ as ‘controlling of the mind by means of the Kṛcchra and other austerties’. It adds that this verse enumerates the duties common to all the four orders;—in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 16a);—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 13), which has the following notes;—‘Dhṛti’, firmness,—‘kṣamā’ is nonperturbation of the mind even when wronged,—‘dama’ is control of the ‘mind’,—‘asteya’ is non-appropriation of what is not given,—‘śauca’ is cleanliness, both internal and external,—‘indriyanigraha’ is keeping the senses from all forbidden objects,—‘hrī’ (which is its reading for ‘dhī’) is cessation from improper acts,—‘vidyā’ is self-knowledge—‘satya’ is saying what is true, which should be agreeable also,—‘akrodha’ is freedom from anger.

Vaśiṣṭha (10.30).—‘To avoid backbiting, jealousy, pride, self-consciousness, unbelief, dishonesty, self-praise, blaming others, deceit, covetousness, delusion, anger, and envy is considered to be the duty of all orders.’

Yājñavalkya (3.66).—‘Truthfulness, abstention from unrighteous appropriation and anger, modesty, purity, discrimination, steadiness, self-control, control over sense-organs and learning—these have been declared to be universal dharma.’

Arthaśāstra (p. 30).—‘To all men—desisting from injuring others, truthfulness, purity, freedom from jealousy and cruelty and forgiveness.’

Kāmandaka (3.34-36).—‘Not to find no fault with others, to observe his own duties, to show compassion for the distressed, to address sweet words to all, to save friends even at the cost of his life, to welcome enemies coming to the house, to practise charity commensurate with his resources, to be against sufferings, to conciliate estranged friends, to treat kindly and obey the wishes of all relations,—these are the characteristics of the high-minded.’

धृतिर् नाम यथाशास्त्रम् अवस्थानम् आत्मगुनाद् यतो भवति सा धृतिः । क्षमा चित्तसंक्षोभहेतुष्व् अप्रतिक्रियापराधमर्षनेन । दमस् तु द्वन्द्वाभिमुख्यम्, शास्त्रविहिताभ्यासं दमं मन्यन्ते च । परद्रव्येष्व् आत्मसंयमो ऽस्तेयम् । आहारादिशुद्धिः शौचम् । इन्द्रियसंयमो नाम इन्द्रियविषयेष्व् अविरुद्धेष्व् अप्रसङ्गं यथाविषयम् । विज्ञानं शस्त्रात् संशयादिप्रतिपक्षरहितं धीः । विद्या वेदाभ्यासः । सत्यम् प्रसिद्धम् । अक्रोधः सत्स्व् अपि संक्षोभहेतुषु चित्तस्याविकारः । पूर्वत्रोत्पन्नस्य क्रोधस्य कार्यानारंभः क्षमेत्य् उक्तः, इह त्व् अनुत्पत्तिर् एव क्रोधस्येति विशेषः । सर्वं चैतच् छास्त्रविहितम् अपि सत् सुखावभोधनार्थं पुनः संक्षिप्योक्तम् ॥ ६.९२ ॥

परिचिन्त्यमानश् च सर्वो ऽयं यमनियमाधीनेति तत्फलविवक्षयेदम् आह ।

092 Contentment, forgiveness, self-control, abstention from unrighteously appropriating anything, (obedience to the rules of) purification, coercion of the organs, wisdom, knowledge (of the supreme Soul), truthfulness, and abstention from anger, (form) the tenfold law.

Those Brāhmaṇas, who properly study the ten forms of duty, and having studied them, follow them in practice, reach the highest state.—(93).

पूर्वस्य विधेः फलकथनम् । अध्ययनात् फलश्रुतिर् अनुष्ठानश्रुत्यर्था ॥ ६.९३ ॥

This describes the reward of what has just been enjoined. The mention of the reward of study is meant to eulogise the actual performance.—(93).

(verses 6.87-93)

See Comparative notes for [Verse 6.87].

संन्यासक्रमार्थम् अधुनेदम् उच्यते ।

093 Those Brahmanas who thoroughly study the tenfold law, and after studying obey it, enter the highest state.

The twice-born person, performing, with collected mind, the ten-fold Duty, and having duly learnt the Vedānta texts, and become free from debts, should take to Renunciation.—(94).

संन्यसेद् अनृणः । यदा ऋणत्रयम् अपाकीर्णं तदा संन्यास इत्य् एवमर्थम् एतत् । समानकाले प्रव्रज्यायां नाधिक्रियते । एवं संन्यासे ऽपि । वेदान्तान् विधिवत् । अविदितवेदान्तार्थस्य नास्ति संन्यासः । यद्य् अपि स्वाध्यायविध्यनुष्ठानाक्षिप्तं कर्म विधिशास्त्रवद् वेदान्तज्ञानम् अपि, स्वाध्यायशब्दवाच्यत्वाविशेषात्, तथापि वेदान्तानां पुनर् उपन्यासो वेशेषार्थः । तत्परेण भवितव्यम् ।

• अथ संन्यसेद् इति कः शास्त्रार्थः । को ऽयं संन्यासो नाम ।

• ममेदम् इति परिग्रहत्यागः ।

• ननु “वेदसंन्यासिकाः” (म्ध् ६.८६) इत्य् उक्तम् । तत्रेदं प्रतीयते- वेदस्य वेदार्थस्य वा संन्यासः, न च वैदिककर्मसिद्ध्यर्था ये प्रतिग्रहादयस् तेषां संन्यासः ।

• “इदम् आनन्त्यम् इच्छताम्” (म्ध् ६.८४) इत्य् अध्ययनस्य ज्ञानप्राधान्ये ऽपि विहितत्वात् । अग्निहोत्रादीनां तु द्रव्यसाध्यत्वाद् असति ममकारे त्याग एव । स चायं धर्मापादको मृतभार्यस्य परनिष्ठस्य वा कृतसंप्रतिविधानस्य । वाजसनेयके हि पठ्यते “यदा प्रैष्यन् मन्यते ऽथ पुत्रम् आह” (बाउ १.५.१७) इत्यादि । अग्निसमारोपणं च तदा विहितम् अजीर्णस्य च “जरया ह वा एतस्मान् मुच्यते इत्य् आमनन्ति” । यानि चाद्रव्यसाध्यानि संध्योपासनादीनि नित्याग्निहोत्रादीनि तेषाम् अनिषेधात् तत्र आ अन्त्याद् उच्छ्वासाद् अधिकारः ॥ ६.९४ ॥

‘Being freed from debts, should take to Renunciation.’—This text is meant to lay down that Renunciation should come only after the three debts have been paid off. Just as all men are not entitled to go forth as a mendicant at the same period of their life, so with Renunciation also.

‘Having duly learnt the Vedānta texts’.—There is no renunciation for one who has not learnt what is contained in the Vedānta texts. Though the performance of Rites, as well as the learning of the Vedānta, are both implied in the injunction of ‘Vedic study’—both kinds of texts being equally ‘Veda,’—yet the learning of the Vedānta texts has been reiterated here for the purpose of laying special stress on it; the sense being that ‘the man shall devote himself entirely to it’.

“What is the actual meaning of the injunction.—‘shall take to Renunciation’? What is thia that is called ‘Renunciation’?”

‘Renunciation’ consists of abandoning the notion that ‘this is mine’.

“What have been referred to above are the ‘Renouncers of the Veda’, from which it would seem as if there were ‘renunciation’ of the ‘Veda’ or of ‘what is contained in the Veda’,—and not that of such acts as the accepting of gifts and the like, which are done for the purpose of enabling the man to perform the acts enjoined by the Veda.”

In verse 84 above it has been declared that the Veda is the ‘refuge for those seeking immortality’; so that Vedic study is enjoined even for that stage at which Knowledge (and not Action) becomes the predominating factor in one’s life. In as much as the Agnihotra and other rites are accomplished with the help of material substances, they naturally become renounced when there is no sense of property (the notion of mine). Such ‘renunciation’ is meritorious only for one whose wife is dead, or who, having made arrangements for the upkeep of bis Fires, concentrates his attention on the Supreme Self. We read in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad—‘when he thinks of going away, he says to his son &c. &c.,’ which lays down the handing over of the Fires. This renunciation of the Fires is enjoined also for the decrepit old man—‘By decrepitude does he become absolved from this.’ Those rites however which do not take the aid of material substances—such for instance as the Twilight Prayers, the daily Agnihotra and the like—the performance of these being not forbidden, one remains entitled to it till his very last breath.—(94).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 973);—and in Yatidharmasaṅgraha (p. 5).

प्रकरणाच् च वेदन्यासिकस्योच्यते । अन्ये तु प्रव्रजिष्यतो ऽप्य् आहुः । एवं च सति परित्यक्तसर्वबाह्यव्यापारः ॥ ६.९४ ॥

094 A twice-born man who, with collected mind, follows the tenfold law and has paid his (three) debts, may, after learning the Vedanta according to the prescribed rule, become an ascetic.

Having renounced all acts, and thrown off the taint of his acts, and studied the Veda with mind self-oontrolled, he shall live at ease under the protection of his son.—(95).

वेदम् अभ्यसेति वेदस्यात्यागम् आह । दर्शितम् एतत् । अभ्यस्यन्न् इति शतृप्रत्ययान्तपाठो वा । पुत्रैश्वर्ये सुखं वसेत् । पुत्रग्रहणम् उतपन्नस्य पुत्रस्य । अन्यो ऽपि यस् तत्स्थानः पौरादिस् तत्रापि युक्तो गृहान्तरन्यास इत्य् आहुः ॥ ६.९५ ॥

‘Having studied the Veda’;—this implies that the Veda shall not be given up. This has been already explained above.

The right reading would appear to be the present-participial form ‘abhyasyan,’ ‘studying.’

‘He shall live at ease under the protection of his son’;—i.e., if he has a son born to him; or of any other person who may be in the place of his son; such, for instance as his grandson. They say that in this case also one should retire to another house.—(95).

Vaśiṣṭha (10.26).—‘At his option, the Renunciate may dwell in the village,’

संन्यासप्रयोजम् इदानीं तदनुष्ठानप्ररोचनार्थम् आह ।

095 Having given up (the performance of) all rites, throwing off the guilt of his (sinful) acts, subduing his organs and having studied the Veda, he may live at his ease under the protection of his son.

Having thus renounced all rites, intent upon his own duty, free from longings, he destroys sin by his renunciation and attains the highest state.—(96).

स्वकार्यम् आत्मोपासनं परमं प्रधानम् अस्येति स्वकार्यपरमः । अस्पृहः मनसापि स्पृहा न क्वचित् कर्तव्या ॥ ६.९६ ॥

‘His oven duty’—meditation on the Soul; he for whom this is the highest duty.

‘Free from longings’—not entertaining a desire for anything, even in his mind—(96).

फलार्थवादो ऽयम्, फलविधिर् वा ॥ ६.९६ ॥

096 He who has thus given up (the performance of) all rites, who is solely intent on his own (particular) object, (and) free from desires, destroys his guilt by his renunciation and obtains the highest state.

Thus has the fourfold duty of the Brāhmaṇa been expounded to you, which is conducive to imperishable rewards after death. Now listen to the duty of Kings.—(97.)

चतुर्विधो धर्मश् चातुराश्रम्यम् । ब्राह्मणस्य सर्वम् एतद् विहितम् ।

• ननु च “एवं गृहाश्रमे स्थित्वा विधिवत् स्नातको द्विजः” (म्ध् ६.१) इति द्विजग्रहणम् उपक्रमे श्रुतम् । तस्य चानुपजातविरोधित्वात् त्रैवर्णिकार्थिता निश्चिता । अतश् चेदं ब्राह्मणग्रहणं त्रैवर्णिकप्रदर्शनार्थम् एव युक्तम् । यद्य् एकवाक्यतोपक्रमोपसंहार्योर् न स्यात् तदा नैवं स्यात्⁶³ । एकवाक्यत्वे तु बलवद् उपक्रमार्थः शक्यः प्रतिपत्तुम् ।

• कृत्स्नवाक्यपर्यालोचनया यो ऽर्थः स निश्चीयते । अतो द्विजग्रहणं ब्राह्मणपरतयोपसंहर्तव्यम् । अस्ति ब्राह्मणस्य द्विजातित्वम्, न तु सर्वेषु द्विजातिषु ब्राह्मण्यम् । अत्रापि द्विजशब्दार्थे संभवति नन्वयिनि लक्षणा न्याय्या । तथा च महाभारते शूद्रस्यापि त्रय आश्रमाः श्रूयन्ते- “शुश्रूषाकृतकृत्यस्य” इति उपक्रम्य “आश्रमा विहिताः सर्वे वर्जयित्वा निरामिषम्” (म्भ् १२.६३.१२–१३) । पारिव्राज्यम् इत्य् आर्थः । नैवं तस्यायम् अर्थः, सर्व आश्रमास् तु न कर्तव्याः । किं तर्हि, शुश्रूषयापत्योत्पादनेन च सर्वाश्रमफलं लभते । द्विजातीन् शुश्रूषमाणो गार्हस्थ्येन सर्वाश्रमफलं लभते, परिव्राजकफलं मोक्षं वर्जयित्वा ।

• अतो ब्राह्मणधर्म एव चातुराश्रम्यम् इति सिद्धम् ॥ ६.९७ ॥

इति मानवे धर्मशास्त्रे भृगुप्रोक्तायां संहितायां

षष्ठो ऽध्यायः ॥

इति भट्टवीरस्वामिसूनोर् भट्टमेधातिथिकृतौ

मनुभाष्ये षष्ठो ऽध्यायः ॥

‘Fourfold Duty’—pertaining to the four life-stages; all this has been expounded for the Brāhmaṇa.

“At the outset the text has spoken of the twice-born person, in the opening verse—‘Having thus lived the life of the. Householder, the accomplished twice-born person &c. &c.’, and it has been decided that the term stands for all the three castes, as there is no sort of incongruity involved in this. Under the circumstances, the term ‘brāhmaṇa’ of the present verse should also be taken as standing for all the three castes. There would be a justification for denying this only if the entire Discourse did not form one organic whole, beginning from the opening verse and ending with the present verse. As a matter of fact, the opening verse is perfectly amenable to being construed with this last verse (the whole discourse thus forming one organic whole); so that it is quite open to us to take this verse as referring to what has been mentioned in the opening verse.”

As a matter of fact, the sentence is regarded as having that meaning which is found to be expressed by it, after a thorough consideration of the sentence as a whole. And in this way, it is distinctly more reasonable to take the term ‘twice-born person’ (of the opening verse) us standing for the Brāhmaṇa (rather than the other wav). Because every ‘Brāhmaṇa’ also is ‘twice-born’, but every ‘twice-born person’ is not a ‘Brāhmaṇa’. So that the term ‘twice-born’ being capable of being directly applied to the Brāhmaṇa, it cannot be right to take the term ‘Brāhmaṇa’ as indirectly indicating the wider circle of twice-born persons.

“But in the Mahābhārata we find three life-stages laid down for the Śūdra also;—having started with the words ‘for the Śūdra who has accomplished all his work, there is attendance, it goes on to say ‘all the life-stages have been prescribed for him, except the Nirāmiṣa’—that is Renunciation.”

This is not right. Such is not the meaning of the text quoted; what it means is as follows—‘the Śūdra should not have recourse to the four stages, he obtains the reward of all the stages by means of service and the begetting of children’;—which means that—‘during Householdership he obtains, by means of serving the twice-born men, the rewards of all stages, with the sole exception of Liberation, which is the reward of Renunciation.’

From this it follows that the Four Life-stages are meant for the Brāhmaṇa only.—(97)

Thus ends the Bhāṣya on Discourse VI.

Printed by Rameshwar Pathak at the Tara Printing Works, Benares.

Buhler is not right in asserting that “according to Medhātithi the word ‘brāhmaṇā’ is not intended to exclude other Aryans (dvijas)”.—He has evidently been misled by the words in which Medhātithi has set forth an objection to the text using the word ‘Brāhmaṇa’. See Translation.

The first half of this verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 3.57) in support of the view that the Brāhmaṇa alone is entitled to enter the fourth stage of the Renunciate;—in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 564) to the same effect;—in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 176),—which says that ‘brāhmaṇa’ here stands for all the twice-born persons;—and in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 65) which quotes ‘my grand-father’ to the effect that ‘brāhmaṇa’ stands for all twice-born men,—while it itself favours the view that it stands for the Brāhmaṇa only.

आगमः सत्य् अपि द्विजातित्वे । तथा च वाजसनेयकं रहस्यब्राह्मणम् इदमर्थं भवति- “ब्राह्मणाः प्रव्रजन्ति” एवमाद्य् उक्तो वर्णाश्रमधर्मः । तद्व्यतिक्रमनिमित्तस् त्व् इदानीं प्रायश्चित्तलक्षणो वक्तव्यो ऽपि स नोच्यते, तत्संरक्षणहेतोः पार्तिवधर्मस्यानभिधानात् । एवं च सति यः श्रद्दधानतया यथाशस्त्रं गुरुम् उपस्थास्यते तस्य व्यतिकर्माभावात् प्रायश्चित्तानधिकार एव, इतरस्य तु राजदण्डभयात् । यः पुनर् अनयोः राजाचार्ययोः शासनातिगो भविष्यति तं प्रत्य् उपदेशः प्रायश्चित्तस्य युज्यते । यतो ऽर्थक्रमाद् एवैतस्मात् प्रायश्चित्तानि प्रोत्सार्य राजधर्मा एव तावच् छिष्यन्त इति ॥ ६.९७ ॥

ऋजुविमलस्य कृतौ मनुशास्त्रविवरणे षष्ठो ऽध्यायः ।

097 Thus the fourfold holy law of Brahmanas, which after death (yields) imperishable rewards, has been declared to you; now learn the duty of kings.