365bet娱乐

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

啶忇い啶︵�曕�嵿し啶班ぎ啷囙い啶距�� 啶� 啶溹お啶ㄠ�� 啶掂�嵿く啶距す啷冟い啶苦お啷傕ぐ啷嵿さ啶苦�曕ぞ啶�啷� 啷�
啶膏え啷嵿ぇ啷嵿く啶�啷嬥ぐ啷嵿さ啷囙う啶掂た啶︵�� 啶掂た啶�啷嵿ぐ啷� 啶掂�囙う啶�啷佮ぃ啷嵿く啷囙え 啶�啷佮�溹�嵿く啶む�� 啷� 啷�啷� 啷�

别迟补诲补办峁�a谤补尘et膩峁� ca japan vy膩h峁泃ip奴rvik膩m |
sandhyayorvedavid vipro vedapu峁噛ena yujyate || 78 ||

Reciting, at the two twilights, this syllable and this verse, preceded by the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉, the Br膩hma峁嘺, learned in the Veda, becomes endowed with Vedic merit.鈥�(78)

 

惭别诲丑腻迟颈迟丑颈鈥檚 commentary (尘补苍耻产丑腻峁�y补):

Though this verse is syntactically connected with the section dealing with the Injunction of Vedic study, yet it is to be taken as embodying the injunction of recitation during the Twilight-Prayers; and as regards the 鈥�骋腻测补迟谤墨鈥�-verse itself, the mention of it (in the present verse) is merely for the purposes of reference (the injunction of its recitation having already gone before), while that of the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补 and the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉 forms the direct injunction of the recitation of these, which has not been enjoined anywhere else.

To this some people make the following objection:鈥�

鈥淭his cannot be regarded as an Injunction pertaining to the Twilight Prayers; as these do not form the subject-matter of the present context. Even if it was an injunction, it could only be one pertaining to the Religious Student; as it is the Student whose duties are being propounded in the present context. But this is not possible, since the text has added the qualification 鈥�learned in the Veda鈥�; and certainly the student just initiated could never be 鈥榣earned in the Veda.鈥� Further, the text also adds a particular fruit鈥斺��becomes endowed with Vedic merit鈥�; while the Injunction of the Twilight-Prayers is a compulsory one. Then again, we do not understand what is this fruit, called 鈥榁edic merit鈥� which is described as proceeding from the recitation. If what is meant is the merit proceeding from the recitation of the Veda, and if the attaining of this merit is what is meant by being 鈥榚ndowed with Vedic merit鈥欌赌攖hen, in regard to this view it has to be noted that so far as the Injunction of Veda-reciting is concerned鈥攚hich forms the subject-matter of the present context,鈥攖here can be no other result proceeding from it, except the understanding of the meaning of tho Vedic texts; for the simple reason that no such result has been anywhere mentioned. Further, in as much as there is a perceptible result in the shape of the comprehension of meaning, there can be no room for the assuming of any other results. The injunction of Veda-reciting that there is for the Householder and others,鈥攊n the words 鈥榙ay after day one should recite the Veda鈥欌赌攖his also is a compulsory one; and the results mentioned in connection with it, in the shape of 鈥榤ilk, and honey, etc.,鈥� this is only a valedictory supplement. From all this it is clear that the present verse cannot be regarded as an Injunction (of recitation during the Twilight Prayers). Specially as, if it were taken as an Injunction, all the above difficulties will have to be explained. On the other band, if the verse be taken as a valedictory reference, then the term 鈥榬eciting鈥� could be taken as referring to the Reciting of the Veda, which forms the subject-matter of the context; and in that case it would be possible to construe the term 鈥榁edic merit鈥� also in some way or the other.鈥�

Our answer to the above is as follows:鈥�

It has been already explained that the implications of context are always set aside by those of Syntactical Connection; and for the very reason that the terms 鈥榣earned in the Veda鈥� and 鈥楾wilight prayers鈥� are not connected with the subject-matter of the context,鈥攖he present Injunction is to be taken as pertaining to something else. The Injunction is simply to the effect that during the two Twilight Prayers one should pronounce the three expressions (Om鈥敵�腻惫颈迟谤�� verse鈥�痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉); and the term 鈥榣earned in the Veda鈥� is merely descriptive?

鈥淏ut as a matter of fact, it is possible only for persons in the Householder and other stages to be 鈥榣earned in the Veda鈥�; the Student can never be so.

What has this possibility got to do with the matter? If the term is taken as merely descriptive of what is already known from other sources, then the injunction contained in the verse becomes applicable to people in all stages of life. While if the term 鈥榣earned in the Veda鈥� were taken as a significant epithet of the Nominative agent (of the act enjoined), then the student would not be entitled to the act.

鈥淲hy should the term be taken as merely descriptive?鈥�

For the simple reason that there would (otherwise) be a syntactical split. The injunction pertaining to the Injunction of the Twilight Prayers, what has to be enjoined regarding it is the reciting of the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补 and the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉, which has not been enjoined anywhere else, Now, if in addition to these, something else were taken as enjoined,鈥攊n the form of 鈥榖eing learned in the Veda,鈥欌赌攖hen there would be a syntactical split [the sentence in question containing two injunctions, (a) 鈥榮hould recite the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补, etc.,鈥� and (b) 鈥榮hould learn the Veda鈥橾; and it is not legitimate to enjoin (by means of a single sentence) several details pertaining to an act already enjoined. Nor is it possible (as another alternative) to take the mention of the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补 and the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉 as merely descriptive [because their injunction has not been met with anywhere else].

From all this it follows that what the Text means is as follows:鈥斺�業n connection with the reciting of the 骋腻测补迟谤墨 that has been enjoined in relation to the Twilight Prayers, there is this further detail that the said recitation is to lie preceded by the uttering of the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补 and the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉.鈥�

The mention of the 鈥�叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺' is only by way of illustration.

It has been argued above that鈥斺�渢he text speaks of a result, while the Injunction of the Twilight Prayers is a compulsory one.鈥�

But what inconsistency is there in this? While what is enjoined is a compulsory act, the result mentioned may follow from the further detail mentioned in the text; the meaning being that 鈥榯he said result follows from the previously enjoined Twilight Prayer, when it is accompanied by the recitation of the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补 and the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉. Just as when the ordinary Agnihotra is performed with the water brought over in the milking vessel, there comes about the particular result in the shape of cattle; and this in (?) accordance with the injunction that 鈥榝or one desiring cattle water should be brought in the milking vessel.鈥�

It is on the strength of this last injunction that we have made bold to say what we have said above. In reality the injunction contained in the verse is not an optional one at all (meant only for those desiring the particular result mentioned). Specially as another 厂尘峁泃颈 (Y膩j帽avalkya, 1. 23) clearly lays it down as a compulsory injunction鈥斺�極ne should recite the 骋腻测补迟谤墨 along with the 艢颈谤补蝉, preceded by the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉.鈥�

Further, you have yourself argued that the exact nature of the result (鈥榁edic merit鈥�) cannot be ascertained (which is an argument against the text being taken as laying down a result). As a matter of fact, what 鈥榁edic merit鈥� means is as follows:鈥斺�楾he merit that has been described in the Veda as resulting from the saying of the Twilight Prayers accrues to man only when he recites all the three expressions鈥攁nd not by reciting the 骋腻测补迟谤墨 only.鈥� 鈥�笔耻峁噛补,鈥� 鈥�merit,鈥� is excellence. Since 厂尘峁泃颈s are based upon the Veda, what is mentioned in the 厂尘峁泃颈s is also called 鈥榁eda-merit,鈥� which last expression stands for the 鈥�merit of the Veda.鈥�

鈥淲hat is the merit of the Veda?鈥�

That (merit) which is expounded by the Veda. The merit that results from the Veda being recited may also be called 鈥榯he merit of the Veda鈥�; but by virtue of the specific relationship, it is what is expounded by the Veda,鈥攁nd what is produced by it鈥攖hat should be spoken of as 鈥榤erit of the Veda.鈥� As for the producing of merit, this is done by other things also, such as sacrificial performances and the like; while the expounding of it is done by the Veda only.

Some people have taken the last foot of the Verse to mean as follows鈥斺�淲hat has been enjoined as compulsory Vedic Study becomes fulfilled merely by reciting the three expressions during the Twilight Prayers.鈥�

But this is not right. For if the present text meant this, then it would be providing an option to what has been laid down as the compulsory 鈥榁edic Study鈥�; and this would mean the partial rejection of this study. But so long as we can avoid it, it is not right to admit the rejection of any injunction.

鈥�This syllable鈥欌赌攔efers to the syllable 鈥�辞峁�.鈥�

鈥淏ut this is not a single letter, containing as it does, two or three syllables.鈥�

Our answer is that the term 鈥榮yllable鈥� here stands for 鈥榲owel-sound鈥� and 鈥榗ontact with consonants.鈥� Hence the term denotes that which forms the subject-matter of the context.

鈥�This Verse鈥欌赌�i.e., the 厂腻惫颈迟谤墨 verse 鈥�tat saviturvare峁噛am, etc.鈥�

鈥�Preceded by the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉;鈥欌赌�i.e., that before which the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉 have been uttered. Here only the three 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉 are meant,鈥攖hese alone having been mentioned in the present context (in verse 76),鈥攁nd not the seven, ending with 鈥�Satyam.鈥�

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

惭别诲丑腻迟颈迟丑颈 (笔.111,1.11)鈥�Pr膩pte hi karma峁噄, &c.鈥欌赌擳his is a paraphrase of Kum膩rila鈥檚 dictum鈥�

pr膩pte karma峁噄 n膩neko vidh膩tu峁� 艣akyate gu峁嘺岣� |
apr膩pte tu vidh墨yante vahavo'pyekapatnata岣� |

This verse is quoted in 础辫补谤腻谤办补 (p. 50), which explains 鈥�别迟补诲补办峁�a谤补尘鈥� as the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补;鈥攁nd in 狈颈迟测腻肠丑腻谤补辫补诲诲丑补迟颈, (p. 189).

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(Verses 78-79)

艢补峁卥丑补 (础辫补谤腻谤办补, p. 1220).鈥斺�楾he Br膩hma峁嘺 stealing gold, or killing a Br膩hma峁嘺, or violating the teacher鈥檚 bed, or drinking wine, becomes absolved from the sin by repeating the 骋腻测补迟谤墨 a lakh of times.鈥�

贬腻谤墨迟补 (Do.).鈥斺�楾he syllable om, the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉 and the 厂腻惫颈迟谤墨 constitute the S膩vitra Pavitra, by which one becomes absolved from all sins; by repeating it a hundred times he becomes purified in a month; repeating it ten thousand times he has his soul entirely purified of all sins.鈥�

痴颈峁ａ箛耻蝉尘峁泃颈, 55.12鈥擺reproduces the words of Manu].

叠补耻诲丑腻测补苍补-顿丑补谤尘补蝉奴迟谤补, 4.6.鈥斺�楾hey declare that seated on ku艣a-grass, holding ku艣a-blades and water in the hand, he should repeat the 骋腻测补迟谤墨 a thousand times.鈥�

叠补耻诲丑腻测补苍补-顿丑补谤尘补蝉奴迟谤补, 2.29.鈥斺�楤reath-suspensions, accompanied by the 痴测腻丑峁泃颈蝉 and the 笔谤补峁嘺惫补, repeated sixteen times daily, purify even the embryo-murderer, in a month鈥檚 time.鈥�

痴补蝉颈峁ａ弓丑补-蝉尘峁泃颈, 36-5 [reproduces the foregoing text of Baudh膩yana].

痴补蝉颈峁ａ弓丑补 (础辫补谤腻谤办补, p. 1220).鈥斺�極n the commingling of all kinds of sin, the best purification consists in repeating the 骋腻测补迟谤墨 ten thousand times.鈥�

狈峁泂颈峁僪补辫耻谤腻峁嘺 (V墨ramitrodaya-膧hnika, pp. 254-255).鈥斺�楬aving offered the Evening Prayers, while the sun is still visible, he should go on repeating the 骋腻测补迟谤墨 till the stars become visible.鈥�