365bet

Manusmriti with the Commentary of Medhatithi

by Ganganatha Jha | 1920 | 1,381,940 words | ISBN-10: 8120811550 | ISBN-13: 9788120811553

This is the English translation of the Manusmriti, which is a collection of Sanskrit verses dealing with ‘Dharma�, a collective name for human purpose, their duties and the law. Various topics will be dealt with, but this volume of the series includes 12 discourses (adhyaya). The commentary on this text by Medhatithi elaborately explains various t...

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

पाठीनरोहितावाद्य� नियुक्तौ हव्यकव्ययो� �
राजीवान् सिंहतुण्डाश्� सशल्काश्चै� सर्वशः � १६ �

pāṭhīnarohitāvⲹ niyuktau havyakavyayo� |
rājīvān siṃhatuṇḍāśca saśalkāścaiva sarvaśa� || 16 ||

The ‘ṻīԲ� and the ‘Rohita� are fit to be eaten when used as offerings to gods or Pitṛs; the ‘ī�, the ‘ṃhٳṇḍ� and the ‘ś�,� (one may ea�) on all occasions�(16)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (Գܲṣy):

ṻīԲ� and �Rohita’Ĕtwo particulars kinds of fish-having been mentioned as fit to be offered to Gods and to Pitṛs, the eating of these is permitted on the occasion of the performance of Ś and other rites; and not in the course of ordinary daily food. As for the ī, the �ṃhٳṇḍ� and the �ś첹� fish on the other hand, these are to be eaten �on all occasions�; i.e. they may be eaten also on occasions other than the offerings to Gods and to Pitṛs.

ī� some people regard this as standing for lotus-coloured fish. Others explain it as standing for those fish that are marked by lines.

ṃhٳṇḍ,’Ĕthose having a lion-like face.

ś첹’Ĕis the same as the fish called �Shakalin.’�(16).

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

Medhātithi and Govindarāja explain the meaning to be that “The ṻīԲ and the Rohita are to be eaten only when offered to the gods or Pitṛs, and not ordinarily, while those enumerated in the second half are to be eaten �� at all times.”—Kullūka objects to this explanation on the following grounds:—There is no authority for the view that the two kinds of fish are to be offered at Śs, eaten only by the person invited at it, not by the performer of the Ś or other persons, while the other kinds are to be eaten by others also;—in fact all other authorities have placed all those mentioned here on the same footing. Kullūka’s own explanation is as follows:—‘The ṻīԲ and the Rohita should be eaten, as also the ī and the rest�;—and the phrase �niyuktau havyakavyo�� he takes as standing by itself, in the sense that ‘all things that are forbidden may be eaten, when one is threatened with starvation, after they have been offered to the gods and Pitṛs.�

This verse is quoted in Ѿṣa (on 1.178), which goes one farther than Medhātithi, and adds that those enumerated in the second line also are to be eaten only when offered at Śs and sacrifices;—and in īٰǻ岹ⲹ (Āhnika, p. 547), which adds the following notes:—�� means ‘are to be eaten’Ĕwhen they are �niyuktau’�i.e., used for the purpose of Ś and other offerings;—�ṻīԲ� is that which is also called �Chandraka,� �ī� is red-coloured, �ṃhٳṇḍ,� is that which has its mouth like the lion’s, �ś첹� are fish covered with shell-like skin.

It is quoted in ṛtٳٱ (p. 449);—in (Ś, p. 577);—and in ṛtǻ (p. 300), which explains �niyuktau,� as employed for Ś and other purposes, and �� as ‘may be eaten,� �ī� as red-coloured.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 5.15-16)

See Comparative notes for Verse 5.15.

Let's grow together!

I humbly request your help to keep doing what I do best: provide the world with unbiased sources, definitions and images. Your donation direclty influences the quality and quantity of knowledge, wisdom and spiritual insight the world is exposed to.

Let's make the world a better place together!

Like what you read? Help to become even better: