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 鈥楧harma鈥�, 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...
Verse 4.173
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:
啶う啶� 啶ㄠぞ啶む啶え啶� 啶啶む啶班啶粪 啶� 啶氞啶む 啶啶む啶班啶粪 啶ㄠお啷嵿い啷冟し啷� 啷�
啶� 啶む啶掂啶� 啶む 啶曕啶む啶洁ぇ啶班啶 啶曕ぐ啷嵿い啷佮ぐ啷嵿き啶掂い啶� 啶ㄠた啶粪啶げ啶� 啷� 啷оキ啷� 啷�yadi n膩tmani putre峁 na cet putre峁 napt峁涐梗u |
na tveva tu k峁泃o'dharma岣� karturbhavati 苍颈峁丑补濒补岣� || 173 ||If not on himself, then on his sons,鈥攊f not on his sons, then on his grandsons (falls the punishment); an unrighteousness, once committed, never fails to bring its consequences to the perpetrator.鈥�(173)
惭别诲丑腻迟颈迟丑颈鈥檚 commentary (尘补苍耻产丑腻峁补):
鈥淚t is not right that the consequences of acts done by one person should be described as falling on others. As a matter of fact, all Vedic acts bring their fruits to the person who performs them. The principle of the 痴补颈艣惫腻苍补谤补 sacrifice (whereby the fruits of the sacrifice accrue to the son of the performer) cannot be held to be applicable to the present case, as there is no direct assertion to that effect. In connection with the acts dealt with in the present context, there is no assertion to the effect that their consequences accrue to the performer鈥檚 son.鈥�
True; but when the son suffers pain, it causes the father still greater pain; so that, in that case also, the resultant suffering would fall upon the perpetrator himsef (himself?). As regards the son also, the said suffering may be said to come to him by virtue of some past misdeed of his son; and there would be nothing incongruous in this.
The same holds good regarding 鈥�grandsons鈥� also.
鈥�碍峁泃辞-诲丑补谤尘补岣�.鈥欌�擶hether the component words be read as 鈥�碍峁泃补岣�-诲丑补谤尘补岣�鈥� or 鈥�碍峁泃补岣�-补诲丑补谤尘补岣�,鈥� the resultant conjunct form would be the same鈥斺��碍峁泃辞-诲丑补谤尘补岣�;鈥� hence both dharma (righteousness) and adharma (unrighteousness) are meant to be spoken of (as not failing in bringing up their consequences)鈥�(173).
Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha
惭别诲丑腻迟颈迟丑颈 (P. 356, l. 20)鈥斺��痴补颈艣惫腻苍补谤补ny膩ya岣�鈥欌�擳his refers to 惭墨尘腻峁僺腻-蝉奴迟谤补, 4.38 et. seq, where it is stated that though the 痴补颈艣惫腻苍补谤补 sacrifice is performed by the Father, yet its results accrue to the Son.
This verse is quoted in 痴墨谤补尘颈迟谤辞诲补测补 (Paribh膩峁Ｄ�, p. 68)鈥攚hich adds 鈥�碍峁泃辞诲丑补谤尘补岣�鈥� should be construed as 鈥�K峁泃a岣� adharma鈥�, as the context deals with Adharma,鈥斺赌�na 苍颈峁丑补濒补岣�,鈥� i.e., unless it is expiated.