Verse 2.87

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

जप्येनैव तु संसिध्येद् ब्राह्मणो नात्र संशयः ।
कुर्यादन्यन्न वा कुर्यान् मैत्रो ब्राह्मण उच्यते ॥ ८७ ॥

japyenaiva tu saṃsidhyed brāhmaṇo nātra saṃśayaḥ |
kuryādanyanna vā kuryān maitro brāhmaṇa ucyate || 87 ||

It is by means of repeating mantras that the Brāhmaṇa succeeds;—there is no doubt in this. he may, or may not, do anything else, one comes to be called a Brāhmaṇa if he is of a friendly disposition.—(87)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

By means of repeating Mantras alone the Brāhmaṇa succeeds;—i.e., acquires all desirable results,and also attains Brahman.

No such doubt on this point should be entertained in the mind, as—“How can one acquire, by means of Mantra-repetition alone, such results as are obtained only by means of such elaborate acts as the Jyotiṣṭoma and the rest, which cost much effort, or from deep and prolonged meditations?”—Because as a matter of fact, such success does actually follow.

‘He may do anything else.’—In the shape of the Jyotiṣṭoma and other non-com pulsory acts, —‘or not do it.’—For ‘one comes to be called a Brahmaṇa if lie is of a friendly disposition.’ ‘Maitra’ is the same as ‘mitra.’ The Brahmaṇa should be friendly to all living beings; and how can there be any friendliness (benevolence) in such acts as the killing of animals during the Agnīṣomīya offerings?

This passage is purely valedictory; it is not a prohibition of the killing of animals during sacrifices; because it is only supplementary to what has gone before (and as such it cannot be taken as an independent prohibition), and because such killing is directly enjoined in the Veda itself.

Thus ends the process of Repeating Mantras.—(87)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

‘Maitraḥ’—‘of friendly disposition (towards all living beings)’—Medhātithi;—‘worshipper of Mitra, Sun’ (suggested by Rāghavāṇanda).

‘Brāhmaṇaḥ’—‘one who will be absorbed in Brahman’ (Kullūka);—‘the best of Brāhmaṇas’ (Rāghavānanda);—

Buhler remarks—“Medhātithi and Govindarāja take the last clause differently: it is declared (in the Veda that) a Brāhmaṇa (shall be) a friend (of all creatures).” But in Medhātithi we find no mention of the Veda here.

The verse is clearly meant to be deprecatory of Animal-sacrifices, which involve the killing of animals, whereas the Brāhmaṇa should be friendly to all creatures.

This verse is quoted in Yatidharmasaṃgraha (p. 127).

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Viṣṇu-smṛti, 55.21 and Vasiṣṭha, 26.12—[reproduce the words of Manu].