Verse 2.137

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

पञ्चानां त्रिषु वर्णेषु भूयांसि गुणवन्ति च ।
यत्र स्युः सोऽत्र मानार्हः शूद्रोऽपि दशमीं गतः ॥ १३७ ॥

pañcānāṃ triṣu varṇeṣu bhūyāṃsi guṇavanti ca |
yatra syuḥ so'tra mānārhaḥ śūdro'pi daśamīṃ gataḥ || 137 ||

Among the three (higher) castes, he, in whom there are present most op these five, and of high degree, deserves (greater) respect; as also the Śūdra who has reached the tenth stage (of life).—(137)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Of these five’ grounds of respect;—he in whom there are ‘a larger number’—not all—‘deserves respect.’ And here the mere sequence (or posteriority) of the qualifications should not be much heeded. For instance, when one man possesses wealth and relations, and the other possesses only old age,—the former gets preference over the latter.

But even when there are several qualities present, if they are not of high degree,—while the single quality possessed by the other person is of very high degree,—then both are equal; and the larger number do not get over the latter (superior) qualification.

When the former verse uses the term ‘weightier,’ it only means superiority in comparison to one (not several) of the preceding ones.

When however in one person there are a larger number of preceding qualities and also of high degree,—of great excellence,—while in the other person there are present the same number of succeeding qualities,—so that the number of preceding and succeeding qualifications (possessed by the two men) are equal,—then, there is no getting over the one by the other, simply on the ground of precedence (in enumeration); in this case both are to he regarded as equal.

“Since what the text declares is that he is deserving of respect in whom the qualities are of high degree,—it would he right to conclude that in the case just mentioned where the two persons possess an equal number of qualities (hut the preceding ones are of higher degree), the presence of the preceding set should get over the other.”

Not so; the epithet ‘of high degree’ is meant to apply to the case where the two sets of qualities are equal; e.g., where the one as well as the other is possessed of learning, superiority belongs to one whose learning is of the superior order. Similarly with the other qualities.

‘Among the three Castes,’—i.e., among Brāhmaṇas, Kṣatriyas and Vaiśyas. If the said qualities, many in number and of high degree, belong to the Kṣatriya, then such a Kṣatriya deserves to be respected by the Brāhmaṇa possessed of inferior qualities, even though he belongs to the higher caste. The Vaiśya, similarly, is to be respected by the Kṣatriya.

Similarly by all the twice-born castes the Śūdra should be respected, ‘when he has reached the tenth stage.’ The ‘tenth’ stands for the last stage of life, and indicates extreme old age. Thus then, in case of the Śūdra, ‘wealth’ and ‘relations’ do not constitute grounds of respect, in relation to tho three higher castes. This is clear from the fact, that the Text specifies the ‘tenth stage.’ ‘Action’ and ‘Learning’ are not possible in the Śūdra; for the simple reason that he is not entitled to these.

‘Most’;—all that is meant by this is excess, not plurality of number (which would mean at least three); hence what is asserted applies to tho presence of qualities also. There is nothing to justify the notion that the term ‘bahu’ (from which ‘bhūyāmsi is derived’) denotes number. Further, the term actually used is ‘bhūyaḥ,’ not ‘bāhu’; and the former is often found to be used in the sense of excess, much: e.g., ‘bhūyāṅśchātra parihāro,’ ‘there is much that can be said in answer to this,’ ‘bhūyābhyudayena yokṣye,' ‘I shall become endowed with much prosperity.’ Nor is any significance meant to be attached to the plural number in ‘bhūyāmsi’; the plural number in this case denoting only kind, according to Pāṇini 3.2.58, which lays down that ‘when a kind or genus is spoken of, the plural number is optionally used.’ If significance were really meant to be attached to the plural number, then a person possessed of only one quality (of however high degree) would never be entitled to respect; and this would run counter to what we h ave learnt from the foregoing verse. Furthor, by speaking of —‘the Śūdra who has reached the tenth stage’—where mere age (only one quality) is mentioned as a ground of respect,—the Text has made it clear that no significance is meant to be attached to the plural number (in ‘bhūyāmsi’). Usage also points to the same conclusion.—(1.37)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted along with verse 136 in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 474), which adds the following explanation:—Among the three castes, Brāhmaṇa, Kṣatriya and Vaiśya, the person who possesses a greater amount of the preceding qualification (among the five mentioned in 136) is to be honoured more than one possessed of the succeeding one only. Thus a person possessed of greater wealth and superior relations is higher than one only older in age; one possessed of a higher degree of wealth, relations and age is higher than one superior in action only;—one possessed in a higher degree of wealth, relation, age and action is superior to one possessing learning only;—‘guṇavanti’ means superior; which means that between two persons possessing wealth, he is higher whose wealth is superior; and the ‘superiority’of wealth would consist in its having been acquired by lawful means and such other circumstaṇces. In the case of ‘relations,’ this superiority would consist in being more intimate and so forth;—in the case of ‘age’ it would consist in being very much older;—in that of ‘action,’ in its being equipped with all auxiliary details;—in that of ‘learning,’ in its being acquired in the prescribed manner.—‘Tenth stage’ stands for the age over ninety years; the hundred years of man’s life being divided into ten equal spans, the tenth one coming after the ninetieth year;—-when he has reached this age, the Śūdra also becomes entitled to honour at the hands of the twice-born.

The last foot of the verse regarding the ‘tenth stage’ is quoted on p. 453 also, as declaring the respectability of the Śūdra.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 159), where ‘daśamī’ is explained as ‘the last ten years of the hundred years’;—‘bhūyāṃsi’ as to number and ‘guṇavanti’ as to degree;—hence without considering the caste, one possessed of superior learning is to he respected by another possessed of less; or one who knows more subjects is to be respected by another knowing a lesser number; similarly in regard to ‘karma’ and other qualifications also;—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 48), which explains ‘daśamīm gataḥ’ as ‘over ninety years of age,’ and ‘pañchānām’ as ‘among learning and the rest’;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 106), which explains ‘daśamī’ as ‘the last part of hundred years, i. e. beyond ninety years,’ and adds that ‘old age’ is meant to be indicative of the presence of wealth and the rest also.

 

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Gautama-Dharmasūtra (10.6).—‘The Śūdra also if he has children and is over 80 years in age.’

Yājñavalkya (1.116).—‘When the said qualities (of Learning, etc.) are present in a very large degree, the Śūdra also deserves respect, when he has reached old age.’