Verse 2.172

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

नाभिव्याहारयेद् ब्रह्म स्वधानिनयनाद् ऋते ।
शूद्रेण हि समस्तावद् यावद् वेदे न जायते ॥ १७२ ॥

nābhivyāhārayed brahma svadhāninayanād ṛte |
śūdreṇa hi samastāvad yāvad vede na jāyate || 172 ||

He should hot pronounce Vedic texts, apart from the Svadhā-offering; because so long as he is not born in the Veda, he is equal to a śūdra.—(172)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The phrase ‘till the tying of the girdle’ has to be construed with this verse; or the intended limit may be taken as supplied by the commendatory statement contained in the second half—‘so long as he is not born in the Veda.’

‘Brahma’—Vedic text—‘he should not pronounce.’ This is an instruction to the father of the boy; the sense being that he should guard the child from pronouncing Vedic texts in the same manner as ho guards him from the drinking of wine and such other acts.

Some people interpret this prohibition of pronouncing Vedic texts to indicate the propriety of learning the Subsidiary Sciences before Upanayana. They further explain the causal affix (in ‘abhivyāhārayet’) to mean that the child should not be made by his father to pronouce Vedic texts, there is no harm done if the child himself pronounces a few indistinct words of the Veda.’

But this is not right; as we read in another Smṛti—‘He should not pronounce Vedic texts’ (Gautama, 2.5). And in the following commendatory statement also it is stated that ‘he is equal to a Śūdra,' which means that the child pronouncing Vedic texts is just as reprehensible as the Śūdra.

The term ‘svadhā’ stands for the food offered to Pitṛs; or, the term may stand for the ‘rites performed in honour of Pitṛs’.; and the term ‘svadhāninayana' means ‘that mantra by means of which the said food is offered or given’; e.g., such mantras as ‘śundhantām pitaraḥ’ and so forth. With the exception of such mantras, the boy should not pronounce any Vedic texts.

It is from this that we deduce the fact that the uninitiated boy should offer to his father libations of water, the ‘nava-śrāddha’; etc. That he is not entitled to the Pārvana and other śrāddhas follows from the fact of his still being without the ‘Fire.’ These latter shall be described under the section on ‘Piṇḍānrāhāryaka (?).’ We shall explain all this in full detail in Adhyāya III.—(172)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Smṛtitattva (I, p. 24) in support of the view that the uninitiated twice-born is like the Śūdra, and as such should not pronounce Vedic mantras except in Śrāddha;—again in the same work, on p. 795, to the same effect, where it adds the following notes:—‘svadḥā’ is śrāddha’, and ‘svadhāninayana’ means ‘that group of mantras by which the śrāddha is accomplished’ (‘svadhā śrāddham ninīyate yena mantrajātena’);—barring this group of mantras, he shall pronounce none other; in every other case the mantra would be recited for him by a Brāhmaṇa.—The same work (II, p. 383) quotes the verse again, in support of the view that the uninitiated boy also is entitled to recite Vedic mantras at śrāddhas;—where ‘abhivyāhārayet’ is explained as ‘vadet’, should pronounce, the causal affix ‘ṇich’ being used reflexively.

Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 327) quotes the second line, in support of the view that whenever the twice-born person is described as having the character of the Śūdra, it is by reason of his being not entitled to Vedic Study;—again on p. 348, where it is explained that ‘equality to the Śūdra’ is a ground for the man’s not being entitled to rites involving the use of Vedic mantras;—that this is so is indicated by the particle ‘hi,’ (which means because)...... In fact whenever a twice-born person is spoken of as being like the Śūdra, what is meant is that he is not entitled to the performance of rites involving the use of Vedic mantras.

It is quoted in Vyāvahāra Bālambhaṭṭi, (p. 656);—and in Nityācārapradīpa (p. 23), as laying down the law for the uninitiated.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Vaśiṣṭha (2.12).—‘In character, he should be regarded as a Śūdra, until he is born in the Veda.’

Baudhāyana (2.1.7).—‘Until he becomes born in the Veda, he remains, in character, equal to the Śūdra.’

Gautama (2.4, 5, 9).—‘The boy may urinate or stool as he pleases; for him there are no rules regarding water—sip-piug; he should not pronounce Vedic texts, except at offerings to Pitṛs.’

Viṣṇupurāṇa (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 327).—‘So long as the boy has not been initiated there is no harm done if he does not observe rules regarding what should or should not be eaten or what should or should not be spoken or regarding lying.’

Brahmapurāṇa (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra).—‘He may do and eat and say what he likes, short of committing degrading sins.’