Verse 3.100

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

शिलानप्युञ्छतो नित्यं पञ्चाग्नीनपि जुह्वतः ।
सर्वं सुकृतमादत्ते ब्राह्मणोऽनर्चितो वसन् ॥ १०० ॥

śilānapyuñchato nityaṃ pañcāgnīnapi juhvataḥ |
sarvaṃ sukṛtamādatte brāhmaṇo'narcito vasan || 100 ||

A Brāhmaṇa staying unhonoured (in one’s house) takes away all his merit, even though he be one who subsists by gathering harvest-droppings, or offers oblations into the five fires.—(100)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Even for one who is extremely poor it is not right to omit the honouring of the guest.

‘Harvest-droppings’— Ears of corn dropped in the fields after harvesting.

‘Gathering’—Collecting.

This is meant to indicate difficulty of livelihood in general.

‘Offers oblations into the five fires.’

What is meant by this is that, even if the householder is one who obeys all the injunctions of the scriptures, and he is also poor, and (therefore) does not honour, with food &c., the guest that happens to arrive,—then the said strict observance of the laws of livelihood becomes fruitless. Hence (it is said) that the guest ‘takes away all his merit’—i.e., nullities it;—if he ‘stays unhonoured.’ Hence one should honour the guest—this is the meaning of the injunction.

The term ‘slays’ indicates that the injunction pertains to one who arrives in the evening.

The ‘five fires’ are—The ‘Tretā’ (Three Sacrificial Fires), (4) the ‘Gṛhya’ (Domestic Fire) and (5) the ‘Sabhya’ (Social Fire).

“What is the fire called ‘sabhya,’ Social’?”

They offer the following explanation:—When one goes to another village, and cooks his food in the ordinary fire;—or, in the house of a rich man fire is lighted in several rooms for the alleviation of cold,—this is what is called the ‘sabhya,’ ‘social’, ‘fire’.

“In that case, what is the oblation that would be offered in such a fire? Since the rule is that⁽the gṛhya oblations are to be offered in that fire (which is set up after marriage or after succession)’ [ Gautama 5.7 & 8]”.

On the strength of the present verse itself they say that, when the man is away from home, he may offer the Vaiśvadeva oblations in the ordinary fire also; and they quote the Smṛti-text—‘wherever one happens to see a well-lighted flaming fire, he should offer into it oblations of dry paddy, or of vrīhi and yava.’

Our revered teachers, however, offer the following explanation:—It is in the Upaniṣads that the⁽science of the Five Fires’ has been described; these five forms of fire have been assumed; and what is called ‘oblation’ here is the act of recognising the fire and worshipping it in those forms. This worshipping has been recognised as leading to results superior to those accomplished by means of all the Śrauta rites. In connection with this, it has been declared that—‘the theft of gold, the drinking of wine, having intercourse with the teacher’s wife and one who kills the Brāhmaṇa,—all these four are fallen, as also one who has relations with these [ and even these sins are purified by the knowledge of the science of Five Fires].’

The result of all these five becomes lost if the guest is not honoured and is sent away; this exaggerated praise is meant to convey the idea that the said honouring of the guest is absolutely necessary.

In connection with the morning breakfast also there is the rule that the guest should be fed; but the omission of it in the evening entails the penalty of a higher expiatory site.

Some people do not take the phrase ‘to the best of his ability’ in the preceding verse as applying to the ‘food; and they assert the meaning to be that ‘guests should be honoured to the best of one’s ability—i.e., one or two or many (as many as one can).’—(100)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 355) in support of the view that—‘if a guest comes to one’s house with a view to getting food, and goes away without getting any, then all the rites that the master of the house performs, in honour of the Gods and the Pitṛs, become futile.’

The verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Āhnika, p. 441), which adds the following explanations:—‘Śilāt’ (which is the reading it adopts)—‘from the remnant of the gleanings dropped in the fields.’—‘uñchataḥ’—‘pickings’;—what is meant is that even a poor man should entertain his guest.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Viṣṇu (67.33).—‘If a guest goes away disappointed from the home of any person, he leaves behind him all his sins and takes away all the merit of that householder.’

Parāśara (1.45.46).—‘If a guest goes away from one’s house disappointed, his Pitṛs do not partake of anything in that house for fifteen years. If one disappoints a guest, one’s libations are futile, even though made with a thousand loads of fuel and a hundred jars of butter.’

Mahābhārata-Āśvamedhika (Parsāharamādhava, p. 355).—‘One may study, day after day, the Vedas and the subsidiaries, if he honours not his guest, all study becomes futile. He who honours not the guest arrived after the Viśvadeva offering, immediately becomes a Caṇḍāla. If a man turns out a guest from his house, arrived at the right time and place, he becomes an outcast at that very moment.’