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 ‘Dharma’, 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...

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

आयुष्मान् भव सौम्यैति वाच्यो विप्रोऽभिवादने ।
अकारश्चास्य नाम्नोऽन्ते वाच्यः पूर्वाक्षरः प्लुतः ॥ १२५ ॥

āyuṣmān bhava saumyaiti vācyo vipro'bhivādane |
akāraścāsya nāmno'nte vācyaḥ pūrvākṣaraḥ plutaḥ || 125 ||

On saluting, the Brāhmaṇa should he answered with the words ‘Be long lived, O Gentle One’; and at the end of his name the vowel “a,” which occurs at the end of the consonant, should be pronounced ultra long.—(125)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

On salutation having been done, the answering greeting should be made by the Father to the accoster, with the words—‘Be long-lived, Oh Gentle One.’ The particle ‘iti’ in the text is meant to show that the preceding words constitute the formula. The use of such expressions also as (a) ‘āyuṣmān edhi,’ ' Prosper O Long-lived One,’ (b) ‘dīrghāyurbhūyāh,’ ‘Be long-lived,’ (c) ‘cirañjīva,’ ‘Live long’—is permitted by the usage of cultured men.

The vowel “a”’—which occurs at the end of the name of the person whose salutation is answered—‘should be pronounced ultra-long.’ The term ‘pluta,’ ‘ultra-long,’ stands for the vowel that is drawn out to the length of three moras. The vowel ‘a’ is mentioned only by way of illustration; it stands for ‘i’ and other vowels also. The ‘end’ spoken of in the text is in relation to the vowels only; so that in the case of names ending in consonants also, the lengthening applies to the vowel that happens to be the last, ‘at the end.’ The term ‘pūrvākṣaraḥ’ qualities the ‘vowel a,’ which is to be lengthened; and ‘akṣara’ here stands for the consonant; and the compound means ‘that vowel of which the preceding syllable is a consonant’; i.e., the vowel occurring along with the consonant. What is meant is that it is the vowel ‘a’ already there tbat is to be lengthened, and not any such vowel as might be added; that is, the vowel that is already present in the name is to be lengthened out.

All this explanation is in accordance with the rules of the revered Pāṇini; as in the matter of the use of words and their meaning, the revered Pāṇini is more authoritative than Manu and other writers. And Pāṇini has laid down (in 8.2.83) that ‘in answering tile greeting of a non-śūdra, the ṭi should be ultra-long and the name ‘ṭi’ is given to that syllable of which the last vowel forms the beginning (which in tho present case is the ‘a,’ which is regarded as a part of itself and hence ‘having the last vowel for its beginning’). No significance is meant to be attached to the specification of the ‘Brāhmaṇa’ in the present verse; as what is here prescribed is applicable to the Kṣatriya and others also. The usage sanctioned by other Smṛtis is also the same, and no separate rules are laid down for these other castes.

As an example we have such expressions as ‘Be long-lived, O Devaḍattā’; and one containing a name ending in consonant,—‘Be long lived, O Somaśarmān.’—(125)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

Buhler adopts the reading ‘pūrvākṣaraplutaḥ’, which is given by Nandana, and mentioned by Nārāyaṇa. The meaning, according to this, as Buhler remarks, is that the name Devadatta should be pronounced as ‘Devadattā.’ Medhātithi and Kullūka adopt the reading ‘pūrvākṣaraḥ plutaḥ,’ under which the meaning is that ‘the vowel a, which occurs at the end of the consonant, should be pronounced ultra-long.’ “According to this interpretation,” says Buhler, “Manu’s rule agrees with Āpastamba and Pāṇinī (8-2-88). Govindarāja and Rāghavānanda go far off the mark.”

Several commentators note that ‘vipraḥ’ includes all the twice-born persons.

Medhātithi (p. 182, 1. 4)—‘Tatra pūrvasmin &c.’—Kullūka’s expounding of the compound is simpler—‘pūrvamnāmagatam—‘akṣaram’—vyāñjanam—saṃśliṣṭam yasya sa pūrvākṣaraḥ.’

Ibid, (p. 182, 1. 8)—‘Bhagavān Paṇinīḥ’—This refers to the sūtra ‘acontyādi ṭi’ which defines the ‘ṭi’ as ‘that which has for its beginning the last among the vowels’; and the example given in Siddhāntakaumudī under Sūtra 8.283 is, Āyuṣmān bhava Devadattā’; from which it is clear that the name ‘ṭi’ is applicable to the vowel ‘a’ in ‘tta’ and it is ‘tadādi’—having for its beginning the last of the vowels—in the sense that it ends in itself, it being regarded as its own constituent part, according to Śabdenduśekhara, which has the following note—

nanu mārtaṇḍa ityatra mārtaśabdāntyāc takārākāraḥ sa ādiryasyetyanyapadārtho durlabha iti cenna | ekasminneva samudāyatvāropeṇa tadavayavatvāropeṇa ca tadupapatteḥ ||

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 297), which adds the following notes:—The compound ‘pūrvākṣaraḥ’ is to be expounded as pūrvara akṣaram yasya; and the ‘purvam akṣaram’, ‘preceding syllable,’ in a name is the consonant, since a vowel can not be ‘preceded’ by another vowel; hence the meaning comes to be that the vowel at the end of the final consonant should be pronounced ultra-long. The term ‘akṣaraḥ’ stands for all vowels that may occur at the end of a name [This is exactly what Medhātithi and Kullūka have said]; the text could not have meant the vowel ‘a’ only; as it is not possible for all names to end in that vowel. Thus the formula comes to be—‘āyuṣmān bhava saumya Devadattā.’

It is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 26), which supplies three different explanations:—At the end of the words ‘āyuṣmān bhava saumya,’ the name of the saluter should be pronounced—‘Viṣṇuśarman’; (a) at the end of the name an ‘a’ should be pronounced, and of this ‘a,’ the ‘pūrvasvaraḥ,’ the preceding syllable,’.should be ultra-long. The masculine form ‘akṣaraḥ’ is a Vedic archaism, [ the right form being ‘akṣaram’]. Though the syllable ‘preceding’ (the ‘a’ pronounced after the name ‘Viṣṇuśarman’) would be ‘n,’ yet inasmuch as the consonant could not be pronounced ‘ultra-long,’ the term ‘preceding syllable’ would apply in this case to ‘a’ that is contained in the name [ i.e. the ‘a’ after ‘m’]; and it is this ‘a’ that would be pronounced ultra-long [The formula thus being ‘āyuṣmān bhava saumya Viṣṇuśarmā3n’].—(&) ‘Pūrvākṣaram plutam’ is another reading, in which case the construction is all light [and there is no archaism]; the meaning being that ‘the preceding syllable is to be pronounced ultra-long.’—(c) Or, the sentence ‘akāraśchāsya nāmno’nte’ may be explained as follows:—The vowel ‘a’ (ākāraḥ) that appears at the end of ‘his’ (‘asya’, the saluter’s) ‘name’ (‘nāmnaḥ’)—‘a’ mentioned only by way of illustration, any vowel at the end of the name being meant,—is what is qualified by the qualifying word ‘pūrvākṣaraḥ’—which means, in this case,—that which has the syllables, akṣaram, in the namepreceding’—‘pūrvāṇi,’—itself; and such a vowel should be pronounced ultra-long,—and no other ‘a’, either in the name itself, or added after the name.

The formula, according to all these explanations, is ‘āyuṣmān bhava saumya Devadattā3.’ This is not accepted by Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra p. 452), which would omit the word ‘saumya,’ which in Manu’s text, it takes as standing for the name of the saluter; so that the formula according to it would be ‘āyuṣmān bhava Devadattā3.’ It argues that if we don’t take the word ‘saumya’ as standing for the name, we would have to seek elsewhere for the injunction for pronouncing the name in regard to which the second half prescribes the ultra-elongation of the final ‘a.’—As regards the second line of the verse, it takes it to mean that, ‘the a tliat appears at the end of the saluter’s name should be pronounced ultra-long;—and adds that the vowel ‘a’ here stands for vowels in general; as all names do not, and cannot end in ‘a’, in the case of names ending in consonants also, fhe syllable to be ultra-elongated would be the last of the vmvels contained in the name; it is clear from Pāṇini’s rule that the ‘ṭi’ syllable is to be so pronounced (see note, above)—and it is the last vowel that is called ‘ṭi’.—In the compound pūrvākṣaraḥakṣara’ means consonant, and the compound means ‘that which has a consonant immediately preceding it’; so that the text comes to mean that ‘the vowel that has a consonant immediately preceding it should not be separated from the consonant and then pronounced ultra-long; it should be pronounced along with the consonant.’ It concludes that this explanation is in agreement with Medhātithi and several others. According to this view the formulas would be—(a) ‘āyuṣmān bhava Devadattā3’ (where the name ends in a vowel) and (b) ‘āyuṣmān bhava Somaśarmā3n,’ where the name ends in a consonant.

The same work goes on to add that Haradatta has adopted the reading ‘pūrvākṣaraplutaḥ’ (see note above) and has explained the verse as follows:—At the end of the name is to be pronounced an additional ‘a’—over and above the syllables in the name itself,—and this additional ‘a’—is to be ‘pūrvākṣaraplutaḥ,’—i. e., ‘having its preceding syllable—i. e., vowel—ultra-long’;—i. e., the vowel preceding the additional ‘a’ should be ultra-long; and this may be done also where consonants may be intervening between the two. Thus in the case of there being no intervening consonant, the formula would be āyuṣmān bhava saumya Devadattā3,’ while in that of there being an intervening consonant, it would be āyuṣmān bhava saumya Agnichi3da’ (where the consnant, ‘d’ intervenes between the additional ‘a’ at the end, and the vowel ‘i’ preceding it.)

It further adds that the term ‘vipraḥ’ includes the Kṣatriya and others also, as is clear from the fact that in grammar we find rules (a) making the ultra-elongation of the final vowel optional in the case of the saluter being a Kṣatriya or a Vaiśya, and also (b) prohibiting the elongation in the case of the saluter being a woman or a Śūdra.

This work quotes Medhātithi to the effect that the words in the text ‘āyuṣmān bhava saumya’ are meant to be purely illustrative, and it is not meant that these should be the very words used; it is thus that even such returns become permissible as—‘āyuṣmānedhi,’ ‘dīrghāyurbhūyāḥ,’ ‘cirañjīva’ and others that are in common use among cultured people.

This verse is quoted also in Nirṇayasindhu (p. 191), where ‘pūrvākṣaraḥ’ is explained as referring to the letter preceding the ‘n’ in ‘śarman’;—and in Aparārka (p, 53), which adds the following note:—The ‘akāra’ here stands for the final vowel in the name of the saluter; hence whichever. vowel occurs at the end of the name should be pronounced ultra-long; hence ‘pūrvākṣaraḥ’ means ‘that which is preceded by a syllable’; this syllable preceding the final vowel must be a consonant. Hence the meaning is that the vowel, along with the consonant, should be pronounced ultra-long. It does not mean that an additional ‘a’ is to be added at the end of the name.

It is quoted in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 98), which adds the following notes:—The vowel ‘a’ here stands for any vowel that occurs at the end of a name; there is no such rule as that every name must end in ‘a’; hence the elongation pertains to the vowel that occurs at the end of a name; and it does not mean that an additional ‘a’ has to be added at the end of every name.

It is quoted also in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 46), which has the same remarks regarding the vowel ‘a’; it adds:—According to some people, the title ‘śarman’ also has to be pronounced; so that the formula would be ‘āyuṣmān bhava Devadattā śarman.’ Others hold that the elongation prescribed is to be done to the ‘a’ contained in the term ‘śarman’ But this is open to doubt, as the term ‘śarman’ does not form part of the name; if it did, then, as some other syllables would necessarily be required to be prefixed to this, it could not be possible to have any name ‘with two letters’, as has been prescribed. This elongation of the vowel is not done in the name of the Śūdra, who is excluded, according to Pāṇini’s Sūtra ‘Pratyabhivāde’śūdre’; this however makes it clear that the salutation of the Śūdra also is to be returned.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Āpastamba-Dharmasūtra (1.6.17).—‘The previous letters should he ultra-long in the salutation as also in the returngreeting.’

Vaśiṣṭha (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 453).—‘The last vowel in the greeting is ultra-long.’

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: