Verse 2.149

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

अल्पं वा बहु वा यस्य श्रुतस्यौपकरोति यः ।
तमपीह गुरुं विद्यात्श्रुतौपक्रियया तया ॥ १४९ ॥

alpaṃ vā bahu vā yasya śrutasyaupakaroti yaḥ |
tamapīha guruṃ vidyātśrutaupakriyayā tayā || 149 ||

If one benefits him by means of knowledge, more or less,—him also one should regard herb as the “mentor,” by virtue of that benefit of knowledge.—(149)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

That teacher who benefits a pupil means of knowledge,—‘more or less’—this is an adverb;—‘him also’—who helps with a little knowledge only—‘one should regard as the mentor.’

The following construction is better:—‘yasya śrutasya’—these are in apposition—i.e., of the knowledge of the Veda, or of the Vedic subsidiaries, or of other Sciences, or of Reasoning and Art—alpam vahu vā—tena—this has to be supplied—upakaroti’ [The meaning, by this construction being—‘that knowledge by a little or more of which he benefits him, etc., etc.’]

The word ‘śrutopakriyayā’ is an appositional compound the apposition being based upon the fact of the ‘knowledge’ being the means of the ‘benefit.’

What is meant by this is that the teacher referred to should be called and treated as a ‘mentor’: just as we haver had above in the case of the terms ‘Ācārya’ and the rest.—(149)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

‘Iha’—‘In these Institutes’ (Kullūka);—‘in the section on salutation’ (Govindarāja). It may also mean, as Buhler rightly suggests, ‘in this world’.

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā, as applying the title ‘guru’ to the mere Upādhyāya or sub-teacher;—also in Madanapārijāta (p. 81);—in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 477);—in Aparārka (p. 65) as laying down that such a person deserves to be simply respected;—in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 89), to the effect that all that is meant by such a person being called ‘guru’ is that ‘he deserves to be honoured’, as is indicated by the particle ‘api’;—in Hemādri (Śrāddha, p. 353);—and in Prāyaścitta-viveka (p. 12) in support of the view that the Father alone is not entitled to be called ‘guru’.

Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 303) quotes it as supporting the view that the name ‘guru’ is applied to persons other than the Father only figuratively or indirectly. To the same effect it is also quoted in the same work in the Prāyaścitta section (p. 259) as describing the secondary ‘guru’.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

See above, verse 142.

Gautama-Dharmasūtra, 1-12.—‘Also because he expounds the Veda,’

Vaśiṣṭha-Smṛti, 3.24.—‘He who teaches a portion of the Veda and the Vedic subsidiaries is the Upādhyāya.’

Atri, 9-10.—‘There is no substance in the world by giving which one could become freed from the debt owing to that Teacher who teaches even a single syllable to his pupil. One who honours not the Teacher who has taught him even a single syllable (is a sinner).’

Yājñavalkya, 1-34.—‘He who teaches a portion is the Upādhyāya: he is a Guru who, having performed the rite, imparts to him the Veda.’

Hārīta (see under 142).