1484. The argument contained in these verses is this: as thou dost not know what becomes of thy relatives when they die, thou canst not help them then. It seems plain, therefore, that when thou shalt die thy relatives will not be able to do thee any good. Hence, thou gainest nothing by bestowing thy thoughts on thy relatives, forgetting thy own great concern, viz., the acquisition of Emancipation. Similarly, when thy relatives live and suffer irrespective of thy life or death, and thou too must enjoy or endure irrespective of their existence or efforts, it is meant that thou shouldst not be forgetful of thy own highest good by busying thyself with the concerns of thy relatives.
1485. The sense is that one who takes only a handful of corn for the support of life even when millions upon millions of carts loaded with corn await his acceptance, is certainly to be regarded as freed. Literally rendered, the second line is–‘who beholds a shed of bamboo or reeds in a palace,’ meaning, of course, as put above, ‘one who sees no difference between the two.’
1486. Avritti is want of the means of sustaining life: thence, scarcity or famine.
1487. The sense is that as the maintenance of wives and children is painful, one should withdraw from the world and retire into solitude.
1488. The sense seems to be this: Is it a life of domesticity that thou wouldst lead? There is no harm in thy doing this, provided thou behavest in the way pointed out. Is it Emancipation that thou wouldst pursue (in the usual way), i.e., by retiring into solitude and betaking thyself to Sannyasa? Thou mayst then behave in the way pointed out, and, indeed, that is the way of Sannyasa which leads to Emancipation.
1489. The planet Venus is supposed to be the sage Usanas or Sukra.
1490. The commentator explains the allusion by saying that formerly Vishnu, induced by the deities, used his discus for striking off the head of Usanas’ mother. Hence the wrath of Usanas against the deities and his desire to succour their foes, the Danavas.
1491. The construction of this verse is very difficult. The order of the words, is–Indrotha jagatah prabhuh. Dhanada, etc., tasya kosasaya prabhavishnuh.
1492. Persons crowned with Yoga-success are competent to enter the bodies of others and deprive the latter of the power of will. Indeed, the belief is that the latter then become mere automata incapable of acting in any other way except as directed by the enlivening possessor.
1493. The etymology of Pinaka is panina anamayat. The initial and final letter of pani (pi) and the middle letter of anamayat (na), with the suffix ka make Pinaka.
1494. The last half of the last line may be taken as applying to Usanas.
1495. The vriddhim that Mahadeva saw could not be his own, for the greatest cannot be greater. The commentator, therefore, is right in holding that vriddhim refers to the greatness of Usanas within Mahadeva’s stomach.
1496. The sa refers to Usanas and not to Mahadeva, as the commentator rightly points out.
1497. i.e., the religions of all the orders and all the modes of life.
1498. The scriptural injunctions are that one should sacrifice in honour of the gods, pour libations on the sacred fire, make gifts etc, In these exists Righteousness.
1499. The grammar of the third line is a little involved. Tasmin refers to Dharme. Supply nisthavantah after tasmin. The sense, of course, is that believing in the efficacy of righteousness, people of all modes of life accomplish the duties of their respective modes.
1500. The sinful become intermediate animals. The virtuous attain to heaven. They that are both virtuous and sinful attain to the status of humanity. They that acquire Knowledge become Emancipated.
1501. Destiny here means the result of the acts of past lives.
1502. The reading I adopt is jatikritam karma etc. Hence, this Verse also represents the arguments of the sceptic or the Charvakas. The four kinds of acts are Nitya, Naimittika, Kamya, and Nishiddha. If, however, for ‘jatikritam karma, etc.,’ the reading yantyakritam karma be adopted, the meaning would be–‘In one’s next life one does not meet with fruits that are not the results of one’s acts of past life. This must be so, for the opposite opinion would imply the destruction of acts and their consequences. Then again, such an opinion would conflict with the received opinion of mankind, for men, when they obtain the fruits of any act, always recollect the four kinds of acts of a past life for explaining the accession of those fruits.
1503. Verses 12 to 14 represent the theory of the sceptic, and I have rendered them as such. Only by reading verse 13 as ‘yantyakritam karma, etc.,’ the commentator points out that it may be taken as an observation of Parasara himself. As regards verse 15, it represents the ipse dixit of the speaker. He does not think that the sceptic is at all entitled to a reply. It is scarcely necessary to say that the Burdwan translator makes a thorough mess of these verses. K.P. Singha gives the substance correctly.
1504. The commentator shows that this is an answer to the sceptic’s averment about Nature being the cause of everything. Fire is hot-by nature, therefore, it does not become hot at one time, cold at another, and _lukewarm_ at another time. One becomes either wholly happy or wholly unhappy or wholly happy and unhappy at the same time. Man’s nature should not be such. The difference of state is produced by difference of causes.
1505. A Brahmana is precluded from eating many things. Many things again that he is competent to eat on all days of the year. In fact, there are many rules for regulating the fare of a Brahmana. To this day, an orthodox Brahmana abstains from many kinds of food. A Brahmana, therefore, who is unscrupulous in respect of his food, is no Brahmana and deserves to be pitied. Similarly, a man who cooks food for himself is an object of pity. Raw food, such as fruits, etc., one may take without offering a share thereof to guests and others. But cooked food can never be taken without a share thereof being given to others. Yati cha Brahmachari cha pakvannaswaminavubhau, hence he that takes cooked food without giving a share to these is said to eat Brahmaswam or that which belongs to a Brahmana.
1506. This is a very abstruse verse. The grammatical construction of the first line is asritena manasa vrittihinasya seva sasyate. Asritena is niralamvanena. By seva is meant homage paid to the Supreme in the form of devotion and concentrated meditation. It implies, of course, a thorough reliance on God. Vrittihina is one who has cast off the means of livelihood, implying one who abstains from worldly objects. In the second line, dwija is a vocative. Nirvritta is nishpanna, qualifying seva. Atihastat is ‘from one who has transcended the use of the hand, i.e., the necessity of acts. Atihastanirvritta, means ‘obtained-from a competent preceptor.’ In brief, what is stated here is that such seva should be learnt from competent preceptors and not by discussion among persons in the stage of spiritual progress.
1507. The object of this verse, the commentator points out, is to show the desirability of practising that seva soon or without loss of time.
1508. In the discourse of Sanatkumara to Vritra, these six colours have been mentioned, and the nature of the acts by which one attains to a superior colour or falls down from a superior to an inferior one. Vide Sec. 280, ante.
1509. A particular kind of Chandala is called kusalin.
1510. Pratyapannasya is viparita-drishteh. Natma is dehadih. Tatah is papaddhetoh. Virochate, is viseshena atmatwena rochate.