Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Purva-Mimamsa in its Sources c40.s3.t12: Bhavadāsa

Pūrva-Mīmāṃsā in its Sources c40.s3.t12

Language
English

Bhavadāsa

c40.s3.t12.1

After these two Vṛttikāras, we come to Bhavadāsa who also wrote a *Vṛtti* on the Sūtras. This assumption of ours is based on the single evidence of the *Prapañcahṛdaya*, which definitely says that Bhavadāsa preceded Shabara. That Bhavadāsa was a great Mīmāṁsaka, who wrote a commentary called *Vṛtti* on the Sūtras, is also quite evident from the *Shlokavārttika* and its commentary by Pārthasārathi Mishra. While commenting on the Kārika—वृत्त्यन्तरेषु केषाञ्चित् लौकिकार्थव्यतिक्रमः (verse 33), Pārthasārathi says—‘केषाञ्चित्—भवदासादीनां वृत्त्यन्तरेषु’. Even Kumārila himself refers to him in the *Shlokavārttika*—प्रदर्शनार्थमित्येके केचिन्नानार्थवाचिनः। समुदायादवच्छिद्य भवदासेन कल्पितात्’’ (pp. 21-22).

c40.s3.t12.2

Regarding Bhavadāsa’s view we can only glean from Kumārila that he thought that the terms अथ and अतः in the first Sūtra should be read together, so that both together may give us the meaning of आनन्तर्य (after). Again, we are told by Kumārila that Bhavadāsa split up the fourth Sūtra into two parts—i) सत्संप्रयोगे पुरुषस्येन्द्रियाणां बुद्धिजन्म तत् प्रत्यक्षम् and ii) अनिमित्तं विद्यमानोपलम्भनत्वात्—the first half gives us the definition of *Pratyakṣa*, while the second half speaks of the unauthoritativeness (अप्रामाण्य) of it regarding *Dharma*. So says Pārthasārathi—भवदासेनतत्सूत्रं द्विधा कृत्वा ‘सत्संप्रयोगे’ इत्येवमादि ‘तत्प्रत्यक्ष’ मित्येवमन्तं प्रत्यक्षलक्षणपरम् । ‘अनिमित्त’ मित्यादि च तस्य धर्मे प्रत्यनिमित्तपरं व्याख्यातम् (pp. 133—34), Shabara, Kumārila and their followers all rejected these views of Bhavadāsa.

c40.s3.t12.3

We now come to the great Bhāṣyakāra of the Jaiminīya-sūtras. His *Bhāṣya* is the first complete work that we have got on the Jaiminīya-sūtras before us. As for the personal history and date of Shabara we are still in dark. The tradition current amongst the Paṇḍitas is that he had six sons—one from his Brāhmaṇa-wife, named Varāhamihira, the great Indian astronomer; from the Kṣattriya-wife he had two sons, Rāja Bhartṛhari and the King Vikrama; from his Vaishya-wife he had the great Vaidya—Haricanda and Śaṅku, and lastly, from the Śūdra-wife he had Amaru. Nothing can be based on this tradition with any certainty. He has referred to, in his Bhāṣya, the names of Katyāyana, Vārttikakāra (X. viii. 4), Manu (I. i. 2), Pāṇini, Piṅgala (I. i. 5); *Sphota*vādino Vaiyākaraṇāḥ (I. i. 5) and many more. But none of these helps us much to fix his date. So Dr. Ganganatha Jha thinks that if his relation with Varāhamihira be believed in, we may say that he lived before 400 A.D. which is the probable date of the great astronomer.

c40.s3.t12.4

It is said that his original name was Ādityadeva which he changed to Shabara when he disguised himself as a forester for fear of Jain persecution. Dr. Jha, on the basis of certain facts from his Bhāṣya, suggests his being a Northerner. Dr. Jha even goes so far as to say that he perhaps lived in Kashmir or Takṣashila (*vide* Introduction to his English Trans., p. 1). No more about him we know. A few facts gleaned from his Bhāṣya are given below which are quite interesting and also may help us to come nearer the truth regarding his native place:

c40.s3.t12.5

(1) The text ‘तस्माद्बराहं गावोऽनुधावन्ति (I iii. 9) meaning—Cows run after the *Barāha* (Shata. Brā. 4.4.3.19)—quoted by Shabara refers to a custom, regarded as a religious duty, which falls on the day following the *Dīpāvalī*. This is even now prevalent in Mithilā where it is called *Hurāhurī*.

c40.s3.t12.6

(2) Shabara says—" In the case of pegs in the wall. we find each of them severally serving the purpose of supporting the hanging noose" (II. ii. 1).

c40.s3.t12.7

(3) The text—‘पयसा प्राष्टिकं भुञ्जीत, यदि शालिं भुञ्जीत तत्र दधि उपसिञ्चेत्’ meaning—one should eat *Ṣaṣṭika* (a kind of grain having black husk, called *Gamharī*, in Mithilā) with milk; if he eats *Shāli* (paddy grains), he should mix curd with it (II. iii. 1). This indeed refers to the practice prevalent even now in Mithilā that people eat *Ṣaṣṭika* with milk and *shāli* with curd (*Dahi-Cūṛā*).

c40.s3.t12.8

(4) The text—‘गर्भदासः कर्मार्थ एव स्वामिना क्रियते’ (III. i. 2), meaning—Born slave is purchased for the sole purpose of working for the master—refers to the custom of slavery existing in North-East India for a very long time.

c40.s3.t12.9

(5) The text—‘दशापवित्रेण ग्रहं समाष्टि’ (III. i. 13), meaning—Cleanses the *Soma*-vessel with ‘the hem of the garment—refers to the practice prevalent amongst the ladies in the North-East of India.

c40.s3.t12.10

(6) The text—‘अग्नचिता पक्षिणो न अशितव्या’ (V. iii. 26), meaning that birds should not be eaten by one who is *अग्नचित्*—shows that birds were regularly eaten in those days and which was known to Shabara.

c40.s3.t12.11

(7) Again, the text—‘शालिसूपमांसापूपैर्देवदत्तो भोजयितव्यः’ (VII. i. 12), meaning that Devadatta should be fed on rice, pulse, meat, and sweet-cakes (*apūpa*)—shows that he lived in that part of the country where the above-mentioned things were eaten during meals.

c40.s3.t12.12

(8) Not only meat as an ingredient of food was known to him but he knew the details of fish-eating too. For instance, the text—‘ये एकस्मिन् कार्ये विकल्पेन साधकाः श्रूयन्ते ते परस्परेण विरोधिनो भवन्ति । विरोधिनश्च न सह प्रवृत्तिः । लोकवत्—यथा मत्स्यान् न पयसा समश्नीयादिति । यद्यपि सगुणा मत्स्या भवन्ति तथापि पयसा सह न समश्यन्ते’ (X. VII. 66), meaning—‘When several things are spoken of as accomplishing the same purpose, they are always regarded as mutually incompatible; and things that are mutually incompatible cannot function jointly; as in the ordinary world; for instance, when it is said “one should not eat fish with milk” the meaning is that “even though the fish be possessed of excellent qualities, yet it is not eaten with milk”, clearly shows that he was very familiar with the process of fish-eating.

c40.s3.t12.13

(9) The sentence—‘वाससि रागः श्रूयते—वासो रञ्जयतीति, वाससि च क्रियते । (असौ) स्त्र्यर्थः पुरुषार्थो वा’ (VII. i. 7), meaning—‘Though the colour is spoken of in connection with the cloth,—in such sentences as’—‘one colours the cloth’,—and it is also done or produced in the cloth,—yet it does not subserve the purposes of the cloth; it subserves the purposes of man or woman (who wears the cloth), indicates that he knew that both man and woman put on coloured cloth. I do not think that man puts on coloured cloth either in Kashmir or in the North-Western side.

c40.s3.t12.14

(10) Again, the statement—‘बाहीकोऽतिथिरागतः यवाञ्जस्मै प्रक्रियताम्’ (VII.i.8), meaning that ‘when it is said, that a Punjab (Bāhīka) has come as guest, prepare for him barley-meal’ shows that though he was aware of the manner of showing hospitality to the guests of the Punjab, yet we think that he would have given this information to non-Punjabis who did not know the above-mentioned custom. Had he been an inhabitant of the Punjab, perhaps he would not have found any opportunity to convey this information to others.

c40.s3.t12.15

(11) The instance—“the cooking of rice is of one kind, while that of molasses is of a totally different kind; so that the man who has learnt the cooking of rice cannot know how to cook molasses” (VII-ii-20), shows that he must have lived in that part of the country where cooking of both the rice and the molasses were known and he also knew the difference between the two methods.

c40.s3.t12.16

(12) The statement—‘ओदने दधि दत्त्वाऽभ्यवहर्तव्यम्’, (IX. iv. 32), that is, one should put curd into cooked rice and then eat it’—refers to the custom of eating cooked rice and curd together (Dahi-bhāta of Mithilā). This very idea is repeated again when he says that—‘Devadatta should be fed with curds, clarified butter and rice’ (X. vi. 22).

c40.s3.t12.17

(13) Lastly, we find that the eating of oil like clarified butter, has been repeatedly referred to by Shabara. For instance, he says “Just as when oil or clarified butter is drunk,—though this drinking is ephemeral, yet it brings about strength, improvement of intelligence, memory and so forth” (VII. i. 5); again, he says—“Yajñadatta should be fed with oil; the purpose that is served in the food by the clarified butter is in the latter case understood to be served by oil; hence, even though it is not asserted in so many words that the food should be lubricated with oil, yet the oil serves to exclude the clarified butter (and no other substance)” (X. ii. 66); again, he says— “for a month Devadatta is to be fed on clarified butter and oil” (X. vi 5.); again, he says—“the oil is used for the purpose of lubricating the food”, “Yajñadatta should be fed like Devadatta with oil” (X. vi 22); again, he says—“feed Yajñadatta with oil,” “oil is mentioned as of use in the feeding”—“It is to be used in the place of clarified butter, the purpose of which alone can be served by oil, etc.” (X. iii. 16). In those days when there was no scarcity of pure clarified butter, even then that he repeatedly mentioned the custom of using oil for food shows that he must have lived in that part where oil was much in use. It is but natural that ingredients of food like rice, fish and oil should go together. Even now we find it so in Bengal and Mithila.

c40.s3.t12.18

(14) In one place he says—‘there are certain illnesses which appear at fixed intervals, namely, the Terian and the Quartian ague (Tṛtīyakāścāturthakāśca)—(VI. i. 5). Undoubtedly, he must have lived where malerial diseases were quite known.

c40.s3.t12.19

(15) He refers to a Vedic custom of cooking coarser rice in curds and the finer rice in boiled milk (IX. iv. 41). Now, this is what is exactly the custom in Mithilā where the former preparation is called ‘ghoracāura’, while the latter is known as ‘khīra.’

c40.s3.t12.20

These are some of the facts referred to by Shabara in his Bhāṣya which may suggest a nearer approach to his place of residence.

c40.s3.t12.21

Besides this Bhāṣya, he also wrote a commentary on the Saṅkarṣa which is clear from his own words (vide his Bhāṣya X. iv. 32; XII. ii. 11).

c40.s3.t12.22

One more characteristic of his Bhāṣya is that in many places he refers to the worldly customs in order to explain the Vedic injunctions, which shows the importance of the worldly instances even in Pūrva-Mīmāṁsā.

c40.s3.t12.23

The Shabara-bhāṣya has been edited in full thrice—1) from the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta; 2) from Vidyavilasa Press, Benares; and 3) from Poona, in the Anandashrama Sanskrit Series. All the editions are more or less of the same nature. This Bhāṣya has just been for the first time translated into English by Dr. Jha and published in 3 volumes in the Gaekwad’s Sanskrit Series. The first Pada of the first Adhyāya has been also printed from Madras and Chowkhamba, Benares. These are well edited along with the *Bṛhatī* and the *Ṛjurimalā*. Reference: Jacobi-Journal, American Oriental Society, Vol. XXI.

Linked texts (5)