|
The Indian Analyst
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
LITERATURE
writers refers to cases where the wife of the dead person led an unchaste life. In such cases she has no right to her husband’s property.[1] .. Hindu society had undergone great change in regard to social and religious matters since the time of Yājñavalkya. Though Aparārka faithfully explains the text of Yājñavalkya, he states his own opinion at the end, citing the authority of later writers on dharmaśāstra. By the time of Aparārka the Brāhmaṇas in Mahārāshṭra and Koṅkaṇ had become strictly vegetarian. So, though Aparārka explains the verses in the Yājñavalkya-Smṛiti about the serving of meat at a śrāddha, he cites at the end passages from the Brahma-Purāṇa and the PulastyaSmṛiti enjoining the offering of vegetable food to Brāhmaṇas.[2] Again, Aparārka quotes a passage from the Mārkaṇḍēya-Purāṇa, recommending the offering of a vessel with gold in lieu of a cow’s flesh at madhuparka.[3] ..Yajñavalkya does not mention the self-immolation of the wife on the death of her husband. Aparārka discusses the matter at some length, cities the opinion of Virāṭ and Āṅgirasa against such self-immolation, but ultimately declares himself in favour of it in the case of a Brāhmaṇa widow, if prompted by a religious motive and not by grief.[4] .. As for his philosophical views, Aparārka was a follower of the Advaita Vēdānta of Śaṅkarāchārya. In the beginning of his work he pays obeisance in two verses to Brahman, which creates, preserves and destroys the universe, and which is identical with Ātman described as sat, chit and ānanda. He refers to the Śārīrakamīmāṁsā or Śaṅkarāchārya’s bhāshya on the Brahmasūtras in one place. As a matter of fact, Yājñavalkya himself uses several illustrations noticed in the Śāṅkara Vēdānta such as the ghaṭ-ākāśa, ornaments of gold and a spider weaving a web out its saliva etc.[5] Aparārka follows him faithfully.
..
Apararka explains the tenets of the different systems of philosophy such as Sāṅkhya,
Yōga, Śaiva, Pāśupata etc. in his commentary on Yājñavalkya, I, 7. He was himself a devotee
of Śiva, whom he has eulogised in the beginning of his Vaḍavalī plates, but in his commentary
he shows himself as an upholder of the Vedic religion and not of the sectarian Śaivism. He
cites with approval passages from the Varāha-Purāṇa, stating that the sectarian āgamas of the
Śaivas and the Pāśupatas were revealed by Śiva for misleading those who had strayed from
the path of the Vēdas.[6] About the Pāñcharātra system he says that it is intended for the
Vrātyas who have not been admitted to the fold of the orthodox due to the non-performance
of the necessary prāyaśchitta.[7] But he declares himself against the questionable rites of the
Śaiva Āgamas such as drinking of liquor, offering of victims to the goddess Chaṇḍikā, the
performance of magical rites for the attainment of supernatural powers etc.[8] He says that
one may study the āgamas of the Sect, but should follow only such dictates in them as do
not conflict with the Vedic religion.
[1] See कयं तर्हि विरोधपरिहार: - उच्यते- ’
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|