________________
392
Albrecht Wezler
The warrior taking to flight in fear
393
But the (kshatriya) who is slain in battle, while he turns back in fear, takes upon himself all the sin of his master, whatever (it may be) :
< And whatever merit (a man) who is slain in flight may have gained for the next (world), all that his master takes !
Though in the absence of a critical edition of the Manusmrti which fully deserves this designation it is not possible to say anything definite about the transmission of the two verses, it seems that there is just one variant to be taken note of, as stated by Jolly, viz. (paravstrahatasya) ca at the end of 7.95, attested in manuscripts containing the mula text together with Medhatithi's and Govindaraja's commentaries. And this ca looks, to be sure, very much like the original reading, whereas tu may well be explained as having originated in order to remove an apparent redundance; but be that as it may, the meaning as such is practically not affected at all by this textual difference.
1.1. To the author of the anukramani. verses 1.111 ff. M. 7.94 and 95, if they were at all known to him, form an integral part of the general subject of the seventh adhyaya, viz. the exposition of & the whole duty of a king » (cf. rajñaś ca dharmam akhilam at 1.114 c); and, to quote a rather modern example, Laxmanshastri
Joshi' similarly failed to see any reason for not subsuming the two verses under the heading of dharmayuddha - which in its turn is a subsection of his long chapter on yātrd, «the march of an army! But inspite of the fact that the term dharmayuddha' has not yet been studied comprehensively there is every likelihood that it does not refer to the duties a warrior has to fulfil towards his master; and it is evidently an important element of these latter duties which is dealt with in M. 7.94 and 95. This distinction was, however, felt and adequately taken into account e.g. by the author of the Nitimayukha, Nilakantha Bhatta"; for he introduces his quotation of the two verses under discussion with the remark: paldyane dosam dha manuh, whereas the matter Manu has in mind according to him in the verses 7.91 - 93 ", which he quotes a little later, is those not to be killed [in battle) (avadhyān aha manuh: 105.29).
3. J.D.M. DERRETT, Bhdruci's Commentary on the Manusmrti. (The ManuSastra-Vivarana, Books 6-12), ... Vol. II: The Translation and Notes, Heidelberg, 1975, p. 61 renders them thus: But he who is frightened, turns back and is slain by the enemy in war, acquires all the evil that may have been done by his master. And as for the merit which the man who was slain after turning his back had won with a view to the next world his master takes all that from him .
4. Manava Dharma-Sastra. The Code of Manu ... critically edited.... London, 1887, p. 309. DERRETT, Bhdruci's Commentary ..., Vol. 1: The Text, Heidelberg, 1975, p. 67 in. 2 notes a reading thabh ... Instead of updrjitant but he justly adds a question mark to it, since it is not even clear whether this has at all to be regarded as a variant. In addition, the Dharmakosa (cf. fn. 7) IV. Pt. 5. p. 279, n. 2 and p. 2780 fm. 1 mentions the following variants: sarvam fat and yar kirit duskotarr bharth for 194, and yad asya as well as (bhart) ca tar samddarte for 7.95; but almost all of them are just transpositions caused most probably by an inaccurate memory.
5. Note that this is also the reading followed by the Nitimayükha (cf. fn. 11). As for the scholastic interpretation of the various ca cf. Sarvajnandrayana on 7.95.
6. This term is applied to them eg by Medhatithi (on 1.111).
7. Dharmakosa (Prajia-Patha-sala-Mandala Grantha-Mala) Rájanitikanda Vol. IV Pt. 5, Wai, 1979, p. 2779 f.
8. Note that systematically this is distinguished from yana, one of the group of the sddgunya dealt with in Pt. 4 of Vol. IV of the Dharmakosa (p. 2151 ff.). If there is a terminological distinction between the two expressiods, it would seem to be a later development for at any rate at Mbh. 12.69.65 66 we find yderd instead of ydna in an enumeration of the individual members of the sddgurtya, and at M. 7.182 the syntagma yderyd refers to the expression yana, and ya, of the preceding verse.
9. Cr. also the term yodhadharma used at M. 7.98 und suyuddha at Kautiliya AS 10.3.30 (cf. fr. 71).
10. In Bhatta Laksmidhara's Kityakalpataru the two groups of verses, i.e. M. 7.91-93, on the one hand, and 7.94 and 95, on the other, are quoted not only separately, but clearly also in different systematic contexts (see vol. XI of the edition in Gaekwad's Oriental Series, No. L, Baroda, 1943 p. 133 and 135 respectively). Similar observations can be made in the Viramitrodaya (Rajanitiprakasa, in Chaukhamba Sanskrit Series, 221, p. 406 and 408).
11. Niti Mayakha ..., ed. by Mahadeva Gangadhar Bakre and Vyankatesha Ramachandra Lele, Bombay 1921. (Note that this edition togther with the other parts of the text has been reprinted under the title Bhagavantabhaskara, Vrajajivan Prachyabharati Granthamala 9.2 Vols., Delhi, 1985). The reference to this text is found in G. JEA, Manusmrti, Notes, Pt. II: Explanatory, Calcutta, 1924, p. 457.
12. Viz. (Page) 105 (line) 10.
13. It should be noted that M. 7.90 is not quoted together with them in the Krtyakalpataru and the Viramitrodaya, the main reason most probably being that this latter verse mentions certain types of weapons not to be used in a battle.