________________
474
THE ADYAR LIBRARY BULLETIN
CATTLE, FIELD AND BARLEY
475
vastutas tu prarohavasthanukalyapannan yavadikam wa bhäsyakdriyapratyudaharanasthitayanasabdena grhyaleala eva male (i.c. in the Siddhantakaumudi) praro-inukalvadyolan irtham bharjitavydorttaye tatkaryasasyapadopidanam samgacchale / tatra sasyapadena ladanukalyan yaudnd dyoyale / Iddrsanam caitanyan abhyupagatam iti tadbhaksare 'Akurddirdpena prawyddhyabhavarüpahinsa tesdm ma bhavati eat ca sase parakiyalvavidesanam anupadeyam masasyandim api kipsd y darlitated ata coa bhd gw udharane vinastaprarohdasthabodhakapindipadoddánart, pratyuddharane ca praroha vasthanukalabijasadharanayanapadopdddnam ca starasata upapadyale / bhagyasvarase 'oy adyavyakhyddm evli vadatd Uddyotokyldpy ayam arthah sphufikyta ili bodhyam.
* See fn. 68.
67 cf. Bhagavata Hari Sastri's explanation of the expression himsdinge (Chitraprabhi. A Commentary of Haridikshita's Laghulabdaratna, ed. by Tata Subbaraya Sastri, Waltair 1932, p. 391, 22 f.): prdnaviyogaphalake galadrodelasamyoganukalavyapare ity arthah Il. In reality, however, the injurious act of eating starts with the tearing off of the barley plants from the lower part of the halm.
'The Origin of ahimsa' in: Mélanges d'indianisme à la mé moire de Louis Renon, Paris 1968, p. 625-655.—'Seeds capable of germination etc. in particular are referred to at pp. 626, 635, 638, 648. At p. 635 Schmidt refers to Baudh. Dh.S. 3.2.13 (tusavikinams tandulan icchati sajjanebhyo bijani od) quoted by him in fn. 5 and commented upon by the remark: 'lusavihina refers probably to bijani, too. The sutra together with this remark made me realize that I was not at all well up in the relevant botanical facts. It was not easy to get the necessary information, but by consulting various botanists I think I got a clearer picture: Rice is in India not only traditionally stored in the form of paddy, i.e. rice in the husk, (cf. e.g. The Welth of India, Raw Materials, Vol. VII: N - Po, New Delhi 1966, p. 164), but it is the unhusked rice which is also sown. This is, unfortunately, in the dictionary just referred to nowhere stated explicitly, but clearly implied e.g. by a statement like that at p. 139 that some varieties of rice 'finish germination by 2-3 days after sowing while others take about a week, the rapidity of germination being probably related to the thickness and hairiness of the husk'. Indeed, mechanically removing the husk of rice grains
almost inevitably leads to injuring the embryo and has thus the consequence that the seeds are no longer viable. This holds good for some other cereals, too, e.g. barley and oats, but by no means for all of them (c.g. wheat and rye), and surely not for all 'seeds' which were--and still are-grown as food in India. This latter type of seeds, i.c. which do not lose the capacity of germination when they are husked, are in their turn, of course, 'killed' e.g. when they are crushed in a mortar, and it is noteworthy that this it is of which Haradatta is thinking in connection with Gaut. 1.3.22 (varjayed bijauadham). As regards Baudh. Dh. S. 3. 2. 13, there are in fact only three possibilities of interpreting the sutra since we have no reason to assume that its statement is based upon a botanical error: (1) that travihina indeed refers to bijani, too, and is meant to express that only such seeds are to be collected which are 'killed' by being husked, and only if they have already been husked, or (2) that though referring to tandulan alone what is implied by it is that bijas also should only be accepted if they have been 'killed', by whatever means, or (3) that the capacity of germination and hence the animateness of seeds does not form part of the purpose of the rule.
" Quoted from H.-P. Schmidt's article, p. 625. . See fn. 34. With the relevant material found in the Moksadharma, quoted also by the editors of the Tattoabodhaoidháyini (cf. fn. I above), I intend to deal in a separate article.
"A good example for the fact that at least some of the traditional Pandits are rather in a state of helplessness when confronted with this view, is the note of Sivadatta Shastri-on the expression tasydm aasthiyam (tesan celanatode) in the Tattoabodhini on the Siddhantakaumudi (cf. $ 2.5.3.)- which reads thus (The Siddhanta Kaumudi of Bhattoji Deekshit..., printed and published by Khemraj Shri Krishnadas, Bombay 1959, p. 165 fn. 9): sasyavasthayam 'pomayah pränah [Ch. U. 6. 6. 5; cf. 6. 7. I and 6] iti frutek adblir vind glayam inatoardpaprdnatasattoena pranaviyoganukilaudparasyaina (cf. fn. 67) sattuena hiyardlodvyághatat ll 'clanatodi' iti tu na samyak stutinin dabhyam harşafokánudbhavdt 'celanat sendriyar drapyam nirindriyam acelanam' ili carakác ca [viz. Sūtrasthāna 1.48, which, however, runs: sendriyam celanam drapyar) anubhilandriydnim tadi celanatodnabhyupa
