1887.] Dr. R. Mitra— New edition of Manu. 115 



bographical accuracy, that s'ulcld " white " also, means ' fair,' and, since 

 the next member of the compound is ambd a " mother," the meaning 

 fair is the most appropriate here, and the two words together mean, 

 'lie whose mother is a fair lady', i. e., Granesa, the elapho-cephalic god 

 whose mother is pre-eminently called Gauri, the ' fair one.' The next 

 element of the compound is ra which means ' to take or take about, 

 i. e., to serve as a vehicle or Vdhana.' This makes the word to 

 mean ' he who carries Granesa,' i. e., a mouse who is well-known 

 to be the vehicle of the god named. The last member of the 

 compound, dhara, means ' to seize ' or ' catch,' as well as to carry, and 

 the whole compound must mean, ' he who has caught the vehicle of him 

 who has a fair lady for his mother,' in other words, a cat holding 

 a mouse. The qualifying epithets apply to this cat just as well as to the 

 donkey, especially the ' benign countenance,' for a cat holding so 

 delectable a morsel in his mouth as a plump mouse cannot but look 

 particularly pleased. The conclusion according to this interpretation is 

 that the devotee should meditate, for the salvation of his soul, on the 

 image of a cat holding a mouse in his mouth. Seeing that the Hindus 

 do worship monkeys, bulls, Brahmani kites, and other animals, the 

 addition of the donkey and the cat to the list need not be looked upon, 

 as improbable, and anthropologists may well look upon these animals 

 as totems. To the Hindus, however, the absurdity is patent, and no 

 further argument is needed to prove the extremely misleading character 

 of exegesis by grammar and concordance. 



Doubtless much may be said per contra, but I need not dwell 

 upon the theme. Suffice it to say that, whatever its merits in expounding 

 the Vedas in regard to which imaginative scholars like to have ample 

 elbow room, the plan of concordance is totally unsuited for the exposi- 

 tion of law. The danger is imminent, and much mischief has already been 

 done by the misinterpretation of our law-books by English Judges, work- 

 ing under the light of imperfect translations. A notable instance of this 

 may be found in the judge-made law about adoptions by women and S'ud- 

 ras. A mediaeval quasi-religious maxim says, ' Women and S udras 

 should not repeat mantras,' (Stri-s'wlro'mantrakah,) and, with that 

 verse before them, our English Judges, not excepting their Lordships 

 of the Privy Council, have decided that S'lidras may adopt, i. e., accept 

 a dattalca son without any form of religious ceremony, forgetting that 

 the word mantra in the verse simply means a verse of the Rig Veda 

 Sanhita, whereas in ordinary parlance it means all Sanskrit words 

 used in religious service, including the declaration of giving and re- 

 ceiving a child, as in the Dattaka ceremony, or of a bride in a mar- 

 riage. 



