Chapter XXI. Nriyajna or Manushya-yajna

Volume II: Part II pp. 749–756

Chapter XXI. Nriyajna or Manushya-yajna

Nṛyajña or Manusya-yajña : ( Honouring guests ).—Manu (III. 70) states that this consists in honouring guestṣ In the oldest hymns of the Ṛgveda fire is described as a guest in the house of the sacrificer. In Ṛg. I. 73. 1 Agni is described as lying in a pleasant spot and pleased like a guest (syonaśir-atithir-na pṛṇāno). Vide Ṛg. V. 1. 8 ¹ and 9, V. 4. 5, VII. 42. 4 for fire being called atithi. In Ṛg. IV. 4. 10 it is said of Agni ‘you become the protector, the friend, of him who offers you hospitality in the usual (or proper) order.’ Vide Ṛg. IV. 33. 7 and Tai. S. I. 2. 10. 1 for the word atithya. Atharvaveda IX. 6 is an eulogy of hospitality in which the various stages in the reception and feeding of a guest are metaphorically represented as the various actions performed in a sacri-fice. ² The Tai. S. V. 2. 2. 4 refers to the fact that ‘when a guest comes, hospitality in which ghee abounds, is offered to him’ and it remarks that ‘one who comes in a chariot and one who comes in a cart are the two most honoured among guestṣ ³’ The Tai. S. (VI. 2. 1. 2) says ‘hospitality is offered to all the followers accompanied by whom a king comes’. Vide Ait. Br. II. 9 for almost the same wordṣ The Śāṅ. Br. II. 9 remarks ⁴ ‘when a man offers oblations at sunrise, he indeed offers hospitality to a great god who has started on a journey.’ The Tai. Br. (II. 1. 3) shows that a guest was honoured by having a lit lamp placed before him and then food was served to hiṃ ⁵ The Ait. Br. (25. 5) says that a guest should not be refused in the evening.⁶ The Śat. Br. (II. 1.4. 2. 8. B. E. vol. 12, p. 291) remarks that ‘it would be unbecoming for a person to take food before men who are staying with him as guests have eaten’. The Śatapatha shows that an ox or a goat was cooked for a guest, either a king or a brāhmaṇa (III. 4. 1. 2.). Vide also Ait. Br. 3. 4 for the offering of an ox or barren cow to a king or another deserving person coming as a guest. Yāj. I. 109 also says that a big ox or a goat was to be kept apart for a guest learned in the Veda. But the Mit. and other⁷ medieval writers to whom flesh-eating was an anathema and an unspeakable sin for a brāhmaṇa remark that an ox or a goat was to be understood as set apart for the guest to flatter him ( with the words ‘this ox is yours’ ) just as one says in humility ‘all this house is yours’ and that the ox or goat was not meant to be given in gift or to be killed since it would be impossible to find an ox each time a śrotriya guest came. The Ait. Ār. I. 1. 1 remarks ‘whoever is good and has attained eminence is a (real) guest, people do not treat with hospitality one who is undeserving.’⁸ In the Tai. Up. ( I. 11. 2 ) one of the exhortations of the teacher to the pupil returning home is ‘atithidevo bhava’ (honour guests). The same Upaniṣad says elsewhere ( III. 10. 1 ) “let him never turn away a stranger from his house, that is the rule. Therefore a man should by all means acquire much food, for people say (to the guest) ‘there is food ready for hiṃ’ If he gives food amply, food is given to him amply”. In the Kaṭhopaniṣad⁹ ( I. 7–9 ) it is said ‘a brāhmaṇa entering a house as a guest is (like) fire. People offer this (well-known) appeasement to hiṃ Oh, son of Vivasvat, offer him water (to wash his feet). If a brāhmaṇa guest stays in a man’s house without food, he cuts off (destroys) the hopes and expectations, (fruits of ) the friendship (of the good), the rewards of sacrifices and charitable acts, sons and cattle.’ Then Yama offered to bestow three boons on Naciketas as some penance for allowing Naciketas to remain without food in his house for three dayṣ The Nirukta¹⁰ IV. 5 in explaining Rg. V. 4. 5 (juṣṭo damūnā atithirdūroṇa) derives the word 'atithi' from the root 'at' to go and also from 'tithi' (day) and 'a' meaning 'comes' (from 'i' with 'abhi'). Vide Manu III. 102 for another derivation; also Parāśara I. 42 and Mārk. 29. 2–9. Manu and others say that an atithi is so called because he does not stay for a whole tithi (i. e. day) and ‘an atithi is a brāhmaṇa who stays for one night only as a guest.'

The honouring of guests comes after the offering of bali and Bauḍ gr. II. 9. 1–2, Vaṣ XI. 6, Viṣṇupurāṇa III. 11. 55 ordain that after baliharaṇa the householder should wait in front of the yard of his house for as much time as would be required for milking a cow or for a longer time at his desire for receiving guestṣ Others make it a definite time viz. one-eighth of a muhūrta (vide Mārk. purāṇa 29. 24–25 quoted in Sṃ C. I., p. 217).¹¹ The Āp. Dh. S. contains a very elaborate treatment of honouring guests (II. 3. 6. 3 to II. 4. 9. 6). Gaut. V. 36, Manu III. 102–103 and Yāj. I. 107 and 111 state that he is called an atithi who belonging to a different village and intending to stay one night only arrives in the evening, that one who has already been invited for dinner is not an atithi properly so called, that a person who belongs to the same village or who is a friend or fellow-student is not an atithi, that one has to honour guests according to one's ability, that guests are to be preferred according to the order of varṇas and that among the brāhmaṇas, the śrotriya and one who has completely mastered (at least one) recension of the Veda is to be honoured first. Gaut. V. 39–42 and Manu III. 110–112 say that a kṣatriya is not really an atithi to a brāhmaṇa nor are vaiśyas nor śūdras; but they add that,¹² if a kṣatriya comes to a brāhmaṇa's house as a guest (i. e. as a traveller who has no food with him and about the time of taking food) he should be treated to a meal after brāhmaṇa guests take their food and vaiśya and śūdra guests should be given food by a brāhmaṇa householder along with his servants and thereby he should show his kindlinesṣ Ap. Dh. S. II. 4. 9. 5 requires the householder to give food to all who come at the end of the Vaiśvadeva, even including cāṇḍālas, but it mentions the view of some that one need not give food to unworthy persons (vide note 1779 above). Commentators like Haradatta explain that, in the case of worthy guests, if the householder does not give food, though able, he incurs sin; but in the case of unworthy people he incurs no blemish by not giving, but if he gives to them also, he secures merit. Vṛddha-Gautama (pp. 535-536) calls upon a householder to treat even a cāṇḍāla with consideratioṇ Parāśara (I. 40) and Śātātapa went so far¹³ as to say that even if a householder hates a visitor or the latter is a fool, the householder should give him food if he arrives at the time of mealṣ Śāntiparva 146. 5 says that even an enemy when he comes to one's house as a guest must be hospitably treated, as a tree does not remove its shade from one who approaches it to fell it. But Ap. Dh. S. II. 3. 6. 19, Manu IV. 213, Yāj. I. 162 are opposed to this and state that a guest who is at enmity with the host shall not eat his food, nor shall he eat the food of a host who accuses him or suspects him of a crime. Vṛddha-Hārīta (8. 239-240) states the humane rule 'if a traveller is a śūdra or belongs to a pratiloma caste (such as a cāṇḍāla) and comes to one's house tired and hungry, the householder should give him food; but if a heretic or a patita (one outcast for grave sins) comes in that condition, one should not give him cooked food, but only graiṇ Compare Manu IV. 30. Vṛddha-Gautama (chap. 6, p. 535 and chap. 12, p. 590, Jīvānanda part 2) says the same about a cāṇḍāla or śvapāka being given cooked fooḍ Bauḍ gr. II. 9. 21 enjoins welcome to all travellers including cāṇḍālaṣ

The guest is to be shown honour by going out to meet him, by offering him water to wash his feet, by giving him a seat, by lighting a lamp before him, by giving food and lodging, by personal attendance on him, by offering him a bed and by accompanying him some distance when he departṣ Vide Gaut. V. 29-34, 37, Āp. Dh. S. II. 3. 6. 7-15, Manu III. 99, 107 and IV. 29, Dakṣa III. 5-8. Vanaparva 200. 22-25 and Anuśāsana 2 highly extol hospitality. Anuśāsana 7. 6 says 'the host should give his eye, mind and agreeable speech to the guest, he should personally attend on him and should accompany him when he (the guest) departs; this sacrifice demands these five fees’.¹⁴ Ap. Dh. S. (II. 2. 4. 16-21) says that if a brāhmaṇa that has not studied the Veda or a kṣatriya or a vaiśya comes as a guest to a brāhmaṇa, the latter should offer him a seat, water and food, but need not rise to receive him, that if a śūdra comes as a guest to a brāhmaṇa, the latter should ask him to do some work, then give him food, but if he has none, he should send his slaves to bring it from the royal palace (or store-house).¹⁵ Haradatta makes the interesting remark that for honouring śūdra visitors the king should set apart in each village some paddy or other corṇ Gaut. V. 33, Manu III. 101 (= Vanaparva II. 54 and Udyoga 36. 34), Ap. Dh. S. II. 2. 4. 13-14, Yāj. I. 107, Bauḍ gr. II. 9. 21-23 say that¹⁶ if a man has not the means to give food to all visitors he should at least offer them water, room and grass to lie down upon, and agreeable speech. If the householder is absent, his wife is to look after honouring guestṣ Gaut. (V. 37-38) says that guests of the brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya and vaiśya castes should be respectively greeted with the words kuśala, anāmaya and ārogya and the śūdra also with ārogya. Vide Manu II. 127 also and note 831 above.

The motive of this injunction to honour guests was clear, viz. universal kindlinesṣ Other motives were added by smṛtis in order to emphasize the observance of this duty. The Śāṇ gr. II. 17. 1 says “Even if a man constantly gathers grass (i. e. maintains himself by collecting the grains that fall in a field when the crop is taken away) and performs agnihotra, a brāhmaṇa guest who stays in his house without receiving the honour (due as a guest) takes away the (merit) of all his good works".¹⁷ Manu III. 100 says the same. Ap. Dh. S. II. 3. 6. 6 says that by honouring guests one secures heaven and freedom from misfortune.¹⁸ Vide also Ap. Dh. S. II. 3. 7. 16. One verse quoted in numerous works like the Viṣṇu Dh. S. 67. 33, Śāntiparva 191. 12, Viṣṇupurāṇa III. 9. 15, Mārkaṇḍeya 29. 31, Brahmapurāṇa 114. 36 is ‘when a guest returns from the house of a person with his hope of getting food shattered, he (the guest) transfers his own sins to the householder and departs taking with him the householder’s merit (puṇya)’. The Vāyupurāṇa (71.74) and Bṛhat-Parāśara (Jīvānanda, part 2, p. 99) say that yogins and siddhas (those who have attained transcendant powers) wander over this earth in various forms for the benefit of men; therefore one should with folded hands welcome a guest. If one is not able to feed many guests, then Bauḍ Dh. S. (II. 3. 15-18) declares that one should feed him who is endowed with superior qualities or who is the first to arrive or who is a śrotriya.

`Parāśara (I. 46-47) says that the brahmacārin and the ascetic are the masters of food (i. e. their claim is the first); if one eats without giving to these one should perform the penance of cāndrāyaṇa. When a yati comes as a guest, one should give water in his hand, then food and then again water. The food becomes as big as Meru (mountain) and the water as the sea. Laghu-Viṣṇu (II. 12-14) highly eulogises a yogin as a guest and Dakṣa VII. 42-44 and Vṛddha-Hārīta 8. 89 say that if a yati stays as a guest in a householder’s house for a single night, the latter’s accumulated sins are destroyed and when a yati takes food at a man’s house it is Viṣṇu himself who is feḍ¹⁹

If after some guests have been fed another guest or a batch of guests arrives, then the householder should have food cooked again, but in such a case no fresh vaiśvadeva and baliharaṇa are necessary. Vide Manu III. 105 and 108. It has been already shown from the Śatapatha that the householder is not to partake of meals before the guests, but rather after the guestṣ The Āp. Dh. S. II. 3. 7. 3 states²⁰ ‘he who eats before his guest eatṣ (destroys) food, prosperity, progeny, cattle and merit of his own house’. Manu III. 114 (= Viṣṇu Dh. S. 67. 39) allows the householder to feed newly married girls (his daughters or sisters), unmarried girls, persons who are ill, and pregnant women even before guests; while Gautama V. 23 says that these should be fed at the same time as the guestṣ Manu III. 113, 116–118, Viṣṇu Dh. S. 67. 38–43, Yāj. I. 105, 108, Āp. Dh. S. II. 4. 9. 10,²¹ Bauḍ Dh. S. II. 3. 19 say that one should feed one’s friends, relatives and one’s servants and then the householder and his wife should dine, that one should not stint one’s servants and slaves (who are to be fed daily with food) in order to be able to feed guests, that he who eats before these (guests, relatives, young women of the house, servants) will have his soul harassed by vultures after death, that he who cooks food for himself only swallows merely sin and that when he eats what remains after offering yajña to gods, beings, pitṛs and guests, he really eatṣ Manu III. 285 (= Vanaparva II. 60) says that ‘vighasa is what is left after brāhmaṇas and guests have partaken and amṛta is what is left after being offered in sacrifice and one should always eat these.’ Bauḍ Dh. S. (II. 3. 68 and 21–22) says²² “all beings subsist on food, the Veda declares ‘food is life’; therefore food should be given, as food is the highest offering. One should not take food without giving it to others” and quotes two verses said to have been sung by food itself. It is on account of these sentiments that are ingrained even to-day in the minds of all Hindus that no Poor Law and no work-houses were required in India. This senti- ment undoubtedly leads to abuses, but what system is not without abuses? The Poor Law and work-houses have their own abuses and the general tax-payer has probably to pay more for relief to the poor, the destitute and unemployed in England than under the Indian system of feeding the poor voluntarily.

Āp. Dh. S. (II. 4. 9. 2-4) says²³ that when the guest departs, the host should accompany him to the place where his conveyance is drawn up and if he has no conveyance, then till the guest gives him leave to go or if the guest forgets to give leave, the host should turn back from the boundary. Vaṣ Dh. S. XI. 15 and Yāj. I. 113 speak also of accompanying the guest till the boundary, and Aparārka explains that the boundary may be that of the host's house site, or of his field or of the village according to the eminence of the guest. Śaṅkha- Likhita²⁴ prescribe that the host should accompany the guest till he reaches a public garden or public hall, a prapā (place where water is distributed gratis), a tank, a temple, a sacred (or big) tree (like the fig tree) or a river and then should go round the guest and say the words ‘farewell till we see each other agaiṇ’ It is in accordance with this that in the fourth Act of the Śakuntala Kanva's pupil reminds his teacher that one should accompany one's dear relative up to some reservoir of water.