1161. Some texts read Prishadhro-gamlavanniva, meaning Prishadhara perpetrated a great sin by killing a cow (mistaking it for a tiger, as the story goes).
1162. The cow is called the mother because of the use to which she is subservient. Her milk nourishes every infant as much as the mother's bosom. The bull, again, is Prajapati, because like Prajapati he creates offspring and assists man in the production of food.
1163. Nahusha had killed a cow and a bull for honouring the Rishis. The latter, however, expressed their dissatisfaction at the act, and cleansed him of the sin in the manner indicated in the text. The commentator cites the instance of how Indra was cleansed of the sin of Brahmanicide. The Rishis, in compassion, distributed the sin among all beings of the feminine sex. That sin manifests itself in their periodical flows and the consequent impurity.
1164. The commentator explains that the Rishis addressed Nahusha in that style even when they knew that he had not intentionally slain the cow and the bull. The object of the speaker is to show the enormity of the act when done intentionally.
1165. The fact is, all Sacrifices, in which injury is done to animal and vegetable life are Sacrifices for Kshatriyas. The only Sacrifice that Brahmanas should perform is Yoga.
1166. Sacrifices are always attractive for the fame they bring. Their performance depends upon wealth. The acquisition of wealth leads to the commission of many evil acts.
1167. The sense is that in former days when the true meaning of Sacrifice was understood and all men performed them without being urged by the desire of fruit, the beneficial consequences that flowed were the production of crops without tillage (and without injury to animals that live in holes and burrows). The good wishes the Rishis cherished for all creatures were sufficient to produce herbs and plants and trees. May not this be taken as an indication of the traditional idea of the happiness of Eden before the fall of man?
1168. 'Bereft of wisdom' is explained by the commentator as implying the non-attainment of emancipation.
1169. This verse is exceedingly terse and condensed. In the second line, the words Brahmana vartate loke, literally rendered, mean 'who believes that only Brahma exists in the world.' The commentator takes these words as implying 'who regards every essential of Sacrifice as Brahma.' Although I have followed the commentator, yet I think his interpretation to be rather far-fetched. Why may not the words be taken in a literal sense? He who takes Brahma to be all things and all things to be Brahma, becomes sinless and deserves to be called a Brahmana. The last word of the second tine simply means 'who does not regard his own self as the actor.' The view expressed in the Gita is that we should do all acts believing ourselves to be only agents or instruments of the Supreme deity. Acts are His, we are only His tools. Such a conviction is sure to guard us against all evil acts.
1170. What is said in verse 17 is that when Sacrifices are done from a sense of duty, notwithstanding their incompleteness, they become efficacious. It is only when they are performed from desire of fruit that expiation becomes necessary if their completion be obstructed by any cause. Having thus applauded the Sacrifices (represented by acts) of the truly wise, other kinds of Sacrifices are indicated in verse 18. K.P. Singha translates 18 correctly. The Burdwan version is erroneous.