"Yudhishthira said, 'Amongst the diverse kinds of sacrifices, all of
which, of course, are regarded to have but one object (viz., the
cleansing of the heart or the glory of God), tell me, O grandsire, what
that sacrifice is which has been ordained for the sake only of virtue and
not for the acquisition of either heaven or wealth!'The Burdwan translator makes nonsense of this verse. He forgets his grammar so completely as to take etaih as qualifying lokah.

"Bhishma said, 'In this connection I shall relate to thee the history,
formerly recited by Narada, of a Brahmana who for performing sacrifices,
lived according to the unchha mode.'

"Narada said, 'In one of the foremost of kingdoms that was distinguished
again for virtue, there lived a Brahmana. Devoted to penances and living
according to the unchha mode, that Brahmana was earnestly engaged in
adoring Vishnu in sacrifices.The verse is not difficult; the commentator, again, is very clear. The Burdwan translator, however, while citing the very words of the commentary, totally misunderstands them and makes utter nonsense of them. Ekarthanam is explained as Ekam chitiasuddhih Iswarapritirva tadarthanam madhya. The question asked is dharmartham yo yajnah samahitah (viniyuktah) tadeva vruhi and not that Yajna which sukhartham (bhavati). He had Syamaka for his food, as also
Suryaparni and Suvarchala and other kinds of potherbs that were bitter
and disagreeable to the taste. In consequence, however, of his penances,
all these tasted sweet.One that subsists upon grains of corn picked up from the fields after the reapers have abandoned them is called a person leading the unchha mode of life. The Burdwan translator commits the ridiculous error of taking unchhavrittih as the _name_ of the Brahmana. The commentator supposes that Yajna here implies Vishnu, as expounded in the Srutis. Abstaining from injuring any creature, and
leading the life of a forest recluse, he attained to ascetic success.
With roots and fruits, O scorcher of foes, he used to adore Vishnu in
sacrifices that were intended to confer heaven upon him.Syamaka is a variety of paddy called Panicum frumentaceum. 'Suryaparni' is otherwise called 'Mashaparni' (Ayurvedhartha chandrika). It is identified with Tiramus labialis, syn.--Glycine deblis. 'Suvarchala' is a name applied to various plants. Here, very probably, 'Brahmisaka,' or Herpestes Monnjera (syn.--Gratiola Monniera, Linn) is intended. The
Brahmana, whose name was Satya, had a wife named Pushkaradharini. She was
pure-minded, and had emaciated herself by the observance of many austere
vows. (Herself having been of a benevolent disposition, and her husband
being thus addicted to sacrifices that were cruel), she did not approve
of the conduct of her lord. Summoned, however, to take her seat by his
side as his spouse (for the performance of a sacrifice), she feared to
incur his curse and, therefore, comforted herself with his conduct. The
garments that invested her body consisted of the (cast off) plumes of
peacocks. Although unwilling, she still performed that sacrifice at the
command of her lord who had become its Hotri. In that forest, near to the
Brahmana's asylum, lived a neighbour of his, viz., the virtuous Parnada
of Sukra's race, having assumed the form of a deer. He addressed that
Brahmana, whose name was Satya, in articulate speech and said unto him
these words, 'Thou wouldst be acting very improperly,i.e., he never slaughtered living animals for offering them in sacrifices because of his inability to procure them. He, therefore, substituted vegetable products for those animals. His sacrifices, intended to take him to heaven, were really cruel in intention. if this
sacrifice of thine were accomplished in such a manner as to be defective
in mantras and other particulars of ritual. I, therefore, ask thee to
slay and cut me in pieces for making libations therewith on thy
sacrificial fire. Do this and becoming blameless ascend to heaven.' Then
the presiding goddess of the solar disc, viz., Savitri, came to that
sacrifice in her own embodied form and insisted upon that Brahmana in
doing what he desired by that deer to do. Unto that goddess, however, who
thus insisted, the Brahmana replied, saying, 'I shall not slay this deer
who lives with me in this same neighbourhood.'Following the Bombay text I read the last line of 8 as Sukrasya punarajatih Parnadonamadharmavit, or Sukrasya punarjnabhih, etc.; ajatih is a 'descendant.' If ajnabhih be taken as the reading it would mean 'at the repeated commands of Sukra.' The Bengal reading apadhyanat adharmavit seems to be vicious. Both the vernacular versions are incorrect; K.P. Singha supplying something of his own will for making sense of what, he writes, and the Burdwan translator writing nonsense as usual. Thus addressed by
the Brahmana, the goddess Savitri desisted and entered the sacrificial
fire from desire of surveying the nether world, and wishing to avoid the
sight of (other) defects in that sacrifice.K.P. Singha wrongly translates this verse; for once, the Burdwan translator is correct. The deer, then, with
joined hands, once more begged of Satya (to be cut in pieces and poured
into the sacrificial fire). Satya, however, embraced him in friendship
and dismissed him, saying, 'Go!'Both the vernacular versions of this verse were incorrect. The commentator explains that the grammar is rasatalam didrikshuh sa Yajna-pavakam pravishtah. Yajne duscharitam kinnu, samipavarti mudo janah i.e., fearing to see many other defects in the sacrifice which was being celebrated by an ignorant person. At this, the deer seemed to leave
that place. But after he had gone eight steps he returned, and said,
'Verily, do thou slay me. Truly do I say, slain by thee I am sure to
attain to a righteous end. I give thee (spiritual) vision. Behold the
celestial Apsaras and the beautiful vehicles of the high-souled
Gandharvas.' Beholding (that sight) for a protracted space of time, with
longing eyes, and seeing the deer (solicitous of sacrifice), and thinking
that residence in heaven is attainable by only slaughter, he approved (of
the counsels the deer had given). It was Dharma himself who had become a
deer that lived in those woods for many years. (Seeing the Brahmana
tempted by the prospect he beheld), Dharma provided for his salvation and
counselled him, saying, 'This (viz., slaughter of living creatures) is
not conformable to the ordinances about Sacrifices.Vaddhanjalim is an adverb, qualifying ayachata. The Burdwan translator wrongly takes it as an adjective of Satyam. The penances,
which had been of very large measure, of that Brahmana whose mind had
entertained the desire of slaying the deer, diminished greatly in
consequence of that thought itself. The injuring of living creatures,
therefore, forms no part of sacrifice.In verse 8, it is said that it was a descendant of Sukra, viz., the virtuous Parnada, who had become a deer and lived in those woods as the Brahmana's neighbour. Here it is said that it was the deity Dharma who had become so. The two statements may be reconciled supposing that Dharma first became the Rishi Parnada and then, as Parnada, was metamorphosed into a deer. Tasya nishkritim adhatta is explained by the commentator in a very far-fetched way. He takes these words to mean that Dharma, who had become a deer, provided at this juncture for his liberation from that metamorphosis. I think tasya has reference to the misled Brahmana. Then the illustrious Dharma
(having assumed his real form), himself assisted that Brahmana, by
discharging the priestly office, to perform a sacrifice. The Brahmana,
after this, in consequence of his (renewed) penances, attained to that
state of mind which was his spouse's.Yajnia is explained as yajnaya hita. Abstention from injury is
that religion which is complete in respect of its rewards. The religion,
however, of cruelty is only thus far beneficial that it leads to heaven
(which has a termination). I have spoken to thee of that religion of
Truth which, indeed, is the religion of those that are utterers of
Brahma.'"Samadhanam is the absorption of meditation, or that state of mind in which one has no longer any affection for the world, Bharyayh is genitive, but the Burdwan translator takes it for the instrumental singular.