Manava Dharmashastra 5.88.1

5.88.1

jātaśabdaḥ pratyekamabhisambadhyate | vṛthājātā yo na devānarcayati na pitṛnna manuṣyāniti | satyadhikāre'nāśramī, hutāhutaparityaktaḥ | 'saṃvatsaramanāśramī bhūtvā' ityādi cirakālāvasthāne mahādoṣaśravaṇāt | brahmacāriparivrājakābhyāmanyasya parapākaratitvam | ātmārthastu pāko niṣiddhaḥ | saṃkarajātā itaretarajātivyatikareṇa pratilomā āyogavādyaḥ | ninditatvādvṛthājātasāhacaryeṇa | anulomāstu satyapi saṃkīrṇayonitve mātṛjātīyatvādadhikāritvācca neha gṛhyante | na cānulomeṣu saṃkīrṇayonivyavahāraḥ | “saṃkīrṇayonayastvetāḥ pratilomānulomajā” iti | aniyuktā sutādayaścānekapuruṣasaṃsargajāḥ veśyājātāśca | pārastraiṇeyāstu asatyanekapuruṣasaṃsarge na saṃkarajātāḥ | ayaṃ ca sapiṇḍānāṃ niṣedho, na tatputrāṇāmiti kecit | ātmatyāgināṃ tu putrāṇāmapi | tadayuktamaviśeṣaśravaṇāt | 'pravrajyāsu' bāhyāsu bhagālavaraktapaṭādyāsu anadhikārādbahuvacananirdeśāt vratādidarśanabhedena bāhyāḥ | ātmanastyāgināṃ puruṣāṇām—yuṣo'kṣaye svecchayā śarīraṃ tyajanti| vṛddhānāmacikitsyamahāvyādhīnāṃ ca bhiṣakpratyākhyātānāmiṣyata eva| yathoktam— "vṛddhaḥ śaucasmṛterluptaḥ pratyākhyātabhiṣakkriyaḥ | ātmānaṃ ghātayedyastu bhṛgvagnyanaśanāmbubhiḥ||" "tasya trirātramāśaucaṃ dvitīye tvasthisaṃcayaḥ| tṛtīye tūdakaṃ kṛtvā caturthe śrāddhamācaret ||"iti| kuṣṭhādestu vyādhigṛhītasya iṣyata eva| yathoktaṃ 'luptaceṣṭasya' | gṛhasthāvasthāyāmapi—"mahāprasthānagamanā vṛthā necchanti jīvitum"| 'luptaceṣṭa'ścocyate yaḥ śaucādiṣvasamarthaḥ saṃdhyopāsanādiṣu ca | 'aparicīṇaśarīro vā sādhayeccātvatmānamaluptaceṣṭo vā' |

The water-offering is withdrawn from those born in vain and from intermixture, from those who are addicted to asceticism and from those who have abandoned themselves.—(88)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
The term ‘born’ is to be construed separately with each of the two terms with which it is compounded. He is said to be ‘born in vain’ who does not worship Gods, Pitṛs or Men; i. e. he who does not lead the life proper for uny of the four stages of life, even though he is capable of doing so; one who is excluded from all offerings and invitations. Having referred to the man ‘who for one year does not lead the life proper for any stage,’ the scriptures speak of a great sin attaching to persons doing this for any length of time. This is so because with the exception of the Student and the Renunciate, all the others have to cook food for other people; and it is only cooking for one’s own self alone that has been prohibited.

‘Born of intermixture;’—i.e., the Āyogara’ and other persons born of an improper and inverse mixture of the several castes; that the issue of improper mixtures is meant is indicated by its association with those ‘born in vain,’ which implies lowness of birth. As regards the issue of legal mixtures, even though these also are ‘born of intermixtures,’ yet these are not meant here, because they belong definitely to their mother’s caste and are entitled to all that pertains thereto. Further, in ordinary usage children of legal mixtures are not spoken of as being of ‘mixed origin’; e.g. in 10.25, where the issues of ‘mixed origin’ are described. The term also includes (a) the children of such widows as have not been ‘permitted’ to beget children, born of the intercourse of several men, and (b) the children of prostitutes; the children of women begotten by a person other than their husbands are not included in this category, if there has not been intercourse with several men.

Some people hold that this prohibition refers to Sapiṇḍa relations who are as described, and not to their sons; while in the case of those who have ‘abandoned themselves,’ it applies to their sons also.

This however is not right; as the text makes no distinction among those mentioned.

Asceticisms; i.e., of heretics, such as the ‘Bhagala,’ the ‘Raktapaṭa’ and the rest. That these are meant is indicated by the plural number and by the fact that it is the heterodox heretic alone that is excluded. These are regarded as ‘heterodox’ by reason of their observances &c., being different from those of the orthodox ascetics.

‘Those who have abandoned themselves;’—i.e ., those who, even before their life’s span has been run out, give up their bodies (by committing suicide). [It is only such suicide that is reprehensible]. It is considered quite desirable in the case of old men suffering from incurable diseases given up by the physicians; as has been thus declared:—‘If an old man,—incapable of purification and memory, who has passed beyond the reach of the physician’s art,—kills himself by falling down from a precipice, or entering into fire, or by fasting, or by drowning in water,—in his case there is impurity for three days; his bones being collected on the second day, on the third day the water offering-should be made, and on the fourth day the Śrāddha should be performed’. Suicide is regarded as desirable also in the case of persons suffering from leprosy and such other diseases; as has been said in connection with men who, though still in the Householder’s state, have lost all energy,—‘Bent upon entering the Great Path, they do not wish to live on uselessly.’ That man is called ‘devoid of energy’ who is incapable of doing purificatory acts, as also saying the Twilight Prayers &c. Then again, in texts deprecating suicide, the words used are—‘if one whose body has not been emaciated, or who has not lost all energy, should kill himself &c. &c.’; which implies that it is permitted for those who are not such as here described.