The Law Code of Yājñavalkya 2.8.12

2.8.12

nanu ca dravyārjanasya kratvarthatve svatvam eva na bhavatīti yāga eva na saṃvarteta, pralapitam idaṃ kenāpy arjanaṃ svatvaṃ nāpādayatīti vipratiṣiddham iti vadatā | tathā siddhānte 'pi svatvasya laukikatvam aṅgikṛtyaiva vicāraprayojanam uktam ato niyamātikramaḥ puruṣasya na kratoḥ iti | asya cārtha evaṃ vivṛtaḥ | yadā dravyārjananiyamānāṃ kratvarthatvaṃ tadā niyamārjite naiva dravyeṇa kratusiddhir na niyamātikramārjitena dravyeṇeti na puruṣasya niyamātikramadoṣaḥ pūrvapakṣe |

[The Guru said:] 'As for the claim that if the acquisition of wealth were for the sake of the sacrifice, there would be no ownership at all and thus the sacrifice itself would not take place, this was babble uttered by someone saying that acquisition does not produce ownership, which is contradictory.' Likewise, in the established conclusion as well, precisely by accepting that ownership is worldly, the purpose of the inquiry was stated: 'Therefore, the transgression of the restrictive rule attaches to the person, not to the sacrifice.' And the meaning of this is explained as follows: When the restrictive rules on acquiring wealth are for the sake of the sacrifice, then the accomplishment of the sacrifice occurs only with wealth acquired according to the rules, not with wealth acquired through the transgression of the rules; thus, in the prima facie view, the fault of transgressing the rule does not fall upon the person.