History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c26.121.3

v2.c26.121.3

Kumārila in his Tantravārtika while discussing the scope and validity of *sadācāra* (on Jaimini I. 3. 7) enumerates many lapses from good conduct attributed to great men and heroes of the past and tries to explain away those violations of good conduct. The charge brought against Vāsudeva (Kṛṣṇa) and Arjuna, the central heroes of the Mahābhārata, is that they respectively married Rukmiṇī and Subhadrā who were their maternal uncle's daughters (this being forbidden). Kumārila makes very scathing remarks against this practice¹⁰⁸² prevalent among southerners and then refutes this charge by saying that although in the Mahābhārata (Ādiparva 219. 17-18) Subhadrā is described as the daughter of Vasudeva and sister¹⁰⁸³ of Kṛṣṇa, she was really not so, but that she was Vāsudeva's mother's sister's daughter or was the daughter's daughter of the sister of the father of Vāsudeva's mother (or step-mother Rohiṇī).¹⁰⁸⁴ Kumārila argues that such female cousins one degree or several degrees removed are often spoken of as sisters. Vide my notes to the Vyavahāramayūkha pp. 200-202 where this matter is fully explained. This reply of Kumārila well illustrates the method of dealing with inconvenient texts adopted by mīmāṁsakas like Kumārila when the texts run counter to their cherished views. Viśvarūpa on Yāj. III. 254 quotes Manu XI. 172 and verses of Saṁvarta prescribing the penance of *Parāka* for carnal intercourse with one's maternal uncle's daughter.¹⁰⁸⁵ Medhātithi on Manu II.