History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v3.c46.68

v3.c46.68

Some espoused the view that *sannyāsa* was meant only for the blind, the cripple and the impotent, that is, for persons who possessed no eligibility (*adhikāra*) for the performance of Vedic rites. Śaṁkarācārya in his bhāṣya on V. S. III. 4. 20 refutes the view that the passage of the Jābālopaniṣad (4) cited above relates to those who are not eligible for performing Vedic rites and establishes that that passage has in view the general prescription that there is a stage of life called pārivrājya (sannyāsa) meant for all that seek release from *saṁsāra*. Sureśvara in his Vārtika on Śaṁkara's Bṛ. Up. bhāṣya (p. 1908 v. 1144) also refutes the view.²¹⁷⁰ Medhātithi on Manu VI. 36 rejects this view (of some) by saying that the blind or cripple cannot follow the rules and practices (such as not staying in one village for more than one night) just as they cannot perform Vedic rites and hence it could not have been intended by the smṛti writers that sannyāsa was only for the blind and the cripple, nor can the impotent take to sannyāsa as no upanayana is performed in their case. The Mit. on Yāj. III. 56 follows Medhātithi. The Sm. Mu. (p. 173) and Yati-dh. (pp. 5-6) quote verses to the effect that 'the son of an apostate from sannyāsa, one having bad nails or black teeth, one emaciated by phthisis, one devoid of a limb—these do not deserve to resort to sannyāsa. Similarly those who are guilty of mortal sins or are suspected of them or are *vrātyas*, those who have left the path of truth, purity, sacrifices, *vratas*, tapas, charity, study of the Veda and homa should not be allowed to take up the ascetic life'.