History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.478.3

v4.c63.t2.478.3

It becomes, therefore, necessary to examine the Sanskrit medieval commentaries and digests in order to arrive at a correct interpretation of the expression ‘*avaruddha strī*’. Strangely enough, the Mit. does not define the word in the section on dāyabhāga, but only under ‘strī-saṅgrahaṇa’. Yāj. II. 290 provides, ‘a man should be awarded a fine of fifty *paṇas*, if he has intercourse with dāsīs that are *avaruddhā* or that are *bhujiṣyā* and also (other women such as prostitutes and *svairiṇīs*), even though ordinarily they (i. e. dāsīs and others) are approachable (without incurring the consequence of punishment)’. The Mit. explains that the word ‘ca’ placed after ‘bhujiṣyāsu’ in Yāj. II. 290 is meant to include *veśyās* and *svairiṇīs* along with bhujiṣyās. Acc. to the Mit. the verse prescribes the same fine for intercourse with three kinds of women, viz. dāsīs that are avaruddhā, dāsīs that are bhujiṣyā and other women such as *veśyās* (who are ordinarily approachable by all males of their own or higher castes) and *svairiṇīs* (who abandon their husbands and resort at their desire to some other male of their own caste, as defined by Yāj. I. 67). A woman though originally a *veśyā* or a *svairiṇī* may be known to be kept by a man. In that case if another man approaches her, Yāj. II.