History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.478.4

v4.c63.t2.478.4

290 declares that he would be liable to be fined in the same amount as if he approached an avaruddhā dāsī or bhujiṣyā, because being in the keeping of another at the time she would be like a wife (as the other two classes do) so far as punishment for approaching a kept woman is concerned. This verse is not concerned with the maintenance of women at all. The Mit. here defines '*avaruddhā dāsī*' as "a slave woman who is prohibited by her master from intercourse with other men with an order to stay in the master's house alone in order that there may be no loss of attendance (on the master)." The Mit. defines a *bhujiṣyā dāsī* as 'one who is restricted (as to enjoyment) to certain definite males' (*puruṣaniyata-parigrahā bhujiṣyāḥ*).¹⁵⁹⁵ It is worthy of note that the Mit. employs different phraseology in defining the two words. In defining a bhujiṣyā it employs the word '*niyata*', which generally means 'fixed or definite', while in defining '*avaruddhā*' it employs the word '*niruddhāḥ*' meaning 'prevented or prohibited'. If the two words were intended to convey the same meaning, there is no reason why the Mit. should not have employed the same word (*niruddhā*) in defining a bhujiṣyā.