History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.802.2

v4.c63.t2.802.2

Viśvarūpa and Medhātithi, it is worth noting, do not quote a single verse about Kalivarjya. On Yāj. III. 30 Viśvarūpa tries to reconcile Parāśara III. 5 (saying that a brāhmaṇa who is learned in the Veda and keeps the sacred Vedic fires becomes free from impurity in a day) with Parāśara III. 8 (that for ten days on impurity due to birth or death the food of that family becomes unpartakable for others). He does not accept the idea that the period of impurity is only one day for a learned man, but explains that Parāśara III. 5 is only an *arthavāda* meant for glorifying the study of Veda and the keeping of sacred fires. Among later commentators it is stated that the narrowing down of the periods of impurity on the ground of Veda study is forbidden in the Kali age. As this explanation is not offered by Viśvarūpa it is not unreasonable to infer that Viśvarūpa was not aware of the passage on this point quoted from the Ādityapurāṇa. Medhātithi¹⁷⁹⁵ also (on Manu IX. 112) refers to the opinion of some that the smṛti passages about niyoga and uddhāra-vibhāga were applicable only in bygone ages, since smṛtis are restricted to certain ages (vide Manu I. 85); but he refutes that view and explains Manu I. 85 by saying that the meaning is that the dharmas (i. e. qualities or natures of things) change from age to age as they do from season to season. From this it is clear that he did not accept that certain practices current in one age were forbidden in others.