History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c71.s1.102.1

v5.c71.s1.102.1

Though many crimes do not in so many words come within the words of the definitions of the mahāpātakas the smṛtis extend by analogy the same condemnation as the mahāpātakas in three ways. For example, Yāj. III. 251 expressly states that one who kills a kṣatriya or vaiśya engaged in (soma) sacrifice or a foetus or an ātreyī woman has to undergo the same expiation as for brāhmaṇa murder (therefore this is *vācanikātideśa*). Yāj. III. 232-233 extends the sin of *gurutalpa-gamana* to intercourse with several near female relatives (such as mother's or father's sister). This is extension by *tādrūpya*. The smṛtis declare many actions as equal to (*sama*) *mahāpātakas* in general or as equal to one of the *mahāpātakas*. This is *atideśa* by *sāmya*. A few words must be said on this topic. The general rule is that the expiation for those lapses that are declared to be equal to a mahāpātaka is less than (i. e. half of) what would be prescribed for the mahāpātaka itself⁷¹. And the penance for those that come under atīdeśa of the vācanika or tādrūpya kind is three fourths of that for the mahāpātaka itself. But it has to be noted that there is divergence of views about these in the sūtras and the smṛtis Acc. to Gaut 21. 10 giving⁷² false evidence, backbiting about another's guilt that will reach the king, falsely accusing one's *guru* with a grave sin or crime are equal to mahāpātaka. In Manu XI 55 (=Agnipurāṇa 168.