History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c71.s1.102.2

v5.c71.s1.102.2

25) the last two of these three and false statement about one's caste or learning or family (i e. saying that one is a brāhmaṇa when one is not) for securing prosperity or eminence are stated to be equal to brāhmaṇa's murder. Acc to Yāj. III 228 falsely charging one's *guru* is equal to brahmahatyā and false statement about one's caste or learning is equal to drinking surā (Yāj. III 229), while acc. to Viṣṇu Dh. S 37. 1–3 the three sins mentioned in Manu XI. 55 are to be included among minor sins (*upapātakas*), while giving false evidence is declared by Viṣṇu to be equal to drinking surā (36. 2). No useful purpose would be served by dilating at great length on the divergences of smṛtis on what lapses are equal to one of the Mahāpātakas. The digests explain that where the same lapse is described as equal to surāpāna by one smṛti and as equal to brāhmaṇa-murder by another the idea is that there is an option as to the penance prescribed for that lapse. Therefore only the remarks of Manu and Yāj. will be set out here. Manu XI. 56 (=Agnipurāṇa 168. 26) prescribes that forgetting the Veda (already studied), reviling the Vedas, giving false evidence, killing a friend, eating forbidden food or food that should not be eaten, these six are equal to surāpāna. Vide Yāj III 228 already referred to above. Manu XI. 57 holds that stealing a deposit or a man or horse or silver or land or diamonds and other gems is equal to the theft of brāhmaṇa's gold. Yāj. III. 230, Viṣṇu Dh S.