History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c71.s1.242

v5.c71.s1.242

The Par M. (II. part 1 pp 201-203) sets out this view of the Mit and appears to hold it itself. It sets out another view also. Those who hold this latter view read Yāj. III. 226 as 'kāmatosvyavahāryastu' with an *avagraha*. The meaning then is that one who has performed the penance prescribed for a sin does not fall into Hell, but he cannot be allowed to associate with good men (śiṣṭas) if he is guilty of a wilful sin. There is a verse of Manu (XI 190 = Viṣṇu Dh. S. 54.32) that one should not associate with those who slay children, who return evil for the good done to them, who slay those that come for protection and who kill women, even though they might have become purified by undergoing the appropriate penance. There is a similar verse of Yāj III 298 on which the comment of Vijñāneśvara is most interesting as indicative of the spirit of our medieval writers who were always oppressed by the might of words (Vedic or smṛti) deemed as authoritative. The Mit remarks ¹⁶¹ 'the prohibition (contained in Yāj. III. 298) is based on the text alone (and not on logic or reasoning). What cannot a text do? There is nothing too heavy for a text. Therefore, even though a light penance is prescribed for slaying an adulterous woman, still there is a prohibition against associating with such slayers based on the words of the text'.