History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c71.s1.243

v5.c71.s1.243

¹⁶¹ प्रायश्चित्तेन क्षीणदोषानपि न संव्यवहरेदिति वाचनिकोऽयं प्रतिषेध । 'किमिति वचनं न कुर्यान्न हि वचनस्यातिभारोऽस्ति'। अतश्च यद्यपि व्यभिचारिणीना वधेऽल्पीय एव प्रायश्चित्त तथापि वाचनिकोऽयं संव्यवहारप्रतिषेध.। मिता on या III 298 The words किकिव हि वचन. भार. occur frequently in शाबरभाष्य, e g on जै II 2.27, III 23, III. 7 11, IV 3 38, V 4 17 etc On जै VI 1 44 (about the privilege of the rathakāra to consecrate Vedic fires) Śabara employs slightly different words 'न हि वचनस्यं किंचिदलभ्यं नाम.' Even Śaṅkarācārya relies on these words of Śabara in his bhāṣya on Vedāntasūtra III 4 32. When Yāj I 58 says that -a son born of a brāhma form of marriage renders 21 generations holy (10 paternal ancestors, ten descendants and himself) Viśvarūpa says that this is all laudatory of the brāhma form and not to be taken seriously as it would be contrary to the doctrine of *Karma*, but then he turns round and says that it may be taken literally as stated by those who know Mīmāṁsā 'श्रुतिमात्रमेतद्भूताना भाविना पावनानुपपत्तेः । उपपत्तौ वा कृतनाशाकृताभ्यागमप्रसङ्गात्। यद्वास्तु फलविधि । विवाहविशेषस्य फलविशेषापेक्षत्वात्। न चागमानुसारिण्यर्येऽनुपपत्तिरिति 'शक्यं वक्तुम्। तथा च नैयायिका - न हि वचनस्यातिभारोऽस्तीत्याहु' ।। विश्वरूप on या I. 58. *Vide* Aparārka on Yāj II. 73-75 (p. 673) who says that one man's merit (*puṇya*) cannot be transferred to another and that Yāj. II. 73-75 are simply intended to frighten away witnesses from perjury as Nārada (*ṛṇādāna* 200) clearly states.