History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c72.421

v5.c72.421

Yāj. III. 6 provides ⁶⁷⁸ that women that have gone over to heterodox views and practices, that do not belong to any particular āśrama, that are thieves (of gold and the like), that (attempt to) kill their husbands, that are unchaste and the like, that drink liquor and that attempt suicide, do not deserve to have water offered to them (on death) and no āśauca should be observed for them. This verse applies to men also as far as possible. Manu V. 89-90 are to the same effect. The Kūrmapurāṇa also prescribes ⁶⁷⁹ that for him who kills himself by means of fire, poison and the like, no āśauca, no cremation and no offering of water is prescribed, there is no cremation for *patitas*, nor *antyesti* nor collection of bones, no shedding of tears and no piṇḍa and no śrāddha should be performed for them. It is provided by Aṅgiras quoted by Mit. on Yāj III. 6 that 'death results to evil-minded men from cāṇḍālas (with whom a quarrel is purposely got up), from water, from a snake, from a brāhmaṇa, from lightning and from animals that have sharp fangs (like tigers). If water and piṇḍa are offered to such people (who die wilfully in these cases) they (water and piṇḍa) do not reach them and perish in mid air.' These verses refer to death in a wrathful fight with tigers, snakes and the like or suicide in water through wrath or sorrow. But, if one died in water or by fire through inadvertence or negligence, then Aṅgiras ⁶⁸⁰ himself provides that water should be offered and āśauca should be observed. Long passages are quoted from the Brahmapurāṇa by Haradatta on Gaut. 14. 11, Śuddhiprakāśa pp. 56-57, Nirṇayasindhu p. 550, which elaborate the same ideas as those of Yāj. III. 6, Aṅgiras and others and wind up by stating that if any one offers water or śrāddha to *patitas* through affection or cremates them, he has to undergo prāyaścitta (viz. two Taptakṛcchras).