History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c92.146.2

v7.c92.146.2

233-235) by way of explaining the insistence on five makāras. The first question is: why was it necessary to employ vulgar language to describe a state of profound bliss? Supposing the explanation of *madya* offered by Woodroffe is accepted, what is the explanation about offering flesh and fish? One cannot easily get out of 'matsyāśī' and 'māṁsāśī' the esoteric sense required by the apologists. The Kulārṇava, the Pārānanda-sūtra and several other works almost always employ the words madya, māmsa and fish in the ordinary sense. They rarely, if at all, drop the hint that words like matsya and māmsa are being used in an esoteric sense and proceed to deal with realities of madya and flesh. The Kulārnava quotes (II. 126) the verse of Manu IX, 93 (surā vai malam-annānām &c.), provides for the preparation of the three kinds of surā (V. 15-21), and says (V. 30) that surā is the 12th kind among intoxicants and that there are eleven other kinds of intoxicants made from jack-fruit, grapes, dates, sugar-cane &c (V. 29). In XI. 22-35 the Kulārnava dilates upon the etiquette to be observed in drinking wine as part of Kaula practice. It proceeds (V. 44) to divide flesh into three classes viz. of animals that fly in the sky (birds), of acquatic animals and of those that move on the earth.