Sexual Life in Ancient India: A Study in the Comparative History of Indian Culture v1.c8.58

v1.c8.58

in vi, 29, 13. But later on I see that he gives in xiv, 42, 56 the same interpretation as myself. In the passage before us we could as against the scholiast choose rather to give the five sense organs and the five active organs according to cl. 30, but to reckon the tongue and speech as one only, thus: ear, eye, skin, tongue, nose, anus, generative member, hand, foot. This, too, seems to be pointed to by cl. 32, which then would be translated: “In perceiving taste it is called tongue, in uttering it is called speech.” Cp. xii, 210.32. Not so beautiful, but on the other hand more common, not in India alone, is the well-known view that the body and its openings are clean above, unclean below the navel. Baudhāyana, i, 5, 10.19 (= i, 5.75; according to Taitt.-Saṃh., vi, 1, 3.4); Viṣṇu, xxiii, 31; Manu, v, 132; Cp. Meyer, *Altind. Rechtsschr.*, p. 9. Therefore it is that at death the soul of the good man escapes through one of the upper openings, the soul of the bad man through the lower ones. For instance, Agnipur., 371.3 ff; Garuḍapurāṇasārod., ix, 36 f.; Crooke, *Anthropos*, iv, 468 (in the last-mentioned that of the bad man through the anus, that of the pious man through brahmarandhra).