Verse 9.60

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

विधवायां नियुक्तस्तु घृताक्तो वाग्यतो निशि ।
एकमुत्पादयेत् पुत्रं न द्वितीयं कथं चन ॥ ६० ॥

vidhavāyāṃ niyuktastu ghṛtākto vāgyato niśi |
ekamutpādayet putraṃ na dvitīyaṃ kathaṃ cana || 60 ||

He who has been authorised in regard to a widow shall, annointed with clarified butter and with speech controlled, beget, at night, one son,—and on no account a second one.—(60)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

No significance is meant to be attached to the mention of the. ‘widow’; as the rule laid down here is applicable also to the case of the woman whose husband is alive, but subject to such disabilities as impotence and the like. That such is the meaning is clear from what follows later (in 63). As a matter of fact, the sole purpose underlying the practice lies in what is stated in the present verse; the restriction too pertains to persons subject to the law, and not to the observances themselves. Otherwise it would seem that the whole thing pertained to widows only. (?)

‘At night—this is meant to indicate the absence of all light, in the shape of lamps etc.; intercourse during the day having been already forbidden by another text.

Others however hold that the prohibition of intercourse during the day is with reference to the benefit of the man, while the specification of ‘night’ in the present text bears upon ritualistic purposes.

Hence what is meant is that ‘only one.’—and never a second—‘Kṣetraja’ son is to be begotten; but never by intercourse during the day.—(60)

An exception to this is set forth in the next verse:—

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

(verses 9.59-60)

See Explanatory notes for Verse 9.59.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 9.60-68)

(See texts under 59.)

Vaśiṣṭha (17.61, et seq.).—‘He shall approach the widow in the moment sacred to Prajāpati, behaving like a husband, without dallying with her, and without abusing or ill-treating her. She shall obtain the expenses for food, raiment, baths and unguents from the estate of her deceased husband. They declare that a son begotten on a widow not duly authorised belongs to the begetter; if she has been duly authorised, the child belongs to both the males connected with the authorisation. No such authorisation shall be made for the purpose of obtaining a living. But some people declare that an authorisation may be made through desire for wealth, after an expiatory penance has been performed.’

Yājñavalkya (1.68-69).—(See under 59.)

Gautama (18.8).—‘She shall not bear more than two sons.’

Nārada (12.82-88).—‘He shall approach the woman, free from passion, and without amorous desire. He must have anointed his limbs with clarified butter, or with oil which has not lost its natural condition, and must turn away his face from hers and avoid the contact of limb with limb. For this custom is practised only when the family threatens to become extinct, for the continuance of the lineage, and not from amorous desire. He must not approach a woman who is with child, or blameworthy, or not duly authorised by her relations. Should a woman procreate a son with her brother-in-law without having been authorised thereto by her relations, that son is declared illegitimate and incapable of inheriting, by the expounders of the Veda. So when a younger brother has intercourse, without authorisation, with the wife of his elder brother,—or an elder brother with the wife of his younger brother,—they are both held to have committed incest. If he has been authorised by the elders, he shall approach the woman and advise her in the manner previously stated, as if she were his daughter-in-law. He becomes purified of the sin when the son is born and his Birth-ceremonies have been performed. He shall approach her only once,—or till conception has taken place. When she has become pregnant, she is again even as a daughter-in-law to him. Should the man or woman behave otherwise, impelled by amorous desire, they shall be severely punished by the King. Otherwise righteousness would be violated.’

Yama (Vivādaratnākara, p. 446).—‘When during her period, the woman has taken her bath, her brother-in-law, desiring an offspring for his deceased brother, may approach her during the dark night, with speech held in check, with a single cloth on, and his body anointed with clarified butter, and mind stricken with grief, avoiding the contact of his face and limbs with her face and limbs.’