Verse 11.58

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

रेतःसेकः स्वयोनीषु कुमारीष्वन्त्यजासु च ।
सख्युः पुत्रस्य च स्त्रीषु गुरुतल्पसमं विदुः ॥ ५८ ॥

retaḥsekaḥ svayonīṣu kumārīṣvantyajāsu ca |
sakhyuḥ putrasya ca strīṣu gurutalpasamaṃ viduḥ || 58 ||

Carnal intercourse with one’s uterine sister, or with virgins, or with low-born women, or with the women of one’s friend or son,—all this they regard as equal to the ‘violating of the Preceptor’s bed.’—(58)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Uterine sisters’—sisters horn of the same mother as oneself.

‘Virgins’— unmarried women.

‘Low-born women’—wild women.

‘Friend’—companion; his ‘women.’

The use of the generic term ‘women’ indicates that it is not only the wife that is meant What is meant is a woman kept for carnal purposes, by the friend or the son.

What we hold however is that, even though the text has used the generic term^‘women,’ yet it cannot be regarded as putting the married and the unmarried women on the same footing; because such an equalisation would be highly unreasonable.

What is said here is not for the purpose of indicating what the exact expiatory rite in the case should be, but with a view to indicate [the seriousness of the crime; which, of course, means that] the expiation also should be heavy. This is what has been set forth in the declaration—‘these shall be heavy in the case of serious, and light in that of lighter, crimes.’ If all this were for this purpose of indicating the exact expiatory rite, it should have occurred under the section dealing with these rites proper. Further, since^‘bearing false witness,’ and^‘slaying of a friend,’ are here placed on the same footing as^‘wine-drinking,’ the expiation for these could not be prescribed as the same as that in the case of^‘Brāhmaṇa-killing’;—secondly, the^‘falsely harassing the Preceptor’ has here been declared to be equal to^‘Brāhmaṇa-killing,’ and yet later on it has been considered necessary to lay down again for this offence the same expiation as for^‘Brāhmaṇa-killing’;—thirdly, carnal intercourse with a^‘virgin’ has here been said to be equal to the^‘violating of the Preceptor’s bed,’ and yet it was considered necessary to prescribe again for this offence the same expiation as that for the said^‘violating of the Preceptor’s bed.’ From all this it is clear that the present equalising of the various sins here with one or the other of the heinous offences is not meant to be an injunction of the necessary expiatory rites.

Other people think that even though all that is meant is to indicate the seriousness of the crimes, yet there is nothing unreasonable in the equalisation here set forth; which may, therefore, be taken as meant to indicate the exact expiations. As for the fact that, even though^‘bearing false witness,’ and ‘slaying a friend’ are here put on the same footing as^‘winedrinking.’ yet the exact expiation for it has been prescribed to be the same as that for Brāhmaṇa-killing,—this means simply that the two expiations are meant to be optional. Where there is absolute equalisation, there can be no option; as is clear from Verse 87 below.—(58)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (3.231), to the effect that the ‘intercourse’ meant here is the actual consummation of the act, as is clear from the use of the term ‘retaḥseka’;—in Aparārka (p. 1048), which also adds that if the intercourse ceases before actual emission, the offence is not equal to the ‘violation of the Teacher’s bed—in Parāśaramādhava (Prāyaścitta p. 251), which adds that this refers to cases where, the act is repeated for fifteen days;—in Madanapārijāta (p. 844), which notes that the use of the expression ‘retaḥseka’ indicates that if the act ceases before emission, it involves an expiation lighter than that in the case of ‘the violation of the Teacher’s bed’;—and in Prāyaścittaviveka (p. 177), which has the following notes—‘Svayonyāsu’, Sapiṇḍa-women, and such women as are blood-relations of one’s father or mother,—‘kumārīṣu’ Brāhmaṇa virgins,—‘Antyajāsu’, Caṇḍāla and other low-born girls,—‘Sakhyuḥ strīṣu’, wives of Brāhmaṇa friends,—‘putrastrīṣu’, wives of sons born of wives of different castes, or wives of sons other than the ‘body born’.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 11.58-66)

Gautama (21.1).—(See under 54.)

Do. (21.11).—‘The guilt of a minor offence rests on those who are defilers of company, or killers of kine, or those who forget the Veda, those who pronounce the Vedic texts for sinners, students who break the vow of chastity, and those who allow the time of initiation to pass.’

Baudhāyana (2.2.5, 13).—‘Trading with merchandise of any description; the following are the minor offences involving loss of caste. Intercourse with women who should not he approached, cohabitation with the female friend of a female Guru, with the female friend of a male Guru, with an Apapātra woman, and a female outcast,—following the medical profession, sacrificing for the multitude, living by the stage, following the profession of the dancing master, or singing master or acting master, tending cows and buffaloes, and so forth, and also fornication.’

Āpastamba (1.21.7-9, 14-15, 17-18).—‘The following acts cause loss of caste: stealing gold, crimes that make one accused, homicide, neglect of the Vedas, causing abortion, incestuous connection with relations born of the same womb as one’s father or mother, or with the offsprings of such relations, drinking wine, intercourse with persons intercourse with whom is forbidden. That man falls who has connection with a female friend of a female Guru, or with a female friend of a male Guru, or with any married woman. Eating forbidden flesh, as of a dog, a man, a village-cock or village pigs, or carnivorous animals; eating what is left by a Śūdra, the cohabitation of Aryans with Apapātra women. Some say that these also lead to loss of caste.’

Viṣṇu (36.4-7).—‘Sexual connection with a paternal aunt, with the maternal grandmother, with a maternal aunt, with the mother-in-law, with the Queen—are crimes equal to connection with a guru’s wife;—and so is sexual intercourse with the father’s or mother’s sister, and with one’s own sister;—and sexual connection with the wife of a learned Brāhmaṇa, or a priest, or an Upādhyāya, or a friend;—and with a sister’s female friend, or with a woman of one’s own race, with a woman belonging to the Brāhmaṇa caste, with a Brāhmaṇa maiden, with a low-caste woman, with a woman in her courses, with a woman come for protection, with a female ascetic, or with a woman entrusted to one’s own care.’

Do. (37.6-10, 13-33).—‘Abandoning one’s holy fire, or father, mother, son or wife;—eating forbidden food, or food of those whose food should not he eaten;—appropriating to one’s self what belongs to another;—sexual intercourse with another man’s wife; sacrificing for persons for whom it is forbidden to sacrifice;—killing a Kṣatriya or a Vaiśya or a Śūdra, or a cow,—selling articles that should not be sold,—for an elder brother to suffer his younger brother to marry before him, for a younger brother to marry before his elder brother,—to give a girl in marriage to either of these two,—or to perform the nuptial ceremony for him,—to allow the proper time for Upanayana to pass off,—to teach the Veda for a reward,—to he taught the Veda by a hired teacher,—to be employed in mines,—to make large instruments,—cutting trees, shrubs, creepers, long climbing plants, or herbs,—to make a living by prostituting one’s own wife,—trying to overcome others by incantations or forcible means; cooking for one’s own self,—omitting to pay one’s debts to God, Sages and Pitṛs,—studying irreligious hooks,—Atheism,—subsisting by a reprehensible act,—intercourse with woman who drinks wine;—these are crimes of the fourth degree.’

Yājñavalkya (3.231, 234-42).—‘Intercourse with a friend’s wife, with a maiden, with one’s own offsprings, with a Caṇḍāla woman, with one’s Sagotra woman, with one’s sons’ wives,—is declared to be equal to the violating of the guru’s bed. Killing cows, apostacy, theft, non-payment of debts, omitting to establish the sacred fires, selling what should not be sold, marrying before the elder brother, learning Veda from a hired teacher, teaching the Veda for payment, adultery, permitting one’s self to be superseded in marriage by the younger brother, usury, manufacturing salt, killing a woman, a Vaiśya, a Śūdra or a Kṣatriya, making a living through reprehensible things, atheism, breaking the vow of celibacy, selling of sons, stealing grains or base metals or cattle, sacrificing for those not entitled to perform sacrifices, abandoning of father, mother or son, selling of tanks or gardens, defiling a maiden, sacrificing for one who has married before his elder brother and giving of girl in marriage to such a person, dishonesty, omitting of the observances and restrictions, undertaking of an act for one’s own benefit, intercourse with a wine-drinking woman, abandoning of Vedic study or of the sacred fires, neglecting one’s sons, forsaking of relatives, cutting trees for fuel, making a living by one’s own wife, or by medicines or by killing, making of murderous machines, being addicted to vicious habits, selling one’s self, serving under a Śūdra, making friendships with low men, intercourse with low-born women, omitting the prescribed life-stages, getting fat with food given by others, studying of evil sciences, superintending mines, selling one’s wife;—each of these is a minor sin, an upapātaka.’