Mimamsa in Medhatithi (study)

by A. R. Joshi | 1982 | 168,442 words

This essay studies the philosophy of Mimamsa as found in Medhatithi’s commentary on the Manu Smriti....

Sahitya in Manubhasya 11.131

[Full title: Mimamsa technical terms (25) Sahitya (4) References in Manubhasya verse 11.131]

Warning! Page nr. 10 has not been proofread. Click the page link to verify the generated OCR text with the original PDF.

REFERENCE Manu Smriti XI-131. 1000 P_ es s a ge - atimahattvatprayascittasya samudayavidhe prayascittametam | nanucatra sahityam vivaksita mityukta ya to jati bhramsaka radisu katham caitat eka sarve caikasya hantara upanayeyuh | Translation - 1 Cmedhatthi on ms XI 131) In as much as the expiation prescribed is a heavy one, it should be understood as applying to a case where all these animals have been killed. It has been ascerted in connection with offences leading to loss of caste etc. that a combination is not meant. How to is it even possible for all these animals to come up before only one man and be killed ? Explanation While discussing expiation for the killing of cats and other 1 animals we have Manu Smriti XI-131 which means - "Having killed a cat, an incherumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an iguona, an owl or a crow he shall perform the penance for the murder of a Sudra." Here the question arises whether the expiation should be performed by a man, when all the animals mentioned in the stanza are killed or one of them is killed? 1. marjara nakulo hatva casam mandukameva ca | svagodhaluka ka kamca sudra hatyavratam caret || 12-233|| Ths P-1410 Mandlik edition

Warning! Page nr. 11 has not been proofread. Click the page link to verify the generated OCR text with the original PDF.

1001 To this tiklish point, Medhatithi clarifies that a man should perform a penance which is prescribed for a murder of Sudra for having killed one animal, only and not several animals. Here the occasion should be given importance. to What Medhatithi means say is that this cannot be a case of Sahitya as the expiation is prescribed for killing a single animal and not for killing several animals at one and the same timg. Had the stanza been meant as expiation for killing several animals, then one would have resort to Sahitya. But, here occasion of killing the animal is not more important than the number of animals killed. Hence this cannot be treated as a case of Sahitya. (Other commentators of Manu are silent from Mimamsa point of view).

Let's grow together!

I humbly request your help to keep doing what I do best: provide the world with unbiased sources, definitions and images. Your donation direclty influences the quality and quantity of knowledge, wisdom and spiritual insight the world is exposed to.

Let's make the world a better place together!

Like what you read? Help to become even better: