DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9551#0141
OF BURNING WIDOWS ALIVE.
by Ungira and others ; and, vice versa, Concremation, as
■directed by Ungira and others, is inconsistent with living
as an ascetic, in order to attain absorption. Therefore
those two authorities are obviously contradictory of each
other. More especially as Ungira, by declaring that " there
is no other way known for a virtuous woman except
ascending the pile of her husband," has made Concre-
mation an indispensable duty. And Hareet also, in his
code, by denouncing evil consequences, in his declaration,
that " as long as a woman shall not burn herself after the
death of her husband, she shall be subject to transmigra-
tion in a female form,'" has made this duty absolute.
Therefore all those passages are in every respect contra-
dictory to the law of Munoo and others.
Advocate. When Ungira says that there is no other
way for a widow except Concremation, and when Hareet
says that the omission of it is a fault, we reconcile their
words with those of Munoo, by considering them as used
merely for the purpose of exalting the merit of
Concremation, but not as prescribing this as an indispes-
able duty. All these expressions, moreover, convey a
promise of reward for Concremation, and thence it
.appears that Concremation is only optional.
Opponent. If, in order to reconcile them with the text
of Munoo, you set down the words of Ungira and
Hareet, that make the duty incumbent, as meant only to
convey an exaggerated praise of Concremation, why do
you not also reconcile the rest of the words of Ungira,
Hareet, and others, with those in which Munoo prescribes
to the widow the practice of living as an ascetic as her
absolute duty ? And why do you not keep aloof from
witnessing the destruction of females, instead of tempting
9
by Ungira and others ; and, vice versa, Concremation, as
■directed by Ungira and others, is inconsistent with living
as an ascetic, in order to attain absorption. Therefore
those two authorities are obviously contradictory of each
other. More especially as Ungira, by declaring that " there
is no other way known for a virtuous woman except
ascending the pile of her husband," has made Concre-
mation an indispensable duty. And Hareet also, in his
code, by denouncing evil consequences, in his declaration,
that " as long as a woman shall not burn herself after the
death of her husband, she shall be subject to transmigra-
tion in a female form,'" has made this duty absolute.
Therefore all those passages are in every respect contra-
dictory to the law of Munoo and others.
Advocate. When Ungira says that there is no other
way for a widow except Concremation, and when Hareet
says that the omission of it is a fault, we reconcile their
words with those of Munoo, by considering them as used
merely for the purpose of exalting the merit of
Concremation, but not as prescribing this as an indispes-
able duty. All these expressions, moreover, convey a
promise of reward for Concremation, and thence it
.appears that Concremation is only optional.
Opponent. If, in order to reconcile them with the text
of Munoo, you set down the words of Ungira and
Hareet, that make the duty incumbent, as meant only to
convey an exaggerated praise of Concremation, why do
you not also reconcile the rest of the words of Ungira,
Hareet, and others, with those in which Munoo prescribes
to the widow the practice of living as an ascetic as her
absolute duty ? And why do you not keep aloof from
witnessing the destruction of females, instead of tempting
9