DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.39769#0457
1
THE NINTH LECTURE. 431
should be understood as being limited to the masculine
gender and to the singular number, according to the
literal construction of the passage ; or it should be appli-
cable to all Brahamans and to ail Brahinan ladies also.
By applying the Grahaikattwa maxim to this case,
Medhatithi holds that' the passage f Brahmana should
not drink spirituous liquor’ should be construed so’as to
include the whole class of Brahmanas, male and female.
Medhatithi, in this connection, enters into a discussion
why passages like ''sacrifice animal in a Yaga’ should
not be construed in the above way to justify the sacri-
fice of many animals but should be’ construed literally
to indicate the sacrifice of a single animal. This dis-o
cuSsion belongs to another maxim 1 Medhatithi’s book
abounds with other instances.
Raghunandana shows that by applying the Vakya
principle, the following text of Manu should not be
taken as a Prakarana of the Darsa Paurnamasi ya$a in
connection with which it occurs, but as a general Vidhi
‘'one who assaults a Brahman must perform the Krichhra
penance.”2 This text read with what follows makes it
a general proposition and not limited to the cases
of one who is, engaged in perforpiing the Darsa
Paurnamasi yaga. With reference to the same passage
the further question raised is, whether when a man as-
saults five Brahmanas he fe to perform the Krichhra
penance five times. Raghunandana shows ■ that per-
forming a penance once only is sufficient by
Application
of Grabai-
katwo a
maxim to a
certain
passage.
Raghiman-
dana apply-
ing Vakya
Principle in
construng
a passage
of Matin.
1 Medhatithi'’s commentary on sloka 00, Ch. V.
2 |
THE NINTH LECTURE. 431
should be understood as being limited to the masculine
gender and to the singular number, according to the
literal construction of the passage ; or it should be appli-
cable to all Brahamans and to ail Brahinan ladies also.
By applying the Grahaikattwa maxim to this case,
Medhatithi holds that' the passage f Brahmana should
not drink spirituous liquor’ should be construed so’as to
include the whole class of Brahmanas, male and female.
Medhatithi, in this connection, enters into a discussion
why passages like ''sacrifice animal in a Yaga’ should
not be construed in the above way to justify the sacri-
fice of many animals but should be’ construed literally
to indicate the sacrifice of a single animal. This dis-o
cuSsion belongs to another maxim 1 Medhatithi’s book
abounds with other instances.
Raghunandana shows that by applying the Vakya
principle, the following text of Manu should not be
taken as a Prakarana of the Darsa Paurnamasi ya$a in
connection with which it occurs, but as a general Vidhi
‘'one who assaults a Brahman must perform the Krichhra
penance.”2 This text read with what follows makes it
a general proposition and not limited to the cases
of one who is, engaged in perforpiing the Darsa
Paurnamasi yaga. With reference to the same passage
the further question raised is, whether when a man as-
saults five Brahmanas he fe to perform the Krichhra
penance five times. Raghunandana shows ■ that per-
forming a penance once only is sufficient by
Application
of Grabai-
katwo a
maxim to a
certain
passage.
Raghiman-
dana apply-
ing Vakya
Principle in
construng
a passage
of Matin.
1 Medhatithi'’s commentary on sloka 00, Ch. V.
2 |