Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 28

Prāyaścitta and Contextual Non-Culpability (प्रायश्चित्त-निमित्त-अदोषवाद)

निवेश्यं तु पुनस्तेन सदा तारयता हा | नतु स्त्रिया भवेद्‌ दोषो न तु सा तेन,इसके सिवा, बड़े भाईका विवाह होनेके बाद पहलेका व्याहा हुआ छोटा भाई पितरोंके उद्धारके निमित्त पुनः विवाह-संस्कार करे; ऐसा करनेसे उस स्त्रीके कारण उसे दोष नहीं प्राप्त होता और न वह स्त्री ही उसके दोषसे लिप्त होती है

niveśyaṃ tu punas tena sadā tārayatā hā | na tu striyā bhaved doṣo na tu sā tena lipyate ||

ಅಣ್ಣನ ವಿವಾಹವಾದ ನಂತರ, ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ವಿವಾಹಿತನಾದ ತಮ್ಮನು ಪಿತೃಗಳ ಉದ್ಧಾರಾರ್ಥವಾಗಿ ಮರು ವಿವಾಹ-ಸಂಸ್ಕಾರವನ್ನು ನೆರವೇರಿಸಬೇಕು. ಹೀಗೆ ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ಆ ಸ್ತ್ರೀಯ ಕಾರಣದಿಂದ ಅವನಿಗೆ ದೋಷ ಬರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ; ಆ ಸ್ತ್ರೀಯೂ ಅವನ ದೋಷದಿಂದ ಲಿಪ್ತಳಾಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.

निवेश्यhaving caused to enter / having placed
निवेश्य:
TypeVerb
Rootनि+विश्
Formक्त्वा-प्रत्ययान्त अव्यय (gerund)
तुbut
तु:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootतु
पुनःagain
पुनः:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootपुनः
तेनby him / by that
तेन:
Karana
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Instrumental, Singular
सदाalways
सदा:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootसदा
तारयताby (one) who causes to cross / who delivers
तारयता:
Karana
TypeVerb
Rootतारयत्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Instrumental, Singular, णिच् causative of √तॄ (to cross) → तारयति; present active participle (शतृ) तारयत्
हाalas / O!
हा:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootहा
Forminterjection; reading uncertain in this context
not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
तुindeed/but
तु:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootतु
स्त्रियाby/through a woman
स्त्रिया:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootस्त्री
FormFeminine, Instrumental, Singular
भवेत्would be / should arise
भवेत्:
TypeVerb
Rootभू
FormOptative (विधिलिङ्), 3rd, Singular, Parasmaipada
दोषःfault, sin, defect
दोषः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootदोष
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
तुand/but
तु:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootतु
साshe
सा:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormFeminine, Nominative, Singular
तेनby him / by that
तेन:
Karana
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Instrumental, Singular

व्यास उवाच

V
Vyāsa
E
elder brother
Y
younger brother
W
woman (wife)
P
pitṛs (ancestors)

Educational Q&A

A remedial re-performance of the marriage rite, when done with the dharmic intention of benefiting the ancestors, does not generate moral fault; importantly, the woman is explicitly protected from blame or moral taint.

Vyāsa lays down a rule-like clarification about a complex marital situation involving elder and younger brothers: after the elder brother’s marriage, the younger brother may undertake a renewed marriage-sacrament for ancestral deliverance, and neither he nor the woman should be considered culpable on that account.