@ahir2350 @Gourav00135439 @Bhaktirassagar While my elaboration of "other such women" is my own, the commentary is clear enough that it's referring to female servants.
@ahir2350 @Gourav00135439 @Bhaktirassagar The verse in question refers to individual soldiers who may keep chariots, horses, such female servants, animals, kupya (zinc, copper, brass, etc) etc for themselves. One may ask why male servants are not included.
@ahir2350 @Gourav00135439 @Bhaktirassagar Likely the same reason why gold is not included but “more ordinary” metals (that’s what kupya means) are allowed for individual soldiers to keep. For gold & male physical labor, a king would have found them substantially more precious & would have wanted first rights over them.
@ahir2350 @Gourav00135439 @Bhaktirassagar Thus, it’s possible to construe Manu 7.96 without any perverse meanings.
And in any case, we have other Smṛtis (Agnipurāṇa ityādi) as well as the opinions of Śiṣṭas (Mahātmas, Mahāpuruṣas, learned vipras).
And in any case, we have other Smṛtis (Agnipurāṇa ityādi) as well as the opinions of Śiṣṭas (Mahātmas, Mahāpuruṣas, learned vipras).
@ahir2350 @Gourav00135439 @Bhaktirassagar And the violation of Women, married or not, would never have the blessings of Śiṣṭas but only their curses. So whoever wishes to justify such deeds on the basis of a faulty interpretation of Manu 7.96 will be liable to be cursed by the Sages & Mahāpuruṣas.
Loading suggestions...