Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 568

1978-19791
MEDHĀTITHI ON MANU IX, 256
59
the readings in the printed editions, we shall have to interpret. the passage as 9919T: (or 961 9T:) AFFITUTIH (meaning 925737 Ha: FATTOTI 49ETT:) 7 Safa af 549€lt: 1 7911 19 etc.
In the end it is good to examine the translation of Ganganath Jba of the above passage of Medhātithi. His translation runs :
Though the action of the 'open' thief does not stand on the same footing as that of the 'concealed' one - such as those who prowl about at night, in forests etc. - yet both have been mentioned together for the purpose of indicating the equality of the punishment to be meted out to them
This interpretation, bowever, is not likely. For, apart from the fact that it requires the addition of two crucial words "though..... yet", it is well to remember that in the very next verse (1X, 257) Manu characterizes both the types as vañcaka. Thus, according to Manu, the activity of the prakāso type is siinilar to that of the aprakasa type and not different. Hence Medhătithi is not likely to say tbat the action of the one
does not stand on the same footing' as that of the other. If the punishment to be meted out to bem is to be equal, their actions have to be on the same footing and not different.
Madhu Vidya/543