faith. Children should not be procreated from lust, etc.

271. Such words are unseizable and unintelligible for their depth of
meaning. Women are equally unseizable and unintelligible.

272. The sense is this: women agitate the hearts of those that treat them
with respect as of those that treat them with disdain. The commentator
explains that Pujitah dhikkritahva tulyavat vikaram janayati.

273. All living creatures are virtuous, for they are capable of
progressing towards godship by their own acts.

274. Pura has little force here, implying 'first'. In the first place,
know that I have come to thee,

275. Ladies spoke in Prakrita and not in Sanskrit. The latter is refined,
the former is unrefined. Hence Indra's surprise at hearing Sanskrit words
from the lady's lips.

276. The adana ceremony was a rite in course of which friends and kinsmen
had to make presents unto the person performing the ceremony. The
investiture with the sacred-thread, marriage, the rite performed in the
sixth and the ninth month of pregnancy, are all ceremonies of this kind.

277. It would be curious to see how the commentator Nilakantha seeks to
include within these five the eight forms of marriage mentioned by Manu.
The fact is, such parts of the Mahabharata are unquestionably more
ancient than Manu. The mention of Manu is either an instance of
interpolation or there must have been an older Manu upon whose work the
Manu we know has been based. The Asura and the Rakshasa forms are
unequivocally condemned. Yet the commentator seeks to make out that the
Rakshasa form is open to the Kshatriyas. The fact is, the Rakshasa was
sometimes called the Paisacha. The distinction between those two forms
was certainly of later origin.

278. Thus, there was no difference, in status, in ancient times, between
children born of a Brahmana, a Kshatriya or a Vaisya mother. The
difference of status was of later origin.

279. Nagnika is said to be one who wears a single piece of cloth. A girl
in whom the signs of puberty have not appeared does not require more than
a single piece of cloth to cover her. The mention of Nagnika, the
commentator thinks, is due to an interdiction about wedding a girl of
even ten years in whom signs of puberty have appeared.

280. When a father happens to have an only daughter, he frequently
bestows her in marriage upon some eligible youth on the understanding
that the son born of her shall be the son, for purposes of both Sradd