Vyasa quoting Manu says:

If a Brahmana takes food that has been cooked by a Kshatriya, it diminishes his energy; if he takes the food provided by a Sudra, it dims his Brahmanic lustre; and if he takes the food provided by a goldsmith or a woman who has neither husband nor children it lessens the period of his life.

There are multiple instances in Mahabharata where Brahmins were fed by Kshatriyas, including Draupadi while in forest.

So how these two contradictions explained?

  • Please mention Mahabharata Santi Parva 37:2 providing this link : en.krishnakosh.org/krishna/Mahabharata_Santi_Parva_Chapter_37:2 Apr 10 at 13:16
  • 4
    Some characters of Itihasas doing some acts don't automatically prove that they were in accordance with Dharma. Rules pertaining to Dharma-Adhrama are laid down in scriptures like the Dharma Shastras. And the acts of those characters are to be judged based on those rules. If Manu Smriti says food of the Ksatriyas decreases Brahmins' energy then that's the rule. Some character of Itihasas going against that rule doesn't render that rule invalid. Also Smritis have more authority than Itihasa-Puranas.
    – Rickross
    Apr 11 at 5:41
  • 1
    Many rituals hv provision to feed Brahmins..so I think this rule is for daily food..but not when a brahmin is guest..
    – YDS
    May 11 at 3:48

Scriptures should not be read on context basis but as whole. While you are correct on the quotes, you haven't quoted anything that increases Kshatriya life. While a Kshatriya may be indulging in activities against scriptures, sometimes or perhaps many a times, but if he is a learned one, he would find "prayaschitas" and thus amend the faults.

If at all a varna to be engaged 100% as per dharma shaastra, there wouldn't be any requirements for prayaschita in scriptures.

Also deeds during Aapatkala do not bear paapa..

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .