sion of the merits of these protests. Suffice it to say, that they gave quite different interpretations to the very passages quoted by Vidyasagar himself, besides new quotations from different Dharma Sastras to refute his arguments. The very passage[1] from the Parasara-Sanhita, which formed the basis of Vidyasagar's arguments, was interpreted very differently. Their interpretation was,—'When the future husband of a betrothed girl cannot be traced, or is dead, or retires from worldly affairs and turns an ascetic, or is found to be impotent, or is degraded,—under any of these five conditions—the betrothed girl may take a second husband.' Even recently, Pandit Panchanan Tarkaratna of Bhatpara, in his edition of the "Parasara-Sanhita" published from the Bangabasi office, has interpreted the passage in the above sense. Besides, he says, that, even assuming for argument's sake, that Vidyasagar's interpretation was correct, the remarriage of widows has been prohibited by other Dharma Sastras. To prove his contention, he quotes the following passage from "Aditya-Purana."
"দীর্ঘকালং ব্রহ্মচর্য্যং ।
দেবরেণ সূতোৎপত্তির্দত্তা কন্যা প্রদীয়তে॥
কন্যানামসবর্ণানাং বিবাহশ্চ দ্বিজাতিভিঃ।
দত্তৌরসেতরেষান্তু পুত্রত্বেন পরিগ্রহঃ॥
- ↑
নষ্টে মৃতে প্রব্রজিতে ক্লীবেচ পতিতে পতৌ।
পঞ্চ স্বাপৎসু নারীণাং পতিরন্যোবিধীয়তে॥
