Getting into the mind of Medhatithi

Abstract

This paper analyses Medhatithi’s discussion of corporal punishment, with special reference to the debate staged in his commentary on MDh 8.318. His arguments are extremely sophisticated, especially because of the application of Mimamsa-influenced reasoning rules. The paper makes implicit steps and unspoken hypotheses explicit and highlights the selection process through which Medhatithi finally selects one solution to the controversy he examines over the others. For some instances of possible candidates: Is analogical reasoning able to provide stronger support than, for example, authoritative statements? What role does inner consistency play? Which criterion wins in case of conflicts among different textual passages? To test the inner-consistency criterion, the paper tackles the issue of corporal punishment as discussed in different contexts and tries to solve the seeming clashes that arise when different texts by Medhatithi are juxtaposed. It concludes by seeing Medhatithi’s commentary on MDh 8.318 as the culmination of a systematisation attempt regarding all cases of corporal punishment as distinctly ordained based on the purpose to be achieved.