ng consistent with the Srutis and the Smritis.'
Then comes Sishtacharah or the conduct of those called Sishta or the good.

1117. However casuists may argue and moralists pretend, a lie like that
of Sir Henry Lee for saving his prince from the hands of Cromwell (vide
Woodstock), or like that of the goldsmith's son, even when he was dying,
for saving the prince Chevalier from the hands of his would-be captors,
is excusable in the estimation of many and even meritorious according to
some. The world again is agreed that if an adulterer be called into the
witness box, perjury would be a venal offence compared with the meanness
of betraying the honour of a confiding woman. Hence, the exclusion of
such a witness (according to almost every system of law) in trials for
adultery. The Rishis wrote for men and not angels. The conduct referred
to is that of the good and pious.

1118. In explaining verse 7, the commentator uses the words that I have
enclosed within parenthesis. According to him, verse 9 hath reference to
the robbed thief while he goes to the king for invoking justice.

1119. There is another reason why one should not give way to intoxication
of might and should not set at naught the eternal injunction against
taking what belongs to another. K.P. Singha incorrectly translates this
line.

1120. Implying that such a man is always alive to his own faults. He
never thinks that others are guilty of an offence which he, in a moment
of temptation, may have committed.

1121. K.P. Singha wrongly translates this line.

1122. The construction is not at all difficult; yet both the vernacular
translators have misunderstood it, the Burdwan version being thoroughly
unintelligible. This is only another form of the well-known saying--'do
to others as you would that they should do to you.'

1123. The Burdwan translator gives an incorrect version of the second
line: yad is equivalent to yadi: anyasya stands for anyam. The genitive
inflection is used for the accusative. Tatah stands for tasmin implying
aupapatye vishaye. Kuryat is driggochari-kuryat.

1124. The surplus should not be coveted for its own sake but for such use.

1125. The second line is incorrectly rendered by K.P. Singha.

1126. Priyabhyupagatam is priyena praptam and not hinsaya.

1127. I am not sure that I have understood the original correctly.
Nilakantha says that the sense intended to be conveyed is that
Yudhishthira finds fault with Bhishma's previous cou