न च आधिकारिकमपि, पतनानुमानात्, तदयोगात् ॥ ४१ ॥
na ca ādhikārikamapi, patanānumānāt, tadayogāt || 41 ||
na—Not; ca—and; ādhikārikam—(expiation) mentioned in the chapter dealing with the qualification; api— even; patana-anumānāt—because a fall (in his case) is inferred from the Smriti; tadayogāt—and because of its inefficacy(in his case).
41. And (the expiation), although mentioned in the chapter dealing with qualifications (in Purva Mimamsa), is not (with reference to one who has taken the vow of lifelong celibacy), because a fall (in his case) is inferred from the Smriti, and because of its (of the expiatory ceremony) inefficacy (in his case).
The case of those who have taken the vow of lifelong celibacy and yet have transgressed this vow through a mistake in judgment, is taken up for discussion. The opponent, whose view is given in this Sutra, holds that for such transgressions there is no expiation. For no such ceremony is mentioned with respect to them, the one mentioned in Purva Mimamsa 6. 8. 22 referring to ordinary Brahmacharins, who are students, and not to Naishthika Brahmacharins. It can also be inferred that the Smriti declares such lapses as not expiable. A beheaded man cannot be cured. “For him who lapses after having embraced the vow of a Naishthika Brahmachari I see no expiatory ceremony by which such a suicide can be purified.” The Smriti here does not refer to the ordinary Brahmacharin, and so the expiatory ceremony applies only to them and not to the Naishthika. Moreover, the ceremony referred to in Purva Mimamsa is not efficacious in his case, for, to perform the ceremony he will have to light the sacrificial fire and therefore have to marry, which means that he will tease to be a Naishthika thereafter.