Mbh 12.33.6c

All that I have told thee, O son of Kunti, about the eating of interdicted food, may be cleansed by such expiatory rites. Connection with the preceptor's wife at the preceptor's command does not stain the pupil. The sage Uddalaka caused his son Swetaketu to be begotten by a disciple. A person by committing theft for the sake of his preceptor in a season of distress is not stained with sin. One, however, that takes to thieving for procuring enjoyments for himself becomes stained. One is not stained by stealing from other than Brahmanas (in a season of distress and for the sake of one's preceptor). Only one that steals under such circumstances without himself appropriating any portion thereof is untouched by sin. A falsehood may be spoken for saving one's own life or that of another, or for the sake of one's preceptor, or for gratifying a woman, or for bringing about a marriage. One's vow of Brahmacharya is not broken by having wet dreams. In such cases the expiation laid down consists in the pouring of libations of clarified butter on the blazing fire. If the elder brother be fallen or has renounced the world, the younger brother does not incur sin by marrying. Solicited by a woman, connection with her is not destructive of virtue. One should not slay or cause to be slain an animal except in a sacrifice. Animals have become sacred (fit for sacrifice) through the kindness manifested towards them by the Creator himself in the ordinance laid down by him. By making a gift in ignorance to an undeserving Brahmana one does not incur sin. The omission (through ignorance) to behave with liberality towards a deserving person does not lead to sin. By casting off an adulterous wife one does not incur sin. By such treatment the woman herself may be purged while the husband may avoid sin. One who knows the true use of the Soma juice, does not incur sin by selling it.[114] By dismissing a servant who is incompetent to render service one is not touched by sin.