The Minor Law-Books: Nârada and Brihaspati — SBE Vol. 33 (trans. Julius Jolly, 1889)
English·1879–1910·trans. Julius Jolly·277 passages
The text · part 8 of 14
p. 93
attempt on her husband's life, he shall banish from the town.
* 93. One who always shows malice to him, or who ‘makes unkind speeches, or eats before her husband, he shall quickly expel from his house.
* 94. Let not a husband show love to a barren woman, or to one who gives birth to female children only, or whose conduct is blamable, or who constantly contradicts him; if he does (have conjugal intercourse with her), he becomes liable to censure (himself).
*g5. If a man leaves a wife who is obedient, pleasant-spoken, skilful, virtuous, and the mother of (male) issue, the king shall make him mindful of his duty by (inflicting) severe punishment (on him).
96. When a faultless maiden has been married to a man who has a blemish unknown (before his marriage), and does not repair to another man (after discovering it), she shall be enjoined to do so by her relations. If she has no relations living, she shall go (to live with another man) of her own accord,
97. When her husband is lost or dead, when he
93. ‘He shall expel from his house.’ This, according to an interpretation mentioned by Gagannatha, means that he shall banish her from the principal habitation, assigning to her a separate dwelling within his close.. See Colebrooke’s Digest, IV, 1, 63. This interpretation is hardly correct, though it is interesting as it shows the tendency of the commentators to explain away those laws under which married women were deprived of their claim to maintenance. Manu IX, 80, 81; Yag#avalkya I, 73, &c.
96. This rule shows that a marriage is dissoluble on the discovery of a blemish, as well as a betrothal. See XII, 3.
97. ‘Lost,’ i.e. gone no one knows whither. This text, or an identical text of Pardsara, has been frequently appealed to by the
XII, ror. DIVORCE AND SEPARATION. 185
has become a religious ascetic, when he is impotent, and when he has been expelled from caste: these are the five cases of legal necessity, in which a woman may be justified in taking another husband.
98. Eight years shall a Brahman woman wait for the return of her absent husband; or four years, if she has no issue; after that time, she may betake herself to another man.
99. A Kshatriya woman shall wait six years; or three years, if she has no issue; a Vaisya woman shall wait four (years), if she has issue; any other Vaisya woman (i.e. one who has no issue), two years.
100. No such (definite) period is prescribed for a Sddra woman, whose husband is gone on a journey. Twice the above period is ordained, when the (absent) husband is alive and tidings are received of him.
1o1, The above series of rules has been laid down by the Creator of the world for those cases where a man has disappeared. No offence is imputed to a woman if she goes to live with another man after (the fixed period has elapsed).
modern advocates of the remarriage of widows in India. Vasishtha XVII, 74.
100, 101. The Nepalese MS. has three paragraphs instead of these two, as follows:—‘ roo. No such period is ordained for a Sidra woman, nor is justice violated (in her case). The utmost limit for her is a year, especially if she has no issue. ror. This term has been ordained for the wives of absent husbands who are dead. Twice the same term is ordained, when (the absent husband) is alive and tidings are received of him. 101 a. The (other) term has been ordained for those who have issue (?). Afterwards, no offence is imputed to a woman who goes to live with another man.’
186 NARADA, XII, ro2.
102. This body of laws is applicable to the offspring of unions in the direct order of the castes; the offspring of a marriage union in the inverse order of the castes is said to be (produced by) a confusion of castes.
103. There are Anantara, EkAntara, and Dvyantara sons both in the direct and inverse order of the castes.
104. (Of this description are) the Ugra, PArasava, and Nish4da, (who are begotten) in the direct order, as well as the Ambash¢ha, MAgadha, and Kshattzz, who spring from a Kshatriya woman.
105. One of these (latter castes) is begotten in the direct order, of the two (others) it must be known that they are (begotten) in an inverse order. The Kshattyz and the rest are begotten in an
1oz. ‘In the direct order of the castes,’ i.e. where a man of higher marries a woman of lower caste. ‘In the inverse order of the castes,’ i.e. where a woman of higher marries a man of lower caste.
103-113. Manu X, 6-41; Gautama IV, 16-28; Vasishéha XVIII; Baudhayana I, 16, 6-12, 17 passim; Vishzu XVI, 1-7; Yagfavalkya I, 91-95.
103. An Anantara is the son of a father whose caste is only one degree higher or lower than the caste of the mother. An Ekantara is the son of a father whose caste is two degrees higher or lower than the caste of the mother. A Dvyantara is the son of a father whose caste is three degrees higher or lower than the caste of the mother, The Nepalese MS., throughout superior to the Indian MSS., reads as follows :—‘ 103. An Ugra, Parasava, and NishAda are (begotten) in the direct order, and are declared to be the sons of SQdra women with husbands of the (three) higher castes. 104. Of a Brahman woman are born a XAndala, a.Sfta, and a Vaidehaka ; they are declared to spring in an inverse order, from their union with husbands of different caste. 105. An Ambash/4a, Magadha, and Kshattr? are the sons of a Kshatriya woman. Of these, one is born in the direct, and two are born in the inverse order. 106a. Of a Vaisya woman, are born an Ambashéka, Yavana, and Ayogava,p. 187 inverse order, the (three) mentioned first in the direct order.
are the sons of a Kshatriya woman. Of these, one is born in the direct, and two are born in the inverse order. 106a. Of a Vaisya woman, are born an Ambashéka, Yavana, and Ayogava,p. 187 inverse order, the (three) mentioned first in the direct order.
106. Sacraments, beginning with the boiling of gruel, three times seven in number (shall be performed) by them. The son (of a Brahman) with a Brahman woman is equal in caste (to his father). The son (of a Brahman) with a Kshatriya woman is an Anantara.
107. An Ambash¢ka and an Ugra are begotten in the same way by Kshatriya men and on Vaisya women respectively. An Ambashéfa is an Ekantara, the son of a Brahman with a Vaisya woman.
108. In the same way, a son called Nishdda
Of these, one is born in the inverse, and two are born in the direct order. 106 b. A Sfita and the other Pratilomas (men born in the inverse order), who are begotten contrary to order, are declared to partake of the series of three times seven sacraments, beginning with the Paka ceremony (cooking food). 106. The son,’ &c.
106. The meaning of the first half of this paragraph is somewhat obscure. The term tri sapta, ‘three times seven,’ has been connected with samsk4r4s, ‘sacraments. The sacraments are peculiar to those mixed castes, which are procreated in the direct order of castes. See Manu X, 41. The ‘boiling of gruel’ (Aarupaka) being mentioned as the first sacrament, it appears that the sacraments here referred to are identical with the yag#as, ‘sacrifices,’ of which there are twenty-one according to the usual theory. See Gautama XVIII, 18-20, and Professor Weber’s paper on Vedic Sacrificial Rites, Indische Studien, X, p. 320. It is also possible to connect the clause ‘ three times seven’ with ‘them.’ The number of twenty-one mixed castes procreated in a direct order is received by adding the fifteen castes springing from a further mixture between the mixed castes (Manu X, 31) to the six principal mixed castes procreated in a direct order. For vai mata’, as I have conjectured, the MSS. read kosh/hatah, which might be rendered ‘(The twenty-one sacraments, beginning with the boiling of gruel, have to be performed by them) out of a pot.’ However, the correctness of this reading is liable to considerable doubt. The Nepalese MS, reads, te samskardska pakAdy4s tesh4m trik saptako ganak. This is perhaps the original reading. See the preceding note.
p. 109
springs from the union of a Kshatriya with a Sddra woman. <A Sidra woman obtains from a Brahman a son (called) Parasava, who is superior (to the Nishada).
109. Thus have the sons born in the direct order of castes been declared. The two sons called Sita, and Magadha as well as the Ayogava,
110, And the Kshattvz and Vaidehaka are begotten in the inverse order of castes. The Sita is declared to be an Anantara, begotten by a Kshatriya on a Brahman woman.
Thus have the sons born in the direct order of castes been declared. The two sons called Sita, and Magadha as well as the Ayogava,
110, And the Kshattvz and Vaidehaka are begotten in the inverse order of castes. The Sita is declared to be an Anantara, begotten by a Kshatriya on a Brahman woman.
111. Similarly, the MAgadha and Ayogava are the sons of Vaisya and Sfdra fathers (and of a Brahman mother). A Brahman woman obtains of a Vaisya father an Ekantara son, the Vaidehaka.
112. A Kshatriya woman (obtains of a Sddra) an Ek4ntara son, called Kshattvz. A Dvyantara son in the inverse order, the most abject of men, because he is the fruit of sinful intercourse, .
113. Kandala by name, is born of a Sdidra, when a Brahman woman forgets herself (with him). Therefore must the king take special care to prevent women from sinful intercourse with men of different caste.
THIRTEENTH TITLE OF LAW.
Tue Law or INHERITANCE.
*1, Where a partition of the paternal property
113. The Nepalese MS. inserts the following before the clause beginning with the word ‘ Therefore :’-—‘ Because confusion of the castes springs up, where the king keeps no watch over them.’
XIII, 1. The term ‘sons’ includes by implication grandsons andp. 189 is instituted by the sons, it is called by the learned, Partition of Property, a title of law.
* 2. The father being dead, the sons shall divide the estate as they ought; (and so shall) daughters (divide the property) of their mother (when she dies); or, failing daughters, their issue.
* 3. (The distribution of the property shall take place) when the mother has ceased to menstruate and the sisters are married, or when the father’s sexual desire is extinguished and he has ceased to care for worldly interests.
*4. Or leta father distribute his property among his sons himself, when he is stricken in years, either allotting a larger share to the eldest son, or (distributing the property in any other way) following his own inclination.
more remote descendants. The term ‘paternal’ includes property of the grandfather and more remote ancestors as well. Mandlik’s Mayfkha, p. 33 (IV, 3, 1, Borrodaile). Analogous remarks are found in most other Commentaries.
2. ‘Their issue’ (tadanvayas). According to the usual explanation, the male issue of the daughters is meant. However, there is nothing in the text to warrant an exclusion of the female issue of daughters. Manu IX, 104, 192; YAg#avalkya II, 117; Gautama XXVIII, 1; Baudhdyana II, 3, 8.
3. According to the May(ikha, the clause ‘ when the sisters are married’ has to be construed with both the preceding and following clauses, the marriage of the sisters being required to precede both a division in the father’s lifetime and a division in the mother’s lifetime. See Mayfkha, p. 33 (translation, p. 39). The Dayabhaga has a totally different reading of this text, which is censured in the Viramitrodaya. Gautama XXVIII, 1.
See Mayfkha, p. 33 (translation, p. 39). The Dayabhaga has a totally different reading of this text, which is censured in the Viramitrodaya. Gautama XXVIII, 1.
4. The Dayabh4ga (II, 82, Colebrooke) states correctly that the unequal distribution referred to in the last clause of this text must be different from that sort of unequal distribution under which the eldest son is to receive a larger share than the rest. The Mitakshar4 school, on the other hand, recognises two different modes of
190 NARADA. XIII, g.
*5. Or the senior brother shall maintain all (the junior brothers), like a father, if they wish it, or even the youngest brother, if able; the well-being of a family depends on the ability (of its head).
*6, Property gained by valour, or belonging to a wife, and the gains of science, are three kinds of wealth not subject to partition; and so is a favour conferred by the father (exempt from partition).
*7, When the mother has bestowed (a portion of) her property on any (of her sons) from affection, the rule is the same in that case also ; for the mother is equal to the father (as regards her competence to bestow gifts).
*8. What (was given) before the (nuptial) fire, what (was given) during the bridal procession, the husband’s donation, and what was received from her brother, mother, or father, that is called the sixfold property of a woman (Stridhana).
distribution only: one equal, and the other with the customary deductions in favour of the eldest son, middlemost son, &c., according to the order of seniority. The writers of this school, therefore, have endeavoured to refute the interpretation of the Dayabhéga. See Viramitrodaya, transl., p. 54.—Manu IX, 112 foll.; YAgfavalkya II, 114; Apastamba II, 6, 14; Gautama XXVIII, 2; Vishau XVII, 1; Baudhdyana II, 3, 9.
5. As the management of the property and government of the family, under this rule, may devolve on the youngest brother even, it follows that the middlemost brother may get it 4 fortiori. This is expressly stated in the Dayabh&ga (III, 1, 15, Colebrooke). Manu IX, 108.
6. ‘ What was received at the time of obtaining a wife is here called the “wealth of a wife;” meaning effects obtained on account of marriage.’ Dayabh4ga (VI, 1, 13, Colebrooke); Manu IX, 206; YAgfiavalkya II, 119.
8. It may be asked by whom the gifts presented before the nuptial fire and during the bridal procession, i.e. at two different stages of the marriage ceremony, must have been presented in
XII, 12, INHERITANCE. 1gI
*o9. Such property of a woman shall go to her offspring ; if she have no offspring, it is declared to go to her husband (if she was married to him) according to one of the four (praiseworthy) marriage forms, beginning with the Brahma form; (if she was married) according to one of the other forms, it shall go to her parents.
*1o. When one brother maintains the family of another brother, who is engaged in studying science, he shall receive a share of the wealth gained by that study, though he be ignorant (himself).
*11. A learned man is not bound to give a share of his own (acquired) wealth against his will to an unlearned co-heir, unless it have been gained by him using the paternal estate.
*12, Two shares let the father keep for himself order to be Stridhana. As all the other gifts classed as Stridhana are presented by relations, it may be inferred that the nuptial gifts have to come from the same quarter. K4tydyana declares expressly that a gift made by a stranger is not Stridhana, Manu IX, 194; Yagnavalkya II, 143, 144; Vishau XVII, 18, g. See XII, 38 foll. The commentators are of opinion that the G&ndharva form of marriage follows the same rule as those four forms which are referred to in the first half of this text. This, however, is an artificial interpretation, which has merely been devised for the purpose of making this text agree with an analogous Tule of Manu (IX, 196). Manu IX, 195-197; YAgnavalkya II, 144,145; Vishnu XVII, 19-21; Vasishtha XVII, 46; Baudhayana II, 2, 3, 43. Read daturshvahu/ in the text.
10. Srikrishna observes that where the support has been offered by several unlearned co-heirs, they shall all of them be made to participate in the gains of science. See Colebrooke’s Dayabhaga, VI, 1, 15, note.
11. ‘ The word “ paternal” intends joint property.’ Dayabhaga VI, 1, 17; Manu IX, 206; YAgfavalkya II, 119; Gautama XXVIII, 30. -
t2. The rule which assigns two shares to a father distributingp. 13 when distributing his property. The mother shall receive the same share as a son (when the sons divide the property) after her husband's death.
*13. To the eldest son a larger share shall be allotted, and a less share is assigned to the youngest son. The rest shall take equal shares, and so shall an unmarried sister.
*14. The same rule applies to sons of a wife (Kshetragas) lawfully begotten on her. For sons of lower caste, a decrease in the shares according to the order (of their caste) is ordained, in case they are born of women legally married.
*15. When a father has distributed his property amongst his sons, that is a lawful distribution for them (and cannot be annulled), whether the share of one be less, or greater than, or equal to the shares of the rest; for the father is the lord of all.
his property himself, is referred to the father’s self-acquired property in the Mitakshara school, and to ancestral property in the Bengal school. This difference of interpretation is connected with the varying views taken in the several schools of law of the extent of the patria potestas in questions of proprietary right and inheritance. See Dayabhaga II, 35, Colebrooke ; Mitékshara I, 5, 7, Colebrooke. YAgfavalkya II, 123; Vishnu XVIII, 34.
See Dayabhaga II, 35, Colebrooke ; Mitékshara I, 5, 7, Colebrooke. YAgfavalkya II, 123; Vishnu XVIII, 34.
13. The share of an unmarried daughter, according to the translation here given, would have to be equal to the shares of the middlemost brothers. According to Gagannatha, all that is meant by N4rada is this, that the daughter shall receive some portion of the property, the precise amount of it being left undecided. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 1, 71.—Manu IX, 113-118; Vishzu XVII, 37; XVIII, 35; Baudhayana II, 3, 9; Gautama XXVIII, 5-13; Vasish/ha XVII, 42 foll.; Apastamba II, 6, 14, 6-10; YAgfavalkya II, 114, 124.
14. For the rules regarding the procreation of a Kshetraga son, see XII, 80-88. Gautama XXVIII, 35-39; Vasish#ha XVII, 47-50; Vishau XVIII, 1-31; Baudhd4yana II, 3, 10; Yagiavalkya II, 125; Manu IX, 149-156.
tg. The writers of the Bengal school give this text its plain
p. 193
*16. A father who is diseased, or angry, or absorbed by (sinful) worldly interests, or who acts illegally, has not the power to distribute his property (as he likes).
*17. The son of a maiden, a son obtained through a pregnant bride, and one born of a woman (whose transgression was) unknown (at first and is found out subsequently): of these, the mother’s husband is regarded as the father, and they are declared to be entitled to shares of his property.
*18,. A maiden’s son, whose father is unknown and whose mother is not legally married (to his father), shall give a funeral ball (of rice) to his maternal grandfather and inherit his property.
*19. Those sons who have been begotten by one or by many on a woman not authorized (to raise issue to her deceased husband), shall all be dismeaning, viz. that a father may distribute his property among his sons as he pleases. They add, however, that in doing so he must be guided by lawful motives, such as compassion on an incapable son, partiality for a pious son, and the like. See Dayabhaga I], 14, 75; Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 1, 32. The Mayfkha, on the other hand, declares that this rule of Narada had legal force in the former ages of the world only. See Mandlik’s Mayfkha, p. 35 (transl. p. 43). Yag#avalkya II, 116.
16. This rule ‘relates to the case where the father, through perturbation of mind occasioned by disease or the like, or through irritation against any one of his sons, or through partiality for the child of a favourite wife, makes a distribution not conformable to law.’ Colebrooke’s Dayabhaga II, 83. The Mitékshard (I, 2, 13, 14), cutting down the privileges of the father everywhere, interprets this rule as a prohibition of any other mode of unequal distribution except that by which the customary deductions are made in favour of the eldest son, &c.
17,18. Manu IX, 170-172; YAgéavalkya II, 129; Vishnu XV, 10-17; Vasish¢ha XVII, 21-23.
19. Regarding the rule of Niyoga, or appointment of a married
[33] fe)
p. 20
17,18. Manu IX, 170-172; YAgéavalkya II, 129; Vishnu XV, 10-17; Vasish¢ha XVII, 21-23.
19. Regarding the rule of Niyoga, or appointment of a married
[33] fe)
p. 20
inherited; they are the sons of their (respective) begetters only.
* 20, They shall offer the funeral ball (of rice) to their begetter, in case their mother had been obtained for a price; if no price has been paid for her, they shall give the funeral ball to the husband (of their mother).
*21. One hostile to his father, or expelled from caste, or impotent, or guilty of a minor offence, shall not even take a share (of the inheritance), if he is a legitimate son; much less so, if he is a (Kshetraga) son of the wife (only).
*22, Persons afflicted with a chronic or acute disease, or idiotic, or mad, or blind, or lame (are also incapable of inheriting). They shall be maintained by the family; but their sons shall receive their respective shares (of the inheritance).
* 23. The sons of two fathers shall give the funeral woman or widow to raise offspring to her husband, see XII, 80-88 ; Manu IX, 143.
20. See XII, 54.
21, 22. Manu IX, 201-203; Apastamba II, 6, 14, 1, 15; Gautama XXVIII, 23, 40, 43; Vasishéha XVII, 52, 53; Baudhéyana II, 3, 37-40; Vishau XV, 32-37; Yagfavalkya II, 140, 141.
21. The commentators are at variance as to the precise meaning of the term ‘ hostile to his father.’ Thus the Sarasvattvildsa declares it to denote one who forgets himself so far as to say, ‘ He is not my father.’ The Dayakramasangraha says it means one who beats his father. According to Gagann4tha and the Ratndkara, it means ‘one who attempts his father’s life or commits other hostile acts against him (m4ra#4dikrit), and who fails to offer the customary funeral oblations to his father after his death.’ See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 4, 320.
22. Atrophy or pulmonary consumption is instanced as a chronic, and leprosy as an acute disease, in the Ratnakara. See Colebrooke’s Digest, loc. cit.
23. ‘The adoptive father,’ literally ‘the man who owns thep. 195 ball (of rice) and the water oblations to each of the two (fathers) singly, and shall receive one half of the property left by their natural and adoptive fathers.
*24. That portion (of the property) which belongs to a reunited coparcener is declared to be absolutely his own. So when one of the sharers has no issue it shall go to the rest (after the death) of those who are childless.
*25. If among several brothers one childless should die or become a religious ascetic, the others shall divide his property, excepting the Stridhana.
So when one of the sharers has no issue it shall go to the rest (after the death) of those who are childless.
*25. If among several brothers one childless should die or become a religious ascetic, the others shall divide his property, excepting the Stridhana.
mother’ (Kshetrika). The ‘son of two fathers’ is no doubt one procreated by Niyoga on the wife of one impotent, &c. It is not equally clear why he is to obtain one half only of the property left by his two fathers, as he is elsewhere declared to succeed to both. According to the Ratn4kara, this rule ‘ relates to the case where the natural father has a son begotten in lawful wedlock, and the husband of the mother also has by some means (katham&it) obtained male issue by himself begotten.’ See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 4, 242.— YVAg#avalkya II,127; Manu IX, 145,190; Baudh4yana II, 3, 18, 19.
24. For several other interpretations of this difficult text, see Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 8, 433. It has to be observed, however, that the reading translated here differs from the reading translated by Colebrooke.
25, 26. The fact that the widow is invested with a claim to maintenance merely under this text, whereas the leading texts of Y4gfavalkya and Vishnu constitute her heir to the property of a husband who has died without leaving male issue, has caused some difficulty to the commentators. Thus Madana says that this text must be held applicable to the widow of an undivided or reunited coparcener only, who is given a mere claim to maintenance by all writers of the Mitéksharé school. The writers of the Bengal school, on the other hand, recognise the widow's right of inheritance in the case of undivided coparceners even. It appears, however, from the order of heirs given in 49-51, that Narada does not make the widow an heir in any case.
25. Manu IX, 212; YAg#avalkya I, 138; Vishau XVII, 17; Gautama XVIII, 21.
p. 02
p. 26
*26. They shall make provision for his women till they die, in case they remain faithful to the bed of their husband. Should the women not (remain chaste), they must cut off that allowance.
*27, If he has left a daughter, her father’s share is destined for her maintenance. They shall maintain her up to the time of her marriage; afterwards let her husband keep her.
*28. After the death of her lord, the relations of her husband shall be the guardians of a woman who has no son. They shall have full authority to control her, to regulate her mode of life, and to maintain her.
*29. When the husband’s family is extinct, or contains no male, or when it is reduced to poverty, or when no one related to it within the degree of a Sapizda is left, the father’s relations shall be the guardians of a woman.
* 30. It is through independence that women go
26. Yag#avalkya II, 142.
When the husband’s family is extinct, or contains no male, or when it is reduced to poverty, or when no one related to it within the degree of a Sapizda is left, the father’s relations shall be the guardians of a woman.
* 30. It is through independence that women go
26. Yag#avalkya II, 142.
24. ‘They shall maintain her,’ literally ‘they shall give her a share.’ See par. 13, where a share is allotted to an unmarried sister. The maintenance of the daughter includes, no doubt, the obligation to defray the expense of her marriage. Yag#avalkya II, 141.
28. All the commentators declare that the right of guardianship goes in the order of proximity. ‘Thus, without (her guardian’s) consent, she may not give away anything to any person; nor indulge herself in matters of shape, taste, smell, and the like ; and if the means of subsistence be wanting he must provide her maintenance. Gagannatha. See Colebrooke’s Digest, IV, 1, 13.
29. The Nepalese MS. and the commentaries insert the following text here: *‘If both families are extinct, the king is declared to be the protector of a woman ; he shall provide for her and punish her when she has swerved from the path of duty.’
30, 31. Vasishsha V, 1, 2; Baudhdyana II, 3, 44, 45; Gautamap. 197 to ruin, though born in a noble family. Therefore the Lord of creatures has assigned a dependent condition to them.
*31. The father protects her during her infancy, the husband protects her when she is grown up, and the sons (protect her) in her old age. A woman is unfit to enjoy independence.
* 32. What is left (of the father’s property), when the father’s obligations have been discharged, and when the father’s debts have been paid, shall be divided by the brothers, in order that the father may not continue a debtor.
* 33. For those (brothers), for whom the initiatory ceremonies have not been duly performed by their father, they must be performed by the (other) brothers, (defraying the expense) from the paternal property.
XVII, 1; Manu IX, 3; V,148; Yag@avalkya I, 85 ; Vishnu XXV, 12, 13.
30. ‘They go to ruin,’ i.e. they are guilty of disloyalty and other offences; thus, because they do not know what is legal for those who live exactly according to sacred ordinances, and because they cannot be instructed, they would violate the duties of their class and the like. Gagannatha. See Colebrooke’s Digest, IV, 1, 4.
32. The term pitrzdayebhyo, ‘ when the father’s obligations have been discharged,’ is differently explained by different commentators. Thus Varadaraga (Burnell’s Vyavaharanirnaya, p. 18) says it denotes the father’s funeral rites and the like. A4yuta, as quoted in Colebrooke’s Dayabhéga I, 47, note, refers it to sums of which payment has been promised by the father. Manu VIII, 166; IX, 104; Baudhdyana II, 3, 8; Gautama XXVIII, 1; Y4gfavalkya II, 117. Read dattvarnam in the text.
A4yuta, as quoted in Colebrooke’s Dayabhéga I, 47, note, refers it to sums of which payment has been promised by the father. Manu VIII, 166; IX, 104; Baudhdyana II, 3, 8; Gautama XXVIII, 1; Y4gfavalkya II, 117. Read dattvarnam in the text.
33. There appears to be some doubt as to what is meant here by the term samskara, ‘initiatory or sacramental ceremonies,’ some commentators including the ceremony of marriage in that term, and others declaring the initiatory ceremonies to terminate with the investiture with the sacred thread. Y4g#avalkya II, 124.
p. 34
*34. Or, no paternal wealth being left, the initiatory ceremonies must be invariably performed for their brothers by those previously initiated contributing (the required) funds from their own portions.
*35. One who, being authorized to look after the affairs of the family, charges himself with the management (of the family property), shall be supported by his brothers with (presents of) food, clothing, and vehicles.
* 36. When the fact of a legal partition should be called into question, the decision of the dispute (which has arisen) among the sharers shall be founded on (the testimony of) kinsmen, the written deed recording the division of the estate, and the separate transaction of business.
*37. Among unseparated brothers, the performance of religious duties is single. When they have come to a partition, they have to perform their religious duties each for himself.
35. Some commentators explain this text as having reference to one who generously declines to take his share at the time of partition. His share shall be made up afterwards by the other brothers contributing severally a portion of their shares. However, there seems to be more foundation for the opinion of those commentators who interpret this text as ordaining the allotment of a preferential share or the presentation of special gifts to the manager of the family property. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 2, 108.
36. The commentators observe that the contest here referred to does not turn on the mode but on the fact of partition. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 6, 381. The business here referred to consists of agriculture and the like acts, according to the Mitékshara. Yagfiavalkya II, 149.
37. The term ‘religious duties,’ according to the Mitakshar4, relates principally to the five Mah4yagfas, ‘ great sacrifices’ or ‘sacraments.’ Before division they are performed by one brother, generally the eldest brother, as representative of the rest. Manu IX, 111; Gautama XXVIII, 4.
p. 199
*38, Giving, receiving, cattle, food, houses, fields, and servants must be regarded as separate among divided brothers, and so must cooking, religious duties, income, and expenditure (be kept separate for each of them).
*39. (The acts of) giving evidence, of becoming a surety, of giving, and of taking, may be mutually performed by divided brothers, but not by unseparated ones.
*39. (The acts of) giving evidence, of becoming a surety, of giving, and of taking, may be mutually performed by divided brothers, but not by unseparated ones.
*4o. If (brothers or others) should transact such matters as these publicly with their co-heirs, they may be presumed to be separate in affairs, even though no written record (of the partition) be in existence.
*41. Those brothers who for ten years continue to live separate in point of religious duties and business transactions, should be regarded as separate; that is a settled rule.
*42, When a number of persons, the descendants of one man, are separate in point of (the performance of) religious duties, business transactions, and work-
38. ‘Giving and receiving,’ without consulting each other. Purchase of ‘cattle’ and the like. See Colebrooke's Digest, V, 6, 380. The upshot of a long discussion of this text by Gagannftha is this, that none of the acts mentioned here may be regarded as conclusive evidence by itself, a great deal of collective evidence of all sorts having to be adduced in each case. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 6, 387.
39. Yagfavalkya II, 52.
41. The term ‘brothers’ is here used to denote coparceners generally. Smritizandrika XVI, 14. The Sarasvativilasa (§ 812, Foulkes) contests the correctness of this interpretation. The Nepalese MS. does not give this paragraph, and it is elsewhere attributed to Brzhaspati.
42, 43. ‘Religious duties,’ prescribed observances, such as the five great sacrifices (Maha4yagaas). ‘ Business transactions,’ such asp. 43 ing utensils, and do not consult each other about their dealings,
*43. They are quite at liberty to perform, according to pleasure, all (such transactions as) the gift or sale of their own shares. They are (in fact) masters of their own wealth.
*44. One born after partition shall receive his father’s property exclusively. Or, if other sharers have reunited with the father, they shall come to a division (with the son born after partition). Such is the law.
*45. The legitimate son of the body, the son begotten on a wife (Kshetraga), the son of an (appointed) daughter, the son of a maiden, the son received with the wife, the son secretly born,
*46. The son of a remarried woman, the son cast off, the adopted son, the son bought, the son made, and the son who has offered himself, are declared to be the twelve sons.
*47. Among these, six are kinsmen and heirs, and six are not heirs (but) kinsmen. Each preceding one is declared to be superior (to the one trading and the like acts. ‘ Working utensils,’ such as household furniture, the separate possession of which is indicative of partition. The meaning is that, when they are separated thus, each may give, sell, or otherwise dispose of (his share). Mayfkha, p. 51 (transl. p. 76).
44. Manu IX, 216; Yagaavalkya II, 122; Gautama XXVIII, 29; Vishzu XVII, 3. This text is not found in the Nepalese MS., nor is it commonly quoted in the Digests.
Mayfkha, p. 51 (transl. p. 76).
44. Manu IX, 216; Yagaavalkya II, 122; Gautama XXVIII, 29; Vishzu XVII, 3. This text is not found in the Nepalese MS., nor is it commonly quoted in the Digests.
45-47, 49. Manu IX, 158-184; Vishnu XV, 1-29; Vasishtha XVII, 12-39; Baudhdyana II, 2, 3, 14-32; Y4gfavalkya II, 128-132.
45, 46. Regarding the meaning of the tcchnical terms in this text, see the corresponding portion of the Code of Manu, and the notes on them in Professor Biihler’s translation.
XIII, sr. INHERITANCE, 201
following next), and each following one inferior (to the preceding one).
[48. Where some doubt arises in regard to a house or field, the possession of which has suffered an interruption, (the doubt) may be removed by consulting a writing, or persons who know all about the enjoyment (of the property in question by its occupant), or witnesses. |
*49. After their father’s death, these (sons) shall succeed to his wealth in order. Whenever a superior son is wanting, the one next to him in rank is entitled to succession.
*50. On failure of a son, the daughter (succeeds), because she continues the lineage just like (a son) ; both a son and a daughter continue the lineage of their father.
*51. On failure of daughters, the Sakulyas (are to succeed) and (after them) the Bandhavas; next, a member of the same caste. In default of all, that (wealth) goes to the king,
48. This text, which comes in very awkwardly between pars. 47 and 49, is apparently spurious, as has been pointed out long ago by Professor Bihler. It is not given in the Nepalese MS.
50. Gimftavahana and other writers of the Bengal school restrict the daughter’s right of succession, as declared in this text, to those daughters who are neither barren nor widowed. See Dayabhaga IV, 2, 10. However, there is nothing in the words of the original to warrant this restriction. Apastamba II, 6, 14, 4.
51. The term Sakulya is apparently used to denote the agnates, and Bandhava to denote the cognates. Therefore the last term sagAti cannot be referred to blood-relationship at all, and must denote connexion by membership of the same caste. It is true that the commentators explain it as denoting descent from the same Arshi. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 8, 448.
p. 52
*52. Unless it should be the property ofa Brahman. A king devoted to duty must allot a maintenance to his women. Thus has the law of inheritance been declared.
FOURTEENTH TITLE OF LAW.
HeErnous OFFENCES.
*1, Whatever act is performed by force (sahas) by persons inflamed with (the pride of) strength, is called Sahasa (a heinous offence); sahas (force) means strength in this world.
* 2. Manslaughter, robbery, an indecent assault on another man’s wife, and the two species of insult, such are the four kinds of Heinous Offences.
* 2. Manslaughter, robbery, an indecent assault on another man’s wife, and the two species of insult, such are the four kinds of Heinous Offences.
* 3. It is again declared to be threefold in’ the law-books, viz. (heinous offences) of the first, middlemost, and highest degree. The definition of each kind shall be given as follows.
* 4. Destroying, reviling, disfiguring or otherwise
52. ‘His women,’ i.e. the women of the deceased proprietor. Vig#dnesvara, Nilakanéha, and other commentators declare that the term stri, ‘woman,’ cannot denote the legitimate wives of a deceased heir, and must therefore mean his concubines. This interpretation has been called forth, no doubt, by the fact that, in the opinion of these commentators, the inheritance of one sonless belongs to the widow in the first instance, and does not go to others, where a legitimate widow is in existence.
XIV, 1. The term Séhasa, literally ‘ violence,’ is used to denote violent deeds or heinous offences of every sort. Manu VIII, 332; Yagiiavalkya II, 230.
2. This text is omitted in the Nepalese MS.
4. ‘Destroying, i.e. totally annihilating the fruits and other objects mentioned in this text. ‘Reviling,’ i.e. abusing, using bad
p. 203
(injuring) fruits, roots, water and the like, or agricultural utensils, is declared to be Sdhasa of the first degree.
* 5. (Injuring) in the same way clothes, cattle, food, drink, or household utensils, is declared to be Sahasa of the middlemost degree.
* 6, Taking human life through poison, weapons or other (means of destruction), indecent assault on another man’s wife, and whatever other (offences) encompassing life (may be imagined), is called Sahasa of the highest degree.
*7, The punishment to be inflicted for it must be proportionate to the heaviness of the crime, (so however as) not to be less than a hundred (Pazas) for Séhasa of the first degree, whereas for Sdhasa of the middlemost degree the punishment is declared by persons acquainted with the law to be no less than five hundred (Pazas).
*8. For Sdhasa of the highest degree, a fine amounting to no less than a thousand (Pamas) is ordained. (Moreover) corporal punishment, confiscation of the entire property, banishment from the town and branding, as well as amputation of that limb (with which the crime has been committed), is declared to be the punishment for Sahasa of the highest degree.
*9, This gradation of punishments is ordained for every (caste) indiscriminately, excepting only corporal punishment in the case of a Brahman. A Brahman must not be subjected to corporal punishment.
language. ‘ Disfiguring,’ injuring so far only as to leave the form intact. Viramitrodaya, p. 499. 8,9. The ambiguous term vadha in these two paragraphs is
p. 10
*ro, Shaving his head, banishing him from the town, branding him on the forehead with a mark of the crime of which he has been convicted, and parading him on an ass, shall be his punishment.
Viramitrodaya, p. 499. 8,9. The ambiguous term vadha in these two paragraphs is
p. 10
*ro, Shaving his head, banishing him from the town, branding him on the forehead with a mark of the crime of which he has been convicted, and parading him on an ass, shall be his punishment.
*11. Those who have committed Sdhasa of either of the two first degrees are allowed to mix in society, after having been punished, but if a man has committed Sahasa of the highest degree, no one is allowed to speak to him, even when he has received punishment.
*12. Theft is a special kind of it. The difference between (Sdhasa and theft) is as follows. SAhasa is where the criminal act consists of a forcible attack, theft is where it is done by fraud.
*13. That (theft) is again declared to be threefold by the wise, according to the (value of the) articles (purloined), whether articles of small, middling, or superior value have been stolen.
*14. Earthenware, a seat, a couch, bone, wood, leather, grass, and the like, legume, grain, and prepared food, these are termed articles of small value.
*15. Clothes made of other material than silk, cattle other than cows, and metals other than gold, are (termed) articles of middling value, and so are rice and barley.
explained as denoting corporal punishment, and not execution, by the commentators.
9, 10, Gautama XII, 46, 47; Vishvu V, 2-8; Y4gviavalkya II, 270; Manu VIII, 124, 379-380.
12. ‘A criminal act’ (4dhif), i.e. injuring another man’s property; ‘through a forcible attack,’ i.e. violently, is called theft equivalent to Saéhasa; a criminal act done ‘by fraud’ is called ordinary theft. Viramitrodaya, p. 490. Manu VIII, 3332.
13. Yagviavalkya II, 275. _ 14. Manu VIII, 326-329.
p. 205
*16. Gold, precious stones, silk, women, men, cows, elephants, horses, and what belongs to a god, a Brahman, or a king, these are regarded as articles of superior value.
17. Taking away by any means whatsoever the property of persons asleep, or disordered in their intellect, or intoxicated, is declared to be theft by the wise.
18. Where stolen goods are found with a man, he may be presumed to be the thief. (The possession of) stolen goods may be inferred from a luxurious mode of life. Suspicion arises where a man is seen in bad company or indulges in extravagance.
*19. Those who give food or shelter to thieves seeking refuge with them, or who suffer them (to escape) though able (to arrest them), partake of their crime themselves.
* 20. Those who do not come to offer assistance, when people are crying out (for help) within their hearing, or when property is being taken away, are likewise accomplices in the crime.
* 21, That series of punishments, which has been ordained by the wise for the three kinds of Sahasa, is equally applicable to theft, according as it concerns one of the three species of articles in their order.
22. When cows or other (animals) have been lost,
* 21, That series of punishments, which has been ordained by the wise for the three kinds of Sahasa, is equally applicable to theft, according as it concerns one of the three species of articles in their order.
22. When cows or other (animals) have been lost,
16. See the Indian law of prescription, where the property of Brahmans and kings is declared to be exempt from the ordinary rules regarding limitation. Manu VIII, 323.
18. Yagmavalkya II, 266.
19. Those who give food or any other assistance to a thief, or who suffer a thief to escape though able to seize him, have to be punished like thieves. Vivddagintémani, p. 93. Manu IX, 278; YAgnavalkya II, 276.
ao. Manu IX, 275. This text is omitted in the Nepalese MS.
p. 23
or when (other) property has been taken away forcibly, experienced men shall trace it from the place where it has been taken.
23. Wherever the footmarks go to, whether it be a village, pasture ground or deserted spot (the inhabitants or owners of) that place must make good the loss, unless they can prove the footmarks to go out of that place again.
24. When the footmarks are obscured or interrupted, because (they lead to) broken ground or to a spot much frequented by other people, the nearest village or pasture ground shall be made responsible.
25. Where two persons have gone the same road, the offence, as a rule, shall be imputed to him who stood charged with other crimes before, or who associates with suspicious characters.
26. Kandalas, executioners, and other such persons, as well as those who are in the habit of roaming at night, shall institute a search (after the thieves) in the villages; those living outside (of inhabited places) shall search (for them) outside.
27. When the thieves are not caught, the king must make good (the loss) from his own treasury. By showing himself remiss (towards criminals), he would incur sin and would offend both against justice and his own interest.
23. Yagiavalkya II, 2471. 24. Yagavalkya II, 272.
26. Manu IX, 267.
p. 207
FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH TITLES OF LAW.
ABUSE AND ASSAULT.
*1, Abusive speeches, couched in offensive and violent terms, regarding the native country, caste, family, and so forth (of a man), are termed Abuse, (a title of law.)
*2. It is divided into three species, called respectively Nish¢dura, Asltla,and Tivra. The punishment for each increases in severity according as the insult is of a more (or less) serious nature.
* 3. Abuse combined with reproaches has to be regarded as Nish¢hura; abuse couched in insulting language is Aslila; charging one with an offence causing expulsion from caste is called Tivra by the learned.
*4. Hurting the limbs of another person with a hand, foot, weapon or otherwise, or defiling him
Abuse combined with reproaches has to be regarded as Nish¢hura; abuse couched in insulting language is Aslila; charging one with an offence causing expulsion from caste is called Tivra by the learned.
*4. Hurting the limbs of another person with a hand, foot, weapon or otherwise, or defiling him
XV, XVI,1. Thus, e.g. when a man says, ‘ The Gaudas (Bengalis) are quarrelsome,’ he abuses another man’s native country. When a man says, ‘ Brahmans are very avaricious,’ he abuses another man’s caste. When he says,‘ The Visvamitras are a ferocious race,’ he abuses another man’s family. The clause ‘and so forth’ is added, in order to include abusive speeches levelled against learned men, artizans, or the like persons, whose learning or art has been abused. ‘ Violent terms,’ i.e. terms which ought never to be used. Mitaékshar&, p. 285; Viramitrodaya, p. 482.
3. ‘Abuse combined with reproaches’ is when e.g. a man says, ‘What a fool,’ or ‘What a rascal.’ ‘Abuse couched in insulting language’ is when a man says, ‘I will visit your sister,’ or the like. ‘Charging one with a mortal sin causing expulsion from caste,’ such as e.g. the drinking of spirituous liquor. See loc. cit.
p. 5
with ashes or other (impure substances), is termed Assault.
*5. There are three species of that also, as it may be either light, or of a middling sort, or heavy, according as it consists in the raising (of a hand or weapon for the purpose of striking a blow), or in an unexpected attack, or in striking a wound.
* 6. Stealing articles of small, middling, or superior value, is called the three kinds of Sdhasa; there the thorny weeds (sinners) should be extirpated.
* 7. In both kinds (of insult) five cases are distinguished, when the respective innocence or guilt of the two parties has to be established.
*8. When two parties have been guilty of insult, and both have commenced to quarrel at the same time, they shall suffer the same punishment, in case that no difference (in their respective culpability) becomes apparent.
*9. He who is the first to offer an insult is decidedly criminal; he who returns the insult is likewise culpable; but the one who began shall suffer the heavier punishment (of the two).
6. The above translation of this paragraph follows the reading of the MSS. If that reading be correct, this paragraph contains a rule relating to the subject of theft or Sahasa. The quotations have a different reading, under which this paragraph has to be closely connected with the preceding one, and has to be referred equally to the three degrees of assault.
4. The Nepalese MS. and the commentaries insert the following paragraph here: *‘ When an insult has occurred between two men engaged in a violent quarrel, he who suffers the insult patiently is struck, but the offender is punishable.’
4. The Nepalese MS. and the commentaries insert the following paragraph here: *‘ When an insult has occurred between two men engaged in a violent quarrel, he who suffers the insult patiently is struck, but the offender is punishable.’
8-10. The one who has first commenced a quarrel shall receive the heavier punishment of the two. That man is liable to punishment who persists in hostility. When it is impossible to ascertain any
p. 209
*to. When both parties are implicated equally, he of the two shall receive punishment who follows up his attack, whether he was (originally) the aggressor or the defendant.
*11. If a Svapaka, Meda, KamdAla, cripple, one who gains his substance by killing (animals), an elephant-driver, one deprived of his caste for nonperformance of the ceremony of initiation, a slave, or one who treats a Guru or spiritual teacher with disregard,
*12. Should offend a superior, he shall be punished by whipping him on the spot. Nor do the sages regard bodily injury done to a man of this stamp as (an offence equal to) theft.
*13. Should any such low person, abhorred by men, insult another man (his superior), that man himself shall punish him. The king has nothing to do with the penalty (to be inflicted on him).
*14. For these people are the refuse of human. society, and their property is (likewise) impure. The king also is at liberty to whip them, but he must not amerce them with a fine.
15. A Kshatriya who reviles a Brahman must difference in the culpability of the two parties, their punishment shall be equal. Viramitrodaya, p. 472. Read pfirvam.
11. Svap4ka, literally ‘ dog-cooking,’ is the name of a particular degraded tribe, whose only office is to act as public executioners. Meda is the name of another mixed caste. andalas are the lowest caste of all, see XII, 113. The Nepalese MS. and the commentaries read shandha, ‘a eunuch,’ instead of Meda.
12-14. When a Svapaka or the like should have insulted an Arya or member of the three higher castes, honourable men shall be entitled to punish them in person. When the (honourable men) are unable to do so, the king shall punish them; but he must not confiscate their property. Viramitrodaya, p. 472.
15-17. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 267= ~
(33) PLO PRAY (UNIVERSITY SALIFORNEZ
p. 16
pay one hundred (Pamas) as a fine. A Vaisya (must pay) one and a half hundred, or two hundred. A Sadra deserves corporal punishment.
16. A Brahman shall be fined fifty (Pazas) for calumniating a Kshatriya; in the case of a Vaisya, the fine shall be half of fifty (i.e. twenty-five) ; in the case of a Sidra, (it shall amount to) twelve (Pamas).
17. When a twice-born man offends against a member of his own caste, (he shall pay) twelve (Pazas as a fine). When he utters calumnies which ought never to be uttered, the fine shall be twice as high.
twenty-five) ; in the case of a Sidra, (it shall amount to) twelve (Pamas).
17. When a twice-born man offends against a member of his own caste, (he shall pay) twelve (Pazas as a fine). When he utters calumnies which ought never to be uttered, the fine shall be twice as high.
18, Even he who in accordance with fact (contemptuously) calls another man one-eyed, lame, or the like (names), shall be fined by the king not less than one K4rshapama.
19. One must not tax with his offence a man who has done penance according to law, or who has received due punishment from the king. By transgressing this rule one becomes liable to punishment.
20. Two persons, a Brahman and a king, are declared to be exempt from censure and corporal punishment in this world; for these two sustain the visible world.
*o1. One who calls an outcast an outcast, or a thief a thief, is equally criminal with those whom he taxes (with their offence). (If he reproaches them) without reason, he is twice as guilty as they are. .
17. According to the commentators of Manu, the term ‘ calumnies which ought never to be uttered’ has to be referred to insinuations against the honour of a man’s mother, sisters, or other female relatives. See Professor Buhler’s note on Manu VIII, 269.
18, Manu VIII, 274; Y4gviavalkya II, 204.
XV, XVI, 29. ABUSE AND ASSAULT. 2II
22. A once-born man (or Sfdra), who insults members of a twice-born caste with gross invectives, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin.
23. If he refers to their name or caste in terms indicating contempt, an iron rod, ten Angulas long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth.
24. If he is insolent enough to give lessons regarding their duty to Brahmans, the king shall order hot oil to be poured into his mouth and ears.
*25. With whatever limb a man of low caste offends against a Brahman, that very limb of his shall be cut off; such shall be the atonement for his crime. .
26. A low-born man, who tries to place himself on the same seat with his superior in caste, shall be branded on his hip and banished, or (the king) shall cause his backside to be gashed.
27. If through arrogance he spits (on a superior), the king shall cause both his lips to be cut off; if he makes water (on him), the penis; if he breaks wind (against him), the buttocks.
28. If he pulls (a superior) by the hair, (the king) shall unhesitatingly cause his hands to be cut off, likewise (if he seizes him) by the feet, beard, neck, or scrotum.
29. If a man breaks the skin (of his equal) or
22. ‘ He is of loworigin,’ because the Sadra caste has been produced from Brahman’s feet. Identical with Manu VIII, 270.
23. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 271.
24. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 272.
25. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 279.
26, 27. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 281, 282. In paragraph 27 the Nepalese MS. has ‘the nose’ instead of ‘the beard.’
28. Identical with Manu VIII, 283.
23. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 271.
24. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 272.
25. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 279.
26, 27. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 281, 282. In paragraph 27 the Nepalese MS. has ‘the nose’ instead of ‘the beard.’
28. Identical with Manu VIII, 283.
39. According to the majority of the commentators of Manu,
P2
p. 30
fetches blood (from him), he shall be fined a hundred (Pamas); if he cuts the flesh, six Nishkas; if he breaks a bone, he shall be banished.
*30, If a man censures a king devoted to the discharge of his duties, he shall have his tongue cut out or his entire property confiscated, as an atonement for such crime.
* 31, When an evil-minded man assails a wicked king even, he shall be (fastened) on a stake and burnt in fire; (for he is) more criminal than one who has committed a hundred times the crime of killing a Brahman.
* 32. A father is not liable to be punished for an offence committed by his son; nor is the owner of a horse, dog, or monkey (responsible for any damage caused by one of these animals), unless he should have set them to do it.
SEVENTEENTH TITLE OF LAW.
GAMES.
*1. Dishonest gambling with dice, small slices of leather, little staves of ivory, or other (games), and betting on birds, form (the subject of) a title of law called (Gambling with Dice and Betting on Animals).
*2, The master of the gaming-house shall arrange this rule has reference to an equal in caste. Nearly identical with Manu VIII, 284.
XVII, 1. The translation is according to the Viramitrodaya. The subject of bets on animals is treated at great length in the Dhammathats of Burma, which are based on the law-codes of India. ‘Other games,’ such as e.g. Katuranga (Shatra#g, the Indian chess). ‘Birds,’ such as pigeons, also bets on professional wrestlers, rams, &c. Viramitrodaya, p. 718. Manu IX, 223.
2. ‘He shall pay the stakes which have been won,’ i.e. to thep. 213 the game and pay the stakes which have been won ; the profit of such a conductor of games shall amount to ten per cent.
3. When the dice on being thrown fall twice in a game at dice, those acquainted with (playing at) dice allot the victory to the adversary and the defeat to the gambler.
4. When a dispute has arisen among gamblers, let (other) gamblers be appealed to; they shall act both as judges and as witnesses in a dispute of this sort.
5. No gambler shall ever enter into another gaming-house before having paid his debt; he must not disobey the master of the gaming-house, and must pay of his own accord what he owes to him.
*6. Wicked men who play with false dice shall be driven out of the gaming-house, after a wreath of dice has been hung round their necks; for that is the punishment ordained for them.
7. If a man gambles with dice, without authorization from the king, he shall not get his stake, and shall have to pay a fine.