Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1253. If there be a doubt even on inspection. of the marks, the settlement of a dispute regarding boundaries shall depend on witnesses. 254. The witnesses, (giving evidence) regarding a boundary, shall be examined concerning the landmarks in the presence of the crowd of the villagers and also of the two litigants. 255. As they, being questioned, unanimously decide, even so he shall record the boundary (in writing), together with their names. 256. Let them, putting earth on their heads, wearing chaplets (of red flowers) and red dresses, being sworn each by (the rewards for) his meritorious deeds, settle (the boundary) in accordance with the truth. 257. If they determine (the boundary) in the 251. According to Kull., who relies on a passage of Brthaspati, these objects are to be placed in jars. 254. According to the commentators the verse refers to a dispute between two villages, and the two litigants are persons deputed by each village to conduct the case (see also below, verse 261). 255. All the commentators explain nibadhnfy&t by ‘he shall record in writing,’ and as it is specially mentioned that the names of the witnesses shall be given, it seems impossible to take the word in any other sense. Medh. says that, if the witnesses disagree, the opinion of the majority shall be taken. 256-260. Yagi. II, 130-152. 300 LAWS OF MANU. VIII, 258. manner stated, they are guiltless (being) veracious witnesses; but if they determine it unjustly, they shall be compelled to pay a fine of two hundred (pazas). 258. On failure of witnesses (from the two villages, men of) the four neighbouring villages, who are pure, shall make (as witnesses) a decision concerning the boundary in the presence of the king. 259. On failure of neighbours (who are) original inhabitants (of the country and can be) witnesses with respect to the boundary, (the king) may hear the evidence even of the following inhabitants of the forest, 260. (Viz.) hunters, fowlers, herdsmen, fishermen, root-diggers, snake-catchers, gleaners, and other foresters. 261. As they, being examined, declare the marks for the meeting of the boundaries (to be), even so the king shall justly cause them to be fixed between the two villages. 262. The decision concerning the boundary-marks of fields, wells, tanks, of gardens and houses depends upon (the evidence of) the neighbours. 263. Should the neighbours give false evidence, 258. Men from the four surrounding villages are meant, as Kull. suggests. The correctness of this opinion is proved by the fact that the land-grants usually mention ‘the four boundaries’ (Aaturagh4/anani) of the villages given away. Medh. and Nand. read gramas4mé4ntavasinaA, ‘ four men living in, &c.’ 259. Maulanaém, ‘original inhabitants,’ i.e. ‘whose ancestors have lived there since the settlement of the village’ (Medh., Gov., Kull, Ragh.). 260. ‘Other foresters,’ i.e. ‘those who collect flowers, fruit, and fuel’ (Medh., Gov., Kull.), or ‘Sabaras and the rest’ (Nar.).
2Maulanaém, ‘original inhabitants,’ i.e. ‘whose ancestors have lived there since the settlement of the village’ (Medh., Gov., Kull, Ragh.). 260. ‘Other foresters,’ i.e. ‘those who collect flowers, fruit, and fuel’ (Medh., Gov., Kull.), or ‘Sabaras and the rest’ (Nar.). 262. Vas. XVI, 13-15; YAgn. II, 154. 263. Yagi. I, 153. VIII, 270. BOUNDARY DISPUTES; DEFAMATION. 301 when men dispute about a boundary-mark, the king shall make each of them pay.the middlemost amercement as a fine. 264. He who by intimidation possesses himself of a house, a tank, a garden, or a field, shall be fined five hundred (pazas); (if he trespassed) through ignorance, the fine ¢shall be) two hundred (pazas). 265. If the boundary cannot be ascertained (by any evidence), let a righteous king with (the intention of) benefiting them (all), himself assign (his) land (to each); that is the settled rule. 266. Thus the law for deciding boundary (disputes) has been fully declared, I will next propound the (manner of) deciding (cases of) defamation. 267. A Kshatriya, having defamed a Brahmaza, shall be fined one hundred (pazas); a Vaisya one hundred and fifty or two hundred; a Sddra shall suffer corporal punishment. 268. A Brahmaza shall be fined fifty (pazas) for defaming a Kshatriya; in (the case of) a Vaisya the fine shall be twenty-five (pamas); in (the case of) a Sidra twelve. 269. For offences of twice-born men against those of equal caste (varua, the fine shall be) also twelve (pazas); for speeches which ought not to be uttered, that (and every fine shall be) double. 270. A once-born man (a Sddra), who insults a 265. Yagi. IT, 153. 267-277. Ap. II, 27,14; Gaut. XII, 1, 8-14; Vas. IX, 9; Vi. V, 23-39; Yaga. II, 204-211. 269. ‘Speeches that ought not to be uttered,’ i.e. ‘insinuations against the honour of another’s female relatives, especially mothers and sisters’ (Medh., Gov., Kull., Ragh.), with which the Hindus, like other Orientals, are very ready. 270. The last clause refers, according to the commentators, to the 302 LAWS OF MANU. VIII, 271. twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. 271. If he mentions the names and castes (gati) of the (twice-born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth. 272. If he arrogantly teaches Bréhmazas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears. 273. He who through arrogance makes false statements regarding the learning (of a caste-fellow), his country, his caste (gAti), or the rites by which his body was sanctified, shall be compelled to pay a fine of two hundred (pavas). 274. He who even in accordance with the true facts (contemptuously) calls another man one-eyed, lame, or the like (names), shall be fined at least one kArshApama.
3274. He who even in accordance with the true facts (contemptuously) calls another man one-eyed, lame, or the like (names), shall be fined at least one kArshApama. 275. He who defames his mother, his father, his wife, his brother, his son, or his teacher, and he who gives not the way to his preceptor, shall be compelled to pay one hundred (pazas). 276. (For mutual abuse) by a Brahmaza and a origin of thé SQdra from Brahman’s feet ; see above, I, 31. According to Medh. the expression ‘once-born’ includes men born from high-caste fathers and low-caste mothers. 271. I.e. if he says ‘re Yagviadatta,’ or ‘thou scum of the Brahmaaas.’ 273. ‘(Of a caste-fellow),’ (Kull., Ragh.), Gov. too states that the rule cannot refer to Sfidras, because the punishment is too light. Medh. explains karma by ‘ occupation,’ and sariram by ‘ bodily (deficiencies),’ while the others refer karma sarfram to a denial of the initiation. 275. Akshérayati, ‘defames,’ i.e. ‘accuses them of a mortal sin’ (Gov., Kull., Ragh.), or ‘of incest’ (N&r.), or ‘causes dissensions between them and others’ (Medh.), or ‘makes them angry’ (Nand.). VITI, 282. ASSAULT AND HURT. 303 Kshatriya a fine must be imposed by a discerning (king), on the Brahmaza the lowest amercement, but on the Kshatriya the middlemost. 277. A Vaisya and a Sidra must be punished exactly in the same manner according to their respective castes, but the tongue (of the Sfdra) shall not be cut out; that is the decision. 278. Thus the rules for punishments (applicable to cases) of defamation have been truly declared ; I will next propound the decision (of cases) of assault, 279. With whatever limb a man of a low caste does hurt to (a man of the three) highest (castes), even that limb shall be cut off; that is the teaching of Manu. 280. He who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his hand cut off; he who in anger kicks with his foot, shall have his foot cut off. 281. A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man ofa high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed. 282. If out of arrogance he spits (on a superior), the king shall cause both his lips to be cut off; if ‘he urines (on him), the penis; if he breaks wind (against him), the anus. 277. Le. if a SQdra defames a Vaisya his tongue is not cut out, but he pays the middlemost amercement. 279-280. Vi.V,19; Yagi. II, 215. 280. Praharet, ‘kicks,’ i.e. ‘lifts his foot in order to kick’ (Medh., Nér., Nand.). 281. Ap. II, 27, 15; Gaut. XII, 7; Vi. V, 20. According to Medh., Gov., Kull., the rule refers to a Brahmama and a Sfdra; according to Ragh., to the latter and an Aryan 3 according to Nar., to a Kshatriya, Vaisya, or Sfdra offending against a Brahmaza. 282. Vi. V, 21-22. 304 LAWS OF MANU. VIII, 283.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1253. If there be a doubt even on inspection. of the marks, the settlement of a dispute regarding boundaries shall depend on witnesses. 254. The witnesses, (giving evidence) regarding a boundary, shall be examined concerning the landmarks in the presence of the crowd of the villagers and also of the two litigants. 255. As they, being questioned, unanimously decide, even so he shall record the boundary (in writing), together with their names. 256. Let them, putting earth on their heads, wearing chaplets (of red flowers) and red dresses, being sworn each by (the rewards for) his meritorious deeds, settle (the boundary) in accordance with the truth. 257. If they determine (the boundary) in the 251. According to Kull., who relies on a passage of Brthaspati, these objects are to be placed in jars. 254. According to the commentators the verse refers to a dispute between two villages, and the two litigants are persons deputed by each village to conduct the case (see also below, verse 261). 255. All the commentators explain nibadhnfy&t by ‘he shall record in writing,’ and as it is specially mentioned that the names of the witnesses shall be given, it seems impossible to take the word in any other sense. Medh. says that, if the witnesses disagree, the opinion of the majority shall be taken. 256-260. Yagi. II, 130-152. 300 LAWS OF MANU. VIII, 258. manner stated, they are guiltless (being) veracious witnesses; but if they determine it unjustly, they shall be compelled to pay a fine of two hundred (pazas). 258. On failure of witnesses (from the two villages, men of) the four neighbouring villages, who are pure, shall make (as witnesses) a decision concerning the boundary in the presence of the king. 259. On failure of neighbours (who are) original inhabitants (of the country and can be) witnesses with respect to the boundary, (the king) may hear the evidence even of the following inhabitants of the forest, 260. (Viz.) hunters, fowlers, herdsmen, fishermen, root-diggers, snake-catchers, gleaners, and other foresters. 261. As they, being examined, declare the marks for the meeting of the boundaries (to be), even so the king shall justly cause them to be fixed between the two villages. 262. The decision concerning the boundary-marks of fields, wells, tanks, of gardens and houses depends upon (the evidence of) the neighbours. 263. Should the neighbours give false evidence, 258. Men from the four surrounding villages are meant, as Kull. suggests. The correctness of this opinion is proved by the fact that the land-grants usually mention ‘the four boundaries’ (Aaturagh4/anani) of the villages given away. Medh. and Nand. read gramas4mé4ntavasinaA, ‘ four men living in, &c.’ 259. Maulanaém, ‘original inhabitants,’ i.e. ‘whose ancestors have lived there since the settlement of the village’ (Medh., Gov., Kull, Ragh.). 260. ‘Other foresters,’ i.e. ‘those who collect flowers, fruit, and fuel’ (Medh., Gov., Kull.), or ‘Sabaras and the rest’ (Nar.).
2Maulanaém, ‘original inhabitants,’ i.e. ‘whose ancestors have lived there since the settlement of the village’ (Medh., Gov., Kull, Ragh.). 260. ‘Other foresters,’ i.e. ‘those who collect flowers, fruit, and fuel’ (Medh., Gov., Kull.), or ‘Sabaras and the rest’ (Nar.). 262. Vas. XVI, 13-15; YAgn. II, 154. 263. Yagi. I, 153. VIII, 270. BOUNDARY DISPUTES; DEFAMATION. 301 when men dispute about a boundary-mark, the king shall make each of them pay.the middlemost amercement as a fine. 264. He who by intimidation possesses himself of a house, a tank, a garden, or a field, shall be fined five hundred (pazas); (if he trespassed) through ignorance, the fine ¢shall be) two hundred (pazas). 265. If the boundary cannot be ascertained (by any evidence), let a righteous king with (the intention of) benefiting them (all), himself assign (his) land (to each); that is the settled rule. 266. Thus the law for deciding boundary (disputes) has been fully declared, I will next propound the (manner of) deciding (cases of) defamation. 267. A Kshatriya, having defamed a Brahmaza, shall be fined one hundred (pazas); a Vaisya one hundred and fifty or two hundred; a Sddra shall suffer corporal punishment. 268. A Brahmaza shall be fined fifty (pazas) for defaming a Kshatriya; in (the case of) a Vaisya the fine shall be twenty-five (pamas); in (the case of) a Sidra twelve. 269. For offences of twice-born men against those of equal caste (varua, the fine shall be) also twelve (pazas); for speeches which ought not to be uttered, that (and every fine shall be) double. 270. A once-born man (a Sddra), who insults a 265. Yagi. IT, 153. 267-277. Ap. II, 27,14; Gaut. XII, 1, 8-14; Vas. IX, 9; Vi. V, 23-39; Yaga. II, 204-211. 269. ‘Speeches that ought not to be uttered,’ i.e. ‘insinuations against the honour of another’s female relatives, especially mothers and sisters’ (Medh., Gov., Kull., Ragh.), with which the Hindus, like other Orientals, are very ready. 270. The last clause refers, according to the commentators, to the 302 LAWS OF MANU. VIII, 271. twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. 271. If he mentions the names and castes (gati) of the (twice-born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth. 272. If he arrogantly teaches Bréhmazas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears. 273. He who through arrogance makes false statements regarding the learning (of a caste-fellow), his country, his caste (gAti), or the rites by which his body was sanctified, shall be compelled to pay a fine of two hundred (pavas). 274. He who even in accordance with the true facts (contemptuously) calls another man one-eyed, lame, or the like (names), shall be fined at least one kArshApama.
3274. He who even in accordance with the true facts (contemptuously) calls another man one-eyed, lame, or the like (names), shall be fined at least one kArshApama. 275. He who defames his mother, his father, his wife, his brother, his son, or his teacher, and he who gives not the way to his preceptor, shall be compelled to pay one hundred (pazas). 276. (For mutual abuse) by a Brahmaza and a origin of thé SQdra from Brahman’s feet ; see above, I, 31. According to Medh. the expression ‘once-born’ includes men born from high-caste fathers and low-caste mothers. 271. I.e. if he says ‘re Yagviadatta,’ or ‘thou scum of the Brahmaaas.’ 273. ‘(Of a caste-fellow),’ (Kull., Ragh.), Gov. too states that the rule cannot refer to Sfidras, because the punishment is too light. Medh. explains karma by ‘ occupation,’ and sariram by ‘ bodily (deficiencies),’ while the others refer karma sarfram to a denial of the initiation. 275. Akshérayati, ‘defames,’ i.e. ‘accuses them of a mortal sin’ (Gov., Kull., Ragh.), or ‘of incest’ (N&r.), or ‘causes dissensions between them and others’ (Medh.), or ‘makes them angry’ (Nand.). VITI, 282. ASSAULT AND HURT. 303 Kshatriya a fine must be imposed by a discerning (king), on the Brahmaza the lowest amercement, but on the Kshatriya the middlemost. 277. A Vaisya and a Sidra must be punished exactly in the same manner according to their respective castes, but the tongue (of the Sfdra) shall not be cut out; that is the decision. 278. Thus the rules for punishments (applicable to cases) of defamation have been truly declared ; I will next propound the decision (of cases) of assault, 279. With whatever limb a man of a low caste does hurt to (a man of the three) highest (castes), even that limb shall be cut off; that is the teaching of Manu. 280. He who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his hand cut off; he who in anger kicks with his foot, shall have his foot cut off. 281. A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man ofa high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed. 282. If out of arrogance he spits (on a superior), the king shall cause both his lips to be cut off; if ‘he urines (on him), the penis; if he breaks wind (against him), the anus. 277. Le. if a SQdra defames a Vaisya his tongue is not cut out, but he pays the middlemost amercement. 279-280. Vi.V,19; Yagi. II, 215. 280. Praharet, ‘kicks,’ i.e. ‘lifts his foot in order to kick’ (Medh., Nér., Nand.). 281. Ap. II, 27, 15; Gaut. XII, 7; Vi. V, 20. According to Medh., Gov., Kull., the rule refers to a Brahmama and a Sfdra; according to Ragh., to the latter and an Aryan 3 according to Nar., to a Kshatriya, Vaisya, or Sfdra offending against a Brahmaza. 282. Vi. V, 21-22. 304 LAWS OF MANU. VIII, 283.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.