Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1son of a daughter,’ means here also ‘the son of an appointed daughter.’ Nand. reads putravat, ‘like a son;’ Gov. pfrvagan, ‘(and) the ancestors.’ 140. Baudh. IJ, 3, 16. Medh. mentions a var. lect., pitus tasya, ‘the second to his father,’ which he, however, justly considers to be bad. 141. Vas. XV, 9-10; Baudh. Parisishfa 16. Medh., Kull., and RAgh. refer this rule to the case where a man has a legitimate son and an adopted son, and think that in such a case the latter, being eminently virtuous, shall receive, like a Kshetraga (see verse 146), a fifth or sixth part of the estate. Medh. remarks that some think he is to have half, but that their opinion is improper, and finally that Upadhyaya, i.e. his teacher, allots to the adopted son less than to the Kshetraga. Kull. and Ragh. state that Gov. took the verse to mean ‘that an eminently virtuous adopted son shall inherit on failure of a legitimate son and of the son of the wife, but that this explanation is inadmissible on account of verse 165. Nevertheless Ragh. reproduces Gov.’s opinion. N§Ar. says, ‘It has been declared that an adopted son receives a share like the chief son, when he is eminently virtuous.’ Nand. reads at the end of the second line, samprapto ’sya na putrakad, ‘shall take the inheritance, (provided) the (adoptive father) has no son.’ 142. Medh. mentions another ‘improper’ explanation, according to which haret, ‘shall take,’ is to mean h4rayet, ‘shal! allow to be taken,’ and the purport of the verse is that ‘he is to benefit both (fathers) like a Dvyamushy4yaza.’ Aa2 356 LAWS OF MANU. IX, 143. 143. The son of a wife, not appointed (to have issue by another), and he whom (an appointed female, already) the mother of a son, bears to her brother-in-law, are both unworthy of a share, (one being) the son of an adulterer and (the other) produced through (mere) lust. 144. Even the male (child) of a female (duly) appointed, not begotten according to the rule (given above), is unworthy of the paternal estate; for he was procreated by an outcast. 145. A son (legally) begotten on such an appointed female shall inherit like a legitimate son of the body; for that seed and the produce belong, according to the law, to the owner of the soil. 146. He who takes care of his deceased brother's estate and of his widow, shall, after raising up a son for his brother, give that property even to that (son). 147. If a woman (duly) appointed bears a son to her brother-in-law or to another (Sapizda), that (son, if he is) begotten through desire, they declare (to be) incapable of inheriting and to be produced in vain. 148. The rules (given above) must be understood (to apply) to a distribution among sons of women of the same (caste); hear (now the law) concerning 144. ‘The rule (given above),’ i.e. that given above, verse 60. Nand. omits this verse.
2148. The rules (given above) must be understood (to apply) to a distribution among sons of women of the same (caste); hear (now the law) concerning 144. ‘The rule (given above),’ i.e. that given above, verse 60. Nand. omits this verse. 145. Medh. and Kull. state that the object of this verse is to teach that a Kshetraga, if endowed with good qualities, may even receive (against verse 120) the additional share of an eldest.son, because it is said that he inherits ‘like a legitimate son.’ N§r. says, ‘(the expression) like a legitimate son (is used) in order to establish (the title to) an equal share.’ Nand. omits this verse. 146. ‘This rule refers to the case where the two brothers are divided, while verse 120 refers to those who live in union’ (Medh., Kull., Ragh.). Nand. places this verse after 147. IX, 152. INHERITANCE. 357 those begotten by one man on many wives of different (castes). 149. If there be four wives of a Brahmava in the direct order of the castes, the rule for the division (of the estate) among the sons born of them is as follows : 150. The (slave) who tills (the field), the bull kept for impregnating cows, the vehicle, the ornaments, and the house shall be given as an additional portion to the Brahmaza (son), and one most excellent share. 151. Let the son of the Brahmamt (wife) take three shares of the (remainder of the) estate, the son of the Kshatriy4 two, the son of the Vaisy4 a share and a half, and the son of the Sddr4 may take one share. 152. Or let him who knows the law make ten shares of the whole estate, and justly distribute them according to the following rule: 149-156. Gaut. XXVIII, 35-39 ; Vas. XVII, 48-50; Baudh. IT, 3, 10; Vi. XVIII, 1-33, 38-40; Y4gh. Il, 125. . 150. ‘The ornaments,’ i.e. ‘the ring which the father used to wear, and the like’ (Medh., Kull.). ‘The house,’ i.e. ‘the principal mansion’ (Medh., Kull. Ragh.). Ekamsas ka pradhdnataA, ‘ one most excellent share’ (Medh., Kull.), means according to Nar., with whom Nand. agrees, ‘and one share consisting of the chief, i. e. best property’ (pradhanato mukhyadhan4d utkrishAd ity arthaA), and according to R4gh. ‘and one share, because he is the chief person.’ According to Nar. this ‘one share’ must be equal in value to one of the three shares mentioned in the next verse. 151. Medh. and Kull. remark that the rule holds good also if there are more sons than one in each class. 152. According to N4r. this rule refers to the case when each of the wives has several sons, while the preceding one is applicable when each wife has one son only. R4gh. thinks that the first rule shall be followed when the son of the Brahmaaf possesses good qualities, the second when he is destitute of them. 358 LAWS OF MANU. IX, 153. 153. The Brahmaza (son) shall take four shares, the son of the Kshatriy4 (wife) three, the son of the Vaisy4 shall have two parts, the son of the Sddra may take one share.
3358 LAWS OF MANU. IX, 153. 153. The Brahmaza (son) shall take four shares, the son of the Kshatriy4 (wife) three, the son of the Vaisy4 shall have two parts, the son of the Sddra may take one share. 154. Whether (a Brahmama) have sons or have no sons (by wives of the twice-born castes), the (heir) must, according to the law, give to the son of a Sadra (wife) no more than a tenth (part of his estate). 155. The son of a Brahmamza, a Kshatriya, and a Vaisya by a Sddra (wife) receives no share of the inheritance ; whatever his father may give to him, that shall be his property. 156. All the sons of twice-born men, born of wives of the same caste, shall equally divide the estate, after the others have given to the eldest an additional share. 157. For a Saidra is ordained a wife of his own caste only (and) no other; those born of her shall have equal shares, even if there be a hundred sons. 153. Medh. points out that according to other Smr¢tis the Brahmava son alone receives land, given to his father, and that the SQdra son receives no share in land, if there is other property. 154. Hence on failure of other sons the other heirs, the Sapindas (Medh.), or the widow and the rest (N4r.), shall take the rest of the estate. N&r. adds that he may obtain more than a tenth, if his father give it to him. 155. The son of a Sfidra wife receives no share of his father’s estate in case the mother was not legally married (Medh. ‘others,’ Kull.), or in case he is destitute of good qualities (Kull., Ragh.). According to Medh. and Na4r., na rikthabhak, ‘receives no share of the inheritance,’ means ‘receives no (larger) share (than one-tenth, except if the father himself has given more to him).’ But it seems more probable, that the verse is intended to inculcate the maxim that a son by a Sfidra wife cannot claim any fixed portion of the inheritance from his father who divides his estate. 156. Medh., Gov., and K. read v4, ‘or,’ instead of ye (gAt44), but this gives no good sense, as Medh. remarks. IX, 162. INHERITANCE. 359 158. Among the twelve sons of men whom Manu, sprung from the Self-existent (Svayambhd), enumerates, six are kinsmen and heirs, and six not heirs, (but) kinsmen. 159. The legitimate son of the body, the son begotten on a wife, the son adopted, the son made, the son secretly born, and the son cast off, (are) the six heirs and kinsmen. 160. The son of an unmarried damsel, the son received with the wife, the son bought, the son begotten on a re-married woman, the son self-given, and the son of a Sfdra female, (are) the six (who are) not heirs, (but) kinsmen. 161. Whatever result a man obtains who (tries to) cross a (sheet of) water in an unsafe boat, even that result obtains he who (tries to) pass the gloom (of the next world) with (the help of) bad (substitutes for a real) son. 162. If the two heirs of one man be a legitimate 158-159. Gaut. XXVIII, 31-33; Vas. XVII, 25, 38; Baudh. Il, 3) 31-32.
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.
1son of a daughter,’ means here also ‘the son of an appointed daughter.’ Nand. reads putravat, ‘like a son;’ Gov. pfrvagan, ‘(and) the ancestors.’ 140. Baudh. IJ, 3, 16. Medh. mentions a var. lect., pitus tasya, ‘the second to his father,’ which he, however, justly considers to be bad. 141. Vas. XV, 9-10; Baudh. Parisishfa 16. Medh., Kull., and RAgh. refer this rule to the case where a man has a legitimate son and an adopted son, and think that in such a case the latter, being eminently virtuous, shall receive, like a Kshetraga (see verse 146), a fifth or sixth part of the estate. Medh. remarks that some think he is to have half, but that their opinion is improper, and finally that Upadhyaya, i.e. his teacher, allots to the adopted son less than to the Kshetraga. Kull. and Ragh. state that Gov. took the verse to mean ‘that an eminently virtuous adopted son shall inherit on failure of a legitimate son and of the son of the wife, but that this explanation is inadmissible on account of verse 165. Nevertheless Ragh. reproduces Gov.’s opinion. N§Ar. says, ‘It has been declared that an adopted son receives a share like the chief son, when he is eminently virtuous.’ Nand. reads at the end of the second line, samprapto ’sya na putrakad, ‘shall take the inheritance, (provided) the (adoptive father) has no son.’ 142. Medh. mentions another ‘improper’ explanation, according to which haret, ‘shall take,’ is to mean h4rayet, ‘shal! allow to be taken,’ and the purport of the verse is that ‘he is to benefit both (fathers) like a Dvyamushy4yaza.’ Aa2 356 LAWS OF MANU. IX, 143. 143. The son of a wife, not appointed (to have issue by another), and he whom (an appointed female, already) the mother of a son, bears to her brother-in-law, are both unworthy of a share, (one being) the son of an adulterer and (the other) produced through (mere) lust. 144. Even the male (child) of a female (duly) appointed, not begotten according to the rule (given above), is unworthy of the paternal estate; for he was procreated by an outcast. 145. A son (legally) begotten on such an appointed female shall inherit like a legitimate son of the body; for that seed and the produce belong, according to the law, to the owner of the soil. 146. He who takes care of his deceased brother's estate and of his widow, shall, after raising up a son for his brother, give that property even to that (son). 147. If a woman (duly) appointed bears a son to her brother-in-law or to another (Sapizda), that (son, if he is) begotten through desire, they declare (to be) incapable of inheriting and to be produced in vain. 148. The rules (given above) must be understood (to apply) to a distribution among sons of women of the same (caste); hear (now the law) concerning 144. ‘The rule (given above),’ i.e. that given above, verse 60. Nand. omits this verse.
2148. The rules (given above) must be understood (to apply) to a distribution among sons of women of the same (caste); hear (now the law) concerning 144. ‘The rule (given above),’ i.e. that given above, verse 60. Nand. omits this verse. 145. Medh. and Kull. state that the object of this verse is to teach that a Kshetraga, if endowed with good qualities, may even receive (against verse 120) the additional share of an eldest.son, because it is said that he inherits ‘like a legitimate son.’ N§r. says, ‘(the expression) like a legitimate son (is used) in order to establish (the title to) an equal share.’ Nand. omits this verse. 146. ‘This rule refers to the case where the two brothers are divided, while verse 120 refers to those who live in union’ (Medh., Kull., Ragh.). Nand. places this verse after 147. IX, 152. INHERITANCE. 357 those begotten by one man on many wives of different (castes). 149. If there be four wives of a Brahmava in the direct order of the castes, the rule for the division (of the estate) among the sons born of them is as follows : 150. The (slave) who tills (the field), the bull kept for impregnating cows, the vehicle, the ornaments, and the house shall be given as an additional portion to the Brahmaza (son), and one most excellent share. 151. Let the son of the Brahmamt (wife) take three shares of the (remainder of the) estate, the son of the Kshatriy4 two, the son of the Vaisy4 a share and a half, and the son of the Sddr4 may take one share. 152. Or let him who knows the law make ten shares of the whole estate, and justly distribute them according to the following rule: 149-156. Gaut. XXVIII, 35-39 ; Vas. XVII, 48-50; Baudh. IT, 3, 10; Vi. XVIII, 1-33, 38-40; Y4gh. Il, 125. . 150. ‘The ornaments,’ i.e. ‘the ring which the father used to wear, and the like’ (Medh., Kull.). ‘The house,’ i.e. ‘the principal mansion’ (Medh., Kull. Ragh.). Ekamsas ka pradhdnataA, ‘ one most excellent share’ (Medh., Kull.), means according to Nar., with whom Nand. agrees, ‘and one share consisting of the chief, i. e. best property’ (pradhanato mukhyadhan4d utkrishAd ity arthaA), and according to R4gh. ‘and one share, because he is the chief person.’ According to Nar. this ‘one share’ must be equal in value to one of the three shares mentioned in the next verse. 151. Medh. and Kull. remark that the rule holds good also if there are more sons than one in each class. 152. According to N4r. this rule refers to the case when each of the wives has several sons, while the preceding one is applicable when each wife has one son only. R4gh. thinks that the first rule shall be followed when the son of the Brahmaaf possesses good qualities, the second when he is destitute of them. 358 LAWS OF MANU. IX, 153. 153. The Brahmaza (son) shall take four shares, the son of the Kshatriy4 (wife) three, the son of the Vaisy4 shall have two parts, the son of the Sddra may take one share.
3358 LAWS OF MANU. IX, 153. 153. The Brahmaza (son) shall take four shares, the son of the Kshatriy4 (wife) three, the son of the Vaisy4 shall have two parts, the son of the Sddra may take one share. 154. Whether (a Brahmama) have sons or have no sons (by wives of the twice-born castes), the (heir) must, according to the law, give to the son of a Sadra (wife) no more than a tenth (part of his estate). 155. The son of a Brahmamza, a Kshatriya, and a Vaisya by a Sddra (wife) receives no share of the inheritance ; whatever his father may give to him, that shall be his property. 156. All the sons of twice-born men, born of wives of the same caste, shall equally divide the estate, after the others have given to the eldest an additional share. 157. For a Saidra is ordained a wife of his own caste only (and) no other; those born of her shall have equal shares, even if there be a hundred sons. 153. Medh. points out that according to other Smr¢tis the Brahmava son alone receives land, given to his father, and that the SQdra son receives no share in land, if there is other property. 154. Hence on failure of other sons the other heirs, the Sapindas (Medh.), or the widow and the rest (N4r.), shall take the rest of the estate. N&r. adds that he may obtain more than a tenth, if his father give it to him. 155. The son of a Sfidra wife receives no share of his father’s estate in case the mother was not legally married (Medh. ‘others,’ Kull.), or in case he is destitute of good qualities (Kull., Ragh.). According to Medh. and Na4r., na rikthabhak, ‘receives no share of the inheritance,’ means ‘receives no (larger) share (than one-tenth, except if the father himself has given more to him).’ But it seems more probable, that the verse is intended to inculcate the maxim that a son by a Sfidra wife cannot claim any fixed portion of the inheritance from his father who divides his estate. 156. Medh., Gov., and K. read v4, ‘or,’ instead of ye (gAt44), but this gives no good sense, as Medh. remarks. IX, 162. INHERITANCE. 359 158. Among the twelve sons of men whom Manu, sprung from the Self-existent (Svayambhd), enumerates, six are kinsmen and heirs, and six not heirs, (but) kinsmen. 159. The legitimate son of the body, the son begotten on a wife, the son adopted, the son made, the son secretly born, and the son cast off, (are) the six heirs and kinsmen. 160. The son of an unmarried damsel, the son received with the wife, the son bought, the son begotten on a re-married woman, the son self-given, and the son of a Sfdra female, (are) the six (who are) not heirs, (but) kinsmen. 161. Whatever result a man obtains who (tries to) cross a (sheet of) water in an unsafe boat, even that result obtains he who (tries to) pass the gloom (of the next world) with (the help of) bad (substitutes for a real) son. 162. If the two heirs of one man be a legitimate 158-159. Gaut. XXVIII, 31-33; Vas. XVII, 25, 38; Baudh. Il, 3) 31-32.
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.