Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1as he has to offer the customary Sraddhas to his great-grandfather, so he is liable for debts contracted by him, which have not been repaid.. I, 6. DEBTS. 43 6. Three deceased (ancestors) must be worshipped, three must be reverenced before the rest. These 6. Three deceased ancestors, i.e. the father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, may claim the discharge of their terrestrial and celestial liabilities from the fourth in descent. This rule is illustrated by the history of an action which was brought before a court in Patna. A merchant of the Brahman caste, by the name of Sridhara, had lent the whole of his wealth, consisting of 10,000 drammas (drachmas), which he had gained through great labour, to a trader, by the name of Devadhara, on condition that interest amounting to two per cent. per mensem of the principal stock should be paid to him. The interest was duly paid to Sridhara at the end of the first month. In the second month, however, Devadhara met his death through an accident. His son died of an attack of cholera. Devadhara’s great-grandson alone was left. His name was Mahfdhara. As he was addicted to licentious courses, the management of the estate was undertaken by his sons and maternal uncles. They got into the hands of a cunning Brahman called Smértadurdhara, who advised them not to pay a single rupee to Sridhara, as he was able to prove from the law-books that he had no claim to themoney. The uncles of Mahfdhara, much pleased with this piece of advice, promised to give 1,000 drammas to the Brahman if they need not pay the money to Sridhara. Thus, when at the close of the second month, the uncles and guardians of Devadhara’s greatgrandson, Mahidhara, were asked by Sridhara to pay 200 drammas, being the amount of interest due on the sum lent to Devadhara, they refused payment. They said: ‘We do not owe you the principal, much less any amount of interest. The Brahman Smfrtadurdhara has pointed out to us that the obligation to pay stops with the fourth in descent.’ Sridhara was struck dumb with grief and terror on hearing this announcement made to him. When he had regained his senses, he repaired to the court of justice, attended by his family, friends, and servants, and impeached Mahidhara, together with his uncles, for their dishonesty. Both parties took sureties. The uncles of Mahfdhara engaged SmArtadurdhara to plead for them. After pretending his clients to be connected with his family by a friendship of long standing, he went on to refer to a text of Narada (above, par. 4), as proving that the obligation to pay the debts of ancestors stops with the fourth in descent. All his arguments, however, were refuted, and held out to derision by a learned a4 NARADA. , 1,7. three ancestors of a man may claim the discharge of their twofold debt from the fourth in descent.
24), as proving that the obligation to pay the debts of ancestors stops with the fourth in descent. All his arguments, however, were refuted, and held out to derision by a learned a4 NARADA. , 1,7. three ancestors of a man may claim the discharge of their twofold debt from the fourth in descent. * 7, If a man fails to pay on demand what had been borrowed or promised by him, that sum (together with the interest) goes on growing till it amounts to a hundred krores (=one milliard). * 8. A hundred krores having been completed, he is born again, in every successive existence, in his (creditor's) house as his slave, in order to repay the debt (by his labour). *9. If an ascetic or an Agnihotri dies without Brahman, by the name of SmArtasekhara, who, at the end of his address, charged him openly with having taken a bribe from his clients. The consequence was that Mahidhara and his uncles lost their cause. A. I have quoted this story in full, because it presents a vivid picture of the way in which judicial proceedings used to be transacted in ancient India. The doctrine which the story is intended to illustrate, viz. that the liability to pay debts contracted by an ancestor extends to the great-grandson, is opposed to the teaching of such an eminent authority as Vig#4nesvara, who maintains in the Mitakshara that the great-grandson is not liable for debts contracted by his great-grandfather, and, conversely, that he does not inherit his property. See the author’s Tagore Law Lectures (Calcutta, 1885). The same opinion was apparently held by the author of the Narada-smriti, as may be gathered from par. 4, and by other Smriti writers. It appears quite probable that the present paragraph, which is not quoted in any of the standard compilations on civil law, may have been inserted by the author of the commentary, who wanted to make the contents of the Narada-smriti agree with his personal views. The shorter recension and the quotations, instead of the present paragraph, exhibit another paragraph, in which the obligation of the son only to release his father from debt is inculcated. 4. This paragraph has been translated according to the explanation given in Viramitrodaya, p. 358. 9. The ample heavenly reward due to an Agnihotri, i.e. one who has kept the three sacred fires from the date of his birth, or who has practised austerities without interruption, shall belong to the creditor, and not to the debtor. A. I, 13. DEBTS. 45 having discharged his debt, the whole merit collected by his austerities and by his Agnihotra belongs to his creditors. *1o. A father must not pay the debt of his son, but a son must pay a debt contracted by his father, excepting those debts which have been contracted from love, anger, for spirituous liquor, games, or bailments, * 11. Such debts of a son as have been contracted by him by his father’s order, or for the maintenance of the family, or in a precarious situation, must be paid by the father.
3Such debts of a son as have been contracted by him by his father’s order, or for the maintenance of the family, or in a precarious situation, must be paid by the father. *12, What has been spent for the household by a pupil, apprentice, slave, woman, menial, or agent, must be paid by the head of the household. 13. When the debtor is dead, and the expense has been incurred for the benefit of the family, the debt must be repaid by his relations, even though they be separated from him in interests. 10,11. A debt contracted by one blinded by love, or incensed by wrath against his own son, or in an outrageous state of intoxication, or mad with gambling, or who has become surety for another, must not be paid by the son. If, however, a debt has been contracted, even by the son, for the benefit of the household, or in a dangerous situation, it is binding on the father. A. According to Katyayana, a debt contracted from love is a promise made to a dissolute woman, and a debt contracted from anger is a reward promised by an angry man to a ruffian for injuring the person or estate of his enemy. ‘A debt contracted in a precarious situation,’ i.e. a debt contracted in danger of life. A. Y§gvavalkya II, 45, 46, 47; Vishnu VI, 33, 39. 12. ‘A pupil,’ one engaged in studying science. ‘An apprentice,’ a pupil who resides with his preceptor for a certain fixed period. ‘A slave,’ whether born in the house or purchased. A. Vishnu VI, 39. 13. Where the debtor has gone abroad and met his death through illness, or accident, the debtor may claim his due from his relatives, should they even be separated in interests. A. 46 NARADA. I, 14. * 14. The father, uncle, or eldest brother having gone abroad, the son, (or nephew, or younger brother) is not bound to pay his debt before the lapse of twenty years. *15. Every single coparcener is liable for debts contracted by another coparcener, if they were contracted while the coparceners were alive and unseparated. But after their death the son of one is not bound to pay the debt of another. * 16. The wife must not pay a debt contracted by her husband, nor one contracted by her son, except if it had been promised by her, or contracted in common with her husband. *17. A sonless widow, and one who has been enjoined by her dying husband (to pay his debt), must pay it. Or (it must be paid) by him who inherits the 14. Necessary debts, such as those enumerated in paragraph 11, must be paid at once by the other family members. Where, however, the father, uncle, or eldest brother resides abroad, and is known to be alive, the son, &c. need not pay his debt till after the lapse of twenty years. A. Vishwu VI, 27; YAgiiavalkya II, 50. 15. After the death of those who have contracted the debt jointly, the son of one is not bound to pay the debt of another than his father. His liability does not extend beyond his father’s share of the debt. A. Vishzu VI, 34; YAgiavalkya II, 45.
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.
1as he has to offer the customary Sraddhas to his great-grandfather, so he is liable for debts contracted by him, which have not been repaid.. I, 6. DEBTS. 43 6. Three deceased (ancestors) must be worshipped, three must be reverenced before the rest. These 6. Three deceased ancestors, i.e. the father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, may claim the discharge of their terrestrial and celestial liabilities from the fourth in descent. This rule is illustrated by the history of an action which was brought before a court in Patna. A merchant of the Brahman caste, by the name of Sridhara, had lent the whole of his wealth, consisting of 10,000 drammas (drachmas), which he had gained through great labour, to a trader, by the name of Devadhara, on condition that interest amounting to two per cent. per mensem of the principal stock should be paid to him. The interest was duly paid to Sridhara at the end of the first month. In the second month, however, Devadhara met his death through an accident. His son died of an attack of cholera. Devadhara’s great-grandson alone was left. His name was Mahfdhara. As he was addicted to licentious courses, the management of the estate was undertaken by his sons and maternal uncles. They got into the hands of a cunning Brahman called Smértadurdhara, who advised them not to pay a single rupee to Sridhara, as he was able to prove from the law-books that he had no claim to themoney. The uncles of Mahfdhara, much pleased with this piece of advice, promised to give 1,000 drammas to the Brahman if they need not pay the money to Sridhara. Thus, when at the close of the second month, the uncles and guardians of Devadhara’s greatgrandson, Mahidhara, were asked by Sridhara to pay 200 drammas, being the amount of interest due on the sum lent to Devadhara, they refused payment. They said: ‘We do not owe you the principal, much less any amount of interest. The Brahman Smfrtadurdhara has pointed out to us that the obligation to pay stops with the fourth in descent.’ Sridhara was struck dumb with grief and terror on hearing this announcement made to him. When he had regained his senses, he repaired to the court of justice, attended by his family, friends, and servants, and impeached Mahidhara, together with his uncles, for their dishonesty. Both parties took sureties. The uncles of Mahfdhara engaged SmArtadurdhara to plead for them. After pretending his clients to be connected with his family by a friendship of long standing, he went on to refer to a text of Narada (above, par. 4), as proving that the obligation to pay the debts of ancestors stops with the fourth in descent. All his arguments, however, were refuted, and held out to derision by a learned a4 NARADA. , 1,7. three ancestors of a man may claim the discharge of their twofold debt from the fourth in descent.
24), as proving that the obligation to pay the debts of ancestors stops with the fourth in descent. All his arguments, however, were refuted, and held out to derision by a learned a4 NARADA. , 1,7. three ancestors of a man may claim the discharge of their twofold debt from the fourth in descent. * 7, If a man fails to pay on demand what had been borrowed or promised by him, that sum (together with the interest) goes on growing till it amounts to a hundred krores (=one milliard). * 8. A hundred krores having been completed, he is born again, in every successive existence, in his (creditor's) house as his slave, in order to repay the debt (by his labour). *9. If an ascetic or an Agnihotri dies without Brahman, by the name of SmArtasekhara, who, at the end of his address, charged him openly with having taken a bribe from his clients. The consequence was that Mahidhara and his uncles lost their cause. A. I have quoted this story in full, because it presents a vivid picture of the way in which judicial proceedings used to be transacted in ancient India. The doctrine which the story is intended to illustrate, viz. that the liability to pay debts contracted by an ancestor extends to the great-grandson, is opposed to the teaching of such an eminent authority as Vig#4nesvara, who maintains in the Mitakshara that the great-grandson is not liable for debts contracted by his great-grandfather, and, conversely, that he does not inherit his property. See the author’s Tagore Law Lectures (Calcutta, 1885). The same opinion was apparently held by the author of the Narada-smriti, as may be gathered from par. 4, and by other Smriti writers. It appears quite probable that the present paragraph, which is not quoted in any of the standard compilations on civil law, may have been inserted by the author of the commentary, who wanted to make the contents of the Narada-smriti agree with his personal views. The shorter recension and the quotations, instead of the present paragraph, exhibit another paragraph, in which the obligation of the son only to release his father from debt is inculcated. 4. This paragraph has been translated according to the explanation given in Viramitrodaya, p. 358. 9. The ample heavenly reward due to an Agnihotri, i.e. one who has kept the three sacred fires from the date of his birth, or who has practised austerities without interruption, shall belong to the creditor, and not to the debtor. A. I, 13. DEBTS. 45 having discharged his debt, the whole merit collected by his austerities and by his Agnihotra belongs to his creditors. *1o. A father must not pay the debt of his son, but a son must pay a debt contracted by his father, excepting those debts which have been contracted from love, anger, for spirituous liquor, games, or bailments, * 11. Such debts of a son as have been contracted by him by his father’s order, or for the maintenance of the family, or in a precarious situation, must be paid by the father.
3Such debts of a son as have been contracted by him by his father’s order, or for the maintenance of the family, or in a precarious situation, must be paid by the father. *12, What has been spent for the household by a pupil, apprentice, slave, woman, menial, or agent, must be paid by the head of the household. 13. When the debtor is dead, and the expense has been incurred for the benefit of the family, the debt must be repaid by his relations, even though they be separated from him in interests. 10,11. A debt contracted by one blinded by love, or incensed by wrath against his own son, or in an outrageous state of intoxication, or mad with gambling, or who has become surety for another, must not be paid by the son. If, however, a debt has been contracted, even by the son, for the benefit of the household, or in a dangerous situation, it is binding on the father. A. According to Katyayana, a debt contracted from love is a promise made to a dissolute woman, and a debt contracted from anger is a reward promised by an angry man to a ruffian for injuring the person or estate of his enemy. ‘A debt contracted in a precarious situation,’ i.e. a debt contracted in danger of life. A. Y§gvavalkya II, 45, 46, 47; Vishnu VI, 33, 39. 12. ‘A pupil,’ one engaged in studying science. ‘An apprentice,’ a pupil who resides with his preceptor for a certain fixed period. ‘A slave,’ whether born in the house or purchased. A. Vishnu VI, 39. 13. Where the debtor has gone abroad and met his death through illness, or accident, the debtor may claim his due from his relatives, should they even be separated in interests. A. 46 NARADA. I, 14. * 14. The father, uncle, or eldest brother having gone abroad, the son, (or nephew, or younger brother) is not bound to pay his debt before the lapse of twenty years. *15. Every single coparcener is liable for debts contracted by another coparcener, if they were contracted while the coparceners were alive and unseparated. But after their death the son of one is not bound to pay the debt of another. * 16. The wife must not pay a debt contracted by her husband, nor one contracted by her son, except if it had been promised by her, or contracted in common with her husband. *17. A sonless widow, and one who has been enjoined by her dying husband (to pay his debt), must pay it. Or (it must be paid) by him who inherits the 14. Necessary debts, such as those enumerated in paragraph 11, must be paid at once by the other family members. Where, however, the father, uncle, or eldest brother resides abroad, and is known to be alive, the son, &c. need not pay his debt till after the lapse of twenty years. A. Vishwu VI, 27; YAgiiavalkya II, 50. 15. After the death of those who have contracted the debt jointly, the son of one is not bound to pay the debt of another than his father. His liability does not extend beyond his father’s share of the debt. A. Vishzu VI, 34; YAgiavalkya II, 45.
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.