Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
11 Sacred Books of the East, vol. vii, p. xxxii. * Tagore Law Lectures, p. 49. 3 See, particularly, p. 27, note on 18. * See Dr. Jacobi’s edition, par. 36 (p. 44), and the same scholar's translation of the Kalpa-s(tra, Sacred Books of the East, vol. xxii, p. 232. [33] Xviii NARADA. statement of the value of a Din4ra which, it says, is called a Suvarnva also. The reception of Dinaras among the ordinary coins of that period shows that their circulation in India must have commenced some time before the Naradasmriti was written. The first importation of gold Dindras into India cannot be referred to an earlier period than the time of the Roman emperors, and the gold Dinaras most numerously found in India belong to the third century A.D." The earliest reference to a work called Ndaradiya Referencesto DharmasAstra seems to be contained ina Narada. work of the sixth century, Baza’s Kadambari. Whether the compiler of the Pa#éatantra was acquainted with the Narada-smriti appears to be doubtful. The Pa#katantra in Kosegarten’s edition contains a legal text which is attributed to Narada, though it is not to be found inthe Narada-smrzti. The standard Bombay edition of the Paskatantra has that very text, but the name of Narada is omitted®. Medhatithiss Manubhdashya, which seems to belong to the ninth century, contains several references to the Narada-smriti, and Asahaya, who appears to have preceded Medhitithi, is the reputed author of the ancient Commentary on it, which has largely been used for the present work ¢. These considerations tend to show that the composition of the Nérada-smriti cannot be referred to a more recent period than the fifth century A.D., or the sixth century at the very latest. Nor can it belong to a much earlier age than that. This estimate of its age agrees with the results arrived at, thirteen years ago, from the very scanty data then available. Result. 1 Biihler, S. B. E., vol. xxv, p. cvii; West and Biihler, p. 48; Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 245; Jolly, Tagore Law Lectures, p. 36; Homle, Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of Orientalists, p. 134. 3 P. 1 in Peterson’s edition. See Biihler, Sacred Books of the East, vol. xxv, p- cvii, note 1. 5 See Kosegarten’s Paftkatantra III, 94; Bombay ed., III, 2. It is true that the two texts immediately preceding the text in question in the Paf#éatantra may be compared with Narada XI, 2 and I, 5, 79. * The fact that Asahdya refers to a coin called dramma, i.e. the Greek 3paxph, may be used for fixing the earlier limit of his date. INTRODUCTION. xix
2It is true that the two texts immediately preceding the text in question in the Paf#éatantra may be compared with Narada XI, 2 and I, 5, 79. * The fact that Asahdya refers to a coin called dramma, i.e. the Greek 3paxph, may be used for fixing the earlier limit of his date. INTRODUCTION. xix The present translation, unlike the Institutes of Narada previously published by myself (London, Triibner & Co., The present 1876), is based in the main on what may be translation. termed the large version of Narada, and accords throughout with the editio princeps of the Nérada-smrtti in the Bibliotheca Indica. The reasons which have induced me to consider the large version as the original and authentic composition of Narada, and to make it the basis of my edition of the Sanskrit text in the Bibliotheca Indica, have been stated in my volume of Tagore Law Lectures, pp. 54-56. In those parts of the work also where both versions agree, or where the only extant MS. of the large version is deficient and has to be supplied from the MSS. of the minor version, the present translation will be found to differ not inconsiderably from my previous rendering of the ‘Institutes of Narada.’ The discovery of five valuable MSS. of the minor version, besides the three used in preparing the ‘Institutes of Narada, the recovery of Asahaya’s ancient and valuable Commentary on the N4radasmriti, and the dies diem docet have united to produce a considerable number of new results. Among the new MSS. discovered, the fifteenth-century Nepalese Palm-leaf MS. of Mr. Bendall is the most important, and has furnished an entire new chapter, the authenticity of which is proved by numerous references in the mediaeval and modern Digests of Law. The chapter in question has been termed an Appendix in the present work (pp. 223-232). It is found, likewise, in a Nepalese paper MS. of the minor version, discovered very recently by Mr. Bendall among the Nepalese MSS. of the British Museum, where it had been labelled wrongly as Xaurapratishedha. The Commentary of Asahdya, as far as it goes, has Asahaya and furnished the substance of the foot-notes Kalyazabha‘fa. to the present translation, in which it has been quoted constantly as ‘A.’ Asahdya was a standard writer in the province of Hindu Law, and his Naradabhdshya is a very valuable production indeed. He shares with other early commentators of law-books the peculiarity of indulging every now and then in illustrations b2 xX NARADA.
3He shares with other early commentators of law-books the peculiarity of indulging every now and then in illustrations b2 xX NARADA. taken from the every-day life of his period, which help to throw some light on the practical working of Indian Law in those times. As an instance of this tendency I would cite his remarks on a rule concerning liability for debts (pp. 43, 44). Of course it would be dangerous to trust his philological skill everywhere, and some of his interpretations are decidedly artificial. -What is worse, the Commentary of Asahdya has not been preserved in its original shape, but in a recast due to one Kalydzabha¢‘a, whose name is entirely unknown to fame. It is just possible that Kalydzabhat/a, instead of confining his activity to supplying deficiencies and correcting mistakes in the copies of Asahdya’s Commentary, may have inserted some new verses in the text of the Narada-smriti as well. Such might be conjectured, for example, to be the origin of the four verses, Introd. I, 21-24 (pp. 9-13), which are quoted in none of the authoritative Digests, and objectionable as to grammar and metre. It should be remembered, however, that Kaly4zabha¢fa declares the original work of Asahdya to have been spoiled by negligent scribes, and so the grammatical blunders may be charged to their account. The latter half of Asahaya’s Commentary being lost, I had to avail myself for the corresponding portion of the Other auxiliary Ndrada-smriti, of the glosses of other mewritings. diaeval writers, by whom the texts of Narada have been quoted and discussed a great deal. Their opinions have been adverted to very fully, in the chapter on inheritance especially, both on account of the practical importance of inheritance for the law-courts of modern India, and because each of the various schools of Sanskrit lawyers has been anxious to interpret the sayings of Narada to its own advantage. For the curious and somewhat obscure disquisition on fourteen kinds of impotency (XII, 11-18, pp. 167-169), I have been able to use the advice of my late lamented friend Dr. Haas, the well-known student of Indian medical science. A somewhat analogous passage in the canonical literature of the Buddhists has been kindly pointed out to me by Mr. Rhys Davids’. 1 Xullavagga X, 17,1. See Sacred Books of the East, vol. xx, p. 349. INTRODUCTION. Xxi
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.
11 Sacred Books of the East, vol. vii, p. xxxii. * Tagore Law Lectures, p. 49. 3 See, particularly, p. 27, note on 18. * See Dr. Jacobi’s edition, par. 36 (p. 44), and the same scholar's translation of the Kalpa-s(tra, Sacred Books of the East, vol. xxii, p. 232. [33] Xviii NARADA. statement of the value of a Din4ra which, it says, is called a Suvarnva also. The reception of Dinaras among the ordinary coins of that period shows that their circulation in India must have commenced some time before the Naradasmriti was written. The first importation of gold Dindras into India cannot be referred to an earlier period than the time of the Roman emperors, and the gold Dinaras most numerously found in India belong to the third century A.D." The earliest reference to a work called Ndaradiya Referencesto DharmasAstra seems to be contained ina Narada. work of the sixth century, Baza’s Kadambari. Whether the compiler of the Pa#éatantra was acquainted with the Narada-smriti appears to be doubtful. The Pa#katantra in Kosegarten’s edition contains a legal text which is attributed to Narada, though it is not to be found inthe Narada-smrzti. The standard Bombay edition of the Paskatantra has that very text, but the name of Narada is omitted®. Medhatithiss Manubhdashya, which seems to belong to the ninth century, contains several references to the Narada-smriti, and Asahaya, who appears to have preceded Medhitithi, is the reputed author of the ancient Commentary on it, which has largely been used for the present work ¢. These considerations tend to show that the composition of the Nérada-smriti cannot be referred to a more recent period than the fifth century A.D., or the sixth century at the very latest. Nor can it belong to a much earlier age than that. This estimate of its age agrees with the results arrived at, thirteen years ago, from the very scanty data then available. Result. 1 Biihler, S. B. E., vol. xxv, p. cvii; West and Biihler, p. 48; Max Miiller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 245; Jolly, Tagore Law Lectures, p. 36; Homle, Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of Orientalists, p. 134. 3 P. 1 in Peterson’s edition. See Biihler, Sacred Books of the East, vol. xxv, p- cvii, note 1. 5 See Kosegarten’s Paftkatantra III, 94; Bombay ed., III, 2. It is true that the two texts immediately preceding the text in question in the Paf#éatantra may be compared with Narada XI, 2 and I, 5, 79. * The fact that Asahdya refers to a coin called dramma, i.e. the Greek 3paxph, may be used for fixing the earlier limit of his date. INTRODUCTION. xix
2It is true that the two texts immediately preceding the text in question in the Paf#éatantra may be compared with Narada XI, 2 and I, 5, 79. * The fact that Asahdya refers to a coin called dramma, i.e. the Greek 3paxph, may be used for fixing the earlier limit of his date. INTRODUCTION. xix The present translation, unlike the Institutes of Narada previously published by myself (London, Triibner & Co., The present 1876), is based in the main on what may be translation. termed the large version of Narada, and accords throughout with the editio princeps of the Nérada-smrtti in the Bibliotheca Indica. The reasons which have induced me to consider the large version as the original and authentic composition of Narada, and to make it the basis of my edition of the Sanskrit text in the Bibliotheca Indica, have been stated in my volume of Tagore Law Lectures, pp. 54-56. In those parts of the work also where both versions agree, or where the only extant MS. of the large version is deficient and has to be supplied from the MSS. of the minor version, the present translation will be found to differ not inconsiderably from my previous rendering of the ‘Institutes of Narada.’ The discovery of five valuable MSS. of the minor version, besides the three used in preparing the ‘Institutes of Narada, the recovery of Asahaya’s ancient and valuable Commentary on the N4radasmriti, and the dies diem docet have united to produce a considerable number of new results. Among the new MSS. discovered, the fifteenth-century Nepalese Palm-leaf MS. of Mr. Bendall is the most important, and has furnished an entire new chapter, the authenticity of which is proved by numerous references in the mediaeval and modern Digests of Law. The chapter in question has been termed an Appendix in the present work (pp. 223-232). It is found, likewise, in a Nepalese paper MS. of the minor version, discovered very recently by Mr. Bendall among the Nepalese MSS. of the British Museum, where it had been labelled wrongly as Xaurapratishedha. The Commentary of Asahdya, as far as it goes, has Asahaya and furnished the substance of the foot-notes Kalyazabha‘fa. to the present translation, in which it has been quoted constantly as ‘A.’ Asahdya was a standard writer in the province of Hindu Law, and his Naradabhdshya is a very valuable production indeed. He shares with other early commentators of law-books the peculiarity of indulging every now and then in illustrations b2 xX NARADA.
3He shares with other early commentators of law-books the peculiarity of indulging every now and then in illustrations b2 xX NARADA. taken from the every-day life of his period, which help to throw some light on the practical working of Indian Law in those times. As an instance of this tendency I would cite his remarks on a rule concerning liability for debts (pp. 43, 44). Of course it would be dangerous to trust his philological skill everywhere, and some of his interpretations are decidedly artificial. -What is worse, the Commentary of Asahdya has not been preserved in its original shape, but in a recast due to one Kalydzabha¢‘a, whose name is entirely unknown to fame. It is just possible that Kalydzabhat/a, instead of confining his activity to supplying deficiencies and correcting mistakes in the copies of Asahdya’s Commentary, may have inserted some new verses in the text of the Narada-smriti as well. Such might be conjectured, for example, to be the origin of the four verses, Introd. I, 21-24 (pp. 9-13), which are quoted in none of the authoritative Digests, and objectionable as to grammar and metre. It should be remembered, however, that Kaly4zabha¢fa declares the original work of Asahdya to have been spoiled by negligent scribes, and so the grammatical blunders may be charged to their account. The latter half of Asahaya’s Commentary being lost, I had to avail myself for the corresponding portion of the Other auxiliary Ndrada-smriti, of the glosses of other mewritings. diaeval writers, by whom the texts of Narada have been quoted and discussed a great deal. Their opinions have been adverted to very fully, in the chapter on inheritance especially, both on account of the practical importance of inheritance for the law-courts of modern India, and because each of the various schools of Sanskrit lawyers has been anxious to interpret the sayings of Narada to its own advantage. For the curious and somewhat obscure disquisition on fourteen kinds of impotency (XII, 11-18, pp. 167-169), I have been able to use the advice of my late lamented friend Dr. Haas, the well-known student of Indian medical science. A somewhat analogous passage in the canonical literature of the Buddhists has been kindly pointed out to me by Mr. Rhys Davids’. 1 Xullavagga X, 17,1. See Sacred Books of the East, vol. xx, p. 349. INTRODUCTION. Xxi
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.