Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1*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 distributing 192 ' NARADA. XII, 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.
2See 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 XIII, 19. INHERITANCE. 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 dis- meaning, 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) 194 NARADA. "XII, 20.
317,18. 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) 194 NARADA. "XII, 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 the XIII, 25. INHERITANCE, 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.
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.
1*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 distributing 192 ' NARADA. XII, 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.
2See 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 XIII, 19. INHERITANCE. 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 dis- meaning, 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) 194 NARADA. "XII, 20.
317,18. 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) 194 NARADA. "XII, 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 the XIII, 25. INHERITANCE, 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.
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.