Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1*39. (The acts of) giving evidence, of becoming a surety, of giving, and of taking, may be mutually performed by divided brothers, but not by unseparated ones. *4o. If (brothers or others) should transact such matters as these publicly with their co-heirs, they may be presumed to be separate in affairs, even though no written record (of the partition) be in existence. *41. Those brothers who for ten years continue to live separate in point of religious duties and business transactions, should be regarded as separate; that is a settled rule. *42, When a number of persons, the descendants of one man, are separate in point of (the performance of) religious duties, business transactions, and work- 38. ‘Giving and receiving,’ without consulting each other. Purchase of ‘cattle’ and the like. See Colebrooke's Digest, V, 6, 380. The upshot of a long discussion of this text by Gagannftha is this, that none of the acts mentioned here may be regarded as conclusive evidence by itself, a great deal of collective evidence of all sorts having to be adduced in each case. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 6, 387. 39. Yagfavalkya II, 52. 41. The term ‘brothers’ is here used to denote coparceners generally. Smritizandrika XVI, 14. The Sarasvativilasa (§ 812, Foulkes) contests the correctness of this interpretation. The Nepalese MS. does not give this paragraph, and it is elsewhere attributed to Brzhaspati. 42, 43. ‘Religious duties,’ prescribed observances, such as the five great sacrifices (Maha4yagaas). ‘ Business transactions,’ such as 200 NARADA, XIII, 43. ing utensils, and do not consult each other about their dealings, *43. They are quite at liberty to perform, according to pleasure, all (such transactions as) the gift or sale of their own shares. They are (in fact) masters of their own wealth. *44. One born after partition shall receive his father’s property exclusively. Or, if other sharers have reunited with the father, they shall come to a division (with the son born after partition). Such is the law. *45. The legitimate son of the body, the son begotten on a wife (Kshetraga), the son of an (appointed) daughter, the son of a maiden, the son received with the wife, the son secretly born, *46. The son of a remarried woman, the son cast off, the adopted son, the son bought, the son made, and the son who has offered himself, are declared to be the twelve sons. *47. Among these, six are kinsmen and heirs, and six are not heirs (but) kinsmen. Each preceding one is declared to be superior (to the one trading and the like acts. ‘ Working utensils,’ such as household furniture, the separate possession of which is indicative of partition. The meaning is that, when they are separated thus, each may give, sell, or otherwise dispose of (his share). Mayfkha, p. 51 (transl. p. 76). 44. Manu IX, 216; Yagaavalkya II, 122; Gautama XXVIII, 29; Vishzu XVII, 3. This text is not found in the Nepalese MS., nor is it commonly quoted in the Digests.
2Mayfkha, p. 51 (transl. p. 76). 44. Manu IX, 216; Yagaavalkya II, 122; Gautama XXVIII, 29; Vishzu XVII, 3. This text is not found in the Nepalese MS., nor is it commonly quoted in the Digests. 45-47, 49. Manu IX, 158-184; Vishnu XV, 1-29; Vasishtha XVII, 12-39; Baudhdyana II, 2, 3, 14-32; Y4gfavalkya II, 128-132. 45, 46. Regarding the meaning of the tcchnical terms in this text, see the corresponding portion of the Code of Manu, and the notes on them in Professor Biihler’s translation. XIII, sr. INHERITANCE, 201 following next), and each following one inferior (to the preceding one). [48. Where some doubt arises in regard to a house or field, the possession of which has suffered an interruption, (the doubt) may be removed by consulting a writing, or persons who know all about the enjoyment (of the property in question by its occupant), or witnesses. | *49. After their father’s death, these (sons) shall succeed to his wealth in order. Whenever a superior son is wanting, the one next to him in rank is entitled to succession. *50. On failure of a son, the daughter (succeeds), because she continues the lineage just like (a son) ; both a son and a daughter continue the lineage of their father. *51. On failure of daughters, the Sakulyas (are to succeed) and (after them) the Bandhavas; next, a member of the same caste. In default of all, that (wealth) goes to the king, 48. This text, which comes in very awkwardly between pars. 47 and 49, is apparently spurious, as has been pointed out long ago by Professor Bihler. It is not given in the Nepalese MS. 50. Gimftavahana and other writers of the Bengal school restrict the daughter’s right of succession, as declared in this text, to those daughters who are neither barren nor widowed. See Dayabhaga IV, 2, 10. However, there is nothing in the words of the original to warrant this restriction. Apastamba II, 6, 14, 4. 51,52. ManuIX, 185-189; Yag#avalkya II, 135,136; Vasish/ha XVII, 81-84; Vishnu XVII, 4-14; Apastamba Il, 6, 14, 2-5; Gautama XXVIII, 21, 41, 42. 51. The term Sakulya is apparently used to denote the agnates, and Bandhava to denote the cognates. Therefore the last term sagAti cannot be referred to blood-relationship at all, and must denote connexion by membership of the same caste. It is true that the commentators explain it as denoting descent from the same Arshi. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 8, 448. 202 NARADA. XIII, 52. *52. Unless it should be the property ofa Brahman. A king devoted to duty must allot a maintenance to his women. Thus has the law of inheritance been declared. FOURTEENTH TITLE OF LAW. HeErnous OFFENCES. *1, Whatever act is performed by force (sahas) by persons inflamed with (the pride of) strength, is called Sahasa (a heinous offence); sahas (force) means strength in this world. * 2. Manslaughter, robbery, an indecent assault on another man’s wife, and the two species of insult, such are the four kinds of Heinous Offences.
3* 2. Manslaughter, robbery, an indecent assault on another man’s wife, and the two species of insult, such are the four kinds of Heinous Offences. * 3. It is again declared to be threefold in’ the law-books, viz. (heinous offences) of the first, middlemost, and highest degree. The definition of each kind shall be given as follows. * 4. Destroying, reviling, disfiguring or otherwise 52. ‘His women,’ i.e. the women of the deceased proprietor. Vig#dnesvara, Nilakanéha, and other commentators declare that the term stri, ‘woman,’ cannot denote the legitimate wives of a deceased heir, and must therefore mean his concubines. This interpretation has been called forth, no doubt, by the fact that, in the opinion of these commentators, the inheritance of one sonless belongs to the widow in the first instance, and does not go to others, where a legitimate widow is in existence. XIV, 1. The term Séhasa, literally ‘ violence,’ is used to denote violent deeds or heinous offences of every sort. Manu VIII, 332; Yagiiavalkya II, 230. 2. This text is omitted in the Nepalese MS. 4. ‘Destroying, i.e. totally annihilating the fruits and other objects mentioned in this text. ‘Reviling,’ i.e. abusing, using bad XIV, 9. INHERITANCE ; HEINOUS OFFENCES, 203 (injuring) fruits, roots, water and the like, or agricultural utensils, is declared to be Sdhasa of the first degree. * 5. (Injuring) in the same way clothes, cattle, food, drink, or household utensils, is declared to be Sahasa of the middlemost degree. * 6, Taking human life through poison, weapons or other (means of destruction), indecent assault on another man’s wife, and whatever other (offences) encompassing life (may be imagined), is called Sahasa of the highest degree. *7, The punishment to be inflicted for it must be proportionate to the heaviness of the crime, (so however as) not to be less than a hundred (Pazas) for Séhasa of the first degree, whereas for Sdhasa of the middlemost degree the punishment is declared by persons acquainted with the law to be no less than five hundred (Pazas). *8. For Sdhasa of the highest degree, a fine amounting to no less than a thousand (Pamas) is ordained. (Moreover) corporal punishment, confiscation of the entire property, banishment from the town and branding, as well as amputation of that limb (with which the crime has been committed), is declared to be the punishment for Sahasa of the highest degree. *9, This gradation of punishments is ordained for every (caste) indiscriminately, excepting only corporal punishment in the case of a Brahman. A Brahman must not be subjected to corporal punishment. language. ‘ Disfiguring,’ injuring so far only as to leave the form intact. Viramitrodaya, p. 499. 8,9. The ambiguous term vadha in these two paragraphs is 204 NARADA, XIV, 10. *ro, Shaving his head, banishing him from the town, branding him on the forehead with a mark of the crime of which he has been convicted, and parading him on an ass, shall be his punishment.
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*39. (The acts of) giving evidence, of becoming a surety, of giving, and of taking, may be mutually performed by divided brothers, but not by unseparated ones. *4o. If (brothers or others) should transact such matters as these publicly with their co-heirs, they may be presumed to be separate in affairs, even though no written record (of the partition) be in existence. *41. Those brothers who for ten years continue to live separate in point of religious duties and business transactions, should be regarded as separate; that is a settled rule. *42, When a number of persons, the descendants of one man, are separate in point of (the performance of) religious duties, business transactions, and work- 38. ‘Giving and receiving,’ without consulting each other. Purchase of ‘cattle’ and the like. See Colebrooke's Digest, V, 6, 380. The upshot of a long discussion of this text by Gagannftha is this, that none of the acts mentioned here may be regarded as conclusive evidence by itself, a great deal of collective evidence of all sorts having to be adduced in each case. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 6, 387. 39. Yagfavalkya II, 52. 41. The term ‘brothers’ is here used to denote coparceners generally. Smritizandrika XVI, 14. The Sarasvativilasa (§ 812, Foulkes) contests the correctness of this interpretation. The Nepalese MS. does not give this paragraph, and it is elsewhere attributed to Brzhaspati. 42, 43. ‘Religious duties,’ prescribed observances, such as the five great sacrifices (Maha4yagaas). ‘ Business transactions,’ such as 200 NARADA, XIII, 43. ing utensils, and do not consult each other about their dealings, *43. They are quite at liberty to perform, according to pleasure, all (such transactions as) the gift or sale of their own shares. They are (in fact) masters of their own wealth. *44. One born after partition shall receive his father’s property exclusively. Or, if other sharers have reunited with the father, they shall come to a division (with the son born after partition). Such is the law. *45. The legitimate son of the body, the son begotten on a wife (Kshetraga), the son of an (appointed) daughter, the son of a maiden, the son received with the wife, the son secretly born, *46. The son of a remarried woman, the son cast off, the adopted son, the son bought, the son made, and the son who has offered himself, are declared to be the twelve sons. *47. Among these, six are kinsmen and heirs, and six are not heirs (but) kinsmen. Each preceding one is declared to be superior (to the one trading and the like acts. ‘ Working utensils,’ such as household furniture, the separate possession of which is indicative of partition. The meaning is that, when they are separated thus, each may give, sell, or otherwise dispose of (his share). Mayfkha, p. 51 (transl. p. 76). 44. Manu IX, 216; Yagaavalkya II, 122; Gautama XXVIII, 29; Vishzu XVII, 3. This text is not found in the Nepalese MS., nor is it commonly quoted in the Digests.
2Mayfkha, p. 51 (transl. p. 76). 44. Manu IX, 216; Yagaavalkya II, 122; Gautama XXVIII, 29; Vishzu XVII, 3. This text is not found in the Nepalese MS., nor is it commonly quoted in the Digests. 45-47, 49. Manu IX, 158-184; Vishnu XV, 1-29; Vasishtha XVII, 12-39; Baudhdyana II, 2, 3, 14-32; Y4gfavalkya II, 128-132. 45, 46. Regarding the meaning of the tcchnical terms in this text, see the corresponding portion of the Code of Manu, and the notes on them in Professor Biihler’s translation. XIII, sr. INHERITANCE, 201 following next), and each following one inferior (to the preceding one). [48. Where some doubt arises in regard to a house or field, the possession of which has suffered an interruption, (the doubt) may be removed by consulting a writing, or persons who know all about the enjoyment (of the property in question by its occupant), or witnesses. | *49. After their father’s death, these (sons) shall succeed to his wealth in order. Whenever a superior son is wanting, the one next to him in rank is entitled to succession. *50. On failure of a son, the daughter (succeeds), because she continues the lineage just like (a son) ; both a son and a daughter continue the lineage of their father. *51. On failure of daughters, the Sakulyas (are to succeed) and (after them) the Bandhavas; next, a member of the same caste. In default of all, that (wealth) goes to the king, 48. This text, which comes in very awkwardly between pars. 47 and 49, is apparently spurious, as has been pointed out long ago by Professor Bihler. It is not given in the Nepalese MS. 50. Gimftavahana and other writers of the Bengal school restrict the daughter’s right of succession, as declared in this text, to those daughters who are neither barren nor widowed. See Dayabhaga IV, 2, 10. However, there is nothing in the words of the original to warrant this restriction. Apastamba II, 6, 14, 4. 51,52. ManuIX, 185-189; Yag#avalkya II, 135,136; Vasish/ha XVII, 81-84; Vishnu XVII, 4-14; Apastamba Il, 6, 14, 2-5; Gautama XXVIII, 21, 41, 42. 51. The term Sakulya is apparently used to denote the agnates, and Bandhava to denote the cognates. Therefore the last term sagAti cannot be referred to blood-relationship at all, and must denote connexion by membership of the same caste. It is true that the commentators explain it as denoting descent from the same Arshi. See Colebrooke’s Digest, V, 8, 448. 202 NARADA. XIII, 52. *52. Unless it should be the property ofa Brahman. A king devoted to duty must allot a maintenance to his women. Thus has the law of inheritance been declared. FOURTEENTH TITLE OF LAW. HeErnous OFFENCES. *1, Whatever act is performed by force (sahas) by persons inflamed with (the pride of) strength, is called Sahasa (a heinous offence); sahas (force) means strength in this world. * 2. Manslaughter, robbery, an indecent assault on another man’s wife, and the two species of insult, such are the four kinds of Heinous Offences.
3* 2. Manslaughter, robbery, an indecent assault on another man’s wife, and the two species of insult, such are the four kinds of Heinous Offences. * 3. It is again declared to be threefold in’ the law-books, viz. (heinous offences) of the first, middlemost, and highest degree. The definition of each kind shall be given as follows. * 4. Destroying, reviling, disfiguring or otherwise 52. ‘His women,’ i.e. the women of the deceased proprietor. Vig#dnesvara, Nilakanéha, and other commentators declare that the term stri, ‘woman,’ cannot denote the legitimate wives of a deceased heir, and must therefore mean his concubines. This interpretation has been called forth, no doubt, by the fact that, in the opinion of these commentators, the inheritance of one sonless belongs to the widow in the first instance, and does not go to others, where a legitimate widow is in existence. XIV, 1. The term Séhasa, literally ‘ violence,’ is used to denote violent deeds or heinous offences of every sort. Manu VIII, 332; Yagiiavalkya II, 230. 2. This text is omitted in the Nepalese MS. 4. ‘Destroying, i.e. totally annihilating the fruits and other objects mentioned in this text. ‘Reviling,’ i.e. abusing, using bad XIV, 9. INHERITANCE ; HEINOUS OFFENCES, 203 (injuring) fruits, roots, water and the like, or agricultural utensils, is declared to be Sdhasa of the first degree. * 5. (Injuring) in the same way clothes, cattle, food, drink, or household utensils, is declared to be Sahasa of the middlemost degree. * 6, Taking human life through poison, weapons or other (means of destruction), indecent assault on another man’s wife, and whatever other (offences) encompassing life (may be imagined), is called Sahasa of the highest degree. *7, The punishment to be inflicted for it must be proportionate to the heaviness of the crime, (so however as) not to be less than a hundred (Pazas) for Séhasa of the first degree, whereas for Sdhasa of the middlemost degree the punishment is declared by persons acquainted with the law to be no less than five hundred (Pazas). *8. For Sdhasa of the highest degree, a fine amounting to no less than a thousand (Pamas) is ordained. (Moreover) corporal punishment, confiscation of the entire property, banishment from the town and branding, as well as amputation of that limb (with which the crime has been committed), is declared to be the punishment for Sahasa of the highest degree. *9, This gradation of punishments is ordained for every (caste) indiscriminately, excepting only corporal punishment in the case of a Brahman. A Brahman must not be subjected to corporal punishment. language. ‘ Disfiguring,’ injuring so far only as to leave the form intact. Viramitrodaya, p. 499. 8,9. The ambiguous term vadha in these two paragraphs is 204 NARADA, XIV, 10. *ro, Shaving his head, banishing him from the town, branding him on the forehead with a mark of the crime of which he has been convicted, and parading him on an ass, shall be his punishment.
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.