Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Other skilful and reliable persons also, artful talkers and former thieves, shall (be appointed to) detect the thieves. 26. By giving them wealth and valuable presents, 20. Viv. p. 102; Col. Dig. III, 1, 98; Ratn. p. 167. 21. Viram. p. 459; Ratn. p. 212. ‘Other persons,’ i.e. hunters, foresters, and so forth. This text comes in between Narada XI, 4 and 8. 22. Ratn. p. 214; Viram. p. 452. 23. Ratn. p. 292. 24. Ratn. p. 335. This text should come in immediately after Narada XIV, 25. 25-29. Ratn. p. 337. Read dauryapadesais fa in 26. VII, 29. MISCELLANEOUS LAWS. 267 by causing them to attend at public shows and festivals, and by pretending intended robberies, they shall cause (the thieves) to assemble together. 27. Those who fail to make their appearance on such occasions, though skilful spies have been set on them, shall be arrested together with their sons, kinsmen, and relatives. 28. He shall then arrest the thieves after having convicted and enticed them (to make their appearance), and shall inflict capital punishment on them in various ways, after having proclaimed (their deeds) everywhere. 29. Innocent persons also are seen to mingle with thieves (occasionally); let not the king inflict punishments indiscriminately on such. Digitized by Goog le BRIJHAS PATI. Digitized by Google INTRODUCTION TO THE FRAGMENTS OF BA/HASPATI. THE fragments of Brzhaspati are among the most precious relics of the early legal literature of India. Apart from Importance of their intrinsic value and interest, as containing Brihaspati. a very full exposition of the whole range of the Hindu law, their close connexion with the Code of Manu gives them a special claim to consideration, and renders them a valuable link in the chain of evidence? by which the date cf the most authoritative code of ancient India has been approximately determined ?. The connexion between the Manu and Brthaspati Smritis appears first from the way in which Brzhaspati refers to, He refersto and quotes from, the Code of Manu. In the Manu. —_ chapter on Gambling and Betting, Brzhaspati says (XXVI, 1), ‘Gambling has been prohibited by Manu, because it destroys truth, honesty, and wealth. It has been permitted by others, when conducted so as to allow the king a share (of every stake).’ The observation that Manu disagrees with the other legislators as to the permissibility of gambling is perfectly just. See Manu IX, 221-228; Yagvavalkya II, 199-203; Apastamba II, 25, 12, 13; Narada XVII, 1-8; Katy4yana XXV,1. Brthaspati goes on to say (XXVI, 2) that ‘Gambling shall take place under the superintendence of keepers of gaming-houses, for the purpose of discovering thieves.’ This rule agrees almost literally with Yagavalkya II, 203, and the fact that Brzhaspati does not refer to YAg#avalkya by name, although he names Manu, can only be accounted for by his very particular veneration for the latter, as the fountain-head of Sacred Law.—On the
21 Biihler, The Laws of Manu (Sacred Pooks of the East, vol. xxv), pp. cviii-cx. 4 What follows up to p. 275 has been reprinted, with modifications and additions, from a paper on ‘ Manu and Brihaspati,’ in the first volume of the Vienna Zeitschrift f£. d. Kunde d. Morgenlandes, pp. 275-250. 272 BRIHASPATI. subject of weights or coins, Brzhaspati says (X, 10), ‘The quantities beginning with a floating particle of dust and ending with a K4rsh4pawa have been declared by Manu.’ The statements of Manu which are thus referred to by Brihaspati may be found, Manu VIII, 132-137.—In speaking of the Niyoga or appointment of a widow to raise offspring to her deceased husband, Brthaspati says (XXIV, 12), ‘The Niyoga has been declared by Manu, and again prohibited by the same; on account of the successive deterioration of the (four) ages of the world, it must not take place (in the present or Kali age).’ This text shows that the conflicting statements of Manu (IX, 57-68) with regard to the Niyoga, which have been the matter of so much comment among European philologists, had already struck his follower Brihaspati, and were ingeniously explained by him, in accordance with the practice of his own times.—In the chapter on Inheritance (X XV, 33), Brzhaspati observes that out of the thirteen sons declared by Manu, a legitimate son of the body (aurasa) and an appointed daughter (putrika) are the only ones that represent real issue. It is true that Manu (IX, 158, 180) speaks emphatically of twelve sons only, but the appointed daughter or her son is not among these, and he advocates in strong terms the rights of an appointed daughter's son (IX, 127- 140), and cuts down very much the rights of all the other substitutes for a son (IX, 180, 181). This shows that Brihaspati’s rules on this head are perfectly in keeping with the teaching of Manu.—In the chapter on Sale without Ownership (XIII, 1) he refers to Manu (VIII, 197) by the name of Bhrigu. Secondly, in a number of other instances, the Code of Manu, though not appealed to by name, is neverthe- Indirect less distinctly referred to by Bvzhaspati. Thus, references. in the chapter on Inheritance (XXV, 79), he observes that ‘ those by whom clothes and so forth have been declared impartible have not decided properly.’ The wellknown versus memorialis concerning impartible property, the contents of which are further discussed in the sequel by Brthaspati, occurs both in the Code of Manu (IX, 219) and INTRODUCTION. 273
3273 in the Vishzu-smriti ; and it may be presumed either that the authors of these two works are the authorities referred to by Brihaspati, or that Manu is referred to in the pluralis majestatis, as is often the case with teachers. The reason why Manu is not referred to by name may be sought in the fact that Brzhaspati does not care to openly avow his dissent from so eminent an authority.—In the chapter on Debts, Brzhaspati remarks (XI, 4) that interest is divided into four species by some, into five by others, and by others again into six sorts. Four sorts of interest are mentioned by Manu, VIII, 153.—In the chapter on Inheritance (XXV, 35), he declares that an appointed daughter or her son has been pronounced equal to a legitimate son of the body. The rights of an appointed daughter, as shown before, are laid great stress upon by Manu, and he actually states that an (appointed) daughter is equal to a son (IX, 130). Thirdly, Brzhaspati, even when not expressly referring to Manu, presupposes throughout an acquaintance with Comments on his Code, and a very large portion of his Manu. Smriti is devoted to the interpretation of technical terms or to the elucidation or amplification of the somewhat laconic enunciations of Manu. Thus, for example, in the chapter on Debts (XI, 5-11), he explains, comments on, and amplifies the four sorts of interest mentioned by Manu (VIII, 153). In the same chapter (XI, 55-58) he interprets the curious terms used by Manu (VIII, 49) to denote the various modes of recovering an outstanding debt. In the chapter on Sale without Ownership (XIII, 2), he explains the technical term asvamin, ‘another person than the owner,’ which had been first used by Manu. From the general maxim of Manu (VIII, 2,11) that the allotment of shares among partners in any undertaking shall be arranged in the same way as for a company of officiating priests, Brzhaspati (XIV, 20-32) has developed a series of elaborate rules regarding partnership in tillage, workmanship, trade, musical performances, and robbery. In the same way, the threefold law of breach of promised obedience, non-payment of wages, and disputes between the owner of cattle and his servants has been (33] T 274 BRIHASPATI.
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.
1Other skilful and reliable persons also, artful talkers and former thieves, shall (be appointed to) detect the thieves. 26. By giving them wealth and valuable presents, 20. Viv. p. 102; Col. Dig. III, 1, 98; Ratn. p. 167. 21. Viram. p. 459; Ratn. p. 212. ‘Other persons,’ i.e. hunters, foresters, and so forth. This text comes in between Narada XI, 4 and 8. 22. Ratn. p. 214; Viram. p. 452. 23. Ratn. p. 292. 24. Ratn. p. 335. This text should come in immediately after Narada XIV, 25. 25-29. Ratn. p. 337. Read dauryapadesais fa in 26. VII, 29. MISCELLANEOUS LAWS. 267 by causing them to attend at public shows and festivals, and by pretending intended robberies, they shall cause (the thieves) to assemble together. 27. Those who fail to make their appearance on such occasions, though skilful spies have been set on them, shall be arrested together with their sons, kinsmen, and relatives. 28. He shall then arrest the thieves after having convicted and enticed them (to make their appearance), and shall inflict capital punishment on them in various ways, after having proclaimed (their deeds) everywhere. 29. Innocent persons also are seen to mingle with thieves (occasionally); let not the king inflict punishments indiscriminately on such. Digitized by Goog le BRIJHAS PATI. Digitized by Google INTRODUCTION TO THE FRAGMENTS OF BA/HASPATI. THE fragments of Brzhaspati are among the most precious relics of the early legal literature of India. Apart from Importance of their intrinsic value and interest, as containing Brihaspati. a very full exposition of the whole range of the Hindu law, their close connexion with the Code of Manu gives them a special claim to consideration, and renders them a valuable link in the chain of evidence? by which the date cf the most authoritative code of ancient India has been approximately determined ?. The connexion between the Manu and Brthaspati Smritis appears first from the way in which Brzhaspati refers to, He refersto and quotes from, the Code of Manu. In the Manu. —_ chapter on Gambling and Betting, Brzhaspati says (XXVI, 1), ‘Gambling has been prohibited by Manu, because it destroys truth, honesty, and wealth. It has been permitted by others, when conducted so as to allow the king a share (of every stake).’ The observation that Manu disagrees with the other legislators as to the permissibility of gambling is perfectly just. See Manu IX, 221-228; Yagvavalkya II, 199-203; Apastamba II, 25, 12, 13; Narada XVII, 1-8; Katy4yana XXV,1. Brthaspati goes on to say (XXVI, 2) that ‘Gambling shall take place under the superintendence of keepers of gaming-houses, for the purpose of discovering thieves.’ This rule agrees almost literally with Yagavalkya II, 203, and the fact that Brzhaspati does not refer to YAg#avalkya by name, although he names Manu, can only be accounted for by his very particular veneration for the latter, as the fountain-head of Sacred Law.—On the
21 Biihler, The Laws of Manu (Sacred Pooks of the East, vol. xxv), pp. cviii-cx. 4 What follows up to p. 275 has been reprinted, with modifications and additions, from a paper on ‘ Manu and Brihaspati,’ in the first volume of the Vienna Zeitschrift f£. d. Kunde d. Morgenlandes, pp. 275-250. 272 BRIHASPATI. subject of weights or coins, Brzhaspati says (X, 10), ‘The quantities beginning with a floating particle of dust and ending with a K4rsh4pawa have been declared by Manu.’ The statements of Manu which are thus referred to by Brihaspati may be found, Manu VIII, 132-137.—In speaking of the Niyoga or appointment of a widow to raise offspring to her deceased husband, Brthaspati says (XXIV, 12), ‘The Niyoga has been declared by Manu, and again prohibited by the same; on account of the successive deterioration of the (four) ages of the world, it must not take place (in the present or Kali age).’ This text shows that the conflicting statements of Manu (IX, 57-68) with regard to the Niyoga, which have been the matter of so much comment among European philologists, had already struck his follower Brihaspati, and were ingeniously explained by him, in accordance with the practice of his own times.—In the chapter on Inheritance (X XV, 33), Brzhaspati observes that out of the thirteen sons declared by Manu, a legitimate son of the body (aurasa) and an appointed daughter (putrika) are the only ones that represent real issue. It is true that Manu (IX, 158, 180) speaks emphatically of twelve sons only, but the appointed daughter or her son is not among these, and he advocates in strong terms the rights of an appointed daughter's son (IX, 127- 140), and cuts down very much the rights of all the other substitutes for a son (IX, 180, 181). This shows that Brihaspati’s rules on this head are perfectly in keeping with the teaching of Manu.—In the chapter on Sale without Ownership (XIII, 1) he refers to Manu (VIII, 197) by the name of Bhrigu. Secondly, in a number of other instances, the Code of Manu, though not appealed to by name, is neverthe- Indirect less distinctly referred to by Bvzhaspati. Thus, references. in the chapter on Inheritance (XXV, 79), he observes that ‘ those by whom clothes and so forth have been declared impartible have not decided properly.’ The wellknown versus memorialis concerning impartible property, the contents of which are further discussed in the sequel by Brthaspati, occurs both in the Code of Manu (IX, 219) and INTRODUCTION. 273
3273 in the Vishzu-smriti ; and it may be presumed either that the authors of these two works are the authorities referred to by Brihaspati, or that Manu is referred to in the pluralis majestatis, as is often the case with teachers. The reason why Manu is not referred to by name may be sought in the fact that Brzhaspati does not care to openly avow his dissent from so eminent an authority.—In the chapter on Debts, Brzhaspati remarks (XI, 4) that interest is divided into four species by some, into five by others, and by others again into six sorts. Four sorts of interest are mentioned by Manu, VIII, 153.—In the chapter on Inheritance (XXV, 35), he declares that an appointed daughter or her son has been pronounced equal to a legitimate son of the body. The rights of an appointed daughter, as shown before, are laid great stress upon by Manu, and he actually states that an (appointed) daughter is equal to a son (IX, 130). Thirdly, Brzhaspati, even when not expressly referring to Manu, presupposes throughout an acquaintance with Comments on his Code, and a very large portion of his Manu. Smriti is devoted to the interpretation of technical terms or to the elucidation or amplification of the somewhat laconic enunciations of Manu. Thus, for example, in the chapter on Debts (XI, 5-11), he explains, comments on, and amplifies the four sorts of interest mentioned by Manu (VIII, 153). In the same chapter (XI, 55-58) he interprets the curious terms used by Manu (VIII, 49) to denote the various modes of recovering an outstanding debt. In the chapter on Sale without Ownership (XIII, 2), he explains the technical term asvamin, ‘another person than the owner,’ which had been first used by Manu. From the general maxim of Manu (VIII, 2,11) that the allotment of shares among partners in any undertaking shall be arranged in the same way as for a company of officiating priests, Brzhaspati (XIV, 20-32) has developed a series of elaborate rules regarding partnership in tillage, workmanship, trade, musical performances, and robbery. In the same way, the threefold law of breach of promised obedience, non-payment of wages, and disputes between the owner of cattle and his servants has been (33] T 274 BRIHASPATI.
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.