23. Some declare, that after having performed that penance, he shall remove its cause.
PKASNA II, PATALA 6, KHAJVDA 13.
i. Sons begotten by a man who approaches in
the proper season a woman of equal caste, who has
Taittiriya-brahmawa III, 2, 8, n and 12, and Ap. .Srauta-sfitra IX, j.2, 1 i. See also Manu XI, 44-49- Regarding the crimes causing impurity, see above, I, 7, 21, 12-19.
23. 'Its cause, i.e. the black nails, &c. According to another Smr/ti, one shall not put away a wife or extinguish a fire, for the taking or kindling of which the penance had to be performed.'— Haradatta. But see VasishMa XX, 7 seq.
13. i. '.SsistravihM (translated by " who has been married to him legally ") means either " married according to the rites prescribed in the .SSstras," or " possessed of the qualities (which have been described) by (the rule of) the .Sastras, He shall not give his daughter to a man of the same Gotra," and in similar (passages).' — Haradatta. See also Colebrooke, Digest, Book V, Text cxcix.
11,6,13. Householder; Inheritance. 131
not belonged to another man, and who has been
married legally, have a right to (follow) the
occupations (of their castes),
2. And to (inherit the) estate,
3. If they do not sin against either (of their parents).
4. If a man approaches a woman who had been
married before, or was not legally married to him, or
belongs to a different caste, they both commit a sin.
5. Through their (sin) their 'son also becomes sinful.
6. A Brahmawa (says), ' The son belongs to the begetter.'
7. Now they quote also (the following Gatha from
the Veda) : * (Having considered myself) formerly a
lather, I shall not now allow (any longer) my wives
(to be approached by other men), since they have
declared that a son belongs to the begetter in the
world of Yama. The giver of the seed carries off the
son after death in Yama's world; therefore they guard
3. Another (commentator) says, 'Neither of the parents shall pass them over at (the distribution of) the heritage. Both (parents) must leave their property to them.' — Haradatia. The text of the Sutra admits of either explanation.
6. See also Manu IX, 32 seq., where the same difference of opinion occurs.
7. According to Haradatta this Gatha gives the sentiments of a husband who neglected to watch his wives, and who had heard from those learned in the law that the sons of his unfaithful wives would in the next world belong to their natural fathers, and that he would not derive any spiritual benefit from their oblations. He adds that this verse does not refer to or prevent the appointment of a eunuch's wife or of a childless widow to a relation. He also quotes a passage from the «9rauta-s6tra I, 9, 7, in which the dvipita, ' the son of two fathers/' is mentioned. But Haradatta's view cannot be reconciled with the statements made below, IJ, 10, 37,
132 APASTAMBA. 11,6,13.
their wives, fearing the seed of strangers. Carefully
watch over (the procreation of) your children, lest
stranger seed be sown on your soil. In the next
world the son belongs to the begetter, an (impru-
dent) husband makes the (begetting of) children
vain (for himself).'
8. Transgression of the law and violence are found amongst the ancient (sages).
9. They committed no sin on account of the greatness of their lustre.
10. A man of later times who seeing their (deeds) follows them, falls.
11. The gift (or acceptance of a child) and the right to sell (or buy) a child are not recognised.
12. It is declared in the Veda that at the time of
marriage a gift, for (the fulfilment of) his wishes,
should be made (by the bridegroom) to the father
2-7, where the Niyoga is plainly forbidden. Baudhayana, who (II, 2, 3, 34) quotes the same Gaiha, reads in the first line the vocative '^anaka' instead of the nominative '^anaka^,' and in the fifth line ' pare bi£ani ' instead of ' parabigini.' The com- mentator Govindasvamin adds that the verses are addressed by the JRt'shi Aupa^anghani to king kanaka of Videha. The trans- lation of the first line must therefore run thus : ' O Ganaka, now I am jealous of my wives, (though I was) not so formerly,' &c. Baudhayana's readings are probably the older ones, and Govin- dasvamin's explanation the right one. See also Colebrooke, Digest, Book V, Text ccli.
11. Haradatta thinks that, as most other Smr/'tis enumerate the adopted son, and ' the son bought' in their lists of substitutes for lawful sons of the body, Apastamba's rule can refer only to the gift or sale of an eldest son, or to the gift or sale of a child effected by a woman. Though it is possible that he may be fight in his interpretation, it remains a remarkable fact that Apastamba does not mention the 'twelve kinds of sons,' which are known to other Smrnis.
12. This Sutra seems to be directed against VasishMa I, 36.
11,6,14. Householder; Inheritance. 133
of the bride, in order to fulfil the law. ' Therefore
he should give a hundred (cows) besides a chariot ;
that (gift) he should make bootless (by returning it
to the giver).' In reference to those (marriage-rites),
the word ' sale ' (which occurs in some Smrztis is
only used as) a metaphorical expression ; for the
union (of the husband and wife) is effected through
the law.
13. After having gladdened the eldest son by some (choice portion of his) wealth,
PRASNA II, PAFALA (5, KHAMDA 14.
1. He should, during his lifetime, divide his
wealth equally amongst his sons, excepting the
eunuch, the mad man, and the outcast.
2. On failure of sons the nearest Sapi#*/a (takes the inheritance).
14. i. The last Sutra of Kha»</a 13 and the first of KhaWa 14 are quoted by Colebrooke, Digest, Book V, Text xlii, and Mitakshara, Chap. I, Sect, iii, Par. 6. Colebrooke translates ^ivan, 'during his lifetime/ by ' who makes a partition during his lifetime.' I think that this is not quite correct, and that Apastamba intends to exhort householders to make a division during their lifetime, as later they ought to become ascetics or hermits. Haradatta intro- duces into his commentary on this Sutra the whole chapter on the division of a father's estate amongst his sons, supplementing Apastamba's short rule by the texts of other lawyers. No doubt, Apastamba means to lay down, in these and the following Sutras, only the leading principles of the law of inheritance, and he intends that the remaining particulars should be supplied from the law of custom or other Smr/tis.
2. Haradatta gives in his commentary a full summary of the rules on the succession of remoter relations. One point only deserves special mention. He declares that it is the opinion of \pastamba, that widows cannot inherit. In this he is probably right, as Apastamba does not mention them, and the use of the
134 APASTAMBA. 11,6,14.
3. On faibre of them the spiritual teacher (in-
herits) ; on failure of the spiritual teacher a pupil
shall take (the deceased's wealth), and use it for
religious works for the (deceased's) benefit, or (he
himself may enjoy it) ;
4. Or the daughter (may take the inheritance).
5. On failure of all (relations) let the king take the inheritance.
6. Some declare, that the eldest son alone inherits.
7. In some countries gold, (or) black cattle, (or) black produce of the earth is the share of the eldest.
8. The chariot and the furniture in the house are the father's (share).
masculine singular ' sapiWa-fc ' in the text precludes the possibility of including them under that collective term. It seems to me certain, that Apastamba, like Baudhayana, considered women, especially widows, unfit to inherit.
4. 'Some -say "on failure of sons," others that the rule refers to the preceding Sfitra (i.e. that the daughter inherits on failure of pupils only).' — Haradatta. The latter seems to be the correct interpretation.
5. 'Because the word "all" is used, (the king shall take the estate) only on failure of Bandhus and Sagotras, i.e. gentiles within twelve degrees.' — Haradatta.
6. ' The other sons shall live under his protection.' — Haradatta. Colebrooke, Mitakshara, Chap. I, Sect, hi, Par. 6.
7. ' " Black produce of the earth," i.e. black grain, or according to others black iron.' — Haradatta. Compare for this and the following Sutras Colebrooke, Mitakshara, Chap. I, Sect, iii, Par. 6, and Digest, Book V, Text xlviii.
8. The translation given above agrees with what I now recognise to be Haradatta's explanation, and with Colebrooke, Mitakshara, Chap. I, Sect, iii, Par. 6. Both the P. U. and Mr. U. MSS. of the U^grala read ratha^ pitura/sjo gr/lie yatp*aribha#</am upakara«am pi/Mdi tadapi, ' the chariot (is) the father's share ; the furniture which (is) in the house, that also.' To this reading Malmdeva's U^vala on the Hiranyakeji SCitra points likewise, which gives pitur anta& The N. U. MS. of the U^vala, according to which
11,6,14. Householder; Inheritance. 135
9. According to some, the share of the wife con-
sists of her ornaments, and the wealth (which she
may have received) from her relations.
10. That (preference of the eldest son) is for- bidden by the .SSstras.
11. For it is declared in the Veda, without
(marking) a difference (in the treatment of the
sons) : Manu divided his wealth amongst his sons.
12. Now the Veda declares also in conformity
with (the rule in favour of the eldest son) alone :
They distinguish the eldest by (a larger share of)
the heritage.
I made the translation given in the Appendix to West and Biihler's Digest (ist edition), leaves out the word a/w-saA, and therefore makes it necessary to combine this Sutra with the preceding one, and to translate, 'The father's chariot and the furniture in the house (are) also (the share of the eldest).' This latter translation agrees nearly with that given by Colebrooke, Digest, Book V, Text xlviir, where this and the preceding Sutra have been joined ; but the chariot is not mentioned. A further variation in the inter- pretation of this Sutra occurs in Golebrooke's Digest, Book V, Text Ixxxix, and MuaksharS, loc. cit., where the words ' the furni- ture in the house ' are joined with Sutra 9, and the furniture is declared to be the wife's share. Considering that Sutra 9 is again quoted in Colebrooke's Digest, Book V, Text cccclxxii, and is not joined with the latter part of Sutra 8, it is not too much to say that Gagannalha has not shown any greater accuracy than his brethren usually do.
9. The MMkshara, loc. cit., apparently takes the words '•ac- cording to some' as referring1 only to property received from relations, I follow Haradatta. The former interpretation is, how- ever, admissible, if the Sutra is split into two.
10. The .Sa"stras are, according to Haradatta, the Vedas.
11. TaittirJyd Saflzhita III, i, 9, 4.
12. 'Athipi (now also) means "and certainly." They dis- tinguish, they set apart the eldest son by wealth : this has been declared in the Veda in conformity with (the rule regarding) one (heir, Sutra 6). He denies (Sutra 13) that a passage also, which
136 APASTAMBA. 11,6,14.
13. (But to this plea in favour of the eldest I
answer) : Now those who are acquainted with the
interpretation of the law declare a statement of facts
not to be a rule, as for instance (the following) :
1 Therefore amongst cattle, goats and sheep walk
together ; ' (or the following), ' Therefore the face
of a learned Brahma#a (a Snataka) is, as it were,
resplendent ; ' (or), ' A Brahma^a who has studied
the Vedas (a .Srotriya) and a he-goat evince the
strongest sexual desires.'
14. Therefore all (sons) who are virtuous in- herit.
15. But him who expends money unrighteously, he shall disinherit, though he be the eldest son.
1 6. No division takes place between husband and wife.
agrees with the statement that the eldest son alone inherits, is found in the Veda.' — Haradatta. See Taittiriya Sa»/hita II, 5, 2, 7. 13. Those who are acquainted with the interpretation of the law are the Mimawsakas. The translation of the second Vedic passage is by no means certain, as the root ribh, translated by ' to be resplendent,' usually means ' to give a sound.' Haradatta thinks that Apastamba means to show that the passage ' Manu divided his wealth among his sons ' is likewise merely a statement of facts, and cannot be considered a rule. This is probably erroneous, as Sutras 10 and n distinctly state, that the practice to allow the eldest alone to inherit, is forbidden by the above- mentioned passage of the Veda.
