with the Commentary of Medhatithi 202 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 208 из 350Следующая ⇒

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 347), which adds the following notes’ — ‘anuyojyaḥ’ ‘should be questioned’, — ‘rūpam’, ‘white and so forth’, — ‘saṅkhyā,’ ‘four, five &c’, — the term ‘ādi’ is meant to include the ‘kind’ character and such other details regarding lost property.

It is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 226); — and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Āhnika, p. 36a).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.31-32)

Agnipurāṇa (Rājadharma, 222-17-18). — (Same as Manu.)

Yājñavalkya (2-33.2173 (?)). — (See under 29 and 30.)

VERSE 8.32

Section VI - Unclaimed Property

अवेदयानो नष्टस्य देशं कालं च तत्त्वतः ।
वर्णं रूपं प्रमाणं च तत्समं दण्डमर्हति ॥३२॥

avedayāno naṣṭasya deśaṃ kālaṃ ca tattvataḥ |
varṇaṃ rūpaṃ pramāṇaṃ ca tatsamaṃ daṇḍamarhati ||32||

If he does not provide a correct account of the place and time, and also the colour, form and size of the lost article, he deserves a fine equal to that article. — (32)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

This verse lays down the penalty for preferring a false claim.

He who does not provide a ‘correct’ — true — account of the time and place of the lost article — that ‘it was lost at such a time and at such a place’; — ‘colour’ white and the rest; ‘form’ — that ‘it was a piece of cloth, or a pair of petty-coats’ and so forth; ‘size’ — that‘it was five cubits or seven cubits in length’; — if he fails to give a correct account of all this, then he deserves a fine equal to the property to which he had laid a false claim. — (32)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 347).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.31-32)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.31.

VERSE 8.33 [Property lost and recovered]

Section VII - Property lost and recovered

आददीताथ षड्भागं प्रनष्टाधिगतान्नृपः ।
दशमं द्वादशं वाऽपि सतां धर्ममनुस्मरन् ॥३३॥

ādadītātha ṣaḍbhāgaṃ pranaṣṭādhigatānnṛpaḥ |
daśamaṃ dvādaśaṃ vā'pi satāṃ dharmamanusmaran ||33||

Property that has been lost and found should remain in the charge of specially deputed (officials); and the thieves that he may detect in connection with this, the king shall cause to be killed by an elephant. — (33)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Pranaṣṭādhigatan’ — that which has been lost and then found, i.e., at first lost and subsequently found.

‘Should remain in charge of officials specially deputed’ — whose chief duty is to take care of the property.

While it is thus kept, if thieves should happen to steal it, — then these thieves the King shall cause to be killed by an elephant.

The specification of the ‘elephant’ can only he with a view to some invisible (transcendental) result. — (33)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Which particular part of the property is to be taken by the king in any particular case shall depend upon the length of time for which it has been kept by the king (Medhātithi and Rāghavānanda), — or on the trouble involved in keeping it (Medhātithi and Govindarāja), — or on the character of the owner (Kullūka and Nārāyaṇa).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 2.33), which concludes that dining the first year, the king should hand over to the owner the entire property, keeping nothing for the state, — during the second year he should keep for the state the twelfth part of it, — during the third year, its tenth part, — and during the fourth year and onwards, the sixth part; and in every case the fourth part of the royal share should be given to the man who found the property. — This is again quoted in the same work under 2.173, where also the same explanation is accepted.

It is quoted in Aparārka (p. 778), which declares that whether the king shall take the larger or smaller share shall depend upon the trouble involved in the keeping of the property.

It is quoted in Vyavahāramayūkha (p. 87), which accepts the explanation given in the Mitākṣarā, and adds that the rule that the king should take the whole property after the lapse of three years is meant for those cases where the owner of the property is not known; but in cases where it is known that such and such an article has been forgotten here by this or that man, — the property has to be handed over to him, even though he may turn up after the lapse of three years.

It is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 347), which adds the following notes; — ‘Praṇaṣṭādhigatāt’ means ‘out of the property that was lost, discovered and kept in custody;’ — the alternatives regarding the portion to be taken by the king are based upon the amount of trouble involved in the keeping of the property; — this rule is meant for the case of property other than the ‘single-hoofed’ and the rest mentioned in Yājñavalkya (2.174).

It is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 226); — and in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 265), which adds the following notes: — ‘Praṇaṣṭa’ means ‘fallen away from the possession of the owner — if some such property has been found by the customs-officer or other officers guarding the place, and brought over to the king, — then out of that, if the owner should turn up to claim it during the first year, the king should hand over to him the whole of it, — if during the second year, he should keep for the state the twelfth part of it, — during the third year, the tenth part, and during the fourth year and onwards, the sixth part, adding that the increased share is justified by the increased trouble involved in keeping the property for a longer period.

It is quoted in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Vyavahāra, p. 27b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.33-34)

Arthaśāstra (p. 96). — ‘In the case of the loss of property in the shape of a biped, the owner shall pay five Paṇas as the fee; in that of one-hoofed animals, 4 Paṇas; in the case of cows and buffaloes, 2 Paṇas; in that of small cattle, one fourth of a Paṇa; in the case of gems and minor metals, five per cent, of the value.’

Gautama (10.36-38). — (See under 30.)

Yājñavalkya (2.174). — ‘The owner should give to the Under 4 Paṇas in the case of a one-hoofed animal, 5 in the ease of man, two in the ease of buffaloes, camels and cows, and a fourth Paṇa in the case of sheep or goat.’

Nārada (Vivādaratnākara). — ‘If a man recovers his own property that had been lost, he shall report it to the King; and he shall take it only after he has proved his honesty.’

VERSE 8.34

Section VII - Property lost and recovered

प्रणष्टाधिगतं द्रव्यं तिष्ठेद् युक्तैरधिष्ठितम् ।
यांस्तत्र चौरान् गृह्णीयात् तान् राजैभेन घातयेत् ॥३४॥

praṇaṣṭādhigataṃ dravyaṃ tiṣṭhed yuktairadhiṣṭhitam |
yāṃstatra caurān gṛhṇīyāt tān rājaibhena ghātayet ||34||

Out of the property that has been lost and found, the king, remembering the duty of good men, shall take the sixth part, or the tenth, or the twelfth. — (34)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Shall take’ — sieze — either the sixth or the tenth or the twelfth part — of the property lost and found, and make over the remainder to the owner. During the first year, he shall take the twelfth part, during the second year, the tenth part, and during the third year, the sixth part. Or, the option regarding the share may be based upon the amount of trouble entailed in taking care of the property.

‘Remembering the duty of good men,’ — i.e., knowing that such is the practice among cultured people. — (34)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 347), which adds the following notes: — ‘Praṇaṣṭādhigatam’, ‘was first lost and then recovered’; — ‘yuktaiḥ’, ‘carefully devoted to guarding the property — ‘ibhena’, ‘by means of an elephant’; — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 149). which notes that the ‘guarding’ is to be done by the king’s officers, and explains ‘ibhena’ as ‘by an elephant’.

Comparative notes by various authors:

(verses 8.33-34)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.33.

VERSE 8.35 [Treasure-trove (nidhi)]

Section VIII - Treasure-trove (nidhi)

ममायमिति यो ब्रूयान्निधिं सत्येन मानवः ।
तस्याददीत षड्भागं राजा द्वादशमेव वा ॥३५॥

mamāyamiti yo brūyānnidhiṃ satyena mānavaḥ |
tasyādadīta ṣaḍbhāgaṃ rājā dvādaśameva vā ||35||

In regard to a treasure-trove, if a man says truly ‘this is mine,’ — from him the king shall take the sixth part, or only the twelfth part. — (35)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Treasure secretly buried under the ground is called ‘nidhi,’ ‘treasure-trove.’ There are treasure-troves that have lain under the ground for a hundred, or even a thousand years. If, when the ground is being dug, such a treasure-trove is somehow found by some one, it belongs to the state. As says Gautama (10.43) — ‘Treasure-trove when found is state-property.’ But this applies only to the case of a treasure-trove the original hoarder of which is not known. And with regard to this it has been laid down that one who reports the find is to receive the sixth part of it.

The present verse refers to the case where the original hoarder is either the person reporting the find himself or a descendant of his.

‘If a man says “this is mine” truly’ — i.e., on reliable evidence, — ‘from him the King shall take the sixth part’ — at which the King’s share is fixed. That is, the King is to take the sixth part out of that treasure-trove of which the rightful owner has been discovered with certainty.

The option regarding the ‘sixth’ or ‘twelfth’ part is based upon the qualities of the finder. — (35)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

The amount to be taken depends ‘upon the character of the finder’ (Medhātithi, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda), — or ‘on the caste of the finder’ (Nārāyaṇa), — or, ‘on the time, place, the caste of the finder and so forth’ (Govindarāja).

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 641), which adds that the amount of the royalty shall be determined in due accordance with the character (of the claimant, and of the treasure); — in Mitākṣarā (on 2.34-35), which notes that the proportion of the royalty is to be determined by considerations of the caste of the claimant, the nature of the place and time and such other details; — in Vivādaratnākara (p. 642), which adds the following notes: — ‘Nidhi’ here stands for ‘treasure buried underground long ago and forgotten’, — whether the king shall receive the sixth or twelfth part shall depend upon the virtuous character or otherwise of the person claiming it.

It is quoted in Vyavahāramayūkha (p. 88), which appears to take the meaning to be that the king shall take the sixth part for the state, and also the twelfth part for the person who discovered the treasure.

It is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 269), which adds that the exact proportion shall depend upon the time and upon the qualifications of the owner of the treasure; — and that this refers to treasure belonging to others than the Brāhmaṇas.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (3.63). — ‘Of treasure anciently hidden by themselves, men of all castes excepting Brāhmaṇas, shall give a twelfth part to the King.’

Yājñavalkya (2.35). — ‘When some one has discovered hidden treasure, the King shall take the sixth part of it. In cases where the find is not reported to the King, on coming to know of it, he shall take the whole of it, and also fine the finder.’

Vaśiṣṭha (3.13). — ‘If anyone finds treasure, the owner of which is not known, the King shall take it, giving one-sixth to the finder.’

Gautama (10.43-45). — ‘Treasure-trove is the property of the King, — excepting such as is found by a Brāhmaṇa who lives according to the law. Some people declare that a finder belonging to a non-Brāhmaṇical caste also, who reports the find to the King, shall obtain the sixth part of its value.’

Nārada (Vivādaratnākara, p. 343). — ‘If a man finds treasure hidden by some one else, he shall take it to the King; all treasure-trove, to whomsoever it may have belonged, should go to the King; except that belonging to the Brāhmaṇa.’

Viṣṇudharmottara (Vīramitrodaya-Rājanīti, pp. 269-270). — ‘Having obtained a treasure-trove, the King shall keep half of it in his Treasury; and the other half the righteous King shall make over to Brāhmaṇas.’

VERSE 8.36

Section VIII - Treasure-trove (nidhi)

अनृतं तु वदन् दण्ड्यः स्ववित्तस्यांशमष्टमम् ।
तस्यैव वा निधानस्य सङ्ख्ययाऽल्पीयसीं कलाम् ॥३६॥

anṛtaṃ tu vadan daṇḍyaḥ svavittasyāṃśamaṣṭamam |
tasyaiva vā nidhānasya saṅkhyayā'lpīyasīṃ kalām ||36||

But he who speaks falsely shall, be fined the eighth part of his property, or a smaller fraction, on calculation, of that same treasure-trove. — (36)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

But when the man, who has made the statement ‘this treasure was hoarded by me, or by my forefathers,’ fails to prove this, — then being a liar, he should be fined the eighth part of what his own property may be, — or a smaller fraction of that same treasure-trove, it is not necessary that he should he made to pay in the same metal, gold or otherwise, as that which has been found; he may pay in some other metal of equal value to the former; the exact amount of the fine being such as does not ruin the culprit, and yet teaches him a lesson.

The option is based either upon the peculiarity of the attendant circumstances of each case, or the qualities of the person concerned. That this is so is indicated by the fact that the latter punishment is lighter than the former one, which is excessive. Thus then, where the man is possessed of a large property, and the treasure concerned is small, there the fine shall not be in proportion to the latter; in this case the fine shall be in proportion to the man’s property; the former would be too little (to be a deterrent). — (36)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

The amount of the fine depends on the circumstances of the case and the virtues of the offender (Medhātithi), — or only on the virtues of the offender (Govindarāja, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda).

The first half of this verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 641); — and the whole verse in Vivādaratnākara (p. 642), which adds the following notes: — ‘Alpīyasīm kalām’ implies that'the fine is to be imposed in such a manner that the entire treasure may not become absorbed, — this being meant for those cases where the exact extent of the entire-property is not known.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Agnipurāṇa (Rājadharma, 222.16). — (Same as Manu.)

Viṣṇu (3.64). — ‘The man, who falsely claims property hidden by another as having been hidden by himself, shall he condemned to pay a fine equal in amount to the property falsely claimed by him.’

Yājñavalkya (2.35). — (See under 31.)

Nārada (Vivādaratnākara, p. 642). — ‘If a man recovers his own lost property, he shall report it to the King; and if he makes good his claim, he shall take it; otherwise he would be suspected.’

VERSE 8.37

Section VIII - Treasure-trove (nidhi)

विद्वांस्तु ब्राह्मणो दृष्ट्वा पूर्वोपनिहितं निधिम् ।
अशेषतोऽप्याददीत सर्वस्याधिपतिर्हि सः ॥३७॥

vidvāṃstu brāhmaṇo dṛṣṭvā pūrvopanihitaṃ nidhim |
aśeṣato'pyādadīta sarvasyādhipatirhi saḥ ||37||

A learned Brāhmaṇa, having found treasure buried by his forefathers, shall take it wholly; as he is the master of everything. — (37)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When a learned Brāhmaṇa finds the treasure that bad been buried by his forefathers — father, grandfather and so forth, — then ‘he shall take it wholly,’ and shall not hand over to the king the aforesaid part of it.

In support of this the text adds a supplementary exaggeration — ‘as he is the master of everything,’ — as has been declared under 1.100.

The rule here laid down applies to the case where the treasure belongs to the Brāhmaṇa; when however its rightful owner is not known, then, even though it may have boon found by a ‘learned Brāhmaṇa,’ the king’s share has to be paid; as it is going to be declared (in 39) that — ‘of all ancient hoards...... the king is entitled to one-half.’ — (37)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Pūrvoyanihitam’ — ‘Deposited by ancestors’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja and Nārāyaṇa); — ‘deposited in former times’ (Kullūka).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (10.43-44). — ‘Treasure-trove is the property of the King; — excepting such as is found by a Brāhmaṇa who lives according to the Law.’

Vaśiṣṭha (3.14). — ‘If a Brāhmaṇa following the six lawful qualifications finds the treasure, the King shall not take it.’

Viṣṇu (3.58). — ‘A Brāhmaṇa who has found treasure may keep it entire.’

Yājñavalkya (2.34). — ‘The learned Brāhmaṇa shall take the treasure; since he is the master of all.’

Nārada (Vivādaratnākara, p. 643). — ‘If a man comes by treasure hidden by another, he shall present it to the King; as all Treasure-trove is the property of the King, except what belongs to the Brāhmaṇa. The Brāhmaṇa also, coming by hidden treasure, shall report it to the King, and it is only when it is made over to him by the King that he should enjoy it; if he failed to report the find, he would be a thief.’

Agnipurāṇa (222. 14). — ‘The Brāhmaṇa finding hidden treasure, shall take it all to himself.’

VERSE 8.38

Section VIII - Treasure-trove (nidhi)

यं तु पश्येन्निधिं राजा पुराणं निहितं क्षितौ ।
तस्माद् द्विजेभ्यो दत्त्वाऽर्धमर्धं कोशे प्रवेशयेत् ॥३८॥

yaṃ tu paśyennidhiṃ rājā purāṇaṃ nihitaṃ kṣitau |
tasmād dvijebhyo dattvā'rdhamardhaṃ kośe praveśayet ||38||

When the king himself finds a hoard buried of old under the ground, he shall give one-half of it to the Brāhmaṇas and have the other half put in his treasury. — (38)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

When the king himself has found treasure, this text lays down that he shall give one-half of it to the Brāhmaṇas.

The term ‘Treasury’ stands for the place of hoarding.

‘Buried of old under the ground’; — this describes the nature of the treasure-trove. — (38)

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (10.43). — (See under 37.)

Viṣṇu (3.56-57). — ‘Of a Treasure-trove he must give one half to the Brāhmaṇas; — he may deposit the other half in his Treasury.’

Yajñavalkya (2.34). — ‘Having found a Treasure-trove, the King shall give half of it to Brāhmaṇas; — the learned Brāhmaṇa however, may take the whole of what he finds; since he is the master of all.’

Agnipurāṇa (222.14). — ‘The King shall deposit half of it in the Treasury and give the other half to Brāhmaṇas; the good Brāhmaṇa however takes the whole of the hidden treasure that he has found.’

VERSE 8.39

Section VIII - Treasure-trove (nidhi)

निधीनां तु पुराणानां धातूनामेव च क्षितौ ।
अर्धभाग् रक्षणाद् राजा भूमेरधिपतिर्हि सः ॥३९॥

nidhīnāṃ tu purāṇānāṃ dhātūnāmeva ca kṣitau |
ardhabhāg rakṣaṇād rājā bhūmeradhipatirhi saḥ ||39||

Of ancient hoards, as also of minerals under the ground, the king is entitled to his share, by reason of his protecting them, — he being the lord of the soil. — (39)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The clause — ‘of ancient hoards, etc’ — is supplementary to the before-mentioned rule that the king should take one-half of the treasure even when it is found by other persons; — while the clause ‘of minerals under the ground’ lays down what has not been mentioned before. Gold, silver and other metals in their crude form, as also red lead, black collyrium and other substances (in their crude form) are what are called ‘minerals.’ So that the man who operates golden and other mines, as also one who makes his living by digging out red chalk and such substances from mountains, has to pay the king’s share.

‘Ardhabhāk,’ ‘is entitled to a share’ — The term ‘ardha’ here should be taken as standing for share or part in general; because it occurs in a compound; just as in the compounds ‘nagarārdha’ and ‘grāmārdha’ (which mean part of the city, part of the village); it is only when it is used in the neuter form that it means exactly half; in the present instance however, as it occurs in a compound and its gender is not ascertainable, it has to be taken as standing for the sixth or twelfth part, which has been spoken of in the present context. ‘He is entitled to his share’; — this means that he takes a part of it.

The reason for this is stated — ‘on account of his protecting them’ — Though when the treasure is buried under the ground, there is no need for any royal protection, yet it is open to the risk of being taken away by some powerful person; so that there is need for the king’s care. It is with a view to this that it has been added — ‘he being the lord of the soil’; — he is the master of the soil, so that when something has been obtained out of the soil that belongs to him, it is only right that he should receive his share out of it. — (39).

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Rājanīti, p. 267), which adds that this verse is supplementary to 38, and notes that the second half, which the king should deposit in his treasury (in terms of verse 38), is to be so kept with the clear purpose of handing it over to the rightful claimant when he turns up.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (10.43-45). — ‘Treasure-trove is the property of the King, — except that which is found by a Brāhmaṇa living according to Law; — some declare that a non-Brahmaṇa also finding hidden treasure and reporting it to the King, shall receive one-sixth of its value.’

Vaśiṣṭha (3.13). — ‘If any one finds treasure, the owner whereof is not known, the King shall take it, giving one-sixth to the finder.’

Viṣṇu (3.58-62). — ‘A Brāhmaṇa finding treasure shall keep it entire; a Kṣatriya finding treasure must give one-fourth of it to the King, another fourth to Brāhmaṇas and keep half to himself; a Vaiśya finding treasure must give a fourth part to the King, one-half to Brāhmaṇas and keep the remainder to himself. A Śūdra finding treasure should divide it into twelve parts and give five parts to the King, five to Brāhmaṇas and keep two parts to himself. Let the King compel him who having found treasure does not report it to the King and is found out afterwards — to give up the whole.’

Познавательные статьи:



Психологические особенности спортивного соревнования

Приготовление дезинфицирующих растворов различной концентрации

Занятость населения и рынок труда

Социальный статус семьи и её типология