with the Commentary of Medhatithi 220 страница

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 226 из 350Следующая ⇒

“The prohibition of excess may apply to a case where the debtor brings up for payment the amount of the principal which has become doubled with accrued interest. Even before the principal becomes doubled, if the debtor is able to pay up the interest only, he can do so, and there can be no limit placed upon the principal to be accepted.”

This view also is nothing. When the debtor is ready to pay up, he deserves favourable consideration, and he should not be made to pay more; and if a debtor is forced by the king to pay up, it cannot be right to remit the excess in his case. Nor does the term ‘āhitā’ of the text mean this.

If the word is read as ‘āhṛtā,’ then the exact signification of the term ‘sakṛt’ would be doubtful; reason would be scattered to the wings, and the text would he a self-conceived one, and not the one propounded by Manu.

From all this it follows, that the most reasonable conclusion is as explained by us above.

In the case of grains and other things, it does not exceed the ‘quintuple’ — i.e., five times.

Another Smṛti text lays down ‘quadruple’ in the case of grains: — ‘In the case of gold, cloth and grains, the interest is to be double, triple and quadruple respectively’ (Nārada, 107). And the law on this point is as follows: If the moneylender has become reduced to poverty, and the debtor has become opulent with much wealth, having earned much wealth by means of the grain he had borrowed, — then the interest is to be five times; and in other cases it is to be only four times.

‘Sada’ — stands for the fruit of trees, — ‘grains’ being mentioned separately.

‘Lava’ — stands, among northerners, for wool.

‘Beasts of burden’ — ass, camel, ox and so forth. — (151)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘Smṛtyantare’ — (Medhātithi, p. 967, l. 30) — see Yājñavalkya (2. 39 ) — ‘Vastradhānyahiraṇyānām catustridviguṇā parā’, and in Nārada (107) — ‘Hiraṇyadhānyavastrāṇām vṛddhirdvitricaturguṇā.’

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 2.39), which adds the following notes: — Capital invested for increase is called ‘kusīda’, — the increase thereof is called ‘vṛddhi’; — and this never goes beyond, exceeds, the double, — if it is the first original investment; in the case of the investment being one that has been transferred from one person to another, it can exceed the double, — as it becomes, in tins case, a fresh transaction. — If we adopt the reading ‘āhṛtā’ (in place of ‘āhitā’), the meaning would he that the amount cannot exceed the double only in the case where the interest is paid all at one time, and that in a case where it is paid by gradual instalments — daily, monthly or yearly, — it does exceed the double. It goes on — ‘The rule applies to cases where the loan has been advanced in one instalment, and is also paid back in one instalment; in cases where the loan has been transferred to another person, or a fresh transaction is entered into by the same parties after certain additions and subtractions, the interest does go on accumulating even after the principal, along with the interest, has reached the amount which is double of the original principal. — On the second half of the verse it remarks that in the case of grains and roots and flowers and fruits, the quantity payable may become five times of the principal. It explains ‘śada’ as agricultural products, fruits, flowers etc., — ‘lava’ as the wool of sheep, the hair of the camarī cow find so forth, — ‘vāhya’ as ‘bullocks, horses and the like.’ Interest on these cannot go beyond five times the principal.

It is quoted in Aparārka (p. 643), which adds that the term ‘sakṛt’ makes it clear that the amount can exceed the double, in a case where with the consent of the debtor the accrued interest is added on to the principal and a fresh transaction entered into. It adds that this applies only to transactions in gold.

It is quoted in Vyavahāramayūkha (p. 76), which adds that Vijñaneśvara and others have held that in a case where interest has been paid by instalments at intervals, the total amount of the amount to be paid ultimately may exceed the double.

It is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 17), which adds the following Explanatory notes: — ‘Dhānye’, barley, vrīhi and the rest, — ‘sade’, fruits and other products from trees, — ‘lave’, wool of the sheep, hair of the Camarī and so forth, the etymological meaning being ‘what is shorn’, ‘lūyate’; — ‘vāhye’, ‘what is driven’, the horse and so forth; — if any of these things is lent, on interest, like gold and silver, — the amount to be paid should not exceed five times the principal. It is just possible that some one may borrow a hundredweight of grains, or a hundred horses, on loan at the rate of 2 per cent interest; — such a debtor, even after a very long time, can repay only five hundred, not more. The present text lays down ‘five times’ as the limit in the case of grain; but Bṛhaspati has fixed this limit at ‘four times’; while ‘three times’ is the limit fixed by Viṣṇu, Marīci, Vaśiṣṭha and Hārīta. In view of these alternative limits, the decision in any particular case will have to be determined by the character of the debtor concerned, or the nature of the time, and consideration of scarcity or affluence.

This verse is quoted in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Vyavahāra, 18b); — in Smṛtisāroddhāra (p. 326), which explains ‘sada’ as the produce of cultivation, other than, corn, — e.g., fruits and other things, — ‘vāhya’ as ‘bullock and the rest’, — and ‘lava’ as ‘wool and the like; — and in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 11), which says that at one transaction, in the case of gems and things of that kind also, the interest cannot go beyond the double; — that in grains etc. it can go upto fivefold; but in repeated transactions it can go beyond the said ‘double’; it notes the reading ‘sakṛdāhitā’; it explains ‘vāhya’ as‘bullock and the like’, — ‘śada’ as ‘field-prodce’, — ‘lava’ as ‘that which is lopped off’, i.e., wool, except that of the sheep.

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (12.31, 36). — ‘If the loan remains outstanding for a long time, the principal may bo doubled; after which the interest ceases. The interest on animal-products, on wool, on agricultural produce, and on beasts of burden shall not increase more than the live-fold value of the object lent,’

Viṣṇu (6.11-14, 16, 17). — ‘On gold, the interest shall rise no higher than to make the debt double; on grain, three-fold; on cloth, fourfold; on liquids eight-fold; on substances from which spirituous liquor is extracted, on cotton, thread, leather, weapons, bricks, and charcoal, the interest is unlimited; on objects other than those just mentioned, it may be double.’

Yājñavalkya (2.39). — ‘For cattle and for women, the interest consists in the form of their offspring; in the case of clarified butter and other Rasas, the highest limit of interest is eight-fold; in that of cloth, fourfold; in that of grains, threefold; and in that of gold, double.’

Kātyāyana (Aparārka, p. 643). — ‘The money-lender shall receive double the amount lent.’

Nārada (1.105-107). — ‘There are special rules according to the local usages of the country where the loan has been made. In some countries the loan may grow till the amount of the principal has been reached; in other countries it may grow till it becomes three, or four, or eight times as large as the principal. The interest on gold, grain and clothes may rise to two, three, or four times the principal. On liquids, the interest may become octuple; of women and cattle, their offspring forms the interest.

Bṛhaspati (11.13-16). — ‘On gold and other precious metals, the interest may make the debt double; on clothes and base metals, treble; on grain, it is allowed to rise to four times the original amount; and so on edible plants or fruits, beasts of burden and wool. It is allowed to make the debt quintuple on pot-herbs; sextuple, on seeds and sugarcane; and octuple, on salt, oil and spirituous liquor. Likewise on sugar and honey, if the loan he of old standing. On grass, wood, bricks, thread, substances from which spirits may he extracted, leaves, hones, leather, weapons, flowers and fruits, no interest is ordained.’

Śukranīti (4.5.631). — ‘When the amount drawn from the debtor in the form of interest has reached twice the principal, then the King shall make the debtor pay only the principal and nothing more than that.’

Kātyāyana (Vivādaratnākara, p. 17). — ‘For gems, pearls, corals, for gold and silver — and for agricultural products and for insect-products (silk, etc.), — the interest shall stop at double of the principal. For oils, wines, clarified butter, molasses and salt, it shall go up to eight-fold.’

VERSE 8.152

Section XXVII - Limitation of Interest (kusīdavṛddhi)

कृतानुसारादधिका व्यतिरिक्ता न सिध्यति ।
कुसीदपथमाहुस्तं पञ्चकं शतमर्हति ॥१५२॥

kṛtānusārādadhikā vyatiriktā na sidhyati |
kusīdapathamāhustaṃ pañcakaṃ śatamarhati ||152||

Interest, stipulated in contravention of the law, being excessive, is not payable. They declare this to be the usurer’s way. It is only five per cent. to which the man is entitled. — (152)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Anusāra’ is that which is followed in all matters; i.e., the law laid down by the scriptures. The law in relation to interests is diverse: one lays down the rate as the eightieth part of the hundred, and another as five per cent, if the rate of interest is stipulated ‘in contravention of’ — in excess of — these sanctioned rates, — it is ‘not payable’ — by the debtor to the creditor. — Why? — Because it is ‘excessive’ — i.e., against the law.

In support of this the text puts forward a commendatory declaration — ‘this they declare to be the usurer’s way.’ The term ‘kusīda’ — means that which is followed by evil persons; and then the persons themselves. This ‘way’ — path, conduct — is of evil persons, and not of good men. This is a deprecation of the act referred to.

If the lender is anxious to make as much money as possible out of the transaction, under the impression that the borrower is going to carry on extensive business with the help of the capital he is going to lend, then he may obtain five per cent., irrespectively of the caste of the borrower. What is meant is that this is all that he should seek to obtain.

Another reading is ‘kṛtā tu sārādadhikā’; and the meaning of the text would in that case he that — ‘if, at the outset, on account of the man’s poverty, a low rate of interest is fixed, but subsequently, the man having acquired much wealth, if, on account of his opulence — ‘sārāt’ — a large rate is demanded, this cannot he payable, since all that the man is entitled to is five per cent. — (152)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse in quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 14), which adds the following explanations: — Any interest, over and above what has been prescribed in the scriptures, — such as

2 per cent and so forth, — cannot be permitted, even though agreed to by the debtor; — why? — because they declare this to be the ‘usurious way’. If, under the stress of business, the creditor wishes to reap a large profit out of the debtor, then the utmost that he can recover is 5 per cent, — and not more, even though the debtor may have agreed to it; — and in Kṛtyakalpataru (p. 68b).

Comparative notes by various authors:

Bṛhaspati (11.9, 10-12). — ‘That interest has always to be paid which has been stipulated by the debtor himself, over and above the ordinary rate of interest, and has been promised in times of distress; when such special interest has been stipulated in any other manner, it must not be paid by any means. The use of a pledge after twice the principal has been realised from it, compound interest, and the exaction of the principal and interest together (as principal) are usury and are reprehensible.’

VERSE 8.153

Section XXVII - Limitation of Interest (kusīdavṛddhi)

नातिसांवत्सरीं वृद्धिं न चादृष्टां पुनर्हरेत् ।
चक्रवृद्धिः कालवृद्धिः कारिता कायिका च या ॥१५३॥

nātisāṃvatsarīṃ vṛddhiṃ na cādṛṣṭāṃ punarharet |
cakravṛddhiḥ kālavṛddhiḥ kāritā kāyikā ca yā ||153||

One shall not pay or receive an interest beyond the annual, or what is unapproved (or unaccumulated); nor compound interest, nor periodical interest, nor that which is (privately) stipulated, nor corporeal. — (153)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Sāmvatsarī’ — means ‘pertaining to the samvatsara,’ ‘annual’; what is in excess of this ‘is atisāmvatsarī,’ ‘beyond the annual’; the idea of pertinence being implied by the nominal affix. Or we may first form the compound ‘atisamvatsara’ in the sense of ‘beyond the year,’ and then have the vowel-changes, giving the form ‘atisāmvatsarī.’

The interest that has been sanctioned in connection with all castes, — at the rate of 5 per cent, shall be realised for one year, and after the lapse of the year. Or, the meaning may be that no interest shall be realised during the year, — and after the year the debtor shall not delay the payment of interest.

‘Nirharet,’ ‘shall pay,’ — i.e., taking out of his own stock, offer to the creditor; what is paid before the year has expired would also be ‘beyond the annual.’

Or, the meaning may be that at the time of the transaction itself, it shall be determined whether the interest shall be computed monthly or yearly. It would not be right for a man desirous of earning interest for two years, to make the other party accept the loan for that long period the idea in his mind being — ‘what would be the use of earning the interest for a few months only? — if the principal is allowed to remain with him for two years, then I shall earn a decent interest.’ In such a case the man would so arrange the advance to the debtor that the interest would be paid after two years. That such a course would not be right is clearly indicated by such texts as — ‘one shall neither pay, nor cause another to pay, interest in such a single instalment as may be beyond the power of the man to pay.’ In the case of interest payable monthly, the debtor is made to pay the interest on the second day after the lapse of the month; similarly when the stipulation is that the interest shall be paid yearly, it should be paid on the second day after the lapse of the year, — and not computed by any longer time.

Nor shall he receive what is ‘adṛṣṭā’ ‘unapproved’; — i.e., a rate not sanctioned by the scriptures; — i.e., rates above 5 per cent., such as 10 per cent., or 11 per cent.

Some people hold that this is only a reiteration of what has been said (under 152) that ‘an excessive rate of interest is not payable.’

The right explanation of ‘adṛṣṭā’ therefore is ‘unaccumulated’; — the meaning being that interest shall not be received by the clay, or by the month, until it has accumulated during several months.

“But under 142 it has been declared that one may take ‘monthly interest.’”

What is meant by that is that the interest shall he computed by the month, and not that it shall be received month by month.

‘Compound interest’: — the various kinds of interest from here down to the ‘corporeal,’ should be construed with ‘he shall not pay.’ Though the prohibition is literally addressed to the debtor, yet it is really meant to be addressed to the creditor; for the debtor, being in distress, — what is there that he may not do?

Or, what is directly meant by ‘nirharet’ is receiving itself; so that the prohibition would he addressed literally to the creditor directly.

“In as much as the rates of interest have been fixed at 2, 3, 4 or 5 per cent, there is no possibility of ‘compound interest’ being paid or received: what then is the need of the present prohibition?”

Our answer is as follows: — This prohibition itself is indicative of the fact that it is open to the creditor to charge such interest also. Just as the prohibition that ‘the Brāhmaṇa shall not sing Sāman during Fire-laying’ is indicative of the fact that though no such Sama-singing is actually prescribed in connection with Fire-laying, yet it is open to the priest to do it. Thus the possibility of the various kinds of interest here mentioned being charged is indicated by this prohibition itself. For instance, in the case of men carrying on inferior kinds of business, the ‘compound’ and other interests are actually paid; it is thus that in connection with traders on land and water, etc., varying rates of interest have been prescribed: ‘Those trading in forests should pay ten per cent., those on the sea twenty per cent.; or among all castes people may pay any interest that has been stipulated among themselves’ (Yājñavalkya, Vyavahāra, 38). ‘Interest stipulated among themselves’ has thus been sanctioned by this other Smṛti-text among all castes, in relation to only those that trade in the forest, etc.; so that ‘compound interest’ is not permissible in other eases.

Interest charged on interest is called ‘compound interest,’ ‘cakravṛddhi.’ Others however explain the term ‘cakravṛddhi’ as ‘wheel-interest’; that in the case of wheeled conveyances, like the cart, etc., interest is paid only for those days on which they are used; and on days when the man has to go by boat, in the crossing of large rivers, no interest is paid. In the case of oxen and other things that are used as conveyances, interest is paid in this same manner and it is this that is called ‘wheel-interest.’

‘Periodical interest’; — “Interest computed month by month is called ‘periodical’” — says a text. But ‘month’ is mentioned only by way of illustration; what is meant is that interest which is not allowed to accumulate, being realised day by day, or month by month, and no time is allowed. Another kind of ‘periodical interest’ is that in which the creditor has stipulated — ‘if you do not pay the interest at such and such a time, my principal shall become doubled.’

‘Privately stipulated’; — when the creditor and the debtor tlx upon a special rate of interest, in view of each other’s requirements. This also is possible only in the case of distant traders. As for others, it has been declared — ‘successive interest is not payable’ and ‘he is entitled to only 5 per cent.’

Or, when what is lent is gold, and what is received in interest is cloth — whose real character is that of a deposit, — it is a case of ‘privately stipulated’ interest; and this would have the character of usufruct, in the case of what has not been kept as a pledge.

‘Corporeal’ — payable by bodily labour. This would be possible only in the case of labourers...... (?) — (153)

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

‘A creditor may take, for the term of a year, interest which has been settled by the following agreement — “when one, two or three months have passed, the interest on the capital shall be calculated and paid to me at one time”; but he shall not take the interest according to the agreement, if the year has passed’ (Kullūka and Rāghavānanda); — ‘If the creditor does not take the money due for two or three years, and the debtor pays then, the creditor shall not take more interest than for one year’ (Govindarāja).

‘Adrṣṭam’ — ‘Not found (in the Śāstras)’ (Medhātithi, Kullūka and Rāghavānanda); — ‘not accumulated by the lapse of several months’ (Medhātithi, alternatively and Nārāyaṇa).

‘Kālavṛddhiḥ’ — ‘Periodical (i.e., monthly) interest’ (Medhātithi, Govindarāja, Nārāyaṇa and Kullūka, who is not rightly represented by Buhler). — See Nārada — ‘Pratimāsam bhavantī yā vṛddhiḥ sā kālikā sṛmtā (smṛta?)’ (‘kālikā’ being the technical name for monthly interest, kālavṛddhiḥ).

‘Kāyikā’ — ‘To be paid by bodily labour’ (Medhātithi), — or ‘by the use of a pledged animal or slave’ (Medhātithi, alternative, Kullūka, Rāghavānanda and Nandana).

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 9), which adds the following notes: — ‘Atisāṃvatsarī’ is that which has gone beyond a year. The meaning is that if the creditor, suspecting an early repayment of the loan, should stipulate that the loan must continue for a certain time, then he cannot stipulate for more than a year. Halāyudha, however holds the meaning to be that however much be the eagerness of the creditor to earn much interest, he should receive payment before one year passes, and not beyond that. — Nor should he receive an interest that is ‘adṛṣtā,’ ‘not permitted by the scriptures.’ — There are four kinds of interest not permitted, — cakravṛddhi, kālavṛddhi, kāritā and kāyikā; these he should not take.

It is quoted in Madanapārijāta (p. 229); — in Vīdhanapārijāta (II, p. 252); — in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Āhnika, 36a); — and in Kṛtyakalpataru (67b), which adds the explanation. — ‘The interest is to be calculated from the first month upto the end of the year, and not beyond that.’

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (12.30, 34-35). — ‘Some declare that the said rates of interest should not be paid longer than a year. The following are the special forms of interest: — Compound interest, Periodical interest, Stipulated interest, Corporal interest, Daily interest and interest in the shape of using the pledge.’

Nārada (l.102-104) — ‘Interest has been declared in lawbooks to be of four kinds: — Periodical, Stipulated, Kāyikā, and Compound. That which runs by the month is Periodical interest; that promised by the debtor himself is Stipulated interest; interest at the rate of one Paṇa and a quarter, paid regularly without diminishing the principal, is denoted Kāyikā interest; interest upon interest is called Compound interest.’

Bṛhaspati (11.4-12). — ‘Interest has been declared by some to be of four kinds; by others, of five kinds; and by others again, of six kinds. Kāyikā, Kālikā, Cakravṛddhi, Kāritā, Śikhāvṛddhi, and Bhogalābha. Kāyikā interest is in the form of bodily labour; Kālikā is what is due every month; Cakravṛddhi is interest on interest; Kāritā is interest promised by the debtor; when interest is received every day, it is called Śikhāvṛddhi; because it grows constantly like hair, except on the loss of the head, that is, the payment of the principal. The use of a mortgaged house, or the produce of a field, is termed Bhogalābha. Sikhā interest, Kāyikā interest and Bhogalābha interest shall be realised by the creditor so long as the principal remains unpaid. But the use of a pledge after twice the principal has been realised, compound interest, and the exaction of the interest and the principal together are usury and are reprehensible.’

Śukranīti (4.5.638). — ‘Creditors take away people’s wealth by the compound rate of interest; so the King should protect the people from them.’

VERSE 8.154

Section XXVII - Limitation of Interest (kusīdavṛddhi)

ऋणं दातुमशक्तो यः कर्तुमिच्छेत् पुनः क्रियाम् ।
स दत्त्वा निर्जितां वृद्धिं करणं परिवर्तयेत् ॥१५४॥

ṛṇaṃ dātumaśakto yaḥ kartumicchet punaḥ kriyām |
sa dattvā nirjitāṃ vṛddhiṃ karaṇaṃ parivartayet ||154||

He who, unable to repay the debt, wishes to renew the contract, shall change the bond, after paying the accrued interest. — (154)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

If a man, having his wealth reduced, is unable to pay the doubled principal, he should be made to renew the contract, and to ‘change the deed’ — i.e., the document properly attested. But he should pay the interest that has already accrued.

This is an exception to what has been said as to the creditor not receiving more than double of bis principal; — since the loan-transaction remains in force.

“How does it follow that there is an exception to the non-exceeding of the double?”

Because in this case there is nothing to show whether further interest accrues upon the principal along with the accrued interest, or upon the principal only; all that is mentioned is the ‘renewal of the contract,’ which is explained in other words — ‘he shall change the bond.’

“If further interest does not accrue on past interest, for what purpose should the bond be altered?”

The answer is as follows: — When interest has ceased to accrue, and the money is not paid, there is every possibility of laxity (on the part of the debtor), and of the witnesses (of the old document), forgetting all about the transaction; and a debt thus ignored for ten years would become non-payable; as has been declared in the following text. — ‘Where a document is ignored for ten years, there can be no suit on its basis; especially in the case of assaults (?).’

This is how it has been explained by older writers.

The following verse (from Nārada, 131) lays down the favour that the king may show towards the debtor:

If by lapse of time the debtor becomes bereft of the capacity to pay, he should be made to pay the debt according to hit capacity, taking into consideration the time and place and the rate of interest.

[The meaning of this is as follows] —

If, through evil fate, the debtor becomes reduced to poverty, he shall not he chastised with imprisonment in the jail and soforth. “What is there to be done?” Whenever he should happen to have any property at all, he should be made to repay the debt by small instalments; — this is what is meant by the phrase ‘according to his capacity.’ This is what is going to be described as — ‘the debt should he liquidated even by bodily labour, etc., etc.’ (8.177.)

In view of this text, the use of altering the bond is just as we have explained above.

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

Karaṇa’ — ‘Written bond’ (Kullūka and Rāghavānanda); — ‘written bond and witnesses’ (Medhātithi).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 193), which adds the following explanation: — ‘When the time for repayment arrives, if the debtor, find himself unable to pay the whole amount due — the principal along with accrued interest, — and the creditor is unwilling to keep the loan hanging, — and should wish to renew the transaction on the same terms, he should pay the accrued interest and renew the bond, dated afresh with the new date.’

Познавательные статьи:



Алгоритмические операторы Matlab

Конструирование и порядок расчёта дорожной одежды

Исследования учёных: почему помогают молитвы?

Почему терпят неудачу многие предприниматели?