________________
The Aurasa Son
131
All these definitions basically require only two qualifications for a son to be aurasa : (1) he must have been sired by his father, and (2) his mother must be his father's duly wedded wife. Yet, there are other restrictions.
First restriction
Except for Kautilya, who uses the term jātah, all other texts quoted so far include either utpadayet or utpäditah "sire, be sired." As a result, some commentators require that the mother must be the father's duly wedded wife, not only at the time of their son's birth, but also at the time of his conception. E. g., Kullūkabhatta (on Manu 9. 166):
svabhāryāyām ... krtavivāhasamskārāyāṁ yam svayam-utpādayet ||
That means that, according to Kullūka, a son born after the wedding of his father and his mother, but conceived prior to it, is not aurasa 18. Second restriction
According to some commentators, for a son to be aurasa he must not only have been conceived after the wedding of his parents; his mother must also be a virgin at that time. Kullūka's sentence which I quoted earlier in a truncated form reads :
svabhāryāyāṁ kanyāvasthāyām-eva krtavivāhasaṁskārāyāṁ yam svayam-utpādayet". Third restriction
At least one dharmaśūtra explicitly requires that the mother of an aurasa son be of the same varna as his father's20. Baudhāyana's definition of aurasa, although close to the definitions cited above, adds one important word:
savarnāyām samskrtāyāṁ svayam-utpăditam aurasam putraṁ vidyāt | (2. 2. 3. 14)
A number of commentators interpret the term savarnāyām literally. For instance, Kullūka (on Manu 9.166) quotes the Baudhāyana text to restrict Manu's definition of the aurasa son:
... iti Baudhāyanavacanät sajātīyāyām-eva svayam-utpădita auraso jñeyah21 Among the commentaries that accepted the requirement that the
