________________
THE MIMAMSA AND HINDU LAW
99
way affect them, as, of course, it would do if it were a prohibition proper.2
In the interpretation of the Smrti injunctions the same principles are applicable as in the case of the interpretation of the injunctions of application in Vedic tests. Thus the express declaration of a text must be held to override any conclusion which might be deduced from it by suggestion (laksana), corresponding to linga in Jaimini. The declam ration of Manu (IX, 104) that "after the death of father and mother the sons should divide the paternal property, for they have no power over it while their parents live," is an absolute declaration that they have no such power; it is impossible to read the rule as forbidding partition during the parents' life, but acknowledging the power of the sons over the property. The power of suggestion, however, has also its own place, thus Nanda Pandita in explaining how, although the word "substitute" was first applied specificially to five kinds of sons, it becomes applicable to all the twelve kınds legally recognised, adduces the Prāṇabhịt maxim (I, 1, 28) as his warrant. Tränabhrt originally denotes a Mantra used in consecrating a brick in the fire altar; thence it passes to be the name of the brick, and from denoting the special bricks used applies more generally to any brick. The principle of syntactical connection (vākya) reappears, usually under the title Anvaya ; its superiority to context (prakarana) is illustrated by Raghunandana's discussion of Manu's rule (XI, 209) that one who assaults a Brahman must undergo the Krcchra penance. If the context is invoked, this may seem merely to refer to the case of the new and full moon sacrifices, and therefore has no general or civil application, but the sound view is that it is to be treated as a single independent proposition.
The term, Arthavāda, which plays so important a part in the Mināmsă discussions is dropped in legal terminology, but the legal texts recognise the existence of such passages in the Smrtis and deal variously with them. One difficult problem is handled in the light of the maxim of Jaimini (I, 2, 1925), dealing with declarations which have the
1 Tagore Law Lectures, 1905, pp. 332, 333,
