Book Title: Makaranda Madhukar Anand Mahendale Festshrift
Author(s): M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre

Previous | Next

Page 146
________________ The Aurasa Son 135 dattake) cet pratigrhīta aurasah putra utpādyate caturbhāgabhāgi syād dattakaḥ (Vasistha 15. 9). 6. Baudhāyana (2. 2. 3. 33) quotes the opinion of Aupajanghani to the effect that the aurasa is the one and only true son : tesam prathama evety-Aupajanghanih, on which Govindarāja comments : Aupajanghanir-ācāryo manyate-sma aurasa eva putro na putrikāputrādaya iti. 7. Cf. Aparārka (on Vasistha 17. 13, sub Yājñavalkya 2. 128) : prathamo mukhyaḥ. tena sa eva putraśabdasya mukhyo ’rthaḥ kṣetrajādis tu gaunah. 8. Eg., Vyavahāraprakāśa, p. 480 : kriyalopāt parinayādikriyalopād ity arthah. kriyālopād iti pratinidhitve hetuḥ | Smsticandrikāyām tu "aurasābhāve tatkartrkaśrāddhādilopäd bibhyato manīsiņa rsaya ekādaśa putranidhin kartavyatvenāhur” iti vyākhyātam 9. Immediately after the list of 12 kinds of sons Manu (9. 161) exhibits the following simile : yādrśam phalam-āpnoti kuplavaih samtaran jalam tādrśaṁ phalam-āpnoti kuputraiḥ saṁtaraṁs tamaḥ || Whether or not the term kuputra was originally meant to refer to "bad" sons generally, as opposed to "good" sons, the commentators agree that kuputra here refers to any son who is not an aurasa. E.g. Kullūka : kuputraiḥ ksetrajādibhiḥ 10. Cf. a verse attributed, among others, to Yama (Dharmakośa, p. 1352) : aputrena sutaḥ kāryo yādrk tādrk prayatnatah | pindodakakriyahetor-nāmasamkīrtanāya ca 11 Jolly's interpretation of the existence of other sons than the aurasa : "originally an economic motive was perhaps a more important factor in it-to get for the family as many powerful workers as possible" (Law and Custom, p. 156), was dismissed by Kane (op. cit., pp. 648-49) and Mayne (op. cit., p. 114). Kane and Mayne refer to the fact that only in the absence of an aurasa son substitute sons could be recurred to. Both also agree that the lists of 12 different kinds of sons were due to "the systematizing habit of Sanskrit writers” (Mayne), or to "the ancient writers' great penchant for divisons and sub-divisions based upon very slight differences of circumstances" (Kane).

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284