DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9551#0237
OVER ANCESTRAL PROPERTY.
and grandson, being obviously at variance with sacred
precepts found on the same subject, should be rejected,
and all sales or gifts of the kind be annulled.
14. I agree in the first assertion, that certain writings
received by Hindoos as sacred, are the origin of the
Hindoo law of inheritance, but with this modification,
that the writings supposed sacred are only, when consis-
tent with sound reasoning, considered as imperative, as
Munoo plainly declares : " He alone comprehends the
system of duties, religious and civil, who can reason, by
rules of logic, agreeably to the Ved, on the general heads
•of that system as revealed by the holy sages." Ch. xih
v. 106. Vrihusputi. " Let no one found conclusions on
the mere words of Shastrus : from investigations without
reason, religious virtue is lost."'* As to the second
position, I first beg to ask, whether or not it be meant by
jeemootvahun's being styled a commentator that he wrote
commentaries upon all or any of those sacred institutes.
The fact is, that no one of those sacred institutes bears
his comment. Should it be meant that the author of the
Dayubhagu was so far a commentator, that he called
passages from different sacred institutes, touching every
particular subject, and examining their purport separately
and collectively, and weighing the sense deducible from
the context, has offered that opinion on the subject which
appeared to agree best with the series of passages cited
collectively, and that when he has found one passage
apparently at variance with another, he has laid strees
upon that which seemed the more reasonable and more
15
and grandson, being obviously at variance with sacred
precepts found on the same subject, should be rejected,
and all sales or gifts of the kind be annulled.
14. I agree in the first assertion, that certain writings
received by Hindoos as sacred, are the origin of the
Hindoo law of inheritance, but with this modification,
that the writings supposed sacred are only, when consis-
tent with sound reasoning, considered as imperative, as
Munoo plainly declares : " He alone comprehends the
system of duties, religious and civil, who can reason, by
rules of logic, agreeably to the Ved, on the general heads
•of that system as revealed by the holy sages." Ch. xih
v. 106. Vrihusputi. " Let no one found conclusions on
the mere words of Shastrus : from investigations without
reason, religious virtue is lost."'* As to the second
position, I first beg to ask, whether or not it be meant by
jeemootvahun's being styled a commentator that he wrote
commentaries upon all or any of those sacred institutes.
The fact is, that no one of those sacred institutes bears
his comment. Should it be meant that the author of the
Dayubhagu was so far a commentator, that he called
passages from different sacred institutes, touching every
particular subject, and examining their purport separately
and collectively, and weighing the sense deducible from
the context, has offered that opinion on the subject which
appeared to agree best with the series of passages cited
collectively, and that when he has found one passage
apparently at variance with another, he has laid strees
upon that which seemed the more reasonable and more
15