DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0250
THE HISTORY OF FEMALE PROPERTY.
235
by loveliness (Lavanyarjita).1 Vicious wives, adulteresses LecwAe
especially, are declared unfit to possess Stridhana. Many
variations of reading occur in these texts of Katyayana,
of which the only important one relating to the meaning of
Adhyavalianika Stridhana has been fully discussed by Dr.
G. D. Banerjee (p. 277 etseq^) As an additional argument in
favour of his view, that the Adhyavahanika does not merely
include gifts received from the father during the bridal
procession from the father’s to the husband’s house, I may
mention that the reading of the Mitakshara (Piturgrihat),2
'which removes all ambiguity on this head, is also found in
the Smritichandrika, Sarasvativilasa, Mayukha, Madana-
parijata, Viramitrodaya, Vi vadataadava, Vaijayanti, Balam-
bhattatika, Apararka’s Commentary on Yajnavalkya and
other works,—in short, in nearly all works outside of the
Bengal and Mithila Schools. Even in these two Schools,
Jagannatha and Vachaspati-migra, though reading Paitrikat
instead of Piturgrihat, agree with Kulluka in explaining
this reading in the same manner as the reading Piturgrihat
is explained by the author of the Mitaksfflara and the rest.
Although Jimutavahana is wrong in restricting the Adhya-
vahanika Stridhana to presents received from the parents
of the bride, it does not seem to include gifts from strangers.
There is another important text of Katyayana, which
states that all property acquired by a woman by mechanical
arts (such as painting or spinning), or given to her through
affection by a stranger, shall not be considered as her
Stridhana. It may be noticed, finally, that Katyayana is
careful to exclude from Stridhana all property given to a
woman under certain conditions («.$,, ornaments to be worn
at festival occasions only), or with a fraudulent design (e.g.,
in order to cheat one’s coparceners of their share of certain
property under pretence that it had been given toa daughter).
Another limitation which Katyayana puts on gifts of
Stridhana concerns their amount, which, according to him,
is not to exceed two thousand annas in value; nor must
immovables be given. The fact that a rule of this kind
1 The Sarasvativilasa, § 250. quotes a third tex’j containing the word
Sauduyika. “Vishnu: ‘A woman may acquire Saudayika according to
her desire.’ ” This text is, however, not found in the Vishnu-sutra, and it
is not the only spurious text quoted in the Sarasvativilasa.
2 Others read Pritidatta, “ gift in token of love,” and take this text of
Katyayana to contain an explanation of the tSrm Pritidatta. occurring
n Katyayana’s and Manu’s enumeration of six sorts of Stridhana.
235
by loveliness (Lavanyarjita).1 Vicious wives, adulteresses LecwAe
especially, are declared unfit to possess Stridhana. Many
variations of reading occur in these texts of Katyayana,
of which the only important one relating to the meaning of
Adhyavalianika Stridhana has been fully discussed by Dr.
G. D. Banerjee (p. 277 etseq^) As an additional argument in
favour of his view, that the Adhyavahanika does not merely
include gifts received from the father during the bridal
procession from the father’s to the husband’s house, I may
mention that the reading of the Mitakshara (Piturgrihat),2
'which removes all ambiguity on this head, is also found in
the Smritichandrika, Sarasvativilasa, Mayukha, Madana-
parijata, Viramitrodaya, Vi vadataadava, Vaijayanti, Balam-
bhattatika, Apararka’s Commentary on Yajnavalkya and
other works,—in short, in nearly all works outside of the
Bengal and Mithila Schools. Even in these two Schools,
Jagannatha and Vachaspati-migra, though reading Paitrikat
instead of Piturgrihat, agree with Kulluka in explaining
this reading in the same manner as the reading Piturgrihat
is explained by the author of the Mitaksfflara and the rest.
Although Jimutavahana is wrong in restricting the Adhya-
vahanika Stridhana to presents received from the parents
of the bride, it does not seem to include gifts from strangers.
There is another important text of Katyayana, which
states that all property acquired by a woman by mechanical
arts (such as painting or spinning), or given to her through
affection by a stranger, shall not be considered as her
Stridhana. It may be noticed, finally, that Katyayana is
careful to exclude from Stridhana all property given to a
woman under certain conditions («.$,, ornaments to be worn
at festival occasions only), or with a fraudulent design (e.g.,
in order to cheat one’s coparceners of their share of certain
property under pretence that it had been given toa daughter).
Another limitation which Katyayana puts on gifts of
Stridhana concerns their amount, which, according to him,
is not to exceed two thousand annas in value; nor must
immovables be given. The fact that a rule of this kind
1 The Sarasvativilasa, § 250. quotes a third tex’j containing the word
Sauduyika. “Vishnu: ‘A woman may acquire Saudayika according to
her desire.’ ” This text is, however, not found in the Vishnu-sutra, and it
is not the only spurious text quoted in the Sarasvativilasa.
2 Others read Pritidatta, “ gift in token of love,” and take this text of
Katyayana to contain an explanation of the tSrm Pritidatta. occurring
n Katyayana’s and Manu’s enumeration of six sorts of Stridhana.