DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0319
304
APPENDIX.
Dattalca-
darpana.
Dvandva (copulative) compound (matapitarau ‘both
parents ’), and because it is said, “ Wlibm his mother or
father give,” etc. (Mann, IX. 168), and because each of the
two component parts of a Dvandva compound is significant
by itself. This objection cannot be maintained in the
face of the rule that the husband’s permission is required.
Again, if it be said that here also the equality of rights
between both parents is established, the prohibitive rule,
“ Let a woman neither give nor receive a son,” would be
unmeaning, the female sex being in every way dependent
on the male sex, because they must never be independent.
And thus says Harita: “ In regard to a wife, in regard to
wealth, and especially in regard to the sacred law, a
woman does not deserve independence neither in taking
nor in abandoning.” Narada: “ Transactions made by a
woman are null and void, except during distress, especially
if they relate to the gift, mortgaging, or sale of a house
or field. Such transactions acquire validity in that case
only, if the husband approves of them; or, on failure of the
husband, the son; or, on failure of both husband and son,
the King.” The term “ during distress ” is used (in the
text of Narada), in order to indicate that a gift or other
transaction made by a woman, for the purpose of obviat-
ing distress, is valid. Therefore, a woman even may give
in adoption, and completely relinquish her dominion over
a son in times of distress. But she may not receive him
(in adoption), because the Dvandva compound, etc., is used
with reference to the gift only of a son. Therefore, both
parents have power to give, sell, or abandon—-from passion
or some other motive—;their son, who is formed of virile
seed and uterine blood, and has proceeded from them (as
an effect) from its cause. But they are not (invested with
equal power) as regards the acceptance (of a son). Although,
therefore, a son owes his existence to his mother, she can-
not be permitted to adopt a son independently (of her
husband), because she is not allowed to give a son in
adoption during the lifetime of her husband. Therefore,
supposing even a man were anxious to give in adoption
his only son, the representative of his race, a woman is
not allowed to receive him in adoption
Dattakadarpana.—The adoption of a substitute for a
son should be undertaken by females as well as by males.
If it be objected that the incapacity of women to give or
receive a son in adoption is shown by the text of Vasish-
APPENDIX.
Dattalca-
darpana.
Dvandva (copulative) compound (matapitarau ‘both
parents ’), and because it is said, “ Wlibm his mother or
father give,” etc. (Mann, IX. 168), and because each of the
two component parts of a Dvandva compound is significant
by itself. This objection cannot be maintained in the
face of the rule that the husband’s permission is required.
Again, if it be said that here also the equality of rights
between both parents is established, the prohibitive rule,
“ Let a woman neither give nor receive a son,” would be
unmeaning, the female sex being in every way dependent
on the male sex, because they must never be independent.
And thus says Harita: “ In regard to a wife, in regard to
wealth, and especially in regard to the sacred law, a
woman does not deserve independence neither in taking
nor in abandoning.” Narada: “ Transactions made by a
woman are null and void, except during distress, especially
if they relate to the gift, mortgaging, or sale of a house
or field. Such transactions acquire validity in that case
only, if the husband approves of them; or, on failure of the
husband, the son; or, on failure of both husband and son,
the King.” The term “ during distress ” is used (in the
text of Narada), in order to indicate that a gift or other
transaction made by a woman, for the purpose of obviat-
ing distress, is valid. Therefore, a woman even may give
in adoption, and completely relinquish her dominion over
a son in times of distress. But she may not receive him
(in adoption), because the Dvandva compound, etc., is used
with reference to the gift only of a son. Therefore, both
parents have power to give, sell, or abandon—-from passion
or some other motive—;their son, who is formed of virile
seed and uterine blood, and has proceeded from them (as
an effect) from its cause. But they are not (invested with
equal power) as regards the acceptance (of a son). Although,
therefore, a son owes his existence to his mother, she can-
not be permitted to adopt a son independently (of her
husband), because she is not allowed to give a son in
adoption during the lifetime of her husband. Therefore,
supposing even a man were anxious to give in adoption
his only son, the representative of his race, a woman is
not allowed to receive him in adoption
Dattakadarpana.—The adoption of a substitute for a
son should be undertaken by females as well as by males.
If it be objected that the incapacity of women to give or
receive a son in adoption is shown by the text of Vasish-