Manusmriti with the Commentary of Medhatithi

by Ganganatha Jha | 1920 | 1,381,940 words | ISBN-10: 8120811550 | ISBN-13: 9788120811553

This is the English translation of the Manusmriti, which is a collection of Sanskrit verses dealing with ‘Dharma’, a collective name for human purpose, their duties and the law. Various topics will be dealt with, but this volume of the series includes 12 discourses (adhyaya). The commentary on this text by Medhatithi elaborately explains various t...

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

पादोऽधर्मस्य कर्तारं पादः साक्षिणं ऋच्छति ।
पादः सभासदः सर्वान् पादो राजानमृच्छति ॥ १८ ॥

pādo'dharmasya kartāraṃ pādaḥ sākṣiṇaṃ ṛcchati |
pādaḥ sabhāsadaḥ sarvān pādo rājānamṛcchati || 18 ||

One quarter of the Injustice falls on the man who commits it, one quarter on the witness, one quarter on the members of the Court and one quarter on the king.—(18)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The judges should not entertain any such idea as the following—‘Between the plaintiff and the defendant, one or the other is taking what belongs to the other,—so that he will incur the sin of wrongful possession of the land,—we are not committing the act,—why then should we be participators in the sin?’ Because as a matter of fact, the said sin is divided into four parts.

This verse is a purely supplementary exaggeration; because in reality the sin committed by one man does not go to another. What happens then is that on the judges also falls the sin of transgressing the law that forbids unjust decisions. On the king, though he does not personally investigate the case, there does fall the sin resulting from the sinful act of the judges appointed by him and acting as his representatives. Or if, on being apprised, by the defeated party, of the unfair dealings of the authorised judges, he does not punish the dishonest officer, and does not take steps to come to a just decision, then also he becomes a participator in the sin. Or, the ‘King’ in the text may be taken as standing for the judge appointed by him; the sense being that when the king himself decides the case wrongly, the sin falls upon him, whereas when his representative does so, the sin falls upon the latter.—(18)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

Sabhāsadaḥ’—‘People assembled in Court’ (Kullūka and Rāghavānanda)‘Judges’ (Govindarāja).

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (on 2.305), to the effect that in the case of miscarriage of justice, every one of those persons should be punished;—in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 15);—in Smṛtitattva (II, p. 200);—and in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, p. 5a).

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Baudhāyana (1.19.8).—‘Of injustice in decisions, one quarter falls on the party in the cause, one quarter on his witnesses, one quarter on all the judges, and one quarter on the King.’

Gautama (13.11).—‘If the sacred law or the rules are violated, the guilt falls on the witnesses, the Assessors, the King, and the offender.’

Nārada (3.12).—‘One quarter of the iniquity goes to the offender, one quarter goes to the witness; one quarter goes to all the members of the Court; one quarter goes to the King.’

Hārīta (Vyavahāratattva).—‘Of injustice, one quarter falls on the perpetrator, one quarter on the witness, one quarter on all the members of the Court and one quarter on the King.’

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: