Verse 8.238

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

तत्रापरिवृतं धान्यं विहिंस्युः पशवो यदि ।
न तत्र प्रणयेद् दण्डं नृपतिः पशुरक्षिणाम् ॥ २३८ ॥

tatrāparivṛtaṃ dhānyaṃ vihiṃsyuḥ paśavo yadi |
na tatra praṇayed daṇḍaṃ nṛpatiḥ paśurakṣiṇām || 238 ||

If the cattle damage the unfenced crops therein, the king, in that case, shall not inflict punishment on the cattle-keepers.—(238)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

As a rule, no crops should be grown on the pasture-lands; since if they have been grown,—why should fences have not been put up? The fault thus lies with the cultivator, and not with the cattle-keepers. The cattle-keeper cannot always be leading each individual animal by the rope; and there is no other grazing ground for the cattle.—(238)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Mitākṣarā (2.162), to the effect that this impurity pertains only to cases where the crops are not fenced.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Yājñavalkya (2.162).—‘If cattle graze in a field on the road-side, or near the village pasture-land, there is no offence, if it goes there by chance, and not intentionally on the part of the cowherd.’

Nārada (11.40).—‘When a field is situated on the borders of a village, or contiguous to the pasture-land, or adjacent to a high road, the herdsman is not reprehensible for any damage to the crops, if the field is not protected by a fence.’

Gautama (12.21).—‘If damage is done in an unenclosed field near the road, the responsibility falls on the herdsman and on the owner of the field.’

Viṣṇu (5.147-148).—‘There is no offence if the damage has been done near a highway, or near a village, or in a field adjacent to the pasture-ground; or if it has been done in an unenclosed field.’