Verse 8.78

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

स्वभावेनैव यद् ब्रूयुस्तद् ग्राह्यं व्यावहारिकम् ।
अतो यदन्यद् विब्रूयुर्धर्मार्थं तदपार्थकम् ॥ ७८ ॥

svabhāvenaiva yad brūyustad grāhyaṃ vyāvahārikam |
ato yadanyad vibrūyurdharmārthaṃ tadapārthakam || 78 ||

What the witnesses state naturally, in relation to the case, should be accepted; apart from this what they state from considerations of righteousness, is useless.—(78)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

What the witnesses state naturally in regard to the case should he accepted; on the other hand, what they state, not quite naturally, but ‘from considerations of righteousness’ ‘is useless’,—i.e., should not he accepted. The describing of things exactly as they were seen is what is meant by ‘natural statement what is otherwise than this,—i.e., what is stated with the motive that what is said may not cause suffering to the poor party concerned,—‘is useless’; e.g., when one party complains—‘I have been insulted by this person’—and the other denies it, the witness may say—‘yes, ho was insulted, but in joke, not through malice’; and in this case, the statement ‘the man has been insulted’ should he accepted; while the qualifying statement ‘in joke,’—which had not been put forth by the defendant—and was made by the witness unasked (gratuitously)—need not he accepted.

‘In relation to the case’—pertaining to the suit.

‘Useless’—futile.

Others explain the verse as follows:—It may so happen that through shyness, a witness deposes in a halting manner,—but that alone need not be made a ground for rejecting his statement; what is to be done is that the nature of the witness should he examined by reasoning, and then it should be determined that ‘this person speaks haltingly through shyness, what he says, however, is quite true?

But the real meaning is as explained above; so much attention need not be paid to this other explanation.—(78)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

‘Svabhāvena’—‘Quite naturally’—‘not out of compassion’ (Medhātithi, who says nothing regarding ‘depending on women’ as Buhler wrongly puts it),—‘not out of fear and the like’ (Kullūka);—‘the reliability or otherwise of the witness is to be ascertained after due consideration of his Svabhāva, character, and not from the manner of bis giving evidence’ (‘others’ in Medhātithi),—‘without hesitation, quickly’ (Nārāyaṇa);—‘in accordance with truth’ (Govindarāja and Nandana).

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 80);—and in Vyavahāra-Bālambhaṭṭī (p. 282).

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Śukranīti (4.5.396).—‘One should accept the evidence of witnesses given spontaneously, not through force; after the evidence has been once given by the witness, he shall not be repeatedly cross-examined.’