Manava Dharmashastra 2.127

2.127

kṛtābhivādanapratyabhivādanayoḥ sauhārde prāpte jijñāsāpraśne jātibhedāśrayaḥ śabdaniyamo'yamiṣyate | praṣṭavyānāṃ jātiniyamo'yaṃ, na praṣṭṛṇām | nātyantabhinnārthatvācca eteṣāṃ svarūpaniyamo'yaṃ vidhīyate | ārogyānāmayaśabdau samānārthoṃ | evaṃ kṣemakuśalaśabdāvapi nātyantabhinnau | kuśalaśabdo yadyapi prāvīṇyavacanastathāpīha saṃyogināmarthānāṃ śarīrāṇāṃ cānapāye vartate | ete'vaśyaṃ prayoktavyāḥ | anyeṣāmapi yathāpratibhaṃ viśeṣajijñāsayā'pratiṣedhaḥ | tathā mahābhārate kasmiṃścidadhyāye darśitam |
kecidiha 'samāgamyeti' liṅgānna gurbādiviṣayo'yaṃ praśnaḥ, kiṃ tarhi sabayasāmeva | abhigamane hi gurau vihitaṃ, na yadṛcchayā samāgamaḥ |

Having met a Brāhmaṇa, one should ask him his “welfare,” a Kṣatriya his “freedom from distemper,” a Vaiśya his “prosperity,” and a Shudra his “freedom from disease.”—(127)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
When a greeting has been offered and answered, and friendly relations have thereby become established, occasion arises for enquiry; and the present verse lays down the verbal forms whose diversity is based upon distinctions of caste; and the caste-distinction pertains to the persons questioned, not to the questioner. And, in as much as there is not very much of a difference in the meaning of the words laid down, the restriction is with reference to the verbal forms only. For instance, the terms ‘anāmaya,’ ‘freedom from distemper,’ and ‘ārogya,’ ‘freedom from disease,’ mean the same thing; nor is there much difference in the meanings of the terms ‘kuśala,’ ‘welfare’ and ‘kṣema,’ ‘prosperity.’ Though the term ‘kuśala’ denotes erpertness, yet it is also used in the sense of the non-deficiency of the body and other things related to it.

The words here laid down must be used; but this does not mean that the man should not make use of other words also, if he wishes to make detailed enquiries; as has been clearly shown somewhere in the

On the strength of the expression ‘having,’ some people explain this verse to mean tbat the questions are to be put only to persons of equal age, and they do not apply to the case of the teacher and other superiors; for the teacher has to be ‘approached,’ not ‘met.’

But, as a matter of fact, there is ‘meeting’ in ‘approaching’ also; so there is no force in the said explanation.—(127)

According to Govindarāja, the rule refers to friends or relatives meeting, not to every one who returns a salute.

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 450) in support of the view that the term ‘vipraḥ’ in verse 125 includes the Kṣatriya, the Vaiśya and the Śūdra also; as it lays down the return-greeting for all these;—and again on page 465, as a verse common to Manu and Yama and laying down the benedictory response to salutation.

It is quoted also in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 298) as laying down the return-greetings appropriate for the several castes;—in Nityāchārapradīpa (p. 406) as laying down what should be said after salutation has been returned;—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 47);—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 100).

Comparative notes by various authors
Yama (Parāśaramādhava, p. 298).—‘The response to the Brāhmaṇa shall he svasti; to the Kṣatriya, āyuṣmān; to the Vaiśya, dhanavān; to the Śūdra, freedom from disease.’