Manava Dharmashastra 3.52

3.52

pūrvasyaiva śeṣaḥ | strīnimittāni dhanāni, kanyādāne varādyāni gṛhyante | ye bāndhavāḥ pitrādayaḥ mohādupajīvanti | yathoktaṃ 'jñātibhyo draviṇaṃ dattveti' | suvarṇarajatādi 'dhanam' | nārīyānāni | yānamaśvādi | vastraṃ vā| etāvanmātramapi na jā tūpajīvanīyaṃ vāso yānādi, kiṃ punarbahu | upajīvatāṃ phalamācaṣṭe | te pāpāḥ śāstrapratiṣiddhasamācaraṇādadhogatiṃ narakaṃ yānti | athavā strīdhanānīti navame darśayiṣyati | tāni ye mohādupajīvanti bāndhavāḥ, pitā tatpakṣāśca, bhartā bhartṛpakṣāśca | evaṃ yānādi | evaṃ vastram | strīṇāṃ buddhau saṃnidhānācchabdaḥ saṃnidhiḥ kalpyate yathā "rājapuruṣaḥ kasya | rājñaḥ |” iti |

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
This verse is supplementary to the foregoing verse.

‘Bride’s properties’—i.e., those properties that are received from the bridegroom for the sake of the bride; ‘the relations’—fathers and others—‘who, through folly, live upon’ them;—as described above (in verse 31)

‘The’ property here spoken, of is that in the form of gold and silver.

‘Bride’s conveyances’—such as the horse and the rest.

‘Clothes;’—even such paltry things as clothes and conveyances should not be lived upon,—what to say of more valuable properties?

The text proceeds to describe what befalls those who do live upon such properties,—they are ‘sinners—and by doing what is prohibited in the scriptures—‘they fall into the lowest state’—i.e., into hell.

Or, ‘bride’s properties’ may be taken in the sense, in which it is going to be described in Discourse 9 below. Those who, through folly, live upon those properties;—the ‘relations,’ in this case, would stand for the girl’s father and his kinsmen, as also the husband and his relations. Similarly, with ‘conveyances’ and ‘clothes the ‘clothes’ also those belonging to the bride; this connection being assumed on the basis of the proximity of the term ‘bride’ (in the compound term ‘bride’s conveyances’); just as in the case of the use of expression, ‘royal servant,’ if some one asks, ‘whose?,’—this is taken to mean ‘of what king?’—(52)