India as Known to Panini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi c9.s6.t1.57

c9.s6.t1.57

*MAHĀ-PRAVṚIDDHA*—(VI.2.38). Pāṇini has cited the formation *mahā-pravṛiddha* for its particular accent. But the word denotes the limit of interest (*vṛiddhi*) allowed on a loan. Manu says that the maximum accumulated interest should not exceed the principal sum (VIII.150). Kauṭilya directs that if the interest is allowed to pile up owing either to the absence abroad of the creditor or debtor, or deliberate intention, the amount payable shall be equal to twice of the principal sum (*mūlya-dviguṇa*, *Artha.* III. 11, p. 174). This is also endorsed by Śukra stating that the debtor shall not be required to pay more than twice the principal sum in discharge of his debt and interest (IV.5.631-2). Thus the maximum limit of accumulated interest was a sum equal to the principal; and when the original amount of loan, say a hundred *kārshāpaṇas*, had by the adding to it of compound interest (*pra-vṛiddha*) increased to two hundred *kārshāpaṇas*, the loan was considered to have reached its maximum increment (*mahā-pravṛiddha*). *APAMITYAKA* (IV.4.21).—Pāṇini mentions *apamityaka* as something borrowed with a view to be returned in kind (*vyatihāra*, III.4.19). The term is explained by Kauṭilya as applicable to grain borrowed with a promise to return an equal quantity (*Arth.* II.15, p. 94). The use of this word in connection with the borrowing of grain was as old as the Atharvaveda: ‘Whatever grain I have borrowed for eating, may I return to redeem my debt’ (*Apamitya dhānyam yaj-jaghās-āham idam tadagne anṛiṇo bhavāmi*, VI.117.8). The *apamityaka* arrangement was a well-recognised practice of rural economy, with a very ancient origin. Kauṭilya refers in the same context to *prāmityaka*, *i.e.* grain borrowed, but without obligation to return (*sasya-yāchanam anyataḥ prāmityakam*, *Arth.* II.15). Pāṇini mentions this as *yāchitaka* (*Apamitya-yāchitābhyāṁ kak-kanau*, IV.4.21).