Hindu Law and Custom (Recht und Sitte) c9.44

c9.44

Points of agreement and distinction between the two systems. There are many more instances of exchange and analogies between these two systems of punishment. Thus in both of these systems the caste-distinction and the privileges of the Brahman have been fully recognised which stand out prominently particularly in the punishments and penances for murder, maiming, adultery, theft, injuries and other grave crimes.¹ In civil law too the gradation of penances, which is seen e. g. in Sāmav. 1,6,8, for withholding the interests on a loan, according as the creditor is a Brahman or not, may be compared with the various rates of interest according to the caste of the debtor and the privileges of the Brahman as found in the law about the recovery of debts. Further in the penances as well as in the punishments the existence or absence of criminal intention is taken into consideration. Y. 3, 226 even expresses the view that penances are proper for sins committed unintentionally and punishments are appropriate for sins committed intentionally (kāmatāḥ), and it corresponds to the religious belief that for the existence of a sin which has to be expiated for only the actual facts of the case and not the evil design come into consideration.