History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s14.29.1

v1.c6.s14.29.1

Kauṭilya allows *niyoga* even in the case of Brāhmaṇas (last verse of III. 6 and at the end of I. 17 about kings). Manu first speaks of Niyoga and then condemns it (vide 9. 57-63 and 9. 64-68). As Bṛhaspati refers to this fact in Manu's work,¹⁷² it appears that the passages condemning *niyoga* were put in probably earlier than the fitst centuries of the Christian era. Though Kauṭilya speaks of almost the same 18 titles as those in Manu (8. 4-7) almost under the same names, there is a slight difference. Manu has no such title as *Prakīrṇaka*. Kauṭilya speaks of upanidhi and extends the same rules to Nikṣepa, while Manu speaks of the title as Nikṣepa. The ancient dharma-sūtras do not give the technical names of the eighteen titles of law, though some of them do occur therein. Vākpāruṣya and daṇḍapāruṣya occur in G. Dh. S. (12. 1) and Vas. (17.61). Baud. seems to have known the term 'Strīsaṅgrahaṇa' (Dh. S. II. 2.54). *Steya* occurs in all. Gautama speaks of *nidhi* (Dh. S. 12. 39). Manu positively says (9. 155) that the son of any member of the first three *varṇas* from a Śūdra woman does not inherit his father's wealth (though the preceding verses 151-154 seem to lay down different rules), while Kauṭilya allows such a son a share when there are sons born to a Brāhmaṇa from wives of higher castes or one third when he has no other sons (III. 6). Manu expressly mentions the mother and paternal grandmother as heirs (9. 217), while Kauṭilya appears to ignore them.