History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s45.17

v1.c6.s45.17

Some of the views attributed to Asahāya may be quoted here. The definition of *dāya* (heritage) given by the Mit. was identical with Asahāya's.⁵¹⁷ Asahāya explained the dictum of Uśanas that fields were impartible by taking it to refer to the son of a Brāhmaṇa from a Kṣatriya wife, who does not participate in land gifted to a Brāhmaṇa.⁵¹⁸ The Mit. on Yāj. II. 119 takes the same view. Asahāya held that as regards succession to the *Śulka* of a woman even step-brothers should be given something, though the major portion would go to the full brothers.⁵¹⁹ According to Asahāya, the wealth of a childless Brāhmaṇa went to the teacher, then to the teacher's son, then to the teacher's widow, the pupil, pupil's son, pupil's widow (one after another) and then to the fellow-student.⁵²⁰ The Vivādaratnākara⁵²¹ (p. 578) quotes the Prakāśa as referring to the views or Asahāya and Medhātithi on Manu IX. 198 that the special rule of Manu applies to all the *strīdhana* belonging to a Kṣatriya woman who has a brāhmaṇī co-wife. The Vivādaratnākara⁵²² quotes a verse of Nārada about *māṣa* and a verse of the bhāṣyakāra thereon. It probably refers to Asahāya's bhāṣya.