History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c34.8

v2.c34.8

The brāhmaṇa householder is again divided into several varieties from different points of view. Baud. Dh. S. III. 1. 1, Devala (quoted in the Mit. on Yāj. I. 128) and other works divide a householder into two varieties viz. śālīna and yāyāvara,¹⁵⁰¹ the latter being superior to the former.¹⁵⁰² The śālīna is one who dwells in a house, is possessed of servants and cattle, has a fixed place and a fixed village and has grain and wealth and follows the life of worldly people; the yāyāvara is one who subsists by the best of livelihood, viz. picking up grains that fall down when the corn that is reaped is taken to the house or threshing floor by the owner and who does not accumulate wealth or who does not earn his livelihood by officiating as priest, or by teaching or by accepting gifts. Manu (IV. 7) appears to divide brāhmaṇa householders into four varieties, viz. one who possesses enough to fill a granary or a store filling a corn jar, one who collects as much as will satisfy his needs for.three days, or one who makes no provision for the morrow. Vide Śāntiparva 244. 1-4 and Laghu-Viṣṇu II. 17 for similar statements. The Mit on Yāj. I. 128 says that ‘śālīna is of four varieties viz. (1) one who maintains himself by officiating as a priest, teaching Veda, accepting gifts, agriculture, trade and breeding cattle, (2) one who subsists by the first three out of the above six, (3) one who subsists by officiating as a priest and by teaching, (4) one who subsists by teaching alone. Manu IV. 9 (as interpreted by the Mit.) refers to these four varieties. The Āp. Śr. (V. 3. 22) distinguishes between śālīna and yāyāvara.¹⁵⁰³ The Baud. gṛ. III. 5. 4 refers to yāyāvara. The word ‘yāyāvara’ occurs in the Tai. S. V. 2. 1. 7¹⁵⁰⁴ ‘therefore the active man lords it over one who is easy-going’; but here the word has not probably any technical sense.