365bet娱乐

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

啶呧う啶距い啶班た 啶�啷佮え啶班�嵿う啶距い啶� 啶掂た啶溹�嵿�炧ぞ啶むお啷嵿ぐ啶曕�冟い啶距さ啷冟ぃ啶�啷� 啷�
啶�啶多�嵿�氞ぞ啶む�� 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶むた啶�啷佮さ啶� 啶�啷嵿ぐ啷囙い啷� 啶�啶班��啶�啷嵿じ啷囙い啷� 啶曕�囙�� 啶灌�囙い啷佮え啶� 啷� 啷оガ啷� 啷�

补诲腻迟补谤颈 punar诲腻迟腻 vij帽膩taprak峁泃膩v峁涐箛am |
pa艣c膩t pratibhuvi prete par墨pset kena hetun膩 || 161 ||

鈥淏y what means then would the creditor seek to obtain his dues, in the event of the death of the surety other than that for 鈥榩ayment,鈥� whose character is fully known?鈥濃��(161)

 

Medh膩tithi鈥檚 commentary (manubh膩峁�ya):

Having raised a question by means of the present verse, the Author answers it in the next verse: and the grounds for doubt are expressed by means of the two words 鈥�other than that for payment鈥� and 鈥�whose character is fully known鈥�;鈥攖he three words with the locative ending鈥斺��补诲腻迟补谤颈,鈥� 鈥�pratibhuvi鈥� and 鈥�惫颈箩帽腻迟补辫谤补办峁泃补耻鈥� being construed together.

鈥�By what means would the Creditor seek to obtain his dues?鈥欌赌擲hould he seek to obtain it entirely by his own operations? Or should he also urge the surety鈥檚 son?

鈥淲hy should there be any such doubt, when it has been distinctly asserted that in the case of the death of sureties other than that for payment, the sous shall not be liable?鈥攚hat connection then can the sons have with such dues?鈥� The doubt arises because the surety is one 鈥�whose character is fully known鈥�; which means that it is fully known that the man had received payment for becoming 鈥榮urety 鈥�; and this fact, being known, might give rise to the idea that his sons should be liable; since it is possible that the amount paid to the surety was for the purpose of paying off the debt in question.

The particle 鈥�辫耻苍补岣�,鈥� 鈥�then,鈥� serves to distinguish the present from the preceding verse; the meaning being鈥斺�榠f the liability falls upon the sons of the surety for payment only, then in the case of the death of one who is surety not for payment, from whom would the creditor, after his death, seek to obtain his dues?鈥�

The rest has been already explained.

鈥�笔补谤墨辫蝉腻鈥� is seeking to obtain.鈥�(101)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in 痴颈惫腻诲补谤补迟苍腻办补谤补 (p. 43), which takes it as putting the question which is answered in the next verse. It adds the following notes:鈥斺��Ad膩 tari鈥�, i.e., a surety other than the one for payment (i.e., the surety for appearance and the surety for trust),鈥攂eing 鈥�惫颈箩帽腻迟辞辫谤补办峁泃颈鈥欌赌�i.e., being known to have stood surety after having received something in pledge from the debtor; and thus having its character fully known;鈥攊f such a surety dies ,鈥斺赌�kena hetun膩鈥欌赌攂y what means鈥攊s the 鈥�诲腻迟腻鈥欌赌攖he man who advanced the loan, the creditor,鈥攖o receive back the debt? The work goes on to quote Hal膩yudha as explaining the term 鈥�惫颈箩帽补迟辞辫谤补办峁泃颈鈥檃s 鈥榖eing known that he became the lagnaka (?) on receiving a pledge鈥�, and regarding the verse as denying the creditor鈥檚 right to receive payment from the surety鈥檚 heirs on his death. But remarks that the net result of both explanations is the same.

This verse is quoted in 碍峁泃测补办补濒辫补迟补谤耻 (74a), which has the following notes:鈥斺��础诲腻迟补谤颈鈥�, a surety other than 顿腻苍补辫谤补迟颈产丑奴,鈥斺赌�诲腻迟腻鈥�, the creditor,鈥斺赌�惫颈箩帽腻迟辞辫谤补办峁泃颈鈥�, one whose solvency is well known.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 8.159-162)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.159.