VY A VASTHA- DA IR PANA 84.4 It appears that the twelve sons enumerated by Manu have been reckoned as thiite, i. by enumeratin: the appointed daughter as distinct from the legitimate son of the body, which two have been reckoned by Hann to be one and the same in essert, and expressed by the to in part« 1. ' ( Se » H t t u, Ch. l X. r. 1:}t}, } } }, ] 3:3. ) A. ording to the calculation of some authorities, the number of sons, including the aurava, is extended even to fifteen, as in the following text of law quoted in the 11a//ot mousá:- “ I. The legitim to son, 2. the appointed daughter, 3. the son begotten on another's wife, 4. the son of the wife, 5, the son of an appointed daughter, 6. the son of a twice married woman, 7. the daimsel’s son, S, the son received with (in the womb of ) a pregnant bride, (), the son of hidden origin, (). LL SAAAAS ALL SLLS 00S LLSLL LLLL LLLLLS 0S LLLS LLLL SLLLLLLLS 0S LLLS LS L LLLL LLS 00S LLLLLLLLLL LLLS un..! ! ... one b., rn of a woul in of nuknown cast.", --are the fifteen sons of a man.” (Sect. I I, § 57. These plus the son of a S/4 ori amount to sixteen. But the appointed daughter and the son of au appointed daughter being reckoned to be one, and the son begotten on another's wife and the son of the wise being assumed to be one, and the son of a Shudrá woman, and the one born of an unknown easte, being omittel, sons are principally enum rated to be two ivo,” is sp 'cified by Já//ara/ya. --See au/e, p. 812. The author of the Du//aka-mináns í has in the following words concluded the nurnber of the sons to be twelve : “lt is established, that there is no contradiction of the number twelve; for the several enumerations in each authority are consistent ; since, in some, particular sons are implied, and in others, expressed.”—Sect. 2, § 58.
- () it of the ten lists, exhibited in the Dixot, the an' hors of three only, besides Manu, included the Shou let ( the s , , of a Shu sci w on an, in arrie 1 or unin irriol, oy any other than a Shūtra father ) as on" CLS LLS 0SSL SLS S 0SL S0 SLS L S S tt SSSS LS0SL SLL LS0 S tt LL LS00S LLLL LSS LLSS000SaaaGGGGS CtStaaaS an the Kiliki-pur in t t , ; other with JIt tu, omitting the Patriktopustra, as being identified with th: 5 on born in w: it ok, whi-h Sunkh and Lokhita a imit : the latter omitting the Aritriota, or bon nì ti ”, as in:łu i: l ( it may be ) in the Dattaka, or son given.
Pishnu as well as 1st not makes the son of a Shūiri won in the twelvesh, calling him “a son an v how LSLLSSL LS SSLLLLSLLS 00S LL LLLLLLL aaGG 0S LLS AA SLLLSLL LL SL LLS LLL LLLL SG LCCCLLS LLLLLLLLL LLL un married, by a in in of the priestly class. --So that, however competent to consor swine briefits on his Pu', ‘tive father, he was even dograd 'd as a corps', though alive, and thence ( in law ) called “a living co,” so.” It is for these reas ons that he is not ret'; 'u'll as a son by the oth or logislators, Sr., Astant, çli. I II. r. 15, 1i}. Ca. IX, v. 178. Caleb, Dig, vol. I : 1, pp. 117, 19, 1 : 1, 2s3, 281. Str. H. I. vol II. pp. 184, 185. The author of tha D tttak 1-mí míns í savs : “The torm "given" is inclusive also of the son« made ( kritrint, } on as ount of a text of Ptrixart, on the occasion of treating on the law of the kali age, which express : 3, . Ta , son of th : l, , lv ( o tra ; , ) the son of the wife, also the son given, the son made, *::" ( D. Mon. So it. I, § 67. ) To a loption of a son in the kritrima form is how over, current in 4fili: lass the al poin in tha', for n h is not been recognised or legalised in the Dattaka Chandriká *d the other leading authorities of this country.
