VYA V ASTI{A-DARPANA.. 97.2 SECTION V l l I. —AGE of the Boy To BE Apoptop. The proper age for adoption has been differently defined by the authorities who have written on the law of adoption. The author of the Duttaka-Mimántá, citing the following texts as of the Kiliki-purána, has acquiesced in the doctrine therein inculcated, adding, however, by way of axplanation of the text No. 2, that the son adopted after having been initiated under the family name of his natural father does not exclusively become the son of the adopter, but is : //eyánushyāyatt, or son of two fathers.--"Sons given and the rest, though sprung from the seed of another, yet being duly initiated under his own family name, become sons (1). () Lord of the earth, a son, having been initiated under the family name of his father, unto the ceremony of tonsure inclusive, does not become the son of another man (2). The ceremony of tonsure and other rites (chú ládvii ) of initiation being indeed performed under his own family name, sons given and the rest may be considered as issue:* else, they are termed slaves (3). After their fifth year, () king ' sons given and the rest, are not sons. ( But ) having taken a boy five years old, the adopter should first perform the sacrifice for male issue.f–1). Miin. Sect. IV. § 22, (?) He does not become exclusively the son of another, but is a Duyámushyāyana, or son of two fathers.-1). M im. Seet. VI, § 13. /.../human.' to a too has cited the same passage as from the Adliki-purána ; and he and hi1ollowers have construed the passage as an unqualified prohibition of the adoption of a youth of child, whose age exceeds five years, and especially one whose initiatory rites, as far as tonsure inclusive, have been performed in the family of his natural father.t According to Jagannātha, the compiler of the Digest, the said passage constitutes an alsolute prohibition of any adoption whatsoever, of one whose age exceeds five years, or on whom the initiatory rite of tonsure may have been performed in the family of his natural father.; Aud, in a case $ in which the adoption of one older than five years was contended to be illega}, on the opinion of its Putdiss ( declaring, on the authority of the Aéliki-purána, the :أو، 1) نادرر، ألم such person to be legal, ) the Sudder Dewanny Atlawlut appears to have determined the following: » Th · foiłowing appears to be the doctrine of Mundu Pitndita, from his elaborate and infriente gło-- o:; the passa : ' r-:':;'i t o. which is attributa d to the Kiliki-puritna. The most preferable object, for adoption is child, wholly uninitiated: his filial relation proceeds from the performance, by the adopter, of .nitiatory ritos. Next in rank to him is one initiated as far as tonsure exclusive, for the performat, " of which the period from the third to the fifth year is prescribed. Inferior, as an oljevi , f adopta,fi s one whose tonsure hit been performed by his natural father, who, provided he he under ox yearof age, inay be adopted, not acquires filial relation to the adopter, on the performance, by that person. of the different initiator: rites, preceded by a sacrifice for male issue (putr, shti, ) Such oil, fron, his having teen initiatod in ton-ore atid other rites, in both familief. is a 19tryūmushyāyana, or son M ‘wo father-. It is to be observed, that Manda Pandita, in the abstrus' gloss noticed, seeing to have betrayed himself in to an inconsistency. According to his explanation, is the boy, proposed to be adopted. has not been initiated in the rite of tonsure by his natural father, he cannot be adopted after having attained his fifth year : it however, he has been so initiated, he may be affiliated, ( provided he be und, r or years of age, ) a sacrifice and so forth being observed, as already noticed. --Sutherland's Synopris, N. : : X I
- See I). Mini. Sect. I W. § 22, note. Mitikshari, ('oleb ('h. I. Seet. XI. § 13, note.
- ; See Sutherland 5 Synopsis, Head second. § 7. § Keerut Naraen v Bhoobunessury S I) A マ・2, р. 161 7 f
