व्यवहारमयूख (नीलकण्ठ भट्ट - पश्चिमी भारत की हिन्दू न्याय-संहिता एवं व्यवहार कोष)

S. IV. 7. 24-26 ] PARTITION 143
M. p 72 l. 16-p. 73 l 5 ]
that is discovered after partition should be divided by them again in equal
shares; this is the settled rule
Anyonyapāhṛtam means 'concealed by the eldest from the youngest
and the like' (i e vice versa). As to the text of Manu (9 213)
He, who, being the eldest, would defraud his younger brothers through
greed, shall lose his position as eldest, shall be deprived of his share and
shall be punished by the king¹
there also the word jyeṣṭha implies (i. e it is merely illustrative and
includes) every sharer in the heritage on the analogy of the maxim of the
staff and the cakes, the meaning being 'even the eldest incurs blame
(when he defrauds), what of younger brothers' (i. e they will be much more
blamable) Hence Gautama² says. 'him who keeps a sharer off from his
share, he (the defrauded sharer) destroys; if he does not destroy him (the
defrauding sharer), he destroys his son or grandson.' Bhāginam means
'him who is entitled to a share'; bhāgāt nudate means 'deprives of a share'.
That man who is so deprived destroys (cayate) him (enam) i e him who
so deprives (or usurps) If he does not destroy him, then he destroys his
son or grandson This is the meaning.
Nārada³ says
The wealth acquired by a separated man belongs to him alone; but as to
what is found after being stolen or lost and the property mentioned before,
there shall again be a division
Prāg-uktam refers to property concealed by some one from among the

---

1. i e he will not be honoured as eldest and, according to Kullūka, will lose his regular
   and special (uddhāra) share.
   Māndlik's explanation of this maxim (p 72n 5) is entirely wrong He says that in
   Southern India cakes are carried after being tied to a stick and 'when a cake is asked for, the
   servant brings the stick, whereby he leaves it to the master to choose any he likes (p 72n 5).'
   Apūpas are preparations of flour and ghee. If they were placed on a stick and if any one were
   to say 'that the stick was gnawed by a mouse', one would infer as a matter of course from
   this announcement that the temptingly flavoury (and very soft as compared with the stick)
   apūpas placed on the stick must have been devoured by the mouse. This maxim is very
   frequently cited in works on rhetoric. The Mit. employs it in its comment on Yāj II. 126
   Vide notes to V M pp 221-22
   2 Nīl follows the Mit in ascribing this quotation to Gautama It is however not
   found in the printed Gautama It is from the Aitareya-brāhmaṇa (II 1. 7) and the Parāśara
   mādhavīya and the Vīr. correctly call it a s'ruti. Vide Krishnabai v Khangowda 18 Bom.
   197 (where it was held that a partition effected without reserving any share for a minor
   member of the family and without the consent of some one authorized to act on his behalf is
   'invalid as against the minor)
   3 This is not found in the printed Nārada and the Smṛticandrikā ascribes it to Kātyā-
   yana and connects it with another verse of Kātyāyana. 'Whatever property is concealed from
   each other and what is inequitably divided should be again divided equally when afterwards
   found out, according to Bhṛgu'. Vide Maruti v Rama 21 Bom. 883 and Ganesh Lal v.
   Babu Lal, 40 All 374 as to reopening of partition

• P. 132 (text).