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

S. IV. 9. 12-15
M. p. 88 ll. 1-35 ] RE-UNION 173
brother called here 'saṁsṛṣṭī' takes the wealth, even though he be not
reunited; by this the fact of being a full brother is itself declared to be a
cause (of taking wealth); (4) a 'saṁsṛṣṭa' i. e. one whose wealth
is reunited, but born of a different mother, does not alone take the wealth.
Hence the conclusion is that both take the wealth in equal shares, one
because he is reunited (though born of a different mother), the other
because he is a full brother (though not reunited) Manu (9. 211-212)
makes this very point clear in his section on reunited coparceners:
If the eldest or youngest of several brothers were to be deprived of his
share or if any one of them were to die, his share is not lost; but the full
brothers and reunited coparceners and the full sisters should assemble
together and should divide that share equally.
'Hīyeta' (be deprived of) means 'by entrance into another order (of
ascetics &c.), by degradation for sins and the like'.¹ The word 'sodaryāḥ'
is connected with 'brothers' (in the latter half). 'Those who are reunited'
mean the wife, the father, paternal grandfather, half brother, the paternal
uncle and the like² On this point Prajāpati states a special rule.
Whatever concealable wealth (like gold and silver) exists is taken by
the reunited members (though born of a different mother); but lands and
houses are taken according to their shares by (full brothers) though not
reunited.
'Antardhanam' means gold, silver and the like which it is possible to
conceal by being deposited underground &c.; 'saṁsṛṣṭaḥ' i. e. a reunited
member born of a different womb should take it; but full brothers should
take lands; and cows, horses and the like should be taken by brothers full
and half. This is the meaning. Madana says that a reunited coparcener
though born of a different womb, alone takes even kine, horses and the like.
But this (view) is not based on the text (of Prajāpati). In the Smṛti-
candrikā (it is said that) the full brother alone, though not reunited, takes
when what is left (by the dying member) is either concealable wealth or
land or kine and the like. The authority (or basis) for this view is ques-
tionable Among full brothers, if some are reunited and others are not
reunited, the reunited (full brothers) alone should take the wealth,
In Bindra v Mathura 6 Lucknow 456 (F. B) it is said that while the general
rule as regards reunited members is that of succession by survivorship, an exception giving
preference to uterine (sodara) brother not reunited has been engrafted to that rule and
that under the Mitākṣarā a uterine (sodara) brother though not reunited succeeds as
against the father (of the deceased) though reunited
1 The section on exclusion from inheritance below sets out the circumstances under
which a man was deprived of his share or right to inherit
2 Vide notes to V M. pp 273-275 for the varying interpretations of the two verses
of Yāj (II 138--139) and of Manu (9. 211--212),

• P. 150 (text).