WYAVASTHA-DARPANA. 978 But this must be understood in respect to an adoption taking place within the primary season for the rite in question, which extends to the eighth year.”—D. C. Sect. II. § 28. “Oh! Lord of the earth, a son having been regularly initiated, under the family name of A contrary opinion his (natural) father, unto the ceremony of tonsure, does not become the son of another nian, when ** أن لا indeed, the ceremony of tonsure and other rites of initiation (Chiididyā-sanskárà) are performed (by the adopter,) under his own family name, (then only) can sons given, and the rest, be considered as issue: else they are termed slaves. Whether he be one, whose initiation has been completed, or one whose pupilago (Shoikara) has passed, on adoption, aster the fifth year, the adopter should first perform the sacrifice for male issue.” As for what, they thus read as from the Paránas that is unauthentic.—Were it even authentic, still the interpretations given by some, that, 'one mitiated in ceremonies down to that of tonsure, under the family name of the natural father, hears no filial relation to the adopter; but such relation obtains, where the ceremonies, commencing with that of tonsure, are performed by the adopter only,'—and—of a child, whose tonsure has heen completed (by the natural father,) or one past five years of age, he adopted, in that case, his filial relation does not accrue,'—are inaccurate. For, a repetition (of the Haine position, in two sentences of the same passage,) would follow:—the generally received rule, as recognised by all good persons, in respect to the filial relation, previous to the investiture of the characteristic thread, of one, also, adopted under five years of age; (if uninitiated in tonsure by the natural father,) would be invali lated,—and the adopter dying at that juncture, incompetency (of the adopted, to perform his obsequies would result—s). Ch, Sect. II. § 25, 20.
On the contrary, this is the meaning of the passage:–Filill relation (to the adopter) of one initiated down to tonsure, under the family name of his matural father, being first barrod, on the repetition of that ceremony, and the rost, such relation is exempted from the prohibition: and accordingly, since previous to the performance of tonsure, and the other rites, by the adopter, the servile state of one initiated (by his natural father unto that ceremony, ) and of him, who has passed his fifth year, is intimated: aster the performunro of that ceremony, and the rest, (by the adopter, ) filial relation to him is established. In respect to one, whose initiation has not been performed (by his natural father,) and a child who is under five years of age, this relation is obtained by law alone; and this is notorious.-D. Ch. Sect. II. § 27. Or there may be this interpretation;– a son, (if adopted, ) though initiated as far as tonsure, by his natural father, is not a son (to such father):’—the author having thus premised such son not to be filially related (to his natural father,)—the sentence 'ayatau-cha pattratán yáti (meaning ‘and he acquires filial relation to another') is subjoined as a reason, and thus the objection, that one term, 'putrak' (son,) and the particle ‘cha' are unmeaning, is obviated.— D. Ch. Sect. II. § 28,
- ‘Extending to the eighth year’—This is the primary season for the to and of a Βάιπεια, the ੰ for the opanayasa of I; and Pοίείναι within the eleventh and twelvth years calculated from their conceptions; as will be known from the **t of Mans hereinster cited 凱 the term 'eighth 盟" meant the eighth year from the dato of conception; this also is clear from the same text of Mons. -
