VYAVA STHAT. DARPANA 299 Authority:VRIIIAspatr;—“Decision must not be made solely by having recourse to the letter of written codes, since, if no decision were made according to the reason of the law, there might be a failure of justice.” August 5th, 1817. Maon. H. L. Vol. II. Ch. I. Sec. VII. case III. (pp. 101, 102). Q. A religious mendicant died, leaving no heir; but there is a person who calls himself the pupil of the same spiritual teacher with the deceased, and alleges that he is therefore entitled to the succession. Is such person recognised as a brother by the fraternity of mendicants P ]R. There is no provision in the Dasyabhaiga and other works of law that, on the death of a religious mcmdicant, his spiritual teacher's pupil has the right of succession to his estate, and there is no relationship between them; but the person who becomes a follower of the spiritual teacher is universally termed a religious brother by the fraternity of devotees. If such person attend the deceased on the point of death, and perform his exeguial rites, and if the spiritual teacher himself disclaim all right of suc cession, such religious brother is entitled to the inheritance. This doctrine is justified by universal usage. Macn. FI. I,. Vol. II. Ch. I. Sec. 7, p. 101. GOBINDA DA"S versus RATMSAHAY JAMATDA R AND OTHERS, - 3rd August 1843. The promovent filed his libel, alleging that he was the cheld or disciple and legal representative in estate, according to the laws and usages of Hindus, of one Måkan Dās, deceased, a Hindu Boiragi or religious devotee. To this libel an exceptive allegation was filed, dissenting from the promovent's being allowed to proceed further with the cause, for that he was a person having no interest in the subject matter of the suit, inasmuch as a chelū of a Hindu Boiraiyi does not, as such, succeed to the property of such a Boiraiyi in the event of intestacy. - Zeith and Fulton in support of the allegation.—For the purposes of this argument, we must assumi. that the deceased was a Boirdogs or religious devotee, and the promovent his cheli or disciple. Such a promovent would not succeed in the event of intestacy. Hindus are divided into four classes, of which the tiaree higher classes (viz. Brothmana, Kshatriya, and Poisya.) are called twice born classes, and the fourth Shiodra. For the members of the twicc-born classes there are three religious orders, into which they may enter if they wish to partake of the divine essence after death. To the Shitdra the privilege of entering a religious order is denied. The three religious orders into which the twice-born classes may enter are those of the Bấnaprastha (or hermit), the Sanyású or Jati (the ascetic), and the Brahmackdrý (religious student). The whole of the authorities refer to a passage of JAGNvAvALkra, where such is laid down to be the law, and clearly shew that the wealth of a Bosnaprastha is inherited by his dharmaBhrátreka-tírthina (or holy brother of the same hermitage), that of a jati or yati by his sat-shishya (or virtuous approved pupil), and that of a Bramachdiri by his 4 chdiriya (or spiritual guide.) Now the term Boirági simply means a person who restrains his passions. It is not a name descriptive of one of the religious orders, of which a man must be a member in order that his goods may be inherited by others than his blood relations. Any one may be a JBoiraiyi, be he a Shitdra or a member of the twice-born classes. The housc-holder Boirdogi is well known amongst the Hindus, and goods are inherited by his blood relations. Brahmachári is a Boirági according to MANU. When used in a more technical sense, the term Boirági is applied to the followers of Ramónanda, whereas the yafi referred to in the above text of Ja'asyavaikva is the Tritandi Sanytisis, a sect who follow the doctrines of Rámùnuja, which are different from those of Rümdimanda. 蠍
- The above opinion is doubtless correct, though the authority cited in support of it appears wholly irrelevant. The នុ៎ះ passage of the Dáyabhāga justifies the exposition of law as given in reply to the question. “The goods of a hermit, of an ascetic, and of a professed student, let the spiritual brother, the virtuous pupil, and the holy preceptor take. On failure of these, the associate in holiness, or person belonging to the same order, shall inherit.”—Dáyabhāga, page 223.
f Asiatic Researches, Vol. XVI. p. a 34. Y 3
