Verse 8.228

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

यस्मिन् यस्मिन् कृते कार्ये यस्येहानुशयो भवेत् ।
तमनेन विधानेन धर्म्ये पथि निवेशयेत् ॥ २२८ ॥

yasmin yasmin kṛte kārye yasyehānuśayo bhavet |
tamanena vidhānena dharmye pathi niveśayet || 228 ||

Whenever any person should have repentance in regard to any compact that has been entered into—the king shall bring him to the righteous path, in the manner just described.—(228)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

The law relating to rescission within ten days is not restricted to transactions among tradesmen; it is applicable also to compacts relating to wages, interest and other kinds of transaction. The repetition of the pronoun in the phrase ‘yasmin yasmin’ indicates that all kinds of transaction are meant to be included.

This is an example of ‘extended application.’

When a compact has been entered into, and the work agreed upon has been commenced, then it is that repentance sets in. When a compact has been entered into verbally, the parties should therefore wait for ten days, to see if there is repentance on either side.

In a case however where after money has been borrowed on interest, or a priest has been appointed, and the wages have been paid,—if a quarrel arises in regard to the terms of the compact,—then this case does not come within the rule here laid down;—so say some people; on the ground that what has been done cannot be undone.

This however is not right. It is only when a work has been completed that it is regarded as ‘done,’—and not only when it has been begun; because the past-participial affix in the term ‘done’ does not connote commencement (but accomplishment), and there is no ground for rejecting its primary connotation. As for the argument that ‘what has been done cannot be undone’;—as a matter of fact, even when an act has been done, if there is any obstruction in the way of the due appearance of its effects, it is regarded to be as good as ‘undone.’ For instance, when the food that has been eaten is thrown out.

Even in the case of ordinary things of the world, when they are found to be amenable to the rules laid down in the scriptures, promulgation or revocation must proceed on these same scriptural lines. Hence even though the things may have become accomplished, there may be revocation. Consequently, even after a money-transaction has been completed and the money has been taken home by the borrower, it shall be brought back, if either party shows signs of repentance. If there has been any deterioration or expenditure, these shall he borne by the party concerned, in accordance with the law laid down in the scriptures. It is for this reason that some people hold that by merely receiving the loan, the borrower becomes liable to a month’s interest.

In cases of mortgage also—when things are mortgaged on the understanding that they shall he used for a stipulated time,—tho transaction is revoked if there is repentance within ten days. As regards the appointment of priests, it is like the marriage of girls. There can be revocation after ten days only when there had been a compact; but only if there is another scriptural text bearing on this subject.—(228)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 191), which adds the following notes:—‘Yasmin yasmin’, the repetition of this general pronoun implies that even in transactions other than sales,—such as loan and so forth,—if there is ‘desire to withdraw’ or ‘repentance’, the same rules are to be followed as those laid down in connection with the Rescission of Sales,—such as returning, receiving back, fine of 600 paṇas and so forth, in accordance with the circumstances of each case; ‘anena,’ i.e., by the method Laid down in connection with the Rescission of Sales and Purchases;—in Vivādacintāmaṇi (p. 88);—and in Kṛtyakalpataru (108b).