Shloka 15
Varṇasaṃkara: Causes, Classifications, and Conduct-based Recognition (वर्णसंकरः—हेतु-जाति-आचारनिर्णयः)
दौहित्रकेण धर्मेण नाज पश्यामि कारणम् । विक्रीतासु हि ये पुत्रा भवन्ति पितुरेव ते,जो कन्याएँ मूल्य लेकर बेच दी गयी हों उनसे उत्पन्न होनेवाले पुत्र केवल अपने पिताके ही उत्तराधिकारी होते हैं। उन्हें दौहित्रक धर्मके अनुसार नानाके धनका अधिकारी बनानेके लिये कोई युक्तिसंगत कारण मैं नहीं देखता
dauhitrakeṇa dharmeṇa nāhaṁ paśyāmi kāraṇam | vikrītāsu hi yāḥ kanyāḥ tāsu jāyante ye sutāḥ pitur eva te ||
Bhishma said: “I see no reasonable ground for applying the ‘dauhitraka’ rule here. For when daughters have been given away for a price, the sons born of them belong only to their father; therefore there is no just basis to make them heirs to the maternal grandfather’s wealth under the dauhitraka principle.”
भीष्म उवाच
Educational Q&A
Bhishma argues that the dauhitraka principle (inheritance through a daughter’s son) should not be invoked when the daughter has been transferred for a price; in such a case, the son is treated as belonging solely to the father’s line, so claiming the maternal grandfather’s property lacks justification.
In Anushasana Parva’s dharma-discourse, Bhishma is clarifying rules of kinship and inheritance. Here he rejects extending a daughter’s-son inheritance claim to a situation involving a ‘sold’ daughter, emphasizing how the mode of marriage/transfer affects lineage and property rights.