Varṇasaṃkara: Causes, Classifications, and Conduct-based Recognition (वर्णसंकरः—हेतु-जाति-आचारनिर्णयः)
दौहित्रकेण धर्मेण नाज पश्यामि कारणम् । विक्रीतासु हि ये पुत्रा भवन्ति पितुरेव ते
dauhitrakeṇa dharmeṇa nāhaṁ paśyāmi kāraṇam | vikrītāsu hi yāḥ kanyāḥ tāsu jāyante ye sutāḥ pitur eva te ||
Bhishma dit : «Je ne vois aucune raison valable d’appliquer ici la règle ‘dauhitraka’. Car lorsque des filles ont été données contre un prix, les fils nés d’elles n’appartiennent qu’à leur père ; dès lors, il n’y a pas de base juste pour en faire les héritiers des biens du grand-père maternel selon le principe dauhitraka.»
भीष्म उवाच
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.