युधिष्ठिर उवाच ब्रूहि तात कुरुश्रेष्ठ वर्णानां त्वं पृथक् पृथक। कीदृश्यां कीदृशाश्चापि पुत्राः कस्य च के च ते॥
Yudhishthira said Describe to us, O sire, the orders and classes separately, what kind of son is begotten on what women, who is entitled to have whom for sons, and what kinds of sons are there.
विप्रवादाः सुबहवः श्रूयन्ते पुत्रकारिताः। अत्र नो मुह्यतां राजन् संशयं छेत्तुमर्हसि॥
It is known that disputes frequently take place about sons. You should, O king, remove the doubts of our mind. Indeed, we are stupefied about this subject.
भीष्म उवाच आत्मा पुत्रश्च विज्ञेयस्तस्यानन्तराश्च यः। निरुक्तजश्च विज्ञेयः सुतः प्रसृतजस्तथा॥
Bhishma said One's own begotten son considered as his own self. The son that is begotten upon one's wife by a person whom he has invited for it, if called Niruktaja. The son that is begotten upon one's wife by somebody without his permission, is Prasritaja.
पतितस्य तु भार्याया भर्ना सुसमवेतया। तथा दत्तकृतौ पुत्रावध्यूढच तथापरः॥
The son begotten upon his own wife by a person degraded from his positions is called Patitaja. There are two other, sons, viz., the son given, and the son made. There is another called Adhyuda.
षडपध्वंसजाश्चापि कानीनापसदास्तथा। इत्येते वै समाख्यातास्तान् विजानीहि भारत॥
The son born of a maiden in her father's house is called Kanina. Besides these, there are six kinds of sons called Apadhwansaja and six others that are called Apasadas. These are the several kind of sons mentioned in the scriptures, know, O Bharata. are
युधिष्ठिर उवाच षडपध्वंसजाः के स्युः के वाप्यपसदास्तथा। एतत् सर्वं यथातत्त्वं व्याख्यातुं मे त्वमर्हसि॥
Yudhishthira said Who the six that are called Apadhvansaja? Who also are the Apasadas? You should fully explain all this to me.
भीष्म उवाच त्रिषु वर्णेषु ये पुत्रा ब्राह्मणस्य युधिष्ठिर। वर्णयोश्च द्वयोः स्यातां यौ राजन्यस्य भारत।॥ एको विड्वर्ण एवाथ तथात्रैवोपलक्षितः। घडपध्वंसजास्ते हि तथैवासपदाशृणु॥
Bhishma said The sons that a Brahmana begets upon wives taken from the three inferior castes, those begotten by a Kshatriya upon wives taken from the two castes inferior to his own, O Bharata, and the sons that a Vaishya begets upon a wife taken from the one caste that is inferior to his,-are all called Apadhvansas. ! They are, as thus explained, of six kinds. Listen now to me as I tell you who the Apasadas are.
चाण्डालो व्रात्यवैद्यौ च ब्राह्मण्यां क्षत्रियासु च। वैश्यायां चैव शूद्रस्य लक्ष्यन्तेऽपसदास्त्रयः॥
The son that a Shudra begets upon a Brahmani woman is called a Chandala. Begotten upon a Kshatriya woman by a person of the Shudra order, the son is called a Vratye.। He who is born of a Vaishya woman by a Shudra father is called a Vaidya. These three kinds of sons are called Apasada.
मागधो वामकश्चैव द्वौ वैश्यस्पोलक्षितौ। ब्राह्मण्यां क्षत्रियायां च क्षत्रियस्यैक एव तु॥
The Vaishya, by knowing a woman of the Brahmana order, begets a son that is called a Magadha, while the son that he begets upon a Kshatriya woman is called a Vamaka, The। Kshatriya can beget but one kind of son of upon a woman of a superior caste.
ब्राह्मण्यां लक्ष्यते सूत इत्येतेऽपसदाः स्मृताः। पुत्रा ह्येते न शक्यन्ते मिथ्याकर्तुं नराधिप॥
Indeed, the son begotten by a Kshatriya upon a Brahmana woman, is called a Suta. These three also are called Apasadas. It cannot be said, O king, that these six kinds of sons are no sons.
युधिष्ठिर उवाच क्षेत्र केचिदेवाहुः सुतं केचित्तु शुक्रजम्। तुल्यावेतौ सुतौ कस्य तन्मे ब्रूहि पितामह॥
Yudhishthira said Some say that one's son is he, who is born in his soil. Some, on the other hand, say that one's son is he who has been begotten from his seed. Are both these kinds of sons equal? Whose, again, is the son to be? Do you tell me, this, O grandfather.
भीष्म उवाच रेतजो वा भवेत् पुत्रस्त्यक्तो वा क्षेत्रजो भवेत्। अध्यूढः समयं भित्त्वेत्येतदेव निबोध मे॥
Bhishma said His is the son from whose seed he has sprung. If, however, the owner of the seed discards the son born of it, such son then becomes his upon whose wife he has been begotten. The same rule applies to the son called Adhyuda. He belongs to the person from whose seed he has sprung. If, however, the owner of the seed forsakes him, he becomes the son of the husband of his mother. Know this is what the law declares.
युधिष्ठिर उवाच रेतजं विद्य वै पुत्रं क्षेत्रजस्यागमः कथम्। अध्यूढं विद्म वै पुत्रं भित्त्वा तु समयं कथम्॥
Yudhishthira said We know that the son becomes his from whose seed he has taken birth. Whence does the husband of the woman who gives birth to the son derive his right to the latter? Likewise the son called Adhyuda should be known to be the son of him from whose seed he has sprung. How can they be the sons of others on account of the engagement about owning and rearing them having been broken?
भीष्म उवाच आत्मजं पुत्रमुत्पाद्य यस्त्यजेत् कारणान्तरे। न तत्र कारणं रेतः स क्षेत्रस्वामिनो भवेत्॥
Bhishma said Fie who, having begotten a son of his own loins: forsakes him for some reason or other, cannot be considered as the father of such son, for vital seed only cannot create sonship. Such son must be held to belong to the person who is the master of the soil.
पुत्रकामो हि पुत्रार्थं यां वृणीते विशाम्पते। क्षेत्रजं तु प्रमाणं स्यान्न वै तत्रात्मजः सुतः॥
When a man, desiring to have a son, marries a girl quick with child, the son born of his wife must belong to him, for it is the fruit of his own soil. The person from whose vital seed the son has sprung, can have no right to such son.
अन्यत्र क्षेत्रजः पुत्रो लक्ष्यते भरतर्षभ। न ह्यात्मा शक्यते हन्तुं दृष्टान्तोपगतो ह्यसौ॥
The son who is born in one's soil but not begotten by the owner, O chief of Bharata's race, bears all the marks of the father that has actually begotten him. The son thus born is incapable of concealing the evidences of physiognomy. He is at He is at once known by eyesight.
क्वचिच्च कृतकः पुत्रः संग्रहादेव लक्ष्यते। न तत्र रेतः क्षेत्रं वा यत्र लक्ष्येत भारत॥
As regards the son made, he is sometimes considered as the child of the person who has made him a son and who brings him up. In his case, neither the vital seed of which he has been born nor the soil in which he has been born, becomes the cause of sonship.
युधिष्ठिर उवाच कीदृशः कृतकः पुत्रः संग्रहादेव लक्ष्यते। शुक्रं क्षेत्रं प्रमाणं वा यत्र लक्ष्यं न भारत॥
Yudhishthira said What kind of son is that who is said to be a made son and whose sonship originates from the fact of his being taken and reared, and in whose case neither the vital seed nor the soil of birth, O Bharata, is caused as the cause of sonship.
भीष्म उवाच मातापितृभ्यां यस्त्यक्तः पथि यस्तं प्रकल्पयेत्। न चास्य मातापितरौ ज्ञायेतां स हि कृत्रिमः॥
Bhishnia said When one takes up and rears a son who has been cast off on the road by his father and mother, and when the person thus taking and rearing him cannot find out his parents after search, he becomes the father of such son and the latter becomes what is called his made son.
अस्वामिकस्य स्वामित्वं यस्मिन् सम्प्रति लक्ष्यते। यो वर्ण: पोषयेत् तं च तद्वर्णस्तस्य जायते॥
Not having anybody to own him, he becomes his who rcars hiin. Such son, again, comes to be considered as belonging to that castes to which his owner or rearer belongs.
युधिष्ठिर उवाच कथमस्य प्रयोक्तव्यः संस्कारः कस्य वा कथम्। देया कन्या कथं चेति तन्मे ब्रूहि पितामह॥
Yudhishthira said How should the purifactory rites of such a person be performed? In whose case that sort of rites are to be performed? With what girl should he be married? Tell me all this, O grandfather.
भीष्म उवाच आत्मवत् तस्य कुर्वीत संस्कारं स्वामिवत् तथा। त्यक्तो मातापितृभ्यां यः सवर्ण प्रतिपद्यते॥
Bhishma said The rites of purification for such a son should be performed according to the usage of the person himself who rears him, for, renounced by his parents, such son gets the caste of the person who takes him and rears him.
तद्गोत्रबन्धुजं तस्य कुर्यात् संस्कारमच्युत। अथ देया तु कन्या स्यात् तद्वर्णस्य युधिष्ठिर।॥
Indeed, O you of unfading glory, the rearer should perform all the purificatory rites for such son according to the practices of his own family and kinsmen. As regards the girl also, O Yudhishthira, that should be bestowed in marriage upon such a son, she should belong to the caste of the rearer himself.
संस्कर्तुं वर्गगोत्रं च मातृवर्णविनिश्चये। कानीनाध्यूढजौ वापि विज्ञेयौ पुत्र किल्बिषौ॥
All this is to be done only when the caste of the son's true mother cannot be learnt. Among sons, he who is born of a maiden and he who is born of a mother who had conceived before her marriage but brought nim forth subsequent to that act, are considered as very disgraceful and degraded.
तावपि स्वाविव सुतौ संस्कार्याविति निश्चयः। श्रेत्रजो वाप्यपसदो येऽध्यूढास्तेषु चाप्युत॥ आत्मवद् वै प्रयुञ्जीरन् संस्कारान् ब्राह्मणादयः। धर्मशास्त्रेषु वर्णानां निश्चयोऽयं प्रदृश्यते॥ एतत् ते सर्वमाख्यातं किं भूयः श्रोतुमिच्छसि॥
Even these two, however, should receive the same rites of purification that sanctioned for the sons begotten by the father in lawful marriage. In respect of the son who becomes his fathers on account of his birth in the father's soil, and of those sons who are called Apsadas, and those conceived by the wife in her maidenhood but brought forth after marriage, Brahmanas and others should apply the same rites of purification that are in vogue in their own castes. These are the conclusions that are seen in the scriptures about the different castes. I have thus told you everything of your questions. What else do you wish to hear?