Proof Before the King
How should a court find out what happened between two people who both claim to be right? The answer decides whether law rests on evidence a judge can weigh or on a sign from the gods.
The second book turns dharma into court procedure before the king and his assessors. Its order of proof is explicit: written documents, possession and witnesses first, an ordeal only where all of these fail. Around it stand rules precise enough to apply, from the interest a lender may charge to the order in which heirs take a sonless man's estate, with the widow and daughters first. Even a king's failures are accounted for, since fate is said to be nothing but his own effort from a former life.
- law
- evidence
- criminal law
- punishment
- kingship
- inheritance
- property
- family law
- debt
Enter a dialogue
- Documents, possession and witnesses are the means of proof, you rule, and trial by ordeal comes only where all three fail. Why keep the ordeal at all?
- When a man dies without a son, his wife comes first among the heirs, then his daughters. Why should the widow inherit ahead of his parents and brothers?
- A king works hard and still his plans fail. Is that fate, or, as you hold, simply his own effort from an earlier life coming due?
- A lender holding a pledge may charge one-eightieth of the loan each month. Why does a book about dharma, right conduct, bother to fix an interest rate?