Page:The Principles of Hindu Law Vol 1.djvu/90

2 they fail to do their duty, they shall certainly meet with the punishment, which follows from the very nature of the Karma or act. If a man commits a wrongful act, he should not avoid the punishment which the law imposes. If it is a sin not punishable by the king, he should perform the necessary expiatory act. If it is an act punishable by the king, he should go to him himself, and take the punishment. "Men who have committed crimes and been punished by the king, go to heaven, being pure like those who perform meritorious acts." This is in short how Law and its character are described in the Smritis.

The doctrine of Karma as mentioned above, is supposed by many to be the final sanction of law and is variously explained. According to the Mimansakas, as Colebrooke says, "the action ceases, yet the consequence does not immediately arise; a virtue meantime subsists unseen but efficacious to connect the consequence with its past and remote cause, and to bring about, at a distant period or in another world, the relative effect. That unseen virtue is termed Apurva being a relation superinduced, not before possessed." In this theory, Divine power or the power of the king was not necessary to support the law, which was based merely on the texts of the Scriptures. This philosophic doctrine, whether it owed its origin to Buddha or not, was generally accepted when Buddhism became the prevailing religion and is still one of the guiding principles of the life of a Hindu. After the downfall of Buddhism in India, the doctrine of Karma still held its sway over the minds of the learned and one of the great feats of