It may be asked, how should the property of a father be distributed among his children? While the Dáyabhága⁽¹⁾ system should be adopted everywhere, the rights of female children have to be safeguarded by giving them equal shares with their brothers so that they may not have to lead a life in penury if they become widowed. However, daughters may only enjoy this property during their lifetimes and they should not have the right of ownership. If they have no children, after they die the property should revert back to their brothers or their brothers’ children.

The universe is our common patrimony. This patrimony has to be managed by the Proutists because others may suffer from selfish sentiments or groupism. To enjoy a right and to enjoy the right of management are not the same thing. Since human beings are mostly followers and not leaders, the right of management should be vested in a select few. In every sphere of life – social, economic, political, etc. – a very few intellectual-cum-intuitional workers should have the right to manage property and to safeguard the rights of others.

Each and every individual has the inborn right to enjoy our common patrimony, the mundane property. Anyone who violates this fundamental law is a vested interest. Nobody should be allowed to go against this patrimony. If anybody does so, they should be cured of their psychic ailments. The process of curing them may be termed dharma yuddha [the war for dharma].

Footnotes

(1) In the Dáyabhága system the heirs’ right of inheritance is subject to the discretion of the father. Another feature of this system is the rights of inheritance for women. For a more detailed discussion of the author’s views on inheritance, see pp. 154-156. –Trans.