Manava Dharmashastra 3.113

3.113

anvāhārya darśapūrṇamāsayoḥ śrautayordakṣi[ārtvijām | yadetanmāsikaṃ śrāddhamamāvāsyāyāmetatpitṝṇām 'anvāhāryam' | yathā'nvāhāryeṇārtvijaḥ prīyante tadvatpitaraḥ śrāddhena | etena pitrarthatāṃ śrāddhasyāha | yathā'gnyādidevatāthau darśādiyāga evaṃ na śrāddhe pitaraḥ, kiṃ tarhi tadupakārārthameva śrāddham | tathā ca pitṝṇāmiti ṣaṣṭhī | kevale hi devatātve caturthyāvirahrāyogaḥ | pakṣe pāṭhāntaramarthāntaraṃ ca 'piṇḍānāṃ māsikamiti' | anvāhāryaṃ vidubu̍dhāḥ | anenāpi pitṛyajñavadavaśyakartavyatocyate | na tvidamaṅgam | tadetadāmiṣeṇa māṃsena kartavyam | praśastenāpratiṣiddhena viśeṣavihitena vā | "dvau māsau matsyamāṃsena" iti yadvakṣyati | ayaṃ ca mukhyaḥ kalpaḥ | tadabhāve dadhighṛtapayo'pūpādi vidhāṣyite | māṃsaṃ ca vyañjanam, bhaktādibhojyasya | na punaretadeva kevalaṃ bhojyaṃ, yena vakṣyati "guḍāṃśca sūpaśākādyān" tathā " yāvantaścaiva yaiścānnairiti " |
"kiṃ punaḥ śrāddhe homabrāhmaṇabhojanapiṇḍanirvapaṇādīni karmāṇi sarvāṇyeva samapradhānāni śrāddhaśabdavācyāni, uta kiñcidaṅgamatra kiñcitpradhānam" | ucyate | 'śrāddhaṃ bhojayet' - 'śrāddhaṃ bhuktamaneneti' sāmānādhikaraṇyādbrāhmaṇabhojanaṃ mukhyaṃ pratīyate | tathā cāha-

The monthly śrāddha to the Pitṛs the wise call “anvāhārya;” and it should be carefully performed with such meat as has been commended.—(123)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
‘Anvāhārya’ is the name of the fee paid to the priests officiating at the Darṣa-Pūrṇamāsa sacrifices; and the monthly śrāddha offered to the Pitṛs is the ‘Anvāhārya fee’ for the Ancestors; and the sense of the metaphor is that the Pitṛs are as much pleased on receiving the śrāddha-ofterings as the Priests are on receiving the fee. This name serves to indicate that the śrāddha is performed for the Pitṛs. But the relation in which the Ancestors stand to the śrāddha is not the same in which the Deities stand to the Darśa and other sacrifices; as the śrāddha is performed for their benefit; and it is in this sense that we have the genitive case in ‘pitṛṛṇām (pitṝṇām?)’; if the Pitṛs were the ‘deities,’ then there would be no reason for the omitting of the Dative affix.

Another reading giving a totally different sense is ‘piṇḍānām māsikam.’

‘The wise call Anvāhārya’— This also indicates the obligatory character of the Pitṛ-yajña (which is as necessary as the sacrificial gift); but with this difference that it is not a mere subordinate factor (as the sacrificial fee is).

‘It should be performed with such meat as has been comended’—i.e., not prohibited, or particularly recommended; as in 268, where it is said ‘with the meat of fish the Ancestors remain satisfied for two months, etc., etc.’

This is the principal method; in the absence of meat, curds, butter, milk, cakes, etc., shall be offered, as is going to be prescribed later on.

The meat, however, is only the sauce for the seasoning of such food as cooked rice and the like; it does not consti-tute a food by itself, since the text is going to describe ‘such subsidiaries us soup and vegetables, etc.’ (226), and also ‘on what kinds of food, etc.’ (next verse).—(123)

The question that arises now is that the śrāddha consisting of the several acts of (a) oblations in fire, (b) feeding of Brāhmaṇas, (c) offering of hulls of food, and so forth,—are they all equally principal and expressible by the name ‘śrāddha?’ Or, some are principal and some secondary? The answer is that, in view of suoh expressions as—‘one should feed Brāhmaṇas in śrāddha,’ ‘this man has eaten at the śrāddha,’ and so forth, where ‘feeding’ and ‘śrāddha’ are spoken of as synonyms,—the ‘feeding of Brāhmaṇas appears to be the principal factor.’ To the same end our Author says—