Manava Dharmashastra 3.238.4

3.238.4

yadapi yājñavalkyavacanaṃ ( ācāre 256 ślo0 ) ‘‘mṛtāhani tu kartavyaṃ pratimāsaṃ tu vatsaram | pratisaṃvatsaraṃ caivamādyamekādaśe'hani’’|| tatrāpyevametādṛśītikartavyatā ucyate | tatrāpi hyamāvāsyameva prakṛtatvenāvagatam | ato na māsakālayoro'pi ekoddiṣṭe tadīyadharmātideśo'nyatrayuktaḥ | na hi bhikṣuko bhikṣukādyācate | so'pi yato'nyasya vikāraḥ | kiṃca ekameva śrāddham | tasmānna māsikaśabdasya sāmānyasyaikoddiṣṭaviśeṣaviṣayatāyāṃ pramāṇamasti | yājñavalkye'pyevamiti | yadyananparāmarśaḥ tadā sapiṇḍīkaraṇetikartavyatātideśaḥ prāpnoti | tadanantaraṃ hyetacchrutam | etatsapiṇḍīkaraṇamiti (yājñava0 ācāra 254) paṭhitvā'‘rvāksapiṇḍīkaraṇāditi (yājña0 ā0 255)’, ca tato'nantaramuktam ‘‘mṛtāhanītyādi ( yājña0 ā0 256 )’’ | tasmātsannidhānamakāraṇīkṛtya dharmavatvenāmāvāsyasyaivamiti nirdeśaḥ | mantrāścāsmatpakṣameva sutarāmavadyotayanti | ‘‘saṃsṛjyadhvaṃ pūrvaiḥ pitṛbhiḥ saheti’’— ‘pūrvaiḥ pitṛbhiḥ saha’ vartamānā ucyante | ‘saṃsṛjyadhvamiti’ bahuvacanaṃ pūjāyām | tathā ca niruktakāraḥ ‘‘etā ( u tyā ) uṣasa iti | etāstā uṣasa ityekasyā eva pūjanārthe bahuvacanamiti’’ | atha ‘‘saṃsṛjyadhvamiti yeṣu piṇḍeṣu nikṣipyante ta ucyante | yaśca nikṣipyate sa bahuvacanena pūrvavatpūrvebhiḥ pitṛbhiriti | evaṃ ca pūrvebhirityevameva bahuvacanaṃ prāyogikaṃ bhaviṣyati | itarathā saṃsṛjyadhvamitinikṣipyamāṇapiṇḍābhidhāne ubhayatra bahuvacanamayathārthaṃ kalpyamiti’’ |

As for Yājñavalkya’s declaration (Ācāra, 256)—‘For one year, every month, on the date of death, the Śrāddha should be performed; similarly, at the end of each year; the first Śrāddha being performed on the eleventh day (after death);’—here also it is the same method that is prescribed. There also it is the ‘Amāvasyā Śrāddha,’ that has been recognised as the archetype. Even if the ‘Unitary

Rite’ were connected with the ‘month’ as the time, it would not be right to make it borrow its details from the Rite here mentioned; as a beggar does not beg from another beggar; so that, since this also would be as much of an ‘Ectypal Rite’ as the ‘Unitary Rite’ itself (there could be no borrowing between them).

Further, there is only one Śrāddha; and the term ‘monthly’ being a generic one, there is nothing to indicate that it stands for the ‘Unitary Rite’ only.

In Yājñavalkya also we find the same thing. If Yājñavalkya’s text were taken as referring to what has gone immediately before it, then the method of the ‘Amalgamating Rite’ should be applicable to it; as the Śrāddha in question is found mentioned after this latter. Having said—‘this is the Amalgamating Rite,’ and ‘before the Amalgamating Rite,’—it is said immediately after this ‘on the date of death, &c.’

From all this it follows that not taking any account of mere proximity, the details that are indicated as belonging to it are those of the ‘Amāvasyā Śrāddha.’

The Mantras also support our view. It says—‘Become united with the previous ancestors, &c., &c.;’ and it is the person recently dead who is thus addressed; the plural number in ‘Saṃsṛjyadhvam; being purely honorific: as says the author of the Nirukta—‘In the expression etā utyā uṣasaḥ &c., the single Uṣas, Dawn, is spoken of in the plural, for the purpose of showing respect to it.”

“The term ‘Saṃsṛjyadhvam,’ ‘become united,’ should refer to those balls into which the ball offered to the deceased is thrown in; and this latter ball also should be referred to by words in the plural, ‘pūrvebhiḥ pitṛbhiḥ etc.’ For in this case it is only this latter plural number that will have to be regarded as figurative. Otherwise, if the plural verb ‘Saṃsṛjyadhvam’ also were taken as referring to the ball that is thrown in, the plural number in both would have to be regarded as figurative and unreal.”