Manava Dharmashastra 3.86

3.86

atha vidhivadityuktaṃ so'yaṃ vidhirucyate | aprakṛtasyodapātrasya śravaṇaṃ sarvadā nṝṇāṃ, na bhikṣādānasyaiveti darśayitum | satkṛtya pūjayitvā vidhiḥ pūrvo yasya dānasya tadvidhipūrvakam | pūrvaśabdaḥ kāraṇavacanaḥ | śāstranimittakametadityarthaḥ | itikartavyatā vā vidhiḥ, sā pūrvaṃ kartavyā | uktaṃ ca pūrvaṃ bhikṣādānaṃ, dadāti satkṛtya pūjayitvā | vedasya tattvārthaḥ pāramārthiko niḥsaṃśayo'rthastaṃ 'vetti', tasmai brāhmaṇāyopapādayeddadyāt | brāhmaṇāyeti jātiniyamaḥ viduṣa iti guṇaniyamaḥ | tena yatkiṃciddātavyaṃ tadbrāhmaṇāya, tasmai ca vedārthavide pūjāpūrvakamityarthatrayavidhānaṃ sarvaṃ dadātyarthoddeśena, pauruṣeyatvānnānākārārthavidhānam |
prāpte dāne doṣaḥ |

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
It has been said above that the alms is to be given ‘in the proper form;’ and this form is now described.

The mention of the ‘water-pot,’ which has not been referred to in this context before, is meant to indicate that in all cases one need not always give alms only.

‘Having honoured,’—after having worshipped.

‘Vidhipūrvakam,’—‘in accordance with scriptural injun ctions’—means ‘that which has scriptural injunctions for its precedent;’ the term ‘precedent’ meaning reason; the compound therefore means that what is here stated is on the basis of scriptural injunctions.

Or, the term ‘vidhi’ may stand for method; the sense being that the right, method should be adopted first; the method being that ‘he should be honoured,’ as already mentioned.

‘The true meaning of the Veda’—the real, the undoubted, sense of the Veda; he who knows this meaning—to such a Brāhmaṇa one should ‘make over’ the things.

The term ‘to the Brāhmaṇa’ restricts the gift to the particular caste; and the term ‘knowing, &c.’ restricts it to persons possessing a certain qualification.

Hence, in connection with the act of giving, three things are enjoined here—

‘whatever is to be given should be given to the Brāhmaṇa,’

‘to a Brāhmaṇa who knows the meaning of the Veda,’

and ‘only after having honoured him,’

And this multiplicity of injunctions (in a single verse) (though inadmissible in a Vedic text) may be admissible in the work of a human author.

The next, verse proceeds to point out the danger in connection with the act of ‘giving’ enjoined above.—(96).