History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v3.c38.12

v3.c38.12

Medieval digests like the Mit. (on Yāj. I. 103) discuss the question whether vaiśvadeva is *puruṣārtha* only (i. e. recommended to men for effecting some beneficent consequence to them) or whether it is puruṣārtha as well as a rite for effecting a saṁskāra (unseen or spiritual result) of the food cooked. In the latter case food will be pradhāna (the principal matter) and vaiśvadeva will be secondary; but in the former case (i. e. if it were only puruṣārtha) food will be secondary and Vaiśvadeva principal. Relying¹⁷⁶⁹ on Āśv. gṛ. I. 2. 1 some say that vaiśvadeva is meant as a saṁskāra of food and relying on Āśv. gṛ. III. 1. 1 and 4 others say that it is puruṣārtha. The Mit. declares that vaiśvadeva is puruṣārtha only, as Manu (II. 28) holds that the human body is rendered fit for spiritual knowledge by the daily yajñas and by other sacrifices and that if vaiśvadeva is not puruṣārtha alone, each time food is cooked in the day (on account of the sudden advent of many guests) vaiśvadeva would have to be performed several times in the day; but Manu III. 108 forbids a fresh vaiśvadeva in such a case. Sm. C. (I. p. 213) and Par. M. (I. 1. p. 390) hold the same view. The Smṛtyarthasāra p. 46 and Laghu-Āśvalāyana I. 116 hold the view that vaiśvadeva is both for the saṁskāra of the householder and also of the food.¹⁷⁷⁰