History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v3.c43.19

v3.c43.19

What constitutes gift (*dāna*) according to the śāstra has been discussed from very ancient times. There is a distinction between *yāga*, *homa* and *dāna*. The first is constituted by abandoning something that belongs to one, intending it for a deity and accompanying it with Vedic mantras; homa is throwing into fire something belonging to oneself over which one abandons one's ownership and which (thing) is intended for a deity; dāna consists in the cessation of one's ownership over a thing and creating the ownership of another over that thing and this last occurs when the other accepts the thing, which acceptance may be mental or vocal or physical; vide Śabara on Jaimini IV. 2. 28 (quoted above in note 1703), VII. 1. 5, IX. 4. 32 and the Mit. on Yāj. II. 27.¹⁹⁸⁵ The Mit. explains that physical acceptance may be effected in various ways such as by actually receiving the thing in one's hand, by simply touching it and quotes a smṛti which illustrates this 'one should give (and the donee may accept) a deer skin (by touching it) on the hairy side, a cow by its tail, an elephant by its trunk, a horse by its mane, a female slave by (touching) her head'. The Mit. adds that as it is impossible to accept a field physically (except by enjoying its fruits) its acceptance is effected by some enjoyment, however small, of its produce. The Viṣṇudharmottara quoted in Dānakriyākaumudī p. 7 gives more examples of the method of acceptance. Vide Bṛhat-Parāśara (chap. VIII. p. 242) for copious illustrations of the way in which a gift is to be accepted according to the nature of the thing given. The word 'pratigraha' has a technical meaning in Dharmaśāstra. Medhātithi on Manu IV. 5 says¹⁹⁸⁶ 'merely taking a thing (from another) does not constitute pratigraha (as understood in Dharmaśāstra). The latter word is applicable only to a particular kind of acceptance viz. when a person accepts what is given by the donor with the idea that he (the donor) will derive from that act some unseen spiritual result (adṛṣṭa or puṇya) and when in making the gift a vedic mantra is repeated. When one gives alms, no mantra (such as 'devasya tvā') is repeated and hence that is not the *dāna* spoken of by *śāstra*, nor does any one apply the word *pratigraha* to the acceptance of an article given through affection to a friend or a servant.' When such a word as vidyādāna (gift of learning to a pupil) is used, the word *dāna* is employed there in a figurative sense only; otherwise the teacher will have to give a dakṣiṇā to the pupil, whereas it is the pupil who may give a dakṣiṇā to the teacher. When some gift is made to an image, the word dāna in that case is also used in a secondary sense, as the image cannot accept the gift. Therefore Devala defines *dāna* (of the *śāstric* kind)¹⁹⁸⁷ as 'that is described as dāna when wealth is given according to śāstric rites so as to reach a receiver who is a fit recipient as defined in the śāstra. What is given to a worthy person without an eye to any particular object (to be achieved by such gift) but solely with the idea of doing one's duty, that is called dharmadāna'. The Dānamayūkha p. 3 explains that the definition of dāna given by Devala applies to the best kind of dāna (called sāttvika) and not to dāna in general. If a gift is sent to a person, but it is lost while on its way or it is stolen and never reaches the donee, then there is no acceptance and so no complete dāna and the donor cannot reap the reward of dāna in such a case.