History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.11

v4.c63.t2.11

The eldest son also should not be taken in adoption, since, as the Mit. (on Yāj. II. 130) puts it, it is the eldest son alone who is the foremost in serving the purposes of a son as regards his genetive father acc. to Manu IX. 106 which says 'a man becomes one having a son (a father) by the mere fact of the birth of his (first) son and becomes free from the debt owed to the *pitṛs*'. But in modern times this rule is taken to be only recommendatory and the adoption of the eldest son is held valid as also that of an only son¹²⁷⁸. The V. Mayūkha (p. 108) states: acc. to the Mit. the prohibition to give the eldest son affects only the giver but not the adopter and he criticizes the Mit. that Manu IX. 106 does not forbid the giving of the eldest son, but only provides that by the birth of the first son a man becomes free from debt (to pitṛs). So the V. Mayūkha goes a step further and holds that there is no prohibition at all either to give or take in adoption the eldest son, while the Mit., though it does not hold the adoption bad, seems to hold that the giver incurred blame. The Saṁ. K. p. 150 also does not allow the adoption of the eldest son. Two or more persons cannot adopt the same boy and if they do so the adoption by each is invalid¹²⁷⁹. The Dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa adoption, to be described later on, is an exception.