History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.209

v4.c63.t2.209

The important question is: what is the meaning of the word 'sapiṇḍa'. The Mitākṣarā and the Dāyabhāga propound two different meanings of the word that have been explained at length in H. of Dh. vol. II, pp. 452–458 and 472–477. Therefore it is not necessary to repeat those explanations. The word 'sapiṇḍa' is employed by Pāṇini (IV. 1. 165) in connection with the technical definition of *gotra* (Pāṇ. IV. 1. 162) given by him. It appears to have been used in the sense of blood relationship as stated by the Kāśikā. According to the Mit. the right to inheritance depends upon blood relationship (connection through particles of the same body, *ekaśarīrāvayavānvaya*) and the preference among those who are blood relations is determined by nearness or propinquity (*pratyāsatti*). According to the Dāyabhāga, sapiṇḍa relationships is based on religious efficacy i. e. on the capacity to offer the cake or ball of rice in śrāddha and it has evolved a peculiar method of determining preference which will be explained immediately below. That there appears to have been a close connection between taking the wealth of the deceased and offering śrāddha to him may be admitted. But the question is whether a person was deemed to be an heir and entitled to take the estate of the deceased because he offered śrāddha to that person or whether the heirship was originally determined on other grounds and whoever took the estate was saddled with the responsibility of performing śrāddhas for the benefit of the soul of the deceased. It is difficult to give a convincing answer to this. It appears, however, that ancient sūtras do not emphasize the religious efficacy of piṇḍas as the determining principle in heirship. Āp., Manu, Bṛ. (particularly the first and last) speak only of nearness (which more naturally means 'nearness of blood'). Yāj. omits the word sapiṇḍa altogether in mentioning heirs. Manu IX. 142 states that piṇḍa follows the gotra and riktha (wealth). Viṣṇu Dh. S. XV. 40 declares, 'whoever inherits the estate (of the deceased) has to offer piṇḍa to him'. This rule is emphasized even by those works (like V. Mayūkha)¹⁴²⁰ that make blood relationship the test of heirship by saying that whoever even including the king (who takes by escheat on failure of all heirs) that takes the estate of the deceased must perform or arrange for the performance of the funeral ceremonies of the deceased up to 10 days after death and the śrāddhas, as said by the Brahma-purāṇa 220. 79 (tadabhāve ca nṛpatiḥ kārayettvakuṭumbinām। tajjātīyair-naraiḥ samyak-dāhādyāḥ sakalāḥ kriyāḥ). The Mit. view is upheld by V. R., V. C., Par. M., Madanapārijāta, Saras-vatīvilāsa, V. Mayūkha, Bālambhaṭṭī and many other works. The theory of the Dāyabhāga is propounded by only a few medieval works and writers like Aparārka (quoted above on p. 725), Raghunandana, Nandapaṇḍita. The Vīramitrodaya generally follows the Mit. but in certain cases it relies on or refers to the principle of religious efficacy in preferring one heir to another, as for example, in preferring the full brother to the step-brother (compare note 1397 and V. P. p. 528) or in preferring three male descendants to the widow. It is therefore that the Privy Council remark,¹⁴²¹ 'now it is absolutely clear that under the Mitākṣarā while the right of inheritance arises from blood relationship or community of blood, in judging of the nearness of blood relationship or propinquity among the gotrajas the test to be applied to discover the preferential heir is the capacity to offer oblations'. Its position is peculiar.¹⁴²² It says that the capacity to offer piṇḍas is not the governing principle as to heirship, but it is only useful in finding out the preferential heir among gotrajas.