History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.214.1

v4.c63.t2.214.1

The argument of the Dāyabhāga (which was propounded before it by a writer probably named Udyota¹⁴²³) that the taking of a deceased person's estate depends upon the spiritual benefit conferred on him is briefly as follows. It relies principally on Baud. Dh. S. and Manu. In the section on the partition of wealth (which begins from IX. 103) Manu (IX. 137) declares the super-eminent spiritual benefits conferred by the son, grandson and great-grandson; further (in IX. 106) Manu states that the son gets all wealth from his father because he frees the latter from debt, that (in IX. 139) the daughter's son also is spoken of as saving the grandfather in the next world and as therefore entitled to the grandfather's wealth, that the verse immediately preceding Manu IX. 187 (declaring that the nearest amongst sapiṇḍas inherits) speaks of the offering of piṇḍa to three ancestors; and since it is reasonable to presume that the blind and the like are excluded from inheritance (Manu IX. 201) because they are incapable of performing religious rites, it follows that Manu and others regarded the taking of wealth as dependent on the conferring of spiritual benefit. This point of view the Dāyabhāga emphasizes at every step. It¹⁴²⁴ says: "There are two purposes for which wealth is acquired, viz. for worldly enjoyment and for the unseen or spiritual benefit derived from making gifts and the like;