History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c73.t1.413.3

v5.c73.t1.413.3

93 ff) has a long passage on this question, one verse of which is quoted below.¹¹⁴² Many of the commentaries and digests hold divergent views on this subject, viz. the Mit. on Yāj. I. 254, Kalpataru (śr. pp 240 ff), Śr. K. K. pp. 552-556 and Nirṇayasindhu (III. pp. 499-503). It is impossible to reconcile all the views. The Kalpataru (on śr. p. 240) states that there are three alternative courses for him whose father is alive, (1) he should pass over the father that is alive and offer pindas to those three ancestors to whom his father offers piṇḍas; (Manu. III. 220, Viṣṇu Dh. S 75.1); (2) he should simply offer *homa* into fire as stated in Āśv. Śr. S. quoted above, (3) he should not engage in the rite of piṇḍapitṛyajña or pārvaṇaśrāddha at all (Gobhila-smṛti II. 93). The Nirṇayasindhu says that there are numerous alternatives mentioned by different writers, that they are forbidden in the Kali age and that one view is that a man whose father is alive cannot engage in a pārvaṇaśrāddha and that the real conclusion is that śrāddha may be offered to those to whom the father (of the performer) who is living offers piṇḍas. It is clear that one whose father is living should have nothing to do with piṇḍadāna for deceased ancestors. Manu (in latter half of III. 220) allowed an alternative viz. one should feed one's father at a dinner (and honour him with the details of worship such as *gandha*, *dhūpa*, *dīpa*) and offer piṇḍas to the deceased grandfather and great-grandfather.