History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c73.t1.519
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v5.c73.t1.519
- Language
- English
v5.c73.t1.519.1
Certain other matters connected with śrāddhas may be briefly touched upon. In very ancient times twelve kinds of sons were recognized out of whom the kṣetraja,¹²⁰⁵ the putrikāputra and dattaka were most important All these were the sons of two fathers. The question mooted was: to whom were they to offer piṇḍas? The Madanapārijāta (pp 607-608) quotes a passage from the Hārīta-dharmasūtra¹²⁰⁶ and explains it. Hārīta says 'seed does not grow without a field. Since it is seen that both are necessary the child born is the child of both. Out of the two (fathers) the procreator is to be first invoked (and then the kṣetrin). He (the son) may offer two piṇḍas to each grade of the ancestors or he may offer a single piṇḍa (to the father and) may repeat the names of both (fathers) as to that single piṇḍa. The son (of the son of two fathers) may repeat two names as to the 2nd piṇḍa (i. e. the piṇḍa for paternal grand-father); the grand-son (of the son of two fathers) may do the same as to the third piṇḍa (viz. the piṇḍa for paternal great-grandfather).' Manu IV. 140 and Gobhila-smṛti II. 105 say about the putrikāputra¹²⁰⁷ that he presents the first piṇḍa to his mother (as she was appointed as a son), the 2nd to her father and the third to his father's father. This appears to be one order in which piṇḍas are to be offered by the putrikāputra, while Manu IX.
v5.c73.t1.519.2
132 sets out another method since it says that a putrikāputra inherits the entire wealth of his own father if he is sonless and he gives two piṇḍas (i. e. performs two śrāddhas) for his own father and for his maternal grandfather. The Śāṅ. Śr. S. provides¹²⁰⁸ that if there be two fathers, the son should recite the names of both (*bījin* and *kṣetrin*) with reference to the same piṇḍa. Even Yāj. says 'The son procreated according to the rules of *niyoga* by a sonless man on the wife of another inherits the wealth of both and offers piṇḍa to both.'¹²⁰⁹ The Mit. adds that if a person appointed to procreate a son on another's wife has a son, then the son so begotten becomes the son of the kṣetrīn alone and not of the bījin. As the kṣetraja and putrikāputra have become obsolete for several centuries the subject has only an academic interest now. But the *dattaka* is still in vogue and a few words must be said here about the persons to whom the dattaka offers piṇḍas. The Kalpataru quotes from the Pravarādhyāya a passage on this point which is as follows:¹²¹⁰ 'If these (i. e. those who are bījin) have no issue born of their own wives, (the sons begotten by *niyoga* or given in adoption) should inherit their wealth and offer pindas to them up to three ancestors;
v5.c73.t1.519.3
if both (the bījin and kṣetrin or the giver and taker in adoption) have no other son, then they (sons begotten or adopted) should offer pinda to both, in one and the same śrāddha they should repeat (the names of) the two ancestors respectively (of the acceptor and that of the begetter) after having separately intended the same pinda for both up to the third ancestor.' The Baud. Dh. S.¹²¹¹ quotes a verse as follows 'The son of two fathers shall give the pinda (to his two fathers and pronounce) two names with each pinda; three pindas will thus serve for six persons (ancestors).' It would be seen from the passage quoted above from Hārīta that some authorities allowed two separate pindas for each degree of ancestors when there were two in the same degree. Manu IX. 142 lays down 'the son given should not take the *gotra* and wealth of his natural father, the pinda follows the gotra and wealth; the *svadhā* (obsequies) of him who gives (his son in adoption) cease or fail (so far as that son is concerned).' This verse has been so interpreted by some decisions of the High Courts and of the Privy Council as to mean that the son adopted becomes totally severed from the family of his birth. This subject has been discussed at great length in H. of Dh.
v5.c73.t1.519.4
vol III pp 690-697 and it is established there that the severance of the son given in adoption is only partial, that the gotra of the natural family persists even after adoption into another family for purposes of marriage and āśauca and that the Nirnayasindhu,¹²¹² the Dharma-sindhu and the Dattaka-candrikā declare that the son given away in adoption into another family can perform the śrāddha of his natural father, if the latter has no son at the time of his death and can also take his wealth.