ADOPTION IN ANCIENT INDIA

ANCIENT INDIAN DATTAKA SYSTEM

Ancient people think that laws are the gifts of God and the discovery of
the sages. This view appears to be similar to the Ancient Hindu view that 
Brahma created Dharma as law. Kautilya in his Arthasastra has given a 
classification of the different branches of learning namely Anviksiki, Trayi, 
Varta" and Dandariiti. In this Anviksiki is the branch of study for logic. In 
Ancient European theory, law is the embodiment of eternal justice.1
 
Manu, Yajnavalkya and Vasista define law as the practice of the Sistas or 
Sadacaras. Secular law is also a branch of Dharma. In the Srnrti literature 
the word, Dharma was used in a very comprehensive sense. According to 
Katyayana, the etymological meaning of the word Vyavahara indicates that 
removal of various doubts.2
In Ancient Indian Literature many records say that the number of 
Srnrtis were about 100. 
,

Srnrtis deal with a host of subjects such as domestic rituals, customary rites, 
inheritance etc. Adoption is a breach of Vyavahara portion. The Smritis like 
Manu, Yajnavalkya, Kapila, Lohita, Angira &Ankara  strongly discuss about 
the law of adoption and inheritance of the adoption child.
Anandadeva has compiled a vast digest called Smrtikaustubha divided into 
several sections. The portion of Samskarakaustubha on the subject of 
adoption is frequently cited as Dattadidhiti.3

1. (p. 136, The Wonder that is Hindu Dharma, R.C. 
      Gupta). 

2. ('Vi' means various 'ava' means doubt and 'hara' removal. (P. 136, The 
    Wonder that is Hindu Dharma).

3. (P. 955,56,vol. I, part II, History of Dharmasastra, P.V. Kane) 
          notice (Abbe J. A. Dubbois, Hindu Manners, Customs and  
Ceremonies).

It is a treaty of great important and deserves to be studies along with the 
Dattakamimamsa and Vyavaharamayukha and other similar works. Abbe J. 
A.Dubbois in his work about manners and customs of the Indian people in 
general has given an exhaustive details regarding adoption based on his own 
observances and texts that have come to his notice.1

Adoption is a process to incorporate a child permanently into a family
with all the rights of a natural child, in which he was not been born. The 
concept of adoption as a welfare measure is of recent origin. Traditionally, a 
child was adopted for temporal and spiritual purposes and more recently, to 
satisfy the emotional and parental instincts of the adopters.
(Adoption Law, D.C. Manuja).
 Manu says, 'by a son, a man attains victory over all people; by a son's son he 
enjoys immortality; and after words by the son of that grandson he reaches 
the solar abode (Manu. 9/137).

According to Arthashastra and other Ancient Jurisprudent texts, the
inheritance of a person is divided in various modes, i.e. by caste, category 
and pratiloma­ Anukuna sons. Here there is a discussion about the 12 kinds 
of sons. They are Aurasa, Ksetraja, Dattaka, Putrikaputra, Krtrima, Gudaja, 
Apavidha, Kanlna, Sahodhaja, Knta, Paunarbha and Svayamdatta.
In the absence of Aurasa, Ksetraja equals to that place. After these two 
sons, most of the Smritis give importance to Data otherwise called as 
Datrima or Dattaka.
 

    1.(Abbe J. A. Dubbois, Hindu Manners, Customs and  
Ceremonies).vijnanacintamani e­journal of sngscollege.info

In the Smritis literature, the law of adoption was parent based and not 
child based. The Smrtikaras suggested that only one son could be adopted 
for the continuation of the family line and to offer oblations to the deceased 
ancestors. The Dharmasastras deals in detail with the qualifications of the 
male child to be taken in adoption. The adopted son is uprooted from his 
natural family and transplanted in to adoptive family like a natural son.
But at present the law of adoption among Hindu is completely regulated by 
the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act of 1956.1

The whole Smritis and Purina’s ordain that an only son shouldn't given 
or received in an adoption. Another common judgment is that, adoption 
should be done by caste or gotra based. Manu, Yajnavalkya and other 
Smrtikaras declare that the sale and gift of children to be sinful. It points out 
that the practice of sale and gift of children in ancient India. But the 
Smrtikaras recognized adoption. 
1. (pl85. Indian Family Law vol.II,Adv. K. Sreedharavariar) In ancient 
Indian Jurisprudence adoption ceremony (Dattahoma) is the 

The age of adoption is also an important point in ancient and modern 
jurisprudence. . Most of the earlier law givers points out, the best time of 
adoption are three to five years old. But Vyavaharamayukha permit an old 
age adoption too. Under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956, an 
adoptive father is at least 21 years older than the person to be adopted and 
admits an unmarried man or woman can adopt a child with the age 
difference of 21 years.

In ancient Indian Jurisprudence adoption ceremony(Dattahoma) is the 
valuable witness of the adoption. Godavarma says that for the validity of 
adoption the adopter should invite his relatives, Acaryas, King etc. Now 
days the District Court should have Jurisdiction to conduct adoption 
proceedings. The Smrtikaras also discuss about the inheritance of an 
adopted child. They say if a person takes a child as his own, he will be the 
authority or heir of the whole properties. But if a boy is born after adoption, 
the adopted child is entitled for the property.

In the Vedic period of Indian law, Practice of adoption was not often 
resorted to the failure of male offspring. The Hindu law of adoption is 
mainly founded on the religious belief that a son is absolutely essential for 
spiritual salvation. In 1956 the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act was 
passed to remove adoption of child without judicial dicta.
Any way issue lessens is an unbearable mental affliction and it is same
as the pain or grief of foundling. Adoption may be given protection or 
dependence to this foundling. The legal adoption is valued and permitted 
for ever.

REFERENCE:
1. Dattakamimamsavyakhya of Godavarmaraja, An unpublished manuscript. 
2. Dattakamimamsa of Nandapandita, ed., Sankarasastri, Anandasram, 
Poona,1954. 
3. Sankarasmrti, ed., T.C. Parameswaramussath, Bharatavilasam Thrissur, 
1925. 
4. Smrtisandarbha (vol. I to VI), Nag, Delhi, 1988. 
5. Adoption Law and Practice, D.C. Manooja, Deep&Deep, Delhi, 1987. 
6. Indian Family Law, Vol.I&II, Adv. K. Sreedharavariar, TVM.1987. 
7. ArthasastraofKautilya(Tran.),KVM,Sahitya Academy, Thrissur, 1998. 
8. History of Dharmasastra, P.V.Kane,BORl,1974. 

As per earlier historical accounts a natural born was taking to be

the sole representative of a man and acceptance of secondary sons by
adoption - was downright denounced. In this regard it is significant
to note that ancient Hindus scriptures never legitimized any son other
than the natural born [aurasa] to be begotten by a man. The rejection
of adoption on the earlier annals of history can be evidenced from the
following extract from Rig Veda:

"oh Agni, no son is he who spring from others,"1

It even went to the extent o observing that considering sons
Bi gotten by others as ones own was the "path of fools and such a child
should not be taken nor even be though of in the mind"2 this
condemnation of seconcfmy sons is further manifest from the
grihayasrtras, which provide he code for domestic rituals in the ancient
Vedic society, overtly excluded rituals for the taking of a secondary son.3
With the advent of Dharmashastras, the institution of adoption eventually
received societal acceptance and became ingrained in Hindu mores
there by altering the concept of son ship forever,"

1. Paras Diwan, Law of Adoption, Minority, Guardianship and Custody 2

(Universal
Law Publishers, 3rd ed. 2000)

2. Rig-Veda VII,4, 7-8

3. Naresh Chandra Sengupta, Evolution of Ancient Indian Law 138-139

(Eastern Law House, 1953).

The Dharmashastras, in particular, imposed myriad restrictions and

ritualistic obligations to be performed prior to undertaking the act of
adoption. To illustrate a few, the adopted had to be, as a rule, a sapinda
implying that the person had to be related through some common
ancestor of the individual seeking to adopt. However, if a sapinda wasn't
available, then a sagotra and if neither were available then only one could
adopt a bhinna – gotra sapinda. There were further precincts of caste and
gotra imposed for an adoption to be conferred legitimacy.1
A primary reason for the evolution of adoption laws in Hindu
religion has been due to the importance Hindus attach to a male child.
Every Hindu was enjoined by scriptures to have his own natural born
son (aursa putra), only failing which he was permitted to have secondary
sons. Moreover, only a male child could be adopted and the taking
of a female born was not accorded acceptance in early Hindu
philosophy.

A second limb of justification for the ancient law prescribing for an

exclusive male adoption could be owing to the fact that the scriptures did
not permit the wife or a daughter to perform the funeral rites of a man or
utter sacred texts, is as a result, she could not, in theory, redeem the
deceased from hell or save from the suffering of the after life.

1. Dattaka Mimansa,II, 74-78, Dattaka Chandrikal, 16; Mitakshara I, ix, 9

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

vijnanacintamani e­journal of sngscollege.info

http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:vOi9CQ1JOKsJ:www.sngscollege.i
nfo/articles/ambika.pdf+ancient+adoption&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=in

Hinduism and Children at http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinliuismlh-

chiidren.htm.
(As on March 23,2005)

Naresh Chandra Sengupta, Evolution ofAncientIndian Law 138-139

(Eastern
Law House, 1953).

Paras Diwan, Law of Adoption, Minority, Guardianship and Custody 2

(Universal
Law Publishers, 3rd ed. 2000)