A community-maintained tertiary reference on dana, directly examined. Its strength is citing a real named scholarly monograph, Maria Heim's Theories of the Gift in South Asia, and dating the doctrine's attestation back through the Upanishads to the Rigveda; its limit is a Wikipedia community article rather than the monograph itself, which is why it sits at reliability tier three. This description is adapted from Wikipedia contributors under CC BY-SA 4.0; changes were made. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier3
Wikipedia's article on dana, consulted 2026-08-13. Useful here for the Sanskrit and Pali etymology, the Rigveda and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad attestations, and Maria Heim's 2004 study naming the medieval Sanskrit gift-literature (Lakshmidhara, Ballalasena, Hemadri). NotesWikipedia's article on dana, consulted 2026-08-13. Useful here for the Sanskrit and Pali etymology, the Rigveda and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad attestations, and Maria Heim's 2004 study naming the medieval Sanskrit gift-literature (Lakshmidhara, Ballalasena, Hemadri).
Citation
AuthorWikipedia contributors
PublisherWikipedia
Publication Year2026
URLhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C4%81na
Source Typereference
Connections
Associated With
This source names Asia directly: "Heim's Theories of the Gift in South Asia, and dating the doctrine's attestation back through the Upanishads to the Rigveda; its limit is a Wikipedia community article rather than the monograph..."
Source Wikipedia, "Dana (Religion)"Wikipedia contributors
Claims Backed By This Source (17 claims)
This source backs 17 claims across the atlas. As facts: 12 well-attested. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 4 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 9 claims: 8 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Doctrines, 6 claims: 3 well-attested, 3 general references.
- Religions, 2 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.