Mimamsashastrasarvasva 2.6

2.6

6
‘ācāntena karttavyaṃ’ ‘yajñopavītinā karttavya’mityevamādīni
kratvārthāṅgasmaraṇāni pramāṇamapramāṇaṃ veti saṃśayaḥ
tatraśrutyuktānāṃ kramādīnāṃ smārterācamanādibhiḥ
vyākopaḥ syādatastāvatspaṣṭaiva virodhitā
tataḥ śrutibalīyastvāt smṛteḥ syādapramāṇatā
pūrvabhāvipramāṇasthaṃ prameyasthādvalābalāt
jyāyastenaiva nirṇīte na paścāditarādaraḥ
nairākāṅkṣyāt pramātṝṇāmataḥ smṛtyarthabādhanam'
'vedaṃ2 kṛtvā vediṃ3 karotīti' kramaḥ | kālaśca yaḥ pradhānenāṅgānāmaviprakarṣaḥ prayogaprāśubhāvaśca prayogavacanāvagataḥ | yaśca
pūrvāhṇādiḥ | parimāṇañcāvismṛtasamastapadārthānuṣṭhānasiddhyarthaṃ prayogavidhinerākāṅkṣitaṃ padārthavidhipracayāvagatam | tattitayamapi krama
kālaparimāṇātmakaṃ prayogamadhye'nuṣṭhīyamānairācamanādibhiranyathātva
pratipadyate | virodhe ca śrutibalīyastvāt smārttasyācamanāderbādhaḥ
na ca śrutyarthatve'pi padārthaguṇatvāt kramāderdaurbalyam | pūrvabhāvipramāṇabalābalacintayaiva nirākāṅkṣatvāt | 4paścādavagataṃ prameyabalābalasyānādarttavyatvāt | tasmādācamanādismṛtīnāmaprāmāṇyamiti
pūrvapakṣaḥ
siddhāntastupadārthaprāptyapekṣatvāt kramāderavirodhitā
virodhe'pi ca daurbalyaṃ padārthebhyo guṇatvataḥ
na, śāstraparimāṇāt

[6]
With regard to recollected auxiliary rules for the sake of the sacrifice, such as ‘It must be performed by one who has sipped water’ and ‘It must be performed by one wearing the sacred thread,’ there is doubt whether they are authoritative or non-authoritative.
There: There would be disruption of order and so forth stated in Śruti by sipping water and the like taught in Smṛti; let that be, for the conflict is indeed clear.
Therefore, owing to the superior strength of Śruti, there must be non-authority of Smṛti.
Superiority belonging to an earlier means of valid cognition is greater than the relative strength residing in the object of knowledge;
when decided by that alone, there is no subsequent regard for the other,
because the cognisers have their expectancy fulfilled; therefore, the meaning of Smṛti is sublated.
Order is [as in] ‘Having made the veda-broom, he makes the altar.’ And time is that non-separation of the auxiliaries from the principal and quickness of performance cognised from the injunction of performance; and that which is forenoon and the like. And measure is what is expected by the injunction of performance to accomplish the performance of all items without omission, cognised from the aggregate of injunctions of the ritual items. All three of these—consisting of order,
time, and measure—undergo alteration by sipping water and the like being performed in the middle of the performance. And in case of conflict, owing to the superior strength of Śruti, there is sublation of sipping water and the like taught in Smṛti.
Nor can it be said that, even though belonging to the sense of Śruti, order and so forth are weak because they are subordinate qualities of the ritual item; because expectancy is fulfilled by the very consideration of the relative strength of the earlier means of valid cognition, since the relative strength of the object of knowledge cognised later is not to be respected. Therefore, Smṛtis of sipping water and the like are non-authoritative—this is the prima facie view.
The established conclusion is: Because order and the like depend upon obtaining the ritual items, there is no conflict;
and even in case of conflict, [they have] weakness because of being subordinate qualities relative to the ritual items.
‘No, because of the measure of the teaching.’