The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c21.47

v1.c21.47

Constant references to the opinions of earlier authorities, indefinitely cited as ‘some,’ show that our extant Sūtras are but a moiety of the mass lost. Naturally the later authors know by name more authorities than do the earlier. Āpastamba discusses ‘those whose food may be eaten’ and cites a certain Kāṇva who declares that ‘who wishes may give’; then a Kautsa, whose opinion is that he who is holy (*puṇya*), may give; then Vārshyāyaṇi who says that ‘anybody may give,’ because, if it is a sinner and the sin remains with him, the receiver cannot suffer, but if it does not remain with him (the giver), then the giving acts as a purification (Āp., *Dh.S.*, I, 19, 3 f.). Again the same author discusses theft. Anyone who takes what belongs to another is a ‘thief’; so teach Kautsa, Hārīta, and Kāṇva; but Vārshyāyaṇi says that there are exceptions. ‘Seeds ripening in the pod and food for a draught-ox’ may be taken (without theft), though ‘to take too much’ is a sin. Hārīta’s opinion is that the owner’s permission must first be given (Āp., *Dh.S.*, I, 28, 5).