Hindu Administrative Institutions c10.s6.5

c10.s6.5

Dr. Jolly in his ‘Study on the *Arthaśāstra* and *Dharmaśāstras*’² shows concordance between the schools of dharma and artha. According to Yājñyavalkya³ if the *smṛtis* are in conflict, equity is to be regarded as more authoritative.⁴ Even then the *Dharmaśāstra* is superior to the *Arthaśāstra*. The commentary of *Mitākṣara*, writes Dr. Nag, ‘attempts to weaken the opposition in stating that the above stanza does not refer to all the conflict between the legal code and the manuals of the *Arthaśāstra* as those of Uśanas, but that it has an allusion to the conflict between the *Dharmaśāstras* and its supplementary chapter on the *Rājanīti*, with the help of which one must interpret the *Arthaśāstra*.⁵ Prof. Rangaswami Aiyangar remarks rightly: ‘The question of such reconciliation was an important topic of *mīmāṃsa* interpretation of Hindu law.’⁶ There is also reference to sacred equity in the Pillar inscription of Aśoka.⁷ The *Kauṭalīya* mentions⁸ four bases of the law in the order of increasing importance: *dharma* or law, *vyavahāra* or evidence, *saṃstha* or *cāritram* or precedent, and *rājaśāsana* or royal writs. By rendering justice agreeably to these as well as to *nyāya* or equity in an impartial spirit (*saman*) the king attains heaven. He agrees with Yājñyavalkya that in conflicts between *dharma* and *saṃstha* or between *dharma* and *vyavahāra* the former always prevails. But if a conflict arises between *dharma* and *dharmanyāya* or equity, the decision may rest with the latter, it being superior to the scholastic logic of the *smṛtis*.¹ Added to these is the obligation of the state to accept as valid every local usage, every custom of a caste, tribe, clan, and family, every bye-law or usage of corporations, guilds and organized non-political communities, or fraternities as was not inconsistent with the state's own laws or interests.² This ruling of the *Arthaśāstra* is also admitted by the *Dharmaśāstras*, the edicts of Aśoka, and the later digests and commentaries and compendia of Hindu law as well as writers of the extant treatises like the *Śukranītisāra*.³