Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6: History of Dharmaśāstra

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6

Language
English

Contents

History of Dharmaśāstra

1. Meaning of Dharma

v1.c6.s1.1.1

*Dharma* is one of those Sanskrit words that defy all attempts at an exact rendering in English or any other tongue. That word has passed through several vicissitudes. In the hymns of the Ṛgveda the word appears to be used either as an adjective or a noun (in the form *dharman*, generally neuter) and occurs at least fifty-six times therein. It is very difficult to say what the exact meaning of the word *dharma* was in the most ancient period of the vedic language. The word is clearly derived from root *dhṛ* (to uphold, to support, to nourish). In a few passages, the word appears to be used in the sense of ‘upholder or supporter or sustainer’ as in Ṛg. I. 187.1¹ and X. 92.2². In these two passages and in Ṛg. X. 21.3³ the word *dharma* is clearly masculine. In all other cases, the word is either obviously in the neuter or presents a form which may be either masculine or neuter. In most cases the meaning of *dharman* is ‘religious ordinances or rites’ as in Ṛg. I. 22. 18, V. 26. 6, VIII. 43. 24, IX. 64. 1 &c. The refrain ‘tāni dharmāṇi prathamānyāsan’ occurs in Ṛg. I. 164, 43 and 50, X. 90. 16. Similarly we have the words ‘prathamā dharmā’ (the primeval or first ordinances) in Ṛg. III. 17. 1. and X. 56. 3 and the words ‘sanatā dharmāṇi (ancient ordinances) occur in Ṛg. III. 3. 1. In some passages this sense of ‘religious rites’ would not suit the context, e. g. in IV. 53. 3⁴, V. 63. 7⁵, VI. 70. 1⁶, VII. 89. 5⁷.

v1.c6.s1.1.2

In these passages the meaning seems to be ‘fixed principles or rules of conduct’. In the Vājasaneyasaṁhitā the above senses of the word *dharman* are found and in II. 3 and V. 27 we have the words ‘dhruveṇa dharmaṇā’. In the same Saṁhitā the form ‘dharmaḥ’ (from dharma) becomes frequent, e. g. X. 29, XX. 9. The Atharvaveda contains many of those verses of the Ṛgveda in which the word *dharman* occurs, e. g. VI. 51. 3 (acittyā chet tava dharmā yuyopima), VII, 5. 1 (Yajñena yajñamayajanta) VII. 27. 5 (trīṇi padā vicakrame). In XI. 9. 17 the word ‘dharmaḥ’ seems to be used in the sense of ‘merit acquired by the performance of religious rites’.⁸ In the Aitareya-brāhmaṇa, the word *dharma* seems to be used in an abstract sense⁹, viz. ‘the whole body of religious duties’. In the Chāndogya-upaniṣad¹⁰ (2. 23) there is an important passage bearing on the meaning of the word *dharma* ‘there are three branches of *dharma*, one is (constituted by) sacrifice, study and charity (i. e. the stage of house-holder); the second (is constituted by) austerities (i. e. the stage of being a hermit); the third is the *brahmacārin* dwelling in the house of his teacher and making himself stay with the family of his teacher till the last; all these attain to the worlds of meritorious men; one who abides firmly in *brahman* attains immortality.’ It will be seen that in this passage the word ‘*dharma*’ stands for the peculiar duties of the *āśramas*.

v1.c6.s1.1.3

The foregoing brief discussion establishes how the word *dharma* passed through several transitions of meaning and how ultimately its most prominent significance came to be ‘the privileges, duties and obligations of a man, his standard of conduct as a member of the Aryan community, as a member of one of the castes, as a person in a particular stage of life.’ It is in this sense that the word seems to be used in the well-known exhortation to the pupil contained in the Taittirīya-upaniṣad (I. 11) ‘speak the truth, practise (your own) *dharma* &c.’ It is in the same sense that the Bhagavadgītā uses the word *dharma* in the oft-quoted verse ‘svadharme nidhanaṁ śreyaḥ.’ The word is employed in this sense in the *dharmaśāstra* literature. The Manusmṛti (1. 2) tells us that the sages requested Manu to impart instruction in the *dharmas* of all the *varṇas*. The Yājñyavalkya-smṛiti (I. 1) employs it in the same sense. In the Tantra-Vārtika¹¹ also we are told that all the dharma-sūtras are concerned with imparting instruction in the *dharmas* of *varṇas* and *āśramas*. Medhātithi commenting on Manu says that the expounders of *smṛtis* dilate upon *dharma* as five-fold, *e. g.* *varṇadharma*, *āśrama-dharma*, *varṇāśrama-dharma*, *naimittikadharma* (such as *prāyaścitta*) and *guṇadharma* (the duty of a crowned king, whether Kṣatriya or not, to protect)¹². It is in this sense that the word *dharma* will be taken in this work.

v1.c6.s1.1.4

Numerous topics are comprehended under the title dharmaśāstra, but in this work prominence will be given to works on *ācāra* and *vyavahāra* (law and administration of justice).

v1.c6.s1.2

¹ पितुं नु स्तोषं म॒हो ध॒र्माणं॑ तवि॒षीम् । This occurs in शुक्लयजुर्वेद 34.7.

v1.c6.s1.3

² इ॒मम॑ञ्स्पामु॒भये॑ अकृण्वत ध॒र्माण॑म॒ग्निं वि॒दथ॑स्य॒ साध॑नम् ।

v1.c6.s1.4

³ त्वे धर्मा॑णं आसते जुह्वभि॑: सिञ्च॒तीरि॑व ।

v1.c6.s1.5

⁴ आमा॒ रजां॑सि दि॒व्यानि॒ पार्थि॑वा॒ श्लोकं॑ दे॒व: कृ॑णुते॒ स्वाय॒ धर्म॑णे ।

v1.c6.s1.6

⁵ धर्म॑णा मित्रावरुणा विपश्चिता व्र॒ता र॑क्षेथे असुर॑स्य मा॒यया॑ ।

v1.c6.s1.7

⁶ द्यावा॑पृथि॒वी वरु॑णस्य॒ धर्म॑णा विष्क॑भिते अ॒जरे॒ भूरि॑रेतसा ।

v1.c6.s1.8

⁷ अचि॑त्ती॒ यत्तव॒ धर्मा॑ युयो॒पिम॒ मा न॒स्तस्मा॒देन॑सो देव रीरिषः ।

v1.c6.s1.9

⁸ ऋतं सत्यं तपो राष्ट्रं श्रमो धर्मश्च कर्म च । भूतं भव्येष्यदुच्छिष्टे वीर्यं लक्ष्मीर्र्बलं बले ॥

v1.c6.s1.10

⁹ धर्मस्य गोप्ताऽजनीति तमभ्युत्कृष्टमेवंविविद्भिषेक्ष्यन्नेतयार्चाऽभिमन्त्रयेत । ऐ. ब्रा. VII. 17; vide also a similar passage at A. Br. VIII. 13. The form *dharman* occurs in the Upaniṣads and in classical Sanskrit in Bahuvrīhi compounds, e.g. अनुच्छित्तिधर्मा in the बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद् and the sūtra धर्मादनिच् केवलात् (पा. V. 4. 124).

v1.c6.s1.11

¹⁰ त्रयो धर्मस्कन्धा यज्ञोऽध्ययनं दानमिति प्रथमस्तप एवेति द्वितीयो ब्रह्मचार्याचार्यकुलवासी तृतीयोऽत्यन्तमात्मानमाचार्यकुलेवसादयन् सर्व एते पुण्यलोका भवन्ति ब्रह्मसंस्थोऽमृतत्वमेति । Vide वेदान्तसूत्र III. 4. 18–20 for a discussion of this passage.

v1.c6.s1.12

¹¹ ‘सर्वधर्मसूत्राणां वर्णाश्रमधर्मोपदेशित्वात्’ p. 237.

v1.c6.s1.13

¹² हरदत्त on गौ. ध. सू. 19. 1 and गोविन्दराज on मनु 2.25 give the same fivefold classification.

v1.c6.s1.14

It would be interesting to recall a few other definitions of *dharma*. Jaimini¹³ defines dharma as ‘a desirable goal or result that is indicated by injunctive (Vedic) passages.’ The word *dharma* would mean such rites as are conducive to happiness and are enjoined by Vedic passages. The Vaiśeṣikasūtra¹⁴ defines *dharma* as ‘that from which results happiness and final beatitude.’ There are several other more or less one-sided definitions of *dharma* such as ‘*ahiṁsā* paramo dharmaḥ’ (Anuśāsanaparva 115. 1.), ‘ānṛśaṁsyam paro dharmaḥ’ (Vanaparva 373. 76), ‘ācāraḥ paramo dharmaḥ’ (Manu I. 108). Hārita defined dharma as ‘śrutipramāṇaka’¹⁵ (based on revelation). In the Buddhist sacred books the word *dharma* has several senses. It often means the whole teaching of Buddha (S. B. E. Vol. X. p. XXXIII). Another meaning of *dharma* peculiar to the Buddhist system is ‘an element of existence, i. e. of matter, mind and forces¹⁶.’

v1.c6.s1.15

¹³ चोदनालक्षणोर्थो धर्मः । पू. मी. सू. I. 1. 2.

v1.c6.s1.16

¹⁴ अथातो धर्मं व्याख्यास्यामः । यतोभ्युदयनिःश्रेयससिद्धिः स धर्मः । वैशेषिकसूत्र.

v1.c6.s1.17

¹⁵ अथातो धर्मं व्याख्यास्यामः । श्रुतिप्रमाणको धर्मः । श्रुतिश्च द्विविधा वैदिकी तान्त्रिकी च । quoted by कुल्लूक on मनु. 2. 1.

v1.c6.s1.18

¹⁶ *Vide* Dr. Stcherbatsky's monograph on ‘the central conception of Buddhism’ (1923) p. 73.

v1.c6.s1.19

The present work will deal with the sources of *dharma*, their contents, their chronology and other kindred matters. As the material is vast and the number of works is extremely ·large, only a few selected works and some important authors will be taken up for detailed treatment. More space will be devoted to comparatively early works.

2. Sources of Dharma

v1.c6.s2.1.1

The Gautamadharmasūtra¹⁷ says ‘the Veda is the source of *dharma* and the tradition and practice of those that know it (the Veda).’ So Āpastamba¹⁸ says ‘the authority (for the *dharmas*) is the consensus of those that know *dharma* and the Vedas.’ Vide also the Vasiṣṭhadharma-sūtra¹⁹ (I. 4-6). The Manusmṛti²⁰ lays down five different sources of *dharma* ‘the whole Veda is (the foremost) source of dharma and (next) the tradition and the practice of those that know it (the Veda); and further the usages of virtuous men and self-satisfaction.’ Yājñavalkya²¹ declares the sources in a similar strain ‘the Veda, traditional lore, the usages of good men, what is agreeable to one’s self and desire born of due deliberation—this is traditionally recognised as the source of dharma.’ These passages make it clear that the principal sources of *dharma* were conceived to be the Vedas, the Smṛtis, and customs. The Vedas do not contain positive precepts (*vidhis*) on matters of *dharma* in a connected form; but they contain incidental references to various topics that fall under the domain of dharmaśāstra as conceived in later times. Such information to be gathered from the Vedic Literature is not quite as meagre as is commonly supposed. In another place²² I have brought together about fifty Vedic passages that shed 'Like (a woman) growing old in her parents' house, I spray to thee as Bhaga from the seat common to all'²³. Vide also Ṛgveda I 124. 7; IV. 5. 5 and Atharvaveda I. 17.

v1.c6.s2.1.2

1 and Nirukta III. 4-5. These passages constitute the basis of the rules of the dharmasūtras and the Yājñavalkya-smṛti against marrying a brotherless maiden²⁴. This bar against marrying a brotherless maiden seems to have been due to the fear that such a girl might be an appointed daughter (*putrikā*) and that a son born of such a girl would be affiliated to his mother's father. This custom of *putrikā* is an ancient one and is alluded to in the Ṛgveda, according to Yāska²⁵. Ṛgveda X. 85 is a very interesting hymn as regards marriage; verses from it are used even to this day in the marriage ritual.²⁶ It shows that in the remote Vedic age the marriage rite resembled in essence the Brāhma form as described in the Dharmasūtras and Manu.²⁷ But the purchase of a bride (i. e. what is called Āsura marriage in later literature) was not unknown in the Vedic age. A passage of the Maitrāyaṇīyasaṁhitā (I. 10. 11) is referred to in the Vasiṣṭhadharmasūtra²⁸ in this connection, viz. 'she who being purchased by the husband'. The Gāndharva form is hinted at in the words²⁹ 'when a bride is fine-looking and well adorned, she seeks by herself her friend among men'. The importance of the *aurasa* son was felt even in the remote Vedic ages. 'Another (person) born of another's loins, though very pleasing, should not be taken, should not be even thought of (as to be taken in adoption³⁰)'. The Taittirīya-saṁhitā (VI. 3. 10. 5) propounds the well-known theory of the three debts³¹.

v1.c6.s2.1.3

The story of Śunaḥśepa in the Aitareya-brāhmaṇa (VII. 3) suggests that a son could be adopted even when there was an *aurasa* son. The Taittirīya-saṁhitā (VII. 1. 8. 1) tells the story of Atri who gave an only son in adoption to Aurva. The Kṣetraja son of the Dharma-sūtras is often referred to in the earliest Vedic literature. ‘What (sacrificer) invites you (Aśvins) in his house to a bed as a widow does a brother-in-law or a young damsel her lover’³². The Taittirī-yasaṁhitā makes it clear that a father could distribute his wealth among his sons during his own life time ‘Manu divided his property among his sons’ &c.³³ Another passage of the same *Saṁhitā* seems to suggest that the eldest son took the whole of the father’s wealth ‘therefore people establish their eldest son with wealth’³⁴. Even in the Vedic ages the son excluded the daughter from inheritance ‘a son born of the body does not give the paternal wealth to (his) sister’³⁵. A passage of the Taittirīya-saṁhitā is relied upon by ancient and modern writers on *dharmaśāstra* for the exclusion of women in general from inheritance ‘therefore women being destitute of strength take no portion and speak more weakly than even a low person’³⁶. The Ṛgveda eulogises the stage of studenthood and the Śatapathabrāhmaṇa speaks of the duties of the Brahmacārin such as not partaking of wine and offering every evening a *samidh* to fire³⁷. The Taittirīya-saṁhitā (VI. 2. 8.

v1.c6.s2.1.4

5) relates³⁸ how Indra consigned Yatis to wolves (or dogs) and how Prajāpati prescribed a Prāyaścitta for him. The Śatapathabrāhmaṇa speaks of the king and the learned Brāhmaṇa as the upholder of the sacred ordinances.³⁹ The Taittirīyasaṁhitā says 'therefore the Śūdra is not fit for sacrifice'.⁴⁰ The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa tells us that when a king or other worthy guest comes, people offer a bull or a cow.⁴¹ The Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa speaks of Vedic study as *yajña* and the Taittirīya-āraṇyaka⁴² enumerates the five *yajñas*, which are a prominent feature of the Manusmṛti. The Ṛgveda eulogises the gifts of a cow, horses, gold and clothes.⁴³ Another passage of the Ṛgveda⁴⁴ (thou art like a *prapā* in a desert) is relied upon by Śabara on Jaimini (I. 3. 2) and by Viśvarūpa on Yājñavalkya as ordaining the maintenance of *prapās* (places where water is distributed to travellers). The Ṛgveda condemns the selfish man who only caters for himself.⁴⁵

v1.c6.s2.2

²³ अमाजूरिव॑ पि॒त्रोः सचा॑ स॒ती स॑मा॒नादा सद॑स॒स्त्वाम॑ये॒ भग॑म्। ऋग्वेद II. 17. 7.

v1.c6.s2.3

²⁴ अरोगिणीं भ्रातृमतीमसमानार्षगोत्रजाम्। याज्ञ. I. 53; *vide also* मनु III. 11.

v1.c6.s2.4

²⁵ Vide Ṛgveda III. 31. 1. and Nirukta III. 4.

v1.c6.s2.5

²⁶ e. g. the verse गृभ्णामि॑ ते सौभग॒त्वाय (ऋग्वेद X. 85. 36). Vide आप. गृ. सू. II. 4. 14.

v1.c6.s2.6

²⁷ गौ. ध. सू. IV. 4; बौ. ध. सू. I. 11. 2; आप. ध. सू. II. 5. 11. 17; मनु III. 27.

v1.c6.s2.7

²⁸ वसिष्ठधर्मसूत्र I. 36-37; note आप. ध. सू. II. 6. 13. 11 where the word 'purchase' is tried to be explained away and also पू. मी. सू. VI. 1. 15. 'क्रयस्य धर्ममात्रत्वम्'

v1.c6.s2.8

²⁹ भ॒द्रा व॒धूर्भवति॒ यत्सु॒पेशा॑ः स्व॒यं सा मि॒त्रं व॑नुते॒ जने॑ चित्। ऋग्वेद X. 27. 12.

v1.c6.s2.9

³⁰ न हि ग्रभायारणः सु॒शेवो॑ अ॒न्योद॑र्यो॒ मर्न॑सा॒ मन्त॒वा उ॑। ऋग्वेद VII. 5. 8.

v1.c6.s2.10

³¹ जायमानो वै ब्राह्मणस्त्रिभिर्ऋणवा जायते ब्रह्मचर्येण ऋषिभ्यो यज्ञेन देवेभ्यः प्रजया पितृभ्यः।

v1.c6.s2.11

³² को वां शयुत्रा विधवेव देवरं मर्यं न योषा कृणुते सधस्थ आ । ऋग्वेद X. 40. 2.

v1.c6.s2.12

³³ मनुः पुत्रेभ्यो दायं व्यभजत् । तै. सं. III. 1. 9 4. This passage is relied upon by आप. ध. सू. II. 6. 14. 11 and बौ. ध. सू. II. 2. 2.

v1.c6.s2.13

³⁴ तस्माज्ज्येष्ठं पुत्रं धनेन निरवसाययन्ति । तै. सं. II. 5. 2. 7. This passage is referred to by आप. ध. सू. II. 6. 14. 12 and बौ. ध. सू. II. 2. 5.

v1.c6.s2.14

³⁵ ‘न जामये तान्वो रिक्थमारेक्’ ऋग्वेद III. 31. 2. Vide निरुक्त III. 5 for explanations of this verse.

v1.c6.s2.15

³⁶ तस्मात्स्त्रियो निरिन्द्रिया अदायादीरपि पापात्पुंस उपस्तितरं वदन्ति । तै. सं. VI. 5. 8. 2. Here the portion spoken of is really that of the *soma* beverage. Vide बौ. ध. सू. II. 2. 47 for reliance on this passage and also हरदत्त (on आप. ध. सू. II. 6. 14. 1) and सरस्वतीविलास (para. 21 and 336). Vide also शतपथब्रा. IV. 4. 2. 13 for a similar passage.

v1.c6.s2.16

³⁷ ब्रह्मचारी चरति वेविषद्विषः स देवानां भवत्येकमङ्गम् । ऋग्वेद X. 109. 5. The शतपथब्रा. (XI. 5. 4. 18) reads ‘तदाहुः । न ब्रह्मचारी सन्मध्वश्नीयात्’. Compare मनु II. 177. Vide शतपथब्रा. XI. 3. 3. 1 for *samidh*.

v1.c6.s2.17

³⁸ इन्द्रो यतीन् सालावृकेभ्यः प्रायच्छत् । मेधातिथि (on मनु XI. 45) quotes this. Vide ऐ. ब्रा. 7. 28 and ताण्ड्यमहाब्रा. 8. 1. 4, 13. 4. 17 and अथर्ववेद II. 5. 3.

v1.c6.s2.18

³⁹ एष च श्रोत्रियश्चैतौ ह वै द्वौ मनुष्येषु धृतव्रतौ । शतपथ V. 4. 4. 5.

v1.c6.s2.19

⁴⁰ तस्माच्छूद्रो यज्ञेऽनवक्लृप्तः । तै. सं. VII. 1. 1. 6.

v1.c6.s2.20

⁴¹ तद्यथैवादो मनुष्यराजे आगतेऽन्यास्मिन्वाहर्त्युक्षाणं वा वेहतं वा क्षदन्त एवमस्मा एतत्क्षदन्ते यदग्निं मथ्नन्ति । ऐ. ब्रा. I.15. Compare वसिष्ठधर्मसूत्र 4. 8.

v1.c6.s2.21

⁴² पञ्च वा एते महायज्ञाः सतति प्रतायन्ते सतति संतिष्ठन्ते देवयज्ञः पितृयज्ञो भूतयज्ञो मनुष्ययज्ञो ब्रह्मयज्ञः । तै. आ. 2. 10. 7.

v1.c6.s2.22

⁴³ उच्चा॒ दिवि दक्षि॑णावन्तो अस्थु॒र्ये अ॑श्व॒दाः स॒ह ते सूर्ये॑ण । हिर॑ण्य॒दा अ॒मृत॒त्वं भ॑जन्ते॒ वासॊदाः सोम॒ प्र ति॑रन्त्॒ आयु॑ः ॥ ऋग्वेद X. 107. 2.

v1.c6.s2.23

⁴⁴ धन्वनि॑व प्र॒पा अ॑सि॒ त्वम॑ग्न इ॒यक्ष॑वे पू॒र्वे प्रत्न राजन् । ऋग्वेद X. 4. 1.

v1.c6.s2.24

⁴⁵ केवलाघो भवति केवलादी । ऋग्वेद X. 117. 6.

v1.c6.s2.25

The foregoing brief discussion will make it clear that the later rules contained in the *dharmasūtras* and other works on *dharmaśāstra* had their roots deep down in the most ancient Vedic tradition and that the authors of the *dharmasūtras* were quite justified in looking up to the Vedas as a source of *dharma*. But, as said above, the Vedas do not profess to be formal treatises on *dharma*; they contain only disconnected statements on the various aspects of *dharma*; we have to turn to the smṛtis for a formal and connected treatment of the topics of the *dharmaśāstra*.

3. When Dharmaśāstra works were first composed

v1.c6.s3.1

An important question is to find out when formal treatises on *dharma* began to be composed. It is not possible to give a definite answer to this question. The Nirukta (III. 4-5) shows that long before Baudhāyana mentions by name several writers on dharma, viz. Aupajaṅghani, Kātya, Kāśyapa, Gautama, Maudgalya and Hārīta. Āpastamba also cites the views of numerous sages such as those of Kaṇva, Kautsa, Hārīta and others. There is a Vārtika which speaks of Dharmaśātra⁵⁰. Jaimini speaks of the duties of a Śūdra as laid down in the dharmaśāstra⁵¹. Patañjali shows that in his days *dharma-sūtras* existed and that their authority was very high, being next to the commandments of God⁵². He quotes verses and dogmas that have their counterparts in the dharmaśūtras. The foregoing discussion establishes that works on the *dharmaśāstra* existed prior to Yāska or at least prior to the period 600-300 B. C. and in the 2nd century B. C. they had attained a position of supreme authority in regulating the conduct of men.

v1.c6.s3.2

⁵⁰ धर्मशास्त्रं च तथा। Vide महाभाष्य vol. I, p. 242.

v1.c6.s3.3

⁵¹ शूद्रश्च धर्मशास्त्रत्वात्। पू. मी. सू. VI. 7. 6.

v1.c6.s3.4

⁵² नैवेश्वर आज्ञापयति नापि धर्मसूत्रकाराः पठन्ति अपवादैरुत्सर्गा बाध्यन्तामिति । महाभाष्य vol. I, p. 115 and vol. II, p. 365. पतञ्जलि quotes आम्राश्च सिक्ताः पितरश्च प्रीणिताः (vol. I. p. 14) for which vide आप. ध. सू. I. 7. 20. 3 तद्यथाम्रे फलार्थे निर्मिते छाया गन्ध इत्यनूत्पद्येते. पतञ्जलि says 'तैलं न विक्रेतव्यं मांस न विक्रेतव्यम् ' and लोमनखं स्पृष्ट्वा शौचं कर्तव्यम् (vol. I p. 25).

v1.c6.s3.5

In this book the whole of the extant literature on *dharma* will be dealt with as follows:—First come the dharmasūtras, some of which like those of Āpastamba, Hiraṇyakeśin and Baudhāyana form part of a larger Sūtra collection, while there are others like those of Gautama and Vasiṣṭha which do not form part of a larger collection; some *dharmasūtras* like that of Viṣṇu are, in their extant form, comparatively later in date than other *sūtra* works; some *sūtra* works like those of Śaṅkha-Likhita and Paiṭhīnasi are known only from quotations. Then early metrical smṛtis like those of Manu and Yājñavalkya will be taken up for discussion; then later versified smṛtis like that of Nārada; there are many smṛti works like those of Bṛhaspati and Kātyāyana that are known only from quotations. The two epics, the Mahābhārata and the Rāmāyaṇa, and the Purāṇas also have played a great part in the development of the Dharmaśāstra. The commentaries on the smṛtis, such as those of Viśvarūpa, Medhātithi, Vijñāneśvara, Aparārka, Haradatta will be next passed in review and then the digests on *dharma* such as the works of Hemādri, Toḍaramalla, Nīlakaṇṭha and others.

v1.c6.s3.6

It is very difficult to settle the chronology of the works on dharmaśāstra, particularly of the earlier ones. The present writer does not subscribe to the view of Max Müller (H. A. S. L. p. 68) and others that works in continuous Anuṣṭubh metre followed sūtra works⁵³. Our knowledge of the works of that period is so meagre that such a generalisation is most unjustifiable. Some works in the continuous śloka metre like the Manusmṛti are certainly older than the Viṣṇudharmasūtra and probably as old as, if not older than, the Vasiṣṭhadharmasūtra. One of the earliest extant dharmasūtras, that of Baudhāyana, contains long passages in the śloka metre, many of which are quotations and even Āpastamba has a considerable number of verses in the śloka metre. This renders it highly probable that works in the śloka metre existed before them. Besides a large literature on *dharma* existed in the days of Āpastamba and Baudhāyana which has not come down to us. In the absence of that literature it is futile to dogmatise on such a point.

v1.c6.s3.7

⁵³ Vide S. B. E vol. II, p. IX, but see Goldstücker's Pāṇini (pp. 59, 60, 78) against Max Müller and Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar's Carmichael lectures for 1918, pp. 105-107.

4. The Dharmasūtras

v1.c6.s4.1

It seems that originally many, though not all, of the *dharmasūtras* formed part of the Kalpasūtras and were studied in distinct *sūtracaraṇas*. Some of the extant dharmasūtras here and there show in unmistakable terms that they presuppose the Gṛhyasūtra of the *caraṇa* to which they belong. Compare Āp. Dh. S. I. 1. 4. 16 with Āp. Gṛ. S. I. 12 and II. 5; and Baud. Dh. S. II. 8. 20 with Baud. Gṛ. S. II. 11. 42 (and other sūtras)⁵⁴. The Dharmasūtras belonging to all sūtracaraṇas have not come down to us. There is no dharmasūtra completing the Āśvalāyana Śrauta and Gṛhya sūtras; no Mānavadharmasūtra has yet come to light, though the

v1.c6.s4.2

⁵⁴ अग्निमिन्धीत परिसमूह्य समिध आदध्यात् सायं प्रातर्यथोपदेशम् । आप. ध. सू. I. 1. 4. 16; अग्निमिन्ध्व। प्रागग्रैर्दर्भैः परै परिस्तृणाति । आप. गृ. I. 12 and इध्ममादाया- ... यति दर्शपूर्णमासवत्तूष्णीम् । आप. गृ. II. 5 ; शेषमुक्तमष्टकाहोमे (बौ. ध. सू. II. 8. 20) refers to बौ. गृ. II. 11. 42; मूर्धललाटनासाग्रप्रमाणा याज्ञिकस्य वृक्षस्य दण्डाः (बौ. ध. सू. I. 2. 16) refers to बौ. गृ. II. 5. 66 and other places where पलाश is one of the याज्ञिक trees.

v1.c6.s4.4

Mānava Śrauta and Gṛhya sūtras are extant; in the same way the Śāṅkhāyana Śrauta and Gṛhya sūtras, but no Śāṅkhāyana sūtra. It is only in the case of the Āpastamba, Hiraṇyakeśi, Baudhāyana Sūtracaraṇas that we have a complete *kalpa* tradit with its three components of Śrauta, Gṛihya and Dharma sūtras. Tantravārtika of Kumārila contains very interesting observations on this point. It tells us that Gautama (dharmasūtra) and Gobhila (gṛhyasūtra) were studied by the *Chandogas* (Sāmavedins), Vasiṣṭha (dharmasūtra) by the Ṛgvedins, the dharmasūtra of Śaṅkha-Likhita by the followers of Vājasaneya-saṁhitā and the sūtras of Āpastamba and Baudhāyana by the followers of the Taittirīya Śākhās. The Tantravārtika (p. 179) establishes it as a *siddhānta* (on Jaimini I. 3. 11) that all the *dharma* and *gṛhya* sūtras are authoritative for all Aryan people. From this it appears that although originally all sūtracaraṇas might not have possessed dharmasūtras composed by the founder of the *caraṇa* or ascribed to him, yet gradually certain dharmasūtras were specially taken over or appropriated by certain *caraṇas*. As the *dharmasūtras* were mostly concerned with rules about the conduct of men as members of the Āryan community and did not deal with ritual of any kind, all *dharmasūtras* gradually became authoritative in all schools.

v1.c6.s4.5

The *dharmasūtras* were closely connected with the *gṛhyasūtras* in subjects and topics. Most of the Gṛhyasūtras treat of the sacred domestic fire, the divisions of Gṛhya sacrifices, the regular morning and evening oblations, sacrifices on new and full moon, sacrifices of cooked food, annual sacrifices, marriage, *puṁsavana*, jātakarma, upanayana and other *saṁskāras*, rules for students and *snātakas* and holidays, śrāddha offerings, madhuparka. In most cases the Gṛihyasūtras confine themselves principally to the various events of domestic life; they rarely give rules about the conduct of men, their rights, duties and responsibilities. The dharmasūtras also contain rules on some of the above topics such as marriage and the saṁskāras, brahmacarya and snātakas and holidays, on śrāddha and pāka. It is therefore not to be wondered at that in the Āpastamba-gṛhyasūtra the topics of the duties of the Brahmacārin and the house-holder, of *atithis* and of *śrāddha* are meagrely treated as compared with the Āpastamba-dharmasūtra. The dharmasūtras very rarely describe the ritual of domestic life; they merely touch upon it; their scope is wider and more ambitious; their principal purpose is to dilate upon the rules of conduct, law and custom. Some sūtras are common to both the Āpastamba-gṛhya and the dharma sūtra⁵⁶. Sometimes the gṛhyasūtra appears to refer to the dharmasūtra⁵⁷. There are certain points which distinguish the dharmasūtras (the more ancient of them at least) from smṛtis. (a) Many dharmasūtras are either parts of the Kalpa belonging to each sūtracaraṇa or are intimately connected with the gṛhyasūtras. (b) The dharmasūtras sometimes betray some partiality in their Vedic quotations for the texts of that Veda to which they belong or in the caraṇas of which they are studied. (c) The authors of the (older) dharmasūtras do not claim to be inspired seers or superhuman beings⁵⁸, while the other smṛtis such as those of Manu and Yājñavalkya are ascribed to Gods like Brahmā. (d) The *dharmasūtras* are in prose or in mixed prose and verse; the other smṛtis are in verse. (e) The language of the *dharmasūtras* is generally more archaic than that of the other smṛtis. (f) The *dharmasūtras* do not proceed upon any orderly arrangement of topics, while the other smṛtis (even the oldest of them, viz. Manusmṛiti) arrange their contents and treat of the subjects under three principal heads viz. *ācāra*, *vyavahāra* and *prāyaścitta*. (g) Most of the *dharmasūtras* are older than most of the other smṛtis.

v1.c6.s4.6

⁵⁵ तन्त्रवार्तिक p. 179 ' पुराणमानवेतिहासव्यतिरिक्तगौतमवसिष्ठशङ्खलिखितहारीता पस्तम्बबौधायनादिप्रणीतधर्मशास्त्राणां गृह्यग्रन्थानां च प्रतिशाख्यलक्षणवत्प्रतिचरणं पाठव्यवस्थोपलभ्यते । तद्यथा गौतमौयगोभिलीये छन्दोगैरेव परिगृहीते । वासिष्ठं बह्वृचैरेव शङ्खलिखितोक्तं च वाजसनेयिभिः । आपस्तम्बबौधायनीये तैत्तिरीयैरेव प्रतिपन्ने । एवं तत्र तत्र गृह्यव्यवस्थाम्युपगमादि दर्शयित्वा विचारयितव्यम् । किं तानि तेषामेव प्रमाणान्युत सर्वेषाम् । (on पू. मी. सू. I. 3. 11).

v1.c6.s4.7

⁵⁶ e. g. पालाशो दण्डो ब्राह्मणस्य...इत्यवर्णसंयोगेनेके उपदिशन्ति। आप. गृ. IV. 17. 15. 16 and आप. ध. I. 1. 2. 38.

v1.c6.s4.8

⁵⁷ e. g. the आप. गृ. says ‘मासि श्राद्धस्यापरपक्षे यथोपदेशं कालाः’ (VIII. 21. 1.). This has in view आप. ध. सू. II. 7. 16. 4-22.

v1.c6.s4.9

⁵⁸ Compare गौ. ध. I. 3-4 and आव. ध. सू. I. 2. 5. 4. 'तस्मादृषयो ऽवरेषु न जायन्ते नियमातिक्रमात्', and आप. ध. सू. II 6. 13. 9 तदन्वीक्ष्य प्रयुञ्जानः सीदत्यवरः.

5. The Dharmasūtra of Gautama

v1.c6.s5.1

This has been printed several times (there is Dr. Stenzler's edition of 1876, the Calcutta edition of 1876, the Ānandāśrama edition with the commentary of Haradatta, and the Mysore Government edition with the bhāṣya of Maskari ; it was translated by Bühler in S. B. E., Vol. II. with an introduction ). The Ānandāśrama edition of 1910 which is incorrect in a few places ( e. g. 21. 7 ) has been used in this work. This dharmasūtra is, as we shall see, the oldest of those we have. The Gautama-dharmasūtra was specially studied by followers of the Sāmaveda (see note 55 above). The commentary on the Caraṇavyūha tells us that Gautama was one of the nine subdivisions of the Rāṇāyanīya school of the Sāmaveda. A teacher Gautama is mentioned frequently in the Lātyāyanaśrautasūtra ( e. g. I. 3. 3 and I. 4. 17 ) and in the Drāhyāyaṇaśrauta ( e. g. I. 4. 17, IX. 3. 15 ) of the Sāmaveda. The Gobhilagṛhya ( III. 10. 6 ) which belongs to the Sāmaveda cites Gautama as an authority. Therefore it is not improbable that a complete Gautamasūtra embodying Śrauta, Gṛhya and Dharma doctrines once existed. There are other indications pointing to the close connection of the Gautamadharmasūtra with the Sāmaveda. Chapter 26 of the dharmasūtra about *Kṛcchra* penance is the same, almost word for word, as the Sāmavidhāna⁵⁹ Brāhmaṇa ( I. 2, Burnell's ed. ). Among the purificatory texts ( 21 in number ) mentioned in Gau. Dh. S. ( 19. 12 ) there are nine that are Sāmans. The mention of the five utterances ( ' Vyāhṛtis ' ) resembles the number in the Vyāhṛtisāma⁶⁰ though the order is different. It is however to be noted that Gautama is a generic name. In the Kaṭhopaniṣad, both Naciketas ( II. 4. 15, II. 5. 6 ) and his father ( I. 1. 10 ) are styled Gautama. In the Chāndogyopaniṣad there is a teacher Hāridrumata Gautama ( IV. 4. 3 ).

v1.c6.s5.2

⁵⁹ There are however considerable divergences; e. g. गौ. ध. सू. 26. 10-12 are ‘आपो हि ष्ठेति तिसृभिः पवित्रवतीभिर्मार्जयीत हिरण्यवर्णाः शुचयः पावका इत्यष्टाभिः । अथोदकतर्पणम् । नमोह्माय &c. while the सामविध.न is ‘आपोहिष्ठीयाभिरथोदकतर्पणं नमोह्माय ’. गौ. ध. सू. 26.12 contains many additions. Wherever there is divergence, it is generally Gautama that amplifies the passages found in the सामविधान.

v1.c6.s5.3

⁶⁰ गौ. ध. सू. I. 52 ओंपूर्वा व्याहृतयः पञ्च सत्यान्ताः. Again in गौ. ध. सू. 25. 8 we have प्रा॑र्तौषद्धवाङ्मनसापचारे व्याहृतयः पञ्च सत्यान्ताः, while in गौ. 28. 8. the five व्याहृतिs seem to be भूः, भुवः, स्वः, तपः, सत्यं. As हरदत्त remarks the five व्याहृतिs in व्याहृतिसाम are भूः, भुवः, स्वः, सत्यं, पुरुषः. The व्याहृतिs are generally declared to be seven ( तै. आ. 10. 28.1), the first three being styled महाव्याहृतिs ( vide मनु II. 81.)

v1.c6.s5.4

According to Haradatta the dharmasūtra has 28 chapters. The Calcutta edition adds one chapter on *Karmavipāka* after chapter 19. In many places Gautama unmistakably refers to his own previous *dicta*; e. g. Yathoktaṁ vā (23. 16) refers to 23. 10; 23. 26 refers to 17. 8-26; 17. 18 refers to 15. 18. The following are briefly the contents of the Gautamadharmasūtra:—1. Sources of dharma, rules about interpretation of texts, time of *Upanayana* for the four *varṇas*, the appropriate girdle, deer skin, cloth and staff for each Varṇa, rules about *śauca* and ācamana, method of approaching the teacher; 2 rules about those not invested with sacred thread, rules for the *brahmacārin*, control of pupils, period of study; 3 The four āśramas, the duties of *brahmacārin*, *bhikṣu*, and *vaikhānasa*; 4 rules about the house-holder, marriage, age at time of marriage, eight forms of marriage, sub-castes; 5 rules about sexual intercourse on marriage, the five great daily sacrifices, the rewards of gifts, *madhuparka*, method of honouring guests of the several castes; 6 rules about showing respect to parents, relatives (male and female) and teachers, rules of the road; 7 rules about the avocations of a brāhmaṇa, avocations for him in distress, what articles a brāhmaṇa could not sell or deal in; 8 the forty saṁskāras and the eight spiritual qualities (such as *dayā*, forbearance &c.); 9 the observances for a *snātaka* and householder; 10 the peculiar duties of the four castes, the responsibilities of the king, taxation, sources of ownership, treasure-trove, guardianship of minor's wealth; 11 Rājadharma, the qualities of the king's *purohita*; 12 punishments for libel, abuse, assault, hurt, adultery and rape, theft in the case of the several varṇas and rules about money-lending and usury and adverse possession, special privileges of brāhmaṇas as to punishments; payment of debts, deposits; 13 rules about witnesses, falsehoods when excusable; 14 rules of impurity on birth and death; 15 Śrāddha of five kinds, persons not fit to be invited at Śrāddha; 16 Upākarma, period of Vedic study in the year, holidays and occasions for them; 17 rules about food allowed and forbidden to Brāhmaṇas and other castes; 18 the duties of women, *niyoga* and its conditions, discussion about the son born of *niyoga*; 19 the causes and occasions of prāyaścitta, five things that remove sin (*japa*, *tapas*, *homa*, fasting, gifts), purificatory Vedic prayers, holy food for one who practises *japa*, various kinds of *tapas* and gifts, appropriate times and places for *japa* &c; 20 abandoning a sinner who does not undergo prāyaścitta and the way of doing it; 21 sinners of various grades, mahāpātakas, upapātakas &c.; 22 prāyaścittas for various sins such as *brahmahatyā*, adultery, killing a Kṣatriya, Vaiśya, Śūdra, cow and other animals &c.; 23 prāyaścitta for drinking wine, and nasty things, for incest and unnatural offences, and for several transgressions by brahmacārin; 24 secret *prāyaścittas* for *mahāpātakas* and *upapātakas*; 26 the penances called Kṛcchra and Atikṛcchra; 27 the penance called Cāndrāyaṇa; 28 partition, strīdhana, reunion, twelve kinds of sons, inheritance.

v1.c6.s5.5

The Gautama-dharmasūtra is written entirely in prose and it contains no verses either quoted or composed by the author himself, as is the case with the other *dharmasūtras*. Here and there occur sūtras that look like portions of Anuṣṭubh verses e. g. 23. 27⁶¹. The language of Gautama agrees far more closely with the standard set up by Pāṇini than the *dharmasūtras* of Baudhāyana and Āpastamba. It is not very easy to account for this difference. It is obvious that commentators and generations of students that were brought up in the tradition of the Pāṇinean grammar tampered with the text and improved it in accordance with their notions of correct Sanskrit. But why this process should not have been carried out to the same extent in the case of Āpastamba it is difficult to say. A conjecture may be hazarded that the Āp. Dh. S. being a well-knit component of the Āp. *Kalpa* and being studied as such was less liable to being tampered with than the Gautama Dh. S., which probably did not in its origin belong to any particular *kalpa*. The same commentator, Haradatta, explained both Gautama and Āpastamba. Haradatta, who as will be seen later on, was a great grammarian, shows in several places that the current reading was ungrammatical from the Pāṇinean stand-point and that he preferred readings that were in consonance with Pāṇini's rules⁶². There are still a few un-Pāṇinean words, e. g. in 1. 14 ('dvāviṁśateḥ' for dvāviṁśāt') and 9. 52 (kulaṁkula). The Tantravārtika (p. 99) appears to discuss the various readings in Gautama (I. 45⁶³). A few sūtras quoted from Gautama in the Mitākṣarā (e. g. the sūtra ‘utpatyaiva arthsvāmitvam labhante), the Smṛticandrikā (ʻdvyaṁśaṁ vā pūrvajaḥ syāt) and other works are not found in the extant text. This fact along with the fact of an interpolation of one chapter makes it clear that the present text of Gautama is of somewhat doubtful authority.

v1.c6.s5.6

⁶¹ आक्रोशामृतहिंसासु त्रिरात्रं परमं तपः ।

v1.c6.s5.7

⁶² e. g. on गौ. ध. सू. 16. 21 (ऋग्यजुषं च सामशब्दो यावत्) he says 'ऋक्च यजुश्व ऋग्यजुषम् । अचतुरेतत्यादिन। निपातः । षष्ठ्यन्तपाठस्तु (i. e. ऋग्यजुषां) नास्मभ्यं रोचते;' on गौ. ध. सू. 25. 8 (प्रतिषिद्धवाङ्मनसापचारे) he says वाङ्मनसोरिति पाठोस्मभ्यं न रोचते । अचतुरोति समासान्तविधिप्रसङ्गात् ।'

v1.c6.s5.8

⁶³ It follows from the discussion in the तन्त्रवार्तिक that the ancient *pāṭha* in its day was ‘लेपगन्धापकर्षणं शौचममेध्यलिप्तस्य’ while the present text has ‘०शौचममेध्यस्य’. *Vide* वसिष्ठधर्मसूत्र III. 48 which reads ‘०कर्षणे शौचममेध्यलिप्तस्य’, etc.

v1.c6.s5.9

The literature known to the Gautama-dharmasūtra was extensive. Besides the Vedic saṁhitās and Brāhmaṇas it mentions the following works; Upaniṣads (19. 13), the Vedāṅgas (8. 5 and 11. 19), Itihāsa (8. 6), Purāṇa (8. 6 and 11. 19), Upaveda (11. 19), dharmaśāstra (11. 19). That he borrows a chapter from the Sāmavidhāna-brāhmaṇa has been mentioned above. He borrows the first six sūtras of the 25th chapter from the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (11.18). The śramaṇaka (in Gautama III. 26) is, according to Haradatta, the Vaikhānasa-śāstra (either composed by Vikhanas or treating of the duties of hermits). Gautama refers to Ānvīkṣikī (XI. 3). The only teacher of *dharma* he quotes by name in Manu (in 21.7) who is cited for the proposition that there is no expiation for the three sins of *brahmahatyā*, drinking wine and violation of the bed of the *guru*. Haradatta says that in the extant Manusmṛti the same propositions are laid down about *brahmahatyā* and *surāpāna* (in Manu 11. 89 and 146 respectively), but that as to violation of *gurutalpa* a passage from the Manusmṛti has to be searched out (i. e. such a passage is not found there). From this Bühler drew the conclusion that Gautama refers to the dharmasūtra attributed to Manu (and not to any versified Manu-smṛti). But Bühler is not right in drawing this inference. In the first place in spite of what Haradatta says there *are* verses in the extant Manusmṛti (XI.104-105) which say that death is the expiation for violation of the *guru’s* bed. In the second place there is nothing to show, even if Haradatta were correct, that Gautama refers only to a *dharmasūtra* of Manu and not to a versified work. Besides Manu, Gautama frequently quotes certain views ascribed to the ‘Ācāryas’ (e. g. III. 35, IV. 18). What teachers are meant by the word ‘Ācāryāḥ’ (which occurs in the Nirukta, in Kauṭilya and various other works), it is difficult to say.

v1.c6.s5.10

Probably the word means ‘the general traditional view of most writers in that particular śāstra on a particular point.’ In numerous places Gautama refers to the views of his predecessors in the words ‘eke’ (2. 15, 40 and 56, 3. 1, 4. 17, 7. 23 &c.) and ‘ekeṣām’ (28. 17 and 38). This proves that Gautama was preceded by great literary activity in the sphere of dharmaśāstra. Gautama 11. 28 seems to be a reminiscence of the Nirukta (II. 3)⁶⁴.

v1.c6.s5.11

⁶⁴ ‘दण्डो दमनादित्याहुस्तेनादान्तान्दमयेत्.’ The निरुक्त has दण्डो ददते...दमनादित्यौपमन्यवः'.

v1.c6.s5.12

The earliest reference to Gautama as an author on dharma occurs in the Baudhāyanadharmasūtra. Baudhāyana discusses the authoritativeness of usages peculiar to the north or the south and quotes Gautama as saying that it is wrong to hold that certain customs must be held authoritative in certain countries (even though opposed to Vedic tradition and smṛti). This refers to G. Dh. S. 11. 20. In another place Baudhāyana gives it as his view that a Brāhmaṇa, if he cannot make a living by teaching, officiating as a priest or by gifts, should earn his livelihood as a Kṣatriya and quotes the views of Gautama as opposed to this⁶⁵. The extant Gautama on the other hand teaches the same view as that of Baudhāyana⁶⁶. Buhler made the plausible suggestion that the sūtra in the extant Gautama is an interpolation. Govindasvāmī, the commentator of Baudhāyana, suggests that another Gautama is referred to by Baudhāyana. It is possible to suggest that in the Ms. of Gautama used by Baudhāyana the sūtra about living as a Kṣatriya did not occur and the next sūtra about living as a Vaiśya alone occurred. Chapter 19 of the Gautamadharmasūtra which forms an introduction to prāyaścittas in Gautama seems to have been borrowed wholesale by Baudhāyana (III. 10) with slight changes. That Baudhāyana borrows follows from the fact that the chapter in Baudhāyana occurs in the middle of the discussion about prāyaścittas and not as an introduction, which is the case in Gautama. Baudhāyana treats of penances in several places (II. 1, III. 5. 10 and IV. 1. 4). There are besides many sūtras in both Gautama and Baudhāyana that exhibit a close correspondence, e. g.

v1.c6.s5.13

⁶⁵ अध्यापनयाजनप्रतिग्रहैराक्तः क्षत्रधर्मेण जीवेत्प्रत्यनन्तरत्वात्। नेति गौतमोत्युग्रो हि क्षत्रधर्मो ब्राह्मणस्य । बौ. ध. सू. II. 2. 69-70.

v1.c6.s5.14

⁶⁶ याजनध्यापनप्रतिग्रहाः सर्वेषाम् । पूर्वः पूर्वो गुरुः। तदलाभे क्षत्रवृत्तिः । तदलाभे वैश्यवृत्तिः । गौ. ध. सू. 7. 4-7.

v1.c6.s5.15

Gautama III. 25-34 and Baudhāyana II. 6. 17 about Vaikhānasa, Gaut. 3. 3 and 35 and Baud. II. 6. 29, Gaut. 15. 29 and Baud. II. 8. 2, Gaut. 23. 8-10 and Baud. II. 1. 12-14, Gaut. 24. 2 and Baud. II. 3. 8. The Āp. Dh. S. II. 6. 15. 25 speaks of Smṛti as laying down that up to *upanayana* there is no *adhikāra* for *homa*. This probably refers to Gautama II. 1-3. The Vasiṣṭhadharmasūtra also quotes the views of Gautama in two places (4. 34 and 36, impurity on death). The first refers to Gautama 4. 41 but the second cannot be traced in the extant Gautama. Chapter 22 of Vasiṣṭha is borrowed from the Gautamadharmasūtra, chapter 19. There are besides many sūtras that are the same or almost the same in Gautama and Vasiṣṭha, e. g. Gautama 3. 31-33 and Vas. 9. 1-3, Gaut. 3. 26 and Vas. 9. 10, Gaut. 1. 44 and Vas. 3. 37, Gaut. 1. 40 and Vas. 3. 38, Gaut. 1. 45-46 and Vas. 3. 48, Gaut. 1. 28 and Vas. 3. 49, Gaut. 14. 5-7 and Vas. 4. 24-26. Gautama is referred to in the Manusmṛti (III. 16) as the son of Utathya. Gautama is one of the authors of *dharmaśāstras* enumerated in Yājñavalkya (I. 5). Aparārka quotes a verse from the Bhaviṣyapurāṇa which speaks of Gautama's prohibition about drinking⁶⁷. Similarly Kullūka (on Manu XI. 146) quotes a verse from the same Purāṇa which refers to Gautama 23. 2. Kumārila in his Tantravārtika quotes over a dozen sūtras from Gautama which present the same text as we have⁶⁸. Gautama 11. 29 and 12. 4 are quoted by Śaṅkara in his *bhāṣya* on Vedāntasūtra III. 1. 8 and I. 3. 38 respectively. Viśvarūpa in his commentary on Yājñavalkya quotes numerous sūtras from Gautama. In Medhātithi's *bhāṣya* on Manu the writer more frequently quoted than any other is Gautama (e. g. on Manu II. 6, VIII. 125 &c.).

v1.c6.s5.16

⁶⁷ प्रतिषेधः सुरापाने मद्यस्य च नराधिप । द्विजोत्तमानामेवोक्तः सततं गौतमादिभिः ॥ भविष्यपुराण quoted by अपरार्क p. 1076.

v1.c6.s5.17

⁶⁸ Vide JBBRAS vol. I (new series) for 1925, pp. 66-67.

v1.c6.s5.18

The foregoing discussion about the literature known to the Gautama Dh. S. and the authors and works that mention Gautama or quote the dharmasūtra helps us in arriving at the approximate age of the dharmasūtra. He is separated by a long interval from the Sāmavidhāna Brāhmaṇa. He is later than Yāska and wrote at a time when Pāṇini's system was either not in existence or had not attained a pre-eminent position. The extant text was known to Baudhāyana and Vasiṣṭha and was in the same state long before 700 A. D. The sūtra betrays no knowledge of the onslaught delivered on Brahmanism by Buddha and his followers. He uses the term Bhikṣu (3. 10) instead of the term parivrājaka that occurs in Baudhāyana, Āpastamba and other sūtra works and lays down that a *bhikṣu* is to stay in one place in the rains, which reminds one of the Buddhist ‘bhikkhu’ and ‘Vasso’. Gautama cites the opinion of some that Yavana is the offspring of a Kṣatriya male and a Śūdra female (4. 17). It is supposed by many scholars that the Yavanas became known to the Indians only at the time of Alexander's invasion and hence every work in which the word *yavana* occurs must be later than 320 B. C. Bühler (S. B. E. vol. II. Intro. lvi.) seems to suggest that the sūtra where the word Yavana occurs in Gautama may be an interpolation. This is not a satisfactory explanation. One may ask, if Bühler believes that the Indians borrowed their alphabet centuries before Alexander from the neighbours of the Greeks, why it is improbable that the Indians may not have heard of the word Yavana centuries before Alexander and why Yavanas may not have resided in India long before that date. Taking all these things into consideration the Gautama-dharmasūtra cannot be placed later than the period between 600-400 B. C.

v1.c6.s5.19

Haradatta wrote a learned commentary on the Gautama-dharmasūtra called Mitākṣarā. For an account *vide* sec. 87 below. In numerous places he quotes the explanations of other commentators of Gautama (e. g. 9. 52; 10. 12, 56, 66; 11. 17; 12. 32; 21. 9 &c.). The *bhāṣya* of Maskari, son of Vāmana, is also a learned one, but may probably be later than Haradatta, since the interpretations which he quotes as given by others are found to be those of Haradatta (vide on Gaut. 12. 30, 13. 20-22).

v1.c6.s5.20

Asahāya seems to have written a *bhāṣya* on Gautama; *vide* sec. 59 below.

v1.c6.s5.21

The Mitākṣarā, the Smṛticandrikā, Hemādri, Mādhava, and other writers quote a śloka-Gautama. *Vide* Parāśara-Mādhavīya, vol. I, part I, p. 7. Aparārka, Hemādri and Mādhava quote Vṛddha-Gautama, while the Dattakamīmāṁsā (p. 72) quotes Vṛddha-Gaut. and Bṛhad-Gaut. side by side on the same point. These are later works. Jīvānanda publishes a smṛti of Vṛddha-Gautama in 22 chapters and about 1700 verses (part II, pp. 497-636), where it is said that Yudhiṣṭhira asked Kṛṣṇa about the *dharmas* of the four castes. This smṛti seems to have been originally taken from the Aśvamedhikaparva of the Mahābhārata, as Mādhava and others cite verses occurring in it as from that parva (vide Parāśaramādhavīya vol. I, part I, pp. 108–110).

6. The Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra

v1.c6.s6.1

This has been edited several times (text by Dr. Hultzsch at Leipzig in 1884, text in the Ānandāśrama collection of smṛtis and in the Mysore Government Oriental Series in 1907 with the commentary of Govindasvāmin; translated in S. B. E., Vol. 14, with an Introduction). The Mysore edition has been used in this work. Baudhāyana is a teacher of the Kṛṣṇayajurveda. A complete set of the Baudhāyanasūtras has not yet been recovered and has not been as carefully preserved as the sūtras of Āpastamba and Hiraṇyakeśin. Dr. Burnell arranges Baudhāyana's sūtras into six sutras, the Śrautasūtra in 19 praśnas (probably); Karmāntasūtra in 20 adhyāyas; Dvaidhasutra in four praśnas; Gṛhyasūtra in four praśnas; Dharmasūtra in four praśnas; Śulvasūtra in three adhyāyas. The commentators offer no indication as to the place originally assigned to the *gṛhya*, *dharma* and *śulva sūtras* in the whole collection. Dr. Caland in his monograph (A. D. 1903) ‘Uber das Rituelle sūtra des Baudhāyana’ gives on p. 12 the contents of the Baudhāyanasūtra as follows:—Praśnas I–XXI Śrauta, XXII–XXV Dvaidha, XXVI–XXVIII Karmānta; XXIX–XXXI Prāyaścitta, XXXII Śulvasūtra, XXXIII–XXXV Gṛhyasūtra, XXXVI Gṛhyaprāyaścitta; XXXVII Gṛhyaparibhāṣā, XXXVIII–XLI Gṛhyapariśiṣṭa; XLII–XLIV Pitṛmedha, XLV Pravara, XLVI–XLIX Dharma. Dr. Caland edited nine *praśnas* of the Śrautasūtra for the B. I. Series (A. D. 1904). Dr. R. Shamsastri published for the Mysore University (in 1920) the Baudhāyanagṛhyasūtra with *paribhāṣā*, *gṛhyaśeṣa*, Pitṛmedhasūtra. The Gṛhyasūtra cites the view of Baudhāyana himself (I. 7). The Baudhāyana-dharma refers to the Gṛhya and presupposes it in several places (vide note 54). In the Baudhāyanagṛhya (III. 9. 6) we have a reference to *padakāra* Ātreya, Vṛttikāra Kauṇḍinya, pravacanakāra Kaṇva Bodhāyana, and Sūtrakāra Āpastamba.68a A similar passage occurs in the Bhāradvāja Gṛhyasūtra. In the Baudhāyana-dharmasūtra (II. 5. 27 Ṛṣitarpaṇa) we have Kaṇva Bodhāyana, Āpastamba sūtrakāra and Satyāṣāḍha Hiraṇyakeśin one after another. These references show that Kaṇva Bodhāyana was an ancient sage when the Baudhāyana-dharmasūtra was written and that he could not have been the author of the gṛhya or the dharma sūtras of Baudhāyana. Baudhāyana may have been a descendant of this Kaṇva Bodhāyana. This surmise is supported by Govindasvāmin who explains Baudhāyana occurring in Baudhāyanadharmasūtra I. 3. 13, as Kāṇvāyana. In the dharmasūtra Baudhāyana is himself cited as an authority several times (e. g. I. 4. 15 and 24, III. 5. 8, III. 6. 20). In all these places the Mysore edition reads Bodhāyana, while the Ānandāśrama reads Baudhāyana. In one or two places he is styled 'bhagavān' (III. 6. 20). Several explanations are offered by the commentator Govindasvāmin (on I. 3. 13). He says that it is the practice of the Ācāryas to refer to themselves in the third person (as Medhātithi says on Manu⁶⁹) or that the author of the dharmasūtra is a pupil of Baudhāyana as the Manusmṛti is promulgated by Bhṛgu, the pupil of Manu, or there was some other Baudhāyana whose works have not come down to us.

v1.c6.s6.2

68a अथ दक्षिणतः प्राचीनावीतिनो वैशम्पायनाय कलिङ्गवे तित्तिरये उखायोख्यायात्रेयात्रेयाय पदकाराय कौण्डिन्याय वृत्तिकाराय कण्वय बोधायनाय प्रवचनकारायापस्तम्बाय सूत्रकाराय सत्याषाढाय हिरण्यकेशाय वाजसनेयाय याज्ञवल्क्याय भारद्वाजायग्निवेश्यायाचार्येभ्य ऊर्ध्वरेतोभ्यो वानप्रस्थेभ्यो वंशस्थेभ्य एकपत्नीभ्यः कल्पयामीति. The epithets must be understood as arranged above, since elsewhere the epithet सूत्रकार is specially appropriated to आपस्तम्ब. The हिरण्यकेशिगृह्य (II. 20. 1, ed. by Kirste in 1889) makes this clear. It reads 'आत्रेयाय पदकाराय कौण्डिन्याय वृत्तिकाराय सूत्रकारेभ्यः सत्याषाढाय प्रवचनकर्तृभ्य आचार्येभ्यः &c. भारद्वाजगृह्य (quoted by Dr. Caland in 'Uber das Rituelle &c. p. 3. n. 2) reads 'बोधायनाय भरद्वाजाय सूत्रकारायोपस्तम्बाय सर्वेभ्यः सूत्रकारेभ्यः &c.'

v1.c6.s6.3

⁶⁹ 'प्रायेण ग्रन्थकाराः स्वमतं परापदेशेन ब्रुवते.'

v1.c6.s6.4

The following are the contents of the Baudhāyana-dharmasūtra:—*Praśna* I:—Sources of *dharma*, who are *śiṣṭas*, *pariṣad*, different practices of northern and southern India, countries where *śiṣṭas* reside and where mixed castes reside, prāyaścitta for visiting countries of the latter type; 2. Studenthood for 48, 24 or 12 years, time of *upanayana* and the girdle, skin, staff appropriate to each caste, duties of *brahmacārin*, eulogy of *brahmacarya*; 3. The duties of the *snātaka* who has completed his studies and observances but has not yet married; 4. directions about carrying the earthen jar (in the case of the *snātaka*); 5. bodily and mental *śauca*, purification of various substances, impurity on birth and death, meaning of *sapiṇḍa* and *sakulya*, rules of inheritance, purification on touching a corpse or a woman in her menses or on dog-bite, what flesh and food was allowed and forbidden; 6. Purification from the point of view of sacrifice, purification of clothes, ground, grass, fuel, vessels, and articles used in sacrifice; 7. Rules about the importance from the sacrificial point of view of sacrifice, of the sacrificial utensils, priests, the sacrificer and his wife, ghee, cooked offerings, the victim, *soma* and fires; 8. The four *varṇas* and the sub-castes; 9. Mixed castes; 10. the duties of kings, the five great sins and punishments for them, punishments for killing birds, witnesses; 11. The eight forms of marriage, holidays; *Praśna* II. 1. Prāyaścittas for *brahmahatyā* and other great sins, prāyaścittas for a *brahmachārin* violating his vow of celibacy, for marrying a *sagotra* girl, for marrying before elder brother, sins lesser than the great ones, description of such penances as Parāka, Kṛcchra, Atikṛcchra; 2. Partition of heritage, larger share for the eldest, the several substitutes for an *aurasa* son, exclusion from inheritance, dependence of women, prāyaścitta for adultery by men and women, rules about *niyoga*, means of subsistence in distress, continuous duties of the house-holder such as Agnihotra &c.; 3. The daily duties of the householder such as bathing, ācamana, Vaiśvadeva, giving food; 4. *Sandhyā*; 5. Rules about the manner of bathing, of Ācamana, worship of the sun, and about the method of propitiating (‘*tarpaṇa*’) gods, sages and pitṛs; 6. The five great daily *yajñas*; the four castes and their duties; 7. regulations about dinner; 8. Śrāddha; 9. eulogy of sons and spiritual benefit from sons; 10. rules about *saṃnyāsa*; *Praśna* III. 1 modes of subsistence for the two kinds of householders, Śālīna and Yayāvara; 2 the means of subsistence called ‘Śaṇṇivartanī’; 3. the duties of the forest hermit and his means of livelihood; 4. prāyaścitta for not observing the vows of *brahmacārin* or householder; 5. method of reciting *Aghamārṣaṇa*, the holiest of texts; 6. the ritual of *praśṛtayāvaka*; 7 the purificatory *homa* called Kūṣmāṇḍa; 9. the penance called *cāndrāyaṇa*; 9 the recital of the Vedas without taking food; 10. theories about purifications for sin, purifying things; *Praśna* IV. 1. prāyaścittas of various kinds viz. for eating forbidden food or drink &c.; 2. *prāṇāyāmas* and *Aghamārṣaṇa* as purifiers in case of several sins; 3. secret prāyaścittas; 4. Various Vedic texts as prāyaścittas; 5. Means of securing *siddhi* by means of *japa*, *homa*, *iṣṭi* and *yantra*: the penances called Kṛcchra, Ati-Kṛcchra, Sāntapana, Parāka, Cāndrāyaṇa; 6 the muttering (japa) of holy texts, the iṣṭis; 7 praise of *Yantras*, various Vedic texts used in *homa*; 8 censure of those who enter on the means of *siddhi* out of great greed, permission to get these things done through another in certain circumstances.

First 90 of 2,140 passages. Read on

Linked texts (53)