Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s10: 10. Viṣṇudharmasūtra

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s10

Language
English

Contents

10. Viṣṇudharmasūtra

v1.c6.s10.1

The Viṣṇudharmasūtra has been printed several times in India, viz. by Jivananda in his Dharmaśāstrasaṅgraha (1876 part I pp. 70-176), by the Bengal Asiatic Society (1881, ed. by Dr. Jolly with extracts from the commentary Vaijayantī), by M. N. Dutt (Dharma-śāstra texts, vol. II. pp. 541-666, Calcutta, 1909) and translated by Dr. Jolly (in the S. B. E. vol. VII with an Introduction). In the present work Dr. Jolly's edition has been used. The sūtra contains one hundred chapters. Though the number of chapters is so large, the sūtra is not very extensive. There are several chapters such as 40, 42 and 76 that contain only one sūtra and one verse. The first chapter and the last two are entirely in verse; the remaining chapters are in mixed prose and verse, the versified portion being generally at the end of each chapter. As pointed out by the Vaijayantī the sūtra is in close relation to one of the oldest schools of the Yajurveda, viz. Kaṭha. It also stands in a peculiar relation to the extant Manusmṛti. According to the Caraṇavyūha, Kaṭha and Cārāyaṇīya are two of the twelve sub-divisions of Caraka-śākhā of the Yajurveda. Dr. Jolly (S. B. E. vol. VII p. XII) says that the Viṣṇudharmasūtra has four chapters (21, 67, 73 and 86) in common with the Kāṭhak-gṛhya (except the final parts in 21, 67, 86) and that both drew from a common source. Bühler points out (West and Bühler's digest, 3rd ed. p. 35) that the Kāṭhakagṛhya found in Kashmir agrees closely with the Dharmasūtra of Viṣṇu and the *mantras* in the latter agree with the Kāṭhaka recension of the Yajurveda. But the Viṣṇudharmasūtra is not the work of the same author that composed the Kāṭhaka Śrauta or Gṛhya sūtras, nor does it appear that it formed part of the Kāṭhaka Kalpa. Dr. Jolly (R. u. S. p. 7) says that Govindarāja (12th century) in his Smṛtimañjarī cites a passage in prose from a Kaṭhasūtraḳrt on the penance for Brāhmaṇa murder which is wanting in our Viṣṇusmṛti (vide S. B. E. Vol. 25, p. xxi n for the passage).

v1.c6.s10.2.1

The contents of the Viṣṇu-dharma-sūtra are :-1. The earth being lifted out of the surging ocean by the great Boar, went to Kaśyapa to inquire as to who would support her thereafter, and was sent by him to Viṣṇu who told her that those who would follow the duties of *varṇas* and *āśramas* would be her support, whereupon the earth pressed the great God to impart to her their duties; 2. the four *varṇas* and their *dharmas*; 3. the duties of kings (*rājadharmaḥ*); 4. the Kārṣāpaṇa and smaller measures; 5. punishments for various offences; 6. debtors and creditors, rates of interest, sureties; 7. three kinds of documents; 8. witnesses; 9. general rules about ordeals; 10-14. ordeals of balance, fire, water, poison and holy water (*kośa*); 15. the twelve kinds of sons, exclusion from inheritance, eulogy of sons; 16. offspring of mixed marriages, aud mixed castes; 17. partition, joint family and rules of inheritance to one dying sonless, re-union, strīdhana; 18. partition among sons of a man from wives of different castes; 19. carrying the dead body for cremation, impurity on death, praise of Brāhmaṇas; 20. the duration of the four Yugas, Manvantara, Kalpa, Mahākalpa, passages inculcating that one should not grieve too much for the departed; 21. the rites for the dead after period of mourning, monthly śrāddha, sapiṇḍīkaraṇa; 22.

v1.c6.s10.2.2

periods of impurity on death for *sapiṇḍas*, rules of conduct in mourning, impurity on birth, and rules about impurity on touching various persons and objects; 23. purification of one's body and of various substances; 24. marriage, forms of marriage, inter-marriages, guardians for marriage; 25. the *dharmas* of women; 26. precedence among wives of different castes; 27. the saṁskāras, garbhādhāna and others; 28. the rules for *brahmacārins*; 29. eulogy of ācārya; 30. time for the starting of Vedic study and holidays; 31. father, mother and ācārya deserve the highest reverence; 32. other persons deserving of respect; 33. the three sources of sin, viz. passion, anger, greed; 34. kinds of *atipātakas*, deadliest sins; 35. five *mahāpātakas*; 36. *anupātakas*, that are as deadly as the mahāpātakas; 37. numerous upapātakas; 38-42. other lesser sins; 43. the twenty one hells and the duration of hell torments for various sinners; 44. the various low births to which sinners are consigned for various sins; 45. the various diseases suffered by sinners and the low pursuits they have to follow by way of retribution; 46-48. various kinds of kṛcchras (penances), sāntapana, cāndrāyaṇa, prasṛtiyāvaka; 49. actions prescribed for a devotee of Vāsudeva and the rewards thereof; 50. prāyaścitta for killing a brāhmaṇa and other human beings, for killing cows and other animals; 51-53.

v1.c6.s10.2.3

prāyaścittas for drinking wine and other forbidden substances, for theft of gold and other articles, for incest and sexual intercourse of other kinds; 54. prāyaścittas for miscellaneous acts; 55. secret penances; 56. holy hymns like *Aghamarṣaṇa* that purge sin; 57. whose society should be avoided, Vrātyas, unrepentant sinners, avoiding gifts; 58. the pure, variegated (mixed) and dark kinds of wealth; 59. The duties of house-holders, *pākayajñas*, the five daily *mahāyajñas*, honouring guests; 60. the daily conduct of a householder and good breeding; 61-62. rules about brushing the teeth, *ācamana*; 63. means of livelihood for a householder, rules for guidance, good and evil omens on starting on journey, rule of the road; 64. bathing and *tarpaṇa* of gods and Manes; 65-67. worship of Vāsudeva; flowers and other materials of worship, offering of food to deities and *piṇḍas* to ancestors and giving food to guests; 68. rules about time and manner of taking food; 69-70. sexual intercourse with wife and about sleep; 71. general rules of conduct for a *snātaka*; 72. value of self-restraint; 73-86. śrāddhas, the procedure of śraddhas, aṣṭakā śrāddha, the ancestors to whom śrāddha is to be offered, times of śrāddha, fruits of śrāddha on the several week days and the 27 *nakṣatras* and the *tithis*, materials for śraddha, brāhmaṇas unfit to be invited at śrāddha, brāhmaṇas who are *paṅktipāvana*; countries unfit for śrāddha, tīrthas, letting loose of a bull; 87-88.

v1.c6.s10.2.4

gifts of antelope skin, or a cow; 89. kārtika snāna; 90. eulogy of gifts of various sorts; 91-93. works of public utility such as wells, lakes, planting gardens, embankments, gifts of food, flowers &c.; difference in merit according to the recipient; 94-95. rules about forest hermit (*vānaprastha*); 96-97. about *saṁnyāsa*, anatomy of the bones, muscles, veins, arteries &c.; concentration in various ways 98-99. praise of Vāsudeva by the Earth and of Lakṣmī; 100. rewards of studying this Dharmaśāstra.

v1.c6.s10.3

The Viṣṇudharma-sūtra somewhat resembles the Dharma-sūtra of Vasiṣṭha. Like the latter it is full of verses. But one feature which is peculiar to the Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra is that it professes to be a revelation by the supreme Being. None of the other dharmasūtras so far described assumes this role. The style of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra is easy and somewhat diffuse. It presents hardly any ungrammatical forms. The printed text is corrupt only in a few cases; the verses occur generally at the end of chapters. Sometimes the number of verses in a chapter is very large e. g. in chapter 20 there are 21 sūtras and 32 verses, in chapter 23 there are 24 verses, in chap. 43 there are 14, in chap. 51 there are are 20 verses. Some of the verses are in the classical Indravajrā (19. 23-24) and the Upajāti metres (23.61 and 59. 30) and a few are Triṣṭubhs (29. 9-10, 30. 47, 72. 77). The three Triṣṭubhs (29. 9-10, 30. 41) are three out of the four verses of the Vidyā-sūkta occurring in the Nirukta (II. 4). There is one verse (72. 6) which has eleven letters in the first *pada* and twelve in the remaining three.

v1.c6.s10.4.1

In determining the age of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra one is confronted with a difficult problem. Some of the chapters undoubtedly contain material which is comparatively old and on a level with the ancient Dharmasūtras of Gautama and Āpastamba. Such are the chapters about rājadharma and punishments (3 and 5), the rules about twelve sons and the mixed castes (15-16), funeral rites and mourning (21 and 22). But there are very large portions of the work that bear a clear impress of a later date. The Viṣṇudharmasūtra and the Manusmṛti have at least 160 identical verses. But this is not all. There are hundreds of sūtras which are merely the prose equivalents of verses from the Manusmṛti. For example, Viṣṇu 2. 3 and Manu 2. 16, Viṣṇu 3. 4 and 6 and Manu 7. 69-70, Viṣṇu 3. 7-10 and Manu 7. 115, Viṣṇu 3. 11-15 and Manu 7. 116-117, Viṣṇu 4. 1-13 and Manu 8. 132-137, Viṣṇu 5. 4-7, and Manu 9. 237, Viṣṇu 20. 1-21, and Manu I. 67-73, Viṣṇu 51. 7-10 and Manu 4. 209-212, Viṣṇu 59. 21-25 and Manu 3. 70, Viṣṇu 62. 224 and Manu 2. 59, Viṣṇu 71. 48-52 and Manu 4. 80, and Viṣṇu 96. 14-17 and Manu 6. 46 agree almost word for word. The verses that are identical in both are found in all the chapters of the Manusmṛti from the second to the last, the largest number (about 47) occurring in the 5th and chapters eleven, two, and three respectively contributing 25, 24, and 19 verses.

v1.c6.s10.4.2

Therefore the question whether the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra borrows from Manu or *vice versa* or whether both borrow from a common original assumes very great importance. As the correspondence extends over several hundred verses of the Manusmṛti, the last hypothesis of borrowing from a common original does not recommend itself to me. No such common source is known to have existed and to say that there were hundreds of floating popular verses whose authorship was unknown and which were drawn upon by both works appears to me to be an extremely gratuitous and unsatisfactory assumption. In my opinion it is the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra that borrowed the verses *ad hoc* or adapted them from the Manusmṛti. There are several lines of reasoning that strengthen this hypothesis. There are some verses that are identical in both, in which the name of Manu occurs, which the Viṣṇudharmasūtra omits by making slight verbal changes. For example, Viṣṇu 23. 50 substitutes 'tat parikīrtitam' for 'Manur-abravīt' in Manu 5. 131 and Viṣṇu 51. 64 reads 'nānyatreti kathaṁcana' for Manu 5. 41 'nānyatretyabravīn-Manuḥ' (this last occurs in Vas. 4. 6). The reason for these changes is obvious. The Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra professes to be a direct revelation from Viṣṇu and it is in keeping with this assumed role that not one human author is mentioned by name in the sūtra. Therefore where the name of Manu occurred in any verse, it was purposely omitted.

v1.c6.s10.4.3

Another reason why the sūtra must be presumed to be the borrower is the character of the extant work itself. It is a kind of hotchpotch and contains verses that are identical with those of other works. For example, several verses of the Bhagavadgītā occur in the Viṣṇudharmasūtra. Viṣṇu 20, 48-49 and 51-52 are the same as Gītā 2. 13. 23, 24, 28; Viṣṇu 72. 7 and Gītā 13. 14-18 are almost identical. Viṣṇu 96. 97 and the first half of 98 are the same as Gītā 13. 1-2, except that in keeping with its character of a revelation to the Earth, the Viṣṇudharmasūtra substitutes 'vasudhe' for 'kaunteya' and 'bhāvinī' for 'bhārata.' Several verses of the Yājñavalkya-smṛti are identical with those of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra. For example, Viṣṇu 6. 41 and Yāj. 2. 53, Viṣṇu 8. 38 and Yāj. II. 79, Viṣṇu 9. 33 and Yāj. 2. 97, Viṣṇu 17. 17 and Yāj. 2. 138, Viṣṇu 17. 23 (first half) and Yāj. 2. 210 (latter half), Viṣṇu 62. 9 and Yāj. I. 21, Vi. 63. 51 and Yāj. I. 117 are identical. Besides these there are hundreds of prose sūtras that are identical with passages of Yājñavalkya. For example, Vi. 3. 72-74 = Yāj. II. 1-4; Vi. 3. 82 = Yāj. I. 318-320 (rules about land grants); Vi. 5. 65-69 = Yāj. II. 217-220, Vi. 5. 73 = Yāj. II. 221; Vi. 45. 3-12 = Yāj. 3. 209-211 (about diseases suffered by sinners); Vi. 60. 24 = Yāj. I. 17; Vi. 96. 55-79 = Yāj. 3. 84-90 (about 360 bones of the body); Vi. 96. 80-88 = Yāj. 3. 100-102 (about the number of arteries, veins, muscles etc.); Vi. 96. 89-92 = Yāj. 3. 93-99. Dr.

v1.c6.s10.4.4

Jolly thinks that Yājñavalkya borrows from Viṣṇu the whole of the anatomical section (vide S. B. E. vol. VII, p. XX). With great respect I differ from this opinion. There is nothing to show that the anatomical details were first given to the world by Viṣṇu. They must have first been embodied in works on medicine such as those of Caraka and Suśruta¹¹¹ and were probably copied by Dharmasūtra writers. But if there is any borrowing between Viṣṇu and Yājñavalkya I think from the character of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra that it is the sūtra that must be regarded as borrowing from Yājñavalkya. There are several matters in the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra which are wanting in Yājñavalkya and which induce one to place the extant sūtra later than Yājñavalkya, viz. the name ‘Jaiva’ for Thursday (Vi. 78. 5), the long list of tīrthas (Vi. chap. 85) which include Śrīparvata and the five rivers of the south called southern Pañcanada, the importance of the conjunction of the moon and Jupiter on a full moon day (Vi. 49. 9-10), the vague definition of Āryāvarta¹¹² (Vi. 84. 4). The verse in Viṣṇu 54. 33 (about half prāyaścitta for boys and old men) is ascribed to Aṅgiras by the Mitākṣarā (on Yāj. III. 243).

v1.c6.s10.5

¹¹¹ Vide चरक, शारीरस्थान chap. 7 and सुश्रुत, शारीरस्थान chap. 5; in the अष्टाङ्गहृदय of वाग्भट, शारीर chap. 3, we find 360 bones and 700 muscles.

v1.c6.s10.6

¹¹² चातुर्वर्ण्यव्यवस्थानं यस्मिन्देशे न विद्यते । स म्लेच्छदेशो विज्ञेय आर्यावर्तस्ततः परः ॥ It is to be noted that Yāj. (I. 2) lays down *dharmas* for the country in which the black deer moves about, following Baud. I. I. 28 and Vas. 1. 13.

v1.c6.s10.7

Therefore the most probable conclusion is that the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra borrows from the Manusmṛti, Yājñavalkya and other authors. It would be too much to assume that the Manusmṛti, the Bhagavatgītā and Yājñavalkya borrow from such a comparatively unimportant work as the Viṣṇudharmasūtra.

v1.c6.s10.8

The above conclusion is further strengthened by certain other considerations. The Manusmṛti has been quoted with utmost reverence by a host of writers from the fifth century downwards, such as Śabara, Kumārila and Śaṅkarācārya. Yājñavalkya was commented upon by Viśvarūpa in the first half of the 9th century. Viśvarūpa in his commentary quotes scores of sūtras from Gautama, Āpastamba, Baudhāyana, Vasiṣṭha, Śaṅkha and Hārīta. But it is significant that Viśvarūpa in his commentary on Yājñavalkya does not quote even a single sūtra of Viṣṇu by name. It is true that Viśvarūpa (on Yāj. III. 66) says that the four forms of asceticism (*pārivrājya*) should be understood from other smṛtis like those of Viṣṇu¹¹³. This probably refers to chap. 97 of the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra. Medhātithi (on Manu 3. 248) quotes Viṣṇu (21. 12) and on Manu 9. 76 quotes a sūtra of Viṣṇu which I could not trace in the printed Viṣṇu.¹¹⁴ The Mitākṣarā mentions Viṣṇu about thirty times. The quotations are taken from chapters 19, 21, 22, 35-42, 50, 51, 52, 75 and 79 of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra, 18 sūtras of chap. 22 (on āśauca and kindred topics) being quoted on Yāj. III. 23, 24, 27, 29-30. But it is a remarkable fact that not one of the verses in the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra is cited as Viṣṇu's in the Mitākṣarā. The only exception is a verse cited as Viṣṇu's on Yāj. III. 265, which has the same purport as Viṣṇu 52. 14 (a verse) and the first *pāda* of which is identical with that of the verse in the Viṣṇudharmasūtra.¹¹⁵ A few verses that are quoted as Viṣṇu's in the Mitākṣarā could not be traced in the extant dharmasūtra.¹¹⁶ It is not unlikely that the sūtra first contained mostly prose sūtras based on Manu and the Kāṭhakagṛhya and verses were tacked on later. Among later writers of *nibandhas* Aparārka quotes Viṣṇu most profusely and the Smṛticandrikā also quotes Viṣṇu about 225 times.

v1.c6.s10.9

¹¹³ स्मृत्यन्तरेभ्यश्च विष्ण्वादिभ्यो विशेषतश्चतुर्विधः पारिव्राज्यप्रकारभेदोऽभ्युपगन्तव्यः ।

v1.c6.s10.10

¹¹⁴ The quotation is 'अष्टौ विप्रसूताः षट् राजन्यश्चतुरो वैश्या द्विगुणं प्रसूतेति न शूद्रायाः कालनियमः स्वात्संवत्सरमित्येके'; compare for a somewhat similar rule Vas. 17. 78.

v1.c6.s10.11

¹¹⁵ यथाह विष्णुः। दत्त्वैवापहृतं द्रव्यं स्वामिने व्रतमाचरेदिति । while विष्णुधर्मसूत्र reads 'दत्त्वैवापहृतं द्रव्यं धनिकस्याप्युपायतः । प्रायश्चित्तं ततः कुर्यात्कल्मषस्यापनुत्तये ॥ .'

v1.c6.s10.12

¹¹⁶ The verse are : ओष्ठौ विलोमकौ स्पृष्ट्वा वासो विपरिधाय च । quoted on Yāj. I. 195; 'अप्रशस्तास्तु कानीनगूढोत्पन्नसहोढजाः । पौनर्भवश्च नैवैते पिण्डरिक्थांशभागिनः ॥ quoted on Yāj. II. 132; अपुत्रपौत्रसन्ताने दौहित्रा धनमाप्नुयुः । पूर्वेषां तु स्वधाकारे पौत्रा दौहित्रका मताः ॥ on Yāj. II. 135; आरुष्टस्ताडितो वापि धनैर्वा विप्रयोजितः । यमुद्दिश्य त्यजेत्प्राणांस्तमाहुर्महाघातकम् ॥ ज्ञातिमित्रकलत्रार्थे सुहृत्क्षेत्रार्थमेव च । यमुद्दिश्य त्यजेत्... घातकम् ॥ उद्दिश्य कुपितो हत्वा तोषितः श्रावयेत् पुनः । तस्मिन् मृते न दोषोस्ति द्वयोरुच्छ्रावणे कृते ॥ on Yāj. III. 227; स्त्रीणामर्धं प्रदातव्यं वृद्धानां रोगिणां तथा । पादो बालेषु दातव्यः सर्वपापेष्वयं विधिः ॥ on Yāj. III. 243; गोघ्नस्य पञ्चगव्येन मासमेकं पलत्रयम् । प्रत्यहं स्यात्पराको वा चान्द्रायणमथापि वा ॥ on Yāj. III. 263.

v1.c6.s10.13

Many of the verses found in Vi. are quoted by Aparārka as Viṣṇu's, e. g. Vi. 84. 4 on Yāj. 1. 2; 68. 46-47 on Yāj. 1, 106; 67. 33 on Yāj. 1. 107; 5. 183 on Yāj. 2. 60; 10. 9-11 on Yāj. 2. 102. But there are numerous verses quoted as Viṣṇu's by Aparārka which are not found in the sūtra, e. g. on Yāj. I. 21, 53, 89, 100. Aparārka quotes almost whole chapters of Viṣṇu, e. g. Vi. 68 on Yāj. I. 106 and 90 on Yāj. I. 208, 70 on Yāj. 1. 114. It is to be noted that Vi. 70. 17 (a verse) is quoted by Aparārka as a prose sūtra (on 1. 114) with slight verbal changes. All these facts make one feel naturally sceptical about the authenticity of most of the verses in the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra. They probably formed no part of the sūtra at the time when the Mitākṣarā was composed. At all events it cannot be gainsaid that the verses are a very late part of the sūtra.

v1.c6.s10.14

The Viṣṇudhamasūtra contains quotations from all the Vedic saṁhitās and from the Aitareya-brāhmaṇa (as in Vi. 15. 45). It mentions the Vedāṅgas very frequently (30. 3 and 38, 28. 35, 83. 6), it speaks of Vyākaraṇa (83. 7), of itihāsa (3. 70, 30. 38, 83. 7), of Dharmaśāstras (3. 70, 30. 38, 73. 16, 83. 8), of Purāṇa (3. 70, 30. 38 &c.). About the close correspondence between Baud. III. 6 and Viṣṇu. 48 and between Vas. 28. 10-15 and 18-22 and Viṣṇu 56 and 87 vide remarks made above pp. 23, 57. The sūtra quotes several verses (called gāthās) and says they were sung by pitṛs; vide 78. 52-53, 80. 14, 83. 21, 85. 65-67. They bear close resemblance to the gāthās sung by the pitṛs quoted in the Anuśāsana-parva 88. 11-15 and a half verse 'eṣṭavyā bahavaḥ putrā yadyekopi Gayāṁ vrajet' is the same in Vi. 85. 67 and Anu. 88. 14. The Viṣṇusmṛti enumerates twenty one hells (43. 1-22), which are almost the same as Yājñavalkya's (3. 222-224). It mentions the names of the seven days of the week (78. 1-7), Thursday being called Jaiva, while Yājñavalkya mentions only the seven planets (with Rāhu and Ketu) in the same order (I. 296). It recommends the practice of *satī* (25. 14), speaks of *pustakas* (18. 44, 23. 56), a word which is not used by the other dharmasūtras so far described. It gives a long list of good and evil omens at the time of starting on a journey (63. 33-39). Among evil omens it includes the sight of yellow-robed ascetics (i. e. Buddhists probably) and Kāpālikas (63. 36). It prohibits speech with Mlecchas, Antyajas (71. 59) and journeys to Mleccha countries (84. 2). It contains special directions about the worship of Vāsudeva in chap. 49 and speaks of Śvetadvīpa as the reward of devotion to Vāsudeva (49. 4). Here and there, there are eulogies of Vāsudeva (1. 50-57, 65. 1, 97. 10, 98 which gives one hundred names of Viṣṇu). It speaks of the four vyūhas of Vāsudeva (67. 2) and of the Varāha incarnation. It gives a vague location of Āryāvarta as a country where the four varṇas exist (84. 4). It enumerates numerous sacred places (85. 1-52), among which Śrīparvata, Saptārṣa (modern Satara?), Godāvarī and southern Pañcanada deserve to be specially noted. Though it does not specifically enumerate the eighteen titles of law just as Yājñavalkya does not, yet it contains rules (in chapters 5-6) on almost all of them.

v1.c6.s10.15

As Yājñavalkya enumerates Viṣṇu among the propounders of dharmaśāstras, it follows that a work of Viṣṇu existed in comparatively early times. What matters that work embraced it is difficult to say. It probably contained the topics found in the works of Gautama, Āpastamba and others. It may have included portions borrowed from the Kāṭhakagṛhya. When Dr. Jolly says that certain chapters of Viṣṇu agree closely with the Kāṭhakagṛhya, all that is meant is that some of the sūtras of Viṣṇu are the same or almost the same as those of the Kāṭhakagṛhya (e. g. compare Viṣṇu 21, 73 and 86 with Kāṭhakagṛhya V. 12, V. 9, and V. 3 respectively). But in all these places Viṣṇu contains more details than the Kāṭhakagṛhya. It may however be noted that in a few cases the views of the Kāṭhakagṛhya differ from those of Viṣṇu. For example, Viṣṇu (30. 1) speaks of Vedic studies for 4½ months only in the year when once they are started on the full-moon day of Śrāvaṇa or Bhādrapada, while the Kāṭhakagṛhya (I. 9. 10) gives three alternatives, viz. 4½, 5 or 5½ months; Viṣṇu prescribes that the proper year for the upanayana of a kṣatriya is the 11th from conception (27. 16), while the Kāṭhaka prescribes the 9th, without specifying whether it is from conception or birth (IV. 1. 2); Viṣṇu enumerates eight forms of marriage (24. 18), while the Kāṭhaka (II. 3 and 4) speaks of only two, Brāhma and Āsura, and is silent about the rest; Viṣṇu (46. 19-20) defines Sāntapana and Mahāsāntapana differently from the Kāṭhaka (I. 7. 3-4), but agrees with Yājñavalkya (III. 315-316). Here the recent Lahore edition of the Kāṭhakagṛhya by Dr. Caland has been used. As it used Kāṭhaka *mantras* and borrowed from the Kāṭhakagṛhya, the dharmasūtra may have been a text-book of the Kāṭhaka school and probably originated in Kashmir and Punjab which is the home of the Kaṭhas. The date of the older portion of Viṣṇu may be placed between 300 B.C. to 100 B.C. But this is no more than a mere conjecture. It is to be noted that Kumārila does not mention the Viṣṇudharmasūtra among the sūtras studied by particular schools. Then several centuries later on the whole of the sūtra was recast from the Vaiṣṇavite point of view and received large additions both in prose and verse. When these additions were made we have no exact means of determining. It is probable that they were not made very long before Viśvarūpa. At all events the additions were made long after the Yājñavalkyasmṛti and after the 3rd century. The mention of the week days makes the sūtra comparatively a late work. The earliest epigraphic mention of a week day is in the Eran inscription of 484 A. D. (vide Fleet's Gupta inscriptions pp. 88-89) and Varāhamihira (6th century) knew the week days well. The Brahmapurāṇa (28. 55) mentions Sunday and the Padmapurāṇa mentions Thursday (Brahmakhaṇḍa chap. 11. 34). The Sūrya-siddhānta (XII. 6 and 78) speaks of the lords of days. Thus although the extant Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra is a late recast, it contains a few doctrines that were held in ancient times. For example it allows a Brāhmaṇa to marry a girl of anyone of the four castes (24. 1) and does not inveigh against *niyoga* as Manu does.

v1.c6.s10.16

A few of the sūtras agree closely with Nãrada. Vide Vi. 7. 10-11 and Nārada (Ṛṇādāna verses 136-137).

v1.c6.s10.17

The Mitākṣarā quotes all the prose passages of chapters 35-42 and ascribes them to Bṛhadviṣṇu (on Yāj. 3. 242). Similarly on Yāj. 3. 261 it ascribes Vi. 35. 3-5 to Bṛhadviṣṇu. Similarly the Smṛticandrikā (II. p. 298) ascribes Vi. 17. 4 ff to Bṛhad-Viṣṇu. The Mitākṣarā (on Yāj. 3. 267) quotes a verse of Vṛddha-Viṣṇu which summarises some sūtras of Viṣṇu¹¹⁷ (50. 6 and 12-14).

v1.c6.s10.18

¹¹⁷ The verse of वृद्धविष्णु is विप्रे तु सकलं देयं पादोनं क्षत्रिये स्मृतम् । वैश्येर्धमेक-पादस्तु शूद्रजातिषु शस्यते ॥ The sūtras are ब्राह्मणं हत्वा द्वादशसंवत्सरं कुर्यात् । पादोनं क्षत्रियवधे । अर्धं वैश्यवधे । तदधं शूद्रवधे ।

v1.c6.s10.19

In the Ānandāśrama collection of smṛtis there is a Laghu-Viṣṇu-smṛti in five chapters and 114 verses dealing with the duties of the *varṇas* and the four *āśramas*. Aparārka in his commentary on Yāj. 3. 258 quotes four verses from Laghu-Viṣṇu, which are not found in the Ānandāśrama text. So Aparārka used some other work or perhaps a larger work. The Parāśara-Mādhavīya often quotes gadya- Viṣṇu and padya-Viṣṇu. The former from a quotation in vol. I. part 2, p. 234 seems to be the Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra itself. In the Sarasvatīvilāsa numerous sūtras of Viṣṇu with the explanations of Bhāruci thereon are quoted, which are not found in the printed Viṣṇu.¹¹⁸

v1.c6.s10.20

¹¹⁸ e. g. para 637 यथाह भारुचिरेतद्विष्णुवचनव्याख्यानावसरे बीजशब्दः पिण्डवाचीति। (Viṣṇu's sūtra seems to have been बीजग्रहणानुविधायमंशं गृह्णीयात्); para 719 अत्र भारुचिः (on विष्णु's सूत्र 'पितृव्यपितृभ्रातृभिरेव संसर्गो नान्यैः) वैकल्पिकोयं संसर्गविधिरिति; para 736 अत्र भारुचिः भिन्नोदराणामिति निर्धारणे षष्ठी (on विष्णु's सूत्र 'भिन्नोदराणां संसृष्टिनो गृह्णीयुः'); para 847 contains a long sūtra of Viṣṇu 'अपित्र्यं गार्भे धार्यं मैत्रं वैद्यमाकस्मिकमादशाब्दं प्रविभाज्यमत ऊर्ध्वं सर्वमविभाज्यम्' and para 848 contains भारुचि's explanation of it. Vide pp. 32, 50, 165, 166, 243, 244 &c. of the recently published Mysore edition of the सरस्वतीविलास for sūtras of Viṣṇu which are not found in the printed text of Viṣṇu. It appears that the सरस्वतीविलास had a very much larger version of the sūtra before it.

v1.c6.s10.21

The Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra was commented upon by Nandapaṇḍita, author of several works on dharmaśāstra, who wrote at Benares the commentary called Vaijayantī (according to certain mss.) in 1679 (i. e. 1622-23 A. D.) of the Vikrama era. Dr. Jolly publishes extracts from this commentary in his edition of the sūtra.

v1.c6.s10.22

From the fact that the Sarasvatīvilāsa quotes several times the sūtras of Viṣṇu with Bhāruci's explanation, it looks probable that Bhāruci commented upon the Viṣṇudharmasūtra. For further information on Bhāruci vide sec. 61.

v1.c6.s10.23

So far only the printed and well-known dharmasūtras have been passed under review. But there were numerous other dharmasūtras which are either now extant in rare mss. or are not yet discovered but are only to be reconstructed from quotations. It is now time to discuss them.

Linked texts (24)