History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s10.8

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.