History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s24.17

v1.c6.s24.17

Dr. Jolly (S. B. E. vol. 33 p. 276) assigns Bṛhaspati to the 6th or 7th century A. D. But this is much later by several centuries than the evidence warrants. Kātyāyana was looked upon as an authoritative writer along with Nārada and Bṛhaspati by Viśvarūpa and Medhātithi. This position he could not have attained in a century or two. So he cannot be placed later than the 6th century. Kātyāyana in several places quotes Bṛhaspati as an authority. Aparārka quotes Kātyāyana as saying that according to Bṛhaspati pastures, ways, clothes that are worn on the body, debts (or books for use according to others) and what is set apart for religious purposes should not be partitioned.³⁸¹ Kātyāyana says that according to Bṛhaspati, that wealth which a man acquires by means of his learning after refuting an opponent in a contest with a stake for the winner is styled "vidyādhana" and is not liable to partition³⁸²; and what is acquired through valour &c. by persons that were taught in the family or learnt under their father should be partitioned among the brothers, according to Bṛhaspati. If a man falsely denies his liability and if only a part of the claim is brought home to him, then he should be made to pay the whole.³⁸³ That the statement of a witness may be relied upon on a matter under his direct perception owing to his being near the plaintiff and the defendant and not otherwise; so says Bṛhaspati.³⁸⁴ The foregoing examples show that Kātyāyana looked upon Bṛhaspati as an authority who must therefore have flourished several centuries before. Therefore Bṛhaspati cannot be placed later than the 4th century A. D. As he knew the extant Manusmṛti, was later than Yāj. and probably than Nārada, Bṛhaspati must have flourished between 200 and 400 A. D. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that Viśvarūpa quotes, without making any difference, prose and verse passages of Bṛhaspati and thereby shows that in his opinion the jurist Bṛhaspati (in verse) was identical with the political writer Bṛhaspati and was a very ancient writer in his day. Medhātithi (on Manu 9. 153) quotes the verse "na pratigrahabhūr" (ascribed to Bṛhaspati by others) as Smṛtyantara. Bṛhaspati is cited in a few cases as referring to his own views in the third person³⁸⁵; sometimes he uses the first person also.³⁸⁶ Nothing can be said about his country at present. In a well-known passage Bṛhaspati refers to the usages of the southern people, of the people in the Madhyadeśa, of the eastern and northern people.³⁸⁷ In a striking and beautiful passage Bṛhaspati compares vyavahāra with yajña,³⁸⁸ the king with Viṣṇu, the successful party with the sacrificer and the defeated party with the victim, the plaint and the reply to food and the *pratijñā* to the sacrificial offering (prepared from food), the śāstras to the three Vedas and the *sabhyas* to the priests in a sacrifice. Bṛhaspati seems to have been very fond of such long-drawn metaphors.³⁸⁹