History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s25.18

v1.c6.s25.18

In the *nibandhas* several verses are ascribed to Kātyāyana along with Manu, Yājñavalkya and Bṛhaspati. For example, the well-known verse about the sixfold division of strīdhana (adhyagnyadhyāvāhanikam &c.) is ascribed by the Dāyabhāga to Manu and Kātyāyana. The half-verse “varṇānāmānulomyena dāsyam na pratilomataḥ” is the same in both Yājñavalkya (II. 183) and Kātyāyana. The Vīramitrodaya (p. 140) ascribes a verse to Bṛhaspati and Kātyāyana, in which the opinion of Bṛhaspati is cited. There is very close agreement between the definitions proposed by the two last writers of dharma, vyavahāra, caritra, and rājaśāsana. Besides Manu (or Mānavas), Bṛhaspati and Bhṛgu, Kātyāyana cites the views of several other writers on dharma. For Gārgyas and Gautama vide notes 403 and 404 above. He says, according to Kauśika, powerful robbers were to be guarded by chains of iron, were to be low-fed and were to undergo hard labour for the state till death (Aparārka p. 849). He quotes the view of Likhita that where a woman is deprived of food, raiment and dwelling (by her husband's coparceners) she would be entitled to demand her own (strīdhana) and a share from the coparceners. In one case (Aparārka p. 755). a verse is cited as Kātyāyana's in which Kātyāyana himself is named (Parāśaramādhavīya III. p. 235).