Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s5: 5. The Dharmasūtra of Gautama

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s5

Language
English

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).

Linked texts (21)