Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s52: 65. Devasvāmin

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s52

Language
English

65. Devasvāmin

v1.c6.s52.1

The Smṛticandrikā tells us that Devasvāmin composed like Śrīkara and Śambhu a work in the nature of a digest of *smṛtis* (*smṛti-samuccaya*). Vide note 563 above. The commentary of Nārāyaṇa of the Naidhruva gotra, son of Divākara, on the Āśvalāyana-gṛhyasūtra⁶⁰² says that it relies upon the bhāṣya of Devasvāmin on the same work. Gārgya Nārāyaṇa, son of Narasiṁha, in his commentary on the Āśvalāyana-śrautasūtra, tells us that he follows the bhāṣya of Devasvāmin thereon. It is hardly likely that two writers of the same name flourished about the same time. Hence it may be assumed that Devasvāmin wrote bhāṣyas on the Āśvalāyana Śrauta and Gṛhya sūtras and a digest of smṛtis, where he discussed all topics of dharma, such as ācāra, vyavahāra, āśauca &c. The commentrry of Bhaṭṭoji⁶⁰³ on the Caturviṁśatimata refers to the view of Devasvāmin on śraddha and aśauca. Hemādri⁶⁰⁴ (vol. III, part 2, p. 324) and Mādhava (on Parāśara, vol. I, part 2, p. 328) also quote Devasvāmin. The Smṛticandrikā quotes the views of Devasvāmin on vyavahāra and āśauca several times. For example, Devasvāmin⁶⁰⁵ explained the word Yautaka differently from the Nighaṇṭu (which explained it as the wealth that was given to a woman when she was seated on the same seat with her husband at the time of marriage). Devasvāmin explained that the words of the Saṁgraha⁶⁰⁶ that, when a son was born to one of several full brothers, he stood as a son to all and that the same rule applied to several co-wives when one of them had a son, meant that in both cases another son should not be adopted. Devasvāmin held the view (like Bhojadeva) that the word ‘duhitṛ’ in Yājñavalkya's verses on succession meant *putrikā*.⁶⁰⁷ Devasvāmin explained Manu⁶⁰⁸ 9. 141 as saying that the adopted son (in the particular case mentioned by Manu) took all the wealth and the *gotra* of his adoptive father. Vide Smṛticandrikā (Mysore ed.) on āśauca p. 22. The Vaijayantī of Nandapaṇḍita (on Viṣṇu 22. 32) quotes the view of Devasvāmin that on the death of unmarried daughters mourning was to be observed for ten days.⁶⁰⁹ The Smṛticandrikā quotes a verse from Devasvāmin⁶¹⁰ on śrāddha also.

v1.c6.s52.2

⁶⁰² आश्वलायनगृह्यस्य भाष्यं भगवता कृतम्। देवस्वामिसमाख्येन विस्तीर्णं तत्प्रसादतः॥

v1.c6.s52.3

⁶⁰³ देवस्वामिमाधवपारिजातकारप्रभृतयस्तु मासिके आशौचेनोपहते सूतकानन्तरशुद्धिदिन एव कर्तव्यं पुरस्तदहरेव वेति । चतुर्विंशतिमतव्याख्यान p. 135 (Benares ed.).

v1.c6.s52.4

⁶⁰⁴ यदि पूर्वाह्ने पर्वसन्धिः समाप्येत तदा नितरामेव च शोभनं यदि पुनरपरात्रे रात्रौ वा तदहरुपोष्य श्वोभूते याग इति । हेमाद्रि ( कालनिर्णय ) III, 2, p. 324; vide pp. 496 and 565 of the same volume for mention of देवस्वामी.

v1.c6.s52.5

⁶⁰⁵ देवस्वामी तु पितृगृहाल्लब्धं भर्तृगृहाल्लब्धापेक्षया पृथग्ध्नतया मातुर्यौतकं मातृधनं मातुरेवेत्याह तच्चिन्त्यम् । स्मृतिच० II, p. 285 ; vide वीर० p. 696 ‘ भर्तृगृहलब्धात्पृथग्ध्नतया पितृगृहलब्धं मातृधनं यौतुकम् । यौतशब्दस्यामिश्रणमप्यर्थः । यु मिश्रणामिश्रणयोरिति धातुपाठात् । युतसिद्धाविति प्रयोगाच्चेति देवस्वाम्याह तदसत् । ’.

v1.c6.s52.6

⁶⁰⁶ The verses of the संग्रह are : यद्येकजाता बहवो भ्रातरस्तु सहोदराः । एकस्यापि सुते जाते सर्वे ते पुत्रिणः स्मृताः ॥ बह्वीनामेकपत्नीनामेष एव विधिः स्मृतः । एका चेत्पुत्रिणी तासां पिण्डदस्तु स इष्यते ॥. The स्मृतिच० (II, p. 289) says ‘तस्य पूर्वोक्तेन सहाविरोधाय देवस्वामिना तात्पर्यार्थ उक्तः उभयत्र नान्यः प्रतिनिधिः कार्य इति ग्रन्थेन ’. The same words occur in the स. वि. (para 392 and p. 305) and in the दत्तकमीमांसा (p. 42).

v1.c6.s52.7

⁶⁰⁷ एवं सोपपत्तिकं पत्न्यभावे दुहितृगामितां ब्रुवता बृहस्पतिनैव यद् दुहितृगामि धनमिति विधायकं वचनजातं तत्पुत्रिकाविषयमेव न पुनरपुत्रिकादुहितृविषयमिति धारेश्वरदेवस्वामिदेवरातमतं स्मृतितन्त्रत्वाभिशत्वाभिमानोन्मादकल्पितं निरस्तं वेदितव्यम् । स्मृतिच० II. 295.

v1.c6.s52.8

⁶⁰⁸ अत्र तृतीयपादार्थो देवस्वामिना विवृतः तदीयं सर्वं रिक्थं गोत्रं च हरेतैवेति ।

v1.c6.s52.9

⁶⁰⁹ देवस्वामी त्वप्रत्तास्वपि दशाहमाह.

v1.c6.s52.10

⁶¹⁰ श्राद्धविघ्ने समुत्पन्ने अन्तरा मृतसूतके । अमावास्यां प्रकुर्वीत शुद्धिमेके मनीषिणः । स्मृतिच० II. p. 385.

v1.c6.s52.11

In the Prapañcahṛdaya (Tri. S. series, p. 39) we are told that Devasvāmin composed a brief gloss on the 12 adhyāyas of the Pūrvamīmāṁsāsūtra and the four adhyāyas of the Saṁkarṣakāṇḍa, seeing that the bhāṣyas of Bodhāyana and Upavarṣa were vast. The Govt. collection of Mss. at Madras has Devasvāmin's bhāṣya on the Saṁkarṣakāṇḍa (*vide* Tri. Cat. vol. III, part I, Sanskrit C, p. 3841). There are not sufficient data available to establish the identity of this writer with Devasvāmin, the writer on dharmaśāstra.

v1.c6.s52.12

As the Smṛticandrikā quotes Devasvāmin so profusely, he cannot be later than 1150 A. D. His earlier limit can be determined in several ways. Gārgya Nārāyaṇa's comment on Āśvalāyanaśrauta (II. 1. 14) is quoted by Trikāṇḍamaṇḍana, who is himself quoted by Hemādri. Therefore Gārgya Nārāyaṇa could not have flourished later than 1100 A. D. (*vide* Bhandarkar's Report on search for mss., 1883-84, pp. 30-31). Therefore Devasvāmin probably flourished about 1000-1050 A. D., if not earlier. The fact that Devasvāmin held certain views similar to Bhojadeva's also corroborates the chronological position thus assigned to him.

Linked texts (17)