History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s6.18.2

v1.c6.s6.18.2

All the three founders of the three schools are mentioned in the Baudhāyanagṛhya and dharma sūtra. One may equally argue with good reason that both these works knew a sūtra work of Āpastamba and that the extant dharmasūtra of Āpastamba is that work. Another reason assigned for the priority of Baudhāyana's work over Āpastamba's is that, though both have numerous sūtras that agree almost word for word, a comparison of the views of the two writers shows that Āpastamba lays down stricter and more puritanic (and therefore later) views on certain points than Baudhāyana. Gautama, Baudhāyana and Vasiṣṭha mention several secondary sons, while Āpastamba is silent about them. Gautama, Baudhāyana (II. 2. 17, 62), Vasiṣṭha and even Viṣṇu approve of the practice of *niyoga*, while Āpastamba condemns it (II. 6. 13. 1-9). Gautama and Baudhāyana (I. 11. 1) speak of eight forms of marriage, while Āpastamba speaks of only six and omits Prājāpatya and Paiśāca (II. 5. 11. 17-20 and II. 5. 12. 1-2). Baudhāyana (II. 2. 4-6) allowed a larger share to the eldest son on a partition, while Āpastamba condemns such a procedure (II. 6. 14. 10-14). The Baudhāyana-gṛhyasūtra (II. 4. 6) allows upanayana to *rathakāra*, while Āpastamba (gṛhya 4. 10. 1-4) does not do so (dharmasūtra I. 1. 1. 19). These points are hardly conclusive on the question of date. From very ancient times there was great divergence of opinion among the doctors of the law on most, if not on all, of these points.