History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s6.8.2

v1.c6.s6.8.2

2. Whether the word "rahasya" in II. 8. 3 means the Āraṇyakas (as Govindasvāmin explains) is doubtful. Baudhāyana mentions a Vaikhānasa-śāstra in II. 6. 16, which appears to refer to the work of Vikhanas on hermits and speaks of Śrāmaṇaka (the rites prescribed by Vikhanas for initiation as hermit), just as Gautama does. Among the authors on *dharma* mentioned by name are: Aupajaṅghani (II. 2. 33 for the view that only *aurasa* son was to be recognised and not the other kinds of sons⁷¹), Kātya (I. 2. 47), Kaśyapa (or Kāśyapa in other editions, I. 11. 20 on the point that a woman bought cannot be a *patnī*), Gautama (I. 1. 23 and II. 2. 70), Prajāpati (II. 4. 15 about failure in Sandhyopāsana, and II. 10. 71 about *sannyāsa*), Manu (IV. 1. 14 and IV. 2. 16), Maudgalya (II. 2. 61, about observances of a widow being restricted only to six months after her husband's death), Hārīta (II. 1. 50). Baud. I. 2. 7 quotes a verse, which Vasiṣṭha ascribes to Hārīta (Vas. II. 6). As to Gautama, *vide* p. 17 above. Manu is only mentioned in the fourth praśna, the authenticity of which, as said above, is very doubtful. Baudhāyana II. 2. 16 (about the efficacy of *Aghamarsaṇa*) closely agrees with Manu XI. 260. The first reference to Manu's teaching cannot be traced in the Manusmṛti. Prajāpati (in III. 9. 21) seems to stand for god Brahmā and not for any real or mythical writer on *dharma*. One remarkable piece of information contained in Baudhāyana (II. 6.