History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s7.13.3

v1.c6.s7.13.3

5-12) about a *brahmacārin* eating the leavings (*ucchiṣṭa*) of his *guru*, provided the things are not directly forbidden by Śruti, seems to be directed against Baudhāyana (II. 1. 25-26). Although Āpastamba does not expressly quote Gautama, he appears to have had before him the Gautama-dharma-sūtra. He speaks of a smṛti (II. 6. 15. 25) that lays down that *upanayana* confers *adhikāra* on a man for śāstric actions and that before *upanayana* one is free to do anything and to eat anything. This, as interpreted by Haradatta, refers to Gautama (II. 1)⁸⁸. There are striking coincidences between Gautama and Āpastamba, e. g. Gaut. I. 19. = Āp. I. 1. 1. 41 (about some teachers prescribing the yellow robe to a *brahmacārin*), Gaut. I. 3 = Āp. II. 6. 13. 7 (about the violation of *dharma* by the great in former ages), Gaut. 9. 52 = Āp. I. 11. 31. 13), Gaut. 23. 9 = Āp. 1. 9. 25. 2; Gaut. 16. 19 = Āp. I. 3. 9. 14-15). Āpastamba frequently refers to the views of his predecessors in the words 'eke' (I. 1. 2. 37, 38, 41; I. 1. 4. 17; I. 2. 5. 20; I. 2. 6. 4; I. 3. 9. 3; I. 3. 11. 3 &c.) and 'aparam' (II. 6. 15. 22). It is somewhat remarkable that in many of these cases (where 'eke' occurs), the views are those either held by Gautama or ascribed by him also to others, e. g. Āp. I. 1. 2. 38 about the staff of a *brahmacārin* refers to Gaut. I. 23; Āp. I. 1. 2. 41 is almost same as Gaut. I. 19, Āp. I. 2. 5. 20 seems to refer to Gaut. 1. 54-59, Āp. 1. 3. 9.