History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.539.2

v4.c63.t2.539.2

In these cases the proposition enunciated by Jaimini is that ‘in case of conflict (between an express śruti rule and a smṛti rule) the smṛti rule should be discarded, for when there is no conflict (with an express śruti) inference may be made (that a smṛti rule is based upon some Vedic text).’ The examples may be explained as follows: The ‘audumbarī’ is a post of udumbara planted in the *sadas* in the performance of the Agniṣṭoma; the stotras (other than Bahiṣpavamāna) are chanted near the audumbarī post in the sadas. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. p. 1155 for the fixing of the audumbara post in the *sadas* and p. 1185 for the chanting of stotras near the *audumbarī*. If the whole of the post be covered with cloth, it would not be possible to touch the post, but only the cloth would be touched. So there is contradiction. If a man is to consecrate Vedic fires when he has a son and his hair is dark, he must be between about 20 and 40 (i. e. a young man), but if a man were to observe brahmacarya for 48 years, he would be about 52 to 56 years of age before he married (as the upanayana of a brāhmaṇa was to be performed generally in the 8th year or from the 5th year onwards at the most). Only a married man could consecrate Vedic fires. But a man's hair when he is fiftytwo years of age or more can hardly be all dark. Therefore there is contradiction between the rule derived from the Veda and that derived from smṛti.