History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.588

v4.c63.t2.588

The Tantravārtika explains that the first two sūtras are meant to refer to another question also, viz. whether the rules of the gṛhyasūtras¹⁶⁵² and of such dharmasūtra works as the sūtra of Gautama are authoritative only as to certain groups or are meant to be authoritative for all. He begins by saying that the Purāṇas, the Manusmṛti and Itihāsa (i. e. the Mahābhārata) are equally authoritative for all people and then points out that the Gobhila-gṛhya and Gautama-dharmasūtra are traditionally accepted by the students of the Sāmaveda, that the dharmasūtra of Vasiṣṭha is accepted by the students of the Ṛgveda, the sūtra of Śaṅkha-Likhita by the followers of the white Yajurveda and the sūtras of Āpastamba and Baudhāyana by the followers of the Taittirīya Śākhā. The Śāstradīpikā explains that an author who was a student of the Sāmaveda taught his own work to his pupils who also learned the Sāmaveda under him, that these pupils in their turn taught that work to others and in that way there arose a tradition among the students of the Sāmaveda to study the sūtra of Gautama. Therefore, to say even as to gṛhya works that they are restricted to particular groups of persons is not correct. Similarly in the case of practices there is no epithet or attribute that is common to all those who practise them or which distinguishes those who do not observe them from those that observe them and therefore it is not possible to restrict such practices as Holākā to particular countries or groups of people.