History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c93.371.2

v7.c93.371.2

4 allowing anuloma marriages and permitting a brāhmaṇa to have a śūdra woman as a wife and the emphatic statement of Yāj. I. 56-57 that it does not agree with those that declare that persons of the three higher classes can take a śūdra woman as wife. Later writers of smṛtis and nibandhas should have said that on account of this conflict there is an option. But they do not say so. They struck upon various devices to wriggle out of such apparent contradictions. The first device was declared by Bṛhaspati (about 500 A. D.) that the Manusmṛti occupies a pre-eminent position as it correctly represents the sense (the real view) of the Vedas and that a smṛti which is opposed to the teaching of Manu is not held in esteem.²⁰⁵⁹ But this was not satisfactory and some other devices were resorted to. One was to insert passages in Manusmṛti itself and in other works opposing what had already been declared as the law Two examples may be cited. As against Manu III. 13 (referred to immediately above) we find in the extant text (III. 14-19) verses very strongly condemning persons of the three higher *varṇas* taking a śūdra woman as wife. Manu allowed the practice of *niyoga* (in IX. 59-62), but the extant Manusmṛti (IX. 64-68) condemns it in no measured terms. These contradictory statements were known to Bṛhaspati who expressly says that Manu permits *niyoga* and himself forbids²⁰⁶⁰ it and assigns a reason viz.