History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c93.62

v7.c93.62

With regard to these five cases where Bādarāyana is cited in the P. M. S. three points emerge, viz the author of the P. M. S. agrees with Bādarāyana's view in all except in X. 8 44 (where the two differ), that the view attributed to Bādarāyana in P. M. S. I. 1. 5 has correspondence with the views of the V. S. (I. 3. 28-29) and that four views out of five refer to purely sacrificial matters to which nothing corresponds in the V. S It follows that the author of the extant P. M. S had some work of Bādarāyana dealing with Pūrvamīmāmsā matters before him and that, if Bādarāyana be the author of the extant V. S., the latter had composed a work on Pūrvamīmāmsā matters also or that there was another Bādarāyana who wrote only on Pūrvamīmāṁsā. The five references to Jaimini in P. M. S. have been noted above and the sūtra VI. 3. 4, which led Prof Sastry to postulate three Jaiminis, has been already explained as not necessarily leading to any such conclusion.