Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c9.s1.17

c9.s1.17

Smṛiti or code. It is more a compilation than an original production. The author borrows freely from Dharma Sūtras, Manu. Viṣṇu, and the Purāṇas among others, but his comprehensive manner and clear style have ensured him a wide popularity.¹ According to Yājñavalkya, there are fourteen seats or sources of the sciences and Dharma or law—the Purāṇas, Nyāya, Mimāṃsa, the Dharma Śāstras together with the Aṅgas and the Vedas. Among the promulgators of Dharma Śāstras he mentions Manu, Atri, Viṣṇu, Hārita, Uśanas, Aṅgiras, Yama, Āpastamba, Saṃvrat, Kātyāyana, Bṛihaspati, Parāśara, Vyāsa, Śaṅkha, Likhita, Dakṣa, Gautama, Śātātapa, Vasiṣṭha and himself. It seems he perceived that these authorities did not always agree among themselves. It was necessary to provide some means for the correct interpretation and elucidation of law. Yājñavalkya would constitute a Pariṣad or legal assembly, versed in the Vedas and Dharmas or in the three sciences. Its decrees should be considered law. Failing an assembly, the verdict of the foremost of theologians was law. It is remarkable that Hindu lawgivers, though wedded to tradition, recognise the need of adapting law and custom to a changing environment and provide a machinery for the purpose. It is generally recognised that the Smṛitis are not eternal or unchangeable. They have