The Sacred Laws of the Âryas, Part II — SBE Vol. 14 (trans. Georg Bühler, 1882)

Finally, the fourth Prasna is divided into

[14] c

XXXIV BAUDHAYANA,

Adhyayas, not into the Kazdikas or Khandas and Adhydyas which are found in the first two Prasnas.

This latter peculiarity is also observable in the third Prasna, and raises a suspicion against the genuineness of that part also. For, though the third Prasna in style and language resembles the first two, it is hard to believe that the author should, for no apparent reason, suddenly have changed the manner of dividing his work towards its end. This suspicion is further strengthened by two other circumstances. First, Prasnas I-II really exhaust the discussion of the whole Dharma, and the third offers supplementary information only on some points which have been touched upon previously. Secondly, several Adhydyas of Prasna III seem to have been borrowed from other works, or to be abstracts from them. Thus the tenth chapter has cer- _ tainly been taken from the Gautamiya Dharmasdstra, the sixth bears a very close and suspicious resemblance to Vishnu XLVIII}, and the third looks very much like a short summary of the doctrine of Vikhanas, whose lost Sdtra contained the original rule of the order of the Vaikhanasas or hermits, living in the forest. These circumstances justify, it seems to me, the assumption that Baudhdyana’s original Dharma-sitra consisted, like Apastamba’s, of two Prasnas only, and that it received, through followers of his school, two separate additions, first in very ancient times Prasna III, where the style of the master is strictly followed, and later Prasna IV, where the language and phraseology of the metrical Smritis are adopted. It ought to be noted that GovindasvAmin, too, does not take the whole of the four Prasnas for Baudha« yana’s composition. With respect to several passages? where Baudhdyana’s name is introduced in order to give weight to the rules, he says that the Sftras may belong to ‘a pupil” Ido not think that the criterion which he uses can be relied on in every case, because oriental authors without doubt occasionally speak of themselves as of third

1 See also Jolly, Sacred Books of the East, vol. vii, p. xix,
2 E. g. Dharma-siitra III, 5, 7.

INTRODUCTION. XXXV

vii, p. xix, 2 E. g. Dharma-siitra III, 5, 7.

INTRODUCTION. XXXV

persons. But the fact that the commentator, though an orthodox Hindu, had misgivings as to the genuineness of portions of the work, is not without significance. It seems also that even the first two Prasnas are not quite free from interpolations. Thus the Kavdik4s on the Tarpama? are certainly much enlarged by additions, the verse at I, 5, 11, 36, a repetition of I, 5, 9, 5, and some prose quotations which are introduced by the words athapy udaharanti, ‘now they quote also,’ standing usually before verses only, are at least suspicious. That the genuineness of many single passages should be doubtful, is no more than might be expected, not only on account of the separation of the Dharma-sitra from the other parts of the Kalpa, but also because the work, as we shall see further on, remained for a long time without the protection of a commentary. The practical conclusion to be drawn from this state of things is that the greatest caution must be observed in using the Baudhayana Dharma-sitra for historical purposes, and that it will be advisable to draw no inferences regarding Baudhayana’s relation to other teachers and schools from the last two Prasnas, and not to trust too much to historical inferences drawn from single passages of the first two.

The position which Baudhayana occupies among the teachers of the Taittiriya-veda has already been discussed in the Introduction to Apastamba. It has been shown that according to the Brahmanical tradition preserved by Mahadeva, the commentator of the Hirazyakesi-sAtras, he composed the first Sfitra for the followers of his Sakha, Internal and external evidence has also been adduced, proving that he certainly was more ancient than Apastamba and Hirazyakesin. It is now possible to bring forward some further facts bearing on these points. First, in the section on the Tarpawa, the libations of water offered to various deities, Rishis, and the manes, II, 5, 9, 14, Kaxzva Baudhdyana receives his share immediately after the Rzshis of the Veda and before Apastamba, the Sftrakdra, and

1 Bandhayana Dharma-sttra II, 5, 8-9.
C2

XXXVI BAUDHAYANA.

C2

XXXVI BAUDHAYANA.

Saty4shadsa Hirazyakesin. The same order is observed in the distribution of the offerings at the Sarpabali, described in the Grzhya-sitra!, where the following teachers of the Yagurveda are specially named, viz. Vaisamp4yana, Phulingu, Tittiri, Ukha, Aukhya, Atreya the author of the Pada-text, Kaundinya the author of the commentary, Kazva Baudhayana the author of the Pravaéana, Apastamba the author of the Satra, and Saty4shadia Hirawyakesin. Neither of these two passages belongs to Baudhayana. They are both clearly interpolations. But they show that Mahadeva’s statement, which makes Baudh4yana the first expounder of the Kalpa among the Taittiriyavedins, agrees with the tradition of the Baudhdyantyas themselves. For not only the place allotted to Baudhayana’s name, but still more the title Pravakanakéra which he receives, show that the followers of his school placed him before and above all other teachers of the ritual. The term pravaana, which literally means ‘proclaiming or recitation,’ has frequently the technical sense of ‘oral instruction,’ and is applied both to the traditional lore contained in the Brahmawzas, and to the more systematic teaching of the Angas?. If, therefore, a teacher is called the author of the Pravagana of a Sakha, that can only mean that he is something more than a common. Sdtrak4ra, and is considered to be the originator of the whole system of instruction among its followers. The epithet Kava, which Baudhdyana receives in both the passages quoted above, indicates that he belonged to the Vedic Gotra of the Kazvas. It deserves to be noted that Govindasvamin, too, on I, 3, 5, 13, explains the name Baudh4yana by K4zvayana ’.

1 Baudhayana Grihya-sitra IV, 8 (fol. 29, B. 5, Elph. Coll. copy, no. 5), WY aferura: aretaratat at (?) Igtarrara yfeswe fafera sarateqra- Aare cearera sferera qfearee wTeTT eheTTATT TTT HTT WIRTH Aaa Taree fecwagra (7) wrenha wataPat

Yqeha wayerha: wararatfa i See also Weber, Hist. Ind. Lit, p. or note; Max Miller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 223; Bumell, Catalogue of a Collection of Sanskrit MSS., p. 14, no. LIII.

3 See Max Miiller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 109.

5 The discovery that Baudhdyana bore also the name Kanva makes it possible

INTRODUCTION. XXXVil

Ind. Lit, p. or

note; Max Miller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 223; Bumell, Catalogue of a Collection of Sanskrit MSS., p. 14, no. LIII.

3 See Max Miiller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 109.

5 The discovery that Baudhdyana bore also the name Kanva makes it possible

INTRODUCTION. XXXVil

The style of Baudhdyana’s works furnishes, as Dr. Burnell has pointed out', another argument for their high antiquity. Compared with the Sitras of Apastamba and Hirazyakesin they are much simpler in their arrangement, and the complete absence of that anxiety to save ‘half a vowel’ which characterises the fully developed Sitra-style is very remarkable. The last point has been noticed by Govindasvamin also. In commenting on I, 2, 3, 17-18, where Baudhayana first permits students to beg food of men of all castes, and afterwards explains that he means Aryans who follow their lawful occupations, he says, ‘(If anybody should ask), “Why give two Sftras, while one Satra, (‘A student shall ask) Aryans who follow their lawful occupations, would have sufficed?” (his objection will be) correct. For this teacher is not particularly anxious to make his book short.’ In other cases we find a certain awkwardness in the distribution of the subject matter, which probably finds its explanation through the fact that Baudhayana first attempted to bring the teaching of the Taittirityas on the Dharma into a systematic form. Thus the rules on the law of inheritance are given without any apparent necessity and against the custom of the other Sfitrakaras in two different chapters, I, 5, 11, 9-16 and II, 2, 3,1-44. The section on purification, too, is divided into two separate portions, I, 4, 6-10 and I, 6, 13-15, and the second, which treats of the purification of the vessels at sacrifices, properly ought to have been placed into the Srauta-sitra, not into the Dharma-sitra. Again, the discussion of several topics is repeatedly interrupted by the introduction of rules belonging to different subjects, and Govindasv4min’s ingenuity is often taxed to the utmost in order to find the reason why certain Sftras which appato refer Apastamba’s quotation of an opinion of a K4nva, I, 6, 19, 7, to Baudhayana, instead of to a teacher of the White Yagur-veda, Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxvi.

' Tanjore Catalogue, p. 20b.

* aq fanfry aatefeate qafara fafafe qaeare: | aR wy araral arate qeacrvarhraray vata nu

XXXVIil BAUDHAYANA.

ii, p. xxvi.

' Tanjore Catalogue, p. 20b.

* aq fanfry aatefeate qafara fafafe qaeare: | aR wy araral arate qeacrvarhraray vata nu

XXXVIil BAUDHAYANA.

rently are unconnected with the main subject have been inserted. A third argument for the great antiquity of Baudhdyana’s Sftras, derived from the archaic character of some of his doctrines, has been discussed in the Introduction to Apastamba}, The number of instances where Baudhdyana’s rules are based on a more ancient order of ideas than Apastamba’s might be increased very considerably. But, as now the comparison of the two works is open to all students, I omit the cases contained in the two Dharma-sitras, and content myself with adducing one more from the less accessible Grzhya-sitras. It is a wellknown fact that the ancient Vedic ritual in certain cases admitted Sfdras, and particularly the Rathakdra or carpenter, who, according to all accounts, has Sfdra blood in his veins, to a participation in the Srauta rites. The Taittiriya-brahmaza even gives certain Mantras to be recited by the Rathakaéra at the Agnyddhana sacrifice *. Now Baudhdyana, who, Dh. S. I, 9, 17, 6, derives the origin of the Rathak4ras from a Vaisya male and Sddra female, apparently reckons him amongst the twice-born, and explicitly allows him to receive the sacrament of the initiation. He says, Gvthya-sitra II, 5, 8-9, ‘Let him initiate a Brahmava in spring, a Kshatriya in summer, a Vaisya in autumn, a Rathakdra in the rainy season; or all of them in spring’” But Apastamba, who shows great hostility against the mixed castes, and emphatically denies the right of Sfidras to be initiated, gives the same rule regarding the seasons for the initiation both in his Gvzhya and Dharma-sitras *, He, however, omits the Rathakara in both cases. There can be no doubt that Apastamba’s exclusion of the carpenter, which agrees with the sentiments prevailing in modern Brahmanical society, is an offshoot of a later doctrine, and as both he and Baudhdyana

1 Sacred Books of.the East, vol. ii, pp. xviii-xx.
3 See Weber, Indische Studien X, 12.

* gaat array WTR Trad gate ted ware coarcfafa wt waive a1 Tet ven

* Grihya-s(tra II, 4,10, §; Dharma-sitra I, 1, 1, 18.

INTRODUCTION. XXXIX

belong to the same vidy4vamsa, or spiritual family, this difference may be used as an argument for his posteriority to Baudhayana. In connexion with this rule of Baudhayana’s it ought to be mentioned that even in the present day certain subdivisions of the modern Sutérs or carpenters actually wear the Brahmanical thread, and, in spite of the adverse teaching of the SAstras, find Brahmans willing to perform the ceremony of investiture for them.

While it thus appears not incredible that Baudhdyana really was the first Sdtrakdéra of the Taittirtyas, the numerous quotations which his works contain, permit us to form an idea of the extent of the Vedic and profane literature known to him. Among the Vedic works which he adduces as authorities, or otherwise refers to, the three sections of the Taittiriya-veda, the Samhita, the Brahmaza, and the Aramyaka, naturally take the first place. For the Aranyaka he seems to have used the Andhra version, as Dh. S. II, 10, 18, 7, 11 references to the seventy-first Anuvaka of the tenth Prap4zaka occur. Two long passages, Dh. S. I, 2, 4, 3-8; II, 6, 11, 1-8, which apparently have been taken from the Satapatha-brahmaza, testify to his acquaintance with the White Yagur-veda. Baudhayana does not say expressly that he quotes from the Brahmaza of the Vagasaneyins, but Govinda has no hesitation in pointing to the Satapatha as their source. It is remarkable that the fact noticeable in Apastamba’s quotation from the Satapatha reappears here, and that the wording of the two quotations does not fully agree with the printed text of the Brahmavza. The differences in the first passage are, no doubt, partly owing to corruptions and interpolations in Baudh4yana’s text; but that cannot be said of the sécond', References to the SAma-veda and the Sdmans occur repeatedly, and the passage from the Nidana of Bhallavins regarding the geographical extent of true Brah-

1 Professor Eggeling has lately discussed the question of the discrepancies between Apastamba’s quotations from the Brahmana of the Vagasaneyins and the existing text. I can only agree with him that we must wait for a comparison of all those quoted, with both the recensions of the Satapatha, before we draw further inferences from the fact. See Sacred Books of the East, vol, xii, p. xl.

xl BAUDHAYANA.

I can only agree with him that we must wait for a comparison of all those quoted, with both the recensions of the Satapatha, before we draw further inferences from the fact. See Sacred Books of the East, vol, xii, p. xl.

xl BAUDHAYANA.

manical learning, which Vasisht#a adduces, is given I, 1, 2, 11-12. From the Rig-veda a few expiatory hymns and verses, such as the Aghamarshaaa and the Taratsamandis, are quoted. The Atharva-veda is not referred to by name,’ but the existence of Atharvaza schools may be inferred from the mention made of the vows called Siras, II, 8, 14, 2. Among the authorities on the Sacred Law, mentioned in the Dharma-sftra, Katya I, 2, 3, 46, Maudgalya II, 2, 4, 8, and Aupagandhani II, 2, 3, 33, do not occur in other works of the same class!. Harita, who is mentioned II, 1, 2, 21, and who probably was a teacher of the Maitrayantya school, is named by Vasishtka and Apastamba also. The Gautama who is quoted I, 1, 2, 7 and II, 2, 4, 17, is, as has been shown in the Introduction to Gautama, most probably the author of the still existing Institutes of Gautama. To the arguments for the latter view, adduced there, I may add that two other passages of the Dharma-sitra, II, 6, 11, 15 and 26, point toa close connexion between Baudhayana’s and Gautama’s works. The former of the two Sftras contains, with the exception of one small clause in the beginning, exactly the same description of the duties of a hermit in the forest as that given by Gautama ITI, 26-35. The second Sftra states, just as Gautama’s rule III, 36, that the venerable teacher (4#4ry4z) prescribes one order only, that of the householders. The reason given for this opinion differs, however, according to Baudh4yana, from that adduced in Gautama’s text. The almost literal identity of the first long passage makes it not improbable that Baudh4yana borrowed in this instance also from Gautama without noting the source from which he drew. On the other hand, the argument drawn from the fact that the tenth Adhydya of Prasna IIT has been taken from Gautama’s . Sfatra loses its force since, as I have shown above, it is improbable that the third Prasna formed part of Baudha-

1 Possibly Kasyapa, whose name occurs in a Sloka, I, 11, 21, 2, may also be an ancient teacher to whom Baudhfyana refers. In the Grihya-s{itra a teacher called S&ltki is repeatedly quoted, and once, I, 11 (end), his opinion is contrasted with that of Baudh4yana and of Asdrya, i.e, Baudhdyana’s teacher. The Grihya-sfitra refers also to Atreya, KAsakritsna, and Badari.

INTRODUCTION. xli

yana’s original work. A metrical work on the Sacred Law seems to be quoted II, 2, 4,14-15. For, as the second verse, adduced there, says that the penance for one who

The
Grihya-sfitra refers also to Atreya, KAsakritsna, and Badari.

INTRODUCTION. xli

yana’s original work. A metrical work on the Sacred Law seems to be quoted II, 2, 4,14-15. For, as the second verse, adduced there, says that the penance for one who

- violated his Guru’s bed has been declared above, it seems impossible to assume that the two Slokas belonged to the versified maxims of the Dharma current among the learned Brahmans. If this quotation is not an interpolation, it proves that, side by side with the Dharma-sitras, metrical treatises on the Sacred Law existed in very early times}. One quotation, finally, which gives a verse from the dialogue of the daughters of Usanas and Vréshaparvan seems to have been taken from an epic poem. The verse is actually found in the Mahabharata I, 78, 10, and again 34, where the altercation between Sarmish##4 and Devayani forms part of the Yayatyupakhy4na. Considering what has been said above regarding the state of the text of the Dharmasitra, and our imperfect knowledge of the history of the Mahabharata, it would be hazardous to assert that the verse proves Baudh4yana’s acquaintance with Vy4sa’s great epic. It will be safer to wait for further proofs that it was known to the Sftrakaras, before one bases far-going speculations on this hitherto solitary quotation.

The arguments which may be brought forward to show that Baudhayana’s home lay in Southern India are not as strong as those which permit us to determine the native country of Apastamba. The portions of the Sftras, known to me, contain no direct mention of the south except in the desanirzaya or disquisition on the countries, Dharma-sitra I, 1, 2, where certain peculiar customs of the southern Brahmans are enumerated, and some districts of Southern India, e.g. Kalinga, are referred to as barbarous countries which must not be visited by Aryans. These utterances show an acquaintance with the south, but by no means prove that Baudhayana lived there. A more significant fact is that Baudhayana declares, I, 1, 2, 4, ‘going to sea’ to be a custom prevailing among the northern Brahmans, and afterwards, II, 1, 22, places that act at the head of the Pata-

* See also West and Biihler, Digest of Hindu Law Cases, p. xxvii, and ed.

xiii BAUDHAYANA.

A more significant fact is that Baudhayana declares, I, 1, 2, 4, ‘going to sea’ to be a custom prevailing among the northern Brahmans, and afterwards, II, 1, 22, places that act at the head of the Pata-

* See also West and Biihler, Digest of Hindu Law Cases, p. xxvii, and ed.

xiii BAUDHAYANA.

niyas, the more serious offences causing loss of caste. It is probable that by the latter rule he wished to show his standpoint as a southerner. But the most conclusive argument in favour of the southern origin of the Baudh4yaniyas is that they, like the Apastambiyas and all other adherents of the Taittiriya schools, are entirely confined to the Dekhan, and are not found among the indigenous subdivisions of the Brahmans in Central and Northern India. This fact is, if not explicitly stated, at least implied by the passage of the Mahdraava quoted in the Introduction to Apastamba!, It is proved by the present state of things, and by the evidence of the land grants of the southern dynasties, several of which have been made in favour of Baudhayaniyas. Thus we find a grant of Bukkardya, the well-known ruler of Vigayanagara®, dated Sakasamvat 1276 or 1354-5 A.D., in which a Brahmaaa, studying the Baudh4yantya-sitra, is mentioned as the donee of a village in Maisdr. Again, in an inscription of Nandivarman Pallavamalla, which its editor, the Rev. Mr. Foulkes, places in the ninth century A.D.%, a considerable number of Brahmawas of the Pravakana-sitra are named as recipients of the royal bounty, together with some followers of the Apastambha‘ school. As we have seen that Baudhayana is called in the Grzhya-sdtra the Pravafanakara, it is not doubtful that the Prava#anasitra of this inscription is the Sdtra of his school. The villages which the grantees received from Nandivarman were situated on the P4lar river in the Kittdr districts of the Madras Presidency. Besides, the interesting tradition which asserts that MAdhava-Sayama, the great commentator of the Vedas, was a Baudhdyaniya® is another point which may be brought forward as evidence for the location of the school in Southern India. Further,

1 Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxx; see also L. von Schréder, Maitrayantya SamhitA, p. xxvii. .

3 Journal of the Bombay Braych of the Royal Asiatic Society, XII, 349-351.

® Indian Antiquary, VIII, 273-284.

* As all the older inscriptions hitherto published give Apastambha instead of Apastamba, I am now inclined to consider the former as the original form of the name,

5 Burnell, Tanjore Catalogue, p. 20 b, remarks on no. CCXXVI.

INTRODUCTION. xhiii

® Indian Antiquary, VIII, 273-284.

* As all the older inscriptions hitherto published give Apastambha instead of Apastamba, I am now inclined to consider the former as the original form of the name,

5 Burnell, Tanjore Catalogue, p. 20 b, remarks on no. CCXXVI.

INTRODUCTION. xhiii

it must not be forgotten that most and the best MSS. of Baudh4yana’s Sitras are found in Southern India. There are also some faint indications that the Andhra country is the particular district to which Baudhayana belonged. For his repeated references to voyages by sea and his rule regarding the duty payable on goods imported by sea show that he must have lived in a coast district where sea-borne trade flourished, and the fact that he uses the Andhra recension of the Taittirtya Arazyaka makes it probable that he was an inhabitant of the eastern coast.

My estimate of the distance between Baudhayana and Apastamba and of that between the latter and the historical period of India has been given in the Introduction to Apastamba, pp. xxii and xliii, and I have nothing further to add on that subject. The oldest witness for the existence of the Srauta-sitra of Baudhayana is its commentator Bhavasvamin, whom Dr. Burnell places in the eighth century A.D. The Dharma-sitra is first quoted by Vigfanesvara, circiter 1080-1100 A.D. Several of the passages adduced by him are, however, not traceable in the MSS.

As regards the materials on which the translation is based, I had at my disposal six MSS. of the text and two copies of Govindasv4min’s commentary, the Bodhayaniya-dharmavivaraza}, one of which (C. I.) gives the text also. These MSS. belong to two chief groups, a northern and a southern one. The northern group contains two subdivisions. The first comprises (1) D., a MS. bought by me for the Government of Bombay at Ahmad4bdd (no. 6 of the Dekhan College collection of 1868-69), and about one hundred or one hundred and fifty years old; (2) P., an old MS. of my own collection, bought in 1865 at Puwa; (3, 4) B. and Bh., two modern transcripts, made for me in Baroda and Bombay. Among these, D. alone is of real value, as P., B., and Bh. faithfully reproduce all its clerical errors and add a good many new ones. The second subdivision of the northern group is represented by K.,a modern transcript, made for

1 Tt ought to be noted that in the south of India the forms Bodhayana and Bodh4yantya are invariably used for Baudhayana and Baudhayantya. But it seems to me that the southerners are in error, as the affix dyana requires vriddhi in the first syllable, xliv BAUDHAYANA,

But it seems to me that the southerners are in error, as the affix dyana requires vriddhi in the first syllable, xliv BAUDHAYANA, the Government of Bombay at Kolhapur in the southern Marazha country (Elphinstone College collection of 1867- 68, Class VI, no. 2). The MSS. of the northern group, which give the vulgata current since the times of Nilakaxtha (1650 A.D.) and Mitramisra (circiter 1700 A.D.) in Western and Central India, can be easily recognised by the omission of the third Adhy4aya of Prasna IV, and by their placing IV, 5, 1 b-25 after IV, 7, 7. One of the chief differences between K. and the other MSS. of the northern group is the omission of II, 5, 8, 4-II, 6, 11, 15 in the latter. The southern group of MSS. is formed by M.,a slovenly Devanagari transcript of a Grantha MS., no. +6,4% of the Madras Government collection’, and by the text of C. I., a Devandgart copy of the MS. of Govindasvamin’s commentary, presented by Dr. Burnell to the India Office library? The second copy of the commentary, C. T., a Telugu paper MS. from Tanjore, I owe to the kindness of Dr. Burnell.

As might be expected, on account of the southern origin of the Baudhayaniya school, M. gives on the whole the best form of the text. It also carefully marks the KamdikAs? in the first two Prasnas, ignoring the Adhy4yas altogether, and contains at the end of each Prasna the first words of each Kazaika, beginning with the last and ending with the first, after the fashion which prevails in the MSS. of the Taittiriya Samhit4, Brahmava, and Arazyaka. Very close to M. comes Govinda’s copy, where, however, as in most northern MSS., the Adhyayas alone are marked. It is, however, perfectly certain that in some very difficult passages, which are disfigured by ancient corruptions, he corrected the text conjecturally*. In a certain number of cases the northern MSS. present better and older readings than M. and C.I.5 Under these

1 Taylor, Catalogue Raisonnée(!), I, p. 190. The clerical errors in my transcript are exceedingly numerous, and mostly owing to the faulty rendering of the value of the Grantha characters, which seem not to have been familiar to the copyist. There are also some small lacunae, and the last leaf has been lost.

3 See Burnell, Catalogue of a Collection of MSS., p. 35, no. CXVII.

• * IT alone am responsible for the title Kandika, given to the small sections.
• M. marks only the figures. D. and the better northern MSS. show only breaks at the end of the Kandik4s and their first words at the end of the Prasnas.

* See e.g. Dharma-siittra I, 2, 3, 35, note.

® See e.g. Dharma-sittra I, 5,11, 35; II, 1, 2, 36; II, 2, 3, 3; II, 2, 4,103 TI, 3, 6, 3; II, 7,12, 5; III, 9, 2.

INTRODUCTION, xlv

show only breaks at the end of the Kandik4s and their first words at the end of the Prasnas.

* See e.g. Dharma-siittra I, 2, 3, 35, note.

® See e.g. Dharma-sittra I, 5,11, 35; II, 1, 2, 36; II, 2, 3, 3; II, 2, 4,103 TI, 3, 6, 3; II, 7,12, 5; III, 9, 2.

INTRODUCTION, xlv

circumstances it has not been possible to follow the commentary or M. throughout. Though they had to be made the basis, they had in many passages to be set aside in. favour of readings of the northern group. In some cases I have also been obliged to make conjectural emendations, which have all been mentioned in the notes. Three Sitras, I, 8, 16, 13-15, have been left untranslated, because the MSS. offer no safe basis for a conjectural restoration, and the commentary is defective.

Govinda, who, as Dr. Burnell informs me, is said to be a modern writer, seems to have composed his vivaraza without the aid of older vrittis. Though he apparently was well acquainted with the writings belonging to the Taittiriya-veda, with the ritual and with the common Iaw-books, he has not succeeded in explaining all the really difficult passages. Sometimes he is clearly mistaken, and frequently he passes by in silence words or whole Sitras, the sense or the general bearing of which is by no means certain. Though it would be ungrateful on my part to underrate the importance of his work for my translation, I cannot place him in the same rank with Haradatta, the commentator of Apastamba and Gautama, and can only regret that no older commentary based on the living tradition of the Baudhayaniyas has been available. If such a work were found, better readings and better explanations of many difficult passages would probably come to light. With the materials at my disposal the translation has been a work of some difficulty, and in trying to settle the text I have often experienced the feeling of insecurity which comes over the decipherer of a difficult inscription when the facsimiles are bad. The short Adhy4ya on adoption, given in the appendix to the Dharma-siitra, has been taken from the Sm4rta or Grthya-sitra. It does not belong to Baudhdyana, but is frequently quoted by the writers on civil law, who wrote in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries of our era.

VASISHT7/AA.

VASISH TAA.

Cuapter I.

1. Now, therefore, the desire to know the sacred law for their welfare (should arise) in (initiated) men.

2. He who knows and follows the (sacred law is called) a righteous man.

3. He becomes most worthy of praise in this world and after death gains heaven.

4. The sacred law has been settled by the revealed texts and by the tradition (of the sages).

5. On failure of (rules given in) these (two sources) the practice of the Sish¢as (has) authority.

6. But he whose heart is free from desire (is called) a Sishdéa.

7. (Acts sanctioned by) the sacred law (are those) for which no (worldly) cause is perceptible.

5. On failure of (rules given in) these (two sources) the practice of the Sish¢as (has) authority.

6. But he whose heart is free from desire (is called) a Sishdéa.

7. (Acts sanctioned by) the sacred law (are those) for which no (worldly) cause is perceptible.

I. r. The word ‘now’ serves, in this as in analogous cases, various purposes. It marks the beginning of the book, serves as an auspicious invocation (mangala), and indicates that something else, the initiation, must precede the study of the sacred law. ‘Therefore’ means ‘ because, after initiation, the neophyte is to be taught the prescribed rules regarcing personal purification,’— Krishnapandita. For the wording of the Sfttra compare the beginning of Gaimini’s Mimams4-sfitras.

3-6. Gautama I, 1-4; XXVIII, 48.

4. The Sfitra contains a limitation of Sftra 5. It indicates that the customs of the Sish/as, for which worldly motives are perceptible, have no authority, and are not to be followed. The principle enunciated is one inculcated by the Mimamsakas (P. M. S.

[14] B

p. 8

8. The country of the Aryas (AryAvarta) lies to the east of the region where (the river Sarasvati) disappears, to the west of the Black-forest, to the north of the P4ripatra (mountains), to the south of the Himalaya.

g. (According to others it lies to the south of the Himalaya) and to the north of the Vindhya range (being limited east and west by the two oceans).

to. Acts productive of spiritual merit, and customs which (are approved of) in that country, must be everywhere acknowledged (as authoritative) ;

11. But not different ones, (i.e. those) of (countries where) laws opposed (to those of AryAvarta prevail).

I, 3, 3-4). See also Apastamba I, 1, 4, 5-10; I, 4, 12, 8; and Introduction, p. xxvii. Krishnapandita has misunderstood the Stra. He reads, against the MSS., agr’hyamamak4ramo ’dharmah, ‘unlawful acts are those for which no motive, i.e. no sacred source such as the Vedas, is perceptible.’

I, 3, 3-4). See also Apastamba I, 1, 4, 5-10; I, 4, 12, 8; and Introduction, p. xxvii. Krishnapandita has misunderstood the Stra. He reads, against the MSS., agr’hyamamak4ramo ’dharmah, ‘unlawful acts are those for which no motive, i.e. no sacred source such as the Vedas, is perceptible.’

8. The region where the river Sarasvati disappears is the Pattidla district in the Pafigab. The Paripatra mountains belong to the great Vindhya range, and are probably the hills in Malva. The position of the Kalakavana or Black-forest is not accurately known. But it must probably be sought in Bihar. All the MSS. as well as Krishnapandita read in this Stra pragddarsanat instead of pragadarsanat, ‘to the east of the region where the river Sarasvati disappears.’ This circumstance gains some importance by the fact that the Mahabh4shya on P4mini II, 4, 10, quotes the same definition of the AryAvarta, giving, however, instead of adarsanat pragAdarsat, ‘to the east of Adarsa, i.e. the Adarsa mountains.’ It seems to me not improbable that our Sftra, too, had originally pragAdarsat, and that some Pandit who knew nothing about the Adarsa hills, but remembered Manu II, 21, and Baudhayana I, 1, 25, where the word vinasanat, ‘the disappearance of the Sarasvati,’ undoubtedly occurs, added the syllable na and forgot to correct the 4, after prag.

g. The translation follows Krishnapandita’s commentary, which recommends itself on account of the analogous definition of Ary4varta given by Manu II, 22.

11. My translation follows the text given by Krishvapandita and

p. 3

12, Some (declare the country of the Aryas to be situated) between the (rivers) Ganga and Yamuna.

13. Others (state as) an alternative, that spiritual pre-eminence (is found) as far as the black antelope grazes.

14. Now the Bhallavins quote also (the following) verse in the Nidana:

15. ‘In the west the boundary-river, in the east

B., and the explanation of the former, because it seems to me that the general sense which they give, is the correct one. I feel, however, not certain that the word pratilomakadharm4z4m, ‘of those countries where opposite laws prevail,’ is more than a careless correction. The majority of the MSS. read pratilomakakshadharmazah (kalpadharmazah), which by itself is difficult of explanation. But, as the text of the next Saitra contains an apparently superfluous phrase, I fear, we shall have to admit that the text is here disfigured by corruptions, which with our present MSS. it is impossible to remove with certainty.

But, as the text of the next Saitra contains an apparently superfluous phrase, I fear, we shall have to admit that the text is here disfigured by corruptions, which with our present MSS. it is impossible to remove with certainty.

12. Krishnapandita reads this Sdtra ‘etad arydvartam ityaéakshate gangdyamunayor antaretyeke,’ and takes it as one sentence, the subject of which is ‘eke.’ I feel no doubt that this explanation is utterly untenable, and that the first four words have nothing to do with this S@tra, the second part of which occurs also in the Baudhayana Dharma-sftra I, 1, 27. My opinion is that they originally belonged to Satra 11, though the state of the MSS. at my disposal does not allow me to say how Sftra rz has to be corrected. The general sense of Sfitra 12 is, however, perfectly certain.

13. Manu II, 23; Yagfavalkya I, 2. It deserves to be noted that the black antelope (black-buck), Oryx cervicapra, selects for its home the well-cultivated, rich plains of India only, and is entirely wanting in the sandy, mountainous or forest districts, which are now, just as in ancient times, the portion of the aboriginal tribes.

14. Regarding the Bhillavins, see Max Miller, History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, pp. 193, 364. Krzshnapamdita thinks that Nidana means desaniraaya, ‘the disquisition on the countries,’ which is the title of a section which occurs in most modern compilations on law. But it will be safer to take it as the name of a Vedic work, identical with or similar to that quoted in Saunaka’s Brthaddevata, Weber, Hist. Ind. Lit., p. 81.

15. Sindhur vidharami or vidharami, as B. reads, cannot be

B 2

p. 16

the region where the sun rises,—as far as the black antelope wanders (between these two limits), so far spiritual pre-eminence (is found).’

16. ‘Those religious acts which men, deeply versed in the knowledge of the three Vedas and acquainted with the sacred law, declare to be lawful, (are efficient) for purifying oneself and others.’

17. Manu has declared that the (peculiar) laws of countries, castes, and families (may be followed) in the absence of (rules of) the revealed texts.

18. Sinful men are, he who sleeps at sunrise or at sunset, he who has deformed nails or black teeth, he whose younger brother was married first, he who married before his elder brother, the husband of a younger sister married before the elder, the husband of an elder sister whose younger sister was married first, he who extinguishes the sacred fires, (and) he who forgets the Veda through neglect of the daily recitation.

taken with Krishnvapandita, as ‘the ocean,’ because in the latter sense sindhu is a masculine. It must be a boundary-river, probably the Sarasvati. By sfiryasyodana, ‘the region where the sun rises,’ the udayagiri or ‘mountain of the east’ may possibly be meant.

taken with Krishnvapandita, as ‘the ocean,’ because in the latter sense sindhu is a masculine. It must be a boundary-river, probably the Sarasvati. By sfiryasyodana, ‘the region where the sun rises,’ the udayagiri or ‘mountain of the east’ may possibly be meant.

16. This verse, too, is marked as a quotation by the concluding word iti, though it is not necessary that it should be taken as a quotation from the Nidana. Here, and in the sequel verses ending in iti are marked as quotations by hyphens.

17. Manu VII, 203; VIII, 41; Gautama XI, 20. ati, ‘ castes,’ which sometimes, and perhaps as appropriately, has been translated by ‘tribes,’ denotes in my opinion those numerous subdivisions of the four great varzas, which we now find all over India, and which can be shown to have existed for a very long time. Usually the word ‘caste’ is also applied to them.

18. Krishnapandita explains viraha, ‘he who extinguishes the sacred fires,’ by ‘the destroyer of his sons or of his spiritual clients’

p. 5

19. They state that there are five mortal sins
(mah4pataka),

20. (Viz. violating) a Guru’s bed, drinking (the spirituous liquor called) sura, slaying a learned Brahmama, stealing the gold of a Brahmaza, and associating with outcasts,

21. Either by (entering into) spiritual or matrimonial (connexion with them).

22. Now they quote also (the following verse): ‘He who during a year associates with an outcast becomes (likewise) an outcast; not by sacrificing for him, by teaching him or by (forming) a matrimonial (alliance with him), but by using the same carriage or seat.’

23. A minor offence causing loss of caste (upapataka, is committed by him) who (after beginning an Agnihotra sacrifice) forsakes the sacred fires, and by him who offends a Guru, by an atheist, by him who takes his livelihood from atheists, and by him who sells the Soma (plant).

24. Three wives (are permitted) to a Brahmaza

{ according to the order of the castes, two to a Kshatriya, one to a Vaisya and to a Sidra.

ii

(yagamana) ; but the rules given below, XX, 11, and XXI, 27, in the section on penances, confirm the explanation given above.

20. Vishnu XXXV, 1-2. Guru means here the father, see below, XX, 15.

21. Vishnu XXXV, 3-5. Spiritual connexion, i.e. becoming the teacher or priest of an outcast, or his pupil or spiritual client (yagam4na).

22. Identical with Manu XI, 181. It must be understood that spiritual or matrimonial connexion with an outcast causes immediate degradation, as Vishmu states expressly.

23. Vishvu XXXVII, 6, 31; Gautama XXI,11. Regarding the precise meaning of pratigahnuyat, ‘ offends,’ see below, XXI, 27.

24-25. Manu III,13; Yagiavalkya 1, 57; Paraskara Grrhyastra I, 4, 8-11.

p. 25

25. Some declare (that twice-born men may | marry) even a female of the Sddra caste, like /| those (other wives), without (the recitation of) ‘ Vedic texts.

7 26. Let him not act thus.

24-25. Manu III,13; Yagiavalkya 1, 57; Paraskara Grrhyastra I, 4, 8-11.

p. 25

25. Some declare (that twice-born men may | marry) even a female of the Sddra caste, like /| those (other wives), without (the recitation of) ‘ Vedic texts.

7 26. Let him not act thus.

27. For in consequence of such (a marriage) the ' degradation of the family certainly ensues, and after death the loss of heaven.

28. There are six marriage-rites,

29. (Viz.) that of Brahman (brahma), that of the gods (daiva), that of the Azshis (4rsha), that of the Gandharvas (gandharva), that of the Kshatriyas (kshatra), and that of men (m4nusha).

30. If the father, pouring out a libation of water,
gives his (daughter) to a suitor, that (is called) the
Brahma-rite.

31. If (the father) gives his daughter, decking her with ornaments, to an officiating priest, whilst a sacrifice is being performed, that is called the Daiva-rite.

32. And (if the father gives his daughter) for a cow and a bull, (that is called) the Arsha-rite.

33. If a lover takes a loving female of equal caste, that (is called) the Gandharva-rite.

34. If they forcibly abduct (a damsel), destroying
(her relatives) by strength (of arms), that (is called)
the KshAtra-rite.

35. If, after making a bargain (with the father, a

26-27. Manu III, 14-19. 28. Apastamba II, 5, 11, 17-20.
30. Vishzu XXIV, 19; Asvalayana Grthya-sfitra I, 6, 1.

• 31. Vishzu XXIV, 20; Asvalayana Grthya-sftra I, 6, 2.
• 32. Vishnu XXIV, 21; Asvalayana Grthya-sfitra I, 6, 3
• 33. Vishzu XXIV, 23; Asvalayana Grthya-sfitra I, 6, 5.
• 34. Vishnu XXIV, 25; Asvalayana Grthya-sftra I, 6, 8.
• 35. Vishnu XXIV, 24; Asvalayana Grihya-sftra I, 6, 6

» VWp. 7 suitor) marries (a damsel) purchased for money, that (is called) the MAnusha-rite.

36. The purchase (of a wife) is mentioned in the following passage of the Veda, ‘ Therefore one hundred (cows) besides a chariot should be given to the father of the bride.’

37. (It is stated) in (the following passage of) the KaturmAsyas, ‘She (forsooth) who has been bought by her husband (commits sin, as) afterwards she unites herself with strangers.’

38. Now they quote also (the following verse): ‘Lost learning comes back ; when the family is lost all is lost. Even a horse becomes estimable on account of its pedigree; therefore men marry wives descended from an (unblemished) family.

39. The three (lower) castes shall live according to the teaching of the Brahmaza.

36. Sankhayana Grrhya-sfitra 1,14; Pdraskara Grzhya-sitra I, 8, 18; Apastamba II, 6,13, 12. Though VasishéAa’s quotation is less complete than Apastamba’s, still the following Sfitras show that he knew the conclusion of the passage, and does not take it as an authority for the sale of a daughter.

36. Sankhayana Grrhya-sfitra 1,14; Pdraskara Grzhya-sitra I, 8, 18; Apastamba II, 6,13, 12. Though VasishéAa’s quotation is less complete than Apastamba’s, still the following Sfitras show that he knew the conclusion of the passage, and does not take it as an authority for the sale of a daughter.

37. Krishnapandita makes a mistake by connecting the word ‘aturmasyeshu’ with the next Sfitra. He is right in saying that ‘the KAturmasyas’ is the name of a book. It is, however, not a separate work, but the k4zda or section of a Vedic work treating of the KaturmAsya sacrifices (see Max Miller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 355). The particular work from which our quotation has been taken, is either the Maitrayamiya Samhita, or the Kashaka. For, as Dr. von Schroeder informs me, Maitray4miya Samhita I, 10, 11 reads ‘anrztam va esha karoti y4 patyuA krita satyathanyais Aarati,” and the title of the kazda is KAturmAsyAni. Professor Weber, Ind. Stud. V, 407, has found the same words in the XAturmAsya section of the Ka‘haka XXXVI, 5. In the translation I have added the beginning of the passage which Vasish/4a omits, according to the Maitrayatya Samhita.

39-41. Gautama XI, 25-27.

p. 40

40. The Brahmama shall declare their duties,

41. And the king shall govern them accordingly.

42. But aking who rules in accordance with the sacred law, may take the sixth part of the wealth (of his subjects),

43. Except from Brahmazas.

44. It has been declared in the Veda, ‘ But he obtains the sixth part of (the merit which Brahmazas gain by) sacrifices and charitable works.’

45. (It is further stated in the Veda), ‘The Brahmaza makes the Veda rich; the Br&hmaza saves from misfortune; therefore the Brahmaza shall not be made a source of subsistence. Soma is his king.’

46. Further (another passage says), ‘After death bliss (awaits the king who does not oppress Brahmamzas).’

42. Vishau III, 22-25. Though the ambiguous word dhana, ‘wealth,’ is used in the text, it seems not doubtful that Vasish‘ha alludes to the land-tax, which generally consists of one sixth of the produce.

43. Vishau III, 26.

44. Vishzu III, 27-28. Pfirta,‘the merit gained by charitable works,’ i.e. by planting trees, digging wells, and so forth. The words ‘iti ha,’ placed at the end of the Sfitra, indicate that it is a quotation, and that vigfidyate, ‘it is declared in the Veda,’ has to be understood from Sfitra 46. Gautama XI, 11, too, alleges that the rule is based on a Vedic passage.

45. Satapatha-brahmaaa V, 4, 2, 3. Krishwapandita’s division of the quotation into several Sfitras is unnecessary. His explanation of anddya, which he takes to mean ‘the first of all,’ is wrong. He asserts that the Brahmana is said ‘to make the Veda rich,’ because by sacrificing and so forth he fulfils its object and protects it. But the phrase is probably corrupt. If it is said that Soma is the king of the Brahmawas, the object is to indicate that an earthly king is not their master, see Gautama XI, 1.

But the phrase is probably corrupt. If it is said that Soma is the king of the Brahmawas, the object is to indicate that an earthly king is not their master, see Gautama XI, 1.

Hy, ¢. THE FOUR CASTES, 9

Crapter II.

1. There are four castes (varva), Brahmamas, shatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sfdras.

2. Three castes, Brahmazas, Kshatriyas, and i Vaisyas, (are called) twice-born. .

3. Their first birth is from their mother; the second from the investiture with the sacred girdle. _In that (second birth) the SAvitrt is the mother, but . the teacher is said to be the father.

4. They call the teacher father, because he gives instruction in the Veda.

5. They quote also (the following passage from the Veda) to the same (effect): ‘Of two kinds, forsooth, is the virile energy of a man learned in the Vedas, that which (resides) above the navel and the other which below (the navel) descends downwards. Through that which (resides) above the navel, his offspring is produced, when he initiates Brahmamas, when he teaches them, when he causes them to offer oblations, when he makes them holy. By that which resides below the navel the children of his body are produced. Therefore they -never say to a Srotriya, who teaches the Veda, “Thou art destitute of offspring.”’

II. 1-2. Vishzu II, 1-2; Manu X, 4.

• 3. Identical with Manu II, 169%, 1704, and Vishzu XXVIII, 37-
• 38. The Savitri or the verse addressed to Savitr?' is found Rig-veda III, 62, ro. ;

4. Gautama I,10; Manu II, 171.

5. The reading tatha4pyud4haranti, which several of my MSS. give, seems to me preferable to Krishnapandita’s udaharati. Krishnapandita explains sAdhu karoti, ‘makes them holy,’ by adhyd4tmam upadisati, ‘teaches them transcendental knowledge.’

p. 6

6. HArtta also quotes (the following verse): ‘No religious rite can be performed by a (child) before he has been girt with the sacred girdle, since he is on a level with a Sidra before his (new) birth from the Veda.’

7. (The above prohibition refers to all rites) except those connected with libations of water, (the exclamation) Svadhd, and the manes.

8. Sacred learning approached a Bréhmamza (and said to him), ‘ Preserve me, I am thy treasure, reveal me not to a scorner, nor to a wicked man, nor to one of uncontrolled passions: so (preserved) I shall become strong.’

9. ‘Reveal me, O Braéhmama, as to the keeper of thy treasure, to him whom thou shalt know to be pure, attentive, intelligent, and chaste, who will not offend thee nor revile thee.’

10. ‘(That man) who fills his ears with truth, who frees him from pain and confers immortality upon him, (the pupil)shall consider as his father and mother; him he must never grieve nor revile.’

11. ‘As those Brahmazas who, after receiving instruction, do not honour their teacher by their speech, in their hearts or by their acts, will not be profitable to their teacher, even so that sacred learning (which they acquired) will not profit them.’

‘As those Brahmazas who, after receiving instruction, do not honour their teacher by their speech, in their hearts or by their acts, will not be profitable to their teacher, even so that sacred learning (which they acquired) will not profit them.’

6. Vishvu XXVIII, 40. Instead of Krishnapandita’s ‘y dvadvedo na gayate, ‘ydvadvede na gayate,’ which occurs in several MSS. and in the parallel passages of Manu II, 172 and other Smritis, must be read.

4. Gautama II, 5. The rites referred to are the funeral rites.

8-9. Vishnu XXIX, 9-10, and introduction, p. xxiii; Nirukta
II, 4.

to. Vishnu XXX, 47.

II, 21. THE FOUR CASTES; LAWFUL OCCUPATIONS. ITI

12. ‘As fire consumes dry grass, even so the Veda, asked for, (but) not honoured, (destroys the enquirer). Let him not proclaim the Veda to that man, who does not show him honour according to his ability.’ ~ 13. The (lawful) occupations ofa Brahmama are six, ' 14. Studying the Veda, teaching, sacrificing for himself, sacrificing for others, giving alms, and accepting gifts.

15. (The lawful occupations) of a Kshatriya are

' three,

- 16. Studying, sacrificing for himself, and bestow-

. ing gifts;

17. And his peculiar duty is to protect the people

_ with his weapons; let him gain his livelihood thereby.

18. (The lawful occupations) of a Vaisya are the

; Same (as those mentioned above, Satra 16),

19. Besides, agriculture, trading, tending cattle,and lending money at interest,

20. To serve those (superior castes) has been fixed

Il as the means of livelihood for a Sddra.

_ 21, (Men of) all (castes) may wear their hair arranged according to the customs fixed (for their family), or allow it to hang down excepting the lock on the crown of the head.

13. Krishnapandita wrongly conriects the word brahmazasya with the next Stra, For this and the next seven Sfitras, compare Vishau II, 4-14.

14. Krishnapandita by mistake leaves out the word ‘d4nam.’

20. I read ‘teshdm parifary4,’ with the majority of the MSS., instead of Krishnapandita’s ‘teshm ka parikary€.’

21. In illustration of this Sitra Krishnapandita quotes a verse of Laugakshi, which states that Br&ahmamas belonging to the Vasishéha family wore the top-lock on the right side of the head, and the members of the Atri family allowed it to hang down on

12 VASISHTHA. If, 22.

22. Those who are unable to live by their own lawful occupation may adopt (that of) the next inferior (caste),

J 23. But never (that of a) higher (caste),

24. (A Brahmaza and a Kshatriya) who have resorted to a Vaisya’s mode of living and maintain themselves by trade (shall not sell) stones, salt, hempen (cloth), silk, linen (cloth), and skins,

25. Nor any kind of dyed cloth,

26. Nor prepared food, flowers, fruit, roots, perfumes, substances (used for) flavouring (food); nor water, the juice extracted from plants; nor Soma, weapons, poison; nor flesh, nor milk, nor preparations from it, iron, tin, lac, and lead,

Nor any kind of dyed cloth,

26. Nor prepared food, flowers, fruit, roots, perfumes, substances (used for) flavouring (food); nor water, the juice extracted from plants; nor Soma, weapons, poison; nor flesh, nor milk, nor preparations from it, iron, tin, lac, and lead,

27. Now they quote also (the following verse) :
‘ By (selling) flesh, lac, and salt a Brahmaza at once
becomes an outcast; by selling milk he becomes
(equal to) a Sidra after three days.’

28. Among tame animals those with uncloven hoofs, and those that have an abundance of hair, (must not be sold), nor any wild animals, (nor) birds, nor beasts that have tusks (or fangs).

29. Among the various kinds of grain they mention sesamum (as forbidden).

both sides, while the Bhrigus shaved their heads, and the Angirasas wore five locks (4tid4) on the crown of the head. Cf. Max Miiller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., p. 53.

22. Vishvu II, 15.

24. For this and the following four Sfitras,see Gautama VII, 8-21.

26. Ras&A, ‘substances used for flavouring,’ i.e. ‘molasses, sugar-cane, sugar, and the like.’—Krishnapandita.: See also note on Gautama VII, 9.

24. Identical with Manu X, 92.

29. Vishnu LIV, 18; Apastamba I, 7, 20, 13. Krishnapandita wrongly connects this Sfitra with the preceding one.

p. 13

+e

30. Now they quote also (the following verse) : ‘If he applies sesamum to any other purpose, but food, anointing, and charitable gifts, he will be born again as a worm and, together with his ancestors, be plunged into his own ordure.’

31. Or, at pleasure, they may sell (sesamum), if they themselves have produced it by tillage.

32. For that purpose he shall plough before breakfast with two bulls whose noses have not been pierced.

33. (If he ploughs) in the hot season, he shall water (his beasts even in the morning).

34. The plough is attended by strong males, provided with a useful share and with a handle (to be held) by the drinker of Soma; that raises (for him) a cow, a sheep, a stout damsel, and a swift horse for the chariot.

35. The plough is attended by strong males, i.e. is attended by strong men and bullocks, provided with a useful share—for its share is useful (because) with the share it raises, i.e. pierces deep—and provided with a handle for the drinker of Soma,—for Soma reaches him,—possessing a handle for him. That raises a cow, a sheep, goats, horses, mules, donkeys and camels, and a stout damsel, i.e. a beautiful, useful maiden in the flower of her youth.

36. For how could the plough raise (anything for him) if he did not sell grain ?

30. Manu X, or. 31. Manu X, go.

34. VAgasaneyi-samhita XII, 71. The translation follows the explanation given in the next Sfitra as closely as possible, though the latter is without doubt erroneous. The purpose for which Vasishéha introduces it, is to show that a Vedic text permits agriculture to a Brahmaza who offers Soma-sacrifices.

14 VASISHTHA. Il, 37.

The translation follows the explanation given in the next Sfitra as closely as possible, though the latter is without doubt erroneous. The purpose for which Vasishéha introduces it, is to show that a Vedic text permits agriculture to a Brahmaza who offers Soma-sacrifices.

14 VASISHTHA. Il, 37.

37. Substances used for flavouring may be bartered for (other) substances of the same kind, be it for one more valuable or for one worth less.

38. But salt must never (be exchanged) for (other) substances used for flavouring (food).

39. It is permitted to barter sesamum, rice, cooked food, learning, and slaves (each for its own kind and the one for the other).

40. A Bréhmaza and a Kshatriya shall not lend
(anything at interest acting like) usurers.

• 41. Now they quote also (the following verses) : ‘He who acquiring property cheap, gives it for a
• * high price, is called a usurer and blamed among those who recite the Veda.’

42. ‘(Brahman) weighed in the scales the crime of killing a learned Brahmaza against (the crime of) usury; the slayer of the Brahmaza remained at the top, the usurer sank downwards.’

43. Or, at pleasure, they may lend to a person who entirely neglects his sacred duties, and is exceedingly wicked,

44. Gold (taking) double (its value on repayment, and) grain trebling (the original price).

37-39. Gautama VII, 16-21.

40. Manu X,117. Krishnapandita reads with MS. B., vardhushim na dadyatam, and explains it by vr¢ddhim naiva prayogayetam, ‘they shall not take interest.’ I read with the other MSS. vardhushi, and translate that term by ‘usurers.’ Below, Sfitra 42, vardhushi is used likewise in this its usual sense.

43. Manu X, 117.

44-47. Vishnu VI, 11-17; Colebrooke I, Dig. LXVI, where ‘silver and gems’ have been added after gold, and ras4A, ‘flavouring substances,’ been translated by ‘fluids.’ The translation differs also in other respects, because there the Sfitras stand by themselves, while here the nouns in Sfitras 44 and 47 are governed by the preceding dadytam, ‘they may lend.’ They, i.e. a Brahmava

II,50. THE FOUR CASTES; LAWFUL OCCUPATIONS, I5

45. (The case of) flavouring substances has been explained by (the rule regarding) grain,

46. As well-as (the case of) flowers, roots, and fruit.

47. (They may lend) what is sold by weight, (taking) eight times (the original value on repayment).

48. Now they quote also (the following verses) : ‘Two in the hundred,.three and four and five, as has been declared in the Smrvti, he may take as interest by the month according to the order of the castes.’

49. ‘But the king’s death shall stop the interest on money (lent) ;’

50. ‘And after the coronation of (a new) king the capital grows again.’

and a Kshatriya. The rule, of course, refers to other castes also, and to those cases where no periodical interest is taken, but the loan returned in kind.

‘But the king’s death shall stop the interest on money (lent) ;’

50. ‘And after the coronation of (a new) king the capital grows again.’

and a Kshatriya. The rule, of course, refers to other castes also, and to those cases where no periodical interest is taken, but the loan returned in kind.

47. The Ratndkara quoted by Colebrooke loc. cit. takes ‘ what is sold by weight’ to be ‘camphor and the like.’ Krishnapandita thinks that ‘clarified butter, honey, spirituous liquor, oil, molasses, and salt’ are meant. But most of these substances fall under the term ras, ‘flavouring substances.’ The proper explanation of the words seems to be, ‘ any other substance not included among those mentioned previously, which is sold by weight.’

48. Vishzu VI, 2, and especially Manu VIII, 142. The lowest rate of interest is to be taken from the highest caste, and it becomes greater with decreasing respectability. According to Krzshmapandita and the commentators on the parallel passage of Vishzu, Manu, and other Smrttis, this rule applies only to loans for which no security is given—a statement which is doubtlessly correct.

49-50. Both the reading and the sense of this verse, which in some MSS. is wanting, are somewhat doubtful. I read with my best MSS., raga tu mritabh4vena dravyavriddhim vinasayet \ puna ragabhishekeza dravyam@lam ka vardhate nt and consider that it gives a rule, ordering all money transactions to be stopped during the period which intervenes between the death of a king and the coronation of his successor. I am, however, unable to point out any parallel passages confirming this

16 VASISHTHA. II, sr.

51. ‘ Hear the interest for a money-lender declared by the words of Vasish¢fa, five mashds for twenty (karsh4pazas may be taken every month); thus the law is not violated.’

Cuapter III.

1, (Brahmazas) who neither study nor teach the
Veda nor keep sacred fires become equal to Sfidras ;

2. And they quote a verse of Manu on this (subject), ‘A twice-born man, who not having studied the Veda applies himself to other (and worldly study), soon falls, even while living, to the condition of a Sfdra, and his descendants after him.’

3. ‘(A twice-born man) who does not know the view. Krishnapandita’s text shows two important various readings, ‘bhritibhavena’ and ‘rAg4bhishikena,’ which I think are merely conjectures, unsupported by the authority of MSS. He explains the verse as follows: ‘The king shall destroy, i.e. himself not take, the interest on money by giving [it away] as a salary. But, after thus giving away interest received, he may increase his capital by [an extra tax imposed on] the cultivators, i.e. take from them the highest rate, consisting of one-fourth of the produce.’