The Sacred Laws of the Aryas, Part I (Bühler) — Clarendon original, page scans + full text

The results of the above investigation which show that the origin of the Apastamba school falls in the middle of the Sutra period of the Black Ya^ur-veda, and that its Sutras belong to the later, though not to the latest products of Vedic litera- ture, are fully confirmed by an examination of the quotations from and references to Vedic and other books contained in Apastamba's Sutras, and especially in the Dharma-sutra. We find that all the four Vedas are quoted or referred to. The three old ones, the Rik, Ya^us, and Saman, are mentioned both separately and collectively by the name trayi vidya, i. e. threefold sacred science, and the fourth is called not Atharvangirasa//, as is done in most ancient Sutras, but Atharva-veda ^. The quotations from the Ri\<. and Saman are not very numerous. But a passage from the ninth Ma;z(^ala of the former, which is referred to Dh. I, 1,2, 2, is

of some extent, and shows that the recension which Apa-

^ Ap. Dh. II, II, 29, 12.

Introduction. Xxv

stamba knew, did not differ from that which still exists. As Apastamba was an adherent of the Black Ya^ur-veda, he quotes it, especially in the 5rauta-sutra, very frequently, and he adduces not only texts from the Mantra-sawhita, but also from the Taittiriya-brahmawa and Ara;zyaka. The most important quotations from the latter work occur Dh. II, 2, 3, 16-II, 2, 4, 9, where all the Mantras to be recited during the performance of the Bali-offerings are enumerated. Their order agrees exactly with that in which they stand in, the sixty-seventh Anuvaka of the tenth Prapa///aka of the recension of the Ara;/yaka which is current among the Andhra-brahma;/as ^ This last point is of considerable importance, both for the history of the text of that book and, as we shall see further on, for the history of the Apa- stambiya school.

The White Ya^ur-veda, too, is quoted frequently in the vSrauta-sutra and once in the section on Dharma by the title Vag-asaneyaka, while twice its Brahmawa, the Vao-a- saneyi-brahmawa, is cited. The longer of the two passages, taken from the latter work, Dh. I, 4, 12, 3, does, however, not fully agree with the published text of the Madhyandina recension. Its wording possesses just sufficient resemblance to allow us to identify the passage which Apastamba meant, but differs from the vSatapatha-brahma;/a in many details. As it is known that the Brahma;/a of the Va^a- saneyins existed in several recensions, among which the Ka«va j-akha was the oldest-, and as a teacher of that name is quoted by Apastamba as an authority on the sacred law, it is not improbable that Apastamba's quota- tion is taken from the Kawva recension, and that the now more common Madhyandina j-akha was unknown to him. As regards the Atharva-veda, Apastamba gives, besides the reference mentioned above and a second to the Angirasa- pavitra-^ an abstract of a long passage from Atharva-veda XV, 10-13, regarding the treatment of aVratya, i.e. a learned

i The Taittiriya Ara«yaka exists in three recensions, the Dravicfa, Kar«a/a, and the Andhra, the first of which has been commented on by Saya«a. 2 See the passage from the A'arawavyuhabhashya given below, ver. lO. 8 Ap. Dh. I, 2, 2, 2.

XXVI APASTAMBA.

mendicant Brahma«a, who really deserves the title of atithi, or guest \ It is true that Apastamba, in the passage re- ferred to, does not say that his rule is based on the Atharva- veda. He merely says that a Brahma;/a is his authority. But it seems, nevertheless, certain that by the expression a Brahma;/a, the Brahmawa-like fifteenth book of the Atharva-veda is meant, as the sentences to be addressed by the host to his guest agree literally with those which the Atharva-veda prescribes for the reception of a Vratya. Haradatta too, in his commentary, expresses the same opinion. Actual quotations from the Athai-va-veda are not frequent in Vedic literature, and the fact that Apastamba's Dharma-sutra contains one, is, therefore, of some interest.

Besides these Vedic texts, Apastamba mentions, also, the Angas or auxiliary works, and enumerates six classes, viz. treatises on the ritual of the sacrifices, on grammar, astronomy, etymology, recitation of the Veda, and metrics ^. The number is the same as that which is considered the correct one in our days ^.

As the Dharma-sutra names no less than nine teachers in connexion with various topics of the sacred law, and fre- quently appeals to the opinion of some (eke), it follows that a great many such auxiliary treatises must have existed in Apastamba's time. The A/^aryas mentioned are Eka, Ka;^va, Ka«va, Kuwika, Kutsa, Kautsa, Push- karasadi, Varshyaya;zi, vSvetaketu, and Harita'*. Some of these persons, like Harita and Ka;/va, are known to have composed Siltras on the sacred law, and fragments or modified versions of their works are still in existence, while Ka?A'a, Kautsa, Pushkarasadi or Paushkarasadi, as the correct form of the name is, and Varshyaya;/i are quoted in the Nirukta, the Pratii-akhyas, and the Varttikas on Pacini as authorities on phonetics, etymology, and grammar ^ Kawva, finally, is considered the author of the still existing Kalpa-sutras of the Kawva school, which has

' Ap. Dh. II, 3, 7, 12-17. 2 Ap. Dh. II, 4, 8, 10.

s See also Max Mliller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit, p. in.

* Ap. Dh. I, 6,19, 3-8; I, 10, 28, 1-2; I. 4, 13,10; I, 6, 18, 2 ; I, 6, 19, r2 ;
I, 10, 28, 5, 16; I, 10, 29, 12-16.
'•' Max Miiller. loc. cit., p. 142.

INTRODUCTION. XXVll

been mentioned above. It seems not improbable that most of these teachers were authors of complete sets of Angas. Their position in Vedic literature, however, except as far as Ka«va, Harita, and ^vetaketu are concerned, is diffi- cult to define, and the occurrence of their names throws less light on the antiquity of the Apastambiya school than might be expected. Regarding Harita it must, however, be noticed that he is one of the oldest authors of Sutras, and that he is quoted by Baudhayana, Apastamba's predecessor. The bearing of the occurrence of vSvetaketu's name will be discussed below.

Of even greater interest than the names of the teachers are the indications which Apastamba gives, that he knew two of the philosophical schools which still exist in India, viz, the Plirva or Karma Mimawsa and the Vedanta, As regards the former, he mentions it by its ancient name, Nyaya, which in later times and at present is usually applied to the doctrine of Gautama Akshapada, In two passages ^ he settles contested points on the authority of those who know the Nyaya, i. e. the Purva Mimawsa, and in several other cases he adopts a line of reasoning which fully agrees with that followed in 6^aimini's Mima;;/sa-sutras. Thus the arguments 2, that 'a revealed text has greater weight than a custom from which a revealed text may be inferred,' and that ' no text can be inferred from a custom for which a worldly motive is apparent,' exactly correspond with the teaching of 6^aimini's Mimawsa-sutras I, 3, 3-4. The wording of the passages in the two works does not agree so closely that the one could be called a quotation

of the other. But it is evident, that if Apastamba did not know the Mima;«sa-sutras of Caimini, he must have pos- sessed some other very similar work. As to the Vedanta, Apastamba does not mention the name of the school. But Khandas 22, 23 of the first Pa/ala of the Dharma-sutra unmistakably contain the chief tenets of the Vedantists, and recommend the acquisition of the knowledge of the Atman as the best means for purifying the souls of sinners.

1 Ap. Dh. II, 4, 8, 13 ; II, 6, 14, 13.

2 Ap. Dh. I, I, 14, 8, 9~io.

XXVUl APASTAMBA.

Though these two Kha«</as are chiefly filled with quota- tions, which, as the commentator states, are taken from an Upanishad, still the manner of their selection, as well as Apastamba's own words in the introductory and concluding SOtras, indicates that he knew not merely the unsystematic speculations contained in the Upanishads and Ara;^yakas, but a well-defined system of Vedantic philosophy identical with that of Badaraya«a's Brahma-sutras. The fact that Apastamba's Dharma-sdtra contains indications of the ex- istence of these two schools of philosophy, is significant as the Purva Mimdwsa occurs in one other Dharma-sdtra only, that attributed to Vasish///a, and as the name of the Veddnta is not found in any of the prose treatises on the sacred law.

Of non-Vedic works Apastamba mentions the Pura;/a. The Dharma-sutra not only several times quotes passages from ' a Purawa ' as authorities for its rules ^, but names in one case the Bhavishyat-pura«a as the particular Pura;/a from which the quotation is taken-. References to the Pura;za in general are not unfrequent in other Sutras on the sacred law, and even in older Vedic works. But Apastamba, so far as I know, is the only S<itrakara who specifies the title of a particular Purawa, and names one which is nearly identical with that of a work existing in the present day. For among the so-called Upa-purawas we find one of considerable extent which bears the title Bhavishya-purawa ^. It is true that the passage quoted in the Dharma-sutra from the Bhavishyat-purawa is not to be found in the copy of the Bhavishya-purawa which I have seen, and that the two titles differ by one letter. It is, therefore, not possible to assert positively that Apastamba knew the present Bhavishya-purawa. Still considering the close resemblance of the two titles, and taking into account the generally admitted fact that most if not all Pura;^as have been remodelled and recast*, it seems to me not

^ Ap. Dh. I, 6, 19, 13 ; I, 10, 29, 7. " Ap. Dh. II, 9, 24, 6.

^ Aufiecht, Oxford Catalogue, p. 30.

* Max Miiller, Hist. Anc. Sansk. Lit., pp. 40-42. Weber, Literaturgeschichte, pp. 206-208. Though I fully subscribe to the opinion, held by the most illus-

Introduction. Xxix

unlikely that Apastamba's authority was the original on which the existing Upa-puraz/a is based. It is, of course, not admissible, at present, to found far-going speculations on this hypothesis. But whether that hypothesis may prove tenable or not, the occurrence of a special Pura/^a title in our Dharma-sCltra will remain of great interest both for the history of the Pura;/as and of the Apastambiya- siatras.

There is yet another point on which Apastamba shows a remarkable agreement with a theory which is prevalent in later Sanskrit literature. He says (Dh. II, ii, 29, 11-12), 'The knowledge which 5udras and women possess, is the completion of all study,' and ' they declare that this knowledge is a supplement of the Atharva-veda.' The commentator remarks with reference to these two Sutras, that ' the knowledge which vSudras and women possess,' is the knowledge of dancing, acting, music, and other branches of the so-called Artha.$-astra, the science of useful arts and of trades, and that the object of the Sutras is to forbid the study of such subjects before the acquisition of sacred learning. His interpretation is, without doubt, correct, as similar sentiments are expressed byother teachers in parallel passages. But, if it is accepted, Apastamba's remark that

trious Sanskritists, that, in general, the existing Pura/^as are not identical with the works designated by that title in Vedic works, still I cannot believe that they are altogether independent of the latter. Nor can I agree to the assertion that the Pur§,«as known to us, one and all, are not older than the tenth or eleventh century a. d. One important fact bearing on the latter point may be mentioned here, viz. that the poet Ba.na, who wrote shortly after 600 a. d., in the 5'riharsha^arita, orders hisPaura?nka to recite the Pavanaprokta-purawa, i.e. the Vayu-pura/ia (5'riharshaA'arita, p. 61, Calcutta ed.) Dr. Hall, the discoverer of the life of 5riharsha, read in his copy Yavanaprokta-pura^a, a title which, as he remarks, might suggest the idea that Ba«a knew the Greek epic poetry. But a comparison of the excellent Ahmadabad and Benares Devanagari MSS. and of the Kasmir .Sarada copies shows that the correct reading is the one given above. The earlier history of the Purareas, which as yet is a mystery, will only be cleared up when a real history of the orthodox Hindu sects, especially of the 5ivites and Vish«uites, has been written. It will, then, pro- bably become apparent that the origin of these sects reaches back far beyond the rise of Buddhism and Jainism. It will also be proved that the orthodox sects used Pura/ias as text books for popular readings, the Pura«apa^Aana of our days, and that some, at least, of the now existing Pura/ias are the latest recensions of those mentioned in Vedic books.

XXX APASTAMBA.