The first of these two quotations or references apparently points to Gautama Dh. XIV, 44, where it is said, that 'if an infant dies, the relatives shall be pure at once.' For, though Vasish///a's Sutra 34, strictly interpreted, would mean, that Gautama declares the relatives to be purified instantaneously, both if an infant dies and if a miscarriage happens, it is also possible to refer the excep-
^ In some MSS. a whole chapter on the results of various sins in a second birth, is inserted after Adhyaya XIX. But Haradatta does not notice it ; see Stenzler, Gautama, Preface, p. iii.
^ In quoting the Vasish//?a Dh. I always refer to the Benares edition, which is accompanied by the commentary of Kmhwapawrfita Dharmadhikarin, called Vidvanmodini,
liv GAUTAMA.
tion to one of the two cases only, which are mentioned in Sutra 33. Similar instances do occur in the Sutra style, where brevity is estimated higher than perspicuity, and the learned commentator of VasishZ/ta does not hesitate to adopt the same view. But, as regards the second quotation in Sutra '3^6, our Gautama contains no passage to which it could possibly refer. Govindasvamin, in his commentary on the second reference to Gautama in Bau- dhayana's Dharma^astra II, 2, 71, expresses the opinion that this Sutra, too, is taken from the ' other ' Gautama Dharma-sutra, the former existence of which he infers from Baudhayana's passage. To me it seems more pro- bable that the quotation in Vas. Dh. IV, 36 is taken from the Grihya-sutra which belonged to the Gautama A'arawa. For the rule refers quite as much to the chapter on burial, which properly belongs to and frequently is treated in the Grzhya-sutras ^ as to impurity.
Regarding Gautama's nineteenth chapter, which appears in the Vasish//^a Dharmai'astra as the twenty-second, I have already stated above that it is not taken directly from Gautama's work, but from Baudhayana's. For it shows most of the characteristic readings of the latter. But a few new ones also occur, and some Sutras have been left out, while one new one, a well known verse regarding the efficacy of the Vaii-vanara vratapati and of the Pavitresh/i, has been added. Among the omissions peculiar to Vasish///a, that of the first Sutra is the most important, as it alters the whole character of the chapter, and removes one of the most convincing arguments as to its original position at the head of the section on penances. Vasish//^a places it in the beginning of the discussion on penances which are generally efficacious in removing guilt, and after the rules on the special penances for the classified offences.
These facts will, I think, suffice to show that the
Gautama Dharmaj-astra may be safely declared to be the
oldest of the existing works on the sacred law. This
assertion must, however, not be taken to mean;- .xidt ^/ery
' See e.g. Asvalayana Gnhya-sulra IV, i.
Single one of its SCitras is older than the other four Dharma- sutras. Two interpolations have already been pointed out above \ and it is not unlikely that there may be more, especially such as refer to the wording of the Sutras. For it is a suspicious fact that Gautama's language agrees closer with Pa//ini's rules than that of Apastamba and Baudha- yana. If it is borne in mind that Gautama's work has been torn out of its original connexion, and from a school- book has become a work of general authority, and for a long time has been studied by Pandits who were brought up in the traditions of classical grammar, it seems hardly likely that it could retain much of its ancient peculiarities of language. But I do not think that the interpolations and alterations can have affected the general character of the book very much. It is too methodically planned and too carefully arranged to admit of any very great changes. The fact, too, that in the chapter borrowed by Baudhayana the majority of the variae lectiones are corruptions, not better readings, favours this view. Regard- ing the distance in time between Gautama on the one hand, and Baudhayana and Vasish///a on the other, I prefer not to hazard any conjecture, as long as the position of the Gautamas among the schools of the Sama-veda has not been cleared up. So much only can be said that Gautama probably was less remote from Baudhayana than from Vasish///a. There are a few curious terms and rules in which the former two agree, while they, at the same time, differ from all other known writers on Dharma. Thus the term bhikshu, literally a beggar, which Gautama^ uses to denote an ascetic, instead of the more common yati or sannyasin, occurs once also in Baudhayana's Sutra. The same is the case with the rule, III, 13, which orders the ascetic not to change his residence during the rains. Both the name bhikshu and the rule must be very ancient, as the Buddhists have appropriated them, and have founded on the latter their practice of keeping the Vasso, or residence in monas jries during the rainy season.
• See p. liii.
2 Gaut. Dh. Ill, 2, II ; see also^Yeber, Hist. Ind. Lit., p. 327 (English ed.)
Ivi GAUTAMA.
As the position of the Gautamas among the Saman schools is uncertain, it will, of course, be likewise inad- visable to make any attempt at connecting them with the historical period of India. The necessity of caution in this respect is so obvious that I should not point it out, were it not that the Dharmaj-astra contains one word, the occurrence of which is sometimes considered to indicate the terminus a quo for the dates of Indian works. The word to which I refer is Yavana. Gautama quotes, IV, 21, an opinion of 'some,' according to which a Yavana is the off- spring of a 5udra male and a Kshatriya female. Now it is well known that this name is a corruption of the Greek 'laFwv, an Ionian, and that in India it was applied, in ancient times, to the Greeks, and especially to Bactrian and Indo- Bactrian Greeks, who ruled in the second century B. C. over a portion of Northern India. As there is no historical evidence to show that the Indians became acquainted with the Greeks before the invasion of Alexander in the fourth century B.C., it has been held that works containing the word Yavana cannot have been composed before 300 B. C. But irrespective of the consideration that the text of our Dharmaj-astra is not trustworthy enough to allow its date to be ascertained by a single word, the reasoning itself on which the determinative power of the word Yavana is based, is not beyond doubt, as it is applied to a person who, to judge from his name, was not a Greek, in the ancient inscription of Rudradaman at 6^unaga^/^^.
The information regarding the state of the Vedic litera-
ture, which the Dharma^-astra furnishes, is not very ex-
tensive. But some of the items are interesting, especially
the proof that Gautama knew the Taittiriya Arawyaka, from which he took the first six Sutras of the twenty-fifth Adhyaya ; the Samavidhana Brahma/^a, from which the twenty-sixth Adhyaya has been borrowed ; and the Athar- vaj-iras, which is mentioned XIX, 12. The latter word denotes, according to Haradatta, one of the Upanishads of
^ The person alluded to is Asoka's lieutenant, the Yavanarag-a Tushaspa, who appears to have been a Persian ; for the inscription, see Ind. Ant. VII, P- 257.
INTRODUCTION. IvH
the Atharva-veda, which usually are not considered to belong to a high antiquity. The fact that Gautama and Baudhayana knew it, will probably modify this opinion. Another important fact is that Gautama, XXI, 'j , quotes Manu, and asserts that the latter declared it to be impos- sible to expiate the guilt incurred by killing a Brah- ma;/a, drinking spirituous liquor, or violating a Guru's bed. From this statement it appears that Gautama knew an ancient work on law which was attributed to Manu. It probably was the foundation of the existing Manava Dhar- ma^astra. No other teacher on law, besides Manu, is men- tioned by name. But the numerous references to the opinions of ' some ' show that Gautama's work was not the first Dharma-sutra. ^
In conclusion, I have to add a few words regarding the materials on which the subjoined translation is based. The text published by Professor Stenzler for the Sanskrit Text Society has been used as the basis \ It has been collated with a rough edition, prepared from my own MSS. P and C, a MS. belonging to the Collection of the Government of Bombay, bought at Belgam, and a MS. borrowed from a Pu?/a vSastri. But the readings given by Professor Stenzler and his division of the Sutras have always been followed in the body of the translation. In those cases, where the variae lectiones of my MSS. seemed preferable, they have been given and translated in the notes. The reason which induced me to adopt this course was that I thought it more advisable to facilitate references to the printed Sanskrit text than to insist on the insertion of a few alterations in the translation, which would have disturbed the order of the Sutras. The notes have been taken from the above-mentioned rough edition and from my MSS. of Haradatta's commentary, called Gau- tamiya Mitakshara.
1 The Institutes of Gautama, edited with an index of words by A. F. Stenzler, London, 1876.
APASTAMBA,
APHORISMS ON THE SACRED LAW OF THE HINDUS.
AP A STAMB A,
APHORISMS ON THE SACRED LAW OF THE HINDUS.
Pra^na I, Pa^ala 1, Khanda 1.
1. Now, therefore, we will declare the acts pro-
ductive of merit which form part of the customs of
daily life, as they have been settled by the agree-
ment (of those who know the law).
2. The authority (for these duties) is the agree-
ment of those who know the law, (and the authorities
for the latter are) the Vedas alone.
3. (There are) four castes — Brahma;zas, Kshatri- yas, Vai^yas, and vS'udras.
4. Amongst these, each preceding (caste) is supe- rior by birth to the one following.
5. (For all these), excepting ^'udras and those
who have committed bad actions, (are ordained) the
initiation, the study of the Veda, and the kindling of
1. I. Samaya, ' agreement, decision,' is threefold. It includes injunction, restriction, and prohibition.
Dharma, ' acts productive of merit,' usually translated by ' duty or law,' is more accurately explained as an act which produces the quality of the soul called apurva, the cause of heavenly bliss and of final liberation.
2. Manu II, 6, 12; Ya^ii. I, 7; Gautama I, i. 5. Manu II, 35.
APASTAMBA. I, i, i.
the sacred fire ; and (their) works are productive of rewards (in this world and the next).
6. To serve the other (three) castes (is ordained) for the ^'udra.
7. The higher the caste (which he serves) the greater is the merit.
8. The initiation is the consecration in accordance
with the texts of the Veda, of a male who is desirous
of (and can make use of) sacred knowledge.
.9. A Brahma;^a declares that the Gayatrt is learnt for the sake of all the (three) Vedas.
10. (Coming) out of darkness, forsooth, he enters
darkness, whom a man unlearned in the Vedas,
initiates, and (so does he) who, without being learned
in the Vedas, (performs the rite of initiation.) That
has been declared in a Brahma;^a.
11. As performer of this rite of initiation he shall
seek to obtain a man in whose family sacred learning
is hereditary, who himself possesses it, and who is
devout (in following the law).
12. And under him the sacred science must be
6. Manu I, 91, VIII, 410, and IX, 334 ; Yagn. 1, 120.
8. The use of the masculine in the text excludes women. For though women may have occasion to use such texts as ' O fire, lord of the dwelling,' &c. at the Agnihotra, still it is specially ordained that they shall be taught this and similar verses only just before the rite is to be performed.
9. The object of the Sutra is to remove a doubt whether the ceremony of initiation ought to be repeated for each Veda, in case a man desires to study more than one Veda. This repetition is declared to be unnecessary, except, as the commentator adds, in the case of the Atharva-veda, for which, according to a passage of a Brahma«a, a fresh initiation is necessary. The latter rule is -given in the Vaitana-sutra I, i, 5.
12. Haradatta: 'But this (latter rule regarding the taking of
I, I, I, Initiation. 3
Studied until the end, provided (the teacher) does not fall off from the ordinances of the law.
13. He from whom (the pupil) gathers (a/imoii)
(the knowledge of) his religious duties (dharman) (is
called) the AMrya (teacher).
14. Him he should never offend.
15. For he causes him (the pupil) to be born (a second time) by (imparting to him) sacred learning.
