10. Vishnudharmasutra

Volume I: Part I pp. 112–127

10. Vishnudharmasutra

10. Viṣṇudharmasūtra.

The Viṣṇudharmasūtra has been printed several times in India, viz. by Jivananda in his Dharmaśāstrasaṁgraha (1876 part I pp. 70-176 ) by the Bengal Asiatic Society (1881, eḍ by Dr. Jolly with extracts from the commentary Vaijayanti), by M. N. Dutt (*Dharmaśāstra texts, vol. II pp. 541-666, Calcutta, 1909) and translated by Dr. Jolly (in the S. B. E. vol. VII with an Introduction ). In the present work Dr. Jolly's edition has been useḍ The sūtra contains one hundred chapterṣ Though the number of chapters is so large, the sūtra is not very extensive. There are several chapters such as 40, 42 and 76 that contain only one sūtra and one verse. The first chapter and the last two are entirely in verse; the remaining chapters are in mixed prose and verse, the versified portion being generally at the end of each chapter. As pointed out by the Vaijayantī the sūtra is in close relation to one of the oldest schools of the Yajurveda, viz. Katha. It also stands in a peculiar relation to the extant Manusmṛti. According to the Caraṇavyūha, Katha and Cārāyanīya are two of the twelve sub-divisions of Caraka-śākhā of the Yajurveda. Dr. Jolly (S. B. E. VII, p. XII) says that the Viṣṇudharmasūtra has four chapters (21, 67, 73 and 86) and that both drew from a common source. Bühler points out (West and Bühler's digest, 3rd eḍ p. 35) that the Kāṭhakāgṛhya found in Kashmir agrees closely with the Dharmasūtra of Viṣṇu and the mantras in the latter agree with the Kāṭhaka recension of the Yajurveda. But the Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra is not the work of the same author that com-posed the Kāṭhaka Śrauta or Gṛhya sūtras, nor does it appear that it formed part of the Kāṭhaka Kalpa. Dr. Jolly (r. u. S. p. 7) says that Govindarāja (12th century) in his Smṛti-mañjarī cites a passage in prose from a Kāṭhasūtrakṛt on the penance for Brāhmaṇa murder which is wanting is our Viṣṇusmṛti (vide S. B. E. Vol. 25, p. XXI n for the passage ).

The contents of the Viṣṇu-dharma-sūtra are :— The earth, being lifted out of the surging ocean by the great Boar, went to Kāśyapa to inquire as to who would support her thereafter, and was sent by him to Viṣṇu who told her that those who would follow the duties of varṇas and āśramas would be her support, whereupon the earth pressed the great God to impart to her their duties; 2. the four varṇas and their dharmas; 3. the duties of kings (rājadharmaḥ); 4. the Kārṣāpaṇa and smaller measures ; 5. punishments for various offences ; 6. debtors and creditors, rates of interest, sureties ; 7. three kinds of documents ; 8. witnesses ; 9. general rules about ordeals; 10–14. ordeals of balance, fire, water, poison and holy water (kośa) ; 15. the twelve kinds of sons, exclusion from inheritance ; eulogy of sons; 16. offspring of mixed marriages, and mixed castes ; 17. partition, joint family and rules of inheritance to one dying sonless, re-union, strīdhana ; 18. partition among sons of a man from wives of different castes ; 19, carrying the dead body for cremation, impurity on death, praise of Brāhmaṇas ; 20. the duration of the four Yugas, Manvantara, Kalpa, Mahākalpa, passages inculcating that one should not grieve too much for the departed ; 21. the rites for the dead after period of mourning, monthly śrāddha, sapiṇḍīkaraṇa ; 22. periods of impurity on death for sapiṇḍas, rules of conduct in mourning, impurity on birth, and rules about impurity on touching various persons and objects ; 23. purification of one's body and of various sub-stances ; 24. marriage, forms of marriage, inter-marriages, guardians for marriage; 25. the dharmas of women; 26. precedence among wives of different castes; 27. the Saṁskāras, garbhādhāna and others; 28. the rules for brahmacārins; 29. eulogy of ācārya; 30. time for the starting of Vedic study and holidays; 31. father, mother and ācārya deserve the highest reverence; 32. other persons deserving of respect; 33. the three sources of sin, viz. passion, anger, greed; 34. kinds of atipātakas, deadliest sins; 35. five mahāpātakas; 36. anu-pātakas, that are as deadly as the mahāpātakas; 37. numerous upapātakas; 38–42. other lesser sins; 43. the twenty-one hells and the duration of hell torments for various sinners; 44. the various low births to which sinners are consigned for various sins; 45. the various diseases suffered by sinners and the low pursuits they have to follow by way of retribution; 46–48. various kinds of kṛcchras (penances), sāntapana, cāndrāyaṇa, prastiyāvaka; 49. actions prescribed for a devotee of Vāsudeva and the rewards thereof; 50. prāyaścitta for killing a brāhmaṇa and other human beings, for killing cows and other animals; 51–53. prāyaścittas for drinking wine and other forbidden substances, for theft of gold and other articles, for incest and sexual intercourse of other kinds; 54. prāyaścittas for miscellaneous acts; 55. secret penances; 56. holy hymns like Aghamarṣaṇa that purge sin; 57. whose society should be avoided, Vratyas, unrepentant sinners, avoiding gifts; 58. the pure, variegated (mixed) and dark kinds of wealth; 59. The duties of house-holders, pākayajñas, the five daily mahāyajñas, honouring guests; 60. the daily conduct of a householder and good breeding; 61–62. rules about brushing the teeth, ācamana; 63. means of livelihood for a house-holder, rules for guidance, good and evil omens on starting on journey, rule of the road; 64. bathing and tarpaṇa of gods and Manes; 65–67. worship of Vāsudeva flowers and other materials of worship, offering of food to deities and piṇḍas to ancestors and giving food to guests; 68. rules about time and manner of taking food; 69–70. sexual intercourse with wife and about sleep; 71. general rules of conduct for a snātaka; 72. value of self-restraint; 73–86. śrāddhas, the procedure of śrāddhas, aṣṭakā śrāddha, the ancestors to whom śrāddha is to be offered, times of śrāddha, fruits of śrāddha on the several week days and the 27 nakṣatras and the tithis, materials for śrāddha, brāhmaṇas unfit to be invited at śrāddha, brāhmaṇas who are paṅktipāvana; countries unfit for śrāddha, tīrthas, letting loose of a bull; 87–88. gifts of . antelope skin, or a cow; 89. kārtika-snāna; 90 eulogy of gifts of various sorts; 91-93. works of public utility such as wells, lakes, planting gardens, embankments, gifts of food, flowers &c.; difference in merit according to the recipient; 94-95 rules about forest hermit ( vānaprastha ); 96-97. anatomy of the bones, muscles, veins, arteries &c.; concentration in various ways; 98-99. praise of Vāsudeva by the Earth and of Lakṣmī; 100. rewards of studying this Dharmaśāstra.

The Viṣṇudharma-sūtra somewhat resembles the Dharma- sūtra of Vasiṣṭha. Like the latter it is full of verseṣ But one feature which is peculiar to the Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra is that it professes to be a revelation by the Supreme Being. None of the other dharmasūtras so far described assumes this role. The style of the Viṣṇudharmaśūtra is easy and somewhat diffuse. It presents hardly any ungrammatical formṣ The printed text is corrupt only in a few cases; the verses occur generally at the end of chapterṣ Sometimes the number of verses in a chapter is very large e. g., in chapter 20 there are 21 sūtras and 32 verses, in chapter 23 there are 24 verses, in chap. 43 there are 14, in chap. 51 there are 20 verseṣ Some of the verses are in the classical Indravajrā (19. 23-24) and the Upajāti metres (23.61 and 59. 30 ) and a few are Triṣṭubhs (29. 9-10, 30. 47, 72. 77 ). The three Triṣṭubhs (29. 9-10, 30. 41 ) are three out of four verses of the Vidyā- sūkta occurring in the Nirukta ( II. 4 ). Chap. 72.77 is Bhagavadgītā II. 70. Chapters 1, 99, 100 are entirely in verse. Chap. 98 contains praise of Vāsudeva by the Earth in about 91 names, some of which like Lekhya, Sapta, Kapila, Sāṁkhyācārya are rather surprising. The revelation by God Viṣṇu is contained in 96 chapters (2 to 97 ). The names of Viṣṇu are only 94 but 98.6 ( om namas-te ) and 98.101 ( namo nama iti ) are added to 94 and thus the names of Viṣṇu are squared up with 96 chapterṣ The word atha does not occur at the beginning of the first two chapters and in Dr. Jolly's edition at the beginning of some other chapters also (viz. 4, 16-20, 22-23, 26-27, 29-32 &c.). The chapters vary greatly in extent. In Chap. 34, 39 and 40 there is only one sūtra followed by one verse. There are other chapters also that are short, that is they have three or four sūtras and a verse viz. 41, 84, 88, 89, while some chapters occupy more than three printed pages such as 3, 20, 22, 23, 51, 54, 96. Chap. 5th is the longest, containing 178 sūtras and 14 verses at the enḍ Here and there Viṣṇu Dh. S. gives etymologies such as of the word putra in 15. 44 (= Manu 9. 138 ), of Māmśā ( in 51. 78 = Manu V.55 ), of puruṣa ( from puri śete ) in 97,15, which is also given in Br. Up. II. 4.18 and Nir. I. 13 ). At the end of Chap. 78 there are two gāthās ( 52-53 ) sung by pitṛs which are quoted by Kullūka on Manu III. 274 as Viṣṇu's and which are similar to Manu III. 273-74 and Vāyu-purāṇa 82.11 and Matsya-purāṇa 204.5 ( matsya gāthās 3-17 sung by the pitṛs, 10 of which begin with ‘api syāt sa kuleśmakain etc. ). Vide Anuśāsana-parva 88. 12-17 ( Ch. eḍ ). There is one verse (72.6) which has eleven letters in the first pāda and twelve in the remaining three.

In determining the age of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra one is confronted with a difficult probleṃ Some of the chapters undoubtedly contain material which is comparatively old and on a level with the ancient Dharmasūtras of Gautama and Āpastamba. Such are the chapters about rājadharma ( 3 and 5 ), the rules about twelve sons and the mixed castes ( 15-16 ), funeral rites and mourning ( 21 and 22 ). But there are very large portions of the work that bear a clear impress of a later date. The Viṣṇudharma-sūtra and the Manusmṛti have at least 160 identical verseṣ But this is not all. There are hundreds of sūtras which are merely the prose equivalents of verses from the Manusmṛti. For example, Viṣṇu 2.3 and Manu 2.16, Viṣṇu 3.4 and 6 and Manu 7. 69-70, Viṣṇu 3. 7-10 and Manu 7. 115, Viṣṇu 3. 11-15 and Manu 7. 116-117, Viṣṇu 4. 1-13 and Manu 8. 132-137, Viṣṇu 5. 4-7, and Manu 9. 237, Viṣṇu 20. 1-21, and Manu I. 67-73, Viṣṇu 51. 7-10 and Manu 4. 209-212, Viṣṇu 59. 21-25 and Manu 3. 70, Viṣṇu 62. 224 and Manu 2. 59, Viṣṇu 71. 48-52 and Manu 4. 80, and Viṣṇu 96. 14-17 and Manu 6. 46 agree almost word for worḍ The verses that are identical in both are found in all the chapters of the Manusmṛti from the second to the last, the largest number ( about 47 , occurring in the 5th and chapters eleven, two, and three respectively contributing 25, 24, and 19 verseṣ Therefore the question whether the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra borrows from Manu or vice versa or whether both borrow from ^*a common original assumes very great importance. As the cor- 10. Viṣṇudharmasūtra respondence extends over several hundred verses of the Manu- smṛti, the last hypothesis of borrowing from a common original does not recommend itself to me. No such common source is known to have existed and to say that there were hundreds of floating popular verses whose authorship was unknown and which were drawn upon by both works appears to me to be an extremely gratuitous and unsatisfactory assumptioṇ In my opinion it is the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra that borrowed the verses ad hoc or adapted them from the Manusmṛti. There are several lines of reasoning that strengthen this hypothesiṣ There are some verses that are identical in both, in which the name of Manu occurs, which the Viṣṇudharmasūtra omits by making slight verbal changeṣ For example, Viṣṇu 23. 50 substitutes ‘tat parikīrtitam’ for ‘Manur-abravīt’ in Manu 5. 131 ; and Viṣṇu 51. 64 reads ‘nānyatreti kathamcana’ for Manu 5. 41 ‘nānyatretyabravīn–Manuḥ’ (this last occurs in Vaṣ 4. 6). The reason for these changes is obviouṣ The Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra professes to be a direct revelation from Viṣṇu and it is in keeping with this assumed role that not one human author is mentioned by name in the sūtra. Therefore where the name of Manu occurred in any verse, it was pur- posely omitteḍ Another reason why the sūtra must be presumed to be the borrower is the character of the extant work itself. It is a kind of hotchpotch and contains verses that are identical with those of other workṣ For example, several verses of the Bhagavadgītā occur in the Viṣṇudharma- sūtra. Viṣṇu 20. 48–49 and 51–52 are the same as Gītā 2. 13; 23, 24, 28; Viṣṇu 72. 7 and Gītā 2–70 are almost identical. Viṣṇu 96. 97 and the first half of 93 are the same as Gītā 13. 1–2, except that in keeping with its character of a revelation to the Earth, the Viṣṇudharmasūtra substitutes ‘vasudhe’ for ‘kaunteya’ and ‘bhāvini’ for ‘bhārata.’ Several verses of the Yājñavalkya-smṛti are identical with those of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra. For example, Viṣṇu 6. 41 and Yāj. 2. 53, Viṣṇu 8. 38 and Yāj. II. 79, Viṣṇu 9. 53 and Yāj. 2. 97, Viṣṇu 17. 17 and Yāj. 2. 138, Viṣṇu 17. 23 (first half) and Yāj. 2. 210 (latter half), Viṣṇu 62. 9 and Yāj. 1. 21, Vi. 63. 51 and Yāj. 1. 117 are identical. Besides these, there are hundreds of prose sūtras that are identical with passages of Yājñavalkya. For example, Vi. 3. 72–74 = Yāj. II. 1–4; Vi. 3. 82=Yāj. 1. 318–320 (rules about land grants); Vi. 5. 65–69=Yāj. II. 317–320, Vi. 5. 73=Yāj. II. 221; Vi. 45. 3–12=Yāj. 3. 209–211 (about diseases suffered by sinners) ; Vi. 60. 24=Yāj. 1. 17;⁵ Vi. 96. 55-79=Yāj. 3. 84-90 (about 360 bones of the body) ; Vi. 96. 80-88=Yāj. 3. 100-102 (about the number of arteries, veins, muscles etc. ) ; Vi. 96. 89-92=Yāj. 3. 93-99. Dr. Jolly thinks that Yājñavalkya borrows from Viṣṇu the whole of the anatomical section (vide S. B. E. vol. VII, p. XX). With great respect I differ from this opinioṇ There is nothing to show that the anatomical details were first given to the world by Viṣṇu. They must have first been embodied in works on medicine such as those of Caraka and Suśruta² and were probably copied by Dharmasūtra writerṣ But, if there is any borrowing between Viṣṇu and Yājñavalkya, I think from the character of the Viṣṇudharmasūtra that it is the sūtra that must be regarded as borrowing from Yājñavalkya. There are several matters in the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra which are wanting in Yājñavalkya and which induce one to place the extant sūtra later than Yājñavalkya, viz. the name 'Jaiva' for Thursday (Vi. 78. 5), the long list of tīrthas (Vi. chap. 85) which include Śrīparvata and the five rivers of the south called southern Pañcanada, the importance of the conjunction of the moon and Jupiter on a full moon day (Vi. 49. 9-10), the vague definition of Āryāvarta³ (Vi. 84. 4). The verse in Viṣṇu 54. 33 (about half prāyaścitta for boys and old men) is ascribed to Aṅgiras by the Mitākṣarā (on Yāj. III. 243).

Therefore, the most probable conclusion is that the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra borrows from the Manusmṛti, Yājñavalkya and other authorṣ It would be too much to assume that the Manusmṛti, the Bhagavadgītā and Yājñavalkya borrow from such a comparatively unimportant work as the Viṣṇudharma- sūtra.

The above conclusion is further strengthened by certain other considerationṣ The Manusmṛti has been quoted with utmost reverence by a host of writers from at least the 4th cen- tury downwards, such as Śabara, Kumārila and Śaṅkarācārya. Yājñavalkya was commented upon by Viśvarūpa in the first half of the 9th century. Viśvarūpa in his commentary quotes scores of sūtras from Gautama, Āpastamba, Baudhāyana, Vasiṣṭha, Śaṅkha and Hārita. But it is significant that Viśvarūpa in his commentary on yajña- valkya does not quote even a single sūtra of Viṣṇu by name. It is true that Viśvarūpa ( on Yāj. III. 66 ) says that the four forms of asceticism ( pārivrājya ) should be under- stood from the other smṛtis like those of Viṣṇu.¹¹³ This probably refers to chap. 97 of the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra. Medhātithi ( on Manu 3. 248 ) quotes Viṣṇu ( 21. 12 ) and on Manu 9. 76 quotes a sūtra of Viṣṇu which I could not trace in the printed Viṣṇu.¹¹⁴ The Mitākṣarā mentions Viṣṇu about thirty timeṣ The quotations are taken from chapters 19, 21, 22, 35-42, 50, 51, 52, 75 and 79 of the Viṣṇudharma- sūtra, 18 sūtras of chap. 22 ( on āśauca and kindred topics ) being quoted on Yāj. III. 23, 24, 27, 29-30. But it is a remarkable fact that not one of the verses in the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra is cited as Viṣṇu's in the Mitākṣarā. The only exception is a verse cited as Viṣṇu's on Yāj. III. 265, which has the same purport as Viṣṇu 52. 14 ( a verse ) and the first pāda of which is identical with that of the verse in the Viṣṇudharmasūtra.¹¹⁵ A few verses that are quoted as Viṣṇu's in the Mitākṣarā could not be traced in the extant dharmasūtra.¹¹⁶ It is not unlikely that the sūtra first contained mostly prose sūtras based on Manu and the Kāṭhakāgṛhya and verses were tacked on later.

Quotations from the Viṣṇudharmasūtra in the Kṛtyakalpataru (no part of which had been published at the time this volume was published in 1930, but now eleven parts of which have been published in the GOS. edited by my friend the late Prof. Rangaswami Aiyangar) are made hundreds of times e. g. 132 times in Vyavahārakāṇḍa, 39 times in Śrāddha, 38 times in Niyatakāla, 35 times in Gṛhasthakāṇḍa, 30 times in Brahmacārikāṇḍa, 10 times on Rājadharma, 15 times on Dānakāṇḍa (the Dānakāṇḍa quotes on pp. 231-33 the whole of chap. 90 except the last five sūtras and a verse). One great advantage is that the Kalpataru often states that the same verse or passage occurs in Viṣṇu and other ancient writers e. g. in Vyavahārakāṇḍa on pp. 270, 613, 627, 652, 676, 678 &c. verses are cited as Manu-Viṣṇu and cited as Viṣṇu and Yājñavalkya on pp. 150, 213, 289. Yāj. II. 120 (second half) is Viṣṇu 17. 23 (first half). The whole of Viṣṇu Chap. 49 (on Dvādaśīvrata) and Viṣṇu Chap. 89 are quoted by Vratakāṇḍa of Kalpataru on pp. 310, 418 respectively. Among later writers of nibandhas Aparārka quotes Viṣṇu most profusely and the Smṛticandrikā also quotes Viṣṇu about 225 timeṣ Many of the verses found in Vi. are quoted by Aparārka as Viṣṇu's e. g. Vi. 84. 4 on Yāj. 1. 2; 68. 46 47 on Yāj. 1, 106; 67. 33 on Yāj. 1. 107 : 5. 183 on Yāj. 2. 60; 10. 9–11 on Yāj 2. 102. But there are numerous verses quoted as Viṣṇu's by Aparārka which are not found in the sūtra, e. g. on Yāj. I. 21, 53, 89, 100. Sometimeṣ Aparārka quotes almost whole chapters of Viṣṇu, e. g. Vi. 68 on Yāj. I. 106 and 90 on Yāj. I. 114. It is to be noted that Vi. 70. 17 (a verse) is quoted by Aparārka as a prose sūtra on 1. 114) with slight verbal changeṣ All these facts make one feel naturally sceptical about the authenticity of most of the verses in the extant Viṣṇudharmasūtra. They probably formed no part of the sūtra at the time when the Mitākṣarā was composeḍ At all events it cannot be gainsaid that the verses are a very late part of the sūtra.

The Viṣṇudhamasūtra contains quotations from all the Vedic samhitās and from the Aitareya-brāhmaṇa (as in Vi. 15. 45 ). It mentions the Vedāngas very frequently ( 30. 3 and 38, 28, 35, 83. 6 ), it speaks of Vyākaraṇa ( 83. 7 ), of itihāsa ( 3. 70, 30. 38, 83. 7 ), of Dharmaśāstras ( 3. 70, 30. 38, 73. 16, 83. 8 ), of Purāṇa ( 3. 70, 30. 38 &c ). About the close correspondence between Bauḍ III. 6 and Viṣṇu. 48 and between Vaṣ 28. 10–15 and 18–22 and Viṣṇu, chap. 56 and 87, vide remarks made above pp. 43 and 103. The sūtra quotes several verses ( called gāthās ) and says they were sung by pitrs ; vide 78. 52–53, 80. 14, 83. 21, 85. 65–67. They bear close resemblance to the gāthās sung by the pitrs quoted in the Anuśāsana-parva 88. 11–15 and a half verse ‘eṣṭavyā bahavaḥ putrā yadyekopi Gayām vrajet’ is the same in Vi. 85. 67 and Anu. 88. 14. The Viṣṇusmṛti enumerates twenty- one hells ( 43. 1–22 ), which are almost the same as yajña- valkya’s ( 3. 222–224 ). It mentions the names of the seven days of the week ( 78. 1–7 ), Thursday being called Jaiva, while Yājñavalkya mentions only the seven planets ( with Rāhu and Ketu ) in the same order ( I. 296 ). It recommends the practice of satī ( 25. 14 ), speaks of pustakas ( 18, 44, 23. 56 ), a word which is not used by the other dharmaśūtras so far describeḍ It gives a long list of good and evil omens at the time of starting on a journey ( 63. 33–39 ). Among evil omens it includes the sight of yellow-robed ascetics ( i. e. Buddhists probably ) and Kāpālikas ( 63. 36 ). It prohibits speech with Mlecchas, Antyajas ( 71. 59 ) and journeys to Mleccha countries ( 84. 2 ). It contains special directions about the worship of Vāsudeva in chap. 49 and speaks of Śvetadvīpa as the reward of devotion to Vāsudeva ( 49. 4 ). Here and there, there are eulogies of Vāsudeva ( 1. 50–57, 65. 1, 97. 10, 98 which ( last ) gives one hundred names of Viṣṇu ). It speaks of the four vyūhas of Vāsudeva ( 67. 2 ) and of the Varāha incarnatioṇ It gives a vague location of Āryāvarta as a country where the four varṇas exist ( 84. 4 ). It enumerates numerous sacred places ( 85. 1–52 ), among which Śrīparvata, Saptārṣa ( modern Satara ? ), Godāvari and southern Pañcanada deserve to be specially noteḍ Though it does not specifically enumerate the eighteen titles of law just as Yājñavalkya does not, yet it contains rules (in chapters 5-6) on almost all of theṃ As Yājñavalkya enumerates Viṣṇu among the pro- pounders of dharmaśāstras, it follows that a work of Viṣṇu existed in comparatively early timeṣ What matters that work embraced it is difficult to say. It probably contained the topics found in the works of Gautama, Āpastamba and otherṣ It may have included portions borrowed from the Kāṭhakagṛhya. An important question is whether the Viṣṇudharmasūtra is related to the Kāṭhaka school (of the Caraka śākhā of the Kṛṣṇayajurveda). I do not propose to deal with it at great length. Nanda Paṇḍita in his Coṃ on Viṣṇu Dh. S. 67. 3 (where twelve deities are named) expressly states that the des- cription of Vaiśvadeva in that chapter follows the procedure adopted in the Kāṭhakaśākhā ‘Kāṭhaka-śākhānusāreṇa Vaiśvadevam-āha …… Agnyādibhyo dvādaśāhutirjuhuyāt’. Important evidence is furnished by the Kṛtyakalpataru, an extensive digest composed in the first half of the 12th century A. D. on Śrāddha (GOS. Eḍ). Viṣṇu Dh. S. chap. 73 provides about āmaśrāddhas (śrāddhas with uncooked grains) and Kāmyaśrāddhas (śrāddhas performed on certain tithis, nakṣatras and weekdays for securing certain desired objects specified in Viṣṇu Dh. S. Chap. 78) a certain procedure (the original is quoted in the note) ⁶ in these śrāddhaṣ during the recitation of the first pañcaka (a collection of five verses), after having offered an oblation into fire; in śrāddhas where meat is offered during the recitation of the second pañcaka; at a śrāddha on amāvāsyā (New Moon) during recitation of the last pañcaka; on the Aṣṭakas (eighth days) of the three dark halves following Agrahāyaṇī (full moon day in Mārgaśīrṣa) during the recitation of the first, second and last pañcaka respectively and likewise on the Anuvākas and śṭakās he must invite the Manes, &c. The Kṛtyakalpataru on Śrāddha (pp. 164–65) sets out Viṣṇu Dh. S. 73. 5–14 and remarks that the words ‘first pañcaka’ &c. have in view, according to Laugākṣigṛhya, the Anuvāka of 15 ṛks, where the first pañcaka begins with the ṛk ‘iyam-eva’ (which is the first of the pentad), the second pentad begins with ‘pañca vyuṣṭiḥ’ and the 3rd pentad begins with ‘ṛtasya dhāma’. These fifteen verses form the 10th anuvāka of 39th Sthānaka (called ‘yadakranda’ from first two words) of the Kāṭhaka-saṃhitā. The first verses of the pentad of this anuvāka in Kāṭhaka-saṃhitā is ‘Iyam-eva sā &c’, the first verse of the 2nd pentad is ‘pañca-vyuṣṭir-anu’ and the first verse of the third pañcaka is ‘ṛtasya dhāma’. The above makes it clear that the Viṣṇudharmasūtra took the Kāṭhaka-saṃhitā and the Kāṭhaka-gṛhya (or Laugākṣi) as its basiṣ The words ‘prathama-pañcakena, madhyamapañcakena’ are vague and could have been understood only by those who know their relation to Kāṭhakagṛhya and Kāṭhakasaṃhitā. It follows that at least some chapters (like 21, 64, 65, 67, 73 &c.) were certainly based on the Kāṭhaka gṛhya (if not all), and the Viṣṇu Dh. S. was originally intended to be a Dharma-sūtra for the students of the Kāṭhaka, though in course of time it grew and included elements not connected with Kāthaka-śākhā.⁸ It may be stated that on Viṣṇu Dh. S. 21. 17 also Nanda-paṇḍita mentions the Kāṭhakagṛhya, that Viṣṇu Dh. S. 64. 21 (Drupadaṁ Sāvitrim vā) refers to ‘Kāṭhaka dādivonmumućanāh etc.). Similarly, Viṣṇu 65. 2 (Aśvinoḥ prāṇastau te iti jīvadānam dattvā) mentions Kāṭhaka-saṃ 11. 17; on Vi. Dh. S. 65. 7 Nandapaṇḍita remarks that the four mantras (Kāṭhaka-saṃ 36. 29-32) are to be recited; Viṣṇu 65. 11 (tejosi śukramiti dīpam) mentions a mantra from Kāṭhaka-saṃ I. 33.

Dr. Jolly in his learned and long introduction to the translation of Viṣṇu Dh. S (SBE. Vol. VII, pp. IX-XXXVII) deals with several problems, some of which have been discussed already. His remarks on some problems will be briefly mentioned here. On p. XXIV (in order to establish the priority of Viṣṇu to the Manusmṛti) he says that the ‘Viṣṇusūtra nowhere refers to South Indian nations such as the Draviḍas and Āndhras or to the Yāvanas’. That non-mention does not lead to positive conclusions is well illus-trated here. The Āndhras are mentioned even in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa (33. 6), where Viśvāmitra curses his disobedient sons that ‘their offspring will be Āudhras, Śabaras and Puṇḍras’ &c.). Aśoka in his 13th Rock edict mentions Āndhraṣ On p. XXI Dr. Jolly refers to Yāj. II. 240-41 where nāṇaka is mentioned and punishment is provided for one turning out a false nāṇaka or for fabricating a royal grant, while Viṣṇu V. 9 refers only to royal grants but not to nāṇakaṣ This is put forward by Dr. Jolly as a ground for regarding Viṣṇu as more ancient than Yāj. (p. XXI). It has been shown that the Viṣṇudharmasūtra professes to be a direct revelation by God Viṣṇu to the Earth Goddess and therefore the redactor of Viṣṇu knowing that the nāṇaka is of foreign origin omitted that worḍ Lastly, his view (Intro. pp. XXV, ff), following the lead of Bühler, that the extant Manusmṛti is an improved metrical edition of the Mānava-dharmaśāstra (not now available) will be dealt with later under section 13 (Mānavadharmasūtra : did it exist?). I agree with Dr. Jolly that some devotee of Viṣṇu recast the original Dharmasūtra (Intro. pp. XXVIII ff). I am in agreement with the view which Dr. Jolly holds that the original Viṣṇudharmasūtra was closely connected with the Kāṭhaka saṃhitā. Not only Nandapaṇḍita, but the Kṛtya-kalpataru (of the first half of 12th century) relies on the tradition that Viṣṇu Dh, S. accords with Laugākṣi-gṛhya. Dr. Jolly (on pp. XXIX-XXXI of his Introduction) puts forward several considerations as to how and why the chapters were raised to 100, what portions may be regarded as old and what were added by the Viṣṇuite redactor later. I do not agree with everything he says but on the whole his treatment is judiciouṣ He observes that the Viṣṇuite editor (pp. XXXII) cannot be placed earlier than 3rd or 4th century A. D. I agree with thiṣ

The original Viṣṇu Dh. S. (mostly in prose) may have to be placed about 300 B. C. to 100 A. D. and the present inflated text about 400 to 600 A. D. Vide two papers of Prof. L. Renou of Paris on Viṣṇu in Journal Asiatique (1961) pp. 163-172 (in French) and in Bulletin of the D. C. R. I. Vol. 20 parts 1-4 (in English) pp. 319-323.

When Dr. Jolly says that certain chapters of Viṣṇu agree closely with the Kāṭhakagṛhya, all that is meant is that some of the sūtras of Viṣṇu are the same or almost the same as those of the Kāṭhakagṛhya (e. g. compare Viṣṇu 21, 73 and 86 with Kāṭhakagṛhya V. 12, V. 9, and V. 3 respectively). But in all these places Viṣṇu contains more details than the Kāṭhakagṛhya. It may, however, be noted that in a few cases the views of the Kāṭhakagṛhya differ from those of Viṣṇu. For example, Viṣṇu (30. 1) speaks of Vedic studies for 4½ months only in the year when once they are started on the full-moon day of Śrāvaṇa or Bhādrapada, while the Kāṭhakagṛhya (I. 9. 10) gives three alternatives, viz. 4½, 5 or 5½ months; Viṣṇu prescribes the 11th from conception (27. 16), while the Kāṭhaka prescribes the 9th, without specifying whether it is to be from conception or birth (IV. 1. 2); Viṣṇu enumerates eight forms of marriage (24. 18), while the Kāṭhaka (II. 3 and 4) speaks of only two, Brāhma and Āsura, and is silent about the rest; Viṣṇu (46. 19-20) defines Santapana and Mahā- sautapana differently from the Kāṭhaka (I. 7. 3-4), but agrees with Yājñavalkya (III. 315-316). Here the recent Lahore edition of the Kāṭhakagṛhya by Dr. Caland has been useḍ As it used Kāṭhaka mantras and borrowed from the Kāṭhakagṛhya, the dharmasūtra may have been a text-book of the Kāṭhaka school and probably originated in Kashmir and Punjab which is the home of the Kāṭhaṣ The date of the older portion of Viṣṇu may be placed between 300 B. C. to 100 B. C. But this is no more than a mere conjecture. It is to be noted that Kumārila does not mention the Viṣṇudharmasūtra among the sūtras studied by particular schoolṣ Then several centuries later on the whole of the sūtra was recast from the Vaiṣṇavite point of view and received large additions both in prose and verse. When these additions were made we have no exact means of determining. It is probable that they were not made very long before Viśvarūpa. At all events the additions were made long after the Yājñavalkyasmṛti and after the 3rd century. The mention of the week days makes the sūtra comparatively a late work. The earliest epigraphic mention of a week-day is in the Eran inscription of 484 A. D. ( vide Fleet's Gupta inscriptions pp. 88-89 ) and Varāhamihira ( 6th century ) knew the week days well. The Brahmapurāṇa ( 28. 55 ) mentions Sunday and the Padmapurāṇa mentions Thursday ( Brahmakhaṇḍa chap. 11. 34 ). The Sūrya-siddhānta ( XII. 6 and 78 ) speaks of the lords of dayṣ Thus although the extant Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra is a late recast, it contains a few doctrines that were held in ancient timeṣ For example, it allows a Brāhmaṇa to marry a girl of anyone of the four varṇas ( 24. 1 ) and does not inveigh against niyoga as Manu doeṣ

A few of the sūtras agree closely with Nārada. Vide Vi. 7. 10–11 and Nārada ( Rṇādāna verses 136–137 ).

The Mitākṣarā quotes all the prose passages of chapters 35-42 and ascribes them to Bṛhadviṣṇu ( on Yāj. 3. 242 ). Similarly, on Yāj. 3. 261 it ascribes Vi. 35. 3–5 to Bṛhad-viṣṇu. Similarly, the Smṛticandrikā ( II. p. 298 ) ascribes Vi. 17. 4 ff to Bṛhad-Viṣṇu. The Mitākṣarā ( on Yāj. 3. 267 ) quotes a verse of Vṛddha-Viṣṇu which summarises some sūtras of Viṣṇu ⁹ ( 50. 6 and 12-14 ).

In the Ānandāśrama collection of smṛtis there is a Laghu-Viṣṇusmṛti in five chapters and 114 verses dealing with the duties of the varṇas and the four āśramaṣ Aparārka in his commentary on Yāj. 3. 258 quotes four verses from Laghu-Viṣṇu, which are not found in the Ānandāśrama text. So Aparārka used some other work or perhaps a larger work. The Parāśara-Mādhava often quotes gadya-Viṣṇu and padya-Viṣṇu. The former from a quotation in vol. I. part 2, p. 234 seems to be the Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra itself. In the Sarasvatīvilāsa numerous sūtras of Viṣṇu with the explanations of Bhāruci thereon are quoted, which are not found in the printed Viṣṇu.¹⁰ The Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra was commented upon by Nanda-paṇḍita, author of several works on dharmaśāstra, who wrote at Benares the commentary called Vaijayantī (accord-ing to certain msṣ) in 1679 (i. e. 1622-23 A. D.) of the Vikrama era. Dr. Jolly publishes extracts from this commen-tary in his edition of the sūtra. From the fact that the Sarasvatīvilāsa quotes several times the sūtras of Viṣṇu with Bhāruci's explanation, it looks probable that Bhāruci commented upon the Viṣṇudharma-sūtra. For further information on Bhāruci vide sec. 61. So far only the printed and well-known dharmasūtras have been passed under review. But there were numerous other dharmasūtras which are either now extant in rare msṣ or are not yet discovered but are only to be reconstructed from quotationṣ It is now time to discuss theṃ