11. The Dharmasutra of Harita

Volume I: Part I pp. 127–136

11. The Dharmasutra of Harita

II. The Dharmasūtra of Hārita That Hārita was an ancient sūtrakāra on dharma is quite patent from the fact that the dharmasūtras of Baudhā-yana, Āpastamba and Vasiṣṭha quote him as an authority. Hārita's view is quoted by Bauḍ Dh. S. II. 1. 50, which differs from the view propounded in Bauḍ Dh. S. II. 1. 49; Āp. Dh. S. refers to Hārita in I. 13. 11, I. 18. 2, I. 19. 12, I. 28 1, 5 and 16, I. 29. 12 (which is the same as quoted in Bauḍ Dh. S. II. 1. 49). Vasiṣṭha quotes Hārita in II. 6 (a verse the first half of which is in Manu 2. 171 and the 2nd half in Manu II. 172 and in Vanaparva 180. 35). Vide also Bauḍ Dh. S. I. 2. 7 (which is almost the same verse as in Vaṣ II. 6 and seems to be a quotation as 'iti' is added at the enḍ Āpastamba quotes Hārita more frequently than any other author. From this it may be concluded that they belonged to the same Veda. The Tantravārtika (vide note 55 above) mentions Hārita along with Gautama and other sūtrakāras on dharma. From Viśvarūpa down to the latest writers on dharmaśāstra Hārita is most profusely quoteḍ From the quotations it appears that his dharmasūtra was perhaps the most extensive of all dharmaśūtraṣ

Dr. S. C. Banerjee contributed to the 'Journal of Oriental Institute' Baroda Vol. VIII. No. 1 (1958) pp. 14-37 a reconstruction of Hārita-dharmasūtra and in his recent publication on 'Dharmaśūtras' devotes pp. 257-289 to prose passages alone from Hārita quoted in several nibandhas on all topics of Dharmaśāstra arranged in Sanskrit alphabeticcal order but transliterated in English characterṣ In pp. 239-244 he mentions twentyfour authors as writers of Dharmaśūtras with brief notes on each and in pp. 244-344 he sets out transliterated prose sūtras from these 24 writers and omits passages from Śankha-likhita because I collected passages from them in ABORI. Vol. VII-VIII (vide p. 84 above) and omits Bṛhaspati also since the late Prof. Ranga-swami Aiyangar extracted passages of Bṛhaspati quoted in nibandhas, arranged them under different topics and published them in the G. O. S., Baroda (1941).

The late Pandit Vamansastri Islampurkar discovered at Nasik a mṣ of the Hārita-dharmasūtra. It was not possible for me to make use of it for the present work. Dr. Jolly (in R. und S. pp. 8-9) gives an account of the mṣ from which I give a summary. It is so faulty that an edition based on it alone cannot be thought of. The mṣ contains thirty chapterṣ So far as the language and contents are concerned the work impresses one as ancient, but the material citations ascribed to Hārita in later digests on court procedure and the law of crimes &c. are not found in the mṣ The prose is mixed up with verses in Anuṣṭubh and Triṣṭubh metres, which are often introduced with the characteristic words “athāpyudāharanti” as in other dharmasūtraṣ The mṣ quotes ‘bhagavān Maitrāyaṇī’ and the verse “Śatādāyo vīro” which is Maitrāyaṇīya Saṃhitā I. 7. 5. Dr. Caland points out remarkable correspondence between the citations of Hārita and the Maitrāyaṇīya Pariśiṣṭa and Mānava-śrāddhakalpa. All this tends to show that he was a sūtra-kāra of the Black Yajurveda. The numerous quotations from Hārita in Āpastamba and Baudhāyana are not, however, found in the mṣ The mṣ was found at Nasik, which is also the source of two msṣ of the Maitrāyaṇīya Saṃhitā. The Kashmirian word ‘kaphella’ is cited in Hārita and so the Hārita-dharmasūtra probably originated there. Hemādri (Caturvarga III. 1. p. 559) mentions a commentator (bhāṣyakāra ¹) of Hārita.

From the numerous quotations from Hārita in the nibandhas it appears that the dharmasūtra dealt exhaus- tively with the same topics as are dealt with in other dharma-sūtras, viz. sources of dharma, brahmacārin of two kinds (upakurvāṇa and naiṣṭhika), snātaka, the householder, the forest hermit, prohibitions about food, impurity on birth and death, śrāddha, the paṅktipāvana, general rules of con- duct, the five yajñas, Vedic study and holidays, duties of kings, rules of statecraft, court procedure, the various titles of law, duties of husband and wife, various kinds of sins, prāyaścittas, expiatory prayers &c.

According to Kullūka (on Manu 2. 1) the Hārita-dharma-sūtra opened with the words ‘now then we shall explain dharma; dharma is based upon revealed texts (śruti); revealed texts are of two kinds, the Vedic and the Tantric’ ² 'Śruti is of two kinds viz. Vaidiki (consisting of the Veda) and Tantriki (consisting of Tantra)'. I did not explain this last worḍ Now I realise that the word is liable to be misunderstooḍ A veteran scholar like Dr. R. C. Hazra went so far as to suggest (in I. H. Q. Vol. 36 pp. 141–150) that by 'Tāntriki' I meant the system of Tantras (developed several centuries later than the Dharmasūtras) dealing with Mantras, secret practices and esoteric teachings of gurus and that Hārita did not know the tantras that were a later development altogether. I agree that the Hāritadharmasūtra did not use the word Tāntriki in the sense in which the word Tantra is used in much later timeṣ But as the text of Hārita was not available, I could not dilate on that point and did not state what he must have meant by Tāntriki śruti.

I was then concerned only with the contents of the Hāritadharmasūtra available from quotations in late works on Dharmaśāstra. Hārita gave a wider meaning to Śruti than what other ancient sūtras and smṛtis give to the worḍ In Gaut. Dh. S. I. 1–2 it is stated that the Veda is the source of dharma and also the smṛtis and usages of those who know the Veda. Manu (II. 6) says the same thing and in II. 10 asserts that Śruti means Veda and Smṛti means Dharmaśāstra. Hārita as quoted by Kullūka widens the meaning of Śruti, as including Veda and also something more. But as that point has been now raised I shall try to explain briefly what he probably meant by Tāntriki (Śruti). The word Tantra is a Vedic one. It occurs in Ṛg. X. 71. 9 (siris-tantam tanvate aprajāñayah). Tantra here appears to mean ‘loom’ and the word is derived from the root ‘tan’ to spread or stretch. Pāṇini in VII. 2. 9 derives the word from the root ‘tan’ with affix ‘tra’ and in another sūtra (V. 2. 70) states that ‘tantraka’ means cloth recently taken off from a looṃ The Amarakosa gives four meanings of ‘tantra’, one of which is ‘siddhānta’ (a system of thought or philosophy). Hārita’s idea appears to have been that a work dealing with the formulation of principles based on the Veda (and hence called ‘Tāntriki’ from the word tantra meaning siddhānta) might be designated Śruti. It would be clear from the Nyāyasūtra (I. I. 27–31) that Sāṇkhya and Yoga may be called ‘samāna-tantra’ though they differ on certain pointṣ Similarly, the Arthaśāstra may be called Samāna-tantra with the Manu-smṛti, as both have certain principles in common, though they differ in other matterṣ It may be noted in this connec-tion that the word ‘tantra’ is applied to the Sāṅkhya system by Śaṅkarācārya (in his bhāṣya on Vedāntasūtra II. 2. 1) and the Pūrvamīmāṃsā system is styled by him as ‘prathama-tantra’ in his bhāṣya on Vedānta-sūtra III. 3. 53. The Sāṅkhya-kārikā refers to itself as ‘tantra’ in Kārikā 70 ‘tena ca bahudhā kṛtam tantram’. Bṛhaspati as quoted by Aparārka p. 740 says that a wife is called half of a man in ‘Āmnāya’ (Veda) and ‘Smṛtitantra’. So Hārita Dharma-sūtra understands the word ‘tantra’ as meaning a ‘śāstra based on Veda’. The Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya sets out in the 15th adhikarana ‘tantra-yuktis’. Vide for further details on the meaning of ‘tantra’ H. of Dh. Vol. V. pp. 1031–3.

The quotations show that this style (as in ṇ 120) was pursued in the body of the work. Aparārka (on Yāj. III. 322) quotes a sūtra¹²¹ in a similar style about a penance ‘Tulā-puruṣa’ said to have been promulgated by Śiva himself. Hārita-sūtra often introduces verses as quotations with the words “an author says thus” (evaṁ hyāha ; vide Aparārka on Yāj. I. 83, I. 154, III. 135, Vivāda-ratnākara pp. 443, 626 ). Numerous passages quoted as Hārita’s are identical with passages from other dharmaśāstra workṣ The sūtra ‘Jāyā-patyor-na vibhāgo vidyate’ is quoted as from Hārita by the Smṛticandrikā (II. p. 268), which is the same as Āp. Dh. S. II. 6. 14. 16. The same work quotes ‘pratyaksavidhānād gārhasthyasya’ as from Hārita which is part of Gautama 3. 35. A verse about the enormity of usury quoted in the Smṛticandrikā (I. p. 177) as Hārita’s is almost the same as Baudhāyana (I. 5. 79) and Vasiṣṭha¹²² (2. 42). A verse about atipātakin s (quoted by Aparārka on Yāj. III. 231) is the same as Viṣṇu 34. 2. Manu is mentioned by name in several verses (vide Smṛticandrikā III. p. 436, Vivāda-ratnākara p. 552–553). Two verses are cited in the Vyavahāratattva of Raghunandana as found in Hārita, Baudhāyana (I. 10. 30) and Manu (8. 18–19). A verse quoted by the Smṛticandrikā (II. p. 21) is almost the same as Manu 8. 95. Several times we have the words ‘Prajāpativaco yathā’ (vide Aparārka on Yāj. I. 154 and Smṛticandrikā I. p. 181). Hārita seems to have relied upon the views of ‘ācāryas’ in several placeṣ³ He often quotes the views of others (eke, apare⁴) and sometimes refutes theṃ⁵

Hārita refers to the Vedas, the Aṅgas, dharmaśāstra, metaphysics, and other branches of knowledge.⁶ The quotations do not show that he belonged to any particular Veda, as he quotes from all the Vedas promiscuously. In this connection it is worthy of note that, though Kumārila mentions Hārita as an ancient dharmasūtrakāra, he does not assign him to any particular school, while he assigns Āpastamba and Baudhāyana to the Taittirīya school.

Some of the doctrines of Hārita are worth noting. He speaks of eight forms of marriage, but two of them are styled Kṣatra and Mānuṣa, while Ārṣa and Prājāpatya are omitted (vide Viramitrodaya, Saṃskāraprākaśa, p. 84). Vasiṣṭha has the same nomenclature (I. 29). Hārita speaks of two sorts of women ( brahmavādinīs and sadyovadhūs ) and states that the former were entitled to have the Upanayana performed, to keep the sacred fire and to study the Vedaṣ⁷ He speaks of the twelve kinds of sons (vide Haradatta on Gautama 28. 32 ). He looks down upon the profession of an actor and forbids the employment of a Brāhmaṇa actor in any śrāddha or rite for godṣ⁸ A Hāritabhāṣyakara is mention-ed by the Kalpataru (śrāddha) on p. 51 in explaining a prose passage. Aparārka (on Yāj. II. 332) quotes from Hārita a lengthy passage in mixed prose and verse, where the worship of Gaṇeśa comes iṇ⁹

A very interesting question is the relation of the verse quotations from Hārita with the prose quotations from Hārita. The dharmasūtra was probably interspersed with verses as is the case more or less with all dharmasūtras except that of Gautama. But there are numerous verses ascribed to Hārita in the nibandhas, which are manifestly moderṇ Both the Mitākṣarā and Aparārka (on Yāj. I. 86) quote Hārita's verses eulogising the satī. The Smṛticandrikā (III. p. 344) quotes his verses that refer to the signs of the Zodiac. There are numerous verses containing elaborate rules of procedure, ascribed to Hārita, which are quite foreign to the general atmosphere of the ancient dharmasūtraṣ All such verses must be ascribed to a comparatively later date. In the Śuddhimayūkha it is said that certain verses quoted from the Mahābhārata by Hārita are not found in several copies of the Mahābhārata.

The Dharmasūtra of Hārita appears to have been a very extensive one and was in mixed prose and verse. Aparārka quotes both prose and verse passages over 110 times, one remarkable matter being that the quotations on Vyavahāra are only a few (both in verse and prose). The Kalpataru contains a very large number of prose and verse quotations from Hārita. It would be a great service if some scholar collected all the quotations (prose and verse) cited in the noteṣ They are profuse and some are very interesting. In the Brahmacarikāṇḍa he is quoted over 50 times and there are very large prose passages on pp. 198, 268, 271, 277 (on three kinds of snātakas). The Vyavahāra-K. profusely quotes both prose and verses over 70 timeṣ Some prose passages are very long e. g. on pp. 623-625 on the proper acts for a wife ( Atha patnyācāraṇānakramisyāmaḥ gṛham patnī &c. ). Even in Śrāddha section there are many huge prose passages on pp. 66-67, 88 ( long list of pańktidūṣakas ), 163, 204.

Dr. Jolly ( in 1889 ) collected most of the prose and verse citations from Hārīta on the Vyavahāra sectioṇ In Jīvānanda's collection, we have a Laghu-Hārīta-smṛti ( I pp. 177-193 ) and a Vṛddha-Hārīta-smṛti ( I. pp. 194-409 ). The former contains seven adhyāyās and about 250 verses, dealing with the duties of the four varṇas and the āśramas and with Yoga. The latter is professedly a Vaiṣṇavite work, said to have been proclaimed by Hārīta to Ambarīṣa ; it is divided into eight chapters and contains about 2600 verses, dealing with the nitya and naimittika rites of the varṇas and āśramas, the nature of the individual and Supreme Self and the means of attaining mokṣa. In the Ānandāśrama collection of smṛtis, Vṛddha-Hārīta is divided into eleven chapters, the first two of Jīvānanda's being split up into five. The Ānandāśrama collection contains a Laghu-Hārīta-smṛti in 117 verses, which is different from the Laghu-Hārīta of Jīvānanda. The former deals with purification from pollutions of various kinds, with prāyaścittas, rules about impurity on birth and death, śrāddha and a few rules about inheritance, partition &c. ¹⁰

It is noteworthy that Aparārka ( on Yāj. III. 254 ) quotes Vṛddha-Hārīta and Hārīta, both in prose, one immediately after the other. Vṛddha-Hārīta in prose is cited by the Mit. on Yāj. III. 259, 261. Some comparatively early commentators and digest-writers started the theory that authors described as Manu and Vṛddha-Manu, Yājñavalkya and Vṛddhayājñavalkya and the like were not entirely different individuals, but they were the same authors at different stages in their liveṣ Vide Aparārka (pp. 7–8) on Vṛddha-Manu and the Kalpataru ( Brahmacārī°) quoted below.¹¹

That the Vṛddha-Hārita in verse is comparatively a late work follows from the fact that it distinctly recites that the smṛtis of Manu, Yājñavalkya, Nārada and Kātyāyana were known to it as authorities on rāja-dharma.¹² Some of the quotations ascribed to Laghu-Hārita in Aparārka and other works are found in the Laghu-Hārita, e. g. the verse ‘vinā yajñopavitena’ ( Laghu-Hārita, Ānandāśrama, verse 23 ) is quoted by Aparārka on Yāj. III. 289. Some verses that are ascribed to Hārita are found in the Laghu-Hārita; for example, the verse ‘snānam kṛtvā tu ye,’ cited by the Smṛticandrikā (I. p. 203), occurs in the Laghu-Hārita (Ānandāśrama, verse 41). It appears that several compilations were made at different times, embracing different topics of dharma and ascribed to Hārita, probably because they were based more or less on the Hāritadharmasūtra.

That some of the verses ascribed to Hārita are very anci- ent follows from several considerationṣ For example, Viśva- rūpa quotes ( on Yāj. III. 246 ) a verse from Hārita. The Sarasvativilāsa quotes from Hārita a brief passage which appears to be a portion of a verse and Kātyāyana's explana-tion thereoṇ¹³ It follows that long before the sixth century A. D. Hārita's Dh. S. contained verseṣ

For Hārita on Vyavahāra, vide sec. below.

Dr. S. C. Banerjee in J. O. I. ( Baroda ) vol. VIII pp. 14–37 (1958) published a collection of passages of Hārita-dharma-sūtra ( transliterated ) from 21 works ( holding the different parts of the Smṛticandrikā as separate works ), but without any translation or noteṣ

If all passages of Hārita quoted in the several nibandhas were collected and carefully studied it would be found that several verses are common to it and Manu and other smṛti-kāraṣ For example, Kalpataru ( on Gṛhastha ) p. 43, noted that the verse ‘Vṛṣaliphenapitasya’ is common to Manu, Yama and Hārita ( it is Manu IV. 19 ). The same kāṇḍa on p. 310 quotes with the word (‘evam hyāha’) three verses one of which ( pañca paśvanṛte hanti ) is the same as Manu VIII. 98.