44. Pitāmaha
Volume I: Part I pp. 514–516
Quotations from Pītāmaha occur mostly on vyavahāra, patri- cularly ordeals – he treats of nine ordeals – 50 *chalas* enumerated by Pītāmaha in which king took action without a complaint – views peculiar to Pītāmaha, viz. 18 lowest castes, eight constituents of hall of justice, &c. – mentions Bṛhaspati – flourished between 400-700 A. D.
— Synopsis by P.V. Kane, from History of Dharmaśāstra
44. Pitāmaha
44. Pītāmaha
Pītāmaha is enumerated among writers on dharma in a verse of Vṛddha–Yājñavalkya quoted by Viśvarūpa. The Smṛti of Pītāmaha (part I p. 10) is drawn upon mostly on Vyavahāra. Viśvarūpa cites (on Yāj. I. 17) a verse from him on śauca.1 The Mitākṣarā and Aparārka respectively quote about 45 and 75 verses from Pītāmaha only on Vyavahāra and specially on ordeals and the Kalpataru on Vyavahāra quotes about 90 verses on the same topics from Pītāmaha. Some verses are ascribed to both Pītāmaha and Nārada (as in Kalpataru Vy. pp. 238, 239) and in a few cases to Bṛhaspati and Pītāmaha (as in Kalpataru, Vy. p. 251). The Smṛticandrikā quotes about ten verses (of Pīt°) on āhnika, 130 on Vyavahāra and only a few on śrāddha. Pītāmaha regards the Vedas with the aṅgas, Mīmāṁsā, the smṛtis, Purāṇa and Nyāya system as dharmaśāstraṣ2 Pitāmaha, like Bṛhaspati, enumerates nine kinds of ordeals,3 while Yāj. and Nārada name only five, though the latter seems to have known two more, viz. taṇḍula and taptamāṣa. The Smṛticandrikā quotes a dozen verses about 50 chalas on which a king took action without any complaint.4 Pitāmaha seems to have followed Vyāsa in defining documents called krayapatra, sthitipatra, saṁdhipatra, viśuddhipatra.5 The Smṛticandrikā cites Pitāmaha for an enumeration of the 18 prakṛtis viz. washerman, leather worker, etc.6 The same work states that according to Pitāmaha the titles of law to be taken cognisance by the king himself were twenty-two. In the hall of justice, he says, there should be eight constituents viz. the scribe, the accountant, śāstra, the sādhya-pāla, the assessors, gold, fire and water.7 Some of the other noteworthy dicta of Pitāmaha are:— a suit should be8 first tried before the village (pañcāyat), then before the town (court of appeal), then before the king; between litigants of the same country, town, societies, cities and villages, the decision should be arrived at according to their own peculiar conventions and usages, but when there is a dispute between these and strangers, the decision must be according to the śāstra; possession in order to be recognised by the courts as decisive must have five characteristics,9 it must have title, long duration, it must be uninterrupted, it must not have been impeached and it must be before the eyes of the opponent; a private document10 under one's own hand is inferior to a jāṅupada (a publicly written and attested) deed, the latter is inferior to a royal edict, this last is inferior to possession continued for three generationṣ
Pītāmaha is later than Bṛhaspati,11 as he cites the latter's view that a litigation between members of the same village, society, town, guild, caravan or army must be decided according to their peculiar usageṣ Therefore, Pītāmaha must be assigned to some date between the 4th and 7th century A. D.