कल्पान्तरे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

11 The Dharmasūtra of Hārīta

The Dharmasutra of Harita That Hārīta was an ancient sūtrakāra on dharma is quite patent from the fact that the dhurmasitras of Baudhā. yana, Apastamba and Vasiṣtha quote him as an authority.

118 6.g. para 637 : JUTE potrafavaraanageTAAT aftage: fouse

वाचीति । ( Viṣṇu’s sutra seems to have been बीजग्रहणानुविधायमर्श

TERITE); para 719 375 HTEN: ( on fai’s FLE ‘foraya T na garnit pe ) que sentiafafa; pura 736 347 prae: भिनोदराणामिति निर्धारणे षष्ठी ( on विष्णु’सूत्र ‘भिन्नोदराणां संसृष्टिनी

Tety:’); para 847 contains a long sūtra of Vi, nu ‘31895i धार्म मैत्रं वैद्यमाकस्मिकमादशाब्दं प्रविभाज्यमत ऊर्ध्वं सर्वमविभाज्यम्’ and para 848 contains #terêts explanntion of it. Vide pp. 32, 50, 165, 166, 243, 244 &c. of the rocently published Mysore edition of the Freilaath for sūtras of Viśṇu wb blato pot found in the printed text of Vižṇu. It appears that the

difaste bad a very much larger version of the sūtra before

128

Harita’s view is quoted by Baud. Dh. S. II. 1. 50, which differs from the view propounded in Baud. Dh. S. II. 1. 49; Ap. 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 Baud. Dh. S. II. 1. 49 ). Vasistha quotes Harita in II. 6 ( a verse the first half of which is in Manu 2. -71 and the 2nd balf in Manu II, 172 and in Vapaparva 180. 35). Vide also Baud. Dh. S. I. 2. 7 ( whieb is almost the same verse as in Vas. II. 6 and seems to be a quotation as ‘iti’ is added at the end. Apagtamba quotes Harita 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 quoted. From the quotations it appears that his dharmasūtra was perhaps the most extensive of all dharmasūtras.

Dr. S. C. Banerjee contributed to the Journal of Oriental Institute’ Baroda Vol. VIII, No. 1 (1958) pp. 14-37 & reconstruction of Harita-dharmasūtra and in his recent publication on Dharmasūtras’ devotes pp. 257-289 to prose passages alone from Hārīta quoted in several nibandhas on all topics of Dharmaśāstra arranged in Saṅkrit alphabeti cal order but transliterated in English characters. In pp. 239-244 he mentions twentyfour authors as writers of Dharmasūtras with brief notes on each and in pp. 244-344 he sets out transliterated prose sutras from these 24 writers and omits passages from Saṅkha-likhita because I collected passages from them in ABORI. Vol. VII-VIII ( vide p. 84 above) and onnits Bșhaspati also since the late Prof. Ranga swami Aiyangar extracted passages of Bṛhaspati quoted in nibandhas, arranged them under different topics and publish ed them in the G. O.S., Baroda (1941 ).

The late Pandit Vamansastri Islampurkar discovered at Nasik a ms. of the Harita-dharmasitra. 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 mg. from which I give a summary. It is so faulty that an edition based on it alone cannot be thought of. The ms. contains thirty chapters. So far as the language and content are concerned the work impresses one as ancient, but the materia) citations ascribed to Hārita in later digests or court

POONS

TIT

The Dharmasūtra of Hārīta

129

procedure and the law of crimes &c. are not found in the m8. The prose is mixed up with verses in Anustubh and Tristubh metres, which are often introduced with the characteristic words “athāpyudāharanti” as in other dharmasūtras. The m8. quotes ‘bhagavān Maitrāyani’ and the verse " Satadāyo viro” which is Maitriyaniya Samhitā 1. 7. 5. Dr. Caland points out remarkable correspondence between the citations of Hārīta and the Maitrāyaniya Parisista and Mānava. Sraddhakalpa. All this tends to show that he was a sūtra kāra of the Black Yajurveda. The numerous quotaticns from Hārīta in Apastamba and Bandhāyana are not, however, found in the ms. The ms. was found at Nasik, which is also the source of two mss. of the Maitrāyaniya Samhitā. The Kashmirian word kaphella’ is cited in Harita and 80 the Hārita-dharmasūtra probably originated there. Hemādri ( Caturvarga III. 1. p. 559 ) mentions a commentator (bhāșyakāra 118 ) of Hārīta.

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 ( upakurvāna and naisthika ), anataka, the householder, the forest hermit, prohibitions about food, impurity on birth and death, śrāddha, the parktipāvana, geueral 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, prāyascittas, expiatory prayers &c.

According to Kullūka (on Manu 2. 1) the Hārita-dharma sutra opened with the words ’now then we shall explain dharma; dharma is based upon revealed texts ( fruti); revealed texts are of two kinds, the Vedic and the Tāntric’.126

119 The sūtra of Hārita is ‘q -oppia atar-fra 4-aralan

FTU-9999-A79-HATI-gorequirat e tid EIC’, on which HIFA says, ‘249 3ogfaīte: Fring afa ofa tama.

976277: ‘. 120 ‘अथातो धर्म व्याख्यास्यामः । श्रुतिप्रमाणको धर्मः । श्रुतिश्च द्विविधा बैदिको

तान्त्रिकी च ॥’. The Brahmayajia probably takes the words आyat. RATTA:’ from entra and not from the Vaisoike-sūtra.

FOUNDED

180

Sruti is of two kinds viz. Vaidiki (consisting of the Veda ) and Tāntriki (consisting of Tantra )’. I did not explain this last word. Now I realise that the word is liable to be misunderstood. 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 tautras that were & later development altogether. I agree that the Haritadharmasutra did not use the word Tāntriki in the sense in which the word

Tantra is used in much later times. But as the text of Harita was not available, I could not dilate on that point and did not state what he must have meant by Tāntriki sruti.

I was then concerned only with the contents of the Hārītadharmasūtra available from quotations in late works on Dharmaśāstra. Hārita gave a wider meaning to Sruti than what other ancient sūtras and smrtis give to the word. 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 11. 10 asserts that Sruti means Veda and Smrti means Dharma sāstra. Hārita as quoted by Kullūka widens the meaning of Sruti, 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 (Sruti). The word Tantra is a Vedic one. It occurs in æg. X. 71. 9 ( siris-tantram tanvate aprajajñayaḥ). 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 loom. The Amara kosa 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 siddhanta ) might be designated Sruti. It would be clear from the Nyāyasūtra ( I. 1. 27-31 ) that Sāṅkhya and Yoga may be called ‘samda tantra’ though they differ on certain points. Similarly the Arthasāstra may be called Samāna-tantra with the Manak smrti, es both have certain principles in common, though

FOUNDEA 7

The Dharmasūtra of Harita

131

they differ in other matters. It may be noted in this conneo tion that the word ’tantra’ is applied to the Sārkhya system by Sāṅkarācārya (in his blāsya on Vedāntasūtra II. 2. 1) and the Purvamimamsā system is styled by him as prathama tantra’ in his bhāsya on Vedānta-sūtra III. 3. 53. The Sāṅkhya-kārikā refers to itself as ’tantra’ in Kārikā 70 ’tena ca bahudhā kṛtam tantram’. Bșhaspati as quoted by A parārka p. 740 says that a wife is called half of a man in Amnāya’ (Veda ) and Smrtitantra’. So Hārīta Dharma. sutra understands the word ’tantra’ as meaning a bāstra based on Veda’. The Arthasāstra of Kautilya sets out in the 15th adhikaranu ’tantra-yuktis’. Vide for further details on the meaning oftantra’H. of Dh. Vol. V. pp. 1031-3.

The quotations show that this style ( as in n. 120 ) was pursued in the body of the work. Aparārka (on Yāj. III. 322) quotes a sūtralal 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” (evam hyāha ; vide Aparūrka on Yāj. I. 83, I. 154, 1II. 135, Vivāda-ratnākarā pp. 443, 626 ). Numerous passages quoted as Hārita’s are identical with passages from other dharmaśāstra works. The sutra ‘Jāyā patyor-na vibhāgo vidyate’ is quoted as from Hārīta by the Smrticandrikā (II. p. 268 ), which is the same as Ap. Dh. S. II. 6. 14. 16. The same work quotes ‘pratyakṣavidhānād gārhasthyasya’ as from Hārita which is part of Gautama. 3. 35. A verse about the enormity of usury quoted in the Smsticandrikā (1. p. 177 ) as Hārīta’s is almost the same as Baudhāyana ( I. 5. 79 ) and Vasiṣtha( 2. 42). A verse about atipātakins (quoted by Aparārka on Yāj. III. 231 ) is the game as Vishu 34. 2. Manu is mentioned by name in several verses (vide Smṛticandrikā III. p. 436, Vivāda-ratnākare p. 552-553). Two verses are cited in the Vyavahāratattve of Ragbunandana as found in Hārīta, Baudhāyana (I. 10. 30 ) and Manu (8. 18-19). A verse quoted by the Smṣticandrika ( II. p. 21 ) is almost the same as Manu 8. 95. Several times

STITU

121 Betafeen goede oport ZEITRITA: I 198 Tho vorse is ‘STER AS a gasi HHTGT i afac

पुद्धिजीवस्त्वकम्पत ॥’

aban

FOUNDED

FOUNDEO132

History of Dharmasastra.

we have the words ’ Prajāpativaco yathā’ (vide A parārka on Yāj. I. 154 and Smṛticandrikā I. p. 181 ). Hārīta seems to have relied upon the views of’ācāryas ’in several places. 138 He often quotes the views of others (eke, apare 124 ) and sometimes refutes them.125

Mārīta refers to the Vedas, the Argas, dharmasastra, metaphysics, and other branches of knowledge. 136 The quota. tions do not show that he belonged to any particular Veda, as be quotes from all the Vedas promiscuously. In this con nection 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 Apastamba and Baudhāyana to the Taittiriya school.

Some of the doctrines of Hārīta are worth noting. He speaks of eight forms of marriage, but two of them are styled Kṣatra and Mānuṣa, while Arṣa and Prājāpatya are omitted ( vide Viramitrodaya, Saṁskāraprakāśa, p. 84). Vasistha has the same nomenclature ( I. 29). Hārita speaks of two sorts of women ( bruhmavādinīs and sadyovadhū8 ) and states that the former were entitled to bave the Upanayana performed, to keep the sacred fire and to study the Vedas.127

rom

123 Viśvarūpa op Yāj. I. 195 p. 137 remarks ‘THTITES CATHA ATHFILI

न. वासाधारणत्वात् । साधारणं हि वास इत्याचार्याः । तस्मात्सर्ववाससामुप Eartzaida ufa: 1; 3177# on Yāj. I., 154 ( pp. 221-22 ) quotes a long prose passage with some verses from Harita in which occur the words ‘SHTETTAISI. TEEN Tarifi’ and op Yaj. III. 58 again quotes Harita’s words 31TETT… 41:’ and explains Battva’ us moaning ‘antahkaranu’. The words

ur ip Chāp. Up. VII. 26. 2. 124 Vide H. 96. pp. 607, 706 ; Farazo III. p. 422, 37 CTE on Yāj.

II. 127. 125 397e on Yuj. I. 183 6 17417AATTIRETTON Fogodt i anlauffant

षात् शुक्लमलिनसंसर्गदर्शनात् पापसंसर्गयोगाच्च तस्मात् पृथक् शौचाच्छ्रेयोसः।’ 126 farda. III. p. 290 raat 3471fa yazd fastia ferrataifat agrau

1991’ (FETTE, 97167108 p. 66 ). 127 द्विविधाः स्त्रियः । ब्रह्मवादिन्यः सद्योवध्वश्च । तत्र ब्रह्मवादिनीनामुपनयनममी.

garaya FETUE 2 Fuerteref quoted in aparato I. p. 24hough trafareig Cat ( Bodaros od. ) p. 113.

•ON

FOUNDER

The Dharmasutra of Harita

188

He speaks of the twelve kiuds of sops ( vide Haradatta on Gautama 28. 32). He looks down upon the profession of an actor and forbids the employment of a Brāhmana actor in any śrāddha or rite for gods.128 A Hārītabhāsyakāra is mention ed by the Kalpataru ( śrāddha ) on p. 51 in explaining a prose passage. Apararka (on Yaj. II. 332 ) quotes from Hārita a lengthy passage in mixed prose and verse, where the worship of Ganesa comes in.128

A very interesting question is the relatiou of the verse quotations from Harita with the prose quotations from Harita 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 Harita in the nibandhus, which are manifestly modern. Both the Mitākṣarī and Aparārka (on Yāj. I. 86 ) quote Hārīta’s verses eulogisivg the satī. The Smrticandrikā ( III. p. 344 ) quotes his verses that refer to the signs of the Zodiac. There are numerous verses coutaining elaborate rules of procedure, ascribed to Hūrīta, which are quite foreigo to the general atmosphere of the ancient dharmasūtras. All such verses must be escribed to a comparatively later date. In the Suddhima yūkha it is said that certain verses quoted from the Mahābhārata by Hārita are not found in several copies of the Mahābhārata.

The Dharmasūtra of Hārīta appears to have been a very extensive one and was iu mixed prose and verse. Aparārk& quotes both prose and verse passages over 110 times, one remarkable matter being that the quotations on Vyavahāra are only a few (both iu 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 Kalpataru with notes. They are profuse and some are very interesting. In the Brahmacārikānda he is quoted over .50 times and there are very large prose passages on pp. 198, 268, 271, 277 (on three kinds of spātakas ). The

128 कुशीलवादीन् देवे रिव्ये च वर्जयेत् । quoted by अपरार्क on Yaj. I.. 222-2244

p. 454. 129 We have there the names frasite, FATUSET519a, Heliantys

वक्रतुण्ड, गणाधिपति. For the irst two, vide मानवगृह्मसूत्र II. HD 915. 1. 286 ff.

184

:: History of Dharmasastra

Vyavahāra-K. profusely quotes both prose and verses over 70 times. Some pruse passages are very long e. g. on pp. 623-625 on the proper acts for a wife ( Atha patnyācārān anukramiṣyāmah gṛham patni &c. ). Even in Srāddha section there are many huge prose passages on pr. 66-67, 88 (long list of panktidūsakas ), 163, 204.

Dr. Jolly ( in 1889) collected most of the prose and verse citations from Hārita on the Vyavahāra section. In Jive nanda’s collection, we have i Laghu-Hārita-smrti (I pp. 177-193 ) and a Vrddha-Hārītasmști (I. pp. 194-409 ). The former contains seven adhyāyas and about 250 verses, dealing with the duties of the four varṇus and the āśramas and with Yoga. The latter is professedly a Vaiṣṇavite work, said to have been proclaimed by Hārīta to Ambarisa; it is divided into eight chapters and contains about 2600 verses, dealing with the nityu and nuinittiku rites of the vurnus and asramas, the nature of the individual and Supreme Self and the means of attaining hvokṣ%. In the Anandasrama collec tion of smrtis, Vrddha-Hārita is divided into eleven chapters, the first two of Jivananda’s being split up into five. The Anandāśrama collection contains a Laghu-Hārita-smrti in 117 verses, which is different from the Laghu-Hārita of Jiva nānda. The former deals with purification from pollutions of various kinds, with prāyaścittas, rules about impurity on birth and death, śrāddba and a few rules about inheritance, pārtition. &c. 129a

It is noteworthy that Aparārka (on Yāj. III. 254 ) quotes Vṇddha-Hārita and Hārīta, both in prose, one immediately after the other. Vrudha-Hīrīta in prose is cited by the Mit. on Yāj. III. 259, 261. Some comparatively early com mentators and digest-writers started the theory that authors

120a The Mit. on Yāj. II. 135-136 quotes the verse fateat orqafat … …

Jirani atat )‘as Hārīta’s, which is Laghu-Harita 67 ( Ādan. ed.). Lagba-Harita ( Ānan. 64–65 ) has the verse Craft … F at :? which is the same as Yāj. II, 135. Tho last three verses of Laghu Hārita ( Adun ed.) are quoted by the Mit. on Vāj. II. 114. (without Dame ), One of them Pit! prasādāt’ is cited as Nārada’s in A parārka p. 730 and all three aro cited ( without pamo) by Par, M. II.

pp. 484-485. A very striking verse is quoted by Kalpataru (onut -getta’’ qaSit dit: 949 Tifotot TEE Panamani

tad tio 7: Sala Paz ITR TË 991974 ‘. ’ ., rouge

POONA

The Dharmasūtra of Harita

186

described as Manu. and Vrddha-Manu, Yajnavalkya and Vrddhayājñavalkya and the like were not entirely different individuals, but they were the same authors at different stages of their lives. Vide Aparārka (pp. 7-8) on Vrddha

Manu and the Kalpataru (Brahmacāri° ) quoted below.120b

That the Vrddha-Hirita in verse is comparatively a late work follows from the fact that it distinctly recites that the smrtis of Manu, Yājñavalkya, Nārada and Kātyāyana were known to it as authorities on raja-dharma.130 Some of the quotations ascribed to Laghu-Hārīta in Aparārka and other works are found in the Laghu-Harita, e. g. the verse —vina yajiiopavitena ’ (Laghu-Hirita, Anandisrama, verse 23 ) is quoted by Aparārka on Yij. III. 289. Some verses that are ascribed to Hārīta are found in the Laghu-Hārīta; for example, the verge ‘snānam kṛtvā tu ye,’ cited by the Smrticandrika (I. p. 203), occurs in the Laghu-Harita ( Anandāśraina, verse 41 ). It appears that several compila tions were made at different times, embracing different topics of dharma and ascribed to Hārīta, probably because they were based more or less on the Hārītadharmasūtra.

That some of the verses ascribed to Hārita are very anci ent follows from several considerations. For example, Viśva rūpa quotes (on Yāj. III. 246 ) a verse from Hārīta. The

129b एवं वृद्धमन्वादयश्च वयोवस्थादिभेदेन मन्वादिप्रणेतार एव द्रष्टव्याः । अविरोधि.

त्वाच्छतिस्मृत्युपबृंहकत्वाच्छिष्टपरिगृहीतत्वादाप्तोक्तत्वाच । अपरार्क pp. 7-8 वृद्धशातातप-योगियाज्ञवल्क्य-वृद्धवसिष्ठ- वृद्धमनु-लघुहारीतादीनि तु प्रसिद्ध षत्रिंशदन्तर्गतकर्तृकान्येव, अवस्थाभेदेन तैरेव करणात् । कृत्यकल्पतरु

(ब्रह्मचारि० p. 24 ). Vido Kr̥tyaratnākara pp. 29-30 for similar words. 130 राजधर्मायमित्येवं प्रसङ्गात् कथितो मया । कात्यायनेन मनुना याज्ञवल्क्येन

धीमता ॥ नारदेन च संप्रोक्तं विस्तरादिदमेव हि । तस्मान्मया विस्तरेण नोक्त मत्र नृपोत्तम ॥ (Jivananda I, 4th chap. p. 205 ; Ādandāśrama, 7th chap. 270-272 ), That the author of Viddha-Hārīta was a rigid Vaiṣṇava follows from two verses in I. 25, 27 अवैष्णवास्तु ये विप्राः पाषण्डास्ते नराधमाः। तेषां त नरके वासः कल्पकोटिशतैरपि ॥ अचक्रधारी यो विप्रो बहुवेदश्रुतोष वा । स जीवन्नेव चाण्डालो मृतो निरयमाप्नुयात् ॥ वृद्धहारीत 9. 230-21 quotes प्रायश्चित्तरपैत्येनो. as from Yogesvara ( Yaj. III. 226). It.mos ry tions • Sanidina’ । Saturday ) in 8.386 and Bhargava-vishra

Friday ) in 8.407. It is olear that it is a lato fabrication.. .

Rhandar

136

Sarasvativilāsa quotes from Harita a brief passage which appears to be a portion of a verse and Katyayana’s explana tion thereon.131 It follows that long before the sixth century A. D. Hārīta’s Dh. S. contained verses.

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 dharina-sutra ( transliterated ) from 21 works ( holding the different parts of the Smṛticandrikā as separate works ), but without any translation or notes.

If all passages of Hārīta 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 kāras. For example, Kalpataru (op Grhastha ) p. 43, noted that the verse Vrsalīphenapītasya’ is common to Manu, Yama and Hūrīta (it is Manu IV. 19). The same kānda on p. 310 quotes with the word (’evam hyāha’) three verses one of which ( pañca paśvanyte hanti) is the same as Manu VIII. 98.