________________
XXIV]
Dharma texts must have existed?. It is only when the smộti is directly contradicted by the Vedas in any particular injunction or statement of fact that the former is to be regarded as invalid.The smrti works are therefore generally regarded as a continuation of the Vedas, though as a matter of fact the smrti works, written at different times at a later age, introduce many new concepts and many new ideals; in some of the smrtis, however, the teachings of the Purānas and Smrtis are regarded as possessing a lower status than those of the Vedas. On the relation of the Smytis and the Vedas there are at least two different views. The first view is that, if the Smặtis come into conflict with the Vedas, then the smrti texts should be so interpreted as to agree with the purport of the Vedic texts; and, if that is not possible, then the smrti texts should be regarded as invalid. Others hold that the conflicting smrti text should be regarded as invalid. Mitra Miśra, commenting on the above two views of the Savara and Bhatta schools, says that, on the first view, it may be suspected that the author of the conflicting smrti texts is not free from errors, and as such even those non-conflicting smrti texts which cannot be traced in the Vedas may be doubted as erroneous On the second view, however, smrti is regarded as valid, since n one can guarantee that the non-conflicting texts which are not traceable to the Vedas are really non-existent in the Vedas. Even in the case of irreconcilably conflicting texts, the smộti directions, though in conflict with the Vedic ones, may be regarded as optionally valid3. The Vedic idea of dharma excludes from its concept all that can be known to be beneficial, to the performer or to others, through experience or observation; it restricts itself wholly to those ritualistic actions, the good effects of which cannot be known by experience, but can only be known through Vedic commands 4. Thus the digging of wells, etc., is directly known by experience to be of public good (paropakārāya) and therefore is not dharma. Thus nothing that is drşțārtha, i.e. no action, the
1 virodhe tvanapeksyam syād asati hyanumānam. Mīmāmsā-sūtra, 1. 3. 3. 2 ataḥ sa paramo dharmo yo vedad avagamyate avaraḥ sa tu vijñeyo yaḥ purāņādişu smrtaḥ tathā ca vaidiko dharmo mukhya utkrştatvāt, smārtaḥ anukalpaḥ apakrstatvāt.
Vyāsa-smrti as quoted in Viramitrodaya-paribhāsāprakāśa, p. 29. 3 See Vīramitrodaya, Vol. I, pp. 28, 29.
• tathā pratyupasthita-niyamānām ācārāņām drstārthatvād eva prāmānyam... prapās tadāgāni ca paropakārāya na dharmāya ity evā'vagamyate.
Sabara-bhāşya on Mimāmsā-sūtra, 1. 3. 2.
