________________
114
वैखानस
33
3:
III 1.15
2.12
2.15
3.10-11
23
93
33
35
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
33
Manu IV 39
59
33
33
22
93
33
V
33
4.4
7.9
VI
6.6
VI 42-44; 47-8 II
I
2.6
177-180; 191
These are some of the instances (which could easily be multiplied), to prove that the present Manusmriti is based on a work that must be in sûtra style.
Moreover, from the parallels between
III 21, and Manu II, 138-9, we get a clear idea of the process of turning sûtras into verses. In the sûtra just referred to, evidently, persons of greater importance are mentioned first. But that order cannot be preserved in rendering the sûtra into slokas. Exigencies of metre necessitate a change. Hence a verse must be added to cover the defect of meaning; and that additional verse should say what the words in the sûtra, by their very position, implied. Thus we get Manu II 138 and 139. Somewhat similar is the case of Manu VI 68 and of IV 2. There. instead of a verse, explanatory words are added.
Now we come to some quotations from the art composed (as we shall prove later on) by the famous minister of Chandragupta.
19 66
कौ' अर्थ Ch. 69p. 191 2, “ साहसमन्वयवत् प्रसभकर्म । रफल्गुकूप्यानां साहसे मूल्यसमो दण्डः इति मानवाः । Cf. Manu
" निरन्वये स्तेयमपव्यथने च । " 3 " रत्नसाVIII 332-333.
"
को अर्थ' Ch. 1P. 6. "आन्वीक्षिकी त्रयी वार्ता दण्डनीतिवेति विद्याः । त्रयी वार्ता दण्डनीतिश्चेति मानवा: त्रयीविशेषी ह्यान्वीक्षिकीति । " Cf. Manu VII 43.
The legitimate conclusion, from these quotations, is that Manu must have written in sutrus. some of which must be identical with those of there and the at The metrical rendering of the sutras appears to have been very cleverly done.
201
It may be said to be now only a question of time, when the Mânavadharmasûtra (henceforth we use the abbreviation ) to designate this sûtra: will be published. There appears a statement made by Sastri Yajneswara Chimanâji (in his introduction to the Gujarati translation of the Vyavahâra portion of the Yâjña and Mitakshara, published in 1872.), ' मानवधर्मशास्त्रने वास्ते मानवधर्मसूत्र तथा लोकात्मक मनुस्मृति पण प्रसिद्ध छे.” “as regards the Manavadharmaśástra, both the Manavadharmasûtra and the versified Manusmṛili " are well known.
113-116
128
46
[JULY, 1916
Here we must stop for a moment and consider certain data, apparently adverse to our position. However strong our arguments may be, we should not shut our eyes to the accounts, which go against our conclusions. In the Nâradasmṛiti (cf. S. B. E. vol. xxxiii.), it is said that Manu first wrote in verse. Hence, according to this account,
3 These two sentences are not marked as quotations from Manu. Hence, we naturally conclude that the definition, whether made by Manu or only accepted by him, must have belonged to the common stock of legal tradition. We do not know who was the first to define the Sahasa. It is, in this connection, interesting to note that the eight forms of marriage given in the art (cf. ch. 59 p. 151,) are not marked as quotation from the laws of Manu either.
