Product Code Database
Dharmaśāstra () are Sanskrit Puranic Smriti texts on law and conduct, and refer to treatises (shastras) on Dharma. Like Dharmasūtra which are based upon Vedas, these texts are also elaborate law commentaries based on vedas, Dharmashastra themselves evolved from dharmshutra. There are many Dharmashastras, variously estimated to number from 18 to over 100. Each of these texts exists in many different versions, and each is rooted in Dharmasutra texts dated to the 1st millennium BCE that emerged from Kalpa (Vedanga) studies in the Vedic era.James Lochtefeld (2002), "Dharma Shastras" in The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Vol. 1: A-M, Rosen Publishing, , pages 191–192
The textual corpus of Dharmaśāstra were composed in poetic verse, and are part of the Hindu , constituting divergent commentaries and treatises on ethics particularly duties, and responsibilities to oneself and family as well as those required as a member of society.Patrick Olivelle, Manu's Code of Law: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Mānava-Dharmaśāstra (New York: Oxford UP, 2005), 64.Ludo Rocher, "Hindu Law and Religion: Where to draw the line?" in Malik Ram Felicitation Volume, ed. S.A.J. Zaidi. (New Delhi, 1972), pp.167–194 and Richard W. Lariviere, "Law and Religion in India" in Law, Morality, and Religion: Global Perspectives, ed. Alan Watson (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp.75–94. The texts include discussion of ashrama (stages of life), varna (social classes), purushartha (proper goals of life), personal virtues and duties such as ahimsa (non-violence) against all living beings, rules of just war, and other topics.Patrick Olivelle (2005), Manu's Code of Law, Oxford University Press, , pages 31–32, 81–82, 154–166, 208–214, 353–354, 356–382Donald Davis (2010), The Spirit of Hindu Law, Cambridge University Press, , page 13-16, 166–179
Dharmaśāstra became influential in modern colonial India history, when they were formulated by early British India colonial administrators to be the Hindu law (Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs) in the Indian subcontinent, after Sharia set by Emperor Aurangzeb under his compendium Fatwa Alamgiri, was already accepted as the law for Muslims in colonial India.Werner Menski (2003), Hindu Law: Beyond tradition and modernity, Oxford University Press, , Chapter 1
Towards the end of the Vedic period, after the middle of the 1st millennium BCE, the language of the Vedic texts composed centuries earlier grew too archaic to the people of that time. This led to the formation of Vedic Supplements called the which literally means 'limbs of the Veda'. The Vedangas were ancillary sciences that focused on understanding and interpreting the Vedas composed many centuries earlier, and included Shiksha (phonetics, syllable), Chandas (poetic metre), Vyakarana (grammar, linguistics), Nirukta (etymology, glossary), Jyotisha (timekeeping, astronomy), and Kalpa (ritual or proper procedures). The Kalpa Vedanga studies gave rise to the Dharma-sutras, which later expanded into Dharma-shastras.
The extant Dharmasutras are written in concise sutra format, with a very terse incomplete sentence structure which are difficult to understand and leave much to the reader to interpret. The Dharmasastras are derivative works on the Dharmasutras, using a shloka (four 8-syllable verse style chandas poetry, Anushtubh meter), which are relatively clearer.
The Dharmasutras can be called the guidebooks of dharma as they contain guidelines for individual and social behavior, ethical norms, as well as personal, civil and criminal law. They discuss the duties and rights of people at different stages of life like studenthood, householdership, retirement and renunciation. These stages are also called ashramas. They also discuss the rites and duties of kings, judicial matters, and personal law such as matters relating to marriage and inheritance. However, Dharmasutras typically did not deal with rituals and ceremonies, a topic that was covered in the Shrautasutras and Grihyasutras texts of the Kalpa (Vedanga).
The Dharmasūtras are composed in sutra style and were part of a larger compilation of texts, called the Kalpasūtras which give an aphoristic description of the rituals, ceremonies and proper procedures. The Kalpasutras contain three sections, namely the Śrautasūtras which deal with vedic ceremonies, Gṛhyasūtras which deal with rites of passage rituals and domestic matters, and Dharmasūtras which deal with proper procedures in one's life. The Dharmasūtras of Āpastamba and Baudhāyana form a part of larger Kalpasutra texts, all of which has survived into the modern era.
The sūtra tradition ended around the beginning of the common era and was followed by the poetic octosyllable verse style called the śloka. The verse style was used to compose the Dharmaśāstras such as the Manusmriti, the Hindu epics, and the Puranas.
The age of Smṛtis that ended around the second half of the first millennium CE was followed by that of commentaries around the 9th century called nibandha. This legal tradition consisted of commentaries on earlier Dharmasūtras and Smritis.
The extant Dharmasūtra texts are listed below:
- Apastamba (450–350 BCE) this Dharmasūtra forms a part of the larger Kalpasūtra of Apastamba. It contains 1,364 sutras.
- Gautama (600–200 BCE) although this Dharmasūtra comes down as an independent treatise it may have once formed a part of the Kalpasūtra, linked to the Samaveda. It is likely the oldest extant Dharma text, and originated in what is modern Maharashtra-Gujarat. It contains 973 sutras.
- Baudhāyana (500–200 BCE) this Dharmasūtra like that of Apastamba also forms a part of the larger Kalpasūtra. It contains 1,236 sutras.
- Vasishtha (300–100 BCE) this Dharmasūtra forms an independent treatise and other parts of the Kalpasūtra, that is Shrauta- and Grihya-sutras are missing. It contains 1,038 sutras.
The Dharmasūtra of Āpastamba and Baudhayana form a part of the Kalpasūtra but it is not easy to establish whether they were historical authors of these texts or whether these texts were composed within certain institutions attributed to their names. Moreover, Gautama and Vasiṣṭha are ancient sages related to specific vedic schools and therefore it is hard to say whether they were historical authors of these texts. The issue of authorship is further complicated by the fact that apart from Āpastamba the other Dharmasūtras have various alterations made at later times.
There is uncertainty regarding the dates of these documents due to lack of evidence concerning these documents. Kane has posited the following dates for the texts, for example, though other scholars disagree: Gautama 600 BCE to 400 BCE, Āpastamba 450 BCE to 350 BCE, Baudhāyana 500 BCE to 200 BCE, and Vasiṣṭha 300 BCE to 100 BCE. Patrick Olivelle suggests that Apastamba Dharmasutra is the oldest of the extant texts in Dharmasutra genre and one by Gautama second oldest, while Robert Lingat suggests that Gautama Dharmasutra is the oldest.
There is confusion regarding the geographical provenance of these documents. According to Bühler and Kane, Āpastamba came from South India probably from a region corresponding to modern Andhra Pradesh. Baudhāyana also came from south although evidence regarding this is weaker than that of Āpastamba. Gautama likely came from western region, nearer to the northwestern region to which Pāṇini belonged, and one which corresponds to where Maratha people in modern India are found. Nothing can be said about Vasiṣṭha due to lack of any evidence.
Scholars have varied opinions about the chronology of these documents. Regarding the age of Āpastamba and Gautama there are opposite conclusions. According to Bühler and Lingat Āpastamba is younger than Baudhāyana. Vasiṣṭha is surely a later text.
The structure of Dharmasūtra of Āpastamba begins with the duties of the student, then describes householder duties and rights such as inheritance, and ends with administration of the king. This forms the early structure of the Dharma texts. However, in the Dharmasūtras of Gautama, Baudhāyana and Vasiṣṭha some sections such as inheritance and penance are reorganized, and moved from householder section to king-related section. Ollivelle suggests that these changes may be because of chronological reasons where civil law increasingly became part of the king's administrative responsibilities.
The term Dharma also includes social institutions such as marriage, inheritance, adoption, work contracts, judicial process in case of disputes, as well personal choices such as meat as food and sexual conduct.
The Hindu scholar Āpastamba, in a Dharmasutra named after him (~400 BCE), made an attempt to resolve this issue of incongruity. He placed the importance of the Veda scriptures second and that of samayacarika or mutually agreed and accepted customs of practice first. Āpastamba thus proposed that scriptures alone cannot be source of Law (dharma), and dharma has an empirical nature. Āpastamba asserted that it is difficult to find absolute sources of law, in ancient books or current people, states Patrick Olivelle with, "The Righteous (dharma) and the Unrighteous (adharma) do not go around saying, 'here we are!'; Nor do gods, Gandharvas or ancestors declare, 'This is righteous and that is unrighteous'." Most laws are based on agreement between the Aryas, stated Āpastamba, on what is right and what is wrong. Laws must also change with ages, stated Āpastamba, a theory that became known as Yuga dharma in Hindu traditions. Āpastamba also asserted in verses 2.29.11–15, states Olivelle, that "aspects of dharma not taught in Dharmasastras can be learned from women and people of all classes".
Āpastamba used a hermeneutic strategy that asserted that the Vedas once contained all knowledge including that of ideal Dharma, but parts of Vedas have been lost. Human customs developed from the original complete Vedas, but given the lost text, one must use customs between good people as a source to infer what the original Vedas might have stated the Dharma to be. This theory, called the 'lost Veda' theory, made the study of customs of good people as a source of dharma and guide to proper living, states Olivelle.
The sources of dharma according to Gautama Dharmasutra are three: the Vedas, the Smriti (tradition), acāra (the practice) of those who know the Veda. These three sources are also found in later Dharmashastra literature. Baudhāyana Dharmasutra lists the same three, but calls the third as śiṣṭa (शिष्ट, literally polite cultured people) or the practice of cultured people as the third source of dharma. Both Baudhāyana Dharmasutra and Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasutra make the practices of śiṣṭa as a source of dharma, but both state that the geographical location of such polite cultured people does not limit the usefulness of universal precepts contained in their practices. In case of conflict between different sources of dharma, Gautama Dharmasutra states that the Vedas prevail over other sources, and if two Vedic texts are in conflict then the individual has a choice to follow either.
The nature of Dharmasūtras is normative, they tell what people ought to do, but they do not tell what people actually did. Some scholars state that these sources are unreliable and worthless for historical purposes instead to use archaeology, epigraphy and other historical evidence to establish the actual legal codes in Indian history. Olivelle states that the dismissal of normative texts is unwise, as is believing that the Dharmasutras and Dharmashastras texts present a uniform code of conduct and there were no divergent or dissenting views.
The extant Dharmaśāstras texts are listed below:
- The Manusmriti (~ 2nd to 3rd century CE)Patrick Olivelle (2005), Manu's Code of Law, Oxford University Press, , pages 24–25 is the most studied and earliest metrical work of the Dharmaśāstra textual tradition of Hinduism. The medieval era Buddhistic law of Myanmar and Thailand are also ascribed to Manu,Steven Collins (1993), The discourse of what is primary, Journal of Indian philosophy, Volume 21, pages 301–393 and the text influenced past Hindu kingdoms in Cambodia and Indonesia.
- The (~ 4th to 5th-century CE) has been called the "best composed" and "most homogeneous"Lingat 1973: 98 text of the Dharmaśāstra tradition, with its superior vocabulary and level of sophistication. It may have been more influential than Manusmriti as a legal theory text.
- The (~ 5th to 6th-century CE) has been called the "juridical text par excellence" and represents the only Dharmaśāstra text which deals solely with juridical matters and ignoring those of righteous conduct and penance.
- The (~ 7th-century CE) is one of the latest books of the Dharmaśāstra tradition in Hinduism and also the only one which does not deal directly with the means of knowing dharma, focusing instead on the bhakti tradition.Olivelle 2007: 149–150.
In addition, numerous other Dharmaśāstras are known, partially or indirectly, with very different ideas, customs and conflicting versions. For example, the manuscripts of and the have not been found, but their verses have been cited in other texts, and scholars have made an effort to extract these cited verses, thus creating a modern reconstruction of these texts. Scholars such as Jolly and Aiyangar have gathered some 2,400 verses of the lost Bṛhaspatismṛti text in this manner. Brihaspati-smriti was likely a larger and more comprehensive text than Manusmriti, yet both Brihaspati-smriti and Katyayana-smriti seem to have been predominantly devoted to judicial process and jurisprudence. The writers of Dharmasastras acknowledged their mutual differences, and developed a "doctrine of consensus" reflecting regional customs and preferences.
Of the four extant Dharmasastras, Manusmriti, Yajnavalkyasmriti and Naradasmriti are the most important surviving texts. But, states Robert Lingat, numerous other Dharmasastras whose manuscripts are now missing, have enjoyed equal authority. Between the three, the Manusmriti became famous during the colonial British India era, yet modern scholarship states that other Dharmasastras such as the Yajnavalkyasmriti appear to have played a greater role in guiding the actual Dharma. Further, the Dharmasastras were open texts, and they underwent alterations and rewriting through their history.
The Dharmashastra texts include conflicting claims on the sources of dharma. The theological claim therein asserts, without any elaboration, that Dharma just like the Vedas are eternal and timeless, the former is directly or indirectly related to the Vedas. Yet these texts also acknowledge the role of Smriti, customs of polite learned people, and one's conscience as source of dharma. The historical reality, states Patrick Olivelle, is very different from the theological reference to the Vedas, and the dharma taught in the Dharmaśāstra has little to do with the Vedas. These were customs, norms or pronouncements of the writers of these texts that were likely derived from evolving regional ethical, ideological, cultural and legal practices.
The Dharmasutra and Dharmaśāstra texts, as they have survived into the modern era, were not authored by a single author. They were viewed by the ancient and medieval era commentators, states Olivelle, to be the works of many authors. Robert Lingat adds that these texts suggest that "a rich literature on dharma already existed" before these were first composed. These texts were revised and interpolated through their history because the various text manuscripts discovered in India are inconsistent with each other, and within themselves, raising concerns of their authenticity.Patrick Olivelle (2005), Manu's Code of Law, Oxford University Press, , pages 353–354, 356–382G Srikantan (2014), Entanglements in Legal History (Editor: Thomas Duve), Max Planck Institute: Germany, , page 123
The Dharmaśāstra texts present their ideas under various categories such as Acara, Vyavahara, Prayascitta and others, but they do so inconsistently.P.V. Kane, History of Dharmaśāstra: (ancient and mediaeval, religious and civil law). (Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1962 – 1975). Some discuss Acara but do not discuss Vyavahara, as is the case with Parasara-Smriti for instance, while some solely discuss Vyavahara.
The Vyavahara sections of Dharma texts included chapters on duties of a king, court system, judges and witnesses, judicial process, crimes and penance or punishment. However, the discussions and procedures in different Dharmasutra and Dharmaśāstra texts diverge significantly.
Some Dharmaśāstra texts such as that attributed to Brihaspati, are almost entirely Vyavahāra-related texts. These were probably composed in the common era, around or after 5th-century of 1st millennium.
Those texts that discuss Prāyaścitta, states Robert Lingat, debate the intent and thought behind the improper act, and consider penance appropriate when the "effect" had to be balanced, but "cause" was unclear. The roots of this theory are found in the Brahmana layer of text in the Samaveda.
| >+ Commentaries (''bhasya'') on Dharmasastras | |
| Dharmasastra | Author of Commentary |
| [[Manusmriti]] | Bhāruci (600–1050 CE),J Duncan J Derrett (1977), Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law, Brill Academic, , pages 10–17, 36–37 with footnote 75a Medhātithi (820–1050 CE),Kane, P. V., History of Dharmaśāstra, (Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1975), Volume I, Part II, 583. Govindarāja (11th-century), Kullūka (1200–1500 CE), Narayana (14th-century), Nandana, Raghavananda, Ramacandra |
| Yajnavalkya Smriti | Visvarupa (750–1000 CE), Vijnanesvara (11th or 12th century, most studied), Apararka (12th-century), Sulapani (14th or 15th century), Mitramisra (17th-century) |
| Narada-smriti | Kalyanabhatta (based on Asahaya's work) |
| Parashara-smriti | [[Vidyaranya]], Nandapandita |
| Vishnu-smriti | Nandapandita |
Some important nibandhas are Harshananda, Swami, A Concise Encyclopaedia of Hinduism, (Ramakrishna Math, Bull Temple Road, Bengaluru, 2007).
The nibandhakāras discussed almost all aspects of society, but specialised in certain topics compared to others.
Mimamsa literally means the "desire to think", states Donald Davis, and in colloquial historical context "how to think, interpret things, and the meaning of texts". In the early portions of the Vedas, the focus was largely on the rituals; in the later portions, largely on philosophical speculations and the spiritual liberation (moksha) of the individual. The Dharma-texts, over time and each in its own way, attempted to present their theories on rules and duties of individuals from the perspective of a society, using the insights of hermeneutics and on language developed by Mimamsa and Vedanga.
Kisori Lal Sarkar, The Mimansa Rules of Interpretation as applied to Hindu Law. Tagore Law Lectures of 1905 (Calcutta: Thacker, Spink, 1909). The Nyaya school of Hindu philosophy, and its insights into the theories on logic and reason, contributed to the development of and disagreements between the Dharmasastra texts, and the term Nyaya came to mean "justice".
In 18th century, the earliest British of the East India Company acted as agents of the Mughal emperor. As the British colonial rule took over the political and administrative powers in India, it was faced with various state responsibilities such as legislative and judiciary functions.Timothy Lubin et al (2010), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction (Editors: Lubin and Davis), Cambridge University Press, , Chapter 1 The East India Company, and later the British Crown, sought profits for its British shareholders through trade as well as sought to maintain effective political control with minimal military engagement. The administration pursued a path of least resistance, relying upon co-opted local intermediaries that were mostly Muslims and some Hindus in various . The British exercised power by avoiding interference and adapting to law practices as explained by the local intermediaries. The colonial policy on the system of personal laws for India, for example, was expressed by Warren Hastings in 1772 as follows,
For Muslims of British India, the Sharia or the religious law for Muslims was easily available in Al-Hidayah and Fatawa al-Alamgir written under the sponsorship of Aurangzeb. But for non-Muslims (followers of Dharmic religions and others such as Tribal people and Parsis), this information was not readily available. Hence the British colonial officials extracted from the Dharmaśāstra, the legal code to apply on non-Muslims for the purposes of colonial administration.Ludo Rocher, "Hindu Law and Religion: Where to draw the line?" in Malik Ram Felicitation Volume. ed. S.A.J. Zaidi (New Delhi, 1972), 190–1.J.D.M. Derrett, Religion, Law, and the State in India (London: Faber, 1968), 96; For a related distinction between religious and secular law in Dharmaśāstra, see However, the Hindu laws as designed by the British, was solely drawn upon from a single text (Manusmriti with the commentary of the Bengali Hindus scholar Kulluka Bhatta, which was widely respected among Bengali Hindu intermediaries of the British living in the capital of Kolkata) & later British-era collections saw increasing importance of canonical texts over secondary sources & prevalent customary law, in a manner similar to the sola scriptura doctrine.
The Dharmashastra-derived laws for non-Muslim Indians were dissolved after India gained independence, but Indian Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937 continued to be the personal and family law for Indian Muslims. For non-Muslims, a non-religious uniform civil code was passed by Indian parliament in the 1950s, and amended by its elected governments thereafter, which has since then applied to all non-Muslim Indians.
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> The Cooperative Annotated Bibliography of Hindu Law and Dharmaśāstra
|
|
