epics, the Ra ̄ma ̄yanaand, even more so, the Maha ̄bha ̄rata (Kane 1968: 349–408),
as well as in several Pura ̄n.as(Kane 1968: 408–21 and Rocher 1986: 37–8 and
passim). In fact, verses from the Maha ̄bha ̄rata and entire sections from a number
ofPura ̄n.ascorrespond nearly literally with passages from the dharmas ́a ̄stras. In
addition, even though Kautilya’s Arthas ́a ̄stra is primarily devoted to the study of
policy and statecraft (artha), it too comprises sections dealing with topics related
todharma (Kane 1968: 149–256).
Dating
Dating most classical Indian texts remains a difficult task, and the dharmasu ̄tras
anddharmas ́a ̄stras are no exception. Dating in absolute terms is possible only to
the extent to which there is agreement on the relative dates of the several texts.
If the Manusmr.tiis indeed the oldest versified dharmas ́a ̄stra and if we accept, with
the majority of scholars, that it was composed between 200 bceand 200 ce(the
time when the Maha ̄bha ̄rata was about to reach its final form), then all dhar-
masu ̄tras are older than 200 bce, and all dharmas ́a ̄stras other than Manu’s are
more recent than 200 ce. Even repeated and detailed comparison, based on
internal criteria, did not always lead to identical conclusions. Yet, it is more or
less established that, of the preserved dharmasu ̄tras, Gautama or, according to
some, A ̄pastamba is the oldest, followed by Baudha ̄yana and Vasis.t.ha. How far
back these texts go prior to the time of Manu is less certain, at most as far as 500
bce, and possibly less. Among the dharmas ́a ̄stras Manu was probably followed by
Ya ̄jñavalkya, Na ̄rada (unless the original Na ̄rada is earlier than Ya ̄jñavalkya),
Br.haspati, and Ka ̄tya ̄yana. The Vis.n.udharmasu ̄tra may be very old, but the text
as it has been preserved, both in prose and in verse, may be dated between 400
and 600 ce. The period of the principal dharmasu ̄tras anddhamas ́a ̄stras may,
therefore, be tentatively fixed between the limits of 500 bceand 500 ce.
TheDharmas ́a ̄strasin the Commentarial Literature
Thedharmasu ̄tras anddharmas ́a ̄stras constitute a vast and, even more so, a
complex body of literature. First, not only are the su ̄tras brief and aphoristic as
mentioned earlier; they are often cryptic and they easily lend themselves to very
different interpretations. Even the verses of the more verbose dharmas ́a ̄stras are
not always as clear as one would wish normative texts to be; some of the most
crucial s ́lokascan be interpreted in very different ways. Second, it is not surpris-
ing that texts composed over a period of about one millennium, in distant parts
of the subcontinent, exhibit injunctions that are not only different, but even
incompatible.
110 ludo rocher