DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.52359#0016
VISHNU.
xii
works hitherto printed, and in the law-books of Manu,
Ya^navalkya, and others; but nearly all are quoted,
exactly in the same order as in this work, in the TCara-
yazziya-kaZ/zaka Gzvhya-sutra, while some of them have
been traced in the KaZ/zaka as well. And what is even
more important, the KaZ/zaka Grzhya does not contain
those Mantras alone, but nearly all the Sutras in which
they occur; and it may be stated therefore, secondly, that
the Vishzzu-sutra has four long sections, viz. Chapter
LXXIII, and Chapters XXI, LXVII, LXXXVI, ex-
cepting the final parts, in common with that work, while
the substance of Chapter LXXIV may also be traced in
it. The agreement between both works is very close, and
where they differ it is generally due to false readings or to
enlargements on the part of the Vishzzu-sutra. However,
there are a few cases, in which the version of the latter
work is evidently more genuine than that of the former,
and it follows, therefore, that the author of the Vishzzu-
sutra cannot have borrowed his rules for the performance
of Vraddhas &c. from the KaZ/zaka GzThya-sutra, but that
both must have drawn from a common source, i. e. no doubt
from the traditions current in the KaZ/za school, to which
this work is indebted for so many of its Mantras as well.
For these reasons1 I fully concur in the view advanced
by Dr. Buhler, that the bulk of the so-called Vishzzu-smrzti
is really the ancient Dharma-sutra of the ATarayazziya-
kaZ/zaka Vakha of the Black Ya^ur-veda. It ranks, like
other Dharma-sutras, with the Grz’hya and Xrauta-sutras of
its school; the latter of which, though apparently lost now,
is distinctly referred to in the Gz'z’hya-sutra in several
places, and must have been in existence at the time when
the Commentaries on Katyayana’s Granta-sutras were
composed, in which it is frequently quoted by the name
1 For details I may refer the reader to my German paper, Das Dharmasutra des
Vishzzu und das KaM.akagn'hyasutra, in the Transactions of the Royal Bavarian
Academy of Science for 1879, where the sections corresponding in both works
have been printed in parallel columns, the texts from the KaZAaka Grzhya-sutra
having been prepared from two of the MSS. of Devapala’s Commentary dis-
covered by Dr. Buhler (Kasmir Report, Nos. 11, 12), one in Devanagari, and
the other in Sarada characters.
xii
works hitherto printed, and in the law-books of Manu,
Ya^navalkya, and others; but nearly all are quoted,
exactly in the same order as in this work, in the TCara-
yazziya-kaZ/zaka Gzvhya-sutra, while some of them have
been traced in the KaZ/zaka as well. And what is even
more important, the KaZ/zaka Grzhya does not contain
those Mantras alone, but nearly all the Sutras in which
they occur; and it may be stated therefore, secondly, that
the Vishzzu-sutra has four long sections, viz. Chapter
LXXIII, and Chapters XXI, LXVII, LXXXVI, ex-
cepting the final parts, in common with that work, while
the substance of Chapter LXXIV may also be traced in
it. The agreement between both works is very close, and
where they differ it is generally due to false readings or to
enlargements on the part of the Vishzzu-sutra. However,
there are a few cases, in which the version of the latter
work is evidently more genuine than that of the former,
and it follows, therefore, that the author of the Vishzzu-
sutra cannot have borrowed his rules for the performance
of Vraddhas &c. from the KaZ/zaka GzThya-sutra, but that
both must have drawn from a common source, i. e. no doubt
from the traditions current in the KaZ/za school, to which
this work is indebted for so many of its Mantras as well.
For these reasons1 I fully concur in the view advanced
by Dr. Buhler, that the bulk of the so-called Vishzzu-smrzti
is really the ancient Dharma-sutra of the ATarayazziya-
kaZ/zaka Vakha of the Black Ya^ur-veda. It ranks, like
other Dharma-sutras, with the Grz’hya and Xrauta-sutras of
its school; the latter of which, though apparently lost now,
is distinctly referred to in the Gz'z’hya-sutra in several
places, and must have been in existence at the time when
the Commentaries on Katyayana’s Granta-sutras were
composed, in which it is frequently quoted by the name
1 For details I may refer the reader to my German paper, Das Dharmasutra des
Vishzzu und das KaM.akagn'hyasutra, in the Transactions of the Royal Bavarian
Academy of Science for 1879, where the sections corresponding in both works
have been printed in parallel columns, the texts from the KaZAaka Grzhya-sutra
having been prepared from two of the MSS. of Devapala’s Commentary dis-
covered by Dr. Buhler (Kasmir Report, Nos. 11, 12), one in Devanagari, and
the other in Sarada characters.